Two National Environmental Standards now open for comment – Have your say! 

Strong National Environmental Standards are the backbone of a reformed EPBC Act, according to the recommendations from the latest independent review of Australia’s federal environment laws by Professor Graeme Samuel (Samuel Review).  

Have Your Say on critical environmental protection requirements 

The federal Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW) is accepting submissions on two draft Standards now until 5pm 30 January 2025.  

You can provide your submission through the DCCEEW website page here.  

Your voice matters. Strong community input can ensure these Standards protect nature, deliver accountability, and reflect the expectations of the Australian public. 

What are National Environmental Standards? 

In 2021 the Samuel Review found that the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth), our national environmental law, is too discretionary, too inconsistent, does not deal with cumulative impacts, and often fails to prevent environmental decline. He found that without fundamental reform, the EPBC Act cannot deliver the level of environmental protection the community expects. His centerpiece recommendation was for the creation of clear, binding National Environmental Standards. 

National Environmental Standards are intended to: 

• Set clear, measurable limits on environmental harm 

• Provide transparent rules that guide decisions under the EPBC Act 

• Lift environmental outcomes, not merely manage decline 

• Ensure governments, proponents and regulators operate with consistency, clarity and accountability 

The latest State of the Environment Report makes it clear that ‘the state and trend of the environment of Australia is poor and deteriorating because of increasing pressures from climate change, habitat loss, invasive species, pollution and resource extraction.’ That’s why it’s so important that these Standards are strong, measurable, enforceable, and ambitious to lead to the ‘quantum shift’ that Professor Samuel stated was required to halt and reverse this decline.   

What are the new requirements for National Environmental Standards? 

The power for the Minister to make National Environmental Standards and the requirement to apply them to EPBC Act decisions were inserted into the EPBC Act in amendments passed in late November 2025. These requirements state that: 

• The Minister may make a National Environmental Standard if the Minister is satisfied that the Standard would promote the objects of the EPBC Act and would not be inconsistent with certain specific international agreements; 

• National Environmental Standards will be legislative instruments (this means that they must be tabled in Parliament and are disallowable);  

• A National Environmental Standard must set out one or more outcomes or objectives; 

• A National Environmental Standard may specify: 

• parameters within, or principles by which, an outcome or objective is to be achieved;  

• processes or actions to be followed or taken in achieving an outcome or objective. 

Regulations made under the EPBC Act will specify which National Environmental Standard must be applied to which decision or process under the Act.

Once a National Environmental Standard is finalised and prescribed for a decision under the EPBC Act,  the decision-maker must ensure they are satisfied that their decisions are consistent with the Standard. These decisions include, for example:  

• whether to approve or refuse referred activities, and conditions placed on those activities;  

• the accreditation of frameworks such as state or territory laws to devolve federal powers under the EPBC Act; and 

• the approval of strategic assessments and bioregional plans.  

Two Draft Standards Are Now Open for Public Comment until 30 Jan 

The Federal Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW) has released two draft National Environmental Standards (including the draft policy paper and legislative instrument) for public consultation until 5pm 30 January 2026. The legislative instrument is the draft ‘Standard’ with the policy paper providing supporting information only.  

1. Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES) Standard 

This Standard provides additional guidance for decision makers when assessing and approving actions that impact MNES, which includes threatened species, migratory species, World Heritage areas, Ramsar wetlands, and other nationally significant matters. Find the draft documents here:  

• Draft MNES Standard Policy Paper 

• Draft MNES Standard legislative instrument  

2. Environmental Offsets Standard 

This Standard governs the use of offsets when ‘residual significant impacts’ cannot be fully avoided or mitigated. The Draft Standard sets out principles for ensuring offsets are effectively achieved. An accompanying Policy Paper also provides guidance on how the Standard is intended to be applied to the new ‘restorations contribution charges’ framework. We understand a separate guidance document will be prepared to provide guidance on the operation of the Standard and what will need to be demonstrated to apply the principles. Find the documents here:  

• Draft Environmental Offsets Standard Policy Paper 

• Draft Environmental Offsets Standard legislative instrument  

These Standards, amongst the others to come, will shape how Australia protects nature for decades. Public submissions are critical to ensuring the final Standards are strong, clear and effective. 

See the DCCEEW consultation page here to find out more about this consultation. 

EDO’s Key Points to Help You Make a Submission 

Below are the EDO’s priority recommendations to help guide submissions. Feel free to use these points in full, but it can be helpful to use them as a guide and provide them in your words to ensure your submission is given full weight as a unique submission.  

Overarching comments on all Standards:  

 1. The Standards must be legally enforceable and leave no room for loopholes 

• Standards should use clear, unqualified language (“must”), not discretionary language (“may” “if possible” or “where necessary”). They currently do not. 

• Requirements must bind both decision-makers and proponents. 

• Standards must be focused on measurable and timely outcomes for nature, not on process 

• The Standards should ensure requirements are SMART requirements- specific, measurable, actionable, realistic, and time-bound. This will assist to ensure that they are enforceable. 

2. The Standards must reflect the full intent of the Samuel Review 

• Professor Samuel recommended strong, outcome-focused Standards as the cornerstone of reform. The Standards must reflect those recommendations in substance, not just in name. Anything less risks repeating the failings of the current EPBC Act. 

• The draft Standards include ‘outcomes’ that do not fall within the scope of what Samuel recommended- they are largely related to process, are not clear or specific, and use vague and qualified language.  

• The full suite of Standards recommended by Professor Samuel needs to be implemented urgently.  

• The full suite of Standards must be implemented prior to any decisions being made under the reforms, including with respect to accreditation or the changed management of Regional Forest Agreement operations.  

3. All detail should be in Standards, not in further policies and guidelines 

• The Policy Papers accompanying the Draft Standards indicate that further detail will be set out in policies and guidance. To provide clear and enforceable Standards most effectively,  and to provide the granular detail envisaged by the Samuel Review, we strongly recommend all necessary considerations should be included in the Standards themselves rather than creating further guidelines. 

• Where policies and guidance are still required, these should be provided for public consultation alongside draft Standards so they can be considered as a whole.  

Draft MNES Standard 

4. The MNES Standard must genuinely protect—not merely manage decline of—nature 

The MNES Standard must: 

• Provide granular, unqualified and non-discretionary science-based thresholds and limits, including red lines where actions cannot proceed due to the impact they will have on MNES. 

• Include clear outcome-based rules that ensure no net loss of MNES, and deliver net improvement. 

• Require decisions to be consistent with recovery plans, threat abatement plans and independent scientific advice. 

• Ensure cumulative impacts are assessed and managed, not overlooked. Clearly state a requirement for cumulative impact assessment for all assessment pathways. Addressing cumulative impacts was a fundamental component of the Samuel Review’s rationale for Standards. 

• Provide clear guidance on how to apply the mitigation hierarchy, by providing clearer guidance on when activities must be avoided, and what sufficient mitigation activities includes.  

Draft Offsets Standard 

 5. The Offsets Standard must ensure offsets deliver genuine environmental outcomes 

The Offsets Standard should establish a robust, ecologically sound offsets framework by addressing the following key points:  

• Require that offsets are ecologically feasible, scientifically sound, and deliver a real net gain for the affected species or ecosystem. Sufficient granularity is needed in the Standard itself (e.g. detail in the Policy Paper regarding feasibility should be included in the Standard itself). 

• Prohibit offsets where offsets are not possible and where impacts are to critically endangered species – so that offsets cannot justify inappropriate impacts. This can be achieved by ensuring protection statements and declarations are published alongside the final Offsets Standard identifying all matters of national environmental significance that cannot be offset and any critically endangered and endangered species and ecosystems.  

• Prevent the use of restoration contribution charges unless they meet all offset principles, including being tied to transparent, measurable, high-quality ecological outcomes that are guaranteed to compensate for the impact allowed (like for like). 

• Ensure that offsets sites are subject to legal security and effective management in perpetuity, for example via legal covenants. Specific detail should be included in the Standard itself. 

• Put clear limits on the use of indirect offsets (in line with the current EPBC Act environmental offsets policy which requires 90% of offsets to be direct offsets). 

• Provide for an offsets register that includes full details of all offset approval conditions, and include information on offset sites and the legal mechanism used to protect the site. 

• Ensures offsets are delivered before impacts occur, not years later, including that the Restoration Contributions Holder spends relevant contribution payments prior to impacts occurring. 

• Require a peer reviewed evidence base to support calculations of impact and offsets proposed and how the offsets meet the principles.  

• Require conditions for ongoing monitoring and reporting of effective achievement and long term management of offsets.   

Get your submissions in by 30 January – don’t miss this important opportunity to help ensure the new National Environmental Standards lead to meaningful improvements to environmental protection in Australia!