1.
Drainage Services Department (DSD) has
awarded the contract for the Design and Construction of Tsuen Wan Drainage
Tunnel (hereafter referred to as the “Project”) to Maeda-CREC-SELI Joint
Venture (MCSJV). MCSJV has
appointed Hyder Consulting Limited (HCL) as the Environmental Team (ET) to
undertake the Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) works in accordance
with the Environmental Monitoring and Audit Manual (EM&A Manual) and
Environmental Permit (EP).
Commencement of the construction work had been notified to the
Environmental Protection Department (EPD) in January 2008. This Monthly EM&A Report summarises
the EM&A works undertaken in August 2008.
2.
According to the EM&A Manual,
there are four designated air quality monitoring locations, five designated
noise monitoring locations and four water quality monitoring locations during
the construction phase: (i) Sik Sik Yuen Ho Fung College (ASR 1, NSR 1 and
Intake I-1); (ii) Hong Hoi Chee Hong Temple (ASR 3, NSR 3 and Intake I-2);
(iii) Squatters (NSR 6 and Intake I-3); (iv) Beach Tower (Long Beach Gardens)
(ASR 8, NSR 8 and Outfall O-1); and (v) Greenview Terrace (Block 1) (ASR 9, NSR
9 and Outfall O-1).
3.
During non-restricted hours, major
construction activities undertaken by the Contractor at TWDT included site
clearance, hoarding & fencing erection, tree survey & transplanting,
slope stabilization, site office formation, pre-construction survey, soil nailing,
relocation of verified boulder, formation of access road and pre-bore H-piling
at I-2 and I-3. No construction
activities were undertaken during restricted hours.
4.
No exceedance has been recorded for
noise or air quality monitoring during the reporting month and exceedances for
water quality monitoring are summarized in the following table:
|
Parameter
|
Action
Level Exceedance
|
Limit
Level Exceedance
|
|
DO
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
|
Turbidity
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
|
SS
|
One record at I-2 on 11 August 2008
|
Two records at I-2 and I-3 on 13 August 2008
|
5.
These exceedances were considered not to be project-related as no direct disturbance was
observed contributed by the project construction activities. Detail interpretation
of the results could be referred to Section 4.3 of this report.
6.
The status of waste generation in the
reporting month are:
·
No C&D material was disposed of to
public fill at Tuen Mun and 445m3 of inert C&D materials were reused in KDB
400, a line extension project of MTR Corportaion at Tai Kok Tsui;
·
About 95.8m3 C&D waste was
disposed off to NENT Landfill;
·
About 180kg of paper/cardboard was
recycled;
·
No chemical waste was disposed off in
the reporting month
·
No metal was generated in the reporting
month.
7.
In this reporting month, two site
inspections and monthly site audit were carried out by ET and Independent
Environmental Checker (IEC), respectively, to ensure proper implementation of
environmental mitigation measures specified in the EM&A Manual and
compliance with environmental legislation. All observations, which were recorded on the inspection
checklists, were passed to the Contractor together with the ET’s
recommendations.
8.
As advised by the Contractor and
verified by ET:
·
No non-compliance was received in the
reporting month;
·
No environmental complaint was
received during the reporting month; and
·
No summons and prosecution were
received in this reporting month.
9.
The major construction works for the
upcoming three months will be:
·
Site clearance at I-1, I-2, I-3 and
Outfall;
·
Hoarding & fencing erection at I-3
and Outfall;
·
Trees survey & transplanting at
I-1, I-2 and Outfall;
·
Slope stabilization at Outfall;
·
Site office formation;
·
Pre-construction survey at I-1, I-2,
I-3 and Outfall;
·
Soil nailing at I-3 and Outfall;
·
Relocation of verified boulder at I-2
and Outfall;
·
Formation of access road at the
Outfall; and
·
Pre-bore H-piling at I-2 & I-3.
1.1.1
The Drainage Services Department (DSD)
proposes to construct a tunnel with an internal diameter of 6.5m and length
5.13km, 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 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 ET to implement an EM&A program in accordance with the EM&A
Manual. The proposed tunnel
section flows from the junction of Shing Mun Road and Wo Yi Hop Road and
discharges to south of Yau Kom Tau underneath Castle Peak Road as shown in
Appendix A.
1.1.5
The construction works of the Project was
commenced in January
2008. This
is the fifth monthly EM&A report summarising the impact monitoring results
and audit findings of the EM&A program in August 2008.
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
Construction Progress
2.2.1
The overall project programme from the
detail design to completion of all civil works shall take approximately 54
months. The construction programme
is presented in Appendix C.
2.2.2
The major construction activities undertaken in the reporting month
were:
·
Site clearance at I-1, I-2, I-3 and
Outfall;
·
Hoarding & fencing erection at I-3
and Outfall;
·
Trees survey & transplanting at
I-1, I-3 and Outfall;
·
Slope stabilization at Outfall;
·
Site office formation;
·
Pre-construction survey at I-1, I-2,
I-3 and Outfall;
·
Soil nailing at I-3 and Outfall;
·
Relocation of verified boulder at I-2
and Outfall;
·
Formation of access road at the
Outfall; and
·
Pre-bore H-piling at I-2 & I-3.
2.2.3
As advised by the Contractor, no
construction activities were undertaken for TWDT during the restricted hours.
2.3
Mitigation Measures
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
Summary of EM&A Requirement
3.1
Air Quality
Air Quality Parameters
3.1.1
1-hour Total Suspended Particulates
(TSP) levels are measured at the designated air monitoring locations in
accordance with the EM&A Manual.
Information such as date of monitoring, duration, weather condition,
equipment used and monitoring results were recorded on the field data sheet
developed for the Project. The
monitoring results are presented in Section 4.
Monitoring Methodology
3.1.2
1-hour TSP monitoring is carried out
under typical weather conditions (with no adverse weather such as typhoon
signal or rain storm warning) three times every six days using High Volume Air
Samplers (HVASs). Monitoring
should be conducted in accordance with the standard sampling method as set out
in High Volume Method for Total Suspended Particulates, Part 50 Chapter 1
Appendix B, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations of the USEPA.
3.1.3
After each sampling, the filter paper
loaded with dust is kept in a clean and tightly sealed plastic bag. The filter
paper is then re-conditioned in a dessicator for 24 hours before obtaining the
weight under laboratory conditions.
3.1.4
The average concentrations of the TSP
are calculated based on the following information obtained from monitoring:
·
Flow
rate;
·
Weight
of the filter paper before and after sampling; and
·
Sampling
period indicated by the elapsed-time meter.
3.1.5
All samples should be kept in good condition
(i.e. stored in sealed plastic bags, with brief description of the monitoring
dates and locations) for a period of 6 months before disposal. Sample analysis is carried out by ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Limited (HOKLAS Registration Number 066).
Monitoring Equipment
and Calibration
3.1.6
High Volume Air Samplers (HVASs) are
used for 1-hour TSP monitoring to comply with the USEPA specifications in
Appendix B Part 5 - Reference Method for the Determination of Suspended
Particulate matter in the Atmosphere (High-Volume Method) of the Code of
Federal Regulation dated June 1, 1991.
3.1.7
All HVASs are calibrated before
commencement of monitoring using standard orifice 5-points calibration method
with orifice calibrator to determine the actual flow rate of each HVAS. This shall be used for the calculation
of the TSP level. Calibration Kit
Model - TE5025A is used for calibration of the HVAS. Recalibration of the HVAS shall be carried out after motor
maintenance, at least once every six months, which is about the expected life
of carbon brush. The air quality monitoring equipment used during the reporting
month is shown in Table 3‑1 below.
The calibration certificates are included in Appendix F.
|
Equipment Type
|
Model
|
Serial Number
|
Calibration Orifice Number
|
Location
|
|
HVAS
|
BM2000HX
|
4994
|
517N
|
ASR 1
|
|
HVAS
|
BM2000HX
|
5875
|
517N
|
ASR 3
|
|
HVAS
|
TE5005X
|
0390
|
517N
|
ASR 8
|
|
HVAS
|
TE5005X
|
0646
|
517N
|
ASR 9
|
Table 3‑1 Air
Quality Monitoring Equipment
Monitoring Location
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
|
|
|
|
ASR1
|
Sik Sik Yuen Ho Fung College
|
G/F
|
|
ASR3
|
Hong Hoi Chee Hong Temple
|
Podium
|
|
ASR8
|
Beach Tower (Long Beach Gardens)
|
G/F
|
|
ASR9
|
Greenview Terrace (Block 1)
|
G/F
|
Table 3‑2 Air
Quality Monitoring Locations
Action and Limit Levels
3.1.9
The Action and Limit Levels for the
1-hour TSP monitoring is shown in Table 3‑3. In case
exceedances of Action and/or Limit levels for air quality occur, Event
Contingency Plans (ECPs) would be implemented. The ECPs for Action and Limit levels exceedances are shown
in Table 3‑4.
|
Station
|
1-hr TSP Level in μg/m3
|
|
Action Level
|
Limit Level
|
|
ASR 1
|
307
|
500
|
|
ASR 3
|
327
|
500
|
|
ASR 8
|
337
|
500
|
|
ASR 9
|
329
|
500
|
Table 3‑3 Action
& Limit Levels for Air Quality
|
EVENT
|
ACTION
|
|
ET
|
IEC
|
SOR
|
CONTRACTOR
|
|
ACTION LEVEL
|
|
Exceedance for one
sample
|
·
Identify source, investigate the causes of exceedance
and propose remedial measures;
·
Inform IEC and SOR;
·
Repeat measurement to confirm finding;
·
Increase monitoring frequency to daily.
|
·
Check monitoring data submitted by ET;
·
Check Contractor’s working method.
|
·
Notify Contractor.
|
·
Rectify any unacceptable practice;
·
Amend working methods if appropriate.
|
|
Exceedance for two or
more consecutive samples
|
·
Identify source;
·
Inform IEC and SOR;
·
Advise SOR on the effectiveness of the proposed
remedial measures;
·
Repeat measurements to confirm findings;
·
Increase monitoring frequency to daily;
·
Discuss with IEC and Contractor on remedial actions
required;
·
If exceedance continues, arrange meeting with IEC and
SOR;
·
If exceedance stops, cease additional monitoring.
|
·
Check monitoring data submitted by ET;
·
Check Contractor’s working method;
·
Discuss with ET and Contractor on possible remedial
measures;
·
Advise the ET on the effectiveness of the proposed
remedial measures;
·
Supervise Implementation of remedial measures.
|
·
Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance in
writing;
·
Notify Contractor;
·
Ensure remedial measures properly implemented.
|
·
Submit proposals for remedial to SOR within 3 working
days of notification;
·
Implement the agreed proposals;
·
Amend proposal if appropriate.
|
|
LIMIT LEVEL
|
|
Exceedance for one
sample
|
·
Identify source, investigate the causes of exceedance
and propose remedial measures;
·
Inform IEC, SOR, Contractor and EPD;
·
Repeat measurement to confirm finding;
·
Increase monitoring frequency to daily;
·
Assess effectiveness of Contractor’s remedial actions
and keep IEC, EPD and SOR informed of the results.
|
·
Check monitoring data submitted by ET;
·
Check Contractor’s working method;
·
Discuss with ET and Contractor on possible remedial
measures;
·
Advise SOR on the effectiveness of the proposed
remedial measures;
·
Supervise implementation of remedial measures.
|
·
Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance in
writing;
·
Notify Contractor;
·
Ensure remedial measures properly implemented.
|
·
Take immediate action to avoid further exceedance;
·
Submit proposals for remedial actions to IEC within 3
working days of notification;
·
Implement the agreed proposals;
·
Amend proposal if appropriate.
|
|
Exceedance for two or
more consecutive samples
|
·
Notify IEC, SOR, Contractor and EPD;
·
Identify source;
·
Repeat measurement to confirm findings;
·
Increase monitoring frequency to daily;
·
Carry out analysis of Contractor’s working procedures
to determine possible mitigation to be implemented;
·
Arrange meeting with IEC and SOR to discuss the
remedial actions to be taken;
·
Assess effectiveness of Contractor’s remedial actions
and keep IEC, EPD and SOR informed of the results;
·
If exceedance stops, cease additional monitoring.
|
·
Discuss amongst SOR, ET, and Contractor on the
potential remedial actions;
·
Review Contractor’s remedial actions whenever
necessary to assure their effectiveness and advise SOR accordingly;
·
Supervise the implementation of remedial measures.
|
·
Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance in
writing;
·
Notify Contractor;
·
In consultation with the IEC, agree with the
Contractor on the remedial measures to be implemented;
·
Ensure remedial measures properly implemented;
·
If exceedance continues, consider what portion of the
work is responsible and instruct the Contractor to stop that portion of work
until the exceedance is abated.
|
·
Take immediate action to avoid further exceedance;
·
Submit proposals for remedial actions to IEC within 3
working days of notification;
·
Implement the agreed proposals;
·
Resubmit proposals if problem still not under
control;
·
Stop the relevant portion of works as determined by
SOR until the exceedance is abated.
|
Table 3‑4 Event/Action
Plan for Air Quality
3.2
Noise
Noise
Parameters
3.2.1
The construction noise level is measured in terms of
equivalent A-weighted sound pressure level (Leq) measured in
decibels (dB(A)). Monitoring of Leq(30
min) is carried out at the noise monitoring locations on a weekly basis
during normal construction working hours (0700-1900 hours from Monday to
Saturday except public holidays).
For all other time periods (i.e. restricted hours), Leq(5 min)
would be employed for comparison with the Noise Control Ordinance (NCO)
criteria if necessary.
3.2.2
The two statistical sound levels L10 and L90:
the level exceeded for 10 and 90 percent of the time respectively, are also
recorded during monitoring. Major
noise sources observed, both on-site and off-site, are recorded on the field
data sheet. All measurements are
recorded to the nearest 0.1 dB(A) and presented in round numbers in this
report. Results are presented in
Section 4.
Monitoring Methodology
3.2.3
Sound level meters, which comply with the International
Electrotechnical Commission Publication 651: 1979 (Type 1) and 804: 1985 (Type
1) specifications as referred to the Technical Memorandum (TM) issued under the
Noise Control Ordinance, are used.
Noise levels for the A-weighted levels Leq(30min), L10
and L90 are measured throughout the impact monitoring. Average, by sound power, of six
consecutive 5 minutes readings is used to provide Leq(30 min) for
non-restricted hours (07:00-19:00 hours from Monday to Saturday except public
holidays). A facade correction of
3dB(A) is applied to measurements that are carried out under free field
conditions.
3.2.4
During the impact monitoring, parameters such as dates,
weather condition, equipment used, measurement results and major noise sources are
recorded on the field data record sheet.
Monitoring would not be carried out in the presence of fog, rain or
strong wind with a steady speed exceeding 5 m/s. In relation to the monitored noise levels, other noise
sources such as road traffic might make a significant contribution to the
overall noise environment.
Therefore, noise monitoring activities would take into account such
influencing factors, which were not presented during the baseline monitoring period.
Monitoring Equipment and
Calibration
3.2.5
Bruel & Kjaer (B&K) Precision Integrating Sound
Level Meters of Type 2238 in compliance with the International Electrotechnical
Commission Publication 651: 1979 (Type 1) and 804: 1985 (Type 1)
Specifications, stated in the Technical Memorandum (TM) issued under the NCO,
is used for noise monitoring.
3.2.6
Prior to and following each noise measurement, the
accuracy of the sound level meter is checked using an acoustic calibrator
(B&K Type 4231(S/N 1770806) generating a known sound pressure level at a
known frequency. Measurements are
considered as valid only if the calibration levels from before and after the
noise measurement agrees to within 1.0 dB(A). The sound level meters
and the calibrators shall be calibrated annually to ensure they perform to the
same level of accuracy as stated in the manufacturers specifications. The noise monitoring equipment used
during the reporting month is shown in Table 3‑5 below.
The calibration certificates are included in Appendix F.
|
Equipment Type
|
Manufacturer
|
Type Number
|
Serial Number
|
Location
|
|
Sound Level Meter
|
Bruel & Kjaer
|
2238
|
2285726
|
NSR1, NSR3, NSR6, NSR8 and NSR9
|
|
Sound Level Calibrator
|
Bruel & Kjaer
|
4231
|
1770806
|
NSR1, NSR3, NSR6, NSR8 and NSR9
|
Table 3‑5 Noise
Monitoring Equipment
Monitoring Location
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.
|
Monitoring
Station ID
|
Name of
Premises
|
Floor Level
|
|
NSR1
|
Sik Sik Yuen
Ho Fung College
|
G/F
|
|
NSR3
|
Hong Hoi Chee
Hong Temple
|
Podium
|
|
NSR6
|
Squatters
|
G/F
|
|
NSR8
|
Beach Tower
(Long Beach Gardens)
|
G/F
|
|
NSR9
|
Greenview
Terrace (Block 1)
|
G/F
|
Table 3‑6 Noise
Monitoring Locations
Construction Groundborne Noise
3.2.8
Prediction of construction groundborne noise indicates
the criteria will be achieved at most NSRs except exceedances are predicted at
Hong Hoi Chee Hong Temple (NSR3) and Squatters (NSR6). It is recommended to restrict the TBM
operation in non-restricted period (i.e. 0700 - 1900) at these NSRs. In order to ensure proper control of
groundborne noise is executed by the contractor, a monitoring requirement is
recommended at the Hong Hoi Chee Hong Temple at Intake 2 and Squatters at
Intake 3 for compliance checking.
According to the monitoring schedule, TBM operation would be carried out
for about 3 months in the vicinity of Hong Hoi Chee Hong Temple at Intake 2 and
Squatters at Intake 3. If
groundborne noise criterion is exceeded, the monitoring shall continue daily
until acceptance has been restored against the criterion. Otherwise the monitoring can be
discontinued.
3.2.9
The criterion include TM for the Assessment of Noise
from Places other than Domestic Premises, Public Places or Construction Sites
(TM-Places) under the NCO stipulates that noise transmitted primarily through
the structural elements of building, or buildings, shall be 10 dB(A) less than
the relevant ANLs. Daytime
groundborne construction noise criterion of 60 dB(A) therefore applies with reference
to TM-EIAO 70 dB(A) criterion for schools and taking account of the minus 10
dB(A) requirement under the NCO TM-Places. Following the same principle for groundborne noise criteria,
groundborne construction noise levels inside domestic premises relying on open
window for ventilation will be limited to 65 dB(A), with reference to the
daytime airborne noise criterion of 75 dB(A) in accordance with TM-EIAO.
Action and Limit Levels
3.2.10
The Action and Limit levels for construction noise are
defined in Table 3‑7. If
non-compliance of the criteria occurs, actions in accordance with the Action
Plan in Table 3‑8 would be carried out.
|
Time Period
|
Action
|
Limit
|
|
0700
– 1900 hrs on normal weekdays
|
When one documented complaint is
received
|
75
dB(A)*
|
|
0700
– 2300 hrs on holidays; and
1900
– 2300 hrs on all other days
|
70
dB(A)
|
|
2300
– 0700 hrs of next day
|
55
dB(A)
|
* For
educational establishments the limit level shall be 70dB(A) and reduced to
65dB(A) during examination periods between 0700-1900 hrs on normal weekdays.
Table 3‑7 Action
& Limit Levels for Noise
|
Event
|
Action
|
|
ET
Leader
|
IEC
|
SOR
|
Contractor
|
|
Action
Level
|
1.
Notify IEC and the Contractor.
2.
Carry out investigation.
3.
Report the results of investigation to IEC and
the Contractor.
4.
Discuss with the Contractor and formulate
remedial measures.
5.
Increase monitoring frequency to check mitigation
measures.
|
1.
Review with analysed results submitted by ET.
2.
Review the proposed remedial measures by the
Contractor and advise SOR accordingly.
3.
Supervise the implement of remedial measures.
|
1.
Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance in
writing.
2.
Notify the Contractor.
3.
Require the Contractor to propose remedial
measures for the analysed noise problem.
4.
Ensure remedial measures are properly
implemented.
|
1.
Submit noise mitigation proposals to IEC.
2.
Implement noise mitigation proposals.
|
|
Limit
Level
|
1.
Identify the source.
2.
Notify IEC, SOR, EPD and the Contractor.
3.
Repeat measurement to confirm findings.
4.
Increase monitoring frequency.
5.
Carry out analysis of Contractor’s working procedures
to determine possible mitigation to be implemented.
6.
Inform IEC, SOR, and EPD the causes & actions
taken for the exceedances.
7.
Assess effectiveness of the Contractor’s remedial
actions and keep IEC, EPD and SOR informed of the results.
8.
If exceedance stops, cease additional monitoring.
|
1.
Discuss amongst SOR, ET Leader and the Contractor
on the potential remedial actions.
2.
Review the Contractor’s remedial actions whenever
necessary to assure their effectiveness and advise SOR accordingly.
3.
Supervise the implementation of remedial
measures.
|
1.
Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance in
writing.
2.
Notify the Contractor.
3.
Require the Contractor to propose remedial
measures for the analysed noise problem.
4.
Ensure remedial measures are properly
implemented.
5.
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.
|
1.
Take immediate action to avoid further
exceedance.
2.
Submit proposals for remedial actions to IEC
within 3 working days of notification.
3.
Implement the agreed proposals.
4.
Resubmit proposals if problem still not under
control.
5.
Stop the relevant activity of works as determined
by the SOR until the exceedance is abated.
|
Table 3‑8 Event/Action
Plan for Noise
3.3
Water Quality
3.3.1
As there is no dredging or reclamation
required for the project, the water quality impact would be insignificant with
the protection measures recommended in Section 5.6 of the EIA report. However in view of the sensitive nature
of the rivers/streams and bathing beaches in the Study Area, it is suggested that a programme of monitoring
should be established to confirm the mitigation measures are protecting these
water bodies.
Water Quality Parameters
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.
Monitoring
Methodology
3.3.4
In
accordance with the EM&A Manual, the water
quality monitoring for all specified parameters shall be measured at all
designated monitoring locations including control points at an interval of 3
days per week. DO, temperature, turbidity, pH and SS shall be undertaken at
designated monitoring locations.
3.3.5
It should be noted that water samples for all monitoring parameters
should be collected, stored, preserved and analysis according to Standard
Methods, APHA 17 ed. and/or methods agreed by the Director of Environmental
Protection.
3.3.6
Each sample shall be analysed in
accordance with the APHA Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater, 18th edition, or an equivalent method approved by the EPD. If an in-house or non-standard method
is proposed, details of the method verification may require to be submitted to
the EPD. In any circumstance, the
sample testing should comply with a comprehensive quality assurance and quality
control programme. The laboratory
should be prepared to demonstrate the quality programmes to the EPD when
requested.
Monitoring Equipment and Calibration
3.3.7
All the water samples collected should
be transferred to clearly labelled and pre-cleaned sample containers with
necessary preservatives immediately after collection. The sample containers should be provided by HOKLAS
accredited laboratory. Sufficient
quantity of samples should be collected for all laboratory analyses. Following sampling, samples should be
stored in a cool box at temperature of between 0 and 4oC, and
transported to the laboratory within the sample retention time as advised by
the laboratory under proper chain-of-custody system. The water quality monitoring equipment used during the
reporting month is shown in Table 3‑9 below.
|
Equipment Type
|
Manufacturer
|
Model
|
Quantity
|
|
PH / DO / Temperature Meter
|
WTW
|
PH/Oxi 340i
|
1
|
|
Tuibidimeter
|
EUTECH
|
TN-100
|
1
|
Table 3‑9 Water
Quality Monitoring Equipment
3.3.8
All pH meters, DO meters and
turbidimeters shall be checked and calibrated prior to use. DO meters and turbidimeters shall be calibrated
by a laboratory accredited under HOKLAS or any other international
accreditation scheme, and subsequently re-calibrated at 3 monthly intervals
throughout all stages of the water quality monitoring. Responses of sensors and electrodes
shall be checked with certified standard solutions before each use. Wet bulb calibrations for all DO meters
shall be carried out before measurement at each monitoring location. For the on site calibration of field
equipment, BS 127:1993, "Guide to field and on-site test methods for the
analysis of waters" should be observed. The calibration certificates are included in
Appendix F.
Monitoring Location
3.3.9
Four
designated monitoring locations were identified in the contract specific EM&A Manual for water quality monitoring. While the
construction of the outfall does not require dredging or reclamation,
monitoring of water quality is only required during which the rip rap is
placed. These four monitoring stations are listed
in Table 3‑10 below and shown in Appendix G.
|
Monitoring
Station ID
|
Name of
Premises
|
|
I-1
|
Intake I-1
|
|
I-1-C
|
Control of
Intake I-1
|
|
I-2
|
Intake I-2
|
|
I-2-C
|
Control of
Intake I-2
|
|
I-3
|
Intake I-3
|
|
I-3-C
|
Control of
Intake I-3
|
|
O-1 (FT)
|
Outfall
1During Flood Tide
|
|
O-1 (ET)
|
Outfall
1During Ebb Tide
|
|
O-1-C (FT)
|
Control of
Outfall O-1 During Flood Tide
|
|
O-1-C (ET)
|
Control of
Outfall O-1 During Ebb Tide
|
Table 3‑10 Water
Quality Monitoring Locations
3.3.10
Note
that there are two control stations for Outfall O-1, one for sampling during
flood tide and one for sampling during ebb tide. Only one of those control stations for Outfall O-1 shall be sampled during each sampling. Control station to be sampled will be
determined base on the tidal information provided by the Hong Kong
Observatory.
Action and
Limit Levels
3.3.11
The Action and Limit levels for water quality monitoring
parameters are defined in Table 3‑11. In case of any exceedance, appropriate action will be undertaken in
accordance with the Event and Action Plan as described in Table 3‑12.
|
Parameters
|
Action
|
Limit
|
|
DO in mg/l
(Surface, Middle &
Bottom)
|
Surface & Middle
5%-ile of baseline data for surface and middle layer.
Bottom
5%-ile of baseline data for bottom layer.
|
Surface & Middle
4mg/l except 5mg/l for FCZ or
1%-ile of baseline data for surface and middle layer
Bottom
2mg/l or 1%-ile of baseline data for bottom layer
|
|
SS in mg/l
(depth-averaged)
|
95%-ile of baseline data
or 120% of upstream control station’s SS at the same tide of the same day
|
99%-ile of baseline or
130% of upstream control station’s SS at the same tide of the same day and
specific sensitive receiver water quality requirements (e.g. required
suspended solids levels for concerned sea water intakes)
|
|
Turbidity (Tby) in NTU
(depth-averaged)
|
95%-ile of baseline
data or 120% of upstream control station’s Tby at the same tide of the same
day
|
99%-ile of baseline or
130% of upstream control station’s Tby at the same tide of the same day
|
Notes:
·
For DO, non-compliance of the water quality limits occurs when
monitoring result is lower than the limits.
·
For SS and Tby, non-compliance of the water quality limits occurs
when monitoring result is higher than the limits.
·
All the figures given in the table are used for reference only
and the EPD may amend the figures whenever it is considered as necessary.
Table 3‑11 Action/Limit
Levels for Water Quality
|
Event
|
ET Leader
|
IEC
|
SOR
|
Contractor
|
|
Action Level being exceeded by one sampling day
|
1. Repeat in-situ
measurement to confirm finding;
2. Identify
source(s) of impact;
3. Inform IEC and
Contractor;
4. Check monitoring
data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods;
5. Discuss
mitigation measures with IEC and Contractor; and
6. Repeat
measurement on next day of exceedance.
|
1. Discuss with ET and
Contractor on the mitigation measures;
2. Review proposals
on mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise the SOR
accordingly; and
3. Assess the
effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures.
|
1. Discuss with IEC
on the proposed mitigation measures; and
2. Make agreement on
the mitigation measures to be implemented.
|
1. Inform the SOR
and confirm notification of the non-compliance in writing;
2. Rectify
unacceptable practice;
3. Check all plant
and equipment;
4. Consider changes
of working methods;
5. Discuss with ET
and IEC and propose mitigation measures to IEC and SOR; and
6. Implement the
agreed mitigation measures.
|
|
Action Level being exceeded by more than one
consecutive sampling day
|
1. Repeat in-situ measurement
to confirm finding;
2. Identify
source(s) of impact;
3. Inform IEC and
Contractor;
4. Check monitoring
data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods;
5. Discuss
mitigation measures with IEC and Contractor;
6. Ensure mitigation
measures are implemented;
7. Prepare to
increase the monitoring frequency to daily; and
8. Repeat
measurement on next day of exceedance.
|
1. Discuss with ET
and Contractor on the mitigation measures;
2. Review proposals
on mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise the SOR
accordingly; and
3. Assess the
effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures.
|
1. Discuss with IEC
on the proposed mitigation measures;
2. Make agreement on
the mitigation measures to be implemented; and
3. Assess the effectiveness
of the implemented mitigation measures.
|
1. Inform the
Engineer and confirm notification of the non-compliance in writing;
2. Rectify
unacceptable practice;
3. Check all plant
and equipment;
4. Consider changes
of working methods;
5. Discuss with ET
and IEC and propose mitigation measures to IEC and SOR within 3 working days;
and
6. Implement the
agreed mitigation measures.
|
|
Limit Level being exceeded by one sampling day
|
1. Repeat in-situ
measurement to confirm finding;
2. Identify source(s)
of impact;
3. Inform IEC,
Contractor and EPD;
4. Check monitoring
data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods;
5. Discuss
mitigation measures with IEC, SOR and Contractor;
6. Ensure mitigation
measures are implemented; and
7. Increase the
monitoring frequency to daily until no exceedance of Limit level.
|
1. Discuss with ET
and Contractor on the mitigation measures;
2. Review proposals
on mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise the SOR
accordingly; and
3. Assess the
effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures.
|
1. Discuss with IEC,
ET and Contractor on the proposed mitigation measures; and
2. Request
Contractor to critically review the working methods;
3. Make agreement on
the mitigation measures to be implemented; and
4. Assess the
effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures.
|
1. Inform the
Engineer and confirm notification of the non-compliance in writing;
2. Rectify
unacceptable practice;
3. Check all plant
and equipment;
4. Consider changes
of working methods;
5. Discuss with ET
and IEC and SOR and propose mitigation measures to IEC and SOR within 3
working days; and
6. Implement the
agreed mitigation measures.
|
|
Limit Level being exceeded by more than one consecutive sampling day
|
1. Repeat in-situ
measurement to confirm finding;
2. Identify
source(s) of impact;
3. Inform IEC,
Contractor and EPD;
4. Check monitoring
data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods;
5. Discuss
mitigation measures with IEC, SOR and Contractor;
6. Ensure mitigation
measures are implemented; and
7. Increase the
monitoring frequency to daily until no exceedance of Limit level for two
consecutive days.
|
1. Discuss with ET
and Contractor on the mitigation measures;
2. Review proposals
on mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise the SOR
accordingly; and
3. Assess the
effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures.
|
1. Discuss with IEC,
ET and Contractor on the proposed mitigation measures; and
2. Request
Contractor to critically review the working methods;
3. Make agreement on
the mitigation measures to be implemented;
4. Assess the
effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures; and
5. 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.
|
1. Inform the SOR
and confirm notification of the non-compliance in writing;
2. Rectify
unacceptable practice;
3. Check all plant
and equipment;
4. Consider changes
of working methods;
5. Discuss with ET
and IEC and SOR and propose mitigation measures to IEC and SOR within 3
working days;
6. Implement the
agreed mitigation measures; and
7. As directed by
the Engineer, to slow down or to stop all or part of the marine work or
construction activities.
|
Table
3‑12 Event/Action
Plan for Water Quality
4.1
Air Quality
4.1.1
The air quality monitoring schedule of
the reporting period is given in Appendix H.
1-hr TSP
Monitoring
4.1.2
Results of 1-hours TSP level are shown in Table 4‑1. All
measurements are recorded to the nearest 0.1mg/m3 and presented in round numbers 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
|
04-Aug-08
|
130
|
307/500
|
|
238
|
|
146
|
|
09-Aug-08
|
25
|
|
37
|
|
62
|
|
15-Aug-08
|
70
|
|
97
|
|
84
|
|
21-Aug-08
|
135
|
|
174
|
|
85
|
|
27-Aug-08
|
165
|
|
107
|
|
61
|
|
ASR 3
|
04-Aug-08
|
34
|
327/500
|
|
42
|
|
56
|
|
09-Aug-08 (1)
|
8
|
|
61
|
|
20
|
|
15-Aug-08
|
64
|
|
63
|
|
78
|
|
21-Aug-08
|
110
|
|
78
|
|
83
|
|
27-Aug-08
|
57
|
|
64
|
|
76
|
|
ASR 8
|
04-Aug-08
|
87
|
337/500
|
|
104
|
|
119
|
|
09-Aug-08
|
79
|
|
22
|
|
37
|
|
15-Aug-08
|
89
|
|
91
|
|
50
|
|
21-Aug-08
|
106
|
|
101
|
|
83
|
|
27-Aug-08
|
42
|
|
57
|
|
42
|
|
ASR 9
|
04-Aug-08 (1)
|
21
|
329/500
|
|
127
|
|
98
|
|
09-Aug-08
|
52
|
|
44
|
|
30
|
|
15-Aug-08
|
59
|
|
56
|
|
62
|
|
21-Aug-08 (1)
|
46
|
|
110
|
|
106
|
|
27-Aug-08
|
68
|
|
70
|
|
38
|
Note: Italic and shaded values indicate exceedance of
Action level
(1) Based on the site
observations, there were no special construction activities undertaken during
monitoring that contributed to the large difference between consecutive sets of
results.
Table 4‑1 Air
Quality Monitoring Results
4.1.3
No exceedances of Action / Limit Level were recorded
during the reporting month.
4.2
Noise
4.2.1
The noise monitoring schedule of the
reporting period is given in Appendix H.
Results of measured
noise level, in terms of Leq(30min), during the construction are
shown in Table 4‑2. All
measurements including L10 and L90 are recorded to the
nearest 0.1 dB(A) and presented in round numbers in this
report. 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-Aug-08
|
63
|
70
|
|
15-Aug-08
|
66
|
|
21-Aug-08
|
65
|
|
27-Aug-08
|
64
|
|
NSR
3
|
04-Aug-08
|
64
|
75
|
|
15-Aug-08
|
62
|
|
21-Aug-08
|
62
|
|
27-Aug-08
|
64
|
|
NSR
6
|
04-Aug-08
|
63
|
|
15-Aug-08
|
62
|
|
21-Aug-08
|
64
|
|
27-Aug-08
|
61
|
|
NSR
8
|
04-Aug-08
|
64
|
|
15-Aug-08
|
64
|
|
21-Aug-08
|
65
|
|
27-Aug-08
|
64
|
|
NSR
9
|
04-Aug-08
|
62
|
|
15-Aug-08
|
63
|
|
21-Aug-08
|
61
|
|
27-Aug-08
|
65
|
Table 4‑2 Noise
Monitoring Results
4.2.2
No exceedances of Action / Limit Level were recorded
during the reporting month.
4.3
Water Quality Monitoring
4.3.1
The water quality monitoring schedule of the reporting
period is given in Appendix H. In
accordance with the monitoring results, a number of exceedances were
identified. Summaries of exceedances for water quality monitoring are provided
in Tables 4-3 to 4-5.
|
Parameter
|
Action
Level Exceedance
|
Limit Level
Exceedance
|
|
DO
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
|
Turbidity
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
|
SS
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
|
Total
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
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 11
August 2008
|
One record on 13
August 2008
|
|
Total
|
One
|
One
|
Table 4‑4 Summary
of exceedances for I-2
|
Parameter
|
Action
Level Exceedance
|
Limit Level
Exceedance
|
|
DO
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
|
Turbidity
|
Nil
|
Nil
|
|
SS
|
Nil
|
One
record on 13 August 2008
|
|
Total
|
Nil
|
One
|
Table 4‑5 Summary
of exceedances for I-3
4.3.2
Results of measured water quality parameters during the
reporting month are shown in Table 4‑6 and detailed results including weather conditions and
graphical presentations are enclosed in Appendix I.
4.3.3
The monitoring results of SS at I-2 and I-3 on 11 and 13
August were well below Action / Limit Levels of baseline measurement levels. As
advised by the Contractor and verified by ET’s monitoring record, levelling of
piling platform and site tidying & cleaning and removal of dead trees were
observed undertaken at I-2 and I-3 on 11 and 13 August 2008 respectively. No
direct disturbance was observed contributed by the above mentioned construction
activities and those exceedances were considered to be non-project related.
4.3.4
Details of the above mentioned investigations can be
referred to the notifications of exceedances as enclosed in Appendix J which
have been provided to the IEC for review.
|
Station
|
Date
|
Temperature
|
DO (mg/L)
|
Action/Limit Level for DO (mg/L)
|
pH
|
Turbidity (NTU)
|
Action/Limit Level for Turbidity (NTU)
|
SS (mg/L)
|
Action/Limit Level for SS (mg/L)
|
|
I-1
|
01-Aug-08
|
26.35
|
5.63
|
3.42 / 3.34
|
7.81
|
2.85
|
9.75 / 12.47
|
1.0
|
8.85 / 10.17
|
|
|
04-Aug-08
|
27.80
|
5.23
|
|
7.68
|
3.17
|
|
3.3
|
|
|
|
07-Aug-08
|
25.90
|
5.29
|
|
7.59
|
4.66
|
|
2.3
|
|
|
|
09-Aug-08
|
25.40
|
5.61
|
|
7.81
|
4.06
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
11-Aug-08
|
25.40
|
5.59
|
|
7.79
|
3.09
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
13-Aug-08
|
26.50
|
5.31
|
|
7.51
|
3.33
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
15-Aug-08
|
27.75
|
5.16
|
|
7.74
|
3.54
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
18-Aug-08
|
26.50
|
5.53
|
|
7.54
|
3.64
|
|
4.3
|
|
|
|
20-Aug-08
|
26.50
|
5.41
|
|
7.75
|
3.61
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
25-Aug-08
|
26.50
|
5.11
|
|
7.59
|
5.54
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
27-Aug-08
|
27.20
|
5.21
|
|
7.80
|
3.90
|
|
2.3
|
|
|
|
29-Aug-08
|
26.10
|
5.22
|
|
7.72
|
4.08
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
I-1-C
|
01-Aug-08
|
26.50
|
5.75
|
- / -
|
7.85
|
3.77
|
- / -
|
2.0
|
- / -
|
|
|
04-Aug-08
|
28.10
|
5.73
|
|
7.75
|
3.88
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
07-Aug-08
|
25.80
|
5.84
|
|
7.83
|
5.53
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
09-Aug-08
|
25.60
|
5.86
|
|
7.84
|
4.28
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
11-Aug-08
|
25.45
|
5.77
|
|
7.76
|
3.19
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
13-Aug-08
|
26.50
|
5.40
|
|
7.54
|
3.33
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
15-Aug-08
|
27.60
|
5.41
|
|
7.73
|
3.59
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
|
18-Aug-08
|
27.00
|
5.37
|
|
7.91
|
3.90
|
|
4.0
|
|
|
|
20-Aug-08
|
26.65
|
5.53
|
|
7.72
|
3.63
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
25-Aug-08
|
26.40
|
5.38
|
|
7.59
|
5.70
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
27-Aug-08
|
27.30
|
5.14
|
|
7.77
|
3.83
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
29-Aug-08
|
26.30
|
5.44
|
|
7.85
|
3.94
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
I-2
|
01-Aug-08
|
26.80
|
5.22
|
3.66 / 3.63
|
7.90
|
4.80
|
6.63 / 6.99
|
1.0
|
7.68 / 8.34
|
|
|
04-Aug-08
|
28.05
|
5.65
|
|
7.87
|
2.64
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
07-Aug-08
|
24.80
|
5.49
|
|
7.50
|
5.49
|
|
3.7
|
|
|
|
09-Aug-08
|
24.70
|
5.28
|
|
7.37
|
2.13
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
11-Aug-08
|
25.00
|
5.43
|
|
7.64
|
2.10
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
13-Aug-08
|
26.50
|
5.48
|
|
7.74
|
2.46
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
15-Aug-08
|
27.00
|
5.06
|
|
7.59
|
3.34
|
|
2.6
|
|
|
|
18-Aug-08
|
27.00
|
5.55
|
|
7.49
|
2.17
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
20-Aug-08
|
27.00
|
5.72
|
|
7.71
|
2.43
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
25-Aug-08
|
26.10
|
5.35
|
|
7.34
|
2.10
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
27-Aug-08
|
26.65
|
5.38
|
|
7.52
|
3.38
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
|
29-Aug-08
|
26.40
|
5.04
|
|
7.44
|
2.10
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
I-2-C
|
01-Aug-08
|
26.80
|
5.12
|
- / -
|
7.73
|
5.38
|
- / -
|
2.5
|
- / -
|
|
|
04-Aug-08
|
28.00
|
5.42
|
|
7.92
|
2.42
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
07-Aug-08
|
24.70
|
5.61
|
|
7.60
|
5.60
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
|
09-Aug-08
|
24.80
|
5.77
|
|
7.62
|
2.19
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
11-Aug-08
|
25.15
|
5.87
|
|
7.64
|
2.22
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
13-Aug-08
|
26.40
|
5.67
|
|
7.75
|
2.60
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
15-Aug-08
|
27.35
|
5.58
|
|
7.61
|
3.46
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
18-Aug-08
|
26.75
|
5.33
|
|
7.51
|
2.14
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
20-Aug-08
|
26.55
|
5.36
|
|
7.57
|
2.29
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
25-Aug-08
|
26.30
|
5.20
|
|
7.44
|
2.11
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
27-Aug-08
|
26.70
|
5.03
|
|
7.46
|
3.74
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
|
29-Aug-08
|
26.80
|
5.33
|
|
7.74
|
2.24
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
I-3
|
01-Aug-08
|
27.75
|
5.44
|
3.65 / 3.51
|
7.68
|
2.92
|
3.99 / 4.18
|
1.5
|
6.13 / 7.23
|
|
|
04-Aug-08
|
28.70
|
5.45
|
|
7.93
|
2.35
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
07-Aug-08
|
25.35
|
5.79
|
|
7.37
|
3.71
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
09-Aug-08
|
26.10
|
5.74
|
|
7.31
|
2.91
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
11-Aug-08
|
25.30
|
5.73
|
|
7.46
|
2.16
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
13-Aug-08
|
26.90
|
5.24
|
|
7.80
|
3.00
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
15-Aug-08
|
28.50
|
5.45
|
|
7.78
|
2.29
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
18-Aug-08
|
27.50
|
5.56
|
|
7.64
|
2.38
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
20-Aug-08
|
28.85
|
5.50
|
|
7.84
|
2.47
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
25-Aug-08
|
27.30
|
5.47
|
|
7.50
|
2.18
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
27-Aug-08
|
26.90
|
5.30
|
|
7.50
|
2.61
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
29-Aug-08
|
27.70
|
5.09
|
|
7.71
|
2.65
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
I-3-C
|
01-Aug-08
|
27.75
|
5.27
|
- / -
|
7.69
|
3.27
|
- / -
|
2.5
|
- / -
|
|
|
04-Aug-08
|
28.40
|
5.42
|
|
7.91
|
2.83
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
07-Aug-08
|
25.30
|
5.53
|
|
7.43
|
3.83
|
|
3.0
|
|
|
|
09-Aug-08
|
26.10
|
5.53
|
|
7.46
|
3.34
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
11-Aug-08
|
25.30
|
5.82
|
|
7.35
|
2.21
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
13-Aug-08
|
26.90
|
5.24
|
|
7.80
|
3.00
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
15-Aug-08
|
28.15
|
5.24
|
|
7.70
|
3.31
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
18-Aug-08
|
27.30
|
5.84
|
|
7.78
|
2.61
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
20-Aug-08
|
28.70
|
5.59
|
|
7.35
|
2.56
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
25-Aug-08
|
27.50
|
5.55
|
|
7.44
|
2.27
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
27-Aug-08
|
27.10
|
5.03
|
|
7.44
|
2.77
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
29-Aug-08
|
28.15
|
5.84
|
|
7.51
|
2.54
|
|
2.0
|
|
Note:
1.
Italic
indicates the occurrence of exceedance of action level.
2.
Bold
indicates the occurrence of exceedance of limit level.
3.
Only two
water monitoring were carried out on the fourth week of August, due to the
cancellation of the scheduled monitoring on 22 and 23 August because of Typhoon
Warnings Signal Number 9 and 3.
Table 4‑6 Water
Quality Monitoring Results
4.4
Summary of Project-Related Exceedances
4.4.1
Table 4‑7 summarises the project-related exceedance results
recorded in August 2008. 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
|
40
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Water
|
72
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Note: Exceedances that are considered not related to the construction
activities are not included in this table.
Table
4‑7 Summary
of Project-Related Exceedances
5.1.1
The status of waste management is summarized in Table 5‑1 below.
|
Status of
waste management
|
Quantity
|
|
Inert C&D
Material Disposed of to Public Fill at Tuen Mun (m3)
|
Nil
|
|
Inert C&D
Material Reused in other Contract (m3)
|
445
|
|
Metals
Generated (kg)
|
Nil
|
|
Paper /
Cardboard Packaging (kg)
|
180
|
|
Plastics (kg)
|
Nil
|
|
Chemical Waste (kg)
|
Nil
|
|
General Waste Disposed of to NENT Landfill (m3)
|
95.8
|
Table 5‑1 Waste
Generated in August 2008
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
|
|
1
August 2008
|
1.
Variation
Environmental Permit was not displayed on site.
2.
Noise emission
label was not displayed on the air compressor at Intake 1.
|
1. The Contractor was requested to display variation
environmental permit on site for inspection.
2. The Contractor was reminded to display noise
emission label on the air compressor for inspection.
|
As advised by the Contractor, all follow-up actions had been completed
on 8 August 2008. The condition had been verified in next site inspection on
29 August 2008 (Closed).
|
|
29
August 2008
|
1.
Accumulation of
debris was found at Intake 3.
2.
Constructional
activities were carried out near protected trees at Intake 2 and Intake 3.
|
1. The
Contractor was reminded that the debris should be disposed off regularly to
prevent accumulation.
2.
The Contractor
was reminded that tree protection measures should be implemented or constructional
activity should be avoided conducting nearby the protected tree.
|
1. No debris was
accumulated at Intake 3 during site inspection on 5 September 2008. (Closed)
2.
Provision of tree protection measures was observed during site
inspection on 5 September 2008 (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
No complaints were received during the reporting
month. Cumulative statistics of
environmental complaints are shown in Table 7‑1.
|
Complaints
Received in the Reporting Month
|
Cumulative
Number of Complaints
|
|
0
|
0
|
Table 7‑1 Cumulative Statistic of Environmental Complaint
8
SUMMARY OF NOTIFICATION OF SUMMONS,
SUCCESSFUL PROSECUTIONS AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
8.1.1
No summons and successful
prosecutions were received during the reporting month.
8.1.2
Cumulative statistics of Notification
of Summon, Successful Prosecutions and Convictions are shown in Table 8‑1.
|
Notification
of Summons
|
Successful Prosecution
|
|
August 08
|
Cumulative
|
August 08
|
Cumulative
|
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
Table 8‑1 Cumulative Statistics of notification of summons and successful
prosecutions
9.1.1
The forecast of construction works for the upcoming
three months are:
·
Site
clearance;
·
Hoarding
& fencing erection;
·
Trees
survey & transplanting;
·
Slope
stabilization;
·
Site
office formation;
·
Pre-construction
survey;
·
Soil
nailing;
·
Relocation
of verified boulder;
·
Formation
of access road at the outfall; and
·
Pre-bore H-piling at I-2 and I-3.
|
Appendix D
|
|
Implementation Status of
Environmental Mitigation Measures
|
|
Appendix J
|
|
Interim Notifications of Environmental
Quality Limits Exceedances
|
