

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 K Summary of Monitoring of Water
Quality associated with Ecological Monitoring 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 23rd
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 March to 31 March 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 March 2012. Exceedances of pH were often observed at
MP2 to MP6, and a few times at MP1. DO exceedance was observed once each at MP4
and MP5, four times at MP6, and seven times at MP3. Turbidity and/or SS
exceedances were recorded on several monitoring dates at MP4 and one monitoring
date each at MP3 and 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,
rainfall and microbe growth (including algae) and wastewater plant clearing,
the exceedances were considered not due to construction works.
Implementation of mitigation
measures
Site audits were carried out on
7, 15, 21 and 30 March 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 (filling), site formation (excavation) and foundation work. 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 March to 31 March 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 (Filling)
¡
Site formation
(Excavations)
¡
Foundation
Work
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 size 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 March 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 NL-52 |
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 0700 and 1900)
· 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 Proplus |
10D101567 |
|
Turbidity Meter |
Hach 2100Q |
09120C000514 |
|
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 556 MPS 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 2100P) 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 3 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 3 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 of 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. Min
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 7,
15, 21 and 30 March 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.
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 |
||||||||
|
02-Mar-12 |
08:25 |
110 |
108 |
102 |
102 - 168 |
378 |
500 |
|
|
08-Mar-12 |
12:45 |
118 |
116 |
114 |
||||
|
14-Mar-12 |
12:50 |
168 |
166 |
162 |
||||
|
20-Mar-12 |
12:59 |
131 |
136 |
160 |
||||
|
26-Mar-12 |
12:44 |
125 |
128 |
126 |
||||
|
30-Mar-12 |
12:55 |
115 |
114 |
112 |
||||
|
ASR2A |
||||||||
|
02-Mar-12 |
12:56 |
102 |
105 |
103 |
102 - 160 |
357 |
500 |
|
|
08-Mar-12 |
08:39 |
112 |
112 |
116 |
||||
|
14-Mar-12 |
08:28 |
160 |
158 |
157 |
||||
|
20-Mar-12 |
08:21 |
134 |
141 |
140 |
||||
|
26-Mar-12 |
08:22 |
120 |
119 |
123 |
||||
|
30-Mar-12 |
08:25 |
107 |
109 |
112 |
||||
|
ASR3 |
||||||||
|
02-Mar-12 |
12:35 |
108 |
106 |
106 |
106 - 165 |
358 |
500 |
|
|
08-Mar-12 |
08:23 |
109 |
112 |
115 |
||||
|
14-Mar-12 |
08:13 |
165 |
163 |
160 |
||||
|
20-Mar-12 |
08:08 |
132 |
134 |
137 |
||||
|
26-Mar-12 |
08:09 |
125 |
122 |
125 |
||||
|
30-Mar-12 |
08:10 |
112 |
113 |
108 |
||||
|
ASR4 |
||||||||
|
02-Mar-12 |
08:20 |
116 |
115 |
113 |
113 - 178 |
372 |
500 |
|
|
08-Mar-12 |
12:39 |
128 |
122 |
125 |
||||
|
14-Mar-12 |
12:40 |
171 |
178 |
174 |
||||
|
20-Mar-12 |
12:40 |
137 |
150 |
166 |
||||
|
26-Mar-12 |
12:36 |
135 |
133 |
130 |
||||
|
30-Mar-12 |
12:33 |
122 |
128 |
120 |
||||
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.
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
02-Mar-12 |
83 |
83 - 112 |
226 |
260 |
|
08-Mar-12 |
87 |
|||
|
14-Mar-12 |
93 |
|||
|
20-Mar-12 |
100 |
|||
|
26-Mar-12 |
112 |
|||
|
30-Mar-12 |
104 |
|||
|
ASR2A |
|
|
|
|
|
02-Mar-12 |
92 |
86 - 104 |
213 |
260 |
|
08-Mar-12 |
86 |
|||
|
14-Mar-12 |
91 |
|||
|
20-Mar-12 |
97 |
|||
|
26-Mar-12 |
104 |
|||
|
30-Mar-12 |
99 |
|||
|
ASR3 |
|
|
|
|
|
02-Mar-12 |
100 |
87 - 102 |
205 |
260 |
|
08-Mar-12 |
87 |
|||
|
14-Mar-12 |
94 |
|||
|
20-Mar-12 |
94 |
|||
|
26-Mar-12 |
102 |
|||
|
30-Mar-12 |
100 |
|||
|
ASR4 |
|
|
|
|
|
02-Mar-12 |
94 |
91 - 106 |
237 |
260 |
|
08-Mar-12 |
91 |
|||
|
14-Mar-12 |
106 |
|||
|
20-Mar-12 |
104 |
|||
|
26-Mar-12 |
98 |
|||
|
30-Mar-12 |
101 |
No exceedance of 1-hour and 24-hour TSP (Action or Limit Level) was recorded in the reporting period.
The weather conditions in the reporting period are provided in Appendix G.
The construction noise monitoring results are summarized in Table 3.3. Graphical plots of the monitoring data are shown in Appendix F.
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 |
|
08-Mar-12 |
08:49 |
56 |
58 |
48 |
|
|
14-Mar-12 |
08:35 |
58 |
59 |
48 |
|
|
20-Mar-12 |
09:31 |
52 |
55 |
45 |
|
|
26-Mar-12 |
08:35 |
54 |
56 |
44 |
|
|
NSR3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
08-Mar-12 |
09:20 |
54 |
55 |
44 |
|
|
14-Mar-12 |
08:46 |
55 |
57 |
45 |
|
|
20-Mar-12 |
10:10 |
48 |
52 |
44 |
|
|
26-Mar-12 |
09:20 |
50 |
51 |
47 |
|
|
NSR5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
08-Mar-12 |
13:00 |
59 |
60 |
53 |
|
|
14-Mar-12 |
13:00 |
59 |
62 |
54 |
|
|
20-Mar-12 |
13:02 |
53 |
55 |
49 |
|
|
26-Mar-12 |
13:01 |
58 |
60 |
55 |
|
|
NSR7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
08-Mar-12 |
13:42 |
66 |
69 |
61 |
|
|
14-Mar-12 |
13:52 |
61 |
62 |
57 |
|
|
20-Mar-12 |
13:49 |
65 |
67 |
62 |
|
|
26-Mar-12 |
13:48 |
64 |
66 |
54 |
|
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.
Table 3.4: Summary of Water Quality Monitoring Results
|
Monitoring Date |
Temp (oC) |
pH |
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) |
DOS (%) |
Turbidity (NT) |
BOD (mg/L) |
Suspended Solids (mg/L) |
|
MP1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
02/03/2012 |
21.2 |
7.4 |
3.6 |
41.6 |
14.8 |
2 |
18.5 |
|
05/03/2012 |
21.6 |
7.3 |
3.3 |
40.0 |
67.4 |
4 |
71.5 |
|
07/03/2012 |
23.3 |
7.5 |
3.0 |
35.9 |
37.0 |
3 |
30 |
|
09/03/2012 |
19.5 |
7.6 |
4.2 |
47.2 |
38.6 |
3 |
32.5 |
|
12/03/2012 |
15.9 |
7.5 |
4.7 |
49.9 |
26.1 |
3 |
21.5 |
|
14/03/2012 |
15.7 |
7.5 |
3.9 |
39.3 |
29.1 |
3 |
16 |
|
16/03/2012 |
20.1 |
7.3 |
5.3 |
57.9 |
82.3 |
6 |
74.5 |
|
19/03/2012 |
20.8 |
7.7 |
5.5 |
62.5 |
74.9 |
4.5 |
55 |
|
21/03/2012 |
22.0 |
6.9 |
3.4 |
40.1 |
31.4 |
3.5 |
29.5 |
|
23/03/2012 |
21.1 |
7.5 |
6.1 |
68.9 |
31.7 |
6 |
24 |
|
26/03/2012 |
20.6 |
7.3 |
5.0 |
56.4 |
39.8 |
3.5 |
29 |
|
28/03/2012 |
21.2 |
7.5 |
4.8 |
54.8 |
96.7 |
4 |
37.5 |
|
30/03/2012 |
22.2 |
8.0 |
5.0 |
57.7 |
97.8 |
4 |
74.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Action Level |
- |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<1.23 |
- |
>173 |
- |
>231 |
|
Limit Level |
- |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<1.17 |
- |
>177 |
- |
>299 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MP2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
02/03/2012 |
21.2 |
7.4 |
3.8 |
43.3 |
11.6 |
3.5 |
10 |
|
05/03/2012 |
20.5 |
7.8 |
5.3 |
59.6 |
84.2 |
3 |
72.5 |
|
07/03/2012 |
23.3 |
7.5 |
2.7 |
32.4 |
35.4 |
3 |
28.5 |
|
09/03/2012 |
19.5 |
7.6 |
3.8 |
42.0 |
39.6 |
3 |
33.5 |
|
12/03/2012 |
16.0 |
7.5 |
4.5 |
47.2 |
26.4 |
3 |
21 |
|
14/03/2012 |
15.7 |
7.5 |
3.4 |
33.4 |
31.1 |
3 |
19.5 |
|
16/03/2012 |
19.8 |
7.2 |
5.1 |
56.1 |
81.9 |
6 |
75 |
|
19/03/2012 |
20.9 |
7.6 |
5.9 |
64.5 |
67.2 |
5 |
50.5 |
|
21/03/2012 |
20.8 |
7.3 |
3.9 |
43.6 |
39.4 |
3 |
31.5 |
|
23/03/2012 |
20.9 |
7.6 |
5.9 |
67.2 |
30.3 |
5 |
22.5 |
|
26/03/2012 |
20.4 |
7.3 |
5.0 |
56.2 |
43.7 |
4 |
36.5 |
|
28/03/2012 |
21.3 |
7.5 |
5.1 |
57.0 |
102.5 |
4 |
84.5 |
|
30/03/2012 |
22.1 |
7.9 |
4.8 |
55.5 |
99.8 |
4 |
74 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Action Level |
- |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<1.04 |
- |
>132 |
- |
>170 |
|
Limit Level |
- |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<0.89 |
- |
>163 |
- |
>209 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MP3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
02/03/2012 |
19.6 |
7.5 |
8.3 |
91.7 |
12.5 |
3 |
10 |
|
05/03/2012 |
21.5 |
7.4 |
4.6 |
52.3 |
18.1 |
5.5 |
18 |
|
07/03/2012 |
24.2 |
8.2 |
6.6 |
78.5 |
32.5 |
7 |
29 |
|
09/03/2012 |
19.7 |
8.2 |
4.4 |
49.3 |
64.2 |
10 |
38.5 |
|
12/03/2012 |
15.2 |
7.9 |
7.8 |
77.3 |
26.1 |
6 |
21.5 |
|
14/03/2012 |
15.3 |
7.7 |
8.5 |
86.4 |
33.2 |
6 |
26 |
|
16/03/2012 |
20.1 |
7.6 |
5.8 |
63.1 |
20.6 |
9 |
14 |
|
19/03/2012 |
22.8 |
7.5 |
6.2 |
73.5 |
49.4 |
10 |
42.5 |
|
21/03/2012 |
22.2 |
7.7 |
5.7 |
65.0 |
49.4 |
8 |
44.5 |
|
23/03/2012 |
23.3 |
7.5 |
3.7 |
44.0 |
59.0 |
8 |
50 |
|
26/03/2012 |
22.0 |
7.4 |
7.0 |
79.9 |
31.3 |
6 |
21 |
|
28/03/2012 |
22.1 |
7.6 |
8.2 |
94.9 |
30.4 |
6 |
22 |
|
30/03/2012 |
22.7 |
7.6 |
8.3 |
96.4 |
33.4 |
8.5 |
24.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Action Level |
- |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<6.85 |
- |
>64 |
- |
>65 |
|
Limit Level |
- |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<6.65 |
- |
>67 |
- |
>66 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MP4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
02/03/2012 |
21.7 |
8.0 |
3.3 |
37.6 |
20.6 |
N/A1 |
19.5 |
|
05/03/2012 |
22.6 |
7.4 |
4.7 |
55.0 |
30.3 |
5 |
30 |
|
07/03/2012 |
24.2 |
7.6 |
7.2 |
88.5 |
46.1 |
9 |
52 |
|
09/03/2012 |
19.6 |
7.8 |
5.8 |
62.7 |
51.3 |
9 |
51 |
|
12/03/2012 |
15.2 |
7.9 |
5.3 |
53.0 |
28.3 |
4 |
23 |
|
14/03/2012 |
15.7 |
7.8 |
5.2 |
52.9 |
29.3 |
3 |
18 |
|
16/03/2012 |
20.2 |
7.3 |
5.0 |
55.6 |
74.8 |
5 |
65 |
|
19/03/2012 |
23.7 |
7.5 |
10.8 |
130.8 |
54.2 |
12.5 |
64 |
|
21/03/2012 |
21.5 |
7.0 |
5.5 |
62.9 |
71.1 |
10 |
67 |
|
23/03/2012 |
25.0 |
7.3 |
10.0 |
121.8 |
52.1 |
5 |
41 |
|
26/03/2012 |
21.0 |
7.5 |
9.0 |
100.8 |
58.0 |
8 |
54 |
|
28/03/2012 |
21.9 |
7.3 |
7.6 |
88.1 |
36.5 |
6 |
38 |
|
30/03/2012 |
22.8 |
7.2 |
4.3 |
50.7 |
45.5 |
6 |
40.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Action Level |
- |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<3.91 |
- |
>60 |
- |
>50 |
|
Limit Level |
- |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<3.82 |
- |
>64 |
- |
>53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MP5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
02/03/2012 |
21.1 |
7.6 |
3.6 |
40.7 |
17.5 |
2 |
17.5 |
|
05/03/2012 |
22.3 |
7.3 |
5.8 |
68.1 |
46.0 |
6.5 |
52.5 |
|
07/03/2012 |
25.0 |
7.8 |
9.0 |
111.4 |
58.1 |
11.5 |
69 |
|
09/03/2012 |
19.5 |
7.9 |
5.6 |
72.5 |
64.1 |
18 |
51 |
|
12/03/2012 |
13.7 |
7.8 |
8.4 |
80.6 |
22.4 |
8 |
24 |
|
14/03/2012 |
15.9 |
7.4 |
4.9 |
49.3 |
47.4 |
3.5 |
30.5 |
|
16/03/2012 |
21.6 |
7.6 |
5.2 |
59.0 |
26.9 |
4 |
19.5 |
|
19/03/2012 |
24.1 |
7.4 |
6.4 |
77.1 |
64.4 |
15 |
49 |
|
21/03/2012 |
21.7 |
7.3 |
6.1 |
70.2 |
46.4 |
5.5 |
51.5 |
|
23/03/2012 |
23.9 |
7.3 |
10.3 |
123.9 |
15.1 |
3 |
10 |
|
26/03/2012 |
20.9 |
7.2 |
4.9 |
55.2 |
18.9 |
3.5 |
11.5 |
|
28/03/2012 |
21.8 |
7.3 |
7.3 |
84.6 |
42.4 |
5 |
35 |
|
30/03/2012 |
23.0 |
7.1 |
5.7 |
68.0 |
28.1 |
4.5 |
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Action Level |
- |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<4.13 |
- |
>81 |
- |
>66 |
|
Limit Level |
- |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<3.87 |
- |
>84 |
- |
>69 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MP6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
02/03/2012 |
21.8 |
8.9 |
4.2 |
48.3 |
8.4 |
4 |
11.5 |
|
05/03/2012 |
22.2 |
7.4 |
4.4 |
51.8 |
23.5 |
4 |
24 |
|
07/03/2012 |
25.0 |
7.9 |
9.4 |
116.3 |
59.1 |
12 |
66 |
|
09/03/2012 |
19.1 |
7.8 |
6.5 |
70.5 |
66.1 |
17.5 |
53.5 |
|
12/03/2012 |
13.4 |
7.7 |
8.0 |
76.9 |
21.1 |
8 |
26.5 |
|
14/03/2012 |
15.8 |
7.4 |
4.5 |
45.7 |
50.1 |
3.5 |
28 |
|
16/03/2012 |
21.3 |
7.6 |
5.1 |
57.2 |
26.5 |
4.5 |
20 |
|
19/03/2012 |
24.0 |
7.4 |
6.6 |
79.5 |
66.9 |
14.5 |
48.5 |
|
21/03/2012 |
20.7 |
7.5 |
4.6 |
51.0 |
19.3 |
3 |
20.5 |
|
23/03/2012 |
24.1 |
7.3 |
10.3 |
124.6 |
20.9 |
4 |
10 |
|
26/03/2012 |
20.7 |
7.2 |
4.7 |
53.0 |
24.9 |
4 |
16 |
|
28/03/2012 |
21.6 |
7.1 |
7.1 |
82.5 |
38.3 |
5 |
32 |
|
30/03/2012 |
22.8 |
7.1 |
5.5 |
65.5 |
27.8 |
4.5 |
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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).
Values Bold indicate Action Level exceedance.
Values Underlined and Bold indicate
Limit Level exceedance.
Exceedances of pH, DO, turbidity and SS were
observed at MP1 to MP6 in March 2012. Exceedances of pH were often observed at
MP2 to MP6, and a few times at MP1. DO exceedance was observed once each at MP4
and MP5, four times at MP6, and seven times at MP3. Turbidity and/or SS
exceedances were recorded on several monitoring dates at MP4 and one monitoring
date each at MP3 and 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
(filling and excavation) and foundation work. 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.
Exceedances
of action and/or limit level of pH were observed at MP1 and MP2 frequently
within the monitoring days and pH ranged from 6.9 to 8.0. From investigation,
there was no direct discharge from the site to the ditch where MP2 is located,
so the exceedance was not considered to be related to the construction
activities of this project.
Exceedances
of the action and/or limit level of pH were observed on eight monitoring dates and
action/limit level exceedances of DO were recorded on seven monitoring dates at
MP3. Also, limit level exceedance of turbidity was observed at MP3 on 16 March
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 and DO may be due to external factors such as pond fish
culture activities which were out of the control of the project. The turbidity
exceedance may have been caused by fish movements.
Exceedances
of action or limit level of pH were observed at MP4, MP5 and MP6 on several
monitoring days. Action and limit levels of DO were exceeded a few times at MP6
and only the limit level of DO was exceeded at MP4 and MP5 on one monitoring
date. Action and/or Limit level exceedance of turbidity were observed at MP4 on
16 and 21 March 2012. Action and/or Limit level exceedances of SS were observed
on six monitoring dates at MP4 and one monitoring date at MP5.
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.
During
monitoring, it was observed that the colour of water body in the ditch was
green. This may indicate the presence of algae and other microbe growth which
consequently results in a significant fall in DO measured at the ditch. The
ditch continued to be affected by this factor (respiration and degradation of
microbes which consumed oxygen). However, on sunny days, photosynthesis of the
algae sometimes increases the DO sharply in the water. As algae grows further
and dies, it causes increase in SS and a decrease in DO in the water.
Exceedances of turbidity and SS may have been caused by formation of floc
(possibly by microbes) due to low flow conditions.
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 March and 31 March 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), 25 bird species of
conservation importance and/or wetland-dependence were recorded. Within the
WRA, 17 bird species of conservation importance and/or wetland-dependent
species were recorded. A summary of survey data is
provided in Appendix I.
Regular observations of two of the
target species were recorded at the WRA (high count and mean respectively), i.e. Chinese Pond Heron Ardeola
bacchus (4, 2.6) and Little Egret Egretta garzetta (3, 1.6). On top of that, the WRA continues to attract a number of species of
conservation importance, including six Chinese Penduline-Tits Remiz consobrinus,a first recorded in
the WRA on 20 March 2012. This species is listed by Fellowes et al. as of “Regional Concern” in 2002.
Two
night time herpetofauna surveys were conducted in the period. Two amphibian
species were recorded both in the Survey
Area (excluding the WRA) and the WRA: Asian Common Toad Bufo
melanostictus and Gunther’s Frog Rana guentheri. Both of these species are
very common and widespread in northwest
Monitoring
of dragonflies and butterflies commenced in
March 2012, and one survey was undertaken according to the EM&A Manual.
A total of one dragonfly species and one butterfly species were recorded in the Survey Area (excluding
the WRA) while one dragonfly and one butterfly species were recorded in the WRA. A summary of
the survey findings is provided in Appendix
J.
Monitoring
of mammals was conducted concurrently with other surveys. One unidentified rat and two Japanese Pipistrelle Pipistrellus abramus were recorded in the Survey Area; no mammals
were recorded in the WRA. A summary of the survey findings is
provided in Appendix J.
There are no water quality issues in the reporting period. Monitoring
date and data are presented in Appendix K.
Vegetation
management activities undertaken at the site primarily involved watering of
plants and grass cutting.
No
management actions were required during the reporting period.
Ecological monitoring during March 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 |
25 |
17 |
|
Amphibians |
2 |
2 |
|
Reptiles |
0 |
0 |
|
Mammals |
2 |
0 |
|
Dragonflies |
1 |
1 |
|
Butterflies |
1 |
1 |
Survey
findings indicate that the ponds within the Survey Area supported numbers and
diversity of wetland-dependent birds and other species of conservation
importance typical of fish pond areas in the end of dry season and that the WRA continues to attract wetland
dependent fauna.
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 14 and 27 March 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, etc. |
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.
|
|
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 of which still need to be rectified. Precautions should be taken to prevent
damage to the trees by the structure. Pruning of some large trees has been
undertaken. The
growth of trees #374-#393, #414-#428, and #445-#458 is still seriously
affected by overhanging / fallen trees on the adjacent property. Tree
#357 is noted with termite tubes at the base of trunk, indicating an
infestation of soil borne termintes. Application of termiticide to the tree
and surrounding soil should undertaken immediately. A general application of an
environmentally sensitive general purpose pesticide (e.g Bacillus
Thuringinensis) should be undertaken now for all planting areas to prevent
the spread of pests. Cables
around the transplanted tree trunks should be fully removed to allow full
establishment of the trees. 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. There
is still very extensive growth of weeds and invasive climbers in the space
behind screen noise barrier which are inhibiting the advance planting, and
urgently needs to be cleared. Weeding and removal of invasive climbers is on
going but these should be complete as soon as possible and carried out on a
regular basis. Condition
of the Phragmites australis reeds
(translocated from the original site) has improved with increased water
level. 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. |
The ET had carried out construction phase
weekly site inspections on 7, 15, 21 and 30 March 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) |
|
Stockpile
of used tyres |
To cover with tarpaulin to prevent
stagnant water accumulation |
Agreed and action to be taken |
15 Mar 2012 |
|
Chemical
bottles without drip trays |
To provide drip trays for chemical
bottle in the storage area |
Agreed and action to be taken |
7 Mar 2012 |
|
Idle
slope should be covered properly |
To cover entirely with tarpaulin
for better dust suppression |
Agreed and action to be taken |
21 Mar 2012 |
|
Unused
channels near the site boundary |
To backfill unused channels to
prevent stagnant water |
Agreed and action to be taken |
15 Mar 2012 |
|
Algae and
mud settled in the drainage channel |
To clean the algae and mud |
Agreed and action to be taken |
On-going |
|
Algae in
a channel next to site office |
To clear the algae |
Agreed and action to be taken |
On-going |
|
Stagnant
water ponds within the site |
To clear the stagnant water |
Agreed and action to be taken |
30 Mar 2012 |
|
Stockpile
of C&D material |
To cover with tarpaulin to prevent
fugitive dust dispersion |
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 March 2012. Exceedances of pH were often observed at
MP2 to MP6, and a few times at MP1. DO exceedance was observed once each at MP4
and MP5, four times at MP6, and seven times at MP3. Turbidity and/or SS
exceedances were recorded on several monitoring dates at MP4 and one monitoring
date each at MP3 and MP5.
Table 7.1: Summary of Exceedances in Water Quality
|
Monitoring Date |
pH |
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) |
Turbidity (NT) |
Suspended Solids (mg/L) |
|
MP1 |
|
|
|
|
|
02/03/2012 |
7.4 |
3.6 |
14.8 |
18.5 |
|
05/03/2012 |
7.3 |
3.3 |
67.4 |
71.5 |
|
07/03/2012 |
7.5 |
3.0 |
37.0 |
30 |
|
09/03/2012 |
7.6 |
4.2 |
38.6 |
32.5 |
|
12/03/2012 |
7.5 |
4.7 |
26.1 |
21.5 |
|
14/03/2012 |
7.5 |
3.9 |
29.1 |
16 |
|
16/03/2012 |
7.3 |
5.3 |
82.3 |
74.5 |
|
19/03/2012 |
7.7 |
5.5 |
74.9 |
55 |
|
21/03/2012 |
6.9 |
3.4 |
31.4 |
29.5 |
|
23/03/2012 |
7.5 |
6.1 |
31.7 |
24 |
|
26/03/2012 |
7.3 |
5.0 |
39.8 |
29 |
|
28/03/2012 |
7.5 |
4.8 |
96.7 |
37.5 |
|
30/03/2012 |
8.0 |
5.0 |
97.8 |
74.5 |
|
Action Level |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<1.23 |
>173 |
>231 |
|
Limit Level |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<1.17 |
>177 |
>299 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MP2 |
|
|
|
|
|
02/03/2012 |
7.4 |
3.8 |
11.6 |
10 |
|
05/03/2012 |
7.8 |
5.3 |
84.2 |
72.5 |
|
07/03/2012 |
7.5 |
2.7 |
35.4 |
28.5 |
|
09/03/2012 |
7.6 |
3.8 |
39.6 |
33.5 |
|
12/03/2012 |
7.5 |
4.5 |
26.4 |
21 |
|
14/03/2012 |
7.5 |
3.4 |
31.1 |
19.5 |
|
16/03/2012 |
7.2 |
5.1 |
81.9 |
75 |
|
19/03/2012 |
7.6 |
5.9 |
67.2 |
50.5 |
|
21/03/2012 |
7.3 |
3.9 |
39.4 |
31.5 |
|
23/03/2012 |
7.6 |
5.9 |
30.3 |
22.5 |
|
26/03/2012 |
7.3 |
5.0 |
43.7 |
36.5 |
|
28/03/2012 |
7.5 |
5.1 |
102.5 |
84.5 |
|
30/03/2012 |
7.9 |
4.8 |
99.8 |
74 |
|
Action Level |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<1.04 |
>132 |
>170 |
|
Limit Level |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<0.89 |
>163 |
>209 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MP3 |
|
|
|
|
|
02/03/2012 |
7.5 |
8.3 |
12.5 |
10 |
|
05/03/2012 |
7.4 |
4.6 |
18.1 |
18 |
|
07/03/2012 |
8.2 |
6.6 |
32.5 |
29 |
|
09/03/2012 |
8.2 |
4.4 |
64.2 |
38.5 |
|
12/03/2012 |
7.9 |
7.8 |
26.1 |
21.5 |
|
14/03/2012 |
7.7 |
8.5 |
33.2 |
26 |
|
16/03/2012 |
7.6 |
5.8 |
20.6 |
14 |
|
19/03/2012 |
7.5 |
6.2 |
49.4 |
42.5 |
|
21/03/2012 |
7.7 |
5.7 |
49.4 |
44.5 |
|
23/03/2012 |
7.5 |
3.7 |
59.0 |
50 |
|
26/03/2012 |
7.4 |
7.0 |
31.3 |
21 |
|
28/03/2012 |
7.6 |
8.2 |
30.4 |
22 |
|
30/03/2012 |
7.6 |
8.3 |
33.4 |
24.5 |
|
Action Level |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<6.85 |
>64 |
>65 |
|
Limit Level |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<6.65 |
>67 |
>66 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MP4 |
|
|
|
|
|
02/03/2012 |
8.0 |
3.3 |
20.6 |
19.5 |
|
05/03/2012 |
7.4 |
4.7 |
30.3 |
30 |
|
07/03/2012 |
7.6 |
7.2 |
46.1 |
52 |
|
09/03/2012 |
7.8 |
5.8 |
51.3 |
51 |
|
12/03/2012 |
7.9 |
5.3 |
28.3 |
23 |
|
14/03/2012 |
7.8 |
5.2 |
29.3 |
18 |
|
16/03/2012 |
7.3 |
5.0 |
74.8 |
65 |
|
19/03/2012 |
7.5 |
10.8 |
54.2 |
64 |
|
21/03/2012 |
7.0 |
5.5 |
71.1 |
67 |
|
23/03/2012 |
7.3 |
10.0 |
52.1 |
41 |
|
26/03/2012 |
7.5 |
9.0 |
58.0 |
54 |
|
28/03/2012 |
7.3 |
7.6 |
36.5 |
38 |
|
30/03/2012 |
7.2 |
4.3 |
45.5 |
40.5 |
|
Action Level |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<3.91 |
>60 |
>50 |
|
Limit Level |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<3.82 |
>64 |
>53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MP5 |
|
|
|
|
|
02/03/2012 |
7.6 |
3.6 |
17.5 |
17.5 |
|
05/03/2012 |
7.3 |
5.8 |
46.0 |
52.5 |
|
07/03/2012 |
7.8 |
9.0 |
58.1 |
69 |
|
09/03/2012 |
7.9 |
5.6 |
64.1 |
51 |
|
12/03/2012 |
7.8 |
8.4 |
22.4 |
24 |
|
14/03/2012 |
7.4 |
4.9 |
47.4 |
30.5 |
|
16/03/2012 |
7.6 |
5.2 |
26.9 |
19.5 |
|
19/03/2012 |
7.4 |
6.4 |
64.4 |
49 |
|
21/03/2012 |
7.3 |
6.1 |
46.4 |
51.5 |
|
23/03/2012 |
7.3 |
10.3 |
15.1 |
10 |
|
26/03/2012 |
7.2 |
4.9 |
18.9 |
11.5 |
|
28/03/2012 |
7.3 |
7.3 |
42.4 |
35 |
|
30/03/2012 |
7.1 |
5.7 |
28.1 |
19 |
|
Action Level |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<4.13 |
>81 |
>66 |
|
Limit Level |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<3.87 |
>84 |
>69 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MP6 |
|
|
|
|
|
02/03/2012 |
8.9 |
4.2 |
8.4 |
11.5 |
|
05/03/2012 |
7.4 |
4.4 |
23.5 |
24 |
|
07/03/2012 |
7.9 |
9.4 |
59.1 |
66 |
|
09/03/2012 |
7.8 |
6.5 |
66.1 |
53.5 |
|
12/03/2012 |
7.7 |
8.0 |
21.1 |
26.5 |
|
14/03/2012 |
7.4 |
4.5 |
50.1 |
28 |
|
16/03/2012 |
7.6 |
5.1 |
26.5 |
20 |
|
19/03/2012 |
7.4 |
6.6 |
66.9 |
48.5 |
|
21/03/2012 |
7.5 |
4.6 |
19.3 |
20.5 |
|
23/03/2012 |
7.3 |
10.3 |
20.9 |
10 |
|
26/03/2012 |
7.2 |
4.7 |
24.9 |
16 |
|
28/03/2012 |
7.1 |
7.1 |
38.3 |
32 |
|
30/03/2012 |
7.1 |
5.5 |
27.8 |
19 |
|
Action Level |
<5.5 or >7.5 |
<4.61 |
>94 |
>75 |
|
Limit Level |
<4.0 or >8.0 |
<4.52 |
>96 |
>75 |
Notes:
Values Bold indicate Action Level exceedance.
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 (filling and
excavation) and foundation work. 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, rainfall, microbe growth (including algae) and wastewater plant clearing, 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 (Mar 2012) |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
From 12 May 2010 to end
of the reporting month (Mar 2012) |
3 |
0 |
0 |
The major site works to be commissioned in the coming month include:
¡
Site
Formation (Filling)
¡
Site
Formation (Excavations)
¡
Foundation
Work
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 April 2012 is shown in the Table 8.1.
Table 8.1: Tentative Environmental Monitoring and
Audit Schedule for April
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 March 2012. Exceedances of
pH were often observed at MP2 to MP6, and a few times at MP1. DO exceedance was
observed once each at MP4 and MP5, four times at MP6, and seven times at MP3.
Turbidity and/or SS exceedances were recorded on several monitoring dates at MP4
and one monitoring date each at MP3 and 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,
rainfall, microbe growth (including algae) and wastewater plant clearing, 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. LUN Ho Yin |
9866 7497 |
|
ENVIRON Hong
Kong Ltd. (Independent
Environmental Checker (IEC)) |
Independent Environmental
Checker |
Mr. David YEUNG |
3743 0788 |
|
Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Ltd. (Environmental Team
(ET)) |
ET 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
|
|
Mar 2012 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
|
Mammals |
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
Birds |
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
Herpetofauna |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dragonflies & butterflies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Water
Quality |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inspection Visits |
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
Mar 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 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dragonflies & butterflies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Water
Quality |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inspection Visits |
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
Note:
* Light grey cells indicate
public holidays, Saturdays or Sundays.
Table
I1. Summary of bird species of
conservation importance and/or wetland-dependence recorded in the Survey Area
(excluding the WRA)
|
Species Name(6) |
Scientific Name(6) |
Conservation Status (2) |
Mar 2012 |
|
|
Occurrence(3) |
Mean(4) |
|||
|
Eurasian Wigeon |
Anas penelope |
RC, (1) |
1 |
0.4 |
|
Little Grebe |
Tachybaptus ruficollis |
LC, (1) |
5 |
8.4 |
|
Eurasian Spoonbill |
Platalea leucorodia |
LC, (1) |
1 |
0.2 |
|
Black-faced Spoonbill |
Platalea minor |
PGC, EN, (1) |
1 |
0.6 |
|
Chinese Pond Heron |
Ardeola bacchus |
PRC, (RC), (1) |
5 |
10.8 |
|
Eastern Cattle Egret |
Bubulcus coromandus |
(LC), (1) |
2 |
4.0 |
|
Grey Heron |
Ardea cinerea |
PRC, (1) |
2 |
1.8 |
|
Eastern Great Egret |
Ardea alba |
PRC, (RC), (1) |
4 |
2.0 |
|
Intermediate Egret |
Egretta intermedia |
RC, (1) |
1 |
0.2 |
|
Little Egret |
Egretta garzetta |
PRC, (RC), (1) |
5 |
12.0 |
|
Great Cormorant |
Phalacrocorax carbo |
PRC, (1) |
4 |
14.0 |
|
Black Kite |
Milvus migrans |
(RC) |
1 |
0.2 |
|
White-breasted Waterhen |
Amaurornis phoenicurus |
(1) |
3 |
2.2 |
|
Common Moorhen |
Gallinula chloropus |
(1) |
4 |
1.2 |
|
Pied Avocet |
Recurvirostra avosetta |
RC, (1) |
2 |
0.8 |
|
Little Ringed Plover |
Charadrius dubius |
(LC), (1) |
4 |
2.4 |
|
Common Greenshank |
Tringa nebularia |
RC, (1) |
2 |
1.2 |
|
Wood Sandpiper |
Tringa glareola |
LC, (1) |
5 |
2.6 |
|
Temminck’s Stint |
Calidris temminckii |
LC, (1) |
1 |
0.2 |
|
Common Kingfisher |
Alcedo atthis |
(1) |
5 |
2.0 |
|
Collared Crow |
Corvus torquatus |
LC, NT |
1 |
0.2 |
|
Zitting Cisticola |
Cisticola juncidis |
LC |
2 |
0.8 |
|
Red-billed Starling |
Spodiopsar sericeus |
GC(5) |
2 |
11.6 |
|
Eastern Yellow Wagtail |
Motacilla flava |
(1) |
2 |
0.6 |
|
Red-throated Pipit |
Anthus cervinus |
LC |
2 |
1.4 |
|
No. of
Species Recorded |
25 |
|||
(1) Indicates wetland-dependant or wetland-associated species.
(2) Conservation status follows that of Fellowes et al. (2002) and BirdLife International listing (2010).
(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) Red-billed Starling is considered by Fellowes et al.
(2002) to be of Global Concern. Since publication, however, the global
population estimate has been revised and the species is no longer considered
globally threatened. (BirdLife International 2010). A listing of Regional
Concern (RC), based on the importance of the large roost present near
(6) 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(6) |
Scientific
Name(6) |
Conservation Status (2) |
Mar 2012 |
|
|
Occurrence(3) |
Mean(4) |
|||
|
Little Grebe |
Tachybaptus ruficollis |
LC, (1) |
3 |
1.4 |
|
Chinese Pond Heron |
Ardeola bacchus |
PRC, (RC), (1) |
5 |
2.6 |
|
Grey Heron |
Ardea cinerea |
PRC, (1) |
2 |
0.8 |
|
Eastern Great Egret |
Ardea alba |
PRC, (RC), (1) |
2 |
0.6 |
|
Intermediate Egret |
Egretta intermedia |
RC, (1) |
3 |
0.6 |
|
Little Egret |
Egretta garzetta |
PRC, (RC), (1) |
4 |
1.6 |
|
Great Cormorant |
Phalacrocorax carbo |
PRC, (1) |
1 |
0.2 |
|
Pied Avocet |
Recurvirostra avosetta |
RC, (1) |
1 |
0.2 |
|
Little Ringed Plover |
Charadrius dubius |
(LC), (1) |
3 |
0.6 |
|
Green Sandpiper |
Tringa ochropus |
(1) |
1 |
0.2 |
|
Common Sandpiper |
Actitis hypoleucos |
(1) |
2 |
0.4 |
|
Common Kingfisher |
Alcedo atthis |
(1) |
3 |
0.8 |
|
Pied Kingfisher |
Ceryle rudis |
(LC), (1) |
1 |
0.2 |
|
Chinese Penduline-Tit |
Remiz consobrinus |
RC, (1) |
1 |
1.2 |
|
Zitting Cisticola |
Cisticola juncidis |
LC |
3 |
0.6 |
|
Red-billed Starling |
Spodiopsar sericeus |
GC(5) |
4 |
17.4 |
|
Eastern Yellow Wagtail |
Motacilla flava |
(1) |
4 |
4.0 |
|
No. of
Species Recorded |
17 |
|||
(1) Indicates wetland-dependant or
wetland-associated species.
(2) Conservation status follows that of Fellowes
et al. (2002) and BirdLife International listing (2010).
(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) Red-billed Starling is considered by Fellowes et al.
(2002) to be of Global Concern. Since publication, however, the global
population estimate has been revised and the species is no longer considered
globally threatened. (BirdLife International 2010). A listing of Regional
Concern (RC), based on the importance of the large roost present near
(6) Follows HK bird list (dated 2011-12-04).
Appendix J.
Summary
of Herpetofauna, and Insects Surveys conducted
|
Table J1. Summary of herpetofauna
monitoring in the Survey Area
|
Species Name |
Scientific Name |
Conservation Status(1) |
Mar 2012 |
|
|
Occurrence(2) |
Mean(3) |
|||
|
Amphibian |
|
|
2 |
|
|
Asian Common
Toad |
Bufo melanostictus |
- |
1 |
7.0 |
|
Günther's Frog |
Rana guentheri |
- |
2 |
2.0 |
|
|
|
|
Occurrence(2) |
Mean(3) |
|
Reptile |
|
|
|
|
|
(No Records in Mar 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 survey (excluding the WRA).
Table J2. Summary of herpetofauna monitoring in the
WRA
|
Species Name |
Scientific Name |
Conservation Status(1) |
Mar 2012 |
|
|
Occurrence(2) |
Mean(3) |
|||
|
Amphibian |
|
|
2 |
|
|
Asian Common Toad |
Bufo
melanostictus |
- |
1 |
2.0 |
|
Günther's Frog |
Rana
guentheri |
- |
2 |
5.0 |
|
|
|
|
Occurrence(2) |
Mean(3) |
|
Reptiles |
|
|
0 |
|
|
(No Records in Mar 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) |
Mar 2012 |
|
Mammal |
|
|
|
|
Unidentified Rat |
Rattus sp. |
- |
1 |
|
Japanese Pipistrelle |
Pipistrellus abramus |
- |
1 |
(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) |
Mar 2012 |
|
Mammal |
|
|
|
|
(No Records in Mar 2012) |
|
|
|
(1) Conservation status follows that of Fellowes et al. (2002) and Shek (2006).
Table J5. Summary
of dragonfly and butterfly monitoring in the Survey Area
|
Common Name |
Scientific Name |
Conservation Status(1) |
Mar 2012 |
|
|
Occurrence(2) |
Mean(3) |
|||
|
Odonate |
No. of Species Recorded |
1 |
||
|
Common Bluetail |
Aschnura
senegalensis |
- |
1 |
1.0 |
|
Butterfly |
No. of Species Recorded |
1 |
||
|
Indian Cabbage White |
Pieris canidia |
- |
1 |
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 survey (excluding the WRA).
Table J6. Summary of dragonfly and butterfly
monitoring in the WRA
|
Common Name |
Scientific Name |
Conservation Status(1) |
Mar 2012 |
|
|
Occurrence(2) |
Mean(3) |
|||
|
Odonate |
No. of Species Recorded |
1 |
||
|
Common Bluetail |
Aschnura
senegalensis |
- |
1 |
8.0 |
|
Butterfly |
No. of Species Recorded |
1 |
||
|
Dark Brand Bush Brown |
Mycalesis mineus |
- |
1 |
1.0 |
(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.
Table K1. Water quality at WRA in March 2012
|
Cell No. |
Temp. (°C) |
pH |
Salinity (ppt) |
Turb (mg/L) |
DO (mg/L) |
Water Level (cm) |
|
1 |
25.1 |
7.53 |
1.060 |
18 |
4.13 |
189 |
|
2 |
24.4 |
7.49 |
1.440 |
9 |
3.56 |
157 |
|
3 |
23.9 |
7.71 |
1.303 |
14 |
3.67 |
196 |
|
4 |
23.7 |
7.61 |
1.453 |
2 |
3.93 |
196 |