Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996

The Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996 is a principal New Zealand Act. It creates a framework for managing hazardous substances and new organisms through approvals, controls, enforcement and decision-making processes.

For a business owner, the first practical question is usually whether the substance or organism can legally be imported, manufactured, developed, field tested or released at all. The second question is what controls, standards or other requirements apply once the activity is allowed.

The Act is broad, but not every business activity sits in the same part of the framework. Some provisions focus on whether an activity can happen in the first place. Other provisions deal with what must happen around possession, use, disposal, border information, inspection and enforcement.

That distinction matters. It helps you avoid treating every operational issue as if it were the same kind of legal trigger. It also helps you focus on the checks that matter most before you commit to a purchase, shipment, trial or product launch.

This Act reaches well beyond large industrial operators. A business can be affected even if hazardous substances or biological materials are only one part of its operations.

Importers are an obvious example. If you bring chemicals or biological material into New Zealand, the Act may affect whether that can happen and what conditions apply. Manufacturers and formulators also need to check the legal status of what they make, blend or repackage.

Research businesses and laboratories are often in scope because the Act contains specific pathways for hazardous substances in containment and for importation or development of new organisms in containment. Businesses involved in field testing or release of organisms are also directly affected.

Retailers, wholesalers and distributors should not assume the law only matters to the original manufacturer. The Act includes a general duty for every person who imports, possesses or uses a hazardous substance or new organism. That means downstream businesses still need to understand the controls that attach to the products they handle.

Freight and logistics businesses can also be affected by the Act’s border and carrier provisions. The Act includes responsibilities for carriers and persons in charge of craft, and specific rules about border information supplied through JBMS.

The Act’s structure makes some trigger points especially important. Part 5 includes a restriction on import, manufacture, development, field testing or release, and then sets out the approval pathways that may apply.

For hazardous substances, the Act includes applications for approval to import or manufacture, rapid assessment in some cases, and containment approvals. For new organisms, the Act includes applications to import or release, conditional release pathways, qualifying organism provisions, and containment approvals for importation or development.

The Act also deals with emergency use in defined situations. That matters if your business is responding to an urgent event and assumes ordinary approval rules can simply be ignored. Emergency pathways still sit within the Act.

Once a substance or organism is already in your business, possession and use still matter because section 13 imposes a general duty on every person who imports, possesses or uses a hazardous substance or new organism. Disposal also matters because the Act includes a requirement for disposing of substances and a separate provision for disposal of persistent organic pollutants.

Storage and transport can still be compliance issues, but the Act should be read carefully. The clearest approval triggers in the Act are not every operational step. They are the activities specifically restricted or approved under Part 5, together with the controls and other obligations that then apply.

Section 13 is important, but it needs to be read accurately. It says every person who imports, possesses or uses a hazardous substance or new organism must ensure that any adverse effect caused by that person’s act or omission in relation to the substance or organism on any other person or the environment is avoided, remedied or mitigated.

Section 13 also says that no action or omission by that person will contravene any requirement or control on that substance or organism imposed by the Act.

Just as importantly, section 13 says the duty is not of itself enforceable against any person, and no person is liable to any other person for breach of that duty. So it should not be described as a free-standing civil claim right.

That does not make section 13 irrelevant. The Act still allows a compliance order to be served requiring a person to cease or not commence conduct that, in the enforcement officer’s opinion, relates to a hazardous substance or new organism and is or is likely to be dangerous to an extent that it has or is likely to have an adverse effect on health and safety or the environment.

In practice, section 13 works as a core behavioural standard that sits alongside approvals, controls, inspections, compliance orders and offences. Businesses should treat it as an operational rule, even though subsection (2) limits its direct enforceability.

A large part of compliance under this Act is working out what legal pathway applies before the activity starts. The Act sets out different approval routes for hazardous substances and new organisms, including rapid assessments in some cases and containment approvals for some activities.

The Act also gives the EPA powers to establish a hazard classification system, prescribe hazardous property controls, prescribe controls and requirements relating to hazardous substances, and issue EPA notices. It also provides for EPA controls on hazardous substances, exposure limits for substances with toxic or ecotoxic properties, and approved codes of practice.

Group standards are another major part of the framework. The Act includes a separate Part 6A on group standards, including when they may be issued, amended or revoked, and the effect of group standards.

For many businesses, the real compliance work sits in the controls attached to an approval or group standard rather than in the Act’s title alone. Two products that look similar commercially may sit under different legal settings. That is why a product-by-product review is often needed.

The Act also allows reassessments and modified reassessments. If a substance or organism has already been approved, that does not always mean the position will stay the same forever. A later reassessment can change the controls or the practical way your business needs to operate.

The Act expressly includes a requirement for disposing of substances and a separate provision on disposal of persistent organic pollutants. That means disposal is not an afterthought. If your business has leftover stock, expired product, contaminated material or waste from a trial or process, disposal should be checked against the legal requirements that apply.

The Act also includes notification of hazardous substances injuries and reporting of incidents. That shows incident response is part of the compliance picture, even if the exact operational steps may depend on the relevant provision and the facts of the event.

The Act requires the EPA to prepare and maintain a register, publish decisions and maintain a reassessments work plan. While that does not automatically create the same recordkeeping duty for every business, clear internal records are still a practical necessity if you need to show what products or organisms you handle and what controls apply.

For a business owner, the safest approach is to keep clear internal records of approvals, group standards, controls, training, incidents and disposal decisions. That helps if an inspector asks questions, if a supplier changes a product, or if a reassessment affects your operations.

The Act contains several border-related provisions that matter for importers and logistics businesses. It includes transhipment provisions, Customs-related provisions, a power to require a hazardous substance imported in breach of the Act to leave New Zealand, and a declaration process that an imported organism is not genetically modified.

The Act also includes responsibilities of carriers and persons in charge of craft. In addition, border information supplied using JBMS must be supplied in the approved form and manner, and there is a duty to use JBMS to supply border information where the Act requires it.

This means compliance is not only about what happens at your site. It can also depend on what information is supplied before arrival, who signs declarations, and what your freight arrangements say about responsibility if goods are delayed, refused or required to leave New Zealand.

If your business imports hazardous substances or biological material, make sure the commercial team, customs broker and freight provider all understand who is responsible for the legal checks and supporting documents. It is much easier to sort this out before shipment than after goods are held at the border.

The Act gives enforcement officers powers to give advice and information, promote and monitor compliance, provide information to the EPA if requested, and carry out powers conferred by the Act. It also includes powers of entry for inspection relating to new organisms and hazardous substances.

The Act provides for compliance orders, offences, infringement offences, penalties, search warrants and related enforcement tools. It also says that a continuing situation or intermittent repetition contrary to the Act can be treated as a continuing offence.

Liability can extend beyond the person physically handling the substance or organism. If an offence is committed by an employee, it may be treated as committed by the employer as well, subject to the statutory defence. If an offence is committed by an agent, it may be treated as committed by the principal unless done without the principal’s express or implied authority.

Directors and people concerned in management can also be liable where the body corporate is convicted and the statutory tests are met. The Act also provides that some offences are strict liability offences, meaning intention does not need to be proved for those specified offences.

For business owners, this means governance matters. Training, supervision, escalation and corrective action are not just good practice. They can be central to whether a defence is available and whether the business can show it took reasonable preventive and remedial steps.

This Act is a framework law. In practice, businesses usually need to check more than the Act itself. The legal answer often depends on the approval status of the substance or organism, any group standard that applies, EPA controls, notices, codes of practice, and any reassessment that has changed the position.

You should also check whether another regulator or another Act is involved. The Act itself refers to relationships with WorkSafe, Customs-related provisions, the Biosecurity Act declaration process, and the Building Act. That is a reminder that compliance can overlap with other legal regimes.

If your business is making a decision about a new import, a reformulation, a trial, a release, a disposal process or a border shipment, do the legal check before the activity starts. It is much harder to fix the problem once goods are in transit or an organism has already been handled incorrectly.

A practical approach is to assign responsibility inside the business. Someone should own the approval check, someone should confirm the controls, and someone should make sure the operational team is actually following them. Without that handover, compliance gaps often appear between procurement, operations and freight.

This is an in-force principal Act. The official legislation site records the current version as at 10 July 2026.

The Act received assent on 10 June 1996. The commencement entry says to see section 1(2), so businesses should avoid making assumptions about historical commencement details without checking the legislation directly if that matters to a past event or older conduct.

The Act has been amended many times. That matters because the current compliance position may depend on later amendments, EPA notices, group standards or reassessment decisions rather than on the original 1996 text alone.