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 December 2019
January
2020
China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Limited
Mott
MacDonald
3/F
International Trade Tower
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 54th Monthly EM&A Report for the Contract which summarises findings of the EM&A works during the reporting period from 1 to 31 December 2019 (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 temporarily 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, 7, 13, 19, 24 and 30 December 2019
● 24-hour TSP Monitoring: 2, 7, 13, 19, 24 and 30 December 2019
● Noise Monitoring: Nil#
● Water Quality Monitoring: 23 December 2019^
● Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring: 3, 10, 12 and 16 December 2019
● Environmental Site Inspection: 4, 11, 16 and 23 December 2019
Remarks:
# A proposal to terminate impact monitoring for noise at NMS2 and NMS3C was justified by the ET Leader of this Contract and verified by the IEC on 13 August 2019, and approved by EPD on 3 September 2019. Therefore, the last noise monitoring event at NMS2 and NMS3C to be reported under this Contract was conducted on 2 September 2019. No noise monitoring was conducted during the reporting period.
^ Monthly impact operation phase water quality monitoring in accordance with Section 9.9 of the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0) was conducted during the reporting period.
* Post-construction dolphin monitoring in accordance with Section 10.7 of the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF was conducted during the reporting period.
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 |
1 |
- |
Noise |
Leq (30 min) |
- |
- |
One Action Level exceedance of 24-hour TSP for air quality at AMS7B was recorded and investigated by the ET of the Contract during the reporting period. It was concluded that the air quality exceedance was not due to the Contract.
Complaint Log
There were no complaints received in relation to the environmental impact during the reporting period.
Notifications of Summons and Successful Prosecutions
There were no notifications of summons or prosecutions received during this reporting period.
Reporting Changes
There was no reporting change during the reporting period.
Future Key Issues
The future key issues to be undertaken in the upcoming month are:
● Surveying works (land-based)
● Trimming of slopes profile and hydroseeding (land-based)
● Construction of remaining U-channels (land-based)
● Maintenance of temporary traffic arrangements (TTA) associated with the commissioning of HKBCF and Tuen Mun – Chek Lap Kok Link Southern Connection (TM-CLKLSC) (land-based), and subsequent removal of TTA upon completion of roadworks (land-based)
● Defects rectification for roads & drainage, bridge, utility drawpit and pillar box (land-based)
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 54th Monthly EM&A Report
summarising the findings of
EM&A activities conducted under the Contract from 1 to 31 December 2019 (the
“reporting period”) and is submitted to
fulfil Condition 5.4 of the EP.
The Highways Department of HKSAR, the Contractor and MMHK consent
to the requirements under the current EP for HZMB HKBCF to submit EM&A
reports to the Environmental Protection Department (EPD) for public inspection.
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.) |
Senior Resident Engineer |
Peter Lee |
3958 7465 |
3748 8900 |
Environmental Project Office / Independent Environmental Checker (Ramboll Hong Kong Limited) |
Environmental Project Office Leader |
Y H Hui |
3465 2888 |
3465 2899 |
Independent Environmental Checker |
Ray Yan |
3465 2836 / 5181 8401 |
3465 2899 |
|
|
Environmental Site Supervisor |
Harris Wong |
3465 2805 / 5181 8709 |
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 |
|
|
K P Ng |
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:
● Surveying works (land-based)
● Trimming of slopes profile and hydroseeding (land-based)
● Construction of remaining U-channels (land-based)
● Maintenance of temporary traffic arrangements (TTA) associated with the commissioning of HKBCF and Tuen Mun – Chek Lap Kok Link Southern Connection (TM-CLKLSC) (land-based), and subsequent removal of TTA upon completion of roadworks (land-based)
● Defects rectification for roads & drainage, bridge, utility drawpit and pillar box (land-based)
● 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 (HZMB HKLR) – 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-5R |
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 HKBCF (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 |
50 |
20 – 147 |
374 |
500 |
AMS3C |
82 |
23 – 233 |
368 |
500 |
AMS7B |
53 |
22 – 127 |
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 |
92 |
34 – 138 |
176 |
260 |
AMS3C |
103 |
33 – 164 |
167 |
260 |
AMS7B |
129 |
39 – 198 |
183 |
260 |
There was no Action and Limit Level exceedance of 1-hour TSP level and 24-hour TSP level recorded at station AMS2 and AMS3C, and no Action and Limit Level exceedance of 1-hour TSP level recorded at station AMS7B, by the Environmental Team of this Contract during the reporting period.
One Action Level exceedance of 24-hour TSP for air quality at AMS7B was recorded and investigated by the ET of the 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.
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.
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.
Air quality exceedance recorded during the reporting period is summarised in Table 2.7.
Table 2.7: Action and Limit Level Exceedance for Air Quality
Date |
Parameter |
Station |
Exceedance Recorded |
2 Dec 2019 |
24-hour TSP |
AMS7B |
Action Level |
The investigation findings into the exceedance are summarised below. The full investigation reports are presented in Appendix N.
2 December 2019 (at AMS7B)
According to the Contractor of HY/2013/04, the major construction activities conducted under the Contract during the monitoring period included aggregate placement for seawall capping layer, formation of remaining works, construction of utilities cross-over frame under Bridge D9c, trimming of fill slopes, U-channel casting works and concrete defect rectification at bridge external face and deck voids.
As informed by the Contractor of HY/2013/04, watering of all main haul roads was provided in accordance with the HY/2013/04 site watering plan. This plan schedules water spraying for at least 8 times per day which follows the recommended mitigation measures in the EM&A Manual and Environmental Permit.
During ET’s regular weekly site inspections on 27 November 2019 (14:45-15:45) and 4 December 2019 (14:30-15:30), one air quality observation was recorded: namely, an exposed works area was observed dry and dusty.
Photos relating to the Contractor’s site watering on 1-3 December 2019 and abovementioned site inspections are presented in the investigation report.
The wind data collected at the AMS3C wind station at Ying Tung Estate and the Hong Kong Observatory wind station at Chek Lap Kok during the abovementioned 24-hour monitoring period (as presented in the investigation report) shows that winds were in the NNW to ENE range during the 24-hour TSP monitoring. This indicates that it was unlikely that the source of exceedance could be attributed to HY/2013/04.
Information available on EPD’s Air Quality Health Index (AQHI) website shows that the short-term health risk of air pollution between 8:00 a.m. on 2 December 2019 and 8:00 a.m. on 3 December 2019 was low to moderate at Tung Chung (with maximum AQHI of 4 at 14:00-02:00 a.m. and 07:00-08:00 a.m.). The AQHI data is available online at:
·
http://www.aqhi.gov.hk/epd/ddata/html/history/2019/201912_Eng.csv
It was concluded that the exceedance was not due to HY/2013/04.
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 Works 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.
A proposal to terminate impact monitoring for noise at NMS2 and NMS3C was justified by the ET Leader of this Contract and verified by the IEC on 13 August 2019, and approved by EPD on 3 September 2019. Therefore, the last noise monitoring event at NMS2 and NMS3C to be reported under this Contract was conducted on 2 September 2019, and no impact noise monitoring was conducted during the reporting period.
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.
No monitoring schedule is presented for the reporting period, since impact noise monitoring has been terminated as approved by EPD on 3 September 2019.
No monitoring equipment is presented for the reporting period, since impact noise monitoring has been terminated as approved by EPD on 3 September 2019.
No monitoring methodology is presented for the reporting period, since impact noise monitoring has been terminated as approved by EPD on 3 September 2019.
No monitoring results are presented for the reporting period, since impact noise monitoring has been terminated as approved by EPD on 3 September 2019.
Upon completion of all marine-based construction activities, a post-project monitoring exercise on water quality shall be carried out for 4 weeks in the same manner as the Baseline monitoring and was conducted during May 2019. An impact operational phase monitoring exercise on water quality shall also be carried out monthly during the first year of Project operation at all designated monitoring stations including control stations; this was commenced in June 2019. For post-construction and impact operational phase water quality monitoring, measurement was taken in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0).
During the reporting period, the impact operational phase water quality monitoring works were covered by this Contract. A total of four stations (two Sensitive Receiver Stations and two Control Stations) are covered for impact operational phase monitoring by the current EM&A programme.
The two Sensitive Receiver Stations (SR) were chosen as they are close to the key sensitive receivers and the two Control Stations (CS) were chosen to facilitate comparison of the water quality of the SR stations with less influence by the Project/ ambient water quality conditions.
During impact construction water quality monitoring, the water quality monitoring station at SR3 was not available for water sampling due to safety reason, thus, monitoring station was changed to SR3(N) (Coordinate: 810689E, 816591N) and was justified by the ET Leader of Contract No. HY/2013/01 on 8 November 2017 and verified by the IEC on 13 November 2017; and submitted to EPD on 29 November 2017 and it was approved by EPD on 22 December 2017. Also, the water quality monitoring station at CS2 (Coordinate: 805849E, 818780N) was occupied by the marine work of a designated project – “Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System” (3RS Project) – thus, monitoring station was changed to CS2(A) (Coordinate: 805232E, 818606N) and was justified by the ET Leader of HZMB HLKR Contract No. HY/2011/09, and verified by the IEC; and submitted to EPD on 12 July 2017 and it was approved by EPD on 28 July 2017 for implementation with effect from 31 July 2017.
Application of the alternative water quality monitoring stations at SR3(N) and CS2(A) to impact operational phase water quality monitoring was justified by the ET Leader of this Contract on 14 May 2019, verified by the IEC on 15 May 2019 and submitted to EPD for record on 15 May 2019 for implementation with effect from June 2019.
Table 4.1 and Figure 4.1 shows the locations of water quality monitoring stations.
Table 4.1: Impact Operational Phase Water Quality Monitoring Stations
Station |
Description |
East |
North |
SR2(A) |
Sensitive receivers (Sha Lo Wan) |
807810 |
817189 |
SR3(N) |
Sensitive receivers (San Tau SSSI) |
810689 |
816591 |
CS2(A) |
Control Station |
805232 |
818606 |
CS(Mf)5 |
Control Station |
817990 |
821129 |
Table 4.2 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and monitoring depths of impact operational phase water quality monitoring in the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0).
Table 4.2: Impact Operational Phase Water Quality Monitoring Parameters and Frequency
Monitoring Stations |
Parameter, Unit |
Frequency |
No. of Depths Measured |
Control
Stations: CS2(A), CS(Mf)5 Sensitive
Receiver Stations: SR2(A), SR3(N) |
●
Depth, m ●
Temperature, °C ●
Salinity, ppt ●
Dissolved Oxygen (DO), mg/L ●
DO Saturation, % ●
Turbidity, NTU ●
pH ●
Suspended Solids (SS), mg/L |
Once monthly, during mid-ebb and mid-flood tides of the same
monitoring day (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 impact water quality monitoring are provided in Table 4.3 for reference.
Table 4.3: Action and Limit Levels for Impact Water Quality Monitoring
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.
Monthly impact operational phase water quality monitoring in accordance with Section 9.9 of the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0) commenced in June 2019 and was conducted during the reporting period on 23 December 2019.
The schedule for impact operational phase water quality monitoring in the reporting period is presented in Appendix I.
Table 4.4 summaries the equipment used in the impact operational phase 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 |
16H104233 |
YSI 6920V2 |
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 operational phase water quality monitoring results and graphical plots are presented in Appendix K.
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 HKBCF reclamation and, if deemed detrimental, to take appropriate action as per the EM&A Manual.
The transfer of the role of implementation of dolphin monitoring and collection of monitoring data from the ET of Contract No. HY/2011/03 to the ET of Contract No. HY/2012/08 “Tuen Mun-Chek Lap Kok Link – Northern Connection Sub-sea Tunnel Section” was justified by the ET Leader of Contract No. HY/2011/03 and verified by the IEC during August 2019, and approved by EPD during September 2019 for implementation with effect from October 2019.
During the reporting period, the ET of Contract No. HY/2012/08 continued the implementation of dolphin monitoring and collection of monitoring data, with the reporting by the ET of this Contract.
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: Post-Construction 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 22 years of marine mammal monitoring surveys in Hong Kong developed by HKCRP (see Hung, 2017, 2018). 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 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.
Post-construction dolphin monitoring in accordance with Section 10.7 of the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF commenced in March 2019 and was conducted during the reporting period.
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 3, 10, 12 and 16
December 2019, 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 262.02 km of survey effort was collected, with 100% 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, 95.80 km and 166.22 km of survey effort were conducted respectively. The total survey effort conducted on primary and secondary lines were 189.40 km and 72.62 km respectively (Annex I of Appendix L).
A total of three groups of 13 Chinese White Dolphins were sighted during the two sets of monitoring surveys conducted in NWL in December 2019, while no dolphin was sighted at all in NEL (Annex II of Appendix L). All three dolphin groups were sighted on primary lines during on-effort search, and they were not associated with any operating fishing vessel (Annex II of Appendix L).
Distribution of the three dolphin sightings made during this monitoring month is shown in Figure 6 of Appendix L. One large group of 11 dolphins was sighted along the HKLR09 alignment at the southwestern corner of NWL survey area, and the other two groups were two lone dolphins sighted to the west of Sha Chau and near Lung Kwu Tan respectively. All three sightings were located very far away from the HKBCF work site (Figure 6 of Appendix L).
During the reporting period’s surveys, the 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 During the reporting period’s surveys, the average dolphin group size was 4.3 individuals per group. Two of the three groups were composed of lone animals, while the other one was a large group composed of 11 dolphins (Annex II of Appendix L).
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: December 3rd / 10th |
0.0 |
0.0 |
Set 2: December 12th / 16th |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
NWL |
Set 1: December 3rd / 10th |
0.0 |
0.0 |
Set 2: December 12th / 16th |
5.0 |
21.8 |
During the reporting period’s surveys, the average dolphin group size was 4.3 individuals per group. Two of the three groups were composed of lone animals, while the other one was a large group composed of 11 dolphins (Annex II of Appendix L).
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 |
2.5 |
1.8 |
10.9 |
7.8 |
During the two sets of monitoring surveys conducted in the reporting period, a total of nine known individuals were sighted nine times (Annex III and IV of Appendix L). All of them were re-sighted only once during the monthly surveys in the reporting period.
Notably, three identified individuals (i.e. CH108, NL120 and WL214) were sighted with their young calves during their re-sightings in the reporting period.
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 4, 11, 16 and 23 December 2019.
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 exposed works area was observed dry and dusty. Subsequently,
as informed by the Contractor, the dry exposed works areas were handed over to
another works contract. The observation was closed on 16 December 2019.
6 November 2019
a.
A chemical waste storage area was observed damaged. The Contractor
should repair / replace the damaged chemcial waste storage area. Follow-up
action for the outstanding observation will be inspected during the upcoming
site inspections and reported in the coming reporting period.
27 November 2019
a.
Muddy trail was observed outside the site entrance of Gate 3
works area. Subsequently, the works area at Bridge No.9 and Gate 3 was taken
over by another works contract. The
observation was closed on 4 December 2019.
4 December 2019
a.
No new
observations were made.
11 December 2019
a.
No new
observations were made.
16 December 2019
a.
The waste skip was observed overflowing. Subsequently, the waste skip was cleared. The observation was closed on 23 December 2019.
b.
Improper NRMM label was observed on a generator. Subsequently, proper NRMM display was provided on the concerned generator. The observation was closed on 23 December 2019.
23 December 2019
a.
No new
observations were made.
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. The localised silt curtains under this Contract were removed on 4 January 2019.
Air Quality
There was no Action and Limit Level exceedance of 1-hour TSP level and 24-hour TSP level recorded at station AMS2 and AMS3C, and no Action and Limit Level exceedance of 1-hour TSP level recorded at station AMS7B, by the Environmental Team of this Contract during the reporting period.
One Action Level exceedance of 24-hour TSP for air quality at AMS7B was recorded and investigated by the ET of the Contract during the reporting period. It was concluded that the air quality exceedance was not due to the Contract.
The investigation findings are presented in Section 2.8 of this report.
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
Not applicable for the reporting period, since impact noise monitoring has been terminated as approved by EPD on 3 September 2019.
Water Quality
Monthly impact operational phase water quality monitoring in accordance with Section 9.9 of the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0) commenced in June 2019 and was conducted during the reporting period on 23 December 2019.
Chinese White Dolphin
Post-construction dolphin monitoring in accordance with Section 10.7 of the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0) commenced in March 2019.
During the reporting period, dolphin surveys were conducted on 3, 10, 12 and 16 December 2019. A total of 262.02 km of survey effort was collected, with 100% of the total survey effort being conducted under favourable weather conditions. During the two sets of monitoring surveys in the reporting period, a total of three groups of 13 Chinese White Dolphins were sighted during the two sets of monitoring surveys conducted in NWL in December 2019, while no dolphin was sighted at all in NEL (Annex II of Appendix L).
Complaints
There were no complaints received in relation to the environmental impact during the reporting period.
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 January 2020 are summarized in Table 7.1.
Table 7.1: Construction Activities for January 2020
Site Area |
Description of Activities |
HKBCF |
●
Surveying works (land-based) ●
Trimming of slopes profile and hydroseeding
(land-based) ●
Construction of remaining U-channels
(land-based) ●
Maintenance of temporary traffic arrangements
(TTA) associated with the commissioning of HKBCF and Tuen
Mun - Chek Lap Kok Link
Southern Connection (TM-CLKLSC) (land-based), and subsequent removal of TTA
upon completion of roadworks (land-based) ●
Defects rectification for roads & drainage,
bridge, utility drawpit and pillar box (land-based) |
The tentative schedule for weekly site inspection and monitoring for air quality, water quality and Chinese White Dolphin for January 2020 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) as well as the reporting of all environmental monitoring. The same implementation of dolphin monitoring was performed by the ET of Contract No. HY/2011/03 from 1 October 2018 to 30 September 2019 and is being continued by the ET of Contract No. HY/2012/08 from 1 October 2019 onwards.
Moreover, post-construction dolphin monitoring in accordance with Section 10.7 of the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0) commenced in March 2019 and was conducted during the reporting period.
Breaches of Action and Limit Levels
Air Quality
There was no Action and Limit Level exceedance of 1-hour TSP level and 24-hour TSP level recorded at station AMS2 and AMS3C, and no Action and Limit Level exceedance of 1-hour TSP level recorded at station AMS7B, by the Environmental Team of this Contract during the reporting period.
One Action Level exceedance of 24-hour TSP for air quality at AMS7B was recorded and investigated by the ET of the Contract during the reporting period. It was concluded that the air quality exceedance was not due to the Contract.
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
Not applicable for the reporting period, since impact noise monitoring has been terminated as approved by EPD on 3 September 2019.
Water Quality
Monthly impact operational phase water quality monitoring in accordance with Section 9.9 of the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0) commenced in June 2019 and was conducted during the reporting period on 23 December 2019.
Chinese White Dolphin
Post-construction dolphin monitoring in accordance with Section 10.7 of the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0) commenced in March 2019 and was conducted during the reporting period.
During the reporting period, dolphin surveys were conducted on 3, 10, 12 and 16 December 2019. A total of 262.02 km of survey effort was collected, with 100% of the total survey effort being conducted under favourable weather conditions. During the two sets of monitoring surveys in the reporting period, a total of three groups of 13 Chinese White Dolphins were sighted during the two sets of monitoring surveys conducted in NWL in December 2019, while no dolphin was sighted at all in NEL (Annex II of Appendix L).
Environmental Site Inspections
Environmental site inspections were carried out on 4, 11, 16 and 23 December 2019. Recommendations on remedial actions were given to the Contractor for the deficiencies identified during the site inspections.
Complaints
There were no complaints received in relation to the environmental impact during the reporting period.
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