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 |
82 |
77 – 85 |
374 |
500 |
AMS3B |
81 |
77 – 85 |
368 |
500 |
AMS7 |
81 |
75 – 85 |
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 |
65 |
46 – 85 |
176 |
260 |
AMS3B |
86 |
49 – 130 |
167 |
260 |
AMS7 |
72 |
47 – 96 |
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 AMS3A was done. Air flow of the HVS was checked and the flow
was steady during the 24-hr TSP sampling at AMS3A. 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 AMS3A on 29 Jan 14, which are within the monitoring
period of the 1-hr TSP, were 83μg/m3, 84μg/m3 and 82μg/m3
respectively. All measured values are well below the Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.4.5 The 1-hr
TSP values recorded at AMS3B on 11 Mar 14, which are within the monitoring
period of the 1-hr TSP, were 81μg/ m3, 81μg/ m3 and
81μg/ m3 respectively. All measured values are well below the
Action and Limit Levels.
2.7.4.6 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.
2.7.4.7 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.
2.7.4.8 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)
2.7.4.9 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 |
67 |
65 – 67* |
75 |
NMS3B |
67 |
61
– 67* |
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
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.
4.7.8.4
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.
4.7.8.5
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.
4.7.8.6
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.
4.7.8.7
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.)
4.7.8.8
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.
4.7.8.9
The
exceedances are likely due to local effects in the vicinity of IS(Mf)9, IS7 and
SR6.
4.7.8.10
As
such, the exceedances recorded at IS(Mf)9, IS7 and SR6 were unlikely to be
project related.
4.7.8.11
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.
4.7.8.12
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.