| |
REFORM
INITIATIVES
| |

Low regulatory concern chemicals initiative
The Industrial Chemicals (Notification and
Assessment) Amendment
(Low Regulatory Concern Chemicals) Bill 2004 (the Bill) was
introduced into
the House of Representatives on 31 March 2004 and passed by the
Senate
on 24 June 2004. The Bill came into effect on 9 August 2004.
The Bill introduced a framework for a range
of measures for the operation
of NICNAS and balances the reduction in red tape and bureaucracy
with
reduced time and costs for certain assessments whilst enhancing
auditing,
compliance and safety information outputs. The specific measures
are
detailed below and a Scorecard of progress with implementation
for each
measure is detailed in Appendix 7.
The Bill introduced the following specific
measures:
1. Audited self-assessment
A new process for audited self-assessment
for LRCC categories, including
an audited self-assessed assessment certificate for:
• polymers of low concern;
• low regulatory concern polymers;
• non-hazardous chemicals; and
• any other chemical, or class of chemical, that is prescribed
by the
regulations for the purposes of the self-assessment system.
The Bill also introduced annual reporting
and record keeping obligations
for the purposes of providing information to NICNAS and for
introducers
to validate self-assessment data to NICNAS inspectors during the
audit
process. New offence and penalty provisions have also been
introduced
to support these measures.
2. A range of new permits
New permit categories for low hazard and/or
low concern chemicals,
including:
• a low hazard permit for chemicals of low volume;
• an early introduction permit system for low hazard and low
risk chemicals; and
• a new permit category for controlled use chemicals.
Some of these new permit categories are also
accompanied by annual
reporting and record keeping obligations. New offence and
penalty
provisions have also been introduced to support the new
measures.
The Bill also adopts administrative processes for Commercial
Evaluation
Category (CEC) and Low Volume Chemicals (LVC) permit renewals.
3. A new range of exemptions
New LRCC exemptions including:
• a transhipment exemption for chemicals off-loaded unopened at
an
Australian port or airport for a short period and kept in control
of Customs
before leaving Australia;
• an exemption for non-hazardous and low hazardous non-cosmetic
chemicals for specified volumes;
• an exemption for low concentration non-hazardous cosmetic
chemicals
imported in specified mixtures of 1% or less;
• an increase to the current exemption for research, development
and
analysis and the general exemption for low volume chemicals.
Other reforms include:
• changing the definition of ‘cosmetics’ in the Act to align it
with that used
under the Trade Practices legislation;
• giving industry the option to nominate an assessed chemical
for immediate
inclusion in AICS;
• giving the Director, NICNAS the ability to put the particulars
of a chemical,
including any conditions to which it is subject, in AICS and making
these
conditions enforceable under the Act; and
• mandatory company registration of all chemical introducers. |
|

|
The Bill passed through both Houses of Parliament as
non-contentious
and received ‘cautious support’ from the Australian Democrats.
In the
passing of the Bill, the Government provided additional
assurances that
the reforms would lead to improved health and safety and
environmental
outcomes for all Australians. NICNAS will include additional
details on selfassessment
applications in its annual reports for 2004-05 and future years,
and will also develop and undertake an audit plan for
self-assessment
certificates in consultation with NICNAS’s IGCC and CEF.The
Bill provides for a range of amendments that deliver industry
real reform
by creating long term, sustainable, competitive advantage for
the chemicals
and plastics industry. These reforms, developed in partnership
with industry,
the community and government, offer an innovative approach to
introduce
flexibility into the regulation of industrial chemicals while
improving health,
safety and environmental standards and public access to chemical
safety
information.
These reforms reflect the Government’s commitment to ensure
the most
efficient regulatory system is in place for industrial
chemicals: a system
that encourages the introduction of new and safer chemicals. The
proposed
changes give effect to the Government’s response to the
recommendations
of the Chemicals and Plastics Action Agenda in December 2002.
This response indicated the Government’s agreement to examine
options
for flexibility in the assessment processes for industrial
chemicals.
The industry has taken the Chemicals and Plastics Action Agenda
very
seriously and is monitoring government and industry progress
in implementing the recommendations through the Chemicals and
Plastics
Leadership Group (CPLG). In December 2003, the Parliamentary
Secretary
for Health, the Hon Trish Worth MP, and the Minister for
Industry, the Hon
Ian Macfarlane MP, met with the CPLG at Parliament House to
discuss
progress with the LRCC reform initiative.
Top of Page
Introduction of an interim arrangement to
allow
audited self-assessment for Synthetic Polymer
of Low Concern (PLC)
In order to progress the LRCC
recommendations, NICNAS introduced
a new innovative method of self-assessment for the PLC category,
which
streamlined assessment of notifications for these PLCs. This was
in
recognition of the low hazard intrinsic to polymers which meet
the PLC
criteria and was the first practical implementation of the LRCC
reforms. |
 |
The interim arrangements were introduced in March 2004 and
streamlined
the process resulting in completion of the certification process
within 28
days of acceptance, and a fee rebate of up to 15% for using the
electronic
template. Industry was eligible for additional savings if an EIP
was not
required. The industry take-up of this innovation resulted in 16
notifications,
mostly in the last quarter. Twelve notifications were accepted
under the selfassessment
arrangements, one refused, as the polymer did not meet the
PLC criteria, and three pending. Six were completed and approved
in
2003–04, with three of the six requiring revision of the
electronic submission
by the applicant before finalisation. Of the 16 notifications,
supporting data
were provided in six cases.The interim self-assessment
approach was only available to notifiers
who were able to produce (prior to submission of the first
self-assessment)
a letter signed by the company CEO or an authorised officer
undertaking to
hold the records on which the assessment is based for a period
of five years
after issue of the certificate. Industry training was provided
in Melbourne
and Sydney during April to assist industry take-up of the new
initiative. |
|

|
AICS moves online
AICS, a list of more than 38,000 industrial chemicals in use
in Australia,
is a key compliance tool as it is the means by which new
chemicals are
identified under the Act. NICNAS is responsible for maintaining
and providing
access to the public or non-confidential section of AICS.
Since 12 January 2004, the non-confidential section of AICS
has been
accessible to industry and the public through the NICNAS
website. With this
move, NICNAS has introduced service charges for requests by
industry
to search the non-confidential section of AICS. This charge does
not apply to
Government agencies, the public and non-commercial requests. The
search
of the confidential section of AICS continues to remain free of
charge.
An AICS inquiry can request a search for any number of
chemicals.
The number of requests to search AICS has decreased markedly
since
the move of AICS online. The three-year trend data for search
requests
of AICS (inquiries) and the resultant number of searches are
summarised
in Table 3.

Since 12 January 2004, the number of non-confidential search
requests
has dropped substantially and only one request was received
since the
introduction of service charges.
Top of Page
Mandatory registration
The Bill provides the legislative framework
for NICNAS to implement new
registration requirements for the 2004-05 registration year. The
Bill amends
Part 3A of the Act to introduce mandatory registration of all
persons who
import and/or manufacture or propose to import and/or
manufacture relevant
industrial chemicals during a registration year. The proposed
changes came
into effect on 1 September 2004. In order to ensure that NICNAS
was
able to implement the new registration requirements once the
legislation
received Proclamation, work commenced on the project during the
latter
part of the year.
Since 1997, companies importing and/or
manufacturing industrial chemicals
over an annual threshold amount of $500,000 per year have been
required
to register with NICNAS and pay a company registration charge. |
|

|
During 2003-04, NICNAS identified from Customs data, over 16,000
additional persons/companies which may need to register with
NICNAS
under the new arrangements. Most are expected to be individuals
or small
to medium-sized enterprises and will generally not be aware of
NICNAS.
The arrangements prior to the introduction of the legislative
amendments
meant that NICNAS did not engage directly with the entire
chemical industry
as its focus is on importers and/or manufacturers of industrial
chemicals
with an annual threshold value of over $500,000.Industry
advised NICNAS during the LRCC consultation process that
NICNAS should extend its current arrangements maintained through
the
company registration process to cover all of the industry. This
would improve
industry compliance and directly engage all importers and/or
manufacturers
with the national industrial chemicals’ regulator. Industry
members
also believed that mandatory registration would maintain public
confidence
in the regulatory scheme, and while recognising that this would
come
at a cost to the industry, in particular to small business,
industry
was of the view that the benefits would outweigh the costs.
The aim of NICNAS registration is to improve industry
compliance and
awareness of their legal obligations when importing and/or
manufacturing
industrial chemicals. The exemption from Company Registration
does not
exempt introducers from the regulatory requirements of the Act.
However,
this may have inadvertently happened and the threshold exemption
may
have unwittingly exposed small business to compliance action.
NICNAS
has found that those businesses falling under the threshold had
a mistaken
belief that the legal obligations of the Act did not apply to
them.
Top of Page
Science Forum for best practice approaches
to health risk assessment
The Science Forum for best practice approaches to health risk
assessment
(Science Forum) continued to operate for 2003-04 under the
auspices of the
OCS to bring together health regulatory agencies: TGA, NICNAS,
Office
of Gene Technology Regulator (OGTR) and Food Standards Australia
New
Zealand. The Agricultural Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines
Authority
(APVMA), NOHSC, the DEH and the NZ ERMA also attended the Forum. |
|
Second Science Forum
- September 2003
(L to R): Dr William Farland
– Chief Scientist in the
Office of the Agency
Science Advisor; Dr
Margaret Hartley – Director
(NICNAS); Dr Ursula
Gundert-Remy – Head of
the Department for the
Assessment of Chemicals
for the Federal Institute for
Risk Assessment in Berlin;
Dr Ada Knaap – Senior
Scientific Officer for Risk
Assessment, at the
National Institute of Public
Health and Environment,
The Netherlands; Ms
Carolyn Vickers – IPCS; Ms
Cynthia Sonich-Mullin – US
EPA Centre; Dr Stephen
Olin – Deputy Director for
Toxicology and Risk
Assessment at the
International life Sciences
Institute Risk Science
Institute in Washington DC;
Dr Tim Meredith – the
coordinator of the IPCS,
World Health Organization,
Geneva, Switzerland. |
 The Science
Forum gives effect to the Government’s undertaking in relation
to the Chemicals and Plastics Action Agenda on regulatory
efficiency
and best practice. The specific objective of the Forum is to
enhance the
efficiency of chemicals regulation in Australia through
comparison of current
regulatory assessment practices and methods amongst
participating
agencies, consideration of international trends and
harmonisation of best
practice risk assessment methodology.
In 2003-04, following initiation at the Forum in May 2003,
the Health
portfolio agencies declared the Mouse Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA)
as
an acceptable toxicological test for assessing the skin
sensitisation potential
of chemicals. On 6 January 2004, NICNAS published in the
Chemical
Gazette its policy on toxicology testing for skin sensitisation
in health risk
assessment. The move to endorse the LLNA as the preferred test
represents regulatory efficiency as it delivers animal welfare
benefits
and a reduction in safety testing costs to industry. The LLNA is
at least equal
to alternative tests in predictability and allows the
establishment
of measures of potency and dose-related nature of responses. |
|

|
All relevant agencies within the Health portfolio have committed
to encouraging their respective industry sectors to consider the
LLNA when
developing safety-testing programs for chemicals. The NOHSC
Office
supports this position, confirms the suitability of the LLNA for
hazard
classification purposes under the NOHSC hazardous substances
framework,
and has agreed to revise the NOHSC Approved Criteria for
Classifying
Hazardous Substances accordingly at the next update. |
 |
‘Best Practice Risk Assessment through Harmonisation’ was the
theme
of Science Forum 2, held on 24 September 2003. International
experts
in chemical risk assessment and safety policy from the
International
Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) participated in the Forum.
Presentations and discussions focussed on a range of topics
including:
Use of Clinical Data in Risk Assessment, Harmonisation of Cancer
Risk
Assessment, Uncertainty and Variability in Risk Assessments,
Exposure
Assessment, Food Safety issues and the USA Rapid Risk Assessment
Program. Considering the expertise of the speakers and broad
interest
in risk assessment methods, the meeting was open to a select
group
of stakeholders outside of Australian government agencies, as an
outreach
exercise. An audience of approximately 100 regulatory and other
scientists,
industry, community groups and academia, benefited from the
presentations
and ensuing discussion.
Top of Page
International treaties
Giving effect to Australia’s obligations
under the Rotterdam Convention
on the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) Procedure for Certain
Hazardous
Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade (Rotterdam
Convention).
The Rotterdam Convention entered into force
on 24 February 2004.
Australia ratified the Convention on 20 May 2004. As a Party to
the
Convention, Australia must have legislative or administrative
measures in
place to implement its obligations. These obligations include
putting controls
in place for the export of the five industrial chemicals that
are listed in Annex
III to the Rotterdam Convention. |
|

|
The objective of the Convention is to promote shared
responsibility
and cooperative efforts among Parties in the international trade
of certain
hazardous pesticides and industrial chemicals in order to
protect human
health and the environment from potential harm and to contribute
to their
environmentally sound use, by facilitating information exchange
about their
characteristics.To enable NICNAS to give effect to the
Rotterdam Convention, the
Industrial Chemicals (Notification and Assessment) Amendment
(Rotterdam
Convention) Bill 2004 was introduced into the House of
Representatives
on 11 February 2004 and passed by the Senate on 4 March 2004.
Section
106(1) of the Amendment Act provides for regulations to be made
to prohibit
(either absolutely or subject to such conditions or restrictions
as prescribed)
the introduction or export of an industrial chemical if it is
the subject
of a prescribed international agreement to which Australia is a
party.
Regulation 11B of the Industrial Chemicals (Notification and
Assessment)
Regulations 1990 (‘the Regulations’) prescribes the Rotterdam
Convention
for the purposes of section 106(1).
As a Party to the Convention, Australia must ensure chemicals
listed
in Annex III are not exported to countries that do not wish to
receive them.
Similarly, Australia must also ensure that the chemicals listed
in Annex III
that it does not wish to receive are not imported. Regulations
are therefore
required to control the importation and the export of some of
these Annex III
chemicals, where controls are not already in place in Australia.
During the year, NICNAS worked with its States and
Territories MOU
Group to ensure that processes were in place to facilitate the
exchange
of information required under the Rotterdam Convention. The MOU
Group,
through their nominated PIC contacts, agreed on behalf of
Premiers and/or
Chief Ministers to supply information on industrial chemicals
banned or
restricted in their States or Territories on environmental or
health grounds,
and to update this information, as necessary, if restrictions
change or new
ones are added.
This information is used by NICNAS to determine when a
chemical
is banned or severely restricted in Australia. The total effect
of regulatory
action in all States and Territories and by the Australian
Government must
be taken into account by NICNAS in determining if an industrial
chemical is
to be notified to the PIC Secretariat as severely restricted or
banned. During
the year, NICNAS did not receive any further information on
restrictions
on Schedule 1 carcinogenic substances from the States and
Territories.
Giving effect to Australia’s obligations under the
Stockholm Convention
on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) Treaty |
|

|
Australia also ratified the Stockholm Convention on 20 May 2004,
which
requires all Parties to phase out the use and manufacture of
some of the
most toxic chemicals on earth. The ratification of the Stockholm
Convention
is consistent with the evolution and maintenance of a regulatory
system
that promotes the sustainable use of chemicals. The POPs
characteristics
are persistence, bioaccumulation, potential for long-range
environmental
transport and adverse effects on human health and the
environment.
Initially, the Stockholm Convention will cover control measures
on 12 POPs,
including the industrial chemicals polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs),
hexachlorobenzene and the by-products, dioxins and furans.
However, Article
3 of the Stockholm Convention requires parties to the Convention
to take
into account POPs characteristics when conducting assessments on
new
and existing chemicals. Sponsors of new industrial chemicals
will need
to inform NICNAS of substances possessing POPs-like
characteristics
so that adequate test data can be developed and risk management
strategies can be implemented.

In the January 2004 Chemical Gazette, NICNAS advised industry
that
it would undertake the screening of new industrial chemicals to
identify
potential POPs chemicals. Additional data could also be required
on persistence and/or bioaccumulation.
Existing chemicals that are POPs will also be subject to
review as to their
continued safe and sustainable use via NICNAS’s Existing
Chemical Program.
Top of Page
Development of an electronic Template for
notifiers
The new notification template for
applications where the notifier seeks
the available rebate for provision of a draft assessment report
is available
to notifiers on request. During the year, 35 notifications
(representing 31%
of Standard and Limited notifications) using the new template
were
received, and these have led to significant timesaving in the
NICNAS
assessment process. The self-assessment template for PLC
notifications
developed as a pilot for the LRCC changes was derived from the
original
template, and 13 notifications (representing 15% of PLC
applications) were
received, mostly in the last quarter. By developing electronic
templates for
use by industry, NICNAS has passed savings of about $65,000 to
industry
for 2003-04. |
|

|
For the templates available for permit applications (Commercial
Evaluation
and Low Volume Chemical permits), significant efficiency gains
were
observed from use of this submission method, primarily in the
completeness
of submissions as received, allowing quicker consideration of
applications
overall. For example, twice as many LVC assessments commenced on
the
date of receipt compared to non-electronic lodgments, and only
13% had
not begun within 28 days (compared to 51%).
Top of Page
Recognition of Foreign Schemes, including
the
Australia-Canada Bilateral Arrangement
|
 |
Under the Transitional Arrangements Towards Approval of Approved
Foreign
Schemes, implemented in November 2001, NICNAS provides for lower
notification fees when assessment reports are available from
other OECD
countries. Most foreign scheme assessment reports received by
NICNAS
are from Canada, a direct result of the Australia-Canada
Bilateral
Arrangement, signed by Australia in May 2002 and Canada in
August 2002.
A free EIP is also available for PLCs under this Bilateral
Arrangement.Twenty-one applications under the Arrangement
have been received this
year, including eight applications for a free EIP. In addition,
four notifications
based on previous assessments in the European Union were
received,
resulting in potential savings of up to $79,000 to these
companies.
Additionally, waiving of the fee for the eight EIPs represented
a further saving of $4,350.
The four-year trend data in foreign scheme use shows a
significant increase
in use since 1999-2000 to about 12 per cent of all certificate
applications in
2003-04. Since 2000-01, a total of up to $150,000 was returned
to industry
as reduction in assessment fees for applications made under the
foreign
scheme arrangements. In 2003-04, a doubling of such applications
was
received with up to $83,350 potential savings made by the
applicants of 25
new chemicals.
Under the work plan developed by the two countries,
activities completed
in 2003-04 included:
• teleconferences conducted between the scientific officers of
both
countries;
• exchange of guidance material for assessing industrial
chemicals; and
• exchange of information on tools for assessing industrial
chemicals; for
example, models to facilitate hazard and exposure assessments.
NICNAS acknowledges the ongoing contribution of industry in
the
cooperative program between NICNAS and Canada. In May 2003,
NICNAS’s
IGCC agreed to work with industry and NICNAS to identify and
develop
further opportunities for bilateral arrangements. |
|

|
NICNAS was approached in October 2003 by the United States to
consider
bilateral arrangements on the basis of the proposed reforms in
the LRCC
documentation. A bilateral arrangement with the US EPA will
represent a
major step forward, not only for harmonised regulatory
approaches, but also
for Australian industry and its competitiveness in the global
marketplace.
NICNAS representatives visited the US in March 2004, meeting
with
government representatives from the US EPA to discuss a
bilateral
arrangement. To progress the arrangement, the US EPA and NICNAS
are
developing a work plan for 2004-05. Exchange of assessment
guidance
material was undertaken and will assist in development of
further guidance
such as low hazard and low risk criteria for LRCC. |
|
NICNAS/US EPA New
Cooperation Program
Meeting, Washington DC
- March 2004
(L to R): Dr Roshini
Jayewardene, Mr Bob Graf,
Ms Anna Coutlakis, Mr
Graeme Barden, Dr
Margaret Hartley, Ms Linda
Gerber, Ms Becky Cool, Mr
Scott Prothero, Ms Flora
Chow, Mr Ward Penberthy |
 The objective
of the bilaterals is to obtain meaningful financial and other
benefits for government and industry, including formal
recognition by
NICNAS of the Canadian and US schemes as recognised foreign
schemes
under the Act.
Top of Page
Aligning notification and assessment reports
for
international harmonisation through the OECD
New Chemicals Task Force
NICNAS aims to deliver a best-practice
industrial chemical regulatory
scheme by participation in global harmonisation activities to
improve its
efficiency, effectiveness and consistency with other national
schemes.
Avoidance of duplication of assessments by regulators is a key
principle
to deliver more safety information about chemicals with the same
resources.
NICNAS is a key member of the OECD New Chemicals Task Force
which
reports each year to the OECD Joint Meeting of the Chemicals
Committee
and the Working Party on Chemicals, Pesticides and
Biotechnology.
The principal aim of the Task Force is to
reduce the burden on industry and
NICNAS by aligning notification requirements and standardising
assessment
reports. Activities undertaken in 2003-04 included work sharing
and the
exchange of information on new industrial chemicals between
member
countries.
NICNAS attended the Task Force meetings in
Brussels in September 2003
and Paris in May 2004. NICNAS was able to significantly shape
the work
towards Mutual Acceptance of Notification (MAN) through a
presentation
of a videotaped talk to the Brussels meeting on its reform
program
and application to the objectives of MAN.

|
 |
NICNAS also attended a workshop in Washington DC in March 2004,
where
agreement with industry was achieved in working towards
preparation
and mutual acceptance of hazard assessment for chemicals.
NICNAS contributed significantly to the OECD work on global
definitions
for exemptions and exclusions for chemical regulation and
through its
experience with the development and implementation of the LRCC
reforms.
A number of LRCC elements are under active consideration for
adoption
within a number of OECD countries including Canada and the US.
Top of Page
Review of NICNAS’s Existing Chemicals Program
NICNAS commenced the review of its existing chemicals program
(the
Program) in November 2003 with the first meeting of the Review
Steering
Committee (RSC). The 11-member RSC, which includes
representatives
from the community, worker safety, industry, government and an
independent OHS expert, will set a framework for the review and
oversee
its activities.
The aim of the review is to assess the efficiency and
effectiveness of the
current Program with a view to positioning it to be more cost
effective as
well as more responsive and timely to stakeholder needs.
The first meeting of the RSC followed a number of preliminary
focus
consultations and scoping activities held during July and August
2003
between Program staff and approximately 30 different
organisations
and representatives from government, worker safety, public
health,
the community and industry familiar with the Program. The aim of
these
activities was to assist in identifying issues for consideration
by the RSC
and resulted in a ‘Brainstorming Workshop’ with approximately 20
participants in August 2003. |
 |
A number of issues have been raised for consideration in the
review.
These issues include the role and priorities of the Program, the
adequacy
of the Act, the focus of assessments, and how best to make
available more
information about chemicals. Issues such as changes to overseas
existing
chemicals assessment programs currently underway or already in
place,
as well the effectiveness of overseas assessment outcomes, are
also
to be taken into account. The review will explore the processes
to determine
national priorities for assessment, how better to utilise
overseas testing
and assessment program outputs and the needs of the community to
have
access to sound information on chemical hazards and risks.
Four background and four draft issues papers to facilitate the
review have
been prepared since July 2003. The background papers were placed
on
NICNAS’s website. An extranet to facilitate information exchange
between
members of RSC was established in February 2004.
To enhance opportunities for additional community
participation in the
review, NICNAS announced a deferral in the review in March 2004.
This allows the recently formed CEF the opportunity to better
provide
comment to the RSC about the review, terms of reference,
timelines,
membership and roles of the working groups.
More importantly, the CEF began development of a NICNAS
community
engagement strategy in 2003-04, which will be used to guide
NICNAS's
review processes including the review of the Program.
NICNAS believes allowing time for advice from the CEF to the
RSC
will result in a better-focussed review and will enable full
community
engagement at all stages of the review. The formal review will
recommence
in early in 2004-05. |
|
|