On 13 May 2024, the defendant company, who supplies liquified petroleum gas to residential and commercial premises, pleaded guilty to two offences under section 708A of the Petroleum and Gas (Production and Safety) Act 2004 (the Act).

The essence of the offending was that the defendant:

• Failed to conduct a ‘pressure / leakage’ test of a gas system before providing gas to that gas system (for charge 1); and
• Failed to train its employees in relation to a safety regulation that was applicable to their work. Specifically, the defendant failed to train its workers of a requirement to conduct a ‘pressure / leakage’ test of a gas system before providing gas to a gas system (for charge 2).

The maximum penalty for each offence was a fine of $55,000.00 (500 penalty units).

During July 2021, a customer contacted the defendant regarding the delivery of a 35kg cylinder of liquified petroleum gas to a café at Robina. The delivery was to be a ‘new install’ to the extent that the café did not have a gas cylinder attached to its gas system at that time.

Unbeknown to all parties involved in the transaction, including the defendant, the gas system at the café had an open end within the café kitchen.

An employee for the defendant delivered a gas cylinder which contained liquified petroleum gas to the café on 16 July 2021.

The employee who delivered the gas cylinder conducted a ‘soapy water test’ at the point of its connection, which was sufficient to test whether there was gas leak at the point of the gas cylinders connection to the gas system but was insufficient to test whether there was a leak further downstream of the point of connection.

The defendant, by virtue of section 708A of the Act, was required to comply with all safety requirements under the Petroleum and Gas (Safety) Regulation 2018 (the Regulation). The Regulation required the defendant to comply with preferred standards for the installation and alteration of gas systems. Section 3.5.2 of Australian/New Zealand Standard 5601.1:2013, Part 1 (the installation standard) required the defendant to conduct a “leakage test” on existing gas installations before providing gas to it. Specifically, the installation standard required the defendant to test the pressure of the gas system downstream of the point of connection in the circumstances that arose on 16 July 2021 at the café. The defendant failed to conduct such a test (which was the basis of charge 1).

The defendant, by virtue of section 708A of the Act, was required to comply with all safety requirements under the Petroleum and Gas (Safety) Regulation 2018 (the Regulation). The Regulation required the defendant to comply with preferred standards for the handling of gas. Section 11.3.7.1(e) of Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 1596:2014 (the handling standard) required the defendant to train its employees in such duties as individually assigned to that person in connection with gas. The defendant failed to train its employee who delivered gas to the café on 16 July 2021, in respect of his requirement to conduct a relevant test to confirm that there was no significant leakage of fuel gas from the gas system before providing gas to the gas system.

Further, the defendant had been made aware, through its sole director, of the requirement to conduct a relevant test of a gas system before providing gas to that gas system in certain circumstances, when in 2015 a Petroleum and Gas Inspector carried out an inspection of the defendant’s place of business and provided the defendant’s sole director, with copies of legislation relevant to the requirement to conduct a relevant test of a gas system before providing gas to that gas system in certain circumstances.

The presiding Magistrate considered the factual basis of the offending, and that the defendant had pleaded guilty at an early stage. The defendant did not have prior convictions. Her Honour also took into account section 9 of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 and noted that the purpose of the Act involved safety and that the safety obligations under the Act are ongoing and positive duties placed on those work in the fuel gas industry.

Her Honour held that a fine (as opposed to a good behaviour bond) was the appropriate penalty.

Her Honour imposed a single fine of $7,000.00, and ordered the defendant to pay $500.00 in court costs and $101.40 for the filing fee of the complaint. The fines and costs were referred to SPER.

Her Honour did not record a conviction.

OWHSP contact: enquiries@owhsp.qld.gov.au