Contract No. HY/2010/02 – Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities
– Reclamation Work (here below, known as “the Project”) mainly comprises
reclamation at the northeast
of the Hong Kong International Airport of
an area of
about 130-hectare for
the construction of an artificial island for the development of the Hong
Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF), and about 19-hectare for the
southern landfall of the Tuen Mun
- Chek Lap Kok Link
(TMCLKL). It is a designated project and is governed by the current permits for
the Project, i.e. the amended Environmental Permits (EPs) issued on 17 July 2015 (EP-353/2009/I) and 13 March 2015 (EP-354/2009/D) (for TMCLKL Southern
Landfall Reclamation only).
Ove Arup & Partners Hong
Kong Limited (Arup) was appointed by Highways Department (HyD)
as the consultants for the design and construction assignment for the Project’s
reclamation works (i.e. the Engineer for the Project).
China Harbour
Engineering Company Limited (CHEC) was awarded by HyD
as the Contractor to undertake the construction work of the Project.
Ramboll Environ Hong Kong Limited.
was employed by HyD as the
Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) and Environmental Project Office (ENPO)
for the Project.
AECOM Asia Co. Ltd. (AECOM) was
appointed by CHEC to undertake the role of Environmental Team for the Project
for carrying out the environmental monitoring and audit (EM&A) works.
The construction phase of the Project
under the EPs was commenced on 12 March 2012 and will be tentatively completed
by early Year 2016. The EM&A programme, including
air quality, noise, water quality and dolphin monitoring and environmental site
inspections, was commenced on 12 March 2012.
This report
documents the findings of EM&A works conducted in the period between 1 and 31 August
2015. As informed
by the Contractor, major activities in the reporting period were:-
Marine-base
-
Cellular structure – Connecting Arcs
-
Rubble Mound Seawall
-
Rock fill
-
Maintenance of silt curtain & silt
screen at sea water intake of HKIA
Land-base
-
Earthwork fill
-
Surcharge removal & laying
-
Deep Cement Mixing
-
Removal of Temporary Seawall
-
Vertical Band Drains
-
Installations of Precast Culverts
except sloping outfalls
-
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
|
5 sessions
|
|
1-hour
TSP monitoring
|
5
sessions
|
|
Noise monitoring
|
4
sessions
|
|
Impact
water quality monitoring
|
13 sessions
|
|
Impact
dolphin monitoring
|
2
surveys
|
|
Joint Environmental
site inspection
|
4
sessions
|
Breaches of Action and Limit Levels for Air Quality
One (1) Limit Level Exceedance of 24hr-TSP was
recorded at AMS2. After investigation, there is no adequate
information to conclude the recorded exceedances are
related to this Contract.
Breaches of Action and Limit Levels for Noise
For
construction noise, no exceedance was recorded at all
monitoring stations in the reporting month.
Breaches of Action and Limit Levels for Water Quality
All
impact water quality monitoring results were below the Action and Limit Level
in the reporting month.
Impact Dolphin Monitoring
A total of five sightings were made, three “on effort” and
two “opportunistic”. Two sightings
were recorded on the 10 August 2015 and three on the 25 August 2015. Sighting
details are summarised are plotted
in Appendix K and Figure 5c, respectively. The first group sighted on the 10 August 2015 comprised one
individual and the second, three individuals. The first group sighted on 25
August 2015 comprised one individual and the second and third groups, each had
three individuals. The two groups of three spotted on the 25 August 2015 were
the same individuals but in different locations.
Behaviour: On the 10 August 2015, both groups sighted were engaged in
feeding activities. On 25 August
2015, the first dolphin sighted was feeding and the second two groups were
travelling. No calves were sighted in August 2015.Locations
of sighting with different behaviour are mapped in
Figure 5d.
For dolphin monitoring, one (1) limit level exceedance is recorded. The Investigation is undergoing and
investigation results will be reported in quarterly report (June – August
2015).
Complaint,
Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecution
No
notification of complaint, summons or prosecution was received in the reporting
period
Reporting Change
There
was no reporting change required in the reporting period.
Future Key
Issues
Key
issues to be considered in the coming month included:
-
Site runoff should be properly
collected and treated prior to discharge;
-
Minimize loss of sediment from filling
works;
-
Regular review and maintenance of silt
curtain systems, drainage systems and desilting
facilities;
-
Exposed surfaces/soil stockpiles should
be properly treated to avoid generation of silty
surface run-off during rainstorm;
-
Regular review and maintenance of wheel
washing facilities provided at all site entrances/exits;
-
Conduct regular inspection of various
working machineries and vessels within works areas to avoid any dark smoke
emission;
-
Suppress dust generated from work
processes with use of bagged cements, earth movements, excavation activities,
exposed surfaces/soil stockpiles and haul road traffic;
-
Quieter powered mechanical equipment
should be used;
-
Provision of proper and effective noise
control measures for operating equipment and machinery on-site, such as
erection of movable noise barriers or enclosure for noisy plants;
-
Closely check and replace the sound
insulation materials regularly;
-
Better scheduling of construction works
to minimize noise nuisance;
-
Properly store and label oil drums and
chemical containers placed on site;
-
Proper chemicals, chemical wastes and
wastes management;
-
Maintenance works should be carried out
within roofed, paved and confined areas;
-
Collection and segregation of
construction waste and general refuse on land and in the sea should be carried
out properly and regularly; and
-
Proper protection and regular
inspection of existing trees, transplanted/retained trees.
-
Control night-time lighting and glare
by hooding all lights.
-
Regular review and provide maintenance
to dust control measures such as sprinkler system.
1.1.1
Contract No. HY/2010/02 – Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao
Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities – Reclamation Work (here below,
known as “the Project”) mainly comprises reclamation at the northeast of
the Hong Kong International Airport of
an area of
about 130-hectare for
the construction of an artificial island for the development of the Hong
Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF), and about 19-hectare for the
southern landfall of the Tuen Mun
- Chek Lap Kok Link
(TMCLKL).
1.1.2
The environmental impact assessment (EIA) reports (Hong Kong –
Zhuhai
– Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing
Facilities – EIA Report (Register No. AEIAR-145/2009) (HKBCFEIA) and Tuen Mun – Chek
Lap Kok Link – EIA Report (Register No.
AEIAR-146/2009) (TMCLKLEIA), and their environmental monitoring and audit
(EM&A) Manuals (original EM&A Manuals), for the Project were approved
by Environmental Protection Department (EPD) in October 2009.
1.1.3
EPD subsequently issued the
Environmental Permit (EP) for HKBCF in November 2009
(EP-353/2009) and the Variation of Environmental Permit (VEP) in June 2010
(EP-353/2009/A), November 2010 (EP-353/2009/B), November 2011 (EP-353/2009/C), March 2012
(EP-353/2009/D), October 2012 (EP-353/2009/E), April 2013 (EP-353/2009/F),
August 2013 (EP-353/2009/G), January 2015 (EP-353/2009/H) and July 2015
(EP-353/2009/I). Similarly, EPD issued the Environmental Permit (EP) for TMCLKL
in November 2009 (EP-354/2009) and the Variation of Environmental Permit (VEP)
in December 2010 (EP-354/2009/A), January 2014 (EP-354/2009/B), December 2014
(EP-354/2009/C) and March 2015 (EP-354/2009/D).
1.1.4
The Project is a designated project and is governed by the current
permits for the Project, i.e. the amended EPs issued on 17 July 2015
(EP-353/2009/I) and 13 March 2015 (EP-354/2009/D) (for TMCLKL Southern Landfall
Reclamation only).
1.1.5
A Project Specific EM&A Manual, which included all project-relation
contents from the original EM&A Manuals for the Project, was issued in May
2012.
1.1.6
Ove Arup & Partners Hong Kong Limited
(Arup) was appointed by Highways Department (HyD) as
the consultants for the design and construction assignment for the Project’s
reclamation works (i.e. the Engineer for the Project).
1.1.7
China Harbour Engineering Company Limited
(CHEC) was awarded by HyD as the Contractor to
undertake the construction work of the Project.
1.1.8
Ramboll Environ Hong Kong Limited. was employed by HyD as the
Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) and Environmental Project Office (ENPO)
for the Project.
1.1.9
AECOM Asia Co. Ltd. (AECOM) was appointed by CHEC to undertake the role
of Environmental Team for the Project for carrying out the EM&A works.
1.1.10
The construction phase of the Project under the EPs was commenced on 12
March 2012 and will be tentatively completed by early Year 2016.
1.1.11
According to the Project Specific EM&A Manual, there is a need of an
EM&A programme including air quality, noise,
water quality and dolphin monitoring and environmental site inspections. The
EM&A programme of the Project commenced on 12
March 2012.
1.2
Scope of Report
1.2.1
This is the forty-second monthly EM&A Report
under the Contract No.HY/2010/02 Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities
– Reclamation Works. This report presents a summary of the environmental
monitoring and audit works, list of activities and mitigation measures proposed
by the ET for the Project in August 2015.
1.3.1 The project organization
structure is shown in Appendix A. The key personnel contact names and numbers
are summarized in Table 1.1.
Table 1.1 Contact
Information of Key Personnel
|
Party
|
Position
|
Name
|
Telephone
|
Fax
|
|
Engineer’s
Representative (ER)
(Ove Arup &
Partners Hong Kong Limited)
|
Chief
Resident Engineer
|
Roger Marechal
|
3698 5700
|
2698 5999
|
|
IEC
/ ENPO
(Ramboll
Environ Hong Kong Limited)
|
Independent
Environmental Checker
|
Raymond
Dai
|
3465 2888
|
3465 2899
|
|
Environmental
Project Office Leader
|
Y. H. Hui
|
3547 2133
|
3465 2899
|
|
Contractor
(China
Harbour Engineering Company Limited)
|
Environmental
Officer
|
Louie Chan
|
36932254
|
2578 0413
|
|
24-hour
Hotline
|
Alan C.C.
Yeung
|
9448 0325
|
--
|
|
ET
(AECOM Asia Company Limited)
|
ET Leader
|
Echo
Leong
|
3922 9280
|
2317 7609
|
1.4.1 The construction phase of the Project under the EP
commenced on 12 March 2012.
1.4.2 As
informed by the Contractor, details of the major works carried out in this
reporting period are listed below:-
Marine-base
-
Cellular structure – Connecting Arcs
-
Rubble Mound Seawall
-
Rock fill
-
Maintenance of silt curtain & silt
screen at sea water intake of HKIA
Land-base
-
Earthwork fill
-
Surcharge removal & laying
-
Deep Cement Mixing
-
Removal of Temporary Seawall
-
Vertical Band Drains
-
Installations of Precast Culverts
except sloping outfalls
-
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
1.4.3 The
3-month rolling construction programme of the Project
is shown in Appendix B.
1.4.4 The
general layout plan of the Project site showing the detailed works areas is
shown in Figure 1.
1.4.5 The
environmental mitigation measures implementation schedule are presented in
Appendix C.
1.5.1
The EM&A programme
required environmental monitoring for air quality, noise, water quality, marine
ecology and environmental site inspections for air quality, noise, water
quality, waste management, marine ecology, and landscape and visual impact. The
EM&A requirements for each parameter described in the following sections include:-
- All monitoring parameters;
- Monitoring schedules for the reporting
month and forthcoming month;
- Action and Limit levels for all
environmental parameters;
- Event / Action Plan;
- Environmental mitigation measures, as
recommended in the Project EIA reports; and
- Environmental requirement in contract
documents.
2.1.1 In
accordance with the Project Specific EM&A Manual, baseline 1-hour and
24-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) levels at 4 air quality monitoring
stations were established. Impact 1-hour TSP monitoring was conducted for at
least three times every 6 days, while impact 24-hour TSP monitoring was carried
out for at least once every 6 days. The Action and Limit level of the air
quality monitoring is provided in Appendix D.
2.2.1 24-hour
TSP air quality monitoring was performed using High Volume Sampler (HVS)
located at each designated monitoring station. The HVS meets all the
requirements of the Project Specific EM&A Manual. Portable direct reading dust meters were
used to carry out the 1-hour TSP monitoring. Brand and model of the equipment is
given in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1 Air Quality Monitoring Equipment
|
Equipment
|
Brand and Model
|
|
Portable direct reading dust meter (1-hour TSP)
|
Sibata Digital Dust Monitor (Model No. LD-3 and LD-3B)
|
|
High Volume Sampler
(24-hour TSP)
|
Tisch Environmental Mass Flow Controlled Total
Suspended Particulate (TSP) High Volume Air Sampler
(Model No. TE-5170)
|
2.3
Monitoring Locations
2.3.1 Monitoring
locations AMS2 and AMS7 were set up at the proposed locations in accordance
with Project Specific EM&A Manual. For AMS6 (Dragonair/CNAC
(Group) Building), permission on setting up and carrying out impact monitoring
works was sought, however, access to the premise has not been granted yet on
this report issuing date. For monitoring location AMS3 (Ho Yu College), as
proposed in the Project Specific EM&A Manual, approval for carrying out
impact monitoring could not be obtained from the principal of the school.
Permission on setting up and carrying out impact monitoring works at nearby
sensitive receivers, like Caribbean Coast and Coastal Skyline, was also
sought. However, approvals for
carrying out impact monitoring works within their premises were not obtained.
Impact air quality monitoring was conducted at site boundary of the site office
area in Works Area WA2 (AMS3B) respectively. Same baseline and Action Level for
air quality, as derived from the baseline monitoring data recorded at Ho Yu
College, was adopted for this alternative air quality location.
2.3.2 It
was observed that a tree near AMS3B may affect the wind flow around the HVS
located at AMS3B. With no further comment received from IEC, the HVS at AMS3B has
been relocated on 8 September 2014 to slightly more than 2 meters separation
from it, measured horizontally.
Same baseline and Action Level for air quality, as derived from the
baseline monitoring data recorded at Ho Yu College, was adopted for this alternative
air quality location.
2.3.3 Reference
is made to ET’s proposal of the omission
of air monitoring station (AMS 6) dated on 1
November 2012 and EPD’s letter dated on 19 November 2012
regarding the conditional approval of
the proposed omission of air monitoring station (AMS 6) for
Contract No. HY/2010/02. The aforesaid omission of Monitoring Station AMS6 is
effective since 19 November
2012.
2.3.4
Reference is made to ET’s proposal of relocation of air
quality monitoring station (AMS7) dated on 2 February 2015, with no further comment received from IEC on 2 February 2015 and no objection
received from EPD on 5 February 2015, the impact air
quality monitoring station AMS7 (Hong Kong SkyCity
Marriott Hotel) has been relocated to AMS7A (Chu Kong Air-Sea Union Transportation
Company Limited) on 3 February 2015. Action
Level for air quality, as derived from the baseline monitoring data recorded at
Hong Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel,
was adopted for this alternative air quality location.
2.3.5 Figure
2 shows the locations of monitoring stations. Table 2.2 describes the details
of the monitoring stations.
Table 2.2 Locations
of Impact Air Quality Monitoring Stations
|
Monitoring
Station
|
Location
|
Description
|
|
AMS2
|
Tung Chung
Development Pier
|
Rooftop of the premise
|
|
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
|
|
AMS7A
|
Chu Kong Air-Sea Union Transportation Company Limited
|
On ground at boundary of the premise
|
#Remarks:
Reference is made to EPD conditional approval of the omission of air monitoring
station (AMS 6) for the project. The omission will be effective on 19 November
2012.
2.4
Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
2.4.1 Table
2.3 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and duration of impact TSP
monitoring.
Table
2.3 Air
Quality Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
|
Parameter
|
Frequency
and Duration
|
|
1-hour TSP
|
Three
times every 6 days while the highest dust impact was expected
|
|
24-hour TSP
|
Once
every 6 days
|
2.5
Monitoring Methodology
2.5.1 24-hour
TSP Monitoring
(a)
The HVS was
installed in the vicinity of the air sensitive receivers. The following criteria were considered
in the installation of the HVS.
(i)
A horizontal
platform with appropriate support to secure the sampler against gusty wind was
provided.
(ii)
No two samplers
should be placed less than 2 meters apart.
(iii)
The distance
between the HVS and any obstacles, such as buildings, was at least twice the
height that the obstacle protrudes above the HVS.
(iv)
A minimum of
2 meters separation from walls, parapets and penthouse for rooftop sampler.
(v)
A minimum of 2 meters
separation from any supporting structure, measured horizontally is required.
(vi)
No furnace
or incinerator flues nearby.
(vii)
Airflow
around the sampler was unrestricted.
(viii)
Permission
was obtained to set up the samplers and access to the monitoring stations.
(ix)
A secured
supply of electricity was obtained to operate the samplers.
(x)
The sampler
was located more than 20 meters from any dripline.
(xi)
Any wire
fence and gate, required to protect the sampler, did not obstruct the
monitoring process.
(xii)
Flow control
accuracy was kept within ±2.5% deviation over 24-hour sampling period.
(b)
Preparation
of Filter Papers
(i)
Glass fibre filters, G810 were labelled
and sufficient filters that were clean and without pinholes were selected.
(ii)
All filters
were equilibrated in the conditioning environment for 24 hours before weighing.
The conditioning environment temperature was around 25 °C and not variable by
more than ±3 °C; the relative humidity (RH) was < 50% and not variable by
more than ±5%. A convenient working RH was 40%.
(iii)
All filter
papers were prepared and analysed by ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd., which is a HOKLAS accredited
laboratory and has comprehensive quality assurance and quality control programmes.
(c)
Field
Monitoring
(i)
The power
supply was checked to ensure the HVS works properly.
(ii)
The filter
holder and the area surrounding the filter were cleaned.
(iii)
The filter
holder was removed by loosening the four bolts and a new filter, with stamped
number upward, on a supporting screen was aligned carefully.
(iv)
The filter
was properly aligned on the screen so that the gasket formed an airtight seal
on the outer edges of the filter.
(v)
The swing
bolts were fastened to hold the filter holder down to the frame. The pressure applied was sufficient to avoid
air leakage at the edges.
(vi)
Then the
shelter lid was closed and was secured with the aluminum strip.
(vii)
The HVS was
warmed-up for about 5 minutes to establish run-temperature conditions.
(viii)
A new flow
rate record sheet was set into the flow recorder.
(ix)
On site
temperature and atmospheric pressure readings were taken and the flow rate of
the HVS was checked and adjusted at around 1.1 m3/min,
and complied with the range specified in the updated EM&A Manual (i.e.
0.6-1.7 m3/min).
(x)
The
programmable digital timer was set for a sampling period of 24 hrs, and the
starting time, weather condition and the filter number were recorded.
(xi)
The initial
elapsed time was recorded.
(xii)
At the end
of sampling, on site temperature and atmospheric pressure readings were taken
and the final flow rate of the HVS was checked and recorded.
(xiii)
The final
elapsed time was recorded.
(xiv)
The sampled
filter was removed carefully and folded in half length so that only surfaces
with collected particulate matter were in contact.
(xv)
It was then
placed in a clean plastic envelope and sealed.
(xvi)
All
monitoring information was recorded on a standard data sheet.
(xvii) Filters were then sent to ALS Technichem
(HK) Pty Ltd. for analysis.
(d)
Maintenance
and Calibration
(i)
The HVS and
its accessories were maintained in good working condition, such as replacing
motor brushes routinely and checking electrical wiring to ensure a continuous
power supply.
(ii)
5-point
calibration of the HVS was conducted using TE-5025A Calibration Kit prior to
the commencement of baseline monitoring. Bi-monthly 5-point calibration of the
HVS will be carried out during impact monitoring.
(iii)
Calibration
certificate of the HVSs are provided in Appendix E.
2.5.2 1-hour
TSP Monitoring
(a)
Measuring
Procedures
The measuring
procedures of the 1-hour dust meter were in accordance with the Manufacturer’s
Instruction Manual as follows:-
(i)
Turn the
power on.
(ii)
Close the
air collecting opening cover.
(iii)
Push the
“TIME SETTING” switch to [BG].
(iv)
Push
“START/STOP” switch to perform background measurement for 6 seconds.
(v)
Turn the
knob at SENSI ADJ position to insert the light scattering plate.
(vi)
Leave the
equipment for 1 minute upon “SPAN CHECK” is indicated in the display.
(vii)
Push
“START/STOP” switch to perform automatic sensitivity adjustment. This
measurement takes 1 minute.
(viii)
Pull out the
knob and return it to MEASURE position.
(ix)
Push the
“TIME SETTING” switch the time set in the display to 3 hours.
(x)
Lower down
the air collection opening cover.
(xi)
Push
“START/STOP” switch to start measurement.
(b)
Maintenance
and Calibration
(i)
The 1-hour
TSP meter was calibrated at 1-year intervals against a continuous particulate
TEOM Monitor, Series 1400ab. Calibration certificates of the Laser Dust
Monitors are provided in Appendix E.
(ii)
1-hour
validation checking of the TSP meter against HVS is carried out on half-year
basis at the air quality monitoring
locations.
2.6
Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month
2.6.1
The schedule for air quality monitoring in August 2015 is
provided in Appendix F.
2.7
Results and Observations
2.7.1 The
monitoring results for 1-hour TSP and 24-hour TSP are summarized in Table 2.4
and 2.5 respectively. Detailed impact air quality monitoring results are
presented in Appendix G.
Table 2.4 Summary
of 1-hour TSP Monitoring Results in the Reporting Period
|
|
Average (mg/m3)
|
Range (mg/m3)
|
Action Level (mg/m3)
|
Limit Level (mg/m3)
|
|
AMS2
|
76
|
70-81
|
374
|
500
|
|
AMS3B
|
76
|
73-81
|
368
|
500
|
|
AMS7A
|
78
|
69-83
|
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
|
109
|
26-270
|
176
|
260
|
|
AMS3B
|
33
|
21-71
|
167
|
260
|
|
AMS7A
|
40
|
23-82
|
183
|
260
|
2.7.2 One
(1) Limit Level Exceedance of 24hr-TSP with a reading
of 270mg/m3
was recorded at AMS2 on 10 August 2015.
2.7.3
According to information provided by the
Contractor during the monitoring period, no changes of major works in the
construction site of this Contract since box-culvert installation had been
commenced in July 2015.
2.7.4
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
The 1-hr TSP values recorded at AMS2 on 10
August 15, were 81μg/m3, 80μg/m3 and 81μg/m3
respectively. All measured values are well below the Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.6
The measured 24-hr TSP values recorded at AMS7A
(which is located closer to active works than AMS2) on 10 August 15 was 29μg/m3,
which was below the Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.7
Site inspection for box-culvert installation
at Portion D was jointly conducted by ET, Contractor and RSS on 6 August 2015, no
fugitive dust was observed at Portion D during the joint site inspection on 6
August 2015.
2.7.8
Box-culvert being installed at Portion D
which is relatively far away from monitoring station AMS2 where the limit exceedance of 24-hr TSP was recorded. As refer to the wind
direction data collected at Chek Lap Kok by Hong Kong Observatory during the monitoring period
on 10 and 11 August 2015 (also see attached), Southwestern 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. (Also see below
layout map for reference.)
2.7.9
In addition, no fugitive dust was expected to
be generated in the process of box-culvert installation, as such, works
activities from this Contract is unlikely to contribute to the recorded
24hr-TSP limit level exceedance.
2.7.10
The latest available checking record shows
that plant engine is operated by ULSD.
2.7.11
With reference to the watering record,
watering was provided 8 times per day on site from 8 to 14 August 2015.
2.7.12
As such, the dust exceedance was therefore considered not to be due to works
of this Contract
2.7.13
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.
2.7.14 The
event action plan is annexed in Appendix L.
2.7.15 Meteorological
information collected from the wind station during the monitoring periods on
the monitoring dates, as shown in Figure 2, including wind speed and wind
direction, is annexed in Appendix H.
3.1.1 In
accordance with the Project Specific EM&A Manual, impact noise monitoring
was conducted for at least once per week during the construction phase of the
Project. The Action and Limit level of the noise monitoring is provided in
Appendix D.
3.2
Monitoring Equipment
3.2.1 Noise
monitoring was performed using sound level meter at each designated monitoring
station. The sound level meters
deployed comply with the International Electrotechnical
Commission Publications (IEC) 651:1979 (Type 1) and 804:1985 (Type 1)
specifications. Acoustic calibrator
was deployed to check the sound level meters at a known sound pressure
level. Brand and model of the
equipment is given in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1 Noise
Monitoring Equipment
|
Equipment
|
Brand and
Model
|
|
Integrated Sound
Level Meter
|
Rion NL-31 & B&K2238
|
|
Acoustic
Calibrator
|
Rion NC-73 & B&K 4231
|
3.3
Monitoring Locations
3.3.1 Monitoring
locations NMS2 was set up at the proposed locations in accordance with Project
Specific EM&A Manual. However, for monitoring location NMS3 (Ho Yu
College), as proposed in the Project Specific EM&A Manual, approval for
carrying out impact monitoring could not be obtained from the principal of the
school. Permission on setting up and carrying out impact monitoring works at
nearby sensitive receivers, like Caribbean Coast and Coastal Skyline, was also
sought. However, approvals for
carrying out impact monitoring works within their premises were not obtained.
Impact noise monitoring was conducted at site boundary of the site office area
in Works Area WA2 (NMS3B) respectively. Same baseline noise level (as derived
from the baseline monitoring data recorded at Ho Yu College) and Limit Level
were adopted for this alternative noise monitoring location.
3.3.2 Figure
2 shows the locations of the monitoring stations. Table 3.2 describes the
details of the monitoring stations.
Table 3.2 Locations
of Impact Noise Monitoring Stations
|
Monitoring
Station
|
Location
|
Description
|
|
NMS2
|
Seaview
Crescent Tower 1
|
Free-field on the rooftop of the premise
|
|
NMS3B
|
Site Boundary of
Site Office Area at Works Area WA2
|
Free-field on ground at the area boundary.
|
3.4.1
Table 3.3 summarizes the monitoring parameters,
frequency and duration of impact noise monitoring.
Table 3.3 Noise
Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
|
Parameter
|
Frequency and Duration
|
|
30-mins measurement at each monitoring
station between 0700 and 1900 on normal weekdays (Monday to Saturday). Leq, L10 and L90 would
be recorded.
|
At least
once per week
|
3.5.1 Monitoring
Procedure
(a)
The sound
level meter was set on a tripod at a height of 1.2 m above the ground for
free-field measurements at NMS2. A correction of +3 dB(A)
shall be made to the free field measurements.
(b)
All measurement at 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.
3.5.2 Maintenance
and Calibration
(a)
The
microphone head of the sound level meter was cleaned with soft cloth at regular
intervals.
(b)
The meter
and calibrator were sent to the supplier or HOKLAS laboratory to check and calibrate
at yearly intervals.
(c)
Calibration
certificates of the sound level meters and acoustic calibrators are provided in
Appendix E.
3.6.1 The
schedule for construction noise monitoring in August 2015 is provided in Appendix F.
3.7.1 The
monitoring results for construction noise are summarized in Table 3.4 and the
monitoring data is provided in Appendix I.
Table 3.4 Summary
of Construction Noise Monitoring Results in the Reporting Period
|
|
Average, dB(A),
Leq (30 mins)
|
Range, dB(A),
Leq (30 mins)
|
Limit Level, dB(A),
Leq (30 mins)
|
|
NMS2
|
65
|
63 - 67*
|
75
|
|
NMS3B
|
65
|
61 - 67*
|
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.
3.7.2 No
Action or Limit
Level Exceedance of construction noise was recorded
in the reporting month.
3.7.3 Major
noise sources during the noise monitoring included construction activities of
the Project, construction activities by other contracts and nearby traffic
noise.
3.7.4 The
event action plan is annexed in Appendix L.
4
WATER QUALITY MONITORING
4.1
Monitoring Requirements
4.1.1 Impact
water quality monitoring was carried out to ensure that any deterioration of
water quality was detected, and that timely action was taken to rectify the
situation. For impact water quality monitoring, measurements were taken in
accordance with the Project Specific EM&A Manual. Appendix D shows the
established Action/Limit Levels for the environmental monitoring works.
4.2.1 Table
4.1 summarises the equipment used in the impact water
quality monitoring programme.
Table 4.1 Water
Quality Monitoring Equipment
|
Equipment
|
Brand and Model
|
|
Dissolved Oxygen (DO) and Temperature
Meter, Salinity Meter and Turbidity Meter
|
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
|
4.3.1
Table 4.2 summarises
the monitoring parameters, frequency and monitoring depths of impact water
quality monitoring as required in the Project Specific EM&A Manual.
Table 4.2 Impact
Water Quality Monitoring Parameters and Frequency
|
Monitoring Stations
|
Parameter, unit
|
Frequency
|
No. of depth
|
|
Impact Stations:
IS5,
IS(Mf)6, IS7, IS8, IS(Mf)9, IS10, IS(Mf)11, IS(Mf)16, IS17
Control/Far Field Stations:
CS(Mf)3,
CS(Mf)5, CS4, CS6, CSA
Sensitive Receiver Stations:
SR3-SR7,
SR10A&SR10B
|
·
Depth, m
·
Temperature, oC
·
Salinity, ppt
·
Dissolved Oxygen
(DO), mg/L
·
DO Saturation, %
·
Turbidity, NTU
·
pH
·
Suspended Solids
(SS), mg/L
|
Three times per week during mid-ebb and mid-flood tides
(within ± 1.75 hour of the predicted time)
|
3
(1 m below water surface, mid-depth and 1 m above sea
bed, except where the water depth is less than 6 m, in which case the
mid-depth station may be omitted. Should the water depth be less than 3
m, only the mid-depth station will be monitored).
|
4.4.1 In
accordance with the Project Specific EM&A Manual, twenty-one stations (9
Impact Stations, 7 Sensitive Receiver Stations and 5 Control/Far Field
Stations) were designated for impact water quality monitoring. The nine Impact
Stations (IS) were chosen on the basis of their proximity to the reclamation
and thus the greatest potential for water quality impacts, the seven Sensitive
Receiver Stations (SR) were chosen as they are close to the key sensitive
receives and the five Control/ Far Field Stations (CS) were chosen to
facilitate comparison of the water quality of the IS stations with less
influence by the Project/ ambient water quality conditions.
4.4.2 Due
to safety concern and topographical condition of the original locations of SR4
and SR10B, alternative impact water quality monitoring stations, naming as SR4
(N) and SR10B (N), were adopted, which are situated in vicinity of the original
impact water quality monitoring stations (SR4 and SR10B) and could be reachable.
4.4.3 Same
baseline and Action Level for water quality, as derived from the baseline
monitoring data recorded, were adopted for these alternative impact water
quality monitoring stations.
4.4.4 The
locations of these monitoring stations are summarized in Table 4.3 and depicted
in Figure 3.
Table
4.3 Impact
Water Quality Monitoring Stations
|
Station
|
Description
|
East
|
North
|
|
IS5
|
Impact
Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
811579
|
817106
|
|
IS(Mf)6
|
Impact
Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
812101
|
817873
|
|
IS7
|
Impact
Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
812244
|
818777
|
|
IS8
|
Impact
Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
814251
|
818412
|
|
IS(Mf)9
|
Impact
Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
813273
|
818850
|
|
IS10
|
Impact Station
(Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
812577
|
820670
|
|
IS(Mf)11
|
Impact
Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
813562
|
820716
|
|
IS(Mf)16
|
Impact
Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
814328
|
819497
|
|
IS17
|
Impact
Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
814539
|
820391
|
|
SR3
|
Sensitive
receivers (San Tau SSSI)
|
810525
|
816456
|
|
SR4(N)
|
Sensitive
receivers (Tai Ho)
|
814705
|
817859
|
|
SR5
|
Sensitive
receivers (Artificial Reef in NE Airport)
|
811489
|
820455
|
|
SR6
|
Sensitive
receivers (Sha Chau and Lung Kwu
Chau Marine Park)
|
805837
|
821818
|
|
SR7
|
Sensitive
receivers (Tai Mo Do)
|
814293
|
821431
|
|
SR10A
|
Sensitive
receivers (Ma Wan FCZ)1
|
823741
|
823495
|
|
SR10B(N)
|
Sensitive
receivers (Ma Wan FCZ)2
|
823683
|
823187
|
|
CS(Mf)3
|
Control
Station
|
809989
|
821117
|
|
CS(Mf)5
|
Control
Station
|
817990
|
821129
|
|
CS4
|
Control
Station
|
810025
|
824004
|
|
CS6
|
Control
Station
|
817028
|
823992
|
|
CSA
|
Control
Station
|
818103
|
823064
|
4.5.1 Instrumentation
(a)
The in-situ
water quality parameters, viz. dissolved oxygen, temperature, salinity,
turbidity and pH, were measured by multi-parameter meters (i.e. Model YSI 6820
CE-C-M-Y) and pH meter (i.e. Thermo Orion 230A+) respectively.
4.5.2 Operating/Analytical
Procedures
(a)
Digital Differential Global Positioning
Systems (DGPS) were used to
ensure that the correct location was selected prior to sample collection.
(b)
Portable, battery-operated
echo sounders were used for the determination of water depth at each designated
monitoring station.
(c)
All in-situ
measurements were taken at 3 water depths, 1 m below
water surface, mid-depth and 1 m above sea bed, except where the water depth
was less than 6 m, in which case the mid-depth station was omitted.
Should the water depth be less than 3 m, only the mid-depth station was
monitored.
(d)
At each
measurement/sampling depth, two consecutive in-situ monitoring (DO
concentration and saturation, temperature, turbidity, pH, salinity) and water
sample for SS. The probes were retrieved out of the water after the first
measurement and then re-deployed for the second measurement. Where the
difference in the value between the first and second readings of DO or
turbidity parameters was more than 25% of the value of the first reading, the
reading was discarded and further readings were taken.
(e)
Duplicate
samples from each independent sampling event were collected for SS measurement.
Water samples were collected using the water samplers and the samples were
stored in high-density polythene bottles. Water samples collected were
well-mixed in the water sampler prior to pre-rinsing and transferring to sample
bottles. Sample bottles were pre-rinsed with the same water samples. The sample
bottles were then be packed in cool-boxes (cooled at 4oC without
being frozen), and delivered to ALS Technichem (HK)
Pty Ltd. for the analysis of suspended solids concentrations. The laboratory
determination work would be started within 24 hours after collection of the
water samples. ALS Technichem (HK) Pty
Ltd. is a HOKLAS accredited laboratory and has comprehensive quality assurance
and quality control programmes. For QA/QC procedures,
one duplicate samples of every batch of 20 samples was analyzed.
(f)
The analysis
method and reporting and detection limit for SS is shown in Table 4.4.
Table 4.4 Laboratory
Analysis for Suspended Solids
|
Parameters
|
Instrumentation
|
Analytical Method
|
Reporting Limit
|
Detection Limit
|
|
Suspended Solid (SS)
|
Weighting
|
APHA
2540-D
|
0.5mg/L
|
0.5mg/L
|
(g)
Other
relevant data were recorded, including monitoring location / position, time,
water depth, tidal stages, weather conditions and any special phenomena or work
underway at the construction site in the field log sheet for
information.
4.5.3 Maintenance
and Calibration
(a)
All in situ
monitoring instruments would be calibrated and calibrated by ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. before use and at 3-monthly
intervals throughout all stages of the water quality monitoring programme. Calibration details are provided in Appendix E.
(b)
The
dissolved oxygen probe of YSI 6820 was calibrated by wet bulb method. Before
the calibration routine, the sensor for dissolved oxygen was thermally
equilibrated in water-saturated air. Calibration cup is served as a calibration
chamber and it was loosened from airtight condition before it is used for the
calibration. Calibration at ALS Technichem (HK) Pty
Ltd. was carried out once every three months in a water sample with a known concentration
of dissolved oxygen. The sensor was immersed in the water and after thermal
equilibration, the known mg/L value was keyed in and the calibration was
carried out automatically.
(c)
The
turbidity probe of YSI 6820 is calibrated two times a month. A zero check in
distilled water was performed with the turbidity probe of YSI 6820 once per
monitoring day. The probe will be calibrated with a solution of known NTU at
ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. once every three months.
4.6
Monitoring Schedule for the
Reporting Month
4.6.1 The
schedule for impact water quality monitoring in August 2015 is
provided in Appendix F.
4.7.1 Impact
water quality monitoring results and graphical presentations are provided in
Appendix J.
Table 4.5 Summary of Water Quality Exceedances
|
Station
|
Exceedance Level
|
DO (S&M)
|
DO (Bottom)
|
Turbidity
|
SS
|
Total
|
|
Ebb
|
Flood
|
Ebb
|
Flood
|
Ebb
|
Flood
|
Ebb
|
Flood
|
Ebb
|
Flood
|
|
IS5
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
IS(Mf)6
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
IS7
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
IS8
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
IS(Mf)9
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
IS10
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
IS(Mf)11
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
IS(Mf)16
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
IS17
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
SR3
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
SR4(N)
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
SR5
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
SR6
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
SR7
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
SR10A
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
SR10B
(N)
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Total
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Note: S:
Surface; and
M: Mid-depth.
4.7.2 The
event action plan is annexed in Appendix L.
5.1.1
Vessel
based surveys for the Chinese White Dolphin (CWD), Sousa chinensis, are
to be conducted by a dedicated team comprising a qualified marine mammal
ecologist and experienced marine mammal observers (MMOs). The purpose of the
surveys are to evaluate the impact of the HKCBF reclamation and, if deemed
detrimental, to take appropriate action as per the EM&A manual.
5.1.2 This
‘Impact Monitoring’ follows several months of ‘Baseline Monitoring’ so similar
survey methodologies have been adopted to facilitate comparisons between
datasets. Further, the data
collected are compatible with, and are available for, incorporation into the
data set managed by the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department
(AFCD) as part of Hong Kong’s long term Marine Mammal Monitoring Programme.
Table 5.1 summarises the equipment used for the impact dolphin
monitoring.
Table 5.1 Dolphin
Monitoring Equipment
|
Equipment
|
Model
|
|
Commercially
licensed motor vessel
|
15m in length with a 4.5m viewing platform
|
|
Global
Positioning System (GPS) x2
|
Integrated into T7000
Garmin GPS Map 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
|
5.3.1 Dolphin
monitoring is conducted twice per month in each survey area.
5.3.2 Dolphin
monitoring is conducted only when visibility is good (e.g., over 1km) and the
sea condition is at a Beaufort Sea State of 4 or better.
5.3.3 When
thunder storm, black rain or typhoon warnings are in force, all survey effort
is stopped.
5.4.1 The
impact dolphin monitoring is vessel-based and combines line-transect and
photo-ID methodology. The survey
follows pre-set and fixed transect lines in the two areas defined by AFCD as:
5.4.2
Northeast Lantau
survey area; and
5.4.3
Northwest Lantau survey area.
5.4.4 The
co-ordinates for the transect lines and layout map have been provided by AFCD
and are shown in Table 5.2 and Figure 4.
Table 5.2 Impact
Dolphin Monitoring Line Transect Co-ordinates (Provided by AFCD)
|
|
HK Grid System
|
Long Lat in WGS84
|
|
ID
|
X
|
Y
|
Long
|
Lat
|
|
1^
|
804671
|
815456
|
113.870287
|
22.276504
|
|
1
|
804671
|
831404
|
113.869975
|
22.421696
|
|
2^
|
805475
|
815913
|
113.878079
|
22.281819
|
|
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
|
820880
|
113.926749
|
22.325043
|
|
7
|
810499
|
824613
|
113.926688
|
22.360464
|
|
8
|
811508
|
820847
|
113.936539
|
22.326475
|
|
8^
|
811508
|
821123
|
113.936539
|
22.326475
|
|
8
|
811508
|
824254
|
113.936486
|
22.357241
|
|
9^
|
812516
|
821303
|
113.946320
|
22.326894
|
|
9
|
812516
|
824254
|
113.946279
|
22.357255
|
|
10*
|
813525
|
820827
|
113.956112
|
22.326321
|
|
10*
|
813525
|
824657
|
113.956066
|
22.360908
|
|
11^
|
814556
|
818853
|
113.966155
|
22.304858
|
|
11
|
814556
|
820992
|
113.966125
|
22.327820
|
|
12
|
815542
|
818807
|
113.975726
|
22.308109
|
|
12
|
815542
|
824882
|
113.975647
|
22.362962
|
|
13
|
816506
|
819480
|
113.985072
|
22.314192
|
|
13
|
816506
|
824859
|
113.985005
|
22.362771
|
|
14
|
817537
|
820220
|
113.995070
|
22.320883
|
|
14
|
817537
|
824613
|
113.995018
|
22.360556
|
|
15
|
818568
|
820735
|
114.005071
|
22.325550
|
|
15
|
818568
|
824433
|
114.005030
|
22.358947
|
|
16
|
819532
|
821420
|
114.014420
|
22.331747
|
|
16
|
819532
|
824209
|
114.014390
|
22.356933
|
|
17
|
820451
|
822125
|
114.023333
|
22.338117
|
|
17
|
820451
|
823671
|
114.023317
|
22.352084
|
|
18
|
821504
|
822371
|
114.033556
|
22.340353
|
|
18
|
821504
|
823761
|
114.033544
|
22.352903
|
|
19
|
822513
|
823268
|
114.043340
|
22.348458
|
|
19
|
822513
|
824321
|
114.043331
|
22.357971
|
|
20
|
823477
|
823402
|
114.052695
|
22.349680
|
|
20
|
823477
|
824613
|
114.052686
|
22.360610
|
|
21
|
805476
|
827081
|
113.877878
|
22.382668
|
|
21
|
805476
|
830562
|
113.877811
|
22.414103
|
|
22
|
806464
|
824033
|
113.887520
|
22.355164
|
|
22
|
806464
|
829598
|
113.887416
|
22.405423
|
|
23
|
814559
|
821739
|
113.966142
|
22.334574
|
|
23
|
814559
|
824768
|
113.966101
|
22.361920
|
*Remark: Due to the presence of deployed silt
curtain systems at the site boundaries of the Project, some of the transect
lines shown in Figure 5 could not be fully surveyed during the regular survey.
Transect 10 is reduced from 6.4km to approximately 3.6km in length due to the
HKBCF construction site. Therefore the total transect
length for both NEL and NWL combined is reduced to approximately 108km.
^coordinates for
transect lines 1,
2, 7, 8,
9 and 11
have been updated in respect to
the Proposal for
Alteration of Transect Line for
Dolphin Monitoring approved by
EPD on 19 August 2015
5.5.1 The
study area incorporates 23 transects which are to be surveyed twice per
month. Each survey day lasts approximately
9 hours.
5.5.2 The
survey vessel departs from Tung Chung Development Pier, Tsing
Yi Public Pier or the nearest safe and convenient pier.
5.5.3 When
the vessel reaches the start of a transect line, “on effort” survey begins.
Areas between transect lines and traveling to and from the study area are
defined as “off effort”.
5.5.4 The
transect line is surveyed at a speed of 6-8 knots (11-14 km/hr). For the sake
of safety, the speed was sometimes a bit slower to avoid collision with other
vessels. During some periods, tide
and current flow in the survey areas exceeds 7 knots which can affect survey
speed. There are a minimum of four marine mammal observers (MMOs) present on
each survey, rotating through four positions, observers (2), data recorder (1)
and ‘rest’ (1). Rotations occur every 30 minutes or at the end of dolphin
encounters. The data recorder
records effort, weather and sightings data directly onto the programme Logger and is not
part of the observer team.
The observers search with naked eye and binoculars between 90° and 270°
abeam (bow being 0°).
5.5.5 When
a group of dolphins is sighted, position, bearing and distance data are
recorded immediately onto the computer and, after a short observation, an
estimate made of group size. These
parameters are linked to the time-GPS-ships data which are automatically stored
in the programme Logger throughout the survey
period. In this manner, information
on heading, position, speed, weather, effort and sightings are stored in a
format suitable for use with DISTANCE software for subsequent
line transect analyses.
5.5.6 Once
the vessel leaves the transect line, it is deemed to be “off effort”. The
dolphins are approached with the purpose of taking high resolution pictures for
proper photo-identification of individual CWD. Attempts to photograph all dolphins in
the group are made. Both the left
and right hand sides of the dorsal fin area of each dolphin in the group are
photographed, if possible. On
finishing photographing, the vessel will return to the transect line at the point
of departure and “on effort” survey is resumed.
5.5.7 Sightings
which are made while on the transect line are referred to as "on effort
sightings", while not on the actual transect line are referred to as an
“opportunistic sightings” (e.g. another group of dolphins is sighted while
travelling back to the transect line).
Only “on effort sightings” can be used in analyses which require effort
or rate quantification, e.g., encounter rate per 100km searched. This is also how “on effort sightings”
are treated in the baseline report.
“Opportunistic sightings” provide additional information on individual
habitat use and population distribution and they are noted accordingly.
5.5.8 As
time and GPS data are automatically logged throughout the survey and are linked
to sightings data input, start and end times of encounters and deviation from
the transect lines are recorded and can be subsequently reviewed.
5.6.1 The
schedule for dolphin monitoring in August 2015 is provided in Appendix F.
5.6.2 Two
surveys covering both study areas were completed.
5.7.1 Dolphin surveys were conducted on 10,
11, 24 and 25 August 2015. A
total of 217.8 km of transect line was conducted, all of which was conducted during
Beaufort Sea State 3 or better (favourable water
conditions). Please note that that some lines were shortened due to
works and/or shipping traffic.
The
effort summary and sightings data are shown in Tables 5.3 and 5.4,
respectively. The survey efforts conducted in August 2015 are plotted in Figure
5a-b. For Table 5.3, only on-effort information is included. Transects
conducted in all Beaufort Sea State are included. Compared to previous monthly
reports, the whole number Beaufort Sea State scale is used so as to ease
comparison with other dolphin monitoring reports.
Table 5.3 Impact
Dolphin Monitoring Survey Effort Summary, Effort by Area and Beaufort Sea State
|
Survey
|
Date
|
Area
|
Beaufort
|
Effort (km)
|
Total Distance Travelled (km)
|
|
1
|
08/10/2015
|
NWL
|
1
|
28.7
|
66.9
|
|
08/10/2015
|
NWL
|
2
|
28.8
|
|
08/10/2015
|
NWL
|
3
|
9.4
|
|
08/11/2015
|
NWL
|
1
|
6.3
|
42.5
|
|
08/11/2015
|
NEL
|
1
|
28.8
|
|
08/11/2015
|
NEL
|
2
|
7.4
|
|
2
|
08/24/2015
|
NWL
|
1
|
23.5
|
59.8
|
|
08/24/2015
|
NEL
|
1
|
33.8
|
|
08/24/2015
|
NEL
|
2
|
2.5
|
|
08/25/2015
|
NWL
|
1
|
48.6
|
48.6
|
|
TOTAL in AUGUST 2015
|
217.8
|
*Remark:
Surveys conduct under Beaufort Sea State 3 or below are considered as under favourable condition.
Table 5.4 Impact
Dolphin Monitoring Survey Details August 2015
|
Date
|
Location
|
No. Sightings “on effort”
|
No. Sightings “opportunistic”
|
|
08/10/2015
|
NW L
|
1
|
1*
|
|
NEL
|
0
|
0
|
|
08/11/2015
|
NW L
|
0
|
0
|
|
NEL
|
0
|
0
|
|
08/24/2015
|
NW L
|
0
|
0
|
|
NEL
|
0
|
0
|
|
08/25/2015
|
NW L
|
2
|
1
|
|
NEL
|
0
|
0
|
|
TOTAL in August 2015
|
3
|
2
|
* Location indicates which area
was being surveyed when the sighting was made. The area noted does not necessarily
indicate where the dolphins were when the sighting was made.
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
|
|
10 & 11 Aug 2015
|
36.2
|
73.2
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
1.4
|
|
24 & 25 Aug 2015
|
36.3
|
72.1
|
0
|
2
|
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
|
|
10 & 11 Aug 2015
|
36.2
|
73.2
|
0
|
3
|
0
|
4.1
|
|
24 & 25 Aug 2015
|
36.3
|
72.1
|
0
|
6
|
0
|
8.3
|
* Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphin Sightings (STG) presents encounter
rates in terms of groups per 100km.
** Encounter Rate of Total Number of Dolphins (ANI) presents encounter
rates in terms of individuals per 100km. And the encounter rate is not corrected
for individuals, calculation may represent double counting.
^The table is
made only for reference to the quarterly STG & ANI, which were adopted for
the Event & Action Plan.
5.7.2
A total of five sightings were made, three “on
effort” and two “opportunistic”.
Two sightings were recorded on the 10 August 2015 and three on the 25
August 2015. Sighting details are summarised are
plotted in Appendix K and Figure 5c, respectively. The first group sighted on
the 10 August 2015 comprised one individual and the second, three individuals.
The first group sighted on 25 August 2015 comprised one individual and the
second and third groups, each had three individuals. The two groups of three
spotted on the 25 August 2015 were the same individuals but in different locations.
5.7.3
Behaviour On the 10 August 2015,
both groups sighted were engaged in feeding activities. On 25 August 2015, the first dolphin
sighted was feeding and the second two groups were travelling. No calves were
sighted in August 2015.Locations of sighting with different behaviour
are mapped in Figure 5d.
5.7.4
For dolphin monitoring, one (1) limit level exceedance is recorded. The Investigation is undergoing and
investigation results will be reported in quarterly report (June – August
2015).
5.7.5
Three re-sightings were
noted in July 2015. On July 6th, HZMB 008 was sighted in NWL. HZMB 008 has been
sighted once previously in NWL in May 2012. HZMB 004 was sighted on 28th July 2015.
HZMB 004 was first sighted in March 2012 and again in September 2012, both
times in NWL. Previously recorded as HZMB 120, this dolphin left fin is now
matched to a right fin of HZMB 107. The single previous sighting of HZMB 120
(May 2014) is now included in HZMB 107 data. HZMB 107 was sighted on 28 July
2015. This dolphin was first sighted in August 2013 and subsequently in May and
October of 2014. All sightings have been made in NWL. It is noted that dolphins
which have not been sighted for several years have been resighted
again in July 2015. Images and re-sightings data are included Appendix K.
5.7.6
Noteworthy Observation:
5.7.6.1 When impact monitoring was
conducted at the southern parts of transect lines 1 & 2, the view of the area
was partially blocked by the working vessels and fixed structures which do not
belong to HKBCF Reclamation Works. The number of fixed structures has
increased and in many areas, it is no longer possible to pass between them by
ship. As the working vessels will
move during the on-going works, it is considered that they will temporarily
affect survey protocol, survey data collection, dolphin movement, dolphin
habitat use and dolphin behaviour, whereas the fixed
structures will continuously affect survey protocol, survey data collection,
dolphin movement, dolphin habitat use and dolphin behaviour.
5.7.6.2 The HKBCF and adjoining “Southern
Landfall” Projects effected lines 11 and 12. The view of the area was partially
blocked by the working vessels and in water structures. As the working vessels
will move as construction progresses, they will cause temporary effects to
survey protocol and survey data collection. In time, the fixed structures will
affect all survey protocols and dolphin ecology in the long term.
5.7.6.3 Travel to the northern end of
line 10 was slightly impeded by the large numbers of ships in the area.
5.7.6.4 Anchored fishing vessels were
noted on lines 1 and 2. In previous encounters, dolphins were seen feeding in
association with these vessels despite them not being active. This may
influence both dolphin behaviour and the view of the
area.
5.7.6.5 New projects were ongoing at the
southern ends of line 3. There are no apparent fixed structures associated with
this project only platform and servicing vessels. As it is not known what
activity was being conducted, the effect that this project may have
specifically on dolphins is not known.
5.7.6.6 The survey effort log notes the
areas in which the visibility is limited or the survey is affected so that
these can be accounted for in any subsequent analyses. Some of
these obstructions will become permanent and some will
be temporary as the HZMB is built and other projects progress. It is
advised that the impact monitoring surveys should be completed as close to the
predefined lines as possible (as per Figure 4 of this report).
5.7.6.7 Coordinates for
transect lines 1,
2, 7, 8,
9 and 11
have been proposed by ET on 19 July 2015 ,
verified by IEC on 4 August 2015 and approved by
EPD on 19 August 2015The amendments proposed to lines 1, 2, 7, 8, 9 and 11 which were
submitted to EPD were approved on 19 August 2015. For this Contract HY/2010/02,
the approved lines were travelled since 24 and 25 August 2015.
5.7.6.8 It is considered EP conditions is
complied with, as all transect lines are still travelled to the best of the
monitoring vessels ability given that there are now large permanent structures
directly over the path of some transects and working barges. These will
continue until any new transect line start/end points is formally approved. All
noteworthy observations shall continue to be reported so IEC/ENPO continues to
have all details.
5.7.7
The event action plan is annexed in Appendix L.
6.1.1 Site
Inspections were carried out on a weekly basis to monitor the implementation of
proper environmental pollution control and mitigation measures for the Project.
In the reporting month, 4
site inspections were carried out on 6, 13, 20 and
27 August 2015.
6.1.2 Particular
observations during the site inspections are described below:
Air
Quality
6.1.3
Rock material was observed dry; the
Contractor was reminded to moisten to prevent generation of fugitive dust
during operation. The Contractor provided dust control measure on barge.
(Closed)
6.1.4
Fugitive dust was observed at northeastern
part of the site, the Contractor was reminded to prevent generation of fugitive
dust and provide sufficient dust control measures to the site. The Contractor
provided dust control measures to the concerned area.
6.1.5
Dark smoke emitted from pelican barge was
observed at Portion C2b. The
Contractor was reminded to keep the plant well maintained to prevent generation
of dark smoke. The Contractor subsequently rectified the situation and no dark
smoke was observed. (Closed)
6.1.6
Dark smoke emitted from excavator was
observed at Portion D. The Contractor was reminded to keep the plant well
maintained to prevent generation of dark smoke. The Contractor subsequently
rectified the situation and no dark smoke was observed. (Closed)
6.1.7
Fugitive dust was observed when vehicle was
drove pass the road. The Contractor was reminded to provide sufficient dust
control to prevent generation of fugitive dust.
Noise
6.1.8 No
relevant adverse impact was observed in the reporting month.
Water
Quality
6.1.9
Insufficient sand bags was observed on idle
grout production facilities, the Contractor was reminded to provide enough sand
bags before operation of the grout production facilities to prevent potential
runoff. (Reminder)
Chemical
and Waste Management
6.1.10
It was observed that liquid was accumulated
inside drip tray, the Contractor was reminded to regularly clear the water
accumulated inside drip tray to prevent potential runoff. The Contractor
subsequently rectified the situation and cleared the water accumulated inside
drip tray. (Closed)
6.1.11
Idle air compressors were observed without
drip tray, the Contractor was reminded to provide trip tray to air compressor
before use of air compressor. (Reminder)
6.1.12
It was observed that sand was loaded inside
drip tray. The Contractor was reminded to clear the sand inside drip tray.
(Pending for Contractor’s rectification)
6.1.13
A deformed drip tray was observed on site.
The Contractor was reminded to provide drip tray which can effectively contain
potential leakage of oil. (Pending for Contractor’s rectification)
Landscape
and Visual Impact
6.1.14 No
relevant adverse impact was observed in the reporting month.
Others
6.1.15 No
relevant adverse impact was observed in the reporting month.
6.2.1
The Contractor had registered as a chemical
waste producer for this Project. Receptacles were available for general refuse
collection and sorting.
6.2.2
As advised by the Contractor, 60,671.8m3
of fill were imported for the Project use in the reporting period. 336kg of
paper/cardboard packaging, 5120kg of plastics and 58.5m3 of general
refuse were generated and disposed of in the reporting period. Monthly summary
of waste flow table is detailed in Appendix M.
6.2.3
The Contractor is advised to properly
maintain on site C&D materials and wastes storage, collection, sorting and
recording system, dispose of C&D materials and wastes at designated ground
and maximize reuse / recycle of C&D materials and wastes. The Contractor is
reminded to properly maintain the site tidiness and dispose of the wastes
accumulated on site regularly and properly.
6.2.4
The Contractor is reminded that chemical
waste should be properly treated and stored temporarily in designated chemical
waste storage area on site in accordance with the Code of Practice on the
Packaging, Labeling and Storage of Chemical Wastes.
6.3
Environmental Licenses and Permits
6.3.1 The
environmental licenses and permits for the Project and valid in the reporting
month is summarized in Table 6.1.
Table 6.1 Summary
of Environmental Licensing and Permit Status
|
Statutory
Reference
|
License/
Permit
|
License
or Permit No.
|
Valid
Period
|
License/
Permit Holder
|
Remarks
|
|
From
|
To
|
|
EIAO
|
Environmental Permit
|
EP-353/2009/I
|
17/07/2015
|
N/A
|
HyD
|
Hong Kong – Zhuhai – Macao
Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities
|
|
EP-354/2009/D
|
13/03/2015
|
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-RS0773-15
|
17/07/2015
|
20/10/2015
|
CHEC
|
Reclamation
Works in Contract HY/2010/02
|
|
NCO
|
Construction
Noise Permit
|
GW-RE0622-15
|
21/06/2015
|
20/12/2015
|
CHEC
|
Section of
TKO Fill Bank under Contract HY/2010/02
|
6.4.1 In
response to the site audit findings, the Contractors carried out corrective
actions.
6.4.2 A
summary of the Implementation Schedule of Environmental Mitigation Measures
(EMIS) is presented in Appendix C. Most of the necessary mitigation measures
were implemented properly.
6.4.3 Training
of marine travel route for marine vessels operator was given to relevant staff
and relevant records were kept properly.
6.4.4 Regarding
the implementation of dolphin monitoring and protection measures (i.e.
implementation of Dolphin Watching Plan, Dolphin Exclusion Zone and Silt
Curtain integrity Check), regular checking were conducted by the experienced
MMOs within the works area to ensure no dolphin was trapped by the enclosed
silt curtain systems. Any dolphin spotted within the enclosed silt curtain
systems was reported and recorded. Relevant procedures were followed and
measures were well implemented. Silt curtain systems were also inspected timely
in accordance to the submitted plan. All inspection records were kept properly.
6.4.5 Acoustic
decoupling measures on noisy plants on construction vessels were checked
regularly and the Contractor was
reminded to ensure provision of ongoing maintenance to noisy plants and to
carry out improvement work once insufficient acoustic decoupling measures were
found.
6.4.6 Frequency of watering per day on exposed soil was
checked; with reference to the record provided by the Contract, watering was
conducted at least 8 times per day on reclaimed land. The frequency of watering
is the mainly refer to water truck. Sprinklers are only served to strengthen
dust control measure for busy traffic at the entrance of Portion D. As informed
by the Contractor, during the mal-function period of sprinkler, water truck
will enhance watering at such area. The Contractor was reminded to ensure
provision of watering of at least 8 times per day on all exposed soil within
the Project site and associated works areas throughout the construction phase.
6.4.7 As informed by the Contractor, an area of Portion B has
been handed over to other Contract and the perimeter silt curtain near this
area of Portion B has been rearranged on 31 July 2015 for berthing another
Contractor’s vessels (which do not belong to this Contract). IEC/ENPO was
informed on 5 Aug 2015 immediately after ET’s review. IEC/ENPO provided
further comments on 1 September 2015, ET responded 2 September 2015 with
notification letter ref.:60249820/rmky15090201. IEC/ENPO expressed no further comment via letter ref.:
HYDHZMBEEM00_0_03351L.15 on 8 September 2015 for the removal of section of
perimeter silt curtain near Portion B of HKBCF.
6.5
Summary of Exceedances of the
Environmental Quality Performance Limit
6.5.1 One
(1) Limit Level Exceedance of 24hr-TSP was recorded at
AMS2 on 10 August 2015. After investigation, there is no adequate information
to conclude the recorded exceedances are related to
this Contract.
6.5.2 For
construction noise, no exceedance was recorded at all
monitoring stations in the reporting month.
6.5.3 All
impact water quality monitoring results were below the Action and Limit Level
in the reporting month.
6.5.4 For
dolphin monitoring, a total of five sightings were made, three “on effort” and
two “opportunistic”. Two sightings
were recorded on the 10 August 2015 and three on the 25 August 2015. Sighting
details are summarised are plotted in Appendix K and
Figure 5c, respectively. The first group sighted on the 10 August 2015
comprised one individual and the second, three individuals. The first group
sighted on 25 August 2015 comprised one individual and the second and third
groups, each had three individuals. The two groups of three spotted on the 25
August 2015 were the same individuals but in different locations.
6.5.5 Behaviour of CWD: On
the 10 August 2015, both groups sighted were engaged in feeding
activities. On 25 August 2015, the
first dolphin sighted was feeding and the second two groups were travelling. No
calves were sighted in August 2015.Locations of sighting with different behaviour are mapped in Figure 5d.
6.5.6 For
dolphin monitoring, one (1) limit level exceedance is
recorded. The Investigation is undergoing and investigation results will be
reported in quarterly report (June – August 2015).
6.5.7 Environmental
site inspection was carried out 4 times in August 2015. Recommendations on
remedial actions were given to the Contractors for the deficiencies identified
during the site audits.
6.5.8 Cumulative
statistics on exceedance is provided in Appendix N.
6.6 Summary of Complaints,
Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecutions
6.6.1 The
Environmental Complaint Handling Procedure is annexed in Figure 6.
6.6.2 No complaint, notification
of summons and successful prosecutions was received in the reporting period.
6.6.3 Statistics on complaints,
notifications of summons and successful prosecutions are summarized in Appendix
N.
7
FUTURE KEY ISSUES
7.2.1 As
informed by the Contractor, the major works for the Project in September and October 2015 will be*:-
Marine-base
-
Rubble Mound Seawall
-
Rock fill
-
Maintenance of silt curtain & silt
screen at sea water intake of HKIA
Land-base
-
Earthwork fill
-
Surcharge removal & laying
-
Deep Cement Mixing
-
Removal of Temporary Seawall
-
Vertical Band Drains
-
Installations of Precast Culverts
except sloping outfalls
-
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 September and October 2015 will be changed subject to works progress.
7.3.1 Key
issues to be considered in the coming months:-
-
Site runoff should
be properly collected and treated prior to discharge;
-
Minimize loss of
sediment from filling works;
-
Regular review and
maintenance of silt curtain systems, drainage systems and desilting
facilities;
-
Exposed
surfaces/soil stockpiles should be properly treated to avoid generation of silty surface run-off during rainstorm;
-
Regular review and
maintenance of wheel washing facilities provided at all site entrances/exits;
-
Conduct regular
inspection of various working machineries and vessels within works areas to
avoid any dark smoke emission;
-
Suppress dust
generated from work processes with use of bagged cements, earth movements,
excavation activities, exposed surfaces/soil stockpiles and haul
road traffic;
-
Quieter powered
mechanical equipment should be used;
-
Provision of
proper and effective noise control measures for operating equipment and machinery
on-site, such as erection of movable noise barriers or enclosure for noisy
plants;
-
Closely check and
replace the sound insulation materials regularly;
-
Better scheduling
of construction works to minimize noise nuisance;
-
Properly store and
label oil drums and chemical containers placed on site;
-
Proper chemicals,
chemical wastes and wastes management;
-
Maintenance works
should be carried out within roofed, paved and confined areas;
-
Collection and
segregation of construction waste and general refuse on land and in the sea
should be carried out properly and regularly; and
-
Proper protection
and regular inspection of existing trees, transplanted/retained trees.
-
Control night-time
lighting and glare by hooding all lights.
-
Regular review and
provide maintenance to dust control measures such as sprinkler system.
7.4
Monitoring Schedule for the Coming Month
7.4.1
The tentative schedule for environmental monitoring in September 2015 is provided in Appendix F.
8.2.1 The
construction phase and EM&A programme of the
Project commenced on 12 March 2012.
8.2.2 One
(1) Limit Level Exceedance of 24hr-TSP was recorded
at AMS2. After investigation, there is no adequate information to conclude the
recorded exceedances are related to this Contract.
8.2.3 For
construction noise, no exceedance was recorded at all
monitoring stations in the reporting month.
8.2.4 All
impact water quality monitoring results were below the Action and Limit Level
in the reporting month.
8.2.5 For
dolphin monitoring: A total of five sightings were made, three “on effort” and
two “opportunistic”. Two sightings
were recorded on the 10 August 2015 and three on the 25 August 2015. Sighting
details are summarised are plotted in Appendix K and
Figure 5c, respectively. The first group sighted on the 10 August 2015
comprised one individual and the second, three individuals. The first group
sighted on 25 August 2015 comprised one individual and the second and third
groups, each had three individuals. The two groups of three spotted on the 25
August 2015 were the same individuals but in different locations.
8.2.6 Behaviour of CWD: On
the 10 August 2015, both groups sighted were engaged in feeding
activities. On 25 August 2015, the
first dolphin sighted was feeding and the second two groups were travelling. No
calves were sighted in August 2015.Locations of sighting with different behaviour are mapped in Figure 5d.
8.2.7 For
dolphin monitoring, one (1) limit level exceedance is
recorded. The Investigation is undergoing and investigation results will be
reported in quarterly report (June – August 2015).
8.2.8 No
notification of complaint, summons or prosecution was received in the reporting
period.
8.3.1 According
to the environmental site inspections performed in the reporting month, the
following recommendations were provided:
Air Quality Impact
l
All working
plants and vessels on site should be regularly inspected and properly
maintained to avoid dark smoke emission.
l All
vehicles should be washed to remove any dusty materials before leaving the site.
l Haul
roads should be sufficiently dampened to minimize fugitive dust generation.
l Wheel
washing facilities should be properly maintained and reviewed to ensure
properly functioning.
l Temporary
exposed slopes and open stockpiles should be properly covered.
l Enclosure
should be erected for cement debagging, batching and mixing operations.
l Water spraying should be provided to suppress
fugitive dust for any dusty construction activity.
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.
