TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.4 Summary of Construction Works
2 Summary of EM&A Programme Requirements
2.2 Environmental Quality Performance (Action/Limit Levels)
2.3 Environmental Mitigation Measures
3.5 Environmental Site Inspection and Audit
4 Advice on the Solid and Liquid Waste Management Status
4.1 Summary of Solid and Liquid Waste Management
5 Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures
5.1 Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures
6 Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality Performance Limit
6.1 Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality Performance Limit
7 Summary of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecutions
7.1 Summary of Environmental Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecutions
8 Comments, recommendations and Conclusions
8.1 Comments on mitigation measures
8.2 Recommendations on EM&A Programme
List of Tables
Table 1.1 Contact Information of Key Personnel
Table 3.1 Summary of Number of Monitoring Events for 1-hr & 24-hr TSP Concentration
Table 3.2 Summary of Number of Exceedances for 1-hr & 24-hr TSP Monitoring
Table 3.3 Summary of Number of Monitoring Events for Impact Noise
Table 3.4 Summary of Number of Monitoring Exceedances for Impact Noise
Table 3.5 Summary of Water Quality Exceedances (June 2017 – August 2017)
Table 3.6 Summary of Key Dolphin Survey Findings in June 2017 – August 2017
Table 3.7 Summary of STG and ANI encounter rates in June 2017 – August 2017
Figures
Figure 1 General Contract Layout Plan
Figure 2 Impact Air Quality and Noise Monitoring Stations and Wind Station
Figure 3 Impact Water Quality Monitoring Stations
Figure 4 Impact Dolphin Monitoring Line Transect Layout Map
Figure 5 Environmental Complaint Handling Procedure
List of Appendices
Appendix A Contract Organization for Environmental Works
Appendix B Three Month Rolling Construction Programmes
Appendix C Implementation Schedule of Environmental Mitigation Measures (EMIS)
Appendix D Summary of Action and Limit Levels
Appendix E Graphical Presentation of Impact Air Quality Monitoring Results
Appendix F Graphical Presentation of Impact Daytime Construction Noise Monitoring Results
Appendix G Graphical Presentation of Impact Water Quality Monitoring Results
Appendix H Impact Dolphin Monitoring Survey Findings and Analysis
Appendix I Quarterly Summary of Waste Flow Table
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Contract
No. HY/2010/02 – Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary
Crossing Facilities – 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.
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 June 2017 and 31 August 2017. As informed by the Contractor, major activities in the reporting quarter were:-
Marine-base
- Maintenance of silt curtain
- Outfall installation
- Additional GI works
Land-base
- Maintenance works of Site Office at Works Area WA2
- 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
In July 2017, for impact water quality monitoring, 2 action
level exceedances of suspended solids were recorded at SR3 during ebb tide on
12 July 2017 and at IS7 during flood tide on 14 July 2017 respectively. After
investigation, it was concluded that those exceedance were unlikely to be
contract related. No other exceedance was recorded at all monitoring stations
in the reporting quarter.
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 complaint, notification of summons or prosecution was
received in the reporting quarter.
1
introduction
1.1
Background
1.1.1
Contract No.
HY/2010/02 – Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing
Facilities – 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 – Zhuhai – Macao
Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities – EIA Report (Register No.
AEIAR-145/2009) (HKBCFEIA) and Tuen Mun – Chek Lap Kok Link – EIA Report (Register No. AEIAR-146/2009)
(TMCLKLEIA), and their environmental monitoring and audit (EM&A) Manuals
(original EM&A Manuals), for the Project were approved by Environmental
Protection Department (EPD) in October 2009.
1.1.3
EPD
subsequently issued the Environmental Permit (EP)
for HKBCF in November 2009 (EP-353/2009) and the Variation of Environmental
Permit (VEP) in June 2010 (EP-353/2009/A), November 2010
(EP-353/2009/B), November 2011 (EP-353/2009/C), March 2012
(EP-353/2009/D), October 2012 (EP-353/2009/E), April 2013 (EP-353/2009/F),
August 2013 (EP-353/2009/G), January 2015 (EP-353/2009/H), 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.
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
Scope of Report
1.2.1 This is the twenty second
quarterly EM&A Report under the Contract No. HY/2010/02 Hong
Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities –
Reclamation Works. This report presents a summary of the environmental
monitoring and audit works, list of activities and mitigation measures proposed
by the ET for the Contract from 1 June 2017 to 31 August 2017.
1.3
Contract Organization
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
|
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 |
3456 2850 |
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
Summary of Construction Works
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
- Maintenance of silt curtain
- Outfall installation
- Additional GI works
Land-base
- Maintenance works of Site Office at Works Area WA2
- 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
Summary of EM&A Programme Requirements
2.1
Monitoring Parameters
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 Due to the commencement of
marine work of the Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into
a Three-Runway System (3RS Project), a
large portion of works site boundary will
be established at the northern part of the existing airport Island. The recent
arrangement of works boundary of 3RS Project which delineates the boundary of
the designated 3RS Project (for the indicative 3RS boundary, please refer to
Figure 5). The works area of 3RS project will affect several water
quality monitoring stations and the dolphin monitoring
transect lines which are being used
for conducting monitoring under Contract No. HY/2010/02.
The EM&A Programme for the HZMB HKBCF Project
will therefore be affected. As a result, a proposal was prepared by ET in
accordance with condition 5.1 of EP-353/2009/K and condition 4.1 of
EP-354/2009/D, to relocate water quality monitoring stations from SR5, IS10,
CS(Mf)3 and alternate the transect lines of dolphin monitoring 2, 3, 4,
5, 6 and 7. A revised proposal has been updated and sent to IEC/ENPO for
their further review on 24 March 2017 and IEC/ENPO verified the revised
proposal on the same date. The revised proposal has been sent to authority by
project team for review and approval on 3 April 2017. The authority
subsequently approved the proposal on 12 May 2017.
2.1.9 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
Environmental Quality Performance (Action/Limit Levels)
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
Environmental Mitigation Measures
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
MONITORING Results
3.1
Air Quality Monitoring
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 |
||
|
June 17 |
July 17 |
August 17 |
||
|
1-hr TSP |
AMS2 |
15 |
15 |
18 |
|
AMS3B |
15 |
15 |
18 |
|
|
AMS7 |
15 |
15 |
18 |
|
|
24-hr TSP |
AMS2 |
5 |
5 |
6 |
|
AMS3B |
5 |
5 |
6 |
|
|
AMS7 |
5 |
5 |
6 |
|
Table 3.2 Summary of Number of Exceedances for 1-hr & 24-hr TSP Monitoring
|
Monitoring Parameter |
Location |
Level of Exceedance |
Numbers of Exceedance |
||
|
June 17 |
July 17 |
August 17 |
|||
|
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 June 2017, July 2017 and
August 2017 respectively.
3.2
Noise Monitoring
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 – 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 The measured noise level on 5
June 2017 at NMS3B exceeded the noise level of 65dB(A)
during examination period but it is higher than the baseline. Therefore,
baseline correction was carried out and the corrected noise level which solely
represent the noise level of Construction works is 63.4 dB(A) which is lower
than the exceedance level of 65dB(A) . As such the EAP was not triggered.
3.2.4 The measured noise level on
16 June 2017 at NMS3B exceeded the noise level of 65dB(A)
during examination period but it was below the baseline level. Therefore, it is
not considered as an exceedance. As such the EAP was not triggered.
3.2.5 Other major noise sources
during the noise monitoring included construction activities of
the Contract, construction activities by other contracts and nearby
traffic noise. Nonetheless, the Contractor of Contract No.HY/2010/02 was reminded to continue to properly
implement all noise mitigation measures.
3.2.6 No Action or Limit Level
Exceedance of construction noise was recorded in the reporting quarter.
3.2.7 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 |
||
|
June 17 |
July 17 |
August 17 |
||
|
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 |
||
|
June 17 |
July 17 |
August 17 |
|||
|
NMS2 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
NMS3B |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
|
Total |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
3.2.8 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.
3.2.9 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 (June 2017 – August 2017)
|
Exceedance Level |
DO (S&M) |
DO (Bottom) |
Turbidity |
SS |
Total |
||||||
|
Ebb |
Flood |
Ebb |
Flood |
Ebb |
Flood |
Ebb |
Flood |
Ebb |
Flood |
||
|
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
IS(Mf)6 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
IS7 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
(1) 14 Jul 2017 |
0 |
1 |
|
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(N) |
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 |
(1) 12 Jul 2017 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
SR4(N) |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
SR5(N) |
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 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
|
|
|
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Note: S: Surface;
M: Mid-depth;
3.3.2 One SS action level
exceedance on 12 July 2017 at monitoring station SR3 during ebb tide. For the
location of monitoring stations, please refer to Figure 3.
3.3.2.1 Investigation Result:
3.3.2.2 With referred to the
information provided by the Contractor, it is confirmed that no construction
activities was conducted when water quality monitoring was conducted at
monitoring station SR3 during ebb tide on 12 July 2017.
3.3.2.3 With referred to the
monitoring record, no sediment plume has been observed during ebb tide on 12
July 2017.
3.3.2.4 As there were no exceedance
at monitoring locations IS7, IS(Mf)6 and IS5 which are located closer to the
site boundary of this Contract than it is of monitoring station SR3, the
exceedance was likely due to local effects in the vicinity of SR3.
3.3.2.5 As such, the exceedance
recorded at SR3 during ebb tide on 12 July 2017 was unlikely to be contract
related.
3.3.2.6 Action taken under the action
plan:
1. Not applicable as SS was not measured in situ;
2. After considering the above mentioned investigation results, it appears that it was unlikely that the SS exceedance was attributed to the active construction activities of this Contract;
3. IEC, contractor and ER were informed via email;
4. Monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods were checked;
5-7. Since it is considered that the SS exceedance is unlikely to be project related, as such, actions 5-7. under the EP are not considered applicable.
3.3.2.7 Nevertheless, the Contractor
was reminded to properly implement all relevant water quality mitigation
measures.
3.3.2.8 The Contractor should
properly implement all relevant water quality mitigation measures.
3.3.3 One SS action level
exceedance on 14 July 2017 at monitoring station IS7 during flood tide. For the
location of monitoring stations, please refer to Figure 3.
3.3.3.1 Investigation Result:
3.3.3.2 With referred to the
information provided by the Contractor, it is confirmed that no construction
activities was conducted when water quality monitoring was conducted at
monitoring station IS7 during flood tide on 14 July 2017.
3.3.3.3 With referred to monitoring
record, no sediment plume has been observed and no construction vessel was
observed in the vicinity of monitoring station IS7 during flood tide on 14 July
2017. As there were no exceedance at all other monitoring locations, the
exceedance was likely due to local effects in the vicinity of IS7.
3.3.3.4 As such, the exceedance
recorded at IS7 during flood tide on 14 July 2017 was unlikely to be contract
related.
3.3.3.5 Action taken under the action
plan:
1. Not applicable as SS was not measured in situ;
2. After considering the above mentioned investigation results, it appears that it was unlikely that the SS exceedance was attributed to the active construction activities of this Contract;
3. IEC, contractor and ER were informed via email;
4. Monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods were checked;
5-7. Since it is considered that the SS exceedance is unlikely to be project related, as such, actions 5-7. under the EP are not considered applicable.
3.3.3.6 Nevertheless, the Contractor
was reminded to properly implement all relevant water quality mitigation
measures.
3.3.3.7 The Contractor should
properly implement all relevant water quality mitigation measures.
3.3.4 No other exceedance was
recorded at all monitoring stations in the reporting quarter.
3.3.5 The event action plan is
annexed in Appendix K.
3.4
Dolphin Monitoring
3.4.1
In accordance with the Contract Specific EM&A Manual,
pre-set and fixed transect line vessel based dolphin survey was required in two
AFCD designated areas (Northeast Lantau (NEL) and Northwest Lantau (NWL) survey
areas). The impact dolphin monitoring at each survey area should be conducted
twice per month.
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 June 2017 – August 2017
|
Number of Impact Surveys Completed^ |
6 |
|
Survey Distance Travelled under Favourable On- Effort Condition |
579.2km |
|
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 |
49 individuals (the best estimated group size) |
|
Dolphin Encounter Rate# |
NEL: 0 NWL: 1.6 |
|
Dolphin Group Size |
Average of NEL: 1 Average of NWL: 3.3 Varied from 1-5 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.
|
Table 3.7 Summary of STG and ANI encounter rates in June 2017 – August 2017 |
||||
|
NEL |
NWL |
Level Exceeded |
|
|
|
STG* |
0 |
1.6 |
Limit |
|
|
ANI** |
0 |
5.1 |
|
|
*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
Environmental Site Inspection and Audit
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:
3.5.3 Discolored NRMM label was
affixed on excavator and a drilling rig machine respectively, the Contractor
was reminded to affix appropriate label on the excavator. As informed by
Contractor, the concerned excavator was not used by this contract or other
contractor. The Contractor subsequently affixed appropriate NRMM on concerned
drilling rig machine. (Closed)
3.5.4 Inappropriate size of NRMM
label affixed onto the drilling rig machine on the working platform in the
vicinity of Portion E1 was observed. The contractor was reminded to affix an
appropriate NRMM label. The Contractor subsequently affixed appropriate NRMM
label on the concerned drilling rig machine. (Closed)
3.5.5 Inappropriate size of NRMM
label affixed onto the boring machine on the working platform in the vicinity
of Portion C1a was observed. The contractor was reminded to affix an
appropriate NRMM label with size of at least 200mm in width and 130 mm in
height. As informed by the contractor, the concerned boring machine has been
removed. (Closed)
Noise
3.5.6 No relevant adverse impact
was observed in the reporting month.
Water Quality
3.5.7 It was observed that silt
curtain near Portion E1 was disconnected on 29 June 2017. The Contractor was
reminded to reinstall silt curtain at the concerned area and provide
maintenance regularly. As informed by Contractor silt curtain at the concerned
area has been removed. (Closed)
3.5.8 It was observed that silt
curtain around the outfall of Portion B was disconnected in Aug 17, the
Contractor was reminded to reinstate the silt curtain at the concerned area and
provide maintenance regularly. (Pending for Contractor’s rectification in
the reporting quarter)
Chemical and Waste Management
3.5.9 The Contractor was reminded
to clean up the site and dispose general refuse properly. (Reminder)
Landscape and Visual Impact
3.5.10 No relevant adverse impact was observed in the reporting
quarter.
Others
3.5.11 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
Summary of Solid and Liquid Waste Management
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,
1,064 kg paper/cardboard packaging, 71.5 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 in June 2017 in 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
Implementation Status of Environmental
Mitigation Measures
5.1
Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures
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.
5.1.7
As informed by the Contractor, the perimeter silt curtain
near Portion B of HKBCF has been arranged on 3 February 2016. A notification on
the concerned site arrangement of the perimeter silt curtain of Contract
HY/2010/02 was sent to IEC/ENPO by the ET for their review on 8 March 2016,
IEC/ENPO issued comments on 10 March 2016 and the notification of realignment
of perimeter silt curtain is under ET’s further review in the reporting
quarter. The concerned notification on the concerned site arrangement of the
perimeter silt curtain of Contract HY/2010/02 will be sent to the Authority
once the review is completed.
5.1.8 Further to our letter
(ET’s letter’s ref.: 60249820/rmky16033001) dated 30/3/2016 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 31 October 2016 to indicate the
current site situation. According to CHEC’s latest removal programme during the reporting month, stage 2 (east side of
the perimeter silt curtain removal work has been completed and dates for the
subsequent stages have also been updated in the reporting month, while the
overall phasing arrangement has not changed. A notification email has been sent
to IEC/ENPO to inform them that the completion of removal of perimeter silt
curtain of Stages 2 and the tentative date for silt curtain removal work of
stage 3, 4 and 5. With referred to previous IEC/ENPO comment received on 7 June
2016 if update of proposal was mainly on time schedule and they have no
objection in principle. However prior to IEC/ENPO’s reply to
confirm ET’s updated proposal, ET was requested to provide site photos to
show ET’s checking of the current site condition with respect to the
reminders given in their previous letter (Ref.: HYDHZMBEEM00_0_4102L.16 dated
22 April 2016).
5.1.9 Due to the commencement of
marine work of the Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into
a Three-Runway System (3RS Project), a
large portion of works site boundary
will be established at the northern part of the existing airport Island.
The recent arrangement of works boundary of 3RS Project which delineates the
boundary of the designated 3RS Project (for the indicative 3RS boundary, please
refer to Figure 5). The works area of 3RS project will affect several
water quality monitoring stations and the dolphin monitoring
transect lines which are being used
for conducting monitoring under Contract No.
HY/2010/02. The EM&A Programme for the HZMB
HKBCF Project will therefore be affected. As a result, a proposal was prepared
by ET in accordance with condition 5.1 of EP-353/2009/K and condition 4.1 of
EP-354/2009/D, to relocate water quality monitoring stations from SR5, IS10,
CS(Mf)3 and alternate the transect lines of dolphin monitoring 2, 3, 4,
5, 6 and 7. A revised proposal has been updated and sent to IEC/ENPO for
their further review on 24 March 2017 and IEC/ENPO verified the revised
proposal on the same date. The revised proposal has been sent to authority by
project team for review and approval on 3 April 2017. The authority
subsequently approved the proposal on 12 May 2017.
5.1.10 After review, no floating grout
production was in operation at any time in reporting period 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
Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental
Quality Performance Limit
6.1
Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality
Performance Limit
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 In July 2017, for impact
water quality monitoring, 2 action level exceedances of suspended solids were
recorded at SR3 during ebb tide on 12 July 2017 and at IS7 during flood tide on
14 July 2017 respectively. After investigation, it was concluded that those
exceedance were unlikely to be contract related. No other exceedance was
recorded at all monitoring stations in the reporting quarter.
6.1.4 For 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.
6.1.5 No 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
Summary of Environmental Complaints, Notification of Summons
and Successful Prosecutions
7.1.1 The Environmental Complaint
Handling Procedure is annexed in Figure 5.
7.1.2 No 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
Comments, recommendations and Conclusions
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
· All working plants and vessels on site should be regularly inspected and properly maintained to avoid dark smoke emission.
· All vehicles should be washed to remove any dusty materials before leaving the site.
· Haul roads should be sufficiently dampened to minimize fugitive dust generation.
· Wheel washing facilities should be properly maintained and reviewed to ensure properly functioning.
· Temporary exposed slopes and open stockpiles should be properly covered.
· Enclosure should be erected for cement debagging, batching and mixing operations.
· Water spraying should be provided to suppress fugitive dust for any dusty construction activity.
· Regular review and provide maintenance to dust control measures such as sprinkler system.
Construction Noise Impact
· Quieter powered mechanical equipment should be used as far as possible.
· Noisy operations should be oriented to a direction away from sensitive receivers as far as possible.
· 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
· Vessels and equipment operating should be checked regularly and properly maintained.
· Noise Emission Label (NEL) shall be affixed to the air compressor and hand-held breaker operating within works area.
· 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
· Regular review and maintenance of silt curtain systems, drainage systems and desilting facilities in order to make sure they are functioning effectively.
· Construction of seawall should be completed as early as possible.
· Regular inspect and review the loading process from barges to avoid splashing of material.
· Silt, debris and leaves accumulated at public drains, wheel washing bays and perimeter u-channels and desilting facilities should be cleaned up regularly.
· Silty effluent should be treated/ desilted before discharged. Untreated effluent should be prevented from entering public drain channel.
· Proper drainage channels/bunds should be provided at the site boundaries to collect/intercept the surface run-off from works areas.
· Exposed slopes and stockpiles should be covered up properly during rainstorm.
Chemical and Waste Management
· 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.
· All chemical containers and oil drums should be properly stored and labelled.
· All plants and vehicles on site should be properly maintained to prevent oil leakage.
· All kinds of maintenance works should be carried out within roofed, paved and confined areas.
· All drain holes of the drip trays utilized within works areas should be properly plugged to avoid any oil and chemical waste leakage.
· Oil stains on soil surface and empty chemical containers should be cleared and disposed of as chemical waste.
· 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
· All existing, retained/transplanted trees at the works areas should be properly fenced off and regularly inspected.
· Control night-time lighting and glare by hooding all lights.