Certified by Environmental Team
Leader
Verified by Independent
Environmental Checker
Contract No. HY/2013/04 HZMB HKBCF – Infrastructure
Works Stage II (Southern Portion)
Monthly EM&A Report
for October 2018
November
2018
China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Limited
Mott
MacDonald
3/F
Mapletree Bay Point
348
Kwun Tong Road
Kowloon
Hong
Kong
T
+852 2828 5757
F
+852 2827 1823
mottmac.hk
Contents
Executive summary
This Monthly Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) Report is prepared for Contract No. HY/2013/04 “Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities – Infrastructure Works Stage II (Southern Portion)” (hereafter referred to as “the Contract”) for the Highways Department of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR). The Contract was awarded to China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Limited (hereafter referred to as “the Contractor”) and Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited (MMHK) was appointed as the Environmental Team (ET) by the Contractor.
The Contract is part of the “Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities” (HZMB HKBCF) Project which is a “Designated Project” under Schedule 2 of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Ordinance (Cap. 499) and for which an EIA Report (Register No. AEIAR-145/2009) was prepared and approved. The current Environmental Permit (EP) for HKBCF, namely No. EP-353/2009/K, was issued on 11 April 2016. These documents are available through the EIA Ordinance Register. Commencement of the Contract took place on 13 March 2015 and the construction works commenced on 13 July 2015.
Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited has been appointed by the Contractor to implement the Environmental Monitoring & Audit (EM&A) programme for the Contract in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0) and will be providing environmental team services for the Contract.
This is the 40th Monthly EM&A Report for the Contract which summaries findings of the EM&A works during the reporting period from 1 to 31 October 2018 (the “reporting period”).
Environmental Monitoring and Audit Progress
The monthly EM&A programme was undertaken in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0).
The remaining air quality, noise, water quality and dolphin monitoring works under Contract No. HY/2013/01 “HZMB HKBCF – Passenger Clearance Building” were suspended from 1 October 2018. The ET of Contract No. HY/2013/04 is required and continues the full implementation of environmental monitoring commencing on 1 October 2018.
Air quality monitoring stations AMS2, AMS3C and AMS7B are covered by this Contract. It should be noted that the air quality monitoring station AMS6 is covered by Contract No. HY/2011/03 “Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link Road (HZMB HKLR) – Section between Scenic Hill and HKBCF”. If the impact air quality monitoring at AMS6 is no longer covered under Contract No. HY/2011/03, it is required to continue such monitoring at AMS6 as part of EM&A programme However, this is subject to ENPO’s final decision on which ET should carry out the monitoring work at these stations.
Noise monitoring stations NMS2 and NMS3C, water quality monitoring works and dolphin monitoring works under HZMB HKBCF are covered by this Contract.
A summary of the monitoring activities during the reporting period are listed below:
● 1-hour TSP Monitoring: 2, 3, 8, 9, 12, 15, 18, 20, 23, 26 and 29 October 2018
● 24-hour TSP Monitoring: 3, 5, 9, 11, 15, 16, 20, 23 and 26 October 2018
● Noise Monitoring: 3, 9, 11, 15 and 26 October 2018
● Water Quality Monitoring: 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 17, 19, 22, 24, 26, 29 and 31 October 2018
● Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring: 4, 11, 16 and 18 October 2018
● Environmental Site Inspection: 3, 10, 18, 22 and 31 October 2018
Breaches of Action and Limit Levels
A summary of environmental exceedances for the reporting period as recorded by the Environmental Team of this Contract are listed below:
Environmental Monitoring |
Parameters |
Action
Level |
Limit
Level |
Air Quality |
1-hour TSP |
- |
- |
|
24-hour TSP |
- |
- |
Noise |
Leq (30 min) |
- |
- |
Water Quality |
Suspended Solids (SS) |
1 |
- |
|
Turbidity |
1 |
- |
|
Dissolved Oxygen (DO) |
- |
- |
Dolphin Monitoring |
Quarterly analysis |
- |
- |
The ET of this Contract conducted investigations and the findings are presented in this report.
Complaint Log
There was one complaint received in relation to the environmental impact during the reporting period and investigated by the ET of the Contract.
Log No. |
Environmental Complaint Ref. No. |
Date of Complaint Receipt |
Description |
010 |
ENPO-C0139 |
3 October 2018 |
Air Quality |
The complaint referred to a large amount of dust generated
due to lack of water spraying on dirt road at HKBCF Island site. As informed by
EPD, the location under complaint was near the exit/entrance of Contract No.
HY/2013/04 as advised by the complainant.
The relevant mitigation measures for access roads for the HZMB BCF Island site, as required in the EMIS and statutory requirements in the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulations and other applicable environmental legislation, are consolidated as follows:
● Immediately before leaving a construction site, every vehicle shall be washed to remove any dusty materials from its body and wheels and to ensure that no earth, mud or debris is deposited by them on roads.
● Vehicle washing facilities with high pressure water jet should be provided at every discernible or designated vehicle exit point. The area where vehicle washing takes place and the road section between the washing facilities and the exit point should be paved with concrete, bituminous materials or hardcores.
● Every main haul road shall be paved with concrete, bituminous materials, hardcores or metal plates, and kept clear of dusty materials, or sprayed with water or a dust suppression chemical so as to maintain the entire road surface wet.
● The portion of any road leading only to construction site that is within 30m of a vehicle entrance or exit should be kept clear of dusty materials.
● The Contractor should undertake proper watering on all exposed spoil (with at least 8 times per day) throughout the construction phase.
The Contractor’s site watering record for 2 and 3 October 2018 as checked by ET was normal with watering provided 8 times per day.
As informed by the Contractor of HY/2013/04, water spray was provided by water truck for the HY/2013/04 site on the morning of 3 October 2018.
During ET’s regular weekly site inspection on 3 October 2018 (between 14:00 and 15:00), a site observation regarding air quality was made, namely dust emission was observed along haul road near bridge D12 area; the Contractor was reminded to provide water spraying to ensure wet surface. Other haul roads within HY/2013/04 site were found to have been provided with water spray.
The vehicular entrance of and the wheel wash facility at the vehicular exit of HY/2013/04 site boundary were also inspected and found to be operating normally with no fugitive dust observed.
The Contractor’s site watering plan (annotated with locations of the abovementioned photos) and wheel wash facility are presented in Attachments 3 and 4 respectively of the investigation report.
Notifications of Summons and Successful Prosecutions
There were no notifications of summons or prosecutions received during this reporting period.
Reporting Changes
The remaining air quality, noise, water quality and dolphin monitoring works under Contract No. HY/2013/01 “HZMB HKBCF – Passenger Clearance Building” were suspended from 1 October 2018. The ET of Contract No. HY/2013/04 is required and continues the full implementation of environmental monitoring commencing on 1 October 2018.
It should be noted that the air quality monitoring station AMS6 is covered by Contract No. HY/2011/03 “Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link Road (HZMB HKLR) – Section between Scenic Hill and HKBCF”.
Future Key Issues
The future key issues to be undertaken in the upcoming month are:
● Erection of sign gantries
● Erection of precast segments
● Erection of precast bridge structures
● Construction of parapets for bridge structures
● Construction of Abutment A1601 and associated retaining walls
● Construction of Bridge D16 in-situ deck
● Construction of utilities cross-over frame under bridge D9c
● Backfilling of utilities cross-over frame under Bridge D9c
● Drainage works and watermains laying
● Roadworks and road furniture
● Removal of silt curtain (expected to be carried out in end of November to early December 2018).
On 13 March
2015, Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited (MMHK) was commissioned by China State
Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Limited (also referred to as “the
Contractor”) to undertake the Environmental Team (ET) services (including
environmental monitoring and audit (EM&A)) for Contract No. HY/2013/04 “Hong
Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities –
Infrastructure Works Stage II (Southern Portion)” (“the Contract”) for the
Highways Department of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR).
The Contract is part of the “Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities” (HZMB HKBCF) Project which is a “Designated Project” under Schedule 2 of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Ordinance (Cap. 499) and for which an EIA Report (Register No. AEIAR-145/2009) was prepared and approved. The current Environmental Permit (EP) for HKBCF, namely No. EP-353/2009/K, was issued on 11 April 2016. These documents are available through the EIA Ordinance Register. Commencement of the Contract took place on 13 March 2015 and the construction works commenced on 13 July 2015. The works areas of the contract are shown in Appendix A.
This is the 40th Monthly EM&A Report
summarising the findings of
EM&A activities conducted under the Contract from 1 to 31 October 2018 (the
“reporting period”) and is submitted to
fulfil Condition 5.4 of the EP.
The Proposed works
under this Contract comprise the following:
● Construction of vehicular bridge and
at-grade roads at the southern portion of Hong Kong Boundary Crossing
Facilities;
● Construction of associated street lighting,
street furniture, road marking, road signage, box culverts and outfalls,
drainage, sewerage, fresh water and flushing water supply, irrigation,
landscape, electrical and mechanical (E&M), utilities and services works;
● Provisioning of civil engineering works and
power supply for Traffic Control and Surveillance System (TCSS); and
● Other works in accordance with the Contract.
The organisation chart and lines of communication with respect to the on-site environmental management structure together with the contact information of the key personnel are shown in Appendix B. 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 or Engineer’s Representative (AECOM Asia Co. Ltd.) |
Chief Resident Engineer |
Alfred Cheng |
3958 7471 |
3468 2076 |
Environmental Project Office / Independent Environmental Checker (Ramboll Hong Kong LImited) |
Environmental Project Office Leader |
Y H Hui |
3465 2888 |
3465 2899 |
Independent Environmental Checker |
Raymond Dai |
3465 2888 |
3465 2899 |
|
|
Environmental Site Supervisor |
Ray Yan |
5181 8165 |
3465 2899 |
Contractor (China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Limited) |
Site Agent |
Jason Chung |
9127 8369 |
2459 4336 |
Environmental Officer |
Xavier Lam |
9493 2944 |
2459 4336 |
|
|
Desmond Ho (until 20 Oct 2018) |
6351 3811 |
2459 4336 |
|
|
|
K P Ng (from 22 Oct 2018) |
9626 9961 |
2459 4336 |
Environmental Team (Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited) |
Environmental Team Leader |
Gary Chow |
2828 5874 |
2827 1823 |
24-hour Complaint Hotline |
- |
- |
5236 7111 |
- |
The Construction Works Programme of the Project is provided in Appendix C.
A summary of the construction activities undertaken during this reporting period is shown below:
● Erection of sign gantries
● Erection of precast segments
● Erection of precast bridge structures
● Construction of parapets for bridge structures
● Construction of Abutment A1601 and associated retaining walls
● Construction of Bridge D16 in-situ deck
● Backfilling walls and formation of fill slopes and road embankment
● Drainage works and watermains laying
● Roadworks and road furniture
● No marine-based segment delivery (all segments stored at segment storage yard on HKBCF island site)
● No generation of excavated marine sediment
During this reporting period, temporary soft landscaping works were conducted and marine-based outfall works had not commenced.
In accordance with the Contract Specific EM&A Manual, baseline 1-hour and 24-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) levels at air quality monitoring stations AMS6 and AMS7 were established. Also, baseline 1-hour and 24-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) levels at air quality monitoring stations AMS2 and AMS3 were established under other HKBCF contracts. Impact 1-hour TSP monitoring was conducted for at least three times every 6 days, while impact 24-hour TSP monitoring was carried out for at least once every 6 days.
Monitoring locations AMS2, AMS3, AMS6 and AMS7 were set up at the proposed locations in accordance with the relevant Contract Specific EM&A Manual. 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) before being relocated to Ying Tung Estate Market Rooftop (AMS3C) on 20 August 2018 under this Contract. The 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.
It should be noted that the air quality monitoring works for the Contract at AMS6 (Dragonair/CNAC (Group) Building) are covered by Contract No. HY/2011/03 “Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link Road – Section between Scenic Hill and HKBCF”.
The ET of the Contract or another ET of the HZMB project is required to conduct impact air quality monitoring at AMS6 as part of EM&A programme if this air quality monitoring station is no longer covered under Contract No. HY/2011/03.
Table 2.1 describes the details of the monitoring stations and Figure 2.1 shows the locations of air monitoring stations.
Table 2.1: Construction Dust Monitoring Locations
Identification No. |
Location Description |
AMS2 |
Tung Chung Development Pier |
AMS3C |
Ying Tung Estate Market Rooftop |
AMS6(1) |
Dragonair/CNAC (Group) Building |
AMS7B |
3RS Site Offices |
Remarks: (1) The ET of this Contract should conduct impact air quality monitoring at station AMS6 listed in the table as part of EM&A programme according to latest notification from ENPO when the monitoring station(s) is/are no longer covered by another ET of the HZMB project.
The Action and Limit Levels for 1-hr TSP and 24-hr TSP are provided in Table 2.2 and Table 2.3 respectively. The same baseline and Action/Limit Levels for air quality, as derived from the baseline monitoring data recorded at and AMS3 and AMS7, apply with the abovementioned relocations to AMS3C and AMS7B respectively.
Table 2.2: Action and Limit Levels for 1-hour TSP
Monitoring Station |
Action Level, µg/m3 |
Limit Level, µg/m3 |
AMS2 – Tung
Chung Development Pier |
374 |
500 |
AMS3C – Ying
Tung Estate Market Rooftop |
368 |
500 |
AMS6 –
Dragonair / CNAC (Group) Building (HKIA) |
360 |
500 |
AMS7B – 3RS
Site Offices |
370 |
500 |
Table 2.3: Action and Limit Levels for 24-hour TSP
Monitoring Station |
Action Level, µg/m3 |
Limit Level, µg/m3 |
AMS2 – Tung
Chung Development Pier |
176 |
260 |
AMS3C – Ying
Tung Estate Market Rooftop |
167 |
260 |
AMS6 – Dragonair
/ CNAC (Group) Building (HKIA) |
173 |
260 |
AMS7B – 3RS
Site Offices |
183 |
260 |
The event and action plan is provided in Appendix D.
If exceedance(s) at these stations is/are recorded by the ET of the Contract or referred by the other ET under the HZMB project to the Contract, the ET of the Contract will carry out an investigation and findings will be reported in the monthly EM&A Report.
The monitoring requirements, monitoring equipment, monitoring parameters, frequency and duration, monitoring methodology and monitoring schedule for air quality monitoring station AMS6 are detailed in the monthly EM&A Reports prepared for Contract No. HY/2011/03.
The schedule for air quality monitoring at AMS2 AMS3C and AMS7B in the reporting period is presented in Appendix I.
24-hour TSP air quality monitoring was performed using High Volume Sampler (HVS) located at each designated monitoring station. The HVS meets all the requirements of the Contract Specific EM&A Manual. Portable direct reading dust meters were used to carry out the 1-hour TSP monitoring. Brand and model of the equipment used for air quality monitoring stations AMS2, AMS3C and AMS7B under this Contract is given in Table 2.4.
Table 2.4: Air Quality Monitoring Equipment
Equipment |
Brand |
Model No. |
Portable
direct reading dust meter (1-hour TSP) |
Sibata
Digital Dust Monitor |
LD-3B |
High Volume
Sampler (24-hour TSP) |
Tisch
Environmental Mass Flow Controlled Total Suspended Particulate (TSP) High
Volume Sampler |
TE-5170 |
24-hour TSP Monitoring
a. The HVS was installed in the vicinity of the air sensitive receivers. The following criteria were considered in the installation of the HVS.
i. A horizontal platform with appropriate support to secure the sampler against gusty wind was provided.
ii. The distance between the HVS and any obstacles, such as buildings, was at least twice the height that the obstacle protrudes above the HVS.
iii. A minimum of 2 meters separation from walls, parapets and penthouse for rooftop sampler was provided.
iv. No furnace or incinerator flues are nearby.
v. Airflow around the sampler was unrestricted.
vi. Permission was obtained to set up the samplers and access to the monitoring stations.
vii. A secured supply of electricity was obtained to operate the samplers.
viii. The sampler was located more than 20 meters from any dripline.
ix. Any wire fence and gate, required to protect the sampler, did not obstruct the monitoring process.
x. Flow control accuracy was kept within ±2.5% deviation over 24-hour sampling period.
b. Preparation of Filter Papers
i. Glass fibre filters, G810 were labelled and sufficient filters that were clean and without pinholes were selected.
ii. All filters were equilibrated in the conditioning environment for 24 hours before weighing. The conditioning environment temperature was around 25 °C and not variable by more than ±3 °C; the relative humidity (RH) was < 50% and not variable by more than ±5%. A convenient working RH was 40%.
iii. All filter papers were prepared and analysed by ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd., which is a HOKLAS accredited laboratory and has comprehensive quality assurance and quality control programmes.
c. Field Monitoring
i. The power supply was checked to ensure the HVS works properly.
ii. The filter holder and the area surrounding the filter were cleaned.
iii. The filter holder was removed by loosening the four bolts and a new filter, with stamped number upward, on a supporting screen was aligned carefully.
iv. The filter was properly aligned on the screen so that the gasket formed an airtight seal on the outer edges of the filter.
v. The swing bolts were fastened to hold the filter holder down to the frame. The pressure applied was sufficient to avoid air leakage at the edges.
vi. Then the shelter lid was closed and was secured with the aluminium strip.
vii. The HVS was warmed-up for about 5 minutes to establish run-temperature conditions.
viii. A new flow rate record sheet was set into the flow recorder.
ix. On site temperature and atmospheric pressure readings were taken and the flow rate of the HVS was checked and adjusted at around 1.1 m3/min, and complied with the range specified in the Updated EM&A Manual for HKLR (Version 1.0) (i.e. 0.6-1.7 m3/min).
x. The programmable digital timer was set for a sampling period of 24 hours, and the starting time, weather condition and the filter number were recorded.
xi. The initial elapsed time was recorded.
xii. At the end of sampling, on site temperature and atmospheric pressure readings were taken and the final flow rate of the HVS was checked and recorded.
xiii. The final elapsed time was recorded.
xiv. The sampled filter was removed carefully and folded in half length so that only surfaces with collected particulate matter were in contact.
xv. It was then placed in a clean plastic envelope and sealed.
xvi. All monitoring information was recorded on a standard data sheet.
xvii. Filters were then sent to ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. for analysis.
d. Maintenance and Calibration
i. The HVS and its accessories were maintained in good working condition, such as replacing motor brushes routinely and checking electrical wiring to ensure a continuous power supply.
ii. 5-point calibration of the HVS was conducted using TE-5025A Calibration Kit prior to the commencement of baseline monitoring. Bi-monthly 5-point calibration of the HVS will be carried out during impact monitoring.
iii. Calibration certificate of the HVSs are provided in Appendix J.
1-hour TSP Monitoring
a. Measuring Procedures
The measuring procedures of the 1-hour dust meter were in accordance with the Manufacturer’s Instruction Manual as follows:
i. Turn the power on.
ii. Close the air collecting opening cover.
iii. Push the “TIME SETTING” switch to [BG].
iv. Push “START/STOP” switch to perform background measurement for 6 seconds.
v. Turn the knob at SENSI ADJ position to insert the light scattering plate.
vi. Leave the equipment for 1 minute upon “SPAN CHECK” is indicated in the display.
vii. Push “START/STOP” switch to perform automatic sensitivity adjustment. This measurement takes 1 minute.
viii. Pull out the knob and return it to MEASURE position.
ix. Push the “TIME SETTING” switch the time set in the display to 3 hours.
x. Lower down the air collection opening cover.
xi. Push “START/STOP” switch to start measurement.
b. Maintenance and Calibration
i. The 1-hour TSP meter was calibrated at 1-year intervals against a Tisch Environmental Mass Flow Controlled Total Suspended Particulate (TSP) High Volume Air Sampler. Calibration certificates of the Laser Dust Monitors are provided in Appendix J.
The monitoring results for 1-hour and 24-hour TSP at AMS2, AMS3C and AMS7B are summarized in Table 2.5 and Table 2.6 respectively. Detailed impact air quality monitoring results are presented in Appendix K.
Table 2.5: Summary of 1-hour TSP Monitoring Results During the Reporting Period
Monitoring Station |
Average, µg/m3 |
Range, µg/m3 |
Action Level, µg/m3 |
Limit Level, µg/m3 |
AMS2 |
59 |
39 – 94 |
374 |
500 |
AMS3C |
40 |
22 – 83 |
368 |
500 |
AMS7B |
44 |
25 – 89 |
370 |
500 |
Table 2.6: Summary of 24-hour TSP Monitoring Results During the Reporting Period
Monitoring Station |
Average, µg/m3 |
Range, µg/m3 |
Action Level, µg/m3 |
Limit Level, µg/m3 |
AMS2 |
84 |
64 – 110 |
176 |
260 |
AMS3C |
80 |
57 – 100 |
167 |
260 |
AMS7B |
97 |
53 – 152 |
183 |
260 |
There was no Action and Limit Level exceedance of 1-hr TSP level and 24-hr TSP level recorded at station AMS2, AMS3C and AMS7B by the Environmental Team of this Contract during the reporting period.
The monitoring results for AMS6 are reported in the monthly EM&A Reports prepared for Contract No. HY/2011/03 respectively.
Summary of Action and Limit Level exceedance of 1-hr TSP level and 24-hr TSP level at AMS6 shall be referred to the monthly EM&A report prepared by Contract No. HY/2011/03.
The wind data obtained from the on-site wind station (as shown in Figure 2.1) during the reporting period is provided in Appendix M.
In accordance with the Contract Specific EM&A Manual, impact noise monitoring was conducted at least once per week for each noise monitoring location during the construction phase of the Contract.
Approval for carrying out impact monitoring at NMS3 (Ho Yu College), as proposed in the Contract Specific EM&A Manual, could not be obtained from the principal of school. Permission on setting up and carry 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 Work Area WA2 (NMS3B) before being relocated to Ying Tung Estate Market Rooftop (NMS3C) on 20 August 2018 under this Contract. The same baseline noise level (as derived from the baseline monitoring data recorded at Ho Yu College) and Limit Level were adopted for this alternative noise monitoring location.
Table 3.1 describes the details of the monitoring stations and Figure 3.1 shows the locations of noise monitoring stations.
Table 3.1: Construction Noise Monitoring Locations
Identification No. |
Location Description |
NMS2 |
Seaview Crescent |
NMS3C(1) |
Ying Tung Estate Refuse Collection Point |
Remarks: (1) The Action and Limit Levels for schools will be applied for this alternative monitoring location.
Table 3.2 summarises the monitoring parameters, frequency and duration of impact TSP monitoring.
Table 3.2: Noise Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
Parameter |
Frequency and Duration |
30-minutes
measurement at each monitoring station between 0700 and 1900 on normal
weekdays (Monday to Saturday). Leq,
L10 and L90 would be recorded. |
At least once
per week |
The Action and Limit Levels for construction noise are defined in Table 3.3.
Table 3.3: Action and Limit Level for Construction Noise
Monitoring Station |
Time Period |
Action Level |
Limit Level |
NMS2 |
07:00 – 19:00
hours on normal weekdays |
When one
documented complaint is received |
70 dB(A) |
NMS3C |
70/65 dB(A)* |
Remark: Limit Level for schools will be applied for NMS3C. Day time noise Limit Level of 70 dB(A) applies to education institutions, while 65 dB(A) applies during the school examination period.
The event and action plan is provided in Appendix D.
If exceedance(s) at these stations is/are recorded by the ET of the Contract or referred by the other ET under the HZMB project to the Contract, the ET of the Contract will carry out an investigation and findings will be reported in the monthly EM&A Report.
The schedule for noise monitoring in the reporting period is presented in Appendix I.
Noise monitoring was performed using sound level meters at each designed monitoring station. The sound level meters deployed comply with the International Electrotechnical Commission Publications (IEC) 651:1979 (Type 1) and 804:1985 (Type 1) specifications. Acoustic calibrator was deployed to check the sound level meters at a known sound pressure level. Brand and model of the equipment used for noise monitoring under this Contract is given in Table 3.4.
Table 3.4: Noise Monitoring Equipment
Equipment |
Brand |
Model No. |
Integrated
Sound Level Meter |
Rion |
NL-52 |
Acoustic
Calibrator |
Larson Davis |
CAL200 |
1. Monitoring Procedure
a. The measurement at NMS3C was free-field measurement and NMS2 was façade measurement. A correction of +3dB(A) shall be made to the free-field measurement.
b. The battery condition was checked to ensure the correct functioning of the meter.
c. Parameters such as frequency weighting, the time weighting and the measurement time were set as follows:
i. frequency weighting: A
ii. time weighting: Fast
iii. time measurement: Leq (30-minutes) during non-restricted hours i.e. 0700-1900 on normal workdays.
d. Prior to and after each noise measurement, the meter was calibrated using the acoustic calibrator for 94dB(A) at 1000 Hz. If the difference in the calibration level before and after measurement was more than 1 dB(A), the measurement would be considered invalid and repeat of noise measurement would be required after re-calibration or repair of the equipment.
e. During the monitoring period, the Leq, L10 and L90 were recorded. In addition, site conditions and noise sources were recorded on a standard record sheet.
f. Noise measurement was paused during periods of high intrusive noise (e.g. dog barking, helicopter noise) if possible. Observations were recorded when intrusive noise was unavoidable.
g. Noise monitoring was cancelled in the presence of fog, rain, wind with a steady speed exceeding 5m/s, or wind with gusts exceeding 10m/s. The wind speed shall be checked with a portable wind speed meter capable of measuring the wind speed in m/s.
2. Maintenance and Calibration
a. The microphone head of the sound level meter was cleaned with soft cloth at regular intervals.
b. The meter and calibrator were sent to the supplier or HOKLAS laboratory to check and calibrate at yearly intervals.
c. Calibration certificates of the sound level meters and acoustic calibrators are provided in Appendix J.
The monitoring results for construction noise are summarized in Table 3.5 respectively. Detailed impact air quality monitoring results are presented in Appendix K.
Table 3.5: Summary of Construction Noise Monitoring Results During the Reporting Period
Monitoring Station |
Average, dB(A) Leq (30 mins) |
Range, dB(A) Leq (30 mins) |
Limit Level, dB(A) Leq (30 mins) |
NMS2 |
63 |
62 – 64 |
75 |
NMS3C |
67 |
66 – 69 |
70/65* |
Remark: (*) The Limit Level for schools will be applied for NMS3C. Daytime noise Limit Level of 70 dB(A) applies to education institutions, while 65 dB(A) applies during the school examination period.
No noise exceedances were recorded at stations NMS2 and NMS3B by the ET of this Contract during the reporting period.
Impact water quality monitoring was carried out to ensure that any deterioration of water quality was detected, and that timely action was taken to rectify the situation. For impact water quality monitoring, measurement were taken in accordance with the Contract Specific EM&A Manual.
During the reporting period, the water quality monitoring works are covered by this Contract. A total of twenty-one stations (nine Impact Stations, seven Sensitive Receiver Stations and five Control/Far Field Stations) are covered by the current EM&A programme.
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.
The water quality monitoring stations at CS(Mf)3 (Coordinate: 809989E, 821117N), IS10 (Coordinate: 812577E, 820670N) and SR5 (811489E, 820455N) have been occupied by the marine work of a designated project – “Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System” (3RS Project). The alternative water quality monitoring station at CS(Mf)3(N) (Coordinate: 808814E, 822355N), IS10(N) (Coordinate: 812942E, 820881N) and SR5(N) (812569E, 8201475N) were justified and verified by the ET Leader of Contract No. HY/2010/02 and the IEC respectively on 24 March 2017 and it was approved by EPD on 12 May 2017.
The water quality monitoring stations at SR3, SR10A and SR10B(N) were not available for water sampling due to safety reason, thus, monitoring stations were changed to SR3(N) (Coordinate: 810689E, 816591N); SR10A(N) (Coordinate: 823644E, 823484N) and SR10B(N2) (Coordinate: 823689E, 823159N) were justified by the ET Leader of Contract No. HY/2013/01 on 8 November 2017 and the IEC verified on 13 November 2017; and submitted to EPD on 29 November 2017 and it was approved by EPD on 22 December 2017.
Table 4.1 and Figure 4.1 shows the locations of water quality monitoring stations.
Table 4.1: Impact Water Quality Monitoring Stations
Station |
Description |
East |
North |
IS5 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
811579 |
817106 |
IS(Mf)6 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
812101 |
817873 |
IS7 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
812244 |
818777 |
IS8 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
814251 |
818412 |
IS(Mf)9 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
813273 |
818850 |
IS10(N) |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
812942 |
820881 |
IS(Mf)11 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
813562 |
820716 |
IS(Mf)16 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
814328 |
819497 |
IS17 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
814539 |
820391 |
SR3(N) |
Sensitive receivers (San Tau SSSI) |
810689 |
816591 |
SR4(N) |
Sensitive receivers (Tai Ho) |
814705 |
817859 |
SR5(N) |
Sensitive receivers (Artificial Reef in NE Airport) |
812569 |
821475 |
SR6 |
Sensitive receivers (Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park) |
805837 |
821818 |
SR7 |
Sensitive receivers (Tai Mo Do) |
814293 |
821431 |
SR10A(N) |
Sensitive receivers (Ma Wan FCZ) 1 |
823644 |
823484 |
SR10B(N2) |
Sensitive receivers (Ma Wan FCZ) 2 |
823689 |
823159 |
CS(Mf)3(N) |
Control Station |
808814 |
822355 |
CS(Mf)5 |
Control Station |
817990 |
821129 |
CS4 |
Control Station |
810025 |
824004 |
CS6 |
Control Station |
817028 |
823992 |
CSA |
Control Station |
818103 |
823064 |
If exceedance(s) at these stations is/are recorded by the ET of the Contract or referred by the other ET under the HZMB project to the Contract, the ET of the Contract will carry out an investigation and findings will be reported in the monthly EM&A Report.
Table 4.2 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and monitoring depths of impact water quality monitoring in the Contract Specific EM&A Manual.
Table 4.2: Impact Water Quality Monitoring Parameters and Frequency
Monitoring Stations |
Parameter, Unit |
Frequency |
No. of Depths Measured |
Impact
Stations: IS5, IS(Mf)6, IS7, IS8, IS(Mf)9, IS10(N), IS(Mf)11, IS(Mf)16, IS17 Control/Far
Field Stations: CS(Mf)3(N), CS(Mf)5, CS4, CS6, CSA Sensitive
Receiver Stations: SR3(N), SR4(N), SR5(N), SR6, SR7, SR10A(N) & SR10B(N2) |
● Depth, m ● Temperature, °C ● Salinity, ppt ● Dissolved
Oxygen (DO), mg/L ● DO
Saturation, % ● Turbidity,
NTU ● pH ● Suspended
Solids (SS), mg/L |
Three times per week during mid-ebb and mid-flood tides (within ±1.75 hour of the predicted time) |
3 (1m below water surface, mid-depth and 1m above sea bed, except where
the water depth is less than 6m, in which case the mid-depth station may be
omitted. Should the water depth be less than 3m, only the mid-depth station
will be monitored.) |
The Action and Limit Levels for water quality are provided in Table 4.3.
Table 4.3: Action and Limit Levels for Water Quality
Parameters |
Action |
Limit |
DO in mg L-1 (Surface, Middle & Bottom) |
Surface and Middle |
|
(depth-averaged)
at all monitoring stations and control stations |
23.5 and 120% of upstream control station's SS at the same tide of the
same day* |
34.4 and 130% of upstream control station's SS at the same tide of the
same day and 10mg/L for WSD Seawater intakes* |
27.5 and 120% of upstream control station's turbidity at the same tide
of the same day* |
47.0 and 130% of upstream control station's |
Remarks:
* Reference is made to EPD approval of adjustment of water quality assessment criteria issued and became effective on 18 February 2013.
Notes:
1. “depth-averaged” is calculated by taking the
arithmetic means of reading of all three depths.
2. For DO, non-compliance of the water quality
limits occurs when monitoring result is lower than the limits.
3.
For turbidity, SS, non-compliance of the water quality limits occurs
when monitoring result is higher than the limits.
4.
All the figures given in the table are used for reference only and the
EPD may amend the figures whenever it is considered as necessary.
5.
The 1%-ile of baseline data for dissolved oxygen (surface and middle)
and dissolved oxygen (bottom) are 4.2 mg/L and 3.6 mg/L respectively.
The event and action plan is provided in Appendix D.
Table 4.4 summaries the equipment used in the impact water quality monitoring programme.
Table 4.4: Water Quality Monitoring Equipment
Equipment |
Brand and Model |
Serial Number |
DO and Temperature Meter, Salinity Meter, Turbidity Meter & pH
Meter |
YSI ProDSS |
16H104234 / 17H105557 / 16H104233 / 17E100747 |
DO and Temperature Meter, Salinity Meter, Turbidity Meter & pH
Meter |
YSI 6920 v2 |
0001C6A7 / 00019CB2 |
a. The in-situ water quality parameters, viz. dissolved oxygen, temperature, salinity, turbidity and pH, were measured by multi-parameter meters and pH meter.
a. Digital Differential Global Positioning Systems (DGPS) were used to ensure that the correct location was selected prior to sample collection.
b. Portable, battery-operated echo sounders were used for the determination of water depth at each designated monitoring station.
c. All in-situ measurements were taken at 3 water depths, 1m below water surface, mid-depth and 1m above sea bed, except where the water depth was less than 6m, in which case the mid-depth station was omitted. Should the water depth be less than 3m, only the mid-depth station was monitored.
d. At each measurement/sampling depth, two consecutive in-situ monitoring (DO concentration and saturation, temperature, turbidity, pH, salinity) and water sample for SS. The probes were retrieved out of the water after the first measurement and then re-deployed for the second measurement. Where the difference in the value between the first and second readings of DO or turbidity parameters was more than 25% of the value of the first reading, the reading was discarded and further readings were taken.
e. Duplicate samples from each independent sampling event were collected for SS measurement. Water samples were collected using the water samplers and the samples were stored in high density polythene bottles. Water samples collected were well-mixed in the water sampler prior to pre-rinsing and transferring to sample bottles. Sample bottles were pre-rinsed with the same water samples. The sample bottles were then be packed in cool-boxes (cooled at 4°C without being frozen), and delivered to ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. for the analysis of suspended solids concentrations. The laboratory determination work would be started within 24 hours after collection of the water samples. ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. is a HOKLAS accredited laboratory and has comprehensive quality assurance and quality control programmes. For QA/QC procedures, one duplicate samples of every batch of 20 samples was analyzed.
f. The analysis method and reporting and detection limit for SS is shown in Table 4.5.
Table 4.5: Laboratory Analysis for Suspended Solids
Parameters |
Instrumentation |
Analytical Method |
Reporting Limit |
Detection Limit |
Suspended Solids (SS) |
Weighting |
APHA 2540-D |
0.5 mg/L |
0.5 mg/L |
g. Other relevant data were recorded, including monitoring location / position, time, water depth, tidal stages, weather conditions and any special phenomena or work underway at the construction site in the field log sheet for information.
a. All in situ monitoring instruments would be calibrated and calibrated by ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. before use and at 3-monthly intervals throughout all stages of the water quality monitoring programme. Calibration details are provided in Appendix J.
b. The dissolved oxygen probe of YSI 6820 was calibrated by wet bulb method. Before the calibration routine, the sensor for dissolved oxygen was thermally equilibrated in water-saturated air. Calibration cup is served as a calibration chamber and it was loosened from airtight condition before it is used for the calibration. Calibration at ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. was carried out once every three months in a water sample with a known concentration of dissolved oxygen. The sensor was immersed in the water and after thermal equilibration, the known mg/L value was keyed in and the calibration was carried out automatically.
c. The turbidity probe of YSI 6820 is calibrated two times a month. A zero check in distilled water was performed with the turbidity probe of YSI 6820 once per monitoring day. The probe will be calibrated with a solution of known NTU at ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. once every three months.
Impact water quality monitoring results and graphical plots are presented in Appendix K.
Water quality exceedances recorded during the reporting period are summarised in Table 4.6.
Table 4.6: Action and Limit Level Exceedance for Water Quality
Date |
Parameter |
Station |
Depth |
Exceedance Recorded during Mid-ebb Tide |
Exceedance Recorded during Mid-flood Tide |
10 Oct 2018 |
SS |
SR6 |
Depth Average |
- |
Action Level |
24 Oct 2018 |
TURB |
IS(Mf)6 |
Depth Average |
Action Level |
- |
Two exceedances of water quality (consisting of one Action Level exceedance of suspended solids and one Action Level exceedance of turbidity) were recorded by the Environmental Team of this Contract during the reporting period. Following investigations, it was concluded that the exceedances were not related to the HZMB HKBCF project. The detailed investigation results of these exceedances recorded is shown in Appendix N.
Vessel based surveys for the Chinese White Dolphin (CWD), Sousa chinensis, are to be conducted by a dedicated team comprising a qualified marine mammal ecologist and experienced marine mammal observers (MMOs). The purpose of the surveys is to evaluate the impact of the HKCBF reclamation and, if deemed detrimental, to take appropriate action as per the EM&A Manual.
According to the requirement of the updated EM&A Manual, the dolphin monitoring programme should adopt line-transect vessel survey method. The survey follows pre-set and fixed transect lines in the two areas defined by AFCD as: Northeast Lantau (NEL) survey area; and Northwest Lantau (NWL) survey area.
Table 5.1 shows the co-ordinates for the transect lines and layout map. The layout map showing the transect lines have been provided by AFCD and are shown in Figure 5.1.
Table 5.1: Impact Dolphin Monitoring Line Transect Co-ordinates (Provided by AFCD)
Transect |
HK
Grid System |
Long
Lat in WGS84 |
||
|
X |
Y |
Long |
Lat |
1# |
804671 |
815456 |
113.870287 |
22.277678 |
|
804671 |
831404 |
113.869975 |
22.421696 |
2#^ |
805476 |
820800 |
113.877995 |
22.325951 |
|
805476 |
826654 |
113.877882 |
22.378815 |
3^ |
806464 |
821150 |
114.030267 |
22.196697 |
|
806464 |
822911 |
114.047344 |
22.196712 |
4^ |
807518 |
821500 |
114.033651 |
22.206219 |
|
807518 |
829230 |
114.108618 |
22.206267 |
5^ |
808504 |
821850 |
114.037037 |
22.215126 |
|
808504 |
828602 |
114.102523 |
22.215169 |
6^ |
809490 |
822150 |
114.039938 |
22.224033 |
|
809490 |
825352 |
114.070995 |
22.224056 |
7#^ |
810499 |
822000 |
114.038474 |
22.233143 |
|
810499 |
824613 |
114.063820 |
22.233163 |
8# |
811508 |
821123 |
113.936539 |
22.328966 |
|
811508 |
824254 |
113.936486 |
22.357241 |
9# |
812516 |
821303 |
113.946320 |
22.330606 |
|
812516 |
824254 |
113.946279 |
22.357255 |
10* |
813525 |
820827 |
113.956112 |
22.326321 |
|
813525 |
824657 |
113.956066 |
22.360908 |
11# |
814556 |
818853 |
113.966155 |
22.304858 |
|
814556 |
820992 |
113.966125 |
22.327820 |
12 |
815542 |
818807 |
113.975726 |
22.308109 |
|
815542 |
824882 |
113.975647 |
22.362962 |
13 |
816506 |
819480 |
113.985072 |
22.314192 |
|
816506 |
824859 |
113.985005 |
22.362771 |
14 |
817537 |
820220 |
113.995070 |
22.320883 |
|
817537 |
824613 |
113.995018 |
22.360556 |
15 |
818568 |
820735 |
114.005071 |
22.325550 |
|
818568 |
824433 |
114.005030 |
22.358947 |
16 |
819532 |
821420 |
114.014420 |
22.331747 |
|
819532 |
824209 |
114.014390 |
22.356933 |
17 |
820451 |
822125 |
114.023333 |
22.338117 |
|
820451 |
823671 |
114.023317 |
22.352084 |
18 |
821504 |
822371 |
114.033556 |
22.340353 |
|
821504 |
823761 |
114.033544 |
22.352903 |
19 |
822513 |
823268 |
114.043340 |
22.348458 |
|
822513 |
824321 |
114.043331 |
22.357971 |
20 |
823477 |
823402 |
114.052695 |
22.349680 |
|
823477 |
824613 |
114.052686 |
22.360610 |
21 |
805476 |
827081 |
113.877878 |
22.382668 |
|
805476 |
830562 |
113.877811 |
22.414103 |
22 |
806464 |
824033 |
113.887520 |
22.355164 |
|
806464 |
829598 |
113.887416 |
22.405423 |
23 |
814559 |
821739 |
113.966142 |
22.334574 |
|
814559 |
824768 |
113.966101 |
22.361920 |
24^ |
805476 |
815900 |
113.979368 |
22.187721 |
|
805476 |
819100 |
114.010398 |
22.187756 |
Remarks:
(a) * Due to the presence of deployed silt curtain systems at the site boundaries of the Contract, some of the transect lines shown in Figure 5.1 could not be fully surveyed during the regular survey. Transect 10 is reduced from 6.4km to approximately 3.6km in length due to the HKBCF construction site. Therefore the total transect length for both NEL and NWL combined is reduced to approximately 108km.
(b) # Coordinates for transect lines 1, 2, 7, 8, 9 and 11 have been updated in respect to the Proposal for Alteration of Transect Line for Dolphin Monitoring approved by EPD on 19 August 2015.
(c) ^ Due to marine works of the Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System (3RS Project), the change of transect lines 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 and new transect line 24 were justified and verified by the ET Leader for Contract No. HY/2010/02 and the IEC respectively on 24 March 2017 and it was approved by EPD on 12 May 2017.
The survey team used standard line-transect methods (Buckland et al., 2001) to conduct the systematic vessel surveys, and followed the same technique of data collection that has been adopted over the last 20 years of marine mammal monitoring surveys in Hong Kong developed by HKCRP (see Hung, 2017). For each monitoring vessel survey, a 15-m inboard vessel with an open upper deck (about 4.5 m above water surface) was used to make observations from the flying bridge area.
Two experienced observers (a data recorder and a primary observer) made up the on-effort survey team, and the survey vessel transited different transect lines at a constant speed of 13-15 km per hour. The data recorder searched with unaided eyes and filled out the datasheets, while the primary observer searched for dolphins and porpoises continuously through 7 x 50 Fuinon marine binoculars.
Both observers searched the sea ahead of the vessel, between 270° and 90° (in relation to the bow, which is defined as 0°). One to two additional experienced observers were available on the boat to work in shift (i.e. rotate every 30 minutes) in order to minimize fatigue of the survey team members. All observers were experienced in small cetacean survey techniques and identifying local cetacean species.
During on-effort survey periods, the survey team recorded effort data including time, position (latitude and longitude), weather conditions (Beaufort sea state and visibility), and distance travelled in each series (a continuous period of search effort) with the assistance of a handheld GPS (Garmin eTrex Legend).
Data including time, position and vessel speed were also automatically and continuously logged by handheld GPS throughout the entire survey for subsequent review.
When dolphins were sighted, the survey team would end the survey effort, and immediately record the initial sighting distance and angle of the dolphin group from the survey vessel, as well as the sighting time and position. Then the research vessel was diverted from its course to approach the animals for species identification, group size estimation, assessment of group composition, and behavioural observations. The perpendicular distance (PSD) of the dolphin group to the transect line was later calculated from the initial sighting distance and angle.
Survey effort being conducted along the parallel transect lines that were perpendicular to the coastlines was labelled as “primary” survey effort, while the survey effort conducted along the connecting lines between parallel lines was labelled as “secondary” survey effort. According to HKCRP long-term dolphin monitoring data, encounter rates of Chinese white dolphins deduced from effort and sighting data collected along primary and secondary lines were similar in NEL and NWL survey areas. Therefore, both primary and secondary survey effort were presented as on-effort survey effort in this report.
Encounter rates of Chinese white dolphins (number of on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort and number of dolphins from all on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort) were calculated in NEL and NWL survey areas in relation to the amount of survey effort conducted during each month of monitoring survey. Only data collected under Beaufort 3 or below condition would be used for encounter rate analysis. Dolphin encounter rates were calculated using primary survey effort alone, as well as the combined survey effort from both primary and secondary lines.
When a group of Chinese White Dolphins were sighted during the line-transect survey, the survey team would end effort and approach the group slowly from the side and behind to take photographs of them. Every attempt was made to photograph every dolphin in the group, and even photograph both sides of the dolphins, since the colouration and markings on both sides may not be symmetrical.
A professional digital camera (Canon EOS 7D or 60D model), equipped with long telephoto lenses (100-400 mm zoom), were available on board for researchers to take sharp, close-up photographs of dolphins as they surfaced. The images were shot at the highest available resolution and stored on Compact Flash memory cards for downloading onto a computer.
All digital images taken in the field were first examined, and those containing potentially identifiable individuals were sorted out. These photographs would then be examined in greater detail, and were carefully compared to the existing Chinese White Dolphin photo-identification catalogue maintained by HKCRP since 1995.
Chinese White Dolphins can be identified by their natural markings, such as nicks, cuts, scars and deformities on their dorsal fin and body, and their unique spotting patterns were also used as secondary identifying features (Jefferson, 2000).
All photographs of each individual were then compiled and arranged in chronological order, with data including the date and location first identified (initial sighting), re-sightings, associated dolphins, distinctive features, and age classes entered into a computer database.
The Action and Limit Levels for Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring are provided in Table 5.2 and Table 5.3, respectively.
Table 5.2: Action and Limit Levels for Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring - Approach to Define Action Level (AL) and Limit Level (LL)
Table 5.3: Derived Value of Action Level (AL) and Limit Level (LL) for Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring
|
North Lantau Social Cluster |
|
|
NEL |
NWL |
Action Level |
(STG <
4.2) & (ANI < 15.5) |
(STG <
6.9) & (ANI < 31.3) |
Limit Level |
[(STG <
2.4) & (ANI <8.9)] AND [ (STG < 3.9) & (ANI < 17.9)] |
The event and action plan is provided in Appendix D.
If exceedance(s) at these survey transect(s) is/are recorded by the ET of the Contract or referred by the other ET under the HZMB project to the Contract, the ET of the Contract will carry out an investigation and findings will be reported in the monthly EM&A Report.
The schedule for dolphin monitoring for the reporting period is provided in Appendix I.
Two sets of systematic line-transect vessel surveys were conducted under the HKBCF dolphin monitoring programme on 4, 11, 16 and 18 October 2018, to cover all transect lines in NWL and NEL survey areas twice. The survey routes of each survey day are presented in Figures 2 to 5 of Appendix L.
A total of 265.60 km of survey effort was collected, with 99.8% of the total survey effort being conducted under favourable weather conditions (i.e. Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with good visibility) during the reporting period’s surveys (Annex I of Appendix L).
Among the two areas, 95.50 km and 170.10 km of survey effort were collected from NEL and NWL survey areas respectively. The total survey effort conducted on primary and secondary lines were 192.70 km and 72.90 km respectively (Annex I of Appendix L).
During the two sets of monitoring surveys in the reporting period, two groups of six Chinese White Dolphins were sighted (Annex II of Appendix L). Both of these dolphin sightings were made in NWL, while none was sighted in NEL. Notably, both dolphin sightings were made during on-effort search, and one of them was made on primary line (Appendix II of Appendix L).
Distribution of the dolphin sightings made in the reporting period is shown in Figure 6 of Appendix L. The two dolphin groups were sighted just to the west of Lung Kwu Chau, and between Sha Chau and Pillar Point respectively (Figure 6 of Appendix L). Notably, these sightings were made far away from the HKBCF reclamation site, as well as the HZMB HLKR HY/2011/03 (HKLR03) reclamation site and HZMB TMCLKL/HKLR HY/2011/09 (HKLR09) alignments. (Figure 6 of Appendix L).
During the reporting period’s surveys, encounter rates of Chinese White Dolphins deduced from the survey effort and on-effort sighting data made under favourable conditions (Beaufort 3 or below) are shown in Table 5.4 and Table 5.5.
Table 5.4: Dolphin encounter rates deduced from the two sets of HKBCF surveys (two surveys in each set) during the reporting period in Northeast (NEL) and Northwest Lantau (NWL)
|
|
Encounter
rate (STG) |
Encounter
rate (ANI) |
|
|
(no. of on-effort dolphin
sightings per 100 km of survey effort) |
(no. of dolphins from all
on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort) |
|
|
Primary Lines
Only |
Primary Lines
Only |
NEL |
Set 1: October 4th / 11th |
0.0 |
0.0 |
Set 2: October 16th / 18th |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
NWL |
Set 1: October 4th / 11th |
0.0 |
0.0 |
Set 2: October 16th / 18th |
1.6 |
3.3 |
Table 5.5: Overall dolphin encounter rates (sightings per 100 km of survey effort) from all four HKBCF surveys conducted during the reporting period on primary lines only as well as both primary lines and secondary lines in NEL and NWL
|
Encounter
rate (STG) |
Encounter
rate (ANI) |
||
|
(no. of on-effort dolphin
sightings per 100 km of survey effort) |
(no. of dolphins from all
on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort) |
||
|
Primary Lines
Only |
Both Primary
and Secondary Lines |
Primary Lines
Only |
Both Primary
and Secondary Lines |
NEL |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
NWL |
0.8 |
1.2 |
1.7 |
3.5 |
The average dolphin group size in the reporting period was just 3.0 individuals per group, as there were only two small groups of four and two dolphins being sighted respectively (Annex II of Appendix L).
Five known individual dolphins were sighted six times in total during the reporting period’s surveys (Annex III and IV of Appendix L). Four of the five known individuals were re-sighted only once, while one individual (NL136) was re-sighted twice.
None of these identified individuals was sighted with any young calf during their re-sightings in this monitoring month (Annex III of Appendix L).
Site Inspections were carried out on a weekly basis to monitor the implementation of proper environmental pollution control mitigation measures for the project. During the reporting period, site inspections were carried out on 3, 10, 18, 22 and 31 October 2018.
When permanent soft landscaping works within the site boundaries of the Contract are commenced, construction phase landscape and visual mitigation measures would be implemented in accordance with the EP, EIA and EM&A Manual. Monitoring and audit of landscape and visual mitigation measures would be conducted bi-weekly in accordance with Section 14.2 of the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0). Permanent soft landscaping works within the Contract site had not commenced during the reporting period.
Particular observations during the site inspections and corrective actions undertaken by the Contractor are described below.
a. The silt curtains at Box Culvert C and D were disconnected from the coastal shoreline. The Contractor was reminded to reinstate the silt curtains. Subsequently, the silt curtain at Box Culvert D was fixed on 10 October 2018. However, the silt curtain at Box Culvert C was still not reinstated. Follow-up actions for the outstanding observation will be inspected during the upcoming site inspections and reported in the coming reporting period.
26 September 2018
a. C&D waste stockpiles were observed at P1211 and next to RW11. Subsequently, the stockpiles have been cleared. The observation was closed on 3 October 2018.
3 October 2018
a. Accumulation of C&D waste and general refuses were observed near Bridge D12 area. Subsequently, the C&D waste and general refuses were cleared. The observation was closed on 10 October 2018.
b. Dust emission was observed along haul road near Bridge D12 area. Subsequently, the water spraying was provided along haul road. The observation was closed on 10 October 2018.
10 October 2018
a. A C&D waste collection area without clear signage and designation were observed near Bridge D12 area. Subsequently, the C&D waste collection area was relocated no further accumulation of C&D waste near Bridge D12 area was observed. The observation was closed on 18 October 2018.
18 October 2018
a. Loose general refuse was observed near P1211 area. Subsequently, the general refuse was cleared. The observation was closed on 22 October 2018.
b. Chemical containers with no drip tray was observed near P1404 area. Subsequently, the chemical container was removed from site. The observation was closed on 22 October 2018.
c. Vehicles were observed leaving the site without wheel wash near P1404 area. Subsequently, safety signage was posted at the site entrance and prominent area to prevent any improper exit. The observation was closed on 22 October 2018.
22 October 2018
a. Accumulation of general refuse was observed underneath Bridge D9a and on Bridge D15. Subsequently, the general refuse has been removed. The observation was closed on 31 October 2018.
31 October 2018
a.
Accumulation of
general refuse was observed near P911 area. The Contractor was reminded to
clear the general refuse as soon as possible. Follow-up action for the
outstanding observation will be inspected during the upcoming site inspections
and reported in the coming reporting period.
The Contractor registered as a chemical waste producer for the Contract. Sufficient numbers of receptacles were available for general refuse collection and sorting. As a practical means, the disposal operation is managed by a single HKBCF contractor who is also responsible for applying dumping permit and its subsequent extension applications from EPD. Contract No. HY/2013/03 has been assigned to coordinate and arrange for disposal of extracted marine sediment from this Contract.
There was no generation of excavated sediment for treatment during this reporting period. Any treatment of excavated marine sediment will be conducted using cement solidification/ stabilization (Cement S/S) techniques and the treated sediment will be reused onsite for either backfilling or landscaping (e.g. berm material).
The monthly summary of waste flow table is detailed in Appendix E.
The Contractor was 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 Packing, Labelling and Storage of Chemical Waste.
After the acceptance of the review of the approved Sediment Quality Report (SQR) for this Project under EPD letter dated 19 August 2015, an approval to dispose the marine sediment extracted from bored piling for this Project was then approved under memo from Secretary, Marine Fill Committee of CEDD dated 20 August 2015 for the disposal of marine sediment extracted from bored piling works. The disposal sites allocated to this Project are the Mud Pit CMP2 of the Confined Marine Sediment Disposal Facility to the South of The Brothers (or at the East of Sha Chau). As advised by CEDD in the memo dated 19 February 2016, from 00:00 on 22 March 2016 onward, the disposal space at CMP2 of the South of The Brothers is closed and all disposal of contaminated sediment is to be carried out at CMP Vd to the East of Sha Chau (ESC).
As Contract No. HY/2013/01 has commenced treatment of the extracted marine sediment, treatment will continue and the treated marine sediment will be re-used within the HKBCF Island. On the other hand, Contract Nos. HY/2013/02, HY/2013/03 and HY/2013/04 have not commenced the treatment of extracted marine sediment. Therefore the marine sediment extracted from these three Contracts will be disposed to the allocated disposal sites directly without treatment. As a practical means, the disposal operation is managed by one contractor who is also responsible for applying dumping permit and its subsequent extension applications from EPD. Contract No. HY/2013/03 has been assigned to coordinate and arrange for disposal of extracted marine sediment from all three Contracts.
The SQR was further reviewed in mid-2016. EPD has no comment to extend the validity of the SQR to August 2017 under letter dated 18 August 2016.
Based on the actual piling operation, the estimated quantity of marine sediment to be extracted has been revised from 85,000 m3 to 126,000 m3 (bulk volume). EPD has no comments on the request as in the letter dated 20 October 2016. The Secretary of Marine Fill Committee, CEDD approved the increasing quantity in the memo dated 10 November 2016.
During the course of reviewing the SQR, it was noted that the contamination level of the marine sediment extracted from the inner part of the HKBCF Island was not identified during the previous sampling and testing. As requested by EPD, sampling and testing are required. The Sediment Sampling and Testing Proposal (SSTP) for the inner area of the HKBCF Island was approved by EPD on 2 June 2016.
As in the agreed SSTP for the inner area of the HKBCF Island, samples were taken from the seventeen batches of stockpiled marine sediments and from five boreholes each in one of the five sampling grids. After conducting chemical tests on samples, six batches of stockpiled samples under Contract No. HY/2013/03 and all eight batches of stockpiled samples under Contract No. HY/20013/04 are classified as Category L sediment. The Secretary of Marine Fill Committee of CEDD allocated disposal sites under memo dated 24 October 2016 and dated 22 November 2016 for disposal of a total of 9,500 m3 in-situ volume of Category L sediment (using a bulk factor of 1.3). The Category L sediment was disposed in December 2016.
One sample from the batch of stockpiled marine sediment under Contract No. HY/2013/03 and samples from all five sampling grids had contamination levels exceeding the Lower Chemical Exceedance Levels (LCEL) and biological screenings were carried out. All samples passed the biological screenings and are classified as Category Mp sediment and to be disposed off site using Type II confined marine disposal method the same method used for marine sediment extracted from other part of the HKBCF Island.
The barge for disposal of marine sediment will morn at the temporary loading and unloading at the east shore of the HKBCF Island, which has been being used by reclamation contractor (Contract No. HY/2010/02) for reclamation activities. In terms of safety consideration, each dumping date will be allocated to one Contract. The quantity of marine sediment disposed on the date is from one Contract.
During dumping, each Contractor is responsible for transporting the marine sediment from his site area to the barge. The estimated quantity of marine sediment in each truck is confirmed by Resident Site Staff of each Contract. The trip tickets for transportation and disposal of marine sediment are collected and checked. Contract No. HY/2013/03 as the dumping permit holder is responsible for reporting to EPD the quantity disposed of as the condition stipulated in the dumping permit.
AECOM has confirmed that the disposal of excavated marine sediments to allocated dumping site via Contract No. HY/2013/03 has been completed with the last batch disposal on 30 August 2017. The total quantities disposed are presented in the following table (Table 6.1):
Table 6.1: Summary of Marine Sediment disposed to Dumping Site via Contract No. HY/2013/03
|
Type
of Sediment and Quantity Disposed (m3) |
|
|
Cat. L (in
Type I) |
Type II |
Total |
3,570 |
39,814 |
Note: For monthly breakdown of these quantities, please refer to the waste flow table in Appendix E.
The valid environmental licenses and permits during the reporting period are summarized in Appendix F.
In response to the site audit findings, the Contractor carried out corrective actions.
A summary of the Implementation Schedule of Environmental Mitigation Measures (EMIS) is presented in Appendix G. Most of the necessary mitigation measures were implemented properly.
Implementation status of the Regular Marine Travel Route Plan (RMTRP) was checked by ET. Training of marine travel route for marine vessel operator was given to relevant staff and relevant records were kept properly.
According to the Contractor of HY/2013/04, all marine-based segment deliveries were completed in January 2018 and no marine-based works were conducted under the contract during the reporting period.
Air Quality
No Action and Limit Level exceedances of 1-hour and 24-hour TSP level were recorded at AMS2, AMS3C and AMS7B during the reporting period.
Summary of Action and Limit Level exceedance of 1-hour TSP level and 24-hour TSP level at AMS6 shall be referred to the monthly EM&A report prepared by Contract No. HY/2011/03.
Noise
No Action and Limit Level exceedances were recorded at the NMS2 and NMS3C during the reporting period.
Water Quality
Two exceedances of water quality (consisting of one Action Level exceedance of suspended solids and one Action Level exceedance of turbidity) were recorded by the Environmental Team of this Contract during the reporting period. Following investigations, it was concluded that the exceedances were not related to the HZMB HKBCF project.
Chinese White Dolphin
For dolphin monitoring, dolphin surveys were conducted on 4, 11, 16 and 18 October 2018. A total of 265.60 km of survey effort was collected, with 99.8% of the total survey effort being conducted under favourable weather. Two groups of six Chinese White Dolphins were sighted. Both of these dolphin sightings were made in NWL, while none was sighted in NEL.
Complaints
There was one complaint received in relation to the environmental impact during the reporting period and investigated by the ET of the Contract. The summary of environmental complaints is presented in Table 6.2. The details of cumulative statistics of Environmental Complaints are provided in Appendix H.
Table 6.2: Summary of Environmental Complaints for the Reporting Period
Log No. |
Environmental Complaint Ref. No. |
Date of Complaint Receipt |
Description |
010 |
ENPO-C0139 |
3 October 2018 |
Air Quality |
The complaint referred to a large amount of dust generated
due to lack of water spraying on dirt road at HKBCF Island site. As informed by
EPD, the location under complaint was near the exit/entrance of Contract No.
HY/2013/04 as advised by the complainant.
The relevant mitigation measures for access roads for the HZMB BCF Island site, as required in the EMIS and statutory requirements in the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulations and other applicable environmental legislation, are consolidated as follows:
● Immediately before leaving a construction site, every vehicle shall be washed to remove any dusty materials from its body and wheels and to ensure that no earth, mud or debris is deposited by them on roads.
● Vehicle washing facilities with high pressure water jet should be provided at every discernible or designated vehicle exit point. The area where vehicle washing takes place and the road section between the washing facilities and the exit point should be paved with concrete, bituminous materials or hardcores.
● Every main haul road shall be paved with concrete, bituminous materials, hardcores or metal plates, and kept clear of dusty materials, or sprayed with water or a dust suppression chemical so as to maintain the entire road surface wet.
● The portion of any road leading only to construction site that is within 30m of a vehicle entrance or exit should be kept clear of dusty materials.
● The Contractor should undertake proper watering on all exposed spoil (with at least 8 times per day) throughout the construction phase.
The Contractor’s site watering record for 2 and 3 October 2018 as checked by ET was normal with watering provided 8 times per day.
As informed by the Contractor of HY/2013/04, water spray was provided by water truck for the HY/2013/04 site on the morning of 3 October 2018.
During ET’s regular weekly site inspection on 3 October 2018 (between 14:00 and 15:00), a site observation regarding air quality was made, namely dust emission was observed along haul road near bridge D12 area; the Contractor was reminded to provide water spraying to ensure wet surface. Other haul roads within HY/2013/04 site were found to have been provided with water spray.
The vehicular entrance of and the wheel wash facility at the vehicular exit of HY/2013/04 site boundary were also inspected and found to be operating normally with no fugitive dust observed.
The Contractor’s site watering plan (annotated with locations of the abovementioned photos) and wheel wash facility are presented in Attachments 3 and 4 respectively of the investigation report.
Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecution
No notification of summons or prosecutions was received during the reporting period.
Statistics on notifications of summons and successful prosecutions are summarized in Appendix H.
As informed by the Contractor, the major construction activities for November 2018 are summarized in Table 7.1.
Table 7.1: Construction Activities for November 2018
Site Area |
Description of Activities |
HKBCF |
● Erection of
sign gantries ● Erection of precast
segments ● Erection of
precast bridge structures ● Construction
of parapets for bridge structures ● Construction
of Abutment A1601 and associated retaining walls ● Construction
of Bridge D16 in-situ deck ● Construction
of utilities cross-over frame under bridge D9c ● Backfilling
of utilities cross-over frame under Bridge D9c ● Drainage
works and watermains laying ● Roadworks and
road furniture ● Removal of
silt curtain (expected to be carried out in end of November to early December
2018). |
The tentative schedule for weekly site inspection and monitoring for air quality, noise, water quality and Chinese White Dolphin for November 2018 is provided in Appendix I.
General
Commencement of the Contract took place on 13 March 2015 and the construction works of the Contract commenced on 13 July 2015.
The air quality, noise, water quality and dolphin monitoring works under Contract No. HY/2013/01 were suspended on 1 October 2018. From 1 October 2018 onwards, the ET of Contract No. HY/2013/04 has continued the same implementation of air quality, noise and water quality environmental monitoring (including air quality and noise monitoring already under its implementation) while the ET of Contract No. HY/2011/03 has continued the same implementation of dolphin monitoring, with the reporting of all environmental monitoring continued by the ET of Contract No. HY/2013/04.
Breaches of Action and Limit Levels
Air Quality
No Action and Limit Level exceedances of 1-hour and 24-hour TSP level were recorded at AMS2, AMS3C and AMS7B during the reporting period.
Summary of Action and Limit Level exceedance of 1-hour TSP level and 24-hour TSP level at AMS6 shall be referred to the monthly EM&A report prepared by Contract No. HY/2011/03.
Noise
No Action and Limit Level exceedances were recorded at the NMS2 and NMS3C during the reporting period.
Water Quality
Two exceedances of water quality (consisting of one Action Level exceedance of suspended solids and one Action Level exceedance of turbidity) were recorded by the Environmental Team of this Contract during the reporting period. Following investigations, it was concluded that the exceedances were not related to the HZMB HKBCF project.
Chinese White Dolphin
For dolphin monitoring, dolphin surveys were conducted on 4, 11, 16 and 18 October 2018. A total of 265.60 km of survey effort was collected, with 99.8% of the total survey effort being conducted under favourable weather. Two groups of six Chinese White Dolphins were sighted. Both of these dolphin sightings were made in NWL, while none was sighted in NEL.
Environmental Site Inspections
Environmental site inspections were carried out on 3, 10, 18, 22 and 31 October 2018. Recommendations on remedial actions were given to the Contractor for the deficiencies identified during the site inspections.
Complaints
There was one complaint received in relation to the environmental impact during the reporting period.
The complaint referred to a large amount of dust generated
due to lack of water spraying on dirt road at HKBCF Island site. As informed by
EPD, the location under complaint was near the exit/entrance of Contract No.
HY/2013/04 as advised by the complainant.
The relevant mitigation measures for access roads for the HZMB BCF Island site, as required in the EMIS and statutory requirements in the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulations and other applicable environmental legislation, are consolidated as follows:
● Immediately before leaving a construction site, every vehicle shall be washed to remove any dusty materials from its body and wheels and to ensure that no earth, mud or debris is deposited by them on roads.
● Vehicle washing facilities with high pressure water jet should be provided at every discernible or designated vehicle exit point. The area where vehicle washing takes place and the road section between the washing facilities and the exit point should be paved with concrete, bituminous materials or hardcores.
● Every main haul road shall be paved with concrete, bituminous materials, hardcores or metal plates, and kept clear of dusty materials, or sprayed with water or a dust suppression chemical so as to maintain the entire road surface wet.
● The portion of any road leading only to construction site that is within 30m of a vehicle entrance or exit should be kept clear of dusty materials.
● The Contractor should undertake proper watering on all exposed spoil (with at least 8 times per day) throughout the construction phase.
The Contractor’s site watering record for 2 and 3 October 2018 as checked by ET was normal with watering provided 8 times per day.
As informed by the Contractor of HY/2013/04, water spray was provided by water truck for the HY/2013/04 site on the morning of 3 October 2018.
During ET’s regular weekly site inspection on 3 October 2018 (between 14:00 and 15:00), a site observation regarding air quality was made, namely dust emission was observed along haul road near bridge D12 area; the Contractor was reminded to provide water spraying to ensure wet surface. Other haul roads within HY/2013/04 site were found to have been provided with water spray.
The vehicular entrance of and the wheel wash facility at the vehicular exit of HY/2013/04 site boundary were also inspected and found to be operating normally with no fugitive dust observed.
The Contractor’s site watering plan (annotated with locations of the abovementioned photos) and wheel wash facility are presented in Attachments 3 and 4 respectively of the investigation report.
Notifications of Summons and Successful Prosecutions
There were no notifications of summons or prosecutions received during the reporting period.
Appendix A. Location of Works Areas
Appendix B. Project Organization for Environmental Works
Appendix C. Construction Programme
Appendix D. Event and Action Plan
Appendix E. Waste Flow Table
Appendix F. Environmental Licences and Permits
Appendix G. Implementation Schedule for Environmental Mitigation Measures (EMIS)
Appendix H. Statistics on Environmental Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecutions
Appendix I. Environmental Site Inspection and Monitoring Schedule
Appendix J. Calibration Certificates
Appendix K. Monitoring Data and Graphical Plots (Air Quality, Noise and Water Quality)
Appendix L. Dolphin Monitoring Results
Appendix M. Wind Data
Appendix N. Investigation Report