Six months into his tenure as general manager at New Zealand's EPA, Fernando Torres-Vélez has settled on a few priorities: speeding up the approval of new chemical applications is one of them.
The infectious disease researcher took up the role in February, filling the vacancy left by Chris Hill's departure last October. Since then, he and the EPA team have mapped out where the organisation can do better, with new chemical approval efficiency high on the list.
Dr Torres-Vélez arrives with a background well-matched to the "new organisms" aspect of the Hazard Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act, which the EPA oversees.
Originally from Puerto Rico, he came to Wellington from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), where he directed the Division of High-Consequence Pathogens and Pathology within the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases.
Before the CDC, he led the WHO's Guinea worm disease eradication research agenda at The Carter Center in Atlanta, Georgia, building the programme's global research portfolio across diagnostics, therapeutics and transmission interruption in endemic sub-Saharan countries.
Being at the EPA is like coming full circle, Dr Torres-Vélez says.
"Working with the environment is a passion of mine," he says. "I started my career looking at the human impact on the environment and how that could lead to the emergence of infectious diseases in wildlife, animals, and humans. When this opportunity came up, it was great to come back to where everything began."
The approvals work he has inherited is contentious. New Zealand's pathway for chemicals has been criticised as too slow, too complex and too costly — particularly for agrichemicals and related products, which must pass through a dual-track regulatory system spanning both the HSNO Act and the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines (ACVM) Act.
The EPA lists statutory assessment times of ten to 30 working days for lower-risk hazardous substance applications, and 70 to 100 working days for publicly notified applications.
Our new models, tools and approaches will reflect international best practice while accounting for New Zealand’s unique conditions
However, those timeframes begin only once an application is formally received. This requires a signed application to be lodged, fees paid and the EPA to check that the form is complete.
Consequently, the end-to-end process can be far longer. EPA data shows that some agrichemical applications have taken more than five years to complete from lodgement to decision.
"To help speed up the process, we will be exploring technologies to improve our data system, as well as identifying what could be automated," Dr Torres-Vélez says.
The team also plans to update toxicology and ecotoxicology models to develop a more robust and transparent approach to assessing risks.
"Our new models, tools and approaches will reflect international best practice while accounting for New Zealand’s unique conditions. They will make the application process more efficient by providing clearer guidance to applicants," he says.
Dr Torres-Veléz also hopes to make the models publicly available once they are ready, so that submitters can provide much of the data ahead of time to help expedite the process.
Staffing
Another obvious route to cut waiting times is to have more staff to complete the approvals, which are often complex and require considerable expertise.
A review by the Ministry for Regulation published in February 2025 identified low staffing levels as among the issues holding up applications, but this should change soon.
"Recently, we have had an injection of funding to recruit more staff," Dr Torres-Vélez says. "They are still in training, but we're very hopeful that they will move into full capacity by the end of the year."
Finding experts does not stop there. Dr Torres-Vélez is also on the hunt for toxicology and ecotoxicology professionals to build up specialist knowledge for New Zealand.
It is a long-term process because we're talking about training people in doctorate degrees, which will take four to five years. And then there is country-specific regulatory knowledge to factor in
"Nationally, there is a lack of training for would-be ecotoxicologists, so the vast majority of current experts come from overseas," he says. "Even then, it is still a big challenge to recruit as we cannot compete with industry when it comes to salaries, and it also means moving to a different country."
It is a scenario he has faced and resolved before while working at the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), and Dr Torres-Velez is hoping for that same success with the EPA.
"It is a long-term process because we're talking about training people in doctorate degrees, which will take four to five years," he says. "And then there is country-specific regulatory knowledge to factor in."
He also wants to establish partnerships with academic institutions in New Zealand and internationally to increase cross-border cooperation and leverage expertise to help develop local talent.
Enhancing engagements
Along with speeding up approvals, Dr Torres-Vélez wants to enhance stakeholder engagements.
"There are a lot of opportunities for us to improve how we become more connected with stakeholders, not only to get feedback, but also to be more transparent and to explain how our processes work," he says. "It works both ways. It's a complementary dual process of being more interconnected so that both sides benefit."
My role here is to improve efficiencies without compromising New Zealand’s special environment
Dr Torres-Vélez says that in his short time at the EPA, it has become clear that a good number of stakeholders do not know the full extent of the approvals process. Conversely, there could be issues stakeholders face that the EPA is unaware of.
For instance, some organisations that submitted comments to the recent HSNO amendment bill consultation complained that the review was focused on recommendations from a narrowly consulted, industry-led group, while scientists, environmental groups and the public were excluded from policy discussions.
"My role here is to improve efficiencies without compromising New Zealand’s special environment," Dr Torres-Vélez says. "What I would say to those stakeholders is that I want to hear from you. If they feel that we have not heard them, let us know."
Some organisations also criticised the HSNO reform bill, saying it will increase reliance on overseas regulators who may have different legislative mandates, therefore potentially reducing independent scrutiny.
Dr Torres-Vélez says the EPA already uses vetted overseas regulators from the US, Europe and Australia. This does not compromise New Zealand standards, he says. Instead, it adds to the agency’s data and knowledge, so it does not have to start from scratch.
"Our mandate is to be the steward of the environment," he says. "And that is at the core of what we do, and how we move forward."
On the radar
Looking ahead to what may be coming down the line for hazardous substances, Dr Torres-Vélez says PFAS and endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are areas of concern that the team is working on.
He notes that New Zealand has already moved ahead with restricting PFAS in firefighting foams and cosmetics, and is on track to adopt the Stockholm Convention listing of long-chain perfluoro carboxylic acids (LC-PFCAs), which takes effect in December.
The EPA’s role as regulator is to make independent, evidence-based decision-making led by science, data and mātauranga Māori [Māori knowledge]
Monitoring work is running alongside these regulations. The EPA commissioned the country's first large-scale survey of PFAS in groundwater wells in 2022 and will repeat the exercise this year, working with the Institute for Public Health and Forensic Science and regional councils. A separate report, drawing on a recent survey of PFAS in Waikato freshwater, drinking water and wastewater, is due for release shortly.
"As the science evolves, we consider new evidence, approaches and methodologies as part of our regulatory work," Dr Torres-Vélez says. "The EPA’s role as regulator is to make independent, evidence-based decision-making led by science, data and mātauranga Māori [Māori knowledge]."