EPBC Act reforms: most significant change to Australia's environmental law in decades 

What you need to know

• In December 2025, the Federal Government passed its long-awaited reform of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth).
• The reforms comprise the most significant change to Australia's environmental approvals process in over 20 years.
• They particularly impact major project approvals, environmental compliance for existing projects, management of environmental incidents and engagement with stakeholders (including First Nations groups). They will also change the way that environmental decision-making occurs at both a State and Federal level.
• With the exception of the few provisions that have already commenced, the reforms will largely commence on a rolling basis during 2026.

What you need to do

• Much is still to come, including the release of the full set of draft National Environmental Standards, the preparation of bioregional plans and the negotiation of bilateral agreements with the States and Territories.
• Proponents should carefully consider the impact of the reforms on their existing operations and future projects.

Package of Bills passed by Senate after Government reaches deal with the Greens

On 27 November 2025, the Senate passed seven bills to implement the Government's long-awaited reform of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) (EPBC Act).

The reforms were designed to implement the core recommendations of Professor Graeme Samuel AC's Independent Review of the EPBC Act – Final Report (Samuel Report).

The EPBC Act has been in force for over 20 years and has been criticised for many years by environmentalists and proponents alike. The Government faced an enormous challenge in developing a reform package acceptable to diverse stakeholders and has achieved a significant milestone with the passing of the reforms.

The reforms comprise the following Acts:

• Environment Protection Reform Act 2025;
• National Environmental Protection Agency Act 2025;
• Environment Information Australia Act 2025; and
• four Bills relating to customs, excise and charges (Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charges Imposition) Act 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (General Charges Imposition) Act 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Customs Charges Imposition) Act 2025 and Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Act 2025), together the "Reforms".

Our 6 November 2025 alert, Ten things you should know about Australia's proposed new environmental laws, provides a high level overview of the main features of the proposed new laws as introduced on 30 October 2025.

Our 1 December 2025 alert, Australia's new environmental laws to commence in 2026, summarises the changes to the 30 October version of the Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025 in order to reach agreement with the Greens to pass the Bills in the Senate.

We have set out below the key things you should know about the final reform package as passed by the Senate.

Key aspects of the final reform package

Decision-making criteria

Under the Reforms, the Minister must not approve the taking of an action unless satisfied the action:

• is consistent with any prescribed national environmental standards;
• will not have an "unacceptable impact" on a protected matter; and
• passes the "net gain" test.

Importantly, actions that are determined to be a "national interest proposal" are not subject to these criteria.

New National Environmental Standards

The Minister has power to make a range of National Environmental Standards (NES) to cover a broad range of issues, which will apply to decisions made under the EPBC Act across the various approval pathways. The NES will be legislative instruments and subject to the same Parliamentary scrutiny as regulations.

A NES must prescribe one or more outcomes or objectives and may also prescribe parameters within which, or principles by which, an outcome or objective is to be achieved and/or processes or actions to be followed or taken in achieving an outcome or objective. It may also prescribe any matters required or permitted by the EPBC Act to be dealt with by standards, or other matters incidental to those required or permitted to be included in a standard.

Before making a NES, the Minister must be satisfied that the NES promotes the objects of the EPBC Act and is not inconsistent with Australia's international obligations.

The Reforms set out the decisions that must not be inconsistent with NES (eg approval decisions, accrediting bilateral agreements and making bioregional plans), but decision-makers can also choose to have regard to the NES in making other decisions.

The Minister must undertake public consultation before making, varying or revoking a NES (with particular obligations for consultation with Indigenous people if the NES relates to Indigenous engagement). There is an 18-month period from publication in which a NES can be revised without the application of the "no regression" principle.

We report on the progress of the draft NES above.

New "unacceptable impact" definition

The EPBC Act originally included a power for the Minister to decide that a proposed action would have unacceptable impacts on a protected matter, with the effect that the proposal no longer proceeds through the assessment phase and cannot be approved. The purpose of this power was to allow actions that were clearly unacceptable to be refused upfront, without having to go through a full assessment process. However, the term "unacceptable impact" was undefined.

The Reforms introduce a full definition of "unacceptable impact" for each protected matter under the EPBC Act that will apply to the exercise of the Minister's existing power to reject a proposal without assessment.

The "unacceptable impact" criteria are also relevant to approval decisions and accreditation of State/Territory processes. Under the Reforms, the Minister cannot approve the taking of an action (other than a national interest proposal) unless the Minister is satisfied that it will not have an unacceptable impact on a protected matter. Further, the Minister may not accredit alternative processes, including State/Territory processes under a bilateral agreement, unless satisfied that actions which are approved under these processes will not have unacceptable impacts on protected matters.

The definition of "unacceptable impact" was a key concern with the reform bills as originally introduced to Parliament. However, the updated amendments as passed by the Senate revised the "unacceptable impact" criteria, including to:

• focus on actions causing serious loss, damage, alteration, impairment or undermining of relevant matters and remove various references to likelihood; and
• add new definitions of "serious damage" and "seriously impair" and amend the definition of "viability" in relation to a species or ecological community.

Broadly these amendments look to address concerns with the original version of the definition and improve its operation. While the amendments mitigate some of the risks arising from the definition of "unacceptable impact", the practical and legal application of the no "unacceptable impact" provision is likely to be a contentious and litigated issue in approval determinations for new projects under the EPBC Act.

Net gain: new approach to offsets

The EPBC Act currently allows the Minister to include environmental offset conditions in an approval to ensure that a project does not result in a "net loss" to a protected matter.

The Reforms amend the EPBC Act to ensure that offsets require a "net gain", not just "no net loss". This is a clear principle from the Samuel Report.

The Reforms provide that the Minister must consider whether the proponent has taken appropriate measures to avoid, mitigate or repair any impact or damage, before deciding to attach conditions directed to compensating for damage (ie offsets).

There is a new concept of "residual significant impact" on a protected matter, which is a significant impact that will not be avoided, mitigated or repaired in the course of taking the action or in the course of complying with any conditions attached to the approval of the action.

The Minister must not approve an action with a residual significant impact unless the Minister is satisfied that the approval passes the "net gain test". An exception is made for national interest proposals.

An approval "passes the net gain test" in relation to a residual significant impact, if either or both of the following conditions are applied to the approval:

• a condition requiring the holder to compensate for damage to the matter that has been caused by the residual significant impact; or
• a condition requiring the holder to pay a restoration contribution charge in relation to the residual significant impact.

"Net gain" for a matter is achieved if it is equal to any net gain prescribed in the regulations, or otherwise, to the satisfaction of the Minister.

To support the shift in the offsets framework and deliver time savings for proponents, a new restoration contribution framework will be introduced. This framework will allow proponents to meet their obligations by either delivering their own offsets, by an upfront payment into a government restoration fund, or both. The new Restoration Contributions Holder will be able to use the funds to strategically deliver offsets to have greater environmental benefits, including through pooling funds for similar impacts.

It is not clear how the Government fund will interact with existing State and Territory offset programs.

National interest

The Minister may determine that the taking of a specified controlled action is a national interest proposal when the outcome from taking the action is in Australia’s national interest. In determining Australia’s national interest, the Minister may consider:

• Australia’s defence, security or strategic interests; or
• Australia’s obligations under an agreement with one or more other countries.

This does not limit the matters the Minister may consider.

National interest proposals can be approved regardless of whether they are inconsistent with national environmental standards, whether they have unacceptable impacts or cause residual significant impact and do not pass the net gain test.

Fossil fuel actions cannot be national interest proposals.

Streamlined assessment pathway

The Reforms are designed to simplify, streamline and improve the existing EPBC Act assessment and approvals pathways.

In addition to the other measures described in this alert (eg, accrediting State/Territory processes, bioregional plans, NES etc), the Reforms remove two of the six existing assessment pathways and replace them with a single new streamlined assessment pathway designed to reduce assessment and approval timeframes.

The Minister can only choose to apply the new streamlined assessment pathway if satisfied they have sufficient information to make an informed decision about whether to approve the taking of the action. This will incentivise proponents to provide as much information as possible upfront in their referral applications. Once the Minister has chosen to apply the new streamlined assessment pathway (there is no statutory timeline for this decision to be made), the Minister has only 30 business days to make a decision.

Importantly, the new streamlined assessment pathway is not available for "fossil fuel actions".

Additionally, the Reforms consolidate and streamline existing assessment pathways to deliver more transparent and efficient processes under the EPBC Act, including by:

• allowing a change of assessment pathway if an alternate pathway becomes more appropriate;
• discouraging "land banking" by ensuring that non-controlled decisions cease to have effect after 5 years if the action is not substantially commenced;
• establishing the ability to surrender an approval by request;
• simplifying publication obligations and clarifying when requests for further information can be made;
• allowing minor works to proceed (with the consent of the Minister) during the evaluation of a broader action;
• allowing works with existing approval to proceed during the evaluation of a larger action (eg an upgrade or development extension); and
• allowing post-approval modifications in relation to minor variations to policies, plans or programs and variations related to the person taking the action, for approvals under section 146B.

State and Territory approval processes can be accredited

The Minister may, by legislative instrument, accredit a State or Territory framework and declare that actions approved in accordance with the framework do not require separate EPBC Act approval if the Minister is satisfied that, among other things:

• the framework is consistent with any prescribed NES;
• actions approved under the framework will not have “unacceptable impacts;” and
• any residual significant impacts would pass the “net gain test.”

The Minister must also obtain undertakings from the relevant State or Territory that its decision-makers will not depart from the accredited framework and that approvals granted under it will themselves remain consistent with the criteria prescribed. These safeguards respond to concerns expressed in the Samuel Report that earlier “one-stop-shop” initiatives did not result in nationally consistent environmental outcomes.

Once accredited, actions approved in accordance with the framework do not require separate EPBC Act approval.

Progress on bilateral agreements

The EPBC Act already creates a process for the Federal Government to enter into a bilateral agreement with a State or Territory Government that ultimately allows the Federal Environment Minister to rely on the State or Territory's environmental assessment report to inform the final decision under the EPBC Act about whether to approve an action. This removes the need for a duplicate federal environmental assessment process.

South Australia entered into a new bilateral agreement with the Federal Government on 18 February 2026.

On 21 April 2026 the Commonwealth Environment Minister and WA Premier signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to develop and implement a bilateral agreement for environmental assessments by December 2026. They presented it as a significant milestone in streamlining how environmental approvals are managed between the Commonwealth and WA, and a positive step towards WA receiving the full benefit of EPBC Act reforms.

There are existing assessment bilateral agreements in place in other States. However, we expect they will need to be revisited to address additional requirements that will be introduced following commencement of the substantive reforms.

Regional plans to guide development

As anticipated, the Reforms include a new regime for bioregional planning. This was recommended in the Samuel Report.

The Minister may make bioregional plans in collaboration with States and Territories that identify:

• development zones where certain classes of actions can occur without EPBC Act approval (and the conditions that apply to various classes of actions);
• conservation zones where certain classes of actions are prohibited; and
• bioregional restoration measures.

Bioregional plans can only be made if impacted protected matters will achieve a "net gain".

The plans are designed to support the roll out of important infrastructure development and improve environmental outcomes.

No climate trigger, but need to give emissions information

The Minister ruled out a climate trigger shortly after the Federal election, in part because it would duplicate existing policies such as the Safeguard Mechanism.

However, the Reforms introduce a requirement for proponents to provide Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions information as part of the assessment of a controlled action. Proponents would also be required to show how the emissions align with national policies. The Government has said in the Explanatory Memorandum for the Reform Bills that the disclosure requirements are an information provision only and not a balancing consideration for decision-making. The amendments do not link to the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting and Safeguard Mechanism legislation and definitions.

Treatment of "fossil fuel actions"

The Senate amendments to the Reform Bills limited available approval pathways for "fossil fuel actions". These are defined as the production or extraction of coal or "petroleum". The "petroleum" definition links to the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006 (Cth) and includes naturally occurring hydrocarbons and mixtures of hydrocarbon whether in a gaseous, liquid or solid state.

As a result of the updated amendments, fossil fuel actions will be excluded from:

• being determined a "national interest" proposal – this means that coal and petroleum projects will always be subject to the new decision-making criteria described above;
• the new streamlined assessment pathway; and
• classes of actions that can be undertaken in a development zone of a bioregional plan.

The updated amendments retain the current EPBC Act requirement for large coal and unconventional gas projects to obtain EPBC Act approval from the Commonwealth Minister for their water use - the Reform Bills originally allowed this to be covered in a State/Territory bilateral agreement to remove duplication.

First Nations people's involvement

The Samuel Report recommended a much larger role for First Nations peoples and Indigenous knowledge in environmental decision-making and urgent reform to the Federal Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984 (Cth).

The Reforms codify the involvement of First Nations people in environmental governance and decision-making through a greater role for the Indigenous Advisory Committee. They also create new statutory advisory functions for the Committee in the development of the NES and in species listings and conservation planning.

Limits on section 43B grandfathering for actions lawfully commenced before the EPBC Act

A late amendment included by the Greens was to limit one of the two existing grandfathering provisions.

Section 43B – which originally allowed actions that were lawful immediately before commencement of the EPBC Act to continue – no longer applies for clearing of land that has not been cleared for a period of at least 15 years and is not a forestry operation, and for clearing within 50m of certain features in a catchment area of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Unusually, two amendments were passed to section 43B, but only one was included in the in-force version of the EPBC Act with the effect as noted above.

This may be of significant importance for operations that commenced before 1999 and do not have a specific environmental authorisation. However, the section 43A grandfathering exemption for actions with prior authorisation has not been amended.

Land clearing and protection of native forests

Under the Regional Forest Agreements Act 2002 (Cth), forestry operations conducted in accordance with a Regional Forestry Agreement are currently exempt from Part 3 of the EPBC Act, meaning they can essentially proceed without requiring EPBC Act approval.

The Reforms sunset the current exemption 12 months after 1 July 2026, meaning from 1 July 2027 such clearing will need to comply with the same EPBC Act requirements as other industries.

New power to extend a "not a controlled action" decision beyond the current 5-year term

The Reforms allow the Minister to approve an extension to the date on which a "not a controlled action" decision lapses, for up to an additional five years in total. The amendments require the Minister to notify the proponent at least six months prior to the end of the initial five year period and allow the proponent to request an extension.

This addresses feedback from industry that the originally proposed five-year timeframe was not sufficiently flexible.

New National EPA (NEPA)

A new National Environment Protection Agency (NEPA) will be created with two main roles:

• Independent regulatory, compliance and enforcement functions: including powers to investigate breaches of the legislation, issue environment protection orders and impose fines on environmental offenders. This will eventually include functions under a range of Commonwealth legislation.
• Advisory and delegated functions (like those currently played by the Department): to advise the Minister on assessments and approval applications and accreditation processes and to exercise delegated authority to undertake environmental assessments and decide project approvals and conditions.

The Federal Minister for the Environment retains decision-making power for major project approvals but will have power to delegate certain assessment decisions to the NEPA.

There will also be a new Head of Environment Information Australia to improve the availability and accessibility of high-quality environmental information and data and to provide regular, comprehensive and transparent reporting.

The legislation creating these new agencies commences on 1 July 2026.

New Enforcement Powers

Environment Protection Orders

The Environment Protection Reform Act 2025 introduces a new power for the NEPA CEO to issue an environment protection order to address, prevent, treat and mitigate imminent significant environmental risks and harm in urgent circumstances.

The power to issue an Environment Protection Order is enlivened if the NEPA CEO reasonably believes that:

• a person has engaged, is engaging or is likely to engage in conduct consisting of an action/omission that constitutes a breach of the EPBC Act or Regulations, one or more conditions of an environment authority or environmental exemption; and
• the contravention or likely contravention is causing, or poses an imminent risk of, serious damage to a protected matter; and
• it is necessary to issue the order to ensure the person's future compliance with the EPBC Act or Regulations or the conditions of the authority or exemption, and/or prevent or mitigate the damage caused, or eliminate/reduce the risk of damage posed by the contravention or likely contravention.

The order may impose any requirements on the person that the NEPA CEO reasonably believes are necessary, including requiring the person to stop work, not start specified activities, take specified action, change the manner of carrying on activities or otherwise restrict the manner in which the person carries on the activities.

The environment protection order may be issued by notice in writing or, in urgent circumstances, by notice given orally.

In response to stakeholder concerns, the updated amendments inserted some limits on that power, as follows:

• the term of an environment protection order is limited to a maximum of 14 days, with the power to grant only one further 14-day period (delivering a 28-day maximum term);
• the NEPA CEO must provide the recipient of an environment protection order with documents that support the CEO's reasonable belief as to the matters triggering the exercise of the power to issue the order; and
• the recipient of an environment protection order may make written representations to the NEPA CEO about the steps taken in relation to the purpose of the order and the reason why the person considers that the order should be revoked.

There will be a range of both fault-based and strict liability offences relating to breach of environment protection orders.

Higher penalties

The Reforms include significant new penalties.

The most significant proposed change relates to civil penalties. The Reforms include a new civil penalty formula to ensure that the court is authorised to determine the maximum penalty for these contraventions by reference to either or both of the benefit derived, and detriment avoided by the contravention, or by reference to the annual turnover of a body corporate.

The Reforms also include new compliance audit powers.

Commencement – late 2026 and beyond

The legislation creating the National EPA and the Head of Environment Information Australia will commence on 1 July 2026. According to the Department, the National EPA will open as an independent regulator on that date.

The bulk of the provisions in the Environment Protection Reform Act 2025 will commence either on a day to be fixed by proclamation or 12 months after the Act receives royal assent. However, the Act also gives the Minister the power to delay the application of particular amendments in relation to different matters and things – which may be necessary if any relevant frameworks are not in place by the date on which the provisions are to commence.

Two of the main exceptions to this regime are:

• National Environmental Standards: the provisions which establish the framework for making National Environmental Standards commenced immediately - giving the Minister some time to prepare the standards before the remaining provisions commence; and
• Certain consequential amendments to the establishment of the NEPA: The Environment Protection Reform Act 2025 includes several amendments which relate to the NEPA, many of which transfer powers and responsibilities currently held by either the Minister or the Secretary of the Department to the NEPA CEO. These amendments will commence when the National Environmental Protection Agency Act 2025 commences, which is currently proposed to occur on 1 July 2026.

Given the potential variance in commencement for each of the provisions, proponents should carefully monitor the commencement to ensure they are prepared for changes as and when they occur.

Transitional provisions

The extensive amendments in the Environment Protection Reform Act 2025 are accompanied by a raft of complex transitional provisions, some of which have now been amended in the Senate. The key aspects of the transitional provisions are as follows:

• Existing approvals will be unaffected. Similarly, the five-year lapsing period for "not a controlled action" decisions will only apply to decisions made on or after commencement (but regardless of when the action was referred).
• The "prior authorisation" grandfathering provision under section 43A will be unaffected, but section 43B – which relates to lawful continuation of use of land – will change (see above).
• The changes to assessment approaches for referrals – namely the removal of some existing assessment approaches and the addition of streamlined assessment – will only apply to referrals that do not already have a decision on assessment approach at commencement.
• The new decision-making criteria, including requirements for an action to be consistent with national environmental standards, not have an unacceptable impact, and pass the net gain test, will only apply to actions referred on or after commencement.
• New enforcement powers will apply to all actions from commencement.

What should proponents do now?

These reforms comprise the most significant change to Australia's environmental approvals process in over 20 years. They will particularly impact major project approvals, environmental compliance for existing projects, management of environmental incidents and engagement with stakeholders (including First Nations groups). They will also change the way that environmental decision-making occurs at both a State and Federal level.

Much is still to come, including progressing all National Environmental Standards, the preparation of bioregional plans and the negotiation of bilateral agreements with the States and Territories.

Proponents should carefully consider the impact of the reforms on their existing operations and future projects.

We will publish more detailed alerts about the reforms as matters progress.

Want to know more?

• Ten things you should know about Australia's proposed new environmental laws (6 November 2025). Provides a high level overview of the main features of the proposed new laws as introduced on 30 October 2025.
• Australia's new environmental laws to commence in 2026 (1 December 2025). Summarises the changes to the 30 October version of the Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025 in order to reach agreement with the Greens to pass the Bills in the Senate October 2025 version of the Bills made in order to secure Greens support for the Bills.ne

Other authors: Shayne Solin, Lawyer.

Download a short report containing a summary of all articles from the 2025 Environment and Planning Year in Review 2025:

Download Bitesize Report [PDF 2.62 MB]