Section 4

Proposed Joint User Complex and Wholesale Fish Market at Area 44 Tuen Mun
- Environmental Impact Assessment
AIR QUALITY
4.1
Introduction
19
This section presents an assessment of the potential air quality impacts arising from
the construction and operation of the proposed Wholesale Fish Market at Tuen Mun
Area 44. Dust emission during the construction phase, odour emission, vehicular
emission and marine traffic emission during the operational phase are the identified
key issues associated with the proposed Wholesale Fish Market.
4.2
Background Air Quality
4.2.1
The assessment area, which lies within 500m from the boundary of the subject site,
is shown in Figure 4.1. The land uses within the assessment area consists of
residential/commercial development, industrial establishments as well as recreational
facilities. As the industrial, commercial and residential uses account for more than
50% of the area within 3km radius of the subject site, an urban land use
classification is assigned for the assessment area.
4.2.2
Traffic emission from nearby roads is the major pollutant source within the area.
Emission from the industrial establishments in the vicinity is also a potential source
of air pollution of the assessment area. Besides, there are other potential sources of
odour in the area, including the Tuen Mun Nullah and the Castle Peak Bay Typhoon
Shelter.
4.2.3
The proposed Wholesale Fish Market (WFM) is located within the Tuen Mun
Airshed. The nearest Environmental Protection Department (EPD) Air Quality
Monitoring Station (AQMS) is located in Yuen Long. Air quality statistics in terms
of annual averages recorded for the Yuen Long District1 during Year 1999 were used
to represent the background air quality in the Tuen Mun Area. As the ambient
concentration of Carbon Monoxide was not monitored at the Yuen Long AQMS, the
air quality statistics recorded at the Tsuen Wan AQMS for Year 1999 were used.
Table 4.1 shows the background pollutant concentration adopted in the study.
Table 4.1
Background Air Quality Levels
Pollutant
SO2
NO2
TSP
RSP
CO
Background Concentration, g/m3

22
60
102
62
1177
There is no recorded data of the ambient odour concentrations at the Tuen Mun Area.
Air Policy Group, Environmental Protection Department, Air Quality in Hong Kong 1999
Issue 7
AEC
4.3
20
Identification of Potential Environmental Impacts

The potential air quality impacts associated with the construction and operational
phases of the proposed WFM are identified and described in this section.
(i)
Construction Phase
4.3.1
Activities associated with the construction of the proposed WFM have the potential
to cause dust impact on the surrounding environment by soiling properties close to
the construction site.
4.3.2
The potential for dust emission during the construction phase of the WFM depends
on the type of construction activities, the application of dust control measures to
reduce emissions, and the weather conditions. Construction activities, which may
cause dust impact on the nearby residents, include site excavation and concreting
operations. However, there will be no concrete batching plant on the site. Other
potential sources include dust blow-off and spillage from vehicles during the
transport of materials as well as indirect transport of particles by vehicles accessing
and leaving the site.
4.3.3
The construction work for the WFM can be divided into two phases, namely
foundation and superstructure construction. The foundation construction is
anticipated to last for 9 months and the superstructure construction for 17 months.
Excavation will be carried out during construction of piles and pile-caps. In view of
the fact that the subject site is an existing open space flat area, extensive demolition
and excavation works will not be required. The construction activities that have the
potential to generate dust will include material handling, wind erosion and truck
haulage on unpaved roads. The potential air quality impact due to dust emission
during the construction phase of the WFM was assessed quantitatively as detailed in
Section 4.6.
(ii)
Operational Phase
Odour from the operation of the WFM

4.3.4
Odour arising from the operation of the WFM may impose air quality impact on the
nearby residents. The potential sources of odour emissions include the various onsite and off-site activities involved in the daily operation of the WFM. Daily
operations vary and can be divided into a) night time operations involving the
wholesale activities associated with loose chilled fish and b) daytime operations
involving the unloading and vehicular transportation of live and boxed fish.
4.3.5
Night time fish auction operations currently account for the major activities of the
WFM and have the greatest potential for environmental impact as operations involve
handling of loose chilled fish. The peak hours for fish auction and wholesale
activities are from 3:00am to 6:30am and the on-site activities related to the fish
wholesaling process are briefly described as follows. From the fishing vessels
berthed at the WFM, fish will be unloaded, sorted and put into the buckets provided
by the FMO. After passing through the weighing station, these buckets of fish will
be arranged and displayed for auction. Fish bought by the fish traders will be
transferred from FMOs buckets to the fish traders containers and loaded onto
parked lorries. Throughout the process, fish will be chilled with ice blocks and kept
in open containers. These activities will be confined to the area within the WFM
Issue 7
AEC
21
building. Upon completion of the night time auction and loading operations all
remaining waste and organic matter will be sealed for removal and all areas
thoroughly and hygienically cleaned before daytime activities commence.
4.3.6
The handling and temporary storing of fish at the WFM may contribute to the odour
impact on the nearby sensitive receivers. Dead fish are potential sources of odour
emission. They have a characteristic smell. Although the odour is not pungent or
offensive generally, it may become a nuisance to some people when encountered at a
relatively high concentration or where deterioration of quality takes place. The
strength of the odour differs slightly for different types and storing conditions of the
chilled fish. Night time operations deal with the sorting and loose handling of fish
and as such have the greatest potential for generating odour and impacting on nearby
sensitive receivers.
4.3.7
Daytime operations in addition to undertaking and updating paperwork associated

with the night time auctions also account for the relatively simple and clean
throughput of both live seafood and boxed fish. AFCD records currently confirm that
unloading of some 660kg of live seafood and some 410kg of preboxed chilled fish
(with a combined total of 1 ton per day representing a small fraction of the total of
some 17 tonnes of chilled fish unloaded per day) take place between 7:00am to
2:30pm each day. Normally, the live seafood and boxed fish are unloaded and
transferred directly to waiting vehicles for dispatch. Due to the method of
containment, avoidance of sorting and handling of loose fish and lack of waste, the
potential source of odour is greatly reduced.
4.3.8
After careful consideration of the above operations, the EIA identifies the peak hours
for fish auction and wholesale activities from 3:00am to 6:30am as being the time
when odour levels will be greatest and potential nuisance to sensitive receivers will
be at its highest. It is considered that the potential for odour emission from other
operations at the WFM, which mainly involves handling of live seafood and boxed
fish, is greatly reduced since the concerned odour emission is normally associated
with decay of organic matter when chilled fish is exposed to open air.
4.3.9
To meet community pressure to reduce potential noise pollution from the future
market the WFM will be designed for all parking and loading of vehicles to be
accommodated inside the building and with no openings (other than fixed windows
and doors) on the sides of the building facing nearby premises (Wu Shan Road).
This is not customary practice in FMO markets and will require the extra operational
expense of a mechanical ventilation system to exhaust engine fumes from FMO
premises. Such a system would also simultaneously exhaust potentially odorous air
from fish handling areas and would vented from the waterfront side of the building.
A quantitative assessment of the odour impact arising from these on-site activities is
detailed in Section 4.6.
4.3.10 The off-site activities which may have the potential to generate odour impact is the
transportation of the fish to and from the proposed WFM. During the operation
period of the WFM for fish auction, the fish wholesalers will use marine/fish vessels
to carry their fish stocks to the WFM. On the other hand, the fish traders will
normally use lorries for the transport of the fishes. These offsite activities may
contribute to the odour impact on the nearby residents.
Issue 7
AEC
22
4.3.11 Another potential source of odour impact is the refuse collection facilities. A Refuse
Collection Point (RCP) and a Marine Refuse Collection Point (MRCP) have been
proposed inside the WFM for the collection of general refuse and marine refuse
respectively. The operation periods of the RCP and MRCP are 7:00am 8:00pm and
8:00a.m. 6:00pm respectively. The operation of these RCPs and the transportation
of refuse to and from them may also pose odour impact on the nearby receivers. The
concerns over the odour impact due to the off-site activities as well as the operation
of the RCP and MRCP are addressed in Section 4.6.
Off-site marine traffic emission
4.3.12 Fishing vessels carrying the fish stocks to be sold at the WFM will approach the
berthing area of the WFM. The vessels will be berthed at the sea frontage of the
WFM while the fishes are unloaded for wholesaling at the WFM. According to the
information provided by the AFCD, there are approximately 18 fishing vessels and 4
to 5 sampans landing fish at the WFM during 3:00am to 5:00am. The 18 fishing
vessels will be berthed in two layers along the sea frontage before 3:00am. Vessels
in the second layer will be waiting behind for their turn to unload fish. The vessels
will leave the WFM when the trading activities between the fish wholesalers and the
traders are completed but may remain alongside if they are not due to return to
fishing. Vessels will remain berthed at the WFM or move to the Fishing Vessel
mooring area if required to vacate the berth. It is likely that vessels will replenish
supplies including ice from the ice plant currently located in Are 27 before
proceeding to open water.
4.3.13 The emission from fishing vessels may impose air quality impact on the nearby
residents. The major air pollutants indicative of marine traffic emissions are TSP,
NO2 and CO. The SO2 emission from the fishing vessels and sampans is considered
insignificant and therefore not included in this assessment. This is in accord with the
fact that there is no emission standard for SO2 stipulated in the USEPA Technical
Highlights Emission Standards for Marine Diesel Engines: Scope of Application.
The potential impact due to the marine traffic emission is quantitatively assessed and
addressed in Section 4.6.
Off-site vehicular emission
4.3.14 During the night time operating hours of the WFM, lorries will access the WFM for
the loading of fish bought by fish traders and transport off-site. The loaded lorries
will leave the WFM when the trading activities between the fish wholesalers and the
traders are completed.
4.3.15 According to the information provided by the AFCD, up to 40 vehicles will
simultaneously access the WFM during its peak operation hours (3:00am to 6:30am).
Thus, an additional traffic flow of 40 lorries will be introduced to the road network
in the vicinity of the WFM.
4.3.16 Vehicular emissions from off-site road traffic may have the potential to impose air
quality impact on the nearby residents. The air pollutants indicative of vehicular
emissions are NO2 and RSP. Although it is anticipated that the vehicular emissions
from the additional traffic will not cause significant air quality impact on the nearby
residents, a quantitative assessment of the air quality impact due to off-site road
traffic was carried out and detailed in Section 4.6.
Issue 7
AEC
23
4.4
Determination of Air Sensitive Receivers
4.4.1
All the existing and planned Air Sensitive Receivers (ASRs) within 500m of the
project site boundary have been identified in accordance with the criteria set out in
the Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (TMEIA)
and shown in Figure 4.1. These identified ASRs comprise domestic premises,
schools and recreational areas located within the study area. The nearest sensitive
receivers, A27 (Lawn Bowling Field) and A28 (Tennis Court), are less than 100m
away from the subject site. Tuen Mun Wu Hong Clinic is located to the west at about
100m to the site boundary. Two secondary schools, namely Ka Chi Secondary
School and South Tuen Mun Government Secondary School, are approximately
300m to the south of the site boundary.
4.4.2
Information on the representative ASRs identified are presented in Table 4.2.

Location of the representative ASRs is illustrated in Figure 4.2.
Table 4.2
ASR
ID
Issue 7
Representative Air Sensitive Receivers
Description
Sensitive Use
Horizontal
separation distance
from the proposed
WFM (m)
Assessment Point
and Elevation
Recreational
Facilities
270
G/F (6.7mPD)
Domestic
Premises
390
G/F (6.8mPD), 1/F

(11.8mPD), 5/F
(23.8mPD), 10/F
(38.8mPD)
Educational
Institution
320
G/F (7.1mPD), 1/F

(12.1mPD), 5/F
(24.1mPD), 10/F
(39.1mPD)
Clinic
90
G/F (6.8mPD)
A1
Wu Shan
Recreation
Playground
A2
Siu Shan Court

Kwai King House
A3
School
A4
Wu Hong Clinic
A5
School
Educational
Institution
340
G/F (7.1mPD), 1/F

(12.1mPD), 5/F
(24.1mPD), 10/F
(39.1mPD)
A6
Po Leung Kok
Leung Chau Shun
Kam Primary
School
Educational
Institution
390
G/F (7.3mPD), 1/F

(12.3mPD), 5/F
(24.3mPD), 10/F
(39.3mPD)
A7
Wu King Estate
Wu Tsui House
Domestic
Premises
235
G/F (7.7mPD), 1/F

(12.7mPD), 5/F
(24.7mPD), 10/F
(39.7mPD)
A8
Yan Tak Catholic

Primary School
Educational
Institution
450
G/F (7.9mPD), 1/F

(12.9mPD), 5/F
(24.9mPD), 10/F
(39.9mPD)
AEC
ASR
ID
Sensitive Use
Horizontal
separation distance
from the proposed
WFM (m)
Assessment Point
and Elevation
Playground
Recreational
Facilities
300
G/F (7.7mPD)
A10 Possible
Neighbourhood
Community Centre
Community
Centre
115
G/F (5.8mPD), 1/F

(10.8mPD), 5/F
(22.8mPD), 10/F
(37.8mPD)
A11 Butterfly Estate Tip

Yee House
Domestic
Premises
420
G/F (8.4mPD), 1/F

(13.4mPD), 5/F
(25.4mPD), 10/F
(40.4mPD)
Office
165
G/F (7.1mPD), 1/F

(12.1mPD)
A13 Carmel Bunnam

Tong Memorial
Secondary School
Educational
Institution
345
G/F (8.3mPD), 1/F

(13.3mPD), 5/F
(25.3mPD), 10/F
(40.3mPD)
A14 Yuet Wu Villa

Block 15
Domestic
Premises
90
G/F (6.8mPD), 1/F

(11.8mPD), 5/F
(23.8mPD), 10/F
(38.8mPD)
A15 Wu King Road

Garden
Recreational
Facilities
240
G/F (10.9mPD)
A16 Tung Wa Group of

Hospitals Sun Hoi
Directors College
Educational
Institution
340
G/F (8.0mPD), 1/F

(13.0mPD), 5/F
(25.0mPD), 10/F
(40.0mPD)
A17 Yan Chai Hospital

Law Chan Chor Si
Primary School
Educational
Institution
260
G/F (6.7mPD), 1/F

(11.7mPD), 5/F
(23.7mPD), 10/F
(38.7mPD)
A18 Buddhist Wong

Sewai Memorial
School
Educational
Institution
370
G/F (8.1mPD), 1/F

(13.1mPD), 5/F
(25.1mPD), 10/F
(40.1mPD)
A19 Yuet Wu Villa

Block 3
Domestic
Premises
160
G/F (6.6mPD), 1/F

(11.6mPD), 5/F
(23.6mPD), 10/F
(38.6mPD)
A20 Siu Hei Court
Domestic
Premises
250
G/F (6.7mPD), 1/F

(11.7mPD), 5/F
(23.7mPD), 10/F
(38.7mPD)
A9
Description
A12 Police Station
Issue 7
24
AEC
ASR
ID
Description
Sensitive Use
Horizontal
separation distance
from the proposed
WFM (m)
Assessment Point
and Elevation
A21 Wu King Estate Wu Boon House
Domestic
Premises
425
G/F (8.0mPD), 1/F

(13.0mPD), 5/F
(25.0mPD), 10/F
(40.0mPD)
A22 South Tuen Mun

Government
Secondary School
Educational
Institution
300
G/F (6.6mPD), 1/F

(11.6mPD), 5/F
(23.6mPD), 10/F
(38.6mPD)
A23 Ka Chi Secondary

School
Educational
Institution
300
G/F (6.6mPD), 1/F

(11.6mPD), 5/F
(23.6mPD), 10/F
(38.6mPD)
A24 Lau Tak Yung

Memorial Primary
School
Educational
Institution
335
G/F (6.7mPD), 1/F

(11.7mPD), 5/F
(23.7mPD), 10/F
(38.7mPD)
A25 Pierhead Garden
Domestic
Premises
435
G/F (7.0mPD), 1/F

(12.0mPD), 5/F
(24.0mPD), 10/F
(39.0mPD)
A26 Miami Beach

Towers
Domestic
Premises
420
G/F (5.8mPD), 1/F

(10.8mPD), 5/F
(22.8mPD), 10/F
(37.8mPD)
A27 Lawn Bowling

Field1
Recreational
Facilities
<100
G/F (6.3mPD)
A28 Tennis Court1
Recreational
Facilities
<100
G/F (6.5mPD)
A29 Community Hall2
Amenities
--
15mPD
A30 Other Possible

Community Uses2
Amenities
--
18.5mPD
25
Notes :
1
The recreational facilities are inside the park located at the District Open Space Sites located adjacent to the proposed WFM.
The park will be opened to the public 24 hours daily while the opening hours of these facilities will be from 7:00am to 11:00pm
daily.
2
Co-users of the proposed Joint User Complex and Wholesale Fish Market included for the odour assessment only.
4.4.3
Issue 7
For the other proposed facilities within the Joint User Complex and Wholesale Fish
Market, namely community hall, marine park management office, spectator stand
and other possible community uses, will be closed during the operation periods for
fish auctioning of the WFM when odour levels will be at the highest (3:00 am and
6:30 am), they are unlikely to be affected by the air quality impact due to the
operation of the WFM. Moreover, central air-conditioning system will generally be
provided to the community hall, marine park management office and other possible
community uses and these facilities will not rely on opened windows for ventilation.
AEC
26
The air intake location for the central air-conditioning system should be suitably
designed to ensure the fresh air supply to these facilities will not be affected by the
localised air quality impact and odour removal systems (e.g. carbon filters) will be
installed at the intakes if considered necessary. Notwithstanding, two representative
air sensitive receivers have been identified within the WFM complex, namely the
community hall and other possible community uses, and included in the odour
assessment to evaluate the potential impact on the co-users and identify appropriate
location for fresh air intake of the ventilation system provided to these facilities.
4.5
Assessment Methodology
(i)
Construction Phase
4.5.1
The potential impact of dust emission during the construction phase of the WFM
depends on the quantity and drift potential of the dust particles emitted to the
atmosphere. On the other hand, the quantity of dust emissions from the construction
activities is dependent on the nature of activities and the extent of dust suppression
measures applied.
4.5.2
The drift distance of dust particles can be expressed as a function of particle

diameter and mean wind speed. For a mean wind speed of 4m/s, dust particles larger
than about 100mm are likely to settle within 20 to 30 ft (6 to 9 m) from the point of
emission. Particles that are 30 to 100mm in diameter are likely to undergo impeded
settling and, depending on the extent of atmospheric turbulence, are likely to settle
within a few hundred feet (100 ft = 30m) from the point of emission. Smaller
particles have slower gravitational settling velocities and their settling rates are more
likely to be retarded by atmospheric turbulence. At greater wind speeds, it is likely to
cause more dust generation from dry exposed surfaces. The potential for dust
emissions is substantially reduced during rainy periods.
4.5.3
In order to evaluate the potential air quality impacts on the neighbouring ASRs
during the construction works, the dust emissions, measurable as Total Suspended
Particulates (TSP) and Respirable Suspended Particulates (RSP), from various onsite construction activities are assessed under the worst-case scenario. The dust
emission from unpaved area, bulk materials handling during excavation and wind
erosion are estimated based on the emission factors compiled in the AP-422 and
other available data. Detailed calculation of the emission factors adopted in the dust
modelling is presented in Appendix 4.1. To enable the worst-case scenario prediction,
conservative assumptions have been made in determining the emission rates of dust
from the various construction activities based on the estimated emission factors.
Table 4.3 gives the dust emission rates adopted in the modelling and the assumptions
made.
Compilation of Air Pollution emission Factors, AP-42, 5th Edition, United States Environmental Protection
Agency, January 1995
Issue 7
AEC
Table 4.3
Dust Emission Rates for Various Construction Activities
Construction Activities
Materials Handling
Assumptions
(an estimated total of

5000m3 of soil will be
excavated)
Unpaved Road
The excavation area

will cover the
whole site area
(8760m2 );
Unmitigated
Dust Emission
Rates
TSP 5.53x10-7
g/m2 /s
RSP 5.23x10-7
g/m2 /s
RSP 2.62x10-7
g/m2 /s
TSP 6.14x10-5
g/m2 /s
A typical
excavation rate of
367.2m3 /day; and
The excavation
works will last for
14 days (112
hours).
7m wide unpaved TSP 1.23x10-4

haul road along the g/m2 /s
site boundary;
RSP 2.51x10-5
g/m2 /s
2 trips of vehicle
will travel around
the site per hour;
and
Mitigated
Dust Emission
Rates
TSP 1.11x10-6
g/m2 /s
Wind Erosion
27
RSP 1.26x10-5
g/m2 /s
Distance travelled
on unpaved road
per hour is 0.808
km.
TSP 2.695x10-6 TSP 1.35x10-6
g/m2 /s
g/m2 /s
RSP 1.347x10-6 RSP 6.74x10-7
g/m2 /s
g/m2 /s
4.5.4
The assessment is carried out using the dispersion model Industrial Source Complex
Short Term (ISCST3). The basis of the model is the linear, steady-state Gaussian
plume equation. The ISCST area source model is used to simulate the effects of
fugitive emission from sources such as unpaved haul roads, bulk material handling
and storage piles.
4.5.5
The 1999 meteorological data (full year), as monitored by the Hong Kong
Observatory at the Tuen Mun Weather Station, is used as model input parameter.
These parameters include wind speed, wind direction, ambient temperature and
stability class. Mixing heights are only monitored at the Hong Kong Observatory
King's Park Weather Station and the mixing height data recorded for Year 1999 is
used as model input.
4.5.6
The dust emission impact on the representative ASRs are predicted under the worstcase scenario with all the dust-generating activities concurrently taking place. The
worst-case TSP and RSP concentrations are predicted at elevations of the ground
Issue 7
AEC
28
floor, 1st floor, 5th floor and 10th floor levels of the representative ASRs. Sample
output files of the ISCST3 model are given in Appendix 4.2.
(ii)
Operational Phase

4.5.7
The potential odour impact arising from the operation of the proposed WFM upon
the sensitive receivers in its vicinity was assessed under the worst-case scenario.
4.5.8
As the proposed WFM at Tuen Mun Area 44 is to replace the CPFM in Sam Shing
Estate, the odour emission rate for the on-site activities at the proposed WFM is
determined with reference to the operation of the CPFM. The odour concentration
within the CPFM at Sam Shing Estate during its peak-hour operation was
determined by means of odour sampling and testing. The rate of odour emission
from the proposed WFM during its peak-hour operation is estimated based on odour
testing results with due consideration to the building design of the proposed WFM.
Appendix 4.3 details the derivation of odour emission rate. It was conservatively
assumed that the proposed WFM will continuously emit odour at the worst-case
emission rate during its peak hours of operation.
4.5.9
The proposed WFM will be mechanically ventilated. The air quality guidelines in the
Environmental Protection Department Practice Note on Control of Air Pollution in
Car Parks (ProPECC PN2/96) and the hourly AQOs for CO and NO2 are used as
reference standards to determine the ventilation rate of 10 air changes per hour
required for the lorry parking spaces inside the WFM (see Appendix 4.4). The major
source of odour emission will be the ventilation exhaust discharge. The odour impact
arising from the operation of the WFM has been predicted using the EPD accepted
Gaussian dispersion computer model, Industrial Source Complex Short Term
Model 3 (ISCST3). Calculation of the emission factors adopted in the prediction
model is detailed in Appendix 4.5.
4.5.10 The 1999 meteorological data (full year), as monitored by the Hong Kong
Observatory at the Tuen Mun Weather Station, is used as model input parameter.
used as model input. Sample output files of the ISCST3 model are given in
Appendix 4.6.
4.5.11 The results of the ISCST3 dispersion model are the maximum odour units predicted
at the ASRs based on an averaging time of 1 hour. For the assessment of odour
impact on the ASRs, a shorter time-averaging period of 5 seconds is required due to
the shorter exposure period tolerable by the receivers. The modelled hourly-average
results are converted to 5-second average values to enable direct comparison against
the odour assessment criterion. Appendix 4.7 details the conversion of ISCST3
dispersion model outputs to 5-second average concentration.
Issue 7
AEC
29
4.5.12 The worst-case concentrations of odour are predicted at elevations of the ground
floor, 1st floor, 5th floor and 10th floor levels of the representative ASRs identified.
It should be noted that the operation period for fish auctioning of the proposed WFM
is 3:00am and 6:30am according to the information provided by the AFCD. Some of
the representative ASRs, namely the educational institutions, district open space and
clinic, would normally be closed during these hours and therefore, are not potentially
affected by odour emission during the operation of the WFM. The predicted odour
levels at these ASRs are included for reference only.

4.5.13 The potential air quality impact due to off-site marine traffic emission upon the
sensitive receivers in the vicinity of the proposed WFM was assessed under the
worst-case scenario. The concentrations of air pollutants indicative of marine traffic
emission, including TSP, NO2 , and CO, were predicted at the representative ASRs to
evaluate the potential air quality impact.
4.5.14 The marine traffic emission varies for different types of vessel and different modes
of operation. The vessels involved in the off-site marine traffic relating to the
operation of the proposed WFM will be mainly non-ocean going fishing vessels. The
primary operating modes of the marine vessels would be slow cruise and
manoeuvring within the typhoon shelter and hoteling (docking) at the sea frontage of
the proposed WFM. According to a technical report on Commercial Marine Vessels
Emissions published by the United States Environmental Protection Agency3 , there
is negligible emission from the non-ocean going vessels while they are in the
hoteling mode. On the other hand, with a higher engine output associated with slow
cruise mode, the emission from fishing vessels in slow cruise mode will be higher
than that in manoeuvring mode.
4.5.15 According to the information provided by AFCD, there will be approximately 18
fishing vessels and 4 to 5 sampans landing fish at the WFM during 3:00am to
5:00am. Moreover, there will be about 9 fishing vessels berthed at the sea frontage
of the WFM and the remaining waiting within the typhoon shelter at any one time. It
is considered that 9 fishing vessels and 2 sampans travelling in slow cruise mode
within the typhoon shelter at the same time would represent the worst-case scenario
of marine traffic emission.
4.5.16 Off-site marine traffic emission impact was predicted based on the assumed routes as
shown in Figure 4.3. According to on-site observations, majority of the fishing
vessels is using the eastern entrance of the typhoon shelter when approaching and
leaving the existing temporary WFM at Sam Shing Estate. Therefore, Route 1 is
considered to be a likely path the fishing vessels would take when travelling to and
from the proposed WFM. On the other hand, in view of the fact that vessels calling
at the proposed WFM from seaward may use a more direct route via the Western
Fairway, Route 2 is included in the assessment to represent the worst-case scenario.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Analysis of Commercial Marine Vessels Emissions and
Fuel Consumption Data, February 2000
Issue 7
AEC
30
4.5.17 In determining the pollutant emission rates from the off-site marine traffic, reference
was made to the emission standards for marine diesel engines4 published by the
United States Environmental Protection Agency. The emission rates of the air
pollutants depend on the horsepower of the vessels engines and the fractional load
(the actual engine output divided by rated engine output). Based on the engine data
information of the fishing vessels provided by the Marine Department, the average
horsepower of the fishing vessels and sampans was estimated to be 814hp and 203hp
respectively. The estimated emission rates of the air pollutants for fishing vessels
and sampans are shown in Table 4.4. Detailed calculation of the emission factors
adopted in the dust modelling is presented in Appendix 4.8.
Table 4.4
Emission Rates of Marine Traffic
Pollutants Types of vessels

TSP
NO2
CO
Fishing Vessel
Sampan
Fishing Vessel
Sampan
Fishing Vessel
Sampan
Horsepower,
hp
814
203
814
203
814
203
Fractional
Load
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
Emission Rates,
g/s
0.0270
0.0067
0.1012
0.0252
0.3372
0.0841
4.5.18 The air quality prediction is carried out utilising the EPD accepted Gaussian
dispersion computer model, Industrial Source Complex Short Term Model 3
(ISCST3). The marine traffic emission for the primary operating modes of slow
cruise and manoeuvring are modelled as line source, which was represented by
separated volume sources in the ISCST3 model.
4.5.19 The 1999 meteorological data (full year), as monitored by the Hong Kong
Observatory at the Tuen Mun Weather Station, is used as the model input parameter.
used as model input. Sample output files of the ISCST3 model are given in
Appendix 4.9.
4.5.20 The worst-case concentrations of TSP, NO2 , and CO are predicted at elevations of
the ground floor, 1st floor, 5th floor and 10th floor levels of the representative ASRs
identified. It should be noted that the operation period of the proposed WFM for fish
auction activities is from 3:00am to 6:30am according to the information provided
by the AFCD. Some of the representative ASRs, namely the educational institutions
and clinic, would normally be closed during these hours and therefore, are not
potentially affected by marine traffic emission during the operation of the WFM. The
predicted air quality levels at these ASRs are included for reference only.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Emission Standards for Marine Diesel Engines: Scope of
Application, February 2000
Issue 7
AEC
31

4.5.21 The potential air quality impact due to off-site vehicular emission on the sensitive
receivers in the vicinity of the proposed WFM is assessed by modelling the
concentrations of nitrogen dioxide (NO2 ) and respirable suspended particulates
(RSP), which are indicative of the vehicular emissions, at the representative ASRs.
Vehicular emission from roads located within 500m from the site boundary of the
proposed WFM, namely Wu Shan Road, Hoi Wong Road, Wu Chui Road and Wu
King Road, is included in the assessment. The vehicular emission rates are estimated
based on the traffic flow data of the roads of concern.
4.5.22 According to the information provided by the AFCD, a maximum number of 40
lorries will access the proposed WFM during its night time operation period (3:00am
to 6:30am). In the assessment, the following two scenarios are assessed:
vehicular emissions due to the existing traffic conditions; and
vehicular emissions due to the introduction of the 40 lorries approaching/leaving
the proposed WFM.
4.5.23 In addition, the cumulative impacts due to the addition of 40 lorries to the traffic
flow are evaluated by combining the results of the two scenarios. The published data
of the Annual Average Daily Traffic5 (AADT) is adopted to represent the existing
traffic conditions on the roads included in the assessment. With reference to the daily
traffic flow statistic of the Tuen Mun and Yuen Long area, the night time traffic flow
data is found to be 3.4% of the AADT. The composition of vehicles during night
time is also taken from the daily flow statistic of the Tuen Mun and Yuen Long area.
Table 4.5 gives the traffic flow data adopted in the assessment of the vehicular
emissions due to the existing traffic conditions.
Table 4.5
Traffic Flow Data - Existing Traffic Conditions
Road
Section
AADT
Wu Shan Road
Wu Shan Road
Wu Chui Road
Hoi Wong Road
Wu King Road
Lung Mun Road to Wu King Road

Wu King Road to Wu Chui Road
Lung Mun Road to Wu Shan Road
Hoi Chu Road to Wu Shan Road
Wu Shan Road to Wu Chui Road
9370
9580
9030
24580
9253*
Traffic Flow at
Night Time
(veh/hr)
318
326
307
836
314
*As there is no traffic flow data record for Wu King Road, the average traffic flow of Wu Shan Road
and Wu Chui Road was adopted.
4.5.24 For assessing the potential air quality impact due to the increase of traffic flow
during the operation of the WFM, it is assumed that the additional 40 lorries will be
introduced to each of the roads included in the assessment to represent the worstcase scenario.
4.5.25 Vehicular emission rates of NO2 and RSP were derived from the traffic flow data
using the Fleet Average Emission Factors for Year 1999 based on EURO III criteria
provided by the EPD. Calculation of the vehicular emission rates adopted in the
assessment is presented in Appendix 4.10.
5
Transport Department, The Annual Traffic Census 1999
Issue 7
AEC
32
4.5.26 The air quality prediction was performed using the California Line Source
Dispersion Model (CALINE4), a Gaussian dispersion model accepted by the EPD.
In order to evaluate the worst-case short-term air quality impact, the following
meteorological conditions were adopted in the model :
Daytime : neutral atmospheric condition (class D); wind speed 1m/s (at 10m
height); worst-case wind angle; mixing height 500m
Night time : stable atmospheric condition (class F); wind speed 1m/s (at 10m
height); worst-case wind angle; mixing height 500m
4.5.27 The results of the CALINE4 dispersion model are the maximum hourly NO2 and
RSP concentrations predicted at the ASRs. As the Air Quality Objectives for RSP
have a longer time-averaging period of 24 hours, a daily RSP level is estimated to
enable direct comparison against the RSP assessment criterion. To calculate the 24hour RSP level, the day is divided into daytime and night time periods, representing
two-thirds and one-third of a day, respectively. Given the above assumptions, both
periods are modelled separately and a time-weighted 24-hour RSP level is then
calculated by adding two-thirds of the daytime result and one-third of the night-time
result. Sample output files of the CALINE4 model are given in Appendix 4.11.
4.5.28 The worst-case concentrations of NO2 and RSP are predicted at representative ASRs
identified. It should be noted that the peak hours for fish auction and wholesale
activities at the proposed WFM are from 3:00 am to 6:30 am according to the
information provided by the AFCD. Some of the representative ASRs, namely the
educational institutions and clinic, would normally be closed during these hours and
therefore, are not potentially affected by road traffic emission during the operation of
the WFM. The predicted air quality levels at these ASRs are included for reference
only.
4.6
Prediction and Evaluation of Environmental Impacts

(i)
4.6.1
Construction Phase
The dust emission impact on the representative ASRs is predicted under the worstcase scenario with all the dust-generating activities concurrently taking place.
Isopleths of the maximum 1-hour and 24-hour average TSP concentration in the
vicinity of the subject site at elevations of 6.5mPD, 11.5mPD, 23.5mPD and
38.5mPD are shown in Figures 4.4a-h. The maximum predicted suspended
particulate concentrations at the representative ASRs due to dust emissions from
unpaved area, loading/unloading and wind erosion are presented in Tables 4.6a &
4.6b. Background levels of 102g/m3 for TSP and 62g/m3 for RSP are incorporated
into the modelled results. It should be noted that these results represent the worstcase TSP and RSP concentrations predicted to occur in a year and the concentrations
at other times will be less than these values.
Issue 7
AEC
Table 4.6a
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A11
A12
A13
A14
A15
A16
A17
A18
A19
A20
A21
A22
A23
A24
A25
A26
A27
A28
Maximum 1-hour and 24-hour Average TSP Concentrations Without

Mitigation
1- hour Average TSP Conc., g/m3
ASR ID
33
24-hour Average TSP Conc., g/m3
G/F
1/F
5/F
10/F
G/F
1/F
5/F
10/F
212.0
168.1
181.7
347.9
173.5
163.4
195.2
155.0
179.1
294.5
158.3
234.7
170.4
349.9
193.0
170.5
187.7
163.0
272.8
192.4
158.0
197.0
199.1
183.6
152.6
165.9
485.3
483.1
166.3
178.8
171.0
161.8
189.3
153.8
254.7
156.9
219.4
168.0
277.9
168.0
183.1
161.0
258.1
188.0
156.6
193.7
195.6
181.1
151.5
164.5
-
154.3
160.1
155.1
150.7
156.0
145.5
156.3
147.2
152.2
163.5
151.8
156.1
148.2
183.9
161.0
147.1
172.3
173.5
164.9
144.0
154.7
-
132.8
130.3
129.1
130.6
131.2
129.7
129.8
129.3
126.8
131.5
126.2
129.2
126.7
142.6
131.4
129.4
137.7
138.0
137.0
129.5
135.8
-
118.1
109.3
111.2
146.8
111.0
108.7
112.7
106.5
109.2
183.9
106.1
147.9
108.2
221.6
118.6
108.5
130.4
109.7
179.6
143.5
109.0
132.3
124.7
131.4
125.0
123.5
360.4
329.1
109.1
110.9
110.7
108.5
112.0
106.4
172.1
106.0
143.4
108.0
197.0
108.3
129.1
109.5
173.5
141.7
108.9
131.3
123.9
130.5
124.6
123.0
-
107.8
108.9
108.8
107.3
108.5
105.7
132.2
105.3
106.6
138.4
107.1
121.2
108.2
142.2
130.8
107.9
124.7
118.8
125.0
121.3
119.9
-
105.4
105.6
105.6
105.1
104.6
104.4
114.6
104.1
104.4
115.9
105.2
111.9
106.0
120.8
117.7
106.0
114.2
110.9
115.4
115.0
114.0
-
Remarks:
Results include annual TSP background level of 102g/m3 .
TSP recommended 1-hour criterion (500g/m3 ) and 24 hours AQO (260g/m3 )
represents no ASRs at the particular elevation
Table 4.6b
ASR
ID
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A11
A12
A13
A14
A15
Issue 7
Maximum 24-hour Average RSP Concentrations - Without Mitigation

G/F
65.7
63.7
64.1
72.2
64.1
63.5
64.5
63.1
63.7
81.0
63.0
72.4
63.5
90.1
65.8
24-hour Average RSP Conc., g/m3

1/F
5/F
63.7
63.4
64.0
63.6
64.0
63.6
63.5
63.2
64.3
63.5
63.0
62.9
78.2
69.0
62.9
62.8
71.4
63.4
63.1
84.3
70.6
-
10/F
62.8
62.8
62.8
62.7
62.6
62.6
64.9
62.5
62.6
65.3
AEC
ASR
ID
G/F
63.5
68.5
63.8
79.9
71.7
63.6
69.0
67.2
68.8
67.3
67.0
121.5
113.6
A16
A17
A18
A19
A20
A21
A22
A23
A24
A25
A26
A27
A28

1/F
5/F
63.4
63.2
68.2
66.4
63.7
63.4
78.5
71.3
71.3
68.7
63.6
63.4
68.8
67.2
67.0
65.9
68.6
67.3
67.2
66.5
66.9
66.1
-
34
10/F
62.7
64.3
62.9
66.3
65.7
62.9
64.8
64.0
65.1
65.0
64.8
-
Remarks:
Results include annual RSP background level of 62g/m3 .
RSP - 24 hours AQO (180g/m3 )
4.6.2
The assessment results indicate that the AQO for daily TSP will be exceeded at
A27(Lawn Bowling Field) and A28(Tennis Court) while the recommended hourly
TSP level and the AQO for daily RSP will not be exceeded at any of the
representative ASRs under the worst-case scenario. The highest 1-hour TSP and
daily RSP concentrations of 485.3g/m3 and 121.5g/m3 respectively are predicted at
A27 (Lawn Bowling Field). The highest predicted 1-hour TSP and 24-hour RSP
concentration represent 97% and 68% of the criteria for TSP and RSP respectively.
On the other hand, the highest predicted 24-hour TSP concentration of 360.4 g/m3
was predicted at A27 (Lawn Bowling Field) which exceeds the AQO for daily TSP.
Thus, effective control measures will be required.
(ii)
Operational Phase

4.6.3
The odour concentrations due to the operation of the WFM during its peak hours for
auction and wholesale activities (from 3:00am to 6:30am) are predicted at
representative Air Sensitive Receivers (ASRs) under the worst-case scenario.
Isopleths of the maximum 5-second average odour concentrations in the vicinity of
the subject site at elevations of 6.5mPD, 11.5mPD, 23.5mPD and 38.5mPD are
illustrated in Figures 4.5a-d. The odour concentrations are predicted for ground floor
level, 1st floor level, 5th floor level and 10th floor level. The maximum predicted 5second average odour concentrations at the representative ASRs are presented at
Table 4.7. It should be noted that these results represent the highest 5-second
concentrations predicted to occur in a year and the concentrations at other times
could be far less than these values.
Issue 7
AEC
Table 4.7
Maximum 5-second Average Odour Concentrations With Enclosed

WFM Design
Maximum 5-second Average Concentration (OU/m3 )
With Mechanical Ventilation
ASR ID
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A11
A12
A13
A14
A15
A16
A17
A18
A19
A20
A21
A22
A23
A24
A25
A26
A27
A28
A291
A301
35
G/F
1/F
5/F
10/F
1.9
1.3
1.7
4.8
1.6
1.1
2.0
1.2
0.9
4.1
1.0
3.4
0.3
4.9
2.3
0.8
1.9
1.4
2.8
2.1
1.3
1.5
1.8
1.3
0.9
1.2
6.2
6.1
4.9 (15mPD)
4.9 (18.5mPD)
1.2
1.7
1.6
1.1
1.9
1.2
3.8
1.0
3.2
0.3
4.4
0.8
1.8
1.3
2.7
2.0
1.2
1.5
1.7
1.2
0.9
1.2
-
1.0
1.4
1.3
0.9
1.4
1.0
2.0
0.9
0.3
2.2
0.7
1.4
1.1
1.9
1.6
1.1
1.2
1.4
1.0
0.8
1.0
-
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.9
0.6
0.2
1.0
0.4
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.5
0.7
-
Notes :
1
Co-users of the proposed Joint User Complex and Wholesale Fish Market ; fresh air intake points shall be
located at levels above 15mPD and 18.5mPD for these co-users. represents no ASRs at the particular elevation
4.6.4
The predicted maximum 5-second average concentrations meet the stipulated

assessment criterion of (less than) 5 odour units at the majority of the representative
ASRs in the vicinity of the proposed WFM except for two. At most of the ASRs, the
concentrations are well below the 5 odour units criterion. At A27 (Lawn Bowling
Field) and A28 (Tennis Court), the worst-case odour concentration predicted at the
ground floor was slightly above the odour criterion. As the opening hours of the
Lawn Bowling Field and Tennis Court will be limited to 7:00am to 11:00pm daily, it
is anticipated that these ASRs are unlikely to be adversely affected by the odour
impact from the operation of WFM which peaks at 03:00 to 06:30.
4.6.5
As discussed in Section 4.3, the odour levels arising from the WFM operation will
be at its highest during the night time auction period. Activities that have the
potential to generate odour would cease after the auction period, thus insignificant
odour impact on the nearby sensitive receivers, including A27 (Lawn Bowling Field)
and A28 (Tennis Court), due to daytime operation of the WFM is anticipated. During
Issue 7
AEC
36
the daytime, operation of the WFM involves handling of live seafood and preboxed
fish which are not likely to generate odour levels experienced during the night time
auction operations. Even if the odour emission during daytime is conservatively
assumed to be 50% of its peak level during the night time auction period, it is
unlikely to result in unacceptable odour impact on nearby sensitive receivers that
open only during the day, including co-users of the WFM complex and Wu Hong
Clinic, as indicated by the odour prediction results.
4.6.6
For the co-users of the WFM complex, namely community hall (A29) and Other
Possible Community Uses (A30), further odour modelling was conducted to identify
location for fresh air intake of the ventilation system that will not be subject to
unacceptable odour levels due to the operation of the WFM. Modelling results
indicate that at levels above 15mPD for the community hall (A29) and above
18.5mPD for the Other Possible Community Uses (A30), the maximum odour
concentrations predicted under the worst-case scenario are below the 5 odour units
criterion.
4.6.7
Apart from the daily operational activities of the proposed WFM, the RCP, marine
RCP and public toilets within the complex represent another potential source of
odour impact. In order to minimise the odour impact from these facilities, separate
mechanical ventilation and odour treatment system will be provided for the RCP and
marine RCP. Odour treatment will be provided to all exhaust air from the RCPs
through water scrubber and deodorisers before discharge to outdoors and appropriate
deodourisation system will be installed for the public toilets. With the incorporation
of the deodourisation system, it is anticipated the odour emission from the RCPs and
public toilets will be insignificant.
4.6.8
Since most activities related to the daily operation of the WFM will be taken place
inside the WFM complex, off-site activities which have the potential to generate
odour impact, notably the lorry parking which for the existing CPFM takes place on
the road outside the market, will be eliminated. Nevertheless, measures should be
taken to further minimize the potential odour impact during the transportation of fish
or other odorous materials, including the use of properly covered containers. It is
anticipated that the odour emission from lorries during the transportation of fish will
be insignificant due to the short duration of travelling.

4.6.9
Issue 7
The off-site marine traffic emission impact on the representative ASRs is predicted
under the worst-case scenario as mentioned in Section 4.5.13. Isopleths of the
maximum 24-hour TSP, hourly NO2 and hourly CO concentrations in the vicinity of
the subject site at elevations of 6.5mPD, 11.5mPD, 23.5mPD and 38.5mPD are
shown in Figures 4.6a-l and 4.7a-l. The maximum predicted TSP, NO2 and CO
concentrations at the representative ASRs due to Route 1 and Route 2 off-site marine
traffic emissions are presented in Tables 4.8a-c and 4.9a-c respectively. Background
levels of 102g/m3 for TSP, 60g/m3 for NO2 and 1177g/m3 for CO are
incorporated to the modelled results. It should be noted that these results represent
the worst-case TSP, NO2 and CO concentrations predicted to occur in a year and the
concentrations during other hours will be less than these values.
AEC
Table 4.8a
37
Maximum 24-hour Average TSP Concentrations Off-site Marine

Traffic Emission (Route 1)
ASR ID
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A11
A12
A13
A14
A15
A16
A17
A18
A19
A20
A21
A22
A23
A24
A25
A26
A27
A28
G/F
1/F
5/F
10/F
104.1
103.6
103.9
105.9
103.8
103.5
103.9
103.2
103.4
105.5
103.2
104.3
103.2
107.7
103.7
103.2
103.8
103.2
108.0
105.1
103.0
106.1
107.0
105.7
104.6
105.2
110.6
107.1
103.6
103.9
103.7
103.4
103.9
103.2
105.2
103.2
104.2
103.1
107.4
103.2
103.7
103.2
107.8
105.0
103.0
106.0
106.9
105.6
104.6
105.1
-
103.5
103.7
103.6
103.3
103.6
103.1
104.1
103.1
103.0
105.5
103.1
103.4
103.0
106.4
104.5
102.9
105.4
106.0
105.2
104.3
104.8
-
103.2
103.3
103.2
103.1
103.1
102.9
103.2
102.9
102.8
103.7
102.8
103.0
102.8
104.3
103.5
102.8
104.2
104.5
104.2
103.7
104.1
-
Remarks: Results include annual TSP background level of 102g/m3 .

TSP - 24 hours AQO (260g/m3 )
Table 4.8b
ASR ID
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A11
A12
A13
A14
A15
A16
Issue 7
Maximum 1-hour and 24-hour Average NO2 Concentrations Off-site

Marine Traffic Emission (Route 1)
1- hour Average NO2 Conc., g/m3
24-hour Average NO2 Conc., g/m3
G/F
1/F
5/F
10/F
G/F
1/F
5/F
10/F
125.4
107.4
114.7
151.9
108.4
103.9
112.8
94.2
106.5
123.1
97.6
113.8
100.2
117.9
103.3
97.3
106.8
113.9
107.6
103.3
111.5
93.8
120.0
97.1
111.9
99.6
114.6
96.7
102.6
108.1
102.3
99.3
102.8
91.2
103.8
93.5
95.3
98.8
92.1
93.6
96.2
91.4
90.6
89.9
85.5
84.8
85.8
86.3
82.6
82.8
68.0
66.1
67.2
74.6
66.6
65.5
67.1
64.5
65.4
73.0
64.5
68.5
64.4
81.4
66.2
64.6
66.0
67.1
66.5
65.4
67.0
64.4
72.1
64.4
68.2
64.3
80.1
64.5
65.5
66.3
65.8
64.9
66.0
64.1
67.9
64.1
63.9
72.9
64.0
64.3
64.7
64.5
63.9
64.3
63.3
64.5
63.3
63.1
66.4
63.0
AEC
ASR ID
A17
A18
A19
A20
A21
A22
A23
A24
A25
A26
A27
A28
38
G/F
1/F
5/F
10/F
G/F
1/F
5/F
10/F
96.8
92.9
98.3
93.4
88.2
87.6
89.2
85.6
82.2
81.7
119.9
162.3
95.9
92.4
96.7
92.5
87.8
86.8
88.4
85.1
81.9
81.4
-
90.1
89.0
86.7
86.9
84.8
82.0
82.8
81.2
79.6
78.7
-
81.1
81.8
77.4
78.4
79.5
74.8
75.1
74.5
74.6
73.9
-
66.6
64.4
82.6
71.7
63.9
75.5
78.7
73.9
69.7
71.9
92.2
79.1
66.5
64.3
81.7
71.3
63.8
75.1
78.2
73.7
69.6
71.7
-
65.2
63.9
76.3
69.3
63.5
72.6
75.0
71.8
68.6
70.5
-
63.6
63.0
68.8
65.7
62.8
68.3
69.2
68.2
66.5
67.8
-
Remarks:
Results include annual NO2 background level of 60g/m3 .
NO2 - hourly AQO (300g/m3 ) and 24 hours AQO (150g/m3 )
Table 4.8c
ASR ID
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A11
A12
A13
A14
A15
A16
A17
A18
A19
A20
A21
A22
A23
A24
A25
A26
A27
A28
Maximum 1-hour and 8-hour Average CO Concentrations Off-site

1-hour Average CO Conc., g/m3
G/F
1/F
5/F
10/F
G/F
1/F
5/F
10/F
1394.9
1334.9
1359.4
1483.3
1338.1
1323.3
1352.9
1290.8
1331.9
1387.2
1302.2
1356.4
1310.9
1369.8
1321.4
1301.4
1299.7
1286.7
1304.5
1288.2
1271.0
1268.8
1274.4
1262.4
1251.0
1249.4
1376.5
1517.8
1332.9
1356.6
1335.6
1321.4
1348.5
1289.6
1377.1
1300.5
1350.1
1308.9
1359.0
1299.2
1296.8
1285.1
1299.2
1285.4
1269.6
1266.4
1271.6
1260.6
1249.9
1248.2
-
1318.9
1337.2
1318.0
1307.8
1319.7
1281.1
1322.8
1288.5
1294.5
1306.2
1283.9
1277.2
1273.6
1265.9
1266.7
1259.7
1250.2
1253.0
1247.8
1242.2
1239.4
-
1289.1
1297.5
1281.8
1278.9
1276.6
1262.1
1259.6
1262.8
1264.8
1252.3
1253.0
1247.4
1249.6
1234.8
1238.4
1242.1
1226.3
1227.2
1225.3
1225.8
1223.3
-
1252.7
1237.8
1248.4
1335.7
1246.3
1237.2
1255.3
1226.5
1236.8
1267.5
1226.3
1246.4
1224.7
1308.5
1229.5
1216.9
1227.1
1215.2
1298.2
1251.8
1211.2
1258.2
1268.2
1253.9
1238.1
1241.9
1349.0
1344.5
1237.0
1247.3
1245.3
1236.5
1253.7
1226.0
1262.2
1225.8
1243.9
1224.1
1299.3
1216.2
1225.9
1214.7
1293.1
1249.7
1210.8
1256.2
1265.6
1252.3
1237.2
1240.9
-
1231.4
1239.3
1238.1
1231.1
1243.2
1222.2
1237.5
1221.8
1219.9
1248.4
1211.7
1217.7
1210.7
1261.2
1235.8
1207.8
1243.0
1248.4
1241.2
1230.9
1233.4
-
1219.5
1223.3
1223.2
1219.6
1223.6
1213.9
1217.1
1213.3
1211.1
1213.1
1205.1
1205.1
1202.5
1218.8
1211.2
1201.4
1218.1
1217.6
1219.6
1217.4
1217.9
-
Remarks:
Results include annual CO background level of 1,177g/m3 (Tsuen Wan AQMS).
CO - 1 hour AQO (30,000g/m3 ) and 8 hours AQO (10,000g/m3 )
Issue 7
AEC
Table 4.9a
39
Maximum 24-hour Average TSP Concentrations Off-site Marine

Traffic Emission (Route 2)
ASR ID
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A11
A12
A13
A14
A15
A16
A17
A18
A19
A20
A21
A22
A23
A24
A25
A26
A27
A28
G/F
1/F
5/F
10/F
105.3
103.7
104.0
106.6
104.0
103.8
104.4
103.5
104.0
106.7
103.5
105.5
103.7
108.5
104.4
103.7
104.3
103.6
110.9
105.5
103.4
110.8
114.1
108.7
105.3
108.8
112.4
108.7
103.6
103.9
103.9
103.7
104.3
103.5
106.5
103.5
105.4
103.7
108.0
103.7
104.3
103.6
110.5
105.4
103.4
110.4
113.3
108.5
105.2
108.6
-
103.5
103.8
103.7
103.6
104.0
103.4
105.3
103.4
103.5
106.0
103.5
103.9
103.4
107.8
104.8
103.3
108.1
109.2
107.2
104.9
107.4
-
103.3
103.5
103.3
103.2
103.4
103.1
104.1
103.1
103.1
104.4
103.1
103.3
103.1
104.9
103.8
102.9
105.2
106.0
105.1
104.2
105.3
-
Remarks: Results include annual TSP background level of 102g/m3 .

TSP - 24 hours AQO (260g/m3 )
Table 4.9b
ASR ID
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A11
A12
A13
A14
A15
A16
Issue 7
Maximum 1-hour and 24-hour Average NO2 Concentrations Off-site

G/F
1/F
5/F
10/F
G/F
1/F
5/F
10/F
115.4
96.3
101.3
131.5
96.5
92.3
102.0
88.7
96.5
119.6
89.5
110.0
93.0
122.3
99.8
93.0
95.8
100.5
95.9
91.8
100.8
88.3
115.9
89.1
107.7
92.3
119.8
92.5
92.3
95.6
91.9
89.1
94.6
85.8
105.0
86.4
88.8
107.1
88.8
85.1
87.7
84.2
83.2
85.6
81.2
87.6
81.4
82.4
86.6
81.4
72.2
66.2
67.4
77.2
67.3
66.6
68.9
65.6
67.4
77.7
65.8
73.2
66.5
84.2
69.0
66.4
66.1
67.3
67.2
66.5
68.7
65.5
76.9
65.7
72.7
66.4
82.6
66.3
65.5
66.6
66.4
65.8
67.4
65.1
72.5
65.2
65.7
74.9
65.6
64.7
65.5
64.7
64.5
65.2
64.1
67.8
64.1
64.2
69.0
64.2
AEC
ASR ID
A17
A18
A19
A20
A21
A22
A23
A24
A25
A26
A27
A28
40
G/F
1/F
5/F
10/F
G/F
1/F
5/F
10/F
97.9
91.1
122.9
100.1
88.7
119.2
136.0
107.1
90.9
104.6
134.0
147.5
97.1
90.6
119.2
99.0
88.3
115.6
129.1
105.2
90.3
103.1
-
91.7
87.4
102.1
91.9
85.3
96.8
100.1
93.2
86.0
93.4
-
82.1
80.6
82.5
81.3
79.2
78.5
80.3
78.2
78.0
79.4
-
68.7
66.0
93.5
73.2
65.4
93.0
105.5
85.0
72.2
85.6
98.8
85.0
68.6
65.9
91.8
72.9
65.3
91.6
102.2
84.3
72.0
84.9
-
67.3
65.3
81.7
70.6
64.7
82.8
87.1
79.4
70.7
80.3
-
65.0
64.0
70.8
66.8
63.5
72.0
75.0
71.7
68.1
72.4
-
Remarks:
NO2 - hourly AQO (300g/m3 ) and 24 hours AQO (150g/m3 )
Table 4.9c
ASR ID
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A11
A12
A13
A14
A15
A16
A17
A18
A19
A20
A21
A22
A23
A24
A25
A26
A27
A28
Maximum 1-hour and 8-hour Average CO Concentrations Off-site

G/F
1/F
5/F
10/F
G/F
1/F
5/F
10/F
1361.6
1297.9
1314.5
1415.4
1298.7
1284.5
1316.8
1272.5
1298.6
1375.5
1275.2
1343.6
1286.8
1384.5
1309.5
1286.9
1303.2
1280.6
1386.6
1310.5
1272.7
1374.2
1430.2
1334.1
1279.9
1325.5
1423.6
1468.5
1296.3
1312.1
1296.5
1283.1
1312.8
1271.2
1363.2
1273.9
1335.9
1284.5
1376.3
1285.2
1300.6
1279.1
1374.2
1307.0
1271.3
1362.2
1407.1
1327.7
1277.8
1320.6
-
1284.5
1295.5
1283.4
1274.1
1292.3
1262.8
1326.9
1265.0
1272.9
1334.1
1273.0
1282.6
1268.3
1317.2
1283.4
1261.5
1299.5
1310.6
1287.5
1263.7
1288.3
-
1260.8
1269.3
1257.7
1254.2
1262.2
1247.5
1269.1
1248.3
1251.6
1265.7
1248.2
1250.8
1245.5
1251.9
1247.9
1240.9
1238.6
1244.7
1237.5
1237.1
1241.7
-
1274.7
1231.7
1240.0
1331.4
1245.4
1240.4
1268.5
1235.6
1255.0
1300.7
1239.0
1280.9
1246.6
1323.3
1260.1
1244.6
1255.1
1239.6
1357.6
1268.4
1231.6
1344.8
1407.5
1312.2
1252.7
1311.1
1381.8
1370.7
1230.9
1238.9
1244.2
1239.5
1266.4
1234.9
1295.4
1238.2
1277.6
1245.4
1313.1
1243.5
1253.5
1238.6
1347.2
1265.8
1230.9
1336.3
1389.6
1307.7
1251.3
1307.2
-
1225.3
1232.1
1236.2
1233.0
1251.8
1229.7
1263.8
1232.3
1237.5
1263.9
1235.7
1242.3
1231.8
1286.6
1248.5
1225.6
1287.8
1296.6
1278.6
1242.1
1281.7
-
1213.8
1221.3
1220.1
1219.4
1225.5
1218.3
1229.4
1219.6
1221.2
1230.1
1219.8
1220.7
1217.7
1233.8
1220.3
1214.2
1235.5
1242.1
1230.5
1223.2
1237.1
-
Remarks:
Results include annual CO background level of 1,177g/m3 (Tsuen Wan AQMS).
CO - 1 hour AQO (30,000g/m3 ) and 8 hours AQO (10,000g/m3 )
Issue 7
AEC
41
4.6.10 The assessment results indicate that the TSP, NO2 and CO AQOs will not be
exceeded at any of the representative ASRs under both Route 1 and Route 2 scenario.
With Route 1, the highest 24-hour TSP concentration of 110.6g/m3 was predicted at
A27 (Lawn Bowling Field). The highest 1-hour and 24 hour NO2 concentrations of
162.3g/m3 and 92.2 g/m3 were predicted at A28 (Tennis Court) and A27 (Lawn
Bowling Field) respectively. The highest 1-hour and 8 hour CO concentrations of
1517.8g/m3 and 1349.1g/m3 are predicted at A28 (Tennis Court) and A27 (Lawn
Bowling Field) respectively. With Route 2, the highest 24-hour TSP concentration of
114.1g/m3 was predicted at A23 (Ka Chi Secondary School). The highest 1-hour
and 24 hour NO2 concentrations of 147.5g/m3 and 105.5g/m3 were predicted at
A28 (Tennis Court) and A23 (Ka Chi Secondary School) respectively. The highest
1-hour and 8 hour CO concentrations of 1468.5g/m3 and 1407.5g/m3 are predicted
at A28 (Tennis Court) and A23 (Ka Chi Secondary School) respectively.
4.6.11 With Route 1, the highest predicted daily TSP concentration represents 43% the
AQO for TSP. The highest 1-hour and 24-hour NO2 concentrations represent 54%
and 61% of the respective AQOs. The highest 1-hour and 8-hour CO concentrations
represent 5% and 13% of the respective AQOs. With Route 2, the highest predicted
daily TSP concentration represents 44% of the AQO for TSP. The highest 1-hour
and 24-hour NO2 concentrations represent 49% and 70% of the respective AQOs.
The highest 1-hour and 8-hour CO concentrations represent 5% and 14% of the
respective AQOs. Thus, it is anticipated that the air quality impact due to the off-site
marine traffic emission is insignificant. Therefore, it is not necessary to adopt
mitigation measures.
4.6.12 Since the highest predicted hourly NO2 concentrations only represent about 50% of
respective AQOs and the highest CO concentration only represents about 5% of its
AQO, it is anticipated that the respective AQOs will not be exceeded in the case of
where all fishing vessels (i.e. 18 fishing vessels and 5 sampans) are travelling in
slow cruise within the typhoon shelter simultaneously.
4.6.13 The assessment results of marine traffic emissions indicated that the highest
predicted 1-hour NO2 and CO concentrations at some ASRs located north-western to
the subject site were slightly higher with Route 1 marine traffic than with Route 2.
At those ASRs located south-western to the subject site, the highest predicted 1-hour
NO2 and CO concentrations were lower with Route 1 marine traffic than with Route
2. On the other hand, the highest 24-hour NO2 and 8-hour CO concentrations at all of
the ASRs are generally slightly higher with Route 2 marine traffic than with Route 1.
This can be attributed to the fact that the predicted 1-hour concentrations were more
subject to short-term variation of meteorological conditions, such as wind speed and
wind direction, which effects are even out for modelling results with a longer
averaging time. In both cases, there are only small differences in predicted pollutant
concentrations with the two access routes.
4.6.14 The off-site vehicular emission impacts on the representative ASRs are predicted
under the scenarios as mentioned in Section 4.5.21. The maximum predicted hourly
NO2 and daily RSP concentrations at the representative ASRs due to off-site
Issue 7
AEC
42
vehicular emissions under the existing traffic conditions are presented in Tables
4.10a. Background levels of 60g/m3 for NO2 and 62g/m3 for RSP are incorporated
in the modelled results. It should be noted that these results represent the worst-case
NO2 and RSP concentrations predicted to occur in a year and the concentrations at
other times will be less than these values.
4.6.15 The assessment results indicate that the hourly NO2 and daily RSP AQOs will not be
exceeded at any of the representative ASRs under the existing traffic conditions. The
highest hourly NO2 concentrations of 88.6g/m3 and daily RSP concentration of
87.5g/m3 were predicted at A7 (Wu King Estate Wu Tsui House). The highest
predicted hourly NO2 and daily RSP concentrations represent 30% and 49% of the
respective AQOs. Isopleths of the maximum predicted hourly NO2 and daily RSP
concentrations at 6.5mPD within 500m from the site boundary are illustrated in
Figures 4.8a-b.
Table 4.10a
ASR ID
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A11
A12
A13
A14
A15
A16
A17
A18
A19
A20
A21
A22
A23
A24
A25
A26
A27
A28
Maximum 1-hour Average NO2 and 24-hour Average RSP

Concentrations Existing Traffic Conditions
NO2 Conc. g/m3
RSP Conc. g/m3
G/F
1/F
G/F
1/F
88.6
80.1
85.0
85.8
83.3
79.9
88.6
77.3
82.6
76.0
78.1
75.6
79.4
75.6
76.0
79.2
74.9
78.6
73.0
72.2
75.8
72.8
78.2
73.2
79.6
80.9
80.9
83.3
78.6
82.8
81.6
78.6
84.8
76.2
75.0
76.9
74.5
77.5
74.1
76.7
73.4
76.2
71.8
71.3
74.3
71.8
76.2
72.0
76.0
78.1
-
87.4
80.8
85.5
86.6
85.4
82.5
87.5
80.5
82.5
77.9
82.1
77.1
79.9
77.2
76.9
79.6
76.0
78.8
74.5
73.8
76.9
74.2
79.1
74.4
81.2
82.4
82.2
84.5
79.1
83.1
83.4
80.8
84.5
79.1
76.5
80.3
75.7
77.9
75.7
77.1
74.5
76.2
73.2
72.5
75.2
73.1
76.9
73.2
77.6
79.4
-
Remarks:
Results include annual NO2 background level of 60g/m3 and RSP background level of 62g/m3 .
NO2 hourly AQO (300g/m3 ) and RSP daily AQO (180g/m3 )
Issue 7
AEC
43
4.6.16 The maximum predicted hourly NO2 and daily RSP concentrations at the
representative ASRs due to off-site vehicular emissions under the scenario of
introduction of 40 lorries approaching/leaving the proposed WFM are presented in
Tables 4.10b. Background levels of 60g/m3 for NO2 and 62g/m3 for RSP are
incorporated in the modelled results. It should be noted that these results represent
the worst-case NO2 and RSP concentrations predicted to occur in a year and the
concentrations at other times will be less than these values.
exceeded at any of the representative ASRs. The highest hourly NO2 concentrations
of 61.5g/m3 were predicted at both A1 (Wu Shan Recreation Playground) and A28
(Tennis Court). The highest daily RSP concentration of 64.5g/m3 was predicted at
A1. The highest predicted hourly NO2 and daily RSP concentrations represent 21%
and 36% of the respective AQOs. Isopleths of the maximum predicted hourly NO2
and daily RSP concentrations at 6.5mPD within 500m from the site boundary are
illustrated in Figures 4.8c-d.
4.6.18 It is noted that the predicted hourly NO2 and daily RSP concentrations at the ASRs
concentrations are slightly higher than that of the annual background levels of NO2
and RSP. The air quality impact due to the vehicular emissions from additional 40
lorries is insignificant. Therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary to be
adopted.
Table 4.10b
ASR ID
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A11
A12
A13
A14
A15
A16
A17
A18
A19
A20
A21
A22
A23
A24
A25
A26
Issue 7

Concentrations Additional Traffic Flow of 40 Lorries
NO2 Conc. g/m3
RSP Conc. g/m3
G/F
1/F
G/F
1/F
61.5
61.1
61.1
61.3
60.9
60.9
61.5
60.9
61.1
60.9
60.9
60.8
61.1
60.9
60.9
60.9
60.9
61.1
60.8
60.8
60.9
60.9
61.3
60.9
61.5
61.3
61.1
61.1
60.9
60.9
61.3
60.9
60.9
60.9
60.8
60.9
60.8
60.9
60.8
60.9
60.8
60.8
60.9
60.9
60.9
60.8
61.1
61.1
64.5
63.7
64.0
64.4
63.8
63.7
64.4
63.4
63.8
63.6
63.5
63.4
63.5
63.4
63.4
63.6
63.3
63.6
63.3
63.2
63.4
63.3
64.0
63.3
64.2
64.5
63.4
63.7
63.6
63.4
63.9
63.3
63.3
63.4
63.1
63.3
63.3
63.3
63.1
63.3
63.1
63.0
63.1
63.1
63.6
63.1
63.7
64.0
AEC
ASR ID
A27
A28
NO2 Conc. g/m3
44
RSP Conc. g/m3
G/F
1/F
G/F
1/F
61.3
61.5
64.1
64.4
Remarks:
4.6.19 The maximum predicted hourly NO2 and daily RSP concentrations at the
representative ASRs due to cumulative off-site vehicular emissions under the
scenario of combining the existing traffic flows and the introduction of 40 lorries
approaching/leaving the proposed WFM during its peak operation hours are
presented in Tables 4.10c. Background levels of 60g/m3 for NO2 and 62g/m3 for
RSP are incorporated in the modelled results. It should be noted that these results
represent the worst-case NO2 and RSP concentrations predicted to occur in a year
and the concentrations at other times will be less than these values.
exceeded at any of the representative ASRs under the scenario of combining the
existing traffic flows and the introduction of 40 lorries approaching/leaving the
proposed WFM. The highest hourly NO2 concentrations of 90.1g/m3 and daily RSP
concentration of 90.0g/m3 were predicted at A1 (Wu Shan Recreation Playground).
Isopleths of the maximum predicted hourly NO2 and daily RSP concentrations at
6.5mPD within 500m from the site boundary are illustrated in Figures 4.8e-f.
4.6.21 The highest predicted cumulative hourly NO2 and daily RSP concentrations
represent 30% and 50% of the respective AQOs. It is noted that the predicted hourly
NO2 and daily RSP concentrations at the ASRs concentrations are slightly higher
than that of the levels of NO2 and RSP under the existing traffic conditions.
Nevertheless, the overall increase in pollutant concentration is less than 3% when
comparing the cumulative and the existing air quality impacts. It is therefore
concluded that the air quality impact due to the vehicular emissions resulting from
the introduction of the 40 lorries approaching/leaving WFM is insignificant and have
negligible effect on the ambient air quality in the area.
Table 4.10c
ASR ID
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A11
A12
A13
A14
Issue 7

Concentrations Cumulative Off-site Vehicular Emission
NO2 Conc. g/m3
RSP Conc. g/m3
G/F
1/F
G/F
1/F
90.1
81.3
86.1
87.1
84.3
80.9
90.1
78.2
83.7
76.9
79.0
76.4
80.5
76.5
79.7
83.9
82.6
79.6
86.1
77.1
76.0
77.9
75.2
78.4
74.9
90.0
82.5
87.4
88.9
87.2
84.1
89.9
81.9
84.3
79.5
83.6
78.5
81.4
78.6
80.5
84.8
85.0
82.3
86.4
80.4
77.8
81.7
76.8
79.2
77.0
AEC
ASR ID
A15
A16
A17
A18
A19
A20
A21
A22
A23
A24
A25
A26
A27
A28
NO2 Conc. g/m3
45
RSP Conc. g/m3
G/F
1/F
G/F
1/F
76.9
80.1
75.8
79.7
73.7
73.0
76.7
73.7
79.6
74.1
81.1
82.2
82.2
84.8
77.7
74.1
77.1
72.6
72.0
75.2
72.8
77.1
72.8
77.1
79.2
-
78.3
81.2
77.3
80.4
75.7
75.0
78.3
75.5
81.0
75.7
83.4
84.9
84.3
86.8
78.4
75.6
77.5
74.3
73.5
76.4
74.2
78.5
74.3
79.3
81.4
-
Remarks:
Cumulative NO2 emission

4.6.22 The cumulative NO2 emission impacts due to the marine traffic (Route 1 and Route 2)
and vehicular traffic are evaluated by combining the prediction results at the
representative ASRs of the two assessments. The maximum predicted cumulative
hourly NO2 concentrations at the representative ASRs are presented in Tables 4.11.
Background levels of 60g/m3 for NO2 are incorporated in the modelled results. The
assessment results indicate that the hourly AQO for NO2 will not be exceeded at any
of the representative ASRs under the combined impact of the marine traffic and
vehicular traffic emission. The highest hourly NO2 concentrations of 187.1g/m3
were predicted at A28 (Tennis Court).
Table 4.11
Maximum 1-hour Average NO2 Concentrations Cumulative

Emission
NO2 Conc. g/m3
ASR ID
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A11
A12
A13
A14
A15
A16
A17
A18
A19
Issue 7
Route 1
Route 2
G/F
1/F
G/F
1/F
155.5
128.6
140.9
179.0
132.6
124.8
142.9
112.4
130.2
140.0
116.6
130.2
120.7
134.4
120.3
117.5
112.6
112.7
112.0
126.5
137.8
130.2
122.9
137.6
110.9
136.0
114.9
127.2
118.0
129.5
114.4
110.1
109.5
109.3
145.5
117.5
127.4
158.6
120.8
113.1
132.0
106.9
120.2
136.5
108.4
126.3
113.4
138.8
116.7
113.1
113.7
110.8
136.6
115.5
124.4
118.4
111.4
126.9
105.4
131.9
106.9
122.9
110.7
134.7
110.1
111.2
107.7
131.8
AEC
46
NO2 Conc. g/m3

ASR ID
A20
A21
A22
A23
A24
A25
A26
A27
A28
Route 1
Route 2
G/F
1/F
G/F
1/F
106.3
104.9
101.3
108.8
99.7
103.3
103.9
142.0
187.1
104.6
103.0
99.6
105.5
97.9
99.0
100.5
-
113.0
105.4
132.9
155.6
121.2
111.9
126.8
156.2
172.3
111.0
103.5
128.4
146.2
118.0
107.4
122.3
-
Remarks:
NO2 hourly AQO (300g/m3 ).
4.7
Mitigation Measures
(i)
4.7.1
Issue 7
Construction Dust
As detailed in Section 4.6.1, the predicted results indicated that the construction
works associated with the proposed development would likely to cause dust levels at
ASRs which exceed the 24-hour TSP AQO of 260g/m3 . Therefore, effective
mitigation measures are required. The following dust control measures should be
implemented during the construction phase of the project:
The area in which excavation takes place should be sprayed with water
immediately prior to, during and immediately after the excavation to minimise
dust generation.
Any debris from the construction of the WFM should be covered entirely by
impervious sheeting or stored in a sheltered debris collection area.
Any dusty material remaining after a stockpile of cement or other materials is

removed should be wetted and removed from the surface of roads.
Any stockpile of dusty material shall be either: (a) covered entirely by

impervious sheeting; (b) placed in an area sheltered on the top and the three sides;
or (c) sprayed with water or a dust suppression chemical so as to maintain the
entire surface wet.
Cement bags or any other dusty materials collected during the work should be
disposed of in totally enclosed containers.
All dusty materials should be sprayed with water immediately prior to any
loading, unloading or transfer operation so as to minimise dust generation.
Every belt-conveyor used for the transfer of dusty materials should be covered.
Every transfer point between any two belt-conveyors should be totally enclosed.
Any skip hoist for the transport of construction wastes should be properly
enclosed.
Vehicle washing facilities, including a high-pressure water jet, should be

provided at the designated vehicle exit point. Every vehicle should be washed
AEC
47
immediately before leaving the construction site to remove any dust materials
from its wheels and body.
4.7.2
The area where vehicle washing takes place and the section of the road between
the washing facilities and the exit point, as well as the main haul road to the
construction site should be paved with concrete, bituminous materials, hardcore
or metal plates and kept clear of dusty materials.
The main haul road to the site should be sprayed with water regularly to keep the
entire road surface wet and to minimise dust generation.
Through the implementation of the above control measure, dust levels will be
reduced. It is estimated that a 50% reduction of dust emission will be achieved.
Isopleths of the maximum 1-hour and 24-hour average TSP concentration with
mitigation measures are shown in Figures 4.9a-h. The maximum predicted mitigated
suspended particulate concentrations at the representative ASRs are presented in
Tables 4.12a-b. The results indicated that the recommended hourly TSP level and the
respective AQOs for TSP and RSP will not be exceeded at any of the representative
ASRs with implementation of the control measures.
Table 4.12a
ASR ID
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A11
A12
A13
A14
A15
A16
A17
A18
A19
A20
A21
A22
A23
A24
A25
A26
A27
A28
Maximum 1-hour and 24-hour Average TSP Concentrations

With Mitigation
1- hour Average TSP Conc., g/m3
G/F
1/F
5/F
10/F
G/F
1/F
5/F
10/F
156.9
135.0
141.8
224.7
137.7
132.7
148.5
128.5
140.5
198.1
130.1
168.2
136.2
225.8
147.4
136.2
144.8
132.4
187.3
147.1
130.0
149.4
150.5
142.7
127.3
133.9
293.4
292.3
134.1
140.3
136.5
131.8
145.6
127.9
178.2
129.4
160.6
134.9
189.8
134.9
142.5
131.4
179.9
144.9
129.3
147.8
148.8
141.5
126.7
133.2
-
128.1
131.0
128.5
126.3
129.0
123.7
129.1
124.6
127.1
132.7
126.9
129.0
125.1
142.9
131.5
124.5
137.1
137.7
133.4
123.0
128.3
-
117.4
116.1
115.5
116.3
116.6
115.8
115.9
115.7
114.4
116.7
114.1
115.6
114.3
122.3
116.7
115.7
119.8
120.0
119.5
115.8
118.9
-
110.0
105.7
106.6
124.4
106.5
105.3
107.3
104.3
105.6
142.9
104.1
124.9
105.1
161.7
110.3
105.2
116.2
105.8
140.8
122.7
105.5
117.1
113.3
116.7
113.5
112.7
231.0
215.4
105.6
106.4
106.4
105.3
107.0
104.2
137.0
104.0
122.7
105.0
149.4
105.1
115.5
105.7
137.7
121.8
105.4
116.6
112.9
116.2
113.3
112.5
-
104.9
105.4
105.4
104.6
105.2
103.9
117.1
103.7
104.3
120.2
104.5
111.6
105.1
122.1
116.4
104.9
113.3
110.4
113.5
111.6
111.0
-
103.7
103.8
103.8
103.5
103.3
103.2
108.3
103.0
103.2
109.0
103.6
106.9
104.0
111.4
109.8
104.0
108.1
106.4
108.7
108.5
108.0
-
Remarks:
Results include annual TSP background level of 102g/m3 .
TSP recommended 1-hour criterion (500g/m3 ) and 24 hours AQO (260g/m3 )
Issue 7
AEC
48
Table 4.12b Maximum 24-hour Average RSP Concentrations With Mitigation

ASR
ID
G/F
63.9
62.9
63.1
67.1
63.0
62.8
63.2
62.5
62.8
71.6
62.5
67.2
62.7
76.1
63.9
62.7
65.3
62.9
71.0
66.9
62.8
65.5
64.6
65.4
64.7
64.5
91.9
87.9
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A11
A12
A13
A14
A15
A16
A17
A18
A19
A20
A21
A22
A23
A24
A25
A26
A27
A28

1/F
5/F
62.8
62.7
63.0
62.8
63.0
62.8
62.8
62.6
63.2
62.7
62.5
62.4
70.1
65.5
62.5
62.4
66.7
62.7
62.5
73.2
66.3
62.7
62.6
65.1
64.2
62.9
62.7
70.3
66.7
66.6
65.4
62.8
62.7
65.4
64.6
64.5
63.9
65.3
64.7
64.6
64.2
64.4
64.1
-
10/F
62.4
62.4
62.4
62.4
62.3
62.3
63.5
62.2
62.3
63.6
62.4
63.1
62.5
64.2
63.8
62.5
63.4
63.0
63.5
63.5
63.4
-
Remarks:
Results include annual RSP background level of 62g/m3 .
RSP - 24 hours AQO (180g/m3 )
(ii)
4.7.3
Issue 7
Odour Emission
In order to ensure minimal air quality impact on the nearby residents and future cousers of the WFM, the auction and marshalling area as well as the lorry parking
spaces within the WFM will be fully enclosed to ASRs (i.e. along Wu Shan Road)
and provided with mechanical ventilation system. fresh air intakes of the mechanical
ventilation system will be provided to the west of the podium complex to draw
intake air from the landward side, while air extracts will be facing the sea and
provided on or near to the east elevation. The ventilation intakes and extracts will be
directional and acoustically screened from nearby residents. In particular, fresh air
intakes of the mechanical ventilation system provided to the community hall and
other possible community uses shall be located at levels above 15mPD and above
18.5mPD, respectively, to ensure that the proposed facilities within the WFM
complex will not be subject to unacceptable odour impact due to the operation of the
WFM.
AEC
49
4.7.4
Notwithstanding that the above measures are considered adequate to mitigate the
odour impact to acceptable levels, the following good housekeeping measures are
proposed to further minimize the potential odour nuisance to nearby sensitive
receivers.
4.7.5
Good hygiene and effective operational and waste management practices are
essential in ensuring that odour from the WFM is minimised and kept to within
acceptable levels. Detailed design of the WFM should allow for ease of cleaning and
management. Fresh fish has little odour but as with all organic matter unless dealt
with effectively and efficiently at source the levels of odour will increase
dramatically with time and temperature. The establishment of a WFM Complex
Management Committee to prepare a management plan for good practices, the
monitoring of daily operations and identification of areas for ongoing improvement
is essential in meeting environmental objectives and acceptance within the
community. Consideration of both Operational and Waste Management will be dealt
with elsewhere in the report.
4.7.6
Operations such as the daily washing down of fish market areas and the storage and
daily removal of organic waste are essential to maintain hygienic conditions and
maintain low odour levels. However, regular cleaning and maintenance of the
building fabric and services, which in itself play an important part in odour control,
will be identified and implemented under the WFM Complex Management Plan.
Such items as regular cleaning, checking and maintenance of fans, exhausts and
filters will need to be identified by management and monitored as to frequency.
Elements such as drainage channels, gratings and traps will need to be regularly
cleaned of all matter and disinfected to prevent the build up of decomposing organic
matter which would give rise to higher odour emissions than those predicted.
4.7.7
Despite a conservative approach being adopted throughout the assessment of impact

to err on the safe side, the results detailed in section 4.6.3 indicate that the operation
of the proposed WFM is unlikely to pose unacceptable odour impact on nearby
residents. If, after implementation of the above mitigation measures, monitoring
shows this not to be the case, there is provision for future addition of odour removal
system in the current design. In this respect, odour levels will be monitored for a
period of 12 months from date of handover to the client by means of odour patrol.
Contingency provision of Odour Removal System has been allowed for in the
building design. An area on the landscaped podium has been reserved and sufficient
headroom and space has been allowed to accommodate the required equipment and
ducting for retrofitting a scrubber system to mitigate any unforeseen odour nuisance
to nearby sensitive receivers. It is therefore recommended that the detailed design of
the WFM shall allow suitable location, area and building height to accommodate the
retrofitting of a scrubber system, if found necessary, and include such structure and
builders work to allow ease of fitting at minimal cost. Also, the detailed design shall
consider the most effective and practical solution for retrofitting a scrubber system.
Of the three options currently identified, namely 1) Centralized plant to be located at
the north east corner of the building; 2) Twin plant system to be located at either side
of the Auction Hall; 3) Individual scrubber units to be located at high level in each
structural bay of the Auction Hall, option 3 is preferred as duct sizes are minimized.
Issue 7
AEC
4.8
Residual Environmental Impacts
4.8.1
Construction Phase
50
It is anticipated that with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures as

detailed in Section 4.7, the air quality impact during the construction phase of the
WFM will be reduced to levels within the requirements stipulated in the Technical
Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process and the residual
impacts will be insignificant. Nevertheless, attention should be paid to the proper
implementation of these mitigation measures during the construction process.
Therefore, it is recommended that the dust control measures should be included in
the contract specifications of the project and, its implementation during the works
should be continuously supervised and monitored. Construction Dust Environmental
Monitoring and Audit is addressed in Section 2 of the EM&A Manual.
4.8.2
Operational Phase
It is anticipated that with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures
including full enclosure of the building facing the ASRs; provision of mechanical
ventilation system and implementation of good housekeeping measures, the air
quality impact during the operational phase of the WFM will be reduced to levels
within the requirements stipulated in the Technical Memorandum on Environmental
Impact Assessment Process and there will unlikely be any residual nuisance
affecting nearby sensitive receivers. Nevertheless, attention should be paid to proper
implementation of these mitigation measures.
Issue 7
AEC

Section 4

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Section 4

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Proposed Joint User Complex and Wholesale Fish Market at Area 44 Tuen Mun

- Environmental Impact Assessment

Background Air Quality

Background Air Quality Levels

Background Concentration, g/m3

Identification of Potential Environmental Impacts

Odour from the operation of the WFM

Daytime operations in addition to undertaking and updating paperwork associated

Determination of Air Sensitive Receivers

Information on the representative ASRs identified are presented in Table 4.2.

Representative Air Sensitive Receivers

G/F (6.8mPD), 1/F

G/F (7.1mPD), 1/F

Siu Shan Court

G/F (7.1mPD), 1/F

G/F (7.3mPD), 1/F

G/F (7.7mPD), 1/F

Yan Tak Catholic

G/F (7.9mPD), 1/F

G/F (5.8mPD), 1/F

A11 Butterfly Estate Tip

G/F (8.4mPD), 1/F

G/F (7.1mPD), 1/F

A13 Carmel Bunnam

G/F (8.3mPD), 1/F

A14 Yuet Wu Villa

G/F (6.8mPD), 1/F

A15 Wu King Road

A16 Tung Wa Group of

G/F (8.0mPD), 1/F

A17 Yan Chai Hospital

G/F (6.7mPD), 1/F

A18 Buddhist Wong

G/F (8.1mPD), 1/F

A19 Yuet Wu Villa

G/F (6.6mPD), 1/F

A20 Siu Hei Court

G/F (6.7mPD), 1/F

A12 Police Station

A21 Wu King Estate Wu Boon House

G/F (8.0mPD), 1/F

A22 South Tuen Mun

G/F (6.6mPD), 1/F

A23 Ka Chi Secondary

G/F (6.6mPD), 1/F

A24 Lau Tak Yung

G/F (6.7mPD), 1/F

A25 Pierhead Garden

G/F (7.0mPD), 1/F

A26 Miami Beach

G/F (5.8mPD), 1/F

A27 Lawn Bowling

A28 Tennis Court1

A29 Community Hall2

A30 Other Possible

The drift distance of dust particles can be expressed as a function of particle

Dust Emission Rates for Various Construction Activities

(an estimated total of

The excavation area

7m wide unpaved TSP 1.23x10-4

Odour from the operation of the WFM

Off-site marine traffic emission

Emission Rates of Marine Traffic