TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.4 Summary
of Construction Works
1.5 Summary
of EM&A Programme Requirements
2.4 Monitoring
Parameters, Frequency and Duration
2.6 Monitoring
Schedule for the Reporting Month
3.4 Monitoring
Parameters, Frequency and Duration
3.6 Monitoring
Schedule for the Reporting Month
4.3 Monitoring
Parameters, Frequency and Duration
4.6 Monitoring
Schedule for the Reporting Month
5.3 Monitoring
Frequency and Conditions
5.4 Monitoring
Methodology and Location
5.6 Monitoring
Schedule for the Reporting Month
6 ENVIRONMENTAL
SITE INSPECTION AND AUDIT
6.2 Advice
on the Solid and Liquid Waste Management Status
6.3 Environmental
Licenses and Permits
6.4 Implementation
Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures
6.5 Summary
of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality Performance Limit
6.6 Summary
of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecutions
7.1 Construction
Programme for the Coming Months
7.2 Key
Issues for the Coming Month
7.3 Monitoring
Schedule for the Coming Month
8 ConclusionS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
List of Tables
Table 1.1 Contact Information of Key Personnel
Table 2.1 Air Quality
Monitoring Equipment
Table 2.2 Locations of Impact
Air Quality Monitoring Stations
Table 2.3 Air Quality
Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
Table 2.4 Summary of 1-hour TSP
Monitoring Results in the Reporting Period
Table 2.5 Summary of 24-hour
TSP Monitoring Results in the Reporting Period
Table 3.1 Noise Monitoring
Equipment
Table 3.2 Locations of Impact
Noise Monitoring Stations
Table 3.3 Noise Monitoring
Parameters, Frequency and Duration
Table 3.4 Summary of
Construction Noise Monitoring Results in the Reporting Period
Table 4.1 Water Quality
Monitoring Equipment
Table 4.2 Impact Water Quality
Monitoring Parameters and Frequency
Table 4.3 Impact Water Quality
Monitoring Stations
Table 4.4 Laboratory Analysis
for Suspended Solids
Table 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 January 2014
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 January
2014
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 January 2014
Appendix
I Impact
Construction Noise Monitoring Results and their Graphical Presentation
Appendix J Impact
Water Quality Monitoring Results and their Graphical Presentation
Appendix
K Impact
Dolphin Monitoring Survey Sighting Summary
Appendix M Monthly Summary
of Waste Flow Table
This report documents
the findings of EM&A works conducted in the period between 1 and 31 January
2014. As informed by the
Contractor, major activities in the reporting period were:-
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
-
Surcharge
laying
-
Precast
Yard setup
-
Sand
Drain
-
Construction
of temporary assess from Portion D to Portion A
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 |
5 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. Four (4) Action Level
Exceedances and two (2) Limit Level Exceedances were recorded at measured
24-hour TSP results in the reporting month. Investigation results showed that Four
(4) Action Level Exceedances and two (2) Limit Level Exceedances were not
related to project.
Breaches of Action and Limit Levels for Water Quality
Six (6) Action Level and
one (1) limit level exceedances recorded at measured suspended solids (SS)
values (in mg/L) in the reporting month.
Investigation results shows that all Action and Limit Level Exceedance
recorded were not related to project.
A total of ten dolphin sightings were recorded during the
two surveys, six on 6 January
2014; two were made on 9 and 10 January 2014. No sightings were recorded on
the 7 January 2014. Of the ten sightings, nine were ¡§on effort¡¨ (which are all under favourable condition) and one was ¡§opportunistic¡¨. A total of thirty six
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 ten sightings made, three sightings were recorded as ¡¥multiple¡¦ behavior (one of which was feeding and travelling and the other two
sightings were feeding and ¡§surface active¡¨); three sightings were recorded as feeding; one in
association with a small purse seiner/trawler; three was recorded as travelling and one
sighting was recorded
as ¡§unknown¡¨. Both of the ¡§milling¡¨ groups contained
calves and close approaches were not made. 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 6 Jan 14. 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 is considered the
complaint is unlikely to be related to this project.
EPD referred a complaint from complainant who advised that blackish mud
was found along the edge of the construction site of Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao
Bridge Hong Kong Project near the airport in the morning of 18 January 2014.
After receipt of the complaint, site daily was reviewed and follow-up
investigation has been conducted and excavation and dredging activities were
not observed within the site boundary of HKBCF during the joint site inspection
audit. Therefore in accordance with the investigation results, the complaint is
considered as not related to contract HY/2010/02.
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.
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 2888 |
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 |
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
-
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.
Table
2.1 Air Quality
Monitoring Equipment
Equipment |
Brand and
Model |
Portable direct
reading dust meter (1-hour TSP) |
Sibata Digital
Dust Monitor (Model No. LD-3 and LD-3B) |
High Volume
Sampler |
Tisch Environmental
Mass Flow Controlled Total Suspended Particulate (TSP) High Volume Air
Sampler (Model No.
TE-5170) |
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.
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 |
(a)
The HVS was installed in the vicinity of the air
sensitive receivers. The following criteria
were considered in the installation of the HVS.
(i)
A horizontal platform with appropriate support to
secure the sampler against gusty wind was provided.
(ii)
No two samplers should be placed less than 2
meters apart.
(iii)
The distance between the HVS and any obstacles,
such as buildings, was at least twice the height that the obstacle protrudes
above the HVS.
(iv)
A minimum of 2 meters separation from walls,
parapets and penthouse for rooftop sampler.
(v)
A minimum of 2 meters separation from any
supporting structure, measured horizontally is required.
(vi)
No furnace or incinerator flues nearby.
(vii)
Airflow around the sampler was unrestricted.
(viii)
Permission was obtained to set up the samplers and
access to the monitoring stations.
(ix)
A secured supply of electricity was obtained to operate
the samplers.
(x)
The sampler was located more than 20 meters from
any dripline.
(xi)
Any wire fence and gate, required to protect the
sampler, did not obstruct the monitoring process.
(xii)
Flow control accuracy was kept within ¡Ó2.5%
deviation over 24-hour sampling period.
(b)
Preparation of Filter Papers
(i)
Glass fibre filters, G810 were labelled and
sufficient filters that were clean and without pinholes were selected.
(ii)
All filters were equilibrated in the conditioning
environment for 24 hours before weighing. The conditioning environment
temperature was around
(iii)
All filter papers were prepared and analysed by ALS
Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd., which is a HOKLAS accredited laboratory and has
comprehensive quality assurance and quality control programmes.
(c)
Field Monitoring
(i)
The power supply was checked to ensure the HVS
works properly.
(ii)
The filter holder and the area surrounding the
filter were cleaned.
(iii)
The filter holder was removed by loosening the four
bolts and a new filter, with stamped number upward, on a supporting screen was
aligned carefully.
(iv)
The filter was properly aligned on the screen so
that the gasket formed an airtight seal on the outer edges of the filter.
(v)
The swing bolts were fastened to hold the filter
holder down to the frame. The
pressure applied was sufficient to avoid air leakage at the edges.
(vi)
Then the shelter lid was closed and was secured
with the aluminum strip.
(vii)
The HVS was warmed-up for about 5 minutes to
establish run-temperature conditions.
(viii)
A new flow rate record sheet was set into the flow
recorder.
(ix)
On site temperature and atmospheric pressure
readings were taken and the flow rate of the HVS was checked and adjusted at
around 1.1 m3/min, and complied with the range specified in the
updated EM&A Manual (i.e. 0.6-1.7 m3/min).
(x)
The programmable digital timer was set for a
sampling period of 24 hrs, and the starting time, weather condition and the
filter number were recorded.
(xi)
The initial elapsed time was recorded.
(xii)
At the end of sampling, on site temperature and
atmospheric pressure readings were taken and the final flow rate of the HVS was
checked and recorded.
(xiii)
The final elapsed time was recorded.
(xiv)
The sampled filter was removed carefully and folded
in half length so that only surfaces with collected particulate matter were in
contact.
(xv)
It was then placed in a clean plastic envelope and
sealed.
(xvi)
All monitoring information was recorded on a
standard data sheet.
(xvii)
Filters were then sent to ALS Technichem (HK) Pty
Ltd. for analysis.
(d)
Maintenance and Calibration
(i)
The HVS and its accessories were maintained in good
working condition, such as replacing motor brushes routinely and checking
electrical wiring to ensure a continuous power supply.
(ii)
5-point calibration of the HVS was conducted using
TE
(iii)
Calibration certificate of the HVSs are provided in
Appendix E.
(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.
Table 2.4 Summary
of 1-hour TSP Monitoring Results in the Reporting Period
|
Average (mg/m3) |
Range (mg/m3) |
Action Level (mg/m3) |
Limit Level (mg/m3) |
AMS2 |
83 |
79 ¡V 86 |
374 |
500 |
AMS3A |
84 |
81 ¡V 88 |
368 |
500 |
AMS7 |
83 |
81 ¡V 85 |
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 |
110 |
66 ¡V 185 |
176 |
260 |
AMS3A |
259 |
154 ¡V 502 |
167 |
260 |
AMS7 |
132 |
82 ¡V 207 |
183 |
260 |
2.7.7.1 According to information provided by the Contractor,
land-based construction activity such as stitching and transloading of Type 2
geotextile were being undertaken at Works Area WA2 during the monitoring
period.
2.7.7.2 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.
2.7.7.3 Photo records shows fugitive dust were generated by
vehicle activities 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.))
View A (fugitive dust were observed at the parking
lot of the nearby construction site which do not belongs to this Contract)
2.7.7.4 As refer to the wind data collected at wind station at
Works Area WA2 during the monitoring period on 06 and 07 Jan 14 (as attached)
Southeast wind 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.
2.7.7.5 The 1-hr TSP values recorded at AMS3A on 7 Jan 14,
which are within the monitoring period of the 24-hr TSP, were 84£gg/m3, 83£gg/m3
and 83£gg/m3 respectively. All measured values are well below the Action and
Limit Levels.
2.7.7.6 The measured 24-hr TSP values recorded at AMS7 (which
are closer to the marine-based works areas) on the same monitoring date
was133£gg/m3, which are below the Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.7.7 The measured 24-hr TSP values recorded at AMS3A on
next monitoring date were 154£gg/m3, which was below the Action and Limit Level.
2.7.7.8 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.
2.7.7.9 The Contractor was recommended
to continue implementing existing dust mitigation measures.
View B
(Hard paved surface observed at Works Area WA2)
The
following figure is the General Layout of Works Area WA2
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, C2c, C1a, C1b, D, E1, E2, A and B.
2.7.5.2 Stone column was being installed at the seabed
therefore it is considered that stone column installation at Portion E1, E2 and
Portion B is unlikely to contribute to the recorded 24hr-TSP exceedance.
2.7.5.3 Both band drain or cellular structure installation
conducted at C2a, C2b, C2c, C1a, C1b, E1, E2, A and B 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 Checking record of Jan 14 shows that plant engine is
operated by ULSD.
2.7.5.5 With reference to the weekly joint site inspection
records of 2, 9, 16, 22 and 29 of Jan 14, no dark smoke of was observed and
this indicates that plant engines are properly maintained.
2.7.5.6 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.
2.7.5.7 Functional checking on HVS at AMS2 was done. Air flow
of the HVS was checked and the flow was steady during the 24-hr TSP sampling at
AMS2. The filter paper was re-weighted by the assigned HOKLAS laboratory and
the result was reconfirmed.
2.7.5.8 The 1-hr TSP values recorded at AMS2 on 7 Jan 14, were
84£gg/m3, 83£gg/m3 and 85£gg/m3 respectively. All measured values are well below
the Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.5.9 The measured 24-hr TSP values recorded at AMS7 (which
is located closer to active works than AMS2) on 7 Jan 14 was 133£gg/m3, which
was below the Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.5.10 On the other hand, according to observation made at
the monitoring station AMS2, there was no non-project potential cause/activity
at the surrounding of monitoring station AMS2 which might potentially
contribute to the dust action level exceedance.
2.7.5.11 As refer to the wind data collected at wind station at
Works Area WA2 during the monitoring period on 7 and 8 Jan 14 (as
attached), East-southeast winds
were prevailing during the monitoring period. Construction works carried out by
this Contract are unlikely to cause dust exceedance at AMS2 under the
abovementioned prevailing wind directions.
2.7.5.12 The dust exceedance was therefore considered not to be
due to the Project works.
2.7.5.13 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.
2.7.6.1 According
to information provided by the Contractor, land-based construction activities
such as transloading land band equipment, accessories and installed sand bags
were being undertaken at Works Area WA2 during the monitoring period.
2.7.6.2 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.
2.7.6.3 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.))
View A (parking lot observed at nearby construction site which
do not belongs to this Contract)
2.7.6.4 As refer to
the wind data collected at wind station at Works Area WA2 during the monitoring
period on 17 and 18 Jan 14 (as attached) South-southeast 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.
2.7.6.5 The 1-hr
TSP values recorded at AMS3A on 18 Jan 14, which are within the monitoring
period of the 24-hr TSP, were 84£gg/m3, 83£gg/m3 and 85£gg/m3
respectively. All measured values are well below the Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.6.6 The measured
24-hr TSP values recorded at AMS2 (which are closer to the marine-based works
areas) on the same monitoring date were 124£gg/m3, which are below
the Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.6.7 The
following dust mitigation measures have been implemented at Works Area WA2:
1.
Works Area WA2¡¦s surface was hard-paved,
compacted or hydro-seeded (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.
View B (Hard
paved surface observed at Works Area WA2)
2.7.6.8
The dust exceedance was therefore considered
not to be due to the Project works.
2.7.7.1 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 all area except Portion D.
2.7.7.2
Stone column was being installed at the seabed
therefore it is considered that stone column installation at Portion C2a,
Portion E2 and Portion B are unlikely to contribute to the recorded 24hr-TSP
exceedance. For active works carried out on 18 Jan 14, please refer to the
below layout map.
2.7.7.3
Both
band drain or cellular structure installation which was conducted during the
monitoring period are considered unlikely to contribute to the recorded
24hr-TSP exceedance due to no significant fugitive dust was expected to be
generated in the process.
2.7.7.4
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.
2.7.7.5
Checking
record of Jan 14 shows that plant engine is operated by ULSD.
2.7.7.6
With
reference to the weekly joint site inspection records of 2, 9, 16, 22 and 29 of
Jan 14, no dark smoke of was observed and this indicates that plant engines are
properly maintained.
2.7.7.7
As
refer to the wind data collected at wind station at Works Area WA2 during the
monitoring period on 23 and 24 Jan 14, South-southeast winds was prevailing
during the monitoring period. However, photo record attached shows that dust
control measures was implemented by the Contractor.
Photo record showed that the Contractor implemented dust control
measures on pelican barge loaded with rock/sand. The Contractor was reminded to
continue to provide dust control measures on pelican barge loaded with
rock/sand.
Photo record showed that the Contractor implemented dust control
measures such as wind-board installed on pelican barge. The Contractor was
reminded to continue to provide such dust control measure.
2.7.7.8
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 AMS3A. The filter paper was
re-weighted by the assigned HOKLAS laboratory and the result was reconfirmed.
2.7.7.9
The
1-hr TSP values recorded at AMS7 on 18 Jan 14, which are within the monitoring
days of the 24-hr TSP, were 84£gg/m3,
83£gg/m3 and 83£gg/m3 respectively. All measured values
are well below the Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.7.10
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.
2.7.7.11
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.
Photo shows the conditions of the surrounding near the monitoring
station AMS7:
2.7.7.12
The
dust exceedance was therefore considered not to be due to the Project works.
2.7.8.1 According to information provided by the Contractor,
land-based construction activities such as transloading band drain material,
sand bags and tidy up and clearance of site area were being undertaken at Works
Area WA2 during the monitoring period.
2.7.8.2 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.
2.7.8.3 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.))
View A (parking lot observed at nearby construction site
which do not belongs to this Contract)
2.7.8.4 As refer to
the wind data collected at wind station at Works Area WA2 during the monitoring
period on 23 and 24 Jan 14 (as attached) Southeast 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.
2.7.8.5 The 1-hr
TSP values recorded at AMS3A on 24 Jan 14, which are within the monitoring
period of the 24-hr TSP, were 84£gg/m3, 82£gg/m3 and 81£gg/m3
respectively. All measured values are well below the Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.8.6 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 66£gg/m3 and109£gg/m3,
which are below the Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.8.7 The
measured 24-hr TSP values recorded at AMS3A on next monitoring date were
183£gg/m3, which exceeded the Action Level (The dust exceedance were considered
not to be due to the Project works after investigation).
2.7.8.8 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.
View B (Hard paved surface observed at Works Area WA2)
2.7.8.9 The dust
exceedance was therefore considered not to be due to the Project works.
2.7.9.1 According
to information provided by the Contractor, land-based construction activity such
removing batch/rolls of materials off site area was being undertaken at Works
Area WA2 during the monitoring period.
2.7.9.2 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.
2.7.9.3 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.))
View A (parking lot observed at nearby construction site
which do not belongs to this Contract)
2.7.9.4 As refer to
the wind data collected at wind station at Works Area WA2 during the monitoring
period on 28 and 29 Jan 14 (as attached) South-southeast 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.
2.7.9.5 The 1-hr
TSP values recorded at AMS3A on 29 Jan 14, which are within the monitoring
period of the 1-hr TSP, were 83£gg/m3, 84£gg/m3 and 82£gg/m3
respectively. All measured values are well below the Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.9.6 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 106£gg/m3 and129£gg/m3,
which are below the Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.9.7 The
measured 24-hr TSP values recorded at AMS3A on next monitoring date were
79£gg/m3, which did not exceed the Action or Limit Level.
2.7.9.8 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.
View B (Hard paved surface observed at Works Area WA2)
2.7.9.9 The dust exceedance
was therefore considered not to be due to the Project works.
Table 3.1 Noise
Monitoring Equipment
Equipment |
Brand and Model |
Integrated Sound Level Meter |
Rion NL-31 &
B&K2238 |
Acoustic Calibrator |
Rion NC-73 |
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.
|
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 |
(a)
The sound level meter was set on a tripod at a height
of
(b)
All measurement at NMS3A
were free
field measurements in the reporting month at NMS3A. A correction of
+3 dB(A) shall be made to the free field measurements.
(c)
The battery condition was checked to ensure the
correct functioning of the meter.
(d)
Parameters such as frequency weighting, the time
weighting and the measurement time were set as follows:-
(i)
frequency weighting: A
(ii)
time weighting: Fast
(iii)
time measurement: Leq(30-minutes) during
non-restricted hours i.e. 07:00 ¡V 1900 on normal weekdays.
(e)
Prior to and after each noise measurement, the
meter was calibrated using the acoustic calibrator for 94dB(A) at 1000 Hz. If the difference in the calibration
level before and after measurement was more than 1 dB(A), the measurement would
be considered invalid and repeat of noise measurement would be required after
re-calibration or repair of the equipment.
(f)
During the monitoring period, the Leq, L10
and L90 were recorded.
In addition, site conditions and noise sources were recorded on a
standard record sheet.
(g)
Noise measurement was paused during periods of high
intrusive noise (e.g. dog barking, helicopter noise) if possible. Observations
were recorded when intrusive noise was unavoidable.
(h)
Noise monitoring was cancelled in the presence of
fog, rain, wind with a steady speed exceeding
(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.
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 |
65 ¡V 67* |
75 |
NMS3A |
64 |
61
¡V 67* |
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.
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 |
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). |
Table
4.3 Impact
Water Quality Monitoring Stations
Station |
Description |
East |
North |
IS5 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
811579 |
817106 |
IS(Mf)6 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
812101 |
817873 |
IS7 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
812244 |
818777 |
IS8 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
814251 |
818412 |
IS(Mf)9 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
813273 |
818850 |
IS10 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
812577 |
820670 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
813562 |
820716 |
|
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
814328 |
819497 |
|
IS17 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
814539 |
820391 |
SR3 |
Sensitive receivers (San Tau SSSI) |
810525 |
816456 |
SR4(N) |
Sensitive receivers (Tai Ho) |
814705 |
817859 |
SR5 |
Sensitive receivers (Artificial Reef in NE Airport) |
811489 |
820455 |
SR6 |
Sensitive receivers (Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park) |
805837 |
821818 |
SR7 |
Sensitive receivers (Tai Mo Do) |
814293 |
821431 |
SR10A |
Sensitive receivers (Ma Wan FCZ)1 |
823741 |
823495 |
SR10B(N) |
Sensitive receivers (Ma Wan FCZ)2 |
823683 |
823187 |
Control Station |
809989 |
821117 |
|
Control Station |
817990 |
821129 |
|
CS4 |
Control Station |
810025 |
824004 |
CS6 |
Control Station |
817028 |
823992 |
CSA |
Control Station |
818103 |
823064 |
(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.
(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.
(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.
Table 4.5 Summary of Water
Quality Exceedances
Exceedance Level |
DO (S&M) |
DO (Bottom) |
Turbidity |
SS |
Total |
||||||
Ebb |
Flood |
Ebb |
Flood |
Ebb |
Flood |
Ebb |
Flood |
Ebb |
Flood |
||
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
(1) 10Jan14 |
0 |
1 |
|
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS(Mf)6 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS7 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS8 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
(1) 06Jan14 |
0 |
1 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS(Mf)9 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
(2) 03Jan14, 15 Jan 14 |
0 |
2 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
(1) 17 Jan 14 |
0 |
1 |
|
IS10 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS(Mf)11 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS(Mf)16 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS17 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR3 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
(1) 10Jan14 |
0 |
1 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR4(N) |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR5 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR6 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
(1) 03Jan14 |
0 |
1 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR7 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR10A |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR10B (N) |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Total |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
6 |
6 |
|
|
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
Note: S: Surface;
and
M:
Mid-depth.
4.7.4 One (1)
Action Level exceedance at measured Suspended Solids (mg/L) was recorded on
03 Jan 2014 at monitoring station SR6 at Mid-flood tide. For Action Level exceedances
at measured Suspended Solids (mg/L), 23.9 mg/L was recorded at Monitoring
Station SR6.
4.7.4.1 For
locations and type of active works carried out on 03 Jan 14, please refer to
the above layout map.
4.7.4.2 When
impact water quality monitoring was carried out during mid flood tide at
monitoring location IS10, SR5 and SR6 on 3 Jan 14, no silty plume were
observed to flow from the inside to the outside of the nortwestern part of the perimeter
silt curtain.
4.7.4.3 IS10, SR5
(located outside northwest part of the perimeter silt curtain) and IS(Mf)11
(located outside north part of the perimeter silt curtain) which are closer
to the active works than monitoring station SR6. Depth Averaged Suspended
Solids (SS) values (in mg/L) recorded during the flood tide on the same day
at IS10, SR5 and IS(Mf)11 were below the Action and Limit Level which shows
that the water quality closer to active works was not adversely
affected.
|
4.7.4.4 Turbidity
level (NTU) results recorded on
03 Jan 14 at SR6, SR5, IS10 and IS(Mf)11 during flood tide are 20.8
NTU, 18.6 NTU, 17.8 NTU and 17.3 NTU which are below the Action and Limit
Level, this indicates turbidity level of the area nearby was not adversely
affected.
4.7.4.5 The
exceedance was likely due to local effects in the vicinity of SR6.
|
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 |
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 |
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 |
1/6/2014 |
NWL |
2 |
27.6 |
51.5 |
1/6/2014 |
NWL |
3 |
23.9 |
||
1/7/2014 |
NWL |
2 |
10.6 |
59.6 |
|
1/7/2014 |
NWL |
3 |
12.5 |
||
1/7/2014 |
NEL |
1 |
1.7 |
||
1/7/2014 |
NEL |
2 |
33.1 |
||
1/7/2014 |
NEL |
3 |
1.7 |
||
2 |
1/9/2014 |
NEL |
1 |
20 |
59.2 |
1/9/2014 |
NEL |
2 |
15.5 |
||
1/9/2014 |
NWL |
2 |
23.7 |
50.0 |
|
1/10/2014 |
NWL |
2 |
40.6 |
||
1/10/2014 |
NWL |
3 |
9.4 |
||
TOTAL in January 2014 |
220.3 |
*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 January 2014
Date |
Location |
No. Sightings ¡§on effort¡¨ |
No. Sightings ¡§opportunistic¡¨ |
06/01/14 |
NW L |
5 |
1 |
NEL |
0 |
0 |
|
07/01/14 |
NW L |
0 |
0 |
NEL |
0 |
0 |
|
09/01/14 |
NW L |
1 |
0 |
NEL |
1 |
0 |
|
10/01/14 |
NW L |
2 |
0 |
NEL |
0 |
0 |
|
TOTAL in January 2014 |
9 |
1 |
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 |
6 & 7/01/2014 |
34.8 km |
74.6 km |
0 |
5 |
0.0 |
6.7 |
9
& 10/01/2014 |
35.5km |
73.7 km |
1 |
3 |
2.8 |
4.1 |
Encounter Rate of Total Number of Dolphins (ANI)** |
||||||
Date |
NEL
Track |
NWL
Track |
NEL
Dolphins |
NWL
Dolphins |
NEL
Encounter Rate |
NWL
Encounter Rate |
6 & 7/01/2014 |
34.8 km |
74.6 km |
0 |
26 |
0.0 |
34.9 |
9
& 10/01/2014 |
35.5km |
73.7 km |
1 |
7 |
2.8 |
9.5 |
* 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.
Air Quality
Noise
Water Quality
Chemical and Waste Management
Landscape and Visual Impact
Others
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/B |
28/01/2014 |
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-RS0012-14 |
11/01/2014 |
10/04/2014 |
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 |
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
-
Construction
of temporary seawall
-
Ground
investigation
-
Construction
of conveyors for public fill
-
Surcharge
laying
-
Precast
Yard setup
-
Construction
of temporary pier at Portion A
-
Sand
Drain
-
Construction
of temporary assess from Portion D to Portion A
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
- 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.
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.