The Chairman welcomed Mr. Eddie CHENG
who had replaced Ms. Cora SO upon her transfer. On behalf
of Members, the Chairman thanked Ms. So for her service to
the Council in the past years.
Agenda Item 1 : Confirmation of Minutes
of the 99th Meeting held on 27 August 2002
2. The minutes were confirmed without amendment.
Agenda Item 2 : Matters Arising
Matters arising from the minutes of 99th
meeting
Para. 15: Data on air pollution concentration relating to
the Deep Bay Link Project
3. The Chairman informed the meeting
that the Secretariat had circulated the data provided by the
project proponent to Members of the Environmental Impact Assessment
(EIA) Subcommittee.
Para. 19 : Council on Sustainable Development
& Para. 20 : Briefings on the Computer Aided Sustainability
Evaluation Tools System, the Third Comprehensive Transport
Study and the Hong Kong 2030 Study
4. The Chairman informed Members that
the Secretariat had passed on their concerns about the establishment
of the Council for Sustainable Development to the Sustainable
Development Unit who had undertaken to brief the Council on
the operation of the Computer Aided Sustainability Evaluation
Tools System after completing a review of the System. The
Secretariat had also approached the relevant bureau/department
inviting them to brief Members on the Third Comprehensive
Transport Study and Hong Kong 2030 Study. The necessary arrangements
would be made once the bureau/department were ready.
Para.22 : Luncheon meeting with the Secretary
for the Environment, Transport and Works on 4 October 2002
5. The Chairman informed Members that
he had conveyed the concerns of the Council raised at the
last meeting to Dr. Sarah Liao at the luncheon meeting on
4 October 2002.
Agenda Item 3 : Report on the 74th meeting
of the Environmental Impact Assessment Subcommittee
(ACE Paper 29/2002)
EIA report on Ngong Ping Sewage Treatment
Works and Sewerage
6. The Subcommittee Chairman summarized
the major concerns of the Subcommittee on the EIA report on
Ngong Ping Sewage Treatment Works and Sewerage. Members agreed
to endorse the EIA report and supported the views set out
in paragraphs 15-17 of ACE Paper 29/2002.
EIA report on Shenzhen Western Corridor
7. The Subcommittee Chairman reported
the major concerns of the Subcommittee regarding the EIA report
on Shenzhen Western Corridor (SWC), particularly the possible
impact of the project on Hong Kong's air quality in the long
run.
8. A Member commented on the data generated
by the air pollutant concentration modeling for the Deep Bay
Link project, which was directly related to the SWC project.
He said that judging from the data, there would be further
degradation in air quality over the next two decades. However,
the data were insufficient to show the exact impact of the
project on air quality because the project proponent only
provided data for the worst-case year of 2021 and did not
indicate the margin of error of the modeling results. There
were particular concerns about the latter point since a number
of the estimations were only one to two £gg/m3 from the compliance
level (135£gg/m3 i.e. 90% centile of the 24 hours air quality
objectives of nitrogen dioxide) adopted by the model. At present,
a model (at 10£gg/m3 increments) was available to estimate
the impacts of air pollution on hospital admission and premature
deaths. The trend of the possible impact of the project on
public health could be predicted if the current data of pollution
concentration and the estimated data in say 2005, 2010 and
2015 could be made available. Such information would be more
meaningful than whether the project would comply with the
Air Quality Objectives (AQOs).
9. The Chairman asked whether the EIA
of the project was conducted in accordance with the requirements
of the EIA Ordinance. The Subcommittee Chairman replied
that according to the report, the EIA had complied with the
requirements of the EIA Ordinance, the Technical Memorandum
as well as the AQOs. However, he agreed that there seemed
to be a trend of deterioration of air quality. After some
discussion, it was agreed that, not as part of the Council's
consideration of the EIA report, the Subcommittee should ask
the project proponent to provide the information as suggested
by the above Member so that Members could better understand
the situation regarding the future air quality in the area
concerned. The Secretariat should make it clear to the project
proponent that the provision of the additional information
would be separate from consideration by the Council of the
EIA report.
10. Mr. Rob Law said that the current
set of AQOs had been discussed a number of times at the Council
meetings. Unless and until changes were made to it, EIA reports
should continue to be assessed on the basis of prevailing
standards including the current set of AQOs. Air quality was
a complex issue and was under the influence of many factors.
It would not be appropriate to attribute the general degradation
of air quality to just one project. He agreed that the Council
should discuss the AQOs in due course.
11. A Member pointed out that traffic
congestion was an important cause of air pollution in Hong
Kong since the engines of the vehicles would be left idling
during traffic congestion. The quantity of pollutants so emitted
would be greater than the amount emitted when the vehicles
were moving. With better road network and less traffic congestion,
there should be marked improvement in air quality. Furthermore,
vehicles using the SWC would mainly be Hong Kong vehicles
and the fuel and vehicle standards in the Mainland were improving
rapidly. In his opinion, the impact of the project on air
pollution would not be as bad as the worst-case scenario set
out in the EIA report.
12. A Member said that the clearance
of oyster bed, being an insignificant issue in the EIA report,
might well be excluded from the report of the Subcommittee.
That was because oyster beds were artificial farming and could
be moved from place to place. They were not part of the natural
environment. The Subcommittee Chairman explained that
the report aimed to present a full picture of what had been
discussed at the Subcommittee meeting.
13. In reply to the Chairman's enquiry, the
Subcommittee Chairman said that the executive summary
of the EIA report prepared by the Shenzhen side was not yet
available. The Chairman pointed out that since more
and more projects would involve Hong Kong and the Mainland,
it would be greatly beneficial if the two sides could agree
on a set of protocol on cross boundary projects for future
compliance.
14. After discussion, Members agreed
to endorse the EIA report on SWC with conditions set out in
paragraph 34 of ACE Paper 29/2002. Members also agreed
that the Subcommittee should request the project proponent
to provide the relevant estimated air pollution concentration
for the current year and for years 2005, 2010 and 2015 for
Members' information outside the context of the EIA process.
The information obtained should not affect the Council's recommendation
to the Director of Environmental Protection.
EIA report on the Construction of Lung
Kwu Chau Jetty
15. Members agreed to endorse the report
with conditions set out in paragraph 37 of ACE Paper 29/2002.
Agenda Item 4 : Any Other Business
Tentative items for discussion at the next
meeting
16. The Chairman informed the meeting
that apart from the report of the Subcommittee, the tentative
items for the next meeting were the progress of work of the
Inter-departmental Working Group on Flytipping Control and
the proposed amendments to the Ozone Layer Protection Ordinance.
The Government Supplies Department was still preparing the
paper on guidelines on green purchasing and would brief the
Council on the subject once the document was ready.
Agenda Item 5 : Date of Next Meeting
17. The next meeting, which would be merged
with the meeting originally scheduled for 26 November 2002,
would be held on Thursday 5 December 2002 at 2:30 pm.
ACE Secretariat
November 2002
|