|
Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System |
Contents
1
Introduction
1.1
Purpose
of the Manual
1.1.1.1 In accordance with Condition
3.1 of Environmental Permit (EP) (EP No. EP-489/2014), an updated Environmental
Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) Manual shall be prepared before the
commencement of construction works. The first submission of Updated EM&A
was made to the Environmental Protection Department (EPD) on 18 September 2015,
and finalised and release via the project’s dedicated website in January 2016.
1.1.1.2
The purpose of this updated EM&A
Manual (hereafter referred to as the Manual) is to guide the setup of an
EM&A programme to ensure compliance with the recommendations in the
approved Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report (Register No.
AEIAR-185/2014), to assess the effectiveness of the recommended mitigation
measures and to identify any further need for additional mitigation measures or
remedial action. This Manual outlines the monitoring and audit programme
proposed for the “Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a
Three-Runway System” (the project).
1.1.1.3
In this updated submission, Section 5
incorporates revised sensitive receiver water quality monitoring locations.
Section 10 incorporates an alternative method for passive acoustic monitoring
of Chinese White Dolphin and the alternative approach for undertaking Dolphin
Exclusion Zone Monitoring.
1.2
Project Description
1.2.1.1
The project will consist of a new third runway with associated taxiways,
aprons (or aircraft stands), as well as new passenger concourse buildings and
expansion of the existing Terminal 2 (T2) building. Included in the project
will be related airside and landside works and associated ancillary and
supporting facilities.
1.2.2
Land
Formation
1.2.2.1
Based on the preferred airport development option identified, land is
required to be formed to the north of the existing airport island, which will
provide a platform for the development. The proposed land formation works will
mainly include:
● Land formation of not more than 650 ha
to the north of the existing airport island with partial construction over the
contaminated mud pits. The area of land formation is defined to be the area at
and above the high water mark of +2.3 mPD; and
● Modification and integration of the
existing seawall at the northern, western and eastern sides of the existing
North Runway into the new land formation and re-provisioning of new seawall
around the land formation.
1.2.3
Airfield
Facilities
1.2.3.1
The proposed airfield facilities will mainly include:
● Construction of a third runway,
related taxiway systems, associated airfield infrastructure, aircraft
navigational aids, approach lighting systems and new Hong Kong International
Airport Approach Area (HKIAAA) beacons;
● Construction of the third runway
passenger concourse (TRC) aprons;
● Temporary closure and modification
of the existing North Runway along with related taxiway systems; and
● Expansion of the freighter aprons in
the existing Midfield area between the existing North and South runways.
1.2.4
Passenger
Facilities
1.2.4.1
The proposed passenger facilities will mainly include:
● Construction of the TRC and
passenger fixed link bridges;
● Expansion of the existing passenger
T2;
● Extension of the automated people
mover (APM) and associated depot and maintenance / stabling areas; and
● Expansion of the baggage handling
system (BHS) and associated baggage halls and early bag store.
1.2.5
Ancillary
Facilities
1.2.5.1
New ancillary facilities will be provided to support the operational
needs of the TRC and airfield facilities. These ancillary facilities will be
located on the west and east sides of the proposed land formation area (i.e. within the western support area and the eastern
support area respectively) and will accommodate utility buildings, airport
support developments, air cargo staging, catering, aircraft maintenance,
aircraft engine run-up (engine testing) facilities, ground services equipment
area, early bag storage facility, fire station, fire training facility, petrol
fuelling station, new air traffic control towers (ATCTs), Hong Kong Observatory
(HKO) facility, mobile phone system antenna towers, stores, security gate houses,
etc.
1.2.6
Infrastructure
and Utilities
1.2.6.1
The proposed infrastructure and utilities will mainly include:
● Expansion of the landside and
airside road network in the passenger, cargo and maintenance areas and landside
transportation facilities, including new car parks;
● Construction of new airside road
access, including the construction of new airside road tunnels and ramps, to
connect the new third runway facilities with the existing airport;
● Modification to existing and
construction of new land based infrastructure including the seawater cooling
and flushing system, stormwater drainage system, greywater system, sewerage
network and potable water supply, Towngas supply,
132 kV / 11 kV and other power supply networks; communication networks; and
● Modifications and re-provisions to
existing marine facilities including the underwater aviation fuel pipelines
between Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA) and the off-airport fuel
receiving facilities at Sha Chau, the associated underwater 11 kV cable and
pilot cable and sea rescue boat points.
1.2.6.2
The key project components are shown in Drawing No. MCL/P132/EMA/1-001 to MCL/P132/EMA/1-004.
1.3
Tentative
Construction Programme
1.3.1.1
The tentative programme for operation of the three-runway system (3RS)
will be in 2024. Given the scale and complexity of the project, construction
and the concurrent runway operational configuration will be implemented in
phases. The tentative phasing programme is provided in Appendix
A which is based on the currently
available information. This programme is subject to change during the detailed
design stage.
1.4
Project
Organisation
1.4.1.1
The proposed project organisation is shown in Chart 1-1 below.
|
|
1.4.2
Airport Authority Hong Kong (AAHK)
1.4.2.1
AAHK is the project proponent for the development of the project and
will assume overall responsibility for the project.
1.4.3
Environmental
Protection Department (EPD)
1.4.3.1
EPD is the statutory enforcement body for environmental protection
matters in Hong Kong.
1.4.4
Project
Manager (PM)
1.4.4.1
The Project Manager (PM) or the PM’s
Representative is responsible for overseeing the construction works and for
ensuring that the works are undertaken by the Contractor in accordance with the
specification and contract requirements. The duties and responsibilities of the
PM with respect to EM&A include:
● To monitor the Contractor’s
compliance with Contract Specifications, including the effective implementation
and operation of the environmental mitigation measures;
● To employ an Independent
Environmental Checker (IEC) to audit the results of the EM&A works carried
out by the Environmental Team (ET);
● To monitor Contractors’ compliance
with the requirements in the EP and updated EM&A Manual;
● To facilitate ET’s implementation of
the EM&A programme;
● To participate in joint site
inspection by the ET and IEC;
● To oversee the implementation of the
agreed Event and Action Plan in the event of any exceedance; and
● To adhere to the procedures for
carrying out complaint investigation.
1.4.5
Contractors
1.4.5.1 The Contractors
employed by AAHK, including Contractors working on the project on a joint
venture (JV) basis, should report to the PM or the PM’s Representative. The
duties and responsibilities of the Contractors include:
● To comply with the relevant contract
conditions and specifications on environmental protection;
● To facilitate ET’s monitoring and
site inspection activities;
● To participate in the site
inspections undertake by the ET and IEC, and undertake any corrective actions;
● To provide information / advice to
the ET regarding works programme and activities which may contribute to the
generation of adverse environmental impacts;
● To submit proposals on mitigation
measures in case of exceedance of Action and Limit Levels in accordance with
the Event and Action Plans;
● To implement measures to reduce
impact where Action and Limit Levels are exceeded; and
● To adhere to the complaint handling procedures
in accordance with this Manual and the Complaint Management Plan.
1.4.6
Environmental
Team (ET)
1.4.6.1
A full time on-site ET should be employed by the AAHK / PM to conduct
the EM&A programme no later than one month before the commencement of
construction of the project. The ET should not be in any way an associated body
of the Contractor or the IEC for the project. The ET should be headed by the
full time on-site ET Leader (ETL). The ETL should have relevant professional
qualifications in environmental control and possess at least seven years of
experience in EM&A or environmental management. Suitably qualified staff
should be included in the ET, and resources for the implementation of the
EM&A programme should be allocated to enable fulfilment of the project’s
EM&A requirements during construction of the project. The ET should report
to AAHK / PM and the duties should include:
● To carry out field sampling, field
measurement, testing, assessment, and reporting for various environmental
parameters as required in this EM&A Manual;
● To analyse the EM&A data, review
the success of EM&A programme and the adequacy of mitigation measures
implemented, confirm the validity of the EIA predictions and identify any
adverse environmental impacts arising and recommend suitable mitigation
measures;
● To monitor compliance with
conditions in the EP, environmental protection, pollution prevention and
control regulations and contract specifications;
● To carry out regular site inspection
at least once per week so as to investigate and audit Contractor’s site
practice, equipment and work methodologies with respect to pollution control
and environmental mitigation;
● To report on the EM&A results to
the AAHK / PM, IEC, EPD and Contractors;
● To vet the Contractor’s method
statements, design plans and submissions and check that the relevant
environmental protection and pollution control measures have been included and
are sufficient to comply with contractual and statutory requirements;
● To inform the AAHK / PM, IEC and
Contractors the recommend suitable mitigation measures in the case of
exceedance of Action and Limit Levels in accordance with the Event and Action
Plans;
● To liaise with the IEC on all
environmental performance matters, and ensure timely submission of all relevant
EM&A pro forma for IEC’s approval;
● To provide advice to the Contractors
on environmental improvement, awareness and enhancement matters, etc. on site;
● To prepare, certify and submit the
Baseline, Monthly, Quarterly, Annual and Final EM&A Review Reports to the
AAHK / PM, IEC and EPD timely;
● To keep a contemporaneous log-book
of each and every instance or circumstance or change of circumstances, which
may affect the compliance with the recommendations of the approved EIA Report
and the EP; and
● To set up and manage the dedicated
complaint hotline and email channel, and manage the complaint handling
procedures in accordance with this Manual and the Complaint Management Plan.
1.4.7
Independent Environmental Checker (IEC)
1.4.7.1
The IEC is empowered to audit the environmental performance of
construction, but is independent from the management of construction works. As
such, the IEC should not be in any way an associated body of the Contractor or
the ET for the project. A full time on-site IEC with a supporting team should
be employed by the AAHK / PM no later than one month prior to the commencement
of the construction of the project. The IEC should be a person who has relevant
professional qualifications in environmental control and at least seven years
of experience in EM&A or environmental management. The duties and
responsibilities of the IEC are:
● To provide proactive advice to the
AAHK / PM on EM&A matters related to the project;
● To verify the environmental
acceptability of permanent and temporary works and relevant design plans;
● To review and verify the monitoring
data and all submissions in connection with the EP, any subsequent
Variations of EP (VEPs) and / or Further EP (FEPs), and EM&A reports submitted by the ET;
● To arrange and conduct at least
monthly site inspections of the works during the construction phase, and to
carry out ad hoc inspections if significant environmental problems are
identified;
● To validate and check the accuracy
of environmental monitoring;
● To audit the compliance with the
complaint handling procedures in accordance with this Manual and the Complaint
Management Plan;
● To verify the ET’s log-book and the
investigation result of any environmental exceedance, non-compliance and complaint
cases, compliance with the agreed Event and Action Plan and the effectiveness
of corrective actions / measures;
● To feedback audit results to the ET
by signing off relevant EM&A pro forma;
● To verify EM&A reports that have
been certified by the ETL;
● To audit EIA recommendations and
requirements against the status of implementation of environmental mitigation
measures on site;
● To report the works conducted, and
the findings, recommendations and improvements of the site inspections, after
reviewing ET’s and Contractor’s works, to the AAHK / PM on a monthly basis; and
● To review the effectiveness of the
EM&A programme, EIA recommendations and the adequacy of mitigation measures
implemented.
2
Air Quality Impact
2.1 Construction Air Quality Monitoring
2.1.1 General
2.1.1.1
The project is anticipated to give rise to construction dust impacts. The
key activities that would potentially result in dust emissions include land
formation works; construction works on the newly formed land and on the
existing airport island; operation of concrete batching plants, asphalt
batching plants, crushing plant, and barging points; haul roads; diversion of
submarine fuel pipeline; diversion of submarine 11 kV cable; and modifications
to existing outfalls. Construction phase dust monitoring is considered
necessary to check and ensure compliance that the relevant recommended
mitigation measures are properly implemented.
2.1.1.2
The key objectives of the construction phase dust monitoring are:
● To identify the extent of dust
impact during construction phase on sensitive receivers;
● To audit the compliance of the
Contractor with regard to dust control, contract conditions and the relevant
dust impact criteria;
● To determine the effectiveness of
mitigation measures to control fugitive dust emission from activities during
the construction phase;
● To recommend further mitigation
measures if found to be necessary; and
● To comply with Action and Limit
Levels for air quality as defined in this Manual.
2.1.2 Air Quality Parameters
2.1.2.1
Monitoring and audit of 24-hour
Respirable Suspended Particulates (RSP or PM10) and 24-hour Fine Suspended
Particulates (FSP or PM2.5) levels are not proposed. This is because even
under the hypothetical worst case Tier 1 mitigated scenario both 24-hour RSP
and 24-hour FSP would comply with the corresponding Air Quality Objectives
(AQO) at all Air Sensitive Receivers (ASR) throughout the construction period,
except the limited non-compliance with the AQO for 24-hour RSP at up to three
ASR in three of the eight construction years. Hence no significant RSP or FSP
impacts are anticipated. Therefore, only 1-hour Total Suspended Particulates
(TSP) will be monitored and audited at the proposed monitoring locations.
Details of the proposed monitoring locations are presented in Section 2.1.5
2.1.2.2
One-hour TSP levels shall be measured to indicate the impacts of
construction dust on air quality. The TSP levels shall be measured by following
the standard high volume
sampling method as set out in the Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
Chapter 1 (Part 50), Appendix B. Upon approval of
the AAHK / PM, as an alternative to using high volume sampling method, 1-hour
TSP levels can be measured by direct reading methods which are capable of
producing comparable results as that by the high volume sampling method, to
indicate short event impacts.
2.1.2.3
All relevant data including temperature, pressure, weather conditions,
elapsed-time meter reading for the start and stop of the sampler,
identification and weight of the filter paper, and any other local atmospheric
factors affecting or affected by site conditions etc. shall be recorded down in
detail. A sample data sheet is shown in Appendix
B. The ET may develop project specific
data sheet to suit this EM&A programme.
2.1.3 Monitoring Equipment
Technical Specifications as Presented in the Original EM&A Manual
2.1.3.1
High volume sampler (HVS) shall be
used for carrying out the 1-hour TSP monitoring.
2.1.3.2
The ET is responsible for provision of the monitoring equipment. They
shall ensure that sufficient number of samplers with an appropriate calibration
kit is available for carrying out the baseline monitoring, regular impact
monitoring and ad hoc monitoring. The samplers shall be equipped with an
electronic mass flow controller and be calibrated against a traceable standard
at regular intervals. All the equipment, calibration kit, filter papers, etc.
shall be clearly labelled.
2.1.3.3
Initial calibration of dust monitoring equipment shall be conducted upon
installation and thereafter at bi-monthly intervals. The transfer standard
shall be traceable to the internationally recognised primary standard and be
calibrated annually. The calibration data shall be properly documented for
future reference by the concerned parties such as the IEC. All the data shall
be converted into standard temperature and pressure condition.
2.1.3.4
The flow-rate of the sampler before and after the sampling exercise with
the filter in position shall be verified to be constant and be recorded down in
the data sheet as shown in Appendix
B.
2.1.3.5
If the ET proposes to use a direct reading dust meter to measure 1-hour
TSP levels, they shall submit sufficient information to the IEC to prove that
the instrument is capable of achieving a comparable result as that of the HVS
and may be used for the 1-hour sampling. The instrument shall also be
calibrated regularly, and the 1-hour sampling shall be determined periodically
by HVS to check the validity and accuracy of the results measured by direct
reading method.
2.1.3.6
Wind data monitoring equipment shall also be provided and set up at
conspicuous locations for logging wind speed and wind direction near to the
dust monitoring locations. The equipment installation location shall be
proposed by the ET and agreed with the IEC. For installation and operation of
wind data monitoring equipment, the following points shall be observed:
● The wind sensors shall be installed
on masts at an elevated level 10 m above ground so that they are clear of
obstructions or turbulence caused by the buildings;
● The wind data shall be captured by a
data logger. The data recorded in the data logger shall be downloaded
periodically for analysis at least once a month;
● The wind data monitoring equipment
shall be re-calibrated at least once every six months; and
● Wind direction shall be divided into
16 sectors of 22.5 degrees each.
2.1.3.7
In exceptional situations, the ET may propose alternative methods to
obtain representative wind data upon approval from the AAHK / PM and agreement
from the IEC.
Proposed Use of Portable Direct Reading Dust Meter and Existing Wind
Data from Chek Lap Kok Wind Station
2.1.3.8
Based on the provisions and
requirements set out in Section 2.1.3.5 above, a proposal of using
portable direct reading dust meter in undertaking the EM&A for the 3RS
project was submitted to the IEC, and agreement from the IEC was obtained. The
proposal concluded that the portable direct reading dust meter is capable to
provide comparable results of monitoring data as that provided by HVS, and with
the benefits of allowing prompt and direct results for the EM&A reporting.
The portable direct reading dust meter will be calibrated every year against
HVS to check the validity an accuracy of the results measured by direct reading
method.
2.1.3.9
On the other hand, the proposed use
of existing wind data from Chek Lap Kok Wind Station operated by HKO for wind
data collection instead of setting up a separate station near the existing
station was submitted to the IEC. Agreement from the AAHK / PM and IEC’s
approval was obtained.
2.1.4
Laboratory
Measurement / Analysis
2.1.4.1
A clean laboratory with constant temperature and humidity control, and
equipped with necessary measuring and conditioning instruments, to handle the
dust samples collected, shall be available for sample analysis, and equipment
calibration and maintenance. The laboratory should be the Hong Kong Laboratory Accreditation Scheme (HOKLAS) accredited or other internationally
accredited.
2.1.4.2
If a site laboratory is set up or a non-HOKLAS accredited laboratory is
hired for carrying out the laboratory analysis, the laboratory equipment shall
be approved by the AAHK / PM and the measurement procedures should be witnessed
by the IEC. Measurement performed by the laboratory shall be demonstrated to
the satisfaction of the AAHK / PM and the IEC. The IEC shall conduct regular
audit to the measurement performed by the laboratory to ensure the accuracy of
measurement results. The ET shall provide the AAHK / PM with one copy of the
Title 40 of the Code of Federal regulations, Chapter 1 (part 50), Appendix B
for his reference.
2.1.4.3
Filter paper of 8” X 10” shall be labelled before sampling of TSP. It
shall be a clean filter paper with no pin holes, and shall be conditioned in a
humidity controlled chamber for over 24-hour and be pre-weighed before use for
the sampling.
2.1.4.4
After sampling, the filter paper loaded with dust shall be kept in a clean
and tightly sealed plastic bag. The filter paper is then returned to the
laboratory for reconditioning in the humidity controlled chamber followed by
accurate weighing by an electronic balance with a readout down to 0.1 mg. The
balance shall be regularly calibrated against a traceable standard.
2.1.4.5
All the collected samples shall be kept in a good condition for six
months before disposal.
2.1.5
Monitoring Locations
Technical
Specifications as Presented in the Original EM&A Manual
2.1.5.1
Two separate air quality monitoring
locations are proposed and summarised in Table 2‑1.
The status and locations of dust sensitive receivers may change after issuing
this Manual. If such cases exist, the ET should propose updated monitoring
locations and seek agreement from EPD, and agreement from the AAHK / PM and IEC
before baseline monitoring commences.
Table 2‑1:
Construction Air Quality Monitoring Stations
|
ID |
ID Adopted in EIA |
Description |
Monitoring Parameters |
|
AR1 |
TC-13 |
Seaview Crescent Block 1 |
1-hour TSP |
|
AR2 |
ST-1 |
Village house at Tin Sum |
1-hour TSP |
2.1.5.2
When alternative monitoring locations are proposed, the following criteria,
as far as practicable, shall be followed:
● At the site boundary or such
locations close to the major dust emission source;
● Close to the sensitive receptors;
and
● Take into account the prevailing
meteorological conditions.
2.1.5.3
Monitoring equipment must be positioned, sited and orientated properly.
The ET should agree with the AAHK / PM in consultation with the IEC on the
position of the samplers for the installation of the monitoring equipment. When
positioning the samplers, the following points shall be noted:
● A horizontal platform with
appropriate support to secure the samplers against gusty wind shall be
provided;
● No two samplers shall be placed less
than 2 m apart;
● The distance between the sampler and
an obstacle, such as buildings, must be at least twice the height that the
obstacle protrudes above the sampler;
● A minimum of 2 m of separation from
walls, parapets and penthouses is required for rooftop samplers;
● A minimum of 2 m separation from any
supporting structure, measured horizontally is required;
● No furnace or incinerator flue is
nearby;
● Airflow around the sampler is
unrestricted;
● The sampler is more than 20 m from
the dripline;
● Any wire fence and gate, to protect
the sampler, shall not cause any obstruction during monitoring;
● Permission must be obtained to set
up the samplers and to obtain access to the monitoring stations; and
● A secured supply of electricity is
needed to operate the samplers.
2.1.5.4
The ET may, depending on site conditions and monitoring results, decide
whether additional monitoring locations should be included or any monitoring
locations could be removed / relocated during any stage of the construction
phase.
Updated Monitoring
Locations
2.1.5.5
Based on the provisions and
requirements set out in Sections 2.1.5.1 and 2.1.5.2 above, a
change in monitoring location was proposed for AR1 (Block 1 at Seaview
Crescent), and agreement was obtained from the AAHK / PM and IEC and EPD.
The location of the alternative monitoring station, AR1A, is shown in Drawing No. MCL/P132/EMA/2-001.
The location of the originally proposed monitoring location AR1 is also shown
in the same drawing for easy reference. Table 2‑2
summarises the updated locations of the construction air quality monitoring
stations.
2.1.5.6
A change of the monitoring location
in both the baseline and subsequent impact monitoring for AR1 was identified
necessary as access was not granted for setting up the onsite monitoring
station. The new monitoring location AR1A is situated in close proximity
to Seaview Crescent and it is also considered to be a representative location
for monitoring the construction phase air quality impact from the project.
Table 2‑2:
Updated Locations of Construction Air Quality Monitoring Stations
|
ID |
ID Adopted in EIA |
Description |
Monitoring Parameters |
|
AR1A(1) |
- |
Man Tung Road Park |
1-hour TSP |
|
AR2 |
ST-1 |
Village house at Tin Sum |
1-hour TSP |
Note: (1) alternative air quality monitoring
location
2.1.6 Baseline Monitoring
2.1.6.1
Baseline monitoring should be conducted at all designated monitoring
locations, see Table
2‑1, for at least 14 consecutive days before
commencement of construction work to obtain ambient 1‑hour TSP samples.
The commencement date of baseline monitoring shall be agreed between the ET /
IEC / AAHK / PM to ensure timely submission of the baseline monitoring report
to EPD. The selected baseline monitoring stations should reflect baseline
conditions at the stations. One-hour TSP sampling shall also be done at least
three times per day. The baseline monitoring will provide data for the
determination of the appropriate Action Levels with the Limit Levels set
against statutory or otherwise agreed limits. General meteorological conditions
(wind speed, wind direction and precipitation) and notes regarding any
significant adjacent dust producing sources should also be recorded throughout
the baseline monitoring period.
2.1.6.2
Before commencing the baseline monitoring, the ET shall inform the IEC
of the baseline monitoring programme such that the IEC can conduct on-site
audit to ensure accuracy of the baseline monitoring results. During the baseline
monitoring, there should not be any construction dust generating activities in
the vicinity of the monitoring stations.
2.1.6.3
In case the baseline monitoring cannot be carried out at the designated
monitoring locations during the baseline monitoring period, the ET shall carry
out the monitoring at alternative locations that can effectively represent the
baseline conditions at the impact monitoring locations. The alternative
baseline monitoring locations should be approved by the AAHK / PM and agreed
with the IEC.
2.1.6.4
In exceptional cases, when insufficient baseline monitoring data or
questionable results are obtained, the ET should liaise with the IEC and EPD to
agree on an appropriate set of data to be used as baseline reference and submit
to EPD for approval.
2.1.6.5
Ambient conditions may vary seasonally and should be reviewed once every
six months. If the ET considers that significant changes in the ambient
conditions have risen, a repeat of the baseline monitoring may be carried out
to update the baseline levels and air quality criteria after consultation and
agreement with the AAHK / PM, IEC and EPD. The monitoring should be undertaken
at times when Contractor’s activities are not generating dust, at least in the
proximity of the monitoring stations. Should change in ambient conditions be
determined, the baseline levels and, in turn, the air quality criteria, shall
be revised. The revised baseline levels and air quality criteria shall be
agreed with the IEC and EPD. If the ET considers that significant changes
in the ambient conditions have risen but a repeat of the 14-day baseline
monitoring is not found feasible due to the presence of ongoing construction
work, the ET may propose an alternative method for updating the baseline levels
and air quality criteria but this shall be subject to the agreement with the
IEC and EPD.
2.1.7 Impact Monitoring
2.1.7.1
The monthly schedule of the compliance and impact monitoring programme
should be drawn up by the ET one month prior to the commencement of the
scheduled construction period.
2.1.7.2
The ET should carry out impact monitoring throughout the entire course
of the Works. For 1-hour TSP monitoring, the sampling frequency of at least
three times in every six days should be undertaken when the highest dust impact
is expected to occur. Highest dust impacts will be determined by the actual
construction site condition, program and the works to be carried out. Before
commencing the impact monitoring, the ET should inform the IEC of the impact
monitoring programme such that the IEC can conduct on-site audit to ensure
accuracy of the impact monitoring results.
2.1.7.3
In case of non-compliance with the air quality criteria, more frequent
monitoring exercise, as specified in the Event and Action Plan, should be
conducted within 24 hours after the result is obtained. This additional
monitoring shall be continued until the excessive dust emission or the
deterioration in air quality is rectified.
2.1.8 Event and Action Plan
2.1.8.1
Baseline 1-hour TSP monitoring was conducted for 14 consecutive days
between 6 November 2015 and 27 November 2015 at two air quality monitoring
stations of AR1A and AR2. The Action Levels for 1-hr TSP during impact
monitoring are established based on the measured baseline TSP levels for
assessing the impact and compliance during the construction of the project. Table 2‑3 shows the air quality criteria, namely Action Level
(AL) and Limit Level (LL) to be used. Should non-compliance of the air quality
criteria occurs, actions in accordance with the Event and Action Plan in Table 2‑4 should
be carried out.
Table 2‑3:
Action and Limit Levels for Air Quality
|
Parameters |
Action Level [1]
|
Limit Level (µg/m3) |
|
1-hour TSP Level in µg/m3 |
For baseline level ≤ 384 µg/m3, Action Level = (130% of baseline level + Limit Level)/2 For baseline level ˃ 384 µg/m3, Action Level = Limit Level |
500 |
|
|
[1] According to the latest submission of
Baseline Monitoring Report approved by EPD, the Action Levels for AR1A and AR2
are 306 µg/m3 and 298 µg/m3 respectively.
Table 2‑4:
Event and Action Plan for Air Quality
|
Event |
ET |
IEC |
Action AAHK / PM |
Contractor |
|
Action Level |
|
|
|
|
|
1. Exceedance for one sample |
1. Identify source, investigate the causes of exceedance and propose remedial measures; 2. Inform IEC and AAHK / PM; 3. Repeat measurement to confirm finding; 4. Increase monitoring frequency to daily. |
1. Check monitoring data submitted by ET; 2. Check Contractor’s working method. |
1. Notify Contractor. |
1. Rectify any unacceptable practice; 2. Amend working methods if appropriate. |
|
2. Exceedance for two or more consecutive samples |
1. Identify source; 2. Inform IEC and AAHK / PM; 3. Advise the AAHK / PM on the effectiveness of the proposed remedial measures; 4. Increase monitoring frequency to daily; 5. Discuss with IEC and Contractor on remedial actions required 6. If exceedance continues, arrange meeting with IEC and AAHK / PM 7. If exceedance stops, cease additional monitoring. |
1. Check monitoring data submitted by ET; 2. Check Contractor’s working method 3. Discuss with ET and Contractor on possible remedial measures; 4. Advise AAHK / PM on the effectiveness of the proposed remedial measures; 5. Supervisor implementation of remedial measures. |
1. Confirm receipt of notification of failure in writing; 2. Notify Contractor; 3. Ensure remedial measures properly implemented. |
1. Submit proposals for remedial actions to IEC within three working days of notification; 2. Implement the agreed proposals; 3. Amend proposal if appropriate. |
|
Limit Level |
|
|
|
|
|
1. Exceedance for one sample |
1. Identify the source, investigate the causes of exceedance and propose remedial measures; 2. Inform AAHK / PM and Contractor. If the exceedance is valid, inform EPD; 3. Repeat measurement to confirm finding; 4. Increase monitoring frequency to daily; 5. Assess effectiveness of Contractor’s remedial actions and keep AAHK / PM, IEC and EPD informed of the results. |
1. Check monitoring data submitted by ET; 2. Check Contractor’s working method; 3. Discuss with ET and Contractor on possible remedial measures; 4. Advise AAHK / PM on the effectiveness of the proposed remedial measures; 5. Monitor the implementation of remedial measures. |
1. Confirm receipt of notification of failure in writing; 2. Notify Contractor; 3. Ensure remedial measures properly implemented. |
1. Take immediate action to avoid further exceedance; 2. Submit proposals for remedial actions to IEC within three working days of notification; 3. Implement the agreed proposals; 4. Amend proposal if appropriate. |
|
2. Exceedance for two or more consecutive sample |
1. Notify AAHK / PM, IEC, Contractor and EPD; 2. Identify source; 3. Repeat measurement to confirm finding; 4. Increase monitoring frequency to daily; 5. Carry out analysis of Contractor’s working procedures to determine possible mitigation to be implemented; 6. Arrange meeting with AAHK / PM and IEC to discuss the remedial actions to be taken; 7. Assess effectiveness of Contractor’s remedial actions and keep AAHK / PM, IEC and EPD informed of the results; 8. If exceedance stops, cease additional monitoring. |
1. Check monitoring data submitted by ET; 2. Check Contractor’s working method; 3. Discuss amongst AAHK / PM, ET, and Contractor on the potential remedial actions; 4. Review Contractor’s remedial actions whenever necessary to assure their effectiveness and advise AAHK / PM accordingly; 5. Monitor the implementation of remedial measures. |
1. Confirm receipt of notification of failure in writing; 2. Notify Contractor; 3. In consultation with IEC, agree with the Contractor on the remedial measures to be implemented; 4. Ensure remedial measures properly implemented; 5. If exceedance continues, consider what portion of the work is responsible and instruct the Contractor to stop that portion of work until the exceedance is abated. |
1. Take immediate action to avoid further exceedance; 2. Submit proposals for remedial actions to IEC within three working days of notification; 3. Implement the agreed proposals; 4. Resubmit proposals if problem still not under control; 5. Stop the relevant portion of works as determined by AAHK / PM until the exceedance is abated. |
2.1.9 Mitigation Measures
2.1.9.1
Appropriate dust suppression measures should be adopted as required
under the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation as well as the
Specified Process licences for the concrete batching plants, asphalt batching
plants and rock crushing plant. A control programme can be instigated to
monitor the construction process in order to enforce dust controls and modify
methods of works where feasible to reduce the dust emission down to acceptable
levels. The implementation schedule of the recommended air quality mitigation
measures is presented in Appendix
C.
2.2
Operational Air Quality Monitoring
2.2.1 General
2.2.1.1
The operational air quality impact
assessment presented as part of the EIA Report has concluded that the operation
of the project will not give rise to adverse residual air quality
impacts. The assessment findings for Year 2031 3RS scenario indicated
that cumulative NO2, RSP, FSP, SO2 and CO levels comply
with the relevant AQOs at all ASR. Nevertheless, to be prudent, it is proposed
that AAHK should carry out regular reviews of the operation phase air quality
monitoring results and relevant operation data in order to:
● Monitor the variations in pollutant
concentrations and compare these with the operation air quality assessment
results presented in the EIA Report;
● Determine the effectiveness of
AAHK’s measures and initiatives aimed at further reducing air pollutant
emissions from airport activities and operations; and
● Identify follow-up actions and / or
further investigation that may be undertaken where necessary with a view to
further reducing air emissions associated with the operation of the
project.
2.2.2 Regular Review of Air Quality
Monitoring Results
Existing Air
Quality Monitoring Stations
2.2.2.1
While the establishment of additional air quality monitoring station was
not identified necessary, the EIA Report recommended that the current airport
air quality monitoring stations shall be maintained. These include three
air quality monitoring stations (AQMSs) operated by AAHK, with one at Sha Chau
(SC) and two on the existing airport island, namely the North Station (PH1) and
South Station (PH5), as shown in Drawing No.
MCL/P132/EMA/2-002. The AQMS at
Tung Chung (TC) operated by EPD is also shown in the drawing.
2.2.2.2
The PH1 and PH5 stations are positioned
on the airport island close to the existing north runway (or the future middle
runway after the airport expansion) and the existing south runway respectively;
the SC station is over 2.8 km to the north of the expanded airport island;
while the TC station is located on the southeast side of the airport island.
This network of existing AQMSs is considered to be able to provide
representative monitoring data on the air quality on the expanded airport
island and its surrounding areas. Therefore, the AQMSs currently operated
by AAHK are to be maintained and the monitoring data obtained from these
stations should be used, together with that from the TC AQMS operated by EPD,
for regular reviews of the operation phase air quality.
2.2.2.3
Table 2-5 summaries the existing AQMSs operated by AAHK.
Table 2-5:
Operational Air Quality Monitoring
|
Station ID |
Station Name |
Location |
Operated by |
Monitoring Parameters |
|
SC |
Sha Chau |
Sha Chau |
Airport Authority |
Conc. of NO2, RSP, FSP, O3, SO2 and CO reported on hourly basis |
|
PH1 |
North Station |
Existing airport island |
Airport Authority |
Conc. of NO2, RSP, FSP, O3, SO2 and CO reported on hourly basis |
|
PH5 |
South Station |
Existing airport island |
Airport Authority |
Conc. of NO2, RSP, FSP, O3, SO2 and CO reported on hourly basis |
Existing Monitoring
Equipment
2.2.2.4 The existing monitoring equipment of NO2,
RSP, FSP, O3, SO2 and CO at the three AQMSs operated by AAHK
are summarised in Table 2-6. As the equipment may be
replaced due to certain period of utilisation, the monitoring equipment shall
be reviewed by the ET prior to the monitoring during operational phase of the
project.
Table
2-6:
The Existing Monitoring Equipment Adopted at South Station, North Station and
Sha Chau Station
|
Parameters |
Adopted Technique |
Existing monitoring equipment |
|
NO2 |
Gas Phase Chemiluminescence |
Ecotech EC9841B / Thermo Scientific 42i |
|
RSP |
Drawing air through a filter at a constant rate, continuously weighing the filter and calculating near real-time mass concentrations |
TEOM 1405DF Ambient Particulate Monitor |
|
FSP |
||
|
O3 |
Non-dispersive ultraviolet (UV) photometer |
Thermo Scientific 49i/ Ecotech EC9810B |
|
SO2 |
Ultraviolet Flourescence |
Thermo Scientific 43i/ Ecotech EC9850B |
|
CO |
Gas Filter Correlation photometry |
Thermo Scientific 48i/ Ecotech EC9830B |
Selection of Air Quality Parameters for Review
2.2.2.5
NOx is the key air pollutant
associated with airport operations. The source contribution breakdown for the
cumulative annual average NO2 impact at the key sensitive areas
under the 3RS scenario in the worst assessment year of 2031 presented in Table
5.5.2 of the EIA Report are reproduced in Table 2-7 below.
The dominant emission sources were identified to be from ambient emissions,
which contributed in most cases more than 60% of the total NO2
concentrations. This is followed by proximity infrastructure emissions
(10 – 30%) and airport-related emissions (< 10%), except for Sha Lo Wan.
Table 2-7:
Concentration Breakdown for the Cumulative Annual NO2 Impact at the
Key Sensitive Area under the 3RS scenario in Year 2031
|
Area |
ASR |
Airport Related Emission (µg/ m3) |
Proximity Infrastructure Emission (µg/ m3) |
Ambient (µg/ m3) |
Cumulative Impact (µg/ m3) |
|
Tung Chung |
TC-22 |
2 |
9 |
22 |
33 |
|
Tung Chung West |
TC-P7 |
2 |
6 |
22 |
30 |
|
Tung Chung East |
TC-P12 |
2 |
4 |
22 |
28 |
|
Sha Lo Wan |
SLW-1 |
12 |
4 |
20 |
36 |
|
Tuen Mun[1] |
TM-10 |
2 [1] |
9 |
27 |
38 |
Note:
[1] Airport related
emission is included in ambient in PATH model for Tuen Mun area
2.2.2.6
Based on the operational air quality
assessment findings presented in the EIA Report, NO2 is considered
as the key parameter for which the available monitoring data obtained at AAHK’s
AQMSs together with that obtained at EPD’s AQMS in TC should be regularly
reviewed during the operation phase of the project. The regular review shall
also analyse and present the measured NO and NOx concentrations for
estimating the pollutant contribution due to airport operations. To be prudent,
available monitoring data on RSP and FSP should also be included in the regular
reviews.
Frequency of Review
2.2.2.7
It is recommended that the first
review of NO2, RSP and FSP monitoring results should be carried out after
the first year of operation of 3RS. Regular review should then be carried out
at regular interval of at least every five years during the first 20 years of
operation of the project. The frequency of the reviews may be subject to
changes depending on the review results.
2.2.3
Operational Phase Air Quality Monitoring and Audit
Requirements
2.2.3.1
During the regular review of NO2,
RSP and FSP monitoring results, a detailed examination of the temporal and
spatial variations of pollutant levels measured at AAHK’s AQMSs shall be
presented and the analysis shall also take into consideration the available
monitoring data obtained at EPD’s AQMS in TC. With consideration of the
available data including those on meteorological conditions (i.e., wind
direction, wind speed, temperature, precipitation, etc), the review shall
characterise the mean seasonal and diurnal variation of pollutant
concentrations, with a view to evaluating the significance of the contribution
of air quality impact from airport emissions on the nearby air sensitive
receivers. Also, the regular review shall include the compilation of an updated
inventory of major emission sources, including emissions from aircraft landing
take-off (LTO) cycle, associated with the airport operations. AAHK shall
collect the relevant information for development of the latest airport
emissions inventory as part of the review.
2.2.3.2
As part of the regular review, the
effectiveness of existing measures and initiatives implemented by AAHK aimed at
further reducing air pollutant emissions from airport operation shall also be
evaluated. Follow-up actions and/or further investigation work that may
be undertaken where necessary with a view to further reducing air emissions
associated with the operation of the project should be recommended as part of
the regular review.
2.2.3.3
The detailed air quality monitoring
and auditing requirements should be presented as part of the Airport Operation
related Emissions Control Plan that shall be submitted no later than 3 months
before the operation of the project in accordance to EP Condition 2.24.
3
Hazard to Human Life
3.1
Introduction
3.1.1.1
A hazard identification workshop has been conducted in the EIA Report to
identify potential hazards associated with the construction and operation phase
of the project. Mitigation measures have also been explored to prevent the
hazards from happening and they will be implemented in the project.
3.1.1.2
A hazard assessment has been
conducted in the EIA Report which concluded that the risk level for the
construction phase is within the acceptable region and mitigation measure is
not required. The risk level for the operation phase has been evaluated to be
in As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP) region and the major risk
contributor is aircraft refuelling operation. Practicable and cost effective
mitigations have been proposed to reduce the risk of aircraft refuelling
operation.
3.2
Recommendation
3.2.1.1
The recommended measures as outlined in the Implementation Schedule
included as Appendix
C in this EM&A Manual should be
implemented to meet the Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment
Process (EIAO-TM) requirements.
4
Noise Impact
4.1 Aircraft Noise Monitoring
4.1.1 Aircraft Noise Monitoring and Audit
Requirements
4.1.1.1
As per the requirements set out in
Section 7, Appendix C of the EIA Study Brief, the aircraft noise monitoring and
audit plan shall:
● Provide data and information for
verifying predictions on the effectiveness of measures to mitigate aircraft
noise impact of the project;
● Formulate audit requirements,
including any necessary compliance and post-project audit program, in order to
review the monitoring data and identify any remedial works, as necessary,
required to address unacceptable or unanticipated aircraft noise impacts; and
● Provide tools, procedures and
supplementary information, including noise descriptor and flight tracks, which
are useful and relevant for communicating the aircraft noise of the project to
the general public.
4.1.1.2
The Procedures for Mitigation of
Aircraft Noise that shall be submitted no later than 3 months before the
operation of the project in accordance to EP Condition 2.21.
4.1.2 Program Elements
4.1.2.1
Taking into account the EIA Study
Brief requirements as described above, it is proposed that the aircraft noise monitoring
and audit plan should consist of the following key elements:
● An exercise by AAHK to verify
predictions on the effectiveness of measures to mitigate aircraft noise impact
and the preparation of a Prediction Verification Report;
● Review Report, prepared on an annual
basis by AAHK, for detailing the compliance with noise abatement procedures and
unanticipated events, as well as any further necessary investigation and/or
remedial action(s); and
● Noise Contour Report, prepared in at
least every five years by AAHK, to compare actual airport operation to forecast
airport operation with respect to aircraft noise, taking into account data
collected on actual aircraft operational levels, fleet mix, runway and flight
track utilizations; and produce an updated noise contour using the most
currently available and internationally accepted noise modelling methodology.
4.1.2.2
In additional to the above reporting
requirements, AAHK shall continue to engage with the neighbouring communities
in the vicinity of HKIA, other stakeholders and interested parties on aircraft
noise issues associated with the operation of the project.
4.1.3 Prediction Verification
4.1.3.1
The purpose of this task is for
verification of predictions on the effectiveness of measures to mitigate
aircraft noise impact of the project. This verification exercise shall be
undertaken upon availability of relevant airport operation data for the first
full year operation of the third runway of the project. A Prediction Verification
Report, certified by the ETL and verified by the IEC, shall be submitted to EPD
for approval.
4.1.3.2
As part of the prediction
verification exercise, AAHK should collect radar data showing airport and
flight operations for the first full year operation of the proposed third
runway from Civil Aviation Department (CAD). Based on the radar data
collected, the AAHK should carry out aircraft noise contour simulation.
Similar approach adopted to process radar data for the prevailing scenario contour
as presented in Chapter 7 of the EIA Report might be applied (individual radar
data be pre-processed and annual daily average noise contours be produced by
Integrated Noise Model (INM) for daily results) and the detailed methodology
shall be agreed with EPD. The computational model to be used shall also
be agreed with EPD prior to the analysis.
4.1.3.3
The Noise Exposure Forecast (NEF) 25
contour prepared based on radar data should be compared against the noise
contours presented in Chapter 7 of the EIA Report for verifying the
effectiveness of measures to mitigate the aircraft noise impact of the
project. If the comparison of contours shows a reasonable converge, this
would imply the aircraft noise prediction by computer simulation with forecast,
assumptions and proposal of mitigation measures would reliably reflect that by
actual airport and flight operations. In case discrepancies are observed,
explanation shall be given and analysed as part of the Prediction Verification
Report.
4.1.3.4
It shall be noted that the noise
contours presented in Chapter 7 of the EIA Report are based on reasonable
assumptions and input data including air traffic forecast, runway mode of
operation, flight tracks and flight track utilisation, and proposed mitigation
measures. Therefore, whilst it is being compared with the one generated
by actual airport and flight operations, variances within reasonable ranges are
envisaged and considered acceptable. Having said that, it is essential to
ensure that with the mitigation measures recommended in the EIA Report, no
additional noise sensitive receivers should be subject to adverse environmental
impact under the requirements of the EIAO-TM. Detailed examination should
be followed especially for those areas with major variances and the underneath
rationale(s) will be elaborated.
4.1.4 Review Report
4.1.4.1
The Review Report, prepared on an
annual basis by AAHK shall include an analysis of how well aircraft flight
follow each of the aircraft noise mitigation measures recommended in Chapter 7
of the EIA Report. Information to be collected shall include available
radar data showing airport and flight operations from CAD, and this is to be
analysed in terms of flight tracks and runway utilisation for checking the
effective implementation of the noise reduction measures. AAHK may make
references to available operational noise data collated by the relevant
authorities. Wind record in the year should also be collected from HKO.
The Review Report should review the data collected including measured noise
levels at representative locations, statistics of flight tracks, flight tracks
dispersion and aircraft using proposed mitigation measures and existing noise
mitigation measures, etc.
4.1.4.2
The annual review and reporting
process will allow AAHK to measure exactly how it stands compared to predicted
operations used in the preparation of the EIA Report. If there are any major
variances / discrepancies / abnormalities that are observed during the ongoing
process of data collection and analysis for preparation of the annual review
when compared with the assumptions / measures adopted in the assessment, early
investigation shall be carried out for identification of the possible causes of
the variances / discrepancies / abnormalities and whether these would
significantly affect the aircraft noise environment.
4.1.5 Noise Contour Report
4.1.5.1
As the aircraft noise impact
assessment was undertaken on the basis of projected air traffic movements and
estimated fleet mix, it is recommended that at regular intervals of at least
every five years during the first 20 operational years of the project, actual
flight data obtained from local Air Traffic Control radar systems should be
acquired and analysed with a similar aircraft noise modelling methodology to
confirm the representativeness of the earlier noise analyses. The first Noise
Contour Report shall be prepared upon availability of the airport operation
data for the first full year operation of the third runway of the project. In
accordance with the requirements set out in Condition 2.22 of the EP, an
updated NEF 25 contour shall also be submitted no later than 3 months after a
full year of operation of the 3RS project. Similar approach adopted to process
radar data for prevailing scenario contour might be applied and the detailed
methodology shall be agreed with EPD.
4.1.5.2
At such time that it is determined
that the noise contours obtained using actual airport data may start to
encroach onto any additional noise sensitive receivers, or when it is
considered that there are major deviations from the assumptions adopted in the
EIA Report, additional analysis would be necessary to update the NEF 25
contour. The need and feasibility of introducing additional mitigation
measures should also be assessed to ensure that no adverse environmental impact
would be resulted from the implementation of the project with respect to
aircraft noise.
4.1.6 Community Liaison
4.1.6.1
AAHK has been actively engaging with
neighbouring communities in the vicinity of the airport, other stakeholders
groups and interested parties to communicate issues and gauge views on aircraft
noise and other environmental aspects. Briefings and airport visits are
organised to explain subjects including but not limited to flight paths under
the planned 3RS and the proposed aircraft noise mitigation measures. These
engagement activities will continue after commencement of the project and a
community liaison plan that presents details of the planned programme,
including proposed communication channels, tools, procedures and supplementary
information, including noise descriptor and flight tracks in accordance with
Section 7.3, Appendix C of the Study Brief and activities that would facilitate
communications with stakeholders on aircraft noise issues, will be developed by
AAHK as part of the detailed Aircraft Noise Monitoring and Audit Plan presented
in Section 4.1.7 below.
4.1.7 Detailed Aircraft Noise Monitoring
and Audit Plan
4.1.7.1
The above subsections set out a clear
EM&A framework with respect to aircraft noise. It is not yet mature
to define all the monitoring and audit details as at the course of assessment
whilst the EM&A task will only be started with operation commencement of
the third runway of the project because computation model and data analysis
tools are in rapid evolution nowadays.
4.1.7.2
Prior to commencement of project operation,
a detailed Aircraft Noise Monitoring and Audit (ANM&A) Plan, proposing (i)
work programme; (ii) actual data collection; (iii) methodologies / procedures,
including proposed computation model, to process data into indicators of
measures / assumptions adopted; (iv) quality control and assurance procedure;
(v) action / investigation plan if any non-compliance, including associated
Action and Limit Levels; (vi) community liaison plan; (vii) relevant proforma
forming part of the reports; (viii) any foreseeable uncertainties, etc, should
be submitted to EPD for agreement.
4.1.7.3
In accordance with the requirements
set out in EP Condition 2.23, the ANM&A Plan shall include information on
aircraft noise monitoring at representative locations in Tung Chung, Ma Wan,
Tsing Yi, Tsuen Wan, Ting Kau, Siu Lam and Tuen Mun. The ANM&A Plan shall
make use of available aircraft noise and flight track monitoring data including
measured noise levels in terms of dB(A) and their distribution, flight tracks, aircraft
fleet mix data and other relevant information at the above-mentioned locations.
The ANM&A Plan shall also include an action plan, as approved by
Director-General of Civil Aviation, to review the noise data to assess the
effectiveness of the mitigation measures and to take appropriate action with
reference to the prevailing internationally recognised standards in aircraft
noise mitigation.
4.1.7.4
Before submission to the Director of Environmental
Protection for approval, the ANM&A Plan shall be certified by the ETL and
verified by the IEC as conforming to the information and recommendations
described in the EIA Report, and taking into account any specific requirements
with respect to the latest in-situ conditions of the project.
4.1.7.5
When developing the detailed plan,
references should be made to relevant international guidelines such as SAE
ARP4721 Part 1 – Monitoring Aircraft Noise and Operations in the Vicinity of
Airports: System Description, Acquisition, and Operation, if applicable, for
the purpose of review and describe the project operation. The latest monitoring
and audit practice / presentation adopted by similar international airports
should be reviewed and reference during the course of preparation of this
detailed plan.
4.2
Fixed
Noise Sources Monitoring
4.2.1 Maximum Permissible Sound Power
Levels of Fixed Plant
4.2.1.1
The maximum permissible sound power
levels of the identified fixed noise sources of the project were predicted in
the EIA Report. The specified sound power levels should be
implemented and refined by the Contractor as appropriate to ensure that the
noise impact associated with the fixed plant operations would comply with the
noise standards stipulated in the EIAO-TM and Noise Control Ordinance (NCO).
4.2.2 Commissioning Test
4.2.2.1
Prior to the operation of the
project, the Contractor should conduct noise commissioning tests for all major
fixed plant noise sources (excluding the ground noise sources associated with
the aircraft taxiing and the operation of auxiliary power units (APUs)) within
HKIA to ensure the noise emission at the fixed plant noise source comply with
the EIA Report assessed scenario. The test should be carried out by a
qualified person possessing at least seven years of noise control experience
and a corporate membership of Hong Kong Institute of Acoustics or
equivalent. The noise commissioning test report should be submitted
to the AAHK / PM, ET and IEC for approval. The ET and IEC should review design
changes to ensure the cumulative noise impact from fixed noise sources comply
with the EIA Report assessed scenario.
4.2.2.2
Noise commissioning tests are also
required for noise enclosure of aircraft engine run-up facilities. ISO 10847 –
In-situ determination of insertion loss of outdoor noise barriers of all types
shall be employed to ensure the required noise reduction (insertion loss) in
the EIA Report (at least 15 dB(A)) would be achieved. The test should be
carried out by a qualified person possessing at least seven years of noise
control experience and a corporate membership of Hong Kong Institute of
Acoustics or equivalent. The noise commissioning test report should be
submitted to the AAHK / PM, ET and IEC for approval.
4.2.2.3
No adverse noise impacts are
anticipated from aircraft taxiing and APU operation, hence no environmental
monitoring and audit is proposed.
4.2.3 Mitigation Measures
4.2.3.1
The relevant noise mitigation
measures have been recommended in the EIA Report. The implementation
schedule of the mitigation measures is given in Appendix
C.
4.3
Construction
Airborne Noise Monitoring
4.3.1 Noise Parameter
4.3.1.1
The construction noise level should be measured in terms of the
A-weighted equivalent continuous sound pressure level (Leq). Leq(30
minutes) should be used as the monitoring parameter for the time period
between 0700-1900 hours on normal weekdays. For all other time periods, a
Construction Noise Permit (CNP) under the NCO would apply.
4.3.1.2
As supplementary information for data auditing, statistical results such
as L10 and L90 should also be obtained for reference. A
sample data record sheet based on the one presented in the “EM&A Guidelines
for Development Projects in Hong Kong” is shown in Appendix
B for reference.
4.3.2 Monitoring Equipment
4.3.2.1
As referred to in the Technical Memorandum (TM) issued under the NCO,
sound level meters in compliance with the International Electrotechnical
Commission Publications 651:1979 (Type 1) and 804:1985 (Type 1) specifications
should be used for carrying out the noise monitoring. Immediately prior to and
following each noise measurement the accuracy of the sound level meter should
be checked using an acoustic calibrator generating a known sound pressure level
at a known frequency. Measurements may be accepted as valid only if the
calibration level from before and after the noise measurement agrees to within
1.0 dB.
4.3.2.2
Noise measurements should be made in accordance with standard acoustical
principles and practices in relation to weather conditions. Handheld wind meter should be used for measuring and
checking the wind speed (in m/s) during the noise monitoring.
4.3.2.3
The ET is responsible for the
availability of monitoring equipment and should ensure that sufficient noise
measuring equipment and associated instrumentation are available for carrying
out the baseline monitoring, regular impact monitoring and ad hoc monitoring.
All the equipment and associated instrumentation should be clearly labelled.
4.3.3 Monitoring Locations
Technical Specifications as Presented in the Original EM&A Manual
4.3.3.1
The noise monitoring locations are
summarised in Table 4‑1. The status and
locations of noise sensitive receivers may change after issuing this manual. If
such case exists, the ET should propose updated monitoring locations and seek
approval from the AAHK / PM and agreement from the IEC and EPD of the proposal.
Table 4‑1:
Construction Noise Monitoring Stations
|
ID |
ID adopted in EIA |
Description |
|
NM1 |
TC-1 |
Seaview Crescent Block 1 |
|
NM2 |
TC-5 |
Tung Chung West Development (Monitoring to start after occupation of development in 2023/24, subject to the construction programme of the project) |
|
NM3 |
TC-30 |
Ho Yu College |
|
NM4 |
TC-37 |
Ching Chung Hau Po Woon Primary School |
|
NM5 |
TS-1 |
House, Tin Sum |
|
NM6 |
SLW-1 |
House No. 1, Sha Lo Wan |
4.3.3.2
When alternative monitoring locations are proposed, the monitoring
locations should be chosen based on the following criteria:
● Monitoring at sensitive receivers close
to the major site activities which are likely to have noise impacts;
● Monitoring at the noise sensitive
receivers as defined in the Technical Memorandum; and
● Assurance of minimal disturbance to
the occupants during monitoring.
4.3.3.3 The monitoring station should normally be at a point 1
m from the exterior of the sensitive receivers building facade and be at
position 1.2 m above the ground. If there is a problem with access to the
normal monitoring position, an alternative position may be chosen, and a
correction to the measurements should be made. For reference, a correction of
+3 dB(A) should be made to the free field measurements. The ET should agree
with the IEC on the monitoring position and the corrections adopted. Once the positions
for the monitoring stations are chosen, the baseline monitoring and the impact
monitoring should be carried out at the same positions.
Updated Monitoring
Locations
4.3.3.4
Based on the provisions and requirements
set out in Sections 4.3.3.1 and 4.3.3.2 above, a change in
monitoring location was proposed for NM1, NM2 and NM3. Agreement from the
AAHK / PM, IEC and EPD’s approval were obtained for the changes. The locations
of the alternative monitoring stations, including NM1A, NM2* and NM3A, are
shown in Drawing No.
MCL/P132/EMA/4-001. The locations of the originally proposed monitoring
locations (NM1, NM2 and NM3) are also shown in the same drawing for easy
reference. Table 4‑2 summarises the updated
locations of the construction noise monitoring stations.
4.3.3.5
The noise monitoring location in both
the baseline and subsequent impact monitoring for NM1 was changed to NM1A as
access to NM1 was not granted for setting up an onsite monitoring station.
4.3.3.6
The noise monitoring location in both
the baseline and subsequent impact monitoring for NM3 was changed to NM3A also
as access to NM3 was not granted for setting up an onsite monitoring station.
Moreover, when construction works of Tung Chung East Development near NM3A is
in place, the monitoring will be temporary suspended with duration subjected to
the programme of the development works and actual site conditions, and will be
resumed when the development works is completed. Actual arrangement of this
station will be reflected in relevant Monthly EM&A Reports.
4.3.3.7 Baseline noise monitoring at NM2 was undertaken at
NM2* as Tung Chung West Development had not yet been constructed. When the
future residential buildings in Tung Chung West Development become occupied,
the impact monitoring would be carried out at a representative location with
noise sensitive land uses and the exact location will be proposed by the ET for
agreement with the IEC and EPD prior to commencement of the impact monitoring.
Table 4‑2:
Construction Noise Monitoring Stations
|
ID |
ID adopted in EIA |
Description |
|
NM1A(1) |
- |
Man Tung Road Park |
|
NM2*(1) / NM2 |
TC-5 |
Tung Chung Battery* / Tung Chung West Development (Monitoring to start after occupation of development in 2023/24, subject to the construction programme of the project) |
|
NM3A(1) |
- |
Site Office at the northern edge of the reclaimed land (Monitoring to be temporarily suspended during construction works of Tung Chung East Development subject to programme of the works and actual site conditions) |
|
NM4 |
TC-37 |
Ching Chung Hau Po Woon Primary School |
|
NM5 |
TS-1 |
House, Tin Sum |
|
NM6 |
SLW-1 |
House No. 1, Sha Lo Wan |
Note: (1)
alternative noise monitoring location
4.3.4 Baseline Monitoring
4.3.4.1
The ET should carry out baseline noise monitoring prior to the
commencement of the project-related construction activities. The baseline
monitoring should be carried out daily for a period of at least two weeks. The
commencement date of baseline monitoring shall be agreed between the ET / IEC /
AAHK / PM to ensure timely submission of the baseline monitoring report to EPD.
Before commencing the baseline monitoring, the ET should develop and submit to
the IEC the baseline monitoring programme such that the IEC can conduct on-site
audit to check accuracy of the baseline monitoring results.
4.3.4.2
There should not be any construction activities in the vicinity of the
stations during the baseline monitoring.
4.3.4.3
In exceptional cases, when insufficient baseline monitoring data or
questionable results are obtained, the ET should liaise with the AAHK / PM, IEC
and EPD to agree on an appropriate set of data to be used as a baseline
reference and submit to the AAHK / PM and IEC for agreement and EPD for
approval.
4.3.5 Impact Monitoring
4.3.5.1
Noise monitoring should be carried out at all the designated monitoring
stations when there are project-related construction activities undertaken. The
monitoring frequency should depend on the scale of the construction activities.
The following is an initial guide on the regular monitoring frequency for each
station on a weekly basis when noise generating activities are underway:
● One set of measurements between
0700-1900 hours on normal weekdays.
4.3.5.2
If construction works are extended to include works during the hours of
1900-0700 as well as public holidays and Sundays, additional impact monitoring
(including monitoring locations) during respective periods of restricted hours
should be subject to the CNP requirements by EPD. Applicable permits under NCO
should also be obtained by the Contractor.
4.3.5.3
For schools located near the HKIA
(e.g. NM4), noise monitoring should be carried out at the monitoring stations
for the schools during the school examination periods. The ET should liaise
with the school’s personnel and the Examination Authority to ascertain the
exact dates and times of all examination periods during the course of the
contract.
4.3.5.4
In case of non-compliance with the construction noise criteria, more
frequent monitoring, as specified in the Event and Action Plan in Table 4‑4, should be carried out. This additional monitoring
should be continued until the recorded noise levels are rectified or proved to
be irrelevant to the construction activities.
4.3.6 Event and Action Plan for Noise
4.3.6.1
The Action and Limit Levels for construction noise are defined in Table 4‑3. Should non-compliance of the criteria occur, action in
accordance with the Event and Action Plan in Table 4‑4, should be carried out.
Table 4‑3:
Action and Limit Levels for Construction Noise
|
Time Period |
Action |
Limit |
|
0700-1900 hours on normal weekdays |
When one valid documented complaint is received. |
75* dB(A) |
Note:
* reduce to 70 dB(A) for schools and 65 dB(A) during school examination
periods.
Table 4‑4: Event and Action Plan
for Construction Noise
|
Event |
ET |
IEC |
Action AAHK / PM |
Contractor |
|
|
Action Level |
1. Notify AAHK / PM, IEC and Contractor; 2. Carry out investigation; 3. Report the results of investigation to the AAHK / PM, IEC and Contractor; 4. Discuss with IEC and Contractor on remedial measures required; 5. Increase monitoring frequency to check mitigation effectiveness. |
1. Review the investigation results submitted by the ET; 2. Review the proposed remedial measures by the Contractor and advise the AAHK / PM accordingly; 3. Advise AAHK / PM on the effectiveness of the proposed remedial measures. |
1. Confirm receipt of notification of failure in writing; 2. Notify Contractor; 3. In consolidation with IEC, agree with the Contractor on the remedial measures to be implemented; 4. Supervise the implementation of remedial measures. |
1. Submit noise mitigation proposals to AAHK / PM and IEC; 2. Implement noise mitigation proposals. |
|
|
Limit Level |
1. Inform AAHK / PM, IEC and Contractor; 2. Repeat measurements to confirm findings; 3. Inform EPD after confirming the validity of exceedance; 4. Increase monitoring frequency; 5. Identify source and investigate the cause of exceedance; 6. Carry out analysis of Contractor’s working procedures; 7. Discus with AAHK / PM, IEC and Contractor on remedial measures required; 8. Assess effectiveness of Contractor’s remedial actions and keep AAHK / PM, IEC and EPD informed of the results; 9. If exceedance stops, cease additional monitoring. |
1. Discuss amongst AAHK / PM, ET and Contractor on the potential remedial actions; 2. Review contractor’s remedial actions whenever necessary to assure their effectiveness and advise AAHK / PM accordingly. |
1. Confirm receipt of notification of failure in writing; 2. Notify Contractor; 3. In consolidation with IEC, agree with the Contractor on the remedial measures to be implemented; 4. Supervise the implementation of remedial measures; 5. If exceedance continues, consider stopping the Contractor to continue working on that portion of work which causes the exceedance until the exceedance is abated. |
1. Take immediate action to avoid further exceedance; 2. Submit proposals for remedial actions to AAHK / PM and IEC within three working days of notification; 3. Implement the agreed proposals; 4. Submit further proposal if problem still not under control; 5. Stop the relevant portion of works as instructed by AAHK / PM until the exceedance is abated. |
|
4.3.7 Mitigation Measures
4.3.7.1
Recommended construction noise control and mitigation measures are
proposed in the EIA Report. The Contractor should be responsible for the design
and implementation of these measures under the supervision of the AAHK / PM and
be monitored by the ET. The implementation schedule of the recommended noise
mitigation measures is presented in Appendix
C.
4.4 Road Traffic and Marine Traffic Noise Monitoring
4.4.1.1
No adverse road or marine traffic
noise impacts are anticipated from operation of the project, hence no
environmental monitoring and audit is proposed.
5
Water Quality Impact
5.1 Construction Water Quality
Monitoring
5.1.1 Introduction
5.1.1.1
The main potential water quality
impact during construction phase is the release of suspended solids (SS) during
land formation. Water jetting and field joint excavation works for the
submarine cable diversion may also generate some SS release. Environmental
monitoring for these marine works are described in Section 5.1.8.
5.1.1.2
The potential risk of contaminants
released from pore water during ground improvement via deep cement mixing (DCM)
within the contaminated mud pit areas has also been identified as a concern.
While the results of the water quality impact assessment suggests that
potential contaminant release from pore water would be insignificant, it is
recognised that full scale ground improvement works over the completed and
capped contaminated mud pits (CMPs) have not previously been implemented in
Hong Kong. Therefore, specific environmental monitoring for the initial DCM
activities are included as part of the EM&A requirements and are described
in Section 5.1.9.
5.1.2 Water Quality Parameters
5.1.2.1
Monitoring of Dissolved Oxygen (DO),
Dissolved Oxygen Saturation (DO%), pH, temperature, turbidity, salinity, and SS
should be undertaken at all designated monitoring locations. Current speed and
direction should also be measured at all monitoring locations except for
sensitive receivers that are enclosed or surrounded by silt curtains (namely
SR1A and SR8).
5.1.2.2
For monitoring of DCM works, there
will be an initial intensive monitoring of DO, DO%, pH, temperature, turbidity,
salinity, total alkalinity, SS, heavy metals and nutrients at designated
DCM-specific monitoring stations. Thereafter, total alkalinity and two
representative heavy metals will be monitored at the general monitoring
locations.
5.1.2.3
The general and DCM-specific
monitoring locations are described in Section 5.1.5. All parameters
should be measured in-situ while total alkalinity should be measured on-site
and SS, heavy metals and nutrients which should be determined by laboratory. DO
should be presented in mg/L and in % saturation.
5.1.2.4
Other relevant data should also be
recorded, including monitoring location, time, tidal stages, weather
conditions, sea conditions and any special phenomena and work underway at the
construction site.
5.1.3
Sampling Procedures and Monitoring Equipment
5.1.3.1 Water samples for all monitoring parameters should be
collected, stored, preserved and analysed according to the Standard
Methods, APHA 22nd ed. and/or other methods as agreed by the EPD.
In-situ measurements at monitoring locations including temperature, DO,
turbidity, pH, salinity and water depth should be collected by equipment with
the characteristics and functions listed in the following sections.
5.1.3.2 Sample data record sheets based on the one presented
in the “EM&A Guidelines for Development Projects in Hong Kong” are shown in
Appendix
B for reference.
5.1.3.3 The following monitoring equipment and facilities
should be provided by the ET.
Dissolved Oxygen and Temperature
Measuring Equipment
5.1.3.4
The instrument should be portable and
weatherproof using a DC power source. It should have a membrane electrode with
automatic temperature compensation complete with a cable. The equipment should
be capable of measuring:
● A dissolved oxygen level in the
range of 0-20 mg/L and 0-200 % saturation; and
● A temperature of 0-45 degree Celsius with a capability of measuring to ±0.1 degree Celsius
pH Measuring Equipment
5.1.3.5
A portable pH meter capable of
measuring a range between 0.0 and 14.0 should be provided to measure pH under
the specified conditions according to the Standard Methods, APHA.
Turbidity Measurement
Instrument
5.1.3.6
The instrument should be portable and
weatherproof using a DC power source. It should have a photoelectric sensor
capable of measuring turbidity between 0-1000 NTU.
Salinity
5.1.3.7 A portable salinometer capable of measuring salinity
in the range of 0-40 ppt should be provided for measuring salinity of the water
at each monitoring location.
Total Alkalinity
5.1.3.8
A digital titrator capable of
dispensing 0.002ml at one single dispense should be provided to measure the
amount of sulphuric acid used in determination of total alkalinity.
Nutrient, Heavy Metals
and Suspended Solids (SS)
5.1.3.9
A water sampler comprising a
transparent PVC cylinder with a capacity of not less than two litres, and could
be effectively sealed with latex cups at both ends, should be used. The sampler
should have a positive latching system to keep it open and prevent premature
closure until released by a messenger when the sampler is at the selected water
depth (e.g. Kahlsico Water Sampler or a similar instrument approved by the AAHK
/ PM and ET).
5.1.3.10
Water samples for nutrients, heavy
metals and SS analysis should be stored in high density polythene bottles with
no preservatives added, packed in ice (cooled to 4 ºC without being frozen),
and delivered to the laboratory within 24 hours of collection.
Water Depth Detector
5.1.3.11
A portable, battery-operated echo
sounder should be used for the determination of water depth at each designated
monitoring station. The unit would either be handheld or affixed to the bottom
of the work boat, if the same vessel is to be used throughout the monitoring
programme.
Positioning Device
5.1.3.12
A hand-held or boat-fixed type
digital Global Positioning System (dGPS) with way point bearing indication or
other equivalent instrument of similar accuracy should be provided and used
during monitoring to ensure the monitoring vessel is at the correct location
before taking measurements.
Calibration of In-situ Instruments
5.1.3.13
In-situ monitoring instruments for
the monitoring of temperature, DO, turbidity, pH and salinity should be
checked, calibrated and certified by a laboratory accredited under HOKLAS (or
other international accreditation scheme that is HOKLAS-equivalent) before use,
and subsequently re-calibrated at three monthly intervals throughout all stages
of the water quality monitoring. Responses of sensors and electrodes should be
checked with certified standard solutions before use.
5.1.3.14
Wet bulb calibration for the DO meter
should be carried out before commencement of monitoring and after completion of
all measurements each day. A zero check in distilled water should be performed
with the turbidity probe at least once per monitoring day. The probe should
then be calibrated with a solution of known NTU. In addition, the turbidity
probe should be calibrated at least twice per month to establish the
relationship between turbidity readings (in NTU) and levels of suspended solids
(in mg/L). Accuracy check of the digital titrator should be performed at
least once per monitoring day.
5.1.3.15
For the on-site calibration of field
equipment, the BS 1427:2009, Guide to on-site test methods for the analysis of
waters should be observed.
5.1.3.16
Sufficient stocks of spare parts
should be maintained for replacements when necessary. Backup monitoring
equipment should also be made available so that monitoring can proceed
uninterrupted even when some equipment is under maintenance, calibration etc.
5.1.4 Laboratory Measurement / Analysis
5.1.4.1 Analysis of nutrients, heavy metals and SS should be
carried out in a HOKLAS laboratory (or other international accredited
laboratory that is HOKLAS-equivalent). Sufficient water samples should be
collected at the monitoring stations for carrying out the laboratory nutrients,
heavy metals and SS determination. The nutrients, heavy metals and SS
determination work should start within 24 hours after collection of the water
samples. The analysis of nutrients, heavy metals and SS should follow the
standard methods summarised in Table 5‑1.
Table 5‑1:
Laboratory Analysis for SS, Nutrients and Heavy Metals
|
Parameters |
Instrumentation |
Analytical Method |
Reporting Limit |
|
Suspended Solid (SS) |
Analytical Balance |
APHA 2540D |
2 mg/L |
|
Nutrients |
|
|
|
|
Ammonia as N |
FIA |
APHA 4500 |
0.01 mg/L |
|
Unionised ammonia (NH3)* |
By calculation |
By calculation |
By calculation |
|
Nitrite as N |
FIA |
APHA 4500 |
0.01 mg/L |
|
Nitrate as N |
FIA |
APHA 4500 |
0.01 mg/L |
|
TKN as N |
Titration |
APHA 4500 |
0.1 mg/L |
|
Total Phosphorus |
Colorimetric |
APHA 4500 |
0.01 mg/L |
|
Reactive Phosphorus |
FIA |
APHA 4500 |
0.01 mg/L |
|
Heavy Metals |
|
|
|
|
Cadmium (Cd) |
ICP-MS |
USEPA 6020A |
0.1 µg/L |
|
Chromium (Cr) |
ICP-MS |
USEPA 6020A |
0.2 µg/L |
|
Copper (Cu) |
ICP-MS |
USEPA 6020A |
0.2 µg/L |
|
Nickel (Ni) |
ICP-MS |
USEPA 6020A |
0.2 µg/L |
|
Lead (Pb) |
ICP-MS |
USEPA 6020A |
0.2 µg/L |
|
Zinc (Zn) |
ICP-MS |
USEPA 6020A |
1 µg/L |
|
Arsenic (As) |
ICP-MS |
USEPA 6020A |
1 µg/L |
|
Silver (Ag) |
ICP-MS |
USEPA 6020A |
0.1 µg/L |
|
Mercury (Hg) |
ICP-MS |
APHA 7470A |
0.05 µg/L |
Note:
* Calculation based on the laboratory
result of ammonia nitrogen (NH4-N) and in-situ measured pH, salinity
and temperature.
5.1.4.2
If in-house or non-standard methods
are proposed, details of the method verification should, if required, be
submitted to EPD. In any circumstances, the sample testing should have
comprehensive quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) programmes. The
laboratory should be prepared to demonstrate the QC programmes to EPD or their
representative if and when required.
5.1.4.3
Additional duplicate samples may be
required by EPD for inter laboratory calibration. Remaining samples after
analysis should be kept by the laboratory for three months in case repeat
analysis is required.
5.1.4.4
If a site laboratory is set up or a non-HOKLAS
and non-international accredited laboratory is hired for carrying out the
laboratory analysis, the laboratory equipment, analytical procedures, and QC
shall be approved by EPD. All the analysis shall be witnessed by the AAHK
/ PM. The ETL shall provide the AAHK / PM and IEC with one copy of the
relevant chapters of the “APHA Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater” 22nd edition and any other relevant document for
their reference.
5.1.5
Monitoring
Locations
General Monitoring Locations (during absence of the
enhanced silt curtain)
5.1.5.1
A total of 25 water quality
monitoring locations (comprising 14 impact stations, eight sensitive receiver
stations and three control stations) have been proposed for the construction
and post-construction phases. The coordinates are shown in Table
5‑2 and the locations are shown in Drawing No. MCL/P132/EMA/5-001 and MCL/P132/EMA/5-002b. The final locations and number of monitoring points
should be agreed with EPD at least two weeks before undertaking any works.
Table 5‑2:
Water Quality Monitoring Stations (baseline and impact monitoring)
|
Monitoring Stations |
|
Coordinates |
Parameters |
|
|
|
|
Description |
Easting |
Northing |
Baseline Monitoring |
Impact Monitoring (excl. intensive DCM) |
Construction Activities Monitored |
|
|
C1 |
Control |
804247 |
815620 |
DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS
|
General Parameters DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS DCM Parameters Total Alkalinity, Two Representative Heavy Metals
|
General Parameters From commencement of advance marine works (submarine 11 kV cable diversion) until completion of all marine filling works for land formation DCM Parameters From commencement until completion of all marine-based DCM works |
|
C2 |
Control |
806945 |
825682 |
|||
|
C3(1) |
Control |
817803 |
822109 |
|||
|
SR2(1) |
Planned marine park / hard corals at The Brothers / Tai Mo To |
814166 |
821463 |
|||
|
IM1 |
Impact |
806458 |
818351 |
DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS Total Alkalinity
|
General Parameters DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS DCM Parameters Total Alkalinity, Two Representative Heavy Metals |
General Parameters From commencement of land formation until completion of all marine filling works DCM Parameters From commencement until completion of all marine-based DCM works |
|
IM7 |
Impact |
806835 |
821349 |
|||
|
IM2 |
Impact |
806193 |
818852 |
DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS Total Alkalinity
|
General Parameters DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS DCM Parameters Total Alkalinity, Two Representative Heavy Metals
|
General Parameters From commencement of land formation until completion of nearest 1 km of seawall DCM Parameters From commencement until completion of all marine-based DCM works |
|
IM3 |
Impact |
806019 |
819411 |
|||
|
IM4 |
Impact |
805039 |
819570 |
|||
|
IM5 |
Impact |
804924 |
820564 |
|||
|
IM6 |
Impact |
805828 |
821060 |
|||
|
IM8 |
Impact |
807838 |
821695 |
|||
|
IM9* |
Impact |
808811 |
822094 |
DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS, Total Alkalinity, Heavy metals and Nutrients
|
General Parameters From commencement of land formation until completion of nearest 1 km of seawall DCM Parameters From commencement until completion of all marine-based DCM works |
|
|
IM12* |
Impact |
811519 |
821162 |
|||
|
IM10* |
Impact |
809838 |
822240 |
General Parameters From commencement of land formation until completion of all marine filling works DCM Parameters From commencement until completion of all marine-based DCM works |
||
|
IM11* |
Impact |
810545 |
821501 |
|||
|
IM13 |
Impact (for submarine 11 kV cable diversion) |
Mobile station (500 m envelope of water jetting works) |
n/a |
General Parameters only DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS
|
General Parameters only From commencement until completion of water jetting works |
|
|
IM14 |
Impact (for submarine 11 kV cable diversion) |
Mobile station (500 m envelope of field joint excavation works) |
General Parameters only From commencement until completion of field joint excavation works |
|||
|
SR1A(2)(3) |
Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge (HZMB) Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF) Seawater Intake for cooling |
812586 |
820069 |
DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS
|
General Parameters only DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS
|
General Parameters only From commencement of advance marine works (submarine 11 kV cable diversion) until completion of all marine filling works for land formation |
|
812660 |
819977 |
|||||
|
(since 5 Jan 2019) |
||||||
|
SR3 |
Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park / fishing and spawning grounds in North Lantau |
807571 |
822147 |
|||
|
SR4A(3) |
Sha Lo Wan |
807810 |
817189 |
|||
|
SR5A(3) |
San Tau Beach SSSI |
810696 |
816593 |
|||
|
SR6(4) |
Tai Ho Bay, Near Tai Ho Stream SSSI |
814663 |
817899 |
|||
|
SR6A(4) |
814739 |
817963 |
||||
|
(since 8 Aug 2019) |
||||||
|
SR7 |
Ma Wan Fish Culture Zone (FCZ) |
823742 |
823636 |
|||
|
SR8(5) |
Seawater Intake for cooling at Hong Kong International Airport (East) |
811593 |
820417 |
|||
|
(before 1 Jul 2017) |
||||||
|
811418 |
820246 |
|||||
|
(1 Jul 2017 to 4 Jan 2019) |
||||||
|
811623 |
820390 |
|||||
|
(since 5 Jan 2019) |
||||||
Notes:
* Denotes monitoring stations for providing
baseline nutrient and heavy metal data for DCM-specific monitoring
(1) According to the Baseline
Water Quality Monitoring Report, C3 station is not adequately representative as
a control station of impact/ SR stations during the flood tide. The control
reference has been changed from C3 to SR2 from 1 September 2016 onwards.
(2) With the operation of HKBCF,
water quality monitoring at SR1A was commenced on 25 October 2018. The
monitoring location of SR1A was shifted closer to the intake to better reflect
the water quality in the immediate vicinity starting from 5 January 2019. The
approval from the IEC and EPD on the updated monitoring location had been
sought before the relocation.
(3) The monitoring locations for
SR1, SR4 and SR5 have been updated (to SR1A, SR4A and SR5A) based on the
Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Report.
(4) As the access to SR6 was
obstructed by the construction activities and temporary structures for Tung
Chung New Town Extension, the monitoring location has been relocated to SR6A
starting from 8 August 2019. The approval from the IEC and EPD on the updated
monitoring location had been sought before the relocation.
(5) The monitoring location for SR8
is subject to further changes due to silt curtain arrangements and the
progressive relocation of this seawater intake. The approval from
the IEC and EPD on the updated monitoring location had been sought before the
relocation.
5.1.5.2
For SR8, the monitoring location has
been modified slightly due to the installation of localised silt curtains which
are required for protecting this sensitive receiver. To ensure the water quality
monitoring at this location is able to represent the water quality at the
seawater intake, the monitoring location will be moved closer to the intakes
and within the area protected by the localised silt curtain.
5.1.5.3
For submarine 11 kV cable diversion
works, two specific impact stations (IM13 and IM14) are proposed for the
construction phase. These impact stations will be mobile stations located
within a 500 m envelope of the respective water jetting / field joint
excavation works. The indicative areas are shown in Drawing No. MCL/P132/EMA/5-001. Exact locations will depend on the tidal conditions (i.e.
the impact station should always be downstream of the respective water jetting
/ field joint excavation works). In case where relocation of the impact
stations is required, a minimum of 2 mobile impact stations at representative
locations should be proposed by ET and approved by the AAHK / PM and IEC.
5.1.5.4
The status and locations of water
sensitive receivers may change after issuing this Manual. If such case exists,
the ETL should propose updated monitoring locations and seek approval from the
IEC and EPD. The selection of these locations should follow the below
criteria:
● Impact (IM) stations should be
within the 500 m envelope of construction works;
● Sensitive receivers (SR) stations should
be at close proximity to key sensitive receivers; and
● Control stations (C), as far as
practicable, should be at representative locations of the water body being
monitored while undisturbed by the project.
Impact Monitoring Locations (during deployment of the enhanced silt
curtain)
5.1.5.5
During deployment of the enhanced
silt curtain as specified in the Silt Curtain Deployment Plan, some of the IM
stations surrounding the land formation footprint (IM1 to IM12) will be
relocated to the locations shown in Drawing No.
MCL/P132/EMA/5-002c to maintain an
appropriate buffer distance away from the enhanced silt curtain. The
coordinates are shown in Table 5‑3.
Table 5‑3:
Location of IM1 to IM12 during
Deployment of the Enhanced Silt Curtains
|
Monitoring Stations |
Easting |
Northing |
|
IM1 |
807132 |
817949 |
|
IM2 |
806166 |
818163 |
|
IM3 |
805594 |
818784 |
|
IM4 |
804607 |
819725 |
|
IM5 |
804867 |
820735 |
|
IM6 |
805828 |
821060 |
|
IM7 |
806835 |
821349 |
|
IM8 |
808140 |
821830 |
|
IM9 |
808811 |
822094 |
|
IM10 |
809794 |
822385 |
|
IM11 |
811460 |
822057 |
|
IM12 |
812046 |
821459 |
5.1.5.6
After the enhanced silt curtain is removed, the location of IM1 to IM12 will
revert to the locations shown in Drawing No.
MCL/P132/EMA/5-002b.
DCM-Specific Monitoring Locations
5.1.5.7
For the initial intensive
DCM-specific water quality monitoring programme, monitoring should be conducted
within 3 months of commencement of actual full scale DCM works and as soon as
there are five DCM rigs working within a work front of 500m x 500m within the
CMPs. Details of the DCM-specific water quality monitoring programme are
specified in the Detailed Plan on DCM. A total of 12 monitoring stations will
be deployed with the following arrangement:
i. Two monitoring stations upstream and
at 150 m envelope of DCM group works area (Control stations);
ii. Five monitoring stations downstream
and at 150 m envelope of DCM group works area (Impact 1 stations);
iii. Five monitoring stations downstream
and at 250 m envelope of DCM group works area (Impact 2 stations);
iv. Monitoring stations should be at
least 50 m apart; and
v. Downstream monitoring stations
should be perpendicular to the tidal direction.
5.1.5.8 Drawing No. MCL/P132/EMA/5-003 shows an indicative arrangement for the DCM work
front.
5.1.5.9 After completion of the initial intensive DCM-specific
water quality monitoring programme, DCM monitoring locations will revert to the
general (control and impact) monitoring locations presented in Table 5‑2.
5.1.6 Baseline Monitoring
5.1.6.1
Baseline conditions for water quality
shall be established and agreed with EPD prior to the commencement of works.
The purpose of the baseline monitoring is to establish ambient conditions prior
to the commencement of the marine works and to demonstrate the suitability of
the proposed impact and control monitoring stations. The baseline conditions
shall be established by measuring DO, DO%, pH, temperature, turbidity,
salinity, and SS at all designated stationary monitoring stations. To provide
the baseline water quality for the DCM-specific monitoring, total alkalinity
shall be measured at all the relevant stationary impact stations, plus
nutrients and heavy metals at the “IM*” stations (which represent the
contaminated mud pit locations). The measurements should be taken three days
per week, at mid-flood and mid-ebb tides, for at least four weeks prior to the
commencement of marine works. Samples should be taken at three depths (at 1m
below surface, at mid-depth, and at 1m above bottom) for locations with water
depth >6m. For locations with water depth between 3m and 6m, two depths
(surface and bottom) should be taken. Locations with water depth <3m, only
surface depth should be taken. The commencement date of baseline monitoring
shall be agreed between the ET / IEC / AAHK / PM to ensure timely submission of
the baseline monitoring report to EPD. Duplicate water samples should be taken
and analysed.
5.1.6.2 As far as possible there should not be any marine
construction activities in the vicinity of the stations during the baseline
monitoring.
5.1.6.3 In exceptional cases when insufficient baseline
monitoring data or questionable results are obtained, the ET should seek
approval from the IEC and EPD on an appropriate set of data to be used as
baseline reference.
5.1.6.4 Baseline monitoring schedule should be faxed to EPD at
least two weeks prior to the commencement of baseline monitoring. The interval
between two sets of monitoring should be not less than 36 hours.
5.1.7 Efficiency of Silt Curtain System
5.1.7.1 Type II and/or Type III silt curtains (as defined by
the United States Army Corporation of Engineers (USACE) classification system
for silt curtains) have been recommended in the EIA Report. These are to be
implemented as a double layer arrangement. Details of the silt curtain
arrangements and the pilot test on the efficiency of the silt curtain system
are specified in the Silt Curtain Deployment Plan. The ET should conduct tests
to confirm that the silt curtain system specified in the Silt Curtain
Deployment Plan satisfies the requirements in the EIA Report.
5.1.7.2
A pilot test should be carried out
during the early stage of construction to confirm whether the silt removal
efficiency of the double layer floating type silt curtains can achieve 61 %
silt removal efficiency for sand blanket laying and marine filling activities.
The pilot test should be undertaken during the highest current speed condition
(covering both flood and ebb tide) and include measurements of current speed
and direction, turbidity and suspended solids. The water quality monitoring
points to be selected should be close to the locations of the marine works.
Monitoring should be conducted on both sides of the silt curtains deployed. If
the pilot test is conducted in dry season, a verification test should be
carried out during wet season at the highest current speed condition to
re-confirm the findings. The details for the pilot test should be proposed by
the ET and agreed with the IEC and EPD, taking into account of the Contractor’s
proposed actual locations of the works.
5.1.7.3
Regardless of the measured efficiency
of the silt curtain system, the Event and Action Plan should only be based on
the monitoring results at the designated stationary monitoring stations.
5.1.8 General Impact Monitoring
5.1.8.1 During marine construction works, impact monitoring
should be undertaken at all designated monitoring stations three days per week
(refer to Table 5‑2 for the activities to be
monitored). Monitoring should be undertaken at mid-flood (within ± 1.75 hour of
the predicted time) and mid-ebb (within ± 1.75 hour of the predicted time)
tides. Samples should be taken at three depths (at 1m below surface, at
mid-depth, and at 1m above bottom) for locations with water depth >6m. For
locations with water depth between 3m and 6m, two depths (surface and bottom)
should be taken. Locations with water depth <3 m, only surface depth should
be taken. The interval between two sets of monitoring should be not less than
36 hours except when the Action Level and/or Limit Level is/are exceeded, in
which case the monitoring frequency may be increased. For DCM impact
monitoring, please refer to Section 5.1.9.
5.1.8.2 Two consecutive measurements of DO concentrations
(mg/L), DO saturation (%) and turbidity (NTU) should be taken in-situ according
to the stated sampling method. Where the difference in value between the first
and second measurement of DO or turbidity parameters is more than 25 % of
the value of the first reading, the reading should be discarded and further
readings would be taken. Water samples for SS (mg/L) measurements should be
collected at the same depths. Duplicate water samples should be taken and
analysed.
5.1.8.3
In addition to the above in-situ
measurements, water temperature and pH should be determined at all designated
monitoring stations at the same depths, as specified above. The monitoring
location / position, time, weather conditions and any special phenomena should
also be recorded.
5.1.9 DCM Impact Monitoring
Initial Intensive DCM Monitoring
5.1.9.1
According to the current design, DCM would
be conducted within the CMPs during land formation. As specified in the
Detailed Plan for DCM, within 3 months of the commencement of full-scale DCM
works and as soon as there are five DCM rigs working within a work front of 500
m x 500 m within the CMPs, the ET is required to conduct an initial intensive
DCM-specific water quality monitoring programme for a period of at least four
weeks to ensure that the criteria for various contaminants are complied. This
would be conducted for a group of five DCM rigs as specified in Section
5.1.5.7.
5.1.9.2
Daily monitoring at mid-flood (within
± 1.75 hour of the predicted time) and mid-ebb (within ± 1.75 hour of the
predicted time) tides is required during the initial intensive DCM monitoring
as shown in Chart 5-1. Samples should be taken at three depths (at 1m below
surface, at mid-depth, and at 1 m above bottom) for locations with water depth
>6m. For locations with water depth between 3 m and 6 m, two depths (surface
and bottom) should be taken. Locations with water depth <3m, only surface
depth should be taken.
5.1.9.3
Two consecutive measurements of DO,
DO%, pH, temperature (oC), turbidity (NTU), and salinity (ppt)
should be taken in-situ according to the stated sampling method. Water samples
for total alkalinity (ppm), SS (mg/L), nutrients (mg/L) and heavy metals (µg/L)
measurements should be collected at the same depths. Monitoring parameters for
nutrients and heavy metals include those listed in Table 5‑1.
Duplicate water samples should be taken and analysed. If no exceedance
(referring to those that are attributable to DCM works as determined by the
findings of exceedance investigation reports) is recorded within two weeks,
then the monitoring frequency can be reduced to every two days. If no
exceedance is recorded after another two weeks, the initial intensive DCM
specific monitoring will be terminated and DCM monitoring will continue as part
of the regular DCM monitoring.
|
|
|
* During regular DCM monitoring, exceedances for total alkalinity and the two representative heavy metals should be confirmed by ET and verified by the IEC as project-related. |
Regular DCM Monitoring
5.1.9.4
After completion of the initial
intensive DCM monitoring, regular DCM monitoring will be conducted as part of
the general impact monitoring presented in Section 5.1.8 for the
remaining duration of the DCM works. During this period, total alkalinity and
two representative heavy metals will be monitored at all stationary control and
impact monitoring stations as specified in Table 5‑2.
The two representative heavy metals shall be proposed by the ET taking into
account the findings of the initial intensive DCM monitoring. The selection
criteria for determining the representative heavy metals should include but not
limited to the following:
● Low natural (baseline)
concentrations in the marine environment
● Present in elevated concentrations
in the CMPs (based on past vibrocores taken from the CMPs)
● Concentrations in the CMPs should be
higher than in non- contaminated mud pit areas; and
● Not associated with strong temporal
variations and/or external influences (e.g. Pearl River Delta discharges,
construction activities by concurrent projects)
5.1.9.5
Two consecutive measurements of total
alkalinity (ppm) should be taken according to the stated sampling and analysis
method, and laboratory water samples for heavy metals (µg/L) measurements
should be collected at the same depths. Duplicate water samples should be taken
and analysed.
5.1.9.6
During this regular DCM monitoring
period, if there is any exceedance of the Limit Levels for total alkalinity and
the two representative heavy metals for two consecutive sampling days and such
exceedance is confirmed by the ET (with verification by the IEC) to be a result
of the DCM works, intensive DCM monitoring will be re-initiated as shown in Chart 5-1. Monitoring parameters during the intensive DCM monitoring will be the
same as those conducted for the initial intensive DCM monitoring until such
time as no further exceedances are detected and regular DCM monitoring resumes.
5.1.10 Post-Construction Monitoring
5.1.10.1
Upon completion of all marine
construction works, a post project water quality monitoring exercise should be
carried out for four weeks, in the same manner as the impact monitoring during
construction phase.
5.1.11 Event and Action Plan for Water
Quality
5.1.11.1
The Action Level and Limit Level for water quality (excluding sensitive
receiver stations representing seawater intakes) are defined in Table 5‑4.
Table 5‑4:
Action and Limit Levels for Water Quality
|
Parameters |
Action Level |
Limit Level |
|
DO in mg/L (Surface, Middle & Bottom) |
Surface and Middle 5 percentile of baseline data for surface and middle layer |
Surface and Middle 5 mg/L or 1 percentile of baseline data for surface and middle layer for Fish Culture Zone (SR7) 4 mg/L or 1 percentile of baseline data for surface and middle layer for other stations |
|
Bottom 5 percentile of baseline data for bottom layer |
Bottom 2 mg/L or 1 percentile of baseline data for bottom layer |
|
|
Temperature in °C (for intensive DCM monitoring only) |
1.8°C above the temperature recorded at representative control stations at the same tide of the same day |
2°C above the temperature recorded at representative control stations at the same tide of the same day |
|
SS in mg/L |
95 percentile of baseline data or 120% of upstream control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher |
99 percentile of baseline data or 130% of upstream control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher |
|
Turbidity in NTU |
||
|
Total Alkalinity in ppm |
||
|
Nutrient |
||
|
Ammonia (NH3) |
||
|
Unionised ammonia (NH3) (with 0.021 mg/L as the upper limit) |
||
|
Nitrite (NO2) |
||
|
Nitrate (NO3) |
||
|
TKN |
||
|
Total Phosphorus |
||
|
Reactive Phosphorus |
||
|
Heavy Metals |
||
|
Cadmium (Cd) |
||
|
Chromium (Cr) |
||
|
Copper (Cu) |
||
|
Nickel (Ni) |
||
|
Lead (Pb) |
||
|
Zinc (Zn) |
||
|
Arsenic (As) |
||
|
Silver (Ag) |
||
|
Mercury (Hg) |
Notes:
1. For DO measurement, non-compliance
occurs when monitoring result is lower than the limits.
2. For parameters other
than DO, non-compliance of water quality results when monitoring results is
higher than the limits.
3. Depth-averaged results
are used unless specified otherwise.
4. All the figures given in
the table are used for reference only and the EPD may amend the figures
whenever necessary.
5. For all mobile impact
stations, the baseline data will be represented by the nearest stationary
monitoring station.
5.1.11.2
The Action Level and Limit Level for
water quality impact monitoring have been established and presented in the
Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Report. The summary tables of the Action
Level and Limit Level for water quality are presented in Table
5‑5 and Table 5‑6.
Table 5‑5:
Action and Limit Levels for General Impact Water Quality Monitoring and Regular DCM
Monitoring
|
Parameters |
Action Level |
Limit Level |
||
|
DO in mg/L (Surface, Middle & Bottom) |
Surface and Middle 4.5 mg/L |
Surface and Middle 4.1 mg/L 5 mg/L for Fish Culture Zone (SR7) only |
||
|
Bottom 3.4 mg/L |
Bottom 2.7 mg/L |
|||
|
Suspended Solids (SS) in mg/L |
23 |
or 120% of upstream control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher |
37 |
or 130% of upstream control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher |
|
Turbidity in NTU |
22.6 |
36.1 |
||
|
Total Alkalinity in ppm |
95 |
99 |
||
|
Representative Heavy Metals for regular DCM monitoring (chromium and nickel) |
Same as that for the intensive DCM monitoring |
Same as that for the intensive DCM monitoring |
||
Note:
1. For DO measurement, non-compliance
occurs when monitoring result is lower than the limits.
2. For parameters other
than DO, non-compliance of water quality results when monitoring results is
higher than the limits.
3. Depth-averaged results are
used unless specified otherwise.
4. The Action and Limit
Levels specified in this table does not apply to SR1A and SR8 (see Section
5.11.1.3).
Table 5‑6:
Action and Limit Levels for Intensive DCM Monitoring
|
Parameters |
Action Level |
Limit Level |
||
|
DCM-Specific Parameters |
|
|
||
|
Temperature in °C
|
1.8°C above the temperature recorded at upstream control stations at the same tide of the same day |
2°C above the temperature recorded at upstream control stations at the same tide of the same day |
||
|
Total Alkalinity in ppm |
95 |
or 120% of upstream control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher |
99 |
or 130% of upstream control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher |
|
Nutrient (mg/l) |
|
|
||
|
Ammonia (NH3) |
0.18 |
0.20 |
||
|
Unionised ammonia (NH3) (with 0.021 mg/L as the upper limit) |
0.01 |
0.01 |
||
|
Nitrite (NO2) |
0.12 |
0.13 |
||
|
Nitrate (NO3) |
1.05 |
1.18 |
||
|
TKN |
0.6 |
0.7 |
||
|
Total Phosphorus |
0.06 |
0.07 |
||
|
Reactive Phosphorus |
0.04 |
0.04 |
||
|
Heavy Metals (µg/l) |
|
|
||
|
Cadmium (Cd) |
0.1 |
0.1 |
||
|
Chromium (Cr) |
0.2 |
0.2 |
||
|
Copper (Cu) |
1.9 |
5.1 |
||
|
Nickel (Ni) |
3.2 |
3.6 |
||
|
Lead (Pb) |
0.2 |
0.2 |
||
|
Zinc (Zn) |
6 |
8 |
||
|
Arsenic (As) |
3 |
4 |
||
|
Silver (Ag) |
0.1 |
0.1 |
||
|
Mercury (Hg) |
0.05 |
0.05 |
||
|
Other Water Quality Parameters |
||||
|
DO in mg/L (Surface and Middle) |
80% of upstream control station* at the same tide of the same day or 4 mg/l, whichever is lower |
70% of upstream control station* at the same tide of the same day or 4 mg/l, whichever is lower |
||
|
DO in mg/L (Bottom) |
80% of upstream control station* at the same tide of the same day or 2 mg/l, whichever is lower |
70% of upstream control station* at the same tide of the same day or 2 mg/l, whichever is lower |
||
|
Suspended Solids (SS) in mg/L |
120% of upstream control station* at the same tide of the same day |
130% of upstream control station* at the same tide of the same day |
||
|
Turbidity in NTU |
||||
Note:
1. Non-compliance of water
quality results when monitoring results is higher than the limits, except for
DO measurement whereby non-compliance results when monitoring results is lower
than the limits.
2. Depth-averaged results
are used unless specified otherwise.
3. For Cd, Cr, Pb, Ag and
Hg, the percentile values are below detection limit, hence the Action and Limit
Levels represent detection limit.
4. Where the water quality
results at control stations for individual parameters are below detection
limit, the value of the detection limit will be adopted.
5. (*) Upstream control station refers
to average of the two control station results, unless the difference between
the two control station results is >25%, in which case the higher (for SS
and turbidity) and lower (for DO) of the two shall apply.
5.1.11.3
For sensitive receiver stations
representing seawater intakes for cooling (e.g. SR1A and SR8), only the Action
and Limit Levels for SS parameter would be applicable (as the operation of
these intakes would not be significantly affected by the other water quality
parameters). At these cooling water intakes, the Action and Limit Levels for SS
are dependent on the operational tolerance of individual intakes. The ET will
propose suitable Action and Limit Levels for SS at individual sensitive
receiver stations representing seawater intakes. This shall be agreed with the
IEC and the respective operators of the intakes prior to commencement of construction
activities or commencement of operation of the seawater intake (whichever is
later) and documented in the Baseline Monitoring Report and EM&A reports.
5.1.11.4
As agreed with the IEC and the respective
operators, the Action and Limit Levels for SR1A and SR8 are shown in Table 5‑7.
Table 5‑7:
Action Level and Limit Level for SR1A and SR8
|
SS (mg/l) |
Action Level |
Limit Level |
|
SR1A |
33 |
42 |
|
SR8 |
52 |
60 |
5.1.11.5
The actions in accordance with the
Event and Action Plan in Table 5‑8 and Table 5‑9 should be carried out if the water quality
assessment criteria are exceeded at any designated monitoring points.
Table 5‑8:
Event and Action Plan for General Impact Water Quality Monitoring
|
Event |
ET |
IEC |
Action AAHK / PM |
Contractor |
|
Action Level being exceeded by one sampling day |
1. Repeat in-situ measurement to confirm findings; 2. Identify reasons for non-compliance and sources of impact; 3. Inform IEC and Contractor; 4. Check monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods; 5. Discuss mitigation measures with IEC and Contractor; 6. Repeat in-situ monitoring on the day after the exceedance. |
1. Discuss with ET and Contractor on the mitigation measures; 2. Review proposals on mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise AAHK / PM accordingly; 3. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
1. Discuss with IEC on the proposed mitigation measures; 2. Make agreement on the mitigation measures to be implemented; 3. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
1. Inform AAHK / PM and confirm receipt of ET’s notification of the non-compliance in writing; 2. Rectify unacceptable practice; 3. Check all plant and equipment; 4. Provide report of the status and condition of plant, equipment and mitigation measures to ET 5. Consider changes of working methods; 6. Discuss with ET and IEC and propose mitigation measures. |
|
Action Level being exceeded by more than two consecutive sampling days |
1. Repeat in-situ measurement to confirm findings; 2. Identify reasons for non-compliance and sources of impact; 3. Inform IEC and Contractor; 4. Check monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods; 5. Discuss mitigation measures with IEC and Contractor; 6. Ensure mitigation measures are implemented; 7. Repeat in-situ monitoring on the day after the exceedance and prepare to increase the monitoring frequency to daily. |
1. Discuss with ET and Contractor on the mitigation measures; 2. Review proposals on mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise AAHK / PM accordingly; 3. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
1. Discuss with IEC on the proposed mitigation measures; 2. Make agreement on the mitigation measures to be implemented; 3. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
1. Inform AAHK / PM and confirm receipt of ET’s notification of the non-compliance in writing; 2. Rectify unacceptable practice; 3. Check all plant and equipment; 4. Provide report of the status and condition of plant, equipment and mitigation measures to ET 5. Consider changes of working methods; 6. Discuss with ET and IEC and propose mitigation measures to AAHK / PM and IEC within three working days; 7. Implement the agreed mitigation measures.
|
|
Limit Level being exceeded by one sampling day |
1. Repeat in-situ measurement to confirm findings; 2. Identify reasons for non-compliance and sources of impact; 3. Inform IEC, Contractor and EPD; 4. Check monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods; 5. Discuss mitigation measures with AAHK / PM, IEC and Contractor; 6. Ensure mitigation measures are implemented; 7. Repeat in-situ monitoring on the day after the exceedance and prepare to increase the monitoring frequency to daily |
1. Discuss with ET and Contractor on the mitigation measures; 2. Review proposals on mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise AAHK / PM accordingly; 3. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
1. Discuss with ET, IEC and Contractor on the proposed mitigation measures; 2. Request Contractor to critically review the working methods; 3. Make agreement on the mitigation measures to be implemented; 4. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
1. Inform AAHK / PM and confirm receipt of ET’s notification of the non-compliance in writing; 2. Rectify unacceptable practice; 3. Check all plant and equipment; 4. Provide report of the status and condition of plant, equipment and mitigation measures to ET 5. Consider changes of working methods; 6. Discuss with AAHK / PM, ET and IEC and propose mitigation measures to AAHK / PM and IEC within three working days; 7. Implement the agreed mitigation measures. |
|
Limit Level being exceeded by more than one consecutive sampling days |
1. Repeat in-situ measurement to confirm findings; 2. Identify reasons for non-compliance and sources of impact; 3. Inform IEC, Contractor and EPD; 4. Check monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods; 5. Discuss mitigation measures with AAHK / PM, IEC and Contractor; 6. Ensure mitigation measures are implemented; 7. Increase the in-situ monitoring frequency to daily until no exceedance of Limit Level for two consecutive days. |
1. Discuss with ET and Contractor on the mitigation measures; 2. Review proposals on mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise AAHK / PM accordingly; 3. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
1. Discuss with IEC, ET and Contractor on the proposed mitigation measures; 2. Request contractor to critically review the working methods; 3. Make agreement on the mitigation measures to be implemented; 4. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures; 5. Consider and instruct, if necessary, the Contractor to slow down or to stop all or part of the construction activities until no exceedance of Limit Level. |
1. Inform AAHK / PM and confirm receipt of ET’s notification of the non-compliance in writing; 2. Rectify unacceptable practice; 3. Check all plant and equipment; 4. Provide daily report of the status and condition of plant, equipment and mitigation measures to ET until no further exceedance; 5. Consider changes of working methods; 6. Discuss with AAHK / PM, ET and IEC and propose mitigation measures to AAHK / PM and IEC within three working days; 7. Implement the agreed mitigation measures; 8. As directed by AAHK / PM, to slow down or to stop all or part of the construction activities. |
Note: Where the Action Level is
the same as the Limit Level, the actions specified for Limit Level exceedances
shall apply.
Table 5‑9:
Event and Action Plan for DCM Process
|
Event |
ET |
IEC |
Action AAHK / PM |
Contractor |
|
Action Level being exceeded by one sampling day |
1. Repeat in-situ measurement to confirm findings; 2. Identify reasons for non-compliance and sources of impact; 3. Inform IEC and Contractor; 4. Check monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods; 5. Discuss mitigation measures with IEC and Contractor; 6. During intensive DCM monitoring and if not already undertaking daily monitoring, increase monitoring frequency in accordance with Chart 5.1 (applies to DCM-specific parameters only). During regular DCM monitoring, repeat monitoring on the day after the exceedance. |
1. Discuss with ET and Contractor on the mitigation measures; 2. Review proposals on mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise AAHK / PM accordingly; 3. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
1. Discuss with IEC on the proposed mitigation measures; 2. Make agreement on the mitigation measures to be implemented; 3. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
1. Inform AAHK / PM and confirm receipt of ET’s notification of the non-compliance in writing; 2. Rectify unacceptable practice; 3. Check all plant and equipment; 4. Provide report of the status and condition of plant, equipment and mitigation measures to ET; 5. Consider changes of working methods; 6. Discuss with ET and IEC and propose mitigation measures. |
|
Action Level being exceeded by more than two consecutive sampling days |
1. Repeat in-situ measurement to confirm findings; 2. Identify reasons for non-compliance and sources of impact; 3. Inform IEC and Contractor; 4. Check monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods; 5. Discuss mitigation measures with IEC and Contractor; 6. Ensure mitigation measures are implemented; 7. During intensive DCM monitoring and if not already undertaking daily monitoring, increase monitoring frequency in accordance with Chart 5.1 (applies to DCM-specific parameters only). During regular DCM monitoring, repeat monitoring on the day after the exceedance and prepare to increase the monitoring frequency to daily. |
1. Discuss with ET and Contractor on the mitigation measures; 2. Review proposals on mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise AAHK / PM accordingly; 3. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
1. Discuss with IEC on the proposed mitigation measures; 2. Make agreement on the mitigation measures to be implemented; 3. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
1. Inform AAHK / PM and confirm receipt of ET’s notification of the non-compliance in writing; 2. Rectify unacceptable practice; 3. Check all plant and equipment; 4. Provide report of the status and condition of plant, equipment and mitigation measures to ET; 5. Consider changes of working methods; 6. Discuss with ET and IEC and propose mitigation measures to AAHK / PM and IEC within 3 working days; 7. Implement the agreed mitigation measures. 8. As directed by AAHK / PM, to slow down all or part of the construction activities. |
|
Limit Level being exceeded by one sampling day |
1. Repeat in-situ measurement to confirm findings; 2. Identify reasons for non-compliance and sources of impact; 3. Inform IEC, Contractor and EPD; 4. Check monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods; 5. Discuss mitigation measures with IEC, AAHK / PM and Contractor; 6. Ensure mitigation measures are implemented; 7. During intensive DCM monitoring and if not already undertaking daily monitoring, increase monitoring frequency in accordance with Chart 5.1 (applies to DCM-specific parameters only). During regular DCM monitoring, repeat monitoring on the day after the exceedance. |
1. Discuss with ET and Contractor on the mitigation measures; 2. Review proposals on mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise AAHK / PM accordingly; 3. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
1. Discuss with IEC, ET and Contractor on the proposed mitigation measures; 2. Request Contractor to critically review the working methods; 3. Make agreement on the mitigation measures to be implemented; 4. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
1. Inform AAHK / PM and confirm receipt of ET’s notification of the non-compliance in writing; 2. Rectify unacceptable practice; 3. Check all plant and equipment; 4. Provide report of the status and condition of plant, equipment and mitigation measures to ET; 5. Consider changes of working methods; 6. Discuss with AAHK / PM, ET and IEC and propose mitigation measures to AAHK / PM and IEC within three working days; 7. Implement the agreed mitigation measures. |
|
Limit Level being exceeded by more than one consecutive sampling days |
1. Repeat in-situ measurement to confirm findings; 2. Identify reasons for non-compliance and sources of impact; 3. Inform IEC, Contractor and EPD; 4. Check monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods; 5. Discuss mitigation measures with IEC, AAHK / PM and Contractor; 6. Ensure mitigation measures are implemented; 7. During intensive DCM monitoring and if not already undertaking daily monitoring, increase monitoring frequency in accordance with Chart 5.1 (applies to DCM-specific parameters only). During regular DCM monitoring, re-initiate the intensive DCM monitoring in accordance with Chart 5.1. |
1. Discuss with ET and Contractor on the mitigation measures; 2. Review proposals on mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise AAHK / PM accordingly; 3. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
1. Discuss with IEC, ET and Contractor on the proposed mitigation measures; 2. Request contractor to critically review the working methods; 3. Make agreement on the mitigation measures to be implemented; 4. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures; 5. Consider and instruct, if necessary, the Contractor to slow down or to stop all or part of the construction activities until no exceedance of Limit Level. |
1. Inform AAHK / PM and confirm receipt of ET’s notification of the non-compliance in writing; 2. Rectify unacceptable practice; 3. Check all plant and equipment; 4. Provide report of the status and condition of plant, equipment and mitigation measures to ET; 5. Consider changes of working methods; 6. Discuss with AAHK / PM, ET and IEC and propose mitigation measures to AAHK / PM and IEC within three working days; 7. Implement the agreed mitigation measures; 8. As directed by AAHK / PM, to stop all or part of the construction activities. |
5.1.12
Mitigation
Measures
5.1.12.1 The implementation schedule of the
recommended water quality mitigation measures is presented in Appendix C.
5.2 Operation Water Quality Monitoring
5.2.1 Introduction
5.2.1.1 As it has been assessed that there would not be any
significant changes in the water quality during operation of the project, no
marine water quality monitoring is considered necessary during the operation
phase.
5.2.1.2 Water quality monitoring for the spent cooling water
discharges will be undertaken in accordance with the future Water Pollution
Control Ordinance (WPCO) license conditions.
5.2.1.3 Water quality monitoring is proposed for the greywater
treatment facility during commissioning of the facility to ensure the treated
effluent quality complies with the reuse standards as defined in the EIA
Report, which are reproduced in Table 5‑10.
Table 5‑10:
Treated Effluent Quality Criteria for Greywater Treatment Facility
|
Parameters |
Criteria Level |
|
SS |
≤ 5 mg/L |
|
BOD5 |
≤ 10 mg/L |
|
COD |
≤ 50 mg/L |
|
Oil and Grease |
≤ 10 mg/L |
|
Surfactants (total) |
≤ 5 mg/L |
|
E. coli |
< 1 count / 100ml |
|
pH |
6.0 – 9.0 |
|
Turbidity |
< 2 NTU |
|
Faecal Coliforms |
Non detectable / 100ml |
5.2.2 Commissioning Test for Greywater Treatment
Facility
5.2.2.1
During commissioning of the greywater
treatment facility, monitoring of pH, turbidity, SS, 5-day Biological Oxygen
Demand (BOD5), Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), oil and grease, E.coli,
faecal coliforms and surfactants for the treated effluent should be undertaken
to ensure the treatment facility will be able to treat the greywater to levels
in compliance with the reuse standards as listed in Table 5‑10.
Details of the proposed monitoring for treated effluent including the
monitoring location, monitoring frequency, effluent sampling and testing
methods should be proposed by the ET, which will then be checked by the IEC for
agreement with the AAHK / PM and EPD at least two weeks before commencement of the
commissioning.
5.2.2.2
During operation of the greywater
treatment facility, regular water quality monitoring for the treated effluent
discharges will be undertaken, which shall monitor compliance of the treated
effluent against both the reuse standard specified in Table
5‑10, and the discharge standard (for discharge to foul sewer) as
per the future WPCO license conditions for discharge to foul sewer. Reuse of
the treated effluent shall be suspended if the monitoring results do not comply
with the reuse standards. The treated greywater will be discharged to the
sewerage system until the greywater treatment system resumes compliance.
6
Sewerage and Sewage Treatment
Implications
6.1
Construction
Phase Monitoring
6.1.1.1
After implementation of the recommended mitigation measure for sewage
from construction workforce as detailed in Appendix
C, no sewerage impacts are expected
from the site during construction stage. No specific sewage monitoring during
construction phase is thus required.
6.2
Operation
Phase Monitoring
6.2.1.1 The gravity sewer from the airport discharge manhole to Tung Chung
Sewage Pumping Station (TCSPS) will be upgraded by AAHK to cater for the
ultimate design sewage flow from the expanded airport. AAHK will start
planning construction of the gravity sewer upgrading in 2022 or when the
sewage flow in the affected gravity sewer exceeds 80% of the design capacity of
the sewer, whichever is earlier, so as to ensure timely completion of the
mitigation works before the flow would exceed the design capacity of the sewer. For this, it is recommended that AAHK should conduct
annual monitoring for the sewage flow build-up of the gravity sewer from the
airport discharge manhole to TCSPS from 2020 onwards, i.e., one year before the
scheduled commencement of operation of the proposed third runway.
6.2.1.2 Moreover, in order to ensure the additional sewage
generated from the 3RS project would not impose adverse impacts in respect of
sewage septicity and odour issues on the existing sewerage networks including
the public sewerage system, it is recommended to start routine monitoring of
hydrogen sulphide (H2S) levels for the sewerage system of 3RS upon
commencement of operation of the project,
6.2.1.3
The ET should propose suitable method
for carrying out the annual sewage flow monitoring for the concerned gravity
sewer as well as details of the routine H2S monitoring system for
the sewerage system of 3RS, which shall be checked by IEC and agreed by the
AAHK / PM and EPD at least one year before commencement of operation of
3RS.
7
Waste Management Implications
7.1
Construction
Phase Monitoring
7.1.1
Monitoring
Requirements
7.1.1.1 Waste Management
Plan (WMP) for the construction of the project was submitted to EPD no later
than 3 months before the commencement of construction in accordance to EP
Condition 2.19. The Contractors are responsible for waste management activities
during construction phase. The Contractors must ensure that all wastes produced
during the construction phase are handled, stored and disposed of in accordance
with EPD’s regulations and requirements and in line with good waste management
practices. Contract-specific WMPs should be prepared and implemented by
individual Contractors in accordance with Environment, Transport and Works Bureau
(ETWB TC(W)) No. 19/2005 Environmental Management on Construction Site and the
Construction WMP. The
contract-specific WMPs shall be updated from time to time and shall be reviewed
and advised by the ET. All submissions shall be submitted to AAHK / PM for
agreement and verified by the IEC.
7.1.1.2
The
Contractors should also refer to the Construction and Demolition Material
Management Plan (C&DMMP) which will be submitted to Public Fill Committee (PFC)
before commencement of construction of the project to facilitate them in the
preparation of the contract-specific WMP. The C&DMMP should provide ways to
minimise the generation and maximise the reuse of the construction and demolition (C&D) material at the construction phase
of the project. The C&DMMP should also describe the arrangement for
collection and disposal of C&D materials to be generated from the
construction phase.
7.1.1.3
During construction phase, the Contractors should perform regular site
inspection (at least once per week) to determine if wastes are being managed in
accordance with approved procedures and the contract-specific WMP. Waste materials generated during the construction works, such as
inert C&D material, general refuse and chemical wastes, are recommended to
be monitored on a weekly basis to ensure that proper storage, transportation
and disposal practices are being implemented. This monitoring of waste
management practices will ensure that these solid and liquid wastes are not
disposed into the nearby harbour waters. The Contractors would be responsible
for the implementation of any mitigation measures to minimise waste or redress
problems arising from the waste materials.
7.1.2
Audit Requirements
7.1.2.1 It is recommended
that the waste generated during construction phase should be audited
periodically (at least once per week) by the ET to determine if wastes are
being managed in accordance with approved procedures and the contract-specific
WMPs. The audits should look at all aspects of waste management including waste
generation, storage, transportation and disposal. An appropriate audit
programme would be to undertake a first audit near the commencement of the
construction works, and then to audit periodically thereafter. In addition,
routine site inspections by the Contractors should check the implementation of
the recommended good site practices and other waste management mitigation
measures. The results of the waste management
audits should be reported in the EM&A reports.
7.1.2.2 In case of any complaint is received, the ET shall
check compliance with the procedures for carrying out complaint investigation
and propose the necessary improvement actions. In case non-compliance of the
WMP, contract-specific WMPs, any statutory and
contractual requirements, the Event and Action Plan as shown in Chart 7-1 shall be triggered.
7.1.2.3 The Action and Limit Levels for construction waste are
defined in Table 7-1. Should non-compliance occur,
actions in accordance with the Event and Action Plan in Chart 7-1, should be carried out.
Table 7-1:
Action and Limit Level of Construction Waste
|
Monitoring Location |
Action Level |
Limit Level |
|
Construction Area |
When one valid documented complaint is received. |
Non-compliance of the WMP, contract-specific WMPs, any statutory and contractual requirements |
|
Chart 7-1: Event and Action Plan for Non-compliance of the WMP, Contract-specific WMPs, Any Statutory and Contractual Requirements
|
||||
|
|
7.1.2.4 The ET shall
check the disposal records for C&D materials and audit the trip-ticket
system (TTS) for off-site delivery of surplus inert C&D materials to the designated
disposal grounds. The ET shall also check that all wastes are appropriately
recorded and disposed in accordance with the contract-specific WMPs.
7.1.2.5
A summary of all key types of waste
arising and the reuse and disposal methods proposed during the construction
phase is presented in Table 7‑2.
Table 7‑2:
Summary of Waste Arising during Construction Phase
|
Waste Type |
Key Sources of Waste Generation |
Timing of Waste Generation (1) |
Estimated Total Quantity of Waste Generation (1) |
Waste Reuse or Disposal |
Handling Methods |
|
Inert C&D Material |
Excavation for APM & BHS tunnels, new APM depot and airside tunnels; piling works for TRC & other buildings; superstructure construction works; surplus surcharge material; modification of existing northern seawall; excavation and demolition as well as superstructure construction works for T2 expansion; excavation for improvement of road networks; and Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) for diversion of existing submarine pipelines |
Q1 of 2016 to Q3 of 2024 |
9,543,500 m3 (in-situ volume) |
About 3,639,230 m3 of the inert C&D materials generated would be reused on-site as fill materials for the proposed land formation works. The remaining 5,904,270 m3 would be delivered off-site to any identified projects that need fill materials and/or to the government’s PFRF for beneficial use by other projects in Hong Kong. |
Segregation of inert C&D material to avoid contamination from other waste arising Stockpile areas should be covered and applied with regular water spraying |
|
Non-inert C&D Material |
Site clearance of the golf course area; demolition works for T2 expansion; and superstructure construction works for various buildings / facilities |
Q3 of 2017 to Q3 of 2024 |
96,200 m3 (in-situ volume) |
The non-inert C&D material will be disposed of at landfills after on-site sorting and segregation of recyclable materials |
Separation of non-inert C&D materials from inert C&D materials Stored in compatible containers in designated area on-site |
|
Excavated Marine Sediments
|
Excavation at the cable field joint area |
Q3 of 2017 |
About 10,200 m3 (in-situ volume) |
Type 1 open sea disposal for Category L sediment or Type 1 open sea disposal at dedicated sites for Category Mp sediment, according to PNAP ADV-21 (subject to endorsement by MFC of CEDD and EPD as well as obtaining dumping permit from EPD under DASO) |
Stockpile with tarpaulin covers with earth bunds and sand bags barriers, if applicable.
|
|
Piling works of the TRC, APM & BHS tunnels, airside tunnels and other facilities on the proposed land formation area |
Q4 of 2017 to Q2 of 2023 |
About 705,350 m3 (in-situ volume) |
Treatment by cement mixing and stabilisation and on-site reuse of treated sediments as backfilling materials in accordance with the Proposal of Further Development on Treatment Level / Details and Reuse Mode for Marine Sediment.(2) |
||
|
Piling works of marine sections of the approach lights for the third runway |
2018 to 2019 (subject to detailed design) |
Western approach lights: about 530 m3 of marine sediments (in-situ volume) Eastern approach lights: about 1,060 m3 of DCM-treated sediment (in-situ volume) |
Treatment by cement mixing and stabilisation and on-site reuse of treated sediments as backfilling materials in accordance with the Proposal of Further Development on Treatment Level / Details and Reuse Mode for Marine Sediment.(2) |
||
|
Piling works of new HKIAAA beacons |
2018 to 2019 (subject to detailed design) |
About 220 m3 (in-situ volume) |
Treatment by cement mixing and stabilisation and on-site reuse of treated sediments as backfilling materials in accordance with the Proposal of Further Development on Treatment Level / Details and Reuse Mode for Marine Sediment. (2) |
||
|
Basement works of T2 expansion |
Q3 of 2017 to Q4 of 2019 |
About 50,730 m3 (in-situ volume) |
Treatment by cement mixing and stabilisation and on-site reuse of treated sediments as backfilling materials in accordance with the Proposal of Further Development on Treatment Level / Details and Reuse Mode for Marine Sediment. (2) |
||
|
Excavation works of APM depot |
Q1 of 2018 to Q3 of 2020 |
About 9,770 m3 (in-situ volume) |
Treatment by cement mixing and stabilisation and on-site reuse of treated sediments as backfilling materials in accordance with the Proposal of Further Development on Treatment Level / Details and Reuse Mode for Marine Sediment. (2) |
||
|
Chemical Waste |
Used cleansing fluids, solvents, lubricating oil, waste fuel, etc., from maintenance and servicing of construction plant and equipment |
2016 to Early 2024 |
Anticipated as small quantity To be quantified in the site Waste Management Plan to be prepared by the Contractor |
Disposal of at the Chemical Waste Treatment Centre or other licensed recycling facilities |
Stored in compatible containers in designated area on-site |
|
General Refuse & Floating Refuse |
Food scraps, waste paper, empty containers, etc. generated from the construction workforce
|
2016 to Early 2024 |
General refuse: maximum daily arising of up to 9,100 kg
|
Encourage segregation of recyclable materials (e.g., paper, tin-cans, etc.) for collection by outside recyclers Collection of non-recyclable refuse by a reputable collector for disposal at designated landfill sites. |
Provide on-site collection points together with recycling bins
|
|
Floating refuse trapped or accumulated in the newly constructed seawall |
2017 to Early 2024 |
Floating refuse: roughly 65 m3/year to be collected from the newly constructed seawall |
Collection by a reputable waste collector for disposal at designated landfill sites |
Provide on-site collection points |
Note: (1) Timing and the quantity of waste
generation was based on the information provided in the EIA Report of the
Project. The update information on waste generation is provided in
“Construction Waste Statistic” presented in the EM&A Reports.
(2) Proposal of Further Development on Treatment Level / Details and Reuse Mode
for Marine Sediment was developed in accordance with the Waste Management Plan
(WMP) of 3RS and has been approved by EPD. The details of the proposal can be
found in Table 4.1 of the online version of 3RS WMP.
7.1.3
Mitigation
Measures
7.1.3.1
The implementation schedule of the recommended waste management
mitigation measures is presented in Appendix
C and the WMP.
7.2
Operation
Phase Monitoring
7.2.1.1
Wastes produced during operation phase would be generated by a variety
of landside and airside activities and mainly comprise of general refuse,
chemical waste, sludge from greywater treatment plant and floating refuse that
may be trapped on the artificial seawall of the expanded airport site.
7.2.1.2 Operation WMP shall
be submitted to EPD no later than 3 months before the commencement of operation
of the project in accordance to EP Condition 2.25.
7.2.1.3 During operation phase, weekly inspection should be
carried out along the artificial seawall of the expanded airport island to
check for any entrapment or accumulation of floating refuse by contractor. Where
an appreciable amount of floating refuse is found on the artificial seawall
during the weekly inspection, the locations of such refuse will be recorded and
arrangements with the contractor will immediately be made to collect and clear
the refuse from the seawall.
7.2.1.4 With the implementation of the recommended mitigation
measures for handling, transportation and disposal of the identified waste
arisings, no adverse residual impacts are anticipated during operation phase of
the project. Therefore, no other specific waste monitoring during operation
phase is required.
8
Land Contamination
8.1
Construction
Phase Monitoring
8.1.1.1
Since some of the assessment areas (i.e. fuel tank room within T2
building, fuel tank room to the west of CAD antenna farm, seawater pump house
and switching station, pumping station and fire training facility) were not
accessible for site reconnaissance, further site reconnaissance would be
conducted once these areas are accessible in
order to identify any land contamination concern for the areas. Subject to the
further site reconnaissance findings, a supplementary Contamination Assessment
Plan (CAP) for additional site investigation (SI) (if necessary) shall be
prepared by the ET in accordance with EP Condition 2.20 and submitted to EPD
for endorsement prior to the commencement of SI at these areas.
8.1.1.2 Since all the areas identified with potential
contamination issues are under on-going use, the SI works are proposed to be
carried out after removal / decommissioning of the concerned facilities but
prior to the commencement of construction works at those areas.
8.1.1.3 After completion of the SI, the Contamination
Assessment Report (CAR) will be prepared and submitted to EPD for approval
prior to the commencement of construction works at the golf course, the
underground and above-ground fuel storage tank areas, emergency power
generation units, airside petrol filling station and fuel tank room. Should
remediation be required, Remediation Action Plan (RAP) and Remediation Report
(RR) will be prepared for EPD’s approval prior to commencement of the proposed
remediation and any construction works respectively.
8.1.1.4 All soil and groundwater remediation works should be
carried out to clean up to levels in compliance with the relevant Risk-based
Remediation Goals (RBRG) prior to commencement of any construction works at all
areas identified with contamination issues (if any).
8.1.1.5 During construction
phase, EM&A is to be carried out in the form of regular site inspections.
All related procedures and facilities for handling or storage of chemicals and
chemical wastes will be audited regularly to ensure they are in order, intact
and reported in the EM&A reports accordingly.
8.2
Operation
Phase Monitoring
8.2.1.1 As land remediation
is not anticipated during the operation phase, no environmental monitoring and
audit for land contamination is considered necessary.
9
Terrestrial Ecological Impact
9.1
Ecological
Mitigation Measures
9.1.1.1
Mitigation measures were recommended in accordance with Annex 16 of the
EIAO-TM. The recommended mitigation measures extracted from Section 12.7 of EIA
Report are listed below and the implementation schedule is presented in Appendix
C. In relation to the pre-construction
egretry survey, the requirement of submission of an Egretry Survey Plan is also
specified in EP Condition 2.14.
Avoidance
Land Formation Area
9.1.1.2
The land formation area is not
located in a habitat of high ecological sensitivity, therefore the impact to
terrestrial ecology is greatly avoided in the project design stage and no
specific terrestrial ecological mitigation measures is deemed necessary for the
loss of terrestrial habitat.
HDD Daylighting
Location
9.1.1.3
The originally proposed daylighting
location is immediately opposite the existing AFRF which minimises the pipe
connection works. However given the presence of the egretry, the daylighting
location is now shifted northwards. This measure aims to avoid direct impacts
to the egretry (an avoidance measure based on the outcomes of the impact
assessment) and furthermore, the daylighting location and mooring of flat top
barge, if required, will be kept away from the egretry (original daylighting
location refers to Section 12.6.3.1 of the EIA Report and alternative location
specified as blue zone in Drawing MCL-P132-EMA-9-001). The vegetation at the northeastern side of Sheung
Sha Chau Island near the proposed daylighting location is short and shrubby
which is less suitable for egretry use. Only a small works area (about 10 m x
10 m) will be needed at the tentative daylighting location. This alternative is
chosen as the preferred option owing to the ecological concerns, despite a
longer pipe connection being required. The final daylighting location within
the blue zone is subject to further adjustment to avoid direct encroachment on
the egretry, giving due consideration to the findings of the pre-construction
monitoring for Sha Chau egretry, which was conducted before
the commencement of the HDD drilling works at HKIA. With the adjustment of the
daylighting location, direct encroachment onto the egretry will be
avoided.
Timing of
Construction Works
9.1.1.4 All HDD and related construction works on Sheung Sha Chau Island will
all be scheduled outside the ardeids’ breeding season (between April and July).
No night-time construction work will be allowed on Sheung Sha Chau Island
during all seasons except the contingency event as specified in Sections
12.6.3.4 and 12.6.3.5 of the EIA Report. With these avoidance measures the
impact can be largely minimised.
Minimisation
Preservation of
Nesting Vegetation
9.1.1.5 The HDD daylighting location proposed in the blue zone
identified in Drawing
MCL-P132-EMA-9-001 will be located
within a rock area near the seashore, whilst the connecting pipelines will be
aligned along the seashore (above the shoreline). This proposed arrangement
will avoid the need for tree cutting, therefore trees that are used by ardeids
for nesting will be preserved.
9.2
Pre-construction
Egretry Survey
9.2.1.1
As a mitigation measure to avoid
disturbance to the egretry, the HDD daylighting location and associated works
will be conducted outside the Sha Chau egretry’s boundary. The location of the
HDD daylighting location is indicated as blue zone in Drawing MCL-P132-EMA-9-001. It is noted that the egretry’s
status and location could change from time to time even in the absence of human
disturbance. Therefore, a pre-construction survey is recommended to update the
latest boundary of the egretry during the breeding season before commencement
of the HDD drilling works at HKIA. The survey will update the latest boundary
of the egretry and to ensure the daylighting location will avoid direct
encroachment on the egretry. Subject to the pre-construction survey findings,
the daylighting location/ works area will be adjusted to avoid the future
egretry location.
9.2.1.2
The pre-construction survey has been
conducted once per month in the breeding season, i.e. between April and July,
prior to the commencement of HDD drilling works. The survey works was conducted
by qualified ecologist with at least three years’ experience on egretry
monitoring. Ardeid species and abundance were recorded whilst the latest
boundary of the egretry was identified. The information collected through the
pre-construction survey was incorporated into the Egretry Survey Plan, which
has been submitted to EPD no later than 1 month before the commencement of HDD
drilling works. The result of the egretry survey and the decision on HDD
daylighting location has been agreed with EPD and Agriculture Fisheries and
Conservation Department (AFCD) by submission of an Egretry Survey Plan prior to
the commencement of HDD drilling works.
9.3
Ecological
Monitoring
9.3.1.1
During the HDD construction works
period from August to March, ecological monitoring shall be undertaken monthly
at the HDD daylighting location on Sheung Sha Chau Island to identify and
evaluate any impacts with appropriate actions taken as required to address and
minimise any adverse impact found. Attention shall also be given to the months
either side of the ardeids breeding season, i.e. March and August, to identify
any early or late breeding activities that might be subject to disturbance. The
monitoring during works period shall be undertaken by experienced ecologist
competent in detecting any potential disturbance to the egretry.
10
Marine Ecological Impact
10.1
Introduction
10.1.1.1 The EIA Report has predicted the
project would lead to
some
ecological impacts and has recommended
a series of measures to avoid, minimise, and mitigate the impacts to an
acceptable level.
According to EIAO-TM Annex 16, an ecological EM&A programme would be needed to ensure
the recommended measures are properly implemented. In addition, the
EM&A programme also serves other purposes, including but not limited to
verifying the accuracy of the ecological assessment study, detecting any
unpredicted ecological impacts and recommending adaptive management in response
to unpredicted impacts.
10.1.1.2 It is recommended that an EM&A programme for
ecology be undertaken during the baseline (pre-construction), construction,
post-construction and operation phases of the project. The objectives of the pre-construction phase EM&A
are to undertake baseline monitoring for the corals and Chinese White Dolphins
(CWDs). The construction, post-construction and operational audit objectives
are to ensure that the ecological mitigation measures recommended in the EIA
Report are carried out as specified and are effective. The construction
and operation phase monitoring will be to monitor the CWDs over the
construction period and also determine the effectiveness of the mitigation on
CWD numbers. The EM&A will also be undertaken to verify the predictions in
the EIA Report.
10.2 Ecological
Monitoring
10.2.1 Background
10.2.1.1 It is predicted in
the EIA Report that there will be direct
impact on the coral communities along the northern seawall of the existing
airport island. A pre-construction phase dive survey is recommended in the EIA Report to review the feasibility of coral
translocation and preparation of translocation and monitoring plan where
necessary. It is also predicted in the EIA Report
that the area immediately north of the existing airport platform, which
is predominantly used as a travelling area for the CWD, will be affected by the
project but that alternative routes for travelling east and west during
construction phase and initial operational phase will be available to CWDs,
potentially shifted to an area further north of the new platform.
10.2.1.2
In addition, habitat will be lost
permanently as a result of the 3RS project and there will be construction phase
disturbance to the CWDs movement and behaviour. Therefore, it is proposed
to conduct ecological monitoring during the baseline, construction,
post-construction and operation phases of the project, with the aims to monitor
the effects on the CWDs over the construction period, including the potential
shift in the CWD travelling areas and habitat use, to monitor the effectiveness
of the High Speed Ferry (HSF) speed and routing restrictions to the CWDs, as
well as the proposed new Marine Park (when it comes into operation) on CWD
distribution and numbers. Post-construction refers to the 12 months period
after the completion of marine works while operational monitoring refers to the
completion of the 3RS project as a whole.
10.2.1.3
The CWD monitoring will be conducted
by the ET, led by a CWD monitoring team leader with five years of post-graduate
experience in CWD monitoring. An overarching goal of these surveys is to
provide a dataset that can be compatible with the AFCD long term monitoring, be
stratified in such a way as to allow the calculation of density and abundance
for the various different phases listed above and to facilitate the calculation
of trends from these estimates, providing some assessment of how the project
and cumulative effects may be impacting the CWDs.
10.2.1.4
Methods of the baseline,
construction, post-construction and operation phase surveys will be as
consistent as possible with the AFCD long-term monitoring programme to allow
for direct comparisons of results among different phases, thus allowing an
evaluation of trends and impact assessments. Further details are provided
below.
10.2.1.5 Regular meetings
with the Authority and relevant Government Departments e.g. EPD and AFCD will
be arranged on a quarterly basis when the construction phase surveys commence
to review CWD distribution and abundance trends. The data collected from
vessel line transect survey, land-based surveys and theodolite tracking and the
Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) will be reviewed to derive the distribution
and abundance trends, which will be checked against the transect survey
conducted under other projects and AFCD’s long-term monitoring. It will also be
conducted in conjunction with the review of stranding data to interpret the
full picture of CWD’s latest status during construction phase. It is
expected that the 3RS reclamation activities would result in the temporary
movement of CWDs away from 3RS works areas during the construction period, and
this may be indicated by a further decline in CWD abundance in the Northwest
Lantau survey area over the period of construction. Actions may also be
explored, where necessary, for remediating unpredictable impacts or changes in
abundance that are identified during the monitoring, recognising that actions
that serve to prolong the period of reclamation activity may in themselves have
an adverse impact on CWDs.
10.2.2 Pre-construction Phase Coral Dive Survey
10.2.2.1
It is proposed to conduct a
pre-construction phase dive survey for corals along the northern and
northeastern seawall of the existing airport island and at the daylighting
location on Sha Chau that may subject to direct habitat loss and disturbance as
a precautionary measure prior to marine construction works. The aim is to
identify any coral colonies suitable for translocation. The potential for coral
translocation will depend on the conservation value, the health status and the translocation
feasibility. A detailed coral translocation plan has been submitted to EPD no
later than 3 months before the commencement of marine construction works at
areas with potential to affect coral colonies in accordance to EP Condition
2.12. The determination of the translocation was based on the conservation
importance of the coral species (including hard corals, soft corals and
octocorals), the coral health conditions, size of the communities and
feasibility for translocation (e.g. attached to large boulders but <50 cm in
diameter and considered as manageable of translocation with minimal destruction
of the coral communities). Locations of pre-construction coral dive surveys for
the directly affected site are shown in Drawing No. MCL/P132/EMA/10-001,
the locations for the potential recipient site(s) were determined as part of
the translocation plan. In addition, it should be noted that the daylighting
location on Sha Chau will be finalised based on the findings from the
pre-construction egretry survey as indicated in Section 9.2, as well as
to avoid affecting any coral colonies in the area. Therefore, pre-construction
phase coral dive survey will only be carried out at Sha Chau if there are any
marine works with potential to affect coral colonies as identified by the ET.
The preliminary methodology for coral dive survey will be as follows:
Coral Dive Survey at
Directly Affected Site and Potential Recipient Site(s)
10.2.2.2
Based on the sub-tidal coral dive
survey at hard substrates conducted in the EIA Report, the underwater
visibility within the western Lantau waters are generally low. It is proposed
to conduct the pre-construction survey at sites which would be directly
affected by the project. Suitable substrates with coral communities will be
identified, supervised by qualified marine ecologists with at least 5 years of
coral dive survey experience.
10.2.2.3 The
pre-construction survey was conducted by spot-check dive followed by Rapid
Ecological Assessment (REA) should coral communities recorded. The survey was
conducted at hard bottom subtidal habitats along the northern artificial
seawall of the existing airport island, and at the proposed daylighting
location on Sha Chau as shown in Drawing No. MCL/P132/EMA/10-001
during daytime. If coral communities suitable for translocation are identified
at these directly affected sites, coral dive surveys including spot-check dive
followed by REA will also be conducted at potential recipient site(s).
10.2.2.4
The spot-check dive survey was
conducted by swimming in a search pattern along pre-determined areas at a
density sufficient to cover any major coral areas and to assess the type of
benthos existing in the proposed survey area, recording any presence of hard
corals (order Scleractinia), octocorals (sub-class Octocorallia), and black
corals (order Antipatharia). Information including estimated number of
colonies, number of species, coral cover, and partial mortality (if any) will
be recorded during the actual dive.
10.2.2.5
The following data was recorded
during the survey:
● Temperature, time and date;
● Location (GPS);
● Depth range;
● Visibility;
● Substratum type (i.e. hard
substratum seabed, intertidal rocky area); and
● Other invertebrates present.