Contract No.
HY/2010/02 – Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities
– Reclamation Work (here below, known as “the Project”) mainly comprises
reclamation at the northeast of the
Hong Kong International
Airport of an
area of about
130-hectare for the construction of an artificial island for
the development of the Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF), and
about 19-hectare for the southern landfall of the Tuen Mun - Chek Lap Kok Link
(TMCLKL). It is a designated project and is governed by the current permits for
the Project, i.e. the amended Environmental Permits (EPs) issued on 7 March
2012 (EP-353/2009/D) and 8 December 2011 (EP-354/2009/A) (for TMCLKL Southern
Landfall Reclamation only).
Ove Arup & Partners Hong Kong Limited (Arup) was
appointed by Highways Department (HyD) as the consultants for the design and
construction assignment for the Project’s reclamation works (i.e. the Engineer
for the Project).
China Harbour Engineering Company Limited (CHEC) was
awarded by Highways Department (HyD) as the Contractor to undertake the
construction work of the Project and ENVIRON Hong Kong Ltd. was employed as the
Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) and Environmental Project Office (ENPO) for the Project.
AECOM Asia Co. Ltd. (AECOM) was appointed by China Harbour
Engineering Company Limited to undertake the role of Environmental Team for the
Project for carrying out the EM&A works.
The construction
phase of the Project under the EPs was commenced on 12 March 2012 and will be
tentatively completed by early Year 2016. The EM&A programme, including air
quality, noise, water quality and dolphin monitoring and environmental site
inspections, was commenced on 12 March 2012.
This report documents the findings of EM&A works
conducted in the period between 1 and 30 April 2012. As informed by the Contractor, major
activities in the reporting period were:-
Marine-based Works
-
Cone
penetration test;
-
Geotextile
laying and fabrication;
-
Stone
column installation trial;
-
Silt
curtain fabrication and deployment;
-
Stone
blankets laying; and
-
Trial
of cellular structure (at Hu Men of Mainland).
Land-based Works
-
Site office erection and construction at Works
Area WA2;
-
Public Works Regional Laboratory erection and
construction at Works Area WA3;
-
Constructing site access at area WA2 to
Ying Hei Road, Tung Chung;
-
Access works construction; and
-
Drainage works.
A summary of monitoring and audit activities conducted in the reporting
period is listed below:
|
24-hour TSP
monitoring
1-hour TSP
monitoring
|
6 sessions
6 sessions
|
|
Day, evening and
night time noise monitoring
|
5 sessions
|
|
Impact water
quality monitoring
|
13 sessions
|
|
Impact dolphin
monitoring
|
2 sessions
|
|
Joint
Environmental site inspection
|
4 sessions
|
Breaches of Action
and Limit Levels for Air Quality
No exceedance of Action and Limit Level was recorded for 1-hour and
24-hour TSP monitoring in the reporting month.
Breaches of Action and Limit
Levels for Noise
No
Action/Limit Level exceedance
of construction noise was recorded in the reporting month.
Breaches of Action
and Limit Levels for Water Quality
Five (5)
Action Level exceedances, where two (2) were recorded at measured turbidity
level and three (3) were recorded at measured SS level, were recorded in the
reporting month. Investigation results show that the exceedances were not due
to the Project works. Nevertheless, the Contractor was reminded to ensure
provision of ongoing maintenance to the silt curtains.
Impact Dolphin Monitoring
A total of two
dolphin sightings were recorded during the two surveys, two on 19th April 2012
and none on 23rd April 2012. Of the two
sightings, one was “on effort” and one was “opportunistic”. The predominant
behavior of the dolphin observed was feeding behind a stationary hang trawler
at the time of the sighting. There is no indication that construction
activities from the Project have caused disturbance or direct damage to the
marine mammals which were observed.
No other
active construction sites were noted during the two survey periods within Hong
Kong waters. Marine construction work
was noted close to the Hong Kong–China maritime border in Chinese waters and
dolphins were observed in this area (near Tai O).
Complaint, Notification of
Summons and Successful Prosecution
No complaint was followed up by
Environmental Team in the reporting month.
No notification of summons and
successful prosecution was received in the reporting month.
Reporting Change
There was no reporting change required in
the reporting period.
Future Key Issues
Key issues to be considered in the coming
month included:-
- Site runoff should be
properly collected and treated prior to discharge;
- Minimize loss of sediment
from filling works;
- Regular review and
maintenance of silt curtain systems, drainage systems and desilting facilities;
- Exposed surfaces/soil
stockpiles should be properly treated to avoid generation of silty surface
run-off during rainstorm;
- Regular review and
maintenance of wheel washing facilities provided at all site entrances/exits;
- Conduct regular inspection
of various working machineries and vessels within works areas to avoid any dark
smoke emission;
- Suppress dust generated
from work processes with use of bagged cements, earth movements, excavation
activities, exposed surfaces/soil stockpiles and haul road traffic;
- Quieter powered mechanical
equipment should be used;
- Provision of proper and
effective noise control measures for operating equipment and machinery on-site,
such as erection of movable noise barriers or enclosure for noisy plants;
- Closely check and replace the
sound insulation materials regularly;
- Better scheduling of
construction works to minimize noise nuisance;
- Properly store and label
oil drums and chemical containers placed on site;
- Proper chemicals, chemical
wastes and wastes management;
- Maintenance works should be
carried out within roofed, paved and confined areas;
- Collection and segregation
of construction waste and general refuse on land and in the sea should be
carried out properly and regularly; and
- Proper protection and
regular inspection of existing trees, transplanted/retained trees.
1.1.1
Contract No. HY/2010/02 – Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge
Hong Kong Boundary Crossing
Facilities – Reclamation Work (here below, known as “the Project”) mainly
comprises reclamation at the northeast
of the Hong
Kong International Airport
of an area
of about 130-hectare
for the construction of an
artificial island for the development of the Hong Kong Boundary Crossing
Facilities (HKBCF), and about 19-hectare for the southern landfall of the Tuen
Mun - Chek Lap Kok Link (TMCLKL).
1.1.2
Subsequent to EIA Study Brief of TMCLKL being prepared and
based upon the proposed schemes for the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge (HZMB)
and HKBCF, it was decided to integrate the TMCLKL southern landfall reclamation
with the HKBCF reclamation. It was
considered that this arrangement would also provide a cost-effective connection
between the HKBCF and North Lantau.
1.1.3
The
environmental impact assessment
(EIA) reports (Hong
Kong – Zhuhai
– Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities
– EIA Report (Register No. AEIAR-145/2009) (HKBCFEIA) and Tuen Mun – Chek Lap
Kok Link – EIA Report (Register No. AEIAR-146/2009) (TMCLKLEIA), and their
environmental monitoring and audit (EM&A) Manuals (original EM&A
Manuals), for the Project were approved by Environmental Protection Department
(EPD) in October 2009.
1.1.4
EPD
subsequently issued the
Environmental Permit (EP) for HKBCF in November 2009 (EP-353/2009)
and the Variation of Environmental Permit (VEP) in June 2010
(EP-353/2009/A), November 2010
(EP-353/2009/B), November 2011 (EP-353/2009/C) and March 2012
(EP-353/2009/D). Similarly, EPD issued the Environmental Permit (EP) for TMCLKL
in November 2009 (EP-354/2009) and the Variation of Environmental Permit (VEP)
in December 2010 (EP-354/2009/A).
1.1.5
The Project is a designated project and is governed by the
current permits for the Project, i.e. the amended 1.1.5 EPs issued on 7 March 2012 (EP-353/2009/D) and 8 December 2011
(EP-354/2009/A) (for TMCLKL Southern Landfall Reclamation only).
1.1.6
A Project Specific EM&A Manual, which included all
project-relation contents from the original EM&A Manuals for the Project,
was issued in March 2012.
1.1.7
The Project comprises of seawall construction and reclamation
works at the northeast waters off the Airport Island to provide land platform
(about 130ha of area) for the construction of an artificial island for the
development of the boundary crossing facilities, and about 19-hectare for the
southern landfall of the Tuen Mun - Chek Lap Kok Link.
1.1.8
Ove Arup & Partners Hong Kong Limited (Arup) was
appointed by Highways Department (HyD) as the consultants for the design and
construction assignment for the Project’s reclamation works (i.e. the Engineer
for the Project).
1.1.9
China Harbour Engineering Company Limited (CHEC) was
awarded by Highways Department (HyD) as the Contractor to undertake the
construction work of the Project and ENVIRON Hong Kong Ltd. was employed as the
Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) and Environmental Project Office (ENPO)
for the Project.
1.1.10
AECOM Asia Co. Ltd. (AECOM) was appointed by China Harbour
Engineering Company Limited to undertake the role of Environmental Team for the
Project for carrying out the EM&A works.
1.1.11
The construction phase of the Project under the EPs was
commenced on 12 March 2012 and will be tentatively completed by early Year
2016.
1.1.12
According to the Project Specific EM&A Manual, there is
a need of an EM&A programme including air quality, noise, water quality and
dolphin monitoring and environmental site inspections. The EM&A programme
of the Project commenced on 12 March 2012.
1.2
Scope of Report
1.2.1
This is the second monthly EM&A Report under the
Contract No. HY/2010/02 Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary
Crossing Facilities – Reclamation Works.
This report presents a summary of the environmental monitoring and audit
works, list of activities and mitigation measures proposed by the ET for the
Project in April 2012.
1.3.1
The project organization structure is shown in Appendix A.
The key personnel contact names and numbers are summarized in Table 1.1.
Table
1.1 Contact Information of Key
Personnel
|
Party
|
Position
|
Name
|
Telephone
|
Fax
|
|
Engineer’s Representative (ER)
(Ove Arup
& Partners Hong Kong Limited)
|
Chief Resident Engineer
|
Michael Lo
|
2528 3031
|
2668 3970
|
|
IEC / ENPO
(ENVIRON Hong Kong Limited)
|
Independent Environmental Checker
|
Raymond Dai
|
3743 0788
|
3548 6988
|
|
Environmental Project Office
|
David Yeung
|
3743 0788
|
3548 6988
|
|
Contractor
(China Harbour Engineering Company
Limited)
|
General Manager (S&E)
|
Daniel Leung
|
3157 1086
|
2578 0413
|
|
Environmental Officer
|
C. M. Wong
|
3157 1086
|
2578 0413
|
|
ET
(AECOM Asia
Company Limited)
|
ET Leader
|
Echo Leong
|
3922 9280
|
2371 7609
|
1.4.1 The construction phase of the Project under the EP commenced on 12
March 2012.
1.4.2 As informed by the Contractor, details of the major works carried out
in this reporting period are listed below:-
Marine-based Works
-
Cone
penetration test;
-
Geotextile
laying and fabrication;
-
Stone
column installation trial;
-
Silt curtain
fabrication and deployment;
-
Stone
blankets laying; and
-
Trial
of cellular structure (at Hu Men of Mainland).
Land-based Works
-
Site
office erection and construction at Works Area WA2;
-
Public
Works Regional Laboratory erection and construction at Works Area WA3;
-
Constructing
site access at area WA2 to Ying Hei Road, Tung Chung;
-
Access
works construction; and
-
Drainage
works.
1.4.3 The 3-month rolling construction programme of the Project is shown in
Appendix B.
1.4.4 The general layout plan of the Project site showing the detailed works
areas is shown in Figure 1.
1.4.5 The environmental mitigation measures implementation schedule are
presented in Appendix C.
1.5.1 The EM&A programme required environmental monitoring for air
quality, noise, water quality, marine ecology and environmental site
inspections for air quality, noise, water quality, waste management, marine
ecology, and landscape and visual impact. The EM&A requirements for each
parameter described in the following sections include:-
-
All monitoring parameters;
-
Monitoring schedules for the reporting month
and forthcoming month;
-
Action and Limit levels for all environmental
parameters;
-
Event / Action Plan;
-
Environmental mitigation measures, as recommended
in the Project EIA reports; and
- Environmental requirement in contract
documents.
2.1.1
In accordance with the Project Specific EM&A Manual,
baseline 1-hour and 24-hour TSP levels at 3 air quality monitoring stations
were established. Impact 1-hour TSP monitoring was conducted for at least three
times every 6 days, while impact 24-hour TSP monitoring was carried out for at
least once every 6 days. The Action and Limit level of the air quality monitoring
is provided in Appendix D.
2.2.1
24-hour TSP air quality monitoring was performed using High
Volume Sampler (HVS) located at each designated monitoring station. The HVS
meets all the requirements of the Project Specific EM&A Manual. Portable direct reading dust meters were used
to carry out the 1-hour TSP monitoring.
Brand and model of the equipment is given in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1 Air Quality Monitoring Equipment
|
Equipment
|
Brand and
Model
|
|
Portable direct
reading dust meter (1-hour TSP)
|
Sibata Digital
Dust Monitor (Model No. LD-3 and LD-3B)
|
|
High Volume
Sampler
(24-hour TSP)
|
Tisch
Environmental Mass Flow Controlled Total Suspended Particulate (TSP) High
Volume Air Sampler
(Model No.
TE-5170)
|
2.3.1
Monitoring locations AMS2 and AMS7 were set up at the
proposed locations in accordance with Project Specific EM&A Manual.
However, for monitoring location AMS3 (Ho Yu College), as proposed in the
Project Specific EM&A Manual, approval for carrying out impact monitoring
could not be obtained from the principal of the school. Permission on setting
up and carrying out impact monitoring works at nearby sensitive receivers, like
Caribbean Coast and Coastal Skyline, was also sought. However, approvals for carrying out impact
monitoring works within their premises were not obtained. Impact air quality
monitoring was conducted at site boundary of the site office area in Works Area
WA2 (AMS3A) respectively. Same baseline and Action Level for air quality, as
derived from the baseline monitoring data recorded at Ho Yu College, was
adopted for this alternative air quality location.
2.3.2
Figure 2 shows the locations of monitoring stations. Table
2.2 describes the details of the monitoring stations.
Table 2.2 Locations
of Impact Air Quality Monitoring Stations
|
Monitoring Station
|
Location
|
Description
|
|
AMS2
|
Tung Chung
Development Pier
|
Rooftop of the premise
|
|
AMS3A
|
Site Boundary of Site Office
Area at Works Area WA2
|
On ground at the area boundary
|
|
AMS7
|
Hong Kong SkyCity
Marriott Hotel
|
On ground at boundary of the premise
|
2.4.1
Table 2.3 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and
duration of impact TSP monitoring.
Table
2.3 Air Quality Monitoring
Parameters, Frequency and Duration
|
Parameter
|
Frequency and Duration
|
|
1-hour TSP
|
Three times every 6 days while the highest
dust impact was expected
|
|
24-hour TSP
|
Once every 6 days
|
2.5.1
24-hour TSP Monitoring
(a)
The HVS was installed in the vicinity of the air
sensitive receivers. The following
criteria were considered in the installation of the HVS.
(i)
A horizontal platform with appropriate support to
secure the sampler against gusty wind was provided.
(ii)
The distance between the HVS and any obstacles,
such as buildings, was at least twice the height that the obstacle protrudes
above the HVS.
(iii)
A minimum of 2 meters separation from walls,
parapets and penthouse for rooftop sampler.
(iv)
A
minimum of 2 meters separation from any supporting structure, measured
horizontally is required.
(v)
No furnace or incinerator flues nearby.
(vi)
Airflow around the sampler was unrestricted.
(vii)
Permission was obtained to set up the samplers and
access to the monitoring stations.
(viii)
A secured supply of electricity was obtained to
operate the samplers.
(ix)
The sampler was located more than 20 meters from
any dripline.
(x)
Any wire fence and gate, required to protect the
sampler, did not obstruct the monitoring process.
(xi)
Flow control accuracy was kept within ±2.5%
deviation over 24-hour sampling period.
(b)
Preparation of Filter Papers
(i)
Glass fibre filters, G810 were labelled and sufficient
filters that were clean and without pinholes were selected.
(ii)
All filters were equilibrated in the conditioning
environment for 24 hours before weighing. The conditioning environment
temperature was around 25 °C
and not variable by more than ±3
°C; the relative humidity (RH) was < 50% and not variable by
more than ±5%. A convenient working RH was 40%.
(iii)
All filter papers were prepared and analysed by ALS
Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd., which is a HOKLAS accredited laboratory and has
comprehensive quality assurance and quality control programmes.
(c)
Field Monitoring
(i)
The power supply was checked to ensure the HVS
works properly.
(ii)
The filter holder and the area surrounding the
filter were cleaned.
(iii)
The filter holder was removed by loosening the four
bolts and a new filter, with stamped number upward, on a supporting screen was
aligned carefully.
(iv)
The filter was properly aligned on the screen so
that the gasket formed an airtight seal on the outer edges of the filter.
(v)
The swing bolts were fastened to hold the filter
holder down to the frame. The pressure
applied was sufficient to avoid air leakage at the edges.
(vi)
Then the shelter lid was closed and was secured
with the aluminum strip.
(vii)
The HVS was warmed-up for about 5 minutes to
establish run-temperature conditions.
(viii)
A new flow rate record sheet was set into the flow
recorder.
(ix)
On site temperature and atmospheric pressure
readings were taken and the flow rate of the HVS was checked and adjusted at
around 1.1 m3/min, and complied with the range specified in the
updated EM&A Manual (i.e. 0.6-1.7 m3/min).
(x)
The programmable digital timer was set for a
sampling period of 24 hrs, and the starting time, weather condition and the
filter number were recorded.
(xi)
The initial elapsed time was recorded.
(xii)
At the end of sampling, on site temperature and
atmospheric pressure readings were taken and the final flow rate of the HVS was
checked and recorded.
(xiii)
The final elapsed time was recorded.
(xiv)
The sampled filter was removed carefully and folded
in half length so that only surfaces with collected particulate matter were in
contact.
(xv)
It was then placed in a clean plastic envelope and
sealed.
(xvi)
All monitoring information was recorded on a
standard data sheet.
(xvii)
Filters were then sent to ALS Technichem (HK) Pty
Ltd. for analysis.
(d)
Maintenance and Calibration
(i)
The HVS and its accessories were maintained in good
working condition, such as replacing motor brushes routinely and checking
electrical wiring to ensure a continuous power supply.
(ii)
5-point calibration of the HVS was conducted using
TE-5025A Calibration Kit prior
to the commencement of baseline monitoring. Bi-monthly 5-point calibration of
the HVS will be carried out during impact monitoring.
(iii)
Calibration certificate of the HVSs are provided in
Appendix E.
2.5.2
1-hour TSP Monitoring
(a)
Measuring Procedures
The measuring procedures of the 1-hour dust
meter were in accordance with the Manufacturer’s Instruction Manual as
follows:-
(i)
Turn the power on.
(ii)
Close the air collecting opening cover.
(iii)
Push the “TIME SETTING” switch to [BG].
(iv)
Push “START/STOP” switch to perform background
measurement for 6 seconds.
(v)
Turn the knob at SENSI ADJ position to insert the
light scattering plate.
(vi)
Leave the equipment for 1 minute upon “SPAN CHECK”
is indicated in the display.
(vii)
Push “START/STOP” switch to perform automatic
sensitivity adjustment. This measurement takes 1 minute.
(viii)
Pull out the knob and return it to MEASURE
position.
(ix)
Push the “TIME SETTING” switch the time set in the
display to 3 hours.
(x)
Lower down the air collection opening cover.
(xi)
Push “START/STOP” switch to start measurement.
(b)
Maintenance and Calibration
(i)
The 1-hour TSP meter was calibrated at 1-year
intervals against a continuous particulate TEOM Monitor, Series 1400ab.
Calibration certificates of the Laser Dust Monitors are provided in Appendix E.
(ii)
1-hour validation checking of the TSP meter against
HVS is carried out on half-year
basis
at the air quality monitoring locations.
2.6
Monitoring
Schedule for the Reporting Month
2.6.1
The schedule for air quality monitoring in April 2012 is
provided in Appendix F.
2.7
Results and
Observations
2.7.1
The monitoring results for 1-hour TSP and 24-hour TSP are
summarized in Table 2.4 and 2.5 respectively. Detailed impact air quality
monitoring results are presented in Appendix G.
Table 2.4 Summary
of 1-hour TSP Monitoring Results in the Reporting Period
|
|
Average (mg/m3)
|
Range (mg/m3)
|
Action Level (mg/m3)
|
Limit Level (mg/m3)
|
|
AMS2
|
75.6
|
67.6 – 83.8
|
374
|
500
|
|
AMS3A
|
78.6
|
70.3 – 84.9
|
368
|
500
|
|
AMS7
|
74.3
|
64.4 – 80.7
|
370
|
500
|
Table
2.5 Summary of 24-hour TSP
Monitoring Results in the Reporting Period
|
|
Average (mg/m3)
|
Range (mg/m3)
|
Action Level (mg/m3)
|
Limit Level (mg/m3)
|
|
AMS2
|
42.3
|
18.9 – 77.4
|
176
|
260
|
|
AMS3A
*
|
47.4
|
24.1 – 105.6
|
167
|
260
|
|
AMS7
|
52.2
|
17.3 – 97.1
|
183
|
260
|
Remarks: *Due to power supply to HVS at AMS3A during the scheduled
24-hour impact monitorings, the measured TSP levels were less/more than 24-hour
sampling period and they are presented herewith as for reference.
2.7.2
The major dust source in the reporting period included
construction activities from the Project, as well as nearby traffic emissions.
2.7.3
All 1-hour and 24-hour TSP results were below the Action
and Limit Level at all monitoring locations in the reporting month.
2.7.4
The event action plan is annexed in Appendix L.
2.7.5
Meteorological information collected from the wind station,
as shown in Figure 2, including wind speed and wind direction, is annexed in
Appendix H. As the weather station
installed was out of service from 5am on 25 April 2012 to 8am on 30 April 2012,
Wind speed and wind direction data was proposed to obtain from the nearest HKO
Weather Station available. However, as informed by HKO, the wind data recorded
at Hong Kong International Airport would not be available shortly after the end
of reporting month due to the internal data treatment and audit process
(Currently, the latest dataset available from HKO website is Jan 2012 only).
Wind speed and wind direction data was therefore obtained from HKO’s Automatic
Weather Station in Siu Ho Wan. However, as informed by the Hong Kong
Observatory, the relevant wind data in April 2012 is not yet available on the
report issuing date (14 May 2012) due to their internal dataset quality
control. Relevant wind data will be provided in next monthly report.
3.1.1
In accordance with the Project Specific EM&A Manual,
impact noise monitoring was conducted for at least once per week during the
construction phase of the Project. The Action and Limit level of the noise
monitoring is provided in Appendix D.
3.2
Monitoring
Equipment
3.2.1
Noise monitoring was performed using sound level meter at
each designated monitoring station. The
sound level meters deployed comply with the International Electrotechnical Commission
Publications (IEC) 651:1979 (Type 1) and 804:1985 (Type 1) specifications. Acoustic calibrator was deployed to check the
sound level meters at a known sound pressure level. Brand and model of the equipment is given in
Table 3.1.
Table 3.1 Noise
Monitoring Equipment
|
Equipment
|
Brand and Model
|
|
Integrated Sound Level Meter
|
B&K 2238
Rion NL-31
|
|
Acoustic Calibrator
|
Rion NC-73
|
3.3.1
Monitoring locations NMS2 was set up at the proposed locations
in accordance with Project Specific EM&A Manual. However, for monitoring
location NMS3 (Ho Yu College), as proposed in the Project Specific EM&A
Manual, approval for carrying out impact monitoring could not be obtained from
the principal of the school. Permission on setting up and carrying out impact
monitoring works at nearby sensitive receivers, like Caribbean Coast and
Coastal Skyline, was also sought.
However, approvals for carrying out impact monitoring works within their
premises were not obtained. Impact air quality monitoring was conducted at site
boundary of the site office area in Works Area WA2 (NMS3A) respectively. Same
baseline noise level, as derived from the baseline monitoring data recorded at
Ho Yu College, was adopted for this alternative noise monitoring location.
3.3.2
Figure 2 shows the locations of the monitoring stations.
Table 3.2 describes the details of the monitoring stations.
Table
3.2 Locations of Impact Noise
Monitoring Stations
|
Monitoring Station
|
Location
|
Description
|
|
NMS2
|
Seaview Crescent
Tower 1
|
Free-field on
the rooftop of the premise
|
|
NMS3A
|
Site Boundary of Site Office Area at Works Area WA2
|
1m from the
exterior façade of the container office on ground at the area boundary
|
3.4.1
Table 3.3 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency
and duration of impact noise monitoring.
Table 3.3 Noise
Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
|
Parameter
|
Frequency and
Duration
|
|
30-mins
measurement at each monitoring station between 0700 and 1900 on normal
weekdays (Monday to Saturday). Leq, L10 and L90
would be recorded.
|
At least once per week
|
3.5.1
Monitoring Procedure
(a)
The sound level meter was set on a tripod at a height
of 1.2 m above the ground
for free-field measurements at NMS2. A correction of +3 dB(A) shall be made to
the free field measurements.
(b)
Façade measurements were made at NMS3A.
(c)
The battery condition was checked to ensure the
correct functioning of the meter.
(d)
Parameters such as frequency weighting, the time
weighting and the measurement time were set as follows:-
(i)
frequency weighting: A
(ii)
time weighting: Fast
(iii)
time measurement: Leq(30-minutes) during
non-restricted hours i.e. 07:00 – 1900 on normal weekdays; Leq(5-minutes)
during restricted hours i.e. 19:00
– 23:00 and 23:00 – 07:00 of normal weekdays, whole day of Sundays and Public
Holidays.
(e)
Prior to and after each noise measurement, the
meter was calibrated using the acoustic calibrator for 94dB(A) at 1000 Hz. If the difference in the calibration level
before and after measurement was more than 1 dB(A), the measurement would be
considered invalid and repeat of noise measurement would be required after
re-calibration or repair of the equipment.
(f)
During the monitoring period, the Leq, L10
and L90 were recorded. In
addition, site conditions and noise sources were recorded on a standard record
sheet.
(g)
Noise measurement was paused during periods of high
intrusive noise (e.g. dog barking, helicopter noise) if possible. Observations
were recorded when intrusive noise was unavoidable.
(h)
Noise monitoring was cancelled in the presence of
fog, rain, wind with a steady speed exceeding 5m/s, or wind with gusts exceeding 10m/s. The wind speed shall be
checked with a portable wind speed meter capable of measuring the wind speed in
m/s.
3.5.2
Maintenance and Calibration
(a)
The microphone head of the sound level meter was
cleaned with soft cloth at regular intervals.
(b)
The meter and calibrator were sent to the supplier
or HOKLAS laboratory to check and calibrate at yearly intervals.
(c)
Calibration certificates of the sound level meters
and acoustic calibrators are provided in Appendix E.
3.6.1
The schedule for construction noise monitoring in April
2012 is provided in Appendix F.
3.7.1
The monitoring results for construction noise are
summarized in Table 3.4 and the monitoring data is provided in Appendix I.
Table 3.4 Summary of Construction Noise Monitoring
Results in the Reporting Period
|
|
Average, dB(A),
Leq
(30 mins)
|
Range, dB(A),
Leq
(30 mins)
|
Limit Level, dB(A),
Leq
(30 mins)
|
|
NMS2
|
64.5*
|
63.1 – 66.3*
|
75
|
|
NMS3A
|
64.1
|
63.3 – 64.5
|
75
|
*+3dB(A) Façade correction included
3.7.2
No noise Action Level and Limit Level exceedance was
recorded at all monitoring stations in the reporting month.
3.7.3
Major noise sources during the noise monitoring included
construction activities of the Project and nearby traffic noise.
3.7.4
The event action plan is annexed in Appendix L.
4
WATER QUALITY MONITORING
4.1
Monitoring
Requirements
4.1.1
Impact water quality monitoring was carried out to ensure
that any deterioration of water quality was detected, and that timely action
was taken to rectify the situation. For
impact water quality monitoring, measurements were taken in accordance with the
Project Specific EM&A Manual. Appendix D shows the established Action/Limit
Levels for the environmental monitoring works.
4.2.1
Table 4.1 summarises the equipment used in the impact water
quality monitoring programme.
Table 4.1 Water
Quality Monitoring Equipment
|
Equipment
|
Brand and Model
|
|
DO and Temperature Meter, Salinity Meter, Turbidimeter and
pH Meter
|
YSI Model 6820 V2
|
|
Positioning Equipment
|
JRC DGPS 224 Model JLR-4341 with J-NAV 500 Model NWZ4551
|
|
Water Depth Detector
|
Eagle Cuda-168
|
|
Water Sampler
|
Kahlsio Water Sampler (Vertical) 2.2 L with messenger
|
4.3.1 Table 4.2 summarises
the monitoring parameters, frequency and monitoring depths of impact water
quality monitoring as required in the Project Specific EM&A Manual.
Table 4.2 Impact
Water Quality Monitoring Parameters and Frequency
|
Monitoring Stations
|
Parameter, unit
|
Frequency
|
No. of depth
|
|
Impact Stations:
IS5, IS(Mf)6,
IS7, IS8, IS(Mf)9, IS10, IS(Mf)11, IS(Mf)16, IS17
Control/Far Field Stations:
CS(Mf)3, CS(Mf)5,
CS4, CS6, CSA
Sensitive Receiver Stations:
SR3-SR7,
SR10A&SR10B
|
·
Depth, m
·
Temperature, oC
·
Salinity,
ppt
·
DO, mg/L
·
DO Saturation, %
·
Turbidity, NTU
·
pH
·
Suspended Solids (SS), mg/L
|
Three times per week during mid-ebb and
mid-flood tides (within ± 1.75 hour of the predicted time)
|
3
(1 m below water surface, mid-depth and 1 m
above sea bed, except where the water depth is less than 6 m, in which case
the mid-depth station may be omitted. Should the water depth be less
than 3 m, only the mid-depth station will be monitored).
|
4.4.1
In accordance with the Project Specific EM&A Manual,
twenty-one stations (9 Impact Stations, 7 Sensitive Receiver Stations and 5
Control/Far Field Stations) were designated for impact water quality
monitoring. The nine Impact Stations (IS) were chosen on the basis of their proximity
to the reclamation and thus the greatest potential for water quality impacts,
the seven Sensitive Receiver Stations (SR) were chosen as they are close to the
key sensitive receives and the five Control/ Far Field Stations (CS) were
chosen to facilitate comparison of the water quality of the IS stations with
less influence by the Project/ ambient water quality conditions.
4.4.2
Due to safety concern and topographical condition of the
original locations of SR4 and SR10B, alternative impact water quality monitoring
stations, naming as SR4(N) and SR10B(N), were adopted, which are situated in
vicinity of the original impact water quality monitoring stations (SR4 and
SR10B) and could be reachable.
4.4.3
Same baseline and Action Level for water quality, as
derived from the baseline monitoring data recorded, were adopted for these
alternative impact water quality monitoring stations.
4.4.4
The locations of these monitoring stations are summarized
in Table 4.3 and depicted in Figure 3.
Table 4.3 Impact Water Quality Monitoring Stations
|
Station
|
Description
|
East
|
North
|
|
IS5
|
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
811579
|
817106
|
|
IS(Mf)6
|
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
812101
|
817873
|
|
IS7
|
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
812244
|
818777
|
|
IS8
|
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
814251
|
818412
|
|
IS(Mf)9
|
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
813273
|
818850
|
|
IS10
|
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
812577
|
820670
|
|
IS(Mf)11
|
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
813562
|
820716
|
|
IS(Mf)16
|
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
814328
|
819497
|
|
IS17
|
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
814539
|
820391
|
|
SR3
|
Sensitive receivers (San Tau SSSI)
|
810525
|
816456
|
|
SR4(N)
|
Sensitive receivers (Tai Ho)
|
814705
|
817859
|
|
SR5
|
Sensitive receivers (Artificial Reef in NE Airport)
|
811489
|
820455
|
|
SR6
|
Sensitive receivers (Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park)
|
805837
|
821818
|
|
SR7
|
Sensitive receivers (Tai Mo Do)
|
814293
|
821431
|
|
SR10A
|
Sensitive receivers (Ma Wan FCZ)1
|
823741
|
823495
|
|
SR10B(N)
|
Sensitive receivers (Ma Wan FCZ)2
|
823683
|
823187
|
|
CS(Mf)3
|
Control Station
|
809989
|
821117
|
|
CS(Mf)5
|
Control Station
|
817990
|
821129
|
|
CS4
|
Control Station
|
810025
|
824004
|
|
CS6
|
Control Station
|
817028
|
823992
|
|
CSA
|
Control Station
|
818103
|
823064
|
4.5.1
Instrumentation
(a)
The in-situ water quality parameters, viz.
dissolved oxygen, temperature, salinity and turbidity, pH were measured by
multi-parameter meters (i.e. Model YSI 6820 CE-C-M-Y).
4.5.2
Operating/Analytical Procedures
(a)
Digital
Differential Global Positioning Systems (DGPS) were used to ensure that the correct location
was selected prior to sample collection.
(b)
Portable, battery-operated echo sounders were used
for the determination of water depth at each designated monitoring station.
(c)
All in-situ measurements were taken at 3 water
depths, 1 m below water
surface, mid-depth and 1 m above sea bed, except where the water depth was less
than 6 m, in which case the mid-depth station was omitted. Should the
water depth be less than 3 m, only the mid-depth station was monitored.
(d)
At each measurement/sampling depth, two consecutive
in-situ monitoring (DO concentration and saturation, temperature, turbidity,
pH, salinity) and water sample for SS. The probes were retrieved out of the
water after the first measurement and then re-deployed for the second
measurement. Where the difference in the value between the first and second
readings of DO or turbidity parameters was more than 25% of the value of the first
reading, the reading was discarded and further readings were taken.
(e)
Duplicate samples from each independent sampling
event were collected for SS measurement. Water samples were collected using the
water samplers and the samples were stored in high-density polythene bottles.
Water samples collected were well-mixed in the water sampler prior to
pre-rinsing and transferring to sample bottles. Sample bottles were pre-rinsed
with the same water samples. The sample bottles were then be packed in
cool-boxes (cooled at 4oC without being frozen), and delivered to
ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. for the analysis of suspended solids
concentrations. The laboratory determination work would be started within 24
hours after collection of the water samples. ALS Technichem
(HK) Pty Ltd. is a HOKLAS accrediated laboratory and has comprehensive quality
assurance and quality control programmes. For QA/QC procedures, one duplicate
samples of every batch of 20 samples was analyzed.
(f)
The analysis method and reporting and detection
limit for SS is shown in Table 4.4.
Table 4.4 Laboratory Analysis for Suspended
Solids
|
Parameters
|
Instrumentation
|
Analytical Method
|
Reporting Limit
|
Detection Limit
|
|
Suspended
Solid (SS)
|
Weighting
|
APHA 2540-D
|
0.5mg/L
|
0.5mg/L
|
(g)
Other relevant data were recorded, including
monitoring location / position, time, water depth, tidal stages, weather
conditions and any special phenomena or work underway at the construction site
in the field log sheet for
information.
4.5.3
Maintenance and Calibration
(a)
All in situ monitoring instruments would be
calibrated and calibrated by ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. before use and at
3-monthly intervals throughout all stages of the water quality monitoring programme. Calibration details are provided in Appendix E.
(b)
The dissolved oxygen probe of YSI 6820 was
calibrated once per monitoring day by wet bulb method. Before the calibration
routine, the sensor for dissolved oxygen was thermally equilibrated in
water-saturated air. Calibration cup is served as a calibration chamber and it
was loosened from airtight condition before it is used for the calibration.
Calibration at ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. was carried out once every three
months in a water sample with a known concentration of dissolved oxygen. The
sensor was immersed in the water and after thermal equilibration, the known
mg/L value was keyed in and the calibration was carried out automatically.
(c)
The turbidity probe of YSI 6820 is calibrated two
times a month. A zero check in distilled water was performed with the turbidity
probe of YSI 6820 once per monitoring day. The probe will be calibrated with a
solution of known NTU at ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. once every three months.
4.6.1
The schedule for impact water quality monitoring in April
2012 is provided in Appendix F.
4.7.1
Impact water quality monitoring was conducted at all
designated monitoring stations in the reporting month. Impact water quality
monitoring results and graphical presentations are provided in Appendix J.
4.7.2
Exceedances were recorded for turbidity and suspended
solids in the reporting month. Number of exceedances recorded in the reporting
month at each impact station are summarised in Table 4.5.
Table 4.5 Summary
of Water Quality Exceedances
|
Station
|
Exceedance Level
|
DO (S&M)
|
DO (Bottom)
|
Turbidity
|
SS
|
Total
|
|
Ebb
|
Flood
|
Ebb
|
Flood
|
Ebb
|
Flood
|
Ebb
|
Flood
|
Ebb
|
Flood
|
|
IS5
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
IS(Mf)6
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
2
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
IS7
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
2
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
IS8
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
IS(Mf)9
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
IS10
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
IS(Mf)11
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
IS(Mf)16
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
IS17
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
SR3
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
SR4(N)
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
SR5
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
SR6
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
SR7
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
SR10A
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
SR10B(N)
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Total
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
2
|
0
|
3
|
5
|
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Note: S: Surface;
M: Mid-depth;
4.7.3
Five (5) Action Level exceedances, where two (2) were
recorded at measured turbidity level and three (3) were recorded at measured SS
level, were recorded in the reporting month.
It was found that only preparation works, like geotextile laying and
stone blanket laying, which are not likely to cause water quality impact, were
carried out on 9 April 2012. Non-Project related trawling activities by fishing
vessels were noted near the monitoring location IS10, which likely cause impact
on ambient water qualtiy. Turbidity and suspsended solid levels recorded at
IS10 on the next monitoring date (i.e. 11 April 2012), when there are similar
preparation works at similar works areas carrying out, were well below the
Action and Limit Levels.
Moreover, only stone
blanket laying, which is not likely to cause water quality impact, was carrying
out during the monitoring period at mid-flood tide on 23 April 2012. Cone
penetration test and stone column trial were suspended at 17:00 and 14:00
respectively on 23 April 2012. Strong wind and rough sea condition was
experienced during the monitoring period, which is likely to affect the ambient
water quality in such shallow water condition. No silty plume was observed near
area between the perimeter of the silt curtain and the monitoring point during
the monitoring. Turbidity and SS levels recorded at IS(Mf)6 and IS7 on the
previous monitoring date (i.e. 18 April 2012) during mid-flood tide, when there
are same activities at works areas being carried out, were well below the
Action and Limit Levels.
It is considered
that the Action Level exceedances as non-Project related. Nevertheless, the
Contractor was reminded to ensure provision of on-goining maintenance to the
silt curtain systems.
4.7.4
Generally, water quality impact sources during the water
quality monitoring were potentially activities of the Project and nearby
operating vessels by other parties.
4.7.5
The event action plan is annexed in Appendix L.
5.1.1
Vessel based surveys for the Chinese White Dolphin (CWD), Sousa chinensis, are to be conducted by
a dedicated team comprising a qualified marine mammal ecologist and experienced
marine mammal observers (MMOs). The
purpose of the surveys are to evaluate the impact of the HKCBF reclamation and,
if deemed detrimental, to take appropriate action as per the EM&A manual.
5.1.2
This ‘Impact Monitoring” follows several months of
‘Baseline Monitoring’ so similar survey methodologies have been adopted to
facilitate comparisons between datasets.
Further, the data collected are compatible with, and are available for,
incorporation into the data set managed by the Agriculture, Fisheries and
Conservation Department (AFCD) as part of Hong Kong’s long term Marine Mammal
Monitoring Programme.
5.2.1
Table 5.1 summarises the equipment used for the impact
dolphin monitoring.
Table 5.1 Dolphin Monitoring Equipment
|
Equipment
|
Model
|
|
Vessel for
Monitoring
|
15m in length with
viewing platform 4.5m above water level
|
|
Global
Positioning System (GPS) x2
|
Garmin 18X-PC
Geo One Phottix
|
|
Computers
(Corei7) x2
|
Windows /MSO 2010
Logger
PamGuard
|
|
AIS Receiver
|
LOGGER-GPS linked
|
|
Camera
|
Nikon D90 300m
2.8D fixed focus
Nikon D90 20-300m zoom lens
|
|
Laser Binoculars
|
Infinitor LRF1000
|
|
Marine Binocular
x2
|
Nexus 7 ´ 50 marine binocular with compass and
reticules
|
|
Acoustic
Monitoring
|
Hydrophone array (2 element, 50m cable)
|
5.3.1
Dolphin monitoring is conducted when visibility is good,
e.g., over 1km and with a Beaufort Sea State of 4 or better.
5.3.2
When thunder storm, black rain or typhoon warnings are in
force, all survey effort is stopped.
5.4.1
The impact dolphin monitoring is vessel-based and combines
line-transect and photo-ID methodology.
The survey follows pre-set and fixed transect lines in the two areas
defined by AFCD as:
·
Northeast
Lantau survey area; and
·
Northwest
Lantau survey area.
5.4.2
The co-ordinates for the transect lines and layout map have
been provided by AFCD and are shown in Table 5.2 and Figure 4.
Table 5.2 Impact Dolphin Monitoring Line
Transect Co-ordinates (Provided by AFCD)
|
|
HK
Grid System
|
Long
Lat in WGS84
|
|
ID
|
X
|
Y
|
Long
|
Lat
|
|
1
|
804671
|
814577
|
113.870308
|
22.269741
|
|
1
|
804671
|
831404
|
113.869975
|
22.421696
|
|
2
|
805475
|
815457
|
113.878087
|
22.277704
|
|
2
|
805477
|
826654
|
113.877896
|
22.378814
|
|
3
|
806464
|
819435
|
113.887615
|
22.313643
|
|
3
|
806464
|
822911
|
113.887550
|
22.345030
|
|
4
|
807518
|
819771
|
113.897833
|
22.316697
|
|
4
|
807518
|
829230
|
113.897663
|
22.402113
|
|
5
|
808504
|
820220
|
113.907397
|
22.320761
|
|
5
|
808504
|
828602
|
113.907252
|
22.396462
|
|
6
|
809490
|
820466
|
113.916965
|
22.323003
|
|
6
|
809490
|
825352
|
113.916884
|
22.367128
|
|
7
|
810499
|
820690
|
113.926752
|
22.325043
|
|
7
|
810499
|
824613
|
113.926688
|
22.360464
|
|
8
|
811508
|
820847
|
113.936539
|
22.326475
|
|
8
|
811508
|
824254
|
113.936486
|
22.357241
|
|
9
|
812516
|
820892
|
113.946329
|
22.326894
|
|
9
|
812516
|
824254
|
113.946279
|
22.357255
|
|
10
|
813525
|
818270
|
113.956156
|
22.303225
|
|
10
|
813525
|
824657
|
113.956065
|
22.360912
|
|
11
|
814556
|
818449
|
113.966160
|
22.304858
|
|
11
|
814556
|
820992
|
113.966125
|
22.327820
|
|
12
|
815542
|
818807
|
113.975726
|
22.308109
|
|
12
|
815542
|
824882
|
113.975647
|
22.362962
|
|
13
|
816506
|
819480
|
113.985072
|
22.314192
|
|
13
|
816506
|
824859
|
113.985005
|
22.362771
|
|
14
|
817537
|
820220
|
113.995070
|
22.320883
|
|
14
|
817537
|
824613
|
113.995018
|
22.360556
|
|
15
|
818568
|
820735
|
114.005071
|
22.325550
|
|
15
|
818568
|
824433
|
114.005030
|
22.358947
|
|
16
|
819532
|
821420
|
114.014420
|
22.331747
|
|
16
|
819532
|
824209
|
114.014390
|
22.356933
|
|
17
|
820451
|
822125
|
114.023333
|
22.338117
|
|
17
|
820451
|
823671
|
114.023317
|
22.352084
|
|
18
|
821504
|
822371
|
114.033556
|
22.340353
|
|
18
|
821504
|
823761
|
114.033544
|
22.352903
|
|
19
|
822513
|
823268
|
114.043340
|
22.348458
|
|
19
|
822513
|
824321
|
114.043331
|
22.357971
|
|
20
|
823477
|
823402
|
114.052695
|
22.349680
|
|
20
|
823477
|
824613
|
114.052686
|
22.360610
|
|
21
|
805476
|
827081
|
113.877878
|
22.382668
|
|
21
|
805476
|
830562
|
113.877811
|
22.414103
|
|
22
|
806464
|
824033
|
113.887520
|
22.355164
|
|
22
|
806464
|
829598
|
113.887416
|
22.405423
|
|
23
|
814559
|
821739
|
113.966142
|
22.334574
|
|
23
|
814559
|
824768
|
113.966101
|
22.361920
|
5.5.1
The study area incorporates 23 transects which are to be
surveyed over two days. Each survey day
lasts approximately 9 hours.
5.5.2
The survey vessel departs from Tung Chung Development Pier,
Tsing Yi Public Pier or the nearest safe and convenient pier.
5.5.3
When the vessel reaches the start of a transect line, “on
effort” survey begins. Areas between
transect lines and traveling to and from the study area are defined as “off
effort”.
5.5.4
The transect line is surveyed at a speed of 8-10
knots. There are a minimum of four
marine mammal observers (MMOs) present on each survey, rotating through four
positions, observers (2), data recorder (1) and ‘rest’ (1). Rotations occur
every 30 minutes or at the end of dolphin encounters. The data recorder records effort, weather and
sightings data directly onto the programme Logger. The observers search with naked eye and
binoculars between 90° and 270° abeam (bow being 0°).
5.5.5
When a group of dolphins is sighted, position, bearing and
distance data are recorded immediately onto the computer and, after a short
observation, an estimate made of group size.
These parameters are linked to the time-GPS-ships data which are
automatically stored in the programme Logger throughout the survey period. In this manner, information on heading,
position, speed, weather, effort and sightings are stored in a format suitable
for use with DISTANCE software for subsequent line transect analyses.
5.5.6
Once the vessel leaves the transect line, it is deemed to
be “off-effort”. The dolphins are
approached with the purpose of taking high resolution pictures for addition to
the photo –identification catalogue of individual CWD. Attempts to photograph all dolphins in the
group are made. Both the left and right
hand sides of the dorsal fin area of each dolphin in the group are
photographed, if possible. On finishing
photographing, the vessel will return to the transect line at the point of
departure and “on effort” survey is resumed.
If another group of dolphins is sighted while travelling back to the
transect line, the event shall be treated as a “secondary sighting” or as an
“opportunistic sighting” and noted accordingly.
5.5.7
As time and GPS data are automatically logged throughout
the survey and are linked to sightings data input, start and end times of encounters
and deviation from the transect lines are recorded and can be subsequently
reviewed.
5.5.8
Throughout the survey and while with groups of CWD,
acoustic data are gathered using calibrated broadband/high frequency
hydrophones. Shipping AIS data and associated
noise are also recorded. Various
software programmes are available to characterise recorded sounds.
5.6.1
The schedule for dolphin monitoring in April 2012 is
provided in Appendix F.
5.7.1
Dolphin surveys were conducted on 19th and 23rd
April 2012. All weather recorded on
effort was Beaufort Sea State 3.5 or less.
Rain and thunder storms occurred on 19th April 2012 and the
survey was discontinued in the afternoon.
On 19th April, a total of 63.2km of transect line was
travelled, of which 25.7m was “on effort”. On 23rd April 2012, a
total of 101.5km of transect line was travelled, of which 53.4km was “on
effort”. The effort summary is shown in Table 5.3.
Table 5.3 Impact Dolphin Monitoring Survey
Effort Summary
|
Date
|
Status
|
Sea State
(on effort)
|
Distance on effort
(km)
|
Time on effort (hh:mm:ss)
|
|
19-04-2012
|
ON
|
0.5
|
0
|
-
|
|
19-04-2012
|
ON
|
1
|
0
|
-
|
|
19-04-2012
|
ON
|
1.5
|
7.1
|
00:45:41
|
|
19-04-2012
|
ON
|
2
|
2.3
|
00:15:01
|
|
19-04-2012
|
ON
|
2.5
|
9.5
|
00:45:03
|
|
19-04-2012
|
ON
|
3
|
6.5
|
00:23:51
|
|
19-04-2012
|
ON
|
3.5
|
0.3
|
00:06:19
|
|
23-04-2012
|
ON
|
0.5
|
3.3
|
00:14:21
|
|
23-04-2012
|
ON
|
1
|
8
|
00:35:22
|
|
23-04-2012
|
ON
|
1.5
|
5.4
|
00:23:30
|
|
23-04-2012
|
ON
|
2
|
19.5
|
1:26:43
|
|
23-04-2012
|
ON
|
2.5
|
11.3
|
00:47:11
|
|
23-04-2012
|
ON
|
3
|
5.5
|
00:24:01
|
|
23-04-2012
|
ON
|
3.5
|
0.4
|
00:2:30
|
5.7.2
A total of two dolphin sightings were recorded during the
two surveys, two on 19th April 2012 and none on 23rd
April 2012. Of the two sightings, one
was “on effort” and one was “opportunistic”. Sighting details are summarised in
Appendix K and Figure 5.
5.7.3
Behaviour: the only on effort sighting made was of
dolphins, including a calf, feeding behind a stationary hang trawler.
5.7.4
Noteworthy Observations: one new born calf was observed
east of Chek Lap Kok Airport in the Northwest Lantau survey block. One survey resulted in no sightings although
weather conditions for that day were good.
5.7.5
Of the observation made and images examined, there is no
indication that construction activities from the Project have caused
disturbance or direct damage to the marine mammals which were observed.
5.7.6
No other active construction sites were noted during the
two survey periods within Hong Kong waters.
Marine construction work was noted close to the Hong Kong–China maritime
border in Chinese waters and dolphins were observed in this area (near Tai O).
5.7.7
Potential impact sources observed during April 2012 dolphin
monitoring included construction activities of the Project, observed
construction activities in adjacent aquatic habitat and shipping.
5.7.8
Review of baseline survey data and long term monitoring
data indicate that although surveys with no dolphin sighted are not frequent
they have been recorded with regularity.
As data points accumulate, it will be possible to have greater insight
to trends in sightings distribution and frequency and thus make valid
comparisons to existing baseline monitoring.
6.1.1 Site Inspections
were carried out on a weekly basis to monitor the implementation of proper
environmental pollution control and mitigation measures for the Project. In the
reporting month, 4 site inspections were carried out on 5, 12, 19 and 26 April
2012 .
6.1.2
Particular observations during the site inspections are
described below:
Air Quality
6.1.3
Bags of cement were found debagged at open area. The
Contractor was reminded that de-bagging, batching and mixing process of cement
should be carried out in an area sheltered on top and the 3 sides.
Noise
6.1.4
Noise Emission
Labels (NELs) were found missing from the air compressors employed on barge
FTP19 at Portion A. The Contractor was reminded to affix the NELs to the air
compressor employed.
Water Quality
6.1.5
Provision of temporary drainage system at Works Area WA3
was undergoing. Concrete u-channels and sand bag bundings were provided at part
of the site boundaries. The Contractor was recommended to provide sand bag
bundings at the site boundaries temporarily prior to completion of u-channels.
The Contractor was reminded to review the temporary drainage systems regularly
to handle the silty surface run-off properly, especially during raining.
6.1.6
Rubbish and accumulated rainwater was found inside the
u-channel at Works Area WA4. The Contractor should clear up the rubbish and
accumulated rainwater, especially after rainstorm.
6.1.7
Broken sand bags were observed at site boundary at Works Area
WA4. The Contractor should remove and replace the broken sand bags.
Chemical and Waste Management
6.1.8
Accumulation of oily water and materials were observed
inside the drip trays employed on barge FTP19 at Portion A. The Contractor was reminded
to clear the materials and oily water. The oily mixture should be treated and
disposed of as chemical waste.
6.1.9
It is noted that few trucks of construction wastes were not
transferred to designated disposal ground. The Contractor was reminded to provide
measures to ensure construction wastes were sorted, transferred and disposed of
properly. Toolbox talks and trainings should be provided to workers and dump
truck drivers on waste management issues.
Landscape and Visual Impact
6.1.10
No adverse observation was identified in the reporting
month.
Miscellaneous
6.1.11
No adverse observation was identified in the reporting
month.
6.1.12
The Contractor has rectified all the observations as
identified during environmental site inspection in the reporting month.
6.2
Advice
on the Solid and Liquid Waste Management Status
6.2.1
The Contractor had submitted application form for
registration as a chemical waste producer for the Project. Sufficient numbers
of receptacles were available for general refuse collection and sorting.
6.2.2
As advised by the Contract, 1.06 tonnes of general refuse
were generated and disposed of in the reporting period. Monthly summary of
waste flow table is detailed in Appendix M.
6.2.3
The Contractor is advised to properly maintain on site
C&D materials and wastes collection, sorting and recording system, dispose
of C&D materials and wastes at designated ground and maximize reuse /
recycle of C&D materials and wastes. The Contractor is reminded to properly
maintain the site tidiness and dispose of the wastes accumulated on site regularly
and properly.
6.2.4
The Contractor is reminded that chemical waste containers
should be properly treated and stored temporarily in designated chemical waste
storage area on site in accordance with the Code of Practise on the Packaging,
Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes.
6.3
Environmental
Licenses and Permits
6.3.1
The environmental licenses and permits for Stage 1 of the
Project and valid in the reporting month is summarized in Table 6.1.
Table 6.1 Summary
of Environmental Licensing and Permit Status
|
Statutory Reference
|
License/ Permit
|
License or Permit No.
|
Valid Period
|
License/ Permit Holder
|
Remarks
|
|
From
|
To
|
|
EIAO
|
Environmental Permit
|
EP-353/2009/D
|
07/03/2012
|
N/A
|
HyD
|
Hong Kong – Zhuhai – Macao Bridge
Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities
|
|
EP-354/2009/A
|
08/12/2010
|
N/A
|
Tuen Mun – Chek Lap Kok Link
(TMCLKL Southern Landfall Reclamation
only)
|
|
APCO
|
NA notification
|
--
|
30/12/2011
|
--
|
CHEC
|
Works Area WA2 and WA3
|
|
APCO
|
NA notification
|
--
|
17/01/2012
|
--
|
CHEC
|
Works Area WA4
|
|
WPCO
|
Discharge License
|
N/A
|
Application in process
|
N/A
|
CHEC
|
Discharge of Construction
Runoff
|
|
WDO
|
Chemical Waste Producer
Registration
|
N/A
|
Application in process
|
N/A
|
CHEC
|
Chemical waste produced in
Contract HY/2010/02
|
|
WDO
|
Billing
Account for Disposal of
Construction Waste
|
7014181
|
05/12/2011
|
N/A
|
CHEC
|
Waste disposal in Contract
HY/2010/02
|
|
NCO
|
Construction Noise Permit
|
GW-RS0125-12
|
28/2/2012
|
27/08/2012
(Cancelled from 1900 on
16/04/2012)
|
CHEC
|
Marine-based areas in Contract
HY/2010/02
|
|
Statutory Reference
|
License/ Permit
|
License or Permit No.
|
Valid Period
|
License/ Permit Holder
|
Remarks
|
|
From
|
To
|
|
NCO
|
Construction Noise Permit
|
GW-RS0392-12
|
16/4/2012
|
15/10/2012
|
CHEC
|
Marine-based areas in Contract
HY/2010/02
|
|
NCO
|
Construction Noise Permit
|
GW-RS0378-12
|
16/4/2012
|
15/10/2012
|
CHEC
|
Works Area WA3 in Siu Ho Wan
|
|
NCO
|
Construction Noise Permit
|
GW-RS0430-12
|
27/4/2012
|
18/10/2012
|
CHEC
|
Works Area WA2 in Tung Chung
|
6.4.1
In response to the site audit findings, the Contractors
carried out corrective actions.
6.4.2
A summary of the Implementation Schedule of Environmental
Mitigation Measures (EMIS) is presented in Appendix C. Most of the necessary
mitigation measures were implemented properly.
6.5
Summary
of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality Performance Limit
6.5.1
All 1-hour and 24-hour TSP monitoring results complied with
the Action / Limit Levels in the reporting period.
6.5.2
For construction noise, no Action and Limit Level
exceedance was recorded at all monitoring stations in the reporting period.
6.5.3
Five (5) Action Level exceedances, where two (2) were
recorded at measured turbidity level and three (3) were recorded at measured SS
level, were recorded in the reporting month.
It was found that only preparation works, like geotextile laying and
stone blanket laying, which are not likely to cause water quality impact, were
carried out on 9 April 2012. Non-Project related trawling activities by fishing
vessels were noted near the monitoring location IS10, which likely cause impact
on ambient water qualtiy. Turbidity and suspsended solid levels recorded at
IS10 on the next monitoring date (i.e. 11 April 2012), when there are similar
activities at similar works areas carrying out, were well below the Action and
Limit Levels.
Moreover, only stone
blanket laying, which is not likely to cause water quality impact, was carrying
out during the monitoring period at mid-flood tide on 23 April 2012. Cone
penetration test and stone column trial were suspended at 17:00 and 14:00
respectively on 23 April 2012. Strong wind and rough sea condition was
experienced during the monitoring period, which is likely to affect the ambient
water quality in such shallow water condition. No silty plume was observed near
area between the perimeter of the silt curtain and the monitoring point during
the monitoring. Turbidity and SS levels recorded at IS(Mf)6 and IS7 on the
previous monitoring date (i.e. 18 April 2012) during mid-flood tide, when there
are same activities at works areas being carried out, were well below the
Action and Limit Levels.
It is considered
that the Action Level exceedances as non-Project related. Nevertheless, the
Contractor was reminded to ensure provision of on-goining maintenance to the
silt curtain systems.
6.5.4
Cumulative statistics on exceedances is provided in
Appendix M.
6.6
Summary
of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecutions
6.6.1
The Environmental Complaint Handling Procedure is annexed
in Figure 6.
6.6.2
There was no environmental complaint followed up by
Environmental Team in the reporting period.
6.6.3
No notification of summons and prosecution was received in
the reporting period.
6.6.4
Statistics on complaints, notifications of summons and
successful prosecutions are summarized in Appendix M.
7.1.1
As informed by the Contractor, the major works for the
Project in May and June 2012 will be:-
Marine-based Works
-
Cone
penetration test;
-
Geotextile
laying and fabrication;
-
Stone
column installation;
-
Cellular
structure construction
-
Silt curtain
fabrication and deployment; and
-
Stone
blankets laying.
Land-based Works
-
Site
office erection and construction at Works Area WA2;
-
Public
Works Regional Laboratory erection and construction at Works Area WA3;
-
Constructing
site access at area WA2 to Ying Hei Road, Tung Chung; and
-
Drainage
works.
7.2
Key
Issues for the Coming Month
7.2.1
Key issues to be considered in the coming months:-
- Site runoff should be
properly collected and treated prior to discharge;
- Minimize loss of sediment
from filling works;
- Regular review and
maintenance of silt curtain systems, drainage systems and desilting facilities;
- Exposed surfaces/soil
stockpiles should be properly treated to avoid generation of silty surface
run-off during rainstorm;
- Regular review and
maintenance of wheel washing facilities provided at all site entrances/exits;
- Conduct regular inspection
of various working machineries and
vessels within works areas to avoid any dark smoke emission;
- Suppress dust generated
from work processes with use of bagged cements, earth movements, excavation
activities, exposed surfaces/soil stockpiles and haul road traffic;
- Quieter powered mechanical
equipment should be used;
- Provision of proper and
effective noise control measures for operating equipment and machinery on-site,
such as erection of movable noise barriers or enclosure for noisy plants;
- Closely check and replace
the sound insulation materials regularly;
- Better scheduling of
construction works to minimize noise nuisance;
- Properly store and label oil
drums and chemical containers placed on site;
- Proper chemicals, chemical
wastes and wastes management;
- Maintenance works should be
carried out within roofed, paved and confined areas;
- Collection and segregation
of construction waste and general refuse on land and in the sea should be
carried out properly and regularly; and
- Proper protection and
regular inspection of existing trees, transplanted/retained trees.
7.3
Monitoring
Schedule for the Coming Month
7.3.1
The tentative schedule for environmental monitoring in May
2012 is provided in Appendix F.
8.1.1
The construction phase and EM&A programme of the
Project commenced on 12 March 2012.
8.1.2
1-hour TSP, 24-hour TSP, noise, water quality and dolphin monitoring
were carried out in the reporting period.
8.1.3
All 1-hour and 24-hour TSP monitoring results complied with
the Action / Limit Levels in the reporting period.
8.1.4
For construction noise, no Action and Limit Level
exceedance was recorded at all monitoring stations in the reporting period.
8.1.5
Five (5) Action Level exceedances, where two (2) were
recorded at measured turbidity level and three (3) were recorded at measured SS
level, were recorded in the reporting month. Investigation results show that
the exceedances were not due to the Project works. Nevertheless, the Contractor
was reminded to ensure provision of ongoing maintenance to the silt curtains.
8.1.6
A total of two dolphin sightings were recorded during the
two surveys, two on 19th April 2012 and none on 23rd
April 2012. Of the two sightings, one
was “on effort” and one was “opportunistic”. The predominant behavior of the
dolphin observed was feeding behind a stationary hang trawler at the time of
the sighting. There is no indication that construction activities from the
Project have caused disturbance or direct damage to the marine mammals which
were observed.
8.1.7
No other active construction sites were noted during the
two survey periods within Hong Kong waters.
Marine construction work was noted close to the Hong Kong–China maritime
border in Chinese waters and dolphins were observed in this area (near Tai O).
8.1.8
Environmental site inspection was carried out 4
times in April 2012. Recommendations on remedial actions were given to the
Contractors for the deficiencies identified during the site audits.
8.1.9
No environmental complaint was followed up by Environmental
Team in the reporting period.
8.1.10
No notification of summons and prosecution was received in
the reporting period.
8.2.1
According to the environmental site inspections performed
in the reporting month, the following recommendations were provided:-
Air Quality Impact
l All working
plants and vessels on site should be regularly inspected and properly
maintained to avoid dark smoke emission.
l All vehicles should be washed to remove any
dusty materials before leaving the site.
l Haul roads should be sufficiently dampened
to minimize fugitive dust generation.
l Wheel washing facilities should be properly
maintained and reviewed to ensure properly functioning.
l Temporary exposed slopes and open stockpiles
should be properly covered.
l Enclosure should be erected for cement
debagging, batching and mixing operations.
l Provide water
spraying to suppress fugitive dust for any dusty construction activity.
Construction Noise Impact
l Quieter powered mechanical equipment should
be used as far as possible.
l Noisy operations should be oriented to a
direction away from sensitive receivers as far as possible.
l Proper and effective noise control measures
for operating equipment and machinery on-site should be provided, such as
erection of movable noise barriers or enclosure for noisy plants. Closely check
and replace the sound insulation materials regularly
l Vessels and equipment operating should be
checked regularly and properly maintained.
l Noise Emission Label (NEL) shall be affixed
to the air compressor and hand-held breaker operating within works area.
l Better scheduling of construction works to
minimize noise nuisance.
Water Quality Impact
l Regular review and maintenance of silt
curtain systems, drainage systems and desilting facilities in order to make
sure they are functioning effectively.
l Construction of seawall should be completed
as early as possible.
l Regular inspect and review the loading process
from barges to avoid splashing of material.
l Silt, debris and leaves accumulated at
public drains, wheel washing bays and perimeter u-channels and desilting
facilities should be cleaned up regularly.
l Silty effluent should be treated/desilted
before discharged. Untreated effluent should be prevented from entering public
drain channel.
l Proper drainage channels/bunds should be
provided at the site boundaries to collect/intercept the surface run-off from
works areas.
l Exposed slopes and stockpiles should be
covered up properly during rainstorm.
Chemical and Waste
Management
l All types of wastes, both on land and
floating in the sea, should be collected and sorted properly and disposed of
timely and properly. They should be properly stored in designated areas within
works areas temporarily.
l All chemical containers and oil drums should
be properly stored and labelled.
l All plants and vehicles on site should be
properly maintained to prevent oil leakage.
l All kinds of maintenance works should be
carried out within roofed, paved and confined areas.
l All drain holes of the drip trays utilized
within works areas should be properly plugged to avoid any oil and chemical
waste leakage.
l Oil stains on soil surface and empty
chemical containers should be cleared and disposed of as chemical waste.
Landscape and Visual
Impact
l All existing, retained/transplanted trees at
the works areas should be properly fenced off and regularly inspected.
