Infrastructure for Penny's Bay Development, Contract 2 ... · Business and taking account of the...

Environmental Resources Management 21/F Lincoln House

979 King’s Road Taikoo Place

Island East, Hong Kong Telephone: (852) 2271 3000 Facsimile: (852) 2723 5660 E-mail: [email protected]

http: //www.erm.com

FINAL QUARTERLY ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND AUDIT REPORT

China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Limited

Infrastructure for Penny's Bay Development, Contract 2: Quarterly Environmental Monitoring & Audit Report for April - June 2004

July 2004

FINAL QUARTERLY ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND AUDIT REPORT

China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Limited

Infrastructure for Penny's Bay Development, Contract 2: Quarterly Environmental Monitoring & Audit Report for April - June 2004

July 2004

Reference C2426

For and on behalf of Environmental Resources Management Approved by: Freeman Cheung Signed: ______________________________ Position: Environmental Team Leader Date: ________________________________

This report has been prepared by Environmental Resources Management the trading name of ‘ERM Hong-Kong, Limited’, with all reasonable skill, care and diligence within the terms of the Contract with the client, incorporating our General Terms and Conditions of Business and taking account of the resources devoted to it by agreement with the client. We disclaim any responsibility to the client and others in respect of any matters outside the scope of the above. This report is confidential to the client and we accept no responsibility of whatsoever nature to third parties to whom this report, or any part thereof, is made known. Any such party relies on the report at their own risk.

1 INTRODUCTION

ERM-Hong Kong, Limited (ERM) was appointed by the China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Limited (CSCE) as the Environmental Team (ET) to implement the Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) programme for the Contract CV/2001/10 of Infrastructure for Penny’s Bay Development Contract 2 (the Project).

1.1 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT

This is the 7th quarterly EM&A report which summarizes the impact monitoring results and audit findings for the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 26 March to 25 June 2004.

1.2 STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT

The structure of the report is as follows:

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

Section 2 : Project Information summarizes background and scope of the project, site description, project organization and contact details, construction programme, the construction works undertaken and the status of Environmental Permits/Licenses during the reporting period.

Section 3 : Environmental Monitoring Requirement summarizes the monitoring parameters, monitoring programmes, monitoring methodology, monitoring frequency, monitoring location, Action and Limit Levels, Event Action Plans, environmental mitigation measures as recommended in the EIA report and relevant environmental requirements.

Section 4 : Implementation Status on Environmental Mitigation Measures summarizes the implementation of environmental protection measures during the reporting period.

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

Section 6 : Environmental Site Auditing summarizes the audit findings of the weekly site inspections undertaken within the reporting period.

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT CHINA STATE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING (HONG KONG) LIMITED

1

Section 7 : Environmental Non-conformance summarizes any monitoring exceedance, environmental complaints, environmental summons and impact prediction review within the reporting period.

Section 8 : Recommendations and Conclusions


2

2 PROJECT INFORMATION

2.1 BACKGROUND

The Project comprises of the following activities:

• Decommissioning of Cheoy Lee Shipyard and off-site treatment of contaminated soil at To Kau Wan;

• Construction of a tree farm and an arboretum; • Construction of Penny’s Bay Section of Chok Ko Wan Link Road i.e., 1.1

km of dual-3 lane carriageway of the Penny’s Bay Section of Chok Ko Wan Link Road (CKWLR) which is an expressway); and

• Construction of Road P2 – Yam O (Sunny Bay) to Penny’s Bay (remaining part) (i.e., a 0.9 km of Road P2 which is a primary distributor at Penny’s Bay).

The potential environmental impacts of the Project have been studied in the following Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report:

(i) “Decommissioning of Cheoy Lee Shipyard in Penny’s Bay” (EIAO Register No: AEIAR-055/2002). The EIA was approved on 24 April 2002 under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO). An Environmental Permit (EP-116/2002/E) associated with the decommission works was also granted on 26 September 2003.

(ii) “Northshore Lantau Development Feasibility Study - Environmental Impact Assessment” (EIAO Register No: AEIAR-031/2000). The EIA was approved on 28 April 2000 under the EIAO. An Environmental Permit (EP-138/2002/C) associated with the infrastructure works to be carried out under CV/2001/10 was granted on 31 March 2003.

(iii) “Construction of an International Theme Park in Penny's Bay of North Lantau together with its Essential Associated Infrastructures - Environmental Impact Assessment” (EIAO Register No: AEIAR-032/2000). The EIA was approved on 28 April 2000 under the EIAO.

Air, noise and water quality sensitive receivers were identified in the above EIA studies and are shown in Annex A.

Construction works commenced on 4 October 2002 and are scheduled to be completed by August 2005.

2.2 SITE DESCRIPTION

The works areas in Cheoy Lee Shipyard (CLS) and To Kau Wan (TKW) are illustrated in Annex B.


3

2.3 PROJECT ORGANIZATION

The project organization chart and contact details are shown in Annex C.

2.4 CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMME

The construction programme for the Project is presented in Annex D. A summary of the major construction activities undertaken in this reporting period is shown in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1 Summary of Construction Activities Undertaken from 26 March 2003 to 25 June 2004

Area Work to be taken CLS

• Hydroseeding of grasscreted channels in CLS site • Asphalt paving for Chok Ko Wan Link Road • Formation of tree farm area and arboretumBridge work in Area 1 • Featured wall construction at Penny’s Bay roundabout at CLS • Scaffolding prepared for the slope planting work • Shrub Tree planting and installation of irrigation pipes at landscape

berms • Slope planting work • Re-creation of Rice Fish Habitat • Filling of topsoil • Soft and hard landscape works • Installation of irrigation system within the tree planting area

TKW • Closure assessment of biopile in April • Cement solidification plant operation • Thermal desorption plant operation in April • Decommissioning of thermal desorption plant in May • Decommissioning of biopile in May and June • Transport of treated soil by barge • Decontamination and confirmation sampling of concrete floor at areas

for stabilisation of post treatment stockpile and dioxin storage shed

2.5 STATUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL APPROVAL DOCUMENTS

A summary of the relevant permits, licences, and/or notifications on environmental protection for this Project as of June 2004 is presented in Table 2.2.

Table 2.2 Summary of Environmental Licensing, Notification and Permit Status

Permit/ Licenses/ Notification

Site Reference Validity Period

Remarks

Environmental Permits

CLS & TKW

EP-116/2002/E Throughout the Contract

Issued on 26 September 2003

CLS EP-138/2002/C Throughout the Contract

Issued on 31 March 2003

Licence to Dispose of Chemical Waste

TKW 9210-974-L2568-DS 4 July 03 to 3 July 06

--

TKW 9210-974-L2568-DS Superseded by


4



Remarks

EP760/974/007849I Notification of Construction Works under Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation

CLS -- -- Notification on 12 August 2002

Construction Noise Permits

CLS GW-UW0245-02 16 Sep 02 to 15 Mar 03

Superseded by GW-UW0297-02

CLS GW-UW0297-02 21 Oct 02 to 12 Apr 03


CLS GW-UW0057-03 12 Mar 03 to 27 Aug 03

Application for CNP was submitted to EPD and the ref. number was UW20031250-001

CLS GW-UW0282-03 11 Sept 03 to 27 Feb 04


CLS GW-UW0075-04 27 Feb 04 – 26 Aug 04

--

TKW GW-UW0321-02 28 Oct 02 to 19 Apr 03

--

TKW GW-UW0277-02 13 Oct 02 to 12 Apr 03


TKW GW-UW0093-03 13 Apr 03 to 12 Oct 03

--

TKW GW-UW0394-02 2 Jan 03 to 1 July 03

--

TKW GW-UW0124-03 1 May 03 to 31 Oct 03

Extended hours operation of the biopile, superseded by GW-UW0376-03

TKW GW-UW0145-03 16 May 03 to 15 Nov 03

Extended hours operation of the thermal desorption plant, superseded by GW-UW0376-03

TKW GW-UW0329-03 12 Oct 03 to 11 April 04


TKW GW-UW0271-03 04 Sept 03 to 29 Feb 04


TKW GW-UW0376-03 1 Nov 03 to 30 Apr 04

---

CLS EP760/973/0078721 13 Jan 03 to 31 Aug 08

-- Water Discharge License TKW EP760/974/0078491 23 Dec 02 to 31

Dec 07 --

CLS 5213-973-C1169-04 Throughout the Contract

-- Chemical Waste Producer Registration TKW 9210-974-L2568-01 -- -- Chemical Waste Collector License

CLS & TKW

9210-974-L2568-WC 29 Nov 02 to 29 Nov 04

--


5



Remarks

Landfill allocation for C&D waste

CLS & TKW

EP195/01/24/0450/2002

Throughout the Contract

EPD replied on 18 Sep 2002

Certificate of approval for Air Pollution Control (Furnaces, Ovens and Chimneys) (Installation and Alteration) Regulation

TKW H2172/E/4020/A, H2172/E/6000, H2172/E/6001, H2172/E/6002, H2172/E/4011/D

Throughout the Contract

TDU operation was completed.

2.6 COMPLIANCE WITH EP CONDITIONS

A summary of the reporting requirement of compliance with EP conditions for this Project as of June 2004 in Table 2.3.

Table 2.3 Environmental Permit Submission

Environmental Submission Condition No. Condition No. EP-116 EP-138 EM&A Manual 2.3 2.3

Decontamination Method Statement

2.4 --

Treatability Test Report – Thermal desorption

2.5 --

Treatability Test Report – Solidification

2.6 --

Treatability Test Report – Biopiling

2.6 --

Remediation Plan – Solidification

2.7 --

Remediation Plan – Biopiling 2.7 --

Remediation Plan – Thermal Desorption

2.7 --

Demolition Plan 2.8 --

Detailed Transplantation Proposal for Restricted/ Protected Plant Species

2.9 --

Detailed Translocation Proposal for Rich Fish at MTHS

2.10 --

Contractor’s Management Organization

3.1 3.1

Waste Management Plan 3.2 3.2

Detailed Design of Filling Work

3.64 --


6

Environmental Submission Condition No. Condition No. EP-116 EP-138 Guidelines and Procedures of Immediate Clean-up Actions for Spillage of Oil, Fuel or Chemicals

-- 3.4

Web Cameras Installation Plan 4.8 --

Baseline Monitoring Report 4.2 5.3 The stormwater design submission

-- 4.5


7

3 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REQUIREMENTS

3.1 LAND CONTAMINATION

3.1.1 Biopile Treatment

Confirmation Sampling/Testing Requirements

Biopile monitoring will be undertaken during the operation of the biopile (progress monitoring) and at the completion of the biopiling (closure assessment).

Progress monitoring consists of the following activities:

• Weekly In-situ soil gas monitoring for oxygen, carbon dioxide, methane and VOC’s. Soil gas samples are collected from the monitoring points by use of a vacuum pump. There are a total of 56 monitoring points located within the biopile;

• Monthly Soil Sampling – samples of soil are collected from the biopile and analysed on a monthly basis for pH, ammonium_N, nitrate_N, inorganic_P, moisture content and bacterial count. Samples are collected at a frequency of 15 samples per 10,000m3 of soil. Extracting the soil samples will be accomplished using a hand auger or other methods approved by the Engineer.

• Quarterly Soil Sampling – In addition to the analyses conducted for the monthly samples, quarterly sampling will include analysis of TPH and SVOC’s for all samples. Extracting the soil samples will be accomplished using a hand auger or other methods approved by the Engineer.

The sampling locations will be determined based on the results of the weekly soil gas monitoring, typically from those locations showing the highest soil gas concentrations of VOCs.

The objective of the biopile closure assessment is to collect soil samples for testing in order to ensure that the soil contaminant levels in the biopiles are below the cleanup targets for TPH and SVOCs. Furthermore, for soil to be treated subsequently by cement solidification, the levels of the concerned metals will also be analysed to provide the baseline conditions.

Confirmation samples will be collected with a sampling frequency of one sample per 100m3 of treated soil. The samples will be collected at representative locations distributed evenly throughout the biopile and at various depths within the biopile. Sample locations within the biopile will be documented accurately so that the analytical results can be correlated with locations within the biopile.


8

Access to the sampling locations will be through opening of cover panels. These openings will be closed after each access. Extracting the soil samples will be accomplished using a hand auger or other methods approved by the Engineer.

All soil samples will be analysed in an HOKLAS accredited laboratory for TPH (US EPA Method 8015 Mod), SVOCs (US EPA Method 8270C) and the concerned metals (US EPA Method 9010B/9012A for total cyanide; US EPA Method 7199 for hexavalent chromium; and US EPA Method 6010B for other metals).

Compliance Assessment and Event/Action Plan

The laboratory results will be considered satisfactory when the levels of TPH and SVOCs in 95% of the samples meet the cleanup targets. This acceptability of 95% serves to allow for laboratory error for soil analysis. In the event that more than 5% of the samples still exceed any cleanup targets, the biopile decontamination system will be restarted to fully remediate the soil. As the typical error for laboratory analysis ±25%, the upper limits on exceedance with respect to the 5% samples should be 1.25 times the corresponding cleaning targets for the concerned contaminants. The event and action plan for confirmation sampling/testing for biopile treatment is given in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1 Event/Action Plan for Confirmation Sampling / Testing for Biopile Treatment

Event Action Action Party More than 5% of the samples still exceed the respective cleanup targets for soil remediation (as tabulated in Table 3.2)

Biopile decontamination system will have to be restarted to fully remediate the soil

Contractor

Table 3.2 Concerned Action Levels and Cleanup Targets for Soil Remediation

Item Parameter Action Level (mg/kg or otherwise specified)

Cleanup Target (mg/kg or otherwise specified)

1 TPH 1000 (total) 1000 (total) 2 Arsenic 30 5 (mg/L as TCLP) 3 Barium 400 21 (mg/L as TCLP) 4 Cadmium 5 0.11 (mg/L as TCLP) 5 Chromium (total) 250 0.6 (mg/L as TCLP) 6 Cobalt 50 Not available 7 Copper 100 7.8 (mg/L as TCLP) 8 Lead 150 0.75 (mg/L as TCLP) 9 Nickel 100 11 (mg/L as TCLP) 10 Molybdenum 40 Not available 11 Tin 50 Not available 12 Zinc 500 4.3 (mg/L as TCLP) 13 Cyanide (total) 50 590 (mg/L as TCLP) 14 Phenol 1 1 15 Styrene 5 5 16 Naphthalene 5 5 17 Benzo(a)pyrene (1,2-

benzopyrene) 1 1


9

Item Parameter Action Level (mg/kg or otherwise specified)

Cleanup Target (mg/kg or otherwise specified)

18 Total PCB 1 (total) 1 (total) 19 Hexachlorobenzene 0.4 0.4 20 Benzo(a)anthracene 0.9 0.9 21 Bis(2-

ethylhexyl)phthalate 46 46

22 Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.9 0.9 23 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.9 0.9 24 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.09 0.09 25 Antimony 31 1.15 (mg/L as TCLP) 26 Hexavalent Chromium 270 Not available 27 Dioxins (2,3,7,8-TCDD

equivalent) 0.001 0.001

3.1.2 Thermal desorption treatment

Sampling and Testing Requirements

Following thermal desorption treatment, confirmation sampling/testing will be undertaken to confirm that the dioxin-contaminated soil has been treated to the cleanup target. The sampling frequency will be 1 sample per 50m3 of treated soil.

The confirmation samples will be analysed for dioxins (US EPA Method 8280A or 8290) and the concerned metals (US EPA Method 9010B/9012A for total cyanide; US EPA Method 7199 for hexavalent chromium; and US EPA Method 6010B for other metals).

A HOKLAS accredited laboratory will carry out all confirmation analyses.

Compliance Assessment and Event/Action Plan

If the dioxin concentration of all confirmation samples is below the cleanup target for dioxin (1 ppb TEQ), the treated soil having metals concentrations exceeding the action levels for soil remediation will be subsequently treated using solidification. If the cleanup target of dioxins is exceeded, the whole batch of treated soil discharged by the thermal desorption unit since the last confirmation sample achieving the cleanup target will be re-treated until the clean up target is met.

The Event and Action Plan for Confirmation Sampling/Testing for Thermal Desorption Treatment is given in Table 3.3.

Table 3.3 Event and Action Plan for Confirmation Sampling/Testing for Thermal Desorption Treatment

Event Action Action PartyThe cleanup target of 1 ppb TEQ for dioxins is not achieved for any one of the confirmation samples.

The whole batch of treated soil discharged by the thermal desorption unit since the last confirmation sample achieving the cleanup target will be re-treated until the clean up target is met

Contractor


10

The primary Cleanup Targets identified for Soil Remediation and associated action levels for each target, are presented in Table 3.2.

3.2 AIR QUALITY

3.2.1 General

Ambient Monitoring

The 24-hour TSP monitoring was carried out at AM1 to AM3 to monitor the construction dust impact and 24-hour dioxin monitoring was carried out at AM2 to AM3 to monitor the ambient dioxin level in this reporting period. The detailed results of the 24-hour TSP monitoring at AM1 to AM3 and 24-hour dioxin monitoring at AM2 to AM3 will be presented in Section 5.2.

The established Action/Limit Levels for the 24-hour and 1-hour TSP monitoring works; and 24-hour Dioxin monitoring works are summarized in Tables 3.4 to 3.6 respectively.

Table 3.4 Action and Limit Level for 24-hours TSP Monitoring

Monitoring Location

Description Action Level (µgm-3)

Limit Level (µgm-3)

AM1 Penny’s Bay Power Station 172 (a) 260 AM2 Toll Plaza Administration Building of

North Lantau Expressway 172 (b) 260

AM3 Dockyard Building next to TKW 161 (b) 260 Notes: (a) The 24-hr TSP action level for AM1 is developed using the impact monitoring data from

Contract No.CV/99/12 - EM&A of the Penny’s Bay Reclamation Stage 1 – covering a three months period.

(b) The action levels for AM2 and AM3 are developed based on the EP-116/2002/E baseline monitoring results.

Table 3.5 Action and Limit Level for 1-hour TSP Monitoring (a)

Monitoring Location

Description Action Level (µgm-3)

Limit Level (µgm-3)

AM1 Penny’s Bay Power Station 339 (a) 500 AM2 Toll Plaza Administration Building of

North Lantau Expressway 302 (a) 500

AM3 Dockyard Building next to TKW 299 (a) 500 Note: (a) The 1-hr TSP action levels are developed based on the EP-116/2002/E baseline monitoring

results.

Table 3.6 Action and Limit Level for 24-hours Dioxin Monitoring

Monitoring Location

Description Action Level (pg I-TEQ m-3) (a)

Limit Level

AM2 AM3

Toll Plaza Administration Building of North Lantau Expressway Dockyard Building next to TKW

16.9 16.9

HPCL1-hr) of 33.6 pg I-TEQ m-3 HPCL1-hr) of 33.6 pg I-TEQ m-3


11

Monitoring Location

Description Action Level (pg I-TEQ m-3) (a)

Limit Level

Note: (a) The 24-hr dioxin action levels are developed based on the EP-116/2002/E baseline

monitoring results.

Plant Emission Monitoring

For the thermal desorption plant, the stack with the highest emission during the POP test will be tested monthly during operations, unless the EPD directs that a different stack should be monitored. The stack gas sampling will be conducted by a HOKLAS accredited laboratory.

Dioxin/furans will be sampled and analysed using US EPA Method 23A; and quantification will be performed by High Resolution Mass Spectrometry with Dual Capillary Column Gas Chromatography. Instrumentation will be VG 70-250S mass spectrometer coupled to a HP5890 gas chromatograph.

TOC emissions from the stack of thermal desorption and from biopile vent is monitored. Continuous emission monitoring (CEM) system is able to measure TOC emission and other thermal desorption plant performance parameters, such as oxygen, carbon monoxide and total hydrocarbons continuously. The measurement results are immediately recorded and processes such that timely remedial action can be implemented in case of exceedance of emission standards. The established Action/Limit Levels for plant emission monitoring is summarized in Tables 3.7.

Table 3.7 Proposed Action and Limit Levels for Plant Emission Monitoring

Emission Point Parameter Average Time Action Level Limit Level Biopile vent Total Organic

Carbon (TOC) Instantaneous reading logged each hour

16mg/m3 at 56m3/min

20mg/m3 at 56m3/min

Thermal desorption stack

Dioxin NA NA 0.1ng/m3 at 289m3/min

Total Organic Carbon (TOC)

60 minutes rolling averages

9ppm (correct to 11% O2)

11 ppm (correct to 11% O2)

Oxygen 60 minutes rolling averages

Minimal 3% Minimal 2%

Carbon Monoxide

60 minutes rolling averages



3.2.2 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Programme

The monitoring parameters and frequency for ambient monitoring and plant emission monitoring are summarized in Table 3.8 and Table 3.9. The monitoring programme for the reporting period is shown in Annex E.

Table 3.8 Ambient Monitoring Parameter and Frequency

Parameter Frequency • 24-hours TSP • Once every 6 days


12

Parameter Frequency • 1-hour TSP (a) • 3 times every 6 days

• 24-hours Dioxin • Once every month Note: (a) 1-hour TSP monitoring will be carried out in case of any air quality complaint due to

Contract 2 works.

Table 3.9 Plant Emission Monitoring Parameter and Frequency

Emission Point

Parameter Sampling Hours Sampling Details Frequency

Biopile gas vent

TOC Continuous CEM system Continuous (with instantaneous readings logged each hour)

Stack of thermal desorption plant

TOC, O2 & CO

Continuous CEM system Continuous

Dioxin 3 hours (180 mins.) Composite of 12 nos. of 15-min samples taken during the plant operation hours

Once every month

3.2.3 Monitoring Location

Ambient Monitoring

In accordance with the EM&A Manual, three monitoring stations were selected. The locations of the three monitoring stations are listed in Table 3.10 and are shown in Annex F.

Table 3.10 Monitoring Locations

Monitoring Location Description AM1 Penny’s Bay Power Station

AM2 Toll Plaza Administration Building of North Lantau Expressway

AM3 Dockyard Building next to TKW

Plant Emission Monitoring

Emissions of thermal desorption stack and biopile vent is measured during soil remediation phase upon commissioning of the remediation plant at TKW. Monitoring points is at a stack/vent location after treatment and before discharge. The locations of the dioxin stack monitoring, CEM system for TOC emission from the ITD and biopile are shown in Annex F.

3.2.4 Monitoring Equipment

Ambient Monitoring

Continuous 24-hour and 1-hour TSP (in case of complaints received) monitoring were performed using High Volume Samplers (HVS) with appropriate sampling inlets installed, located at the designated monitoring


13

station. The HVS composed of a motor, a filter holder, a flow controller and a sampling inlet and its performance specification complies with the standard method “Determination of Suspended Particulate Matter in the Atmosphere (High Volume Method)” as stipulated in US EPA Standard Title 40, Code of Federation Regulations Chapter 1 (Part 50 Appendix B). Table 3.11 summarizes the equipment that was used in the 24-hour and 1-hour TSP monitoring programme.

Continuous 24-hour Dioxin monitoring was performed using PUF Samplers with the pre-treated quartz-fibre filter and PUF glass cartridge will be used for 24 hours to sample 325 to 400m3 ambient air. The PUF sampler composed of a motor, a PUF glass cartridge holder, a flow controller and a sampling inlet and its performance specification complies with the standard method Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations of the US EPA and US EPA Method TO-9A. Table 3.12 summarizes the equipment that was used in the 24-hours Dioxin monitoring programme.

Table 3.11 TSP Monitoring Equipment

Monitoring Location Equipment Model AM1 HVS GMWS 2310 HVS with TSP sampling inlet

Calibration Kit GMW-25

AM2 HVS Thermo Andersen model GV2360-80 HVS

Calibration Kit G2535 Calibration Kit

AM3 HVS Thermo Andersen model GV2360-80 HVS Calibration Kit G2535 Calibration Kit

Table 3.12 Dioxin Monitoring Equipment

Monitoring Location Equipment Model AM2 PUF Sampler Thermo Andersen model GPS1

Calibration Kit G40 PUF Calibration Kit

AM3 PUF Sampler Thermo Andersen model GPS1 Calibration Kit G40 PUF Calibration Kit

Wind monitoring equipment was installed at the rooftop of the Dockyard Building next to TKW (AM3) on 12 February 2003 for logging wind speed and wind direction. The wind sensor was fixed on a 4m mast above the rooftop of the Dockyard Building which is about 9m high. For installation and operation of the wind data monitoring equipment, the following points have been observed:

• the wind sensors should be installed on masts at an elevated level 10 m above the ground, so that they are clear of obstructions or turbulence caused by building(s);

• the wind data should be captured by a data logger and be downloaded for processing at least once a month;

• wind direction should be divided into 16 sectors of 22.5 degrees.


14

In exceptional situations, the ET may propose alternative methods to obtain representative wind data upon approval from the IEC and Engineer, and agreed with EPD. Plant Emission Monitoring

Thermal Desorption System

A continuous emissions monitor (CEM) and a data acquisition system (CEMDAS) for monitoring of gas emissions from the furnace will be used for the thermal desorption plant. The CEM will measure oxygen (O2), carbon monoxide (CO) and Total Organic Compounds (TOCs). This is the combination of CEMs noted in the Penny’s Bay EIA paragraph 4.283. The CEM system will be calibrated daily using a calibration drift test for each CEM parameter.

Carbon monoxide (CO) will be monitored using an infrared analyser. The analyser range will be determined based on site-specific conditions. The analyser will output its signal to the CEMDAS.

The CO analyser will have a single range of 0-200 ppm and the oxygen analyser will have a range of 0 to 25%. Both analysers will output their signals to the CEMDAS. The CEMDAS will accept the raw data from the CO analyser and correct it to equivalent 11% oxygen content. The CEMDAS will be programmed to provide an alarm if CO levels move outside predetermined concentrations, so that adjustments can be made to the process operations as required to return CO levels to normal concentrations. The CEMDAS will also perform daily calibration and drift exceedance alarms.

Guidance on TOC monitoring is found in the EPD document “Best Practicable Means for Incinerators (Municipal Waste Incineration)”, which specifies measurement of “gaseous and vaporous substances expressed as total organic carbon”. Total Organic Compounds can be measured using U.S. EPA Method 25A, which is a continuous emission monitoring instrument. According to Method 25A, “this method applies to the measurement of total gaseous organic concentration of vapours consisting primarily of alkanes, alkenes, and/or arenas (aromatic hydrocarbons). The concentration is expressed in terms of propane (or other appropriate organic calibration gas) or in terms of carbon.”

This typically involves measurement of Total Hydrocarbons (THCs) using a flame ionisation detector (FID) continuous emissions monitoring instrument. The FID ionises all organic carbon based compounds to CO2. The results are then expressed on a carbon basis.


15

Both the actual CO and O2 data and corrected CO data will be logged by the CEMDAS for all dioxin sampling of the thermal desorption plant, the sampling equipment will conform with the US EPA Method 23. Biopile A continuous emission monitoring (CEM) system was installed to measure VOC emissions continuously. The system consists of a PID with data logging capability that extracts gas from a sampling point located at the outlet of the activated carbon adsorption system. The specification for the continuous monitoring probes is as follows:

Minimum Detection Range : 0-60 ppm Operating Temperature : -15°C to +50°C Operating Humidity : Continuous 20 to 90% RH (non-

condensing) Intermittent 10% to 99% RH (non-condensing)

Calibration : Daily 2-point calibration using Isobutylene in air span gas (~100ppm) or as otherwise specified by the manufacturer.

3.2.5 Monitoring Methodology and Calibration Details

Ambient Monitoring

Installation

The HVS monitors were placed at the rooftop of a plant room of the Penny’s Bay Power Station (about 3.5 m above ground) (AM1), rooftop of the Toll Plaza Administration Building of North Lantau Expressway (AM2) and rooftop of dockyard Building next to TKW (AM3), which was freestanding with no obstruction. The HVS was situated about 1.3 metres above the rooftop.

The PUF Samplers with PUF glass cartridge for dioxin monitoring was also installed beside the HVS monitors at AM2 and AM3.

The following criteria were considered in the installation of the HVS and PUF Sampler:

• a horizontal platform with appropriate support to secure the samplers 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 penthouses was required for rooftop samplers;

• no furnace or incinerator flues were nearby;


16

• airflow around the sampler was unrestricted; and

• permission was obtained to set up the samplers and to obtain access to the monitoring stations.

Preparation of Filter Papers for TSP Monitoring

• 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; the relative humidity (RH) was < 50% and not variable by more than ± 5%. A convenient working RH was 40%; and

• two HOKLAS accredited laboratories, Wellab Ltd and Hong Kong Productivity Council (HKPC) have comprehensive quality assurance and quality control programmes.

Preparation of PUF Cartridge for Dioxin Monitoring

• Pre-treated quartz fibre filter and PUF glass cartridge were prepared;

• HKPC, a HOKLAS accredited laboratory, has comprehensive quality assurance and quality control programmes.

Field Monitoring for TSP

• the power supply was checked to ensure the HVS worked properly;

• the filter holder and the area surrounding the filter were cleaned;

• the filter holder was removed by loosening the foul 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;

• then the shelter lid was closed and secured with the aluminium strip;

• the HVS was warmed-up for about 5 minutes to establish run-temperature conditions;

• a new flowrate record sheet was set into the flow recorder;

• the flow rate of the HVS was checked and adjust at around 1.1 m3/min. The range specified in the EM&A Manual was between 0.6 – 1.7 m3/min;


17

• the programmable timer was set for a sampling period of 24 hours ± 1 hour, 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 folder 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; and

• filters were sent to Wellab Ltd (AM1) and Hong Kong Productivity Council (AM2 & AM3) for analysis.

Field Monitoring for Dioxin

• the power supply was checked to ensure the PUF Sampler worked properly;

• the PUF glass cartridge holder and the area surrounding the holder were cleaned;

• the PUF Sampler was warmed-up for about 5 minutes to establish run-temperature conditions;

• a new flowrate record sheet was set into the flow recorder;

• the flow rate of the PUF Sampler was checked and adjust at 8 standard cubic feet per minute (scfm) (0.225 std m3/min) to obtain a total sample volume of greater than 325 scm over a 24-hours period;

• the programmable timer was set for a sampling period of 24 hours ± 1 hour, 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 PUF glass cartridge was removed carefully and cover with another quartz filter;

• the whole glass cartridge is then wrapped with the original aluminium foil, capped with Teflon end caps, placed back into the original shipping containers, identified, and shipped to the analytical laboratory for sample processing and analysis by HRGC-HRMS.

Maintenance and Calibration for TSP Monitoring Equipment


18

• the HVS and its accessories were maintained in good working condition, such as replacing motor brushes routinely and checking electrical wiring to ensure a continuous power supply;

• the flow rate of each HVS with mass flow controller were calibrated using an orifice calibrator. Initial calibrations of the dust monitoring equipments were conducted upon installation and prior to commissioning. Five-point calibration was carried out for Thermo Andersen GMWS-2310 HVS using GMW-25 Calibration Kit every two months for AM1; and for AM2 and AM3; five point calibration were carried out for Thermo Andersen GV2360-80 HVS using G2535 Calibration Kit every month.

Maintenance and Calibration for Dioxin Monitoring Equipment

• the PUF sampling system and its accessories were maintained in good working condition, such as replacing motor brushes routinely and checking electrical wiring to ensure a continuous power supply;

• initial calibration of the dioxin monitoring equipments were conducted upon installation and prior to commissioning. Five-point calibration was carried out for Thermo Andersen GPS1 PUF using G40 PUF Calibration Kit once every six months.

• The calibration record for both High Volume Sampler for TSP and PUF Sampler for Dioxin are shown in Annex G.

Thermal Desorption Plant Emission

Maintenance and Calibration for Stack Monitoring Equipment

For dioxin stack sampling of the thermal desorption plant, the calibration detail for equipment used for stack monitoring is summarised in Table 3.13. The calibration record for the sampling equipment is shown in Annex G.

Table 3.13 Calibration for Stack Dioxin Monitoring

Equipment Description Parameters to be Calibrated

Calibration

Control Panel (Andersen or Apex)

Monitor the stack gas 1. dH@ - orifice calibration factor

• Once per year

2. Dry gas meter factor • Calibrated DGM to calibrate the internal dry gas meter

3. Stack temp. sensor • Using a calibrated thermometer to calibrate the sensors for items 3 to 6

4. Probe temp. sensor 5. Oven temp. sensor 6. Impinger outlet

temp. sensor


19

Equipment Description Parameters to be Calibrated

Calibration

Standardized Dry Gas Meter

Calibrate the control panel

Dry gas meter • Once every 3 years

• Five points calibration by the equipment supplier

3.2.6 Event Action Plans

The Event and Action Plan (EAP) for air quality monitoring is presented in Annex H.

3.3 WATER QUALITY MONITORING

3.3.1 Monitoring Requirement

The water quality of effluent of centralized water treatment units on TKW was monitored, in accordance with the requirements of license issued under Water Pollution Control Ordinance. Subject to the license requirement, the monitoring location was selected at final treated water tank of the WWTP. The location for effluent monitoring of the WWTP in TKW is shown in Annex F. The effluent was monitored for the following parameters:

1. Suspended solids, 2. TPH, 3. Metals (As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Pb, Ni, Zn), and 4. Dioxin

3.3.2 Effluent Sampling Requirement and Procedure

Table 3.14 lists the preservation and storage requirements for the chemical analysis stated above. All samples were stored in clean containers and were protected from direct sunlight.

Table 3.14 Preservation and Storage Requirements for the Chemical Analysis of Effluents

Test Parameters Container Volume Preservation Holding Time Suspended Solids

HDPE 1000 mL 4°C 7 days

TPH Amber Glass Vial Amber Glass

2 X 40 mL 1 L

4°C 7 days for extraction, 40 days for extract analysis

Metals (As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Pb, Ni, Zn)

HDPE 250 mL 4°C 6 months, 14 days for mercury

Dioxin Amber Glass 2 L 4°C 7 days for extraction, 40 days for extract analysis

The sample collection procedure was as follows:


20

• Sample bottles were used to collect effluent samples at the final effluent discharge point of centralised water treatment unit.

• Gloves were worn during sample collection if necessary.

• Surface debris or other solid substances were avoided when sampling. Disturbance of the water will be minimised by carefully immersing the bottle into the water.

• Water was filled to the top of the bottle, with no air bubbles present, to ensure a sufficient sample is collected for analysis.

• The bottle was tightly capped to ensure no loss of samples during transportation to the laboratory.

• Labels on all sample containers were completed.

• The samples were chilled in the field at 4°C while awaiting transportation to the laboratory. The analysis started within 24 hours after collection of the water samples.

The effluent sample were analysed by a HOKLAS and other international accredited laboratories. Table 3.15 lists out the analytical method for the parameters.

Table 3.15 Reference Methods for the Parameters in Effluents

Parameters Reference Method Limit of Reporting Suspended Solids (SS)

APHA 2540D 2 mg/L

TPH

US EPA 8015/8260 25 µg/L

PAH US EPA 8270C 2 µg/L Metals ----- US EPA 6020

As 10 µg/L Cd 0.2 µg/L Cr 1 µg/L Cu 1 µg/L Pb 1 µg/L Ni 1 µg/L Zn 10 µg/L

Dioxins US EPA 1613B/8290A 10 pg/L

3.4 COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT AND ACTION PLAN

Discharge limits of water quality parameter were specified in the Water Pollution Control Ordinance licence and conformed to the Technical Memorandum on Standards for Effluents Discharged into Drainage and Sewerage Systems, Inland and Coastal Waters (TM-ES). Since the TM-ES has no provision for dioxin, it is proposed that “undetectable concentration” (i.e. < 10 pg I-TEQ/L) was adopted as the effluent discharge standard for dioxin. The


21

analytical method was subjected to EPD’s agreement prior to the commencement of testing.

Should any of the effluent discharge standards be exceeded, the Contractor will follow the event and action plan as summarized in Table 3.16.


22

Table 3.16 Event and Action Plan for the Effluent Discharge Monitoring

Event Action Exceedance of discharge limit for any water quality parameter

•

•

•

•

•

The Contractor/ ET to notify IEC, EPD and the Engineer’s Representative (ER). The Contractor to stop the effluent discharge· The Contractor to propose remedial action for IEC & EPD’s acceptance and the ER’s approval· The ET/Contractor to monitor the effluent discharge to confirm the effectiveness of the remedial action implemented. The Contractor resumes the discharge with the approved remedial action implemented.

3.5 WASTE MANAGEMENT

Wastes generated from this Project included construction and demolition (C&D) materials including C&D wastes and public fill, chemical waste and general refuse. The Waste Management Plan has recommended procedures for handling of C&D materials, excavated materials, chemical waste and general refuse.

Solid thermal desorption residue will be stored within the existing storage shed at TKW and will be absorbed by the A620 polymer and turned all the oily thermal desorption residue to a solid form as a risk reduction measure when transporting the residue from TKW to CWTC. This storage shed has previously been approved as a chemical waste storage area. Wastes will be stored in sealed containers prior to transport by Enviropace to the CWTC. The leakproof containers will be stored in a dedicated, labelled, ventilated, roof building enclosed on at least 3 sides. The store will have an impermeable concrete floor that is bunded and graded to a sump. The bund will be capable of containing 110% of the storage capacity of the largest storage container or 20% of the total volume of residue in the store.

Based on the information provided by CSCE with respect to relevant handling records and trip-tickets of this Project, the quantities of different types of waste are summarized in Table 3.17.


23

Table 3.17 Quantities of Waste Materials Generated

Site Quantities C&D Waste

(tons) (a) Public Fill (tons) (b)

General Refuse (m3)

Chemical Waste

Recyclable

CLS 167.65 17,297 180 - 271.4 kg(f)

TKW -- -- 96

27,197 kg(c) 1000 L(d) 4 m3(e)

--

Total 167.65 17297 276 27,197 kg(c) 1,000 L(d) 4 m3(e)

271.4 kg

Notes: (a) C&D wastes included vegetated materials and wood. (b) Public fill included bricks, rubble and concrete. Density of public fill is assumed to be 1.8

tons/m3. (c) Solid materials generated from thermal desorption system such as filter cake, filter medium

and spent carbon. (d) Spent lube oil. (e) Sludge was generated from the cleaning of water storage pond and it will be disposed as

dioxin residue. (f) Recyclables included plastics bottles, aluminium/iron cans and waste papers.

In CLS, the C&D wastes and general refuses were disposed of at the WENT/NENT landfills and the Public Fill materials were transported to the Tuen Mun Area 38 Public Filling Area. The recyclables were collected by the waste collectors regularly for recycling.

In TKW, the general refuse was disposed of at the SENT landfill. The spent lube oil was sent to CWTC for treatment. Approximately 27,197 kg of solid thermal desorption residue generated by the ITD and the sludge generated from the cleaning of water storage pond during the reporting period was stored in the storage shed for future disposal to the CWTC. About 15,800 m3 of treated solidified soil was delivered to the Ma Liu Shui reclamation site by barge during the reporting period. Confirmation testing had been undertaken for the treated solidified material and the results are complied with the cleanup targets, as stipulated in Condition 3.19 of EP-116/2002/E.


24

4 IMPLEMENTATION STATUS ON ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS

The implementation status of environmental mitigation measures and requirements as stated in the EIA Report, Environmental Permits and EM&A Manual during the reporting period is summarized in Annexes I1 and I2.


25

5 MONITORING RESULTS

5.1 LAND CONTAMINATION

5.1.1 Biopile Treatment

The biopile operation was completed on 20 March 2004. Closure assessment of biopile was carried out in April and May and the biopile was being decommissioned during June. Confirmation sampling and testing were carried out to ensure the cleanup targets have been attained. The sampling requirement stipulated in Condition 3.48 of EP-116/2002/E for non-dioxin treated soil was fulfilled.

14141.8 m3 of the treated material was above the clean up target for metals, further processing by solidification treatment was required. 3,100 m3 of material has passed the clean up target for metal, which included both the Toxicity Characteristics Leaching Procedure (TCLP) and Unconfined Compressive Strength Test (UCS); and 3,400 m3 of material was still pending the result. The volume of the treated materials is presented in Annex J.

5.1.2 Thermal Desorption Plant

The volume of treated material which has passed the clean up target for dioxins, Cr VI, Cyanide, VOC, SVOC, PCB, TPH and PAHs, but above the clean up target for metal was 4,850.22 m3 during this reporting period.

When the treated material above the clean up target for metal, then further processing by solidification treatment was required. 5,000 m3 of material has passed the clean up target for metal, which included both the Toxicity Characteristics Leaching Procedure (TCLP) and Unconfined Compressive Strength Test (UCS). The volume of the treated materials is presented in Annex J.

The dioxin stack tests were carried out on 14 April 2004 and the results were below the action level.

5.1.3 Ambient Monitoring

The TSP monitoring data at Penny’s Bay Power Station (AM1) were provided by MEMCL – Environmental Team for Penny’s Bay Reclamation Stage 2 Project; and Toll Plaza Administration Building on North Lantau Expressway (AM2) and Dockyard Building next to TKW (AM3) are undertaken by ERM. Sixteen sets of TSP monitoring events of AM1, AM2 and AM3 and one dioxin monitoring event for AM2 and AM3 was undertaken in this reporting period. The TSP monitoring data together with wind data are summarized in Annex K2 and graphical presentations of the TSP monitoring results are presented in Annex K3. In addition, the dioxin monitoring data are presented in Annex K4 and the graphical presentations are presented in Annex K5.


26

The 24-hour TSP monitoring at AM1 in Penny’s Bay on 7 June 2004 was 186.9 µg/m3, which exceeded the Action level (172 µg/m3) but below the Limit level (260 µg/m3). The data were received by the ETL on 11 June 2004. An email notification was issued to the contractor, RE and IEC on 11 June 2004, notifying the TSP exceedance at AM1 and notification of exceedance was issued to EPD and IEC on 16 June 2004.

Both ET and IEC considered that the exceedance was not resulted from the construction works of the Contract 2. Summary of the investigation of the exceedance was presented in Section 7.1.

24-hour dioxin monitoring was carried out at AM2 and AM3 on 27 March 2004. The monitoring results were all below the action level. As the remediation by thermal desorption unit was completed on 22 April 2004, the ambient dioxin monitoring requirement as stipulated in Condition 4.9 of EP-116/2002/E was fulfilled.

5.1.4 Plant Emission Monitoring

The TOC monitoring data at biopile gas vent and TOC, O2 and CO monitoring data at thermal desorption plant were recorded. No exceedance of EM&A Action Level and EP Limit Level of TOC monitoring was recorded at the biopile vent. Also, no exceedance of TOC, O2 and CO monitoring was recorded at the thermal desorption plant. The graphical presentations of the monitoring result at biopile and thermal desorption plant are presented in Annex K6 and Annex K7.

5.2 WATER QUALITY

The wastewater samples were collected once a month. All samples collected were analyzed for metals, suspended solids to comply with the WPCO license requirement. The parameters included TPH, PAH and dioxin are also being tested.

The analysis results revealed that there had been an exceedance of the discharge limit for TPH measured at TKW Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) on 3 May 2004. The proposed remedial actions were received from the Contractor and the notification was submitted by ET to EPD and IEC. Summary of the investigation of the exceedance was presented in Section 7.1.2.

The water sampling results during this reporting period are presented in Annex K8.

5.3 ECOLOGICAL MONITORING

A total of 1000 nos. Nepenthes mirabilis, 125 nos. Fuirena ciliaris and 102.5 m2 of wetland area containing Eriocaulon merrilli, Fimbristylis acuminata, and Fimbristylis complanata were transplanted to the receptor site at Tai Tam Country Park. The maintenance and monitoring period was commenced on 3


27

May 2003. From September 2003 onwards, monitoring was carried out once a month.

In general, the health condition of the monitored transplanted species was acceptable during the monitoring period from 26 March to 25 June 2004. The monitored transplanted plant species have shown evidence of self-generation and flowering/fruiting. The survival rates of the area of wetland were 49.6% (April), 46% (May) and 46% (June).

In general, the condition of the Eriocaulon merrilli was considered good while signs of improvement were noted for the Nepenthes mirabilis and Fimbristylis acuminata. Fimbristylis complanata and Fuirena ciliaris were considered to be poor. No signs of self-regeneration were noted for these two species. As expected, no Fuirena ciliaris was observed and it is believed that this was due to seasonality. For Eriocaulon merrilli, a slight increase was noted and signs of self-regeneration were observed at all monitored dams.

The survival rates of the Nepenthes mirabilis recorded were approximately 37% (April), 40.5% (May) and 43.6% (June). The overall condition of the N. mirabilis has shown improvement. Due to the potential effects of seasonality, it was agreed that monitoring be continued before any conclusion can be drawn. Field survey will be continued to closely monitor the conditions of the transplanted species. Details of the ecological monitoring are presented in the Monthly Post-Transplantation Monitoring Report for Restricted/Protected Plant Species at Tai Tam Country Park.


28

6 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE AUDITING

Weekly site inspections were carried out by representatives of the IEC, the ER, the Contractor and the ET.

Thirteen site inspections were conducted on 30 March, 6, 13, 20 and 27 April, 4, 11, 18 and 25 May and 1, 8, 15 and 23 June 2004 for both TKW and CLS site. In general, the environmental performance in both CLS and TKW site was considered satisfactory.

Follow up from last quarterly report

• No follow up action from last quarterly report.

EP-116/2002/E

• A non-compliance was observed during the joint site inspection on 15 June 2004 and the incident is summarised as follows:

After heavy rain fall in the early morning of the audit day, surface runoff was observed to the area adjacent to the barging point. There was no water overflow from the biopile screening pad with a continuous 300mm bund in place, in which the water pump was in operation. There is a bund and sump in the stockpile area that directs the water to the WWTP. Any overflow water from the stockpile area to the wheel washing bay was pumped back to WWTP for treatment.

The causes of non-compliance include: (1) the heavy rainfall recorded during the audit day, (2) no sand bag was placed at overflow locations and (3) pump capacity not enough.

• Follow-up actions were carried out by the contractor in response to the non-compliance and it was listed as follows:

a. The access road between the treated soil stockpile and biopile screening pad was covered with cobbles to improve the water drainage and a concrete bund was constructed at the entrance of this road to prevent the influx of water onto it.

b. A sump pit was constructed at the corner of the bare land between the treated soil stockpile and biopile screening pad to assist the collection of water to the WWTP for treatment. A pump with higher pumping capacity was also used to remove the water from this area.

c. Additional sand bags were placed along the perimeter of the bare land to prevent the surface runoff to the surrounding areas.


29

d. Establish an inspection team (leader is site superintendent and members are supervisor and engineer) to inspect site drainage conditions when heavy rainfall events are forecasted.

e. After intense rainfall events, inspections and necessary actions (such as maintenance or repair of damaged drainage items) will be carried out.

f. At biopile screening pad, the pump was also upgraded. Water was pumped to the collection point in biopile via PVC piping and the water was then sent to the WWTP for treatment.

g. At wheel washing bay, the pump was upgraded and the mud was cleared.

• Given the remedial actions had been carried out effectively, the non-compliance was signed off by IEC but the contractor should keep monitoring the effectiveness of the flood control measures.

EP-138/2002/C

No environmental deficiency was observed during this reporting quarter.


30

7 ENVIRONMENTAL NON-CONFORMANCE

7.1 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL NON-COMPLIANCE

7.1.1 Air Quality

The 24-hour TSP monitoring at AM1 in Penny’s Bay on 7 June 2004 was 186.9 µg/m3, which exceeded the Action level but below the Limit level (260 µg/m3). The data were received by the ETL on 11 June 2004 and notifications of exceedance were issued to EPD and IEC on 16 June 2004. IEC observed that the flood protection berm adjacent to AM1 was hydroseeded and covered and the haul road was damp. Moreover, no dusty activity related to Contract 2 works was carried out in the vicinity of AM1 during the TSP monitoring. Therefore, IEC considered the exceedence was not relevant to the construction works of Contract 2.

A summary of non-compliance recorded to date is presented in Table 7.1.

Table 7.1 Summary of Environmental Non-Compliance

Reporting Period Nature No. of Exceedance Action Level Limit Level 04/10/02 – 25/10/02 24-hour TSP 1 - 24-hour Dioxin - - 26/10/02 – 25/11/02 24-hour TSP 2 - 24-hour Dioxin - - 26/11/02 – 25/12/02 24-hour TSP 2 - 24-hour Dioxin - - 26/12/02 – 25/1/03 24-hour TSP 5 2 24-hour Dioxin - - 26/1/03 – 25/2/03 24-hour TSP 3 1 24-hour Dioxin - - 26/2/03 – 25/3/03 24-hour TSP - - 24-hour Dioxin - - 26/3/03 – 25/4/03 24-hour TSP - - 24-hour Dioxin - - 26/4/03 – 25/5/03 24-hour TSP - - 24-hour Dioxin - - 26/5/03 – 25/6/03 24-hour TSP - - 24-hour Dioxin - - 26/6/03 – 25/7/03 24-hour TSP 2 2 24-hour Dioxin - - 26/7/03 – 25/8/03 24-hour TSP - - 24-hour Dioxin - - 26/8/03 – 25/9/03 24-hour TSP - - 24-hour Dioxin - - 26/9/03 – 25/10/03 24-hour TSP 2 - 24-hour Dioxin - - 26/10/03 – 25/11/03 24-hour TSP - - 24-hour Dioxin - - 26/11/03 – 25/12/03 24-hour TSP 2 - 24-hour Dioxin - - 26/12/03 – 25/1/04 24-hour TSP 1 -


31

Reporting Period Nature No. of Exceedance 24-hour Dioxin - - 26/1/04 – 25/2/04 24-hour TSP 2 - 24-hour Dioxin - - 26/2/04 – 25/3/04 24-hour TSP 3 - 24-hour Dioxin - - 26/3/04 – 25/4/04 24-hour TSP - - 24-hour Dioxin - - 26/4/04 – 25/5/04 24-hour TSP - - 26/5/04 – 26/6/04 24-hour TSP 1 -

7.1.2 Water Quality

The analysis results revealed that there had been an exceedance of the discharge limit for TPH measured at TKW Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) on 3 May 2004. The proposed remedial actions were received from the Contractor and notification was submitted by ET to EPD and IEC.

The results for Sample TKW/WW/31 showed detentions of TPH in the C10 to C28 fraction. No discharge of the treated wastewater from TKW WWTP had occurred. All other parameters were below the discharge limit stipulated in the EM&A Manual. Remedial actions had been implemented as follows:

The wastewater was pumped back to the WWTP receiving pond for temporary storage. All water storage tanks were cleaned to remove any organic material and the Aquased was drained and cleaned.

The exceedance did not appear to have been attributable to contamination from a petroleum fuel oil source. Additionally, it was observed that algal buildup had occurred in the storage tanks at the TKW site and it was considered that this might have been the reason as to why TPH was detected at very low concentrations. Hence, it is an isolated incident and not related to the works.

An additional sample was taken on 22 May 2004 and the analysis results received from LAES indicated that the TPH levels in the wastewater were below the discharge limit and hence the remedial actions were implemented effectively.

To prevent the recurrence of the exceedance, the ET has recommended and the Contractor has implemented the pro-active measures, including the increase of the frequency of replacement of carbon filter element, skim the free product (if any) at effluent reception tank before treatment and increase the frequency of inspection. The ET will closely monitor the environmental performance of the Contractor.

7.2 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLAINT

No environmental compliant was received during the reporting period.


32

A statistical summary of environmental complaints since project commencement is presented in Table 7.2.

Table 7.2 Statistical Summary of Environmental Complaints

Reporting Period Complaint Statistics Frequency Cumulative Complaint Nature 04/10/02 – 25/10/02 0 0 -- 26/10/02 – 25/11/02 0 0 -- 26/11/02 – 25/12/02 0 0 -- 26/12/02 – 25/01/03 1 1 Dust 26/01/03 – 25/02/03 0 1 -- 26/02/03 – 25/03/03 0 1 -- 26/03/03 – 25/04/03 1 2 Dark smoke 26/04/03 – 25/05/03 1 3 Dust cloud 26/05/03 – 25/06/03 0 3 -- 26/06/03 – 25/07/03 1 4 Dust cloud 26/07/03 – 25/08/03 0 4 -- 26/08/03 – 25/09/03 0 4 -- 26/09/03 – 25/10/03 1 5 Dust 26/10/03 – 25/11/03 0 5 -- 26/11/03 – 25/12/03 0 5 -- 26/12/03 – 25/1/04 0 5 -- 26/1/04 – 25/2/04 0 5 -- 26/2/04 – 25/3/04 0 5 -- 26/3/04 – 25/4/04 0 5 -- 26/4/04 – 25/5/04 0 5 -- 26/5/04 – 25/6/04 0 5 --

7.3 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL SUMMONS

No summons was received in this reporting period. A statistical summary of legal proceeding since project commencement is presented in Table 7.3.

Table 7.3 Statistical Summary of Environmental Summons

Reporting Period Environmental Summons Frequency Cumulative Summon Nature 4/10/02 – 25/10/02 0 0 -- 26/10/02 – 25/11/02 0 0 -- 26/11/02 – 25/12/02 0 0 -- 26/12/02 – 25/01/03 0 0 -- 26/01/03 – 25/02/03 0 0 -- 26/02/03 – 25/03/03 0 0 -- 26/03/03 – 25/04/03 0 0 -- 26/04/03 – 25/05/03 0 0 -- 26/05/03 – 25/06/03 0 0 -- 26/06/03 – 25/07/03 0 0 -- 26/07/03 – 25/08/03 0 0 -- 26/08/03 – 25/09/03 0 0 -- 26/09/03 – 25/10/03 0 0 -- 26/10/03 – 25/11/03 0 0 -- 26/11/03 – 25/12/03 0 0 -- 26/12/03 – 25/1/04 0 0 -- 26/1/04 – 25/2/04 0 0 -- 26/2/04 – 25/3/04 0 0 --


33

Reporting Period Environmental Summons 26/3/04 – 25/4/04 0 0 -- 26/4/04 – 25/5/04 0 0 -- 26/5/04 – 25/6/04 0 0 --

7.4 IMPACT PREDICTION REVIEW

No Limit Level exceedances of 24 hr TSP were recorded during this reporting period. One action level exceedances of 24–hr TSP were found during the reporting period, however, IEC and ET considers the exceedances were not resulted from the construction works of Contract 2. Therefore, no impact prediction review will be necessary during this reporting period.

Although there was an exceedance of TPH in WWTP effluent sample, no effluent with TPH exceedance was discharged from the WWTP and the remedial actions, including the cleaning of the water storage tanks, had been implemented effectively. It was observed that algal buildup had occurred in the storage tanks at and it was considered that this might have been the reason as to why TPH was detected at very low concentrations. Hence, it is an isolated incident and not related to the works. Hence, no impact prediction review will be necessary during this reporting period.

One non-compliance about surface runoff was recorded during the reporting period. Given the contractor has implemented additional mitigation measures and it was considered effective, therefore, no impact prediction for surface runoff is anticipated.


34

8 RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

8.1 CONCLUSIONS

The Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) Report presents the EM&A works undertaken during the period from 26 March to 25 June 2004 in accordance with EM&A Manual and the requirement under EP-116/2002/E and EP-138/2002/C.

Air Quality

Sixteen sets of 24-hour TSP monitoring were carried out at Penny’s Bay Power Station (AM1), the Toll Plaza Administration Building of North Lantau Expressway (AM2) and the Dockyard Building next to TKW (AM3) during this reporting period.

The 24-hour TSP exceedances was recorded at AM1 on 7 June 2004 and the result was 186.9 µg/m3 which exceeded the Action Level (172 µg/m3) but below the Limit Level (260 µg/m3);

Notifications of exceedances were submitted to IEC and EPD. The Contractor has all along implemented dust mitigation measures including haul road watering and covering active and inactive stockpiles. Both ET and IEC considered that these measures were effective. Therefore, the exceedances were not relevant to the construction works of Contract 2.

24-hour Dioxin monitoring was carried out at AM2 and AM3 on 27 March 2004 and the monitoring results were below the action level.

Dioxin stack monitoring was carried out on 14 April 2004 and the results were below the action level.

No exceedance of EM&A Action Level and EP Limit Level of TOC monitoring was recorded at the biopile vent. Also, no exceedance of TOC, O2 and CO monitoring was recorded at the thermal desorption plant.

Water Quality

The analysis results revealed that there had been an exceedance of the discharge limit for TPH measured at TKW Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) on 3 May 2004. The proposed remedial actions were received from the Contractor and the notification was submitted by ET to EPD and IEC.

It was observed that algal buildup had occurred in the storage tanks at TKW site and it was considered that this might have been the reason as to why TPH was detected at very low concentrations. Hence, the exceedance is an isolated incident and not related to the works. No discharge of this treated wastewater had occurred since this sample was collected. All other parameters were below the discharge limit stipulated in the EM&A Manual.


35

The remedial actions had been implemented and an additional sample was collected on 22 May 2004 and the analysis results indicated that the TPH levels in the wastewater were below the discharge limit.

Ecology

A total of 1000 nos. Nepenthes mirabilis, 125 nos. Fuirena ciliaris and 102.5 m2 of wetland area containing Eriocaulon merrilli, Fimbristylis acuminata, and Fimbristylis complanata were transplanted to the receptor site at Tai Tam Country Park. The maintenance and monitoring period was commenced on 3 May 2003. From September 2003 onwards, monitoring has been carried out once a month.

Construction Waste Management

In CLS, 167.65 tons of C&D waste, 180 m3 of general refuse, 17,297 tons of public fill and 271.4 kg of recyclables were produced during the reporting period. In TKW, 96 m3 of general refuse, approximately 27,197 kg of solid thermal desorption residue, 4 m3 of sludge and 1000L lube oil were produced during the reporting period. The dioxin residue and sludge was subsequently stored in the storage shed for future disposal to the CWTC. About 15,800 m3 of treated solidified soil was delivered to the Ma Liu Shui reclamation site by barge during the reporting period. Confirmation testing had been undertaken for the treated solidified material and the results are complied with the cleanup targets, as stipulated in Condition 3.19 of EP-116/2002/E.

Environmental Complaint

No environmental compliant was received during the reporting period. Environmental Summons No environmental summons was received in this reporting period.

8.2 RECOMMENDATION

In accordance with the joint site audits with the ER, Contractor, IEC and ET undertaken during the reporting period, the environmental performance in both CLS and TKW sites were considered satisfactory.

The ET will keep track on the EM&A programme to ensure compliance of environmental requirements and the proper implementation of all necessary mitigation measures.

The environmental performance of the construction site in both CLS and TKW was considered acceptable during the past three months. Only few isolated issues were noted. The contractor has carried out immediately on the required remedial measures accordingly for the observations though they are isolated incidents. The measures were found effective for the improvement of


36

the environmental performance of the construction site during subsequent weekly inspection by the audit team. The performance of overall EM&A programme was effective reflected the site situation and the EM&A programme was able to improve the environmental condition on site. This practice will be continued and any updates on the site situation will be reported.


37

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The construction works of Infrastructure for Penny’s Bay Development Contract 2 (Contract CV/2001/10) was commenced on 4 October 2002. This quarterly Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) report presents the EM&A works carried out during the period from 26 March to 25 June 2004 in accordance with the EM&A Manual.

Summary of construction works undertaken during this reporting period

The major construction works included hydroseeding of grasscreted channels in CLS site, asphalt paving for Chok Ko Wan Link Road, formation of tree farm area and arboretum, bridge work in Area 1, featured wall construction at Penny’s Bay roundabout at CLS, scaffolding prepared for the slope planting work, shrub Tree planting and installation of irrigation pipes at landscape berms, slope planting work, re-creation of Rice Fish Habitat, filling of topsoil, soft and hard landscape works and installation of irrigation system within the tree planting area at CLS site; closure assessment of biopile in April, cement solidification plant operation, thermal desorption plant operation in April, decommissioning of thermal desorption plant in May, decommissioning of biopile in May and June, transport of treated soil by barge, decontamination and confirmation sampling of concrete floor at areas for stabilisation of post treatment stockpile and dioxin storage shed at TKW site.

Environmental Monitoring and Audit Progress

A summary of the monitoring activities in this reporting period is listed below: 24-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) monitoring at AM1 16 times 24-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) monitoring at AM2 16 times 24-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) monitoring at AM3 16 times 24-hour Dioxin monitoring at AM2 1 time 24-hour Dioxin monitoring at AM3 1 time Water Quality Monitoring at TKW 3 times Joint environmental site auditing 13 times

Air Quality

Sixteen sets of 24-hour TSP monitoring were carried out at Penny’s Bay Power Station (AM1), the Toll Plaza Administration Building of North Lantau Expressway (AM2) and the Dockyard Building next to TKW (AM3) during this reporting period.

The 24-hour TSP exceedances was recorded at AM1 on 7 June 2004 and the result was 186.9 µg/m3 which exceeded the Action Level (172 µg/m3) but below the Limit Level (260 µg/m3);

Notifications of exceedances were submitted to IEC and EPD. The Contractor has all along implemented dust mitigation measures including


I

haul road watering and covering active and inactive stockpiles. Both ET and IEC considered that these measures were effective. Therefore, the exceedances were not relevant to the construction works of Contract 2.

24-hour Dioxin monitoring was carried out at AM2 and AM3 on 27 March 2004 and the monitoring results were below the action level.

Dioxin stack monitoring was carried out on 14 April 2004 and the results were below the action level.

No exceedance of EM&A Action Level and EP Limit Level of TOC monitoring was recorded at the biopile vent. Also, no exceedance of TOC, O2 and CO monitoring was recorded at the thermal desorption plant.

Water Quality

The analysis results revealed that there had been an exceedance of the discharge limit for TPH measured at TKW Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) on 3 May 2004. The proposed remedial actions were received from the Contractor and the notification was submitted by ET to EPD and IEC.

It was observed that algal buildup had occurred in the storage tanks at TKW site and it was considered that this might have been the reason as to why TPH was detected at very low concentrations. Hence, the exceedance is an isolated incident and not related to the works. No discharge of this treated wastewater had occurred since this sample was collected. All other parameters were below the discharge limit stipulated in the EM&A Manual.

The remedial actions had been implemented and an additional sample was collected on 22 May 2004 and the analysis results indicated that the TPH levels in the wastewater were below the discharge limit.

Ecology

The ecological monitoring of the transplanted restricted/protected plant has been undertaken. The health condition of the monitored transplanted plant species was acceptable. All mitigation measures implemented for rare/restricted plants are summarized in Annex I1.

Construction Waste Management

In CLS, C&D waste, public fill, general refuse and recyclables were produced during the reporting period. In TKW, general refuse, solid thermal desorption residue, sludge and lube oil were produced during the reporting period. The solid thermal desorption residue and sludge were subsequently stored in the storage shed for future disposal to the CWTC.

Environmental Site Auditing


II

Thirteen weekly joint environmental site audits were carried out by the representatives of the IEC, Engineer’s Representative, CSCE and ET. Details of the audit findings and implementation status are presented in Section 6.

Environmental Complaint

No environmental compliant was received during the reporting period.

Environmental Summons

No environmental summons was received in this reporting period.


III

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I

1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT 1 1.2 STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT 1

2 PROJECT INFORMATION 3

2.1 BACKGROUND 3 2.2 SITE DESCRIPTION 3 2.3 PROJECT ORGANIZATION 4 2.4 CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMME 4 2.5 STATUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL APPROVAL DOCUMENTS 4 2.6 COMPLIANCE WITH EP CONDITIONS 6

3 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REQUIREMENTS 8

3.1 LAND CONTAMINATION 8 3.2 AIR QUALITY 11 3.3 WATER QUALITY MONITORING 20 3.4 COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT AND ACTION PLAN 21 3.5 WASTE MANAGEMENT 23

4 IMPLEMENTATION STATUS ON ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS 25

5 MONITORING RESULTS 26

5.1 LAND CONTAMINATION 26 5.2 WATER QUALITY 27 5.3 ECOLOGICAL MONITORING 27

6 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE AUDITING 29

7 ENVIRONMENTAL NON-CONFORMANCE 31

7.1 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL NON-COMPLIANCE 31 7.2 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLAINT 32 7.3 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL SUMMONS 33 7.4 IMPACT PREDICTION REVIEW 34

8 RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS 35

8.1 CONCLUSIONS 35 8.2 RECOMMENDATION 36

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Summary of Construction Activities undertaken from 26 March to 25 June 2004

Table 2.2 Summary of Environmental Licensing, Notification and Permit Status

Table 2.3 Environmental Permit Submission Table 3.1 Event and Action Plan for Confirmation Sampling/Testing for Soil

Excavation Table 3.2 Concerned Action Levels and Cleanup Targets for Soil

Remediation Table 3.3 Event and Action Plan for Confirmation Sampling/Testing for

Thermal Desorption Treatment Table 3.4 Action and Limit Level for 24-hour TSP Monitoring Table 3.5 Action and Limit Level for 1-hour TSP Monitoring Table 3.6 Action and Limit Level for 24-hours Dioxin Monitoring Table 3.7 Proposed Action and Limit Level for TOC Monitoring Table 3.8 Ambient Monitoring Parameter and Frequency Table 3.9 Plant Emission Monitoring Parameter and Frequency Table 3.10 Monitoring Locations Table 3.11 TSP Monitoring Equipment Table 3.12 Dioxin Monitoring Equipment Table 3.13 Calibration for Stack Dioxin Monitoring Table 3.14 Preservation and Storage Requirements for the Chemical Analysis

of Effluents Table 3.15 Reference Methods for the Parameters in Effluents Table 3.16 Event and Action Plan for the Effluent Discharge Monitoring Table 3.17 Quantities of C&D Materials and Chemical Waste Generated Table 7.1 Summary of Environmental Non-compliance Table 7.2 Statistical Summary of Environmental Complaints Table 7.3 Statistical Summary of Environmental Summons

LIST OF ANNEXES

Annex A Location of Environmental Sensitive Receivers Annex B Location of Works Area Annex C Project Organization Chart and Contact Details Annex D Construction Programme Annex E TSP and Dioxin Monitoring Schedule from 26 March to 25 June

2004 Annex F Monitoring Locations Annex G Calibration Record for TSP, Dioxin Monitoring and Dioxin Stack

Monitoring equipment Annex H Event/Action Plan for Air Quality Monitoring Annex I1 Summary of Implementation Status of Mitigation Measures under

EP-116/2002/E Annex I2 Summary of Implementation Status of Mitigation Measures under

EP-138/2002/C Annex J The schematic diagram of the Treated Material Result

Annex K1 Graphical Presentation of Stack Dioxin Monitoring Annex K2 24-hour TSP Monitoring Results and Meteorological Data Annex K3 Graphical Presentation of 24-hour TSP Monitoring Results Annex K4 24-hour Dioxin Monitoring Results Annex K5 Graphical Presentation of 24-hour Dioxin Monitoring Results Annex K6 Graphical Presentation of Plant Emission Monitoring – Biopile Annex K7 Graphical Presentation of Plant Emission Monitoring – Thermal

Desorption Plant Annex K8 Water Monitoring Results

Infrastructure for Penny's Bay Development, Contract 2 ... · Business and taking account of the...

Documents

Transcript of Infrastructure for Penny's Bay Development, Contract 2 ... · Business and taking account of the...