The new massive legal obligation placed on CMOs you probably don’t even know
Coal Mine Operators have a new legal obligation that has a HUGE impact on your SHMS – but it’s hidden within the latest version of the Coal Mining Safety and Health Act (CMSHA) where most people don’t look.”
In the latest version of the CMSHA (1999) – 1 July 2025 version, the following appears for the first time:
“material unwanted event, at a coal mine, means an unwanted event in relation to which the potential or real consequence to safety or health exceeds a threshold defined by the coal mine operator as warranting the highest level of attention.”
Where is this you may ask?
Incredibly, this is found on page 269 of the CMSHA, in Schedule 3 Dictionary!
What does this mean?
This definition clearly places an obligation on the Coal Mine Operator to define the threshold above which a risk warrants the highest level of attention.
NOTE, this obligation doesn’t appear in s.41 Obligations of coal mine operators.
Why not? Good question – we agree - surely it should?
What does this mean for the SSE and the CMO? Read on ….
Definition and legislative context:
Since 1 July 2025, the CMSHA places responsibility on the Coal Mine Operator (CMO) to determine and apply the threshold establishing which events must be treated with the highest level of attention.
Implications:
At a minimum, the threshold set affects how risks identified from the BBRA/BRA/Site Wide Risk Assessment:
• Are elevated into the mine’s PHMPs and critical-control framework - and thus require critical controls and formal bow-tie / control assurance work (refer QGN35 The Integration of Critical Controls into PHMPs for Coal Mines in Queensland).
• Drive the establishment of the Management Structure by the Site Senior Executive to ensure the risk from coal mining operations is at an acceptable level (refer CMSHA s.55 and RS22 Management Structure for the development and implementation of the Safety and Health Management System).
It also highlights what is likely to draw regulator attention during inspections and compliance assessments (because regulators assess whether PHMPs/critical controls and competencies for MUEs are in place and effective).
In other words: the CMO’s threshold changes what the SSE must treat as a top-priority when implementing the Safety Health Management System (SHMS) and it has a significant impact on resources!
Setting the threshold:
The CMO has formal discretion to set the threshold for the mine.
Resources Safety & Health Queensland guidance QGN35 notes industry practice often treats the MUE threshold for principal hazards as events with potential for multiple fatalities, while also saying the CMO may determine a lower threshold (eg a single fatality). Recognised Standard 22 sets the expectation that SHMS responsibilities will be set for Principal Hazards (multiple fatality) and serious risks (single-fatality and serious harm).
That means the regulator expects the operator to adopt appropriate thresholds and then implement PHMP/critical control rigour consistent with that threshold.
What if the threshold is set at the wrong level?
Because the operator’s threshold drives what is managed as an MUE, an operator who sets an inappropriately high threshold (so fewer events qualify as MUEs) but then fails to manage the real risks appropriately can face compliance action if the safety management system is inadequate to keep risk at an acceptable level.
Put simply: discretion to set the threshold does not remove the operator’s obligations to keep risk at an acceptable level — the regulator will likely examine whether the threshold and resulting risk controls are reasonable and effective.
Conversely, if the threshold is set too low (and therefore more events qualify as MUEs), not only is there a significant establishment and ongoing compliance cost, but the intent of the legislation to focus SSEs on the most important risks could be reduced by diluting the focus of all on the Coal Mine.
Best practice / practical advice
CMOs / SSEs should:
Document the threshold clearly (what consequence = MUE) and the rationale (risk-modelling, site context, principal hazards). The Act gives the operator the discretion — but it must be justifiable.
Clearly identify events that exceed the threshold inside the BRA/BBRA/Site Wide Risk Assessment and are thus considered MUEs.
Align PHMPs/critical controls/MUEs to that threshold and ensure Risk Owners, verification and assurance match the “highest level of attention” requirement.
Consider a conservative threshold (Industry practise is either Single or Multiple Fatality as the threshold).
Evidence the decision — demonstrate why the threshold is appropriate for the site and how risks below/above the threshold are managed.
reach out to us info@mycompetency.expert for further assistance in this matter.