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

The instrument rests on a small number of statutory concepts, each given effect by the Act and by this Determination. The concepts and how the instrument treats them are as follows.

First point of entry: The instrument designates Port of Hay Point as a first point of entry for particular classes of vessels and goods (ss 5-6). That status ties arrivals at that port into the Act’s first point of entry framework. The instrument itself defines which vessels and which goods are covered within the port.

Biosecurity entry point: Separate from first point of entry status, the Determination designates discrete areas within Port of Hay Point as biosecurity entry points for the covered vessels and goods (ss 7-8). For vessels (other than non‑commercial and passenger vessels) and for waste, Dalrymple Bay Coal Terminal and Hay Point Coal Terminal are named as the biosecurity entry points. The instrument contains tables that map classes to areas; these tables are the operative designations.

Classes and exclusions: The Determination is class‑based. For vessels, the class is “vessels other than non‑commercial vessels and passenger vessels” (s 5, s 7 table column 1, item 1). For goods, only two classes are captured: baggage carried on vessels that are not non‑commercial vessels or passenger vessels; and waste, which the instrument defines by reference to goods subject to biosecurity control and intended to be disposed of by the person in charge of the vessel (s 6; definition of waste in s 4). The instrument expressly excludes other goods from first point of entry status at Hay Point (Note under s 6), and it notes that it does not designate biosecurity entry points for other goods even if those goods are within the port’s first point of entry scope (Note 2 under s 8).

Operational link to the Act: The Determination repeatedly points users back to the Act, and it invokes statutory duties that are triggered when a vessel or goods arrive at a first point of entry or a biosecurity entry point. The instrument’s notes cite section 147 (unloading at a biosecurity entry point), section 173 and 174 (prohibited and conditionally non‑prohibited goods), and section 246 (bringing a vessel to a biosecurity entry point) of the Act. The Determination itself does not restate the content of those Act provisions; it specifies the places and classes to which those Act provisions, when engaged, will apply at Hay Point.

Notification and change management: Section 9 creates administrative conditions. Owners and lessees have an immediate written notification duty to the Agriculture Department where they become aware 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 are listed in s 9(5) as affecting biosecurity risk or officials’ ability to perform functions (s 9(4)-(5)). The instrument therefore couples location designation with duties designed to keep the regulator informed about changes that could affect how biosecurity oversight is delivered at the port.

Definitions as operative terms: Section 4 imports the Act’s definitions and supplies instrument‑specific definitions for goods, vessel, non‑commercial vessel, and waste. The definition of waste is two‑part: goods that are subject to biosecurity control, and goods that the person in charge intends to dispose of. This creates a precise trigger for when goods will be treated as waste for the purposes of the instrument’s biosecurity entry point designation.

Delegate authority and commencement: The instrument records that it is made by a delegate of the Director of Biosecurity and commenced in June 2019 (s 3; s 2). The commencement table is limited to the original instrument and is not to be read as an ongoing amendment record (s 2 notes).

Each of these concepts is operationalised by pointing to named port areas, imposing notification duties, and leaving the enforcement and detailed duties to the Act itself. The Determination therefore functions primarily as a place‑and‑class designation that connects statutory powers and duties in the Act to specific terminals and operators at Port of Hay Point.

The instrument identifies four primary groups of affected parties by operation and text: owners and lessees of Port of Hay Point (and of the biosecurity entry points at the port), persons or bodies responsible for carrying out operations at Port of Hay Point, persons in charge of vessels arriving at the port, and the Department of Agriculture (the Agriculture Department) as the recipient of notices. Beyond those parties, the instrument’s scope also practically touches terminal operators and shipping interests that deal with the two designated terminals, because those terminals are the designated biosecurity points.

Owners and lessees: Section 9(2) and (3) impose duties on the owner (or an owner where multiple owners exist) and the lessee (or a lessee where multiple lessees exist) to give written notice to the Agriculture Department as soon as practicable after becoming aware of a change to the business entity operating the port or a biosecurity entry point. The obligation is framed in terms of awareness and timeliness. The instrument therefore assigns primary notification responsibility to property interests,owners and lessees,rather than to an operator or the regulator.

Persons or bodies responsible for operations: Section 9(4) requires any person or body responsible for carrying out operations at the port to give reasonable written notice of proposed changes referred to in subsection (5). Subsection (5) lists five types of changes that, in the instrument’s view, could affect the level of biosecurity risk or officials’ ability to exercise functions. Those responsible for operations therefore must assess proposed changes to procedures and facilities and provide written, reasonable notice to the Agriculture Department.

Persons in charge of vessels: The instrument’s definitions and the class designations mean that persons in charge of vessels other than non‑commercial vessels and passenger vessels must bring those vessels to the designated biosecurity entry points as soon as practicable, consistent with the Act (note under s 7 referencing s 246 of the Act). Persons in charge also control whether goods are intended for disposal on the vessel; the definition of "waste" in s 4 ties the waste classification to the intention of the person in charge.

Operators of terminals and shipping agents: While not named in statutory duties, terminal operators (Dalrymple Bay Coal Terminal and Hay Point Coal Terminal) and the commercial parties who arrange berthing and unloading will be practically affected. The designation narrows where biosecurity inspection and unloading obligations attach (ss 7-8), so parties responsible for logistics at those terminals will need to accommodate the Act’s processes where engaged.

Agriculture Department and biosecurity officials: The Agriculture Department is the notice recipient (s 9(2)-(4)), and the instrument repeatedly cross‑references biosecurity officials’ functions and powers under the Act (notes under ss 6, 7, 8). While the instrument does not create new powers for officials, it identifies the terminals at which officials may exercise their Act powers and creates a flow of information to the Department about changes that might affect those powers.

Excluded classes: The instrument explicitly excludes non‑commercial vessels and passenger vessels from the vessel first point of entry designation (s 5). Baggage carried on those excluded vessels is also outside the goods first point of entry designation because s 6 captures baggage only where it is carried on a vessel other than a non‑commercial vessel or a passenger vessel. The instrument therefore has an exclusionary structure that affects who must comply.

Other interested parties: Parties dealing with goods that are not baggage or waste should note that the instrument says it is not a first point of entry for other goods (Note under s 6), and it does not designate biosecurity entry points for such other goods (Note 2 under s 8). Those parties might therefore not be subject to the same arrival and unloading restrictions at Hay Point under this Determination, but their obligations under the Act remain determined by the Act and other instrument designations where applicable.

In short, the instrument places procedural and notification duties on owners, lessees, operations managers and persons in charge of affected vessels, designates particular terminal areas as the focal points for biosecurity activity at Hay Point, and thereby affects the operational responsibilities and information flows for port operators, shipping interests and the Agriculture Department.

The Determination creates a small set of express duties and triggers a set of statutory duties under the Act by designating place and class. The instrument itself contains no express enumerated rights beyond the location designations; it focuses on duties and administrative conditions.

Express duties created by the Determination

• Notification by owners: Under s 9(2) an owner, or an owner where there are multiple owners, must give written notice to the Agriculture Department as soon as practicable after becoming aware that there has been, or will be, a change to the business entity operating Port of Hay Point or a biosecurity entry point at the port. The duty is time‑sensitive and attaches to "awareness."
• Notification by lessees: Under s 9(3) a lessee, or a lessee where there are multiple lessees, must give the same written notice as an owner must give, under the same timetable.
• Notice of proposed operational changes: Under s 9(4) any person or body responsible for carrying out operations at Port of Hay Point must give the Agriculture Department reasonable written notice of proposed changes referred to in s 9(5). Subsection (5) lists changes to procedures and facilities that could affect biosecurity risk or the ability of officials to perform functions; the obligation is to give "reasonable notice" in writing.
• Operational obligations that the Determination enables: By naming particular terminals as biosecurity entry points (ss 7-8), the instrument activates statutory duties that apply when a vessel or goods arrive at a first point of entry or at a biosecurity entry point under the Act. For example, the instrument’s notes cite section 246 of the Act that requires a vessel that has arrived at Port of Hay Point be brought to a biosecurity entry point "as soon as practicable," and section 147 that requires goods to be brought to a biosecurity entry point if they are to be unloaded (see Notes under ss 7-8). The Determination therefore imposes operational duties by reference to Act provisions that govern arrival and unloading at biosecurity entry points.

Nature of the duties

• Written form and timeliness: The owner/lessee notifications must be in writing and given "as soon as practicable" after becoming aware of the change (ss 9(2)-(3)). The operations‑responsible party must provide "reasonable notice" in writing of proposed changes (s 9(4)). The instrument therefore insists on written communications and sets a high bar for timeliness, though it leaves "as soon as practicable" and "reasonable" to be applied in the circumstances.
• Who must notify when there are multiple owners or lessees: The instrument requires an owner (or where more than one owner exists, an owner) to give notice, and similarly a lessee (or where more than one lessee exists, a lessee) must give notice (ss 9(2)-(3)). This distributes the statutory burden across owners/lessees but does not require each owner/lessee to notify. It allocates the duty to at least one representative of the owner or lessee group.
• Scope of proposed changes that trigger notice: Section 9(5) is specific about the kinds of changes for which reasonable notice must be given: changes to procedures that provide for biosecurity measures; changes to facilities or amenities for biosecurity officials and human biosecurity officers to perform functions; changes to procedures that affect identification of biosecurity risks or notification of such risks to officials; and changes to procedures for managing other factors that affect biosecurity risk. Each listed change concerns either the mitigation of biosecurity risk or the practical ability of officials to perform their Act functions.

Rights and entitlements

• No express private rights created in the Determination: The instrument does not create explicit private entitlements, permits or exemptions in its text. Its primary legal effect is to designate locations and classes so that the statutory powers and duties in the Act apply at those locations and to those classes.
• Deference to the Act for enforcement and remedies: The Determination is made under s 229(1) of the Act (s 3). It does not itself set out enforcement mechanisms or penalties; those will be found in the Act. The instrument’s operation therefore gives the Agriculture Department and biosecurity officials the ability to apply statutory powers and duties at named terminals in Hay Point, but the instrument does not itself create independent enforcement processes.

Interplay between duties and operational practice

• Movement of vessels and unloading timing: By designating specific biosecurity entry points and linking to the Act’s requirements about bringing vessels and goods to biosecurity entry points as soon as practicable (notes under ss 7-8 referencing ss 246 and 147 of the Act), the Determination places a procedural duty on persons in charge of vessels and those responsible for unloading to coordinate with biosecurity processes at the two named terminals.
• Information flow duties: The written notice requirements in s 9 create an information flow into the Agriculture Department about changes to the business structure and to operational procedures that could affect biosecurity risk or the ability to administer biosecurity controls. Those duties do not automatically require remedial action beyond notice; they are disclosure obligations.

In summary, the Determination primarily operates by imposing notification obligations on owners, lessees and operators, and by designating particular terminals as the places at which Act powers and duties apply to certain vessels and goods. It does not itself create fines, licences or operational procedural rules beyond the notice and designation mechanisms; those substantive enforcement and compliance powers remain within the Act.

The Determination does not contain express penalty provisions or independent enforcement machinery within its text. It is made under subsection 229(1) of the Biosecurity Act 2015 (s 3), and it functions as a location and class designation which brings the statutory powers, duties and enforcement mechanisms of the Act into play at the designated terminals and for the designated vessels and goods. Accordingly, the instrument leaves the imposition and enforcement of penalties to the Act’s framework rather than creating new sanctions within the Determination itself.

What the Determination does establish that bears on enforcement

• Activation of Act obligations and powers: By designating Port of Hay Point as a first point of entry for certain vessels and goods (ss 5-6) and by designating Dalrymple Bay Coal Terminal and Hay Point Coal Terminal as biosecurity entry points for those vessels and goods (ss 7-8), the Determination activates the relevant provisions of the Act that govern inspection, unloading, movement of vessels, quarantine directions and similar functions. The instrument’s notes explicitly refer to sections 147 and 246 of the Act in the context of unloading and moving vessels to biosecurity entry points (Notes under ss 7-8). Enforcement of obligations that arise on arrival or unloading will therefore be undertaken under the Act’s enforcement provisions rather than under any penalty clauses in the Determination.
• Notice obligations as a compliance mechanism: Section 9 places written notice duties on owners, lessees and operators. Failure to provide those notices may engage the Act’s compliance and enforcement powers, depending on how the Act treats failure to comply with determinations and notice conditions. The Determination itself does not describe the consequences of non‑compliance with s 9; those consequences would be located in the Act.

Observable absences relevant to enforcement

• No fines or infringement notices in the Determination text: The instrument does not specify monetary penalties, infringement notice regimes or procedural penalty mechanisms. It sets out duties and references Act sections for operational obligations but does not itself prescribe sanctions.
• No administrative review or appeal pathways set out here: The Determination does not outline a route for internal review or appeal of the designation or of decisions grounded in the designation. Any review rights would be those provided under the Act or other administrative law frameworks outside the Determination text.

Practical implications for enforcement actors

• Enforcement will depend on Act powers and procedural rules: Biosecurity officials and the Agriculture Department will be expected to use the Act’s powers when a vessel or goods fall within the categories designated by the Determination. The instrument makes clear where and for which classes those powers apply, but it does not change the substantive enforcement regime that is located in the Act.
• Reliance on written notices for situational awareness and action: The written notice duties in s 9 are an enforcement‑adjacent mechanism intended to give the Agriculture Department situational awareness of changes to operations, facilities, or business entities. The Department can use information received under s 9 to decide whether to exercise enforcement powers under the Act. The Determination itself grants no independent remedial powers.

Because the Determination is a location and class designation instrument made under the Act, those seeking to understand penalties and enforcement consequences should consult the Act to see how breaches of determinations, failures to meet obligations at first points of entry, and failures to cooperate with biosecurity officials are dealt with under the Act. The instrument does not alter or add to the Act’s enforcement architecture in its own text; instead it makes explicit where that architecture applies at Port of Hay Point.

This Determination is expressly made under the Biosecurity Act 2015 (s 3), and it references multiple provisions of that Act in its notes and operation. It is a subordinate instrument that operates within the Act’s statutory framework; it neither purports to override the Act nor to create a parallel regime. The instrument’s interaction with other laws is therefore primarily through the Act and through the port’s contractual and operational arrangements relevant to owners, lessees and terminal operators.

Interaction with the Biosecurity Act 2015

• Made under the Act’s delegated power: Section 3 records that the instrument is made under subsection 229(1) of the Act. The Determination therefore derives its legal effect from the Act and must be read subject to the Act’s terms, interpretation rules, enforcement mechanisms and other subordinate instruments made under the Act.
• Triggers Act provisions: The Determination’s purpose is to identify a first point of entry and biosecurity entry points, which in turn trigger Act provisions about prohibited goods, controlled goods, unloading, movement of vessels and the exercise of biosecurity powers (see Notes under ss 6, 7 and 8 that refer to ss 173, 174, 147 and 246 of the Act). The instrument does not restate those Act provisions; rather it maps statutory duties and powers to concrete locations at Hay Point.
• Definitions: Section 4 of the Determination notes that a number of expressions used are defined in section 9 of the Act and then supplies instrument‑specific definitions consistent with the Act (for example, goods is defined by reference to s 19 of the Act). Where the Act contains operative definitions, the Determination imports them.

Relation to port and property law and contracts

• Duties on owners and lessees: Section 9 places duties on owners and lessees of Port of Hay Point to notify the Agriculture Department of changes to the business entity operating the port or a biosecurity entry point. Those duties interact with property and contractual arrangements because the owner/lessee may have contractual obligations with terminal operators or licensed users; the Determination’s notification duties do not displace contractual obligations but overlay an independent statutory communication obligation to the Agriculture Department.
• Operational responsibility vs ownership: The instrument distinguishes between owners/lessees and the person or body responsible for carrying out operations (s 9(4)-(5)). Operational changes that affect biosecurity risk must be notified by the operations party whether or not that party is the owner or lessee. This mirrors how statutory regulatory regimes often overlay operating and property relationships.

Other statutory frameworks and administrative law

• Administrative law processes remain available outside the Determination: The Determination does not specify appeal or review mechanisms. Any challenge to actions taken under the Act because of the Determination, or to the validity of the Determination itself, would be considered against the Act and general administrative law principles. The Determination’s note about the commencement table (s 2) is administrative and does not change legal effect; the table relates only to the instrument as originally made.
• Human biosecurity and other specialist powers: Section 9(5)(b) and the references to human biosecurity officers in s 9(5)(b) indicate that the Determination contemplates the interaction of the port’s facilities and procedures with both goods and human biosecurity functions under the Act. The instrument therefore operates at the intersection of goods biosecurity and human biosecurity regimes within the Act’s umbrella.

Limits on the Determination’s legal alterations

• No displacement of Act provisions: Because the Determination is made under the Act, it cannot alter the Act’s substantive legal standards, penalty regimes or officials’ powers. It designates location and classes only.
• No independent penalties or licences: The instrument does not create new licensing regimes or penalty schemes that would interact with other legislation. Enforcement and penalties are to be found in the Act.

In practical terms, the Determination is the mapping device that tells users and officials where the Act’s provisions about first points of entry and biosecurity entry points apply within the Port of Hay Point. It interacts with contractual, property and operational arrangements at the port by imposing notice duties and by designating where biosecurity officials will be expected to exercise the Act’s powers.

The Determination contains a commencement table in section 2 and an explicit note about the scope of that table. The amendment history recorded in the instrument is limited to its original commencement detail; the text makes clear that the commencement table is not a running record of future amendments.

Key commencement and amendment observations from the instrument

• Commencement date: Section 2 includes a table which states that "The whole of this instrument" commenced on 16 June 2019. The face of the Instrument therefore shows that the Determination was intended to take effect on that date.
• Original instrument only: Section 2 contains a note that the table relates only to the provisions of the instrument “as originally made.” It states that it will not be amended to deal with any later amendments of this instrument. That means the table is a historical record of initial commencement rather than an ongoing amendment log.
• Editable metadata field: Section 2(2) says that any information in column 3 of the table is not part of the instrument and that information may be inserted in that column, or edited, in any published version. This is an administrative point about published versions and does not change the instrument’s operative text. It is a clarification about how commencement metadata is handled in published forms.
• Maker and date signed: The instrument is signed and dated 7 June 2019 by Dean Merrilees, Assistant Secretary Compliance Division Department of Agriculture, as delegate of the Director of Biosecurity. That signature block is on the instrument and records the authority and the date of execution distinct from the commencement date in the table.
• No in‑text amendment clauses: The instrument contains no clauses that amend earlier instruments, nor does it include a schedule that explicitly repeals or varies previous determinations. It stands as a self‑contained determination made under s 229(1) of the Act.

What the instrument does not record

• No subsequent amendments recorded: There are no recorded later amendments, revocations, or modifications in the text provided. The instrument’s own note about the commencement table not being amended suggests that any later legal changes would be recorded elsewhere (for example in the Act’s registers or in separate instruments), but they are not included in this Determination’s text.
• No amendment mechanism within the Determination itself: The instrument does not provide a built‑in procedure for amendment by notice or by agreement with port owners or operators. Any change to the Determination would be by the same delegated authority under the Act or by further amendment instruments, not by any procedure set out within this Determination.

Practical consequence for users seeking amendment history

• Check the Act’s instrument registers or departmental records: Because the Determination’s table is static in the instrument and the Determination itself does not record subsequent changes, those needing an authoritative amendment history should refer to the official Commonwealth legislation register and the Department of Agriculture’s records for any instruments that supersede or amend this Determination. The Determination’s text, however, contains no amendment history beyond the original commencement entry.

In short, the Determination’s amendment history as recorded in this text is limited to its commencement on 16 June 2019; there are no amendments or revocations contained within the instrument’s text provided here.

The Determination’s text contains no references to litigation, judicial decisions, reviews or reported disputes. It is a short, administrative instrument that designates locations and classes and sets out notification obligations; the instrument itself does not include any litigation history or summaries of judicial treatment.

What the absence of litigation references in the instrument means for readers

• No cases cited in the instrument: The Determination does not cite any judicial decisions or administrative review determinations. The instrument is made under delegated statutory power and is presented as an administrative designation with conditions.
• Instruments of this type are typically subject to challenge under general administrative law principles: While the Determination itself does not record any litigation, parties affected by it could, in principle, seek judicial review of decisions made under the Act that flow from the Determination, or challenge the validity of the Determination itself, by reference to the Act and administrative law. The instrument does not specify review routes or decisions subject to review. Any such litigation would appear in external legal reporting or court files, not in the instrument text.
• No reported enforcement disputes in the instrument text: The Determination contains no record of contested enforcement, notices, or compliance disputes. It makes the designations and leaves the application and enforcement to biosecurity officials operating under the Act.

Practical pointers for researchers

• Seek external sources for case law: Because the instrument contains no litigation history, researchers who require information about how similar determinations or the particular effects of first point of entry designations have been treated by courts or tribunals will need to search judicial and tribunal databases, administrative law decisions, and the Act’s related decisions. The Determination itself provides no such references.
• Administrative context may produce reviewable decisions: Decisions by the Department of Agriculture or biosecurity officials that act under the Act at the designated terminals and those that are based on this Determination could give rise to reviewable decisions. The Determination does not create a special immunity for those decisions; it is silent on review rights.

In sum, the text does not record any litigation history. Any litigation relating to the Determination or to actions taken under it would be found in external judicial or tribunal records rather than in the Determination itself.

This Determination is short but contains a number of technical features and drafting choices that can produce practical pitfalls for affected parties. The instrument’s language is specific and case‑based; misreading the classes, the notice requirements, the definition of waste or the scope of designated goods could lead to non‑compliance or unexpected operational constraints.

Key items that commonly trip up users

• Limited classes of goods: Section 6 designates only two classes of goods for first point of entry at Hay Point: baggage carried on certain vessels and waste as defined. The instrument’s Note 1 under s 6 explicitly says the port is not a first point of entry for any other goods. Users who assume that all imported cargo or all shipborne goods are covered at Hay Point will be mistaken. The Determination narrowly defines the goods that are within its first point of entry ambit.
• Narrow vessel coverage and exclusions: Section 5 designates the Port of Hay Point as a first point of entry for vessels other than non‑commercial vessels and passenger vessels. That exclusion can be counterintuitive: operators should confirm whether a vessel is a "non‑commercial vessel" as defined by the Biosecurity Regulation 2016 (s 4 references the Regulation for the same term) because the exclusion turns on that statutory meaning. The instrument imports that term, so parties must verify which vessels fall outside the designation under the Act/regulation.
• Waste definition depends on intention of the person in charge: The instrument defines waste to include goods that are subject to biosecurity control and that are intended by the person in charge of the vessel to be disposed of (s 4). That creates a subjective element: whether goods constitute "waste" for the Determination turns on the person in charge’s intent. Assessments of intent may be factual and potentially contentious in enforcement contexts.
• Mandatory uncertainty in timing terms: The two temporal standards in the instrument,"as soon as practicable" (ss 9(2)-(3) and note under s 7 referring to the Act) and "reasonable notice" (s 9(4)),are open textured legal standards. They require contextual judgments about what is practicable or reasonable. Entities should keep contemporaneous records showing when they became aware of changes and when notices were sent, because the instrument conditions the notice duty on those temporal standards.
• Notification duty allocation where there are multiple owners or lessees: Section 9(2) and (3) require "the owner (or, if there is more than one owner, an owner)" to notify and likewise for lessees. That drafting means only one owner or one lessee needs to notify, but it also creates potential coordination issues: who is the notifying owner or lessee when there are several? Failure by any owner/lessee to take the initiative could result in no notice being given; parties should have processes to ensure one of them makes notification.
• The Determination does not set out operational requirements for facilities: Section 9(5)(b) requires notification of changes to facilities or amenities available to biosecurity officials, but the instrument does not itself require specific facilities or standards. Port operators may be told to notify the Department but are not given a statutory schedule of required infrastructure in this text. This means practical expectations about amenity and facilities will be defined in interactions with the Department under the Act, not by the Determination.
• Designation of specific terminals may affect berthing and logistics: The instrument names Dalrymple Bay Coal Terminal and Hay Point Coal Terminal as the biosecurity entry points for the listed vessels and goods (ss 7-8). Parties that typically berth vessels elsewhere at Hay Point could consequently need to arrange to berth at the designated terminals "as soon as practicable" when biosecurity protocols apply. The Determination does not itself resolve berth availability or commercial berth allocation questions.
• The Determination’s silence on penalties and operational instructions: The instrument imposes notice duties and makes designations, but it contains no enforcement detail, penalties, or specific operational procedures for inspections, holding areas, or costs of compliance. Users should not assume the Determination gives them clear operational guidance; the Act and departmental practice will fill those gaps.
• Interaction with the Act’s other sections is essential: The instrument’s notes point to ss 147, 173, 174 and 246 of the Act for issues about prohibited goods, conditionally non‑prohibited goods and movement to biosecurity entry points. Misreading the Determination without consulting those Act sections could produce incorrect operational choices, because the Determination does not restate those Act obligations.

Procedural and commercial practicalities to watch

• Recordkeeping to demonstrate compliance: Because timing words are imprecise and notice duties are to be given "as soon as practicable" or with "reasonable notice," maintaining detailed records of awareness dates, decision timelines, the content and date of notices to the Agriculture Department, and the operational steps taken will be essential to demonstrate compliance.
• Clarity on who is "person or body responsible for carrying out operations": Section 9(4) requires that the person or body responsible for carrying out operations must give reasonable notice of proposed changes in procedures or facilities. Parties need to agree which contractual party is the responsible person or body and ensure that party knows it has the notice duty.
• Potential for coordination failures: Because the Determination imposes duties that cut across ownership, leasehold and operational responsibilities, there is a risk of coordination failures where owners, lessees and operators assume another party will notify the Department. The instrument’s drafting that allows a single owner or lessee to fulfil the duty reduces duplication but creates coordination risk.

Overall, the main "gotchas" are the Determination’s narrow class scope, the subjective intent element for the waste definition, the open legal standards for timing of notices, the allocation of notification duty among multiple owners/lessees, and the fact that the instrument leaves operational detail and enforcement to the Act or to departmental practice. Parties should not treat the Determination as a comprehensive operational manual; it is a targeted mapping of place and class that creates informational duties and activates the Act’s powers.

Compliance with this Determination requires two types of action: first, operational adjustments to ensure vessels and goods that fall within the designated classes are dealt with at the two named terminal areas; and second, governance and communication measures to meet the written notice requirements in section 9. Because the Determination triggers provisions of the Biosecurity Act 2015, compliance planning must integrate the Act’s operative requirements where arrivals, unloading or inspections are involved.

Immediate operational steps

• Identify covered classes: Confirm which vessels and goods you handle fall within the Determination. Vessels covered are those that are not non‑commercial vessels and not passenger vessels (s 5). Goods covered are baggage carried on vessels that are not non‑commercial vessels or passenger vessels, and waste as defined (s 6; s 4 definition of waste). Maintain an up‑to‑date roster of vessel types and cargo classes to ensure correct treatment.
• Direct arrivals to the designated biosecurity entry points: For covered vessels and covered goods that are to be unloaded, arrange to bring the vessel and the goods to Dalrymple Bay Coal Terminal or Hay Point Coal Terminal, the two areas designated as biosecurity entry points (ss 7-8). The Act requires vessels to be brought to a biosecurity entry point "as soon as practicable" once arrived; document the timing and steps taken to meet that standard (note under s 7 referencing s 246 of the Act).
• Establish handling protocols for waste: Because "waste" is defined to require both biosecurity control status and the intent of the person in charge to dispose of the goods (s 4), document decisions about disposal intent on vessels and procedures for segregating and handling waste at the terminals. Ensure manifest information and declarations reflect the intended disposal status so the correct classification can be applied on arrival.
• Coordinate with terminal operators and shipping agents: Ensure contractual and operational arrangements with Dalrymple Bay Coal Terminal and Hay Point Coal Terminal account for the Determination’s requirements, including berth allocation and unloading sequencing for biosecurity inspections. While the Determination does not specify who bears costs, operational parties should document responsibility for any additional time or services required to comply with the Act at the designated terminals.

Governance and notification processes

• Put a written notification process in place for owners and lessees: Section 9(2)-(3) requires owners and lessees to give written notice to the Agriculture Department as soon as practicable after becoming aware of a change to the business entity operating the port or a biosecurity entry point. Create a standard operating procedure for identifying a qualifying change, documenting the date of awareness, preparing the written notice and sending it to the Agriculture Department promptly. Because the duty is satisfied by "an owner" where there are multiple owners, establish internal rules for which owner will carry the duty in each instance.
• Establish a notice procedure for operators: Under s 9(4) any person or body responsible for carrying out operations must give reasonable written notice of proposed changes in procedures or facilities of the kinds listed in s 9(5). Develop a process to assess whether a proposed change intersects with any of the s 9(5) categories; if it does, issue written notice to the Agriculture Department with sufficient lead time to be considered reasonable in the circumstances. Keep copies of all notices and supporting documentation.
• Maintain records of awareness and notices: Given the instrument’s reliance on "as soon as practicable" and "reasonable notice," contemporaneous records will be essential. Preserve records of the dates on which changes were contemplated, internal approvals, the date notice was sent to the Agriculture Department, and any departmental responses. This evidentiary trail will be central to demonstrating compliance if questioned.
• Clarify internal accountability: Where there are multiple owners, multiple lessees or separate operational managers, assign roles so that the notification duties in s 9 are not overlooked. Nominate a contact person to monitor corporate changes and operational proposals and to ensure timely written notice is provided to the Agriculture Department.

Practical liaison with the Agriculture Department

• Use the Department’s preferred channels and formats: Although the Determination requires written notice, it does not prescribe format or contact details. Check the Agriculture Department’s guidance for the appropriate address, email address, or online form for notifications relating to first point of entry determinations and follow those channels to avoid avoidable delays.
• Tell the Department the substance needed: When providing notices under s 9, describe the change in business entity or the proposed operational/procedural change clearly, explain how the change may affect biosecurity risk or officials’ ability to exercise functions, and provide dates for when the change will take effect or when it was discovered. Because the instrument lists categories of changes in s 9(5), reference those categories in the notice where relevant.

Coordination with Act obligations

• Cross‑check with the Act on prohibited and conditionally non‑prohibited goods: The Determination’s notes refer to sections 173 and 174 of the Act regarding prohibited and conditionally non‑prohibited goods (Note under s 6). Ensure that goods arriving at Hay Point, whether or not covered by this Determination, are checked against the Act’s prohibited goods lists and any applicable determinations under the Act.
• Prepare for inspections and possible delays: Because the Determination ties arrivals to the Act’s biosecurity entry point provisions, prepare for biosecurity inspections at the named terminals. Build potential inspection time and contingency planning into berth and cargo schedules and be ready to provide the information and access that biosecurity officials require.

Contingency planning and contract clauses

• Consider contractual allocation of notification duties and costs: If you are a terminal operator, ship operator or logistics provider, consider contract clauses that allocate the cost and responsibility of meeting the Determination’s practical demands and of providing notices to the Agriculture Department. For example, include clauses specifying which party will notify, what records will be kept, and who pays for delays caused by biosecurity actions.
• Update internal compliance manuals: Integrate the Determination’s requirements into port operating manuals, emergency response plans and training materials for staff who will manage vessel arrivals, waste handling and communication with the Agriculture Department.

In sum, compliance requires operational alignment to ensure designated vessels and goods are brought to the specified terminals; documented intent for waste categorisation; robust internal procedures for owners, lessees and operations personnel to provide timely written notices to the Agriculture Department; and coordination with the Act’s provisions for inspections and movement to biosecurity entry points. Keep contemporaneous records to evidence "as soon as practicable" and "reasonable" standards, and liaise with the Agriculture Department to confirm expectations and any sectoral guidance.