Contract
No. HY/2011/03
Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link
Road
Section between Scenic Hill and Hong Kong Boundary Crossing
Facilities
Monthly EM&A Report No.1 (October 2012)
17 December 2012
Revision 3
Main Contractor Designer
Contents
Executive Summary
1.4 Construction Works Undertaken During the Reporting Month
2....... Air Quality Monitoring
2.4 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
2.6 Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month
3.4 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
3.6 Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month
4....... Water Quality Monitoring
4.3 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
4.6 Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month
6....... ENVIRONMENTAL SITE INSPECTION AND AUDIT
6.2 Advice on the Solid and Liquid Waste Management Status
6.3 Environmental Licenses and Permits
6.4 Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures
6.5 Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality Performance
Limit
6.6 Summary of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful
Prosecution
7.1 Construction Programme for the Coming Months
7.2 Environmental Monitoring Scheme for the Coming Month
Figures
Figure 1.1 Location
of the Site
Figure 2.1 Environmental
Monitoring Stations
Appendices
Appendix A Environmental
Management Structure
Appendix B Construction
Programme
Appendix C Calibration
Certificates
Appendix D Monitoring
Schedule
Appendix F Event
and Action Plan
Appendix H Dolphin
Monitoring Results
Appendix J Cumulative
Statistics on Complaints
Appendix K Environmental
Licenses and Permits
Appendix L Implementation
Schedule of Environmental Mitigation Measures
Executive Summary
The Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao
Bridge (HZMB) Hong Kong Link Road (HKLR) serves to connect the HZMB Main Bridge
at the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Boundary and the HZMB
Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF) located at the north eastern
waters of the Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA).
The HKLR project has been
separated into two contracts. They
are Contract No. HY/2011/03 Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link
Road-Section between Scenic Hill and Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities
(hereafter referred to as the Contract) and Contract No. HY/2011/09 Hong
Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link Road-Section between HKSAR Boundary and
Scenic Hill.
China State Construction Engineering
(Hong Kong) Ltd. was awarded by Highways Department as the Contractor to
undertake the construction works of Contract No. HY/2011/03. The main works of the Contract include
land tunnel at Scenic Hill, tunnel underneath Airport Road and Airport Express
Line, reclamation and tunnel to the east coast of the Airport Island, at-grade
road connecting to the HKBCF and highway works of the HKBCF within the Airport
Island and in the vicinity of the HKLR reclamation. The Contract is part of the HKLR Project
and HKBCF Project, these projects are considered to be ¡§Designated Projects¡¨,
under Schedule 2 of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Ordinance (Cap
499) and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Reports (Register No.
AEIAR-144/2009 and AEIAR-145/2009) were prepared for the Project. The current Environmental Permit (EP)
EP-352/2009/A for HKLR and EP-353/2009/E for HKBCF were issued on 31 October
2011 and 16 October 2012, respectively. These documents are available through
the EIA Ordinance Register. The Contract commenced on 17 October 2012.
BMT Asia Pacific 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 HKLR (Version 1.0) and will be providing
environmental team services to the Contract.
This is the first Monthly
EM&A report for the Contract which summaries the monitoring results and
audit findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 17
October to 31 October 2012.
Environmental
Monitoring and Audit Progress
The monthly EM&A
programme was undertaken in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual for
HKLR (Version 1.0). A summary of
the monitoring activities in this reporting month is listed below:
1-hr TSP Monitoring 18,
24 and 30 October 2012
24-hr TSP Monitoring 18,
24 and 30 October 2012
Noise Monitoring 18
and 24 October 2012
Water Quality Monitoring 17,
20, 22, 25, 27 and 30 October 2012
Chinese White Dolphin
Monitoring 17,
18, 25, 26 and 29 October 2012
Site Inspection 17,
24 and 30 October 2012
Breaches of Action and Limit Levels
A summary of environmental
exceedances for this reporting month is as follows:
Environmental Monitoring |
Parameters |
Action Level (AL) |
Limit Level (LL) |
Air Quality |
1-hr TSP |
2 |
1 |
24-hr TSP |
0 |
0 |
|
Noise |
Leq (30
min) |
0 |
0 |
Water Quality |
Suspended
solids level (SS) |
8 |
18 |
Turbidity
level |
5 |
18 |
|
Dissolved
oxygen level (DO) |
0 |
0 |
Two Action Level exceedances
of 1-hr TSP and one Limit Level exceedances of 1-hr TSP were recorded at
Station AMS5 on 30 October 2012.
The construction activities during the sampling period included laying
of geotextile and rock filling, and GI survey at works area of Kwo Lo Wan
Road. These activities did not
generate significant dust impact and were undertaken far away (greater than
500m) from AMS5. The general
weather conditions in Tung Chung were drizzle during the dust sampling
period. The drizzle would cause
high readings of portable dust meter. Therefore, it was considered that the
exceedances were not related to the construction activities of the Contract and
caused by the weather condition.
During the reporting month,
there are eight Action Level exceedances and eighteen Limit Level exceedances
of suspended solids level. Five
Action Level exceedances and eighteen Limit Level exceedances of turbidity
level were recorded. Investigation works were undertaken and it was found that
only preparation works such as geotextile laying and stone blanket laying were
undertaken. These activities were
unlikely to cause adverse water quality impact. Therefore, all exceedances were
considered not project related.
All investigation reports
for exceedances of the Contract have been submitted to ENPO/IEC for comments
and/or follow up to identify whether the exceedances occurred related to other
HZMB contracts
Complaint Log
There was one environmental
complaint received during this reporting month. An e-mail
complaint was received from EPD on 22 October 2012 regarding the potential
discharge of effluent into marine water in the vicinity of the construction
site for the HZMB project. Based on the photos provided by the
complainant and the information from the Contractor, the observation was not
likely due to effluent discharge or oil spill. The pelican barge as shown in the photos
provided on 24 Oct 2012 does not belong to this Contract. The complaint was
not related to this Contract so no follow up action was
required. However, the Contractor was reminded to implement necessary
mitigation measures properly and undertake regular environmental inspections
and maintenance of machinery to avoid environmental pollution.
Notifications of Summons and Prosecutions
There were no notifications of summons or
prosecutions received during this reporting month.
Reporting Changes
This report has been
developed in compliance with the reporting requirements for the first monthly
EM&A report as required by the Updated EM&A Manual for HKLR (Version
1.0). There are no reporting
changes.
Future Key Issues
The future key issues
include potential noise, air quality, water quality and ecological impacts and
waste management arising from the following construction activities to be
undertaken in the upcoming month:
¡P
Ground
investigation work at Portion Y;
¡P
Site clearing for
road and drainage work at Portion Y;
¡P
Marine site
investigation at Portion X;
¡P
Removal of armour
rocks of existing seawall at Portion X;
¡P
Installation of
silt curtain at Portion X;
¡P
Formation of
temporary stone platform at Portion X;
¡P
Reclamation at
Portion X;
¡P
Relocation of
Flag Poles at Kwo Lo Wan Road;
¡P
Site formation
work for tunneling at West Portal; and
¡P
Installation of
soil nails at West Portal.
¡P
New reclamation along the east coast
of the approximately 23 hectares.
¡P
Tunnel of Scenic Hill (Tunnel SHT)
from Scenic Hill to the new reclamation, of approximately 1km in length with
three (3) lanes for the east bound carriageway heading to the HKBCF and four
(4) lanes for the westbound carriageway heading to the HZMB Main Bridge.
¡P
An abutment of the viaduct portion of
the HKLR at the west portal of Tunnel SHT and associated road works at the west
portal of Tunnel SHT.
¡P
An at grade road on the new
reclamation along the east coast of the HKIA to connect with the HKBCF, of
approximately 1.6 km along dual 3-lane carriageway with hard shoulder for each
bound.
¡P
Road links between the HKBCF and the
HKIA including new roads and the modification of existing roads at the HKIA,
involving viaducts, at grade roads and a Tunnel HAT.
¡P
A highway operation and maintenance
area (HMA) located on the new reclamation, south of the Dragonair Headquarters
Building, including the construction of buildings, connection roads and other
associated facilities.
¡P
Associated civil, structural,
building, geotechnical, marine, environmental protection, landscaping, drainage
and sewerage, tunnel and highway electrical and mechanical works, together with
the installation of street lightings, traffic aids and sign gantries, water
mains and fire hydrants, provision of facilities for installation of traffic
control and surveillance system (TCSS), reprovisioning works of affected
existing facilities, implementation of transplanting, compensatory planting and
protection of existing trees, and implementation of an environmental monitoring
and audit (EM&A) program.
Table 1.1 Contact
Information of Key Personnel
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Fax |
Supervising
Officer¡¦s Representative |
CRE |
Robert Antony
Evans |
3968 0801 |
2109 1882 |
Environmental Protection Office /
Independent Environmental Checker |
Environmental Project Office Leader |
Y. H Hui |
3743 0788 |
3548 6988 |
Independent Environmental Checker |
Antony Wong |
3743 0788 |
3548 6988 |
|
Contractor |
Project Manager |
S. Y. Tse |
3968 7002 |
2109 2588 |
Environmental Officer |
Federick Wong |
3968 7117 |
2109 2588 |
|
Environmental Team |
Environmental Team Leader |
Claudine Lee |
2241 9847 |
2815 3377 |
Table 1.2 Construction
Activities During Reporting Month
Site Area |
Description of
Activities |
WA 6 |
Construction of site office |
Portion Y |
Ground Investigation Work Site clearing for road and drainage work |
Portion B |
Site formation work for tunnelling at West Portal |
Portion X |
Marine Site investigation Installation of silt curt Removal of armour rocks of existing seawall Formation of temporary stone platform |
Table 2.1 Action
and Limit Levels for 1-hour TSP
Monitoring
Station |
Action Level,
µg/m3 |
Limit Level,
µg/m3 |
AMS 5 ¡V Ma Wan Chung Village (Tung Chung) |
352 |
500 |
AMS 6 ¡V Dragonair / CNAC (Group) Building (HKIA) |
360 |
Table 2.2 Action
and Limit Levels for 24-hour TSP
Monitoring
Station |
Action Level,
µg/m3 |
Limit Level,
µg/m3 |
AMS 5 ¡V Ma Wan Chung Village (Tung Chung) |
164 |
260 |
AMS 6 ¡V Dragonair / CNAC (Group) Building (HKIA) |
173 |
260 |
Table 2.3
Air Quality Monitoring Equipment
Equipment |
Brand and
Model |
Portable direct reading
dust meter (1-hour TSP) |
Sibata Digital Dust
Monitor (Model No. LD-3B) |
High Volume Sampler |
Tisch Environmental
Mass Flow Controlled Total Suspended Particulate (TSP) High Volume Air
Sampler (Model No. TE-5170) |
Table
2.4 Locations
of Impact Air Quality Monitoring Stations
Monitoring Station |
Location |
AMS5 |
Ma Wan Chung Village
(Tung Chung) |
AMS6 |
Dragonair / CNAC
(Group) Building (HKIA) |
Table 2.5 Air
Quality Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
Parameter |
Frequency and Duration |
1-hour TSP |
Three times every 6
days while the highest dust impact was expected |
24-hour TSP |
Once every 6 days |
(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.
(iv) No furnace or incinerator flues 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 ¡Ó2.5%
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
(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 aluminum 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 hrs, 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
(iii) Calibration certificate of the HVSs are provided in
Appendix C.
(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 C.
Table 2.6 Summary
of 1-hour TSP Monitoring Results During the Reporting Month
Monitoring
Station |
Average (mg/m3) |
Range (mg/m3) |
Action Level (mg/m3) |
Limit Level (mg/m3) |
AMS5 |
271 |
82 ¡V 562 |
352 |
500 |
AMS6 |
145 |
101 ¡V 178 |
360 |
500 |
Table 2.7 Summary
of 24-hour TSP Monitoring Results During the Reporting Month
Monitoring
Station |
Average (mg/m3) |
Range (mg/m3) |
Action
Level (mg/m3) |
Limit Level (mg/m3) |
AMS5 |
73 |
46 ¡V 94 |
164 |
260 |
AMS6 |
N/A* |
N/A* |
173 |
260 |
Remarks:
* The
permission of HVS installation was granted at the end of October 2012. The impact monitoring at AMS6 commenced
on 1 November 2012.
Table 3.1 Action
and Limit Levels for Noise during Construction Period
Monitoring Station |
Time Period |
Action Level |
Limit Level |
NMS5 - Ma Wan
Chung Village (Ma Wan Chung Resident Association) (Tung Chung) |
0700-1900 hrs
on normal weekdays |
When one
documented complaint is received |
75 dB(A) |
Table 3.2 Noise
Monitoring Equipment
Equipment |
Brand and Model |
Integrated
Sound Level Meter |
B&K 2238 |
Acoustic
Calibrator |
B&K 4321 |
Table 3.3 Locations
of Impact Noise Monitoring Stations
Monitoring Station |
Location |
NMS5 |
Ma Wan Chung
Village (Ma Wan Chung Resident Association) (Tung Chung) |
Table 3.4 Noise
Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
Parameter |
Frequency and Duration |
30-mins
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 |
(a) The sound level
meter was set on a tripod at a height of
(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. 07:00
¡V 1900 on normal weekdays;
(e) Prior to and
after each noise measurement, the meter was calibrated using the acoustic
calibrator for 94.0 dB(A) at 1000 Hz.
If the difference in the calibration level before and after measurement
was more than 1.0 dB(A), the measurement would be considered invalid and repeat
of noise measurement would be required after re-calibration or repair of the
equipment.
(f) 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.
(g) 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.
(h) Noise monitoring
was cancelled in the presence of fog, rain, wind with a steady speed exceeding
(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 C.
Table 3.5 Summary
of Construction Noise Monitoring Results During the Reporting Month
Monitoring
Station |
Average Leq
(30 mins), dB(A) |
Range of Leq (30 mins), dB(A) |
Limit Level Leq (30 mins), dB(A) |
NMS5 |
56 |
52 ¡V 59 |
75 |
Table 4.1 Action
and Limit Levels for Water Quality
Parameter (unit) |
Water Depth |
Action Level |
Limit Level |
Dissolved
Oxygen (mg/L) (surface, middle and bottom) |
Surface and
Middle |
5.0 |
4.2 except 5
for Fish Culture Zone |
Bottom |
4.7 |
3.6 |
|
Turbidity
(NTU) |
Depth average |
27.5 or 120%
of upstream control station¡¦s turbidity at the same tide of the same day |
47.0 or 130%
of turbidity at the upstream control station at the same tide of same day |
Suspended
Solid (SS) (mg/L) |
Depth average |
23.5 or 120%
of upstream control station¡¦s SS at the same tide of the same day |
34.4 or 130%
of SS at the upstream control station at the same tide of same day and 10mg/L
for Water Services Department Seawater Intakes |
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 limit occurs when monitoring result is lower that the
limit.
(3) For SS & turbidity
non-compliance of the water quality limits occur when monitoring result is
higher than the limits.
Table
4.2 Water Quality
Monitoring Equipment
Equipment |
Brand and Model |
DO and
Temperature Meter, Salinity Meter, Turbidimeter and pH Meter |
YSI Model 6920
V2-M, 650 |
Positioning
Equipment |
DGPS ¡V KODEN :
KGP913MkII, KBG3 |
Water Depth
Detector |
Layin
Associates: SM-5 & SM5A |
Water Sampler |
Wildlife
Supply Company : 5487-10 |
Table 4.3 Impact
Water Quality Monitoring Parameters and Frequency
Monitoring Stations |
Parameter, unit |
Frequency |
No. of depth |
Impact Stations: Control/Far Field
Stations: Sensitive Receiver
Stations: |
¡P
Depth, m ¡P
Temperature, oC ¡P
Salinity, ppt ¡P
Dissolved Oxygen (DO), mg/L ¡P
DO Saturation, % ¡P
Turbidity, NTU ¡P
pH ¡P
Suspended Solids (SS), mg/L |
Three times per week
during mid-ebb and mid-flood tides (within ¡Ó 1.75 hour of the predicted time) |
3 (1 m below water surface,
mid-depth and 1 m above sea bed, except where the water depth is less than 6
m, in which case the mid-depth station may be omitted. Should the water
depth be less than 3 m, only the mid-depth station will be monitored). |
Table 4.4 Impact Water Quality
Monitoring Stations
Monitoring Stations |
Description |
Coordinates |
|
Easting |
Northing |
||
IS5 |
Impact Station
(Close to HKLR construction site) |
811579 |
817106 |
IS(Mf)6 |
Impact Station
(Close to HKLR 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* |
Impact Station
(Close to HKBCF construction site) |
812577 |
820670 |
SR3 |
Sensitive
receivers (San Tau SSSI) |
810525 |
816456 |
SR4 |
Sensitive
receivers (Tai Ho Inlet) |
814760 |
817867 |
SR5* |
Sensitive
receivers (Artificial Reef In NE Airport) |
811489 |
820455 |
SR10A |
Sensitive
receivers (Ma Wan Fish Culture Zone) |
823741 |
823495 |
SR10B |
Sensitive
receivers (Ma Wan Fish Culture Zone) |
823686 |
823213 |
CS2* |
Control
Station |
805849 |
818780 |
CS(Mf)5 |
Control
Station |
817990 |
821129 |
(a) The
in-situ water quality parameters including dissolved oxygen, temperature,
salinity and turbidity, pH were measured by multi-parameter meters.
(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, 1 m below water surface, mid-depth and 1 m above sea bed, except
where the water depth was less than 6 m, in which case the mid-depth station
was omitted. Should the water depth be less than 3 m, 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 4oC 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.
(f) The analysis method and detection limit for
SS is shown in Table 4.5.
Table 4.5 Laboratory Analysis for Suspended Solids
Parameters |
Instrumentation |
Analytical Method |
Detection Limit |
Suspended
Solid (SS) |
Weighting |
APHA 2540-D |
0.5mg/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 by FT Laboratories Ltd.
before use and at 3-monthly intervals throughout all stages of the water
quality monitoring programme. The procedures of performance check of sonde and
testing results are provided in Appendix C.
Table 4.6 Summary
of Water Quality Exceedances
Station |
Exceedance Level |
DO (S&M) |
DO (Bottom) |
Turbidity |
SS |
Total number of exceedances |
|||||
Ebb |
Flood |
Ebb |
Flood |
Ebb |
Flood |
Ebb |
Flood |
Ebb |
Flood |
||
IS5 |
Action Level |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
17/10/2012 |
17/10/2012 |
1 |
3 |
Limit Level |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
20/10/2012 |
-- |
20/10/2012 |
0 |
4 |
|
IS(Mf)6 |
Action Level |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
27/10/2012 |
-- |
27/10/2012 |
0 |
2 |
Limit Level |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
20/10/2012 |
-- |
20/10/2012 |
0 |
3 |
|
IS7 |
Action Level |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
0 |
0 |
Limit Level |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
20/10/2012 |
-- |
20/10/2012 |
0 |
6 |
|
IS8 |
Action Level |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
17/10/2012 |
-- |
-- |
0 |
3 |
Limit Level |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
17/10/2012 |
0 |
3 |
|
IS(Mf)9 |
Action Level |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
0 |
0 |
Limit Level |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
20/10/2012 |
-- |
20/10/2012 |
0 |
5 |
|
IS10* |
Action Level |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
Limit Level |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
|
SR3 |
Action Level |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
22/10/2012 |
-- |
27/10/2012 |
0 |
3 |
Limit Level |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
20/10/2012 |
-- |
20/10/2012 |
0 |
6 |
|
SR4 |
Action Level |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
0 |
0 |
Limit Level |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
20/10/2012 |
-- |
20/10/2012 |
0 |
6 |
|
SR5* |
Action Level |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
Limit Level |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
|
SR10A |
Action Level |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
0 |
0 |
Limit Level |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
20/10/2012 |
0 |
1 |
|
SR10B |
Action Level |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
17/10/2012 |
0 |
1 |
Limit Level |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
20/10/2012 |
-- |
20/10/2012 |
0 |
2 |
|
Total |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
5 |
1 |
7 |
13** |
|
|
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
18 |
0 |
18 |
36** |
Notes:
S: Surface;
M: Mid-depth;
* Monitoring
Stations SR5 and IS10 are located within the Airport Approach Restricted Area.
Therefore, a permit is required for entering into the area. The Contractor applied the permit in
October 2012 and expected to receive the permit soon. Monitoring work will commence once the
permit is granted.
** The total
exceedances.
Table 5.1 Co-ordinates
of transect lines
Line No. |
Easting |
Northing |
|
Line No. |
Easting |
Northing |
||
1 |
Start Point |
804671 |
814577 |
|
13 |
Start Point |
816506 |
819480 |
1 |
End Point |
804671 |
831404 |
|
13 |
End Point |
816506 |
824859 |
2 |
Start Point |
805475 |
815457 |
|
14 |
Start Point |
817537 |
820220 |
2 |
End Point |
805477 |
826654 |
|
14 |
End Point |
817537 |
824613 |
3 |
Start Point |
806464 |
819435 |
|
15 |
Start Point |
818568 |
820735 |
3 |
End Point |
806464 |
822911 |
|
15 |
End Point |
818568 |
824433 |
4 |
Start Point |
807518 |
819771 |
|
16 |
Start Point |
819532 |
821420 |
4 |
End Point |
807518 |
829230 |
|
16 |
End Point |
819532 |
824209 |
5 |
Start Point |
808504 |
820220 |
|
17 |
Start Point |
820451 |
822125 |
5 |
End Point |
808504 |
828602 |
|
17 |
End Point |
820451 |
823671 |
6 |
Start Point |
809490 |
820466 |
|
18 |
Start Point |
821504 |
822371 |
6 |
End Point |
809490 |
825352 |
|
18 |
End Point |
821504 |
823761 |
7 |
Start Point |
810499 |
820690 |
|
19 |
Start Point |
822513 |
823268 |
7 |
End Point |
810499 |
824613 |
|
19 |
End Point |
822513 |
824321 |
8 |
Start Point |
811508 |
820847 |
|
20 |
Start Point |
823477 |
823402 |
8 |
End Point |
811508 |
824254 |
|
20 |
End Point |
823477 |
824613 |
9 |
Start Point |
812516 |
820892 |
|
21 |
Start Point |
805476 |
827081 |
9 |
End Point |
812516 |
824254 |
|
21 |
End Point |
805476 |
830562 |
10 |
Start Point |
813525 |
820872 |
|
22 |
Start Point |
806464 |
824033 |
10 |
End Point |
813525 |
824657 |
|
22 |
End Point |
806464 |
829598 |
11 |
Start Point |
814556 |
818449 |
|
23 |
Start Point |
814559 |
821739 |
11 |
End Point |
814556 |
820992 |
|
23 |
End Point |
814559 |
824768 |
12 |
Start Point |
815542 |
818807 |
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
End Point |
815542 |
824882 |
|
|
|
|
|
5.2.6.
Survey effort being conducted along the parallel transect lines that
were perpendicular to the coastlines (as indicated in Figure 1 of Appendix H)
was labeled as ¡§primary¡¨ survey effort, while the survey effort being conducted
along the connecting lines between parallel lines was labeled 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,
primary and secondary survey effort were both presented as on-effort survey
effort in this report.
5.2.7.
Encounter rates of Chinese White Dolphins (number of 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.
5.3.6.
During October¡¦s surveys, dolphin encounter rates deduced from survey
effort and sighting data collected from primary lines only were 6.2 and 5.2
sightings per 100 km of survey effort in NWL and NEL survey areas respectively. On the other hand, dolphin encounter
rates deduced from survey effort and sighting data collected from both primary
and secondary lines were 6.6 and 6.6 sightings per 100 km of survey effort in
NWL and NEL survey areas respectively.
5.3.7.
The average group size of Chinese White Dolphins was 3.0 individuals per group
during October¡¦s surveys. Moreover,
the average dolphin group size in NWL and NEL were 2.9 and 3.2 individuals pre
group respectively.
5.3.11.
During this month of dolphin monitoring, no adverse impact from the
activities of this construction project on Chinese White Dolphins was
noticeable from general observations.
5.3.12.
Due to the monthly variation in dolphin occurrence within the study
area, it would be more appropriate to draw conclusion on whether any impacts on
dolphins have been detected related to the construction activities of this
project in the quarterly EM&A report, where comparison on distribution,
group size and encounter rates of dolphins between the quarterly impact
monitoring period (October-December 2012) and baseline monitoring period (3-month
period) will be made.
Table 7.1 Construction
Activities for November and December 2012
Site Area |
Description of Activities |
Portion Y |
Ground Investigation Work |
Portion Y |
Site clearing for road and drainage work |
Portion X |
Marine Site investigation |
Portion X |
Removal of armour rocks of existing seawall |
Portion X |
Installation
of silt curtain |
Portion X |
Formation
of temporary stone platform |
Portion X |
Reclamation |
Kwo Lo Wan Road |
Relocation
of Flag Poles |
West Portal |
Site
formation work for tunnelling |
West Portal |
Installation
of Soil Nails |
Appendix A
Environmental Management Structure
Appendix B
Construction Programme
Appendix C
Calibration Certificates
Appendix D
Monitoring Schedule
Appendix E
Monitoring Data
Appendix F
Event and Action Plan
Appendix G
Wind Data
Appendix H
Dolphin Monitoring Results
Appendix I
Waste Flow Table
Appendix J
Cumulative Statistic on Complaints
Appendix K
Environmental Licenses and Permits
Appendix L
Implementation Schedule of Environmental Mitigation
Measures
Appendix M
Record of ¡§Notification of Environmental Quality
Limit Exceedances¡¨ and ¡§Complaint Enquiry Form¡¨