Road Traffic (Blood Sampling and Analysis) Regulations 1975

The Regulations are organised around a small set of interlocking concepts that structure operational practice and evidentiary reliability: prescribed sample taker; sampling equipment and its preparation; method of sampling; documentation and certification; analytical method; prescribed delivery particulars; and fees. Each concept is implemented by prescriptive requirements.

• Prescribed sample taker. Regulation 3A prescribes for the Act the classes “pathology collector” and “phlebotomist” as prescribed sample takers. The Regulations therefore constrain who may perform venepuncture under the Act to recognised consumable/clinical practitioner classes (regulation 3A).

• Sampling equipment and approved providers. Regulation 4 requires that blood samples taken under the Act be taken using sampling equipment provided by a body approved by the Minister. Regulation 5 defines the contents of that sampling kit, including two evacuated tubes containing specified quantities of sodium fluoride (approx. 170 mg) and potassium oxalate (42.5 mg). Regulation 6 requires a technologist from a Minister‑approved body to prepare the equipment, sign Form A and seal the serially numbered package.

• Method of sampling and immediate handling. Regulation 7 prescribes the technique: two blood samples drawn one immediately after the other by venepuncture using the vacutainer kit in the sampling equipment (regulation 7(2A)); the package must be intact and unexpired (regulation 7(2)(a)(i)-(ii)); the skin must be cleansed using the supplied sterile, non‑alcoholic wipe (regulation 7(2)(c)); each container must be filled and tightly closed, then inverted at least 20 times to mix contents (regulation 7(2)(e)-(g)). These detailed steps are framed as mandatory requirements in the Regulation.

• Certification and chain of custody. Regulation 6 requires Form A (certifying kit contents and sterility) and sealing by the preparer. Regulation 8 requires completion of two copies of Form B with Part I by the prescribed sample taker and Part II by a police officer present; each container is then sealed in a separate package by the sample taker and the police officer (regulation 8). Regulation 3B lists the particulars that must accompany a sample to an analyst (serial or barcode, subject name, sample taker’s name and qualifications, police officer name and signature, collection date/time and delivery signatures), formalising the laboratory’s intake information.

• Analytical method, certificates and competence. Regulation 9 permits two analytical techniques for alcohol testing: dichromate or gas chromatography. Regulation 10 prescribes Form C for analyst certificates for alcohol results; for drugs the Road Traffic (Drug Driving) Regulations 2007 Schedule 1 Form 1 is prescribed (regulation 10(2)). Regulations 13-14 prescribe Forms E and F as certificates of analyst competence and drug analyst competence respectively, to be signed by the chief executive officer of the Chemistry Centre (WA).

• Fees and recovery. Regulation 15 fixes attendance fees for prescribed sample takers, differentials for after‑hours/public holiday attendance ($120) versus other times ($100), and laboratory analysis fees ($296 for alcohol; $780 for drugs; exclusive combined fee $780). Subregulation 15(5) directs that fees are payable by the Commissioner of Police; subregulation 15(6) requires a court, upon convicting a person under specified Act sections, to order the convicted person to repay the Commissioner for fees paid under certain subregulations and permits recovery as if the amount were a penalty.

These core concepts combine to create a compliance and evidentiary regime: Ministerial approval and technologist preparation create a controlled supply chain for equipment; the procedural checklist in regulation 7 and the documentary requirements in Forms A-C and B create discrete checkpoints for chain of custody and competence; and the fees allocation creates an administrative funding path with statutory cost recovery from convicted persons.

Several distinct actors are affected by the Regulations, with different duties and exposures.

• Prescribed sample takers (pathology collectors and phlebotomists). These individuals must follow the prescribed venepuncture method in regulation 7, examine and accept only sealed, in‑date equipment (regulation 7(2)(a)), perform two consecutive venepunctures using the supplied vacutainer kit (regulation 7(2A) and 7(2)(d)), apply the supplied non‑alcoholic antiseptic wipe (regulation 7(2)(c)), place each portion in its separate container, ensure the cover is tightly fastened and invert each container at least 20 times (regulation 7(2)(f)-(g)). They must complete and sign Part I of Form B (regulation 8). Their conduct and signatures form part of the formal chain of custody.

• Police officers. A police officer present at sampling must complete and sign Part II of Form B (regulation 8). When a person is incapable of submitting to sampling, the police officer must make a written request to a prescribed sample taker using Form D (regulation 12). A police officer also signs delivery particulars under regulation 3B and forms part of the chain of custody.

• Technologists and approved bodies. A technologist of a Minister‑approved body must prepare, certify (Form A) and seal sampling equipment (regulation 6 and Form A). The Regulations require the sampling equipment be supplied by a body approved by the Minister (regulation 4), creating an approval relationship between suppliers and the Minister, and placing preparation and initial sealing responsibility with the technologist.

• Analysts and the Chemistry Centre (WA). Analysts receive sealed packages and must analyse by the permitted methods (regulation 9). Form C is the prescribed certificate for alcohol analyses (regulation 10(1)), and Forms E and F enable certification of who is an analyst or drug analyst, signed by the chief executive officer of the Chemistry Centre (WA) (regulations 13-14 and Forms E-F). The Regulations explicitly refer to the Chemistry Centre (WA) in certificate forms (Forms C, E, F), signalling its central role in analysis and credentialing.

• Commissioner of Police and courts. The Commissioner of Police funds prescribed sample taker attendance and analysis fees initially (regulation 15(5)). If a person is later convicted under specified Act sections, the court must order repayment to the Commissioner for fees paid under relevant subregulations and the Commissioner may recover amounts as if they were a penalty (regulation 15(6)). Thus the Commissioner bears initial cost and has a statutory recovery path tied to convictions.

• Subjects (people from whom blood is taken). Subjects are required by the Act to submit to sampling in applicable circumstances; the Regulations specify how their blood must be taken and recorded but do not themselves specify the substantive circumstances that trigger sampling , those are in the Act provisions referenced (sections 66, 66B, 66E, 69 and others). The Regulations govern the technical integrity of the sample that may be used in proceedings under the Act.

• Providers of medical supplies and hospital/phlebotomy services. Entities seeking to be suppliers of sampling equipment must be approved by the Minister to supply the sampling equipment under regulation 4 and to have technologists who will prepare and seal kits under regulation 6. The Regulations therefore have procurement and supplier‑qualification implications for commercial suppliers and clinical services.

The Regulations thus allocate responsibilities across operational, administrative and judicial actors. They create documentary obligations (Forms A-F and the prescribed delivery particulars in regulation 3B) that are likely to be used as primary evidence in prosecutions under the Act. Who pays is made explicit: the Commissioner pays initial fees (regulation 15(5)), with statutory recovery against convicted defendants (regulation 15(6)).

The Regulations impose specific duties on named actors and establish documentary rights and procedural requisites.

Duties on prescribed sample takers:

• Use only sampling equipment provided by a Minister‑approved body and only the vacutainer kit contained in the package for venepuncture (regulation 4; regulation 7(2A), (2)(a) and (d)). This excludes use of alternative sampling methods for samples taken under the Act.
• Inspect the package in the presence of the person producing it, ensuring it is sealed and unexpired (regulation 7(2)(a)(i)-(ii)).
• Refuse to use equipment that is unsealed or expired (regulation 7(2)(b)).
• Cleanse the venepuncture site using the supplied sterile, non‑alcoholic antiseptic wipe and nothing else (regulation 7(2)(c)).
• Take two blood samples consecutively by venepuncture, discharge each into separate containers, tighten covers securely and invert each container at least 20 times to mix (regulation 7(2A); regulation 7(2)(d)-(g)).
• Complete and sign Part I of two copies of Form B (regulation 8(1)(a); Form B).

Duties on police officers:

• Be present during sampling and complete and sign Part II of the two copies of Form B (regulation 8(1)(b); Form B).
• Where a person is incapable of submitting to sampling, make a written request to a prescribed sample taker in Form D (regulation 12; Form D).
• Ensure the prescribed particulars accompany the sample to the analyst if delivering a sample (regulation 3B lists serial/barcode, name of subject, name and qualifications of sample taker, name and signature of police officer requiring the sample, collection date/time and delivery signatures).

Duties on technologists and approved bodies:

• Prepare and sterilise sampling equipment, complete and sign Form A certifying kit contents and expiry, seal the kit in a serially numbered package by signing across the seal (regulation 6; Form A).
• Ensure kits contain specified items in regulation 5 (two screw top containers, two evacuated tubes with sodium fluoride and potassium oxalate in stated approximate amounts, sterile gloves, wipes, needle(s), tamper‑proof outer bags, plaster).

Duties on analysts and credentialing:

• Analyse blood for alcohol only by the methods permitted in regulation 9 (dichromate change or gas chromatography).
• Provide a certificate in Form C for alcohol analyses (regulation 10(1); Form C).
• For drug analysis, report using the form prescribed in the Road Traffic (Drug Driving) Regulations 2007 Schedule 1 Form 1 (regulation 10(2)).
• Hold competence certificated by the chief executive officer of the Chemistry Centre (WA) in Forms E and F where relevant (regulations 13-14; Forms E-F).

Financial duties and court powers:

• The Commissioner of Police must pay prescribed attendance and analysis fees (regulation 15(5), 15(1) and 15(3)-(4) on amounts).
• If a person is convicted under the Act’s specified sections, the convicting court must order the person to repay the Commissioner for fees the Commissioner has paid under subregulation (1) or (3) for the purposes of section 66 of the Act; that amount may be recovered as if it were a penalty (regulation 15(6)).

Rights and constraints implied by the Regulations:

• The subject has the procedural protection that the sample must be taken only with sealed, in‑date equipment (regulation 7(2)(a)-(b)) and documented by the sample taker and police officer on Form B (regulation 8), which creates a record for defence or evidentiary challenge.
• Analysts and the Chemistry Centre have prescribed forms (Form C and Forms E/F) recognised by the Regulations for evidentiary certification (regulations 10, 13-14). The Regulations do not authorise alternative documentary forms for certificate of analysis and analyst competence.
• The Minister retains discretion over which bodies may provide kits and which classes of persons (technologists) may prepare them (regulation 4; regulation 6), a regulatory constraint on suppliers.

The Regulations are largely procedural and prescriptive: failure to comply with a specified duty will affect the statutory chain of custody and the admissibility/weight of results in proceedings under the Act, although the Regulations do not themselves set out an exhaustive list of consequences for non‑compliance , the Act’s provisions referenced in the Regulations govern the legal consequences.

The Regulations themselves do not create a standalone catalogue of criminal penalties; rather, they establish operational obligations and documentation that feed into enforcement under the Road Traffic Act 1974 and related provisions referenced throughout the Regulations. Two enforcement mechanisms and financial recovery rules are explicitly present in the text.

• Financial charge and recovery. Regulation 15 sets fixed fees for prescribed sample taker attendance and laboratory analysis, and assigns payment responsibility initially to the Commissioner of Police (15(5)). Regulation 15(6) provides a statutory recovery rule: if a person is convicted of an offence under sections 63, 64, 64AA or 64A of the Act and the Commissioner has paid a fee under subregulation (1) or (3) for the purposes of section 66 of the Act, the convicting court must order the person to repay the Commissioner the amount of that fee and permits the Commissioner to recover the amount as if it were a penalty imposed under the Act. That provides a back‑end enforcement path to recoup costs when a conviction is secured. The Regulations therefore set a two‑stage financial enforceability mechanism: initial public payment, followed by court‑ordered repayment contingent on conviction.

• Evidentiary enforcement through documentary requirements. The Regulations prescribe how samples are to be handled, sealed, documented and certified (regulations 6-10, Forms A-C, regulation 3B). These prescriptive steps support enforcement by ensuring a documented chain of custody and analyst competence. Although the Regulations do not specify criminal sanctions for breach of a specific regulation, failure to comply with prescribed technical or documentary steps may undermine admissibility or evidentiary weight of results in prosecutions under the Act. That is an indirect enforcement mechanism: compliance preserves admissibility; non‑compliance exposes risk in prosecution, which courts will resolve under the Act and evidentiary law.

• Ministerial approval and administrative control. Regulation 4 requires sampling equipment to be provided by a body approved by the Minister. Regulation 6 requires preparation by a technologist of a Minister‑approved body. These provisions give the Minister administrative control over suppliers and preparers. Enforcement of those approval conditions will be administrative rather than criminal under the Regulations: the text confers no offence but creates regulatory pre‑conditions whose breach (e.g., use of non‑approved equipment) may affect the validity of sampling and so the enforceability of subsequent prosecutions.

• Court role. The Regulations explicitly engage the courts in recovery of fees (regulation 15(6)). Beyond that, the Regulations assume the courts will determine the legal effect of any non‑compliance with the procedural requirements when adjudicating prosecutions under the Act. The Regulations make particular documentary instruments (Forms A-F and the specified delivery particulars in regulation 3B) the formal routes for establishing compliance and analyst competence in court.

• No stand‑alone criminal offences in the Regulations. The Regulations do not create offences for, say, failing to invert a tube 20 times or not using the non‑alcoholic wipe. Those duties are framed as mandatory procedural requirements, but the text does not attach distinct penalty provisions to each step; consequences arise within the broader framework of the Act and normal evidentiary rules.

In short, enforcement under the Regulations is primarily evidentiary and administrative: they build the chain of custody, set approved supply/credential structures and fix funding/recovery mechanisms, while specific criminal liability sits in the Act provisions referenced by the Regulations.

The Regulations are expressly framed as subordinate to, and operational within, the Road Traffic Act 1974. They reference specific Act sections and several external instruments and statutes, creating an interlocking legal environment.

• Relationship to the Road Traffic Act 1974. The Regulations apply "whenever a blood sample is taken for the purposes of the Act" (regulation 3). They repeatedly reference Act provisions: section 65 (definition of prescribed sample taker), section 66, section 66B, section 66E (procedural bases for compelled sampling and requests), section 69 (method and authorisation of sampling , reg 7 states it applies for the purposes of s 69(1a)), section 70 and 70B (certificates and delivery particulars , regs 10 and 3B). The Regulations therefore operationalise the Act’s sampling, analysis and evidentiary mechanics: where the Act authorises or requires sampling, these Regulations prescribe the how and the documentary form.

• Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1911. The defined term "technologist" in regulation 2 includes "a person registered as an analyst under the Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1911 section 203" (regulation 2). That ties registration and professional qualification to a separate health statute for the purpose of who may prepare sampling equipment.

• Road Traffic (Drug Driving) Regulations 2007. Regulation 10(2) prescribes the Road Traffic (Drug Driving) Regulations 2007 Schedule 1 Form 1 as the form a drugs analyst must use to certify that an identified blood sample was analysed for drugs and the analysis result. That creates a direct cross‑instrument reporting linkage between alcohol/drug analysis regimes.

• Chemistry Centre (WA) and internal certification. The Forms in the Schedule (Forms C, E, F) name the Chemistry Centre (WA) and require the chief executive officer of that Centre to certify who is, or was, an analyst or drug analyst (Forms E and F). That ties the laboratory accreditation/credential documentation to a named public laboratory institution.

• Legislation Act 2021 editorial powers. The compilation notes and editorial changes table reference the Legislation Act 2021 Part 3, authorising editorial changes to laws and documenting one such editorial change to regulation 7(2A) effective 14 June 2024. That administrative cross‑reference explains how small textual amendments or formatting changes may be effected editorially without altering substantive operation.

• Ministerial approval and discretion. The requirement that sampling equipment be supplied by a body approved by the Minister (regulation 4), and that equipment be prepared by a technologist of a Minister‑approved body (regulation 6), creates an administrative interface with executive power. The Regulations do not themselves set criteria for Ministerial approval; those criteria would be governed by the Minister’s processes and, potentially, other administrative law limits.

• Evidence and criminal law. The Regulations set documentary forms and a method for certifying sampling and analysis that will be used under the Act and in criminal proceedings. The Regulations provide the prescribed forms that courts will expect for proof of sampling and laboratory analysis. Any challenge to admissibility, weight or compliance will be resolved by reference to these Regulations together with the Act and the general law of evidence.

In sum, the Regulations are an implementation instrument: they are closely integrated with the Road Traffic Act 1974 and cross‑refer to health registration law, drug‑driving regulations, and the administrative structures of the Chemistry Centre (WA) and Ministerial approvals. The Regulations do not operate in isolation; accurate legal effect depends on the Act provisions and the external administrative arrangements they reference.

The compilation table in the source records an extended amendment history from 1975 to 2024. Key substantive amendments reflected in the current text include the following items, each cited to the relevant regulation or Gazette notice as presented in the schedule.

• Insertion of Form‑based certification and technical detail (1975-1984). The original Regulations and a series of early amendments established the Forms (A-C) and initial sampling procedures. Form A was amended in 1978; regulation 6 provisions for certificate and sealing date to these early amendments (Schedule, Form A history).

• Technologist and analyst certification cross‑links (1983). Regulation 2’s definition of "technologist" was amended (Gazette 25 Feb 1983 p. 650) to include persons registered as analysts under the Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1911 s 203 and those approved by the Minister to prepare sampling equipment.

• Formal recognition of the Chemistry Centre (WA) and analyst certificates (1991-2008). Several amendments amended Form C and inserted Forms E/F, formalising the Chemistry Centre (WA) as the analytical authority and providing the chief executive officer a role in certifying analysts and drug analysts (Forms E and F inserted 25 Feb 1983; amended 9 Aug 1991 and 14 Mar 2008).

• Prescribed sample taker classes (2017). Regulation 3A was inserted by Gazette 7 Feb 2017 p. 1172, prescribing “pathology collector” and “phlebotomist” as the classes of persons within the Act’s definition of prescribed sample taker.

• Prescribed particulars for sample delivery (2017). Regulation 3B was inserted by Gazette 7 Feb 2017 p. 1172, listing the specific particulars (serial number/barcode, name of person sampled, prescribed sample taker’s name and qualifications, police officer name/signature, collection date/time and delivery signatures) that must accompany a sample delivered to an analyst pursuant to section 70B(1) of the Act.

• Substantial sampling equipment specification (2019). The Road Traffic (Blood Sampling and Analysis) Amendment Regulations 2019 (Gazette 8 Feb 2019 p. 247-9) updated regulation 5 to specify the precise contents required in sampling equipment (two screw top storage containers; two evacuated tubes with approximately 170 mg sodium fluoride and 42.5 mg potassium oxalate; needles and holders; tamper‑proof outer bags; sterile gloves; sterile dry swab; sterile non‑alcoholic antiseptic wipe; sticking plaster). Regulation 16 created a transitional provision permitting use of pre‑2019 certified equipment until exhausted.

• Formalisation of two‑sample vacutainer method and editorial change (2024). Regulation 7 was amended to include subregulation (2A) requiring two samples to be taken immediately one after the other by venepuncture with the vacutainer kit provided in the sampling equipment and no other. The editorial changes table records an editorial change authorisation for r 7(2A) effective 14 June 2024.

• Fee schedule and recovery mechanism (2014-2021). Regulation 15 was inserted and amended across 2014, 2017, 2019 and 2021 to fix attendance fees for prescribed sample takers (after‑hours/public holiday $120; otherwise $100) and laboratory fees (alcohol $296; drugs $780; combined $780), to assign initial payment to the Commissioner of Police, and to permit recovery of those fees from convicted persons under certain Act sections (regulation 15(5)-(6)). These changes appear in Gazettes from 2014 (insertion) and later amendments in 2017, 2019 and SL 2021/58.

• Reprints and technical amendments. Multiple reprints (1979, 1985, 2002, 2010, 2019) and smaller amendments (1980s-2011) adjusted forms, references and minor procedural text as recorded in the compilation table.

Taken together, the amendment history shows progressive specification of equipment contents, formalisation of the vacutainer two‑sample technique, expansion and clarification of who may be a sample taker, the introduction of prescribed delivery particulars for analysts, and the establishment of fee and recovery arrangements. The Regulations also demonstrate an administrative consolidation around the Chemistry Centre (WA) for analytical certification. For precise provenance or the text of each amending instrument, the compilation table provides Gazette references and dates that appear in the Schedule.

The Regulations’ Schedule and compilation do not include any reported litigation or case citations. The instrument itself supplies forms and procedural steps intended to reduce evidentiary contest; it does not list judicial decisions applying or interpreting its provisions. Therefore the source contains no cases to cite.

That absence in the source does not mean the Regulations are unlitigated in practice; it simply reflects that the provenance document is a legislative compilation and does not record judicial treatment. The Regulations nonetheless create multiple discrete evidentiary touchpoints that are predictable loci for litigation in prosecutions under the Road Traffic Act 1974. Those loci include:

• Chain of custody and kit integrity. Regulation 6 requires a technologist to seal the kit in a serially numbered package and sign over the sealed portion; regulation 7 requires the sample taker to inspect the package in the presence of the person producing it and to refuse use if the package is unsealed or expired (regulations 6 and 7(2)(a)-(b)). In litigation, a defence could contest whether the kit was sealed, whether the serial number matched the analyst’s intake record, whether the expiry date had passed, or whether seals were broken after sampling , all factual questions that the Regulations’ required documentation are designed to address.

• Technique and sample handling. The Regulations prescribe technique (two venepunctures immediately one after the other using the vacutainer kit, cleansing with the supplied non‑alcoholic wipe, inversion at least 20 times) and container handling (separate containers, secure tightening, sealing in separate packages) (regulation 7 and 8). Disputes in proof could focus on whether venepuncture was performed correctly, whether the wipe used was alcohol‑free, whether the inversion requirement was observed and documented, and whether the sample tubes were correctly sealed and labelled.

• Analyst competence and method. Regulations 9-10 and Forms E-F create a formal route for certifying analyst competence and prescribing analytical methods (dichromate or gas chromatography for alcohol). Litigation may engage questions about whether the analyst held a valid certificate (Forms E/F), whether the laboratory used an allowed method (regulation 9), and whether the analyst’s certificate (Form C or the drug form prescribed in Drug Driving Regulations) reliably identifies the sample analysed.

• Signature and delivery particulars. Regulation 3B prescribes particulars to be delivered to the analyst, including serial/barcode, subject’s name, sample taker’s name and qualifications, police officer name and signature, collection time and the names/signatures of deliverers. Disputes over mismatches between intake particulars and container serial numbers, or absence of signatures, would be expected.

Because the Regulations set out the procedural checklist and formal forms, litigation is likely to be documentary and technical rather than conceptual: courts confronted with contested samples will apply the Act and evidentiary law to the facts established by Forms A-F and the documented chain of custody. Those are the precise sites at which judicial scrutiny would occur, but the source contains no reported court decisions that interpret or resolve such disputes.

The Regulations are prescriptive and procedural; small departures from the specified steps can have outsized evidentiary consequences. The following practical pitfalls are drawn directly from the text and the forms it prescribes.

• Use only approved equipment and only the vacutainer kit supplied. Regulation 4 mandates that blood samples taken under the Act be taken by means of equipment provided by a body approved by the Minister, and regulation 7(2A) requires that the two venepuncture samples be taken with the vacutainer kit provided in the sampling equipment and no other. Using an alternate tube, needle, or local hospital supplies that are not from a Minister‑approved kit risks non‑compliance; the Regulations do not authorise substitution.

• Package seal and expiry date are gatekeepers. Regulation 7(2)(a) requires the prescribed sample taker to examine the package in the presence of the person producing it and ensure the package is sealed and intact and that the indicated expiry date has not passed. Regulation 7(2)(b) forbids using a package that is unsealed or expired. That creates an absolute procedural bar: once a kit is unsealed or out of date the sample cannot be taken using that equipment under these Regulations, and any use is outside the prescribed regime.

• Non‑alcoholic antiseptic wipe only. Regulation 7(2)(c) requires cleansing the venepuncture site with the sterile, non‑alcoholic antiseptic wipe contained in the sampling equipment and "by no other means." Using an alcohol‑based antiseptic, a different wipe or alternative skin prep may breach the Regulations and expose the analysis to challenge on contamination or procedural grounds.

• Two samples, immediate succession and inversion. The Regulations mandate two samples taken "one immediately after the other" by venepuncture with the supplied vacutainer kit (regulation 7(2A)). Each container's contents must be mixed by inverting at least 20 times (regulation 7(2)(g)). Failing to take two samples, to take them sequentially, or to invert the tubes adequately can affect preservative distribution (sodium fluoride/potassium oxalate mixture) and the laboratory’s ability to rely on the sample.

• Separate sealing and duplicate Form B. Regulation 8 requires completion of two copies of Form B , Part I by the sample taker and Part II by the police officer , and for each container to be sealed in a separate package by the sample taker and the police officer. If either step is omitted or signatures are missing, the chain of custody record is incomplete.

• Delivery particulars and analyst intake. Regulation 3B prescribes specific particulars (serial/barcode, subject name, prescribed sample taker name/qualifications, police officer name/signature, date/time of collection, deliverers' names/signatures) that must accompany a sample to an analyst. Laboratories are directed by the Regulations to expect these particulars; failing to include them could result in the laboratory rejecting the sample or creating gaps in admissibility.

• Ministerial approval creates supplier dependency. Regulation 4 requires sampling equipment be provided by a Minister‑approved body and regulation 6 requires preparation by a technologist of a Minister‑approved body. The Regulations do not specify how many bodies may be approved or the approval criteria. Operationally, users should check which bodies are approved and whether short‑term supply bottlenecks or single‑supplier dependencies exist.

• Fees: who pays and who ultimately reimburses. Regulation 15 requires the Commissioner of Police to pay initial fees for attendance and analysis but enables courts to order convicted persons to repay the Commissioner for fees paid under specified subregulations (regulation 15(5)-(6)). Practically, an acquitted person will not be ordered to repay; a convicted person will be. Record‑keeping of payments by the Commissioner and linking payments to the charged person is necessary to support later recovery.

• Transitional treatment for older kits. Regulation 16 creates a narrow transitional rule allowing sampling equipment certified under regulation 6(a) before the 2019 amendment to be used as if the 2019 amendments had not come into effect. Practitioners should verify kit certification dates and whether the kit in use falls within the transitional provision; otherwise, the kit contents must meet the regulation 5 specification.

• Forms are prescribed; do not substitute. The Schedule prescribes Forms A-F (and the drug form is prescribed from another regulation). Using alternative forms or omitting prescribed fields risks evidentiary objections. Form C in particular is the prescribed analyst certificate for alcohol results (regulation 10(1)).

These are not merely drafting niceties: each prescriptive step is a possible locus for evidentiary challenge where the Regulations make the step mandatory. Operational systems should be designed to record every required detail and preserve physical seals and serial numbers.

Below is a practical checklist, organised to the regulated role, to achieve compliance with the Regulations as set out in their current text.

For Minister/administrators (approval and supply):

• Maintain a register of bodies approved by the Minister to supply sampling equipment (regulation 4).
• Ensure approved bodies employ technologists who are either registered under the Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1911 s 203 or otherwise approved by the Minister to prepare sampling equipment (regulation 2 definition of technologist).
• Require approved bodies to package kits with serially numbered seals and a completed Form A certifying kit contents, sterility and expiry date (regulation 6 and Form A).
• Ensure procurement of kit components matches regulation 5 specifications (two screw top containers; two evacuated tubes with approx. 170 mg sodium fluoride and 42.5 mg potassium oxalate; needles and holders; tamper‑proof bags; sterile gloves; sterile dry swab; sterile non‑alcoholic antiseptic wipe; plaster).

For technologists and supplier personnel:

• Prepare kits in serially numbered packages and sign the package seal. Complete Form A stating kit contents and expiry date and retain a copy (regulation 6; Form A).
• Maintain traceable records linking serial numbers to production batches and expiry dates to support chain of custody.

For prescribed sample takers (pathology collectors and phlebotomists):

• Before sampling, in the presence of the person producing the kit, inspect the kit for intact seal and check the expiry date; refuse to use kits that are unsealed or expired (regulation 7(2)(a)-(b)).
• Use only the vacutainer kit contained in the sampling equipment , do not substitute other equipment (regulation 7(2A); regulation 4).
• Clean the venepuncture site with the supplied sterile non‑alcoholic antiseptic wipe only (regulation 7(2)(c)).
• Take two venepuncture blood samples immediately one after the other, discharge each into a separate container, tighten covers securely and invert each container at least 20 times (regulation 7(2A); regulation 7(2)(d)-(g)). Do not pool or mix the two containers.
• Seal each container separately in its own package after collection; ensure the police officer present also signs the sealing (regulation 8(2)).
• Complete and sign Part I of two copies of Form B and retain one copy; ensure the police officer completes Part II (regulation 8(1); Form B).

For police officers:

• Be present during sampling and complete Part II of both copies of Form B (regulation 8(1)(b); Form B).
• If the subject is incapable of consenting or submitting, make a written request addressed to a prescribed sample taker using Form D, properly populated and dated (regulation 12; Form D).
• Ensure the package is sealed in the presence of the sample taker and that the required particulars listed in regulation 3B accompany the sample to the analyst: serial/barcode, subject name, sample taker’s name and qualifications, police officer’s name and signature who required the sample, date/time of collection, and names/signatures of the persons who deliver the sample to the analyst (regulation 3B).

For analysts/laboratory intake staff (Chemistry Centre (WA) or otherwise):

• Verify the serial number/barcode of the package, ensure the package is intact, and check the Form A/Form B particulars and signatures against the package and the intake register (regulation 3B; Form C).
• Use only the analytical methods permitted by regulation 9 to analyse blood for alcohol: dichromate change or gas chromatography (regulation 9).
• For drug analyses, use the Road Traffic (Drug Driving) Regulations 2007 Schedule 1 Form 1 as the prescribed reporting form (regulation 10(2)).
• Provide the analyst’s certificate in Form C for alcohol analyses and ensure Forms E/F are available to certify who is an analyst or drug analyst as required (regulations 10, 13-14; Forms C, E, F).
• Maintain a documented chain of custody and intake log that mirrors the particulars in regulation 3B.

For administrators handling fees:

• Ensure funds and payment mechanisms exist for the Commissioner of Police to pay prescribed sample taker attendance fees and laboratory analysis fees as set out in regulation 15 (regulation 15(1), (3), (4), (5)). Attendance fees: $120 (after‑hours/public holiday) or $100 (other times). Analysis fees: $296 (alcohol), $780 (drugs), combined $780 if both analyses are performed (regulation 15).
• Track payments performed by the Commissioner and associate them with the charges and the relevant person so that, upon conviction under the specified sections of the Act, the court can order repayment and the Commissioner can recover amounts as if they were a penalty (regulation 15(6)).

For defence and compliance auditing:

• Retain and copy Forms A, both copies of Form B, Form C and any Forms E/F or drug Form 1. These documents are the prescribed forms and will be central to admissibility and evidentiary questions.
• Insist on photographic or electronic capture of package serial numbers/barcodes and seals at handover points, and preserve tamper‑proof packaging intact until analysis is complete.
• Verify analyst methods match regulation 9 and that the laboratory’s intake particulars match regulation 3B.

Checklist summary (minimum documents and physical checks):

• Form A signed by technologist and serial number on kit (regulation 6; Form A).
• Two intact sampled tubes, each sealed separately and sealed packages signed by sample taker and police officer (regulation 8).
• Two copies of Form B completed: Part I (sample taker) and Part II (police officer) (regulation 8; Form B).
• Delivery to analyst with the particulars listed in regulation 3B (regulation 3B).
• Analyst certificate in Form C (alcohol) or prescribed Form 1 (drug analyst) and competence certificates (Forms E/F) where required (regulation 10; Forms C, E, F).
• Payment record showing Commissioner of Police payment for attendance and analysis, with identifiers for later recovery if a conviction is secured (regulation 15).

Following these steps aligns operations with the Regulations’ prescribed chain of custody, documentation and analytical requirements and reduces the risk of procedural defects that could compromise admissibility in proceedings under the Act.