Public comments on IChEMS proposed standards

Our ref N/A
Your ref N/A Department of
Enquiries [redacted] Transport and Main Roads

01 September 2023

TMR Submission for IChEMS Scheduling Decisions for PFOA, PFOS and PFHxS

TMR thanks the Department of Climate Change, Energy the Environment and Water
(DCCEEW), for the opportunity to submit feedback on the Proposed Schedule 7 decisions for PFOA, PFOS and PFHxS. The feedback below is for all three chemicals and will refer to the chemicals collectively as ‘the relevant PFAS’ and all three scheduling decisions for the relevant PFAS as ‘the scheduling decisions’.

The Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) supports the proposed Schedule 7 decisions to prohibit the import, manufacture, export and use of the relevant PFAS.
 TMR has been impacted by PFAS contamination and faces significant costs for the
investigation, identification, treatment, disposal and reuse of PFAS contaminated
soils, waters, and wastes generated from the construction, demolition, maintenance
and operation of transport infrastructure.
 TMR believes that the proposed scheduling decisions will help, in the future, to
reduce the amounts of PFAS that will be subsequently released to the environment,
which will then reduce the amounts of PFAS that will contaminate land and
infrastructure that TMR owns or is otherwise responsible for.

TMR envisages the following challenges in implementing the proposed Schedule 7 decisions for the relevant PFAS:

 The frameworks for the management of waste (especially those wastes related to or
containing industrial chemicals) must more clearly distinguish between:
 a user of the relevant PFAS under these scheduling decisions that then disposes
of that chemical or article, i.e. an industrial chemical user and
 an entity that is undertaking an activity that does not use the relevant chemicals,
i.e. a victim of contamination, but which is looking to reuse soils and waters or
other articles (including wastes such as concrete and asphalt) which have been
contaminated by the industrial chemical use and disposal of the original industrial
chemical user.
 Responsibilities, requirements and penalties must consider the reasonable level
of control that can be expected from a victim of contamination in managing their
wastes/soils/waters that have been contaminated by industrial chemical users
versus those expectations for industrial chemical users.

[redacted] Website www.tmr.qld.gov.au
[redacted] tmr.qld.gov.au
ABN 39 407 690 291
 It is unclear whether the use/reuse of soils, waters, biosolids or wastes impacted by
the relevant PFAS are considered to be uses of an article where the relevant PFAS
are present as unintentional trace contamination under paragraphs (c) of the
scheduling decisions.
 Paragraphs (f) of the scheduling decisions should also clearly differentiate between
industrial chemical users and victims of contamination that then generate wastes
containing the relevant PFAS.
 The scheduling decisions each make reference to waste disposal in an
‘environmentally sound manner’ where treatment in accordance with subparagraph
(i) is not the environmentally preferred option.
 Is this intended to be consistent with the “General technical guidelines on the
environmentally sound management of wastes consisting of, containing or
contaminated with persistent organic pollutants”1?
 If so, can that distinction please be made, for example as part of the ‘Terms
defined in the Register instrument’ if not, why not and what does
‘environmentally sound manner’ then mean?
 It is unclear how the administering authorities will determine when treatment is NOT
the environmentally preferred option.
 Will there be guidance on what needs to be considered?
 Will this guidance consider the Australian context in terms of what treatment
options are available in Australia and at what point treatment is no longer the
environmentally preferred option?
 It is unclear how DCCEEW will implement legislation on the labelling of Schedule 7
chemicals and articles as this has been a very difficult part of risk identification and
assessment: not knowing what potential sources of chemicals have been and are
likely to be in the future, especially with regards to the reuse and recycling of wastes.
 Will there be a public register of those uses exempt in the scheduling decisions?
 Will there be public registers of commonwealth PFAS uses and releases to the
environment (i.e. land and water contamination)?

TMR looks forward to further developments in the IChEMS space and any other PFAS related matters under the scope of DCCEEW and is available to discuss any of these matters further, especially in relation to impacts to linear infrastructure.

Yours sincerely

[redacted]

1 UNEP/CHW.14/7/Add.1/Rev.1

Page 2 of 2