
Rev. A	Jan 2010	Benny Liu/ Peter Wong	Florence Yuen	Eric Ching	Submission to IEC for comment
Rev. B	Jan 2010	Benny Liu/ Peter Wong	Florence Yuen	Eric Ching	Submission to EPD

1. Introduction

1.1 Background

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 EIAO since then and the Environmental Permit for construction of the comprehensive development in Wo Shang Wai was granted by EPD on 9 September 2008.

Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Ltd. (“MMHK”) has been commissioned by the Heng Shung Construction Co. Ltd. to undertake the Environmental Team (ET) services to carry out environmental monitoring and audit for the construction of the Proposed Comprehensive Development at Wo Shang Wai, Yuen Long.

1.2 Purpose of the Report

This Baseline monitoring report is required under the approved EM&A and is submitted to fulfil Conditions 4.4 of the Environmental Permit No. EP-311/2008 issued pertaining to this designated project – “Proposed Comprehensive Development at Wo Shang Wai, Yuen Long”

The purpose of this Baseline monitoring report is to establish the baseline levels of air quality (dust), noise, water quality, ecology, and landscape and visual in accordance with the EM&A Manual.

These levels are intended as the basis for assessing environmental impact and compliance during construction phase of the Project. This report presents the baseline monitoring requirements, methodologies and results of baseline measurements in accordance with the requirements, where applicable, in the EM&A Manual.

This Baseline Monitoring Report presents the monitoring works conducted from 24 November 2009 to 16 December 2009. A layout plan of the Project is provided in Figure 1.1.

1.3 Structure of the Report

The structure of the report is as follows:

· Section 1 - Introduction, background, purpose and the structure of the report

· Section 2 - Air Quality with description of the baseline air quality monitoring requirements, methodology and results

· Section 3 - Noise with description of the baseline noise monitoring requirements, methodology and results

· Section 4 - Water quality with description of the baseline water quality monitoring requirements, methodology and results

· Section 5 - Ecology

· Section 6 - Landscape and visual, with description of the baseline monitoring requirements, methodology and results

· Section 7 - Comments and Conclusions

2. Air Quality

2.1 Monitoring Requirements

In accordance with the EM&A Manual, baseline 1-hour and 24-hour TSP levels at 4 air quality monitoring stations are to be established. Baseline 1-hour and 24-hour TSP monitoring were conducted for 14 consecutive days from 1 December to 14 December 2009 inclusive of both days prior to commencement of construction of the Project.

2.2 Monitoring Equipment

Continuous 24-hour TSP air quality monitoring was conducted using High Volume Sampler (HVS) (Model: GMWS-2310 Accu-vol) located at designated monitoring station shown in Figure 2.1. 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 2-1 summarizes the equipment used in the baseline air quality monitoring. Copies of the calibration certificates for the HVS and portable dust meters are attached in Appendix A.

Table 2‑1 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	8520 Dust Track Aerosol Monitor

2.3 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

Table 2-2 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and duration of baseline TSP monitoring. Baseline 1-hour and 24-hour TSP monitoring was scheduled at 4 stations from 1 December to 14 December 2009 for 14 consecutive days. Detailed baseline air quality monitoring schedule is provided in Appendix B.

Table 2‑2 Air Quality Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

Monitoring Stations	Parameter	Frequency and Duration
ASR1, ASR2A, ASR3 & ASR4	24-hour TSP	Daily, for 14 consecutive days
ASR1, ASR2A, ASR3 & ASR4	1-hour TSP	3 times a day, for 14 consecutive days

2.4 Monitoring Locations

Four monitoring stations (ASR1, ASR2A, ASR3 and ASR4) were proposed in the EM&A Manual. Upon review of site constraints and agreement with property owners around the site, the actual locations of these stations were slightly altered following the criteria set in the EM&A Manual. The renewed locations of air quality monitoring stations were agreed with the IEC and EPD prior to the baseline monitoring. Locations of the monitoring stations are given in Table 2-3 and are shown in Figure 2.1.

Table 2‑3 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 Palm Springs, which is located at the south of the project area
ASR4	Works Site Boundary

2.5 Monitoring Methodology

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 meters separation from walls, parapets and penthouse was required for rooftop sampler.

· A minimum of 2 meters 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 prior to the commencement of baseline monitoring.

· Calibration records for HVSs are shown in Appendix A.

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 BATTERY button, make sure that the meter’s indicator is in the range with a red line and allow the instrument to stand for about 3 minutes (Then, the air sampling inlet has been capped).

· Push the knob at MEASURE position.

· 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 MEASURE position.

· 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 baseline monitoring.

· Calibration records for HVS and direct dust meters are shown in Appendix A.

Weather Condition

· The weather conditions, including wind data, during the monitoring period were recorded and provided in Appendix G.

2.6 Results and Observations

The baseline air quality monitoring results at the 4 stations are summarized in Table 2-4. Detail 1-hour and 24-hour TSP monitoring results are presented in Appendix C.

Table 2‑4 Summary of Average Baseline Air Quality Monitoring Results

Monitoring Station

Average 24-hour TSP Concentration (mg/m³)/ (Range)

Average 1-hour TSP Concentration (mg/m³)/ (Range)

ASR1

148

(93 – 212)

197

(92 – 312)

ASR2A

127

(74 – 184)

165

(80 – 280)

ASR3

115

(69 – 172)

166

(80 – 286)

ASR4

165

(91 – 234)

188

(88 – 322)

The weather condition during the baseline monitoring period was mostly sunny and fine at the start and end of the monitoring but the weather were rainy and cloudy for a few days in between. No major activities were observed in the Project Area during the monitoring period. The major dust sources were from road traffic along Castle Peak Road and San Tin Highway while dust from the mainland could be another significant source.

2.7 Action and Limit Levels

The Action and Limit levels (AL levels) have been set in accordance with the derivation criteria specified in the EM&A Manual (Table 2.2). This is shown in Table 2-5.

Table 2‑5 Derivation of Action and Limit Levels for Air Quality

Parameter

Action Level

Limit Level

24-hour TSP Level in mg/m³

· For baseline level ≤ 200 mg/m³, Action level = (Baseline level x 1.3 + Limit level)/2

· For baseline level > 200 mg/m³, Action level = Limit level

260

1-hour TSP Level in mg/m³

· For baseline level ≤ 384 mg/m³, Action level = (Baseline level x 1.3 + Limit level)/2

· For baseline level > 384 mg/m³, Action level = Limit level

500

Following the criteria shown in Table 2-5, the AL Levels for 24-hour and 1-hour TSP for the 4 monitoring stations are derived and presented in Table 2-6 & Table 2-7 respectively.

Table 2‑6 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

Table 2‑7 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

2.8 Event and Action Plan

Should non-compliance of the air quality criteria occurs during construction stage, actions in accordance with the Event and Action Plan in Table 2-8 below should be carried out.

Table 2‑8 Event and Action Plan for Air Quality

Event	Action
Event	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.

3. Noise

3.1 Monitoring Requirements

Following the requirements in the EM&A Manual for noise, baseline noise monitoring has been carried out prior to the commencement of the construction works. No construction activities in the vicinity of the stations were observed during the baseline monitoring. Continuous baseline noise monitoring for the A-weighted levels L_eq, L₁₀ and L₉₀ was carried out daily for a period of at least two weeks. The schedule on the baseline monitoring was approved by IEC and EPD before the monitoring started.

3.2 Monitoring Equipment

Integrating Sound Level Meter was used for noise monitoring. It was a Type 1 sound level meter capable of giving a continuous readout of the noise level readings including equivalent continuous sound pressure level (L_eq) and percentile sound pressure level (L_x). They comply with International Electrotechnical Commission Publications 651:1979 (Type 1) and 804:1985 (Type 1). Table 3-1 summarizes the noise monitoring equipment model being used.

Table 3‑1 Noise Monitoring Equipments

Monitoring locations	Equipment Model
Monitoring locations	Integrating Sound Level Meter	Calibrator
NSR1	B&K 2238	Rion NC-73
NSR3	Rion NL-14
NSR5	Rion NA27
NSR7	B&K 2238

3.3 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

Table 3-2 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and duration of noise monitoring. It was proposed that the baseline noise in A-weighted levels L_eq, L₁₀ and L₉₀ were recorded in a 30-minute interval between 0700-1900 during the 14-day monitoring period at the designated monitoring stations shown in Figure 3.1. The baseline noise monitoring schedule is provided in Appendix B.

Table 3‑2 Noise Monitoring Parameters, Period and Frequency

Period

Parameters

1 December to 16 December 2009

with sampling period of 30 minutes between 0700 and 1900.

L_eq, L₉₀ & L₁₀

Due to rainfall on 8 December 2009, the monitoring was suspended on 8 December 2009 and restarted on 9 December 2009. The monitoring period was extended to 16 December 2009.

3.4 Monitoring Locations

Four monitoring stations (NSR1, NSR3, NSR5 and NSR7) were proposed in the EM&A Manual. Access to some of these monitoring locations stated were rejected or not available. Therefore, alternative locations were proposed and agreed by the IEC and EPD. The locations of the monitoring stations are described in Table 3-3 and shown in Figure 3.1.

Table 3‑3 Locations of Noise Monitoring Stations

Monitoring Station	Locations	Type of measurement
NSR1	Noise monitoring equipment was set up near the boundary wall at Palm Springs.	Free-field
NSR3	The monitoring station was located next to the guard house at Palm Springs.	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

* For free-field measurement, +3dB(A) was added to the measured results.

3.5 Monitoring Methodology

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 L_eq, 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 A.

3.6 Results and Observations

The noise monitoring results are summarized in Table 3‑4. Detailed noise monitoring results are presented in Appendix D. A few questionable results of L_eq (e.g. noise levels that are unusually high or low) are excluded to provide a more representative set of data.

Table 3‑4 Summary of Baseline Daytime Noise Monitoring Results

Normal weekdays, 30 minutes between 0700 - 1900 hrs

Mean & Range of Noise Levels, dB(A)

L₉₀

L₁₀

L_eq

NSR1

46.6

(36.5 – 51.0)

51.6

(43.0 – 61.0)

50.7

(43.6 – 57.5)

NSR3

47.9

(37.1 – 53.4)

51.6

(39.9 – 56.0)

50.3

(39.6 – 55.3)

NSR5

51.7

(41.6 – 56.1)

57.3

(43.7 – 72.6)

58.5

(42.8 – 67.3)

NSR7

57.4

(45.1 – 61.0)

62.1

(57.0 – 65.0)

60.5

(56.4 – 63.6)

The measured baseline noise levels (Leq, 30min) between 0700 and 1900 hours are well within 75dB(A), which is daytime construction noise limit under Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO). The noise levels are also within the daytime construction noise criteria during examination periods (65 dB(A). Results of L_eq for the 4 stations ranged from 50 to 61 dB(A) which show that the area are under a low ambient noise condition. It is noted that the L_eq of NSR5 is larger than L₁₀. This is a reflection of the intermittent noise impact from trucks going into and out of the open storage area near the site while NSR5 was located close to the access road.

The noise levels of NSR1 and NSR3 were significantly lower than that of NSR5 and NSR7 as they are farther away from highway traffic and therefore are subjected to lower ambient noise.

The weather condition during the monitoring period was mainly sunny and fine. However, the monitoring was suspended on 8 December 2009 due to rainfall. There were vehicles passing through the access road to open storage which also contributed to the noise source. No major activities in the Project were undertaken during baseline monitoring period, and therefore the baseline noise monitoring data is representative of the baseline condition for the Project. The weather condition during the monitoring period is provided in Appendix G.

3.7 Action and Limit Levels

The Action and Limit Levels (AL levels) for noise have been proposed in the EM&A Manual. The action/ limit levels are tabulated below.

Table 3‑5 Action and Limit Levels for Construction Noise

Time Period	Action Level	Limit Level
NSR1
0700 – 1900 hours on normal weekdays	When one documented complaint is received from any one of the sensitive receivers	75 dB(A)
NSR3
0700 – 1900 hours on normal weekdays	When one documented complaint is received from any one of the sensitive receivers	75 dB(A)
NSR5
0700 – 1900 hours on normal weekdays	When one documented complaint is received from any one of the sensitive receivers	75 dB(A)
NSR7
0700 – 1900 hours on normal weekdays	When one documented complaint is received from any one of the sensitive receivers	75 dB(A)

3.8 Event and Action Plan

In case the Action and Limit Levels are not complied during construction stage, the following Event and Action Plan should be followed:

Table 3‑6 Event and Action Plan for Construction Noise

Event	Action
Event	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.

4. Water Quality

4.1 Monitoring Requirements

In accordance with Section 4.5 of the EM&A Manual, baseline water quality monitoring has been carried out to establish ambient conditions prior to the commencement of the works; and to demonstrate the suitability of the proposed impact and reference monitoring points.

4.2 Monitoring Equipment

The Water Quality Monitoring Equipments and Analytical Methods applied to Water Quality Samples are given in Table 4-1 and Table 4-2 respectively. Details of which are discussed below.

Table 4-1 Water Quality Monitoring Equipments

Equipment	Model	Equipment /Serial Number
Dissolved oxygen, temperature & pH Measuring Meter	YSI 556 MPS	ENO 008/ 07L100507
Turbidimeter	Hach 2100P	ENO 010/ 07030C021728
Global Positioning System (GPS)	Garmin eTrex Vista	ENO 007

Table 4-2 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 baseline 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 Vista) was used to identify the designated monitoring stations prior to water sampling.

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 4^oC without being frozen), delivered to the laboratory, and analysed as soon as possible after collection. Analysis was carried out in a HOKLAS accredited laboratory.

4.3 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

In accordance with Section 4.2 of the EM&A Manual, monitoring for Dissolved Oxygen (DO), temperature, pH, suspended solids (SS) and Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD) were undertaken at 6 designated monitoring locations as described in Section 4.4 below. DO, temperature and pH were measured in-situ whereas SS and BOD were analysed in a laboratory.

Monitoring Duration and Period

Following the requirement established in the EM&A Manual, the measurements were taken at all designated monitoring stations, 3 days per week, for 4 weeks prior to the commencement of construction works. In-situ measurement was carried out at each location from 16 November to 11 December 2009 according to the schedule of monitoring shown in Appendix B. The interval between any two sets of monitoring was not less than 36 hours. No construction activities over water in the vicinity of the points were observed during the baseline monitoring.

4.4 Monitoring Locations

The water quality monitoring points presented in the EM&A Manual were reviewed. All monitoring points were still applicable. No addition or alternation to the proposed monitoring stations in the EM&A Manual was considered to be required. The water quality monitoring locations listed in Table 4-3 were adopted during baseline monitoring and they are shown in Figure 4.1.

Table 4-3 Water Quality Monitoring Stations

ID	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

4.5 Monitoring Methodology

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 middepth 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 4^oC. 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.

Detection Limit

The limits of detection for the in-situ and laboratory measurements are shown in Table 4-4.

Table 4-4 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

Details of site Equipment used for In-situ measurement

The calibration certificates for equipments used for in-situ monitoring of water quality are attached in Appendix A.

4.6 Results and Observations

No major activities were observed in the Project Area during the monitoring period. The baseline water quality monitoring results are provided in Appendix E. The summary of results for Dissolved Oxygen (DO), Turbidity and Suspended Solids (SS) are tabulated below. Graphical presentations of baseline water quality monitoring and results of other parameters at the locations are provided in Appendix E.

Table 4-5 Summary of Water Quality monitoring results

Monitoring Stations	Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)
Monitoring Stations	Average	Range	5%-ile	1%-ile
MP1	2.71	(1.15 – 4.65)	1.23	1.17
MP2	4.57	(0.85-7.10)	1.04	0.89
MP3	8.92	(6.60-11.90)	6.85	6.65
MP4	5.69	(3.80-10.05)	3.91	3.82
MP5	5.52	(3.80-8.60)	4.13	3.87
MP6	6.20	(4.50-9.10)	4.61	4.52
Monitoring Stations	Turbidity (NTU)
Monitoring Stations	Average	Range	95%-ile	99%-ile
MP1	79	(10-178)	173	177
MP2	46	(17-171)	132	163
MP3	53	(39-68)	64	67
MP4	42	(23-65)	60	64
MP5	56	(26-84)	81	84
MP6	65	(33-96)	94	96
Monitoring Stations	Suspended Solids (mg/L)
Monitoring Stations	Average	Range	95%-ile	99%-ile
MP1	104	(13-316)	231	299
MP2	60	(18-219)	170	209
MP3	50	(35-66)	65	66
MP4	37	(24-54)	50	53
MP5	48	(28-70)	66	69
MP6	54	(24-76)	75	75
Monitoring Stations	pH
Monitoring Stations	Average	Range
MP1	7.3	(7.1-7.5)
MP2	7.4	(7.3-7.7)
MP3	8.2	(7.7-8.6)
MP4	7.3	(7.1-7.6)
MP5	7.3	(7.1-7.5)
MP6	7.4	(7.2-7.5)
Monitoring Stations	BOD (mg/L)
Monitoring Stations	Average*	Range
MP1	3.0	(<2-5.5)
MP2	2.8	(<2-5.0)
MP3	10.8	(5.0-16.5)
MP4	4.2	(<2-8.5)
MP5	5.0	(<2-10.5)
MP6	4.3	(<2-9.5)

Note: Only 1 sample was taken at each monitoring stations every time since water depths were below 3m for all monitoring stations.

* In the average calculation, the detection limit 2 mg/L is adopted for all values smaller than 2 mg/L.

Dissolved Oxygen (DO) ranged from 0.85 to 11.9 mg/L for the 6 monitoring stations, with MP1 and MP2 having lower DO levels. The minimum DO level suggested in the Water Quality Objective is 4 mg/L. Results of MP3, MP4, MP5, and MP6 show compliance with the Objective. However, the measured DO level of MP1 was well below the required DO level.

Turbidity and SS also appeared to perform poorer at MP1 and MP2. Although all stations show a similar level of SS, the fluctuations in SS levels at MP1 and MP2 were larger.

pH values at MP3 were constantly higher than that of the other monitoring stations, though all pH values were within acceptable limits. On the other hand, BOD results at MP3 were also higher than that of the other stations.

There appeared to be local impact near the monitoring stations MP1 and MP2 (water ditch at the west of Palm Springs). However, since there was no local impact found near the monitoring stations during the monitoring, the data is a representative set of baseline for the monitoring stations.

Action/Limit (A/L) Levels for Water Quality Monitoring Parameters are determined according to the EM&A Manual.

4.7 Action and Limit Levels

Determination of Action and Limit Level

The Action and Limit (AL) Levels for water quality for construction phases are defined in Tables 4-2 of the EM&A Manual and are shown in Table 4-6.

Table 4-6 Action and Limit (AL) Levels for water quality defined in the EM&A Manual

Parameters	Action Level	Limit Level
DO in mg/L	5 percentile of baseline data	≤2 or 1-percentile of baseline data
pH	< 5.5 or > 7.5	< 4.0 or > 8.0
Turbidity in NTU	95 percentile of baseline data	99 percentile of baseline data
SS in mg/L	95 percentile of baseline data	99 percentile of baseline data
BOD	For Surveillance only	For Surveillance only

Table 4-7 shows the Action and Limit Levels of Water Quality according to the baseline monitoring data.

Table 4-7 Action and Limit (AL) Levels for water quality for construction phrase

Parameters	DO in mg/L		Turbidity in NTU		SS in mg/L		pH
	Action Level	Limit Level	Action Level	Action Level	Limit 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

4.8 Event and Action Plan

The actions in accordance with the Event and Action Plan in Tables 4-8 below should be carried out if the water quality assessment criteria are exceeded at any designated monitoring points.

Table 4-8 Event and Action Plan for Water Quality for construction phrase

Event	Action
Event	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.

5. Ecology

5.1 Monitoring Requirements

As stated in Section 7.3.1 of the EM&A Manual, baseline ecological monitoring was conducted during the preparation of the Ecological Impact Assessment for the EIA report of the project. Data collected during these surveys would be used as the baseline for evaluation of the success in achieving numerical targets for the Target Species of the WRA.

The detailed results of the baseline surveys could be referred to Section 8.6 of the EIA Report (ref. no. EIA-144/2008).

6. Landscape and Visual

6.1 Monitoring Requirements

In accordance with Section 10.4 of the EM&A Manual, a baseline monitoring for landscape and visual resources was conducted in November 2009.

6.2 Monitoring Methodology

Baseline monitoring for landscape and visual resources is defined in reference to the Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) and EM&A Manual of the EIA report for the Project.

In accordance with Section 10.4.2 of the EM&A Manual, Baseline monitoring for the landscape and visual resources will comprise checking and updating of: the landscape resources identified in the EIA report and elements of particular concern are to be re-checked and any changes identified.

The landscape and visual baseline is confirmed with the followings:

¡ any Tree Survey Report prepared;

¡ habitat maps in the EIA; and

¡ landscape and visual impact assessments included in the EIA Report, to include updated photos of each LCA and landscape resources which have been changed since the EIA was carried out.

For clarity, the numbering system for landscape and visual resources from the EIA report is maintained.

6.3 Findings of Baseline Monitoring

6.3.1 Landscape Resources (LRs)

LRs identified within the proposed project site include:

¡ LR29 – Drainage Channel at east of Site;

¡ LR30 – Freshwater Marsh;

¡ LR32 – Grassland with Seasonal Marsh Patches and Soils on Site;

¡ LR33 – Tree Group on Site;

¡ LR34 – Banana Trees on Site;

¡ LR36 – Trees in Open Storage Area; and

¡ LR39 – Trees along Castle Peak Road (Mai Po)

Based on the site visit findings; and review of the tree survey report, habitat maps and LVIA of the EIA report, the status of all the LRs have been checked and updated.

No substantial change in landscape resources of LR29, LR30, LR32, LR33, LR36 and LR39 was identified. The only change between the baseline monitoring and EIA report is the removal of LR34.

LR34 – Banana Trees on Site was found to be removed during the baseline monitoring. According to the approved EIA report, this LR comprised a group of approximately 10 nos. of 4m high banana trees (Musa sp.). As the sensitivity of this LR is Low. Its removal does not cause any significant change in the landscape baseline. Updated photos showing the change are presented in Appendix F.

The landscape resources beyond the project site limit have no records of substantial changes.

Plan of Landscape Resources is illustrated in Figure 6.1.

6.3.2 Landscape Character Areas (LCAs)

The project site lies wholly within on distinct landscape character area:

¡ LCA2 – Tsing Lung Tsuen Plain

This LCA is a low-lying and predominantly rural landscape. Occasional densely clustered villages, such as Wing Ping Tsuen, Fan Tin Tsuen, Mai Po San Tsuen, Mai Po Lo Wai and On Lung Tsuen are situated across the plain. Around the villages lie areas of active and disused agricultural land and there are a number of open storage areas, giving the landscape a slightly incoherent and degraded quality.

No substantial change in the baseline condition of the LCA was found.

The landscape character areas beyond the project site limit have no records of substantial changes.

Plan of Landscape Character Areas is illustrated in Figure 6.2.

6.3.3 Visually Sensitive Receivers (VSRs)

The VSRs identified in the EIA report are listed below:

Residential VSRs:

¡ R1 – Residents in Royal Palms (those most affected are approximately 21 properties on Ventura Avenue and approximately 8 properties on Santa Monica Avenue which are the only properties which directly face the site);

¡ R2 – Residents in Palm Springs (those most affected are approximately 17properties in Camellia Path and approximately 32 properties on Narcissus Path which are the only properties which directly face the site);

¡ R3 – Residents in Wo Shang Wai;

¡ R4 – Residents in Cottage Area South of Mai Po San Tsuen;

¡ R5 – Residents in Mai Po San Tsuen and Mai Po Lo Wai;

¡ R6 – Residents in Tam Kon Chau

Occupational VSRs:

¡ O1 – Workers in Fishponds in and around Mai Po

¡ O2 – Workers in Industrial / Storage Areas north of Royal Palms

¡ O3 – Workers in Industrial / Storage Areas east of Royal Palms

Travelling VSRs:

¡ T1 – Motorists on San Tin Highway

¡ T2 – Motorists on Castle Peak Road

¡ T3 – Motorists on Tam Kon Chau Road

¡ T4 – Pedestrians on San Tin Highway Footbridge

Recreational VSR:

¡ RE1 – Visitors to Mai Po Nature Reserve

Based on the site visit findings, no substantial change in the baseline condition of all the VSRs was observed.

Plan of VSRs is illustrated in Figure 6.3.

6.4 Conclusion

Based on the baseline monitoring conducted in November 2009, and review of the previously approved EIA report, it is considered that the baseline landscape resources, landscape character areas and visually sensitive receivers originally identified in the EIA study are generally unchanged and remain valid.

The removal of the LR34 – Banana Trees on Site did not substantially affect the landscape and visual baseline or outcome of the assessment for its low sensitivity to change, as detailed in Section 6.3 above.

Changes to the landscape and visual baseline are therefore judged to be insignificant.

7. Revisions for inclusion in the EM&A Manual

7.1 Alternative locations of monitoring stations

Change in locations of monitoring stations was required for air and noise monitoring. The procedures of alternation of locations of monitoring stations in the EM&A Manual were followed. Justifications for alternation and the proposed alternative air quality and noise monitoring stations for baseline and construction phase had been submitted to IEC for agreement before commencement of monitoring. This proposal has also been agreed by EPD.

7.2 Revised EM&A Manual

Due to the revisions of monitoring locations mentioned above, the EM&A Manual will be updated for submission.

8. Comments and Conclusions

Baseline monitoring was carried out prior to the commencement of construction works for air quality (dust), noise and water quality in accordance with the requirements in the EM&A Manual for the Project. The weather during the baseline period was generally sunny and fine, however rainfall was recorded during two days of this period. All monitoring equipment used were properly calibrated and have valid calibration certificates.

Air quality monitoring was conducted at four air quality monitoring for 14 consecutive days. There were no major observations of note during monitoring. The major dust sources were from road traffic along Castle Peak Road and San Tin Highway. Dust originating from the mainland could also be another source. The measured results are considered representative of the ambient air quality conditions prior to the commencement of works.

Noise monitoring was carried out at four noise monitoring stations for 14 consecutive days. However, monitoring was suspended for one day during this period due to rainfall, and the monitoring period was extended to make up for this interruption. A few noise levels recorded which were unusually high or low were removed to give a more representative set of data. The measured results are considered representative of the ambient background noise conditions prior to the commencement of works.

Water quality monitoring was carried out at 6 designated monitoring stations at 3 days per week for 4 weeks. Parameters including Dissolved Oxygen and Suspended Solids, Turbidity, pH, temperature and BOD were recorded during the baseline monitoring period. The measured results of the monitoring parameters are considered representative of the pre-construction ambient conditions prior to the commencement of the works.

The ecological baseline monitoring was conducted during the preparation of the Ecological Impact Assessment for the approved EIA report of the project. Therefore the ecological baseline is considered unchanged and valid.

Baseline landscape and visual monitoring was conducted in November 2009 to review and update all the landscape and visual resources previously identified in the EIA report. Monitoring results showed that there are no substantial changes in landscape resources, landscape character areas and visually sensitive receivers.

Action and Limit Levels of the relevant parameters at each monitoring location were derived from the baseline monitoring results and these will be adopted for impact environmental monitoring.

In conclusion, the Contractor is advised to be aware of any site practice that may give rise to significant pollution to the existing environment. Implementation of necessary remedial measures should be instigated to rectify the potential impact on sensitive receivers located in the vicinity of the construction area.

Figures

Appendices

Appendix A. Calibration Record

Appendix B. Baseline Monitoring Schedule

Appendix C. Baseline Air Quality Monitoring Results

Appendix D. Baseline Noise Monitoring Results

Appendix E. Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Results

Appendix F. Updates of Landscape Resources

Appendix G. Weather Information from HKO



Revision	Date	Originator	Checker	Approver	Description
Rev. A	Jan 2010	Benny Liu/ Peter Wong	Florence Yuen	Eric Ching	Submission to IEC for comment
Rev. B	Jan 2010	Benny Liu/ Peter Wong	Florence Yuen	Eric Ching	Submission to EPD