Biosecurity (First Point of Entry—Horn Island Airport) Determination 2019

This instrument, the Biosecurity (First Point of Entry,Horn Island Airport) Determination 2019, designates Horn Island Airport as a statutory first point of entry for certain biosecurity purposes under the Biosecurity Act 2015. It was made by an authorised delegate of the Director of Biosecurity and is expressed to be made under subsection 223(1) of the Act (see s 3). The whole instrument commenced on 16 June 2019 (see s 2).

Mechanically, the determination does the following directly from its operative provisions:

• Declares Horn Island Airport to be a first point of entry for aircraft generally (s 5).
• Declares Horn Island Airport to be a first point of entry for three specified classes of goods: baggage, dead crustacea, and waste (s 6). The instrument expressly notes it is not a first point of entry for other goods (note to s 6).
• Designates a specified area at Horn Island Airport as a biosecurity entry point for a specific class of goods: baggage must be handled at the Horn Island Airport International Inspection Point (s 8 and the table in s 8).
• Declares there is no biosecurity entry point for aircraft at Horn Island Airport under this determination (s 7 and the note to s 7). The instrument records the legal consequence from the Act: if there is no biosecurity entry point for aircraft at a first point of entry the statutory requirement to bring aircraft to such a point does not apply (note to s 7, citing s 238 of the Act).
• Imposes ongoing procedural conditions on owners, lessees and persons or bodies responsible for operations at the airport to notify the Department of Agriculture in specified circumstances: business-entity changes (owners and lessees must give written notice as soon as practicable where they become aware such a change has occurred or will occur) and proposed operational changes that may affect biosecurity arrangements (operators must give the Department reasonable written notice) (s 9(1)-(5)).

The instrument uses and defines a few terms for its own purposes. It adopts the Act’s definitions for aircraft and goods but also provides local definitions to tailor the scope: "Act" means the Biosecurity Act 2015; "aircraft" references the Act’s definition; "goods" means goods as defined in s 19 of the Act that are subject to biosecurity control or subject to an exposed goods order; "waste" is defined as goods that are subject to biosecurity control and intended by the person in charge of the aircraft to be disposed of (s 4).

The instrument is narrow in scope. It sets a first point of entry status for Horn Island Airport and identifies one specific biosecurity entry point for baggage, but it does not create biosecurity entry points for other classes of goods identified as first point goods (dead crustacea and waste) nor for aircraft themselves. It also imposes notice conditions relating to business and operational changes at the airport. The Act’s substantive operational obligations that follow from these designations (for example the requirement to bring goods or aircraft to a biosecurity entry point) are referenced in the instrument’s notes (notably s 147 and s 238 of the Act), but the instrument itself does not enumerate the broader enforcement regime; it is made under the Act’s delegation power (s 3). The instrument is the procedural and territorial vehicle that ties Horn Island Airport into the statutory architecture of the Biosecurity Act 2015 in the limited ways set out above.

The instrument is compact and relies heavily on the statutory architecture of the Biosecurity Act 2015. Its principal concepts and the way it uses them are:

• First point of entry: The instrument designates Horn Island Airport as a "first point of entry" for specified subjects. For aircraft generally, the airport is a first point of entry (s 5). For goods, the instrument narrows the first-point designation to baggage, dead crustacea and waste (s 6). The instrument includes an explicit note that Horn Island Airport is not a first point of entry for other goods (note to s 6). A first point of entry is a statutory status under the Act that interacts with obligations elsewhere in the Act (the instrument cites s 173, s 174, s 147 and s 238 in its notes).

• Biosecurity entry point: Distinct from being a first point of entry, a "biosecurity entry point" is a spatial point or area at a first point of entry where certain statutory actions must occur. The instrument designates the Horn Island Airport International Inspection Point specifically as the biosecurity entry point for baggage (s 8 and the table). The instrument explicitly states it does not designate any area of Horn Island Airport as a biosecurity entry point for aircraft (s 7, note). It also states it does not designate biosecurity entry points for the other classes of goods for which Horn Island Airport is a first point of entry; the consequence is that some statutory requirements (such as the obligation to bring goods to a biosecurity entry point before unloading) do not apply for those classes (note to s 8).

• Class-based treatment of goods: The instrument treats goods disaggregated by class. "Goods" is defined as per s 19 of the Act but limited to goods that are subject to biosecurity control or covered by an exposed goods order (s 4). Within that frame, the instrument singles out baggage, dead crustacea and waste as distinct categories for first point designation (s 6), then selects only one of those categories (baggage) for a specific biosecurity entry point (s 8). The instrument defines "waste" in a manner targeted to aircraft carriage: goods subject to biosecurity control that the person in charge of the aircraft intends to dispose of (s 4).

• Notification and change-management conditions: The instrument imposes ongoing administrative duties on owners, lessees and operators within Horn Island Airport. Owners and lessees must notify the Agriculture Department in writing "as soon as practicable" after becoming aware of a change in the business entity operating the airport or a biosecurity entry point (s 9(2)-(3)). Persons or bodies responsible for airport operations must give "reasonable" written notice of proposed changes to operations that affect biosecurity procedures, facilities, personnel access or the identification and communication of biosecurity risks (s 9(4)-(5)). The instrument lists the kinds of changes that trigger the reasonable-notice duty, capturing procedural, facility, identification and communication aspects of biosecurity operations (s 9(5)(a)-(e)).

The instrument identifies specific classes of persons and entities that bear duties or that will be directly affected by how Horn Island Airport is treated under the Biosecurity Act 2015. From the instrument itself, those parties are:

• Owners of Horn Island Airport: The instrument places explicit duties on the owner or, where there is more than one, an owner, to notify the Agriculture Department in writing "as soon as practicable" if they become aware of a change to the business entity operating Horn Island Airport or to a biosecurity entry point at the airport (s 9(2)). In practice the "owner" in the instrument is the legal owner of the airport infrastructure; the instrument does not define further but speaks of "the owner" in mandatory terms.

• Lessees of Horn Island Airport: Similarly, the lessee (or, if more than one, a lessee) has the same duty to notify the Agriculture Department in writing "as soon as practicable" upon becoming aware of a change to the business entity operating the airport or a biosecurity entry point (s 9(3)). This captures concessionaires or long-term tenants who exercise part of the airport’s operation.

• Persons or bodies responsible for carrying out operations at Horn Island Airport: The instrument requires any person or body responsible for airport operations, who proposes to make an operational change described in s 9(5), to give the Agriculture Department reasonable written notice of the proposed change (s 9(4)). This category will encompass airport operators, ground handlers, contracting service providers and potentially the airport’s operator company or its delegates, insofar as they are the entities carrying out operations.

• Airlines and the person in charge of an aircraft: Section 5 makes Horn Island Airport a first point of entry for aircraft generally. The instrument’s notes invoke the Act’s consequence that if there is a biosecurity entry point for aircraft at a first point of entry an aircraft must be brought there (note to s 7 referring to s 238 of the Act). However, because the instrument does not designate any biosecurity entry point for aircraft at Horn Island Airport (s 7), the statutory aircraft-to-entry-point requirement does not apply in that specific local context. Aircraft operators and the "person in charge" of such aircraft are affected to the degree the instrument designates the airport a first point of entry, and by the distinct treatment of particular goods aboard aircraft (see below).

• Persons handling goods: The instrument makes Horn Island Airport a first point of entry for three categories of goods: baggage, dead crustacea, and waste (s 6). For baggage specifically, the instrument designates the Horn Island Airport International Inspection Point as the biosecurity entry point (s 8 and the table), and the instrument’s notes draw the reader’s attention to the Act’s requirement that goods to be unloaded must be brought to a biosecurity entry point as soon as practicable (note to s 8, citing s 147 of the Act). As such, baggage handlers, ground staff, customs brokers and agents who unload or process baggage will be directly governed by that requirement in practice. For dead crustacea and waste, though they are first point goods (s 6), the instrument does not designate a biosecurity entry point for those goods (note to s 8); therefore the s 147 requirement to bring goods to a biosecurity entry point as soon as practicable does not apply to unloading those classes at Horn Island Airport.

This instrument imposes a limited set of statutory duties and creates a small set of operational rights by designation. Everything below is grounded in the instrument’s text.

Key duties

• Obligation on owners to notify the Agriculture Department of business-entity changes: If an owner (or an owner where multiple owners exist) becomes aware that there has been, or will be, a change to the business entity operating Horn Island Airport or a biosecurity entry point at the airport, the owner must give the Agriculture Department written notice "as soon as practicable" after becoming aware (s 9(2)). The duty is triggered by knowledge of an actual or prospective change.

• Parallel obligation on lessees: The same duty applies to a lessee (or a lessee where multiple lessees exist) (s 9(3)). The instrument therefore reaches both property owners and tenants with written notice requirements.

• Duty on persons or bodies responsible for operations to give reasonable notice of proposed operational changes: Where a person or body responsible for carrying out operations at Horn Island Airport proposes to make a change outlined in s 9(5), that person or body must give the Agriculture Department reasonable written notice of the proposed change (s 9(4)). The list of changes in s 9(5) is the operative trigger set and captures procedural, facility and communication changes that may affect biosecurity risk management.

• Duty to deliver notices in writing to the Agriculture Department: The instrument repeatedly mandates written notice to the Agriculture Department (s 9(2)-(4)). The means of giving notice is therefore not oral or informal; the instrument prescribes writing.

• Operational duty implied by designation and by the Act for certain goods: By designating baggage as a first point of entry and designating the Horn Island Airport International Inspection Point as the biosecurity entry point for baggage (s 8 and the table), the instrument invokes the Act’s operational regime. The instrument’s note expressly points to s 147 of the Act, which the instrument says governs the requirement that goods to be unloaded at a first point of entry must be brought to a biosecurity entry point as soon as practicable (note to s 8). Therefore baggage that is to be unloaded must be brought to the designated International Inspection Point as soon as practicable.

Key rights and situational consequences

The instrument itself does not specify penalty amounts, criminal offences, infringement regimes or administrative sanctioning mechanisms. It is a determination made under the Biosecurity Act 2015 (s 3) and therefore sits within the Act’s broader enforcement and compliance framework. The instrument contains no express enforcement subsections, penalty schedules or infringement notices. Everything stated below is an effect of the instrument as it integrates with the Act and is grounded in the instrument’s text.

• No penalties in the instrument: There are no provisions in this instrument that set out fines, imprisonment, enforceable undertakings, infringement notices, or administrative penalties. The instrument imposes mandatory duties (for example, written notification duties in s 9), but it does not itself specify sanctions for failure to comply.

• Enforcement to be sought under the Act: Because the instrument is made under subsection 223(1) of the Biosecurity Act 2015 (s 3), enforcement would proceed under the Act’s mechanisms rather than under any enforcement mechanism contained within the instrument. The instrument’s notes refer to several sections of the Act for operational effect (for example s 147 and s 238 in the notes to ss 8 and 7 respectively). Accordingly, any contravention of duties that engage the Act’s enforcement provisions will likely be dealt with under the Act’s general enforcement provisions rather than by this determination creating a separate enforcement regime.

• Practical enforcement pathways that the instrument enables: By designating Horn Island Airport as a first point of entry for aircraft and for particular goods (ss 5-6), the instrument shapes where statutory powers and duties under the Act become operational. For example, the instrument’s designation of a biosecurity entry point for baggage invokes the Act’s rule that goods to be unloaded must be brought to a biosecurity entry point as soon as practicable (note to s 8 citing s 147). The Act’s corresponding compliance and enforcement powers would therefore be the vehicle for ensuring those obligations are observed. The instrument does not itself define what constitutes compliance beyond the written-notice requirements.

• Administrative risk and ambiguity in temporal standards: The instrument’s use of "as soon as practicable" and "reasonable notice" (s 9(2)-(4)) creates a compliance standard that is fact-specific. The lack of numerical timeframes increases the risk that actors may be uncertain about when they will be considered non-compliant. Any enforcement under the Act will likely assess whether a person acted with the requisite timeliness according to those contextual standards.

This determination interacts with the Biosecurity Act 2015 by design and reference. The instrument repeatedly directs readers to specific sections of the Act for definitional and operational effect; it does not purport to be a freestanding legal regime. The interactions that the instrument articulates are as follows, grounded in the instrument’s own cross-references.

• Made under the Act: The instrument is made under subsection 223(1) of the Biosecurity Act 2015 (s 3). That statutory provenance means the instrument’s legal effect is as a determination under the Act, not as independent primary legislation.

• Reliance on the Act for definitions and operative meaning: The instrument imports the Act’s definitional framework. It notes that a number of expressions are defined in s 9 of the Act (s 4 note). It defines "aircraft" by reference to the Act’s definition and defines "goods" by reference to s 19 of the Act (s 4). This ensures the instrument’s scope tracks the Act’s substantive definitions.

• Interaction with Act sections on prohibited and conditionally non-prohibited goods: The instrument’s note to s 6 directs attention to ss 173 and 174 of the Act concerning prohibited goods and conditionally non‑prohibited goods. This indicates that while the instrument designates first point of entry status for certain goods, the Act’s prohibitions or conditions on specific goods remain applicable and are relevant to whether goods may be brought into the first point of entry.

• Invocation of duties to bring goods or aircraft to biosecurity entry points: The instrument’s notes explicitly reference the Act’s mechanisms that require movement of aircraft or goods to biosecurity entry points. The note to s 7 refers to s 238 of the Act to explain that an aircraft must be brought to a biosecurity entry point at a first point of entry if there is a biosecurity entry point for aircraft at that first point of entry. Because this instrument expressly does not designate any area at Horn Island Airport as a biosecurity entry point for aircraft (s 7), the consequence is that the Act’s s 238 requirement is not triggered at Horn Island Airport for aircraft. Similarly, the note to s 8 refers to s 147 of the Act, which requires goods to be brought to a biosecurity entry point as soon as practicable where they are to be unloaded at a first point of entry. The instrument designates a specific biosecurity entry point for baggage, thereby triggering the Act’s s 147 obligation for baggage. For dead crustacea and waste, although they are first point goods at Horn Island Airport (s 6), the instrument does not designate a biosecurity entry point and therefore the s 147 obligation does not apply to their unloading at Horn Island Airport (note to s 8).

The instrument contains an internal commencement and amendment table and an explicit note on that table. The material in the instrument concerning amendment history and commencement is limited and specific.

• Commencement: The instrument specifies that "the whole of this instrument" commenced on 16 June 2019 (s 2 and the commencement table). The instrument’s text states the table relates only to the instrument "as originally made" and will not be updated to reflect later amendments in published versions (s 2(1)-(2) and the note in the table). That means the instrument’s original commencement date is fixed and recorded as 16 June 2019.

• No amendments recorded within the instrument: The instrument itself does not contain any later entries in the commencement table, nor does it include subsequent amendment provisions. There are no schedules, amending clauses or later commencement variations within the instrument as presented. The instrument’s note to the commencement table states that the table relates only to the instrument as originally made and will not be amended in published versions to deal with later amendments, which implies that any later amendments (if they exist) would need to be found in the legislative database or the legal register rather than within the instrument text.

• Instrument provenance and date of execution: The front matter of the instrument records the delegate who made the determination: Dean Merrilees, Assistant Secretary, Compliance Division, Department of Agriculture, dated 7 June 2019. The date of execution is therefore 7 June 2019, with the instrument’s commencement stated as 16 June 2019 (front matter and s 2).

• No repeal or expiry provisions contained in the instrument: The instrument contains no express sunset, expiry or repeal clause within its text. It remains effective from its commencement date until revoked, amended or replaced by further determinations or changes in the Act. Any revocation or amendment would require a subsequent instrument made under the Act; such changes are not recorded here.

• Note on published versions: The instrument contains an administrative note that the commencement table will not be amended in published versions to reflect later amendments (s 2(2)). This is a publishing convention rather than a substantive legal point, but it is useful for readers relying on parliamentary or legislative databases to remember to consult amendment histories outside the instrument.

The instrument does not record any litigation history. It contains no references to judicial decisions, no internal summaries of case law and no mention of disputes or legal challenges. The instrument is a statutory determination and not itself a case or judicial instrument; therefore it does not include adjudicative material.

Practical implications of the absence of litigation history in the instrument:

• No authoritative judicial interpretations recorded in the instrument: Because the instrument contains no cases or judicial pronouncements, its provisions stand as administrative determinations whose interpretation in contentious contexts would be resolved by the usual legal processes under the Biosecurity Act 2015 and applicable administrative law principles. The instrument offers no guidance from courts on how its "as soon as practicable" or "reasonable notice" standards should be applied at Horn Island Airport.

• Reliance on the Act for dispute resolution: Disputes about compliance with obligations arising from this determination would be litigated, if contested, under the Biosecurity Act 2015 and associated administrative law. The instrument itself does not set out an internal dispute mechanism nor does it identify an appeals pathway; any review or appeal will proceed under the Act or under general administrative review processes.

• Practical advice for practitioners: In the absence of established litigation, obligations and ambiguous standards in the instrument are best treated conservatively: maintain contemporaneous written records of notices, give as prompt a notice as is feasible in the circumstances and seek clarification from the Agriculture Department where the appropriate timing or content of notices is uncertain. Those practical measures are responsive to the instrument’s written-notice duties and the fact that interpretation of the temporal standards will depend on context.

• No recorded judicial interpretation of the spatial designations: The instrument’s limited spatial designations , for example, the designation of the Horn Island Airport International Inspection Point as the biosecurity entry point for baggage and the absence of a biosecurity entry point for aircraft , have not been judicially considered within the instrument itself. Any legal contest about whether a particular area constitutes the International Inspection Point or whether certain goods should be treated as baggage, waste or dead crustacea in a particular factual matrix would be matters for the Act and possibly for administrative decisions that could be subject to review.

This instrument is brief but contains several potential operational and legal pitfalls that arise from how it links spatial designations, class-based treatment of goods and open-ended temporal standards. Everything below is traceable to the instrument’s text.

• Distinction between first point of entry and biosecurity entry point: The instrument designates Horn Island Airport as a first point of entry for aircraft generally (s 5) and for the three classes of goods (s 6). However, it designates only one biosecurity entry point: the Horn Island Airport International Inspection Point for baggage (s 8, table). The instrument expressly does not designate any biosecurity entry point for aircraft (s 7). Practitioners should not conflate the two concepts. The Act’s requirements to bring aircraft or goods to a biosecurity entry point only arise where a biosecurity entry point is designated; the instrument repeatedly acknowledges this (note to s 7 referencing s 238 and note to s 8 referencing s 147). The risk is operational confusion where parties assume the Act’s location-specific duties apply simply because the airport is a first point of entry.

• Baggage is treated differently to dead crustacea and waste: Horn Island Airport is a first point of entry for baggage, dead crustacea and waste (s 6). Yet the instrument designates a biosecurity entry point only for baggage (s 8), and includes a note that the s 147 requirement to bring goods to an entry point as soon as practicable does not apply to the other two classes (note to s 8). That means baggage must be brought to the International Inspection Point if it is to be unloaded, but dead crustacea and waste do not have the same prescribed unloading location under this instrument. This difference is a likely source of operational error: handlers may assume all first point goods must be taken to a biosecurity entry point when the instrument creates a more granular rule.

• Ambiguity of temporal standards: The instrument uses "as soon as practicable" for the owner/lessee notice obligations and "reasonable notice" for proposed operational changes (s 9(2)-(4)). These standards are fact-sensitive and unspecified, making compliance timing uncertain. That uncertainty is a compliance risk because failure to provide notice in a timeframe later judged to be impracticable or unreasonable could expose parties to enforcement under the Act. The instrument does not provide guidance on benchmarks for "reasonable" or "practicable" timeframes.

• Writing requirement without address or means: The instrument requires notices to be given "in writing" to the Agriculture Department (s 9(2)-(4)) but does not specify the department contact point, postal address, email address or the official to whom notices must be sent. This creates a procedural vulnerability: sending a notice to an incorrect address, or failing to retain evidence of delivery, may cause disputes about whether the notice was given. Practitioners should therefore ensure they obtain an acknowledgement of receipt and retain copies.

This section sets out practical, source-grounded steps and record-keeping suggestions to comply with the instrument’s requirements. All duties and obligations cited below derive from the instrument’s text and the cross-references the instrument makes to the Biosecurity Act 2015.

1. Confirm current designations and scope

   • Record and retain the determination: Ensure Horn Island Airport’s status under this instrument is recorded in the airport’s compliance registry. The instrument designates the airport a first point of entry for aircraft generally (s 5) and for baggage, dead crustacea and waste (s 6), and designates the Horn Island Airport International Inspection Point as the biosecurity entry point for baggage (s 8). Keep a dated copy of the determination accessible to operations, ground handling and compliance teams.

2. Baggage handling processes

   • Bring baggage to the designated biosecurity entry point when unloading: If an aircraft arrives and will unload baggage, ensure baggage is brought to the Horn Island Airport International Inspection Point as soon as practicable, in accordance with s 8 and the instrument’s note referencing s 147 of the Act. Operational checklists, signage and staff training should reflect that baggage unloading routes lead to the designated inspection point and that this must occur promptly.

3. Handling dead crustacea and waste

   • Recognise different statutory treatment: Although dead crustacea and waste are first point goods at the airport (s 6), the instrument does not designate a biosecurity entry point for those goods (note to s 8). That means the Act’s s 147 requirement to bring goods to a biosecurity entry point as soon as practicable does not, under this instrument, apply to unloading those goods at Horn Island. However, you should: (a) maintain clear internal procedures for handling, segregation and containment of such goods; and (b) engage the Agriculture Department to confirm any preferred operational arrangements, since the instrument requires notice of changes affecting biosecurity procedures and facilities (s 9(5)).

4. Notification obligations , owners and lessees

   • Prepare to notify in writing "as soon as practicable" of business-entity changes: Owners (s 9(2)) and lessees (s 9(3)) must give the Agriculture Department written notice as soon as practicable after becoming aware that there has been, or will be, a change to the business entity operating Horn Island Airport or a biosecurity entry point at Horn Island Airport. To comply: (a) include a checklist item in transactional and corporate governance processes to identify when such a change occurs or is likely; (b) draft template written notices that include the nature of the change, effective date, contact details for the incoming entity and any transitional arrangements; and (c) retain evidence of notice delivery and any departmental acknowledgement. Because the instrument uses "as soon as practicable" the timing should be prompt and documented.