{"id":"tas:sr-1996-206","name":"Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals (Control of Use) (Exemptions) Order 1996","slug":"agricultural-and-veterinary-chemicals-control-of-use-exemptions-order-1996","collection":"regulation","jurisdiction":"tas","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":"206 of 1996","makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":319109,"registerId":"tas-tas:sr-1996-206-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-08","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Short title","content":"### 1 Short title\n\n> This order may be cited as the [Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals (Control of Use) (Exemptions) Order 1996](/view/html/inforce/2026-04-12/sr-9999-999) .","sortOrder":0},{"sectionNumber":"2","sectionType":"section","heading":"Commencement","content":"### 2 Commencement\n\n> This order takes effect on the day proclaimed under [section 2 of the](/view/html/inforce/2026-04-12/act-1995-106#GS2@EN) [Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals (Control of Use) Act 1995](/view/html/inforce/2026-04-12/act-1995-106) .","sortOrder":1},{"sectionNumber":"3","sectionType":"section","heading":"Interpretation","content":"### 3 Interpretation\n\n> > (1)  In this order –\n> > \n> > > ***Act*** means the [Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals (Control of Use) Act 1995](/view/html/inforce/2026-04-12/act-1995-106) .\n> \n> > (2)  The [Acts Interpretation Act 1931](/view/html/inforce/2026-04-12/act-1931-059) applies to the interpretation of this order as if the order were by-laws.","sortOrder":2},{"sectionNumber":"4","sectionType":"section","heading":"Exemption from holding agricultural aircraft operator licence","content":"### 4 Exemption from holding agricultural aircraft operator licence\n\n> A person who is the employee of the holder of an agricultural aircraft operator licence is exempt from [section 32(2)](/view/html/inforce/2026-04-12/act-1995-106#GS32@Gs2@EN) of the Act when piloting an aircraft in the course of that employment.","sortOrder":3},{"sectionNumber":"5","sectionType":"section","heading":"Exemption from holding commercial operator licence","content":"### 5 Exemption from holding commercial operator licence\n\n> A person who holds an agricultural aircraft operator licence is exempt from [section 21](/view/html/inforce/2026-04-12/act-1995-106#GS21@EN) of the Act in respect of a service delivered by aerial spraying.\n\nDisplayed and numbered in accordance with the *[Rules Publication Act 1953](/view/html/inforce/current/act-1953-050)*.\n\nNotified in the *Gazette* on 25 December 1996\n\nThis order is administered in the Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries.","sortOrder":4}],"analysis":{"issue_detection":{"absurdities":[],"contradictions":[]},"flash_summary_failed":{"failed":true,"reason":"A positive credit balance is required for all requests, including BYOK, so fallback providers remain available. Add credits at https://vercel.com/d?to=%2F%5Bteam%5D%2F%7E%2Fai%3Fmodal%3Dtop-up to continue.","source":"analysis-cron"},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"This Order narrows the scope of licensing obligations under the principal Act by exempting (a) employees piloting aircraft while employed by an agricultural aircraft operator licence holder from s 32(2), and (b) agricultural aircraft operator licence holders from the requirement in s 21 to hold a commercial operator licence for aerial spraying (ss 4–5). It does not create new regulatory obligations."},"complexity_factors":["Very short instrument with only two operative exemptions.","Direct cross-references to provisions in the principal Act (ss 21 and 32(2)) require reading the Act to see full effect.","Key terms (eg, “employee”, “in the course of that employment”, scope of “service delivered by aerial spraying”) are not defined here, creating interpretive reliance on the Act and ordinary statutory construction.","Commencement is contingent on proclamation under the principal Act (s 2), so effective date depends on external step.","Acts Interpretation Act 1931 is applied to treat the order as by-laws, affecting interpretive rules.","Administrative burden is low, but regulatory responsibility and compliance monitoring rest with licence-holders and the administering Department."],"plain_english_summary":"This Order creates two narrow exemptions to the Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals (Control of Use) Act 1995: employees of licence-holders need not hold an agricultural aircraft operator licence when piloting in the course of employment, and holders of an agricultural aircraft operator licence need not hold a separate commercial operator licence for aerial spraying (ss 4–5). Mechanically, it lowers individual licensing costs and shifts practical compliance and operational responsibility onto licence-holders/employers."},"summary":{"complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"Based on the available information, the instrument appears to have remained focused on its original purpose of granting exemptions from chemical use controls. The document has been in continuous force since 1 January 1997 with no evidence of significant scope expansion or contraction, though amendments have been made (as indicated by the Table of Amending Instruments reference)."},"complexity_factors":["Subordinate instrument (Order) that depends on a parent Act for context — meaning you need to read both documents together to understand the full picture","The actual exemption provisions are not visible in the provided text, limiting full assessment","Interplay between state-level Tasmanian law and the broader national agricultural chemicals regulatory framework adds a layer of jurisdictional context","Has been in force since 1997 with potential amendments, meaning the current version may differ from the original"],"plain_english_summary":"This Tasmanian subordinate instrument creates exemptions from the usual control-of-use rules for agricultural and veterinary chemicals, easing licensing and use restrictions for routine farming, veterinary and chemical-handling activities. It affects farmers, graziers, horticulturalists, veterinarians and others who apply, store or handle these chemicals.\n\nNote: the specific exemption details aren’t included in the supplied extract, so exact scope and limits can’t be determined here."},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This order remains tightly focused on its original purpose of creating specific licensing exemptions for aerial agricultural chemical operations. It has not expanded beyond the two narrow exemptions originally intended."},"complexity_factors":["Only 5 short sections total","Just 1 defined term ('Act') in the interpretation section","No cross-references beyond basic citations to the parent Act","No conditional logic, exceptions, or nested provisions","Straightforward exemption language with no qualifications or limitations"],"plain_english_summary":"This is a short legal order that creates two specific exemptions from licensing requirements under Tasmania's agricultural chemicals law.\n\n**What it does:**\nNormally, people who apply agricultural chemicals (pesticides, herbicides, etc.) commercially need a licence. This order creates two exceptions:\n\n*   **Employees of aerial spraying companies** don't need their own agricultural aircraft operator licence when piloting spray aircraft — their employer's licence covers them.\n*   **Aerial spraying companies** don't need a separate commercial operator licence for ground-based chemical application services — their aircraft operator licence is enough for aerial work.\n\n**Who it affects:**\n*   Pilots who work for aerial agricultural spraying businesses\n*   Businesses that operate agricultural aircraft for spraying crops\n\n**Why it matters:**\nThis prevents double-licensing and reduces red tape. Without these exemptions, a pilot working for a licensed aerial spraying company would need both their employer's company licence AND a personal operator licence. Similarly, aerial spraying companies would need two different licences to do essentially the same work (just from the air versus on the ground)."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/agricultural-and-veterinary-chemicals-control-of-use-exemptions-order-1996","history":"/api/acts/agricultural-and-veterinary-chemicals-control-of-use-exemptions-order-1996/history","analysis":"/api/acts/agricultural-and-veterinary-chemicals-control-of-use-exemptions-order-1996/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/agricultural-and-veterinary-chemicals-control-of-use-exemptions-order-1996/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/agricultural-and-veterinary-chemicals-control-of-use-exemptions-order-1996/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/agricultural-and-veterinary-chemicals-control-of-use-exemptions-order-1996/documents"}}