Contents
1.1 Purpose of the Report
1.2 Key Contact Information
2.1 Project Area
2.2 Environmental Sensitive Receivers
2.3 Major Construction Activities
2.4 Monitoring Schedule of the Reporting Period
2.5 Status of Environmental Approval Documents
2.6 Community Liaison Group Meeting
2.7 Summary of Non-Compliance with the Environmental Quality Performance Limits
3 Environmental Issues and Actions
3.1 Previous Environmental Deficiencies and Follow-up Actions
3.2 Description of Actions Taken in Event of Non-Compliance and Deficiency Reporting
3.3 Implementation Status on Environmental Protection Requirements
3.4 Event and Action Plans
5 Review of the EM&A and Impact Assessment Predictions
6 Future Key Issues and Conclusion
6.1 Key Issues for the Next Reporting Period
6.2 Impact Prediction for the Next Reporting Period
6.3 Works and Monitoring Schedule for the Next Reporting Period
6.4 Conclusion
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Summary of Works Undertaken from 1 July 2009
up to 30 June 2010
Table 2.2 Period and Cumulative Quantity of Excavated
Materials up to 30 June 2010
Table 2.2 Summary of Environmental Licensing,
Notification and Permit Status up to 30 June 2010
Table 2.3 Summary of Exceedances
of Action and Limit Levels Recorded during the Reporting Period
Table 3.1 Environmental Deficiencies (Observations)
from Site Inspections during Reporting Period
LIST OF ANNEXES
Annex B Water
Quality Monitoring Stations, Water Quality and Ecological Sensitive Receivers
Annex C Cumulative
Complaints Statistics
Annex D
Implementation Programme of Mitigation Measures
Annex E Event and Action
Plans
Annex F Impact Water Quality Monitoring Results
Annex G Dolphin
Visual Monitoring Records
Annex H Dolphin
Post-Construction Monitoring Records
After the resumption of the construction works and the EM&A requirements for the Permanent Aviation Fuel Facility on 9 July 2007, this is the third annual Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) report presenting the EM&A works carried out during the period from 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010 in accordance with the EM&A Manual.
Breaches of all Action and Limit Levels
Water quality monitoring during dredging activities, conducted from 13 November 2009 to 11 December 2009 inclusive, recorded no exceedance of Action or Limit Levels for bottom Dissolved Oxygen (DO). Exceedances of Depth-averaged DO were recorded on 13, 14, 15, 17, 21 and 23 November (although on 13 and 23 November these were only exceedances of Action levels) and of Depth-averaged Suspended Solids on 13,15, 17, 18, 19 and 21 November and on 3 and 5 December (although on 13, 19 and 21 November these were only exceedances of Action levels). There were no exceedances of Limit levels for Depth-averaged Turbidity during the reporting period but on both 18 November and 3 December, each day there were exceedances of Action Levels at four stations for Depth-averaged Turbidity.
Following review of data in accordance with the procedures specified in the EM&A Manual, all these exceedances were considered likely to be due to natural fluctuations in the water body rather than the Project Works.
Complaint Log
No environmental complaints were received during the reporting period.
Notifications of any Summons and Successful Prosecutions
No environmental summon or prosecutions were received in this reporting period.
Future Key Issues
· Dust release and suppression;
· Water discharge.
Conclusion
The EM&A works were conducted throughout the annual reporting period and the relevant monitoring was conducted in accordance with the EP’s requirements. Mitigation measures were used to minimise the environmental impacts, where appropriate.
Some environmental deficiencies were observed during the weekly site inspections and where necessary, the Contractor implemented corrective actions to mitigate the issues. With Phase 1a operational on 30 March 2010, bi-monthly landscape and visual audits also started in April 2010. Overall, the site was considered to be in an orderly manner.
Water quality in the vicinity of the project area during construction (pipeline repair works) was found to be similar to that collected during baseline monitoring conducted prior to the commencement of the Project works and any changes recorded appear to be as a result of natural or seasonal variations. This implies the impact of the project works on the water quality at the Project Site is negligible.
Prior to Phase 1a becoming operational on 30 March 2010, post-construction marine mammal monitoring results concluded that the variation of Humpback dolphin abundance and sighting numbers, in between pre- and post-construction of PAFF, are not significant and the construction of Phase 1a of PAFF does not appear to have had any adverse effects on the marine mammals in the vicinity.
It is concluded the current EM&A programme, including the monitoring programme and the mitigation measure herein, is sufficient to monitor the environmental performance of the project works and during the reporting period the project works had a negligible adverse environmental impact.
Leighton Contractors (
The construction works for PAFF commenced in November 2005 based upon the previous EIA (EIAO Register Number AEIAR-062-2002) conducted and the Environmental Permit EP-139/2002 granted on the 28 August 2002. Due to minor changes to the detailed layout of the site and the site boundary, application for Variation to the Environmental Permit (VEP) (VEP-133/2004) was submitted to the Director of Environmental Protection (DEP) for approval. The variation to the EP (EP-139/2002/A) was granted by EPD in February 2004.
However, the decision by EPD to grant the above Environmental Permit was subject to a Judicial Review. The Judicial Review sided in the favour of the DEP, as did the subsequent Judgement from the Court of Appeal from the High Court for Judicial Review in March 2005. However, the DEP’s decision to grant the EP was quashed by the Judgement of the Court of Final Appeal of July 2006.
The construction works were stopped following the Judgement of the Court of Final Appeal of July 2006. As such, in order to continue with the construction of the project, the project went through the statutory procedures under the EIAO again with a new design in order to obtain an environmental permit. The revised EIA was submitted in 2007 and the environmental permit (EP-262/2007) was granted in May 2007. EP-262/2007 has been amended to EP262/2007/A and issued by the EPD on 30 November 2007. A further Variation to the Environmental Permit has been approved to allow for dredging works to continue during March 2008. As such, EP-262/2007/A has been amended to EP-262/2007/B and issued by the EPD on 27 February 2008.
The construction works and EM&A requirements resumed on 9 July 2007 following the latest requirements of the EP-262/2007/B and EM&A Manual. Construction of Phase 1a of PAFF was completed on 20 March 2010 and operations began on 30 March 2010. Details regarding the EM&A requirements and changes should refer to the updated EM&A Manual. For the marine works, all piling activities were completed before the previous suspension of construction works in 2006.
After the resumption of the construction works and EM&A requirements on 9 July 2007, this is the third EM&A Report which summarizes the monitoring results and audit findings for the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010.
1.2 Key Contact Information
Key contact information of the Project is presented in Table 1.1.
|
Name |
Position |
Telephone |
Facsimile |
|
|
Airport Authority |
||||
|
Anthony Wong |
Assistant General Manager Aviation Logistics |
2183 3099 |
2824 2786 |
anthony.wong@hkairport.com |
|
Contractor – Leighton ( |
||||
|
Brian Gillon |
Project Director |
2823 1111 |
2529 8784 |
brian.gillon@leightonasia.com |
|
Elias Zraicat |
Project Manager |
2404 8900 |
2404 0081 |
elias.zraicat@leightonasia.com |
|
Franchisee’s Site Representative – ECO Aviation Fuel Development Limited |
||||
|
Philip Siu |
Franchisee’s Site Representative |
2963 2820 |
2563 6311 |
philip.siu@towngas.com |
|
Environmental Team – ERM- |
||||
|
Craig Reid |
Environmental Team Leader |
2271 3000 |
2723 5660 |
craig.reid@erm.com |
|
Independent Environmental Checker – Hyder Consulting Limited |
||||
|
Roger Leung |
Independent Environmental Checker |
2911 2233 |
2805 5028 |
roger.leung@hyderconsulting.com |
The project area is in Area 38 of Tuen Mun and the pipelines are located in
2.2 Environmental Sensitive Receivers
No air and noise sensitive receivers were identified close to the project area. However, water sensitive receivers and ecological sensitive receivers were identified in the EIA study, and are shown in Annex B.
2.3 Major Construction Activities
A summary of the major works undertaken in this reporting period is shown in Table 2.1. Initial marine dredging operations were completed on 23 January 2009 and resumed on 13 November 2009 for pipeline repair works that were completed on 11 December 2009. Table 2.2 presents the cumulative quantity of excavated materials from December 2007 up to 30 June 2010. Daily and cumulative dredging production rates from December 2007 to 30 June 2010 are illustrated in Figure 2.1.
Table 2.1 Summary of Works Undertaken from 1 July 2009 up to 30 June 2010
|
Area |
Works undertaken |
|
Tuen Mun Area 38 |
· Tank Farm, Roof Truss and Bund Wall Construction · Permanent Drainage Construction · Operational & Fire Services Buildings Construction · Jetty Works (Non-piling) · Pre-Commission and Commissioning Activities for Phase 1a
|
|
Submarine |
· Riser connections at seawall and Sha Chau · Backfilling and placing of rock armour over the pipelines · Dredging operations |
Table 2.2 Period and Cumulative Quantity of Excavated Materials up to 30 June 2010
|
Type of Excavated Materials |
Period Bulk Volume (m3) |
Cumulative Bulk Volume (m3) (from 17 December 2007 to the specified date date) |
|
From 17 December 2007 to 31 March 2008 |
||
|
Contaminated Mud |
71,564 |
71,564 |
|
Uncontaminated Mud |
123,953 |
123,953 |
|
From 1 September 2008 to 23 January 2009 |
||
|
Contaminated Mud |
0 |
71,564 |
|
Uncontaminated Mud |
149,147 |
273,100 |
|
From 13 November 2009 to 13 December 2009 |
||
|
Contaminated Mud |
7,399 |
78,963 |
|
Uncontaminated Mud |
18,561 |
291,661 |
|
From 14 December 2009 to 30 June 2010 |
||
|
Contaminated Mud |
0 |
78,963 |
|
Uncontaminated Mud |
0 |
291,661 |
2.4 Monitoring Schedule of the Reporting Period
Weekly site audits took place throughout the reporting period and following the commencement of Phase 1a operations. The first Landscape and visual bi-monthly inspection was carried out on 29 April 2010.
Daily water quality monitoring and dolphin monitoring and biweekly Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) monitoring during dredging activities were conducted from 13 November to 11 December 2009 inclusive.
Post-construction marine mammal surveys were conducted during daylight hours for six consecutive days between 22 March and 27 March 2010.
2.5 Status of Environmental Approval Documents
A summary of the relevant permits, licences, and/or notifications on environmental protection for this Project since July 2007 is presented in Table 2.2.
Table 2.2 Summary of Environmental Licensing, Notification and Permit Status up to 30 June 2010
|
Reference |
Validity Period |
Remarks |
||
|
Environmental Permit |
EP-262/2007/B |
Throughout Project |
Issued on 27 February 2008 (EP-262/2007/A on 30 November 2007, EP-262/2007 issued on 31 May 2007, EP-139/2002 originally granted on 28 August 2002 and EP-139/2002/A granted on 24 February 2004 were superseded) |
|
|
Chemical Waste Producer Registration
|
WPN 5111-421-L2174-25 |
Throughout Project |
Issued on 10 November 2005 |
|
|
Notification of Construction Works under Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation
|
H2104/U1D/5542/DG/DH/PL
|
Throughout Project |
Notification on 6 July 2007 |
|
|
Construction Noise Permit |
GW-RW0676-07 |
21 December 2007 to 19 June 2008
|
For land-based works including air compressors, breakers, excavators, wheeled loaders, mobile cranes, concrete lorry mixers, hand-held pokers, bar benders/cutters, wood saws, grinders, submarine water pump, lorries with crane, dump trucks, rollers, ventilation fans and generators
|
|
|
GW-RW0677-07 |
21 December 2007 to 29 February 2008 |
For marine dredging operation including grab dredger, tug boat, split hopper barge and motor sampan
|
||
|
GW-RW0678-07 |
21 December 2007 to 18 June 2008
|
For marine jetty works including concrete pump derrick barges, hand-held grinders, generators, air compressors, boring machines, water pumps, tug boat, grout mixers and grout pumps
|
||
|
GW-RW0094-08 |
1 March to 31 March 2008 |
For marine dredging operation including grab dredger, tug boat, split hopper barge and motor sampan
|
||
|
GW-RW0312-08 |
04 July 2008 to 22 December 2008
|
For marine jetty works including concrete pump derrick barges, hand-held grinders, generators, air compressors, boring machines, water pumps, tug boat, grout mixers and grout pumps
|
||
|
GW-RW0313-08 |
04 July 2008 to 19 December 2008
|
For land-based works including air compressors, breakers, excavators, wheeled loaders, mobile cranes, concrete lorry mixers, hand-held pokers, bar benders/cutters, wood saws, grinders, submarine water pump, lorries with crane, dump trucks, rollers, ventilation fans and generators
|
||
|
GW-RW0373-08 |
1 August 2008 to 20 January 2009 |
For land-based works including air compressors, breakers, excavators, wheeled loaders, mobile cranes, concrete lorry mixers, hand-held pokers, bar benders/cutters, wood saws, grinders, submarine water pump, lorries with crane, dump trucks, rollers, ventilation fans, generators, stirrer, jet chisel, water jet machine and dehumidifier
|
||
|
GW-RW0368-08 |
1 September to 30 November 2008 |
For marine dredging operation including grab dredger, tug boat, split hopper barge and motor sampan
|
||
|
GW-RW0054-09 |
16 February 2009 to 5 August 2009
|
For land-based and marine works including passenger launch, winch, welding machine, grinder, generator, power pack, tug boat, crane, air compressor, roller, hoist and derrick barge
|
||
|
|
GW-RW0261-09 |
3 July 2009 to 3 November 2009
|
For land-based and marine works including derrick barge, grinder, crane, tug boat, drill, welding machine, hopper barge, motor sampan, air compressor
|
|
|
GW-RW0299-09 |
21 July 2009 to 20 January 2010
|
For land-based works including air compressors, breakers, excavators, wheeled loaders, mobile cranes, concrete lorry mixers, hand-held pokers, bar benders/cutters, wood saws, grinders, submarine water pump, lorries with crane, dump trucks, rollers, ventilation fans, generators, stirrer, jet chisel, water jet machine and dehumidifier etc
|
||
|
|
GW-RW0459-09 |
26 October 2009 to 28 February 2010 |
For marine dredging operation including air compressors, derrick barge, tug boat, mobile crane, hand-held grinder, generator, hand-held drill, winch, welding machine, motor sampan, grab dredger hopper barge etc
|
|
|
|
GW-RW0008-10 |
21 January 2010 to 20 July 2010 |
For the use of powered mechanical equipment for the purpose of carrying out construction work other than percussive piling and/or the carrying out of prescribed construction work. For on-site powered mechanical equipment.
|
|
|
|
GW-RW0092-10 |
1 March 2010 to 30 April 2010 |
For the use of powered mechanical equipment for the purpose of carrying out construction work other than percussive piling and/or the carrying out of prescribed construction work. Specifically for Grab dredger, Derrick barge, Tug boat, Motor sampan and Hopper barge.
|
|
|
Marine Dumping Permit |
EP/MD/08-064 |
13 December 2007 to 29 February 2008
|
For Type 1 – Open Sea Disposal |
|
|
EP/MD/08-065 |
13 December 2007 to 12 January 2008 |
For Type 1d & Type 2 marine disposal |
||
|
EP/MD/08-071 |
13 January 2008 to 12 February 2008
|
For Type 1d & Type 2 marine disposal |
||
|
EP/MD/08-090 |
3 March to 31 March 2008
|
For Type 1d & Type 2 marine disposal |
||
|
EP/MD/08-091 |
3 March to 31 March 2008
|
For Type 1 – Open Sea Disposal |
||
|
EP/MD/09-018 |
1 September to 30 September 2008
|
For Type 1d & Type 2 marine disposal |
||
|
EP/MD/09-032 |
1 October to 31 October 2008
|
For Type 1d & Type 2 marine disposal |
||
|
EP/MD/09-017 |
1 September to 30 November 2008
|
For Type 1 – Open Sea Disposal |
||
|
EP/MD/09-039 |
1 December 2008 to 31 January 2009 |
For Type 1 – Open Sea Disposal |
||
|
|
EP/MD/10-041 |
11
November 2009 to 31 December 2009 |
For
Type 1 – Open Sea Disposal |
|
|
|
EP/MD/10-042 |
11
November 2009 to 10 December 2009 |
For
Type 1 – Open Sea Disposal (Dedicated Site) & Type 2 – Confined Marine
Disposal |
|
|
Wastewater Discharge License |
EP760/421/011399/l |
15 March 2006 to 31 March 2011 |
Issued on 15 March 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.6 Community Liaison Group Meeting
In accordance with the EP requirements, a Community Liaison Group (CLG) was established within three months after commencement of construction of the Project. The major duty of CLG is to advise on and monitor the proper design, construction and operation of the Project. The CLG comprises representatives from Airport Authority, members of Tuen Mun community and academics. During the reporting period, the CLG held meetings on 30 September 2009, 3 February and 26 May 2010.
The details of PAFF CLG (including Membership and its Terms of Reference) and the meeting minutes can be found on the Project website (http://www.paffhk.com).
2.7 Summary of Non-Compliance with the Environmental Quality Performance Limits
Summary of Environmental Non-compliance
Water quality monitoring during dredging activities (13 November to 11 December 2009) recorded no exceedance of Action or Limit Levels for DO Bottom. Exceedances of Depth-averaged DO Action Levels were recorded on 13, 14, 15, 17, 21 and 23 November and of both Limit and Action Levels on 14, 15, 17 and 21 November 2009.
Exceedances of Depth-averaged Suspended Solids Action Levels were recorded on 13, 15, 17, 18, 19 and 21 November and 3 and 5 December 2009 and of both Limit and Action Levels on 15, 17 and 18 November 2009 and 3 and 5 December 2009.
There were no exceedances of Limit levels for Depth-averaged Turbidity during the reporting period but on each of 18 November and 3 December there were four exceedances of Action Levels for Depth-averaged Turbidity.
A summary of the exceedances occurring during the reporting period is shown in Table 2.3 and a description of the actions taken following these non-compliances is discussed in Section 3.2.
Table 2.3 Summary of Exceedances of Action and Limit Levels Recorded during the Reporting Period
|
Date |
Parameter |
Monitoring Stations |
|
|
Mid-Ebb Tide |
Mid-Flood Tide |
||
|
13 Nov 2009 |
DO (Depth-averaged) |
|
IMO1*, IMO3*, IMO4* |
|
SS (Depth-averaged) |
|
IMO4* |
|
|
14 Nov 2009 |
DO (Depth-averaged) |
IMO1, MPB1, MPB2 |
IMO1, IMO2, IMO3, IMO4, MPB1*, MPB2*, MP* |
|
15 Nov 2009 |
DO (Depth-averaged) |
MPB1, MPB2, MP |
IMO1*, IMO2, IMO3, IMO4, MPB2 |
|
|
SS (Depth-averaged) |
MP |
IMO2*, IMO3, IMO4* |
|
17 Nov 2009 |
DO (Depth-averaged) |
MPB1 |
IMO1*, IMO2*, MP |
|
|
SS (Depth-averaged) |
MPB1*, MPB2, MP* |
IMO1*, MPB1*, MPB2*, MP* |
|
18 Nov 2009 |
Turbidity (Depth-averaged) |
IMO5*, MPB2* |
IMO5*, MPB2* |
|
|
SS (Depth-averaged) |
MPB1*, MPB2 |
MPB1* |
|
19 Nov 2009 |
SS (Depth-averaged) |
MPB2* |
IMO1*, IMO6*, MPB2* |
|
21 Nov 2009 |
DO (Depth-averaged) |
IMO5*, IMO6* |
IMO6 |
|
SS (Depth-averaged) |
MPB1* |
|
|
|
23 Nov 2009 |
DO (Depth-averaged) |
|
IMO5* |
|
3 Dec 2009 |
Turbidity (Depth-averaged) |
|
IMO5*, MPB1*, MPB2*, MP* |
|
SS (Depth-averaged) |
MPB1 |
IMO5, IMO6*, MPB1, MPB2, MP |
|
|
5 Dec 2009 |
SS (Depth-averaged) |
|
IMO5, IMO6 |
*Note: Action Level but not Limit Level exceedance
As per the requirements of the EM&A Manual, incidents were notified to the Franchisee’s Site Representative, the Contractor and the Independent Environmental Checker upon identification of an exceedance.
Summary of Environmental Complaints
No environmental complaints were received during the reporting period. A summary of environmental complaints since project commencement is presented in Annex C.
Summary of Environmental Summons
No summons were received in this reporting period. A summary of legal proceeding since project commencement is presented in Annex C.
3.1 Previous Environmental Deficiencies and Follow-up Actions
As no environmental complaint was received during the last reporting period, no follow-up action has been required.
Weekly site inspections were carried out during the reporting period. Overall, the site was in good orderly manner and no non-compliance was found. Environmental deficiencies and follow-up actions/mitigation measures were identified during the inspections are presented in previous Monthly EM&A Reports. Key findings are summarised in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1 Environmental Deficiencies (Observations) from Site Inspections during Reporting Period
|
Key Observations |
Follow-up Action |
|
Small piles of construction waste were observed within the site. |
The Contractor was reminded to provide appropriate receptacles for such refuse in the area, or clear it to appropriate area.
|
|
When sediment tanks were moved due to the construction works they were disconnected from the drainage system.
|
The Contractor was asked to ensure this was temporary measure as possible. |
|
Sediment plumes were sometimes observed in the marine area at the outfall of the drainage system in the Jetty Area, particularly after heavy rain. |
The Contractor was reminded to check the drainage system, particularly the sediment tanks to ensure they were of sufficient capacity and free from sediments. They were also reminded to repair leaking sandbags surrounding manholes.
|
|
Pooling of water was observed in the construction site from various leaking taps and pipes and from tank cleaning operations. |
The Contractor was reminded to repair all leaks and ensure stagnant water was pumped offsite via the drainage system
|
|
Stagnant water pools were observed at some locations on site (eg in drip trays, wheel wash area, under dehumidifier, above blocked drain and in chemical waste storage) and mosquito larvae were also present in sediment tank water on occasion.
|
The Contractor was reminded to arrange ad hoc water clearance as necessary and take measures to stop mosquito breeding.
|
|
Drums and some machinery (eg generators) were found with no drip trays. |
Drip trays were installed under the drums or machinery.
|
|
General refuse was found littered around the site, particularly in the Tank Farm area and on occasion refuse bins and the chemical waste storage facilities were observed to be full or overflowing
|
The Contractor was asked to remind all workers to dispose of refuse in the provided bins/recycling bins, clear any general refuse around the site and ensure bins were emptied as required. For the chemical waste storage facilities, they were reminded to ensure they were cleared by a licensed collector as necessary.
|
|
Empty paint cans were observed strewn around the Tank Farm area or in unlabelled containers outside the chemical waste storage facility.
|
The Contractor was reminded to ensure empty paint cans were stored appropriately in labelled black plastic bags within the chemical waste storage facility. |
|
The chemical waste storage facilities had no ventilation and one was leaking from the ceiling and floor, on one occasion with oil leaking out to the surrounding area.
|
Ventilation windows were installed and the leaks detected and repaired. |
|
Lubricant/oil was found containers in the chemical waste storage facility rather than the labelled drums. Similarly unlabelled waste was sometimes found within the facilities.
|
The Contractor was reminded to empty lubricant/oil into the appropriate receptacle and ensure all waste was suitably labelled. |
|
The painting subcontractor’s chemical waste disposal trip tickets for disposal of their empty paint cans were not available for inspection.
|
The Contractor was advised to follow this up with the subcontractor as soon as possible to ensure they were obtained.
|
|
Much of the site was unpaved for the majority of the reporting period, and large stockpiles of construction material were present. Often these areas were not sufficiently watered.
|
The Contractor was reminded to ensure all these areas were watered regularly to avoid dust generations. |
|
The exposed slope surfaces at excavation site near the main entrance were not sufficiently covered.
|
The Contractor was reminded to cover exposed surfaces with tarpaulin or by planting vegetation to avoid dust generation.
|
|
The rock-filling barge operating in the marine area was observed to be emitting black smoke from its exhaust.
|
The Contractor was requested to inspect/service the barge engine. |
|
There were insufficient waste receptacles on the dredging barge.
|
More receptacles were provided on the dredging barge. |
|
White foam was observed being discharged from the outlet at the Jetty Area and a large area of the surrounding sea was covered in white foam.
|
No follow-up actions were required as the foam was non-toxic and dispersed naturally. At the subsequent site inspection no white form was observed.
|
|
Construction materials were observed stored near the roots of the retained trees T70 and T72 near the Phase 1a Tank Farm vehicular entrance and the re-location of concrete blocks just outside the main entrance was causing damage to a nearby tree.
|
The Contractor was reminded to ensure material was re-located to ensure no tree damage was incurred and to remind workmen to avoid all further damage to trees in the vicinity. |
|
Some compensatory trees in Phase 1a, en route to Jetty Area for drainage outlet inspection, were observed to have no leaves.
|
The Contractor was advised to evaluate condition of these trees as soon as possible and arrange replacement if trees are reported to be dead.
|
Overall, the site was in an orderly manner. The ET will keep track on the EM&A programme to ensure compliance of environmental requirements and the proper implementation of all necessary mitigation measures.
3.2 Description of Actions Taken in Event of Non-Compliance and Deficiency Reporting
Water quality monitoring during dredging activities (13 November to 11 December 2009) recorded no exceedance of Action or Limit Levels for Bottom Dissolved Oxygen (DO). There were no exceedances of Limit levels for Depth-averaged Turbidity during the reporting period but on 18 November and 3 December, there were exceedances of Action Levels at four stations for Depth-averaged Turbidity. Exceedances of Action and Limit Levels for Depth-averaged DO were recorded on 14, 15, 17 and 21 November and just of Action Levels on `13 and 23 November. Exceedances of Depth-averaged Suspended Solids were recorded on 13, 15, 17, 18, 19 and 21 November and 3 and 5 December (although on 13, 19 and 21 November these were only exceedances of Action levels).
A summary of the exceedances recorded during the reporting period is shown in Section 2.7, Table 2.3 and graphical representations of the results are presented in Annex F. Descriptions of the actions taken following identification of non-compliance are discussed below.
Although dredging operations were undertaken during the reporting period, on examination of the results, it was concluded that all the exceedances described above were unlikely to be caused by the Project for the following reasons:
· Not all parameters showed the same trend of exceedance results at the same stations at the same tide (eg on 3 December there were exceedances of Depth-averaged Turbidity and Suspended Solids at various stations, but there were no exceedances of Bottom or Depth-averaged DO at any station throughout the day).
· Exceedances were found at monitoring stations upstream and downstream of dredging vessels that were not in operation (e.g. exceedance of Action Level of depth-averaged DO on 13 November 2009 at IMO3 and IMO4). The values were comparable to exceedances found at stations upstream and downstream of operational dredging vessels on the same day (eg exceedance of Action Level of depth-averaged DO on 13 November 2009 at IMO1).
· There have been incidents in the past in this area where exceedances have occurred despite the dredger not being in operation (eg 10 Feb 2008, exceedance in SS despite no dredging work; 17 and 22 Dec 2007, 4 and 5 Jan 2008, 6 and 10 Feb 2008, exceedances in Turbidity despite no dredging work).
Although the measured levels of Suspended Solids were particularly high at MPB1 on 3 December 2009, MPB1 station was located far away from the dredging operation at the time. As mentioned previously, there have also been incidents in the past in this area where exceedances have occurred despite the dredger not being in operation, it was concluded that the exceedances were unlikely to be due to the project works.
As per the requirements of the EM&A Manual, incidents were notified to the Franchisee’s Site Representative, the Contractor and the Independent Environmental Checker upon identification of an exceedance.
The temporal and spatial trend of the results collected during the impact monitoring have been plotted against those collected during the baseline monitoring and are discussed below. Results are illustrated in Annex F.
Results showed that during impact monitoring on ebb and flood tides, DO and turbidity levels at all stations are generally comparable with those levels recorded during the baseline monitoring. It was thus considered likely that the waters upstream of the works site are influenced by other factors, such as natural fluctuations observed in the Pearl River Estuary.
3.3 Implementation Status on Environmental Protection Requirements
The implementation status of environmental mitigation measures and requirements as stated in the EIA Report, Environmental Permits and EM&A Manual during the reporting period is summarized in Annex D.
3.4 Event and Action Plans
The event and action plans for construction noise, water quality monitoring, dolphin monitoring, cultural heritage, landscape and visual, as stated in the EM&A Manual, are summarized in Annex E.
4.1.1 Air and Noise
Air and Noise monitoring was not required for the project.
4.1.2 Water Quality
In accordance to the EM&A Manual, water quality monitoring was conducted during dredging activities from 13 November 2009 to 11 December 2009. Graphical presentations of the results are included in Annex F.
Water quality monitoring during dredging activities, conducted from 13 November 2009 to 11 December 2009 inclusive, recorded no exceedance of Action or Limit Levels for bottom Dissolved Oxygen (DO). Exceedances of Depth-averaged DO were recorded on 13, 14, 15, 17, 21 and 23 November (although on 13 and 23 November these were only exceedances of Action levels) and of Depth-averaged Suspended Solids on 13, 15, 17, 18, 19 and 21 November and on 3 and 5 December (although on 13, 19 and 21 November these were only exceedances of Action levels). There were no exceedances of Limit levels for Depth-averaged Turbidity during the reporting period but on both 18 November and 3 December, each day there were exceedances of Action Levels at four stations for Depth-averaged Turbidity. A review of the above exceedances concluded that these were not attributable to Project works and were likely due to natural variation (see Section 3.2 for further details).
Biweekly monitoring of water samples was also conducted for POPs analysis on 25 November and 8 December 2009. All POPs parameters (ie total Polychorinated Biphenyls (PCBs), total Dichloro-Diphenyl-Trichloroethane (DDTs) and total Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)) were below detection limits. Monitoring results and QA/QC reports for POPs testing are presented in the 37th and 38th Monthly EM&A Reports.
4.1.3 Waste Management
4.1.4 Cultural Heritage
The Watching Brief Report, verified by the Independent Environmental Checker, was submitted to the EPD and AMO on 9 May 2008.
4.1.5 Landscape and Visual
The project construction works began at the end of 2005 and the
landscape works began in mid-2006. In accordance with the Condition
3.8 of Environmental Permit (EP 139/2002/A granted in February 2004),
the Contractor employed Toyo Greenland Co. Ltd
(Toyo) to create a detailed landscape plan and this was submitted to the
Director of EPD on 8 February 2006. This original landscape plan was
certified by IEC and ET, and approved by the Leisure and Cultural Services
Department on 6 April 2006 and the District Lands Office,
Although construction work was suspended between July 2006 and July 2007, the berm/landscaping bund was originally populated by vegetation grown during this project suspension period.
To address Condition 3.4 of the updated Environmental Permit (EP 262/2007/B) based on an updated EIA report (Register No. AEIAR-107/2007), the Contractor submitted the Landscape Plan, which was certified by ET and IEC, to the EPD in December 2009. The EPD provided comments on 4 February 2010. Following revisions, the Contractor submitted an updated landscaping proposal for the PAFF project to the Lands Department (who are responsible for circulating it to other government departments including EPD) in April 2010. The Lands Department then required that the submission be in compliance with the latest technical circular, so a resubmission was made, which is currently being reviewed by Lands Department.
Planting works were carried out by Toyo on the berm/landscaping bund with over 1,100 trees planted by the end of the reporting period([1]). A tree survey was also conducted in April 2010 and revealed a 100% tree survival rate of the newly planted trees. It is expected that landscaping works will be completed in July 2010 and ECO will then undertake the landscape maintenance at PAFF([2]).
According to the EIA report and EM&A Manual, mitigation measures and site inspections are required during the landscaping/planting works and the weekly site inspections include general audits on landscape and visual issues to ensure that the site is in an orderly and acceptable manner.
Operations of PAFF Phase 1a started on 30 March 2010 and in accordance
with the EM&A Manual , Landscape and Visual audits of the site will
be carried out once every two months for one year following this date.
According to the EM&A Manual, the
Bi-monthly Landscape and Visual Audits
The first monthly site audit was undertaken on 29 April 2010 and the findings and observations are included in the 42nd Monthly EM&A Report.
4.1.6 Land Contamination, Hazard to Life and Fuel Spill Risk
The ET and IEC verified updated design audit plan was submitted to the EPD on 7 November 2007.
Pursuant to Condition 3.5 of the EP, the Contractor submitted design drawings and supporting information according to the EP requirements in 2009. The ET and IEC certified the documents and submitted to the EPD on 7 December 2009. The documents were placed under the EIAO register on 14 December 2009.
Weekly site inspection covered the waste management aspects which included measures to prevent land contamination by chemical wastes.
4.1.7 Ecology
Dolphin Visual Monitoring
In accordance to EM&A Manual, dolphin monitoring was undertaken during dredging activities from 13 November to 11 December 2009 inclusive.
During the reporting period, a total of eight Humpback dolphin (Sousa chinensis) or Chinese White Dolphin sightings were recorded; in November, no dolphin sightings were recorded within the exclusion zone so no action was considered necessary according to the EM&A Manual. In December while all the sightings were recorded within the exclusion zone of 500m radius from the dredger, only one occurred during dredging activities. According to the EM&A Manual, if dolphins are sighted within the zone during dredging no action is required.
The sighting locations and field records are presented in Annex G.
Marine Mammal Monitoring
In accordance to EM&A Manual, following the completion of PAFF Phase 1a construction activities on 20 March 2010, six days of post-construction marine mammal monitoring were undertaken in the spring period from 22 March to 27 March 2010 prior to the operation of the Phase 1a.
44 Humpback dolphin individuals were recorded from 20 on-effort sightings during post-construction monitoring, with an additional off-effort sighting of seven individuals. While total number of sightings and total number of individuals recorded were lower in post-construction monitoring than in pre-construction monitoring, the variance of both sets of monitoring results is high and results of two-sample t-tests, using a 5% significance level, indicated that the variation between pre- and post-construction of PAFF are not significant.
Based on the results of the monitoring, it would appear that the construction of Phase 1a of PAFF does not appear to have had any adverse effects on the marine mammals in the vicinity. No further actions with regard to marine mammal monitoring are hence required, in accordance with the Action Plan in the EM&A Manual.
The field records and sighting locations are presented in Annex H.
Full details of the monitoring methodology and results are presented in the Post-Construction Marine Mammal Monitoring Report, which was certified by the IEC and submitted to the EPD on 15 April 2010.
4.1.8 EM&A Manual
The EM&A Manual for the Project has been updated by the ET to include the detailed arrangements of setting up a Community Liaison Group, carrying out design audit, and POPs monitoring during construction of the Project. The updated EM&A Manual was revised accordingly to the comments received from the EPD on 16 January 2009 and was submitted to the EPD on 1 April 2009.
4.1.9 Baseline Water Quality Monitoring
The Final Baseline Monitoring Report was submitted to the EPD on 20 February 2008 and placed under the EIAO register.
Dredging operation was carried out for pipleline repair during the period from 13 November to 11 December 2009. Monitoring data of suspended solids (SS) concentrations collected are compared with the impact assessment predictions in the EIA Report. As stated in the EIA report, the predicted allowable maximum contribution on suspended sediment concentration from dredging activity will be 30% increase of the background concentration. Tables 5.1 and 5.2 show the comparison between the monthly mean value of the impact monitoring data and the average values of the baseline monitoring.
Table 5.1 Average Suspended Solids Concentrations (SS, mg/L) calculated from Baseline Monitoring and Monthly Average Values calculated from Impact Monitoring at Impact Stations during mid-ebb. Exceedance of EIA prediction was indicated in grey shaded cells.
|
Stations |
Suspended Solid Concentrations (mg/L) |
|||
|
|
Baseline monitoring (Average) |
EIA Prediction (Baseline values x 130%) |
Impact Monitoring (Average) |
|
|
Nov 09 |
Dec 09 |
|||
|
MPB1 |
14.57 |
18.94 |
14.99 |
18.27 |
|
MPB2 |
13.33 |
17.33 |
16.88 |
15.98 |
|
MP |
13.76 |
17.89 |
15.39 |
16.21 |
|
IMO1* |
11.77 |
15.30 |
13.79 |
n/a |
|
IMO2* |
11.77 |
15.30 |
12.61 |
n/a |
|
IMO3* |
11.77 |
15.30 |
11.83 |
n/a |
|
IMO4* |
11.77 |
15.30 |
10.66 |
n/a |
|
IMO5* |
11.77 |
15.30 |
13.87 |
17.63 |
|
IMO6* |
11.77 |
15.30 |
13.18 |
16.89 |
*Note: baseline monitoring was not applicable to these stations and hence data was compared against the average value of all baseline monitoring data at that flood tide.
n/a: Dredger was not in operation
Table 5.2 Average Suspended Solids Concentrations (SS, mg/L) calculated from Baseline Monitoring and Monthly Average Values calculated from Impact Monitoring at Impact Stations during mid-flood. Exceedances of EIA prediction was indicated in grey shaded cell.
|
Stations |
Suspended Solid Concentrations (mg/L) |
|||
|
|
Baseline monitoring (Average) |
EIA Prediction (Baseline values x 130%) |
Impact Monitoring (Average) |
|
|
Nov 09 |
Dec 09 |
|||
|
MPB1 |
18.31 |
23.80 |
13.77 |
18.03 |
|
MPB2 |
10.86 |
14.12 |
13.68 |
15.91 |
|
MP |
13.50 |
17.55 |
13.67 |
15.81 |
|
IMO1* |
13.20 |
17.16 |
15.04 |
n/a |
|
IMO2* |
13.20 |
17.16 |
13.48 |
n/a |
|
IMO3* |
13.20 |
17.16 |
20.17 |
n/a |
|
IMO4* |
13.20 |
17.16 |
18.67 |
n/a |
|
IMO5* |
13.20 |
17.16 |
13.55 |
18.02 |
|
IMO6* |
13.20 |
17.16 |
14.05 |
16.89 |
*Note: baseline monitoring was not applicable to these stations and hence data was compared against the average value of all baseline monitoring data at that flood tide.
n/a: Dredger was not in operation
During the reporting period, monthly average of measured elevations of SS at the monitoring stations during both mid-ebb and mid-flood did not exceed 130% of the baseline levels, except in December, when the monthly average at station IMO5 exceeded the predictions at both mid-ebb and mid-flood tide and that at station IMO6 exceeded it at the mid-ebb tide. Such exceedances are more likely due to natural fluctuations of SS observed in the Pearl River Estuary (see Section 3.2 for further details). Moreover, all SS levels recorded at all impact stations in November 2009 did not exceed the predictions, which can further imply that such exceedance is unlikely due to the project works.
6.1 Key Issues for the Next Reporting Period
Key issued to be considered in the next reporting period will be:
· Dust release and suppression; and
· Water discharge.
6.2 Impact Prediction for the Next Reporting Period
Provided that environmental mitigation measures including good on-site practises are properly implemented, it is not expected that unacceptable adverse impact will arise.
6.3 Works and Monitoring Schedule for the Next Reporting Period
Work programme for the next reporting period includes:
· Site works at Phase 1b (construction works for tank farm, drainages, emergency vehicle access road etc).
Weekly site inspections of Phase 1b construction site will be undertaken in accordance with the EM&A Manual and bi-monthly Landscape and Visual audits will be undertaken for the first 12 months of operation, also in accordance with the EM&A Manual.
It is expected that the majority of the remaining construction works will be completed by August 2010.
6.4 Conclusion
The EM&A works were conducted throughout the annual reporting period and the relevant monitoring was conducted in accordance with the EP’s requirements. Mitigation measures were used to minimise the environmental impacts, where appropriate.
Some environmental deficiencies were observed during the weekly site inspections and where necessary, the Contractor implemented corrective actions to mitigate the issues. With Phase 1a operational on 30 March 2010, bi-monthly landscape and visual audits also started in April 2010. Overall, the site was considered to be in an orderly manner.
Water quality in the vicinity of the project area during construction (pipeline repair works) was found to be similar to that collected during baseline monitoring conducted prior to the commencement of the Project works and any changes recorded appear to be as a result of natural or seasonal variations. This implies the impact of the project works on the water quality at the Project Site is negligible.
Prior to Phase 1a becoming operational on 30 March 2010, post-construction marine mammal monitoring results concluded that the variation of Humpback dolphin abundance and sighting numbers, in between pre- and post-construction of PAFF, are not significant and the construction of Phase 1a of PAFF does not appear to have had any adverse effects on the marine mammals in the vicinity.
It is concluded the current EM&A programme, including the monitoring programme and the mitigation measure herein, is sufficient to monitor the environmental performance of the project works and during the reporting period the project works had a negligible adverse environmental impact.