Ecological Audit

M P

Description

Technoprojekt a.s. Havlickovo nabrezi 38 730 16 Ostrava Czech Republic Division: Construction and Ecology Department: 216 Job no.: 887-30305 EKOLOGICAL AUDIT Name of project: Industrial Zone Vlcovice Client: K oprivnice Municipality Prepared by: Ing. Josef Benes Ostrava, august 2000 File no.: 887-30305-0/1 No. of pages : 49 2TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction 2. Description of urban utility space 2.1 Natural conditions 2.2 Current site utilization 2.3 Development 2.4 Utility services 2.5 Vegetation 2.6 Hydrography of the site 3. Atmosphere 3.1 Polluted air 3.1.1 Measurement of air quality in the utility space 3.1.2 Survey of air pollution in the utility space 3.1.3 Current pollutant limits 3.1.4 Evaluation of air pollution in the utility space 3.1.5 Direction of dominant winds 3.1.6 Main air polluting agents 3.1.7 The utilization of the area in the direction of dominant winds 3.2 Temperature 3.3 Precipitation 4. Underground water 4.1 Hydrological conditions 4.2 Direction of water flow 4.3 Underground water level depth 4.4 Surveying 4.4.1 Results of performed surveying 4.5 Information on underground water utilization in the utility space 4.6 Possible underground water pollution sources 5. Surface water 5.1 Lubina river 5.1.1 Hydrological data of the stream 5.1.2 ...

Informations

• Publié par: Zyog
• Nombre de lectures: 10
• Langue: English

Extrait

Technoprojekt a.s. Havlickovo nabrezi 38 730 16 Ostrava Czech Republic 

EKOLOGICAL AUDIT

    Division: and Ecology Construction Department: 216 Job no.:   887-30305           Name of project: Industrial Zone Vlcovice Client: Koprivnice Municipality   Prepared by: Josef Benes Ing.           Ostrava, august 2000 File no.: 887-30305-0/1  No. of pages : 49 



2

TABLE OF CONTENTS  1. Introduction  2. Description of urban utility space 2.1 Natural conditions 2.2 Current site utilization 2.3 Development 2.4 Utility services 2.5 Vegetation 2.6 Hydrography of the site  3. Atmosphere  3.1 Polluted air  3.1.1 Measurement of air quality in the utility space  3.1.2 Survey of air pollution in the utility space  3.1.3 Current pollutant limits  3.1.4 Evaluation of air pollution in the utility space  3.1.5 Direction of dominant winds  3.1.6 Main air polluting agents  3.1.7 The utilization of the area in the direction of dominant winds  3.2 Temperature  3.3 Precipitation  4. Underground water  4.1Hydrological conditions  4.2 Direction of water flow  4.3 Underground water level depth  4.4 Surveying  4.4.1 Results of performed surveying  4.5 Information on underground water utilization in the utility space  4.6 Possible underground water pollution sources  5. Surface water  5.1 Lubina river  5.1.1 Hydrological data of the stream  5.1.2 Water quality  5.2 Sykorecek brook  5.2.1 Hydrological data of the stream  5.2.2 Water quality  5.3 Koprivnicka river  5.3.1 Hydrological data of the stream  5.3.2 Water quality  5.4 Babincův brook  5.4.1 Hydrological data of the stream  5.4.2 Water quality  5.5 Other water streams and basins  5.6 Limits of admissible surface water pollution  5.7 Surface water quality in the utility space  5.8 Possible surface water pollution sources

887-30305-0/1



3

 5.9 Flood areas  6. Soil  6.1 Geological conditions  6.2 Geological survey  6.3 Results of surveying works  6.3.1 Top soil  6.3.2 Made-up ground  6.3.3 Clay loam  6.3.4 Clay gravel  6.3.5 Weathered claystone, claystone  6.4 Soil conditions  6.5 Soil investigation  6.6 Results of investigating works  6.6.1 Soil pollution assessment  6.7 Current utilization of the lands  6.8 Possible pollution by the sources round  7. Radon  7.1 Site investigation  7.2 Sampling points  7.3 Applied investigation methods  7.4 Subbase permeability  7.5 Results of radon volume activity measurement  7.6 Assessment of radon risk in the utility space  7.7 Recommendation for construction  7.8 Protection of buildings with occupied rooms contacted with the ground  8. Noise  8.1 Main noise sources  8.2 Noise impacts upon the existing buildings  9. Conclusion  10. Survey of the most important regulations, laws, decrees and standards related to environmental protection  10.1 Environment - general provisions 10.2 Air protection 10.3 Water systems 10.4 Rock protection 10.5 Protection of agricultural and forest lands 10.6 Waste 10.7 Others       

887-30305-0/1



 Annexes: Annex no. 1 Annex no. 2 Annex no. 3  Annex no. 4  Annex no. 5                                         

4

Vicinity plan M 1:25 000 Layout M 1:10 000 Layout M 1:10 000 - water analyses Layout M 1:10 000 - radon investigation Special Competence Certificate

887-30305-0/1



5

 1. Introduction  The ecological audit provides an assessment of the condition of different environmental components (atmosphere, water, soil) in the site approved for the construction of Industrial zone Vlcovice. These assessment was supported by available surveying and measurements done in the utility space. In addition, the chemical analyses of soil and water samples taken in the area of the industrial zone and adjacent streams were performed in July 2000.  The environmental condition has been assessed considering current Czech law and standards.   2. Description of the urban utility space  2.1 Natural conditions The industrial zone Vlcovice is situated at the eastern limit of Koprivnice, in the direction to the village Vlcovice, between the Tatra, a.s. complex and the state road I/58 Pribor  Koprivnice. The road I/58 provides good transport availability of Pribor, Ostrava, Novy Jicin, Frydek  Mistek and Frenstat pod Radhostem.  It is a flat area moderately sloped to the north to Lubina river. The average altitude ranges from 322 a.s.l. (northern part) to 340 a.s.l. (southern part).  From the climatic point of view the site is classified with the MT 10 type of area characterized by moderately warm spring, long moderately dry summer, moderately warm autumn and dry winter with short snow melting.   2.2 Current site utilization The lands considered for the industrial zone are registered as agricultural lands (arable) and currently utilized for the agricultural purposes.   2.3 Development The industrial zone area follows the production complex of Tatra, a.s. Koprivnice on the west boundary.  Family houses are exceptional in the utility area. Only 3 family houses near the road I/58 on the north-eastern side and 7 buildings 150  300 m to the north from the industrial zone are located there. Family houses are built also along the Sykorecek brook approximately 800 m north-west and along the road I/58 to Pribor. Approximately 400 m to the south-east houses of the village Vlcovice are located. Residential family houses are mostly single-floor or two- floor buildings with gardens and outbuildings situated within the area.   2.4 Utility services The existing utility services run along the road I/58 and an access road leading to the loading gatehouse Tatra, a.s. They cover Telecom cabling, drinking water pipes DN 400 and gas pipes VTL (high-pressure) 200.

887-30305-0/1



6

The area approved for the industrial zone is mostly vacant, only on the east side gas pipes VTL 200 run.   2.5 Vegetation As mentioned above the area of the future industrial zone consists of lands without any permanent vegetative cover and used for the agricultural production as arable soil.  Grown vegetation occurs along the road I/58, along Sykorecek brook and along a nameless left-bank tributary of Sykorecek brook, which makes a south-east limit of the industrial zone area.  The vegetative cover along Sykorecek brook consists of willows, alders, ashes, maples, oaks, birches which are completed with new plants in the upper part of the stream.  In the east where a nameless brook flows there is a vegetative cover 15  20 m wide with common domestic kinds of trees and bushes (willows, alder, maple, ash, European elder, black-thorn, red dogwood etc.).  Along the road I/58 fruit trees, ashes, maples and birches can be found. In the south in the distance of about 600 m there is a complex of forest lands, which is part of the natural park called Podbeskydi.   VKP, ÚSES (significant landscape elements, territorial systems of ecological stability) The Sykorecek brook and a nameless left-bank tributary to Babincův brook are significant landscape elements (VKP) in accordance with Law no. 114/92 of Code on Nature and Landscape Preservation § 4 par. 2 a 6.  Any territorial systems of ecological stability (ÚSES) does not occur in the site of the future industrial zone. The closest biocorridor occurs over the state road I/58 on the east side as the proposed local biocentre  The southern part of the industrial zone touches the protective zone of the natural park Podbeskydi.  According to available information nor plants nor animals protected in accordance with Law no. 114/92 on Nature and Landscape Preservation live in the industrial zone and close vicinity   2.6 Hydrography of the site The main stream of a wide area is Lubina river flowing from the south to the north in the distance of about 450  800 m.  The other important stream in the utility space is Koprivnicka river flowing though the town and creating a left tributary of the Lubina, pouring into it in front of Pribor.  In the southern half of the area of the industrial zone Sykorecek brook springs, then flows around the complex of Tatra, a.s. and empties into Koprivnicka river.

887-30305-0/1



7

Another important stream in the utility space is Babincův brook flowing between the road I/58 and Lubina river, the left-bank tributary of which is a south-eastern limit of the industrial zone.   3. Atmosphere  3.1 Polluted air  3.1.1 Measurement of air quality in the utility space The air pollution in the area of Koprivnicka has been monitored by an automatic monitoring station running by the Czech hydrometeorological Institute, branch office Ostrava  Poruba within the scope of the national automatic pollution monitoring system (AIMS) since 1994. The station is located near the state road approximately 900 m far from the Industrial zone Vlcovice. The station monitors concentrations of SO 2 , NO X and from 22 October 1995 as well fractions PM 10 of powder aerosol.  In the North-Moravion Region air quality is currently measured by 23 automatic monitoring stations (AMS) and 15 manual monitoring stations (MMS).  Map no. 1     Map no. 2    3.1.2 Survey of air pollution in the utility space The following tables show values of air pollution: SO 2 , NO X  powder aerosol (PM 10) and inµ/m 3 per last 5 years of monitoring (1995  1999) by the Lubina station.  Table no. 1 - Average annual concentrationµ/m 3   Year SO NO X  Powder aerosol 2  10) (PM 1995 24 29 - 1996 33 35 41 1997 19 29 31 1998 13 22 24 1999 9 20 21        

887-30305-0/1



8

 Table no. 2  Average monthly concentrationsµ/m 3  Year I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X. XI. XII. SO 2  1995 46 20 24 16 13 8 11 13 12 21 32 68 1996 93 - 52 29 12 9 8 11 10 18 15 57 1997 89 16 16 12 4 5 4 7 - 14 27 25 1998 30 21 14 8 6 6 4 7 9 8 26 21 1999 17 17 11 9 6 6 4 4 6 7 17 9 NO X  1995 37 23 31 25 26 17 18 21 19 39 39 57 1996 63 - 52 37 19 14 12 21 19 34 32 60 1997 70 27 31 21 14 15 14 23 - 29 - 34 1998 26 32 21 14 12 10 11 16 19 20 42 38 1999 25 21 21 18 13 14 14 14 22 21 34 23 Powder aerosol PM 10 1995 - - - - - - - - - - 47 81 1996 78 - 63 49 26 22 - 22 23 36 26 56 1997 82 24 41 26 19 21 13 25 - - - 29 1998 32 28 26 21 18 15 15 20 22 17 39 32 1999 31 25 30 25 18 18 16 14 20 15 33 16   Table no. 3  Maximum daily concentrations inµ/m 3  Year I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X. XI. XII. SO 2  1995 134 49 53 43 30 19 29 40 22 61 81 187 1996 198 174 110 64 34 32 16 23 19 37 38 169 1997 309 42 51 29 11 18 12 19 27 45 75 77 1998 129 63 56 16 14 14 10 17 23 26 121 58 1999 38 63 27 28 16 15 15 17 14 17 45 23 NO X  1995 123 58 76 44 53 28 32 41 37 104 149 155 1996 150 161 105 71 46 34 20 35 40 70 76 175 1997 212 50 64 48 37 28 22 36 42 80 134 110 1998 94 101 49 30 24 26 19 28 40 115 128 111 1999 89 78 55 63 24 27 25 27 39 63 102 94 Powder aerosol (PM 10) 1995 - - - - - - - - - 132 218 257 1996 208 157 116 101 56 43 28 36 54 70 80 202 1997 246 52 115 63 36 34 29 38 37 52 94 96 1998 132 64 56 51 37 41 31 40 63 54 139 78 1999 59 62 81 58 32 32 43 33 53 56 114 60

887-30305-0/1



9

 Notes: −  the average monthly value is stated if at least 16 daily averages are available in a month and the continuous drop-out in daily averages is not longer than 5 days −  fraction PM 10 of powder aerosol has been measured by AMS since 22 October 1995   3.1.3 Current pollutant limits In the CR the limits for selected polluting agents set in the Amendment of the Federal Environmental Committee of 1 October 1991 to Law no. 309 of 9 July 1991 on Air Protection against Polluting Agents are valid.   Table no. 4  Pollutant limits for polluting agents  Pollutan ressed  Pollutant limits (µg/m 3 ) t Ex  as  IH r IH d  IH 8h  IH k  requirement General  Concentration of IH d  and Fly dust 60  150  500  IH om k deecideonn r mubstexe seicsanatieth%ofn5 the year  Concentration of IH d  and Suplhur dioxide  SO 2  60  150  500  IH om k dedexeecbeumts thatre noin cfosesani%5ni the year Sulp f h l u u r e  du dioxide SO 2  p.p. 250* and st  Concentration of IH d  and Nitrogen dioxide NO 2 01 m 0 o 800 IH 02 k stmuebecxededenino rethatin5%focsasein the year  Concentration of IH d  and Carbon dioxide CO 5000 10000 IH k noededinbexeecumts i%5cfotahtnimore ases n the year Ozone O 3  160 Lead in flue dust Pb 0,5 Cadmium in flue dust 0,01 Malodorous Concentrations must not trouble inhabitants substances  Notes IH r - Average yearly concentrations of a pollutant. The average concentration means a mean value of concentration found out in a selected point within one year as an arithmetic average of average 24-hour concentrations.  IH d of a pollutant. The average daily concentration means a mean value- Average yearly concentration of concentration found out in a selected point within one year as an arithmetic average of average 24-hour concentrations. The average daily concentration means also a value of at least uniformly

887-30305-0/1



10

distributed measurements of average half-hour concentrations within 24-hours (arithmetic average).  IH 8h - Average eight-hour concentration of pollutant. The average eight-hour concentration means a mean value of concentration found out in a selected point within 8 hours.  IH k of pollutant. The average half-hour concentration means a mean half-hour concentration - Average value of concentration found out in a selected point within 30 minutes.   3.1.4 Evaluation of air pollution in the utility space The evaluation of air pollution was performed by the branch office of CHMÚ in Ostrava   Poruba in July 2000 supported by measurements done in the Lubina station (see Table no. 5).   Table no. 5  Air pollution in AMS CHMÚ Lubina in 1995  1999  PRM % IH k  % IH d  PRM % IH k  % IH d  IH PRM % k  IH % d  Year Sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ) Nitrogen dioxides (NO X  aerosol (PM 10)) Powder 1995 24 0,0 0,6 29 0,4 2,8 - - - 1996 33 0,0 2,8 35 0,6 3,3 41 - 5,6 1997 19 0,0 0,9 29 0,7 2,7 31 - 11,9 1998 13 0,0 0,0 22 0,1 1,6 24 - 2,3 1999 9 0,0 0,0 20 0,1 0,3 21 - 0,6    Current pollutant limits 1)  lutant IH r  IH k  Exceeded 2)  IH d  Exceeded 2)  Pol [µg/m 3 ] [µg/m 3 ] [%] [ µg/m 3 ] [%] SO 2  500 5 150 5 60 NO X  200 80 5 150 5 PA 3)  60 500 5 150 5  Notes - fraction PM 10 of powder aerosol has been measured by AMS since 22 October 1995  PRM: average yearly concentration % IH d days with the daily concentration higher than the daily pollutant limit no. of : relative % IH k : relative no. of half-hours with 30-minute concentration higher that the short-term pollutant limit; AMS takes three-hour powder aerosol samples and that´s why % of IHk of this pollutant cannot be evaluated 1)  1 January 1991 to Law 309/91 of Code (part current pollutant limit acc. to provision of EM of 84/94 and 84/92) 2)  number of limit exceeding per year allowed 3) for powder aerosol (applied for total powder TSP pollutant limits are generally adopted  existing even for fraction PM 10)    

887-30305-0/1



11

 From the above evaluation it accrues  a) Average yearly pollutant limits IH r  not nearly exceeded (SO were 2 , NO X , powder aerosol) in the utility space in 1995  1999. b) The relative number of half-hours, in which the 30-minute concentration was higher than the short-time pollutant limit (IH k, ) was not exceeded in than 5% of more monitored pollutants (SO 2 , NO X ) in the utility space in 1995 1999. Samples of  powder aerosol were taken by AMS Lubina by three hours therefore the percentage of IH k exceeding was not evaluated. c) The relative number of days when the daily concentration was higher than the daily pollutant IH d limit of the powder aerosol allowed limit was exceeded in more than 5 % cases in the years 1996 a (5,6 %) and 1997 (11,9 %). The 5 % limit of SO 2  and NO X  was not exceeded in 1995  1999.   3.1.5 Direction of dominant winds The direction of dominant winds was defined by the Czech Hydrometerological Institute, Branch Office Ostrava Poruba in January 2000. It is based on measurements performed at  the nearest monitoring station for last 10 years:   N NE E SE S SW W NW Calm Sum 11,7 6,2 2,0 3,9 8,4 28,2 6,2 3,9 29,5 100   3.1.6 Main air polluting agents  The main polluting agents in Koprivnice are: −  Tatra, a.s., registered office Koprivnice, Stefanikova 1163 −  Senov u Nového Jicina, Dukelska 109Tatra Novy Jicin, a.s.  boiler house,  In the south-west direction towards dominant winds there are: −   cement manufacturing, premises in Stramberk (app. 5Kotouc Stramberk, spol. s r. o. km) −  Frenstat pod Radhostem roughly 6,5 km far −  SUPERIOR  boiler house, premises in Frenstat pod Radhostem, Mistecka 963 −   r. o.  boiler house, premises Frenstat pod Radhostem,L. A. BERNKOP, spol. s Maskova 929 −   s.r.o., Mohelnice, Nadrazni 25SIEMENS ELEKTRMOTORY, −  In Pribor roughly 4,5 km far −Tatra Pribor, a.s., Pribor, Mistecka 1111  −  LONKA Pribor, a.s., Pribor, ul. 9. kvetna 1162 −  TEDOM ENERGO, s.r.o. house (earlier Priborska tepelna spolecnost), sidlem boiler  Trebic, Vycapy 195  3.1.7 The utilization of the area in the direction of dominant winds The dominant wind direction is from SW (28,2 %) and north (11,7 %). The area in the direction of winds in the north-east is mostly used for farming. Roughly 1,1 km far there is a 887-30305-0/1