Environmental Performance Assessment Scheme (EPAS) - a fair way to report performance​ 

Closes 30 Jun 2025

This service needs cookies enabled.

Section 7: Time taken to resolve compliance issues

Time taken to resolve compliance issues is one of three parts that determine the environmental performance rating, alongside the compliance category and environmental harm caused. 

A house infographic. The three parts of EPAS, compliance, time and harm are displayed as pillars. EPAS is the roof of the house. The green compliance pillar is highlighted as this section focuses on compliance.

Figure 6: EPAS focus on time.

How long an operator is ‘Non-compliant’ or ‘Major non-compliant’ for matters. A longer time in non-compliance places the environment at greater risk and undermines other operators that invest to remain compliant. This is not acceptable. The environmental performance rating rewards resolving compliance issues quickly. 

We consider that a reasonable time to resolve compliance issues is 30 days from when the issue was identified. Operators who have some non-compliance i.e. not major non-compliance and resolve this within 30 days can retain an environmental performance rating of ‘Good’. If it takes more than 30 days to resolve, but less than 180 days (roughly six months) then the environmental performance rating is downgraded to ‘Below expectations’. Anything longer than six months is ‘Unacceptable’. 

A diagram with a timeline at the top and the two compliance categories (non-compliant and major non-compliant) that shows how an operator's performance rating will change over time, the longer they take to resolve a compliance issue.

Figure 7: How long an operator takes to resolve a compliance issue affects their environmental performance rating.

We know that in some instances, significant capital expenditure is required to comply, together with complex design and build solutions and that this can often span a multi-year period. Simply put, it is not possible to resolve within 180 days. In these instances, we expect operators to prepare an appropriate compliance recovery plan. When a compliance recovery plan is in place that we have confirmed includes reasonable steps to resolve non-compliance in a timely manner, this will be published alongside the environmental performance rating. This provides a transparent picture to those who use environmental performance ratings and ensures actions operators are taking to resolve non-compliance are fairly represented. 

How quickly an operator resolves compliance issues will impact their environmental performance rating

Question 3: How important do you think it is to include the length of time taken to resolve compliance issues within the environmental performance assessment?

More information

We think that how long an operator takes to resolve compliance issues matters.  A longer time in non-compliance places the environment at greater risk and undermines other operators that invest to remain compliant.

Question 4: In your view, how many days should an operator have to resolve an issue categorised as 'Non-compliant' and still retain a 'Good' performance rating?

More information

Rule 2: If a 'Non-compliant' issue is resolved within 30 days, environmental performance is rated as ‘Good’.

Compliance issues categorised as 'Non-compliant' are generally of lower environmental significance.  When an issue categorised as 'Non-compliant' is resolved quickly, we think it is fair that an operator retains a ‘Good’ performance rating. We have proposed 30 days is an appropriate time for an operator to resolve any issues categorised as 'Non-compliant'. We think this will act as an incentive for operators to resolve any non-compliance quickly. This does not apply for any issue categorised as 'Major non-compliant' or where a Category 1 or 2 environmental event has been caused, see table 4 section 9.1.

Question 5: How many days should an operator have to resolve an issue categorised as 'Non-compliant' before their environmental performance is rated as 'Unacceptable'? 

More information

Rule 4: If a ‘Non-compliant’ issue took more than 180 days to resolve, environmental performance is rated as ‘Unacceptable’.  

Compliance issues categorised as ‘Non-compliant’ are generally of lower environmental significance. Therefore, we think it is appropriate that operators have a longer time to resolve issues categorised as ‘Non-compliant’ before being rated as ‘Unacceptable’. However, it is still important that operators meet all their legal environmental requirements. Therefore, if an operator takes longer than 180 days (approximately 6 months) to resolve an issue that is generally of lower environmental significance, we think it is fair for operators to be rated as ‘Unacceptable’. If ongoing environmental harm caused equates to a Category 1 or 2 environmental event, an operators’ performance will be rated as ‘Unacceptable’ immediately as stated in rule 8, table 4 section 9.1.

Question 6: How many days should an operator have to resolve an issue categorised as 'Major non-compliant' before their environmental performance is rated as 'Unacceptable'? 

More information

Rule 6: If a ‘Major non-compliant’ issue took more than 30 days to resolve, environmental performance is rated as ‘Unacceptable’.

Compliance issues categorised as 'Major non-compliant' are of higher environmental significance. Therefore, we think it is appropriate that operators have a shorter time to resolve issues categorised as ‘Major non-compliant’ before being rated as ‘Unacceptable’. If environmental harm caused equates to a Category 1 or 2 environmental event, an operators’ performance will be rated as ‘Unacceptable’ immediately, see rule 8, table 4 section 9.1.