TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY  1

1      introduction  5

1.1        Background  5

1.2        Scope of Report 5

1.3        Project Organization  6

1.4        Summary of Construction Works  6

1.5        Summary of EM&A Programme Requirements  7

2      AIR QUALITY MONITORING   8

2.1        Monitoring Requirements  8

2.2        Monitoring Equipment 8

2.3        Monitoring Locations  8

2.4        Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration  9

2.5        Monitoring Methodology  9

2.6        Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month  11

2.7        Results and Observations  11

3      Noise MONITORING   17

3.1        Monitoring Requirements  17

3.2        Monitoring Equipment 17

3.3        Monitoring Locations  17

3.4        Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration  18

3.5        Monitoring Methodology  18

3.6        Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month  18

3.7        Monitoring Results  19

4      WATER QUALITY MONITORING   20

4.1        Monitoring Requirements  20

4.2        Monitoring Equipment 20

4.3        Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration  20

4.4        Monitoring Locations  21

4.5        Monitoring Methodology  22

4.6        Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month  23

4.7        Results and Observations  23

5      Dolphin monitoring   31

5.1        Monitoring Requirements  31

5.2        Monitoring Equipment 31

5.3        Monitoring Frequency and Conditions  31

5.4        Monitoring Methodology and Location  31

5.5        Monitoring Procedures  33

5.6        Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month  33

5.7        Results and Observations  33

6      ENVIRONMENTAL SITE INSPECTION AND AUDIT  37

6.1        Site Inspection  37

6.2        Advice on the Solid and Liquid Waste Management Status  39

6.3        Environmental Licenses and Permits  40

6.4        Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures  40

6.5        Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality Performance Limit 41

6.6        Summary of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecutions  41

7      FUTURE KEY ISSUES  43

7.1        Construction Programme for the Coming Months  43

7.2        Key Issues for the Coming Month  44

7.3        Monitoring Schedule for the Coming Month  44

8      ConclusionS AND RECOMMENDATIONS  45

8.1        Conclusions  45

8.2        Recommendations  47

 

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 4.5       Summary of Water Quality Exceedances

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, Effort by Area and Beaufort Sea State

Table 5.4       Impact Dolphin Monitoring Survey Details in December 2013

Table 5.5       The Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphin Sightings & Total Number of Dolphins per Area^

Table 6.1       Summary of Environmental Licensing and Permit Status

 

Figures

 

Figure 1         General Project Layout Plan

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

Figure 3         Impact Water Quality Monitoring Stations

Figure 4         Impact Dolphin Monitoring Line Transect Layout Map

Figure 5         Impact Dolphin Monitoring Survey Efforts and Sightings in December 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 December 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 L       Event Action Plan

Appendix M      Monthly Summary of Waste Flow Table

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

 


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Contract No. HY/2010/02 ¡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 06 August 2013 (EP-353/2009/G) 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 31 December 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

-             Sand filling

-             Maintenance of silt curtain & silt screen at sea water intake of HKIA

-             Stone column installation

-             Band drain installation

-             Backfill cellular structure

-             Geotechnical Instrumentation works

-             Rubble mound seawall construction

-             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

-             Installed sand bag at Works Area WA2

-             Silt curtain fabrication at Works Area WA4

-             Maintenance 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 results were below the Action and Limit Level in the reporting month. Two (2) 24-hour TSP results recorded at AMS3A and AMS7 exceeded the Action Level in the reporting month.  Investigation results showed that the Two (2) 24-hour TSP action level exceedances recorded at AMS3A and AMS7 were not related to project.

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

Three (3) Action Level Exceedances and two (2) Limit Level Exceedances were recorded at measured suspended solids (SS) values (in mg/L) in the reporting month.  Investigation results shows that Action Level Exceedance recorded at SR10A on 6 Dec 13, IS(Mf)9 on 18 Dec 13 and Limit Level Exceedance recorded at IS8 on 20 Dec 13 were not related to project. Investigation results shows that the Action Level Exceedance recorded at SR5 and Limit Level Exceedance recorded at  IS10 on 18 Dec 13 were related to project.

 

Impact Dolphin Monitoring

A total of fourteen dolphin sightings were recorded during the two surveys, five on 19 December 2013; six on 26 December 2013 and three sightings were made on 28 December 2013.  No sightings were recorded on the 21 December 2013. Of the fourteen sightings, ten were ¡§on effort¡¨ (which are all under favourable condition) and four were ¡§opportunistic¡¨.  A total of sixty one 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: Of the fourteen sightings made, three sightings were recorded as ¡¥multiple¡¦ behavior (all as travelling and feeding); four sightings were recorded as feeding; four was recorded as travelling and one sighting was recorded as ¡§unknown¡¨ and; two sightings were recorded as ¡§milling¡¨. The locations of sighting with different behaviour are mapped in Figure 5d.  

Complaint, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecution

 

As informed by the Contractor on 5 Dec13, one complaint was noted on 12 Nov regarding a barge moving through the southern channel. After investigation, the noise complaint was considered as non-project related

 

As informed by the Contractor, complaint received from Penta-Ocean ¡V Gitanes Joint Venture (CV/2012/03) mentioned that the formation works of the Contaminated Mud Pit CMP1 to the South of the Brothers (CMP1 of SB) which has been completed in mid-August 2013 and the pit has been commissioned for receiving contaminated marine mud from other projects starting from 16 August 2013. However, it was recently observed that some of the project vessels of HY/2010/02 (photos taken on 20 Nov 2013 are attached) had berthed within the said pit and those anchorages would likely cause disruption to the underlying contaminated mud and thus induce unfavourable contamination impact to the surrounding marine environment. In this regard, they reminded the contractor to avoid berthing of their vessels within the boundary of CMP1 of SB thereafter for the sake of environmental concern. After investigation, the complaint was considered as non-project related

 

As informed by the Contractor on 12 Dec 13. A complaint involves the leakage of sand from barges causing water discoloration at sea near Tuen Mun Pierhead Garden and sand material without properly covered was blown to the inside of the residential area which caused disturbance to residence. With refer to available information provided and monitoring data recorded on 09 Dec 13, it cannot indicate that the water quality impact and air quality impact were caused by the vessel of this Contract and therefore the complaint could not be concluded as related to this Contract.

 

As informed by the Contractor on 27 Dec 13. A complaint involves barges loaded with sand material without properly covered was blown to the inside of the residential area of Tuen Mun Pierhead Garden which caused disturbance to residence. With refer to available information provided, it cannot indicate that the water quality impact and air quality impact were caused by the vessel of this Contract and therefore the complaint could not be concluded as related to this Contract.

 

No notification of summons and successful 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             introduction

1.1          Background

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), October 2012 (EP-353/2009/E), April 2013 (EP-353/2009/F) and August 2013 (EP-353/2009/G). 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 6 August 2013 (EP-353/2009/G) 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 twenty-second 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 December 2013.


1.3          Project Organization

1.3.1      The project organization structure is shown in Appendix A. The key personnel contact names and numbers are summarized in Table 1.1.

  Table 1.1          Contact Information of Key Personnel

Party

Position

Name

Telephone

Fax

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

3465 2868

3465 2899

Environmental Project Office Leader

Y. H. Hui

3465 2868

3465 2899

Contractor

 

(China Harbour Engineering Company Limited)

Environmental Officer

Richard Ng

36932253

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

-             Connecting arc cell installation

-             Laying geo-textile

-             Sand blanket laying

-             Sand filling

-             Maintenance of silt curtain & silt screen at sea water intake of HKIA

-             Stone column installation

-             Band drain installation

-             Backfill cellular structure

-             Geotechnical Instrumentation works

-             Rubble mound seawall construction

-             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

-             Installed sand bag at Works Area WA2

-             Silt curtain fabrication at Works Area WA4

-             Maintenance 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       Summary of EM&A Programme Requirements

1.5.1      The EM&A programme required environmental monitoring for air quality, noise, water quality, marine ecology and environmental site inspections for air quality, noise, water quality, waste management, marine ecology, and landscape and visual impact. The EM&A requirements for each parameter described in the following sections include:-

-       All monitoring parameters;

-       Monitoring schedules for the reporting month and forthcoming month;

-       Action and Limit levels for all environmental parameters;

-       Event / Action Plan;

-       Environmental mitigation measures, as recommended in the Project EIA reports; and

-       Environmental requirement in contract documents.

 


2             AIR QUALITY MONITORING

2.1          Monitoring Requirements

2.1.1      In accordance with the Project Specific EM&A Manual, baseline 1-hour and 24-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) levels at 4 air quality monitoring stations were established. Impact 1-hour TSP monitoring was conducted for at least three times every 6 days, while impact 24-hour TSP monitoring was carried out for at least once every 6 days. The Action and Limit level of the air quality monitoring is provided in Appendix D.

2.2          Monitoring Equipment

2.2.1      24-hour TSP air quality monitoring was performed using High Volume Sampler (HVS) located at each designated monitoring station. The HVS meets all the requirements of the Project Specific EM&A Manual.  Portable direct reading dust meters were used to carry out the 1-hour TSP monitoring.  Brand and model of the equipment is given in Table 2.1.

  Table 2.1          Air Quality Monitoring Equipment

Equipment

Brand and Model

Portable direct reading dust meter (1-hour TSP)

Sibata Digital Dust Monitor (Model No. LD-3 and LD-3B)

High Volume Sampler
(24-hour TSP)

Tisch Environmental Mass Flow Controlled Total Suspended Particulate (TSP) High Volume Air Sampler

(Model No. TE-5170)

2.3          Monitoring Locations

2.3.1       Monitoring locations AMS2 and AMS7 were set up at the proposed locations in accordance with Project Specific EM&A Manual. For AMS6 (Dragonair/CNAC (Group) Building), permission on setting up and carrying out impact monitoring works was sought, however, access to the premise has not been granted yet on this report issuing date. For monitoring location AMS3 (Ho Yu College), as proposed in the Project Specific EM&A Manual, approval for carrying out impact monitoring could not be obtained from the principal of the school. Permission on setting up and carrying out impact monitoring works at nearby sensitive receivers, like Caribbean Coast and Coastal Skyline, was also sought.  However, approvals for carrying out impact monitoring works within their premises were not obtained. Impact air quality monitoring was conducted at site boundary of the site office area in Works Area WA2 (AMS3A) respectively. Same baseline and Action Level for air quality, as derived from the baseline monitoring data recorded at Ho Yu College, was adopted for this alternative air quality location.

2.3.2       Reference is made to 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 ¡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 25 ¢XC and not variable by more than ¡Ó3 ¢XC; the relative humidity (RH) was < 50% and not variable by more than ¡Ó5%. 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 December 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

82

71 ¡V 91

374

500

AMS3A

83

73 ¡V 92

368

500

AMS7

81

71 ¡V 89

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

91

24 ¡V 115

176

260

AMS3A

140

89 ¡V 212

167

260

AMS7

114

19 ¡V 186

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.  Two (2) 24-hour TSP results recorded at AMS3A and AMS7 exceeded the Action Level. No results of 24-hour TSP exceed the Limit Level in the reporting month.


2.7.4       For the 24Hr TSP Action Level exceedance recorded at AMS3A, a result of 212mg/m3 was recorded on 11 Dec 13 (24-hr TSP).

2.7.4.1   According to information provided by the Contractor, land-based construction activity such as installation of sand bags, delivery of band drain material and stitching of Type 2 geotextile were being undertaken at Works Area WA2 during the monitoring period.

 

2.7.4.2   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.

 

2.7.4.3   Photo records shows vehicle parking activities were observed inside an area at construction sites of nearby private development project which are close to the monitoring station AMS3A but beyond the site boundary of Works Area WA2. (Please also see photo and layout map attached for reference of site conditions (View A.))

 

2.7.4.4   As refer to the wind data collected at wind station at Works Area WA2 during the monitoring period on 10 and 11 Dec 13 (as attached) east winds was prevailing during the monitoring period. Traffic activities at construction sites of nearby private development project which are close to the monitoring station AMS3A but beyond the site boundary of Works Area WA 2 may contribute to the measured dust levels at the monitoring station AMS3A.

 


Conditions of the construction sites near Works Area WA2:

 

View A: (Parking lot observed at nearby construction site which do not belongs to this Contract):

 

 

View B (Hard paved surface observed at Works Area WA2)


 

2.7.4.5   The 1-hr TSP values recorded at AMS3A on 11 Dec 13, which are within the monitoring period of the 24-hr TSP, were 84£gg/m3, 88£gg/m3 and 86£gg/m3 respectively. All measured values are well below the Action and Limit Levels.

 

2.7.4.6   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 155£gg/m3 and 165£gg/m3 respectively, which are below the Action and Limit Levels.

 

2.7.4.7   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 (Please refer to attached layout map and photo record (View B))

2.       Vehicle washing facility was provided at vehicle exit points,

3.       Measures for preventing fugitive dust emission are provided, e.g. canvas/tarpaulin covers.

 

2.7.4.8   The dust exceedance was therefore considered not to be due to the Project works.

 

2.7.4.9   The Contractor was recommended to continue implementing existing dust mitigation measures.

 


 

2.7.5       For the 24Hr TSP Action Level exceedance recorded at AMS7, a result of 186mg/m3 was recorded on 27 Dec 13 (24-hr TSP).

2.7.5.1   According to information provided by the Contractor during the monitoring period. Marine-based construction activity such as band drain, stone column installation and cellular structure installation was being undertaken at C2a, portion D and portion A.

 

2.7.5.2   Stone column was being installed at the seabed therefore it is considered that stone column installation at Portion D and Portion A is unlikely to contribute to the recorded 24hr-TSP exceedance.

 

2.7.5.3   Both band drain or cellular structure installation conducted at C2a, portion D and portion A are unlikely to contribute to the recorded 24hr-TSP exceedance due to no significant fugitive dust was expected to be generated in the process.

 

2.7.5.4   Excavators and generators were operated by ultra low sulphur diesel (ULSD) to minimize the possibility of air pollution have been implemented at throughout the construction site.

 

2.7.5.5  


Photo record below shows that the Contractor implemented dust control measures on works area of Portion A:

 

2.7.5.6   Functional checking on HVS at AMS7 was done. Air flow of the HVS was checked and the flow was steady during the 24-hr TSP sampling at AMS7. The filter paper was re-weighted by the assigned HOKLAS laboratory and the result was reconfirmed.

 

2.7.5.7   The 1-hr TSP values recorded at AMS7 on 27 Dec 13, which are within the monitoring days of the 24-hr TSP, were 89£gg/m3, 89£gg/m3 and 88£gg/m3 respectively. All measured values are well below the Action and Limit Levels.

 

2.7.5.8   The measured 24-hr TSP values recorded at AMS2 and AMS3A on the same monitoring date were 93 £gg/m3 and 160 £gg/m3 respectively, which are below the Action and Limit Levels.

 

2.7.5.9   On the other hand, according to observation made at the monitoring station AMS7, there was no non-project potential cause/activity at the surrounding of monitoring station AMS7 which might potentially contribute to the dust action level exceedance.

 

2.7.5.10 As refer to the wind data collected at wind station at Works Area WA2 during the monitoring period on 27 and 28 Dec 13 (as attached) southwest winds was prevailing during the monitoring period. Construction works carried out by this Contract is unlikely to cause dust exceedance at AMS7 under South-southwest prevailing wind direction.

 

2.7.5.11 The dust exceedance was therefore considered not to be due to the Project works.

 

2.7.5.12 The Contractor was recommended to continue implementing existing dust mitigation measures and the Contractor was reminded ensure to undertake watering at least 8 times per day on all exposed soil within the Project site and associated work areas throughout the construction phase.

 

2.7.6      The event action plan is annexed in Appendix L.

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

 

 


3             Noise MONITORING

3.1          Monitoring Requirements

3.1.1      In accordance with the Project Specific EM&A Manual, impact noise monitoring was conducted for at least once per week during the construction phase of the Project. The Action and Limit level of the noise monitoring is provided in Appendix D.

3.2          Monitoring Equipment

3.2.1      Noise monitoring was performed using sound level meter at each designated monitoring station.  The sound level meters deployed comply with the International Electrotechnical Commission Publications (IEC) 651:1979 (Type 1) and 804:1985 (Type 1) specifications.  Acoustic calibrator was deployed to check the sound level meters at a known sound pressure level.  Brand and model of the equipment is given in Table 3.1.

  Table 3.1          Noise Monitoring Equipment

Equipment

Brand and Model

Integrated Sound Level Meter

Rion NL-31 & B&K2238

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.

3.3.2      Figure 2 shows the locations of the monitoring stations. Table 3.2 describes the details of the monitoring stations.

  Table 3.2          Locations of Impact Noise Monitoring Stations

Monitoring Station

Location

Description

NMS2

Seaview Crescent Tower 1

Free-field on the rooftop of the premise

NMS3A

Site Boundary of Site Office Area at Works Area WA2

Free-field on ground at the area boundary.

 


3.4          Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

3.4.1       Table 3.3 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and duration of impact noise monitoring.

Table 3.3          Noise Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

Parameter

Frequency and Duration

30-mins measurement at each monitoring station between 0700 and 1900 on normal weekdays (Monday to Saturday). Leq, L10 and L90 would be recorded.

At least once per week

 

3.5          Monitoring Methodology

3.5.1      Monitoring Procedure

(a)           The sound level meter was set on a tripod at a height of 1.2 m above the ground for free-field measurements at NMS2. A correction of +3 dB(A) shall be made to the free field measurements.

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

(c)           The battery condition was checked to ensure the correct functioning of the meter.

(d)           Parameters such as frequency weighting, the time weighting and the measurement time were set as follows:-

(i)             frequency weighting: A

(ii)            time weighting: Fast

(iii)           time measurement: Leq(30-minutes) during non-restricted hours i.e. 07:00 ¡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 5m/s, or wind with gusts exceeding 10m/s. The wind speed shall be checked with a portable wind speed meter capable of measuring the wind speed in m/s.

 

3.5.2      Maintenance and Calibration

(a)           The microphone head of the sound level meter was cleaned with soft cloth at regular intervals.

(b)           The meter and calibrator were sent to the supplier or HOKLAS laboratory to check and calibrate at yearly intervals.

(c)           Calibration certificates of the sound level meters and acoustic calibrators are provided in Appendix E.

3.6          Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month

3.6.1       The schedule for construction noise monitoring in December 2013 is provided in Appendix F.


3.7          Monitoring Results

3.7.1      The monitoring results for construction noise are summarized in Table 3.4 and the monitoring data is provided in Appendix I.

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

 

Average, dB(A),

Leq (30 mins)

Range, dB(A),

Leq (30 mins)

Limit Level, dB(A),

Leq (30 mins)

NMS2

67

64 ¡V 68*

75

NMS3A

67

65 ¡V 69*

 70^

                   *+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          Monitoring Equipment

4.2.1      Table 4.1 summarises the equipment used in the impact water quality monitoring programme.

  Table 4.1          Water Quality Monitoring Equipment

Equipment         

Brand and Model

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

YSI Model 6820

pH Meter

YSI Model 6820 or Thermo Orion 230A+

Positioning Equipment

JRC DGPS 224 Model JLR-4341 with J-NAV 500 Model NWZ4551

Water Depth Detector

Eagle Cuda-168

Water Sampler

Kahlsio Water Sampler (Vertical) 2.2 L with messenger

 

4.3          Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

4.3.1      Table 4.2 summarises the monitoring parameters, frequency and monitoring depths of impact water quality monitoring as required in the Project Specific EM&A Manual.

   Table 4.2         Impact Water Quality Monitoring Parameters and Frequency

Monitoring Stations

Parameter, unit

Frequency

No. of depth

 

Impact Stations:

IS5, IS(Mf)6, IS7, IS8, IS(Mf)9, IS10, IS(Mf)11, IS(Mf)16, IS17

 

Control/Far Field Stations:

CS(Mf)3, CS(Mf)5, CS4, CS6, CSA

 

Sensitive Receiver Stations:

SR3-SR7, SR10A&SR10B

¡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          Monitoring Locations

4.4.1      In accordance with the Project Specific EM&A Manual, twenty-one stations (9 Impact Stations, 7 Sensitive Receiver Stations and 5 Control/Far Field Stations) were designated for impact water quality monitoring. The nine Impact Stations (IS) were chosen on the basis of their proximity to the reclamation and thus the greatest potential for water quality impacts, the seven Sensitive Receiver Stations (SR) were chosen as they are close to the key sensitive receives and the five Control/ Far Field Stations (CS) were chosen to facilitate comparison of the water quality of the IS stations with less influence by the Project/ ambient water quality conditions.

4.4.2      Due to safety concern and topographical condition of the original locations of SR4 and SR10B, alternative impact water quality monitoring stations, naming as SR4 (N) and SR10B (N), were adopted, which are situated in vicinity of the original impact water quality monitoring stations (SR4 and SR10B) and could be reachable.

4.4.3      Same baseline and Action Level for water quality, as derived from the baseline monitoring data recorded, were adopted for these alternative impact water quality monitoring stations.

4.4.4      The locations of these monitoring stations are summarized in Table 4.3 and depicted in Figure 3.

  Table 4.3          Impact Water Quality Monitoring Stations

Station

Description

East

North

IS5

Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)

811579

817106

IS(Mf)6

Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)

812101

817873

IS7

Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)

812244

818777

IS8

Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)

814251

818412

IS(Mf)9

Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)

813273

818850

IS10

Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)

812577

820670

IS(Mf)11

Impact Station  (Close to HKBCF construction site)

813562

820716

IS(Mf)16

Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)

814328

819497

IS17

Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)

814539

820391

SR3

Sensitive receivers (San Tau SSSI)

810525

816456

SR4(N)

Sensitive receivers (Tai Ho)

814705

817859

SR5

Sensitive receivers (Artificial Reef in NE Airport)

811489

820455

SR6

Sensitive receivers (Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park)

805837

821818

SR7

Sensitive receivers (Tai Mo Do)

814293

821431

SR10A

Sensitive receivers (Ma Wan FCZ)1

823741

823495

SR10B(N)

Sensitive receivers (Ma Wan FCZ)2

823683

823187

CS(Mf)3

Control Station

809989

821117

CS(Mf)5

Control Station

817990

821129

CS4

Control Station

810025

824004

CS6

Control Station

817028

823992

CSA

Control Station

818103

823064

 

4.5          Monitoring Methodology

4.5.1      Instrumentation

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

 

4.5.2      Operating/Analytical Procedures

(a)           Digital Differential Global Positioning Systems (DGPS) were used to ensure that the correct location was selected prior to sample collection.

(b)           Portable, battery-operated echo sounders were used for the determination of water depth at each designated monitoring station.

(c)           All in-situ measurements were taken at 3 water depths, 1 m below water surface, mid-depth and 1 m above sea bed, except where the water depth was less than 6 m, in which case the mid-depth station was omitted.  Should the water depth be less than 3 m, only the mid-depth station was monitored.

(d)           At each measurement/sampling depth, two consecutive in-situ monitoring (DO concentration and saturation, temperature, turbidity, pH, salinity) and water sample for SS. The probes were retrieved out of the water after the first measurement and then re-deployed for the second measurement. Where the difference in the value between the first and second readings of DO or turbidity parameters was more than 25% of the value of the first reading, the reading was discarded and further readings were taken.

(e)           Duplicate samples from each independent sampling event were collected for SS measurement. Water samples were collected using the water samplers and the samples were stored in high-density polythene bottles. Water samples collected were well-mixed in the water sampler prior to pre-rinsing and transferring to sample bottles. Sample bottles were pre-rinsed with the same water samples. The sample bottles were then be packed in cool-boxes (cooled at 4oC without being frozen), and delivered to ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. for the analysis of suspended solids concentrations. The laboratory determination work would be started within 24 hours after collection of the water samples. ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. is a HOKLAS accredited laboratory and has comprehensive quality assurance and quality control programmes. For QA/QC procedures, one duplicate samples of every batch of 20 samples was analyzed. 

(f)            The analysis method and reporting and detection limit for SS is shown in Table 4.4.

Table 4.4          Laboratory Analysis for Suspended Solids

Parameters

Instrumentation

Analytical Method

Reporting Limit

Detection Limit

Suspended Solid (SS)

Weighting

APHA 2540-D

0.5mg/L

0.5mg/L

(g)           Other relevant data were recorded, including monitoring location / position, time, water depth, tidal stages, weather conditions and any special phenomena or work underway at the construction site in the field log sheet for information.


4.5.3      Maintenance and Calibration

(a)           All in situ monitoring instruments would be calibrated and calibrated by ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. before use and at 3-monthly intervals throughout all stages of the water quality monitoring programme. Calibration details are provided in Appendix E.

(b)           The dissolved oxygen probe of YSI 6820 was calibrated by wet bulb method. Before the calibration routine, the sensor for dissolved oxygen was thermally equilibrated in water-saturated air. Calibration cup is served as a calibration chamber and it was loosened from airtight condition before it is used for the calibration. Calibration at ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. was carried out once every three months in a water sample with a known concentration of dissolved oxygen. The sensor was immersed in the water and after thermal equilibration, the known mg/L value was keyed in and the calibration was carried out automatically.

(c)           The turbidity probe of YSI 6820 is calibrated two times a month. A zero check in distilled water was performed with the turbidity probe of YSI 6820 once per monitoring day. The probe will be calibrated with a solution of known NTU at ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. once every three months.

4.6          Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month

4.6.1       The schedule for impact water quality monitoring in December 2013 is provided in Appendix F.

4.7          Results and Observations

4.7.1       Impact water quality monitoring was conducted at all designated monitoring stations in the reporting month. Except Impact water quality monitoring at sampling location IS(Mf)9. Sampling location IS(Mf)9 was found enclosed by silt curtain during the reporting month. Samples were taken about 140 meters away from IS(Mf)9. The sampling location¡¦s coordination (East 813226, North 818708) was recorded. The Contractor was advised to take corrective actions to the temporary arrangement of the perimeter silt curtain as soon as possible.

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

4.7.3       No water quality exceedance was recorded in the reporting month.

4.7.4       Three (3) Action Level exceedances and two (2) Limit Level Exceedances were recorded at measured suspended solids (SS) values (in mg/L) in the reporting month. The number of exceedances recorded in the reporting month at each impact station is summarized in Table 4.5.


Table 4.5               Summary of Water Quality Exceedances

Station

Exceedance Level

DO (S&M)

DO (Bottom)

Turbidity

SS

Total

Ebb

Flood

Ebb

Flood

Ebb

Flood

Ebb

Flood

Ebb

Flood

IS5

Action

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Limit

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

IS(Mf)6

Action

0

0

0

0

0

0

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

(1)

20 Dec13

0

1

IS(Mf)9

Action

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

(1)

18 Dec13

0

1

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

(1)

18 Dec13

0

1

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

(1)

18 Dec13

0

1

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

(1)

6 Dec13

0

1

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

3

 

Limit

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

Note:       S: Surface; and

                M: Mid-depth.

 


4.7.5       One (1) Action Level exceedance at measured Suspended Solids (mg/L) were recorded on 06 Dec 2013 at monitoring station SR10A at Mid-flood tide. For Action Level exceedances at measured Suspended Solids (mg/L), 28.2 mg/L was recorded at Monitoring Station SR10A.

 

 

 

4.7.5.1   For locations and type of active works carried out on 6 Dec 13, please refer to the above layout map.

4.7.5.2   IS(Mf)11 and IS10 are located downstream and closer to the active works than monitoring station SR10A during flood tide. Depth Averaged Suspended Solids (SS) values (in mg/L) recorded during  flood tide on the same day at IS(Mf)11 and IS10 were below the Action and Limit Level which indicates project work is unlikely to contribute to the action level exceedance recorded at SR10A.

4.7.5.3   The monitoring location of monitoring station SR10A are considered upstream and remote to the active works of this project during flood tide. Therefore it was unlikely that the exceedance recorded at SR10A during flood tide was due to active construction activities of this project.

4.7.5.4   The depth averaged SS (in mg/L) and depth averaged turbidity (in NTU) at CS(Mf)5 is 12mg/L and 18.7NTU respectively which is below the action and limit levels. This indicates that water quality at area closer to active works was not adversely affected.

4.7.5.5   The exceedance was likely due to local effects in the vicinity of SR10A.

4.7.5.6   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.

4.7.5.7   Maintenance work of the silt curtain was carried out by the Contractor on a daily basis except Sunday and public holiday.

 

 

4.7.6       One (1) action level exceedances at measured Suspended Solids (mg/L) were recorded on 18 Dec 2013 at monitoring station SR5 at Mid-flood tide and one (1) limit level exceedance at measured Suspended Solids (mg/L) was recorded on 18 Dec 2013 at monitoring station IS10 at Mid-flood tide. For Action Level exceedance at measured Suspended Solids (mg/L), 33.2mg/L were recorded at Monitoring Station SR5. For limit level exceedance at measured Suspended Solids (mg/L), 34.9 mg/L was recorded at Monitoring Station IS10.  

4.7.6.1   For locations and type of active works carried out on 18 Dec 13, please refer to the above layout map.

4.7.6.2   Exceedances recorded at SR5 and IS10 are likely due to marine based construction activities of the Project because:

4.7.6.3   With refer to monitoring record, appearance of water was not clear at IS10 and SR5 when compared with the appearance of water at IS(Mf)11 and IS17 during monitoring during Mid-flood tide on 18 Dec 13. This indicates the source of exceedance may not due to works activities at portion E1and E2 which is directly upstream of IS(Mf)11 and IS17. The relatively turbid water observed at IS10 and SR5 may due to activities at Portion C2a during flood tide.

4.7.6.4   As informed by the Contractor, active works like stone column and cellular structure installation were carried out at Portion C2a, E1, E2 and B on18 and 20 Dec 13. With review of the information provided by the Contactor, active works like stone column and cellular structure installation were both carried out at Portion C2a, E1, E2 and B on 16, 18 and 20 Dec 13 at almost the same location but no exceedance was recorded at monitoring station SR5, IS10 and IS(Mf)9 on 16 and 20 Dec 13 during mid flood tide. This indicates stone column and cellular structure installation were unlikely to cause the exceedance at monitoring station SR5, IS10 and IS(Mf)9 on 18 Dec 13.

4.7.6.5   With refer to the silt curtain condition on 18 Dec 13, defects of the perimeter silt curtain was observed at northwest of the construction site.

 

4.7.6.6   As such, the exceedances recorded at IS10 and SR5 were considered as project related.

4.7.6.7   For action required under the action plan, please refer to Appendix L - Event Action Plan

4.7.6.8   Action taken under the action plan

1         Water sample was taken on site and was delivered to the laboratory and the SS was not measured in-situ, as a result it is not applicable to ¡§Repeat in situ measurement to confirm findings¡¨

2         With refer to the joint site inspection audit conducted on 19 Dec 13, sources of impact is likely due to the turbine activities and/or movement of vessel at shallow water (at near the entrance at southwestern of the Construction site and/or when vessel¡¦s propeller was turn on at shallow water). The dispersion of turbid water from the inside of the perimeter silt curtain to the outside of the perimeter silt curtain is potentially due to defects of perimeter silt curtain at certain sections.

3         IEC, contractor, ER and EPD were informed on 3 January 13 through notification of exceedance via email;

4         Monitoring data was reviewed, plant, equipment and Contractor's working methods was checked during joint site inspection audit conducted on 19 Dec 13;

5         The Contractor was reminded to ensure provision of ongoing maintenance to the silt curtains and to carry out maintenance work once defects were found.

6         As informed by the Contractor maintenance work for the defects of the northwest part of the perimeter silt curtain was conducted on 4 January 13.

7         Monitoring results show no recurrence of exceedance of SS at IS10 and SR5 on 20, 23 and 25 of Dec 2013.

 

4.7.6.9   The exceedances note at IS10 and SR5 on 18 Dec 13 were considered as project related. Althuogh the silt curtain integrity checking record on 4 January 13 shows that the disconnected silt curtain observed on 18 Dec 13 at northwest of HKBCF were rectified, the effectiveness of such rectification will be closedly monitored through impact water quality monitoring and inspected through regular site inspection audit. The Contractor was further reminded to ensure provision of ongoing maintenance to the silt curtains and to carry out maintenance work once defects were found.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

4.7.7       One (1) action level exceedances at measured Suspended Solids (mg/L) were recorded on 18 Dec 2013 at monitoring station IS(Mf)9 at Mid-flood tide. For Action Level exceedances at measured Suspended Solids (mg/L), 23.9 mg/L was recorded at Monitoring Station IS(Mf)9.

4.7.7.1   For locations and type of active works carried out on 18 Dec 13, please refer to the above layout map.

4.7.7.2   Exceedance recorded at IS(Mf)9 is unlikely due to marine based construction activities of the Project because:

4.7.7.3   With refer to the silt curtain condition on 18 Dec 13, no defects of the perimeter silt curtain was observed at south and southeast of the construction site.

4.7.7.4   The Depth averaged turbidity (in NTU) and depth averaged SS (in mg/L) of nearby monitoring station, such as IS7, IS8 and IS(Mf)16 were below the action and limit level, indicating the water quality at area nearby IS(Mf)9 was not adverse affected.

4.7.7.5   With referred to monitoring record, no turbid water or silt plume was observed when monitoring was conducted IS(Mf)9. (Please refer to the attached photo record for reference of sea condition)

4.7.7.6   As such, the exceedance recorded at IS(Mf)9 is considered non-project related.

4.7.7.7   The Contractor was reminded to ensure provision of ongoing maintenance to the silt curtains and to carry out maintenance work once defects were found.

4.7.7.8   Maintenance work of the silt curtain was carried out by the Contractor on a daily basis except Sunday and public holiday.


 

4.7.8       One (1) Limit Level exceedance at measured Suspended Solids (mg/L) was recorded on 20 Dec 2013 at monitoring station IS8 at Mid-flood tide. For limit exceedance at measured Suspended Solids (mg/L), 44.1 mg/L was recorded at Monitoring Station IS8.

4.7.8.1    For locations and type of active works carried out on 20 Dec 13, please refer to the above layout map.

4.7.8.2   IS(Mf)9 and IS(Mf)16 are located closer to the active works than monitoring station IS8. Depth Average Suspended Solids (SS) values (in mg/L) recorded during the flood tide on the same day at IS(Mf)9 and IS(Mf)16 were below the Action and Limit Level which shows that the water quality closer to active works were not adversely affected. 

4.7.8.3   The monitoring location of monitoring station IS8 are considered located upstream to the active works of this project during flood tide. Therefore it was unlikely that the exceedances recorded at IS8 was due to active construction activities of this project.

4.7.8.4   When impact water quality monitoring was carried out during mid flood tide at monitoring location IS8 on 20 Dec 13, no defects of the perimeter silt curtain was observed and no silty plume were observed to flow from the inside to the outside of the site boundary.  (For reference, please see attached photo):

CIMG9918.JPG

4.7.8.5   Turbidity level (NTU) result recorded on  20 Dec 13 at IS8 during flood tide is 22.3 NTU which is below the Action and Limit Level, this indicates turbidity level was not adversely affected.

4.7.8.6   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.

4.7.8.7   Maintenance work of the silt curtain was carried out by the Contractor on a daily basis except Sunday and public holiday.

4.7.8.8   The exceedances were likely due to local effects in the vicinity of IS8.

4.7.9        The event action plan is annexed in Appendix L.

 


5             Dolphin monitoring

5.1          Monitoring Requirements

5.1.1       Vessel based surveys for the Chinese White Dolphin (CWD), Sousa chinensis, are to be conducted by a dedicated team comprising a qualified marine mammal ecologist and experienced marine mammal observers (MMOs). The purpose of the surveys are to evaluate the impact of the HKCBF reclamation and, if deemed detrimental, to take appropriate action as per the EM&A manual.

 

5.1.2      This ¡¥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          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:

5.4.2       Northeast Lantau survey area; and

5.4.3       Northwest Lantau survey area.

5.4.4      The co-ordinates for the transect lines and layout map have been provided by AFCD and are shown in Table 5.2 and Figure 4.

 


 

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

 

HK Grid System

Long Lat in WGS84

ID

X

Y

Long

Lat

1

804671

814577

113.870308

22.269741

1

804671

831404

113.869975

22.421696

2

805475

815457

113.878087

22.277704

2

805477

826654

113.877896

22.378814

3

806464

819435

113.887615

22.313643

3

806464

822911

113.887550

22.345030

4

807518

819771

113.897833

22.316697

4

807518

829230

113.897663

22.402113

5

808504

820220

113.907397

22.320761

5

808504

828602

113.907252

22.396462

6

809490

820466

113.916965

22.323003

6

809490

825352

113.916884

22.367128

7

810499

820690

113.926752

22.325043

7

810499

824613

113.926688

22.360464

8

811508

820847

113.936539

22.326475

8

811508

824254

113.936486

22.357241

9

812516

820892

113.946329

22.326894

9

812516

824254

113.946279

22.357255

10*

813525

818270

113.956156

22.303225

10*

813525

824657

113.956065

22.360912

11

814556

818449

113.966160

22.304858

11

814556

820992

113.966125

22.327820

12

815542

818807

113.975726

22.308109

12

815542

824882

113.975647

22.362962

13

816506

819480

113.985072

22.314192

13

816506

824859

113.985005

22.362771

14

817537

820220

113.995070

22.320883

14

817537

824613

113.995018

22.360556

15

818568

820735

114.005071

22.325550

15

818568

824433

114.005030

22.358947

16

819532

821420

114.014420

22.331747

16

819532

824209

114.014390

22.356933

17

820451

822125

114.023333

22.338117

17

820451

823671

114.023317

22.352084

18

821504

822371

114.033556

22.340353

18

821504

823761

114.033544

22.352903

19

822513

823268

114.043340

22.348458

19

822513

824321

114.043331

22.357971

20

823477

823402

114.052695

22.349680

20

823477

824613

114.052686

22.360610

21

805476

827081

113.877878

22.382668

21

805476

830562

113.877811

22.414103

22

806464

824033

113.887520

22.355164

22

806464

829598

113.887416

22.405423

23

814559

821739

113.966142

22.334574

23

814559

824768

113.966101

22.361920

 

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

5.5          Monitoring Procedures

5.5.1      The study area incorporates 23 transects which are to be surveyed twice per month.  Each survey day lasts approximately 9 hours. 

5.5.2      The survey vessel departs from Tung Chung Development Pier, Tsing Yi Public Pier or the nearest safe and convenient pier. 

5.5.3      When the vessel reaches the start of a transect line, ¡§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 December 2013 is provided in Appendix F.

5.7          Results and Observations

5.7.1       Dolphin surveys were conducted on 19, 21, 26 and 28 December 2013. In summary, a total of 221.2km of survey was conducted. All 100% 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 December 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

19/12/2013

NWL

2

40.5

62.1

19/12/2013

NWL

3

21.6

21/12/2013

NWL

2

7.9

46.8

21/12/2013

NWL

3

2.1

21/12/2013

NEL

1

8.3

21/12/2013

NEL

2

20.9

21/12/2013

NEL

3

7.6

2

26/12/2013

NWL

2

35.8

52.7

26/12/2013

NWL

3

16.9

28/12/2013

NWL

1

4.8

59.6

28/12/2013

NWL

2

11.7

28/12/2013

NWL

3

6.9

28/12/2013

NEL

1

25

28/12/2013

NEL

2

11.2

TOTAL in December 2013

221.2

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

 

 

Table 5.4          Impact Dolphin Monitoring Survey Details in December 2013

Date

Location

No. Sightings ¡§on effort¡¨

No. Sightings ¡§opportunistic¡¨

19/12/13

NW L

4

1

NEL

0

0

21/12/13

NW L

0

0

NEL

0

0

26/12/13

NW L

5

1

NEL

0

0

28/12/13

NW L

1

2

NEL

0

0

TOTAL in December 2013

10

4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


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

19 & 21/12/2013

36.8 km

72.1 km

0

4

0.0

5.5

26 & 28/12/2013

36.2 km

76.1 km

0

6

0.0

7.9

Encounter Rate of Total Number of Dolphins (ANI)**

Date

NEL Track

NWL Track

NEL Dolphins

NWL Dolphins

NEL Encounter Rate

NWL Encounter Rate

19 & 21/12/2013

36.8 km

72.1 km

0

21

0.0

29.1

26 & 28/12/2013

36.2 km

76.1 km

0

28

0.0

36.8

* 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 fourteen dolphin sightings were recorded during the two surveys, five on 19 December 2013; six on 26 December 2013 and three sightings were made on 28 December 2013.  No sightings were recorded on the 21 December 2013. Of the fourteen sightings, ten were ¡§on effort¡¨ (which are all under favourable condition) and four were ¡§opportunistic¡¨.  A total of sixty one 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: Of the fourteen sightings made, three sightings were recorded as ¡¥multiple¡¦ behavior (all as travelling and feeding); four sightings were recorded as feeding; four was recorded as travelling and one sighting was recorded as ¡§unknown¡¨ and; two sightings were recorded as ¡§milling¡¨. The locations of sighting with different behaviour are mapped in Figure 5d. 

 

5.7.5       Photo ID analyses for December 2013 are underway (as of 8 January 2014) and will be presented in the monthly EM&A Report for January 2014.

5.7.6       Noteworthy Observation: Six mother and calf pairs were observed during six separate encounters.  Close approaches were not made to these groups.  Analyses of the images which were obtained indicate that at least 4 different calves were seen in December 2013.  This was concluded as differences between calf size and of the mothers fin shapes could be discerned.  At least two calves were recently born (sightings 879 and 883).  The location of sightings and images available are provided in Figure 5e and 5f.

 

5.7.7       Route travelled on CWD line transect surveys conducted on 21 and 28 Dec 13 shifted slightly to the east at the northern end of transect line 11 due works at HKBCF. Survey will be taken as close to transect 11 as possible.  IEC and RSS was informed on 7 Jan 13 and investigation started on 9 January 13 after request for investigation received from IEC on the same date.

 

5.7.7.1   According to the preliminary assessment and review provided by the dolphin specialist, the shift in the transect line is insignificant and will not affect the overall dolphin survey and analysis. Further, as informed by the Contractor, the temporary arrangement of the silt curtain would be kept tentatively to mid- 2014.

 

5.7.7.2   Site visit will be conducted to investigate the situation and such temporary arrangement of the silt curtain, the condition for any significant effect will be further reviewed, to advise potential mitigation measures to the Contractor to further minimize the effect, if needed.

 

5.7.8       Further, southern ends of transect 1 and 2 was truncated on the 19th of December as works were located in this area.  These works had relocated by the 26 of December and lines 1 and 2 were completed.  Thus there were 999.4m of trackline that could not be conducted in December.

 

5.7.9       The event action plan is annexed in Appendix L.


6             ENVIRONMENTAL SITE INSPECTION AND AUDIT

6.1          Site Inspection

6.1.1      Site Inspections were carried out on a weekly basis to monitor the implementation of proper environmental pollution control and mitigation measures for the Project. In the reporting month, 5 site inspections were carried out on 5, 12, 19 and 27 December 2013.

6.1.2      Particular observations during the site inspections are described below:

Air Quality

 

6.1.3       Dark smoke was observed generating from an excavator at works area of Portion A. The Contractor should provided maintenance to the machineries used on-site. Maintenance had been provided to the concerned excavator. No dark smoke was observed to be generated from the excavator. (Closed)

6.1.4       Fugitive dust was observed when moisten rock material is being transferred by a barge installed with conveyor belt. The Contractor was reminded to enhanced dust control measures to prevent generation of fugitive dust. (Reminder)

6.1.5       Dry sand surface was observed on works area of Portion A. The Contractor was reminded to provide sufficient dust control measures. Pending for Contractor¡¦s rectification (Follow-up).

Noise

 

6.1.6       Noise decoupling measure was observed to be missing from the generators on Hong Fai and SHB205 and on barge SHB210. Noise decoupling measures should be provided to the concerned generators. Noise decoupling measures were provided to the concerned generators. (Closed)

6.1.7       Insufficient acoustically decoupling measure was observed from a generator and two water pumps on barge FTB19 and 2 generators on FTB 21. The Contractor was advised to provide sufficient acoustic decoupling measure(s) such as acoustic mat to noisy equipments. The Contractor was reminded that insufficient/inadequate mitigation measures must be swiftly rectified. Pending for Contractor¡¦s rectification for Insufficient acoustically decoupling measure observed on FTB19 and FTB21. (Follow-up)

Water Quality

 

6.1.8       Turbid water was observed at the southwestern silt curtain entrance area. Refer to the photo taken and site observations, sources of impact likely due to the turbine activities and/or movement of vessel at shallow water (at near the entrance at southwestern of the Construction site and/or when vessel¡¦s propeller was turn on at shallow water). The dispersion of turbid water from the inside of the perimeter silt curtain to the outside of the perimeter silt curtain is potentially due to defects of perimeter silt curtain at certain sections and/or insufficient overlapping at entrance/exit of the perimeter silt curtain.

The Contractor was advised to regularly evaluate the integrity of the perimeter silt curtain by reviewing the results obtained from daily checking or/and monthly diver inspections specified by the Silt Curtain Deployment Plan. The Contractor was advised to provide sufficient mitigation measures and swiftly carry out maintenance once defects of the perimeter silt curtain are found during the above mentioned daily checking and/or monthly diver inspection. As refer to the silt curtain integrity checking record maintenance was given to the southwestern silt curtain entrance area. (Closed)

6.1.9       Oil drums and chemical containers were observed without the provision of drip trays at Portion A, on barge SHB205 and on temporary rock bund. The Contractor was reminded to provide drip trays to oil drums and chemical container to retain leakage, if any. Drip trays were provided to oil drums as preventive measure for oil leakage. The concerned chemical container had been removed off-site. (Closed)

 

6.1.10    An oil drum was observed to be not properly plugged at works area of Portion A. The Contractor should provide proper measures to seal the opening of oil drums to avoid leakage. The concerned oil drum was plugged. (Closed)

6.1.11    Containers of chemical to be used and chemical waste were misplaced together in Hong Fai. The Contractor should store the chemical and chemical waste separately. Containers of chemical to be used and chemical waste were separately stored. (Closed)

6.1.12    Movable lighting machineries were observed to be placed on bare ground of Portion D, on SHB205 and at works area at Portion A without the provision of drip trays. It was observed that drip trays were provided to movable lighting machineries at temporary rock bund and at works area at portion A and on SHB205. The contractor was advised to continue to provide drip tray or equivalent measures to retain potential oil leakage to movable lighting machineries. An ineffective leakage preventive measure for movable lighting machineries at Portion D was pending for Contractor¡¦s rectification. (Follow-up)

6.1.13    Trays of oil drums were found to be placed near to the shore. The Contractor should secure the oil drums with drip tray away from the shore to ensure no washing off of oil occurs. Trays of oil drums have been moved away from the shore. (Closed)

6.1.14    During site inspection audit, sandfilling seem to be conducted at one end of the temporary rock bund. The Contractor was reminded to conduct sandfilling behind at least 200m leading temporary rock bund/seawall. (Reminder)

6.1.15    Oil stain was observed on barge FTB19. The Contractor was advised to clear the oil stain using absorbent material. The Contractor cleared the oil stain using absorbent material and disposed the spent absorbent material as chemical waste. (Closed)

6.1.16    Waste water was observed accumulated inside drip trays on FTB21 and the Contractor was reminded to clear the waste water regularly to prevent runoff or accidental spillage (Reminder)

6.1.17    Defect was observed within a bunding and waste oil water mixture was observed on the barge surface. The Contractor was reminded to rectify the defects observed and cleared the oil waste using chemical absorbent material and dispose the chemical absorbent material as chemical waste. The Contractor rectified the defects observed and cleared the oil waste using chemical absorbent material and dispose the chemical absorbent material as chemical waste. (Closed)

6.1.18    Oil stain was observed on temporary rock bund. The Contractor was advised to clear the oil stain using absorbent material. The Contractor cleared the oil stain on the temporary rock bund. (Closed)

Chemical and Waste Management

 

6.1.19    Rubbish bin was observed without being covered; the Contractor was reminded to properly store general waste and covers all rubbish bins. The rubbish was removed cleared by the Contractor (Closed).

6.1.20    General refuse was scattered on sea water and along the shore near Portion D. The Contractor was reminded to clear the refuse in timely manner and keep site clean and tidy. Pending for Contractor¡¦s rectification (Follow-up).

Landscape and Visual Impact

 

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

Others

 

6.1.22    Rectifications of remaining identified items are undergoing by the Contractor. Follow-up inspections on the status on provision of mitigation measures will be conducted to ensure all identified items are mitigated properly.


6.2          Advice on the Solid and Liquid Waste Management Status

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

6.2.2      As advised by the Contractor,1,213,844.1m3 of fill were imported for the Project use in the reporting period. 0.0103 tonnes of metals, 2tonnes chemical waste and 26m3 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/G

06/08/2012

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-RW0888-13

27/12/2013

26/06/2014

CHEC

Works Area WA4 in Contract HY/2010/02

NCO

Construction Noise Permit

GW-RS1279-13

12/11/2013

11/01/2014

CHEC

Reclamation Works in Contract HY/2010/02

NCO

Construction Noise Permit

GW-RE1345-13

31/12/2013

30/06/2014

CHEC

Section of TKO Fill Bank under Contract HY/2010/02

6.4          Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures

6.4.1      In response to the site audit findings, the Contractors carried out corrective actions.

6.4.2      A summary of the Implementation Schedule of Environmental Mitigation Measures (EMIS) is presented in Appendix C. Most of the necessary mitigation measures were implemented properly.

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

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

6.4.5      Acoustic decoupling measures on noisy plants on construction vessels were checked regularly and the Contractor was reminded to ensure provision of ongoing maintenance to noisy plants and to carry out improvement work once insufficient acoustic decoupling measures were found.

6.5          Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality Performance Limit

6.5.1       All 1-Hour TSP results were below the Action and Limit Level in the reporting month. Two (2) 24-hour TSP results recorded at AMS3A and AMS7 exceeded the Action Level in the reporting month.  Investigation results showed that the Two (2) 24-hour TSP action level exceedances recorded at AMS3A and AMS7 were not related to project.

6.5.2       For construction noise, no exceedance was recorded at all monitoring stations in the reporting period.

6.5.3       Three (3) Action Level Exceedances and two (2) Limit Level Exceedances were recorded at measured suspended solids (SS) values (in mg/L) in the reporting month.  Investigation results shows that Action Level Exceedance recorded at SR10A on 6 Dec 13, IS(Mf)9 on 18 Dec 13 and Limit Level Exceedance recorded at IS8 on 20 Dec 13 were not related to project. Investigation results shows that the Action Level Exceedance recorded at SR5 and Limit Level Exceedance recorded at  IS10 on 18 Dec 13 were related to project.

6.5.4      Cumulative statistics on exceedance is provided in Appendix N.

6.6          Summary of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecutions

6.6.1       The Environmental Complaint Handling Procedure is annexed in Figure 6.

6.6.2      As informed by the Contractor on 5 Dec13, one (1) noises related complain of a barge moving through the southern channel of HyD¡¦s construction site after 23:00 on 8.11.2013. Site daily for barges was requested from the Contractor and as refer to the site daily provided by the  Contractor, there was no barge operated after 18:25 on 08 Nov 13. The complaint is therefore considered not likely to be related to the construction works.

6.6.2.1   The Contractor was remind to continue to properly implement the existing noise mitigation measures i.e. to well maintain all plant and equipment in good condition to avoid noise generation and to turn off or throttled down idle equipment. The Contractor was reminded to inform related parties when environmental complain was received to ensure future timely reporting of any complaints/ enquiry.

6.6.3       One (1) complaint received from Penta-Ocean ¡V Gitanes Joint Venture (CV/2012/03) mentioned that the formation works of the Contaminated Mud Pit CMP1 to the South of the Brothers (CMP1 of SB) which has been completed in mid-August 2013 and the pit has been commissioned for receiving contaminated marine mud from other projects starting from 16 August 2013.  However, it was recently observed that some of the project vessels of HY/2010/02 (photos taken on 20 Nov 2013 are attached) had berthed within the said pit and those anchorages would likely cause disruption to the underlying contaminated mud and thus induce unfavourable contamination impact to the surrounding marine environment. In this regard, they reminded the contractor to avoid berthing of their vessels within the boundary of CMP1 of SB thereafter for the sake of environmental concern.  

6.6.3.1   With refer to the given photo, there are no sufficient details or features could be found on the anchored vessels that confirmed they are project vessels (lack of names and vessel number); it cannot be conclude that the concerned vessels shown in the photos belong to this Contract. The complaint is therefore considered not likely to be related to the construction works.

6.6.3.2   The Contractor was advised to notice all captains of the boats of this Contract to be aware of the captioned incident and to avoid the anchoring of vessels within the concerned area.  Further to the captioned complaint on 22/11/2013, The Contractor had followed up with the case about their vessels berthing within the boundary of CMP1 of SB thereafter, causing disruption to the underlying contaminated mud and induces contamination impact to the surrounding marine environment. In respect of the concern situation, all captains of the vessels were reminded to avoid anchor in the captioned area immediately.

6.6.4       As informed by the Contractor on 12 Dec 13. A complaint involves the leakage of sand from barges causing water discoloration at sea near Tuen Mun Pierhead Garden and sand material without properly covered was blown to the inside of the residential area which caused disturbance to residence.

6.6.4.1   Regarding the leakage from work barges causing water pollution near Tuen Mun Pierhead Garden , it is noted that all project related vessels (including sand barges) are designated with a regular marine travel route to the site, but the regular travel route plan of this project does not specify the travel route passing through the at area at sea near Tuen Mun Pierhead Garden and with refer to photo record, Contractor would water the sand material to keep the sand material wet to prevent generation of fugitive dust.

6.6.4.2   With refer to available information provided and monitoring data recorded on 09 Dec 13, it cannot indicate that the water quality impact and air quality impact were caused by the vessel of this Contract and therefore the complaint could not be concluded as related to this Contract.

6.6.4.3   The Contractor was advised to ensure the regular travel routes for all project related vessels (including sand barges) were being strictly followed and all vessels should have regular maintenance to ensure that all Sand Barge functioning well.

6.6.4.4   The Contractor was advised to ensure to continue the provision of fugitive dust mitigation measures to barges loaded with filling material such as watering to sand filling material on sand barges to keep the surface of stockpile of filling material wet.

6.6.4.5   Photo record shows that watering equipment is provided on pelican barge loaded with sand for watering of sand filling material to keep the sand material wet.

6.6.5       As informed by the Contractor on 27 Dec 13. A complaint involves barges loaded with sand material without properly covered was blown to the inside of the residential area of Tuen Mun Pierhead Garden which caused disturbance to residence.

6.6.5.1   The air quality impact causing disturbance to residence near Tuen Mun Pierhead Garden was followed up and replied by Highway Department and reply was given to Oriental Daily Newspaper and it is noted that all project related vessels (including sand barges) are designated with a regular marine travel route to the site, however the regular travel route plan of this project does not specify the travel route passing through the at area at sea near Tuen Mun Pierhead Garden and with refer to photo record, Contractor would water the sand material to keep the sand material wet to prevent generation of fugitive dust.

6.6.5.2   With refer to available information provided, it cannot indicate that the water quality impact and air quality impact were caused by the vessel of this Contract and therefore the complaint could not be concluded as related to this Contract.

6.6.5.3   The Contractor was advised to ensure the regular travel routes for all project related vessels (including sand barges) were being strictly followed. The Contractor was advised to ensure to continue the provision of air quality mitigation measures to barges loaded with filling material such as sufficient watering to keep the surface of stockpile of filling material wet.

6.6.5.4   Photo record shows that watering equipment is provided on pelican barge loaded with sand for watering of sand filling material:

6.6.6       No notification of summons and successful prosecutions was received in the reporting period.

6.6.7       Statistics on complaints, notifications of summons and successful prosecutions are summarized in Appendix N.


7             FUTURE KEY ISSUES

7.1          Construction Programme for the Coming Months

7.1.1      As informed by the Contractor, the major works for the Project in December 2013 and January 2014 will be:-

 

Marine-based Works

-             Marine-base

-             Cellular structure installation

-             Connecting arc cell installation

-             Laying geo-textile

-             Sand blanket laying

-             Sand filling

-             Maintenance of silt curtain & silt screen at sea water intake of HKIA

-             Stone column installation

-             Band drain installation

-             Backfill cellular structure

-             Geotechnical Instrumentation works

-             Construction of temporary seawall

-             Ground investigation

-             Construction of conveyors for public fill 

-             Surcharge laying

-             Construction of temporary assess from Portion D to Portion A

-             Precast Yard for seawall blocks and culverts

 

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

-             Installed sand bag 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 January 2013 is provided in Appendix F.


8             ConclusionS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1          Conclusions

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

8.1.2       All 1-Hour TSP results were below the Action and Limit Level in the reporting month. Two (2) 24-hour TSP results recorded at AMS3A and AMS7 exceeded the Action Level in the reporting month.  Investigation results showed that the Two (2) 24-hour TSP action level exceedances recorded at AMS3A and AMS7 were not related to project.

 

8.1.3       For construction noise, no exceedance was recorded at all monitoring stations in the reporting period.

8.1.4       Three (3) Action Level Exceedances and two (2) Limit Level Exceedances were recorded at measured suspended solids (SS) values (in mg/L) in the reporting month.  Investigation results shows that Action Level Exceedance recorded at SR10A on 6 Dec 13, IS(Mf)9 on 18 Dec 13 and Limit Level Exceedance recorded at IS8 on 20 Dec 13 were not related to project. Investigation results shows that the Action Level Exceedance recorded at SR5 and Limit Level Exceedance recorded at  IS10 on 18 Dec 13 were related to project.

 

8.1.5       A total of fourteen dolphin sightings were recorded during the two surveys, five on 19 December 2013; six on 26 December 2013 and three sightings were made on 28 December 2013.  No sightings were recorded on the 21 December 2013. Of the fourteen sightings, ten were ¡§on effort¡¨ (which are all under favourable condition) and four were ¡§opportunistic¡¨.  A total of sixty one 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: Of the fourteen sightings made, three sightings were recorded as ¡¥multiple¡¦ behavior (all as travelling and feeding); four sightings were recorded as feeding; four was recorded as travelling and one sighting was recorded as ¡§unknown¡¨ and; two sightings were recorded as ¡§milling¡¨. The locations of sighting with different behaviour are mapped in Figure 5d

8.1.7       Environmental site inspection was carried out 4 times in December 2013. Recommendations on remedial actions were given to the Contractors for the deficiencies identified during the site audits.

8.1.8       As informed by the Contractor on 5 Dec 13, one complaint was noted on 12 Nov regarding a barge moving through the southern channel. After investigation, the noise complaint was considered as non-project related

8.1.9       As informed by the Contractor, complaint received from Penta-Ocean ¡V Gitanes Joint Venture (CV/2012/03) mentioned that the formation works of the Contaminated Mud Pit CMP1 to the South of the Brothers (CMP1 of SB) which has been completed in mid-August 2013 and the pit has been commissioned for receiving contaminated marine mud from other projects starting from 16 August 2013. However, it was recently observed that some of the project vessels of HY/2010/02 (photos taken on 20 Nov 2013 are attached) had berthed within the said pit and those anchorages would likely cause disruption to the underlying contaminated mud and thus induce unfavourable contamination impact to the surrounding marine environment. In this regard, they reminded the contractor to avoid berthing of their vessels within the boundary of CMP1 of SB thereafter for the sake of environmental concern. After investigation, the complaint was considered as non-project related

8.1.10    As informed by the Contractor on 12 Dec 13. A complaint involves the leakage of sand from barges causing water discoloration at sea near Tuen Mun Pierhead Garden and sand material without properly covered was blown to the inside of the residential area which caused disturbance to residence. With refer to available information provided and monitoring data recorded on 09 Dec 13, it cannot indicate that the water quality impact and air quality impact were caused by the vessel of this Contract and therefore the complaint could not be concluded as related to this Contract.

8.1.11    As informed by the Contractor on 27 Dec 13. A complaint involves barges loaded with sand material without properly covered was blown to the inside of the residential area of Tuen Mun Pierhead Garden which caused disturbance to residence. With refer to available information provided, it cannot indicate that the water quality impact and air quality impact were caused by the vessel of this Contract and therefore the complaint could not be concluded as related to this Contract.

8.1.12    No notification of summons and successful 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, enclosure for noisy plants or enhancement works to provide sufficient acoustic decoupling measure(s). 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  Acoustic decoupling measures should be properly implemented for all existing and incoming construction vessels with continuous and regularly checking to ensure effective implementation of acoustic decoupling measures.

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.