Humidifier Disinfectant Disaster Victims Emergency Response Committee Press Conference. Reporter Kim Jeong-yeon
As the Ministry of Environment conducted a fraudulent investigation to impose a share of damage relief for humidifier disinfectants, it was revealed that businesses who did not meet the requirements were also exempted from the contribution.
According to the Board of Audit and Inspection on the 4th, the Ministry of Environment conducted an on-site survey in March to April 2017 to check whether manufacturers included toxic chemicals in order to impose and collect contributions for damage relief for humidifier disinfectants.
The relevant enforcement ordinance stipulates that these companies must meet three conditions: ▲ the sales volume of humidifier disinfectants is less than 1/100 of the total sales volume; ▲ small businesses ▲ ▲ The humidifier disinfectant does not contain toxic chemicals.
However, the Ministry of Environment conducted an investigation and determined that even though the data submitted by companies A and B contained silver nitrate (AgNO3), there were no toxic chemicals. Sodium dichloride isocyanurate contained in Company C’s products was recognized as meeting the exemption requirements without confirming whether it is a toxic substance. In some cases, it was determined that there were no toxic substances based solely on corporate statements.
Accordingly, manufacturers of raw materials that supplied silver nitrate to companies A and B were not even investigated to impose contributions.
The auditor pointed out that there is a problem with the composition and operation of the field investigation team of the Ministry of Environment. According to the Humidifier Disinfectant Damage Relief Act, the investigation must be carried out by the Ministry of Environment’s staff, but it was revealed that the subsidiary, Korea Environmental Industry & Technology Institute manpower and municipal government officials formed an investigation team to handle the work.
In particular, the Board of Audit and Inspection said, “Out of the 12 companies exempted from the contribution, 10 companies were investigated only by municipal officials (8) or technical staff (2),” and said that the Ministry of Environment did not properly review the authority or competence of the investigator. .
The auditor pointed out that there is no legal basis for entrusting the authority to investigate from the Ministry of Environment, and that it is difficult for city government officials to have expertise, such as expertise, in their affairs as they are in practice.
The Board of Audit and Inspection notified the raw material companies that were exempted from the damage relief contributions to come up with a plan to impose and collect contributions.
This audit was carried out when the Special Investigation Committee for Social Disasters (Correspondents Committee) requested an audit for the negligence of the Ministry of Environment staff’s work in connection with the selection of a company exempted from damage relief contributions for humidifier disinfectants in June of last year.
Reporter Dayoung Kim [email protected]