Telecommunications (Fibre-ready Facilities — Exempt Real Estate Development Projects) Instrument 2023

The instrument relies on a small set of interlocking concepts, some defined within the instrument and some by reference to the Telecommunications Act 1997. Section 4 contains definitions specific to the instrument and an explicit note that many expressions are defined in the Act. Key instrument definitions include fixed-line SIP network, fixed-line SIP network region, headworks and relevant SIP. The instrument uses these concepts to identify which projects will be exempt.

Fixed-line SIP network is defined as any fixed-line telecommunications network that is owned, controlled, or operated by, or on behalf of, a relevant SIP or a related entity of a relevant SIP (section 4). That definition ties network presence to ownership, control or operation by the SIP or its related entities, rather than to any independent deployment activity by other market participants. Fixed-line SIP network region is a geographically ascertainable region determined by a relevant SIP within which a fixed-line network is deployed or planned to be deployed (section 4). The instrument therefore delegates to the SIP the task of determining the boundaries of its network region.

Headworks is defined in section 4 as underground utility infrastructure installed at the point from which existing underground infrastructure ends, to the boundary of a real estate development project. The instrument’s focus on headworks ties the exemption to the existence or planned installation of underground utilities that extend existing infrastructure to a development boundary. The instrument’s wording in item 1(c) links headworks and other new underground utility infrastructure to the proximity requirement, namely proximity to each building lot situated in the project area, either as part of the project or as headworks to service the project.

Relevant SIP is defined simply as a statutory infrastructure provider for a service area within which a project area is located (section 4). The instrument therefore frames the SIP as the territorial authority whose network planning and ownership decisions determine whether a project qualifies for an exemption. The instrument also notes that certain core expressions are defined in the Act, including fibre-ready facility, fixed-line facility, project area, proximity and real estate development project. Those terms are central to understanding what the exemptions disapply, because section 6(1) expressly exempts qualifying projects from the requirements in sections 372E, 372F, 372G and 372H of the Act.

Procedurally, the instrument sets out a written-notice regime. Item 1(b) requires that a relevant SIP has provided written notice to the person responsible for the project that the SIP will not install a fixed-line network in the project area. Item 2(b) requires written notice that the SIP will not take ownership of any fibre-ready facilities located inside the project area. Section 6(2) establishes a 30 business day deemed notice rule when the responsible person makes a written request and receives no reply within 30 business days (or a later date agreed in writing). Section 6(3) clarifies that a single relevant SIP’s written notice or receipt of a written request suffices where multiple relevant SIPs exist for the service area. The requirements in section 6(4) specify the documentary material the responsible person must serve on the Secretary to claim the exemption, which includes the SIP’s written notice or the request/correspondence that invokes the deeming rule.

The instrument therefore combines spatial determinations (is any part of the project within a SIP’s fixed-line network region), SIP declarations about installation and ownership intentions, a developer-driven request-and-deem mechanism tied to a 30 business day timetable and a mandatory notification to the Secretary containing enumerated particulars. These concepts work together to create a defined exemption class, while preserving the SIP’s role in delineating network regions and deciding installation and ownership intentions.

The instrument affects three principal categories of actors, as identified in the text: persons responsible for real estate development projects, statutory infrastructure providers (relevant SIPs), and the Department Secretary who receives notices. The definitions and provisions in sections 3, 4 and 6 make clear which duties and interactions fall to each party.

Persons responsible for real estate development projects are the primary actors who will use the instrument to claim an exemption from sections 372E, 372F, 372G and 372H of the Telecommunications Act 1997, according to section 6(1). These persons must determine whether their project satisfies the factual predicates in the instrument. To obtain the exemption they must either obtain written notice from a relevant SIP, or, failing a timely SIP reply, rely on the deeming mechanism in section 6(2) by having sent a written request and providing the correspondence required by section 6(4)(i). Section 6(4) requires the person responsible (or a person acting on their behalf) to furnish the Secretary a written notice containing a specific set of project particulars, before the exemption can be claimed. That list includes the development name, stage, type, estimated number of building lots or units, whether any part of the project area is inside a fixed-line SIP network region, whether any new underground utility infrastructure is installed or planned in proximity to each building lot, geographic particulars, and the SIP’s written notice or the written request/correspondence if the deeming rule applies.

Relevant SIPs are affected because the instrument formalises the legal significance of their communications and planning choices. A relevant SIP is defined in section 4 as the statutory infrastructure provider for the service area within which the project area is located. The SIP’s written notice that it will not install a fixed-line network inside the project area (item 1(b)) or that it will not take ownership of fibre-ready facilities (item 2(b)) is decisive for the availability of the exemption. The instrument also implicitly obliges SIPs to respond to written requests received from persons responsible within 30 business days to avoid being taken to have provided the requisite written notice under section 6(2). Where multiple SIPs exist for a service area, a single SIP’s written notice suffices for the person responsible to claim the exemption, per section 6(3)(a).

The Secretary of the Department is a recipient of the developer’s statutory notice under section 6(4). The Secretary is the administrative gatekeeper who receives the factual statement that the person responsible relies upon to claim the exemption; the instrument prescribes the minimum content of that notice. The instrument does not set out further administrative procedures the Secretary must follow after receipt, nor does it specify penalties or follow-on processes in the instrument text. The Department in practice will be the repository of the documents that evidence the exemption claim.

Other affected parties include any related entities of a relevant SIP, since the definition of fixed-line SIP network includes networks owned, controlled or operated by related entities of the relevant SIP (section 4). The presence or planning of underground utility infrastructure, including headworks, is also material to the exemption and thus affects utilities contractors, headworks designers and any other party responsible for installing underground infrastructure in proximity to building lots.

Finally, the instrument affects the application of sections 372E, 372F, 372G and 372H of the Act by creating a class of projects that are exempt from those sections. The instrument does not itself set out the content of those sections; its effect is to remove those obligations from qualifying projects, subject to the administrative and documentary conditions in section 6.

The instrument allocates duties and creates a limited right to exemption, tied to documentary proof. The primary duties fall on the person responsible for the real estate development project, with secondary duties on relevant SIPs through their written communications and on the Secretary as receiver of the developer’s notice.

Duties of persons responsible: Under section 6(4), a person seeking to rely on the exemption must provide the Secretary with a written notice that contains specific particulars. Those particulars are enumerated in 6(4)(a)-(i) and include: the development name and stage, the development type, the total estimated number of building lots or building units, whether any part of the project area is located inside a fixed-line SIP network region, whether any new underground utility infrastructure is installed or planned to be installed in proximity to each building lot (either as part of the development or as headworks), location and boundary information (or lot/plan number or address), and either the SIP’s written notice (where subsection 6(2) does not apply) or the written request/agreements to a later date (where subsection 6(2) applies). The obligation to furnish this material is a precondition to claiming the exemption, as the exemptions in section 6(1) are available "provided that subsection (4) is satisfied."

Duties of relevant SIPs: The SIPs’ procedural duty is effectively to respond to written requests from the person responsible. Section 6(1) requires that the relevant SIP provide written notice that it will not install a fixed-line network inside a project area for item 1(b) to be satisfied, and written notice that it will not take ownership of fibre-ready facilities for item 2(b). Section 6(2) imposes a 30 business day window: if the responsible person sends a written request and the relevant SIP does not respond within 30 business days, the SIP is taken to have provided the requisite notice. That provision shifts a practical burden onto SIPs to reply timely to written requests if they wish to avoid the deeming consequence, although the instrument does not prescribe the content or format of the SIP’s reply beyond being written notice.

The Secretary’s role: The Secretary receives the required notice under section 6(4). The instrument does not specify an internal process or timeframe for the Secretary to accept or register the notice, nor does it specify any power to reject or query the notice. The Secretary's function here is limited to being the official recipient for the documents that evidence entitlement to the exemption.

Rights created: The principal right created by the instrument is the right for certain real estate development projects to be exempt from the specified sections of the Telecommunications Act 1997 (sections 372E, 372F, 372G and 372H), where the factual and procedural requirements in section 6 are met. Subsection 6(1) identifies two pathways to exemption: item 1 requires the three-part factual constellation including absence from a fixed-line SIP network region and absence of new underground infrastructure, together with written SIP notice; item 2 provides an alternative pathway where items 1(a) and 1(b) apply and the SIP has provided written notice it will not take ownership of fibre-ready facilities. The right to claim the exemption is conditional on the person responsible having provided the Secretary with the documentation listed in section 6(4).

Interaction of duties and rights: A developer’s ability to claim the exemption depends on satisfying both substantive facts (spatial location, infrastructure plans) and procedural steps (acquiring SIP notice or triggering the deeming rule, and lodging the specified notice with the Secretary). The SIP’s written communications are the pivot that converts spatial facts into entitlement to the exemption. The instrument therefore creates a compliance pathway that is documentary and time-sensitive, allocating evidentiary responsibilities to the developer and a reactive correspondence duty to the SIP.

The instrument itself does not create express penalties, pecuniary sanctions, or criminal offences. It sets out an exemption regime and procedural requirements for claiming an exemption, but it does not, within the text provided, prescribe enforcement mechanisms, compliance sanctions, or administrative penalties associated with non-compliance with the instrument’s provisions. The instrument is made under the Telecommunications Act 1997 (section 3), and it exempts qualifying projects from specific sections of that Act (sections 372E, 372F, 372G and 372H) pursuant to section 6(1). Therefore, enforcement and penalties for matters falling outside the exemption will depend on the enforcement and penalty regime established in the Telecommunications Act 1997, but those provisions are not reproduced or described in the instrument.

The practical enforcement measures the instrument does introduce are administrative and documentary. Section 6(4) requires the person responsible to provide the Secretary with particular details before the exemption may be claimed. The obligation to provide that notice creates an administrative compliance point. Failure to file the required notice would mean the person responsible has not satisfied the proviso in section 6(1) that subsection 6(4) be satisfied, and therefore the exemption would not apply. The instrument does not specify whether the Secretary will acknowledge receipt, or whether there is a formal registration process or certificate of exemption. The instrument also does not stipulate sanctions for false or misleading statements in the notice to the Secretary. Any such sanctions would have to be found in other legislation or the principal Act, which is outside the instrument’s text.

Section 6(2) contains a deeming rule that is effectively self-executing. If the person responsible sends a written request to a relevant SIP and the SIP does not reply within 30 business days (or an agreed later date), the SIP is taken to have provided the requisite written notice. That deeming mechanism reduces the compliance risk for developers in circumstances where SIPs do not respond, but it simultaneously creates an enforcement implication for SIPs: failure to reply within the specified window results in an automatic legal consequence. The instrument does not provide SIPs with a remedy or a process to retract a deemed notice once the 30 business day period expires.

Where multiple relevant SIPs exist, section 6(3) states that item 1(b) or item 2(b) applies if one of the relevant SIPs has provided written notice. Subsection 6(3)(b) states the deeming rule applies if one relevant SIP has received the written request. This can have enforcement implications where SIPs might contest territoriality or the identity of the relevant SIP, but the instrument does not provide a dispute resolution mechanism for such contests. Any disputes about whether the substantive conditions are met or whether the SIP’s written notice is genuine or timely would likely be dealt with under the principal Act or general administrative law, but the instrument itself remains silent on those enforcement paths.

In summary, the instrument imposes administrative obligations and contains a self-executing deeming rule to facilitate exemption claims, but it does not create standalone penalties or enforcement procedures within its text. Enforcement therefore depends on the interaction with the Telecommunications Act 1997 and other applicable administrative or criminal provisions outside the instrument.

The instrument explicitly situates itself within the regime of the Telecommunications Act 1997. Section 3 states the instrument is made under paragraphs 372K(1)(b), (c), (d), (e) and (f) of that Act, and section 6(1) expressly exempts qualifying real estate development projects from the requirements in sections 372E, 372F, 372G and 372H of the Act. The instrument also invokes the Legislation Act 2003 by noting, in the text following the exemption table, that subsection 13(3) of the Legislation Act allows specification of matters by class or classes of matters. That reference underpins the instrument’s use of an instrument to define classes of exempt projects.

The instrument depends on definitional material in the Telecommunications Act 1997. Section 4 notes that a number of expressions used in the instrument are defined in the Act, including building lot, building unit, fibre-ready facility, fixed-line facility, project area, proximity, real estate development project, service area, statutory infrastructure provider and telecommunications network. The interaction is therefore definitional: the instrument’s effect depends on the meanings those terms have in the Act.

Operationally, the instrument interacts with SIP planning and ownership decisions. It requires written notice from a relevant SIP as a condition of exemption (items 1(b) and 2(b)), and treats the SIP’s fixed-line network region determination as determinative of whether the project is spatially inside the SIP’s region (section 4, fixed-line SIP network region). That places SIP planning documents and communications at the centre of the legal consequence. The instrument therefore shifts some of the legal effect of the Act’s sections 372E-372H into the hands of SIPs, through their written statements about installation and ownership intentions. The instrument does not modify the Act itself; rather, it exercises the delegated power under the Act to specify exempt classes of projects.

The instrument also interacts with administrative law principles by imposing documentary requirements to the Secretary. Section 6(4) requires specific items of information be provided to the Secretary for an exemption claim. While the instrument does not specify the administrative consequences of the Secretary’s acceptance, the requirement to provide particular material creates an administrative record and engages broader administrative law remedies and review mechanisms applicable to decisions by the Department, though those mechanisms are not specified in the instrument.

By repealing the 2021 instrument in Schedule 1, the instrument also alters the statutory instrument landscape and replaces any prior exemption class established by that earlier instrument. The repeal is explicit: Schedule 1 states, "The whole of the instrument: Repeal the instrument." The 2023 instrument therefore interacts with the corpus of delegated legislation by removing the 2021 instrument and substituting the current regime.

The instrument does not reference other Commonwealth, state or local planning laws, nor does it alter property rights or contractual obligations directly. However, by conditioning exemptions on whether new underground utility infrastructure is installed or planned in proximity to building lots, the instrument interacts indirectly with development design, utility service agreements and headworks arrangements that are often governed by local government approvals and utility contracts. The instrument’s scope is limited to exempting projects from specified sections of the Telecommunications Act 1997; any other statutory obligations or contractual duties remain unaffected by the instrument except insofar as their practical compliance choices are influenced by the exemption.

The instrument is short and contains its own amendment history within its text. It expressly repeals the prior Telecommunications (Fibre-ready Facilities , Exempt Real Estate Development Projects) Instrument 2021 in Schedule 1. Schedule 1 states: "The whole of the instrument: Repeal the instrument." That is an explicit and total repeal of the earlier instrument. No other amendments to other instruments are specified in Schedule 1.

Section 5 provides a standard machinery clause for how items in the Schedules operate. It states: "Each instrument that is specified in a Schedule to this instrument is amended or repealed as set out in the applicable items in the Schedule concerned, and any other item in a Schedule to this instrument has effect according to its terms." In practice, Schedule 1’s sole entry is the repeal of the 2021 instrument. Section 1 provides the name of the instrument, and section 2 provides commencement timing, which is the day after registration. Section 3 cites the authority under the Telecommunications Act 1997.

The instrument contains no other amendment entries and no transitional provisions or savings clauses that preserve rights or obligations created under the repealed 2021 instrument. The absence of transitional provisions means that application of the new instrument and the repeal is likely immediate upon commencement, subject to the broader statutory framework governing the effect of repeal and commencement under the Legislation Act or the principal Act. The instrument does not specify whether projects previously relying on the 2021 instrument must re-submit notices under the 2023 instrument. The only express administrative requirement in the 2023 instrument is section 6(4), which requires an eligible person to provide to the Secretary the specified details about the project for which the exemption is claimed.

No other amendments to primary legislation or other instruments are recorded in the instrument text. The instrument therefore has a narrow amendment history: it substitutes the 2023 instrument’s exemption rules for whatever the 2021 instrument provided, by wholly repealing the earlier instrument. The instrument contains no schedule amending the Telecommunications Act 1997 itself, and it does not purport to alter definitions in the principal Act; it relies instead on the Act’s delegated power to make instruments specifying exempt classes of projects.

The instrument contains no mention of litigation history, and no cases or disputes are named or referenced within the instrument text. There is no indication in the instrument itself of judicial or tribunal determinations that interpret or apply its provisions. The instrument is administrative in nature, setting out defined conditions for exemption and documentary requirements for claiming that exemption. Because the instrument does not itself create sanctions, nor does it set out dispute resolution or appeal pathways within its text, any litigation or administrative review that might arise would depend on the processes and remedies available under the Telecommunications Act 1997 and broader administrative law, neither of which is reproduced in this instrument.

While the instrument does not supply litigation history, the structure of its provisions suggests potential points where disputes could arise and potentially proceed to judicial review or other litigation outside the instrument. These potential dispute loci include disagreements about whether a project area is inside a fixed-line SIP network region, whether any new underground infrastructure is "installed or planned to be installed in proximity to each building lot," whether a SIP’s written notice conforms to what the instrument requires for item 1(b) or item 2(b), and whether the 30 business day deeming rule in section 6(2) has been properly triggered. The instrument provides no internal dispute resolution mechanism for such disagreements. Any challenge to denial of an exemption, or contestation of whether the exemption applies, would therefore be handled under applicable judicial review and administrative law pathways outside the instrument.

The absence of litigation history in the instrument text does not mean litigation is impossible; it only means the instrument itself does not document past or pending litigation. Users relying on the instrument for practical guidance will need to consider that legal uncertainty about definitions and the adequacy of documentary proof may be resolved through litigation or administrative review processes external to the instrument. The instrument’s provisions governing notice to the Secretary and the deeming rule may, in practice, reduce the incidence of disputes by creating clear documentary steps, but any residual uncertainty about key factual predicates or the sufficiency of SIP notices could still produce contested cases.

The instrument contains several provisions and drafting features that create practical risks or traps for parties relying on the exemption. The following are specific, source-grounded issues to watch, drawn directly from the instrument’s text.

1. "At the relevant time" qualification: The exemption in section 6(1) applies to projects that meet the specified conditions "in respect of which (at the relevant time) all of the following apply." The instrument does not define "the relevant time" further. This creates potential timing risk where the factual situation changes after the notice is lodged, for example if a SIP changes its plans or underground infrastructure is subsequently installed or planned. The instrument does not specify whether the exemption can be revoked or how later changes affect an already claimed exemption.

2. Spatial determination is SIP-determined: Fixed-line SIP network region is defined as the geographic region determined by a relevant SIP within which a fixed-line network is deployed or planned to be deployed (section 4). That means the SIP effectively controls whether a development is "inside" its region, and developers must rely on SIP determinations. There is no mechanism in the instrument for challenging a SIP’s region determination.

3. Deeming rule can cut both ways: Section 6(2) deems a relevant SIP to have provided the required written notice if it does not reply within 30 business days of receiving the responsible person’s written request (unless a later date is agreed). Developers can use non-response to their advantage, but SIPs may view that as an improper outcome. The instrument contains no process for SIPs to retract a deemed notice or to correct a later-in-time response that contradicts the deemed notice.

4. Difference between Item 1 and Item 2: Item 1 requires three conjunctive facts including absence of new underground infrastructure in proximity to each building lot. Item 2 requires only that items 1(a) and 1(b) apply and adds a SIP written notice that it will not take ownership of any fibre-ready facilities inside the project area. Because item 2 does not repeat the headworks/no-new-underground-infrastructure requirement, it appears to offer exemption in circumstances where underground infrastructure might be installed or planned, provided the SIP agrees it will not take ownership. This difference matters practically; developers who cannot satisfy item 1(c) might still achieve exemption by obtaining an item 2(b) ownership disclaimer from the SIP, but they must navigate the SIP’s willingness to issue such a notice.

5. Secretary notification is mandatory and detailed: Section 6(4) requires the person responsible to give the Secretary a notice containing numerous particulars, including whether any part of the project area is inside a fixed-line SIP network region and whether any new underground utility infrastructure is installed or planned in proximity to each building lot. Failure to provide each specified item would mean the proviso in section 6(1) is not satisfied and the exemption may not be available.

6. Proof of "planned" underground infrastructure: Item 1(c) hinges on whether new underground utility infrastructure is "installed or planned to be installed in proximity to each building lot." The notion of "planned" is factual and may involve internal project schedules, contracts with utility providers and design documents. The instrument does not specify what counts as sufficient evidence of "planned", so developers should preserve contemporaneous planning documents and correspondence.

7. Multiple SIPs scenario: Section 6(3) says item 1(b) or item 2(b) applies if one of the relevant SIPs has provided the written notice, and subsection (2) applies if one of the relevant SIPs has received a written request. Where multiple SIPs cover a service area, a developer may obtain notice from only one SIP and claim the exemption. That may create coordination or boundary disputes among SIPs. The instrument gives no route for resolving contested claims between SIPs.

8. No expressed revocation or appeal mechanism in the instrument: The instrument does not provide a mechanism to revoke an exemption, nor does it explain how a SIP or the Department can address a later-discovered misstatement or changed circumstance. Any revocation or enforcement action would therefore rely on other legal mechanisms not in this instrument.

9. Interaction with the Act’s sections not described: The instrument exempts projects from sections 372E-372H of the Act but does not reproduce those sections or explain practical consequences. Users must be careful: the instrument removes obligations in those sections only where the instrument’s conditions are met; it does not relieve the person responsible of obligations under other provisions of the Act or other laws.

10. No specification of the form or content of SIP written notice: The instrument requires a written notice from the SIP but does not prescribe form, content, required signatory, or whom within the SIP may provide acceptable written notice. Developers should obtain clear, signed, dated written statements from SIPs and keep correspondence demonstrating the SIP’s position.

Each of these features is present in the instrument text and creates practical documentary, timing, and evidentiary risks that will need active management by parties seeking to rely on the exemption.

Compliance with the instrument requires satisfying both the substantive predicates of the relevant exemption item and the documentary requirements set out in section 6(4). The following step-by-step compliance checklist follows directly from the instrument text and the operational mechanics it establishes.

1. Establish whether the project is a "real estate development project" and identify the project area and building lots or building units using the definitions in the Act and the instrument. Section 4 notes that expressions such as real estate development project, project area, building lot and building unit are defined in the Telecommunications Act 1997; ensure the project documentation aligns with those definitions prior to seeking an exemption.

2. Determine whether any part of the project area is located inside a fixed-line SIP network region. The instrument defines fixed-line SIP network region as a geographic region determined by a relevant SIP (section 4). Contact the relevant SIP to confirm whether the project area falls within its fixed-line SIP network region. Record any communications and obtain a written statement where possible.

3. If the project is outside the SIP’s fixed-line network region, obtain written notice from the relevant SIP that it will not install a fixed-line network inside the project area, as required by item 1(b) of section 6(1). If item 2 exemption is being sought, obtain written notice that the SIP will not take ownership of any fibre-ready facilities located inside the project area (item 2(b)). Ensure the notices are signed and dated, and identify the SIP, the project and the service area.

4. Use the 30 business day deeming rule to your advantage if the SIP does not respond. Section 6(2) provides that where the person responsible sends a written request to the relevant SIP and the SIP does not provide written notice within 30 business days of the day after the SIP receives the request (or by a later date in writing agreed between the parties), the SIP is taken to have provided the notice. To rely on the deeming rule: a) send a clear written request to the SIP asking for the specific written notice required by item 1(b) or item 2(b); b) send it to an address or contact point that can be evidenced as received by the SIP; c) retain proof of posting and receipt; d) if no reply within 30 business days, retain the original request and any non-response evidence to submit to the Secretary per section 6(4)(i). If a later date is agreed in writing with the SIP, retain that agreement.

5. Assess underground utility infrastructure and headworks. For item 1, confirm whether any new underground utility infrastructure is installed or planned to be installed in proximity to each building lot, either as part of the project or as headworks (item 1(c)). Compile design documents, utility service contracts, headworks plans, and correspondence with utility providers. If any such infrastructure is planned, consider whether you can secure an item 2(b) notice from the SIP that it will not take ownership of fibre-ready facilities so that item 2 may apply.

6. Prepare the Secretary notice required by section 6(4). That notice must include:

   • the name of the development, if available (6(4)(a));
   • the development’s stage name or number, if available (6(4)(b));
   • the development type (residential, commercial, industrial, mixed development, public/private institution or other) (6(4)(c));
   • the total estimated number of building lots or building units (6(4)(d));
   • whether any part of the project area is located inside the fixed-line SIP network region of a relevant SIP (6(4)(e));
   • whether there is any new underground utility infrastructure installed or planned to be installed in proximity to each building lot (6(4)(f));
   • location and boundary of the development, or lot/plan number, or address (6(4)(g));
   • if subsection 6(2) does not apply, the written notice provided by a relevant SIP pursuant to item 1(b) or item 2(b) (6(4)(h));
   • if subsection 6(2) applies, either the written request sent to the relevant SIP that did not provide written notice, or the written correspondence agreeing to a later date (6(4)(i).

7. Lodge the notice with the Secretary of the Department. The instrument does not prescribe a particular form of lodgement, but section 6(4) makes the presence of that documentation a precondition for claiming the exemption. Ensure the lodgement method produces a verifiable receipt or acknowledgement. Keep copies of everything.

8. Preserve records for audit and potential disputes. Retain original SIP notices, written requests, proof of posting and receipt, planning documents about underground infrastructure and headworks, and all correspondence with SIPs. Because the instrument does not prescribe appeal or revocation procedures, documentary evidence will be crucial in the event of a later challenge.

9. Where multiple SIPs exist for the service area, a single SIP’s notice suffices (section 6(3)(a)). However, confirm which SIP is being relied upon and ensure the notice from that SIP is clear and covers the exact territory of the project area. If there is uncertainty about which SIP’s written notice is operative, obtain written clarification.

10. Monitor SIP planning and project circumstances after lodging the Secretary notice. The exemption is expressed to apply "at the relevant time" (section 6(1)). Although the instrument does not provide for revocation, subsequent changes in SIP plans or new underground infrastructure installation may affect entitlement in practice. Maintain ongoing monitoring of SIP statements and infrastructure plans.

11. When in doubt, seek written clarification from the relevant SIP and record any agreed extensions to the 30 business day deeming period in writing to ensure compliance with section 6(2). The instrument allows for a later date agreed in writing between the parties.

12. Note the instrument’s commencement. The instrument commences the day after it is registered (section 2). Confirm that any reliance on the instrument is timed to its commencement and that any prior reliance under the 2021 instrument is assessed in light of the 2021 instrument’s repeal in Schedule 1.

Following these steps will align practice with the instrument’s textual requirements. The critical compliance tasks are securing the requisite SIP written notice (or successfully invoking the deeming rule), compiling the detailed project notice for the Secretary, and maintaining documentary proof of all communications and planning positions.