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 during October 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 month.
1-hr TSP
No
non-compliance of action/limit level was recorded at all monitoring stations
for noise during the reporting month.
24-hr TSP
No
non-compliance of action/limit level was recorded at all monitoring stations
for noise during the reporting month.
Complaints
Log
During this
reporting month, no environmental complaint was received.
Notifications
of Any Summons and Successful Prosecutions
During the reporting month, no
notification of summons or successful prosecution was recorded.
Reporting
Changes
There was no
reporting change during the reporting month.
Future Key
Issues
The
construction activities for the coming three months will include the construction of mini piles,
excavation, pile head / cap construction, temporary work including sheet piling
work, installation of wailings and struts, 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 specifications 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 Month
Works
undertaken during the reporting month included:
§
excavation
§
cable
/ utilities diversion
§
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
Works Undertaken during the Month with
Illustrations
The site has been
subdivided into different Works Areas/Portions as illustrated in Appendix
3. Excavation was undertaken in
Portions 1, 2 and 3. Cable/ utilities diversion
was undertaken in Portions 1 and 2.
Installation of wailings and struts and substructure construction
were undertaken at Portion 2.
Superstructure construction was undertaken in Portions 2 and 3.
3.2
Project 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. The project area,
environmental sensitive receivers and monitoring locations are shown in
Appendix 4.
4
Brief Summary
of EM&A Requirements
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 frequency 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 the 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.
5
Implementation
Status of Environmental Protection and Pollution Control/ Mitigation Measures
The
status of the mitigation measures implemented by the Contractor is listed in Appendix
6.
6.1
Monitoring
Methodology
6.1.1
Air Quality
1-hr and
24-hr TSP monitoring works were undertaken by the ET using high volume samplers
(HVS). The sampling procedures followed the
standard sampling method as set out in High Volume Method for Total Suspended
Particulates, Part 50 Chapter 1 Appendix B, Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations of the USEPA.
During the sampling, dust laden air was
drawn through a HVS fitted with a conditioned, pre-weighted filter paper, at a
controlled rate. After sampling for 1
hour and 24 hours, the filter paper with retained particles was collected and returned to the laboratory
for drying in a desiccator followed by accurate weighing. Respective 1-hour and 24-hour TSP levels were calculated from the ratio of the mass of
particulates retained on the filter paper to the total volume of air sampled.
The HVSs were equipped with an electronic
mass flow controller and calibrated against a traceable standard at regular
intervals. All equipment, calibration
kit and filter papers were clearly labelled.
The sampling procedures and specifications were the same for 1-hour and 24-hour baseline
air quality monitoring except the sampling duration. The specifications were as follows:
§
0.6-1.7 m3/min (20-60SCFM);
§
Equipped with a timing/control device with +/- 5
minutes accuracy for 24 hours operation;
§
Installed with elapsed time meter with +/- 2 minutes
accuracy for 24 hours operation;
§
Capable of providing a minimum exposed area of 406 cm2
(63in2);
§
Flow control accuracy: +/- 2.5% deviation over 24-hr
sampling period;
§
Equipped with a shelter to protect the filter and
sampler;
§
Incorporated with an electronic mass flow rate
controller or other equivalent devices;
§
Equipped with a flow recorder for continuous
monitoring;
§
Provided with a peaked roof inlet;
§
Incorporated with a manometer;
§
Able to hold and seal the filter paper to the sampler
housing at horizontal position;
§
Easy to change the filter; and
§
Capable of operating continuously for a 24-hour period.
Relevant environmental data including
temperature, pressure, weather conditions, elapsed-time meter reading for the
start and stop of the sampler, identification and weight of the filter paper,
and other special phenomena observed and work progress of the concerned site
were also recorded.
Filter papers of size 8"x10" were
labelled before sampling. They were
inspected clean with no pin holes and conditioned in a humidity-controlled
chamber for over 24-hr and be pre-weighed before use for the sampling.
After sampling, the filter papers loaded
with dust were kept in a clean and tightly sealed plastic bag, and then
returned for reconditioning in the humidity controlled chamber followed by
accurate weighing by an electronic balance with a readout down to 0.1 mg. All the collected samples would be kept in a
good condition for 6 months before disposal.
The weight of filter paper was measured by a
HOKLAS accredited laboratory.
6.1.2
Noise
Weatherproof
logging sound level meters which comply with the International Electrotechnical
Commission Publication 651: 1979 (Type 1) and 804: 1985 (Type 1) specifications
were used to measure the construction noise at the designated monitoring
locations. Noise parameters of the
A-weighted levels Leq, L10 and L90 were
measured with a sampling period of 5 minutes throughout the monitoring. The average of six consecutive 5-minute
readings was used to provide Leq(30 minutes) for non-restricted
hours. A facade correction of 3dB(A)
would be applied to all free field measurements.
During
the impact monitoring, information such as date, weather condition, equipment
used, measurement results and major noise sources were recorded on the field
data record sheet. Noise measurements
would not be made in fog, rain, wind with a steady speed exceeding 5 m/s or
wind with gusts exceeding 10 m/s. The
wind speed would be checked with a portable wind speed meter capable of
measuring wind speed in m/s. All
measurements were recorded to the nearest 0.1dB(A).
6.2
Name
of Laboratory, Types of Equipment Used and Calibration Details
6.2.1
Name of Laboratory
Filter papers used for air quality
monitoring were sent to ALS Environmental, a HOKLAS accredited laboratory, for
weighing. Other sampling and analytical
works were conducted by Hyder Consulting Limited, the ET.
6.2.2
Types of
Equipment Used and Calibration Details
HVS
- Model GBM2000H1, manufactured by Anderson Instruments Inc., was
used for TSP monitoring. It complies
with the USEPA specifications in Appendix B Part 50 - Reference Method for the
Determination of Suspended Particulate matter in the Atmosphere (High-Volume
Method) of the Code of Federal Regulation dated July 1, 1991. Initial calibration of dust monitoring
equipment was conducted upon installation and prior to commissioning. One point flow rate calibration would be
carried out every two months.
Five-point calibration would be carried out every six months. All the calibration data were
converted into standard temperature and pressure condition.
Orific
HVS Calibration
Kit model G2523 was used for the calibration of HVSs. Calibration of calibration kit would be carried out annually. Appendix 7 presents the monitoring equipment
calibration records.
For
noise monitoring, Bruel & Kjaer (B&K) Precision Integrating Sound Level
Meters of Type 2238 in compliance with the International Electrotechnical
Commission Publication 651: 1979 (Type 1) and 804: 1985 (Type 1) Specifications
were used.
Prior
to and following each noise measurement, the accuracy of the sound level meter was
checked using an acoustic calibrator (B&K Type 4230) generating a known
sound pressure level at a known frequency.
Measurements were considered as valid only if the calibration level from
before and after the noise measurement agree to within 1dB. All sound level meters and calibrators would
be calibrated annually. Appendix 7
presents the monitoring equipment calibration records.
Table
6-5 summarises the types of monitoring and calibration equipment.
Equipment
Type
|
Manufacturer
|
Model
|
Serial
Number/I.D.
|
|
Sound Level Meter
|
B&K
|
Type 2236
|
1785701
|
|
Sound Level Meter
|
B&K
|
Type 2238
|
2285726
|
|
Sound Level
Calibrator
|
B&K
|
Type 4231
|
1770806
|
|
High Volume
Sampler
|
Anderson
|
GBM 2000 H1
|
1097
|
|
High Volume
Sampler
|
Anderson
|
GBM 2000 H1
|
1101
|
|
Orific HVS
Calibration Kit
|
Tisch Environmental
|
G2523
|
517N
|
Table
6-5 Monitoring Equipment
6.3
Parameters Monitored
Parameters monitored
are described in Sections 4.1.1 and 4.1.2.
6.4
Monitoring
Locations
There are two designated air quality
monitoring locations identified in the EM&A Manual. Due to the access constraint, alternative monitoring
locations were selected and approved by ER, IEC and EPD prior the
commencement of monitoring. These
alternative locations for air quality monitoring are summarised in Table 6-6 and shown in Appendix 4.
|
Monitoring Station ID
|
Name of Premises
|
Monitoring Location
|
|
CAM1a
|
San Po Street Pumping Station
|
Ground floor level
|
|
CAM2a
|
Sheung Shui Heung Floodwater Pumping Station
|
Ground floor level
|
Table 6-6 Air Quality Monitoring Locations
There are two designated noise monitoring locations
identified in the EM&A Manual and their locations are described below and
shown in Appendix 4.
|
Monitoring Station ID
|
Name of Premises
|
Monitoring Location
|
|
NM1
|
Wai Loi Tsuen
|
1.2m above ground
|
|
NM2
|
Temporary Domestic Structure
|
1.2m above ground
|
Table 6-7 Noise Monitoring Locations
6.5
Monitoring
Date, Time, Frequency
and Duration, Weather Condition and Other Factors
Monitoring
frequency for 1-hr TSP and 24-hr TSP is 3 times every 6 days and once every 6
days, respectively. One set of noise
measurements will be conducted between 0700 and 1900 on normal weekdays at
each monitoring station on a weekly basis, when noise-generating activities are
underway. Monitoring date, time and
duration for noise and air quality monitoring and all other factors related to
the monitoring result, such as weather condition, are listed in the following
tables.
|
Station
|
Date
|
Time
|
Duration
|
Weather Condition
|
|
1-hr
TSP
|
|
CAM1a
|
6 October 2006
|
0944-1250
|
3 X 1 hour
|
Fine
|
|
12 October 2006
|
0941-1248
|
3 X 1 hour
|
Sunny
|
|
18 October 2006
|
0947-1250
|
3 X 1 hour
|
Cloudy
|
|
24 October 2006
|
1010-1312
|
3 X 1 hour
|
Fine
|
|
28 October 2006
|
0930-1315
|
3 X 1 hour
|
Fine
|
|
CAM2a
|
6 October 2006
|
0950-1255
|
3 X 1 hour
|
Fine
|
|
12 October 2006
|
0950-1257
|
3 X 1 hour
|
Sunny
|
|
18 October 2006
|
0956-1258
|
3 X 1 hour
|
Cloudy
|
|
24 October 2006
|
1018-1325
|
3 X 1 hour
|
Fine
|
|
28 October 2006
|
0945-1310
|
3 X 1 hour
|
Fine
|
|
24-hr
TSP
|
|
CAM1a
|
6 October 2006
|
1325-1325
|
24 hours
|
Fine
|
|
12 October 2006
|
1325-1325
|
24 hours
|
Sunny
|
|
18 October 2006
|
1220-1220
|
24 hours
|
Cloudy
|
|
24 October 2006
|
1315-1315
|
24 hours
|
Fine
|
|
28 October 2006
|
1315-1415
|
24 hours
|
Fine
|
|
CAM2a
|
6 October 2006
|
1315-1315
|
24 hours
|
Fine
|
|
12 October 2006
|
1315-1315
|
24 hours
|
Sunny
|
|
18 October 2006
|
1308-1308
|
24 hours
|
Cloudy
|
|
24 October 2006
|
1330-1330
|
24 hours
|
Fine
|
|
28 October 2006
|
1310-1410
|
24 hours
|
Fine
|
Table 6-8 Sampling Schedule of Air Quality
Monitoring
|
Station
|
Date
|
Time
|
Duration
|
Weather Condition
|
|
NM1
|
6 October 2006
|
0955-1025
|
30 minutes
|
Sunny
|
|
12 October 2006
|
0955-1025
|
30 minutes
|
Sunny
|
|
18 October 2006
|
1005-1035
|
30 minutes
|
Cloudy
|
|
24 October 2006
|
1025-1055
|
30 minutes
|
Fine
|
|
NM2
|
6 October 2006
|
1100-1130
|
30 minutes
|
Sunny
|
|
12 October 2006
|
1100-1130
|
30 minutes
|
Sunny
|
|
18 October 2006
|
1110-1040
|
30 minutes
|
Cloudy
|
|
24 October 2006
|
1130-1200
|
30 minutes
|
Fine
|
Table 6-9 Sampling Schedule of Noise Monitoring
6.6
Results and Graphical Plots of Monitoring Parameters
Air quality monitoring results of 1-hour and 24-hour
TSP levels are summarised in Table 6-10 and detailed in Appendix 8. Graphical plots of the monitoring results
are also provided in Appendix 8.
|
Station
|
Date
|
Measured
Level (mg/m3)
|
Action/Limit
Level (mg/m3)
|
|
1-hr
TSP
|
24-hr
TSP
|
1-hr
TSP
|
24-hr
TSP
|
|
CAM1a
|
6 October 2006
|
168.0
|
136.8
|
342.7/500
|
203.3/260
|
|
190.6
|
|
132.2
|
|
12 October 2006
|
183.0
|
98.5
|
|
143.1
|
|
154.4
|
|
18 October 2006
|
159.2
|
103.7
|
|
109.8
|
|
73.1
|
|
24 October 2006
|
132.6
|
143.8
|
|
135.5
|
|
95.4
|
|
28 October 2006
|
219.2
|
150.5
|
|
208.0
|
|
160.8
|
|
CAM2a
|
6 October 2006
|
106.5
|
97.0
|
340.2/500
|
201.6/260
|
|
111.4
|
|
89.4
|
|
12 October 2006
|
114.2
|
60.6
|
|
102.7
|
|
92.0
|
|
18 October 2006
|
123.1
|
65.3
|
|
28.9
|
|
53.1
|
|
24 October 2006
|
117.9
|
107.7
|
|
102.9
|
|
71.0
|
|
28 October 2006
|
185.3
|
130.4
|
|
172.8
|
|
122.0
|
Note:
* Shaded area indicates an exceedance of
Limit Level.
Table
6-10 Air Quality Monitoring Results
Noise
monitoring results are summarised in Table 6-11 and detailed in Appendix 8.
Graphical plots of the monitoring results are also provided in Appendix
8. As all monitoring was conducted at
free field condition, a facade correction of 3dB(A) was applied to each of the
noise measurements.
Station
|
Date
|
Measured Noise Level, dB(A)
|
Limit Level for
Leq(30 min), dB(A)
|
|
L90(30min)
|
L10(30min)
|
Leq (30min)
|
|
NM1
|
6 October 2006
|
55.3
|
61.3
|
58.6
|
75
|
|
12 October 2006
|
63.3
|
67.6
|
66.5
|
|
18 October 2006
|
54.5
|
62.2
|
61.3
|
|
24 October 2006
|
52.5
|
58.5
|
56.2
|
|
NM2
|
6 October 2006
|
50.3
|
57.1
|
53.9
|
|
12 October 2006
|
50.2
|
54.6
|
53.2
|
|
18 October 2006
|
52.4
|
60.5
|
58.4
|
|
24 October 2006
|
51.0
|
55.9
|
53.3
|
Note :
(1) Shaded area indicates
an exceedance of Limit Level.
(2) A facade correction of
3dB(A) was applied to each of noise measurements.
Table 6-11 Noise Monitoring Results
6.7
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.
6.8
QA/QC
Results and Detection Limit
The quality assurance (QA) / quality
control (QC) results and detection limit are shown in Appendix 9.
7
Non-compliance, Complaints, Notifications of
Summons and Successful Prosecutions
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 month, no environmental complaint was received. Cumulative number of environmental complaint
is shown in Appendix 10.
7.3
Notifications
of Summons and Successful Prosecutions
No notification of summons or
successful prosecution was recorded during the
reporting month. The cumulative
number of notifications of
summons and successful prosecutions are shown in Appendix 10.
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
non-compliance 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
Inspection
Weekly
site inspections were carried out on 4, 12, 18 and 26 October 2006. 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 7-12.
Inspection
Date
|
Deficiencies
|
Recommendation
|
Status
|
Note / Reminder
|
|
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.
|
Table 7-12 Summaries of Site Inspections and Recommendations
The
site audit conducted by IEC was carried out on 26 October 2006 and the
Contractor has undertaken appropriate actions in response to the IEC’s
findings.
No EPD
inspection was undertaken in the reporting month.
There was no
outstanding issue or deficiency for the observations arising during the weekly
site inspections. However, the Contractor
was reminded to inspect and
maintain the surface channels and mosquito control measures after rainstorm.
8
Waste
Management Status
According to the information provided by the
Contractor, the following waste materials were generated during the reporting
month:
§
Inert C&D materials –
2,360 m3; and
§
General Refuse – 65 m3.
C&D
materials were disposed of at Tuen Mun Area 38 Public Fill. General
refuse was collected and disposed of at NENT Landfill properly. No chemical waste was produced during the reporting
month. Trip ticket system was implemented and disposal records were in order on
site. The Waste Management Plan was
followed.
The
construction activities for the coming three months are summarized below:
§
construction
of mini piles
§
excavation
§
pile
head / cap construction
§
sheet
piling work, installation of walings and struts
§
sub-structure
and superstructure construction
§
pipe
works
§
internal
/ external finishing
The upcoming EM&A schedule for the future
three months is shown in Appendix 11.
10
Comments,
Recommendations and Conclusions
EM&A works have been undertaken during October
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 was recorded
during the reporting month.
No compliant, notification of summons or successful
prosecution was recorded during the reporting month.
Four weekly site inspections were carried out during
the reporting month. In response to the
observations raised by ET, the Contractor has undertaken follow-up actions to
rectify the condition.
