Primary Produce (Food Safety Schemes) (Dairy) Regulations 2017

The Regulations pivot around a small number of core concepts. These concepts define who is regulated, what legal status the regulator holds, what standards must be complied with and how funding and administration will work.

• Accredited producer: defined broadly to mean a person authorised by an accreditation to carry on a dairy primary production business, dairy processing business or dairy transport business (reg 3(1)). Accreditation is the legal gateway to undertake the regulated activities; reg 15 makes it an offence under the Act to engage in those activities without accreditation.
• Dairy primary production business, dairy processing business, dairy transport business: each term is defined by activity, emphasising commercial purpose. Dairy primary production business covers production of milk for human or animal consumption and expressly includes keeping, grazing, feeding and milking of animals and storage of milk on the milking premises (reg 3(1)). Dairy processing business covers manufacture of dairy products and dairy transport business covers collection and transport of milk or bulk movement of dairy products between processors (reg 3(1)).
• Dairy products and milk: dairy products are tied to Standard 4.2.4 of the Food Standards Code and the Regulations specify that products within Standard 4.2.4 are "prescribed milk products" for the Act’s definition of dairy produce (reg 4). Milk is defined to include colostrum from specified species (cow, camel, goat, sheep or buffalo) (reg 3(1)).
• Dairy Authority of South Australia (the Authority): continued in existence and designated as the accreditation body with functions to administer the scheme, monitor and enforce compliance with Standard 4.2.4 and approve food safety arrangements (reg 7; reg 12). The Authority is a body corporate with power to contract, employ staff and delegate (reg 7(2); reg 13).
• Approved food safety arrangement: an accreditation condition. An accredited producer must have an approved food safety arrangement (reg 17). The Authority also approves and monitors these arrangements (reg 12(2)(c)).
• Standard 4.2.4 of the Food Standards Code: the Regulations require accredited producers to comply with the Standard as modified by reg 18(4). The Authority has limited power to exempt producers from specified provisions where satisfactory alternative arrangements exist or to allow time to comply (reg 18(3)).
• Fees and returns: the Regulations institute periodic fees (monthly and annual) and returns to fund accreditation and enforcement functions (Part 5). The Authority determines monthly rates and annual fees but must, in setting monthly rates, have regard only to the estimated costs of accrediting and enforcing compliance for that class of producer (reg 20(2)) and must disregard auditing costs incurred by the Authority associated with auditing of approved food safety arrangements (reg 20(3)).
• Designation of large scale dairy processor: the Authority may designate or revoke designations by written notice (reg 3(2)). Designation changes the timing and mechanics of fee payment and reporting: large scale processors pay monthly fees and pay on behalf of dairy farmers who sell milk to them (reg 22).

These concepts set up an administrative regime that ties statutory accreditation to compliance with the national Food Standards Code, funds the administrative body through producer fees, and places practical collection and reporting responsibilities on particular categories of operator. The Regulations also create governance rules for the Authority, including a tripartite membership, Ministerial direction subject to a carve out for reports and recommendations (reg 7(4)), and annual reporting to Parliament with audited accounts (reg 14).

The Regulations identify who is subject to the scheme and who bears financial, administrative and legal obligations.

Primary regulated persons

• Dairy farmers: persons carrying on dairy primary production businesses as defined in reg 3(1). They must be accredited to engage in those activities (reg 15), hold an approved food safety arrangement (reg 17) and comply with Standard 4.2.4 as modified (reg 18). Dairy farmers who supply milk to a designated large scale dairy processor have their periodic fee payable by that processor (reg 22(1)(b)).
• Dairy processors: persons carrying on dairy processing businesses. Processors who are designated as large scale by the Authority (reg 3(2)) are subject to a monthly fee and reporting cycle and are required to pay monthly fees for their own activity and on behalf of dairy farmers who sell milk to them (reg 22). Processors not so designated fall into the "other producers" category and pay an annual fee and lodge an annual return by 30 September (reg 23).
• Dairy transporters: persons carrying on dairy transport businesses must be accredited and comply with the same standards; they fall into the "all other producers" annual fee class under reg 23(1)(c).

Who decides and who enforces

• The Dairy Authority of South Australia: the statutory accreditation and enforcement body for the scheme (reg 12(1)). The Authority decides accreditation, approves food safety arrangements, monitors and enforces compliance with Standard 4.2.4 (reg 12(2)(a)-(c)), determines fees constrained by reg 20, and may issue information notices (reg 26).
• The Minister: the Authority is subject to the Minister’s direction in performance of its functions, except regarding the making of recommendations or reports to the Minister (reg 7(4)). The Minister receives the Authority’s annual report which must be laid before Parliament (reg 14).

Financial and administrative burden

• Fee payers: accredited producers are liable for periodic fees (monthly or annual) and specific application fees (Schedule 1 items 1-3). Designation as a large scale processor shifts the payment cadence to monthly and places a collection obligation on that processor to pay fees on behalf of dairy farmers who supply them (reg 22).
• Entity obligations: accredited producers must establish and maintain approved food safety arrangements (reg 17) and comply with Standard 4.2.4 (reg 18). They must file returns and provide information to the Authority on request with a maximum penalty of $5,000 for non-compliance (reg 26).

Other institutional actors

• Parliament: receives the Authority’s annual report, including audited accounts and any Ministerial directions (reg 14).
• The Public Sector (Honesty and Accountability) Act 1995: reg 11 modifies how conflicts of interest are treated for Authority members, stating that a member is not taken to have an interest for the purposes of that Act solely because their interest is shared in common with the dairy industry or a substantial section of it.

Transitionally affected persons

• Persons previously accredited under the 2005 Regulations: existing approved food safety arrangements and exemptions under the revoked Regulations continue under the new Regulations subject to the same terms (Schedule 3).

In sum, the Regulations affect the full value chain from farm to processor and transporter, allocate fee liabilities and reporting obligations according to whether operators are designated large scale or not, and vest administrative authority largely with the Dairy Authority subject to Ministerial oversight and parliamentary reporting.

The Regulations impose specific duties on accredited producers and confer rights and discretions on the Authority and the Minister. Below are the principal duties and the rights that shape behaviour.

Duties on accredited producers

• Accreditation requirement: a person must not engage in a class of activities covered by the dairy industry food safety scheme without accreditation for that class (reg 15). The accreditation requirement is functionally the primary regulatory gate.
• Capacity to comply: an applicant must satisfy the Authority that they have the capacity, or have made or propose to make arrangements, to meet the requirements of the Act and Regulations applicable to the activities to be accredited (reg 16). This creates an evidentiary burden at the application stage.
• Approved food safety arrangement: an accredited producer must have and implement an approved food safety arrangement (reg 17). The Authority approves arrangements and monitors their implementation (reg 12(2)(c)).
• Compliance with Food Standards Code: an accredited producer must ensure activities under accreditation comply with the provisions of Standard 4.2.4 of the Food Standards Code applicable to those activities, read as modified by reg 18(4) (reg 18(2)). Non-compliance may lead to enforcement action by the Authority under its functions to monitor and enforce the Standard (reg 12(2)(b)).
• Periodic fees and returns: accredited producers must pay periodic fees and lodge returns according to class. Large scale dairy processors must pay monthly fees within 14 days of each month, calculated by reference to the volume processed in the prior relevant month and one twelfth of the annual fee (reg 22(1)(a)). They must also pay, on behalf of each dairy farmer selling to them, a monthly fee calculated on litres sold in the relevant month and lodge a monthly return (reg 22(1)(b)-(c)). Other producers pay an annual fee and lodge annual returns by 30 September (reg 23).
• Information notices: an accredited producer must comply with a written notice from the Authority requiring information to enable the Authority to determine the producer’s level of activity; failure carries a maximum penalty of $5,000 and an expiation fee of $315 (reg 26).

Rights, discretions and administrative powers

• Authority's discretion to permit exemptions: the Authority may, on application, exempt an accredited producer from specified provisions of Standard 4.2.4 if satisfied that satisfactory alternative arrangements exist or to allow time to comply (reg 18(3)). An application fee for exemption is $100 (Schedule 1 item 3).
• Fee relief powers: the Authority may waive, reduce or defer payment of a fee payable under these Regulations if it considers that appropriate in the circumstances (reg 5(1)). The Authority also has debt recovery powers (reg 5(2)).
• Designation rights: the Authority may designate a producer as carrying on a large scale dairy processing business or revoke such a designation by written notice (reg 3(2)). Designation alters the fee and reporting regime for the designated entity and those who sell to it (reg 22).
• Fee-setting constraints: when determining monthly rates the Authority must have regard only to its estimate of costs associated with accrediting producers of that class and enforcing their compliance with the scheme (reg 20(2)). The Authority must disregard costs associated with auditing of approved food safety arrangements conducted by or on behalf of the Authority (reg 20(3)). These constraints limit what the Authority may roll into monthly rates.
• Governance and reporting: the Authority has rights to delegate, to contract, to engage staff and consultants (reg 13), and must prepare an annual report with audited accounts and particulars of directions given by the Minister (reg 14(1)-(2)). The Minister must cause the report to be laid before each House of Parliament within 12 sitting days of receipt (reg 14(3)).

Procedural and legal protections

• Continuity of arrangements: approved food safety arrangements and exemptions in force under the revoked 2005 Regulations continue on the same terms under these Regulations (Schedule 3 items 2-3). That protects incumbents from immediate re-approval processes.
• Conflict of interest carve out: reg 11 provides that, for the purposes of the Public Sector (Honesty and Accountability) Act 1995, a member of the Authority is not taken to have a personal or pecuniary interest solely because their interest is shared in common with the dairy industry or a substantial section of it. This affects how recusals are treated.

Duty/rights interaction summary

• Who bears costs: accredited producers ultimately fund the Authority through periodic fees; a procedural right to waiver exists but is discretionary (reg 5).
• Who decides compliance questions: the Authority determines accreditation and approves food safety arrangements and has enforcement responsibilities under reg 12(2)(b)-(c).
• What can be varied: the Authority can set fees subject to specified cost-accounting boundaries (reg 20), grant specified exemptions from the Food Standards Code (reg 18(3)) and designate large scale processors (reg 3(2)), each decision carrying material consequences for regulated parties.

These duties and rights establish a regime of mandatory accreditation, statutory adherence to Standard 4.2.4, a fees-funded enforcement model, discrete relief mechanisms and administrative discretion concentrated in the Authority, with Ministerial oversight and parliamentary accountability through annual reporting.

The Regulations create specific compliance and enforcement levers and specify monetary penalties or expiation amounts for a limited set of breaches. Enforcement is to be exercised by the Dairy Authority under its statutory functions.

Enforcement responsibilities

• The Authority’s functions include monitoring and enforcing compliance by accredited producers with Standard 4.2.4 of the Food Standards Code (reg 12(2)(b)). The Authority is the accreditation body (reg 12(1)). The Regulations do not, however, list every enforcement power of the Authority in granular detail. The functions and powers include example powers to enter into contracts, employ staff, engage consultants and delegate (reg 13(1)(a)-(d)). A delegation may be revoked at will (reg 13(2)).

Specific penalties and expiation amounts provided in the Regulations

• Failure to comply with an information notice: reg 26 requires an accredited producer to comply with a written notice from the Authority requiring information to enable the Authority to determine the producer's level of activity. Maximum penalty: $5,000. Expiation fee: $315 (reg 26).
• Default in payment of an annual fee or lodging of an annual return: Schedule 1 item 4 prescribes a penalty of $180 for default in payment of an annual fee or lodging an annual return (Schedule 1).
• Application fees and variation/exemption fees: Schedule 1 prescribes set fees for applications: accreditation $100 (item 1), variation of accreditation $100 (item 2), application for exemption from compliance with Standard 4.2.4 $100 (item 3).
• Other fee recovery: the Authority may recover a fee or part of a fee as a debt from the person liable to pay (reg 5(2)).

Scope and limits on fee-setting as an enforcement funding mechanism

• The Authority sets monthly rates and annual fees to calculate periodic fees, but must, when determining monthly rates, have regard only to its estimate of the costs associated with accrediting producers of that class and enforcing their compliance with the scheme (reg 20(2)). The Authority must disregard costs incurred by it associated with auditing of approved food safety arrangements conducted by or on behalf of the Authority (reg 20(3)). These constraints limit the Authority’s ability to fund enforcement from fee income beyond accreditation and enforcement costs narrowly defined.

Administrative enforcement mechanisms

• Accreditation as a pre-condition: reg 15 establishes accreditation as a legal precondition to carry on regulated activities. The Regulations do not list an explicit criminal sanction in the text for carrying on activities without accreditation, but the provision “for the purposes of section 12 of the Act” anchors the obligation in the parent Act. Any penalty for unauthorised operation would flow from the Act’s enforcement regime rather than these Regulations. The Regulations do provide for penalties relating to failure to comply with particular regulatory requirements such as information notices and fee defaults (reg 26; Schedule 1).
• Authority’s discretionary powers: the Authority may waive, reduce or defer payment of a fee if it considers appropriate (reg 5(1)). It may also grant exemptions from elements of Standard 4.2.4 on application (reg 18(3)). Those discretions operate as administrative relief mechanisms that can alter enforcement outcomes at the Authority’s instance.

Procedural checks and transparency

• Annual report with audited accounts: the Authority must present an annual report to the Minister on or before 30 September in each year, and the report must include audited accounts and details of directions given to the Authority by the Minister during the reporting period (reg 14(1)-(2)). The Minister must lay the report before Parliament within 12 sitting days (reg 14(3)). These provisions create transparency around the Authority’s finances and Ministerial directions.

What is not in the Regulations

• The Regulations do not detail all enforcement remedies that the Authority may use in cases of contravention of Standard 4.2.4 or of operating without accreditation; those likely rest in the parent Act. The Regulations do, however, equip the Authority to demand information, recover fees as debts and impose prescribed financial penalties for specific defaults.

Practical enforcement implications

• The Authority’s monitoring and enforcement role coupled with fee-collection powers and information notices places it in a position to detect and act on non-compliance. Material enforcement sticks set out in the Regulations are primarily monetary or administrative rather than prescribing immediate closure or criminal sanctions within the text of the Regulations themselves.

The Regulations explicitly link to, modify or are constrained by several other statutes and instruments. The key interactions are with the Primary Produce (Food Safety Schemes) Act 2004 (the parent Act), the Food Standards Code (Standard 4.2.4), the Food Act 2001 and the Public Sector (Honesty and Accountability) Act 1995. They also continue and revoke earlier subordinate legislation.

Interaction with the Primary Produce (Food Safety Schemes) Act 2004

• The Regulations are made under and operate for the purposes of the Act. The accreditation obligation in reg 15 is expressly “for the purposes of section 12 of the Act” and the Part 5 fee framework is made for the purposes of section 17 of the Act (reg 19). The Act provides the statutory backbone; the Regulations implement operational and procedural detail such as definitions, fees, and functions of the Authority.
• Because the Act contains central enforcement provisions and offences, certain enforcement outcomes for operating without accreditation are likely governed by the Act rather than these Regulations. The Regulations preserve prior approvals and exemptions and link transitional arrangements to the parent Act (Schedule 3).

Interaction with the Food Standards Code and the Food Act 2001

• Standard 4.2.4 of the Food Standards Code is the substantive food safety standard that the Regulations make mandatory for accredited producers (reg 18(2)). The Regulations modify the application of that Standard by substituting the local definitions in reg 18(4), and reg 4 prescribes that dairy products within Standard 4.2.4 are prescribed milk products for the purpose of the Act’s definition of dairy produce.
• Food Standards Code is a national instrument; the Regulations adopt it as the technical basis for operational compliance while tailoring the definitions and creating a South Australian enforcement channel via the Authority.
• The Food Standards Code is given the same meaning as in the Food Act 2001 (reg 3(1)), thereby linking definitional scope to the statute that governs food regulation within South Australia.

Interaction with the Public Sector (Honesty and Accountability) Act 1995

• Reg 11 proposes a statutory interpretation rule for conflicts of interest for members of the Authority: a member will not be taken to have a direct or indirect personal or pecuniary interest in a matter for the purposes of that Act by reason only of an interest shared in common with the dairy industry or a substantial section of it. This modifies the operation of the Public Sector Act with respect to Authority members and potentially affects how recusal and disclosure obligations are applied.

Interaction with previous subordinate legislation

• The Regulations revoke the Primary Produce (Food Safety Schemes) (Dairy Industry) Regulations 2005 and continue the Authority established under them (Schedule 2; reg 7(1)). Transitional provisions preserve designations, approved food safety arrangements and exemptions that existed under the revoked Regulations (Schedule 3). The Legislative history records the principal regulations number and commencement date.

Administrative law and public accountability connections

• The Authority is subject to direction by the Minister in the performance of its functions (reg 7(4)), but the Authority retains the right to make recommendations and reports to the Minister independent of ministerial direction. The Authority must provide an annual report to the Minister with audited accounts and details of Ministerial directions, and the Minister must table the report in Parliament (reg 14). Those provisions create public law accountability points.

Financial and audit interactions

• Fee-setting constraints in reg 20 mean that when determining monthly rates the Authority must confine itself to estimated costs of accrediting and enforcing for the relevant class. The Authority must also exclude auditing costs associated with audits of approved food safety arrangements (reg 20(3)). Those directions interact with public finance expectations about transparency and allocation of operational costs.

In sum, the Regulations sit within a network of statutory instruments: they operationalise the parent Act, adopt the national technical standard for dairy production, modify conflict of interest rules for the Authority, and preserve continuity with prior subordinate law. Obligations, enforcement and penalties either flow directly from the Regulations or are routed to the Act for primary enforcement mechanisms.

The Regulations’ legislative metadata and transitional arrangements are contained in the instrument text and schedules. The text gives the following history and points for checking amendment status.

• Making and commencement: The principal Regulations are identified as Primary Produce (Food Safety Schemes) (Dairy) Regulations 2017 (Regulations 2017 No 288). The Gazette reference is 4.10.2017 p4235. The Regulations commence four months after the day on which they are made, consistent with the Subordinate Legislation Act 1978 s 10AA; the Legislative history notes commencement date 4 February 2018 (reg 2; Legislative history).
• Revocation of the 2005 Regulations: Schedule 2 expressly revokes the Primary Produce (Food Safety Schemes) (Dairy Industry) Regulations 2005. Concurrently the Dairy Authority established under the revoked Regulations is continued under reg 7(1). Transitional provisions in Schedule 3 preserve existing designations, approved food safety arrangements and exemptions under the revoked Regulations (Schedule 3 items 1-3).
• No amending instruments listed in this text: the Regulations themselves include a Legislative history table that lists only the principal 2017 Regulations and their commencement. The text provided does not include any subsequent amending instruments or later schedules. Users should verify on the official legislation website whether later statutory instruments or amendments post-dating this source have been made.
• Structural continuity: Many operative provisions carry forward practical arrangements from the revoked Regulations, including the Authority’s constitution, accreditation framework and approved food safety arrangements via Schedule 3. This indicates an intention for regulatory continuity rather than a clean break.
• Fees and Schedules: Schedule 1 lists application fees and penalties. These monetary figures are fixed in the Regulations and any change to them requires a formal amending instrument. The text does not show any subsequent changes to Schedule 1.
• Delegated discretion preserved: The Regulations continue powers of the Authority including delegations and employer/contractor arrangements (reg 13). Any substantive changes to those powers would require amendment to these Regulations.

Practical note for practitioners

• Because the instrument creates fee liabilities and compliance obligations tied to operational activities, readers should check the consolidated versions on the South Australian legislation website for any later amendments to fee amounts, fee-setting methodology, or definitions (for example, changes to the classification of large scale processing) that could materially affect cost and compliance positions.
• Transitional protections mean that arrangements existing immediately before commencement continued under the new Regulations, but subsequent regulatory change could affect new applicants or existing accreditations upon later modification of the Regulations or Ministerial direction.

The Regulations text contains no case law or reported litigation. The instrument includes no references to judicial decisions, and the Legislative history provided does not list any litigation. The following points describe the practical litigation landscape as indicated by the text and where litigation would most likely arise.

• No named cases in the instrument: the Regulations do not name any cases or list decisions interpreting particular provisions. There is therefore no statutory record in the text of judicial interpretation of the Authority’s powers, the fee-setting constraints in reg 20, the designation power in reg 3(2) or the conflict-of-interest carve out in reg 11.
• Likely litigation vectors (based on regulation mechanics): if litigation were to arise, probable subjects would include:
  • Challenges to Authority decisions on accreditation, refusal to approve food safety arrangements, or conditions attached to accreditation under reg 16 and reg 17. Judicial review actions could contest procedural fairness, jurisdictional error or unreasonable exercise of discretion.
  • Disputes over fee determinations under reg 20, particularly where a producer argues the Authority has not had regard only to costs associated with accrediting and enforcing compliance, or has included disallowed audit costs in monthly rates (reg 20(2)-(3)).
  • Challenges to designation decisions made under reg 3(2), where designation imposes monthly payment obligations and special collection duties under reg 22.
  • Enforcement action stemming from non-compliance with Standard 4.2.4 where the Authority’s enforcement powers or sanctions are exercised; parties might litigate the legal basis for particular enforcement steps, though the Act may be the primary source of enforcement sanctions.
  • Disputes arising from the Authority’s decision to grant or refuse exemptions under reg 18(3), including whether alternative arrangements are “satisfactory”.
• Administrative law considerations: decisions by the Authority are likely subject to Commonwealth and State administrative law principles. The Regulations set out governance and reporting requirements (regs 8-14) and some conflict-of-interest modifications (reg 11) which could be relevant in review proceedings about bias or procedural fairness.
• Absence of reported litigation in the text: because the instrument provides no litigation history, legal practitioners must search case law databases and South Australian court and tribunal records for any judicial treatment of the Authority’s decisions or the Regulations’ provisions.

For a practitioner preparing to litigate or advise on a dispute under these Regulations, the instrument signals the natural points of contest but does not itself provide precedential material. The Authority’s annual reports, decision notices and any published internal policies may also be relevant sources when assessing the litigation posture.

The Regulations contain several drafting features and implementation details that can create practical traps for regulated entities, advisers and the Authority itself. The following are concrete operational and legal pitfalls drawn from the text.

Timing and calculation of monthly fees

• Large scale processors must pay monthly fees within 14 days after the commencement of each month (reg 22(1)). The volumetric component of the monthly fee is calculated by reference to “the number of litres or kilograms of dairy produce processed or packed by the producer during the last month but 1 before the commencement of the current month (the relevant month)” (reg 22(1)(a)(i)). That phrasing means the processor must report a lagged month’s volumes rather than the immediately preceding month. Misreading the calculation period will lead to incorrect returns and payments.
• Processors also pay “one twelfth of the relevant annual fee for the current financial year” with each monthly payment (reg 22(1)(a)(ii)). Cashflow planning must therefore allow for both variable volumetric charges and a pro-rata annual fee component.

Collection obligation on designated large scale processors

• When a processor is designated as a large scale dairy processor under reg 3(2), the processor must pay on behalf of each accredited producer who sells milk to the processor a monthly fee calculated on litres sold by each farm (reg 22(1)(b)). This places collection, accounting and potential pass-through obligations on the processor and exposes the processor to creditor risk for sums payable in relation to farmers’ sales if the processor remains liable regardless of whether it actually recovers the amounts from suppliers. The Regulations do not expressly allocate netting or recovery mechanics between processor and farmer beyond debt recovery powers for the Authority (reg 5(2)). Designation discretion and uncertainty
• The Authority has unilateral discretion to designate or revoke designation of a producer as a large scale processor by written notice (reg 3(2)). The absence of explicit criteria for designation in the Regulations creates uncertainty for businesses about when the monthly payment regimen will apply to them. Fee-setting constraints and audit cost exclusion
• Reg 20(2) restricts the Authority, when determining monthly rates, to regard only costs associated with accrediting producers of that class and enforcing compliance. Reg 20(3) requires the Authority to disregard costs associated with auditing approved food safety arrangements conducted by or on behalf of the Authority. Parties should scrutinise whether fee determinations comply with these constraints, as the Authority’s apparent outsourcing of audit functions could raise allocation disputes about who bears audit costs. Single annual fee for multiple capacities
• Reg 24 provides that an accredited producer is liable for only one annual fee in each financial year even if accredited for multiple classes of activities. While this prevents double charging, it creates a potential classification issue where a producer’s activities span classes and different annual fee rates might apply. Information notice penalties
• Reg 26 imposes a maximum penalty of $5,000 and an expiation fee of $315 for failure to comply with an information notice. Producers should treat information notices as high-priority legal obligations since the monetary exposure is significant in proportion to small operators’ revenue. Approved food safety arrangements and continuity
• Transitions provisions preserve prior approved food safety arrangements and exemptions (Schedule 3), but any modifications to those arrangements or subsequent Authority requirements could trigger the need for producers to seek variation, incurring application costs (Schedule 1 item 2) and potential operational changes. Conflict-of-interest carve out
• Reg 11 states a member of the Authority is not taken to have an interest in a matter for the purposes of the Public Sector (Honesty and Accountability) Act 1995 solely because they share that interest with the dairy industry. This narrow carve out could be tested in practice where particular decisions are alleged to have been influenced by a member’s industry position. The provision does not remove other conflict of interest obligations or the need to consider perceptions of bias. Exemption application and fees
• The Authority may exempt an accredited producer from specified provisions of Standard 4.2.4 on application (reg 18(3)). The application fee is $100 (Schedule 1 item 3). Producers relying on bespoke operational arrangements should plan for the time and evidentiary burden of establishing satisfactory alternative arrangements to justify an exemption. Payment before grant of accreditation
• Reg 25 requires payment before grant of accreditation as a pro-rata of the periodic fee applicable had the producer been accredited at the last payment date. This creates an up-front cash requirement for new entrants or applications for new classes of accreditation. Limited list of monetary penalties in the Regulations
• The Regulations prescribe only a limited set of monetary penalties and do not comprehensively enumerate all enforcement remedies. Parties should therefore consult the parent Act and other applicable law to identify all potential compliance consequences.

In practice these “gotchas” require close attention to timing formulas, clear record-keeping for volumetric measurements, contractual arrangements between processors and farmers about fee pass-throughs, and early engagement with the Authority where exemption or designation questions arise.

Advising a client on compliance with the Regulations requires concrete steps mapped to the statutory duties. The following checklist links regulatory requirements to recommended operational actions and documents that advisers should look for and prepare, citing the relevant provisions.

1. Establish whether the activity requires accreditation (reg 6; reg 15)

• Confirm whether the client carries on a dairy primary production business, dairy processing business or dairy transport business as defined in reg 3(1).
• If yes, do not commence or continue the activity without applying for accreditation under the parent Act. Gather documentation demonstrating commercial purpose, scope of activity and premises.

2. Prepare the accreditation application and evidence of capacity (reg 16)

• Compile evidence that the applicant has the capacity, or will make appropriate arrangements, to satisfy the Act and Regulations. This may include:
  • organisation charts, quality assurance policies, staffing arrangements;
  • proposed or existing food safety procedures and infrastructure;
  • evidence of training, equipment and recordkeeping systems.
• Budget for the application fee ($100, Schedule 1 item 1).

3. Develop an approved food safety arrangement (reg 17)

• Draft a food safety arrangement aligned with Standard 4.2.4 of the Food Standards Code as modified by reg 18(4). Ensure definitions used correspond to reg 3 and reg 18(4).
• Prepare to submit the arrangement to the Authority for approval and set up internal compliance controls for implementation and monitoring (reg 12(2)(c)).

4. Ensure ongoing compliance with Standard 4.2.4 (reg 18)

• Map Standard 4.2.4 requirements to on-farm and processing operations. Where a producer seeks an exemption, prepare an application justifying satisfactory alternative arrangements and budget for the $100 application fee (reg 18(3); Schedule 1 item 3).
• Keep records of hygiene, temperature controls, traceability, and corrective actions to demonstrate compliance during Authority monitoring.

5. Understand fee classification and payment timing (regs 20-25)

• Determine whether the client could be designated as a large scale dairy processor (reg 3(2)). If designated, the client will have monthly payment obligations and must also pay on behalf of supplying dairy farmers (reg 22). If not, the client will likely be subject to annual fees (reg 23).
• For large scale processors:
  • implement systems to measure volumes processed or packed each relevant month and the litres purchased from supplying farms in the relevant month but 1 before the current month (reg 22(1)(a)(i); reg 22(1)(b)(i));
  • allocate cashflow for monthly payments within 14 days after the commencement of each month (reg 22(1));
  • ensure monthly returns are lodged (reg 22(1)(c)).
• For other producers:
  • prepare the annual return for the financial year ending 30 June and lodge by 30 September; pay the annual fee by that date (reg 23(2)).
• Where a producer holds multiple accreditations, they are liable for only one annual fee (reg 24); however, the pro-rata payment before grant of accreditation applies (reg 25).

6. Prepare for information notices and recordkeeping duties (reg 26)

• Establish robust recordkeeping systems for activity levels, volumes, sales, purchases and processing metrics. Ensure prompt response workflows for written notices from the Authority because failure to comply carries a maximum penalty of $5,000 and an expiation fee of $315 (reg 26).
• Assign a responsible officer and contact details to receive Authority notices and returns.

7. Manage exposure to fee recovery and relief options (regs 5; 20)

• Recognise the Authority may waive, reduce or defer fees in appropriate circumstances (reg 5(1)). If cashflow distress occurs, prepare an evidence-based application demonstrating why relief is appropriate.
• Verify fee calculations against reg 20 constraints. If you suspect the Authority has included in monthly rates costs it must disregard (reg 20(3)), prepare a formal query or internal review request and, if necessary, be ready to seek legal advice.

8. Governance and conflict of interest considerations for Authority members (regs 7-14; reg 11)

• If advising a client who is a member or potential member of the Authority, note that reg 11 provides a limited carve out from having an interest for the purposes of the Public Sector (Honesty and Accountability) Act 1995 where the interest is shared in common with the dairy industry. Nonetheless, members should still observe best practice disclosure and recusal where specific personal or pecuniary interests arise.

9. Transitional and continuity steps (Schedule 3)

• If operating under an existing approved food safety arrangement or exemption from the revoked 2005 Regulations, verify the arrangement continues under Schedule 3 and ensure continued compliance with its terms.
• If changes to operations or to the arrangement are planned, consult the Authority about variation procedures and associated application fees (Schedule 1 item 2).

10. Reporting and transparency obligations

• For those interacting with the Authority, monitor the Authority’s annual reports for audited accounts and disclosure of Ministerial directions (reg 14). These reports may reveal administrative priorities and fee-setting rationale.
• Keep documentary trails of communications with the Authority, decisions on designation, accreditation approvals and any exemptions.

Operational checklist for large scale processors (practical priorities)

• Implement accounting sub-ledgers to record volumes by supplier for the “relevant month” used in reg 22 calculations.
• Draft supplier contractual terms addressing the processor’s obligation to pay fees on behalf of suppliers, including indemnities or pass-through clauses. The Regulations do not specify private contractual arrangements between farmer and processor; these are for parties to settle.
• Test internal timelines against the 14-day monthly payment requirement and allocate treasury resources accordingly.

For legal advisers and compliance officers, cross-check the parent Act for the full scope of offences and sanctions that supplement the penalties listed in the Regulations. Regularly review the consolidated Regulations on the official South Australian legislation site for amendments and check the Authority’s published guidance and forms to ensure procedural compliance.