Uncategorised
By Alex Mandl
Alex is the Principal of Shrapnel Explosive Solutions, a dangerous goods and compliance consultancy. He is also a former Chief Inspector of Explosives for Queensland.
Australia’s approach to regulating the transport of explosives is about to undergo its most significant structural change in more than a decade.
For many years, organisations transporting Class 1 explosives by road and rail have worked with two separate regulatory documents: the Australian Dangerous Goods Code (ADG Code) for most dangerous goods, and the Australian Code for the Transport of Explosives by Road and Rail (AEC) for explosives.
That separation is now coming to an end.
The National Transport Commission (NTC) has completed the technical work required to incorporate the transport provisions of the AEC into the next major revision of the ADG Code. Although the drafting work is effectively complete, the reform has not yet become law. The next phase will involve government approvals, legislative adoption by each jurisdiction and the development of governance arrangements that will support the new framework.
For industry, this is far more than an editorial exercise. It represents a fundamental change in how Australia’s transport requirements for Class 1 explosives will be maintained, updated and administered into the future.
Why Is the AEC Being Incorporated?
The current Australian Explosives Code is the third edition, published in 2009. While it established a nationally consistent approach to transporting explosives by road and rail, it has not kept pace with developments in international dangerous goods regulation or contemporary Australian industry practice.
The National Transport Commission identified several reasons why reform had become necessary.
These included:
- The AEC had not been updated since 2009.
- There was no sustainable long term process for maintaining a standalone explosives transport code.
- The requirements were becoming increasingly misaligned with the United Nations Model Regulations and other international land transport frameworks.
- Application of the AEC varied between Australian jurisdictions.
- The Australian Forum of Explosives Regulators (AFER) did not have legal standing to make decisions that automatically applied nationally.
By incorporating Class 1 explosives into the ADG Code, future amendments can be managed through the ADG Code’s established biennial review process. This should improve consistency, reduce duplication and allow Australian requirements to evolve alongside international developments more efficiently.
Importantly, this reform relates only to transport.
It does not create a national explosives regulator, nor does it transfer responsibility for manufacture, storage, possession, licensing, security or use of explosives to the National Transport Commission.
Those responsibilities remain with Commonwealth, state and territory regulators under their respective explosives legislation. As the author notes, those jurisdictional differences continue to create challenges for industry and are unlikely to disappear in the near future.
More Than a Simple Copy and Paste
One misconception is that the AEC has simply been inserted into the ADG Code.
In reality, the review has been one of the most comprehensive dangerous goods projects undertaken by the National Transport Commission in recent years.
During 2023 and 2024, the NTC released twelve technical discussion papers, followed by a Consultation Regulatory Impact Statement, public submissions, industry information sessions and post consultation stakeholder workshops throughout 2025.
Recognising the specialist nature of explosives transport, the NTC also issued dedicated consultation papers dealing specifically with Class 1 explosives.
An Explosives Working Group reviewed both the existing AEC and relevant provisions contained within the European ADR framework before developing the proposed Class 1 chapters for inclusion in the new ADG Code.
The resulting draft combines:
- Existing Australian requirements that remain operationally necessary.
- Updated provisions carried across from the AEC.
- Relevant requirements from the United Nations Model Regulations.
- Appropriate provisions drawn from ADR.
- New concepts that have emerged internationally since 2009.
- Australian operational practices where they continue to provide value.
Rather than preserving the existing Code unchanged, the review has produced a modernised transport framework that reflects current international practice while retaining Australian operational experience where appropriate.
What Has Changed?
The draft Class 1 provisions cover a broad range of transport requirements, including:
- Low hazard explosives.
- Import and export concessions.
- Overall load division determination.
- Explosives load categories.
- Security planning.
- Driver authorisation.
- Limited quantity provisions.
- Packaging and marking.
- Segregation.
- Vehicle construction requirements.
- Journey planning.
- Parking and supervision.
- Mobile processing units.
The review did not end with the initial consultation.
Following stakeholder feedback, the NTC refined a number of important areas, including provisions for low hazard explosives, import and export controls, load categories, administrative controls for explosives drivers and requirements for explosives transport vehicles.
Some requirements that may ultimately belong outside transport legislation, such as certain marking provisions for inner packagings, have been retained temporarily to avoid creating regulatory gaps during the transition.
The NTC has indicated that these provisions may later move into more appropriate regulatory instruments.
What Still Needs to Happen?
Although the technical drafting has largely been completed, several important steps remain before the new framework becomes operational.
The current ADG Code Edition 7.9 remains the latest published edition and continues to apply, subject to each jurisdiction’s legislative arrangements.
Before the new explosives provisions become enforceable, three major milestones must still be achieved.
- Government Approval and Publication
The National Transport Commission has advised that the revised ADG Code was finalised in late 2025 for consideration by Australia’s transport ministers.
However, finalisation does not mean implementation.
The new edition must first complete the national approval process before it can be formally published as the successor to Edition 7.9. Until then, the existing Code remains the operative document for dangerous goods transport.
- Legislative Adoption by Each Jurisdiction
Publication alone will not make the new requirements legally enforceable.
Unlike Commonwealth legislation, the ADG Code derives its legal authority through the dangerous goods transport legislation adopted by each Australian state and territory.
This is particularly significant for Class 1 explosives.
Some jurisdictions currently reference the Australian Explosives Code directly within their legislation, while others apply different legislative mechanisms. Each jurisdiction will therefore need to review how licences, approvals, enforcement powers and legislative references continue to operate once the transport provisions move into the ADG Code.
Although the technical requirements may become nationally consistent, implementation will still depend upon each jurisdiction completing its own legislative process.
- New Governance Arrangements
Perhaps the least visible, but arguably most important, task still to be completed concerns governance.
The incorporation of Class 1 into the ADG Code creates important questions about how future technical decisions, approvals and nationally consistent interpretations will be managed.
That means governments must determine how the National Transport Commission, the Competent Authorities Panel (CAP) and the Australian Forum of Explosives Regulators (AFER) will work together under the new framework.
While the technical drafting has progressed significantly, these governance arrangements are still being developed.
Timing Remains Uncertain
The Consultation Regulatory Impact Statement released during 2024 contemplated implementation from 1 October 2026.
That date represented a consultation target rather than a confirmed commencement date.
With Edition 7.9 still identified as the current ADG Code during July 2026, a single nationally consistent commencement on that date now appears increasingly unlikely.
Publication during 2026 remains possible.
However, businesses should prepare for the possibility that jurisdictions will adopt the revised Code at different times. From an operational planning perspective, substantial implementation during 2027 appears to be a realistic assumption, although no formal government timetable has yet been announced.
Understanding CAP’s Role
Throughout this reform, the Competent Authorities Panel (CAP) continues to operate exactly as it does today.
CAP is made up of representatives from Australia’s state and territory dangerous goods regulators and remains responsible for considering whether certain approvals, exemptions and determinations should receive national recognition.
Although the National Transport Commission provides CAP’s secretariat, the two organisations perform very different functions.
In simple terms:
Organisation | Primary Role |
National Transport Commission | Drafts and maintains the ADG Code |
Competent Authorities Panel (CAP) | Considers nationally applicable approvals, exemptions and determinations |
State and Territory Regulators | Administer and enforce dangerous goods legislation |
This distinction is important because CAP is often mistakenly viewed as the body responsible for writing the ADG Code. In reality, its role is to support nationally consistent regulatory decision making rather than legislative drafting.
Will CAP Now Control Class 1 Decisions?
The short answer is not automatically.
Simply incorporating Class 1 explosives into the ADG Code does not give CAP authority over every explosives related approval or exemption.
CAP’s powers arise through jurisdictional legislation together with its own governance arrangements.
During consultation, the National Transport Commission specifically recognised that new processes would need to be developed covering the interaction between CAP and AFER. Later drafting also removed governance material from the ADG Code itself, recognising that matters relating to CAP membership, voting and authority belong within legislation or CAP’s own Rules rather than within the Code.
As things currently stand, several important governance questions remain unanswered.
These include:
- Which Class 1 matters should be referred to CAP.
- Whether all existing CAP members will vote on explosives matters.
- How technical advice from AFER will be presented to CAP.
- How nationally agreed decisions will be reflected within explosives legislation.
- How disagreements between explosives regulators and dangerous goods transport regulators will be resolved.
These governance issues may ultimately prove just as important as the technical drafting itself.
AFER: Still an Important Part of Australia’s Explosives Framework
While much attention has focused on incorporating the Australian Explosives Code into the ADG Code, the reform does not signal the end of the Australian Forum of Explosives Regulators (AFER).
AFER continues to be recognised by Safe Work Australia as the national forum through which Commonwealth, state and territory explosives regulators collaborate on explosives safety, security and regulatory consistency.
Its role extends well beyond transport.
Historically, AFER has considered matters including:
- Explosives classification.
- Packaging and authorisation.
- Manufacture and importation.
- Storage and handling.
- Sale and use.
- Security.
- National consistency.
- Information sharing between explosives regulators.
Importantly, AFER is not a statutory regulator.
It is not a corporation, an enforcement agency or a national licensing authority. Nor can it make legislation in its own right.
The Australian Explosives Code itself has long recognised this position, noting that AFER is not a legal entity and that the application of its decisions has always depended upon each jurisdiction adopting them through its own legislative arrangements.
Who Supports AFER?
Current administrative arrangements indicate that Safe Work Australia once again provides AFER’s secretariat and serves as its central contact point.
This is broadly consistent with the original arrangements established when the Australian Explosives Code was first developed.
However, there is an important historical distinction.
The National Transport Commission noted during consultation that Safe Work Australia had previously ceased supporting the Australian Explosives Code, with secretariat responsibilities rotating between competent authorities for a period.
The present arrangement therefore represents a return to central administrative support rather than continuous involvement since 2009.
Although Safe Work Australia provides administrative coordination, it does not regulate explosives transport, licensing or enforcement activities. Those responsibilities remain with the relevant Commonwealth, state and territory regulators.
What Could AFER’s Future Look Like?
One of the more interesting questions arising from these reforms is what role AFER will play once the transport provisions of the Australian Explosives Code become part of the ADG Code.
The author suggests that AFER’s future may lie less in maintaining a standalone transport code and more in providing specialist explosives expertise that informs future development of the ADG Code.
That evolution would allow each organisation to focus on its particular strengths.
Function | Likely Lead Organisation |
Drafting and maintaining Class 1 transport provisions | National Transport Commission |
Explosives technical policy and specialist advice | AFER |
National approvals, exemptions and determinations | CAP, where legislative authority exists |
Licensing, inspections and enforcement | Commonwealth, state and territory regulators |
CAP secretariat | National Transport Commission |
AFER secretariat | Safe Work Australia |
This model has not been formally adopted.
Rather, it represents the author’s assessment of how existing institutional responsibilities could logically evolve as the new framework matures.
A Possible Future Governance Model
Based on the current regulatory landscape, the author suggests one possible approach.
Under such a model:
- AFER would consider the explosives safety, security and policy implications of proposed changes.
- The National Transport Commission would use that technical advice when developing amendments to the ADG Code.
- CAP would consider nationally applicable approvals, exemptions and determinations where jurisdictional legislation gives it authority.
- Individual jurisdictions would continue implementing and enforcing those requirements under their own legislation.
Again, this should be viewed as informed opinion rather than announced government policy.
The National Transport Commission has already acknowledged that processes linking AFER and CAP still require further development before the new framework becomes fully operational.
AFER itself may also evolve.
Clearer terms of reference, updated membership arrangements and formal referral pathways between AFER, the National Transport Commission and CAP could all strengthen the governance of Australia’s explosives transport framework.
Even with these developments, however, AFER would still not become an independent statutory regulator.
From Technical Drafting to Effective Governance
The incorporation of the Australian Explosives Code into the ADG Code represents much more than the consolidation of two documents.
It closes a long standing maintenance gap and creates a framework capable of evolving alongside international dangerous goods requirements.
Much of the technical drafting now appears complete.
Attention is increasingly shifting towards implementation.
Key issues that still require resolution include:
- Ministerial approval and publication of the revised ADG Code.
- Legislative adoption by each jurisdiction.
- Transitional arrangements for licences, approvals and existing operations.
- Clarification of CAP’s future role in Class 1 matters.
- Formal governance arrangements linking the National Transport Commission, CAP, AFER and jurisdictional regulators.
Until these matters are resolved, ADG Code Edition 7.9 together with existing jurisdictional explosives legislation remains the operative regulatory framework.
Final Reflection
Australia’s explosives transport framework is entering one of its most significant periods of reform in decades.
The technical work required to incorporate the Australian Explosives Code into the ADG Code is largely complete. The greater challenge now lies in ensuring that governance, legislation and administrative arrangements evolve with the same level of coordination.
Ultimately, the long term success of these reforms will depend on more than well drafted technical provisions.
It will depend on governments creating a durable governance framework capable of maintaining nationally consistent transport requirements, supporting informed regulatory decision making and translating those decisions into legislation that can be applied consistently across Australia.
For industry, now is the time to understand not only what is changing, but how those changes will shape the future administration of explosives transport for many years to come.