Figure 1.1 Layout of Work Site
1.3 Construction Works undertaken during the Reporting Month
1.4 Summary of EM&A Requirements
2.4 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
2.5 Monitoring Procedures and Calibration Details
3.4 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
3.5 Monitoring Procedures and Calibration Details
4.4 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
4.5 Monitoring Procedures and Calibration Details
5.1 Review of Environmental Monitoring Procedures
5.2 Assessment of Environmental Monitoring Results
5.4 Status of Environmental Licensing and Permitting
5.5 Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures
5.6 Implementation Status of Action/Limit Plans
5.7 Implementation Status of Environmental Complaint Handling Procedures
6.1 Status of Natural Gas supply
6.2 Key Issues for the Coming Month
6.3 Monitoring Schedules for the Next 3 Months
6.4 Construction Program for the Next 3 Months
List of Tables
Table 1.1 Construction
Activities and Their Corresponding Environmental Mitigation
Measures
Table 2.1 Air-Quality Monitoring Locations
Table 2.2 Air Quality Monitoring Equipment
Table 2.3 Air Quality Monitoring Parameter, Duration and Frequency
Table 3.1 Noise
Monitoring Locations
Table 3.2 Noise
Monitoring Equipment
Table 3.3 Noise
Monitoring Duration and Parameter
Table 4.1 Water Quality Monitoring Locations
Table 4.2 Water-Quality Monitoring Equipment
Table 4.3 Water Quality Monitoring Parameters and Frequency
Table 4.4 Laboratory
Analysis Methodologies of Marine Water Samples
Table 5.1 Summary of
AL Level Exceedances on Monitoring Parameters
Table 5.2 Estimated
Amounts of Waste Generated in April 2001
Table 5.3 Summary of
Environmental Licensing and Permit Status
Table 5.4 Environmental Complaints / Enquiries Received in April 2001
Table 5.5 Outstanding Environmental Complaints / Enquiries Received Before
List of figures
Figure
1.1 Layout
of Work Site
Figure
1.2 Location
of Dumping Area
Figure
2.1 Location
of Air Quality Monitoring Stations
Figure
3.1 Location
of Noise Monitoring Stations
Figure
4.1 Location
of Water Quality Monitoring Stations
Appendices
Appendix B Amount of Dredged and Dumped Marine
Sediment
Appendix C Action and Limit Levels for Air Quality, Noise, Water quality Monitoring
Appendix D Environmental
Monitoring Schedule
Appendix E Air
Quality Monitoring Results for April 2001
Appendix F Noise
Monitoring Results for April 2001
Appendix G Water
Quality Monitoring Results for April 2001
Appendix H The
QA/QC Procedures and Results
Appendix L Tentative Construction Programme
The site formation work for Lamma Extension started on 2nd April 2001 and the actual dredging work was conducted on 12th April 2001. This is the first monthly Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) report for the Project “Construction of Lamma Power Station Extension” prepared by the Environmental Team (ET). This report presents the results of impact monitoring on air quality, noise and marine water quality for the said project in April 2001.
Air, noise and water quality monitoring were performed. The results were checked against the established Action/Limit (AL) levels. An on-site audit was conducted once per week. The implementation status of the environmental mitigation measures, Event/Action Plan and environmental complaint handling procedures were also checked.
Environmental
Monitoring Works
One marine water quality
monitoring on 11th April 2001 was cancelled due to adverse weather
conditions. Except this, all monitoring work at designated stations was performed
on schedule in the reporting period.
Air Quality
No exceedance
of Action and Limit levels for air
quality was recorded in the
month.
Noise
Construction work was carried out during the restricted hours including
evening time and holidays (effective from 2nd April 2001) and
night-time (effective
from 24th April 2001). Four cases of Limit level exceedances
on 5-min Leq noise level were reported at Long Tsai Tsuen/Hung Shing Ye in the
reporting month. It is suspected
that two of them were caused by birds’ activities. As the limit level exceedances were not related to
construction activities, no further action can be devised.
Water Quality
A total of twenty-eight
cases of Action level exceedances and seventeen cases of Limit
Level exceedance for water quality were recorded in the reporting month. All of these exceedances
were considered not related to site activities. No further action was required.
Site Environmental Audit
Site audits
were carried out on a weekly basis to monitor environmental issues on the construction site. The site conditions were generally
satisfactory. All required
mitigation measures were implemented.
Environmental Licensing and Permitting
|
Description |
Permit No. |
Valid Period |
Issued To |
Date of Issuance |
|
|
From |
To |
||||
|
Varied Environmental Permit |
EP-071/2000/A |
22/12/00 |
- |
HEC |
22/12/00 |
|
Construction Noise Permit |
GW-UW0109-01 GW-UW0163-01 |
02/04/01 24/04/01 |
01/10/01 08/10/01 |
Contractor Contractor |
31/03/01 24/04/01 |
|
Dumping Permit |
EP/MD/01-174 |
07/04/01 |
06/10/01 |
Contractor |
27/03/01 |
Implementation
Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures
Environmental
mitigation measures for the dredging activities were implemented in the
reporting month.
Environmental
Complaints
No
complaint was received in the reporting month.
Concluding Remarks
The
environmental performance of the project was generally satisfactory.
The Environmental Team (hereinafter called the “ET”) was formed within the Hongkong Electric Co. Ltd (HEC) to undertake Environmental Monitoring and Audit for “Construction of Lamma Power Station Extension” (hereinafter called the “Project”). Under the requirements of Section 6 of Environmental Permit EP-071/2000/A, an EM&A programme for impact environmental monitoring as set out in the EM&A Manual (Construction Phase) is required to be implemented. In accordance with the EM&A Manual, environmental monitoring of air quality, noise and water quality and regular environmental audits are required for the Project.
The Project involves the construction of a gas-fired power station
employing combined cycled gas turbine technology, forming an extension to the
existing Lamma Power Station. The
following outlines the key elements of the Project including the construction
activities associated with the transmission system and submarine gas pipeline.
· dredging and reclamation to form approximately 22 hectares of usable area;
· construction of six 300MW class gas-fired combined cycle units;
· construction of a gas receiving station;
· construction of a new transmission system linking the Lamma Extension to load centres on Hong Kong Island;
· laying of a gas pipeline for the supply of natural gas to the new power station
This report summarizes the environmental monitoring and
audit work for the Project for the month of April 2001
An
Environmental Management Committee (EMC) has been set up in HEC to oversee the
Project. The management structure
includes the following:
· Environmental Protection Department (The Authority);
· Environmental Manager (The Chairman of the Environmental Management Committee);
· Engineer;
· Independent Environmental Checker (IEC);
· Environmental Team (ET);
· Contractor.
The project organisation chart for the construction EM&A programme is shown in Appendix A.
1.3
Construction Works undertaken during the Reporting
Month
The site formation work for Lamma Extension started on 2nd April 2001 and the actual dredging work commenced on 12th April 2001. Construction activities undertaken during the reporting month were dredging and dumping of dredged mud. A Layout Plan showing the dredging locations for the Project is shown in Figure 1.1. The total volume of dredged material from 12th to 30th April 2001 was 214,132m3. No filling activities were undertaken in the month. Uncontaminated materials were dumped at the assigned location within the South Cheung Chau Spoil Disposal Area and the total dumped volume in April 2001 was 214,132m3. Figure 1.2 shows all dumping locations for this project. Daily records of dredged / dumped volume are presented in Appendix B.
The main construction activities carried out during the reporting month and the corresponding environmental mitigation measures are summarized in Table 1.1. The implementation of major mitigation measures in the month is provided in Appendix K.
Table 1.1 Construction Activities and Their Corresponding Environmental Mitigation Measures
|
Item |
Construction
Activities |
Environmental Mitigation Measures |
|
1 |
Dredging |
The following mitigation measures related to dredging have been
implemented:
|
1.4 Summary of EM&A Requirements
The EM&A program requires environmental monitoring
for air, noise and water
quality. Regular environmental site audits for air quality, noise, water
quality and waste management were
carried out. The detailed EM&A monitoring
work for air quality, noise
and water quality are described in Sections 2, 3 and 4
respectively.
The
following environmental audits are summarized in Section 5 of this report:
· Environmental monitoring results;
· Waste Management Records;
· Weekly site audit results;
· The status of environmental licensing and permits for the Project;
· The implementation status of environmental protection and pollution control/ mitigation measures.
Future key issues will be reported in Section 6 of this report.
1-hour and 24-hour TSP monitoring at agreed frequencies were conducted to monitor air
quality. The impact
monitoring data were checked against the Action/Limit Levels as determined in the Baseline Monitoring
Report (Construction Phase). Appendix C
shows the established Action/Limit Levels for Air Quality.
Three
dust monitoring locations were selected for 1-hour TSP sampling (AM1, AM2 &
AM3) whereas four monitoring locations were selected for 24-hour TSP sampling
(AM1, AM2, AM3 and AM4). Table 2.1 tabulates the monitoring stations. The locations of the monitoring
stations are shown in Figure 2.1.
Table 2.1 Air-Quality Monitoring Locations
|
Location I.D. |
Description |
|
AM1 |
Reservoir |
|
AM2 |
East Gate |
|
AM3 |
Ash Lagoon |
|
AM4 |
Tai Yuen Village |
Continuous
24-hour TSP air quality monitoring was performed using the GS2310 High Volume
Air Samplers (HVAS), Partisol Model 2000 Sampler and the MINIVOL Portable
Sampler at AM1&2, AM3 and AM4 respectively. TEOM Model 1400a continuous dust monitors were used to carry
out the 1-hour TSP monitoring at AM1, AM2 and AM3. Table 2.2 summarises the equipment used
in the dust monitoring.
Table 2.2 Air Quality Monitoring Equipment
|
Equipment |
Model and Make |
|
24-hour
sampling: HVAS
Sampler Partisol
Air Sampler MINIVOL
Portable Sampler 1-hour
sampling: Continuous
TSP Dust Meter |
Model GS2310 Anderson Instruments Inc. Partisol Model 2000 Rupprecht & Patashnick AIRMETRICS TEOM Model 1400a Rupprecht & Patashnick |
2.4
Monitoring
Parameters, Frequency and Duration
Table 2.3 summarises the monitoring parameters, duration and
frequency of air quality monitoring.
The monitoring schedule for the reporting month is shown in Appendix D.
Table 2.3 Air Quality Monitoring Parameter,
Duration and Frequency
|
Monitoring Stations |
Parameter |
Duration |
Frequency |
|
AM1 |
1-hour TSP |
1 |
3 times every 6 days |
|
24-hour TSP |
24 |
Once every 6 days |
|
|
AM2 |
1-hour TSP |
1 |
3 times every 6 days |
|
24-hour TSP |
24 |
Once every 6 days |
|
|
AM3 |
1-hour TSP |
1 |
3 times every 6 days |
|
24-hour TSP |
24 |
Once every 6 days |
|
|
AM4 |
24-hour TSP |
24 |
Once every 6 days |
2.5
Monitoring Procedures and Calibration Details
24- hour TSP Monitor:
Preparation of
Filter Papers
·
Visual
inspection of filter papers was made to ensure that no pinholes, tears and
creases were found;
·
The filter papers were then labelled before sampling.
·
The filter
papers were equilibrated at room temperature and relative humidity < 50% for
at least 24 hours before weighing.
Field
Monitoring
·
During
collection of the sampled filter paper, the information on the elapse timer was
logged. Site observations around
the monitoring stations, which might have affected the monitoring results, were also recorded. Major pollution sources, if any, would
be identified and reported. The
flow record chart for the previous sampling was checked to see if there was any
abnormality.
·
The post-sampling
filter papers were removed carefully from the filter holder and folded to avoid
loss of fibres or dust particles from the filter papers;
·
The
filter holder and its surrounding were cleaned;
·
A pre-weighed
blank filter paper for the next sampling was put in place and aligned
carefully. The filter holder
should be tightened firmly to avoid leakage;
·
A new
flow record chart was set into the flow recorder;
·
The
programmable timer was set for the next sampling period of 24 hrs ! 1/2 hr;
·
The
post-sampling filter papers were equilibrated at room temperature and relative
humidity < 50% for at least 24 hours before weighing.
1- hour
TSP Monitor:
· The following parameters of the TEOM model dust meters are regularly checked to ensure proper functionality:
¨ Mass concentration;
¨ Total mass;
¨ Frequency of the tapered element;
¨ Electrical noise;
¨ Main flow;
¨ Auxiliary flow.
Maintenance
& Calibration
·
The monitoring
equipment and their accessories are maintained in good working conditions.
·
Monitoring
equipment is calibrated at monthly intervals. Calibration details are shown in Appendix
H.
Dust
monitoring was conducted as scheduled in the reporting month. All monitoring
data and graphical presentation of the monitoring results are provided in Appendix E. Key findings and observations are provided as below:
1-hour TSP
No
exceedance of 1-hour TSP Action/Limit Level was recorded in the month.
24-hour TSP
No
exceedance of 24-hour TSP Action/Limit Levels was reported in the month.
Continuous noise alarm monitoring at Ash Lagoon/Ching Lam were carried out to calculate the noise contributed by the construction activities at the two critical NSR’s at Long Tsai Tsuen/Hung Shing Ye and the school within the village of Tai Wan San Tsuen. The noise impact monitoring data for construction noise other than percussive piling were checked against the limit levels as specified in the EM&A Manual. With the availability of the two construction noise permits on 2/4 and 24/4 respectively, impact monitoring for the construction work during the restricted hours was also carried out. Section 5 presents the details of the construction noise permits.
As there
were no activities for the construction of the transmission system, no manual
noise measurement at the Pak Kok Tsui residences was carried out in the
reporting month. Appendix C shows the established Action/Limit
Levels for noise.
In accordance with the EM&A manual, the identified noise monitoring locations are listed in Table 3.1 and shown in Figure 3.1.
Table
3.1 Noise Monitoring
Locations
|
Purpose of noise monitoring |
Monitoring Location |
|
Lamma Extension |
Ash Lagoon |
|
Lamma Extension |
Ching Lam |
The sound level meters used for noise monitoring complied with International Electrotechnical Commission Publications 651:1979 (Type 1) and 804:1985 (Type 1). The noise monitoring equipment used is shown in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2 Noise Monitoring Equipment
|
Equipment |
Model |
|
Sound level meter |
Rion NA-27 |
|
Calibrator (IEC 60942 Class 1) |
Rion NC-74 |
3.4 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
Continuous noise alarm monitoring of A-weighted Leq
levels was carried out at Ash Lagoon and Ching Lam. The measurement duration and
parameter of noise monitoring were presented in Table 3.3
as follows:
Table 3.3 Noise Monitoring Duration and
Parameter
|
Location |
Time Period |
Frequency |
Parameter |
|
Ash Lagoon Ching Lam |
Daytime: 0700-1900
hrs on normal weekdays Evening-time
& holiday *: 0700-2300 hrs on holidays; and 1900-2300 hrs on
all other days Night-time
*: 2300-0700 hrs of next
day |
Daytime: 30 minutes Evening-time
& holiday: 5 minutes Night-time: 5 minutes |
30-min
LAeq 5-min
LAeq 5-min
LAeq |
* Noise monitoring is only carried out after the CNP was effective
3.5
Monitoring Procedures and
Calibration Details
Monitoring Procedures
The measured noise
levels (MNL's) were collected at the noise alarm monitoring
stations at Ash Lagoon and Ching Lam. The notional
background noise levels (viz. baseline noise data at
Ash Lagoon and Ching Lam) were applied to the corresponding MNL's in
30-min/5-min LAeq.
A wind speed sensor was installed at Station Building
Rooftop. The wind speed signal was used to determine whether the
data from Ash Lagoon and Ching Lam noise alarm monitoring stations were affected. The instantaneous data was discarded in case the
instantaneous wind speed exceeded
10 m/s. The 30-min/5-min LAeq was
considered valid only if the amount of valid data was equal to or above 70%.
The Environmental Team, when calibrating the noise measuring equipment, recorded all observations around the monitoring stations, which might have affected the monitoring results.
Equipment Calibration
Monthly calibration of the noise measuring equipment was carried out. Calibration details are shown in Appendix H.
The sound level meters and calibrators were verified by
the manufacturer. A copy of calibration certificates is shown in Appendix H.
Continuous noise monitoring was conducted at the two monitoring stations at Ash Lagoon and Ching Lam. All monitoring results and their graphical presentations are provided in Appendix F.
Based on monitoring results, four cases of
noise limit level exceedances were estimated for Long Tsai Tsuen/Hung Shing Ye
in the reporting month. Details
are summarised
as follows:
|
Date |
Time |
Cause |
Action taken |
|
8/4/2001 |
13:05-13:15 |
Two limit level exceedances on
noise at Long Tsai Tsuen/Hung Shing Ye was recorded (measured noise level: 66 and 63dBA; Limit noise level:
60dBA). As there was
no dredging work on that day, the exceedances were not related to the
construction work. Hence no further action was required. |
The construction
contractor was informed of
the limit
level exceedances for investigation of the causes on 17/4/2001. IEC and EPD were informed of
the exceedances on 27/4/2001. |
|
30/4/2001 |
05:10-05:15 |
One marginal limit level
exceedance on noise at Long Tsai Tsuen/Hung Shing Ye was recorded (measured noise level: 46dBA; Limit noise
level: 45dBA). After
investigation, it is suspected that the limit level exceedance was caused by
birds’ activities as birds were seen to gather around the noise monitoring
station early in the morning.
Measures to deter birds are being devised. |
The construction
contractor was informed of
the limit
level exceedance for investigation of the causes on 5/5/2001. IEC and EPD were informed of
the exceedance on 11/5/2001. |
|
1/5/2001 |
06:40-06:45 |
One marginal limit level
exceedance on noise at Long Tsai Tsuen/Hung Shing Ye was recorded (measured noise level: 46dBA; Limit noise
level: 45dBA). After
investigations, it is suspected that the limit level exceedance was caused by
birds’ activities as birds were seen to gather around the noise monitoring
station early in the morning.
Measures to deter birds are being devised. |
The construction
contractor was informed of
the limit
level exceedance for investigation of the causes on 5/5/2001. IEC and EPD were informed of
the exceedance on 11/5/2001. |
Marine
water quality monitoring at the monitoring locations adjacent to the dredging
and filling operations for Lamma Extension was carried out by a monitoring
consultant, HKPC. The purpose was
to ensure that any deterioration of water quality could be detected and that
timely action would be taken to rectify the situation. The impact monitoring data were checked
against the AL levels as set out
in the Baseline Monitoring Report (Construction Phase).
As there were no activities for the laying of the gas pipeline in the
reporting month, no water quality impact monitoring at the relevant stations
was carried out. Appendix C shows the established
Action/Limit Levels for water quality.
A total of twelve water quality monitoring locations were selected. 7 Sensitive Receiver
(SR) stations were chosen on the basis of their proximity to the dredging and
filling operations, 5 Marine Control Stations (C) as recommended in the EIA were selected to facilitate
comparison of the water quality of the SR stations with ambient water quality
conditions. Table 4.1
describes the locations of these monitoring stations. Their locations are shown
in Figure 4.1.
Table 4.1 Water Quality Monitoring Locations
|
Type |
Monitoring Location |
HK Metric Grid E |
HK Metric Grid N |
|
Sensitive Receiver
Stations |
SR1 |
830 224 |
811 528 |
|
SR2 |
829 004 |
810 903 |
|
|
SR3 |
829 194 (829 166)1 |
808 600 (808 592)1 |
|
|
SR4 |
830 119 |
808 650 |
|
|
SR5 |
830 386 |
807 189 |
|
|
SR6 |
829 977 |
805 758 |
|
|
SR7 |
829 566 |
804 545 |
|
|
Marine Control Stations |
C1 |
830 542 |
813 492 |
|
C2 |
828 608 |
813 492 |
|
|
C3 |
826 776 |
809 978 |
|
|
C4 |
826 776 |
806 464 |
|
|
C5 |
830 440 |
802 186 |
1. Due to the construction programme, the
monitoring location SR3 was slightly shifted since the monitoring on 16th
April 2001. EPD has verbally been
informed of the shift of the monitoring location.
Table 4.2 summarizes the equipment used in the baseline water-quality monitoring
programme.
Table 4.2 Water-Quality Monitoring Equipment
|
Equipment |
Detection
Limit |
|
YSI 6820 Water Quality Monitor |
Temperature: -5 to 50 0C; +/- 0.15 0C Salinity: 0 to 70 ppt; +/- 0.2 ppt Dissolved Oxygen: 0 to 200%; +/- 0.5% 0 to 20 mg/L; +/- 0.2 mg/L Turbidity: 0 to 100 and 100 to 1000 NTU; +/- 5%
of the range |
|
Trimble NT200 GPS |
Accuracy better than 3m |
4.4
Monitoring
Parameters, Frequency and Duration
Table 4.3
summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequencies and total duration of water
quality monitoring. The monitoring schedule for reporting month is shown in Appendix D.
Table 4.3 Water Quality Monitoring Parameters and Frequency
|
Monitoring Stations |
Parameters |
Frequency |
No. of Depths |
No. of Samples |
|
Sensitive Receiver Stations SR1, SR2,
SR4, SR5, SR6 & SR7 Marine Control Stations C1, C2,
C3, C4 & C5 |
· Depth, m · Temperature, oC · Salinity, ppt · DO, mg/L · DO Saturation, % · Turbidity, NTU · SS, mg/L · pH · Total inorganic nitrogen, mg/L ·
Un-ionised
ammonia, mg/L |
3 Surface, Mid-Depth
and Bottom |
2 Mid-ebb
and Mid-flood |
For
laboratory analysis of marine water samples collected at SR3, only SS parameter
was measured.
4.5
Monitoring
Procedures and Calibration Details
Monitoring
Procedures
· The monitoring stations were accessed using survey boat to within 3m, guided by Differential Global Positioning System (DGPS).
· The depth of the monitoring location was measured using depth meter in order to determine the sampling depths. Afterwards, the water sampler was lowered into the water to the required depths of sampling. Upon reaching the pre-determined depth, a messenger to activate the sampler was then released to travel down the wire. The water sample was sealed within the sampler before retrieving.
· All in-situ measurements at each monitoring stations were taken at 3 water depths, where appropriate, namely 1m below water surface, mid-depth, and 1 meter from seabed, except where the water depth was less than 6m, the mid-depth measurement was omitted. If the water depth was less than 3m, only the mid-depth position was monitored.
· At each measurement/sampling depth, two consecutive measurements were taken. The probes were retrieved out of the water after the first measurement and then redeployed for the second measurement. Where the difference in the value between the first and the second readings of each set was more than 25% of the value of the first reading, the reading was discarded and further samplings were taken.
· The duplicate water samples for physical and chemical analysis were stored into a pre-labelled high-density polyethylene (HDPE) bottle pre-rinsed with the same water samples. The sample bottles were than packed in cool-box (cooled to 4oC without being frozen) and delivered to a HOKLAS Laboratory for analysis upon the completion of each round of sampling.
· In addition, field information such as general meteorological conditions and any observations regarding any significant activities in the vicinity of each monitoring location were also recorded. Major water pollution sources, if any, would be identified and recorded.
Equipment
Calibration
The
equipment deployed for in-situ measurement of marine water quality was
calibrated before use. The
methodologies for the calibration follow the instruction manuals provided by
the corresponding manufacturers.
The calibration records are shown in Appendix H.
Laboratory Analysis & QA/QC
The collected marine water samples were analyzed for Suspended Solids, Total Inorganic Nitrogen and Unionized Ammonia with methodologies as summarized in Table 4.4.
Table 4.4 Laboratory
Analysis Methodologies of Marine Water Samples
|
Parameter |
Method |
Limit of Reporting
(mg/L) |
|
Suspended Solids |
APHA 17 ed 2540 D |
1.0 |
|
Total Inorganic Nitrogen |
APHA 18 ed 4500 NO2 B & NO3 E + APHA 17ed 4500-NH3B, E |
0.01 |
|
Ammoniacal Nitrogen (Un-ionized Ammonia) |
APHA 17 ed 4500-NH3 G |
0.01 (Limit of Reporting for Ammoniacal Nitrogen) x degree of ionization |
Note: The determination of unionized ammonia was based on the articles entitled “Aqueous Ammonia Equilibrium Calculation: Effect of pH and Temperature” and “Ionization of Ammonia in Seawater: Effects of Temperature, pH and Salinity” which was accepted by EPD.
In order to ensure that the laboratory analysis works were carried out properly, stringent QA/QC procedures (which includes the sample preparation as well as the subsequent instrumentation analysis) were followed. According to the requirements as stipulated in the EM&A Manual, QA/QC requirements for laboratory testing include: 1) "Blind" duplicate samples analysis of 10% collected marine water samples; and 2) in-house QA/QC procedures of the testing laboratory (this includes the use of blank, batch duplicates, quality control samples and matrix spike recovery test).
Blind Duplicate:
In order to cross check the precision of the measurement results obtained from the laboratory analysis, “blind” duplicate samples of 10% of the collected marine water samples were analysed alongside the normal samples. The sample codes for the “blind” duplicates were determined by the sampling team and are not identifiable by the laboratory. The results of the “blind” duplicate samples are summarized in Appendix H.
In accordance with the QA/QC procedures of Environmental Management Laboratory of HKPC, QA/QC procedures shall be conducted for at least 5% of samples. A total of 792 sets of samples (for Total Inorganic Nitrogen and Unionized Ammonia) and 864 sets of samples (for Suspended Solids analysis) were received during the marine monitoring period including both ebb and flood tides. Therefore at least 5% laboratory blanks, batch duplicates, quality control samples and recovery tests for each parameter were conducted. The acceptance criteria are outlined in each type of Quality Control data.
Blank:
A laboratory blank is an analyte free matrix to which all reagents are added in the same volumes or proportions as used in the standard sample preparation to monitor contamination introduced in laboratory. The acceptance criterion for laboratory blank in Environmental Management Division (EMD) Laboratory of HKPC stipulated in EMD Quality Manual is less than the detection limit. All the laboratory blank values and acceptance criterion of the following testing parameter are summarized in Appendix H.
· Suspended Solids
· Unionized Ammonia
· Total Inorganic Nitrogen
Batch Duplicate:
Batch duplicate is an intra-laboratory split sample randomly selected from the sample batch to monitor the method precision in a given matrix. The acceptance limit of duplicate values of the following testing parameters and their duplicate results are summarized in Appendix H.
· Suspended Solids
· Unionized Ammonia
· Total Inorganic Nitrogen
Quality Control Sample:
The quality control sample is the analysis of material with a known concentration of contaminants to determine the accuracy of results in a given matrix. The quality control samples are not applicable to all testing parameters due to the constraints of the testing parameters. The quality control samples results for the following testing parameters are shown in Appendix H.
· Unionized Ammonia
· Total Inorganic Nitrogen
Quality control sample testing is not applicable to the testing of Suspended Solids.
Matrix Spike:
Matrix spike is an intra-laboratory split of a sample digested spiked with target known concentration analyte to determine method bias in a given matrix. The matrix spike is applicable to the following tests:
· Unionized Ammonia
· Total Inorganic Nitrogen
Matrix spike testing is not applicable to testing of Suspended Solids. The matrix spike samples results are shown in Appendix H.
The QA/QC results in Appendix H indicated that the laboratory analysis works of the collected marine water samples were properly carried out and the measurement results obtained were valid in accordance with the Hong Kong Laboratory Accreditation Scheme (HOKLAS) requirements. On the other hand, the “blind” duplicate measurement results indicated that the precision of the measurements for Suspended Solids, Total Inorganic Nitrogen and Unionized Ammonia are in compliance with the HOKLAS requirements.
Marine water monitoring was conducted as scheduled in
the reporting month except the monitoring on 11th April 2001 which was
cancelled due to adverse weather.
All monitoring data and graphical presentation of the monitoring results
are provided in Appendix G. Key findings and observations are
provided in the following tables:
Summary of Exceedances in Dissolved Oxygen
(Surface and Middle) in April 2001
|
Monitoring Dates |
Number of Exceedances |
Investigation Findings (if any) |
|
|
Action Level |
Limit Level |
||
|
2nd April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
4th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
6th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
9th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
13th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
16th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
18th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
20th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
23rd April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
25th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
27th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
30th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
Summary of Exceedances in Dissolved Oxygen
(Bottom) in April 2001
|
Monitoring Dates |
Number of Exceedances |
Investigation Findings (if any) |
|
|
Action Level |
Limit Level |
||
|
2nd April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
4th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
6th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
9th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
13th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
16th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
18th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
20th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
23rd April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
25th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
27th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
30th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
Summary of Exceedances in Turbidity (Depth
Average) in April 2001
|
Monitoring Dates |
No. of Exceedances |
Investigation Findings (if any) |
|
|
Action Level |
Limit Level |
||
|
2nd April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
4th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
6th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
9th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
13th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
16th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
18th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
20th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
23rd April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
25th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
27th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
30th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
Summary of Exceedances in Suspended Solids
(Depth Average) in April 2001
|
Monitoring Dates |
Number of Exceedances |
Investigation Findings (if any) |
|
|
Action Level |
Limit Level |
||
|
2nd April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
4th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
6th April |
0 |
1 (SR1 at mid flood tide) |
Not
related to site activities since no dredging and reclamation works were
carried out |
|
9th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
13th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
16th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
18th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
20th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
23rd April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
25th April |
1 (SR1 at mid flood) |
0 |
Not
related to site activities since SR1 was located at the upstream of the study
area during the sampling |
|
27th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
30th April |
0 |
1 (SR1 at mid flood) |
Not
related to site activities since the results at SR2,
located upstream of SR1, was much lower than the result at SR1
suggesting that the background fluctuation is significant |
Summary of Exceedances in Unionized Ammonia
(Depth Average) in April 2001
|
Monitoring Dates |
Number of Exceedances |
Investigation Findings (if
any) |
|
|
Action Level |
Limit Level |
||
|
2nd April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
4th April |
1 (SR6 at mid ebb tide) |
0 |
Not related to site activities since no dredging works were carried
out |
|
6th April |
1 (SR2 at mid ebb tide) |
0 |
Not related to site activities since no dredging
works were carried out |
|
9th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
13th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
16th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
18th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
20th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
23rd April |
5 (SR1, SR2, SR5, SR7 during mid ebb; SR2
during mid flood) |
0 |
The exceedances at SR1 and
SR2 during ebb tide were not related to site activities since they were located upstream of the site works activities during the sampling. The exceedances at SR5 and
SR7 during mid ebb tide were not related to site activities. By reviewing the literature data of
EPD in 1999, the range of SS in the vicinity of the said stations (i.e. SM5) was <0.001 to 0.003,
therefore the elevated measurement results might be due to the background
fluctuation of the study area. For the elevated
measurement result at SR2 during flood tide, the routine monitoring results
on 25/4/01 at the flood tide was used for result
confirmation purpose and it was below the Action Level. Therefore, it is considered that the
elevated measurement result at SR2 during flood tide might be due to the
background fluctuation. |
|
25th April |
1 (SR2 at mid ebb) |
0 |
The exceedance was not
related to site activities. It was
rainy during sampling and SR2 was located quite close to the shore. Therefore, it would be expected that the water
quality at SR2 was significantly affected by the surface runoff from the shore. |
|
27th April |
8 (SR1,SR4, SR5, SR6 &
SR7 at mid ebb; (SR2, SR5 & SR6 at mid flood) |
2 (SR2 at mid ebb; SR7 at
mid flood) |
Measurement results at
control stations were notably high (some measurements
even higher than the impact station results) indicating that the background concentrations were already high. In addition, based on the site diary there was no
significant increase in the magnitude of construction works at the site area.
On the other hand, as recorded from the AFCD that red tide occurred in HK waters on 25th
April suggesting that the elevated measurement results might be due to the
background fluctuation. Taking the above into account, the said exceedances were considered not related to site
activities. |
|
30th April |
7 (SR4, SR5, SR6 & SR7
during mid ebb; SR5, SR6 and SR7 during mid flood) |
0 |
Measurement results at
control stations were found to be higher than the impact stations results
suggesting that the background concentration were high. The said exceedances were considered
not related to site activities.
However, it was found that the magnitude of exceedances have decreased
as compared with the results on 27th April 2001. |
Summary of Exceedances in Total Inorganic
Nitrogen (Depth Average) in April 2001
|
Monitoring Dates |
Number of Exceedances |
Investigation Findings (if any) |
|
|
Action Level |
Limit Level |
||
|
2nd April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
4th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
6th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
9th April |
1 (SR4 at mid flood) |
1 (SR4 at mid ebb) |
Not related to site activities since no dredging works were carried
out |
|
13th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
16th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
18th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
20th April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
23rd April |
0 |
0 |
N. A. |
|
25th April |
0 |
1 (SR2 at mid ebb) |
The exceedance was not
related to site activities. It was
rainy during sampling and SR2 was located quite close to the shore. Therefore, it would be expected that the water
quality at SR2 was significantly affected by the surface runoff from the shore. |
|
27th April |
1 (SR4 at mid ebb) |
9 (SR1, SR2, SR5, SR6
& SR7 during mid ebb; SR2, SR5, SR6 and SR7 during mid flood) |
Measurement results at
control stations were notably high (some measurements
even higher than the impact station results) indicating that the background concentrations were already high. In addition, based on the site diary there was no
significant increase in the magnitude of construction works at the site
area. On the other hand, as
recorded from the AFCD that red tide occurred
in HK waters on 25th April 2001 suggesting
that the elevated measurement results might be due to the background
fluctuation. Taking the above into account, the said exceedances were considered not related to site
activities. |
|
30th April |
2 (SR2 & SR4 during
mid ebb) |
2 (SR5 & SR6 during
mid ebb) |
Measurement results at
control stations were found to be higher than the impact stations results
suggesting that the background concentration were high. The said exceedances were considered
not related to site activities.
However, it was found that the magnitude of exceedances have decreased
as compared with the results on 27th April 2001. |
As all of the above exceedances were not related to site activities, no
further action need to be devised.
Nevertheless, EPD, IEC and the construction contractor have been
informed of the exceedances accordingly as per the requirements of the EM&A
Manual.
5.1
Review of Environmental Monitoring Procedures
The environmental
monitoring procedures were regularly reviewed by the Environmental Team. No modification to the existing monitoring procedures was recommended.
5.2
Assessment
of Environmental Monitoring Results
Monitoring results for Air Quality, Noise and Water Quality
The environmental monitoring results for Air Quality, Noise and Water Quality in April 2001 presented in sections 2,3 and 4 respectively are summarized in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1 Summary of AL Level Exceedances on Monitoring
Parameters
|
Item |
Parameter
Monitored |
Monitoring
Period |
No.
of Exceedances In |
Event/Action
Plan Implementation Status and Results |
||
|
Action
Level |
Limit Level |
|||||
|
Air |
||||||
|
1 |
Ambient TSP (24-hour) |
02/04/01-30/04/01 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
2 |
Ambient TSP (1-hour) |
02/04/01-30/04/01 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
Noise |
||||||
|
1 |
Noise level at the critical NSR’s predicted by the noise alarm monitoring system |
02/04/01-30/04/01 |
0 |
4 |
The exceedances were considered not related to the construction site. For details, please refer to section 3 of the report. |
|
|
2 |
Manual noise monitoring at the Pak Kok Tsui residences |
02/04/01-30/04/01 |
NA |
NA |
Construction of transmission system not yet commenced. |
|
|
Water |
||||||
|
1 |
DO (Surface & Middle) |
02/04/01-30/04/01 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
2 |
DO (Bottom) |
02/04/01-30/04/01 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
3 |
SS |
02/04/01-30/04/01 |
1 |
2 |
The exceedances were considered not related to the construction site. Please refer to section 4 of the report for details. |
|
|
4 |
Turbidity |
02/04/01-30/04/01 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
5 |
NH3-N |
02/04/01-30/04/01 |
23 |
2 |
The exceedances were considered not related to the construction site. Please refer to section 4 of the report for details. |
|
|
6 |
TIN |
02/04/01-30/04/01 |
4 |
13 |
The exceedances were considered not related to the construction site. Please refer to section 4 of the report for details. |
|
Waste
Management Records
The estimated amounts of different types of waste
generated in April 2001 are shown in Table 5.2.
Table
5.2 Estimated Amounts of Waste
Generated in April 2001
|
Waste Type |
Description |
Estimated Amount (m3) |
|
Dredged Materials |
Marine Mud |
|
|
Construction Waste |
Concrete Waste, Used formwork |
0 |
|
Excavated Materials |
Rock and soil |
0 |
|
General Refuse |
Domestic wastes collected on site |
1 |
The total bulk volume of dredged material was 214,132m3. No filling took place.
EPD officials have inspected the construction site on 4th
April 2001 and 20th April 2001. They were generally satisfied with the environmental performance of the Project. In addition to these, site audits were carried out by ET on a weekly basis to monitor
environmental issues on the construction sites to ensure that all mitigation
measures were implemented timely and properly. The site conditions were generally satisfactory. All required mitigation measures were
implemented. The weekly
site inspection results
are attached in Appendix J.
5.4 Status of Environmental Licensing and Permitting
All permits/licenses obtained
as of April
2001 are summarised in Table 5.3.
Table 5.3 Summary of Environmental Licensing and Permit Status
|
Description |
Permit No. |
Valid Period |
highlights |
Status |
|
|
From |
To |
||||
|
Varied Environmental Permit |
EP-071/2000/A |
22/12/00 |
- |
The whole construction work sites |
Valid |
|
Construction Noise Permit |
GW-UW0109-01 GW-UW0163-01 |
02/04/01 24/04/01 |
01/10/01 08/10/01 |
4 derrick barges, 4 dredger grabs and 6 tug boats for 0700 to 2300
& holiday 2 dredger barges and 1 tug boat for 2300 to 0700 next day |
Valid |
|
Dumping Permit |
EP/MD/01-174 |
07/04/01 |
06/10/01 |
Dumping at South Cheung Chau Disposal Area |
Valid |
5.5
Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation
Measures
Mitigation measures detailed in the permits and the EM&A Manual (Construction
Phase) are required to be implemented. An updated summary of the Environmental Mitigation Implementation Schedule (EMIS) is
presented in Appendix K.
5.6 Implementation Status of Action/Limit Plans
The Action/Event Plans for air quality, noise and water quality extracted from the EM&A Manual (Construction Phase) are presented in Appendix I.
As all the action/limit level exceedances were not related to the construction work, no further action can be devised. Nevertheless, EPD, IEC and the construction contractor have been informed of the exceedances accordingly as per requirements of the EM&A Manual.
5.7 Implementation Status of Environmental Complaint Handling Procedures
There was no complaint / enquiry on environmental issues received in April 2001.
Table 5.4 Environmental
Complaints / Enquiries Received in April 2001
|
Case Reference / Date, Time Received / Date, Time Concerned |
Descriptions /Actions Taken |
Conclusion / Status |
|
Nil |
N/A |
N/A |
Table 5.5 Outstanding Environmental
Complaints / Enquiries Received Before
|
Case Reference / Date, Time Received / Date, Time Concerned |
Descriptions /Actions Taken |
Conclusion / Status |
|
Nil |
N/A |
N/A |
6.1
Status
of Natural Gas supply
Based on current project schedule HEC anticipates there is no delay in the supply of natural gas.
6.2 Key Issues for the Coming Month
Key issues to be considered in the coming month include:
·
Noise
from the operating equipment and machinery on-site;
·
Accumulation
of waste materials on site.
The following mitigation measures are required:
Construction
Noise Impact
·
To
follow up any exceedance caused by the construction works.
Construction
Water Impact
· To avoid the debris floating/suspending in the sea which may probably be generated during filling works.
Construction
Waste Management
·
To
check for any accumulation of waste materials or rubbish on site.
6.3 Monitoring Schedules for the Next 3 Months
The tentative environmental monitoring schedules for the next 3 months are shown in Appendix D.
6.4 Construction Program for the Next 3 Months
The tentative construction program for the next 3 months is shown in Appendix L.
Environmental monitoring and site inspection were performed on schedule in the reporting month except one marine water quality monitoring which was cancelled on 11th April 2001 due to adverse weather. All monitoring results were checked and reviewed.
No Action/Limit level exceedance on 1-hour and 24-hour TSP level was recorded in the reporting month.
A total of four cases of limit level exceedance on noise were recorded in the reporting month. It is suspected that two of them were caused by birds’ activities. As the limit level exceedances were not related to construction activities, no further action can be devised.
A total of 45 cases of action/limit level exceedance on water quality parameters were recorded in the reporting month. As the action/limit level exceedances were not related to construction activities, no further action can be devised.
Environmental
mitigation measures recommended in the EM&A manual for the dredging
activities were implemented in the reporting month. No environmental complaint was received in the reporting month. No prosecution was received for
this Project in the
reporting period.
The
environmental performance of the
Project was generally satisfactory.
