Contract
No. HY/2011/03
Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link
Road
Section between Scenic Hill and Hong Kong Boundary Crossing
Facilities
Baseline Environmental Monitoring Report
5 November 2012
Revision 4
Main Contractor Designer
Contents
Executive Summary.......................................................................................................................
2.1 Air Quality Monitoring Stations
2.2 Monitoring Methodology and Results
2.4 Event and Action Plan for Air Quality
3.2 Monitoring Methodology and Results
3.4 Event and Action Plan for Noise Monitoring
4.1 Water Quality Monitoring Stations
4.2 Monitoring Methodology and Results
4.4 Event and Action Plan for Water Quality Monitoring
5.1 Monitoring Methodology and Results for Chinese White Dolphins
5.2 Event and Action Plan for Dolphin Monitoring
6.1 Mudflat Ecology Monitoring Methodology
6.2 Mudflat Ecology Monitoring Results
6.4 Sedimentation Rate Monitoring
6.5 Event and Action Plan for Mudflat Monitoring
Figures
Figure 6.1 Mudflat
Survey Areas
Appendices
Appendix A Environmental
Monitoring Stations
Executive Summary
Prior to the commencement
of Contract No. HY/2011/03 Hong Kong Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link Road ¡V
Section between Scenic Hill and Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities
(hereafter referred to as the Contract), Highways Department employed environmental
specialist under Agreement No. CE35/2011 (EP) and Contract No. HY/2011/02 to
carry out baseline environmental monitoring in air quality, noise water quality
and ecology (Chinese White Dolphin) to facilitate early commencement of
construction of Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF) reclamation
works and the Tuen Mum ¡V Chek Lap Kok Link (TM-CLKL) advance Southern Landfall
reclamation works under Contract No. HY/2010/02. The baseline environmental monitoring
for air quality, noise, water quality and ecology (Chinese White Dolphin) was
undertaken between September and November 2011 in accordance with requirements
provided in the Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) Documents for the
Hong Kong Link Road (HKLR), HKBCF and TM-CLKL. A Baseline Environmental Monitoring
Report (Version C) for Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Projects ¡V
Investigation (hereafter referred to as ¡§BEMR¡¨) was prepared to fulfil
environmental permit conditions for HKBCF (including TM-CLKL southern landfall)
project. The BEMR presented
monitoring locations, equipment, period, methodology, results and observations
and is available from the website of Agreement No. CE 48/2011 (EP)
Environmental Project Office (ENPO) for the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong
Kong Link Road, Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing
Facilities, & Tuen Mun-Chek Lap Kok Link ¡V Investigation:
http://www.hzmbenpo.com/
There are a total of two air
quality monitoring stations, one noise monitoring station and thirteen water
quality monitoring stations for this Contract No. HY/2011/03. As these environmental monitoring
locations were also covered in the BEMR, the baseline monitoring results for
these environmental monitoring locations will be adopted for the Contract.
This Baseline Environmental
Monitoring Report has been prepared based on baseline mudflat monitoring
results and baseline monitoring results presented in the BEMR.
The Action and Limit Levels
for air quality, noise, water quality and ecology (Chinese White Dolphin) were
developed based on the baseline monitoring results presented in the BEMR.
According to the baseline
mudflat monitoring, surveys for horseshoe crabs, seagrass beds, intertidal soft
shore communities as well as sedimentation rate monitoring were conducted in
September 2012 at the specified mudflat survey areas.
The mudflat monitoring
covered water quality monitoring data.
Reference was made to the water quality baseline monitoring data of the
representative water quality monitoring station (i.e. SR3) as presented in the
BEMR. Baseline water quality
monitoring in San Tau (monitoring station, SR3) was conducted in October 2011
prior to the construction of the HZMB.
http://www.hzmbenpo.com/
Table 2.1 Locations
of Air Quality Monitoring Stations
Monitoring
Stations |
Location |
AMS 5 |
Ma Wan Chung Village (Tung Chung) |
AMS 6 |
Dragonair / CNAC (Group) Building (HKIA) |
Table 2.2 Summary
of Baseline 1-hour TSP Monitoring Results
Monitoring
Station |
Average 1-hour
TSP Concentration, µg/m3 |
AMS 5 |
156.9 (82.2 ¡V 246.6) |
AMS 6 |
169.2 (87.8 ¡V 273.2) |
Table 2.3 Summary
of Baseline 24-hour TSP Monitoring Results
Monitoring
Station |
Average
24-hour TSP Concentration, µg/m3 |
AMS 5 |
52.9 (25.3 ¡V 74.2) |
AMS 6 |
66.4 (35.2 ¡V 103.5) |
Table
2.4 Action
and Limit Levels for 1-hour TSP
Monitoring
Station |
Action Level,
µg/m3 |
Limit Level,
µg/m3 |
AMS 5 |
352 |
500 |
AMS 6 |
360 |
Table 2.5 Action
and Limit Levels for 24-hour TSP
Monitoring
Station |
Action Level,
µg/m3 |
Limit Level,
µg/m3 |
AMS 5 |
164 |
260 |
AMS 6 |
173 |
Table 2.6 Event
and Action Plan for Air Quality
Event |
Action |
|||
ET |
IEC |
SO |
Contractor |
|
Exceedance of Action Level for one
sample |
1. Identify
source, investigate the causes of exceedance and propose remedial measures; 2. Inform
IEC and SO; 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. |
Exceedance of Action Level for two or
more consecutive samples |
1. Identify
source; 2. Inform
IEC and SO; 3. Advise
the SO 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 Contractor on remedial actions required; 7. If
exceedance continues, arrange meeting with IEC and SO; 8. If
exceedance stops, cease additional monitoring. |
1. Check
monitoring data submitted by ET; 2. Check
Contractor¡¦s working method; 3. Discuss
with ET and Contractor on possible remedial measures; 4. Advise
the ET on the effectiveness of the proposed remedial measures; 5. Supervise
Implementation of remedial measures. |
1. Confirm
receipt of notification of failure in writing; 2. Notify
Contractor; 3. Ensure
remedial measures properly implemented. |
1. Submit
proposals for remedial to SO within 3 working days of notification; 2. Implement
the agreed proposals; 3. Amend
proposal if appropriate. |
Exceedance of Limit Level for one
sample |
1. Identify
source, investigate the causes of exceedance and propose remedial measures; 2. Inform
SO, Contractor 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 SO
informed of the results. |
1. Check
monitoring data submitted by ET; 2. Check
Contractor¡¦s working method; 3. Discuss
with ET and Contractor on possible remedial measures; 4. Advise
the SO on the effectiveness of the proposed remedial measures; 5. Supervise
implementation of remedial measures. |
1. Confirm
receipt of notification of failure in writing; 2. Notify
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. |
Exceedance of Limit Level for two or
more consecutive samples |
1. Notify
IEC, SO, Contractor and EPD; 2. Identify
source; 3. Repeat
measurement to confirm findings; 4. Increase
monitoring frequency to daily; 5. Carry
out analysis of Contractor¡¦s working procedures to determine possible
mitigation to be implemented; 6. Arrange
meeting with IEC and SO to discuss the remedial actions to be taken; 7. Assess
effectiveness of Contractor¡¦s remedial actions and keep IEC, EPD and SO
informed of the results; 8. If
exceedance stops, cease additional monitoring. |
1. Discuss
amongst SO, ET, and Contractor on the potential remedial actions; 2. Review
Contractor¡¦s remedial actions whenever necessary to assure their
effectiveness and advise the SO accordingly; 3. Supervise
the implementation of remedial measures. |
1. Confirm
receipt of notification of failure in writing; 2. Notify
Contractor; 3. In
consultation with the IEC, agree with the Contractor on the remedial measures
to be implemented; 4. Ensure
remedial measures properly implemented; 5. If
exceedance continues, consider what portion of the work is responsible and instruct
the Contractor to stop that portion 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 portion of works as determined by the SO until the exceedance is
abated. |
Note: ET ¡V Environmental Team, IEC ¡V
Independent Environmental Checker, SO ¡V Supervising Officer
Table 3.1 Locations
of Noise Monitoring Stations
Monitoring
Station |
Location |
NMS 5 |
Ma Wan Chung Village (Tung Chung) |
Table 3.2 Summary of Daytime (Normal Weekdays) Noise
Monitoring Results
Monitoring
Station |
Daytime
0700-1900 hrs on normal weekdays |
||||||||
Leq (30 min) |
L10 (5 min) |
L90 (5 min) |
|||||||
Mean |
Max |
Min |
Mean |
Max |
Min |
Mean |
Max |
Min |
|
NMS 5 |
55.3 |
63.5 |
51.0 |
57.5 |
74.1 |
50.8 |
51.1 |
61.7 |
48.3 |
Table 3.3 Summary
of Evening-Time & Daytime (Holiday) Noise Monitoring Results
Monitoring |
Evening-time
1900-2300 hrs on all days & Daytime 0700-1900 hrs on holidays |
||||||||
Leq (30
min) |
L10 (5
min) |
L90 (5
min) |
|||||||
Mean |
Max |
Min |
Mean |
Max |
Min |
Mean |
Max |
Min. |
|
NMS 5 |
55.4 |
68.2 |
48.9 |
58.2 |
67.8 |
49.7 |
51.0 |
57.5 |
48.1 |
Table 3.4 Summary
of Night Time Noise Monitoring Results
Monitoring |
Night-time
2300-0700 hrs on the next day |
||||||||
Leq (30
min) |
L10 (5
min) |
L90 (5
min) |
|||||||
Mean |
Max |
Min |
Mean |
Max |
Min |
Mean |
Max |
Min |
|
NMS 5 |
53.7 |
67.5 |
48.6 |
55.7 |
71.5 |
49.5 |
50.0 |
55.0 |
48.0 |
Table 3.5 Action
Limit Levels for Noise during Construction Period
Monitoring
Station |
Time Period |
Action Level |
Limit Level |
NMS5 |
0700-1900 hrs on normal weekdays |
When one documented complaint is received |
75 dB(A) |
Notes:
If works are to
be carried during restricted hours, the conditions stipulated in the
construction noise permit issued by the Noise Control Authority have to be
followed.
(*): Reduce to
65 dB (A) during school examination periods.
Table 3.6 Event
and Action Plan for Construction Noise
Event |
Action |
|||
ET |
IEC |
SO |
Contractor |
|
Exceedance of Action Level |
1. Identify
source, investigate the causes of exceedance and propose remedial measures; 2. Notify
IEC and Contractor; 3. Report
the results of investigation to the IEC, SO and Contractor; 4. Discuss
with the Contractor and formulate remedial measures; 5. Increase
monitoring frequency to check mitigation effectiveness. |
1. Review
the analysed results submitted by the ET; 2. Review
the proposed remedial measures by the Contractor and advise the SO accordingly; 3. Supervise
the implementation of remedial measures. |
1. Confirm
receipt of notification of failure in writing; 2. Notify
Contractor; 3. Require
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. |
Table 4.1 Locations
of the Water Quality Monitoring Stations
Monitoring
Stations |
Description |
Coordinates |
|
Easting |
Northing |
||
IS5 |
Impact Station (Close to HKLR construction site) |
811579 |
817106 |
IS(Mf)6 |
Impact Station (Close to HKLR construction site) |
812101 |
817873 |
IS7 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
812244 |
818777 |
IS8 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
814251 |
818412 |
IS(Mf)9 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
813273 |
818850 |
IS10 |
Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site) |
812577 |
820670 |
SR3 |
Sensitive receivers (San Tau SSSI) |
810525 |
816456 |
SR4 |
Sensitive receivers (Tai Ho Inlet) |
814760 |
817867 |
SR5 |
Sensitive receivers (Artificial Reef In NE
Airport) |
811489 |
820455 |
SR10A |
Sensitive receivers (Ma Wan Fish Culture Zone) |
823741 |
823495 |
SR10B |
Sensitive receivers (Ma Wan Fish Culture Zone) |
823686 |
823213 |
CS2 |
Control Station |
805849 |
818780 |
CS(Mf)5 |
Control Station |
817990 |
821129 |
Table 4.2 Action
and Limit Levels for Water Quality
Parameter
(unit) |
Water Depth |
Action Level |
Limit Level |
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) (surface, middle and
bottom) |
Surface and Middle |
5.0 |
4.2 except 5 for Fish Culture Zone |
Bottom |
4.7 |
3.6 |
|
Turbidity (NTU) |
Depth average |
27.5 or 120% of upstream control station¡¦s
turbidity at the same tide of the same day |
47.0 or 130% of turbidity at the upstream control
station at the same tide of same day |
Suspended Solid (SS) (mg/L) |
Depth average |
23.5 or 120% of upstream control station¡¦s SS at
the same tide of the same day |
34.4 or 130% of SS at the upstream control
station at the same tide of same day and 10mg/L for Water Services Department
Seawater Intakes |
Notes:
(1) Depth-averaged
is calculated by taking the arithmetic means of reading of all three depths.
(2) For
DO, non-compliance of the water quality limit occurs when monitoring result is
lower that the limit.
(3) For
SS & turbidity non-compliance of the water quality limits occur when
monitoring result is higher than the limits.
(4) All
the figures given in the table are used for reference only and the EPD may
amend the figures whenever it is considered as necessary.
(5) The
1 percentile of baseline data for dissolved oxygen (surface and middle) and
dissolved oxygen (bottom) are 4.2mg/L and 3.6mg/L respectively.
Table 4.3 Event
and Action Plan for Water Quality
Event |
Action |
|||
ET
Leader |
IEC |
SO |
Contractor |
|
Action level being exceeded by one
sampling day |
1. Repeat
in situ measurement on next day of exceedance to confirm findings; 2. Identify
source(s) of impact; 3. Inform
IEC, contractor and SO; 4. Check
monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor's working methods. |
1. Check
monitoring data submitted by ET and Contractor¡¦s working methods. |
1. Confirm
receipt of notification of non-compliance in writing; 2. Notify
Contractor. |
1. Inform
the SO and confirm notification of the non-compliance in writing; 2. Rectify
unacceptable practice; 3. Amend
working methods if appropriate. |
Event |
Action |
|||
ET
Leader |
IEC |
SO |
Contractor |
|
Action level being exceeded by two or
more consecutive sampling days |
1. Repeat
measurement on next day of exceedance to confirm findings; 2. Identify
source(s) of impact; 3. Inform
IEC, contractor, SO and EPD; 4. Check
monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor's working methods; 5. Discuss
mitigation measures with IEC, SO and Contractor; 6. Ensure
mitigation measures are implemented; 7. Increase
the monitoring frequency to daily until no exceedance of Action level; |
1. Check
monitoring data submitted by ET and Contractor¡¦s working method; 2. Discuss
with ET and Contractor on possible remedial actions; 3. Review
the proposed mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise the SO
accordingly; 4. Supervise
the implementation of mitigation measures. |
1. Discuss
with IEC on the proposed mitigation measures; 2. Ensure
mitigation measures are properly implemented; 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 and consider changes of working methods; 4. Submit
proposal of additional mitigation measures to SO within 3 working days of
notification and discuss with ET, IEC and SO; 5. Implement
the agreed mitigation measures. |
Limit level being exceeded by one
sampling day |
1. Repeat
measurement on next day of exceedance to confirm findings; 2. Identify
source(s) of impact; 3. Inform
IEC, contractor, SO and EPD; 4. Check
monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor's working methods; 5. Discuss
mitigation measures with IEC, SO and Contractor; |
1. Check
monitoring data submitted by ET and Contractor¡¦s working method; 2. Discuss
with ET and Contractor on possible remedial actions; 3. Review
the proposed mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise the SO
accordingly. |
1. Confirm
receipt of notification of failure in writing; 2. Discuss
with IEC, ET and Contractor on the proposed mitigation measures; 3. Request
Contractor to review the working methods. |
1. Inform
the SO and confirm notification of the non-compliance in writing; 2. Rectify
unacceptable practice; 3. Check
all plant and equipment and consider changes of working methods; 4. Submit
proposal of mitigation measures to SO within 3 working days of notification
and discuss with ET, IEC and SO. |
Limit level being exceeded by two or
more consecutive sampling days |
1. Repeat
measurement on next day of exceedance to confirm findings; 2. Identify
source(s) of impact; 3. Inform
IEC, contractor, SO and EPD; 4. Check
monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor's working methods; 5. Discuss
mitigation measures with IEC, SO and Contractor; 6. Ensure
mitigation measures are implemented; 7. Increase
the monitoring frequency to daily until no exceedance of Limit level for two
consecutive days; |
1. Check
monitoring data submitted by ET and Contractor¡¦s working method; 2. Discuss
with ET and Contractor on possible remedial actions; 3. Review
the Contractor¡¦s mitigation measures whenever necessary to assure their
effectiveness and advise the SO accordingly; 4. Supervise
the implementation of mitigation measures. |
1. Discuss
with IEC, ET and Contractor on the proposed mitigation measures; 2. Request
Contractor to critically review the working methods; 3. Make
agreement on the mitigation measures to be implemented; 4. Ensure
mitigation measures are properly implemented; 5. Consider
and instruct, if necessary, the Contractor to slow down or to stop all or part
of the construction activities until no exceedance of Limit level. |
1. Take
immediate action to avoid further exceedance; 2. Submit
proposal of mitigation measures to SO within 3 working days of notification
and discuss with ET, IEC and SO; 3. Implement
the agreed mitigation measures; 4. Resubmit
proposals of mitigation measures if problem still not under control; 5. As
directed by the Engineer, to slow down or to stop all or part of the
construction activities until no exceedance of Limit level. |
Table 5.2 Event
and Action Plan for Dolphin Monitoring
Event |
Action* |
|||
ET |
IEC |
SO |
Contractor |
|
Dolphin numbers and behaviour patterns recorded in
the construction and post-construction monitoring are significantly lower
than or different from those recorded in the pre-construction monitoring. |
Repeat statistical data analysis to confirm
findings; Review historical data to ensure differences are as
a result of natural variation or previously observed seasonal differences; Identify source(s) of impact; Inform the IEC, SO
and Contractor; Check monitoring data; Discuss additional dolphin monitoring and any
other measures, with the IEC and Contractor. |
Discuss monitoring with the ET and the
Contractor; Review proposals for additional monitoring and
any other measures submitted by the Contractor and advise the SO accordingly. |
Discuss with the IEC additional monitoring
requirements and any other measures proposed by the ET; Make agreement on the measures to be implemented |
Inform the SO and confirm notification of the
non-compliance in writing; Discuss with the ET and the IEC and propose
measures to the IEC and the SO; Implement the agreed measures. |
Notes:
ET ¡V Environmental Team
IEC ¡V Independent Environmental Checker
SO ¡V Supervising Officer
* Action to be instigated within 1 month of an event
Table 6.1 Summary
of Prosomal Width of Horseshoe Crab Survey
|
TC1 |
TC2 |
TC3 |
ST |
No. of
individuals |
1 |
N/A |
9 |
16 |
Mean prosomal width
(mm) |
28.14 |
N/A |
42.65 |
24.41 |
Range of
prosomal width (mm) |
N/A |
N/A |
12.67 ¡V 59.32 |
8.45 ¡V 47.90 |
Search record |
0.25 |
N/A |
1.50 |
2.67 |
Table 6.2 Baseline
Water Quality Monitoring Results (Depth Average)
Date |
Mid Ebb Tide |
Mid Flood Tide |
||||||
DO Saturation
(%) |
DO (mg/L) |
Turbidity (NTU) |
SS (mg/L) |
DO Saturation
(%) |
DO (mg/L) |
Turbidity (NTU) |
SS (mg/L) |
|
6 Oct 2011 |
87.6 |
6.0 |
7.3 |
15.5 |
91.1 |
6.2 |
9.4 |
7.6 |
8 Oct 2011 |
89.2 |
6.0 |
4.6 |
7.4 |
95.7 |
6.4 |
9.7 |
12.0 |
10 Oct 2011 |
92.1 |
6.2 |
6.3 |
11.0 |
93.9 |
6.3 |
8.5 |
14.0 |
12 Oct 2011 |
100.4 |
7.2 |
5.6 |
6.7 |
92.8 |
6.6 |
7.7 |
11.5 |
14 Oct 2011 |
91.4 |
6.4 |
9.1 |
10.0 |
88.2 |
6.2 |
10.5 |
16.5 |
16 Oct 2011 |
96.9 |
6.8 |
14.1 |
13.0 |
91.0 |
6.5 |
8.5 |
9.7 |
18 Oct 2011 |
85.6 |
6.5 |
7.0 |
16.0 |
85.3 |
6.5 |
9.4 |
14.5 |
22 Oct 2011 |
93.2 |
7.4 |
9.2 |
12.5 |
92.5 |
7.3 |
10.3 |
18.0 |
25 Oct 2011 |
89.8 |
7.2 |
8.4 |
8.3 |
88.4 |
7.1 |
17.8 |
28.0 |
27 Oct 2011 |
94.1 |
6.4 |
6.4 |
31.0 |
100.7 |
6.9 |
19.7 |
20.5 |
29 Oct 2011 |
120.6 |
8.1 |
8.1 |
15.0 |
106.1 |
7.3 |
14.1 |
22.0 |
31 Oct 2011 |
84.1 |
6.8 |
6.8 |
21.0 |
88.8 |
7.1 |
19.0 |
21.0 |
Average |
93.8 |
6.8 |
7.7 |
14.0 |
92.9 |
6.7 |
12.1 |
16.3 |
Table 6.3 Measured Mudflat Surface Level Results
Monitoring Station |
Easting (m) |
Northing (m) |
Sedimentation Rate (mPD) |
Remarks |
S1 |
810291.160 |
816678.727 |
0.950 |
Soft
mudflat |
S2 |
810958.272 |
815831.531 |
0.864 |
Soft
mudflat |
S3 |
810716.585 |
815953.308 |
1.341 |
Soft
mudflat |
S4 |
811221.433 |
816151.381 |
0.931 |
Soft
mudflat |
Table 6.4 Event
and Action Plan for Mudflat Monitoring
Event |
ET |
IEC |
SO |
Contractor |
Density or the
distribution pattern of horseshoe crab, seagrass or intertidal soft shore
communities recorded in the impact or post-construction monitoring are significantly lower than or different
from those recorded
in the baseline monitoring. |
Review
historical data to ensure differences are as a result of natural variation or
previously observed seasonal differences; Identify
source(s) of impact; Inform the IEC,
SO and Contractor; Check monitoring
data; Discuss
additional monitoring and any other measures, with the IEC and Contractor. |
Discuss
monitoring with the ET and the Contractor; Review proposals
for additional monitoring and any other measures submitted by the Contractor
and advise the SO accordingly. |
Discuss with the
IEC additional monitoring requirements and any other measures proposed by the
ET; Make agreement
on the measures to be implemented. |
Inform the SO
and in writing; Discuss with the
ET and the IEC and propose measures to the IEC and the ER; Implement the
agreed measures. |
Notes:
ET ¡V Environmental Team
IEC ¡V Independent Environmental Checker
SO ¡V Supervising Officer
Appendix A
Environmental Monitoring Stations
Appendix B
Intertidal Soft Shore Communities Survey Results
Appendix C
Draft Final Report on Baseline Chinese White
Dolphin Monitoring for
Hong Kong ¡V Zhuhai ¡V Macao Bridge Hong Kong Projects