Go to main content
 
Pillar Point Valley Restored Landfill's contractor convicted for contravening Water Pollution Control Regulations
******************************************************************************************
     As the discharge from the leachate treatment plant at Pillar Point Valley Restored Landfill (PPVRL) in Tuen Mun contravened the requirements of the licence issued under the Water Pollution Control Ordinance, the contractor concerned, SITA Waste Services Limited, was convicted and fined $200,000 by Fanling Magistrates' Courts today (May 23) of a total of 20 offences under the Water Pollution Control (General) Regulations (WPC(G)R).
 
     The Environmental Protection Department (EPD) received complaints last year that the flaring temperature of the landfill gas treatment facility of PPVRL had failed to reach the contractual requirement of 1 000 degrees Celsius, leading to the discharge of sub-standard leachate into the foul sewer and untreated leachate into a nearby stream. An investigation team was subsequently set up by the EPD to conduct thorough investigation on the complaints.
 
     The investigation found that the flaring temperature of PPVRL's landfill gas treatment facility as shown on the daily log sheets had not complied with the contractual requirement of 1 000 degrees C on many occasions in December 2015, as well as in February and March 2016. A test conducted by the investigation team on-site in May 2016 found that the leachate treatment plant failed to handle leachate effectively, and was therefore required to suspend operation to conduct thorough repair works.
 
     Regarding whether sub-standard effluent had been discharged from PPVRL, the investigation found that the leachate concentration was at relatively low levels as the landfill had been closed for many years and sometimes the leachate could meet the dry season discharge standard even without pre-treatment. The contractor explained that by mixing the strong leachate with weak leachate, the discharge might still meet the standard. However, since the mixing of leachate could not meet the wet season discharge standard, the investigation team could not exclude the possibility that sub-standard discharge had happened given that the treatment plant could not handle the leachate effectively. On the complaint against the alleged discharge of untreated leachate by the contractor into the nearby stream, the investigation team found that the overflow pipe had been blocked for a long time and no wastewater could be discharged via the pipe.
 
     The follow-up actions taken by the EPD's enforcement team found that the discharge of the leachate treatment plant during the period from May to mid-October 2016 repeatedly contravened the requirements of the licence issued under the Water Pollution Control Ordinance. It was found that the total nitrogen level in the discharge exceeded the specified limit in the licence on eight occasions, the amount of discharge exceeded the discharge flow limit specified in the licence on 10 occasions, and the contractor also failed to notify the EPD immediately on two occasions when the amount of discharge exceeded the discharge flow limit. After completion of evidence collection, the EPD prosecuted the contractor for contravening the WPC(G)R.
 
     The complainants also complained against the EPD for disclosing their identities to the contractor and for having informed the contractor prior to the enforcement action. The investigation team found that a complainant had told the contractor that he would lodge a complaint to the EPD, while there is no evidence that EPD staff had disclosed the identities of the complainants or information on the department's enforcement action to the contractor.
 
     In addition, the investigation team found that although the daily log sheets showed that the landfill gas treatment system of PPVRL had operated below the contractual requirement of 1 000 degrees C on many occasions, the monthly report submitted by the contractor to the EPD showed that the gas flaring temperature met the requirement. The investigation team had referred the relevant information to the Police for follow-up on whether someone had deliberately provided inaccurate data or false statements to the EPD.
 
     A spokesman for the EPD said that the department is gravely concerned about the management and monitoring by the contractors of its facilities. After learning about alleged sub-standard operation by PPVRL's contractor, the EPD immediately stepped up the random checks and monitoring in regard to PPVRL. The EPD also ordered the contractor to conduct a thorough examination of the leachate treatment plant and carry out the follow-up repair works, which have now been completed by the contractor. As the leachate treatment plant has failed to meet the contractual requirements of treating leachate effectively, the EPD has deducted operation payments according to the contract provisions. Up to the end of April, the EPD had already deducted a total amount in operation payment of about $5.5 million. The EPD will continue to closely monitor the operation of PPVRL.
 
     The investigation findings (English only) have been uploaded to the EPD's website for public viewing (www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/environmentinhk/waste/studyrpts/waste_studyrpts.html).
 
Ends/Tuesday, May 23, 2017
Issued at HKT 15:42
NNNN
Today's Press Releases