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 October 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 October 2014
Figure 6 Environmental Complaint Handling Procedures
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 October 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 October 2014. As informed by the Contractor, major activities in the reporting period were:-
Marine-base
- Capping Beams structures
- Optimizing rubble mound seawalls
- Conforming sloping seawalls
- Laying geo-textile
- Rock filling
- Sand filling
- Public filling
- Band drain installation
- Surcharge remove & laying
- Geotechnical Instrumentation works
- Precast Yard for seawall blocks & culverts
- Maintenance of silt curtain & silt screen at sea water intake of HKIA
Land-base
- Maintenance works of Site Office at Works Area WA2
- Maintenance works of Public Works Regional Laboratory at Works Area WA3
- 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 |
14 sessions |
Impact dolphin monitoring |
2 surveys |
Joint Environmental site inspection |
5 sessions |
Breaches of Action and Limit Levels for Air Quality
One (1) 24-hour TSP result at AMS3B exceeded Action Level on 27 October 2014, after investigation, the exceedance was considered not related to this Contract. All 1-Hour TSP results were below the Action and Limit Level in the reporting month.
Breaches of Action and Limit Levels for Water Quality
Complaint, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecution
No notification of summons or prosecution was received in the reporting period.
Reporting Change
There was no reporting change required in the reporting period.
Future Key Issues
Key issues to be considered in the coming month included:-
- Site runoff should be properly collected and treated prior to discharge;
- Minimize loss of sediment from filling works;
- Regular review and maintenance of silt curtain systems, drainage systems and desilting facilities;
- Exposed surfaces/soil stockpiles should be properly treated to avoid generation of silty surface run-off during rainstorm;
- Regular review and maintenance of wheel washing facilities provided at all site entrances/exits;
- Conduct regular inspection of various working machineries and vessels within works areas to avoid any dark smoke emission;
- Suppress dust generated from work processes with use of bagged cements, earth movements, excavation activities, exposed surfaces/soil stockpiles and haul road traffic;
- Quieter powered mechanical equipment should be used;
- Provision of proper and effective noise control measures for operating equipment and machinery on-site, such as erection of movable noise barriers or enclosure for noisy plants;
- Closely check and replace the sound insulation materials regularly;
- Better scheduling of construction works to minimize noise nuisance;
- Properly store and label oil drums and chemical containers placed on site;
- Proper chemicals, chemical wastes and wastes management;
- Maintenance works should be carried out within roofed, paved and confined areas;
- Collection and segregation of construction waste and general refuse on land and in the sea should be carried out properly and regularly; and
- Proper protection and regular inspection of existing trees, transplanted/retained trees.
- Control night-time lighting and glare by hooding all lights.
- Regular review and provide maintenance to dust control measures such as sprinkler system.
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
- Optimizing rubble mound seawalls
- Conforming sloping seawalls
- Laying geo-textile
- Sand blanket laying
- Sand filling
- Rock filling
- Maintenance of silt curtain & silt screen at sea water intake of HKIA
- Band drain installation
- Backfill cellular structure
- Geotechnical Instrumentation works
- Surcharge laying
- Capping Beams structures
- Construction of temporary jetties for surcharge laying
- Temporary Watermain construction
- Flat barge of unloading public fill for surcharge laying
- Precast Yard Setup
Land-based Works
- Maintenance works of Site Office at Works Area WA2
- Maintenance works of Public Works Regional Laboratory at Works Area WA3
- 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 |
AMS3B |
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 ±2.5% deviation over 24-hour sampling period.
(b) Preparation of Filter Papers
(i) Glass fibre filters, G810 were labelled and sufficient filters that were clean and without pinholes were selected.
(ii) All filters were equilibrated in the conditioning environment for 24 hours before weighing. The conditioning environment temperature was around 25 °C and not variable by more than ±3 °C; the relative humidity (RH) was < 50% and not variable by more than ±5%. A convenient working RH was 40%.
(iii) All filter papers were prepared and analysed by ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd., which is a HOKLAS accredited laboratory and has comprehensive quality assurance and quality control programmes.
(c) Field Monitoring
(i) The power supply was checked to ensure the HVS works properly.
(ii) The filter holder and the area surrounding the filter were cleaned.
(iii) The filter holder was removed by loosening the four bolts and a new filter, with stamped number upward, on a supporting screen was aligned carefully.
(iv) The filter was properly aligned on the screen so that the gasket formed an airtight seal on the outer edges of the filter.
(v) The swing bolts were fastened to hold the filter holder down to the frame. The pressure applied was sufficient to avoid air leakage at the edges.
(vi) Then the shelter lid was closed and was secured with the aluminum strip.
(vii) The HVS was warmed-up for about 5 minutes to establish run-temperature conditions.
(viii) A new flow rate record sheet was set into the flow recorder.
(ix) On site temperature and atmospheric pressure readings were taken and the flow rate of the HVS was checked and adjusted at around 1.1 m3/min, and complied with the range specified in the updated EM&A Manual (i.e. 0.6-1.7 m3/min).
(x) The programmable digital timer was set for a sampling period of 24 hrs, and the starting time, weather condition and the filter number were recorded.
(xi) The initial elapsed time was recorded.
(xii) At the end of sampling, on site temperature and atmospheric pressure readings were taken and the final flow rate of the HVS was checked and recorded.
(xiii) The final elapsed time was recorded.
(xiv) The sampled filter was removed carefully and folded in half length so that only surfaces with collected particulate matter were in contact.
(xv) It was then placed in a clean plastic envelope and sealed.
(xvi) All monitoring information was recorded on a standard data sheet.
(xvii) Filters were then sent to ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. for analysis.
(d) Maintenance and Calibration
(i) The HVS and its accessories were maintained in good working condition, such as replacing motor brushes routinely and checking electrical wiring to ensure a continuous power supply.
(ii) 5-point calibration of the HVS was conducted using TE-5025A Calibration Kit prior to the commencement of baseline monitoring. Bi-monthly 5-point calibration of the HVS will be carried out during impact monitoring.
(iii) Calibration certificate of the HVSs are provided in Appendix E.
(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 |
82 |
75 - 90 |
374 |
500 |
AMS3B |
82 |
75 - 91 |
368 |
500 |
AMS7 |
82 |
73 - 92 |
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 |
83 |
67 – 106 |
176 |
260 |
AMS3B |
114 |
67 – 220 |
167 |
260 |
AMS7 |
84 |
60 – 124 |
183 |
260 |
2.7.3.1 According to information provided by the Contractor, no land-based construction was being undertaken at Works Area WA2 during the monitoring period.
2.7.3.2 Site inspection has been conducted on 7 November 2014 to review works activities of adjacent construction site(s) for identifying the possible source(s), construction site was observed and the source of impact may be contributed by adjacent construction site which do not belongs to this contract. Please see below photo record for reference.
2.7.3.3 Functional checking on HVS at AMS3B was done. Air flow of the HVS was checked and the flow was steady during the 24-hr TSP sampling at AMS3B, initial flow, final flow and average rate are 1.34m3/min. The filter paper was re-weighted by the assigned HOKLAS laboratory and the result was reconfirmed.
2.7.3.4 The 1-hr TSP values recorded at AMS3B on 27 October 14, which are within the monitoring period of the 1-hr TSP, were 75μg/m3, 76μg/m3 and 76μg/m3 respectively. All measured values are well below the Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.3.5 The measured 24-hr TSP values recorded at AMS2 and AMS7 (which are closer to the marine-based works areas) on 27 October 2014 date were 76μg/m3 and 92μg/m3, which are below the Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.3.6 The measured 24-hr TSP values recorded at AMS3B on next monitoring date, 1 November 2014 was 76μg/m3, which did not exceed the Action or Limit Level.
2.7.3.7 Below layout map shows the location of HVS at AMS3B:
2.7.3.8
|
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 above layout map and photo records below (View A))
· Photo record taken on 7 November 2014 during ad hoc site inspection: View B on layout map
· Photo record taken on 7 November 2014 during ad hoc site inspection: View C on layout map
2 Vehicle washing facility was provided at vehicle exit points,
3 Measures for preventing fugitive dust emission are provided, e.g. canvas/tarpaulin covers.
2.7.3.9 After investigation, the dust exceedance was considered not to be due to works of this Contract.
Table 3.1 Noise Monitoring Equipment
Equipment |
Brand and Model |
Integrated Sound Level Meter |
Rion NL-31 & B&K2238 |
Acoustic Calibrator |
Rion NC-74 & B&K 4231 |
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 |
NMS3B |
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 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 NMS3B were free field measurements in the reporting month at NMS3B. A correction of +3 dB(A) shall be made to the free field measurements.
(c) The battery condition was checked to ensure the correct functioning of the meter.
(d) Parameters such as frequency weighting, the time weighting and the measurement time were set as follows:-
(i) frequency weighting: A
(ii) time weighting: Fast
(iii) time measurement: Leq(30-minutes) during non-restricted hours i.e. 07:00 – 1900 on normal weekdays.
(e) Prior to and after each noise measurement, the meter was calibrated using the acoustic calibrator for 94dB(A) at 1000 Hz. If the difference in the calibration level before and after measurement was more than 1 dB(A), the measurement would be considered invalid and repeat of noise measurement would be required after re-calibration or repair of the equipment.
(f) During the monitoring period, the Leq, L10 and L90 were recorded. In addition, site conditions and noise sources were recorded on a standard record sheet.
(g) Noise measurement was paused during periods of high intrusive noise (e.g. dog barking, helicopter noise) if possible. Observations were recorded when intrusive noise was unavoidable.
(h) Noise monitoring was cancelled in the presence of fog, rain, wind with a steady speed exceeding 5m/s, or wind with gusts exceeding 10m/s. The wind speed shall be checked with a portable wind speed meter capable of measuring the wind speed in m/s.
(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 |
66 – 68* |
75 |
NMS3B |
67 |
63 – 68* |
70/65^ |
*+3dB(A) Façade correction included
^ Daytime noise Limit Level of 70 dB(A) applies to education institutions, while 65dB(A) applies during school examination period.
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 and Lowrance x-4 |
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 |
· Depth, m · Temperature, oC · Salinity, ppt · Dissolved Oxygen (DO), mg/L · DO Saturation, % · Turbidity, NTU · pH · Suspended Solids (SS), mg/L |
Three times per week during mid-ebb and mid-flood tides (within ± 1.75 hour of the predicted time)
|
3 (1 m below water surface, mid-depth and 1 m above sea bed, except where the water depth is less than 6 m, in which case the mid-depth station may be omitted. Should the water depth be less than 3 m, only the mid-depth station will be monitored). |
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 |
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 |
(1) 31 Oct 14 |
(1) 3 Oct 14 |
1 |
1 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
(1) 20 Oct 14 |
0 |
1 |
|
IS(Mf)9 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS10 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
(2) 13 and 24 Oct 14 |
0 |
2 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS(Mf)11 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
(1) 6 Oct 14 |
(1) 6 Oct 14 |
1 |
1 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS(Mf)16 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS17 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
(1) 20 Oct |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
(1) 10 Oct 14 |
0 |
(1) 10 Oct |
0 |
2 |
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 |
(3) 13, 20 and 24 Oct 14 |
0 |
3 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR5 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
(2) 6 and 13 Oct 14 |
0 |
2 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR6 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR7 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR10A |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
(1) 22 Oct 14 |
0 |
1 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR10B (N) |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
(2) 10 and 22 Oct 14 |
0 |
2 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Total |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
12 |
15 |
|
|
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
Note: S: Surface; and
M: Mid-depth.
1. in situ measurement was repeated to confirm findings of the exceedance of turbidity. Repeat in situ measurement is not applicable to suspended solid as SS was not measured in situ;
2. Source of impact refer to Section 4.7.3.3
3. IEC, Contractor, ER and EPD were noticed of the limit level exceedances via email;
4. Monitoring data was reviewed, plant, equipment and contractor's working methods were checked. Please refer to the layout map above.
5. The Contractor was reminded to ensure swift provision of ongoing maintenance to the silt curtains and to carry out maintenance work once defects were found.
6. Mitigation measures such as perimeter silt curtain was implemented by the Contractor, however defects of the perimeter silt curtain was observed, the Contractor was reminded to ensure swift provision of maintenance to the silt curtains once defects were found. With refer to the maintenance record provided by the Contractor, maintenance work for the defects of the northwest part of the perimeter silt curtain was conducted on 28 October 2014.
7. Monitoring results show no recurrence of exceedance at IS17 during ebb tide on 13 Oct 2014.
Action taken under the action plan
1. Not applicable as SS was not measured in situ;
2. After considering the above mentioned investigation results, it appears that it was unlikely that the SS exceedance was attributed to active construction activities of this project;
3. IEC, contractor and ER were informed via email;
4. Monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor's working methods were checked;
5. Since it is considered that the SS exceedance is unlikely to be project related, as such, actions 5 - 7 under the EAP are not considered applicable.
Contractor’s actions to implement the mitigation
1. Not applicable as SS was not measured in situ;
2. After considering the above mentioned investigation results, it appears that it was unlikely that the SS exceedance was attributed to active construction activities of this project;
3. IEC, contractor and ER were informed via email;
4. Monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor's working methods were checked;
5-7. Since it is considered that the SS exceedance is unlikely to be project related, as such, actions 5 - 7 under the EAP are not considered applicable.
1. Not applicable as SS was not measured in situ;
2. After considering the above mentioned investigation results, it appears that it was unlikely that the SS exceedances were attributed to active construction activities of this project;
3. IEC, contractor and ER were informed via email;
4. Monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor's working methods were checked;
5-7. Since it is considered that the SS exceedances are unlikely to be project related, as such, actions 5 - 7 under the EAP are not considered applicable.
1. Not applicable as SS was not measured in situ;
2. After considering the above mentioned investigation results, it appears that it was unlikely that the SS exceedances were attributed to active construction activities of this project;
3. IEC, contractor and ER were informed via email;
4. Monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor's working methods were checked;
5-7. Since it is considered that the SS exceedances are unlikely to be project related, as such, actions 5 - 7 under the EAP are not considered applicable.
1. Repeat in situ measurement is not applicable to suspended solid as SS was not measured in situ;
2. Source of impact refer to bullet point section 4.7.8.4
3. IEC, Contractor, ER and EPD were noticed of the limit level exceedances via email;
4. Monitoring data was reviewed, plant, equipment and contractor's working methods were checked. Please refer to the layout map above.
5. The Contractor was reminded to ensure swift provision of ongoing maintenance to the silt curtains and to carry out maintenance work once defects were found.
6. Mitigation measures such as perimeter silt curtain was implemented by the Contractor, however defects of the perimeter silt curtain was observed, the Contractor was reminded to ensure swift provision of maintenance to the silt curtains once defects were found. With refer to the maintenance record provided by the Contractor, maintenance work for the defects of the Northeastern part of the perimeter silt curtain was conducted on 28-Oct-14.
7. Monitoring results show no recurrence of exceedance at IS17 during ebb tide on 22 Oct 2014.
1. Not applicable as SS was not measured in situ;
2. After considering the above mentioned investigation results, it appears that it was unlikely that the SS exceedances were attributed to active construction activities of this project;
3. IEC, contractor and ER were informed via email;
4. Monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor's working methods were checked;
5-7. Since it is considered that the SS exceedances are unlikely to be project related, as such, actions 5 - 7 under the EAP are not considered applicable.
1. Not applicable as SS was not measured in situ;
2. After considering the above mentioned investigation results, it appears that it was unlikely that the SS exceedances were attributed to active construction activities of this project;
3. IEC, contractor and ER were informed via email;
4. Monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor's working methods were checked;
5-7. Since it is considered that the SS exceedances are unlikely to be project related, as such, actions 5 - 7 under the EAP are not considered applicable.
1. Not applicable as SS was not measured in situ;
2. After considering the above mentioned investigation results, it appears that it was unlikely that the SS exceedances were attributed to active construction activities of this project;
3. IEC, contractor and ER were informed via email;
4. Monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor's working methods were checked;
5-7. Since it is considered that the SS exceedances are unlikely to be project related, as such, actions 5 - 7 under the EAP are not considered applicable.
1. Not applicable as SS was not measured in situ;
2. After considering the above mentioned investigation results, it appears that it was unlikely that the SS exceedances were attributed to active construction activities of this project;
3. IEC, contractor and ER were informed via email;
4. Monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor's working methods were checked;
5-7. Since it is considered that the SS exceedance is unlikely to be project related, as such, actions 5 - 7 under the EAP are not considered applicable.
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 76C |
Computers (T7000 Tablet, Intel Atom) |
Windows 7/MSO 13 Logger |
Camera |
Nikon D7100 300m 2.8D fixed focus Nikon D90 80-400mm zoom lens |
Laser Rangefinder |
Range Finder Bushnell 1000m |
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 |
10/13/2014 |
NWL |
1 |
13.1 |
63 |
|
10/13/2014 |
NWL |
2 |
33.3 |
|||
10/13/2014 |
NWL |
3 |
16.6 |
|||
10/14/2014 |
NWL |
2 |
3.1 |
47.2 |
||
10/14/2014 |
NWL |
3 |
6.9 |
|||
10/14/2014 |
NEL |
1 |
32.9 |
|||
10/14/2014 |
NEL |
2 |
4.3 |
|||
2 |
10/20/2014 |
NWL |
1 |
14.7 |
62.7 |
|
10/20/2014 |
NWL |
2 |
47 |
|||
10/20/2014 |
NWL |
3 |
1 |
|||
10/21/2014 |
NWL |
1 |
9.9 |
47.2 |
||
10/21/2014 |
NEL |
1 |
37.3 |
|||
TOTAL in October 2014 |
220.1 |
*Remark: Surveys conduct under Beaufort Sea State 3 or below are considered as under favourable condition.
Location |
No. Sightings “on effort” |
No. Sightings “opportunistic” |
|
10/13/2014 |
NW L |
2 |
1 |
NEL |
0 |
0 |
|
10/14/2014 |
NW L |
0 |
0 |
NEL |
0 |
0 |
|
10/20/2014 |
NW L |
2 |
1 |
NEL |
0 |
0 |
|
10/21/2014 |
NW L |
0 |
0 |
NEL |
0 |
0 |
|
TOTAL in September 2014 |
4 |
2 |
Table 5.4 Impact Dolphin Monitoring Survey Details October 2014
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 (km) |
NWL Track (km) |
NEL Sightings |
NWL Sightings |
NEL Encounter Rate |
NWL Encounter Rate |
13 & 14/10/2014 |
37.2 |
73.0 |
0 |
2 |
0.0 |
2.7 |
20 & 21/10/2014 |
37.3 |
72.6 |
0 |
2 |
0.0 |
2.8 |
Encounter Rate of Total Number of Dolphins (ANI)** |
||||||
Date |
NEL Track (km) |
NWL Track (km) |
NEL Dolphins |
NWL Dolphins |
NEL Encounter Rate |
NWL Encounter Rate |
13 & 14/10/2014 |
37.2 |
73.0 |
0 |
10 |
0.0 |
13.7 |
20 & 21/10/2014 |
37.3 |
72.6 |
0 |
4 |
0.0 |
5.5 |
* 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 – Zhuhai – Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities |
EP-354/2009/B |
28/01/2014 |
N/A |
Tuen Mun – Chek Lap Kok Link (TMCLKL Southern Landfall Reclamation only) |
|||
APCO |
NA notification |
-- |
30/12/2011 |
-- |
CHEC |
Works Area WA2 and WA3 |
APCO |
NA notification |
-- |
17/01/2012 |
-- |
CHEC |
Works Area WA4 |
WDO
|
Chemical Waste Producer Registration |
5213-951-C1186-21 |
30/3/2012 |
N/A |
CHEC |
Chemical waste produced in Contract HY/2010/02 |
WDO
|
Chemical Waste Producer Registration |
5213-974-C3750-01 |
31/10/2012 |
-- |
CHEC |
Registration as Chemical Waste Producer at To Kau Wan(WA4) |
WDO
|
Chemical Waste Producer Registration |
5213-839-C3750-02 |
13/09/2012 |
-- |
CHEC |
Registration as Chemical Waste Producer at TKO 137(FB) |
WDO |
Billing Account for Disposal of Construction Waste |
7014181 |
05/12/2011 |
N/A |
CHEC |
Waste disposal in Contract HY/2010/02 |
NCO |
Construction Noise Permit |
GW-RS0990-14 |
18/09/2014 |
24/12/2014 |
CHEC |
Reclamation Works in Contract HY/2010/02 |
NCO |
Construction Noise Permit |
GW-RE0656-14 |
30/06/2014 |
22/12/2014 |
CHEC |
Section of TKO Fill Bank under Contract HY/2010/02 |
· Review of monitoring data obtained 20, 22, 24 and 27 October 2014.
· Investigation report provided by the Contractor on 29 October 2014 was reviewed:
· Diver checking and rectification record for integrity of silt curtain has been checked.
· Inspection condition of sea area near Portion E1 on 31 October 2014 around 1pm.
· Suspended Solids (SS) level and turbidity level recorded at IS(Mf)11, IS17 and IS(Mf)16 and IS8 on 20, 22, 24 and 27 October 2014 were reviewed. (for IWQM data, refer to Appendix J)
· Review of Suspended Solids (SS) level and turbidity level recorded at IS(Mf)11, IS17 and IS(Mf)16 and IS8 on 20 October 2014:
· Limit Level Exceedance of SS at IS8 during flood tide and Action Level Exceedance of IS17 during ebb tide was noted on 20 October 2014. After investigation, the exceedance recorded at IS8 are unlikely to be project related. However, exceedance recorded at IS17 is likely due to marine based construction activities of the Project. For details of investigation, please refer to investigation details section 4.7.3 to 4.7.4.
· Review of Suspended Solids (SS) level and turbidity level recorded at IS(Mf)11, IS17, IS(Mf)16 and IS8 on 22, 24 and 27 October 2014:
· Turbidity level and Suspended Solids recorded on 22, 24 and 27 October 2014 at IS(Mf)11, IS17, IS(Mf)16 and IS8 were below the action and limit level. This indicates the turbidity level and suspended solid at sea area close to portion E1 was not adversely affected on 22, 24 and 27 October 2014.
· Figure 3.2 of the investigation report showed that the silt plume was no longer observed at 02:09pm on 23 October 2014 after derrick barge (振明28) ceased the work at 11:40am.
· The Contractor arranged diver to check the integrity of the concerned silt curtain. Minor damaged found on the concerned silt curtain and rectification works had been carried out by the Contractor.
· Diver checking and rectification record for integrity of silt curtain has been checked and it shows that the part of the silt curtain which was suspected to be malfunction (showed by red arrow in the diagram below) has been rectified by the Contractor.
· Subsequently, a rock placement trial was conducted by the Contractor on 28 October 2014. Silt plume was observed during the process but Figure 3.8 of the investigation report shows that spreading to the outside of the silt curtain was prevented by the silt curtain.
· Photo records taken on 31 October 2014 shows the sea condition at sea area near the northeast side of the HKBCF Reclamation Works and no silt plume was observed spreading out from Portion E1 of the construction site through the silt curtain:
· Review of monitoring results on 27 and 29 October 2014.
· Ad hoc site inspection was conducted on 31 October 2014
· IWQM data obtained on 27 and 29 October 2014 were reviewed; no water quality monitoring exceedance was noted on 27 and 29 October 2014.
· Ad hoc site inspection was subsequently conducted on 31 October 2014 but no silt plume or turbid water was observed on 31 October 2014. Photo records taking on 31 October 2014 at around 01:00pm which shows the sea condition at sea area near Portion E1 of the HKBCF Reclamation Works:
· 1hr TSP and 24hrs TSP monitoring data of complaint period 1- 15 October 2014 have been reviewed.
· Site inspections were conducted jointly with RSS, IEC and the Contractor on 16 October 2014 and jointly with RSS and the Contractor on 23 October 2014.
· There is no sufficient information provided by the complainant to make sure that the concerned barges are related to this project.
· Date of the observed impact was not specified by the complainant so the impact air quality monitoring (IAQM) results within the complaint period 1- 15 October 2014 for monitoring stations close to the concerned area – AQMS1, ASR1, ASR5, ASR6 and ASR10 have been reviewed and there was one action level exceedance of 24hr TSP on impact air quality monitoring result recorded at ASR1 but no information which shows that the action level exceedance at ASR1 is related to vessel of this Contract. IAQM data AQMS1, ASR1, ASR5, ASR6 and ASR10 also available online from: http://www.hzmbenpo.com/php/list_air_year_All.php)
· As informed by the Contractor, the Contractor would continue to provide watering to stockpile of sand on sand delivery barges.
· Photo record below shows that sand barges were not covered but they are equipped with watering equipment and in order to prevent generation of fugitive dust, watering equipment was used to keep the sand filling material wet.
· In addition, site inspections were conducted jointly with RSS, IEC and the Contractor on 16 October 2014 and jointly with RSS and the Contractor on 23 October 2014, but no generation of fugitive dust was observed to be caused by barges loaded with filling material.
· Sand barges usually moor at around Sham Shui Kok anchorage area and the Contractor would continue to provide watering to stockpile of sand on sand delivery barges, therefore the potential impact to resident areas concerned by the complainant is low.
· The Contractor usually moor vessel at around Sham Shui Kok anchorage area (Except upon request by HK government and under this circumstances, then they will moor at Tuen Mun waters shortly for inspection.)
· Spot check of travel route record of sand delivery barges and review whether sand delivery barges of this Contract would moor/stay at sea area near Tuen Mun Ferry Pier
· Impact water quality monitoring (IWQM) results recorded in September and October 2014 which cover IWQM station(s) - IS14, IS15 and SR9 which are near to the concern area(s), have been reviewed.
· Regular site inspections were conducted jointly with RSS, IEC and the Contractor on 16 October 2014 and jointly with RSS and the Contractor on 23 October 2014.
· Spot check of travel route record also shows that that sand delivering vessels follow a designated marine travel route. However, only in particular cases, those vessels will moor near sea area off Butterfly beach for government department to carry out inspection. In general, the sand delivery barges were requested by the Contractor to moor as far away from residence as possible and continue to provide watering to stockpile of sand on sand delivery barges.
· Impact water quality monitoring (IWQM) results recorded in September and October 2014 which cover IWQM station(s) - IS14, IS15 and SR9 which are near to the concern area(s), have been reviewed. However no IWQM exceedance was noted in September and October 2014 at monitoring station IS14, IS15 and SR9 which are near to the concern area(s). (IWQM data of IS14, IS15 and SR9 available online at: http://www.hzmbenpo.com/php/list_water_year.php )
· In addition, site inspections were conducted jointly with RSS, IEC and the Contractor on 16 October 2014 and jointly with RSS and the Contractor on 23 October 2014, but no leakage of sand material or generation of fugitive dust was observed to be caused by barges loaded with sand material.
· In addition, sand delivery barges are equipped with watering equipment and in order to prevent generation of fugitive dust, watering equipment was used to keep the sand filling material wet.
· Nonetheless, as informed by the Contractor, the Contractor would study the feasibility of covering stockpile of sand on sand delivery barges.
Marine-base
- Cellular structure installation
- Capping Beams structures
- Optimizing rubble mound seawalls
- Conforming sloping seawalls
- Laying geo-textile
- Rock filling
- Sand filling
- Public filling
- Band drain installation
- Surcharge laying
- Geotechnical Instrumentation works
- Precast Yard for seawall blocks & culverts
- Maintenance of silt curtain & silt screen at sea water intake of HKIA
Land-base
- Maintenance works of Site Office at Works Area WA2
- Maintenance works of Public Works Regional Laboratory at Works Area WA3
- Maintenance of Temporary Marine Access at Works Area WA2
*Construction activities in November & December 2014 will be changed subject to works progress.
- 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.
- Control night-time lighting and glare by hooding all lights.
- Regular review and provide maintenance to dust control measures such as sprinkler system.
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.
l Regular review and provide maintenance to dust control measures such as sprinkler system.
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.
l Control night-time lighting and glare by hooding all lights.
[1] A noteworthy observation is to show that either the conduct of the surveys themselves is affected, i.e., the noted vessel or works impedes the progress or view of the survey platform. In addition, the vessel or construction works may be different or additional to that observed previously and further, are of such a nature that they are a likely to create an impact on the movement or behaviour of the subject of the impact survey, in this case, the dolphins.