Victoria’s mining and quarrying industries are moving to a duty-based regulatory model

Victoria is changing how it regulates mines, quarries and exploration activities. The reform changes how activities are regulated. It does not change what activities are regulated.

From 1 July 2027, operators will need to meet a new general duty. This means they must proactively identify and manage risks and take reasonable steps to remove or reduce harm as far as reasonably practicable. This includes risks to the community, environment, land, property and infrastructure.

The reform will be delivered through the Mineral Resources (Sustainable Development) Amendment Act 2023. New regulations and guidance will support the reform.

Resources Victoria is leading this reform and will support operators through the transition.

What is changing

Operators will have a general duty to manage risks and impacts from work on their sites. This is a shift from relying on detailed work plans that capture risks at one point in time.

The new model puts ongoing risk management at the centre of day-to-day operations. Operators will need to:

• identify and assess risks
• put controls in place
• check that controls are working
• review and improve their approach over time.

The duty will apply to all licence and work authority holders, regardless of risk level. This means it will not only apply to operators that previously needed a work plan.

The reform also introduces increased penalties for failing to meet the duty, including fines and, in some cases, imprisonment.

What is staying the same

Operators will still need a licence or a work authority to operate.

Rehabilitation will remain essential. Operators will still need to rehabilitate land, even if their licence or work authority has expired. This will help protect land for future use and support agreed land use outcomes.

Depending on the operation, we will either:

• approve and enforce rehabilitation plans in a similar way to the current process
• require operators to complete rehabilitation in line with the regulations.

The duty-based model will not:

• change the environment effects statement (EES) process, which will continue to be managed by the Minister for Planning and their department under the Environment Effects Act 1978
• remove the need for planning permission.

Licence conditions will still be used where appropriate. However, the primary focus will be on using the duty-based model to drive compliance.

Risk levels

The reform will introduce new risk levels for licences and work authorities.

Each site will be classed as one of the following:

• lower risk
• moderate risk
• higher risk.

What each risk level means

• Lower risk sites will need to comply with a new Code of Compliance. The current Codes of Practice will no longer exist.
• Moderate and higher risk sites will need to meet additional requirements for specific activities. These requirements will be set out in the regulations. These sites will also need an approved rehabilitation plan. Existing approved rehabilitation plans for these sites will transition into the new framework.

All sites, regardless of risk level, must meet the general duty.

Applying the general duty

Operators need to consider what risks might be relevant to their operation. If operators can eliminate a risk, they must do so. If it is not possible to eliminate a risk, operators must minimise it as much as reasonably practicable.

To decide what is reasonably practicable, operators should consider 5 things for every risk. This includes new risks and risks that already have controls in place. Operators must use the same feedback loop to check whether existing controls are still effective and whether new or improved controls are needed.

1. How likely is the risk to happen?

Operators could assess likelihood using a simple 1–5 scale, where 1 means the risk is unlikely to happen and 5 means it is almost certain to happen.

Example: A site has batters that are prone to failure, like rockfalls in hard rock or slumps in sand. Without any controls, failure is very likely.

2. How serious could the harm be?

Operators also need to consider how serious the harm could be if the risk occurs.

Harm can happen as a one-off event, such as a failure or spill. It can also build up over time. Both need to be considered.

Example: These batters are next to sensitive receptors, like roads, houses or even waterways. If they fail, roads could be blocked off, houses could sustain damage or a river could flood the site. The site may even have to stop operating.

3. What does the operator know, or should know?

Operators need to consider what they know, and what they should reasonably know, about the risks linked to their activities. This includes expected ways to manage those risks, based on their role, experience, industry knowledge and regulatory guidance. This is known as the ‘state of knowledge’.

If operators do not know enough about how to identify and manage a risk, they need to investigate it further.

Example: Operators should know the design of the batters, including the specific height, width and angle needed to keep them stable, and build them accordingly. Operators should know what events may increase the risk of failure, like heavy rain or an earthquake. In some cases, a suitably qualified and experienced specialist (e.g. a geotechnical engineer) may need to undertake an investigation, assess the risk, and outline design and monitoring requirements.

4. What controls are available and suitable?

Operators need to consider what controls are available to reduce the risk. They need to decide which controls are suitable for their site and activities.

Operators should consider the hierarchy of controls. In general, engineering controls (e.g. equipment or design features) are stronger than administrative controls (e.g. work procedures, monitoring programs, training or maintenance processes).

For controls, it is not a case of one or the other – different ‘levels’ of controls may be suitable. Operators should implement all suitable levels of controls in case one level fails.

Example: When managing slope stability, operators should use the hierarchy of controls to decide which controls would work best for their site:

• Flatten the slope to a shallow angle (elimination)

• Replace weak material with a stronger one (substitution)

• Relocate the slope away from sensitive receptors (isolation)

• Add catch benches and drainage behind the slope (engineering)

• Restrict access around the potential failure zone (administrative)

• Ensure all personnel wear high-vis clothing, hard hats and steel-toe boots (PPE)

5. What will the controls cost?

Cost can be considered, but not first. Operators need to understand the risk and the available controls before they consider costs.

A control does not need to be used if its cost is far greater than the risk reduction it provides. A cost-benefit analysis can help show whether a control is proportionate to the risk.

Financial hardship or high market prices are generally not enough reason to avoid using suitable controls.

Example: An operator may hire a consultant to complete a geotechnical assessment of their batters. This may be expensive, but it can greatly reduce the overall level of risk. It can help confirm key factors such as material strength through laboratory testing. It can also help determine how likely instability is, such as through modelling. This information can help the operator choose suitable controls. For example, it may show that daily field inspections are enough, instead of more costly options like real-time radar monitoring.

What is reasonably practicable can change over time

Operators need to review risks and controls regularly, such as when:

• new information becomes available about a risk (state of knowledge)

• site operations change

• a failure or incident occurs, including a near miss

• new risks are identified

• better ways to manage existing risks become available.

Operators must manage risk across the full lifecycle of their operation. This includes planning, construction, operation, closure and rehabilitation.

In practice, this may look like keeping ‘live’ management plans for each risk. Each plan should include a record of changes, so operators can clearly show how they have reviewed and updated controls over time.

The duty does not stop once controls are in place. Operators need to keep checking that they still work and remain suitable for the risks at their site.

Examples of risk management in practice

Below are examples of what risk management controls may look like for different activities or risks at a site.

The different levels of controls are:

• Required practice – what you must do (minimum requirements)
• Stronger practice – what better risk management looks like (how you could improve your practices)
• Leading practice – what best practice looks like
• Not meeting your duty – what happens when risks are not managed

Operators can use these examples to assess their sites, identify risks and strengthen controls where needed.

Some sites may require more robust controls, particularly where risks are ongoing, complex or interconnected. In these situations, operators may need to adopt stronger or leading practices to meet the general duty.

It is important to note that the transition to the new model is not about having everything in place by 1 July 2027. What matters is that operators understand their risks, are actively working to manage them and can demonstrate a genuine commitment to continuous improvement.

Our focus during the transition will be on supporting operators to understand their obligations and build capability. Where operators are making reasonable efforts to identify hazards, implement controls and improve their approach over time, the emphasis will be on supporting compliance rather than enforcement.

General risk management and monitoring

Required practice

• Have a documented risk management and monitoring program or plan in line with the Code or Standards and any licence or work authority conditions.

Stronger practice

• Set additional review triggers in the risk management and monitoring program or plan, such as when compliance limits are exceeded.

Leading practice

• Build continuous monitoring, triggers and feedback into everyday operations.
• Use risk management to guide business strategy and planning.

Not meeting your duty

• Risks are missed and not monitored.
• Issues are not acted on early and escalate.

Qualifications

Required practice

• Hire suitably qualified and trained employees and contractors.
• Keep records of training and inductions, such as a training register.
• Ensure managers have the right qualifications in line with the Code or Standards.

Stronger practice

• Refresh training and inductions regularly, such as annually or when circumstances change.
• Match qualifications to your operation, such as a mine.

Leading practice

• Build workforce capability into business planning.

Not meeting your duty

• Employees, contractors, including designers, and managers do not have the skills to do the work safely.
• Work is done incorrectly, without proper supervision, or results in an incident.

Geotechnical and landform stability

Required practice

• Design landform stability, such as benches and stockpiles, in line with the Code.
• Develop a geotechnical risk management and monitoring plan in line with the Standards.

Stronger practice

• Review whole-site stability regularly, such as every 2 years, to confirm that design assumptions remain valid based on exposure and rock mass behaviour conditions.

Leading practice

• Engage an independent expert, such as an engineering geologist, to periodically peer review the geotechnical management and monitoring plan, such as every 5 years.

Not meeting your duty

• Signs of potential slope failure, such as subsidence or excessive cracking, are missed.
• The final landform is not safe, stable or sustainable.

Fire management

Required practice

• Maintain fire preparedness in line with the Code.
• Develop a fire risk management and monitoring plan in line with the Standards.

Stronger practice

• Keep fire authorities’ contact lists up to date within the response plan.
• Develop mature working relationships with CFA and FRV.

Leading practice

• Run fire response drills.

Not meeting your duty

• Fire risks are not identified and controlled.
• The likelihood of a fire event increases.

Air and dust emissions

Required practice

• Minimise or eliminate air emissions, such as particulate matter and nuisance dust, in line with the Code or Standards.

Stronger practice

• Use continuous air quality monitoring and link it to a weather station through telemetry.
• Set up alerts for onsite employees.

Leading practice

• Share live air quality data so the community and other stakeholders can view it in real time.

Not meeting your duty

• Dust and air emissions adversely affect sensitive receptors, such as community health.

Blasting

Required practice

• Undertake blasting in line with the Code or Standards.
• Ensure a qualified person prepares a blast impact assessment or plan.

Stronger practice

• Regularly monitor blast impacts at sensitive receptors.

Leading practice

• Develop detailed blast modelling.
• Continuously monitor blast impacts at sensitive receptors.

Not meeting your duty

• Dust, ground vibration and air blasts affect nearby sensitive receptors.

Imported materials

Required practice

• Manage imported materials correctly in line with the Code.
• Develop and implement an imported material management and monitoring plan in line with the Standards.

Stronger practice

• Review the imported material management and monitoring plan regularly, such as annually.

Leading practice

• Actively contribute to research and development for alternative options to material importation, such as onsite treatment and reuse.

Not meeting your duty

• Contaminated material is brought onsite.
• There is damage to the local ecosystem, biodiversity or culture.
• Imported materials are not suitable for the proposed rehabilitated final landform.

Tailings and quarry fines

Required practice

• Minimise production of tailings or quarry fines.
• Design, construct and manage storage facilities in line with the Code or Standards.

Stronger practice

• Eliminate surface impounded deposition, such as dry stacking as part of rehabilitation.
• Design, construct and manage storage facilities in line with industry best practice, such as ANCOLD.
• Consider water reduction methods, such as mechanical dewatering.

Leading practice

• Improve safe storage, such as dry stacking or underground backfill.
• Research, develop and test new management options.

Not meeting your duty

• Storage facility failures occur, such as excessive ground movement or water ponding at the toe of an embankment.
• Monitoring is poor.
• Groundwater contamination occurs.

Waste rock dumps

Required practice

• Design, construct, manage and rehabilitate waste rock dumps in line with the minimum requirements under the general duty for all sites, or the Standards for moderate and higher risk sites.

Stronger practice

• Apply the design through a structured and multidisciplinary approach across the full cycle.
• Have a qualified person regularly review performance against the design, such as every 5 years.

Leading practice

• Use risk-based and data-driven design, construction and management across the full life cycle of the site to support closure-ready landform outcomes.

Not meeting your duty

• Waste rock dumps are not safe, stable or sustainable.
• There is a risk of failure or contamination.

Noise pollution

Required practice

• Eliminate or minimise the impacts of noise pollution from activities in line with the Code or Standards.

Stronger practice

• Implement a regular noise management and monitoring program onsite.
• Keep a record of high noise, or decibel, events.

Leading practice

• Install systems that warn when noise levels are too high.

Not meeting your duty

• Noise adversely affects sensitive receptors and the community.

Surface water contamination

Required practice

• Design and implement erosion, drainage and water run-off controls in line with the Code or Standards.

Stronger practice

• Maintain and regularly review the surface water management and monitoring plan.
• Add additional review triggers for heavy rain events.

Leading practice

• Trial better sediment treatment technologies where needed.

Not meeting your duty

• Action is not taken quickly after sediment control failure.
• There are ongoing impacts on surface water, such as contamination or turbidity.

Groundwater contamination

Required practice

• Manage groundwater and reduce impacts in line with the Code or Standards.

Stronger practice

• Maintain and regularly review the groundwater management and monitoring plan.
• Include clear trigger levels and response actions.

Leading practice

• Regularly review monitoring data and trends, such as meteorological trends, to ensure long-term and cumulative impacts are managed.

Not meeting your duty

• Impacts on groundwater quality, such as contamination or overextraction, are not identified and managed.

Hazardous substances and dangerous goods

Required practice

• Store and handle hazardous materials safely in line with the Code or the minimum requirements of the general duty for all sites.

Stronger practice

• Use bunded, self-draining concrete pads for maintenance and refuelling.
• Connect collection drains to interceptor traps and check and empty them often.
• Keep a detailed and up-to-date register of hazardous substances and dangerous goods onsite.

Leading practice

• Build advanced containment facilities.
• Look for safer alternatives to reduce the need for hazardous substances and dangerous goods, such as electric vehicles.

Not meeting your duty

• Spills, such as chemical spills, are not responded to quickly and appropriately.
• Ongoing spills or storage failures could contaminate soil or groundwater.

Systems, policies and procedures

Required practice

• Develop systems, policies and processes in line with the Code or the minimum requirements of the general duty for all sites.

Stronger practice

• Regularly review systems, policies and processes, such as annually.
• Reinforce the importance of general duty compliance.

Leading practice

• Continuously review and improve systems, policies and procedures, and adjust them if needed.
• Build general duty compliance into organisational culture, strategy and planning.

Not meeting your duty

• Employees do not understand their responsibilities under the general duty.
• Incidents reported to management increase or become more frequent.
• Community and stakeholder complaints increase or are not addressed.

Downloads

Disclaimer: References in the MRSDA quick reference tool include legislation that will not come into effect until 1 July 2027. These include:

• Codes of Compliance for quarrying, exploration and mining
• Future versions of the:
  • Mineral Resources (Sustainable Development) (Mineral Industries) Regulations 2019
  • Mineral Resources (Sustainable Development) (Extractive Industries) Regulations 2019

From 1 July 2027, the Mineral Resources (Sustainable Development) Act 1990 will be renamed to the Mineral Resources and Extractive Industries Act 1990.

Transitioning to the new model

Operators of existing sites will be notified of their risk levels from 1 July 2027. Before then, we will work with operators to give them an indication of where their sites may fit under the new framework.

During the transition, the focus will be on helping operators understand the new requirements and prepare for change.

If an operator already has an approved work plan with up-to-date risk management and monitoring arrangements, this may help show they are meeting the general duty.

The duty-based model builds on what many operators are already doing. Operators that are already meeting their obligations under the current model are likely to be well placed under the new model.

Where operators are actively trying to manage risks, the focus will be on supporting compliance rather than enforcement.

Key dates before the transition for work plans

Operators should plan ahead before the new model starts.

We strongly recommend submitting all work plan and work plan variation applications by 1 November 2026.

Applications or variations submitted after this date are unlikely to be processed before 1 July 2027.

If an application or variation is not approved before 1 July 2027, it will lapse before the new model starts. Operators will not need to resubmit variations unless there are updates to the rehabilitation plan. However, if operators significantly change their operations beyond their planning permit requirements, they may still need to submit a variation to the relevant planning authority.

Minor variations, previously called administrative updates, can still be lodged until 31 May 2027. These are encouraged where they improve existing rehabilitation plans or approach to ongoing risk management.

Updating older rehabilitation plans may also reduce an operation’s rehabilitation liability and bond.

Why the model is changing

• It supports a more outcomes-focused and risk-based approach. It gives operators more flexibility to choose controls that suit their site, while still requiring them to meet clear standards. This means operators can focus on what is safest and most effective for their operations, rather than following prescriptive and potentially outdated approvals for every situation.
• It focuses paperwork on managing real risks. Under the new model, statutory work plan approvals will no longer be required. This may reduce time, cost and administrative burden for industry. Operators will still need to keep records, including a risk management plan, to show how they identify, manage and review risks.
• It aligns Victoria with contemporary standards. This supports Victoria’s investment appeal and strengthens the state’s reputation for responsible resource development.

Stages of reform and engagement

We will deliver the reform across 2 main stages:

Stage 1: Implementation

• We will release the proposed regulations and supporting materials through a regulatory impact statement (RIS). This process is required for all new regulations.
• Before the RIS is released, we will carry out targeted engagement with relevant stakeholders. This includes industry, local governments, co-regulators, environmental organisations, Traditional Owners and the wider community. This engagement will help test policy settings and inform the design of the regulations.
• The RIS will be published for public feedback. Supporting regulations will progress in 2026.
• Planning instruments will also be reviewed. These changes will follow the public consultation requirements of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

Stage 2: Transition

The transition phase will focus on readiness before the new model starts on 1 July 2027.

We will:

• update operational processes
• strengthen regulatory capability
• prepare guidance and education materials
• plan how existing licence and authority holders will move to the new framework
• continue engaging with industry to ensure operators are ready for the new requirements.

Find out more

Read the Amendment Act on the Victorian Legislation website. The Act received Royal Assent on 29 August 2023.

The Explanatory Memorandum on the Victorian Bills in Parliament explains what each clause of the Act does.

Page last updated: 28 Jul 2026