|
APPENDICES |
|
|
Appendix A Site
Map and Works Area
Appendix D Implementation
Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures
Appendix E Monitoring
Locations
Appendix G Interim
Notifications of Environmental Quality Limits Exceedances
|
TABLES |
|
|
Table 3-1 Frequency of Air Quality, Noise and Water Quality
Monitoring
Table 3-2 Air Quality Monitoring Locations
Table 3-3 Noise Monitoring Locations
Table 3-4 Water Quality Monitoring Locations
Table 3-5 Action & Limit Levels for Air
Quality
Table 3-6 Action & Limit Levels for Air
Borne Noise
Table 3-7 Action & Limit Levels for Water
Quality
Table 3-8 Summary of Air Quality Monitoring
Results
Table 3-9 Summary of Impact Air Borne Noise
Monitoring Results
Table 3-10 Summary of Impact Water Quality
Monitoring Results
Table 3-11 Summary of Impact Marine Water Quality Monitoring Results
Table 4-1 Waste
Generated from January to March 2012
Table 4-2 Summary
of Project- related Exceedances
Table 5-1 Cumulative Statistics of Environmental Complaints
Table 6-1 Cumulative Statistics of
Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecutions
Table 7-1 Total Wastes Generated from January to March 2012
1
This
quarterly EM&A summary report under the Main Contract for the Design and
Construction of Tsuen Wan Drainage Tunnel (hereafter referred to as the
“Project”) to Maeda-CREC-SELI Joint Venture (MCSJV), which summarises the
findings of environmental impact monitoring works during the period from
January to March 2012.
2
Air borne
noise monitoring was performed at five monitoring stations (NSR1, NSR3, NSR6,
NSR8 and NSR9). Air quality monitoring
was carried out at four monitoring stations (ASR1, ASR3, ASR8 and ASR9). Water quality monitoring was carried out at
four monitoring stations (Intake I-1, Intake I-2, Intake I-3 and Outfall O-1).
Noise level was measured in terms of Leq, L10 and L90
(30min). Air quality was measured
in terms of 1-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP). Water quality was
measured in terms of Temperature, pH, Dissolved Oxygen (DO), Turbidity (Tby)
and Suspended Solids (SS).
3
Details of
all monitoring stations are summarized in the table below.
|
Type of
Monitoring |
Monitoring
Station ID |
Name of Premises |
Status of
Monitoring Works during the Reporting Period |
|
Air
Quality Monitoring |
ASR1 |
Sik Sik Yuen Ho Fung
College |
Ongoing |
|
ASR3 |
Hong
Hoi Chee Hong Temple |
Ongoing |
|
|
ASR8 |
Beach
Tower (Long Beach Gardens) |
Ongoing |
|
|
ASR9 |
Greenview
Terrace (Block 1) |
Ongoing |
|
|
Air
Borne Noise Monitoring |
NSR1 |
Sik
Sik Yuen Ho Fung College |
Ongoing |
|
NSR3 |
Hong
Hoi Chee Hong Temple |
Ongoing |
|
|
NSR6 |
Squatters |
Ongoing |
|
|
NSR8 |
Beach
Tower (Long Beach Gardens) |
Ongoing |
|
|
NSR9 |
Greenview
Terrace (Block 1) |
Ongoing |
|
|
Water
Quality Monitoring |
I-1 |
Intake
I-1 |
Ongoing |
|
I-2 |
Intake I-2 |
Ongoing |
|
|
I-3 |
Intake I-3 |
Ongoing |
|
|
O-1 |
Outfall O-1 |
Ongoing |
4
The major
construction activities undertaken by the Contractor during the period from
January to March 2012 include site cleaning and tidying at Outfall, I-1, I-2 and
I-3; tunnel boring machine (TBM) drilling of the tunnel and mucking out of
tunnel spoil at Outfall; dismantling and removal of TBM services at Outfall and
I-1; asphalt paving for the Castle Peak Road fast lane at Outfall; construction
of box culvert and L-shaped retaining wall at Outfall; construction of
spiral ramp structure at Outfall; removal of muck hopper at Outfall;
construction of the open channel, seawall copping and baffle wall at Portion E;
installation of precast sea wall blocks and panels at Portion E; placing
leveling stone and trimming formation for precast slab at Portion E;
reinstatement of rock armour including placing of rock armour on step blocks at
Portion E; trimming formation for precast slab at Portion E; blasting and
excavation at man access shaft, deaeration chamber and main adit tunnel at I-2;
construction for reinforced cement concrete (RCC) frame for stop log and
columns for trash grill at I-1; construction of L-shaped retaining wall at I-2;
construction of bund wall at I-2; construction of 300 U-channel and catchpit at
Portion G at I-2; construction of skin wall at Portion G at I-2; construction
of boulder traps at I-2; drainage works (1500 mm diameter pipe and associated
works) at Portion G at I-2; excavation for construction of L-shaped wall at
I-2; grouting dowel bars and shotcreting at upper man access adit at I-2;
construction of man access adit at I-3; construction of man access shaft at
I-3; construction of approach channel at I-3; construction of deaeration
chamber at I-3; construction of preventive measure for temporary drainage
management plan (TDMP) at I-3; construction of road drainage (U-channel and 900
mm diameter pipe) at proposed access road at I-3; drilling hole and excavation
for main adit tunnel at I-3; and lowering down the permanent access road at PB
wall at I-3.
5
Underground mining and probe drilling were
undertaken during the restricted hours in the reporting period.
6
As confirmed
by the Contractor, no marine mud dredging works for basin scheme at Portion E
was conducted in the reporting period.
7
No project
related exceedance of air quality and water quality monitoring was recorded. No air borne noise limit level
exceedance was recorded during the reporting period, but one construction noise complaint at I-3 was received on
8 February 2012 and regarded as one action level exceedance. The table below summarizes the exceedances of air
quality, noise and water quality in the reporting period.
|
Parameter |
Action
Level Exceedance |
Limit
Level Exceedance |
|
Air
|
Nil |
Nil |
|
Air
Borne Noise |
One recorded
on 8 Feb 2012 at I-3 |
Nil |
|
DO |
One record on 22 Feb
2012 at O-1(FT) Twelve records on 3 Jan,
5 Jan, 10 Feb, 15 Feb, 22 Feb, 24 Feb, 27 Feb, 2 Mar, 5 Mar, 7 Mar and 16 Mar
2012 at O-1(ET) |
Forty-nine records on 3
Jan , 5 Jan, 7 Jan , 18 Jan, 3 Feb, 6 Feb, 8 Feb, 13 Feb, 15 Feb, 17 Feb, 20
Feb, 22 Feb, 24 Feb, 27 Feb, 29 Feb, 2 Mar, 5 Mar, 9 Mar, 12 Mar, 14 Mar, 16
Mar, 23 Mar and 30 Mar 2012 at O-1(FT) Forty-one records on 3
Jan, 5 Jan, 7 Jan, 28 Jan, 8 Feb, 13 Feb, 15 Feb, 17 Feb, 20 Feb, 22 Feb, 24
Feb, 27 Feb, 29 Feb, 2 Mar, 5 Mar, 9 Mar, 12 Mar, 14 Mar, 16 Mar, 23 Mar, 26
Mar and 30 Mar 2012 at O-1(ET) |
|
Turbidity |
Nil |
Nil |
|
SS |
Two records on 7 Jan
and 9 Mar 2012 at I-1 One record on 12 Mar
2012 at I-2 Six records on 7 Jan,
11 Jan ,16 Jan, 24 Feb , 2 Mar and 5 Mar 2012 at O-1(FT) One record on 18 Jan
2012 at O-1(ET) |
Three recorded on 20
Feb, 22 Feb and 19 Mar 2012 at I-1 Two records on 29 Feb
and 5 Mar 2012 at I-2 One record on 6 Feb
2012 at I-3 Two records on 20 Jan
and 22 Feb 2012 at O-1(FT) Eight records on 11 Jan
, 16 Jan , 30 Jan , 1 Feb, 6 Feb, 15 Feb, 2 Mar and 14 Mar 2012 at O-1(ET) |
8
Waste
figures during the reporting period are summarized in the table below.
|
Status of Waste Management |
Quantity |
|
Inert C&D Material Disposed of to
Public Fill at Tuen Mun (m3) |
3797.8 |
|
Inert C&D Material
Reused in this Contract (m3) |
532.5 |
|
Inert C&D Material Reused in
other Contract* (m3) |
6982.5 |
|
Metals Generated (kg) |
229052.0 |
|
Paper / Cardboard Packaging (kg) |
350.0 |
|
Plastics (kg) |
20.0 |
|
Chemical Waste (kg) |
411.0 |
|
General Waste Disposed of to NENT
Landfill (m3) |
196.5 |
* Other Contracts include CV/2009/14,
DC/2007/08, DC/2007/09, HY/2007/09, HY/2007/10, HY/2008/09, XRL823AB and Tailor
Recycle Aggregate
9
One
environmental complaint was received on 8 February 2012 by
SOR about daytime construction noise from the Intake I-3 construction site on 8
February 2012. The Contractor informed ET that one public complaint regarding
daytime construction noise from the Intake I-3 construction site was received
by SOR on 8 February. The ET conducted site inspections at Intake I-3
construction site on 9 and 23 February 2012 to review and audit the site
setting, mitigation measures implemented on-site and the environmental
performance of the Contractor. Noise monitoring at NSR 6 was increased to twice
per week from 10 February 2012 to 29 February 2012 according to the
Event/Action Plan and no exceedance of limit level was recorded. An
investigation report was prepared and submitted on 5 March 2012. Since no
further complaint was received, the complaint was considered closed.
10
No
Notification of Summons was received since the commencement of the Project.
1.1.1
The
Drainage Services Department (DSD) proposes to construct a tunnel of an
internal diameter of 6.5 m and length 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 was 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 commenced in January 2008. This is the sixteenth quarterly EM&A report summarising the impact monitoring results and audit findings of the EM&A program during the reporting period between January and March 2012.
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
It is
anticipated that 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 quarter are:
· Site cleaning and tidying at Outfall, I-1, I-2 and I-3;
· Tunnel boring machine (TBM) drilling of the tunnel and mucking out of tunnel spoil at Outfall;
· Dismantling and removal of TBM services at Outfall and I-1;
· Asphalt paving for the Castle Peak Road fast lane at Outfall;
· Construction of box culvert and L-shaped retaining wall at Outfall;
· Construction of spiral ramp structure at Outfall;
· Removal of muck hopper at Outfall;
· Construction of the open channel, seawall copping and baffle wall at Portion E;
· Installation of precast sea wall blocks and panels at Portion E;
· Placing leveling stone and trimming formation for precast slab at Portion E;
· Reinstatement of rock armour including placing of rock armour on step blocks at Portion E;
· Trimming formation for precast slab at Portion E;
· Blasting and excavation at man access shaft, deaeration chamber and main adit tunnel at I-2;
· Construction for reinforced cement concrete (RCC) frame for stop log and columns for trash grill at I-1;
· Construction of L-shaped retaining wall at I-2;
· Construction of bund wall at I-2;
· Construction of 300 U-channel and catchpit at Portion G at I-2;
· Construction of skin wall at Portion G at I-2;
· Construction of boulder traps at I-2;
· Drainage works (1500 mm diameter pipe and associated works) at Portion G at I-2;
· Excavation for construction of L-shaped wall at I-2;
· Grouting dowel bars and shotcreting at upper man access adit at I-2;
· Construction of man access adit at I-3;
· Construction of man access shaft at I-3;
· Construction of approach channel at I-3;
· Construction of deaeration chamber at I-3;
· Construction of preventive measure for temporary drainage management plan (TDMP) at I-3;
· Construction of road drainage (U-channel and 900 mm diameter pipe) at proposed access road at I-3;
· Drilling hole and excavation for main adit tunnel at I-3; and
·
Lowering down the permanent
access road at PB wall at I-3.
2.3.1 The environmental mitigation measures that were implemented and their statuses are given in Appendix D.
3.1.1 The EM&A requirements are stipulated in the EM&A Manual. The principal purposes of the EM&A program are to assess the compliance with applicable environmental legislation and associated regulations, to ensure the implementation of mitigation measures specified in the EM&A Manual, and to identify any remedial works necessary for redressing any unacceptable or unanticipated environmental impacts.
3.2 EM&A on Air Quality, Noise and Water Quality
3.2.1
The air
quality, noise and water quality monitoring frequencies and parameters are
shown in Table
3-1.
|
Type of Monitoring |
Monitoring Station ID |
Parameter |
Frequency |
|
Air Quality
Monitoring |
ASR1; ASR3;
ASR8 and ASR9 |
1-hour TSP (mg/m3) |
Once every 6 days |
|
Air Borne Noise
Monitoring |
NSR1; NSR3;
NSR6; NSR8 and NSR9 |
Leq (30
min.) (dB(A)) |
Once every week |
|
Water
Quality Monitoring |
I-1;
I-1-C; I-2; I-2-C; I-3; I-3-C, O-1(FT), O-1-C(FT), O-1(ET) and O-1-C(ET) |
DO
(mg/L) |
Three days per week |
|
SS
(mg/L) |
|||
|
Turbidity
(NTU) |
|||
|
pH |
|||
|
Temperature
(oC) |
Table 3-1 Frequency of Air Quality, Noise and Water Quality Monitoring
3.3.1 The monitoring locations for air quality, noise and water quality are shown in Tables 3-2, 3-3, 3-4 and Appendix E.
|
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
|
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* (from 16 July 2009) |
* The noise monitoring location of NSR9 had been relocated to the rooftop from 16 July 2009.
Table 3-3 Noise Monitoring Locations
|
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) & (ET) |
Outfall
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 |
Note: #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 was sampled during each sampling.
Control station to be sampled was determined according to the tidal
information provided by the Hong Kong Observatory.
^ The
upper stream location (I-3-C^) had been relocated from the end of February 2009
due to coarse stone blockage.
Table 3-4 Water Quality Monitoring Locations
3.4
Performance Limits (
3.4.1
In
accordance with the EM&A Manual, the appropriate Action and Limit Levels
for air quality, air borne noise and water quality were established. They are
presented in Table
3-5, Table 3-6 and
Table
3-7. Should non-compliance
of the air quality, noise and water quality criteria occur, actions in
accordance with the Event / Action Plan stipulated in contract specific
EM&A Manual should be carried out.
|
Station |
1-hr TSP Level in μg/m3 |
|
|
Action Level |
Limit Level |
|
|
ASR1 |
307 |
500 |
|
ASR3 |
327 |
500 |
|
ASR8 |
337 |
500 |
|
ASR9 |
329 |
500 |
Table 3-5 Action & Limit Levels for Air Quality
|
Time Period |
Action |
Limit |
|
0700 – 1900 hours on normal weekdays |
When one documented complaint is received |
75 dB(A)* |
* For
educational establishments the limit level shall be 70 dB(A) and reduced to 65
dB(A) during examination periods between 0700 and 1900 hours on normal
weekdays.
Table 3-6 Action & Limit Levels for Air Borne Noise
|
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 4 mg/L, except 5 mg/L for Fish Culture
Zone (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 level at the same tide of the same day |
99%-ile of baseline or 130% of upstream
control station’s SS level 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 necessary.
Table 3-7 Action & Limit Levels for Water Quality
|
1-hour TSP (mg/m3) |
Action Level |
Limit Level |
|||
|
Range |
(mg/m3) |
(mg/m3) |
|||
|
ASR1 |
18.4 |
- |
207.5 |
307 |
500 |
|
ASR3 |
26.1 |
- |
219.9 |
327 |
500 |
|
ASR8 |
20.1 |
- |
196.8 |
337 |
500 |
|
ASR9 |
26.9 |
- |
180.0 |
329 |
500 |
Italic indicates the exceedances of Action Levels
Bold indicates the exceedances of Limit Levels
Table 3-8 Summary of Air Quality Monitoring Results
3.5.2
All
measured air borne noise monitoring levels were complying with the Limit Levels
in the reporting period. However, one construction noise complaint at I-3 was received on
8 February 2012 and regarded as one action level exceedance. Details of the
complaint are included in Section 5.12 and Appendix H.
3.5.3 A summary of noise monitoring results is presented in Table 3-9 and Appendix F.
|
Leq
(30mins) dB(A) |
Limit
Level |
|||
|
Range |
dB(A) |
|||
|
NSR1 |
62 |
- |
64 |
65/70# |
|
NSR3 |
58 |
- |
64 |
75 |
|
NSR6 |
57 |
- |
69 |
75 |
|
NSR8 |
61 |
- |
71 |
75 |
|
NSR9 |
63 |
- |
70 |
75 |
Bold indicates
the exceedances of Limit Levels
# - Noise Limit Level was
reduced to 65 dB(A) from 70 dB(A) during school examination period.
Table 3-9 Summary of Impact Air Borne Noise Monitoring Results
3.5.4
A summary
of water quality monitoring results is presented in Table
3-10 and Appendix F.
3.5.5
None of
exceedance related to project construction activities was recorded during the
reporting quarter but a total of 129
non-project related exceedances were recorded.
River Water
Quality Monitoring
3.5.6
A total of 1 non-project related
exceedances were recorded in January 2012 including:
l One exceedance of SS
action level was recorded at I-1 on 7 January 2012. The measured SS level (5.40
mg/L) was well below the baseline action/limit level, but higher than 120% of the
SS level (4.25 mg/L) of the control station (I-1-C). Details of the
construction activities conducted on the monitoring day are given in Appendix
G. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedance was
considered to be contributed by natural variation and non-project related.
Therefore, no further action was required.
3.5.7
A total of 4 non-project related
exceedances were recorded in February 2012 including:
l Two exceedances of SS limit
levels were recorded at I-1 on 20 and 22 February 2012. For 20 February 2012,
the measured SS level (4.05 mg/L) was well below the baseline action/limit
level, but higher than 130% of the SS level (2.95 mg/L) of the control station.
Details of the construction activities conducted on the monitoring day are
given in Appendix G. There was no water discharge from the construction site on
the monitoring day. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The
exceedance on 20 February 2012 was considered to be contributed by natural
variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further action was required.
For 22 February 2012, the measured SS level (13.00 mg/L) was higher than the
baseline limit level, but lower than the SS level (14.35 mg/L) of the control
station. Details of the construction activities conducted on the monitoring day
are given in Appendix G. There was no water discharge from the construction
site on the monitoring day. No direct disturbance was observed from the site.
The exceedance on 22 February 2012 was considered to be contributed by high SS
level at the upstream location and non-project related. Therefore, no further
action was required.
l One exceedance of SS
limit level was recorded at I-2 on 29 February 2012. The measured SS level
(3.10 mg/L) was well below the baseline action/limit level, but higher than
130% of the SS level (<2.00 mg/L) of the control station (I-2-C). Details of
the construction activities conducted on the monitoring day are given in
Appendix G. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedance
was considered to be contributed by natural variation and non-project related.
Therefore, no further action was required.
l One exceedance of SS
limit level was recorded at I-3 on 6 February 2012. The measured SS level (2.65
mg/L) was well below the baseline action/limit level, but higher than 130% of
the SS level (<2.00 mg/L) of the control station (I-3-C). Details of the
construction activities conducted on the monitoring day are given in Appendix
G. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. Therefore, the exceedance
was considered to be contributed by natural variation. Since the exceedance was
non-project related, no further action was required.
3.5.8
A total of 4 non-project related
exceedances were recorded in March 2012 including:
l One exceedance of SS
action level was recorded at I-1 on 9 March 2012. The measured SS level (5.50
mg/L) was below the baseline action/limit level, but higher than 120% of the SS
level (4.40 mg/L) of the control station (I-1-C). Details of the construction
activities conducted on the monitoring day are given in Appendix G. No direct
disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedance was considered to be
contributed by natural variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further
action was required.
l One exceedance of SS
action level was recorded at I-2 on 12 March 2012. The measured SS level (2.50
mg/L) was well below the baseline action/limit level, but higher than 120% of
the SS level (<2.00 mg/L) of the control station (I-2-C). Details of the
construction activities conducted on the monitoring day are given in Appendix
G. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedance was
considered to be contributed by natural variation and non-project related. Therefore,
no further action was required.
l One exceedance of SS
limit level was recorded at I-1 on 19 March 2012. The measured SS level (3.45
mg/L) was well below the baseline action/limit level, but higher than 130% of
the SS level (2.25 mg/L) of the control station (I-1-C). Details of the
construction activities conducted on the monitoring day are given in Appendix
G. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. Therefore, the exceedance
was considered to be contributed by natural variation. Since the exceedance was
non-project related, no further action was required.
l One exceedance of SS
limit level was recorded at I-2 on 5 March 2012. The measured SS level (2.80
mg/L) was well below the baseline action/limit level, but higher than 130% of
the SS level (<2.00 mg/L) of the control station (I-2-C). Details of the
construction activities conducted on the monitoring day are given in Appendix
G. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. Therefore, the exceedance
was considered to be contributed by natural variation. Since the exceedance was
non-project related, no further action was required.
Marine Water
Quality Monitoring
3.5.10
A total of 27 non-project related
exceedances were recorded in January 2012 including:
l
Two exceedances of DO action levels were recorded at O-1(ET) (marine
bottom) on 3 and 5 January 2012. For 3 January 2012, the measured DO level
(6.57 mg/L) at the monitoring station was below the baseline action level, but
higher than the DO level (6.53 mg/L) of the corresponding control station. For
5 January 2012, the measured DO level (6.66 mg/L) at the monitoring station was
below the baseline action level and lower than the DO level (6.76 mg/L) of the
corresponding control station (about 1.5%). Details of the construction
activities conducted on the monitoring days are given in Appendix G. No direct
disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedances were considered to be
contributed by natural variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further
action was required.
l
Four exceedances of DO limit levels were recorded at O-1(FT) (marine
surface) on 3, 5, 7 and 18 January 2012. For 3, 7 and 18 January 2012, the
measured DO levels (6.70, 6.72 and 6.74 mg/L, respectively) were below the
baseline limit level and lower than the DO levels (6.72, 6.82 and 6.88 mg/L,
respectively) of the corresponding control station (about 0.3%, 1.5% and 2.0%,
respectively). For 5 January 2012, the measured DO level (6.65 mg/L) at the
monitoring station was below the baseline limit level, but higher than the DO
level (6.60mg/L) of the corresponding control station. Details of the
construction activities conducted on the monitoring days are given in Appendix
G. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedances were
considered to be contributed by natural variation and non-project related.
Therefore, no further action was required.
l
Three exceedances of DO limit levels were recorded at O-1(FT) (marine
mid-depth) on 3, 5 and 7 January 2012. For 3 and 5 January 2012, the measured
DO levels (6.64 and 6.66 mg/L, respectively) at the monitoring station were
below the baseline limit level, but higher than the DO levels (6.63 and 6.45
mg/L, respectively) of the corresponding control station. For 7 January 2012,
the measured DO level (6.70 mg/L) at the monitoring station was below the
baseline limit level and lower than the DO level (6.79 mg/L) of the
corresponding control station (about 1.3%). Details of the construction
activities conducted on the monitoring days are given in Appendix G. No direct
disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedances were considered to be
contributed by natural variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further
action was required.
l
Three exceedances of DO limit levels were recorded at O-1(FT) (marine
bottom) on 3, 5 and 7 January 2012. For 3 and 7 January 2012, the measured DO
levels (6.85 and 6.80 mg/L, respectively) at the monitoring station were below
the baseline limit level, but higher than the DO levels (6.82 and 6.75 mg/L,
respectively) of the corresponding control station. For 5 January 2012, the
measured DO level (6.48 mg/L) at the monitoring station was below the baseline
limit level and lower than the DO level (6.49 mg/L) of the corresponding
control station (about 0.2%). Details of the construction activities conducted
on the monitoring days are given in Appendix G. No direct disturbance was
observed from the site. The exceedances were considered to be contributed by
natural variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further action was
required.
l
Three exceedances of DO limit levels were recorded at O-1(ET) (marine
surface) on 3, 5 and 7 January 2012. For 3 and 7 January 2012, the measured DO
levels (6.55 and 6.82 mg/L, respectively) at the monitoring station were below
the baseline limit level, but higher than the DO levels (6.42 and 6.76 mg/L,
respectively) of the corresponding control station. For 5 January 2012, the
measured DO level (6.62 mg/L) at the monitoring station was below the baseline
limit level and lower than the DO level (6.74 mg/L) of the corresponding
control station (about 1.8%). Details of the construction activities conducted
on the monitoring days are given in Appendix G. No direct disturbance was
observed from the site. The exceedances were considered to be contributed by
natural variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further action was
required.
l
Four exceedances of DO limit levels were recorded at O-1(ET) (marine
mid-depth) on 3, 5, 7 and 28 January 2012. For 3 January 2012, the measured DO
level (6.50 mg/L) at the monitoring station was below the baseline limit level,
but higher than the DO level (6.47 mg/L) of the corresponding control station.
For 5, 7 and 28 January 2012, the measured DO levels (6.53, 6.64 and 6.93 mg/L,
respectively) at the monitoring station were below the baseline limit level and
lower than the DO levels (6.59, 6.72 and 7.01 mg/L, respectively) of the
corresponding control station (about 0.9%, 1.2% and 1.1%, respectively).
Details of the construction activities conducted on the monitoring days are
given in Appendix G. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The
exceedances were considered to be contributed by natural variation and
non-project related. Therefore, no further action was required.
l
Three exceedances of SS action levels were recorded at O-1(FT) on 7, 11
and 16 January 2012. The measured SS levels (5.98, 3.78 and 4.85 mg/L,
respectively) at the monitoring station were well below the baseline
action/limit level, but higher than 120% of the SS levels (4.77, 3.10 and 3.90
mg/L, respectively) of the corresponding control station. Details of the
construction activities conducted on the monitoring days are given in Appendix
G. No direct disturbance was observed
from the site. The exceedances were considered to be contributed by natural
variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further action was required.
l
One exceedance of SS action level was recorded at O-1(ET) on 18 January
2012. The measured SS level (2.87 mg/L) at the monitoring station was well
below the baseline action/limit level, but higher than 120% of the SS level
(2.37 mg/L) of the corresponding control station. Details of the construction
activities conducted on the monitoring day are given in Appendix G. No direct
disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedances were considered to be
contributed by natural variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further
action was required.
l
One exceedance of SS limit level was recorded at O-1(FT) on 20 January 2012.
The measured SS level (6.15 mg/L) at the monitoring station was well below the
baseline action/limit level, but higher than 130% of the SS level (4.57 mg/L)
of the corresponding control station. Details of the construction activities
conducted on the monitoring day are given in Appendix G. No direct disturbance
was observed from the site. The exceedance was considered to be contributed by
natural variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further action was
required.
l
Three exceedances of SS limit levels were recorded at O-1(ET) on 11, 16
and 30 January 2012. The measured SS levels (4.65, 4.90 and 4.95 mg/L,
respectively) at the monitoring station were well below the baseline
action/limit level, but higher than 130% of the SS levels (3.23, 3.62 and 3.65
mg/L, respectively) of the corresponding control station. Details of the
construction activities conducted on the monitoring days are given in Appendix
G. No direct disturbance was observed
from the site. The exceedances were considered to be contributed by natural
variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further action was required.
3.5.11
A total of 55 non-project related
exceedances were recorded in February 2012 including:
l One exceedance of DO
action level was recorded at O-1(FT) (marine mid-depth) on 22 February 2012.
The measured DO level (6.82 mg/L) at the monitoring station was below the
baseline action level and lower than the DO level (6.84 mg/L) of the
corresponding control station (about 0.3%). Details of the construction
activities conducted on the monitoring day are given in Appendix G. No direct
disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedance was considered to be
contributed by natural variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further
action was required
l One exceedance of DO
action level was recorded at O-1(ET) (marine surface) on 10 February 2012. The
measured DO level (6.94 mg/L) at the monitoring station was below the baseline
action level and lower than the DO level (6.99 mg/L) of the corresponding
control station (about 0.7%). Details of the construction activities conducted
on the monitoring day are given in Appendix G. No direct disturbance was
observed from the site. The exceedance was considered to be contributed by
natural variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further action was
required.
l One exceedance of DO
action level was recorded at O-1(ET) (marine mid-depth) on 22 February 2012.
The measured DO level (6.95 mg/L) at the monitoring station was below the
baseline action level, but higher than the DO level (6.94 mg/L) of the
corresponding control station. Details of the construction activities conducted
on the monitoring day are given in Appendix G. No direct disturbance was
observed from the site. The exceedance was considered to be contributed by
natural variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further action was
required.
l Three exceedances of DO
action levels were recorded at O-1(ET) (marine bottom) on 15, 24 and 27
February 2012. For 15 and 27 February 2012, the measured DO levels
(6.65 and 6.60 mg/L, respectively) were below the baseline action level, but
higher than the DO levels (6.47 and 6.56 mg/L, respectively) of the
corresponding control station. For 24 February 2012, the measured DO level
(6.66 mg/L) at the monitoring station was below the baseline action level and
lower than the DO level (6.76 mg/L) of the corresponding control station (about
1.5%). Details of the construction activities conducted on the monitoring days
are given in Appendix G. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The
exceedances were considered to be contributed by natural variation and
non-project related. Therefore, no further action was required.
l Six exceedances of DO
limit levels were recorded at O-1(FT) (marine surface) on 8, 13, 15, 17, 27 and
29 February 2012. The measured DO levels (6.63, 6.48, 6.32, 6.46, 6.64 and 6.76
mg/L, respectively) at the monitoring station were below the baseline limit
level and lower than the DO levels (6.64, 6.60, 6.36, 6.49, 6.71 and 6.81 mg/L,
respectively) of the corresponding control station (about 0.2%, 1.8%, 0.6%,
0.5%, 1.0% and 0.7%, respectively). Details of the construction activities
conducted on the monitoring days are given in Appendix G. No direct disturbance
was observed from the site. The exceedances were considered to be contributed
by natural variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further action was
required.
l Eight exceedances of DO
limit levels were recorded at O-1(FT) (marine mid-depth) on 8, 13, 15, 17, 20,
24, 27 and 29 February 2012. For 8, 13, 15, 27 and 29 February 2012, the
measured DO levels (6.61, 6.49, 6.23, 6.62 and 6.69 mg/L, respectively) at the
monitoring station were below the baseline limit level and lower than the DO
levels (6.68, 6.56, 6.34, 6.64 and 6.70 mg/L, respectively) of the
corresponding control station (about 1.0%, 1.1%, 1.7%, 0.3% and 0.1%,
respectively). For 17 and 20 February 2012, the measured DO levels (6.43 and
6.74 mg/L, respectively) at the monitoring station were below the baseline limit
level, but higher than the DO levels (6.31 and 6.68 mg/L, respectively) of the
corresponding control station. For 24 February 2012, the measured DO level
(6.66 mg/L) at the monitoring station was below the baseline limit level and
same as the DO level of the corresponding control station. Details of the
construction activities conducted on the monitoring days are given in Appendix
G. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedances were
considered to be contributed by natural variation and non-project related.
Therefore, no further action was required.
l Eleven exceedances of DO
limit levels were recorded at O-1(FT) (marine bottom) on 3, 6, 8, 13, 15, 17,
20, 22, 24, 27 and 29 February 2012. For 3, 6, 8, 17, 22, 24 and 27 February
2012, the measured DO levels (6.77, 6.88, 6.68, 6.36, 6.87, 6.62 and 6.59 mg/L,
respectively) at the monitoring station were below the baseline limit level and
lower than the DO levels (6.80, 7.01, 6.75, 6.47, 6.88, 6.67 and 6.73 mg/L,
respectively) of the corresponding control station (about 0.4%, 1.9%, 1.0%,
1.7%, 0.1%, 0.7% and 2.1%, respectively). For 13, 20 and 29 February 2012, the
measured DO levels (6.47, 6.80 and 6.75 mg/L, respectively) at the monitoring
station were below the baseline limit level, but higher than the DO levels
(6.45, 6.78 and 6.63 mg/L, respectively) of the corresponding control station.
For 15 February 2012, the measured DO level (6.41 mg/L) at the monitoring
station was below the baseline limit level and same as the DO level of the corresponding
control station. Details of the construction activities conducted on the
monitoring days are given in Appendix G. No direct disturbance was observed
from the site. The exceedances were considered to be contributed by natural
variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further action was required.
l Nine exceedances of DO
limit levels were recorded at O-1(ET) (marine surface) on 8, 13, 15, 17, 20,
22, 24, 27 and 29 February 2012. For 8, 17, 22 and 24 February 2012, the
measured DO levels (6.48, 6.53, 6.92 and 6.78 mg/L, respectively) at the
monitoring station were below the baseline limit level and lower than the DO
levels (6.59, 6.63, 7.05 and 6.82 mg/L, respectively) of the corresponding
control station (about 1.7%, 1.5%, 1.8%, and 0.6%, respectively). For 15, 20,
27 and 29 February 2012, the measured DO levels (6.50, 6.87, 6.63 and 6.78
mg/L, respectively) at the monitoring station were below the baseline limit
level, but higher than the DO levels (6.43, 6.86, 6.51 and 6.66 mg/L,
respectively) of the corresponding control station. For 13 February 2012, the
measured DO level (6.30 mg/L) at the monitoring station was below the baseline
limit level and same as the DO level of the corresponding control station.
Details of the construction activities conducted on the monitoring days are
given in Appendix G. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The
exceedances were considered to be contributed by natural variation and
non-project related. Therefore, no further action was required.
l Eight exceedances of DO
limit levels were recorded at O-1(ET) (marine mid-depth) on 8, 13, 15, 17, 20,
24, 27 and 29 February 2012. For 8, 15, 17, 20, 24 and 29 February 2012, the
measured DO levels (6.66, 6.59, 6.41, 6.79, 6.76 and 6.71 mg/L, respectively)
at the monitoring station were below the baseline limit level, but higher than
the DO levels (6.53, 6.31, 6.36, 6.72, 6.70 and 6.70 mg/L, respectively) of the
corresponding control station. For 13 February 2012, the measured DO level
(6.35 mg/L) at the monitoring station was below the baseline limit level and
lower than the DO level (6.36 mg/L) of the corresponding control station (about
0.2%). For 27 February 2012, the measured DO level (6.69 mg/L) at the
monitoring station was below the baseline limit level and the same as the DO
level of the corresponding control station. Details of the construction
activities conducted on the monitoring days are given in Appendix G. No direct
disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedances were considered to be
contributed by natural variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further
action was required.
l Two exceedances of DO
limit levels were recorded at O-1(ET) (marine bottom) on 13 and 17 February
2012. For 13 February 2012, the measured DO level (6.42 mg/L) at the monitoring
station was below the baseline limit level, but higher than the DO level (6.32
mg/L) of the corresponding control station. For 17 February 2012, the measured
DO level (6.38 mg/L) at the monitoring station was below the baseline limit
level and lower than the DO level (6.44 mg/L) of the corresponding control
station (about 0.9%). Details of the construction activities conducted on the
monitoring days are given in Appendix G. No direct disturbance was observed
from the site. The exceedance was considered to be contributed by natural
variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further action was required.
l One exceedance of SS
action level was recorded at O-1(FT) on 24 February 2012. The measured SS level
(7.50 mg/L) at the monitoring station was below the baseline action/limit
level, but higher than 120% of the SS level (6.22 mg/L) of the corresponding
control station. Details of the construction activities conducted on the
monitoring days are given in Appendix G. No direct disturbance was observed
from the site. The exceedance was considered to be contributed by natural
variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further action was required.
l One exceedance of SS
limit level was recorded at O-1(FT) on 22 February 2012. The measured SS level
(2.68 mg/L) was well below the baseline action/limit level, but higher than
130% of the SS level (2.05 mg/L) of the corresponding control station. Details
of the construction activities conducted on the monitoring days are given in
Appendix G. No direct disturbance was
observed from the site. The exceedance was considered to be contributed by
natural variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further action was
required.
l Three exceedances of SS limit levels
were recorded at O-1(ET) on 1, 6 and 15 February 2012. The measured SS levels
(2.95, 3.33 and 3.93 mg/L, respectively) at the monitoring station were well
below the baseline action/limit level, but higher than 130% of the SS levels
(2.23, 2.55 and 2.88 mg/L, respectively) of the corresponding control station.
Details of the construction activities conducted on the monitoring days are
given in Appendix G. No direct
disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedances were considered to be
contributed by natural variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further
action was required.
3.5.12
A total of 38 non-project related
exceedances were recorded in March 2012 including:
l Two exceedances of DO
action levels were recorded at O-1(ET) (marine mid-depth) on 7 and 16 March
2012. For 7 March 2012, the measured DO level (7.01 mg/L) at the monitoring
station was below the baseline action level and lower than the DO level (7.08
mg/L) of the corresponding control station (about 1.0%). For 16 March 2012, the
measured DO level (6.98 mg/L) at the monitoring station was below the baseline
action level, but higher than the DO level (6.85 mg/L) of the corresponding
control station. Details of the
construction activities conducted on the monitoring days are given in Appendix
G. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedances were
considered to be contributed by natural variation and non-project related.
Therefore, no further action was required.
l Three exceedances of DO
action levels were recorded at O-1(ET) (marine bottom) on 2, 5 and 16 March 2012.
For 2 March 2012, the measured DO level (6.55 mg/L) at the monitoring station
was below the baseline action level and lower than the DO level (6.56 mg/L) of
the corresponding control station (about 0.2%). For 5 and 16 March 2012, the
measured DO levels (6.63 and 6.67 mg/L, respectively) at the monitoring station
were below the baseline action level, but higher than the DO levels of the
corresponding control station (6.54 and 6.50 mg/L, respectively). Details of
the construction activities conducted on the monitoring days are given in
Appendix G. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedances
were considered to be contributed by natural variation and non-project related.
Therefore, no further action was required.
l One exceedance of DO limit
level was recorded at O-1(FT) (marine surface) on 5 March 2012. The
measured DO level (6.70 mg/L) at the monitoring station was below the baseline
limit level and lower than the DO level (6.84 mg/L) of the corresponding
control station (about 2.0%). Details of the construction activities conducted
on the monitoring day are given in Appendix G. No direct disturbance was
observed from the site. The exceedance was considered to be contributed by
natural variation and non-project related. Therefore, no further action was
required.
l Five exceedances of DO
limit levels were recorded at O-1(FT) (marine mid-depth) on 2, 5, 9, 12 and 16
March 2012. For 2 March 2012, the measured DO level (6.70 mg/L) at the monitoring
station was below the baseline limit level, but higher than the DO level (6.66
mg/L) of the corresponding control station. For 5, 9, 12 and 16 March 2012, the
measured DO levels (6.61, 6.79, 6.55 and 6.46 mg/L, respectively) at the
monitoring station were below the baseline limit level and lower than the DO
levels (6.68, 6.84, 6.71 and 6.53 mg/L, respectively) of the corresponding
control station (about 1.0%, 0.7%, 2.4% and 1.1%, respectively). Details of the
construction activities conducted on the monitoring days are given in Appendix
G. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedances were
considered to be contributed by natural variation and non-project related.
Therefore, no further action was required.
l Eight exceedances of DO
limit levels were recorded at O-1(FT) (marine bottom) on 2, 5, 9, 12, 14, 16,
23 and 30 March 2012. For 2, 9 and 16 March 2012, the measured DO levels (6.59,
6.88 and 6.64 mg/L, respectively) at the monitoring station were below the
baseline limit level and lower than the DO levels (6.61, 6.89 and 6.75 mg/L,
respectively) of the corresponding control station (about 0.3%, 0.1% and 1.6%,
respectively). For 5, 12, 23 and 30 March 2012, the measured DO levels (6.61,
6.78, 6.92 and 6.84 mg/L, respectively) at the monitoring station were below
the baseline limit level, but higher than the DO levels (6.60, 6.67, 6.90 and
6.79 mg/L, respectively) of the corresponding control station. For 14 March
2012, the measured DO level (6.80 mg/L) at the monitoring station was below the
baseline limit level and same as the DO level of the corresponding control
station. Details of the construction activities conducted on the monitoring
days are given in Appendix G. No direct disturbance was observed from the site.
The exceedances were considered to be contributed by natural variation and
non-project related. Therefore, no further action was required.
l Eight exceedances of DO
limit levels were recorded at O-1(ET) (marine surface) on 2, 5, 9, 12, 14, 16,
23 and 26 March 2012. For 2, 5, 9, 12, 14, 16 and 26 March 2012, the measured
DO levels (6.75, 6.91, 6.81, 6.84, 6.93, 6.80 and 6.91 mg/L, respectively) at
the monitoring station were below the baseline limit level and lower than the
DO level (6.80, 7.04, 6.89, 6.89, 6.97, 6.91 and 7.12 mg/L, respectively) of
the corresponding control station (about 0.7%, 1.8%, 1.2%, 0.7%, 0.6%, 1.6% and
2.9%, respectively). For 23 March 2012, the measured DO level (6.92 mg/L) at
the monitoring station was below the baseline limit level, but higher than the
DO level (6.91 mg/L) of the corresponding control station. Details of the
construction activities conducted on the monitoring days are given in Appendix
G. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedances were
considered to be contributed by natural variation and non-project related.
Therefore, no further action was required.
l Seven exceedances of DO
limit levels were recorded at O-1(ET) (marine mid-depth) on 2, 5, 9, 12, 14, 23
and 30 March 2012. The measured DO levels (6.64, 6.59, 6.82, 6.73, 6.74, 6.88
and 6.91 mg/L, respectively) at the monitoring station were below the baseline
limit level and lower than the DO levels (6.71, 6.71, 6.86, 6.75, 6.83, 6.95
and 6.94 mg/L, respectively) of the corresponding control station (about 1.0%,
1.8%, 0.6%, 0.3%, 1.3%, 1.0% and 0.4%, respectively). Details of the
construction activities conducted on the monitoring days are given in Appendix
G. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedances were
considered to be contributed by natural variation and non-project related.
Therefore, no further action was required.
l Two exceedances of SS
action level were recorded at O-1(FT) on 2 and 5 March 2012. The measured SS
levels (2.78 and 4.32 mg/L, respectively) at the monitoring station were well
below the baseline action/limit level, but higher than 120% of the SS levels
(2.17 and 3.50 mg/L, respectively) of the corresponding control station.
Details of the construction activities conducted on the monitoring days are
given in Appendix G. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The
exceedances were considered to be contributed by natural variation and
non-project related. Therefore, no further action was required.
l Two exceedances of SS
limit level were recorded at O-1(ET) on 2 and 14 March 2012. The measured SS
levels (3.86 and 4.28 mg/L, respectively) at the monitoring station were well
below the baseline action/limit level, but higher than 130% of the SS levels
(2.83 and 2.98 mg/L, respectively) of the corresponding control station.
Details of the construction activities conducted on the monitoring days are
given in Appendix G. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The
exceedances were considered to be contributed by natural variation and
non-project related. Therefore, no further action was required.
3.5.13
The above mentioned exceedances were considered non-project related.
However, proper mitigation measures had been implemented during measurements.
Details of the above mentioned investigations could be referred to the Interim
Notifications of Environmental Quality Limits Exceedances as enclosed in Appendix G.
|
Monitoring Station |
Temperature (oC) |
DO (mg/L) |
pH |
Turbidity (NTU) |
Suspended Solid (mg/L) |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Range |
Range |
Action / Limit Level |
Range |
Range |
Action / Limit Level |
Range |
Action / Limit Level |
||||||||||||||||||
|
I-1 |
12.00 |
- |
24.10 |
7.06 |
- |
9.82 |
3.42 |
/ |
3.34 |
7.60 |
- |
8.31 |
2.14 |
- |
9.25 |
9.75 |
/ |
12.47 |
<2.00 |
- |
13.00 |
8.85 |
/ |
10.17 |
|
|
I-1-C |
12.10 |
- |
24.10 |
7.09 |
- |
9.87 |
|
- |
|
7.60 |
- |
8.30 |
2.21 |
- |
9.20 |
|
- |
|
<2.00 |
- |
14.35 |
|
- |
|
|
|
I-2 |
11.90 |
- |
24.75 |
7.19 |
- |
9.78 |
3.66 |
/ |
3.63 |
7.54 |
- |
8.23 |
1.04 |
- |
5.26 |
6.63 |
/ |
6.99 |
<2.00 |
- |
3.10 |
7.68 |
/ |
8.34 |
|
|
I-2-C |
11.90 |
- |
24.70 |
7.04 |
- |
9.91 |
|
- |
|
7.54 |
- |
8.23 |
1.08 |
- |
5.24 |
|
- |
|
<2.00 |
- |
3.65 |
|
- |
|
|
|
I-3 |
11.70 |
- |
25.00 |
7.04 |
- |
9.86 |
3.65 |
/ |
3.51 |
7.50 |
- |
8.31 |
0.83 |
- |
3.58 |
3.99 |
/ |
4.18 |
<2.00 |
- |
3.90 |
6.13 |
/ |
7.23 |
|
|
I-3-C |
11.70 |
- |
24.90 |
6.94 |
- |
9.83 |
|
- |
|
7.50 |
- |
8.31 |
0.84 |
- |
3.70 |
|
- |
|
<2.00 |
- |
4.50 |
|
- |
|
|
Note: Italic indicates the exceedances of Action Levels
Bold indicates the exceedances of Limit Levels
Table 3-10 Summary of Impact Water Quality Monitoring Results
|
Monitoring |
Temperature (oC) |
DO (mg/L) |
pH |
Turbidity (NTU) |
Suspended Solid (mg/L) |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Range |
Range |
Action / Limit Level |
Range |
Range |
Action / Limit Level |
Range |
Action / Limit Level |
||||||||||||||||||
|
O-1(FT) |
Surface |
15.90 |
- |
21.38 |
6.32 |
- |
7.54 |
6.84 |
/ |
6.81 |
7.70 |
- |
8.34 |
1.51 |
- |
7.53 |
10.35 |
/ |
13.15 |
<2.00 |
- |
9.52 |
14.10 |
/ |
18.08 |
|
Middle |
6.23 |
- |
7.59 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Bottom |
6.36 |
- |
7.44 |
6.99 |
/ |
6.96 |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
O-1-C(FT) |
Surface |
15.90 |
- |
21.40 |
6.36 |
- |
7.48 |
- |
/ |
- |
7.72 |
- |
8.32 |
1.53 |
- |
10.39 |
- |
/ |
- |
<2.00 |
- |
15.97 |
- |
/ |
- |
|
Middle |
6.31 |
- |
7.58 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Bottom |
6.41 |
- |
7.38 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
O-1(ET) |
Surface |
15.90 |
- |
21.80 |
6.30 |
- |
7.41 |
7.02 |
/ |
6.94 |
7.72 |
- |
8.33 |
1.48 |
- |
4.88 |
11.87 |
/ |
13.44 |
<2.00 |
- |
11.22 |
13.25 |
/ |
14.39 |
|
Middle |
6.35 |
- |
7.54 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Bottom |
6.38 |
- |
7.43 |
6.70 |
/ |
6.48 |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
O-1-C(ET) |
Surface |
15.90 |
- |
21.77 |
6.30 |
- |
7.44 |
- |
/ |
- |
7.72 |
- |
8.33 |
1.52 |
- |
4.84 |
- |
/ |
- |
<2.00 |
- |
9.47 |
- |
/ |
- |
|
Middle |
6.31 |
- |
7.54 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Bottom |
6.32 |
- |
7.46 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
Note: Italic indicates the exceedances of Action Levels
Bold indicates the exceedances of Limit Levels
Table 3-11 Summary of Impact Marine Water Quality Monitoring Results
4 Quarterly Summary, Environmental Condition and Non-Compliance Records
4.1 Summary of Waste Disposal Records
4.1.1 According to the information provided by the Contractor; the quantities of C&D materials and other wastes in the reporting period are summarized in Table 4-1
|
Status of Waste Management |
January 2012 |
February 2012 |
March 2012 |
|
Inert C&D Material Disposed of to Public Fill at Tuen Mun (m3) |
2,196.5 |
1,315.6 |
285.7 |
|
Inert C&D Material Reused in this Contract (m3) |
Nil |
532.5 |
Nil |
|
Inert C&D Material Reused in other Contract* (m3) |
1,145.0 |
4,630.0 |
1,207.5 |
|
Metals Generated (kg) |
22.0 |
Nil |
229,030.0 |
|
Paper / Cardboard Packaging (kg) |
350.0 |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Plastics (kg) |
20 |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Chemical Waste (kg) |
Nil |
Nil |
411.0 |
|
General Waste Disposed of to NENT Landfill (m3) |
66.2 |
87.0 |
43.3 |
* Other Contracts include CV/2009/14,
DC/2007/08, DC/2007/09, HY/2007/09, HY/2007/10, HY/2008/09, XRL823AB and Tailor
Recycle Aggregate
Table 4-1 Waste Generated from January to
March 2012
4.2.1
The weather
conditions during the period from January to March 2012 were mainly sunny, cloudy and rainy.
4.3 Summary of Project-Related Exceedances
4.3.1 Summary of exceedance results are summarized in Table 4-2. Appendix G shows the Interim Notifications of Environmental Quality Limits Exceedances issued in the reporting period.
Environmental Monitoring |
Total No. of Measurement |
Action Level Exceedance |
% of Action Level Exceedance |
Limit Level Exceedance |
% of Limit Level Exceedance |
|
Air
Quality |
192 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Air
Borne Noise |
69 |
1(Complaint) |
1.4 |
0 |
0 |
|
Water |
378 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Table 4-2 Summary of Project-
related Exceedances
5.1.1
A complaint
hotline at 9850 3241 of the Contractor has been established for the
Project.
5.1.2
One
environmental complaint
was received on 8 February 2012 by SOR about daytime construction noise from
the Intake I-3 construction site on 8 February 2012.The Contractor informed ET that one public complaint
regarding daytime construction noise from the Intake I-3 construction site was
received by SOR on 8 February. The ET conducted site inspections at Intake I-3
construction site on 9 and 23 February 2012 to review and audit the site
setting, mitigation measures implemented on-site and the environmental
performance of the Contractor. Noise monitoring at NSR 6 was increased to twice
per week from 10 February 2012 to 29 February 2012 according to the
Event/Action Plan and no exceedance of limit level was recorded. An
investigation report was prepared and submitted on 5 March 2012. Since no
further complaint was received, the complaint was considered closed. Details of
the complaint investigation and observations can be referred to Appendix H.
5.1.3
Cumulative
statistics of environmental complaints are shown in Table 5-1.
|
Complaints Received in the Reporting Period |
Cumulative Number of Complaints |
|
1 |
24 |
Table 5-1 Cumulative Statistics of Environmental Complaints
6 Summary of Notification of Summons, Successful Prosecutions and Corrective Actions
6.1.1
No summons
and successful prosecution was received during the reporting period.
6.1.2 Cumulative statistics of Notification of Summon, Successful Prosecutions and Convictions are shown in Table 6-1.
|
Notification of Summons |
Successful Prosecution |
||
|
January – March 2012 |
Cumulative |
January – March 2012 |
Cumulative |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Table 6-1 Cumulative Statistics of Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecutions
7 Comments, Recommendations and Conclusion
7.1.1
During the reporting
period, no project related exceedance of air quality monitoring and air borne
noise monitoring was recorded. Exceedances of water quality monitoring were
recorded but none of these exceedances were related to Project’s construction
activities.
7.1.2
One
environmental complaint was received on 8 February 2012
by SOR about daytime construction noise from the Intake I-3 construction site
on 8 February 2012. Details of the complaint investigation and observations can be
referred to Section 5.1.2 and Appendix H.
7.1.3
No
Notification of Summons has been received since the commencement of the
Project.
7.1.4
Waste
management mitigation measures have been implemented by the Contractor within
the reporting period. Waste figures
during the reporting period are summarized in Table 7-1.
|
Status of Waste Management |
Quantity |
|
Inert C&D
Material Disposed of to Public Fill at Tuen Mun (m3) |
3797.8 |
|
Inert C&D Material Reused in this Contract (m3) |
532.5 |
|
Inert C&D
Material Reused in other Contract* (m3) |
6982.5 |
|
Metals
Generated (kg) |
229052.0 |
|
Paper /
Cardboard Packaging (kg) |
350.0 |
|
Plastics (kg) |
20.0 |
|
Chemical Waste
(kg) |
411.0 |
|
General Waste
Disposed of to NENT Landfill (m3) |
196.5 |
* Other
Contracts include CV/2009/14, DC/2007/08, DC/2007/09, HY/2007/09, HY/2007/10,
HY/2008/09, XRL823AB and Tailor Recycle Aggregate
Table 7-1 Total
Wastes Generated From January to March 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Site Map and Works Area |
|
|
|
|
|
Organization Chart |
|
|
|
|
|
Works Programme |
|
|
|
|
|
Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures |
|
|
|
|
|
Monitoring Locations |
|
|
|
|
|
Monitoring Results |
|
|
|
|
|
Interim Notifications of Environmental Quality Limits Exceedances |
|
|
|
|
|
Complaint Log |
