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

Construction Phase Quarterly EM&A Report No.14 (1 April to 30 June 2019)

August 2019

 

 

 

355482

06/15/13

A

 

 

 

 

Mott MacDonald

 

 

 

 

 

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     Environmental Site Inspection

2.7     Audit of SkyPier High Speed Ferries

2.8     Audit of Construction and Associated Vessels

2.9     Coral Post-Translocation Monitoring

2.10    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 7

Table 1.2: Contact Information of the Project 9

Table 1.3: Summary of Status for All Environmental Aspects under the Updated EM&A Manual 10

Table 2.1: Impact Air Quality Monitoring Stations  13

Table 2.2: Percentage of Air Quality Monitoring Results within Action and Limit Levels  13

Table 2.3: General Meteorological Condition During Impact Air Quality Monitoring  13

Table 2.4: Impact Noise Monitoring Stations  14

Table 2.5: Percentage of Noise Monitoring Results within Action and Limit Levels  14

Table 2.6: General Meteorological Condition During Impact Noise Monitoring  15

Table 2.7: Monitoring Locations and Parameters for Impact Water Quality Monitoring  15

Table 2.8: Action and Limit Levels for General Water Quality Monitoring and Regular DCM Monitoring  16

Table 2.9: The Control and Impact Stations during Flood Tide and Ebb Tide for General Water Quality Monitoring and Regular DCM Monitoring  17

Table 2.10: Percentage of Water Quality Monitoring Results within Action and Limit Levels  18

Table 2.11: General Weather Condition and Sea Condition During Impact Water Quality Monitoring  18

Table 2.12: Summary of DO (Surface and Middle) Results Triggering Action or Limit Level (Mid-Ebb Tide) 18

Table 2.13: Summary of DO (Bottom) Results Triggering Action or Limit Level (Mid-Ebb Tide) 19

Table 2.14: Summary of DO (Surface and Middle) Results Triggering Action or Limit Level (Mid-Flood Tide) 19

Table 2.15: Summary of DO (Bottom) Results Triggering Action or Limit Level (Mid-Flood Tide) 19

Table 2.16: Summary of Nickel Results Triggering Action or Limit Level (Mid-Ebb Tide) 19

Table 2.17: Summary of Nickel Results Triggering Action or Limit Level (Mid-Flood Tide) 19

Table 2.18: Action and Limit Levels for Construction Waste  20

Table 2.19: Construction Waste Statistics  21

Table 2.20: Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey Station Details  21

Table 2.21: Derived Values of Action Level and Limit Level for Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring  22

Table 2.22: Summary of Number of CWD Sightings and Number of Dolphins for the Same Quarter Last Year, Previous Quarter, and Current Reporting Period  23

Table 2.23: Summary of Monthly and Running Quarterly STG and ANI of Chinese White Dolphin for the Same Quarter Last Year, Previous Quarter, and Current Reporting Period  25

Table 2.24: Summary of Photo Identification  29

Table 2.25: Summary of Survey Effort and CWD Group of Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey  30

Table 2.26: Summary of the 8th Post-Translocation Monitoring Survey  35

Table 3.1: Summary of Environmental Complaints  37

Table 3.2: Statistics for Valid Exceedances for the Environmental Monitoring  38

Table 3.3: Statistics for Non-compliance, Complaints, Notifications of Summons and Prosecution  38

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figures

Figure 1.1

Locations of Key Construction Activities

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

 

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

EMIS

Environmental Mitigation Implementation Schedule

EP

Environmental Permit

EPD

Environmental Protection Department

ET

Environmental Team

FCZ

Fish Culture Zone

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

Updated 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

SCZ

Speed Control Zone

SCLKCMP

Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park

SS

Suspended Solids

STG

Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphin Sightings

SWL

Southwest Lantau

The Manual

The Updated EM&A Manual

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

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 14th 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 April 2019 to 30 June 2019.  

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, marine filling, seawall construction, and prefabricated vertical drain (PVD) installation. Land-side works involved mainly foundation and substructure work for Terminal 2 expansion, modification and tunnel work for Automated People Mover (APM) and Baggage Handling System (BHS), and preparation work for utilities, with activities include site establishment, site office construction, road and drainage works, cable ducting, demolition, piling, and excavation works.

EM&A Activities Conducted in the Reporting Period

The 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

96

Noise monitoring

52

Water quality monitoring

38

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

6

Land-based theodolite tracking survey effort for CWD monitoring

9

Additional coral post-translocation 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 activities of the Project in the reporting period did not introduce adverse impacts to the sensitive receivers.

Snapshots of Good Environmental Practices in the Reporting Period

A picture containing ground, outdoor, building

Description automatically generated

A picture containing indoor, table, wall, electronics

Description generated with very high confidence

 

 

Water mist spraying machine deployed to suppress potential fugitive dust emission

Eco-enhancement designs for concrete seawall blocks

Video recording system to monitor movements of C&D waste

Key examples of good site practices implemented in the Project are highlighted here:

1.     Water mist spraying machine was deployed at excavated area by a contractor to suppress potential fugitive dust emission.

2.     Eco-enhancement designs have been incorporated into the concrete seawall blocks for installation along the artificial seawall to facilitate and promote colonisation of intertidal and sub-tidal fauna.

3.     Video recording systems were installed by some contractors at major vehicular entrance/exits to monitor all movement of trucks carrying C&D waste.

Summary Findings of the EM&A Programme

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

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

The water quality monitoring results for turbidity, total alkalinity, SS, and chromium obtained during the reporting period were within the corresponding Action and Limit Levels stipulated in the EM&A programme. Relevant investigation and follow-up actions will be conducted according to the EM&A programme if the corresponding Action and Limit Levels are triggered. For dissolved oxygen (DO) and nickel, some testing results triggered the relevant Action or Limit Levels, and the corresponding investigations were conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded that the case was not related to the Project. To conclude, the construction activities in the reporting period did not introduce adverse impact to all water quality sensitive receivers.

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 regarding suspected open burning at airport runway, outlying island was received on 12 April 2019.

ET investigated all work contracts that carried out construction activities at or near the alleged area. Based on information provided by contractors, no open burning activities were carried out in the period of 3 to 10 April 2019. The case was considered closed.

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

Remarks:

^Only triggering of Action or Limit Level found 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 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. 42.

1.2      Scope of this Report

This is the 14th 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 April 2019 to 30 June 2019.

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

Daniel Sum

2585 8495

Independent Environmental Checker (IEC)

(AECOM Asia Company Limited)

Independent Environmental Checker

Jackel Law

3922 9376

 

Deputy Independent Environmental Checker

Roy Man

3922 9141

 

 

Advanced Works:

 

 

 

Party

Position

Name

Telephone

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:

Party

Position

Name

Telephone

Contract 3201 DCM (Package 1)

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

Project Director

Tsugunari Suzuki

9178 9689

Environmental Officer

Hiu Yeung Tang

 

6329 3513

Contract 3202 DCM (Package 2)

(Samsung-BuildKing Joint Venture)

Project Manager

Ilkwon Nam  

9643 3117

Contract 3203 DCM (Package 3)

(Sambo E&C Co., Ltd.)

Project Manager

Eric Kan

9014 6758

Contract 3204 DCM (Package 4)

(CRBC-SAMBO Joint Venture)

Project Manager

 

Kyung-Sik Yoo

 

9683 8697

 

Contract 3205 DCM (Package 5)

(Bachy Soletanche - Sambo Joint Venture)

Deputy Project Director

Min Park

9683 0765

Environmental Officer

Lawrence Chan

5107 5961

 

Reclamation Works:

 

 

 

Party

Position

Name

Telephone

Contract 3206

Main Reclamation Works (ZHEC-CCCC-CDC Joint Venture)

Project Manager

Kim Chuan Lim

3763 1509

Environmental Officer

Kwai Fung Wong

3763 1452

 

Airfield Works:

Party

Position

Name

Telephone

Contract 3301 North Runway Crossover Taxiway

(FJT-CHEC-ZHEC Joint Venture)

Deputy Project Director

Kin Hang Chung

9800 0048

Environmental Officer

Nelson Tam

9721 3942

Contract 3302 Eastern Vehicular Tunnel Advance Works

(China Road and Bridge Corporation)

 

Project Manager

Wan Cheung Lee

6100 6075

Environmental Officer

Wilmer Ng

3919 9421

Contract 3303 Third Runway and Associated Works

(SAPR Joint Venture)

Project Manager

Steven Meredith

6109 1813

Environmental Officer

Pan Fong

9436 9435

 

Third Runway Concourse and Integrated Airport Centres Works:

Party

Position

Name

Telephone

Contract 3402 New Integrated Airport Centres

Enabling Works

(Wing Hing Construction Co., Ltd.)

Contract Manager

Michael Kan

9206 0550

Environmental Officer

Lisa He

5374 3418

 

Terminal 2 Expansion Works:

Party

Position

Name

Telephone

Contract 3501 Antenna Farm and Sewage Pumping Station

(Build King Construction Ltd.)

Project Manager

Vincent Kwan

9833 1313

Environmental Officer

Edward Tam

9287 8270

Contract 3502 Terminal 2 APM Depot Modification Works

(Build King Construction Ltd.)

Project Manager

David Ng

9010 7871

Environmental Officer

Chun Pong Chan

9187 7118

Contract 3503 Terminal 2 Foundation and Substructure Works

(Leighton – Chun Wo Joint Venture)

Construction Manager

Eric Wu

3973 1718

Environmental Officer

Stephen Tsang

5508 6361

 

 

 

Automated People Mover (APM) Works:

Party

Position

Name

Telephone

Contract 3602 Existing APM System Modification Works

(Niigata Transys Co., Ltd.)

Project Manager

Kunihiro Tatecho

9755 0351

Environmental Officer

Arthur Wong

9170 3394

 

Baggage Handling System (BHS) Works:

Party

Position

Name

Telephone

Contract 3603 3RS Baggage Handling System (VISH Consortium)

Project Manager

Andy Ng

9102 2739

Environmental Officer

Eric Ha

9215 3432

 

Airport Support Infrastructure and Logistic Works:

Party

Position

Name

Telephone

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, marine filling, seawall construction, and prefabricated vertical drain (PVD) installation. Land-side works involved mainly foundation and substructure work for Terminal 2 expansion, modification and tunnel work for Automated People Mover (APM) and Baggage Handling System (BHS), and preparation work for utilities, with activities include site establishment, site office construction, road and drainage works, cable ducting, demolition of existing facilities, piling, and excavation works.

The locations of the key construction activities are presented in Figure 1.1.

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.

The terrestrial ecological monitoring at Sheung Sha Chau was completed in January 2019.

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

The post-translocation monitoring programme according to the Coral Translocation Plan was completed in April 2018.

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

 

 

Landscape and Visual Plan

At least 3 months before the commencement of construction works on the formed land of the Project.

The Landscape & Visual Plan was submitted to EPD under EP Condition 2.18

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

Dolphin Exclusion Zone (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, landscape & 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 post-translocation monitoring programme has been undertaken and completed in April 2018. Two additional monitoring surveys (in accordance with Detailed Coral Translocation Report) scheduled in October 2018 and April 2019 have also been completed. This quarterly report presents the results of the final round of additional monitoring survey.

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 trainings and regular environmental management meetings were conducted during the reporting period which are summarized as below:

    Four skipper trainings provided by ET;

    Twenty-two environmental management meetings for EM&A review with works contracts;

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.

Table 2.1: Impact Air Quality Monitoring Stations

Monitoring Station

Location

Action Level (mg/m3)

Limit Level (mg/m3)

AR1A

Man Tung Road Park

306

500

AR2

Village House at Tin Sum

298

2.1.2      Summary of Monitoring Results

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

Table 2.2: Percentage of Air Quality Monitoring Results within Action and Limit Levels

 

AR1A

AR2

Apr 2019

100.0%

100.0%

May 2019

100.0%

100.0%

Jun 2019

100.0%

100.0%

Overall

100.0%

100.0%

Note: The percentages are calculated by dividing the number of monitoring results within their corresponding Action and Limit Levels by the total number of monitoring results.

All monitoring results were within their corresponding Action and Limit Levels at all monitoring stations in the reporting period.

General meteorological conditions in the last month of the previous quarter and this reporting period were recorded and summarized in Table 2.3.

Table 2.3: General Meteorological Condition During Impact Air Quality Monitoring

 

Weather

Dominant Wind Direction

Mar 2019

Sunny to Cloudy

Southwest

Apr 2019

Sunny to Rainy

East or Southwest

May 2019

Sunny to Rainy

Southwest

Jun 2019

Sunny to Cloudy

Southwest

2.1.3      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 was effective and there was no adverse impact attributable to the Project activities.

2.2      Noise Monitoring

Impact noise monitoring was conducted at four representative monitoring stations once per week during 0700 and 1900 in the reporting period. The locations of monitoring stations are described in Table 2.4 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 2.4 for reference.

Table 2.4: Impact Noise Monitoring Stations

Monitoring Station

Location

Action Level

Limit Level

NM1A

Man Tung Road Park

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

75 dB(A)

NM4

Ching Chung Hau Po Woon Primary School

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

NM5

Village House in Tin Sum

75 dB(A)

NM6

House No. 1, Sha Lo Wan

75 dB(A)

Note:

 (i) Reduced to 70dB(A) for school and 65dB(A) during school examination periods at NM4. School examination and Territory-wide System Assessment (TSA) took place from 31 May to 6 June and from 11 to 12 June in this reporting period respectively.

2.2.2      Summary of Monitoring Results

The noise monitoring results in the reporting period are summarized in Table 2.5 and the graphical plot is presented in Appendix C.

Table 2.5: Percentage of Noise Monitoring Results within Action and Limit Levels

 

NM1A

NM4

NM5

NM6

Apr 2019

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

May 2019

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

Jun 2019

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

Overall

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

Note: The percentages are calculated by dividing the number of monitoring results within their corresponding Action and Limit Levels by the total number of monitoring results.

No complaints were received from any sensitive receiver that triggered the Action Level. All monitoring results were also within the corresponding Limit Levels at all monitoring stations in the reporting period.

General meteorological conditions in the last month of the previous quarter and this reporting period were recorded and summarized in Table 2.6.

Table 2.6: General Meteorological Condition During Impact Noise Monitoring

 

Weather

Mar 2019

Sunny to Cloudy

Apr 2019

Sunny to Cloudy

May 2019

Sunny to Drizzle

Jun 2019

Sunny to Cloudy

2.2.3      Conclusion

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

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 23 water quality monitoring stations, comprising 12 impact (IM) stations, 8 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 2.7 describes the details of the monitoring stations. Figure 2.2 shows the locations of the monitoring stations.

Table 2.7: Monitoring Locations and Parameters for Impact Water Quality Monitoring

Monitoring Station

Description

Coordinates

Parameters

 

 

Easting

Northing

 

C1

Control Station

804247

815620

General Parameters

DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS

 

DCM Parameters

Total Alkalinity, Heavy Metals(2)

C2

Control Station

806945

825682

C3(3)

Control Station

817803

822109

IM1

Impact Station

807132

817949

IM2

Impact Station

806166

818163

IM3

Impact Station

805594

818784

IM4

Impact Station

804607

819725

IM5

Impact Station

804867

820735

IM6

Impact Station

805828

821060

IM7

Impact Station

806835

821349

IM8

Impact Station

808140

821830

IM9

Impact Station

808811

822094

IM10

Impact Station

809794

822385

IM11

Impact Station

811460

822057

IM12

Impact Station

812046

821459

SR1A(1)

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

812660

 

819977

General Parameters

DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS

SR2(3)

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

814166

821463

General Parameters

DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS

 

DCM Parameters

Total Alkalinity, Heavy Metals(2)(4)

SR3

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

807571

822147

General Parameters

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)

811623

820390

 

Notes:

(1)    With the operation of HKBCF, water quality monitoring at SR1A station was commenced on 25 October 2018.

(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 2.8. The control and IM stations during flood tide and ebb tide for general water quality monitoring and regular DCM monitoring are presented in Table 2.9.

Table 2.8: 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 SR1A & 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 SR1A

 

 

 

SS (mg/l)

33

42

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 2.9: 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

SR21

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

Note:

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 within their corresponding Action and Limit Levels in the reporting period are presented in Table 2.10. The weather and sea conditions in the last month of the previous quarter and this reporting period were recorded and summarized in Table 2.11.

Table 2.10: Percentage of Water Quality Monitoring Results within Action and Limit Levels

 

General Water Quality Monitoring

Regular DCM Monitoring

DO

(Surface and Middle)

DO

(Bottom)

SS

Turbidity

Alkalinity

Chromium

Nickel

Apr 2019

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

May 2019

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

Jun 2019

98.4%

96.1%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

99.3%

Overall

99.5%

98.7%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

99.8%

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

 

Table 2.11: General Weather Condition and Sea Condition During Impact Water Quality Monitoring

 

Weather

Sea Condition

Mar 2019

Sunny to Cloudy

Calm to Rough

Apr 2019

Sunny to Rainy

Calm to Rough

May 2019

Sunny to Rainy

Calm to Rough

Jun 2019

Sunny to Rainy

Calm to Rough

The monitoring results for SS, turbidity, total alkalinity, and chromium obtained in the reporting period were within their corresponding Action and Limit Levels stipulated in the EM&A programme. Relevant investigation and follow-up actions will be conducted according to the EM&A programme if the corresponding Action and Limit Levels are triggered. For DO and nickel, some of the testing results triggered the relevant Action or Limit Level in the reporting period, and investigations were conducted accordingly.

Summaries of results triggering Action or Limit Level for DO and nickel are presented in Table 2.12 to Table 2.17.  

Details of the investigation findings were presented in Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 42, which concluded that all results triggering the Action or Limit Level were not related to the Project.

Table 2.12: Summary of DO (Surface and Middle) 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

15/6/2019

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

D

D

 

 

 

 

 

D

27/6/2019

 

D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No. of result triggering Action or Limit Level

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

0

1

0

0

0

1

Table 2.13: Summary of DO (Bottom) 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

27/6/2019

 

 

D

D

 

 

 

 

 

 

D

D

 

 

D

D

 

D

29/6/2019

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

D

D

 

 

 

 

 

D

No. of result triggering Action or Limit Level

0

0

1

1

0

1

0

0

0

0

2

2

0

2

1

1

0

2

Table 2.14: Summary of DO (Surface and Middle) Results Triggering Action or Limit Level (Mid-Flood Tide)

IM1

IM2

IM3

IM4

IM5

IM6

IM7

IM8

IM9

IM10

IM11

IM12

SR2

SR3

SR4A

SR5A

SR6

SR7

25/6/2019

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No. of result triggering Action or Limit Level

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

Table 2.15: Summary of DO (Bottom) Results Triggering Action or Limit Level (Mid-Flood Tide)

IM1

IM2

IM3

IM4

IM5

IM6

IM7

IM8

IM9

IM10

IM11

IM12

SR2

SR3

SR4A

SR5A

SR6

SR7

25/6/2019

 

 

 

 

D

D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No. of result triggering Action or Limit Level

0

1

0

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Table 2.16: Summary of Nickel Results Triggering Action or Limit Level (Mid-Ebb Tide)

IM1

IM2

IM3

IM4

IM5

IM6

IM7

IM8

IM9

IM10

IM11

IM12

11/6/2019

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

D

 

No. of result triggering Action or Limit Level

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

Table 2.17: Summary of Nickel Results Triggering Action or Limit Level (Mid-Flood Tide)

IM1

IM2

IM3

IM4

IM5

IM6

IM7

IM8

IM9

IM10

IM11

IM12

11/6/2019

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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 within 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

 

Result triggered the Limit Level at monitoring station located upstream 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

 

Downstream 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 were within 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. 42, all cases 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 were followed.

Nevertheless, the non-project related triggers were attended to and 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 inspections and regular environmental management meetings. These include maintaining mitigation measures properly for reclamation works including DCM works, marine filling, seawall construction, and PVD installation as recommended in the Manual.

2.4      Waste Monitoring

In accordance with the Manual, 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 2.18.

Table 2.18: 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

Weekly 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.

Recommendations made by the ET included provision and maintenance of proper chemical waste storage area, as well as handling, segregation, and regular disposal of general refuse. The contractors had taken actions to implement the recommended measures.

Based on updated contractors’ information, summary of construction waste generated in the reporting period is presented in Table 2.19.

There were no complaints, non-compliance of the WMP, contract-specific WMPs, statutory and contractual requirements that triggered Action and Limit Levels in the reporting period.

Table 2.19: Construction Waste Statistics

 

C&D1 Material Stockpiled for Reuse or Recycle

(m3)

C&D Material Reused in the Project (m3)

C&D Material Reused in other Projects (m3)

C&D Material Transferred to Public Fill

(m3)

Chemical Waste

(kg)

Chemical Waste

(L)

General Refuse (tonne)

Apr 20192

10,184

5,748

5,184

5,598

90

13,200

432

May 20192

13,616

10,284

0

5,617

230

18,000

242

Jun 20192

9,982

4,684

339

5,570

150

15,400

354

Total

33,782

20,716

5,523

16,785

470

46,600

1,028

 

Notes:

1.     C&D refers to Construction and Demolition.

2.     Paper, metals and/or plastics were recycled in the reporting period.

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. Since January 2019, additional theodolite tracking surveys for one day at LKC station was conducted on a voluntary basis to collect supplementary information for the Project, such that a total of one tracking day at SC station and two tracking days at LKC station were conducted per month. The vessel survey transects followed the transect lines proposed in the Manual and 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 April to June 2019 are shown in Figure 2.3, whilst the land-based theodolite tracking survey stations are described in Table 2.20 and depicted in Figure 2.4. The location of the PAM device is shown in Figure 2.10.

Table 2.20: 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 Level 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 2.21.

Table 2.21: 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 April to June 2019 reporting period, a total of six sets of vessel line transect survey covering all transects in Northeast Lantau (NEL), Northwest Lantau (NWL), Airport West (AW), West Lantau (WL) and Southwest Lantau (SWL) survey areas were conducted at a frequency of twice per month, in each survey area.

A total of around 1,371 km of survey effort was collected from these surveys, with around 93.4% 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 April to June 2019, there were a total of 35 sightings of CWDs, with 135 dolphins sighted (Table 2.22). All these sightings were made during on-effort searches under favourable weather condition.

When breaking down the sightings by survey areas, 9 sightings with 22 dolphins, 20 sightings with 96 dolphins and 6 sightings with 17 dolphins were recorded in NWL, WL and SWL survey areas respectively during the current reporting period. No CWD was sighted in NEL or AW.

Compared with the last quarter (i.e. January to March 2019), there is an overall observable increase in terms of both number of CWD sightings and number of dolphins (increased by around 40% and 73% respectively). NWL, WL and SWL all showed increases in terms of both number of CWD sightings and number of dolphins, and such increases were most remarkable in NWL (excluding AW, number of CWD sightings and number of dolphins increased by around 125% and 144% respectively).

Compared with the same quarter of last year in 2018 (i.e. April to June 2018), there were an overall drop in both number of CWD sightings and number of dolphins by 20% and 5% respectively. The decrease is attributed to SWL waters with the number of CWD sightings and number of dolphins dropped by around 65% and 69% respectively. On the other hand, NWL showed increases in both numbers of sightings and dolphins by 50% and 10% respectively, while WL showed an increase in number of dolphins by 43%.

Table 2.22 below shows the comparison of the numbers of sightings and dolphins amongst the current reporting period, last quarter, and the same quarter of year 2018.

Table 2.22: Summary of Number of CWD Sightings and Number of Dolphins for the Same Quarter Last Year, Previous Quarter, and Current Reporting Period

 

Same Quarter of Last Year

Previous Reporting Period

Current Reporting Period

 

April to June 2018

January to March 2019

April to June 2019

NEL

0 (0)

0 (0)

0 (0)

NWL

6 (20)

4 (9)

9 (22)

AW

0 (0)

2 (10)

0 (0)

WL

21 (67)

16 (45)

20 (96)

SWL

17 (55)

3 (14)

6 (17)

Total

44 (142)

25 (78)

35 (135)

Note: Values in ( ) represent number of dolphins

The distribution of CWD sightings recorded from April to June 2019 is illustrated in Figure 2.5. In NWL, CWD sightings were clustered at three main locations including waters around Black Point, western and northwestern waters of Lung Kwu Chau and the southwestern corner of NWL survey area. In WL, CWD sightings were scattered from Tai O to Fan Lau. In SWL, most CWD sightings were all scattered along the coastal waters from Fan Lau to Lo Kei Wan. No CWD sightings were recorded in NEL or in close vicinity of the 3RS works area. Details of the sighting data are presented in Appendix C.

Figure 2.5: Sightings Distribution of Chinese White Dolphins from April to June 2019


Remarks: Please note that there are 35 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 on-effort dolphin sightings per 100 km survey effort (STG) and for the total on-effort number of dolphins per 100 km survey effort (ANI) in the whole survey area (i.e. NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL) for April, May and June 2019 are summarized in Table 2.23.

In this reporting period, the monthly STG increased slightly from April to June 2019 while the monthly ANI showed a slight decrease. Both running quarterly STG and ANI increased from April to June 2019. The running quarterly ANI returned to a level above the Action Level (9.35) in May 2019 after falling below the Action Level for four consecutive months from January to April 2019.

Compared with the previous reporting period, there are rebounds in both running quarterly STG (from 1.94 to 2.73) and running quarterly ANI (from 5.67 to 10.54). While comparing with the same quarter of last year (i.e. April to June 2018), the running quarterly STG decreased slightly from 3.19 to 2.73 but the running quarterly ANI remained relatively steady. Such decrease in the running quarterly STG is mainly caused by the observable decline in number of sightings in SWL survey area during the current reporting period as aforementioned in the CWD Sighting section.     

Table 2.23: Summary of Monthly and Running Quarterly STG and ANI of Chinese White Dolphin for the Same Quarter Last Year, Previous Quarter, and Current Reporting Period

 

Same Quarter of Last Year

Previous Reporting Period

Current Reporting Period

 

Apr 18

May 18

Jun 18

Jan 19

Feb 19

Mar 19

Apr 19

May 19

Jun 19

Monthly STG

3.38

1.90

4.48

2.47

1.47

1.89

2.86

2.33

3.02

Monthly ANI

11.28

4.51

17.36

5.69

3.43

7.81

10.78

10.72

10.07

Running Quarterly STG

4.18

3.04

3.19

2.96

1.87

1.94

2.10

2.37

2.73

Running Quarterly ANI

12.54

8.74

10.72

9.29

5.76

5.67

7.47

9.80

10.54

Note:    For detailed calculations of encounter rates STG and ANI, please refer to the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 40, 41 and 42.

Group Size

Between April and June 2019, the group size of CWD sightings ranged from 1 to 21 dolphins. The average group size of CWDs was 3.9 dolphins per group which is bigger than that of the last quarter which was 3.1. The average group size of CWDs in this reporting quarter is also bigger that of the same quarter of last year (3.2 dolphins per group).

In this reporting quarter, the number of CWD sightings with medium group size (i.e. 3-9 dolphins) was dominant. Amongst all 35 sightings, there were two sightings with large group size (i.e. 10 or more dolphins). The large CWD groups were sighted in WL. Sighting locations of CWD groups with different group sizes are depicted in Figure 2.6.

There were no distinct distribution patterns of small-sized (i.e. 1-2 dolphins) and medium-sized CWD groups observed in the current reporting period. The two large CWD groups recorded in the current reporting period were both encountered in WL around the waters between Yi O and Peaked Hill.

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

Remarks: Please note that there are 35 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 April to June 2019, 11 sightings of CWDs were recorded with feeding activities.  Two of these sightings were observed in association with operating fishing boats (pair trawler in WL and purse seiner in SWL).

The number of sightings with feeding recorded in the current reporting period is higher than the last reporting period (6 sightings involved feeding activities and 1 sighting with association with operating fishing boat from January to March 2019). Compared with the data in the same quarter of last year, number of CWD sightings with feeding activities is similar.

The sighting locations of CWDs engaged in different behaviours during the current 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 April to June 2019, 8 sightings of CWDs were recorded with the presence of mother-and-unspotted calf and/or mother-and-unspotted juvenile, which is more than the last reporting quarter (i.e. 3 sightings between January and March 2019). The number is also higher than the same quarter of last year (i.e. 5 sightings between April and June 2018). All these sightings were recorded in WL survey areas as shown in Figure 2.8.

Figure 2.8: Sighting Locations of Mother-calf Pairs


Photo Identification

During April to June 2019, a total number of 70 different CWD individuals were identified altogether for 91 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 70 different CWD individuals, 15 animals (i.e. NLMM016, NLMM039, NLMM070, SLMM002, SLMM030, SLMM034, WLMM007, WLMM039, WLMM043, WLMM063, WLMM069, WLMM076, WLMM078, WLMM079 and WLMM083) were sighted for more than once.

Four individuals including NLMM070, SLMM030, WLMM076 and WLMM079 were re-sighted in different survey areas during this reporting period. NLMM070 had cross-area movement between NWL and WL survey areas while the other three had cross-area movement between WL and SWL survey areas. The most frequently re-sighted individual in this reporting quarter was WLMM043 which has been encountered altogether for 6 times. The number of re-sighted CWD individuals is higher than that of the last reporting quarter, while the number of CWD individuals showing cross-area movement from April to June 2019 is slightly lower than that of the last reporting quarter.

A summary of photo identification works is presented in Table 2.24. Representative photos of the 70 identified individuals and figures depicting the sighting locations of the aforementioned 15 re-sighted individuals recorded in this reporting period are presented Appendix C.

Table 2.24: Summary of Photo Identification

Individual ID

Date of sighting

Sighting Group No.

Area

 

Individual
ID

Date of sighting

Sighting Group No.

Area

NLMM004

17-Apr-19

1

WL

WLMM027

18-Jun-19

2

SWL

NLMM006

15-May-19

3

NWL

WLMM030

3-Apr-19

3

WL

NLMM013

15-May-19

3

NWL

WLMM032

3-Apr-19

3

WL

NLMM016

3-Apr-19

2

WL

WLMM039

3-Apr-19

3

WL

17-Apr-19

4

WL

17-Apr-19

6

WL

14-May-19

1

WL

WLMM043

3-Apr-19

1

WL

NLMM019

19-Jun-19

1

NWL

17-Apr-19

1

WL

NLMM021

19-Jun-19

1

NWL

5

WL

NLMM027

19-Jun-19

1

NWL

14-May-19

1

WL

NLMM034

26-Jun-19

1

WL

6-Jun-19

2

WL

NLMM039

25-Apr-19

2

NWL

26-Jun-19

1

WL

15-May-19

1

NWL

WLMM046

17-Apr-19

3

WL

NLMM046

26-Jun-19

1

WL

WLMM052

26-Jun-19

1

WL

NLMM060

3-Apr-19

3

WL

WLMM054

3-Apr-19

3

WL

NLMM061

14-May-19

4

WL

WLMM056

3-Apr-19

3

WL

NLMM063

25-Apr-19

3

NWL

WLMM061

15-May-19

2

NWL

NLMM065

17-Apr-19

1

WL

WLMM063

3-Apr-19

3

WL

NLMM069

25-Apr-19

1

NWL

14-May-19

4

WL

NLMM070

25-Apr-19

1

NWL

WLMM068

6-Jun-19

1

WL

26-Jun-19

1

WL

WLMM069

3-Apr-19

3

WL

SLMM002

3-Apr-19

3

WL

14-May-19

4

WL

8-May-19

1

WL

WLMM070

14-May-19

3

WL

SLMM011

18-Jun-19

2

SWL

WLMM073

26-Jun-19

2

WL

SLMM014

3-Apr-19

3

WL

WLMM076

14-May-19

3

WL

SLMM022

3-Apr-19

3

WL

27-May-19

3

SWL

SLMM023

14-May-19

4

WL

WLMM078

27-May-19

3

SWL

SLMM025

26-Jun-19

2

WL

18-Jun-19

2

SWL

SLMM028

18-Jun-19

1

SWL

WLMM079

8-May-19

1

WL

SLMM030

14-May-19

3

WL

18-Jun-19

3

SWL

27-May-19

3

SWL

WLMM083

14-May-19

2

WL

SLMM034

3-Apr-19

3

WL

6-Jun-19

2

WL

8-May-19

1

WL

WLMM086

17-Apr-19

4

WL

14-May-19

5

WL

WLMM090

17-Apr-19

4

WL

SLMM045

14-May-19

4

WL

WLMM095

14-May-19

2

WL

SLMM049

14-May-19

4

WL

WLMM103

14-May-19

2

WL

SLMM050

3-Apr-19

3

WL

WLMM115

24-Apr-19

1

NWL

SLMM059

3-Apr-19

3

WL

WLMM118

17-Apr-19

6

WL

WLMM001

3-Apr-19

3

WL

WLMM120

3-Apr-19

3

WL

WLMM003

3-Apr-19

3

WL

WLMM122

26-Jun-19

1

WL

WLMM004

3-Apr-19

3

WL

WLMM127

25-Apr-19

1

NWL

WLMM005

14-May-19

4

WL

WLMM129

14-May-19

4

WL

WLMM006

14-May-19

2

WL

WLMM131

6-Jun-19

3

WL

WLMM007

3-Apr-19

3

WL

WLMM132

3-Apr-19

3

WL

8-May-19

1

WL

WLMM137

8-May-19

1

WL

WLMM009

14-May-19

2

WL

WLMM138

6-Jun-19

2

WL

WLMM019

17-Apr-19

2

WL

2.5.2.2            Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey

Survey Effort

During April to June 2019, a total of nine days of land-based theodolite tracking survey effort were completed, including six days on Lung Kwu Chau and three days on Sha Chau. In total, five CWD groups were tracked from the Lung Kwu Chau station while no CWD groups were tracked from the Sha Chau station, with an overall 0.09 CWD groups sighted per survey hour.

Information on survey effort and CWD groups sighted during land-based theodolite tracking surveys are presented in Table 2.25. Details on the survey effort and CWD groups tracked are presented in Appendix C. The first sighting locations of CWD groups tracked between April and June 2019 are shown in Figure 2.9.

Table 2.25: 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

April 2019

Lung Kwu Chau

2

12:00

1

0.08

Sha Chau

1

06:00

0

0

TOTAL

3

18:00

1

0.06

May 2019

Lung Kwu Chau

2

12:00

1

0.08

Sha Chau

1

06:00

0

0

TOTAL

3

18:00

1

0.06

June 2019

Lung Kwu Chau

2

12:00

3

0.25

Sha Chau

1

06:00

0

0

TOTAL

3

18:00

3

0.17

OVERALL

9

54:00

5

0.09

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

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, while data from the EAR intended primarily to supplement the data collected from the land-based theodolite tracking survey station on Sha Chau. In this reporting period, the EAR has been retrieved on 12 April and 24 May 2019 for data collection and subsequently redeployed. The EAR deployment is generally for 6 weeks prior to data retrieval for analysis. As the period of data collection and analysis takes more than four months, PAM results could not be reported in quarterly intervals but report for supplementing the annual CWD monitoring analysis.

2.5.2.4            Site Audit for CWD-related Mitigation Measures

During the reporting period, silt curtains were in place by the contractors for marine filling works (similar to the previous reporting period), 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 4 to 14 dolphin observation stations by the contractors for continuous monitoring of the DEZ by all contractors for DCM works, seawall construction, and PVD installation that were similar to the previous reporting period 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 677 individuals being trained and the training records were 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 or the DEZ in this reporting period. 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 2.7 and Section 2.8 respectively.

2.6      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. Besides, ad-hoc site inspections were conducted by ET and IEC if environmental problems were identified, or subsequent to receipt of an environmental complaint, or as part of the investigation work. These site inspections provided a direct means to reinforce the specified environmental protection requirements and pollution control measures in construction sites.

During site inspections, environmental situation, status of implementation of pollution control and mitigation measures were observed. Environmental documents and site records, including waste disposal record, maintenance record of environmental equipment, and relevant environmental permit and licences, were also checked on-site. Observations were recorded in the site inspection checklist and passed to the contractor together with the appropriate recommended mitigation measures where necessary in order to advise contractors on environmental improvement, awareness and on-site enhancement measures. The observations were made with reference to the following information during the site inspections:

·         The EIA and EM&A requirements;

·         Relevant environmental protection laws, guidelines, and practice notes;

·         The EP conditions and other submissions under the EP;

·         Monitoring results of EM&A programme;

·         Works progress and programme;

·         Proposal of individual works;

·         Contract specifications on environmental protection; and

·         Previous site inspection results.

Good site practices were implemented in the project to enhance environmental performance. Key examples are highlighted here:

1.     In order to reduce dust nuisance generated from construction activities, dust control measures, such as water spraying or covering with tarpaulin, have been implemented at all active works area and material stockpile site. To further improve the environmental performance at works area, one contractor also deployed mist spraying machines at excavated areas to further suppress fugitive dust emission.

2.     Eco-enhancement designs have been incorporated into the concrete seawall blocks for installation along the artificial seawall to facilitate and promote colonisation of intertidal and sub-tidal fauna. The eco-enhancement designs aim to provide areas for establishment of intertidal sessile species, as well as shelters for juvenile fishes and habitats for other marine fishes.

3.     All contractors have implemented trip ticket system for tracking the removal of C&D materials from construction site to disposal grounds. To further enhance the control measures, video recording systems were installed by some contractors at the major vehicular exits of construction site to monitor all movement of trucks carrying C&D waste before leaving the sites.

A picture containing ground, outdoor, building

Description automatically generated

A picture containing indoor, table, wall, electronics

Description generated with very high confidence

Water mist spraying machine deployed to suppress fugitive dust emission

Eco-enhancement designs for concrete seawall blocks

Video recording system to monitor movements of C&D waste

Besides, advices were given when necessary to ensure the construction workforce were familiar with relevant procedures, and to maintain good environmental performance on site. Regular toolbox talks on environmental issues were organized for the construction workforce by the contractors to ensure understanding and proper implementation of environmental protection and pollution control mitigation measures.

During the reporting period, implementation of recommended landscape and visual mitigation measures (CM1 – CM10) where applicable was monitored weekly in accordance with the Manual and no non-conformity was recorded. In case of non-conformity, specific recommendations will be made, and actions will be proposed according to the Event and Action Plan. The monitoring status is summarized in Appendix B.

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.

2.7      Audit of SkyPier High Speed Ferries

In total, 2,088 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 82 and 89, which fell within the maximum daily cap number of 125.

The average speeds of all HSFs travelling through the Speed Control Zone (SCZ) ranged from 8.4 to 14.1 knots. All HSFs travelled through the SCZ with average speed within 15 knots in compliance with the Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for High Speed Ferries of SkyPier (the SkyPier Plan).

Nine ferry movements were recorded with minor deviations from the diverted route. Notices of deviation were sent to the ferry operators and the cases were investigated. All the cases involved giving way to other vessels to ensure public safety, and the HSFs returned to the normal route following the SkyPier Plan as soon as practicable after the incidents. The summary of the SkyPier Plan monitoring result is presented in Graph 1.

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

Graph 1: Summary of SkyPier High Speed Ferries Monitoring Results

2.8      Audit of Construction and Associated Vessels

On the implementation of the updated Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for Construction and Associated Vessels (MTRMP-CAV), the Marine Surveillance System (MSS) automatically recorded deviation cases such as speeding, entering no entry zone, and not traveling through the designated gates. 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 plans 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.

During the reporting period, 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 four skipper training workshops were held by ET during the reporting period with seven 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 15 skipper training workshops were held with 23 captains by contractors’ Environmental Officers and competency tests were conducted subsequently with the trained captains by ET.

2.9      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 and was completed in April 2018. Two additional monitoring surveys (beyond the CTP requirement) scheduled in October 2018 and April 2019 were proposed in the Detailed Coral Translocation Report. Results of the 1st round of additional monitoring survey (7th post-translocation monitoring survey) conducted in October 2018 were presented in Section 2.10 of the Construction Phase Quarterly EM&A Report No. 12. This quarterly report presents the results of the final round of additional monitoring survey (8th post-translocation monitoring survey) completed in April 2019 (Table 2.26 below).

Table 2.26: Summary of the 8th Post-Translocation Monitoring Survey

 

General Health Conditions (a)

% Change in Partial Mortality (b)(c)

Triggering Action Level(d)

Triggering Limit Level(e)

Eighth Round of Survey in April 2019

Control gorgonian corals (tagged)

0-4

(Average:1.8)

<25% change for 11.1% of the tagged corals and 25% for 83% of the tagged corals

(Average PM: 68.6%)

No

No

Translocated gorgonian corals (tagged)

0-4

(Average:1.9)

<25% change for 3.4% of the tagged corals and 25% for 97% of the tagged corals

(Average PM: 75.4%)

Notes:

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

(b)     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. As with previous Quarterly EM&A Reports, the partial mortality is calculated based on baseline total length of each colony.

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

(d)     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.

(e)     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.

 

Based on the results of the eighth post-translocation monitoring, ≥25% change in partial mortality was recorded on 57 out of 59 translocated corals (97% of the tagged translocated coral colonies that were studied). For control corals, ≥25% change was recorded on 15 out of 18 control corals (83% of the tagged control coral colonies that were studied) and no change was recorded on one control coral. The health condition ranged from 0 to 4 for both control and translocated coral. Action and Limit Levels were not triggered during this round of monitoring.

As the average partial mortality recorded during the 7th and 8th monitoring is similar and the average general health condition had remained between 1.5 and 2.5 for both rounds of monitoring, the coral condition appear to have been stabilized after the damage caused by typhoon Mangkhut in September 2018.

2.10    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 compliant was received in the reporting period. All environmental complaints were attended to and investigation was conducted by the ET in accordance with the Manual and the Complaint Management Plan. The summary of the complaints and analysis is presented Table 3.1.

Table 3.1: Summary of Environmental Complaints

Date of Complaint Received

Details

Analysis / Remedial Actions

Status

12 Apr 2019

A complaint was received regarding suspected open burning at Airport Runway, Outlying Island.

Investigation was conducted by the ET in accordance with the Manual and the Complaint Management Plan of the Project. Exact location could not be identified from the photographic and video record provided by the anonymous complainant. Specific information (e.g. date and time) were also not provided.

ET investigated all work contracts that carried out construction activities at or near the alleged area. Based on information provided by the contractors, no open burning or related activities were carried out in the period of 3 to 10 April 2019. As a side note, based on information provided by AAHK, a small fire incident occurred on a piece of newly reclaimed land of the 3RS Project on 10 April 2019, which confirmed was not a case of open burning on site. The above issue also did not cause any impact on the implementation of environmental mitigation measures under the Project.

In view of the findings, there was no evidence suggesting that open burning activity was carried out under the Project in the concerned period. ET will remind all contractors that open burning of construction waste was strictly prohibited and the contractors shall follow the corresponding statutory regulations.

Closed