Investigation into alleged falsified sampling results: frequently asked questions

We’ve been responding to enquiries from the community and here you can find answers to the most common questions.

Hiring an environmental consultant for development applications in NSW is important due to their knowledge of environmental regulations and ability to conduct environmental assessments.  These consultants provide information and advice to assist people making development applications with local, state planning bodies, helping to navigate complex planning laws.

They prepare detailed reports that evaluate impacts on flora, fauna, water quality, air quality, and noise levels, and develop mitigation strategies to address any negative effects.

Environmental consultants also help identify and manage environmental risks early in the project planning process preventing lengthy delays.

The EPA were contacted by a laboratory manager after an EPA accredited site auditor raised concerns with the laboratory about the validity of sampling results contained within a report prepared by N G Child & Associates.

This led to the EPA doing further investigations into other reports completed by N G Child & Associates.

We believe that some reports issued by N G Child & Associates may have contained sampling data purported to have been issued by accredited commercial laboratories. This represented analysis work which had not been completed by those laboratories.

The reports containing the alleged falsified sampling data was then supplied to various clients and councils, often as part of development applications.

No immediate risks to public health and safety have been identified.

The EPA has evaluated 2,460 pieces of data collected and has concluded that there is no immediate risk to public health or safety.

Preliminary assessments have been undertaken on prioritised sites where falsified sampling data has been identified.

No immediate concerns have been identified that people living on, or using these sites, are likely to be exposed to contamination.

135 sites were identified as allegedly containing falsified sampling data.

Of these, the EPA prioritised the assessment of certain sites related to either childcare centres or residential land where development on the sites have been completed.

The remaining sites were either in the process of being developed or development had not started.

The reports mainly relate to contaminated land and air assessments involving soil, groundwater and surface water and air sampling. The potential contaminants of concern vary from site to site depending on the previous land uses.

The alleged falsified sampling data related to a range of land uses, but mostly involved residential and childcare centre developments. Some of the sites are still under development, while others have been completed. These include:

  • 24 early childhood education and care services
  • 18 residential properties
  • 8 industrial/commercial sites
  • 1 school
  • 84 sites yet to be developed.

The EPA’s investigation is active and ongoing. Councils and clients of N G Child & Associates are being notified.

EPA officers are visiting childcare centres to discuss the issues with operators. 

Where the report relates to a development application where council has relied on reports provided by N G Child & Associates, the EPA is recommending to those councils to conduct further assessments, including a review of all information available to them for the sites.  

We will continue to support local councils as they undertake their own review of the individual sites affected in their LGA.

The EPA understands that Mr Child isn’t a certified contaminated land consultant, and he is not an accredited site auditor.

We encourage the use of accredited contaminated land site auditors or certified consultants when managing contaminated land sites, to ensure they have the necessary skills to carry out the work.

More information

Local councils and DPHI are consent authorities for assessing development applications in NSW.

There is no legal requirement for environmental consultants to be certified.

All contaminated land reports submitted to the EPA must be prepared, or reviewed and approved, by a certified consultant. We recommend local councils follow this practice as well, but there is no requirement to do so.

The EPA has no role in accrediting or endorsing environmental consultants, outside the NSW site auditor scheme. Mr Child is not an EPA accredited site auditor.

See more information and the EPA’s recommendations for engaging a consultant.

The EPA does not licence, accredit or regulate environmental consultants.

Mr Child has provided a written undertaking that he will not be producing any further new reports.

The EPA is encouraging the councils and any other stakeholders such as developers, site auditors and any other environmental consultants to review any reports they have received from Mr Child.

Many of the N G Child & Associates reports were submitted to councils as part of a development application. Local councils and the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure are responsible for assessing and approving development applications in NSW.

As part of their work assessing development applications, councils review a range of reports (including contaminated land and air reports) submitted by the applicant and consider whether they have enough information to determine whether a development should be approved.

Councils and clients of N G Child & Associates are being notified and encouraged to conduct their own enquiries to determine the validity of any reports prepared.

We encourage them to contact the EPA via email at info@epa.nsw.gov.au or their local council for further advice.

The EPA is investigating a range of potential offences, including but not limited to alleged breaches of section 144AA of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (POEO Act) and section 103 of the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997 (CLM Act), relating to providing false or misleading information.

Following this investigation the EPA will determine the appropriate regulatory action in the circumstances, which could include prosecution.

Breaches of section 144AA of the POEO Act and 103 of the CLM Act can attract maximum penalties for individuals of up to $1 million and imprisonment for 18 months or $250,000 and imprisonment for 18 months respectively.