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

The instrument organises its rules around four core legal concepts taken from the Biosecurity Act 2015 and implemented at Perth Airport:

1. First point of entry designation. The instrument declares Perth Airport to be a first point of entry for aircraft generally (s 5) and for all goods (s 6). Under the Act, being a first point of entry activates particular Act-based obligations and powers at that location; the instrument performs the localising function by naming Perth Airport.

2. Biosecurity entry point designation. A first point of entry can have one or more biosecurity entry points for specific types of goods or for aircraft. The instrument uses that mechanism to designate particular areas within Perth Airport as biosecurity entry points for defined goods (s 8). The legal consequence, as noted in the instrument, is that where a biosecurity entry point is designated for goods then s 147 of the Act requires goods unloaded from an aircraft to be brought to that biosecurity entry point as soon as practicable.

3. Scope limits for aircraft. The instrument explicitly states that it does not designate any area of Perth Airport as a biosecurity entry point for aircraft (s 7). The instrument notes the link to the Act’s requirement 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 the aircraft at that first point of entry (the instrument cites s 238 of the Act). By not establishing aircraft biosecurity entry points at Perth Airport, the instrument leaves that specific requirement inapplicable at Perth Airport under the terms of this instrument.

4. Procedural conditions on airport owners, lessees and operators. Section 9 imposes notice obligations on owners and lessees to notify the Agriculture Department in writing, as soon as practicable, if they become aware of changes to the business entity operating Perth Airport or a biosecurity entry point at Perth Airport (ss 9(2)-(3)). It also imposes on a person or body responsible for carrying out operations at Perth Airport an obligation to give the Agriculture Department reasonable written notice of proposed changes of certain kinds (s 9(4)), with s 9(5) listing the types of changes that trigger that obligation. The triggering categories include changes to biosecurity procedures, facilities or amenities for biosecurity officials and human biosecurity officers, procedures affecting risk identification and communication, and procedures for managing other factors affecting biosecurity risk (s 9(5)(a)-(e)).

Definitions in the instrument are limited and cross‑referenced to the Act. The instrument defines “Act” to mean the Biosecurity Act 2015 and uses the Act’s definitions for “aircraft” (s 4, note that section 9 of the Act defines aircraft) and “goods” (s 4, note that s 19 of the Act defines goods). The instrument therefore relies on the Act for detailed definitional scope.

Finally, the instrument includes explanatory notes that point users to other provisions of the Act that determine whether particular goods are prohibited or conditionally non‑prohibited at a first point of entry (notes to s 6 referencing ss 173 and 174); and to s 147 regarding the requirement to bring unloaded goods to a biosecurity entry point. Those notes frame the instrument as part of the Act’s wider statutory architecture rather than as a freestanding regime.

The instrument identifies three categories of parties that have duties or whose conduct will be directly affected:

• Owners of Perth Airport. Section 9(2) requires an owner, or if more than one owner any owner, to give the Agriculture Department written notice as soon as practicable if they become aware that there has been or will be a change to the business entity operating Perth Airport, or operating a biosecurity entry point at Perth Airport. That imposes an on‑going administrative monitoring and notification obligation on owners insofar as they are “aware” of such changes.

• Lessees of Perth Airport. Section 9(3) imposes an equivalent notice obligation on a lessee (or if multiple lessees any lessee) if they become aware of the same category of change regarding the business entity operating Perth Airport or a biosecurity entry point.

• Persons or bodies responsible for carrying out operations at Perth Airport. Section 9(4) requires a person or body that is responsible for carrying out operations at Perth Airport to give the Agriculture Department reasonable written notice of any proposed changes listed in s 9(5). The listed changes include procedural and facility changes that affect biosecurity risk identification, communication, response capability or management.

Other parties affected by the instrument’s designations include:

• Air carriers and aircraft operators. Although the instrument does not designate any biosecurity entry points for aircraft (s 7), it does make Perth Airport a first point of entry for aircraft generally (s 5). The instrument cites s 238 of the Act which, if relevant at other first points of entry, requires aircraft to be brought to a biosecurity entry point at a first point of entry if such a point exists. At Perth Airport, however, no aircraft biosecurity entry points are designated by this instrument, so that Act‑level requirement is not engaged via this instrument for aircraft at Perth.

• Importers, freight forwarders, ground handlers and international passengers. Section 6 makes Perth Airport a first point of entry for all goods. Section 8 designates particular locations within the airport as the biosecurity entry points for baggage and for live horses. The instrument expressly notes that where an aircraft arrives carrying designated goods that are to be unloaded, those goods must be brought to the designated biosecurity entry point as soon as practicable (note to s 8 referencing s 147 of the Act). Operators involved in unloading, handling and transporting those designated goods will therefore face operational requirements to present goods at the designated areas.

• Biosecurity officials and human biosecurity officers. Section 9(5)(b) and the instrument’s general structure recognise that officials need facilities and amenities to perform functions and exercise powers under the Act. The requirement that proposed changes to facilities or amenities be the subject of reasonable notice to the Agriculture Department is a procedural protection for those officials and affects the bodies that control such facilities.

Who decides and who pays:

• The Agriculture Department is the recipient of notices and therefore the administrative decision recipient. The instrument does not specify fees or charges, but it places the compliance burden for notification and operational coordination on airport owners, lessees, and operators. Those parties will bear the administrative cost of monitoring, preparing and delivering written notices and of making operational arrangements to ensure goods designated in s 8 are brought to the specified biosecurity entry points as required by the Act.

• The instrument itself does not create an explicit enforcement body; enforcement is governed by the Biosecurity Act 2015 and the operational role of the Agriculture Department as reflected in the notice obligations of s 9.

Geographic and commodity limits:

• Geographic scope is Perth Airport and the specific terminal areas listed in s 8 for baggage and the entity “QANTAS CTO” for live horses. The instrument explicitly states it does not designate biosecurity entry points for other goods for which Perth Airport is a first point of entry, and therefore the s 147 obligation to bring goods to a biosecurity entry point does not apply to those other goods in respect of Perth Airport under this determination (note 2 to s 8). This creates a split: for baggage and live horses the designated areas and the s 147 consequence apply; for other goods at Perth Airport the instrument leaves the s 147 consequence out.

The instrument itself is primarily directive and procedural. It creates a set of duties and identifies certain consequent obligations under the Biosecurity Act 2015. Key duties and operational rights flow from the instrument’s provisions:

Duties created by the instrument

• Duty to treat Perth Airport as a first point of entry for aircraft and for goods. The instrument declares Perth Airport to be a first point of entry for aircraft generally (s 5) and for all goods (s 6). The instrument does not itself spell out additional duties arriving from those declarations, but it situates the airport within the Act’s first point of entry regime.

• Duty to deliver specific goods to designated biosecurity entry points. Section 8 designates specific areas as biosecurity entry points for the goods listed. The instrument references s 147 of the Act and notes that goods mentioned in the table that are to be unloaded from an aircraft must be brought to the biosecurity entry point for those goods as soon as practicable. Practically this imposes an operational duty on airlines, ground handlers, cargo handlers, and importers to ensure baggage and live horses are moved to the specified areas once unloaded.

• Duty on owners to notify changes to business entity operators. Under s 9(2) an owner (or any one owner where more than one) must, on becoming aware of a change to the business entity operating Perth Airport or a biosecurity entry point, give the Agriculture Department written notice as soon as practicable after becoming aware.

• Duty on lessees to notify changes to business entity operators. Section 9(3) imposes the same “as soon as practicable” written notice obligation on a lessee (or any one lessee where multiple).

• Duty on persons or bodies responsible for operations to give reasonable notice of proposed changes. Section 9(4) requires reasonable written notice to the Agriculture Department where an operation-related person or body proposes to make changes enumerated in s 9(5), including changes to procedures for biosecurity measures, facilities and amenities for officials, and procedures affecting the identification and communication of biosecurity risks.

Rights and administrative relationships in the instrument

• The instrument does not create substantive private rights or remedies within its text. It sets out administrative duties that direct particular actors to inform the Agriculture Department. The instrument also references statutory duties and powers in the Biosecurity Act 2015 (for example, s 147 and s 238) that create operative consequences for goods and aircraft when biosecurity entry points are designated by the instrument.

• The Agriculture Department is the recipient of notices. The instrument does not specify discretion or decision‑making powers exercised by the Agriculture Department in response to notices; it merely imposes the obligation to notify.

Operational effects and interplay with Act obligations

• Where the instrument designates a biosecurity entry point for a class of goods, the instrument triggers the Act’s requirement that goods unloaded from an aircraft at that first point of entry must be brought to the biosecurity entry point as soon as practicable (note to s 8 referencing s 147). The method and timing are therefore shaped by the Act but are triggered by the instrument’s local designations.

• Where the instrument does not designate an aircraft biosecurity entry point for Perth Airport, the Act requirement to bring aircraft to a biosecurity entry point at a first point of entry where such a point exists (cited in note to s 7 referencing s 238) does not apply at Perth Airport by virtue of this instrument.

Formality, timing and standards

• Notices must be in writing (ss 9(2)-(4)). The instrument uses two timing standards: “as soon as practicable” for owners and lessees notifying changes they become aware of (ss 9(2)-(3)); and “reasonable notice” for persons or bodies proposing to make certain operational changes (s 9(4)). The instrument does not define those temporal standards; they are fact‑sensitive and will depend on context.

• The instrument specifies the content scope for the reasonable notice obligation by listing the types of changes that require notice (s 9(5)(a)-(e)).

No penalties or appeal rights in the instrument

• The instrument does not, within its text, prescribe penalties, infringement notices, or appeal mechanisms for failure to comply with its notice provisions. Enforcement, sanctioning and any appeal procedures remain matters for the Biosecurity Act 2015 and associated regulations, as referenced by the instrument’s authority under s 223(1).

The instrument itself does not set out penalty provisions, enforcement mechanisms or appeal pathways. Instead, it is made under subsection 223(1) of the Biosecurity Act 2015 (s 3), and it references the Act’s operational sections where substantive powers and obligations reside (for example ss 147, 173, 174 and 238 are cited in the instrument’s notes). From the instrument’s text the following enforcement architecture and limits are visible:

• The instrument relies on the Biosecurity Act 2015 for enforcement. Because the instrument is a determination under the Act, any sanctions, compliance notices, infringement provisions or criminal offences applicable to compliance with the Act’s requirements will be governed by the Act and regulations made under it. The instrument does not itself create a bespoke enforcement regime.

• The instrument places mandatory written-notice duties on owners, lessees and operational controllers (s 9). Failure to comply with those duties may, as a legal matter, expose the relevant party to whatever enforcement tools the Biosecurity Act 2015 provides for failure to comply with conditions attached to determinations or with Act obligations. The instrument does not state specific penalties, so any reader must refer to the Act to identify the applicable civil or criminal consequences and the enforcement forms available to the Agriculture Department.

• Operational enforcement for goods at designated biosecurity entry points. The instrument’s designation of biosecurity entry points for baggage and live horses (s 8) interacts with s 147 of the Act (cited in the instrument’s note). Section 147, by the instrument’s own account, requires goods that are to be unloaded from an aircraft and are covered by a biosecurity entry point designation to be brought to that point as soon as practicable. Non‑compliance with s 147’s requirement, where engaged, will therefore be enforced under the Act’s enforcement framework, not by the instrument.

• Administrative oversight by the Agriculture Department. The instrument places the Agriculture Department in the position of recipient of required notices under s 9. That creates an administrative monitoring function; the Department is the entity that will be informed of and can act on changes or proposed changes that may have biosecurity implications. How the Agriculture Department exercises enforcement or regulatory follow up is not specified in the instrument.

• No infractions or civil fines specified in the instrument. Because the instrument is silent on specified penalties, no specific monetary fines or infringement notice amounts are imposed by the instrument itself. The applicable penalties, if any, for failure to notify or to meet the “as soon as practicable” or “reasonable notice” standards must be sought in the Biosecurity Act and in any regulations or statutory instruments made under it.

Practical implication for compliance and enforcement risk

• Those subject to the notice obligations should assume that failure to comply with the written notification or reasonable notice obligations could be reviewed or acted on by the Agriculture Department under the Act’s enforcement powers. The instrument’s structure places procedural duties on airport owners, lessees and operators that can be observed and documented. Creating processes to generate written notices and to record their delivery will materially reduce enforcement risk, even though the instrument does not specify enforcement measures.

• For persons handling designated goods, operational controls that ensure baggage and live horses are routed to the specified biosecurity entry points will be the primary mitigant against enforcement action triggered by the Act’s s 147 obligation referred to in the instrument.

The instrument is embedded in the statutory scheme of the Biosecurity Act 2015 by explicit references and by the authority under which it is made. The instrument both invokes and depends on several provisions of the Act. The instrument’s internal notes identify the points of interaction; the following summarises those interactions as stated in the instrument:

• Authority and enabling power. The instrument is made under subsection 223(1) of the Biosecurity Act 2015 (s 3). That is the enabling provision that allows the Minister or relevant authority to make determinations such as this. The instrument does not purport to replace or alter the Act’s substantive default rules; it operates within the Act’s delegated power structure.

• Definitions and cross‑references. The instrument defines “Act” to mean the Biosecurity Act 2015 and relies on the Act for definitions of “aircraft” (see s 4 referencing s 9 of the Act) and “goods” (s 4 referencing s 19 of the Act). This means the instrument’s scope is dependent on how the Act defines these concepts. Any change in interpretation or amendment of those Act definitions will change how the instrument’s designations reach specific objects.

• Interaction with goods prohibition and conditional regimes. The instrument notes that for matters relating to whether particular goods may be brought into a first point of entry one should see ss 173 and 174 of the Act (note to s 6). The instrument therefore coexists with the Act’s substantive rules on prohibited goods and conditionally non‑prohibited goods; the instrument does not itself determine whether particular goods are prohibited or require conditions for entry.

• Interaction with unloading and biosecurity entry point obligations. The instrument’s note to s 8 references s 147 of the Act, which the instrument identifies as the section that requires that goods unloaded from an aircraft at a first point of entry must be brought to a biosecurity entry point if one has been designated for the goods. The instrument’s designation of specific areas for baggage and live horses therefore operates alongside s 147 to create an operative duty to bring those goods to the specified areas.

• Interaction with aircraft movement requirements. The instrument’s note to s 7 references s 238 of the Act, which it cites for the proposition 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 the aircraft at that first point of entry. Because the instrument does not designate any aircraft biosecurity entry points at Perth Airport (s 7), the instrument leaves that Act provision inoperative at Perth Airport until or unless a subsequent determination designates aircraft biosecurity entry points there.

• Administrative and procedural interaction. Section 9 imposes notice requirements that bring the Agriculture Department into the loop for operational and organisational changes at Perth Airport that may affect biosecurity risk. Those notice duties create an administrative interface between private parties that own, lease or operate the airport and the executive agency responsible for biosecurity.

Matters the instrument does not alter

• The instrument does not override the Act’s substantive prohibitions or permissions regarding the import or entry of goods and does not create independent offences or fines in addition to those in the Act.

• The instrument does not set out a detailed enforcement or inspection protocol. Any inspection powers, detention powers, seizure, treatment or destruction powers, or powers to issue directions remain those provided in the Biosecurity Act 2015; the instrument does not substitute its own mechanisms.

• The instrument does not designate aircraft biosecurity entry points at Perth Airport. Therefore, any Act provisions that require aircraft to be brought to a biosecurity entry point only apply in respect of aircraft at Perth Airport if and when an aircraft biosecurity entry point is designated in the future.

The instrument identifies itself as the Biosecurity (First Point of Entry,Perth Airport) Determination 2019 (s 1). The instrument text provided contains no express amendment clauses, repeal clauses, or a schedule of amendments. From the instrument as provided:

• Original instrument date. The instrument’s title indicates it was made in 2019. The text does not record subsequent amendment dates, repeals, or consolidations.

• No amendments recorded in the instrument. There is no schedule, footnote or textual marker within the provided text indicating that the instrument has been amended since its making in 2019. The instrument does not state it is a consolidated or varied instrument.

• No sunset or expiry provision. The instrument does not contain any sunset clause or express expiry date; it appears to operate until it is amended or revoked under the authority of subsection 223(1) of the Biosecurity Act 2015.

• Relationship to future determinations. The instrument’s content suggests that further determinations under the Act could alter the designations at Perth Airport, for instance by designating aircraft biosecurity entry points or by adding other goods. Section 9 requires notice of proposed changes to operations that affect biosecurity functionality, which could precede formal amendment to the instrument by the decision‑maker under the Act.

For an authoritative amendment history or any subsequent changes after the 2019 instrument, readers must consult the formal legislative instruments register or the version history maintained by the Australian Government, as the instrument itself contains no internal amendment narrative.

The instrument text provided contains no reference to litigation, court decisions, appeals, or tribunal determinations involving the instrument. The instrument does not cite any judicial authorities or indicate that it has been the subject of court review or legal challenge in the text given.

Because the instrument is a statutory determination made under subsection 223(1) of the Biosecurity Act 2015, any legal challenges to its validity or to actions taken under it would appear in judicial records rather than in the instrument. The instrument itself is silent on:

• Whether any party has sought judicial review in relation to the instrument’s designations or conditions.
• Whether any enforcement action under the Biosecurity Act has been initiated that relied on this specific determination as the basis for action.
• Any precedent or case law that interprets s 9 notice obligations, the designation of first points of entry, or the consequences of failing to present designated goods at biosecurity entry points at Perth Airport.

If litigation history is required, users should consult court databases, administrative review records or the Attorney‑General’s Department or Agriculture Department records for judicial review applications, statutory appeals or case law referencing this determination. The instrument by itself offers no litigation narrative.

The instrument is short but contains several concrete traps for compliance and operational coordination. The following items are explicit in the instrument and have practical consequences that parties should not overlook:

1. As soon as practicable versus reasonable notice. Sections 9(2)-(3) use the timing standard “as soon as practicable” for owners and lessees notifying the Agriculture Department when they become aware of a change to the business entity operating Perth Airport or a biosecurity entry point. Section 9(4) uses “reasonable notice” for persons or bodies proposing certain operational changes. Neither phrase is defined in the instrument. The absence of a defined timeframe creates legal uncertainty: “as soon as practicable” imposes a promptness obligation when awareness arises, and “reasonable notice” will be context dependent. Parties should not assume a long lead time is acceptable and should document the moment of awareness and the steps taken to notify.

2. Who must act when there are multiple owners or lessees. Sections 9(2)-(3) require that an owner, or if there is more than one owner, an owner must give notice; the equivalent applies to lessees. This is a potential coordination risk. Where multiple owners or lessees exist, any single owner or lessee who becomes aware can fulfil the notification obligation; however, if none are clearly tracking “awareness”, the obligation could be missed. Parties should establish internal triggers and delegation to ensure an owner or lessee will act promptly on awareness.

3. Narrow designation of biosecurity entry points. The instrument designates biosecurity entry points only for baggage and live horses (s 8). The instrument explicitly states it does not designate biosecurity entry points for other goods for which Perth Airport is a first point of entry (note 2 to s 8), and therefore the s 147 obligation to bring unloaded goods to a biosecurity entry point does not apply to those other goods at Perth Airport. This asymmetry can be counterintuitive for freight operators who assume all imported goods at a first point of entry must be processed at designated biosecurity entry points. Freight handlers should confirm whether their goods are among those designated in s 8 before relying on s 147 procedures.

4. Ambiguous identification of “QANTAS CTO”. Section 8’s table lists “QANTAS CTO” as the area for live horses. The instrument does not define “QANTAS CTO” within its text. Parties handling live horses must therefore confirm with the Agriculture Department or Perth Airport management the physical location, access arrangements and operational protocol associated with the label “QANTAS CTO” to avoid misrouting animals and breaching the practical requirement cited under s 147.

5. Aircraft biosecurity entry points not designated. Section 7 states the determination does not designate any area of Perth Airport as a biosecurity entry point for aircraft, and notes the Act’s s 238 requirement applies only where such a point exists. This means obligations that might attach to arrival aircraft under s 238 at other first points of entry are not automatically engaged at Perth Airport under this instrument. Operators should not assume aircraft are subject to mandatory routing to a biosecurity entry point at Perth Airport on the basis of the airport’s first point of entry status alone.

6. Written notice formality. Section 9 requires notices to be in writing. Verbal communication will not satisfy the instrument’s formal requirement. Parties should ensure they maintain recordable communications and retain proof of delivery to the Agriculture Department.

7. The instrument’s dependence on Act definitions and provisions. The instrument relies on definitions in the Biosecurity Act 2015 for “aircraft” and “goods” (s 4) and references substantive Act sections (ss 147, 173, 174, 238). Changes in Act interpretation or amendments to those sections could change how the instrument functions. Parties should interpret the instrument in conjunction with the Act.

8. No local procedural detail for on‑the‑ground operations. The instrument designates points and imposes notice obligations, but it does not state operational hours, access protocols, contact persons, or biosecurity officer resourcing expectations at the designated areas. That absence means that logistical compliance requires separate operational arrangements agreed with airport operators and the Agriculture Department.

9. Who bears costs. The instrument imposes duties but does not address who pays for facilities, amenities, or procedural changes. Section 9(5)(b) requires notice of changes to facilities or amenities available for biosecurity officials. Parties should not assume that the Agriculture Department or airport owner will fund modifications; the instrument is silent on cost allocation.

10. No immediate penalty guidance. The instrument does not set fines or enforcement mechanisms in its text. Parties may be uncertain of the consequences of failure to give notice or of misrouting goods. The remedy is to consult the Biosecurity Act 2015 for enforcement mechanisms and possible sanctions.

In short, the main practical pitfalls are timing uncertainty, ambiguous nomenclature (e.g. QANTAS CTO), narrow coverage of designated goods, and absence of operational and cost allocation detail. Documenting awareness, adopting clear internal reporting lines among owners/lessees, and seeking operational clarification from the Agriculture Department will reduce compliance risk.

This section sets out concrete steps, drawn from the instrument’s text, that owners, lessees, operators, air carriers, ground handlers and freight interests should take to comply with the instrument’s requirements.

1. Establish written notification procedures for owners and lessees

• Implement a monitoring and reporting protocol that captures events that could constitute a change to the business entity operating Perth Airport or a biosecurity entry point. Section 9(2) and 9(3) require an owner or lessee, on becoming aware of such a change, to give the Agriculture Department written notice as soon as practicable. To satisfy “as soon as practicable” the protocol should require notification within a short, defined internal timeframe from the moment of awareness; for example, within 24 to 72 hours of awareness unless immediate action is required.

• Assign responsibility to a named officer for delivering notices. Because the instrument allows any owner (where multiple) or any lessee to serve the notice, the practical compliance approach is to designate a single point of contact who will dispatch notices and keep records.

• Use written formats that record transmission and receipt. Notices must be in writing (s 9). Use email or postal methods that produce an auditable record and retain copies of each notice and any response.

2. Prepare reasonable notice protocols for proposed operational changes

• Any person or body responsible for carrying out operations at Perth Airport must give the Agriculture Department reasonable notice of proposed changes specified in s 9(5). The listed categories are changes to biosecurity procedures, to facilities and amenities for officials, to procedures affecting risk identification or communication, and to procedures for managing other factors affecting biosecurity risk.

• Draft standard operating procedure change templates that include an assessment of biosecurity impacts. When proposing changes, include information about the nature of the change, the anticipated timeline, how biosecurity risks will be identified, communicated and mitigated, and any effects on facilities used by biosecurity officials.

• Provide notice early in project planning. “Reasonable notice” is context dependent; giving advance notice during design or planning reduces the risk that the Agriculture Department will consider the notice insufficient.

3. Ensure designated biosecurity entry points for goods are used correctly

• Baggage: route baggage to the terminals specified in s 8 for baggage , Perth Airport International Terminal 1; Perth Airport International Terminal 3; the terminal at 26 Newton Road; the terminal at 131 Fauntleroy Avenue; and the terminal at 145 Fauntleroy Avenue. Where aircraft arrive carrying baggage to be unloaded, s 8’s note referencing s 147 of the Act requires those goods to be brought to the biosecurity entry point as soon as practicable.

• Live horses: confirm the practical details for “QANTAS CTO” as listed in s 8. The instrument does not define the physical location or access method for “QANTAS CTO”. Operators should obtain written confirmation from Perth Airport management and the Agriculture Department setting out the physical location, access permissions, hours of operation, and handling procedures for live horses.

• Document handling chains. For both baggage and live horses, maintain records showing when goods were unloaded, when they were moved to the designated biosecurity entry point, and confirmation of acceptance by a biosecurity official if applicable. These records will evidence compliance with the “as soon as practicable” standard under s 147 as incorporated by the instrument’s note.

4. Coordinate with the Agriculture Department and with airport management

• Establish a liaison process and contact points with the Agriculture Department (the instrument identifies it as the recipient of notices but does not provide contact details). Ensure written notices and other communication are sent to the Department and retain delivery and read receipts.

• Coordinate with Perth Airport management to ensure facilities and amenities used by biosecurity officials remain available and that any scheduled changes are communicated to the Agriculture Department in accordance with s 9(4) and s 9(5).

5. Maintain internal records and evidence of compliance

• Keep copies of all notices sent to the Agriculture Department and written evidence of the awareness trigger for the notice (for example, corporate change documentation, board minutes, lease assignments, letters of intent). Because the instrument uses “as soon as practicable” and “reasonable notice”, evidence of timing and content of notices will be crucial.

• Retain operational logs showing when goods covered by s 8 were unloaded and brought to the designated biosecurity entry points. Include timestamps, carrier and handler details, and any communications with biosecurity officials.

6. Review commercial contracts and operational agreements

• Airlines, freight forwarders and ground handlers should review contracts relating to unloading and onward transportation to ensure responsibilities for moving designated goods to the specified biosecurity entry points are clearly allocated.

• Where multiple parties are involved in operations at the airport, include clauses that obligate the relevant party to notify the Agriculture Department when an owner or lessee change or an operational change in the s 9(5) categories is proposed. These contractual measures will reduce coordination failures where multiple owners or multiple lessees exist.

7. Seek clarification where the instrument is silent

• The instrument does not prescribe operational hours, practical ingress and egress protocols for designated biosecurity entry points, or cost allocation for facilities and amenities. Parties should seek written clarification from Perth Airport management and the Agriculture Department on those operational matters, and retain the Department’s responses.

8. Train staff on awareness triggers and written notice obligations

• Provide targeted training for legal, compliance, operations and airport management staff on what constitutes a change to the business entity operating Perth Airport or a biosecurity entry point and on which operational changes fall within s 9(5). Training should emphasise the requirement for written notice and record retention.

9. Audit compliance periodically

• Regularly audit whether designated goods are being taken to the correct biosecurity entry points, whether notices have been dispatched in a timely manner, and whether the Agriculture Department has been kept informed of proposed operational changes in the categories listed in s 9(5).

10. Refer to the Biosecurity Act 2015 for enforcement consequences

• The instrument does not specify penalties. Parties should consult the Biosecurity Act 2015 to understand enforcement measures, potential sanctions for non‑compliance, and the processes for dispute resolution or review.

Following these steps converts the instrument’s relatively high‑level duties into operationally verifiable actions. The central compliance priorities are written notification with auditable records, clear operational routing of the goods identified in s 8 to the specified biosecurity entry points, and proactive coordination with the Agriculture Department and Perth Airport management regarding proposed operational changes.