The expansion of Shek Wu Hui Sewage Treatment
Works (SWHSTW) aims to increase the treatment capacity of the existing SWHSTW
to cope with the increasing wastewater flows and loads as a result of the
population growth in the catchment area of Fanling/Sheung Shui and the
committed extension of sewerage system to unsewered areas. It is considered as a project
constituting a material change to an exempted designated project under Schedule
2 of EIAO. Thus, the procedures under the EIAO have been followed and an
Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) Programme has to be carried
out. The present report documents the outcomes of the EM&A Works
undertaken between September and November 2006.
Breaches of
Action and Limit Levels
Noise
No
non-compliance of action/limit level was recorded at all monitoring stations
for noise during the reporting period.
1-hr TSP
No
non-compliance of action/limit level was recorded at all monitoring stations
for 1-hr TSP during the reporting period.
24-hr TSP
No non-compliance
of action/limit level was recorded at all monitoring stations for 24-hr TSP during the reporting period.
Complaints
Log
During this
reporting period, no environmental complaint was received.
Notifications
of Any Summons and Successful Prosecutions
During the reporting period, no notification of summons or successful prosecution was recorded.
Reporting
Changes
There was no
reporting change during the reporting period.
Future Key
Issues
The
construction activities for the coming three months will include excavation, pile head / cap
construction, sheet piling work, sub-structure and superstructure construction,
pipe works and internal/
external finishing.
2.1
Basic
Information
Shek Wu Hui Sewage Treatment Works (SWHSTW)
provides treatment to the wastewater generated from Fanling/Sheung Shui areas
before discharge it into Mai Po Inner Deep Bay Ramsar Site through River Indus
and Shenzhen River, thus helps protecting the water quality of River Indus,
Shenzhen River and Mai Po Inner Deep Bay Ramsar Site. The expansion of SWHSTW aims to expand the treatment capacity of
the existing SWHSTW to cope with the increasing wastewater flows and loads as a
result of the population growth in the catchment area of Fanling/Sheung Shui
and the committed extension of sewerage system to unsewered areas.
In accordance with Section 9(2)(g) of the Environmental Impact
Assessment Ordinance (EIAO), the SWHSTW is an exempted designated project as
the existing SWHSTW has been in operation before the EIAO came into effect on 1
April 1998. However, since the proposed works involve physical expansion and
alternation to the existing SWHSTW (hereafter called “the Project”) and may cause adverse
environmental impacts if mitigation measures are not in place, it shall be
considered as a project constituting a material change to an exempted
designated project under Schedule 2 of EIAO.
Hence the procedures under the
EIAO have been followed. A Project Profile (PP) for direct
application of the EP (Application No.DIR-121/2005) was approved by
Environmental Protection Department (EPD) in May 2005 and an environmental permit (EP-218/2005)
was obtained prior to the commencement of the expansion works.
Drainage Services Department (DSD) awarded the civil contract of
the expansion of SWHSTW to Maeda Corporation (Maeda) in September 2005. Maeda appointed Hyder Consulting Limited
(HCL) as the Contractor’s Environmental Team (ET) during
the construction period. CH2M HILL Hong
Kong Limited (formerly known as CH2M-IDC Hong Kong Limited) is the independent
environmental checker (IEC). The
construction contract commenced in September 2005 and the total construction
period is approximately 36
months. The notified commencement date
of work to the Director of EPD is 14 December 2005.
2.2
Management Structure
and Project Organisation
The
Engineer (DSD) is responsible for overseeing the construction works and
ensuring that they are undertaken by the Contractor (Maeda) in accordance with
the specification and contractual requirements. The Contractor shall report to the Engineer. The ET is employed by the Contractor and is
responsible for conducting the EM&A programme. The IEC shall advise the Engineer on the environmental issues
related to the Project.
The
key personnel contact names and telephone number are summarised in Table
2-1. The project organisation is shown
in Appendix 1.
|
Party
|
Position
|
Name
|
Telephone number
|
|
Project Proponent - DSD
|
Project Manager
|
Raymond Lee
|
2594 7457
|
|
Engineer’s Representative
|
Tim Tsoi
|
2594 7460
|
|
Contractor - Maeda
|
Site Agent
|
George Cheung
|
9268 1918
|
|
ET - Hyder
|
ET Leader
|
Sharifah Or
|
2911 2730
|
|
IEC – CH2M HILL
|
IEC
|
David Yeung
|
2872 2934
|
Table 2-1 Key Personnel Contact Names and Telephone Number for the
Project
2.3
Construction Programme
Construction
programme of the Project is attached in Appendix 2.
2.4
Works Undertaken during the Reporting Quarter
Works
undertaken during the reporting period included:
§
excavation
§
cable
/ utilities diversion
§
sheet
piling work
§
installation
of wailings and struts
§
substructure
and superstructure construction
2.5
Status of Environmental Permit/ Licence
The status of the Environmental
Permit/Licence for the Project is shown below.
|
Permit/Licence
|
Application Date
|
Date of issue
|
Ref. No.
|
Valid Until
|
|
Environmental
Permit
|
21
May 2005
|
16
June 2005
|
EP-218/2005
|
N/A
|
|
Notification was made to EPD pursuant to Section 3(1) of
the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation (Form NA was submitted)
|
22
Sep 2005
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|
Registration
as a chemical waste producer
|
26
Sep 2005
|
4
Nov 2005
|
WPN:
5213-624-M2446-06
|
N/A
|
|
Effluent
Discharge Licence
|
11
Nov 2005
|
20
Dec 2005
|
Licence
No.: W5/1I287/1
|
19
Dec 2010
|
|
Application
for Exemption Account for Disposal of Construction Waste
|
12
Dec 2005
|
Approved
by EPD on 31 Dec 2005
|
Application
No.: RN/00134
|
25
Sep 2008
|
|
Construction
Noise Permit
|
15
May 2006
|
26
May 2006
|
Permit
No.: GW-RN0272-06
|
From
1 Jun 2006 to 30 Nov 2006
|
|
Construction
Noise Permit
|
4
September 2006
|
18
September 2006
|
Permit
No.: GW-RN0469-06
|
From
18 Sep 2006 to 10 Oct 2006
|
Table 2-2 Status of Permit/Licence for the
Project
3.1
Project and Work Area, Environmental Sensitive Receivers and
Monitoring Locations
The
site is located at the existing Shek Wu Hui Sewage Treatment Plant, next to
Chuk Wan Street. It has been subdivided into different Works
Areas/Portions as illustrated in Appendix 3. Project
area, environmental sensitive receivers and monitoring locations are shown in
Appendix 4.
4.1
Monitoring Parameters
4.1.1
Air Quality
During
the construction phase impact monitoring, 1-hour and 24-hour Total Suspended
Particulates (TSP) levels should be measured at the selected air
monitoring locations in accordance with the EM&A Manual. These two parameters are aimed to indicate the impacts of
construction dust on air quality.
4.1.2
Noise
The
construction noise level should be measured in terms of the A-weighted
equivalent continuous sound pressure level (Leq) for 30
minutes. Leq(30 min) is used as the monitoring parameter for the
period between 0700 and 1900 hours on normal weekdays. For all other time periods, three
consecutive Leq(5min) are employed for comparison with the Noise
Control Ordinance (NCO) criteria.
Other noise parameters such as L10 and L90
should
also be
obtained for reference.
4.2
Action and Limit Levels
4.2.1
Air Quality
The
baseline monitoring results documented in the Baseline Monitoring Report for
the Project (our report ref.: EA01284R0012) form the basis for derivation of
the Action and Limit Levels for air quality impact monitoring. Appendix 5 shows the derived Action and
Limit Levels for the Project. If the
air quality criteria are exceeded due to the Project, the Event/Action Plan
summarised in Table 4-3 should be triggered immediately.
4.2.2
Noise
The
Action and Limit Levels for construction noise are defined in Appendix 5. If valid non-compliance of the criteria
occurs, actions in accordance with the Event and Action Plan in Table 4-4
should be implemented. If construction
works are undertaken during the restricted hours, a construction noise permit
under NCO shall be obtained by the Contractor.
4.3
Event and Action Plans
The Event and Action Plans for air quality and noise
monitoring are shown in Tables 4-3 and 4-4, respectively.
EVENT
|
ACTION
|
|
ET
|
IEC
|
ER
|
CONTRACTOR
|
|
ACTION LEVEL
|
|
Exceedance for
one sample
|
·
Identify source, investigate the causes of exceedance and propose
remedial measures;
·
Inform IEC and ER;
·
Repeat measurement to confirm finding.
|
·
Check monitoring data submitted by ET;
·
Check Contractor’s working method.
|
·
Notify Contractor.
|
·
Rectify any unacceptable practice;
·
Amend working methods if appropriate.
|
|
Exceedance for
two or more consecutive samples
|
·
Identify source, investigate the cause of exceedance and propose
remedial measures;
·
Inform IEC and ER;
·
Advise ER on the effectiveness of the proposed remedial measures;
·
Repeat measurements to confirm findings;
·
Increase monitoring frequency to daily;
·
Discuss with IEC and Contractor on remedial actions required;
·
If exceedance continues, arrange meeting with IEC and ER;
·
If exceedance stops, cease additional monitoring.
|
·
Check monitoring data submitted by ET;
·
Check Contractor’s working method;
·
Discuss with ET and Contractor on possible remedial measures;
·
Advise the ET on the effectiveness of the proposed remedial measures;
·
Supervise Implementation of remedial measures.
|
·
Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance in writing;
·
Notify Contractor;
·
Ensure remedial measures properly implemented.
|
·
Submit proposals for remedial to ER within 3 working days of
notification;
·
Implement the agreed proposals;
·
Amend proposal if appropriate.
|
|
LIMIT LEVEL
|
|
Exceedance for
one sample
|
·
Identify source, investigate the causes of exceedance and propose
remedial measures;
·
Inform IEC, ER, Contractor and EPD;
·
Repeat measurement to confirm finding;
·
Increase monitoring frequency to daily;
·
Assess effectiveness of Contractor’s remedial actions and keep IEC,
EPD and ER informed of the results.
·
If exceedance stops, cease additional monitoring.
|
·
Check monitoring data submitted by ET;
·
Check Contractor’s working method;
·
Discuss with ET and Contractor on possible remedial measures;
·
Advise ER on the effectiveness of the proposed remedial measures;
·
Supervise implementation of remedial measures.
|
·
Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance in writing;
·
Notify Contractor;
·
Ensure remedial measures properly implemented.
|
·
Take immediate action to avoid further exceedance;
·
Submit proposals for remedial actions to IEC within 3 working days of
notification;
·
Implement the agreed proposals;
·
Amend proposal if appropriate.
|
|
Exceedance for
two or more consecutive samples
|
·
Notify IEC, ER, Contractor and EPD;
·
Identify source, investigate the cause of exceedance and propose remedial
measures;
·
Repeat measurement to confirm findings;
·
Increase monitoring frequency to daily;
·
Carry out analysis of Contractor’s working procedures to determine
possible mitigation to be implemented;
·
Arrange meeting with IEC and ER to discuss the remedial actions to be
taken;
·
Assess effectiveness of Contractor’s remedial actions and keep IEC,
EPD and ER informed of the results;
·
If exceedance stops, cease additional monitoring.
|
·
Discuss amongst ER, ET, and Contractor on the potential remedial
actions;
·
Review Contractor’s remedial actions whenever necessary to assure
their effectiveness and advise ER accordingly;
·
Supervise the implementation of remedial measures.
|
·
Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance in writing;
·
Notify Contractor;
·
In consultation with the IEC, agree with the Contractor on the
remedial measures to be implemented;
·
Ensure remedial measures properly implemented;
·
If exceedance continues, consider what portion of the work is
responsible and instruct the Contractor to stop that portion of work until
the exceedance is abated.
|
·
Take immediate action to avoid further exceedance;
·
Submit proposals for remedial actions to IEC within 3 working days of
notification;
·
Implement the agreed proposals;
·
Resubmit proposals if problem still not under control;
·
Stop the relevant portion of works as determined by ER until the
exceedance is abated.
|
Table
4-3 Event/
Action Plan for Air Quality Monitoring
EVENT
|
Action
|
|
ET
|
IEC
|
ER
|
CONTRACTOR
|
|
Action Level
|
·
Notify IEC and ER;
·
Carry out investigation;
·
Report the results of investigation to the
IEC, ER and Contractors;
·
Discuss with the Contractor and formulate
remedial measures;
·
Increase monitoring requrency to check mitigation
effectiveness.
|
·
Review the analysed results submitted by the
ET;
·
Review the proposed remedial measures by the
Contractor and advise the ER accordingly;
·
Supervise the implementation of remedial
measure.
|
·
Confirm receipt of notification of failure in
writing;
·
Notify Contractor;
·
Require Contractor to propose remedial
measures for the analysed noise problem;
·
Ensure remedial measures are properly
implemented.
|
·
Submit noise mitigation proposal to IEC;
·
Implement noise mitigation proposals.
|
|
Limit Level
|
·
Identify source;
·
Inform IEC, ER, EPD and Contractor;
·
Repeat measurements to confirm findings;
·
Increase monitoring frequency to check
mitigation effectiveness;
·
Carry out analysis of Contractor’s working
procedures to determine possible mitigation to be implemented;
·
Inform IEC, ER and EPD the causes and actions
taken for the exceedances;
·
Assess effectiveness of Contractor’s remedial
actions and keep IEC, EPD and ER informed of the results;
·
If exceedance stops, cease additional
monitoring.
|
·
Discuss amongst ER, ET, and Contractor on the
potential remedial actions;
·
Review Contractors remedial actions whenever
necessary to assure their effectiveness and advise the ER accordingly;
·
Supervise the implementation of remedial
measures.
|
·
Confirm receipt of notification of failure in
writing;
·
Notify Contractor;
·
Require Contractor to propose remedial
measures for the analysed noise problem;
·
Ensure remedial measures properly
implemented;
·
If exceedance continues, consider what
portion of the work is responsible and instruct the Contractor to stop that
portion of work until the exceedance is abated.
|
·
Take immediate action to avoid further
exceedance;
·
Submit proposals for remedial actions to IEC
within 3 working days of notification;
·
Implement the agreed proposals;
·
Resubmit proposals if problem still not under
control;
·
Stop the relevant portion of works as
determined by th ER until the exceedance is abated.
|
Table
4-4 Event/
Action Plan for Noise Monitoring
4.4
Environmental Mitigation Measures and Requirements
The
recommended measures for mitigating air quality, water quality, noise, waste
and all other possible environmental impacts due to the construction works have
been stated clearly in the EM&A Manual.
The details of the measures implemented by the Contractor are shown in
Appendix 6.
The
status of the mitigation measures implemented by the Contractor is listed in
Appendix 6.
6.1
Graphical
Plots of Monitoring Parameters
Graphical plots of the monitoring results are summarized in Appendix 7.
6.2
Factors Which Might Affect the Monitoring Results
Dust from other sources such as roads with the movement of heavy vehicles
in the vicinity of the monitoring stations would affect the air quality
monitoring results.
7.1
Non-compliance
of Action and Limit Levels
No non-compliance of Action or Limit Level was
recorded for air quality and noise monitoring.
7.2
Complaints Received
In
case of an environmental complaint received, all related parties should follow
the complaints response procedures specified in the EM&A Manual.
During
this reporting quarter, no environmental complaint was received. Cumulative number of environmental complaint
is shown in Appendix 8.
7.3
Notifications of Summons and Successful Prosecutions
No notification of summons or
successful prosecution was recorded during the
reporting period. The cumulative
number of notifications of
summons and successful prosecutions are shown in Appendix 8.
7.4
Review of the Reasons and Implications of Non-compliance,
Complaints, Summons and Prosecutions
7.4.1
Non-compliance
of Acton/Limit Level
No valid exceedance of Action/Limit Level was recorded during the reporting period.
7.4.2
Complaints, Summons and Prosecutions
No complaints, summons and prosecutions were recorded during the reporting period.
7.5
Site Inspections
Weekly site inspections have been carried out during the
reporting period. The findings
of the site inspections and appropriate mitigation measures were recorded in
the site inspection checklists. The
observations raised during the site inspections, corresponding recommendations
and rectification status are summarised in Table 7-5.
Inspection Date
|
Deficiencies
|
Recommendation
|
Status
|
Note / Reminder
|
|
6 September 2006
|
1.
No deficiency was
observed.
|
N.A.
|
N.A.
|
N.A.
|
|
13 September 2006
|
1. No deficiency was observed.
|
N.A.
|
N.A.
|
1.
Ponding water was
observed at site exit and switch room area. The Contractor was reminded to
drain away the ponding water after rainstorm.
|
|
21 September 2006
|
1.
Sand and gravel
were observed on bare ground near switch room and cleaning up action was in
progress during the inspection.
|
1. The Contractor was reminded to keep the
road clean and free from dust to prevent dust generation.
|
1. Sand and gravel on bare ground has been
removed as observed on 27 September 2006.
|
N.A.
|
|
27 September 2006
|
1.
No deficiency was
observed.
|
N.A.
|
N.A.
|
1.
Wastewater
discharging at Portion 2 was observed clean. The Contractor was reminded that
silt removal facilities should be well maintained and clear of silt.
|
|
4 October 2006
|
1.
Sand and silt were
observed in the gully outside Portion 3.
|
1.
The Contractor was
reminded to clear up the accumulated sand and silt properly.
|
1.
Sand and silt in
the gully were removed as observed on 12 October 2006.
|
N.A.
|
|
12 October 2006
|
1. No deficiency was observed.
|
N.A.
|
N.A.
|
1.
Sedimentation
tanks were in use for underground water treatment. The Contractor was reminded to ensure proper functioning and
maintenance of wastewater treatment facilities.
|
|
18 October 2006
|
1.
No deficiency was
observed.
|
N.A.
|
N.A.
|
1. The Contractor was reminded to provide water
spraying frequently during dry season.
2. Water from silt removal facilities was
observed silty. The Contractor was
reminded to closely inspect the silt removal facilities to ensure they are
functioning properly.
|
|
26 October 2006
|
1.
No deficiency was
observed.
|
N.A.
|
N.A.
|
1.
Silt and sand were
observed in a gully at Potion 1. The
Contractor was reminded to remove the silt and sand in the gully.
2.
Wastewater
discharging at Portion 2 was observed clean. The Contractor was reminded that
silt removal facilities should be well maintained and clear of silt.
|
|
1 November 2006
|
1. No deficiency was observed.
|
N.A.
|
N.A.
|
1.
Silt removal
facilities were in used on site.
However, the Contractor was reminded to inspect and maintain the AquaSep
closely and review the capacity of sediment silting tank to ensure the
discharge water quality is in well condition.
|
|
8 November 2006
|
1. No deficiency was observed.
|
N.A.
|
N.A.
|
N.A.
|
|
15 November 2006
|
1.
No deficiency was
observed.
|
N.A.
|
N.A.
|
1. Silt removal facilities were in use and
the discharge water was observed up to standard. However, water overflow from the sedimentation tank was
observed during the site inspection.
The Contractor was reminded to review the capacity of the sedimentation
tank or the water flow rate to ensure all water is properly treated prior
discharge.
|
|
22 November 2006
|
1.
Wheel washing was
carried out at non-designated area and muddy water was observed entering the
gully directly in which the gully was sealed up by cement but the cement was
broken.
|
1.
The Contractor was
reminded to carry out wheel washing at designated area, remove the mud on DSD
road and seal the gully to prevent muddy water from entering public drainage.
|
N.A.
|
N.A.
|
|
28 November 2006
|
1.
Stagnant muddy
water accumulated in the excavation trench was observed.
2.
Stagnant water
with debris accumulated in U-channel near the WetSep was observed.
|
1.
The Contractor was
reminded to drain away the stagnant muddy water through silt removal
facilities.
2.
The Contractor was
reminded to drain away the stagnant water and maintain U-channel clear of
debris regularly.
|
N.A.
|
1.
The Contractor was
reminded to provide drip tray for oil drums and store the chemicals properly
at designated areas.
|
Table 7-5 Summaries of Site Inspections and Recommendations
EPD conducted site visit on 25 September
2006 and 29 November 2006 during the reporting period. EPD inspected the effluent discharge at all
areas and chemical waste storage area and checked whether Environmental Permit
and Construction Noise Permit were displayed at site entrance on 25 September
2006. EPD had no adverse comment.
EPD inspected
the effluent discharge, chemical waste storage area, wheel washing facility and
dust control measure on 29 November 2006.
No adverse comment was given.
8
Waste Management Status
According to the information provided by the
Contractor, Table 8-5 shows waste materials were generated during the reporting
period.
|
Type of Waste
|
Sept 06
|
Oct 06
|
Nov 06
|
|
Inert C&D material
(m3)
|
3495
|
2360
|
3567
|
|
General Refuse (m3)
|
65
|
65
|
32.5
|
|
Chemical waste (L)
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Table 8-6 The
Quantity of Waste Generation
Inert
C&D materials were disposed of at Tuen Mun Area 38 Public Fill. General refuse was collected and disposed of
at NENT Landfill. No chemical waste was
produced during the reporting period.
Trip ticket system was implemented and disposal records were in order on
site. The Waste Management Plan was
followed.
EM&A
works have been undertaken between September and November 2006 for the
Project based on the requirements set in the EM&A Manual.
All
monitoring equipments have been calibrated and all monitoring protocols have
been carried out properly according to the EM&A Manual.
No
valid exceedance of Action/Limit Level on air quality and noise was recorded
during the reporting period.
No
compliant, notification of summons or successful prosecution was recorded
during the reporting period.
The overall
EM&A programme is considered efficient during the reporting period and no
material and technical changes are considered necessary.
