Kinetic Sand & Asbestos: The Hidden Risk in Sensory Play

Even seemingly safe sensory play materials can hide serious risks. The 2025 coloured sand asbestos recall proves no product is immune. Read our risk-management guide: Kinetic Sand & Asbestos – The Hidden Risk in Sensory Play

Overview

In recent weeks, the national recall of certain coloured sand products—often used in educational settings for sensory and creative activities—has raised concerns due to the detection of low levels of asbestos. This situation, stemming from post-market testing, highlights the importance of robust risk management strategies to ensure the safety of staff, students, and other stakeholders. At MiSAFE Solutions Pty Ltd, we approach such incidents from a risk-based viewpoint, focusing on practical steps to mitigate potential hazards while maintaining operational continuity. This blog provides general guidance on response options, drawing from regulatory insights and industry practices. Please note that this is not legal advice; organisations should seek independent legal counsel for tailored recommendations. For more on our QHSE consulting services, visit our dedicated page.

Understanding the Risk Profile

Regulators, including the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), WorkSafe Queensland, Queensland Health, and the Asbestos and Silica Safety and Eradication Agency (ASEA), have consistently described the risk as low. The asbestos fibres (tremolite and/or chrysotile) are unlikely to become airborne unless the sand is mechanically disturbed, such as through crushing or pulverising. From a risk management perspective, this low-risk classification allows for proportionate responses that prioritise immediate product removal, area isolation, and safe disposal without necessitating extensive escalation. Key considerations include evaluating the potential for exposure in high-use areas, such as classrooms or storage spaces, and documenting all actions to demonstrate due diligence.

Organisations facing this recall must weigh options like laboratory testing of the sand versus direct disposal. Testing can provide definitive data on asbestos presence, aiding in stakeholder reassurance and long-term record-keeping, but it involves costs, delays (often 7–14 days), and the possibility of generating discoverable results that could heighten concerns despite the low risk. Direct disposal without testing aligns closely with regulatory recommendations, enabling faster resolution and resource allocation to other safety initiatives, though it may require enhanced communication to address any perceptions of incomplete investigation. Explore how our risk assessment services can support your evaluation process.

Response Options: Professional vs. Self-Managed Approaches

When addressing the recall, two primary pathways emerge: engaging professional services for remediation or managing disposal internally. Professional hazmat remediation offers independent verification through licensed assessors, including air monitoring and clearance certificates, which can strengthen duty of care documentation. This approach is particularly favourable for organisations seeking external validation, though it comes with associated timelines and expenses—obtaining multiple quotes is advisable to ensure value.

Alternatively, self-managed disposal allows for immediate action, following guidelines such as double-bagging products, secure storage, and transport to licensed facilities. Some schools have opted to clean affected rooms themselves, which is their prerogative, provided they adhere to safe handling protocols, use appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE), and maintain vigilance for residues. This method can minimise disruption but relies on internal capabilities and rigorous staff training to avoid unnecessary risks. Regardless of the chosen path, ongoing staff awareness—through checklists for visual inspections of surfaces, floors, and storage—is essential to identify any trace materials.

From a risk perspective, both options can fulfil obligations when supported by thorough records, such as inventories, isolation logs, and disposal receipts. Ethical reflections are also key: testing may enhance transparency, while direct disposal prioritises practicality without compromising safety. Learn more about why QHSE software is a game-changer for Australian workplaces in managing such incidents.

Communication and Long-Term Prevention

Effective communication is a cornerstone of risk management in such scenarios. Messaging to staff should emphasise factual updates, the low risk, and actions taken, while encouraging vigilance without causing undue alarm. For parents and guardians, templates can convey reassurance, link to official sources, and advise checking home products. All communications benefit from review to ensure appropriate phrasing.

Looking ahead, prevention strategies can reduce future vulnerabilities. Updating procurement guidelines to require Australian Standards approval, prohibiting implicated brands, and banning products from high-risk manufacturers are practical steps. Annual hazardous materials audits and supplier declaration reviews further bolster resilience.

If your organisation requires advice from a risk management perspective on handling this recall or similar issues, MiSAFE Solutions Pty Ltd can assist. Contact us at contact@misafesolutions.com.au or +61 (0) 7 5641 2101 to discuss how we can support your needs, or book a consultation. Remember, while this guidance is based on available information as of November 2025, seeking legal advice is recommended for any specific decisions.