Contract No. HY/2010/02 – Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao
Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities – Reclamation Work (here below,
known as “the Project”) mainly comprises reclamation at the northeast of
the Hong Kong International Airport of
an area of
about 130-hectare for
the construction of an artificial island for the development of the Hong
Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF), and about 19-hectare for the
southern landfall of the Tuen Mun
- Chek Lap Kok Link
(TMCLKL). It is a designated project and is governed by the current permits for
the Project, i.e. the amended Environmental Permits (EPs) issued on 24 Apr 2013
(EP-353/2009/F) 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 30 June 2013. As informed by
the Contractor, major activities in the reporting period were:-
Marine-based
Works
-
Cellular structure installation
-
Connecting arc cell installation
-
Laying geo-textile
-
Sand blanket laying
-
Maintenance of silt curtain & silt screen at sea water
intake of HKIA
-
Stone column installation
-
Band drain installation
-
Backfill cellular structure
-
Instrumentation works
-
Construction of temporary seawall
-
Ground investigation
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
-
Construction of Temporary Marine Access at Works Area WA2
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
|
13 sessions
|
|
Impact dolphin monitoring
|
2 surveys
|
|
Joint Environmental site
inspection
|
4
sessions
|
Breaches of
Action and Limit Levels for Air Quality
All 1-Hour TSP and 24-hour TSP results were below the Action and
Limit Level in the reporting month.
Breaches of
Action and Limit Levels for Noise
For construction noise, no exceedance was recorded at all monitoring stations in the
reporting period.
Breaches of
Action and Limit Levels for Water Quality
Six (6)
Action Level Exceedances and (Two) 2 Limit Level exceedances
were recorded within the reporting month. Action Level Exceedances
of DO(B) at Mid-Ebb tide: IS(Mf)11, IS10; Action Level Exceedances
of DO(B) at Mid-Flood tide: IS(Mf)11, IS10, IS5; Limit level exceedance of DO(S&M) and Action Level Exceedance of DO(B) at SR10B(N) at Mid-Flood tide, on 10
Jun 2013. One (1) Limit Level Exceedance of Suspended
Solid (SS) during mid-ebb tide at SR4(N) on 24 June
2013. After investigation, the water quality exceedances
were considered not to be due to the Project works.
Impact
Dolphin Monitoring
A total
of eight dolphin
sightings were recorded during the two surveys, four on 13 June 2013,
three on 25 June 2013 and one on 26 June 2013. Of the eight sightings, six were “on effort” (which are all
under favourable condition) and two were “opportunistic”. A total of twenty-five 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: three groups were travelling; two groups
were associated with multiple behaviour
(one was a combination of feeding and travelling and one was surface active and travelling);
two groups were recorded as feeding and one was recorded as unknown in
Figure 5d.
Complaint,
Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecution
No complaint,
summons or prosecution was received in the reporting period.
Reporting
Change
There was
no reporting change required in the reporting period.
Future Key Issues
Key issues to be
considered in the coming month included:-
-
Site runoff should be properly collected and treated prior
to discharge;
-
Minimize loss of sediment from filling works;
-
Regular review and maintenance of silt curtain systems,
drainage systems and desilting facilities;
-
Exposed surfaces/soil stockpiles should be properly treated
to avoid generation of silty surface run-off during
rainstorm;
-
Regular review and maintenance of wheel washing facilities
provided at all site entrances/exits;
-
Conduct regular inspection of various working machineries
and vessels within works areas to avoid any dark smoke emission;
-
Suppress dust generated from work processes with use of
bagged cements, earth movements, excavation activities, exposed surfaces/soil
stockpiles and haul road traffic;
-
Quieter powered mechanical equipment should be used;
-
Provision of proper and effective noise control measures for
operating equipment and machinery on-site, such as erection of movable noise
barriers or enclosure for noisy plants;
-
Closely check and replace the sound insulation materials
regularly;
-
Better scheduling of construction works to minimize noise
nuisance;
-
Properly store and label oil drums and chemical containers
placed on site;
-
Proper chemicals, chemical wastes and wastes management;
-
Maintenance works should be carried out within roofed, paved
and confined areas;
-
Collection and segregation of construction waste and general
refuse on land and in the sea should be carried out properly and regularly; and
-
Proper protection and regular inspection of existing trees,
transplanted/retained trees.
1.1.1
Contract
No. HY/2010/02 – Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong
Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities – Reclamation Work (here below, known as “the
Project”) mainly comprises reclamation at the northeast of
the Hong Kong International Airport of
an area of
about 130-hectare for
the construction of an artificial island for the development of the Hong
Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF), and about 19-hectare for the
southern landfall of the Tuen Mun
- Chek Lap Kok Link
(TMCLKL).
1.1.2
The environmental impact assessment (EIA) reports (Hong Kong –
Zhuhai
– Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing
Facilities – EIA Report (Register No. AEIAR-145/2009) (HKBCFEIA) and Tuen Mun – Chek
Lap Kok Link – EIA Report (Register No.
AEIAR-146/2009) (TMCLKLEIA), and their environmental monitoring and audit
(EM&A) Manuals (original EM&A Manuals), for the Project were approved
by Environmental Protection Department (EPD) in October 2009.
1.1.3
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), October 2012 (EP-353/2009/E)
and 24 April 2013 (EP-353/2009/F). 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 24 April 2012 (EP-353/2009/F) 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
Scope of Report
1.2.1
This is the
sixteenth
monthly EM&A Report under the Contract No. HY/2010/02
Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary
Crossing Facilities – Reclamation Works. This report presents a summary of the
environmental monitoring and audit works, list of activities and mitigation
measures proposed by the ET for the Project in June 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
|
Roger Marechal
|
3698 5700
|
2698 5999
|
|
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
|
1.4.1 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
-
Connecting arc cell installation
-
Laying geo-textile
-
Sand blanket laying
-
Maintenance of silt curtain & silt screen at sea water
intake of HKIA
-
Stone column installation
-
Band drain installation
-
Backfill cellular structure
-
Instrumentation works
-
Construction of temporary seawall
-
Ground investigation
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
-
Construction of Temporary Marine Access at Works Area WA2
1.4.3 The 3-month rolling
construction programme of the Project is shown in
Appendix B.
1.4.4 The general layout
plan of the Project site showing the detailed works areas is shown in Figure 1.
1.4.5 The environmental
mitigation measures implementation schedule are presented in Appendix C.
1.5.1 The EM&A programme required environmental monitoring for air
quality, noise, water quality, marine ecology and environmental site
inspections for air quality, noise, water quality, waste management, marine
ecology, and landscape and visual impact. The EM&A requirements for each
parameter described in the following sections include:-
-
All monitoring
parameters;
-
Monitoring
schedules for the reporting month and forthcoming month;
-
Action and
Limit levels for all environmental parameters;
-
Event / Action
Plan;
-
Environmental
mitigation measures, as recommended in the Project EIA reports; and
-
Environmental
requirement in contract documents.
2.1.1 In accordance with
the Project Specific EM&A Manual, baseline 1-hour and 24-hour 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
(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
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 is 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 ±2.5% deviation over 24-hour sampling period.
(b)
Preparation of Filter Papers
(i)
Glass fibre
filters, G810 were labelled and sufficient filters
that were clean and without pinholes were selected.
(ii)
All filters were equilibrated in
the conditioning environment for 24 hours before weighing. The conditioning
environment temperature was around 25 °C
and not variable by more than ±3 °C;
the relative humidity (RH) was < 50% and not variable by more than ±5%. A
convenient working RH was 40%.
(iii)
All filter papers were prepared
and analysed by ALS Technichem
(HK) Pty Ltd., which is a HOKLAS accredited laboratory and has comprehensive
quality assurance and quality control programmes.
(c)
Field Monitoring
(i)
The power supply was checked to
ensure the HVS works properly.
(ii)
The filter holder and the area
surrounding the filter were cleaned.
(iii)
The filter holder was removed by
loosening the four bolts and a new filter, with stamped number upward, on a
supporting screen was aligned carefully.
(iv)
The filter was properly aligned
on the screen so that the gasket formed an airtight seal on the outer edges of
the filter.
(v)
The swing bolts were fastened to
hold the filter holder down to the frame.
The pressure applied was sufficient to avoid air leakage at the edges.
(vi)
Then the shelter lid was closed
and was secured with the aluminum strip.
(vii)
The HVS was warmed-up for about 5
minutes to establish run-temperature conditions.
(viii)
A new flow rate record sheet was
set into the flow recorder.
(ix)
On site temperature and
atmospheric pressure readings were taken and the flow rate of the HVS was
checked and adjusted at around 1.1 m3/min,
and complied with the range specified in the updated EM&A Manual (i.e.
0.6-1.7 m3/min).
(x)
The programmable digital timer
was set for a sampling period of 24 hrs, and the starting time, weather
condition and the filter number were recorded.
(xi)
The initial elapsed time was
recorded.
(xii)
At the end of sampling, on site
temperature and atmospheric pressure readings were taken and the final flow
rate of the HVS was checked and recorded.
(xiii)
The final elapsed time was
recorded.
(xiv)
The sampled filter was removed
carefully and folded in half length so that only surfaces with collected
particulate matter were in contact.
(xv)
It was then placed in a clean
plastic envelope and sealed.
(xvi)
All monitoring information was
recorded on a standard data sheet.
(xvii)
Filters were then sent to ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. for analysis.
(d)
Maintenance and Calibration
(i)
The HVS and its accessories were
maintained in good working condition, such as replacing motor brushes routinely
and checking electrical wiring to ensure a continuous power supply.
(ii)
5-point calibration of the HVS
was conducted using TE-5025A
Calibration Kit prior to the commencement of baseline monitoring. Bi-monthly
5-point calibration of the HVS will be carried out during impact monitoring.
(iii)
Calibration certificate of the
HVSs are provided in Appendix E.
2.5.2 1-hour TSP Monitoring
(a)
Measuring Procedures
The
measuring procedures of the 1-hour dust meter were in accordance with the
Manufacturer’s Instruction Manual as follows:-
(i)
Turn the power on.
(ii)
Close the air collecting opening
cover.
(iii)
Push the “TIME SETTING” switch to
[BG].
(iv)
Push “START/STOP” switch to
perform background measurement for 6 seconds.
(v)
Turn the knob at SENSI ADJ
position to insert the light scattering plate.
(vi)
Leave the equipment for 1 minute
upon “SPAN CHECK” is indicated in the display.
(vii)
Push “START/STOP” switch to
perform automatic sensitivity adjustment. This measurement takes 1 minute.
(viii)
Pull out the knob and return it
to MEASURE position.
(ix)
Push the “TIME SETTING” switch
the time set in the display to 3 hours.
(x)
Lower down the air collection
opening cover.
(xi)
Push “START/STOP” switch to start
measurement.
(b)
Maintenance and Calibration
(i)
The 1-hour TSP meter was
calibrated at 1-year intervals against a continuous particulate TEOM Monitor,
Series 1400ab. Calibration certificates of the Laser Dust Monitors are provided
in Appendix E.
(ii)
1-hour validation checking of the
TSP meter against HVS is carried out on half-year basis at the air quality monitoring locations.
2.6
Monitoring
Schedule for the Reporting Month
2.6.1 The schedule for air
quality monitoring in June 2013 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
|
78
|
72 – 84
|
374
|
500
|
|
AMS3A
|
80
|
73 – 88
|
368
|
500
|
|
AMS7
|
75
|
68 – 82
|
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
|
26
|
12 – 39
|
176
|
260
|
|
AMS3A
|
32
|
17 – 53
|
167
|
260
|
|
AMS7
|
33
|
23 – 45
|
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 and 24-hour TSP results were
below
the Action and Limit Level at all monitoring locations in the reporting
month.
2.7.4 The event action plan
is annexed in Appendix L.
2.7.5 Meteorological
information collected from the wind station 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
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.
|
3.4.1 Table 3.3 summarizes
the monitoring parameters, frequency and duration of impact noise monitoring.
Table
3.3 Noise
Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
|
Parameter
|
Frequency and Duration
|
|
30-mins measurement at each monitoring station between
0700 and 1900 on normal weekdays (Monday to Saturday). Leq,
L10 and L90 would be recorded.
|
At least once per week
|
3.5.1 Monitoring Procedure
(a)
The sound level meter was set on
a tripod at a height of 1.2 m
above the ground for free-field measurements at NMS2. A correction of +3 dB(A) shall be made to the free field measurements.
(b)
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 – 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.
3.6.1 The schedule for
construction noise monitoring in June 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
|
65
|
65 – 67*
|
75
|
|
NMS3A
|
62
|
58 – 65*
|
65^
|
*+3dB(A) Façade correction included
^ Daytime noise Limit Level of 70 dB(A) applies to education institutions, while
65dB(A) applies during school examination period.
3.7.2 No Action or Limit Level Exceedance of construction noise
was recorded 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.
4.2.1 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
|
4.3.1 Table 4.2 summarises the monitoring parameters, frequency and
monitoring depths of impact water quality monitoring as required in the Project
Specific EM&A Manual.
Table 4.2 Impact
Water Quality Monitoring Parameters and Frequency
|
Monitoring
Stations
|
Parameter,
unit
|
Frequency
|
No.
of depth
|
|
Impact
Stations:
IS5, IS(Mf)6, IS7, IS8,
IS(Mf)9, IS10, IS(Mf)11, IS(Mf)16, IS17
Control/Far
Field Stations:
CS(Mf)3, CS(Mf)5, CS4, CS6,
CSA
Sensitive
Receiver Stations:
SR3-SR7, SR10A&SR10B
|
·
Depth, m
·
Temperature, oC
·
Salinity, ppt
·
Dissolved Oxygen (DO), mg/L
·
DO Saturation, %
·
Turbidity, NTU
·
pH
·
Suspended Solids (SS), mg/L
|
Three
times per week during mid-ebb and mid-flood tides (within ± 1.75 hour of the
predicted time)
|
3
(1 m
below water surface, mid-depth and 1 m above sea bed, except where the water
depth is less than 6 m, in which case the mid-depth station may be
omitted. Should the water depth be less than 3 m, only the mid-depth
station will be monitored).
|
4.4.1 In accordance with
the Project Specific EM&A Manual, twenty-one stations (9 Impact Stations, 7
Sensitive Receiver Stations and 5 Control/Far Field Stations) were designated
for impact water quality monitoring. The nine Impact Stations (IS) were chosen
on the basis of their proximity to the reclamation and thus the greatest
potential for water quality impacts, the seven Sensitive Receiver Stations (SR)
were chosen as they are close to the key sensitive receives and the five
Control/ Far Field Stations (CS) were chosen to facilitate comparison of the
water quality of the IS stations with less influence by the Project/ ambient
water quality conditions.
4.4.2 Due to safety concern
and topographical condition of the original locations of SR4 and SR10B,
alternative impact water quality monitoring stations, naming as SR4 (N) and SR10B
(N), were adopted, which are situated in vicinity of the original impact water
quality monitoring stations (SR4 and SR10B) and could be reachable.
4.4.3 Same baseline and Action
Level for water quality, as derived from the baseline monitoring data recorded,
were adopted for these alternative impact water quality monitoring stations.
4.4.4 The locations of
these monitoring stations are summarized in Table 4.3 and depicted in Figure 3.
Table 4.3 Impact
Water Quality Monitoring Stations
|
Station
|
Description
|
East
|
North
|
|
IS5
|
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site)
|
811579
|
817106
|
|
IS(Mf)6
|
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site)
|
812101
|
817873
|
|
IS7
|
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site)
|
812244
|
818777
|
|
IS8
|
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site)
|
814251
|
818412
|
|
IS(Mf)9
|
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site)
|
813273
|
818850
|
|
IS10
|
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site)
|
812577
|
820670
|
|
IS(Mf)11
|
Impact Station (Close to
HKBCF construction site)
|
813562
|
820716
|
|
IS(Mf)16
|
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site)
|
814328
|
819497
|
|
IS17
|
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site)
|
814539
|
820391
|
|
SR3
|
Sensitive receivers (San Tau
SSSI)
|
810525
|
816456
|
|
SR4(N)
|
Sensitive receivers (Tai Ho)
|
814705
|
817859
|
|
SR5
|
Sensitive receivers
(Artificial Reef in NE Airport)
|
811489
|
820455
|
|
SR6
|
Sensitive receivers (Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau
Marine Park)
|
805837
|
821818
|
|
SR7
|
Sensitive receivers (Tai Mo Do)
|
814293
|
821431
|
|
SR10A
|
Sensitive receivers (Ma Wan
FCZ)1
|
823741
|
823495
|
|
SR10B(N)
|
Sensitive receivers (Ma Wan
FCZ)2
|
823683
|
823187
|
|
CS(Mf)3
|
Control Station
|
809989
|
821117
|
|
CS(Mf)5
|
Control Station
|
817990
|
821129
|
|
CS4
|
Control Station
|
810025
|
824004
|
|
CS6
|
Control Station
|
817028
|
823992
|
|
CSA
|
Control Station
|
818103
|
823064
|
4.5.1 Instrumentation
(a)
The in-situ water quality
parameters, viz. dissolved oxygen, temperature, salinity, 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 June 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 Six (6) Action Level Exceedances and (Two) 2 Limit Level exceedances were recorded within the reporting month. Action Level Exceedances
of DO(B) at Mid-Ebb tide: IS(Mf)11, IS10; Action Level Exceedances
of DO(B) at Mid-Flood tide: IS(Mf)11, IS10, IS5; Limit level exceedance of DO(S&M) and Action Level Exceedance of DO(B) at SR10B(N) at Mid-Flood tide, on 10
Jun 2013. One (1) Limit Level Exceedance of Suspended
Solid (SS) during mid-ebb tide at SR4(N) on 24 June
2013. After investigation,
the water quality exceedances were considered not to
be due to the Project works.
4.7.3
The investigation results show that the action exceedances were non-project related.
4.7.3.1
For type, location and duration of
works carried out on 10 June 2013 please refer to the above layout map.
4.7.3.2
Exceedances were not due to marine based
construction works of the Project because:
4.7.3.3
During ebb tide, monitoring
station IS(Mf)11 and IS10 are considered upstream to
active works which the water quality are unlikely to be affected by active
works. In addition, no exceedance was recorded at
IS(Mf)16 and IS17 which are considered downstream to active works suggesting
active works were unlikely to be the source of impact.
4.7.3.4
During ebb tide, low DO (Bottom) -
4.8mg/L was noted at control station CS(Mf)3 which is considered upstream to
monitoring station IS(Mf)11 and IS10, indicating DO (Bottom) at location
upstream to active construction works was adversed
affected by local effects in the vicinity. As such, the exceedances
recorded were likely due to local effects in the vicinity at IS(Mf)11
and IS10 .
4.7.3.5
Low DO (Bottom) - 4.4mg/L,
4.2mg/L, 4.0mg/L and 4.0mg/L were noted at monitoring station SR10B(N), CS6, CSA and CS(Mf)5 respectively which are
considered upstream to monitoring stations IS(Mf)11 and IS10 during mid flood
tide indicating DO (Bottom) at locations upstream to active construction works
were adversed affected by local effects in the
vicinity. As such, the exceedances recorded were
likely due to local effects in the vicinity at IS(Mf)11,
IS10 and IS5 during mid flood tide.
4.7.3.6
No DO (Bottom) exceedance
was recorded during flood tide at monitoring locations IS7, IS(Mf)6 and IS(Mf)9
which are closer to active works than monitoring location IS5, indicating exceedance of DO (Bottom) recorded at monitoring location
IS5 during flood tide was unlikely to be contributed by active works.
4.7.3.7
The exceedances
were considered as Non-Project Related.
4.7.3.8
Nevertheless, the Contractor was
reminded to ensure provision of ongoing maintenance to the silt
curtains.
4.7.3.9
Maintenance work of the silt
curtain was carried out by the Contractor on a daily basis except Sunday and
public holiday.
4.7.4
For the one (1) Limit Level Exceedance of SS was recorded at SR4(N)
during mid ebb tide on 24 June 2013.
4.7.4.1
The investigation results show
that the action exceedances were non-project related.
4.7.4.2
For type, location and duration of
works carried out on 10 June 2013 please refer to the above layout map.
4.7.4.3
Exceedances were not due to marine based
construction works of the Project because:
4.7.4.4
Red rain storm signal was hoisted
between 10:20am to
11:35am by Hong Kong Observatory during
flood tide and adverse weather condition e.g. heavy rainfall in the
monitoring area was noted before the limit level exceedance
recorded at SR4(N) at 12:53pm on 24 June 2013. As such, the water quality at SR4(N) was likely to be affected.
4.7.4.5
The monitoring sites SR4 far away
from where active works were carried out during ebb tide. 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.
4.7.4.6
For limit level exceedance of depth averaged SS (in mg/L) recorded at SR4(N) during mid ebb tide, same works were carried out at
almost the same locations on 21, 24
and 26 June 13, but all depth averaged SS (in mg/L) results recorded at
all monitoring location on 21 and 26 June 13 were all below the Action and
Limit Level. Which indicates project works is unlikely to contribute to the
limit level exceedance recorded at SR4(N).
4.7.4.7
The exceedances
were likely due to local effects in the vicinity SR4(N).
4.7.4.8
The exceedances
were considered as Non-Project Related.
4.7.4.9
Nevertheless, the Contractor was
reminded to ensure provision of ongoing maintenance to the silt curtains and to
carry out maintenance work once defects were found.
4.7.4.10
Maintenance work of the silt
curtain was carried out by the Contractor on a daily basis except Sunday and
public holiday.
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
|
1 (10
June 13)
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
|
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
|
1 (10
June 13)
|
1 (10
June 13)
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
IS(Mf)11
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
1 (10
June 13)
|
1 (10
June 13)
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
|
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
|
1 (24
June 13)
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
|
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
|
1 (10
June 13)
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
1 (10
June 13)
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
|
Total
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
2
|
4
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
7
|
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
Note: S:
Surface; and
M:
Mid-depth.
4.7.5 The event action plan
is annexed in Appendix L.
5
Dolphin monitoring
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
|
Integrated into T7000
Garmin GPS Map 78C
|
|
Computers (T7000
Tablet, Intel Atom)
|
Windows 7/MSO 13
Logger
|
|
Camera
|
Nikon D90 300m 2.8D fixed focus
Nikon D90 20-400m zoom lens
|
|
Laser Rangefinder
|
Infinitor LRF1000/ Kings 950
|
|
Marine Binocular x3
|
Nexus 7 x 50 marine binocular with
compass and reticules
Fujinon 7 x 50 marine
binocular with compass and reticules
|
5.3.1 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.
5.4.1 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° and 270° abeam (bow being 0°).
5.5.5 When a group of
dolphins is sighted, position, bearing and distance data are recorded
immediately onto the computer and, after a short observation, an estimate made
of group size. These parameters are
linked to the time-GPS-ships data which are automatically stored in the programme Logger throughout the survey period. In this manner, information on heading,
position, speed, weather, effort and sightings are stored in a format suitable
for use with DISTANCE software for subsequent line transect
analyses.
5.5.6 Once the vessel
leaves the transect line, it is deemed to be “off effort”. The dolphins are
approached with the purpose of taking high resolution pictures for 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.
Remark: The survey on 14 June was cut short due to unexpected poor
weather conditions, hence an additional survey was conducted on the 19 June.
Remark: Due to
adverse weather on 24 June 2013, the water quality monitoring scheduled on mid-glood tide was cancelled.
5.7
Results and
Observations
5.7.1 Dolphin surveys were
conducted on 13, 14, 19, 25 and 26 June 2013. The survey on 14 June 2013 was cut short due to unexpected poor weather conditions, hence an additional survey was conducted on the
19 June
2013. In summary, a total of 219.5km of “on effort” survey was conducted while 99.9% 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 efforts
conducted in May 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, Effort by Area and Beaufort Sea State
|
Survey
|
Date
|
Area
|
Beaufort
|
Effort (km)
|
Total
Distance
Travelled (km)
|
|
1
|
13-06-13
|
NWL
|
1
|
28.1
|
67.0
|
|
13-06-13
|
NWL
|
2
|
31.7
|
|
13-06-13
|
NWL
|
3
|
7.2
|
|
14-06-13
|
NWL
|
1
|
6.6
|
10.1
|
|
14-06-13
|
NEL
|
1
|
3.5
|
|
19-06-13
|
NEL
|
1
|
33.2
|
33.2
|
|
2
|
25-06-13
|
NEL
|
1
|
16.2
|
61.5
|
|
25-06-13
|
NEL
|
2
|
18.6
|
|
25-06-13
|
NEL
|
3
|
2.0
|
|
25-06-13
|
NWL
|
2
|
8.2
|
|
25-06-13
|
NWL
|
3
|
14.9
|
|
25-06-13
|
NWL
|
4
|
1.6
|
|
26-06-13
|
NWL
|
2
|
14
|
49.3
|
|
26-06-13
|
NWL
|
3
|
35.3
|
|
TOTAL in June 2013
|
221.1
|
*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 June 2013
|
Date
|
Location
|
No. Sightings “on effort”
|
No. Sightings “opportunistic”
|
|
13-06-13
|
NW L
|
2
|
2
|
|
NEL
|
0
|
0
|
|
14-06-13
|
NW L
|
0
|
0
|
|
NEL
|
0
|
0
|
|
19-06-13
|
NW L
|
0
|
0
|
|
NEL
|
0
|
0
|
|
25-06-13
|
NW L
|
3
|
0
|
|
NEL
|
0
|
0
|
|
26-06-13
|
NW L
|
1
|
0
|
|
NEL
|
0
|
0
|
|
TOTAL in June 2013
|
6
|
2
|
Table 5.5 The Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphin Sightings &
Total Number of Dolphins per Area^
|
Encounter Rate of Number
of Dolphin Sightings (STG)*
|
|
Date
|
NEL Track
|
NWL Track
|
NEL Sightings
|
NWL Sightings
|
NEL Encounter Rate
|
NWL Encounter Rate
|
|
13 -14
&19/06/2013
|
36.7 km
|
73.6 km
|
0
|
2
|
0.0
|
2.7
|
|
25 - 26/06/2013
|
36.8 km
|
72.4km
|
0
|
4
|
0.0
|
5.5
|
|
Encounter Rate
of Total Number of Dolphins (ANI)**
|
|
Date
|
NEL Track
|
NWL Track
|
NEL Dolphins
|
NWL Dolphins
|
NEL Encounter Rate
|
NWL Encounter Rate
|
|
13 -14
&19/06/2013
|
36.7 km
|
73.6 km
|
0
|
6
|
0.0
|
8.2
|
|
25 - 26/06/2013
|
36.8 km
|
72.4km
|
0
|
12
|
0.0
|
16.6
|
*
Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphin Sightings (STG) presents encounter rates in terms of groups per 100km.
** Encounter Rate of
Total Number of Dolphins (ANI) presents encounter rates
in terms of individuals per 100km. And the encounter rate is not corrected for
individuals, calculation may represent double counting.
^The table is made only for reference to the
quarterly STG & ANI, which were adopted for the Event & Action Plan.
5.7.3 A total of eight dolphin
sightings were recorded during the two surveys, four on 13 June 2013, three on 25 June 2013 and one on
26 June 2013. Of the eight sightings, six were “on
effort” (which are all under favourable condition)
and two were “opportunistic”. A total of
twenty-five 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:
three groups were travelling; two groups were associated with multiple behaviour
(one
was a combination of feeding and travelling and one was surface active and travelling); two groups were recorded as feeding and one was recorded as unknown in Figure 5d.
5.7.5 Two mother and calf pairs were observed.
It is unknown if these mother and calf pairs are the same. Although close
approaches were not made to these pairs, it is possible to discern from the
images taken that the mothers were different due to the distinctiveness of the
trailing edge of the fin. Location and image data of the identified females,
HZMB 026 and HZMB 099, are provided in Figure K.1 of Appendix K.
5.7.6 Photo ID analyses is completed
(as of 11/7/13). Of the eight
sightings recorded, nine dolphins were individually identifiable, one of which
was new to the catalogue (HZMB 099).
On the 13 June
2013, five dolphins were individually
identified; two of which were seen once only (HZMB 001 and HZMB 045); one was resighted the same day (HZMB 099) and two were resighted on the 25 June (HZMB 090 and HZMB 095). Three additional individuals were seen on the 25 June 2013, two of
which were seen once only (HZMB 003 and HZMb 026) and
the third was resighted on the 26 June 2013 (HZMB
094). In total, nine individuals
were unambiguously identified, four of which were resighted
in June 2013, and two
calves were noted with identified mothers. A summary table and images are
presented in Appendix K.
5.7.7 Noteworthy Observation:
l
Project preparation
works which do not belong to this Contract
continue in NWL, in particular in the vicinity of transect line 1 and 2.
Dredging activities were noted near
the northern boundary of SCLKMP (Sha
Chau Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park) in the vicinity of
line 21 and 22 (NWL). Dredging activities were noted at the Brothers Islands; in the
vicinity of transect lines 11 and 12.
l In NWL, strong currents occurred
throughout June 2013, in particular following the Tropical Storm which occurred
on and around 23/24 June.
5.7.8 The event action plan is annexed
in Appendix L.
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, 19
and 27 June 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 No adverse
observation was identified in the reporting month.
Water Quality
6.1.5 Litter and silty
plumes were observed
when filling material was being used for filling cellular structure number
C057. The Contractor stopped the activity to prevent litter and silty plumes from dispersing. The Contractor was advised to
provide mitigation measures such as silt curtain to enclose active filling
activities at cellular structures to prevent litter and silty
plumes from dispersing. (Reminder)
6.1.6 While inspection was conducted on
FTB 23, silty plume was observed to flow from the
inside to the outside of a cellular structure. The Contractor stopped prevented
the silty plumes from dispersing. The Contractor was
advised to provide mitigation measures such as silt curtain to enclose active
filling activities at cellular structures to prevent litter and silty plumes from dispersing. (Reminder)
6.1.7 Hole was observed within the
frame of the drip tray on barge Evershine No.1 and
FTB17. The
Contractor provided mitigation measures and sealed the hole of the drip tray to
prevent potential oil leakage. (Closed)
6.1.8 Generator was observed without
drip tray or bunding on barge Evershine
No.1 and FTB17. The Contractor provided bunding to generator
to contain any potential oil leakage. (Closed)
6.1.9 Defect was observed within the
side of the enclosing silt curtain on barge AP4. The contractor was rectified
the defected silt curtain in order to prevent silt plumes from dispersing out
from the vicinity of active stone column works. (Closed)
6.1.10 Defects were observed at portion
B (southwest part of the perimeter silt curtain) and E2 (northeast part of the
perimeter silt curtain). The Contractor rectified the defects of the silt
curtain at portion B (southwest part of the perimeter silt curtain) and E2
(northeast part of the perimeter silt curtain) so the silt can be effectively
prevented from dispersing from the inside to the outside of the site boundary.
(Closed)
6.1.11 Oil stain was observed on barge
Fai Yue 3228. The Contractor immediately rectified
the situation by clearing the oil stand using absorbant
and the absorbant was disposed of as chemical waste.
Chemical and Waste
Management
Waste
6.1.12 Oil drum was observed improperly
stored on barge Chi Full, Kiu Chi (AP1), FTB20. The
Contractor was reminded to provide mitigation measures such as bunding/ drip tray to all oil drums. The Contractor
relocated the oil drum to area enclosed by bunding.
(Closed)
6.1.13 Waste oil was observed
accumulated inside bunding. The Contractor was
reminded to clear the waste oil with water and disposed of as chemical waste. The
Contractor cleared the waste oil with water and disposed of as
chemical waste. (Closed)
Landscape and Visual
Impact
6.1.14 No relevant works was
carried out in the reporting month.
Others
6.1.15 The EP and CNP were
observed not the latest version on barge FTB23. The Contractor was reminded to
rectify the situation immediately by replacing them with a valid EP and CNP.
The Contractor immediately replaced them with valid EP and CNP. (Closed)
6.1.16 No other 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.
6.2.1 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, 415,936.6 m3 of fill were
imported for the Project use in the reporting period. 13 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/F
|
24/04/2012
|
N/A
|
HyD
|
Hong
Kong – Zhuhai – Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary
Crossing Facilities
|
|
EP-354/2009/A
|
08/12/2010
|
N/A
|
Tuen Mun – Chek
Lap Kok Link (TMCLKL Southern Landfall Reclamation only)
|
|
APCO
|
NA
notification
|
--
|
30/12/2011
|
--
|
CHEC
|
Works
Area WA2 and WA3
|
|
APCO
|
NA
notification
|
--
|
17/01/2012
|
--
|
CHEC
|
Works
Area WA4
|
|
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-RS0122-13
|
08/02/2013
|
04/08/2013
|
CHEC
|
Marine-based
areas in Contract HY/2010/02
|
|
NCO
|
Construction
Noise Permit
|
GW-RE0634-13
|
24/06/2013
|
31/12/2013
|
CHEC
|
Works Area WA4 in Contract
HY/2010/02
|
|
NCO
|
Construction
Noise Permit
|
GW-RW0424-13
|
28/06/2013
|
27/12/2013
|
CHEC
|
Section of TKO Fill Bank under Contract
HY/2010/02
|
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.
6.5
Summary
of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality
Performance Limit
6.5.1 All 1-Hour TSP and 24-hour TSP results were
below the
Action and Limit Level in the reporting month.
6.5.2 For construction
noise, no exceedance was recorded at all
monitoring stations in the reporting period.
6.5.3 Six (6) Action Level Exceedances and (Two) 2 Limit Level exceedances were recorded within the
reporting month. Action Level Exceedances of DO(B) at
Mid-Ebb tide: IS(Mf)11, IS10; Action Level Exceedances
of DO(B) at Mid-Flood tide: IS(Mf)11, IS10, IS5; Limit level exceedance of DO(S&M) and Action Level Exceedance of DO(B) at SR10B(N) at Mid-Flood tide, on 10
Jun 2013. One (1) Limit Level Exceedance of Suspended
Solid (SS) during mid-ebb tide at SR4(N) on 24 June
2013. After investigation, the water quality exceedances
were considered not to be 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 No complaints, 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.
7.1.1 As informed by the
Contractor, the major works for the Project in June and July 2013 will be:-
Marine-based Works
-
Cellular structure installation
-
Connecting arc cell installation
-
Laying geo-textile
-
Sand blanket laying
-
Maintenance of silt curtain & silt screen at sea water
intake of HKIA
-
Stone column installation
-
Band drain installation
-
Backfill cellular structure
-
Instrumentation works
-
Construction of temporary seawall
-
Ground investigation
-
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
-
Maintenance of Temporary Marine Access at Works Area WA2
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 June
2013 is provided in Appendix F.
8.1.1 The construction
phase and EM&A programme of the Project commenced
on 12 March 2012.
8.1.2 All 1-Hour TSP and 24-hour
TSP results were below the Action and Limit Level in the reporting month.
8.1.3 For construction
noise, no exceedance was recorded at all monitoring
stations in the reporting period.
8.1.4
Six (6) Action Level Exceedances and (Two) 2
Limit Level exceedances were recorded within the reporting month. Action Level Exceedances of DO(B) at Mid-Ebb tide: IS(Mf)11, IS10;
Action Level Exceedances of DO(B) at Mid-Flood tide:
IS(Mf)11, IS10, IS5; Limit level exceedance of
DO(S&M) and Action Level Exceedance of DO(B) at
SR10B(N) at Mid-Flood tide, on 10 Jun 2013. One (1) Limit Level Exceedance of Suspended Solid (SS) during mid-ebb tide at SR4(N) on 24 June 2013. After investigation, the water
quality exceedances were considered not to be due to
the Project works.
8.1.5
A total of eight dolphin sightings were recorded
during the two surveys, four on 13 June 2013, three on 25 June 2013 and one on 26
June 2013. Of the eight sightings, six were “on effort” (which are all
under favourable condition) and two were “opportunistic”. A total of twenty-five 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.
8.1.6
Behaviour: three groups were travelling; two groups
were associated with multiple behaviour
(one was a combination of feeding and travelling and one was surface active and
travelling);
two groups were recorded as feeding and one was recorded as unknown in
Figure 5d.
8.1.7 Environmental site
inspection was carried out 4 times in June 2013. Recommendations on remedial actions were given to the Contractors
for the deficiencies identified during the site audits.
8.1.8 No complaints, 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.
