



|
|
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 Air Borne Noise
Table 3‑8 Event/Action Plan for Airborne Noise
Table 3‑9 Action
& Limit Levels for Ground Borne Noise
Table 3‑10 Event/Action Plan for Ground Borne Noise
Table 3‑11 Water Quality Monitoring Equipment
Table 3‑12 Water Quality Monitoring Locations
Table 3‑13 Action/Limit Levels for Water Quality
Table 3‑14 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 Summary of Exceedances for O-1(FT)
Table 4-7 Summary of Exceedances for O-1(ET)
Table 4-8 Water Quality Monitoring Results
Table 4-9 Summary
of Project-Related Exceedances
Table 5-1 Waste Generated in January 2011
Table 6-1 Site Inspection by ET
Table 7-1 Cumulative Statistic of Environmental Complaint
|
APPENDICES |
|
|
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 five 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 Tsuen Wan Drainage Tunnel included site cleaning and tidying at I-1, I-2, I-3 and Outfall; drilling, excavation and rock splitting at spiral ramp at Outfall; pre-bored H-pile drilling and soil nailing for Castle Peak Road (CPR) box culvert construction at Outfall; tunnel boring machine (TBM) drilling of the tunnel and mucking out of tunnel spoil at Outfall; removal of sea wall and armour rock for basin scheme at Portion E; drilling and excavation of vortex shaft at I-3; temporary rock dowel drilling and installation at I-3; construction of footing for erecting the tower crane at I-3; construction of PB wall at I-3; drilling, excavation and rock splitting of man access shaft and vortex drop shaft at I-2; pipe jacking at Portion G at I-2; construction of approach channel structure at I-2; construction of 750 step channel and catchpit at Portion G at I-2; erection of temporary steel platform and mobilization for construction of skin wall at Portion G at I-2; cascade and channel modification concrete structure works at I-1; horizontal drilling at I-1; and back filling of spiral ramp centre void at I-1 within the reporting month.
4.
No exceedances have been recorded for air quality monitoring during
the reporting month.
5.
No exceedance of limit level
was recorded for noise monitoring. However, one environmental complaint on noise
triggered the exceedance of action level during the reporting month.
6.
Exceedances
for river water quality monitoring are summarised in the following table:
|
Parameter |
Action Level Exceedance |
Limit Level Exceedance |
|
DO |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Turbidity |
One record at I-1 on 3
Jan 2011 |
One record at I-1 on 19
Jan 2011 and one record at I-3 on 14 Jan 2011 |
|
SS |
One
record at I-1 on 3 Jan 2011 and one record at I-2 on 3 Jan 2011 |
Three
records at I-1 on 10, 19 and 28 on Jan 2011 |
7.
Exceedances
for marine water quality monitoring are summarized in the following table:
|
Parameter |
Action Level Exceedance |
Limit Level Exceedance |
|
DO |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Turbidity |
One record at O-1(FT) on
21 Jan 2011 |
Nil |
|
SS |
Three records at O-1(FT) on 5, 17 and 19 Jan 2011 |
One
record at O-1(FT) on 21 Jan 2011 and three records at O-1(ET) on 14, 24 and
26 Jan 2011 |
8.
The status
of waste generation in the reporting month are:
·
A total of
9,631.7 m
·
About 41.9
m3 general waste was disposed of to NENT Landfill;
·
About 300.0 kg paper/cardboard was recycled in the reporting month;
·
No metal was
generated in the reporting month;
·
No plastic waste was
disposed of in the reporting month; and
·
About 588.8 kg chemical waste
was disposed of in the reporting month.
9.
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
site inspection checklists, were passed to the Contractor together with the
ET’s recommendations.
10.
As advised
by the Contractor and verified by ET:
·
No
non-compliance regarding the site inspection was received in the reporting
month;
·
One environmental complaint
was received during the reporting month; and
·
No summons
and prosecution was received in the reporting month.
11.
The major construction
works for the upcoming three months will be:
· Site cleaning and tidying at I-1, I-2, I-3 and Outfall;
· TBM drilling of the tunnel and mucking out of tunnel spoil at Outfall;
· Drilling, excavation and rock splitting at spiral ramp at Outfall;
· Excavation and soil nailing for CPR box culvert construction at Outfall;
· Removal of sea wall and armour rocks for basin scheme at Portion E;
· Installation of marine sea wall block and rock armour for basin scheme at Portion E;
· Drilling and excavation of vortex shaft at I-3;
· Construction of PB wall structure at I-3;
· Construction of approach channel at I-3;
· Pipe jacking at Portion G at I-2;
· Pre-bored H-pile construction for skin wall at Portion G at I-2;
· Drilling, excavation and rock splitting of man access shaft and vortex drop shaft at I-2;
· Construction of approach channel structure at I-2;
· Construction of 750 step channel and catchpit at I-2;
· Cascade and channel modification concrete structure works at I-1;
· Horizontal drilling at I-1; and
· Back filling of spiral ramp centre void at I-1.
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 programme 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
thirty-fourth monthly EM&A report summarising the impact monitoring results
and audit findings of the EM&A program in January 2011.
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:
l Site cleaning and
tidying at I-1, I-2, I-3 and Outfall;
l Drilling, excavation
and rock splitting at spiral ramp at Outfall;
l Pre-bored H-pile
drilling and soil nailing for CPR box culvert construction at Outfall;
l Tunnel boring machine
(TBM) drilling of the tunnel and mucking out of tunnel spoil at Outfall;
l Removal of sea wall
and armour rock for basin scheme at Portion E;
l Drilling and
excavation of vortex shaft at I-3;
l Temporary rock dowel
drilling and installation at I-3;
l Construction of
footing for erecting the tower crane at I-3;
l Construction of PB
wall at I-3;
l Drilling, excavation
and rock splitting of man access shaft and vortex drop shaft at I-2;
l Pipe jacking at
Portion G at I-2;
l Construction of
approach channel structure at I-2;
l Construction of 750
step channel and catchpit at Portion G at I-2;
l Erection of temporary
steel platform and mobilization for construction of skin wall at Portion G at
I-2;
l Cascade and channel
modification concrete structure works at I-1;
l Horizontal drilling
at I-1; and
l Back filling of
spiral ramp centre void at I-1.
2.2.3
As confirmed by the contractors, only removal of seawall and
armour rock was conducted in January 2011. No marine dredging works for basin
scheme at Portion E was conducted in the reporting month.
2.2.4
No open 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
One-hour
total suspended particulates (TSP) levels were 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
One-hour
TSP monitoring was 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 was 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 was kept in a clean and tightly
sealed plastic bag. The filter paper was then re-conditioned in desiccators for
24 hours before obtaining the weight under laboratory conditions.
3.1.4
The average
concentrations of the TSP were 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
were 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 was carried out by ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Limited (HOKLAS Registration Number
066).
Monitoring Equipment and Calibration
3.1.6
High Volume
Air Samplers (HVASs) were 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
were 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 was used
for the calculation of the TSP level.
Calibration Kit Model - TE
|
Equipment Type |
Model |
Serial Number |
Calibration Orifice Number |
Location |
|
HVAS |
BM2000HX |
4994 |
1785 |
ASR 1 |
|
HVAS |
BM2000HX |
5875 |
1785 |
ASR 3 |
|
HVAS |
TE5005X |
1059 |
1785 |
ASR 8 |
|
HVAS |
TE5005X |
1713 |
1785 |
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 are 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-hour 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 was
measured in terms of equivalent A-weighted sound pressure level (Leq)
measured in decibels (dB(A)). Monitoring
of Leq(30 min) was 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, were also recorded during monitoring. Major noise sources observed, both on-site
and off-site, were recorded on the field data sheet. All measurements were recorded and presented
to the nearest 0.1 dB(A) 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, were used. Noise levels for the A-weighted levels Leq(30min),
L10 and L90 were measured throughout the impact
monitoring. An average, by sound power,
of six consecutive 5 minutes readings was 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 3
dB(A) was applied to the measurements that were 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 were 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 NL-31 and B&K Integrating Sound Level Meter of Type 2238 in compliance
with the International Electrotechnical Commission Publication specifications
(Paragraph 3.2.3) were used for noise monitoring in this reporting month.
3.2.6
Prior to and following each noise
measurement, the accuracy of the sound level meters was checked using an
acoustic calibrator (B&K 4231) generating a known sound pressure level at a
known frequency. Measurements were considered
as valid only if the calibration levels from before and after the noise
measurement agreed to within 1.0 dB(A).
Sound level meters and calibrators were calibrated annually to ensure
they performed to the same level of accuracy as stated in the manufacturer’s
specifications. The noise monitoring
equipments used during the reporting month are 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 |
NL-31 |
00410224 |
NSR1,
NSR3, NSR6, NSR8 and NSR9 |
|
Sound
Level Meter |
B&K |
2238 |
2562782 |
|
|
Sound
Level Meter |
B&K |
2238 |
2448529 |
|
|
Sound
Level Calibrator |
B&K |
4231 |
2699361 |
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 facade
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* (since 16 July 2009) |
* The noise monitoring
location of NSR9 had been adjusted to rooftop since 16 July 2009.
Table 3‑6 Noise Monitoring Locations
Construction Ground Borne Noise
3.2.8
Prediction of construction ground
borne 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 hours) at these
NSRs. In order to ensure proper control of ground borne noise is executed by
the contractor, a monitoring requirement is recommended at the Hong Hoi Chee Hong
Temple at Intake 2 and Squatters at Intake 3 for compliance checking. Ground
borne noise impact monitoring will be carried out only when operation of TBM is
conducted within area under monitoring requirement. Detail of the monitoring
area and period can be referred to a stand-alone document of Ground Borne Noise Monitoring Methodology.
3.2.9
Ground borne noise impact monitoring will be carried out once
per week during the monitoring period at NSR 3 and NSR 6, respectively. Parameters such as date, weather condition,
equipment used, measurement results and major noise sources will be recorded on
the field data record sheet. Monitoring
should be carried out at the ground floor inside the building with all windows,
doors and openings being closed. Electrical appliances, such as air
conditioners and television, and any other that may emit sound during operation
will be switched off or removed to minimise disturbance to the monitoring. If ground borne noise criterion is exceeded,
the monitoring shall continue daily until acceptance has been restored against
the criterion. Otherwise the monitoring
can be discontinued.
3.2.10
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 ground borne construction noise
criterion of 60 dB(A) therefore applies with reference to Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (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 ground borne
noise criteria, ground borne 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 the TM-EIAO.
3.2.11
In the evening (1900 – 2300 hours) and during night time (2300 – 0700
hours), ground borne noise level will be limited to 10 dB(A) below the
respective ANLs for the Area Sensitivity Rating categories of “A”, “B” and “C”
at the NSRs along the proposed project. Determination of the Area
Sensitivity Ratings for the NSRs in this study has been made with reference to
TM-Places. According to the approved EIA
Report of the Project (Register No.: AEIAR-088/2005), NSR 3 and NSR 6 were
assigned as Area Sensitivity Rating of “A”, the areas were classified as ‘low
density areas’ and not influenced by road traffic noise from main roads.
3.2.12
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 hours on normal weekdays |
When one documented complaint is received |
75 dB(A)* |
Table 3‑7 Action & Limit
Levels for Air Borne 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 and 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 Airborne Noise
3.2.13
The Action and Limit levels for
construction ground borne noise are defined in Table 3-9. If non-compliance of the criteria occurs,
actions in accordance with the Action Plan in Table 3-10 would be carried out.
|
Monitoring
Station ID |
NSR 3 |
NSR 6 |
|
|
Name of
Premises |
Hong Hoi Chee |
Squatters |
|
|
Action Level |
When one documented complaint is received |
||
|
Limit
Level |
Working days during daytime (0700-1900 hours) (Leq(30min)) |
65 dB(A) |
65 dB(A) |
|
All days during the evening (1900-2300
hours) and general holidays (including Sundays) during the day and evening
(0700-2300 hours) (Leq(
5 min)) |
50 dB(A) (Area Sensitivity Rating “A”) |
50 dB(A) (Area Sensitivity Rating “A”) |
|
|
All days during the night-time (2300-0700
hours) (Leq( 5 min)) |
35 dB(A) (Area Sensitivity Rating “A”) |
35 dB(A) (Area Sensitivity Rating “A”) |
|
Table 3‑9 Action & Limit Levels for Ground Borne 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 daily until exceedance is abated. |
· Review with analysed results submitted by ET. · Review the proposed remedial measures by the Contractor 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. |
· Submit noise mitigation proposals to IEC. · Implement noise mitigation proposals. |
|
Limit
Level |
· Identify the source. · Notify IEC, SOR, EPD and the Contractor. · 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. · Increase monitoring frequency to daily until exceedance is abated. |
· 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 3‑10 Event/Action Plan for Ground Borne 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 effectiveness of these mitigation measures in
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 were measured at all designated monitoring
locations including control points at an interval of 3 days per week. DO,
temperature, turbidity, pH and SS measurements were undertaken at designated
monitoring locations.
3.3.5
It should be noted that water
samples for all monitoring parameters were collected, stored, preserved and
analysed according to Standard Methods, APHA 17 ed. and/or methods agreed by
the Director of Environmental Protection.
3.3.6
Each sample
was 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. 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 were transferred to clearly labelled and pre-cleaned sample containers
with necessary preservatives immediately after collection. The sample containers were provided by a
HOKLAS accredited laboratory. About 1 L
of samples was collected for all laboratory analysis. Following sampling, samples should be stored in a cool box at
temperature between 0 and 4 oC, 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 3-11 below.
|
Equipment Type |
Manufacturer |
Model |
Quantity |
|
pH Meter / DO / Temperature Meter |
WTW |
PH/Oxi 340i |
1 |
|
Turbidimeter |
EUTECH |
TN-100 |
1 |
Table 3‑11 Water Quality Monitoring Equipment
3.3.8
All pH
meters, DO meters and turbidimeters were checked and calibrated prior to
use. DO meters and turbidimeters were
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 were
checked with certified standard solutions before each use. Wet bulb calibrations for all DO meters were
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" was observed. The
calibration certificates are included in Appendix F.
3.3.9
Five designated impact monitoring locations (three river stations and two
marine stations) and five control locations (three river control stations and
two marine stations) were identified in the contract specific EM&A Manual for river and
marine water quality monitoring. These monitoring stations are listed in Table 3-12 below and shown in Appendix G.
|
Monitoring Station ID |
Name of Premises |
|
River
|
|
|
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 |
|
Marine |
|
|
O-1 (FT) and (ET) |
Outfall 1During Flood Tide and 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 3‑12 Water Quality Monitoring Locations
3.3.10
Note that there were 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 was sampled during each sampling.
Control station to be sampled was 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 3-13. In case of any exceedance,
appropriate actions would be undertaken in accordance with the Event and Action
Plan as described in Table 3-14.
|
Parameters |
Action |
Limit |
|
DO in
mg/l (Surface,
Middle and Bottom) |
Surface
and Middle 5%-ile
of baseline data for surface and
middle layer. Bottom 5%-ile
of baseline data for bottom layer. |
Surface
and 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 limit.
·
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 necessary.
Table 3‑13 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 · 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 3‑14 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 and presented to the nearest 0.1 mg/m3
in this report. Detail results including
weather conditions, and graphical presentations are presented in Appendix I.
|
Station |
Monitoring Date |
Monitoring Result (mg/m3) |
Action/Limit Levels (mg/m3) |
|
ASR 1 |
04-Jan-11 |
83.8
|
307/500 |
|
19.0
|
|||
|
47.0
|
|||
|
10-Jan-11 |
224.6
|
||
|
96.5
|
|||
|
101.5
|
|||
|
14-Jan-11 |
214.5
|
||
|
26.7
|
|||
|
44.4
|
|||
|
20-Jan-11 |
142.1
|
||
|
114.2
|
|||
|
154.8
|
|||
|
26-Jan-11 |
177.5
|
||
|
79.1
|
|||
|
128.3
|
|||
|
ASR 3 |
04-Jan-11 |
91.4
|
327/500 |
|
12.0
|
|||
|
38.5
|
|||
|
10-Jan-11 |
176.8
|
||
|
79.4
|
|||
|
95.0
|
|||
|
14-Jan-11 |
123.9
|
||
|
28.9
|
|||
|
51.7
|
|||
|
20-Jan-11 |
154.0
|
||
|
104.6
|
|||
|
123.9
|
|||
|
26-Jan-11 |
157.3
|
||
|
99.2
|
|||
|
78.6
|
|||
|
ASR 8 |
04-Jan-11 |
82.0
|
337/500 |
|
68.8
|
|||
|
21.2
|
|||
|
10-Jan-11 |
271.1
|
||
|
334.6
|
|||
|
228.8
|
|||
|
14-Jan-11 |
300.2
|
||
|
96.5
|
|||
|
74.1
|
|||
|
20-Jan-11 |
222.2
|
||
|
148.1
|
|||
|
108.4
|
|||
|
26-Jan-11 |
213.1
|
||
|
160.2
|
|||
|
84.2
|
|||
|
ASR 9 |
04-Jan-11 |
90.9
|
329/500 |
|
99.1
|
|||
|
104.5
|
|||
|
10-Jan-11 |
244.3
|
||
|
137.1
|
|||
|
172.4
|
|||
|
14-Jan-11 |
290.4
|
||
|
54.3
|
|||
|
115.4
|
|||
|
20-Jan-11 |
316.2
|
||
|
122.1
|
|||
|
95.0
|
|||
|
26-Jan-11 |
134.4
|
||
|
169.7
|
|||
|
100.5
|
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 air quality
exceedance was recorded in the reporting month.
4.2.1
The noise monitoring schedule of the
reporting period is given in Appendix H.
In response to the complaint on construction noise received on 6 January
2011, additional noise measurements were conducted at NSR 9 on 14, 17 and 28
January 2011. 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. Detailed 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-Jan-11 |
64.1 |
70 |
|
10-Jan-11 |
64.1 |
||
|
20-Jan-11 |
63.5 |
||
|
26-Jan-11 |
64.3 |
||
|
NSR 3 |
04-Jan-11 |
56.5 |
75 |
|
10-Jan-11 |
68.6 |
||
|
20-Jan-11 |
62.3 |
||
|
26-Jan-11 |
71.1 |
||
|
NSR 6 |
04-Jan-11 |
67.0 |
|
|
10-Jan-11 |
65.4 |
||
|
20-Jan-11 |
70.1 |
||
|
26-Jan-11 |
67.3 |
||
|
NSR 8 |
04-Jan-11 |
72.8 |
|
|
10-Jan-11 |
70.7 |
||
|
20-Jan-11 |
71.3 |
||
|
26-Jan-11 |
70.8 |
||
|
NSR 9 |
04-Jan-11 |
71.0 |
|
|
10-Jan-11 |
73.1 |
||
|
14-Jan-11* |
73.5 |
||
|
17-Jan-11* |
71.9 |
||
|
20-Jan-11 |
72.3 |
||
|
26-Jan-11 |
71.3 |
||
|
28-Jan-11* |
72.7 |
Note: * means additional noise monitoring
Table
4-2 Noise Monitoring Results
4.2.2
No
exceedances of Limit Levels were recorded in our noise monitoring during the
reporting month.
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 4-7.
|
Parameter |
Action
Level Exceedance |
Limit
Level Exceedance |
|
DO |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Turbidity |
One record on 3 Jan 2011 |
One record on 19 Jan 2011 |
|
SS |
One record on 3 Jan 2011 |
Three records on 10, 19
and 28 Jan 2011 |
|
Total |
2 |
4 |
Table 4-3 Summary of Exceedances for I-1
|
Parameter |
Action
Level Exceedance |
Limit
Level Exceedance |
|
DO |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Turbidity |
Nil |
Nil |
|
SS |
One record on 3 Jan 2011 |
Nil |
|
Total |
1 |
Nil |
Table 4-4 Summary of Exceedances for I-2
Parameter |
Action
Level Exceedance |
Limit
Level Exceedance |
|
DO |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Turbidity |
Nil |
One record on 14 Jan 2011 |
|
SS |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Total |
Nil |
1 |
Table 4-5 Summary of Exceedances for I-3
Parameter |
Action
Level Exceedance |
Limit
Level Exceedance |
|
DO |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Turbidity |
One record on 21 Jan 2011 |
Nil |
|
SS |
Three records on 5, 17 and 19 Jan 2011 |
One record on 21 Jan 2011 |
|
Total |
4 |
1 |
Table 4-6 Summary of Exceedances for O-1(FT)
Parameter |
Action
Level Exceedance |
Limit
Level Exceedance |
|
DO |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Turbidity |
Nil |
Nil |
|
SS |
Nil |
Three records on 14, 24
and 26 Jan 2011 |
|
Total |
Nil |
3 |
Table 4-7 Summary of Exceedances for O-1(ET)
4.3.2
Results of measured water quality parameters during the reporting month
are shown in Table 4-8. Detailed results
including weather conditions and graphical presentations are enclosed in
Appendix I.
River Water Quality Monitoring
4.3.3
Eight non-project
related exceedances were recorded for the river water quality monitoring within
the reporting month.
Exceedances of Turbidity Level
Action
Level at I-1 on 3 January 2011
4.3.4
An
exceedance of Turbidity Action Level was recorded at I-1 on 3 January 2011. The measured
turbidity level (11.31 NTU) was above the baseline action Level, but lower than
the turbidity level of the control station (I-1-C)(11.44 NTU). General site
cleaning and housekeeping, filling TBM spoil into centre void, spatterdashing
on spiral ramp, horizontal drilling and grouting, and geotechnical
instrumentation monitoring were undertaken during the measurement. No direct
disturbance was observed from the site. Thus, the exceedance was considered to
be contributed by natural variation and no action was required.
Limit
Level at I-3 on 14 January 2011
4.3.5
An
exceedance of Turbidity Limit Level was recorded at I-3 on 14 January 2011. The measured turbidity level (10.62 NTU) was higher than baseline limit
level, but lower than the turbidity level of the control station (I-3-C)(10.97
NTU). General site cleaning and housekeeping, monitoring of deformation
monitoring point (DMP), shotcreting at shaft, approach channel excavation –
rock removal, rock breaking, pre-drilling, mesh installation, rock dowel
drilling and grouting and peeling cement grout outside H-pile for PB wall were
undertaken during measurement. No direct disturbance was observed from the
site. Milky green coloured water was found coming from upstream of the Intake
I-3 works area, so the exceedance was considered to be contributed by pollution
from upstream and not project related. As a result, no action was required.
Limit
Level at I-1 on 19 January 2011
4.3.6
An
exceedance of Turbidity Limit Level was recorded at I-1 on 19 January 2011. The measured turbidity level (13.70 NTU) was above the baseline limit
level, but lower than the turbidity level of the control station (I-1-C)(13.88
NTU). General site cleaning and tidy up works, filling the spoil of the tunnel
boring machine (TBM) into spiral ramp, dismantling of steel working platform
and geotechnical monitoring were undertaken during the measurement. No direct
disturbance was observed from the site. Thus, the exceedance was considered to
be contributed by high turbidity level of upstream location and natural
variation. Since the exceedance was not project related, no action was required.
Exceedances of Suspended Solids Level
Action
Level at I-1 on 3 January 2011
4.3.7
An
exceedance of SS Action Level was recorded at I-1 on 3 January 2011. The
measured SS level (10.10 mg/L) was above the baseline Action Level, but lower
than the SS level of the control station (I-1-C) (11.00mg/L). General site
cleaning and housekeeping, filling tunnel boring machine (TBM) spoil into
centre void, spatter-dashing on spiral ramp, horizontal drilling and grouting,
and geotechnical instrumentation monitoring were undertaken during the
measurement. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. Thus, the
exceedance was considered to be contributed by natural variation and no action
was required.
Action
Level at I-2 on 3 January 2011
4.3.8
An
exceedance of SS Limit Level was recorded at I-2 on 3 January 2011. The
measured SS level (2.45 mg/L) was below the baseline Action / Limit Level and
within the range of baseline SS concentration (1 - 8.5 mg/L) but was more than
120% of the SS level measured (2.00 mg/L) at the upstream control station
(I-2-C). General site cleaning, housekeeping and temporary traffic arrangement
(TTA), excavation (drilling holes) at vortex drop shaft, excavation
(shotcreting and mucking) at man access shaft, closed formwork for dry flow
channel, rock breaking for 16th jacking pipe at Portion G; erection of 60 ton
temporary steel platform at Portion G and excavation for 750 step channel (SC)
and catchpit were undertaken during measurement. No direct disturbance was
observed from the site. Thus, the exceedance was considered to be contributed
by natural variation and no action was required.
Limit Level at I-1 on 10, 19 and 28 January
2011
4.3.9
Three
exceedances of SS Limit Level were recorded at I-1 on 10, 19 and 28 January
2011. For exceedance on 10 January 2011. The measured SS level (3.50 mg/L) was
below the baseline action level, but higher than 130% of the SS level of the
control station (I-1-C) (2.45 mg/L) and within the range of baseline SS
concentration (1 - 10.5 mg/L). General site cleaning and housekeeping,
dismantling of facade platform, horizontal drilling and grouting, and
geotechnical instrumentation monitoring were undertaken during measurement. No
direct disturbance was observed from the site. Thus, the exceedance was
considered to be contributed by natural variation and no action was required.
4.3.10
For
exceedances on 19 and 28 January 2011, the measured SS level (14.50 and 10.25
mg/L respectively) was above the baseline limit level, but lower than the SS level
of the control station (I-1-C) (15.30 and 10.90 mg/L respectively). General
site cleaning and tidy up works, filling the spoil of the tunnel boring machine
(TBM) into spiral ramp, dismantling of steel working platform and geotechnical
monitoring were undertaken during the measurement on 19 January 2011 and
general site cleaning, filling the spoil of the tunnel boring machine into
spiral ramp, breaking shear key for cascade construction and geotechnical
instrumentation monitoring were undertaken during the measurement on 28 January
2011. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. Thus, the exceedances
were considered to be contributed by high SS levels of upstream location and
not project related, so no action was required.
Marine Water Quality Monitoring
4.3.11
Eight non-project related exceedances were recorded for
the marine water quality monitoring within the reporting month.
Exceedances of Turbidity
Level
Action
Level at O-1(FT) on 21 January 2011
4.3.12
One exceedance of Turbidity
Action Level was recorded on 21 January 2011 at O-1(FT). The measured
turbidity level (depth-averaged) (12.61 NTU) at O-1(FT) was above the baseline
action level but was lower than the control station's turbidity level (O-1-C
(FT)) (14.57 NTU) at the same tide of the same day. No marine works was undertaken on that
morning. Silt curtain was deployed along
the Portion E boundary line and extended from seawater level to seabed.
Floating type silt curtain was also employed at the inner side. As such, the exceedance was considered to be
contributed by natural variation and no further action was required.
Exceedances of Suspended
Solids Level
Action
Level at O-1(FT) on 5, 17 and 19 January 2011
4.3.13
Three exceedances of SS
Action Level were recorded on 5, 17 and 19 January 2011 at O-1(FT). The
measured SS levels (10.55, 5.10 and 7.52 mg/L respectively) were below the
baseline Action/Limit Level but was higher than 120% of the control station's
SS level (O-1-C(FT)) (8.72, 4.18 and 6.20 respectively) at the same tide of the
same day. The works conducted during
monitoring included armour
rock removal from the sea wall to the derrick barge at Portion E only on 5
January 2011, relocation of rock armour to another derrick barge for
transportation to storage area only on 17 January and armour rock removal from
seawall only on 19 January. During monitorings, silt curtain was deployed along
the Portion E boundary line and extended from seawater level to seabed.
Floating type silt curtain was also employed at the inner side. As such, the exceedances were considered to
be contributed by natural variation and no further action was required.
Limit
Level at O-1(FT) on 21 January 2011
4.3.14
One exceedance of SS
Limit Level was recorded on 21 January 2011 at O-1(FT).
The measured SS level (depth-averaged) (19.27 mg/L) at O-1(FT) was above the
baseline limit level and the control station's SS level (O-1-C(FT)) (16.85
mg/L) at the same tide of the same day.
No marine works was undertaken on that morning. During monitoring, silt curtain was deployed
along the Portion E boundary line and extended from seawater level to seabed.
Floating type silt curtain was also employed at the inner side. As such, the exceedance was considered to be
contributed by natural variation and no further action was required.
Limit Level at O-1(ET) on 14, 24 and 26 January 2011
4.3.15
Three exceedances of
SS Limit Level were recorded on 14, 24 and 26 January 2011 at O-1(ET). The
measured SS levels (5.10, 5.68 and 6.68 respectively) were below the baseline Action
/ Limit Level but higher than 130% of the
control station's SS level (O-1-C (FT)) (3.63, 3.75 and 4.65 respectively) at
the same tide of the same day. Works conducted during measurement included removal of armour
rock from seawall and placing them into derrick barge on 14 and 24 January, and
transfer of excavated materials from derrick barge to split barge on 26
January. During monitorings, silt curtains had been deployed along the dredging
boundary line and extended from the seawater level to the seabed. Floating type
silt curtain had been employed at the inner side. As such, the exceedance was
considered to be contributed by natural variation and no further action was
required.
|
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 |
03-Jan-11 |
16.80 |
7.13 |
3.42 / 3.34 |
8.06 |
11.31 |
9.75 / 12.47 |
10.10 |
8.85 / 10.17 |
|
|
05-Jan-11 |
17.80 |
8.19 |
|
8.04 |
3.82 |
|
2.30 |
|
|
|
07-Jan-11 |
16.80 |
7.22 |
|
8.03 |
5.72 |
|
3.05 |
|
|
|
10-Jan-11 |
17.00 |
7.53 |
|
8.02 |
5.74 |
|
3.50 |
|
|
|
12-Jan-11 |
14.80 |
7.94 |
|
8.02 |
3.51 |
|
3.45 |
|
|
|
14-Jan-11 |
18.20 |
7.83 |
|
7.96 |
4.93 |
|
6.85 |
|
|
|
17-Jan-11 |
16.70 |
8.46 |
|
7.98 |
8.77 |
|
8.70 |
|
|
|
19-Jan-11 |
16.90 |
8.02 |
|
7.84 |
13.70 |
|
14.50 |
|
|
|
21-Jan-11 |
17.10 |
8.15 |
|
7.76 |
5.74 |
|
7.10 |
|
|
|
24-Jan-11 |
15.30 |
8.73 |
|
7.97 |
6.88 |
|
8.05 |
|
|
|
26-Jan-11 |
19.20 |
7.74 |
|
8.08 |
4.08 |
|
6.25 |
|
|
|
28-Jan-11 |
16.30 |
7.97 |
|
8.07 |
5.35 |
|
10.25 |
|
|
|
31-Jan-11 |
17.40 |
8.05 |
|
8.47 |
9.05 |
|
8.65 |
|
Note: Italic indicates
the occurrence of exceedance of Action level.
Bold
indicates the occurrence of exceedance of Limit level.
|
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 |
03-Jan-11 |
17.00 |
7.08 |
- / - |
8.05 |
11.44 |
- / - |
11.00 |
- / - |
|
|
05-Jan-11 |
17.50 |
8.28 |
|
8.04 |
3.91 |
|
2.25 |
|
|
|
07-Jan-11 |
17.00 |
7.62 |
|
8.05 |
5.83 |
|
3.20 |
|
|
|
10-Jan-11 |
17.10 |
7.31 |
|
8.03 |
5.93 |
|
2.45 |
|
|
|
12-Jan-11 |
14.90 |
8.33 |
|
8.01 |
3.56 |
|
3.60 |
|
|
|
14-Jan-11 |
18.40 |
7.63 |
|
7.98 |
5.09 |
|
6.70 |
|
|
|
17-Jan-11 |
16.50 |
8.63 |
|
7.95 |
8.95 |
|
11.85 |
|
|
|
19-Jan-11 |
16.80 |
8.27 |
|
7.82 |
13.88 |
|
15.30 |
|
|
|
21-Jan-11 |
17.00 |
8.22 |
|
7.75 |
5.89 |
|
7.25 |
|
|
|
24-Jan-11 |
15.30 |
8.54 |
|
7.98 |
6.95 |
|
7.50 |
|
|
|
26-Jan-11 |
19.70 |
7.79 |
|
8.10 |
4.23 |
|
6.35 |
|
|
|
28-Jan-11 |
16.25 |
8.06 |
|
8.10 |
5.48 |
|
10.90 |
|
|
|
31-Jan-11 |
17.30 |
7.72 |
|
8.50 |
9.46 |
|
8.70 |
|
Note: Italic indicates
the occurrence of exceedance of Action level.
Bold
indicates the occurrence of exceedance of Limit level.
|
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 |
03-Jan-11 |
16.30 |
7.11 |
3.66
/ 3.63 |
8.05 |
1.50 |
6.63
/ 6.99 |
2.45 |
7.68
/ 8.34 |
|
|
05-Jan-11 |
17.60 |
8.29 |
|
8.03 |
1.95 |
|
2.05 |
|
|
|
07-Jan-11 |
16.90 |
7.38 |
|
8.05 |
2.24 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
10-Jan-11 |
17.15 |
7.40 |
|
8.06 |
1.44 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
12-Jan-11 |
14.50 |
7.93 |
|
7.99 |
2.23 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
14-Jan-11 |
18.20 |
7.58 |
|
7.91 |
2.40 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
17-Jan-11 |
16.80 |
8.49 |
|
7.98 |
1.53 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
19-Jan-11 |
17.10 |
7.90 |
|
7.86 |
2.07 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
21-Jan-11 |
17.10 |
8.05 |
|
7.72 |
2.34 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
24-Jan-11 |
16.00 |
8.71 |
|
7.98 |
1.89 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
26-Jan-11 |
19.10 |
7.94 |
|
8.02 |
2.28 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
28-Jan-11 |
16.70 |
7.99 |
|
8.05 |
2.19 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
31-Jan-11 |
17.20 |
8.19 |
|
8.35 |
5.14 |
|
2.10 |
|
Note: Italic indicates
the occurrence of exceedance of Action level.
Bold
indicates the occurrence of exceedance of Limit level.
|
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 |
03-Jan-11 |
16.50 |
7.21 |
- / - |
8.06 |
1.59 |
- / - |
2.00 |
- / - |
|
|
05-Jan-11 |
17.85 |
8.10 |
|
8.04 |
2.00 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
07-Jan-11 |
16.90 |
7.08 |
|
8.06 |
2.31 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
10-Jan-11 |
17.20 |
7.21 |
|
8.05 |
1.52 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
12-Jan-11 |
14.60 |
7.95 |
|
8.00 |
2.88 |
|
2.05 |
|
|
|
14-Jan-11 |
18.50 |
7.79 |
|
7.92 |
2.56 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
17-Jan-11 |
16.70 |
8.39 |
|
7.96 |
1.59 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
19-Jan-11 |
17.00 |
8.11 |
|
7.85 |
2.07 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
21-Jan-11 |
17.00 |
8.09 |
|
7.71 |
2.49 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
24-Jan-11 |
15.80 |
8.63 |
|
7.96 |
1.97 |
|
5.15 |
|
|
|
26-Jan-11 |
19.25 |
7.84 |
|
8.00 |
4.21 |
|
5.50 |
|
|
|
28-Jan-11 |
16.50 |
7.89 |
|
8.06 |
2.70 |
|
2.05 |
|
|
|
31-Jan-11 |
17.00 |
8.38 |
|
8.31 |
5.11 |
|
2.00 |
|
Note: Italic indicates
the occurrence of exceedance of Action level.
Bold
indicates the occurrence of exceedance of Limit level.
|
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 |
03-Jan-11 |
16.50 |
7.08 |
3.65 / 3.51 |
8.06 |
1.80 |
3.99 / 4.18 |
2.00 |
6.13 / 7.23 |
|
|
05-Jan-11 |
17.85 |
8.18 |
|
8.06 |
1.61 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
07-Jan-11 |
16.80 |
7.58 |
|
8.02 |
1.89 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
10-Jan-11 |
17.50 |
7.24 |
|
8.09 |
1.46 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
12-Jan-11 |
14.90 |
7.75 |
|
7.98 |
1.79 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
14-Jan-11 |
18.05 |
7.57 |
|
7.96 |
10.62 |
|
2.80 |
|
|
|
17-Jan-11 |
16.65 |
8.23 |
|
7.98 |
3.58 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
19-Jan-11 |
16.90 |
8.15 |
|
7.87 |
1.89 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
21-Jan-11 |
17.10 |
8.10 |
|
7.75 |
1.98 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
24-Jan-11 |
16.00 |
8.74 |
|
8.02 |
1.64 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
26-Jan-11 |
19.10 |
7.81 |
|
8.22 |
2.06 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
28-Jan-11 |
16.40 |
7.89 |
|
8.04 |
1.91 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
31-Jan-11 |
17.30 |
7.99 |
|
8.13 |
1.81 |
|
2.00 |
|
Note: Italic indicates
the occurrence of exceedance of Action level.
Bold
indicates the occurrence of exceedance of Limit level.
|
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 |
03-Jan-11 |
16.55 |
7.12 |
- / - |
8.03 |
1.83 |
- / - |
2.00 |
- / - |
|
|
05-Jan-11 |
17.80 |
8.06 |
|
8.05 |
1.71 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
07-Jan-11 |
16.90 |
7.49 |
|
8.02 |
1.94 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
10-Jan-11 |
17.40 |
7.51 |
|
8.08 |
1.49 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
12-Jan-11 |
14.80 |
7.83 |
|
7.99 |
1.78 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
14-Jan-11 |
18.00 |
7.52 |
|
7.96 |
10.97 |
|
2.55 |
|
|
|
17-Jan-11 |
16.50 |
8.21 |
|
7.99 |
3.70 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
19-Jan-11 |
16.85 |
8.22 |
|
7.80 |
1.94 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
21-Jan-11 |
17.20 |
8.11 |
|
7.77 |
2.11 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
24-Jan-11 |
16.00 |
8.56 |
|
8.00 |
1.73 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
26-Jan-11 |
19.10 |
7.52 |
|
8.03 |
2.09 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
28-Jan-11 |
16.50 |
7.96 |
|
8.02 |
1.96 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
31-Jan-11 |
17.20 |
8.14 |
|
8.12 |
1.82 |
|
2.00 |
|
Note: Italic indicates the
occurrence of exceedance of Action level.
Bold indicates
the occurrence of exceedance of Limit level.
|
Station |
Date |
Depth |
Temperature (℃) (depth-averaged) |
DO (mg/L) |
Action / Limit Level for DO (mg/L) |
pH (depth-averaged) |
Turbidity (NTU) (depth-averaged) |
Action / Limit Level for Turbidity (NTU) |
SS (mg/L) (depth-averaged) |
Action / Limit Level for SS (mg/L) |
|
O-1(FT) |
03-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.60 |
7.47 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.27 |
4.74 |
10.35
/ 13.15 |
6.05 |
14.1 /
18.08 |
|
|
|
Middle |
7.29 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.34 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
05-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.70 |
8.24 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.21 |
7.62 |
|
10.55 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
8.01 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.95 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
07-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.20 |
7.47 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.22 |
6.26 |
|
7.73 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.55 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.67 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
10-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.20 |
7.22 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.22 |
8.92 |
|
12.13 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.49 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.52 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
12-Jan-11 |
Surface |
14.38 |
8.51 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.19 |
5.24 |
|
5.12 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
8.26 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
8.29 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
14-Jan-11 |
Surface |
18.12 |
7.77 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.22 |
2.74 |
|
3.70 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.86 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.70 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
17-Jan-11 |
Surface |
16.80 |
8.19 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.12 |
3.17 |
|
5.10 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
8.02 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
8.29 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
Note: Italic indicates the
occurrence of exceedance of Action level.
Bold indicates the
occurrence of exceedance of Limit level.
|
Station |
Date |
Depth |
Temperature (℃) (depth-averaged) |
DO (mg/L) |
Action / Limit Level for DO (mg/L) |
pH (depth-averaged) |
Turbidity (NTU) (depth-averaged) |
Action / Limit Level for Turbidity (NTU) |
SS (mg/L) (depth-averaged) |
Action / Limit Level for SS (mg/L) |
|
O-1(FT) |
19-Jan-11 |
Surface |
16.90 |
8.24 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.24 |
4.66 |
10.35
/ 13.15 |
7.52 |
14.1 /
18.08 |
|
|
|
Middle |
8.23 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
8.10 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
21-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.42 |
7.89 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.19 |
12.61 |
|
19.27 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.83 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.84 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
24-Jan-11 |
Surface |
16.30 |
8.31 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.22 |
8.34 |
|
8.72 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
8.09 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
8.14 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
26-Jan-11 |
Surface |
18.90 |
7.73 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.20 |
3.36 |
|
3.28 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.71 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.93 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
28-Jan-11 |
Surface |
16.20 |
7.75 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.21 |
2.49 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.75 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.68 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
31-Jan-11 |
Surface |
16.78 |
7.83 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.23 |
3.66 |
|
3.18 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.86 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.77 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
Note: Italic indicates the occurrence of
exceedance of Action level.
Bold indicates
the occurrence of exceedance of Limit level.
|
Station |
Date |
Depth |
Temperature (℃) (depth-averaged) |
DO (mg/L) |
Action / Limit Level for DO (mg/L) |
pH (depth-averaged) |
Turbidity (NTU) (depth-averaged) |
Action / Limit Level for Turbidity (NTU) |
SS (mg/L) (depth-averaged) |
Action / Limit Level for SS (mg/L) |
|
O-1-C(FT) |
03-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.50 |
7.43 |
- / - |
8.27 |
4.84 |
- / - |
5.55 |
- / - |
|
|
|
Middle |
7.48 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.38 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
05-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.67 |
7.99 |
- / - |
8.22 |
8.05 |
|
8.72 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
8.15 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
8.23 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
07-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.18 |
7.42 |
- / - |
8.22 |
7.07 |
|
10.17 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.68 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.59 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
10-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.13 |
7.56 |
- / - |
8.22 |
9.05 |
|
11.78 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.51 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.47 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
12-Jan-11 |
Surface |
14.40 |
8.45 |
- / - |
8.19 |
6.20 |
|
7.78 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
8.08 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.80 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
14-Jan-11 |
Surface |
18.13 |
7.75 |
- / - |
8.23 |
2.87 |
|
4.37 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.81 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.70 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
17-Jan-11 |
Surface |
16.73 |
8.08 |
- / - |
8.13 |
3.77 |
|
4.18 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
8.21 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
8.11 |
- / - |
|
|
Note: Italic indicates the
occurrence of exceedance of Action level.
Bold indicates
the occurrence of exceedance of Limit level.
|
Station |
Date |
Depth |
Temperature (℃) (depth-averaged) |
DO (mg/L) |
Action / Limit Level for DO (mg/L) |
pH (depth-averaged) |
Turbidity (NTU) (depth-averaged) |
Action / Limit Level for Turbidity (NTU) |
SS (mg/L) (depth-averaged) |
Action / Limit Level for SS (mg/L) |
|
O-1-C(FT) |
19-Jan-11 |
Surface |
16.83 |
8.05 |
- / - |
8.25 |
4.80 |
- / - |
6.20 |
- / - |
|
|
|
Middle |
8.00 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
8.01 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
21-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.53 |
7.89 |
- / - |
8.19 |
14.57 |
|
16.85 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.77 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.64 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
24-Jan-11 |
Surface |
16.28 |
7.92 |
- / - |
8.22 |
8.71 |
|
10.18 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
8.00 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
8.01 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
26-Jan-11 |
Surface |
19.00 |
7.60 |
- / - |
8.19 |
3.92 |
|
6.58 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.78 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.61 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
28-Jan-11 |
Surface |
16.17 |
7.98 |
- / - |
8.21 |
2.50 |
|
2.43 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.73 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.69 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
31-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.67 |
7.82 |
- / - |
8.23 |
3.52 |
|
3.37 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.63 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.87 |
- / - |
|
|
Note: Italic indicates the
occurrence of exceedance of Action level.
Bold indicates
the occurrence of exceedance of Limit level.
|
Station |
Date |
Depth |
Temperature (℃) (depth-averaged) |
DO (mg/L) |
Action / Limit Level for DO (mg/L) |
pH (depth-averaged) |
Turbidity (NTU) (depth-averaged) |
Action / Limit Level for Turbidity (NTU) |
SS (mg/L) (depth-averaged) |
Action / Limit Level for SS (mg/L) |
|
O-1(ET) |
03-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.40 |
7.19 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.26 |
5.55 |
11.87/13.44 |
7.18 |
13.25/14.39 |
|
|
|
Middle |
7.12 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.26 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
05-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.98 |
8.27 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.22 |
4.04 |
|
4.77 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
8.53 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
8.35 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
07-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.37 |
7.62 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.23 |
4.89 |
|
6.37 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.57 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.49 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
10-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.40 |
7.40 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.23 |
5.56 |
|
6.25 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.49 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.69 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
12-Jan-11 |
Surface |
14.72 |
8.25 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.20 |
4.14 |
|
4.97 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
8.01 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
8.19 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
14-Jan-11 |
Surface |
18.22 |
7.91 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.22 |
3.11 |
|
5.10 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.70 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.75 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
17-Jan-11 |
Surface |
16.63 |
8.20 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.12 |
3.55 |
|
4.63 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
8.24 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
8.31 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
Note: Italic indicates the
occurrence of exceedance of Action level.
Bold indicates
the occurrence of exceedance of Limit level.
|
Station |
Date |
Depth |
Temperature (℃) (depth-averaged) |
DO (mg/L) |
Action / Limit Level for DO (mg/L) |
pH (depth-averaged) |
Turbidity (NTU) (depth-averaged) |
Action / Limit Level for Turbidity (NTU) |
SS (mg/L) (depth-averaged) |
Action / Limit Level for SS (mg/L) |
|
O-1(ET) |
19-Jan-11 |
Surface |
16.82 |
8.09 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.27 |
3.91 |
11.87/13.44 |
4.43 |
13.25/14.39 |
|
|
|
Middle |
8.27 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
8.22 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
21-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.55 |
7.97 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.20 |
7.57 |
|
8.63 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.83 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.82 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
24-Jan-11 |
Surface |
16.50 |
8.21 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.23 |
6.33 |
|
5.68 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
8.09 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
8.32 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
26-Jan-11 |
Surface |
19.20 |
7.86 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.20 |
3.49 |
|
6.68 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.82 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.73 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
28-Jan-11 |
Surface |
16.03 |
7.73 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.20 |
2.39 |
|
2.53 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.80 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.88 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
31-Jan-11 |
Surface |
18.38 |
7.90 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.22 |
3.40 |
|
3.17 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.68 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.78 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
Note: Italic indicates the
occurrence of exceedance of Action level.
Bold indicates the
occurrence of exceedance of Limit level.
|
Station |
Date |
Depth |
Temperature (℃) (depth-averaged) |
DO (mg/L) |
Action / Limit Level for DO (mg/L) |
pH (depth-averaged) |
Turbidity (NTU) (depth-averaged) |
Action / Limit Level for Turbidity (NTU) |
SS (mg/L) (depth-averaged) |
Action / Limit Level for SS (mg/L) |
|
O-1-C(ET) |
03-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.40 |
7.52 |
- / - |
8.27 |
5.61 |
- / - |
7.35 |
- / - |
|
|
|
Middle |
7.37 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.32 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
05-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.85 |
8.36 |
- / - |
8.22 |
4.26 |
|
5.12 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
8.18 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
8.31 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
07-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.37 |
7.78 |
- / - |
8.23 |
5.02 |
|
5.92 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.64 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.42 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
10-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.40 |
7.39 |
- / - |
8.23 |
5.68 |
|
6.75 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.44 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.51 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
12-Jan-11 |
Surface |
14.65 |
8.08 |
- / - |
8.20 |
3.87 |
|
5.15 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
8.01 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
8.06 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
14-Jan-11 |
Surface |
18.27 |
7.62 |
- / - |
8.22 |
3.20 |
|
3.63 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.73 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.58 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
17-Jan-11 |
Surface |
16.63 |
8.17 |
- / - |
8.12 |
3.87 |
|
4.42 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
8.13 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
8.10 |
- / - |
|
|
Note: Italic indicates the
occurrence of exceedance of Action level.
Bold indicates
the occurrence of exceedance of Limit level.
|
Station |
Date |
Depth |
Temperature (℃) (depth-averaged) |
DO (mg/L) |
Action / Limit Level for DO (mg/L) |
pH (depth-averaged) |
Turbidity (NTU) (depth-averaged) |
Action / Limit Level for Turbidity (NTU) |
SS (mg/L) (depth-averaged) |
Action / Limit Level for SS (mg/L) |
|
O-1-C(ET) |
19-Jan-11 |
Surface |
16.80 |
8.07 |
- / - |
8.27 |
4.01 |
- / - |
3.83 |
- / - |
|
|
|
Middle |
8.18 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
8.11 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
21-Jan-11 |
Surface |
17.52 |
7.79 |
- / - |
8.20 |
7.64 |
|
9.60 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.68 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.89 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
24-Jan-11 |
Surface |
16.35 |
8.23 |
- / - |
8.23 |
6.50 |
|
3.75 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
8.08 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
8.14 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
26-Jan-11 |
Surface |
19.18 |
7.56 |
- / - |
3.97 |
3.59 |
|
4.65 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.91 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.83 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
28-Jan-11 |
Surface |
15.97 |
7.82 |
- / - |
8.20 |
2.41 |
|
2.60 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.93 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.64 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
31-Jan-11 |
Surface |
18.37 |
7.65 |
- / - |
8.22 |
3.37 |
|
3.72 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.58 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.71 |
- / - |
|
|
Note: Italic indicates the
occurrence of exceedance of Action level.
Bold indicates
the occurrence of exceedance of Limit level.
Table 4-8 Water Quality Monitoring Results
4.4 Summary of Project-Related Exceedances
4.4.1
Table 4-9 summarises
the project-related exceedance results recorded in January 2011. 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 |
23 |
1(complaint) |
4.3 |
0 |
0 |
|
Water |
130 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Table 4-9 Summary
of Project-Related Exceedances
5.1.1
The status of waste management is summarised in Table 5-1.
|
Status of waste management |
Quantity |
|
Inert C&D
Material Disposed of to Public Fill at Tuen Mun (m3) |
9631.7 |
|
Inert C&D
Material Reused in this Contracts (m3) |
1210.9 |
|
Inert C&D Material
Reused in other Contracts* (m3) |
10389.8 |
|
Metals Generated (kg) |
Nil |
|
Paper / Cardboard
Packaging (kg) |
300.0 |
|
Plastics (kg) |
Nil |
|
Chemical Waste (kg) |
588.8 |
|
General Waste Disposed of to NENT
Landfill (m3) |
41.9 |
* Other Contract includes DC/2007/08,
YL/2009/01, HY/2007/10, Wo Shang Wai, DC/2007/17, CV/2009/14 and Tailor Recycle
Aggregate (Lung Kwu Tan).
Table
5-1 Waste Generated in January 2011
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 |
|
6 January 2011 |
1.
No drip trays were observed for the chemical
containers at Outfall and Intake I-3. |
1.
The Contractor was reminded to provide drip
trays for chemical containers. |
1. Drip trays were provided for
the chemical containers on 7 January 2011. (Closed) |
|
2.
Noise insulation wrapping
for breaking tips of the breakers was not installed properly at Intake I-3. |
2.
The Contractor was
reminded to install the noise insulation wrapping properly. |
2. Noise Insulation
wrapping was installed properly for the breaking tips of the breakers on 11 January 2011. (Closed) |
|
|
21 January 2011 |
1.
Control on dusty
activity (rock breaking) was not adequate at Intake I-3. |
1.
The Contractor was reminded to provide water
spray to minimize any fugitive dust dispersed from dusty activities. |
1.
Water spray was provided on
22 January 2011. (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
One
environmental complaint was received during the reporting
month.
7.1.3
EPD had informed ET on 10 January 2011 that one public
complaint regarding dark smoke emission from derrick barge and construction
noise and dust at outfall construction site was received. The ET have conducted
site inspection at the Outfall construction site and the Greenview Terrace (NSR
9) on 21 January 2011 to review and audit the site setting,
mitigation measures implemented on-site and the environmental performance of
the contractor. Enhanced on-site mitigation measures have been implemented by
the contractor. An investigation report will be submitted to the EPD in
February 2011. Details of the past complaint investigation and observations can
be referred to Appendix K.
7.1.4
Cumulative statistics of
environmental complaints are shown in Table 7-1.
|
Complaints Received in the
Reporting Month |
Cumulative Number of Complaints |
|
1 |
21 |
Table
7-1 Cumulative Statistics of Environmental Complaints
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 and conviction |
||
|
January 2011 |
Cumulative |
January 2011 |
Cumulative |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Table 8-1 Cumulative Statistics of Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecutions and Convictions
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;
· TBM drilling of the tunnel and mucking out of tunnel spoil at Outfall;
· Drilling, excavation and rock splitting at spiral ramp at Outfall;
· Excavation and soil nailing for CPR box culvert construction at Outfall;
· Removal of sea wall and armour rocks for basin scheme at Portion E;
· Installation of marine sea wall block and rock armour for basin scheme at Portion E;
· Drilling and excavation of vortex shaft at I-3;
· Construction of PB wall structure at I-3;
· Construction of approach channel at I-3;
· Pipe jacking at Portion G at I-2;
· Pre-bored H-pile construction for skin wall at Portion G at I-2;
· Drilling, excavation and rock splitting of man access shaft and vortex drop shaft at I-2;
· Construction of approach channel structure at I-2;
· Construction of 750 step channel and catchpit at I-2;
· Cascade and channel modification concrete structure works at I-1;
· Horizontal drilling at I-1; and
· Back filling of spiral ramp centre void at I-1.
|
|
|
|
|
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 |