University of Technology SydneyUTS: Rules, Policy and Legislation


The information in this site is maintained by Governance Support Unit

Act
By-law
Rules
Policies and Directives
A-Z
by classification
Delegations
Standing Orders
Faculty Management
Controlled Entities and Commercial Activities
Legislation, Rules
and Policies home


GSU home

Ethical Conduct of Research Involving Animals Vice-Chancellor's Directive

Abstract

The purpose of this Directive is to outline the responsibilities of UTS researchers whose research activities involve the use of, or interaction with, animals. This Directive also highlights the role and functions of the UTS Animal Care and Ethics Committee (ACEC).

The Ethical Conduct of Research Involving Animals Vice-Chancellor's Directive is also available as a PDF document.

Dates Directive approved 20/02/2014
Directive takes effect 20/03/2014
Directive is due for review (up to five years) 03/2019
Directive amendment approved 11/12/2014
Directive amendment takes effect 05/02/2015
Approved by Vice-Chancellor
Latest amendment: Director, Governance Support Unit (see change history for details)
Implementation Officers Director, Research and Innovation Office
Dean, Graduate Research School
Relevant to All researchers at UTS, including staff and students
Related documents
Legislation
File number UR14/346
Superseded documents None

Contents

1. Purpose

This Directive outlines the responsibilities of UTS researchers who use animals in their research. It also highlights the function of the Animal Care and Ethics Committee (ACEC) and the University's requirements to ensure compliance with government legislation.

This Directive is supplementary to, and should be read in conjunction with the UTS Responsible Conduct of Research Policy.

2. Scope

This Directive applies to any person conducting research and teaching involving live animals under the auspices of UTS, whether that person is a staff member, student or non-staff member. Research in this context is understood broadly to encompass both funded and unfunded research. This Directive also applies to UTS centres and institutes.

This Directive is implemented by the Director, Research and Innovation Office and the Dean, Graduate Research School. Day-to-day advice regarding matters covered by this Directive can be sought from the Ethics Secretariat (restricted access: UTS login only).

3. Definitions

The following definitions define terms that are specific to this Directive. These are in addition to terms defined in Schedule 1, Student Rules and those provided in the Responsible Conduct of Research Policy.

Animal means any non-human vertebrate: that is, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals; encompassing domestic animals, purpose-bred animals, livestock, wildlife, and higher-order invertebrates (cephalopods; for example, octopus, squid and cuttlefish). This includes animals at early stages in their development, that is in their embryonic, foetal or larval forms. This definition is in line with Australian Code for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes 8th Edition (2013).

Animal research: any procedure, test, experiment, inquiry, investigation or study in connection with which an animal is used and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, includes any procedure, test, experiment, inquiry, investigation or study in the course of which:

  1. an animal is subjected to:
    1. surgical, medical, psychological, biological, chemical or physical treatment
    2. abnormal conditions of heat, cold, light, dark, confinement, noise, isolation or overcrowding
    3. abnormal dietary conditions, or
    4. electric shock or radiation treatment, or
  2. any material or substance is extracted or derived from the body of an animal, but does not include any procedure, test, experiment, inquiry, investigation or study which is carried out in the course of:
    1. the administration of veterinary treatment to an animal for the purpose of protecting the welfare of the animal, or
    2. the conduct of normal animal husbandry operations.

Chief investigator is the person who takes responsibility for the conduct of the research on day-to-day basis.

UTS Animal Care and Ethics Committee (ACEC) is a Vice-Chancellor's committee established to ensure that all research undertaken by UTS staff and students conform to the highest ethical standards and to the Australian Code for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes. The ACEC composition and membership are outlined in the ACEC Terms of Reference (restricted access: UTS login only).

4. Directive principles

UTS promotes an ethical research culture which is underpinned in the Responsible Conduct of Research Policy. The University has endorsed and adopted the principles in the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research (the Code) as a requirement for good research practice at UTS. These principles are also applicable to this Directive.

Research and teaching involving animals is permitted under the proviso that prior written approval has been acquired from the Animal Care and Ethics Committee (ACEC), in accordance with the Animal Research Act 1985 (NSW) and the Australian Code for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes (enacted under the Act).

UTS also adheres to the policies and guidelines developed by the Animal Research Review Panel (ARRP) and the Animal Welfare Branch of NSW Department of Primary Industries.

5. Directive statements

5.1 General requirements for research involving animals

When undertaking research involving animals, the University requires researchers to adhere to UTS and relevant national policy and guidelines and obtain the necessary approvals from ACEC.

Researchers have personal responsibility for all matters related to the welfare of the animals that they use in conducting their research. Researchers must treat the animals with respect and consider the welfare of the animals when planning and conducting experiments.

Note: For research conducted outside of NSW, researchers must comply with the governing principles of this directive, provided that such compliance does not breach relevant local legislation.

Research should not be conducted in other countries as a mechanism of avoiding compliance with this directive and local legislation.

5.2 Animal ethics approval

For live animals : All research and teaching activities involving live animals require written approval from ACEC prior to the work commencing. This includes research that is minimally or non-invasive, such as field studies or observational studies.

For dead animals or animal tissue: Research and teaching using dead animals or animal tissue does not require animal ethics approval.

Retrospective approval is not permitted, and animal research conducted without prior approval is considered a breach of Australian Code for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes.

ACEC approval is granted only if the use of animals is essential and justified (see also section 5.2.2 in this Directive). Furthermore, each application is reviewed incorporating the principles of the three 'Rs':

  1. replacement of animals with non-animal alternatives (for example, human clinical trials, tissue banks, primary human/animal cells or cell lines, computer models)
  2. reduction in the number of animals used, and
  3. refinement of procedures to minimise the impact on animals (for example, experiments to be performed or directly supervised by competent personnel; incorporation of anaesthetics and analgesics; and provisions of environmental enrichment).

Initial ACEC approval is granted until February of the following year. Subsequent continuation of approval is for a period of 12 months, with a maximum approval period for the total project being three years. Continuation of approval is conditional on the submission of a satisfactory annual report, as deemed by ACEC.

5.2.1 Communication and monitoring

5.2.1.1 Communication to ACEC

All communication to ACEC must be made in writing to the Ethics Secretariat (restricted access: UTS login only).

Applications

All applications need to be received by the Ethics Secretariat by the closing date (restricted access: UTS login only). Any application not received by this date will be held over until the meeting after.

Researchers must submit written proposals to ACEC for all animal projects. These proposals must take into account the expected value of the knowledge to be gained, the justification for the project and all ethical and animal welfare aspects, including the three 'Rs' — replacement, reduction and refinement (see sections 5.2.4–5.2.6).

Experiments must not commence until written approval has been obtained from ACEC.

Only UTS staff may be listed as the chief investigator on animal ethics applications.

Further details about the ACEC application process can be found on the Ethics website (restricted access: UTS login only).

Ongoing projects

It is a condition for the continuation of approval for ongoing projects that an annual report and animal use statistics form (Form L) be submitted to the Ethics Secretariat by 15 January each year, for project activity conducted the previous year. In the event that this information is not received by this deadline, a period of non-approval may arise resulting in project delays.

5.2.1.2 Communication from ACEC

Correspondence from ACEC is sent to the chief investigator and nominated associate investigators by email from the Ethics Secretariat (on behalf of ACEC).

Outcomes of research applications are sent within 10 working days of the meeting date. Researchers should not approach individual members of ACEC to discuss the progress of pending applications.

Copies of 'approval letters' and 'Animal Research Authorities', including animal numbers approved and any conditions imposed, are sent to the relevant animal facilities manager (for example, Facility Manager or Environmental Sciences Research Laboratory Manager).

5.2.1.3 Official records of ACEC

After each ACEC meeting, copies of ACEC meeting minutes are circulated to the Vice-Chancellor, Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) and senior members of the Faculty of Science (the Dean, Associate Dean (Research) and Research Development Manager). Minutes documents are confidential and access is made available only to aforementioned personnel, Ethics Secretariat, ACEC and the Animal Research Review Panel (ARRP).

The ACEC annual report is submitted to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) and the Animal Welfare Branch of NSW Department of Primary Industries.

5.2.1.4 Monitoring of Research

The ACEC and Research Ethics Manager may conduct unannounced inspections of any UTS animal holding facility at any time. Announced inspections occur annually at a minimum, with a written report reviewed at the following ACEC meeting.

5.2.2 Justification for the use of animals in research

The proposed use of animals is justified by weighing the predicted scientific or educational value of the research against the potential impact on the welfare of the animals. The following should be considered and presented in any application to ACEC.

Evidence to support a case to use animals must demonstrate that:

  • the project has scientific or educational merit and has potential benefit for humans, animals or the environment
  • the use of animals is essential to achieve the stated aims and suitable alternatives to replace the use of animals to achieve the stated aims are not available
  • the project involves the minimum number of animals required to obtain valid data
  • the project involves the minimum adverse impact on the wellbeing of the animals involved.

Scientific and teaching activities using animals may be performed only when they are essential:

  • to obtain and establish significant information relevant to the understanding of humans and/or animals, or
  • to maintain and improve human and/or animal health and welfare, or
  • to improve animal management or production, or
  • to obtain and establish significant information relevant to the understanding, maintenance or improvement of the natural environment, or
  • to achieve educational outcomes in science, as specified in the relevant curriculum or competency requirements.

5.2.3 Responsibilities of researchers

Researchers and teachers who use animals for scientific purposes have personal responsibility for all matters relating to the welfare of these animals. They have an obligation to treat the animals with respect and to consider their welfare as an essential factor when planning or conducting research or teaching projects.

Researchers and animal carers must ensure that individual(s) responsible for the wellbeing of each animal is clearly identified, and that procedures are implemented for the care of each animal, ensuring the responsible individual(s) are contactable in an event of an emergency.

Researchers, animal carers and teachers must ensure that scientific and teaching activities do not commence until written approval has been obtained from ACEC.

5.2.3.1 Unexpected adverse events

Researchers are required to informally notify ACEC (for example, via email or phone) within 48 hours of any adverse or unexpected events that impact of animal wellbeing. A formal 'Unexpected Adverse Event Report' must be submitted within 72 hours of the event being identified.

An unexpected adverse incident is considered to be any event that is not anticipated within an approved animal ethics project plan, as approved by ACEC, or was an expected outcome or result occurring at a frequency or severity in excess of that forecast, all of which impact negatively on the wellbeing of animal(s).

Unexpected adverse events can be a single or cumulative, and will normally involve unexpected mortality, morbidity, discomfort or injury. Sudden deaths (unless within the normal mortality rate for a strain) and husbandry-related accidents are considered by UTS to be immediately reportable adverse events.

Any negative animal welfare impact would be considered an unexpected adverse event if that impact has not been described in the approved ACEC application.

5.2.3.2 Alleviation of pain and distress

An animal that develops signs of pain or distress of a kind and degree not predicted in the proposal must have the pain or distress alleviated promptly. If severe pain cannot be alleviated promptly, the animal must be killed humanely without delay. Alleviation of such pain or distress must always take precedence over continuing or finishing the project.

5.2.4 Replacement of animals used in research

Techniques that totally or partially replace the use of animals for scientific purposes must be sought, considered and used wherever possible. Before the use of animals is considered, all existing information relevant to the proposed aim(s), including existing databases, must be examined. Examples of replacement techniques include human clinical trials, epidemiological data, tissue banks, primary human/animal cells or cell lines, computer and mathematical models, physical and chemical analysis, less-sentient animals (lower-order invertebrates) or cadavers.

5.2.5 Reduction of animal numbers in research

The number of animals used in a project must be the minimum necessary to achieve the proposed aim(s) and to satisfy good statistical design. However UTS recognises that the use of too few animals may invalidate the experimental result and result in wastage of animals.

The number of animals used may be reduced by the appropriate reuse of individual animals. The benefits of reusing animals must be balanced against any adverse effects on their wellbeing, taking into account the lifetime experience of the individual animal. Reuse of animals requires particular justification and specific ACEC approval.

Activities involving the use of animals must not be repeated within a project or between projects unless such repetition is essential for the purpose or design of the project (for example, sound experimental design, statistical analysis, corroboration by the same or another investigator).

Reducing the number of animals used should not result in greater harm, including pain and distress, to the animals used.

All possible steps must be taken to reduce factors that are not part of the experimental design of the project and are known to contribute to variability of experimental results, including the use of animals of known genetic, biological and behavioural background. Reduction of experimental variables may result in reduced animal use.

Where practicable, tissue and other biological material from animals being killed must be shared among investigators or deposited in a tissue bank for subsequent distribution.

Breeding of animals must be managed to avoid or minimise the production of excess animals. A new line of animal should not be generated if a similar suitable animal line is available to the investigator. When a new animal line is generated, the colony should be made available as a source for other investigators, as appropriate.

5.2.6 Refinement of procedures to minimise pain and distress in animals

Steps must be taken at all times to support and safeguard animal wellbeing. The effectiveness of strategies for supporting and safeguarding animal wellbeing must be kept under review during the lifetime of activities, including projects. Where relevant and applicable, the outcome of this review must be implemented in current activities and taken into account in planning future activities, including projects.

People who care for and use animals must ensure that procedures are performed competently, and

  • be competent for the procedure they perform, or
  • be under the direct supervision of a person who is competent to perform the procedure.

The duration of activities must be no longer than required to meet the aim(s) of the project and must be compatible with supporting and safeguarding animal wellbeing. Animals must not be held for prolonged periods as part of an approved project before their use, without ACEC approval.

Animals must be suitable for the scientific purpose taking into account their biological characteristics including behaviour, genetic attributes and nutritional, microbiological and general health status.

The design and management of animal accommodation should meet species-specific needs (see ARRP guidelines on animal care). Special consideration is required where this is precluded by the requirements of the project.

Animals should be transported, housed, fed, watered, handled and used under conditions that meet species-specific needs. The welfare of the animals must be a primary consideration in the provision of care, which should be based on behavioural and biological needs.

Wildlife should not be taken from natural habitats unless animals bred in captivity are not available or are not suitable for the specific scientific purpose.

Researchers and teachers who use animals for scientific purposes must employ the best available scientific and educational techniques, be competent in the procedures they perform or must be under the direct supervision of a person competent in the procedure.

Projects should be designed to avoid both pain and distress in animals. If this is not possible, pain or distress must be minimised.

Pain and distress cannot be evaluated easily in animals and therefore investigators and teachers must assume that animals experience these in a manner similar to humans unless there is evidence to the contrary. Decisions regarding the animals' welfare must be based on this assumption.

An animal with signs of pain or distress not predicted in the proposal must have the pain or distress alleviated promptly. Alleviation of such pain or distress must take precedence over completing a project. If this is not possible, the animal must be euthanised without delay.

Scientific and teaching activities that may cause pain or distress of a kind or degree for which anaesthesia would normally be used in medical or veterinary practice, must be carried out by individuals with the necessary training, using anaesthesia appropriate to the species and the procedure.

Pain management appropriate to the species, the procedure and the circumstances must be provided.

The use of local or general anaesthetic, analgesic or tranquillising agents must be appropriate to the species, and should at least parallel their use in current medical or veterinary practice.

Where it is established that the purpose of the project precludes the use of anaesthetic or analgesic agents to alleviate pain, the planned end-point of the project must be as early as feasible to avoid or minimise pain or distress in the animals.

Neuromuscular blocking agents must not be used without appropriate general anaesthesia, except in animals where sensory awareness has been eliminated. If such agents are used, continuous or frequent monitoring of paralysed animals is essential to ensure that the depth of anaesthesia is adequate to prevent pain or distress.

'Death as an end-point' must be avoided wherever possible. This is defined as when the death of an animal is the deliberate measure used for evaluating biological or chemical processes, responses or effects. That is, where the researcher or teacher will not intervene to kill the animal humanely before death occurs in the course of a scientific activity.

Scientific and teaching activities involving the use of animals must be of minimum duration compatible with the objectives of the project.

5.3 Resolving breaches of the Directive

Breaches of this Directive should be resolved through the processes outlined below and in accordance with the UTS Code of Conduct.

Concerns about animal use can be brought to the researcher or their supervisor, facility managers, animal care staff, Research Ethics Manager, ACEC Chair or Deputy Chair or the Ethics Secretariat. If the concern is found to be the result of behaviour that is not in compliance with the Australian Code for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes or the decisions of ACEC, then ACEC will be notified.

5.3.1 Complaints and grievances

Complaints or concerns can originate from individuals or groups that are internal or external UTS. Complaints may fall into the following categories:

  • complaints from individuals who are not associated with the research (may include members of the public and visitors to the University)
  • complaints by UTS staff or students
  • disputes between researchers and ACEC
  • serious disagreements between members of ACEC
  • disagreements between ACEC and UTS Senior Managers.

All staff have the right and responsibility to report incidents of incompetence, non-compliance or other breaches of the Australian Code for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes directly to ACEC.

5.3.2 Managing incidents and categorisation of non-compliance

The Research Ethics Manager is authorised by ACEC to monitor projects using animals to ensure they are proceeding in compliance with the Australian Code for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes and the decisions of ACEC.

Concerns or complaints from internal and external stakeholders are recorded in writing by the Research Ethics Manager and kept in a file which only the Research Ethics Manager can access.

The ACEC 'Compliance Decision Tree' (see Attachment 1) serves as a framework for dealing with incidences of non-compliance, which are categorised as minor or serious breaches.

A minor offence is defined as a breach of the facility guidelines that has minimal impact, affecting neither the work of other researchers nor immediate animal welfare implications (for example, inadequate cage card recording).

A serious offence may include a breach of the Australian Code for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes or Animal Research Act or a breach of this Directive or associated Policy that significantly impacts on animal welfare and/or on another investigator's project(s). For example, commencing work before an 'Animal Research Authority' is issued or ACEC approval granted, making changes to a treatment or procedure without seeking ACEC approval, inadequate monitoring of animals awaiting or undergoing study, and failing to relieve distress or euthanise animals that have reached their prescribed endpoints.

In exceptional cases, the ACEC Chair, Deputy Chair or Research Ethics Manager is able to place an immediate suspension on a project. The researcher is notified immediately if this occurs.

ACEC has authority to recommend to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) the withdrawal of a study if there is a major deviation from the ACEC-approved procedure or proven misconduct. The responsible researchers may also be subject to disciplinary action with the matter being referred to the Associate Dean (Research) and the Research Integrity Advisor.

All cases of serious non-compliance must be reported in the National Health and Medical Research Council annual statement of compliance and may result in the withdrawal of research funding.

6. Roles and responsibilities

Accountable Officer Implementation Officer Researchers, supervisors Research students
6.1 General requirements for research involving animals
Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research)

Deans, Associate Deans (Research) of faculties and centre directors are responsible for:

  • promoting the awareness of policies, procedures and guidelines related to the ethical conduct of research involving animals
  • training researchers and students in responsible and ethical research practice.

Director, Research and Innovation Office is responsible for:

  • providing advice on implementing and administrating the Directive
  • managing the processes through which a research project gains approval to be conducted, including the approval from ACEC
  • ensuring ACEC is appropriately constituted
  • facilitating access to information about the ethical conduct of research and the procedures for seeking approval and reporting on the completion of research.

All researchers are responsible for ensuring that their conduct of research complies with the statements in this Directive as well as with state and federal legislation.

Research supervisors are responsible for ensuring that research students are aware of the requirements of the research they will be conducting and have complied with the requirements of the particular committee.

Research students are responsible for ensuring that their conduct of research complies with this Directive, the associated Policy, as well as with state and federal legislation.

Research students should be aware of the requirements of the research they will be conducting and have complied with the requirements of ACEC.

6.2 Animal ethics approval
Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research)

UTS Animal Care and Ethics Committee (ACEC) is responsible for:

  • proposing amendments to the Directive, and provision of comments and feedback in the consultation process when the Directive is due for review.

Ethics Secretariat is the primary point of contact for:

  • establishing and maintaining the official file of the directive
  • proposing amendments as required, and
  • managing the consultation process when the Directive is due for review.

All researchers and supervisors are:

  • accountable for seeking ethics approval when required and for keeping clear and accurate records of the research process, including methodologies and data sources and any approvals granted
  • responsible for ensuring that the design and conduct of their research complies with the University's policies, directives and guidelines on ethical conduct and the responsible conduct of research.

Research students are responsible for:

  • actively engaging with the research training opportunities offered through the Graduate Research School and their faculty/research strength
  • seeking guidance from their supervisor on the ethical conduct of their research
  • ensuring that the design and conduct of their research complies with the University's policies, directives and guidelines on ethical conduct and the responsible conduct of research.
6.3 Unexpected adverse events
Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research)

Research Ethics Manager and the Ethics Secretariat are responsible for:

  • communicating the adverse or unexpected events that impact animal wellbeing to ACEC
  • promoting the awareness of policies, procedures and guidelines related to the ethical conduct of research involving animals.

Researchers and supervisors of research students are responsible for:

  • informally notifying ACEC within 48 hours of any adverse or unexpected events that impact of animal wellbeing, with a formal 'Unexpected Adverse Event Report' submitted within 72 hours of the event occurring.

Research students are responsible for:

  • notifying their supervisor as soon as possible when an adverse or unexpected event related to their animal research occurs
  • informally notifying ACEC within 48 hours of any adverse or expected events that impact of animal wellbeing, with a formal 'Unexpected Adverse Event Report' submitted within 72 hours of the event occurring.
6.4 Resolving breaches of the Directive
Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research)

Director, Research and Innovation is responsible for:

  • ensuring that processes outlined in this Directive and in UTS Responsible Conduct of Research policy are implemented.

The Designated Person in research integrity under the Australian Code (currently the Dean, Graduate Research School) is responsible for:

  • ensuring that processes outlined in this Directive and in UTS Responsible Conduct of Research policy are implemented.

Researchers are responsible for:

  • being aware and complying with this Directive and
  • relevant University policies and agreements.

Research students are responsible for:

  • being aware and complying with this Directive and
  • relevant University policies and agreements.

7. Acknowledgments

Australian Code for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes

National Health and Medical Research Council

8. Version control and change history

Effective date Version Approved by (date) Amendment
20/03/2014 1 Vice-Chancellor (20/02/2014) New Directive
05/02/2015 1.1 Director, Governance Support Unit (GSU) (11/12/2014) Changes (approved under Delegation 3.17) to implement 2014 Senior Executive restructure.

Attachment 1. Alleged breaches

Alleged breach Steps taken Outcomes References
1. First minor breach
Breach of facility guidelines* that does not significantly impact on animal wellbeing.

Facility Manager to keep record of offence, with mandatory, de-identified notification to the Animal Facilities Management Committee, (AFMC).

Facility Manager and Chief Investigator (CI) collaborate to remedy procedural breach.

Staff member/student informed fully regarding minor breach and provided with a verbal reminder of correct procedures by Facility Manager.

No further action.

 
2. Repeat minor breach

Breach of facility guidelines* that does not significantly impact on animal wellbeing.

In this case there may be a repeated offence of an already 'managed' breach.

Facility Manager sends a 'Corrective Action Report' to inform the staff member/student (or the CI's supervisor in the case of a breach by a CI) of the breach, cc'ing (copying in) the AFMC.

The staff member/student and student's supervisor sends a response to the AFMC.

The AFMC considers the response and advises the staff member/student and their supervisor of a need to modify behaviour or competence (cc to ACEC).

A satisfactory written response from the CI is provided to the AFMC, including a description of the action taken to brief or counsel the staff member/student.

Subject to the response received, the matter may be referred to the AFMC.

CI may be required to monitor animal work of staff member/student.

Staff member/student and CI/student supervisor counselled regarding repeat minor breach in context of the University's unsatisfactory performance process.

Clause 48 – Academic Staff Agreement 2010 (PDF)

Clause 53 – Support Staff Agreement 2010 (PDF)

3. First serious breach
This may include a breach of the Australian Code for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes 8th Edition (2013) or Animal Research Act 1985 (NSW) or a breach of an institutional requirement that significantly impacts on animal welfare and/or on another investigator's project(s).

Facility Manager to provide written report to the ACEC chair informing ACEC of nature and extent of alleged offence (cc to CI, staff member/student, staff member/student's supervisor and CI's supervisor).

Animal work on project may be suspended by Chair if offence is serious enough.

CI required to provide a written report to the ACEC Chair.

Associate Dean (Research) and Research Integrity Advisor informed of alleged breach.

DVC Research informed of alleged breach.

ACEC subcommittee formed to investigate.

Matter considered at the next full ACEC meeting.

No breach:

No further action.

Any suspension removed.

DVC Research informed of outcome.

Breach:

Action may include any or all of the following:

  • CI to directly supervise team or student.
  • Retraining of team / staff member / student.
  • Work with supervision.
  • Matter referred to Provost for possible disciplinary action.

Clauses 48 or 49 – Academic Staff Agreement 2010 (PDF)

Clauses 53 and 54 – Support Staff Agreement 2010 (PDF)

4. Repeat serious breach

This may include a breach of the Australian Code for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes or Animal Research Act or a breach of an institutional requirement that significantly impacts on animal welfare and/or on another investigator's project(s).

In this case there may be a repeated offence of an already 'managed' breach.

Facility Manager to provide written report informing ACEC of nature and extent of alleged offence (cc to CI, staff member, staff member's supervisor and CI's supervisor).

Project immediately suspended (CI to justify why suspension should be lifted).

CI required to provide a written report to the ACEC Chair.

Associate Dean (Research) and Research Integrity Advisor informed of alleged repeat breach.

DVC Research informed of alleged repeat breach.

ACEC subcommittee reformed to investigate.

Matter considered at the next full ACEC meeting.

No breach:

No further action.

Suspension removed.

DVCR informed of outcome.

Breach:

Action may include any of the following:

  • Terminate project.
  • Suspend for a defined period.
  • Work with constant supervision. Matter referred to Provost for mediation of matters in breach, in accordance with disciplinary action for misconduct/serious misconduct.

Clause 49 – Academic Staff Agreement 2010 (PDF)

Clause 54 – Support Staff Agreement 2010 (PDF)

* Facility guidelines are formulated based on the NHMRC Code of Practice and legislation relating to animal research, PC2 facilities, quarantine approved facilities, gene technology and other biohazardous materials.