TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.4 Summary of Construction Works
1.5 Summary of EM&A Programme Requirements
2.4 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
2.6 Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month
3.4 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
3.6 Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month
4.3 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
4.6 Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month
5.3 Monitoring Frequency and Conditions
5.4 Monitoring Methodology and Location
5.6 Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month
6 ENVIRONMENTAL
SITE INSPECTION AND AUDIT
6.2 Advice on the Solid and Liquid Waste Management Status
6.3 Environmental Licenses and Permits
6.4 Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures
6.5 Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality Performance Limit
6.6 Summary of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful
Prosecutions
7.1 Construction
Programme for the Coming Months
7.2 Key
Issues for the Coming Month
7.3 Monitoring
Schedule for the Coming Month
8 ConclusionS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
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 February 2013
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 February 2013
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
February 2013
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
M Monthly
Summary of Waste Flow Table
Contract No. HY/2010/02 ¡V Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities ¡V Reclamation Work (here below, known as ¡§the Project¡¨) mainly comprises reclamation at the northeast of the Hong Kong International Airport of an area of about 130-hectare for the construction of an artificial island for the development of the Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF), and about 19-hectare for the southern landfall of the Tuen Mun - Chek Lap Kok Link (TMCLKL). It is a designated project and is governed by the current permits for the Project, i.e. the amended Environmental Permits (EPs) issued on 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 Project¡¦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 28 February 2013. As informed by the Contractor, major activities in the reporting period were:-
Marine-based Works
-
Laying geo-textile
-
Maintenance of silt curtain
-
Stone column installation
-
Cellular structure installation
-
Band drain 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 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 |
5 sessions 5 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
One (1) Action
Level and One (1) Limit Level exceedance of 24-hour
TSP results were recorded at monitoring location AMS3A in the reporting month.
Investigation results show that both the Action and Limit Level exceedance of 24-hour TSP results were not project-related.
All 1-hour TSP results were below the Action and Limit Level at all monitoring
locations in the reporting month.
Breaches of Action and Limit Levels for
Noise
No Action/Limit Level exceedance of construction
noise was recorded in the reporting month.
Breaches of Action and Limit Levels for
Water Quality
No Action/Limit Level exceedance was recorded in the reporting month.
Impact Dolphin Monitoring
A total of seventeen dolphin sightings were
recorded during the two surveys, five on the 14 February 2013, three on the 15 February 2013, seven on the 21 February
2013 and two on the 22
February 2013. Of the seventeen sightings, eleven were ¡§on effort¡¨ (which are all
under favourable condition) and six were ¡§opportunistic¡¨. A total of sixty-eight 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: twelve groups were feeding which
one of them was associated with a fishing
vessel; three groups were recorded as travelling; two groups were associated with multiple behaviour (feeding and travelling).
Complaint, Notification of Summons and
Successful Prosecution
One (1) complaint was referred to the HyD by the Islands District
Council (IDC) on the
6 Feb 13 regarding
a resident from Phase 1 Caribbean Coast who complained the nuisance brought by
construction along Ying Hei Road, Tung Chung.
Complaint investigation was conducted by HyD and it
was subsequently replied by HyD on 4 March 13. The investigation results show that the
complaint was non-project related.
No notification of summons and successful prosecution was received in
the reporting month.
Reporting Change
There was no reporting change
required in the reporting period.
Future Key Issues
Key issues to be considered in
the coming month included:-
-
Site runoff should be properly collected and treated prior to discharge;
-
Minimize loss of sediment from filling works;
-
Regular review and maintenance of silt curtain systems, drainage systems
and desilting facilities;
-
Exposed surfaces/soil stockpiles should be properly treated to avoid
generation of silty surface run-off during rainstorm;
-
Regular review and maintenance of wheel washing facilities provided at
all site entrances/exits;
-
Conduct regular inspection of various working machineries and vessels
within works areas to avoid any dark smoke emission;
-
Suppress dust generated from work processes with use of bagged cements,
earth movements, excavation activities, exposed surfaces/soil stockpiles and
haul road traffic;
-
Quieter powered mechanical equipment should be used;
-
Provision of proper and effective noise control measures for operating
equipment and machinery on-site, such as erection of movable noise barriers or
enclosure for noisy plants;
-
Closely check and replace the sound insulation materials regularly;
-
Better scheduling of construction works to minimize noise nuisance;
-
Properly store and label oil drums and chemical containers placed on
site;
-
Proper chemicals, chemical wastes and wastes management;
-
Maintenance works should be carried out within roofed, paved and confined
areas;
-
Collection and segregation of construction waste and general refuse on
land and in the sea should be carried out properly and regularly; and
-
Proper protection and regular inspection of existing trees,
transplanted/retained trees.
1.1.1 Contract No. HY/2010/02 ¡V Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities ¡V Reclamation Work (here below, known as ¡§the Project¡¨) mainly comprises reclamation at the northeast of the Hong Kong International Airport of an area of about 130-hectare for the construction of an artificial island for the development of the Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF), and about 19-hectare for the southern landfall of the Tuen Mun - Chek Lap Kok Link (TMCLKL).
1.1.2 The environmental impact assessment (EIA) reports (Hong Kong ¡V Zhuhai ¡V Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities ¡V EIA Report (Register No. AEIAR-145/2009) (HKBCFEIA) and Tuen Mun ¡V Chek Lap Kok Link ¡V 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 Project¡¦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.
1.2.1 This is the twelve monthly EM&A Report under the Contract No. HY/2010/02 Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities ¡V 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 February 2013.
1.3.1 The project organization structure is shown in Appendix A. The key personnel contact names and numbers are summarized in Table 1.1.
Table
1.1 Contact
Information of Key Personnel
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Fax |
Engineer¡¦s Representative (ER) (Ove Arup & Partners Hong Kong Limited) |
Chief Resident Engineer |
Michael Lo |
2528 3031 |
2668 3970 |
IEC / ENPO (ENVIRON Hong Kong Limited) |
Independent Environmental Checker |
Raymond Dai |
3743 0788 |
3548 6988 |
Environmental Project Office 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
-
Cellular structure installation
-
Laying geo-textile
-
Laying sand blanket trial
-
Maintenance of silt curtain
-
Stone column installation
-
Band drain installation
-
Backfill cellular structure
Land-based Works
-
Maintenance works of Site Office at Works Area WA2
-
Maintenance works of Public Works Regional Laboratory at Works Area
WA3
-
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.
2.1.1 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.
2.2.1 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 |
Tisch
Environmental Mass Flow Controlled Total Suspended Particulate (TSP) High
Volume Air Sampler (Model No.
TE-5170) |
2.3.1 Monitoring locations AMS2 and
AMS7 were set up at the proposed locations in accordance with Project Specific
EM&A Manual. 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 ET¡¦s
proposal of the omission
of air monitoring station (AMS 6) dated on 1 November 2012 and EPD¡¦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 |
2.5.1 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 ¡Ó2.5%
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
(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
(iii)
Calibration certificate of the HVSs are
provided in Appendix E.
2.5.2 1-hour TSP Monitoring
(a)
Measuring Procedures
The measuring
procedures of the 1-hour dust meter were in accordance with the Manufacturer¡¦s
Instruction Manual as follows:-
(i)
Turn the power on.
(ii)
Close the air collecting opening cover.
(iii)
Push the ¡§TIME SETTING¡¨ switch to [BG].
(iv)
Push ¡§START/STOP¡¨ switch to perform
background measurement for 6 seconds.
(v)
Turn the knob at SENSI ADJ position to insert
the light scattering plate.
(vi)
Leave the equipment for 1 minute upon ¡§SPAN
CHECK¡¨ is indicated in the display.
(vii)
Push ¡§START/STOP¡¨ switch to perform automatic
sensitivity adjustment. This measurement takes 1 minute.
(viii)
Pull out the knob and return it to MEASURE
position.
(ix)
Push the ¡§TIME SETTING¡¨ switch the time set
in the display to 3 hours.
(x)
Lower down the air collection opening cover.
(xi)
Push ¡§START/STOP¡¨ switch to start
measurement.
(b)
Maintenance and Calibration
(i)
The 1-hour TSP meter was calibrated at 1-year
intervals against a continuous particulate TEOM Monitor, Series 1400ab.
Calibration certificates of the Laser Dust Monitors are provided in Appendix E.
(ii)
1-hour validation checking of the TSP meter
against HVS is carried out on half-year basis at the air quality monitoring locations.
2.6 Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month
2.6.1 The schedule for air quality
monitoring in February
2013 is provided in Appendix F.
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 |
83 |
79 ¡V 88 |
374 |
500 |
AMS3A |
85 |
80 ¡V 92 |
368 |
500 |
AMS7 |
82 |
78 ¡V 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 |
54 |
37 - 76 |
176 |
260 |
AMS3A |
162 |
60 - 374 |
167 |
260 |
AMS7 |
82 |
49 - 107 |
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 8 Feb 2013 at monitoring station AMS3A and
one (1) 24-hour TSP
result exceeded the action Level on 26 Feb 2013 at monitoring station AMS3A in
the reporting month.
2.7.5 For the one (1) 24-hour TSP
result exceeded the Limit Level on 8 Feb 2013 at monitoring station AMS3A,
according to information provided by the Contractor, land-based construction
activity installation of sand bags and band drain material sampling were being
undertaken at Works Area WA2 during the monitoring period.
2.7.5.1 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.
2.7.5.2 1hr-TSP
and 24 hr-TSP monitoring was conducted at AMS3A on 02 and 14 Feb 13, but all
measured values recorded on 02 and 14 Feb 13 are well below the Action and Limit
Levels.
2.7.5.3 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).
2.7.5.4 As
refer to the wind data collected at wind station at Works Area WA2 during the
monitoring period on 7 and 8 Feb 13 (as attached) 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.
2.7.5.5 The
1-hr TSP values recorded at AMS3A on 26 Feb 2013, which are within the
monitoring period of the 24-hr TSP, were 84 /m3, 84 /m3 and 83 /m3
respectively. All measured values are well below the Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.5.6 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 37 g/m3 and 49 /m3
respectively, which are below the Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.5.7 As
informed by the Contractor, the following dust mitigation measures have been
implemented at WA2:
1. Main haul road in Works Area WA2 were
concrete paved.
2. 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.
3. Measures for preventing fugitive
dust emission are provided, e.g. watering and tarpaulin covers.
2.7.5.8 The
dust exceedance was therefore considered not to be
due to the Project works.
2.7.5.9 The
Contractor was recommended to continue implementing existing dust mitigation
measures.
2.7.6 For the one (1) 24-hour TSP
result exceeded the action Level on 26 Feb 2013 at monitoring station AMS3A,
according to information provided by the Contractor, land-based construction
activity installation of sand bags and band drain material sampling were being
undertaken at Works Area WA2 during the monitoring period.
2.7.6.1 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.
2.7.6.2 1hr-TSP
and 24hr-TSP monitoring was conducted at AMS3A on 2, 14 and 20 Feb 13, but all measured
values recorded on 2, 14 and 20 Feb 13 are well below the Action and Limit
Levels.
2.7.6.3 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 but beyond the site boundary of Works
Area WA2. Exposed soil surfaces were observed at those construction sites of
nearby private development project (Please refer to the attached maps and
photos for illustration).
2.7.6.4 As
refer to the wind data collected at wind station at Works Area WA2 during the
monitoring period on 25 and 26 Feb 13 (as attached) east south east 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.
2.7.6.5 The
1-hr TSP values recorded at AMS3A on 26 Feb 2013, which are within the
monitoring period of the 24-hr TSP, were 92 g/m3, 92 g/m3 and 90 g/m3
respectively. All measured values are well below the Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.6.6 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 64 g/m3 and 90 g/m3 respectively,
which are below the Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.6.7 The
following dust mitigation measures have been implemented at Works Area WA2:
1. Works Area WA2¡¦s surface was
hard-paved, compacted or hydro-seeded
2. Vehicle washing facility was
provided at vehicle exit points,
3. Measures for preventing fugitive
dust emission are provided, e.g. tarpaulin covers.
2.7.6.8 The
dust exceedance was therefore considered not to be
due to the Project works.
2.7.6.9 The
Contractor was recommended to continue implementing existing dust mitigation
measures.
2.7.7 The event action plan is annexed
in Appendix L.
2.7.8 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.
3.1.1 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.
3.2.1 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 |
3.3.1 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 |
3.5.1 Monitoring Procedure
(a)
The sound level meter was set on a tripod at
a height of
(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 ¡V 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
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 February 2013 is provided in Appendix F.
3.7.1 The monitoring results for
construction noise are summarized in Table 3.4 and the monitoring data is
provided in Appendix I.
Table
3.4 Summary
of Construction Noise Monitoring Results in the Reporting Period
|
Average, dB(A), Leq (30 mins) |
Range, dB(A), Leq (30 mins) |
Limit Level, dB(A), Leq (30 mins) |
NMS2 |
68* |
66 ¡V 71* |
75 |
NMS3A |
66* |
63 ¡V 67* |
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.
4.1.1 Impact water quality monitoring
was carried out to ensure that any deterioration of water quality was detected,
and that timely action was taken to rectify the situation. For impact water quality monitoring,
measurements were taken in accordance with the Project Specific EM&A
Manual. Appendix D shows the established Action/Limit Levels for the
environmental monitoring works.
4.2.1 Table 4.1 summarises
the equipment used in the impact water quality monitoring programme.
Table 4.1 Water
Quality Monitoring Equipment
Equipment |
Brand
and Model |
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 |
¡P
Depth, m ¡P
Temperature, oC ¡P
Salinity, ppt ¡P
Dissolved Oxygen (DO), mg/L ¡P
DO Saturation, % ¡P
Turbidity, NTU ¡P
pH ¡P
Suspended Solids (SS), mg/L |
Three times per
week during mid-ebb and mid-flood tides (within ¡Ó 1.75 hour of the predicted
time) |
3 (1 m below water
surface, mid-depth and 1 m above sea bed, except where the water depth is
less than 6 m, in which case the mid-depth station may be omitted.
Should the water depth be less than 3 m, only the mid-depth station will be
monitored). |
4.4.1 In accordance with the Project Specific
EM&A Manual, twenty-one stations (9 Impact Stations, 7 Sensitive Receiver
Stations and 5 Control/Far Field Stations) were designated for impact water
quality monitoring. The nine Impact Stations (IS) were chosen on the basis of
their proximity to the reclamation and thus the greatest potential for water
quality impacts, the seven Sensitive Receiver Stations (SR) were chosen as they
are close to the key sensitive receives and the five Control/ Far Field
Stations (CS) were chosen to facilitate comparison of the water quality of the
IS stations with less influence by the Project/ ambient water quality
conditions.
4.4.2 Due to safety concern and
topographical condition of the original locations of SR4 and SR10B, alternative
impact water quality monitoring stations, naming as SR4(N)
and SR10B(N), were adopted, which are situated in vicinity of the original
impact water quality monitoring stations (SR4 and SR10B) and could be
reachable.
4.4.3 Same baseline and Action Level
for water quality, as derived from the baseline monitoring data recorded, were
adopted for these alternative impact water quality monitoring stations.
4.4.4 The locations of these monitoring
stations are summarized in Table 4.3 and depicted in Figure 3.
Table 4.3 Impact
Water Quality Monitoring Stations
Station |
Description |
East |
North |
IS5 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site) |
811579 |
817106 |
IS(Mf)6 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site) |
812101 |
817873 |
IS7 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction
site) |
812244 |
818777 |
IS8 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site) |
814251 |
818412 |
IS(Mf)9 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site) |
813273 |
818850 |
IS10 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site) |
812577 |
820670 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site) |
813562 |
820716 |
|
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 |
Control Station |
809989 |
821117 |
|
Control Station |
817990 |
821129 |
|
CS4 |
Control Station |
810025 |
824004 |
CS6 |
Control Station |
817028 |
823992 |
CSA |
Control Station |
818103 |
823064 |
4.5.1 Instrumentation
(a)
The in-situ water quality parameters, viz.
dissolved oxygen, temperature, salinity, 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 February 2013 is provided in Appendix F.
4.7.1 Impact water quality monitoring
results and graphical presentations are provided in Appendix J.
4.7.2 No Action/Limit Level exceedance was recorded in the reporting month.
Table 4.5 Summary
of Water Quality Exceedances
Exceedance Level |
DO (S&M) |
DO (Bottom) |
Turbidity |
SS |
Total |
||||||
Ebb |
Flood |
Ebb |
Flood |
Ebb |
Flood |
Ebb |
Flood |
Ebb |
Flood |
||
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 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS7 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS8 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS(Mf)9 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS10 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
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 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS17 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR3 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR4(N) |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR5 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR6 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR7 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR10A |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR10B (N) |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Total |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Note: S: Surface;
and
M:
Mid-depth.
4.7.3 The event action plan is annexed
in Appendix L.
5.1.1 Vessel based surveys for the Chinese White
Dolphin (CWD), Sousa chinensis,
are to be conducted by a dedicated
team comprising a qualified marine mammal ecologist and experienced marine
mammal observers (MMOs). The purpose of the surveys are to evaluate the impact
of the HKCBF reclamation and, if deemed detrimental, to take appropriate action
as per the EM&A manual.
5.1.2 This ¡¥Impact Monitoring¡¦ follows
several months of ¡¥Baseline Monitoring¡¦ so similar survey methodologies have
been adopted to facilitate comparisons between datasets. Further, the data collected are
compatible with, and are available for, incorporation into the data set managed
by the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) as part of
Hong Kong¡¦s long term Marine Mammal Monitoring Programme.
5.2 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
¡V 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.
5.5.1 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, ¡§on effort¡¨ survey begins. Areas between transect lines and
traveling to and from the study area are defined as ¡§off effort¡¨.
5.5.4 The transect line is surveyed at
a speed of 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 ¡¥rest¡¦
(1). Rotations occur every 30 minutes or at the end of dolphin encounters. The data recorder records effort,
weather and sightings data directly onto the programme
Logger 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 ¡§off effort¡¨. 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 ¡§on effort¡¨ 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 ¡§opportunistic sightings¡¨
(e.g. another group of dolphins is sighted while travelling back to the
transect line). Only ¡§on effort
sightings¡¨ can be used in analyses which require effort or rate quantification,
e.g., encounter rate per 100km searched.
This is also how ¡§on effort sightings¡¨ are treated in the baseline
report. ¡§Opportunistic sightings¡¨
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 February
2013 is provided in Appendix F.
5.7 Results and Observations
5.7.1 Dolphin surveys were conducted on
14, 15, 21 and
22 February
2013. In summary, a total of 222.9km of ¡§on effort¡§ survey was conducted while 99% of ¡§on effort¡¨ 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 February
2013 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 |
14-02-13 |
ON |
1 |
41.2 |
14-02-13 |
ON |
2 |
35.4 |
|
Total |
76.6 |
|||
15-02-13 |
ON |
1 |
17.5 |
|
15-02-13 |
ON |
2 |
17.5 |
|
Total |
35.0 |
|||
2 |
21-02-13 |
ON |
1 |
55.7 |
21-02-13 |
ON |
2 |
16.1 |
|
Total |
71.8 |
|||
22-02-13 |
ON |
1 |
0.6 |
|
22-02-13 |
ON |
2 |
24.9 |
|
22-02-13 |
ON |
3 |
11.8 |
|
22-02-13 |
ON |
4 |
2.2 |
|
Total |
39.5 |
|||
TOTAL February 2013 |
222.9 |
*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 February 2013
Date |
Location (transect line) |
No.
Sightings ¡§ON
EFFORT¡¨ |
No.
Sightings ¡§OPPORTUNISTIC¡¨ |
14-02-13 |
NW
& NE Lantau (4-20,23) |
5 |
0 |
15-02-13 |
NW Lantau (1-3,21,22) |
3 |
0 |
21-02-13 |
NW Lantau (1-8,21,22) |
3 |
4 |
22-02-13 |
NW
& NE Lantau (9-20,23) |
0 |
2 |
Total in February 2013 |
11 |
6 |
5.7.3 A total of seventeen dolphin
sightings were recorded during the two surveys, five on the 14 February 2013, three on the 15
February 2013, seven on the 21 February 2013 and two on the 22
February 2013. Of the seventeen
sightings, eleven were ¡§on effort¡¨ (which are all under favourable
condition) and six were ¡§opportunistic¡¨. A
total of sixty-eight 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: twelve groups were feeding which
one of them was associated
with a fishing vessel; three groups were recorded as travelling; two groups were associated with multiple behaviour (feeding and travelling).
5.7.5 Noteworthy Observations: three mother and
calf pairs were observed comprising
three distinct pairs.
5.7.6 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, 4, 5, 11, 12 and 23.
5.7.7 The event action plan is annexed
in Appendix L.
6
ENVIRONMENTAL SITE
INSPECTION AND AUDIT
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 7, 14, 21, and 28 February 2013.
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 Air compressors on barge Sun Moon
Kee were observed without valid noise emission label. The contractor was
reminded to fit air compressor with valid noise emission label prior to
operation. (Reminder)
Water Quality
6.1.5 Defects noticed at parts of the
perimeter silt curtain at portions E1, C2a. C2c were observed and under
maintenance. The Contractor was reminded to swiftly rectify the perimeter silt
curtain in particular the portions where defects were observed to ensure the
sediment plume generated by construction activities could be prevented from
discharging to areas outside the site boundary. (Follow up)
6.1.6 It was noticed that a localised silt curtain was readily adjacent to Barge AP4
but was not deployed to enclose the active stone column installation at Portion
A in last reporting month. The Contractor rectified the situation by enclosing
the active stone column installation with localised
silt curtain in the reporting month. (closed)
Chemical and Waste Management
6.1.7
Waste
6.1.8 Oil stain was observed on barge
and near a vibration clamp on barge Fai Yue 3228. The
contractor rectified the condition by clearing the oil stain and the absorbents
were treated as chemical wastes. Mitigation measure such as tarpaulin sheet was
provided to retain any potential oil leakage. (Closed)
6.1.9 Oil drums were improperly stored
on barge SHB 208. The Contractor immediately provided mitigation measures and
put the oil drum inside bunding. The Contractor was
reminded to provide mitigation measures such as bunding
to all oil drums. (reminder)
6.1.10 Oil drums were observed improperly
stored on barge Sun Moon Kee. The Contractor was reminded to provide mitigation
measures such as bunding to oil drums. (Follow up)
Landscape and Visual Impact
6.1.11 No relevant works was carried out
in the reporting month.
Others
6.1.12 No adverse observation was
identified in the reporting month.
6.1.13 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 (To be updated)
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, 493,18.3 m3 of fill were imported for the Project use in the
reporting period. 200.0 L of chemical waste (liquid) were generated and disposed of in the
reporting period. 19.5 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, Labeling 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
¡V Zhuhai ¡V Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing
Facilities |
EP-354/2009/A |
08/12/2010 |
N/A |
Tuen Mun ¡V 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-RS0122-13 |
08/02/2013 |
04/08/2013 |
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 As
mentioned in section 6.1.5 above, defects were noticed at parts of the perimeter silt curtain at portions E1, C2a. C2c
and those defective parts are yet to be rectified. Although maintenance works were noted during
site inspections and on the records provided by the Contractor. However, there
is still parts of the silt curtain were found defective in the reporting month
therefore the
Contractor was reminded again to swiftly complete the rectification works
of the perimeter
silt curtain in particular the portions where defects were observed to ensure
the sediment plume generated by construction activities could be prevented from
discharging to areas outside the site boundary. Meanwhile, ET
shall follow up the situation and continue to closely monitor progress of the
maintenance work and report the progress accordingly.
6.4.2 In response to the site audit
findings, the Contractors carried out corrective actions.
6.4.3 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.
6.4.4 Training of marine travel route
for marine vessels operator was given to relevant staff and relevant records
were kept properly.
6.4.5 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.
6.4.6 Acoustic decoupling measures on
noisy plants on construction vessels were checked regularly and these measures
were well implemented.
6.5 Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality Performance Limit
6.5.1 One (1) Action and One (1) Limit
Level exceedance of 24-hour TSP results was recorded
in the reporting month. Investigation results showed that both Action and Limit
Level exceedance of 24-hour TSP results recorded
at AMS3A were not
project-related. No Action/Limit Level exceedance of
1-hour TSP results was recorded in the reporting month.
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 For
water quality. no Action/Limit Level exceedance was recorded in the reporting month.
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.
6.6.2.1 One
(1) complaint was referred to the HyD by the Islands
District Council (IDC) on the 6 February 2013 regarding a resident from Phase 1
Caribbean Coast who complained the nuisance brought by construction along Ying Hei Road, Tung Chung. Complaint investigation was conducted
by the HyD and written reply were subsequently given
to IDC by HyD on 4 March 13. The investigation results show that the
complaint was non-project related.
6.6.2.2 In
summary, the follow environmental issues were noted by the complainant:
-
Insects (including cockroaches) were found
inside the flats which are facing the construction sites.
-
Leisure area next the Ying Hei
Road was adversely affected.
-
Workers coming from the construction sites
made area nearby the bus stops at Caribbean Coast very dirty by throwing debris
and cigarette or cigarette ash.
-
Pilling was carried out outside the permitted
hours.
6.6.2.3 Complaint
investigation was conducted by the HyD and written
reply were subsequently given to IDC by HyD on 4
March 13.
6.6.2.4 Investigation
result shows that the site under Contract No. HY/2010/02 was used for
accommodating site offices of the Contract and therefore there have been
neither piling works carried out within the site, nor deployment of dump trucks
to it.
6.6.2.5 Majority
of the construction works under the Contract are being carried out far away at
the water off northeast of the HKIA.
6.6.2.6 Moreover,
investigation result indicates that the site and the access road (paved with
concrete) to the site have been maintained in a clean and tidy condition.
6.6.2.7 Furthermore,
the contractor has arranged shuttle buses for workers of this Contract to
travel to and from the site offices to reduce their interference with the local
community.
6.6.2.8 Nevertheless,
the Contractor was reminded by HyD to continue to
keep the site and its nearby area clean and tidy.
6.6.2.9 The
investigation results show that the complaint was non-project related.
6.6.2 No notification of summons and prosecution was
received in the reporting period.
6.6.3 Statistics on complaints,
notifications of summons and successful prosecutions are summarized in Appendix
N.
6.7 Construction Programme for the Coming Months
6.7.1 As informed by the Contractor,
the major works for the Project in March and April 2013 will be:-
Marine-based Works
-
Cellular structure installation
-
Connecting arcs installation
-
Laying geo-textile
-
Laying sand blanket
-
Maintenance of silt curtain
-
Stone column installation
-
Band drain installation
-
Backfill cellular structure
-
Removal of rockfill at exiting seawall
-
Geotechnical instrumentation works
-
Rubble mound seawall construction
Land-based Works
-
Maintenance works of Site Office at Works Area WA2
-
Maintenance works of Public Works Regional Laboratory at Works Area
WA3
-
Geo-textile fabrication at Works Area WA2
-
Silt curtain fabrication at Works Area WA4
-
Erection of site office at Works Area WA2
6.8 Key Issues for the Coming Month
6.8.1 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.
6.9 Monitoring Schedule for the Coming Month
6.9.1
The tentative schedule for
environmental monitoring in February 2013 is
provided in Appendix F.
7
ConclusionS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1.1 The construction phase and EM&A
programme of the Project commenced on 12 March 2012.
7.1.2 One
(1) Action Level and One (1) Limit Level exceedance
of 24-hour TSP
results were recorded at monitoring location AMS3A in the reporting month. Investigation results show that
both the Action and Limit Level exceedance of 24-hour TSP results were not project-related. All 1-hour TSP results were below
the Action and Limit Level at all monitoring locations in the reporting month.
7.1.3 For construction noise, no Action
and Limit Level exceedance was recorded at all
monitoring stations in the reporting period.
7.1.4 For
water quality, no Action/Limit level exceedance was recorded in the reporting month.
7.1.5
A total of seventeen dolphin sightings were recorded during the two surveys, five on the 14 February
2013, three on the 15 February
2013, seven on the 21
February 2013 and two on
the 22 February 2013. Of the seventeen sightings, eleven were ¡§on effort¡¨ (which are all
under favourable condition) and six were ¡§opportunistic¡¨. A total of sixty-eight 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.
7.1.6
Behaviour: twelve groups were feeding which
one of them was associated with a fishing
vessel; three groups were recorded as travelling; two groups were associated with multiple behaviour (feeding and travelling).
7.1.7 Environmental site inspection was
carried out 4 times in February 2013. Recommendations on remedial actions were given to the Contractors for
the deficiencies identified during the site audits.
7.1.8
One (1) complaint was referred to the HyD by the Islands District Council
(IDC) on the 6 February 2013 regarding a resident from Phase 1 Caribbean Coast
who complained the nuisance brought by construction along Ying Hei Road, Tung Chung. Complaint investigation was conducted
by the HyD and written reply were subsequently given
to IDC by HyD on 4 March 13. The investigation results show that the
complaint was non-project related.
7.1.9 No notification of summons and prosecution was received in the reporting period.
7.2 Recommendations
7.2.1 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.