The PFAS Regulatory Wave - What Comes Next
Background: A Decade of Escalating Concern
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS, or 'forever chemicals') have been on Australian environmental regulators' radar for well over a decade. They have been detected in soil, groundwater, surface water, drinking water supplies and biota at sites across the country, particularly where aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) has been used in firefighting training. What has changed dramatically in the past two years is the pace and scope of regulatory action, and 2026 represents a genuine inflection point.
The Regulatory Milestones
In March 2025, the Commonwealth and state environment ministers agreed on and published the third version of the PFAS National Environmental Management Plan (PFAS NEMP 3.0). This document is Australia's primary national guidance framework for managing PFAS contamination in the environment, and version 3.0 represents a substantial step forward from its 2020 predecessor. The revised guideline values for soil, surface water, groundwater and biota are more stringent, more nuanced, and more risk-based, and they will require reassessment of sites that were considered 'managed' under older standards.
Then, on 1 July 2025, the Commonwealth Government enacted arguably the most significant regulatory step to date: a ban on the manufacture, import, export and use of three of the most harmful PFAS (PFOS, PFOA and PFHxS) under Schedule 7 of the Industrial Chemicals Environmental Management Standard (IChEMS). These are chemicals of the highest risk classification, assessed as likely to cause serious or irreversible harm to the environment. The ban covers approximately 500 individual substances, including salts, isomers and precursors.
The Senate Select Committee on PFAS, established in August 2024, published its final report in November 2025, making 47 recommendations aimed at establishing a nationally consistent approach to PFAS management and remediation. Those recommendations ranged from strengthened enforcement powers, expanded notifiable contamination triggers, to greater investment in PFAS destruction technologies, and they signal the direction of future legislative reform.
Most recently, the DCCEEW consultation on proposed IChEMS Schedule 17 environmental standards for additional PFAS chemicals (including PFHpS, PFNS and PFBS) closed on 24 April 2026. The outcome of that consultation, and any additions to the IChEMS register, is expected before the end of June 2026. The regulatory net is widening beyond the 'big three' to encompass a broader range of PFAS compounds now understood to pose contamination risks in soil and groundwater.
What NEMP 3.0 Means in Practice
NEMP 3.0 is not simply an update to guideline values, it represents a shift in how PFAS contamination is approached conceptually. Key changes include:
- Revised health-based and ecological guideline values for soil, surface water, groundwater and biota, in many cases more stringent than NEMP 2.0, particularly for drinking water exposure pathways.
- A shift in remediation hierarchy from containment and disposal toward treatment-focused outcomes, with new guidance on demonstrating remediation success and managing long-term residual risk.
- Strengthened sampling and analysis requirements, including newer PFAS variants and precursors that were not captured under earlier testing suites.
- New guidance on the reuse of PFAS-impacted soils, with a distinction between reuse with standard controls and reuse requiring a detailed risk assessment.
- Recognition that PFAS compounds beyond PFOS, PFOA and PFHxS may contribute their own contamination risks and need to be considered in investigation and monitoring programs.
For businesses and site managers, this means that sites previously assessed and managed under NEMP 2.0 protocols may need revisiting. A site that was assessed as 'low risk' under 2020 guideline values may present differently under 2025 standards, particularly where groundwater pathways or ecological receptors were not the primary focus of earlier investigations.
Liability Exposure Is Growing
The combination of tighter guideline values expanded chemical scope, a ban on key PFAS chemicals and 47 Senate Committee recommendations creates a significantly higher liability environment for any business with historic or current PFAS exposure. That includes not only the obvious sectors (defence-adjacent sites, airports, fire training facilities, industrial firefighting operations) but also manufacturers and industrial sites that used PFAS-containing products such as stain-resistant treatments, surface coatings and cleaning agents.
The class action landscape reinforces this. Australian courts have already seen successful class actions brought by landholders impacted by PFAS contamination from defence sites, and the West Gate Tunnel Project's extended delays due to PFAS-impacted spoil management are a salient reminder of the practical and financial consequences.
What Businesses Should Be Doing Now
The June 2026 IChEMS deadline is a natural prompt for action. Businesses should be asking:
- Has our site been assessed for PFAS using NEMP 3.0 protocols, and do our investigation data cover the expanded suite of PFAS analytes now required?
- Do we have current use of, or historic exposure to, any of the newly regulated PFAS compounds beyond the 'big three'?
- If PFAS have been detected, does our risk assessment and management approach reflect the revised guideline values and the treatment-first remediation hierarchy of NEMP 3.0?
- Are we meeting the IChEMS ban requirements, including for products and articles containing PFOS, PFOA or PFHxS?
- Do our due diligence and transaction processes adequately capture PFAS liability risk under the current regulatory framework?
PJRA's Role in the Data Centre Sector
PJRA has deep experience in PFAS investigation, risk assessment and regulatory engagement across Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland. Our team can assist clients to understand their exposure under the current regulatory framework, design investigation programs that meet NEMP 3.0 requirements, and develop practical management and remediation strategies that are both technically defensible and regulatorily appropriate.