|
Client |
Territory Development Department, Hong Kong |
|||||||
|
Project |
Supplementary Agreement No. 3 to Agreement No. CE 15/94 Design and Construction for the Minimum Option |
|||||||
|
Report
No. |
3128-REP-156-00 |
|||||||
|
Date of Issue |
5 December 2003 |
File
Ref. L:\S-proj\CR3\CR3.NEW\3128\ Reports\0156.doc |
||||||
|
Report Title |
Central
Reclamation, Phase III Environmental
Monitoring & Audit Monthly
Report No.4 - November2003 |
|||||||
|
|
Name |
|
Sign |
|
Date |
|
||
|
Prepared
by : |
Albert Chan,
ACL - Environmental Consultant |
|
|
|
5 Dec 2003 |
|
||
|
Reviewed by : |
Susana
Bezy, ACL – ET Leader |
|
|
|
5
Dec 2003 |
|
||
|
Authorised by : |
Jon
Varndell, ACL – Project Mgr |
|
|
|
5
Dec 2003 |
|
||
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
Distribution |
|
|
||||||
|
Copy No |
Issue to |
Attention |
Corr. Ref. |
|||||
|
1 |
TDD |
Mr
H H Yeung |
3128/124/OC5521/al |
|||||
|
2,
3 |
EPD |
Mr
M W Ho |
3128/124/OC5521/al |
|||||
|
4 |
EPD
(LCO) |
Mr
Allan Hung |
3128/124/OC5521/al |
|||||
|
5 |
Leighton-China
State-Van Oord JV |
Mr
Malcolm Plummer |
3128/124/OC5521/al |
|||||
|
6 |
CRIII
Sites/PRE |
Mr
Douglas Miller |
3128/124/OC5521/al |
|||||
|
7 |
Independent
Checker (Environment) |
Mr
Bill Douglas |
3128/124/OC5521/al |
|||||
|
8 |
Environmental
Team Leader |
Ms
Susana Bezy |
3128/124/OC5521/al |
|||||
|
9 |
Office
Copy |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
List of Annexes
Annex A Project Organisation / Contact Information
Annex B Contractor’s Work Programme
Annex C Location of Monitoring Stations & Outfalls
Annex D Environmental Quality Performance Limits for Air, Noise and Water Quality
Annex E Event and Action Plan for Air, Noise and Water Quality
Annex F Noise Monitoring Results
Annex G Graphical Representation of Noise Monitoring Results
Annex H Water Quality Monitoring Results
Annex I Graphical Representation of Water Quality Monitoring Results
Annex J Water Quality Exceedance Review
Annex K EPD Water Quality Monitoring Data
List of Tables
Table 2.1 - Summary of the Environmental License / Permit Status................................................ 3
Table 2.2 - Summary of the Contractor's Environmental Related Document
Submissions to the Engineer’s Representatives (ER).............................................................................................................................. 5
Table 2.3 - Summary of Environmental Certification Sheet Submissions to
the Environmental Protection Department (EPD).................................................................................................................................... 7
Table 3.1 - Summary of Impact EM&A Requirements................................................................... 9
Table 3.2 - Summary of Impact EM&A Requirements................................................................. 11
Table 4.1 - Water Quality Monitoring Programme (Seawater Intakes
Stations)............................ 13
Table 4.2 - Equipment for Air
Quality Monitoring...................................................................... 14
Table 4.3 - Noise Monitoring Equipment.................................................................................... 16
Table 4.4 - Equipment Used for Marine Water Quality Monitoring............................................. 17
Table 4.5 - Summary of Mid-Ebb Results for Marine-Based Stations............................................ 18
Table 4.6 - Summary of Mid-Flood Results for Marine-Based Stations......................................... 19
Table 4.7 - Summary of Mid-Ebb Results for Seawater Intake Stations......................................... 20
Table 4.8 - Summary of Mid-Flood Results for Seawater Intake Stations...................................... 21
Table 6.1 - Water Quality Monitoring Programme...................................................................... 24
|
ACL |
Atkins China Limited |
|
CRIII |
Central Reclamation Phase III |
|
EIA |
Environmental Impact Assessment |
|
EM&A |
Environmental Monitoring and Audit |
|
EPD |
Environmental Protection Department |
|
ER |
Engineer’s Representatives |
|
ET |
Environmental Team |
|
IEC |
Independent Environmental Checker |
|
LCSD |
Leisure and Cultural Services Department |
|
LCSVO-JV |
Leighton China State Van Oord Joint Venture |
|
TDD |
Territory Development Department |
|
TSP |
Total Suspended Particulates |
Executive
Summary
The Central Reclamation Phase III Works,
Contract No. HK 12/02, was awarded to Leighton China State Van Oord Joint
Venture (LCSVO-JV) by the Territory Development Department (TDD), Hong Kong
Islands and Islands Development Office.
The works under the Contract HK 12/02 commenced on 28 February 2003.
Atkins China Limited (ACL) has been appointed by TDD to implement the
Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) programme that was identified in
the EIA Report for the CRIII Project and is providing Environmental Team (ET)
services during the duration of the construction works.
This is the third Monthly
EM&A Report under the EIAO for the
works specified in Section 1.3 of the CRIII EIA Report. This report summarises the monitoring
results and audit findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting
period from 1 November to 30 November 2003.
Environmental Monitoring and Audit Progress
The monthly EM&A programme was undertaken in accordance with the
EM&A Manual. A summary of the
monitoring activities performed in this reporting month is listed below:
·
Environmental site inspections were undertaken on 6,
13, 20, and 27 November 2003.
·
Noise monitoring was performed continuously
for 24 hours.
·
Water quality monitoring was undertaken on the
following days:
-
3 November 2003
-
5 November 2003
-
7 November 2003
-
10 November 2003
-
12 November 2003
-
14 November 2003
-
17 November 2003
-
19 November 2003
-
21 November 2003
-
24 November 2003
-
26 November 2003
-
28 November 2003
Exceedance of Action and Limit Levels
There was no environmental air quality monitoring required during the
reporting period.
The noise monitoring results for the reporting period did not show any
exceedances.
From the analysis of water quality monitoring results collected during
the reporting period, no exceedances were identified as directly attributable
to the project marine works. However,
on several occasions, the dissolved oxygen (DO) and suspended solids (SS)
levels exceeded the Action and Limit Levels.
Investigations found that they were due to natural variation in ambient
conditions and/or local influencing factors.
A review of the monitoring results showed that control stations located
outside the project's influence had similar values as marine impact stations
and seawater intake monitoring data showed variable results with localised exceedances
near stormwater outfalls. These
findings were similar to the conditions observed during baseline monitoring and
silty discharges from outfalls within the project area were documented during
the reporting month.
Complaint Log
There were no environmental complaints
received during this reporting period.
Notifications of Summons and Prosecutions
There were no notifications of summons or
prosecutions received with regard to the environment during this reporting
period.
Site Inspection and
Audit
Site inspections
for the CRIII project works area were undertaken on 6,
13, 20, and 27 November 2003. Several deficiencies were recorded during
site inspections carried out on 13 and 20 November 2003. The Contractor was immediately notified and
subsequently rectified the deficiencies.
Future Key Issues
Future Key Issues are as follows:
·
Dredging that is allowed during the daytime hours at
IRAW was completed on 7 November 2003.
The remaining dredging area for IRAW lies within the "Star Ferry
Zone" and can only be dredged during nighttime hours. Dredging activities are now presently
limited within IRAE. The Contractor has
requested permission to dredge the remaining area at IRAW between the hours of
00:00 and 06:00. The ET and IEC have
provided comments on the Contractor's request to the ER.
·
Dredging work at IRAE is limited to an area 100 m
outside the "Heliport Exclusion Zone." The delays to the relocation of the Heliport may postpone
dredging in this area. Additionally,
the marine site investigation within the exclusion zone will not be carried out
until the Heliport is relocated.
·
Dredging work at IRAE experienced further delays
due to an increase in the dredging quantity, interruption of work due to
protestors and suspension of rock fill above the seabed level.
·
Large quantities of silty discharge, from outfalls
within the project area, which were unrelated to project works, have been
observed and documented during November 2003. The situation has been reported
to EPD and they are currently investigating the issue.
The Main Works Contract HK 12/02 for CRIII commenced on 28th February
2003. Leighton-China State-Van Oord Joint Venture (LCSVO-JV) was awarded the
Contract No. HK 12/02 for the construction of the CRIII Engineering Works. Construction works undertaken during the report
month include dredging, reclamation up to the original seabed level only,
ground investigation work, demolition of Pier No. 7 and temporary traffic and
pedestrian diversion work.
Atkins China Limited (ACL) has been commissioned by TDD to undertake the
environmental monitoring and audit work for the project in accordance with the
Environmental Permit (EP No. EP-122/2002) issued to TDD on 7 March 2002. The CRIII Project Organisation is shown in Annex
A.
This is the fourth monthly
EM&A Report under the EIAO, which presents the results of EM&A
work conducted during the period from 1 November to 30 November 2003,
inclusive.
The works undertaken during the reporting
month were limited to dredging, rockfilling up to the original seabed level at
IRAW, marine site investigation for the Eastern Seawall, demolition of Pier No.
7, site investigation work for the Man Yiu Street Foot Bridge, demobilisation
of drill rigs for the Central Terminal Building (CTB) site investigation work
and preparation for demolition work of the General Post Office (GPO) Walkway.
A summary of the status of all environmental
permits, license, and/or notification to EPD for this project during the
reporting period are presented in Table 2.1.
|
Item |
Item
Description |
Date of
Application |
Permit Status |
|
1 |
LCSVO-JV submitted a
notice to terminate the employment of hopper barges ST11, ST12 and Yuk Yin 28
(Vessel Licence No. 21623V, 21537V and 21335V respectively) for the dumping
operation under two valid Marine Dumping Permits (Permit No. EP/MD/04-058 and
EP/MD/04-087) effective from 26 November 2003 (Ref. H2189/U2c/4102/MP/CST/
EY/ST/cm) |
26
November 2003 |
- |
|
2 |
LCSVO-JV submitted a
Renewal of Construction Noise Permit GW-TS0372-03 (Ref.
H2189/U2c/3675/AT/CST/EY/ ST/ec) |
20
October 2003 |
Approved
on |
|
3 |
LCSVO-JV submitted a
notice to terminate the employment of hopper barge SB1 (Vessel Licence No.
21630V) for the dumping operation under two valid Marine Dumping Permits
(Permit No. EP/MD/04-074) effective from 11 November 2003 (Ref.
H2189/U2c/4102/MP/CST/ EY/ST/cm) |
11
November |
- |
|
4 |
LCSVO-JV submitted an
Application for Construction Noise Permit for the use of power mechanical
equipment (PME) for the purpose of carrying out construction work other than
percussive piling at Initial Reclamation Area East (Ref.
H2189/U2c/3538/MP/CST/EY/ST/cm) |
14
October 2003 |
Approved
on |
|
4 |
LCSVO-JV submitted an
Application for Construction Noise Permit for the use of power mechanical
equipment (PME) for the purpose of carrying out the demolition of Link Bridge
of General Post Office (Ref. H2189/U2c/3512/MP/ ATA/CKA/ST/cm) |
13
October 2003 |
Approved
on |
|
Table 2.2 - Summary of the
Contractor's Environmental Related Document Submissions to the Engineer’s
Representatives (ER) |
|
Item |
Document
Title |
Version |
Date of
Submission to ER |
|
1 |
Photographs
of Silty Discharge (12 - 15 November 2003) |
- |
15 November 2003 |
|
2 |
Photographs
of Silty Discharge (3 & 5 November 2003)) |
- |
5 November 2003 |
|
3 |
Proposal
for Variation of Further Environmental Permit Condition 3.2(a) |
- |
3 November 2003 |
|
4 |
Photographs
of Silty Discharge (30 Oct and 1 Nov 2003) |
- |
1 November 2003 |
A summary of the Environmental Certification Sheet submissions to EPD
for the Month of November 2003 is presented in Table 2.3.
|
No |
Certification
Subject |
Letter Ref. |
Date of
Submission to EPD |
Approved
Status |
|
1 |
Certification of Monthly Environmental Report
No. 3 - October 2003 |
3128/M45/200/OC5458/AC/al |
14
November 2003 |
- |
During the reporting period the following
environmental meetings were held:
·
13 November 2003 – a brief meeting between ACL site
staff, EPD's Local Control Officers, the IEC and the ET team was held before a
joint environmental site inspection with the above parties.
The environmental monitoring locations are
provided in Annex C.
The EM&A programme requires environmental monitoring for air
quality, noise, water quality, waste management and landscape and visual
aspects as specified in the CRIII Project EIA.
The EM&A requirements for each issue area are described in
subsequent sections including:
·
All required monitoring parameters;
·
Action and Limit Levels; and
·
Event-Action Plans.
A summary of impact EM&A requirements is presented in Table
3-1.
|
Descriptions |
Locations |
Frequencies |
Duration |
|||
|
TSP |
24-Hour
TSP |
2
Locations |
Once
every 6 days |
During
dust generating construction works |
||
|
1-Hour
TSP |
2
Locations |
Three
times in every 6 days |
During
dust generating construction works |
|||
|
Noise |
Leq (30
mins), L10, L90, |
1
Location |
Continuous
measurements |
Two
weeks before Construction and During Construction |
||
|
Water
Quality |
Dissolved
Oxygen; Salinity; Temp; Suspended
Solids; Turbidity. |
14
Locations |
3 times
a week, Mid-ebb/flood tides |
During
Marine Works |
||
|
Waste |
On-Site
Waste Audit |
Active
Work Sites |
Periodically |
During
Construction |
||
|
On-Site
Waste Inspection |
||||||
|
Landscape
and Visual |
Audits
to ensure effective implementation of mitigation measures |
During
Construction |
||||
|
General
Site Conditions |
Environmental
Site Inspection |
Works
areas and areas affected by works |
Periodically |
During
Construction |
||
Environmental Quality Performance Limits for air, noise and water
quality as provided in the Baseline Monitoring Report (Final) are shown in the
following table.
Parameter
|
Station
|
Action Level
|
Limit Level
|
||
|
Air
Quality |
|
|
|
||
|
1-Hour TSP Level
in mg/m3 |
City Hall |
460 mg/m3 |
500 mg/m3 |
||
|
1-Hour TSP Level
in mg/m3 |
PLA |
432 mg/m3 |
500 mg/m3 |
||
|
24-Hour TSP
Level in mg/m3 |
City Hall |
163 mg/m3 |
260 mg/m3 |
||
|
24-Hour TSP
Level in mg/m3 |
PLA |
154 mg/m3 |
260 mg/m3 |
||
|
Noise
Quality |
|||||
|
07:00-19:00 hrs on normal weekdays |
City Hall |
When one
documented complaint is received |
75 dB(A) |
||
|
07:00-23:00 hrs
on holidays; and 1900-2300 hrs on all other days |
City Hall |
When one
documented complaint is received |
60/65/70* dB(A) |
||
|
23:00-07:00 hrs
of next day |
City Hall |
When one
documented complaint is received |
45/50/55* dB(A) |
||
|
Marine
Water Quality - Marine Based Stations A |
|||||
|
DO (mg/L) |
Surface & Middle |
4.7 mg/L |
4.0 mg/L |
||
|
Bottom |
Wet |
Dry |
Wet |
Dry |
|
|
3.2 |
4.9 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
||
|
SS (mg/L) |
Depth-avg |
Wet |
Dry |
Wet |
Dry |
|
10 |
11 |
12 |
14 |
||
|
Turbidity (NTU) |
Depth-avg |
Wet |
Dry |
Wet |
Dry |
|
11 |
14 |
13 |
18 |
||
|
Marine
Water Quality - Seawater Intakes B |
|||||
|
DO (mg/L) |
All |
4.6 mg/L |
3 mg/L |
||
|
SS (mg/L) |
M1 |
11 mg/L |
14 mg/L |
||
|
M2 |
23 mg/L |
27 mg/L |
|||
|
M3 |
13 mg/L |
16 mg/L |
|||
|
M4 |
10 mg/L |
12 mg/L |
|||
|
M5 |
12 mg/L |
17 mg/L |
|||
|
M6 |
11 mg/L |
14 mg/L |
|||
|
M11 |
11 mg/L |
13 mg/L |
|||
|
M12 |
11 mg/L |
12 mg/L |
|||
Notes: A - Only for Stations M8 & M10
B - Although the majority
of the intake stations are located within close proximity of each other,
separate Action and Limit Levels have been established due to the number of influencing factors affecting the
stations (i.e. outfalls and storm drains).
The Event Action Plans for air, noise and water quality as provided in
the Baseline Monitoring Report (Final) are shown in Annex E.
The Contractor is required to implement mitigation measures listed in
the EIA Report, EM&A Manual and Further Environmental Permit. During routine site inspections, the
Contractor's implementation of mitigation measures is reviewed. With regard to mitigation measures for water
quality, the Contractor carried out daily visual inspection of the silt screens
for seawater intakes. Bi-weekly diving
inspections for the silt screens were also carried out in November 2003. During the month of November, there were no
records of the Contractor not implementing relevant mitigation measures.
Regular site inspections were carried out
to assess whether the project's environmental protection and pollution control
measures are in compliance with the contract specifications. Inspections were conducted on 6, 13, 20, and 27 November 2003.
Air quality monitoring has not commenced
yet as no work areas or construction activities with the potential to impact
air quality are within range of the closest air quality sensitive receivers.
Continuous 24-hour noise monitoring was conducted during this report
period.
Impact water quality monitoring at all
monitoring stations was undertaken during this reporting month. Ad-hoc monitoring on a daily basis was
conducted between 4 and 8 November 2003 due to an observed rise in turbidity
levels on 3 November 2003. The ad-hoc
monitoring later found that the rise in turbidity levels was not due to project
works. The water quality monitoring
schedule for November 2003 is presented in Table 4-1.
|
Date of Sampling |
Tidal State |
Timing of Sampling |
|
3
November 2003 |
Mid Ebb |
07:03 - 10:59 |
|
Mid Flood |
14:06 - 17:07 |
|
|
4
November 2003 * |
Mid Flood |
14:47 - 17:40 |
|
5
November 2003 * |
Mid Ebb |
09:02 - 11:59 |
|
Mid Flood |
15:00 - 17:58 |
|
|
6
November 2003 * |
Mid Ebb |
09:15 - 12:06 |
|
Mid Flood |
15:37 - 18:11 |
|
|
7
November 2003 * |
Mid Ebb |
10:03 - 13:21 |
|
Mid Flood |
15:02 - 18:06 |
|
|
8
November 2003 * |
Mid Ebb |
11:30 - 14:19 |
|
Mid Flood |
06:54 - 09:35 |
|
|
10
November 2003 |
Mid Ebb |
10:43 - 13:21 |
|
Mid Flood |
16:12 - 18:47 |
|
|
12
November 2003 |
Mid Ebb |
12:42 - 15:19 |
|
Mid Flood |
07:24 - 10:08 |
|
|
14
November 2003 |
Mid Ebb |
13:57 - 16:35 |
|
Mid Flood |
08:23 - 11:20 |
|
|
17
November 2003 |
Mid Ebb |
07:08 - 10:00 |
|
Mid Flood |
15:34 - 18:25 |
|
|
19
November 2003 |
Mid Ebb |
07:28 - 10:06 |
|
Mid Flood |
14:00 - 16:35 |
|
|
21
November 2003 |
Mid Ebb |
08:52 - 11:58 |
|
Mid Flood |
14:54 - 17:45 |
|
|
24
November 2003 |
Mid Ebb |
10:38 - 13:34 |
|
Mid Flood |
15:37 - 18:21 |
|
|
26
November 2003 |
Mid Ebb |
12:30 - 15:05 |
|
Mid Flood |
07:24 - 10:57 |
|
|
28
November 2003 |
Mid Ebb |
13:29 - 17:28 |
|
Mid Flood |
08:36 - 12:18 |
Note: * Ad-hoc monitoring on a daily basis was
conducted between 4 and 8 November 2003.
Air quality monitoring will be performed in
accordance with the methodology described in the EM&A Manual once
construction activities requiring air quality monitoring commence. The locations of the monitoring stations at
City Hall and PLA Headquarters are shown in Annex C.
Continuous 24-hour noise monitoring was performed
in accordance with the methodology described in the EM&A Manual in the
reporting period. The location of the noise monitoring station at City Hall is
shown in Annex C.
Water quality monitoring was performed in
accordance with the methodology described in the EM&A Manual. Monitoring for the reporting month was conducted
at all stations, which comprises of 6 marine-based stations and 8 seawater
intake stations. The locations of the
monitoring stations are shown in Annex C.
The equipment that is used
for air quality monitoring is listed in Table 4-2.
|
Parameter Measured |
Equipment |
|
24-Hour
Sampling |
High
Volume Sampler Model GS2310 by Anderson Instruments to be used for both
monitoring stations. |
|
1-Hour
Sampling |
MicroDust
pro Aerosol Monitoring System to be used for both monitoring locations. |
The equipment used for
continuous noise quality monitoring is listed in Table 4-3.
|
Equipment |
Model |
|
Integrated Sound Level Meter |
B&K 2238 |
|
Calibrator |
B&K 4231, Class 1 |
The equipment that was used
for water quality monitoring is listed in Table 4-4.
|
Parameter Measured |
Equipment |
|
Dissolved Oxygen and Temperature Measuring Equipment |
A
Dissolved Oxygen meter YSI model 58 was used. ·
This
instrument was portable and weatherproof and used a DC power source. The equipment was capable of measuring: ·
DO levels
in the range of 0-20 mg/l and 0-200% saturation; and ·
Temperature
of between 0 - 45 degree Celsius. ·
The
equipment had a membrane electrode with an automatic temperature compensation
complete with a cable. In addition, a Wirling Psychrometer was used as a
reference thermometer during the sampling. |
|
Turbidity Measurement Instrument |
|
|
PH |
A
MP125 pH Meter from Mettler Toledo was used to measure pH. |
|
Salinity / Conductivity Meter |
A
Salinity / Conductivity meter YSI model 63 and model 30 was used for
determining salinity concentrations. |
|
Sample Containers and Storage |
Water
samples for SS analysis were stored in high density polythene bottles with no
preservative added, packed in ice and delivered to the laboratory, and
analysed as soon as possible after collection. |
No air quality monitoring work was undertaken
during the reporting period as no
work areas or construction activities with the potential to impact air quality
are within range of the closest air quality sensitive receivers.
Noise quality monitoring work was undertaken
during the reporting period. The noise
monitoring results are provided in Annex F. Graphical representation of the noise
monitoring data is provided in Annex G.
Water quality monitoring was undertaken at
all water quality monitoring locations during the reporting period. The water quality monitoring results from
this reporting period are presented in Annex H. Graphical representation of the water quality data is provided in
Annex
I. Summaries of the results are
provided in Tables 4.5 to 4.9.
Marine-Based Stations
Monitoring stations M8 and M10 were selected as the marine-based impact
stations as they are located outside the predicted influence of the dredging
and reclamation works. The detection of
water quality degradation at these two stations may indicate that project
marine works are adversely affecting water quality in Victoria Harbour. Stations M7 and M9 are within the expected
influence of the reclamation activities and are located along the works area
boundary (or extent of the predicted sediment plume). As such, M7 and M9 are used as indicator stations to note any
significant elevations in SS, turbidity or reductions in DO that may affect the
marine-based impact monitoring stations.
Table 4.5 is a summary of the marine-based stations monitoring results
during mid-ebb tide.
|
Station |
|
Parameter |
||||
|
DO (S&M) mg/L |
DO (B) mg/L |
DO % Sat. (DA) |
Turbidity (DA) NTU |
SS (DA) mg/L |
||
|
C1 |
min |
5.1 |
4.7 |
72.4 |
3.0 |
4 |
|
max |
6.0 |
5.8 |
86.7 |
7.9 |
15 |
|
|
avg |
5.4 |
5.2 |
76.5 |
4.9 |
7 |
|
|
sd |
0.3 |
0.4 |
3.6 |
1.3 |
3 |
|
|
C2 |
min |
4.5 |
4.9 |
70.0 |
2.4 |
5 |
|
max |
5.8 |
5.8 |
79.4 |
6.3 |
7 |
|
|
avg |
5.3 |
5.3 |
75.4 |
4.2 |
6 |
|
|
sd |
0.4 |
0.3 |
3.3 |
1.3 |
1 |
|
|
M7 |
min |
4.0 |
4.0 |
59.5 |
3.5 |
5 |
|
max |
5.4 |
5.5 |
74.6 |
7.4 |
10 |
|
|
avg |
4.8 |
4.8 |
67.8 |
5.0 |
7 |
|
|
sd |
0.4 |
0.4 |
4.7 |
1.0 |
1 |
|
|
M8 |
min |
4.2 |
4.1 |
61.8 |
3.5 |
5 |
|
max |
5.7 |
5.7 |
82.6 |
7.0 |
8 |
|
|
avg |
5.0 |
4.9 |
70.9 |
4.9 |
6 |
|
|
sd |
0.5 |
0.5 |
6.1 |
1.1 |
1 |
|
|
M9 |
min |
4.1 |
4.2 |
61.3 |
3.6 |
5 |
|
max |
5.4 |
5.4 |
75.4 |
8.3 |
12 |
|
|
avg |
4.8 |
4.8 |
68.6 |
5.5 |
8 |
|
|
sd |
0.4 |
0.3 |
4.4 |
1.4 |
2 |
|
|
M10 |
min |
4.4 |
4.3 |
64.0 |
3.4 |
5 |
|
max |
5.6 |
5.7 |
79.1 |
6.1 |
9 |
|
|
avg |
5.1 |
5.0 |
71.7 |
4.5 |
7 |
|
|
sd |
0.3 |
0.4 |
4.5 |
1.0 |
1 |
|
As Table 4.5 shows, DO levels at marine-based impact stations (M8 &
M10) in the surface to middle layer during mid-ebb survey ranged between 4.2 and
5.7 mg/L with an average value of 5.0 mg/L and DO measurements in the bottom
layer ranged from 4.1 to 5.7 mg/L with an average level of 5.0 mg/L. Similar DO levels were recorded at the
control stations at which DO levels in the surface to middle layer during
mid-ebb survey ranged from 4.5 to 6.0 mg/L with an average value of around 5.4
mg/L; DO measurements in the bottom layer ranged between 4.7 and 5.8 mg/L with
an average level of 5.3 mg/L.
SS levels during mid-ebb tide ranged from 5 to 9 mg/L with an average
value of 7 mg/L at the marine-based impact stations (M8 & M10), which is
comparable to results from the control stations in which SS content ranged from
4 to 15 mg/L with an average of 7 mg/L.
The results showed no clear gradient effect (high SS and low DO levels
from near-field stations M7 and M9 to far-field stations M8 and M10), which
indicates that dredging works are not adversely affecting marine water quality
outside the work site boundary in Victoria Harbour. Marine water quality at impact monitoring stations was found to
be similar to that at the control stations also indicating that project marine
works were adversely affecting water quality in Victoria Harbour.
Table 4.6 is a summary of monitoring results from marine-based stations
during mid-flood tide.
|
Station |
|
Parameter |
||||
|
DO
(S&M) mg/L |
DO
(B) mg/L |
DO %
Sat. (DA) |
Turbidity
(DA) NTU |
SS
(DA) mg/L |
||
|
C1 |
min |
5.2 |
4.7 |
70.5 |
2.6 |
5 |
|
max |
5.8 |
5.8 |
85.7 |
10.2 |
15 |
|
|
avg |
5.4 |
5.3 |
76.6 |
5.9 |
8 |
|
|
sd |
0.2 |
0.3 |
3.5 |
2.1 |
3 |
|
|
C2 |
min |
4.9 |
5.1 |
72.8 |
2.5 |
4 |
|
max |
5.9 |
5.8 |
85.8 |
8.0 |
9 |
|
|
avg |
5.4 |
5.4 |
76.5 |
4.5 |
6 |
|
|
sd |
0.3 |
0.3 |
3.7 |
1.4 |
1 |
|
|
M7 |
min |
3.8 |
3.8 |
56.0 |
4.3 |
5 |
|
max |
5.3 |
5.2 |
73.7 |
8.3 |
11 |
|
|
avg |
4.7 |
4.6 |
65.9 |
5.8 |
8 |
|
|
sd |
0.4 |
0.4 |
4.0 |
1.2 |
2 |
|
|
M8 |
min |
4.2 |
4.2 |
62.4 |
3.9 |
6 |
|
max |
5.6 |
5.6 |
78.9 |
6.8 |
10 |
|
|
avg |
4.9 |
4.9 |
69.4 |
5.3 |
7 |
|
|
sd |
0.4 |
0.4 |
5.0 |
0.9 |
1 |
|
|
M9 |
min |
3.9 |
3.9 |
57.4 |
3.2 |
4 |
|
max |
5.4 |
5.4 |
76.1 |
7.9 |
11 |
|
|
avg |
4.8 |
4.7 |
67.8 |
5.7 |
8 |
|
|
sd |
0.4 |
0.4 |
4.2 |
1.3 |
2 |
|
|
M10 |
min |
4.3 |
4.2 |
63.0 |
3.0 |
5 |
|
max |
5.6 |
5.6 |
79.0 |
7.1 |
11 |
|
|
avg |
5.0 |
4.9 |
70.4 |
5.1 |
8 |
|
|
sd |
0.3 |
0.4 |
4.5 |
1.2 |
2 |
|
During mid-flood tide, DO levels at marine-based impact stations (M8
& M10) in the surface to middle layer ranged from 4.2 to 5.6 mg/L with an
average level of 5.0 mg/L while DO values in the bottom layer ranged between
4.2 and 5.6 mg/L with an average of 4.9 mg/L.
Similar DO concentrations were recorded at the control stations in the
surface to middle layer during mid-flood survey ranged between 4.9 and 5.9 mg/L
with an average value of 5.4 mg/L and DO results in the bottom layer ranged
from 4.7 and 5.8 mg/L with an average of 5.4 mg/L.
SS content ranged between 5 and 11 mg/L (for stations M8 & M10) with
an average of 8 mg/L during mid-flood tide and ranged from 4 to 15 mg/L with an
average value of 7 mg/L at the control stations. Again, the results showed no clear gradient effect and no
significant difference between control stations and marine-based impact
stations. Therefore, the marine-based
station results indicate that during the month of November the dredging works
were not adversely affecting water quality outside the work site boundary.
Seawater Intake Stations
Table 4.7 is a summary of monitoring results from seawater intake
stations during mid-ebb tide.
|
Station |
|
Parameter |
|||
|
DO
mg/L |
DO %
Sat. |
Turbidity
NTU |
SS
mg/L |
||
|
M1 |
min |
3.7 |
54.9 |
4.8 |
7 |
|
max |
5.5 |
82.0 |
8.1 |
10 |
|
|
avg |
4.5 |
66.4 |
6.6 |
9 |
|
|
sd |
0.5 |
7.7 |
0.9 |
1 |
|
|
M2 |
min |
3.7 |
53.0 |
4.3 |
8 |
|
max |
5.6 |
83.0 |
11.7 |
22 |
|
|
avg |
4.5 |
65.3 |
8.6 |
13 |
|
|
sd |
0.5 |
7.7 |
2.2 |
3 |
|
|
M3 |
min |
2.5 |
37.9 |
4.2 |
8 |
|
max |
6.2 |
91.2 |
14.4 |
19 |
|
|
avg |
4.4 |
63.4 |
8.1 |
12 |
|
|
sd |
0.9 |
12.2 |
2.5 |
3 |
|
|
M4 |
min |
3.9 |
56.5 |
5.6 |
5 |
|
max |
6.0 |
87.5 |
9.6 |
12 |
|
|
avg |
4.7 |
67.9 |
7.7 |
9 |
|
|
sd |
0.5 |
7.7 |
1.2 |
2 |
|
|
M5 |
min |
3.6 |
54.1 |
4.5 |
5 |
|
max |
6.6 |
96.7 |
11.2 |
16 |
|
|
avg |
4.8 |
69.6 |
8.2 |
9 |
|
|
sd |
0.7 |
9.5 |
2.4 |
3 |
|
|
M6 |
min |
3.8 |
56.0 |
3.9 |
6 |
|
max |
5.0 |
72.0 |
12.0 |
14 |
|
|
avg |
4.5 |
64.3 |
7.6 |
9 |
|
|
sd |
0.4 |
4.5 |
2.4 |
3 |
|
|
M11 |
min |
3.8 |
56.5 |
4.0 |
6 |
|
max |
5.4 |
78.5 |
10.5 |
10 |
|
|
avg |
4.5 |
65.8 |
7.7 |
8 |
|
|
sd |
0.5 |
6.6 |
1.8 |
1 |
|
|
M12 |
min |
3.6 |
53.0 |
4.0 |
5 |
|
max |
5.5 |
80.3 |
12.2 |
19 |
|
|
avg |
4.5 |
65.1 |
7.5 |
9 |
|
|
sd |
0.6 |
7.5 |
2.5 |
3 |
|
Seawater intake results during mid-ebb tide, Table 4.7, show that DO levels ranged from 2.5 to 6.6 mg/L with an average of 4.6 mg/L. SS ranged between 5 and 22 mg/L with an average value of 9.8 mg/L. The monitoring results show that water quality at seawater intake stations, particularly at M2 and M3, was generally poorer than that at marine-based stations. The baseline monitoring results have demonstrated similar conditions. The low DO levels are expected to be attributable to adverse influencing factors such as discharges from outfalls in proximity to the monitoring points and poor seawater flushing in the area. Localised high SS levels were also recorded at distant station M12, which is outside the influence of project marine works at the current stage, on several occasions. The poor water quality at M6 is also due to adverse impacts from outfalls located adjacent to the station. During the reporting month large quantities of silty discharges from outfalls were observed and documented near station M5 on various occasions. Observations noted that the large patches of brown silty water generally dispersed westwards after discharge from the outfall. A figure showing the location of various outfalls along the seawall within the project area is shown in Annex C.
Table 4.8 is a summary of monitoring results from seawater intake
stations during mid-flood tide.
|
Station |
|
Parameter |
|||
|
DO
mg/L |
DO %
Sat. |
Turbidity
NTU |
SS
mg/L |
||
|
M1 |
min |
3.3 |
49.7 |
5.1 |
7 |
|
max |
5.2 |
75.7 |
9.1 |
12 |
|
|
avg |
4.3 |
63.6 |
7.0 |
9 |
|
|
sd |
0.5 |
7.1 |
1.2 |
1 |
|
|
M2 |
min |
3.6 |
54.7 |
5.7 |
7 |
|
max |
5.5 |
78.5 |
11.1 |
17 |
|
|
avg |
4.4 |
64.4 |
8.3 |
12 |
|
|
sd |
0.5 |
6.6 |
1.7 |
3 |
|
|
M3 |
min |
3.5 |
51.9 |
6.7 |
8 |
|
max |
5.2 |
74.6 |
15.1 |
16 |
|
|
avg |
4.3 |
62.3 |
9.2 |
12 |
|
|
sd |
0.5 |
6.7 |
2.4 |
3 |
|
|
M4 |
min |
3.8 |
56.7 |
5.7 |
7 |
|
max |
5.4 |
77.6 |
11.3 |
14 |
|
|
avg |
4.6 |
67.0 |
8.2 |
10 |
|
|
sd |
0.4 |
6.5 |
1.8 |
3 |
|
|
M5 |
min |
3.9 |
57.7 |
5.1 |
6 |
|
max |
5.7 |
80.7 |
10.4 |
13 |
|
|
avg |
4.6 |
66.2 |
7.8 |
9 |
|
|
sd |
0.5 |
6.6 |
1.5 |
2 |
|
|
M6 |
min |
3.5 |
52.1 |
4.1 |
6 |
|
max |
5.0 |
71.4 |
11.6 |
13 |
|
|
avg |
4.2 |
61.0 |
7.9 |
9 |
|
|
sd |
0.4 |
6.1 |
2.0 |
2 |
|
|
M11 |
min |
3.9 |
57.6 |
5.4 |
8 |
|
max |
6.0 |
87.8 |
13.5 |
21 |
|
|
avg |
4.7 |
67.4 |
9.2 |
11 |
|
|
sd |
0.6 |
8.4 |
2.2 |
3 |
|
|
M12 |
min |
3.5 |
51.7 |
3.7 |
5 |
|
max |
5.2 |
73.3 |
12.3 |
14 |
|
|
avg |
4.2 |
60.5 |
7.8 |
9 |
|
|
sd |
0.5 |
5.9 |
2.3 |
3 |
|
No waste management audit was scheduled
within this reporting period. The
arrangement of waste management audit will be detailed in the Waste Management
Plan.
As the works undertaken during the reporting
month were related to site investigation works, minor demolition works and
dredging works, the landscape and visual impacts are considered to be minimal.
The total number of exceedances for air,
noise and water quality are presented in following sections.
No air quality monitoring work was undertaken
during the reporting period.
No exceedances of noise quality were observed
during the reporting period.
DO levels were found to have exceeded the
Action Level at marine-based stations during the reporting month. Investigations found that they were due to
natural variation or changes in ambient conditions and not caused the project
marine works. It was noted that during the reporting month, water quality
at marine-based impact monitoring stations (M8 and M10) was found to be similar
to the control stations and the ambient level of DO increased slightly from the
previous month. However, DO
concentrations of less than 4.7 mg/L were still recorded during this period,
which is consistent with EPD's routine water quality monitoring results during
the month of November in recent years (see Annex K).
The November 2003 monitoring results also
showed occasional elevated concentrations of SS above the Action and/or Limit
Level at seawater intake stations.
Investigations into these monitoring results found that the SS levels may
be attributed to discharge influences from outfalls located in proximity of
seawater intake monitoring stations.
All of the high SS concentrations recorded were shown to be localised
conditions as no sediment plumes were detected at the marine-based impact
stations and no unusual concentrations were measured at adjacent monitoring
stations during the same time. High SS
levels were often recorded at locations (stations M1 to M6) with outfalls and
stormwater culverts that discharge into the harbour. Baseline monitoring results showed similar localised elevated
concentrations of SS.
No non-compliances with regard to waste
management were recorded in the reporting month.
No non-compliance with regard to landscape
and visual aspects were recorded in the reporting month.
No environmental non-compliances were found
during environmental site inspections conducted during the reporting
period. A joint site environmental
inspection with EPD's Local Control Officers and the IEC was conducted on 13
November 2003.
During the inspection carried out on 13
November 2003, two deficiencies were noted.
The first deficiency found was that the dust screen in the immediate
area next to the demolition works at Pier No. 7 did not provide sufficient
enclosure. The second deficiency was
that a small chemical container at the chemical storage area was not
labelled. An additional minor
deficiency was found on the site inspection conducted on 20 November 2003. The deficiency was that a chemical container
on the Wharf barge was not properly capped.
The Contractor rectified all deficiencies after being notified.
No environmental complaints were
received during the reporting period.
Further, no environmental prosecution notices or summons were received
during the reporting period.
The key issues to be considered in the coming
month include the following:
·
The Contractor has proposed to carry out alternate
dredging at IRAE and IRAW to complete the remaining part of IRAW within the
Star Ferry operation zone. An
additional monitoring programme for the alternate dredging trial is being
proposed and discussed by the by the Contractor, ER, IEC and ET;
·
The suspension of critical marine works and the
possibility of a further protracted suspension of works is an area of concern.
The construction works scheduled in December
2003 include dredging at IRAE, demolition of Pier No. 7, marine site
investigation for the Eastern Seawall and site investigation works. Based on the Contractor’s programme, the
Environmental Monitoring Programme for the next three months is planned as
follows:
TSP (24 hr and 1 hr monitoring)
Upon commencement of
dust generating activities within range of the closest air quality sensitive
receiver, dependent upon the Contractor’s programme.
Noise (Continuous
Measurements)
The noise monitoring
programme throughout the entire construction period is 24-hour continuous.
Water Quality
Monitoring
The water quality
monitoring schedule for the next 3 months is provided in the following table.
|
Date of Sampling |
Sampling Time |
|
|
1 December 2003 |
08:30 |
14:10 |
|
3 December 2003 |
08:30 |
15:18 |
|
5 December 2003 |
10:03 |
16:12 |
|
8 December 2003 |
11:30 |
17:00 |
|
10 December 2003 |
12:00 |
17:30 |
|
12 December 2003 |
09:00 |
14:30 |
|
15 December 2003 |
08:00 |
16:01 |
|
17 December 2003 |
12:00 |
17:30 |
|
19 December 2003 |
08:30 |
14:48 |
|
22 December 2003 |
11:23 |
16:38 |
|
24 December 2003 |
08:00 |
13:30 |
|
26 December 2003 |
09:00 |
14:38 |
|
29 December 2003 |
12:00 |
17:30 |
|
31 December 2003 |
08:30 |
14:00 |
|
2 January 2003 |
08:30 |
14:33 |
|
5 January 2003 |
10:30 |
16:00 |
|
7 January 2003 |
11:30 |
17:00 |
|
9 January 2003 |
08:30 |
14:00 |
|
12 January 2003 |
10:00 |
15:30 |
|
14 January 2003 |
11:39 |
17:25 |
|
16 January 2003 |
08:30 |
14:00 |
|
19 January 2003 |
10:00 |
15:30 |
|
21 January 2003 |
12:00 |
17:30 |
|
24 January 2003 |
09:00 |
14:30 |
|
26 January 2003 |
10:14 |
15:52 |
|
28 January 2003 |
11:25 |
17:00 |
|
30 January 2003 |
12:00 |
17:30 |
|
2 February 2003 |
10:18 |
17:00 |
|
4 February 2003 |
11:00 |
16:30 |
|
6 February 2003 |
12:00 |
17:30 |
|
9 February 2003 |
08:48 |
14:21 |
|
11 February 2003 |
09:52 |
15:48 |
|
13 February 2003 |
11:05 |
17:00 |
|
16 February 2003 |
09:15 |
17:00 |
|
18 February 2003 |
11:00 |
16:30 |
|
20 February 2003 |
12:00 |
17:30 |
|
23 February 2003 |
08:43 |
14:32 |
|
25 February 2003 |
09:30 |
15:40 |
|
27 February 2003 |
10:14 |
17:00 |
The construction programme for the next 3
months is provided in Annex B and will be updated by the
Contractor.
The ET will follow the Contractor’s proposed programme
to ensure the compliance of environmental performance and proper implementation
of all necessary mitigation measures.
During the reporting period,
no exceedances of environmental performance criteria were found to be caused by
the project works. For water quality
monitoring, low DO levels and elevated SS concentrations recorded were
investigated and have been attributed to either ambient conditions or adverse
influencing factors unrelated to project marine works. Daily ad-hoc monitoring was conducted
between 4 and 8 November 2003 due to an observed rise in turbidity levels on 3
November. However, the monitoring
results and an investigation later found that the temporary rise in levels was
not due to project works. It was found
that discharges from outfalls and stormwater culverts located near seawater
intake monitoring stations are major influencing factors that adversely impact
water quality within the works site area.
The marine-based impact
monitoring stations established to monitor the overall impact of the
reclamation activities on water quality in Victoria were shown to have similar
results as the control stations which are located outside the influence of
project works. As such, the water
quality monitoring results did not indicate that the marine works were
adversely affecting water quality outside the works boundary in Victoria
Harbour.
Three deficiencies were
recorded on environmental site inspections during the reporting period. The Contractor subsequently rectified all
the deficiencies after being notified.
The monitoring work for this
reporting month has been independently verified by the Independent
Environmental Checker (IEC) and has been found to be in compliance with the
requirements of the EM&A programme.