Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Safety Levies Act 2011

The Act’s central concepts are defined either in the Act itself or by reference to the Work Health and Safety Act 2020 and petroleum statutes. These definitions determine the levy triggers, the liable parties, and the scope of regulatory powers. Core defined concepts include safety case, DSMS, petroleum operation, geothermal energy operation, levy period and person responsible.

Safety case and DSMS. A safety case is a document that a prescribed provision of the WHS regulations requires for a petroleum operation or a geothermal energy operation and which must set out, in accordance with any applicable WHS requirements, a case for safety of the operation (s 3E(2)). A DSMS is a document that a prescribed provision of the WHS regulations requires for a diving operation and which must set out a safety management system for the diving operation (s 3B(2)). The Act therefore ties levy triggers to the existence of documents required under WHS regulations; the Act does not itself set technical standards for safety cases or DSMSs, it references the WHS regulatory framework for those requirements (s 3E(1), s 3B(1)).

Petroleum operation and geothermal energy operation. The Act provides expansive definitions for what constitutes an operation for levy purposes. A petroleum operation is an activity carried out in an area in respect of which a petroleum title is in force, or in the adjacent area, for the purpose of exploration, drilling, extraction, injection, processing, handling, storing, piping or offloading of petroleum, and expressly includes planning, commissioning, maintenance, decommissioning, support facilities and accommodation premises in the vicinity (s 3D(2)-(3)). Similarly, a geothermal energy operation is an activity in an area where a geothermal energy title is in force for exploration, drilling or recovery of geothermal energy and includes planning, commissioning, maintenance, decommissioning, support facilities and accommodation premises in the vicinity (s 3C(2)-(3)). The definitions extend to associated plant, structures and places (cross-referencing the WHS Act definitions at s 3).

Diving operation and dive. A diving operation is defined as a petroleum operation carried out in the adjacent area that comprises one or more dives (s 3A(2)). A “dive” is an activity involving persons being in pressurised chambers, submerged under pressure, or being in a manned submersible craft (s 3A(3)). That concentrates the DSMS levy on diving activities within the adjacent area scope drawn from the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1982 (s 3 and s 3A).

Levy triggers and liability. Levies become payable if a safety case (s 4(1)) or DSMS (s 7(1)) is in force for the whole or part of a levy period. The person liable to pay is the person responsible for the safety case or DSMS (s 5(1), s 8(1)); the Act permits regulations to specify or work out who is the person responsible (s 5(2), s 8(2)). The actual quantum of levy and the levy period are set out in regulations or worked out in accordance with them (s 6(1), s 9(1), s 4(2), s 7(2), s 26(2)(a)).

Assessment and collection. The Chief Inspector Petroleum Safety must assess amounts payable and issue assessment notices specifying amount, due date and other matters required by regulation (s 10(1)(a)-(b)). The CIPS may base assessments on information obtained under this Act or information available under the listed petroleum and WHS statutes (s 10(2)). Payment is to be made to the CIPS (s 11(2)), late payment attracts a prescribed rate penalty (s 12(1)) and the CIPS can waive penalty amounts in whole or part (s 12(2)). Unpaid amounts can be recovered as debts owing to the State (s 13).

Information powers, admissibility and offences. The CIPS has formal investigative powers to direct persons to give information, answer questions, produce and allow copying of records (s 18). Failure to comply without reasonable excuse carries a $20,000 fine (s 18(4)). Compelled material is not admissible against an individual in civil or criminal proceedings except for perjury or offences under s 20 (s 19). False or misleading information offences attract a $20,000 fine (s 20).

Administration and procedural devices. The Act establishes a ring-fenced Account for levy receipts and penalty amounts to fund administration and enforcement of this Act and the WHS Act in relation to petroleum/geothermal operations (s 21). The CIPS may delegate powers to public service officers, but delegates may not sub-delegate (s 22). Assessment notices are prima facie evidence in proceedings (s 25). The regulations are given broad scope to make detailed provision on classification, assessment, reassessment, objections and penalties (s 26).

The architecture therefore is: WHS instruments (safety case/DSMS) are the trigger; regulations determine who is liable, how much, and for what periods; the CIPS assesses and enforces; funds are ring-fenced to cover administration and enforcement. Each of these components shifts different costs and operational decisions between legislature, regulators and regulated entities, and concentrates significant discretion in regulation-making and administrative processes.

Primary payers. The Act charges levies on the person responsible for a safety case or a DSMS (s 5(1), s 8(1)). The Act leaves the detailed identification of the “person responsible” to regulations (s 5(2), s 8(2)), so operators, title-holders, contract managers, joint venture participants, offshore operators and service companies may each be within scope depending on how regulations define responsibility. The statutory design therefore creates potential for different entities involved in the same operation to be classified as liable depending on regulatory definitions and administrative determinations.

Operationally regulated activities. The levy applies where a safety case is in force for a petroleum operation or geothermal energy operation (s 4(1)) and where a DSMS is in force for a diving operation (s 7(1)). The statutory definitions of petroleum operation and geothermal energy operation are intentionally broad and include exploration, drilling, recovery, processing, handling, storage, pipeline conveyance, offloading, and ancillary activities such as planning, commissioning, maintenance, decommissioning, administrative support facilities and accommodation premises at or in the vicinity of a site (s 3D(2)-(3), s 3C(2)-(3)). Consequently, the Act affects not only producers and title-holders but also contractors that operate plant, maintain sites, supply accommodation or provide diving services connected with the petroleum or geothermal operations.

Diving activities. Diving operations defined in s 3A, and DSMS documents required under the WHS regulations (s 3B), are specifically captured. Entities that operate manned submersible craft, conduct saturation dives, operate hyperbaric chambers, or undertake other pressurised diving activities in the adjacent area will likely be subject to the DSMS levy where the DSMS is in force for part or all of the levy period (s 7(1)).

Government actors and the CIPS. The CIPS is the primary decision-maker for assessments and has powers to require information, make assessments and recover amounts (s 10, s 18, s 13). The department , the agency principally assisting in the Act’s administration (s 3) , benefits from levy receipts ring‑fenced to the Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Safety Levies Account (s 21). Ministers and the Governor influence the detailed design through regulations and possibly through written consents to disclose information (s 23(c)).

Service providers and contractors. Contractors performing activities covered by the statutory definitions (for example pipeline operators, maintenance contractors, accommodation providers or diving contractors) are affected in two ways. First, the documents required by WHS regulations (safety cases/DSMSs) generally sit with the operation or installation and so may attract an allocation of responsibility under regulations. Second, the Act’s information‑gathering powers (s 18) and record-keeping requirements that regulations may prescribe (s 26(2)(h)) place record and disclosure costs on persons who are or may be liable to pay levies.

Financial and accounting consequences. The levy creates a recurring cost linked to the regulatory instruments in force; it is payable for the whole or part of a levy period when the safety case/DSMS is in force (s 4(1), s 7(1)). The Act requires payments to be made to the CIPS (s 11(2)) and provides for recovery as debt if unpaid (s 13). For entities with multiple titles, wells or sites, the potential for classification and per-title levies is left to regulation (s 6(2), s 9(2), s 26(3)), which could mean repeated or tiered levies across different operations.

Disputes and compliance actors. Persons objecting to assessment notices can lodge objections with the CIPS (s 14). Decisions on objections may be reviewed by the State Administrative Tribunal (s 16), so legal advisers, compliance officers and litigators will be engaged in disputes. However the Act does not suspend payment obligations while objections proceed (s 17), which can create short‑term cashflow strain for disputing parties.

Indirectly affected parties. Joint venture participants, financiers, insurers and subcontractors may be indirectly affected through contract allocation of levy costs, enforcement of recovery as debts, and impacts on project economics. Because the Act allows regulations to classify safety cases/DSMSs and to set different amounts for different classes (s 6(2), s 9(2), s 26(3)), there is scope for the regulations to create differentiated burdens based on size, risk or other criteria; until regulations are consulted, that allocation remains uncertain.

In short, the Act affects virtually any entity that holds, operates under or provides services to a petroleum or geothermal activity that requires a safety case or DSMS under WHS regulations. The person who must pay is determined by regulation and administrative assessment, and the design gives the executive considerable scope to allocate levy incidence within the regulated universe.

Statutory duties. The Act creates a set of clear duties for persons who are or may be liable to pay levies, as well as duties on the CIPS:

• Payment duty: A person responsible for a safety case or a DSMS must pay the applicable levy for the whole or part of the levy period during which the instrument is in force (s 4(1), s 7(1); s 5(1), s 8(1); s 11(1)-(2)). The levy amount is determined under the regulations or by formula in the regulations (s 6(1), s 9(1), s 26(2)(a)).

• Provision of information and records: The CIPS may direct a person to give information, answer questions, produce records and allow copying of records for the purposes of administration and enforcement (s 18(1)(a)-(c)). Directions concerning production of records must be in writing and specify time and place (s 18(3)).

• Accuracy: Persons must not provide false or misleading information in compliance with a direction or requirement under the Act (s 20(1)-(2)). Penalty: fine of $20,000 (s 20(1)).

• Compliance with directions: Failure without reasonable excuse to comply with an information or production direction is a criminal offence attracting a fine of $20,000 (s 18(4)).

• Confidentiality for officials: Persons engaged in performing functions under the Act must not use or disclose information obtained in the performance of functions except in prescribed circumstances or with proper authority (s 23). Penalty: fine of $20,000 (s 23).

Administrative duties of CIPS and department. The CIPS must assess the amount of safety levy payable and issue an assessment notice specifying amount and due date and other matters required by regulation (s 10(1)). The CIPS has powers to assess based on information under this Act and other petroleum and WHS statutes (s 10(2)). CIPS may waive penalty amounts if satisfied there are good reasons (s 12(2)). The department holds the Account and applies receipts to administrative and enforcement expenses (s 21(1)-(3)).

Rights and procedural protections. The Act creates limited procedural rights for liable persons:

• Notice and assessment: The CIPS must give assessment notices specifying amount and due date (s 10(1)).

• Objection: A person may object to an assessment notice on specified grounds (s 14(1)). Objections must be in writing within the prescribed period and comply with prescribed requirements (s 14(2)-(3)). The CIPS must consider and decide objections in accordance with regulations (s 15).

• Review: A person dissatisfied with the CIPS decision on an objection may apply to the State Administrative Tribunal for review (s 16).

• Privilege against self-incrimination limited: Individuals cannot refuse to give information on compulsion by claiming incrimination, but compelled material is protected from admissibility in civil or criminal proceedings except for perjury or s 20 offences (s 19). That creates a constrained form of testimonial compulsion combined with a use immunity.

• Evidentiary presumption: Assessment notices are admissible and, absent proof to the contrary, are proof of the matters stated (s 25). That shifts the evidentiary burden to the recipient to rebut details of assessments.

Key limitations and process traps. Notably, liability to pay is not suspended by the making of an objection (s 17), so rights to dispute do not relieve immediate payment obligations. The Act leaves core definitional and valuation decisions to regulations (s 26), and provides for regulatory classification and delegations to the CIPS to determine class (s 26(3)), thus embedding administrative discretion into the operation of the levy regime.

Collectively, the duties and rights create a regime where administrative assessment, compelled information-gathering and recoverability of unpaid amounts are the principal enforcement mechanisms, while dispute resolution is available but not suspensive of payment obligations.

Monetary penalties and civil recovery. The Act provides both civil recovery mechanisms and criminal fines linked to specific breaches:

• Recovery as debt: Unpaid safety levies and unpaid penalty amounts may be recovered in a court of competent jurisdiction as debts due to the State (s 13). That frames unpaid amounts as ordinary debts rather than solely regulatory fines, enabling standard civil enforcement mechanisms, garnishee, judgment enforcement and interest accrual as determined by courts.

• Penalty for late payment: If a levy remains unpaid after its due date, the liable person must pay, in addition to the levy, an amount calculated at the prescribed rate on outstanding sums from time to time (s 12(1)). The Act does not specify the prescribed rate in the text; that rate is delegated to subordinate instruments (s 12(1), s 26). The CIPS has a discretion to waive penalty amounts in whole or in part when satisfied there are good reasons (s 12(2)).

Criminal offences and fines. The Act creates criminal offences that attract monetary fines:

• Failure to comply with an information or production direction: A person who, without reasonable excuse, fails to comply with a direction under s 18(1) to give information, answer a question or produce a record commits an offence with a penalty of $20,000 (s 18(4)).

• False or misleading information: Making a statement the person knows is false or misleading in a material particular; making a statement with reckless disregard as to truth in a material particular; providing or causing to be provided information known to be false or misleading; or with reckless disregard as to truth, providing information that is false or misleading , each attracts a $20,000 fine (s 20(1)-(2)).

• Confidentiality breach: A person engaged in the performance of functions under the Act who improperly records, discloses or uses information obtained in the performance of those functions is liable to a $20,000 fine (s 23).

Evidential and procedural enforcement. The Act gives assessment notices evidentiary value: an assessment notice or a copy is admissible in proceedings under the Act and, in the absence of proof to the contrary, is proof of the making of the assessment, the amount assessed, the identity of the person liable, when payment is due, and any other fact stated in the notice (s 25). This evidentiary presumption facilitates recovery proceedings and shifts the burden of rebuttal onto recipients.

Compulsion plus use immunity. The CIPS’ investigative powers (s 18) are backed by criminal penalties for non-compliance but are balanced by s 19, which protects compellable information from admissibility against the individual in civil and criminal proceedings (other than perjury and s 20 offences). The protection is a use immunity, not a transaction or derivative-use prohibition, but it substantially limits prosecutorial use of compelled disclosures, while still allowing the CIPS to use compelled information for administrative assessment and possibly as leads to independently obtained admissible evidence.

Delegation of enforcement. The CIPS may delegate powers or duties to a public service officer in the department (s 22(1)-(2)), but a delegate cannot sub-delegate (s 22(3)). Delegation centralises operational enforcement within the department while preserving formal accountability to the CIPS.

Regulatory offences. The Governor may make regulations that create offences and penalties (s 26(2)(j)). The Act caps such penalties at a fine not exceeding $10,000 for contraventions of regulations. That means the regulations can expand the catalogue of compliance offences and impose additional sanctions subject to the $10,000 cap on regulatory offences.

Practical enforcement sequence. In practice the Act allows the CIPS to assess, issue a notice (s 10), require supporting information (s 18), and then, if unpaid, pursue the assessed amount and prescribed penalties via civil recovery as a debt (s 13) while retaining the power to prosecute false statements or failure to comply with directions (s 18, s 20). The CIPS’ discretion to waive penalties (s 12(2)) and the ability to have decisions reviewed at the State Administrative Tribunal (s 16) provide procedural checks, but the statutory design does not suspend the payment obligation pending objection (s 17), which means that enforcement can involve near‑immediate debt recovery pressure during disputes.

Cross-reference to WHS regime. The Act is expressly linked to the Work Health and Safety Act 2020 and its WHS regulations. Safety cases and DSMSs are defined by what the WHS regulations prescribe (s 3E(2), s 3B(2)). The CIPS may use information from the WHS Act, and assessments can be based on information obtained under the WHS Act and other petroleum statutes (s 10(2)). The Account created by the Act is to be applied to costs and expenses in the administration and enforcement of both this Act and the WHS Act in relation to petroleum and geothermal operations (s 21(3)). That creates an operational funding link between safety regulation under WHS and the levy regime under this Act.

Interaction with petroleum statutes. The Act references and draws content from the Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Resources Act 1967, the Petroleum Pipelines Act 1969 and the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1982 (s 10(2)). Definitions such as “adjacent area” are taken from the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1982 (s 3). The Act’s concept of “petroleum title” explicitly includes authorities under the Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Resources Act 1967, the Petroleum Pipelines Act 1969 and the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1982 and the Barrow Island lease under the Barrow Island Act 2003 (s 3D(1)). This aligns levy incidence with the geographic and licensing concepts established in the petroleum statutory framework.

Regulatory delegation and rule‑making. The Act delegates major operational questions to regulations (s 26). That includes the basis and factors for working out levy amounts (s 26(2)(a)), assessment and reassessment procedures (s 26(2)(d)-(f)), the keeping of records by persons who are or may be liable (s 26(2)(h)), matters related to objections and reviews (s 26(2)(g)), and classification of safety cases and DSMSs (s 26(3)). The regulations therefore act as the primary instrument that operationalises interactions among this Act, the WHS regulations, and petroleum licensing frameworks. Where the WHS regulations require safety cases or DSMSs, this Act superimposes a financial consequence via regulations.

Evidence and administrative law. Assessment notices have evidentiary value in proceedings under this Act (s 25). Decisions on objections are made by the CIPS in accordance with regulations (s 15), and dissatisfied persons may seek review in the State Administrative Tribunal (s 16). The Act thus channels administrative law review through the SAT rather than ordinary courts in the first instance, while preserving civil recovery routes for unpaid amounts (s 13).

Privation of privilege and use immunity. The Act requires production of information under s 18 and limits the use of compelled material by excluding it from admissibility in civil and criminal proceedings against the individual who provided it (s 19), except for perjury or s 20 offences. This interaction with general rules on privilege and evidence creates a statutory compulsion regime conjoined with a statutory use immunity, which will affect how the WHS and petroleum regulators and prosecutors approach evidence-gathering strategies.

Financial management law. The Account established under the Financial Management Act 2006 framework (s 21(1)) ensures that receipts are separately managed for specified expenditures (s 21(2)-(3)). That interacts with public finance procedures and may insulate levy receipts for use in administering and enforcing safety regulation under the WHS Act and this Act.

Objection and review pathways. The objection and review pathway interacts with administrative review mechanisms in WA law: objections to CIPS (s 14-15) and appeals to SAT (s 16) sit within the broader administrative law framework. However, the Act’s provision that liability to pay is not affected by making an objection (s 17) means that judicial or tribunal review does not alter immediate enforcement power under the Act.

Overall, the Act is designed to overlay a levy funding stream atop existing WHS safety regulatory requirements and the petroleum licensing landscape, while leaving detailed operational interaction , who pays, how much, classification of instruments, periods of liability and assessment procedures , to subordinate regulation. That design creates a layering of statutory and regulatory duties that will require coordination across the department, CIPS, WHS regulators and petroleum licensing authorities.

The compilation table embedded in the Act provides the authorised legislative history featured in the official text. Key entries and their mechanical consequences, as stated in the Act compilation, are:

• Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Safety Levies Act 2011 (No. 50 of 2011): Royal assent 11 November 2011; s 1 and 2 commenced 11 November 2011; remainder commenced 1 January 2012 (compilation table). This is the original enactment establishing the safety levies framework.

• Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Safety Levies Amendment Act 2011 (No. 51 of 2011): Assent 11 November 2011; specific commencement details provided in the compilation table for s 3-5 commencing 1 October 2012. The presence of two 2011 Acts indicates early fine-tuning; specifics of the amendments are not repeated in the main text beyond the compilation table.

• Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Safety Levies Amendment Act 2012 (No. 19 of 2012): Assent 3 July 2012; s 1 and 2 commenced 3 July 2012; other provisions commenced 1 October 2012 (compilation table). The Act indicates s 3 and other sections were amended by No. 19 of 2012 (see notes to s 3 and s 21, s 26).

• Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Safety Levies Amendment Act (No. 2) 2012 (No. 20 of 2012): Assent 3 July 2012; commencement similar to No. 19 (compilation table).

• Work Health and Safety Act 2020 amendments and related changes: The Act records that many definitions and provisions were inserted or amended by No. 36 of 2020 (the Work Health and Safety Act 2020 Pt 15 Div 3 Subdiv 2), with the insertion of sections 3A-3E and substantial additions to Part 2 and elsewhere cited as inserted by No. 36 of 2020 ss 311-323. The compilation table notes assent 10 November 2020 for those amending instruments, with a commencement date of 31 March 2022 for the relevant provisions (SL 2022/18 cl. 2). Those 2020 amendments therefore modernised and aligned the levy Act with the WHS Act regime and added specific concepts for diving, DSMS, geothermal operations and safety cases.

• Safety Levies Amendment Act 2020 (No. 37 of 2020): Inserted or amended parts of the levy Act (Pt 3) and changes commenced 31 March 2022 alongside the WHS Act amendments (see compilation table entries showing No. 37 of 2020 and commencement on 31 March 2022).

• Recent uncommenced amendments: The compilation table lists the Petroleum Legislation Amendment Act 2024 (No. 17 of 2024 Pt 5 Div 10) and the Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Safety Levies Amendment Act 2024 (No. 18 of 2024 Pt 2 and 3) as having received assent on 14 May 2024 but not yet proclaimed (see uncommenced provisions table). The Act’s compilation table therefore records further legislative changes awaiting proclamation; the Act itself flags these uncommenced amendments but does not reproduce their substantive text.

Textual amendments flagged within the Act. The Act contains marginal notes and bracketed annotations indicating which provisions were inserted or amended by which amending laws; for example, the heading “Part 2 , Safety levies” was inserted by No. 36 of 2020 s 312 and the safety case and DSMS levy divisions likewise were inserted (see notes to Part 2). Sections setting out the definitions for diving operations and DSMS (ss 3A-3B), petroleum and geothermal operation specifics (ss 3C-3D), and the safety case concept (s 3E) were inserted by No. 36 of 2020 ss 311-311. Various sections in Part 3, Part 4, Part 5 and Part 6 show amendment notes pointing to No. 36 of 2020 (for example s 10, s 12, s 18, s 22, s 26).

What this means operationally. The Act’s architecture has evolved to integrate the levy regime with the WHS regulatory framework (Work Health and Safety Act 2020) and to broaden coverage to geothermal activities and diving operations. The 2020 amendments modernised definitions and connected levy triggers to WHS-prescribed documents. The uncommenced 2024 amendments indicate continuing legislative activity in the petroleum legislative framework; their practical effect will depend on proclamation and must be checked by practitioners once promulgated.

For compliance advisers and regulatory drafters, the amendment record signals three practical risks: (1) significant operational detail is set by subsequent regulations and by coordination with WHS rules introduced after the Act’s original passage; (2) frequent amendments mean that operational guidance and compliance processes must be revisited when major WHS or petroleum statute changes occur; and (3) uncommenced provisions may change obligations and liabilities once proclaimed, so practitioners should monitor proclamations and consolidated texts.

The Act’s text and compilation material included in the source do not record any case law or judicial decisions concerning the Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Safety Levies Act 2011. The compilation table and notes list statutory amendments and commencement dates but do not list any reported litigation arising under the Act. The Act itself establishes enforcement pathways that could give rise to litigation , recovery of unpaid levies as debts (s 13), reviews of CIPS decisions by the State Administrative Tribunal (s 16), and criminal prosecutions for offences under s 18, s 20 and s 23 , but the source text provides no examples of such proceedings.

Practical implications for advisers. Although the Act does not catalogue case law, the statutory structure makes two types of litigation or tribunal engagement foreseeable:

• Civil recovery proceedings: The CIPS may recover unpaid levies or penalty amounts as debts under s 13. These proceedings would likely be conducted in the State courts and may involve disputation over liability, the validity of the assessment notice (s 25 gives the assessment notice evidentiary force), and the constitutional validity of the levy if novel arguments were raised. The Act’s provision that assessment notices are proof of the matters stated unless proven otherwise (s 25) means that debtor-defendants bear evidentiary burdens in defending recovery actions.

• Administrative review and tribunal litigation: Decisions on objections by the CIPS are subject to review by the State Administrative Tribunal (s 16). Challenges are likely to focus on whether the CIPS applied the regulations correctly in assessing liability or amount, whether the person identified as “responsible” falls within regulatory definitions, or procedural fairness in assessment processes.

Because the Act ties levy liability to documents required by the WHS regulations (s 3B and s 3E) and leaves identification of the “person responsible” to the regulations (s 5(2), s 8(2)), litigation may also arise over the construction and interplay of the WHS regulations and this Act once regulations are promulgated and applied. In particular, disputes could turn on whether a safety case or DSMS was “in force” for a levy period (s 4(3), s 7(3)), on whether a particular entity is the person responsible, or on the correct classification under regulatory schemes that permit different levy amounts for different classes (s 6(2), s 9(2), s 26(3)).

Absent reported cases in the Act text, practitioners should rely on administrative law and statutory interpretation principles when advising clients, pay close attention to the content of regulations when made, and monitor State Administrative Tribunal decisions as they arise, because the SAT is the statutory review forum provided by s 16.

The Act contains several practical traps and structural choices that can catch advisers and clients unaware; these are concrete legal mechanisms rather than evaluative labels.

1. Liability determined by regulation, not Act. The Act makes the person liable the “person responsible for the safety case” or “person responsible for the DSMS” (s 5(1), s 8(1)) but expressly allows regulations to specify or work out who that is (s 5(2), s 8(2)). Until regulations specify, multiple parties could claim not to be the responsible person. Practitioners should not assume the title-holder will inevitably be the payer; contractual allocation of responsibility will matter and regulations may override private arrangements.

2. Payment not suspended by objection. An objection to an assessment does not stay the liability to pay (s 17). This means disputing parties must fund the levy while litigation or review proceeds, with the risk of having to recover overpaid amounts later via reassessment and refund mechanisms in the regulations (s 26(2)(f)). Cashflow and accounting provisions must reflect that payment is immediate even if contested.

3. Wide regulatory discretion on amounts and classification. The Act leaves the amount of levies, different classes and the basis for calculation to regulation (s 6(1), s 9(1), s 6(2), s 9(2), s 26(2)(a), s 26(3)). That creates uncertainty until regulations are made and gives the executive scope to design progressive or regressive levy schedules, fixed fees, per-title levies, or variable charges. Entities should plan for varied outcomes and engage in regulation-making consultations.

4. Evidentiary presumption in assessments. An assessment notice is admissible and, unless disproved, is proof of the assessment and related facts (s 25). In recovery proceedings, that reverses the initial evidentiary burden and increases the cost and complexity for respondents who must assemble contrary proof.

5. Information compulsion with heavy fines. The CIPS can direct persons to produce records and give information (s 18) and a $20,000 fine applies for non-compliance (s 18(4)). While compulsion is coupled with a use-immunity for incriminating information (s 19), the risk of prosecution for false or misleading statements under s 20 (also $20,000) places a premium on careful verification before responding.

6. False statement and perjury distinct. s 19 protects compelled compellable answers from admissibility in subsequent civil or criminal proceedings (other than perjury and s 20 offences). But the Act preserves prosecution for perjury (if an oath is involved) and for making false or misleading statements (s 20). Giving information under direction without verification may therefore generate criminal exposure.

7. Delegation and accountability. The CIPS can delegate to a public service officer (s 22) but delegated powers cannot be sub-delegated (s 22(3)). This concentrates decision-making pathways and may create operational bottlenecks or challenges in tracing decision‑maker responsibilities during reviews or litigation.

8. Ring-fenced Account with restricted use. Levy receipts must be credited to the Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Safety Levies Account and applied to administration and enforcement costs for this Act and WHS operations related to petroleum/geothermal activities (s 21(1)-(3)). While this provides a funding stream for regulatory activity, it also means those receipts are not available to other purposes , an issue for public finance managers but potentially a reassurance for levy-payers that funds are not general revenue.

9. Regulatory penalty caps. While the Act sets $20,000 fines for key offences in the principal Act (s 18, s 20, s 23), the Act allows the regulations to create offences with penalties up to $10,000 (s 26(2)(j)). The existence of both Act-level and regulation-level penalties means exposure to multiple fines depending on the breach and the instrument breached.

10. Uncommenced amendments. The compilation table records uncommenced amending Acts from 2024 (No. 17 and No. 18 of 2024). Until they are proclaimed, practitioners must treat the current consolidated Act as operative and monitor proclamation for changes to liability, scope or procedures. Advisers should not assume uncommenced amendments are in force.

11. Multiple instruments feed into assessments. s 10(2) permits the CIPS to base assessments on information obtained under this Act and under the Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Resources Act 1967, the Petroleum Pipelines Act 1969, the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1982 and the WHS Act 2020. That cross-referencing can broaden the sources used for assessment and create intersecting compliance obligations.

12. DSMS and diving scope is specific and potentially easily triggered. The DSMS levy applies to diving operations as defined (s 3A and s 7). Activities involving pressurised chambers, dives under pressure or manned submersibles are captured; parties running support services for dives should check whether they are within the “person responsible” construct.

These “gotchas” are concrete legal risks traceable to the Act’s text. Each creates a decision point where the allocation of costs, the timing of payments, dispute strategy and information governance require active management.

Practical compliance with the Act involves a combination of regulatory monitoring, internal controls, record-keeping, contractual allocation and administrative responsiveness. Below is a structured compliance checklist tied to the Act’s provisions.

1. Determine whether a levy trigger exists.

• Review whether any safety case is in force for your petroleum or geothermal operations or any DSMS is in force for a diving operation for whole or part of the applicable levy period (s 4(1), s 7(1)). Because the Act ties levy liability to documents required under the WHS regulations (s 3B(2), s 3E(2)), track WHS regulatory obligations to know when a safety case or DSMS must be in place.

• Consult the regulations as soon as they are issued for definitions of when a safety case or DSMS is “in force” and for the prescribed levy periods (s 4(3), s 7(3), s 26).

2. Identify who is the “person responsible”.

• Until regulations specify, review contracts, title documentation and operator agreements to establish who is operationally the party that prepares, holds or is accountable for the safety case or the DSMS. Once regulations are published, confirm whether your entity fits the regulatory definition of the person responsible (s 5(2), s 8(2)).

• If joint arrangements exist, seek to allocate responsibility and cost in commercial agreements. However, note that regulatory definitions may override private contract allocations, so ensure contracts contain protective clauses for any regulatory imposition.

3. Financial planning and bookkeeping.

• Model and reserve for levy amounts and potential penalties. The quantum is set in regulations (s 6(1), s 9(1)), and the Account is credited with levy and penalty receipts (s 21(2)), so treasury teams should set up dedicated accounting codes for levy outflows.

• Ensure timely payment processes to the CIPS are in place to avoid prescribed-rate penalty amounts (s 11, s 12). Until the prescribed rate is known, plan conservatively for interest on late payments.

4. Record-keeping and audit readiness.

• Establish and retain records that might be required under the regulations (s 26(2)(h)) and preserve documents likely to be requested under s 18: safety cases, DSMSs, operational logs, title documents, contracts and financial records.

• Prepare for directions to produce records by designating authorised officers who can respond quickly, arranging for secure electronic transfer of documents and ensuring copies and indexes are available to minimise disruption.

5. Response protocols for CIPS directions.

• Develop a legal-verified protocol for responding to CIPS directions for information and records (s 18). This should include steps for verifying accuracy, obtaining statutory declarations where required under s 18(2)(c)(iv), and legal review to reduce risk of s 20 false or misleading information offences.

• Designate contact points and timelines for urgent response; non-compliance without reasonable excuse carries a $20,000 fine (s 18(4)).

6. Manage disclosure and confidentiality risk.

• Train staff on confidentiality requirements for officials performing functions under the Act and for those handling information obtained through the CIPS process (s 23). Ensure secure information handling and comply with express statutory exceptions before disclosing data.

7. Objection and dispute strategy.

• If issued an assessment notice, consider objections under s 14 promptly. Objections must be in writing within the prescribed time or any extended period the CIPS allows and must comply with prescribed content requirements (s 14(2)-(3)).

• Prepare to pay despite objection: arrange funding to make payments while objections or SAT review proceed, because liability to pay is unaffected by objection (s 17). Map out procedures to seek refund or reassessment outcomes (see s 26(2)(f) for regulations providing for refunds after reassessment).

• For SAT review (s 16), engage administrative law specialists quickly. Ensure that record retention supports review evidence.

8. Governance and contractual protections.

• Insert contractual terms in service and joint venture agreements allocating levy liabilities, indemnities, and obligations to provide information and pay levies if the regulations attribute responsibility to another party. Contemplate priority charging or lien arrangements in contracts to secure recovery of levies paid on behalf of others.

• Ensure insurance policies are reviewed: the Act’s fines and debt recovery may or may not be insurable; check indemnity and coverage clauses for levy exposure.

9. Liaise in regulation-making and consultation.

• Actively monitor and participate in consultations on the regulations that will specify amount, classification, levy period and identification of the responsible person (s 26). Early engagement can influence how levies are measured and apportioned.

10. Internal compliance training.

• Train compliance, HSE, finance and legal teams on the interplay between the WHS obligations (safety cases/DSMSs) and levy triggers. Ensure that HSE documents that must be held by operation managers are flagged for financial review when they become “in force”.

11. Use immunity and legal advice strategy.

• If compelled under s 18 to give incriminating information, clients should be advised that compelled material is protected from admissibility in civil or criminal proceedings under s 19 (other than for perjury or s 20 offences). Still, exercise care: prepare responses with legal counsel to avoid s 20 exposures.

12. Delegation and point-of-contact management.

• Identify authorised delegates within the organisation who can sign statutory declarations or produce records. For interactions with the CIPS, ensure continuity and authority in communications to avoid procedural gaps attributable to delegate limitations (s 22).

13. Monitor legislative developments.

• Watch for proclamation of uncommenced 2024 amendments flagged in the compilation table and any regulations made under s 26. Compliance duties may change on proclamation.

14. Contingency planning for diving and geothermal-specific obligations.

• For diving operations, check whether DSMS documents must be prepared under WHS regulations (s 3B) and plan for DSMS-related levies. For geothermal projects, account for the broad definition of geothermal energy operations and associated accommodation and support facility coverage (s 3C).

By following these steps, an operator or advisor can convert the Act’s general requirements into specific, actionable compliance systems. The two practical constants are: the trigger is documentary (safety case or DSMS required by WHS regulations) and the regulatory detail , who pays, how much, and how it is assessed , will be determined by regulations and administrative processes. Thus, continuous regulatory monitoring and robust internal controls are essential.