Police Force (Member Testing) Regulations 2011

Definitions and thresholds are central to how the regulations operate. “Member” is defined with reference to the Police Act 1892 s 33K and expressly includes commissioned and non‑commissioned officers, constables including probationary constables, Aboriginal police liaison officers and police auxiliary officers (reg 3(1)). A “critical incident” is comprehensively defined and includes death, serious injury, discharge of a firearm and custody incidents linked to the member’s exercise of force or authority or driving, when the member was acting in capacity as a member (reg 3(1)). The regime distinguishes preliminary testing and confirmatory analysis: a “preliminary test” (as defined in the Road Traffic Act 1974 s 65, adopted here by reg 3(2)) produces a “presumptive positive test result”, while a drugs analyst or analyst certified by the Chemistry Centre (WA) provides a “confirmed adverse test result” (reg 3(1), regs 23, 16, 31).

Sampling modalities are specified. Breath samples are used for alcohol, with a confirmed adverse alcohol result defined as breath analysing equipment showing 0.02 g of alcohol per 100 ml of blood or more (reg 3(1) defined term; reg 31). Drug testing may use oral fluid, urine, blood or hair samples, and the Commissioner may declare additional targeted drugs (reg 19(2), reg 10). For blood samples, the taking of the sample is restricted to a medical practitioner, nurse, nurse practitioner or phlebotomist (reg 19(4); Form 2 completion requirements). The regulations permit sample collection by approved sample collectors trained in accordance with Commissioner‑approved standards and protocols (reg 6(1A), reg 12(1)). The Commissioner may approve standards or collection protocols and items of equipment for testing (reg 12), but breath analysing equipment and preliminary test apparatus are defined via the Road Traffic Act and treated distinctly (reg 12(2)).

Three testing modalities are authorised: random testing, targeted testing based on credible information, intelligence or suspicion, and mandated testing under written direction of the Commissioner (regs 7, 8, 9). Random testing may be applied to selected members in a common work area or to all members present (reg 7(1)-(2)). Targeted testing may be directed where there is credible information that a member is affected while on duty or has taken targeted drugs at any time (reg 8(1)-(2)). Mandated testing may be applied in specified circumstances, such as involvement in a critical incident, membership of high risk business areas, completion of critical skills competency courses, or following a confirmed adverse test result (reg 9(1)-(2)).

Adverse result regimes are specific about consequences. A confirmed adverse test result for alcohol triggers referral to the WA Police Health and Welfare Unit, managerial interventions, disciplinary action under Police Act 1892 s 23, or invocation of removal powers under Police Act 1892 s 8 (reg 34(1)). For drugs, the Commissioner may take similar actions, but certain classes of drugs and poisons (Misuse of Drugs Act sched I or II, Medicines and Poisons Act 2014 Schedule 8 or 9, specified drugs per Misuse of Drugs Act s 3(1), or masking agents) require invocation of removal powers (reg 35(1)-(2)). The regulations also prohibit refusal to undertake testing, avoidance, tampering with the testing process and possession or use of masking agents immediately before or during testing, and make non‑compliance an offence against the discipline of the Force (regs 36-39).

Procedural and recording requirements are embedded. Identity confirmation by showing police identification is mandatory when providing a sample (regs 14, 20). Forms are prescribed: Schedule 1 Form 1 for written requests to take blood or urine, and Form 2 for recording collection details and sealed kit serial numbers (Schedule 1). Where confirmatory analyses are performed by an analyst or drugs analyst, the written results must be provided to the Commissioner irrespective of whether a confirmed adverse result is reached (regs 17(3), 23).

Administrative control and publication are designed into the structure. The Commissioner may specify approved persons and approved sample collectors and must publish the details in the Police Gazette (regs 5(1)-(3), 6(2)). Declarations of targeted drugs and masking agents only take effect when published in the Police Gazette (regs 10(2), 11(2)). The Commissioner may delegate the power to specify sample collectors to the Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner by written instrument (reg 6A). The regulations also allow the Commissioner to disregard minor variations in collection or analysis that do not affect outcome, which calibrates procedural strictness to practical collection realities (reg 12(3)).

Primary subjects are Western Australia Police Force members as defined in reg 3(1). The definition expressly includes commissioned officers, non‑commissioned officers, constables (including probationary police constables), Aboriginal police liaison officers and police auxiliary officers, so the testing regime covers essentially the whole workforce of operational personnel (reg 3(1)). The regulations do not authorise testing of civilians or contractors, and they explicitly limit testing to members who are on duty or have been recalled to duty for testing purposes, unless other rules in the regulations permit otherwise (reg 4(1)-(2)).

Operational decision‑makers are affected by the power structure created in the regulations. The Commissioner retains broad discretion to specify approved persons who may direct testing, to approve sample collectors, to declare targeted drugs and masking agents and to approve standards, protocols and testing equipment (regs 5, 6, 10, 11, 12). Approved persons, as specified by the Commissioner, are the on‑the‑ground decision makers who may require selected members to submit to tests under random, targeted or mandated regimes (regs 5, 7, 8, 9). The names or classes of approved persons and approved sample collectors are to be published in the Police Gazette for the information of members (regs 5(3), 6(2)).

Health practitioners and laboratory personnel are also implicated. The regulations require that blood samples be taken by specified health professionals (medical practitioner, nurse, nurse practitioner or phlebotomist), and that analysts and drugs analysts be certified by the chief executive officer of the Chemistry Centre (WA) (reg 19(4); definitions reg 3(1) for analyst and drugs analyst). These designations create a channel of professional responsibility and potential liability for the taking and analysis of samples, and they impose documentation obligations such as completion of Schedule 1 Form 2 when samples are taken (regs 17(2), 19(5)-(6), Schedule 1).

Members involved in critical incidents are a specifically identified subgroup. The definition of “critical incident” in reg 3(1) captures situations such as deaths or serious injuries linked to the exercise of force, authority, driving police vehicles or custody, and discharge of firearms. In those circumstances, the regulations authorise requiring the member to remain on duty until tests are completed, and to recall off‑duty members for alcohol and drug testing (regs 24-26). Members assigned to high risk business areas are listed as candidate groups for mandated testing, and may be placed on ongoing testing cycles under reg 9(2)(b)-(3).

Who bears costs and burdens is explicit in the text. If a member requests independent testing after an adverse result, that independent testing is to be conducted at the expense of the member (reg 33(2)). The administrative costs of testing are borne by the Force where the Commissioner requires tests, but some ancillary costs are shifted to members by the independent testing provision. Disciplinary consequences for non‑compliance are internal administrative sanctions under the Police Act 1892, not civil or criminal penalties specified in the regulations; the instrument treats refusal, avoidance and tampering as “offences against the discipline of the Force” (regs 36-39).

Indirectly affected actors include legal advisers, occupational health staff and union or representative bodies who advise members facing testing and potential disciplinary outcomes. The regulations direct referral pathways to the WA Police Health and Welfare Unit for adverse alcohol or drug results (regs 34(1)(a), 35(1)(a)), which places occupational health professionals in a consequential role for follow‑up. The Commissioner’s publication obligations in the Police Gazette mean transparency about who can order tests and who can collect samples is frameworked administratively rather than through individual notices to members (regs 5(3), 6(2), 10(2), 11(2)).

Duties on members. Members must comply with requirements to undertake tests and provide specified samples when requested by an approved person: breath for preliminary and confirmed breath analysis (reg 13(1A), reg 15(2)), blood, urine, oral fluid or hair for drug testing (reg 19(1)-(2)). Members must confirm identity by showing police identification when providing samples for alcohol and drug testing (regs 14, 20). There are specific duties to avoid certain behaviours: members must not refuse tests (reg 36), must not cease duty or otherwise avoid testing prior to ceasing duty except for urgent medical circumstances (reg 37(1)), must not provide two or more invalid samples without a written medical explanation (reg 37(2)-(3)), must not unnecessarily delay testing after a critical incident (reg 37(4)), and must not tamper with a testing process or possess or take masking agents immediately before or during testing (reg 38).

Rights and limited procedural protections. Members have the right to request a portion of a sample for independent testing where they return a confirmed adverse test result for alcohol based on a non‑breath sample, or a presumptive positive for drugs (reg 33(1)). That independent testing is at the member’s expense (reg 33(2)). Where preliminary tests return presumptive positives, members must be provided with confirmatory analysis by accredited analysts or drugs analysts (regs 15, 22, 23). Members who are unable to provide samples due to injury or illness may be assisted by specified health professionals, via a written request on Schedule 1 Form 1 from the approved person, and samples may be taken by a medical practitioner, nurse, nurse practitioner or phlebotomist (regs 17, 18, 21). The regulations require that testing be conducted in a manner that respects dignity and privacy to the extent possible without compromising test integrity, which is the textually stated privacy safeguard (reg 4(3)). Members also receive some transparency by virtue of publication requirements for approved persons, approved sample collectors, and declarations of targeted drugs and masking agents in the Police Gazette (regs 5(3), 6(2), 10(2), 11(2)).

Duties on the Commissioner and approved persons. The Commissioner must specify who are approved persons and approved sample collectors and publish those details in the Police Gazette (regs 5(1)-(3), 6(1), 6(2)). The Commissioner may approve standards, protocols and equipment for testing and may declare targeted drugs and masking agents for the regime (reg 12(1)-(2), regs 10-11). The Commissioner also retains discretion to impose disciplinary or managerial consequences and to invoke removal powers following confirmed adverse results, and in certain drug classifications removal is mandatory under the text (regs 34-35). The Commissioner may delegate the power to specify sample collectors to the Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner, but the delegation must be in writing and is non‑delegable further (reg 6A).

Duties on approved sample collectors and health professionals. Approved sample collectors must be trained in collection protocols approved under reg 12(1) to be specified under reg 6(1A). When taking blood or urine, the sample taker must complete Schedule 1 Form 2 and follow the sealed kit and chain of custody requirements described in Form 2 (reg 17(2), reg 19(5)-(6), Schedule 1). Analysts and drugs analysts must be certified by the chief executive officer of the Chemistry Centre (WA) (defns reg 3(1) for analyst and drugs analyst). Those certification requirements create professional gatekeeping for confirmatory analyses.

Procedural thresholds and evidentiary rules. For alcohol, a preliminary positive triggers the requirement for a breath sample for analysis by breath analysing equipment, and a confirmed adverse test result for alcohol is defined as 0.02 g per 100 ml blood or more on breath analysing equipment (regs 13, 15, definition in reg 3(1); reg 31). Two or more invalid preliminary samples without medical explanation are treated as a presumptive positive and must be followed up with breath analysing equipment (reg 31(2)-(3)). For drugs, a presumptive positive on preliminary analysis is followed by drugs analyst confirmatory testing, and a specific rule applies to testosterone testing where a confirmed adverse drug test requires a testosterone to epitestosterone ratio of 4 or more (reg 32(1)(b)). The Commissioner does not have to state which drug a sample will be tested for (reg 19(3)).

Consequences of non‑compliance and adverse results. Non‑compliance provisions (refusal, avoidance, tampering) are disciplinary offences under the Force’s internal regime and may be dealt with by the Commissioner under Police Act 1892 ss 8 or 23 (regs 36-39). Confirmed adverse alcohol or drug results authorise referral to the WA Police Health and Welfare Unit, managerial interventions, disciplinary action, and invocation of removal powers; certain drug classes and masking agents trigger mandatory removal powers unless the substance was prescribed by a medical practitioner (regs 34, 35(2)-(3)). The regulations also preserve the operation of Police Force Regulations 1979 reg 505A despite actions taken under regs 34(1) and 35(1), though the text does not restate the content of reg 505A (regs 34(3), 35(4)).

Nature of penalties. The regulations do not prescribe criminal penalties or monetary fines within the text. Instead, contraventions of the enforcement provisions in Part 7 are framed as “offences against the discipline of the Force” and the sanction mechanism is internal administrative discipline under the Police Act 1892 sections 8 or 23 (regs 36-39, reg 39). The Commissioner therefore controls enforcement outcomes, which may include managerial interventions, referral to health and welfare services, disciplinary processes under s 23 of the Police Act 1892 and invocation of removal powers under s 8 (regs 34(1), 35(1)).

Disciplinary and removal outcomes. The text specifies that a confirmed adverse test result may lead to a menu of actions: referral to the WA Police Health and Welfare Unit for review, imposition of managerial interventions, initiation of disciplinary action under Police Act 1892 s 23, and invocation of removal powers under Police Act 1892 s 8 (reg 34(1) for alcohol; reg 35(1) for drugs). For certain drugs listed by reference to external statutes, the Commissioner is required to invoke removal powers: drugs in Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 Schedule I or II, Schedule 8 or Schedule 9 poisons under the Medicines and Poisons Act 2014 s 3, a “specified drug” under Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 s 3(1), or a masking agent (reg 35(2)). Subregulation 35(3) creates a narrow exception where the specified drug or masking agent was prescribed to the member by a medical practitioner, allowing the Commissioner discretion not to apply mandatory removal in those limited circumstances.

Procedural enforcement mechanisms. The regulations articulate administrative processes that underpin enforcement. Preliminary positive results are to be followed with confirmatory analysis by accredited analysts or drugs analysts, and the analyst must provide written results to the Commissioner even if the confirmatory result is negative (regs 16, 23, 17(3)). The Commissioner and approved persons are responsible for requiring members to remain on duty, to accompany authorised persons to testing locations, and to wait at locations set by the approved person (reg 15(1), regs 24, 27). For incapacity to provide samples due to injury or illness, approved persons must issue written requests in the form prescribed (Schedule 1 Form 1) to medical practitioners, nurses, nurse practitioners or phlebotomists to take blood or urine samples (regs 17(1)-(2), 18(2), 21(1)-(2)).

Prohibitions that support enforcement. The regulations criminalise, within the discipline framework, refusal, avoidance, tampering and improper use or possession of masking agents (regs 36-38). Avoidance rules make clear that members must not cease duty or leave the workplace before complying with testing requirements except where urgent medical circumstances prevent compliance, and they treat two or more invalid samples without medical explanation as a presumptive positive (reg 37(1)-(3), reg 31(2)). Tampering and interference with testing and possession or intake of masking agents immediately before or during testing are expressly prohibited (reg 38(1)-(3)). These prohibitions create clear breaches that can be processed through the Force’s disciplinary system.

Evidence chain and administrative record keeping. The regulations require record keeping to support disciplinary outcome decisions. Breath analysis forms must be completed for confirmed adverse alcohol breath analyses (reg 16). When samples are taken, Form 2 must be completed with the sample container numbers, kit serial numbers and witness signatures, and the Form 2 text requires that sample packages be sealed and intact (Schedule 1 Form 2). Analysts and drugs analysts must provide written analysis results to the Commissioner (regs 17(3), 23). These provisions create documentary pathways that allow administrative review and underpin disciplinary proceedings.

Limits to enforcement in the text. The regulations preserve non‑applicability of some tests: testing can only be carried out where the member is on duty or recalled to duty for the purpose (reg 4(2)). When testing is conducted under recall powers, the regulations forbid testing at the member’s place of residence in several contexts (regs 25(3), 28(2)). The Commissioner may disregard minor variations in collection or analysis that do not affect outcomes (reg 12(3)), which limits over‑formalistic challenges to outcomes where variation is immaterial. The regulations do not create a separate criminal offence or non‑disciplinary civil penalty; they place enforcement squarely within the Force’s internal disciplinary mechanisms and occupational health process (regs 34-39).

Express cross‑references in the regulations create points of legal interaction. The Police Act 1892 is the parent Act, and the regulations repeatedly invoke Police Act provisions for discipline and removal. “Member” adopts the meaning given in Police Act 1892 s 33K (reg 3(1)), and confirmed adverse test results may lead to disciplinary action under Police Act 1892 s 23 or invocation of removal powers under s 8 (regs 34(1)(c)-(d), 35(1)(c)-(d), reg 39). The regulations themselves are made under the police legislative framework and the notes in the compilation table record that some attempted amendments outside the Commissioner/Minister approval process were of no effect, which underscores the regulatory architecture under the Police Act (Other notes regarding Police Regulations Amendment (Poisons) Regulations 2016).

The Road Traffic Act 1974 s 65 provides definitions adopted into the regulations for “breath analysing equipment” and “preliminary test” (reg 3(2)). This connection is consequential because breath analysis equipment and preliminary test apparatus are referred to in the testing rules and are treated distinctly when the Commissioner approves other equipment (reg 12(2)). The Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 and the Medicines and Poisons Act 2014 are integrated by reference for substance classification. The regulations treat as “targeted drugs” any drugs to which the Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 applies, and Schedule 2, 3 and 4 poisons under the Medicines and Poisons Act 2014 are included in the targeted drug definition, in addition to any drugs or substances the Commissioner declares under reg 10 (reg 3(1)). Consequences in reg 35(2) tie mandatory removal to drugs listed in Misuse of Drugs Act Schedule I or II and to Schedule 8 and 9 poisons under the Medicines and Poisons Act 2014 s 3, and to “specified drug” as defined in Misuse of Drugs Act s 3(1). Those cross‑references let the external statutory classification determine internal removal consequences.

Health practitioner regulation also intersects with the testing framework. The definitions of “medical practitioner”, “nurse” and “nurse practitioner” are taken from the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (Western Australia) as cited in reg 3(1). Blood and urine samples must be taken by persons registered under that Law or qualified phlebotomists, and a written medical explanation is the accepted basis for excusing invalid samples (regs 17(2), 19(4), 31(2), 37(2)-(3)). The Chemistry Centre (WA) is embedded as the certifying authority for analysts and drugs analysts, via definitions in reg 3(1), making the Centre an administrative node for competence certification and thus tying laboratory accreditation and process to the agency.

Administrative law and procedural safeguards are implicated. The Commissioner’s power to approve standards and protocols and to make declarations (regs 12, 10, 11) is implemented by publication in the Police Gazette (regs 5(3), 6(2), 10(2), 11(2)). Publication rather than individual notice is the specified transparency mechanism. The regulations preserve the operation of a particular Police Force Regulations 1979 provision, reg 505A, by stating it is unaffected by disciplinary actions under regs 34 and 35 (regs 34(3), 35(4)); the text does not reproduce reg 505A but signals a link to other internal Force regulatory material.

Limits and invalid amendments. The compilation notes state that attempted amendments in the Police Regulations Amendment (Poisons) Regulations 2016 Pt. 3 were of no effect because they were made by the Governor whereas regulations under Police Act 1892 s 9 must be made by the Commissioner with Ministerial approval. That note highlights a constitutional or statutory procedural limit on how subordinate legislation under the Police Act must be made and indicates that not all published amending instruments were legally effective (Other notes).

Privacy and workplace law interactions. The regulations require tests to be conducted with respect for dignity and privacy “to the extent possible without compromising the integrity of the testing process” (reg 4(3)). While the regulations set out operational privacy constraints, they do not supplant other statutory privacy regimes. The regulations also impose workplace obligations, including a duty on members to remain on duty for testing or to be recalled, and these rules will interact operationally with employment law, industrial agreements and health and safety obligations, although the regulations do not enumerate those external instruments.

The compilation table included in the source gives a clear sequence of amendments and relevant dates. The principal regulations were published 2 December 2011, with the remainder of the regulations commencing on 3 December 2011 (reg 2; compilation table entries). Subsequent formally recognised amendments recorded in the compilation table are:

• Police Force (Member Testing) Amendment Regulations 2018 (published 16 February 2018), with operative provisions other than citation and commencement from 17 February 2018.
• Police Force (Member Testing) Amendment Regulations (No. 2) 2018 (published 17 August 2018), with operative provisions other than citation and commencement from 18 August 2018.
• Police Force (Member Testing) Amendment Regulations (No. 3) 2018 (published 13 November 2018), with operative provisions other than citation and commencement from 1 December 2018.
• Police Force (Member Testing) Amendment Regulations 2021, SL 2021/99 (published 25 June 2021), with operative provisions other than citation and commencement largely commencing 1 July 2021 per the compilation note.
• Police Force (Member Testing) Amendment Regulations 2026, SL 2026/34 (published 25 March 2026), with the rest of the regulations commencing 26 March 2026.

Textual amendments within the regulations are explicitly recorded in the body. For example, reg 3 was amended on multiple occasions (Gazette 16 Feb 2018; 17 Aug 2018; 13 Nov 2018; SL 2021/99 r. 4), reg 6 was amended 17 Aug 2018, reg 12 amended SL 2021/99 r. 5, reg 15 amended SL 2021/99 r. 6, reg 31 amended SL 2021/99 r. 7, and regs 36-38 amended SL 2021/99 rr. 8-9. A new reg 6A was inserted by SL 2026/34 r. 4 to allow delegation of the power to specify sample collectors to a Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner, via a written delegation instrument with non‑delegable delegation (reg 6A).

The compilation table also includes an “Other notes” entry explaining that the Police Regulations Amendment (Poisons) Regulations 2016 Pt. 3, published 17 January 2017, are of no effect because they were made by the Governor when, under the Police Act 1892 s 9, regulations are required to be made by the Commissioner with Ministerial approval. The compilation note states that the 2016 amending regulations are therefore not included in the compilation of the principal regulations. That annotation is a record that not all amendments that appeared in the Gazette were legally effective, and it highlights the importance of the compilation and the specified legislative process.

Operationally significant changes apparent from the amendment notes include the introduction of reg 6A in 2026, which formalised a delegation path for the specification of sample collectors, suggesting administrative decentralisation in sample collector appointment. The 2018 and 2021 amendment activities included amendments to definitions, collection procedure approvals, and offence provisions, as reflected by the multiple references to Gazette entries against reg 3 and to the SL 2021/99 package which explicitly amended regs 12, 15, 31, 36-38. The source places weight on publication in the Police Gazette as the operative vehicle for approved lists and declarations, and the Commissioner’s rule‑making and approval powers are the principal lever for change within the instrument (regs 5, 6, 10, 11, 12). The compilation table and notes therefore document both the instrument’s evolution and a cautionary note that some external amendment attempts were not effective due to process requirements.

The text of the regulations and the compilation notes included in the source do not record any cases, judicial decisions, or litigation arising from the Police Force (Member Testing) Regulations 2011. The instrument itself cites external statutes and internal Force regulations but does not reference any court or tribunal determinations, and the compilation table lists only legislative amendments and a note about the invalidity of a 2016 amending regulation. There is therefore no litigation history recorded within the source material provided.

Practical implications of the absence of recorded litigation in the source are limited. The regulatory text creates multiple points where legal challenges could in theory arise, such as challenges to the lawfulness of a particular testing direction, the procedural adequacy of sampling and chain of custody, the lawfulness of recall to duty or of mandatory removal decisions, or privacy and workplace rights challenges. However, the source does not include any appellate or superior court authority addressing these regulations, nor does it include administrative decisions or tribunal determinations. The absence of recorded litigation within the instrument does not mean that litigation has not occurred, only that the regulations and compilation notes as provided do not report decisions.

Where practitioners anticipate potential litigation or review, the regulatory text indicates the internal administrative routes and statutory hooks to examine. Relevant statutory anchors for any judicial review or administrative law challenge will include the Police Act 1892 provisions relied upon for disciplinary and removal powers (ss 8 and 23), the Commissioner’s wider statutory delegations and rule‑making powers that produce approved persons and sample collector lists (reg 5, reg 6, reg 6A), and the prescribed publication process for declarations and approvals (regs 5(3), 6(2), 10(2), 11(2)). Procedural safeguards in the regulations such as the requirement for certified analysts and drugs analysts, the completion of Forms 1 and 2, and specified medical exceptions for invalid samples will be relevant to any evidentiary or process challenge. The requirement that confirmatory analyses be provided in writing to the Commissioner (regs 17(3), 23) also creates record material relevant to any contested disciplinary proceeding.

Given the absence of reported cases in the source, practitioners should plan to rely on statutory text and administrative records where contests arise. The regulations create internal documentation and publication obligations that will feature in any review,Police Gazette entries, completed Schedule 1 Forms, breath analysis forms, Form 2 chain‑of‑custody details and written analyst reports are all within the regulatory architecture as documentary nodes.

Low alcohol threshold. The confirmed adverse test result for alcohol is defined as breath analysing equipment showing 0.02 g of alcohol per 100 ml of blood or more (definition in reg 3(1); reg 31). That is a low threshold compared to many civilian driving limits, and the regulation treats values at or above 0.02 as adverse for the purpose of internal police discipline and operational response. Practitioners should note the difference between occupational thresholds here and criminal driving thresholds that are not set by these regulations.

Two invalid samples treated as presumptive positives. If a member provides two or more invalid preliminary samples without a written medical explanation, the member is deemed to have returned a presumptive positive result for alcohol or for drugs, which then triggers confirmatory testing or treatment as a positive result (reg 31(2)-(3); reg 32(2)). Thus inadvertent or medically explained collection failures must be documented contemporaneously with medical evidence to avoid being converted into presumptive positives.

Independent testing is at member’s expense. While reg 33(1) gives members access to a portion of the sample for independent testing after certain adverse or presumptive results, reg 33(2) makes independent testing the member’s obligation financially. This shifts both financial and logistical burdens to members seeking independent confirmation.

Blood sample requirements and practitioner involvement. Blood samples must be taken by a medical practitioner, nurse, nurse practitioner or phlebotomist (reg 19(4)). If a member is incapable of providing breath or oral fluid samples due to injury or illness, the approved person must issue a written request on Schedule 1 Form 1 to the health professional to take blood or urine (regs 17(1), 18(2), 21(1)-(2)). Failure to observe the required forms or qualified sample takers can be a procedural weakness. Form 2 requires sealed kit numbers and a witness signature, so chain of custody defects can be identified if documentation is incomplete (Schedule 1 Form 2).

Commissioner discretion and publication mechanics. The Commissioner has broad discretion to declare targeted drugs and masking agents and to approve standards, protocols and equipment (regs 10-12). These declarations and approvals only take effect when published in the Police Gazette (regs 10(2), 11(2), 5(3), 6(2)). Publication in the Police Gazette is the statutory trigger, so a declaration not published is not effective. Practitioners should verify Gazette entries when challenging the legal basis of a particular test or of a declared substance.

Masking agent rules and narrow medical exception. Reg 38 prohibits possession or taking of masking agents immediately before or during testing and forbids being in possession of a masking agent without lawful reason. Reg 35(3) provides that mandatory removal under reg 35(2) does not apply where the masking agent or certain Schedule 8 poisons were prescribed to the member by a medical practitioner. Practitioners should ensure prescriptions and medical explanations are documented if a member’s medication could be characterised as a masking agent or Schedule 8 substance.

Recall and testing location limits. The regulations permit recall to duty for testing after critical incidents or where there is credible information, but reg 25(3) and reg 28(2) prohibit testing a recalled selected member at his or her place of residence. The regulations therefore require an approved person to bring the member to a police station or “some other place” for testing (reg 15(1)). A recall that manifests as a summons to attend at home and tested there would be inconsistent with the text.

Preservation of other Force regulations. The regulations explicitly state that the operation of Police Force Regulations 1979 reg 505A is unaffected by disciplinary actions taken under regs 34 and 35 (regs 34(3), 35(4)). Because the text does not reproduce reg 505A, practitioners must consult the Police Force Regulations 1979 to determine how that provision interacts with testing consequences.

No civil penalties in the text for non‑compliance. The instrument treats non‑compliance as an internal disciplinary offence. There are no statutory monetary fines or criminal penalties specified; enforcement is via Police Act 1892 disciplinary and removal powers (regs 36-39). Practitioners should therefore direct any enforcement analysis to internal police disciplinary frameworks rather than to national criminal law, unless external law also applies.

Commissioner approval of standards and minor variation rule. Reg 12(3) allows the Commissioner to disregard a minor variation in collection or analysis if it does not affect the testing outcome. That delegation may limit the efficacy of procedural‑only challenges that do not demonstrate outcome‑affecting errors. Conversely, where a variation does affect outcome, the text contemplates challenges; practitioners must be specific about materiality.

Timing and on‑going mandated testing. Mandated testing may be required at the time of the triggering circumstance or as an on‑going requirement resulting from that circumstance (reg 9(3)). Once placed on an on‑going mandatory cycle (for instance, as a member of a high risk business area), members may face repeated testing obligations. The regulations permit such arrangements, so the administrative design can create serial compliance burdens.

Delegation constraints. Reg 6A allows the Commissioner to delegate the power to specify sample collectors to the Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner, but the delegation must be in writing and cannot be further delegated (reg 6A(1)-(3)). Any challenge to authority to require testing may need to examine whether the specifier had lawful delegated power and whether the delegation instrument complied with reg 6A.

Form and chain of custody traps. Form 2 requires serially numbered equipment, kit numbers and witness signatures and a statement that the package was sealed and intact prior to opening. Missing or inconsistent Form 2 entries could be a procedural lever in contested disciplinary matters. Similarly, breath analysis forms are required for confirmed adverse breath results (reg 16). Practitioners should audit forms and sealed kit serial numbers for completeness.

For members

• Always carry and be ready to show police identification when providing samples (regs 14, 20). Identity confirmation is required at point of sampling.
• If requested to provide a breath sample for a preliminary test, comply with directions from the approved person and provide the sample to an authorised person or approved sample collector (reg 13(1A)). If preliminary tests return presumptive positives, expect to be required to provide breath into breath analysing equipment or to provide blood or urine under specified circumstances (reg 15).
• Do not provide two or more invalid samples without securing a contemporaneous written medical explanation, as two or more invalid preliminary samples without explanation are treated as presumptive positives (regs 31(2)-(3), 32(2), 37(2)-(3)).
• If injured or ill and incapable of providing a sample, cooperate with the procedure for a written request to a medical practitioner, nurse, nurse practitioner or phlebotomist as per Schedule 1 Form 1 (regs 17(1), 18(2), 21(1)-(2), Schedule 1 Form 1).
• If you receive a confirmed adverse test result and wish independent analysis, request a portion of the sample under reg 33(1) promptly, and note independent testing will be at your expense (reg 33(2)).
• Avoid possession of materials that could be characterised as masking agents before or during testing, and if you are taking prescribed substances that could trigger a positive result, ensure you have a valid medical prescription and contemporaneous documentation to support that fact (regs 38(2)-(3), 35(3)).
• Be ready to remain on duty or be recalled for testing in critical incidents or where selected for random, targeted or mandated testing, and note testing cannot ordinarily occur at your place of residence when recall provisions are used (regs 24-28, reg 4(2)).

For approved persons and the Commissioner

• Ensure you are acting within the scope of your designation as an approved person; the Commissioner must specify classes or named individuals, and those specifications are to be published in the Police Gazette (reg 5(1)-(3)). Verify your approval is current and published.
• When requiring samples, follow approved standards and collection protocols once the Commissioner has approved them, and use Schedule 1 Form 1 for requests to medical practitioners or qualified health professionals to take blood or urine (regs 12(1), 17(2), Schedule 1 Forms).
• For blood samples, ensure only a medical practitioner, nurse, nurse practitioner or qualified phlebotomist takes the sample and completes Form 2, including sealed kit serial numbers and witness signature, to preserve chain of custody and evidentiary integrity (reg 19(4)-(6), Schedule 1 Form 2).
• Publish any declarations of targeted drugs or masking agents in the Police Gazette before acting on them (regs 10(2), 11(2)). Publish the names or classes of approved persons and sample collectors in the Police Gazette to meet the publication requirements (regs 5(3), 6(2)).
• If an approved sample collector is specified, confirm their training meets standards and collection protocols approved under reg 12(1) and record their designation in the Police Gazette (reg 6(1A), reg 12(1), reg 6(2)).
• Where minor procedural variations occur in collection or analysis, document the variation and the reasons, and assess materiality against reg 12(3) which allows disregarding non‑material variations. If a variation could affect outcomes, consider repeating the collection or obtaining additional analysis.
• Keep complete documentation: preliminary test results, breath analysis forms for confirmed adverse breath results, complete Schedule 1 Form 2 entries for each collected sample, analyst and drugs analyst written reports to the Commissioner, and any medical explanations for invalid samples (regs 16, 17(2)-(3), 23, Schedule 1).
• Use the disciplinary and removal pathways under the Police Act 1892 ss 8 and 23 where the regulations warrant that action, and ensure procedural fairness within internal processes (regs 34-35, reg 39).

For laboratories and health professionals

• Ensure analysts and drugs analysts are certified by the chief executive officer of the Chemistry Centre (WA) before performing confirmatory analyses, and provide written reports to the Commissioner irrespective of outcome as required (defs reg 3(1); regs 17(3), 23).
• When taking blood or urine, complete Schedule 1 Form 2 in full, verify sealed kit serial numbers, sign and have the approved person witness the Form 2 signatures. Ensure that packaging was sealed and intact prior to opening and that chain of custody is recorded (Schedule 1 Form 2).
• Maintain documented adherence to any standards or collection protocols approved by the Commissioner, and be prepared to provide evidence of compliance if procedural questions arise (reg 12).

Record keeping and audit

• Retain all completed Forms 1 and 2, breath analysis forms, analyst and drugs analyst reports, evidence of Police Gazette publications that are relied on to give authority for testing, and any medical certificates provided by members to explain invalid samples.
• Ensure independent testing requests are tracked and that the member is provided the portion of sample as required under reg 33(1).

Practical administrative checklist

• Confirm Commissioner’s published lists and declarations in the Police Gazette before relying on a particular approval or declaration (regs 5(3), 6(2), 10(2), 11(2)).
• Verify the approved sample collector is trained per Commissioner‑approved standards (reg 6(1A)).
• For breath testing, use authorised persons and ensure breath analysis forms are completed when a confirmed adverse breath result occurs (regs 13(1A), 16).
• For blood samples, obtain written requests where incapacity exists and ensure qualified health professionals perform the sampling and complete Form 2 (regs 17, 18, Schedule 1).
• Document any medical explanations for invalid samples contemporaneously and place them on record (regs 31(2), 37(2)-(3)).
• If the sample is to be retained for independent testing, set aside and seal the requested portion, provide necessary documentation and advise the member of the cost responsibility (reg 33).

These steps follow the precise procedural and documentary obligations set out in the regulations, and they are the practical means by which members, decision makers and health professionals can meet the statutory requirements while preserving evidentiary integrity and enabling internal disciplinary and welfare responses.