A major accident at a Major Hazard Facility creates the potential for serious consequences at the facility and for the surrounding community and environment. Globally, major accidents have caused the loss of many lives and cost billions of dollars.

Effective risk management plays an important role in reducing the risk of these types of accidents; however, because of their exceptional nature, major accidents do not typically fit into a standard likelihood / consequence matrix. Risk management needs to be ‘fit for purpose’ and emergency plans and emergency preparedness are critical risk management elements. Many sites promote their emergency plans as control measures, but they may not be suitable or appropriate.

The introduction of harmonised WHS laws within Australia is changing compliance obligations for facilities and compliance assessment obligations for regulators. Fire services authorities also have obligations under this legislation to provide comments and recommendations to facilities, which must comply with those recommendations (previously, facilities were only required to have due regard to any comment or recommendation). Compliance now includes all aspects of emergency plan testing.

Although not all Australian jurisdictions have yet adopted the model laws, history has shown that regardless of the jurisdiction in which an accident has occurred, the investigative team will typically explore relevant standards and laws, whether or not they strictly apply. The Report of the Longford Royal Commission into the major accident at the Esso site in Victoria is an example, canvassing multiple standards, codes of practice and legislation from within Australia and overseas.

This paper explores the risks and opportunities presented to both industry and fire services through the introduction of Model WHS legislation, and how an open and collaborative approach can achieve regulatory compliance and improve public safety.