


|
|
Table 3‑1 Air Quality Monitoring Equipment
Table 3‑2 Air Quality Monitoring Locations
Table 3‑3 Action & Limit Levels for Air
Quality
Table 3‑4 Event/Action Plan for Air Quality
Table 3‑5 Noise Monitoring Equipment
Table 3‑6 Noise Monitoring Locations
Table 3‑7 Action & Limit Levels for Noise
Table 3‑8 Event/Action Plan for Noise
Table 3‑9 Water Quality Monitoring Equipment
Table 3‑10 Water Quality Monitoring Locations
Table 3‑11 Action/Limit Levels for Water Quality
Table 3‑12 Event/Action Plan for Water Quality
Table 4-1 Air
Quality Monitoring Results
Table 4-2 Noise
Monitoring Results
Table 4-3 Summary
of Exceedances for I-1
Table 4-4 Summary
of Exceedances for I-2
Table 4-5 Summary
of Exceedances for I-3
Table 4-6 Water
Quality Monitoring Results
Table 4-7 Summary
of Project-Related Exceedances
Table 5-1 Waste Generated in November 2009
Table 6-1 Site
Inspection by ET
Table 7-1 Cumulative
Statistic of Environmental Complaint
Table 8-1 Cumulative
Statistics of Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecutions
|
Appendixes |
|
|
Appendix A Site Map and Works Area
Appendix C Construction Programme
Appendix D Implementation Status of Environmental
Mitigation Measures
Appendix E Status of License and Permit
Appendix F Calibration Certificates
Appendix G Monitoring Locations
Appendix J Interim Notifications of Environmental
Quality Limits Exceedances
2.
According
to the EM&A Manual, there are four designated air quality monitoring
locations, five designated noise monitoring locations and four water quality monitoring
locations during the construction phase: (i) Sik Sik Yuen Ho Fung College (ASR
1, NSR 1 and Intake I-1); (ii) Hong Hoi Chee Hong Temple (ASR 3, NSR 3 and
Intake I-2); (iii) Squatters (NSR 6 and Intake I-3); (iv) Beach Tower (Long
Beach Gardens) (ASR 8, NSR 8 and Outfall O-1); and (v) Greenview Terrace (Block
1) (ASR 9, NSR 9 and Outfall O-1).
3.
During the non restricted
hours, major construction activities undertaken by the Contractor at TWDT
included site cleaning and tidying and
breaking up exiting boulder at I-1, I-2, I-3 and Outfall, tree transplanting at
I-1, I-2 and I-3; socket H-piling and construction
of launching chamber at Outfall; soil nailing at I-1,
I-3 and Outfall; formation of access road
at I-3 and Outfall; Excavation and Lateral Support (ELS) at I-1; construction
of skin wall and formation of steel platform at I-2. No construction activities were carried out during restricted hours.
4.
No
exceedance has been recorded for air quality during the reporting month. For
noise monitoring, two environmental complaints on
noise trigger the excceedances of
Action Levels.
5.
Exceedances
for water quality monitoring are summarized in the following table:
|
Parameter |
Action Level Exceedance |
Limit Level Exceedance |
|
DO |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Turbidity |
One recorded at I-1 on 25 November 2009. |
Four recorded at I-1 and I-2 on 4, 6, 11 and 13
November 2009. |
|
SS |
One recorded at I-3 on 11 November 2009 |
Nine recorded at I-1, I-2 and I-3 on 2, 4, 9, 11,
23, 25, 27 and 30 November 2009. |
6.
The exceedances
were considered not to be project-related as no direct disturbance was observed
contributed by the project construction activities. Detail interpretation could
be referred to Section 4.3 of this report.
7.
The status
of waste generation in the reporting month are:
·
A total of
·
About
·
·
·
·
No chemical
waste was disposed of in the reporting month
8.
In this
reporting month, two site inspections and one monthly site audit were carried
out by ET and Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) respectively, to ensure
proper implementation of environmental mitigation measures specified in the
EM&A Manual and compliance with environmental legislation. All observations, which were recorded on the
inspection checklists, were passed to the Contractor together with the ET’s
recommendations.
9.
As advised
by the Contractor and verified by ET:
·
No
non-compliance regarding the site inspection was received in the reporting
month;
·
Two environmental complaints were
received during the reporting month; and
·
No summons
and prosecution was received in this reporting month.
10.
The major
construction works for the upcoming three months will be:
·
Site
cleaning and tidying at I-1, I-2, I-3 and Outfall;
·
Tree
transplanting at I-1, I-2, I-3 and Outfall;
·
Socket H-piling at Outfall;
·
Soil
nailing at I-1, I-3 and Outfall;
·
Breaking up
exiting boulder at I-1, I-2, I-3, and Outfall;
·
Formation of
access road at I-3 and Outfall;
·
Erosion
control mat and green wire mesh at Outfall;
·
Excavation
and Lateral Support (ELS) at I-1;
·
Construction
of skin wall at I-2;
·
Formation
of steel platform at I-2
·
Formation
of shaft at I-2;
·
Formation of Noise Enclosure at I-2; and
·
Construction of launching chamber at Outfall.
1.1.1
The
Drainage Services Department (DSD) proposed to construct a tunnel with an
internal diameter of
1.1.2
This
project is a Designated Project under Schedule 2 Part I Category Q, of the
Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO) as part of the proposed Tsuen
Wan Drainage Tunnel (TWDT) passes underneath the existing Tai Mo Shan Country
Park.
An Environmental Impact
Assessment (EIA) Study has therefore been undertaken to provide information on
the nature and extent of environmental impacts arising from the construction
and operation of the proposed designed project and related activities taking
place concurrently. From the EIA the
recommendations for monitoring contained herein, are made.
1.1.3
The
Maeda-CREC-SELI Joint Venture (MCSJV) was awarded by DSD with the Contract – Design
and Construction of Tsuen Wan Drainage Tunnel.
1.1.4
Hyder was
commissioned by the MCSJV as the Environmental Team (ET) to implement an
EM&A program in accordance with the EM&A Manual. The proposed tunnel section flows from the
junction of Shing Mun Road and Wo Yi Hop Road and discharges to south of Yau
Kom Tau underneath Castle Peak Road as shown in Appendix A.
1.1.5
The
construction works of the Project was commenced in January 2008. This is the twentieth
monthly EM&A report summarising the impact monitoring results and audit
findings of the EM&A program in November
2009.
2.1 Project Organization and Management Structure
2.1.1
The
organization chart and lines of communication with respect to the on-site
environmental management are shown in Appendix B.
2.2.1
The overall
project programme from the detail design to completion of all civil works shall
take approximately 54 months. The construction programme is presented in Appendix
C.
2.2.2
The major construction
activities undertaken in the reporting month were:
·
Site
cleaning and tidying at I-1, I-2, I-3 and Outfall;
·
Tree
transplanting at I-1, I-2 and I-3;
·
Socket H-piling at Outfall;
·
Soil
nailing at I-1, I-3 and Outfall;
·
Breaking up
exiting boulder at I-1, I-2, I-3 and Outfall;
·
Formation
of access road at I-3 and Outfall;
·
Excavation
and Lateral Support (ELS) at I-1;
·
Construction
of skin wall at I-2;
·
Formation
of steel platform at I-2; and
·
Construction of Launching Chamber at Outfall.
2.2.3
No
construction activities were undertaken for TWDT during the restricted hours.
2.3.1
The
implemented environmental mitigation measures and their statuses are given in
Appendix D.
2.4 Status of License and Permit
2.4.1 A summary of relevant permits and licences for the Project is given in Appendix E.
3.1.1
1-hour
Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) levels are measured at the designated air
monitoring locations in accordance with the EM&A Manual. Information such
as date of monitoring, duration, weather condition, equipment used and
monitoring results were recorded on the field data sheet developed for the
Project. The monitoring results are presented in Section 4.
3.1.2
1-hour TSP
monitoring is carried out under typical weather conditions (with no adverse
weather such as typhoon signal or rain storm warning) three times every six
days using High Volume Air Samplers (HVASs).
Monitoring should be conducted in accordance with the standard sampling
method as set out in High Volume Method for Total Suspended Particulates, Part
50 Chapter 1 Appendix B, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations of the
USEPA.
3.1.3
After each sampling,
the filter paper loaded with dust is kept in a clean and tightly sealed plastic
bag. The filter paper is then re-conditioned in desiccators for 24 hours before
obtaining the weight under laboratory conditions.
3.1.4
The average
concentrations of the TSP are calculated based on the following information
obtained from monitoring:
·
Flow rate;
·
Weight of
the filter paper before and after sampling; and
·
Sampling
period indicated by the elapsed-time meter.
3.1.5
All samples
should be kept in good condition (i.e. stored in sealed plastic bags, with
brief description of the monitoring dates and locations) for a period of 6
months before disposal. Sample analysis is carried out by ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Limited (HOKLAS Registration Number
066).
Monitoring Equipment and Calibration
3.1.6
High Volume
Air Samplers (HVASs) are used for 1-hour TSP monitoring to comply with the
USEPA specifications in Appendix B Part 5 - Reference Method for the
Determination of Suspended Particulate matter in the Atmosphere (High-Volume
Method) of the Code of Federal Regulation dated June 1, 1991.
3.1.7
All HVASs
are calibrated before commencement of monitoring using standard orifice
5-points calibration method with orifice calibrator to determine the actual
flow rate of each HVAS. This shall be
used for the calculation of the TSP level.
Calibration Kit Model - TE
|
Equipment Type |
Model |
Serial Number |
Calibration Orifice Number |
Location |
|
HVAS |
BM2000HX |
4994 |
1559 |
ASR 1 |
|
HVAS |
BM2000HX |
5875 |
1559 |
ASR 3 |
|
HVAS |
TE5005X |
0390 |
1559 |
ASR 8 |
|
HVAS |
TE5005X |
0646 |
1559 |
ASR 9 |
Table 3‑1 Air Quality Monitoring Equipment
3.1.8
Four
designated air quality-monitoring locations were identified in the contract
specific EM&A manual. They are
listed in Table 3‑2 below and shown in
Appendix G.
|
Monitoring
Station ID |
Name of
Premises |
Floor
Level |
|
ASR1 |
|
G/F |
|
ASR3 |
|
Podium |
|
ASR8 |
|
G/F |
|
ASR9 |
Greenview Terrace (Block 1) |
G/F |
Table 3‑2 Air Quality Monitoring Locations
3.1.9
The Action
and Limit Levels for the 1-hour TSP monitoring is shown in Table
3‑3. In case exceedances of Action and/or Limit
levels for air quality occur, Event Contingency Plans (ECPs) would be
implemented. The ECPs for Action and
Limit levels exceedances are shown in Table 3‑4.
|
Station |
1-hr TSP Level in μg/m3 |
|
|
Action Level |
Limit Level |
|
|
ASR 1 |
307 |
500 |
|
ASR 3 |
327 |
500 |
|
ASR 8 |
337 |
500 |
|
ASR 9 |
329 |
500 |
Table 3‑3 Action & Limit Levels for Air
Quality
|
EVENT |
ACTION |
|||||||
|
ET |
IEC |
SOR |
CONTRACTOR |
|||||
|
ACTION
LEVEL |
||||||||
|
Exceedance
for one sample |
· Identify source, investigate the causes of exceedance and propose remedial measures; · Inform IEC and SOR; · Repeat measurement to confirm finding; · Increase monitoring frequency to daily. |
· Check monitoring data submitted by ET; · Check Contractor’s working method. |
· Notify Contractor. |
· Rectify any unacceptable practice; · Amend working methods if appropriate. |
||||
|
Exceedance
for two or more consecutive samples |
· Identify source; · Inform IEC and SOR; · Advise SOR on the effectiveness of the proposed remedial measures; · Repeat measurements to confirm findings; · Increase monitoring frequency to daily; · Discuss with IEC and Contractor on remedial actions required; · If exceedance continues, arrange meeting with IEC and SOR; · If exceedance stops, cease additional monitoring. |
· Check monitoring data submitted by ET; · Check Contractor’s working method; · Discuss with ET and Contractor on possible remedial measures; · Advise the ET on the effectiveness of the proposed remedial measures; · Supervise Implementation of remedial measures. |
· Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance in writing; · Notify Contractor; · Ensure remedial measures properly implemented. |
· Submit proposals for remedial to SOR within 3 working days of notification; · Implement the agreed proposals; · Amend proposal if appropriate. |
||||
|
LIMIT
LEVEL |
||||||||
|
Exceedance
for one sample |
· Identify source, investigate the causes of exceedance and propose remedial measures; · Inform IEC, SOR, Contractor and EPD; · Repeat measurement to confirm finding; · Increase monitoring frequency to daily; · Assess effectiveness of Contractor’s remedial actions and keep IEC, EPD and SOR informed of the results. |
· Check monitoring data submitted by ET; · Check Contractor’s working method; · Discuss with ET and Contractor on possible remedial measures; · Advise SOR on the effectiveness of the proposed remedial measures; · Supervise implementation of remedial measures. |
· Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance in writing; · Notify Contractor; · Ensure remedial measures properly implemented. |
· Take immediate action to avoid further exceedance; · Submit proposals for remedial actions to IEC within 3 working days of notification; · Implement the agreed proposals; · Amend proposal if appropriate. |
||||
|
Exceedance
for two or more consecutive samples |
· Notify IEC, SOR, Contractor and EPD; · Identify source; · Repeat measurement to confirm findings; · Increase monitoring frequency to daily; · Carry out analysis of Contractor’s working procedures to determine possible mitigation to be implemented; · Arrange meeting with IEC and SOR to discuss the remedial actions to be taken; · Assess effectiveness of Contractor’s remedial actions and keep IEC, EPD and SOR informed of the results; · If exceedance stops, cease additional monitoring. |
· Discuss amongst SOR, ET, and Contractor on the potential remedial actions; · Review Contractor’s remedial actions whenever necessary to assure their effectiveness and advise SOR accordingly; · Supervise the implementation of remedial measures. |
· Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance in writing; · Notify Contractor; · In consultation with the IEC, agree with the Contractor on the remedial measures to be implemented; · Ensure remedial measures properly implemented; · If exceedance continues, consider what portion of the work is responsible and instruct the Contractor to stop that portion of work until the exceedance is abated. |
· Take immediate action to avoid further exceedance; · Submit proposals for remedial actions to IEC within 3 working days of notification; · Implement the agreed proposals; · Resubmit proposals if problem still not under control; · Stop the relevant portion of works as determined by SOR until the exceedance is abated. |
||||
Table 3‑4 Event/Action Plan for Air Quality
3.2.1
The construction noise level is measured
in terms of equivalent A-weighted sound pressure level (Leq)
measured in decibels (dB(A)). Monitoring
of Leq(30 min) is carried out at the noise monitoring locations on a
weekly basis during normal construction working hours (0700-1900 hours from
Monday to Saturday except public holidays).
For all other time periods (i.e. restricted hours), Leq(5 min)
would be employed for comparison with the Noise Control Ordinance (NCO)
criteria if necessary.
3.2.2
The two statistical sound levels L10
and L90: the level exceeded for 10 and 90 percent of the time
respectively, are also recorded during monitoring. Major noise sources observed, both on-site
and off-site, are recorded on the field data sheet. All measurements are recorded to the nearest
0.1 dB(A) and presented in round numbers in this report. Results are presented in Section 4.
3.2.3
Sound level meters, which comply with
the International Electrotechnical Commission Publication 651: 1979 (Type 1)
and 804: 1985 (Type 1) specifications as referred to the Technical Memorandum
(TM) issued under the Noise Control Ordinance, are used. Noise levels for the A-weighted levels Leq(30min),
L10 and L90 are measured throughout the impact
monitoring. Average, by sound power, of
six consecutive 5 minutes readings is used to provide Leq(30 min) for
non-restricted hours (07:00-19:00 hours from Monday to Saturday except public
holidays). A facade correction of 3dB(A)
is applied to the measurements that are carried out under free field
conditions.
3.2.4
During the impact monitoring,
parameters such as dates, weather condition, equipment used, measurement
results and major noise sources are recorded on the field data record
sheet. Monitoring would not be carried
out in the presence of fog, rain or strong wind with a steady speed exceeding
Monitoring Equipment and Calibration
3.2.5
Rion Precision Sound Level Meters of
Type NA-27 and Type NL
3.2.6
Prior to and following each noise measurement,
the accuracy of the sound level meters is checked using an acoustic calibrators
(Rion Type NC-73) generating a known sound pressure level at a known
frequency. Measurements are considered
as valid only if the calibration levels from before and after the noise
measurement agrees to within 1.0 dB(A).
The sound level meters and the calibrator are calibrated annually to
ensure they perform to the same level of accuracy as stated in the
manufacturer’s specifications. The noise
monitoring equipment used during the reporting month is shown in Table 3‑5 below. The calibration certificates are included in
Appendix F.
|
Equipment
Type |
Manufacturer |
Type
Number |
Serial
Number |
Location |
|
Sound
Level Meter |
Rion |
NA-27 |
00201194 |
NSR1,
NSR3, NSR6, NSR8 and NSR9 |
|
Sound
Level Meter |
Rion |
NL-18 |
00360030 |
|
|
Sound
Level Calibrator |
Rion |
NC-73 |
10786708 |
|
|
Sound
Level Calibrator |
Rion |
NC-73 |
10997142 |
Table 3‑5 Noise Monitoring Equipment
3.2.7
Five designated noise monitoring
locations were identified in the contract specific EM&A manual. They are listed in Table 3‑6 below and shown in
Appendix G. All the locations below are
in façade
measurement.
|
Monitoring Station ID |
Name of Premises |
Floor Level |
|
NSR1 |
|
G/F |
|
NSR3 |
|
Podium |
|
NSR6 |
Squatters |
G/F |
|
NSR8 |
|
G/F |
|
NSR9 |
Greenview Terrace (Block 1) |
Podium (up to 6 July2009) Roof* (from 16 July 2009) |
* The noise monitoring location of NSR9 had been adjusted
at rooftop from 16 July 2009.
Table 3‑6 Noise Monitoring Locations
Construction Groundborne Noise
3.2.8
Prediction of construction
groundborne noise indicates the criteria will be achieved at most NSRs except exceedances
are predicted at Hong Hoi Chee Hong Temple (NSR3) and Squatters (NSR6). It is recommended to restrict the TBM
operation in non-restricted period (i.e. 0700 - 1900) at these NSRs. In order
to ensure proper control of groundborne noise is executed by the contractor, a
monitoring requirement is recommended at the
3.2.9
The criteria including Technical
Memorandum for the Assessment of Noise from Places other than Domestic
Premises, Public Places or Construction Sites (TM-Places) under the NCO
stipulates that noise transmitted primarily through the structural elements of
building, or buildings, shall be 10 dB(A) less than the relevant ANLs. Daytime groundborne construction noise
criterion of 60 dB(A) therefore applies with reference to TM-EIAO 70 dB(A)
criterion for schools and taking account of the minus 10 dB(A) requirement
under the NCO TM-Places. Following the
same principle for groundborne noise criteria, groundborne construction noise
levels inside domestic premises relying on opened window for ventilation will
be limited to 65 dB(A), with reference to the daytime airborne noise criterion
of 75 dB(A) in accordance with TM-EIAO.
3.2.10
The Action and Limit levels for
construction noise are defined in Table
3‑7. If non-compliance of the criteria occurs,
actions in accordance with the Action Plan in Table 3‑8 would be carried out.
|
Time Period |
Action |
Limit |
|
0700 – 1900 hrs on normal weekdays |
When one documented complaint is received |
75 dB(A)* |
Table 3‑7 Action & Limit
Levels for Noise
|
Event |
Action |
|||
|
ET
Leader |
IEC |
SOR |
Contractor |
|
|
Action
Level |
· Notify IEC and the Contractor. · Carry out investigation. · Report the results of investigation to IEC and the Contractor. · Discuss with the Contractor and formulate remedial measures. · Increase monitoring frequency to check mitigation measures. |
· Review with analysed results submitted by ET. · Review the proposed remedial measures by the Contractor and advise SOR accordingly. · Supervise the implement of remedial measures. |
· Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance in writing. · Notify the Contractor. · Require the Contractor to propose remedial measures for the analysed noise problem. · Ensure remedial measures are properly implemented. |
· Submit noise mitigation proposals to IEC. · Implement noise mitigation proposals. |
|
Limit
Level |
· Identify the source. · Notify IEC, SOR, EPD and the Contractor. · Repeat measurement to confirm findings. · Increase monitoring frequency. · Carry out analysis of Contractor’s working procedures to determine possible mitigation to be implemented. · Inform IEC, SOR, and EPD the causes & actions taken for the exceedances. · Assess effectiveness of the Contractor’s remedial actions and keep IEC, EPD and SOR informed of the results. · If exceedance stops, cease additional monitoring. |
· Discuss amongst SOR, ET Leader and the Contractor on the potential remedial actions. · Review the Contractor’s remedial actions whenever necessary to assure their effectiveness and advise SOR accordingly. · Supervise the implementation of remedial measures. |
· Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance in writing. · Notify the Contractor. · Require the Contractor to propose remedial measures for the analysed noise problem. · Ensure remedial measures are properly implemented. · If exceedance continues, consider what activity of the work is responsible and instruct the Contractor to stop that activity of work until the exceedance is abated. |
· Take immediate action to avoid further exceedance. · Submit proposals for remedial actions to IEC within 3 working days of notification. · Implement the agreed proposals. · Resubmit proposals if problem still not under control. · Stop the relevant activity of works as determined by the SOR until the exceedance is abated. |
Table 3‑8 Event/Action Plan for Noise
3.3.1
The water
quality impact would be insignificant with the protection measures recommended
in Section 5.6 of the EIA report.
However in view of the sensitive nature of the rivers/streams and
bathing beaches in the
Study Area, it is suggested that a programme of monitoring should be
established to confirm the mitigation measures are protecting these water
bodies.
3.3.2
Monitoring for Dissolved Oxygen (DO), temperature, turbidity, pH and
suspended solids (SS) should be undertaken at designated monitoring locations. It should be noted that DO,
temperature, turbidity and pH should be measured in-situ whereas SS is assayed
in a laboratory.
3.3.3
In association with the water quality parameters, other relevant data
should also be measured, such as monitoring location/position, time, weather
conditions, and any special phenomena and description of work
underway at the construction site etc.
3.3.4
In accordance with the EM&A Manual, the water quality monitoring
for all specified parameters shall be measured at all designated monitoring
locations including control points at an interval of 3 days per week. DO,
temperature, turbidity, pH and SS shall be undertaken at designated monitoring
locations.
3.3.5
It should be noted that water
samples for all monitoring parameters should be collected, stored, preserved
and analysis according to Standard Methods, APHA 17 ed. and/or methods agreed
by the Director of Environmental Protection.
3.3.6
Each sample
shall be analysed in accordance with the APHA Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18th edition, or an equivalent method
approved by the EPD. If an in-house or
non-standard method is proposed, details of the method verification may require
to be submitted to the EPD. In any
circumstance, the sample testing should comply with a comprehensive quality
assurance and quality control programme.
The laboratory should be prepared to demonstrate the quality programmes
to the EPD when requested.
Monitoring Equipment and Calibration
3.3.7
All the water samples collected should be transferred to clearly labelled and pre-cleaned sample containers
with necessary preservatives immediately after collection. The sample containers should be provided by a
HOKLAS accredited laboratory. Sufficient
quantity of samples should be collected for all laboratory analyses. Following sampling, samples should be stored in a cool box at
temperature of between 0 and 4oC, and transported to the laboratory within
the sample retention time as advised by the laboratory under proper
chain-of-custody system. The water quality monitoring equipment used
during the reporting month is shown in Table 3‑9 below.
|
Equipment Type |
Manufacturer |
Model |
Quantity |
|
pH Meter / DO / Temperature Meter |
WTW YSI |
PH/Oxi 340i YSI 58 |
1 |
|
Tuibidimeter |
EUTECH |
TN-100 |
1 |
Table 3‑9 Water Quality Monitoring Equipment
3.3.8
All pH
meters, DO meters and turbidimeters shall be checked and calibrated prior to
use. DO meters and turbidimeters shall
be calibrated by a laboratory accredited under HOKLAS or any other international
accreditation scheme, and subsequently re-calibrated at 3 monthly intervals
throughout all stages of the water quality monitoring. Responses of sensors and electrodes shall be
checked with certified standard solutions before each use. Wet bulb calibrations for all DO meters shall
be carried out before measurement at each monitoring location. For the on site calibration of field
equipment, BS 127:1993, "Guide to field and on-site test methods for the
analysis of waters" should be observed.
The calibration certificates are included in Appendix
F.
3.3.9
Four
designated monitoring locations were
identified
in the contract specific EM&A Manual for
water quality monitoring. While the construction of the outfall basin at the
seashore has not been started, monitoring of marine water quality is only
required during which the stilling basin is placed at the seashore area. These
four monitoring stations are listed in Table 3‑10 below
and shown in Appendix G.
|
Monitoring Station ID |
Name of Premises |
|
I-1 |
Intake I-1 |
|
I-1-C |
Control of Intake I-1 |
|
I-2 |
Intake I-2 |
|
I-2-C |
Control of Intake I-2 |
|
I-3 |
Intake I-3 |
|
I-3-C* |
Control of Intake I-3 |
|
O-1 (FT) |
Outfall 1During Flood Tide |
|
O-1 (ET) |
Outfall 1During Ebb Tide |
|
O-1-C (FT) |
Control of Outfall O-1 During Flood Tide |
|
O-1-C (ET) |
Control of Outfall O-1 During Ebb Tide |
*The upper stream
location (I-3-C*) had been relocated from end of February 2009 due to coarse
stone blockage.
Table 3‑10 Water Quality Monitoring Locations
3.3.10
Note that there are two control stations for Outfall O-1, one for
sampling during flood tide and one for sampling during ebb tide. Only one of those control stations for
Outfall O-1 shall be sampled during each sampling. Control station to be sampled will be
determined based on the tidal information provided by the Hong Kong
Observatory.
3.3.11
The Action and Limit levels for water
quality monitoring parameters are defined in Table 3‑11. In case of any exceedance, appropriate actions will be undertaken in accordance
with the Event and Action Plan as described in Table 3‑12.
|
Parameters |
Action |
Limit |
|
DO in
mg/l (Surface,
Middle & Bottom) |
Surface
& Middle 5%-ile
of baseline data for surface and
middle layer. Bottom 5%-ile
of baseline data for bottom layer. |
Surface
& Middle 4mg/l
except 5mg/l for FCZ or 1%-ile
of baseline data for surface and middle layer Bottom 2mg/l
or 1%-ile of baseline data for bottom layer |
|
SS in
mg/l (depth-averaged) |
95%-ile
of baseline data or 120% of upstream control station’s SS at the same tide of
the same day |
99%-ile
of baseline or 130% of upstream control station’s SS at the same tide of the
same day and specific sensitive receiver water quality requirements (e.g.
required suspended solids levels for concerned sea water intakes) |
|
Turbidity
(Tby) in NTU (depth-averaged) |
95%-ile
of baseline data or 120% of upstream control station’s Tby at the same tide
of the same day |
99%-ile
of baseline or 130% of upstream control station’s Tby at the same tide of the
same day |
Notes:
·
For DO,
non-compliance of the water quality limits occurs when monitoring result is
lower than the limits.
·
For SS and Tby,
non-compliance of the water quality limits occurs when monitoring result is
higher than the limits.
·
All the
figures given in the table are used for reference only and the EPD may amend
the figures whenever it is considered as necessary.
Table 3‑11 Action/Limit Levels for Water Quality
|
Event |
ET Leader |
IEC |
SOR |
Contractor |
|
Action Level being exceeded by one sampling day |
· Repeat in-situ measurement to confirm finding; · Identify source(s) of impact; · Inform IEC and Contractor; · Check monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods; · Discuss mitigation measures with IEC and Contractor; and · Repeat measurement on next day of exceedance. |
· Discuss with ET and Contractor on the mitigation measures; · Review proposals on mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise the SOR accordingly; and · Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
· Discuss with IEC on the proposed mitigation measures; and · Make agreement on the mitigation measures to be implemented. |
· Inform the SOR and confirm notification of the non-compliance in writing; · Rectify unacceptable practice; · Check all plant and equipment; · Consider changes of working methods; · Discuss with ET and IEC and propose mitigation measures to IEC and SOR; and · Implement the agreed mitigation measures. |
|
Action Level being exceeded by more than one consecutive sampling day |
· Repeat in-situ measurement to confirm finding; · Identify source(s) of impact; · Inform IEC and Contractor; · Check monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods; · Discuss mitigation measures with IEC and Contractor; · Ensure mitigation measures are implemented; · Prepare to increase the monitoring frequency to daily; and · Repeat measurement on next day of exceedance. |
· Discuss with ET and Contractor on the mitigation measures; · Review proposals on mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise the SOR accordingly; and · Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
· Discuss with IEC on the proposed mitigation measures; · Make agreement on the mitigation measures to be implemented; and · Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
· Inform the Engineer and confirm notification of the non-compliance in writing; · Rectify unacceptable practice; · Check all plant and equipment; · Consider changes of working methods; · Discuss with ET and IEC and propose mitigation measures to IEC and SOR within 3 working days; and · Implement the agreed mitigation measures. |
|
Limit Level being exceeded by one sampling day |
· Repeat in-situ measurement to confirm finding; · Identify source(s) of impact; · Inform IEC, Contractor and EPD; · Check monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods; · Discuss mitigation measures with IEC, SOR and Contractor; · Ensure mitigation measures are implemented; and · Increase the monitoring frequency to daily until no exceedance of Limit level. |
· Discuss with ET and Contractor on the mitigation measures; · Review proposals on mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise the SOR accordingly; and · Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures.
|
· Discuss with IEC, ET and Contractor on the proposed mitigation measures; and · Request Contractor to critically review the working methods; · Make agreement on the mitigation measures to be implemented; and · Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
· Inform the Engineer and confirm notification of the non-compliance in writing; · Rectify unacceptable practice; · Check all plant and equipment; · Consider changes of working methods; · Discuss with ET and IEC and SOR and propose mitigation measures to IEC and SOR within 3 working days; and · Implement the agreed mitigation measures. |
|
Limit Level being exceeded by more than one consecutive sampling day |
· Repeat in-situ measurement to confirm finding; · Identify source(s) of impact; · Inform IEC, Contractor and EPD; · Check monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods; · Discuss mitigation measures with IEC, SOR and Contractor; · Ensure mitigation measures are implemented; and · 7. Increase the monitoring frequency to daily until no exceedance of Limit level for two consecutive days. |
· Discuss with ET and Contractor on the mitigation measures; · Review proposals on mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise the SOR accordingly; and · Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
· Discuss with IEC, ET and Contractor on the proposed mitigation measures; and · Request Contractor to critically review the working methods; · Make agreement on the mitigation measures to be implemented; · Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures; and · Consider and instruct, if necessary, the Contractor to slow down or to stop all or part of the marine work until no exceedance of Limit Level. |
· Inform the SOR and confirm notification of the non-compliance in writing; · Rectify unacceptable practice; · Check all plant and equipment; · Consider changes of working methods; · Discuss with ET and IEC and SOR and propose mitigation measures to IEC and SOR within 3 working days; · Implement the agreed mitigation measures; and · As directed by the Engineer, to slow down or to stop all or part of the marine work or construction activities. |
Table 3‑12 Event/Action Plan for Water Quality
4.1.1
The air
quality monitoring schedule of the reporting period is given in Appendix
H.
4.1.2
Results of 1-hours TSP level are
shown in Table 4-1. All measurements were recorded to the nearest
|
Station |
Monitoring Date |
Monitoring Result (mg/m3) |
Action/Limit Levels (mg/m3) |
|
ASR 1 |
04-Nov-09 |
61.8 |
307/500 |
|
146.8 |
|||
|
253.7 |
|||
|
10-Nov-09 |
131.3 |
||
|
57.9 |
|||
|
45.1 |
|||
|
16-Nov-09 |
72.1 |
||
|
38.6 |
|||
|
33.5 |
|||
|
20-Nov-09 |
65.7 |
||
|
46.4 |
|||
|
78.5 |
|||
|
26-Nov-09 |
190.6 |
||
|
99.1 |
|||
|
128.8 |
|||
|
ASR 3 |
04-Nov-09 |
88.1 |
327/500 |
|
303.5 |
|||
|
108.9 |
|||
|
10-Nov-09 |
126.0 |
||
|
46.5 |
|||
|
61.2 |
|||
|
16-Nov-09 |
91.8 |
||
|
47.7 |
|||
|
40.4 |
|||
|
20-Nov-09 |
86.9 |
||
|
45.3 |
|||
|
55.1 |
|||
|
26-Nov-09 |
133.4 |
||
|
74.6 |
|||
|
94.2 |
|||
|
ASR 8 |
04-Nov-09 |
169.1 |
337/500 |
|
198.8 |
|||
|
109.7 |
|||
|
10-Nov-09 |
142.0 |
||
|
24.5 |
|||
|
40.0 |
|||
|
16-Nov-09 |
95.5 |
||
|
28.4 |
|||
|
29.7 |
|||
|
20-Nov-09 |
112.3 |
||
|
118.7 |
|||
|
117.5 |
|||
|
26-Nov-09 |
220.7 |
||
|
318.8 |
|||
|
206.5 |
|||
|
ASR 9 |
04-Nov-09 |
168.8 |
329/500 |
|
298.2 |
|||
|
89.9 |
|||
|
10-Nov-09 |
106.2 |
||
|
50.4 |
|||
|
30.0 |
|||
|
16-Nov-09 |
111.6 |
||
|
43.6 |
|||
|
13.6 |
|||
|
20-Nov-09 |
100.8 |
||
|
55.8 |
|||
|
84.4 |
|||
|
26-Nov-09 |
39.5 |
||
|
55.8 |
|||
|
55.8 |
Note: Italic indicates the occurrence of exceedance of
Action level
Bold indicates the occurrence of
exceedance of Limit Level
Table 4-1 Air Quality
Monitoring Results
4.1.3
No project related exceedance was
recorded in the reporting month.
4.2.1
The noise monitoring schedule of the
reporting period is given in Appendix H.
Results of measured noise level, in terms of Leq (30min), during the
construction are shown in Table
4-2.
All measurements including L10 and L90 are recorded to the nearest 0.1 dB(A)
and presented in round numbers in this report.
Detail results including weather conditions and graphical presentation
are presented in Appendix I.
|
Station |
Monitoring Date |
Leq (30 min) dB(A) |
Limit Levels dB(A) |
|
NSR 1 |
04-Nov-09 |
66.8 |
70 |
|
10-Nov-09 |
68.5 |
||
|
16-Nov-09 |
69.8 |
||
|
26-Nov-09 |
66.4 |
||
|
NSR 3 |
04-Nov-09 |
66.8 |
75 |
|
10-Nov-09 |
72.1 |
||
|
16-Nov-09 |
68.0 |
||
|
26-Nov-09 |
66.0 |
||
|
NSR 6 |
04-Nov-09 |
65.7 |
|
|
10-Nov-09 |
64.6 |
||
|
16-Nov-09 |
53.9 |
||
|
26-Nov-09 |
56.3 |
||
|
NSR 8 |
04-Nov-09 |
63.3 |
|
|
10-Nov-09 |
62.1 |
||
|
16-Nov-09 |
69.0 |
||
|
26-Nov-09 |
72.0 |
||
|
NSR 9 |
02-Nov-09* |
65.4 |
|
|
04-Nov-09 |
68.8 |
||
|
06-Nov-09* |
65.2 |
||
|
09-Nov-09* |
72.0 |
||
|
10-Nov-09 |
72.2 |
||
|
10-Nov-09* |
71.4 |
||
|
10-Nov-09* |
71.0 |
||
|
10-Nov-09* |
71.6 |
||
|
11-Nov-09* |
70.8 |
||
|
11-Nov-09* |
71.1 |
||
|
11-Nov-09* |
71.2 |
||
|
16-Nov-09 |
70.9 |
||
|
18-Nov-09* |
71.8 |
||
|
20-Nov-09* |
69.5 |
||
|
26-Nov-09 |
73.0 |
||
|
27-Nov-09* |
71.3 |
||
|
27-Nov-09* |
72.3 |
||
|
27-Nov-09* |
72.7 |
*
Additional noise monitoring due to the documented complaints.
Table 4-2 Noise Monitoring Results
4.2.2
No
exceedances of Limit Level were recorded during the reporting month. One environmental complaint
was received by EPD on 9 November regarding movable
noise barrier not placing close enough to the piling machine. Another environmental complaint
was received by EPD on 18 November 2009 regarding rock-breaking activity
carried out in the eastern area of Portion D, closest to Greenview Terrace, not
totally screened and line of sight of the breaker observed from the NSR. Hence, they would be Action Level exceedances. Details of the complaint are
presented in Section 7.as well as the
notification of exceedances enclosed in Appendix J.
4.3.1
The water quality monitoring schedule
of the reporting period is given in Appendix H.
Summaries of exceedances for water quality monitoring are provided in Table 4-3 to Table 4-5.
|
Parameter |
Action
Level Exceedance |
Limit
Level Exceedance |
|
DO |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Turbidity |
One
recorded on 25 November 2009 |
Two
recorded on 4 and 6 November 2009 |
|
SS |
Nil |
Five recorded
on 2, 4, 25, 27 and 30 November 2009 |
|
Total |
One |
Seven |
Table 4-3 Summary of Exceedances for I-1
|
Parameter |
Action
Level Exceedance |
Limit
Level Exceedance |
|
DO |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Turbidity |
Nil |
Two recorded
on 11 and 13 November 2009 |
|
SS |
Nil |
Three
recorded on 9, 11 and 23 November 2009 |
|
Total |
Nil |
Five |
Table 4-4 Summary of Exceedances for I-2
Parameter |
Action
Level Exceedance |
Limit
Level Exceedance |
|
DO |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Turbidity |
Nil |
Nil |
|
SS |
One
recorded on 11 November 2009. |
One
recorded on 30 November 2009 |
|
Total |
One |
One |
Table 4-5 Summary of Exceedances for I-3
4.3.2
Results
of measured water quality parameters during the reporting month are shown in Table 4-6 and detailed results including weather
conditions and graphical presentations are enclosed in Appendix I.
4.3.3
A total of
15 non-project related exceedances was recorded for the water quality
monitoring within the reporting month.
4.3.4
The exceedances of Limit Levels of SS recorded at I-1 on 2 and 4 November 2009 were above baseline Action and Limit Levels as well as the range
of baseline SS concentration. The exceedances of Limit Levels of turbidity
recorded at I-1 on 4 and 6 November were above baseline Action and Limit Levels
as well as the range of baseline turbidity concentration. Construction
activities, such as rock breaking, rock dowel and mucking out, were
undertaken during the measurements. No direct disturbance was observed from the
site. Muddy stain was observed at
the exit of the closed channel at upstream near
4.3.5
Exceedance of Action Level of turbidity was
recorded at I-1 on 25 November 2009. The measured turbidity level was above
baseline Action Level but below Limit Level. It was still within the range of
baseline turbidity concentration. The exceedances of Limit Levels of SS
recorded on 25, 27 and 30 November 2009 were above baseline Action and Limit
Levels and also the range of baseline SS concentration. Site cleaning and
tidying, disposal of C&D materials, excavation and breaking up of rock,
slope stabilization, mucking out, shotcrete of shaft wall and rock face, as
well as cement grouting were undertaken during the measurements. No direct disturbance was observed
from the site. However, other construction activities were carried
out at Wo Yi Hop Village near control station (I-1-C). Therefore, the
exceedances of SS and turbidity levels recorded on 25, 27 and 30 November 2009
were considered to be contributed by the high SS and turbidity levels of
control station (I-1-C) and no action should be taken as the SS and turbidity
results were below the action and limit levels of control station.
4.3.6
The exceedances of Limit Levels of SS (130% higher than I-2-C) recorded
at I-2 on 9 and 23 November 2009 were below baseline Action/Limit Levels and within the range
of baseline SS concentration. Construction activities, such as site cleaning and
tidying, C&D materials excavation and disposal, erect and dismantle
formwork of skin wall, as well as formation of man access shaft, were carried
out during the measurements. No direct disturbance was observed from the site.
Thus, the exceedances of SS levels recorded on 9 and 23 November at I-2 was
considered to be contributed by natural variation and no action was therefore
required.
4.3.7
The
exceedances of Limit Level of turbidity recorded at I-2 on 11 and 13 November
2009 were above baseline Action and Limit Levels as well as the range of baseline
turbidity concentration. Exceedance of Limit level of SS was recorded at 1-2 on
11 November 2009. Construction activities, such as steel frame erection and
formwork erection for skin wall, site cleaning and tidying, dismantle formwork
of skin wall, were undertaken during the monitoring. No direct disturbance was
observed from the site. However, there were construction activities of Landslip
preventative works for slopes and retaining walls by CEDD at control station
(I-2-C). As such, the exceedances of
turbidity and SS levels at I-2 on 11 and 13 November 2009 were considered to be
contributed by the high turbidity and SS levels of control station (I-2-C) and
no action should be taken as the turbidity and SS results at monitoring station
were below the action and limit levels of control station.
4.3.8
Exceedance
of Action Level of SS was recorded at I-3 on 11 November 2009. The measured SS
level was above baseline Action Level but below Limit Level, and it was within
the range of baseline SS concentration. The exceedance of Limit Level of SS
(130% higher than I-3-C) recorded on 30 November 2009 was below baseline Action
/ Limit Levels and it was within the range of baseline SS concentration. Site
cleaning and tidying, soil nailing, boulder breaking, formation of access road
and C&D materials disposal, were carried out during the measurements. No
direct disturbance was observed from the site.
Hence, the exceedances of SS levels at I-3 were considered to be contributed
by natural variation and no action was therefore required.
4.3.9
The above mentioned exceedances were considered
as non project
related, however, proper mitigation measures had been
implemented during measurements. Details of the above mentioned investigations
could be referred to the notifications of exceedances as enclosed in Appendix
J, which have been provided to the IEC for review.
|
Station |
Date |
Temperature |
DO
(mg/L) |
Action/Limit
Level for DO (mg/L) |
pH |
Turbidity
(NTU) |
Action/Limit
Level for Turbidity (NTU) |
SS
(mg/L) |
Action/Limit
Level for SS (mg/L) |
|
I-1 |
2-Nov-09 |
22.55 |
7.95 |
3.42 /
3.34 |
7.33 |
4.09 |
9.75 /
12.47 |
17.8 |
8.85 /
10.17 |
|
|
4-Nov-09 |
24.25 |
7.78 |
|
7.23 |
13.68 |
|
13.7 |
|
|
|
6-Nov-09 |
24.85 |
8.24 |
|
7.34 |
20.40 |
|
8.8 |
|
|
|
9-Nov-09 |
24.10 |
7.87 |
|
7.32 |
2.73 |
|
3.8 |
|
|
|
11-Nov-09 |
25.00 |
6.93 |
|
7.44 |
5.47 |
|
3.5 |
|
|
|
13-Nov-09 |
22.95 |
8.03 |
|
7.25 |
3.70 |
|
2.2 |
|
|
|
16-Nov-09 |
19.95 |
8.36 |
|
7.59 |
2.47 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
18-Nov-09 |
18.15 |
8.83 |
|
7.65 |
3.36 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
20-Nov-09 |
19.70 |
8.57 |
|
7.22 |
2.52 |
|
2.3 |
|
|
|
23-Nov-09 |
21.00 |
8.41 |
|
7.44 |
3.63 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
25-Nov-09 |
21.30 |
8.37 |
|
7.44 |
10.80 |
|
11.3 |
|
|
|
27-Nov-09 |
21.55 |
8.32 |
|
7.54 |
9.39 |
|
12.6 |
|
|
|
30-Nov-09 |
20.95 |
8.26 |
|
7.51 |
9.39 |
|
16.3 |
|
|
Station |
Date |
Temperature |
DO
(mg/L) |
Action/Limit
Level for DO (mg/L) |
pH |
Turbidity
(NTU) |
Action/Limit
Level for Turbidity (NTU) |
SS
(mg/L) |
Action/Limit
Level for SS (mg/L) |
|
I-1-C |
2-Nov-09 |
22.60 |
8.02 |
- / - |
7.32 |
4.23 |
- / - |
16.7 |
- / - |
|
|
4-Nov-09 |
24.45 |
7.83 |
|
7.22 |
14.11 |
|
13.7 |
|
|
|
6-Nov-09 |
25.05 |
8.19 |
|
7.33 |
21.55 |
|
9.1 |
|
|
|
9-Nov-09 |
23.95 |
7.85 |
|
7.32 |
2.87 |
|
3.5 |
|
|
|
11-Nov-09 |
25.15 |
6.97 |
|
7.52 |
5.68 |
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
13-Nov-09 |
22.75 |
8.11 |
|
7.26 |
3.81 |
|
2.4 |
|
|
|
16-Nov-09 |
20.20 |
8.43 |
|
7.59 |
2.70 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
18-Nov-09 |
18.20 |
8.89 |
|
7.65 |
3.50 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
20-Nov-09 |
19.85 |
8.66 |
|
7.25 |
2.68 |
|
2.6 |
|
|
|
23-Nov-09 |
21.15 |
8.48 |
|
7.45 |
3.69 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
25-Nov-09 |
21.15 |
8.44 |
|
7.43 |
11.11 |
|
11.1 |
|
|
|
27-Nov-09 |
21.60 |
8.29 |
|
7.52 |
9.46 |
|
11.7 |
|
|
|
30-Nov-09 |
20.85 |
8.30 |
|
7.52 |
9.57 |
|
18.8 |
|
|
Station |
Date |
Temperature |
DO
(mg/L) |
Action/Limit
Level for DO (mg/L) |
pH |
Turbidity
(NTU) |
Action/Limit
Level for Turbidity (NTU) |
SS
(mg/L) |
Action/Limit
Level for SS (mg/L) |
|
I-2 |
2-Nov-09 |
22.05 |
8.02 |
3.66 /
3.63 |
7.28 |
1.59 |
6.63 /
6.99 |
2.0 |
7.68 /
8.34 |
|
|
4-Nov-09 |
24.05 |
8.04 |
|
7.32 |
3.98 |
|
2.6 |
|
|
|
6-Nov-09 |
25.20 |
8.31 |
|
7.32 |
1.28 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
9-Nov-09 |
24.50 |
7.86 |
|
7.34 |
2.05 |
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
11-Nov-09 |
24.95 |
7.33 |
|
7.48 |
9.89 |
|
9.8 |
|
|
|
13-Nov-09 |
23.30 |
7.99 |
|
7.32 |
8.49 |
|
5.1 |
|
|
|
16-Nov-09 |
20.35 |
8.45 |
|
7.66 |
2.17 |
|
2.1 |
|
|
|
18-Nov-09 |
17.90 |
9.15 |
|
7.56 |
6.58 |
|
3.4 |
|
|
|
20-Nov-09 |
20.00 |
8.82 |
|
7.45 |
1.64 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
23-Nov-09 |
21.20 |
8.71 |
|
7.56 |
3.05 |
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
25-Nov-09 |
21.30 |
8.71 |
|
7.35 |
2.32 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
27-Nov-09 |
21.80 |
8.45 |
|
7.42 |
1.67 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
30-Nov-09 |
21.00 |
8.62 |
|
7.48 |
3.59 |
|
2.3 |
|
|
Station |
Date |
Temperature |
DO
(mg/L) |
Action/Limit
Level for DO (mg/L) |
pH |
Turbidity
(NTU) |
Action/Limit
Level for Turbidity (NTU) |
SS
(mg/L) |
Action/Limit
Level for SS (mg/L) |
|
I-2-C |
2-Nov-09 |
22.25 |
7.95 |
- / - |
7.23 |
1.66 |
- / - |
2.0 |
- / - |
|
|
4-Nov-09 |
24.10 |
8.16 |
|
7.23 |
4.11 |
|
2.2 |
|
|
|
6-Nov-09 |
25.00 |
8.39 |
|
7.32 |
1.39 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
9-Nov-09 |
24.20 |
7.79 |
|
7.33 |
2.19 |
|
2.3 |
|
|
|
11-Nov-09 |
24.75 |
7.40 |
|
7.49 |
10.29 |
|
10.7 |
|
|
|
13-Nov-09 |
23.05 |
8.06 |
|
7.34 |
8.79 |
|
5.8 |
|
|
|
16-Nov-09 |
20.30 |
8.38 |
|
7.64 |
2.27 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
18-Nov-09 |
17.85 |
9.12 |
|
7.53 |
6.80 |
|
4.6 |
|
|
|
20-Nov-09 |
19.60 |
8.86 |
|
7.43 |
1.72 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
23-Nov-09 |
21.00 |
8.74 |
|
7.52 |
3.15 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
25-Nov-09 |
21.40 |
8.75 |
|
7.34 |
2.47 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
27-Nov-09 |
21.80 |
8.52 |
|
7.45 |
1.79 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
30-Nov-09 |
21.05 |
8.55 |
|
7.47 |
3.68 |
|
2.6 |
|
|
Station |
Date |
Temperature |
DO (mg/L) |
Action/Limit
Level for DO (mg/L) |
pH |
Turbidity
(NTU) |
Action/Limit
Level for Turbidity (NTU) |
SS
(mg/L) |
Action/Limit
Level for SS (mg/L) |
|
I-3 |
2-Nov-09 |
21.95 |
7.85 |
3.65 /
3.51 |
7.23 |
1.42 |
3.99 /
4.18 |
2.0 |
6.13 /
7.23 |
|
|
4-Nov-09 |
23.95 |
8.40 |
|
7.23 |
2.07 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
6-Nov-09 |
25.20 |
8.49 |
|
7.33 |
1.20 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
9-Nov-09 |
24.50 |
7.78 |
|
7.35 |
2.03 |
|
2.7 |
|
|
|
11-Nov-09 |
25.00 |
7.49 |
|
7.26 |
3.01 |
|
6.6 |
|
|
|
13-Nov-09 |
24.30 |
7.97 |
|
7.25 |
1.82 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
16-Nov-09 |
20.30 |
8.51 |
|
7.72 |
2.28 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
18-Nov-09 |
17.50 |
9.48 |
|
7.72 |
1.31 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
20-Nov-09 |
19.85 |
9.02 |
|
7.67 |
1.40 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
23-Nov-09 |
21.20 |
8.92 |
|
7.64 |
1.30 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
25-Nov-09 |
21.25 |
8.89 |
|
7.34 |
2.02 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
27-Nov-09 |
21.55 |
8.64 |
|
7.45 |
2.13 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
30-Nov-09 |
21.15 |
8.55 |
|
7.43 |
1.73 |
|
2.7 |
|
|
Station |
Date |
Temperature |
DO
(mg/L) |
Action/Limit
Level for DO (mg/L) |
pH |
Turbidity
(NTU) |
Action/Limit
Level for Turbidity (NTU) |
SS
(mg/L) |
Action/Limit
Level for SS (mg/L) |
|
I-3-C |
2-Nov-09 |
22.25 |
7.92 |
- / - |
7.23 |
1.58 |
- / - |
2.0 |
- / - |
|
|
4-Nov-09 |
24.05 |
8.39 |
|
7.23 |
2.23 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
6-Nov-09 |
25.25 |
8.48 |
|
7.32 |
1.25 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
9-Nov-09 |
24.60 |
7.80 |
|
7.33 |
2.20 |
|
2.4 |
|
|
|
11-Nov-09 |
25.10 |
7.55 |
|
7.22 |
3.09 |
|
7.6 |
|
|
|
13-Nov-09 |
24.00 |
8.02 |
|
7.22 |
1.95 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
16-Nov-09 |
20.45 |
8.45 |
|
7.74 |
2.41 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
18-Nov-09 |
17.35 |
9.56 |
|
7.74 |
1.42 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
20-Nov-09 |
19.95 |
9.10 |
|
7.63 |
1.47 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
23-Nov-09 |
21.20 |
8.92 |
|
7.62 |
1.37 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
25-Nov-09 |
21.40 |
8.94 |
|
7.37 |
2.13 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
27-Nov-09 |
24.75 |
8.70 |
|
7.44 |
2.19 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
30-Nov-09 |
21.00 |
8.59 |
|
7.44 |
1.82 |
|
2.0 |
|
Note: Italic indicates the occurrence
of exceedance of Action level.
Bold
indicates the occurrence of exceedance of Limit level.
Table
4-6 Water Quality Monitoring Results
4.4 Summary of Project-Related Exceedances
4.4.1
Table 4-7 summarises the
project-related exceedance results recorded in November 2009. Note that
exceedances that are considered not related to the construction activities are
not included in this table.
|
Environmental Monitoring |
Total No. of Measurement |
Action Level Exceedance |
% of Action Level Exceedance |
Limit Level Exceedance |
% of Limit Level Exceedance |
|
Air Quality |
60 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Noise |
34 |
2 |
5.9 |
0 |
0 |
|
Water |
78 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Table 4-7 Summary of Project-Related Exceedances
5.1.1
The status of waste management is
summarized in Table 5-1 below.
|
Status of waste management |
Quantity |
|
Inert C&D Material Disposed of to Public Fill at Tuen Mun (m3) |
3,909.4 |
|
Inert C&D Material Reused in other Contracts* (m3) |
5,555.0 |
|
Metals Generated (kg) |
10.0 |
|
Paper / Cardboard Packaging (kg) |
400.0 |
|
Plastics (kg) |
10.0 |
|
Chemical Waste (kg) |
Nil |
|
General Waste Disposed of to NENT Landfill (m3) |
7.9 |
* Other Contracts include DC/2007/08, ST/2008/02, DC/2006/04, Ocean Park, CDA12/01, and HY/2007/10.
Table 5-1 Waste Generated in November 2009
6 NON-COMPLIANCE AND DEFICIENCY
6.1.1
ET has carried out two site inspections
in the reporting month. All observations
together with the appropriate recommended mitigation measures where necessary
were recorded in the audit checklists that were passed to the Contractor. Major environmental deficiencies observed
during site inspection/audits and recommendation, which were made by the ET,
are summarised in Table 6-1 below. No
non-compliance was observed.
|
Inspection Date |
Observation |
Recommendation |
Status |
|
5
November 2009 |
1. The designated road area was observed to be dusty
at I-3. |
1. The Contractor was reminded to provide frequent water spraying to the designated
road area regularly. |
1. During
site inspection on 27 November 2009, water spraying was provided at the designated
road area at I-3. (Closed) |
|
30
November 2009 |
1. The
site was observed to be dirty and untidy at
Outfall. |
1. The Contractor
was reminded to maintain site cleaning
and tidying regularly. |
1. During
the site inspection on 3 December 2009,
site cleaning and tidying was maintained at Outfall. (Closed) |
Table 6-1 Site Inspection by ET
7.1.1
A complaint
hotline at 9850
3241 of the Contractor has been established for the Project.
7.1.2
Two
complaints were received during the reporting month.
7.1.3
One environmental complaint was received
by EPD on 9 November regarding movable
noise barrier not placing close enough to the piling machine. Immediate Action was taken. The rig was
re-orientated and the barrier was placed closed to the drilling head. The Contractor also proposed the follow-up
action on the same day. Training was conducted to the operator to ensure
that the workers aware that the barrier should be placed closed not the
drilling head not the machine itself. In order to prevent future occurrence, a permit to
dig system was adopted. It should be
checked by the Contractor and endorsed by the SOR before starting the drilling
rig. The follow up action was checked and a permit to dig system has been
implemented. Detail
of the complaint investigation can be referred to Appendix K.
7.1.4
Another environmental complaint was received by EPD on 18 November 2009
regarding rock-breaking activity carried out in the eastern area of Portion D,
closest to Greenview Terrace, not totally screened and line of sight of the
breaker observed from the NSR. Follow up action was taken.
The bamboo scaffold was extended further away
from stage 3 scaffold to further screen off the activities to the
Greenview. The length of the extension
was about 8 to 10 m. A strong reminded was given to the relevant staff
and sub-contractor and the barrier should be placed in the right orientation
before breaking. The
mitigation measures were strictly followed as stated in the proposal. The follow up action
and relevant records was checked and the follow up action was implemented. Detail of the complaint
investigation can be referred to Appendix K.
7.1.5
Cumulative statistics of
environmental complaints are shown in Table 7-1.
|
Complaints Received in the Reporting Month |
Cumulative Number of Complaints |
|
2 |
14 |
Table 7-1 Cumulative Statistic of Environmental Complaint
8 SUMMARY OF NOTIFICATION OF SUMMONS, SUCCESSFUL PROSECUTIONS AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
8.1.1
No summons and successful prosecution was received during the
reporting month.
8.1.2
Cumulative
statistics of Notification of Summons, Successful Prosecutions and Convictions
are shown in Table 8-1.
|
Notification of Summons |
Successful Prosecution |
||
|
November 09 |
Cumulative |
November 09 |
Cumulative |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Table 8-1 Cumulative Statistics of Notification of Summons
and Successful Prosecutions
9.1.1
The forecast of construction works
for the upcoming three months are:
·
Site
cleaning and tidying at I-1, I-2, I-3 and Outfall;
·
Tree
transplanting at I-1, I-2, I-3 and Outfall;
·
Socket H-piling at Outfall;
·
Soil
nailing at I-1, I-3 and Outfall;
·
Breaking up
exiting boulder at I-1, I-2, I-3, and Outfall;
·
Formation
of access road at I-3 and Outfall;
·
Erosion
control mat and green wire mesh at Outfall;
·
Excavation
and Lateral Support (ELS) at I-1;
·
Construction
of skin wall at I-2;
·
Formation
of steel platform at I-2
·
Formation
of shaft at I-2;
·
Formation of Noise Enclosure at I-2; and
·
Construction of launching chamber at Outfall.
|
|
|
|
|
Site Map and Works Area |
|
|
|
|
|
Organization Chart |
|
|
|
|
|
Construction Programme |
|
|
|
|
|
Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures |
|
|
|
|
|
Status of License and Permit |
|
|
|
|
|
Calibration Certificates |
|
|
|
|
|
Monitoring Locations |
|
|
|
|
|
EM&A Schedule |
|
|
|
|
|
Monitoring Results |
|
|
|
|
|
Interim Notifications of Environmental Quality Limits Exceedances |
|
|
|
|
|
Complaint Log |