Tag: plant engineering

  • RPEQ Explained: When Queensland Plant Work Needs a Registered Engineer

    RPEQ Explained: When Queensland Plant Work Needs a Registered Engineer

    Four Letters Every Queensland Project Runs Into

    Plant managers who have worked in other states are often surprised by a question that comes up in Queensland projects: who is the RPEQ? It appears in tender documents, in insurer questionnaires and in conversations with consultants. Queensland has required engineers to be registered for far longer than other states, and the rules reach further into day to day plant work than many people expect.

    This guide explains what an RPEQ is, when Queensland law requires one, what that means for work inside a manufacturing plant and what to ask your suppliers.

    What RPEQ Means

    RPEQ stands for Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland. It is a registration granted by the Board of Professional Engineers of Queensland under the Professional Engineers Act 2002. An engineer is registered in one or more areas of engineering, such as civil, mechanical or electrical, after their qualifications and competence have been assessed.

    Registration lasts twelve months, running from 1 July to 30 June, and is renewed each year. Registered engineers must complete 150 hours of continuing professional development over each three year period. The Board publishes a register that anyone can search by name, location, area of engineering or registration number.

    What the Law Requires

    Section 115 of the Act is the core provision. A person who is not a practising professional engineer must not carry out professional engineering services. There are two ways for unregistered people to work lawfully. The first is to carry out the services under the direct supervision of a practising professional engineer who is responsible for them. The second is where the service is provided only in accordance with a prescriptive standard.

    The maximum penalty is 1,000 penalty units. At the Queensland penalty unit value of $172.70 that applies in 2026/27, that is $172,700.

    The Act applies to services carried out in Queensland and to services carried out for Queensland. An engineer in another state or overseas who designs something for a Queensland plant is covered in the same way as one based in Brisbane.

    What a Professional Engineering Service Is

    The Act defines a professional engineering service as an engineering service that requires, or is based on, the application of engineering principles and data to a design, or to a construction, production, operation or maintenance activity, relating to engineering. It does not include an engineering service that is provided only in accordance with a prescriptive standard.

    Notice the breadth. The definition is not limited to design, and it is not limited to buildings or infrastructure. Production, operation and maintenance activities are all named. That brings a good deal of what happens in and around a manufacturing plant within reach.

    The Prescriptive Standard Exception

    A prescriptive standard is defined as a document that states procedures or criteria for carrying out a design, or a construction, production, operation or maintenance activity, relating to engineering, where applying it does not require advanced scientifically based calculations. The example the Board gives is the timber framing code, AS 1684.

    The Board’s guidance draws the line this way. A person who is simply carrying out the tasks set out in such a document is not providing a professional engineering service. A service that includes professional decisions about which standards to apply is likely to be one.

    In plant terms, a tradesperson installing equipment to the manufacturer’s instructions or carrying out maintenance to a set procedure is following a prescription. Somebody deciding what the design should be, selecting the criteria and doing the calculations to prove it is doing engineering.

    What Direct Supervision Means

    Much engineering work in industry is done by people who are not registered, working under someone who is. The Act allows this, and the Board is specific about what it expects. The supervising engineer must be registered in the relevant area of engineering, must have the authority to direct the work, must see the final results of the work and must actually take responsibility for it.

    A signature added at the end by an engineer who was not involved is not direct supervision. If a supplier tells you their work is supervised by an RPEQ, it is reasonable to ask who that person is, what their area of registration is and how they are involved in your job.

    Where This Arises in a Manufacturing Plant

    There is no list in the Act of which plant activities need an RPEQ, and the answer always depends on what is actually being done. The following are the situations where the question most often comes up and where it is worth asking.

    Structural work. Platforms, mezzanines, pipe bridges, equipment supports, crane beams and anything else that has to carry load.

    Machine design and modification. Designing new machinery, or changing an existing machine in a way that affects its strength, function or safety.

    Pressure equipment and piping. Design of pressure vessels and process pipework.

    Electrical design. Power system design, protection studies and the sizing of supply equipment, as distinct from the installation work done by licensed electricians.

    Control and safety systems. The design of control systems, and the design and verification of safety functions.

    Engineering assessments and reports. Capacity checks, failure investigations and certifications that rely on engineering analysis.

    Registration under this Act is separate from trade licensing. An electrical work licence and an RPEQ registration cover different things, and a job can need both.

    Why It Matters to the Plant, Not Only the Engineer

    The offence in section 115 is committed by the person who carries out the service. That does not mean the client is unaffected. If a design on your site was produced by someone who should have been registered and was not, you have a design with no accountable engineer behind it. That is uncomfortable in an insurance claim, in a regulator’s investigation after an incident, or when you try to sell or relocate the equipment.

    There is also a practical benefit. Asking who the responsible engineer is forces clarity about who has actually checked the design. On many projects the honest answer turns out to be nobody, and it is far better to learn that before fabrication than after commissioning.

    Six Questions to Ask a Supplier

    Does any part of this job involve engineering design or analysis, or is it all carried out to existing drawings and procedures? If it does, who is the RPEQ responsible, and in which area are they registered? Is that person doing the work or supervising it, and how? Will the drawings or calculations identify the responsible engineer? If the design is being done outside Queensland, is the engineer registered here? And what happens to design responsibility if we modify the equipment later?

    Then check the register. It takes a minute and it is free.

    When You Are Not Sure

    The boundary between following a standard and applying engineering judgement is not always obvious, and reasonable people can disagree about a particular task. The Board of Professional Engineers of Queensland publishes practice notes on these questions and will respond to enquiries. For anything significant, ask before the work is done.

    Where BevTech Fits

    BevTech is a family owned engineering business in Richlands, Brisbane, with more than 25 years in beverage and FMCG manufacturing. We deliver projects from design drawings through fabrication, installation and commissioning, with electrical, automation, functional safety and mechanical capability in one business. On any project we are happy to set out, before work starts, what is being designed, what is being built to existing drawings and procedures, and who is responsible for each part.

    If you are planning a modification or a new installation and want that clarity from the outset, use the contact form at bevtech.com.au/contact.

    This article is a general guide current as at October 2026 and is not legal advice. For guidance on a specific situation, refer to the Board of Professional Engineers of Queensland.

  • Allen Bradley vs Siemens: Choosing the Right PLC Platform for Your FMCG Plant

    Few decisions in plant engineering generate as much internal debate as the choice between Allen Bradley and Siemens as a PLC platform standard. Both are mature, capable systems used extensively across Australian food and beverage manufacturing, and both can deliver excellent reliability when properly specified and maintained. For procurement and operations leaders, the more useful question is not which brand is objectively superior, but which platform best fits the existing plant environment, the available technician pool, and the long term support model the business wants to rely on.

    Hardware ecosystem and plant standardisation

    Allen Bradley, built on the Rockwell Automation ecosystem, tends to be the more common standard among manufacturers with strong ties to North American equipment suppliers, while Siemens has a deep installed base across European sourced machinery and many Australian beverage and dairy operations. For a plant building a new line from scratch, this is a relatively open decision. For most existing FMCG sites, however, the practical answer is largely already decided by what is already installed. Mixing platforms across a single production line, while sometimes unavoidable when integrating third party OEM equipment, adds complexity to fault finding and spares holding, so the strategic goal for most plants should be consolidating toward one primary standard wherever practical.

    Programming environment and integration

    Allen Bradley’s Studio 5000 environment and Siemens’ TIA Portal are both capable, modern programming environments, and the gap between them has narrowed considerably over the past decade. Where differences matter more in practice is integration with peripheral equipment. Siemens PLCs tend to integrate cleanly with Siemens drives, HMIs, and safety relays in a tightly coupled ecosystem, which is useful for projects like temperature and pressure controlled refrigeration systems, where PID loops, variable speed drives, and HMI feedback all need to work together reliably. Allen Bradley offers similarly tight integration within its own ecosystem and tends to have stronger native support for certain robotics and vision system integrations common in high speed packaging lines.

    For a plant manager evaluating a new automation project, the practical question is which platform the existing line equipment, OEM machinery, and any planned future expansions are likely to use. A mismatch here creates ongoing integration friction that outweighs any inherent advantage of either brand.

    Technician availability and support risk

    This is where the decision becomes genuinely strategic rather than technical. Both Allen Bradley and Siemens have a reasonable base of qualified technicians across South East Queensland and the broader Australian east coast, but availability shifts regionally and by industry. A plant that standardises on a platform with thin local technician coverage creates a support risk that only becomes obvious during an emergency breakdown, when the nearest qualified engineer may be hours away or already committed elsewhere.

    This is one of the strongest arguments for working with an engineering partner who maintains genuine dual platform capability rather than specialising exclusively in one brand. Bevtech Engineering and Automation’s team of control system engineers and industrial electricians work across both Allen Bradley and Siemens platforms, supported by TUV functional safety engineers for safety critical integration work. That breadth means a plant is not locked into a single support relationship, and it allows a phased migration strategy if a site is consolidating from a mixed fleet toward one standard over time, rather than requiring a disruptive single event changeover.

    Total cost of ownership

    Procurement teams evaluating PLC platform decisions should look beyond the upfront hardware quote. Spare parts pricing, software licensing models, the cost of training or hiring technicians familiar with the platform, and the resale or repurposing value of decommissioned hardware all factor into total cost of ownership. Siemens hardware has historically commanded a price premium in the Australian market relative to Allen Bradley in some product categories, though this varies by component family and has narrowed in recent years. The more material cost driver is usually the labour market for technicians, since a plant with a thin local pool of qualified Siemens or Allen Bradley engineers will pay a premium for emergency support regardless of the hardware cost difference.

    A practical decision framework

    For most FMCG plant managers, the decision comes down to four questions. What platform does the majority of existing line equipment already use. What platform do the in house maintenance team and preferred service partners already support. What does planned future capital equipment, particularly from key OEM suppliers, typically arrive configured with. And finally, is there a credible path to consolidate toward a single standard over the next capital cycle, reducing long term spares and training overhead.

    Working through these questions with an integrator who is not commercially tied to a single hardware vendor produces a more honest recommendation than working with a reseller who only carries one brand.

    Get an independent assessment

    Bevtech Engineering and Automation has supported Australian food and beverage manufacturers across both Allen Bradley and Siemens platforms for over 25 years, including direct work with major industry names across the FMCG sector. If your plant is weighing a platform decision for a new line, an expansion, or a phased consolidation of legacy systems, the team can provide an independent assessment based on your existing equipment fleet and maintenance resourcing. Contact Bevtech on +61 400 881 321 or admin@bevtech.com.au, or visit the team at 25 Silvio St, Richlands QLD.

@Fd2X@HoSi10178
Shutdown Checklist
Bevtech fmcg beverage shutdown planning checklist glass.webp0000

Get Your FMCG & Beverage Plant Shutdown Planning Checklist

We wont spam you :) or share your details.
We will send you an email with the PDF checklist.