The Bill rests on three technical concepts introduced or clarified in the text: minimum biobased-content thresholds expressed as % v/v, the labelling and representation trigger for “E10”, and procedural-defence mechanics for compliance efforts.

% v/v. The Bill defines “% v/v” to mean per cent volume by volume, and cross-references that definition for Part 5A, Division 1, Subdivision 2A (s 35DA; cl 8, sch 1 insertion). All content minimums (9% v/v for E10, 1% v/v for other petrol-biobased blends, and 2% v/v for diesel-biobased diesel blends) are expressed in these volumetric terms (ss 35DB(1)(a)-(b); 35DC(1)). Expressing the minima as % v/v fixes the measurement axis to volumetric blending ratios rather than mass, energy content or CO2-equivalent metrics; the Bill does not provide alternative metrics or conversion rules.

E10 as a marketing descriptor. The Bill defines “E10” in s 35DA as a petrol-biobased petrol blend that is sold, marketed or represented as “E10”. That means the obligation in s 35DB(1)(a) applies to products where the seller uses the label “E10” in sale, marketing or representation, regardless of the blend’s actual ethanol share, subject to the prohibition in s 35DB. The Bill therefore ties regulatory effect to commercial representation, not strictly to an objective chemical composition independent of labelling. This creates an explicit compliance boundary based on how a product is described to customers.

Statutory minima and labelling. The Bill creates three numerically specific minima: E10 must contain at least 9% v/v biobased petrol; other petrol-biobased petrol blends must contain at least 1% v/v biobased petrol; diesel-biobased diesel blends must contain at least 2% v/v biobased diesel (ss 35DB(1), 35DC(1)). These minima operate as prohibitions on selling blends below the stated volumetric share. They are not framed as escalating percentage targets over time; the Bill does not provide for annual increases, exemptions, credit trading, or reporting thresholds. The content minima apply to “fuel seller[s]” (ss 35DB, 35DC), a term used throughout the Act but not redefined in the Bill text supplied.

Defence mechanism. The Bill supplies a statutory defence in any proceeding for breach of s 35DB or s 35DC, allowing a defendant to prove they took “all reasonable steps” to prevent the offence (s 35DD(1)). Section 35DD(2) lists non-exhaustive matters a court may consider when deciding whether all reasonable steps were taken: systems established and maintained, training required of employees, testing carried out, and records kept to demonstrate compliance. The provision operates as an evidentiary gateway, but it leaves the ultimate legal assessment of “all reasonable steps” to judicial discretion.

Presentation requirement for E10. Section 35DE places a specific display obligation on “fuel retailers” not to sell E10 unless the octane rating for the E10 is displayed on each E10 fuel pump in a place likely to be seen by both a person approaching in a vehicle and a person dispensing fuel. The term “E10 fuel pump” is defined to include a pump that is used to sell E10, whether or not it is also used for another purpose (s 35DE(3)). “Octane rating” is defined for E10 as the research octane number for the E10, rounded down to the next whole number (s 35DE(3)).

Penalty structure. Across the amended and new provisions, the Bill implements the same two-tier maximum penalty architecture: 400 penalty units for a first offence, 4,000 penalty units for a second or later offence (amendments to s 35B(2) and s 35C(2); ss 35DB(2)-(3), 35DC(2)-(3), 35DE(1)). The Bill does not change procedural enforcement mechanisms, inspector powers, or evidentiary presumptions beyond what is expressly set out.

Scope adjustments. The amendment to s 35A(2) replaces text to specify that Division 1 applies to the sale of petrol or diesel fuel by a fuel wholesaler to another fuel wholesaler, and removes subsections (3) and (5), while renumbering (4) as (3) (cl 4). The net effect, on its face, is to limit the stated application to wholesale-to-wholesale transactions; the Bill does not elaborate the reasons for deletion of the omitted subsections or provide transitional detail.

Collectively, these concepts create a compliance architecture with volumetric content floors, consumer-facing labelling duties for E10, a statutory defensive route that privileges documented compliance systems, and escalated penalties for repeat offences. The Bill relies on court adjudication to apply the “all reasonable steps” standard and does not embed administrative exemption or compliance-check frameworks in the text you supplied.

The Bill creates obligations and potential liabilities for distinct classes of actors in the fuel supply chain. The text uses three recurrent actor labels: fuel wholesaler, fuel seller, and fuel retailer. The Bill also affects downstream consumers indirectly through labelling rules.

Fuel wholesalers. The amendment to s 35A(2) explicitly locates the application of Division 1 to the sale of petrol or diesel fuel by a fuel wholesaler to another fuel wholesaler (cl 4). That change implies the Bill recognises a defined role for wholesale-to-wholesale transactions within Division 1; it also removes certain subsections of s 35A, which may have previously broadened or clarified the Division’s reach. Practically, wholesale suppliers engaged in transactions with other wholesalers should review contractual terms, quality specifications and compliance assurances, because the Division’s application is now articulated in wholesale-to-wholesale terms.

Fuel sellers. The new content offences in ss 35DB and 35DC are framed as prohibitions on a “fuel seller” selling a petrol-biobased petrol blend or a diesel-biobased diesel blend below the statutory minimums. The Bill does not redefine “fuel seller” in the excerpt provided, so that term will bear its meaning from the principal Act. If the principal Act’s definition includes wholesalers, retailers, importers, or terminal operators, each of those categories may be caught. Practitioners should therefore check the Act’s existing definitions to identify precisely which commercial roles the term “fuel seller” covers. Where it applies to entities that blend, import or supply fuel into the market, those entities must either ensure their supplied blends meet the minima or rely on the statutory defence by demonstrating all reasonable steps were taken to prevent the breach (s 35DD).

Fuel retailers. Section 35DE imposes an active duty on “fuel retailer[s]” to display the E10 octane rating at each E10 fuel pump in a place likely to be seen by approaching drivers and persons dispensing fuel. The definition of “E10 fuel pump” extends to pumps used to sell E10 even where the pump is used for other purposes (s 35DE(3)); therefore, retail sites with multi-product pumps will need to ensure that an E10 octane display is present on any pump used to sell E10. The obligation is site-level and pump-specific; a non-compliant display at any E10 pump attracts the prescribed penalties (s 35DE(1)).

Associated commercial parties. Suppliers, blenders, logistics operators, terminals and franchisees will be affected indirectly because the content minima and labelling rules change the requirements those commercial partners must meet or enforce contractually. For example, suppliers providing product to retail sites that market E10 will need to ensure that the product sold as E10 meets the 9% v/v requirement, or have contractual terms that shift liability and provide data to support a “reasonable steps” defence.

Customers and consumers. The E10 labelling rule changes the information consumers see at the point of sale. Because “E10” is defined by the seller’s marketing or representation (s 35DA), retailers and marketers determine whether the 9% v/v threshold and octane-display duty apply by how they label the product. Consumers benefit from clearer octane information at pump-level where E10 is sold, but the Bill does not create consumer remedy mechanisms beyond criminal penalties applied through prosecutions.

Enforcement actors. The Bill creates offences and maximum penalties to be applied in proceedings; it does not specify an administrative enforcement agency or an inspectorate in the inserted text. Enforcement therefore will be prosecution-based under the Act’s existing enforcement framework. Courts are explicitly involved in determining whether the “all reasonable steps” defence applies (s 35DD). Any prosecution or regulatory action will be subject to the Act’s overall enforcement mechanisms already present in the principal Act, though those mechanisms are not reproduced in the Bill text you provided.

In sum, the Bill primarily affects any entity classed as a fuel seller or fuel retailer under the principal Act, and it clarifies application to wholesale-to-wholesale sales for Division 1. Operators across the supply chain who blend, market, label, transport or retail petrol and diesel blends will need to examine contractual allocation of risk, quality-assurance processes, staff training and on-site signage practices to manage legal exposure under the new provisions.

This Bill establishes discrete duties on fuel sellers and fuel retailers, alongside a statutory defensive right in proceedings for content breaches. It also alters the stated application of Division 1 to wholesale-to-wholesale sales. The duties, their triggers and the available defences are set out in the inserted subdivision and amendments.

Duties on fuel sellers for content minima. A fuel seller must not sell a petrol-biobased petrol blend unless the percentage of biobased petrol in the blend is at least 9% v/v for products sold, marketed or represented as “E10”, and at least 1% v/v for other petrol-biobased petrol blends (s 35DB(1)(a)-(b)). A fuel seller must not sell a diesel-biobased diesel blend unless the percentage of biobased diesel in the blend is at least 2% v/v (s 35DC(1)). These are strict prohibitions framed as “must not sell” obligations; compliance is determined by measuring the volumetric percentage of biobased content in the final blend.

Duties on fuel retailers for display. A fuel retailer must not sell E10 unless the retailer displays the octane rating for the E10 at each E10 pump in a manner likely to be seen by both (a) a person approaching the fuel pump in a vehicle, and (b) a person dispensing fuel from the fuel pump (s 35DE(1)-(2)). An “E10 fuel pump” is any pump used to sell E10, regardless of whether the pump is also used for another purpose (s 35DE(3)). The octane rating for E10 is the research octane number rounded down to the next whole number (s 35DE(3)); the rounding rule removes decimals in the displayed figure.

Rights and defensive mechanisms. If charged with an offence under s 35DB or s 35DC, the person may rely on the statutory defence in s 35DD(1) by proving they took all reasonable steps to prevent the offence. The court may consider specified factors, namely: systems established and maintained to ensure compliance; training required for employees; testing carried out to assess compliance; and records kept to demonstrate compliance (s 35DD(2)(a)-(d)). This creates an affirmative evidential right to point to documented compliance measures and operational controls; the defence is proximate to due diligence statutes but framed in the Bill as “all reasonable steps”, leaving the ultimate evaluation to judicial discretion.

Rights to clarity in definition and labelling. The Bill’s definition of E10 (s 35DA) ties obligations to marketing and representation, so sellers have an operational right to determine whether to describe a product as “E10” and thereby bring it within the stricter 9% v/v rule and the pump display obligation. This gives commercial actors a degree of control over which statutory duties apply by their labelling choices, subject to consumer and advertising law constraints not present in the Bill text.

Amended application of Division 1. By amending s 35A(2) to refer specifically to the sale of petrol or diesel fuel by a fuel wholesaler to another fuel wholesaler, the Bill narrows the stated application of Division 1 (cl 4). This creates a jurisdictional or scope-related change that affects who must comply under Division 1, and may narrow certain obligations outside the newly inserted subdivision 2A.

Penalty rights and escalation. The Bill sets maximum penalties for the new content and display offences and for the revised sustainable biobased petrol and diesel requirements. Each relevant provision contains a two-tier maximum: 400 penalty units for a first offence and 4,000 penalty units for a second or later offence (amendments in cl 5(1), cl 6; ss 35DB(2)-(3), 35DC(2)-(3), 35DE(1)). The Bill does not prescribe mitigations, administrative notices or infringement mechanisms; rights to challenge a prosecution or invoke the defence rest with the charged party in court.

Record-keeping and evidential rights. While the Bill does not impose a standalone record-keeping obligation, the s 35DD defence expressly invites courts to consider records and testing as evidence that “all reasonable steps” were taken (s 35DD(2)(c)-(d)). That creates an indirect, practical duty to maintain records if a party wishes to preserve the defence.

No express administrative discretion. The inserted provisions do not create a power for a regulator to grant exemptions, issue guidance or reconcile technical non-conformities administratively. The Bill relies on criminal offence provisions, with courts determining breaches and the availability of the statutory defence.

In short, the Bill imposes affirmative duties to meet volumetric minima and to display octane ratings for E10, provides a judicially-assessed “all reasonable steps” defence tied to documented systems and testing, and sets a two-tiered penalty framework. Commercial actors have a limited tactical ability to avoid certain obligations through their choice of marketing terms, but that comes with market and reputational trade-offs.

The Bill standardises and escalates maximum penalties across amended and newly inserted offences, and specifies the circumstances in which courts may assess a statutory defence. Enforcement mechanisms are not otherwise expanded in the text supplied; prosecutions and judicial determination remain the central enforcement pathway.

Two-tier maximum penalties. For the amended existing offences under s 35B (sustainable biobased petrol requirement) and s 35C (sustainable biobased diesel requirement), the Bill replaces the previous single penalty figure with a two-tier maximum penalty regime: 400 penalty units for a first offence, and 4,000 penalty units for a second or later offence (cl 5(1); cl 6). The same two-tier penalty scale applies to the new content offences (s 35DB(2)-(3) and s 35DC(2)-(3)) and to the E10 display offence (s 35DE(1)). The Bill therefore aligns penalties for content and display failures with the heavier escalation for recidivist conduct.

Penalty units as metric. Each maximum is expressed in penalty units; the Bill does not state the monetary value of a penalty unit within its own text. The effect of a maximum expressed in penalty units will therefore depend on the statutory value of a penalty unit as set in the broader legislative framework; the Bill leaves that conversion implicit.

Enforcement forum and prosecutorial approach. The offences created and amended are framed as criminal offences for which proceedings are to be brought, rather than as infringements or civil penalties administered by an agency within the Bill text. The presence of a statutory defence in s 35DD confirms that breaches are to be addressed in proceedings where the evidential burden to establish the defence falls on the person charged. The Bill does not identify the prosecuting authority, nor does it confer additional investigatory powers, enforcement discretions, or administrative penalty mechanisms in the text supplied.

Defensive evidentiary regime. Section 35DD provides a codified defence to charges for s 35DB or s 35DC offences, requiring proof that the accused took “all reasonable steps” to prevent the offence (s 35DD(1)). The court may consider specified factors in assessing whether reasonable steps were taken: systems established and maintained, employee training, testing carried out to assess compliance, and records kept to demonstrate compliance (s 35DD(2)(a)-(d)). This makes the defence materially evidential and operationally consequential: well-documented compliance programmes, quality control testing, and training records form the core of the available evidential response. The defence is not framed as an administrative excuse; it is a judicially tested justification to be evaluated in the course of proceedings.

Scope of sentencing discretion. The Bill sets maximum penalties for first and subsequent offences but does not limit judicial sentencing discretion below those maxima nor prescribe minimum penalties. Courts retain discretion to consider mitigating and aggravating factors not enumerated in the Bill when imposing a penalty for a convicted offence. The Bill also does not prescribe alternative sentencing mechanisms such as remedial orders, corrective advertising orders, or community-based penalties.

No express administrative remedial powers. The Bill does not establish a compliance notice regime, rectification period, or infringement notice pathway in the text supplied. That suggests that enforcement will proceed through ordinary prosecutorial channels under the Act’s existing enforcement framework, subject to procedural provisions that are not included in the excerpt.

Practical enforcement implications. From a compliance standpoint, the two-tier escalation markedly raises maximum exposure for repeat non-compliance. The statutory defence in s 35DD heightens the evidential importance of compliance systems and records; absence of those records will weaken a defendant’s position. Retailers face potential liability for display offences at the pump, which are specific and visible targets for enforcement. The interplay between labelling practices and criminal exposure (because E10 is defined by sale, marketing or representation) will be an enforcement vector: mislabelling or misrepresentation may prompt prosecutions under the content provisions or display offences.

Overall, penalties are higher and structured to escalate for repeat offenders, enforcement is prosecution-based under the Act as supplied, and the Bill places evidential weight on documented compliance systems as the principal mitigation route in court.

The Bill is an amending instrument to the Liquid Fuel Supply Act 1984, and its provisions must be read in the context of that Act’s existing definitions, enforcement framework and penalty-unit mechanics. The supplied text amends specific sections and the dictionary, but it does not reproduce or restate cross-references to other Acts, regulations or administrative regimes. The interaction themes below draw from the Bill’s text and the structural points the Bill changes.

Amendment to the principal Act. The Bill explicitly amends the Liquid Fuel Supply Act 1984 (cl 3). It alters the application clause for Division 1 (s 35A), the sustainable biobased fuel requirement provisions (ss 35B, 35C), and inserts a new subdivision setting content minima and display obligations (Part 5A, Div 1, Subdiv 2A). Practically, these amendments will operate within the Act’s pre-existing architecture for definitions, enforcement, and interpretation. Entities and practitioners must therefore consult the principal Act to see how terms like “fuel seller”, “fuel retailer”, and “penalty unit” are defined and how enforcement procedures are framed.

Penalty-unit framework and financial quantification. The Bill uses “penalty units” to state maximum penalties (for example, 400 and 4,000 penalty units). The monetary value of a penalty unit is generally set in separate legislation or the principal Act, which is not reproduced here. Therefore, the precise monetary exposure from the Bill depends on the statutory “penalty unit” value as established elsewhere; the Bill interacts with that separate scheme to produce financial consequences.

Criminal enforcement and prosecutorial processes. The Bill creates criminal offences and provides a defence assessed by a court (s 35DD). The procedural rules for bringing prosecutions, the identity of prosecuting authorities, evidentiary standards and the roles of inspectors or investigators will be governed by other provisions in the principal Act or by general criminal procedure law. The Bill does not itself confer investigatory powers or civil penalty mechanisms. Consequently, compliance and enforcement practice will be shaped by the existing enforcement powers and procedures the principal Act contains.

Labeling and consumer law intersection. The Bill ties certain obligations to how a product is “sold, marketed or represented” as E10 (s 35DA). That interacts conceptually with consumer-protection and trade-descriptions law, which also regulates misleading representations; however, the Bill’s text does not expressly reference those statutes. Nevertheless, a product described as “E10” but containing less than 9% v/v biobased petrol could create parallel liabilities under the principal Act’s content offences and under consumer protection laws. The Bill does not create a private right of action or specify concurrent remedies; it leaves enforcement of the content prohibition to proceedings under the Act.

Quality and testing standards. The Bill specifies volumetric minima in % v/v terms (ss 35DB, 35DC), but it does not set laboratory methods, sampling regimes or accredited testing standards. Therefore, the Bill interacts with existing technical standards and measurement regimes outside its text, and those standards will effectively determine how % v/v is measured in enforcement or in applying the s 35DD defence. Parties will need to rely on accepted fuel testing protocols, but the Bill neither prescribes nor adopts a specific protocol.

Contractual allocation and supply chain law. Because the Bill affects sellers, wholesalers and retailers, contractual frameworks governing supply, warranties, indemnities, and specifications will be implicated. The Bill’s obligations may be allocated contractually to suppliers, blenders or retailers, but contractual arrangements cannot negate statutory obligations in the Bill. Contracts will therefore have to address risk allocation for content compliance, testing regimes and record-keeping to enable use of the s 35DD defence.

No express interaction with environmental or vehicle-safety statutes. While the Bill addresses biobased content and octane display, it does not reference vehicle standards, emissions rules, or fuel specification legislation. The Bill therefore operates in a narrow regulatory lane focused on supply and representation; interactions with vehicle warranty, emissions compliance or safety standards are not expressly engaged by the Bill’s text.

Dictionary amendments. The Bill inserts references into Schedule 1 for % v/v and E10 (cl 8, sch 1). This clarifies cross-referencing across the Act, but it also means that where other parts of the principal Act refer to the dictionary, these defined terms will now import into other provisions where the schedule applies.

In short, the Bill amends the principal Act’s content and labelling obligations and relies on the principal Act’s definitions, enforcement procedures and external measurement and consumer-protection frameworks to give effect to those obligations. The Bill does not itself create statutory measurement protocols, administrative enforcement powers, or express cross-references to other regulatory regimes within its text, so interpretation and operationalisation will require reading the Bill in the context of the principal Act and other technical or consumer laws.

The Bill formally records a discrete set of amendments to the Liquid Fuel Supply Act 1984. The operative changes in the Bill are confined to a small number of sections and to Schedule 1. The Bill also sets its own commencement date. The specific amendments in the Bill are as follows.

Commencement. Clause 2 provides that the Act amended by the Bill commences on the day that is one year after the date of assent. That delayed commencement creates a one-year implementation period before the amended obligations and penalties take effect (s 2).

Amendment to s 35A (Application of division 1). Clause 4 replaces the opening words of s 35A(2) so the provision applies to the sale of petrol fuel or diesel fuel by a fuel wholesaler to another fuel wholesaler. Clause 4(2) omits subsections 35A(3) and (5) and clause 4(3) renumbers 35A(4) as 35A(3). The Bill therefore both narrows the textual application of Division 1 and removes certain subsections of s 35A, though the content of the omitted subsections is not reproduced in this Bill text.

Amendment to s 35B (Sustainable biobased petrol requirement). Clause 5 amends s 35B(2) by substituting the penalty provision with a two-tier maximum: 400 penalty units for a first offence and 4,000 penalty units for a second or later offence. Clause 5 also changes s 35B(3) by deleting paragraph (b) from the definition of “minimum amount” and renumbering paragraph (c) as paragraph (b). The deletion and renumbering modify how the Act expresses the “minimum amount” within that subsection.

Amendment to s 35C (Sustainable biobased diesel requirement). Clause 6 replaces the penalty provision in s 35C(2) with the same two-tier structure used elsewhere: 400 penalty units for a first offence and 4,000 penalty units for a second or later offence.

Insertion of new Part 5A, Division 1, Subdivision 2A. Clause 7 inserts a new Subdivision 2A under Part 5A, Division 1. It contains:

• s 35DA, definitions for the subdivision, including definition of % v/v and E10;
• s 35DB, which sets biobased petrol content minima for petrol-biobased petrol blends (9% v/v for E10 and 1% v/v for other petrol-biobased blends) and prescribes the two-tier maximum penalty for breaches;
• s 35DC, which sets a 2% v/v minimum for biobased diesel content in diesel-biobased diesel blends and prescribes the two-tier maximum penalty;
• s 35DD, which establishes the “all reasonable steps” defence and lists factors a court may consider in assessing that defence, namely systems, training, testing and records; and
• s 35DE, which requires fuel retailers to display E10 octane ratings at each E10 pump, sets the two-tier penalty scale for non-compliance, defines “E10 fuel pump” and defines “octane rating” for E10 as the research octane number rounded down to the next whole number.

Amendment of Schedule 1 (Dictionary). Clause 8 inserts into Schedule 1 the references to % v/v and E10 for Part 5A, Division 1, Subdivision 2A, pointing those dictionary entries to section 35DA.

Organisational effect. The Bill is limited to a defined set of technical and penalty changes; it does not purport to alter the Act’s enforcement machinery, inspector powers, or create transitional or savings provisions in the text supplied. The one-year commencement delay is the only temporal transitional mechanism included.

Because the Bill deletes subsections from s 35A and adjusts the internal structure of s 35B(3), practitioners should cross-reference the existing wording of the principal Act to understand how those deletions alter operative scope and definitions. The Bill’s amendment record is self-contained to the clauses above; it does not cite earlier amendment acts or a history of prior changes within this text.

The Bill text supplied does not cite, reference, or summarise any judicial decisions, prior litigation, or case law relating to the Liquid Fuel Supply Act 1984 or its provisions. There are no named cases, judicial interpretations, or past enforcement outcomes included in the Bill as explanatory material. Consequently, the Bill does not record any litigation history within the text you provided.

Because the inserted provisions introduce a statutory “all reasonable steps” defence (s 35DD) and tighten penalties, future litigation could be expected to address the scope of “all reasonable steps”, what constitutes adequate testing and record-keeping, and how courts interpret the marketing-triggered definition of E10. However, those are prospective observations about how litigation might engage these provisions; they are not grounded in any litigation record contained in the Bill.

Given the absence of litigation material in the Bill, practitioners should treat the Bill as a legislative change to be interpreted in the context of existing statutory interpretation doctrines and the principal Act’s enforcement framework. Any precedential guidance on the new or amended provisions will only be developed once the courts have had the opportunity to consider cases brought under these provisions after commencement.

If legal teams intend to advise clients on likely litigation risks post-commencement, the relevant preparatory tasks are: (1) identify the precise definitions of “fuel seller” and “fuel retailer” in the principal Act; (2) map current compliance systems and testing regimes against the minima imposed by ss 35DB and 35DC; and (3) collect contemporaneous documentation that could underpin an “all reasonable steps” defence in future proceedings. None of these steps rely on existing case law supplied in the Bill, but they are pragmatic measures to shape litigation preparedness.

In summary, the Bill contains no litigation history; courts’ future treatment of the “all reasonable steps” defence, the measurement of % v/v, and labelling-trigger issues will create the litigation record that the Bill itself does not provide.

This Bill contains several specific features and drafting choices that create practical risks and compliance traps for market participants. Below are concentrated points practitioners and compliance officers should note, citing the relevant sections.

Marketing triggers obligations. E10 is defined as a petrol-biobased petrol blend that is “sold, marketed or represented as ‘E10’” (s 35DA). That means a commercial decision to label or advertise a product as E10 imports the 9% v/v minimum and the pump display duty. Sellers risk criminal exposure under s 35DB(1)(a) if they call a product E10 but the product is below the 9% v/v threshold. The flip side is that deliberately avoiding the “E10” label may avoid the 9% threshold but could result in other misrepresentation exposures under consumer protection law not addressed in the Bill.

Low but precise volumetric minima. The numeric minima are low and specific: E10 at least 9% v/v, other petrol blends at least 1% v/v, diesel blends at least 2% v/v (ss 35DB(1), 35DC(1)). Because these are volumetric percentages, measurement methods matter. The Bill does not specify sampling protocols or reference testing standards, which creates uncertainty about how compliance is measured in practice and what sampling error margins a court will accept. Without agreed testing standards in the Bill, parties must rely on external technical standards to defend compliance.

Rounding rule for octane rating. The octane rating for E10 is prescribed as the research octane number, rounded down to the next whole number (s 35DE(3)). The rounding-down rule systematically reduces the displayed number relative to a decimal RON, which could affect consumer perception and must be built into site signage. Retailers must ensure the rounded-down figure is used consistently, because an incorrect display could be a breach under s 35DE(1).

E10 fuel pump definition is pump-specific. The definition of “E10 fuel pump” includes any pump used by the retailer to sell E10, even if it serves other purposes (s 35DE(3)). Practically, that requires a retailer to place octane displays on any multi-product pump that is used to sell E10 at any time. Operationally, that may require updating signage across pumps, even where E10 is an occasional product on a pump.

“Must not sell” is strict. The content obligations are framed as absolute prohibitions on sale below the minimum concentrations (ss 35DB(1), 35DC(1)). There is no express de minimis tolerance, no administrative correction period and no express exemption mechanism in the inserted provisions. If a sale results in the product being below the stated minima, the seller is exposed to the maximum penalties unless they can prove the s 35DD defence.

Burden of proof for the defence. The defence in s 35DD is phrased as “it is a defence for the person charged … to prove that the person took all reasonable steps”. That places the evidential legal onus on the accused to demonstrate the affirmative defence in proceedings, not on the prosecution to disprove it. Courts may consider systems, training, testing and records (s 35DD(2)), so lack of contemporaneous documentation will materially weaken a defendant’s posture.

Repeat-offender escalation. The penalty structure escalates substantially for a second or later offence (from 400 to 4,000 penalty units). Organisations without robust compliance programs face significant exposure if an incident recurs. The Bill does not define what counts as “second or later” for sentencing aggregation across entities or individuals; standard sentencing principles will apply, but the Bill leaves aggregation mechanics to the courts or prosecutorial practice under the principal Act.

Amendment to s 35A may alter scope unexpectedly. The amendment narrows s 35A to sales by a fuel wholesaler to another fuel wholesaler and removes subsections (3) and (5) (cl 4). Because the Bill does not reproduce the omitted subsections, parties should check the existing Act to see whether the deletions narrow or broaden who is required to comply under Division 1. An incorrect assumption about scope may lead to exposure.

No testing standard in the Bill. Testing is referenced as a factor in the defence, but the Bill does not specify accepted analytical techniques or accredited laboratories (s 35DD(2)(c)). Disputes about methodology, sampling site, chain of custody and laboratory accreditation could be central to prosecutions and defences. Parties should ensure test protocols are contemporaneously documented and, where possible, use accredited methods.

Display compliance enforcement. The display duty requires the octane rating to be displayed “in 1 or more places on the fuel pump in a way that is likely to be seen” by approaching and dispensing persons (s 35DE(2)). The subjective element “likely to be seen” introduces factual variability and potential enforcement disputes about adequacy of placement, font size, illumination, and obstruction. Retailers should adopt conservative, prominently visible signage to minimise disagreement.

Dictionary interaction risk. The Bill adds % v/v and E10 to the Schedule 1 dictionary by reference to s 35DA (cl 8). However, other provisions in the Act that reference Schedule 1 may now carry these defined terms, which could have unintended reach beyond the new subdivision. Practitioners should map where Schedule 1 definitions apply across the Act.

In short, the primary gotchas are labelling-triggered obligations, the requirement to maintain contemporaneous systems and records to support the statutory defence, the absence of specified testing standards, the pump-level signage burden, and the significant penalty escalation for repeated offences. Each of these points creates concrete compliance levers that should be anticipated.

The Bill creates clear, measurable duties and a statutory defence based on documented compliance measures. Compliance programmes should therefore be pragmatic, documentation-led and focused on measurement, training, contractual allocation and point-of-sale presentation. Below is a targeted checklist and recommended operational steps mapped to the Bill’s provisions.

1. Map legal roles and contractual allocations

• Identify which entities in your organisation are defined as “fuel seller”, “fuel retailer”, and “fuel wholesaler” under the principal Act, because ss 35DB, 35DC and 35DE use those labels directly.
• Update supply agreements, sale contracts and franchise agreements to allocate responsibility for meeting the % v/v minima, testing, record-keeping, and indemnities for breaches. The Bill does not negate statutory duties, but contractual allocation clarifies internal risk.

(Reference: cl 4; ss 35DB, 35DC, 35DE)

2. Adjust blend specifications and supplier controls

• Ensure blends marketed as E10 contain at least 9% v/v biobased petrol; other petrol blends must meet at least 1% v/v; diesel blends must meet at least 2% v/v.
• Implement or prespecify blending tolerances, supplier declarations and acceptance criteria at receipts and loading points to ensure volumetric minima are achieved before sale.

(Reference: ss 35DA, 35DB(1), 35DC(1))

3. Establish robust testing regimes

• Develop a testing protocol for batch sampling and testing that records sampling method, chain of custody and laboratory accreditation. Although the Bill does not prescribe test methods, s 35DD explicitly lists “testing the person carried out” as material to the defence.
• Maintain a program of periodic spot-testing and pre-sale testing to detect and remediate off-spec product prior to sale.

(Reference: s 35DD(2)(c))

4. Implement documented systems and training

• Create and maintain documented compliance systems and standard operating procedures that govern blending, sampling, acceptance, storage and delivery. s 35DD(2)(a) invites consideration of such systems in the defence.
• Provide regular training for operational staff on blending controls, labelling rules (particularly the definition and implications of marketing a product as “E10”), and pump signage obligations.

(Reference: s 35DD(2)(a)-(b); s 35DA)

5. Record-keeping and audit trails

• Maintain contemporaneous records demonstrating compliance: blend sheets, supplier certificates, testing results, training attendance logs, and pump-signage inventories. The s 35DD defence expressly includes records as a factor the court may consider (s 35DD(2)(d)).
• Establish a document-retention policy that aligns with the defence’s evidential needs, ensuring records are retrievable for any future proceedings.

(Reference: s 35DD(2)(d))

6. Pump signage and consumer information for E10

• For any pump used to sell E10, install octane-rating signage that displays the research octane number rounded down to the next whole number, positioned where it is likely to be seen by a person approaching in a vehicle and a person dispensing fuel (ss 35DE(1)-(3)).
• Audit pump signage across all sites to ensure E10 pumps are compliant, including multi-product pumps that may occasionally sell E10.

(Reference: s 35DE(2)-(3))

7. Marketing policy and labelling strategy

• Review marketing materials, point-of-sale advertising and product labels to ensure that products described as “E10” actually meet the 9% v/v threshold. Because the E10 definition depends on sale, marketing or representation, deliberate labeling decisions determine whether the stricter E10 rules apply (s 35DA).
• Where a product does not meet 9% v/v, avoid marketing it as E10 to reduce statutory exposure, while ensuring compliance with other advertising and consumer laws.

(Reference: s 35DA)

8. Incident response and remediation

• Draft an incident response protocol for suspected non-compliant product detection, including immediate withdrawal, customer notification if necessary, retesting, and remediation steps. Document each step to support a potential s 35DD defence.
• Consider whether to suspend sales pending confirmatory testing when doubt exists about a batch’s content percentage, and document the decision process.

(Reference: s 35DD(1))

9. Legal and regulatory review

• Conduct a legal review to map how the principal Act’s definitions and enforcement provisions interact with the Bill’s new obligations. This includes confirming the definition of “penalty unit” to quantify financial risk.
• Review insurance policies and indemnities, and update risk registers to reflect the 400/4,000 penalty-unit structure.

(Reference: cl 5(1), cl 6; ss 35DB(2)-(3), 35DC(2)-(3))

10. Timing and transitional planning

• The Bill commences one year after assent (s 2). Use the one-year lead time to upgrade systems, complete contractual changes, roll out training, and perform a full supply-chain compliance audit.
• Prioritise highest-risk sites where E10 is sold or where blending operations occur.

(Reference: s 2)

Operational best practice summary. The path to robust compliance is documentation-driven: establish and maintain written systems, training, testing and records; avoid representing a blend as “E10” unless it meets 9% v/v; ensure pump-level octane displays (research octane number rounded down) are in place for any pump used to sell E10; and ensure supply contracts allocate responsibilities for blend quality and provide access to testing and records. Those measures directly mirror the statutory considerations a court may weigh under the statutory defence and address the principal operational triggers of liability in the Bill.

Legal counsel should periodically verify that testing protocols and supplier certificates conform to accepted technical standards. Additionally, because the Bill omits testing methodologies, consider adopting widely recognised laboratory standards and accreditation to strengthen a future s 35DD defence.