Toxic test process wor­ries res­i­dents

The Gold Coast Bulletin - - NEWS - LEA EMERY

SOUTH­ERN Gold Coast res­i­dents are call­ing for a more trans­par­ent test­ing process when it comes to the toxic con­tam­i­na­tion orig­i­nat­ing at the Gold Coast Air­port.

Friends of Cur­rumbin sec­re­tary Glo­ria Baker said res­i­dents were frus­trated about the lack of in­for­ma­tion forth­com­ing on the per­flu­o­roc­tane­sul­fonic acid (PFAS) found at the air­port last year.

The chem­i­cal has been linked to ma­jor health prob­lems in Oakey, west of Toowoomba.

The con­tam­i­na­tion is be­lieved to have spread from the Gold Coast Air­port area, where PFAS was found in fire­fight­ing foam used for decades.

Gold Coast City Coun­cil yes­ter­day erected no swim­ming and fish­ing signs after higher than nor­mal lev­els of PFAS were found at the Coolan­gatta Creek out­let on Kirra Beach.

AirSer­vices Aus­tralia are also pre­par­ing to re­lease the re­sults of test­ing com­pleted on pri­vate bores on Ad­ina Ave.

Ms Baker said it was hoped a clear plan was re­vealed when the test re­sults were made pub­lic. “Ev­ery­thing that has been re­vealed has had to be pushed for,” she said.

Ms Baker said com­mu­nity groups would meet to as­sess their op­tions when the re­sults were re­leased .

An AirSer­vices Aus­tralia spokes­woman stressed the amount of chem­i­cals found in the test done by the Gold Coast City Coun­cil were low.

“The coun­cil’s ac­tions are a mat­ter for the coun­cil, but its rec­om­men­da­tion for no di­rect wa­ter con­tact for recre­ational ac­tiv­i­ties does not ap­pear con­sis­tent with its char­ac­ter­i­sa­tion of the re­sults as very low and not of con­cern, nor does the rec­om­men­da­tion re­flect the health-based guid­ance val­ues,” she said.

The spokes­woman said tests had been con­ducted in places around the air­port and re­sults were con­sis­tent with those recorded by the coun­cil.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.