Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (Cap. 499), Section 5 (7)
Environmental Impact Assessment Study Brief No. ESB- 095/2001
Project Title: New Contaminated Mud Marine Disposal Facility at Airport East/East Sha Chau Area
Name of Applicant: Civil Engineering Department (hereinafter known as the "Applicant")
1.1 An application (No. ESB-095/2001) for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) study brief under section 5(1) of the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO) was submitted by the Applicant on 17.12.2001 with a project profile (No. PP-157/2001).
1.2 Pursuant to section 5(7)(a) of the EIAO, the Director of Environmental Protection (the Director) issues this EIA study brief to the Applicant to carry out an EIA study for the Project.
1.3 The Project Profile (No. PP-157/2001) proposes to construct a new contaminated mud marine disposal facility at Airport East/East Sha Chau Area as an intermediate measure for 2007 to 2010. The facility is intended to be capable of handling up to a maximum of 8 Mm3 contaminated mud.
1.4 A study "Strategic Assessment and Site Selection Study for Contaminated Mud Disposal" was completed in 2001 and recommended the strategy of developing a contained aquatic disposal (CAD) facility at Airport East as an intermediate measure for 2007 to 2010. The study was presented to the Environmental Impact Assessment Sub-Committee of the Advisory Council on the Environment (ACE) and the Full Council on 9.7.2001 and 23.7.2001 respectively. The Council had no objection to proceed with the EIA study on the understanding that CED would carry out separate EIA studies for other options and sites if eventually the CAD option at Airport East were not recommended in the EIA report. In addition, the Council considered that all sites and options should be kept open as far as practicable. In response to the comment, Civil Engineering Department (CED) broadened the study boundary of this study to cover the area of both Airport East and East Sha Chau. One of the objectives of this EIA study is to identify the environmentally preferred location for the facility within the study boundary.
1.5 During the public inspection period of the project profile, members of the public suggested the use of Confined Disposal Facility (CDF) to minimize the potential environmental impacts. The EIA study shall address the public's concern and demonstrate the consideration of alternatives for minimizing the potential environmental impacts.
1.6 The purpose of the EIA study is to provide information on the nature and extent of environmental impacts arising from the construction and operation of the Project as an intermediate facility and related activities that take place concurrently. This information will contribute to decisions by the Director on:
(i) the overall acceptability of any adverse environmental consequences that are likely to arise as a result of the Project;
(ii) the conditions and requirements for the detailed design, construction and operation of the Project to mitigate against adverse environmental consequences wherever practicable; and
(iii) the acceptability of residual impacts after the proposed mitigation measures are implemented.
2. Objectives of the EIA Study
2.1 The objectives of the EIA study are as follows:
(i) to describe the Project and associated works together with the requirements for carrying out the Project;
(ii) to identify and describe elements of community and environment likely to be affected by the Project and/or likely to cause adverse impacts to the Project, including natural and man-made environment and the associated environmental constraints;
(iii) to identify and quantify emission sources and determine the significance of impacts on sensitive receivers and potential affected uses;
(iv) to identify and quantify any potential impact to water quality and to propose measures to mitigate these impacts;
(v) to identify and quantify any potential impact to marine ecology and to propose measures to mitigate these impacts;
(vi) to identify any negative impacts on fisheries and to propose measures to mitigate the impacts;
(vii) to identify the human health risk and ecological risk associated with consumption of seafood from the project area;
(viii) to identify and quantify any potential impacts to Chinese White Dolphins and to propose measures to mitigate the impacts;
(ix) to identify any negative impacts on site of cultural heritage and to propose measures to mitigate these impacts;
(x) to identify and quantify the potential long-term impact of seabed ecology and bio-accumulation of contaminants in biota of the subject site and to propose measures to mitigate the impacts;
(xi) to identify any potential noise impacts to the sensitive receivers during construction and operation and to propose measures to mitigate these impacts;
(xii) to propose the provision of mitigation measures so as to minimize pollution, environmental disturbance and nuisance during construction and operation of the Project;
(xiii) to investigate the feasibility, effectiveness and implications of the proposed mitigation measures;
(xiv) to identify, predict and evaluate the residual environmental impacts (i.e. after practicable mitigation) and the cumulative effects expected to arise during the construction and operation phases of the Project in relation to the sensitive receivers and potential affected uses;
(xv) to recommend the environmentally preferred location for the facility within the study boundary;
(xvi) to identify, assess and specify methods, measures and standards, to be included in the detailed design, construction and operation of the Project which are necessary to mitigate the identified environmental impacts and cumulative effects and reduce them to acceptable levels;
(xvii) to design and specify environmental monitoring and audit requirements to ensure the effective implementation of the recommended environmental protection and pollution control measures;
3. Detailed Requirements of the EIA Study
3.1 The purpose of this study brief is to scope the key issues of the EIA study. The Applicant has to demonstrate in the EIA report that the criteria in the relevant sections of the Technical Memorandum on the Environmental Impact Assessment Process of the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (hereinafter referred to as "the TM") are fully complied with.
3.2 The Scope
3.2.1 The EIA study shall assess the impact on the environment of the proposed facility during construction and operation stages. The EIA study shall identify the environmentally preferred location for the project within the scheme boundary as shown in Figure 1 attached to the Study Brief.
3.2.2 The scope of this EIA study covers the project mentioned in section 1.3 above. The EIA study shall address any key issues identified during the course of the study and the cumulative environmental impacts of the Project, through interaction or in combination with other existing, committed and planned developments in the vicinity of the Project. The EIA study shall address the likely key issues describe below, together with any other key issues identified during the course of the EIA study:
(i) water quality impact associated with dredging works and construction and operation of the disposal facilities;
(ii) cumulative water quality impact, including the discharges from the Siu Ho Wan Sewage Treatment Works outfall;
(iii) human health risk and ecological risk associated with consumption of seafood from the project area;
(iv) impact on marine ecology of the Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park during construction and operation of disposal facilities;
(v) potential long term impact of seabed ecology and bio-accumulation of contaminants in biota of the subject site;
(vi) impact on the Chinese White dolphins and artificial reef complexes during the construction and operation of the disposal facilities;
(vii) impact on capture fisheries during construction and operation stages of the disposal facilities.
3.3 Technical Requirements
The Applicant shall conduct the EIA study to address all environmental aspects of the activities as described in the scope as set out above. The EIA study shall include the following technical requirements on specific impacts.
3.3.1 Alternative Consideration
220.127.116.11 During the public inspection period of the project profile, members of the public raised environmental concerns over the project and suggested the use of Confined Disposal Facility (CDF) to minimize the potential environmental impacts. The EIA study shall evaluate and review the possible use of CDF as compared to the proposed CAD for minimizing the potential environmental impacts, provide sound technical justifications for selecting the disposal method and the part environmental factors played in the selection shall be described. The EIA report shall present the consideration of different contaminated mud disposal options and disposal sites, taking on board the findings in previous studies such as the Strategic Assessment and Site Selection Study for Contaminated Mud Disposal.
18.104.22.168 The EIA study shall provide clear and objective comparison of the environmental benefits and disbenefits of different possible project location within the scheme boundary. The applicant shall compare the main environmental impacts of different locations within the scheme boundary and provide reasons for selecting the project location, and the part environmental factors played in the selection shall be described.
22.214.171.124 Having regard to the effects on the environment of the construction/operation period and the severity of the construction/operation impacts, the EIA study shall explore different construction and operation methods (i.e. mud dredging and disposal methods) and sequences of works for the Project, with a view to avoiding prolonged adverse environmental impacts. The Applicant shall focus on the ecological valuable habitats, including Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park, the habitat of the Indo-Pacific Hump-Backed Dolphin and the artificial reef complexes.
3.3.2 Use of the Relevant Findings of Previously Approved EIA Report and EM&A Reports
126.96.36.199 The Applicant shall review all on-going and previous studies/EIA studies and EM&A reports relevant to the proposed development and extract relevant information for the purpose of this EIA study. EIA studies relevant to the proposed development include, but not limited to:
- Environmental Impact Assessment Study for Disposal of Contaminated Mud in the East Sha Chau Marine Borrow Pit (January 1997)
3.3.3 Cumulative Environmental Impact
The Applicant shall assess and evaluate the cumulative environmental impacts arising from the project and other planned development in its vicinity, including but not limited to, Contaminated Mud Marine Disposal facility at East Sha Chau, reclamation at Yam O, Permanent Aviation Fuel Facilities for Hong Kong International Airport, Remaining development at Tung Chung and Tai Ho, Sewage Discharge from the Siu Ho Wan Sewage treatment work.
3.3.4 Water Quality Impact
188.8.131.52 The Applicant shall follow the criteria and guidelines for evaluating and assessing water pollution as stated in Annexes 6 and 14 of the TM respectively.
184.108.40.206 The assessment area for the purpose of this water quality impact assessment shall cover an area of 6 km from the project sites as shown in Figure 2. The study area could be extended to include other areas if they are found also being impacted during the course of the EIA study and have a bearing on the environmental acceptability of the Project.
220.127.116.11 The Applicant shall identify and analyze all physical, chemical and biological disruptions of marine water system arising from the construction and operation of the proposed project. Impact assessment shall include any disruption to the operation of the existing submarine outfalls, such as the Siu Ho Wan outfall.
18.104.22.168 The Applicant shall include the following in the water quality impact assessment:
(i) Collection and review of background information on the existing water system(s);
(ii) Characterization of water quality based on existing information or site surveys/tests as appropriate;
(iii) Identification and analysis of all existing and planned future activities and beneficial uses related to the water system(s) and identification of all water sensitive receivers;
(iv) Identification of pertinent water quality objectives and establishment of other appropriate water quality criteria or standards for the water system(s) and all the sensitive receivers;
(v) Review the specific construction and operation methods (e.g., the mud dredging and contaminated mud disposal method);
(vi) Predication and quantification, by mathematical modeling or other technique approved by the Director, of the impacts on the water system(s) and the sensitive receivers, in particular Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park, Airport sea channel, gazetted and non-gazetted beaches along the Tuen Mun Coastline such as the Butterfly Beach, water intakes within the study area, due to the construction and operation of the Project. Possible impacts include changes in hydrology, flow regime, sediment erosion or deposition, water and sediment quality and the effects on the marine mammal and aquatic organisms due to such changes. The predication shall include possible different construction stages or sequences, and different operation stages. The water quality model used shall comply with the specifications listed in Appendix I:
(vii) Cumulative impacts due to other projects, activities or pollution sources, within a boundary around the assessment area, subject to the agreement of the Director shall also be predicted and quantified.
Dredging and Dumping
(viii) Identification and quantification of all dredging, fill extraction, filling, sediment/ mud transportation and disposal activities and requirements. Field investigation, sampling and chemical and biological laboratory tests to characterize the sediment/mud concerned shall be conducted as appropriate. The ranges of parameters to be analyzed; the number, type and methods of sampling; sample preservation; chemical and biological laboratory test method to be used shall be subject to the approval of the Director. The categories of sediments which require different types of disposal in accordance with WBTC No.3/2000 shall be identified by both chemical and biological tests, and their quantities shall be estimated. If the presence of any seriously contaminated sediment which requires Types 3 disposal is confirmed, the Applicant shall identify the most appropriate treatment and/or disposal arrangement and demonstrate its feasibility.
3.3.5 Marine Ecological Impact
22.214.171.124 The Applicant shall follow the criteria and guideline for evaluating and assessing ecological impact as stated in Annexes 8 and 16 of the TM respectively.
126.96.36.199 The assessment area for the purpose of this ecological impact assessment shall be the same as the assessment area for the Water Quality Impact Assessment, including the Sha Chau, Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park, the Tai Ho Bay and all areas with frequent vessels movements during the construction and operational phase and any other areas likely to be impacted by the project.
188.8.131.52 The project shall avoid impacts on recognized sites of conservation importance and other ecological sensitive areas including the Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park, the habitat for the Indo-Pacific Hump-Backed Dolphin and the nearby artificial reef complexes. The assessment shall identify and quantify as far as possible the potential ecological impacts during the construction and operation of the project and should evaluate the environmental acceptability of the proposed project.
184.108.40.206 The assessment shall include the following:
(i) review the finding of relevant studies and collate all the available information regarding the ecological characters;
(ii) evaluate the information collected and identify any information gap relating to the assessment of potential ecological impacts to the aquatic environment;
(iii) carry out necessary field surveys which shall cover the wet season, the duration of which shall be at least 4 months, and investigations to verify the information collected in (ii), fill the information gaps identified and fulfill the objectives of the EIA study;
(iv) establish the general ecological profile and describe the characteristics of each habitat found; major information to be provided shall include:(a) description of the physical environment;
(b) habitat maps of suitable scale (1:1000 to 1:5000) showing the types and locations of habitats in the assessment area;
(c) ecological characteristics of each habitat type such as size, type, species present, dominant species found, species diversity and abundance, community structure, seasonality and inter-dependence of the habitats and species, and presence of any features of ecological importance;
(d) representative color photos of each habitat type and any important ecological features identified;
(e) investigate and describe the existing wildlife uses of various habitats with special attention to:
- the habitat of the Chinese White Dolphin, Sousa chinensis, in the North Lantau area and;
- any other habitats and wildlife groups identified by the study as having special conservation interest.
(f) species found that are rare, endangered and/or listed under local legislation, international conventions for conservation of wildlife/habitats or red data books;
(v) describe all recognized sites of conservation importance in the assessment area, in particular, the Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park, Tai Ho Bay and assess whether these sites will be affected by the proposed development;
(vi) using suitable methodology, identify and quantify as far as possible, any direct, indirect, on-site, off-site, primary, secondary and cumulative ecological impacts such as destruction of habitats, reduction of species abundance/diversity, loss of feeding and breeding grounds, reduction of ecological carrying capacity and habitat fragmentation; and in particular the following:a) impact of habitat disturbance associated with dredging and backfilling of the pits during the construction and operational phases;
b) impact on hard and soft bottom assemblages as well as other marine organism during the construction and operational phases;
(vii) assess the impacts on Chinese White Dolphins (Sousa chinensis)a) review and incorporate the findings of relevant studies including the previous dolphins studies, in particular, the "Population Biology of the Indo-Pacific Hump-backed Dolphin in Hong Kong Waters" (Wildlife Monograph No. 144 Page 1-65, published in October 2000) and collate all the available information regarding the ecological characters of the "Assessment Area" ;
b) evaluate the information collected and identify any information gap relating to the assessment of potential impacts on the Chinese White Dolphins;
c) carry out necessary field surveys and investigations to verify the information collected, fill the information gaps identified, if any, and to fulfill the objectives of the EIA study;
d) assess the impacts on Chinese White Dolphin due to disturbance, loss of habitat and food supply;
e) to assess whether the levels of contaminants present in prey species in the project area are likely to pose unacceptable risks, through the food chain to Chinese White Dolphin;
f) present all relevant survey findings including previous surveys conducted in relevant studies together with surveys carried out under this study;
g) assess the cumulative impacts on the dolphins due to this project and any nearby dredging/reclamation works and other existing or planned projects during construction;
h) assess the disturbance of the dolphins' habitat, such as underwater noise generated by vessels and equipments, and the risk of dolphins being hit by vessel traffic in the vicinity of the facility during construction and operation of the disposal facility;
i) identify precautionary and mitigation measures for protection of the Chinese White Dolphins. The proposed measures shall include those recommended in previous EIA studies and dolphins studies, such as ecological monitoring on the dolphins during construction and operation phase.
(viii) evaluate the significance and acceptability of the ecological impacts identified using well-defined criteria;
(ix) recommend all possible alternatives and practicable mitigation measures to avoid, minimize and/or compensate for the adverse ecological impacts identified;
(x) evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of the recommended mitigation measures and define the scope, type, location, implementation arrangement, subsequent management and maintenance of such measures;
(xi) determine and quantify the residual ecological impacts after implementation of the proposed mitigation measures;
(xii) evaluate the severity and acceptability of the residual ecological impacts using well-defined criteria; and
(xiii) review the need for and recommend any ecological monitoring programme, in particular on the Chinese White Dolphins during the construction and operation phase.
3.3.6 Fisheries Impact
220.127.116.11 Fisheries Impact Assessment shall follow the criteria and guidelines as specified in Annexes 9 and 17 of the TM respectively.
18.104.22.168 The assessment area for fisheries impact assessment shall include all areas within 500m distance from the project area and any areas likely to be impacted by the project. Special attention shall be given to the artificial reefs deployed within the Chek Lap Kok Marine Exclusion Zone 3 and the Ma Wan fish culture zone.
22.214.171.124 The assessment shall cover any potential impact of the proposed project on both capture and culture fisheries, during the construction the construction and operation phase.
126.96.36.199 Existing information regarding the study area shall be reviewed. Based on the review results, the study shall identify data gap and determine if there is any need for field surveys. If field surveys are considered necessary, the study shall recommend appropriate methodology, duration and timing for the field surveys.
188.8.131.52 The fisheries impact assessment shall include the following:
(i) description of the physical environmental background;
(ii) description and quantification as far as possible of the existing capture and culture fisheries activities;
(iii) description and quantification as far as possible of the existing fisheries resources (eg. major fisheries products and stocks)
(iv) identification of parameters (water quality parameters) and areas that will be affected;
(v) identification and quantification any direct/indirect and on-site/off-site impacts to fisheries;
(vi) evaluation of impacts and make recommendations for any environmental mitigation measures with details on justification, description of scope and programme, feasibility as well as staff and financial implications including those related to subsequent management and maintenance requirements of the proposals; and
(vii) review the need for monitoring and, if necessary, recommend a monitoring and auditing programme.
3.3.7 Hazard to Health
The Applicant shall carry out a risk assessment on human consumption of seafood from the project area due to heavy metal accumulation. The risk assessment assessing the potential adverse effects due to changes in the food chain by the proposed disposal activity shall include the followings:
(i) the applicant shall review local monitoring data and review the level of contaminants in the seafood in the vicinity of East Sha Chau area. When interpreting the previous monitoring data, the applicant shall take into account the duration of the bioassay programme in relation to the entire monitoring period;
(ii) description and evaluation on the impact of the contaminant release from the dumped spoils;
(iii) prediction on the accumulation of contaminant in the tissue of fish and invertebrates due to the project, application shall also evaluate the cumulative effects due to the current disposal activities at East Sha Chau;
(iv) identification on the risk of inducing a toxic effect when organisms are exposed to given concentrations of contaminants;
(v) address whether human consumption of seafood from the project area is predicted to result in exposures to contaminants that would give rise to concern for the general public and sensitive subpopulations;
3.3.8 Noise Impact
184.108.40.206 The Applicant shall follow the criteria and guidelines for evaluating and assessing construction noise impact as stated in Annexes 5 and 13 of the TM, respectively (i.e. excluding operational noise impact assessment).
220.127.116.11 The noise impact assessment shall include the following :
(i) Determination of Assessment Area
The study area for the noise impact assessment shall generally include all areas within 300m from the study area shown in Figure 1. Subject to the agreement of the Director, the assessment area shall be expanded to include NSRs at larger distance which would be affected by the construction of the Project.
(ii) Provision of Background Information and Existing Noise Levels
The Applicant shall provide all background information relevant to the Project, e.g. relevant previous or current studies.
(iii) Identification of Noise Sensitive Receivers
(a) The Applicant shall refer to Annex 13 of the TM when identifying the NSRs. The NSRs shall include all existing NSRs and all planned/committed noise sensitive developments and uses earmarked on the relevant Outline Zoning Plans, Development Permission Area Plans, Outline Development Plans and Layout Plans.
(b) The Applicant shall select assessment points to represent all identified NSRs for carrying out quantitative noise assessment described below.
(iv) Provision of an Emission Inventory of the Noise Sources
The Applicant shall provide an inventory of noise sources for all the plants and equipments relating to the construction works of the Project. Confirmation of the validity of the inventory shall be obtained from the relevant government departments/authorities and documented.
(vi) Construction Noise Assessment
(a) The Applicant shall carry out assessment of noise impact from construction (excluding percussive piling) of the Project during day time, i.e. 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., on weekdays other than general holidays in accordance with the methodology stipulated in paragraphs 5.3. and 5.4 of Annex 13 of the TM. The criteria in Table 1B of Annex 5 of the TM shall be adopted in the assessment.
(b) To minimize the construction noise impact, alternative construction methods to replace percussive piling shall be proposed as far as practicable.
(c) If the unmitigated construction noise levels are found exceeding the relevant criteria, the Applicant shall propose practicable direct mitigation measures (including quieter alternative methods, re-scheduling and restricting hours of operation of noisy task) to minimize the impact. If the mitigated noise levels still exceed the relevant criteria, the duration of the noise exceedance shall be given.
(d) In case the Applicant would like to evaluate whether construction works in restricted hours as defined under the Noise Control Ordinance (NCO) are feasible or not in the context of programming construction works, reference should be made to the relevant technical memoranda issued under the NCO. Regardless of the results of the construction noise impact assessment for restricted hours, the Noise Control Authority will process the Construction Noise Permit (CNP) application, if necessary, based on the NCO, the relevant technical memoranda issued under the NCO, and the contemporary conditions/situations. This aspect should be explicitly stated in the noise chapter and the conclusions and recommendations chapter in the EIA report.
3.3.9 Impact on Cultural Heritage
18.104.22.168 The Applicant shall follow the criteria and guidelines for evaluating and assessing impact on cultural heritage as stated in Annexes 10 and 19 of the TM, respectively.
22.214.171.124 A Marine Archaeological Investigation (MAI) on the area of the seabed to be affected by the Project should be carried out to assess the marine archaeological value of the area. Guidelines for the MAI is attached in Appendix II. The study area for the purpose of the impact on marine archaeological deposit shall be defined as the area within 10m of the pits. The MAI should be conducted by a qualified marine archaeologist.
126.96.36.199 The Applicant shall assess the extent to which those sites of cultural heritage might be affected and recommend possible alternatives (such as different location of the submarine outfall) and practicable monitoring and mitigation measures to avoid or keep the adverse impacts on the site of cultural heritage to an absolute minimum.
3.3.10 Summary of Environmental Outcomes
The EIA report shall contain a summary of the key environmental outcomes arising from the EIA study, including the population and environmentally sensitive areas protected, environmentally friendly designs recommended, key environmental problems avoided, compensation areas included and the environmental benefits of environmental protection measures recommended.
4. Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) Requirements
4.1 The Applicant shall identify and justify in the EIA study whether there is any need for EM&A activities during the construction and operation phases of the Project and, if affirmative, to define the scope of the EM&A requirements for the Project in the EIA study.
4.2 Subject to the confirmation of the EIA study findings, the Applicant shall comply with the requirements as stipulated in Annex 21 of the TM. The Applicant shall propose real-time reporting of monitoring data for the Project through a dedicated internet website accessible to the public
4.3 The Applicant shall prepare a project implementation schedule containing all the EIA study recommendations and mitigation measures with reference to the implementation programme.
5. Duration of Validity
5.1 This EIA study brief is valid for 36 months after the date of issue. If the EIA study does not commence within this period, the Applicant shall apply to the Director for a fresh EIA study brief before commencement of the EIA study.
6. Report Requirements
6.1 In preparing the EIA report, the Applicant shall refer to Annex 11 of the TM for the contents of an EIA report. The Applicant shall also refer to Annex 20 of the TM, which stipulates the guidelines for the review of an EIA report.
6.2 The Applicant shall supply the Director with the following number of copies of the EIA report and the executive summary:
(i) 50 copies of the EIA report in English and 80 copies of the executive summary (each bilingual in both English and Chinese) as required under section 6(2) of the EIAO to be supplied at the time of application for approval of the EIA report.
(ii) when necessary, addendum to the EIA report and the executive summary submitted in 6.2 (i) above as required under section 7(1) of the EIAO, to be supplied upon advice by the Director for public inspection.
(iii) 20 copies of the EIA report in English and 50 copies of the executive summary (each bilingual in both English and Chinese) with or without Addendum as required under section 7(5) of the EIAO, to be supplied upon advice by the Director for consultation with the Advisory Council on the Environment.
6.3 The Applicant shall, upon request, make additional copies of the above documents available to the public, subject to payment by the interested parties of full costs of printing.
6.4 In addition, to facilitate the public inspection of the EIA Report via the EIAO Internet Website, the applicant shall provide electronic copies of both the EIA Report and the Executive Summary Report prepared in HyperText Markup Language (HTML) (version 4.0 or later) and in Portable Document Format (PDF version 4.0 or later), unless otherwise agreed by the Director. For the HTML version, a content page capable of providing hyperlink to each section and sub-section of the EIA Report and the Executive Summary Report shall be included in the beginning of the document. Hyperlinks to all figures, drawings and tables in the EIA Report and Executive Summary shall be provided in the main text from where the respective references are made. All graphics in the report shall be in interlaced GIF format unless otherwise agreed by the Director.
6.5 The electronic copies of the EIA report and the Executive Summary shall be submitted to the Director at the time of application for approval of the EIA Report.
6.6 When the EIA Report and the Executive Summary are made available for public inspection under s.7(1) of the EIAO, the content of the electronic copies of the EIA Report and the Executive Summary must be the same as the hard copies and the Director shall be provided with the most updated electronic copies.
6.7 To promote environmentally friendly and efficient dissemination of information, both hardcopies and electronic copies of future EM&A reports recommended by the EIA study shall be required and their format shall be agreed by the Director.
7. Other Procedural Requirements
7.1 If there is any change in the name of Applicant for this EIA study brief during the course of the EIA study, the Applicant must notify the Director immediately.
7.2 If there is any key change in the scope of the Project mentioned in Sections 1.3 of this EIA study brief and in Project Profile (No. PP-157/2001), the Applicant must seek confirmation from the Director in writing on whether or not the scope of issues covered by this EIA study brief can still cover the key changes, and the additional issues, if any, that the EIA study must also address. If the changes to the Project fundamentally alter the key scope of the EIA study brief, the Applicant shall apply to the Director for a fresh EIA study brief.
--- END OF EIA STUDY BRIEF ---
Environmental Assessment and Noise Division,
Environmental Protection Department
Water Quality Modeling Requirements
Modeling software general
(a) The modeling software shall be fully 3-dimensional capable of accurately simulating the stratified condition, salinity transport, and effect of wind and tide within the model area.
(b) The modeling software shall consist of hydrodynamic, water quality and particle dispersion modules. The hydrodynamic and water quality modules shall have been proven with successful applications locally and overseas.
(c) The hydrodynamic and water quality modules shall be strictly mass conserved at all levels.
(d) The assessment and modeling tool for oil spill events should be quantitative with proven applications locally or overseas.
Model details - Calibration & Validation
(e) No field data collection is required for model calibration for this study. However, the models shall be properly calibrated and validated before its use in this study in the marine waters in the area including Western Buffer, North Western and Deep Bay Water Control Zones defined under the Water Pollution Control Ordinance, and the Pearl Estuary, with the field data collected by:
(f) Tidal data shall be calibrated and validated in both frequency and time domain manner.
(g) For the purpose of calibration and validation, the model shall run for not less than 15 days of real sequence of tide (excluding model spin up) in both dry and wet seasons with due consideration of the time required to establish initial conditions.
(h) In general the hydrodynamic models shall be calibrated to the following criteria:
|Criteria||Level of fitness
with field data
|tidal elevation (rms)||< 8 %|
|maximum. phase error at HW and LW||< 20 minutes|
|maximum. current speed deviation||< 30 %|
|maximum phase error at peak speed||< 20 minutes|
|maximum direction error at peak speed||< 15 degrees|
|maximum salinity deviation||< 2.5 ppt|
Model details - Simulation
(i) The suspended solids model for assessing impacts of sediment loss due to marine works shall incorporate the processes of settling, deposition and erosion. Contaminants release and DO depletion during dredging and backfilling shall be simulated by the model.
(j) The water quality modeling results shall be qualitatively explainable, and any identifiable trend and variations in water quality shall be reproduced by the model. The water quality model shall simulate and take account of the interaction of dissolved oxygen, suspended solids, contaminants release of dredged and disposed material, and benthic processes. It shall also simulate salinity. Salinity results simulated by hydrodynamic models and water quality models shall be demonstrated to be consistent.
(k) The models shall at least cover the eastern Pearl Estuary and Water Control Zones identified in above to incorporate all major influences on hydrodynamic and water quality.
(l) In general, grid size at the area affected by the project shall be less than 400 m in open waters and less than 75 m around sensitive receivers. The grid schematisation shall be agreed with EPD. All models shall either be dynamically linked to a far field model or form part of a larger model by gradual grid refinement. The regional model shall at least cover the Hong Kong waters, the Pearl Estuary, the Lema Channel and the Mirs Bay to incorporate all major influences on hydrodynamic and water quality.
(m) Scenarios to be assessed shall cover all phases of development being considered. Corresponding pollution load, bathymetry and coastline shall be adopted in the model set up.
(n) Hydrodynamic and water quality models shall be run for (with proper model spin up) at least a real sequence of 15 days spring-neap tidal cycle in both dry season and wet season.
(o) The results shall be assessed for compliance of Water Quality Objectives. Any changes in hydrodynamic regime shall be assessed. Daily sedimentation rate shall be computed and its ecological impact shall be assessed.
(p) Assess the predicted impacts on all sensitive receivers.
(q) Cumulative impacts due to other projects, activities or pollution sources within a boundary, subject to the agreement of the Director, shall also be predicted and quantified.
(r) All modeling input data and results shall be submitted in digital media to EPD.
Guidelines for Marine Archaeological Investigation (MAI)
The standard practice for MAI should consist of four separate tasks, i.e., (1) Baseline Review, (2) Geophysical Survey, (3) Establishing Archaeological Potential and (4) Remote Operated Vehicle (ROV)/Visual Diver Survey/Watching Brief.
1. Baseline Review
1.1 A baseline review should be conducted to collate the existing information in order to identify the potential for archaeological resources and, if identified, their likely character, extent, quality and value.
1.2 The baseline review will focus on known sources of archive data. It will include:
(a) Geotechnical Engineering Office (GEO) - the Department holds extensive seabed survey data collected from previous geological research. (b) Marine Department, Hydrographic Office - the Department holds a substantial archive of hydrographic data and charts. (c) The Royal Naval Hydrographic Department in the UK - the Department maintains an archive of all survey data collected by naval hydrographers.
1.3 The above data sources will provide historical records and more detailed geological analysis of submarine features which may have been subsequently masked by more recent sediment deposits and accumulated debris.
2. Geophysical Survey
2.1 Extensive geophysical survey of the study area should deploy high-resolution boomer, side scan sonar and an echo sounder. The data received from the survey would be analyzed in detail to provide:
(a) Exact definition of the areas of greatest archaeological potential.
(b) Assessment of the depth and nature of the seabed sediments to define which areas consist of suitable material to bury and preserve archaeological material.
(c) Detailed examination of the boomer and side scan sonar records to map anomalies on the seabed which may be archaeological material.
3. Establishing Archaeological Potential
3.1 The data examined during Tasks 1 and 2 will be analyzed to provide an indication of the likely character and extent of archaeological resources with the study area. This would facilitate formulation of a strategy for investigation.
3.2 The results would be presented as a written report and charts. If there is no indication of archaeological material there would be no need for further work, subject to the agreement of the Antiquities and Monuments Office (AMO).
4. Remote Operated Vehicle (ROV)/Visual Diver Survey/Watching Brief
4.1 Subject to the outcome of Tasks 1, 2 and 3, accepted marine archaeological practice would be to plan a field evaluation programme to acquire more detailed data on areas identified as having archaeological potential. The areas of archaeological interest can be inspected by ROV or divers. ROV or a team of divers with both still and video cameras would be used to record all seabed features of archaeological interest.
4.2 Owing to the heavy marine traffic in Hong Kong, the ROV/visual diver survey may not be feasible to achieve the target. If that is the case, an archaeological watching brief is the most appropriate way to monitor the dredging operations in areas of identified high potential to obtain physical archaeological information.
4.3 A sampling strategy for an archaeological watching brief would be prepared based on the results of Tasks 1, 2 and 3 to focus the works on areas of greatest archaeological potential. Careful monitoring of the dredging operations would enable immediate identification and salvage of archaeological material. If archaeological material is found, the AMO should be contacted immediately to seek guidance on its significance and appropriate mitigation measures would be prepared.
5.1 If Task 4 is undertaken, the results would be presented in a written report with charts.