

|
|
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 Air Borne 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 June 2011
Table 6-1 Site Inspection by ET
Table 7-1 Cumulative Statistics of Environmental Complaints
|
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 Outfall, I-1, I-2
and I-3; drilling, excavation and rock splitting at spiral ramp at Outfall;
tunnel boring machine (TBM) drilling of the tunnel and mucking out of tunnel
spoil at Outfall; excavation and soil nailing for box culvert construction at
fast lane of Castle Peak Road (CPR) east bound at Outfall; excavation and
disposal of excavated material from existing arch bridge underneath CPR at
Outfall; placing levelling stone to formation of sea wall at Portion E;
installation of precast sea wall blocks at Portion E; relocation of type II
armour rocks behind the seawall blocks at Portion E; disposal of the excavated
soil under the arc bridge to TM38 at Portion E; drilling, rock splitting and
excavation of vortex shaft at I-3, construction of PB Wall structure skin wall
and copping beam at I-3; backfilling for PB Wall; removal of piling platform
and slope reinstatement at I-3; tree establishment works of the transplanted
trees at I-3; construction of base slab for approach channel 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; pre-bored H-pile construction for skin wall
at Portion G at I-2; construction of drainage works at Portion G at I-2;
preparation works for blasting at I-2, cascade and channel modification
concrete structure works at I-1; construction of horizontal pipe pile (pipe
roofing) for TBM break-through at I-1; and pre-bored H-pile construction for
vehicular access at I-1.
4.
Underground mining and probe drilling were
undertaken during restricted hours during the reporting period.
5.
No
exceedances have been recorded for air quality monitoring during
the reporting month.
6.
No
exceedances have been recorded for air borne noise monitoring during the
reporting month. However, one environmental complaint on noise triggered the
exceedance of action level during the reporting month.
7.
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 22 June 2011 |
Five records at I-1 on 17
June 2011, at I-2 on 17 and 22 June 2011 and at I-3 on 17 and 22 June 2011. |
|
SS |
Two records at I-1 on 9 and 17 June 2011 |
Three records at I-2 on
17 and 22 June 2011 and at I-3 on 17 June 2011 |
8.
Exceedances
for marine water quality monitoring are summarised in the following table:
|
Parameter |
Action
Level Exceedance |
Limit
Level Exceedance |
|
DO |
Seven records at O-1(FT) on 20 June 2011 and at O-1(ET) on 3, 7, 17
and 20 June 2011 |
Twenty-eight records at O-1(FT)
on 7, 11, 13, 15, 17, 20, 27 and 29 June 2011 and at O-1(ET) on 1, 9, 11, 15,
17, 20, 24, 27 and 29 June 2011 |
|
Turbidity |
Nil |
Nil |
|
SS |
Nil |
Two
records at O-1(ET) on 11 and 27 June 2011 |
9.
The status
of waste generation in the reporting month is:
·
A total of
5,250.3 m
·
About 34.1
m3 general waste was disposed of to NENT Landfill;
·
About 350.0 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 1,812.0 kg chemical waste
was disposed of in the reporting month.
10.
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.
11.
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.
12.
The major
construction works for the upcoming three months will be:
·
Site
cleaning and tidying at Outfall, I-1, I-2 and I-3;
·
TBM
drilling of the tunnel and mucking out of tunnel spoil at Outfall;
·
Construction
of spiral ramp structure at Outfall;
·
Excavation
and soil nailing for box culvert construction at fast lane of CPR east bound at
Outfall;
·
Construction
of box culvert at Outfall;
·
Placing
levelling stone and bagged concrete to formation of sea wall at Portion E;
·
Installation
of precast seawall blocks and panels for construction of outfall apron at
Portion E;
·
Drilling
and excavation of vortex shaft at I-3;
·
Backfilling
for PB Wall at I-3;
·
Construction
of approach channel at I-3;
·
Tree
establishment works of the transplanted trees 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 drainage works at Portion G at I-2;
·
Cascade and
channel modification concrete structure works at I-1;
·
Construction
of horizontal pipe pile (pipe roofing) for TBM break-through at I-1; and
· Construction of vehicular access at I-1.
1.1.1
The
Drainage Services Department (DSD) proposed to construct a tunnel with an
internal diameter of 6.5 m and a length of 5.13 km, with the purpose to alleviate
the flooding risk in Tsuen Wan and Kwai Chung.
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 designated 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-ninth monthly EM&A report summarising the impact monitoring results
and audit findings of the EM&A programme in June 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 Outfall, I-1, I-2 and I-3;
l
Drilling,
excavation and rock splitting at spiral ramp at Outfall;
l
Tunnel
boring machine (TBM) drilling of the tunnel and mucking out of tunnel spoil at
Outfall;
l
Excavation and
soil nailing for box culvert construction at fast lane of Castle Peak Road
(CPR) east bound at Outfall;
l
Excavation
and disposal of excavated material from existing arch bridge underneath CPR at
Outfall;
l
Placing
levelling stone to formation of sea wall at Portion E;
l
Installation
of precast sea wall blocks at Portion E;
l
Relocation
of type II armour rocks behind the seawall blocks at Portion E;
l
Disposal of
the excavated soil under the arc bridge to TM38 at Portion E;
l
Drilling,
rock splitting and excavation of vortex shaft at I-3;
l
Construction
of PB Wall structure skin wall and copping beam at I-3;
l
Backfilling
for PB Wall, removal of piling platform and slope reinstatement at I-3;
l
Tree
establishment works of the transplanted trees at I-3;
l
Construction
of base slab for approach channel 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
Pre-bored
H-pile construction for skin wall at Portion G at I-2;
l
Construction
of drainage works at Portion G at I-2;
l
Preparation
works for blasting at I-2;
l
Cascade and
channel modification concrete structure works at I-1;
l
Construction
of horizontal pipe pile (pipe roofing) for TBM break-through at I-1; and
l
Pre-bored
H-pile construction for vehicular access at I-1.
2.2.3
As confirmed by the Contractor, no marine mud dredging works for
basin scheme at Portion E was conducted in the reporting month.
2.2.4
Underground
mining and probe drilling were undertaken during restricted hours during the
reporting period.
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
quality 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-minute 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
equipment 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 July 2009) 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 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,
equipments 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 ground borne noise monitoring at
NSR 6 was conducted from 1 March 2011 (chainage section 3406 m) to 14 April
2011 (chainage section 2991 m), in order to cover the ground borne noise
monitoring zone for NSR 6. For NSR 3, the monitoring would be commenced around
early August 2011 according to the progress of works. Layout plans showing the chainage
and the location of ground borne noise monitoring stations at NSR 6 and NSR 3
are shown in Appendix G.
3.2.11
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
stipulate 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.
3.2.12
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) |
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 |
|
DO / Temperature
Meter |
YSI |
55/12 |
1 |
|
pH Meter /
Temperature Meter |
DKK-TOA |
HM20P |
1 |
|
Turbidimeter |
EUTECH |
TN-100 |
1 |
Table 3‑11 Water Quality Monitoring Equipment
3.3.8
All in situ
monitoring equipment were checked and calibrated prior to use. They 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 control 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 O-1 during 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 4 mg/L
except 5 mg/L for FCZ or 1%-ile
of baseline data for surface and middle layer Bottom 2 mg/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; · 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; · 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-hour TSP level are shown
in Table 4-1. All measurements were
recorded and presented to the nearest 0.1 mg/m3
in this report. Detailed 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 |
02-Jun-11 |
162.2 |
307/500 |
|
124.8 |
|||
|
166.0 |
|||
|
08-Jun-11 |
223.4 |
||
|
149.8 |
|||
|
147.3 |
|||
|
14-Jun-11 |
157.2 |
||
|
103.6 |
|||
|
134.8 |
|||
|
20-Jun-11 |
127.3 |
||
|
124.8 |
|||
|
72.4 |
|||
|
24-Jun-11 |
142.3 |
||
|
129.8 |
|||
|
164.7 |
|||
|
30-Jun-11 |
179.7 |
||
|
143.5 |
|||
|
188.4 |
|||
|
ASR 3 |
02-Jun-11 |
174.5 |
327/500 |
|
140.6 |
|||
|
90.4 |
|||
|
08-Jun-11 |
198.4 |
||
|
169.5 |
|||
|
213.5 |
|||
|
14-Jun-11 |
153.2 |
||
|
115.5 |
|||
|
187.1 |
|||
|
20-Jun-11 |
154.5 |
||
|
209.7 |
|||
|
139.4 |
|||
|
24-Jun-11 |
135.6 |
||
|
151.9 |
|||
|
120.6 |
|||
|
30-Jun-11 |
158.2 |
||
|
187.1 |
|||
|
129.3 |
|||
|
ASR 8 |
02-Jun-11 |
115.6 |
337/500 |
|
140.2 |
|||
|
194.8 |
|||
|
08-Jun-11 |
166.2 |
||
|
194.8 |
|||
|
168.8 |
|||
|
14-Jun-11 |
171.4 |
||
|
159.7 |
|||
|
141.5 |
|||
|
20-Jun-11 |
205.2 |
||
|
110.4 |
|||
|
111.7 |
|||
|
24-Jun-11 |
138.9 |
||
|
140.2 |
|||
|
80.5 |
|||
|
30-Jun-11 |
187.0 |
||
|
151.9 |
|||
|
144.1 |
|||
|
ASR 9 |
02-Jun-11 |
267.7 |
329/500 |
|
138.5 |
|||
|
150.5 |
|||
|
08-Jun-11 |
242.4 |
||
|
255.7 |
|||
|
127.9 |
|||
|
14-Jun-11 |
206.5 |
||
|
189.1 |
|||
|
141.2 |
|||
|
20-Jun-11 |
169.2 |
||
|
149.2 |
|||
|
150.5 |
|||
|
24-Jun-11 |
134.5 |
||
|
111.9 |
|||
|
133.2 |
|||
|
30-Jun-11 |
209.1 |
||
|
175.8 |
|||
|
109.2 |
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 air borne 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 and presented to the nearest 0.1 dB(A) 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 |
02-Jun-11 |
62.3 |
65 |
|
08-Jun-11 |
63.4 |
||
|
14-Jun-11 |
63.7 |
||
|
20-Jun-11 |
64.7 |
||
|
30-Jun-11 |
63.7 |
70 |
|
|
NSR 3 |
02-Jun-11 |
68.6 |
75 |
|
08-Jun-11 |
63.5 |
||
|
14-Jun-11 |
62.8 |
||
|
20-Jun-11 |
62.5 |
||
|
30-Jun-11 |
60.5 |
||
|
NSR 6 |
02-Jun-11 |
68.4 |
|
|
08-Jun-11 |
65.8 |
||
|
14-Jun-11 |
62.3 |
||
|
20-Jun-11 |
59.3 |
||
|
30-Jun-11 |
67.3 |
||
|
NSR 8 |
02-Jun-11 |
72.9 |
|
|
08-Jun-11 |
66.3 |
||
|
14-Jun-11 |
63.5 |
||
|
20-Jun-11 |
70.1 |
||
|
30-Jun-11 |
73.3 |
||
|
NSR 9 |
02-Jun-11 |
65.6 |
|
|
08-Jun-11 |
65.5 |
||
|
14-Jun-11 |
66.8 |
||
|
20-Jun-11 |
66.9 |
||
|
30-Jun-11 |
70.5 |
Table
4-2 Air
Borne Noise Monitoring Results
4.2.2
No exceedance of noise limit level
was recorded in the reporting month. However, one environmental complaint triggered
the exceedance of noise action level.
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 22 June 2011 |
One
record on 17 June 2011 |
|
SS |
Two
records on 9 and 17 June 2011 |
Nil |
|
Total |
3 |
1 |
Table 4-3 Summary of Exceedances for I-1
|
Parameter |
Action
Level Exceedance |
Limit
Level Exceedance |
|
DO |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Turbidity |
Nil |
Two
records on 17 and 22 June 2011 |
|
SS |
Nil |
Two
records on 17 and 22 June 2011 |
|
Total |
Nil |
4 |
Table 4-4 Summary of Exceedances for I-2
Parameter |
Action
Level Exceedance |
Limit
Level Exceedance |
|
DO |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Turbidity |
Nil |
Two
records on 17 and 22 June 2011 |
|
SS |
Nil |
One
record on 17 June 2011 |
|
Total |
Nil |
3 |
Table 4-5 Summary of Exceedances for I-3
Parameter |
Action
Level Exceedance |
Limit
Level Exceedance |
|
DO |
One record on 20 June
2011 |
Fourteen records on 7, 11, 13, 15, 17, 20, 27 and 29 June 2011 |
|
Turbidity |
Nil |
Nil |
|
SS |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Total |
1 |
14 |
Table 4-6 Summary of Exceedances for O-1(FT)
Parameter |
Action
Level Exceedance |
Limit Level
Exceedance |
|
DO |
Six records on 3, 7, 17
and 20 June 2011 |
Fourteen records on 1, 9, 11, 15, 17, 20, 24, 27 and 29 June 2011 |
|
Turbidity |
Nil |
Nil |
|
SS |
Nil |
Two
records on 11 and 27 June 2011 |
|
Total |
6 |
16 |
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
Eleven 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 22 June 2011
4.3.4
One exceedance of turbidity action
level was recorded at I-1 on 22 June 2011. The measured turbidity level (10.57
NTU) was higher than the baseline action level and slightly higher than the
turbidity level of the control station (I-1-C) (10.56 NTU). General site
cleaning, dismantling formwork at Bay 5, 6 and 7, removal of H-pile platform,
formwork at cascade bay 8, temporary traffic arrangement (TTA) at Shing Mun
Road, and geotechnical instrumentation monitoring were undertaken during
measurement. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedance
was considered to be contributed by high turbidity level at upstream location
and heavy rainfall. Since the exceedance was non-project related, no further
action was required.
Limit
Level at I-1 on 17 June 2011
4.3.5
One exceedance of turbidity limit
level was recorded at I-1 on 17 June 2011. The measured turbidity level (14.79
NTU) was higher than the baseline limit level, but lower than the turbidity
level of the control station (I-1-C)(14.86 NTU). General site cleaning,
dismantling formwork at Bay 5 and 6, filling tie bar hole in cascade, temporary
traffic arrangement (TTA) at Shing Mun Road and geotechnical instrumentation
monitoring were undertaken during measurement. No direct disturbance was
observed from the site. The exceedance was considered to be contributed by high
turbidity level at upstream location and heavy rainfall. Since the exceedance
was non-project related, no further action was required.
Limit
Level at I-2 on 17 and 22 June 2011
4.3.6
Two exceedances of turbidity limit
level were recorded at I-2 on 17 and 22 June 2011. The measured turbidity levels (14.31
and 15.19 NTU, respectively) were higher than the baseline limit level, but
lower than the turbidity level of the control station (I-2-C)(14.54 and 15.49
NTU, respectively). The construction conducted on 17 June 2011 included general site cleaning, housekeeping and temporary
traffic arrangement (TTA), excavation (rock splitting and mucking) at vortex
drop shaft, drilling, survey check and rock mapping at man access shaft,
excavating the receiving pit at Portion G, and breaking footing of piling
platform and on 22 June 2011 included general site cleaning, housekeeping and
TTA, excavation (drilling holes and rock splitting) at vortex drop shaft, drilling
holes at man access shaft, rock breaking for receiving pit at Portion G slope,
and breaking footing of piling platform and excavation for skin wall. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedances were
considered to be contributed by high turbidity level at upstream location and
heavy rainfall. Since the exceedance was non-project related, no further action
was required.
Limit
Level at I-3 on 17 and 22 June 2011
4.3.7
Two exceedances of turbidity limit level
were recorded at I-3 on 17 and 22 June 2011. The measured turbidity levels (25.75
and 9.08 NTU, respectively) were higher than the baseline limit level, but
lower than the turbidity level of the control station (I-3-C)(26.05 and 9.20
NTU, respectively). The construction conducted on 17 June 2011 included general site cleaning and housekeeping, monitoring of de-formation
monitoring point (DMP), drilling rock dowel and splitting holes in shaft, and
slope cutting and backfilling at PB wall and on 22
June 2011 included general site cleaning and housekeeping, monitoring of
DMP, drilling splitting holes and rock breaking in shaft, curing of planter
wall and backfilling, and slope reinstatement and backfilling at PB wall. No direct disturbance was observed
from the site. The exceedances were considered to be contributed by high
turbidity level at upstream location and heavy rainfall. Since the exceedance
was non-project related, no further action was required.
Exceedances of Suspended Solids Level
Action
Level at I-1 on 9 and 17 June 2011
4.3.8
Two exceedances of SS action level
were recorded at I-1 on 9 and 17 June 2011. On 9 June 2011, the measured SS level (2.50 mg/L) was
lower than the baseline action/limit level, but slightly higher than 120% of SS
level of the control station (I-1-C) (2.00 mg/L). General site cleaning,
removing working platform next to Bay 5, formwork at cascade Bay 7, trimming
shotcrete and cutting wire mesh, installation of bracket on spiral ramp for
construction of Shing Mun Road platform and geotechnical instrumentation
monitoring were undertaken during measurement. No direct disturbance was
observed from the site. The exceedance was considered to be contributed by low
SS level at the control station. On 17 June 2011, the measured SS level (9.65
mg/L) was higher than the baseline action level but lower than 120% of the SS
level of the control station (I-1-C) (9.00 mg/L). General site cleaning,
dismantling formwork at Bay 5 and 6, filling tie bar hole in cascade, TTA at
Shing Mun Road and geotechnical instrumentation monitoring were undertaken
during measurement. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The
exceedance was considered to be contributed by high SS level at upstream
location and heavy rainfall. Since the exceedances were non-project related, no
further action was required.
Limit
Level at I-2 on 17 and 22 June 2011
4.3.9
Two exceedances of SS limit level
were recorded at I-2 on 17 and 22 June 2011. The measured SS levels (8.85 and
14.05 mg/L, respectively) were higher than the baseline limit level, but former
was lower than 120% of the SS level of the control station and the latter was
nearly the same as the SS level of the control station (I-2-C) (8.75 and 14.00
mg/L, respectively). The construction activities conducted on 17 June 2011
included general site cleaning, housekeeping and TTA,
excavation (rock splitting and mucking) at vortex drop shaft, drilling, survey
check and rock mapping at man access shaft, excavating the receiving pit at
Portion G, and breaking footing of piling platform and on 22 June 2011 included
general site cleaning, housekeeping and TTA, excavation (drilling holes and
rock splitting) at vortex drop shaft, drilling holes at man access shaft, rock
breaking for receiving pit at Portion G slope, and breaking footing of piling
platform and excavation for skin wall. No direct disturbance was observed from
the site. The exceedances were considered to be contributed by high SS level at
upstream location and heavy rainfall. Since the exceedances were non-project
related, no further action was required.
Limit
Level at I-3 on 17 June 2011
4.3.10
One exceedance of SS limit level was
recorded at I-3 on 17 June 2011. The measured SS level (18.10 mg/L) was higher than the baseline limit
level, but lower than 120% of the SS level of the control station (I-3-C)(17.75
mg/L). General site cleaning and housekeeping, monitoring of DMP, drilling rock
dowel and splitting holes in shaft, and slope cutting and backfilling at PB
wall were undertaken during measurement. No direct disturbance was observed
from the site. The exceedance was considered to be contributed by high SS level
at upstream location and heavy rainfall. Since the exceedance was non-project
related, no further action was required.
Marine Water Quality
Monitoring
4.3.11
Thirty-seven
exceedances were recorded
for the marine water quality monitoring within the reporting month.
Exceedances of Dissolved Oxygen Level
Action
Level at O-1(FT) (Marine Mid-depth) on 20 June 2011
4.3.12
One exceedance of DO action level was
recorded at O-1(FT) (marine mid-depth) on 20 June 2011. The measured DO level
(6.81 mg/L) at the monitoring station was below the baseline action level and
lower than DO level (6.96 mg/L) of the corresponding control station (about
2.2%). Only re-position of the inner
silt curtain and carrying out fifth shipment of disposal to TM38 were
undertaken at the Outfall basin (Portion E) on the monitoring day. No other
marine works was conducted. No direct disturbance from the site was observed
during monitoring. Therefore, the
exceedance was considered to be contributed by natural variation and no further
action was required.
Action
Level at O-1(ET) (Marine Surface) on 3 and 7 June 2011 and at O-1(ET) (Marine
bottom) on 17 June 2011
4.3.13
Three exceedances of DO action level
were recorded at O-1(ET) (marine surface) on 3 and 7 June 2011 and at O-1(ET)
(marine bottom) on 17 June 2011. The measured DO levels (6.97, 6.98 and 6.66
mg/L, respectively) at the monitoring station were below the baseline action
level and lower than DO level of the corresponding control station (7.20, 7.02
and 6.69 mg/L, respectively). Details of
the construction activities conducted on each monitoring days are given in
Appendix J. Since no direct disturbance
from the site was observed during monitoring, the exceedances were considered
non-project related and no further action was required.
Action
Level at O-1(ET) (Marine Mid-depth) on 3, 7 and 20 June 2011
4.3.14
Three exceedances of DO action level
were recorded at O-1(ET) (marine mid-depth) on 3, 7 and 20 June 2011. The
measured DO levels of these three monitoring days were lower than the baseline
action level. On 3 and 20 June 2011, the measured DO levels (6.98 and 6.99
mg/L, respectively) were higher than the DO level of the corresponding control
stations (6.92 and 6.91 mg/l, respectively). On 7 June 2011, the measured DO
level (6.94 mg/L) was lower than the DO level of the corresponding control
station (7.11 mg/L). Details of the construction activities conducted on each
monitoring days are given in Appendix J. Since no direct disturbance from the
site was observed during monitoring, the exceedances were considered
non-project related and no further action was required.
Limit
Level at O-1(FT) (Marine Surface) on 15, 17, 20, 27 and 29 June 2011
4.3.15
Five exceedances of DO limit level
were recorded at O-1(FT)(Marine surface) on 15, 17, 20, 27 and 29 June 2011.
The measured DO levels (6.70, 6.45 and 6.70 mg/L, respectively) on 15, 17 and
20 were lower than the baseline limit level and lower than the DO levels of the
corresponding control station (6.75, 6.48 and 6.86 mg/L, respectively). For 27
and 29 June 2011, the measured DO levels (6.74 and 6.78 mg/L, respectively)
were lower than the baseline DO limit level, but higher than the DO levels of
the corresponding control stations (6.69 and 6.58 mg/L, respectively). Details
of the construction activities conducted on each monitoring days are given in
Appendix J. Since no direct disturbance was observed from the site during
monitoring, the exceedances were considered non-project related. Therefore, no
further action was required.
Limit
Level at O-1(FT) (Marine Mid-depth) on 17 and 29 June 2011
4.3.16
Two exceedances of DO limit level
were recorded at O-1(FT)(marine mid-depth) on 17 and 29 June 2011. The measured
DO levels (6.50 and 6.68 mg/L, respectively) on 17 and 29 were lower than the
baseline limit level and slightly lower than the DO levels of the corresponding
control station (6.53 and 6.76 mg/L, respectively). Details of the construction
activities conducted on each monitoring days are given in Appendix J. Since no
direct disturbance was observed from the site during monitoring, the
exceedances were considered non-project related. Therefore, no further action
was required.
Limit
Level at O-1(FT) (Marine Bottom) on 7, 11, 13, 15, 17, 20 and 29 June 2011
4.3.17
Seven exceedances of DO limit level
were recorded at O-1(FT)(marine bottom) on 7, 11, 13, 15, 17, 20 and 29 June
2011. The measured DO levels of these seven monitoring days were lower than the
baseline limit level. On 7, 11, 15, 17 and 29 June 2011, the measured DO levels
(6.94, 6.83, 6.88, 6.60 and 6.79 mg/L, respectively) were slightly lower than
the DO levels of the corresponding control stations (7.08, 6.90, 6.91, 6.67 and
6.80 mg/L, respectively). On 13 June 2011, the measured DO level (6.89 mg/L)
were the same as the corresponding control station. For 20 June 2011, the
measured DO level (6.95 mg/L) was higher than the DO level of the corresponding
control station (6.79 mg/L). Details of the construction activities conducted
on each monitoring days are given in Appendix J. Since no direct disturbance
from the site was observed, the exceedances were considered non-project related
and no further action was required.
Limit
Level at O-1(ET) (Marine Surface) on 9, 11, 15, 17, 20, 24, 27 and 29 June 2011
4.3.18
Eight exceedances of DO limit level
were recorded at O-1(ET) (marine surface) on 9, 11, 15, 17, 20, 24, 27 and 29
June 2011. The measured DO levels of these eight monitoring days were lower
than the baseline limit level. On 9, 11, 15, and 20 June 2011, the measured DO
levels (6.89, 6.76, 6.76 and 6.80 mg/L, respectively) were lower than the DO
levels of the corresponding control station (7.00, 6.82, 6.83 and 6.86 mg/L,
respectively). For 17, 24, 27 and 29 June 2011, the measured DO levels (6.73,
6.92, 6.89 and 6.82 mg/L, respectively) were higher than the DO levels of the
corresponding control station (6.61, 6.88, 6.82 and 6.70 mg/L). Details of the
construction activities conducted on each monitoring days are given in Appendix
J. Since no direct disturbance from the site was observed, the exceedances were
considered non-project related and no further action was required.
Limit
Level at O-1(ET) (Marine Mid-depth) on 1, 11, 15, 17, 27 and 29 June 2011
4.3.19
Six exceedances of DO limit level
were recorded at O-1(ET) (marine mid-depth) on 1, 11, 15, 17, 17 and 29 June
2011. The measured DO levels of these six monitoring days were lower than the
baseline limit level. On 1, 11, 15, 27 and 29 June 2011, the measured DO levels
(6.93, 6.89, 6.69, 6.82 and 6.72 mg/L, respectively) were lower than the DO
levels of the corresponding control station (7.00, 6.92, 6.77, 6.97 and 6.81
mg/L, respectively). For 17 June 2011, the measured DO level (6.62 mg/L) was
higher than the DO level of the corresponding control station (6.55 mg/L).
Details of the construction activities conducted on each monitoring days are
given in Appendix J. Since no direct disturbance from the site was observed,
the exceedance was considered non-project related and no further action was
required.
Exceedances of Suspended Solids Level
Limit
Level at O-1(ET) on 11 and 27 June 2011
4.3.20
Two exceedances of SS limit action
level were recorded at O-1(ET) on 11 and 27 June 2011. The measured SS levels
(3.60 and 9.20 mg/L, respectively) at the monitoring station were below the
baseline action/limit, but higher than 130% of the SS level of the
corresponding control station (2.48 and 5.97 mg/L, respectively). On 11 June
2011, only outer silt curtain
maintenance and repairing was undertaken at the Outfall basin (Portion E). On
27 June 2011, the derrick barge was unloading the excavated material at Tuen
Mun Area 38. Since no other marine works was conducted, the exceedances were
considered as contributed by natural variation. Therefore, 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 |
01-Jun-11 |
30.10 |
6.79 |
3.42 / 3.34 |
8.06 |
2.83 |
9.75 / 12.47 |
<2.00 |
8.85 / 10.17 |
|
|
03-Jun-11 |
30.15 |
6.78 |
|
8.15 |
2.85 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
07-Jun-11 |
31.10 |
6.93 |
|
7.71 |
3.65 |
|
3.55 |
|
|
|
09-Jun-11 |
30.15 |
7.06 |
|
7.05 |
2.05 |
|
2.50 |
|
|
|
11-Jun-11 |
26.30 |
7.45 |
|
7.58 |
3.07 |
|
5.10 |
|
|
|
13-Jun-11 |
27.00 |
7.24 |
|
7.57 |
3.45 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
15-Jun-11 |
30.00 |
6.87 |
|
8.06 |
2.40 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
17-Jun-11 |
27.05 |
6.92 |
|
8.07 |
14.79 |
|
9.65 |
|
|
|
20-Jun-11 |
28.10 |
7.24 |
|
8.19 |
2.73 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
22-Jun-11 |
26.50 |
7.22 |
|
7.90 |
10.57 |
|
3.25 |
|
|
|
24-Jun-11 |
31.05 |
6.87 |
|
7.90 |
2.53 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
27-Jun-11 |
30.00 |
6.69 |
|
8.21 |
2.53 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
29-Jun-11 |
27.50 |
6.88 |
|
8.11 |
4.01 |
|
<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-1-C |
01-Jun-11 |
30.25 |
6.84 |
- / - |
8.06 |
2.97 |
- / - |
<2.00 |
- / - |
|
|
03-Jun-11 |
30.00 |
6.71 |
|
8.16 |
2.92 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
07-Jun-11 |
31.00 |
6.87 |
|
7.73 |
3.64 |
|
3.75 |
|
|
|
09-Jun-11 |
30.30 |
7.18 |
|
7.04 |
2.07 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
11-Jun-11 |
26.40 |
7.50 |
|
7.57 |
3.11 |
|
4.90 |
|
|
|
13-Jun-11 |
27.10 |
7.16 |
|
7.57 |
3.46 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
15-Jun-11 |
29.95 |
6.87 |
|
8.06 |
2.48 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
17-Jun-11 |
27.00 |
6.86 |
|
8.06 |
14.86 |
|
9.00 |
|
|
|
20-Jun-11 |
28.00 |
7.27 |
|
8.19 |
2.81 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
22-Jun-11 |
26.40 |
7.18 |
|
7.91 |
10.56 |
|
3.50 |
|
|
|
24-Jun-11 |
31.20 |
6.96 |
|
7.91 |
2.61 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
27-Jun-11 |
30.10 |
6.64 |
|
8.20 |
2.57 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
29-Jun-11 |
27.55 |
6.99 |
|
8.11 |
4.09 |
|
<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-2 |
01-Jun-11 |
30.10 |
6.93 |
3.66 / 3.63 |
7.98 |
1.51 |
6.63 / 6.99 |
<2.00 |
7.68 / 8.34 |
|
|
03-Jun-11 |
30.20 |
7.08 |
|
8.08 |
1.65 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
07-Jun-11 |
31.10 |
7.04 |
|
8.03 |
1.80 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
09-Jun-11 |
30.25 |
6.85 |
|
7.66 |
1.50 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
11-Jun-11 |
26.40 |
7.19 |
|
8.07 |
1.88 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
13-Jun-11 |
27.30 |
7.13 |
|
7.55 |
2.88 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
15-Jun-11 |
30.20 |
6.88 |
|
7.87 |
0.91 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
17-Jun-11 |
27.40 |
6.98 |
|
8.02 |
14.31 |
|
8.85 |
|
|
|
20-Jun-11 |
28.60 |
7.09 |
|
8.16 |
2.44 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
22-Jun-11 |
26.50 |
7.33 |
|
7.57 |
15.19 |
|
14.05 |
|
|
|
24-Jun-11 |
30.30 |
6.99 |
|
8.04 |
3.11 |
|
2.30 |
|
|
|
27-Jun-11 |
30.30 |
6.73 |
|
7.89 |
1.72 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
29-Jun-11 |
27.70 |
6.77 |
|
8.05 |
5.88 |
|
3.05 |
|
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 |
01-Jun-11 |
30.20 |
7.01 |
- / - |
7.96 |
1.58 |
- / - |
<2.00 |
- / - |
|
|
03-Jun-11 |
30.40 |
7.01 |
|
8.08 |
1.63 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
07-Jun-11 |
31.00 |
6.99 |
|
8.02 |
1.83 |
|
2.10 |
|
|
|
09-Jun-11 |
30.30 |
6.95 |
|
7.66 |
1.50 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
11-Jun-11 |
26.30 |
7.19 |
|
8.07 |
1.95 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
13-Jun-11 |
27.30 |
7.15 |
|
7.55 |
2.95 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
15-Jun-11 |
30.20 |
6.80 |
|
7.87 |
0.99 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
17-Jun-11 |
27.15 |
6.90 |
|
8.03 |
14.54 |
|
8.75 |
|
|
|
20-Jun-11 |
28.60 |
6.98 |
|
8.17 |
2.47 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
22-Jun-11 |
26.60 |
7.37 |
|
7.57 |
15.49 |
|
14.00 |
|
|
|
24-Jun-11 |
30.20 |
6.92 |
|
8.04 |
3.20 |
|
2.25 |
|
|
|
27-Jun-11 |
30.30 |
6.86 |
|
7.88 |
1.77 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
29-Jun-11 |
27.70 |
6.85 |
|
8.04 |
5.89 |
|
2.95 |
|
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 |
01-Jun-11 |
30.50 |
6.90 |
3.65 / 3.51 |
8.13 |
1.72 |
3.99 / 4.18 |
<2.00 |
6.13 / 7.23 |
|
|
03-Jun-11 |
30.25 |
6.81 |
|
8.20 |
1.78 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
07-Jun-11 |
31.00 |
7.07 |
|
8.32 |
1.75 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
09-Jun-11 |
30.15 |
6.96 |
|
8.38 |
1.65 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
11-Jun-11 |
26.30 |
7.17 |
|
8.00 |
1.29 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
13-Jun-11 |
27.50 |
7.12 |
|
8.01 |
1.82 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
15-Jun-11 |
30.50 |
7.00 |
|
8.07 |
1.52 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
17-Jun-11 |
27.45 |
6.95 |
|
8.03 |
25.75 |
|
18.10 |
|
|
|
20-Jun-11 |
28.10 |
7.23 |
|
8.04 |
1.69 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
22-Jun-11 |
26.45 |
7.34 |
|
7.56 |
9.08 |
|
3.95 |
|
|
|
24-Jun-11 |
30.10 |
6.87 |
|
7.90 |
1.80 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
27-Jun-11 |
30.10 |
6.90 |
|
8.15 |
2.59 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
30-Jun-11 |
28.00 |
6.59 |
|
8.00 |
3.06 |
|
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-3-C |
01-Jun-11 |
30.60 |
6.82 |
- / - |
8.14 |
1.77 |
- / - |
<2.00 |
- / - |
|
|
03-Jun-11 |
30.50 |
6.79 |
|
8.20 |
1.82 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
07-Jun-11 |
31.05 |
7.10 |
|
8.33 |
1.76 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
09-Jun-11 |
30.20 |
7.07 |
|
8.39 |
1.66 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
11-Jun-11 |
26.30 |
7.12 |
|
8.00 |
1.29 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
13-Jun-11 |
27.50 |
7.06 |
|
8.00 |
1.91 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
15-Jun-11 |
30.40 |
6.94 |
|
8.07 |
1.59 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
17-Jun-11 |
27.40 |
7.05 |
|
8.03 |
26.05 |
|
17.75 |
|
|
|
20-Jun-11 |
27.95 |
7.17 |
|
8.04 |
1.74 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
22-Jun-11 |
26.40 |
7.29 |
|
7.56 |
9.20 |
|
4.10 |
|
|
|
24-Jun-11 |
30.00 |
6.99 |
|
7.90 |
1.83 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
27-Jun-11 |
30.00 |
6.96 |
|
8.16 |
2.65 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
30-Jun-11 |
27.90 |
6.57 |
|
7.99 |
3.11 |
|
2.05 |
|
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) |
01-Jun-11 |
Surface |
29.15 |
7.16 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.20 |
5.81 |
10.35 / 13.15 |
7.77 |
14.10 / 18.08 |
|
|
|
Middle |
6.91 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.10 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
03-Jun-11 |
Surface |
28.10 |
6.98 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.16 |
3.16 |
|
8.23 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.85 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.14 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
07-Jun-11 |
Surface |
30.38 |
7.04 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.08 |
2.07 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.97 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.94 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
09-Jun-11 |
Surface |
29.80 |
6.94 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
7.95 |
1.65 |
|
2.10 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.88 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.02 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
11-Jun-11 |
Surface |
30.23 |
6.85 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.06 |
3.04 |
|
3.20 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.87 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.83 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
13-Jun-11 |
Surface |
29.78 |
7.02 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.06 |
4.83 |
|
4.13 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.96 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.89 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
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) |
15-Jun-11 |
Surface |
31.70 |
6.70 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.05 |
8.71 |
10.35 / 13.15 |
5.88 |
14.10 / 18.08 |
|
|
|
Middle |
6.84 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.88 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
17-Jun-11 |
Surface |
29.47 |
6.45 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.01 |
4.49 |
|
4.07 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.50 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.60 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
20-Jun-11 |
Surface |
30.13 |
6.70 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.07 |
5.56 |
|
5.53 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.81 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.95 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
24-Jun-11 |
Surface |
29.02 |
7.11 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
7.87 |
2.68 |
|
2.48 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.22 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.05 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
27-Jun-11 |
Surface |
30.38 |
6.74 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.14 |
4.63 |
|
10.45 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.90 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.99 |
6.99 / 6.96 |
|
|
||||
|
|
29-Jun-11 |
Surface |
28.60 |
6.78 |
6.84 / 6.81 |
8.07 |
8.25 |
|
10.05 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.68 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.79 |
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) |
01-Jun-11 |
Surface |
29.08 |
7.06 |
- / - |
8.20 |
5.78 |
- / - |
7.57 |
- / - |
|
|
|
Middle |
6.99 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.11 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
03-Jun-11 |
Surface |
27.97 |
7.19 |
- / - |
8.16 |
3.20 |
|
7.67 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.11 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.06 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
07-Jun-11 |
Surface |
30.35 |
7.27 |
- / - |
8.07 |
2.10 |
|
2.10 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.90 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.08 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
09-Jun-11 |
Surface |
29.88 |
7.01 |
- / - |
7.95 |
1.73 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.84 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.93 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
11-Jun-11 |
Surface |
30.30 |
6.70 |
- / - |
8.07 |
2.96 |
|
3.28 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.97 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.90 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
13-Jun-11 |
Surface |
29.87 |
6.88 |
- / - |
8.06 |
4.93 |
|
3.73 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.10 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.89 |
- / - |
|
|
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) |
15-Jun-11 |
Surface |
31.68 |
6.75 |
- / - |
8.05 |
8.82 |
- / - |
7.40 |
- / - |
|
|
|
Middle |
6.84 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.91 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
17-Jun-11 |
Surface |
29.50 |
6.48 |
- / - |
8.01 |
4.49 |
|
4.20 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.53 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.67 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
20-Jun-11 |
Surface |
30.17 |
6.86 |
- / - |
8.07 |
5.57 |
|
6.98 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.96 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.79 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
24-Jun-11 |
Surface |
29.03 |
7.13 |
- / - |
7.87 |
2.74 |
|
2.65 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.02 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.97 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
27-Jun-11 |
Surface |
30.32 |
6.69 |
- / - |
8.14 |
4.72 |
|
11.18 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.81 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.87 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
29-Jun-11 |
Surface |
28.47 |
6.58 |
- / - |
8.06 |
8.51 |
|
11.08 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.76 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.80 |
- / - |
|
|
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) |
01-Jun-11 |
Surface |
29.02 |
7.24 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.20 |
5.34 |
11.87/13.44 |
7.98 |
13.25/14.39 |
|
|
|
Middle |
6.93 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.88 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
03-Jun-11 |
Surface |
28.25 |
6.97 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.15 |
5.36 |
|
7.30 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.98 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.11 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
07-Jun-11 |
Surface |
30.57 |
6.98 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.09 |
2.65 |
|
2.40 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.94 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.90 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
09-Jun-11 |
Surface |
29.70 |
6.89 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
7.96 |
1.22 |
|
2.48 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.03 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.11 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
11-Jun-11 |
Surface |
30.58 |
6.76 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.00 |
2.20 |
|
3.60 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.89 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.93 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
13-Jun-11 |
Surface |
29.72 |
7.04 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.03 |
2.77 |
|
2.12 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.13 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.18 |
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) |
15-Jun-11 |
Surface |
31.90 |
6.76 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.04 |
8.56 |
11.87/13.44 |
7.97 |
13.25/14.39 |
|
|
|
Middle |
6.69 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.78 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
17-Jun-11 |
Surface |
29.70 |
6.73 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
7.99 |
5.33 |
|
5.27 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.62 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.66 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
20-Jun-11 |
Surface |
30.40 |
6.80 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.06 |
5.58 |
|
6.85 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.99 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.03 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
24-Jun-11 |
Surface |
28.90 |
6.92 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
7.91 |
2.84 |
|
3.13 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.05 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.15 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
27-Jun-11 |
Surface |
30.65 |
6.89 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.15 |
4.12 |
|
9.20 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.82 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.86 |
6.7 / 6.48 |
|
|
||||
|
|
29-Jun-11 |
Surface |
27.88 |
6.82 |
7.02 / 6.94 |
8.12 |
3.45 |
|
4.10 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.72 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.80 |
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) |
01-Jun-11 |
Surface |
29.03 |
7.19 |
-
/ - |
8.21 |
5.50 |
- / - |
7.68 |
- / - |
|
|
|
Middle |
7.00 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.97 |
-
/ - |
|
|
||||
|
|
03-Jun-11 |
Surface |
28.20 |
7.20 |
-
/ - |
8.15 |
5.36 |
|
7.65 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.92 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.00 |
-
/ - |
|
|
||||
|
|
07-Jun-11 |
Surface |
30.53 |
7.02 |
-
/ - |
8.09 |
2.71 |
|
2.12 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.11 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.86 |
-
/ - |
|
|
||||
|
|
09-Jun-11 |
Surface |
29.63 |
7.00 |
-
/ - |
7.96 |
1.30 |
|
2.07 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.10 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.95 |
-
/ - |
|
|
||||
|
|
11-Jun-11 |
Surface |
30.50 |
6.82 |
-
/ - |
8.00 |
2.20 |
|
2.48 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.92 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.90 |
-
/ - |
|
|
||||
|
|
13-Jun-11 |
Surface |
29.75 |
6.88 |
-
/ - |
8.03 |
2.77 |
|
2.22 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
7.08 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.06 |
-
/ - |
|
|
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) |
15-Jun-11 |
Surface |
30.93 |
6.83 |
- / - |
8.03 |
8.59 |
- / - |
7.77 |
- / - |
|
|
|
Middle |
6.77 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.67 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
17-Jun-11 |
Surface |
29.72 |
6.61 |
- / - |
7.99 |
5.52 |
|
6.55 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.55 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.69 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
20-Jun-11 |
Surface |
30.42 |
6.86 |
- / - |
8.06 |
5.66 |
|
6.88 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.91 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.98 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
24-Jun-11 |
Surface |
28.95 |
6.88 |
- / - |
7.91 |
2.88 |
|
2.93 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.95 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
7.03 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
27-Jun-11 |
Surface |
30.65 |
6.82 |
- / - |
8.15 |
4.18 |
|
5.97 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.97 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.89 |
- / - |
|
|
||||
|
|
29-Jun-11 |
Surface |
27.63 |
6.70 |
- / - |
8.12 |
3.47 |
|
4.77 |
|
|
|
|
Middle |
6.81 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Bottom |
6.76 |
- / - |
|
|
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 June 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 |
72 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Air Borne
Noise |
25 |
1 (complaint) |
4 |
0 |
0 |
|
Water |
126 |
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) |
5,250.3 |
|
Inert C&D
Material Reused in this Contract (m3) |
117.5 |
|
Inert C&D
Material Reused in other Contracts* (m3) |
16,187.5 |
|
Metals Generated (kg) |
Nil |
|
Paper / Cardboard
Packaging (kg) |
350.0 |
|
Plastics (kg) |
Nil |
|
Chemical Waste (kg) |
1,812.0 |
|
General Waste Disposed of to NENT
Landfill (m3) |
34.1 |
* Other Contracts include DC/2007/08,
HY/2007/10, HY/2008/09, Tailor Recycle Aggregate, XRL 823A and 823B and CUHK.
Table
5-1 Waste Generated in June 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 |
|
9 June 2011 |
1.
Temporary noise barrier
erected on the edge of shaft was found not properly maintained at Intake I-3. |
1.
The Contractor was reminded
to maintain the temporary noise barrier properly. |
1. Temporary noise barrier erected on the edge of shaft was found
properly maintained on 9 June 2011. (Closed) |
|
23 June 2011 |
1.
Unused C&D materials were
found accumulated at the cascade at Intake I-3. |
1.
The Contractor was
reminded to remove the unused C&D materials regularly. |
1.
Unused C&D materials
were found removed on 27 June 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 8 July 2011 that one public complaint
regarding construction dust and daytime construction noise from the Intake I-3
construction site was received on 30 June 2011. The ET has conducted site
inspection at Intake I-3 construction site on 8 July 2011 to review and audit
the site setting, mitigation measures implemented on-site and the environmental
performance of the Contractor. An
investigation report will be submitted to EPD in July 2011. In addition, noise monitoring at NSR 6 will
increase to twice per week from 11 July to 29 July 2011. The noise monitoring results will be reported
in the Monthly EM&A Report of July 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 |
22 |
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 |
||
|
June 2011 |
Cumulative |
June 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 Outfall, I-1, I-2 and I-3;
·
TBM
drilling of the tunnel and mucking out of tunnel spoil at Outfall;
·
Construction
of spiral ramp structure at Outfall;
·
Excavation
and soil nailing for box culvert construction at fast lane of CPR east bound at
Outfall;
·
Construction
of box culvert at Outfall;
·
Placing
levelling stone and bagged concrete to formation of sea wall at Portion E;
·
Installation
of precast seawall blocks and panels for construction of outfall apron at
Portion E;
·
Drilling
and excavation of vortex shaft at I-3;
·
Backfilling
for PB Wall at I-3;
·
Construction
of approach channel at I-3;
·
Tree
establishment works of the transplanted trees 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 drainage works at Portion G at I-2;
·
Cascade and
channel modification concrete structure works at I-1;
·
Construction
of horizontal pipe pile (pipe roofing) for TBM break-through at I-1; and
·
Construction
of vehicular access 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 |