


Content
Chapter Title Page
List of Figures
Figure 1.1 General
Layout Plan of the Project Site
Figure 2.1 Locations
of Air Quality Monitoring Stations
Figure 2.2 Locations
of Noise Monitoring Stations
Figure 2.3 Locations
of Water Quality Monitoring Stations
Figure 4.1 Survey
Area and Transect Walked
List of Appendices
Appendix A Project Organization Chart
Appendix B Tentative Construction Programme
Appendix C Action and Limit Levels for Construction Phase
Appendix D Event and Action Plan for Air Quality, Noise and Water
Quality
Appendix E Calibration certificates
Appendix F Graphical plots of the monitoring results
Appendix G Weather conditions during the monitoring period
Appendix H Ecological Monitoring conducted
Appendix I Summary of Bird Surveys conducted
Appendix J Summary of Herpetofauna, and Insects
Surveys conducted
Appendix L Environmental
Mitigation Measures - Implementation Status
Executive Summary
Mott
MacDonald Hong Kong Ltd. (“MMHK”) has been commissioned by Heng Shung
Construction Co. Ltd. (The Contractor) to undertake the Environmental Team (ET)
services to carry out environmental monitoring and audit (EM&A) for both
pre-construction and construction phases of the Proposed Comprehensive
Development at Wo Shang Wai, Yuen Long.
This
is the 27th EM&A report submitted under the Condition 4.5 of
Environmental Permit No. EP-311/2008/B. This report summarises the findings on
EM&A during the period from 1 July to 31 July 2011.
Exceedance of Action and Limit
Levels
There
was no breach of Action or Limit levels for Air Quality (1-hr TSP and 24-hr
TSP) and Noise level (as Leq) in the reporting month.
Exceedances of pH, DO, turbidity
and SS were observed at MP1 to MP6 in July 2012. Action Level exceedances of pH
were observed at MP1 to MP6, with some Limit Level exceedances at MP4 and MP5.
DO exceedance was observed four times at MP5, six times at MP6, ten times at
MP4 and eleven times at MP3. Turbidity and/or SS exceedances were recorded on
five monitoring dates at MP3, three monitoring dates at MP4 and one monitoring
date at MP5. The summary of measured water quality is presented in Section 3.2.3.
Investigations have been carried out to
identify the causes of exceedance. From investigation, the Contractor has
implemented water quality mitigation measures as recommended in the EIA report.
With external factors affecting the adjacent
environments, such as natural variations, pond fish culture activities and rainfall,
the exceedances were considered not due to construction works.
Implementation of mitigation
measures
Site audits were carried out on 3, 10, 17, 23 and 31 July 2012 to confirm the implementation measures undertaken by the Contractor in
the reporting month. The outcomes are presented in Section 6 and the status of implementation of mitigation measures
in the site is shown in Appendix L.
Record of Complaints
There was no record of complaints received in the reporting month.
Record of Notification of summons
and successful prosecution
There
was no record of Notification of summons and successful prosecution in the
reporting month.
Reporting Changes
There
was no reporting change in the reporting month.
Future Key Issues
The major site works to be commissioned in the coming three months
include site formation. Potential environmental impacts due to the construction
activities, including air quality, noise, water quality, ecology and landscape
and visual, will be monitored.
Environmental mitigation measures
will be implemented on site as recommended and weekly site audits will be
carried out to ensure that the environmental conditions are acceptable.
In March 2005, the Project
Proponent, Profit Point Enterprises Limited, acquired the development site in Yuen Long at Wo Shang Wai. An
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was carried out under the EIA Ordinance (EIAO)
since then and the Environmental Permit (EP-311/2008B) for construction of the
comprehensive development in Wo Shang Wai was granted by EPD on 29 July 2010. The
Project involves the residential development and associated infrastructure and wetland restoration area and linear landscape
area. The construction works under the Environmental Permit commenced on 12 May
2010.
Heng Shung Construction Co. Ltd. was commissioned as the Contractor for the Project. Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Ltd. (“MMHK”) has been commissioned by Heng Shung Construction Co. Ltd. to undertake the Environmental Team (ET) services to carry out environmental monitoring and audit (EM&A) for both pre-construction and construction phases of the Proposed Comprehensive Development at Wo Shang Wai, Yuen Long.
According to the EP Condition 4.5, the monthly EM&A Report shall be submitted to the Director within 2 weeks after the end of the reporting month. This report summarises the findings during the period from 1 July to 31 July 2012.
The organization chart and lines of communication with respect to the
on-site environmental management structure together with the contact
information of the key personnel are shown in Appendix A.
During the reporting period,
construction works of the Project undertaken include:
¡
Site formation
The Construction Works Programme
of the Project is provided in Appendix B. The general layout plan of the
Project site is shown in Figure 1.1.
The EM&A programme requires environmental monitoring of air quality, noise, water quality, ecology and landscape and visual as specified in the approved EM&A Manual.
A summary of impact EM&A requirements is presented in Table 1.1:
Table 1.1: Summary of Impact EM&A Monitoring Requirements
|
Parameters |
Descriptions |
Locations |
Frequencies |
|
Air Quality |
24-Hour TSP |
ASR1, ASR2A, ASR3, ASR4 |
Once every 6 days |
|
1-Hour TSP |
ASR1, ASR2A, ASR3, ASR4 |
3 times every 6 days |
|
|
Noise |
Leq, 30min |
NSR1, NSR3, NSR5, NSR7 |
Weekly |
|
Water Quality |
Dissolved Oxygen (DO), temperature, pH, suspended solids (SS) and Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD) |
MP1 to MP6 |
3 days per week |
|
Ecology |
Birds |
Within the Project Area and Assessment Area of 500m |
Weekly |
|
Dragonflies and Butterflies |
Within the Project Area and Assessment Area of 500m |
Once per month during Mar and Sep to November, and twice per month during Apr to Aug |
|
|
Herpetofauna |
Within the Project Area and Assessment Area of 500m |
Once per month during Apr to Nov |
|
|
Water quality of Wetland Restoration Area (WRA) |
Wetland Restoration Area |
After filling of WRA with water, monthly for in situ water quality and every six months (end of wet season and end of dry season) for laboratory testing |
|
|
Site Inspections |
Within the Project Area and Assessment Area of 500m |
Weekly |
|
|
Landscape
and Visual |
Auditing of protection of existing trees,
the transplanting of existing trees, the creation of new wetland, the
planting of new trees and shrubs and other landscape and visual mitigation
measures |
CM1 to CM10 and OM1 to OM7 within the
Project Area |
Site inspections once every two weeks
during construction phase; once every two months during operational phase |
The Environmental Quality Performance Limits for air quality, noise and water quality are shown in Appendix C.
The Event and Action Plan for air quality, noise and water quality are shown in Appendix D.
The monitoring schedule for the
reporting month is shown in Table 1.2
below:
Table 1.2: Environmental Monitoring and Audit Schedule for July 2012

2.
Impact Monitoring Methodology
|
For air quality, construction noise and water quality, ecology, landscape and visual monitoring
methodology, including the monitoring locations, monitoring equipments used,
monitoring parameters, and frequency and duration etc., are detailed in this
Chapter.
In accordance with the EM&A Manual, 1-hour and 24-hour TSP levels monitoring are to be conducted during the construction phase. Table 2.1 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and duration of air quality monitoring.
Table 2.1: Air Quality Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
|
Parameter |
Frequency and Duration |
|
|
ASR1, ASR2A, ASR3 & ASR4 |
24-hour TSP |
At least once in every six-days |
|
1-hour TSP |
3 times every six-days |
The 4 air quality monitoring stations were established in the
EM&A manual and were slightly adjusted during the baseline monitoring
phase. Locations of the agreed air quality monitoring stations are listed in Table 2.2 and as shown in Figure 2.1.
Table 2.2: Air Monitoring Stations
|
Monitoring Stations |
Locations |
|
ASR1 |
Works Site Boundary |
|
ASR2A |
At the rooftop of refuse collection point,
which is located at the southwest of the project area |
|
ASR3 |
At the commercial centre at |
|
ASR4 |
Works Site Boundary |
Continuous 24-hour TSP air
quality monitoring is conducted using High Volume Sampler (HVS)
(Model: GMWS-2310 Accu-vol). The HVS meets all the requirements of the EM&A
Manual. Portable direct reading dust meters were used to carry out the 1-hour
TSP monitoring. Table 2.3 summarizes
the equipment used in the impact air quality monitoring.
Table 2.3: TSP Monitoring Equipment
|
Equipment |
Model |
|
24-hr TSP monitoring |
|
|
High
Volume Sampler |
GMWS
2310 Accu-vol |
|
Calibrator |
GMW
25 |
|
1-hr TSP monitoring |
|
|
Portable
direct reading dust meter |
AM510
SidePak Personal Aerosol Monitor |
24-hour TSP Monitoring
Installation
The HVS was installed in the vicinity of the air sensitive receiver. The following criteria were considered in the installation of the HVS.
· A horizontal platform with appropriate support to secure the sampler against gusty wind was provided.
· The distance between the HVS and any obstacles, such as buildings, was at least twice the height that the obstacle protrudes above the HVS.
· A minimum of 2 metres separation from walls, parapets and penthouse was required for rooftop sampler.
· A minimum of 2 metres separation from any supporting structure, measured horizontally was required.
· No furnace or incinerator flues or building vent were nearby.
· Airflow around the sampler was unrestricted.
· The sampler has been more than 20 metres from any drip line.
· Permission was obtained to set up the samplers and to obtain access to the monitoring stations.
· A secured supply of electricity is needed to operate the samplers.
Preparation of Filter
Papers
· Glass fibre filters, were labelled and sufficient filters that were clean and without pinholes were selected.
· All filters were equilibrated in the conditioning environment for 24 hours before weighing. The conditioning environment temperature was around 25 °C and not variable by more than ±3 °C with relative humidity (RH) < 50 % and was not variable by more than ±5 %. A convenient working RH was 40 %.
Field Monitoring
· The power supply was checked to ensure the HVS works properly.
· The filter holder and the area surrounding the filter were cleaned.
· The filter holder was removed by loosening the four bolts and a new filter, with stamped number upward, on a supporting screen was aligned carefully.
· The filter was properly aligned on the screen so that the gasket formed an airtight seal on the outer edges of the filter.
· The swing bolts were fastened to hold the filter holder down to the frame. The pressure applied should be sufficient to avoid air leakage at the edges.
· The shelter lid was closed and was secured with the aluminium strip.
· The HVS was warmed-up for about 5 minutes to establish run-temperature conditions.
· A new flow rate record sheet was set into the flow recorder.
· The flow rate of the HVS was checked and adjusted at around 1.1 m3/min. The range specified in the EM&A Manual was between 0.6-1.7 m3/min.
· The programmable timer was set for a sampling period of 24 hrs + 1 hr, and the starting time, weather condition and the filter number were recorded.
· The initial elapsed time was recorded.
· At the end of sampling, the sampled filter was removed carefully and folded in half length so that only surfaces with collected particulate matter were in contact.
· It was then placed in a clean plastic envelope and sealed.
· All monitoring information was recorded on a standard data sheet.
· Filters were sent to a HOKLAS accredited laboratory for analysis.
Maintenance and
Calibration
· The HVS and its accessories are maintained in good working condition, such as replacing motor brushes routinely and checking electrical wiring to ensure a continuous power supply.
· HVSs were calibrated at 2-month intervals.
· Calibration records for HVSs are shown in Appendix E.
1-hour TSP Monitoring
Field Monitoring
The measuring procedures of the 1-hour dust meter are in accordance with the Manufacturer’s Instruction Manual as follows:
·
Set POWER to “ON”, push
·
Push the knob at MEASU
· Push “O-ADJ” button. (Then meter’s indication is 0).
· Push the knob at SENSI ADJ position and set the meter’s indication to S value described on the Test Report using the trimmer for SENSI ADJ.
·
Pull out the knob and return it
to MEASU
· Push “START” button.
Maintenance and
Calibration
· The 1-hour dust meter would be checked at 3-month intervals and calibrated at 1-year intervals throughout all stages of the air quality monitoring.
· Calibration records for direct dust meters are shown in Appendix E.
Following the requirements in the EM&A Manual for noise, noise monitoring has to be carried out during the construction phase. Continuous noise monitoring for the A-weighted levels Leq, L10 and L90 is undertaken once per every week.
Table 2.4 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and duration of air quality monitoring.
Table 2.4: Noise Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
|
Monitoring Stations |
Parameter |
Frequency and Duration |
|
NSR1, NSR3,
NSR5, NSR7 |
Leq, L90 & L10 |
Once every
week |
The 4 noise quality monitoring stations were established
in the EM&A manual and were slightly adjusted during the baseline
monitoring phase. Locations of the agreed noise quality
monitoring stations are listed in Table
2.5 and as shown
in Figure 2.2.
Table 2.5: Noise Monitoring Stations
|
Monitoring Stations |
Locations |
Type of measurement |
|
NSR1 |
Noise monitoring equipment was set up near
the boundary wall at |
Free-field |
|
NSR3 |
The monitoring station was located next to
the guard house at |
Facade |
|
NSR5 |
The monitoring station was located within
the work site boundary. |
Free-field |
|
NSR7 |
The monitoring station was located near the
boundary wall of the house of Mai Po San Tsuen. |
Free-field |
Integrating Sound Level Meter will be used for noise monitoring. It is a Type 1 sound level meter capable of giving a continuous readout of the noise level readings including equivalent continuous sound pressure level (Leq) and percentile sound pressure level (Lx). They comply with International Electrotechnical Commission Publications 651:1979 (Type 1) and 804:1985 (Type 1). Table 2.6 summarizes the noise monitoring equipment model being used.
Table 2.6: Noise Monitoring Equipment
|
Monitoring
locations |
Equipment Model |
|
|
Integrating Sound
Level Meter |
Calibrator |
|
|
NSR1 |
Rion
NL-31 |
Rion
NC-73 |
|
NSR3 |
||
|
NSR5 |
||
|
NSR7 |
||
Field Monitoring
· The Sound Level Meter was set on a tripod at a height of at least 1.2 m above the ground.
· Façade and free-field measurements were made at the monitoring locations.
· The battery condition was checked to ensure the correct functioning of the meter.
· Parameters such as frequency weighting, the time weighting and the measurement time were set as follows:
- frequency weighting: A
- time weighting: Fast
- time measurement: 30 minutes intervals (between 07:00 and 19:00)
· Prior to and after each noise measurement, the meter was calibrated using a Calibrator for 94 dB at 1 kHz. If the difference in the calibration level before and after measurement was more than 1 dB, the measurement would be considered invalid has to be repeated after re-calibration or repair of the equipment.
· During the monitoring period, the Leq, L10 and L90 were recorded. In addition, any site observations and noise sources were recorded on a standard record sheet.
Maintenance and
Calibration
· The microphone head of the sound level meter and calibrator is cleaned with soft cloth at quarterly intervals.
·
The meter and calibrator are
sent to the supplier or HOKLAS laboratory to check and calibrate at yearly
intervals.
·
Calibration records are shown
in Appendix E.
In accordance with the requirements in the EM&A
Manual for water quality, water quality parameters including
Dissolved Oxygen (DO), temperature, pH, turbidity, suspended solids (SS) and
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) have to be monitored at designated monitoring
stations during construction of the Project. DO, temperature and pH were
measured in-situ whereas SS and BOD were analysed in a laboratory. The measurements should be taken at
all designated monitoring stations, 3 days per week. The interval between any
two sets of monitoring was not less than 36 hours. Table 2.7 summarizes
the monitoring parameters, frequency and duration of water quality monitoring.
Table 2.7: Water Quality
Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
|
Monitoring Stations |
Parameter |
Frequency and Duration |
|
MP1, MP2, MP3,
MP4, MP5 & MP6 |
DO,
temperature, pH, SS, turbidity, BOD |
Three days
every week |
The 6 water quality
monitoring stations were established in the EM&A manual. Locations of the
agreed water quality monitoring stations are listed in Table 2.8 and as shown in Figure 2.3.
Table 2.8: Water Quality
Monitoring Stations
|
Monitoring Stations |
Easting |
Northing |
|
MP1 |
838 730.50 |
822 862.25 |
|
MP2 |
838 933.26 |
823 247.41 |
|
MP3 |
839 107.17 |
823 596.84 |
|
MP4 |
839 286.14 |
823 638.55 |
|
MP5 |
839 134.35 |
823 722.99 |
|
MP6 |
839 063.02 |
823 842.25 |
The Water Quality Monitoring Equipments and Analytical Methods applied to Water Quality Samples are given in Table 2.9 and Table 2.10 respectively. Details of which are discussed below.
Table 2.9: Water Quality Monitoring Equipments
|
Equipment |
Model |
Equipment /Serial Number |
|
Conductivity, Dissolved oxygen, pH, Salinity and
Temperature Measuring Meter |
YSI Professional Plus |
10D101566 |
|
Turbidity Meter |
Hach 2100QIS |
1050C001263 |
|
Global Positioning System (GPS) |
Garmin
eTrex |
ENO 007 |
Table 2.10: Analytical Methods applied to Water Quality Samples
|
Determinant, unit |
Standard Method |
|
Total Suspended Solids, mg/L |
In house method based on APHA 2540D; ALS Method
Code: EA-025 |
|
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), mg/L |
In house method based on APHA 5210B; ALS Method
Code: EP-030 |
All in-situ monitoring instruments were checked, calibrated and
certified by a laboratory accredited under HOKLAS or
any other international accreditation scheme before use.
Dissolved Oxygen (DO), temperature and pH
measuring equipment
A portable, weatherproof multiparameter instrument (YSI Professional Plus) was used in the monitoring. It can be capable for measuring dissolved oxygen (DO), pH, and temperature simultaneously with the following limits:
· a dissolved oxygen level in the range of 0-50 mg/L and 0-500 % saturation;
· a temperature of -5 to 45 degree Celsius; and
· pH value of 0-14 with 0.1 as the base unit.
Turbidity Measurement Instrument
Portable and weatherproof turbidity meter (HACH model 2100QIS) was used during impact monitoring. It has a photoelectric sensor capable of measuring turbidity between 0-1000 NTU. Response of the sensor was checked with certified standard turbidity solutions before the start of measurement.
Global Positioning System
A hand-held GPS navigator (Garmin eTrex
Suspended Solids and BOD
Measurements (Sample Containers and Storage)
Water samples for SS analysis were
stored in high density polythene bottles with no preservative added, packed in
ice (cooled to 4oC without being frozen), delivered to the laboratory,
and analysed as soon as possible after collection. Analysis was carried out in a
HOKLAS accredited laboratory.
Detection
Limit
The
limits of detection for the in-situ and laboratory measurements are shown in Table
2.11.
Table 2.11: Detection Limits for Water Quality Determinants
|
Determinant |
Limit of Detection |
|
Dissolved Oxygen |
0.1 mg/L |
|
Temperature |
0.1 degree Celsius |
|
pH |
0.01 unit |
|
Turbidity |
0.1 NTU |
|
Suspended Solids |
1 mg/L |
|
BOD |
2 mg/L |
In situ measurement
All pH meters, DO/ temperature
meters had been checked and calibrated prior to use. Standard buffer solution
of at least 2 pH levels (either pH 4 and pH 7, or pH 7 and pH 10) had been used
for calibration of the instrument before and after use.
DO meters had been calibrated by a
laboratory accredited under HOKLAS or any other international accreditation
scheme, and subsequently re-calibrated at three-monthly intervals throughout
all stages of the water quality monitoring. Responses of sensors and electrodes
had been checked with certified standard solutions before each use. Wet bulb
calibrations for all DO meters had been carried out before measurement at each
monitoring location. For the on site calibration of field equipment, BS
127:1993, "Guide to field and on-site test methods for the analysis of
waters" had been observed.
Measurements shall be at three water
depths, namely, 1m below water surface, mid-depth and 1m above stream bed/pond
bed, except where the water depth less that 6m, the mid-depth station maybe omitted. Should the water depth be less than 3m,
only the mid-depth station will be monitored.
Replicates in-situ measurements
and samples collected from each independent monitoring event are required for
all parameters to ensure a robust statistically interpretable dataset.
Water Samples Preparation and
Analysis
For collection of water sampling
within the water courses, a 500ml clean plastic beaker was used. After
collection, the water samples were stored in high-density polythene bottles.
The sample container was rinsed with a portion of the water sample. The water sample was then transferred to
the container, labelled with a unique sample ID and sealed with a screw cap. The water samples
were stored in a cool box maintained at 4oC. The water samples were then delivered to
a local HOKLAS-accredited laboratory (ALS) on the same day for analysis.
The testing methods of testing
parameters as recommended by EIA or required by EPD, with the QA/QC results are in accordance with the requirement of
HOKLAS or international accredited scheme.
The
calibration certificates for equipments used for in-situ
monitoring of water quality are attached in Appendix E.
Target species and certain other
fauna will be monitored within the Project Area and Assessment Area during the
wetland and residential construction phase. This will be important to ensure
that any unexpected events or impacts either on- or off-site are quickly
identified so that remedial action can be taken. The groups to be monitored and frequency of
monitoring are shown in Table 2.12.
Table 2.12: Summary of Construction Phase Ecological Monitoring
for the Wo Shang Wai Wetland Restoration Area (WRA)
|
Species /
Parameter |
Construction
Phase Ecological Monitoring |
|
Birds |
Weekly (including Assessment Area). |
|
Dragonflies and Butterflies |
Once per month during March and September to
November, and twice per month during April to August. |
|
Herpetofauna |
Once per month during April to November. |
|
Water Quality |
After filling of WRA with water, monthly for in situ water quality and every six
months (end of the wet season and end of the dry season) for laboratory
testing. |
|
Site Inspections |
Weekly. |
Ecological
monitoring locations during construction phase are shown in Figure 4.1 and the methodology for ecological monitoring is
detailed in Section 4.
·
The extent of the agreed works area should
be regularly checked during the construction phase. Any trespass by the
Contractor outside the limit of the works, including any damage to existing
trees and woodland shall be noted;
·
The progress of the engineering works
should be regularly reviewed on site to identify the earliest practical
opportunities for the landscape works to be undertaken;
·
All existing vegetation, streams and other
features within the study area which are not directly affected by the works are
retained and protected;
·
The methods of protecting existing
vegetation proposed by the Contractor are acceptable and enforced;
·
Preparation, lifting transport and
re-planting operations for any transplanted trees;
·
The layout, design and construction of
buildings conforms to requirements specified in the EIA report;
·
All landscaping works are carried out in accordance
with the EIA recommendations and with specifications;
·
The planting of new trees, shrubs,
groundcover, climbers, grasses and other plans, together with the replanting of
any transplanted trees are carried out properly and within the right season;
·
All necessary horticultural operations and
replacement planting are undertaken throughout the Establishment Period to
ensure the healthy establishment and growth of both transplanted trees and all
newly establishment plants.
Table 2.13: Construction and Operation
Phase Audit Checklist
|
Area of Works |
Items to be Monitored |
|
Works Area |
Check the extent of the Works to ensure
that the Works Area is not exceeded |
|
Protection
of all trees and woodland blocks to be retained |
Identification
and demarcation of trees / vegetation to be retained, erection of physical
protection (e.g. fencing), monitoring against possible incursion, physical
damage, fire, pollution, surface erosion, etc. |
|
Streams |
Ensure
no run-off into existing streams |
|
Clearance
of existing vegetation |
Identification
and demarcation of trees / vegetation to be cleared, checking of extent of
works to minimize damage, monitoring of adjacent areas against possible
incursion, physical damage, fire, pollution, surface erosion, etc. |
|
Transplanting
of trees |
Identification
and demarcation of trees / vegetation to be transplanted, monitoring of
extent of pruning / lifting works to minimize damage, timing of operations
implementation of all stages of preparatory and translocation works, and
maintenance of transplanted vegetation, etc. |
|
Topsoil
stripping |
Ensuring
existing topsoil is stripped and stored under recognized good practice and is
hydroseeded and regularly turned to prevent anaerobic conditions |
|
New
buildings |
Ensure
that building finishes accord with mitigation proposals with regard to colour
and albedo. |
|
Boundaries |
Ensuring
hoarding are erected as required |
|
Noise
Barrier |
Ensure
noise barrier design accords with the mitigation proposals with regard to
location, materials and finishes. |
|
Night-time
lighting |
Ensuring
night-time lighting is directional, hooded and shielded away from VSRs |
|
Plant
supply |
Monitoring
of operations relating to the supply of specialist plant material (including
the collecting, germination and growth of plants from seed) to ensure that
plants will be available in time to be used within the construction works. |
|
Landscape
and wetland treatments generally |
Check
that wetland, and hard / soft landscape designs conform to intent of
mitigation measures and agreed designs |
|
Soiling,
planting, etc. |
Monitoring
of implementation and maintenance of soiling and planting works against
possible incursion, physical damage, fire, pollution, surface erosion, etc. |
|
Establishment
Works |
Monitoring
of implementation of maintenance operation during Establishment Period |
The monitoring locations should
check against the mitigation measures proposed under the approved Environmental
Impact Assessment, which are summarised as follows:
Table 2.14: Proposed Construction Phase
Mitigation Measures
|
ID No. |
Landscape and Visual
Mitigation Measure |
|
CM1 |
The construction area and contractor’s
temporary works areas should be minimised to avoid impacts on adjacent landscape. |
|
CM2 |
Screening of construction works by
hoardings/noise barriers around Works area in visually unobtrusive colours,
to screen Works. |
|
CM3 |
Reduction of construction period to
practical minimum. |
|
CM4 |
Topsoil, where identified, should be
stripped and stored for re-use in the construction of the soft landscape
works, where the soil material meets acceptable criteria and where
practical. The Contract Specification
shall include storage and reuse of topsoil as appropriate. |
|
CM5 |
Hydroseeding or sheeting of soil
stockpiles with visually unobtrusive material (in earth tone). |
|
CM6 |
Advance screen planting to noise
barriers. |
|
CM7 |
Control night-time lighting and glare by
hooding all lights. |
|
CM8 |
Ensure no run-off into streams adjacent
to Project Area. |
|
CM9 |
Protection of existing trees on boundary
of project area shall be carefully protected during construction. Detailed Tree Protection Specification
shall be provided in the Contract Specification. Under this specification,
the Contractor shall be required to submit, for approval, a detailed working
method statement for the protection of trees prior to undertaking any works
adjacent to all retained trees, including trees in contractor’s works
areas. (Tree protection measures will
be detailed at S16 and Tree Removal Application stage). |
|
CM10 |
Trees unavoidably affected by the works
shall be transplanted where practical.
Trees should be transplanted straight to their destinations and not
held in a nursery. A detailed Tree
Transplanting Specification shall be provided in the Contract Specification,
if applicable. Sufficient time for necessary tree root and crown preparation
periods shall be allowed in the project programme. |
Table 2.15: Proposed Operation Phase
Mitigation Measures
|
ID No. |
Landscape Mitigation Measure |
|
OM1 |
Compensatory Tree Planting for all felled
trees shall be provided to the satisfaction of relevant Government
departments. Required numbers and
locations of compensatory trees shall be determined and agreed separately
with Government during the Tree Felling Application process under ETWBTC
3/2006. |
|
OM2 |
A continuous belt of screen planting
along southern perimeter of project area with fast growing tree species. At least 450 trees capable of reaching a height
> 10m within 10 years should be planted.
Planting of the belt of trees shall be carried out as advance works
ahead of other site formation and building works. |
|
OM3 |
Maximise soft landscape and amenity water
bodies in residential areas of the development. Approximately 750 trees (of Heavy Standard
size) should be planted. Where space
permits, roadside berms should be created. Street trees should be of species
that reach a mature height of no less than 15m. |
|
OM4 |
Maximise freshwater habitat wetland creation
consistent with achieving other parameters.
Minimum 4.74 ha to be provided.
Wetlands must have natural edge profiles with >1m wide emergent
zone. No access to the wetland by
residents and all wetlands must be screened from residential development by a
continuous tree screen at interface with residential development or earth
mounding such that disturbance is minimised. Implementation of the wetland
shall be carried out as advance works. |
|
OM5 |
Use appropriate (visually unobtrusive and
non-reflective) building materials and colours in built structures. |
|
OM6 |
During detailed design, refine building
layout to create a min 10m wide gap between buildings north of Wo Shang Wai
pond and also two min 10m wide gaps in the row of buildings adjacent to Royal
Palms. |
|
OM7 |
Streetscape elements (e.g. paving,
signage, street furniture, lighting etc.) shall be sensitively designed in a
manner that responds to the local context, and minimises potential negative
landscape and visual impacts. Lighting
units should be directional and minimise unnecessary light spill. |
Impact monitoring for air quality (dust), noise and water quality
due to the construction work were undertaken during the reporting month in
compliance with the EM&A manual in the reporting period. Regular site
inspections were carried out on 3, 10, 17, 23 and 31 July 2012 in the reporting month to assess the compliance
with environmental requirements.
Results of 1-hour TSP at the four monitoring locations are summarised in Table 3.1. Graphical plots of the monitoring results are shown in Appendix F. The weather conditions in the reporting period are provided in Appendix G.
Table 3.1: Summary of 1-hour TSP Monitoring Results
|
Monitoring Date |
Start Time |
1-hr TSP (μg/m3) |
Range (μg/m3) |
Action Level
(μg/m3) |
Limit Level
(μg/m3) |
|||
|
1st
Result |
2nd
Result |
3rd Result |
||||||
|
ASR1 |
||||||||
|
06-Jul-12 |
13:43 |
68 |
69 |
70 |
66 - 74 |
378 |
500 |
|
|
12-Jul-12 |
12:58 |
68 |
70 |
66 |
||||
|
18-Jul-12 |
12:38 |
68 |
70 |
70 |
||||
|
24-Jul-12 |
11:15 |
70 |
70 |
74 |
||||
|
30-Jul-12 |
12:55 |
68 |
68 |
66 |
||||
|
ASR2A |
||||||||
|
06-Jul-12 |
08:40 |
70 |
72 |
70 |
65 - 72 |
357 |
500 |
|
|
12-Jul-12 |
08:30 |
66 |
68 |
68 |
||||
|
18-Jul-12 |
08:41 |
70 |
68 |
68 |
||||
|
24-Jul-12 |
13:59 |
66 |
65 |
68 |
||||
|
30-Jul-12 |
08:32 |
68 |
68 |
68 |
||||
|
ASR3 |
||||||||
|
06-Jul-12 |
08:05 |
69 |
72 |
70 |
66 - 72 |
358 |
500 |
|
|
12-Jul-12 |
08:46 |
70 |
68 |
70 |
||||
|
18-Jul-12 |
08:35 |
72 |
72 |
70 |
||||
|
24-Jul-12 |
13:45 |
66 |
66 |
68 |
||||
|
30-Jul-12 |
08:20 |
66 |
68 |
66 |
||||
|
ASR4 |
||||||||
|
06-Jul-12 |
12:42 |
73 |
77 |
72 |
66 - 77 |
372 |
500 |
|
|
12-Jul-12 |
12:33 |
73 |
74 |
74 |
||||
|
18-Jul-12 |
12:48 |
66 |
68 |
66 |
||||
|
24-Jul-12 |
11:05 |
68 |
72 |
74 |
||||
|
30-Jul-12 |
12:44 |
73 |
70 |
70 |
||||
Results of 24-hour TSP at the four monitoring locations are summarised in Table 3.2. Graphical plots of the monitoring results are shown in Appendix F. The weather conditions in the reporting period are provided in Appendix G.
Table 3.2: Summary of 24-hour TSP Monitoring Results
|
Monitoring Date |
Monitoring
Results (μg/m3) |
Range
(μg/m3) |
Action Level
(μg/m3) |
Limit Level
(μg/m3) |
|
ASR1 |
|
|
|
|
|
06-Jul-12 |
86 |
78 –
105 |
226 |
260 |
|
12-Jul-12 |
78 |
|||
|
18-Jul-12 |
84 |
|||
|
24-Jul-12 |
80 |
|||
|
30-Jul-12 |
105 |
|||
|
ASR2A |
|
|
|
|
|
06-Jul-12 |
93 |
83 –
93 |
213 |
260 |
|
12-Jul-12 |
89 |
|||
|
18-Jul-12 |
84 |
|||
|
24-Jul-12 |
83 |
|||
|
30-Jul-12 |
92 |
|||
|
ASR3 |
|
|
|
|
|
06-Jul-12 |
91 |
79 –
91 |
205 |
260 |
|
12-Jul-12 |
82 |
|||
|
18-Jul-12 |
79 |
|||
|
24-Jul-12 |
85 |
|||
|
30-Jul-12 |
91 |
|||
|
ASR4 |
|
|
|
|
|
06-Jul-12 |
79 |
73 –
97 |
237 |
260 |
|
12-Jul-12 |
83 |
|||
|
18-Jul-12 |
74 |
|||
|
24-Jul-12 |
73 |
|||
|
30-Jul-12 |
97 |
No exceedance of 1-hour and 24-hour TSP (Action or Limit Level) was recorded in the reporting period.
The construction noise monitoring results are summarized in Table 3.3. Graphical plots of the monitoring data are shown in Appendix F. The weather conditions in the reporting period are provided in Appendix G.
Table 3.3: Summary of Construction
Noise Monitoring Results
|
Monitoring Date |
Start Time |
Mean &
Range of Noise Levels, dB(A) |
Limit Level
for Leq (dB) |
||
|
Leq |
L10 |
L90 |
|||
|
NSR1 |
|
|
|
|
>
75 |
|
06-Jul-12 |
09:15 |
52 |
56 |
48 |
|
|
12-Jul-12 |
08:58 |
57 |
59 |
50 |
|
|
18-Jul-12 |
08:45 |
55 |
58 |
52 |
|
|
24-Jul-12 |
14:59 |
48 |
52 |
45 |
|
|
30-Jul-12 |
08:42 |
55 |
58 |
47 |
|
|
NSR3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-Jul-12 |
09:59 |
51 |
53 |
46 |
|
|
12-Jul-12 |
09:39 |
56 |
58 |
48 |
|
|
18-Jul-12 |
09:30 |
57 |
57 |
51 |
|
|
24-Jul-12 |
14:18 |
56 |
57 |
52 |
|
|
30-Jul-12 |
09:28 |
54 |
56 |
42 |
|
|
NSR5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-Jul-12 |
13:38 |
57 |
59 |
54 |
|
|
12-Jul-12 |
13:02 |
57 |
59 |
55 |
|
|
18-Jul-12 |
13:50 |
64 |
66 |
58 |
|
|
24-Jul-12 |
11:08 |
58 |
60 |
56 |
|
|
30-Jul-12 |
13:02 |
56 |
57 |
52 |
|
|
NSR7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-Jul-12 |
14:53 |
65 |
67 |
63 |
|
|
12-Jul-12 |
13:49 |
62 |
66 |
59 |
|
|
18-Jul-12 |
13:00 |
58 |
59 |
56 |
|
|
24-Jul-12 |
13:00 |
64 |
66 |
61 |
|
|
30-Jul-12 |
13:49 |
67 |
69 |
65 |
|
No exceedance (Action/Limit Level) of construction noise was recorded in the reporting period.
The water quality monitoring results are summarized in Table 3.4. Graphical plots of the monitoring data are shown in Appendix F. The weather conditions in the reporting period are provided in Appendix G.
Table 3.4: Summary of Water Quality Monitoring Results
|
Monitoring Date |
Temp (oC) |
pH |
Dissolved Oxygen (DO) (mg/L) |
DO (%) |
Turbidity
(NT) |
BOD (mg/L) (1) |
Suspended
Solids (mg/L) |
|
MP1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
03/07/2012 |
29.2 |
7.8 |
4.3 |
56.4 |
19.2 |
3 |
13.5 |
|
05/07/2012 |
28.9 |
7.5 |
4.4 |
57.4 |
25.4 |
3.5 |
23.5 |
|
07/07/2012 |
30.6 |
7.6 |
5.6 |
75.7 |
35.2 |
3 |
37 |
|
09/07/2012 |
31.0 |
7.7 |
4.4 |
59.9 |
26.6 |
3 |
21.5 |
|
Action Level |
- |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<1.23 |
- |
>173 |
- |
>231 |
|
Limit
Level |
- |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<1.17 |
- |
>177 |
- |
>299 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MP2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
03/07/2012 |
29.1 |
7.9 |
3.8 |
49.5 |
22.2 |
3 |
10.5 |
|
05/07/2012 |
29.1 |
7.6 |
2.9 |
37.6 |
27.6 |
4 |
29.5 |
|
07/07/2012 |
30.3 |
7.6 |
5.1 |
67.7 |
47.2 |
3 |
37.5 |
|
09/07/2012 |
30.8 |
7.6 |
4.7 |
62.8 |
33.0 |
4 |
27.5 |
|
Action Level |
- |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<1.04 |
- |
>132 |
- |
>170 |
|
Limit
Level |
- |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<0.89 |
- |
>163 |
- |
>209 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MP3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
03/07/2012 |
29.8 |
7.8 |
4.6 |
61.2 |
71.2 |
9 |
53.5 |
|
05/07/2012 |
29.8 |
7.5 |
2.1 |
28.2 |
74.7 |
9 |
60.5 |
|
07/07/2012 |
31.7 |
7.6 |
5.9 |
80.6 |
59.4 |
7 |
56 |
|
09/07/2012 |
31.8 |
7.6 |
3.8 |
52.3 |
72.2 |
7 |
53 |
|
11/07/2012 |
32.1 |
7.6 |
4.8 |
65.8 |
63.5 |
7 |
53.5 |
|
13/07/2012 |
33.4 |
7.7 |
6.2 |
84.0 |
73.4 |
7 |
66.5 |
|
16/07/2012 |
32.4 |
7.7 |
6.2 |
85.8 |
49.9 |
7.5 |
46 |
|
18/07/2012 |
31.9 |
7.2 |
3.7 |
49.9 |
33.7 |
7 |
22 |
|
20/07/2012 |
30.8 |
7.4 |
4.4 |
61.8 |
53.9 |
6.5 |
33 |
|
23/07/2012 |
25.7 |
7.7 |
6.2 |
75.8 |
64.8 |
4 |
48 |
|
25/07/2012 |
25.8 |
8.0 |
7.0 |
87.3 |
53.6 |
2 |
43.5 |
|
27/07/2012 |
26.0 |
7.5 |
3.0 |
36.4 |
42.3 |
3.5 |
38.5 |
|
30/07/2012 |
31.2 |
7.7 |
6.9 |
92.7 |
33.4 |
5.5 |
26 |
|
Action Level |
- |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<6.85 |
- |
>64 |
- |
>65 |
|
Limit
Level |
- |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<6.65 |
- |
>67 |
- |
>66 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MP4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
03/07/2012 |
29.5 |
7.8 |
1.4 |
18.3 |
24.6 |
3 |
16.5 |
|
05/07/2012 |
28.2 |
7.2 |
1.6 |
20.4 |
44.0 |
3 |
25 |
|
07/07/2012 |
32.4 |
7.2 |
3.2 |
44.8 |
47.1 |
3 |
44.5 |
|
09/07/2012 |
30.7 |
7.7 |
3.0 |
39.7 |
41.1 |
4.5 |
37 |
|
11/07/2012 |
30.3 |
7.7 |
3.4 |
45.6 |
34.2 |
4 |
35.5 |
|
13/07/2012 |
33.8 |
7.6 |
3.9 |
53.7 |
15.6 |
4 |
19.5 |
|
16/07/2012 |
31.4 |
7.5 |
5.3 |
72.0 |
29.4 |
6 |
39 |
|
18/07/2012 |
29.9 |
7.4 |
1.8 |
24.2 |
17.3 |
4 |
23.5 |
|
20/07/2012 |
32.4 |
7.7 |
1.9 |
25.6 |
43.3 |
8 |
34.5 |
|
23/07/2012 |
25.6 |
7.5 |
4.8 |
59.3 |
68.1 |
4 |
46.5 |
|
25/07/2012 |
26.1 |
8.1 |
6.3 |
77.3 |
76.6 |
- |
46.5 |
|
27/07/2012 |
26.2 |
7.3 |
3.3 |
40.9 |
60.0 |
3 |
44.5 |
|
30/07/2012 |
33.4 |
7.4 |
1.9 |
26.2 |
143.5 |
2.5 |
103.5 |
|
Action Level |
- |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<3.91 |
- |
>60 |
- |
>50 |
|
Limit
Level |
- |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<3.82 |
- |
>64 |
- |
>53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MP5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
03/07/2012 |
29.7 |
7.8 |
4.0 |
52.8 |
54.7 |
- |
51 |
|
05/07/2012 |
28.1 |
7.3 |
3.9 |
50.2 |
43.3 |
- |
30 |
|
07/07/2012 |
31.7 |
7.4 |
5.1 |
71.0 |
32.6 |
- |
32 |
|
09/07/2012 |
31.8 |
7.6 |
5.5 |
75.2 |
52.3 |
3 |
55 |
|
11/07/2012 |
32.5 |
7.5 |
6.4 |
88.5 |
30.6 |
4 |
30 |
|
13/07/2012 |
33.2 |
7.6 |
4.9 |
67.1 |
15.9 |
2 |
13.5 |
|
16/07/2012 |
31.5 |
7.4 |
3.4 |
46.9 |
20.3 |
2.5 |
19 |
|
18/07/2012 |
30.3 |
7.4 |
3.1 |
40.3 |
43.3 |
3 |
31 |
|
20/07/2012 |
32.0 |
7.3 |
4.2 |
57.7 |
52.0 |
3 |
43.5 |
|
23/07/2012 |
25.8 |
7.3 |
5.5 |
67.7 |
68.3 |
4 |
48 |
|
25/07/2012 |
26.0 |
8.2 |
6.6 |
81.3 |
56.5 |
- |
32 |
|
27/07/2012 |
26.0 |
7.4 |
4.8 |
59.5 |
81.1 |
3.5 |
68 |
|
30/07/2012 |
32.6 |
7.7 |
5.4 |
74.8 |
66.2 |
3 |
57 |
|
Action Level |
- |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<4.13 |
- |
>81 |
- |
>66 |
|
Limit
Level |
- |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<3.87 |
- |
>84 |
- |
>69 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MP6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
03/07/2012 |
29.3 |
7.7 |
3.6 |
47.4 |
58.4 |
2 |
47 |
|
05/07/2012 |
28.5 |
7.3 |
3.6 |
46.1 |
36.5 |
- |
33 |
|
07/07/2012 |
31.9 |
7.4 |
4.5 |
62.4 |
32.7 |
- |
28.5 |
|
09/07/2012 |
31.7 |
7.6 |
5.0 |
68.4 |
49.7 |
2.5 |
53 |
|
11/07/2012 |
32.8 |
7.5 |
6.0 |
80.9 |
31.6 |
4 |
32 |
|
13/07/2012 |
32.9 |
7.6 |
5.2 |
71.0 |
14.7 |
2 |
13.5 |
|
16/07/2012 |
31.8 |
7.5 |
3.2 |
43.7 |
34.5 |
2.5 |
22 |
|
18/07/2012 |
30.0 |
7.4 |
2.8 |
36.6 |
41.5 |
3 |
30 |
|
20/07/2012 |
32.3 |
7.4 |
4.5 |
62.9 |
45.8 |
3 |
37 |
|
23/07/2012 |
26.3 |
7.4 |
6.1 |
75.8 |
59.3 |
4 |
47 |
|
25/07/2012 |
26.2 |
8.2 |
6.9 |
85.4 |
36.1 |
- |
17.5 |
|
27/07/2012 |
25.8 |
7.6 |
5.1 |
64.7 |
66.4 |
3 |
60.5 |
|
30/07/2012 |
33.0 |
7.7 |
5.2 |
71.9 |
72.7 |
3 |
50.5 |
|
Action Level |
- |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<4.61 |
- |
>94 |
- |
>75 |
|
Limit
Level |
- |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<4.52 |
- |
>96 |
- |
>75 |
Notes:
(1)
“-“ : BOD value is too low to indicate (<2mg/L).
(2)
Values Bold indicate Action
Level exceedance.
(3)
Values Underlined and Bold
indicate Limit Level exceedance.
Exceedance Investigation and Findings
Exceedances of pH, DO, turbidity
and SS were observed at MP1 to MP6 in July 2012. Action Level exceedances of pH
were observed at MP1 to MP6, with some Limit Level exceedances at MP4 and MP5.
DO exceedance was observed four times at MP5, six times at MP6, ten times at
MP4 and eleven times at MP3. Turbidity and/or SS exceedances were recorded on
five monitoring dates at MP3, three monitoring dates at MP4 and one monitoring
date at MP5.
The Event and Action
Plan in Appendix D was followed under these cases of exceedances.
From investigation, construction activities
during the period of exceedance included mainly site formation. It was observed
that the Contractor has implemented water quality mitigation measures as
recommended in the EIA report, including the provision of temporary drainage
facility and associated treatment facility. Sand bags are in place in the
temporary drainage channel to enhance the desilting efficiency. The Contractor
further enhanced the water quality mitigation measures by erecting several
segments of rock bunds at the discharge outlet to avoid site runoff draining
directly to the northern ditches.
Exceedance of pH at MP1 and MP2
Exceedances
of action and/or limit level of pH were observed at MP1 and MP2 frequently
within the monitoring days and pH ranged from 7.5 to 7.9. From investigation,
there was no direct discharge from the site to the ditch where MP1 and MP2
located, so the exceedances were not considered to be related to the
construction activities of this project. The exceedances of pH could be due to
natural variations.
Exceedances of pH, DO and turbidity and SS at MP3
Exceedances of the
action and/or limit level of pH were often observed and action/limit level
exceedances of DO were recorded on eleven monitoring dates at MP3. Also, limit
level exceedance of turbidity and/or SS was observed at MP3 on 3, 5, 9, 13 and
23 July 2012. As understood, the fish pond near the site (represented by MP3)
was being separated from the construction site by the WRA since November 2010,
so the exceedances were not considered to be related to the construction
activities. The exceedances of pH, DO, turbidity and SS may be due to external
factors such as pond fish culture activities which were out of the control of
the project.
Exceedances of pH, DO, turbidity and SS at MP4 to MP6
Exceedances of action or limit level of pH were observed at
MP4, MP5 and MP6 on several monitoring days. Action and/or limit levels of DO
were exceeded on four monitoring dates at MP5, six monitoring dates at MP6, and
ten monitoring dates at MP4. Action level exceedance of turbidity was observed
at MP5 on 27 July 2012, while Limit level exceedance was observed at MP4 on 23,
25 and 30 July 2012. Limit level exceedance of SS was observed on one
monitoring date each at MP4 and MP5.
Most of the exceedances of pH during the period could be
due to natural variation as the values were in similar range compared to other
stations where exceedances were also observed. The higher values of pH recorded
on 25 July 2012 may be due to the heavy rainfall associated with Tropical
Cyclone Vicente.
From Hong Kong Observatory (HKO) records, rain was recorded
at HKO every day during the reporting month except for 3, 4, 29 and 30 July
2012. The days of heaviest rain were 18, 23, 24 and 25 July 2012 when 34.3, 112.0,
99.5 and 82.3 mm of rain were recorded respectively at the HKO. Also, Amber
Rainstorm Warning signal was issued on 5, 18, 21, 24, 25, 27 and 31 July 2012,
while Special Announcement on Flooding in the northern
On the days of heavy rainfall, the rain could have caused
large amounts of surface runoff from all sources in the vicinity of the ditch.
Since turbidity and SS was only exceeded at MP4 on 23, 25 and 30 July 2012, and
at MP5 on 27 July 2012, it is believed that the runoff significantly increased
the turbulence and thus resulted in higher turbidity and SS inside the ditch
water on the day of turbidity/SS exceedance. The higher SS induced by the heavy
rain may have resulted in a subsequent decrease in DO.
Conclusion
Since the site
discharge was controlled and treated by the AquaSed system during the period,
the exceedance was not considered to be related to the project.
This report documents surveys conducted in the
Survey Area between 1 July and 31 July 2012. The Wetland Restoration Area (WRA)
is also surveyed as the area is accessible and site formation works for WRA has
been completed. The updated survey
transect is provided in Figure 4.1.
Dates and ecological surveys conducted during this period are summarised in Appendix H.
Monitoring was undertaken following the survey
methodology in the EM&A Manual. A transect was followed in the bird surveys
(see Figure 4.1). All
birds were identified to species and all bird species of conservation
importance and/or wetland dependent were enumerated and recorded to the habitats
in which they are observed. Flying birds were not recorded unless they were
foraging and/or
associated with the habitat (such as swifts). Further, notable bird
observations during other surveys were also recorded.
Bird surveys were conducted on a weekly basis. In the Survey Area (excluding WRA), 14 bird
species of
conservation importance and/or wetland-dependence were recorded. Within the
WRA, 6 bird species of conservation importance and/or wetland-dependent species
were recorded, including one of the target species (i.e. Chinese Pond Heron). A summary
of survey data is provided in Appendix I.
Two night time herpetofauna surveys were conducted in the
period. Five amphibian and one reptile
species were recorded in the Survey Area (excluding the WRA) while one
amphibian and no reptile species were recorded within the WRA. All of these
species are very common and widespread in northwest
Monitoring of dragonflies and butterflies continued in July 2012,
and two surveys were undertaken in accordance with the EM&A Manual. A total
of eight odonate species and two butterfly species were recorded in the Survey
Area (excluding the WRA). One of the dragonfly species recorded, Coastal Glider
Microdiplax cora, is of “Local Concern” according to Fellows et al. (2002).
Within the WRA, a slightly higher diversity of odonate species (10 species,
including the Coastal Glider M. cora) and two butterfly species were recorded. A
summary of the survey findings is provided in Appendix J.
Monitoring of mammals was conducted concurrently with other surveys. Two mammals were recorded in the Survey Area (excluding the WRA)
including Musk Shrew Suncus murinus and Asiatic House Rat Rattus tanezumi, while no mammals were
found in the WRA. A
summary of the survey findings is provided in Appendix J.
During the reporting period, pH of all cells reached the Action Level. Monitoring data are presented in Appendix K.
On top of the routine vegetation management
activities which included watering of plants, weeding and grass cutting, an
instruction to provide tree support (ties and stakes) for some of the impacted
planted whips and shrubs was issued after Typhoon Vicente.
Removal of Golden
Apple Snail was undertaken on an “as-seen” basis.
Ecological monitoring during July 2012 was carried out according to the
survey methodology and frequency outlined in the EM&A Manual.
Summary of survey finding listed as follows:
Table 4.1: Summary of Ecological Monitoring in WRA and Survey Area
|
Species |
Survey Area (excluding WRA) |
WRA |
|
Birds
of conservation importance and/or wetland-dependence |
14 |
6 |
|
Amphibians |
5 |
1 |
|
Reptiles |
1 |
0 |
|
Mammals |
2 |
0 |
|
Odonates |
8 |
10 |
|
Butterflies |
2 |
2 |
Survey findings indicate that the ponds within the Survey Area
supported numbers and diversity of wetland-dependent birds typical of fish pond
areas and a slightly higher dragonfly diversity than the Survey Area during the
wet season. The WRA continues to attract
wetland dependent fauna and serves as a buffer between the residential portion
and the fishponds in the north.
The EM&A programme for
Landscape and Visual impact due to the construction commenced in May 2010 and
continued during the reporting period. Site inspections on Landscape and Visual
impact were carried out on 13 and 27 July 2012 to confirm the implementation of
mitigation measures at construction stage.
The audit was
undertaken with references to the specific checklists provided in Tables 2.13 – 2.15 and audit results
are summarized as below:
Table 5.1: Construction and Operation Phase Audit Summary
|
Area of Works |
Items to be Monitored |
|
Works Area |
The
boundaries of the works area have been established on site in accordance
with the contract documents and approved plans (EP), and the limit of
current heavy construction activity is now confined to within the site
hoardings (North side of the site / access road) and the noise barriers
(other sides of the site). Minor works such as horticultural maintenance of
the planting and transplanted trees, and boundary fence repair was
proceeding along the Royal Palms - No
construction works were observed to have exceeded the site boundaries. No construction was carried out at the wetland restoration area after 15 November 2010. |
|
Protection
of all trees and woodland blocks to be retained |
Trees
retained within the site along the northeast boundary, beside wetland
restoration area, have been identified and protected by temporary protective
fencing. |
|
Streams |
The works
site is encircled by a berm / perimeter channel to intercept surface water
and prevent it from washing off into any of the neighboring sites. Surface water is collected within the site
in a temporary drainage channel.
Gravels beds and barriers have been installed to filter site runoff,
sedimentation ponds have been provided to enable primary treatment before
discharge to mains drains. |
|
Clearance
of existing vegetation |
Site
clearance was completed prior to the commencement of construction. |
|
Transplanting
of trees |
Tree
transplanting has been completed, with the trees relocated to various points
within the planting strip along the southern boundary of the site, outside
the noise barrier. The trees continue
to re-establish well. |
|
Topsoil
stripping |
Suitable
pond bund and soil material which had been excavated and stockpiled from the
original site, has now been re-used within the landscape works Dust
suppression measures are active along all internal site access tracks. |
|
New
buildings |
No new
permanent buildings have yet been constructed on site |
|
Boundaries |
Hoardings
have been erected along most of the boundaries of the site. Installation of new screen fence between
the future residential sites and the constructed wetland restoration areas
is complete. Fence has been painted green to match with the surrounding
vegetated environment. |
|
Noise
Barrier |
Noise
barriers have been installed along the southern and western boundaries of
the site in accordance with the contract requirements. Their design complies with the mitigation
requirements, with upper 6 to 7m portion of the barrier being made from a
translucent material with green tinted (to match with the environment).
Supporting GMS structure, likewise, has been painted green. |
|
Night-time
lighting |
No
night-time works were reported to have been carried out during the
monitoring period |
|
Landscape
and wetland treatments generally |
Continuous
belt of screen planting along the southern and western boundaries of the
site has been completed. The
formation, soiling and water control structures of the wetland restoration
area have been completed. The
wetland areas are being established, with the ponds are being seasonally
filled with rain water. Planting of
areas around the WRA cells is complete.
No construction was carried out at the wetland restoration area after
15 November 2010. |
|
Soiling |
The
soiling for the advance planting strip has been completed. The soil placement and grading for each of
the wetland restoration areas has been completed. |
|
Plant
supply |
The plant
material used in the Advance Planting Strip and in the WRA are all commonly
available species and came from commercial sources. Transplanted
reeds (Phragmites australis) at the wetland habitat came from the
temporary holding nursery onsite. |
|
Planting |
The total
number of trees that will reach a minimum of 10m in the advance planting
strip meets the contract requirements.
The tree species are all from the approved list. This planting should achieve the required
screening effect within the required time period. Some of
the trees that were identified as dead in previous month or having defects
(i.e. extensive bark damage, cavities, fungal growths etc) still need to be
replaced with new specimens. Some of the recently planted trees are still in
poor condition, but are showing small signs of graduate improvement Seedling
trees and shrubs, have been established at the margins of the wetland cells.
Some additional fill-in planting has been undertaken. |
|
Establishment
Works |
The
advance planting, the compensatory planting and the transplanted trees are
generally being maintained by the landscape sub-contractor in accordance
with the specification to ensure that the contract requirements are met. Some of
the taller trees (Eucalyptus sp.) that
had been partially blown over, or are growing into the noise barrier
structure, have been set upright and supported with rope cables and bamboo
stalks. Some trees still need to be rectified before the typhoon
season. Precautions should be taken
to prevent damage to the trees by the structure. Pruning of some large trees
has been undertaken. Low
coverage of some areas of shrubs need to be rectified with further infill
shrubs planting. Minor areas of
shrubs have been cleared and these need to be replaced. Pruning of
tall shrubs (i.e. Ligustrum sinensis)
needs to be undertaken There is
still extensive growth of weeds and invasive climbers in the space behind
screen noise barrier which are inhibiting the advance planting, and needs to
be cleared. Weeding and removal of invasive climbers is on going but these
should be carried out on a monthly basis. Condition
of the Phragmites australis reeds
(translocated from the original site) is good Hydroseeded
grass has been established along the access path around the WRA cells. Regular
horticultural maintenance (grass cutting, weeding, watering etc.) of the
shrubs and tree seedlings planted around the WRA cells is being undertaken,
but needs to continue on a regular basis. The condition of
seedling trees / shrubs planted around the WRA cells, along the northern
site boundary is affected by insects. A general pesticide should be sprayed
to eradicate / control these insects. Fifty nine (59) trees have been substantially blown over
and need to be set up-right and supported by cabling.
(T11,T18,T19,T25,T26,T28,T29,T32,T35,T562,T39,T45,T47,T49, T50,
T59,T67,T69,T88,T120,T127,T143,T180,T191,T241,T248,T251,T265,T271, T279,
T294,T309,T327,T336,T343,T348,T350,T365,T367,T377,T380,T385,T390,
T391,T393,T397,T404,T407-413,T425,T432,T456,T459,T467) Trees from outside the site which have fallen or leaning
on top of trees in the advance planting strip, and now very adversely
affecting their growth, should be removed. 48 trees affected (T562, T115, T116,
T117, T118, T137, T138, T156, T184, T401, T343-353, T374-378, T414-T428, and
T451-457). Trees (T21 and T364) that have lost their leader and are
no longer viable, so should be removed and replaced. Branches broken during
the typhoon on trees T96, T383, T391 and T419, should be pruned away
cleanly. |
The ET had carried out construction
phase weekly site inspections on 3, 10, 17, 23 and 31 July 2012. All
observations have been recorded in the site inspection checklist and passed to
the Contractor together with the appropriate recommended mitigation measures
where necessary. The key observations from site inspections and associated
recommendations are summarized in Table 6.1.
Table 6.1: Summary of Site Inspections and Recommendations
|
Key Observations |
ET Recommendation |
Contractor’s Responses / Action(s) Undertaken |
Close-out (Date) |
|
Mud settled in the drainage
channel |
To clear accumulated mud at
regular intervals |
Agreed and followed up |
31Jul 2012 |
|
Large stagnant water ponds after heavy
rain |
To minimise water ponds to prevent
mosquito breeding |
Agreed and followed up |
3 Jul 2012 |
|
Some water barriers, used
air-conditioner units and a used table were located next to a drainage
channel |
To move away from drainage channel
and properly sotre or dispose of |
Agreed and followed up |
17 Jul 2012 |
|
Haul roads frequented by dump
trucks were at risk of creating dust impact |
Reminder: To provide water spray
more frequently |
- |
- |
|
Wooden board in drainage channel
near discharge point had been removed |
To reinstate the wooden board to
prevent direct discharge of site runoff to the outside water ditch |
Agreed and action to be taken |
On-going |
|
Stagnant water ponds observed
following recent heavy rain |
To monitor and minimise where
possible |
Agreed and action to be taken |
On-going |
The Contractor has been registered as a
chemical waste producer for the Project. Construction and demolition (C&D)
material sorting was carried out on site. A sufficient number of receptacles were
available for general refuse collection.
As advised by the Contractor, 8765.6 tonnes of C&D material were generated
on site during the period. No metals was generated and collected by registered
recycling collector. No paper cardboard packing and plastic were generated on
site and collected by registered recycling collector. No chemical waste was
generated and collected by licensed chemical waste collector. 7.1 tonnes of other types of wastes
(e.g. general refuse) was generated on site and disposed of at public landfill
facility.
The Contractor is advised to maintain on
site waste sorting and recording system and maximize reuse/recycling of C&D
wastes.
The environmental permits, licenses, and/or
notifications on environmental protection for this Project which were valid during
the period is summarised in Table 6.2.
Table 6.2: Status of Environmental Submissions, Licenses and Permits
|
Statutory Reference |
Description |
Permit /Reference
No. |
Status |
|
EIAO |
Environmental Permit |
EP-311/2008B |
Valid |
|
APCO |
Notification of
Construction Work under APCO |
316688
(27 Apr 2010) |
Valid |
|
WPCO |
Discharge
License |
WT00007442-2010 (2
Nov 2010) |
Valid |
|
WDO |
Registration as Chemical
Waste Producer |
WPN0000-542-H3083-04 |
Valid |
|
WDO |
Bill Account for
disposal |
700945423 |
Valid |
Legend: EIAO – Environmental Impact Assessment
Ordinance
APCO – Air Pollution
Control Ordinance
WPCO – Water Pollution
Control Ordinance
WDO – Waste Disposal
Ordinance
The EM&A programme followed the
recommended mitigation measures in the EM&A manual. The EM&A
requirements as well as the summary of implementation status of the
environmental mitigation measures are provided in Appendix L. In particular, the following
mitigation measures were brought to attention during the site audits:
Air Quality
·
All stockpiles should be covered by tarpaulin or kept wet
by water spraying;
·
All
vehicles should be washed to remove any dusty materials before leaving the
construction sites;
·
The
portion of road leading the construction site that is within
·
During the dry season, sufficient water spraying should
be provided at haul road to reduce dust emission; and
·
Ensure proper functioning of the wheel wash facility.
Noise
·
Mobile plant should be sited as far away from NSRs as
possible;
·
Plant
known to emit noise strongly in one direction should be orientated to direct
noise away from the NSRs; and
·
The construction activities should be
better scheduled to reduce noise nuisance.
Water Quality
·
Water accumulated in the site (including water inside
drip trays) should be cleared frequently;
·
Ensure
proper functioning of the wastewater treatment
facility; and
·
Silt and debris should be removed from the temporary
drainage channel regularly.
Waste management
·
Reuse the excavated materials as far as practical to
reduce the amount of waste disposal;
·
Ensure drip trays are provided for chemical containers
to prevent leakage or soil contamination;
·
All
plants and vehicles should be properly maintained to prevent oil leakage; and
·
Oil
stains on soil should be cleared by disposal of contaminated soil.
There is no breach of Action or Limit Levels for Air Quality and Noise monitoring in the reporting month.
Exceedances of pH, DO, turbidity and SS were
observed at MP1 to MP6 in July 2012. Action Level exceedances of pH were
observed at MP1 to MP6, with some Limit Level exceedances at MP4 and MP5. DO
exceedance was observed four times at MP5, six times at MP6, ten times at MP4
and eleven times at MP3. Turbidity and/or SS exceedances were recorded on five
monitoring dates at MP3, three monitoring dates at MP4 and one monitoring date
at MP5.
Table 7.1: Summary of Exceedances in Water Quality
|
Monitoring
Date |
pH |
Dissolved
Oxygen (mg/L) |
Turbidity
(NT) |
Suspended
Solids (mg/L) |
|
MP1 |
|
|
|
|
|
03/07/2012 |
7.8 |
4.3 |
19.2 |
13.5 |
|
05/07/2012 |
7.5 |
4.4 |
25.4 |
23.5 |
|
07/07/2012 |
7.6 |
5.6 |
35.2 |
37 |
|
09/07/2012 |
7.7 |
4.4 |
26.6 |
21.5 |
|
Action Level |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<1.23 |
>173 |
>231 |
|
Limit
Level |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<1.17 |
>177 |
>299 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MP2 |
|
|
|
|
|
03/07/2012 |
7.9 |
3.8 |
22.2 |
10.5 |
|
05/07/2012 |
7.6 |
2.9 |
27.6 |
29.5 |
|
07/07/2012 |
7.6 |
5.1 |
47.2 |
37.5 |
|
09/07/2012 |
7.6 |
4.7 |
33.0 |
27.5 |
|
Action Level |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<1.04 |
>132 |
>170 |
|
Limit
Level |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<0.89 |
>163 |
>209 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MP3 |
|
|
|
|
|
03/07/2012 |
7.8 |
4.6 |
71.2 |
53.5 |
|
05/07/2012 |
7.5 |
2.1 |
74.7 |
60.5 |
|
07/07/2012 |
7.6 |
5.9 |
59.4 |
56 |
|
09/07/2012 |
7.6 |
3.8 |
72.2 |
53 |
|
11/07/2012 |
7.6 |
4.8 |
63.5 |
53.5 |
|
13/07/2012 |
7.7 |
6.2 |
73.4 |
66.5 |
|
16/07/2012 |
7.7 |
6.2 |
49.9 |
46 |
|
18/07/2012 |
7.2 |
3.7 |
33.7 |
22 |
|
20/07/2012 |
7.4 |
4.4 |
53.9 |
33 |
|
23/07/2012 |
7.7 |
6.2 |
64.8 |
48 |
|
25/07/2012 |
8.0 |
7.0 |
53.6 |
43.5 |
|
27/07/2012 |
7.5 |
3.0 |
42.3 |
38.5 |
|
30/07/2012 |
7.7 |
6.9 |
33.4 |
26 |
|
Action Level |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<6.85 |
>64 |
>65 |
|
Limit
Level |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<6.65 |
>67 |
>66 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MP4 |
|
|
|
|
|
03/07/2012 |
7.8 |
1.4 |
24.6 |
16.5 |
|
05/07/2012 |
7.2 |
1.6 |
44.0 |
25 |
|
07/07/2012 |
7.2 |
3.2 |
47.1 |
44.5 |
|
09/07/2012 |
7.7 |
3.0 |
41.1 |
37 |
|
11/07/2012 |
7.7 |
3.4 |
34.2 |
35.5 |
|
13/07/2012 |
7.6 |
3.9 |
15.6 |
19.5 |
|
16/07/2012 |
7.5 |
5.3 |
29.4 |
39 |
|
18/07/2012 |
7.4 |
1.8 |
17.3 |
23.5 |
|
20/07/2012 |
7.7 |
1.9 |
43.3 |
34.5 |
|
23/07/2012 |
7.5 |
4.8 |
68.1 |
46.5 |
|
25/07/2012 |
8.1 |
6.3 |
76.6 |
46.5 |
|
27/07/2012 |
7.3 |
3.3 |
60.0 |
44.5 |
|
30/07/2012 |
7.4 |
1.9 |
143.5 |
103.5 |
|
Action
Level |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<3.91 |
>60 |
>50 |
|
Limit
Level |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<3.82 |
>64 |
>53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MP5 |
|
|
|
|
|
03/07/2012 |
7.8 |
4.0 |
54.7 |
51 |
|
05/07/2012 |
7.3 |
3.9 |
43.3 |
30 |
|
07/07/2012 |
7.4 |
5.1 |
32.6 |
32 |
|
09/07/2012 |
7.6 |
5.5 |
52.3 |
55 |
|
11/07/2012 |
7.5 |
6.4 |
30.6 |
30 |
|
13/07/2012 |
7.6 |
4.9 |
15.9 |
13.5 |
|
16/07/2012 |
7.4 |
3.4 |
20.3 |
19 |
|
18/07/2012 |
7.4 |
3.1 |
43.3 |
31 |
|
20/07/2012 |
7.3 |
4.2 |
52.0 |
43.5 |
|
23/07/2012 |
7.3 |
5.5 |
68.3 |
48 |
|
25/07/2012 |
8.2 |
6.6 |
56.5 |
32 |
|
27/07/2012 |
7.4 |
4.8 |
81.1 |
68 |
|
30/07/2012 |
7.7 |
5.4 |
66.2 |
57 |
|
Action Level |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<4.13 |
>81 |
>66 |
|
Limit
Level |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<3.87 |
>84 |
>69 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MP6 |
|
|
|
|
|
03/07/2012 |
7.7 |
3.6 |
58.4 |
47 |
|
05/07/2012 |
7.3 |
3.6 |
36.5 |
33 |
|
07/07/2012 |
7.4 |
4.5 |
32.7 |
28.5 |
|
09/07/2012 |
7.6 |
5.0 |
49.7 |
53 |
|
11/07/2012 |
7.5 |
6.0 |
31.6 |
32 |
|
13/07/2012 |
7.6 |
5.2 |
14.7 |
13.5 |
|
16/07/2012 |
7.5 |
3.2 |
34.5 |
22 |
|
18/07/2012 |
7.4 |
2.8 |
41.5 |
30 |
|
20/07/2012 |
7.4 |
4.5 |
45.8 |
37 |
|
23/07/2012 |
7.4 |
6.1 |
59.3 |
47 |
|
25/07/2012 |
8.2 |
6.9 |
36.1 |
17.5 |
|
27/07/2012 |
7.6 |
5.1 |
66.4 |
60.5 |
|
30/07/2012 |
7.7 |
5.2 |
72.7 |
50.5 |
|
Action Level |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<4.61 |
>94 |
>75 |
|
Limit
Level |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<4.52 |
>96 |
>75 |
Notes:
(1) Values Bold indicate Action Level exceedance.
(2) Values Underlined and Bold indicate Limit Level exceedance.
No environmental complaint was received the reporting month.
No notifications of summons or successful prosecution were received the reporting month.
Investigations have been carried out to identify
the causes of exceedance.
From investigation, construction activities
during the period of exceedance included mainly site formation. It was observed
that the Contractor has implemented water quality mitigation measures as
recommended in the EIA report, including the provision of temporary drainage
facility and associated treatment facility. Sand bags are in place in the
temporary drainage channel to enhance the desilting efficiency. The Contractor
further enhanced the water quality mitigation measures by erecting several
segments of rock bunds at the discharge outlet to avoid site runoff draining
directly to the northern ditches.
With external factors
affect the adjacent environments, such as natural variations, pond fish culture
activities and rainfall, the exceedances were considered not due to
construction works.
As non-compliances have been recorded, the
Event and Action Plan has been followed. Although it is considered that the
exceedances were not related to the Project, the Contractor was reminded to
implement the water quality mitigation measures in accordance with the
recommendation stated in Section 5.6.1 – 5.6.4 of the EIA Report as far as
practicable and regular spot check would be conducted on the nearby discharge
by Contractor and inform ET for investigation.
To cater for the site runoff in wet season, the
Contractor has further enhanced the water quality mitigation measures by
erecting several segments of rock bunds at the discharge outlet to avoid site
runoff draining directly to the northern ditches.
Cumulative statistics for complaints, notifications of summons and
successful prosecutions for the Project account for period starting from the
date of commencement of construction (i.e. 12 May 2010) to the end of the
reporting month and are summarized in the Table
7.2 below.
Table 7.2: Statistics for Complaints, Notifications of Summons and Successful Prosecutions
|
Reporting Period |
Cumulative Statistics |
||
|
|
Complaints |
Notifications of summons |
Successful prosecutions |
|
This reporting month (Jul
2012) |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
From 12 May 2010 to end of the reporting
month (Jul 2012) |
3 |
0 |
0 |
The major site works to be commissioned in the coming month include:
¡
Site Formation
Key issues to be considered in the coming month include:
¡
Generation of dust from activities on-site during dry weather
condition;
¡
Noise impact from operating equipment and machinery on-site;
¡
Generation of site surface runoffs and wastewater from activities
on-site;
¡
Sorting, recycling, storage and disposal of general refuse and
construction waste from activities on-site; and
¡
Management of chemicals and avoidance of oil spillage on-site and to the
drainage.
The environmental site inspection and environmental monitoring will be continued in the coming month. Impact monitoring for air, noise, water quality, ecology and landscape and visual in accordance with the approved EM&A Manual has commenced since 12 May 2010. The tentative monitoring schedule for August 2012 is shown in the Table 8.1.
Table 8.1: Tentative
Environmental Monitoring and Audit Schedule for August 2012

The EM&A programme as recommended in the EM&A manual has been undertaken in the reporting month since 12 May 2010.
Monitoring of Air Quality, Noise, Water Quality, Ecology and Landscape and Visual impacts due to the Project was under way. In particular, the 1-hr TSP, 24-hr TSP, noise level (as Leq) and water quality parameters (such as pH, DO and SS) under monitoring have been checked against established Action and Limit levels.
There was no breach of Action and Limit
Levels for 1-hr TSP, 24-hr TSP and
noise in the reporting month.
Exceedances
of pH, DO, turbidity and SS were observed at MP1 to MP6 in July 2012. Action
Level exceedances of pH were observed at MP1 to MP6, with some Limit Level
exceedances at MP4 and MP5. DO exceedance was observed four times at MP5, six
times at MP6, ten times at MP4 and eleven times at MP3. Turbidity and/or SS
exceedances were recorded on five monitoring dates at MP3, three monitoring
dates at MP4 and one monitoring date at MP5.
From investigation, the
Contractor has implemented water quality mitigation measures as recommended in
the EIA report. With external factors affect the adjacent environments, such as
natural variations, pond fish culture activities and rainfall, the exceedances
were considered not due to construction works.
With
considerations on the construction activities and environment, the following
recommendations were provided:
Air Quality
·
All stockpiles should be covered by tarpaulin or kept
wet by water spraying;
·
All
vehicles should be washed to remove any dusty materials before leaving the
construction sites;
·
The
portion of road leading the construction site that is within
·
Sufficient water spraying should be provided at haul
road to reduce dust emission, especially during dry weather conditions; and
·
Ensure proper functioning of the wheel wash facility.
Noise
·
Mobile plant should be sited as far away from NSRs as
possible;
·
Plant
known to emit noise strongly in one direction should be orientated to direct
noise away from the NSRs; and
·
The
construction activities should be better scheduled to reduce noise nuisance.
Water Quality
·
Water accumulated in the site (including water inside
drip trays) should be cleared frequently;
·
Ensure
proper functioning of the wastewater treatment facility; and
·
Silt and debris should be removed from the temporary
drainage channel regularly.
Waste Management
·
Reuse the excavated materials as far as practical to
reduce the amount of waste disposal;
·
Ensure drip trays are provided for chemical containers
to prevent leakage or soil contamination;
·
All
plants and vehicles should be properly maintained to prevent oil leakage; and
·
Oil
stains on soil should be cleared by disposal of contaminated soil.


Contact
information:
|
Company |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
|
Heng Shung Construction Co. Ltd. (The
Contractor) |
Assistant
Construction Manager |
Ms. Lynne HUNG |
2908 2391 |
|
Heng Shung Construction Co. Ltd. (The
Contractor) |
Site Agent |
Mr. POON Man Ho |
9426 3533 |
|
Heng Shung Construction Co. Ltd. (The
Contractor) |
Environmental
Officer |
Mr. Ricky WONG |
9866 7625 |
|
ENVIRON Hong
Kong Ltd. (Independent
Environmental Checker (IEC)) |
Independent
Environmental Checker |
Mr. David YEUNG |
3743 0788 |
|
Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Ltd. (Environmental Team
(ET)) |
Environmental
Team Leader |
Ms. Florence YUEN |
2828 5768 |
Appendix C.
Action and Limit Levels for
Construction Phase
|
Action and Limit Levels for 24-hour TSP
|
Monitoring Station |
Action Level (mg/m3) |
Limit Level (mg/m3) |
|
ASR1 |
226 |
260 |
|
ASR2A |
213 |
260 |
|
ASR3 |
205 |
260 |
|
ASR4 |
237 |
260 |
Action and Limit Levels for 1-hour TSP
|
Monitoring Station |
Action Level (mg/m3) |
Limit Level (mg/m3) |
|
ASR1 |
378 |
500 |
|
ASR2A |
357 |
500 |
|
ASR3 |
358 |
500 |
|
ASR4 |
372 |
500 |
Noise
Action and Limit Levels for
Construction Noise
|
Time Period |
Action Level |
Limit Level |
|
NSR1, NSR3, NSR5, NSR7 |
||
|
0700 – 1900 hours
on normal weekdays |
When one
documented complaint is received from any one of the sensitive receivers |
75 dB(A) |
Water Quality
Action and Limit
Levels for Water Quality
|
Parameters |
DO in mg/L |
Turbidity in NTU |
SS in mg/L |
pH |
||||
|
|
Action Level |
Limit Level |
Action Level |
Limit Level |
Action Level |
Limit Level |
Action Level |
Limit Level |
|
MP1 |
1.23 |
1.17 |
173 |
177 |
231 |
299 |
< 5.5 or > 7.5 |
< 4.0 or > 8.0 |
|
MP2 |
1.04 |
0.89 |
132 |
163 |
170 |
209 |
||
|
MP3 |
6.85 |
6.65 |
64 |
67 |
65 |
66 |
||
|
MP4 |
3.91 |
3.82 |
60 |
64 |
50 |
53 |
||
|
MP5 |
4.13 |
3.87 |
81 |
84 |
66 |
69 |
||
|
MP6 |
4.61 |
4.52 |
94 |
96 |
75 |
75 |
||
Appendix D.
Event and
Action Plan for Air Quality, Noise, Water Quality, Ecology and Landscape
& Visual
|
|
Event |
Action |
|||
|
ET Leader |
IEC |
ER |
Contractor |
|
|
Action Level |
|
|
|
|
|
1.
Exceedance
for one sample |
1.
Identify source, investigate the causes
of exceedance and propose remedial measures. 2.
Inform IEC and ER. 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 the source. 2.
Inform
IEC and ER. 3.
Advise
ER on the effectiveness of the proposed remedial measures 4.
Repeat measurements to confirm findings. 5.
Increase monitoring frequency to daily. 6.
Discuss with IEC and the Contractor on
remedial actions required. 7.
If exceedance continues, arrange meeting with
IEC and ER. 8.
If exceedance stops, cease additional
monitoring. |
1.
Check monitoring data submitted by ET. 2.
Check the Contractor’s working method. 3.
Discuss with ET Leader and the Contractor on
possible remedial measures. 4.
Advise ER on the effectiveness of the proposed
remedial measures. 5.
Supervise implementation of remedial measures. |
1.
Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance
in writing. 2.
Notify the Contractor. 3.
Ensure remedial measures properly implemented. |
1.
Submit proposals for remedial actions to IEC
within 3 working days of notification. 2.
Implement the agreed proposals. 3.
Amend proposal if appropriate. |
|
Limit Level |
|
|
|
|
|
1.
Exceedance
for one sample |
1.
Identify source, investigate the causes of
exceedance and propose remedial measures. 2.
Inform ER and EPD. 3.
Repeat measurement to confirm finding. 4.
Increase monitoring frequency to daily. 5.
Assess effectiveness of Contractor’s remedial
actions and keep IEC, EPD and ER informed of the results. |
1.
Check monitoring data submitted by ET. 2.
Check the Contractor’s working method. 3.
Discuss with ET Leader and the Contractor on
possible remedial measures. 4.
Advise ER on the effectiveness of the proposed
remedial measures. 5.
Supervise implementation of remedial measures. |
1.
Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance
in writing. 2.
Notify the Contractor. 3.
Ensure remedial measures properly implemented. |
1.
Take immediate action to avoid further
exceedance. 2.
Submit proposals for remedial actions to IEC
within 3 working days of notification. 3.
Implement the agreed proposals. 4.
Amend proposal if appropriate. |
|
2.
Exceedance
for two or more consecutive samples |
1.
Notify IEC, ER, EPD and the Contractor. 2.
Identify the source. 3.
Repeat measurements to confirm findings. 4.
Increase monitoring frequency to daily. 5.
Carry out analysis of the Contractor’s working
procedures to determine possible mitigation to be implemented. 6.
Arrange meeting IEC and ER to discuss the
remedial actions to be taken. 7.
Assess effectiveness of the Contractor’s
remedial actions and keep IEC, EPD and ER informed of the results. 8.
If exceedance stops, cease additional
monitoring. |
1.
Discuss amongst ER, ET Leader and the
Contractor on the potential remedial actions. 2.
Review the Contractor’s remedial actions
whenever necessary and advise ER accordingly. 3.
Supervise the implementation of remedial
measures. |
1.
Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance
in writing. 2.
Notify the Contractor. 3.
In consultation with IEC, agree with the
remedial measures to be implemented. 4.
Ensure remedial measures are properly
implemented. 5.
If exceedance continues, consider what
activity of the work is responsible and instruct the Contractor to stop that
activity of work until the exceedance is abated. |
1.
Take immediate action to avoid further
exceedance. 2.
Submit proposals for remedial actions to IEC
within 3 working days of notification. 3.
Implement the agreed proposals. 4.
Resubmit proposals if problem still not under
control. 5.
Stop the relevant activity of works as
determined by ER until the exceedance is abated. |
Construction Noise
|
Event |
Action |
|||
|
ET
Leader |
IEC |
ER |
Contractor |
|
|
Action
Level |
1. Notify
IEC and the Contractor. 2. Carry
out investigation. 3. Report
the results of investigation to IEC and the Contractor. 4. Discuss
with the Contractor and formulate remedial measures. 5. Increase
monitoring frequency to check mitigation measures. |
1. Review
with analysed results submitted by ET. 2. Review
the proposed remedial measures by the Contractor and advise ER accordingly. 3. Supervise
the implement of remedial measures. |
1. Confirm
receipt of notification of exceedance in writing. 2. Notify
the Contractor. 3. Require
the Contractor to propose remedial measures for the analysed noise problem. 4. Ensure
remedial measures are properly implemented. |
1. Submit
noise mitigation proposals to IEC. 2. Implement
noise mitigation proposals. |
|
Limit
Level |
1. Identify
the source. 2. Notify
IEC, ER, EPD and the Contractor. 3. Repeat
measurement to confirm findings. 4. Increase
monitoring frequency. 5. Carry
out analysis of Contractor’s working procedures to determine possible
mitigation to be implemented. 6. Inform
IEC, ER, and EPD the causes & actions taken for the exceedances. 7. Assess
effectiveness of the Contractor’s remedial actions and keep IEC, EPD and ER
informed of the results. 8. If
exceedance stops, cease additional monitoring. |
1. Discuss
amongst ER, ET Leader and the Contractor on the potential remedial actions. 2. Review
the Contractor’s remedial actions whenever necessary to assure their
effectiveness and advise ER accordingly. 3. Supervise
the implementation of remedial measures. |
1. Confirm
receipt of notification of exceedance in writing. 2. Notify
the Contractor. 3. Require
the Contractor to propose remedial measures for the analysed noise problem. 4. Ensure
remedial measures are properly implemented. 5. If
exceedance continues, consider what activity of the work is responsible and
instruct the Contractor to stop that activity of work until the exceedance is
abated. |
1. Take
immediate action to avoid further exceedance. 2. Submit
proposals for remedial actions to IEC within 3 working days of notification. 3. Implement
the agreed proposals. 4. Resubmit
proposals if problem still not under control. 5. Stop
the relevant activity of works as determined by the ER until the exceedance
is abated. |
Water Quality
|
Event |
Action |
|||
|
ET Leader |
IEC |
ER |
Contractor |
|
|
Action Level |
|
|
|
|
|
1. Exceedance for one sample |
1. Repeat in-situ measurement to confirm
finding; 2. Identify source(s) 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; and 6. Repeat measurement on next day of
exceedance. |
1. Discuss with ET and Contractor on the
mitigation measures; 2. Review proposals on mitigation measures
submitted by Contractor and advise the ER accordingly; and 3. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented
mitigation measures. |
1. Discuss with IEC on the proposed mitigation
measures; and 2. Make agreement on the mitigation measures
to be implemented. |
1. Inform the ER and confirm notification of
the non-compliance in writing; 2. Rectify unacceptable practice; 3. Check all plant and equipment; 4. Consider changes of working methods; 5. Discuss with ET and IEC and propose
mitigation measures to IEC and ER; and 6. Implement the agreed mitigation measures. |
|
2.
Exceedance
for two or more consecutive samples |
1. Repeat in-situ measurement to confirm
finding; 2. Identify source(s) 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. Prepare to increase the monitoring
frequency to daily; and 8. Repeat measurement on next day of
exceedance. |
1. Discuss with ET and Contractor on the
mitigation measures; 2. Review proposals on mitigation measures
submitted by Contractor and advise the ER accordingly; and 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; and 3. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented
mitigation measures. |
1. Inform the Engineer and confirm
notification of the non-compliance in writing; 2. Rectify unacceptable practice; 3. Check all plant and equipment; 4. Consider changes of working methods; 5. Discuss with ET and IEC and propose
mitigation measures to IEC and ER within 3 working days; and 6. Implement the agreed mitigation measures. |
|
Limit Level |
|
|
|
|
|
1.
Exceedance
for one sample |
1. Repeat in-situ measurement to confirm
finding; 2. Identify source(s) 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, ER
and Contractor; 6. Ensure mitigation measures are implemented;
and 7. Increase the monitoring frequency to daily
until no exceedance of Limit level. |
1. Discuss with ET and Contractor on the
mitigation measures; 2. Review proposals on mitigation measures
submitted by Contractor and advise the ER accordingly; and 3. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented
mitigation measures. |
1. Discuss with IEC, ET and Contractor on the
proposed mitigation measures; and 2. Request Contractor to critically review the
working methods; 3. Make agreement on the mitigation measures
to be implemented; and 4. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented
mitigation measures. |
1. Inform the Engineer and confirm
notification of the non-compliance in writing; 2. Rectify unacceptable practice; 3. Check all plant and equipment; 4. Consider changes of working methods; 5. Discuss with ET and IEC and ER and propose
mitigation measures to IEC and ER within 3 working days; and 6. Implement the agreed mitigation measures. |
|
2.
Exceedance
for two or more consecutive samples |
1. Repeat in-situ measurement to confirm
finding; 2. Identify source(s) 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, ER
and Contractor; 6. Ensure mitigation measures are implemented;
and 7. Increase the 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 the ER accordingly; and 3. Assess the effectiveness of the implemented
mitigation measures. |
1. Discuss with IEC, ET and Contractor on the
proposed mitigation measures; and 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; and 5. Consider and instruct, if necessary, the
Contractor to slow down or to stop all or part of the marine work until no
exceedance of Limit Level. |
1. Inform the ER and confirm notification of
the non-compliance in writing; 2. Rectify unacceptable practice; 3. Check all plant and equipment; 4. Consider changes of working methods; 5. Discuss with ET and IEC and ER and propose
mitigation measures to IEC and ER within 3 working days; 6. Implement the agreed mitigation measures;
and 7. As directed by the Engineer, to slow down
or to stop all or part of the marine work or construction activities. |
Appendix E.
Calibration certificates
|
Appendix F. Graphical plots of the monitoring results |
Appendix G. Weather conditions during the monitoring period |
Appendix H.
Ecological Monitoring conducted
|
|
July 2012 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
|
Mammals |
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Birds |
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Herpetofauna |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
Dragonflies &
butterflies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Water Quality |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inspection Visits |
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 2012 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
25 |
26 |
27 |
28 |
29 |
30 |
31 |
|
Mammals |
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
Birds |
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
Herpetofauna |
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dragonflies &
butterflies |
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Water Quality |
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inspection Visits |
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
Note:
* Light grey cells indicate
public holidays, Saturdays or Sundays.
Appendix I.
Summary of Bird
Surveys conducted
|
Table I1. Summary of bird species
of conservation importance and/or wetland-dependence recorded in the Survey
Area (excluding the WRA)
|
Species Name(5) |
Scientific Name(5) |
Conservation Status (2) |
Jul 2012 |
|
|
Occurrence(3) |
Mean(4) |
|||
|
Little
Grebe |
Tachybaptus ruficollis |
LC, (1) |
4 |
8.0 |
|
Yellow
Bittern |
Ixobrychus sinensis |
(LC), (1) |
1 |
0.3 |
|
B-c
Night Heron |
Nycticorax nycticorax |
LC, (1) |
3 |
3.3 |
|
Chinese Pond Heron |
Ardeola bacchus |
PRC, (1) |
4 |
23.8 |
|
Eastern Cattle Egret |
Bubulcus ibis |
(LC), (1) |
1 |
0.3 |
|
Eastern
Great Egret |
Egretta alba |
PRC, (1) |
4 |
7.3 |
|
Little Egret |
Egretta garzetta |
PRC, (1) |
4 |
22.8 |
|
White-breasted
Waterhen |
Amaurornis phoenicurus |
(1) |
4 |
4.8 |
|
Common
Moorhen |
Gallinula chloropus |
(1) |
1 |
0.3 |
|
Little
Ringed Plover |
Charadrius dubius |
LC, (1) |
1 |
0.5 |
|
Common
Sandpiper |
Actitis hypoleucos |
(1) |
1 |
0.3 |
|
W-t
Kingfisher |
Halcyon smyrnensis |
(LC) |
2 |
0.5 |
|
Common
Kingfisher |
Alcedo atthis |
(1) |
3 |
1.3 |
|
Common Moorhen |
Gallinula chloropus |
(1) |
1 |
0.3 |
|
No.
of Species Recorded |
14 |
|||
(1) Indicates wetland-dependant or wetland-associated species.
(2) Conservation status follows that of Fellowes et al. (2002) and BirdLife International listing (2011).
(3) Indicates number of surveys recorded within the reporting period.
(4) Refers to the mean number of individuals recorded in the reporting period (excluding the WRA)
(5) Follows HK bird list (dated 2011-12-04).
Table I2. Summary of bird
species of conservation importance and/or wetland-dependence recorded in the WRA
|
Species Name(5) |
Scientific Name(5) |
Conservation Status (2) |
Jul 2012 |
|
|
Occurrence(3) |
Mean(4) |
|||
|
Little Grebe |
Tachybaptus ruficollis |
LC, (1) |
3 |
1.3 |
|
Chinese Pond Heron |
Ardeola bacchus |
PRC, (1) |
2 |
0.8 |
|
Grey Heron |
Ardea cinerea |
PRC, (1) |
1 |
0.3 |
|
White-breasted Waterhen |
Amaurornis phoenicurus |
(1) |
2 |
0.5 |
|
W-t Kingfisher |
Halcyon smyrnensis |
(LC) |
1 |
0.3 |
|
Pied Kingfisher |
Ceryle rudis |
(LC), (1) |
1 |
0.5 |
|
No.
of Species Recorded |
6 |
|||
(1) Indicates wetland-dependant or
wetland-associated species.
(2) Conservation status follows that of Fellowes
et al. (2002) and BirdLife International listing (2011).
(3) Indicates number of surveys recorded within
the reporting period.
(4) Refers to the mean number of individuals
recorded in the reporting period at WRA.
(5) Follows HK bird list (dated 2011-12-04).
Table J1. Summary of herpetofauna monitoring in the Survey Area
|
Species Name |
Scientific Name |
Conservation Status(1) |
Jul 2012 |
|
|
Occurrence(2) |
Mean(3) |
|||
|
Amphibian |
No. of |
Species Recorded |
5 |
|
|
Asian Common Toad |
Bufo melanostictus |
- |
1 |
2 |
|
Asiatic Painted Frog |
Kaloula pulchra |
- |
1 |
5 |
|
Paddy Frog |
Fejervarya limnocharis |
- |
1 |
1 |
|
Günther's Frog |
Rana guentheri |
- |
1 |
18 |
|
Brown Tree Frog |
Polypedates megacephalus |
- |
1 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
Occurrence(2) |
Mean(3) |
|
Reptile |
No. of |
Species Recorded |
1 |
|
|
Bowring’s Gecko |
Hemidactylus
bowringii |
- |
1 |
0.5 |
(1) Conservation status follows that of Fellowes et al. (2002), Chan et al. (2005) and Karsen et al. (1998).
(2) indicates number of surveys recorded within the reporting period.
(3) refers to the mean number of individuals
recorded in each survey in the survey (excluding the WRA).
Table J2. Summary of herpetofauna monitoring
in the WRA
|
Species Name |
Scientific Name |
Conservation Status(1) |
Jul 2012 |
|||||
|
Occurrence(2) |
Mean(3) |
|||||||
|
Amphibian |
No. of |
Species Recorded |
1 |
|||||
|
Günther's Frog |
Rana guentheri |
- |
1 |
0.5 |
||||
|
|
|
|
Occurrence(2) |
Mean(3) |
||||
|
Reptiles |
No. of |
Species Recorded |
0 |
|||||
|
(No Records in Jul 2012) |
|
|
|
|
||||
(1) Conservation status follows that of Fellowes et al. (2002), Chan et al. (2005) and Karsen et al. (1998).
(2) indicates number of surveys recorded within the reporting period.
(3) refers to the mean number of individuals
recorded in each survey in the WRA.
Table J3. Summary of mammal
monitoring in the Survey Area
|
Species Name |
Scientific Name |
Conservation Status(1) |
Jul 2012 |
|
|
Occurrence |
Mean |
|||
|
Mammal |
No. of |
Species Recorded |
2 |
|
|
Musk Shrew |
Suncus murinus |
- |
1 |
0.25 |
|
Asiatic House Rat |
Rattus tanezumi |
- |
1 |
0.25 |
(1) Conservation status follows that of Fellowes et al. (2002) and Shek (2006).
Table J4. Summary
of mammal monitoring in the WRA
|
Species Name |
Scientific Name |
Conservation Status(1) |
Jul 2012 |
|
Mammal |
No. of |
Species Recorded |
0 |
|
(No Records in Jul 2012) |
|
|
|
(1) Conservation status
follows that of Fellowes et al.
(2002) and Shek (2006).
Table J5. Summary of odonate and butterfly
monitoring in the Survey Area
|
Common Name |
Scientific Name |
Conservation Status(1) |
Jul 2012 |
|
|
Occurrence(2) |
Mean(3) |
|||
|
Odonate |
No. of Species Recorded |
8 |
||
|
Common Bluetail |
Aschnura senegalensis |
- |
1 |
3.0 |
|
Common Flangetail |
Ictinogomphus pertinax |
- |
1 |
2 |
|
Asian Amberwing |
Brachythemis contaminata |
- |
2 |
205.0 |
|
Crimson Darter |
Crocothemis servilia |
- |
1 |
1 |
|
Coastal Glider |
Macrodiplax cora |
LC |
1 |
3 |
|
Green Skimmer |
Orthetrum sabina |
- |
2 |
18.5 |
|
Variegated Flutterer |
Rhyothemis variegata |
- |
2 |
6.0 |
|
Saddlebag Glider |
Tramea virginia |
- |
1 |
0.5 |
|
Butterfly |
No. of
Species Recorded |
2 |
||
|
Common Mormon |
Papilio polytes |
- |
1 |
0.5 |
|
Common Grass Yellow |
Eurema hecabe |
- |
1 |
1.5 |
(1) Conservation status follows that of Fellowes et al. (2002), Lo & Hui (2004), Tam et al. (2011) and Young & Yiu (2002).
(2) indicates number of surveys recorded within the reporting period.
(3) refers to the mean number of individuals recorded in each survey in the survey (excluding the WRA).
Table J6. Summary of dragonfly and butterfly
monitoring in the WRA
|
Common Name |
Scientific Name |
Conservation Status(1) |
Jul 2012 |
|
|
Occurrence(2) |
Mean(3) |
|||
|
Odonate |
No. of Species Recorded |
10 |
||
|
Common Flangetail |
Ictinogomphus pertinax |
- |
10 |
4 |
|
Blue Dasher |
Brachydiplax chalybea |
- |
0 |
1 |
|
Asian Amberwing |
Brachythemis contaminata |
- |
3 |
5 |
|
Crimson Darter |
Crocothemis servilia |
- |
6 |
2 |
|
Amber-winged Glider |
Hydrobasileus croceus |
- |
5 |
0 |
|
Coastal Glider |
Macrodiplax cora |
LC |
0 |
4 |
|
Pied Percher |
Neurothemis tullia |
- |
1 |
0 |
|
Green Skimmer |
Orthetrum sabina |
- |
5 |
3 |
|
Variegated Flutterer |
Rhyothemis variegata |
- |
36 |
9 |
|
Saddlebag Glider |
Tramea virginia |
- |
0 |
1 |
|
Butterfly |
No. of Species Recorded |
2 |
||
|
Common Mormon |
Papilio polytes |
- |
1 |
0.5 |
|
Common Grass Yellow |
Eurema hecabe |
- |
2 |
2.0 |
(1) Conservation status follows that of Fellowes et al. (2002), Lo & Hui (2004), Tam et al. (2011) and Young & Yiu (2002).
(2) indicates number of surveys recorded within the reporting period.
(3) refers to the mean number of individuals recorded in each survey in the WRA.
Appendix K.
Summary of Monitoring of Water and
Soil Quality associated with Ecological Monitoring conducted
|
Table K1. Water quality at WRA in Jul 2012
|
Cell No. |
Temp. (°C) |
pH |
Salinity (ppt) |
Turb (mg/L) |
DO (mg/L) |
Water Level (cm) |
|
1 |
34.0 |
6.40 |
0.753 |
26 |
2.63 |
200 |
|
2 |
33.0 |
6.42 |
0.847 |
9 |
3.69 |
160 |
|
3 |
32.8 |
6.44 |
0.910 |
11 |
3.63 |
200 |
|
4 |
32.9 |
6.34 |
1.000 |
10 |
3.63 |
190 |
Note: Values highlighted in bold indicate that
action level is reached; whereas values in bold and underline indicate that
limit level is reached.