Petroleum (Submerged Lands) (Pipelines) Regulations 2022

The regulations operate through several interlocking definitions and concepts, none of which are exhaustively defined in the instrument itself but are imported from the Act and from the structure of the regulatory scheme.

Pipeline licence. The regulations apply only to a pipeline that is subject to a pipeline licence under the Act, or that will be subject to such a licence when constructed or operating (regulation 3). This means the regulations do not cover every submerged pipeline; they are confined to pipelines holding a licence granted under Part IV of the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1982. The pipeline licence is the primary statutory right to construct and operate a pipeline in the adjacent area, and these regulations add a further consent requirement that sits within that licensing framework.

Adjacent area. This term is not defined in the regulations but is a central geographical concept in the Act. It refers to the offshore area over which Western Australia has legislative jurisdiction under the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006 (Commonwealth) as applied by the State. Practically, it means the waters beyond the coastal baseline but within the State’s constitutional limits. It is the physical scope of the prohibition in regulation 4: a person must not engage in construction activities in the adjacent area without consent.

Consent to construct. This is the first of the two ministerial approvals. Regulation 4 prohibits any activity relating to pipeline construction unless the Minister has granted a consent that provides for that activity. The consent can be granted for all or only some construction activities (regulation 6(3)), and the application may relate to all or some of them (regulation 5(2)). This per-activity granularity means a pipeline licensee could, in theory, obtain consent for site preparation but not for trenching or laying, though the regulation does not elaborate on what constitutes a separate activity. The consent is personal: it is granted to an applicant and does not appear to be transferable on its face, though the Act may provide otherwise.

Consent to operate. This is the second approval, required before a pipeline licensee may operate a pipeline (regulation 8). The key criterion for granting this consent is that the Minister must grant it if there are reasonable grounds for believing the pipeline licensee is maintaining insurance in compliance with section 97A of the Act (regulation 10(3)). This is a mandatory direction: the Minister has no residual discretion to refuse on other grounds once that insurance condition is satisfied. However, the Minister must still decide within 7 days of the application being lodged, and a failure to decide on time does not invalidate a later decision. The consent to operate is the final regulatory gateway before flow can commence.

Pipeline licensee. This term is used in regulations 7, 8, 11 and 12. It is not defined in these regulations but is a defined term in the Act, meaning the holder for the time being of a pipeline licence. The obligations to notify the route (regulation 7), to keep contact details current (regulation 11), and to obtain the operate consent (regulation 8) all fall on the pipeline licensee, not on the original applicant if that applicant is different.

Minister’s discretion. The Minister has significant procedural control. For construction consent, the Minister must decide within 28 days but may grant or refuse without specific statutory criteria beyond the requirement to give reasons if refused (regulation 6(5)). For operate consent, the Minister must grant if the insurance condition is met, but the Minister also decides what “reasonable grounds for believing” means. The Minister can also decline to consider any application until the pipeline licensee provides up-to-date contact details or the required accompanying information (regulation 12). This last power is a potent tool: a licensee that falls behind on administrative compliance can be locked out of the approval process entirely until it rectifies the deficiency.

Commencement day. Defined in regulation 13 as the day on which Part 15 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2020 comes into operation. This ties the operative date of the new consent regime to the commencement of the WHS Act, not to the date of publication of the regulations. Part 1 (citation and commencement) came into effect on 11 March 2022, but the substantive Parts 2, 3 and 4 began on 31 March 2022.

The primary entities affected by these regulations are pipeline licensees - the companies or persons holding a pipeline licence under the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1982 for a pipeline in Western Australia’s adjacent area. Any licensee who wishes to construct a new pipeline or continue operating an existing one must comply with the consent regime. This includes major oil and gas producers, midstream operators, and potentially joint ventures that hold licences for offshore pipelines.

Applicants for consents are the next affected group. These may be pipeline licensees or persons who will become licensees once the pipeline is constructed, such as a special-purpose vehicle set up to build and operate a trunk line. An applicant must provide its name, address and email (regulation 5(3) and 9(2)), and for an operate consent must also provide proof of insurance compliance with section 97A of the Act (regulation 9(3)(a)). The applicant bears the cost of preparing and lodging the application and of supplying any additional information the Minister reasonably requires on reasonable grounds (regulation 5(4) and 9(3)(b)). There is no fee stated in the regulations themselves, but the Act may prescribe fees.

The Minister (presumably the Minister for Mines and Petroleum, or a delegate) is the decision-maker. The Minister is obliged to decide within statutory timeframes (28 days for construct, 7 days for operate), but failures to meet those deadlines do not invalidate a decision. The Minister also has the power to decline to consider applications if the licensee has not kept contact details current or has not provided required information. This creates an administrative burden on the Minister’s office, but also gives the Minister leverage over recalcitrant licensees.

The Australian Hydrographic Office is a recipient of information under regulation 7(b). The pipeline licensee must inform that office, in writing, of the exact route followed by the pipeline as soon as practicable after construction is completed but no later than 3 months after a consent to operate is granted. This affects navigational charting and maritime safety.

Insurers are indirectly affected because the operate consent hinges on the pipeline licensee maintaining insurance under section 97A of the Act. The regulations do not specify the type or amount of insurance, leaving that to the Act, but the requirement means insurers must be willing to provide and maintain such cover for the pipeline’s operational life. If an insurer cancels or refuses to renew, the pipeline licensee may lose the ability to obtain or maintain the consent to operate, effectively forcing a shut-down.

Third parties such as contractors engaged to construct the pipeline are not directly regulated by these regulations - the prohibition in regulation 4 falls on “a person” engaging in construction activities, which would include contractors. However, the consent is obtained by the pipeline licensee or applicant, so contractors rely on the principal having that consent. The penalty of $5,500 applies to any person who breaches regulation 4, so a contractor could theoretically be fined if it works on a pipeline without the Minister’s consent, even if the principal assured it that consent existed.

The broader offshore petroleum industry is affected because pipeline infrastructure is essential for transporting product from production platforms to onshore processing facilities or offtake points. Delays in obtaining consents can delay first production and affect revenue. The regulations add a discrete administrative step that may be relatively minor in the context of large projects but which creates a compliance risk if the Minister chooses to take longer than the statutory 28 days or 7 days, or if the Minister declines an application.

State regulatory agencies are affected insofar as they must process applications and maintain records. The Minister’s power to require “other relevant information” on reasonable grounds (regulations 5(4) and 9(3)(b)) gives flexibility but also risks inconsistency if different officers apply different standards to different applicants.

Duty to obtain consent to construct (regulation 4). The principal duty: no person may engage in any activity relating to the construction of a pipeline in the adjacent area unless the Minister has granted a consent that covers that activity. This is a prohibition backed by a fine of $5,500. The duty is absolute on its face; there is no reasonable-excuse defence provided. The duty applies to the person actually undertaking the activity, not only the licensee.

Duty to obtain consent to operate (regulation 8). Similarly, a pipeline licensee must not operate a pipeline unless the Minister has granted a consent to operate. This duty falls specifically on the licensee. Again, no express defence. The penalty is $5,500.

Duty to notify the route (regulation 7). The pipeline licensee must inform the Minister and the Australian Hydrographic Office, in writing, of the exact route followed by the pipeline. This notification must occur as soon as practicable after construction is completed, but in any event within 3 months after a consent to operate is granted. The penalty for breach is $4,400. The dual notification requirement ensures both the regulatory authority and the charting authority have accurate location data. The timing is ambiguous if the consent to operate is granted before construction is finished (regulation 10(4) says the Minister gives the consent in writing; but the consent to operate is presumably granted after construction is complete, because you cannot operate a pipeline that has not been built. In practice, the 3-month period from the grant of the operate consent will likely be the operative deadline.)

Duty to keep contact details up to date (regulation 11(1)). A pipeline licensee who has applied for a consent to construct must ensure the Minister has at all times the licensee’s current address for communications. This duty is ongoing, not just at the time of application. The penalty is $3,300. Unlike the other duties, regulation 11(2) provides a defence: it is a defence to prove that the pipeline licensee had a reasonable excuse. This is the only strict-liability modifier in the regulations.

Right to apply for consent. Any person may apply for a consent to construct (regulation 5(1)) and any pipeline licensee may apply for a consent to operate (regulation 9(1)). The right is qualified by the Minister’s power to decline to consider an application if contact details or information are missing (regulation 12).

Right to receive a decision within a statutory timeframe (regulations 6(1) and 10(1)). The Minister must decide within 28 days for construction applications and within 7 days for operation applications. However, those timeframes are aspirational rather than enforceable: a failure to comply does not invalidate a later decision. This means the applicant’s right is effectively a right to have the application processed within a reasonable time, but the statutory timeframe creates expectation without remedy.

Right to reasons if consent refused (regulations 6(5) and 10(5)). If the Minister decides not to grant consent, the Minister must provide written advice and a statement of reasons. This is a procedural right that enables the applicant to understand the basis of the refusal and potentially to challenge it through administrative review under the parent Act or general law, though the regulations do not create a statutory review mechanism.

Right to have existing consents transitioned (regulations 14 and 16). A pipeline licensee who held a consent to construct or operate under the 2007 Regulations immediately before commencement day is taken to hold the equivalent consent under the new regulations on the same terms. This is a vested right preserved by the transitional provisions.

Right to have pending applications transitioned (regulations 15 and 17). If an application was lodged under the 2007 Regulations but not decided before commencement day, it is taken to have been lodged under the new regulations. This prevents loss of work product and resubmission costs.

Minister’s right to decline to consider (regulation 12). The Minister may decline to consider applications until the pipeline licensee complies with the contact details duty or provides required information. This is a ministerial right that can delay an application indefinitely at the Minister’s discretion, but only until compliance.

The regulations create three specific pecuniary penalties, all expressed as fixed fine amounts without a daily component: $5,500 for engaging in unauthorised construction activities (regulation 4) or operating without consent (regulation 8); $4,400 for failing to provide the route notification (regulation 7); and $3,300 for failing to keep contact details current (regulation 11(1)). These are not large sums by corporate regulatory standards, but they are fixed and not indexed to the size of the operator or the scale of the breach. The absence of a per-day penalty means that a continuing breach (such as operating a pipeline for weeks without consent) would likely be treated as a single offence unless the prosecution can prove separate acts on separate days, which is not specified.

The penalties are payable upon conviction in a court of summary jurisdiction. The regulations do not assign the power to issue infringement notices or on-the-spot fines, so enforcement would require prosecution by the regulator (likely the Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety). This creates a significant compliance cost for the state to enforce, potentially making enforcement sporadic. The fixed-sum nature also means the penalty may be a trivial cost to a large oil and gas company, undermining deterrence. Conversely, a small operator might find $5,500 material.

The only express defence is in regulation 11(2): it is a defence to a charge under the contact-details duty to prove the pipeline licensee had a reasonable excuse. This places the evidentiary burden on the defendant to raise the excuse, after which the prosecution must disprove it beyond reasonable doubt. The other offences (regulations 4, 7 and 8) carry no statutory defence, which under ordinary criminal law principles means they are likely strict liability offences. The physical element must be proved, but no mental element (intention, recklessness, negligence) needs to be shown. This is consistent with regulatory offences designed to ensure compliance regardless of fault. However, a defendant could still argue an honest and reasonable mistake of fact at common law, depending on the relevant interpretation legislation.

Beyond fines, the regulations do not provide for civil penalties, injunctions, licence suspension or cancellation, or remediation orders. Those might be available under the parent Act, but the regulations themselves are limited to financial penalties and the Minister’s power to decline to consider applications (regulation 12). That power is a potent enforcement tool: if a pipeline licensee does not keep its contact details up to date, the Minister can refuse to process any new application, effectively freezing the licensee’s ability to obtain any further consents. This creates a strong incentive for compliance with the contact-details duty.

There is no provision for compensation to third parties affected by non-compliance. The regulations focus on state regulatory control, not private rights of action. A third party harmed by a pipeline operating without consent (e.g. a fishing operator whose nets are snagged) would need to rely on other common law remedies or other statutes.

The regulations do not create any reporting requirement for the Minister to publish decisions, reasons, or lists of granted consents. This lack of transparency is a feature of the regime: applicants are given reasons individually, but the public and competitors cannot easily see what consents have been granted or on what basis. This can reduce accountability and make it harder for third parties to identify whether a pipeline is operating with proper authorisation.

The regulations are made under the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1982 (WA) and sit within a complex web of federal and state legislation governing offshore petroleum operations.

The parent Act (PSLA). The regulations give effect to specific provisions of the PSLA, particularly section 97A which requires pipeline licensees to maintain insurance. Regulation 9(3)(a) requires the operate consent application to be accompanied by information showing compliance with that insurance requirement, and regulation 10(3) makes that the sole substantive criterion for granting the operate consent. The regulations also rely on the Act’s definition of “pipeline licence”, “adjacent area” and “pipeline licensee”. The Act will contain the broader framework for licensing, exploration, production, safety and environmental management, and the regulations are a supplementary layer. Any enforcement action for breach of the regulations would likely occur under the Act’s general penalty and prosecution provisions.

The Work Health and Safety Act 2020 (WA). The commencement of the substantive parts of the regulations is tied to the commencement of Part 15 of the WHS Act (regulation 2(b)). That Part presumably deals with offshore petroleum workplace health and safety, though the regulations themselves do not contain WHS duties. The link is purely temporal: the 2022 Pipelines Regulations replace the 2007 Pipelines Regulations on the same date that the new WHS regime for offshore petroleum takes effect. This suggests the state considered it convenient to update both instruments simultaneously, perhaps to ensure that consent provisions aligned with new safety obligations. The transitional provisions (Part 4) assume that before commencement day, the 2007 Regulations were in force; after commencement day, the 2022 Regulations apply alongside the WHS Act Part 15.

The 2007 Pipelines Regulations (repealed by implication). The 2022 Regulations do not expressly repeal the 2007 version, but they operate as a complete replacement for the subject matter. Transitional provisions preserve existing consents and applications, so the practical effect is supersession. Any pipeline that was subject to the 2007 regime must now comply with the 2022 regime, though the consents themselves are grandfathered on the same terms.

Commonwealth offshore petroleum legislation. The adjacent area concept originates from the Commonwealth Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006, which allocates legislative jurisdiction to coastal states in certain offshore areas. The PSLA is the state mirror of the Commonwealth regime, and these regulations apply only to state-regulated offshore pipelines. Pipelines in Commonwealth waters (outside the adjacent area) are regulated under the Commonwealth regime, which has its own consent requirements. An operator moving product from a Commonwealth field through a state pipeline must comply with both regimes. The regulations do not attempt to harmonise with Commonwealth consent processes, potentially creating duplication and increased compliance costs.

Marine safety and navigation laws. Regulation 7’s requirement to notify the Australian Hydrographic Office (AHO) interacts with Commonwealth maritime legislation that requires accurate charting of submarine cables and pipelines. The AHO uses this information to update nautical charts and issue notices to mariners. Failure to notify could also breach obligations under the Navigation Act 2012 (Cth) or the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006 (Cth) if the pipeline affects shipping routes. The regulations do not provide any immunity from those other laws.

Environmental legislation. The regulations do not mention environmental approvals. Pipeline construction in the adjacent area would likely require environmental impact assessment under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (WA) and possibly under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. The PSLA may also have environment plans. The consent to construct under these regulations is separate from those environmental approvals, so an applicant must navigate multiple regulatory gateways.

Insurance law. The operate consent condition ties to section 97A of the PSLA, which presumably mandates a minimum level of insurance for pipeline licensees. The regulations do not specify the type, amount or duration of the insurance. This interacts with general insurance contract law and with the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth). If a licensee’s insurance lapses, the Minister could withdraw the operate consent (though no mechanism for revocation is in the regulations; they only address initial grant). The regulations are silent on what happens if the Minister later discovers the insurance is not maintained.

The Petroleum (Submerged Lands) (Pipelines) Regulations 2022 are a single instrument that has not been amended since its making. The compilation table shows only the original citation: SL 2022/28, published 11 March 2022. Part 1 (citation and commencement) came into operation on that date. The remainder of the regulations came into operation on 31 March 2022, being the date on which Part 15 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2020 came into operation as declared in SL 2022/18.

No amending regulations have been published, and the compilation table contains no entries after the original. The regulations are therefore in the form they were originally made.

The 2022 Regulations superseded the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) (Pipelines) Regulations 2007. The 2007 Regulations had been in force for approximately 15 years and had likely been amended several times. The new regulations provided for a fresh start with modernised language, updated penalty amounts (the 2007 penalties were expressed in penalty units; the 2022 ones appear as fixed dollar amounts, which may have changed due to periodic unit increases) and transitional provisions aligned with the WHS Act.

The regulations have not been repealed, sunsetted or replaced. There is no indication of any pending or proposed amendments. They are current as at the date of this analysis.

The source text contains no references to any court or tribunal decisions interpreting or applying the 2022 Regulations. This is unsurprising given the regulations are relatively new (since March 2022) and the subject matter is highly specialised offshore pipeline regulation, which rarely generates reported litigation. The fixed penalty amounts are low and may be unlikely to justify the cost of a contested prosecution, so enforcement might occur through negotiated outcomes rather than court proceedings.

There is no mention of any existing cases under the predecessor 2007 Regulations. The regulations themselves do not create a private right of action or an internal review mechanism, which limits the ability of third parties to bring proceedings directly under the regulations. Any litigation would likely be: (a) a prosecution by the regulator for an alleged breach; (b) a judicial review of the Minister’s decision to refuse a consent or to decline to consider an application; or (c) a contractual dispute between a pipeline licensee and a contractor about compliance obligations. The source does not provide any information about such matters.

The lack of litigation history means there is no judicial guidance on ambiguous terms such as “activity relating to the construction of a pipeline” (regulation 4), “exact route followed by the pipeline” (regulation 7), or “reasonable grounds for believing” (regulation 10(3)). Practitioners should therefore construe these terms according to their ordinary meaning, keeping in mind that a court may later interpret them in a particular way. The risk of an unfavourable interpretation adds to the compliance cost and uncertainty for licensees. For example, a court could hold that “activity relating to the construction” includes preliminary surveying, environmental monitoring, or even the mobilisation of a lay barge, which would broaden the scope of the prohibition and increase the need for a comprehensive consent.

The 7-day decision window for operate consent is not a guarantee. Regulation 10(1) says the Minister must decide within 7 days after the application is lodged, but regulation 10(2) says a failure to comply with that time limit does not invalidate a decision. A pipeline licensee cannot insist on a decision after 7 days; the Minister could take weeks or months, and there is no statutory remedy for delay. This creates uncertainty when planning the start of operations, and may force licensees to build in buffer time.

The operate consent must be obtained before operation, but the insurance condition binds the licensee, not the applicant. The application must include information showing that the pipeline licensee is maintaining insurance (regulation 9(3)(a)). If the applicant for the operate consent is not yet the licensee (because the licence transfers only on construction completion), this may be impossible to demonstrate. The regulations are silent on whether a future licensee can apply or whether only the current licensee may do so.

The route notification period of “3 months after a consent to operate is granted” is tied to the operate consent, not to the completion of construction. This creates an anomaly: if construction is completed before the operate consent is applied for, the licensee could be in breach of regulation 7 if it fails to notify the route within 3 months from the grant of the operate consent, but the regulation also says “as soon as practicable after the construction of a pipeline is completed”. The shorter of the two periods applies. A licensee that delays applying for the operate consent risks falling foul of the “as soon as practicable” limb. Conversely, if the operate consent is granted immediately upon completion, the licensee has a full 3 months to prepare the route notice.

The Minister may decline to consider any application until contact details are current (regulation 12(1)). This applies even if the contact details duty is breached only in relation to an application under regulation 5(1) for a different pipeline. So a pipeline licensee with multiple pipelines could find that failing to update its details on one project blocks all new applications across its portfolio, creating a disproportionate consequence.

No statutory mechanism to amend or revoke a consent. The regulations provide for the grant of consents but do not address what happens if circumstances change, such as a change in the pipeline’s route, the scope of construction activities, or the licensee’s insurance status. If a licensee needs to modify an activity covered by a consent to construct, it may need to apply for a new consent, but the regulations do not say so. Similarly, an operate consent is granted once and there is no expiry or renewal provision. This lack of clarity can lead to disputes about whether a particular activity is still within the scope of a consent.

The penalty for operating without consent is the same as for constructing without consent. A pipeline built without consent but later discovered might attract a fine for construction, but the operator also faces a separate fine for operating without consent. Each day of operation could potentially be a separate offence if the prosecution can prove separate acts of operating (such as each day flow is commingled), though the fine is not daily-rated. The risk of multiple convictions is real.

The transitional provisions preserve consents on the same terms that applied immediately before commencement day, but those terms may be inconsistent with the new regulatory scheme. For example, if a consent under the 2007 Regulations contained a condition that is now impossible to satisfy under the 2022 Regulations, the pipeline licensee may be in a difficult position. The regulations do not provide for the Minister to revise or update such terms.

No express power to impose conditions on consents. The regulations say the Minister must give the consent in writing (regulation 6(4) and 10(4)) but do not say whether the consent can be subject to conditions. The absence of an express condition-making power may be interpreted negatively: the Minister cannot add conditions beyond those implied by the regulations. However, the parent Act may grant a general power to impose conditions, and practitioners should check that.

Compliance with the 2022 Regulations requires a pipeline licensee or applicant to navigate four sequential stages: planning the consent application, obtaining the consent to construct, constructing the pipeline while complying with the consent, notifying the route, and then obtaining and maintaining the consent to operate.

Step one: prepare the consent to construct application. Before any construction activity begins, the person proposing to construct the pipeline (usually the pipeline licensee or a special-purpose company) must lodge a written application with the Minister (regulation 5(1)). The application must identify the applicant by name, address and email (regulation 5(3)). It may relate to all or some of the construction activities (regulation 5(2)), so the applicant should carefully define the scope of activities for which consent is sought. Overly broad scoping may attract scrutiny; overly narrow scoping may require multiple applications. The applicant must also be prepared to provide “other relevant information that the Minister may require on reasonable grounds” (regulation 5(4)). To avoid delay, the applicant should proactively submit a complete technical description of the construction methods, timetables, environmental safeguards and any other information commonly requested by the department, even if not expressly listed. The Minister has 28 days to decide, but the applicant should not assume that a favourable decision will issue within that period. It is advisable to start the application well before the intended construction start date and to maintain regular contact with the Minister’s office to ensure the application is progressing.

Step two: obtain and comply with the consent to construct. If the Minister grants the consent, it will be given in writing (regulation 6(4)). The consent may cover all or some of the activities. The pipeline licensee must ensure that only activities authorised by the consent are carried out. No construction work may proceed without that consent (regulation 4). If the Minister refuses, the applicant receives written reasons (regulation 6(5)) and may consider whether to seek judicial review or to modify the application and resubmit. During construction, the licensee must also keep its contact details current with the Minister (regulation 11(1)). Failure to do so exposes the licensee to a $3,300 fine and, more consequentially, the Minister can decline to consider any future applications until compliance is restored (regulation 12(1)).

Step three: notify the route. As soon as practicable after construction is completed, and in any case within 3 months after the consent to operate is granted, the pipeline licensee must provide the exact route in writing to both the Minister and the Australian Hydrographic Office (regulation 7). The licensee should therefore have accurate survey data and a system to generate the route description promptly. The notification should include coordinates, depths, and any other details necessary to exactly identify the pipeline’s location. A failure to notify carries a $4,400 fine, and the omission could also affect navigation safety liability.

Step four: apply for the consent to operate. Before any operation (i.e., flow of petroleum) can commence, the pipeline licensee must apply for a consent to operate (regulation 8). The application must include the applicant’s name, address and email (regulation 9(2)), plus information showing that the pipeline licensee is maintaining insurance in compliance with section 97A of the Act (regulation 9(3)(a)), plus any other relevant information the Minister reasonably requires (regulation 9(3)(b)). The application can be lodged at any time after construction is completed and the insurance is in place. The Minister must decide within 7 days (regulation 10(1)), but again this is not enforceable. The Minister is obliged to grant the consent if there are reasonable grounds for believing the pipeline licensee is maintaining the required insurance (regulation 10(3)). Therefore, the key compliance step is to have the insurance policy in effect and to gather documentary proof (e.g., a certificate of currency, a policy schedule, a letter from the insurer). The licensee should also keep that insurance maintained for the life of the pipeline, because although the regulations do not explicitly require ongoing compliance, the operate consent was granted in reliance on insurance being in place. If the insurance lapses, the Minister may take the view that the consent is no longer valid, and the licensee would be operating in breach of regulation 8.

Step five: maintain ongoing compliance. After the consent to operate is granted, the licensee must continue to keep its contact details up to date (regulation 11(1)) and should also maintain its insurance. There is no requirement to renew the operate consent periodically, but any material change in the pipeline’s configuration or the licensee’s corporate structure might require a fresh application or notification, depending on the interpretation of the regulatory scheme. The licensee should also keep records of all consents, correspondence with the Minister, insurance policies and route notifications to demonstrate compliance if audited or investigated.

Practical tips. (a) Submit the consent to construct application early, with comprehensive supporting information, to minimise the risk of the Minister requesting further information under regulation 5(4) and restarting the 28-day clock. (b) Maintain a compliance calendar that tracks the 3-month route notification deadline from the date of the operate consent grant. (c) Ensure that the insurance policy complies with section 97A of the Act and does not have an exclusion that would make it ineffective in respect of the particular pipeline. (d) If the Minister fails to decide within the statutory timeframes, send a follow-up request in writing and seek a response; if the delay continues, consider whether the Minister’s inaction could be challenged as a non-exercise of power under the Act. (e) When dealing with multiple pipelines, keep a centralised register of contact details to ensure compliance with regulation 11 across all licences. (f) Any refusal of consent should be scrutinised carefully: the Minister must provide reasons, and those reasons may disclose legal error that could be the subject of judicial review.