I

Embargo: Not to be broadcast, telecast or published before 4 p.m. on 20 November, 1970

FOR PR ESS

TEMPORARY PROT ECT IONT

INDU STRIAL RADIOGRAPHIC EQUIPMENT

(Statement by the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister

for Trade and Industry,. the Rt. Hon.- J. McEwen)

The Minister for Trade and Industry,- - v:

the -Rt. Hon. J. McEwen, today ;announced _that temporary duties

-of 47 per cent General and 272 per -cent Preferential would

apply to imports of certain industrial radiographic equipment

based on the use of radiations from radioactive substances,

following adoption of a report by a Special Advisory Authority.

Mr. McEvven explained that the temporary duty,

which would operate from 23 November 1970, would be in addition

to the normal duties. The temporary duties would not apply to

goods in transit on 7 October 1970, provided they were entered

for home consumption on arrival.

Mr. McEwen said that the question of the long

term protection of industrial radiographic equipment based on

the use of radiations from radio-active substances had been

referred to the Tariff Board for inquiry and report. The

temporary protection now applied was holding action pending the

Government's decision on receipt of the Board's report.

Copies of the Special Advisory Authority's

report may be purchased from Government Bookshops in Canberra,

Sydney and Melbourne and from Collectors of Customs in all States.

Canberra, A.C.T.

20 November 1970 82/70T

INDUSTRIAL RADIOGRAPHIC EQUIPMENT

::Â± :Â° 1

INDUSTRIAL RADIOGRAPHIC EQUIPMENT

The Right Honourable the Minister for Trade & Industry

The following report is submitted in response to your

reference of 7th October 1970 on the question of whether it is

necessary that urgent action be taken to protect the Australian

industry manufacturing industrial radiographic equipment of a_

type which utilises a radioactive source in relation to the

Ã¢ÂÂ¢ importation of apparatus, not of a kind ordinarily used for

medical purposes, based. on the use of radiations from radioactive

substances, falling within sub-item 90.20.9 of the First Schedule

to the Customs Tariff 1966-1970.

The full terms of the reference are set out in Appendix A

attached to this report. The reference arose from an application

by Ray-Guard Handling Equipment Co., Sydney.

Sub-item 90.20.9 of the Customs Tariff is set out in full

in Appendix B. The current operative rates of duty of 7 ,

General, andFree, Preferential, wereintroduced following the Tariff Board'sreport of 10th October1968 on X-Ray Apparatus

and Accessories. Before that the principal operative rates of

duty applying to the goods under reference were 55 o plus

Primage 56, General, and 27LÂ°, Preferential. In recommending

that the duties on equipment based on the use of radiations from

radioactive sources and used in .industry and in scientific

research be reduced to minimum rates, the Tariff Board was

concerned only with the products of Ray-Guard Handling

Equipment Co. In particular, the Board had regard to a unit

designed for use in the inspection of welded joints in pipes

INDUSTRIAL RADIOGRAPHIC EQUIPMENT

which it considered to be the company's major product. The

Board found that the Australian product was not at a price

disadvantage compared with products from the United Kingdom.'

At that time United Kingdom manufacturers had already changed

from lead shielding to depleted uranium shielding because of

its lower weight.. The Australian manufacturer was in the process

of changing and actual prices for units using depleted uranium

0 were not available. For the purposes of its comparisons

therefore the Board used estimated Australian prices.

Ray-Guard Handling Equipment Co. was the only. Australian

manufacturer of the goods under reference represented at my

inquiry. There was some evidence that other Australian manu-facturers have done some work in this field but, while the full

extent of their manufacture is not known, it" is believed that

it has been limited. There were no importing interests

represented at the inquiry but written representations were

Â® received from Tasman Vaccine Laboratory (Australia) Pty. Ltd.

A representative of the Australian Atomic Energy Commission

who attended the inquiry as an impartial observer has assisted

me by supplying advice and information.

The applicant company claimed that the removal of the

protection which it had formerly enjoyed had resulted in

increased imports and that its sales had been reduced accordingly.

One of the reasons why the company could not compete was the

necessity tc use depleted uranium rather than lead for shielding

purposes. Supplies of this Ã¢ÂÂº material could not be obtained

locally and had to be imported at high cost. Because of the loss

2.

3,

INDUSTRIAL, RADIOGRAPHIC EQUIPMENT

of sales the company had been obliged to suspend developmental

projects. and to dispense with some employees. Because of the

present situation the company asked for a substantial increase in

the General rate and for the restoration of the former Preferential

. rate. It also asked for_the imposition.of:quantitative

restrictions.

Ã¢ÂÂ¢



_ , ;.  Ray- -Guard Handling Equipment Co.is .small both as regards

the number of persons , employed and the capital invested. In the past however It was able to sell its products both in Australia and overseas. Exports have been made to three overseas countries

and possibilities existed for export to a number of others.' Although small the company has, as stated in the Board's report,

undertaken considerable research work and by 1968 had produced

six different models of the equipment which the Board considered to be the company's major product. At that time the company was

Ã¢ÂÂ¢ changing from lead shielding to depleted uranium shielding.

Further research has been done in connection with shielding and

new materials are being examined for use in. the place of depleted

uranium. In a letter to me enclosing information which I had

requested the Australian Atomic Energy Commission included the following paragraph : -

" The Commission is not in a position to judge whether tariff protection is warranted, and in any case would wish to remain impartial. However the fact that Rayguard Handling Equipment Pty. Ltd. is making a good product which loses only very little by comparison with similar. imported

equipment and that the Company is also putting a worthwhile effort into development with a view to overcoming the minor deficiencies of their product, would appear prima facie o he points tending to support a case for. some protection".

-- s

M

INDUSTRIAL RADIOGRAPHIC EQUIPMENT

Imports of goods covered by the reference are not

recorded separately in official statistics. While some information

was obtained by me from two individual importers there was

evidence that units are available from a number of overseas

sources including the United Kngdom,_the United_Statesof

America, Holland and Germany. In respect of some of these

imports I have little knowledge. Some types of-equipment, on _v r

importation ., - ,,are re 7 ferred  t o_t he.Australian Atomic Energy

Commission and I was able to Obtain information relating to these

imports.

there could be other imports of which. the _ -Commission would have no official knowledge.

In the circumstances it has been necessary to make

some assessments of imports. These assessments indicate that

in the year following the i mplementation of the Tariff Board's Â® report imports increased s ubstantially and were then supplying a considerable part of the probable Australian denai^d.

Imports to date in 1970 have been less than they were in. 1969

but are still much .higher than they were in 1968._ _ Ray-Guard Hanuling Equipment Co. supplied details of

sales for each of the calendar years 1967, 1968 and 1969.

Actual sales to date were supplied for 1970 with an estimate of

what total sales are expected to be for the complete year.

Sales in 1968 were considerably higher than in 1967 and in my

estimation the Australian manufacturer in 1968 was probably

supplying the greater part of the Australian demand.

_. n

5.

INDUSTRIAL RADIOGRAPHIC EQUIPMENT

While import9 rose in 1969 the Australian manufacturer's sales

in the same year fell by about 50% and in the current year

they are expected to be at about the same level.

The units produced by the Australian manufacturer

are mainly Iridium with depleted uranium shielding and

Cobalt. I have attempted to make price comparisons between

Australian and imported comparable equipment within each

of these categories. However, because even within each

category the units can vary widely, and also because of

the limited information available to me regarding imported

units, these comparisons have not been altogether satisfactory.

The price disability of the Australian manufacturer varied

widely depending on which overseas unit was accepted as

comparable. I am, however, satisfied that overall the

Australian industry is at a substantial price disability.

The Australian industry manufacturing industrial

Ã¢ÂÂ¢

radiographic equipment of a type utilising a radioactive

source commenced about 1967 when protective rates of duty

were operating. As stated by the Tariff Board the industry

Was, in 1968, still in its early stages of development but

the duties were reduced to minimum rates early in 1969.

The removal of the protective duties has resulted in increased

imports with consequent loss of sales by the Australian m anufacturer. Supplies of units are readily available from

a number of overseas countries at prices with which the

Australian manufacturer has difficulty in com peting. Up till

1969 the industry was making good progress but because of

overseas competition it has since lost ground. It has for

6.

INDUSTRIAL RA-DIOCRAP.HIC. EQUIPMENT some time been operating at a loss. The industry is small

and could not be expected to survive for any length of time

without some increased protection. In the circumstances I

consider that urgent action should be taken to protect it.

The 'information available has shown that :the Australian

industry cannot compete with imports at existing rates of

duty. Sufficient information however is not available to.

enable me to determine precisely what rate of duty is needed

to provide adequate protection. For the purposes of its Ã¢ÂÂ¢ report on this industry in 1968, the Tariff Board was.

Ã¢ÂÂ¢ concerned mainly with imports from the United Kingdom and,

because the Australian manufacturer was in the early stages

of production of the then new depleted uranium type units,

the Board based its assesments on estimated Australian

costs Ã¢ÂÂ¢and prices. Actual costs and prices of the Australian _ product are now available and imported units are now being

obtained from a number of countries besides the United

Kingdom. Because of these factors the circumstances of the

Â® industry are somevihat'different from those applying when the Tariff Board recommended removal of duties in 1968. As a

holding action until the Board can, under the reference

which it already holds, examine the industry under present

circumstances I think reasonable protection would be given

to the industry by the re-introduction of the protective

rates of duty (excluding Primage) operating prior to 1969.

I propose to recommend therefore that this industry be

protected by rates of 55% General and 272 %% Preferential.

,

S Ã¢ÂÂ¢ 1

7.

INDUSTRIAL RADIOGRAPHIC EQUIPMENT

The Minister's reference covers all imports of

industrial apparatus, based on the use of radiations from

radioactive substances, falling within sub-item 90..20.9.

Ray-Guard Handling Equipment Co. claimed that its products

could be used for a variety of purposes other than those

referred to in the Tariff Board's report and drew attention

to the fact that the patents it holds relate to a remote

controlled system of handling capsules of radioactive

materials irrespective of the final uses of the radiations

Ã¢ÂÂ¢ from such capsules. It was clear, however, that if the

proposed duties were to apply to all goods covered by the

Minister's reference some products, which the local industry Ã¢ÂÂ¢  was not capable of or not interested in manufacturing could

be made dutiable unnecessarily. This question was discussed

with representatives of Ray-Guard Handling Equipment Co. and

the Australian Atomic Energy Commission and subsequently with

officers of the Department of Customs and Excise. Asa result

of these discussions I suggest that the proposed protective

duties should apply only to the following goods being goods

falling within the scope of the reference

Gamma ray apparatus, non-medical :-(a) irradiation units not having a capacity in

excess of 10,000 curies of Cobalt-60;

(b) radiography units

(c) shielded radioisotope storage containers; and

(d) shielded radioisotope handling systems.

8.

INDUSTRIAL RADIOGRAPHIC EQUIPMENT

0

Cl

In reply to the questions raised in the Minister's reference I advise as follows ;-(a) it is necessary that urgent action be taken to

protect the Australian industry manufacturing

industrial radiographic equipment of a type which

utilises a radioactive source in relation to the

importation of apparatus, not of a kind ordinarily

used for medical purposes, based on the use of

radiations from radioactive substances, falling

within sub-item 90.20.9 of the First Schedule

to the Customs Tariff 1966-1970 ;

(b) the protection can appropriately be provided by means of temporary additional duties of 471%

ad valorem, General, and 272% ad valorem, Preferential,

on the following goods being goods falling within

the scope of the reference :-Gamma ray apparatus, non-medical :-(a) irradiation units not having a capacity

in excess of 10,000 curies of Cobalt-60 ;

(b) .radiography units ;

(c) shielded radic ,isotope storage containers ; and Ã¢ÂÂ¢ (d) shielded radioisotope handling systems (o) the temporary additional duties should not apply

to goods in direct transit to Australia on 7th

Ã¢ÂÂ¢ October 1970 provided they are entered for home

consumption on arrival. .r ^

SPECIAL ADVISORY A UTHORITY

CANBERRA, AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY 	 Ã¢ÂÂ¢..  ... 5th NOVEi;iBER, 1970

Y

APPENDIX A .

INDUSTRIAL RADIOGRAPHIC EQUIPM T ..

Whereas it appears to me, JOHN MoEWEN, Minister of State for Trade and Industry, that urgent action may be necessary to proteot the Australian industry manufacturing industrial radio-graphic equipment of a type which utilises a radioactive source, It JOHN I.icEI EN, in pursuance of the powers conferred upon me by Section 18A of the Tariff Board Act 1921-1966, do hereby request the Special Advisory Authority, SIR FRANK MEERE, C.B.E. -.

(1) to undertake an inquiry under Section 18B of the aforesaid Act., on the following questions : (a), whether it is necessary that urgent action be taken to protect that industry in relation to the importation of apparatus, not of a

kind ord inarily used for medical purposes, based on the use of radiations from radio-active substances, falling within sub-item 90.20.9 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff 1966-70 (b) if such urgent action is necessary - whether,

having regard to the public interest, the protection can appropriately be provided by means of a temporary duty, or if it cannot be so provided, whether it can appropriately be provided -

(i) by means of the temporary restriction of the importation of these goods; or (ii) by means of a combination of both a temporary duty and the temporary

restriction of the importation of these goods; and

Â® (c) whether any recommended temporary duty,

temporary restriction of imports or combination of both should apply to goods in transit at the date of this reference; and

(2) to report, in accordance with Section 18D of the aforesaid Act, on these questions.

J. McEWEN

MINISTER OF STATE FOR TRADE AND INDUSTRY

7th October, 1970

Custom

s Tariff 1966-1970

Item Goods Rates of Duty General Preferential

90.20 Apparatus based on the use of Â® X-rays"or of the radiations

Ã¢ÂÂ¢

from radio-active substances (including ra diographyan . radiotherapy apparatus) Ã¢ÂÂ¢ X-ray generators; X-ray tube . -ray screens; X-ray high tension generators; X-ray control panels and desks; .. -ray examination or treatment tables, chairs and the like ;90.20.100 - X-ray apparatus and' VNot under accessories of a kind ordinarily used 'for medicalVreference purposes, as followsÂ° X-ray tubes; X-ray generators; X-ray high tensionÃ¢ÂÂ¢ generators tube shields; bucky fluoroscopic grids; fluorescent screens; Ã¢ÂÂ¢ intensifying screens; lead glass protective screen eye localisers .-tube holders of the shock- proof type as used in Ã¢ÂÂ¢ deep therapy units90.20.200 - X-ray control panels,X-ray Not under control desks, X-ray referenc examination or treatment . tables, 'chairs or the like and other apparatus based on the use of X-rays,being goods of a kind ordinarily used for medical purposes Ã¢ÂÂ¢ and not falling within 90.20.190.20.900 - Other 710 Free Ã¢ÂÂ¢

I

Â® UNDER

PJÃ¢ÂÂº RT V OF THE TARIFF BOARD ACT

.1921 — 1966

5th. NOVEMBER 1970

Price 25:-

