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

Construction Phase Quarterly EM&A Report No.8 (1 October to 31 December 2017)

April 2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Contents

Abbreviations

Executive Summary

1       Introduction

1.1     Background

1.2     Scope of this Report

1.3     Project Organisation

1.4     Contact information for the Project

1.5     Summary of Construction Works

1.6     Summary of EM&A Programme Requirements

2       Environmental Monitoring and Auditing

2.1     Air Quality Monitoring

2.1.1       Action and Limit Levels

2.1.2       Summary of Monitoring Results

2.1.3       Conclusion

2.2     Noise Monitoring

2.2.1       Action and Limit Levels

2.2.2       Summary of Monitoring Results

2.2.3       Conclusion

2.3     Water Quality Monitoring

2.3.1       Action and Limit Levels

2.3.2       Summary of Monitoring Results

2.3.3       Conclusion

2.4     Waste Monitoring 

2.4.1       Action and Limit Levels

2.4.2       Summary of Monitoring Results

2.5     Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring

2.5.1       Action and Limit Levels

2.5.2       Summary of Monitoring Results

2.6     Weekly Environmental Site Inspection

2.7     Ecological Monitoring

2.8     Audit of SkyPier High Speed Ferries

2.9     Audit of Construction and Associated Vessels

2.10    Coral Post-Translocation Monitoring

2.11    Review of the Key Assumptions Adopted in the EIA Report

3       Report on Non-compliance, Complaints, Notifications of Summons and Prosecutions

3.1     Compliance with Other Statutory Environmental Requirements

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

3.2.1       Complaints

3.2.2       Notifications of Summons or Status of Prosecution

3.3     Cumulative Statistics

4       Conclusion and Recommendation

 

Tables

Table 1.1: Contact Information of Key Personnel 5

Table 1.2: Contact Information of the Project 8

Table 1.3: Summary of Status for All Environmental Aspects under the Updated EM&A Manual 8

Table 2.1: Impact Air Quality Monitoring Results  12

Table 2.2: Impact Noise Monitoring Results  13

Table 2.3: Monitoring Locations and Parameters for Impact Water Quality Monitoring  14

Table 2.4: Action and Limit Levels for General Water Quality Monitoring and Regular DCM Monitoring  15

Table 2.5: The Control and Impact Stations during Flood Tide and Ebb Tide for General Water Quality Monitoring and Regular DCM Monitoring  15

Table 2.6: Percentage of Monitoring Results Complying with Action and Limit Levels  16

Table 2.7: Summary of SS Results Triggering Action or Limit Level (Mid-Ebb Tide) 16

Table 2.8: Summary of SS Results Triggering Action or Limit Level (Mid-Flood Tide) 17

Table 2.9: Summary of Chromium Results Triggering Action or Limit Level (Mid-Ebb Tide) 17

Table 2.10: Summary of Nickel Results Triggering Action or Limit Level (Mid-Ebb Tide) 17

Table 2.11: Action and Limit Levels for Construction Waste  18

Table 2.12: Summary of Construction Waste Generated in the Reporting Period  19

Table 2.13: Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey Station Details  19

Table 2.14: Derived Values of Action Level and Limit Level for Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring  20

Table 2.15: Summary of Number of CWD Sightings and Number of Dolphins for the Same Quarter Last Year, Previous Quarter, and Current Reporting Period  21

Table 2.16: Summary of Monthly and Running Quarterly STG and ANI of Chinese White Dolphin for Previous and Current Reporting Periods  23

Table 2.17: Summary of Photo Identification  27

Table 2.18: Summary of Survey Effort and CWD Group of Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey  28

Table 2.19: Summary of the 5th Post-Translocation Monitoring Surveys Completed in October 2017  33

Table 2.20: Summary of Sediment Trap Results  34

Table 2.21: Average Partial Mortality of Natural Corals at TMT, RT2 and RT4  35

Table 3.1: Statistics for Non-compliance, Complaints, Notifications of Summons and Prosecution  37

Table 3.2: Statistics for Breach of Action or Limit Level for the Environmental Monitoring  38

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figures

Figure 1.1- 1.2

Locations of Key Construction Activities in this reporting period

Figure 2.1

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

Figure 2.2

Locations of Water Quality Monitoring Stations 

Figure 2.3

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

Figure 2.4

 

Land based Dolphin Monitoring Locations in Baseline and Construction Phases

Figure 2.5

Sightings Distribution of Chinese White Dolphins

Figure 2.6

 

Sighting Locations of Chinese White Dolphins with Different Group Sizes

Figure 2.7

Sighting Locations of Chinese White Dolphins Engaged in Different Behaviours

Figure 2.8

Sighting Locations of Mother-calf Pairs

Figure 2.9

 

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

Figure 2.10

Location for Passive Acoustic Monitoring

Figure 2.11

Locations of Sediment Trap Deployment

 

Appendices

Appendix A

Project Organization Chart

Appendix B

Environmental Mitigation Implementation Schedule (EMIS) for Construction Phase

Appendix C

Monitoring Results

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


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

CAP

Contamination Assessment Plan

CAR

Contamination Assessment Report

CTP

Coral Translocation Plan

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

HSF

High Speed Ferry

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

PM

Partial Mortality

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

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

TMT

Tai Mo To

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.

This is the 8th Construction Phase Quarterly 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 October 2017 to 31 December 2017.   

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, laying of sand blanket, seawall construction, and prefabricated vertical drain (PVD) installation. Land-side works included horizontal directional drilling (HDD) works, site office establishment, cable ducting works, concrete removal works, piling, and excavation works.

EM&A Activities Conducted in the Reporting Period

The EM&A programme was undertaken in accordance with the Updated EM&A 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

96

Noise monitoring

65

Water quality monitoring

39

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

6

Land-based theodolite tracking survey effort for CWD monitoring

15

Terrestrial ecology monitoring

3

Coral post-translocation monitoring

1

Apart from the regular site inspections, audit of SkyPier High Speed Ferries (HSF), audit of the construction and associated vessels, and audit of the implementation of Marine Mammal Watching Plan (MMWP) and Dolphin Exclusion Zone (DEZ) Plan were also conducted in the reporting period. Based on the information including ET’s observations, records of Marine Surveillance System (MSS) and contractors’ site records, the environmental mitigation measures were properly implemented and the 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

Photo 1: Land-Based Theodolite Tracking Survey for CWD at Sha Chau Conducted by ET

Photo 2: Sample Collection for Water Quality Monitoring Conducted by ET

Photo 3: Chemical Spill Drill Conducted by Contractor

Summary Findings of the EM&A Programme

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

The water quality monitoring results for dissolved oxygen (DO), turbidity, and total alkalinity 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), chromium, and nickel, some of the testing results triggered the relevant Action or Limit Levels in the reporting period, 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 egrets foraging at Sheung Sha Chau by the works.

The key findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period is summarized as below:

 

 

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

Complaints Received

A complaint on material dumping from construction vessel was received on 24 Nov 2017.

Contractor had provided adequate disposal facilities and arranged regular disposal. 

No observation relating to illegal dumping was found during regular and ad-hoc site inspections.  

Notification of any summons and status of prosecutions

 

No notification of summons or prosecution were received.

Nil

Changes that affect the EM&A

 

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

Nil

Note:     

^ 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[1]. 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. 22.

1.2      Scope of this Report

This is the 8th Construction Phase Quarterly EM&A Report for the Project which summarizes the key findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 October 2017 to 31 December 2017.

1.3      Project Organisation

The Project’s organisation structure is provided in Appendix A. Contact details of the key personnel have been updated and provided in and 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

3693 2288

Environmental Officer

Kwai Fung Wong

3693 2252

 

Airfield Works:

Contract 3301 North Runway Crossover Taxiway

(FJT-CHEC-ZHEC Joint Venture)

Project Manager

Kin Hang Chung

9412 1386

 

Terminal 2 Expansion Works:

Contract 3501 Antenna Farm and Sewage Pumping Station

(Build King Construction Ltd.)

Project Manager

Osbert Sit

9079 7030

Environmental Officer

Kelvin Cheung

9305 6081

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

 

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      Contact information for the Project

The contact information for the Project is provided in Table 1.2. The public can contact us through the following channels if they have any queries and comments on the environmental monitoring data and project related information.

 

Table 1.2: Contact Information of the Project

Channels

Contact Information

Hotline

3908 0354

Email

env@3rsproject.com

Fax

3747 6050

Postal Address

Airport Authority Hong Kong

HKIA Tower

1 Sky Plaza Road

Hong Kong International Airport

Lantau

Hong Kong

Attn: Environmental Team Leader Mr Terence Kong

c/o Mr Lawrence Tsui (TRD)

1.5      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 deep cement mixing (DCM) works, laying of sand blanket, seawall construction, and prefabricated vertical drain (PVD) installation. Land-side works included horizontal directional drilling (HDD) works, site office establishment, cable ducting works, concrete removal works, piling, and excavation works.

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

1.6      Summary of EM&A Programme Requirements

The status for all environmental aspects is presented in Table 1.3. The EM&A requirements remained unchanged during the reporting period.

Table 1.3: Summary of Status for All Environmental Aspects under the Updated EM&A Manual

Parameters

EM&A Requirements

Status

Air Quality

 

 

Baseline Monitoring

At least 14 consecutive days before commencement of construction work

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

Impact Monitoring

At least 3 times every 6 days

On-going

Noise

 

 

Baseline Monitoring

Daily for a period of at least two weeks prior to the commencement of construction works

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

Impact Monitoring

Weekly

On-going

Water Quality

 

 

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

Three days per week, at mid-flood and mid-ebb tides, for at least four weeks prior to the commencement of marine 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

Three days per week, at mid-flood and mid-ebb tides.

On-going

Initial Intensive Deep Cement Mixing (DCM) Water Quality Monitoring

At least four weeks

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

Three times per week until completion of DCM works.

On-going

Waste Management

 

 

Waste Monitoring

At least weekly

On-going

Land Contamination

 

 

Supplementary Contamination Assessment Plan (CAP)

At least 3 months before commencement of any soil remediation works.

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

Contamination Assessment Report (CAR) for Golf Course

CAR to be submitted for golf course first; programme for submission of supplementary CAR at the other areas to be agreed.

The CAR for Golf Course was submitted to EPD.

Terrestrial Ecology

 

 

Pre-construction Egretry Survey Plan

Once per month in the breeding season between April and July, prior to the commencement of HDD drilling works.

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

Ecological Monitoring

Monthly monitoring during the HDD construction works period from August to March.

On-going

Marine Ecology

 

 

Pre-Construction Phase Coral Dive Survey

Prior to marine construction works

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

Coral Translocation

-

The coral translocation was completed on 5 January 2017.

Post-translocation Monitoring

As per an enhanced monitoring programme based on the Coral Translocation Plan

On-going

Chinese White Dolphins (CWD)

 

Baseline Monitoring

6 months of baseline surveys before the commencement of land formation related construction works.

Vessel line transect surveys: Two full surveys per month;

Land-based theodolite tracking surveys: Two days per month at the Sha Chau station and two days per month at the Lung Kwu Chau station; and

Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM): For the whole duration of baseline period.

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

Impact Monitoring

Vessel line transect surveys: Two full surveys per month;

Land-based theodolite tracking surveys: One day per month at the Sha Chau station and one day per month at the Lung Kwu Chau station; and

PAM: For the whole duration for land formation related construction works.

On-going

Landscape and Visual

 

 

Baseline Monitoring

One-off survey within the Project site boundary prior to commencement of any construction works

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

Impact Monitoring

Weekly

On-going

Environmental Auditing

 

Regular site inspection

Weekly

On-going

Marine Mammal Watching Plan (MMWP) implementation measures

Monitor and check

On-going

DEZ Plan implementation measures

Monitor and check

On-going

SkyPier High Speed Ferries (HSF) implementation measures

Monitor and check

On-going

Construction and Associated Vessels implementation measures

Monitor and check

On-going

Complaint Hotline and Email Channel

Construction phase

On-going

Environmental Log Book

Construction phase

On-going

Taking into account the construction works in the reporting period, impact monitoring of air quality, noise, water quality, waste management, terrestrial ecology, landscape and visual, and CWD were carried out in the reporting period. Upon completion of coral translocation in January 2017, a summary of the ensuing post-translocation monitoring is reported quarterly.

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

    Five dolphin observer trainings provided by ET;

    Nine skipper trainings provided by ET;

    Three environmental briefings on EP and EM&A requirements of the 3RS provided by ET;

    One environmental briefing on Control of Marine Dumping provided by EPD; and

    27 occasions of environmental management meetings on EM&A matters.

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 B.

 

2              Environmental Monitoring and Auditing

2.1      Air Quality Monitoring

Impact 1-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) monitoring was conducted three times every six days at two representative monitoring stations during the reporting period. The locations of monitoring stations are described in Table 2.1 and presented in Figure 2.1.

2.1.1      Action and Limit Levels

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 2.1 for reference.

2.1.2      Summary of Monitoring Results

The air quality monitoring results in the reporting period are summarized in Table 2.1 and the graphical plot is presented in Appendix C.

Table 2.1: Impact Air Quality Monitoring Results

Monitoring Station

Location

1-hr TSP Concentration Range (µg/m3)

Action Level (mg/m3)

Limit Level (mg/m3)

AR1A

Man Tung Road Park

12 – 119

306

500

AR2

Village House at Tin Sum

14 – 276

298

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

The weather varied from sunny to rainy during the reporting period. Wind direction was mainly northeast or northwest in the reporting period.

2.1.3      Conclusion

The major dust sources during the reporting period were observed to be local air pollution and nearby traffic emissions. It is considered that the monitoring work in the reporting period was effective and there was no adverse impact attributable to the works of the Project.

2.2      Noise Monitoring

Impact noise monitoring was conducted at five representative monitoring stations once per week during 0700 and 1900 in the reporting period. The locations of monitoring stations are described in Table 2.2 and presented in Figure 2.1.

2.2.1      Action and Limit Levels

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 2.2 for reference.

2.2.2      Summary of Monitoring Results

The noise monitoring results in the reporting period are summarized in Table 2.2 and the graphical plot is presented in Appendix C.

Table 2.2: Impact Noise Monitoring Results

Monitoring Station

Location

Noise Level Range, Leq (30 mins) (dB(A))

Action Level

Limit Level

NM1A

Man Tung Road Park

71 – 73

When one documented complaint is received from any one of the sensitive receivers

75 dB(A)

NM3A

Site Office

57 – 63

75 dB(A)

NM4

Ching Chung Hau Po Woon Primary School

60 – 66

65dB(A) / 70 dB(A) (i)

NM5

Village House in Tin Sum

53 – 66

75 dB(A)

NM6

House No. 1, Sha Lo Wan

66 – 73

75 dB(A)

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

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

2.2.3      Conclusion

The major noise sources during the reporting period were observed to be road traffic and helicopters at NM1A, aircrafts and helicopters at NM3A, helicopters and construction activities from a nearby school at NM4, aircrafts and helicopters at NM5, and aircrafts, helicopters, and marine vessels at NM6. It is considered that the monitoring work in the reporting period was effective and there was no adverse impact attributable to the works of the Project.

2.3      Water Quality Monitoring

During the reporting period, water quality monitoring was conducted three days per week, at mid-flood and mid-ebb 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 the 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 impacts from the Project before the impacts could become apparent at sensitive receivers (represented by the SR stations). Table 2.3 describes the details of the monitoring stations. Figure 2.2 shows the locations of the monitoring stations.

Table 2.3: Monitoring Locations and Parameters for Impact Water Quality Monitoring

Monitoring Stations

Description

Coordinates

Parameters

 

 

Easting

Northing

 

C1

Control Station

804247

815620

 

C2

Control Station

806945

825682

 

C3(3)

Control Station

817803

822109

 

IM1

Impact Station

806458

818351

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

IM2

Impact Station

806193

818852

IM3

Impact Station

806019

819411

IM4

Impact Station

805039

819570

IM5

Impact Station

804924

820564

IM6

Impact Station

805828

821060

IM7

Impact Station

806835

821349

IM8

Impact Station

807838

821695

IM9

Impact Station

808811

822094

 

IM10

Impact Station

809838

822240

IM11

Impact Station

810545

821501

IM12

Impact Station

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

DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS, Total Alkalinity, Heavy Metals(2)(4)

SR3

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

807571

822147

DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS

 

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(5)

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)    Total alkalinity and heavy metals results are collected at SR2 as a control station for regular DCM monitoring.

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

2.3.1      Action and Limit Levels

The Action and Limit Levels for 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 presented in Table 2.4. The control and IM stations during flood tide and ebb tide for general water quality monitoring and regular DCM monitoring are presented in Table 2.5.

Table 2.4: 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, Action or Limit Level is triggered when monitoring result is lower than the limits.

2. For parameters other than DO, Action or Limit Level of water quality results is triggered 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 2.5: 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.

2.3.2      Summary of Monitoring Results

The summary or results complying with their corresponding Action and Limit Levels in the reporting period are presented in Table 2.6. It should be noted that Severe Typhoon Khanun hit Hong Kong from 14 to 16 Oct 2017 and the water quality monitoring results in that period might be affected by the inclement weather

Table 2.6: Percentage of Monitoring Results Complying with Action and Limit Levels

DO

(Surface and Middle)

DO

(Bottom)

SS

Turbidity

Alkalinity

Chromium

Nickel

 

Oct 2017

100%

100%

98.75%

100%

100%

100%

100%

 

Nov 2017

100%

100%

98.96%

100%

100%

99.36%

99.68%

 

Dec 2017

100%

100%

97.09%

100%

100%

100%

100%

 

Overall

100%

100%

98.27%

100%

100%

99.79%

99.89%

 

Note: The percentages are calculated by dividing the number of depth-averaged results complying with their corresponding Action and Limit Level by the total number of depth-averaged results.

The monitoring results for DO, turbidity, and total alkalinity obtained in 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 SS, chromium and nickel, some of the testing results triggered the relevant Action or Limit Levels in the reporting period, and the corresponding investigations were conducted accordingly.

Summaries of results triggering Action or Limit Level for SS, chromium, and nickel are presented in Table 2.7 to Table 2.10. Details of the investigation findings are presented in Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 22, 23, and 24, which concluded that all results triggering the Action or Limit Level were not related to the Project.

Table 2.7: Summary of SS Results Triggering Action or Limit Level (Mid-Ebb Tide)

IM1

IM2

IM3

IM4

IM5

IM6

IM7

IM8

IM9

IM10

IM11

IM12

SR2

SR3

SR4A

SR5A

SR6

SR7

SR8

17/10/2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

19/10/2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

24/10/2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

09/12/2017

D

D

D

D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

16/12/2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

21/12/2017

 

 

 

D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No. of result triggering Action or Limit Level

1

1

1

2

3

2

0

0

1

0

2

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Table 2.8: Summary of SS Results Triggering Action or Limit Level (Mid-Flood Tide)

IM1

IM2

IM3

IM4

IM5

IM6

IM7

IM8

IM9

IM10

IM11

IM12

SR3

SR4A

SR5A

SR6

SR7

SR8

24/10/2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

04/11/2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

07/11/2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

23/11/2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

07/12/2017

 

 

 

 

D

D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

16/12/2017

 

 

 

 

D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

21/12/2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

23/12/2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No. of result triggering Action or Limit Level

1

0

1

1

2

1

0

1

1

1

2

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

Table 2.9: Summary of Chromium Results Triggering Action or Limit Level (Mid-Ebb Tide)

IM1

IM2

IM3

IM4

IM5

IM6

IM7

IM8

IM9

IM10

IM11

IM12

25/11/2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

D

D

 

 

No. of result triggering Action or Limit Level

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

0

0

Table 2.10: Summary of Nickel Results Triggering Action or Limit Level (Mid-Ebb Tide)

IM1

IM2

IM3

IM4

IM5

IM6

IM7

IM8

IM9

IM10

IM11

IM12

18/11/2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

D

 

 

 

 

No. of result triggering Action or Limit Level

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

Note: The monitoring results on monitoring dates not presented in the above tables did not trigger their corresponding Action or Limit Levels. Detailed results are presented in Appendix C.

Legend:

 

Result complied with corresponding Action and Limit Levels

 

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

D

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

D

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

2.3.3      Conclusion

In the reporting period, it is noted that most monitoring results complied with their corresponding Action and Limit Levels, while minor number of results triggered their corresponding Action or Limit Level, and investigations were conducted accordingly. Based on the findings presented in Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 22, 23, and 24, all results that triggered the corresponding Action or Limit Level were not related to the Project; hence, the Project did not introduce adverse impact to all water quality sensitive receivers. All required actions under the Event and Action Plan had been followed.

Nevertheless, the non-project related triggers have been attended to and have initiated corresponding action 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. These include maintaining the silt curtain for sand blanket laying properly and maintaining the levels of materials on barges to avoid overflow as recommended in the Manual.

2.4      Waste Monitoring

In accordance with the Manual, the waste generated from construction activities was audited once per week to determine if wastes were 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.

2.4.1      Action and Limit Levels

The Action and Limit Levels of the construction waste are provided in Table 2.11.

Table 2.11: 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

2.4.2      Summary of Monitoring Results

Based on updated contractors’ information, summary of construction waste generated in the reporting period is presented in Table 2.12.

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

Table 2.12: Summary of Construction Waste Generated in the Reporting Period

 

Excavated Material (m3)1

C&D2 Material Reused in the Project (m3)

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

Chemical Waste (kg)

Chemical Waste (L)

General Refuse (tonne)3

Oct 2017

371

84

53

30

11,400

149

Nov 2017

380

530

101

105

3,100

193

Dec 2017

1,381

1,320

269

240

7,600

246

Total

2,132

1,934

423

375

22,100

589

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.     Figures are rounded off to the nearest tonne.

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

Weekly waste monitoring of the Project construction works was carried out by the ET in the reporting period to check and monitor the implementation of proper waste management practices during the reporting period.

Recommendations were provided during monitoring, including provision and maintenance of spill kits and drip trays, provision of proper storage area for general refuse and chemical waste, as well as regular segregation and removal of waste. The contractors had taken actions to implement the recommended measures.

2.5      Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring

CWD monitoring was conducted by vessel line transect survey at a frequency of two full surveys per month, supplemented by land-based theodolite tracking survey and PAM. The frequency of the land-based theodolite tracking survey during the construction phase was one day per month at both Sha Chau (SC) and Lung Kwu Chau (LKC) stations as stipulated in the Manual. Additional land-based theodolite tracking survey at the SC station and the LKC station (in total 2 tracking days and 3 tracking days per month at respective stations) were also conducted on a voluntary basis to collect supplementary information for the project. Monitoring was fully completed in the reporting period. The vessel survey transect lines matched those proposed in the Manual and transect lines are consistent with those used in the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) long-term CWD monitoring programme. The transect locations of CWD monitoring by vessel line transect survey conducted from October to December 2017 are shown in Figure 2.3, whilst the land-based theodolite tracking survey stations are described in Table 2.13 and depicted in Figure 2.4. The location of the PAM device is shown in Figure 2.10.

Table 2.13: Land-based Theodolite Tracking 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

2.5.1           Action and Limit Levels

The Action Level and Limit Levels for CWD monitoring were formulated by an action response approach using the running quarterly dolphin encounter rates (STG and ANI) derived from baseline monitoring data, as presented in the CWD Baseline Monitoring Report. The derived values of Action and Limit Levels for CWD monitoring are shown in Table 2.14.

Table 2.14: Derived Values of Action Level and Limit Level 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

2.5.2      Summary of Monitoring Results

2.5.2.1            Vessel Line Transect Survey

Survey Effort

During the reporting period, six complete sets of vessel line transect surveys were conducted from October to December 2017 to cover all transects in Northeast Lantau (NEL), Northwest Lantau (NWL), Airport West (AW), West Lantau (WL) and Southwest Lantau (SWL) survey areas twice per month.

A total of around 1,369 km of survey effort was collected from these surveys, with around 81.2% 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 data are presented in Appendix C.

CWD Sighting

From October to December 2017, there were in total 47 groups with 168 dolphins sighted (Table 2.19). Amongst the sightings of CWDs, 45 groups with 164 dolphins were made during on-effort searches during favourable weather conditions.

When breaking down the sightings by survey areas, 13 sightings with 62 dolphins, two sightings with 10 dolphins, 24 sightings with 78 dolphins and 8 sightings with 18 dolphins were recorded in NWL, AW, WL and SWL survey areas respectively during the current reporting period. No CWD was sighted in NEL survey area.

Compared to last quarter (i.e. July to September 2017), there are observable declines in CWD sightings in WL and SWL (43% and 76% decline in WL and SWL respectively). Taking account of the number of dolphins as recorded, there are 33% and 83% decline in WL and SWL respectively.

However, the number of CWD sightings in NWL (including AW) remains relative steady and even with an increase of 76% in terms of number of dolphins compared with last quarter.

Comparison between the current reporting quarter and the same quarter of last year (i.e. October to December 2016) revealed that the overall number of CWD sightings has a decline of around 20%. However, there is an increase of about 8% in terms of number of dolphins.

Table 2.15 below shows the comparison of the numbers of sightings and dolphins amongst the current reporting period, last quarter, and the same quarter of year 2016.

Table 2.15: Summary of Number of CWD Sightings and Number of Dolphins for the Same Quarter Last Year, Previous Quarter, and Current Reporting Period

 

October to December 2016

July to September 2017

October to December 2017

NEL

0 (0)

0 (0)

0 (0)

NWL

18 (59)

16 (40)

13 (62)

AW

0 (0)

1 (1)

2 (10)

WL

25 (63)

42 (116)

24 (78)

SWL

16 (34)

34 (109)

8 (18)

Total

59 (156)

93 (266)

47 (168)

Note: Values in ( ) represent number of dolphins

Distribution of CWD sightings recorded from October to December 2017 are illustrated in Figure 2.5. In NWL, CWD sightings were mostly within and around Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park (SCLKCMP) as well as the southwestern part of the survey area with two sightings recorded in close vicinity to the 3RS works area. In WL, the majority of the CWD sightings were located along the coastal waters from Tai O to Fan Lau, especially the waters around Tai O, Yi O and off Peaked Hill. While in SWL, CWD sightings mainly distributed in the coastal waters at Fan Lau Tung Wan and Lo Kei Wan. Details of the sighting data are presented in Appendix C.

Figure 2.5: Sightings Distribution of Chinese White Dolphins


Remarks: Please note that there are 47 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 sighting distribution map.

Encounter Rate

The dolphin encounter rates for the number of dolphin sightings per 100 km survey effort (STG) and for the total number of dolphins per 100 km survey effort (ANI) in the whole survey area (i.e. NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL) for October, November and December 2017 are summarized in Table 2.16.

In this reporting period, the monthly encounter rates for STG and ANI both decrease from October to November 2017 followed by an increase in December 2017. Comparing with the previous reporting period, the running quarterly STG and ANI decrease from 6.68 to 4.05 and from 19.97 to 14.75 respectively.

Table 2.16: Summary of Monthly and Running Quarterly STG and ANI of Chinese White Dolphin for Previous and Current Reporting Periods

 

Previous Reporting Period

Current Reporting Period

 

Jul 17

Aug 17

Sep 17

Oct 17

Nov 17

Dec 17

Monthly STG

6.76

8.11

5.32

4.54

2.07

5.33

Monthly ANI

18.45

24.06

17.73

16.02

6.82

20.77

Running Quarterly STG

5.73

7.03

6.68

5.90

4.09

4.05

Running Quarterly ANI

20.95

20.30

19.97

19.05

13.91

14.75

Notes: For detailed calculations of encounter rates STG and ANI, please refer to the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 22, 23 and 24.

Group Size

Between October and December 2017, the group size of CWDs ranged from 1 to 12 dolphins per group. The average group size of CWDs was 3.6 dolphins per group while that of the last quarter was 2.9. Medium-sized CWD groups (i.e. 3-9 dolphins) were dominant (i.e. 32 out of 47 sightings). There was only one CWD sighting with a large group size (i.e. 10 or more dolphins) in this reporting period, which was recorded in NWL.

In NWL and WL, medium group size of CWD sightings dominated in this reporting period. While in SWL, the number of small group size sightings (i.e. 1-2 dolphins) dominated. This finding is a contrast to the findings of previous reporting period in which NWL and WL were dominated by small-sized CWD sightings and SWL was dominated by medium-sized sighting. Sighting locations of CWD groups with different group sizes are depicted in Figure 2.6.

Figure 2.6: Sighting Locations of Chinese White Dolphins with Different Group Sizes

Remarks: Please note that there are 47 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 sighting distribution map.


Activities and Association with Fishing Boats

During October to December 2017, 14 sightings of CWDs were sighted with feeding activities.  Amongst these 14 sightings of feeding CWDs, two were observed in association with operating gill netter in WL and SWL respectively, while one sighting was observed in association with operating shrimp trawler in WL. The numbers of sightings with feeding and association with operating fishing boats are similar to the last reporting period (i.e. 12 sightings involved feeding activities with two sightings observed in association with operating fish boat). Compared with the data in the same period of last year, there is a 30% decline of feeding activities (i.e. 20 sightings observed with feeding activities) while there were three sightings recorded in association with operating fishing boats. The sighting locations of CWDs engaged in different behaviours during the reporting period are illustrated in Figure 2.7.

Figure 2.7: Sighting Locations of Chinese White Dolphins Engaged in Different Behaviours


Mother-calf Pairs

From October to December 2017, 8 sightings of CWDs were recorded with the presence of mother-and-calf, mother-and-unspotted juvenile and/or mother-and-spotted juvenile pairs. The majority of these mother-calf pairs were sighted in WL. The sighting locations of mother-calf pairs are shown in Figure 2.8.

Figure 2.8: Sighting Locations of Mother-calf Pairs


Remarks: Please note that there are 8 pink circles on the map indicating the locations of the sightings with the presences of mother-and-calf, mother-and-unspotted juvenile and/or mother-and-spotted juvenile pairs. Some of them were very close to each other and therefore appear overlapped on this sighting distribution map.

Photo Identification

During October to December 2017, a total number of 61 different CWD individuals were identified altogether for 84 times. Re-sighting information of CWD individuals provides an initial idea of their range use and apparent connection between different areas around Lantau. Amongst these 61 different CWD individuals, 16 animals (i.e. NLMM002, NLMM004, NLMM027, NLMM028, NLMM037, SLMM014, SLMM018, SLMM028, SLMM030, WLMM001, WLMM019, WLMM026, WLMM027, WLMM065, WLMM066, WLMM107) were sighted for more than once.

Six individuals including SLMM014, SLMM018, SLMM030, WLMM001, WLMM026 and WLMM027 were re-sighted in different survey areas within this reporting period. Amongst these six animals, WLMM026 and WLMM027 have cross-area movement between NWL (including AW) and WL or SWL survey area. Whilst SLMM014, SLMM018 and WLMM001 have cross-area movement in WL and SWL. The most frequently re-sighted individuals were SLMM030, WLMM065 and WLMM066, all recorded for 4 times during this reporting period. SLMM030 has shown cross-area movement amongst NWL, WL and SWL, while WLMM065 and WLMM066 were only encountered in WL. The number of CWD individuals re-sighted for more than once and the number of CWD individuals showing cross-area movement are both fewer than last quarter (i.e. July to September 2017).

A summary of photo identification works is presented in Table 2.17. Representative photos of the 61 identified individuals and figures depicting the sighting locations of the aforementioned 16 re-sighted individuals recorded in this reporting period are presented Appendix C.

Table 2.17: Summary of Photo Identification

Individual ID

Date of sighting

Sighting Group No.

Area

 

Individual
ID

Date of sighting

Sighting Group No.

Area

NLMM002

25-Oct-17

1

NWL

 

SLMM048

28-Dec-17

3

WL

 

14-Dec-17

1

NWL

 

SLMM049

07-Dec-17

4

WL

NLMM004

06-Dec-17

5

NWL

 

SLMM052

28-Dec-17

8

SWL

 

14-Dec-17

1

NWL

 

SLMM053

06-Dec-17

2

NWL

NLMM005

14-Dec-17

1

NWL

 

WLMM001

21-Nov-17

2

SWL

NLMM010

25-Oct-17

1

NWL

 

 

07-Dec-17

2

WL

NLMM011

15-Nov-17

1

NWL

 

WLMM007

07-Dec-17

4

WL

NLMM012

15-Nov-17

1

NWL

 

WLMM019

24-Oct-17

1

NWL

NLMM015

27-Oct-17

3

WL

 

 

25-Oct-17

1

NWL

NLMM016

07-Dec-17

3

WL

 

WLMM021

27-Oct-17

1

WL

NLMM019

21-Nov-17

1

AW

 

WLMM024

21-Nov-17

1

AW

NLMM027

25-Oct-17

1

NWL

 

WLMM026

26-Oct-17

1

WL

 

14-Dec-17

2

NWL

 

 

06-Dec-17

3

NWL

NLMM028

25-Oct-17

1

NWL

 

WLMM027

26-Oct-17

1

WL

 

14-Dec-17

2

NWL

 

 

06-Dec-17

3

NWL

NLMM033

25-Oct-17

2

NWL

 

WLMM030

25-Oct-17

2

NWL

NLMM037

15-Nov-17

1

NWL

 

WLMM049

06-Dec-17

5

NWL

 

14-Dec-17

1

NWL

 

WLMM054

26-Oct-17

1

WL

NLMM039

15-Nov-17

1

NWL

 

WLMM056

27-Oct-17

1

WL

NLMM049

07-Nov-17

1

NWL

 

WLMM062

26-Oct-17

5

WL

NLMM051

25-Oct-17

2

NWL

 

WLMM063

28-Dec-17

3

WL

NLMM054

07-Nov-17

1

NWL

 

WLMM064

06-Dec-17

1

NWL

NLMM055

06-Dec-17

1

NWL

 

WLMM065

26-Oct-17

4

WL

NLMM056

06-Dec-17

4

NWL

 

 

 

6

WL

NLMM057

06-Dec-17

4

NWL

 

 

27-Oct-17

2

WL

NLMM058

06-Dec-17

4

NWL

 

 

17-Nov-17

1

WL

NLMM059

06-Dec-17

4

NWL

 

WLMM066

26-Oct-17

4

WL

SLMM014

07-Dec-17

5

WL

 

 

 

6

WL

 

08-Dec-17

2

SWL

 

 

27-Oct-17

2

WL

SLMM015

19-Oct-17

2

SWL

 

 

17-Nov-17

1

WL

SLMM018

23-Oct-17

2

SWL

 

WLMM071

06-Dec-17

1

NWL

 

07-Dec-17

5

WL

 

WLMM075

27-Oct-17

2

WL

SLMM021

19-Oct-17

2

SWL

 

WLMM091

26-Oct-17

7

WL

SLMM023

26-Oct-17

8

WL

 

WLMM093

26-Oct-17

7

WL

SLMM028

06-Dec-17

3

NWL

 

WLMM094

26-Oct-17

7

WL

 

07-Dec-17

1

AW

 

WLMM100

24-Oct-17

1

NWL

SLMM030

19-Oct-17

1

SWL

 

WLMM104

26-Oct-17

2

WL

 

26-Oct-17

1

WL

 

WLMM105

26-Oct-17

8

WL

 

06-Dec-17

3

NWL

 

WLMM106

26-Oct-17

8

WL

 

07-Dec-17

1

AW

 

WLMM107

26-Oct-17

8

WL

SLMM031

26-Oct-17

10

SWL

 

 

28-Dec-17

2

WL

SLMM037

26-Oct-17

2

WL

 

 

 

3

WL

2.5.2.2            Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey

Survey Effort

During October to December 2017, a total of 15 days of land-based theodolite tracking survey effort were completed, including nine days on Lung Kwu Chau and six days on Sha Chau. In total, 50 CWD groups were tracked from the Lung Kwu Chau station while no CWD groups were tracked from the Sha Chau station, with an overall 0.56 CWD groups sighted per survey effort hour.

Information on survey effort and CWD groups sighted during land-based theodolite tracking surveys are presented in Table 2.18. Details on the survey effort and CWD groups tracked are presented in Appendix C. The first sighting locations of CWD groups tracked between October and December 2017 are shown in Figure 2.9.

Table 2.18: Summary of Survey Effort and CWD Group of Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey

Land-based Station

# of Survey Sessions

Survey Effort (hh:mm)

# CWD Groups Sighted

CWD Group Sighting per Survey Hour

October 2017

Lung Kwu Chau

3

18:00

16

0.89

Sha Chau

2

12:00

0

0

TOTAL

5

30:00

16

0.53

November 2017

Lung Kwu Chau

3

18:00

18

1.0

Sha Chau

2

12:00

0

0

TOTAL

5

30:00

18

0.60

December 2017

Lung Kwu Chau

3

18:00

16

0.89

Sha Chau

2

12:00

0

0

TOTAL

5

30:00

16

0.53

OVERALL

15

90:00

50

0.56

Figure 2.9:       Plots of First Sightings of All CWD Groups from Land-based Stations

Remarks: Please note that there are 50 green circles on the map indicating the first sighting locations of CWD groups tracked off Lung Kwu Chau. Some of them were very close to each other and therefore appear overlapped on this map.

2.5.2.3            Progress Update on PAM

An Ecological Acoustic Recorder (EAR) has been deployed and positioned to the south of Sha Chau Island inside the SCLKCMP (Figure 2.10) with 20% duty cycle with data from the EAR intended primarily to supplement the data collected from the land-based theodolite tracking survey station on Sha Chau. The EAR deployment generally lasts around 4-6 weeks followed by a period of data retrieval for subsequent analysis. As the data analysis takes more than two months after retrieval, PAM results are not suitable for reporting on a quarterly basis.  Rather, detailed analysis of PAM data will be presented in annual CWD reports.

2.5.2.4            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 Marine Mammal Watching Plan (MMWP). Teams of at least two dolphin observers were deployed at 12 to 22 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 546 individuals being trained and the training records kept by the ET. Observations were recorded on DEZ monitoring in this reporting period during site inspection by the ET and IEC. 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 was one record of dolphin sighting within the DEZ of DCM works in this reporting period. According to the contractor’s site records, relevant DCM works were suspended in the dolphin sighting event until the DEZ was clear of dolphin for a continuous period of 30 minutes. The 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 summarized in Section 2.6. Summary of audits of SkyPier HSFs route diversion and speed control and construction vessel management are presented in Section 2.8 and Section 2.9 respectively.

2.6      Weekly Environmental Site Inspection

Site inspections of the construction works were carried out on a weekly basis to monitor the implementation of proper environmental pollution control and mitigation measures for the Project. Bi-weekly site inspections were also conducted by the IEC. Observations have been recorded in the site inspection checklist and passed to the contractor together with the appropriate recommended mitigation measures where necessary.

Based on the observations from site inspections, the key recommendations were related to:

    display of relevant permit, licenses, and labels;

    provision and maintenance of drip trays and chemical storage area;

    implementation of noise mitigation, dust suppression, wastewater treatment, tree protection and surface runoff prevention measures; and

    segregation of waste for recycling and disposal.

In addition, the following key recommendations were provided during site inspection on construction vessels:

    display of relevant permit, licenses, and labels;

    provision and maintenance of drip tray and chemical storage area;

    proper implementation of acoustic decoupling, wastewater treatment, dust suppression and spill and runoff preventive measures;

    proper disposal of general refuse and segregation of recyclables from general refuse; and

    ensuring the effectiveness of silt curtains.

The daily visual inspection checklists for silt curtains and bi-weekly diver inspection records which were implemented by the contractors in accordance with the Silt Curtain Deployment Plan had been checked during site inspection and reviewed at the end of the reporting period, summarizing that the silt curtains were maintained in the correct positions and intact without obvious defects or damage.

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 C.

2.7      Ecological Monitoring

In accordance with the Manual, ecological monitoring shall be undertaken monthly at the 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.

Monthly ecological monitoring was carried out in October, November and December 2017 on Sheung Sha Chau Island. No encroachment of any works upon the egretry area nor any significant disturbance to the egrets foraging on the island by the works was recorded during ecological monitoring. No sign of nursery activity was observed in the reporting period at the previously identified egretry area at the southern side of Sheung Sha Chau Island. At the HDD daylighting location, neither nest nor breeding activity of birds were found during the monthly ecological monitoring and weekly site inspections in the reporting period. The site photos and location map regarding the ecological monitoring for HDD works and egretry area are provided in Appendix C for reference.

2.8      Audit of SkyPier High Speed Ferries

In total, 2,336 ferry movements between HKIA SkyPier and Zhuhai / Macau were audited in the reporting period. The daily movements of all SkyPier HSFs in the reporting period ranged between 1 and 93, which falls within the maximum daily cap number of 125. There was only one ferry movement on 15 October 2017 due to typhoon.

All HSFs travelled through the SCZ with average speed within 15 knots (9.2 knots to 14.1 knots), which complied with the Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for High Speed Ferries of SkyPier (the SkyPier Plan). Seven ferry movements were recorded with minor deviations from the diverted route during the reporting period. Notices of deviation were sent to the ferry operators and the cases have been investigated. One case on 30 October 2017 was due to error of a few Automatic Information System (AIS) points and the vessel had actually followed the normal route. Another four deviation cases from the diverted route during the reporting period were due to public safety considerations or emergency situations, i.e., giving way to other vessels or avoiding collision with floating objects to ensure safety, and the HSFs had returned to the normal route following the SkyPier Plan as soon as practicable. The remaining two deviation cases recorded on 7 October 2017 and 29 December 2017 were considered as non-safety related. In these two cases, the captains found difficulty to follow the normal route due to AIS failure. The ferry operator was advised to investigate the reason for the AIS failure and check the AIS system to ensure that accurate data points can be received for checking. The summary of the SkyPier Plan monitoring result is presented in Graph 3.

Insufficient AIS data were received from some HSFs during the reporting period. After investigation, it was found AIS data for the concerned ferries was missing due to effects of interference of the signal as reported by the ferry operator after checking the condition of the AIS transponders. Vessel captains were requested to provide the radar track photos which indicated the vessel entered the SCZ through the gate access points and there was no speeding in the SCZ. Ferry operator’s explanation has been accepted.

Graph 3: Summary of SkyPier High Speed Ferries Monitoring Results

2.9      Audit of Construction and Associated Vessels

On the implementation of MTRMP-CAV, the MSS automatically recorded deviation cases such as speeding, entering no entry zone, and not traveling through the designated gate. ET conducted bi-weekly audit of relevant information including AIS data, vessel tracks and other relevant records to ensure sufficient information were provided by the system and the contractors complied with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV. The contactors submitted endorsed 3-month rolling vessel plan for construction vessel activities to AAHK in order to help maintain the number of construction vessels to a practicable minimum. The IEC also performed audit on the compliance of the requirements as part of the EM&A programme.

Between October and December 2017, deviations including speeding in the works area, entry from non-designated gates and entering no-entry zones were identified. All the concerned captains were reminded by the contractor’s MTCC representative to comply with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV.

A total of 9 skipper training workshops were held by ET between October and December 2017 with 58 concerned captains of construction vessels associated with the 3RS Contracts to familiarise them with the predefined routes, general education on local cetaceans, guidelines for avoiding adverse water quality impact, the required environmental practices / measures while operating construction and associated vessels under the Project, and guidelines for operating vessels safely in the presence of CWDs. Another 9 skipper training workshops were held with 19 concerned captains by contractor’s Environmental Officers and competency tests were conducted subsequently with the trained captains by ET.

2.10    Coral Post-Translocation Monitoring

In accordance with the approved Coral Translocation Plan (CTP), gorgonian corals suitable for translocation were translocated to the recipient site at Yam Tsai Wan (YTW), with translocation completed in January 2017. Since then the post-translocation monitoring programme has been undertaken according to the CTP. This quarterly report presents the results of the 5th post-translocation monitoring survey completed in October 2017 (summarized in Table 2.19 below) and wraps up the ad-hoc surveys and further investigations initiated after the significant change in partial mortality (PM) and deterioration in coral health conditions that were identified during the April 2017 monitoring event.

Table 2.19: Summary of the 5th Post-Translocation Monitoring Surveys Completed in October 2017

 

Colony Height (cm) (a)

General Health Conditions(b)

% Change in Partial Mortality (PM) (c) (d)

Triggering of Action Level(e)

Triggering of Limit Level(f)

Fifth Round of Survey in October 2017

Control gorgonian corals (tagged)

7-59

0-5

(Average: 2.4)

<25% change for 10% of the tagged corals and 25% change for 90% of the tagged corals

(Average PM: 67.3%)

No

 

No

 

Translocated gorgonian corals (tagged)

5-44

0-4

(Average: 2.5)

<25% change for 5.9% of the tagged corals and 25% change for 94.1% of the tagged corals

(Average PM: 74.6%)

Notes:

(a)     Colony height refers to the baseline coral height.

(b)     General health conditions of coral were measured on an ordinal scale of 0 to 5 (0=dead, 5=very healthy).

(c)      The percentage change in partial mortality of the tagged translocated and control corals are both determined by comparing the partial mortality recorded during each post-translocation monitoring with reference to the partial mortality observed during the baseline conditions, as represented by the tagged coral survey results.

(d)     Coral showing no change in partial mortality is not presented in this account.

(e)     As defined in the approved CTP, the Action Level is triggered if during monitoring a 15% increase in the percentage of partial mortality occurs at more than 20% of the translocated coral colonies that is not recorded on the original (control) corals at the recipient site.

(f)      As defined in the approved CTP, the Limit Level is triggered if during monitoring a 25% increase in the percentage of partial mortality occurs at more than 20% of the translocated coral colonies that is not recorded on the original (control) corals at the recipient site.

The monitoring results show that the PM and the health condition of both the translocated and control corals have largely stabilized after the significant change in April 2017 (see Quarterly EM&A Report No. 7). The tagged translocated corals showing 25% change in PM remained at around 94% during the period from April to October, whilst the control corals showing 25% change in PM remained in the range 90%-95% during the same period. Although minor fluctuations were observed in the period June to September, the average General Health Condition remained at between 2.0 and 3.0. Monitoring results in Table 2.19 show that neither Action nor Limit Levels were triggered over the Quarter.

Review of Sediment Deposition

Ad-hoc surveys and investigations were conducted and reported in the Quarterly EM&A Report No. 7 (July to September 2017) with the exception of sediment deposition data results as the information was not available during Report No.7 preparation.

Sediment traps for measuring sediment deposition were set up at RT2 (recipient site) and RT4 (in Yam Tsai Wan) concurrently to obtain information on suspended sediment in the water column at these locations. Sediment traps were also set up at Tai Mo To (TMT) at later stage to collect supplementary information about the general sediment condition in the ad-hoc dive survey area. The results are indicative only.

The sediment trap is a vertical pipe of 4 cm diameter with netting fitted over the top to prevent small animals from disturbing the contents of the traps. The traps were attached to specially prepared concrete bases which were placed in suitable locations in RT2, RT4 and TMT for a period of about 9 to 10 weeks. Locations of these three sites are shown in Figure 2.11.

Figure 2.11:     Locations of Sediment Trap Deployment

 

The sediment trap results of the three sites are summarized in Table 2.20 below:

Table 2.20: Summary of Sediment Trap Results

Site

Deposition of Dry Weight into Trap (g day-1)

Deposition Rate per area

(mg cm-2 day-1)

Sediment Texture

RT2

0.644

51.3

Fine, very fine

RT4

0.201

15.4

Coarse

TMT

0.398

31.8

Very fine

Sediment Trap results identified differences in the deposition rate at recipient site RT2 and nearby comparison sites at TMT and RT4.  The relationship between sedimentation rate and coral mortality is not clearly known because the corals at TMT have the lowest PM among the three sites but the sedimentation rate at TMT is not the lowest (see Table 2.21). Similarly, even though the deposition rate at RT2 was higher than TMT and RT4 during the period of sediment trap deployment, there is no clear relationship between deposition rate and partial mortality.

 

Table 2.21: Average Partial Mortality of Natural Corals at TMT, RT2 and RT4

TMT

RT2 (Recipient Site)

RT4

Distance from 3RS project site boundary

3.5km

8.5km

9.0km

Average Partial Mortality

 

June 2017

10.0%

73.5%

29.8%

July 2017

6.8%

68.8%

57.3%

September 2017

12.3%

67.8%

61.3%

 

 

Potential Causes for Significant Change in Partial Mortality in April 2017

Various potential causes for the high PM and deterioration in coral health have been evaluated and were presented in Quarterly EM&A Report No. 7. The findings of the ad-hoc Dive Surveys of Natural Corals at YTW, Sham Shui Kok (SSK) and TMT have clearly identified that while the dive survey locations at TMT and SSK are much closer to the 3RS project site than the YTW survey locations, the average PM levels of natural corals (tagged) at these locations are generally lower than those at the four YTW locations.  It is therefore evident that the relatively high PM levels at YTW are not likely to be related to 3RS marine works activities.

 

The results from the sediment trap work reported in this quarterly report do not alter ad-hoc investigation findings as reported in Quarterly EM&A Report No. 7.  All of the ad-hoc findings can now be summarized as follows:

    Review of weather conditions:  There were no obvious weather events (e.g. strong monsoon signal, typhoon, cold weather warning) that could potentially have affected coral health conditions during the period January to April 2017, before the significant change of PM was identified.

    Review of red tides/ algal blooms that may have affected Yam Tsai Wan:  AFCD records show no red tides were reported during the period from January to April 2017, in the period before the significant change of PM.  However, a University of Hong Kong coral specialist consulted by the ET reported that algal bloom incidents were observed at Kap Shui Mun, Sham Wat and Tai O during dive surveys in January 2017, with the bloom resembling Microcystis sp. (known to produce hepatoxins that have potentially chronic harmful effects on fish and shellfish).  These observations suggest that harmful algal blooms may have occurred in some parts of north Lantau waters quite close to YTW with some potential for residual effects; meaning that these blooms may have been associated with the significant change of PM at the recipient site.

    Review of water quality: Relevant water quality parameters including pH, DO, temperature, salinity and total alkalinity were measured at all six ad-hoc survey sites in conjunction with coral monitoring at the same six sites in June, July and September 2017, after the April PM was identified.  Most of the monitored parameters at these sites generally fell within natural fluctuations at Station C3 (3RS water quality monitoring programme control station near YTW) between January and September 2017. Results indicated that the rate of salinity drop was higher in 2017 as compared to 2016 in the area surrounding the recipient site, and higher water temperature was recorded in 2017 than 2016. There was also a decrease in DO during the wet season. Hence the corals might have been exposed to an interplay of environmental stresses, including salinity, DO and thermal stress, leading to unfavourable water quality conditions during the period prior to April 2017.

    Review of sediment deposition: The sediment deposition investigations undertaken as part of the ad-hoc monitoring effort have identified relatively high sedimentation at recipient site RT2 compared to the other monitored site at YTW. Although no apparent relationship was evident between high sedimentation and the high coral PM, a possible detrimental effect from sedimentation on the translocated corals at the recipient site cannot be ruled out.

In conclusion, the ad-hoc dive surveys of natural corals nearer to the 3RS project site indicate that the relatively high PM levels identified in control and translocated corals at YTW in April 2017 are unlikely to be related to 3RS marine works activities.  Various other potential causes of the high PM have been evaluated, however, it is not possible to single out one specific cause of the identified increased coral PM levels.  From all of the investigation work undertaken, it seems that the relatively high PM levels identified in April 2017 are most likely to have been caused by an interplay of environmental factors, rather than one single factor.

2.11    Review of the Key Assumptions Adopted in the EIA Report

With reference to Appendix E of the Manual, it is noted that the key assumptions adopted in approved EIA report for the construction phase are still valid and no major changes are involved. The environmental mitigation measures recommended in the approved EIA Report remain applicable and shall be implemented in undertaking construction works for the Project.

 

3              Report on Non-compliance, Complaints, Notifications of Summons and Prosecutions

3.1         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.

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

3.2.1      Complaints

One environmental-related complaint on material dumping from construction vessel of Contract 3205 was received on 24 November 2017. Investigation was conducted by the ET in accordance with the Manual and the Complaint Management Plan of the Project. The anonymous complainant did not provide any specific information (e.g. date/time) on the case or any details of the vessel(s) and materials (e.g. name of vessel, description or characteristic of vessel, type of materials etc.). During the ET’s weekly and ad-hoc site inspections, it was observed that the concerned Contractor had provided sufficient waste disposal facilities including chemical waste storage area on each barge with regular collection for disposal. No observation relating to illegal dumping was found. ET reminded the concerned Contractor and other DCM Contractors to continue implementing proper waste handling procedures and conducting relevant on-site training for all frontline staff.

3.2.2      Notifications of Summons or Status of Prosecution

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

3.3        Cumulative Statistics

Cumulative statistics on non-compliance, complaints, notifications of summons and status of prosecutions are summarized in Table 3.1. Cumulative statistics on breach of Action or Limit Level for environmental monitoring are summarized in Table 3.2.

Table 3.1: Statistics for Non-compliance, Complaints, Notifications of Summons and Prosecution

Reporting Period

Cumulative Statistics

 

Non-compliance

Complaints

Notifications of Summons

Prosecutions

This reporting period

0

1

0

0

From 28 December 2015 to end of the reporting period

0

8

1

0

 

Table 3.2: Statistics for Breach of Action or Limit Level for the Environmental Monitoring

 

 

Total No. in the Reporting Period

Total No. since the Project Commenced

1-hr TSP

Action Level

0

0

 

Limit Level

0

0

Noise

Action Level

0

0

 

Limit Level

0

0

Waste

Action Level

0

0

 

Limit Level

0

0

Water

Action Level

0

0

 

Limit Level

0

0

CWD

Action Level

0

0

 

Limit Level

0

0

Remark: Exceedances, which are not project related, are not shown in this table.


 

4        Conclusion and Recommendation

In this quarterly period from 1 October 2017 to 31 December 2017, the EM&A programme has been implemented as planned, including 96 sets of air quality measurements, 65 sets of construction noise measurements, 39 sets of water quality measurements, 6 complete sets of vessel line transect surveys and 15 days of land-based theodolite tracking survey effort for CWD monitoring, 3 rounds of terrestrial ecology monitoring, as well as environmental site inspections and waste monitoring for the Project’s 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, laying of sand blanket, seawall construction, and PVD installation. Land-side works included HDD works, site office establishment, cable ducting works, concrete removal works, piling, and excavation works.

Monitoring results of construction dust, construction noise, construction waste, CWD, and coral post-translocation did not trigger any corresponding Action and Limit Levels in the reporting period. All site observations made by the ET were recorded in the site inspection checklists and passed to the contractor together with the recommended follow-up actions.

For water quality, the water quality monitoring results for DO, turbidity, and total alkalinity 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 SS, chromium, and nickel, some of the testing results triggered the relevant Action or Limit Levels in the reporting period, and the corresponding investigations were conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded that the cases were not due to the Project; hence, no adverse impact was introduced to all water quality sensitive receivers.

In total, 2,336 ferry movements between HKIA SkyPier and Zhuhai / Macau were audited in the reporting period. All HSFs travelled through the SCZ with average speed within 15 knots, which complied with the SkyPier Plan. Seven ferry movements had minor deviations from the diverted route during the reporting period. ET investigated the deviation cases and confirmed that all of them were related to public safety or emergency situations, except two cases that the captains found difficulty to follow the normal route due to AIS failure. The ferry operator was advised to investigate the reason for the AIS failure and check the AIS system to ensure that accurate data points should be received.

Between October and December 2017, ET conducted bi-weekly audit of the MSS to ensure the system recorded all deviation cases accurately and the contractors fully complied with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV. A total of nine skipper training workshops were held by ET between October and December 2017 for captains of construction vessels associated with 3RS contracts. Another nine skipper training workshops were held by contractors’ Environmental Officers and competency tests were conducted subsequently with the trained captains by ET.

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 in accordance with the plan. On the implementation of DEZ Plan, dolphin observers were deployed for continuous monitoring of the DEZ by the 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 was one record of dolphin sighting within the DEZ of DCM works in this reporting period. Audits of acoustic decoupling for construction vessels were also carried out by ET.

The recommend