Development and the Approval Clock
What the NOPSEMA Environment Plan register shows for the 183 plans it classifies as development: how many are filed, what happens to them, and the elapsed time from submission to decision, on two windows that both clear the reporting floor.
One address, and the PDF is yours.
We ask for an email so we know who is reading it. That is the entire use of it.
- No mailing list and no drip sequence
- No third-party marketing tool — it arrives as an email to a person here
- The download starts immediately
- Would rather not? Write to services@klarite.com.au and we will send it back by hand.
Download the brief
PDF, KLA-PINTEL-REP-005 Rev B.
The findings, each with its population and n.
From the brief's own start-here page. Every duration is elapsed time from submission to decision for accepted plans, grouped by the year they were decided. The register cannot divide that time between the regulator and the titleholder, and the brief does not try.
01 Elapsed time for accepted development plans rose
A median of 75 days from submission to decision for plans decided 2017 to 2020 (n=38), and 239 days for plans decided 2023 to 2025 (n=32). Removing any one recent plan moves the recent median to between 229 and 249 days.
02 The rise holds when the windows move
Plans decided 2022 to 2025 had a median of 229 days (n=35), and plans decided 2021 to 2025 217 days (n=44).
03 Filings fell, but development held its share
72 development-stage plans were submitted in 2012 to 2014 and 27 in 2023 to 2025: 27.0% of all filings in the first period and 29.0% in the second. The brief does not say why.
04 New plans clear the floor
New development plans went from a median of 78 days (n=28, decided 2017 to 2020) to 217 days (n=24, decided 2023 to 2025). Revisions and each activity type are below the floor and are not shown.
05 Cancellation and refusal are uncommon
10 of 183 development-stage plans were cancelled (5.5%). 2 of the 168 with a completed decision were refused, both decided in 2012 or 2013. The register does not record why.
Read the size of the rise as a range
The brief puts a resampling interval of about 2.0 to 4.9 times on the 2023 to 2025 median (n=32) against the 2017 to 2020 median (n=38) (95%, bootstrap). The direction is clear; the size is not.
What the brief is computed on.
| Fact | Value |
|---|---|
| Development-stage plans | 183: 140 new plans and 43 revisions |
| Duration basis | Accepted plans, including those accepted with conditions, grouped by decision year; 2026 excluded from the windows the brief leads with |
| Reporting floor | An elapsed-time median is led with only when it rests on at least 20 plans |
| Register | Coverage to 17 July 2026; extracted 21 July 2026; frozen as a census table on 27 July 2026 |
What this brief deliberately does not do.
No cause
It measures that elapsed time changed. It does not say why, and attributes no change to the regulator, to titleholders or to anyone else.
No forecast
No future volume, no future timeframe and no decision date for any plan is projected from this data.
No titleholder named
Like the Census, the brief names no titleholder and makes no cross-operator comparison.
Environment Plans only
No safety cases or other submissions, and no Environment Plan text is reproduced.
The other briefs, and the Census.
ProveINTEL, Development and the Approval Clock. KLA-PINTEL-REP-005 Rev B. ProveINTEL is Klarite's tool for analysing the NOPSEMA public register of Environment Plans. Data derived from the public register at info.nopsema.gov.au. ProveINTEL is not affiliated with, or endorsed by, NOPSEMA.
One address, and the brief is yours.
No list, no follow-up sequence, no card. If the brief raises a question it does not answer, describe it and we will tell you first what the public register can and cannot support.
Or write to services@klarite.com.au and we will send it by hand.