The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, explained in practical terms, is Australia’s principal federal environmental law: if a project could significantly affect one of nine nationally protected matters, the proponent must refer it to the Environment Minister, wait for a decision, and follow whatever conditions come with approval. Everything else in the Act — assessments, offsets, penalties, state agreements — flows from that gateway. As of early 2026, the Act is in the middle of its biggest overhaul since it was passed, with seven reform bills before Parliament.
The Nine Matters That Trigger Federal Involvement
The Act only applies when a proposed action is likely to have a significant impact on a matter of national environmental significance. There are nine categories:
- World Heritage areas listed under international treaty obligations.
- National Heritage places with recognised natural, Indigenous, or historic values.
- Ramsar wetlands of international importance.
- Listed threatened species and ecological communities identified as at risk of decline or extinction.
- Listed migratory species protected under international agreements.
- Nuclear actions, including uranium mining and radioactive waste.
- The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park.
- Commonwealth marine areas beyond state coastal limits.
- Water resources affected by large coal mining or unconventional gas development.
The water trigger was originally limited to coal seam gas and large coal mining. In December 2023, Parliament expanded it to all forms of unconventional gas development, including shale and tight gas.1Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. Updated Water Trigger in Our Environmental Law
State and territory governments handle local environmental regulation. The EPBC Act sits above that, focused specifically on these nine categories.
The Referral: The Gateway Step
Any person or company proposing an action that could significantly affect a protected matter must refer it to the federal government before starting work. Skipping the referral exposes the proponent to serious penalties even if the project would otherwise have been approved.
A referral is more than a notification. It requires a detailed project description covering construction through operation, precise coordinates and maps, field surveys done under established scientific protocols to identify protected species or habitats on site, and a description of the mitigation measures planned — avoiding sensitive areas, installing noise barriers, filtering water, or timing work around breeding and migration seasons.
Referrals go in through the EPBC Act Business Portal, which structures the application and supporting documents in a standardised digital format.2Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. Referral Applications and Proposals
What It Costs to Apply
The standard referral fee is $6,577. If the Minister needs more information and pauses the statutory clock, a stop-clock fee of $1,701 applies each time. Projects declared controlled actions face additional assessment fees:3Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. Fees, Exemptions and Waivers Under the EPBC Act
- Assessment on referral information: $8,964
- Assessment on preliminary documentation: $8,010
- Public environment report or environmental impact statement: $25,583
- Assessment by bilateral agreement or accredited process: $18,146
These are base figures. Requesting reconsideration of a controlled action decision costs another $6,577, and post-approval management plan evaluations cost $2,690.
How Assessment and Approval Work
Once a referral is lodged, the Minister for the Environment has 20 business days to decide whether the proposal is a “controlled action” — meaning it is likely to significantly affect one or more protected matters.4Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. Decisions on Referred Actions Under the EPBC Act
If the action is not controlled, the proponent can proceed without further federal involvement. If it is controlled, the government selects an assessment method proportional to the risk. Simple projects may be assessed on the information already in the referral. Larger or riskier ones move to a full Environmental Impact Statement, with deeper investigation and additional rounds of public consultation. A public comment phase lets community members and organisations respond to the proposal.
When the assessment is complete, the Minister either approves or refuses. Approvals almost always come with binding conditions, and the proponent receives a formal notification setting them out.
Judicial Review and National Interest Exemptions
Section 487 of the Act provides “extended standing” for judicial review. Individuals and organisations can challenge the Minister’s decisions in court without needing a direct personal connection to the affected area — broader than the usual standing test under Australian administrative law. Environmental groups have used this provision to bring legal challenges to project approvals across the country.
In narrow circumstances the Minister can exempt an action from the standard process if it is in the “national interest,” typically for defence, national security, or a declared national emergency. The Minister has 20 business days to decide on an exemption and must notify the applicant within 10 business days of the decision.5Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. Register of Exemptions
State Bilaterals and Strategic Assessments
Since 2015, the Australian Government has held bilateral agreements with every state and territory. These let a state or territory run a single assessment process covering both its own environmental requirements and the federal ones under the EPBC Act, cutting duplication for proponents.6Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. Shared Environmental Assessments With States and Territories
One important limit: these are assessment agreements only. The state conducts the review and sends its report to the Commonwealth, but the project still needs separate approvals from both the Commonwealth Environment Minister and the state before it can proceed. States cannot issue final federal approvals.
For large-scale plans covering entire regions or development programs, strategic assessments offer an alternative to project-by-project referrals. The Minister assesses the cumulative impacts of everything under a policy, plan, or program. If the Minister endorses the program, individual actions carried out under it do not need separate referrals or approvals, and compliance is monitored through annual audits and longer-term reviews.7Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. Strategic Assessments of an Endorsed Policy, Plan or Program Actions that fall outside the endorsed program still go through the standard referral process.
Environmental Offsets
When a project will unavoidably damage a protected matter, the proponent must compensate for the residual harm through environmental offsets. The Act enforces a strict hierarchy: avoid the harm first, mitigate whatever cannot be avoided, and only then offset what remains.8Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. Stronger Environmental Protection and Restoration
Offsets can be delivered directly by the proponent, through the Nature Repair Market, by a restoration contribution payment to the government, or through a combination of these. The Offsets Assessment Guide functions as a balance sheet, weighing habitat quality and area lost at the impact site against what the offset site provides. Variables include total area affected, habitat quality, the time horizon for ecological benefit, and the risk the offset land would have been lost anyway.9Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. Offsets Assessment Guide
At least 90% of offsets should be direct offsets unless a larger indirect offset would deliver more benefit or scientific uncertainty makes a direct offset impractical. Some impacts are classified as “unacceptable” and cannot be offset at all, no matter what compensation is proposed.
Penalties for Breaching the Act
Taking an action without approval that significantly impacts a protected matter carries heavy consequences. The maximum criminal penalty is seven years’ imprisonment and a fine of up to 420 penalty units. At the current rate of $313 per penalty unit, that is $131,460 for an individual, and courts can fine a body corporate up to five times that. The maximum civil penalty reaches 5,000 penalty units for an individual ($1,565,000) and 50,000 penalty units for a body corporate ($15,650,000).10Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. Compliance Outcomes
Beyond fines and prison, the government can seek court-ordered injunctions to halt non-compliant work. The Minister can also issue remediation determinations under sections 480D through 480N, requiring the offender to repair or mitigate the damage, spend a set amount on restoration, and undertake ongoing monitoring and reporting. Ignoring a remediation determination brings the Federal Court in, with power to order compliance and add further penalties.
Most approvals include a condition requiring annual compliance reports to the Minister, addressing both the EPBC Act conditions and any approved management plans. The Department reviews every report, and missing the deadline is itself treated as a potential breach.11Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. Annual Compliance Report Guidelines
What the 2025 Reform Package Would Change
On 30 October 2025, the Australian Government introduced a package of seven bills to Parliament, including the Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025 and the National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025. The Senate Environment and Communications Committee is examining the package, with a reporting deadline of 24 March 2026.12Parliament of Australia. Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025 and Related Bills
The centrepiece is a new National Environmental Protection Agency, proposed to begin operating on 1 July 2026. The agency would function as an independent watchdog with power to issue stop-work orders and audit approval holders. Other proposed changes include national environmental standards, a formal “net gain test” requiring offsets to deliver a positive environmental outcome rather than merely compensating for damage, a statutory definition of “unacceptable impacts” that cannot be approved under any circumstances, and a requirement for proponents to report greenhouse gas emissions during assessment.
Corporate penalties would climb sharply. Under the proposed formula, a body corporate could face the greater of 50,000 penalty units, three times the benefit derived or detriment avoided, or 10% of annual turnover (capped at 2.5 million penalty units). The reform bills have not passed Parliament, so the current framework described above remains in force until they do.