Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System

Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No.26 (For February 2018)

March 2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Contents

Abbreviations

Executive Summary

1      Introduction

1.1    Background

1.2    Scope of this Report

1.3    Project Organisation

1.4    Summary of Construction Works

1.5    Summary of EM&A Programme Requirements

2      Air Quality Monitoring

2.1    Action and Limit Levels

2.2    Monitoring Equipment

2.3    Monitoring Methodology

2.3.1     Measuring Procedure

2.3.2     Maintenance and Calibration

2.4    Summary of Monitoring Results

2.5    Conclusion

3      Noise Monitoring

3.1    Action and Limit Levels

3.2    Monitoring Equipment

3.3    Monitoring Methodology

3.3.1     Monitoring Procedure

3.3.2     Maintenance and Calibration

3.4    Summary of Monitoring Results

3.5    Conclusion

4      Water Quality Monitoring

4.1    Action and Limit Levels

4.2    Monitoring Equipment

4.3    Monitoring Methodology

4.3.1     Measuring Procedure

4.3.2     Maintenance and Calibration

4.3.3     Laboratory Measurement / Analysis

4.4    Summary of Monitoring Results

4.5    Conclusion

5      Waste Management

5.1    Action and Limit Levels

5.2    Waste Management Status

6      Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring

6.1    Action and Limit Levels

6.2    CWD Monitoring Transects and Stations

6.2.1     Small Vessel Line-transect Survey

6.2.2     Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey

6.3    CWD Monitoring Methodology

6.3.1     Small Vessel Line-transect Survey

6.3.2     Photo Identification

6.3.3     Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey

6.4    Monitoring Results and Observations

6.4.1     Small Vessel Line-transect Survey

6.4.2     Photo Identification

6.4.3     Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey

6.5    Progress Update on Passive Acoustic Monitoring

6.6    Site Audit for CWD-related Mitigation Measures

6.7    Timing of Reporting CWD Monitoring Results

6.8    Summary of CWD Monitoring

7      Environmental Site Inspection and Audit

7.1    Environmental Site Inspection

7.2    Audit of SkyPier High Speed Ferries

7.3    Audit of Construction and Associated Vessels

7.4    Implementation of Dolphin Exclusion Zone

7.5    Ecological Monitoring

7.6    Status of Submissions under Environmental Permits

7.7    Compliance with Other Statutory Environmental Requirements

7.8    Analysis and Interpretation of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Status of Prosecutions

7.8.1     Complaints

7.8.2     Notifications of Summons or Status of Prosecution

7.8.3     Cumulative Statistics

8      Future Key Issues and Other EIA & EM&A Issues

8.1    Construction Programme for the Coming Reporting Period

8.2    Key Environmental Issues for the Coming Reporting Period

8.3    Monitoring Schedule for the Coming Reporting Period

9      Conclusion and Recommendation

 

 

 

 

Tables

Table 1.1: Contact Information of Key Personnel 8

Table 1.2: Summary of status for all environmental aspects under the Updated EM&A Manual 10

Table 2.1:  Locations of Impact Air Quality Monitoring Stations  12

Table 2.2:  Action and Limit Levels of Air Quality Monitoring  12

Table 2.3:  Air Quality Monitoring Equipment 12

Table 2.4: Summary of Air Quality Monitoring Results  13

Table 3.1: Locations of Impact Noise Monitoring Stations  14

Table 3.2: Action and Limit Levels for Noise Monitoring  14

Table 3.3: Noise Monitoring Equipment 15

Table 3.4: Summary of Construction Noise Monitoring Results  16

Table 4.1: Monitoring Locations and Parameters of Impact Water Quality Monitoring  17

Table 4.2: Action and Limit Levels for General Water Quality Monitoring and Regular DCM Monitoring  18

Table 4.3: The Control and Impact Stations during Flood Tide and Ebb Tide for General Water Quality Monitoring and Regular DCM Monitoring  19

Table 4.4: Water Quality Monitoring Equipment 19

Table 4.5: Other Monitoring Equipment 19

Table 4.6: Laboratory Measurement/ Analysis of SS and Heavy Metals  20

Table 4.7: Summary of SS Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide) 21

Table 4.8: Summary of Findings from Investigations of SS Monitoring Results (Mid-Ebb Tide) 22

Table 4.9: Summary of SS Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide) 22

Table 4.10: Summary of Findings from Investigations of SS Monitoring Results (Mid-Flood Tide) 23

Table 4.11: Summary of Chromium Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide) 24

Table 4.12: Summary of Findings from Investigations of Chromium Monitoring Results (Mid-Ebb Tide) 24

Table 4.13: Summary of Chromium Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide) 25

Table 4.14: Summary of Findings from Investigations of Chromium Monitoring Results (Mid-Flood Tide) 26

Table 4.15: Summary of Nickel Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide) 26

Table 4.16: Summary of Findings from Investigations of Nickel Monitoring Results (Mid-Flood Tide) 27

Table 5.1: Action and Limit Levels for Construction Waste  28

Table 5.2: Construction Waste Statistics  28

Table 6.1: Derived Values of Action and Limit Levels for Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring  29

Table 6.2: Coordinates of Transect Lines in NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL Survey Areas  30

Table 6.3: Land-based Theodolite Survey Station Details  31

Table 6.4: Comparison of CWD Encounter Rates of the Whole Survey Area with Action Levels  35

Table 6.5: Summary of Photo Identification  36

Table 6.6: Summary of Survey Effort and CWD Group of Land-based Theodolite Tracking  36

Table 7.1: Summary of Key Audit Findings against the SkyPier Plan  40

Table 7.2: Summary of Dolphin Sightings within the DEZ  41

Table 7.3: Status of Submissions under Environmental Permit 42

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figures

Figure 1.1- 1.2

Key Construction Areas in this Reporting Period

Figure 2.1

Locations of Air and Noise Monitoring Stations and Chek Lap Kok Wind Station

Figure 3.1

Water Quality Monitoring Stations

Figure 6.1

Vessel based Dolphin Monitoring Transects in Construction, Post-construction and Operation Phases

Figure 6.2

Land based Dolphin Monitoring in Baseline and Construction Phases

Figure 6.3

Sightings Distribution of Chinese White Dolphins

Figure 6.4

Plots of First Sightings of All CWD Groups obtained from Land-based Stations

Figure 6.5

Location for Autonomous Passive Acoustic Monitoring

Figure 7.1

Duration of the SkyPier HSFs travelled through the SCZ for 1 – 28 February 2018

 

Appendices

Appendix A

Environmental Mitigation Implementation Schedule (EMIS) for Construction Phase

Appendix B

Monitoring Schedule

Appendix C

Monitoring Results

Appendix D

Status of Environmental Permits and Licences

Appendix E

Cumulative Statistics on Exceedances, Environmental Complaints, Notification of Summons and Status of Prosecutions

Appendix F

Data of SkyPier HSF Movements to/from Zhuhai and Macau (between 1 and 28 February 2018)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Abbreviations

3RS

Three-Runway System

AAHK

Airport Authority Hong Kong

AECOM

AECOM Asia Company Limited

AFCD

Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department

AIS

Automatic Information System

ANI

Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphins

APM

Automated People Mover

AW

Airport West

BHS

Baggage Handling System

C&D

Construction and Demolition

CAP

Contamination Assessment Plan

CAR

Contamination Assessment Report

CNP

Construction Noise Permit

CWD

Chinese White Dolphin

DCM

Deep Cement Mixing

DEZ

Dolphin Exclusion Zone

DO

Dissolved Oxygen

EAR

Ecological Acoustic Recorder

EIA

Environmental Impact Assessment

EM&A

Environmental Monitoring & Audit

EP

Environmental Permit

EPD

Environmental Protection Department

ET

Environmental Team

FCZ

Fish Culture Zone

HDD

Horizontal Directional Drilling

HKBCF

Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities

HKIA

Hong Kong International Airport

HOKLAS

Hong Kong Laboratory Accreditation Scheme

HSF

High Speed Ferry

HVS

High Volume Sampler

IEC

Independent Environmental Checker

LKC

Lung Kwu Chau

MMHK

Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited

MMWP

Marine Mammal Watching Plan

MSS

Marine Surveillance System

MTRMP-CAV

Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for Construction and Associated Vessel

NEL

Northeast Lantau

NWL

Northwest Lantau

PAM

Passive Acoustic Monitoring

PVD

Prefabricated Vertical Drain

SC

Sha Chau

SCLKCMP

Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park

SS

Suspended Solids

STG

Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphin Sightings

SWL

Southwest Lantau

T2

Terminal 2

The Project

The Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System

The SkyPier Plan

Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for High Speed Ferries of SkyPier

The Manual

The Updated EM&A Manual

TSP

Total Suspended Particulates

WL

West Lantau

WMP

Waste Management Plan


 

Executive Summary

The “Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System” (the Project) serves to meet the future air traffic demands at Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA).  On 7 November 2014, the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report (Register No.: AEIAR-185/2014) for the Project was approved and an Environmental Permit (EP) (Permit No.: EP-489/2014) was issued for the construction and operation of the Project.

Airport Authority Hong Kong (AAHK) commissioned Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited (MMHK) to undertake the role of Environmental Team (ET) for carrying out the Environmental Monitoring & Audit (EM&A) works during the construction phase of the Project in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual (the Manual).

This is the 26th Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report for the Project which summarizes the monitoring results and audit findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 to 28 February 2018.

Key Activities in the Reporting Period  

The key activities of the Project carried out in the reporting period included reclamation works and land-side works. Reclamation works included deep cement mixing (DCM) works, seawall construction, laying of sand blanket, and prefabricated vertical drain (PVD) installation. Land-side works included horizontal directional drilling (HDD) works, site establishment, site office construction, road and drainage works, cable ducting, demolition and modification of existing facilities, piling, and excavation works.   

EM&A Activities Conducted in the Reporting Period

The monthly EM&A programme was undertaken in accordance with the Manual of the Project. Summary of the monitoring activities during this reporting period is presented as below:

Monitoring Activities

Number of Sessions

1-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) air quality monitoring

30

Noise monitoring

21

Water quality monitoring

12

Vessel line-transect surveys for Chinese White Dolphin (CWD) monitoring

2

Land-based theodolite tracking survey effort for CWD monitoring

5

Terrestrial ecology monitoring

1

Environmental auditing works, including weekly site inspections of construction works conducted by the ET and bi-weekly site inspections conducted by the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC), audit of SkyPier High Speed Ferries (HSF), audit of construction and associated vessels, and audit of implementation of Marine Mammal Watching Plan (MMWP) and Dolphin Exclusion Zone (DEZ) Plan, were conducted in the reporting period. Based on information including ET’s observations, records of Marine Surveillance System (MSS), and contractors’ site records, it is noted that environmental pollution control and mitigation measures were properly implemented and construction operation of the Project in the reporting period did not introduce adverse impacts to the sensitive receivers.

Snapshots of EM&A Activities in the Reporting Period

Environmental Briefing on Environmental Compliance and Construction Waste Management Provided by EPD and AAHK

Sampling for Water Quality Monitoring Conducted by ET

DEZ Monitoring Conducted by Contractor

Results of Impact Monitoring

The monitoring works for construction dust, construction noise, water quality, construction waste, terrestrial ecology, and CWD were conducted during the reporting period in accordance with the Manual.

Monitoring results of construction dust, construction noise, construction waste, and CWD did not trigger the corresponding Action and Limit Levels in the reporting period. 

The water quality monitoring results for dissolved oxygen (DO), turbidity, total alkalinity, and nickel obtained during the reporting period complied with their corresponding Action and Limit Levels stipulated in the EM&A programme for triggering the relevant investigation and follow-up procedures under the programme if being triggered. For suspended solids (SS) and chromium, some of the testing results triggered the relevant Action or Limit Level, and the corresponding investigations were conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded that the cases were not related to the Project. To conclude, the construction operation in the reporting period did not introduce adverse impact to all water quality sensitive receivers.

The monthly terrestrial ecology monitoring on Sheung Sha Chau observed that HDD works were conducted at the daylighting location and there was no encroachment upon the egretry area nor any significant disturbance to the ardeids foraging at Sheung Sha Chau by the works.

Summary of Upcoming Key Issues  

Key activities anticipated in the next reporting period of the Project include the following:

Advanced Works:

Contract P560 (R) Aviation Fuel Pipeline Diversion Works

    HDD works; and

    Stockpiling of excavated materials from HDD operation.

DCM Works:

Contract 3201 to 3205 DCM Works

    DCM works; and

    Seawall construction.

Reclamation Works:

Contract 3206 Main Reclamation Works

    Laying of sand blanket;

    PVD installation; and

    Seawall construction.

Airfield Works:

Contract 3301 North Runway Crossover Taxiway

    Cable ducting works;

    Subgrade works; and

    Precast of duct bank and fabrication of steel works.

Terminal 2 Expansion Works:

Contract 3501 Antenna Farm and Sewage Pumping Station

    Excavation works;

    Pipe installation;

    Piling works; and

   Builders works of antenna farm.

Contract 3502 Terminal 2 Automated People Mover (APM) Depot Modification Works

    Removal of existing concrete;

    Formwork erection and concreting works; and

    Steel platform erection.

Contract 3503 Terminal 2 Foundation and Substructure Works

    Site establishment;

    Electrical and mechanical (E&M), drainage, and road work; and

    Piling works

APM works:

Contract 3602 Existing APM System Modification Works

    Site office establishment.

Baggage Handling System (BHS) works:

Contract 3603 3RS Baggage Handling System

    Site establishment.

Airport Support Infrastructure & Logistic Works:

Contract 3801 APM and BHS Tunnels on Existing Airport Island

    Erection of hoarding;

    Diversion of underground utilities;

    Piling works; and

    Demolition of footbridge.

The key environmental issues will be associated with construction dust, construction noise, water quality, construction waste management, CWD and terrestrial ecology on Sheung Sha Chau. The implementation of required mitigation measures by the contractor will be monitored by the ET.

Summary Table

The following table summarizes the key findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period:

 

Yes

No

Details

Analysis / Recommendation / Remedial Actions

Breach of Limit Level^

 

No breach of Limit Level was recorded.

Nil

Breach of Action Level^

 

No breach of Action Level was recorded.

Nil

Complaint Received

 

A complaint on noise from Sha Chau works was received on 5 Feb 2018.

No observation relating to construction works and deployment of powered mechanical equipment during restricted hours was found during regular and ad-hoc site inspections.

The contractor was reminded to comply with all conditions stipulated in the Environmental Permit and Construction Noise Permit.

Notification of any summons and status of prosecutions

 

No notification of summon or prosecution was received.

Nil

Change that affect the EM&A

 

There was no change to the construction works that may affect the EM&A

Nil

Remark: ^Only triggering of Action or Limit Level related to Project works is counted as Breach of Action or Limit Level. 

 

1        Introduction

1.1         Background

On 7 November 2014, the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report (Register No.: AEIAR-185/2014) for the “Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System” (the Project) was approved and an Environmental Permit (EP) (Permit No.: EP-489/2014) was issued for the construction and operation of the Project.

Airport Authority Hong Kong (AAHK) commissioned Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited (MMHK) to undertake the role of Environmental Team (ET) for carrying out the Environmental Monitoring & Audit (EM&A) works during the construction phase of the Project in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual (the Manual) submitted under EP Condition 3.1 (accessible at: http://env.threerunwaysystem.com/en/index.html). AECOM Asia Company Limited (AECOM) was employed by AAHK as the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) for the Project.

The Project covers the expansion of the existing airport into a three-runway system (3RS) with key project components comprising land formation of about 650 ha and all associated facilities and infrastructure including taxiways, aprons, aircraft stands, a passenger concourse, an expanded Terminal 2, all related airside and landside works and associated ancillary and supporting facilities. The existing submarine aviation fuel pipelines and submarine power cables also require diversion as part of the works.

Construction of the Project is to proceed in the general order of diversion of the submarine aviation fuel pipelines, diversion of the submarine power cables, land formation, and construction of infrastructure, followed by construction of superstructures.

The updated overall phasing programme of all construction works was presented in Appendix A of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 7 and the contract information was presented in Appendix A of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 25.

1.2         Scope of this Report

This is the 26th Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report for the Project which summarizes the key findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 to 28 February 2018.

1.3         Project Organisation

The Project’s organization structure presented in Appendix B of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No.1 remained unchanged during the reporting period. Contact details of the key personnel are presented in Table 1.1.

Table 1.1: Contact Information of Key Personnel

Party

Position

Name

Telephone

Project Manager’s Representative

(Airport Authority Hong Kong)

Principal Manager, Environment

Lawrence Tsui

2183 2734

Environmental Team (ET)

(Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited)

Environmental Team Leader

Terence Kong

2828 5919

 

Deputy Environmental Team Leader

Heidi Yu

2828 5704

 

Deputy Environmental Team Leader

Keith Chau

2972 1721

Independent Environmental Checker (IEC)

(AECOM Asia Company Limited)

Independent Environmental Checker

Jackel Law

3922 9376

 

 

Deputy Independent Environmental Checker

Roy Man

3922 9376

 

Advanced Works:

 

 

 

Contract P560(R) Aviation Fuel Pipeline Diversion Works

(Langfang Huayuan Mechanical and Electrical Engineering Co., Ltd.)

Project Manager

 

Wei Shih

 

2117 0566

 

 

Environmental Officer

Lyn Liu

 

5172 6543

 

 

Deep Cement Mixing (DCM) Works:

Contract 3201 DCM (Package 1)

(Penta-Ocean-China State-Dong-Ah Joint Venture)

Project Director

 

Tsugunari Suzuki

 

9178 9689

 

Environmental Officer

 

Alan Tam

 

6119 3107

Contract 3202 DCM (Package 2)

(Samsung-BuildKing Joint Venture)

Project Manager

Ilkwon Nam

 

9643 3117

 

Environmental Officer

 

Dickson Mak

 

9525 8408

Contract 3203 DCM  (Package 3)

(Sambo E&C Co., Ltd)

Project Manager

 

Eric Kan

 

9014 6758

 

Environmental Officer

 

David Hung

 

9765 6151

Contract 3204 DCM  (Package 4)

(CRBC-SAMBO Joint Venture)

Project Manager

Kyung-Sik Yoo

 

9683 8697

 

 

Environmental Officer

Kanny Cho

6799 8226

Contract 3205 DCM (Package 5)

(Bachy Soletanche - Sambo Joint Venture)

Deputy Project Director

Min Park

9683 0765

 

Environmental Officer

Margaret Chung

9130 3696

 

Reclamation Works:

 

 

 

Contract 3206

(ZHEC-CCCC-CDC Joint Venture)

Project Manager

Kim Chuan Lim

 

3763 1509

 

Environmental Officer

Kwai Fung Wong

3763 1452

 

Airfield Works

 

 

 

Contract 3301 North Runway Crossover Taxiway (FJT-CHEC-ZHEC Joint Venture)

Project Manager

Kin Hang Chung

9412 1386

 

Terminal 2 (T2) Expansion Works:

Contract 3501 Antenna Farm and Sewage Pumping Station

(Build King Construction Ltd.)

Project Manager

 

Raymond Au

 

6985 8860

 

 

Environmental Officer

Edward Tam

9287 8270

Contract 3502 Terminal 2 APM Depot Modification Works

(Build King Construction Ltd.)

Project Manager

Kivin Cheng

9380 3635

 

Environmental Officer

Chun Pong Chan

9187 7118

Contract 3503 Terminal 2 Foundation and Substructure Works

(Leighton – Chun Wo Joint Venture)

Construction Manager

Stephen O’Donoghue

9732 6787

 

Environmental Officer

Stephen Tsang

5508 6361

 

Automated People Mover (APM) Works:

Contract 3602 Existing APM System Modification Works

(Niigata Transys Co., Ltd.)

Project Manager

Kunihiro Tatecho

9755 0351

 

Environmental Officer

Arthur Wong

9170 3394

 

Airport Support Infrastructure and Logistic Works:

Contract 3801 APM and BHS Tunnels on Existing Airport Island

(China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Ltd.)

Project Manager

Tony Wong

9642 8672

 

Environmental Officer

Fredrick Wong

9842 2703

 

1.4         Summary of Construction Works

The key activities of the Project carried out in the reporting period included reclamation works and land-side works. Reclamation works included DCM works, seawall construction, laying of sand blanket, and PVD installation. Land-side works included HDD works, site establishment, site office construction, road and drainage works, cable ducting, demolition and modification of existing facilities, piling, and excavation works.

The locations of the works area are presented in Figure 1.1 to Figure 1.2.

1.5         Summary of EM&A Programme Requirements

The status for all environmental aspects are presented in Table 1.2. The EM&A requirements remained unchanged during the reporting period and details can be referred to Table 1.2 of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 1.

Table 1.2: Summary of status for all environmental aspects under the Updated EM&A Manual        

Parameters

Status

Air Quality

 

Baseline Monitoring

The baseline air quality monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4.

Impact Monitoring

On-going

Noise

 

Baseline Monitoring

The baseline noise monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4.

Impact Monitoring

On-going

Water Quality

 

General Baseline Water Quality Monitoring for reclamation, water jetting and field joint works

The baseline water quality monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition

3.4.

General Impact Water Quality Monitoring for reclamation, water jetting and field joint works

On-going

Initial Intensive Deep Cement Mixing (DCM) Water Quality Monitoring

The Initial Intensive DCM Monitoring Report was submitted and approved by EPD in accordance with the Detailed Plan on DCM.

Regular DCM Water Quality Monitoring

On-going

Waste Management

 

Waste Monitoring

On-going

Land Contamination

 

Supplementary Contamination Assessment Plan (CAP)

The Supplementary CAP was submitted and approved by EPD pursuant to EP condition 2.20.

Contamination Assessment Report (CAR) for Golf Course

The CAR for Golf Course was submitted to EPD.

Terrestrial Ecology

 

Pre-construction Egretry Survey Plan

The Egretry Survey Plan was submitted and approved by EPD under EP Condition 2.14.

Ecological Monitoring

On-going

Marine Ecology

 

Pre-Construction Phase Coral Dive Survey

The Coral Translocation Plan was submitted and approved by EPD under EP Condition 2.12.

Coral Translocation

The coral translocation was completed.

Post-Translocation Coral Monitoring

On-going

Chinese White Dolphins (CWD)

 

Vessel Survey, Land-based Theodolite Tracking and Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM)

 

Baseline Monitoring

Baseline CWD results were reported in the CWD Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD in accordance with EP Condition 3.4.

Impact Monitoring

On-going

Landscape & Visual

 

Baseline Monitoring

The baseline landscape & visual monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4.

Impact Monitoring

On-going

Environmental Auditing

 

Regular site inspection

On-going

Marine Mammal Watching Plan (MMWP) implementation measures

On-going

Dolphin Exclusion Zone (DEZ) Plan implementation measures

On-going

SkyPier High Speed Ferries (HSF) implementation measures

On-going

Construction and Associated Vessels Implementation measures

On-going

Complaint Hotline and Email channel

On-going

Environmental Log Book

On-going

Taking into account the construction works in this reporting period, impact monitoring of air quality, noise, water quality, waste management, terrestrial ecology, landscape & visual and CWD were carried out in the reporting period.

The EM&A programme also involved weekly site inspections and related auditing conducted by the ET for checking the implementation of the required environmental mitigation measures recommended in the approved EIA Report. To promote the environmental awareness and enhance the environmental performance of the contractors, environmental trainings and regular environmental management meetings were conducted during the reporting period, which are summarized as below:

    One dolphin observer training provided by ET: 14 Feb 2018

    Two skipper trainings provided by ET: 7 and 21 Feb 2018

    One environmental briefing on environmental compliance and construction waste management provided by EPD and AAHK: 13 Feb 2018

    Nine environmental management meetings for EM&A review with works contracts: 6, 13, 21, 27, and 28 Feb 2018

The EM&A programme has been following the recommendations presented in the approved EIA Report and the Manual. A summary of implementation status of the environmental mitigation measures for the construction phase of the Project during the reporting period is provided in Appendix A.

 

2        Air Quality Monitoring

Air quality monitoring of 1-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) was conducted three times every six days at two representative monitoring stations in the vicinity of air sensitive receivers in Tung Chung and villages in North Lantau in accordance with the Manual. Table 2.1 describes the details of the monitoring stations. Figure 2.1 shows the locations of the monitoring stations.

Table 2.1:  Locations of Impact Air Quality Monitoring Stations

Monitoring Station

Location

AR1A

Man Tung Road Park

AR2

Village House at Tin Sum

2.1         Action and Limit Levels

In accordance with the Manual, baseline air quality monitoring of 1-hour TSP levels at the two air quality monitoring stations were established as presented in the Baseline Monitoring Report. The Action and Limit Levels of the air quality monitoring stipulated in the EM&A programme for triggering the relevant investigation and follow-up procedures under the programme are provided in Table 2.2.  

Table 2.2:  Action and Limit Levels of Air Quality Monitoring

Monitoring Station

Action Level (mg/m3)

Limit Level (mg/m3)

AR1A

306

500

AR2

298

2.2         Monitoring Equipment

Portable direct reading dust meter was used to carry out the air quality monitoring. Details of equipment used in the reporting period are given in Table 2.3.

Table 2.3:  Air Quality Monitoring Equipment

Equipment

Brand and Model                  

Last Calibration Date                   

Calibration Certificate Provided in

Portable direct reading dust meter (Laser dust monitor)

SIBATA LD-3B-001 (Serial No. 934393)

11 Oct 2017

Monthly EM&A Report No. 22, Appendix E

SIBATA LD-3B-002 (Serial No. 974350)

11 Sep 2017

SIBATA LD-3B-003 (Serial No. 276018)

11 Sep 2017

2.3         Monitoring Methodology

2.3.1      Measuring Procedure

The measurement procedures involved in the impact air quality monitoring can be summarised as follows: 

a.   The portable direct reading dust meter was mounted on a tripod at a height of 1.2 m above the ground.

b.   Prior to the measurement, the equipment was set up for 1 minute span check and 6 second background check.

c.   The one hour dust measurement was started. Site conditions and dust sources at the nearby area were recorded on a record sheet.

d.   When the measurement completed, the “Count” reading per hour was recorded for result calculation.

2.3.2      Maintenance and Calibration

The portable direct reading dust meter is calibrated every year against high volume sampler (HVS) to check the validity and accuracy of the results measured by direct reading method. The calibration record of the HVS provided in Appendix E of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 22, and the calibration certificates of portable direct reading dust meters listed in Table 2.3 are still valid.

2.4         Summary of Monitoring Results

The air quality monitoring schedule involved in the reporting period is provided in Appendix B.

The air quality monitoring results in the reporting period are summarized in Table 2.4. Detailed impact monitoring results are presented in Appendix C.

Table 2.4: Summary of Air Quality Monitoring Results

Monitoring Station

1-hr TSP Concentration Range (mg/m3)

Action Level (mg/m3)

Limit Level (mg/m3)

AR1A

29 – 64

306

500

AR2

23 – 65

298

The monitoring results complied with the corresponding Action and Limit Levels at all monitoring stations in the reporting period.

General meteorological conditions throughout the impact monitoring period were recorded. Wind data including wind speed and wind direction for each monitoring day were collected from the Chek Lap Kok Wind Station.

2.5         Conclusion

No dust emission source from Project activities was observed during impact air quality monitoring. Major sources of dust observed at the monitoring stations during the monitoring sessions were local air pollution and nearby traffic emissions. It is considered that the monitoring work in the reporting period is effective and there was no adverse impact attributable to the Project activities.

 

3        Noise Monitoring

Noise monitoring in the form of 30-minute measurements of Leq, L10, and L90 levels was conducted once per week between 0700 and 1900 on normal weekdays at five representative monitoring stations in the vicinity of noise sensitive receivers in Tung Chung and villages in North Lantau in accordance with the Manual. Table 3.1 describes the details of the monitoring stations.  Figure 2.1 shows the locations of the monitoring stations. As described in Section 4.3.3 of the Manual, monitoring at NM2 will commence when the future residential buildings in Tung Chung West Development become occupied.

Table 3.1: Locations of Impact Noise Monitoring Stations

Monitoring Station

Location

Type of measurement

NM1A

Man Tung Road Park

Free field

NM2(1)

Tung Chung West Development

To be determined

NM3A

Site Office

Facade  

NM4

Ching Chung Hau Po Woon Primary School

Free field

NM5

Village House in Tin Sum

Free field

NM6

House No. 1, Sha Lo Wan

Free field

Note: (1) As described in Section 4.3.3 of the Manual, noise monitoring at NM2 will only commence after occupation of the future Tung Chung West Development.

3.1         Action and Limit Levels

In accordance with the Manual, baseline noise levels at the noise monitoring stations were established as presented in the Baseline Monitoring Report. The Action and Limit Levels of the noise monitoring stipulated in the EM&A programme for triggering the relevant investigation and follow-up procedures under the programme are provided in Table 3.2.

Table 3.2: Action and Limit Levels for Noise Monitoring

Monitoring Stations

Time Period

Action Level

Limit Level, Leq(30mins) dB(A)

NM1A, NM2, NM3A, NM4, NM5 and NM6

0700-1900 hours on normal weekdays

When one documented

complaint is received from

any one of the sensitive

receivers

75 dB(A)(i)

Note: (i) Reduced to 70dB(A) for school and 65dB(A) during school examination periods for NM4.

3.2         Monitoring Equipment

Noise monitoring was performed using sound level meter at each designated monitoring station.  The sound level meters deployed comply with the International Electrotechnical Commission Publications 651:1979 (Type 1) and 804:1985 (Type 1) specifications. Acoustic calibrator was used to check the sound level meters by a known sound pressure level for field measurement.  Details of equipment used in the reporting period are given in Table 3.3.

Table 3.3: Noise Monitoring Equipment

Equipment

Brand and Model

Last Calibration Date

Calibration Certificate Provided in

Integrated Sound Level Meter

B&K 2238 (Serial No. 2800932)

17 Jul 2017

Monthly EM&A Report No. 19, Appendix E

B&K 2238 (Serial No. 2808432)

30 Aug 2017

Monthly EM&A Report No. 21, Appendix E

Acoustic Calibrator

B&K 4231 (Serial No. 3003246)

16 May 2017

Monthly EM&A Report No. 17, Appendix D

B&K 4231 (Serial No. 3004068)

17 Jul 2017

Monthly EM&A Report No. 19, Appendix E

3.3         Monitoring Methodology

3.3.1      Monitoring Procedure

The monitoring procedures involved in the noise monitoring can be summarised as follows: 

a.   The sound level meter was set on a tripod at least a height of 1.2 m above the ground for free-field measurements at monitoring stations NM1A, NM4, NM5 and NM6. A correction of +3 dB(A) was applied to the free field measurements.

b.   Façade measurements were made at the monitoring station NM3A.

c.   Parameters such as frequency weighting, time weighting and measurement time were set.

d.   Prior to and after each noise measurement, the meter was calibrated using the acoustic calibrator.  If the difference in the calibration level before and after measurement was more than 1 dB(A), the measurement would be considered invalid and repeat of noise measurement would be required after re-calibration or repair of the equipment.

e.   During the monitoring period, Leq, L10 and L90 were recorded.  In addition, site conditions and noise sources were recorded on a record sheet.

f.    Noise measurement results were corrected with reference to the baseline monitoring levels.

g.   Observations were recorded when high intrusive noise (e.g. dog barking, helicopter noise) was observed during the monitoring.

3.3.2      Maintenance and Calibration

The maintenance and calibration procedures are summarised below:

a.   The microphone head of the sound level meter was cleaned with soft cloth at regular intervals.

b.   The meter and calibrator were sent to the supplier or laboratory accredited under Hong Kong Laboratory Accreditation Scheme (HOKLAS) to check and calibrate at yearly intervals.

Calibration certificates of the sound level meters and acoustic calibrators used in the noise monitoring listed in Table 3.3 are still valid.

3.4         Summary of Monitoring Results

The noise monitoring schedule involved in the reporting period is provided in Appendix B.

The noise monitoring results in the reporting period are summarized in Table 3.4. Detailed impact monitoring results are presented in Appendix C.

Table 3.4: Summary of Construction Noise Monitoring Results

Monitoring Station

Noise Level Range, dB(A)

Leq (30 mins)

Limit Level, dB(A)

Leq (30 mins)

NM1A(i)

72 – 73

75

NM3A

57 – 63

75

NM4(i)

60 – 66

70(ii)

NM5(i)

57 – 62

75

NM6(i)

66 – 73

75

Notes:    (i) +3 dB(A) Façade correction included;

               (ii) Reduced to 65 dB(A) during school examination periods at NM4. No examination was held in this reporting period.

The monitoring results complied with the corresponding Action and Limit Levels at all monitoring stations in the reporting period.

3.5         Conclusion

As the construction activities were far away from the monitoring stations, major sources of noise dominating the monitoring stations observed during the construction noise impact monitoring were road traffic noise at NM1A, student activities, aircraft and helicopter noise at NM4, and aircraft and helicopter noise at NM3A, NM5 and NM6 during this reporting period. It is considered that the monitoring work during the reporting period is effective and there was no adverse impact attributable to the Project activities.

 

4        Water Quality Monitoring

Water quality monitoring of DO, turbidity, total alkalinity, chromium, and nickel was conducted three days per week, at mid-ebb and mid-flood tides, at a total of 22 water quality monitoring stations, comprising 12 impact (IM) stations, 7 sensitive receiver (SR) stations and 3 control (C) stations in the vicinity of water quality sensitive receivers around the airport island in accordance with the Manual. The purpose of water quality monitoring at the IM stations is to promptly capture any potential water quality impact from the Project before it could become apparent at sensitive receivers (represented by the SR stations). Table 4.1 describes the details of the monitoring stations. Figure 3.1 shows the locations of the monitoring stations. 

Table 4.1: Monitoring Locations and Parameters of Impact Water Quality Monitoring

 

Monitoring

Description

Coordinates

Parameters

Station

 

Easting

Northing

 

C1

Control

804247

815620

DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS, Total Alkalinity, Heavy Metals(2)

C2

Control

806945

825682

C3(3)

Control

817803

822109

IM1

Impact

806458

818351

IM2

Impact

806193

818852

IM3

Impact

806019

819411

IM4

Impact

805039

819570

IM5

Impact

804924

820564

IM6

Impact

805828

821060

IM7

Impact

806835

821349

IM8

Impact

807838

821695

IM9

Impact

808811

822094

IM10

Impact

809838

822240

IM11

Impact

810545

821501

IM12

Impact

811519

821162

SR1(1)

Future Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF) Seawater Intake for cooling

812586

820069

DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS

 

SR2(3)

Planned marine park / hard corals at The Brothers / Tai Mo To

814166

821463

SR3

Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park / fishing and spawning grounds in North Lantau

807571

822147

SR4A

Sha Lo Wan

807810

817189

SR5A

San Tau Beach SSSI

810696

816593

SR6

Tai Ho Bay, Near Tai Ho Stream SSSI

814663

817899

SR7

Ma Wan Fish Culture Zone (FCZ)

823742

823636

SR8(4)

Seawater Intake for cooling at Hong Kong International Airport (East)

811418

(from July 2017 onwards)

820246

 

 

Notes:   

(1) The seawater intakes of SR1 for the future HKBCF is not yet in operation, hence no water quality impact monitoring was conducted at this station. The future permanent location for SR1 during impact monitoring is subject to finalisation after the HKBCF seawater is commissioned.

(2) Details of selection criteria for the two heavy metals for regular DCM monitoring refer to the Detailed Plan on Deep Cement Mixing available on the dedicated 3RS website (http://env.threerunwaysystem.com/en/ep-submissions.html).  DCM specific water quality monitoring parameters (total alkalinity and heavy metals) were only conducted at C1 to C3, SR2, and IM1 to IM12.

(3) According to the Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Report, C3 station is not adequately representative as a control  station of impact/ SR stations during the flood tide. The control reference has been changed from C3 to SR2 from 1 September 2016 onwards.

(4) The monitoring location for SR8 is subject to further changes due to silt curtain arrangements and the progressive relocation of this seawater intake.

 

4.1      Action and Limit Levels

In accordance with the Manual, baseline water quality levels at the abovementioned representative water quality monitoring stations were established as presented in the Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Report. The Action and Limit Levels of general water quality monitoring and regular DCM monitoring stipulated in the EM&A programme for triggering the relevant investigation and follow-up procedures under the programme are provided in Table 4.2. The control and impact stations during ebb tide and flood tide for general water quality monitoring and regular DCM monitoring are presented in Table 4.3.

Table 4.2: Action and Limit Levels for General Water Quality Monitoring and Regular DCM Monitoring

Parameters

Action Level

Limit Level

Action and Limit Levels for general water quality monitoring and regular DCM monitoring

(excluding SR1& SR8)

DO in mg/L

(Surface, Middle & Bottom)

Surface and Middle

4.5 mg/L

Surface and Middle

4.1 mg/L

5 mg/L for Fish Culture Zone (SR7) only

Bottom

3.4 mg/L

Bottom

2.7 mg/L

SS in mg/L

23

or 120% of upstream control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher

37

or 130% of upstream control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher

Turbidity in NTU

22.6

36.1

Total Alkalinity in ppm

95

99

Representative Heavy Metals for regular DCM monitoring

(Chromium)

0.2

0.2

Representative Heavy Metals for regular DCM monitoring

(Nickel)

3.2

 

3.6

 

Action and Limit Levels SR1

 

 

 

SS (mg/l)

To be determined prior to its commissioning

To be determined prior to its commissioning

Action and Limit Levels SR8

 

 

 

 

SS (mg/l)

52

 

60

 

Notes:

(1)   For DO measurement, non-compliance occurs when monitoring result is lower than the limits.

(2)     For parameters other than DO, non-compliance of water quality results when monitoring results is higher than the limits.

(3)     Depth-averaged results are used unless specified otherwise.

(4)     Details of selection criteria for the two heavy metals for regular DCM monitoring refer to the Detailed Plan on Deep Cement Mixing available on the dedicated 3RS website (http://env.threerunwaysystem.com/en/ep-submissions.html)

(5)     The Action and Limit Levels for the two representative heavy metals chosen will be the same as that for the intensive DCM monitoring.

Table 4.3: The Control and Impact Stations during Flood Tide and Ebb Tide for General Water Quality Monitoring and Regular DCM Monitoring

 

Control Station

Impact Stations

Flood Tide

 

C1

IM1, IM2, IM3, IM4, IM5, IM6, IM7, IM8, SR3

SR2^1

IM7, IM8, IM9, IM10, IM11, IM12, SR1A, SR3, SR4A, SR5A, SR6, SR8

Ebb Tide

 

C1

SR4A, SR5A, SR6

C2

IM1, IM2, IM3, IM4, IM5, IM6, IM7, IM8, IM9, IM10, IM11, IM12, SR1A, SR2, SR3, SR7, SR8

^1 As per findings of Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Report, the control reference has been changed from C3 to SR2 from 1 Sep 2016 onwards.

4.2         Monitoring Equipment

Table 4.4 summarises the equipment used in the reporting period for monitoring of specific water quality parameters under the water quality monitoring programme.

Table 4.4: Water Quality Monitoring Equipment

Equipment

Brand and Model

Last Calibration Date

Calibration Certificate Provided in

Multifunctional Meter (measurement of DO, pH, temperature, salinity and turbidity)

YSI ProDSS (Serial No. 16H104234)

7 Dec 2017

Monthly EM&A Report No. 24, Appendix D

YSI ProDSS (Serial No. 17H105557)

7 Dec 2017

YSI 6920 V2 (Serial No. 00019CB2)

7 Dec 2017

YSI 6920 V2 (Serial No. 000109DF)

7 Dec 2017

Digital Titrator (measurement of total alkalinity)

Titrette Digital Burette 50ml Class A

(Serial No. 10N65665)

18 Dec 2017

Monthly EM&A Report No. 24, Appendix D

Other equipment used as part of the impact water quality monitoring programme are listed in Table 4.5.

Table 4.5: Other Monitoring Equipment

Equipment

Brand and Model

Water Sampler

Van Dorn Water Sampler

Positioning Device (measurement of GPS)

Garmin eTrex Vista HCx

Current Meter (measurement of current speed and direction, and water depth)

Sontek HydroSurveyor

4.3         Monitoring Methodology

4.3.1      Measuring Procedure

Water quality monitoring samples were taken at three depths (at 1m below surface, at mid-depth, and at 1m above bottom) for locations with water depth >6m. For locations with water depth between 3m and 6m, water samples were taken at two depths (surface and bottom). For locations with water depth <3m, only the mid-depth was taken. Duplicate water samples were taken and analysed.

The water samples for all monitoring parameters were collected, stored, preserved and analysed according to the Standard Methods, APHA 22nd ed. and/or other methods as agreed by the EPD. In-situ measurements at monitoring locations including temperature, pH, DO, turbidity, salinity and water depth were collected by equipment listed in Table 4.4 and Table 4.5. Water samples for heavy metals and SS analysis were stored in high density polythene bottles with no preservative added, packed in ice (cooled to 4 şC without being frozen), delivered to the laboratory within 24 hours of collection.

4.3.2      Maintenance and Calibration

Calibration of In-situ Instruments

All in-situ monitoring instrument were checked, calibrated and certified by a laboratory accredited under HOKLAS before use. Responses of sensors and electrodes were checked with certified standard solutions before each use.

Wet bulb calibration for a DO meter was carried out before commencement of monitoring and after completion of all measurements each day. Calibration was not conducted at each monitoring location as daily calibration is adequate for the type of DO meter employed. A zero check in distilled water was performed with the turbidity probe at least once per monitoring day. The probe was then calibrated with a solution of known NTU. In addition, the turbidity probe was calibrated at least twice per month to establish the relationship between turbidity readings (in NTU) and levels of SS (in mg/L).  Accuracy check of the digital titrator was performed at least once per monitoring day.

Calibration certificates of the monitoring equipment used in the reporting period listed in Table 4.4 are still valid.

4.3.3      Laboratory Measurement / Analysis

Analysis of SS and heavy metals have been carried out by a HOKLAS accredited laboratory, ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd (Reg. No. HOKLAS 066). Sufficient water samples were collected at all the monitoring stations for carrying out the laboratory SS and heavy metals determination. The SS and heavy metals determination works were started within 24 hours after collection of the water samples. The analysis of SS and heavy metals have followed the standard methods summarised in Table 4.6. The QA/QC procedures for laboratory measurement/ analysis of SS and heavy metals were presented in Appendix F of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No.8.

Table 4.6: Laboratory Measurement/ Analysis of SS and Heavy Metals

Parameters

Instrumentation

Analytical Method

Reporting Limit

SS

Analytical Balance

APHA 2540D

2 mg/L

Heavy Metals

 

 

 

Chromium (Cr)

ICP-MS

USEPA 6020A

0.2 µg/L

Nickel (Ni)

ICP-MS

USEPA 6020A

0.2 µg/L

4.4         Summary of Monitoring Results

The water quality monitoring schedule for the reporting period is updated and provided in Appendix B.The sea conditions varied from calm to rough, and the weather conditions varied from sunny to rainy during the monitoring period.

The water quality monitoring results for DO, turbidity, and total alkalinity obtained during the reporting period were within their corresponding Action and Limit Levels.

For SS, chromium, and nickel, some of the testing results triggered the corresponding Action or Limit Level, and investigation was conducted accordingly.

Table 4.7 presents a summary of the SS compliance status at IM and SR stations during mid-ebb tide for the reporting period.

Table 4.7: Summary of SS Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide)

Note: Detailed results are presented in Appendix C.

Legend:

 

The monitoring results complied with the corresponding Action and Limit Levels

 

Monitoring result triggered the Action Level at monitoring station located upstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow

D

Monitoring result triggered the Action Level at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow

 

Upstream station with respect to the Project during the respective tide based on dominant tidal flow

Monitoring results triggered the corresponding Action Levels on two monitoring days. As some of these results were collected at stations located downstream of the Project, which might be affected by Project’s construction activities, investigation was carried out.

As part of the investigation on the downstream events, details of the Project’s marine construction activities on the concerned monitoring days were collected, as well as any observations during the monitoring. The findings are summarized in Table 4.8.

Table 4.8: Summary of Findings from Investigations of SS Monitoring Results (Mid-Ebb Tide)

Date

Marine construction works nearby

Approximate distance from marine construction works*

 

Status of water quality measures (if applicable)

Construction vessels in the vicinity

Turbidity / Silt plume observed near the monitoring station

Action or Limit Level triggered due to Project

01/02/2018

DCM works

Sand blanket laying

Around 500m

Silt curtain deployed

No

No

No

03/02/2018

DCM works

Sand blanket laying

Around 500m

Silt curtain deployed

No

No

No

* This refers to the approximate distance between the marine construction works and the nearest monitoring stations with monitoring results triggering the corresponding Action or Limit Level.

According to the investigation findings, it was confirmed that both DCM and sand blanket laying activities were operating normally with silt curtains deployed. The silt curtains were maintained properly.

For the monitoring results at IM4 on 1 February 2018 and IM3 on 3 February 2018, it appeared to be isolated cases with no observable temporal and spatial trend to indicate any effect due to Project activities. As there was no evidence of SS release due to Project activities from site observations and all mitigation measures were carried out properly, the cases were possibly due to natural fluctuation in the vicinity of the monitoring stations, and considered not due to the Project.

Table 4.9 presents a summary of the SS compliance status at IM and SR stations during mid-flood tide for the reporting period.

Table 4.9: Summary of SS Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)

Note: Detailed results are presented in Appendix C.

Legend:

 

The monitoring results complied with the corresponding Action and Limit Levels

 

Monitoring result triggered the Action Level at monitoring station located upstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow

D

Monitoring result triggered the Action Level at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow

 

Upstream station with respect to the Project during the respective tide based on dominant tidal flow

Monitoring results triggered the corresponding Action Levels on three monitoring days. As some of these results were collected at stations located downstream of the Project, which might be affected by Project’s construction activities, investigation was carried out.

As part of the investigation on the downstream events, details of the Project’s marine construction activities on the concerned monitoring days were collected, as well as any observations during the monitoring. The findings are summarized in Table 4.10.

Table 4.10: Summary of Findings from Investigations of SS Monitoring Results (Mid-Flood Tide)

Date

Marine construction works nearby

Approximate distance from marine construction works*

 

Status of water quality measures (if applicable)

Construction vessels in the vicinity

Turbidity / Silt plume observed near the monitoring station

Action or Limit Level triggered due to Project

01/02/2018

DCM works

Sand blanket laying

Around 500m

Silt curtain deployed

No

No

No

06/02/2018

DCM works

Sand blanket laying

Around 1000m

Silt curtain deployed

No

No

No

According to the investigation findings, it was confirmed that both DCM and sand blanket laying activities were operating normally with silt curtains deployed. The silt curtains were maintained properly.

For the monitoring result at IM5 on 1 February 2018, it appeared to be an isolated case with no observable temporal and spatial trend to indicate any effect due to Project activities. As there was no evidence of SS release due to Project activities from site observations and all mitigation measures were carried out properly, the cases were possibly due to natural fluctuation in the vicinity of the monitoring station, and considered not due to the Project.

For the monitoring result at SR3 on 6 February 2018, all monitoring results collected at the impact stations, which were located closer to Project activities, complied with the corresponding Action and Limit Levels. Therefore, the case was considered not due to the Project.

Table 4.11 presents a summary of the chromium compliance status at IM and SR stations during mid-ebb tide for the reporting period.

Table 4.11: Summary of Chromium Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide)

Note: Detailed results are presented in Appendix C.

Legend:

 

The monitoring results complied with the corresponding Action and Limit Levels

D

Monitoring result triggered the Limit Level at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow

 

Upstream station with respect to the Project during the respective tide based on dominant tidal flow

Monitoring results triggered the corresponding Limit Level on one monitoring day. As the result was collected at a station located downstream of the Project, which might be affected by Project’s construction activities, investigation was carried out.

As part of the investigation on the downstream events, details of the Project’s marine construction activities on the concerned monitoring days were collected, as well as any observations during the monitoring. The findings are summarized in Table 4.12.

Table 4.12: Summary of Findings from Investigations of Chromium Monitoring Results (Mid-Ebb Tide)

Date

Marine construction works nearby

Approximate distance from marine construction works*

 

Status of water quality measures (if applicable)

Construction vessels in the vicinity

Turbidity / Silt plume observed near the monitoring station

Action or Limit Level triggered due to Project

06/02/2018

DCM works

Sand blanket laying

Around 500m

Silt curtain deployed

No

No

No

According to the investigation findings, it was confirmed that both DCM and sand blanket laying activities were operating normally with silt curtains deployed. The silt curtains were maintained properly.

For the monitoring result at IM11 on 6 February 2018, it appeared to be an isolated case with no observable temporal and spatial trend to indicate any effect due to Project activities. The monitoring result was also marginally above the Limit Level (0.4 µg/L compared to Limit Level of 0.3 µg/L based on the results recorded at control stations). Based on the investigation of in-situ water quality monitoring at the nearest DCM barges, no significant elevation of ammonia was observed among the monitoring points in the immediate vicinity of the DCM rigs and the ammonia concentration was well below the Action and Limit Levels specified in the Baseline Monitoring Report. This suggests that there was no leakage of contaminants from the contaminated mud pits due to DCM activities.

Therefore, the case was considered not due to the Project and may be due to natural fluctuation or other sources not related to the Project.

Table 4.13 presents a summary of the chromium compliance status at IM and SR stations during mid-flood tide for the reporting period.

Table 4.13: Summary of Chromium Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)

Note: Detailed results are presented in Appendix C.

Legend:

 

The monitoring results complied with the corresponding Action and Limit Levels

D

Monitoring result triggered the Action Level at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow

D

Monitoring result triggered the Limit Level at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow

 

Upstream station with respect to the Project during the respective tide based on dominant tidal flow

Monitoring results triggered the corresponding Action and Limit Levels on one monitoring day respectively. As the results were collected at stations located downstream of the Project, which might be affected by Project’s construction activities, investigation was carried out.

As part of the investigation on the downstream events, details of the Project’s marine construction activities on the concerned monitoring days were collected, as well as any observations during the monitoring. The findings are summarized in Table 4.14.

Table 4.14: Summary of Findings from Investigations of Chromium Monitoring Results (Mid-Flood Tide)

Date

Marine construction works nearby

Approximate distance from marine construction works*

 

Status of water quality measures (if applicable)

Construction vessels in the vicinity

Turbidity / Silt plume observed near the monitoring station

Action or Limit Level triggered due to Project

06/02/2018

DCM works

Sand blanket laying

Around 500m

Silt curtain deployed

No

No

No

For the monitoring result at IM8 and IM9 on 6 February 2018, the monitoring results were marginally above the Action and Limit Levels (0.3 µg/L at IM8 and 0.4 µg/L at IM9 compared to the Action and Limit Levels of 0.2 µg/L and 0.3 µg/L based on the results recorded at control stations). Investigation on the in-situ water quality monitoring results at DCM barges nearest to these monitoring stations were also conducted, in which no significant elevation of ammonia was observed among the monitoring points in the immediate vicinity of the DCM rigs and the concentration was below the Action and Limit Levels specified in the Baseline Monitoring Report. This suggests that there was no leakage of contaminants from the contaminated mud pits due to DCM activities.

Based on these findings the cases were considered not due to the Project and may be due to natural fluctuation or other sources not related to the Project.

Table 4.15 presents a summary of the nickel compliance status at IM and SR stations during mid-flood tide for the reporting period.

Table 4.15: Summary of Nickel Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)

Note: Detailed results are presented in Appendix C.

Legend:

 

The monitoring results complied with the corresponding Action and Limit Levels

D

Monitoring result triggered the Limit Level at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow

 

Upstream station with respect to the Project during the respective tide based on dominant tidal flow

Monitoring results triggered the corresponding Limit Level on one monitoring day. As the result was collected at a station located downstream of the Project, which might be affected by Project’s construction activities, investigation was carried out.

As part of the investigation on the downstream event, details of the Project’s marine construction activities on the concerned monitoring day was collected, as well as any observations during the monitoring. The findings are summarized in Table 4.16.

Table 4.16: Summary of Findings from Investigations of Nickel Monitoring Results (Mid-Flood Tide)

Date

Marine construction works nearby

Approximate distance from marine construction works*

 

Status of water quality measures (if applicable)

Construction vessels in the vicinity

Turbidity / Silt plume observed near the monitoring station

Action or Limit Level triggered due to Project

20/02/2018

DCM works

Sand blanket laying

Around 800m

Silt curtain deployed

No

No

No

For the monitoring result at IM9 on 20 February 2018, it appeared to be an isolated case with no observable temporal and spatial trend to indicate any effect due to Project activities. The monitoring result was also marginally above the Limit Level (3.8 µg/L compared to Limit Level of 3.6 µg/L based on the results derived from baseline monitoring data). Based on the investigation of in-situ water quality monitoring at the nearest DCM barges, no significant elevation of ammonia was observed among the monitoring points in the immediate vicinity of the DCM rigs and the ammonia concentration was below the Action and Limit Levels specified in the Baseline Monitoring Report. This suggests that there was no leakage of contaminants from the contaminated mud pits due to DCM activities.

Therefore, the case was considered not due to the Project and may be due to natural fluctuation or other sources not related to the Project.

4.5         Conclusion

During the reporting period, it is noted that the vast majority of monitoring results were within their corresponding Action and Limit Levels, while only a minor number of results triggered their corresponding Action or Limit level, and investigation were conducted accordingly.

Based on the investigation findings, all results that triggered the corresponding Action or Limit Level were not due to the Project. Therefore, the Project did not cause adverse impact at the water quality sensitive receivers. All required actions under the Event and Action Plan were followed. These cases appeared to be due to natural fluctuation or other sources not related to the Project.

Nevertheless, the non-project related triggers have been attended to and have initiated corresponding actions and measures. As part of the EM&A programme, the construction methods and mitigation measures for water quality will continue to be monitored and opportunities for further enhancement will continue to be explored and implemented where possible, to strive for better protection of water quality and the marine environment. 

In the meantime, the contractors were reminded to implement and maintain all mitigation measures during weekly site inspection and regular environmental management meetings. These include maintaining mitigation measures for DCM works and sand blanket laying works properly as recommended in the Manual.

 

5        Waste Management

In accordance with the Manual, the waste generated from construction activities was audited once per week to determine if wastes are being managed in accordance with the Waste Management Plan (WMP) prepared for the Project, contract-specific WMP, and any statutory and contractual requirements. All aspects of waste management including waste generation, storage, transportation and disposal were assessed during the audits.

5.1         Action and Limit Levels

The Action and Limit Levels of the construction waste are provided in Table 5.1.

Table 5.1: Action and Limit Levels for Construction Waste

Monitoring Stations

Action Level

Limit Level

Construction Area

When one valid documented complaint is

received

Non-compliance of the WMP, contract-specific

WMPs, any statutory and contractual

requirements

5.2         Waste Management Status

Weekly monitoring on all works contracts were carried out by the ET to check and monitor the implementation of proper waste management practices during the construction phase.

Recommendations made included provision and maintenance of drip trays and proper chemical waste storage area. The contractors had taken actions to implement the recommended measures.

Based on updated information provided by contractors, updates of construction waste statistics in previous reporting period and construction waste generated in the reporting period is summarized in Table 5.2.

The monitoring results complied with the Action or Limit Levels during the reporting period.

Table 5.2: Construction Waste Statistics

 

Excavated Material (m3)1

C&D2 Material Reused in the Project (m3)

C&D Material Reused in other projects (m3)

C&D Material Disposed of as Public Fill (m3)

Chemical Waste (kg)

Chemical Waste (L)

General Refuse (tonne)

Jan 20183

-

4,310

-

-

-

45,200

-

Feb 2018

739

480

0

1,387

225

25,000

141

Notes:

1.     The excavated materials were temporarily stored at stockpiling area and will be reused in the Project.

2.     C&D refers to Construction and Demolition

3.     Only updated figures are presented.

4.     Paper and plastics were recycled in the reporting period.

 

6        Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring

In accordance with the Manual, CWD monitoring by small vessel line-transect survey supplemented by land-based theodolite tracking survey and passive acoustic monitoring should be conducted during construction phase.

The small vessel line-transect survey as proposed in the Manual should be conducted at a frequency of two full surveys per month while land-based theodolite tracking survey should be conducted at a frequency of one day per month per station during the construction phase. In addition to the land-based theodolite tracking survey required for impact monitoring as stipulated in the Manual, supplemental theodolite tracking surveys have also been conducted during the implementation for the SkyPier HSF diversion and speed control in order to assist in monitoring the effectiveness of these measures, i.e. in total twice per month at the Sha Chau station and three times per month at the Lung Kwu Chau station.

6.1         Action and Limit Levels

The Action and Limit Levels for CWD monitoring were formulated by the action response approach using the running quarterly dolphin encounter rates STG and ANI derived from the baseline monitoring data, as presented in the CWD Baseline Monitoring Report. The derived values of Action and Limit Levels for CWD monitoring were summarized in Table 6.1.

Table 6.1: Derived Values of Action and Limit Levels for Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring

 

NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL as a Whole

Action Level

Running quarterly* STG < 1.86 & ANI < 9.35

Limit Level

Two consecutive running quarterly^ (3-month) STG < 1.86 & ANI < 9.35

[Notes for Table 6.1 (referring to the baseline monitoring report):

*Action Level – running quarterly STG & ANI will be calculated from the three preceding survey months. For CWD monitoring for February 2018, data from 1 December 2017 to 28 February 2018 will be used to calculate the running quarterly encounter rates STG & ANI; 

^Limit Level – two consecutive running quarters mean both the running quarterly encounter rates of the preceding month January 2018 (calculated by data from November 2017 to January 2018) and the running quarterly encounter rates of this month (calculated by data from December 2017 to February 2018).

Action Level and/or Limit Levels will be triggered if both STG and ANI fall below the criteria.]

6.2         CWD Monitoring Transects and Stations

6.2.1      Small Vessel Line-transect Survey

Small vessel line-transect surveys were conducted along the transects covering Northeast Lantau (NEL), Northwest Lantau (NWL), Airport West (AW), West Lantau (WL) and Southwest Lantau (SWL) areas as proposed in the Manual, which are consistent with the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) long-term monitoring programme (except the addition of AW). The AW transect has not been previously surveyed in the AFCD programme due to the restrictions of HKIA Approach Area, nevertheless, this transect was established during the EIA of the 3RS Project and refined in the Manual with the aim to collect project specific baseline information within the HKIA Approach Area to fill the data gap that was not covered by the AFCD programme. This provided a larger sample size for estimating the density, abundance and patterns of movements in the broader study area of the project.

The planned vessel survey transect lines follow the waypoints set for construction phase monitoring as proposed in the Manual and depicted in Figure 6.1 with the waypoint coordinates of all transect lines given in Table 6.2, which are subject to on-site refinement based on the actual survey conditions and constraints.

Table 6.2: Coordinates of Transect Lines in NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL Survey Areas

Waypoint

Easting

Northing

Waypoint

Easting

Northing

NEL

1S

813525

820900

6N

818568

824433

1N

813525

824657

7S

819532

821420

2S

814556

818449

7N

819532

824209

2N

814559

824768

8S

820451

822125

3S

815542

818807

8N

820451

823671

3N

815542

824882

9S

821504

822371

4S

816506

819480

9N

821504

823761

4N

816506

824859

10S

822513

823268

5S

817537

820220

10N

822513

824321

5N

817537

824613

11S

823477

823402

6S

818568

820735

11N

823477

824613

NWL

1S

804671

814577

5S

808504

821735

1N

804671

831404

5N

808504

828602

2Sb

805475

815457

6S

809490

822075

2Nb

805476

818571

6N

809490

825352

2Sa

805476

820770

7S

810499

822323

2Na

805476

830562

7N

810499

824613

3S

806464

821033

8S

811508

821839

3N

806464

829598

8N

811508

824254

4S

807518

821395

9S

812516

821356

4N

807518

829230

9N

812516

824254

AW

1W

804733

818205

2W

805045

816912

1E

806708

818017

2E

805960

816633

WL

1W

800600

805450

7W

800400

811450

1E

801760

805450

7E

802400

811450

2W

800300

806450

8W

800800

812450

2E

801750

806450

8E

802900

812450

3W

799600

807450

9W

801500

813550

3E

801500

807450

9E

803120

813550

4W

799400

808450

10W

801880

814500

4E

801430

808450

10E

803700

814500

5W

799500

809450

11W

802860

815500

5E

801300

809450

12S/11E

803750

815500

6W

799800

810450

12N

803750

818500

6E

801400

810450

 

 

 

SWL

1S

802494

803961

6S

807467

801137

1N

802494

806174

6N

807467

808458

2S

803489

803280

7S

808553

800329

2N

803489

806720

7N

808553

807377

3S

804484

802509

8S

809547

800338

3N

804484

807048

8N

809547

807396

4S

805478

802105

9S

810542

800423

4N

805478

807556

9N

810542

807462

5S

806473

801250

10S

811446

801335

5N

806473

808458

10N

811446

809436

6.2.2      Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey

Land-based theodolite tracking survey stations were set up at two locations, one facing east/south/west on the southern slopes of Sha Chau (SC), and the other facing north/northeast/northwest at Lung Kwu Chau (LKC). The stations (D and E) are depicted in Figure 6.2 and shown in Table 6.3 with position coordinates, height of station and approximate distance of consistent theodolite tracking capabilities for CWD.

Table 6.3: Land-based Theodolite Survey Station Details

Stations

Location

Geographical Coordinates

Station Height (m)

Approximate Tracking Distance (km)

D

Sha Chau (SC)

22° 20’ 43.5” N

113° 53’ 24.66” E

45.66

2

E

Lung Kwu Chau (LKC)

22° 22’ 44.83” N

113° 53’ 0.2” E

70.40

3

6.3         CWD Monitoring Methodology

6.3.1      Small Vessel Line-transect Survey

Small vessel line-transect surveys provided data for density and abundance estimation and other assessments using distance-sampling methodologies, specifically, line-transect methods.

The surveys involved small vessel line-transect data collection and have been designed to be similar to, and consistent with, previous surveys for the AFCD for their long-term monitoring of small cetaceans in Hong Kong. The survey was designed to provide systematic, quantitative measurements of density, abundance and habitat use.

As mentioned in Section 6.2.1, the transects covered NEL, NWL covering the AW, WL and SWL areas as proposed in the Manual and are consistent with the AFCD long-term monitoring programme (except AW). There are two types of transect lines:

    Primary transect lines: the parallel and zigzag transect lines as shown in Figure 6.1; and

    Secondary transect lines: transect lines connecting between the primary transect lines and crossing islands.

All data collected on both primary and secondary transect lines were used for analysis of sighting distribution, group size, activities including association with fishing boat, and mother-calf pair. Only on-effort data collected under conditions of Beaufort 0-3 and visibility of approximately 1200 m or beyond were used for analysis of the CWD encounter rates.

A 15-20 m vessel with a flying bridge observation platform about 4 to 5 m above water level and unobstructed forward view, and a team of three to four observers were deployed to undertake the surveys.  Two observers were on search effort at all times when following the transect lines with a constant speed of 7 to 8 knots (i.e. 13 to 15 km per hour), one using 7X handheld binoculars and the other using unaided eyes and recording data.

During on-effort survey periods, the survey team recorded effort data including time, position (waypoints), weather conditions (Beaufort sea state and visibility) and distance travelled in each series with assistance of a handheld GPS device. The GPS device also continuously and automatically logged data including time, position (latitude and longitude) and vessel speed throughout the entire survey.

When CWDs were seen, the survey team was taken off-effort, the dolphins were approached and photographed for photo-ID information (using a Canon 7D [or similar] camera and long 300 mm+ telephoto lens), then followed until they were lost from view.  At that point, the boat returned (off effort) to the same location of the survey line where dolphins were spotted as far as practicable and began to survey on effort again. 

Focal follows of dolphins were conducted where practicable (i.e. when individual dolphins or small stable groups of dolphins with at least one member that could be readily identifiable with unaided eyes during observations and weather conditions are favourable). These involved the boat following (at an appropriate distance to minimize disturbance) an identifiable individual dolphin for an extended period of time, and collecting detailed data on its location, behaviour, response to vessels, and associates.

6.3.2      Photo Identification

CWDs can be identified by their unique features like presence of scratches, nick marks, cuts, wounds, deformities of their dorsal fin and distinguished colouration and spotting patterns.

When CWDs were observed, the survey team was taken off-effort, the dolphins were approached and photographed for photo-ID information (using a Canon 7D [or similar] camera and long 300 mm+ telephoto lens). The survey team attempted to photo both sides of every single dolphin in the group as the colouration and spotting pattern on both sides may not be identical. The photos were taken at the highest available resolution and stored on Compact Flash memory cards for transferring into a computer.

All photos taken were initially examined to sort out those containing potentially identifiable individuals. These sorted-out images would then be examined in detail and compared to the CWD photo-identification catalogue established for 3RS during the baseline monitoring stage.

6.3.3      Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey

Land-based theodolite tracking survey obtains fine-scale information on the time of day and movement patterns of the CWDs.  A digital theodolite (Sokkia/Sokkisha Model DT5 or similar equipment) with 30-power magnification and 5-s precision was used to obtain the vertical and horizontal angle of each dolphin and vessel position. Angles were converted to geographic coordinates (latitude and longitude) and data were recorded using Pythagoras software, Version 1.2. This method delivers precise positions of multiple spatially distant targets in a short period of time.  The technique is fully non-invasive, and allows for time and cost-effective descriptions of dolphin habitat use patterns at all times of daylight.

Three surveyors (one theodolite operator, one computer operator, and one observer) were involved in each survey. Observers searched for dolphins using unaided eyes and handheld binoculars (7X50). Theodolite tracking sessions were initiated whenever an individual CWD or group of CWDs was located.  Where possible, a distinguishable individual was selected, based on colouration, within the group.  The focal individual was then continuously tracked via the theodolite, with a position recorded each time the dolphin surfaced. In case an individual could not be positively distinguished from other members, the group was tracked by recording positions based on a central point within the group whenever the CWD surfaced. Tracking continued until animals were lost from view; moved beyond the range of reliable visibility (>1-3 km, depending on station height); or environmental conditions obstructed visibility (e.g., intense haze, Beaufort sea state >4, or sunset), at which time the research effort was terminated.  In addition to the tracking of CWD, all vessels that moved within 2-3 km of the station were tracked, with effort made to obtain at least two positions for each vessel.

Theodolite tracking included focal follows of CWD groups and vessels. Priority was given to tracking individual or groups of CWD. The survey team also attempted to track all vessels moving within 1 km of the focal CWD.

6.4         Monitoring Results and Observations

6.4.1      Small Vessel Line-transect Survey

Survey Effort

Within this reporting period, two complete sets of small vessel line-transect surveys were conducted on the 6, 7, 12, 13, 14, 21, 22, and 23 February 2018, covering all transects in NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL survey areas for twice.

A total of around 457.00 km of survey effort was collected from these surveys, with around 89.44% of the total survey effort being conducted under favourable weather condition (i.e. Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with favourable visibility). Details of the survey effort are given in Appendix C.

Sighting Distribution

In February 2018, 25 sightings of CWDs with 71 individuals were sighted. Details of cetacean sightings are presented in Appendix C.

Distribution of all CWD sightings recorded in February 2018 is illustrated in Figure 6.3. In NWL, a few sightings of CWD were scattered within and around Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park, and quite a number of sightings were recorded at the southwestern corner of the survey area including the AW transects with one of the sighting recorded in close vicinity to the 3RS works area. It is worth noting that one off-effort sighting of CWD with two individuals was recorded feeding near the eastern tip of the 3RS works area, which is the first time that CWD group was encountered at that part of the NWL survey area since the start of CWD monitoring for the 3RS Project dated back to December 2015. In WL, CWD sightings were recorded quite evenly from the northernmost transect to Yi O with one scattered sighting at the off-shore waters of Peaked Hill. In SWL, only one CWD sighting was encountered at the central part of Soko Islands. No sightings of CWDs were recorded in NEL survey area.


Figure 6.3: Sightings Distribution of Chinese White Dolphins

Remarks: Please note that there are 25 pink circles on the map indicating the sighting locations of CWD. Some of them were very close to each other and therefore appear overlapped on this distribution map.

Encounter Rate

Two types of dolphin encounter rates were calculated based on the data from February 2018. They included the number of dolphin sightings per 100 km survey effort (STG) and total number of dolphins per 100 km survey effort (ANI) in the whole survey area (i.e. NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL). In the calculation of dolphin encounter rates, only survey data collected under favourable weather condition (i.e. Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with favourable visibility) were used. The formulae used for calculation of the encounter rates are shown below:

Encounter Rate by Number of Dolphin Sightings (STG)

Encounter Rate by Number of Dolphins (ANI)

(Notes:    Only data collected under Beaufort 3 or below condition was used)

In February 2018, a total of around 408.74 km of survey effort were conducted under Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with favourable visibility, whilst a total number of 22 on-effort sightings with 66 individuals were sighted under such condition. Calculation of the encounter rates in February 2018 are shown in Appendix C.

For the running quarter of the reporting period (i.e., from December 2017 to February 2018), a total of around 1196.18 km of survey effort were conducted under Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with favourable visibility, whilst a total number of 63 on-effort sightings and a total number of 226 dolphins from on-effort sightings were obtained under such condition. Calculation of the running quarterly encounter rates are shown in Appendix C.

The STG and ANI of CWD in the whole survey area (i.e. NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL) during the month of February 2018 and during the running quarter are presented in Table 6.4 below and compared with the Action Level. The running quarterly encounter rates STG and ANI did not trigger the Action Level (i.e., remained above the Action Level).

Table 6.4: Comparison of CWD Encounter Rates of the Whole Survey Area with Action Levels

 

Encounter Rate (STG)

Encounter Rate (ANI)

February 2018

5.38

16.15

Running Quarter from December 2017 to February 2018*

5.27

18.89

Action Level

Running quarterly* < 1.86

Running quarterly* < 9.35

*Running quarterly encounter rates STG & ANI were calculated from data collected in the reporting period and the two preceding survey months, i.e. the data from December 2017 to February 2018, containing six sets of transect surveys for all monitoring areas.

Group Size

In February 2018, 25 groups of CWDs with 71 individuals were sighted, and the average group size of CWDs was 2.84 individuals per group. The number of sightings with small group size (i.e. 1-2 individuals) and medium group size (i.e. 3-9 individuals) are similar. No sightings with large group size (i.e. 10 or more individuals) were recorded in this reporting period. 

Activities and Association with Fishing Boats

Seven out of 25 sightings of CWDs were recorded engaging in feeding activities in February 2018. CWDs from two out of these seven sightings were observed associating with operating gillnetter in NWL and WL respectively.

Mother-calf Pair

In February 2018, three sightings of CWDs were recorded with the presence of mother-and-unspotted juvenile pair and mother-and-calf pair in NWL (including AW) and WL.

6.4.2      Photo Identification

In February 2018, a total number of 33 different CWD individuals were identified for totally 37 times. A summary of photo identification works is presented in Table 6.5. Representative photos of these individuals are given in Appendix C.

Table 6.5: Summary of Photo Identification

Individual ID

Date of Sighting (dd/mm/yy)

Sighting Group No.

Area

 

Individual ID

Date of Sighting (dd/mm/yy)

Sighting Group No.

Area

NLMM001

12-Feb-18

4

NWL

SLMM053

14-Feb-18

3

WL

NLMM002

12-Feb-18

2

NWL

SLMM055

14-Feb-18

4

WL

NLMM004

06-Feb-18

4

NWL

SLMM062

13-Feb-18

7

WL

12-Feb-18

2

NWL

WLMM001

13-Feb-18

5

WL

NLMM009

12-Feb-18

2

NWL

WLMM004

13-Feb-18

1

AW

NLMM016

14-Feb-18

5

WL

WLMM006

14-Feb-18

2

AW

NLMM023

12-Feb-18

2

NWL

 

 

3

WL

NLMM043

12-Feb-18

2

NWL

WLMM009

14-Feb-18

2

AW

NLMM049

12-Feb-18

3

NWL

 

 

3

WL

NLMM052

06-Feb-18

3

NWL

WLMM017

13-Feb-18

8

WL

NLMM055

12-Feb-18

2

NWL

WLMM029

14-Feb-18

2

AW

NLMM061

12-Feb-18

1

NWL

WLMM055

13-Feb-18

2

AW

NLMM064

06-Feb-18

1

NWL

WLMM057

14-Feb-18

2

AW

NLMM065

12-Feb-18

4

NWL

 

 

3

WL

SLMM002

14-Feb-18

8

WL

WLMM062

12-Feb-18

1

NWL

SLMM003

14-Feb-18

8

WL

WLMM063

13-Feb-18

1

AW

SLMM037

14-Feb-18

8

WL

WLMM107

13-Feb-18

5

WL

SLMM044

13-Feb-18

8

WL

WLMM113

14-Feb-18

4

WL

SLMM048

13-Feb-18

5

WL

 

 

 

 

6.4.3      Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey

Survey Effort

Land-based theodolite tracking surveys were conducted at LKC on 9, 13 and 26 February 2018 and at SC on 8 and 27 February 2018, with a total of five days of land-based theodolite tracking survey effort accomplished in this reporting period. A total number of eight CWD groups were tracked at LKC station during the surveys. Information of survey effort and CWD groups sighted during these land-based theodolite tracking surveys are presented in Table 6.6. Details of the survey effort and CWD groups tracked are presented in Appendix C. The first sighting locations of CWD groups tracked at LKC station during land-based theodolite tracking surveys in February 2018 were depicted in Figure 6.4. No CWD group was sighted from SC station in this reporting month.

Table 6.6: Summary of Survey Effort and CWD Group of Land-based Theodolite Tracking

Land-based Station

No. of Survey Sessions

Survey Effort (hh:mm)

No. of CWD Groups Sighted

CWD Group Sighting per Survey Hour

Lung Kwu Chau

3

18:00

8

0.44

Sha Chau

2

12:00

0

0

TOTAL

5

30:00

8

0.27

Figure 6.4: Plots of First Sightings of All CWD Groups obtained from Land-based Stations

6.5         Progress Update on Passive Acoustic Monitoring

Underwater acoustic monitoring using Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) should be undertaken during land formation related construction works. In this reporting period, the Ecological Acoustic Recorder (EAR) has been remained underwater and positioned at south of Sha Chau Island inside the SCLKCMP with 20% duty cycle (Figure 6.5). The EAR deployment is generally for 4-6 weeks prior to data retrieval for analysis. Acoustic data is reviewed to give an indication of CWDs occurrence patterns and to obtain anthropogenic noise information simultaneously. Analysis (by a specialized team of acousticians) involved manually browsing through every acoustic recording and logging the occurrence of dolphin signals. All data will be re-played by computer as well as listened to by human ears for accurate assessment of dolphin group presence. As the period of data collection and analysis takes more than two months, PAM results could not be reported in monthly intervals.

6.6         Site Audit for CWD-related Mitigation Measures

During the reporting period, silt curtains were in place by the contractors for sand blanket laying works, in which dolphin observers were deployed by each contractor in accordance with the MMWP. Teams of at least two dolphin observers were deployed at 17 to 23 dolphin observation stations by the contractors for continuous monitoring of the DEZ by all contractors for ground improvement works (DCM works and PVD installation) in accordance with the DEZ Plan. Trainings for the proposed dolphin observers on the implementation of MMWP and DEZ monitoring were provided by the ET prior to the aforementioned works, with a cumulative total of 584 individuals being trained and the training records kept by the ET. Observation was recorded on DEZ monitoring in this reporting period during site inspection by the ET. The contractors had taken actions to implement the recommended measures. From the contractors’ MMWP observation records and DEZ monitoring records, no dolphin or other marine mammals were observed within or around the silt curtains, whilst there were three records of dolphin sighting within the DEZ of DCM works in this reporting period. According to the contractor’s site record, relevant DCM works were suspended in the dolphin sighting events until the DEZ was clear of dolphin for a continuous period of 30 minutes. Details for the implementation of DEZ during the incident of dolphin sighting within the DEZ of DCM works are mentioned in Section 7.4. These contractors’ records were also audited by the ET during site inspection.

Audits of acoustic decoupling for construction vessels were carried out during weekly site inspection and the observations are summarised in Section 7.1. Audits of SkyPier high speed ferries route diversion and speed control and construction vessel management are presented in Section 7.2 and Section 7.3 respectively. 

6.7         Timing of Reporting CWD Monitoring Results

Detailed analysis of CWD monitoring results collected by small vessel line-transect survey will be provided in future quarterly reports. Detailed analysis of CWD monitoring results collected by land-based theodolite tracking survey and PAM will be provided in future annual reports after a larger sample size of data has been collected.

6.8         Summary of CWD Monitoring

Monitoring of CWD was conducted with two complete sets of small vessel line-transect surveys and five days of land-based theodolite tracking survey effort as scheduled.  The running quarterly encounter rates STG and ANI in the reporting period did not trigger the Action Level for CWD monitoring.

 

7        Environmental Site Inspection and Audit

7.1         Environmental Site Inspection

Weekly site inspections of construction works were carried out by the ET to audit the implementation of proper environmental pollution control and mitigation measures for the Project. The weekly site inspection schedule of the construction works is provided in Appendix B. Bi-weekly site inspections were also conducted by the IEC.  Observations have been recorded in the site inspection checklists and provided to the contractors together with the appropriate follow-up actions where necessary.

The key observations from site inspection and associated recommendations were related to display of appropriate licences, permits, and labels; provision and maintenance of drip trays, spill kits, and waste storage area; proper handling of general refuse and chemical wastes; proper implementation of dust suppression, acoustic decoupling, wastewater treatment, and runoff prevention measures; as well as proper implementation DEZ and marine traffic monitoring.

A summary of implementation status of the environmental mitigation measures for the construction phase of the Project during the reporting period is provided in Appendix A.

7.2         Audit of SkyPier High Speed Ferries

The Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for High Speed Ferries of SkyPier (the SkyPier Plan) was submitted to the Advisory Council on the Environment for comment and subsequently submitted to and approved by EPD in November 2015 under EP Condition 2.10. The approved SkyPier Plan is available on the dedicated website of the Project. In the SkyPier Plan, AAHK has committed to implement the mitigation measure of requiring high speed ferries (HSFs) of SkyPier travelling between HKIA and Zhuhai / Macau to start diverting the route with associated speed control across the area, i.e. Speed Control Zone (SCZ), with high CWD abundance. The route diversion and speed restriction at the SCZ have been implemented since 28 December 2015.

Key audit findings for the SkyPier HSFs travelling to/from Zhuhai and Macau against the requirements of the SkyPier Plan during the reporting period are summarized in Table 7.1.  The daily movements of all SkyPier HSFs in this reporting period (i.e., 87 to 96 daily movements) were within the maximum daily cap of 125 daily movements. Status of compliance with the annual daily average of 99 movements will be further reviewed in the annual EM&A Report.

In total, 812 ferry movements between HKIA SkyPier and Zhuhai / Macau were recorded in February 2018 and the data are presented in Appendix F. The time spent by the SkyPier HSFs travelling through the SCZ in February 2018 were presented in Figure 7.1.  It will take 9.6 minutes to travel through the SCZ when the SkyPier HSFs adopt the maximum allowable speed of 15 knots within the SCZ. Figure 7.1 shows that all of the SkyPier HSFs spent more than 9.6 minutes to travel through the SCZ.

Figure 7.1: Duration of the SkyPier HSFs travelling through the SCZ for February 2018

 

Note: Data above the red line indicated that the time spent by the SkyPier HSFs travelling through the SCZ is more than 9.6 minutes, which is in compliance with the SkyPier Plan.

Six ferries were recorded with minor deviation from the diverted route on 05 February 2018, 17 February 2018, 18 February 2018, 20 February 2018, and 24 February 2018. Notices were sent to the ferry operators and the cases are under investigation by ET. The investigation result will be presented in the next monthly EM&A report.

Table 7.1: Summary of Key Audit Findings against the SkyPier Plan

Requirements in the SkyPier Plan

1 February to 28 February 2018

Total number of ferry movements recorded and audited

812

 

Use diverted route and enter / leave SCZ through Gate Access Points

6 deviations.

Speed control in speed control zone

The average speeds taken within the SCZ of all HSFs were within 15 knots (10.1 knots to 14.0 knots), which complied with the SkyPier Plan. The time used by HSFs to travel through SCZ is presented in Figure 7.1.

Daily Cap (including all SkyPier HSFs) 

 

87 to 96 daily movements (within the maximum daily cap  - 125 daily movements).

7.3         Audit of Construction and Associated Vessels

The updated Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for Construction and Associated Vessel (MTRMP-CAV) was submitted and approved in November 2016 by EPD under EP Condition 2.9. The approved Plan is available on the dedicated website of the Project.

ET carried out the following actions during the reporting period:

7.4         Implementation of Dolphin Exclusion Zone

The DEZ Plan was submitted in accordance with EP Condition 3.1 (v) requirement and Section 10.3 of the Manual, and approved in April 2016 by EPD. The 24-hour DEZs with a 250m radius for marine works were established and implemented by the contractors for ground improvement works (DCM works and PVD installation) according to their Method Statement for DEZ Monitoring that followed the specifications and requirements of the DEZ Plan.

During the reporting period, ET was notified on three records of dolphin sighting within the DEZ of DCM works by the contractor. The ET checked the dolphin sighting records and the contractor’s site records to audit the implementation of DEZ. Details of the sightings are summarized in Table 7.2. DCM installation works on DCM barges within the DEZ were ceased by the contractor, and not resumed until the DEZ was clear of dolphin for a continuous period of at least 30 minutes in accordance with the DEZ Plan.

Table 7.2: Summary of Dolphin Sightings within the DEZ

Date

Works Area* and Type of Works Suspended

Location of the DEZ Monitoring Station

Time of Initial Sighting of Dolphin Group

Time of Last Sighting of Dolphin Group

22 Feb 2018

DCM works at Area G4

22°18.436N, 113°53.515E

17:30

18:10

24 Feb 2018

DCM works at Area G4

22°18.438N, 113°53.515E

15:00

15:30

24 Feb 2018

DCM works at Area G4

22°18.434N, 113°53.515E

17:18

17:35

*Note: Please refer to Figure 1.2 for the location of works area.

 

7.5         Ecological Monitoring

In accordance with the Manual, ecological monitoring shall be undertaken monthly at the Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) daylighting location on Sheung Sha Chau Island during the HDD construction works period from August to March to identify and evaluate any impacts with appropriate actions taken as required to address and minimise any adverse impact found. During the reporting period, the monthly ecological monitoring at the HDD daylighting location on Sheung Sha Chau observed that pipe installation works were ongoing under the Contract P560(R) at the daylighting location, and there was no encroachment of any works upon the egretry area nor any significant disturbance to the ardeids on the island by the works. No signs of breeding or nursery activities were observed. At the HDD daylighting location, neither nest nor breeding activity of ardeids were found during the monthly ecological monitoring and weekly site inspections in the reporting period. The site photos and location map regarding the monthly ecological monitoring for the HDD works and egretry area are provided in Appendix C for reference.

7.6         Status of Submissions under Environmental Permits

The current status of submissions under the EP up to the reporting period is presented in Table 7.3

Table 7.3: Status of Submissions under Environmental Permit

EP Condition

Submission

Status

2.1

Complaint Management Plan

Accepted / approved by EPD

2.4

Management Organizations

2.5

Construction Works Schedule and Location Plans

2.7

Marine Park Proposal

2.8

Marine Ecology Conservation Plan

2.9

Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for Construction and Associated Vessels

2.10

Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for High Speed Ferries of SkyPier

2.11

Marine Mammal Watching Plan

2.12

Coral Translocation Plan

2.13

Fisheries Management Plan

2.14

Egretry Survey Plan

2.15

Silt Curtain Deployment Plan

2.16

Spill Response Plan

2.17

Detailed Plan on Deep Cement Mixing

2.19

Waste Management Plan

2.20

Supplementary Contamination Assessment Plan

3.1

Updated EM&A Manual

3.4

Baseline Monitoring Reports

7.7         Compliance with Other Statutory Environmental Requirements

During the reporting period, environmental related licenses and permits required for the construction activities were checked. No non-compliance with environmental statutory requirements was recorded. The environmental licenses and permits which are valid in the reporting period are presented in Appendix D.

7.8         Analysis and Interpretation of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Status of Prosecutions

7.8.1      Complaints

A complaint was received on 5 February 2018 regarding noise from Sha Chau works. Investigation was conducted by the ET in accordance with the Manual and the Complaint Management Plan of the Project. Based on information including daily inspection records and vessel records from 29 January 2018 to 4 February 2018, as well as the observation from the ad-hoc site inspection on 30 January 2018, no construction activities were conducted and no powered mechanical equipment was deployed at Sheung Sha Chau Island during the restricted hours. And there was no evidence on any non-compliance with the relevant EP conditions or the Construction Noise Permit (CNP) conditions found. Nevertheless, the contractor has been reminded to strictly follow the EP and CNP conditions and the ET will continue to conduct regular and ad-hoc inspections at Sheung Sha Chau to ensure relevant regulations and conditions are complied.

7.8.2      Notifications of Summons or Status of Prosecution

Neither notification of summons nor prosecution was received during the reporting period.

7.8.3      Cumulative Statistics

Cumulative statistics on complaints, notifications of summons and status of prosecutions are summarized in Appendix E.

 

8        Future Key Issues and Other EIA & EM&A Issues

8.1         Construction Programme for the Coming Reporting Period

Key activities anticipated in the next reporting period for the Project will include the following:

Advanced Works:

Contract P560 (R) Aviation Fuel Pipeline Diversion Works

    HDD works; and

    Stockpiling of excavated materials from HDD operation.

DCM Works:

Contract 3201 to 3205 DCM Works

    DCM works; and

    Seawall construction.

Reclamation Works:

Contract 3206 Main Reclamation Works

    Laying of sand blanket;

    PVD installation; and

    Seawall construction.

Airfield Works:

Contract 3301 North Runway Crossover Taxiway

    Cable ducting works;

    Subgrade works; and

    Precast of duct bank and fabrication of steel works.

Terminal 2 Expansion Works:

Contract 3501 Antenna Farm and Sewage Pumping Station

    Excavation works;

    Piling works; and

    Builders works of antenna farm.

Contract 3502 Terminal 2 Automated People Mover (APM) Depot Modification Works

    Removal of existing concrete;

    Formwork erection and concreting works; and

    Steel platform erection.

Contract 3503 Terminal 2 Foundation and Substructure Works

    Site establishment;

    E&M, drainage, and road work; and

    Piling works.

APM works:

Contract 3602 Existing APM System Modification Works

    Site office establishment.

Airport Support Infrastructure & Logistic Works:

Contract 3801 APM and BHS Tunnels on Existing Airport Island

    Erection of hoarding;

    Diversion of underground utilities;

    Piling works; and

    Demolition of footbridge.

8.2         Key Environmental Issues for the Coming Reporting Period

The key environmental issues for the Project in the coming reporting period expected to be associated with the construction activities include:  

    Generation of dust from construction works and stockpiles;

    Noise from operating equipment and machinery on-site;

    Generation of site surface runoffs and wastewater from activities on-site;

    Water quality from laying of sand blankets and DCM works;

    DEZ monitoring for ground improvement works (DCM works and PVD installation);

    Implementation of MMWP for silt curtain deployment by the contractors’ dolphin observers;

    Sorting, recycling, storage and disposal of general refuse and construction waste;

    Management of chemicals and avoidance of oil spillage on-site; and

    Acoustic decoupling measures for equipment on marine vessels.

The implementation of required mitigation measures by the contractors will be monitored by the ET.

8.3         Monitoring Schedule for the Coming Reporting Period

A tentative schedule of the planned environmental monitoring work in the next reporting period is provided in Appendix B.

 

9        Conclusion and Recommendation

The key activities of the Project carried out in the reporting period included reclamation works and land-side works. Reclamation works included DCM works, seawall construction, laying of sand blanket, and PVD installation. Land-side works included HDD works, site establishment, site office construction, road and drainage works, cable ducting, demolition and modification of existing facilities, piling, and excavation works.

All the monitoring works for construction dust, construction noise, water quality, construction waste, terrestrial ecology, and CWD were conducted during the reporting period in accordance with the Manual.

Monitoring results of construction dust, construction noise, construction waste, and CWD did not trigger the corresponding Action and Limit Levels during the reporting period. 

The water quality monitoring results for DO, turbidity, and total alkalinity obtained during the reporting period were within their corresponding Action and Limit Levels stipulated in the EM&A programme for triggering the relevant investigation and follow-up procedures under the programme if being exceeded. For SS, chromium, and nickel, some of the testing results triggered the relevant Action or Limit Level, and the corresponding investigations were conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded that the cases were not related to the Project. To conclude, the construction operation during the reporting period did not introduce adverse impact to all water quality sensitive receivers.

The monthly terrestrial ecology monitoring on Sheung Sha Chau Island observed that HDD works were conducted at the daylighting location and there was no encroachment upon the egretry area nor any significant disturbance to the egrets at Sheung Sha Chau by the works.

Weekly site inspections of the construction works were carried out by the ET to audit the implementation of proper environmental pollution control and mitigation measures for the Project. Bi-weekly site inspections were also conducted by the IEC.  Site inspection findings were recorded in the site inspection checklists and provided to the contractors to follow up.

On the implementation of MMWP, dolphin observers were deployed by the contractors for laying of open sea silt curtain and laying of silt curtains for sand blanket works in accordance with the MMWP. On the implementation of DEZ Plan, dolphin observers at 17 to 23 dolphin observation stations were deployed for continuous monitoring of the DEZ by all contractors for ground improvement works (DCM works and PVD installation) in accordance with the DEZ Plan. Trainings for the proposed dolphin observers were provided by the ET prior to the aforementioned works, with the training records kept by the ET.  From the contractors’ MMWP observation records and DEZ monitoring records, no dolphin or other marine mammals were observed within or around the silt curtains, whilst there were three records of dolphin sighting within the DEZ of DCM works in this reporting month. The contractor’s record was checked by the ET during site inspection. Audits of acoustic decoupling for construction vessels were also carried out by the ET. 

On the implementation of the SkyPier Plan, the daily movements of all SkyPier high speed ferries (HSFs) in February 2018 were in the range of 87 to 96 daily movements, which are within the maximum daily cap of 125 daily movements. A total of 812 HSF movements under the SkyPier Plan were recorded in the reporting period. All HSFs had travelled through the Speed Control Zone (SCZ) with average speeds under 15 knots (10.1 to 14.0 knots), which were in compliance with the SkyPier Plan. No deviation from the diverted route in January 2018 is recorded in the High Speed Ferry Monitoring System. In summary, the ET and IEC have audited the HSF movements against the SkyPier Plan and conducted follow up investigation or actions accordingly.

On the implementation of MTRMP-CAV, the MSS automatically recorded the deviation case such as speeding, entering no entry zone, not travelling through the designated gates. ET conducted checking to ensure the MSS records all deviation cases accurately. Training has been provided for the concerned skippers to facilitate them in familiarising with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV. Deviations including speeding in the works area and entry from non-designated gates were reviewed by ET. All the concerned captains were reminded by the contractor’s MTCC representative to comply with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV. ET reminded contractors that all vessels shall avoid entering the no-entry zone, in particular the Brothers Marine Park. Three-month rolling programmes for construction vessel activities, which ensures the proposed vessels are necessary and minimal through good planning, were also received from contractors.