TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY  1

1      introduction  3

1.1        Background  3

1.2        Scope of Report 3

1.3        Project Organization  4

1.4        Summary of Construction Works  4

1.5        Summary of EM&A Programme Requirements  5

2      AIR QUALITY MONITORING   6

2.1        Monitoring Requirements  6

2.2        Monitoring Equipment 6

2.3        Monitoring Locations  6

2.4        Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration  7

2.5        Monitoring Methodology  7

2.6        Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month  9

2.7        Results and Observations  9

3      Noise MONITORING   11

3.1        Monitoring Requirements  11

3.2        Monitoring Equipment 11

3.3        Monitoring Locations  11

3.4        Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration  11

3.5        Monitoring Methodology  12

3.6        Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month  12

3.7        Monitoring Results  12

4      WATER QUALITY MONITORING   14

4.1        Monitoring Requirements  14

4.2        Monitoring Equipment 14

4.3        Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration  14

4.4        Monitoring Locations  15

4.5        Monitoring Methodology  16

4.6        Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month  17

4.7        Results and Observations  17

5      Dolphin monitoring   23

5.1        Monitoring Requirements  23

5.2        Monitoring Equipment 23

5.3        Monitoring Frequency and Conditions  23

5.4        Monitoring Methodology and Location  23

5.5        Monitoring Procedures  25

5.6        Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month  25

5.7        Results and Observations  25

6      ENVIRONMENTAL SITE INSPECTION AND AUDIT  28

6.1        Site Inspection  28

6.2        Advice on the Solid and Liquid Waste Management Status  29

6.3        Environmental Licenses and Permits  30

6.4        Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures  30

6.5        Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality Performance Limit 31

6.6        Summary of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecutions  32

7      FUTURE KEY ISSUES  34

7.1        Construction Programme for the Coming Months  34

7.2        Key Issues for the Coming Month  34

7.3        Monitoring Schedule for the Coming Month  34

8      ConclusionS AND RECOMMENDATIONS  35

8.1        Conclusions  35

8.2        Recommendations  35

 

List of Tables

 

Table 1.1         Contact Information of Key Personnel

Table 2.1         Air Quality Monitoring Equipment

Table 2.2         Locations of Impact Air Quality Monitoring Stations

Table 2.3         Air Quality Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

Table 2.4         Summary of 1-hour TSP Monitoring Results in the Reporting Period

Table 2.5         Summary of 24-hour TSP Monitoring Results in the Reporting Period

Table 3.1         Noise Monitoring Equipment

Table 3.2         Locations of Impact Noise Monitoring Stations

Table 3.3         Noise Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

Table 3.4         Summary of Construction Noise Monitoring Results in the Reporting Period

Table 4.1         Water Quality Monitoring Equipment

Table 4.2         Impact Water Quality Monitoring Parameters and Frequency

Table 4.3         Impact Water Quality Monitoring Stations

Table 4.4         Laboratory Analysis for Suspended Solids

Table 5.1         Dolphin Monitoring Equipment

Table 5.2         Impact Dolphin Monitoring Line Transect Co-ordinates (Provided by AFCD)

Table 5.3         Impact Dolphin Monitoring Survey Effort Summary

Table 5.4         Impact Dolphin Monitoring Survey Details in December 2012

Table 6.1         Summary of Environmental Licensing and Permit Status

 

Figures

 

Figure 1         General Project Layout Plan

Figure 2         Impact Air Quality and Noise Monitoring Stations and Wind Station

Figure 3         Impact Water Quality Monitoring Stations

Figure 4         Impact Dolphin Monitoring Line Transect Layout Map

Figure 5         Impact Dolphin Monitoring Survey Efforts and Sightings in December 2012

Figure 6         Environmental Complaint Handling Procedure


List of Appendices

 

Appendix A       Project Organization for Environmental Works

Appendix B       Three Month Rolling Construction Programmes

Appendix C       Implementation Schedule of Environmental Mitigation Measures (EMIS)

Appendix D      Summary of Action and Limit Levels

Appendix E       Calibration Certificates of Monitoring Equipments

Appendix F       EM&A Monitoring Schedules

Appendix G      Impact Air Quality Monitoring Results and their Graphical Presentation

Appendix H      Meteorological Data for Monitoring Periods on Monitoring Dates in December 2012

Appendix I        Impact Construction Noise Monitoring Results and their Graphical Presentation

Appendix J       Impact Water Quality Monitoring Results and their Graphical Presentation

Appendix K       Impact Dolphin Monitoring Survey Sighting Summary

Appendix L       Event Action Plan

Appendix M      Monthly Summary of Waste Flow Table

Appendix N       Cumulative Statistics on Exceedances, Complaints, Notifications of Summons and Successful Prosecutions

 


 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Contract No. HY/2010/02 ˇV Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities ˇV Reclamation Work (here below, known as ˇ§the Projectˇ¨) 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 16 Oct 2012 (EP-353/2009/E) 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 Projectˇ¦s reclamation works (i.e. the Engineer for the Project).

China Harbour Engineering Company Limited (CHEC) was awarded by HyD as the Contractor to undertake the construction work of the Project.

ENVIRON Hong Kong Ltd. was employed by HyD as the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) and Environmental Project Office (ENPO) for the Project.

AECOM Asia Co. Ltd. (AECOM) was appointed by CHEC to undertake the role of Environmental Team for the Project for carrying out the environmental monitoring and audit (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 31 December 2012. As informed by the Contractor, major activities in the reporting period were:-

Marine-based Works

-              Maintenance of Silt curtain

-              Stone column installation

-              Band drain installation trial

 

Land-based Works

-              Maintenance works of Site Office at Works Area WA2

-              Maintenance works of Public Works Regional Laboratory at Works Area WA3

-              Sign board erection at Works Area WA2

-              Geo-textile fabrication at Works Area WA2

-              Stone column installation barges setup and their maintenance works at Works Area WA4

-              Silt curtain fabrication at Works Area WA4

 

A summary of monitoring and audit activities conducted in the reporting period is listed below:

24-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) monitoring

1-hour TSP monitoring

  6 sessions

  6 sessions

Noise monitoring

  4 sessions

Impact water quality monitoring

12 sessions

Impact dolphin monitoring

  2 surveys

Joint Environmental site inspection

  4 sessions

 

Breaches of Action and Limit Levels for Air Quality

No Action/Limit Level exceedance of 1-hour TSP results was recorded in the reporting month. However, one (1) Limit Level exceedance of 24-hour TSP results was recorded in the reporting month. Investigation result show that the exceedance was not due to the Project works.

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

Ten (10) Action Level exceedances were recorded at measured suspended solids (SS) values (in mg/L) in the reporting month. Investigation result show that the exceedances were not due to the Project works.

Impact Dolphin Monitoring

 

A total of eighteen dolphin sightings were recorded during the two surveys, two on the 4 December 2012, two on the 6 December 2012, four on the 10 December 2012 and ten on the 11 December 2012.  Of the eighteen sightings, eleven were ˇ§on effortˇ¨ (which are all under favourable condition) and seven were ˇ§opportunisticˇ¨.  A total of forty-seven individuals were sighted from the two impact dolphin surveys in the reporting period. Sighting details are summarised and plotted in Appendix K and Figure 5c, respectively.

 

Behaviour: eleven groups were feeding six of which was associated with a fishing vessel (hang trawler); one group were recorded as travelling; two groups were associated with multiple behaviour (feeding and traveling, socializing and feeding); one group were recorded as surface active; the behavior of three groups were unknown.

 

Complaint, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecution

As informed by the Contractor on 30 November 12. One complaint was received on 18 October 2012 and is reported in this reporting month due to the time required for conducting investigation.

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             introduction

1.1          Background

1.1.1       Contract No. HY/2010/02 ˇV Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities ˇV Reclamation Work (here below, known as ˇ§the Projectˇ¨) 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       The  environmental  impact  assessment  (EIA)  reports  (Hong  Kong  ˇV  Zhuhai  ˇV  Macao  Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities ˇV EIA Report (Register No. AEIAR-145/2009) (HKBCFEIA) and Tuen Mun ˇV Chek Lap Kok Link ˇV 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. 

1.1.3       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), March 2012 (EP-353/2009/D) and October 2012 (EP-353/2009/E). 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).

1.1.4       The Project is a designated project and is governed by the current permits for the Project, i.e. the amended EPs issued on 16 October 2012 (EP-353/2009/E) and 8 December 2011 (EP-354/2009/A) (for TMCLKL Southern Landfall Reclamation only).

1.1.5       A Project Specific EM&A Manual, which included all project-relation contents from the original EM&A Manuals for the Project, was issued in May 2012.

1.1.6       Ove Arup & Partners Hong Kong Limited (Arup) was appointed by Highways Department (HyD) as the consultants for the design and construction assignment for the Projectˇ¦s reclamation works (i.e. the Engineer for the Project).

1.1.7       China Harbour Engineering Company Limited (CHEC) was awarded by HyD as the Contractor to undertake the construction work of the Project.

1.1.8       ENVIRON Hong Kong Ltd. was employed by HyD as the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) and Environmental Project Office (ENPO) for the Project.

1.1.9       AECOM Asia Co. Ltd. (AECOM) was appointed by CHEC to undertake the role of Environmental Team for the Project for carrying out the EM&A works.

1.1.10    The construction phase of the Project under the EPs was commenced on 12 March 2012 and will be tentatively completed by early Year 2016.

1.1.11    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 tenth monthly EM&A Report under the Contract No. HY/2010/02 Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities ˇV 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 December 2012.


1.3          Project Organization

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

Engineerˇ¦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 Leader

Y. H. Hui

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

24-hour Hotline

Alan C.C. Yeung

9448 0325

--

ET

(AECOM Asia Company Limited)

ET Leader

Echo Leong

3922 9280

   2317 7609

 

1.4          Summary of Construction Works

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

-              Maintenance of Silt curtain

-              Stone column installation

-              Band drain installation trial

 

Land-based Works

-              Maintenance works of Site Office at Works Area WA2

-              Maintenance works of Public Works Regional Laboratory at Works Area WA3

-              Sign board erection at Works Area WA2

-              Geo-textile fabrication at Works Area WA2

-              Stone column installation barges setup and their maintenance works at Works Area WA4

-              Silt curtain fabrication at Works Area WA4

 

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       Summary of EM&A Programme Requirements

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             AIR QUALITY MONITORING

2.1          Monitoring Requirements

2.1.1      In accordance with the Project Specific EM&A Manual, baseline 1-hour and 24-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) levels at 4 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          Monitoring Equipment

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          Monitoring Locations

2.3.1      Monitoring locations AMS2 and AMS7 were set up at the proposed locations in accordance with Project Specific EM&A Manual. For AMS6 (Dragonair/CNAC (Group) Building), permission on setting up and carrying out impact monitoring works was sought, however, access to the premise has not been granted yet on this report issuing date. 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      Reference is made to ETˇ¦s proposal of the omission of air monitoring station (AMS 6) dated on 1 November 2012 and EPDˇ¦s letter dated on 19 November 2012 regarding the conditional approval of the proposed omission of air monitoring station (AMS 6) for Contract No. HY/2010/02. The aforesaid omission of Monitoring Station AMS6 will be effective since 19 November 2012.

2.3.3      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

AMS6*

Dragonair/CNAC (Group) Building

On ground at boundary of the premise

AMS7

Hong Kong SkyCity

Marriott Hotel

On ground at boundary of the premise

#Remarks: Reference is made to EPD conditional approval of the omission of air monitoring station (AMS 6) for the project. The omission will be effective on 19 November 2012.

 

2.4          Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

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          Monitoring Methodology

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)            No two samplers should be placed less than 2 meters apart.

(iii)           The distance between the HVS and any obstacles, such as buildings, was at least twice the height that the obstacle protrudes above the HVS.

(iv)          A minimum of 2 meters separation from walls, parapets and penthouse for rooftop sampler.

(v)           A minimum of 2 meters separation from any supporting structure, measured horizontally is required.

(vi)          No furnace or incinerator flues nearby.

(vii)         Airflow around the sampler was unrestricted.

(viii)        Permission was obtained to set up the samplers and access to the monitoring stations.

(ix)          A secured supply of electricity was obtained to operate the samplers.

(x)           The sampler was located more than 20 meters from any dripline.

(xi)          Any wire fence and gate, required to protect the sampler, did not obstruct the monitoring process.

(xii)         Flow control accuracy was kept within ˇÓ2.5% 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 ˘XC and not variable by more than ˇÓ3 ˘XC; the relative humidity (RH) was < 50% and not variable by more than ˇÓ5%. 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 Manufacturerˇ¦s Instruction Manual as follows:-

(i)             Turn the power on.

(ii)            Close the air collecting opening cover.

(iii)           Push the ˇ§TIME SETTINGˇ¨ switch to [BG].

(iv)          Push ˇ§START/STOPˇ¨ 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 ˇ§SPAN CHECKˇ¨ is indicated in the display.

(vii)         Push ˇ§START/STOPˇ¨ 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 ˇ§TIME SETTINGˇ¨ switch the time set in the display to 3 hours.

(x)           Lower down the air collection opening cover.

(xi)          Push ˇ§START/STOPˇ¨ 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 December 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

76

66 ˇV 87

374

500

AMS3A

78

69 ˇV 89

368

500

AMS7

75

64 - 84

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

66

35-103

176

260

AMS3A

119

33 - 292

167

260

AMS7

73

37 ˇV 116

183

260

 

2.7.2      The major dust source in the reporting period included construction activities from the Project, construction activities by other contacts, as well as nearby traffic emissions.

2.7.3      All 1-hour TSP results were below the Action and Limit Level at all monitoring locations in the reporting month. 

2.7.4      However, one (1) 24-hour TSP result exceeded the Limit Level on 13 Dec 2012 at monitoring station AMS3A in the reporting month.

2.7.5      According to information provided by the Contractor and on-site observations, installing sand bags and stitching geotextile were the major land-based construction activity being undertaken at Works Area WA2 during the monitoring period.

2.7.6      Similar construction activities were carried out on 12 &13 Dec 2012 and 18 & 19 Dec 12 but no exceedance was recorded on 18 & 19 Dec 12.

2.7.7      Functional checking on HVS at AMS3A was done. Air flow of the HVS was checked and the flow was steady during the 24-hr TSP sampling at AMS3A. The filter paper was re-weighted by the assigned HOKLAS laboratory and the result was reconfirmed.

2.7.8      Construction activities, like sheet piling and percussive piling, were carrying out by nearby private development project during the course of monitoring, which are close to the monitoring station AMS3A. Meanwhile, exposed soil surfaces were observed at those construction sites of nearby private development project (Please refer to the attached maps and photos for illustration).

2.7.9      As refer to the wind data collected at wind station at Works Area WA2 during the monitoring period on 12 Dec 2012 and 13 Dec 2012 (as attached), east-southeast wind was prevailing during the monitoring period. Construction works carried out at construction sites of nearby private development project may contribute to the measured dust levels at the monitoring station AMS3A.

2.7.10    The 1-hr TSP values recorded at AMS3A on 13 Dec 2012, which are within the monitoring period of the 24-hr TSP, were 76 g/m3, 78 g/m3 and 80 g/m3 respectively. All measured values are well below the Action and Limit Levels.

2.7.11    The measured 24-hr TSP values recorded at AMS2 and AMS7 (which are closer to the marine-based works areas) on the same monitoring date were 57 g/m3 and 57 g/m3 respectively, which are below the Action and Limit Levels.

2.7.12    The following dust mitigation measures have been implemented by the Contractor:

2.7.13    Main haul road in Works Area WA2 were concrete paved.

2.7.14    Vehicle washing facility was provided at vehicle exit points, and vehicle was washed to remove any dusty materials from its body and wheels before leaving.

2.7.15    Measures for preventing fugitive dust emission are provided, e.g. watering and tarpaulin covers.

2.7.16    The dust exceedance was therefore considered not to be due to the Project works. Nevertheless, the Contractor was recommended to continue implementing existing dust mitigation measures.

2.7.17    The event action plan is annexed in Appendix L.

2.7.18    Meteorological information collected from the wind station during the monitoring periods on the monitoring dates, as shown in Figure 2, including wind speed and wind direction, is annexed in Appendix H. 

 


3             Noise MONITORING

3.1          Monitoring Requirements

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

Rion NL-31

Acoustic Calibrator

Rion NC-73

3.3          Monitoring Locations

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 noise 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) and Limit Level were adopted for this alternative noise monitoring location.

Remarks: Monitoring

 

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

Free-field on ground at the area boundary.

 

3.4          Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

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          Monitoring Methodology

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)           All measurement at NMS3A were free field measurements in the reporting month at NMS3A. A correction of +3 dB(A) shall be made to the free field measurements.

(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 ˇV 1900 on normal weekdays.

(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          Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month

3.6.1      The schedule for construction noise monitoring in December 2012 is provided in Appendix F.

3.7          Monitoring Results

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

65*

62 ˇV 66*

75

NMS3A

64*

61 ˇV 66*

  70^

                   *+3dB(A) Façade correction included

                    ^ Daytime noise Limit Level of 70 dB(A) applies to education institutions

 

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, construction activities by other contracts 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          Monitoring Equipment

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

Dissolved Oxygen (DO) and Temperature Meter, Salinity Meter and Turbidimeter

YSI Model 6820

pH Meter

YSI Model 6820 or Thermo Orion 230A+

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          Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

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

ˇP         Depth, m

ˇP         Temperature, oC

ˇP         Salinity, ppt

ˇP         Dissolved Oxygen (DO), mg/L

ˇP         DO Saturation, %

ˇP         Turbidity, NTU

ˇP         pH

ˇP         Suspended Solids (SS), mg/L

 

Three times per week during mid-ebb and mid-flood tides (within ˇÓ 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          Monitoring Locations

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

Remarks: The sampling location IS7 was found enclosed by silt curtain on 17-30 December 2012. Samples were taken about 60meters away from IS7. The sampling locationˇ¦s coordination (East 812266, North 818713) was recorded

 

4.5          Monitoring Methodology

4.5.1      Instrumentation

(a)           The in-situ water quality parameters, viz. dissolved oxygen, temperature, salinity, turbidity and pH, were measured by multi-parameter meters (i.e. Model YSI 6820 CE-C-M-Y) and pH meter (i.e. Thermo Orion 230A+) respectively.

 

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 accredited 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 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          Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month

4.6.1      The schedule for impact water quality monitoring in December 2012 is provided in Appendix F.

4.7          Results and Observations

4.7.1      Impact water quality monitoring was conducted at all designated monitoring stations in the reporting month. Except Impact water quality monitoring at sampling location IS7. Sampling location IS7 was found enclosed by silt curtain on 17-30 December 2012. Samples were taken about 60 meters away from IS7. The sampling locationˇ¦s coordination (East 812266, North 818713) was recorded.

4.7.2       Impact water quality monitoring results and graphical presentations are provided in Appendix J.

4.7.3      Total of Ten (10) Acton Level exceedances at measured Suspended Solids (mg/L) were recorded during the reporting month. Number of exceedances recorded in the reporting month at each impact station is summarized 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

0

2

(5 and10 Dec, 12)

2

(5 and 14 Dec, 12)

0

4

Limit

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

IS7

Action

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

(10 Dec, 12)

0

0

1

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

Limit

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

 0

0

IS10

Action

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

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

1

(3 Dec, 12)

0

1

 Limit

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

IS17

Action

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

1

(10 Dec, 12)

0

1

Limit

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

SR4(N)

Action

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

(3 Dec, 12)

0

1

Limit

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

SR5

Action

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

(5 and 10  Dec, 12)

0

2

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

0

0

0

10

(3, 5, 10 and 14 Dec 12)

 

Limit

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Note:       S: Surface; and

                M: Mid-depth.

 

4.7.4     
Two (2) Action Level exceedances at measured Suspended Solids (mg/L) where recorded on 3 Dec 2012 during mid-flood tide at monitoring station IS(Mf)16 and SR4 (N). For Action Level exceedances at measured Suspended Solids (mg/L), 26.1 mg/L and 26.7 mg/L were recorded at Monitoring Station IS(Mf)16 and SR4 (N) respectively.

 

4.7.4.1   For the exceedances recorded at IS(Mf)16 and SR4 (N), it was found that Stone column installation was carried out throughout the day at Portion D by FTB 16, AP1 and AP2, at Portion A by FTB20, at Portion C2A by FTB17 and Portion C2C by FTB19 on 3 Dec 2012. Location plan showing the locations of the mentioned works is shown below:

4.7.4.2   Suspended solids values recorded at Impact Stations closer to the works are (e.g. IS(Mf)9, IS7 and IS8) all below the Action and Limit Level during the same tide on the same day.

4.7.4.3   The exceedances were recorded during flood tide in which the direction of the flow was flowing from east to west and monitoring stations IS(Mf)16 and SR4(N) is located at the east side of the Project boundary, therefore it is unlikely that the exceedances recorded were contributed by Project works.

4.7.4.4   The monitoring sites IS(Mf)16 and SR4 were upstream of and far away from Partion D, C2A and C2C where works were carried out during flood tide.

4.7.4.5   The exceedances were likely due to local effects in the vicinity of IS(Mf)16 & SR4(N).

4.7.4.6   The exceedances were considered as non-Project related.

4.7.5      Three (3) where recorded on 05 Dec 2012 during mid-ebb tide at Impact Station IS(Mf)6 and during mid-flood tide at monitoring station IS(Mf)6 and SR5. For Action Level exceedances at measured Suspended Solids (mg/L), 26.6 mg/L, 25.4 mg/L and 24.3 mg/L were recorded at Impact Station IS(Mf)6 during mid-ebb tide, IS(Mf)6 during mid-flood tide and SR5 during mid-flood respectively.

4.7.5.1   For Action Level Exceedances recorded at Impact Station IS(Mf)6 during mid-ebb tide, IS(Mf)6 during mid-flood tide and SR5 during mid-flood on 5 Dec 2012, stone column installation was carried out throughout the day at Portion D by FTB 16, AP1 and AP2, at Portion A by FTB20, at Portion C2A by FTB17 and Portion C2C by FTB19.

4.7.5.2   Suspended Solids values recorded at Impact Station IS(Mf)9 and IS7 which are closer to the works than monitoring station IS(Mf)6 are all below the Action and Limit Level during the same tide on the same day.

4.7.5.3   Suspended Solids value recorded at Impact Station IS10 which is closer to the works than monitoring station SR5 is below the Action and Limit Level during the same tide on the same day.

4.7.5.4   Same type of works was carried out at the same location on 3 and 7 Dec 12 but Suspended Solids values recorded at IS(Mf)6 & SR5 on 3 and 7 Dec 12 are all below the Action and Limit Level during the same tide on the same day.

4.7.5.5   The exceedances were likely due to local effects in the vicinity of IS(Mf)6 & SR5.

4.7.5.6   The exceedances were considered as Non-Project Related.

4.7.6      Four (4) where recorded on 10th Dec 2012 during mid-ebb tide at Impact Station IS(Mf)6 and IS7 and during mid-flood tide at monitoring station SR3 and SR5. For Action Level exceedances at measured Suspended Solids (mg/L), 31mg/L, 31.8mg/L, 27.3mg/L and 32.2 mg/L were recorded during mid-ebb tide at Impact Station IS(Mf)6 and IS7 and during mid-flood tide at monitoring station SR3 and SR5.

4.7.6.1   For Action Level Exceedances of SS at during mid-ebb tide at Impact Station IS(Mf)6 and IS7 and during mid-flood tide at monitoring station SR3 and SR5 recorded on 10 Dec 2012, Stone column installation was carried out throughout the day at Portion D by FTB 16, AP1 and AP2, at Portion A by FTB20, at Portion C2A by FTB17 and Portion C2C by FTB19 .

4.7.6.2   Suspended solids values recorded at Impact Station IS(Mf) 9 and IS 8 located downstream of IS7 and IS(Mf)6 during Mid-Ebb tide were below the Action and Limit Level during the same tide on the same day.

4.7.6.3   Same type of works was carried out at the same locations on 7 and 12 Dec 12 but Suspended Solids values recorded at IS(Mf)6, IS7, SR3 and SR5 on 7 and 12 Dec 12 are all below the Action and Limit Level during the same tide on the these days.

4.7.6.4   Suspended Solids values recorded at Impact Station IS10 located closer to the Project site boundary than SR5 was below the Action and Limit Level during the same tide and on the same day.

4.7.6.5   Suspended Solids values recorded at IS7, IS(Mf)6 and IS5 located closer to the Project site boundary than SR3 were below the Action and Limit Level during the same tide and on the same day.

4.7.6.6   The exceedances were likely due to local effects in the vicinity of  IS(Mf)6, IS7, SR3 and SR5.

4.7.6.7   The exceedances were considered as Non-Project Related.

4.7.7      One (1) where recorded on 14 Dec 2012 during mid-ebb tide at Impact Station IS(Mf) 6. For Action Level exceedances at measured Suspended Solids (mg/L), 27.7mg/L was recorded at Impact Station IS(Mf)6.

 

4.7.7.1   For Action Level Exceedance of SS at IS(Mf)6 at Mid-Flood tide on 14 December 2012 Stone column installation was carried out throughout the day at Portion D by AP1 and AP2, at Portion A by FTB20, at Portion C2A by FTB17 and Portion C2C by FTB19 and FTB18.

 

4.7.7.2   Suspended Solids values recorded at Impact Station IS(Mf)9 and IS7 which are closer to the works than monitoring station IS(Mf)6 are all below the Action and Limit Level during the same tide on the same day.

 

4.7.7.3   Same type of works were carried out at the same location on 12 and 17 Dec 12 but Suspended Solids values recorded at IS(Mf)6 on 12 and 17 Dec 12 are all below the Action and Limit Level during the same tide on the same day.

 

4.7.7.4   The exceedance was likely due to local effects in the vicinity of IS(Mf)6.

 

4.7.7.5   The exceedance was considered as Non-Project Related.

 

4.7.8      The event action plan is annexed in Appendix L.


5             Dolphin monitoring

5.1          Monitoring Requirements

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 ˇĄImpact Monitoringˇ¦ follows several months of ˇĄBaseline Monitoringˇ¦ 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 Kongˇ¦s long term Marine Mammal Monitoring Programme.

5.2          Monitoring Equipment

5.2.1      Table 5.1 summarises the equipment used for the impact dolphin monitoring.

Table 5.1          Dolphin Monitoring Equipment

Equipment

Model

Commercially licensed motor vessel

15m in length with a 4.5m viewing platform

Global Positioning System (GPS) x2

Garmin 18X-PC

Geo One Phottix

Computers (Corei7) x2

Windows /MSO 10

Logger

AIS receiver

Logger ˇV GPS linked

Camera

Nikon D90 300m 2.8D fixed focus

Nikon D90 20-300m zoom lens

Laser Rangefinder

Infinitor LRF1000/Visionking 900

Marine Binocular x3

Nexus 7 x 50 marine binocular with compass and reticules

Fujinon 7 x 50 marine binocular with compass and reticules

5.3          Monitoring Frequency and Conditions

5.3.1      Dolphin monitoring is conducted twice per month in each survey area.

5.3.2      Dolphin monitoring is conducted only when visibility is good (e.g., over 1km) and the sea condition is at a Beaufort Sea State of 4 or better. 

5.3.3      When thunder storm, black rain or typhoon warnings are in force, all survey effort is stopped.

5.4          Monitoring Methodology and Location

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

 

*Remark: Due to the presence of deployed silt curtain systems at the site boundaries of the Project, some of the transect lines shown in Figure 5 could not be fully surveyed during the regular survey. Transect 10 is reduced from 6.4km to approximately 3.6km in length due to the HKBCF construction site. Therefore the total transect length for both NEL and NWL combined is reduced to approximately 111km.


 

5.5          Monitoring Procedures

5.5.1      The study area incorporates 23 transects which are to be surveyed twice per month.  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, ˇ§on effortˇ¨ survey begins. Areas between transect lines and traveling to and from the study area are defined as ˇ§off effortˇ¨.

5.5.4      The transect line is surveyed at a speed of 6-8 knots (11-14 km/hr). For the sake of safety, the speed was sometimes a bit slower to avoid collision with other vessels.  During some periods, tide and current flow in the survey areas exceeds 7 knots which can affect survey speed. There are a minimum of four marine mammal observers (MMOs) present on each survey, rotating through four positions, observers (2), data recorder (1) and ˇĄrestˇ¦ (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 and is not part of the observer team.  The observers search with naked eye and binoculars between 90˘X and 270˘X abeam (bow being 0˘X). 

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 ˇ§off effortˇ¨. The dolphins are approached with the purpose of taking high resolution pictures for proper photo-identification 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 ˇ§on effortˇ¨ survey is resumed. 

5.5.7      Sightings which are made while on the transect line are referred to as "on effort sightings", while not on the actual transect line are referred to as an ˇ§opportunistic sightingsˇ¨ (e.g. another group of dolphins is sighted while travelling back to the transect line).  Only ˇ§on effort sightingsˇ¨ can be used in analyses which require effort or rate quantification, e.g., encounter rate per 100km searched.  This is also how ˇ§on effort sightingsˇ¨ are treated in the baseline report.  ˇ§Opportunistic sightingsˇ¨ provide additional information on individual habitat use and population distribution and they are noted accordingly.

5.5.8      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.

5.6          Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month

5.6.1      The schedule for dolphin monitoring in December 2012 is provided in Appendix F.

5.7          Results and Observations

5.7.1      Dolphin surveys were conducted on 4, 6, 10 and 11 December 2012.  In summary, a total of 221.2km of ˇ§on effortˇ§ survey was conducted while 97% of ˇ§on effortˇ¨ survey was conducted under favourable conditions (Beaufort Sea State 3 or better).  The details are shown below:-

 

5.7.2      The effort summary and sightings data are shown in Tables 5.3 and 5.4, respectively. The survey effort conducted in December 2012 are plotted in Figure 5a-c. For Table 5.3, only on-effort information is included. Transects conducted in all Beaufort Sea State are included. Compared to previous monthly reports, the whole number Beaufort Sea State scale is used so as to ease comparison with other dolphin monitoring reports.  

Table 5.3          Impact Dolphin Monitoring Survey Effort Summary

Survey

Date

Status

Sea State

(on effort only)

Distance (km)

 

 

1

 

04-12-12

ON

1

2.5

04-12-12

ON

2

52.9

04-12-12

ON

3

23.6

Total

79

06-12-12

ON

1

15.4

06-12-12

ON

2

16.9

Total

32.3

 

 

 

2

10-12-12

ON

1

16.6

10-12-12

ON

2

30.5

10-12-12

ON

3

4.4

Total

51.5

11-12-12

ON

1

10.3

11-12-12

ON

2

32.6

11-12-12

ON

3

8.4

11-12-12

ON

4

7.1

Total

58.4

TOTAL DECEMBER 2012

221.2

*Remark: Surveys conduct under Beaufort Sea State 3 or below are considered as under favourable condition.

Table 5.4          Impact Dolphin Monitoring Survey Details in December 2012

Date

Location (transect line)

No. Sightings

ˇ§ON EFFORTˇ¨

No. Sightings ˇ§OPPORTUNISTICˇ¨

04-12-12

NW & NE Lantau (1-10,21,22)

1

1

06-12-12

NE Lantau (11-20,23)

1

1

10-12-12

NW & NE Lantau (6-20,23)

2

2

11-12-12

NW Lantau (1-5,21,22)

7

3

Total in December 2012

11

7

 

5.7.3      A total of eighteen dolphin sightings were recorded during the two surveys, two on the 4 December 2012, two on the 6 December 2012, four on the 10 December 2012 and ten on the 11 December 2012.  Of the eighteen sightings, eleven were ˇ§on effortˇ¨ (which are all under favourable condition) and seven were ˇ§opportunisticˇ¨.  A total of forty-seven individuals were sighted from the two impact dolphin surveys in the reporting period. Sighting details are summarised and plotted in Appendix K and Figure 5c, respectively.

 

5.7.4      Behaviour: eleven groups were feeding six of which was associated with a fishing vessel (hang trawler); one group were recorded as travelling; two groups were associated with multiple behaviour (feeding and traveling, socializing and feeding); one group were recorded as surface active; the behavior of three groups were unknown.

 

5.7.5      Noteworthy Observations: four mother and calf pairs were noted although two of these sightings were likely the same pair.

 

5.7.6      Noteworthy Observations: a dolphin entangled in rope was photographed on the 11th December close to line 4. The rope was caught across the dolphin in front of the dorsal fin and is clearly abrading and slowly removing the dorsal fin. This dolphin has not been seen before during HKBCF Impact Surveys and was not recorded during the baseline survey for the HKBCF. The injuries apparent on this individual indicate entanglement in, likely abandoned, fishing gear. As such it is considered that it is not project related.

 

5.7.7      Noteworthy Observations: other non-project related marine works were observed in both NWL and NEL areas, respectively; in particular in the vicinity of transect line 2, 11, 12 and 23. Dredging works were noted, in particular, on the 10th December survey at line 11 and also at line 9 which caused the survey vessel to divert off the transect line. These dredging works are not related to the Project.

 

5.7.8      The event action plan is annexed in Appendix L.


6             ENVIRONMENTAL SITE INSPECTION AND AUDIT

6.1          Site Inspection

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 6, 13, 14 and 27 December 2012.

6.1.2      Particular observations during the site inspections are described below:

Air Quality

 

6.1.3      No adverse observation was identified in the reporting month.

Noise

 

6.1.4       No adverse observation was identified in the reporting month.

Water Quality

 

6.1.5      No adverse observation was identified in the reporting month.

Chemical and Waste Management

 

6.1.6      Oil drums were provided with bundnig and the Contractor properly labelled the oil drum on barge Sang Hang Qi 7. (Closed). Oil drums were found without proper labelling at barge Ever Shine. The Contractor was advised to label all oil drums properly and oil drums were provided with proper labelling at barge Ever Shine within the reporting month (Closed).

6.1.7      The oil stain found near the power pack on barge Sang Hang Qi 7 and Sang Hang Bo 210 were cleared and the absorbents were treated as chemical wastes (Closed).

6.1.8      The Contractor provided mitigation measure such as tarpaulin sheet and bunding to retain potential leaked oil near the machine on barge Sun Moon Kee to power pack on Sang Hang Bo 205 to retain leaked oil respectively within the reporting month (Closed).

6.1.9      Oil drums were provided with bunding on barge Sang Hang Bo 205 to enclose the oil drums stored within works areas to retain any leaked oil within the reporting month (Closed). Bucket of waste water was found near at a location without bunding/drip tray on Sang Han Bo 209. The Contractor immediately rectified the situation by relocated the bucket of waste water inside the bunded area to prevent potential waste water run off into nearby water system. The Contractor was reminded to place buckets of waste water inside bunded area on barge (reminder).

6.1.10    Oil drum was found improperly stored at FTB24 and FTB18.The Contractor rectified the situation immediately by relocating the oil drum inside the bunded area to prevent oil leakage (Closed). The Contractor was reminded to place oil drums inside bunded area or to provide drip tray to oil drums on barge (Reminder).

6.1.11    Gap was observed between barge surface and the bunding on barge Sun Moon Kee. The Contractor was reminded to seal the gap to prevent oil leakage. Gaps between barge surface and the bunding on barge Sun Moon Kee were sealed within the reporting month (Closed).

6.1.12    Incident of oil spillage was observed on barge FTB 20. The spilled oil was immediately cleared by the Contractor using spill kit and the Contractor was reminded to dispose the absorbents as chemical waste. The Contractor was reminded to maintain proper oil spill cleanup procedure for oil spillage (Reminder).

6.1.13    Oil leakage was found on barge Sun Moon Kee leaked through a bunding. The oil stain was immediately cleared by the Contractor using absorbents and the Contractor was reminded to dispose the absorbents as chemical waste. (Reminder).The holes of the bunding found on barge Sun Moon Kee was sealed to prevent oil leakage. (Closed)

6.1.14    Air compressors were found not fitted with valid noise emission labels on barge Sun Moon Kee. The Contractor was reminded to ensure all air compressors on barge Sun Moon Kee are fitted with valid noise emission labels. Air compressors were fitted with valid noise emission labels on barge Sun Moon Kee within the reporting month (Closed).

Landscape and Visual Impact

 

6.1.15    No relevant works was carried out in the reporting month.

Others

 

6.1.16    No adverse observation was identified in the reporting month.

6.1.17    The Contractor had rectified most of the observations as identified during environmental site inspection in the reporting month. Rectifications of remaining identified items are undergoing by the Contractor. Follow-up inspections on the status on provision of mitigation measures will be conducted to ensure all identified items are mitigated properly.

6.2          Advice on the Solid and Liquid Waste Management Status

6.2.1      The Contractor had registered as a chemical waste producer for this Project. Receptacles were available for general refuse collection and sorting.

6.2.2      As advised by the Contractor, 5,038 m3 of imported fill, and 35,8314 m3 of rock fill were imported for the Project use in the reporting period. 2,400.0 L of chemical waste (liquid) were generated and disposed of in the reporting period. 4.06 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 storage, 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 should be properly treated and stored temporarily in designated chemical waste storage area on site in accordance with the Code of Practice on the Packaging, Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes.

 

6.3          Environmental Licenses and Permits

6.3.1      The environmental licenses and permits for 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/E

16/10/2012

N/A

HyD

Hong Kong ˇV Zhuhai ˇV Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities

EP-354/2009/A

08/12/2010

N/A

Tuen Mun ˇV 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

WDO

 

Chemical Waste Producer Registration

5213-951-C1186-21

30/3/2012

N/A

CHEC

Chemical waste produced in Contract HY/2010/02

WDO

 

Chemical Waste Producer Registration

5213-974-C3750-01

31/10/2012

--

CHEC

Registration as Chemical Waste Producer at To Kau Wan(WA4)

WDO

 

Chemical Waste Producer Registration

5213-839-C3750-02

13/09/2012

--

CHEC

Registration as Chemical Waste Producer at TKO 137(FB)

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-RS1111-12

01/11/2012

30/04/2013

CHEC

Works Area WA3 in Siu Ho Wan

NCO

Construction Noise Permit

GW-RS0861-12

24/8/2012

23/2/2013

CHEC

Works Area WA2 in Tung Chung

NCO

Construction Noise Permit

GW-RS1360-12

21/12/2012

20/6/2013

CHEC

Marine-based areas in Contract HY/2010/02

NCO

Construction Noise Permit

N/A

Application in process

N/A

CHEC

Works Area WA 4 in Contract HY/2010/02

 

6.4          Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures

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.

6.4.3      Training of marine travel route for marine vessels operator was given to relevant staff and relevant records were kept properly.

6.4.4      Regarding the implementation of dolphin monitoring and protection measures (i.e. implementation of Dolphin Watching Plan, Dolphin Exclusion Zone and Silt Curtain integrity Check), regular checking were conducted by the experienced MMOs within the works area to ensure no dolphin was trapped by the enclosed silt curtain systems. Any dolphin spotted within the enclosed silt curtain systems was reported and recorded. Relevant procedures were followed and measures were well implemented. Silt curtain systems were also inspected timely in accordance to the submitted plan. All inspection records were kept properly.

6.4.5      Acoustic decoupling measures on noisy plants on construction vessels were checked regularly and these measures were well implemented.

6.4.6      One (1) Non-Compliance dated on 31 Oct 2012 was noted, as informed by the Contractor on 30 November 2012, a noise complaint was received by EPD on the 18 Oct 2012 and on one of the two complaint follow up inspection conducted by EPD on 19 and 31 October 2012, operation of a powered mechanical equipment after 19:00 without valid CNP was observed on 31 Oct 12 at WA4. One worker was carrying out emergency maintenance for machinery with generator after 19:00, while no construction noise permit was in force, which is suspected that the Noise Control Ordinance (Cap.400) was violated. A ˇ§Pink Formˇ¨ (inspection record) was subsequently issued by EPD on the 14 November 2012 regarding the suspected violation of Noise Control Ordinance (Cap.400).

6.4.6.1   The Contractor was recommended to implement the following noise mitigation measures in case any construction activities involving the use of Powered Mechanical Equipment (PME) is conducted in the concerned area:

a)     Work involves Powered Mechanical Equipment (PME) should be stopped before 7 pm

b)    Review the need to increase the frequency of Construction Noise and Suppression training, provide extra training if deemed necessary.

c)     Install notice sign on site to notice workers that Powered Mechanical Equipment (PME) and Prescribed Construction Work (PCW) (e.g. 1. Erection or dismantling of formwork or scaffolding. 2. Loading, unloading or handling of rubble, wooden boards, steel bars, wood or scaffolding material and 3. Hammering) are not allowed from 7pm to 7am on the next day or anytime on public holidays, including Sundays.

d)    The noise mitigation measures should be maintained and the effectiveness of noise mitigation measures deployed within works area should be enforced and reviewed onsite regularly in order to provide sufficient noise screening effect properly.

 

6.4.6.2   A follow-up site inspection was conducted on 3 January 2013 by ET and with representative from the Contractor. During the inspection, follow up actions taken by the Contractor to improve the situation was observed. No Powered Mechanical Equipment (PME) was in operation and it was observed that notice signs were installed on site by the Contractor to notice workers that work involves Powered Mechanical Equipment (PME) is prohibited from 19:00 to 07:00 on all days and whole day on public holiday.

6.4.6.3   Prior to any confirmation of any possible summon and prosecution. ET will continue to monitor the mitigation actions carried out by the Contractor and provide appropriate assistance and advice whenever necessary.

6.5          Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality Performance Limit

6.5.1      No Action/Limit Level exceedance of 1-hour TSP results was recorded in the reporting month. However, one (1) Limit Level exceedance of 24-hour TSP results was recorded in the reporting month. Investigation result show that the exceedance was not due to the Project works.

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      Ten (10) Action Level exceedances were recorded at measured suspended solids (SS) values (in mg/L) in the reporting month. Investigation result show that the exceedances were not due to the Project works.

6.5.4      Cumulative statistics on exceedance is provided in Appendix N.

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       As informed by the Contractor in the reporting month. One complaint was received by EPD on 18 October 2012 and is reported in this reporting month due to the time required for conducting investigation.

6.6.2.1   As informed by the Contractor on the 30 Nov 2012, a noise related complaint was received by EPD on 18 Oct 2012

6.6.2.2   As provided by the Contractor, the site daily of Works Area WA4 for 18 October 2012 was reviewed. In accordance with the site daily of Area WA4 for 18 October 2012, only construction work like welding was carried on at 08:00am and no construction work was being carried out in restricted hour (7 pm to 7am next day on weekdays and whole day on public holiday.)

6.6.2.3   A follow-up site inspection was conducted between 14:00 and 14:30 on 3 January 2013 by the ET and with representative from the Contractor. During the inspection, follow up actions were taken by the Contractor to improve the situation was observed. No generator was in operation and also it was observed that notice signs were installed on site by the Contractor to notice workers that work involves Powered Mechanical Equipment (PME) is prohibited after 7 pm to 7am next day on weekdays and whole day on public holiday.

6.6.2.4   As informed by the Contractor, a foreman was assigned to the working area as corrective action to ensure generator was switched off and workers have left before 7pm, who would also report to the superintendent.

6.6.2.5   The Contractor provided preventive actions such as reinforced the number of construction noise and suppression training. After the complaint, such training were given on 12, 15,21, 23, 26, 28 and 30 Nov and 3, 7, 11, 14, 15, 17, 20 and 24 Dec among Works Area WA2 & WA4, on Vessel FTB-16, FTB-18, FTB-19 & FTB -20, site TKO, on vessel SHB 601 & SHB208 and Site office.

6.6.2.6   The Contractor was recommended to implement the following noise mitigation measures in case any construction activities involving the use of Powered Mechanical Equipment (PME) is conducted in the concerned area:

l   Any PME should not be operated from 7pm to 7am on the next day or anytime on public holidays, including Sundays.

l   Review the need to increase the frequency of Construction Noise and Suppression training, provide extra training if deemed necessary.

l   Install notice sign on site to notice workers that PME and Prescribed Construction Work (PCW) are not allowed from 7pm to 7am on the next day or anytime on public holidays, including Sundays.

l   The noise mitigation measures should be maintained and the effectiveness of noise mitigation measures deployed within works area should be enforced and reviewed onsite regularly in order to provide sufficient noise screening effect properly.

l   Contractor must obtain a valid CNP for operation of PME from 7pm ˇV 7am on weekdays and whole day on public holiday.

 

6.6.2.7   After investigation the complaint was considered to be not project related.

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 N.


7             FUTURE KEY ISSUES

7.1          Construction Programme for the Coming Months

7.1.1      As informed by the Contractor, the major works for the Project in January and February 2013 will be:-

Marine-based Works

-              Laying geo-textile

-              Maintenance of Silt curtain

-              Stone column installation

-              Backfill cellular structure

-              Stone blanket laying

-              Band drain installation

-              Cellular structure installation

 

Land-based Works

-              Maintenance works of Site Office at Works Area WA2

-              Maintenance works of Public Works Regional Laboratory at Works Area WA3

-              Sign board erection at area WA2

-              Geo-textile fabrication at Works Area WA2

-              Stone column installation barges setup and their maintenance works at Works Area WA4

-              Silt curtain fabrication at Works Area WA4

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 December 2012 is provided in Appendix F.

 

 

 

8             ConclusionS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1          Conclusions

8.1.1      The construction phase and EM&A programme of the Project commenced on 12 March 2012.

8.1.2      All 1-hour TSP results were below the Action and Limit Level at all monitoring locations in the reporting month.

8.1.3      One (1) Limit Level exceedance of 24-hour TSP results was recorded in the reporting month. Investigation result show that the exceedance was not due to the Project works.

8.1.4      For construction noise, no Action and Limit Level exceedance was recorded at all monitoring stations in the reporting period. Investigation result show that the exceedances were not due to the Project works.

8.1.5      Ten (10) Action Level exceedances were recorded at measured suspended solids (SS) values (in mg/L) in the reporting month. Investigation results show that the exceedances were not due to the Project works.

8.1.6      A total of eighteen dolphin sightings were recorded during the two surveys, two on the 4 December 2012, two on the 6 December 2012, four on the 10 December 2012 and ten on the 11 December 2012.  Of the eighteen sightings, eleven were ˇ§on effortˇ¨ (which are all under favourable condition) and seven were ˇ§opportunisticˇ¨.  A total of forty-seven individuals were sighted from the two impact dolphin surveys in the reporting period. Sighting details are summarised and plotted in Appendix K and Figure 5c, respectively.

 

8.1.7      Behaviour: eleven groups were feeding six of which was associated with a fishing vessel (hang trawler); one group were recorded as travelling; two groups were associated with multiple behaviour (feeding and traveling, socializing and feeding); one group were recorded as surface active; the behavior of three groups were unknown.

 

8.1.8      Environmental site inspection was carried out 4 times in December 2012. Recommendations on remedial actions were given to the Contractors for the deficiencies identified during the site audits.

8.1.9       As informed by the Contractor on 30 November 12. One complaint was received on 18 October 2012 and is reported in this reporting month due to the time required for conducting investigation.

8.1.10    No notification of summons and prosecution was received in the reporting period.

8.2          Recommendations

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  Water spraying should be provided 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, batteries and oil drums should be properly stored and labelled.

l  All plants and vehicles on site should be properly maintained to prevent oil leakage. Proper measures, like drip trays and/or bundings, should be provided for retaining leaked oil/chemical from plants.

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, accumulated oil mixture and empty chemical containers should be cleared and disposed of as chemical waste.

l  Regular review should be conducted for working barges and patrol boats to ensure sufficient measures and spill control kits were provided on working barges and patrol boats to avoid any spreading of leaked oil/chemicals.

Landscape and Visual Impact

l  All existing, retained/transplanted trees at the works areas should be properly fenced off and regularly inspected.