Official Information Act Request — EPA Use of the Term “Safe”

Dear Environmental Protection Authority,
This is a request for official information under the Official Information Act 1982.

Following the EPA’s response dated 21 May 2026 (Ref: OIA 26083), I request the following information, limited to the EPA’s Communications Team, Legal Team, and Risk / Hazardous Substances Team.

1. Communications Team — Use of the Term “Safe”
Please provide:

all internal emails, drafts, briefing notes, messaging guidelines, or communication strategy documents that discuss, reference, justify, or approve the use of the word “safe” in the EPA’s public mission statement or website content;

any internal discussions regarding the decision to rely on the dictionary definition of “safe” for public communications;

any internal review, risk assessment, or sign‑off relating to the accuracy or appropriateness of using “safe” in public‑facing material.

If no such documents exist, please provide the Communications Team’s section 23 explanation for using the term “safe” in public communications despite the absence of any internal definition, criteria, or framework.

2. Legal Team — Interpretation and Risk of Using “Safe”
Please provide:

all legal advice, internal memos, or discussions concerning the legal implications of using the term “safe” in EPA communications;

any analysis of whether the use of “safe” could mislead the public or imply a regulatory assurance the EPA cannot substantiate;

any legal review of the EPA’s reliance on the dictionary definition of “safe.”

If no such documents exist, please provide the Legal Team’s section 23 explanation for the EPA’s continued use of the term “safe” without any internal definition or criteria.

3. Risk / Hazardous Substances Team — Operational Meaning of “Safe”
Please provide:

any documents, emails, or internal discussions that address how the EPA operationalises or interprets “safe” in the context of hazardous substances, approvals, controls, or risk management;

any internal analysis of the statement in the EPA’s letter that “we do not describe approved substances as ‘safe’”;

any documents explaining how the EPA reconciles this position with the public claim of “enhancing a safe way of life.”

If no such documents exist, please provide the Risk Team’s section 23 explanation for the EPA’s operational use of the term “safe” in the absence of any definition or criteria.

4. Cross‑Team Coordination
Please provide:

any cross‑team communications (Comms ↔ Legal ↔ Risk) relating to the EPA’s use of the term “safe”;

any internal discussions triggered by OIA 26083 or earlier OIAs concerning the meaning or use of “safe.”

Format
Electronic copies (PDF or native format) are preferred.

Yours Faithfully,
Nigel Gray

Yours faithfully,

Nigel Gray