TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.4 Summary of Construction
Works
1.5 Summary of EM&A
Programme Requirements
2.4 Monitoring Parameters,
Frequency and Duration
2.6 Monitoring Schedule for
the Reporting Month
3.4 Monitoring Parameters,
Frequency and Duration
3.6 Monitoring Schedule for
the Reporting Month
4.3 Monitoring Parameters,
Frequency and Duration
4.6 Monitoring Schedule for
the Reporting Month
5.3 Monitoring Frequency and
Conditions
5.4 Monitoring Methodology
and Location
5.6 Monitoring Schedule for
the Reporting Month
6 ENVIRONMENTAL
SITE INSPECTION AND AUDIT
6.2 Advice on the Solid and
Liquid Waste Management Status
6.3 Environmental Licenses
and Permits
6.4 Implementation Status of
Environmental Mitigation Measures
6.5 Summary of Exceedances of
the Environmental Quality Performance Limit
6.6 Summary of Complaints,
Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecutions
7.1 Construction Programme
for the Coming Months
7.2 Key Issues for the
Coming Month
7.3 Monitoring Schedule for
the Coming Month
8 ConclusionS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS
List of Tables
Table 1.1 Contact Information of Key Personnel
Table 2.1 Air
Quality Monitoring Equipment
Table 2.2 Locations
of Impact Air Quality Monitoring Stations
Table 2.3 Air
Quality Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
Table 2.4 Summary of
1-hour TSP Monitoring Results in the Reporting Period
Table 2.5 Summary of
24-hour TSP Monitoring Results in the Reporting Period
Table 3.1 Noise
Monitoring Equipment
Table 3.2 Locations
of Impact Noise Monitoring Stations
Table 3.3 Noise
Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
Table 3.4 Summary of
Construction Noise Monitoring Results in the Reporting Period
Table 4.1 Water
Quality Monitoring Equipment
Table 4.2 Impact
Water Quality Monitoring Parameters and Frequency
Table 4.3 Impact
Water Quality Monitoring Stations
Table 4.4 Laboratory
Analysis for Suspended Solids
Table 4.5 Summary of
Water Quality Exceedances
Table 5.1 Dolphin
Monitoring Equipment
Table 5.2 Impact
Dolphin Monitoring Line Transect Co-ordinates (Provided by AFCD)
Table 5.3 Impact Dolphin
Monitoring Survey Effort Summary, Effort by Area and Beaufort Sea State
Table 5.4 Impact
Dolphin Monitoring Survey Details in March 2014
Table 5.5 The
Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphin Sightings & Total Number of Dolphins
per Area^
Table 6.1 Summary of
Environmental Licensing and Permit Status
Figures
Figure 1 General Project Layout Plan
Figure
2 Impact Air Quality and Noise
Monitoring Stations and Wind Station
Figure
3 Impact Water Quality Monitoring
Stations
Figure
4 Impact Dolphin Monitoring Line
Transect Layout Map
Figure
5 Impact Dolphin Monitoring Survey
Efforts and Sightings in March 2014
Figure 6 Environmental Complaint Handling
Procedure
List of Appendices
Appendix
A Project Organization for
Environmental Works
Appendix B Three Month Rolling Construction
Programmes
Appendix C Implementation
Schedule of Environmental Mitigation Measures (EMIS)
Appendix D Summary of Action and Limit Levels
Appendix E Calibration Certificates of Monitoring Equipments
Appendix F EM&A Monitoring Schedules
Appendix
G Impact Air Quality Monitoring
Results and their Graphical Presentation
Appendix H Meteorological Data for
Monitoring Periods on Monitoring Dates in March 2014
Appendix
I Impact Construction Noise
Monitoring Results and their Graphical Presentation
Appendix J Impact
Water Quality Monitoring Results and their
Graphical Presentation
Appendix
K Impact Dolphin Monitoring Survey
Sighting Summary
Appendix M Monthly Summary of Waste Flow Table
This report documents the findings
of EM&A works conducted in the period between 1 and 31 March 2014. As informed
by the Contractor, major activities in the reporting period were:-
Marine-based Works
-
Connecting arc cell installation
-
Laying geo-textile
-
Sand blanket laying
-
Sand filling
-
Maintenance of silt curtain & silt screen at sea water intake of
HKIA
-
Stone column installation
-
Band drain installation
-
Backfill cellular structure
-
Geotechnical Instrumentation works
-
Construction of temporary seawall
-
Portion D Construction of Access to Portion A
-
Surcharge laying
-
Construction of temporary pier at Portion A
-
Precast Yard setup
-
Seawall blocks for temporary construction
-
Vibro-compaction on surcharge
-
Capping Beams structures
-
Construction of Conveyors for public fill
-
Temporary bridge at Portion D
Land-based Works
-
Maintenance of Temporary Marine Access at Works Area WA2Maintenance
works of Site Office at Works Area WA2
-
Maintenance works of Public Works Regional Laboratory at Works Area
WA3
-
Geo-textile fabrication at Works Area WA2
-
Installed sand bag at Works Area WA2
-
Maintenance of Temporary Marine Access at Works Area WA2
A summary of monitoring and audit activities
conducted in the reporting period is listed below:
24-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP)
monitoring 1-hour TSP monitoring |
5 sessions 5 sessions |
Noise monitoring |
4 sessions |
Impact water quality monitoring |
13 sessions |
Impact dolphin monitoring |
2 surveys |
Joint Environmental site inspection |
4 sessions |
Breaches
of Action and Limit Levels for Air Quality
All 1-Hour TSP results were below the Action
and Limit Level in the reporting month. One (1) Action Level Exceedance was recorded
at measured 24-hour TSP results in the reporting month. No Limit Level Exceedance was recorded at
measured 24-hour TSP results in the reporting month. Investigation results showed that the action
Level exceedance was not related to project.
Breaches
of Action and Limit Levels for Water Quality
Complaint,
Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecution
One notification of summons was received in the
reporting month due to works carried out contrary to conditions of NCO, Cap.400
on 6 October 13. No successful prosecution was received in the reporting
period.
Reporting Change
There was no
reporting change required in the reporting period.
Future Key Issues
Key issues to be considered in
the coming month included:-
-
Site runoff should be properly collected and treated prior to discharge;
-
Minimize loss of sediment from filling works;
-
Regular review and maintenance of silt curtain systems, drainage systems
and desilting facilities;
-
Exposed surfaces/soil stockpiles should be properly treated to avoid
generation of silty surface run-off during rainstorm;
-
Regular review and maintenance of wheel washing facilities provided at
all site entrances/exits;
-
Conduct regular inspection of various working machineries and vessels
within works areas to avoid any dark smoke emission;
-
Suppress dust generated from work processes with use of bagged cements,
earth movements, excavation activities, exposed surfaces/soil stockpiles and
haul road traffic;
-
Quieter powered mechanical equipment should be used;
-
Provision of proper and effective noise control measures for operating
equipment and machinery on-site, such as erection of movable noise barriers or
enclosure for noisy plants;
-
Closely check and replace the sound insulation materials regularly;
-
Better scheduling of construction works to minimize noise nuisance;
-
Properly store and label oil drums and chemical containers placed on
site;
-
Proper chemicals, chemical wastes and wastes management;
-
Maintenance works should be carried out within roofed, paved and
confined areas;
-
Collection and segregation of construction waste and general refuse on
land and in the sea should be carried out properly and regularly; and
-
Proper protection and regular inspection of existing trees,
transplanted/retained trees.
Table 1.1 Contact Information of Key Personnel
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Fax |
Engineer’s Representative (ER) (Ove
Arup & Partners Hong Kong Limited) |
Chief Resident Engineer |
Roger Marechal |
3698 5700 |
2698 5999 |
IEC / ENPO (ENVIRON Hong Kong Limited) |
Independent Environmental Checker |
Raymond Dai |
3465 2888 |
3465 2899 |
Environmental Project Office Leader |
Y. H. Hui |
3465 2868 |
3465 2899 |
|
Contractor (China Harbour Engineering
Company Limited) |
Environmental Officer |
Richard Ng |
36932253 |
2578 0413 |
24-hour Hotline |
Alan C.C. Yeung |
9448 0325 |
-- |
|
ET (AECOM
Asia Company Limited) |
ET Leader |
Echo Leong |
3922 9280 |
2317 7609 |
Marine-based Works
- Connecting arc cell installation
- Laying geo-textile
- Sand blanket laying
- Sand filling
- Maintenance of silt curtain & silt screen at sea water intake of HKIA
- Stone column installation
- Band drain installation
- Backfill cellular structure
- Geotechnical Instrumentation works
- Construction of temporary seawall
-
Portion D
Construction of Access to Portion A
-
Surcharge
laying
- Construction of temporary pier at Portion A
- Precast Yard setup
- Seawall blocks for temporary construction
- Vibro-compaction on surcharge
- Capping Beams structures
- Construction of Conveyors for public fill
- Temporary bridge at Portion D
Land-based Works
-
Maintenance works of Site Office at Works Area WA2
-
Maintenance works of Public Works Regional Laboratory at
Works Area WA3
-
Geo-textile
fabrication at Works Area WA2
-
Installed
sand bag at Works Area WA2
-
Maintenance of Temporary Marine Access at
Works Area WA2
-
All monitoring parameters;
-
Monitoring schedules for
the reporting month and forthcoming month;
-
Action and Limit levels
for all environmental parameters;
-
Event / Action Plan;
-
Environmental mitigation
measures, as recommended in the Project EIA reports; and
-
Environmental requirement
in contract documents.
Table
2.1 Air Quality Monitoring
Equipment
Equipment |
Brand and Model |
Portable direct
reading dust meter (1-hour TSP) |
Sibata Digital
Dust Monitor (Model No. LD-3 and LD-3B) |
High Volume
Sampler |
Tisch Environmental
Mass Flow Controlled Total Suspended Particulate (TSP) High Volume Air
Sampler (Model No.
TE-5170) |
Table 2.2 Locations of Impact Air Quality
Monitoring Stations
Monitoring Station |
Location |
Description |
AMS2 |
Tung
Chung Development
Pier |
Rooftop
of the premise |
AMS3B |
Site
Boundary of Site Office Area
at Works Area WA2 |
On ground at the area boundary |
AMS6* |
Dragonair/CNAC (Group) Building |
On ground at boundary of the premise |
AMS7 |
Hong
Kong SkyCity Marriott
Hotel |
On ground at boundary of the premise |
#Remarks: Reference is made to EPD conditional
approval of the omission of air monitoring station (AMS 6) for the project. The
omission will be effective on 19 November 2012.
Table 2.3 Air
Quality Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
Parameter |
Frequency and Duration |
1-hour TSP |
Three times every 6 days while
the highest dust impact was expected |
24-hour TSP |
Once every 6 days |
(a)
The HVS was installed in the vicinity of the
air sensitive receivers. The following
criteria were considered in the installation of the HVS.
(i)
A horizontal platform with appropriate
support to secure the sampler against gusty wind was provided.
(ii)
No two samplers should be placed less than 2 meters
apart.
(iii)
The distance between the HVS and any
obstacles, such as buildings, was at least twice the height that the obstacle
protrudes above the HVS.
(iv)
A minimum of 2 meters separation from walls,
parapets and penthouse for rooftop sampler.
(v)
A minimum of 2 meters separation from any supporting
structure, measured horizontally is required.
(vi)
No furnace or incinerator flues nearby.
(vii)
Airflow around the sampler was unrestricted.
(viii)
Permission was obtained to set up the samplers
and access to the monitoring stations.
(ix)
A secured supply of electricity was obtained
to operate the samplers.
(x)
The sampler was located more than 20 meters
from any dripline.
(xi)
Any wire fence and gate, required to protect
the sampler, did not obstruct the monitoring process.
(xii)
Flow control accuracy was kept within ±2.5%
deviation over 24-hour sampling period.
(b)
Preparation of Filter Papers
(i)
Glass fibre filters, G810 were labelled and
sufficient filters that were clean and without pinholes were selected.
(ii)
All filters were equilibrated in the
conditioning environment for 24 hours before weighing. The conditioning
environment temperature was around 25 °C and not variable by more than ±3 °C;
the relative humidity (RH) was < 50% and not variable by more than ±5%. A
convenient working RH was 40%.
(iii)
All filter papers were prepared and analysed
by ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd., which is a HOKLAS accredited laboratory and
has comprehensive quality assurance and quality control programmes.
(c)
Field Monitoring
(i)
The power supply was checked to ensure the
HVS works properly.
(ii)
The filter holder and the area surrounding
the filter were cleaned.
(iii)
The filter holder was removed by loosening
the four bolts and a new filter, with stamped number upward, on a supporting
screen was aligned carefully.
(iv)
The filter was properly aligned on the screen
so that the gasket formed an airtight seal on the outer edges of the filter.
(v)
The swing bolts were fastened to hold the
filter holder down to the frame. The
pressure applied was sufficient to avoid air leakage at the edges.
(vi)
Then the shelter lid was closed and was
secured with the aluminum strip.
(vii)
The HVS was warmed-up for about 5 minutes to
establish run-temperature conditions.
(viii)
A new flow rate record sheet was set into the
flow recorder.
(ix)
On site temperature and atmospheric pressure
readings were taken and the flow rate of the HVS was checked and adjusted at
around 1.1 m3/min, and complied with the range specified in the
updated EM&A Manual (i.e. 0.6-1.7 m3/min).
(x)
The programmable digital timer was set for a
sampling period of 24 hrs, and the starting time, weather condition and the
filter number were recorded.
(xi)
The initial elapsed time was recorded.
(xii)
At the end of sampling, on site temperature
and atmospheric pressure readings were taken and the final flow rate of the HVS
was checked and recorded.
(xiii)
The final elapsed time was recorded.
(xiv)
The sampled filter was removed carefully and
folded in half length so that only surfaces with collected particulate matter
were in contact.
(xv)
It was then placed in a clean plastic
envelope and sealed.
(xvi)
All monitoring information was recorded on a
standard data sheet.
(xvii)
Filters were then sent to ALS Technichem (HK)
Pty Ltd. for analysis.
(d)
Maintenance and Calibration
(i)
The HVS and its accessories were maintained
in good working condition, such as replacing motor brushes routinely and
checking electrical wiring to ensure a continuous power supply.
(ii)
5-point calibration of the HVS was conducted
using TE-5025A Calibration Kit prior to the commencement of baseline
monitoring. Bi-monthly 5-point calibration of the HVS will be carried out
during impact monitoring.
(iii)
Calibration certificate of the HVSs are
provided in Appendix E.
(a)
Measuring Procedures
The measuring procedures of the 1-hour dust
meter were in accordance with the Manufacturer’s Instruction Manual as
follows:-
(i)
Turn the power on.
(ii)
Close the air collecting opening cover.
(iii)
Push the “TIME SETTING” switch to [BG].
(iv)
Push “START/STOP” switch to perform background
measurement for 6 seconds.
(v)
Turn the knob at SENSI ADJ position to insert
the light scattering plate.
(vi)
Leave the equipment for 1 minute upon “SPAN
CHECK” is indicated in the display.
(vii)
Push “START/STOP” switch to perform automatic
sensitivity adjustment. This measurement takes 1 minute.
(viii)
Pull out the knob and return it to MEASURE
position.
(ix)
Push the “TIME SETTING” switch the time set
in the display to 3 hours.
(x)
Lower down the air collection opening cover.
(xi)
Push “START/STOP” switch to start
measurement.
(b)
Maintenance and Calibration
(i)
The 1-hour TSP meter was calibrated at 1-year
intervals against a continuous particulate TEOM Monitor, Series 1400ab.
Calibration certificates of the Laser Dust Monitors are provided in Appendix E.
(ii)
1-hour validation checking of the TSP meter
against HVS is carried out on half-year basis at the air quality monitoring locations.
Table 2.4 Summary of 1-hour TSP Monitoring
Results in the Reporting Period
|
Average (mg/m3) |
Range (mg/m3) |
Action Level (mg/m3) |
Limit Level (mg/m3) |
AMS2 |
83 |
78 – 89 |
374 |
500 |
AMS3B |
83 |
79 –
87 |
368 |
500 |
AMS7 |
83 |
78 – 89 |
370 |
500 |
Table 2.5 Summary
of 24-hour TSP Monitoring Results in the Reporting Period
|
Average (mg/m3) |
Range (mg/m3) |
Action Level (mg/m3) |
Limit Level (mg/m3) |
AMS2 |
95 |
75 – 111 |
176 |
260 |
AMS3B |
125 |
106 – 178 |
167 |
260 |
AMS7 |
81 |
46 – 111 |
183 |
260 |
2.7.4.1 According
to information provided by the Contractor, land-based construction activity
such transloading stitched geotextile and transloading sand bags to barges was
being undertaken at Works Area WA2 during the monitoring period.
2.7.4.2 Functional
checking on HVS at AMS3B was done. Air flow of the HVS was checked and the flow
was steady during the 24-hr TSP sampling at AMS3B. The filter paper was
re-weighted by the assigned HOKLAS laboratory and the result was reconfirmed.
2.7.4.3 As
refer to the wind data collected at wind station at Works Area WA2 during the
monitoring period on 10 and 11 Mar 14 (as attached) Southeast to
South-southeast winds was prevailing during the monitoring period. As such, the 24hr-TSP exceedance is unlikely
to be contributed by active works at the HKBCF – reclamations works which is
located North to the monitoring location.
2.7.4.4 The
1-hr TSP values recorded at AMS3B on 11 Mar 14, which are within the monitoring
period of the 24-hr TSP, were 83μg/ m3, 80μg/ m3 and
81μg/ m3 respectively. All measured values are well below the
Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.4.5 The
measured 24-hr TSP values recorded at AMS2 and AMS7 (which are closer to the
marine-based works areas) on the same monitoring date were 111μg/m3 and
90μg/m3, which are below the Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.4.6 The
measured 24-hr TSP values recorded at AMS3B on next monitoring date were
106μg/m3, which did not exceed the Action or Limit Level.
2.7.4.7 The
following dust mitigation measures have been implemented at Works Area WA2:
1.
Works Area WA2’s surface was hard-paved, compacted or
hydro-seeded (Please refer to attached layout map and photo record (View B))
2.
Vehicle washing facility was provided at vehicle exit
points,
3.
Measures for preventing fugitive dust emission are provided,
e.g. canvas/tarpaulin covers.
View B (Hard paved surface observed at
Works Area WA2)
2.7.4.8 The
dust exceedance was therefore considered not to be due to the Project works.
Table 3.1 Noise
Monitoring Equipment
Equipment |
Brand and Model |
Integrated Sound Level Meter |
Rion NL-31 &
B&K2238 |
Acoustic Calibrator |
Rion NC-73 |
Table 3.2 Locations
of Impact Noise Monitoring Stations
Monitoring Station |
Location |
Description |
NMS2 |
Seaview Crescent Tower 1 |
Free-field on
the rooftop of the premise |
NMS3B |
Site Boundary of Site Office Area at Works Area
WA2 |
Free-field on ground at
the area boundary. |
Table 3.3 Noise Monitoring Parameters, Frequency
and Duration
Parameter |
Frequency
and Duration |
30-mins measurement at each monitoring station between 0700 and 1900
on normal weekdays (Monday to Saturday). Leq, L10 and L90
would be recorded. |
At least once per week |
(a)
The sound level meter was set on a tripod at
a height of 1.2 m above the ground for free-field measurements at NMS2. A
correction of +3 dB(A) shall be made to the free field measurements.
(b)
All measurement
at NMS3A were free field measurements in the reporting
month at NMS3A. A
correction of +3 dB(A) shall be made to the free field measurements.
(c)
The battery condition was checked to ensure
the correct functioning of the meter.
(d)
Parameters such as frequency weighting, the
time weighting and the measurement time were set as follows:-
(i)
frequency weighting: A
(ii)
time weighting: Fast
(iii)
time measurement: Leq(30-minutes)
during non-restricted hours i.e. 07:00 – 1900 on normal weekdays.
(e)
Prior to and after each noise measurement,
the meter was calibrated using the acoustic calibrator for 94dB(A) at 1000
Hz. If the difference in the calibration
level before and after measurement was more than 1 dB(A), the measurement would
be considered invalid and repeat of noise measurement would be required after
re-calibration or repair of the equipment.
(f)
During the monitoring period, the Leq,
L10 and L90 were recorded. In addition, site conditions and noise
sources were recorded on a standard record sheet.
(g)
Noise measurement was paused during periods
of high intrusive noise (e.g. dog barking, helicopter noise) if possible.
Observations were recorded when intrusive noise was unavoidable.
(h)
Noise monitoring was cancelled in the
presence of fog, rain, wind with a steady speed exceeding 5m/s, or wind with
gusts exceeding 10m/s.
The wind speed shall be checked with a portable wind speed meter capable of
measuring the wind speed in m/s.
(a)
The microphone head of the sound level meter
was cleaned with soft cloth at regular intervals.
(b)
The meter and calibrator were sent to the
supplier or HOKLAS laboratory to check and calibrate at yearly intervals.
(c)
Calibration certificates of the sound level
meters and acoustic calibrators are provided in Appendix E.
Table 3.4 Summary
of Construction Noise Monitoring Results in the Reporting Period
|
Average, dB(A), Leq (30 mins) |
Range, dB(A), Leq (30 mins) |
Limit Level, dB(A), Leq (30 mins) |
NMS2 |
68 |
68 – 69* |
75 |
NMS3B |
67 |
66 – 68* |
70^
|
*+3dB(A) Façade correction
included
^
Daytime noise Limit Level of 70 dB(A) applies
to education institutions, while 65dB(A) applies during school examination
period.
Table 4.1 Water Quality Monitoring Equipment
Equipment |
Brand
and Model |
Dissolved
Oxygen (DO) and Temperature Meter, Salinity Meter and Turbidimeter |
YSI
Model 6820 |
pH
Meter |
YSI
Model 6820 or Thermo Orion 230A+ |
Positioning
Equipment |
JRC
DGPS 224 Model JLR-4341 with J-NAV 500 Model NWZ4551 |
Water
Depth Detector |
Eagle
Cuda-168 |
Water
Sampler |
Kahlsio
Water Sampler (Vertical) 2.2 L with messenger |
Table
4.2 Impact Water Quality
Monitoring Parameters and Frequency
Monitoring
Stations |
Parameter,
unit |
Frequency |
No. of
depth |
Impact Stations: IS5, IS(Mf)6, IS7, IS8, IS(Mf)9, IS10,
IS(Mf)11, IS(Mf)16, IS17 Control/Far Field
Stations: CS(Mf)3, CS(Mf)5, CS4, CS6, CSA Sensitive
Receiver Stations: SR3-SR7, SR10A&SR10B |
·
Depth, m ·
Temperature, oC ·
Salinity, ppt ·
Dissolved Oxygen (DO), mg/L ·
DO Saturation, % ·
Turbidity, NTU ·
pH ·
Suspended Solids (SS), mg/L |
Three times per
week during mid-ebb and mid-flood tides (within ± 1.75 hour of the predicted
time) |
3 (1 m below water
surface, mid-depth and 1 m above sea bed, except where the water depth is
less than 6 m, in which case the mid-depth station may be omitted.
Should the water depth be less than 3 m, only the mid-depth station will be
monitored). |
Table
4.3 Impact Water Quality
Monitoring Stations
Station |
Description |
East |
North |
IS5 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site) |
811579 |
817106 |
IS(Mf)6 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site) |
812101 |
817873 |
IS7 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site) |
812244 |
818777 |
IS8 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site) |
814251 |
818412 |
IS(Mf)9 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site) |
813273 |
818850 |
IS10 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site) |
812577 |
820670 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site) |
813562 |
820716 |
|
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site) |
814328 |
819497 |
|
IS17 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF
construction site) |
814539 |
820391 |
SR3 |
Sensitive receivers (San Tau SSSI) |
810525 |
816456 |
SR4(N) |
Sensitive receivers (Tai Ho) |
814705 |
817859 |
SR5 |
Sensitive receivers (Artificial Reef in NE
Airport) |
811489 |
820455 |
SR6 |
Sensitive receivers (Sha Chau and Lung Kwu
Chau Marine Park) |
805837 |
821818 |
SR7 |
Sensitive receivers (Tai Mo Do) |
814293 |
821431 |
SR10A |
Sensitive receivers (Ma Wan FCZ)1 |
823741 |
823495 |
SR10B(N) |
Sensitive receivers (Ma Wan FCZ)2 |
823683 |
823187 |
Control Station |
809989 |
821117 |
|
Control Station |
817990 |
821129 |
|
CS4 |
Control Station |
810025 |
824004 |
CS6 |
Control Station |
817028 |
823992 |
CSA |
Control Station |
818103 |
823064 |
(a)
The in-situ water quality parameters, viz.
dissolved oxygen, temperature, salinity, turbidity and pH, were measured by multi-parameter
meters (i.e. Model YSI 6820 CE-C-M-Y) and pH meter (i.e. Thermo Orion 230A+) respectively.
(a)
Digital Differential Global Positioning Systems (DGPS) were
used to ensure that the correct location was selected prior to sample
collection.
(b)
Portable, battery-operated echo sounders were
used for the determination of water depth at each designated monitoring
station.
(c)
All in-situ measurements were taken at 3
water depths, 1 m
below water surface, mid-depth and 1 m above sea bed, except where the water
depth was less than 6 m, in which case the mid-depth station was omitted.
Should the water depth be less than 3 m, only the mid-depth station was
monitored.
(d)
At each measurement/sampling depth, two
consecutive in-situ monitoring (DO concentration and saturation, temperature,
turbidity, pH, salinity) and water sample for SS. The probes were retrieved out
of the water after the first measurement and then re-deployed for the second
measurement. Where the difference in the value between the first and second
readings of DO or turbidity parameters was more than 25% of the value of the
first reading, the reading was discarded and further readings were taken.
(e)
Duplicate samples from each independent
sampling event were collected for SS measurement. Water samples were collected
using the water samplers and the samples were stored in high-density polythene
bottles. Water samples collected were well-mixed in the water sampler prior to
pre-rinsing and transferring to sample bottles. Sample bottles were pre-rinsed
with the same water samples. The sample bottles were then be packed in
cool-boxes (cooled at 4oC without being frozen), and delivered to
ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. for the analysis of suspended solids
concentrations. The laboratory determination work would be started within 24
hours after collection of the water samples. ALS
Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. is a HOKLAS accredited laboratory and has
comprehensive quality assurance and quality control programmes. For QA/QC
procedures, one duplicate samples of every batch of 20 samples was
analyzed.
(f)
The analysis method and reporting and
detection limit for SS is shown in Table 4.4.
Table
4.4 Laboratory Analysis for
Suspended Solids
Parameters |
Instrumentation |
Analytical
Method |
Reporting
Limit |
Detection
Limit |
Suspended
Solid (SS) |
Weighting |
APHA 2540-D |
0.5mg/L |
0.5mg/L |
(g)
Other relevant data were recorded, including
monitoring location / position, time, water depth, tidal stages, weather conditions
and any special phenomena or work underway at the construction site in the
field log sheet for
information.
(a)
All in situ monitoring instruments would be
calibrated and calibrated by ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. before use and at
3-monthly intervals throughout all stages of the water quality monitoring programme. Calibration details
are provided in Appendix E.
(b)
The dissolved oxygen probe of YSI 6820 was
calibrated by wet bulb method. Before the calibration routine, the sensor for
dissolved oxygen was thermally equilibrated in water-saturated air. Calibration
cup is served as a calibration chamber and it was loosened from airtight
condition before it is used for the calibration. Calibration at ALS Technichem
(HK) Pty Ltd. was carried out once every three months in a water sample with a
known concentration of dissolved oxygen. The sensor was immersed in the water
and after thermal equilibration, the known mg/L value was keyed in and the
calibration was carried out automatically.
(c)
The turbidity probe of YSI 6820 is calibrated
two times a month. A zero check in distilled water was performed with the
turbidity probe of YSI 6820 once per monitoring day. The probe will be
calibrated with a solution of known NTU at ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. once
every three months.
Table 4.5 Summary of Water Quality
Exceedances
Exceedance Level |
DO (S&M) |
DO (Bottom) |
Turbidity |
SS |
Total |
||||||
Ebb |
Flood |
Ebb |
Flood |
Ebb |
Flood |
Ebb |
Flood |
Ebb |
Flood |
||
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 (16 March 14) |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS(Mf)6 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS7 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 (31 March 14) |
0 |
1 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS8 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS(Mf)9 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1(24 March 14) |
2 (24 and 31 March 14) |
1 |
2 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS10 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 (16 March 14) |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS(Mf)11 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS(Mf)16 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
IS17 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 (16 March 14) |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
SR3 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 (16 March 14) |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR4(N) |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR5 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 (16 March 14) |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR6 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 (31 March 14) |
0 |
1 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR7 |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR10A |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
SR10B (N) |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Total |
Action |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
4 |
4 |
9 |
|
|
Limit |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
Note: S: Surface; and
M: Mid-depth.
4.7.6.1
Please see above layout map for work activities carried out on 19 March
14.
4.7.6.2
Exceedance recorded at IS10 during mid-flood tide is unlikely due to
marine based construction activities of the Project because:
4.7.6.3
With reference to the information provided by the Contractor, same types
of work were carried out at almost the same locations on 17, 19 and 21 March
14, impact water quality monitoring data recorded on 17 and 21 March 14 are all
below the Action and Limit Level which indicates active works were unlikely to
adversely affect the water quality at IS10.
4.7.6.4
With reference to monitoring record and photo record taken on 19 and 20
March 2014, no silt plume was observed on sea near the northwest part of the
site which is close to IS10. (Please see attached photo record)
4.7.6.5
Photo of sea condition taken near the northwest part of the site (Near
IS10) on 19 March 14.
4.7.6.6
Photo of sea condition taken near the northwest part of the site (Near IS10)
on 20 March 14.
4.7.6.7
In accordance with the silt curtain integrity checking record, no
disconnection was observed at the northwest part of site which is near IS10.
4.7.6.8
Turbidity level recorded at IS10, SR5 and IS(Mf)11 were below the action
and limit level. This indicates the turbidity level at area near IS10 was not
adversely affected.
4.7.6.9
The exceedance was likely due to local effects in the vicinity of IS10.
4.7.6.10
As such, the exceedance recorded at IS10 is unlikely to be project
related.
4.7.6.11
For the action Level Exceedance on Turbidity recorded at SR5 on 19 March
14.
4.7.6.12
in situ measurement was repeated to
confirm findings;
4.7.6.13
The monitoring location of monitoring station SR5 is considered upstream
to the active works of this project during ebb tide. Therefore it appears that
it was unlikely that the exceedance recorded at SR5 was due to active
construction activities of this project;
4.7.6.14
IEC, contractor and ER were informed via email;
4.7.6.15
Monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor's working methods
were checked;
4.7.6.16
Since it is considered that the exceedance at SR5 is unlikely to be
project related, as such, actions 5 - 7 under the EAP are not considered
applicable.
4.7.6.17
Exceedance recorded at SR5 during mid-ebb tide are unlikely due to
marine based construction activities of the Project because:
4.7.6.18
With reference to the information provided by the Contractor, same types
of work were carried out at almost the same locations on 17, 19 and 21 March
14, impact water quality monitoring data recorded on 17 and 21 March 14 are all
below the Action and Limit Level which indicates active works were unlikely to
adversely affect the water quality at SR5.
4.7.6.19
The monitoring location of monitoring station SR5 is considered upstream
to the active works of this project during ebb tide. Therefore it appears that
it was unlikely that the exceedance recorded at SR5 was due to active
construction activities of this project.
4.7.6.20
With reference to the silt curtain checking record no defects was
observed at parts of the perimeter silt curtain which are close to the SR5.
4.7.6.21
The exceedance was likely due to local effects in the vicinity of SR5.
4.7.6.22
As such, the exceedance recorded at SR5 is unlikely to be project
related.
4.7.6.23
Exceedance recorded at SR3 during mid-ebb tide are unlikely due to
marine based construction activities of the Project because:
4.7.6.24
With reference to the information provided by the Contractor, same types
of work were carried out at almost the same locations on 17, 19 and 21 March
14, impact water quality monitoring data recorded on 17 and 21 March 14 are all
below the Action and Limit Level which indicates active works were unlikely to
adversely affect the water quality at SR3.
4.7.6.25
The monitoring location of monitoring station SR3 is considered upstream
to the active works of this project during ebb tide. Therefore it appears that
it was unlikely that the exceedance recorded at SR3 was due to active
construction activities of this project.
4.7.6.26
With reference to the silt curtain checking record no defects was
observed at parts of the perimeter silt curtain which are close to the SR3.
4.7.6.27
The exceedance was likely due to local effects in the vicinity of SR3.
4.7.6.28
As such, the exceedance recorded at SR3 is unlikely to be project
related.
4.7.6.29
Exceedance recorded at IS5 during mid-ebb tide are unlikely due to
marine based construction activities of the Project because:
4.7.6.30
With reference to the information provided by the Contractor, same types
of work were carried out at almost the same locations on 17, 19 and 21 March
14, impact water quality monitoring data recorded on 17 and 21 March 14 are all
below the Action and Limit Level which indicates active works were unlikely to
adversely affect the water quality at IS5.
4.7.6.31
The monitoring location of monitoring station IS5 is considered upstream
to the active works of this project during ebb tide. Therefore it appears that
it was unlikely that the exceedance recorded at IS5 were due to active construction
activities of this project.
4.7.6.32
With reference to the silt curtain checking record no defects was
observed at parts of the perimeter silt curtain which are close to the IS5.
4.7.6.33
The exceedance was likely due to local effects in the vicinity of IS5.
4.7.6.34
As such, the exceedance recorded at IS5 is unlikely to be project
related.
4.7.6.35
Exceedance recorded at IS17 during mid-ebb tide are unlikely due to
marine based construction activities of the Project because:
4.7.6.36
With reference to the information provided by the Contractor, same types
of work were carried out at almost the same locations on 17, 19 and 21 March
14, impact water quality monitoring data recorded on 17 and 21 March 14 are all
below the Action and Limit Level which indicates active works were unlikely to
adversely affect the water quality at SR5, IS5, SR3 and IS17.
4.7.6.37
With reference to monitoring record and photo record taken on 19 and 20
March 2014, no silt plume was observed on sea near the northeast part of the
site which is close to IS17. (Please see attached photo record)
4.7.6.38
Photo of sea condition taken near the northeast part of the site (Near
IS17) on 19 March 14.
4.7.6.39
Photo of sea condition taken near the northeast part of the site (Near
IS17) on 20 March 14.
4.7.6.40
With reference to the silt curtain checking record no defects was
observed at parts of the perimeter silt curtain which are close to the
locations where the exceedance was recorded during mid-ebb tide.
4.7.6.41
Turbidity level recorded at IS(Mf)11, IS17 and IS(Mf)16 were below the
action and limit level. This indicates
the turbidity level at area near IS17 was not adversely affected.
4.7.6.42
The exceedance is likely due to local effects in the vicinity of IS17.
4.7.6.43
As such, the exceedance recorded at IS17 is unlikely to be project
related.
4.7.6.44
Nevertheless, the Contractor was reminded to ensure provision of ongoing
maintenance to the silt curtains and to carry out maintenance work once defects
were found.
4.7.6.45
Maintenance work of the silt curtain was carried out by the Contractor
on a daily basis except Sunday and public holiday.
4.7.7.1
Please see above layout map for work activities carried out on 24 March
14.
4.7.7.2
In accordance with the silt curtain integrity checking record,
deficiency such as missing segments at one end of the perimeter silt curtain at
the southern marine access was noted. This part of the perimeter silt curtain
is close to IS(Mf)9. The Contractor was
reminded to ensure provision of ongoing maintenance to the silt curtains and to
carry out maintenance work once defects were found and maintenance work of the
silt curtain was carried out by the Contractor on a daily basis except Sunday
and public holiday.
4.7.7.3
However, exceedances recorded at IS(Mf)9 recorded during mid-Ebb tide
and mid-Flood tide are unlikely due to marine based construction activities of
the Project because:
4.7.7.4
With reference to the information provided by the Contractor, same types
of work were carried out at almost the same locations on 21, 24 and 26 March
2014, impact water quality monitoring data recorded on 21 and 26 March 2014 are
all below the Action and Limit Level which indicates active works as shown on
the layout map attached is unlikely to adversely affect the water quality at
IS(Mf)9.
4.7.7.5
Mitigation measures such as localised silt curtain was implemented for
stone column installation. (Please refer to the photo record)
4.7.7.6
Also, in accordance with the monitoring record, no silt plume was
observed to flow from the inside of the perimeter silt curtain to the outside
of the perimeter silt curtain during impact water quality monitoring on 24
March 2014. (Please refer to the photo attached which shows the sea condition
near IS(Mf)9 on 24 March 2014.)
4.7.7.7
Photo of silt curtain near south part of the site IS(Mf)9 on 24 March
2014.
4.7.7.8
With referred to the monitoring data, turbidity level recorded at IS7,
IS(Mf)9, IS8 and IS(Mf)16 were below the action and limit level. This indicates
the turbidity level at area near IS(Mf)9 was not adversely affected.
4.7.7.9
In addition, with referred to the monitoring data, the Suspended Solids
recorded at IS7, IS8 and IS(Mf)16 were below the action and limit level. This
indicates the Suspended Solids at areas next to IS(Mf)9 was not adversely
affected.
4.7.7.10
The exceedance was likely due to local effects in the vicinity of
IS(Mf)9.
4.7.7.11
As such, the exceedance recorded at IS(Mf)9 is unlikely to be project
related.
4.7.7.12
Nonetheless, the Contractor was reminded to ensure provision of ongoing
maintenance to the silt curtains and to carry out maintenance work once defects
were found.
4.7.7.13
Maintenance work of the silt curtain was carried out by the Contractor
on a daily basis except Sunday and public holiday.
4.7.8.1
Please see above layout map for work activities carried out on 31 March
14.
4.7.8.2
IS10 and SR5 which are located downstream and closer to active works
than SR6. No Action and Limit Level exceedance was recorded at IS10 and SR5
during mid flood tide on 31 March 2014 and this indicates that the water
quality noted at downstream and closer to active works were not adversely affected,
hence it is considered that the exceedance recorded at SR6 are not related to
the Project.
4.7.8.3
Same type of works was carried out at almost the same locations on 28
and 31 March 2014 but Suspended Solids values recorded at 28 March 2014 are all
below the Action and Limit Level during mid-flood tide, this indicates active
works as shown on the layout map attached is unlikely to contribute to the
exceedances recorded at IS(Mf)9, IS7 and SR6.
4.7.8.4
With reference to layout map attached, construction activity close to
IS(Mf)9 and IS7 such as band drain installation was conducted at southeast part
of portion B, since band drain is considered unlikely to cause silt plume.
Therefore, the exceedances are unlikely attributed to construction activity
close to IS(Mf)9 and IS7.
4.7.8.5
In accordance with the silt curtain integrity checking record, defects
such as missing segments at southern marine access at one end of the perimeter
silt curtain was noted. This part of the perimeter silt curtain is close to
IS(Mf)9. The Contractor was reminded to
ensure provision of ongoing maintenance to the silt curtains and to carry out
maintenance work once defects were found and maintenance work of the silt
curtain was carried out by the Contractor on a daily basis except Sunday and public
holiday.
4.7.8.6
However, in accordance with the monitoring record, no silt plume was
observed outside the perimeter silt curtain near IS(Mf)9 and IS7 on 31 March
2014. (Please refer to the photo below which shows the sea condition near
IS(Mf)9 on 31 March 2014.)
4.7.8.7
With referred to the monitoring data, turbidity level recorded at
IS(Mf)6, IS7, IS(Mf)9, IS8 and IS(Mf)16 were below the action and limit level.
This indicates the turbidity level at area near IS(Mf)9 and IS7 were not
adversely affected.
4.7.8.8
The exceedances are likely due to local effects in the vicinity of
IS(Mf)9, IS7 and SR6.
4.7.8.9
As such, the exceedances recorded at IS(Mf)9, IS7 and SR6 were unlikely
to be project related.
4.7.8.10
Nonetheless, the Contractor was reminded to ensure provision of ongoing
maintenance to the silt curtains and to carry out maintenance work once defects
were found.
4.7.8.11
Maintenance work of the silt curtain was carried out by the Contractor
on a daily basis except Sunday and public holiday.
Table 5.1 Dolphin Monitoring Equipment
Equipment |
Model |
Commercially licensed motor vessel |
15m in
length with a 4.5m viewing platform |
Global Positioning
System (GPS) x2 |
Integrated into T7000 Garmin GPS Map 78C |
Computers
(T7000 Tablet, Intel Atom) |
Windows 7/MSO 13 Logger
|
Camera
|
Nikon D90 300m 2.8D
fixed focus Nikon D90 20-400m zoom lens |
Laser
Rangefinder |
Infinitor
LRF1000/ Kings 950 |
Marine
Binocular x3 |
Nexus 7 x 50 marine
binocular with compass and reticules Fujinon 7 x 50 marine binocular
with compass and reticules |
Table 5.2 Impact Dolphin Monitoring Line
Transect Co-ordinates (Provided by AFCD)
|
HK Grid System |
Long Lat in WGS84 |
||
ID |
X |
Y |
Long |
Lat |
1 |
804671 |
814577 |
113.870308 |
22.269741 |
1 |
804671 |
831404 |
113.869975 |
22.421696 |
2 |
805475 |
815457 |
113.878087 |
22.277704 |
2 |
805477 |
826654 |
113.877896 |
22.378814 |
3 |
806464 |
819435 |
113.887615 |
22.313643 |
3 |
806464 |
822911 |
113.887550 |
22.345030 |
4 |
807518 |
819771 |
113.897833 |
22.316697 |
4 |
807518 |
829230 |
113.897663 |
22.402113 |
5 |
808504 |
820220 |
113.907397 |
22.320761 |
5 |
808504 |
828602 |
113.907252 |
22.396462 |
6 |
809490 |
820466 |
113.916965 |
22.323003 |
6 |
809490 |
825352 |
113.916884 |
22.367128 |
7 |
810499 |
820690 |
113.926752 |
22.325043 |
7 |
810499 |
824613 |
113.926688 |
22.360464 |
8 |
811508 |
820847 |
113.936539 |
22.326475 |
8 |
811508 |
824254 |
113.936486 |
22.357241 |
9 |
812516 |
820892 |
113.946329 |
22.326894 |
9 |
812516 |
824254 |
113.946279 |
22.357255 |
10* |
813525 |
818270 |
113.956156 |
22.303225 |
10* |
813525 |
824657 |
113.956065 |
22.360912 |
11 |
814556 |
818449 |
113.966160 |
22.304858 |
11 |
814556 |
820992 |
113.966125 |
22.327820 |
12 |
815542 |
818807 |
113.975726 |
22.308109 |
12 |
815542 |
824882 |
113.975647 |
22.362962 |
13 |
816506 |
819480 |
113.985072 |
22.314192 |
13 |
816506 |
824859 |
113.985005 |
22.362771 |
14 |
817537 |
820220 |
113.995070 |
22.320883 |
14 |
817537 |
824613 |
113.995018 |
22.360556 |
15 |
818568 |
820735 |
114.005071 |
22.325550 |
15 |
818568 |
824433 |
114.005030 |
22.358947 |
16 |
819532 |
821420 |
114.014420 |
22.331747 |
16 |
819532 |
824209 |
114.014390 |
22.356933 |
17 |
820451 |
822125 |
114.023333 |
22.338117 |
17 |
820451 |
823671 |
114.023317 |
22.352084 |
18 |
821504 |
822371 |
114.033556 |
22.340353 |
18 |
821504 |
823761 |
114.033544 |
22.352903 |
19 |
822513 |
823268 |
114.043340 |
22.348458 |
19 |
822513 |
824321 |
114.043331 |
22.357971 |
20 |
823477 |
823402 |
114.052695 |
22.349680 |
20 |
823477 |
824613 |
114.052686 |
22.360610 |
21 |
805476 |
827081 |
113.877878 |
22.382668 |
21 |
805476 |
830562 |
113.877811 |
22.414103 |
22 |
806464 |
824033 |
113.887520 |
22.355164 |
22 |
806464 |
829598 |
113.887416 |
22.405423 |
23 |
814559 |
821739 |
113.966142 |
22.334574 |
23 |
814559 |
824768 |
113.966101 |
22.361920 |
Table 5.3 Impact Dolphin Monitoring Survey Effort Summary, Effort by Area and Beaufort Sea State
Survey |
Date |
Area |
Beaufort |
Effort (km) |
Total Distance
Travelled (km) |
1 |
17/03/2014 |
NWL |
0 |
4.6 |
60.8 |
17/03/2014 |
NWL |
1 |
19.0 |
||
17/03/2014 |
NEL |
0 |
8.0 |
||
17/03/2014 |
NEL |
1 |
29.2 |
||
19/03/2014 |
NWL |
0 |
0.1 |
50.1 |
|
19/03/2014 |
NWL |
1 |
35.4 |
||
19/03/2014 |
NWL |
2 |
14.6 |
||
2 |
24/03/2014 |
NWL |
0 |
0.1 |
60.8 |
24/03/2014 |
NWL |
1 |
20.3 |
||
24/03/2014 |
NWL |
2 |
3.3 |
||
24/03/2014 |
NEL |
0 |
0.1 |
||
24/03/2014 |
NEL |
1 |
20.5 |
||
24/03/2014 |
NEL |
2 |
14.8 |
||
24/03/2014 |
NEL |
3 |
1.7 |
||
25/03/2014 |
NWL |
0 |
0.1 |
49.9 |
|
25/03/2014 |
NWL |
1 |
49.8 |
||
TOTAL in March 2014 |
221.6 |
*Remark: Surveys conduct under Beaufort Sea
State 3 or below are considered as under favourable condition.
Table 5.4 Impact Dolphin Monitoring Survey Details in March 2014
Date |
Location |
No. Sightings “on effort” |
No. Sightings “opportunistic” |
17/03/2014 |
NW L |
0 |
0 |
NEL |
0 |
0 |
|
19/03/2014 |
NW L |
6 |
0 |
NEL |
0 |
0 |
|
24/03/2014 |
NW L |
1 |
0 |
NEL |
0 |
0 |
|
25/03/2014 |
NW L |
3 |
0 |
NEL |
0 |
0 |
|
TOTAL in March 2014 |
10 |
0 |
Table 5.5 The
Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphin Sightings & Total Number of Dolphins
per Area^
Encounter Rate of Number
of Dolphin Sightings (STG)* |
||||||
Date |
NEL Track |
NWL Track |
NEL Sightings |
NWL Sightings |
NEL Encounter Rate |
NWL Encounter Rate |
17 & 19/03/2014 |
37.2 km |
73.7 km |
0 |
6 |
0.0 |
8.1 |
24 & 25/03/2014 |
37.1 km |
73.6 km |
0 |
4 |
0.0 |
5.4 |
Encounter Rate of
Total Number of Dolphins
(ANI)** |
||||||
Date |
NEL Track |
NWL Track |
NEL Dolphins |
NWL Dolphins |
NEL Encounter Rate |
NWL Encounter Rate |
17 & 19/03/2014 |
37.2 km |
73.7 km |
0 |
12 |
0.0 |
16.3 |
24 & 25/03/2014 |
37.1 km |
73.6 km |
0 |
10 |
0.0 |
13.6 |
* Encounter Rate of Number
of Dolphin Sightings (STG) presents encounter rates
in terms of groups per 100km.
** Encounter Rate of
Total Number of Dolphins (ANI) presents encounter rates in
terms of individuals per 100km. And the encounter rate is not corrected for
individuals, calculation may represent double counting.
^The table is made only for reference to
the quarterly STG & ANI, which were adopted for the Event & Action
Plan.
Air Quality
Noise
Water Quality
Chemical and Waste Management
Landscape and Visual Impact
Others
Table 6.1 Summary of Environmental Licensing and Permit Status
Statutory Reference |
License/ Permit |
License or Permit No. |
Valid Period |
License/ Permit Holder |
Remarks |
|
From |
To |
|||||
EIAO |
Environmental
Permit |
EP-353/2009/G |
06/08/2012 |
N/A |
HyD |
Hong Kong – Zhuhai
– Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities |
EP-354/2009/B |
28/01/2014 |
N/A |
Tuen Mun – Chek Lap
Kok Link (TMCLKL Southern Landfall
Reclamation only) |
|||
APCO |
NA notification |
-- |
30/12/2011 |
-- |
CHEC |
Works Area WA2 and
WA3 |
APCO |
NA notification |
-- |
17/01/2012 |
-- |
CHEC |
Works Area WA4 |
WDO |
Chemical Waste
Producer Registration |
5213-951-C1186-21 |
30/3/2012 |
N/A |
CHEC |
Chemical waste
produced in Contract HY/2010/02 |
WDO |
Chemical Waste
Producer Registration |
5213-974-C3750-01 |
31/10/2012 |
-- |
CHEC |
Registration as
Chemical Waste Producer at To Kau Wan(WA4) |
WDO |
Chemical Waste
Producer Registration |
5213-839-C3750-02 |
13/09/2012 |
-- |
CHEC |
Registration as Chemical
Waste Producer at TKO 137(FB) |
WDO |
Billing
Account for Disposal of Construction Waste |
7014181 |
05/12/2011 |
N/A |
CHEC |
Waste disposal in
Contract HY/2010/02 |
NCO |
Construction Noise Permit |
GW-RW0888-13 |
27/12/2013 |
26/06/2014 |
CHEC |
Works Area WA4 in Contract HY/2010/02 |
NCO |
Construction Noise Permit |
GW-RS0211-14 |
11/03/2014 |
10/09/2014 |
CHEC |
Reclamation Works in Contract HY/2010/02 |
NCO |
Construction Noise Permit |
GW-RE1345-13 |
31/12/2013 |
30/06/2014 |
CHEC |
Section of TKO Fill Bank under Contract HY/2010/02 |
6.6.2.1
Staining material, stained filling material or blue
colored sea water was not observed during a follow-up site inspection audit
conducted with the representatives of the Contractor, Residential Engineer and
IEC/ENPO on 20 Mar 14. The photo record taken during the joint site inspection
audit was attached.
|
|
|
|
6.6.2.2
The locations of stone column installation (please
refer to the attached layout map for the locations of stone column
installation) and impact water quality monitoring data recorded between 12 – 17
Mar 14 were reviewed. In accordance with the monitoring records, no
discoloration of sea water or silty plume appearance outside the seawall was
observed during the water quality monitoring between 12 – 17 Mar 14. Also, no Action/ Limit level exceedance of
water quality was recorded in the vicinities where stone column installation
were carried out.
6.6.2.3
In addition, mitigation measure for active stone
column installation such as localised silt curtain was implemented in Mar
14. Please see below photo record for
reference.
|
|
|
|
6.6.2.4
Therefore, with reference to the available
information, it is indicated that the abovementioned sea water colored in blue
observed in vicinity of HKBCF is unlikely to be project related.
6.6.3.1
No silt plume or muddy water was observed being
discharged from HKBCF – Reclamation Works during a follow-up site inspection
audit conducted with the representatives of the Contractor and Residential
Engineer 27 March 2014. Please see below photo record for reference.
|
|
|
|
6.6.3.2
The locations of stone column installation (please
refer to the attached layout map for the locations of stone column
installation) and impact water quality monitoring data recorded on 21 March
2014 were reviewed. In accordance with the monitoring records, no discoloration
of sea water or silty plume appearance outside the perimeter silt curtain was
observed during the water quality monitoring conducted on 21 March 2014. Also, no Action/ Limit level exceedance of
water quality was recorded in the vicinities where stone column installations
were carried out.
6.6.3.3
In addition, with referred to the photo record
attached, mitigation measure for active stone column installation such as
localised silt curtain was implemented in March 2014. Please see below photo record for reference.
|
|
|
|
6.6.3.4
Therefore, with reference to the available
information, it is indicated that the abovementioned complaint of muddy water
which was found being discharged from the construction site of Hong
Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge HKBCF – Reclamation Works on 22 March 2014 is unlikely
to be project related.
6.6.3.5
Nevertheless, the Contractor was recommended to
continue implementing existing water quality mitigation measures.
6.6.4.1
As informed by the Contractor 7-10 trips of sand
barges per week would stay at the concerned area.
6.6.4.2
However, base on the available information; it is unable to conclude whether the
complaint it is project related,
because:
6.6.4.3
Photo record shows that watering equipment was
provided on pelican barge loaded with sand for watering of sand filling
material to keep the sand material wet:
6.6.4.4
Nevertheless, the Contractor was reminded to
continue to properly implement all dust mitigation measures.
6.6.4.5
The Contractor was advised to ensure to continue
the provision of fugitive dust mitigation measures to barges loaded with
filling material such as watering to sand filling material on sand barges to
keep the surface of stockpile of filling material wet.
6.6.4.6
As informed by the Contractor, skipper of all
working barges would be reminded to beware and to pay particular attention to
the issue concerning sand and dust emission from uncovered barges parking at
the sea area off the Tuen Mun Ferry Pier.
Marine-based Works
-
Cellular structure installation
-
Connecting arc cell installation
-
Laying geo-textile
-
Sand blanket laying
-
Sand filling
-
Maintenance of silt curtain & silt screen at sea water intake of
HKIA
-
Stone column installation
-
Band drain installation
-
Backfill cellular structure
-
Geotechnical Instrumentation works
-
Construction of temporary seawall
-
Portion D Construction of Access to Portion A
-
Surcharge laying
-
Construction of temporary pier at Portion A
-
Precast Yard setup
-
Seawall blocks for temporary construction
-
Vibro-compaction on surcharge
-
Capping Beams structures
-
Construction of Conveyors for public fill
-
Temporary bridge at Portion D
-
Access Road for delivery of public fill material from existing road
Land-based Works
-
Maintenance works of Site Office
at Works Area WA2
-
Maintenance works of Public Works Regional Laboratory at Works Area
WA3
-
Geo-textile fabrication at Works Area WA2
-
Installed sand bag at Works Area WA2
-
Maintenance of Temporary Marine Access at Works Area WA2
-
Site runoff should be properly collected and
treated prior to discharge;
-
Minimize loss of sediment from filling works;
-
Regular review and maintenance of silt curtain
systems, drainage systems and desilting facilities;
-
Exposed surfaces/soil stockpiles should be properly
treated to avoid generation of silty surface run-off during rainstorm;
-
Regular review and maintenance of wheel washing
facilities provided at all site entrances/exits;
-
Conduct regular inspection of various working
machineries and vessels within works areas to avoid any dark smoke emission;
-
Suppress dust generated from work processes with
use of bagged cements, earth movements, excavation activities, exposed
surfaces/soil stockpiles and haul road
traffic;
-
Quieter powered mechanical equipment should be
used;
-
Provision of proper and effective noise control
measures for operating equipment and machinery on-site, such as erection of
movable noise barriers or enclosure for noisy plants;
- Closely check
and replace the sound insulation materials regularly;
- Better
scheduling of construction works to minimize noise nuisance;
-
Properly store and label oil drums and chemical
containers placed on site;
-
Proper chemicals, chemical wastes and wastes
management;
-
Maintenance works should be carried out within
roofed, paved and confined areas;
-
Collection and segregation of construction waste
and general refuse on land and in the sea should be carried out properly and regularly; and
- Proper
protection and regular inspection of existing trees, transplanted/retained
trees.
Air Quality Impact
l All
working plants and vessels on site should be regularly inspected and properly
maintained to avoid dark smoke emission.
l All vehicles should be washed to
remove any dusty materials before leaving the site.
l Haul roads should be sufficiently
dampened to minimize fugitive dust generation.
l Wheel washing facilities should
be properly maintained and reviewed to ensure properly functioning.
l Temporary exposed slopes and open
stockpiles should be properly covered.
l Enclosure should be erected for
cement debagging, batching and mixing operations.
l Water spraying
should be provided to suppress fugitive dust for any dusty construction
activity.
Construction Noise Impact
l Quieter powered mechanical equipment should be used as far as possible.
l Noisy operations should be oriented to a direction away from sensitive
receivers as far as possible.
l Proper and effective noise control measures for operating equipment and
machinery on-site should be provided, such as erection of movable noise
barriers, enclosure for noisy plants or enhancement works to provide
sufficient acoustic decoupling measure(s). Closely check and replace the sound
insulation materials regularly
l Vessels and equipment operating should be checked regularly and properly
maintained.
l Noise Emission Label (NEL) shall be affixed to the air compressor and
hand-held breaker operating within works area.
l Acoustic decoupling measures should be properly implemented for all existing
and incoming construction vessels with continuous and regularly checking to
ensure effective implementation of acoustic decoupling measures.
Water Quality Impact
l Regular
review and maintenance of silt curtain systems, drainage systems and desilting facilities
in order to make sure they are functioning effectively.
l Construction
of seawall should be completed as early as possible.
l Regular
inspect and review the loading process from barges to avoid splashing of
material.
l Silt,
debris and leaves accumulated at public drains, wheel washing bays and
perimeter u-channels and desilting facilities should be cleaned up regularly.
l Silty
effluent should be treated/ desilted before discharged. Untreated effluent
should be prevented from entering public drain channel.
l Proper
drainage channels/bunds should be provided at the site boundaries to
collect/intercept the surface run-off from works areas.
l Exposed
slopes and stockpiles should be covered up properly during rainstorm.
Chemical and Waste
Management
l All
types of wastes, both on land and floating in the sea, should be collected and
sorted properly and disposed of timely and properly. They should be properly
stored in designated areas within works areas temporarily.
l All
chemical containers, batteries and oil drums should be properly stored and
labelled.
l All
plants and vehicles on site should be properly maintained to prevent oil
leakage. Proper measures, like drip
trays and/or bundings, should be provided for retaining leaked oil/chemical
from plants.
l All
kinds of maintenance works should be carried out within roofed, paved and
confined areas.
l All
drain holes of the drip trays utilized within works areas should be properly
plugged to avoid any oil and chemical waste leakage.
l Oil
stains on soil surface, accumulated oil mixture and empty chemical containers
should be cleared and disposed of as chemical waste.
l Regular review should be conducted for working
barges and patrol boats to ensure sufficient measures and spill control kits
were provided on working barges and patrol boats to avoid any spreading of
leaked oil/chemicals.
Landscape and Visual
Impact
l All
existing, retained/transplanted trees at the works areas should be properly
fenced off and regularly inspected.