Contract
No. HY/2010/02 ¡V Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing
Facilities ¡V Reclamation Works (here below, known as ¡§the Contract¡¨) 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 11
April 2016 (EP-353/2009/K) 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 Contract).
China
Harbour Engineering Company Limited (CHEC) was awarded by HyD as the Contractor
to undertake the construction work of the Contract.
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 Contract 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 2017. 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 March 2016 and 31 May 2016. As informed
by the Contractor, major activities in the reporting quarter were:-
Marine-base
-
Sloping Seawalls
-
Rubble Mound Seawall
-
Rock fill
- Maintenance of silt curtain & silt
screen at sea water intake of HKIA (As informed by the Contractor, the silt curtain
at NE Airport Cooling Water Intake has been removed on 10 May 2016.)
Land-base
-
Surcharge removal & laying
-
Deep Cement Mixing
-
Installations of Precast Culverts except sloping outfalls
-
Construction of 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 quarter is listed below:
24-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) monitoring
1-hour TSP monitoring
|
16 sessions
16 sessions
|
Noise monitoring
|
13 sessions
|
Impact water quality monitoring
|
38 sessions
|
Impact dolphin monitoring
|
6 surveys
|
Joint Environmental site inspection
|
13
sessions
|
Breaches of
Action and Limit Levels for Air Quality
All 1-Hour TSP and 24-Hour TSP results
were below the Action and Limit Level in the reporting quarter.
Breaches of
Action and Limit Levels for Noise
For construction noise, no
exceedance was recorded at all monitoring stations in the reporting quarter.
Breaches of
Action and Limit Levels for Water Quality
For water quality monitoring,
one (1) Limit level impact water quality monitoring exceedance at monitoring
station SR(4)N has been recorded on 20 May 2016 during flood tide. After
investigation, there is no adequate information to conclude the recorded
exceedances are related to this Contract.
Breaches
of Action and Limit Levels for Impact Dolphin Monitoring
One (1) Limit Level exceedance of
dolphin monitoring was recorded in the reporting quarter. After investigation,
it was concluded that the HZMB works is one of the contributing factors
affecting the dolphins. It was also concluded the contribution of impacts due
to the HZMB works as a whole (or individual marine contracts) cannot be
quantified nor separate from the other stress factors. Event Action Plan for
Impact Dolphin Monitoring was triggered. For detail of investigation, please
refer to appendix L.
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.
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
No environmental complaint,
notification of summons or prosecution was received in the reporting period
1.1.1
Contract No.
HY/2010/02 ¡V Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing
Facilities ¡V Reclamation Works (here below, known as ¡§the Contract¡¨) mainly
comprises reclamation at the northeast
of the Hong Kong International Airport of
an area of
about 130-hectare for
the construction of an artificial island for the development of the Hong
Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF), and about 19-hectare for the
southern landfall of the Tuen Mun - Chek Lap Kok Link (TMCLKL).
1.1.2
The environmental impact assessment (EIA) reports (Hong Kong ¡V
Zhuhai ¡V Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing
Facilities ¡V EIA Report (Register No. AEIAR-145/2009) (HKBCFEIA) and Tuen Mun ¡V
Chek Lap Kok Link ¡V EIA Report (Register No. AEIAR-146/2009) (TMCLKLEIA), and
their environmental monitoring and audit (EM&A) Manuals (original EM&A
Manuals), for the Project were approved by Environmental Protection Department
(EPD) in October 2009.
1.1.3
EPD subsequently issued the
Environmental Permit (EP) for HKBCF in November 2009
(EP-353/2009) and the Variation of Environmental Permit (VEP) in June 2010
(EP-353/2009/A), November 2010 (EP-353/2009/B), November 2011 (EP-353/2009/C), March 2012
(EP-353/2009/D), October 2012 (EP-353/2009/E), April 2013 (EP-353/2009/F),
August 2013 (EP-353/2009/G), January 2015 (EP-353/2009/H), July 2015
(EP-353/2009/I), February 2016
(EP-353/2009/J) and April 2016 (EP-353/2009/K). 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 11 April 2016 (EP-353/2009/K) and 13 March 2015
(EP-354/2009/D) (for TMCLKL Southern Landfall Reclamation only).
1.1.5
A Contract Specific
EM&A Manual, which included all Contract -relation contents from the
original EM&A Manuals for the Contract, 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 Contract).
1.1.7
China Harbour
Engineering Company Limited (CHEC) was awarded by HyD as the Contractor to
undertake the construction work of the Contract.
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 Contract 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 2017.
1.1.11
According to the Contract
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 Contract commenced on 12 March 2012.
1.2.1 This is the seventeenth 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 Contract from 1 March 2016 to 31 May 2016.
1.3.1 The Contract 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
|
Paul
Appleton
|
3698 5889
|
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 the reporting quarter are listed below:-
Marine-base
-
Sloping Seawalls
-
Rubble Mound Seawall
-
Rock fill
- Maintenance of silt curtain & silt
screen at sea water intake of HKIA (As informed by the Contractor, the silt
curtain at NE Airport Cooling Water Intake has been removed on 10 May 2016.)
Land-base
-
Surcharge removal & laying
-
Deep Cement Mixing
-
Installations of Precast Culverts except sloping outfalls
- Construction of 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 Contract
is shown in Appendix B.
1.4.4 The general layout plan of the Contract 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 Contract 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 Contract Specific
EM&A Manual. The conditional omission of Monitoring Station AMS6 was effective
since 19 November 2012. For monitoring location AMS3 (Ho Yu College), as
proposed in the Contract 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.
2.1.3
For impact noise
monitoring, monitoring locations NMS2 (Seaview Crescent Tower 1) was set up at
the proposed locations in accordance with Contract Specific EM&A Manual.
However, for monitoring location NMS3 (Ho Yu College), as proposed in the
Contract 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 was adopted for this
alternative noise monitoring location. 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.
2.1.4 As informed by the premises owner of (AMS7A) - Chu Kong
Air-Sea Union Transportation Co. LTD would not grant us the permission to
install air quality monitoring equipment (High volume sampler) and conduct
1-hour TSP/24 hour TSP monitoring at the premises of Chu Kong Air-Sea Union
Transportation Co. LTD after December 2015. In order to fulfil the EM&A
requirement of this Contract, as permission to conduct impact air quality
monitoring at the premise of Hong Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel has been granted
in December 2015, ET proposed relocation of air quality monitoring station
(AMS7A) on 15 December 2015, with no further comment received from IEC on 15
December 2015 and no particular comment received from EPD on 21 December 2015,
the impact air quality monitoring station AMS7A (Chu Kong Air-Sea Union
Transportation Company Limited) has been relocated to AMS7 (Hong Kong SkyCity
Marriott Hotel) on 30 December 2015. The impact air quality monitoring for
December 2015 was conducted before the relocation of AQM Station from AMS7A to AMS7.
The impact air quality monitoring has been conducted at AMS7 (Hong Kong SkyCity
Marriott Hotel) since 1 January 2016, Action Level for air quality, as derived
from the baseline monitoring data recorded at Hong Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel
will be adopted for this air quality monitoring location.
2.1.5 In accordance with the Contract 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.
2.1.6 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.
2.1.7 The monitoring locations used during the reporting quarter
are depicted in Figures 2, 3 and 4
respectively.
2.1.8 The Contract 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/K and EP-354/2009/D) (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 Contract 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,
AMS3B, 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 As informed by the premises owner of (AMS7A) - Chu Kong
Air-Sea Union Transportation Co. LTD would not grant us the permission to
install air quality monitoring equipment (High volume sampler) and conduct
1-hour TSP/24 hour TSP monitoring at the premises of Chu Kong Air-Sea Union
Transportation Co. LTD after December 2015. In order to fulfil the EM&A
requirement of this Contract, as permission to conduct impact air quality
monitoring at the premise of Hong Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel has been granted
in December 2015, ET proposed relocation of air quality monitoring station
(AMS7A) on 15 December 2015, with no further comment received from IEC on 15
December 2015 and no particular comment received from EPD on 21 December 2015,
the impact air quality monitoring station AMS7A (Chu Kong Air-Sea Union Transportation
Company Limited) has been relocated to AMS7 (Hong Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel)
on 30 December 2015. The impact air quality monitoring for December 2015 was
conducted before the relocation of AQM Station from AMS7A to AMS7. The impact
air quality monitoring for this report quarter were conducted at AMS7 (Hong
Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel), Action Level for air quality, as derived from the
baseline monitoring data recorded at Hong Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel will be
adopted for this air quality monitoring location.
3.1.4 The weather was mostly fine and sunny, with occasional
cloudy in the reporting quarter. The major dust source in the reporting quarter
included construction activities from the Project, as well as nearby traffic
emissions.
3.1.5 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
|
March 16
|
April 16
|
May 16
|
1-hr TSP
|
AMS2
|
15
|
18
|
15
|
AMS3B
|
15
|
18
|
15
|
AMS7
|
15
|
18
|
15
|
24-hr TSP
|
AMS2
|
5
|
6
|
5
|
AMS3B
|
5
|
6
|
5
|
AMS7
|
5
|
6
|
5
|
Table 3.2 Summary of Number of Exceedances for 1-hr & 24-hr TSP Monitoring
Monitoring Parameter
|
Location
|
Level of Exceedance
|
Numbers of Exceedance
|
March 16
|
April 16
|
May 16
|
1-hr TSP
|
AMS2
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
AMS3B
|
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
|
AMS3B
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
AMS7
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Total
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
3.1.6 All 24-Hour TSP and 1-Hour TSP results were below the
Action and Limit Level in the reporting quarter.
3.1.7 The event action plan is annexed in Appendix K.
3.1.8 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 of monthly
EM&A report March 2016, April 2016 and May 2016 respectively.
3.1.9 Due to electricity failure, the 24-hour TSP Monitoring at
Station AMS3B - Site Boundary of Site Office (WA2) was rescheduled from 23 May
2016 - 24 May 2016 to 24 May 2016 - 25 May 2016.
3.2.1 Impact noise monitoring was conducted at the 2 monitoring
stations (NMS2 and NMS3B) 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 No Action or Limit Level Exceedance of construction noise
was recorded in the reporting quarter.
3.2.4 Major noise sources during the noise monitoring included
construction activities of the Project and nearby traffic noise.
3.2.5 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
|
March 16
|
April 16
|
May 16
|
NMS2
|
4
|
4
|
5
|
NMS3B
|
4
|
4
|
5
|
Table 3.4 Summary
of Number of Monitoring Exceedances for Impact Noise
Monitoring Parameter
|
Location
|
Level of Exceedance
|
Level of Exceedance
|
March 16
|
April 16
|
May 16
|
NMS2
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
NMS3B
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Total
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
3.2.6 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.
3.2.7 The event action plan is annexed in Appendix K.
3.3
Water Quality Monitoring
3.3.1 The monitoring locations used during the reporting quarter
are depicted in Figure 3.
Table 3.5 Summary
of Water Quality Exceedances in
March 2016 ¡V May 2016
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
|
1
20 May 16
|
0
|
1
20 May 16
|
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
|
1
20 May 16
|
1
20 May 16
|
Note: S: Surface;
M: Mid-depth;
3.3.2 For the limit Level Exceedance of Suspended
Solids at water quality monitoring station SR4(N) was measured on 20 May 2016
during flood tide. After investigation, there is no adequate information to
conclude the recorded exceedances are related to this Contract.
3.3.2.1
Below layout map shows that marine based
construction works such as box culverts and seawall construction was carried
out at Portion D and Portion A of HKBCF Reclamation Works.
![](Quarterly%20EM&A%20Summary%20Report%20for%20March%202016%20-%20May%202016%20(Rev.%200)%2020161214_files/image013.jpg)
3.3.2.2
Exceedances recorded at SR4(N) during mid-flood
tide are unlikely due to marine based construction activities of the Contract
because:
3.3.2.3
With reference to the silt curtain checking
record, no defect was observed at southern and southeastern parts of the
perimeter silt curtain which are facing SR4(N).
3.3.2.4
With referred to the attached layout map, marine
based construction works such as seawall construction were conducted at Portion
A and Portion C2A, however no silt plume was observed to flow from the inside
of the perimeter silt curtain to the outside of the perimeter silt curtain when
monitoring was conducted during flood tide. (Also see attached Photo record 1
for sea condition observed on 20 May 2016 during flood tide.)
3.3.2.5
Photo record 1 which shows the sea condition at
southern and southeastern part of the HKBCF reclamation works during flood tide
on 20 May 2016. No turbid water was observed.
![](Quarterly%20EM&A%20Summary%20Report%20for%20March%202016%20-%20May%202016%20(Rev.%200)%2020161214_files/image014.jpg)
3.3.2.6
Also, turbidity and suspended solids levels
recorded at IS7, IS8, IS(Mf)9 and IS(Mf)16 were below the action and limit
level. This indicates that the turbidity and suspended solids levels recorded
at monitoring stations closer to the active works, were not adversely affected.
As such, the exceedances recorded at SR4(N) were unlikely attribute to the
active works of this Contract.
3.3.2.7
With referred to the photo record 2 taken at
monitoring station SR4(N) on 20 May 2016 (also see attached photo record)
turbid water was observed at this area. However, with referred to the photo
record 1 taken at southern and southeastern part of the HKBCF reclamation works
during flood tide on 20 May 2016, turbid water was not noted. Photo record 2 shows that vessel
activities was observed when monitoring was conducted at monitoring location
SR4(N), as confirmed with the Contractor of HY/2010/02, this Contract did not
have any construction vessels working outside the site boundary of Contract
HY/2010/02 on 20 May 2016 (also refer to the above layout map).
3.3.2.8
Photo record 2 which shows the sea condition
taken on 20 May 2016 at near monitoring location SR4(N) and facing monitoring
station SR4(N), turbid water was observed at this area.
![](Quarterly%20EM&A%20Summary%20Report%20for%20March%202016%20-%20May%202016%20(Rev.%200)%2020161214_files/image015.jpg)
3.3.2.9
The exceedances were likely due to local effects
in the vicinity of SR4(N).
3.3.2.10After
investigation, there is no adequate information to conclude the recorded
exceedances are related to this Contract.
3.3.2.11Action
taken under the action plan:
1. Not applicable as SS was not measured in situ;
2. After considering the above mentioned
investigation results, it appears that it was unlikely that the suspended solids exceedance was attributed to active construction activities of
this Contract;
3. IEC, Contractor, ER and EPD were informed via email;
4. Monitoring data, all plant, equipment and
Contractor's working methods were checked;
5. Since it is considered that the suspended solids
exceedance is unlikely to be contract related, as such, actions 5-7 under the
EAP are not considered applicable.
3.3.2.12Nevertheless,
the Contractor was reminded to ensure provision of ongoing maintenance to the
silt curtains and to carry out maintenance work once defects were found.
3.3.2.13Maintenance
work of the silt curtain was carried out by the Contractor on a daily basis
except Sunday and public holiday.
3.3.2.14The
Contractor was reminded to adhere to the environmental permit requirement and
undertake the necessary mitigation measures after the realignment of the
perimeter silt curtain near sourtheastern corner of HKBCF Reclamation Works, as
necessary.
3.3.2.15No
exceedance was recorded at all other monitoring stations in the reporting
period.
3.3.3 The Impact Water Quality Monitoring
originally scheduled on 27 May 2016 was cancelled due to Tropical Cyclone
Warning Signal No.3 was hoisted.
3.3.4 The event action plan is annexed in Appendix
K.
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 March
2016 ¡V May 2016
Number of Impact Surveys Completed^
|
6
|
Survey Distance Travelled under Favourable On- Effort Condition
|
633.6km
|
Number of Sightings
|
15 sightings (6 sightings are ¡¨on effort¡¨ (which are all under favourable
condition), 9 sightings are ¡§opportunistic¡¨)
|
Number of dolphin individual sighted
|
59 individuals (the best estimated group size)
|
Dolphin Encounter Rate#
|
NEL: 0
NWL: 1.4
|
Dolphin Group Size
|
Average of NEL: 0
Average of NWL: 3.8
Varied from 1-8 individuals
|
Most Often frequent dolphin sighting area
|
Northern Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park, the western limit of
NWL and Tai O area.
|
Remarks:
^
Completion of line transect survey of NEL and NWL survey area once was counted
as one complete survey.
# Dolphin Encounter Rate = (Sum of 1st 2nd, 3rd
month¡¦s total sighting/ Sum of 1st , 2nd,
3rd month¡¦s total effort)*100km (encounter
rates are calculated using on effort sightings made under favourable conditions
only.)
3.4.5
One (1) Limit Level
exceedance of dolphin monitoring was recorded in the reporting quarter. After
investigation, it was concluded that the HZMB works is one of the contributing
factors affecting the dolphins. It was also concluded the contribution of
impacts due to the HZMB works as a whole (or individual marine contracts)
cannot be quantified nor separate from the other stress factors. Event Action
Plan for Impact Dolphin Monitoring was triggered. For detail of investigation,
please refer to appendix L.
*Quarterly Average Encounter Rate of Number of
Dolphin Sightings (STG) presents averaged encounter rates of the three monitored
months in terms of groups per 100km per survey event.
STG Encounter rate = (Average of (total number
sighting/total effort) of 1st and 2nd completed survey# of 1st month+ Average
of (total number sighting/total effort) of 1st and 2nd completed survey# of 2nd
month + Average of (total number sighting/total effort) of 1st and 2nd
completed survey# of 3rd month)/3*100km
**Quarterly Average Encounter Rate of Total Number
of Dolphins (ANI) presents averaged encounter rates of the three monitored
months in terms of individuals per 100km per survey event.
ANI Encounter rate = (Average of (total number of
Individual/total effort) of 1st and 2nd completed survey# of 1st month+ Average
of (total number of Individual/total effort) of 1st and 2nd completed survey#
of 2nd month + Average of (total number of Individual/total effort) of 1st and
2nd completed survey# of 3rd month +)/3*100km
3.4.6
Details of the
comparison and analysis methodology and their findings and discussions are
annexed in Appendix H.
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
Breaker was observed
without dust suppression measures at TKO sorting facility, the Contractor was
reminded to provide dust suppression measure such as watering during the
operation of breaker. The Contractor subsequently provided watering during
operation of breaker. (Closed)
3.5.4
The Contractor was
reminded to affix a proper exception/approval label to the power pack at
Portion E2 under NRMM regulation. The Contractor subsequently rectified the
situation. (Closed)
Noise
3.5.5
No relevant adverse
impact was observed in the reporting quarter.
Water Quality
3.5.6
Turbid water was
observed at Portion D, it is noted that the source of turbid water was
originated from the wheel washing facility at Portion D managed by another
Contract. The Contractor of
Contract HY/2010/02 was advised to liaise with another Contract so that
recurrence of the situation could be prevented. (Reminder)
3.5.7
It was observed that
the overlapping of the perimeter silt curtain maybe insufficient at the
northeast access. The Contractor was advised to provide sufficient length of
overlapping at the northeast marine access. The Contractor subsequently extended to
overlapping at the northeast marine access. (Closed)
Chemical and Waste Management
3.5.8
Water and oil mixture
was observed accumulated inside drip tray at TKO sorting facility, the
Contractor was reminded to properly clear the water accumulated inside drip
tray. The Contract subsequently cleared the water accumulated inside drip tray.
(Closed)
3.5.9
Water was observed
accumulated inside a bunded area on barge FTB19. The Contractor was reminded to
regularly clear the water inside bunding to prevent potential oil
spillage/runoff. The Contractor
subsequently rectified the situation by clearing the water accumulated inside
bunding. (Closed)
3.5.10
Oil was observed
stored without measure to prevent oil leakage or spillage on barge Tung Fu 18,
the Contractor was reminded to provide measures to prevent oil leakage or
spillage. The Contractor subsequently provided measure barge Tung Fu 18 to prevent oil leakage
or spillage. (Closed)
3.5.11
The Contractor was
reminded to keep the site tidy at Portion D. Sorting was subsequently observed
onsite, the Contractor was reminded to continue to keep the site tidy at
Portion D. (Closed)
3.5.12
General refuse was
observed, near box culvert area at Portion D, at the edge of the land area when
inspection was conducted on barge FTP24, at other area of Portion D, the
Contractor was reminded to regularly remove the general refuse on site to keep
the site clean and tidy. The Contractor subsequently removed the general refuse
and kept the site clean and tidy. (Closed)
3.5.13
Chemical waste
container was observed without drip tray, the Contractor was reminded to place
the chemical waste container onto the drip tray. The Contractor subsequently
place the chemical waste container onto drip tray. (Closed)
3.5.14
The Contractor was
reminded to dispose of general refuse regularly at Portion E2 properly. The
Contractor subsequently cleared the generation refuse at Portion E2. (Closed)
3.5.15
The Contractor was
reminded to provide drip tray for the moveable light generator at Portion E2.
The Contractor subsequently provided drip tray to the moveable light generator. (Closed)
3.5.16
Oil drum was observed
without drip tray. The Contractor was reminded to provide drip tray to oil
drum. The Contractor subsequently removed from oil drum. (Closed)
Landscape and Visual Impact
3.5.17
No relevant adverse
impact was observed in the reporting quarter.
Others
3.5.18
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.
4.1.1 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, 128239.5 m3 of
inert C&D Materials generated and reused in other Projects; 97381m3
of surplus surcharge exported to Macau; 102329m3 of Imported fill;
532kg paper/cardboard packaging, 489.7 m3 other C&D waste such
as general refuse were generated and disposed of in the reporting period.
Monthly 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 Practice on the Packaging,
Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes.
4.1.5 The treated marine sediment and/or treated excavated
filling material specified by Contract no. HY/2013/01 has
been received as public fill for Contract no.
HY/2010/02¡¦s reclamation filling works since January 2015. As
informed by the Contractor in the last reporting quarter, such site arrangement
has been discontinued since 24 February 2016.
4.1.6 After checking with the Contractor, surcharge material was
removed off site to Macau from 27 April 2016 and it is continued in the
reporting quarter. Surplus surcharge was exported to Macau during the reporting
quarter. The Contractor was reminded to ensure consistency in quantities
in case of any C&D material disposed off-site and/or no
surcharge material removed off site.
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 are being upheld. 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 Training of marine travel route for marine vessels operator
was given to relevant staff 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 checks were conducted
by experienced MMOs within the works area to ensure that no dolphins were
trapped by the silt curtain area. There were no dolphins spotted within the
silt curtain during this quarter. The relevant procedures were followed and all
measures were well implemented. The silt curtains were also inspected in
accordance to the submitted plan.
5.1.5 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.
5.1.6 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
reporting period.
5.1.8
As informed by the
Contractor on 16 February 2016, a MMWG meeting was held among the
representatives of Airport Authority (AA), Arup (RSS of
Contract HY/2010/02) and
CHEC (the Contractor of
Contract HY/2010/02) on 15 February 2016.
In the meeting, it was mentioned that in order to
facilitate the site investigation (SI) works of
the AA¡¦s contractor in
the vicinity of
the concerned location, removal of the concerned silt curtain at the NE
Cooling Water Intake of Hong Kong International Airport was discussed. The
environmental aspect of the proposed removal of the silt curtain at NE Airport
Cooling Water Intake (WSR25) was reviewed by the ET and no adverse comment was
received from IEC/ENPO on 21 March 2016. As informed by the Contractor, the
silt curtain at NE Airport Cooling Water Intake has been removed on 10 May
2016.
5.1.9
Further to our letter
(ET¡¦s letter¡¦s ref.: 60249820/rmky16033001) dated 20 March 2016 regarding the
notification of silt curtain removal programme and arrangement, as informed by
RSS on 18 May 2016, the Contractor provided an updated programme on 17 May 2016
to indicate the current site situation. According to CHEC¡¦s latest removal
programme, stage 1 (southern section of Portion B) removal work is scheduled to
be carried out in mid-June 2016 while the associated section of the seawall
should have been substantially completed. Tentative completion dates for
the subsequent stages have also been updated, while the overall phasing
arrangement has not changed. A notification letter was being prepared in the
reporting quarter and should be sent to IEC/ENPO in the next reporting quarter
to inform them that the removal of perimeter silt curtain of Stages 1, 2, 3 and
4 has been rescheduled and removal works will be commenced tentatively on 15
June 2016, 18 August 2016, 7 November 2016 and 1 December 2016 respectively
subject to the site progress. The arrangement is currently under ET¡¦s review in
the reporting quarter.
5.1.10
IEC/ENPO observed that
one Floating Concrete Batching Plant and two Floating Grout Production
Facilities anchored at Portion C2b and Portion E2 respectively at around 9:13
am on 25 April 2016. IEC/ENPO opined that a review should be conducted by ET to
assess if Condition 3.26A of EP-353/2009/K for HZMB HKBCF Project is complied,
after investigation, two number of FGP barges DL-4 and DL-5 were under BCF
contract. The FGP barges were servicing Contract No.HY/2010/02, but the
observed FGP barges were berthing at the concerned location for upcoming works
but were not operated on 25 April 2016. In addition, after further review, no
floating grout production was in operation at any time in March and April
2016 for Contract No.HY/2010/02; 1 floating grout production was in
operation at any time in May 2016 for Contract No.HY/2010/02. Condition 3.26A of EP-353/2009/K for Contract No.HY/2010/02 is complied with during the reporting quarter.
6.1.1 All 1-Hour TSP and 24-Hour TSP results were below the
Action and Limit Level in the reporting quarter.
6.1.2 For construction noise, no exceedance was recorded at all
monitoring stations in the reporting quarter.
6.1.3 For water quality monitoring, one (1) Limit level impact
water quality monitoring exceedance at monitoring station SR(4)N has been
recorded on 20 May 2016 during flood tide. After investigation, there is no
adequate information to conclude the recorded exceedances are related to this
Contract.
6.1.4 One (1) Limit Level exceedance of dolphin monitoring was
recorded in the reporting quarter. After investigation, it was concluded that
the HZMB works is one of the contributing factors affecting the dolphins. It
was also concluded the contribution of impacts due to the HZMB works as a whole
(or individual marine contracts) cannot be quantified nor separate from the
other stress factors. Event Action Plan for Impact Dolphin Monitoring was
triggered. For detail of investigation, please refer to appendix L.
6.1.5 No environmental complaint, notification of summons or
prosecution was received in the reporting period
6.1.6 Cumulative statistics on exceedances is provided in
Appendix J.
7
Summary of Complaints, Notification of Summons
and Successful Prosecutions
7.1.1 The Environmental Complaint Handling Procedure is annexed
in Figure 5.
7.1.2
No environmental complaint, notification of summons or prosecution was received
in the reporting quarter.
7.1.3 Statistics on complaints, notifications of summons and
successful prosecutions are summarized in Appendix N.
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
¡P
All working plants and vessels on site should be regularly
inspected and properly maintained to avoid dark smoke emission.
¡P
All vehicles should be washed to remove any dusty materials before
leaving the site.
¡P
Haul roads should be sufficiently dampened to minimize fugitive
dust generation.
¡P
Wheel washing facilities should be properly maintained and
reviewed to ensure properly functioning.
¡P
Temporary exposed slopes and open stockpiles should be properly covered.
¡P
Enclosure should be erected for cement debagging, batching and
mixing operations.
¡P
Water spraying should be provided to suppress fugitive dust for
any dusty construction activity.
¡P
Regular review and provide maintenance to dust control measures
such as sprinkler system.
Construction Noise Impact
¡P
Quieter powered mechanical equipment should be used as far as
possible.
¡P
Noisy operations should be oriented to a direction away from
sensitive receivers as far as possible.
¡P
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
¡P
Vessels and equipment operating should be checked regularly and
properly maintained.
¡P
Noise Emission Label (NEL) shall be affixed to the air compressor
and hand-held breaker operating within works area.
¡P
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
¡P
Regular review and maintenance of silt curtain systems, drainage
systems and desilting facilities in order to make sure they are functioning
effectively.
¡P
Construction of seawall should be completed as early as possible.
¡P
Regular inspect and review the loading process from barges to
avoid splashing of material.
¡P
Silt, debris and leaves accumulated at public drains, wheel
washing bays and perimeter u-channels and desilting facilities should be
cleaned up regularly.
¡P
Silty effluent should be treated/ desilted before discharged.
Untreated effluent should be prevented from entering public drain channel.
¡P
Proper drainage channels/bunds should be provided at the site
boundaries to collect/intercept the surface run-off from works areas.
¡P
Exposed slopes and stockpiles should be covered up properly during
rainstorm.
Chemical and Waste Management
¡P
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.
¡P
All chemical containers and oil drums should be properly stored
and labelled.
¡P
All plants and vehicles on site should be properly maintained to
prevent oil leakage.
¡P
All kinds of maintenance works should be carried out within
roofed, paved and confined areas.
¡P
All drain holes of the drip trays utilized within works areas
should be properly plugged to avoid any oil and chemical waste leakage.
¡P
Oil stains on soil surface and empty chemical containers should be
cleared and disposed of as chemical waste.
¡P
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
¡P
All existing, retained/transplanted trees at the works areas
should be properly fenced off and regularly inspected.
¡P
Control night-time lighting and glare by hooding all lights.
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 All 1-Hour TSP and 24-Hour TSP results were below the
Action and Limit Level in the reporting quarter.
8.3.3 For construction noise, no exceedance was recorded at all
monitoring stations in the reporting quarter.
8.3.4 For water quality monitoring, one (1) Limit level impact
water quality monitoring exceedance at monitoring station SR(4)N has been
recorded on 20 May 2016 during flood tide. After investigation, there is no
adequate information to conclude the recorded exceedances are related to this
Contract.
8.3.5 One (1) Limit Level exceedance of dolphin monitoring was
recorded in the reporting quarter. After investigation, it was concluded that
the HZMB works is one of the contributing factors affecting the dolphins. It
was also concluded the contribution of impacts due to the HZMB works as a whole
(or individual marine contracts) cannot be quantified nor separate from the
other stress factors. Event Action Plan for Impact Dolphin Monitoring was
triggered. For detail of investigation, please refer to appendix L.
8.3.6 Environmental site inspection was carried out 13 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 No environmental complaint notification of summons or
prosecution was received in the reporting quarter.
8.3.8 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.
8.3.9 The recommended environmental mitigation measures
effectively minimize the potential environmental impacts from the Contract. 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.
8.3.10 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.