Commonwealth Numbered Regulations - Explanatory Statements

[Index] [Search] [Download] [Related Items] [Help]

HAZARDOUS WASTE (REGULATION OF EXPORTS AND IMPORTS) (OECD DECISION) AMENDMENT REGULATIONS 2004 (NO. 1) 2004 NO. 73

Section 62 of the Hazardous Waste (Regulation of Exports and Imports) Act 1989 (the Act) provides that the Governor-General may make regulations, not inconsistent with the Act, prescribing matters required or permitted by the Act to be prescribed, or necessary or convenient to be prescribed for carrying out or giving effect to the Act.

The purpose of the Regulations is to update Australia's regulatory scheme for the control of transboundary movements of hazardous wastes, by giving effect to changes in the relevant multilateral arrangements.

Subsection 3(2) of the Act states that the Act aims to give effect to the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal (the Basel Convention); and to give effect to agreements and arrangements of the kind mentioned in Article 11 of the Basel Convention.

Section 4C of the Act provides that the Minister must declare in writing that such an agreement or arrangement is an Article 11 arrangement for the purposes of the Act, and arrange for the declaration to be published in the Gazette.

Section 13C of the Act provides that regulations may give effect to an Article 11 arrangement (as declared, pursuant to section 4C of the Act). Subsection 13C(2) provides that Regulations made to give effect to an Article 11 arrangement must not be expressed to take effect before the day on which an arrangement comes into effect for Australia.

The Hazardous Waste (Regulation of Exports and Imports) (OECD Decision) Regulations 1996 (the Principal Regulations), among other things, implement the OECD's control system (set out in OECD Decision C(92)39/FINAL) for transfrontier movements between OECD countries of hazardous wastes destined for recovery operations. The OECD Decision operates on a system of prior notification by the country of export to the country of import, and written or tacit consent from the latter. Imports and exports of hazardous wastes under the Principal Regulations require permit approval, with applicants required to meet specified requirements relating to, for example, insurance and contractual arrangements.

In April 2000, Australia entered into multilateral negotiations to amend OECD Council Decision C(92)39/FINAL concerning the control of transfrontier movements of wastes destined for recovery operations. The Government's objectives in participating in the negotiations were to secure a control system for transboundary movements of wastes, destined for recovery within the OECD, that is consistent with the global system established in the Basel Convention, provides certainty and simplicity to industry and minimises administrative costs to the Commonwealth. Leading up to OECD Council Decision C(2001)107/FINAL, Australia argued in favour of the OECD adopting Annexes VIII and IX of the Basel Convention in place of the existing red, amber and green lists. Australia's preferred option was not agreed to but our fall-back position was adopted. This was partial adoption of Annexes VIII and IX, which retains some of the disadvantages of the status quo, but provided a means of securing a consensus decision.

The Regulations give effect to OECD Council Decision C(2001)107/FINAL, which was adopted by OECD Council on 14 June 2001 and came into effect for Australia on the same day. It was declared to be an Article 11 arrangement for the purposes of the Act on 19 December 2003. Section 13D of the Act prescribes the contents of a set of Article 11 Regulations. The Decision improves the existing control system for movements of hazardous wastes from one OECD country for recycling operations in another OECD country. The Decision harmonises the OECD lists of wastes with Annexes VIII and IX to the Basel Convention and amendments to Annexes VIII and IX will be automatically incorporated into the Decision from time to time.

Decision C(2001)107/FINAL continues an arrangement made under Article 11.2 of the Basel Convention, which exempts pre-existing control systems from the provisions of the Convention provided they are compatible with the Convention.

The Regulations were developed in consultation with the Hazardous Waste Act Policy Reference Group, on which various industry and community groups, and relevant Commonwealth, State and Territory Departments are represented.

The Act specifies no conditions that had to be met before the power to make the Regulations was exercised.

Details of the Regulations are attached. A Regulation Impact Statement is at Attachment A. A copy of the Declaration pursuant to section 4C of the Act is at Attachment B.

The Regulations commenced on the date of their notification in the Gazette.

ATTACHMENT

Details of the Hazardous Waste (Regulation of Exports and Imports) (OECD Decision) Amendment Regulations 2004 (No. 1)

Regulation 1 provides that the Regulations are the Hazardous Waste (Regulation of Exports and Imports) (OECD Decision) Amendment Regulations 2004 (No. 1).

Regulation 2 provides that the Regulations commenced on the date of their notification in the Gazette.

Regulation 3 provides for the Schedule to the amending Regulations to amend the principal regulations, the Hazardous Waste (Regulation of Exports and Imports) (OECD Decision) Regulations 1996.

Unless otherwise indicated, the amendments would revise references and terminology to align the Principal Regulations with OECD Decision C(2001)107/FINAL, to be inserted as Schedule 1, under Schedule 1 and 2, below:

Subregulation 4(1) includes a number of amendments:

Item 1 substitutes the existing definition of "amber control procedure".

Item 2 omits the definition of an approved recovery facility.

Item 3 substitutes the existing definition of "EPIP Act" with a definition of "EPBC Act", to reflect recent legislative amendments.

Item 4 inserts definitions of "green control procedure" and "hazardous wastes".

Item 5 substitutes the existing definitions of "OECD Decision" and "pre-consented recovery facility".

Item 6 substitutes the existing definition of "recovery operation".

Item 7 omits the definition of "red list hazardous waste".

Item 8 inserts a definition of "transboundary movement".

Item 9 inserts a definition of "wastes".

Regulation 6 substitutes a new regulation, which prescribes control procedures of wastes that require transboundary movement.

Regulation 7 substitutes a new regulation, which prescribes procedures for other wastes including wastes not listed in Appendix 3 or Appendix 4 of the OECD Decision.

Regulation 8 substitutes a new regulation, which prescribes procedures for mixtures of wastes.

Regulation 8A substitutes a new regulation, which prescribes procedures for transboundary movement of wastes for laboratory analysis.

Subregulation 9(1) substitutes a new regulation, which defines wastes for which a person may apply for a special export permit.

Subregulation 15(1) omit "If, within the period mentioned in subregulation 14(1)", (which is within 40 days of receiving an application), and inserts "If, within 35 days of receiving an application", in subregulation 15(1). Under the previous subregulation 15(1), if the final consent was received on the 40^th day, the Minister must grant or refuse the permit on the same day. Under the amendments, if the final consent is received on or after the 35^th day, the Minister must grant or refuse the permit within 5 working days.

Subregulation 15(1)(b) omits the word "special" because it is superfluous and is not used in other relevant subregulations.

Subregulation 16(1)(e) substitutes a new paragraph which references the clause in Chapter II of Section D(1)(a) of OECD Decision C(2001)107/FINAL which refers to contracts.

Subregulation 16(5) and 16(b) substitutes existing regulations with new subregulations which prescribes the circumstances under which consent is taken to have been given by an importing country.

Subregulation 17(2) substitutes a new subregulation which prescribes the period for which special export permits have effect, that is not longer than three years for a pre-consented recovery facility, or not longer than one year in any other case.

Subregulation 21(5) substitutes a new subregulation which prescribes the procedures that apply to the granting of a special import permit and delete the existing reference to "hazardous waste other than amber list hazardous waste".

Subregulation 22(1)(a) substitutes a new paragraph which references the terms "waste subject to the amber control procedure" and "pre-consented recovery facility".

Subregulation 23(3)(d) substitutes a new paragraph which references the clause in Chapter II of Section D(1)(a) of OECD Decision C(2001)107/FINAL which refers to contracts.

Subregulation 24(2) substitutes a new subregulation which prescribes the period for which special import permits may have effect, that is not longer than three years for a pre-consented recovery facility, or not longer than one year in any other case.

Subregulation 28(5) substitutes a new subregulation which prescribes the procedures that apply to the granting of a special transit permit and delete the existing reference to "hazardous waste other than amber list hazardous waste".

Subregulation 30(2) substitutes a new subregulation which prescribes the period for which special transit permits may have effect, that is not longer than three years for a pre-consented recovery facility, or not longer than one year in any other case.

Regulation 42 substitutes a new regulation which references the terms "waste subject to the amber control procedure" and "pre-consented recovery facility", and provide that the Minister may give a pre-consent for a specified period of time and revoke a pre-consent at any time.

Subregulations 43(a), 43(b), and 43(c) substitutes new paragraphs which omit references to red list hazardous waste and inserts references to revoking a pre-consent.

Schedules 1 and 2 substitutes existing Schedules 1 and 2 to the Principal Regulations with a new Schedule 1 which provides the full text of the revision of the decision of the Council C(92)39/FINAL on the control of transboundary movements of wastes destined for recovery operations.

Subregulations 15(5A), 15(5A) note, 21(3), 21(3) note, 22(2) and (3), 22(3) note, 28(3), 28(3) note, 40(4A), and 40(4A) note are amended by omitting each mention of the EPIP Act (the Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act 1974) and inserting EPBC Act (the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999).

ATTACHMENT A

PROBLEM

1.       In April 2000, Australia entered into multilateral negotiations to amend OECD Council Decision C(92)39/FINAL concerning the control of transfrontier movements of wastes destined for recovery operations. Prior to pursuing the negotiations, a Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) was prepared in accordance with the Government's requirements. A copy is at Annex 1.

OBJECTIVES

2.       The Government's objectives in participating in the negotiations were to secure a control system for transboundary movements of wastes, destined for recovery within the OECD, that is consistent with the global system established in the Basel Convention, provides certainty and simplicity to industry and minimises administrative costs to the Commonwealth.

OPTIONS

3.       The two options canvassed in the negotiations were full adoption of Annexes VIII and IX of the Basel Convention as they stood, or partial adoption of the Annexes.

IMPACT ANALYSIS

4.       A detailed impact analysis of the options was undertaken (see Annex 1).

5.       Australia argued in favour of the OECD adopting Annexes VIII and IX of the Convention in place of the existing red, amber and green lists. This option would provide certainty and simplicity to industry and minimise administrative costs to the Commonwealth. There would also be some benefits to importers of aluminium ashes and residues from OECD countries, who would no longer require a permit for such imports.

6.       Negotiations were concluded at the 51^st meeting of the Working Group on Waste Management Policy (WGWMP), in October 2000, which agreed and adopted amendments to Council Act C(92)39/FINAL. Australia's recommended option, that the OECD adopt Annexes VIII and IX of the Basel Convention as they stood, was not agreed but our fall-back position was adopted. This was partial adoption of Annexes VIII and IX, which retains some of the disadvantages of the status quo, but provided a means of securing a consensus decision. The main consequence of this in practice is that movements of electronic scrap destined for recovery operations will continue to be subject to Green tier controls within the OECD.

7.       The amended Decision was adopted by OECD Council on 14 June 2001 as Decision C(2001)107, but without a technical appendix that included the forms for the notification of movement documents. The technical appendix was subsequently adopted by Council on 28 February 2002 and the full Decision was finally adopted by Council 21 May 2002, as OECD Council Decision C(2001)107/FINAL. It was on that date that a full legal text of the Decision became available and a copy is at Annex 2.

8.       Implementing the requirements of OECD Council Decision C(2001)107/FINAL in amended regulations requires a number of consequent changes to the Hazardous Waste (Regulation of Exports and Imports) (OECD Decision) Regulations 1996. Table 1 describes each amendment.

Table 1.       Explanatory Table - Hazardous Waste (Regulation of Exports and Imports) (OECD Decision) Amendment Regulations.

Existing Regulation	Change and description	Rationale for change
4(1)	Substitutes amber control procedure in place of amber list waste	The new Decision contains a list of wastes subject to the amber control procedure, not an amber list of waste
4(1)	Omits the definition of an approved recovery facility in Australia	To replace approved with pre-consented
4(1)	Omits the definition of an approved recovery facility outside Australia	To replace approved with pre-consented
4(1)	Substitutes the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999	Replaces the reference to the old Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act 1974
4(1)	Inserts definitions of green control procedure and hazardous wastes	The new Decision contains a list of wastes subject to the green control procedure, not a green list of waste. The definition of hazardous waste is new because we no longer cite the OECD Decision of 1988.
4(1)	Substitutes definitions of the OECD Decision and a pre-consented recovery facilities	Updates the definition of the OECD Decision and replaces approved with pre-consented
4(1)	Substitutes definition of recovery operation	The definition of a recovery operation is new because we no longer cite the OECD Decision of 1988.
4(1)	Omits definition of red list hazardous waste	A separate red list has been deleted and all wastes are now subject to either amber or green control procedures
4(1)	Inserts definition of transboundary movement	Definition not included in old regulations
4(1)	Inserts definition of wastes	The definition of wastes is new because we no longer cite the OECD Decision of 1988.
6	Substitutes control procedures to allow transboundary movement	The new Decision contains a list of wastes subject to the amber control procedure, not an amber list of waste
7	Wastes not listed in the OECD Decision and having a hazardous characteristic are subject to the amber control procedure	Unlisted wastes were subject to red tier controls in the old Decision
8	Substitutes mixtures of wastes	The new Decision clarifies the status of mixtures of wastes subject to the amber and green control procedures. More than a trivial amount of amber means amber control procedure.
8A	Exempts transboundary movement of wastes for laboratory analysis provided the Minister confirms exemption within 30 days	Countries may exempt up to 25 kilograms of waste for laboratory analysis to assess physical or chemical characteristics, or to determine suitability for recovery operations
9(1)	Substitutes amber control procedure in place of amber list waste	The new Decision contains a list of wastes subject to the amber control procedure, not an amber list of waste
15(1)	Automatic extension begins after 35 days, not 40	At present the Minister may have to make a decision within hours if a consent is received on the 40th day
15(1)(b)	Omits the word 'special'	Inclusion of the word 'special' is superfluous
16(1)(e)	Substitutes the requirements of OECD Decision C(2001)107/FINAL	References the new Decision in place of the old one
16(5)	Omits 'amber list hazardous waste' by inserting 'waste subject to the amber control procedure'	The new Decision contains a list of wastes subject to the amber control procedure, not an amber list of waste
16(5)(b)	Omits 'an approved recovery facility' by inserting 'a pre-consented recovery facility'	To replace approved with pre-consented
17(2)	Substitutes the commencement and duration of special export permits for one and three years	Permits to pre-consented facilities may be granted for up to three years. All others for up to one year.
21(5)	Substitutes amber control procedure in place of amber list waste	The new Decision contains a list of wastes subject to the amber control procedure, not an amber list of waste
22(1)(a)	Substitutes amber control procedure in place of amber list waste	The new Decision contains a list of wastes subject to the amber control procedure, not an amber list of waste
22(1)(a)	Omits 'an approved recovery facility' by inserting 'a pre-consented recovery facility'	To replace approved with pre-consented
23(3)(d)	Substitutes the requirements of OECD Decision C(2001)107/FINAL	References the new Decision in place of the old one
24(2)	Substitutes the commencement and duration of special import permits for one and three years	Permits to pre-consented facilities may be granted for up to three years. All others for up to one year.
28(5)	Substitutes by removing reference to 'hazardous waste other than amber list hazardous waste'	Removes a reference to red list waste
30(2)	Substitutes the commencement and duration of special transit permits for one and three years	Permits to pre-consented facilities may be granted for up to three years. All others for up to one year.
42	Omits 'an approved recovery facility' by inserting 'a pre-consented recovery facility'	To replace approved with pre-consented, introduce a specified period of time and provide for revocation
43(a), (b) & (c)	Substitutes provisions for review of decisions to include pre-consented recovery facility and 3 year permits	To replace approved with pre-consented
15(5A), 21(3), 22(2) and (3), 28(3), and 40(4A)	Omits each mention of EPIP Act by inserting EPBC Act	Replaces references to the old Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act 1974
Schedules 1 and 2	Substitutes C(2001)107/FINAL	Replaces C(92)39/FINAL

CONSULTATION

9.       The Commonwealth undertakes consultation with Australian industry, environment groups and State and Territory governments through the Hazardous Waste Act Policy Reference Group, which is convened once or twice each year by the Department of the Environment and Heritage ("DEH").

10.       After the OECD meeting in April 2000, stakeholders' views were sought on the draft revision of C(92)39/FINAL at the 27^th meeting of the PRG, on Thursday 22 June 2000. Stakeholders made no comment apart from noting the new waste lists in Appendix 3 and Appendix 4 of the draft amended decision.

11.       After the WGWMP adopted the text of the new Council Decision in October 2000, stakeholders' views were sought at the 29^th meeting of the PRG, on Thursday 23 November 2000. The minutes record that:

"Paragraph 3 of the agenda paper summarised the instructions agreed by the OECD Environment Policy Committee (EPOC) for amendment of Decision C(92)39/FINAL. On page 4, the Preamble records the desire of Member countries to continue C(92)39/FINAL as an arrangement under Article 11.2 of the Basel Convention. Page 7 contains the new definition of wastes, which for the first time separates wastes destined for (final) disposal from those destined for recovery.

"A number of amendments were agreed to the Amber tier control procedures. For example, up to 25 kg of material explicitly destined for laboratory analysis to assess its physical or chemical characteristics or to determine its suitability for recovery operations may be exempted from controls. Members of the Group noted the importance of having an effective procedure in place for testing materials and the need for arrangements to facilitate the testing. Many samples of varying sizes and weights were sent overseas for testing by Australian industry and in some instances, considerable problems had been encountered, particularly to the United States. Group members requested an additional two weeks to make comments on this issue.

"Under a draft of the amended Decision, competent authorities who issued written consents would have had to do so within thirty days. This would have been difficult for Australia because we usually have to wait more than thirty days for consent from countries of import or transit. We resolved this by inserting the words 'do not object', so that issuing an objection can effectively stop the clock until the necessary consents are received. Written consent will continue to remain valid for up to one year from the date of issuance, but shipments to pre-consented recovery facilities may be granted consent for up to three years.

"A significant amendment was made to the OECD Amber List when aluminium ashes and residues were deleted from it. This will have a significant impact for Australia when it comes into force because imports and exports of aluminium dross and residues will no longer require a permit when shipped within the OECD. This change will align the OECD controls with the Basel Convention. The amended Amber List also contains an Australian footnote that clarifies the hazard status of spent potlinings from aluminium smelting.

"The amended Council Decision is expected to be adopted by the OECD Council early in 2001 and to be implemented by amendments to the Australian OECD Regulations soon afterwards."

12.       At the 31^st meeting of the PRG, on Friday 9 November 2001, the minutes record that: "A new OECD Council Decision had been adopted on 14 June 2001 and Environment Australia was working on new Regulations to implement it."

13.       At the 32^nd meeting of the PRG, on Thursday 21 February 2002, the minutes record that "Environment Australia was resolving a number of issues with the Office of Legal Drafting."

14.       At the 33^rd meeting of the PRG, on Friday 25 October 2002, Members were advised that DEH was still working on amendments to the Australian OECD Decision Regulations.

15.       Throughout this consultation process, stakeholders did not raise any substantive concerns.

16.       In August 2003, DEH consulted directly with stakeholders including current applicants for permits and permit holders. The following comments were received:

§       New South Wales Environment Protection Authority. "The EPA confirms its support for the proposed implementation of the requirements of the OECD Council Decision C(2001)107/FINAL and endorses the RIS of the amendment regulations to enact the decision. The EPA would also encourage EA to specifically seek feedback from the aluminium and electronic industry sectors during the Hazardous Waste Act Policy Reference Group meeting on 19 September 2003".

§       Weston Aluminium Pty Limited. "We understand that many countries, such as New Zealand, have removed control and the need for licences for movement of Waste between OECD countries (from OECD to OECD). Why has this not occurred as yet in Australia? We have been promised it and yet we have been waiting for more than a year with no action. If this is done, then there would be no need for a permit for waste from NZ or any OECD counties to Australia. (Currently, you do not need a permit from Developing countries to OECD). That only leaves the need from OECD to Developing countries, which is understandable because that is what the Basel Convention intended - To protect developing countries from waste being "dumped" on them as exports by developing countries."

"We look forward to hearing the results of feedback about this proposal and hope that the need for special import permits for imports from OECD countries into Australia, NZ in particular, may in fact be removed."

17.       At the 34^th meeting of the PRG, on Friday 19 September 2003, the minutes record that: "Peter Netchaef asked whether there were any moves to amend the Customs Codes relevant to the OECD Decision Regulations. Mark Hyman replied that there were not: amendments to the Customs Codes had been proposed through the Basel Secretariat but this process took several years. At the request of several members, the Secretariat agreed to provide an additional opportunity to comment on the Statement."

18.       After the 34^th meeting of the PRG the following comment was received:

Mr David Sinclair. "I have some reservations about the regulation impact statement. My views are as follows: The statement provides an accurate description of the process including Australia's position and why it was necessary to adopt the fall back position to achieve consensus. It also provides a good description of the consultation process with the PRG, some of the states and individual industries. I do not think the paper provides enough detail on the impacts. I would have liked to have seen a table giving detail of the areas where the proposed regulation differed from the existing regulation and an assessment of the impact (positive and negative) of those differences. This would inform the view of key stakeholders on what changes are proposed and the impact on their business activities. An example which is in the text is the exemption which applies to laboratory samples, which from my perspective is a positive impact. Harmonising with Basel may be a positive or negative impact depending on your view on Basel and on the avoidance of duplication. I am sure that there are other examples where the impacts should be assessed."

19.       At the 35^th meeting of the PRG, on Friday 13 February 2003, the explanatory table requested by Mr Sinclair, was given to the Group and the draft minutes record that "Mr Sinclair noted that the table goes a fair way to what was asked for and assesses impacts". No other comments were received. (The table has been reproduced under the heading Impact Analysis.)

CONCLUSION

20.       Implementing the requirements of OECD Council Decision C(2001)107/FINAL in amended regulations would ensure that Australia meets its international obligations. It would improve the harmonisation between the OECD and Basel lists of wastes and introduce potentially useful options such as the power to exempt small transboundary boundary movements of wastes from the Amber control procedure if they are explicitly destined for laboratory analysis, and to grant permits for up to three years for waste movements that are destined for pre-consented recovery facilities.

IMPLEMENTATION

21.       OECD Council Decision C(2001)107/FINAL will be adopted by an amendment to the Hazardous Waste (Regulation of Exports and Imports) (OECD Decision) Regulations. DEH and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade will monitor the impact of the amendments to the OECD Decision and the Act on an ongoing basis. In addition, DEH has in place consultative arrangements to obtain regular feedback from industry and environment group stakeholders on the effectiveness of the Convention, the OECD Decision and the Act.

REVIEW

22.       Section 61 of the Act requires the Minister to, as soon as practicable after the end of each financial year, prepare a report on the operation of the Act during that year; and cause a copy of the report to be laid before each House of the Parliament within 15 sitting days of that House after completion of the report. Consequently, the operation of the OECD Decision Regulations would form part of the annual report to the Commonwealth Parliament.

Problem

1.       In February 1998 the Parties to the Basel Convention adopted two new Annexes to the Convention (Annexes VIII and IX). The new Annexes contain detailed lists of wastes that are explicitly subject (Annex VIII) or not subject (Annex IX) to the Convention. The new Annexes were based on the red, amber and green lists of wastes that were originally adopted by the OECD in 1992 and the Basel and OECD lists, whilst not identical, are very similar.

2.       In October 1998 the OECD Working Group on Waste Management Policy (WGWMP), recognising that duplication of the two sets of lists was largely unnecessary, decided to amend OECD Decision C(92)39/FINAL by attaching Annexes VIII and IX as they stood, followed by further harmonisation of the OECD lists and Basel lists through applications to amend Annexes I, VIII and IX of the Basel Convention. The amber procedure would be used for Annex VIII wastes and the green procedure for Annex IX wastes. In exceptional cases the amber procedure for could be used for Annex IX wastes and the green procedure for Annex VIII wastes.

3.       In February 1999 the OECD Environment Policy Committee (EPOC) endorsed the proposal that Basel Annexes VIII and IX would replace the OECD red, amber and green lists. The green procedure would be applied to Annex IX wastes and the amber procedure to Annex VIII wastes. The present Review Mechanism would be eliminated but it would be possible to re-assign wastes to the other list in exceptional cases.

4.       At the next WGWMP meeting, in November 1999, it became obvious that there were difficulties concerning the relations between the Basel and OECD lists. All European Union Member States and the Commission supported the direct adoption of the Basel lists into the OECD control system, unless there were a consensus of Member countries to apply a different level of control in exceptional cases. If no consensus could be reached in these exceptional cases, Member countries could "opt out" of direct adoption of the Basel lists on a case-by-case basis. Other countries, however, led by the United States, supported the direct adoption of the Basel lists only in those cases where no Member country objected. Where such an objection is made, the Basel listing would not apply until Council so decided, and in these cases decisions on the level of control to be applied would be based on the existing OECD risk-based criteria.

5.       Debate on these issues will resume at the 50^th meeting of the WGWMP to be held in April 2000. The OECD Secretariat has proposed a way forward that consists of replacing the OECD red, amber and green lists with Annexes VIII and IX to the Basel Convention in future drafts of OECD Decision C(92)39. While the amendment of C(92)39 is under preparation, OECD Member countries would continue submitting applications to the Basel Review Mechanism to reduce the number of differences between the Basel lists and the green/amber/red lists. Exceptional cases might entail OECD Member countries using the adjustment procedure to apply a different level of control within the OECD Control System only. It has been noted, however, that the OECD System still provides the possibility for a Member country to individually control a waste differently from the other Member countries. Decision C(92)39/FINAL will remain in force and valid until the amended Decision has formally been adopted by the Council and the present one repealed.

6.       Australia is likely to align with European Union Member States and the Commission in supporting the direct adoption of the Basel lists into the OECD control system. There are several reasons for this. One is that different lists mean that we treat different countries in different ways and we wish to keep such differences to a minimum. Another is that different lists introduce complexity into a control system that we want to keep simple, particularly when wastes destined for OECD countries transit through non-OECD countries. A third reason is that we wish to avoid the costs associated with maintaining different sets of lists.

7.       Adoption of the Basel lists into the OECD control system will directly affect business because the existing lists are different. The OECD amber and red lists of wastes currently consist of 88 entries in eight categories. Two entries have been added since 1992 and one has been modified. Some 17 out of the existing 80 entries are not included in Annexes I or VIII of the Basel Convention, and 11 of the 16 are not even included in the OECD's lists of potentially hazardous waste types or constituents (which implies that they are not controlled in any OECD country's national list of wastes). If the amber list were replaced by Annex VIII of the Basel Convention, these 17 wastes would no longer be controlled inside the OECD. They are not controlled outside the OECD. Annex VIII contains five entries which are not on the amber list: these are all hazardous wastes under the Basel Convention and OECD member countries are legally bound to control them through OECD Decision C(88)90 (see Attachment A "Harmonising the OECD green, amber and red lists of wastes with Annexes VIII and IX of the Basel Convention: an Australian perspective").

8.       The OECD green list currently consists of 141 entries in 15 categories. Thirteen entries have been deleted since 1992, four have been modified and four have been added. If the green list were replaced by Annex IX of the Basel Convention, the only significant implication is that fluorinated polymer wastes and chlorinated polymer and copolymer wastes would be removed to list C, the list of wastes whose status is yet to be decided. This is unlikely to result in any changes in practice: wastes on list C are subject to the decisions of national competent authorities and OECD countries are unlikely to change their current national positions.

Objectives

9.       The objectives are to secure a control system for transboundary movements of wastes, destined for recovery within the OECD, that is consistent with the global system established in the Basel Convention, provides certainty and simplicity to industry and minimises administrative costs to the Commonwealth.

10.       Adoption of Annexes VIII and IX to the Basel Convention would eliminate the need for countries that are both Parties to the Basel Convention and members of the OECD to subscribe to two sets of lists. The current use of Annexes VIII and IX and the OECD amber and green lists create some confusion amongst industry as to what waste is and is not controlled. Adoption would reduce the need for time-consuming consultation by industry with Environment Australia and the Hazardous Waste Technical Group. It would also reduce the risk that certain wastes, controlled under Basel but not under OECD, would illegally transit non-OECD countries.

11.       Adoption of Annexes VIII and IX in place of the existing OECD amber and green lists would remove the need for the Review Mechanism of the OECD, and all functions of that body could be carried out by the Review Mechanism of the Basel Convention. Funding for the OECD Review Mechanism has already been removed from the OECD's main budget and the work is currently funded only on a voluntary basis.

Options

12.       The OECD has three options: the status quo, partial adoption of Annexes VIII and IX, and full adoption of the Annexes. Maintaining the status quo means that some wastes would be controlled differently inside and outside the OECD, the control system would be more complex than it need be, and resources would have to be found to continue to support a Review Mechanism for adjusting the lists.

13.       Partial adoption of Annexes VIII and IX would retain some of the disadvantages of the status quo, but may provide a means of securing a consensus decision.

14.       Full adoption of Annexes VIII and IX would realise the objectives of consistency with the global system established in the Basel Convention, certainty and simplicity to industry and minimal administrative costs to the Commonwealth.

Impact analysis

15.       A detailed analysis of the combined red and amber lists is at Attachment A. The various entries may be assigned to three categories: significant differences between the Basel and OECD lists are in Appendix 1 of the Attachment A, non-significant differences (the largest category) are in Appendix 2, and no differences are in Appendix 3. Detailed analysis of the green list appears to be unnecessary because no significant differences have been identified.

16.       Only two waste streams listed in Appendix 1 are known to be exported from or imported to Australia. These waste streams are aluminium ashes and residues and waste electrical and electronic assemblies or scrap.

17.       Aluminium wastes in the form of ash, residue, slag, dross, skimming, scaling, dust, powder, sludge and cake is currently regulated under the OECD control system and is assigned to amber list entry AA050. Adoption of Annexes VIII and IX to the Basel Convention would mean that these aluminium wastes would not appear on any list and there would be no requirement to control transboundary movements between OECD member countries.

18.       Since the amended Hazardous Waste Act entered into force in December 1996, four applications have been received to import aluminium ashes and residues (Table 1). Three permits were granted and one was refused. If the amber list were replaced by Annex VIII, these imports would not have been subject to controls. In considering the impact of removing these controls, the following factors are relevant:

(a)       Aluminium ashes and residues can be imported, free of controls, from any country except an OECD member country;

(b)       The recovery facilities that process the waste are permitted under New South Wales and Victorian law to carry out recovery operations on waste of that type; and

(c)       One application was refused because processing of imported dross at the particular facility would have been contrary to a condition imposed under New South Wales planning law. There was no other reason for the refusal and removal of controls under the Hazardous Waste Act would not have any effect on the planning condition.

19.       Exports and imports of waste electrical and electronic assemblies or scrap require a permit under the Hazardous Waste Act unless they do not contain hazardous components such as nickel-cadmium batteries, mercury switches and glass from cathode-ray tubes. They must not be contaminated with constituents listed in Annex I of the Basel Convention such as cadmium, mercury, lead, or polychlorinated biphenyl. Waste or scrap consisting of printed circuit boards (even if accompanied by other waste or scrap) requires a permit unless:

(a)       the boards contain less than 1% (w/w) of lead and leach less than 1 mg/L of lead in a TCLP leachate test (and are free of other hazardous constituents); or

(b)       the material is destined for recovery operations in an OECD country.

Table 1. Permits granted and applications refused for the export or import of aluminium dross since December 1996

Applicant	Quantity (tonnes)	Period of Permit	Type of Waste, Disposal Operation & Destination
Permits granted
Simsmetal Ltd	1,500	18.11.97 - 17.11.98	Aluminium ashes and residues from New Zealand for recycling/reclamation of metals and metal compounds at Sims Aluminium RSF Technology, 80 Buckley Grove, Moolap, Victoria.
Simsmetal Limited	80	18.12.98 - 17.12.99	Aluminium ashes and residues from New Zealand for recycling/reclamation of metals and metal compounds at Sims Aluminium RSF Technology, 80 Buckley Grove, Moolap, Victoria.
Sims Aluminium Pty Limited	1,200	31.05.99 - 30.05.00	Aluminium ashes and residues from New Zealand for recycling/reclamation of metals and metal compounds at Sims Aluminium Pty Limited, St Mary's, New South Wales.
Applications refused
Weston Aluminium Pty Ltd	100	Refused on 27.10.99	Aluminium dross from Japan for recycling/reclamation of metals and metal compounds and uses of residual materials obtained from the recycling/reclamation of metals and metal compounds to Weston Aluminium Pty Ltd, Mitchell Avenue, Weston, NSW, 2326.

20.       Note that boards containing lead solder will usually leach more than 1 mg/L lead and fail the TCLP test.

21.       Waste electrical and electronic assemblies or scrap do not require a permit when exported to or imported from OECD countries because they have been assigned to OECD green list entry GC020: "Electronic scrap (eg printed circuit boards, electronic components, wire, etc) and reclaimed electronic components suitable for base and precious metal recovery". There are no relevant entries on the OECD red or amber lists.

22.       Currently, some waste electrical and electronic assemblies or scrap are exported from Australia to OECD countries free of controls. In considering the impact of imposing controls under the Hazardous Waste Act, the following factors are relevant:

(a)       Waste electrical and electronic assemblies or scrap must not be exported to or imported from any country, except an OECD member country, without a permit;

(b)       Figures on the quantities exported or imported are not available because there is no specific customs code for this material. However, there are so few facilities equipped to process these wastes in Australia that the quantities proposed for export to OECD countries are likely to be very small;

(c)       Exports to environmentally sound recovery facilities in OECD countries would normally be permitted under the Act; and

(d)       Requiring that exports to OECD countries be controlled would greatly reduce the risk of illegal transits of non-OECD countries on the way to the country of import.

Consultation

23.       The Commonwealth undertakes consultation with State and Territory governments as well as hazardous waste stakeholder groups through the Hazardous Waste Act Policy Reference Group (PRG), which is convened three to four times each year by Environment Australia.

24.       State and Territory governments are represented by a senior official of the Environment Protection Authority of Victoria, who was nominated by State and Territory environment agencies to attend meetings on their behalf and report back to them on any issues of interest or relevance. Representatives from Australian industry and environment groups are also represented on the PRG, as are officers of interested Commonwealth government departments and agencies.

25.       The PRG acts as a forum for the Commonwealth to raise issues of policy development with stakeholders, and to receive their direct feedback. It also provides a conduit for interested parties to report on any issues they consider to be of importance to the implementation of the Hazardous Waste Act, and the development of briefing positions for Australian delegations to Basel Convention meetings.

26.       The views of affected stakeholders were discussed at the 26^th meeting of the PRG, on Thursday 16 March 2000. Members agreed with the position as proposed. Industry representatives supported harmonisation of the lists because it would increase clarity and certainty, as long as it was not intended to abolish the OECD control system by stealth. They commented that they had placed some value on the separate OECD lists as a check against unacceptable positions that might be reached in the Basel Convention. They were more confident now and in any event, the meeting noted that provision for separate listing in the OECD would still be possible under the amended Council Decision. Environment groups said that they had always favoured one list only.

Conclusion and recommended option

27.       The recommended option is that Australia argue in favour of the OECD adopting Annexes VIII and IX of the Basel Convention as they stand, in place of the existing red, amber and green lists. This is the best way to realise the objectives, which are to secure a control system for transboundary movements of wastes, destined for recovery within the OECD, that is consistent with the global system established in the Basel Convention, provides certainty and simplicity to industry and minimises administrative costs to the Commonwealth. There would also be some benefits to importers of aluminium ashes and residues from OECD countries, who would no longer require a permit for such imports, but these would be matched by some costs to exporters of waste electrical and electronic assemblies or scrap to OECD countries, who would require a permit for such exports.

28.       Maintenance of the status quo is not a recommended option because it means that some wastes would be controlled differently inside and outside the OECD, the control system would be more complex than it need be, and resources would have to be found to continue to support a Review Mechanism for adjusting the lists.

29.       Partial adoption of Annexes VIII and IX would retain some of the disadvantages of the status quo, but could be accepted if it provided a means of securing a consensus decision

Implementation and review

30.       If consensus is reached on this and other issues relating to amendment of OECD Council Decision C(92)39/FINAL, an amended Decision would then need to be adopted through the normal OECD processes. When these processes were completed, the OECD Decision Regulations, made under the Hazardous Waste Act, would require amendment in turn. Environment Australia and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade will monitor the impact of the amendments to the OECD Decision and the Hazardous Waste Act on an ongoing basis. In addition Environment Australia has in place consultative arrangements to obtain regular feedback from industry and environment group stakeholders on the effectiveness of the Basel Convention, the OECD Decision and the Act.

Attachment A

Executive Summary

As a result of the adoption of two new lists of wastes as Annexes VIII and IX to the Basel Convention, countries that are both Parties to the Basel Convention and members of the OECD now subscribe to two detailed sets of lists: the new Annexes to the Basel Convention and the old green, amber and red lists adopted by the OECD in March 1992. Red list wastes are subject to controls similar to those of the Basel Convention, amber list wastes are subject to a somewhat simplified control procedure and green list wastes are subject only to controls normally applied in commercial transactions.

This development raises the question of whether it is necessary to maintain two sets of lists complete with review mechanisms that meet regularly to review and revise those lists. The OECD and its member countries are currently operating under severe budgetary restraints and the OECD Waste Management Policy Group (WMPG) has been required to identify areas where it would be feasible and appropriate to harmonise procedures and requirements of the OECD with those of the Basel Convention. The WMPG has agreed that the five OECD Council Decisions and three Resolutions should be consolidated and, as part of this process, is working towards the laudable goal of harmonising its lists of wastes with those of the Basel Convention.

One option to achieve harmonisation is to retain the OECD control system but to replace the OECD's own lists of wastes with the global lists adopted by the Basel Convention. That is, the control system would continue in its present form but review and revision of the lists would be transferred to the review mechanism of the Basel Convention. Detailed analysis of the implications of this leads to the following conclusions:

(a)       The OECD red list of wastes consists of 8 entries in 4 categories. Seven of these entries are listed in Annex VIII: the eighth, ceramic based fibres similar to asbestos, does not belong to any category contained in Annex I of the Basel Convention. Replacement of the red list by Annex VIII is not compatible with the existing control system, which prescribes specific procedures for red-listed wastes. However, the red list is also very stable and it has not been amended since entering into force in 1992. It could be retained in its present form with no formal provision made for review or revision.

(b)       The OECD amber list of wastes currently consists of 80 entries in four categories. Two entries have been added since 1992 and one has been modified. Some 16 out of the existing 80 entries are not included in Annexes I or VIII of the Basel Convention, and 11 of the 16 are not even included in the OECD's lists of potentially hazardous waste types or constituents (which implies that they are not controlled in any OECD country's national list of wastes). If the amber list were replaced by Annex VIII of the Basel Convention, these 16 wastes would no longer be controlled inside the OECD. (They are not controlled outside the OECD and in fact, the implications of the present system may merit further examination. If trade in certain wastes is controlled in the pursuit of environmental protection under certain circumstances, it may be inconsistent with Article XX of the GATT to limit those controls to OECD countries only.) Annex VIII contains five entries which are not on the amber list: these are all hazardous wastes under the Basel Convention and OECD member countries are legally bound to control them through OECD Decision C(88)90.

(c)       The OECD green list currently consists of 141 entries in 15 categories. Thirteen entries have been deleted since 1992, four have been modified and four have been added. If the green list were replaced by Annex IX of the Basel Convention, the only significant implication is that fluorinated polymer wastes and chlorinated polymer and copolymer wastes would be removed to list C, the list of wastes whose status is yet to be decided. This is unlikely to result in any changes in practice: wastes on list C are subject to the decisions of national competent authorities and OECD countries are unlikely to change their current national positions.

It may be concluded that from an Australian perspective at least, transfer of the functions of the OECD Review Mechanism to the Basel Convention could be achieved if three steps were taken:

(a)       Retain the existing OECD red list and make no formal provision for its review or revision;

(b)       Delete the existing amber list of wastes and re-define amber list wastes as those included in Annex VIII of the Basel Convention; and

(c)       Delete the existing green list of wastes and re-define green list wastes as those included in Annex IX of the Basel Convention.

Introduction

1.       In February 1998 the Fourth Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Basel Convention (COP 4) adopted two new lists of wastes as Annexes VIII and IX to the Convention. Annex VIII, or list A, contains wastes that are characterised as hazardous under Article 1.1.(a) of the Convention. Annex IX, or list B, contains wastes that are not hazardous under Article 1.1.(a).

2.       As a result of this decision, countries that were both Parties to the Basel Convention and members of the OECD found that they were subscribing to two sets of lists: the new ones adopted by the Parties to the Basel Convention and the old green, amber and red lists that had been adopted by the OECD in March 1992. While OECD countries wish to retain the OECD control system, the question arises whether it is also necessary to maintain two sets of lists complete with review mechanisms that meet regularly to review and revise those lists.

3.       This paper examines the implications of replacing the local lists, those of the OECD, with the global lists, those of the Basel Convention. Although the two listing systems are based on different approaches and serve different purposes, there is a high degree of correlation between them. This is to be expected because the lists have much common history. In particular, Annexes I and III of the Basel Convention were taken directly from OECD Decision C(88)90, and Annexes VIII and IX were negotiated using the OECD green, amber and red lists as the starting point. The paper considers factors which allow the various lists to diverge and the use of the chapeaux (or headings) to interpret the lists. It then draws conclusions from a detailed review of all the lists.

4.       To understand the relationship between the different lists, it is helpful to have a clear picture of the close historical links between the OECD control system and the Basel Convention. These are described in Appendix 1, which describes how the OECD adopted several Council Acts as an evolving process between 1984 and 1992. These Acts established many of the principles on which the Basel Convention was based and a particularly significant feature was the adoption of a core list of hazardous wastes in 1988 which became, with one addition, Annex I of the Basel Convention in 1989. This core list was constructed by identifying which items appeared most frequently on all existing national and international lists of hazardous wastes: it contains between 85 to 90 percent of all wastes legally defined as or considered to be hazardous by OECD member countries and the European Community, and over 90 percent of wastes which are prohibited or restricted from disposal at sea,

Factors allowing divergence between the Basel and OECD lists

5.       The Basel lists of wastes are based strictly on hazard: Article 1.1.(a) defines as hazardous wastes all wastes that belong to any category contained in Annex I, the core list of wastes, unless they do not possess any of the hazardous characteristics contained in Annex III.

6.       In the OECD control system, wastes are assigned to one of the lists in accordance with a set of criteria which are set out in Annex 2 to Decision C(92)39/Final, which is reproduced here as Appendix 2. The first question is whether the waste exhibits any of the hazardous characteristics listed in OECD Table 5 (or Annex III of the Basel Convention), but ten other questions follow about the properties and management of the waste.

7.       The criteria in Annex 2 are often described as a "risk-based approach" within the OECD, but this language is misleading because it invites confusion with a quite different process, that of of risk assessment (comprising hazard identification, dose-response assessments, exposure assessment and risk characterisation). The Annex 2 criteria are related far more closely to the assessment of environmentally sound management and they were reproduced, in this context, in the Guidance Document on Transboundary Movements of Hazardous wastes Destined for Recovery Operations that was adopted by the Parties to the Basel Convention in Decision III/14. Satisfactory replies to these questions should be provided before a particular movement takes place, but the relevance of the criteria to the placement of wastes on lists seems questionable.

8.       These differences allow two basic types of divergence: placement of a waste on the amber or red lists of the OECD but in Annex IX of Basel, or placement of a waste on the green list of the OECD but in Annex VIII of Basel.

9.       The first type of divergence can occur in two ways. First, wastes may be proposed for amber or red listing without considering whether they are included in Tables Y, 3 or 4. For example, aluminium ashes and residues have been placed on the amber list although aluminium is neither on the core list of wastes nor among the constituents of potentially hazardous wastes. Second, a waste may be proposed for control even though it lacks hazardous characteristics. For example, mixed non-ferrous shredder fractions containing less than 20 percent non-ferrous metals have been proposed for amber listing because a risk-based assessment indicates that although they lack hazardous characteristics, the high percentage of non-metallic residues increases the risk of poor waste management practices.

10.       The second type of divergence occurs when a waste listed in Annex I and having Annex III characteristics is placed on the green list because it presents a low environmental risk when destined for recovery within the OECD area. This type of divergence is discouraged by clause 2 of section III of Annex I to OECD Council Decision C(92)39/FINAL, which states that wastes may not be included in the green list if they exhibit any of the hazardous characteristics, and in practice there appear to be no wastes on the green list that fall within the scope of Annex VIII of the Basel Convention.

11.       Consideration of these factors suggests that in general, the scope of the OECD control system is likely to be wider than that of the Basel Convention. An analysis prepared by the OECD Secretariat in February 1998 indicates that this is in fact the case. Nineteen Annex IX wastes appeared to fall within the scope of specific amber list entries and 22 amber and red list entries appeared not to have corresponding entries in either Basel Annex. This suggested that a total of 41 wastes might be controlled by the OECD system but not by the Basel Convention.

12.       In practice, however, national competent authorities use the chapeaux, or headings, on the various lists when deciding whether particular materials are controlled or not. Application of these additional criteria at a national level tends to reduce the number of discrepancies between the Basel and OECD lists, as described below.

Using chapeaux to interpret the lists

13.       Both the Basel and OECD lists of wastes are subject to headings, or chapeaux, that are used in interpreting them. The chapeau to Basel Annex VIII states that designation on the Annex does not preclude the use of Annex III to demonstrate that a waste is not hazardous. The chapeau to Annex IX states that wastes contained in it are not covered by Article 1.1.(a) unless they contain Annex I material to an extent causing them to exhibit an Annex III characteristic.

14.       The OECD green and amber lists have chapeaux that state that regardless of whether or not wastes are included, they may not be moved as green or amber list wastes if they are contaminated by other materials to an extent which increases the risks associated with the waste sufficiently to render it appropriate for inclusion in the amber or red lists, or prevents the recovery of the waste in an environmentally sound manner. The wording of these chapeaux reflects the risk-based approach of Annex 2 to the Decision.

15.       There is no OECD chapeau equivalent to that on Basel Annex VIII: that is, a heading that allows materials to be excluded if they lack hazardous characteristics. Provision for this is, instead, made in clause 4 of section II of Annex I to OECD Council Decision C(92)39/FINAL, which provides that a specific waste might not be legally defined or considered to be a hazardous waste in the exporting country because the competent authority is satisfied that it does not exhibit any of the hazardous characteristics.

16.       The analysis that follows is based on the judgement of the Australian competent authority. Other competent authorities may come to different conclusions. It is important to note, in particular, that the Australian Hazardous Waste Act does not provide for wastes to be controlled if they lack hazardous characteristics (unless they are to be exported to a foreign country that classifies them as hazardous wastes).

Analysis of differences between the Basel and OECD lists

17.       Detailed analysis of the combined red and amber lists enables them to be divided into three parts: significant differences between Basel and OECD are in Appendix 3, non-significant differences (the largest category) are in Appendix 4, and no differences are in Appendix 5. Detailed analysis of the green list appears to be unnecessary because no significant differences have been identified.

18.       The term "significant differences between Basel and OECD" is applied to wastes that are regulated differently in the Basel and OECD systems. There are 22 such wastes in Appendix 3 and they fall into different groups. First, there are 12 wastes which are not included either in the core list of wastes, or in the OECD's lists of potentially hazardous waste types or constituents. Eleven of these are amber-listed wastes such as aluminium ashes and residues, magnesium waste and scrap with H4 hazard characteristics, sands used in foundry operations, surfactants and liquid pig manure. One is a red-listed waste, ceramic based fibres similar to asbestos.

19.       The second group contains two wastes that are not listed in the core list of wastes but are included in Table 3, the OECD list of generic types of potentially hazardous wastes. These are sewage sludge and ion exchange resins.

20.       The third group contains three wastes that are not listed in the core list of wastes but are included in Table 4, the OECD list of constituents of potentially hazardous wastes. These are vanadium ashes and residues, asphalt cement waste containing tar and triethlamine catalysts for setting foundry sands.

21.       The fourth group contains five wastes where the scope of Annex VII is wider than the scope of the amber list. These include the light fraction of fluff from shredding (not just from automobiles), clinical and related wastes, and waste consisting of or containing off-specification and outdated chemicals. All these wastes are on the core list of wastes and possess hazardous characteristics, which means that OECD member countries are legally bound to control them through OECD Decision C(88)90.

22.       We may conclude from Appendix 3 that if the OECD amber list were replaced by Annex VIII of the Basel Convention, 17 wastes would no longer be controlled when moved between OECD countries for recycling. These wastes are not controlled outside the OECD and in fact, the implications of the present system may merit further examination. If trade in certain wastes is controlled in the pursuit of environmental protection under certain circumstances, it may be inconsistent with Article XX of the GATT to limit those controls to OECD countries only.

23.       Five entries would be added to the amber list: these are all hazardous wastes under the Basel Convention and OECD member countries are legally bound to control them through OECD Decision C(88)90.

24.       No other changes have been identified that would result from adoption of Annex VIII in place of the existing amber list. There are about 60 entries which are described or placed differently in the Basel and OECD systems (Appendix 4) but which would be controlled in the same way in practice, usually through use of Annex I/Annex III criteria in accordance with the chapeaux to the lists. Three of these entries are on the red list, the remainder are amber listed. (It is emphasised again that these reflect decisions made by the Australian competent authority at a national level. Other authorities may make different decisions leading to different outcomes.)

25.       There are about 22 entries which are described and placed in the same way in the Basel and OECD systems although there may be differences in the exact words used (Appendix 5). Four of these entries are on the red list, the remainder are on the amber list.

26.       One problem that would arise if the OECD amber list were replaced by Annex VIII of the Basel Convention would be the status of the seven red-listed wastes in Annex VIII: these need to be separately identified in the OECD control system. One possible solution is to retain the existing red list. This list is stable: it has not been amended since entering into force in 1992. This solution also retains the eighth entry, ceramic based fibres similar to asbestos. It would be necessary to give priority to the red-listing for those red-listed wastes that are also included in Annex VIII

27.       The OECD green list currently consists of 141 entries in 15 categories. Thirteen entries have been deleted since 1992, four have been modified and four have been added. If the green list were replaced by Annex IX of the Basel Convention, the only significant implication appears to be that fluorinated polymer wastes and chlorinated polymer and copolymer wastes would be removed to list C, the list of wastes whose status is yet to be decided. This is unlikely to result in any changes in practice: wastes on list C are subject to the decisions of national competent authorities and OECD countries are unlikely to change their current national positions.

28.       From the above, it may be concluded that from an Australian perspective at least, the functions of the OECD Review Mechanism could be transferred to the Basel Convention if three steps were taken:

(a)       Retain the existing OECD red list with no formal provision for review or revision;

(b)       Replace the amber list of wastes with Annex VIII of the Basel Convention; and

(c)       Replace the green list of wastes with Annex IX of the Basel Convention.

Appendix 1: History of the lists

1.       The OECD Member countries have been concerned with the control of transfrontier movements of hazardous wastes since the beginning of the 1980's and several Council Acts were adopted as an evolving process between 1984 and 1992. OECD Member countries who have not specifically abstained from voting are legally bound by these Decisions pursuant to the provisions of article 5(a) of the OECD Convention.

2.       The first Act was Decision-Recommendation C(83)180, adopted on 1 February 1984, which instructs Member countries to control transfrontier movements of hazardous waste. This Decision did not provide for operational action by OECD Member countries, but did establish many of the principles on which the Basel Convention was based.

3.       On 5 June 1986 the OECD Council adopted Decision-Recommendation C(86)64, which prohibits Member countries from exporting hazardous wastes to a non-OECD country without its consent and requires the notification of transit countries. The Decision instructs that controls on such transfrontier movements to non-Member countries must be at least as strict as controls governing movements to Member countries. Finally, the Decision prohibits movements of hazardous wastes to non-Member countries if the waste disposal facility within the jurisdiction of the non-Member country is inadequate.

4.       The Council adopted Decision C(88)90 on 27 May 1988, in which the terms "waste" and "disposal" are defined in the context of transfrontier movements of hazardous waste involving any Member country. Member countries agreed to control a certain number of wastes which they considered hazardous. A "core list" of hazardous wastes to be controlled was thus developed and is an essential part of this Decision.

5.       The core list was constructed by determining which items appeared most frequently on all existing national and international lists of hazardous wastes. This process clearly indicated that wastes containing some proportion of one or more of twenty-seven constituents were proscribed by all or almost all of the national or international lists. In addition, certain types of generic wastes (waste streams) were often defined as hazardous. As a result of this process, one may predict with confidence that between 85 to 90 percent of all wastes legally defined as or considered to be hazardous by OECD member countries and the European Community, and over 90 percent of wastes which are prohibited or restricted from disposal at sea, are included in the core list. The core list, known as Table Y, later became Annex I of the Basel Convention.

6.       The Decision further provided that all other wastes, not mentioned in the "core list", but considered to be hazardous in the exporting or importing Member country, are also subject to controls. Such wastes are listed in Table 3, generic types of potentially hazardous wastes, and Table 4, constituents of potentially hazardous wastes. Taken together, Tables 3 and 4 provide almost total coverage of all wastes legally defined as or considered to be hazardous in the OECD area. These wastes are controlled when exported from or imported into a country in which they are considered to be or legally defined as hazardous wastes.

7.       Decision C(88)90 preceded the adoption of the Basel Convention, and its major elements were incorporated into the Convention. In particular, Table Y became Annex I and Table 5, the list of hazardous characteristics, became Annex III. The fact that the OECD control system and the Basel Convention share the same core list of wastes to be controlled and the same list of hazardous characteristics is the most important single factor that inhibits divergence between the two systems.

8.       Council Decision C(92)39 was adopted on 30 March 1992 prior to entry into force of the Basel Convention. It organises the control of transboundary movements of wastes destined for recovery operations (reflecting Annex IV B of the Basel Convention) within the OECD area. This Decision classifies wastes to be recovered into one of three categories - the green, amber and red lists - and specifies the control regime which should apply for each.

9.       Red list wastes are subject to similar control procedures as applied to hazardous wastes under the Basel Convention, although the time limit for prior written consent of the importing and transit countries has been set at 30 days, based on experience of such procedures within OECD.

10.       Amber list wastes are subject to a somewhat simplified control procedure, because they have been considered to present a lower overall risk when such wastes are destined for recovery operations than do red list wastes. All movements of amber list wastes must be notified in advance to all countries concerned (exporting, importing and transit countries); there is a 30 day time limit for responding to a notification (which commences on the date that the importing country acknowledges receipt of the notification in writing) and consent is assumed if no objection to the movement is then lodged by any of the concerned countries within the time limit.

11.       The green list covers wastes destined for recovery operations which do not exhibit any of the hazardous characteristics set forth in Table 5 of OECD Decision C(88)90. Wastes on the green list are therefore permitted to be moved across borders within the OECD area, to authorised recovery facilities, subject to all existing controls normally applied in commercial transactions. Such a procedure does not prejudice the right of Member countries to control certain wastes which have been assigned to the green list as if those wastes had been assigned to one of the other lists, in conformity with domestic legislation and the rules of international law, in order to protect human health and the environment.

12.       In September 1995, Decision III/1 of the Third Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Basel Convention instructed the Technical Working Group to give full priority to completing its work on the development of lists of wastes which are hazardous and wastes which are not subject to the Convention. The Technical Working Group carried out this work between April 1996 and February 1997 at its tenth, eleventh and twelfth meetings. In February 1998 the two new lists of wastes were adopted by Decision IV/9 as Annexes VIII and IX to the Convention. Annex VIII, or list A, contains wastes that are characterised as hazardous under Article 1.1.(a) of the Convention. Annex IX, or list B, contains wastes that are not hazardous under Article 1.1.(a). The lists enter into force on 6 November 1998.

Appendix 2: Annex 2 to OECD Council Decision C(92)39

CRITERIA

A) Properties

(a)       Does the waste normally exhibit any of the hazardous characteristics listed in Table 5 of OECD Council Decision C(88)90(Final)? Furthermore, it is useful to know if the waste is legally defined as or considered to be a hazardous waste in one or more Member countries.

Is the waste typically contaminated?

What is the physical state of the waste?

What is the degree of difficulty of cleanup in the case of accidental spillage or mismanagement?

What is the economic value of the waste bearing in mind historical price fluctuations?

B)       Management

Is there technological capability to recover the waste?

Is there a history of adverse environmental incidents arising from transfrontier movements of the waste or associated recovery operations?

Is the waste routinely traded through established channels and is that evidenced by commercial classification?

Is the waste usually moved internationally under the terms of a valid contract or chain of contracts?

What is the extent of reuse and recovery of the waste and how is any portion separated from the waste but not subject to recovery managed?

What are the overall environmental benefits arising from the recovery operations?

Appendix 3: Significant differences between Basel and OECD

These wastes are regulated differently in the Basel and OECD systems

	Basel Annex VIII		OECD Red and Amber lists	Comments
Group 1	Wastes not listed in Annex I of the Basel Convention or in OECD Tables 3 and 4.
		AA050	Aluminium wastes in the form of ash, residue, slag, dross, skimming, scaling, dust, powder, sludge and cake	Does not belong to any category contained in Annex I. Not currently controlled outside OECD. Aluminium is not a constituent of potentially hazardous wastes (Table 4).
		AA110	Residues from alumina production not elsewhere specified or included (see AB090, AB100)	Does not belong to any category contained in Annex I. Not currently controlled outside OECD. Aluminium is not a constituent of potentially hazardous wastes (Table 4).
		AA190	Magnesium waste and scrap that is flammable, pyrophoric or emits, upon contact with water, flammable gases in dangerous quantities (see B1010)	Does not belong to any category contained in Annex I. Not currently controlled outside OECD. Magnesium is not a constituent of potentially hazardous wastes (Table 4).
		AB070	Sands used in foundry operations	Does not belong to any category contained in Annex I. Not currently controlled outside OECD. No information on likely hazardous constituents.
B2100	Waste hydrates of aluminium and waste alumina and residues from alumina production, excluding such wastes arising from gas cleaning, flocculation or filtration processes	AB090	Waste hydrates of aluminium (see AA110)	Does not belong to any category contained in Annex I. Not currently controlled outside OECD. Aluminium is not a constituent of potentially hazardous wastes (Table 4). The excluded wastes in B2100 fall within Y18.
		AB100	Waste alumina (see AA110)	Does not belong to any category contained in Annex I. Not currently controlled outside OECD. Aluminium is not a constituent of potentially hazardous wastes (Table 4).
		AB120	Inorganic halide compounds, not elsewhere specified or included	Inorganic fluorine compounds and inorganic cyanides are controlled under Y32 and Y33. AB120 extends controls to bromides, chlorides and iodides, which do not belong to any category in Annex I or Table 4.
		AC170	Treated cork and wood wastes	Does not belong to any category contained in Annex I. Not currently controlled outside OECD. No information on likely hazardous constituents
		AC250	Surface active agents (surfactants)	Does not belong to any category contained in Annex I. Not currently controlled outside OECD. No information on likely hazardous constituents
		AC260	Liquid pig manure; faeces	Does not belong to any category contained in Annex I. Not currently controlled outside OECD. No information on likely hazardous constituents
		AD150	Naturally occurring organic material used as a filter medium (such as biofilters)	Does not belong to any category contained in Annex I. Not currently controlled outside OECD. No information on likely hazardous constituents
		RB020	Ceramic based fibres of physico-chemical characteristics similar to those of asbestos	Does not belong to any category contained in Annex I. Not currently controlled outside OECD. No other information available.
Group 2	Wastes not listed in Annex I of the Basel Convention but listed in OECD Table 3.
		AC270	Sewage sludge	Does not belong to any category contained in Annex I. Not currently controlled outside OECD. Sewage sludge is a generic type of potentially hazardous waste (33 in Table 3)
		AD120	Ion exchange resins	Does not belong to any category contained in Annex I. Not currently controlled outside OECD. Ion-exchange column residue is a generic type of potentially hazardous waste (32 in Table 3)
Group 3	Wastes not listed in Annex I of the Basel Convention but listed in OECD Table 4.
		AA060	Vanadium wastes in the form of ash, residue, slag, dross, skimming, scaling, dust, powder, sludge and cake	Does not belong to any category contained in Annex I. Not currently controlled outside OECD. Vanadium is a constituent of potentially hazardous wastes (C2 in Table 4).
		AC020	Asphalt cement waste not elsewhere specified or included	The hazardous constituent is tar containing polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. This waste does not fall within Y11, waste tarry residues arising from refining, distillation and any pyrolytic treatment, and asphalt cements are specifically excluded from A3190 and RA020. Aromatic compounds: polycyclic and heterocyclic organic compounds are constituents of potentially hazardous wastes (C44 in Table 4)
		AC140	Triethylamine catalysts for setting foundry sands	Does not belong to any category contained in Annex I. Not currently controlled outside OECD. Organic nitrogen compounds, especially aliphatic amines, are constituents of potentially hazardous wastes (C45 in Table 4).
Group 4	Wastes where the scope of Annex VII is wider than the scope of the amber list
A3120	Fluff - light fraction from shredding	AC190	Fluff: light fraction from automobile shredding	A3120 has a wider scope than AC190. In general, fluff from automobile shredding comprises about 90% of total fluff.
A4020	Clinical and related wastes; that is wastes arising from medical, nursing, dental, veterinary, or similar practices, and wastes generated in hospitals or other facilities during the investigation or treatment of patients, or research projects.			There is no entry equivalent to A4020 in the amber list. Clinical wastes from medical care in hospitals, medical centres and clinics are included in Y1 of Table Y.
A4130	Waste packages and containers containing Annex I substances in concentrations sufficient to exhibit Annex III hazard characteristics			There is no entry equivalent to A4130 in the amber list but these are wastes that have Table Y/5 characteristics. Contaminated containers, whose contents include one or more Table 4 constituents, are a generic type of potentially hazardous waste (37 in Table 3).
A4140	Waste consisting of or containing off-specification and outdated chemicals corresponding to Annex I categories and exhibiting Annex III hazard characteristics			There is no entry equivalent to A4140 in the amber list but these are wastes that have Table Y/5 characteristics.
A4150	Waste chemical substances arising from research and development or teaching activities which are not identified and/or are new and whose effects on human health and/or the environment are not known.			There is no entry equivalent to A4150 in the amber list but these are wastes that are listed in Y14 and have Table 5 characteristics.

Appendix 4: Non-significant differences between Basel and OECD

These hazardous wastes are described or placed differently in the Basel and OECD systems but in practice they are controlled in the same way under both systems

	Basel Annex VIII		OECD Red and Amber lists	Comments
A1010	Metal waste and waste consisting of alloys of any of the following, but excluding such wastes specifically listed on List B (Annex IX)			No wastes have been identified which fall into this category but do not also fall into A1020 or A1030.
	Antimony (see B1020)
	Arsenic (see A1020)
	Beryllium (see B1020)
	Cadmium (see B1020)
	Lead (see B1020)
	Mercury (see A1030)
	Selenium (see B1020)
	Tellurium (see B1020)
	Thallium (see A1030)
A1020	Waste having as constituents or contaminants, excluding metal wastes in massive form, any of the following
	Antimony; antimony compounds (see B1020)		(see AA070)	No specific amber list entry but as a Table Y constituent will be controlled under AA070
	Beryllium; beryllium compounds (see B1020)		(see AA070)	No specific amber list entry but as a Table Y constituent will be controlled under AA070
	Cadmium; cadmium compounds (see B1020)		(see AA070)	No specific amber list entry but as a Table Y constituent will be controlled under AA070
	Lead; lead compounds (see B1020)	AA030	Lead wastes in the form of ash, residue, slag, dross, skimming, scaling, dust, powder, sludge and cake	The Basel entry is wider than the OECD entry because it potentially covers all non-massive wastes containing lead. In practice these are probably all covered by other amber list entries or the chapeaux.
	Selenium; selenium compounds (see B1020)		(see AA070)	No specific amber list entry but as a Table Y constituent will be controlled under AA070
	Tellurium; tellurium compounds (see B1020)		(see AA070)	No specific amber list entry but as a Table Y constituent will be controlled under AA070
B1060	Waste Selenium and Tellurium in metallic elemental form including powder	AA070	Wastes including ash, residue, slag, dross, skimming, scaling, dust, powder, sludge and cake containing metals or metal compounds not elsewhere specified or included	B1060 falls within the scope of AA070, but Basel Parties have agreed that it would not be considered hazardous because it lacks Annex III hazardous characteristics. Will not be controlled under OECD if it lacks Table 5 hazardous characteristics
		AA010	Ash, residue, slag, dross, skimming, scaling, dust, powder, sludge and cake and other wastes from the manufacture of iron and steel	AA010 does not correspond to a specific Basel entry but will be controlled under various Basel entries if it meets Annex I/III criteria. Will not be controlled under OECD if it lacks Table Y constituents or Table 5 hazardous characteristics.
A1030	Waste having as constituents or contaminants any of the following:
	Arsenic; arsenic compounds	AA090	Arsenic wastes including ash, residue, slag, dross, skimming, scaling, dust, powder, sludge and cake, unless a material is expressly listed elsewhere	The Basel entry is wider than the OECD entry because it potentially covers all non-massive wastes containing arsenic. In practice these are probably all covered by other amber list entries or the chapeaux.
	Mercury; mercury compounds	AA100	Mercury wastes including ash, residue, slag, dross, skimming, scaling, dust, powder, sludge and cake, unless a material is expressly listed elsewhere	The Basel entry is wider than the OECD entry because it potentially covers all non-massive wastes containing mercury. In practice these are probably all covered by other amber list entries or the chapeaux.
	Thallium; thallium compounds	AA080	Thallium wastes including ash, residue, slag, dross, skimming, scaling, dust, powder, sludge and cake, unless a material is expressly listed elsewhere	The Basel entry is wider than the OECD entry because it potentially covers all non-massive wastes containing thallium. In practice these are probably all covered by other amber list entries or the chapeaux.
A1040	Wastes having as constituents any of the following:
	Metal carbonyls		(see AA070)	No specific amber list entry but as a Table Y constituent will be controlled under AA070
	Hexavalent chromium compounds		(see AA070)	No specific amber list entry but as a Table Y constituent will be controlled under AA070
A1080	Waste zinc residues not included on list B, containing lead and cadmium in concentrations sufficient to exhibit Annex III characteristics	AA020	Zinc wastes in the form of ash, residue, slag, dross, skimming, scaling, dust, powder, sludge and cake	The OECD entry is wider than the Basel entry because it potentially covers all zinc residues. In practice, however, residues that are below concentration cut-offs for lead and cadmium will probably lack Table 5 hazardous characteristics and not be subject to controls.
B1080	Zinc ash and residues including zinc alloys residues in dispersible form unless containing Annex I constituents in concentrations such as to exhibit Annex III characteristics or exhibiting hazard characteristic H4.3	AA020	Zinc wastes in the form of ash, residue, slag, dross, skimming, scaling, dust, powder, sludge and cake	B1080 appears to fall within the scope of AA020, but in practice it would not be controlled under OECD if it lacks Table Y/Table 5 characteristics
A1090	Ashes from the incineration of insulated copper wire	AA040	Copper wastes in the form of ash, residue, slag, dross, skimming, scaling, dust, powder, sludge and cake	The OECD entry is wider than the more precise Basel entries because it potentially covers all copper residues. In practice, however, residues that are below Table Y/5 limits will not be subject to controls within OECD. Conversely, copper wastes that are above Annex I/III limits for constituents such as lead will be controlled under other Basel entries such as A1020.
A1100	Dusts and residues from gas cleaning systems of copper smelters		(see AA040)
A1110	Spent electrolytic solutions from copper electrorefining and electrowinning operations		(see AA040)
A1120	Waste sludges, excluding anode slimes, from electrolyte purification systems in copper electrorefining and electrowinning operations		(see AA040)
A1130	Spent etching solutions containing dissolved copper		(see AA040)
A1140	Waste cupric chloride and copper cyanide catalysts		(see AA040)
B1070	Wastes of copper and copper alloys in dispersible form, unless they contain Annex I constituents to an extent that they exhibit Annex III characteristics		(see AA040)	B1070 appears to fall within the scope of AA040, but in practice it would not be controlled under OECD if it lacks Table Y/Table 5 characteristics
B1140	Precious metal-bearing residues in solid form which contain traces of inorganic cyanides	AA150	Precious metal-bearing residues in solid form which contain traces of inorganic cyanides	The tenth meeting of the Basel Convention Technical Working Group considered whether an hazard resulted from the cyanide, or from other Annex I constituents which could be present. Seveal delegates said they had not experienced problems with these wastes, that levels of trade were low and rather specialised. List B placement was agreed subject to a reference in the chapeau to Annex I constituents. Therefore, B1140 will be controlled under various Basel entries if it meets Annex I/III criteria. AA150 Will not be controlled under OECD if it lacks Table Y constituents or Table 5 hazardous characteristics
		AA160	Precious metal ash, sludge, dust and other residues such as
A1150	Precious metal ash from incineration of printed circuit boards not included on List B (see B1160)	AA161	-       precious metal ash from incineration of printed circuit boards	This material is placed on both Basel lists and a footnote comments that the list B entry does not specify exceptions. In practice Annex I/Annex III criteria will be used in Basel and Table Y/Table 5 criteria will be used in OECD.
B1160	Precious metal ash from the incineration of printed circuit boards (see A1150)
B1170	Precious metal ash from the incineration of photographic film (see AA162)	AA162	- photographic film ash	This material is placed on both Basel lists. In practice Annex I/Annex III criteria will be used in Basel and Table Y/Table 5 criteria will be used in OECD.
A1170	Unsorted waste batteries excluding mixtures of only list B batteries. Waste batteries not specified on list B containing Annex I constituents to an extent to render them hazardous (see B1090)	AA180	Used batteries or accumulators, whole or crushed, other than lead-acid batteries, and waste and scrap arising from the production of batteries and accumulators, not elsewhere specified or included	AA180 appears to be wider in scope than A1170 but in practice, however, batteries that lack Table Y/Table 5 characteristics would not be subject to controls.
B1090	Waste batteries conforming to a specification, excluding those made with lead, cadmium, or mercury			B1090 appears to fall within the scope of AA040, but in practice it would not be controlled under OECD if it lacks Table Y/Table 5 characteristics
A1180	Waste electrical and electronic assemblies or scrap containing components such as accumulators and other batteries included on List A, mercury switches, glass from cathode-ray tubes and other activated glass and PCB-capacitors, or contaminated with Annex I constituents (e.g. cadmium, mercury, lead, polychlorinated biphenyl) to an extent that they possess any of the characteristics contained in Annex III (see B1110). (Note this entry does not include scrap assemblies from electric power generation)			There is no comparable entry on the amber list, but hazardous components or constituents will be controlled if they posess List Y/List 5 characteristics
		AB010	Wastes in the form of ash, residue, slag, dross, skimming, scaling, dust, powder, sludge and cake, not elsewhere specified or included	AB010 does not correspond to a specific Basel entry but will be controlled under various Basel entries if it meets Annex I/III criteria. Will not be controlled under OECD if it lacks Table Y/Table 5 characteristics. The distinction between AA070 and AB010 is not very clear.
	Residues arising from the incineration of household wastes (Basel Convention Annex II, Y47)	AB020	Residues arising from the combustion of municipal/household wastes	OECD List Y does not include Y47. Placement in Basel Annex II means that no provision is made for testing to demonstrate that the material lacks Annex III characteristics, but this is unlikely to be the case for this material.
		AB030	Wastes from non-cyanide based systems which arise from surface treatment of metals	There is no Annex VIII entry for this material but since it falls within Basel Y17 it will be controlled unless it lacks Annex III characteristics.
A2010	Glass waste from cathode-ray tubes and other activated glass	AB040	Cullet or other waste and scrap of glass not elsewhere specified or included	GE010 and GE011 exclude glass from cathode-ray tubes and other activated glasses from the green list unless the coatings have been removed
B2070	Calcium fluoride sludge	AB050	Calcium fluoride sludge	B2070 will be controlled under various Basel entries if it meets Annex I/III criteria. AB050 will not be controlled under OECD if it lacks Table Y constituents or Table 5 hazardous characteristics
A2020	Waste inorganic fluorine compounds in the form of liquids or sludges but excluding such wastes specified on List B	AB060	Other inorganic fluorine compounds in the form of liquids or sludges	A2020 excludes B7070. AB060 excludes AB050.
A4090	Waste acidic or basic solutions (other than those specificied in the corresponding entry on list B) (see B2120)	AB110	Basic solutions	B2120 excludes waste acidic or basic solutions with a pH greater than 2 and less than 11.5, which are not corrosive or otherwise hazardous. Basic solutions that lack List 5 characteristics would be excluded from AB110
		AB130	Used blasting grit	There is no Annex VIII entry equivalent to AB130, but in practice used blasting grit that has Annex I/III characteristics will be controlled under Basel. Used blasting grit that lacks Table Y/5 characteristics will not be controlled under OECD.
A2040	Waste gypsum arising from chemical industry processes, when containing Annex I constituents to the extent that it exhibits an Annex III hazardous characteristic (see B2080)	AB140	Gypsum arising from chemical industry processes	Not controlled under OECD if lacking Tables Y/5 characteristics
		AB150	Unrefined calcium sulphite and calcium sulphate from flue gas desulphurisation (FGD)	There is no Annex VIII entry equivalent to AB150, but it will be controlled under Y18 of Basel Annex I unless it lacks Annex III characteristics
A2060	Coal fired power-plant fly ash containing Annex I substances in concentrations sufficient to exhibit Annex III characteristics (see B2050)			There is no amber list entry equivalent to A2060 but this waste will be controlled under AB010.
A3010	Waste from the production or processing of petroleum coke and bitumen	AC010	Waste from the production or processing of petroleum coke and bitumen excluding anode butts	B2090 covers waste anode butts from steel and aluminium production, made of petroleum coke or bitumen and cleaned to normal industry specifications (excluding anode butts from chlor alkali electrolyses and from metallurgical industry).
A3030	Wastes that contain, consist of or are contaminated with leaded anti-knock compound sludges	RC030	Leaded anti-knock compound sludges	A3030 covers both RC030 and AC040
		AC040	Leaded petrol (gasoline) sludges
		AC060	Hydraulic fluids	There is no Annex VIII entry equivalent to AC060, but in practice hy