Biosecurity (First Point of Entry—Port of Geraldton) Determination 2019

The determination is conceptually narrow and procedural. It relies on several definitional anchors imported from the Act and the Biosecurity Regulation 2016 and then applies those definitions to designate first point of entry and biosecurity entry point status for Port of Geraldton.

Key defined terms within the instrument are:

• Act: the Biosecurity Act 2015 (s 4).
• Vessel: used as in section 9 of the Act; the instrument addresses vessels that are subject to biosecurity control (s 4).
• Non‑commercial vessel: defined by reference to the Biosecurity Regulation 2016; the instrument excludes non‑commercial vessels from its vessel first point of entry designation (s 4).
• Goods: goods as defined by s 19 of the Act, limited in the instrument to goods that are subject to biosecurity control or goods subject to an exposed goods order (s 4 definition of goods).
• Inorganic bulk goods: the instrument defines this class to mean chemicals, ores, minerals or gases brought into Australian territory in bulk and not containing animals, plants, organic compounds or microbes (s 4).
• Waste: goods that are subject to biosecurity control and intended by the person in charge of the vessel to be disposed of (s 4).

Conceptually the instrument performs two related functions under the Act:

1. First point of entry designation (Part 2): This is a location‑level classification under the Act that determines where vessels and particular classes of goods are first introduced into the Australian biosecurity system (ss 5-6). The instrument limits that designation to particular categories rather than applying it to all vessel or goods types (see s 5 and s 6, Note 1).

2. Biosecurity entry point designation (Part 3): Within the port, specific areas (berths) are designated as places where biosecurity control functions should be exercised for arriving vessels and specified goods (ss 7-8). The instrument maps classes of vessels/goods to specific berths.

The instrument also sets out conditions as a form of ongoing compliance interface between the port governance (owners, lessees and operators) and the Agriculture Department (s 9). These are notification and reasonable notice requirements tied to changes in business entities, procedures, facilities or amenities that may affect biosecurity risk management or the ability of officials to exercise functions under the Act (s 9(2)-(5)).

Finally, the instrument is procedural rather than punitive in its content: it does not itself set out penalties or enforcement measures but embeds its operational designations into the Act’s compliance and enforcement framework by reference to the Act’s relevant sections (see s 3 and the notes referencing ss 147 and 246).

The determination distributes obligations and practical effects across several categories of actors. Those actors and the ways they are affected, grounded in the instrument’s text, are:

• Owners of Port of Geraldton: Subject to express notification obligations. If an owner becomes aware that there has been, or will be, a change to the business entity operating the port or a biosecurity entry point at the port, the owner must, in writing, notify the Agriculture Department as soon as practicable (s 9(2)). If there is more than one owner, only an owner is required to give notice (s 9(2) wording).

• Lessees of Port of Geraldton (if any): Similarly subject to notification obligations. If a lessee becomes aware that there has been, or will be, a change to the business entity operating the port or a biosecurity entry point, a lessee must give written notice as soon as practicable (s 9(3)). Again, if there is more than one lessee, a lessee suffices.

• Persons or bodies responsible for operations at Port of Geraldton: They must give the Agriculture Department reasonable written notice of proposed changes to procedures or facilities that relate to biosecurity risk management (s 9(4)-(5)). This imposes a prospective obligation to inform the regulator of planned operational changes that might affect biosecurity risk identification, information flows to biosecurity officials, or amenities available to officers.

• Masters and persons in charge of vessels: The instrument designates specific berths as biosecurity entry points for vessels (s 7) and goods (s 8), and it references the Act’s obligations that a vessel that has arrived must be brought to a biosecurity entry point as soon as practicable, and that goods to be unloaded must be brought to a biosecurity entry point as soon as practicable (s 7 Note and s 8 Note 1 referencing ss 246 and 147 of the Act). While the instrument itself does not restate those Act provisions in full, it makes clear that masters/persons in charge of vessels carrying the specified goods must use the designated biosecurity entry points.

• Operators and logistic providers handling specified goods: Only certain goods are subject to the first point of entry designation at Geraldton,baggage carried on certain vessels, inorganic bulk goods, and waste (s 6). Operators or stevedores handling these goods must ensure unloading and movement to the designated berths identified in s 8 (Items 1-2). The instrument’s Note 2 points users to ss 173 and 174 of the Act for matters relating to prohibited or conditionally non‑prohibited goods; that interacts with operators involved in handling suspect consignments.

• Biosecurity officials and human biosecurity officers: The instrument identifies facilities or amenities for biosecurity officials and human biosecurity officers as a class of matters for which proposed changes must be notified (s 9(5)(b)). The designations determine the locations where officials will exercise their powers and functions under the Act (s 9(5)(b) and s 9(5)(d)).

• Vessels and goods categories explicitly excluded or treated differently: Non‑commercial vessels are excluded from the vessel first point of entry designation (s 5 and s 4 definition). Baggage on passenger vessels is excluded from the goods designation at s 6(a) because s 6(a) specifically covers baggage carried on a vessel other than a non‑commercial vessel or a passenger vessel.

In practical terms, costs (administrative and operational) are concentrated on port owners, lessees and the operators handling designated goods; obligations to move vessels and goods to particular berths implicate vessel masters and cargo handling arrangements. The Agriculture Department is the recipient of all required notices, and a delegate of the Director of Biosecurity made the determination (signature block and s 3), placing departmental administration at the centre of the compliance interface.

The instrument establishes duties that are procedural and location-specific; it does not create statutory entitlements beyond those implicit in the Act. The key duties and rights, grounded in the relevant sections, are as follows.

Principal duties created or activated by the determination

• Duty to observe first point of entry designations: The port is a statutory first point of entry for vessels other than non‑commercial vessels (s 5) and for particular classes of goods (s 6). That designation activates existing duties in the Act that concern arrival points, movement to biosecurity entry points and controls that can be applied at first points of entry. The instrument expressly references the Act’s sections dealing with whether goods may be brought into a particular first point of entry (s 6 Note 2 referring to ss 173 and 174).

• Duty to bring vessels to a designated biosecurity entry point: The instrument designates Berths 1-7 for vessels other than non‑commercial vessels (s 7). The explanatory note in s 7 and cross‑reference to s 246 of the Act indicate that a vessel that has arrived must be brought to a biosecurity entry point as soon as practicable. The instrument thereby operationally imposes a duty on those in charge of arriving vessels to use the designated berths for biosecurity entry.

• Duty to bring specified goods to designated biosecurity entry points: For inorganic bulk goods and waste, ss 8(1) and 8(2) specify the berths that are biosecurity entry points. The instrument’s Note 1 to s 8 cross‑references s 147 of the Act, which governs the obligation to bring goods to a biosecurity entry point when unloading from a vessel. Cargo handlers and vessel masters therefore have to bring those classes of goods to the designated berths as soon as practicable when unloading.

• Duty to notify the Agriculture Department: Owners and lessees must give written notice as soon as practicable of changes to the business entity operating the port or a biosecurity entry point (s 9(2)-(3)). Persons or bodies responsible for operations must give reasonable written notice of proposed changes to procedures or facilities that affect biosecurity risk identification, response or the ability of officials to perform functions (s 9(4)-(5)).

Rights, discretion and procedural aspects established or implicated

• Right of the Agriculture Department to be informed: The instrument creates a reporting right for the Agriculture Department; it does not on its face grant the Department a veto or approval power over changes, but the notification requirements give the Department knowledge and potential scope to act under the Act. The instrument does not prescribe the Department’s subsequent actions after receiving notice.

• Delegated decision-making: The determination itself was made by a delegate of the Director of Biosecurity (signature block and s 3), demonstrating that such determinations are exercisable by delegates under the Act. That is a procedural allocation of decision‑making authority but does not on its face restrict later departmental discretion in enforcement or directions under the Act.

• Procedural burden is asymmetric: The duties to notify are phrased so that a single owner or a single lessee need provide notice where there are multiple owners/lessees (s 9(2)-(3)). This creates a practical duty allocation: in multi‑owner or multi‑lessee situations one identified party must give the notice, rather than requiring unanimous or multiple notices.

What the instrument does not do within its text

• It does not set out penalties or enforcement mechanisms itself. Enforcement and penalties for non‑compliance with the obligations that are activated by the designation (for example, failing to bring a vessel or goods to a biosecurity entry point) are matters governed by the Act; the instrument refers to the Act in s 3 and in the notes to ss 6-8.

• It does not specify standards for facilities, or mandatory facility upgrades, only that proposed changes to facilities or amenities that affect officials’ abilities must be notified (s 9(5)(b)). It leaves the content of “reasonable notice” and the consequences of failing to notify to the Act and departmental practice.

Grounded in the instrument, the duties are principally imposed on owners, lessees, persons responsible for operations, vessel masters and cargo handlers for particular classes of goods. Rights and departmental discretion are primarily implicit: the Agriculture Department receives notice and will be placed to exercise its functions under the Act, but the instrument itself delegates and defines only location designations and notification duties.

The determination itself does not prescribe penalties or a new enforcement regime; it operates within the enforcement architecture of the Biosecurity Act 2015 by designating a first point of entry and biosecurity entry points and by creating procedural notification requirements. That placement has several enforcement and practical implications, which the instrument signals but does not fully specify.

Instrumental silence and cross-reference to the Act

• Authority under the Act: The instrument is made under subsection 229(1) of the Act (s 3). Enforcement of duties that arise from first point of entry or biosecurity entry point designations is therefore a matter for the Act and the enforcement powers and penalties set out in that Act. The instrument itself contains no penalty clauses or enforcement procedures.

• References to the Act’s operational provisions: Notes in ss 7 and 8 refer to sections 246 and 147 of the Act (vessel and goods movement to biosecurity entry points). Those Act provisions will set out obligations and, importantly, the Act contains provisions about offences, directions, biosecurity orders and powers of biosecurity officers. The instrument’s designations therefore trigger Act liabilities and the Act’s enforcement tools where duties are breached.

Enforcement effects implied by the instrument’s obligations

• Duty breach consequences are statutory: Because the requirement to bring vessels and specified goods to designated biosecurity entry points is tied back to the Act (s 7 Note and s 8 Note 1 referencing ss 246 and 147), failure to comply with the movement or unloading obligations would engage whatever contraventions, directions or compliance powers the Act provides. The instrument does not alter those penalties but gives them a port‑specific locus.

• Compliance interface via notices: The notification duties in s 9 create a compliance interface in which the Agriculture Department is to be informed of changes in ownership, lessees or operational procedures/facilities. Failure to provide required notices might be treated as non‑compliance under the Act or may lead to administrative consequences, but the instrument itself does not specify the sanction for non‑notification. The practical consequence is that the Department will be uninformed about changes that may affect its ability to exercise functions under the Act.

• Enforcement agents: The instrument contemplates biosecurity officials and human biosecurity officers using facilities and exercising functions at the designated berths (s 9(5)(b)-(d)). These are the officials who, under the Act, have powers to inspect, detain, or take action in relation to vessels and goods at first points of entry or biosecurity entry points. The instrument therefore identifies locations where those powers will be operationally exercised.

Operational enforcement and resource implications

• Port operations may be subject to directions: Because biosecurity officials exercise powers under the Act at these designated berths (s 9(5)(b)-(d)), vessels and operators can expect directions or instructions from officials consistent with Act powers. The instrument does not prescribe what those directions might be, but it situates the Department to act on biosecurity risks at the identified berths.

• Compliance monitoring and administrative workload: The notification regime (s 9) creates a continuing administrative workload for both port stakeholders and the Agriculture Department. The Department will have to receive, process and possibly act upon notices of ownership, leaseholder, or procedural changes; port owners and operators must generate written notices and keep records. The instrument does not specify timeframes for Department responses, remedying or approving changes; that is left to operational practice under the Act.

In short, penalties and specific enforcement steps are not set out in this instrument. Instead, the instrument activates and situates the Act’s enforcement architecture at Port of Geraldton by designating which vessels and goods are subject to first point of entry and by identifying the berths where biosecurity officials will operate. Non‑compliance with movement/unloading or notification duties would therefore be managed under the Act’s enforcement provisions rather than by this instrument’s text.

This determination is explicitly framed as an instrument operating under, and in conjunction with, the Biosecurity Act 2015. The instrument repeatedly cross‑references definitions and operational provisions of the Act and points to other determinations that may exist under that Act. Its interaction with other legal texts is therefore primarily integrative.

Direct cross‑references within the instrument

• Definitions and statutory anchors: The instrument imports and relies on definitions in the Act, particularly the definitions of vessel (s 9 of the Act) and goods (s 19 of the Act), as noted in s 4 of the instrument. The instrument also refers to the Biosecurity Regulation 2016 for the definition of non‑commercial vessel (s 4).

• Operational cross‑references: The instrument’s Notes identify how designated first points of entry and biosecurity entry points interact with specific Act provisions:

  • s 6 Note 2 directs readers to ss 173 and 174 of the Act regarding whether particular goods may be brought into a first point of entry (prohibited and conditionally non‑prohibited goods).
  • s 7 Note refers to s 246 of the Act for the obligation to bring an arrived vessel to a biosecurity entry point as soon as practicable.
  • s 8 Note 1 refers to s 147 of the Act for the obligation that goods to be unloaded must be brought to a biosecurity entry point as soon as practicable.

These cross‑references mean the instrument does not stand alone; it is an operational layer that applies the Act’s general rules to a specific site.

Interactions that follow from the text

• Priority of Act provisions: Because the determination is made under s 229(1) of the Act (s 3), any enforcement, obligations, exceptions, or offences applicable at Port of Geraldton flow from the Act in conjunction with this port‑specific determination. The Act will therefore govern any conflicts, enforcement choices, powers of officials, and the substantive rules about permitted and prohibited goods.

• Administrative coordination with other instruments: The instrument notes that other determinations may be made under ss 173 and 174 in relation to goods (s 6 Note 2). This implies that other instruments,such as determinations about prohibited goods or conditionally non‑prohibited goods,may further constrain or enable particular imports at Geraldton. The Department’s internal determinations and regulations under the Act can therefore interact with this instrument’s geographic and categoric designations.

• Regulatory layering for port operations: The instrument’s notification duties (s 9) require owners/lessees and operators to notify the Agriculture Department of changes to business entities, procedures, or facilities that affect biosecurity. That creates a regulatory reporting layer that will intersect with corporate law (changes of business entity), lease arrangements, port safety and environment obligations, and any other statutory regimes governing ports and maritime operations. The instrument does not attempt to displace those regimes; rather, it adds a tailored reporting obligation in the biosecurity domain.

• Interaction with cargo classification and customs regimes: The instrument’s focus on categories like “inorganic bulk goods” and “waste” is a biosecurity classification that will intersect operationally with customs, import control, maritime safety and local environmental law. The instrument does not address those other regimes but its designations will affect how cargo is handled in practice at the berths it identifies.

Limits and non‑interference

• No change to other statutory regimes on its face: The determination does not purport to amend or supersede other legislation. It is an instrument under the Act that designates a location and creates notification duties for biosecurity purposes. Any tension with other laws would be resolved under the usual principles of statutory interpretation and the Act’s own primacy in the biosecurity field.

• Narrow scope limits legal overlap: By limiting the first point of entry designation to particular classes of goods and to vessels other than non‑commercial vessels, the instrument circumscribes its interaction with other legal regimes to a defined set of arrivals and handling procedures, leaving other goods and vessel classes to be governed by other port designations or no designation as applicable (s 6 Note 1 and s 8 Note 2).

In summary, the determination is an instrument that fits into the Biosecurity Act’s legal infrastructure and relies on a set of other statutory provisions and regulations for definitions, substantive prohibitions, procedural obligations and enforcement. It creates port‑specific designations and reporting obligations that will operate alongside customs, maritime and corporate regimes rather than replacing them.

The instrument’s text provides a limited and explicit amendment/commencement history. It was made on 7 June 2019 by a delegate of the Director of Biosecurity and the commencement provision deals only with the original making of the instrument.

What the instrument records

• Single commencement entry: Section 2 contains a commencement table. The entry records that “The whole of this instrument” commences on 16 June 2019 (s 2 and the commencement table). That is the only commencement detail recorded in the instrument.

• Note about future amendments: The instrument contains an explicit note stating the commencement table relates only to the provisions of the instrument as originally made and will not be amended to deal with later amendments of the instrument (s 2 note). This is an administrative observation about published versions versus the instrument text itself.

• Signature and date: The instrument bears a dated signature block indicating it was made on 7 June 2019 by Dean Merrilees as Assistant Secretary, Compliance Division, Department of Agriculture, acting as a delegate of the Director of Biosecurity. That signature block establishes the chain of delegation for the determination (opening paragraph and s 3).

What the instrument does not contain

• No recorded amendments: The text does not record any later amendments, modifications, or revocations. The only temporal metadata is the original commencement date. There is no schedule of amending instruments, no transitional provisions other than commencement, and no end date or sunset clause.

• No legislative history or explanatory memorandum included: The text provided here does not include an explanatory memorandum, second reading speech text, or other legislative history. The instrument itself is a short, functional determination and contains no legislative commentary.

Practical implication for users

• Treat this as a stable, single‑event determination starting 16 June 2019: In the absence of amendment records within this instrument, the practical reading is that the instrument took effect on 16 June 2019 and remains in force until it is amended or revoked under the Act. Any later changes to the port’s designation would be effected by a separate instrument under the Act and would need to be checked in the federal register or within the Act’s instrument register.

• Check departmental registers for updates: Because the instrument’s own commencement table will not be edited to reflect later amendments (s 2 note), users should consult the Agriculture Department’s instrument registers or the official consolidated instrument source for any subsequent changes. The instrument itself contains no automatic amendment trace beyond the original commencement metadata.

In short, the instrument documents only its initial making and commencement. No amendment entries are present in the supplied text; future or prior changes must be confirmed from external consolidated legislative records rather than from alterations within this instrument as provided.

The determination text does not include or cite any judicial decisions, nor does it record any litigation, appeals, or tribunal determinations relating to the instrument. There are no cases named or reported within the document. The instrument is an administrative determination made under the Act; it contains no internal record of challenges, disputes or litigation.

What the instrument reveals about possible litigation vectors

• Potential disputes would arise under the Act: If litigation were to arise, it would be under the Biosecurity Act 2015 and would concern the application or validity of the designation, compliance with notification obligations, or conflicts between port operations and biosecurity directions. The instrument itself does not set out a dispute resolution process; such matters would follow the Act’s statutory scheme and general administrative law principles, which are not detailed in the instrument.

• No caselaw provided: Because the instrument contains no litigation history, users should not assume any judicial interpretation exists unless identified elsewhere. Any statutory ambiguities in phrases such as “as soon as practicable” or “reasonable notice” in ss 7-9 may have been or could be litigated, but the instrument itself includes no record of such cases.

Recommended practical step for readers wanting litigation information

• Check external legal databases and the public record: To determine whether this determination has been the subject of litigation, review court and tribunal databases, decisions involving the Biosecurity Act and port operations, and any published administrative law challenges. The instrument does not supply this information.

In summary, the instrument as provided presents no litigation history or case law citations. Any inquiries about judicial interpretation, enforcement challenges or administrative decisions must be pursued through external legal records and court decisions under the Biosecurity Act framework.

The instrument is short but contains several operational subtleties and potential pitfalls for port stakeholders, vessel masters, cargo operators and compliance officers. These are matters that create practical risk or require close attention to avoid unintended non‑compliance. Each point below is grounded in the instrument’s text.

1. Limited scope of first point of entry designation

• The Port of Geraldton is a first point of entry only for specific categories: vessels other than non‑commercial vessels (s 5) and goods listed in s 6: baggage carried on vessels other than non‑commercial or passenger vessels, inorganic bulk goods, and waste (s 6). Note 1 to s 6 expressly states the port is not a first point of entry for other goods. Practitioners must ensure they are not assuming a blanket first point of entry status for all cargo types.

2. Subtle exclusions for baggage and vessel classes

• Baggage on passenger vessels is excluded from the goods designation because s 6(a) limits baggage to vessels other than non‑commercial vessels or passenger vessels. This means baggage carried on passenger vessels is not covered by this instrument’s first point of entry designation. Confirm commodity and vessel type classification before applying port‑specific rules.

3. Berth specificity for goods versus vessels

• Vessels other than non‑commercial vessels may be brought to any of Berths 1-7 (s 7). However, for goods the designated berths differ by class: inorganic bulk goods must be taken to Berths 1, 2, 3 or 6 (s 8, Item 1) while waste must be taken to Berths 1-7 (s 8, Item 2). That means a vessel may berth at berth X but certain cargo types must be moved to a specific berth among the designated list. Unloading plans must reflect both vessel berthing and cargo destination berths.

4. “As soon as practicable” and “reasonable notice” are context‑dependent

• The instrument uses the phrases “as soon as practicable” (s 7 Note and s 8 Note 1 referencing the Act) and “reasonable notice” (s 9(4)). These are flexible legal standards and will depend on the Act’s interpretation and departmental practice. There is no fixed timeframe in the instrument. Stakeholders should document commercial constraints and keep contemporaneous records when timing is contested.

5. Single‑party notice in multi‑owner/lessee situations

• The notification duties are framed so that where there are multiple owners or multiple lessees, a single owner or lessee must give notice (s 9(2)-(3) wording). This simplifies compliance but may create internal coordination questions: which owner/lessee will take responsibility? Failing to coordinate could lead to missed notices.

6. Notification covers both actual and proposed changes

• Owners/lessees must notify when they become aware that a change has occurred or will occur (s 9(2)-(3)), and persons or bodies responsible for operations must give reasonable notice of proposed changes to procedures or facilities (s 9(4)-(5)). Both retrospective and prospective obligations exist; record‑keeping and early engagement with the Agriculture Department are advisable.

7. “Facilities or amenities available for biosecurity officials” is broad

• Section 9(5)(b) requires notice for changes to facilities or amenities “available at Port of Geraldton for biosecurity officials and human biosecurity officers to perform functions or exercise powers under the Act.” This could capture a wide range of infrastructure and access arrangements. Operational changes (e.g. restricted access to certain berths, changes to security checkpoints, removal of office space) that affect officials’ access may fall within the notification duty.

8. Interaction with prohibited or conditionally non‑prohibited goods

• Section 6 Note 2 points readers to ss 173 and 174 of the Act about prohibited and conditionally non‑prohibited goods. Even if a good is listed in s 6, additional prohibitions could apply under those Act provisions. Operators must check the Act’s substantive rules and any other determinations affecting particular goods.

9. Delegation and departmental discretion are not spelled out

• The determination was made by a delegate (opening paragraphs and s 3). The instrument does not explain how the Agriculture Department will process notifications, what standards will be applied, or how it will communicate decisions. This creates operational uncertainty for stakeholders about post‑notice expectations.

10. No explicit facility standards or mandated upgrades

• While s 9 requires notice of changes to facilities or amenities, the instrument does not mandate specific facility standards, upgrades, or investments to support biosecurity functions. Stakeholders needing to meet particular departmental expectations will have to obtain those requirements through subsequent communications with the Department.

These gotchas are practical issues that arise directly from how the instrument is phrased, what it precisely designates and the cross‑references it makes to the Act. Users should map their vessel types, cargo types and berth plans against ss 5-8 and institute internal procedures to satisfy the notification duties in s 9 to avoid inadvertently breaching biosecurity obligations that will be enforced under the Act.

Compliance with this determination requires aligning port operations, ownership/lease reporting, vessel masters and cargo handlers with the instrument’s designations and notification duties. The steps below are grounded in the instrument’s specific requirements and cross‑references to relevant Act provisions noted in the text.

1. Map port operations to designations (ss 5-8)

• Identify which arriving vessels are “vessels other than non‑commercial vessels” and therefore fall under the first point of entry designation for the Port of Geraldton (s 5). Confirm the status of any vessel against the Biosecurity Regulation 2016 definition of non‑commercial vessel as referenced in s 4.
• For cargo handling, classify incoming consignments to determine whether they are (a) baggage carried on a vessel other than a non‑commercial vessel or a passenger vessel, (b) inorganic bulk goods as defined in s 4, or (c) waste as defined in s 4. Only those categories are covered by the first point of entry designation (s 6).
• Ensure berth allocation practices reflect the biosecurity entry point designations:
  • Vessels (other than non‑commercial vessels): Berths 1-7 are designated biosecurity entry points (s 7).
  • Inorganic bulk goods: Berths 1, 2, 3, or 6 (s 8, Item 1).
  • Waste: Berths 1-7 (s 8, Item 2).
• Plan logistics so that goods requiring specific berths are unloaded at those berths or are immediately moved there as required by the Act (see s 8 Note 1 and s 7 Note referencing ss 147 and 246 of the Act).

2. Implement notification procedures (s 9)

• Owners and lessees: Establish a process to monitor changes in business entity operating the port or biosecurity entry points. If any owner/lessee becomes aware that such a change has occurred or will occur, the owner or a lessee must give written notice to the Agriculture Department as soon as practicable (s 9(2)-(3)). In multi‑owner/lessee situations identify and assign responsibility to a named person for giving this notice to avoid gaps.
• Operators and responsible bodies: If proposing changes to procedures, facilities, amenities or other matters listed in s 9(5) that could affect biosecurity risk identification or officials’ capacity to act, provide the Agriculture Department with reasonable written notice prior to making such changes (s 9(4)-(5)). Define internal lead times to ensure “reasonable notice” is given and documented.

3. Recordkeeping and written communications

• The instrument requires notices “in writing” (ss 9(2)-(4)). Maintain written records of all notices sent to the Agriculture Department, with dates, recipients and content, and store acknowledgements of receipt. Where timing may be contentious, contemporaneous records demonstrating when information was known and when notice was given will be material.

4. Integrate Act provisions into operational instructions

• Align port standard operating procedures with the Act’s obligations referred to in the instrument (e.g. moving vessels and goods “as soon as practicable” to biosecurity entry points under ss 147 and 246 of the Act as referenced in s 7 Note and s 8 Note 1). Develop concrete internal definitions of “as soon as practicable” for routine scenarios (e.g. percentage of arrivals moved within fixed hours) while maintaining the flexibility to deviate and record reasons in exceptional circumstances.

5. Prepare for inspections and officials’ needs

• Section 9(5)(b) requires notifying the Department about changes to facilities or amenities available for the use of biosecurity officials and human biosecurity officers. Confirm the physical and administrative arrangements that allow officials to perform functions at the designated berths (e.g. secure access routes, workspace, waste handling points). If changes are proposed that may reduce officials’ access or capability, notify the Department in advance and provide alternative arrangements where possible.

6. Coordinate berth scheduling and cargo handling

• Because certain goods have specific berth designations (s 8), coordinate vessel berthing, cargo transfer and storage so that such goods can be placed at the correct berths without delay. Where cargo arrives on a vessel berthed at a different berth, plan immediate transfer protocols to the designated berth to satisfy the “as soon as practicable” requirement referenced in the notes.

7. Liaise with the Agriculture Department early

• The instrument gives the Department a central role as the recipient of notices. Early engagement with the Department is sensible for clarifying expectations about reasonable notice, acceptable timing for bringing vessels/goods to biosecurity entry points, and any procedural gaps in the port’s facilities. Because the instrument does not specify departmental response times or approval mechanisms, establish contact points within the Department and obtain confirmations in writing where possible.

8. Legal and compliance audit

• Conduct an internal compliance audit to ensure that all operational policies, lease or ownership arrangements, and contractor relationships allow for the timely generation and delivery of the required notices under s 9, and that berth allocation and cargo handling practices will enable compliance with ss 7-8.

9. Train staff and contractors

• Vessel masters, cargo handlers, stevedores, port security and operational planners should receive training on which vessel and goods categories are covered by the determination, the berth designations, and the need for written notifications under s 9. Include scenarios for non‑commercial vessels and passenger vessels to avoid misclassification.

10. Monitor changes in law and departmental instruments

• The instrument’s Note in s 2 states the commencement table will not be amended in later published versions. To capture any amendments, revocations or additional determinations under the Act that may affect Port of Geraldton, monitor official registers and the Agriculture Department’s instrument publications and guidance.

Following these steps will operationalise the instrument’s specific statutory duties: ensuring goods and vessels covered by this determination are taken to the correct designated berths, providing the Agriculture Department with required notices in writing and in timely fashion, and keeping records that demonstrate active compliance. The instrument ties these duties to the wider Biosecurity Act framework; compliance therefore requires coordination between operational practices at the port and the Act’s statutory requirements.