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 February 2007.
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 and 24-hr TSP
An Action
Level exceedance and two Limit Level exceedances for 1-hr TSP were recorded on
6 February 2007 at the monitoring station CAM1a. Two of three 1-hr TSP results, (532.2 µg/m3 and 594.9 µg/m3) respectively,
exceeded the Limit Level (500 µg/m3) while the other one (495.2 µg/m3) was close to
it. A Limit Level exceedance for 24-hr
TSP was recorded on the same day at the same location. The result of the 24-hr TSP (357.0 µg/m3) exceeded the Limit Level
(260 µg/m3). The Event and Action Plans were
followed. Investigation for the
exceedance was undertaken.
The
Contractor has already informed DSD's contractor of the paving works to stop construction
activities during the course of the 1-hr and 24-hr TSP monitoring, hence the
contractor stopped the works on 6 February 2007 in the morning for the TSP
monitoring conducted in the afternoon.
However, construction activities of metal cutting from the E&M
installation of the San Po Street Pumping Station next to it were operating in
the afternoon. Besides, some vehicles
were observed moving in and out of the pumping station. A Blower was placed outside the pumping
station for enhancing ventilation inside the pumping station. Some sand accumulated outside the pumping
station was also another source of construction dust. The above activities were suspected to be the cause for the TSP
exceedances.
Besides, when
compared with the TSP results at CAM2a, it was observed that the results for
1-hr TSP at CAM2a was about 10 times smaller than that at CAM1a and about 5
times lower for 24-hr TSP. Hence it is
possible that the exceedances were related to any dust generating activities
near CAM1a.
As advised by the
Contractor, the construction activities undertaken on 6 and 7 February 2007
included welding at Portion 1, concrete breaking at one manhole at Portion 1,
substructure at Portion 2, superstructure at Portion 3. The concrete breaking activity at manhole at
Portion 1 was of very small scale and watering was provided at nearby areas,
fugitive dust generation was not anticipated to be large. While the other construction activities are
not considered to be dust generating.
Hence the above exceedances are unlikely to be caused by the
construction activities of the Project.
The above exceedances
for both 1-hr and 24-hr TSP were likely to be caused by the construction
activities from the metal cutting and E&M installation works nearby and not
caused by the Project works. Hence, the
exceedances are regarded as invalid.
Results of the
subsequent 1-hr and 24-hr TSP monitoring conducted on 12 February 2007 showed
full compliance of Action and Limit Levels.
No non-compliance of Action Level was recorded for 24-hr TSP
monitoring.
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 excavation and backfilling, temporary
work including sheet piling work, extraction of sheet piles, removal /
installation of waling and strut, sub-structure and superstructure
construction, pipe
works, finishing work, steelwork and Fiber Glass Reinforced Plastic
installation.
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
and backfilling;
§
Pile
cap construction;
§
Substructure
and superstructure construction;
§
Pipe
laying; and
§
Demolition
of existing structure
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
|
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 and backfilling were
undertaken in Portions 1 and 2. Pile cap construction and demolition of existing structure were undertaken in Portion 1. Substructure
works and pipe laying 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
|
1774423
|
|
Sound Level
Calibrator
|
B&K
|
Type 4231
|
1770806
|
|
High Volume
Sampler
|
Anderson
|
GBM 2000 H1
|
1097
|
|
High Volume
Sampler
|
Anderson
|
GBM 2000 H1
|
1062
|
|
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. The High Volume Sampler at monitoring
location CAM1a was relocated to the end of the vehicle access area which is
around 2m from the original location due to the paving works of granite blocks
inside the San Po Street Pumping Station.
The relocation was undertaken on 17 January 2007. The High Volume Sampler was relocated back
to its original location on 24 February 2007 after the paving works were
finished. Calibration was undertaken on
28 February 2007 prior to the subsequent air quality monitoring conducted on
the same day. The calibration
certificates are shown in Appendix 7.
|
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 February 2007*
|
1335-1630
|
3 X 1 hour
|
Sunny
|
|
12 February 2007*
|
0955-1255
|
3 X 1 hour
|
Sunny
|
|
16 February 2007*
|
1038-1330
|
3 X 1 hour
|
Cloudy
|
|
22 February 2007*
|
1012-1312
|
3 X 1 hour
|
Rainy
|
|
28 February 2007
|
0958-1258
|
3 X 1 hour
|
Cloudy
|
|
CAM2a
|
6 February 2007
|
1320-1620
|
3 X 1 hour
|
Sunny
|
|
12 February 2007
|
1015-1320
|
3 X 1 hour
|
Sunny
|
|
16 February 2007
|
1016-1313
|
3 X 1 hour
|
Cloudy
|
|
22 February 2007
|
1018-1318
|
3 X 1 hour
|
Rainy
|
|
28 February 2007
|
0958-1255
|
3 X 1 hour
|
Cloudy
|
|
24-hr TSP
|
|
CAM1a
|
6 February 2007*
|
1630-1630
|
24 hours
|
Sunny
|
|
12 February 2007*
|
1335-1335
|
24 hours
|
Sunny
|
|
16 February 2007*
|
1330-1330
|
24 hours
|
Cloudy
|
|
22 February 2007*
|
1345-1345
|
24 hours
|
Rainy
|
|
28 February 2007
|
1259-1259
|
24 hours
|
Cloudy
|
|
CAM2a
|
6 February 2007
|
1622-1622
|
24 hours
|
Sunny
|
|
12 February 2007
|
1318-1318
|
24 hours
|
Sunny
|
|
16 February 2007
|
1315-1315
|
24 hours
|
Cloudy
|
|
22 February 2007
|
1320-1320
|
24 hours
|
Rainy
|
|
28 February 2007
|
1259-1259
|
24 hours
|
Cloudy
|
Note: * Due to the paving works of granite blocks
inside the San Po Street Pumping Station, the High Volume Sampler at CAM1a was
relocated to the end of the vehicle access that is about 2m from the original
location. The High Volume Sampler was relocated to its original location on 24
February 2007 after the paving works were finished.
Table 6-8 Sampling Schedule of Air Quality
Monitoring
|
Station
|
Date
|
Time
|
Duration
|
Weather Condition
|
|
NM1
|
6 February 2007
|
1340-1410
|
30 minutes
|
Sunny
|
|
12 February 2007
|
1020-1050
|
30 minutes
|
Sunny
|
|
22 February 2007
|
1030-1100
|
30 minutes
|
Cloudy
|
|
28 February 2007
|
1010-1040
|
30 minutes
|
Cloudy
|
|
NM2
|
6 February 2007
|
1550-1620
|
30 minutes
|
Sunny
|
|
12 February 2007
|
1125-1155
|
30 minutes
|
Sunny
|
|
22 February 2007
|
1130-1200
|
30 minutes
|
Cloudy
|
|
28 February 2007
|
1115-1145
|
30 minutes
|
Cloudy
|
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 February
2007*
|
532.2
|
357.0
|
342.7/500
|
203.3/260
|
|
495.2
|
|
594.9
|
|
12 February
2007*
|
268.3
|
200.9
|
|
302.1
|
|
341.9
|
|
16 February 2007*
|
173.5
|
124.8
|
|
164.4
|
|
202.9
|
|
22 February 2007*
|
66.5
|
50.1
|
|
78.1
|
|
70.7
|
|
28 February
2007
|
131.5
|
85.2
|
|
104.0
|
|
190.6
|
|
CAM2a
|
6 February
2007
|
53.6
|
62.4
|
340.2/500
|
201.6/260
|
|
20.4
|
|
71.2
|
|
12 February
2007
|
182.6
|
136.4
|
|
169.2
|
|
156.2
|
|
16 February 2007
|
142.3
|
112.9
|
|
143.3
|
|
161.5
|
|
22 February 2007
|
71.7
|
30.1
|
|
73.5
|
|
76.8
|
|
28 February
2007
|
80.2
|
56.0
|
|
69.1
|
|
87.8
|
Note:
(1)
*
Due to the paving works of granite blocks inside the San Po Street Pumping
Station, the High Volume Sampler at CAM1a was relocated to the end of the
vehicle access that is about 2m from the original location. The High Volume
Sampler was relocated to its original location on 24 February 2007 after the
paving works were finished.
(2)
“Shading”
indicates an exceedance of Action Level.
“Bold and shading” 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)
|
|
Leq (30min)
|
L10(30min)
|
L90(30min)
|
|
NM1
|
6 February 2007
|
58.7
|
61.0
|
54.0
|
75
|
|
12 February 2007
|
60.6
|
62.8
|
57.0
|
|
22 February 2007
|
58.3
|
61.2
|
55.5
|
|
28 February 2007
|
59.6
|
63.1
|
56.5
|
|
NM2
|
6 February 2007
|
54.2
|
57.0
|
51.0
|
|
12 February 2007
|
54.2
|
57.0
|
50.5
|
|
22 February 2007
|
52.6
|
56.0
|
50.0
|
|
28 February 2007
|
53.2
|
57.0
|
51.0
|
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. Construction
activities of metal cutting from the E&M installation of the San Po Street
Pumping Station and sand accumulated outside the pumping station were also
other sources that would affect the 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
An Action Level exceedance and two
Limit Level exceedances for 1-hr TSP were recorded on 6 February 2007 at the
monitoring station CAM1a. Two of three
1-hr TSP results, (532.2 µg/m3 and 594.9 µg/m3) respectively, exceeded the Limit Level (500 µg/m3) while the other one
(495.2 µg/m3)
was close to it. A Limit Level
exceedance for 24-hr TSP was recorded on the same day at the same
location. The result of the 24-hr TSP
(357.0 µg/m3)
exceeded the Limit Level (260 µg/m3). The Event and
Action Plans were followed.
Investigation for the exceedance was undertaken.
The Contractor has already informed
DSD's contractor of the paving works to stop construction activities during the
course of the 1-hr and 24-hr TSP monitoring, hence the contractor stopped the
works on 6 February 2007 in the morning for the TSP monitoring conducted in the
afternoon. However, construction
activities of metal cutting from the E&M installation of the San Po Street
Pumping Station next to it were operating in the afternoon. Besides, some vehicles were observed moving
in and out of the pumping station. A
Blower was placed outside the pumping station for enhancing ventilation inside
the pumping station. Some sand
accumulated outside the pumping station was also another source of construction
dust. The above activities were suspected
to be the cause for the TSP exceedances.
Besides, when compared with the TSP results
at CAM2a, it was observed that the results for 1-hr TSP at CAM2a was about 10
times smaller than that at CAM1a and about 5 times lower for 24-hr TSP. Hence it is possible that the exceedances
were related to any dust generating activities near CAM1a.
As advised by the Contractor, the
construction activities undertaken on 6 and 7 February 2007 included welding at
Portion 1, concrete breaking at one manhole at Portion 1, substructure at
Portion 2, superstructure at Portion 3.
The concrete breaking activity at manhole at Portion 1 was of very small
scale and watering was provided at nearby areas, fugitive dust generation was
not anticipated to be large. While the
other construction activities are not considered to be dust generating. Hence the above exceedances are unlikely to
be caused by the construction activities of the Project.
The above exceedances for both 1-hr and
24-hr TSP were likely to be caused by the construction activities from the
metal cutting and E&M installation works
nearby and not caused by the Project works.
Hence, the exceedances are regarded as invalid.
Results of the subsequent 1-hr and 24-hr TSP
monitoring conducted on 12 February 2007 showed full compliance of Action and
Limit Levels.
No
non-compliance of Action Level was recorded for 24-hr TSP monitoring.
No non-compliance of Action or Limit
Level was recorded for 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
An Action
Level exceedance and two Limit Level exceedances for 1-hr TSP were recorded on
6 February 2007 at the monitoring station CAM1a. These exceedances were
likely to be caused by the construction activities from the metal cutting and
E&M installation works nearby and not caused by the Project
works. No valid exceedance of Action/Limit Level was
recorded during the reporting month.
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 9, 14, 23 and 27 February 2007. 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
|
|
9 February 2007
|
1.
One of the oil
drums was placed outside the drip tray.
|
1.The Contractor was reminded to place all oil drums inside drip tray.
|
1.
The oil drums were
placed inside drip tray as observed on 14 February 2007.
|
1.
The Contractor was
recommended to provide close monitoring for the wastewater treatment facility
to ensure that the effluents meet the discharge standard.
|
|
14 February 2007
|
1. No deficiency was observed.
|
N.A.
|
N.A.
|
1.
The Contractor was
reminded to further improve the discharge water quality of the sedimentation
tank at Portion 2.
|
|
23 February 2007
|
1.
No deficiency was
observed.
|
N.A.
|
N.A.
|
1. The Contractor was reminded to further improve
the discharge water quality of the sedimentation tank at Portion 2.
|
|
27 February 2007
|
1.
Standing water
with debris was observed near the wheel washing facilities and Portion
3.
|
1. The Contractor was reminded to drain away the
standing water and remove the debris.
|
1.
To be followed up
in March 2007.
|
N.A.
|
Table 7-12 Summaries of Site Inspections and Recommendations
The
site audit conducted by IEC was carried out on 27 February 2007 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.
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 – 50.4 m3, and
§
General Refuse – 78.0 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:
§
Excavation
and backfilling;
§
Removal
/ installation of waling and strut;
§
Sheet
piling work;
§
Extraction
of sheet piles;
§
Sub-structure
and superstructure construction;
§
Pipe
works;
§
Finishing
works;
§
Steelwork;
and
§
Fiber
Glass Reinforced Plastic installation.
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 February
2007 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.
