Currency (Perth Mint) Determination 2001 (No. 2A)

The Determination operates as a technical specification instrument. Its principal concepts are: identification of coin items; specification of composition and physical tolerances; coding of design elements into short symbols; and a declaratory relationship to other Determinations.

Identification and scope. Schedule 1 Part 1 lists coin items by item number (101-104). Each item is described by denomination (column 2) and "standard composition" (column 3). Section 3 ties the rest of the columns to the coin that matches that denomination and standard composition. In other words, the Determination applies to coins that meet both the denomination and composition entries in columns 2 and 3; the prescribed weight, dimensions and design then apply to that coin.

Physical tolerances. For each listed coin the Determination sets a "standard weight and allowable variation (g)" (column 4), diameter and thickness in millimetres (column 5), and shape and edge coding (column 6, Part 1). Examples from Schedule 1 Part 1 include item 101: standard weight 20.71 g ±0.500 g, diameter 32.00 mm, thickness 2.80 mm, shape S1 (circular) and edge E1 (milled). Items 103 and 104 list standard weight 31.635 g ±0.500 g, diameter 40.60 mm, thickness 4.00 mm, shape S1 and edge E1. The weight tolerances are therefore explicit numeric windows to be observed.

Composition and bi-metallic construction. The Schedule differentiates between bi-metallic coins and single-metal pieces. Items 101 and 102 are bi-metallic; the composition column identifies each bi-metallic component: for item 101 the centrepiece is "99.9% silver" and the surround "99.99% gold"; for item 102 the centrepiece is "99.99% gold" and the surround "99.9% silver". The $1 coins are specified as "Not less than 99.9% silver". The use of phrasing such as "Not less than 99.9% silver" establishes a compositional floor for that content.

Design coding and explanation. The Determination uses shorthand codes for design and form: S1, E1 for shape and edge, O27, O28, O29 for obverse variants and R267-R270 for reverse variants. Part 2 of Schedule 1 provides a textual explanation for each code. Those explanations are detailed and prescriptive. For example O27 specifies "A gold annulus bearing 2 circles of raised beads immediately inside the rim, enclosing: (a) the inscriptions: (i) 'ELIZABETH II'; and (ii) 'AUSTRALIA 2002'; and (b) an inscription stating, in Arabic numerals, the amount ... followed by the word 'DOLLAR', 'DOLLARS' or 'CENTS' ... that, in turn, surrounds a silver centrepiece bearing an effigy of Queen Elizabeth II and the monogram 'IRB'." Reverse designs include narrative descriptions of imagery and inscriptions and indicate whether parts are pad printed in colour and the presence of the mint mark 'P'.

Relationship to other Determinations. Section 4 states "The specifications in this Determination do not affect any other Determination of the specifications of a coin." This establishes that the instrument is not intended to revoke or supplant other coin specifications and that multiple Determinations may coexist. The Notes record this Determination was amended by subsequent amendment determinations in 2002; the table records amendments to section 1 and to Schedule 1.

Administrative provenance. The Determination is made under subsection 13A(1) of the Currency Act 1965. The instrument itself is compiled and presented as amended up to the 2002 amendment. The commencement provision is simple and immediate: "This Determination commences on gazettal" (section 2). The Notes list Gazette notification dates for the original Determination and its amendments.

Taken together, the main concepts are precise and technical: they define which coins are intended, what metal content and physical tolerances apply, what exact inscriptions and images must appear, and the limited legal posture of the Determination relative to other determinations. The instrument is a producer-facing specification rather than a policy statement of broader economic or monetary effect.

The Determination’s text identifies a narrow and technical set of affected parties by implication rather than by explicit statutory direction. Primary addressees are those responsible for producing coins that purport to be the coins described in Schedule 1 Part 1. Because the Determination prescribes the "standard weight, the allowable variation from that weight, the dimensions and the design" for coins that match the listed denomination and composition (section 3), any entity that mints, strikes, markets or issues coins under those denominations and compositions will be directly affected.

Perth Mint and its contractors. The title identifies the Determination as a Perth Mint Determination; it is made under the Currency Act 1965. Practically, the Perth Mint, its manufacturing divisions and any external manufacturers contracted to produce the specified coins are affected because the Determination sets the technical parameters their production processes must meet. The Schedule’s detailed composition, weight and design requirements impose specific production tolerances and finishing standards, for example composition purity thresholds (99.9% silver, 99.99% gold), weight tolerances, diameters, thicknesses, milled edges (E1), circular shape (S1) and complex obverse/reverse designs that include effigies, inscriptions and pad-printed colour in some cases (Part 2).

Designers and rights-holders. Part 2 names particular effigies and designers in the reverse and obverse explanations (for example the R268 reverse listing effigies by Mary Gillick, Arnold Machin, Raphael Maklouf and Ian Rank Broadley). While the Determination itself does not state intellectual property consequences, the explicit identification of artistic works and effigies means that designers, their estates or rights-holders may have an interest in how those designs are used and reproduced. The mint mark 'P' and the monogram 'IRB' are also specified features that rights-holders or heraldic authorities may care about.

Distributors, dealers and secondary market participants. Retailers, coin dealers and auction houses marketing or selling coins that match these precise commemorative specifications must ensure product descriptions accurately reflect what the Determination prescribes. If a marketed coin claims to be one of the listed items, its physical characteristics would need to match the Determination’s specifications to avoid misdescription. The Determination does not itself create sale or consumer protection rules, but it creates a technical standard that will be relevant to claims about authenticity.

Enforcement and regulatory authorities. The Determination does not set out enforcement mechanics or penalties. However, because it is made under the Currency Act 1965, the bodies responsible for administering that Act and any delegated functions under subsection 13A(1) will be indirectly affected through duties to ensure compliance with coin specifications. Any regulatory action in relation to counterfeiting, misuse of inscriptions or contravention of coin specifications would derive from the enabling Act or other laws, not from the Determination text itself.

Other coin specification regimes. The Determination expressly states that its specifications do not affect other Determinations of coin specifications (section 4). That implies administrators, manufacturers and legal advisers who operate across multiple coin Determinations must track the various instruments together. Where another Determination covers a coin of the same denomination but a different specified composition, that other instrument remains in force and relevant.

Members of the public. Collectors and purchasers of commemorative coins are affected in a consumer-facing sense because the Determination sets the official, statutory specifications for the items they may buy, and the inscriptions include particular years, effigies and mint marks which are part of the product’s collectible attributes.

Absent from the Determination are explicit duties placed on consumers, or specific licensing requirements for private parties who might wish to reproduce the designs for commercial purposes. The Determination is directed at specifying coin characteristics; any additional licensing or legal consequences must be found in the Currency Act or separate intellectual property or trade legislation.

The Determination itself is primarily prescriptive about physical characteristics; it does not create a detailed set of procedural duties or positive rights such as licensing, fee structures or administrative appeal rights within its text. Nevertheless, the instrument creates de facto production duties and specification-based rights that flow from its structure.

Obligation to meet specifications. Section 3 operates as the operative prescription: for a coin that has the denomination and standard composition specified in Schedule 1 Part 1, this Determination "specifies" the standard weight, allowable variation, dimensions and design in the corresponding columns. The practical effect is that any coin produced that claims to be one of the listed items should meet those characteristics. From a compliance perspective, a minter or manufacturer faces the duty to produce coins to the listed weight and composition tolerances, dimensions and design features if they are to be consistent with the Determination.

Design fidelity. Part 2 translates shorthand symbols into detailed design text. Entities producing these coins will need to ensure the obverse and reverse designs match the textual descriptions. Examples include precise inscriptions ("ELIZABETH II", "AUSTRALIA 2002", "AUSTRALIA 2003" in particular Obverse symbols), the presence of the monogram 'IRB' on certain obverses, the mint mark 'P' on certain reverses, and pad printing in colour for some reverse designs (R269 and R270). The text also directs the use of particular effigies and inscriptions and the layout of annulus and centrepiece. The duty to reproduce these elements arises from the Determination’s role as a specification.

Compositional minimums and bi-metallic construction. The composition column supplies minimums and component breakdowns. For the $1 coins the text uses "Not less than 99.9% silver", which creates a compositional floor for those pieces. For bi-metallic pieces the centrepiece and surround metal purities are separately specified (for example item 101 centrepiece 99.9% silver; surround 99.99% gold). A coin that deviates from the specified composition would, by definition, not match the Schedule 1 entry and would not fall within the scope of the corresponding specification.

Relationship to other Determinations. Section 4 instructs that these specifications do not affect any other Determination of a coin’s specifications. The duty to comply with this Determination therefore coexists with any duty under other Determinations that may apply to other coins. The practical duty for the administrator or minter is to maintain compliance with multiple overlapping Determinations where relevant.

No penalties or enforcement provisions in instrument. The Determination does not itself provide rights of enforcement, sanctions for non-compliance or appeal mechanisms. It is a specification instrument. Any enforcement of adherence to these specifications, and any statutory rights to challenge administrative action, must be found in the Currency Act 1965 or other applicable legislation and administrative instruments. Practitioners should not assume penalty provisions are contained within this Determination.

Record-keeping and quality assurance implications. Although the Determination does not mandate record-keeping, the nature of the prescription implies that issuers and manufacturers will have operational duties to implement quality control: measurement of weights and dimensions to within stated tolerances, assay of precious metal content to meet minimums, and inspection of design elements including pad printing and mint marks. These are practical duties arising from production processes to meet the Determination, even though they are not spelt out as statutory obligations in the text.

Rights implicit in specification. The Determination confers a kind of definitional right: coins that match the listed denomination and composition and conform to the specified weight, dimensions and design may be described as the coins the Determination specifies. That definitional status is valuable for marketing and authenticity claims. The Determination, however, does not confer express exclusive rights to design elements, nor does it address intellectual property ownership. Those rights, if any, rest with designers, the Crown, the Perth Mint or other legal regimes beyond this Determination.

In short, the Determination creates operational duties for producers to meet tight physical and design standards and creates a statutory reference point for what constitutes the specified Perth Mint coins. It leaves enforcement, sanctions and intellectual property consequences to other statutory instruments and legal regimes.

The Determination contains no express penalty, infraction, or enforcement provisions. It is a specification instrument that states what the standard weight, allowable variation, dimensions and design of certain Perth Mint coins are (section 3; Schedule 1). There is no clause in the text that prescribes fines, criminal offences, seizure powers, inspection powers, or administrative penalties for failure to conform.

Consequently, any enforcement or penalty regime applicable to conduct contravening these specifications must be sourced in the enabling legislation under which the Determination was made, namely the Currency Act 1965, or in other statutes that address counterfeiting, false representations, trade practices or consumer protection. The Determination’s header and opening paragraph make that statutory provenance clear: it is "made under subsection 13A(1) of the Currency Act 1965." Readers and practitioners should therefore consult the Currency Act 1965 to identify statutory offences, enforcement powers, delegated authorities and administrative remedies that relate to non-conforming coins. The Determination itself gives no locus for enforcement action.

Practical enforcement implications. In the absence of internal penalty provisions, enforcement will typically follow these modalities, though the Determination does not set them out: administrative refusal to accept an item as an authorised coin; criminal or civil action under the Currency Act for unauthorised manufacture or misuse; prosecutions under counterfeiting or trademark laws where relevant; or consumer protection actions for misrepresentation. None of these modalities are contained in this Determination, so they are matters for cross-reference.

Standard-of-proof and evidentiary considerations. Because the Determination prescribes numeric tolerances and textual design features, any enforcement action that relies on the Determination would need to prove deviation from those numerical or textual specifications. Examples in this Determination that produce clear evidentiary thresholds include the weight tolerances (20.71 g ±0.500 g for item 101; 31.635 g ±0.500 g for items 103 and 104), diameters, thickness and compositional minimums ("Not less than 99.9% silver"). These are objective measures that can be tested by assay, mass measurement, diameter measurement and visual inspection of inscriptions, effigies and mint marks. The Determination therefore provides hard technical thresholds that can be invoked in evidence, even though it does not itself deliver enforcement mechanisms.

Administrative discretion and delegated action. The text does not identify which official or agency is the responsible enforcement authority. The enabling provision in the Currency Act 1965 presumably allocates decision-making and enforcement powers to particular offices or ministers, but those allocations and the scope of discretion are not contained in this Determination. Practitioners who need to act on potential non-compliance should consult the Currency Act 1965 and administrative instruments that implement it for information on inspection powers, delegation and administrative enforcement.

Conclusion on penalties. The Determination is silent on penalties and enforcement. It supplies the technical standard that any enforcement action would need to measure against, but the legal authority to penalise, seize or prosecute, the procedures for inspection and enforcement, and the remedies available are not in this instrument and must be located in the Currency Act or other legislation.

This Determination is a specialised regulatory instrument; its text both references and limits its own interaction with other laws. The explicit legal relationship it creates is narrow: it is made under subsection 13A(1) of the Currency Act 1965, and section 4 states that its specifications "do not affect any other Determination of the specifications of a coin." From those provisions the following legal interactions arise.

Enabling statute: Currency Act 1965. The Determination’s power and legal existence flow from subsection 13A(1) of the Currency Act 1965 (as stated in the instrument heading). The Determination does not reproduce that subsection, nor does it restate the enforcement, delegation, or administrative procedures contained in the Currency Act. Any legal consequences for failing to comply with these specifications, or for unauthorised manufacture and distribution of coinage, will be governed by the Currency Act and associated regulations. The Determination therefore functions as a subordinate instrument under the Currency Act’s delegation structure.

Other coin Determinations. Section 4 instructs that the specifications in this Determination do not affect any other Determination of the specifications of a coin. The practical legal interaction is therefore cumulative or coexistential. Multiple Determinations can be in force concurrently, each specifying different coins or overlapping features. Administrators and producers must therefore maintain awareness of the matrix of Determinations that apply to Perth Mint coinage. Where another Determination governs a coin of the same denomination but a different composition, both instruments remain relevant and must be read together to determine which specification applies to a particular coin.

Intellectual property regimes. The Determination names effigies and designers (for example in R268 the listing of effigies designed by Mary Gillick, Arnold Machin, Raphael Maklouf and Ian Rank Broadley) and specifies monograms, inscriptions and mint marks. While the Determination itself does not grant or record copyright ownership or moral rights, the presence of named artistic works means that copyright and related rights under other laws may be implicated in the reproduction and commercial use of the designs. The Determination thus interacts indirectly with intellectual property law, in the sense that design reproduction must also respect the rights and licences existing under IP law, a matter outside the text of the Determination.

Consumer and trade laws. The Determination creates an objective specification for particular coins that is relevant to conduct regulated under consumer protection and trade description laws. If a coin is marketed as one of the specified items, representations about composition, weight and design may be tested against this Determination in disputes about misdescription. The Determination itself does not create consumer remedies, but it provides a statutory benchmark that will inform other laws' application.

Customs, export and precious metals regimes. The Determination prescribes high-purity gold and silver content for certain coins (for example 99.99% gold surrounds). Those metal content specifications may be relevant to statutory regimes that regulate export or trade in precious metals, duty or customs classification. Again, the Determination does not address customs or export control; it supplies technical data that may be used within those regimes.

Counterfeiting and criminal law. The Determination’s prescribed designs, inscriptions and mint mark may be relevant to counterfeiting offences under separate criminal provisions. The instrument gives the technical characteristics against which allegedly counterfeit items would be compared, but any criminal liability for counterfeiting is determined by criminal statutes and evidentiary standards outside the Determination text.

Administrative law and review. Because the Determination is an instrument made under the Currency Act, actions taken under it by government bodies (such as recognizing or rejecting coins, or decisions about minting) may be amenable to administrative law review, subject to the procedures and rights set out in the enabling Act and any relevant administrative review statutes. The Determination does not itself establish review rights.

In summary, this Determination is a technical, subordinate instrument that supplies binding specifications for certain Perth Mint coins and interacts legally with the Currency Act 1965 and other statutes that provide enforcement, intellectual property protections, customs classification or consumer remedies. Where those interactions matter for enforcement or commercial consequences, the relevant provisions are located outside this Determination.

The instrument includes an explicit notes section recording amendments and compilation details. The compilation was prepared on 27 March 2006 and takes into account amendments up to the Currency (Perth Mint) Determination 2001 (No. 2A) Amendment Determination 2002 (No. 1). The Notes provide a Table of Instruments and a Table of Amendments.

Table of Instruments. The Notes list three instruments in chronological order with Gazette notification and commencement dates:

• Currency (Perth Mint) Determination 2001 (No. 2), notified 26 September 2001, commenced 26 September 2001.
• Currency (Perth Mint) Determination 2001 (No. 2) Amendment Determination 2002 (No. 1), notified 15 May 2002, commenced 15 May 2002.
• Currency (Perth Mint) Determination 2001 (No. 2A) Amendment Determination 2002 (No. 1), notified 18 September 2002, commenced 18 September 2002.

Table of Amendments. The Table of Amendments shows the following entries:

• Provision affected: S. 1 , How affected: amended 2002 (No. 1) (First Amendment).
• Provision affected: Schedule 1 , entries show amendments in 2002 (No. 1) (First Amendment and Second Amendment). The table format in the Notes records ad., am., rep., rs. abbreviations, and the Table of Amendments records that section 1 and Schedule 1 were subject to amendment by the 2002 instruments.

Compilation note. The front matter of the instrument states the compilation date and that the document is "as amended" and "taking into account amendments up to" the specified 2002 Amendment Determination. The Notes function as an internal record that the instrument has been modified after its original gazettal and that those modifications were incorporated into the current compilation.

Implication for practitioners. The amendment history recorded in the Notes indicates that Schedule 1 and section 1 were the primary objects of amendment. Practitioners should not rely on the instrument’s original 2001 text alone; they must consult the amendment instruments referenced in the Notes and the Gazette entries provided to ensure they are working from the current, operative specification. The Notes give the Gazette references and dates required to locate the amendment instruments and the context needed for historical or transitional analysis.

No amendments after 2002 recorded in this compilation. The compilation statement declares that it takes into account amendments up to the 2002 Amendment Determination. There is no entry in the Notes for amendments after 18 September 2002 in this text. If later amendments exist, they will not be reflected in this compilation and must be checked in more recent legislative databases or the Gazette.

Record of which parts changed. The Table of Amendments specifically notes section 1 and Schedule 1 as amended; the second Table entry repeats Schedule 1 as affected. The absence of entries against other sections (for example sections 2-4) indicates that amendments were concentrated on naming and the Schedule technical content. Users interested in what specific wording changed will need to compare the original 2001 Determination text published in the 26 September 2001 Gazette with the amendment instruments listed for May and September 2002.

Conclusion on amendments. The instrument’s internal Notes provide clear pointers to the original instrument and two amendment determinations in 2002. Practitioners should treat the compilation as current up to September 2002 and verify whether subsequent amendments have been made since the compilation date of 27 March 2006 if up-to-date accuracy is required.

This Determination’s text and compilation do not record any litigation history. There are no cases, judgments or legal proceedings cited in the instrument, its Notes, or its Schedule. The compilation contains only the Determination text, Schedule 1 design and specification entries, and the Notes that list amendment instruments and Gazette dates.

What the instrument does provide are the technical criteria that a court, tribunal or enforcement body would use to assess whether a coin met the statutory specification if an action were brought alleging non-conformity, misdescription, counterfeiting or similar conduct. Examples of measurable data in the Determination that would be relevant as evidence include:

• Numeric weight standards and allowable variations (for example 20.71 g ±0.500 g for item 101; 31.635 g ±0.500 g for items 103 and 104).
• Diameter and thickness measurements (32.00 mm by 2.80 mm for the $20 items; 40.60 mm by 4.00 mm for the $1 items).
• Compositional thresholds (for example "Not less than 99.9% silver" for $1 coins; bi-metallic centrepiece and surround purities for the $20 coins).
• Prescribed inscriptions, effigies and mint marks as described in Part 2.

Because the Determination is a subordinate instrument under the Currency Act 1965, if litigation arose concerning its application or compliance the relevant procedural and substantive legal rules, including standing, jurisdiction and remedies, would derive from the Currency Act and general administrative and criminal law. The Determination does not itself provide causes of action, nor does it cite authority for legal proceedings.

Absence of recorded litigation does not mean disputes cannot or have not arisen. Practitioners requiring a litigation history should search court and tribunal databases, the Gazette entries cited in the Notes, and the records of the administering authority since none of that material is reproduced here.

In short, the compilation contains no litigation history or judicial interpretation; it is purely a technical specification and an index of amendment instruments. Any litigation history that may exist in relation to these coins or their specifications is not recorded in this text and must be researched in external legal databases and official records.

The instrument’s technical specificity produces several practical risks and unexpected traps for producers, dealers and advisers. These are not legal conclusions about policy. They are concrete attention points drawn strictly from the Determination’s wording and structure.

Composition-versus-denomination linkage. Section 3 ties the application of the specification to a coin that has both the listed denomination and the listed standard composition. That means a coin with the same denomination but a different composition will not fall under the same Schedule entry. Producers or marketers who assume "same denomination equals same specification" may be mistaken. For example, if a $1 coin were produced with a different silver purity than "Not less than 99.9% silver" (Schedule 1 Part 1, items 103-104), it would not match items 103 or 104 in the Schedule and therefore would not be the coin specified by this Determination.

Bi-metallic asymmetry. Items 101 and 102 are both $20 bi-metallic coins, but they reverse the metal purities between centrepiece and surround. Item 101 specifies centrepiece 99.9% silver and surround 99.99% gold; item 102 specifies centrepiece 99.99% gold and surround 99.9% silver. These are distinct items even though they share denomination and diameter. Confusion can arise if a producer or vendor swaps centre and surround materials in manufacture or description. The Schedule’s precision means that material placement is part of the design specification.

Year inscriptions and obverse variants. The obverse codes O27 and O28 include specific year inscriptions: O27 carries "AUSTRALIA 2002" and O28 "AUSTRALIA 2003" (Part 2). O29 obverse includes "2002" or "2003". The presence of these year inscriptions in obverse descriptions means accuracy in stamping or pad printing of year is material to compliance. A minted $20 coin with the wrong obverse year would not conform to the textual description in Part 2.

Monograms, effigies and multiple effigies. Some reverse descriptions are complex. R268, for instance, requires a silver annulus with particular inscriptions and a gold centrepiece bearing "the following effigies of Queen Elizabeth II: (i) the effigy designed by Mary Gillick; (ii) ... Ian Rank Broadley" together with the inscription "ER II" and mint mark 'P'. Translating that textual prescription into die design requires careful legal and artistic clarity about which effigy is used and how multiple effigies are represented. Mistakes in reproducing the specified effigies or misplacing the monogram 'IRB' will produce non-conformance.

Pad printing in colour. Reverses R269 and R270 require pad printed colour for particular elements (R269 pad printed Union Jack; R270 pad printed St Edward’s Crown). Color application is a manufacturing step distinct from standard striking and requires separate quality control. Failure to apply or correctly register the pad-printed colour will produce a coin that fails to meet the Determination’s textual design requirements.

Weight tolerances and assay precision. The weight tolerances are relatively tight (for example ±0.500 g). Combined with the high purities of gold and silver specified, small changes in plating, bonding or material tolerance can cause a coin to fall outside the prescribed window. For bi-metallic pieces, accurate control of component masses is essential. Assay methods to confirm metal purity must also be capable of supporting "not less than" precision for silver or gold content.

Mint mark and monogram. The mint mark 'P' and monogram 'IRB' appear in the Part 2 design descriptions. Failure to include the mint mark where required or incorrect use of the monogram may create authenticity disputes. The Determination prescribes the content; absence or misapplication risks a product being non-conforming.

Coexistence with other Determinations. Section 4 clarifies that these specifications do not affect other Determinations. If another Determination covers coins of the same denomination with different specifications, confusion can arise in classification and marketing. Sellers and manufacturers must ensure the correct Determination is cited when describing a coin.

No enforcement or remedy provisions in the instrument. Because the Determination contains no enforcement provisions, parties cannot rely on it alone to identify statutory penalties or compliance procedures. Practitioners should not assume that the Determination confers remedies; enforcement is found in the Currency Act and other statutes.

Amendment history and version control. The Notes show amendments in 2002. If users rely on older drafts, or on external marketing collateral that predates amendments, descriptions may be out of date. Always validate the version of the Determination and confirm whether later amendments exist beyond those incorporated in this compilation.

In sum, the "gotchas" are technical: misplacing metal purities, wrong obverse year, missing mint marks, incorrect pad-printed colour, weight out of tolerance, and confusion with other Determinations. Each of these points arises directly from the exacting language of the Schedule and Part 2 design explanations and is therefore a concrete compliance risk.

The Determination is procedural in the sense that compliance means ensuring that any coin manufactured or marketed as one of the specified items matches the Schedule’s denomination-composition pairing and every prescribed physical and design attribute. The following step-by-step checklist is grounded in the Determination text.

1. Identify the precise Schedule item.

   • Confirm the coin’s denomination and standard composition match one of the items in Schedule 1 Part 1 (items 101-104). Section 3 applies the rest of the columns only to a coin that has the denomination and standard composition specified in columns 2 and 3.

2. Verify metal composition and placement.

   • For bi-metallic items (101 and 102) ensure the centrepiece and surround metal purities match the Schedule entries (for example item 101 centrepiece 99.9% silver; surround 99.99% gold). For $1 coins (items 103-104) ensure silver content is not less than 99.9%.
   • Maintain assay documentation and certificates to demonstrate compliance with compositional minimums.

3. Control mass and tolerances.

   • Produce coins to the standard weight and allowable variation listed in column 4. For example item 101 standard weight 20.71 g ±0.500 g; items 103 and 104 standard weight 31.635 g ±0.500 g.
   • Implement production weighing procedures and statistical quality control to ensure batch compliance.
   • Keep measurement records that show each production lot’s mean mass and variation within the allowable window.

4. Dimension and shape adherence.

   • Ensure the coin’s diameter and thickness meet the mm values in column 5 (for example 32.00 mm diameter and 2.80 mm thickness for the $20 items; 40.60 mm by 4.00 mm for the $1 items).
   • Confirm shape S1 (circular) and edge E1 (milled) are applied as required. Document inspection protocols and maintain gauges for diameter and thickness.

5. Produce obverse and reverse designs per Part 2.

   • Translate the design symbols (O27, O28, O29; R267-R270) into die specifications. Part 2 contains precise textual descriptions: inscriptions to be used, effigies to be reproduced, presence of monograms, mint marks 'P', beads and annulus features, and any pad-printed colour elements.
   • For obverses: ensure the inscription text and year (AUSTRALIA 2002 for O27, AUSTRALIA 2003 for O28, and O29 permitting 2002 or 2003) match the correct code. Include the effigy and monogram 'IRB' where specified.
   • For reverses: follow the descriptive requirements for the imagery, inscriptions and mint mark. For R268 and similar entries that reference multiple effigies, ensure the die art implements the specified listing.
   • If pad printing in colour is specified (R269, R270), use an approved pad-printing process and verify colour registration and durability.

6. Include mint marks and monograms as required.

   • Where Part 2 specifies the mint mark 'P' include it in the correct position. Include monogram 'IRB' where the obverse description requires it.

7. Maintain documentary evidence.

   • Keep die proofs, design approvals, assay certificates, weight and dimension inspection logs, and pad-printing quality control records. The Determination does not require a particular documentation regime, but those records will be necessary to demonstrate conformance if authenticity or regulatory questions arise.

8. Version control and amendment checking.

   • The Notes record amendments up to September 2002 and a compilation date of 27 March 2006. Before minting or marketing, check whether further amendments have been made after the compilation date. Consult the Gazette notices listed in the Notes and current legislative databases to ensure you are using the operative text.

9. Coordinate with counsel on intellectual property and licensing.

   • The Determination identifies designs and effigies; if designers’ rights, Crown copyright, or licensing obligations exist, obtain the required permissions. The Determination itself does not grant reproduction rights.

10. Cross-reference enforcement and enabling law.

    • The Determination contains no enforcement provisions. Confirm with legal counsel or the administering authority what statutory consequences attach to non-conformance under the Currency Act 1965 and related laws.

11. Market description accuracy.

    • When selling or advertising coins, ensure product descriptions match the Determination content exactly: denomination, composition, weight tolerance, diameter, thickness, obverse and reverse codes, year stamp and mint mark. Misdescription will create consumer and trade risk.

12. Quality assurance for multi-component assembly.

    • For bi-metallic coins, ensure the bonding, assembly and finishing processes do not materially alter the specified weights, dimensions or composition readings. Conduct end-of-line checks that replicate how a regulator or buyer might test for compliance.

13. Handling variant items.

    • Items 103 and 104 are both $1 silver coins but have different reverse codes (R269 and R270). Ensure the correct reverse is used for the correct coin and that any packaging or certification unambiguously identifies which item the buyer is receiving.

This compliance checklist is practical and strictly derived from the Determination’s content. The Determination does not itself require particular administrative filings, certification procedures or approvals for dies and design art. Those administrative processes, if required, will be governed by the Currency Act or by directions of the administering authority. Legal advice should be taken where the coin production or marketing raises questions about enforcement, intellectual property, classification for customs, or other statutory obligations outside the Determination.