5 . Who was consulted and how was their feedback incorporated ?
5 . Who was consulted and how was their feedback incorporated ?
This Decision RIS was informed by a consultation process that ran from March – April 2023 . The Agency sought feedback on a consultation paper outlining 3 options . Submissions were accepted via Safe Work Australia ’ s consultation platform , Engage , from 2 March 2023 to 2 April 2023 . Late submissions were also accepted where requested .
5.1 Options
Feedback was sought on the following 3 options : �
Option 1 : Prohibition on the use of all engineered stone
� �
Option 2 : Prohibition on the use of engineered stone containing 40 % or more crystalline silica , and
Option 3 : Prohibition on the use of engineered stone containing 40 % or more crystalline silica and licensing of PCBUs working with engineered stone containing less than 40 % crystalline silica .
The 3 options for prohibition include a licensing framework common to all 3 options :
� licensing framework for work with legacy products – to undertake exempt work ( removal , repair , minor modifications ) with engineered stone installed prior to prohibition .
As described above , Option 3 includes an additional licensing framework for work with lower silica engineered stone .
The consultation paper asked stakeholders to provide data and evidence to support their preferred options and to inform the impact analysis . Stakeholders were also asked to submit any evidence to support a “ threshold ” level of crystalline silica below which engineered stone can be worked with safely .
5.2 Submissions at a glance
A total of 114 submissions were received from a range of stakeholders , including : � PCBUs working with engineered stone ( 60 , including four engineered stone suppliers ) � other PCBUs , including law firms ( 11 ) � industry groups ( 8 ) � professional organisations and peak health bodies ( 6 ) � commonwealth , state and territory government departments and agencies ( 6 ) � unions ( 5 ), and � individuals , including WHS and medical professionals and individuals who work with stone ( 18 ).
Some submissions represented views of individuals or small organisations , while other submissions were made by one organisation on behalf of many members and / or by organisations with unique expertise in a particular area . While all submissions were invaluable to informing the impact analysis , submissions were weighted with these considerations in mind when informing the analysis .
DECISION REGULATION IMPACT STATEMENT Prohibition on the use of engineered stone Page 50 of 107