Revision History
|
Rev. |
Description of Modification |
Date |
|
1 |
Revision according to IEC’s comments |
13 January 2022 |
CONTENTS
|
|
|
|
Summary of Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation |
|
|
|
|
|
Impact Monitoring Schedule of this and next Reporting Period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Works Description |
Location |
|
Contract No. CV/2020/09 · Pre-bored socketed H pile at landing facility · Infill grouting of 610mm dia. pipe piles · Rock Excavation · Temporary working platform erection for pre-bored socketed H piles at breakwater area · 273mm Dia. pipe piling work at Viewing Platform · Infill grouting of pipe piles
Contract No. SS J521 · 4th Pour concrete work · 5th Pour concrete work · Formwork & Rebar fixing · Excavation |
|
· Construction dust and noise generation from excavation and construction works
· Waste generation from construction activities
· Impact on water quality from marine construction works and inland construction works
· Dust suppression by regular wetting and water spraying for construction works
· Reduction of noise from equipment and machinery on-site
· Sorting and storage of general refuse and construction waste
· The dredging rate shall not exceed 100 m3 per hour with a maximum working period of 12 hours per day throughout the construction phase and operation phase.
· Silt curtains should be deployed enclosing the dredging operation. Regular inspection on the silt curtain on the silt curtain condition by the contractor should be carried out.
|
Works Description |
Location |
|
Contract No. CV/2020/09 |
|
|
610mm Dia. pipe piling works at landing facility |
Landing Facility |
|
Pre-bored socketed H pile at landing facility |
Landing Facility |
|
Infill grouting of 610mm dia. pipe piles |
Landing Facility |
|
Infill grouting of pre-bored socketed H pile |
Landing Facility |
|
Rock excavation at landing facility |
Landing Facility |
|
Temporary working platform erection for pre-bored socketed H piles at breakwater area |
Breakwater Construction Area |
|
Installation of precast seawall & RC pavement at viewing platform |
Viewing Platform |
|
Construction of skin wall and R.C paving |
Lookout Point |
|
|
|
|
Contract No. SS J521 |
|
|
Concrete work |
Draw pit |
|
Excavation |
Planter 1 |
|
Construct blinding layer |
Planter 1 |
|
Rebar fixing |
Planter 1 |
|
Formwork |
Precast staircase |
|
Excavation Backfill the existing soil |
UG Drainage System UG cable ducting (meter room) Draw pit |
· Construction dust and noise generation from excavation and construction works
· Waste generation from construction activities
· Impact on water quality from marine construction works and inland construction works
· Dust suppression by regular wetting and water spraying for construction works
· Reduction of noise from equipment and machinery on-site
· Sorting and storage of general refuse and construction waste
· The dredging rate shall not exceed 100 m3 per hour with a maximum working period of 12 hours per day throughout the construction phase and operation phase.
· Silt curtains should be deployed enclosing the dredging operation. Regular inspection on the silt curtain on the silt curtain condition by the contractor should be carried out.
Civil Engineering and Development Department (CEDD) has contracted Concentric - Hong Kong River Joint Venture (CHKRJV) to carry out the Construction of Lei Yue Mun Public Landing Facility under Contract No. CV/2020/09; and Architectural Services Department (ArchSD) has contracted Milestone Builder Engineering Limited to carry out the development of a waterfront promenade and related improvement works under Contract No. SS J521 for the Lei Yue Mun Waterfront Enhancement Project (the Project).
Acuity Sustainability Consulting Limited (ASCL) is commissioned by CEDD to undertake the Environmental Team (ET) services as required and/or implied, both explicitly and implicitly, in the Environmental Permit (EP), Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIA Report) (Register No. AEIAR-219/2018) and Environmental Monitoring and Audit Manual (EM&A Manual) for the Project; and to carry out the Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) programme in fulfillment of the EIA Report’s EM&A requirements under Contract No. PI 2/2020.
Pursuant to the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO), the Director of Environmental Protection granted the Environmental Permit (No. EP-564/2018) to CEDD for the Project.
This is the 8th Monthly EM&A Report for the Project which summarizes the key findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 December to 31 December 2021.
The Project Organization structure for Construction Phase is presented in Figure 1.1. The key personnel’s’ contacts are presented in Table 1.1 and Table 1.2.
Figure 1.1 Project Organization Chart
Table 1.1 Key Personnel’s’ Contact for the Construction of a Public Landing Facility and Improvement Works to Existing Lookout Points and Viewing Platform
|
Party |
Position |
Name |
Phone |
|
Civil Engineering and Development Department |
Engineer |
Ms. Lam Sau Lai, Katy |
2762 5044 |
|
ANewR |
Independent Environmental Checker |
Mr. Choi Pui Sum, James |
2618 2831 |
|
Acuity Sustainability Consulting Limited |
Environmental Team |
Mr. Li Wai Ming, Kevin |
2698 6833 |
|
Concentric - Hong Kong River Joint Venture |
Contractor |
Mr. T S Lam |
9655 5486 |
Table 1.2 Key Personnel’s’ Contact for the Development of a Waterfront Promenade and Related Improvement Works
|
Party |
Position |
Name |
Phone |
|
Architectural Services Department |
Project Manager |
Mr. Ken Chan |
2867 3850 |
|
ANewR |
Independent Environmental Checker |
Mr. Choi Pui Sum, James |
2618 2831 |
|
Acuity Sustainability Consulting Limited |
Environmental Team |
Mr. Li Wai Ming, Kevin |
2698 6833 |
|
Milestone Builder Engineering Ltd. |
Environmental Officer |
Ms. Mandy Fung |
6506 0375 |
Details of the major construction activities undertaken in this reporting period are shown as below. The construction programme is presented in Appendix A.
Key activities carried out in this reporting period for the Project included the followings:
|
Works Description |
Location |
|
Contract No. CV/2020/09 |
|
|
Pre-bored socketed H pile at landing facility |
Landing Facility |
|
Infill grouting of 610mm dia. pipe piles |
Landing Facility |
|
Rock Excavation |
Landing Facility and Breakwater Construction Area |
|
Temporary working platform erection for pre-bored socketed H piles at breakwater area |
Breakwater Construction Area |
|
273mm Dia. pipe piling work at Viewing Platform |
Viewing Platform |
|
Infill grouting of pipe piles |
Viewing Platform |
|
|
|
|
Contract No. SS J521 |
|
|
4th Pour concrete work 5th Pour concrete work Formwork & Rebar fixing |
Viewing Platform |
|
Formwork & Rebar fixing |
Manhole |
|
Excavation |
UG Drainage System UG cable ducting (meter room) Draw pit |
A summary of the valid permits, licences, and/or notifications on environmental protection for this Project is presented in Table 1.3.
Table 1.3 Summary of the Status of Valid Environmental Licence, Notification and Permit
|
Permit/ Licenses/ Notification |
Reference |
Validity Period |
|
Contract No. CV/2020/09 |
||
|
Environmental Permit |
EP-564/2018 |
Throughout the Contract |
|
Notification of Construction Works under the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation (Form NA) |
Ref. No.: 463353 |
Throughout the Contract |
|
Chemical Waste Producer Registration |
5213-298-C3752-02 |
Throughout the Contract |
|
Billing Account for Disposal of Construction Waste |
7039364 |
Throughout the Contract |
|
|
|
|
|
Contract No. SS J521 |
||
|
Environmental Permit |
EP-564/2018 |
Throughout the Contract |
|
Notification of Construction Works under the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation (Form NA) |
Ref. No.: 467619 |
Throughout the Contract |
|
Chemical Waste Producer Registration |
5312-298-M2939-02 |
Throughout the Contract |
|
Billing Account for Disposal of Construction Waste |
7039353 |
Throughout the Contract |
|
Discharge Licence under Water Pollution Control Ordinance |
WT00039075-2021 |
Valid to 30 Sep 2026 |
The status for all environmental aspects is presented in Table 1.4.
Table 1.4 Summary of Status for Key Environmental Aspects under the EM&A Manual
|
The baseline monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.3 on 25 May 2021 |
|
|
The impact water quality monitoring of the Project commenced on 14 September 2021 |
|
|
The baseline monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.3 on 25 May 2021 |
|
|
Noise Management Plan |
The Noise Management Plan was submitted by the Contractor on 4 May 2021 and approved on 10 May 2021 |
|
Ecology |
|
|
Conceptual Landscape Layout Plan |
The Conceptual Landscape Layout Plan will be submitted no later than three months prior to the commencement of detailed design of the landscape and architectural works of the Project under EP Condition 2.10 |
|
Coral Baseline Survey Report |
The Coral Baseline Survey Report was submitted to EPD under EP Condition 2.14 on 12 May 2021 and approved by EPD on 18 May 2021 |
|
Coral Translocation Plan |
The Coral Translocation Plan was submitted to EPD under EP Condition 2.16 on 28 April 2021 and commented received on 27 September 2021. Updated Coral Translocation Plan was submitted to EPD on 22 December 2021 and approved on 7 January 2022. |
|
Coral Review Report |
The Coral Review Report will be submitted no later than three months before the commencement of each maintenance dredging under EP Condition 2.20 |
|
Site Inspection covering Measures of Air Quality, Noise Impact, Water Quality, Waste, Ecological Quality, Fisheries, Landscape and Visual |
|
Other than the EM&A work by ET, environmental briefings, trainings and regular environmental management meetings were conducted, in order to enhance environmental awareness and closely monitor the environmental performance of the contractors.
The EM&A programme has been implemented in accordance with the recommendations presented in the approved EIA Report and the EM&A Manual. A summary of implementation status of the environmental mitigation measures for the construction phase of the Project during the reporting period is provided in Appendix B.
To ensure no adverse noise impact, noise monitoring is recommended to be carried out within 300m radius from the nearby noise sensitive receivers (NSRs), during construction phase. The NSRs selected as monitoring station are (i) NM1 – Village house in Lei Yue Mun Hoi Pong Road Central, (ii) NM2-A – No.79B, Lei Yue Mun Hoi Pong Road East, (iii) NM3 – Jockey Club Lei Yue Mun Plus and (iv) NM4 – No. 21C, Lei Yue Mun Hoi Pong Road East respectively.
In accordance with the EM&A Manual, baseline noise level at the noise monitoring stations were established as presented in the Baseline Monitoring Report. Impact noise monitoring was conducted once per week in the form of 30-minutes measurements Leq, L10 and L90 levels recorded at each monitoring station between 0700 and 1900 on normal weekdays.
Four (4) sessions of noise monitoring were carried out at the monitoring locations sited at LYM in the reporting month. The results are presented in Appendix F.
Construction noise level were measured in terms of the A-weighted equivalent continuous sound pressure level (LAeq). Leq 30min was used as the monitoring parameter for the time period between 0700 and 1900 on normal weekdays. Table 2.1 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and duration of the impact noise monitoring.
Table 2.1 Noise Monitoring Parameters, Time, Frequency and Duration
|
Time |
Duration |
Interval |
Parameters |
|
Daytime: 0700-1900 |
Day time: 0700-1900 (during normal weekdays) |
Continuously in Leq 5min/Leq 30min (average of 6 consecutive Leq 5min) |
Leq 30min L10 30min & L90 30min |
The monitoring locations should normally be made at a point 1m from the exterior of the NSRs building façade and be at a position 1.2m above the ground. A correction of +3dB(A) should be made to the free-field measurements.
According to the environmental findings detailed in the EIA report and Baseline Monitoring Report, the designated locations for the construction noise monitoring are listed in Table 2.2 below.
Table 2.2 Noise Monitoring Locations
|
Station |
Noise Monitoring Stations |
Monitoring Location |
Position |
|
NM1 |
Village house in Lei Yue Mun Hoi Pong Road Central |
Pedestrian Road on Ground Floor |
1 m from facade |
|
NM2 |
No.81, Lei Yue Mun Hoi Pong Road East |
Pedestrian Road on Ground Floor |
1 m from facade |
|
NM3 |
Jockey Club Lei Yue Mun Plus |
Fenced Road on Ground Floor |
1 m from facade |
|
NM4 |
No. 21C, Lei Yue Mun Hoi Pong Road East |
Fenced Road on Ground Floor |
1 m from facade |
The original construction noise monitoring station NM2 was selected at the façade of No. 81 of Lei Yue Mun Hoi Pong Road East. However, the residents of the premises at No. 81 of Lei Yue Mun Hoi Pong Road East do not allow the setting up of the construction noise monitoring station NM2. No. 79B, Lei Yue Mun Hoi Pong Road East, was proposed as the alternative noise monitoring location for set up of construction noise monitoring station named as NM2-A.
A Proposal for Alternative Noise Monitoring Station, which was certified by the ET Leader and verified by the IEC, has been prepared to conclude that the alternative construction noise monitoring station NM2-A could conform to relevant requirements as set out in the EM&A Manual, namely:
· locate close to the major site activities which are likely to have noise impacts;
· locate close to the most affected existing NSRs; and
· take into account the possibility of minimizing disturbance to occupants at the NSRs during monitoring.
The Proposal for Alternative Noise Monitoring Station NM2-A has been approved by EPD on 16 April 2021.
The latest locations for the construction noise monitoring are listed in Table 2.3.
Table 2.3 Updated Noise Monitoring Stations for Baseline and Impact Monitoring
|
Station |
Noise Sensitive Receiver |
Monitoring Location |
Position |
|
NM1 |
Village house in Lei Yue Mun Hoi Pong Road Central |
Pedestrian Road on Ground Floor |
1 m from facade |
|
NM2-A |
No.79B, Lei Yue Mun Hoi Pong Road East |
Pedestrian Road on Ground Floor |
1 m from facade |
|
NM3 |
Jockey Club Lei Yue Mun Plus |
Fenced Road on Ground Floor |
1 m from facade |
|
NM4 |
No. 21C, Lei Yue Mun Hoi Pong Road East |
Fenced Road on Ground Floor |
1 m from facade |
The location of all original construction noise
monitoring stations and the alternative construction noise monitoring station
are shown in Figure 2.1.
|
|
Figure 2.1 Noise Monitoring Locations |
Integrated sound level meter shall be used for the noise monitoring. The meter shall be in compliance with the International Electrotechnical Commission Publications 651: 1979 (Type 1) and 804: 1985 (Type 1) specifications. Immediately prior to and following each noise measurement the accuracy of the sound level meter shall 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 levels before and after the noise measurements agree to within 1.0 dB(A). Calibration certificates of the instruments used are shown at Appendix E.
Noise measurements shall not be made in the presence of fog, rain, wind with a steady speed exceeding 5 m/s or wind with gusts exceeding 10 m/s. The wind speed shall be checked with a portable wind speed meter capable of measuring the wind speed in m/s.
Table 2.4 Impact Noise Monitoring Equipment
|
Equipment |
Make and Model |
|
Sound Level Meter |
Scarlet ST-11D |
|
Acoustic Calibrator |
Pulsar Model 105 |
The Action/Limit Levels are in line with the criteria of Practice Note for Professional Persons (ProPECC PN 2/93) “Noise from Construction Activities – Non-statutory Controls” and Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process issued by HKSAR Environmental Protection Department [“EPD”] under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance, Cap 499, S.16 are presented in Table 2.5.
Table 2.5 Action and Limit Levels for Noise per EM&A Manual
|
Time Period |
Action |
Limit (dB(A)) |
|
0700-1900 on normal weekdays |
When one documented complaint is received from any one of the noise sensitive receivers |
75 dB(A) for residential areas; 70 dB(A) for school; and 65 dB(A) during examination period |
Notes: Limits specified in the GW-TM and IND-TM for construction and operation noise, respectively.
If exceedances were found during noise monitoring, the actions in accordance with the Event and Action Plan shall be carried out according to Appendix D.
Referring to EM&A manual Section 4.6.1.1 construction noise monitoring should be carried out when there are project-related construction activities undertaken within a radius of 300m from the monitoring stations. Four (4) sessions of noise monitoring were carried out at the monitoring locations sited at LYM in the reporting month. The below Table 2.6 summarized the results of the monitoring.
Table 2.6 Summary of Noise Monitoring Results in the Reporting Month
|
Noise in dB(A) |
|||
|
Leq 30min Daytime (7:00-19:00 on normal weekdays) |
|||
|
NM1 |
62.9 |
- |
67.5 |
|
NM2-A |
60.8 |
- |
61.4 |
|
NM3 |
62.3 |
- |
65.7 |
|
NM4 |
63.9 |
- |
67.9 |
As identified in the EIA Report, suspended sediment is the most critical water quality parameter caused by the dredging works. Marine water quality monitoring should be carried out during the dredging and filling operation to ensure that any unacceptable increase in suspended solids / turbidity and decrease in dissolved oxygen due to the dredging activities could be readily detected and timely action be taken to rectify the situation.
During the dredging (both capital and maintenance) and filling operation of the Project, water quality impact monitoring should be undertaken 3 days per week, at mid-flood and mid-ebb tides, with sampling / measurement at the designated monitoring stations. The locations for impact monitoring should be the same as those for baseline monitoring.
The impact water quality monitoring of the Project commenced on 14 September 2021.
The parameters that have been selected for measurement in situ and in the laboratory are those that were either determined in the EIA to be those with the most potential to be affected by the construction works or are a standard check on water quality conditions. Parameters to be measured in the impact monitoring are listed in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1 Parameters measured in the marine water quality monitoring
|
Parameters |
Unit |
Abbreviation |
|
In-situ measurements |
||
|
Dissolved oxygen* |
mg/L |
DO |
|
Temperature |
oC |
- |
|
pH |
- |
- |
|
Turbidity* |
NTU |
- |
|
Salinity |
mg/L |
- |
|
Laboratory measurements |
||
|
Suspended Solids* |
mg/L |
SS |
Notes: * Key Parameters shown in EM&A manual Table 5.1.
For water quality monitoring, the following equipment will be used:
Dissolved Oxygen and Temperature Measuring Equipment - The instrument will be a portable, weatherproof dissolved oxygen measuring instrument complete with cable, sensor, comprehensive operation manuals, and will be operable from a DC power source. It will be capable of measuring: dissolved oxygen levels in the range of 0 - 20 mg/L and 0 - 200% saturation; and a temperature of 0 - 45 degrees Celsius. It shall have a membrane electrode with automatic temperature compensation complete with a cable of not less than 35 m in length. Sufficient stocks of spare electrodes and cables shall be available for replacement where necessary (e.g. YSI model 59 DO meter, YSI 5739 probe, YSI 5795A submersible stirrer with reel and cable or an approved similar instrument).
Turbidity Measurement Equipment - The instrument will be a portable, weatherproof turbidity-measuring unit complete with cable, sensor and comprehensive operation manuals. The equipment will be operated from a DC power source, it will have a photoelectric sensor capable of measuring turbidity between 0 - 1000 NTU and will be complete with a cable with at least 35 m in length (for example Hach 2100P or an approved similar instrument).
pH Measurement Instrument - The instrument should consist of a potentiometer, a glass electrode, a reference electrode and a temperature-compensating device. It should be readable to 0.1 pH in a range of 0 to 14. Standard buffer solutions of at least pH 7 and pH 10 should be used for calibration of the instrument before and after use.
Salinity Measurement Instrument - A portable salinometer capable of measuring salinity in the range of 0 - 40 ppt will be provided for measuring salinity of the water at each monitoring location.
Sample Containers and Storage - Water samples for SS should be stored in high density polythene bottles with no preservative added, packed in ice (cooled to 4 °C without being frozen) and delivered to the laboratory and analyzed as soon as possible after collection. Sufficient volume of samples should be collected to achieve the detection limit.
Water Depth Gauge – A portable, battery-operated echo sounder (for example Seafarer 700 or a similar approved instrument) will be used for the determination of water depth at each designated monitoring station. This unit will preferably be affixed to the bottom of the work boat if the same vessel is to be used throughout the monitoring programme. The echo sounder should be suitably calibrated. The ET shall seek approval for their proposed equipment with the client prior to deployment.
Positioning Device – A Global Positioning System (GPS) shall be used during monitoring to allow accurate recording of the position of the monitoring vessel before taking measurements. The Differential GPS, or equivalent instrument, should be suitably calibrated at appropriate checkpoint (e.g. Quarry Bay Survey Nail) to verify that the monitoring station is at the correct position before the water quality monitoring commence.
Water Sampling Equipment - A water sampler, consisting of a PVC or glass cylinder of not less than two litres, which can be effectively sealed with cups at both ends, will be used (e.g. Kahlsico Water Sampler 13SWB203 or an approved similar instrument). The water sampler will 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.
Calibration certificate for the water quality monitoring equipment is attached in Appendix H.
All in situ monitoring instruments will be checked, calibrated and certified by a laboratory accredited under HOKLAS or any other international accreditation scheme before use, and subsequently re-calibrated at monthly intervals throughout the stages of the water quality monitoring. Responses of sensors and electrodes will be checked with certified standard solutions before each use.
On-site calibration of field equipment shall follow the “Guide to On-Site Test Methods for the Analysis of Waters”, BS 1427: 2009. Sufficient stocks of spare parts shall be maintained for replacements when necessary. Backup monitoring equipment shall also be made available so that monitoring can proceed uninterrupted even when equipment is under maintenance, calibration etc.
All laboratory work shall be carried out in a HOKLAS accredited laboratory. Sufficient volume of each water sample shall be collected at the monitoring stations for carrying out the laboratory analyses. Using chain of custody forms, collected water samples will be transferred to an HOKLAS accredited laboratory for immediate processing. The determination work shall start within 24 hours after collection of the water samples. The laboratory measurements shall be provided to the client within 5 working days of the sampling event. Analytical methodology and sample preservation of other parameters will be based on the latest edition of Standard Methods for the Examination of Waste and Wastewater published by APHA, AWWA and WPCF and methods by USEPA, or suitable method in accordance with requirements of HOKLAS or another internationally accredited scheme.
Detailed testing methods, pre-treatment procedures, instruments use, Quality Assurance / Quality Control (QA/QC) details (such as blank, spike recovery, number of replicate samples per batch, etc.), detection limit and accuracy were submitted to EPD for approval on 3 February 2021 prior to the commencement of monitoring programme. EPD may also request the laboratory to carry out analysis of known standards provided by EPD for quality assurance. The QA / QC shall be in accordance with the requirements of HOKLAS or international accredited scheme. The QA/ QC results shall be reported. The testing methods and related proposal were checked and certified by IEC before submission to EPD for approval.
Parameters for laboratory measurements, their standard methods and their detection limits are presented in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2 Laboratory measurements, standard methods and corresponding detection limits of marine water quality monitoring
|
Parameter |
Standard Method |
Detection Limit |
Accuracy |
|
Suspended Solids (mg/L) |
APHA 2540D |
1.0* |
±17% |
Remark *: Albeit the selected HOKLAS accredited laboratories’ standard testing method of total suspended solid according to APHA Method 2540D is capable of reporting the results to 1 mg/L, the laboratory advised that results reported between 1 and 2 mg/L shall be considered to be used as reference value and receive no HOKLAS accreditation for this particular range of result.
If exceedances were found during water monitoring, the actions in accordance with the Event and Action Plan shall be carried out according to Appendix G.
The water quality monitoring locations for baseline are in accordance to the EM&A Manual and detailed in Table 3.3 below. The water quality monitoring schedule should be submitted to EPD at least 1 week before the first day of the monitoring month.
Table 3.3 Location of Water Quality Monitoring Station
|
Station |
Easting |
Northing |
Description |
|
C1 |
842134 |
816765 |
Control Station |
|
C2 |
842946 |
816172 |
Control Station |
|
M1 |
842605 |
816433 |
Coral Communities (Impact Monitoring Station) |
|
M2 |
842329 |
816615 |
100m away from the dredging site (Impact Monitoring Station) |
|
M3 |
842639 |
816410 |
Coral Communities (Impact Monitoring Station) |
|
M4 |
842515 |
816878 |
Sam Ka Tsuen Typhoon Shelter (Impact Monitoring Station) |
Figure 3.1 Water quality monitoring locations under EM&A Manual
During periods when there are dredging or filling works, impact monitoring should be undertaken at the monitoring stations as shown in Figure 3.1 and Table 3.3 three days per week during the construction phase after the commencement of marine construction works and dredging or filling activities. Monitoring at each station would be undertaken at both mid-ebb and mid-flood tides on the same day. The interval between two sets of monitoring would not be less than 36 hours. The monitoring frequency would be increased in the case of exceedances of Action/Limit Levels if considered necessary by ET. Monitoring frequency would be maintained as far as practicable.
For water quality monitoring, each station will be sampled and measurements/ water samples will be taken at three depths, 1 m below the sea surface, mid-depth and 1 m above the seabed. For stations that are less than 3 m in depth, only the mid depth sample shall be taken. For stations that are less than 6 m in depth, only the surface and seabed sample shall be taken. For in situ measurements, duplicate readings shall be made at each water depth at each station. Duplicate water samples shall be collected at each water depth at each station.
Based on the baseline water quality monitoring data and the derivation criteria specified in the Baseline Monitoring Report, the Action/Limit Levels have been derived for the Project and presented in Table 3.4.
Table 3.4 Derived Action and Limit Levels for Water Quality Monitoring
|
Parameters |
Action |
Limit |
|
During the Dredging and Filling Operation of the Project |
||
|
DO in mg/L |
Surface and Middle 7.95 mg L-1 Bottom 7.91 mg L-1 |
Surface and Middle 4 mg L-1 Bottom 2 mg L-1 |
|
SS in mg/L (Depth-averaged) |
6.73 mg L-1 or 120% of control station’s SS at the same tide of the same day |
17.60 mg L-1 or 130% of control station’s SS at the same tide of the same day and specific sensitive receiver water quality requirements (e.g. required SS level for concerned seawater intakes) |
|
Turbidity in NTU (Depth-averaged) |
7.42 NTU or 120% of control station’s SS at the same tide of the same day compared with corresponding data from control station |
7.79 NTU or 130% of control station’s SS at the same tide of the same day compared with corresponding data from control station |
Notes:
i. "Depth-averaged" is calculated by taking the arithmetic means of reading of all three depths.
ii. For DO, non-compliance of the water quality limits occurs when monitoring result is lower than the limits.
iii. For Turbidity, SS and Salinity, non-compliance of the water quality limits occurs when monitoring result is higher than the limits.
The ET of the Project had conducted the baseline water monitoring between 15 April 2021 to 11 May 2021 at all six designated monitoring stations (i.e. C1, C2, M1, M2, M3 and M4). The monitoring results was presented in Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Report separately.
The commencement of marine construction activities for the Project is expected to be commenced in mid-September 2021 and the impact water quality monitoring of the Project commenced on 14 September 2021.
The impact water quality monitoring was conducted at all six monitoring stations (i.e. C1, C2, M1, M2, M3 and M4). The monitoring results are summarized in Table 3.5. Details of water quality monitoring results are presented in Appendix I.
Table 3.5 Summary of Water Quality Monitoring Results in the Reporting Month
|
Location
|
Parameters |
||||||||
|
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) |
Turbidity |
Suspended Solids |
|||||||
|
S&M(i) |
B(i) |
||||||||
|
Mid-Flood |
Mid-Ebb |
Mid-Flood |
Mid-Ebb |
Mid-Flood |
Mid-Ebb |
Mid-Flood |
Mid-Ebb |
||
|
C1 |
Avg. |
8.46 |
8.47 |
8.46 |
8.46 |
4.68 |
6.02 |
7 |
12 |
|
Min. |
7.93 |
7.94 |
7.96 |
7.98 |
1.96 |
2.39 |
4 |
5 |
|
|
Max. |
9.13 |
9.64 |
9.36 |
9.49 |
8.26 |
12.83 |
25 |
26 |
|
|
C2 |
Avg. |
8.52 |
8.61 |
8.43 |
8.56 |
6.49 |
4.70 |
11 |
9 |
|
Min. |
8.11 |
8.02 |
7.94 |
7.96 |
2.80 |
2.59 |
5 |
4 |
|
|
Max. |
9.06 |
9.62 |
9.22 |
9.71 |
9.77 |
7.90 |
29 |
22 |
|
|
M1 |
Avg. |
8.63 |
8.46 |
8.60 |
8.53 |
4.78 |
4.47 |
8 |
7 |
|
Min. |
8.08 |
8.12 |
7.97 |
8.08 |
2.00 |
1.54 |
3 |
3 |
|
|
Max. |
9.10 |
8.83 |
9.02 |
8.96 |
6.89 |
8.02 |
24 |
12 |
|
|
M2 |
Avg. |
8.61 |
8.55 |
8.54 |
8.44 |
4.72 |
4.16 |
7 |
7 |
|
Min. |
8.08 |
8.03 |
7.95 |
8.01 |
1.99 |
1.73 |
4 |
3 |
|
|
Max. |
9.22 |
9.33 |
9.31 |
9.41 |
7.98 |
7.58 |
11 |
11 |
|
|
M3 |
Avg. |
8.38 |
8.56 |
8.67 |
8.68 |
4.69 |
4.38 |
6 |
6 |
|
Min. |
8.05 |
8.04 |
7.96 |
8.01 |
1.89 |
1.94 |
3 |
4 |
|
|
Max. |
8.71 |
9.12 |
9.33 |
9.36 |
7.41 |
8.73 |
18 |
11 |
|
|
M4 |
Avg. |
8.61 |
8.56 |
8.50 |
8.54 |
4.23 |
4.00 |
8 |
6 |
|
Min. |
8.02 |
8.07 |
8.08 |
8.07 |
1.92 |
1.09 |
3 |
3 |
|
|
Max. |
9.19 |
9.42 |
9.01 |
9.13 |
8.02 |
7.32 |
23 |
9 |
|
Notes:
i. " S&M": Surface and Middle, “B”: Bottom.
Water monitoring exceedances were record in reporting period and summarized as below:
|
Date |
Tidal |
Location |
Parameter |
Monitoring Result (mg/L) |
AL (mg/L) |
LL (mg/L) |
|
30/12/2021 |
Mid-Flood |
M1 |
SS* |
13.83 |
6.80 |
7.37 |
|
30/12/2021 |
Mid-Flood |
M4 |
SS* |
22.50 |
6.80 |
7.37 |
|
30/12/2021 |
Mid-Ebb |
M2 |
SS* |
7.50 |
7.40 |
8.02 |
Notes: SS*: Suspended Solids
All water monitoring exceedances were under investigation and the follow-up would be present in the next monthly EM&A report.
Lei Yue Mun (LYM) is one of the most popular tourist attractions in Hong Kong, for its pleasant seaside ambience and excellent seafood. LYM was included in the Tourism Commission (TC)’s Tourism District Enhancement Programme to enrich Hong Kong’s appeal to visitors. In 2003, initial minor improvements were completed along the LYM waterfront, and further improvement of facilities along the LYM waterfront was planned.
The Project, Lei Yue Mun Waterfront Enhancement Project is a Designated Project under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO). An EIA Report under Agreement No. CE 54/2015 (EP) (Report No.: AEIAR-219/2018) for the Project was approved under EIAO on 26 October 2018 in accordance with the EIA Study Brief (No. ESB-287/2015) and the Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO-TM). The corresponding Environmental Permit was issued (EP no.: EP-564/2018) by the Director of Environmental Protection (DEP) on 10 December 2018.
The works to be executed under Contract No. CV/2020/09 Construction of Lei Yue Mun Public Landing Facility (hereinafter called “the Contract”) mainly comprise the construction of a public landing facility, a breakwater, and structural improvement works to an existing viewing platform and a lookout point. Dredging and excavation works for berthing of vessels at the new public landing facility will be involved, which might directly affect the hard coral colonies. Thus, a coral baseline survey that involves a detail coral mapping survey shall be conducted to ascertain the location, sizes, species and health status of the corals with reference to the extent of marine ecological survey indicated at Figure 9.1 of the EIA Report under the Contract.
Coral mapping surveys were conducted in March 2021, forty-four (44) octocoral colonies recorded on movable boulders shall be translocated to a coral recipient site Fat Tong Chau (FTC), Junk Bay.
Coral translocation was conducted on 20 and 21 May 2021, a total of forty-seven (47) octocoral colonies attached to movable boulders were translocated to the coral recipient site FTC, Junk Bay.
A Post-translocation Coral Survey was conducted on 21 May 2020, to monitor the health condition of the tagged colonies after coral translocation, including the tagged colonies from the donor site (i.e. the proposed dredging area at LYM) and also the tagged naturally occurring corals at the coral recipient site at Fat Tong Chau (FTC), Junk Bay.
Followed by the Post-translocation Coral Survey, Post-translocation monitoring will be conducted quarterly for one year.
Following coral translocation which was undertaken on 20th and 21st May 2021, 10 selected translocated coral colonies as well as the 10 tagged natural coral colonies at the recipient site will be monitored once every 3 months for a period of 12 months. The monitoring team will record the following parameters (using the same methodology adopted during the pre-translocation survey): size, presence, survival, health conditions (percentage of mortality) and percentage of sediment of each translocated coral colonies. The general environmental conditions including weather, sea, and tidal conditions of the coral recipient site will also be monitored.
Photographic records of the translocated and natural coral colonies will be taken as far as possible maintaining the same aspect and orientation as photographs taken for the pre-translocation surveys. All the tags for marking the translocated and natural coral colonies will be removed / retrieved once the monitoring programme is completed.
The results of the post-translocation monitoring surveys should be reviewed with reference to findings of the baseline survey and the data from original colonies at the recipient site.
If, during the post-translocation monitoring, observations of any die-off / abnormal conditions of the translocated corals are made, the ET will inform the Contractor, Independent Environmental Checker (IEC)/ Environmental Project Office (ENPO), Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) and in liaison with AFCD investigate any measures needed.
The results of the post-translocation monitoring will be reviewed with reference to findings of the baseline survey and the data from naturally occurring colonies at the recipient site and evaluated against Action and Limit Levels. Evaluation will be based on recorded changes in percentage of partial mortality of the corals. Action and Limit Levels are defined in Table 4.2.1 below.
Table 4.2.1 Action and Limit Levels for Coral Post-translocation Monitoring
|
Parameter |
Action Level Definition |
Limit Level Definition |
|
Mortality |
If during Post-translocation Monitoring a 15% increase in the percentage of partial mortality on the corals occurs at more than 20% of the translocated coral colonies that are not recorded on the original corals at the receptor site, then the Action Level is exceeded. |
If during the Post-translocation Monitoring a 25% increase in the percentage of partial mortality at more than 20% of the translocated coral colonies occurs that is not recorded at the original corals at the recipient site, then the Limit Level is exceeded. |
Post-translocation monitoring results will be evaluated against Action and Limit Levels. Evaluation will be based on recorded changes in percentage of partial mortality of the corals. Action and Limit Levels are defined in Table 2.1.
If the defined Action Level or Limit Level for coral monitoring as listed in Table 4.2.1 is exceeded, the actions as set out in Table 4.2.2 will be implemented.
Table 4.2.2 Event and Action Plan for Coral Post-translocation Monitoring
|
Event |
Action |
||
|
ET Leader |
IEC |
Main Contractor |
|
|
Action Level Exceedance |
1. Check monitoring data; 2. Identify the source(s) of impact; 3. Inform the IEC and main contractor of the findings; 4. Increase the monitoring to at least once a month to confirm findings; 5. Liaise with AFCD to investigate any mitigation measures needed; and 6. Propose mitigation measures for consideration. |
1. Discuss monitoring with the ET; 2. Review proposals for additional monitoring and any other measures and advise the main contractor accordingly. |
1. Discuss with the IEC additional monitoring requirements and any other measures proposed by the ET; 2. Make the agreement on the measures to be implemented. |
|
Limit Level Exceedance |
1. Undertake Steps 1-5 as in the Action Level Exceedance. If further exceedance of Limit Level, propose enhancement measures for consideration. |
1. Discuss monitoring with the ET; 2. Review proposals for additional monitoring and any other measures and advise the main contractor accordingly. |
1. Discuss with the IEC additional monitoring requirements and any other measures proposed by the ET; 2. Make the agreement on the measures to be implemented. |
No Post-translocation Monitoring was performed in the reporting month.
Table 4.3.1 Weather Condition for the Coral Translocation
|
Date |
Condition |
Average Underwater Visibility |
|
NIL |
- -- |
-- |
10 selected translocated coral colonies were monitored at the recipient site as suggested in the Coral Translocation Plan. The area with translocated coral colonies in recipient Site A is shown in Figure 4.1. The general health conditions (size, mortality, bleaching and sediment) were recorded and summarized in Table 4.3.2.
Table 4.3.2 Size, Mortality, Bleaching and Sediment of 16 Translocated Coral Colonies
|
Coral # |
Species |
Size (cm) – Max. Diameter/ Height |
Mortality (%) |
Bleaching (%) |
Sediment (%) |
|||
|
Baseline |
Dec-21* |
Baseline |
Dec-21* |
Baseline |
Dec-21* |
|||
|
T1 |
Echinomuricea sp. |
20 |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
|
T2 |
Echinomuricea sp. |
15 |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
|
T3 |
Echinomuricea sp. |
15 |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
|
T4 |
Echinomuricea sp. |
20 |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
|
T5 |
Echinomuricea sp. |
20 |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
|
T6 |
Echinomuricea sp. |
25 |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
|
T7 |
Echinomuricea sp. |
20 |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
|
T8 |
Echinomuricea sp. |
25 |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
|
T9 |
Echinomuricea sp. |
15 |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
|
T10 |
Echinomuricea sp. |
15 |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
Notes: * No Post-translocation Monitoring was performed in the reporting month.
Ten (10) hard coral colonies which grow naturally at the recipient site R3 were also monitored and photos of each coral colony were taken during the post-translocation activities (Photo Plate 2). The general health conditions (Size, Mortality, Bleaching and Sediment) were recorded and summarized in Table 4.3.3.
Table 4.3.3 Size, Mortality, Bleaching and Sediment of 10 Natural Coral Colonies
|
Coral # |
Species |
Size (cm) – Max. Height |
Mortality (%) |
Bleaching (%) |
Sediment (%) |
|||
|
Baseline |
Dec-21* |
Baseline |
Dec-21* |
Baseline |
Dec-21* |
|||
|
R1 |
Echinomuricea sp. |
35 |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
|
R2 |
Echinomuricea sp. |
35 |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
|
R3 |
Echinomuricea sp. |
30 |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
|
R4 |
Echinomuricea sp. |
30 |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
|
R5 |
Echinomuricea sp. |
35 |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
|
R6 |
Echinomuricea sp. |
30 |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
|
R7 |
Echinomuricea sp. |
30 |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
|
R8 |
Echinomuricea sp. |
20 |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
|
R9 |
Echinomuricea sp. |
20 |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
|
R10 |
Echinomuricea sp. |
20 |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
0 |
N. A |
Notes: * No Post-translocation Monitoring was performed in the reporting month.
No Post-translocation Monitoring was performed in the reporting month.
 |
Figure 4.1 Location of Coral Recipient Site
The waste generated from this Project includes inert construction and demolition (C&D) materials, and non-inert C&D materials. Non-inert C&D materials are made up of general refuse, vegetative wastes and recyclable wastes such as plastics and paper/cardboard packaging waste. Steel materials generated from the project are also grouped into non-inert C&D materials as the materials were not disposed of with other inert C&D materials. With reference to relevant handling records and trip tickets of this Project, the quantities of different types of waste generated in the reporting month are presented in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1 Quantities of Waste Generated from the Project during 2021
No noise-related exceedance was recorded in the reporting period.
Water monitoring exceedances were record in reporting period and the follow-up would be present in the next monthly EM&A report.
No notification of summons and prosecution was received in the reporting period.
Statistics on complaints and regulatory
compliance are summarized in Appendix J.
Site inspections were carried out on a weekly basis to monitor the implementation of proper environmental pollution control and mitigation measures under the Contract. In the reporting period, site inspections were carried out on 2, 9, 17, 23 and 30 December 2021. A joint site inspection with IEC was carried out on 9 December 2021.
Environmental deficiencies were observed during weekly site inspection. Key observations during the site inspections and during the reporting period are summarized in Table 7.1.
Table 7.1 Site Observations
|
Date |
Environmental Observations |
Follow-up Status |
|
Follow-up action of last month site observation(s) |
||
|
25 Nov 21 |
1. At viewing platform, mitigation measures should be well-implemented for silt curtain. |
1. Rectified. |
|
Site observation(s) in reporting month |
||
|
2 Dec 21 |
1. No observation. |
1. N.A |
|
9 Dec 21 |
1. At A and B site, NRMM label color faded out. 2. At A and B site, stagnant water on drip tray should be cleaned up. |
1. Rectified. 2. Rectified. |
|
17 Dec 21 |
1. No observation. |
1. N.A |
|
23 Dec 21 |
1. Mitigation measures should be well-implemented for the tree T7 at viewing platform. 2. Sewage leakage was observed at landing facility. |
1. Rectified.
2. Rectified. |
|
30 Dec 21 |
1. Chemical containers if empty should be removed, if not, should be stored properly with a drip tray. |
1. Follow-up action would be reported in the following reporting month. |
According to the EIA
Study Report, Environmental Permit, contract documents and EM&A Manual, the
mitigation measures detailed in the documents should be implemented as much as
practical during the reporting period. An updated Implementation Status of
Environmental Mitigation Measures (EMIS) is provided in Appendix B.
Works to be undertaken in the next reporting month are:
|
Works Description |
Location |
|
Contract No. CV/2020/09 |
|
|
610mm Dia. pipe piling works at landing facility |
Landing Facility |
|
Pre-bored socketed H pile at landing facility |
Landing Facility |
|
Infill grouting of 610mm dia. pipe piles |
Landing Facility |
|
Infill grouting of pre-bored socketed H pile |
Landing Facility |
|
Rock excavation at landing facility |
Landing Facility |
|
Temporary working platform erection for pre-bored socketed H piles at breakwater area |
Breakwater Construction Area |
|
Installation of precast seawall & RC pavement at viewing platform |
Viewing Platform |
|
Construction of skin wall and R.C paving |
Lookout Point |
|
|
|
|
Contract No. SS J521 |
|
|
Concrete work |
Draw pit |
|
Excavation |
Planter 1 |
|
Construct blinding layer |
Planter 1 |
|
Rebar fixing |
Planter 1 |
|
Formwork |
Precast staircase |
|
Excavation Backfill the existing soil |
UG Drainage System UG cable ducting (meter room) Draw pit |
The major environmental impacts brought by the above construction works will include:
· Construction dust and noise generation from excavation and construction works
· Waste generation from construction activities
· Impact on water quality from marine construction works and inland construction works
The key environmental mitigation measures for the Project in the coming reporting period associated with the above construction works will include:
· Dust suppression by regular wetting and water spraying for construction works
· Reduction of noise from equipment and machinery on-site
· Sorting and storage of general refuse and construction waste
· The dredging rate shall not exceed 100 m3 per hour with a maximum working period of 12 hours per day throughout the construction phase and operation phase.
· Silt curtains should be deployed enclosing the dredging operation. Regular inspection on the silt curtain on the silt curtain condition by the contractor should be carried out.
Referring to EM&A Manual Section 4.6.1.1, the impact noise and water quality monitoring should be carried out at all the designated monitoring stations when there are project-related construction activities undertaken within a radius of 300m from the monitoring stations.
This is the 8th Monthly EM&A Report for the Project which summarizes the key findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 December to 31 December 2021, in accordance with the EM&A Manual and the requirement under EP-564/2018.
No noise-related exceedance was recorded in the reporting period.
Water monitoring exceedances were record in reporting period and the follow-up would be present in the next monthly EM&A report.
Weekly environmental site inspection was conducted during the reporting period. No major deficiency was observed during site inspection. The environmental performance of the project was therefore considered satisfactory.
No environmental complaint was received in the reporting period.
No notification of summons or prosecution was received since commencement of the Contract.
Agreed with the EIA prediction in Section 14.2.4.4, with the adoption of good site practice, quiet PME and noise barriers/enclosure, the noise levels at all the representative NSRs complied with the EIAO-TM noise criteria. The comparison between the EM&A data in the reporting month and the most updated noise level prediction as presented in the Noise Mitigation Plan (NMP) is presented in Table 9.1.
Table 9.1 Comparison between the EM&A Data in the Reporting Month and the Updated Noise Level Predictions
|
EIA Noise Assessment Point (NAP) |
Prediction [dB(A)] |
EM&A Monitoring Station |
Noise Levels [db(A)] |
||
|
HPRC V1 |
62-72 |
NM1 |
62.9 |
- |
67.5 |
|
HPRE 75B* |
55-75 |
NM2-A |
60.8 |
- |
61.4 |
|
LYMP |
70 |
NM3 |
62.3 |
- |
65.7 |
|
HPRE 21C |
67-75 |
NM4 |
63.9 |
- |
67.9 |
*NM2-A is located between NAPs HPRE 75B and HPRE 81, with lack of data in the NMP, the EIA prediction was used instead.
The ET will keep track on the construction works to confirm compliance of environmental requirements and the proper implementation of all necessary mitigation measures.
