to cover Serious Health Effects (but not requiring a Toxic Skull & Crossbones Pictogram) which may be used for Carcinogenicity, Reproductive Toxicity, Respiratory Sensitisation Hazards etc.

Most experts of the Sub-Committee expressed support for the proposal by Sweden (the pictogram with the human torso being split by a disintegrating 6 pointed star – Ed. Note). They felt that a symbol which conveys a human shape was preferable to an abstract symbol conveying a general warning, especially in those countries with a large proportion of illiterate people, or where in practice very few workers were effectively trained, or where information of the public in general could not be done appropriately.

The Sub-Committee finally agreed not to take a final decision on the recommended GHS symbol at this session. Both the double-exclamation mark symbol and symbol No.4 would be kept as two possible options for decision at the next session.

From UN Sub-Committee of Experts on the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals – Report on the 3^rd session 10-12 July 2002. Downloadable from:

www.unece.org/trans/main/dgdb/dgsubc4/c4rep.html

Hazmat & Environment Notes are prepared by:

Jeff Simpson

Hazardous Materials Consultant

Editor & Publisher

I have edited and published this newsletter since 1985, initially within the Aerospace Industry, and then to all industry using chemicals since 1991.

I work as a Regulatory Affairs and Hazardous Materials Consultant and try to put my concern about chemicals into practice, and influence everyone to make better choices of, and better use of chemicals.

My approach is to provide a short, succinct note on each hazardous material issue, sufficient to allow you to make a decision of whether it is relevant to you. If you need more information contact details / website / etc are provided.

I encourage all readers to make comment on draft regulations, codes and standards.

ISSN: 1441-5534

Prepared by Jeff Simpson, Haztech Environmental, 18 Laurel St, Ashburton VIC 3147, ph: 03-9885-1269, email: jsimpson@haztech.com.au

Hazardous Substances

r USA NTP 2002 Substance Nominations

19 Substances or Substance Groups nominated to the USA National Toxicology program (NTP) for Toxicological Studies and Testing Recommendations. These were made by the NTP Interagency Committee for Chemical Evaluation and Coordination (ICCEC) on April 17, 2002

You may view the nomination supporting documents and public comments received.

Some of the chemicals that caught my attention are:

Abrasive blasting agents; 5-Amino-o-cresol [2835-95-2]; Hexafluorosilicic acid [16961-83-4], and Sodium hexafluorosilicate [16893-85-9]; Sodium metasilicate [6834-92-0]; Turpentine [8006-64-2]; Welding fume.

For details go to:

http://ntp-server.niehs.nih.gov/NomPage/2002Noms.html

Contact: Dr Scott Masten, NIEHS, ph: USA-919-541-5710; email: masten@neihs.nih.gov

From the USA NTP website, August 2002.

r Proposed Amendment to the National Workplace Exposure Standard for Benzene

NOHSC proposed amendment to 1 ppm (TWA).

The main industrial use of benzene is as a starting material for the synthesis of other chemicals. Most benzene feedstock is imported, but some is manufactured at an Australian steelworks as a by-product of coal coking. Large quantities of benzene are produced during the refining of petroleum and retained as a component of petrol. Petrol vehicle emissions are the predominant source of benzene in the environment.

A Preliminary Regulation Impact Statement is available free of charge by downloading from the NOHSC Website at: www.nohsc.gov.au/OHSInformation/Databases/ExposureStandards/expsearch.asp

A copy can also be requested by freecall: 1800 666 843 and follow the prompts; or by fax: 02-6279-1150.

From Chemical Gazette, 4^th June 2002.

r Proposed Amendments to Exposure Standards

NOHSC released on the 23^rd August 2002, 6 draft exposure standards for comment by mid Nov 2002. These are for:

Chemical	Proposed TWA Std	Proposed STEL Std
Dimethylamine	2 ppm	6 ppm
Ethyl acetate	200 ppm	400 ppm
Ethylamine	2 ppm	6 ppm
2-(Methoxymethylethoxy) propanol	50 ppm
1-Methoxy propyl acetate	50 ppm	150 ppm
Pentyl acetate isomers (n-Amyl acetate, sec-Amyl acetate and Isoamyl acetate)	50 ppm	100 ppm

Table 2 has a summary of known uses of the chemicals and the affected industries. The two Appendices include Full Documentation and Regulatory Impact Statements for the Proposed Amendments to the Exposure Standards

NOHSC is seeking comment on the application of the proposed exposure standards in the Australian setting with indications in two specific areas:

1/ the health effects and exposure risk assessment analysis with emphasis on technological and scientific aspects including measurement methodology if relevant; and

2/ the economic costs or benefits of compliance with such proposed exposure standards as described in the Preliminary Regulation Impact Statement.

Send comment to: The Secretary, The Secretary, Chemical Standards Sub Committee, NOHSC, GPO Box 1577, Canberra 2601.

From the Chemical Gazette August 2002

r Eleven Amended National Exposure Standards

The amendments were declared by NOHSC in April 2002 and advised in the August 2002 Chemical Gazette,

- lowered existing NES for 4 substances:

Chemical	TWA	STEL
Methyl methacrylate;	50 ppm	100 ppm
Phosgene;	0.02 ppm	0.06 ppm
Selenium and compounds (as Se) excluding hydrogen selenide	0.1 mg/m³	-
Toluene.	50 ppm	150 ppm

- established standards for 7 substances that had no NES:

Chemical	TWA	STEL
Methyl-tert butyl ether	25 ppm	75 ppm
1-Methyl-2-pyrrolidone	25 ppm	75 ppm
Monochloroacetic acid	0.3 ppm	-
Piperidine	1 ppm	-
Propane-1,2-diol (total (vapour and particulates) and particulates only)	150 ppm 10 mg/m³	- -
Propranolol	2 mg/m³	6 mg/m³
1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane (HFC 134a)	1000 ppm	-

To a obtain copy go the NOHSC website: www.nohsc.gov.au/ohslegalobligations/hazsubstancesanddnggoods/nes/secondbatch.htm

r Dermatitis – The Facts Starting from Scratch

The information contained in this Guide focuses on the control of contact dermatitis in the workplace.

To obtain a free copy go to www.worcover.nsw.gov.au/search.asp and search on “dermatitis”.

NICNAS (Industrial Chemicals)

r TTMRA Chemical Cooperation Program

The Trans-Tasman Mutual Recognition Arrangement Chemical Cooperation Program - Draft Regulatory Impact Statement from the NOHSC website: www.nohsc.gov.au/NewsAndWhatsNew/MediaReleases/

The TTMRA Chemical Co-operation Program between Australia and New Zealand needs an urgent review to ensure we get a harmonised cost effective evaluation of chemicals or mixtures that have physical, health or environmental hazards.

When we spend our own money as private citizens we try not to waste it on activities of almost no added benefit. A large part of the chemical evaluation programs in both NICNAS and ERMA is currently of almost no added benefit.

1/ We cannot afford what NICNAS does in Australia, spending a lot of its time re-reviewing data on non-hazardous individual ingredients. This duplicates a manufacturer’s or importer’s obligation to classify chemicals. New non-hazardous ingredients without a sufficient market to justify the expense of being added to the inventory are cancelled by all potential importers and manufacturers, so we don’t see the benefits of these new ingredients.

2/ We also cannot afford what ERMA is doing in New Zealand for hazardous substances (which includes mixtures), which is to review them ALL (eventually) for the risk and safety information that will be on the label. Thus every chemical mixture variation that has a slightly different set of hazards will need a separate review by ERMA. This NRA like Label review process will eventually cost NZ a lot of money! Non-hazardous substances are not included under the NZ HSNO Act and are not even tracked by ERMA.

Suggested Action Needed at NICNAS and ERMA

We need to rationalise both the NICNAS and ERMA programs so they don’t unnecessarily duplicate work and make ALL their review work of value to the community:

a/ NICNAS and ERMA should only review new chemicals which are hazardous or have synergistic effects that increase the hazards of other products. The legal responsibility and cost for the classification of a chemical against agreed physical, health and environmental hazards criteria should rest with the manufacturer or importer.

b/ New non-hazardous chemical classification should be the responsibility of the manufacturer or importer, and NICNAS and ERMA should automatically add them to their chemical inventories BUT track these new non-hazardous chemicals (at a minimum cost) so that if a hazardous or a synergistic effect becomes known for one of these substances they can trace which companies have products containing them.

c/ NICNAS and ERMA should evaluate Priority Existing Chemicals as NICNAS is currently doing and help the world effort to create a proper physical, health and environmental effects data set for all existing chemicals of significance.

d/ NICNAS and ERMA should act as a place of review to sort out anomalous classifications by different companies supplying essentially the same chemicals or preparations.

r May 2002 AICS CD

Changes Since Then

Now that we finally have an Australian Inventory of Chemical Substances (AICS) CD that that is current to the end of May 2002 it is important to simplify how to easily keep up with and search the changes and additions that are published monthly in the Chemical Gazette and available at: www.nicnas.gov.au.

I suggest electronically cutting the Changes and Additions to the AICS from the “pdf” document and putting these into a word processor document. Then just add to this document as the changes and additions are published. You lose the page formatting, but this approach will then allow you to easily search on names and CAS No.s

Received the 3^rd Issue? For those of your who originally started with the 2^nd issue of the 1999 AICS CD released in June 2000 and haven’t received the latest 3^rd issue released in July 2002. If you thought you had a subscription because of the order form in several of the hard copy Chemical Gazettes to Jan 2001 advising of a free update, I suggest you contact NICNAS, advise them of your expectation, and request the 3^rd issue be sent.

r NICNAS Section 48 Reports

The objectives of Section 48 Reports are to identify the quantities of the chemical(s) and products containing the chemical(s) imported into Australia, quantities manufactured and the uses of the products containing the chemical(s) being evaluated. Amounts of chemical(s) produced, and/or released as by-products of processing and/or manufacture, and uses were also investigated.

In addition to the uses and amounts, the reports include information on the physico-chemical characteristics of the chemical(s) and overseas regulatory initiatives pertaining to the chemical(s).

Reports are now available are for:

Polychlorinated diphenyl ethers (PDF 82K)

Polychlorinated naphthalenes (PDF 178K)

Polychlorinated styrenes (PDF 95K)

Tetrachlorobenzyltoluenes (PDF 80K)

The reports can be found on the NICNAS website at www.nicnas.gov.au/news or at www.nicnas.gov.au/publications/car/pec/pecindex.htm#other. Hard copies of the reports may be obtained directly from: Existing Chemicals, NICNAS, Free call: 1800 638 528

Chemical Gazette 2^nd July 2002.

r NICNAS Chemical Info Sheets

The first two of the new series of Chemical Info sheets for general use are now available. These are both 3 page information sheets.

Chemical Info sheet No. 1 What is Regulatory Toxicology? (PDF 88K)

Chemical Info sheet No. 2 What is an Industrial Chemical? (PDF 336K)

Available at www.nicnas.gov.au/publications

From the NICNAS website, July 2002.

r Australian High Volume Industrial Chemicals List - Stage II, Imported Chemicals

In May 2001, Stage I of the establishment of an Australian High Volume Industrial Chemicals (HVIC) List, NICNAS released information regarding chemicals manufactured in Australia in volumes ≥1000 tonnes per year.

In December 2001 Chemical Gazette, NICNAS made a call for information on industrial chemicals imported to Australia in large quantities. This represents Stage II of the establishment of the Australian HVIC List.

Companies importing industrial chemicals in volumes ≥100 metric tonnes per year between 1999 and 2001 were required to submit information regarding chemical identity, the volumes imported and general uses of the chemicals.

Collation of information received on imported chemicals is nearing completion. There are a small number of chemicals for which information is still outstanding.

Of the 642 responses received,

· 594 industrial, reportable chemicals were imported at ≥100 tonnes per year with 214 imported at ≥1000 tonnes per year;

· 224 (35%) companies import industrial, reportable chemicals at ≥100 tonnes per year.

Chemicals for which the summed, total imported volume to Australia is ≥1000 tonnes per year are listed in the Chemical Gazette 2^nd July 2002.

The data for imported chemicals will be combined with data for manufactured chemicals (collected in Stage I) to produce an Australian HVIC List, which will include aggregate quantities reported in bands (e.g. 1,000-9,999 tonnes) and additional information such as the industries in which the chemicals are used and use categories.

For further information, contact Dr Graham Harvey by phone: 02-8577-8851, fax: 02-8577-8888 or email: graham.harvey@nicnas.gov.au.

From Chemical Gazette 2^nd July 2002.

r PEC Candidate List of Chemicals

Chemicals contained in the standby section of the Priority Existing Chemicals (PEC) Candidate List were reviewed in June 2002 to determine whether the awaited data has become available, and if new information has come to hand this has been reviewed and the status of all the chemicals on the List re-determined.

Table 1 gives the PEC Candidate List of chemicals following the review of the standby section. The PEC Candidate List will be used by NICNAS as a basis for selecting chemicals from time to time for declaration and assessment as Priority Existing Chemicals.

Table 2 gives the chemicals remaining on the Standby section of the List following the review. This list will be reviewed periodically and chemicals transferred to the main section of the PEC Candidate List or the Not Selected List depending on the outcomes of awaited assessments and/or testing.

Table 3 lists the chemicals moved from the main or standby sections of the PEC Candidate List in the current review and the reasons for the change.

Obtain a copy from the July 2002 Chemical Gazette at: www.nicnas.gov.au/publications/gazette/chemgazettejul2002.htm.