Environment Protection Authority tests for toxic chemicals in Hillsdale park botched Natalie OBrien November 17, 2013 Barry Buffier. Denied misleading the committee: EPA chairman Barry Buffier. Photo: AFR The NSW government laboratory used by the Environment Protection Authority to test the levels of toxic chemicals and metals around a Hillsdale park area, made a series of embarrassing bungles that skewed the official results. An investigation by Fairfax Media has uncovered the trail of errors by the Office of Environment and Heritages laboratory, which included misinterpreting the levels of metal found in the soil by 100-fold. The discovery comes after NSW Chief Scientist Mary OKane chose Emeritus Professor Chris Fells, AM, to scrutinise the EPAs methodology and analysis in concluding that toxic metals from the park and the verges of homes were below health investigation levels. Controversy flared earlier this year when concerned residents engaged their own expert, Andrew Helps, from Hg Recoveries, a company that is part of the United Nations Environment Programmes Global Mercury Partnership, to carry out some testing for potential off-site contamination around the Orica chemical companys Botany site. Mr Helps reported significant levels of a man-made organochlorine and heavy metals, including mercury, sparking a flurry of testing by the EPA on the front verges of homes on Denison Street, the back fence lines of homes that abut a Hillsdale park and into the park area that adjoins Grace Campbell reserve. The EPA did not release the full results and told residents they were below the residential health investigation levels. But residents obtained a copy, which was given to Mr Helps and the National Toxics Network, and their assessments disagreed with the EPA. Despite putting out a statement in May saying the results were below residential health investigation levels, the EPA has since said the testing was done on recreational land. Documents obtained by Fairfax Media under freedom of information laws revealed the trail of laboratory errors, as well as emails that also showed the authority suddenly switched the health investigation levels it was using to compare the soil results. The most stringent residential level was dropped in favour of the weaker recreational level after senior managers were told the toxic metals exceeding the residential levels would then mostly disappear. Emails also show that right from the start, when the EPA was assessing the results, it was doing so against residential levels, in one case warning well need to be cautious … PCB (chemical) detection limits seem to be too high to compare with residential land-use scenarios. EPA chairman Barry Buffier was asked at an August parliamentary estimates committee by opposition environmental spokesman Luke Foley if the authority had applied a lower standard - that is, recreational C rather than residential A - so that you could deliver the news that everything is hunky-dory? Mr Buffier said, absolutely not. Mr Foley said it appears that Mr Buffier has misled the committee and I think he should be recalled in the light of this new evidence. Mr Buffier has denied misleading the committee. Several emails dated July 31 show chief environmental regulator Mark Gifford was advised by a department director that although the EPA had initially used residential comparisons, if that changed and if it was compared to recreational C, then, of course, all the metal exceedences i.e. chromium and lead disappear except for that one site that remains above the HIL [health investigation level] for lead. The director told Mr Gifford he had already given an analysis of that scenario to another senior EPA manager at the Orica meeting they had the week before, with instructions to show it to Mr Gifford. Documents also reveal the EPA then changed a draft media statement, dropping the reference to residential, and saying it had used recreational. The documents also show that it was not until the Office of Environment and Heritages laboratory had reissued its report for the fourth and final time after making mistakes, which included cross-contamination of samples, that the true metal readings were found to be 100-fold higher than before. The national laboratory accreditation body, NATA, is now reviewing the bungles. Emails show staff apologised for any embarrassment caused and warned others not to compromise quality or take shortcuts that could harm its reputation. Environment Protection Authority: Culture of bullying, says report The NSW Environment Protection Authority is riddled with workplace bullying, according to a public sector report that also finds most complaints are going unreported either by the victims or witnesses. One staff member, who has complained of intimidation and physical violence by an EPA supervisor, has alleged there is a culture of bullying at the environmental watchdog. The complaint of physical violence was revealed in freedom of information documents obtained by Fairfax Media. The State of the NSW Public Sector Report - People Matter Survey had a 69 per cent participation rate from EPA staff. Of those staff, almost a third said they had witnessed bullying at work in the past 12 months. Six per cent of those reported they were currently experiencing this behaviour, according to the report. Separate documents obtained by Fairfax Media show that, in the past 12 months, only three complaints of bullying had been made against managers in the EPA. The documents showed that, in October last year, there was an email complaint about how a manager continuously discriminated against, intimidated, bullied and victimised a staff member. But after the matter was investigated, it was found there was no evidence to support the allegation. A separate formal grievance complaint made last November addressed a number of issues, including repetitive bullying. It was investigated but treated as a respectable workplace policy issue. In a December case, a staff member claimed intimidation and physical violence and a culture of bullying at the EPA. But the documents said investigations showed there was no evidence to support the allegations and it was a he said-she said scenario. The EPA chairman Barry Buffier said the organisation had developed and promoted information for staff to identify what bullying was, what to do if bullying occurred, and the roles and responsibilities for all staff concerned. The revelations about the culture at the EPA came after reports that workplace bullying had also reached extreme levels in the NSW health system, despite government programs, including an anti-bullying hotline, to stamp out the practice. with Kirsty Needham Do you know more? Email [email protected] Environment Protection Authority tests for toxic chemicals in Hillsdale park botched Natalie OBrien November 17, 2013 Barry Buffier. Denied misleading the committee: EPA chairman Barry Buffier. Photo: AFR The NSW government laboratory used by the Environment Protection Authority to test the levels of toxic chemicals and metals around a Hillsdale park area, made a series of embarrassing bungles that skewed the official results. An investigation by Fairfax Media has uncovered the trail of errors by the Office of Environment and Heritages laboratory, which included misinterpreting the levels of metal found in the soil by 100-fold. The discovery comes after NSW Chief Scientist Mary OKane chose Emeritus Professor Chris Fells, AM, to scrutinise the EPAs methodology and analysis in concluding that toxic metals from the park and the verges of homes were below health investigation levels. Controversy flared earlier this year when concerned residents engaged their own expert, Andrew Helps, from Hg Recoveries, a company that is part of the United Nations Environment Programmes Global Mercury Partnership, to carry out some testing for potential off-site contamination around the Orica chemical companys Botany site. Mr Helps reported significant levels of a man-made organochlorine and heavy metals, including mercury, sparking a flurry of testing by the EPA on the front verges of homes on Denison Street, the back fence lines of homes that abut a Hillsdale park and into the park area that adjoins Grace Campbell reserve. The EPA did not release the full results and told residents they were below the residential health investigation levels. But residents obtained a copy, which was given to Mr Helps and the National Toxics Network, and their assessments disagreed with the EPA. Despite putting out a statement in May saying the results were below residential health investigation levels, the EPA has since said the testing was done on recreational land. Documents obtained by Fairfax Media under freedom of information laws revealed the trail of laboratory errors, as well as emails that also showed the authority suddenly switched the health investigation levels it was using to compare the soil results. The most stringent residential level was dropped in favour of the weaker recreational level after senior managers were told the toxic metals exceeding the residential levels would then mostly disappear. Emails also show that right from the start, when the EPA was assessing the results, it was doing so against residential levels, in one case warning well need to be cautious … PCB (chemical) detection limits seem to be too high to compare with residential land-use scenarios. EPA chairman Barry Buffier was asked at an August parliamentary estimates committee by opposition environmental spokesman Luke Foley if the authority had applied a lower standard - that is, recreational C rather than residential A - so that you could deliver the news that everything is hunky-dory? Mr Buffier said, absolutely not. Mr Foley said it appears that Mr Buffier has misled the committee and I think he should be recalled in the light of this new evidence. Mr Buffier has denied misleading the committee. Several emails dated July 31 show chief environmental regulator Mark Gifford was advised by a department director that although the EPA had initially used residential comparisons, if that changed and if it was compared to recreational C, then, of course, all the metal exceedences i.e. chromium and lead disappear except for that one site that remains above the HIL [health investigation level] for lead. The director told Mr Gifford he had already given an analysis of that scenario to another senior EPA manager at the Orica meeting they had the week before, with instructions to show it to Mr Gifford. Documents also reveal the EPA then changed a draft media statement, dropping the reference to residential, and saying it had used recreational. The documents also show that it was not until the Office of Environment and Heritages laboratory had reissued its report for the fourth and final time after making mistakes, which included cross-contamination of samples, that the true metal readings were found to be 100-fold higher than before. The national laboratory accreditation body, NATA, is now reviewing the bungles. Emails show staff apologised for any embarrassment caused and warned others not to compromise quality or take shortcuts that could harm its reputation. Environment Protection Authority: Culture of bullying, says report The NSW Environment Protection Authority is riddled with workplace bullying, according to a public sector report that also finds most complaints are going unreported either by the victims or witnesses. One staff member, who has complained of intimidation and physical violence by an EPA supervisor, has alleged there is a culture of bullying at the environmental watchdog. The complaint of physical violence was revealed in freedom of information documents obtained by Fairfax Media. The State of the NSW Public Sector Report - People Matter Survey had a 69 per cent participation rate from EPA staff. Of those staff, almost a third said they had witnessed bullying at work in the past 12 months. Six per cent of those reported they were currently experiencing this behaviour, according to the report. Separate documents obtained by Fairfax Media show that, in the past 12 months, only three complaints of bullying had been made against managers in the EPA. The documents showed that, in October last year, there was an email complaint about how a manager continuously discriminated against, intimidated, bullied and victimised a staff member. But after the matter was investigated, it was found there was no evidence to support the allegation. A separate formal grievance complaint made last November addressed a number of issues, including repetitive bullying. It was investigated but treated as a respectable workplace policy issue. In a December case, a staff member claimed intimidation and physical violence and a culture of bullying at the EPA. But the documents said investigations showed there was no evidence to support the allegations and it was a he said-she said scenario. The EPA chairman Barry Buffier said the organisation had developed and promoted information for staff to identify what bullying was, what to do if bullying occurred, and the roles and responsibilities for all staff concerned. The revelations about the culture at the EPA came after reports that workplace bullying had also reached extreme levels in the NSW health system, despite government programs, including an anti-bullying hotline, to stamp out the practice. with Kirsty Needham Do you know more? Email [email protected]
Posted on: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 06:29:06 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015