{"id":"F2005B01068","name":"Trade Practices Act 1974 - Consumer Protection Notice No. 9 of 1997 - Consumer Product Safety Standard: Exercise Cycles","slug":"trade-practices-act-1974-consumer-protection-notice-no-9-of-1997-consumer-product-safety-standard-ex","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":32418,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2005B01068-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-01","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Trade Practices Act 1974 - Consumer Protection Notice No. 9 of 1997 - Consumer Product Safety Standard: Exercise Cycles","content":"COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA\n\nTrade Practices Act 1974\n\nConsumer Protection Notice No. 9 of 1997\n\nCONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY STANDARD – EXERCISE CYCLES\n\nI, GEOFFREY DANIEL PROSSER, Minister for Small Business and Consumer Affairs, pursuant to section 65E(1) of the Trade Practices Act 1974, hereby:\n\n(a) REVOKE the consumer product safety standard in respect of exercise cycles published in Gazette No. GN41, 19 October, 1994; and\n\n(b) DECLARE that, in respect of goods of a kind specified in Division 1 of the Schedule to this Notice, the standard approved by the Standards Association of Australia specified in Division2 of the Schedule as varied by the variations specified in Division 3 of the Schedule, is a consumer product safety standard for the purposes of section 65C of the Act.\n\nSCHEDULE\n\nDivision 1: Particulars of goods\n\nExercise cycles, being stationary devices designed to be used for personal physical exercise by means of an activity simulating bicycle riding.\n\nDivision 2: The Standard\n\nAustralian Standard 4092 – 1993, Exercise cycles – Safety requirements, approved by the Standards Association of Australia on 26 August 1993 and published on 11 October 1993.\n\nDivision 3: Variations\n\nThe standard specified in Division 2 is varied by deleting clauses 1.1, 1.2, 1.3.1,3.3 and 4.1.\n\nDated this 24th day of February 1997\n\nGEOFFREY DANIEL PROSSER\n\nMinister for Small Business and Consumer Affairs","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This notice maintains the same scope as its predecessor (exercise cycles safety standards). It is a straightforward update revoking the 1994 standard and replacing it with the 1993 Australian Standard (as varied). There is no expansion beyond the original purpose of regulating exercise cycle safety."},"complexity_factors":["Very short document (under 400 words)","Only 5 defined structural divisions (Divisions 1-3, plus introductory clauses)","Simple legislative mechanism: revoke old standard, declare new standard, specify variations","No nested conditional logic or cross-references to other legislation beyond basic citations (Trade Practices Act 1974, sections 65C and 65E)","Variations are straightforward deletions of specific clause numbers (1.1, 1.2, 1.3.1, 3.3, 4.1) without complex modifications","Single subject matter (exercise cycles only)","Incorporation by reference of external standard (AS 4092-1993) means technical complexity exists in the referenced document, not this legislative instrument itself"],"plain_english_summary":"This is a 1997 Australian government notice that sets safety rules for exercise bikes (stationary bicycles used for fitness). \n\n**What it does:**\n- **Replaces an older safety standard** from 1994 with an updated one\n- **Makes it mandatory** for exercise cycles sold in Australia to meet specific safety requirements\n- **Adopts an existing industry standard** (Australian Standard 4092-1993) but **removes certain clauses** from it (specifically sections dealing with scope, definitions, and some technical requirements)\n\n**Who it affects:**\n- **Manufacturers and importers** of exercise bikes sold in Australia\n- **Retailers** selling these products\n- **Consumers** who buy exercise bikes (they get safer products)\n\n**Why it matters:**\nWithout this safety standard, exercise bikes could have design flaws that cause injuries—like unstable frames, dangerous moving parts, or inadequate warnings. This notice makes compliance with safety requirements a legal requirement, meaning businesses can face penalties if they sell non-compliant exercise bikes. The government is essentially saying: \"You must follow this technical safety manual, except for these specific sections we've crossed out.\""},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":5,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This Notice replaces an earlier Gazette standard (1994) with AS 4092–1993 as the mandatory safety standard for stationary exercise cycles and deletes specific clauses of that standard. That is an update or modification of the regulatory instrument but does not materially expand the legislative scheme beyond its original purpose of prescribing consumer safety requirements for exercise cycles. The Notice narrows or alters specific technical obligations (by deleting clauses), but it remains within the original scope of setting mandatory safety requirements for the identified goods."},"complexity_factors":["Short, single-purpose instrument (revocation and replacement) — low intrinsic length","Relies on an external technical document: Australian Standard AS 4092–1993 (a separate, detailed standard)","Varies the external standard by deleting specific clauses (1.1, 1.2, 1.3.1, 3.3 and 4.1), so practical effect requires cross-reading the standard","Cross-reference to Trade Practices Act (s.65C and s.65E(1)) for legal force and enforcement — external statutory framework applies","Absence of reproduced technical text in the Notice creates ambiguity without consulting the external standard","Few defined terms or nested exceptions inside the Notice itself (low internal conditionality), but dependent conditionality exists in the referenced standard"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this instrument does, mechanically**\n\n- Revokes the prior consumer product safety standard for exercise cycles that was published in Gazette No. GN41 (1994).\n- Declares that the mandatory safety standard for certain exercise cycles is the Australian Standard AS 4092–1993 (\"Exercise cycles – Safety requirements\") as approved by the Standards Association of Australia, but with specific clauses deleted. (See Division 2 and Division 3 of the Schedule.)\n- Identifies the covered goods as \"exercise cycles\", defined here as stationary devices designed to be used for personal physical exercise by means of an activity simulating bicycle riding. (Division 1.)\n\n**Who is affected**\n\n- Manufacturers, importers, distributors and retailers of stationary exercise cycles sold in Australia. These businesses must ensure their products meet the declared mandatory standard (AS 4092–1993 as varied).\n- Test laboratories, conformity-assessment bodies and standards consultants who advise or certify compliance with Australian standards.\n- Consumers of stationary exercise cycles, because the instrument sets the mandatory safety requirements that those products must meet.\n\n**How it matters (practical effect and mechanics)**\n\n- By declaring AS 4092–1993 (with deletions) a consumer product safety standard under s.65C of the Trade Practices Act 1974, the instrument makes compliance with that standard a legal requirement for the covered goods. Non-compliant products may be subject to the enforcement provisions of the Trade Practices Act (e.g. prohibition on supply of unsafe goods, recalls or other regulatory action under the Act).\n- The instrument does not restate the technical requirements of AS 4092–1993 in full. Instead it imports the external standard by reference and then varies it by deleting clauses 1.1, 1.2, 1.3.1, 3.3 and 4.1 (Division 3). To know precisely what obligations or protections have been removed, a reader must compare the text of AS 4092–1993 with those clause deletions.\n\n**Stated purpose and practical trade-offs**\n\n- The instrument's stated legal function is to set the mandatory consumer safety standard for stationary exercise cycles (Divisions 1–3). The practical effects depend on what the deleted clauses required. Deleting clauses can either reduce regulated obligations (lower compliance costs) or remove certain safety requirements (potentially increasing safety risk), depending on the content of those clauses.\n\n- Who pays: primarily suppliers (manufacturers, importers, retailers) bear the direct costs of design changes, testing, certification and possible relabelling required to comply. Those costs can be passed on to consumers through higher prices. Test houses and conformity-assessment bodies may gain or lose business depending on whether the variation increases or reduces testing obligations.\n\n- Who decides: the Minister (via this Notice) selects which external standard applies and which clauses are deleted. The Standards Association of Australia produced the underlying AS 4092–1993. Firms will have incentives to engage with standards-setting and ministerial processes because those processes determine technical obligations.\n\n**Implementation, compliance and risks**\n\n- Implementation requires suppliers to ensure their stationary exercise cycles meet the varied AS 4092–1993. Because the Notice deletes specific clauses rather than adding new text, there is a risk of ambiguity unless businesses and regulators check the original standard to see what deleted clauses covered.\n\n- Enforcement is effected under the Trade Practices Act framework. The Notice itself does not set out enforcement steps or penalties; those are in the Act and its enforcement practice.\n\n**Market effects to look for**\n\n- If the deletions relax certain technical or labelling requirements, compliance costs fall and some smaller suppliers or importers may find it easier to enter or remain in the market. If the deletions remove safety protections, consumer risk could rise.\n\n- If the deletions tighten or clarify requirements indirectly (for example by deleting permissive exceptions), compliance costs may increase and raise barriers to entry.\n\n**Concrete references in the instrument**\n\n- Division 1: defines covered goods (stationary exercise cycles).\n- Division 2: identifies the adopted standard (AS 4092–1993).\n- Division 3: lists the deleted clauses from AS 4092–1993 (clauses 1.1, 1.2, 1.3.1, 3.3 and 4.1).\n\n**Practical next step for a regulated business or regulator**\n\n- Compare the full text of AS 4092–1993 with and without the listed deletions to determine the exact duties, tests, labelling or design requirements removed or retained. That comparison is necessary to calculate compliance cost, product redesign needs, testing regimes and any consumer-safety implications.\n\n(Instrument dated 24 February 1997; Ministerial action under s.65E(1) of the Trade Practices Act 1974. See Schedule Divisions 1–3.)"},"flash_summary_failed":{"failed":true,"reason":"A positive credit balance is required for all requests, including BYOK, so fallback providers remain available. Add credits at https://vercel.com/d?to=%2F%5Bteam%5D%2F%7E%2Fai%3Fmodal%3Dtop-up to continue.","source":"analysis-cron"}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/trade-practices-act-1974-consumer-protection-notice-no-9-of-1997-consumer-product-safety-standard-ex","history":"/api/acts/trade-practices-act-1974-consumer-protection-notice-no-9-of-1997-consumer-product-safety-standard-ex/history","analysis":"/api/acts/trade-practices-act-1974-consumer-protection-notice-no-9-of-1997-consumer-product-safety-standard-ex/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/trade-practices-act-1974-consumer-protection-notice-no-9-of-1997-consumer-product-safety-standard-ex/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/trade-practices-act-1974-consumer-protection-notice-no-9-of-1997-consumer-product-safety-standard-ex/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/trade-practices-act-1974-consumer-protection-notice-no-9-of-1997-consumer-product-safety-standard-ex/documents"}}