The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) has responded to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs' consultation on biodiversity net gain (BNG) implementation reforms, expressing concerns about several proposed changes, particularly the plan to exempt minor developments, warning that this could narrow the scope of BNG and potentially lead to habitat loss. In its response letter, the OEP acknowledged Defra's overall aim of improving BNG implementation but advised that the reforms should be approached with caution, given BNG's early stage of operation. It recommended that any changes support broader nature improvement strategies, align with the upcoming revision of the Environmental Improvement Plan, and strengthen the likelihood of achieving legally binding nature targets. Additionally, the Chair of the OEP, Dame Glenys Stacey, highlighted the consultation's lack of detailed evidence regarding implementation challenges and the absence of impact assessments for the proposed reforms.

The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) has responded to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra)'s June 2025 consultation on updates to the UK Marine Strategy (UKMS) Part One Assessment. The OEP identified essential shortcomings in Defra's assessment that risk undermining efforts to achieve Good Environmental Status (GES) of UK marine waters. It highlights that progress towards GES remains inadequate, with only two out of 15 indicators met in the latest assessment—down from four in 2019. The response outlines three main issues: inconsistent methodology—and a lack of transparency in assessment aggregation, data gaps and an inconsistent approach to addressing them and the lack of SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound) targets. The OEP emphasises that an effective update to the UK's Part One assessment is vital, noting that a comprehensive understanding of the marine environment—underpinned by a robust evidence base and assessment methodology is a prerequisite for effective management, and urges the government to rectify these issues in the final assessment.

The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) has published its response to the proposed Marine Recovery Fund (MRF), welcoming its overall design and ambition, and highlighting positive aspects such as the integration of monitoring, adaptive management, and the mitigation hierarchy. However, the OEP identifies three key environmental risks associated with the proposed MRF, including uncertainties around how compensation will be delivered, cross-boundary issues, and the role of delivery partners. It also calls for increased transparency on how the duty to have regard to the Environmental Principles Policy Statement is informing the MRF’s development. This clarity is needed to understand the MRF’s role in achieving statutory targets and fulfilling the commitments outlined in the government’s Environmental Improvement Plan.

The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) has sought permission from the Court of Appeal to intervene in R (Pickering Fishery Association) v the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2023] EWHC 2918 (Admin). The appeal concerns a judicial review of the Secretary of State’s approval of the Humber River Basin Management Plan under the Water Framework Directive Regulations 2017, SI 2017/407 (WFD Regulations). The Court of Appeal will consider whether the planned programme of measures to achieve the environmental objectives for the Upper Costa Beck water body in North Yorkshire were sufficient to comply with the WFD Regulations. The OEP was prompted by the alleged failure of the Secretary of State to comply with environmental law and through this intervention, seeks to highlight the importance of legal clarity to promote positive outcomes for English water bodies. This follows the publication of the OEP’s report on the implementation of the WFD Regulations and River Basin Management Planning in England.

The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) has sought permission from the Court of Appeal to intervene in the appeal of R (Rights Community Action Ltd) v the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government [2024] EWHC 1693 (Admin). The case will consider the duty to have due regard to the Environmental Principles Policy Statement (EPPS). Through this intervention, the OEP aims to ensure that this duty is interpreted to support environmentally aware policy making, further delivering the government’s ambitions for environmental protection and improvement.

The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) has submitted advice to the UK government on strengthening environmental protections in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill. While welcoming the government’s intention to secure better outcomes for both development and nature, the OEP expressed concerns that the Bill, as currently drafted, could weaken environmental protections established under existing environmental law. The advice identifies several key areas for improvement, such as enhancing the ‘overall improvement test’ and incorporating safeguards across the entire network of protected sites.

The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) has submitted evidence to the Environmental Audit Committee (EAC)'s inquiry into per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The submission identifies several regulatory gaps, including the absence of statutory limits and targets, limited data accessibility, inadequate monitoring systems for chemicals of concern and delays in regulatory decision-making. The OEP recommends: (1) adopting a coordinated approach to PFAS across its life cycle; (2) addressing monitoring gaps for new and emerging substances of concern; (3) incorporating the precautionary principle into policy and regulatory framework development; and (4) establishing clear governmental direction on PFAS use and pollution through the Environmental Improvement Plan Review and the UK Chemicals Strategy.

The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) has submitted its formal response to the Independent Water Commission (IWC) regarding potential reforms to the 2027 targets set under the Water Environment (Water Framework Directive) (England and Wales) Regulations 2017, SI 2017/407 (WFD Regulations). The OEP asserts that many surface water bodies are unlikely to meet these targets, attributing this to inadequate planning and implementation rather than issues with the WFD Regulations themselves. It advises that if the IWC or the government considers reforming the 2027 targets, any new objectives should be ambitious, long-term, and legally binding, with clearly defined environmental outcomes. These should be supported by clear delivery plans, as well as review and governance mechanisms to ensure accountability.

The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) has confirmed it will conclude its investigation into combined sewer overflow (CSO) regulation, following commitments and progress from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), the Environment Agency (EA) and Ofwat to address identified shortcomings. The investigation found breaches of environmental law by all three bodies. In response to the OEP’s decision notices issued in December 2024, the organisations have implemented several reforms: (1) Defra updated its storm overflow policy and guidance document in March 2025 to better reflect the legal duties of sewerage undertakers; (2) Ofwat revised its enforcement guidance in April 2025 and has taken action against several water companies; and (3) the EA updated its Storm Overflow Assessment Framework in March 2025 and is progressing with plans to modernise permits and introduce spill limits.  Further progress includes clarification of roles and responsibilities between authorities and improved assessments for cost-effective CSO discharge reductions. The OEP will publish its detailed investigation reports in autumn 2025.

The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) has welcomed the Court of Appeal's decision in R (Pickering Fishery Association) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2025] EWCA Civ 378, which clarifies the correct interpretation of water quality laws. The court ruled that government programmes of measures under the Water Framework Directive Regulations 2017, SI 2017/407 (WFD Regulations) must specify actions for each water body to meet environmental objectives.  It dismissed the Secretary of State's appeal, ruling the current approach by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and the Environment Agency (EA) in preparing and approving River Basin Management Plans as unlawful. The OEP, which intervened in the appeal, stated that this ruling will inform its ongoing investigation into potential non-compliance by Defra and the EA with the WFD Regulations. The OEP plans to engage with these bodies to understand their intended actions to address the court's findings and improve water quality.

The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) has welcomed the Supreme Court judgment in CG Fry & Son Ltd v the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, handed down on 22 October 2025. The Supreme Court confirmed that assessments of impacts on protected sites may be required at later stages of the multi-stage consent process for planning applications under the Habitats Regulations, even where no assessment was conducted when outline planning permission was granted. The judgment established that the Habitats Regulations must be interpreted in light of the precautionary principle and continue to implement the Habitats Directive despite the UK having left the European Union. The Court addressed two issues: the interpretation of regulation 63 of the Habitats Regulations and the effect of outline planning permission grants. The OEP intervened only on the first issue to clarify regulatory interpretation for environmental protection purposes. The Supreme Court allowed CG Fry's appeal on the second ground, ruling that lower courts erred in giving policy statements the same status as legislative rules when comparing paragraph 181 of the National Planning Policy Framework with regulation 63 of the Habitats Regulations.

operating in the sectors/subsectors set out in Sch 2, which include: ? energy—including the electricity, oil and gas subsectors ? transport—including the air, rail, water and road subsectors ? health care—including the health care settings subsector (such as hospitals, private clinics and online settings) ? drinking water supply and distribution, and ? digital infrastructure—such as internet exchange points (IXPs), domain name service providers (DNS), and top level domain name registries (TLD)