CONTRACT NO: HY/2019/14   New Wang Tong River Bridge   Under Environmental Permit no. EP-555/2018/A   Quarterly Environmental Monitoring & Audit Report   April - June 2023

Table of contents

 

1     Introduction.. 6

1.1.......... Scope of the Report 6

1.2.......... Structure of the Report 6

2     Project Background.. 7

2.1.......... Background. 7

2.2.......... Project Organization and Contact Personnel 7

2.3.......... Construction Activities. 8

3     Status of Regulatory Compliance.. 9

3.1.......... Status of Environmental Licensing and Permitting under the Project 9

3.2.......... Status of Submission under the EP-555/2018/A.. 9

3.3.......... Status of Submission under the EP-555/2018/A.. 10

4     Monitoring Requirements.. 11

4.1.......... Noise Monitoring. 11

4.2.......... Air Monitoring. 12

4.3.......... Water Quality Monitoring. 14

5  Monitoring Results.. 16

5.1.......... Noise Monitoring Results. 16

5.2.......... Air Monitoring Results. 16

5.3.......... Water Quality Monitoring Results. 16

5.4.......... Waste Management 19

6     Compliance Audit.. 21

6.1.......... Noise Monitoring. 21

6.2.......... Air Quality Monitoring. 21

6.3.......... Water Quality Monitoring. 21

6.4.......... Summary of Exceedance. 22

6.5.......... Environmental Site Audit 23

6.6.......... Review of the Reasons for and the Implications of Non-compliance. 23

6.7.......... Summary of action taken in the event of and follow-up on non-compliance  23

7     Complaints, Notification of Summons and Prosecution.. 24

8     Conclusion.. 25

lIST OF TABLES

 

Table 2.2       Contact Details of Key Personnel

Table 3.1       Summary of the current status on licences and/or permits on environmental protection pertinent to the Project

Table 3.2       Summary of submission status under EP-555/2018/A

Table 4.1       Noise Monitoring Station

Table 4.3       Action and Limit Level for Noise Monitoring

Table 4.4       Air Monitoring Station

Table 4.6       Action and Limit Level for Air Quality Monitoring

Table 4.7     Marine Water Quality Stations for Water Quality Monitoring

Table 4.9       Action and Limit Level for Water Quality Monitoring

Table 5.1       Summary of Quantities of Inert C&D Materials

Table 5.2       Summary of Quantities of C&D Wastes

Table 8.1       Cumulative Statistics on Complaints

Table 8.2       Cumulative Statistics on Successful Prosecutions

 

 

lIST OF FIGUREs

 

Figure 2.1     Project Layout

Figure 2.2     Project Organization Chart

Figure 4.1    Locations of Noise Monitoring Station

Figure 4.2    Locations of Air Quality Monitoring Stations

Figure 4.3    Locations of Water Quality Monitoring Stations

 

 

 

lIST OF APPENDIces

 

Appendix 3.1    Implementation Schedule

Appendix 4.1    Action and Limit Level

Appendix 4.3    Wind data extracted fro HKO Automatic Weather Station

Appendix 5.2    Noise Monitoring Results and Graphical Presentations

Appendix 5.3    Air Quality Monitoring Results and Graphical Presentations

Appendix 5.4    Water Quality Monitoring Results and Graphical Presentations

Appendix 6.1    Event and Action Plans

Appendix 6.2    Summary for Notification of Exceedance

Appendix 8.1    Complaint Log

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

       i.        This is the Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) Quarterly Report – April 2023 to June 2023 of New Wang Tong River Bridge under Environmental Permit no. EP-555/2018/A (Hereafter as “the Project”). The construction works of the Project was commenced on 12 July 2021 and the tentative completion date is Q3 2024. This is the 8^th Quarter EM&A report presenting the environmental monitoring findings and information recorded during the period of 01 April 2023 to 30 June 2023.

 

      ii.        In the reporting month, the principal work activities conducted are as follow:

April 2023	May 2023	June 2023
·    Bridge Deck construction	·    Retaining Wall Construction – Bay N2, N3 and N4	·    Retaining Wall Construction – Bay N1, N2 and N3

 

Air Quality Monitoring

     iii.        1-hour and 24-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) monitoring was conducted at two monitoring station. 24-hour TSP shall be sampled at least once in every 6 days, while sampling for 1-hour TSP shall be at least 3 times in every 6 day in the reporting period.

     iv.        No action or limit level exceedance was recorded in this reporting period.

 

Noise Monitoring

      v.        Noise monitoring was conducted at one noise monitoring station once per week in the reporting period.

     vi.        No action or limit level exceedance was recorded in this reporting period.

 

Water Quality Monitoring

    vii.        Water quality monitoring was conducted at seven monitoring stations three days per week in according to the schedule in the reporting period. Details of water quality monitoring results and graphical presentation can be referred in Appendix 5.4.

   viii.        Owing to accessibility and safety issues, water quality monitoring at Station W3 was cancelled with verification from the IEC in November 2020 and approval from the EPD in December 2020.

     ix.        Action level exceedances on SS were recorded at station W4 during mid-flood on 4 April. Investigation revealed these exceedances could be due to: Foam and rubbish were accumulated at the estuary that day by wind; high SS were also recorded at upstream control station W5 (SS: 14.6 mg/L); downstream riverbed sediment may be stirred up during tidal flush as well; no river channel blockage was observed.

      x.        Action level exceedances on SS were recorded at station W2 during mid-flood on 19 April. Investigation revealed these exceedances could be due to: Localized fluctuation around baseline SS range; no river channel blockage was observed.

     xi.        Limit level exceedances on SS were recorded at station W1 during mid-flood on 22 April. Investigation revealed these exceedances could be due to: Extreme low water level with heavy rain may stir up the riverbed sediment; high SS were also recorded at low water level upstream W2 (SS: 10.9mg/L); no river channel blockage was observed.

    xii.        Action level exceedance on SS was recorded at station W2 during mid-flood on 2 May. Investigation revealed this exceedance could be due to: Localized SS exceedance; extremely low water level; rubbish were trapped at the turning point at the river near W2 which may cause the exceedance; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1 and downstream at W4; no river channel blockage was observed.

   xiii.        Limit level exceedances on Turb and SS were recorded at W4 during mid-flood on 4 May. Investigation revealed these exceedances could be due to: Turb and SS exceedances were related to the high Turb (15.3 NTU) and SS(13.5 mg/L) recorded at W5; extremely low water level during mid-flood; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1 and W2; no river channel blockage was observed.

   xiv.        Limit level exceedance on SS was recorded at station W4 during mid-flood on 10 May. Investigation revealed this exceedance could be due to: SS exceedance was related to extremely low water level during mid-flood which may stir up the muddy sediment near W4; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1 and W2; no river channel blockage was observed.

    xv.        Action level exceedances on SS were recorded at W2 and W4 during mid-flood on 12 May. Investigation revealed these exceedances could be due to: Localized fluctuation around baseline SS range; no river channel blockage was observed.

   xvi.        Limit level exceedance on SS was recorded at W2 and limit level exceedances on Turb and SS were recorded at W4 during mid-flood on 15 May. Investigation revealed these exceedances could be due to: Turb and SS exceedances were related to the high Turb (10.8 NTU) and SS (12.6 mg/L) recorded at W5; many trapped rubbish were found near W2 and W4 which may also cause the exceedances; extremely low water current flow during mid-flood which may cause the rubbish to stayed at W2 and W4; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1; no river channel blockage was observed.

  xvii.        Limit level exceedance on SS was recorded at station W4 during mid-flood on 17 May. Investigation revealed this exceedance could be due to: SS exceedance was related to the high SS (15.5 mg/L) recorded at W5; remaining trapped rubbish were found near W4 which may also cause the exceedances; extremely low water current flow during mid-flood which may cause the rubbish to stayed at W4; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1 and W2; no river channel blockage was observed.

 xviii.        Limit level exceedance on Turb and SS was recorded at station W2 and W4 during mid-flood on 12 June. Investigation revealed this exceedance could be due to: Turb and SS exceedances was related to extremely low water level during mid-flood which may stir up the muddy sediment near W2 and W4; many trapped rubbish were found near W2 and W4 which may also cause the exceedances; extremely low water current flow during mid-flood which may cause the rubbish to stayed at W2 and W4; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1 and downstream W5; no river channel blockage was observed.

   xix.        Limit level exceedance on SS was recorded at station W5 during mid-ebb on 14 June. Investigation revealed this exceedance could be due to: SS exceedance was related to the high SS (25.6 mg/L) recorded at W4; remaining trapped rubbish found from previous monitoring near W4 were flowing to W5 may also cause the exceedance; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1; no river channel blockage was observed.

 

Site Inspections and Audit

    xx.        During the reporting period, the Environmental Team (ET) conducted weekly site inspections and monthly landscape site inspections and IEC attended the joint site inspection monthly.

   xxi.        No non-compliance was found during the site inspection while reminders on environmental measures were recommended.

 

Complaints, Notifications of Summons and Successful Prosecutions

  xxii.        No environmental complaint, notification of summons and successful prosecution regarding the construction works was recorded in the reporting period.

 

Reporting Changes

 xxiii.        There are no particular reporting changes.

 

1          Introduction

1.1          Scope of the Report

1.1.1.     Lam Environmental Services Limited (LES) has been appointed to work as the Environmental Team (ET) under Environmental Permit (EP) no. EP-555/2018/A to implement the Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) programme as stipulated in the EM&A Manual of the approved Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report for New Wang Tong River Bridge (Register No.: AEIAR-199/2016).

1.1.2.     According to Section 10.6 of the Project EM&A Manual, the Quarterly EM&A Report should be submitted.

1.2          Structure of the Report

Section 1        Introduction – details the scope and structure of the report.

 

Section 2        Project Background – summarizes background and scope of the project, site description, project organization and contact details of key personnel during the reporting period.

 

Section 3        Status of Regulatory Compliance – summarizes the status of valid Environmental Permits / Licenses during the reporting period.

 

Section 4        Monitoring Requirements – summarizes all monitoring parameters, monitoring criteria and respective event and action plan.

 

Section 5        Monitoring Results – summarizes the monitoring results obtained in the reporting period.

 

Section 6        Compliance Audit – summarizes the auditing of monitoring results, all exceedances environmental parameters.

 

Section 7        Environmental Site Audit – summarizes the findings of weekly site inspections undertaken within the reporting period, with a review of any relevant follow-up actions within the reporting period.

 

Section 8        Complaints, Notification of summons and Prosecution – summarizes the cumulative statistics on complaints, notification of summons and prosecution

 

Section 9        Conclusion

2          Project Background

2.1          Background

2.1.1.     Silver Mine Bay is a popular bathing beach in Mui Wo, Lantau that attracted 4,550 visitors on a peak day and over 69,000 visitors utilized the beach in 2012.

2.1.2.     In order to relieve the overcrowding problem and the road safety concern of Wang Tong Bridge (hereafter called “Old Bridge”), two bridges (pedestrian bridge and cycle bridge) are proposed to replace the Old Bridge. The new pedestrian bridge and the new cycle bridge (hereafter called “New Bridge”) are also designed to align with the future amenity development on the northern side of the Old Bridge. The location of the project site is shown in Figure 2.1.

2.1.3.     The Project consists of a designated project under Part I, Schedule 2 of the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO) which is Item C.12 – (a)…a dredging operation which is less than 500m from the nearest boundary of an existing…(iii) bathing beach…

2.1.4.     The major components of the Project under Environmental Permit (EP) (EP No. EP-555/2018/A) comprises: (i) demolition of the existing Wang Tong River Bridge; and (ii) construction of a new twin bridge with segregation for pedestrians and cyclists.

 

2.2          Project Organization and Contact Personnel

2.2.1       Highways Department is the overall project controllers for the Project. For the construction phase of the Project, Contractor(s), Environmental Team and Independent Environmental Checker are appointed to manage and control environmental issues.

2.2.2       The project organization and lines of communication with respect to environmental protection works are shown in Figure 2.2. Key personnel and contact particulars are summarized in Table 2.2:

Table 2.2             Contact Details of Key Personnel

Party	Role	Post	Name	Contact No.	Contact Fax
Highways Department (HyD)	The Engineer for the Contract	Senior Engineer	Mr. Terry Chung	3903 6799	3188 3418
	Engineer’s Representative	Engineer	Mr. Yeung Sui Chung	3903 6813	3188 3418
Unison Construction Engineering Limited	Contractor	Site Agent	Mr. Peter Lui	2690 2232	2363 3199
		Environmental Officer	Ms. Suki Chan
ANewR Consulting Limited	Independent Environmental Checker (IEC)	Independent Environmental Checker (IEC)	Mr. James Choi	2618 2831	3007 8648
Lam Environmental Services Limited	Environmental Team (ET)	Environmental Team Leader (ETL)	Mr. Raymond Dai	2882 3939	2882 3331

 

2.3          Construction Activities

2.3.1       In the reporting period, the principal work activities conducted are as follows.

April 2023	May 2023	June 2023
·    Bridge Deck construction	·    Retaining Wall Construction – Bay N2, N3 and N4	·    Retaining Wall Construction – Bay N1, N2 and N3

 

2.3.2       Overall layout showing work areas is shown in Figure 2.1.

 

3          Status of Regulatory Compliance

3.1          Status of Environmental Licensing and Permitting under the Project

3.1.1.     A summary of the current status on licences and/or permits on environmental protection pertinent to the Project is shown in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1 Summary of the current status on licences and/or permits on environmental protection pertinent to the Project

Permits and/or Licences	Permit. No. / Account No.		Valid From	Expiry Date		Status
Notification pursuant to Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation	Form NA submitted to EPD on 25 June 2021.
Environmental Permit	EP-555/2018/A		16 Dec 2020	N/A		Valid
Billing Account for Disposal of Construction Waste	7038550		29 Mar 2021	End of the Project		Valid
Registration as a Chemical Waste Producer	5213-962-U2333-01		28 Jun 2021	N/A		Valid
Discharge Licence	WT00040069-2021	10/1/2022			31/1/2027		Valid
Construction Noise Permit	N/A

 

3.2          Status of Submission under the EP-555/2018/A

3.2.      

3.2.1.     A summary of the current status on submission under EP-555/2018/A is shown in Table 3.2.

Table 3.2 Summary of submission status under EP-555/2018/A

EP Condition	Submission	Date of Latest Submission^ or Approval#
Condition 1.12	Notification of Commencement Date of Works	3 June 2021 ^
Condition 2.7	Submission of Management Organization of Main Construction Companies, the ET and the IEC	20 May 2021 ^
Condition 2.8	Submission of Construction Works Schedule and Location Plan	22 June 2021 #
Condition 2.9	Submission of Breeding Bird Survey Report	29 December 2020 #
Condition 3.3	Submission of Baseline Monitoring Report	24 June 2021 #
Condition 4.2	Setting up Dedicated Internet Website	28 April 2021 ^

 

 

3.3          Status of Submission under the EP-555/2018/A

3.3.1       Mitigation measures according to the environmental mitigation implementation schedule and the EIA were generally implemented by the Contractor as listed and shown in Appendix 3.1.

 

 

4          Monitoring Requirements

4.1          Noise Monitoring

Noise Monitoring Stations

4.1.1.     The noise monitoring stations for the Project are listed and shown in Table 4.1 and Figure 4.1.

Table 4.1 Noise Monitoring Station

Monitoring Station ID	Monitoring Location	Measurement Type	Level (in terms of no. of floor)
NMS1 A	1 Tung Wan Tau Road	Free-field	G/F

 

Remarks A:    As discussed with the lot owner, a fine adjustment of location at the boundary of 1 Tung Wan Tau Road was proposed and approved in the Baseline Monitoring Report, in order to prevent access obstruction.

 

Noise Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

4.1.2.     For daytime construction work on normal weekdays (0700-1900 Monday to Saturday), one set of 30-min measurement shall be carried out at each NMS every week. Measurement procedures shall be referred to the Noise Control Ordinance-TM. Construction noise level shall be measured in terms of the A-weighted equivalent continuous sound pressure level (L_eq). L_{eq 30min} shall be used as the monitoring parameter. As supplementary information for data auditing, statistical results such as L₁₀ and L₉₀ shall also be obtained for reference.

 

EVENT and action plan

4.1.3.     Noise Standards for Daytime Construction Activities are specified under EIAO-TM. The Action and Limit levels for construction noise are defined in Table 4.3 and Appendix 4.1. Should non-compliance of the criteria occurs, action in accordance with the Event and Action Plan in Appendix 6.1 shall be carried out.

 

Table 4.3 Action and Limit Level for Noise Monitoring

Monitoring Station	Action Level	Limit Level
NMS1	When one documented complaint is received	75 dB(A)

 

4.2          Air Monitoring

Air Quality Monitoring Stations

4.2.1.     The air monitoring stations for the Project are listed and shown in Table 4.4 and Figure 4.3.

Table 4.4 Air Monitoring Station

Monitoring Station	Location	Level (in terms of no. of floor)
AMS1 A	Silvermine Beach Resort	G/F
AMS2 B, C	1 Tung Wan Tau Road	G/F

Remarks A:    AMS1 recommended under EM&A manual is at the north of boundary wall of Silvermine Beach Resort. Positioning of HVS on a narrow road at the northern boundary wall would obstruct access of passengers. After liaison with the resort owner, HVS is located near the eastern boundary wall, which is representative and suitable for air quality monitoring. Thus, fine adjustment of location at the boundary of Silvermine Beach Resort was therefore proposed and approved in the Baseline Monitoring Report.

 

Remarks B:    As discussed with the lot owner, a fine adjustment of location at the boundary of 1 Tung Wan Tau Road was proposed and approved in the Baseline Monitoring Report, in order to prevent access obstruction and to minimize noise nuisance induced from HVS operation.

Remarks C:    As the agreement of ER and IEC, a fine adjustment of location at the boundary of 1 Tung Wan Tau Road was proposed and approved in the impact monitoring, in order to prevent the interruption of GI working area conducted by contractor.

 

Air Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

4.2.2.     One-hour and 24-hour TSP levels shall be measured to indicate the impacts of construction dust on air quality.

4.2.3.     24-hour TSP shall be sampled at least once in every 6 days, while sampling for 1-hour TSP shall be at least 3 times in every 6 days when the highest dust impact takes place.

 

Wind Data

4.2.4.     Hong Kong Observatory (HKO) meteorological information is widely accepted to be used in various environmental monitoring practices within HKSAR due to its professional quality and precision. Therefore, the daily wind data including Prevailing Wind Direction (degrees) and Mean Wind Speed (km/h) were obtained from Peng Chau Automatic Weather Station to serve as the representative data for meteorological condition during monitoring. The method was agreed by the IEC and approved by the ER on 4 December 2020. The representative wind data from Peng Chau Station were obtained covering the 1-hour and 24-hour TSP monitoring periods. The wind data were extracted and shown in Appendix 4.3.

 

EVENT and action plan

4.2.5.     The Action and Limit levels for construction air quality are defined in Table 4.6 and Appendix 4.1. Should non-compliance of the air quality criteria occur, action in accordance with the Event and Action Plan in Appendix 6.1 shall be carried out.

Table 4.6 Action and Limit Level for Air Quality Monitoring

Parameter	Monitoring Station	Action Level (µg/m3)	Limit Level (µg/m3)
24-hour TSP Level	AMS1	176.0	260.0
	AMS2	176.0	260.0
1-hour TSP Level	AMS1	276.5	500.0
	AMS2	283.7	500.0

4.3          Water Quality Monitoring

WATER QUALITY MONITORING STATIONS

4.3.1.     Water quality monitoring shall be undertaken at 7 monitoring stations in the reporting month. The proposed water quality monitoring stations of the Project are shown in Table 4.7 and Figure 4.3.

Table 4.7      Marine Water Quality Stations for Water Quality Monitoring

Remark *: Water quality monitoring at Station W3 was cancelled with verification from the IEC and approval from the EPD.

 

Water Quality Parameters, Frequency and Duration

4.3.2.     The levels of dissolved oxygen (DO), turbidity, salinity and pH shall be measured in situ while suspended solids (SS) is determined by laboratory analysis at all the designated monitoring stations.

4.3.3.     In association with the water quality parameters, other relevant data shall also be recorded, such as monitoring location / position, time, water temperature, DO saturation, weather conditions, and any special phenomena underway near the monitoring station.

4.3.4.     Impact Monitoring shall be carried out 3 days per week, at mid-flood and mid-ebb tides (within ± 1.75 hour of the predicted time). The interval between two sets of monitoring shall not be less than 36 hours. The monitoring period should avoid concurrent marine project in the vicinity.

4.3.5.     The sampling frequency of at least three days per week should be undertaken when the highest dust impact occurs. Upon completion of the construction works, the monitoring exercise at the designated monitoring locations should be continued for four weeks in the same manner as the impact monitoring. In case exceedance of Action/Limit Level is recorded, the frequency shall be increased as per the Event and Action Plan.

4.3.6.     To ensure the robustness of in-situ measurement, parameters shall be measured in duplicate. In case the difference between duplicates is larger than 25%, a third set of measurement shall be carried out.

 

EVENT and action plan

4.3.7.     The Action and Limit levels for construction water quality are defined in Table 4.9 and Appendix 4.1. Should the monitoring results of the water quality parameters at any designated monitoring station exceed the water quality criteria, action in accordance with the Event and Action Plan in Appendix 6.1 shall be carried out.

 

Table 4.9 Action and Limit Level for Water Quality Monitoring

Monitoring Station	Depth	DO (mg/L) +		Turbidity (NTU) ~		SS (mg/L) ~
		Action Level	Limit Level	Action Level	Limit Level	Action Level	Limit Level
W1	Surface, Middle & Bottom	6.5	5.3	7.7 NTU or 120% of upstream control station's turbidity at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher	12.4 NTU or 130% of upstream control station's turbidity at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher	8.9 mg/L or 120% of upstream control station's SS at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher	11.3 mg/L or 130% of upstream control station's SS at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher
W2
W4
W5	Surface, Middle & Bottom	5.9	5.5	9.8 NTU or 120% of upstream control station's turbidity at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher	10.5 NTU or 130% of upstream control station's turbidity at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher	12.6 mg/L or 120% of upstream control station's SS at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher	15.0 mg/L or 130% of upstream control station's SS at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher
W6
W7
W8	Surface & Middle
	Bottom	5.9	5.5

Remarks +: For DO, non-compliance occurs when monitoring results is lower than the limits.

Remarks ~: For SS and Turbidity, non-compliance occurs when monitoring results is larger than the limits

5          Monitoring Results

5.0.1      The environmental monitoring were implemented as per the environment monitoring schedules for reporting period.

 

5.1          Noise Monitoring Results

5.0.        

5.1.1       Noise monitoring results measured in this reporting period are reviewed and summarized. Details of noise monitoring results and graphical presentation can be referred in Appendix 5.2.

5.1.2       No action or limit level exceedance was recorded in this reporting period.

 

5.2          Air Monitoring Results

5        

5.2.1       Air quality monitoring results measured in this reporting period are reviewed and summarized.  Details of air monitoring results and graphical presentation can be referred in Appendix 5.3.

5.2.2       No action or limit level exceedance was recorded in this reporting period. 

 

5.3          Water Quality Monitoring Results

1        

2        

3        

4        

5        

5.1        

5.2        

5.3        

5.3.1       Action level exceedances on SS were recorded at station W4 during mid-flood on 4 April. Investigation revealed these exceedances could be due to: Foam and rubbish were accumulated at the estuary that day by wind; high SS were also recorded at upstream control station W5 (SS: 14.6 mg/L); downstream riverbed sediment may be stirred up during tidal flush as well; no river channel blockage was observed.

5.3.2       Action level exceedances on SS were recorded at station W2 during mid-flood on 19 April. Investigation revealed these exceedances could be due to: Localized fluctuation around baseline SS range; no river channel blockage was observed.

5.3.3       Limit level exceedances on SS were recorded at station W1 during mid-flood on 22 April. Investigation revealed these exceedances could be due to: Extreme low water level with heavy rain may stir up the riverbed sediment; high SS were also recorded at low water level upstream W2 (SS: 10.9mg/L); no river channel blockage was observed.

5.3.4       Action level exceedance on SS was recorded at station W2 during mid-flood on 2 May. Investigation revealed this exceedance could be due to: Localized SS exceedance; extremely low water level; rubbish were trapped at the turning point at the river near W2 which may cause the exceedance; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1 and downstream at W4; no river channel blockage was observed.

5.3.5       Limit level exceedances on Turb and SS were recorded at W4 during mid-flood on 4 May. Investigation revealed these exceedances could be due to: Turb and SS exceedances were related to the high Turb (15.3 NTU) and SS(13.5 mg/L) recorded at W5; extremely low water level during mid-flood; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1 and W2; no river channel blockage was observed.

5.3.6       Limit level exceedance on SS was recorded at station W4 during mid-flood on 10 May. Investigation revealed this exceedance could be due to: SS exceedance was related to extremely low water level during mid-flood which may stir up the muddy sediment near W4; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1 and W2; no river channel blockage was observed.

5.3.7       Action level exceedances on SS were recorded at W2 and W4 during mid-flood on 12 May. Investigation revealed these exceedances could be due to: Localized fluctuation around baseline SS range; no river channel blockage was observed.

5.3.8       Limit level exceedance on SS was recorded at W2 and limit level exceedances on Turb and SS were recorded at W4 during mid-flood on 15 May. Investigation revealed these exceedances could be due to: Turb and SS exceedances were related to the high Turb (10.8 NTU) and SS (12.6 mg/L) recorded at W5; many trapped rubbish were found near W2 and W4 which may also cause the exceedances; extremely low water current flow during mid-flood which may cause the rubbish to stayed at W2 and W4; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1; no river channel blockage was observed.

5.3.9       Limit level exceedance on SS was recorded at station W4 during mid-flood on 17 May. Investigation revealed this exceedance could be due to: SS exceedance was related to the high SS (15.5 mg/L) recorded at W5; remaining trapped rubbish were found near W4 which may also cause the exceedances; extremely low water current flow during mid-flood which may cause the rubbish to stayed at W4; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1 and W2; no river channel blockage was observed.

5.3.10    Limit level exceedance on Turb and SS was recorded at station W2 and W4 during mid-flood on 12 June. Investigation revealed this exceedance could be due to: Turb and SS exceedances was related to extremely low water level during mid-flood which may stir up the muddy sediment near W2 and W4; many trapped rubbish were found near W2 and W4 which may also cause the exceedances; extremely low water current flow during mid-flood which may cause the rubbish to stayed at W2 and W4; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1 and downstream W5; no river channel blockage was observed.

5.3.11    Limit level exceedance on SS was recorded at station W5 during mid-ebb on 14 June. Investigation revealed this exceedance could be due to: SS exceedance was related to the high SS (25.6 mg/L) recorded at W4; remaining trapped rubbish found from previous monitoring near W4 were flowing to W5 may also cause the exceedance; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1; no river channel blockage was observed.

Table 5.1     Summary of Water Quality Exceedances (April)

	Parameter	DO (S&M)		DO (Bottom)		Turbidity		SS		Exceedance count
Station	Level exceeded	Mid Ebb	Mid Flood	Mid Ebb	Mid Flood	Mid Ebb	Mid Flood	Mid Ebb	Mid Flood	Mid Ebb	Mid Flood
W1	Action	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-
	Limit	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	22/04/23	N/A	1
W2	Action	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	19/04/23	N/A	1
	Limit	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-
W4	Action	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	04/04/23	N/A	1
	Limit	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-
W5	Action	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
	Limit	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
W6	Action	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
	Limit	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
W7	Action	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
	Limit	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
W8 Surface	Action	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
	Limit	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
W8 Bottom	Action	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
	Limit	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
Total	Action	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	2	-	2
	Limit	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	1

 

Table 5.2     Summary of Water Quality Exceedances (May)

	Parameter	DO (S&M)		DO (Bottom)		Turbidity		SS		Exceedance count
Station	Level exceeded	Mid Ebb	Mid Flood	Mid Ebb	Mid Flood	Mid Ebb	Mid Flood	Mid Ebb	Mid Flood	Mid Ebb	Mid Flood
W1	Action	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-
	Limit	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-
W2	Action	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	02/05/23 12/05/23	N/A	2
	Limit	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	15/05/23	N/A	1
W4	Action	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	12/05/23	N/A	1
	Limit	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	04/05/23 15/05/23	N/A	04/05/23 10/05/23 15/05/23 17/05/23	N/A	6
W5	Action	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
	Limit	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
W6	Action	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
	Limit	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
W7	Action	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
	Limit	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
W8 Surface	Action	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
	Limit	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
W8 Bottom	Action	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
	Limit	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
Total	Action	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	3	-	3
	Limit	-	-	-	-	-	2	-	5	-	7

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 5.3     Summary of Water Quality Exceedances (June)

	Parameter	DO (S&M)		DO (Bottom)		Turbidity		SS		Exceedance count
Station	Level exceeded	Mid Ebb	Mid Flood	Mid Ebb	Mid Flood	Mid Ebb	Mid Flood	Mid Ebb	Mid Flood	Mid Ebb	Mid Flood
W1	Action	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-
	Limit	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-
W2	Action	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-
	Limit	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	12/06/23	N/A	12/06/23	N/A	2
W4	Action	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-
	Limit	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	12/06/23	N/A	12/06/23	N/A	2
W5	Action	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
	Limit	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	14/06/23	N/A	1	N/A
W6	Action	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
	Limit	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
W7	Action	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
	Limit	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
W8 Surface	Action	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
	Limit	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
W8 Bottom	Action	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
	Limit	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A	-	N/A
Total	Action	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
	Limit	-	-	-	-	-	2	1	2	1	4

 

5.4          Waste Management

5.       

5.3.2.       

5.4       

5.4.1      The quantities of waste for disposal in the Reporting Period are summarized in Table 5.3 and Table 5.4.

 

Table 5.3 Summary of Quantities of Inert C&D Materials

 

Table 5.4 Summary of Quantities of C&D Wastes

 

 

6          Compliance Audit

6.1          Noise Monitoring.

6.1.1   No action or limit level exceedance was recorded in this reporting period.

 

6.2          Air Quality Monitoring

6.2.1       No action or limit level exceedance was recorded in this reporting period.

 

6.3          Water Quality Monitoring

6.3.1       Action level exceedances on SS were recorded at station W4 during mid-flood on 4 April. Investigation revealed these exceedances could be due to: Foam and rubbish were accumulated at the estuary that day by wind; high SS were also recorded at upstream control station W5 (SS: 14.6 mg/L); downstream riverbed sediment may be stirred up during tidal flush as well; no river channel blockage was observed.

6.3.2       Action level exceedances on SS were recorded at station W2 during mid-flood on 19 April. Investigation revealed these exceedances could be due to: Localized fluctuation around baseline SS range; no river channel blockage was observed.

6.3.3       Limit level exceedances on SS were recorded at station W1 during mid-flood on 22 April. Investigation revealed these exceedances could be due to: Extreme low water level with heavy rain may stir up the riverbed sediment; high SS were also recorded at low water level upstream W2 (SS: 10.9mg/L); no river channel blockage was observed.

6.3.4       Action level exceedance on SS was recorded at station W2 during mid-flood on 2 May. Investigation revealed this exceedance could be due to: Localized SS exceedance; extremely low water level; rubbish were trapped at the turning point at the river near W2 which may cause the exceedance; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1 and downstream at W4; no river channel blockage was observed.

6.3.5       Limit level exceedances on Turb and SS were recorded at W4 during mid-flood on 4 May. Investigation revealed these exceedances could be due to: Turb and SS exceedances were related to the high Turb (15.3 NTU) and SS(13.5 mg/L) recorded at W5; extremely low water level during mid-flood; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1 and W2; no river channel blockage was observed.

6.3.6       Limit level exceedance on SS was recorded at station W4 during mid-flood on 10 May. Investigation revealed this exceedance could be due to: SS exceedance was related to extremely low water level during mid-flood which may stir up the muddy sediment near W4; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1 and W2; no river channel blockage was observed.

6.3.7       Action level exceedances on SS were recorded at W2 and W4 during mid-flood on 12 May. Investigation revealed these exceedances could be due to: Localized fluctuation around baseline SS range; no river channel blockage was observed.

6.3.8       Limit level exceedance on SS was recorded at W2 and limit level exceedances on Turb and SS were recorded at W4 during mid-flood on 15 May. Investigation revealed these exceedances could be due to: Turb and SS exceedances were related to the high Turb (10.8 NTU) and SS (12.6 mg/L) recorded at W5; many trapped rubbish were found near W2 and W4 which may also cause the exceedances; extremely low water current flow during mid-flood which may cause the rubbish to stayed at W2 and W4; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1; no river channel blockage was observed.

6.3.9       Limit level exceedance on SS was recorded at station W4 during mid-flood on 17 May. Investigation revealed this exceedance could be due to: SS exceedance was related to the high SS (15.5 mg/L) recorded at W5; remaining trapped rubbish were found near W4 which may also cause the exceedances; extremely low water current flow during mid-flood which may cause the rubbish to stayed at W4; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1 and W2; no river channel blockage was observed.

6.3.10    Limit level exceedance on Turb and SS was recorded at station W2 and W4 during mid-flood on 12 June. Investigation revealed this exceedance could be due to: Turb and SS exceedances was related to extremely low water level during mid-flood which may stir up the muddy sediment near W2 and W4; many trapped rubbish were found near W2 and W4 which may also cause the exceedances; extremely low water current flow during mid-flood which may cause the rubbish to stayed at W2 and W4; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1 and downstream W5; no river channel blockage was observed.

6.3.11    Limit level exceedance on SS was recorded at station W5 during mid-ebb on 14 June. Investigation revealed this exceedance could be due to: SS exceedance was related to the high SS (25.6 mg/L) recorded at W4; remaining trapped rubbish found from previous monitoring near W4 were flowing to W5 may also cause the exceedance; no exceedances were recorded upstream at W1; no river channel blockage was observed.

 

6.4          Summary of Exceedance

6.4.1       The Event Action Plan for construction noise, air quality and water quality are presented in Appendix 6.1.

6.4.2       The summary of exceedance is presented in Appendix 6.2.

 

6.5          Environmental Site Audit

6.        

7.        

7.0.        

6.5.1       During the reporting period, the Environmental Team (ET) conducted weekly site inspections and IEC attended the joint site inspection monthly.

6.5.2       During this reporting month, monthly landscape site audits were conducted monthly.

6.5.3       No non-compliance was found during the site inspection while reminders on environmental measures were recommended.

 

6.6          Review of the Reasons for and the Implications of Non-compliance

6.6.1       No environmental non-compliance was recorded in the reporting period.

 

6.7          Summary of action taken in the event of and follow-up on non-compliance

6.7.1       There was no particular action taken since no non-compliance was recorded in the reporting period.

7          Complaints, Notification of Summons and Prosecution

7.0.1.     No environmental complaint, notification of summons and successful prosecution regarding construction works was recorded in the reporting period.

7.0.2.     The details of cumulative complaint log and updated summary of complaints are presented in Appendix 8.1.

7.0.3.     Cumulative statistic on complaints and successful prosecutions are summarized in Table 8.1 and Table 8.2 respectively.

Table 8.1 Cumulative Statistics on Complaints

Reporting Period	No. of Complaints
April 2023 – June 2023	0
Project commencement to the end of last reporting month	-
Total	0

 

Table 8.2 Cumulative Statistics on Successful Prosecutions

Environmental Parameters	Cumulative No. Brought Forward	No. of Successful Prosecutions this month (Offence Date)	Cumulative No. Project-to-Date
Air	-	0	0
Noise	-	0	0
Water	-	0	0
Waste	-	0	0
Total	-	0	0

 

8          Conclusion

8.      

8.0.      

8.0.1.     The EM&A programme was carried out in accordance with the EM&A Manual requirements, minor alterations to the programme proposed were made in response to changing circumstances.

8.0.2.     The EM&A programme was considered effective and no change is anticipated as reviewed for this quarter.