Three tests failed to detect waste problem
During the construction of the Nanomilling facility at the GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) plant, the mislabelling of pipes was recorded between November 2003 and May 2004. However, only one of the faults was corrected, it emerged yesterday.
The failure to correct the second fault resulted in the pumping of waste - meant for incineration - from the plant’s Nanomilling facility to GSK’s waste water treatment plant, which in turn discharged into Cork harbour.
An EPA report on the incident, obtained by the Irish Examiner, outlines the catalogue of mistakes. The first pipe labelling mistake was detected by contractors building the Nanomilling facility and corrected.
Once the facility’s pipes were connected, and before operations began, they were inspected and a snag list was drawn up. That list included a second pipe labelling error which was detected on March 24, 2004.
However, a mechanical supervisor contracted by GSK thought this mistake was the first mistake which had already been corrected.
“Therefore, the latter mix-up was not corrected,” the EPA report said.
The supervisor had signed off on the snag list.
The report found two further tests failed to detect the problem.
The EPA said a test which flushes water through the facility’s pipes did not follow the pipes to their final destination.
A further examination of the plant’s design drawings only, which were correct, did not show up the problem.
The company and the EPA insist the environment was not damaged by the mix-up which was eventually spotted during routine maintenance in April 2005. It was corrected immediately.
However, Fine Gael councillor Tim Lombard said the EPA should be monitoring the pharmachem industries rather than depending on the industries to carry out their own monitoring and to report any incidents, Mr Lombard said.
“It’s absolutely amazing and frightening that GSK missed this mistake three times,” he said. “The company’s procedures appear to have totally failed. This is a very serious issue.
“It’s unbelievable to think that a company this size commissioned this plant without spotting the mistake. Where is our independent monitoring in this?
“The EPA had to be involved in some way as part of the licensing of this facility. But the EPA never picked up on the problem.
“The question now is: did the EPA sign off on it?”
GSK has since changed its procedures used for commissioning facilities, a company spokeswoman said.



