Contract
No. HY/2010/02 ¡V Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong
Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities ¡V Reclamation Work (here below, known as ¡§the
Project¡¨) mainly comprises reclamation at the northeast of
the Hong Kong International Airport of
an area of
about 130-hectare for
the construction of an artificial island for the development of the Hong
Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF), and about 19-hectare for the
southern landfall of the Tuen Mun
- Chek Lap Kok Link (TMCLKL).
It is a designated project and is governed by the current permits for the
Project, i.e. the amended Environmental Permits (EPs) issued on 16 Oct 2012
(EP-353/2009/E) and 8 December 2011 (EP-354/2009/A) (for TMCLKL Southern
Landfall Reclamation only).
Ove Arup & Partners Hong
Kong Limited (Arup) was appointed by Highways Department (HyD)
as the consultants for the design and construction assignment for the Project¡¦s
reclamation works (i.e. the Engineer for the Project).
China Harbour Engineering Company Limited (CHEC) was
awarded by HyD as the Contractor to undertake the
construction work of the Project.
ENVIRON Hong Kong Ltd. was employed by HyD
as the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) and Environmental Project Office
(ENPO) for the Project.
AECOM Asia Co. Ltd. (AECOM) was appointed by CHEC to
undertake the role of Environmental Team for the Project for carrying out the environmental
monitoring and audit (EM&A) works.
The construction
phase of the Project under the EPs was commenced on 12 March 2012 and will be
tentatively completed by early Year 2016. The EM&A programme,
including air quality, noise, water quality and dolphin monitoring and environmental
site inspections, was commenced on 12 March 2012.
This report documents the findings of EM&A works
conducted in the period between 1 September 2012 and 30 November 2012. As informed
by the Contractor, major activities in the reporting quarter were:-
Marine-based Works
-
Maintenance of Silt
curtain
-
Silt curtain deployment
and repairing
-
Sand blanket trial
-
Band drain installation
trial
-
Stone column
installation
-
Construction of cellular
structure
-
Backfill cellular
structure
Land-based Works
-
Site office erection and
construction at Works Area WA2
-
Hoarding erection at
Work Areas Portion D and Works Area WA2
-
Sign board erection
at Works Area WA2
-
Maintenance works
of Public Works Regional Laboratory at Works Area WA3
-
Geo-textile fabrication
at Works Area WA2 and WA4
-
Silt curtain fabrication
at Works Area WA2;
-
Stone column and cellular installation barges setup
and their maintenance works at Works Area WA4
A summary of monitoring and audit activities conducted in the reporting quarter is listed below:
24-hour Total
Suspended Particulates (TSP) monitoring
1-hour TSP
monitoring
|
15 sessions
15 sessions
|
Noise
monitoring
|
13 sessions
|
Impact water quality
monitoring
|
39 sessions
|
Impact dolphin
monitoring
|
6 surveys
|
Joint
Environmental site inspection
|
13 sessions
|
Breaches of Action
and Limit Levels for Air Quality
No Action/Limit Level exceedance of 1-hour TSP
results was recorded in the reporting quarter. However, one (1) Limit Level exceedance of 24-hour TSP results was
recorded in the reporting quarter.
Breaches of Action
and Limit Levels for Noise
No
Action/Limit Level exceedance of impact
noise monitoring was
recorded in the reporting quarter.
Breaches
of Action and Limit Levels for Water Quality
Five (5) Action Level exceedances were recorded at
measured suspended solids (SS) values (in mg/L) and one (1) Action Level exceedance was recorded at measured turbidity (in NTU) in
the reporting quarter. Investigation results show that the exceedances
were not due to the Project works.
Triggering of Event
and Action Plan for Impact
Dolphin Monitoring
No
triggering of Event and Action Plan for impact dolphin monitoring was noted in the reporting quarter.
Implementation Status and
Review of Environmental Mitigation Measures
Most of the recommended mitigation
measures, as included in the EM&A programme, were implemented properly in
the reporting quarter, except inability of setting up and carrying
out impact air quality monitoring at AMS6 (Dragonair/CNAC
(Group) Building) were noted. Liaison with relevant parties for permission on
access to the premise for setting up and carrying out impact air quality
monitoring works at AMS6 was continued until 19 November 2012. Reference is
made to ET¡¦s proposal of the omission of air monitoring station (AMS 6) dated
on 1st November 2012 and EPD¡¦s letter dated on 19th 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 will be effective since 19th November 2012.
The recommended environmental
mitigation measures effectively minimize the potential environmental impacts
from the Project. The EM&A programme effectively monitored the
environmental impacts from the construction activities and ensure the proper
implementation of mitigation measures. No particular recommendation was advised
for the improvement of the programme.
Moreover, regular review and checking
on the construction methodologies, working processes and plants were carried
out to ensure the environmental impacts were kept minimal and recommended
environmental mitigation measures were implemented effectively.
Complaint,
Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecution
1 (one) environmental complaint
was received in the reporting quarter.
No notification of summons and
successful prosecution was received in the reporting quarter.
1.1.1
Contract No. HY/2010/02 ¡V Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao
Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing
Facilities ¡V Reclamation Work (here below, known as ¡§the Project¡¨) mainly
comprises seawall construction
and reclamation
at the northeast of the
Hong Kong International Airport of
an area of
about 130-hectare for
the construction of an artificial island for the development of the Hong
Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF), and about 19-hectare for the
southern landfall of the Tuen Mun
- Chek Lap Kok Link (TMCLKL).
1.1.2
The
environmental impact assessment (EIA) reports (Hong Kong ¡V
Zhuhai
¡V Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing
Facilities ¡V EIA Report (Register No. AEIAR-145/2009) (HKBCFEIA) and Tuen Mun ¡V Chek
Lap Kok Link ¡V EIA Report (Register No. AEIAR-146/2009) (TMCLKLEIA), and their
environmental monitoring and audit (EM&A) Manuals (original EM&A
Manuals), for the Project were approved by Environmental Protection Department
(EPD) in October 2009.
1.1.3
EPD subsequently issued the
Environmental Permit (EP) for HKBCF in November 2009
(EP-353/2009) and the Variation of Environmental Permit (VEP) in June 2010
(EP-353/2009/A), November 2010 (EP-353/2009/B), November 2011 (EP-353/2009/C), March 2012
(EP-353/2009/D) and October 2012 (EP-353/2009/E). Similarly, EPD issued the
Environmental Permit (EP) for TMCLKL in November 2009 (EP-354/2009) and the
Variation of Environmental Permit (VEP) in December 2010 (EP-354/2009/A).
1.1.4
The Project is a designated project and is governed by the
current permits for the Project, i.e. the amended EPs issued on 16 October 2012
(EP-353/2009/E) and 8 December 2011 (EP-354/2009/A) (for TMCLKL Southern
Landfall Reclamation only).
1.1.5
A Project Specific EM&A Manual, which included all
project-relation contents from the original EM&A Manuals for the Project,
was issued in May 2012.
1.1.6
Ove Arup &
Partners Hong Kong Limited (Arup) was appointed by Highways Department (HyD) as the consultants for the design and construction
assignment for the Project¡¦s reclamation works (i.e. the Engineer for the
Project).
1.1.7
China Harbour Engineering Company Limited (CHEC) was
awarded by HyD as the Contractor to undertake the
construction work of the Project.
1.1.8
ENVIRON Hong Kong Ltd. was employed by HyD
as the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) and Environmental Project Office
(ENPO) for the Project.
1.1.9
AECOM Asia Co. Ltd. (AECOM) was appointed by CHEC to
undertake the role of Environmental Team for the Project for carrying out the
EM&A works.
1.1.10
The construction phase of the Project under the EPs was
commenced on 12 March 2012 and will be tentatively completed by early Year
2016.
1.1.11
According to the Project Specific EM&A Manual, there is
a need of an EM&A programme including air
quality, noise, water quality and dolphin monitoring and environmental site
inspections. The EM&A programme of the Project
commenced on 12 March 2012.
1.2
Scope
of Report
1.2.1
This is the third
quarterly
EM&A Report under the Contract No. HY/2010/02 Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities
¡V Reclamation Works. This report presents a summary of the environmental
monitoring and audit works, list of activities and mitigation measures proposed
by the ET for the Project
from 1
September 2012 and 30 November
2012.
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
|
Michael Lo
|
2528 3031
|
2668 3970
|
IEC / ENPO
(ENVIRON Hong Kong Limited)
|
Independent Environmental Checker
|
Raymond Dai
|
3743 0788
|
3548 6988
|
Environmental Project Office Leader
|
Y.H. Hui
|
3743 0788
|
3548 6988
|
Contractor
(China Harbour Engineering Company Limited)
|
General Manager (S&E)
|
Daniel Leung
|
3157 1086
|
2578 0413
|
Environmental Officer
|
C. M. Wong
|
3157 1086
|
2578 0413
|
24-hour Hotline
|
Alan C.C. Yeung
|
9448 0325
|
--
|
ET
(AECOM Asia
Company Limited)
|
ET Leader
|
Echo Leong
|
3922 9280
|
2317 7609
|
1.4.1 The construction phase of the Project under the EP
commenced on 12 March 2012.
1.4.2 As informed by the Contractor, details of the major works carried out in
the reporting quarter are listed below:-
Marine-based
Works
-
Maintenance of Silt
curtain
-
Silt curtain deployment
and repairing
-
Sand blanket trial
-
Band drain installation
trial
-
Stone column
installation
-
Construction of cellular
structure
-
Backfill cellular
structure
Land-based
Works
-
Site office erection and
construction at Works Area WA2
-
Hoarding erection at
Work Areas Portion D and Works Area WA2
-
Sign board erection
at Works Area WA2
-
Maintenance works
of Public Works Regional Laboratory at Works Area WA3
-
Geo-textile fabrication
at Works Area WA2 and WA4
-
Silt curtain fabrication
at Works Area WA2;
-
Stone column and cellular installation barges setup
and their maintenance works at Works Area WA4
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.
2.1.1
The Project Specific EM&A Manual designated 4 air
quality monitoring stations, 2 noise monitoring stations, 21 water monitoring stations
(9 Impact Stations, 7 Sensitive Receiver Stations and 5 Control/Far Field
Stations) to monitor environmental impacts on air quality, noise and water
quality respectively. Pre-set and fixed transect line vessel based dolphin
survey was required in two AFCD designated areas (Northeast and Northwest Lantau survey areas). The impact dolphin monitoring at each
survey area should be conducted twice per month.
2.1.2
For impact air quality monitoring, monitoring locations
AMS2 (Tung Chung Development Pier) and AMS7 (Hong Kong SkyCity
Marriott Hotel) 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 before
November 2012. Liaison with relevant parties for permission on access to the
premise for setting up and carrying out impact air quality monitoring works at
AMS6 was continued until 19 November 2012. Reference is made to ET¡¦s proposal
of the omission of air monitoring station (AMS 6) dated on 1st November 2012
and EPD¡¦s letter dated on 19th 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 will be effective since 19th November 2012. For monitoring location AMS3
(Ho Yu College), as proposed in the Project Specific EM&A Manual, approval
for carrying out impact monitoring could not be obtained from the principal of
the school. Permission on setting up and carrying out impact monitoring works
at nearby sensitive receivers, like Caribbean Coast and Coastal Skyline, was
also sought. However, approvals for
carrying out impact monitoring works within their premises were not obtained.
Impact air quality monitoring was conducted at site boundary of the site office
area in Works Area WA2 (AMS3A) respectively. Same baseline and Action Level for
air quality, as derived from the baseline monitoring data recorded at Ho Yu
College, was adopted for this alternative air quality location.
2.1.3
For impact noise monitoring, monitoring locations NMS2 (Seaview Crescent Tower 1) was set up at the proposed
locations in accordance with Project Specific EM&A Manual. However, for
monitoring location NMS3 (Ho Yu College), as proposed in the Project Specific
EM&A Manual, approval for carrying out impact monitoring could not be
obtained from the principal of the school. Permission on setting up and
carrying out impact monitoring works at nearby sensitive receivers, like
Caribbean Coast and Coastal Skyline, was also sought. However, approvals for carrying out
impact monitoring works within their premises were not obtained. Impact noise
monitoring was conducted at site boundary of the site office area in Works Area
WA2 (NMS3A) respectively. Same baseline noise level, as derived from the
baseline monitoring data recorded at Ho Yu College was adopted for this
alternative noise monitoring location.
2.1.4
In accordance with the Project Specific EM&A Manual,
twenty-one 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.
2.1.5
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. 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.
2.1.6
The monitoring locations used during the reporting quarter
are depicted in Figures 2, 3 and 4 respectively.
2.1.7
The Project Specific EM&A Manual also required
environmental site inspections for air quality, noise, water quality, chemical,
waste management, marine ecology and landscape and visual impact.
2.2.1
The environmental quality performance limits (i.e. Action
and/or Limit Levels) of air and water quality monitoring were derived from the baseline air and
water quality monitoring
results at the respective monitoring stations, while the environmental quality
performance limits of noise monitoring were defined in the EM&A Manual.
2.2.2
The environmental quality performance limits of air quality,
noise and water monitoring are given in Appendix D.
2.3.1
Relevant environmental mitigation measures were stipulated
in the Particular Specification and EPs (EP-353/2009/E and EP-354/2009/A) (for TMCLKL Southern Landfall
Reclamation only) for the Contractor to adopt. A list of environmental
mitigation measures and their implementation statuses are given in Appendix C.
3.1.1
In accordance with the Project Specific EM&A Manual, impact
1-hour Total Suspended Particulates (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 at the 4 monitoring stations (AMS2, AMS3A, AMS6 and
AMS7).
3.1.2
The
monitoring locations for impact air quality monitoring are depicted in Figure
2. However, 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.
3.1.3
The weather was mostly sunny, with occasional cloudy and occasional rainy in the reporting
quarter. The major dust source in the reporting quarter included construction activities from the Project, as well
as nearby traffic emissions.
3.1.4
The number of monitoring events and exceedances
recorded in each month of the reporting quarter are presented in Table 3.1 and
Table 3.2 respectively.
Table 3.1 Summary of Number of Monitoring Events for 1-hr &
24-hr TSP Concentration
Monitoring Parameter
|
Location
|
No. of monitoring events
|
Sep 12
|
Oct 12
|
Nov 12
|
1-hr TSP
|
AMS2
|
15
|
15
|
15
|
AMS3A
|
15
|
15
|
15
|
AMS7
|
15
|
15
|
15
|
24-hr TSP
|
AMS2
|
5
|
5
|
5
|
AMS3A
|
5
|
5
|
5
|
AMS7
|
5
|
5
|
5
|
Table
3.2 Summary of Number of Exceedances for 1-hr & 24-hr TSP Monitoring
Monitoring Parameter
|
Location
|
Level of Exceedance
|
Level of Exceedance
|
Sep 12
|
Oct 12
|
Nov 12
|
1-hr TSP
|
AMS2
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
AMS3A
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
AMS7
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Total
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
24-hr TSP
|
AMS2
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
AMS3A
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
AMS7
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Total
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
3.1.5
All impact 1-hour TSP monitoring results at all monitoring
locations were below the Action and Limit Levels in the reporting quarter.
3.1.6
However, one (1) 24-hour TSP result exceeded the
Limit Level at monitoring station AMS3A in the reporting quarter.
3.1.6.1
According to information provided by the
Contractor and on-site observations, installing sand bags, stitching geotextile and transloading
finished product to vessels were the major land-based construction activity
being undertaken at Works Area WA2 during the monitoring period.
3.1.6.2
Construction activities, including installing
sand bags, stitching geotextile and transloading finished product to vessels were carried out
on 13 &14 Nov 2012 and 19 &20 Nov 12 but no exceedance
was recorded on 13 &14 Nov 12.
3.1.6.3
Functional checking on HVS at AMS3A was done.
Air flow of the HVS was checked and the flow was steady during the 24-hr TSP
sampling at AMS3A. The filter paper was re-weighted by the assigned HOKLAS
laboratory and the result was reconfirmed.
3.1.6.4
Construction activities, like sheet piling and
percussive piling, were carrying out by nearby private development project
during the course of monitoring, which are close to the monitoring station
AMS3A. Meanwhile, exposed soil surfaces were observed at those construction
sites nearby
3.1.6.5
As refer to the wind data collected at wind
station at Works Area WA2 during the monitoring period on 19 Nov 2012 and 20
Nov 2012, south eastern wind was prevailing during the monitoring period.
Construction works carried out at nearby construction sites may contribute to
the measured dust levels at the monitoring station AMS3A.
3.1.6.6
The 1-hr TSP values recorded at AMS3A on 20 Nov
2012, which are within the monitoring period of the 24-hr TSP, were 91.7 mg/m3, 88.3 mg/m3 and 87.1 mg/m3 respectively. All measured values are well
below the Action and Limit Levels.
3.1.6.7
The measured 24-hr TSP values recorded at AMS2
and AMS7 (which are closer to the marine-based works areas) on the same
monitoring date were 80.4g/m3 and 88.4g/m3 respectively, which are below the
Action and Limit Levels.
3.1.6.8
The following dust mitigation measures have
been implemented by the Contractor:
¡P
Main
haul road in Works Area WA2 were concrete paved.
¡P
Vehicle
washing facility was provided at vehicle exit points, and vehicle was washed to
remove any dusty materials from its body and wheels before leaving.
¡P
Measures
for preventing fugitive dust emission are provided, e.g. watering and tarpaulin
covers.
3.1.6.9
The dust exceedance
was therefore considered not to be due to the Project works. Nevertheless, the
Contractor was recommended to continue implementing existing dust mitigation
measures.
3.1.7
The graphical plots
of the impact air quality monitoring results are provided in Appendix E. No
specific trend of the monitoring results or existence of persistent pollution
source was noted.
3.2.1
Impact noise monitoring was conducted at the 2 monitoring stations
(NMS2 and NMS3A) for at least once per week during 07:00 ¡V 19:00 in the
reporting quarter.
3.2.2
The monitoring locations used during the reporting quarter are depicted in
Figure 2.
3.2.3
Major noise sources during the noise monitoring included
construction activities of the Project and nearby traffic noise.
3.2.4
The number of impact noise monitoring
events and exceedances are summarized in Table 3.3 and Table 3.4 respectively
Table 3.3 Summary of Number of Monitoring Events for Impact Noise
Monitoring
Parameter
|
Location
|
No.
of monitoring events
|
Sep 12
|
Oct 12
|
Nov12
|
NMS2
|
13
|
13
|
13
|
NMS3A
|
13
|
13
|
13
|
Table 3.4 Summary
of Number of Monitoring Exceedances for Impact Noise
Monitoring Parameter
|
Location
|
Level of Exceedance
|
Level of Exceedance
|
Sep 12
|
Oct 12
|
Nov12
|
NMS2
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
NMS3A
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Total
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
3.2.5
The graphical plots
of the trends of the monitoring results are provided in Appendix F. No specific trend of the
monitoring results or existence of persistent pollution source was noted.
3.3.1
Impact water quality
monitoring was conducted 3 times
per week during mid-ebb and mid-flood tides at 21 water monitoring stations (9 Impact
Stations, 7 Sensitive Receiver Stations and 5 Control/Far Field Stations).
3.3.2
The
monitoring locations used during the reporting quarter are depicted in Figure 3.
3.3.3
Total
of Nine (9) Action Level exceedances and (1) Limit
Level Exceedance were recorded at measured suspended solids
(SS) values (in mg/L) and one (1) Action Level exceedance
was recorded at measured turbidity (in NTU) in the reporting quarter.
Investigation results show that the exceedances were
not due to the Project works. Number of exceedances
recorded in the reporting month at each impact station is summarized in Table
3.5
Table 3.5 Summary
of Water Quality Exceedances in Sep-Nov 2012
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
|
1
(28Nov 12)
|
1
(26 Nov 12)
|
1
(28 Nov 12)
|
1
(26 Nov 12)
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
IS7
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
2
(26, 28 Nov 12)
|
1
(16 Nov 12)
|
2
(26, 28 Nov 12)
|
1
(16 Nov 12)
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
IS8
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
(16 Nov 12)
|
0
|
1
(16 Nov 12)
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
IS(Mf)9
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
(26 Nov 12)
|
|
0
|
1
(26 Nov 12)
|
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
|
1
(30 Nov 12)
|
0
|
1
(30 Nov 12)
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
IS17
|
Action
|
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
|
1
(16 Nov 12)
|
0
|
1
(16 Nov 12)
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
SR5
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
(29 Oct 12)
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
(29 Oct 12)
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
(29 Oct 12)
|
0
|
1
(29 Oct 12)
|
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
|
10
(29 Oct,16, 26, 28 and 30 Nov 12)
|
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
(29 Oct 12)
|
Note: S:
Surface;
M:
Mid-depth;
3.3.4
One
(1) Action Level exceedance was recorded for
turbidity (in NTU) and one (1) Limit Level exceedance
was recorded for suspended solids (mg/L) at monitoring station SR5 in October.
3.3.4.1 One (1) turbidity Action Level exceedance and one (1) suspended solids Limit Level exceedance were recorded on 29th Oct 2012 during mid-flood
tide at Sensitive Receiver Station SR5. For Action Level exceedance
at measured turbidity (NTU), 41 (NTU) was recorded. For Limit Level exceedance at measured Suspended Solids (mg/L), 38.4 mg/L was
recorded.
3.3.4.2 For the exceedances
recorded at SR5, it was found that stone column installation was carried out
during mid-flood tide at Portion C2c by FTB 19 and FTB23. Location plan showing
the locations of the mentioned works is shown below:
![](TOC_files/image005.jpg)
3.3.4.3 Turbidity and suspended solids values
recorded at Impacts Stations closer to the works area (e.g. IS10 and IS(Mf)11) are all below the Action and Limit Level during
the mid-flood tide on the same day.
3.3.4.4 Same work at same portion was carried out
on the day(s) on 26 October and 31 October while no exceedance
was recorded on these two days at the same tide.
3.3.4.5 Strong wind and rough sea condition was
experienced during the monitoring period, which is likely to affect the ambient
water quality in such shallow water condition.
3.3.4.6 The exceedance
was considered as non-project related.
3.3.5
Total
of Nine (9) Acton Level exceedances at measured
Suspended Solids (mg/L) were recorded during November
3.3.5.1 Three (3) suspended solids
Action Level exceedances were recorded, Three (3)
where recorded on 16th Nov 2012 during mid-flood tide at Impact Station IS7,
IS8 and SR4 (N). For Action Level exceedances at
measured Suspended Solids (mg/L), 25.7 mg/L, 26.0 mg/L and 27.1 were recorded
at Impact Station IS7, IS8 and SR4 (N) respectively.
3.3.5.2 For the exceedances
recorded at IS7, IS8 and SR4 (N), it was found that stone column installation
was carried out during 09:08-12:02 at Portion D by FTB 16 and FTB20 on the
16-Nov-12. Location plan showing the locations of the mentioned works is shown
below:
![](TOC_files/image007.jpg)
3.3.5.3 IS(Mf)9 is located between
monitoring site IS7 and IS8 and has a shorter distance to the work area than
monitoring site SR4(N) and IS8. Suspended Solids (SS) values (in mg/L) recorded
at IS(Mf)9 is below the Action and Limit Level during
the flood tide on the same day.
3.3.5.4 Same work at same portion was
carried out on the day(s) on 14th November and 19th November while no exceedance was recorded on these two days at the same tide.
3.3.5.5 Strong wind and rough sea
condition was experienced during the monitoring period, which is likely to affect
the ambient water quality in such shallow water condition.
3.3.5.6 The exceedance
was considered as non-Project related.
3.3.6
Three (3) where recorded on 26th
Nov 2012 during mid-ebb tide at Impact Station IS(Mf)9
and IS7 and during mid-flood tide at Impact Station IS(Mf)6. For Action Level exceedances at measured Suspended Solids (mg/L), 23.8 mg/L,
24.2 mg/L and 28.1mg/L were recorded at Impact Station IS(Mf)9, IS7 and IS(Mf)6
respectively.
3.3.6.1 For Action Level Exceedances of SS at IS(Mf)9 and IS7 at Mid-Ebb tide,
IS(Mf)6 at Mid-Flood tide on 26 November 2012, Stone column installation was
carried out throughout the day at Portion D by FTB 16, FTB20 and AP2 on 26 Nov
2012.
3.3.6.2 Same work at same portion was
carried out on the day on 23 November 2012 while no exceedance
was recorded on 23 November 2012 at the same tide.
3.3.6.3 Rough sea condition and strong
wind was noted during both Mid-Ebb tide and Mid-Flood tide. Shallow water
condition at IS(Mf)9, IS7 and IS(Mf)6, water quality
was likely to be affected up by rough sea condition and strong wind.
3.3.6.4 The exceedances was considered
as Non-Project Related.
3.3.7
Two (2) where recorded on 28th
Nov 2012 during mid-ebb tide at Impact Station IS(Mf)6
and IS7. For Action Level exceedances at measured
Suspended Solids (mg/L), 31mg/L and 24.1mg/L were recorded at Impact Station IS(Mf)6
and IS7 respectively.
3.3.7.1 For Action Level Exceedances of SS at IS(Mf)6 and IS7 at Mid-Ebb tide on 28
November 2012, Stone column installation was carried out throughout the day at
Portion D by FTB 16, FTB20 and AP2 on 28 Nov 2012.
3.3.7.2 Same work at same portion was
carried out on the day on 23 November 2012 while no exceedance was recorded on 23rd November 2012 at the same
tide.
3.3.7.3 Suspended solids values recorded
at Impact Station IS(Mf)9 which is
closer to the works area than IS(Mf)6 is below the Action and Limit Level
during the mid-ebb tide on the same day.
3.3.7.4 Bottom sediment might be stirred
up by rough sea condition and strong wind at shallow water condition at Mid-Ebb
tide at IS(Mf)6 and IS7 which in turn might contribute
to the elevation in suspended solid.
3.3.7.5 In view of there is no damage
can be observed from the silt curtain which deployed in the works area at
Portion D.
3.3.7.6 The exceedances
were considered as Non-Project Related.
3.3.8 One (1) where recorded on 30th
Nov 2012 during mid-ebb tide at Impact Station IS(Mf)16.
For Action Level exceedances at measured Suspended
Solids (mg/L), 27.3mg/L was recorded at Impact Station IS(Mf)16
respectively.
![](TOC_files/image013.jpg)
3.3.8.1 For Action Level Exceedance of SS at IS(Mf)16 at Mid-Ebb tide on 30 November
2012 Stone column installation was carried out throughout the day at Portion D
by FTB 16, FTB20, AP1 and AP2 on 30-Nov-12
3.3.8.2 Suspended solids values recorded
at Impact Station closer to the works are (e.g. IS(Mf)9
and IS7) are all below the Action and Limit Level during the mid-ebb tide on
the same day.
3.3.8.3 The monitoring site was far away
from Partion D where work was carried out.
3.3.8.4 In view of there is no damage
can be observed from the silt curtain which deployed in the works area at
Portion D.
3.3.8.5 The exceedance
was considered as Non-Project Related.
3.3.9
The graphical plots
of the trends of the monitoring results are provided in Appendix G. No specific trend of the monitoring
results or existence of persistent pollution source was noted.
3.4.2
The impact dolphin monitoring conducted is vessel-based and
combines line-transect and photo-ID methodology, which have adopted similar
survey methodologies as that adopted during baseline monitoring to facilitate
comparisons between datasets.
3.4.3
The layout map of impact dolphin monitoring have been
provided by AFCD and is shown in Figure 4.
3.4.4
The effort summary and sighting details during the
reporting quarter are shown in the
Appendix H. A summary of key
findings of the dolphin surveys completed during the reporting quarter is shown
below:
Table 3.6 Summary
of Key Dolphin Survey Findings in Sep-Nov 2012
Number of Impact Surveys Completed^
|
6
|
Survey Distance Travelled under Favourable On- Effort Condition
|
659.8km
|
Number of Sightings
|
71 sightings (52 sightings are ¡¨on effort¡¨ (which
are all under favourable condition), 19 ¡§sightings
are opportunistic¡¨)
|
Number of dolphin individual sighted
|
228 individuals (the best estimated group size)
|
Dolphin Encounter Rate
|
NEL: 6.3%
NWL: 8.7%
|
Dolphin Group Size
(for both NEL and NWL)
|
Average of 3.3¡Ó2.5(SD)
Varied from 1-10 individuals
|
Most Often frequent dolphin sighting area
|
NWL: Lung Kwu Chau and Sha Chau Marine Park area and adjacent, eastern waters
and northeast of the airport platform.
NEL: Southern Brothers Islands and the coastal
area from Sham Shui Kok
to the Ma Wan Bridge.
|
Remarks:
^ Completion of
line transect survey of NEL and NWL survey area once
was counted as one complete survey.
3.4.5
No triggering of Event and Action Plan for impact dolphin monitoring
was noted in the reporting quarter.
3.4.6
Details of the comparison and analysis methodology and
their findings and discussions are annexed in Appendix H.
3.4.7
During
a survey period encounter on 3 September 2012, a dead adult female was observed
in Northwest Lantau (NWL) near Transect line no. 1.
The deceased dolphin was retrieved approximately 13km from north perimeter of
HKBCF reclamation works. The Agriculture Fisheries and
Conservation Department (AFCD) Hotline and Ocean Park (OP) were called. AFCD
dispatched a Marine Parks boat to collect the carcass. It was noted that major
construction works carried out for a period prior to the observation made on 3
September 12 are stone column installation and cellular structure construction.
It is similar to the works carried out since the project construction work
began. (Please refer to Section 1.4.2 for types of works being conducted)
3.4.8
Furthermore,
the HKBCF PAM system records underwater noise levels as well as dolphin vocal
activity. Both stone column piling and vibration piling create very low
underwater noise levels as most of the activity actually occurs within the
sediment rather than in the open water column. There is minimal transmission of
sound at the solid-liquid interface of the sea bed. Any noise from the HKBCF
stone column and vibration piling construction activities appears to be site
specific and is considered to be minimal.
3.4.9
Moreover,
there had been no exceedance of any monitored marine
water quality parameter at all monitoring stations around the worksite, for a
period of time prior to this record. Considering the nature, scale and location
of the works, it is reasonable to conclude that marine works at HKBCF did not
contribute to this mortality incident
3.4.10
Also, the recommended mitigation measures, such as implementation of
dolphin exclusion zone during deployment of perimeter silt curtain system, implementation
of dolphin watching plan for enclosed areas after deployment of perimeter silt
curtain system, controlling of vessel speed and travelling routes and provision
of decoupling measures to compressors and other equipment on working vessels,
which are in place to lessen direct impact from construction
activities to individual dolphins, are currently being implemented
consistently. (Please
refer to Appendix C -EMIS for more mitigation measures).
3.5.1
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 quarter, 13 site
inspections were carried out. Recommendations on remedial actions were given to
the Contractors for the deficiencies identified during the site audits.
3.5.2
Particular observations during the site inspections are
described below:
Air Quality
3.5.3 The Contractor was reminded to
check the operating plants on barge regularly and carry out maintenance /repair
(if necessary), to avoid any dark smoke emission. (Reminder)
Noise
3.5.4
No adverse observation was identified in the reporting
Quarter.
Water Quality
3.5.5
Distortion of part of silt curtain system at site boundaries
at Portion D, B, C2a and silt curtain system installed around the stone column
installation area of FTB19 at Portion C2c were rectified. (Closure of item from
previous reporting month)
3.5.6
Silty plume was noted
around the stone column installation areas of FTB16 at Portion D and around the
silt curtain system when the stone column installation was carried out by FTB23
when site inspection was conducted on FTB 19. The Contractor was advised to
check the silt curtain systems installed regularly and review the arrangement
of localized primary silt curtains to minimize any leakage from works. Also the
Contractor was reminded to fix the primary silt curtain prior to stone column
installation works. Such conditions were rectified within the reporting quarter and the contractor
was reminded to keep checking the silt curtains systems regularly. (Closure of
item in reporting quarter)
Chemical and Waste Management
3.5.7
Open holes was found in the bunding
for storage oil drums and power pack at Barge San Hang Bo 208 and between barge
surface and the bunding on barge Sang Hang Qi 7. The Contractor was reminded to seal the open holes to
retain any oil leakage. Open holes found in the bunding
for storage oil drums and power pack at Barge Sang Hang Bo 208 and barge Sang Hang Qi 7
were
sealed to prevent any leakage of oil. Also, an opening at the bottom of a drip
tray was observed on FTB 19. The Contractor was reminded to seal the opening at
the bottom of the drip tray. The opening at the bottom of a drip tray was
sealed in the reporting quarter. (Closure of item
in the reporting quarter)
3.5.8
Oily water accumulated in drip trays were cleared on Barge
FTB 20 and Barge Kiu Chi and disposed of as chemical
waste in the reporting quarter. (Closure of item
in the reporting quarter)
3.5.9
General refuses accumulated on Barge Kiu
Chi were disposed of properly in the reporting quarter. (Closure of item in the reporting quarter)
3.5.10
Oil leakage was noted from a plant on FTB16 at Portion D.
Oily mixture was accumulated inside the bunded area, at FTB19 at Portion C2a and accumulated
inside the power pack on Barge San Hang Bo 305, too. The Contractor was
recommend to repair the plant and clear the mixture
and treat them as chemical wastes. Such conditions were rectified within
the reporting quarter. (Closure of item
in reporting quarter)
3.5.11
Oil stains were found on barge and near power pack at barge
San Hang Qi 7, near two roll of wire on barge Sang
Hang Qi 7, near oil drum on barge Sun Moon Kee, on
barge near powerpack on barge Sang Hang Bo 210 and on
Barge San Hang Bo 401. The contractor was reminded to clean the oil stain and
the absorbents should be treated as chemical wastes. The Contractor was
reminded to provide mitigation measure such as drip tray or tarpaulin sheet to
retain any oil leakage. The Contractor provided mitigation measure such as tarpaulin
sheet to retain any oil leakage and bunding was provided
to retain leaked oil from the power pack on Barge San Hang Qi
7. (Closure of item in the reporting quarter)
3.5.12 Empty oil drums
were found improperly stored on barge Sun Moon Kee. The contractor was reminded
to provide mitigation measures such as providing drip trays to waste oil drums
or to place the waste oil drum to a proper storage area for temporary storage. Empty
oil drums on barge Sun Moon Kee were removed. Also, oil drums were stored
inside the drip trays to retain any oil leakage at Works Area WA4. (Closure of
item in the reporting quarter)
3.5.13
Oil drums were found improperly stored on barge San Hang Qi 7, barge Sun Moon Kee, FTB19 at Portion C2a and Sang
Hang Bo 205. Drip trays should be provided to oil drums stored within works
areas to retain any leaked oil. Oil drums were stored inside the bunding on barge within the reporting quarter. (Closure of item
in the reporting quarter) A drum of waste
oil was found improperly stored on barge Sun Moon Kee. The Contractor was
reminded to place the waste oil drum to designated chemical waste storage area
for temporarily storage. The chemical waste container should also be labelled. A proper lid should be provided to the opened
drum. Such condition was rectified within the reporting quarter. (Closure of item
in the reporting quarter)
3.5.14
Drip tray was provided to the power pack on barge San Hang
Bo 402 at Portion B. Measure was provided to vibratory clamp on barge San Hang
Bo 208 and oil stains on barge deck were cleared. The Contractor was reminded
that measures like drip trays and tarpaulin sheet coverage should be provided
to plants to retain any leakage. Oil stains on barge deck should be cleared and
absorbents should be treated as chemical wastes. (Closure of item in reporting quarter)
3.5.15
Power pack without drip trap was observed. The contractor
was reminded to provide proper measure such as drip tray to power pack to
retain leaked oil. Power pack was found improperly stored on Barge San Hang Bo
401. The Contractor was reminded that proper measures like drip trays/tarpaulin
sheets should be provided to retain any leaked oil from power pack on the
barge. Power pack improperly stored on Barge San Hang Bo 401 was removed within
the reporting quarter. (Closure of item in the reporting quarter).
3.5.16
Drip tray was provided to the power pack on barge San Hang
Bo 402 at Portion B. Measure was provided to vibratory clamp on barge San Hang
Bo 208 and oil stains on barge deck were cleared. The Contractor was reminded
that measures like drip trays and tarpaulin sheet coverage should be provided
to plants to retain any leakage. Oil stains on barge deck should be cleared and
absorbents should be treated as chemical wastes. (Closure of item in reporting quarter)
3.5.17
The contractor was reminded to disposal the oil absorbent
materials of as chemical wastes and provide a proper chemical waste storage
area on Barge San Hang Bo 208. (reminder)
3.5.18 General refuse
collection bin on FTB16 at Portion D was found placed inside the bunded area for oil drums storage. The Contractor was
recommended to relocate the general refuse collection area. Such condition was
rectified within the reporting quarter. (Closure of item
in reporting quarter)
3.5.19
The containers placed for containing the dripping water
from air-conditors were found full of water and
debris at Barge SHA HANG QI 6.
Immediate actions of clearing up the containers were taken by the
Contractor. The Contractor was
reminded to keep the barge clean and tidy. (Closure of item in reporting quarter)
Landscape and Visual Impact
3.5.20
No adverse observation was identified in the reporting quarter.
Others
3.5.21
No adverse observation was identified in the reporting quarter.
3.5.22
The Contractor has rectified most of the observations as identified during environmental site
inspection in the reporting quarter. Rectifications of remaining
identified items are undergoing by the Contractor. Follow-up inspections on the
status on provision of mitigation measures will be conducted to ensure all
identified items are mitigated properly.
4
Advice on the Solid and
Liquid Waste Management Status
4.1.1
The Contractor registered
as a chemical waste producer for this project. Sufficient numbers of receptacles were
available for general refuse collection and sorting.
4.1.2
As advised by the Contractor, 14,845 m3 of
imported fill, 48,399.01m3 of public fill and 42,535.9m3
of rock fill were imported for the Project use in the reporting quarter. 200.0kg
of chemical waste (solid) and 3,418.0L of chemical waste (liquid) were
generated and disposed of in the reporting quarter. 21.71 tonnes
of general refuse were generated and disposed of in the reporting quarter. Summary
of waste flow table is detailed in Appendix I.
4.1.3
The Contractor is advised to
properly maintain on site C&D materials and wastes 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.
4.1.4
The Contractor is reminded that
chemical waste containers should be properly treated and stored temporarily in
designated chemical waste storage area on site in accordance with the Code of Practise on the Packaging, Labelling
and Storage of Chemical Wastes.
5.1.1
In response to the site audit findings, the Contractors
carried out corrective actions.
5.1.2
A summary of the Implementation Schedule of Environmental
Mitigation Measures (EMIS) is presented in Appendix C. Most of the recommended
mitigation measures, as included in the EM&A programme,
were implemented properly in the reporting quarter, except inability of setting
up and carrying out impact air quality monitoring at AMS6 (Dragonair/CNAC
(Group) Building) were noted. Liaison with relevant parties for permission on
access to the premise for setting up and carrying out impact air quality
monitoring works at AMS6 was
continued
until 19 November 2012. Reference is made
to ET¡¦s proposal of the omission of air monitoring station (AMS 6) dated on 1st
November 2012 and EPD¡¦s letter dated on 19th 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 will be effective since 19th November 2012. Moreover, regular review and checking on
the construction methodologies, working processes and plants were carried out
to ensure the environmental impacts were kept minimal and recommended
environmental mitigation measures were implemented effectively.
5.1.3
Regular marine travel route for marine vessels were
implemented properly in accordance to the submitted plan and relevant records
were kept properly.
5.1.4
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.
5.1.5
Acoustic decoupling measures on noisy plants on
construction vessels were checked regularly and these measures were well
implemented.
5.1.6
One (2) Non-Compliance
dated on 31 Oct 2012 and 6 Nov 2012 was noted during the reporting quarter.
5.1.7
For the Non-Compliance dated on 31 Oct 2012, as informed by
the Contractor on 30 November 2012, a noise complaint was received by EPD on
the 18 Oct 2012 and on one of the two complaint follow up inspection conducted
by EPD on 19 and 31 October 2012, operation of a powered mechanical equipment
after 19:00 without valid CNP was observed on 31 Oct 12 at WA4. One worker was
carrying out emergency maintenance for machinery with generator after 19:00,
while no construction noise permit was in force, which is suspected that the
Noise Control Ordinance (Cap.400) was violated. A ¡§Pink Form¡¨ (inspection
record) was subsequently issued by EPD on the 14 November 2012 regarding the
suspected violation of Noise Control Ordinance (Cap.400).
5.1.7.1
The Contractor was recommended to implement the following
noise mitigation measures in case any construction activities involving the use
of Powered Mechanical Equipment (PME) is conducted in the concerned area:
a) Work involves Powered Mechanical Equipment (PME)
should be stopped before 7 pm
b) Review the need to increase the frequency of
Construction Noise and Suppression training, provide extra training if deemed
necessary.
c) Install notice sign on site to notice workers that
Powered Mechanical Equipment (PME) and Prescribed Construction Work (PCW) (e.g.
1. Erection or dismantling of formwork or scaffolding. 2. Loading, unloading or
handling of rubble, wooden boards, steel bars, wood or scaffolding material and
3. Hammering) are not allowed from 7pm to 7am on the next day or anytime on
public holidays, including Sundays.
d) The noise mitigation measures should be maintained
and the effectiveness of noise mitigation measures deployed within works area
should be enforced and reviewed onsite regularly in order to provide sufficient
noise screening effect properly.
5.1.7.2
A follow-up site inspection was conducted on 3 January 2013
by ET and with representative from the Contractor. During the inspection,
follow up actions taken by the Contractor to improve the situation was
observed. No Powered Mechanical Equipment (PME) was in operation and it was observed
that notice signs were installed on site by the Contractor to notice workers
that work involves Powered Mechanical Equipment (PME) is prohibited from 19:00
to 07:00 on all days and whole day on public holiday.
5.1.7.3
Prior to any confirmation of any possible summon and
prosecution. ET will continue to monitor the mitigation actions carried out by
the Contractor and provide appropriate assistance and advice whenever
necessary.
5.1.8
For the Non-Compliance dated 6 Nov 2012 there was an
incident of trial filling of sand blanket by conveyor without full enclosure
observed and reported. The condition was rectified and the wind board was
installed on 8 Nov 2012.
6
Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental
Quality Performance Limit
6.1
Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality Performance
Limit
6.1.1
No
Action/Limit Level exceedance of 1-hour TSP results
was recorded in the reporting quarter. However, one (1) Limit Level exceedance of 24-hour TSP results was recorded in the
reporting quarter.
6.1.2
For impact noise monitoring, no Action and
Limit Level exceedance was recorded at all monitoring
stations in the reporting period.
6.1.3
For
impact water monitoring, Nine (9) Action Level exceedances
and (1) Limit Level Exceedance were recorded at
measured suspended solids (SS) values (in mg/L) and one (1) Action Level exceedance was recorded at measured turbidity (in NTU) in
the reporting quarter. Investigation results show that the exceedances
were not due to the Project works.
6.1.4
Cumulative statistics on exceedances
is provided in Appendix J.
7
Summary of Complaints, Notification of Summons
and Successful Prosecutions
7.1
Summary of Environmental Compliants, Notification of Summons and Successful
Prosecutions
7.1.1
The Environmental Complaint Handling Procedure is annexed
in Figure 5.
7.1.2
As informed by the Contractor in
the reporting quarter. One complaint was received by EPD on 18 October 2012.
7.1.3
1
(One) environmental complaint was received in
the reporting quarter.
7.1.2.1 As informed by the Contractor on the 28 Dec 2012, a noise related complaint
was received by EPD on 18 Oct 2012
7.1.2.2 As provided by the Contractor, the site daily of Works Area WA4 for 13
- 18 October 2012 was reviewed. In accordance with the site daily of Works Area
WA4 for 13 - 18 October 2012, no construction activities was being carried out
during restricted hour (7 pm to 7am next day on weekdays)
7.1.2.3 A follow-up site inspection was conducted between 14:00 and 14:30 on 3
January 2013 by the ET and with representative from the Contractor. During the
inspection, follow up actions were taken by the Contractor to improve the
situation was observed. No generator was in operation and also it was observed
that notice signs were installed on site by the Contractor to notice workers
that work involves Powered Mechanical Equipment (PME) is prohibited after 7 pm
to 7am next day on weekdays and whole day on public holiday.
7.1.2.4 As informed by the Contractor, a foreman was assigned to the working
area as corrective action to ensure generator was switched off and workers have
left before 7pm, who would also report to the superintendent.
7.1.2.5 The Contractor provided preventive actions such as reinforced the
number of construction noise and suppression training. After the complaint,
such training were given on 12, 15,21, 23, 26, 28 and 30 Nov and 3, 7, 11, 14, 15,
17, 20 and 24 Dec among Works Area WA2 & WA4, on Vessel FTB-16, FTB-18,
FTB-19 & FTB -20, site TKO, on vessel SHB 601 & SHB208 and Site office.
7.1.2.6 The Contractor was recommended to implement the following noise
mitigation measures in case any construction activities involving the use of
Powered Mechanical Equipment (PME) is conducted in the concerned area:
l
Any PME should not be operated from 7pm to 7am on
the next day or anytime on public holidays, including Sundays.
l
Review the need to increase the frequency of
Construction Noise and Suppression training, provide extra training if deemed
necessary.
l
Install notice sign on site to notice workers that
PME and Prescribed Construction Work (PCW) are not allowed from 7pm to 7am on
the next day or anytime on public holidays, including Sundays.
l
The noise mitigation measures should be maintained
and the effectiveness of noise mitigation measures deployed within works area
should be enforced and reviewed onsite regularly in order to provide sufficient
noise screening effect properly.
l
Contractor must obtain a valid CNP for operation of
PME from 7pm ¡V 7am on weekdays and whole day on public holiday.
7.1.4
No notification of summons and prosecution was received in
the reporting quarter.
7.1.5
Statistics on complaints, notifications of summons and
successful prosecutions are summarized in Appendix J.
8.1
Comments on mitigation measures
8.1.1
According
to the environmental site inspections performed in the reporting quarter, the
following recommendations were provided:
Air Quality Impact
l All working
plants and vessels on site should be regularly inspected and properly
maintained to avoid dark smoke emission.
l All vehicles should be washed to remove any
dusty materials before leaving the site.
l Haul roads should be sufficiently dampened
to minimize fugitive dust generation.
l Wheel washing facilities should be properly
maintained and reviewed to ensure properly functioning.
l Temporary exposed slopes and open stockpiles
should be properly covered.
l Enclosure should be erected for cement
debagging, batching and mixing operations.
l Water spraying should be provided to suppress
fugitive dust for any dusty construction activity.
Construction Noise Impact
l Quieter powered mechanical equipment should
be used as far as possible.
l Noisy operations should be oriented to a
direction away from sensitive receivers as far as possible.
l Proper and effective noise control measures
for operating equipment and machinery on-site should be provided, such as
erection of movable noise barriers or enclosure for noisy plants. Closely check
and replace the sound insulation materials regularly
l Vessels and equipment operating should be
checked regularly and properly maintained.
l Noise Emission Label (NEL) shall be affixed
to the air compressor and hand-held breaker operating within works area.
l Better scheduling of construction works to
minimize noise nuisance.
Water Quality Impact
l Regular review and maintenance of silt
curtain systems, drainage systems and desilting
facilities in order to make sure they are functioning effectively.
l Construction of seawall should be completed
as early as possible.
l Regular inspect and review the loading
process from barges to avoid splashing of material.
l Silt, debris and leaves accumulated at
public drains, wheel washing bays and perimeter u-channels and desilting facilities should be cleaned up regularly.
l Silty effluent should be treated/ desilted before discharged. Untreated effluent should be
prevented from entering public drain channel.
l Proper drainage channels/bunds should be
provided at the site boundaries to collect/intercept the surface run-off from
works areas.
l Exposed slopes and stockpiles should be
covered up properly during rainstorm.
Chemical and Waste
Management
l All types of wastes, both on land and
floating in the sea, should be collected and sorted properly and disposed of
timely and properly. They should be properly stored in designated areas within
works areas temporarily.
l All chemical containers and oil drums should
be properly stored and labelled.
l All plants and vehicles on site should be
properly maintained to prevent oil leakage.
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 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.
8.2
Recommendations
on EM&A Programme
8.2.1
The
impact monitoring programme for air quality, noise,
water quality and dolphin ensured that any deterioration in environmental
condition was readily detected and timely actions taken to rectify any
non-compliance. Assessment and analysis of monitoring results collected demonstrated
the environmental impacts of the Project. With implementation of recommended effective
environmental mitigation measures, the Project¡¦s environmental impacts were
considered as environmentally acceptable. The weekly environmental site
inspections ensured that all the environmental mitigation measures recommended
were effectively implemented.
8.2.2
The
recommended environmental mitigation measures, as included in the EM&A programme, effectively minimize the potential environmental
impacts from the Project. Also, the EM&A programme
effectively monitored the environmental impacts from the construction
activities and ensure the proper implementation of mitigation measures. No
particular recommendation was advised for the improvement of the programme.
8.3
Conclusions
8.3.1
The construction phase and EM&A programme
of the Project commenced on 12 March 2012.
8.3.2
No
Action/Limit Level exceedance
of 1-hour TSP results was recorded in the reporting quarter. However, one (1) Limit
Level exceedance of 24-hour TSP results was recorded
in the reporting quarter.
8.3.3
For impact noise monitoring, no Action and Limit Level exceedance
was recorded at all monitoring stations in the reporting period.
8.3.4 For impact water monitoring, Nine
(9) Action Level exceedances and (1) Limit Level Exceedance were recorded at measured suspended solids (SS)
values (in mg/L) and one (1) Action Level exceedance was
recorded at measured turbidity (in NTU) in the reporting quarter. Investigation
results show that the exceedances were not due to the
Project works.
8.3.5
No
triggering of Event and Action Plan for impact dolphin monitoring was noted in
the reporting quarter.
8.3.6
Environmental
site inspection was carried out twelve times in the reporting quarter.
Recommendations on remedial actions were given to the Contractors for the
deficiencies identified during the site audits.
8.3.7
1 (one) environmental complaint was received in the reporting quarter.
8.3.8
No
notification of summons and successful prosecution was received in the
reporting quarter.
8.3.9
Apart
from the above mentioned monitoring, most of the recommended mitigation
measures, as included in the EM&A programme, were
implemented properly in the reporting quarter, except inability of setting up and
carrying out impact air quality monitoring at AMS6 (Dragonair/CNAC
(Group) Building) were noted. Liaison with relevant parties for permission on
access to the premise for setting up and carrying out impact air quality
monitoring works at AMS6 was continued until 19 November 2012. Reference is
made to ET¡¦s proposal of the omission of air monitoring station (AMS 6) dated
on 1st November 2012 and EPD¡¦s letter dated on 19th 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 will be effective since 19th November 2012.
8.3.10
The
recommended environmental mitigation measures effectively minimize the
potential environmental impacts from the Project. The EM&A programme
effectively monitored the environmental impacts from the construction
activities and ensure the proper implementation of mitigation measures. No
particular recommendation was advised for the improvement of the programme.
8.3.11
Moreover,
regular review and checking on the construction methodologies, working
processes and plants were carried out to ensure the environmental impacts were
kept minimal and recommended environmental mitigation measures were implemented
effectively.