Victoria general environmental duty

EPA Victoria enforces the general environmental duty (GED) through a graduated, risk-based ladder. It starts with compliance advice. Next come remedial notices and directions that force a duty holder to fix a risk. At the top are sanctions: official warnings, infringement notices, enforceable undertakings, civil penalty proceedings and criminal prosecution. A remedial notice can be issued for a GED risk before any harm occurs.

Approach: The datasets I can search hold only EPA Victoria's Priority Sites Register, not its enforcement policies. So I read EPA Victoria's Remedial powers policy (Publication 1813, June 2021), its Sanction powers policy (Publication 1814, June 2021) and its "Manage compliance and enforce the law" page. Both policies are dated June 2021, and I did not open the Compliance and enforcement policy (Publication 1798) that they point to.

The overall approach

• EPA says it combines "encouragement and deterrence" with a risk-based approach. It assumes most people want to comply, and escalates when duty holders resist or evade their obligations (EPA Victoria, Manage compliance and enforce the law).
• Both policies show the same response pyramid (Publication 1814, p. 5):
  1. guidance and support (compliance advice);
  2. directed compliance (remedial notices, directions);
  3. graduated sanctions (official warnings, infringements, enforceable undertakings);
  4. the "full force of the law" (civil proceedings, criminal prosecution).
• EPA can act against government, businesses or individuals who fail to comply with the GED. It can also act against officers of bodies corporate who failed to exercise due diligence to make sure their organisation complies (Publication 1814, p. 6).

Remedial tools: making the duty holder fix the risk

From the Remedial powers policy, Table 1 (Publication 1813, pp. 8-12):

Tool	EP Act section	Use
Compliance advice	s 359	Explains how to comply. It is recorded, adds to your compliance history and forms part of your "state of knowledge"
Improvement notice	s 271	EPA's "primary tool for compelling compliance with the duties", including the GED. It does not require harm to have occurred, and can be issued during an inspection
Prohibition notice	s 272	Stops an activity immediately where there is an immediate risk of harm
Notice to investigate	s 273	Requires investigation of suspected contamination, a pollution incident, unlawful industrial waste or a risk of harm
Environmental action notice	s 274	Requires clean-up, waste removal or remediation
Waste abatement notice	s 121	Deals with waste problems; councils' litter enforcement officers can also issue it
Site management order	s 275	Requires long-term management of a site. It attaches to the land title and binds future owners and occupiers
Directions	s 260	Deal with immediate risks, for example in an emergency. Can be given to anyone, and may be given verbally first
Clean-up powers	s 294	EPA does the clean-up itself, but only when other attempts have failed

Points that matter for GED compliance (Publication 1813, pp. 5-7):

• Reasonably practicable is the ceiling. A notice will not require a duty holder to go beyond what is reasonably practicable to minimise risk.
• What you knew counts. Officers judge what you knew or ought to have known, for example from industry standards.
• Shared duties mean multiple notices. Where several parties share a duty (owner, operator), what is reasonably practicable can differ for each, so EPA may issue notices to each of them.
• Notices bite immediately. They take effect straight away, and EPA revokes them in writing once you comply.
• Breaching a notice escalates. Non-compliance can lead to an infringement notice, civil penalty proceedings or prosecution.
• Corporate obligations can be redirected. EPA can redirect environmental action notices and site management orders to another party, such as the company's officers, where the company fails to comply or is being wound up (Part 10.7).
• Review rights: where EPA internal review is available, you must use it before applying to VCAT. Timeframes are set in EPA's Remedial notice review policy (Publication 1926) (Publication 1813, p. 14).

Sanctions: penalising the breach

From the Sanction powers policy (Publication 1814, pp. 7-10):

• Infringement notices and official warnings: used for minor or discrete breaches. The infringeable offences and penalty amounts are in Schedule 10 of the Environment Protection Regulations 2021. You can seek internal review of an infringement notice but not of an official warning.
• Enforceable undertakings: a binding voluntary agreement and an alternative to prosecution or civil proceedings. If you comply with it, EPA will not prosecute or bring civil proceedings. If you withdraw or fail to complete it, EPA may then sue or prosecute.
• Civil penalty proceedings: brought in the Magistrates', County or Supreme Court. The GED (s 25) is on the section 314(3) list of civil penalty provisions. EPA uses this route where it is likely to have a stronger deterrent effect. Under s 315(2), the court sets the amount by looking at the conduct, the loss caused, the circumstances, any past contraventions and any relevant enforceable undertaking.
• Criminal prosecution: needs sufficient evidence and must be in the public interest. EPA follows the Victorian Director of Public Prosecutions' policy. It "will seek to calculate the economic benefit gained from delayed or avoided compliance." Imprisonment is available for an aggravated breach of the GED (s 27), for repeat waste offenders (s 136), and for assaulting or intimidating an authorised officer.
• Court orders can be made on top of a penalty: monetary benefit orders, adverse publicity orders, restoration and prevention orders, restorative project orders, environmental audit orders, interim orders and restraining orders. The maximum penalty is the same in criminal and civil proceedings.
• Permissions: EPA may also suspend or revoke a licence or other permission on top of any sanction (p. 11).

How EPA chooses the response

• Low-end responses: low culpability, low risk, or reasonable systems already in place point towards enforceable undertakings or infringement notices (Publication 1814, p. 12).
• High-end responses: medium to high risk, or negligent, reckless or deliberate conduct, point towards civil proceedings or prosecution (p. 12).
• The GED-specific factor: "how far the duty holder has departed from the requirement to take reasonably practicable measures" (p. 13).
• Other culpability factors (p. 13):
  • how long the breach lasted and whether it is likely to recur;
  • any money gained from it;
  • compliance history;
  • whether you notified EPA yourself;
  • what you did voluntarily to mitigate;
  • whether EPA had already given you guidance.
• Polluter pays: the cost of clean-up is not a factor in deciding whether to pursue a sanction (Publication 1813, p. 5).
• Publicity: EPA publishes sanction outcomes on its website, including details of the offence and the offender (Publication 1814, p. 15).

Sources:

• EPA Victoria, Manage compliance and enforce the law
• EPA Victoria, Sanction powers policy, Publication 1814 (June 2021)
• EPA Victoria, Remedial powers policy, Publication 1813 (June 2021)

A breach of the general environmental duty (GED) in the course of a business or undertaking carries a maximum of 2,000 penalty units for an individual (about $418,200) and 10,000 penalty units for a body corporate (about $2.09 million). That ceiling is the same whether EPA Victoria prosecutes or seeks a civil penalty. An aggravated breach under s 27 doubles it, and an individual can also be jailed.

Approach: The Victorian Environment Protection Act 2017 isn't in the datasets I can search. I read the authorised Act (Authorised Version No. 016) on the Victorian Legislation portal and the Victoria Government Gazette notice that sets the 2026-27 penalty unit. The dollar figures below are my own multiplication of the statutory penalty units by $209.10.

Maximum penalties (penalty unit = $209.10 from 1 July 2026)

Route	Individual	Body corporate
Civil penalty, s 25(1) (s 314 table, item 1)	2,000 PU ≈ $418,200	10,000 PU ≈ $2,091,000
Criminal offence, s 25(2)-(3) (indictable, can be heard summarily)	2,000 PU ≈ $418,200	10,000 PU ≈ $2,091,000
Aggravated breach, s 27 (intentional or reckless, material harm)	4,000 PU ≈ $836,400 and/or 5 years' jail	20,000 PU ≈ $4,182,000

On the penalty unit: the Treasurer fixed it at $209.10 for the financial year starting 1 July 2026, under section 6 of the Monetary Units Act 2004 (Victoria Government Gazette S 234, 5 May 2026).

Rules that shape the exposure (Act, Part 11.5, ss 314-326)

• The business link is required for a civil penalty. Under s 314(3), a court can make a civil penalty order for a GED breach only if the person breached it while conducting a business or undertaking. An officer of a body corporate who is liable through Part 11.8 is also covered.
• Civil or criminal, not both. EPA can seek a civil penalty in addition to, or instead of, a prosecution (s 314(2)). But:
  • a court cannot make a civil penalty order once the person has been convicted for substantially the same conduct (s 318);
  • if criminal proceedings start, civil proceedings are stayed, and they are dismissed if the person is convicted (s 319).
• How the court sets the amount (s 315(2)):
  • the nature and extent of the conduct;
  • the loss or damage caused, including the cost of remedying harm;
  • the circumstances;
  • any previous contraventions;
  • any enforceable undertaking EPA has accepted.
• Multiple contraventions. The court can impose one civil penalty for contraventions based on the same facts or forming a series. That penalty cannot exceed the sum of the separate maximums (s 323). A person pays only one civil penalty for the same conduct (s 322).
• Accessories are treated as contraveners. Anyone who attempts, aids, abets, induces, conspires in or is knowingly concerned in a contravention is treated as having contravened the provision (s 316).
• No Magistrates' Court cap. Its usual civil jurisdictional limit does not apply to civil penalty orders (s 325). A civil penalty order is enforceable as a judgment debt (s 326).

Orders on top of the penalty

In civil or criminal proceedings, the court can add orders that are not capped by the maximum penalty (s 328(2)):

• Monetary benefit orders: these recover the benefit gained, including from avoiding or delaying compliance (s 329).
• Adverse publicity orders (s 330).
• Restoration and prevention orders: for example, training or compliance programs, or a financial assurance (s 331).
• Restorative project orders (s 332).
• Environmental audit orders (s 333).
• Compensation orders for injury, loss, damage or clean-up costs (s 313).

Related penalties

• Ignoring a GED-related improvement or prohibition notice is a separate civil penalty provision. The maximum is 500 PU (≈ $104,550) for an individual and 2,500 PU (≈ $522,750) for a body corporate (s 314 table, items 26-27).
• Infringement notices can only be issued for prescribed offences (s 307). The amounts are in the Environment Protection Regulations 2021, which I did not open, so I can't say whether any GED-related offence is infringeable or at what amount.

Sources:

• Environment Protection Act 2017 (Vic), Authorised Version No. 016
• Victoria Government Gazette S 234, 5 May 2026: value of a fee unit and penalty unit