Legal Metrology Policy Review – Commercial-In-Confidence Submission Form

August 2016

Commercial-In-Confidence Submission Legal Metrology Policy Review

PRIVACY COLLECTION STATEMENT

The Department of Industry, Innovation and Science (the Department) is bound by the Australian Privacy Principles (APPs) outlined in Schedule 1 of the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) (Privacy Act) which regulates how entities may collect, use, disclose and store personal information.

The Department is seeking feedback from stakeholders for the purpose of informing the legal metrology review. Information is being collected through an online submission form for the purposes of providing input into the review. The information may also be used to notify you of the progress and outcomes of the review.

Through your completion of the online submission form the Department will collect any personal information submitted including your name, email address, home or business address, information about you and/or the organisation (if any) on whose behalf you are sending the submission, and your comments and opinions.

The personal information collected from you will be used by the Department to inform the legal metrology review and to notify you of the progress and outcomes of the review. The information may be disclosed to Departmental staff, the Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science, and staff members of the Minister’s Office for the purpose of conducting the legal metrology review and informing the Minister about the review.

Personal information obtained will be stored and held in accordance with the Department’s obligations under the Archives Act 1983 (Cth). Your personal information obtained will only be used and disclosed for the purposes outlined above and will not be used or disclosed without your consent, except where authorised or required by law. For further information, please refer to the Department’s Privacy Policy.

Do you agree to the Privacy Collection Statement?

☒ Yes, I agree

☐ Yes, I agree and would like to make a confidential submission

☐ No, I do not agree

Please note: Without agreeing to the privacy collection statement you cannot proceed to make a submission.

Commercial-In-Confidence Submission Legal Metrology Policy Review

PROVIDING YOUR FEEDBACKNMI is seeking your input on appropriate policy objectives for the national legal metrology (measurement) system.

All submissions received by the due date will be considered by NMI in preparing a strategic policy statement to outline the direction and desired outcomes for legal metrology and inform a subsequent legislative review.

The public consultation process will run from 12 August until 12 September 2016.

The closing date for submissions and comments is 12 September 2016.

Submissions on this consultation paper

Key questions are provided throughout this paper and are replicated in the online submission form, to facilitate and focus submissions. Attachments, providing supporting evidence, may also be included.

Your submission must reach NMI by 11.59 PM AEST on 12 September 2016.

NMI prefers submissions be made through the Department of Industry, Innovation & Science’s internet portal for stakeholder engagement, the Consultation Hub 1 .

Responses to the consultation paper may, however, also be submitted by:

emailing with the subject heading ‘Legal Metrology Consultation’ to LMReview@measurement.gov.au; or

posting to Legal Metrology Branch, National Measurement Institute, PO Box 264, Lindfield NSW 2070 marked Attention: Legal Metrology Consultation

All information (including name and address) contained in formal submissions may be made available to the public on the Department’s consultation hub following the close of submissions.

Providing a confidential submission

If you wish to make a confidential submission, please complete the commercial-in-confidence submission form that is available on the Department’s consultation hub.

For this purpose, automatically generated confidentiality statements in emails would not be viewed as a request to consider your submission as confidential.

Decisions on requests made under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 for a submission marked ‘confidential’ to be made available, will be determined in accordance with that Act.

1 https://consult.industry.gov.au/national-measurement-institute/lmreview

SUBMISSION DETAILS

Name:

Australian Sugar Milling Council

Jim Crane, Senior Executive Officer

Email address:

Jim.crane@asmc.com.au

Street Address / PO Box:

GPO Box 945

City:

Brisbane

State / Territory:

QLD

I am submitting on behalf of:

☐ Myself (answer Questions 1-16)

☐ Business (answer Questions A-E and 1-16)

☐ Consumer association (answer Questions A-B, I and 1-16)

☐ Government department/agency (answer Questions A-B, F-H and 1-16)

☒ Industry association (answer Questions A-B, I and 1-16)

Commercial-In-Confidence Submission Legal Metrology Policy Review

A. ABN Number:(Business, consumer association, Government department/agency and industry association only)

44 010 779 496

B. Industry sector:(Business, consumer association, Government department/agency and industry association only)

Manufacturing

C. Type of Business:(Business only)

☐ Servicing licensee (verifier)

☐ Legal metrology authority

☐ Measuring instrument supplier/distributor

☐ Measuring instrument user

☐ Other

D. Number of Employees:(Business and Government department/agency only)

☐ 0-4

☐ 5-19

☐ 20-199

☐ 200+

E. How many measuring instruments does your business interact with per year? (e.g. used/sold/verified)

(Business only)

☐ 1-10

☐ 11-50

☐ 51-100

☐ 100+

F. Jurisdiction:(Government departments and agencies only)

☐ Commonwealth

☐ State / Territory

☐ Local government

G. Do you use measurements for health, environment or justice purposes?(Government departments and agencies only)

☐ Yes

☐ No

H. How many legal measuring instruments are used by your department?(Government departments and agencies only)

☐ 1-10

☐ 11-50

☐ 51-100

☐ 100+

I. Number of Association Members:(Consumer and industry associations only)

☒ 1-10

☐ 11-50

☐ 51-100

☐ 100+

LEGAL METROLOGY POLICY REVIEW – DISCUSSION PAPER QUESTIONS

Policy objectives for legal metrology in Australia

1a. Are the following policy objectives appropriate for legal metrology in Australia?

Yes No Unsure

Supporting confidence in the measurement system

☒ ☐ ☐

Facilitating a level playing field for business

☒ ☐ ☐

Consumer (or the broader term customer) protection

☒ ☐ ☐

Supporting industry development and technology innovation

☒ ☐ ☐

Commercial-In-Confidence Submission Legal Metrology Policy Review

1b. What is the relative importance of the following policy objectives for legal metrology in Australia?

Not importantSomewhat important

Highly important

Unsure

Supporting confidence in the measurement system

☐ ☐ ☒ ☐

Facilitating a level playing field for business

☐ ☐ ☒ ☐

Consumer (or the broader term customer) protection

☐ ☐ ☒ ☐

Supporting industry development and technology innovation

☐ ☐ ☒ ☐

Further comments:

It is important that there is a legal metrology overlay in place in Australia, but it should have sufficient flexibility to encourage industries to pursue innovative arrangements in terms of measurement and provide for self-regulation as a least cost alternative.

2. Are there any other policy objectives for legal metrology that would assist in delivering successful outcomes for Australian businesses and consumer?

Click here to enter text.

International cooperation and harmonisation

3. What should be the criteria for Australia's participation in the development of international documentary standards relevant to legal metrology?

Australia should participate in the development of international documentary standards to ensure they are sufficiently broad to provide for operating conditions in Australia.

4. What should be NMI’s approach to determining Australia’s pattern approval requirements where documentary standards from organisations such as the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) more fully account for recent developments in technology and operation of measuring instruments than equivalent OIML standards?

NMI should have the flexibility to align with a range of international standards particularly where a standard might be better suited to Australian conditions or to particular industries.

5. To what extent should NMI consider flexibility to allow for particular circumstances in Australia when adopting international standards for pattern approval?

See above response to Q 4.

Principles-based approach to regulation

6. What are the key principles that should drive Australia’s regulatory approach to legal metrology?

Stability, flexibility and innovation

7. What concerns, if any, could there be for a business when managing compliance in a principles-based regulatory environment?

Governance across the value chain could be challenging in terms of trade particularly if there is an adversarial element to supplier / processor relationships at an operational level.

8. What level of guidance material, if any, should be available to ensure stakeholders have sufficient understanding of the policy objectives and outcomes being sought?

Where possible, guidance material should be developed in partnership with industry stakeholders and demonstrate the level of transparency in metrology arrangements.

9. What should be the legislative status of such guidance material?

The actual material should not have any legislative status although the requirement for such material to be available could be covered by legislation.

Risk-based approach to compliance monitoring

10. What are the appropriate factors to inform risk management related to setting priorities for regulation of legal metrology, including compliance and enforcement activity?

Historical performance, the strength of commercial arrangements between parties, the industry context for the principles of stability, flexibility and innovation.

Regulatory approaches for legal metrology – Fit for purpose

11. How important is it that NMI considers the broader context of 'fit-for-purpose' when developing requirements/policies in relation to measurement?

☐ Not important ☐ Somewhat important ☒ Highly important ☐ Unsure

Further comments

Click here to enter text.

12. How should NMI focus its regulatory activity in relation to conformity to type assessment?

Manufacturers/providers of measurement instruments should have the primary responsibility for verification that their instrument is fit for purpose. NMI should continue to have a role in testing the veracity of the verification evidence in consultation with industry users.

Regulatory approaches for legal metrology - Compliance and enforcement

13. How should NMI focus its compliance activities to ensure businesses are meeting their obligations under trade measurement law?

A risk-based approach to audit driven by performance history i.e minimum complaints should equal minimum audit.

14. Which is more harmful: inaccuracy that benefits the customer/consumer or inaccuracy that benefits the vendor/trader?

The impact could be just as harmful to either party although inaccuracy benefiting the vendor/trader will always be perceived as more harmful (particularly in the court of public opinion).

15. What relative weight should NMI give to: identifying that certain thresholds have been breached; and individual risk assessments, before financial penalties are imposed?

The individual risk assessments should always be the primary approach by NMI and financial penalties for breaches should give significant weight to the level of intent of the party committing the breach.

16. What are the appropriate circumstances for NMI to consider referral for prosecution as a regulatory response?

A high level of intent to breach identified by the complexity of the measures adopted to prevent discovery of the breach

Ignorance of the requirement for appropriate instruments for trade to be used in transactions

Failure to have systems in place for verification of instruments