Nature Conservation Council CEO Kate Smolski said the government response fell well short of community expectations and failed to restore community confidence. "Despite a clear and urgent need to separate the roles of chairman and CEO of the EPA, the government has put off taking action to remedy this serious flaw in the organisation's governance," said Ms Smolski. "The government has failed to respond to community demands for urgent reform. What we need is a clear commitment to separate these roles, not another review." Dailan Pugh, spokesman for the North East Forest Alliance, warned that despite the inquiry's call for the EPA to make effective stakeholder engagement a greater priority, their relationship "has significantly deteriorated due to the EPA's ongoing refusal to engage with us in an open and transparent manner". Dr James Whelan, researcher and community organiser from Environmental Justice Australia, said as recently as the last few weeks he had witnessed hostility and mistrust in meetings between EPA and community groups.

Dr Whelan said that while they had been trying to get action on covering coal trains in the Hunter region, the government has been delaying and deferring responses to the EPA inquiry. He criticised the lack of action in separating the roles of EPA chair and chief executive position held by Barry Buffier. He said that when Mr Buffier declined their requests in his role as EPA chief executive they have no one to complain or appeal to because Mr Buffier is his own boss. A spokeswoman for the EPA said the agency "is, and always has been, committed to continuous improvement in all our practices. We are an important agency working in a space that is often divided in stakeholder opinions, with staff that work hard to achieve environmentally sustainable outcomes for the community. She said that after four days of hearings, including consideration of over 250 submissions, the committee overseeing the parliamentary inquiry into the performance of the EPA concluded that: "The EPA is performing the majority of its functions in keeping with the objectives set out under the Protection of the Environment Administration Act 1991.

"In the period since its re-establishment in 2012, the agency has sought to clarify its role and vision, and has worked to develop a relationship with industry that strikes the right balance between oversight and effective collaboration. "The committee believes that the EPA has struck this balance appropriately and professionally. Nevertheless, this inquiry has identified a number of areas in which the either the performance of the EPA was found wanting, or areas for legislative amendment with a view to enhanced governance, oversight and, ultimately, accountability were identified." Opposition environment spokeswoman Penny Sharpe said the weak response from the Baird government would do nothing to build public confidence in the EPA. "The inquiry could have been a catalyst for improved governance and genuine community consultation, instead there are more reviews and more delays for change that is desperately needed," said Ms Sharpe. The inquiry into the performance of the EPA was launched following a series of Fairfax Media reports about the EPA's management of land contamination in the Botany area, the regulation of passenger cruise ships at White Bay and coal dust pollution in the Hunter region.

It also looked at the failed prosecution of chemical company Du Pont, the EPA investigation into groundwater contamination in the Pilliga by Santos and the regulation of forestry practices affecting koalas at the Royal Camp State Forest. It received more than 250 submissions and held public hearings around the state. While it found the EPA was performing the majority of its functions in line with its objectives, the final report said the agency was found wanting in some areas and needed better governance, oversight and accountability, as well as an overhaul of the structure of Mr Buffier's roles.