10.
Waste Management Implications
|
10.1.1.1 This chapter identifies the types of
wastes that are likely to be generated during the construction and operation
phases of the project and evaluates the potential
environmental impact that may result from these wastes in accordance with
Section 3.4.8 of the EIA Study Brief (ESB-250/2012) as well as the criteria and
guidelines outlined respectively in Annex 7 and Annex 15 of the EIAO-TM.
10.2.1.1
The
criteria and guidelines for assessing waste management implications are
outlined in Annex 7 and Annex 15 of the EIAO-TM
respectively.
10.2.1.2
The
following legislation which relates to the handling, storage
and disposal of wastes in Hong Kong are relevant in
the assessment of waste management implication:
¡ Waste Disposal Ordinance (Cap. 354)
¡ Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation (Cap. 354C)
¡ Waste Disposal (Charges for Disposal of Construction Waste) Regulation
(Cap. 354N)
¡ Buildings Ordinance (Cap. 123)
¡ Land (Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance (Cap. 28)
¡ Dumping at Sea Ordinance (Cap. 466)
¡ Public Cleansing and Prevention of Nuisances Regulation (Cap. 132BK)
10.2.2.1 The Waste Disposal Ordinance (WDO) is the principal piece of legislation for
management and control of waste disposal in Hong Kong. The WDO prohibits
the unauthorised disposal of wastes. Construction waste is defined as any
substance, matter or thing that is generated from construction work and
abandoned, whether or not it has been processed or stockpiled before being
abandoned, but does not include any sludge, screenings or matter removed in or
generated from any desludging, desilting or dredging works. Under the WDO,
wastes can be disposed of only at designated waste disposal facilities.
10.2.3.1 Under the WDO, the Waste Disposal (Chemical
Waste)
(General) Regulation is enacted to provide
regulations for chemical waste control, and to administer
the possession, storage, collection, transport and disposal of chemical wastes.
10.2.3.2 According
to the
Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation, all producers of chemical
waste must register with EPD and treat their wastes, either utilising on-site
plant licensed by EPD, or arranging for a licensed collector to transport the
wastes to a licensed facility. The Regulation
also prescribes
the storage facilities to be provided on site, including labelling and warning
signs, and requires
the preparation of written procedures and training to deal with emergencies
such as spillages, leakages or accidents arising from
the storage of chemical wastes.
10.2.3.3 The EPD has issued a ‘guideline’
document, the Code of Practice on the
Packaging, Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes (1992), which details
how chemical waste producers should
comply with the regulations on chemical wastes.
10.2.4.1 Under the Waste Disposal (Charges for
Disposal of Construction Waste) Regulation, construction waste delivered to a
landfill for disposal must not contain more than 50% by weight of inert
material. Construction waste delivered to a sorting facility for disposal must
contain more than 50% by weight of inert material, whereas
construction waste delivered to a public fill reception facility for disposal
must consist entirely of inert material.
10.2.5.1 Regulation
of private projects, as opposed to government public works projects, is subject
to the Buildings Ordinance (BO) and relevant Practice
Notes for Authorised Persons, Registered Structural Engineers and Registered
Geotechnical Engineers (PNAPs). Measures have been introduced under PNAP ADV-19 Construction and
Demolition Waste,
to enhance the management of construction and demolition (C&D)
material, and to minimise its generation at source. The enhancement measures
include:
¡ Identifying opportunities to prevent waste during both the project
planning and design stage as well as construction stage; and
¡ Requiring the contractor to prepare a Waste Management Plan (WMP)
including areas described in PNAP ADV-19
and submit to the project proponent for agreement
10.2.5.2 For private projects generating more
than 300,000 m3 of C&D material, the project
proponent
may consult the Director of Environmental Protection (DEP) for advice prior to
accepting the WMP. Moreover, the Public Fill Committee (PFC) of Civil
Engineering and Development Department (CEDD) is also prepared to offer advice
to the Authorised Person (AP) and Resident Site Engineer (RSE) on the
management and beneficial reuse of C&D material.
10.2.6.1 The Land (Miscellaneous Provisions)
Ordinance requires that dumping licenses be obtained by individuals or
companies who deliver public fill to public filling areas. The CEDD issues the
licences under delegated powers from the Director of Lands. The current policy
related to dumping of C&D material is documented in the Works Branch
Technical Circular No. 2/93 –
Public Dumps. C&D materials that are wholly inert, namely public fill,
should not be disposed of to landfill, but taken to fill banks or public
filling areas.
10.2.7.1 In accordance with the Dumping at Sea
Ordinance (DASO), application for dumping permits from EPD are required for
marine disposal of dredged materials.
10.2.7.2 The Practice Notes for Authorised
Persons, Registered Structural Engineers and Registered Geotechnical Engineers,
PNAP ADV-21 – Management Framework for
Disposal of Dredged/ Excavated Sediment (April 2007), set out the
procedures for seeking approval to dredge/ excavate sediment and the management
framework for marine disposal of such sediment. This PNAP outlines the
requirements to be followed in assessing and classifying the sediment and
explains the marine disposal arrangement for the classified material.
10.2.8.1 The Public Cleansing and Prevention of
Nuisances Regulation provides control on illegal tipping of wastes on
unauthorised (unlicensed) sites.
10.3.1.1
Assessment
of the waste management issues associated with construction and operation
phases of the project has been carried out in accordance with Clause 3.4.8 and
Appendix E1 of the EIA Study Brief.
The scope of the assessment has covered the following:
Analysis of Activities and Waste Generation
¡ Identify the quantity, quality and timing of waste arising as a result of the
construction and operation activities of the project.
¡ Adopt appropriate design, general layout, construction methods and
programme to minimise the generation of inert C&D materials and maximise the use of inert C&D
materials for other construction works.
Development of Proposals for Waste Management
¡ Prior to considering the disposal options for various types of
wastes, opportunities for reducing waste generation, on-site or off-site re-use
and recycling should be fully evaluated.
¡ Identify measures / proposals for potential floating refuse
issues.
¡ Estimate the types and quantity of the wastes required to be disposed of.
¡ Identify the disposal methods / options for each type of waste.
¡ Identify the transportation routings and the frequency of the
trucks/vessels involved.
¡ Identify the stockpiling areas and the disposal outlets for the
wastes, and the need for barging points or conveyor systems.
¡ Assess the potential impact from the management of solid waste with
respect to potential hazards, air and odour emissions, noise, wastewater
discharges, ecology and public transport.
Identification of Any Need for Dredging / Excavation, Filling and Dumping
¡ Identify and quantify dredging/ excavation, fill extraction, filling, reclamation, sediment/ mud transportation and disposal activities and
requirements.
¡ Identify potential fill source and dumping ground to be involved.
¡ Identify and evaluate the best practicable dredging / excavation
methods, treatment methods, reuse/ recycling options
and work programme to minimise excavation and dumping requirements and demand for fill sources.
10.4 Identification,
Prediction and Evaluation of Environmental Impact
10.4.1.1
The
construction activities to be carried out for the project are expected to
generate a variety of wastes that can be divided into distinct categories based
on their composition and ultimate method of disposal. The identified waste
types include:
¡ C&D materials
¡ Excavated marine sediment
¡ Chemical waste
¡ General refuse
¡ Floating refuse
10.4.1.2
Each
type of waste arising is described below, together with an evaluation of the potential
environmental impact associated with the handling, storage and transport of the
waste.
Inert Construction and Demolition Materials
¡ Excavation works would be required to:
-
extend the Automated People Mover (APM) tunnels
from the Terminal 2 (T2) APM Interchange Station (AIS) to the Third Runway
Concourse (TRC) and associated APM stations in TRC;
-
extend the Baggage Handling
System (BHS) tunnels from the T2 Baggage Hall to the Baggage Hall associated
with the TRC;
-
construct the new AIS
facility;
-
construct the APM Depot;
-
extend the airside road tunnels from the
existing system to serve the new TRC;
-
construct the drainage culvert; and
-
install
major underground utilities.
¡ At the current stage of project development, the
construction method is still under investigation and is yet to be confirmed. It is initially proposed
that the APM tunnels, BHS tunnels and baggage hall facilities may be
excavated largely through the newly reclaimed land platform using the
cut-and-cover method or open cut. The airside road tunnels excavated partially through the
existing airport site and
partially through newly reclaimed land also using cut-and-cover method or open cut. At the time of preparing this report, the proposed works would not
require excavation into the marine sediments or the contaminated mud pits (CMPs) beneath the fill
materials, but this is subject to review of the outcomes of a marine site investigation
that will be conducted in 2014. Temporary piling wall will
be carried out to act as a coffer dam to reduce groundwater intrusion during
the excavation. The coffer dam piled wall will require
excavation into the marine sediment and CMP.
¡ At the current stage of project development, it is anticipated that permanent piling works will be carried out for foundation construction
of the TRC and other buildings within the proposed land formation area. Temporary lateral support using
piling or sheet pile may be required to form a
coffer dam to facilitate excavation of the basement or any underground structure.
¡ Temporary surcharge material will be used to facilitate the
settlement of individual work areas during the land formation. Upon completion
of the surcharge process for a work area, the material will be reused in other
work areas as fill or surcharge
materials. Although every effort will be made
to reduce surplus surcharge materials requiring off-site disposal, there may be
surplus surcharge materials that cannot be
reused (refer to Section 4.2.2).
¡ Modification of the existing northern seawall will be required to enable the proposed land formation
work (refer to Section 4.2.2).
¡ Excavation and demolition works will be carried out at part of the
existing T2 for its expansion (refer to Section 4.2.4).
¡ Excavation works would be required as part of the proposed
foundation of new road network and improvements to the existing road networks
for T2 expansion, as well as at the
cargo area on the existing airport site (refer to Section 4.2.6).
¡ For diversion of the existing submarine fuel pipelines, the
Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD)
method is proposed for installing new
fuel pipelines directly from the west end of the
existing airport island to Sha
Chau by underground drilling (mostly at sub-seabed rock level), as detailed in Section 4.2.6. Minimal excavation works would be required at
the proposed launching and land points of the submarine fuel pipelines.
10.4.1.4
Construction works including excavation within the
land formation platform would commence once the required level of settlement has been achieved through
surcharging.
Details of the proposed construction works are given in Section 4.2 while the tentative construction
programme is presented in Section 4.3
and Appendix 4.2.
10.4.1.5
Based on the tentative construction programme, initial
estimates indicate that about
9,543,500 m3
of inert C&D materials would be generated from the aforementioned
activities during the
period from Q3 of 2015 to Q4 of 2022, as summarised in Table
10.1.
Detailed
estimates of the inert C&D material volumes are given in Appendix
10.1.
Table 10.1: Estimated Quantity
of Inert C&D Materials to be Generated by the Project
|
Key Sources of Inert C&D materials
|
Estimated Quantity of Inert C&D
Materials Generated ( in-situ volume, m3)
|
Tentative Timeframe of Generation
|
|
Excavation
works for APM & BHS tunnels, new APM depot and airside tunnels and piling
works for TRC and other facilities as well as superstructure construction
works
|
4,812,230
|
Q1 of 2017 – Q4
of 2022
|
|
Surplus
surcharge material
|
3,793,000
|
Q4 of 2018 – Q3 of 2022
|
|
Modification
of existing northern seawall
|
487,000
|
Q1 of 2016 – Q3
of 2021
|
|
Excavation and demolition works for T2 expansion as well as superstructure construction
works
|
437,270
|
Q4 of 2016 – Q4
of 2019
|
|
Excavation
works for improvement of the road networks
|
8,000
|
Q1 of 2017 – Q3 of 2017
|
|
HDD
for diversion of existing submarine fuel pipelines
|
6,000
|
Q3 of 2015 – Q4 of 2015
|
|
Total
|
9,543,500
|
Q3 of 2015 – Q4 of 2022
|
10.4.1.6
The
yearly breakdown of the inert C&D material generation is as shown in Table
10.2.
Table 10.2: Yearly Generation of Inert
C&D Materials
|
Year
|
Estimated
Amount of Inert C&D Materials to be Generated by the Project (in-situ volume, m3)
|
|
2015
|
6,000
|
|
2016
|
398,000
|
|
2017
|
710,000
|
|
2018
|
4,359,230
|
|
2019
|
1,344,270
|
|
2020
|
1,531,000
|
|
2021
|
689,000
|
|
2022
|
506,000
|
|
Total
|
9,543,500
|
10.4.1.7
Initial scheme design estimates identify
requirements for various types of fill materials for the proposed
land formation work from 2016 to 2021, as summarised in Table
10.3.
It is currently estimated that between 8.6 and 20.7 million m3 would be sourced
from public fill material with approximately 7.5
million m3 of rock fill
required.
Table 10.3: Estimated
Quantity and Sources of Fill Materials Required for the Proposed Land Formation
|
Type
of Fill Materials
|
Estimated Quantity (million m3)
|
Timeframe
|
Potential
Sources for Import
|
|
Sand
fill
|
82.8-97.5
|
2016 – 2021
|
Hong Kong, Mainland China
|
|
Public
fill
|
8.6-20.7
|
2016 – 2021
|
Concurrent projects in Hong Kong (e.g.
West Kowloon Cultural District, Shatin to Central Link, Hong
Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge), Government’s
Public Fill Reception Facilities
|
|
Rock
fill
|
7.5
|
2016 – 2021
|
Quarries and concurrent projects in Hong
Kong (limited supply), quarries from Mainland China
|
|
Rock
armour & underlayer
|
0.6
|
2016 – 2021
|
10.4.1.8
The
approach pursued by the project is a strategy that seeks to maximise the
earthworks balance, thereby minimising the volumes of fill that would be
required to be imported to and exported from the site. Every effort would be made to minimise the extent of excavation
and to ensure that as much of the inert C&D materials generated by the
project will be reused on-site as practicable.
For this, the
relevant construction activities (particularly for the tunnel works) and
construction programme have been carefully planned and
developed.
The combination of these initiatives is anticipated to maximise the
on-site reuse of inert C&D materials as fill material for the proposed land
formation as far as practicable, hence
minimising the quantity of any surplus inert C&D
materials requiring off-site delivery and the impact resulting from the associated
collection and transportation works.
10.4.1.9
While
approximately 8.6 to 20.7 million m3 of public fill
could be used for the proposed land formation, the scheme design estimates identify
that the project would require a total of 14,551,000 m3 of public
fill materials for land formation work.
While all practicable measures will be employed for reuse of inert
C&D material generated by the project before consideration of importing material,
it is anticipated that approximately 3,639,230 m3 (or about 38%) of
the inert C&D materials generated by the project would be reused as fill
material for land formation work, as summarised in Table
10.4.
Therefore, approximately 10,911,770 m3 (14,551,000 –
3,639,230 m3) of public fill materials will need to be imported to
this project. Priority will be given to
maximise the use of suitable fill materials available from other concurrent
projects and the Government’s Public Fill Reception Facilities (PFRF). AAHK
will continue to liaise with the relevant concurrent projects for direct reuse
of their surplus public fill for the proposed land formation works of this
project. Details of the estimated on-site reuse and import quantity are given
in Appendix
10.1.
Table 10.4: Estimates of Inert C&D Materials to be Reused On-site as Fill
Materials for Land Formation
|
Year
|
Estimated
Demand of Public Fill Materials for Land Formation
(in-situ
volume, m3)
|
Estimated
Amount of Inert C&D Materials to be Reused On-site for Land Formation
(in-situ
volume, m3)
|
Estimated
Amount of Public Fill Materials to be Imported for Land Formation
(in-situ
volume,m3)
|
|
2015*
|
0
|
6,000
|
0
|
|
2016*
|
1,912,000
|
398,000
|
1,508,000
|
|
2017
|
6,099,000
|
710,000
|
5,389,000
|
|
2018
|
4,788,000
|
773,230
|
4,014,770
|
|
2019
|
674,000
|
674,000
|
0
|
|
2020
|
835,000
|
835,000
|
0
|
|
2021
|
243,000
|
243,000
|
0
|
|
2022
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Total
|
14,551,000
|
3,639,230
|
10,911,770
|
*Note: Inert C&D materials generated from Q3 of 2015 to Q3 of 2016 would
be temporarily stored in stockpiles, which would then be reused for land
formation from Q3 of 2016 onwards.
10.4.1.10 It should be
noted that temporary stockpiling of the inert C&D materials generated from
Q3 of 2015 to Q3 of 2016 would be required in order to facilitate the
subsequent reuse of such materials for the land formation work. The indicative locations of such temporary
stockpiling areas are as shown in Drawing
MCL/P132/EIA/10-001.
10.4.1.11
It
is estimated that about 5,904,270 m3 (9,543,500 – 3,639,230 m3)
of inert C&D materials generated by the project could not be reused
on-site. Therefore, this volume of surplus inert C&D materials would
require off-site delivery to any projects that require fill materials and/or
the Government’s PFRF for beneficial use by other projects in Hong Kong. Table 10.5
summarises the annual quantity of such
surplus materials requiring off-site delivery. Details of
the relevant estimates are given in Appendix
10.1.
10.4.1.12
For year 2018, the amount generated in Q1 to Q3
will be fully reused on-site for land formation. The surplus amount of
3,586,000 m3 is generated from Q4 of 2018 where the amount of public
fill demand is much less than that of inert C&D generated. The quarterly
breakdown of the inert C&D material generated
and reused is detailed in
Appendix
10.1.
Table 10.5: Estimates of Surplus Inert C&D Materials to be Delivered Off-site
|
Year
|
Estimated
Amount of Inert C&D Materials to be Generated by the Project
(in-situ
volume, m3)
|
Estimated
Amount of Inert C&D Materials to be Reused On-site for Land Formation
(in-situ
volume, m3)
|
Estimated
Amount of Surplus Inert C&D Materials to be Delivered Off-site
(in-situ
volume, m3)
|
|
2015
|
6,000
|
6,000
|
0
|
|
2016
|
398,000
|
398,000
|
0
|
|
2017
|
710,000
|
710,000
|
0
|
|
2018
|
4,359,230
|
773,230
|
3,586,000
|
|
2019
|
1,344,270
|
674,000
|
670,270
|
|
2020
|
1,531,000
|
835,000
|
696,000
|
|
2021
|
689,000
|
243,000
|
446,000
|
|
2022
|
506,000
|
0
|
506,000
|
|
Total
|
9,543,500
|
3,639,230
|
5,904,270
|
10.4.1.13
AAHK
is exploring any potential projects that could receive any surplus inert
C&D materials generated from this project during the years of 2018 to 2022.
Subject to the identification of such potential projects, it is anticipated
that up to 5,904,270 m3 of inert C&D materials would be
delivered to the PFRF from 2018 to 2022. Priority will be given to deliver the
surplus inert C&D materials of this project to any identified projects that
would require public fill during those years, and therefore delivery of the surplus
inert C&D materials to the PFRF will be considered as the last resort. It is also understood that any surplus inert
C&D materials received by the PFRF should be not exceed 250 mm in size.
10.4.1.14
It
is anticipated that six temporary barging points would be located around the
perimeter of the newly formed land as shown in Drawing
MCL/P132/EIA10-001. The
estimated maximum total handling capacity of inert C&D materials at the six
temporary barging points will be 282,000 ton/day or 141,000 m3/day
(47,000 ton/day or 23,500 m3/day for each barging point). Barges,
each with a loading capacity of about 3,000 m3, will be used for delivery
of the surplus inert C&D materials that could not be reused on-site from
barging points to the PFRF
via the Urmston Road or Ma Wan. Taking the
peak quarterly amount of surplus materials requiring off-site delivery at Q4 of
2018, i.e., 3,586,000 m3 (see Appendix
10.1), it is
estimated that a maximum of approximately 46,000 m3/day of surplus
materials would be delivered off-site via the barging points, which is well
within the total handling capacity of the six barging points. Corresponding to this maximum daily volume,
up to approximately 16 barge-trips per day will be needed for off-site delivery of the
surplus inert C&D materials. The barge
should be properly covered with tarpaulin and provided with frequently water spraying, to aid dust
suppression, when handling and transporting these materials. The
potential dust impact due to handling of materials at the barging points has
been quantitatively assessed as part of the construction phase air quality
impact assessment as detailed in Section 5.2.
10.4.1.15
AAHK has liaised with the PFC of CEDD regarding
the allocation of space at PFRF for receipt of the
estimated amount of surplus inert C&D materials from the
project. Relevant correspondences on the
allocation of space for receipt of the surplus inert C&D materials with PFC
are provided in Appendix 10.2. A detailed C&D Material
Management Plan (C&DMMP) will be provided and submitted to the PFC during
the detailed design stage when more information is available. The C&DMMP
will be updated from time to time during construction phase.
10.4.1.16 AAHK will continue to explore any
opportunities for off-site delivery of the surplus inert C&D materials for
beneficial uses by other projects. For
this, AAHK will:
¡ Continue to explore
any potential projects in Hong
Kong that would be able to receive the surplus inert C&D materials from this 3RS project from 2018
onwards. One such potential project
would be the Tung Chung New Town Extension, which comprises reclamation works
and is targeted to commence in 2018 according to the recent communications with
the project proponent. AAHK will
maintain liaison with that project proponent for the possible future
arrangement.
¡ Maintain regular
liaison with PFC on details of the future arrangement for off-site delivery of
the surplus inert C&D materials to the PFRF.
¡ If there is a lack of any suitable outlets in
Hong Kong for receipt of the surplus inert C&D materials from the 3RS
project, AAHK will explore and consider cross-boundary delivery of the
materials.
10.4.1.17
No
construction work would be permitted to proceed until all issues on management
of inert C&D materials have been resolved and all relevant arrangements
have been endorsed by the appropriate authorities, including PFC and EPD.
10.4.1.18
The
storage, handling, transport and disposal of surplus inert C&D materials,
if not managed properly, has the potential to create visual, water quality and
dust impacts. Therefore, good site practices including dust-suppression
measures, use of good environmental management protocols for the storage and
management of excavated materials (as detailed in Section 10.5.1) will be implemented to prevent or
reduce the associated potential impacts. With such good site practices in place, it is
anticipated that storage, handling, transport and disposal of the inert C&D
materials will not result in adverse dust, visual or water quality impacts.
Non-inert
Construction and Demolition Materials
10.4.1.19
It
is anticipated that non-inert C&D materials will be generated from the
following activities:
¡ Site clearance at golf course area; and
¡ Demolition and superstructure construction works.
10.4.1.20 It is estimated that the top 0.3 m of soil layer would be removed from site
clearance works at the golf course area where the new APM depot will be
constructed, hence approximately 8,700 m3 of non-inert C&D
materials will be generated in 2017. These
non-inert C&D materials would mainly be a mixture of topsoil and vegetative
materials, which are considered as unsuitable for direct
reuse during any earthworks on site due to its non-inert contents, and will
therefore be disposed of at designated landfill sites by a
reputable licensed waste collector. The contractor should separate such
non-inert C&D materials from the inert C&D materials on-site.
10.4.1.21
Based on initial scheme design information, it is estimated that approximately
87,500 m3 of non-inert C&D materials would be generated from the demolition works for T2 expansion and various
superstructure construction works from
2016 to 2021. The
contractor should separate these non-inert C&D materials from the inert
C&D materials on site. Any
recyclable materials (e.g., metal) should be segregated from the non-inert
C&D materials for collection by reputable licensed recyclers. The remaining non-recyclable waste materials
will be disposed of at designated landfill sites by a reputable licensed waste
collector.
10.4.1.22
The
non-inert C&D materials (after
the recyclable materials have been segregated for recycling) will be delivered to designated landfill sites by dump trucks through North Lantau Highway. With a
loading capacity of about 6 m3 per dump truck, it can be estimated
that up to 8 vehicle-trips per day would be required for delivery of the
non-inert C&D materials, which would not impose significant traffic loading
on North Lantau Highway. The storage, handling, transport and
disposal of non-inert C&D materials, if not managed properly, would have
the potential to create visual, dust and water quality impacts. Therefore, good
site practices as detailed in Section 10.5.1 will be implemented to prevent or
reduce the associated potential impacts.
Excavated Marine Sediments
10.4.1.23
As
the proposed land formation will be carried out by non-dredged methods only
(see Section 4.2.2), dredging of marine sediments will
not be required.
10.4.1.24
Diversion
of the submarine fuel pipelines will be conducted by adopting the HDD method,
involving tunnel drilling at the sub-sea bedrock level (see Section 4.2.6).
Therefore, no marine sediments are required to be excavated from the
pipeline diversion work.
10.4.1.25
However,
the activities that are likely to involve excavation of marine sediments
include:
¡ Diversion of the submarine 11 kV cable
– the field joint area;
¡ Foundation piling works within
the proposed land formation area (after land formation);
¡ Piling works for the marine sections of the new approach lights required at either end
of the proposed third
runway;
¡ Piling works for the proposed Hong Kong International Airport
Approach Area (HKIAAA) beacons;
¡ Basement work for the proposed T2 expansion; and
¡ Excavation works for the proposed APM depot.
Diversion
of submarine 11 kV cable – field joint area
10.4.1.26
As
detailed in Section 4.2.6, the preferred option for diversion
of the existing submarine 11kV cable is to lay a new submarine 11 kV cable by
water jetting method from west of the existing airport island to the south of
the Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau (SCLKC) Marine Park where the new cable will be
connected to the existing cable via a field joint. Laying of the new cable by water jetting will
not require localised dredging or disposal of any marine sediment. However, excavation of the seabed will be
carried out at the field joint area to expose a segment of the existing cable,
which will then be lifted up to a barge for connection to the new cable. The proposed field joint area is
approximately 120 m in length, 32 m in width and 5 m in depth, and its boundary
will be over 500 m from the boundary of the SCLKC Marine Park. It is estimated that about 10,200 m3 of marine sediment will be dredged
from the field joint area. Details of the
marine sediment quantity estimation are given in Appendix 10.3.
10.4.1.27 Sediment sampling and laboratory
testing was undertaken in the
field joint area in accordance with the requirements
in PNAP ADV-21. The sampling locations, measurement
and testing methodology are detailed in the
Sediment Sampling and Testing Plan (SSTP), which was approved by EPD on 13 March 2013. Details of SSTP and the approval letter from
EPD are given in Appendix
10.4.
10.4.1.28 As given in the SSTP, vibrocore
sampling was carried out at two locations, namely, RV12 and RV13, in the
vicinity of the field joint area as shown in Drawing No MCL/P132/EIA/10-002. The vibrocore sampling locations are
at about 120 m away from the existing cable location, which is the buffer
distance recommended by CLP to safeguard the existing cable from any potential
damage by the vibrocore sampling work.
At each sampling location, sediment sub-samples were collected at the
seabed and at depths of 0.9 m down, 1.9 m down 2.9 m down and then at every 3 m
to the bottom of the sediment layer. The
chemical
and biological testing results of
the collected sediment
sub-samples are given in Appendix 10.5a
and are also
summarised in Table
10.6.
In summary, the testing results show that according
to the PNAP ADV-21, 10 of the sediment sub-samples are classified as Category L
with no exceedance of any LCEL while the remaining four sub-samples are
classified as Category M with exceedance of the LCEL for arsenic only. However, the four
sub-samples with
arsenic exceedance passed the required biological tests
in accordance with the requirements in PNAP ADV-21.
Table 10.6: Summary of Chemical Testing Results for Sediment Sub-samples Collected near Field Joint Area
|
Sampling Location
|
Depth
of Sub-samples
|
Parameters Exceeding LCEL*
|
Parameters Exceeding UCEL*
|
Classification
|
|
RV12
|
0.10
– 0.90 m
0.90
– 1.90 m
1.90
– 2.90 m
2.90
– 5.90 m
6.00
– 8.90 m
8.90
– 11.90 m
12.00
– 14.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
RV13
|
0.10
– 0.90 m
|
Arsenic (18 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
0.90
– 1.90 m
|
Arsenic (14 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
1.90
– 2.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
2.90
– 5.90 m
|
Arsenic (15 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
6.00
– 8.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
8.90
– 12.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
12.00
– 14.90 m
|
Arsenic (13 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
*Values inside brackets represent
concentrations of the parameters that exceeded the corresponding Lower Chemical
Exceedance Level (LCEL) or Upper Chemical Exceedance Level ( UCEL) as specified
in the PNAP ADV-21.
10.4.1.29 Based on the tentative construction programme (refer to Appendix 4.2), dredging of marine sediments from the field joint area would take place
in 2015/2016, which is over one year before the
majority of the filling works for the
proposed land formation is
scheduled to begin.
Due to this
non-alignment with the overall construction programme, the opportunity for
on-site treatment and reuse of the marine sediments generated by field joint
dredging would be unlikely. Therefore,
it is anticipated that off-site disposal of the sediments would be needed.
10.4.1.30 Based on PNAP ADV-21, the disposal
methods for sediments classified as Category L and Category M with biological
tests passed (or Category Mp) are open sea disposal and open sea
disposal at dedicated sites respectively.
Therefore, marine dumping permit for disposal of marine sediments to be
dredged from the field joint area will need to be obtained in advance according
to the relevant requirements of PNAP ADV-21.
Based on the sediment testing results, the
sub-samples at RV12 down to a depth of 5 m (i.e., the dredging depth of the
field joint area) are all classified as Category L whereas
majority of the sub-samples at RV13 down to the depth of 5 m are classified as Category Mp. Therefore, it can be roughly estimated that
about 50% of the sediments to be dredged from the field
joint area would be of
Category L and the remaining 50% would be of Category Mp, as summarised in Table
10.7.
Table 10.7: Summary
of Marine Sediments from Field Joint Area Requiring Disposal
|
Category
|
Quantity to be Disposed (in-situ volume, m3)
|
Disposal
Method*
|
|
Category L
|
5,100
|
Type
1 – Open Sea Disposal
|
|
Category Mp
|
5,100
|
Type
1 – Open Sea Disposal (Dedicated Site)
|
*Based on PNAP ADV-21
10.4.1.31
AAHK has been liaised with the Marine Fill Committee (MFC) of CEDD to seek
their approval on the rationale for removal of sediment from the field joint
excavation and to request for provisional allocation of disposal capacity at
appropriate marine disposal site for the sediments. Relevant correspondences on the
provisional allocation of space for disposal of marine sediment with MFC are
provided in Appendix 10.6. No field joint
excavation work would be permitted to proceed
until all matters on marine
sediment disposal have been resolved and all relevant
arrangements have been endorsed by the appropriate authorities, including MFC and EPD.
Piling
Works within the Proposed Land Formation Area
10.4.1.32 It is anticipated that the work
including pile cap that would be required for construction of the TRC, APM &
BHS tunnels, airside tunnels and other facilities would result in
the excavation of marine sediment.
However, it is anticipated that a number of the
piles and pile cap would pass through CMP material. The expected volumes will vary depending on
the location and depth of the piles and the depth of the CMP area. Based on current project design information,
the volumes of CMP material and marine
sediments estimated to be excavated as a result
of the foundation piling, based on 100% excavation and 0% consolidations, are
summarised in Table
10.8. A description of the likely chemical
characteristics of such materials is provided below.
Table 10.8: Estimated Quantity of CMP and Marine Sediments from Piling Works on Proposed Land Formation Area
|
Sediments
|
Estimated Quantity of Sediments Generated from Piling
Works ( in-situ volume, m3)
|
Tentative
Timeframe of Generation
|
|
CMP Sediments
|
499,550
|
Q2 of 2017 to
Q1 of 2022
|
|
Marine
Sediments (from outside CMP area)
|
205,800
|
Q1 of 2017 to Q3 of 2022
|
|
Total
|
705,350
|
Q1 of 2017 to
Q3 of 2022
|
10.4.1.33
As
detailed in the SSTP, vibrocore sampling was carried out within the area that
is proposed as the land formation footprint. The investigation included 11
locations (AV01 to AV11) within the CMP area and 11 locations (RV01 to RV11)
outside the CMP area as shown in Drawing No. MCL/P132/EIA/10-003. At each sampling location, sediment
sub-samples were collected at the seabed, 0.9 m down, 1.9 m down 2.9 m down and
then every 3 m to the bottom of the sediment layer. In preparation for the Deep Cement Mixing (DCM) trial completed in February 2012,
similar vibrocore sampling was also conducted at 20 locations (TC1A to TC20A)
within the CMP area in April 2011, with the sampling locations shown in Drawing No. MCL/P132/EIA/10-003.
The chemical testing results of sediment sub-samples collected at the
relevant sampling locations within the CMP and non-CMP areas where the future
TRC, APM &
BHS tunnels and airside tunnels will be constructed, i.e., AV08,
AV10, TC7A to TC9A, TC15A to TC16A and RV07 to RV11, are given in Appendix 10.5b and are also summarised in Table
10.9.
10.4.1.34
In
summary, the testing results show that:
¡ Seven of
the sub-samples collected within the CMP are classified as Category H according
to the PNAP ADV-21 with exceedance of the LCEL for silver, chromium, mercury,
arsenic, copper, lead, zinc and/or high molecular weight Polycyclic Aromatic
Hydrocarbons (PAH) and exceedance of the UCEL for copper, nickel, zinc and/or
mercury. For the remaining 47 sub-samples, 29 of them are
classified as Category L with no exceedance of any LCEL while the other 18 sub-samples are
classified as Category M with exceedance of the LCEL for arsenic, silver,
copper, lead, zinc and/or mercury.
¡ Nineteen of the
sub-samples taken from outside the CMP area are classified as Category L with
no exceedance of any LCEL while the remaining 13 sub-samples
are classified as Category M with exceedance of the LCEL for arsenic only.
Table 10.9: Summary
of Chemical Testing Results for Sediment Sub-samples Collected
within/close to TRC, APM & BHS Tunnels and Airside Tunnels Footprint
|
Sampling
Location
|
Depth
of Sub-samples
|
Parameters Exceeding LCEL*
|
Parameters Exceeding UCEL*
|
Classification
|
|
Testing Results
within CMP Area
|
|
AV08
|
0.20 – 0.90 m
|
Arsenic (16
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
0.90 – 1.90 m
|
Arsenic (16
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
1.90 – 2.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
2.90 – 5.90 m
|
Arsenic (14
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
6.00 – 8.90 m
|
Copper (76 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
8.90 – 11.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
12.00 – 14.90 m
|
Arsenic (25
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
14.90 – 16.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
AV10
|
0.00
– 0.90 m
0.90
– 1.90 m
1.90
– 2.90 m
2.90
– 5.90 m
6.00
– 8.90 m
8.90
– 10.60 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
TC7A
|
0.10 – 0.90 m
|
Arsenic (13
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
0.90 – 1.90 m
|
Arsenic (20
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
1.90 – 2.90 m
|
Arsenic (14
mg/kg)
Chromium (89
mg/kg)
|
Copper (121
mg/kg)
Nickel (52
mg/kg)
|
Category H
|
|
2.90 – 3.90 m
|
Silver (1.2
mg/kg)
|
Copper (130
mg/kg)
Nickel (44
mg/kg)
|
Category H
|
|
6.00 – 6.90 m
|
Chromium (81
mg/kg)
Copper (100
mg/kg)
|
Nickel (45 mg/kg)
|
Category H
|
|
8.90 – 9.90 m
|
Silver (1.1 mg/kg)
Copper (106
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
12.00 – 12.90 m
14.90 – 15.90 m
18.00 – 18.90 m
20.90 – 21.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
TC8A
|
0.00 – 0.90 m
|
Arsenic (23
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
0.90 – 1.90 m
|
Arsenic (23
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
1.90 – 2.90 m
2.90 – 3.90 m
6.20 – 6.90 m
8.90 – 9.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
12.00 – 13.00 m
|
Lead (80 mg/kg)
Zinc (212 mg/kg)
Mercury (0.57
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
TC9A
|
0.00 – 0.90 m
|
Arsenic (13
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
0.90 – 1.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
1.90 – 2.90 m
|
Arsenic (17
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
2.90 – 3.90 m
|
Silver (1.1
mg/kg)
Lead (85 mg/kg)
Zinc (218 mg/kg)
High molecular
weight PAH (2,040 µg/kg)
|
Copper (122
mg/kg)
Nickel (43
mg/kg)
|
Category H
|
|
6.40 – 6.90 m
6.90 – 7.90 m
8.90 – 9.90 m
12.00 – 12.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
14.90 – 15.90 m
|
Arsenic (13
mg/kg)
|
Nickel (143 mg/kg)
Zinc (310 mg/kg)
|
Category H
|
|
18.00 – 18.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
TC15A
|
0.00 – 0.90 m
|
Arsenic (14 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
0.90 – 1.90 m
|
Arsenic (14 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
1.90 – 2.90 m
|
Arsenic (14 mg/kg)
Lead
(80 mg/kg)
|
Mercury (1.24 mg/kg)
|
Category H
|
|
2.90 – 3.90 m
6.00 – 6.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
8.90 – 9.90 m
|
Arsenic (17 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
9.90 – 10.90 m
|
Arsenic (13 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
TC16A
|
0.00
– 0.90 m
0.90
– 1.90 m
1.90 – 2.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
2.90 – 3.90 m
|
Arsenic (16 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
6.00 – 6.90 m
|
Silver (2 mg/kg)
Mercury (0.51 mg/kg)
|
Copper (197 mg/kg)
|
Category H
|
|
8.90 – 9.80 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
Testing Results
outside CMP Area
|
|
RV07
|
0.00
– 0.90 m
0.90
– 1.90 m
1.90
– 2.90 m
2.90
– 5.90 m
6.00
– 8.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
8.90 – 11.90 m
|
Arsenic (13
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
12.00 – 14.90 m
|
Arsenic (18
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
RV08
|
0.00 – 0.90 m
|
Arsenic (14
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
0.90
– 1.90 m
1.90
– 2.90 m
2.90 – 5.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
5.90 – 8.90 m
|
Arsenic (25
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
8.90 – 9.70 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
RV09
|
0.00 – 0.90 m
|
Arsenic (13mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
0.90 – 1.90 m
|
Arsenic (13
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
1.90 – 2.90 m
|
Arsenic (14
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
2.90 – 5.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
6.00 – 8.90 m
|
Arsenic (20
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
8.90 – 9.90 m
|
Arsenic (27mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
RV10
|
0.10
– 0.90 m
0.90
– 1.90 m
1.90 – 2.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
2.90 – 5.90 m
|
Arsenic (14
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
6.00 – 8.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
8.90 – 11.70 m
|
Arsenic (19
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
RV11
|
0.10 – 0.90 m
|
Arsenic (13
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
0.90
– 1.90 m
1.90
– 2.90 m
2.90
– 5.90 m
6.00 – 8.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
8.90 – 11.90 m
|
Arsenic (19
mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
12.00 – 14.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
*Values inside
brackets represent concentrations of the parameters that exceeded the
corresponding Lower Chemical Exceedance Level (LCEL) or Upper Chemical
Exceedance Level ( UCEL) as specified in the PNAP ADV-21.
10.4.1.35
Based on the sediment characterisation results as
summarised in Table
10.10, it can be
estimated that about 54.4%, 35.3% and 10.3% of the sediments to be excavated
from within the CMP areas would be classified as Category L, M and H
respectively. For sediments to be
excavated from outside the CMP areas, around 56.5% and 43.5% of them would be
characterised as Category L and M respectively (no sediments of Category
H).
Table 10.10: Estimated Quantity of Different Categories of Sediments from Piling Works on Proposed Land Formation Area
|
Item
|
CMP Sediments
|
Marine
Sediments (from outside CMP areas)
|
|
|
Category*
|
Total
|
Category*
|
Total
|
|
|
L
|
M
|
H
|
L
|
M
|
H
|
|
|
No. of
sub-samples
|
29
|
18
|
7
|
54
|
19
|
13
|
0
|
32
|
|
Depth of
sub-samples (m)
|
37
|
24
|
7
|
68
|
35
|
27
|
0
|
62
|
|
% depth of
sub-samples
|
54.4%
|
35.3%
|
10.3%
|
100%
|
56.5%
|
43.5%
|
0%
|
100%
|
|
Estimated
quantity of sediments (in-situ volume, m3)
|
271,820
|
176,310
|
51,420
|
499,550
|
116,180
|
89,620
|
0
|
205,800
|
* Based on
PNAP-ADV21
10.4.1.36 In order to avoid disposal of the
sediments generated from the foundation / piling work, it is proposed to treat
all the sediments using cement mixing and stabilisation
/ solidification method. It is currently proposed that the treated
material would then be reused as backfilling materials on-site, although
treatment level / details and the reuse mode are under further development. Initially, a minimum cement content of 5% weight
per weight (w/w) is proposed as treatment of the CMP sediments
and marine sediments. The treated sediment will
then be tested against the
relevant Risk Based Remediation Goals (RBRGs), the Toxicity Characteristics Leaching
Procedure (TCLP) and the Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) before reuse.
Subject to the TCLP and UCS test results, the cement content may need to be increased. Details of the sediment treatment are
presented in Section 10.5.1. Excavation/ dredging of sediment
should not proceed until all issues on management of excavated/ dredged
sediment have been resolved and all relevant arrangements have been endorsed by
the relevant authorities including MFC and EPD.
Piling
works for the Approach Lights of the Proposed Third Runway
10.4.1.37
Approach
lights will be installed within the paved areas of
both the new
third runway and the centre
runway. For the proposed new third
runway, a section of the approach lights will extend off either end of the
eastern and western edges of the land
formation area into the adjacent marine waters.
10.4.1.38
At
the current stage of project design, it is proposed that the sections of the
approach lights that would be erected in the sea will be bore-piled with a pile
cap, on top of which the light barrette will be placed.
10.4.1.39
It
is anticipated that the eastern section of the approach lights for the new
runway will extend into an area of CMP.
Therefore, it is currently proposed that the area beneath each light
stand will be treated with reduced cement ratio DCM prior to piling. A description of the characteristics of the
material that is likely to be encountered is provided below. This approach will facilitate the management
of the material extracted from piling and provide additional support during
installation of the piles.
10.4.1.40
Based on the project design information, it is estimated that approximately 530 m3 of marine sediments would be excavated from the piling work for the
western approach lights whereas about 1,060 m3 of DCM-treated
sediments would be excavated from the piling work for the eastern approach
lights.
The construction programme for the piling works is subject to the
detailed design. Nevertheless, as both
the western and eastern approach lights will have to be completed by 2021 when
the proposed third runway will commence its operation (see Section 4.3), it is anticipated that the piling
works for the approach lights would be carried out in 2018 to 2019 when
majority of the land formation work for the proposed third runway would be
completed.
10.4.1.41
As
detailed in the SSTP, vibrocore sampling was conducted at RV01 and RV02 near
the west end of the proposed third runway, as shown in Drawing No. MCL/P132/EIA/10-003. At each sampling location, sediment
sub-samples were collected at the seabed, 0.9 m down, 1.9 m down 2.9 m down and
then every 3 m to the bottom of the sediment layer. The chemical testing results of the
collected sediment sub-samples are given in Appendix 10.5c and are also summarised in Table
10.11. In summary,
the testing results show that
according to the PNAP ADV-21, eight of the sediment sub-samples are classified
as Category L with no exceedance of any LCEL while the remaining five
sub-samples are classified as Category M with exceedance of the LCEL for
arsenic only.
10.4.1.42
Vibrocore
sampling was conducted at AV11 and TC17A near the east end of the proposed
third runway, as shown in Drawing No. MCL/P132/EIA/10-003. The chemical testing results of the
collected sediment sub-samples are given in Appendix 10.5c and are also summarised in Table
10.11. In summary,
the testing results show that
according to the PNAP ADV-21, eight of the sediment sub-samples are classified
as Category L with no exceedance of any LCEL, nine sub-samples are classified
as Category M with exceedance of the LCEL for arsenic, silver and copper, ,
while the remaining three sub-samples are classified as Category H with
exceedance of the LCEL for cadmium, silver and lead as well as with exceedance
of the UCEL for silver, chromium, copper, nickel and zinc.
10.4.1.43
Marine
sediments excavated from the piling work for the west-end approach lights will
be treated and reused on-site as described earlier.
Table 10.11: Summary
of Chemical Testing Results for Sediment Sub-samples Collected near West End of Third Runway
|
Sampling
Location
|
Depth
of Sub-sample
|
Parameters Exceeding LCEL*
|
Parameters Exceeding UCEL*
|
Classification
|
|
West-end Approach Lights
|
|
RV01
|
0.00 – 0.90 m
|
Arsenic (14 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
0.90 – 1.90 m
|
Arsenic (14 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
1.90 – 2.90 m
|
Arsenic (14 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
2.90 – 5.90 m
|
Arsenic (13 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
6.00 – 8.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
8.90 – 11.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
12.00 – 14.40 m
|
Arsenic (16 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
RV02
|
0.60
– 0.90 m
0.90
– 1.90 m
1.90
– 2.90 m
2.90
– 5.90 m
6.00
– 8.90 m
8.90
– 11.80 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
East-end Approach Lights
|
|
AV11
|
0.00
– 0.90 m
|
Arsenic (15 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
0.90
– 1.90 m
|
Silver (1.5 mg/kg)
Copper (77 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
1.90
– 2.90 m
|
Cadmium (2 mg/kg)
Lead (76 mg/kg)
|
Silver (18.2 mg/kg)
Chromium (218 mg/kg)
Copper (523 mg/kg)
Nickel (177 mg/kg)
Zinc (347 mg/kg)
|
Category H
|
|
2.90
– 5.90 m
|
Arsenic (13 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
6.20
– 8.90 m
|
Silver (2 mg/kg)
Lead (79 mg/kg)
|
Copper (139 mg/kg)
|
Category H
|
|
8.90
– 11.90 m
12.00
– 13.55 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
TC17A
|
0.00
– 0.90 m
0.90
– 1.90 m
1.90
– 2.90 m
2.90
– 3.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
6.00
–6.90 m
|
Nil
|
Copper (117 mg/kg)
|
Category H
|
|
8.90
– 9.90 m
|
Copper (80 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
12.00
–12.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
14.90
– 15.90 m
|
Arsenic (14 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
18.00
– 18.90m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
20.90
– 21.90 m
24.00
– 24.90 m
|
Arsenic (16 mg/kg) Arsenic (25 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
25.90
– 26.90 m
|
Arsenic (13 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
26.90
– 27.80 m
|
Arsenic (18 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
*Values inside brackets represent
concentrations of the parameters that exceeded the corresponding Lower Chemical
Exceedance Level (LCEL) or Upper Chemical Exceedance Level ( UCEL) as specified
in the PNAP ADV-21
Piling work for the Proposed HKIAAA beacons
10.4.1.44 A line of new HKIAAA beacons will be
installed to mark
the northern boundary of the restricted zone around the third runway.
10.4.1.45 At the current stage of project
design, it is proposed that rock socketed H piles will be used to support the
beacons. Based on the project design information, it is estimated that
approximately 220 m3 of marine sediments would be excavated from the
piling work for the beacons. The construction programme for the piling works is
subject to the detailed design.
Nevertheless, as HKIAAA beacons will
have to be completed by 2021 when the proposed third runway will commence its
operation (see Section
4.3.1),
it is anticipated that the piling works for the beacons
would be carried out in 2018 to 2019 when majority of the land formation work
for the proposed third runway would be completed.
10.4.1.46 As detailed in the SSTP, vibrocore
sampling was conducted at RV01 to RV05 near the locations of proposed beacons,
as shown in Drawing
No. MCL/P132/EIA/10-003.
At
each sampling location, sediment sub-samples were collected at the seabed, 0.9
m down, 1.9 m down 2.9 m down and then every 3 m to the bottom of the sediment
layer. The
chemical testing
results of the collected sediment sub-samples are given in Appendix
10.5c and are
also summarised
in Table 10.12.
In summary, the
testing results show that according to the PNAP ADV-21, 20 of the
sediment sub-samples are classified as Category L with no exceedance of any
LCEL while the remaining 14 sub-samples are classified as Category M with
exceedance of the LCEL for arsenic only.
10.4.1.47 Marine sediments excavated from the
piling work for HKIAAA beacons
will be treated and reused on-site as described earlier.
Table 10.12: Summary
of Chemical Testing Results for Sediment Sub-samples Collected near HKIAA Beacons
|
Sampling Location
|
Depth of Sub-sample
|
Parameters
Exceeding LCEL*
|
Parameters
Exceeding UCEL*
|
Classification
|
|
RV01
|
0.00
– 0.90 m
|
Arsenic
(14 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
0.90
– 1.90 m
|
Arsenic
(14 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
1.90
– 2.90 m
|
Arsenic
(14 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
2.90
– 5.90 m
|
Arsenic
(13 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
6.00
– 8.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
8.90
– 11.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
12.00
– 14.40 m
|
Arsenic
(16 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
RV02
|
0.60 – 0.90 m
0.90 – 1.90 m
1.90 – 2.90 m
2.90 – 5.90 m
6.00 – 8.90 m
8.90 – 11.80 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
RV03
|
0.00 – 0.90 m
|
Arsenic
(14 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
0.90 – 1.90 m
|
Arsenic
(16 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
1.90 – 2.90 m
|
Arsenic
(17 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
2.90 – 5.90 m
|
Arsenic
(15 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
6.00 – 8.90 m
8.90 – 11.90 m
12.00 – 14.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
RV04
|
0.10 – 0.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
0.90 – 1.90 m
|
Arsenic
(15 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
1.90 – 2.90 m
|
Arsenic
(15 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
2.90 – 5.90 m
|
Arsenic
(16 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
6.10 – 8.90 m
|
Arsenic
(14 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
8.90 – 11.90 m
|
Arsenic
(13 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
12.00 – 14.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
RV05
|
0.00 – 0.90 m
0.90 – 1.90 m
1.90 – 2.90 m
2.90 – 5.90 m
6.00 – 8.90 m
8.90 – 11.90 m
12.90 – 14.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
*Values
inside brackets represent concentrations of the parameters that exceeded the
corresponding Lower Chemical Exceedance Level (LCEL) or Upper Chemical
Exceedance Level ( UCEL) as specified in the PNAP ADV-21
Basement work for the Proposed T2 Expansion and Excavation works for the
Proposed APM Depot
10.4.1.48 The existing T2 building will be
expanded in order to provide space to meet the future passenger demand. The
expanded T2 building is generally bounded by the airport road
networks
to the north, south and east,
with the Ground Transportation Centre (GTC) to the west. The proposed T2
expansion works will consist of three key parts, i.e., expansion of the T2
building, construction of the new North Annex Building, and construction of the
new South Annex Building.
10.4.1.49 The
existing underground APM depot beneath the existing T2 building will be
relocated to the east of T2 in order to accommodate the future APM network
capacity. The new underground APM depot will be established at the existing golf course.
10.4.1.50 According
to the
preliminary ground investigation (GI) woks undertaken during October to
November 2013, excavation of marine deposit (mainly sand) would be encountered
at some of the T2 expansion works including the proposed North Annex Building
and northern part of proposed T2 expansion area as well as at the proposed new
APM depot which was historically seabed area as
shown in Drawing
MCL/P132/EIA/10-004.
10.4.1.51 Based on the preliminary drillhole
record of P282-DH2 as shown in Appendix
10.7,
marine deposit would be encountered between the depths of -0.40 mPD and -3.51
mPD, whereas the anticipated excavation level at the North Annex Building is
down to about -6.5 mPD. No marine deposit was found in the drillhole record of
P282-DH4 as shown in Appendix
10.7 and
part of the North Annex Building is located at the historical Chek Lap Kok
island where marine deposit would not be expected, as shown in Drawing
MCL/P132/EIA/10-004.
Based on the drillhole record and the latest
engineering design, it
can be estimated that about 44,400 m3 of marine deposit would be
generated from the excavation at North Annex Building.
10.4.1.52 Based on
the preliminary drillhole record of P282-DH3 as shown in Appendix 10.7, marine deposit would be encountered between the
depths of -5.91 mPD and -11.91 mPD, whereas the anticipated excavation level at
the T2 expansion area is down to about -6.5 mPD. Based on the drillhole record
of P282-DH6 as shown in Appendix 10.7, no marine deposit was found. Based on the drillhole record and the latest
engineering design, it can be estimated that about 6,330 m3 of
marine deposit would be generated from the excavation at T2 expansion area.
10.4.1.53 Based on
the preliminary drillhole record of P283-DH036 and P283-DH038 as shown in Appendix 10.7, marine deposit would be encountered between the
depths of 0.52 mPD and -0.21 mPD and between the depths of 1.50 mPD and -1.60
mPD respectively, whereas the anticipated excavation level at the APM depot is
down to about -6.5 mPD. No marine deposit was recorded in P283-DH039,
P283-DH041 and P283-DH042 as shown in Appendix 10.7. A large part of the APM depot is located at the historical
Chek Lap Kok island where marine deposit would not be expected, as shown in Drawing
MCL/P132/EIA/10-004. Based on the drillhole record and the latest
engineering design, it can be estimated that about 9,770 m3 of
marine deposit would be generated from the excavation at APM depot.
10.4.1.54 It is estimated that approximately
50,730 m3 of marine deposit would
be excavated from the basement work for the proposed T2 expansion during the
period from Q4 of 2016 to Q1 of 2019 while approximately 9,770 m3 of
marine deposit would
be generated from the excavation work for the proposed APM depot during the
period from Q1 of 2018 to Q3 of 2020.
10.4.1.55 As part of the completed sampling and
testing work at the proposed land formation footprint, vibrocore sampling and
testing works were completed at seabed locations around the northeast corner of
the existing airport island (RV10 and RV11), which are not far away from the T2
expansion works or APM depot locations as shown in Drawing
MCL/P132/EIA/10-005.
The
chemical testing
results of the collected sediment sub-samples are given in Appendix
10.8a and are
also summarised
in Table 10.13.
Table 10.13: Summary
of Chemical Testing Results for Sediment Sub-samples Collected around the
Northeast Corner of the Existing Airport Island
|
Sampling Location
|
Depth of Sub-samples
|
Parameters
Exceeding LCEL*
|
Parameters
Exceeding UCEL*
|
Classification
|
|
RV10
|
0.10 – 0.90 m
0.90 – 1.90 m
1.90
– 2.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
2.90
– 5.90 m
|
Arsenic (14 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
6.00
– 8.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
8.90 – 11.70 m
|
Arsenic (19 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
RV11
|
0.10
– 0.90 m
|
Arsenic (13 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
0.90 – 1.90 m
1.90 – 2.90 m
2.90 – 5.90 m
6.00
– 8.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
8.90 – 11.90 m
|
Arsenic (19 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
12.00 – 14.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
*Values
inside brackets represent concentrations of the parameters that exceeded the
corresponding Lower Chemical Exceedance Level (LCEL) or Upper Chemical
Exceedance Level ( UCEL) as specified in the PNAP ADV-21.
10.4.1.56 As identified from the Hong Kong -
Zhuhai - Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF) EIA Report
(Register No.: AEIAR-145/2009), vibrocore sampling and testing works were done
at seabed locations (BCF/VC-A03, BCF/VC-B06, BCF/VC-B09 and BCF/VC-C11) that
are close to the T2 expansion works and APM depot locations as shown in Drawing
MCL/P132/EIA/10-005.
The
chemical testing
results of the collected sediment sub-samples are given in Appendix
10.8b and are
also summarised
in Table 10.14.
Table 10.14: Summary of Chemical Testing Results for Sediment Sub-samples Collected close to the T2 Expansion Works and APM Depot Locations from the HKBCF EIA Report
|
Sampling Location
|
Depth of Sub-samples
|
Parameters
Exceeding LCEL*
|
Parameters
Exceeding UCEL*
|
Classification
|
|
BCF/VC-A03
|
0.20 – 0.90 m
0.90 – 1.90 m
1.90
– 2.90 m
4.90
– 5.90 m
7.90 – 8.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
12.00 – 12.90 m
14.90 – 15.90 m
15.90 – 16.35 m
|
Arsenic (14 mg/kg)
Arsenic (15 mg/kg)
Arsenic (15 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
BCF/VC-B06
|
0.35 – 0.90 m
0.90 – 1.90 m
1.90
– 2.90 m
4.90
– 5.90 m
7.90 – 8.90 m
9.90 – 10.90 m
10.90 – 11.35 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
BCF/VC-B09
|
0.10 – 0.90 m
0.90 – 1.90 m
|
Arsenic (12 mg/kg)
Arsenic (14 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
1.90
– 2.90 m
4.90
– 5.90 m
7.90
– 8.90 m
12.10 – 12.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
14.90 – 15.90 m
18.00 – 18.90 m
|
Arsenic (14 mg/kg)
Arsenic (13 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
|
BCF/VC-C11
|
0.30 – 0.90 m
0.90 – 1.90 m
1.90
– 2.90 m
4.90
– 5.90 m
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
Category L
|
|
7.90
– 8.90 m
9.90
– 10.80 m
|
Arsenic (14 mg/kg)
Arsenic (13 mg/kg)
|
Nil
|
Category M
|
Source: Hong Kong - Zhuhai - Macao Bridge Hong Kong
Boundary Crossing Facilities EIA Report
(Register No.: AEIAR-145/2009)
10.4.1.57 The tested parameters of all sediment
samples as shown in Table 10.13
and Table 10.14
did not exceed their corresponding LCEL, as defined in PNAP ADV-21, with the
exception of arsenic which exceeded its LCEL for some sub-samples. Therefore,
all these sediment samples are classified as either Category L or Category M
with arsenic exceedance based on the criteria of PNAP ADV-21. Based on the
above available sediment testing results around the northeast corner of the
existing airport island, it is anticipated that the marine deposit to be
excavated from the proposed T2 expansion works and APM depot would likely be
Category L or Category M with arsenic exceedance.
10.4.1.58 Marine deposit to be excavated from
the T2 expansion works and APM depot will be treated and reused on-site as
described earlier.
Chemical Waste
10.4.1.59 The operation, maintenance and
servicing of construction plant and equipment has the potential to generate
chemical waste such as cleansing fluids, solvents, oil,
fuel, etc.
It is difficult to quantify the amount of chemical waste that will arise from
the construction activities as this will be dependent on the contractor’s
on-site maintenance requirements and the amount of plant ultimately utilised.
However, it is anticipated that the quantity of chemical waste would be
relatively small. The amount of chemical waste to be generated will be
quantified in the site Waste Management Plan to be prepared by contractors.
10.4.1.60 Chemical
waste generated during construction has the potential to pose environmental,
health and safety hazards if not stored and disposed of in an appropriate
manner, in accordance with the Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General)
Regulations. The potential hazards include:
¡ Toxic effects to workers;
¡ Adverse impact on water quality and wildlife from spills; and
¡ Fire hazards.
10.4.1.61 Materials classified as chemical
wastes will require special handling and storage arrangements before off-site disposal at
Chemical Waste Treatment Centre or
other licensed
chemical waste recycling/ treatment facilities. The chemical wastes will be delivered to the off-site licensed
facilities by trucks
through North Lantau Highway and Tsing Sha Highway. Due to the anticipated
small amount of chemical wastes requiring delivery, the extra traffic loading
on North Lantau Highway/ Tsing Sha Highway would be minimal. Wherever possible opportunities will be taken
to reuse and recycle materials, preferably on site. Mitigation and control
requirements for chemical wastes are detailed in Section 10.5.1.
Provided that the handling, storage and disposal of chemical wastes are
implemented in accordance with these requirements, adverse environmental impact
would not be expected.
General Refuse
10.4.1.62 The construction workforce would
generate general refuse comprising food scraps, waste paper, empty containers,
etc. These waste materials must be collected, stored and managed in a manner
that minimises the risk of intentional or accidental release to the surrounding
environment, and eliminates the potential to produce Foreign
Object Debris (FOD) – a safety risk when operating in an active airport
environment. Release of any general refuse into marine waters
should be strictly prohibited in order to avoid adverse impact on water quality in the area. Disposal
of refuse at sites other than approved waste transfer or disposal facilities will
be prohibited. The effective collection and storage of site waste would be
required to prevent waste materials from being blown around by wind, flushed or
leached into the surrounding environment or creating an odour nuisance. Waste
storage areas
will be well maintained and cleaned regularly so as to avoid
attracting pests and vermin to work sites. The management of sewage that would
be generated by construction workforce during
the construction phase
of the project is assessed in Chapter 8.
10.4.1.63 A provisional estimate based on the
current tentative
phasing of construction works anticipates that the maximum number of workers on
site would be up to 14,000. Based on a generation rate of 0.65 kg per worker
per day, the maximum daily arising of general refuse from construction workers
would be up to 9,100 kg. Corresponding to this maximum daily volume, up to
around 10 vehicle-trips per day would be needed for delivery
of the general refuse by dump trucks (each with a
loading capacity of about 6 m3) to the West New Territories Landfill
(WENT) landfill via North
Lantau Highway. Given this
small daily number of vehicle-trips, the extra traffic loading on North Lantau
Highway would be negligible. With
the adequate implementation of appropriate waste management practices on the
site during construction (as recommended in Section 10.5.1),
significant adverse environmental impact would not be expected from the
storage, handling and transportation of refuse.
10.4.1.64 The refuse should be temporarily stored
in enclosed bin to avoid adverse impact to the surroundings. Recycling bins
should be provided to maximise waste reuse
and recycle volume. A reputable licensed collector should be employed to
collect the general refuse for disposal at designated landfill sites.
Floating Refuse
10.4.1.65 Floating refuse may be trapped or
accumulated in the existing seawall or the newly constructed seawall during the
construction phase. As detailed
in Section 10.4.2, it
can be estimated
based on the historical records that
roughly 65
m3 of floating refuse will be collected from the newly constructed seawall during each year of construction.
10.4.1.66 The future artificial seawall of the
proposed airport expansion area has been properly designed to achieve a shoreline that does not have any sharp
turns or abrupt indentation in order to avoid or minimise any trapped or
accumulated refuse. The construction
contractors will be required to regularly check and clean any refuse trapped or
accumulated along the newly constructed seawall. Floating
refuse will be collected by a reputable licensed waste collector for disposal
at WENT landfill by dump trucks
through North Lantau Highway. Given the
small estimated quantity of floating refuse requiring delivery every year, the
additional traffic loading on North Lantau Highway would be negligible. With the proper seawall design and regular checking
and cleaning of such refuse, no adverse environmental impact associated with
such refuse are anticipated.
Summary
10.4.1.67 Table 10.15 presents
a summary of the key types of waste that are expected to be generated
during the construction phase of the project. Table 10.16 presents
a summary of the methods by which wastes arising are avoided or reduced through
consideration of alternative design options and/or construction methods.
10.4.2 Operation Phase
10.4.2.1 Wastes produced during operation phase
of the project would be generated by a variety of landside and airside
activities and mainly comprise general refuse, chemical waste and floating
refuse that may be trapped on the artificial seawall of the expanded airport
site. The management of sewage that would be generated during the operational
phase of the project is assessed in Chapter
9.
General Refuse
10.4.2.2 General refuse (such as waste paper,
empty containers and packaging, food scraps, redundant equipment and machinery
parts, etc.) would be generated from operation of passenger concourses, aircraft cabins,
terminal buildings, offices, commercial establishments (e.g., restaurants,
retail outlets, etc.), as well as ground
handling agents activities and various airport infrastructure facilities. According to AAHK’s historical records of
total waste arisings (before recovery of recyclable materials) per passenger
from 2008 to 2012, it can be estimated that the 5-year average of waste arising
is 0.366 kg/pax as detailed in Table 10.17.
Based on HKIA long term traffic forecast from the International Air Transport
Association (IATA), the anticipated number of passengers/ visitors in 2038
(i.e., 15 years after the planned commencement of operation of the 3RS in 2023)
is about 126.2 million pax. Therefore, it is estimated that about 46,190
ton/year of general refuse will be generated in 2038. Corresponding to this waste volume and with a
loading capacity of about 12 ton per refuse collection vehicle (RCV), it can be
estimated that up to around 11 vehicle-trips per day would be needed for delivery
of the general refuse by RCV to the designated
landfill sites, which will be via North
Lantau Highway. Given this
small daily number of vehicle-trips, the extra traffic loading on North Lantau
Highway would be negligible.
Table 10.17: Historical Records of Waste
Arising from Operation of the Existing Airport (2008 – 2012)
|
Item
|
Total Waste
Generation per Passenger (kg/pax)
|
|
2008
|
2009
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
5-Year Average
|
|
Waste arising
|
0.371
|
0.365
|
0.354
|
0.360
|
0.382
|
0.366
|
Source: AAHK’s waste collection records
10.4.2.3 In line with the existing airport
operational policy to encourage recycling, recyclable materials, including
paper, cardboard, metals, plastics, glass bottles, food waste, wooden pallets, etc.,
will be segregated and stored separately for delivery to outside licensed
recyclers. The non-recyclable portion of the general refuse will be properly
stored and collected by reputable waste collector for delivery to the landfill
sites in Hong Kong by refuse collection vehicles for final disposal. According to HKIA annual reports, the amounts
of recyclable materials collected for recycling by AAHK had been increasing
from 2008 to 2012 as detailed in Table 10.18. In 2012, a total of 2,957 tons of recyclable
waste materials were collected for recycling by AAHK, representing a waste
recycling rate of around 18%. With continuation and strengthening of the
current waste recycling initiatives in both existing and future facilities of
the project, it is anticipated that waste recycling rate would be improved in
future years and the amount of general refuse to be disposal will be
accordingly reduced.
Table 10.18: Amount
of Waste Recycled by AAHK from 2008 to 2012
|
|
Amount
Collected for Recycling (ton)
|
|
Recyclable
Materials
|
2008
|
2009
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
|
Cardboard
|
264
|
413
|
456
|
531
|
511
|
|
Paper
|
372
|
372
|
536
|
843
|
1,089
|
|
Metals
|
152
|
107
|
99
|
88
|
48
|
|
Plastics
|
13
|
16
|
14
|
57
|
53
|
|
Glass
Bottles
|
16
|
17
|
3
|
6
|
9
|
|
Food
Waste
|
19
|
42
|
37
|
115
|
1,133
|
|
Wooden
Pallets, Vehicle Tyres, Lubricating Oil, Fluorescent Tubes, Toners, Batteries
and Waste Cooking Oil
|
5
|
5
|
10
|
28
|
114
|
|
Total
|
840
|
972
|
1,154
|
1,668
|
2,957
|
Source: HKIA Annual Reports
2007/08, 2008/09, 2009/10, 2010/11 and 2011/12.
10.4.2.4 Storage of general
refuse would generate odour nuisance
and visual impact if they are not managed in a
proper manner. Vermin and pests may also be attracted if the waste containers
are not cleaned or maintained properly and frequently. Therefore, the general
refuse should be temporarily stored in proper containers with covers, which
should be regularly cleaned and checked, to avoid adverse impact to the
surroundings. A reputable licensed waste collector should be employed to
collect the general refuse daily for disposal at designated landfill sites.
With proper implementation of waste management practices, the environmental
impact from handling and disposal of general refuse would not be anticipated.
Chemical Waste
10.4.2.5 According to AAHK’s historical records
of chemical waste arisings during the period from 2011 to 2013, it can be
estimated that the average chemical waste arising was roughly 15 ton per month,
and the major types of chemical wastes generated included lubricating oil,
spent fuel, non-halogenated solvent, waste batteries, etc. It is anticipated
that similar types of chemical waste will be generated from maintenance,
servicing and repairing of various electrical & mechanical (E&M)
equipment during operation phase of the project. However, it is difficult to
quantify the additional amount of chemical waste that will arise during the
operation phase since it will be dependent on the maintenance and servicing
requirements of various new E&M equipment and the amount of such equipment. All
chemical wastes generated will require special handling and storage
arrangements before removal for appropriate treatment at the Chemical Waste
Treatment Centre or other licensed facility.
The chemical wastes will be delivered to the off-site licensed
facilities by trucks
through North Lantau Highway and Tsing Sha Highway. As it is anticipated that
the additional amount of chemical wastes to be generated by project would not
be substantial, the extra traffic loading on North Lantau Highway/ Tsing Sha
Highway would not be significant.
10.4.2.6 Chemical wastes arising during the operation
phase may pose environmental, health and safety hazards if not stored and
disposed of in an appropriate manner as stipulated in the Waste Disposal
(Chemical Waste) (General) Regulations. The potential hazards include:
¡ Toxic effects to workers;
¡ Adverse impact on water quality and wildlife from spills; and
¡ Fire hazards.
10.4.2.7 Materials classified as chemical
wastes will require special handling and storage arrangements before off-site disposal at
licensed chemical waste treatment facilities.
Wherever possible opportunities should be taken to reuse and recycle materials.
Mitigation and control requirements for chemical wastes are detailed in Section 10.5.2.
Provided that the handling, storage and disposal of chemical wastes are in
accordance with these requirements, adverse environmental impact would not be
expected.
Floating Refuse
10.4.2.8 Floating refuse may wash up onto the
project site through the effect of currents and wind, with waste then trapped
and accumulated on the artificial seawall of the existing airport island or the
expanded airport island. According to
the historical records provided by Marine Department (MD), the amounts of
floating refuse collected by MD’s contractor within the project area from 2010
to 2012 are as shown in Table 10.19.
It is noted that the quantity of floating refuse collected was higher in the
summer months, which may be attributed to heavy rains and/or typhoons bringing
more refuse into the harbour.
Table 10.19: Summary of Floating Refuse Collected in Chek Lap Kok Watercourse
|
|
Monthly
Quantity of Floating Refuse Collected (ton)
|
|
Year
|
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
2010
|
1.4
|
0.3
|
1.5
|
2.3
|
1.7
|
1.5
|
1.4
|
1.5
|
1.9
|
1.6
|
1.3
|
1.1
|
|
2011
|
1.4
|
1.7
|
2.6
|
1.7
|
1.4
|
1.6
|
4.6
|
1.6
|
1.5
|
1.5
|
1.4
|
1.5
|
|
2012
|
1.6
|
1.8
|
1.6
|
1.4
|
2.2
|
1.9
|
4.1
|
3.1
|
1.7
|
2.7
|
1.1
|
1.1
|
Source: Marine Department
10.4.2.9 Current practice is that regular
cleaning of floating refuse trapped or accumulated on the existing seawall
along the North Perimeter Road is carried out once per year whereas regular
cleaning for other existing seawalls is performed twice a year subject to
cleaning conditions. According to the
cleaning contractor, roughly 13 m3 of refuse and 70 pieces of
bamboos/ wood were collected from the seawall along the North Perimeter Road in
early 2013 while roughly 26 m3 of refuse and 50 pieces of bamboos/
wood were collected from the other seawalls in early 2012. Since the extent and design of the newly
constructed seawall is similar to the existing seawall, it is anticipated that
the amount of floating refuse trapped or accumulated during operation
phase will be similar to the historical records. Therefore, it can be estimated that roughly 65 m3
(13 m3 + 26 m3 x 2) of floating refuse would be collected
from the new artificial seawall of the proposed Airport expansion area every
year. Floating
refuse will be collected together with general refuse by a reputable licensed waste collector for disposal
at designated landfill sites by RCV
through North Lantau Highway. Given the
small estimated quantity of floating refuse requiring delivery every year, the additional
traffic loading on North Lantau Highway would be negligible.
10.4.2.10 Entrapment or accumulation of floating
refuse on the artificial seawall of the expanded airport island, if not
properly controlled, may cause aesthetic and/or hygiene issues. Therefore, the
artificial seawall has been properly designed to achieve a shoreline that does not have any sharp
turns or abrupt indentation in order to avoid or minimise any trapped or
accumulated refuse. With the proper
seawall design and implementation of management control practices as detailed
in Section 10.5.2, no adverse environmental impact associated with
such refuse are anticipated.
Sludge from Proposed Greywater Treatment Plant
10.4.2.11 It is proposed to install a greywater
treatment plant to treat a portion of greywater from the project and reuse the
treated greywater for irrigation and general cleaning activities. The design
capacity of the proposed treatment plant is 700 m3/day, the details of which are described in Section 8.7.2.
10.4.2.12
Sludge generated from the proposed greywater treatment plant will be mechanically dewatered, which will then be delivered by trucks via the
North Lantau Highway to the designated landfill sites for final disposal. Based on the operation records of the existing
greywater treatment facility, it can be estimated that the quantity
of dewatered sludge from the proposed greywater
treatment plant would be approximately
0.23 ton/day. To avoid odour emission
during the transportation, the dewatered sludge
should be stored in tight containers or skips for delivery to the designated
landfill sites by a reputable licensed waste collector. Given the small daily quantity of sludge, the extra
traffic loading on North Lantau Highway would be negligible. The sludge generated needs to be carefully handled
and properly managed to minimise the adverse impact of odour and potential
health risks to the operators by attracting pests and other disease
vectors.
10.5.1 Construction Phase
Opportunities for Reducing
Waste Generation and
Maximising Reuse / Recycling
10.5.1.1
Opportunities to minimise waste generation and maximise
the reuse of waste materials generated by the project have been
incorporated where possible into the planning,
design and construction stages,
and the following measures have been recommended:
¡ The relevant construction methods (particularly for the tunnel
works) and construction programme have been carefully planned and developed to
minimise the extent of excavation and to maximise the on-site reuse of inert
C&D materials generated by the project as far as practicable. Temporary stockpiling areas will also be
provided to facilitate on-site reuse of inert C&D
materials. Considering all these
initiatives, the quantity of any surplus inert C&D
materials requiring off-site delivery will be minimised as far as
practicable. According to the project design information, initial estimates
show that about 38% (or 3,639,230 m3) of
the inert C&D materials generated by the project would be reused on-site as
fill materials for the proposed land formation whereas the remaining 62% (or 5,904,270 m3)
would be delivered to any identified projects that would need fill materials
and/or to the Government’s PFRF for beneficial reuse by other projects in Hong
Kong.
¡ Priority will be given to collect and reuse suitable inert C&D
materials generated from other concurrent projects and the Government’s PFRF as
fill materials for the proposed land formation works. Based on the project design
information, it is estimated that about 10,911,770 m3 of public fill
materials would be collected from any available concurrent projects and/or from
the Government’s PFRF, and reused in this project for the proposed land
formation.
¡ Only non-dredged ground improvement methods (see Section 4.2.2 for details) will be adopted in order to completely avoid the need
for dredging and disposal of marine sediment for the proposed land formation
work.
¡ Excavation work for constructing the APM tunnels, BHS tunnels and
airside tunnels will not be down to the CMPs beneath the fill materials in
order to avoid excavating any sediments.
¡ For marine
sediments expected to
be excavated from the piling works of TRC, APM & BHS tunnels, airside
tunnels and other facilities on the proposed land formation area, piling
work of marine sections of the approach lights and HKIAAA beacons, basement works for some of T2
expansion area and excavation works for the proposed APM depot (a total quantity of about 767,660 m3)
will be treated and reused on-site as backfilling materials, although required treatment level / detail and the specific re-use mode are under
development.
Good Site Practices
10.5.1.2
Adverse
impact related to waste management such as dust, odour and noise are not
expected to arise, provided that good site practices are strictly followed.
Recommendations for good site practices during the construction activities
include:
¡ Nomination of an approved person, such as a site manager, to be
responsible for good site practices, arrangements for collection and effective
disposal to an appropriate facility, of all wastes generated at the site.
¡ Training of site personnel in proper waste management and chemical
waste handling procedures.
¡ Provision of sufficient waste disposal points and regular
collection for disposal.
¡ Appropriate measures to minimise windblown litter and dust during
transportation of waste by either covering trucks by tarpaulin/ similar
material or by transporting wastes in enclosed containers. The cover should be extended over the
edges of the sides and tailboards.
¡ Stockpiles of C&D
materials should be kept covered by impervious sheets to avoid wind-blown dust.
¡ All dusty materials including C&D materials should be sprayed with water immediately prior to any loading
transfer operation so as to keep the dusty material wet during material
handling at the barging points/ stockpile areas.
¡ C&D materials to be delivered to and from the project site by barges
or by trucks should be kept wet or covered to avoid wind-blown dust.
¡ The speed of the trucks including dump trucks carrying
C&D or waste materials within the site should be
controlled to about 10 km/hour
in order to reduce adverse dust impact and secure the safe movement around the
site.
¡ To avoid or minimize dust emission
during transport of C&D or waste materials within the site, each and every main temporary access should be paved with concrete,
bituminous hardcore materials or metal plates and kept clear of dusty materials.
Unpaved parts of the road should be sprayed
with water or a dust suppression chemical so as to keep the entire road surface
wet.
Waste Reduction Measures
10.5.1.3
Good
management and control can prevent the generation of a significant amount of
waste. Waste reduction is best achieved at the planning and design stage, as
well as by ensuring the implementation of good site practices. Recommendations
to achieve waste reduction include:
¡ Use of steel or aluminium formworks and falseworks for temporary
works as far as practicable.
¡ Adoption of repetitive design to allow reuse of formworks as far as
practicable.
¡ Segregation and storage of different types of waste in different
containers, skips or stockpiles to enhance reuse or recycling of materials and
their proper disposal.
¡ Encourage collection of aluminium cans, PET bottles and paper by
providing separate labelled bins to enable these wastes to be segregated from
other general refuse generated by the work force.
¡ Any unused chemicals or those with remaining functional capacity
should be collected for reused as far as practicable.
¡ Proper storage and site practices to minimise the potential for
damage or contamination of construction materials.
¡ Plan and stock construction materials carefully to minimise amount
of waste generated and avoid unnecessary generation of waste.
10.5.1.4
In
addition to the above measures, specific mitigation measures are recommended
below for the identified waste arisings to minimise environmental impact during
handling, transportation and disposal of these wastes.
Inert
and Non-inert C&D Materials
10.5.1.5
Inert and
non-inert C&D materials should be handled and stored separately to avoid
mixing the two types of materials. Any
recyclable materials (e.g., metals) should be segregated from the non-inert
C&D materials for collection by reputable licensed recyclers whereas the non-recyclable waste
materials should be disposed of at the designated landfill site by a reputable licensed waste collector.
10.5.1.6
In
order to monitor the off-site delivery of surplus
inert C&D materials (about 5,904,270 m3 in total) that could not
be reused on-site for the proposed land formation work at the PFRF and to control fly tipping, a
trip-ticket system promulgated under DEVB TC(W) No. 6/2010 shall be included as
one of the contractual requirements for implementation by the
contractor. In addition, it is also
recommended that the contractor should be required to prepare and implement a
Waste Management Plan detailing various waste arising and waste management
practices in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Technical
Circular (Works) No. 19/2005 Environmental Management on Construction Site.
Marine Sediments
Marine Sediments from Foundation Piling Works for the TRC, Approach Lights, New HKIAAA Beacons, Basement Works for
T2 Expansion and Excavation for APM Depot
10.5.1.7
At
this stage of project development, it is proposed that all CMP and marine
sediments that are excavated through the piling works required for the TRC, APM
& BHS tunnels, airside tunnels and other facilities on the proposed land
formation area, the piling works for marine sections of the approach lights and
new HKIAAA beacons, basement works for some of T2 expansion area and excavation
works for proposed APM depot (with a total quantity of about 767,660 m3) are treated on-site
using cement mixing and stabilisation /
solidification method. Currently, a minimum cement content of 5%
weight per weight (w/w) is proposed for treating the CMP and marine sediments.
The treated sediments will then be tested against the TCLP and UCS before
reuse. Subject to the TCLP and UCS test results, the cement content may need to
be increased. If the treated sediments
do not comply with UTS or UCS, re-stabilization has to be undertaken to meet compliance
of UTS and UCS before reusing the treated sediment as backfilling material. As
described in the following paragraphs, the proposed approach for management of
the treated sediment is that it will be reused on-site as backfilling materials
within the project area. A pilot trial will be conducted for the
concerned sediments (in particular the contaminated sediment excavated from
within the CMP area) in order to identify / confirm the appropriate treatment
conditions for the stabilisation / solidification methods. However, it should
be noted that the treatment level / details and the reuse mode are subject to
further development during the detailed design stage.
10.5.1.8
On-site
reuse of treated sediment has been proposed for other projects in Hong Kong
including Tseung Kwan O – Lam Tin Tunnel and Associated Works (EIA Register No.
AEIAR-173/2013) and Public Housing Development at Kai Tak Site 1A of Housing
Department1. These reports have been reviewed for
reference.
1 Hong Kong
Institution of Engineers Environmental Division, Hong Kong, Green Treatment of
Marine Mud for Insitu Backfilling, 2010.
10.5.1.9
EPD
has expressed support to
the beneficial reuse of treated sediment as fill materials for in-situ
backfilling and has no objection to the proposed sediment
treatment method.
10.5.1.10 Possible re-use locations
for the treated sediments include the non-critical areas (e.g. landscape areas)
within the land formation area. As the project is still under detailed design,
the locations for re-use of the treated sediment will be subject to further development
during detailed design stage of the project.
10.5.1.11 The criteria for reuse of treated
sediments are proposed with reference to the Universal Treatment Standards
(UTS), which specify the TCLP test limits as given in Table 4.6 of the Practice
Guide for Investigation and Remediation of Contaminated Land, as shown in below
table.
Table 10.20: Universal Treatment
Standards for On-site Reuse of Sediments Treated by Cement Mixing and Stabilisation
|
Parameters(1),(2)
|
TCLP
Limit (mg/L)
|
|
Arsenic
|
5
|
|
Cadmium
|
0.11
|
|
Chromium
|
0.6
|
|
Lead
|
0.75
|
|
Mercury
|
0.025
|
|
Nickel
|
11
|
|
Zinc
|
4.3
|
Notes:
(1)
Universal Treatment
Standard – US 40 CFR 268.48
(2)
For other metal
contaminants under RBRGs, e.g., copper, silver, they must be reduced by at least 90% in mobility for respective metals through cement
stabilization/solidification remedial treatment. The reduction of mobility of metal
contaminants (leachable metals contaminants) should be confirmed through TCLP
tests (i.e. to carry out TCLP test for the untreated sediment and for the
sediment after treatment and to compare the concentrations of the metals in the
leachates).
10.5.1.12
According to the result of sediment sampling and testing (see Table
10.9 and Table
10.11), some of the sediments would be classified as Category M or Category H
primarily due to high natural background levels
of arsenic and/or elevated levels of lead, zinc, copper, chromium, nickel,
sliver and mercury.
10.5.1.13
After
exploring different possibilities of carrying out on-site remediation and reuse of treated
sediment, the current preliminary proposal is to mix sand/ soil and cement with
the sediments to stabilise any contaminants
so that the treated sediments can be used as backfilling within the
project site. A minimum cement content of 5% is proposed for treating
the sediments subject to the corresponding test results.
The on-site sediment treatment is expected to be carried out in an
enclosed/ covered area provided with proper site drainage, and therefore
significant odour emissions and/or uncontrolled release of contaminated runoff
would not be anticipated during the on-site treatment works.
10.5.1.14
The
sediment treatment facility is expected to be located within the project site
depending on the construction phasing.
The initially proposed treatment process is expected to begin with
initial mixing of the sediments with inert
C&D materials/ soil in batches using an excavator and/or backhoe. Cement
slurry will then be added to the initially mixed sediment for the stabilisation/
solidification process. The treated sediments will be placed at a
temporary storage area covered by tarpaulin sheets, while samples are taken for
laboratory testing. The testing frequency will be one sample per 50 m3
for the first 1,000 m3 of treated sediment (two further samples
should be collected at the same time and kept for contingency in case of damage
to the sample being tested). Provided that the samples meet the UTS for the tested parameters shown in
Table 10.20 and the UCS test, the subsequent
testing frequency will be reduced to be at least two samples
per 10,000 m3. In the event that
required levels are not achieved, the sample should be crushed and the sediment
should be treated with a higher cement content (e.g. 10%, 20% or 30%). The
testing frequency should be revised to one sample per 50 m3 (with
two further samples kept for contingency) and
treated samples should be taken for laboratory testing. Once the UTS and UCS
for the relevant tested parameters is attained, the previous sampling frequency
should be resumed but the revised cement content should be maintained for
treatment.
10.5.1.15
From
Table
10.9, only one sub-sample (at a depth of
2.90 - 3.90 m from TC9A) was found to have high molecular weight PAH exceeding
the LCEL. Therefore, it is suggested to collect samples of the sediments that
are excavated from the vicinity of TC9A for testing of semi-volatile organic
compound (sVOC) against the relevant RBRGs. Should there be any exceedance of
the RBRGs, those sediments will require extra treatment such as air purging or
bio-pile (in addition to mixing with sand / soil and cement) to achieve
compliance with the RBRGs prior to on-site reuse. After formation of the bio-pile, soil samples should be taken monthly at one sample per
20m3 for the analysis of pH, moisture content and sVOCs. Soil
sampling from bio-pile will be accomplished using the
hand-driven sampler.
10.5.1.16
As
the proposal is to treat all excavated sediments from the
foundation/ piling/ excavation works for on-site reuse, off-site disposal of such sediments via marine dumping is not
expected to be required although this aspect will be subject to further
consideration and development at the scheme design / detailed design stage Subject to confirmation of the
proposed treatment method, significant adverse impact from such excavated sediment is not anticipated.
10.5.1.17
The
following mitigation measures are recommended during excavation and treatment
of the sediments:
¡ On-site remediation should be carried
out in an enclosed area in order to minimise odour/ dust emissions;
¡ The loading, unloading, handling,
transfer or storage of treated and untreated sediment should be carried out in
such a manner to prevent or minimise dust emissions;
¡ All practical measures, including but
not limited to speed control for vehicles, should be taken to minimise dust
emission;
¡ Good housekeeping should be maintained
at all times at the sediment treatment facility and storage area;
¡ Treated and untreated sediment should be clearly separated and stored
separately; and
¡ Surface runoff from the enclosed area
should be properly collected and stored separately, and then properly treated
to levels in compliance with the relevant effluent standards as required by the
Water Pollution Control Ordinance before final discharge.
Marine Sediments from the Cable Field Joint
10.5.1.18
The
marine sediments to be dredged from the cable field joint area (with a quantity
of about 10,200 m3) would, however, need to be disposed off-site due
to non-alignment
with the overall construction programme. The basic requirements and
procedures for marine sediment disposal are specified under the PNAP ADV-21.
The Marine Fill Committee (MFC) of CEDD is responsible for the provision and
management of disposal capacity for dredged/ excavated sediment. At least three
months prior to commencement of the dredging work, the contractor will have to
submit a Sediment Quality Report (SQR) in accordance with PNAP ADV-21 in order
to apply for a dumping permit from EPD for marine disposal of the sediments
under the provisions of DASO. No
dredging work is allowed to proceed until all matters on management of dredged
sediments have been resolved and all relevant arrangements have been endorsed
by the relevant authorities including MFC and EPD.
10.5.1.19
The
dredged marine sediments would be loaded onto
barges, transported to and disposed of at the designated disposal sites to be
allocated by the MFC depending on their level of contamination or at other
disposal sites after consultation with the MFC and EPD. Based on the relevant chemical and biological testing results of the
sediment samples, the marine sediment to be dredged from the
field joint area is classified as Category L or Category Mp and would be disposed by Type 1 open sea disposal (for
Category L sediment) or Type 1 open sea disposal at
dedicated sites (for
Category Mp sediment) respectively, according to PNAP ADV-21. The contaminated
sediments should be dredged and transported with great care, and
the following mitigation measures should be strictly
followed to minimise potential impact on water
quality during transportation of the sediments requiring Type 1 disposal:
¡ Bottom opening of barges shall be fitted with tight fitting seals
to prevent leakage of material;
¡ Monitoring of the barge loading shall be conducted to ensure that
loss of material does not take place during transportation. Transport barges or
vessels shall be equipped with automatic self-monitoring devices as specified
by EPD; and
¡ Barges or hopper barges shall not be filled to a level that would
cause the overflow of materials or sediment laden water during loading or
transportation.
Chemical Waste
10.5.1.20
As it is anticipated that chemical wastes will be produced
during construction, all construction contractors will be required to register
with the EPD as a chemical waste producers and to follow the guidelines stated
in the “Code of Practice on the Packaging Labelling and Storage of Chemical
Wastes”. Good quality containers compatible with the chemical wastes should be
used, and incompatible chemicals should be stored separately. Appropriate
labels must be securely attached on each chemical waste container indicating
the corresponding chemical characteristics of the chemical waste, such as
explosive, flammable, oxidizing, irritant, toxic, harmful, corrosive, etc. The
contractor will use a licensed collector to transport and dispose of the
chemical wastes at the approved Chemical Waste Treatment Centre or other
licensed recycling facilities, in accordance with the Waste Disposal (Chemical
Waste) (General) Regulation.
General Refuse
10.5.1.21
Release of any general refuse into marine waters
should be strictly prohibited. General refuse should be stored in
enclosed bins or compaction units separated from inert C&D material. A
reputable waste collector should be employed by the contractor to remove general refuse
from the site for
disposal at designated landfill sites. Preferably an enclosed and covered
area should be provided to reduce the occurrence of 'wind blown' light
material.
Floating Refuse
10.5.1.22
The
future artificial seawall of the proposed airport expansion area has been
properly designed to achieve
a shoreline that does not have any sharp turns or abrupt indentation in order
to avoid or minimise any trapped or accumulated refuse. The construction contractors will be required
to regularly check and clean any refuse trapped or accumulated along the newly
constructed seawall. Such refuse will
then be stored and disposed of together with the general refuse.
10.5.2
Operation Phase
General Refuse
10.5.2.1
General
refuse should be temporarily stored in proper containers with covers, which
should be regularly cleaned and checked for maintenance. General refuse should
be collected on daily basis and delivered to the refuse collection point
accordingly. A reputable waste collector should be employed to remove the
general refuse regularly for off-site disposal at designated landfill sites in
order to avoid odour nuisance or pest/ vermin problem. AAHK’s current initiatives in segregating
recyclable materials (such as cardboard, paper, metals, plastics, glass
bottles, food waste, etc.) from general refuse for recycling should be extended
to cover the expanded airport. Such
waste recycling initiatives include:
¡ Recycling facilities are
provided in prominent areas in passenger terminal buildings to facilitate
separation of recyclable waste by passengers;
¡ Recycling facilities are also provided in refuse rooms of the
passenger terminal buildings to facilitate separation of recyclable waste by
tenants;
¡ Food waste recycling programme has been implemented at the airport to collect and recycle food waste;
¡ Food waste can be delivered to EPD’s Organic Waste Treatment
Facilities for recycling as compost;
¡ Food & beverage tenants are encouraged to recycle waste cooking
oil (e.g., recycling of waste cooking oil to biodiesel); and
¡ AAHK has stepped up on-site waste separation and recycling at the
Airside Waste Station to raise the amount of recyclable materials recovered
from aircraft cabin waste.
Chemical Waste
10.5.2.2
Where chemical wastes are expected to
be produced during the
operation phase, AAHK and/or
owners/ operators of the relevant facilities should register with the EPD as a
chemical waste producer and follow the guidelines stated in the “Code of
Practice on the Packaging, Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes”. Good quality containers compatible
with the chemical wastes should be used, and incompatible chemicals should be
stored separately. Appropriate labels
should be securely attached on each chemical waste container indicating the
corresponding chemical characteristics of the chemical waste, such as
explosive, flammable, oxidizing, irritant, toxic, harmful, corrosive, etc. Licensed collector should be
deployed to transport and dispose of the
chemical wastes at the approved Chemical Waste Treatment Centre or other
licensed recycling facilities, in accordance with the Waste Disposal (Chemical
Waste) (General) Regulation.
Floating Refuse
10.5.2.3
The
artificial seawall of the expanded airport island has been properly designed to
achieve a shoreline without any sharp turns or abrupt indentation where
floating refuse would easily be trapped or accumulated.
10.5.2.4
As
the current practices, regular cleaning of floating refuse trapped or
accumulated on the existing seawall along the North Perimeter Road is carried
out once per year. For other existing
seawalls, the regular cleaning is performed twice a year subject to cleaning
conditions, which has been handed over to the contractor of the Hong
Kong - Zhuhai - Macao Bridge (HZMB) project since May 2012. It is anticipated that similar regular
cleaning of floating refuse from the seawalls of the expanded airport island
will continue to be implemented. In
addition to regular cleaning, it is also recommended to implement the following
management control measures.
10.5.2.5
Weekly inspection will be carried out along
the artificial seawall of the expanded airport island to check for any entrapment or
accumulation of floating refuse. Where an appreciable amount of
floating refuse is found on the artificial seawall during the weekly
inspection, the locations of such refuse will be recorded and arrangements with
the contractor will immediately be made to collect and clear the refuse from
the seawall.
Sludge from Proposed Greywater Treatment Plant
10.5.2.6
Sludge generated from the proposed greywater
treatment
plant will be mechanically
dewatered, which will then be delivered to
the designated landfill
sites for final disposal. To avoid odour emission during the
transportation, the dewatered sludge should be stored in tight
containers or skips for delivery to the designated landfill sites by a
reputable licensed waste collector. The sludge
generated should be carefully handled and properly managed to minimise the
adverse impact of odour and potential health risks to the operators by
attracting pests and other disease vectors.
10.6
Evaluation of Residual Impact
10.6.1.1
With
the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures for the handling,
transportation and disposal of the identified waste arisings, no adverse
residual impact are anticipated during both construction and
operation phases of
the project.
10.7.1.1 It will be the contractor’s
responsibilities to ensure that all wastes produced during the construction phase of the project are handled, stored and
disposed of in accordance with good waste management practices and the relevant
regulations and requirements. The
recommended mitigation measures shall form the basis of the Waste Management
Plan to be developed by the contractor in the construction phase.
10.7.1.2 During construction phase, regular
site inspection as part of the EM&A procedures should be carried out to check if various types of waste are being
managed in accordance with approved procedures and the Waste Management Plan.
It should cover different aspects of waste management including waste
generation, storage, recycling, treatment, transport and disposal.
10.7.2.1 During operation phase, weekly
inspection should be carried out along the artificial seawall of the expanded
airport island to check for any entrapment or accumulation of floating refuse.
Where an appreciable amount of floating refuse is found on the artificial
seawall during the weekly inspection, the locations of such refuse will be recorded
and arrangements with the contractor will immediately be made to collect and
clear the refuse from the seawall.
10.8.1.1 The major waste types generated by the
construction activities will include:
¡
Inert
C&D materials from excavation works, demolition works, seawall modification, piling works and
superstructure construction works on the existing airport island/ proposed land formation area as well
as from HDD during diversion of the existing submarine pipelines;
¡
Non-inert
C&D materials from site clearance at the golf course area, demolition works
for the T2 expansion and various superstructure construction works;
¡
Marine sediments dredged from the cable field joint
area;
¡
CMP and marine sediments excavated from the
foundation / piling / basement / excavation works for constructing the various
tunnels, facilities and buildings;
¡
Chemical
waste from maintenance and servicing of construction plant and equipment;
¡
General
refuse from the workforce; and
¡
Floating
refuse trapped/ accumulated on the newly constructed seawall.
10.8.1.2 Every effort would be made to minimise the extent of
excavation and to ensure that as much of the inert C&D materials generated
by the project will be reused on-site as practicable. Based on
the initial scheme design estimates, it is anticipated that a
total of approximately 9,543,500 m3 of inert C&D materials will
be generated from 2015 to 2022, the majority of which would be from excavation
works for APM and BHS tunnels, new APM depot and airside tunnels, and piling works for TRC and other facilities. Of this total amount
of inert C&D materials, it is estimated that approximately 3,639,230 m3
(or about 38%) could be reused on-site as fill
materials for the proposed land formation works. The remaining 5,904,270 m3 (or about 62%) would be transferred off-site to any identified projects
that would require fill materials and/ or the PFRF for beneficial use by any other projects in Hong Kong. Despite maximising the on-site reuse of inert
C&D materials, it is estimated that the project would require importing
approximately 10,911,770 m3 of public fill materials for land
formation during the period from 2016 to 2018.
10.8.1.3 Based on initial scheme design
information, it is estimated that approximately 96,200 m3 of non-inert
C&D materials would be generated during the period from 2016 to 2021. The
contractor should separate the non-inert C&D materials from the inert
C&D materials on site. Any
recyclable materials (e.g., metal) will be segregated from the non-inert
C&D materials for collection by reputable licensed recyclers. The remaining non-recyclable waste materials
would be disposed of at designated landfill sites by a reputable licensed waste
collector.
10.8.1.4 It is estimated that in total
approximately 777,860 m3
of
marine sediments will be
generated by the various
construction activities from 2015 to 2022. Majority of this
total amount of marine sediments, i.e., about 767,660 m3 (or
about 98.7%), would be generated from the foundation / piling works
for the tunnels, buildings, approach lights and new HKIAAA beacons as well as
excavation works for the new APM depot. These marine sediments will be treated and reused on-site as
backfilling materials, thus avoiding the need for disposal of the sediments
off-site. The remaining minority, i.e., about 10,200 m3
(or
about 1.3%), it is estimated to be generated from excavation of the cable field
joint area during the advance works in 2015/16. This material would require
open sea disposal (for Category L sediments) or open sea disposal at dedicated
sites (for Category Mp sediments) as such sediments cannot be
treated and reused as backfilling materials on-site due to mis-match with the overall construction
programme (i.e., the estimated time of generation of such sediments would be over one year before majority of the
filling works for the proposed land formation work is scheduled to begin).
10.8.1.5 At this stage, the daily general
refuse arising from the construction workforce is estimated to be approximately 9,100 kg. A
Construction Waste Management Plan will be prepared, which will prioritise the
provision and arrangement of recycling facilities to maximise the diversion of
construction waste from being sent to landfill. Non-recycling waste will be disposed
of at designated landfill sites. With the appropriate design of the artificial seawall to avoid or minimise any trapped or
accumulated refuse, it is
estimated that roughly 65 m3
of floating refuse will be collected during each year of construction from the newly constructed seawall. The floating refuse will be sorted and
recycled or disposed of at designated landfill sites, as appropriate. It is expected that minor volumes of
chemical waste would be generated during construction, which
would be properly
handled, stored, labelled and disposed of in accordance with the Waste Disposal
(Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation.
10.8.1.6 Provided that all the identified
wastes are handled, transported and reused/ disposed of in strict accordance with the relevant legislative and recommended
requirements and that the recommended good site practices and mitigation
measures are properly implemented, no adverse environmental impact is expected
during the construction phase.
10.8.2.1
During
the operation phase, the key waste types generated will include general refuse
from operation of passenger concourses, aircraft cabins, terminal buildings,
offices, commercial establishments (e.g., restaurants from various restaurants,
retail outlets, etc.) and various airport infrastructure facilities as well as
chemical waste from maintenance, servicing and repairing of various E&M
equipment. There would also be
entrapment or accumulation of floating refuse on the artificial seawall of the
expanded airport island. With the proposed installation of a new greywater
treatment plant, sludge from the proposed treatment plant would also be
generated and disposed of in accordance with the relevant guidance and
regulations.
10.8.2.2
It is estimated that approximately 46,190 tons of
general refuse would be generated by the project in 2038 (i.e., 15 years after the planned commencement of operation of the
3RS in 2023). The initiatives currently
implemented at HKIA in segregating recyclable waste materials (such as cardboard, paper, metals, plastics, glass bottles,
food waste, etc.) from general refuse for recycling should be extended to cover
the expanded airport. The
non-recyclable waste will be disposed of at designated landfill sites.
10.8.2.3
The new artificial seawall has been properly
designed to achieve a shoreline that does not have any sharp turns or abrupt
indentation in order to avoid or minimise any trapped or accumulated refuse. With the
proper seawall design, it
is estimated that roughly 65 m3
of floating refuse will be collected from the new artificial seawall of the proposed airport expansion area
every year. The floating refuse will be disposed of at
designated landfill sites, as appropriate.
10.8.2.4
It is difficult to quantify the amount of chemical
waste that would arise during operation phase of the
project at this stage since it would be dependent on the equipment maintenance
requirements and the amount of equipment utilised. As per current requirements at the
airport, all chemical waste would be properly handled, stored, labelled and disposed of in accordance
with the Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation.
10.8.2.5
Based on the operation records of the existing
greywater treatment facility, it is estimated that the quantity of dewatered
sludge from the proposed new greywater treatment plant would be approximately
0.23 ton/day. The dewatered sludge will
be stored in tight containers or skips and delivered to the designated landfill
sites for final disposal by a reputable licensed waste collector. The sludge generated would be handled and
managed to minimise the adverse impact of odour and potential health risks to
the operators by attracting pests and other disease vectors.
10.8.2.6 Provided that all the identified wastes are handled, transported and
disposed of in strict accordance with the relevant legislative requirements and
the recommended mitigation measures are properly implemented, no adverse environmental impact is
expected during the operation phase.