|
Press
Releases - 2000
Claims
by Greenpeace about EPD untrue
A spokesman
for the Environmental Protection Department (EPD) said today
(September 12) that the EPD was strongly dissatisfied with
Greenpeace for putting words into the mouth of its officer.
The spokesman
noted that what Greenpeace said about their meeting with the
Assistant Director of Environmental Protection (Waste and
Water), Mr Benny Wong, last Friday on the disposal of dredged
sediment of the Container Terminal 9 project(CT9) were untrue.
The spokesman
also strongly rejected the claim by Greenpeace that the EPD
was unduly helpful to the contractor.
During
the meeting last Friday, Mr Wong told Greenpeace representatives
that under the London Convention (the Convention on the Prevention
of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matters),
mud transfer between contracting parties for dumping was not
prohibited provided that there was previous consent between
parties.
In cases
where dredged spoil is to be dumped outside Hong Kong waters
a permit is required under the Dumping at Sea Ordinance for
loading of the spoil onto a barge or other vessel.
Before
such a permit is issued, the applicant is required to obtain
a permit issued by the appropriate authority outside Hong
Kong permitting the marine dumping.
In the
case of CT9, the appropriate authority outside Hong Kong is
the State Oceanic Administration (SOA) and a permit is issued
by the EPD to the contractor after it has obtained a permit
from the SOA.
Mr Wong
also told Greenpeace that the EPD understood that the SOA
had tested sediment samples of the project and issued a permit
for the contractor to dispose of the dredged mud at a designated
area near Erzhou Island based on its test results.
Mr Wong
mentioned to Greenpeace that over 100 sediment samples were
collected by the project proponent and tested by an accredited
laboratory in 1992/93.
Under
the EPD's classification system, the mud is classified as
Class C - seriously contaminated material.
Because
of the scale of the dredging in the CT9 project, the EPD passed
the test results to the SOA for their reference.
It is
understood that the SOA uses the terms "dredged mud in all
its dumping permits regardless of the level of contamination
of the mud and issues a permit when it is satisfied that the
mud in question can safely be disposed of.
Details
of the test results, which were sent to the SOA previously,
were faxed to the media on September 8.
End/Tuesday,September
12, 2000
|
