Environmental Referrals (EPBC Act)

Australia EPBC Act DCCEEW Environment Land Development Infrastructure Regulatory Compliance

Overview

Draft Referral of Proposed Action for developments affecting matters of national environmental significance (MNES) under the EPBC Act. Covers Ramsar wetlands, threatened species, mitigation and offsets, and DCCEEW submission. Australia; land development and infrastructure. Includes mitigation_commitment_check to ensure all environmental offset and mitigation commitments use mandatory language (“shall” not “should”) before submission to DCCEEW.

Example conversation

You: We’re submitting an EPBC referral for a pipeline corridor that may affect Ramsar buffer. Draft the impact and mitigation sections, then check the commitment wording.
Agent: I’ll draft the referral sections using the EPBC skill: describe the action and location, which MNES may be affected (Ramsar wetland buffer), and the proposed mitigation and offsets. I’ll use “shall” for all binding commitments. Once the draft is ready, I’ll run mitigation_commitment_check to flag any “should” in offset or mitigation context so we can fix them before submission.
You: The client sent a revised mitigation table — run the wording check on it.
Agent: (Runs mitigation_commitment_check on the file.) Two lines in the offset section still use “should”. I’ve listed them with suggested “shall” replacements. Update those and re-run to confirm.

Excerpt of a generated referral (mitigation and offsets)

The agent structures mitigation and environmental offset commitments in mandatory language. Example:

## Mitigation and environmental offsets

### Avoidance and mitigation

- Construction shall avoid direct disturbance of the wetland buffer; all works within 200 m of the Ramsar boundary shall follow the agreed construction management plan.
- The proponent shall install and maintain sediment controls for the duration of works and shall remove them only after revegetation is established.

### Environmental offsets

- The proponent shall secure and manage an offset area of no less than 2.5 ha of equivalent wetland habitat, to be legally protected and monitored for 20 years post-construction.
- Annual monitoring reports shall be submitted to DCCEEW; the proponent shall implement corrective measures if monitoring indicates decline in offset condition.

mitigation_commitment_check ensures every such commitment uses “shall” (not “should”) so obligations are binding.

Extension tool

mitigation_commitment_check — Run on the referral or mitigation document after drafting or revising. It validates:

Check	Requirement
Commitment wording	In any line that refers to offsets, mitigation, commitments, compensation, conditions of approval, undertakings, obligations, environmental management plans, habitat restoration/protection, threatened species, or Ramsar — the word “should” is reported as non-compliant.
Suggested fix	Each flagged line is shown with a suggested replacement: “should” → “shall”, “should not” → “shall not”.

DCCEEW expects binding language for environmental commitments. The tool scans only commitment-related context (e.g. offset, mitigation, undertaking) and lists line numbers and suggested wording so you can correct and re-run before submission.

Getting Started

Add your source materials (project description, site info, impact assessments) to the project workspace, then activate the Environmental Referrals (EPBC Act) skill. The agent will guide you through the referral structure, draft mitigation and offsets in mandatory language, and run mitigation_commitment_check before you submit to DCCEEW.