EPBC Act reforms: stronger protections or more red tape?

Reforms to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) have been contemplated for a long time, pre-dating even the Samuel Review's scathing indictment of the failures plaguing the current federal legislation intended to protect the environment.

During the Labor Government's first term in 2023, then Environment Minister, The Hon. Tanya Plibersek, seemingly started out strong with a "Nature Positive" plan that was gradually watered down and eventually quashed following pressure from lobbyists. Upon Labor's re-election in 2025, the newly sworn in Environment Minister, The Hon. Murray Watt, revived the reforms, leading to the tabling of not one, not two, but seven Bills to Parliament on 30 October 2025.

The Minister stated, "Today we’ve introduced a package of reforms that delivers stronger environmental protections, faster project approvals and more transparency." But is that the case? What do the reforms actually propose, and will they truly go towards fixing what Professor Samuel described as a "broken" system?

The key Bills introduced as part of the package are:

• Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025
• National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025
• Environment Information Australia Bill 2025

The reform package is now open for public submissions to the Senate Standing Committees on Environment and Communications until 5 December 2025. The Committee will report in March 2026.

Environmental protection and restoration

National Environmental Standards

National Environmental Standards (Standards) were a key aspect of the Samuel Review. They will be legislative instruments to guide approval decisions. Whilst the package does not contain Standards, it proposes a new Ministerial power to create them subject to a "no regression" principle. This means that, prior to the amendment or revocation of a Standard, the Minister must ensure that changes will not lessen environmental protections provided by that Standard.

Unacceptable Impacts

The EPBC Act currently includes a "clearly unacceptable" decision category, however, the phrase is undefined. The bill introduces a definition of "unacceptable impacts" in respect to each matter protected by the relevant provision, as shown in the example extracted below. The Minister cannot approve a project unless they are satisfied that it will not have unacceptable impacts.

New Offset Regime

The current Environmental Offsets Policy is set to be replaced by a new framework for "Restoration Actions" and "Restoration Contributions" under Part 12B of the Environment Protection Reform Bill. Whilst the Government is framing this as a new and robust regime, some environmental groups have labelled this as "pay to destroy" provisions.

The proposed offset regime requires offsets to be utilised as a last resort to mitigate and repair impacts, with the aim of delivering a "net gain", in contrast to the current "no net loss" test. Importantly, offsets cannot be utilised to mitigate "unacceptable impacts".

Higher Penalties

The reforms introduce new formulas to determine penalties. As such, the penalty for an individual may be the higher of:

• up to 5,000 penalty units ($1,650,000) for an individual; or
• 3 times the value of the benefit derived by the non-compliance.

Similarly for corporations, the reforms propose penalties of the higher of:

• up to 50,000 penalty units ($16,500,000) for a body corporate; or
• 3 times the value of the benefit derived by the non-compliance; or
• 10% of the company's annual turnover, up to 2.5 m penalty units ($825,000,000).

Efficient project assessment and approvals

Removing duplicative approvals

The use of updated bilateral agreements between the federal government and states and territories has been proposed to remove the need for federal assessment or approval, on the basis that a state or territory can gain the requisite accreditation in order to obtain Commonwealth-level approval powers.

Whilst a form of these provisions already exist, they have yet to have been used due to perceived legal ambiguities (clarifications have been sought at various times but have never passed the Senate).

Streamlined Assessment Pathway

Most exciting for future development is the proposal to streamline assessment pathways to reduce approval times. Where sufficient information has been provided upfront, a decision on the application is to be made within 30 business days. There is also the ability to change the assessment pathway if it becomes apparent there is a more suitable pathway.

There are presently no requirements regarding the level of information that will be required in order for a streamlined pathway to be nominated.

Bioregional planning

Bioregional plans will be developed in collaboration with States and Territories and will establish:

• development zones;
• conservation zones;
• priority actions;
• impacted protected matters;
• bioregional restoration measures; and
• conditions of the bioregional plan.

The purpose of the bioregional plan is to permit the faster development of key national initiatives such as renewable energy and critical minerals, whilst helping to protect areas of high conservation priority. Bioregional plans will also enable better management of cumulative impacts of development.

National interest exemption and national interest approval

The national interest exemption is strengthened by allowing conditions to be attached to the taking of an action covered by the national interest exemption and providing for a set period for which such an exemption is granted. This exemption is intended to be directed at national defence, security and emergencies.

The national interest approval provides the ability for the Minster to approve critical projects that the Minister considers to be in the national interest even if they do not meet the requirements of the EPBC Act. 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. Projects approved under this pathway must still go through an environmental assessment process and be subject to ongoing compliance and enforcement. The Minister must publish reasons for determining the project is in the national interest.

Accountability and transparency

National Environmental Protection Agency

Perhaps the crowning jewel of the EPBC Act reforms is the establishment of a statutory based, independent watchdog - the National Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA) to undertake regulatory and implementation functions under a range of Commonwealth environmental laws. NEPA will be listed under the Public Governance Performance and Accountability Act 2013. Its powers will be vested in a CEO, who will be responsible for permitting, compliance and enforcement. The CEO of NEPA will have the power to make rulings in relation to the powers vested in NEPA, such as compliance and enforcement, to demonstrate how the legislative framework should apply in specific situations.

However, the Minister will retain decision-making on environmental assessments and approvals, with the ability to issue directives to the NEPA CEO.

Environment Information Australia

Lastly, the Environment Information Australia Bill proposes to establish the statutory position of Head of Environment Information Australia (HEIA), with the purpose of overseeing better environmental data and reporting with the ultimate goal of providing access to "authoritative sources of high-quality environmental information".

Our experts will continue to track the progress of the EPBC Act reforms through Parliament but please get in touch with our Environment and Planning team if you would like to discuss how the proposed reforms may impact the approval and delivery of your particular project.