Biosecurity (First Point of Entry—Hobart Airport) Determination 2019

The determination deploys a narrow set of statutory concepts drawn from the Biosecurity Act 2015 and applied specifically to Hobart Airport. Those concepts, as they appear in the instrument, are:

• First point of entry, declared for Hobart Airport in relation to aircraft generally (s5) and goods other than live horses (s6). The instrument does not attempt to redefine the statutory meaning of first point of entry; it uses the term as a label under the Act and makes Hobart Airport the location where the statutory regime attaches for incoming aircraft and certain goods.

• Biosecurity entry point, a separate designation from first point of entry. The instrument designates areas within the airport as biosecurity entry points for specified goods. The table in s8 lists a single biosecurity entry point for a class of goods: baggage at Hobart Airport International Terminal (s8, table). The instrument expressly declines to designate any area as a biosecurity entry point for aircraft (s7, note).

• Goods, defined by reference to section 19 of the Act and in the instrument described to include goods that are subject to biosecurity control or that are the subject of an exposed goods order (s4). The instrument therefore treats the statutory categories rather than attempting to catalogue particular commodity types, except by excluding live horses from the class of goods for which Hobart Airport is a first point of entry (s6).

• Notification and procedural conditions, set out in Part 4. The instrument requires owners, lessees and persons responsible for operations to notify the Agriculture Department in writing of changes to the business entity operating the airport or a biosecurity entry point (s9(2)-(3)), and requires responsible persons to give the Agriculture Department reasonable notice of proposed operational changes that fall within a listed set of examples (s9(4)-(5)).

• Cross-references to statutory machinery. The instrument includes notes that direct users to relevant Act provisions: section 147 concerning bringing goods to biosecurity entry points when unloading from aircraft (s8, notes), sections 173 and 174 regarding prohibited and conditionally non‑prohibited goods (s6, note), and section 238 concerning the obligation to bring aircraft to a biosecurity entry point at a first point of entry (s7, note). The instrument is made under subsection 223(1) of the Biosecurity Act 2015 (s3).

The instrument therefore operates within the Act’s framework by declaring the Hobart Airport location for particular statutory obligations, identifying a discrete facility within the airport for baggage processing, and imposing written-notification conditions designed to inform the Agriculture Department about changes that might affect biosecurity risk management at that first point of entry (s5-9). The terms used in the instrument are largely referential to the Act, and the instrument does not purport to alter the statutory definitions or the broader enforcement architecture of the Act.

The instrument creates duties and operational expectations that fall primarily on a limited set of actors associated with Hobart Airport. Identification of affected parties follows directly from the text.

Primary obligated parties

• The owner or an owner of Hobart Airport. Subsections 9(2) and 9(3) require an owner (or, if more than one owner, an owner) to give written notice to the Agriculture Department when they become aware of a change to the business entity operating Hobart Airport or a biosecurity entry point at Hobart Airport (s9(2)-(3)). The instrument places the obligation on an owner rather than mandating joint notice by all owners.

• The lessee or a lessee of Hobart Airport, where a lease exists. If a lessee becomes aware of a change to the business entity operating Hobart Airport or a biosecurity entry point, the lessee must also give written notice to the Agriculture Department as soon as practicable (s9(3)).

• A person or body responsible for carrying out operations at Hobart Airport. Such a person or body must give the Agriculture Department reasonable written notice of proposed changes to procedures, facilities or other factors that the instrument lists as relevant to biosecurity risk (s9(4)-(5)).

Operationally affected parties

• Aircraft operators and masters of arriving aircraft. The instrument designates Hobart Airport as a first point of entry for aircraft generally (s5). The instrument’s note at s7 refers to section 238 of the Act, which the instrument identifies as the statutory provision that requires an aircraft to be brought to a biosecurity entry point at a first point of entry if a biosecurity entry point exists at that first point of entry (s7, note). Although the instrument itself does not create new immediate operational steps for aircraft beyond the designation, it links aircraft operators to obligations that the Act imposes where a biosecurity entry point is designated.

• Persons unloading goods from arriving aircraft. The instrument designates baggage at Hobart Airport International Terminal as a biosecurity entry point for goods of the class “baggage” (s8, table). The note to s8 refers to section 147 of the Act, under which goods unloaded from an aircraft that are mentioned in the table must be brought to a biosecurity entry point as soon as practicable (s8, notes). Practically, that links baggage handlers, ground handling companies and airlines to the requirement in the Act to bring baggage to the designated biosecurity entry point.

• The Agriculture Department is the recipient of the written notices required by s9(2)-(4). The instrument repeatedly specifies that notices must be given to the Agriculture Department, in writing (s9(2)-(4)).

Other affected parties

• Passengers and shippers whose goods fall within the class designated for the baggage biosecurity entry point. Their baggage will be processed through the International Terminal baggage biosecurity entry point where that applies (s8).

• Entities interested in importing live horses. The determination explicitly excludes live horses from the goods for which Hobart Airport is a first point of entry (s6). That exclusion signals that parties importing live horses will be subject to a different entry point regime or separate determinations.

Who pays and who decides

• Administrative burdens fall on owners, lessees and operationally responsible persons at the airport, who must monitor, prepare and dispatch written notices to the Agriculture Department in the circumstances specified (s9). There is no fee schedule or cost-recovery mechanism specified in the determination itself; the instrument imposes a time and administrative cost which those actors will bear.

• Decision-making authority for the designation is exercised by the Director of Biosecurity, or their delegate; this instrument records the decision made by a delegate of the Director of Biosecurity (instrument header, s3). The Agriculture Department is the administrative recipient of the notification obligations.

In short, the legal effects of the instrument concentrate on airport owners, lessees and operational actors, connect ground operations for baggage to a specific biosecurity processing point within the International Terminal, and allocate to the Agriculture Department the role of information recipient in relation to material changes to entities, procedures and facilities that affect biosecurity risk at Hobart Airport.

The instrument creates a short list of duties, and it leaves rights largely to the statutory scheme in the Act. The duties and operational expectations are explicit in Part 2, Part 3 and Part 4.

Key duties imposed by the instrument

• Bring aircraft to a biosecurity entry point where one exists at the first point of entry. The instrument does not itself restate the Act, but it notes the effect of section 238 of the Act: an aircraft must be brought to a biosecurity entry point at a first point of entry if there is a biosecurity entry point for the aircraft at that first point of entry (s7, note). The instrument also clarifies it has not designated any area of Hobart Airport as a biosecurity entry point for aircraft (s7, note), which affects whether the s238 obligation applies in practice.

• Bring goods unloaded from an aircraft to a biosecurity entry point for those goods, where designated. Section 8 designates the baggage area at the International Terminal as a biosecurity entry point for “baggage” (s8). The s8 note cross-references section 147 of the Act, which the instrument says requires goods mentioned in the table that are to be unloaded from an aircraft to be brought to the biosecurity entry point as soon as practicable (s8, note).

• Owners’ written-notice duty for changes to the business entity. If an owner becomes aware that there has been, or will be, a change to the business entity operating Hobart Airport or to a biosecurity entry point at Hobart Airport, the owner must give the Agriculture Department written notice as soon as practicable after becoming aware of the change (s9(2)).

• Lessees’ written-notice duty for changes to the business entity. If a lessee becomes aware of a change to the business entity operating Hobart Airport or a biosecurity entry point, the lessee must likewise give the Agriculture Department written notice as soon as practicable (s9(3)).

• Responsible persons’ duty to give reasonable written notice of proposed operational changes. A person or body that is responsible for carrying out operations at Hobart Airport must provide the Agriculture Department with reasonable written notice of a proposed change of certain kinds, including changes to procedures for biosecurity risk management, changes to facilities available to biosecurity officials, or changes affecting the identification and communication of biosecurity risks (s9(4)-(5)).

Rights and practical expectations

• The instrument confers the status of first point of entry on Hobart Airport for aircraft and most goods (ss5-6). That status triggers, where applicable, statutory obligations under the Act that bind arriving aircraft and goods, as signposted in the instrument’s notes (s7 and s8 notes). The instrument itself does not create separate administrative appeals or rights of review; any rights of challenge or review must be sought under the Act or general administrative law, but the instrument does not itself provide those mechanisms.

• The instrument establishes specific communication channels: notices must be given to the Agriculture Department in writing (s9(2)-(4)). The instrument does not prescribe the contents of notices, forms, or specific addresses or contact points; the practical effect is to require owners, lessees and operationally responsible persons to establish a written-notice mechanism that meets the “in writing” standard (s9).

Limitations, ambiguities and delegations

• The instrument delegates decision-making about its content to a delegate of the Director of Biosecurity, as seen in the instrument’s header and the authority provision referencing s223(1) (instrument header, s3). The instrument does not specify any further delegations or subordinate rules that owners, lessees or operators must adopt beyond the written-notice and reasonable-notice requirements.

• The terms used to set timing of notifications are “as soon as practicable” for owners and lessees (s9(2)-(3)) and “reasonable notice” for proposed changes by persons responsible for operations (s9(4)). Those terms are imprecise and create a requirement to act according to circumstances; the instrument does not supply bright line timeframes or procedural templates.

In short, the determination imposes a combination of location-based obligations (first point of entry and a designated baggage biosecurity entry point) and procedural notification duties on owners, lessees and persons responsible for airport operations. Rights under the instrument are largely procedural and derive from the Act’s broader framework rather than from the instrument itself.

The instrument itself does not specify criminal or civil penalties, nor does it set out enforcement mechanisms or sanctions. Its text confines itself to declarations and conditions, and it contains no express penalty provisions.

What the instrument says about enforcement context

• The instrument is made under subsection 223(1) of the Biosecurity Act 2015 (s3), and it makes cross-references in notes to other Act provisions that set out operational obligations, for example section 147 about bringing goods to biosecurity entry points and section 238 about bringing aircraft to biosecurity entry points (s7, s8 notes). The instrument therefore situates itself within the Act’s framework, but it does not reproduce any enforcement or penalty provisions from the Act.

• Because this determination imposes duties of notice on owners, lessees and persons responsible for operations (s9), failure to comply with these duties could fall to be considered under any enforcement powers and offence provisions that exist in the Biosecurity Act 2015. The instrument does not, however, create or prescribe those enforcement pathways, nor does it indicate administrative procedures or timeframes for departmental responses to notices.

Practical consequences of the absence of penalties in the instrument

• The instrument leaves open the question of explicit sanctions for non-compliance with its notification conditions. Practically, administrators, owners and lessees must assume that failure to comply could engage enforcement under the overarching Biosecurity Act 2015 or other applicable laws, but the instrument itself is silent on how the Agriculture Department will react, what remedial steps will be taken or whether failure to notify triggers any immediate administrative consequences under this determination.

• The lack of specified penalties in the determination increases the administrative uncertainty for owners, lessees and operators because they are not informed by the instrument of the consequences of non-compliance, the remedial options available, or the Department’s enforcement priorities.

Where to look for enforcement authority

• The instrument indicates by cross-reference that relevant enforcement and operational obligations exist elsewhere in the Biosecurity Act 2015 (for example ss147 and 238 are identified in notes, and s223(1) is the authority for making the instrument) (s3, s7 note, s8 note). To identify specific offences, penalties, powers of seizure, directions or other enforcement measures, users must consult the Biosecurity Act 2015 itself and any regulations or other determinations made under that Act. The determination does not summarise or excerpt those enforcement provisions.

In short, this determination imposes duties and makes designations but contains no penalty clauses or enforcement procedures. Enforcement, where required, must be located in the statutory framework of the Biosecurity Act 2015 and related instruments, not within this determination.

The determination is explicitly a subordinate instrument made under the Biosecurity Act 2015, and the instrument uses explicit cross-references to several Act provisions. The interaction is limited to designation, notification and signposting; the determination does not attempt to remake statutory rules.

Direct statutory cross-references contained in the instrument

• Authority: the instrument is made under subsection 223(1) of the Biosecurity Act 2015 (s3). That locates the determination within the Act’s delegated instrument-making power.

• Definitions: the instrument relies on the Act for core meanings. It states that aircraft is as defined by section 9 of the Act and goods is as defined by section 19 of the Act (s4). That means the instrument’s use of those terms is intended to be read in conjunction with the Act’s definitions.

• Operational obligations in the Act: the instrument’s notes refer to section 147 of the Act for obligations about unloading goods and bringing them to a biosecurity entry point (s8 note), and to sections 173 and 174 for matters about prohibited goods and conditionally non-prohibited goods (s6 note). The instrument also references section 238 of the Act in relation to the requirement to bring an aircraft to a biosecurity entry point at a first point of entry where such a point exists (s7 note). These references indicate where operational obligations and prohibitions are set out, rather than restating them.

Scope of interaction

• The determination designates Hobart Airport as a statutory location (first point of entry) within the Act’s regulatory geography (ss5-6). That designation interacts with the Act’s substantive rules by creating the circumstances in which the Act’s requirements (for example those mentioned in the notes) become operational at Hobart Airport.

• The instrument’s notification conditions require interaction with administrative procedures under the Agriculture Department, which administers the Act. Notices are to be given to the Agriculture Department in writing (s9). The determination does not specify the forms, templates or address for such notices, so practical interaction will occur through departmental practice and any administrative instruments the Department may publish.

Matters not altered by the instrument

• The determination does not alter or displace other legislation. It does not purport to modify statutory definitions or change offence provisions in the Act; rather, it operates as a location-specific instrument within the Act’s delegated powers.

• The instrument does not specify how it interacts with state or local laws governing airports, leases, land use or aviation. It is confined to biosecurity designations and notification conditions under the Biosecurity Act 2015. The instrument does not assert primacy over other legal obligations that airport owners and operators may have under contract, aviation safety regulation, or local governance, nor does it attempt to harmonise those regimes.

Practical cross-checks that users should perform

• Consult the Biosecurity Act 2015 for the substantive rules on prohibited goods, conditionally non‑prohibited goods, exposed goods orders, obligations to bring aircraft and goods to biosecurity entry points, and enforcement provisions; the instrument’s notes point to sections 147, 173, 174 and 238, and the instrument is made under s223(1) (s3, s6 note, s7 note, s8 note).

• Review any other determinations made under the Act that might designate other biosecurity entry points at Hobart Airport or elsewhere, and check departmental guidance about notice procedures and contact details because the instrument requires written notices to the Agriculture Department but does not specify administrative detail (s9(2)-(4)).

In sum, the instrument functions as an Act-based, location-specific administrative determination. Its principal interactions with other laws are via cross-reference to and reliance on the Biosecurity Act 2015; it does not itself create separate enforcement rules or displace other statutory regimes.

The determination includes a commencement table and an explanatory note about that table but records no subsequent amendments within the instrument text.

Documented original enactment and commencement

• The instrument contains an explicit commencement table in s2. The table records that the whole of the instrument commenced on 16 June 2019 (s2). The instrument also contains a note that the table relates only to provisions as originally made and will not be amended in the instrument to deal with any later amendments (s2).

Making authority and date

• The instrument was made under subsection 223(1) of the Biosecurity Act 2015 (s3). The instrument header states it was made by Dean Merrilees, as delegate of the Director of Biosecurity, dated 7 June 2019, and notes the maker’s administrative role as Assistant Secretary, Compliance Division, Department of Agriculture.

No subsequent amendments recorded in the instrument

• The instrument text as supplied contains no amendment provisions, no variation clauses, and no schedules indicating changes after the original making. The instrument itself states the commencement arrangement and notes that the table "relates only to the provisions of this instrument as originally made" (s2). There is therefore no internal record of any amendment history within this instrument text.

How to treat external amendment records

• Since the instrument gives no internal record of later amendments, users seeking to establish whether the determination has been varied, revoked or replaced must consult external sources: the Commonwealth Gazette, the Federal Register of Legislation, or the Department of Agriculture’s administrative records. The instrument does not include a sunset clause, nor does it specify review periods; any amendment or revocation would therefore be effected by subsequent instrument-making under the Biosecurity Act 2015.

Practical note about the instrument’s silence on amendments

• Because the instrument records only its original commencement and contains no amendment entries, practitioners should assume the text as supplied reflects the instrument as originally made on the dates specified (s1-s2, header). For up-to-date compliance advice or operational planning, users should check whether subsequent determinations, legislative amendments, or departmental guidance have modified Hobart Airport’s status or the procedures for giving notice to the Agriculture Department.

The instrument itself contains no mention of litigation, judicial review, or case law. It does not list any proceedings involving the determination.

What the instrument records

• The text contains only the determinations, notes and conditions; it names the delegate who made the determination and records the date of the instrument (header). There is no litigation history, challenge record or reference to any judicial interpretation of the instrument in the supplied text.

Implications for research

• Since no cases or decisions are named in the instrument, any litigation relating to the instrument must be identified through external legal research, such as searching court databases or administrative law review records. The instrument’s notes refer to sections of the Biosecurity Act 2015 (for example ss147, 173, 174 and 238), which are statutory provisions that could give rise to disputes; however, the instrument does not itself document any disputes or rulings.

Practical consequence for practitioners

• If legal advice or defence is required in relation to actions taken under the instrument, practitioners will need to gather contemporaneous administrative correspondence, departmental notices, and any relevant Act provisions, and then search for case law that interprets either the Biosecurity Act 2015 or specific determinations made under it. The instrument as provided contains no litigation anchors or references.

The instrument is short and direct, but several practical and legal features can catch practitioners, airport operators and handlers if not closely observed. These are concrete operational and legal points drawn from the instrument text.

1. Exclusion of live horses from goods first point of entry (s6)

• The instrument makes Hobart Airport a first point of entry for goods other than live horses (s6). That specific exclusion is narrow and may surprise parties assuming all goods are covered. Importers, freight forwarders and quarantine planners dealing with live horses must not presume Hobart Airport is the relevant first point of entry under this instrument, and they should check where live-horse entries are directed by other determinations or by the Act.

2. Only baggage is designated as a biosecurity entry point for goods (s8)

• The instrument’s table in s8 designates only “baggage” at the Hobart Airport International Terminal as a biosecurity entry point. The note to s8 explicitly states that the requirement in section 147 of the Act to bring goods to a biosecurity entry point on unloading applies to goods mentioned in the table (s8, note). Because the table lists only baggage, other unloaded goods that arrive at Hobart Airport may not be required by section 147 to be brought to a biosecurity entry point at Hobart unless other designations exist. Practically, operators of cargo, mail and freight should not assume the same handling requirements apply to non-baggage goods without checking for other designations.

3. No designated biosecurity entry point for aircraft (s7)

• The instrument’s note to s7 states that it does not designate any area of Hobart Airport as a biosecurity entry point for aircraft. Section 238 of the Act triggers an obligation to bring an aircraft to a biosecurity entry point at a first point of entry if a biosecurity entry point exists there (s7, note). Because no aircraft biosecurity entry point is designated at Hobart by this instrument, the s238 obligation will not, on the instrument’s face, require aircraft to be brought to a specific aircraft biosecurity entry point at Hobart. Aircraft operators should therefore check whether other instruments or determinations designate an aircraft biosecurity entry point at Hobart or whether operational directions from the Agriculture Department apply.

4. Ambiguity in timing phrases , "as soon as practicable" and "reasonable notice" (s9)

• The notification duties for owners and lessees use the phrase "as soon as practicable" (s9(2)-(3)), while the duty for persons or bodies responsible for operations to give notice of proposed changes uses "reasonable notice" (s9(4)). Neither phrase is defined in the instrument. Practically, operators must calibrate notices to the facts: urgent changes should prompt prompt written notice, and proposed changes that affect biosecurity risk should be notified with sufficient lead time to allow departmental engagement. The instrument does not provide safe-harbour timeframes.

5. Who must notify when there are multiple owners or lessees (s9(2)-(3))

• The instrument limits the owner/lessee obligation to an owner, or a lessee, where there are multiple owners or lessees. That drafting choice could create uncertainty about who bears the practical duty to monitor and notify. For entities coordinating operations, it will be necessary to determine internally which owner or lessee will discharge the obligation, and to document that assignment because the instrument’s language does not mandate collective or joint notice.

6. Notices must be "in writing" but the instrument gives no form or address (s9(2)-(4))

• The requirement that notices be given "in writing" to the Agriculture Department is precise in form but silent on content, submission channels, or departmental contact points (s9(2)-(4)). Practitioners should obtain and follow departmental guidance or confirmed contact details to ensure notices are received and recorded. Failure to use an accepted channel could raise disputes about whether notice was effectively given.

7. No penalties or prescribed departmental response in the instrument (s9)

• The instrument does not set out consequences for failing to notify or for providing late or inadequate notice. That silence creates operational uncertainty, because stakeholders cannot rely on the instrument alone to predict enforcement action or administrative outcomes. Operators should assume that failure to notify could have implications under the Biosecurity Act 2015 but must consult the Act and departmental policy for specifics.

8. The instrument is narrow and references wider Act obligations (s4, notes to s6-s8)

• Because the instrument incorporates definitions and cross-references to other Act provisions, users must not treat the determination as a self-contained compliance checklist. For example, the meaning of "goods subject to biosecurity control" and the operation of exposed goods orders are matters of the Act (s4). Practitioners handling complex consignments should map their obligations against the Act as well as this determination.

These practical observations are grounded in the instrument’s text. Each point identifies a precise operational or legal interface where failure to check the instrument’s scope or to seek clarifying departmental guidance could produce confusion or non-compliance.

Compliance under this determination requires a combination of location-based operational practices and written-notification procedures. The instrument’s obligations are succinct and focused; compliance steps below follow directly from the relevant provisions.

1. Establish a written-notice protocol to the Agriculture Department (s9(2)-(4))

• Implement an internal procedure that identifies who will provide notices to the Agriculture Department. The instrument requires that an owner (or a lessee, if applicable) must give written notice where they become aware that there has been, or will be, a change to the business entity operating Hobart Airport or a biosecurity entry point (s9(2)-(3)). Where there are multiple owners or lessees, the instrument places the duty on an owner or a lessee, so designate a responsible person or entity to assume that duty and keep records of the delegation.

• Prepare a standard written-notice template that captures: the nature of the change (business entity or biosecurity entry point), the expected date of the change, contact details for the notifying party, and any material effects on biosecurity procedures or facilities. The instrument requires notices be "in writing" but does not prescribe content, so include sufficient detail to enable departmental assessment.

• Determine and document departmental contact details and submission channels. The instrument requires notices be given to the Agriculture Department in writing (s9(2)-(4)) but does not name an address, email or portal. Confirm with the Department the appropriate recipient, the preferred method of delivery, and the person or unit responsible for recording the notice.

2. Adopt a procedure for providing "reasonable notice" of proposed operational changes (s9(4)-(5))

• For persons or bodies responsible for carrying out operations at Hobart Airport, prepare a process to: (a) identify proposed changes that fall within subsection 9(5), namely changes to procedures for biosecurity risk management, changes to facilities or amenities available to biosecurity officials, changes affecting the ability to identify biosecurity risks, changes affecting the ability to inform biosecurity officials of risks, and procedural changes managing other biosecurity risk factors; and (b) give the Agriculture Department reasonable written notice of such proposals (s9(4)-(5)).

• Define in internal policy what will count as "reasonable notice" for different classes of proposed changes, for example: minor administrative adjustments may warrant two weeks’ notice, significant changes to facility layouts or to screening procedures may require 30-60 days’ notice. The instrument leaves "reasonable" open; an internal standard will assist in demonstrating good faith compliance.

3. Operational handling for baggage at the designated biosecurity entry point (s8)

• Ensure that baggage arriving at Hobart Airport International Terminal is treated in accordance with the instrument’s designation of the baggage area as a biosecurity entry point (s8, table). The instrument’s note to s8 cross-references section 147 of the Act, which requires goods mentioned in the table that are to be unloaded from an aircraft to be brought to a biosecurity entry point as soon as practicable. Practical steps include:

  • Configuring baggage handling and delivery workflows so that unloaded international baggage is routed to the Hobart Airport International Terminal baggage biosecurity entry point for inspection or processing as required.

  • Training ground handling staff and baggage operators to recognise which arrivals are subject to biosecurity processing at the designated baggage area.

  • Maintaining records of baggage processed through the biosecurity entry point, including dates, flight numbers and handlers, to evidence compliance.

4. Identify and plan for exceptions, notably live horses (s6)

• The instrument explicitly excludes live horses from the set of goods for which Hobart Airport is a first point of entry (s6). If your operation involves the importation or transit of live horses, confirm the applicable first point of entry determination that applies to live horses, and obtain departmental guidance on permitted entry points, special facility requirements, and notification procedures.

5. Recordkeeping and internal audit

• Keep contemporaneous records of notices given to the Agriculture Department, including dates, recipients, and copies of the written notice. Although the instrument does not state recordkeeping requirements, documented evidence of timely written notice will be important if the Department later questions compliance.

• Periodically audit your internal monitoring arrangements to ensure the responsible person is aware of transactions and proposals that could trigger notification duties under s9, for example corporate restructures, changes in ground handling operators, or proposals to reconfigure passenger terminals.

6. Coordinate with the Agriculture Department proactively

• Because the instrument is silent on departmental timelines for response, arrange pre-notification discussions with relevant departmental officers where significant changes are proposed. Early engagement will reduce the risk of later objections or operational disruption.

7. Check for other instruments and the Biosecurity Act 2015 provisions

• The instrument cross-references several sections of the Act (s4 and the notes to s6-s8). Practitioners should consult the Biosecurity Act 2015 for the content of sections 147, 173, 174 and 238 and any other Act provisions relevant to arrivals, prohibited goods, exposed goods orders and enforcement. Compliance under this determination needs to be integrated with statutory obligations under the Act.

8. Address ambiguity proactively in contracts and leases

• Where leases or operational contracts exist, insert clauses assigning responsibility for compliance with notification duties, and for liaising with the Agriculture Department. The instrument places obligations on an owner, a lessee and persons responsible for operations; contractual clarity will prevent disputes about who provides the written notice.

By following these concrete steps , adopting notice templates, confirming departmental contacts, routing baggage to the designated International Terminal facility, recording notices and maintaining internal audit trails , owners, lessees and operationally responsible parties can align practices with the instrument’s requirements. The instrument’s lack of prescriptive timeframes and departmental procedures means that early and written engagement with the Agriculture Department is a practical compliance priority.