Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System |
Construction
Phase Monthly EM&A Report No.8 |
Contents
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 commencement of initial reclamation works
was announced on 1 August 2016. This is the 8th Construction
Phase Monthly EM&A Report for the Project which summarizes the monitoring
results and audit findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting
period from 1 August 2016 to 31 August 2016.
Key
Construction Activities in the Reporting Period
The key construction activities of the Project
carried out in the reporting month were related to Contract P560(R) Aviation
Fuel Pipeline Diversion Works (Contract P560(R)) which involved drilling a
pilot hole using Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD), stockpiling of
excavated materials from HDD operation and site clearance and preparation works
at Sheung Sha Chau. The key activities of the four DCM contracts involved
mobilization and off-site plant fabrication, and CLP cable diversion enabling
work involved site preparation works. Site investigation works were also
continued during the reporting period.
EM&A
Activities Conducted in the Reporting Period
The monthly EM&A programme was undertaken
in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual of the Project. During the
reporting period, the ET conducted thirty-six sets of
air quality measurements, twenty-five sets of construction noise measurements,
twelve sets of water quality measurements, one ecological monitoring on Sheung
Sha Chau Island, two complete sets of small vessel line-transect surveys and
five days of land-based theodolite tracking survey effort for Chinese White
Dolphin (CWD) monitoring as well as environmental site inspections, landscape
& visual and waste monitoring for the Project’s construction works.
On the implementation of the SkyPier Plan, the
daily movements of all SkyPier High Speed Ferries (HSFs) in August 2016
were 10 to 94 daily movements, which are within the maximum daily cap of 125
daily movements. A total of 809 HSF movements under SkyPier Plan were
recorded. All HSFs had travelled through the SCZ with prevailing speed under 15
knots (5.7 to 14.6 knots) in compliance with the SkyPier Plan. Seven ferry
movements had minor deviation from the diverted route. Four of the cases were
due to public safety and the remaining three cases are under investigation. In
summary, the ET and IEC have audited the HSF movements against the SkyPier Plan
and conducted follow up investigation or actions accordingly.
On the implementation of the Marine Travel
Routes and Management Plan for Construction and Associated Vessel (MTRMP-CAV),
skipper training workshops have been held with concerned captains of
construction vessels to familiarise them with the requirements of the
Plan. The ET is working with contractors to familiarise with the
requirements of the MTRMP-CAV .
Results
of Impact Monitoring
Four DCM contracts were awarded in August 2016.
The key activity of the four DCM contracts was mobilization and off-site plant
fabrication. Water quality monitoring and CWD monitoirng were conducted as
scheduled although no marine construction works was carried during the
reporting period.
All 1-hour total suspended particulate (TSP),
noise and waste were completed in the reporting period for the land-based
construction activities. No exceedance of the Action/ Limit Levels was
recorded. Monthly ecological monitoring on Sheung Sha Chau Island confirmed
that there was no construction works at Sheung Sha Chau and no direct
encroachment or disturbance to the identified egretry area.
Summary of Upcoming Key Issues
Major site activities anticipated in the next
reporting period for the Project will be under the following contracts
including:
Advanced
works Contract:
Contract
P560 (R) Aviation Fuel Pipeline Diversion Works
● HDD pilot hole drilling;
● Stockpiling of excavated materials
from HDD operation; and
● Site clearance and construction work
at Sheung Sha Chau.
DCM
Contracts:
Contract
3201 to 3204 Deep Cement Mixing Works
● Off-site plant fabrication; and
● Site
survey and investigation.
Other Contracts:
Contract 3213 CLP Cable Diversion Enabling
Works
● Land-based site preparation works.
Site investigation works will
continue. The key environmental
issues will be associated with dust, noise generation, water quality,
construction waste management, CWD, ecological impact on Sheung Sha Chau. The
implementation of required mitigation measures by the Contractor will be
monitored by the ET.
|
|
|
Land-based CWD Monitoring by Theodolite |
Construction Vessel Skipper Training |
Skypier Plan Briefing at Integrated Airport Centre |
Summary
Table
The
following table summarizes the key findings of the EM&A programme during
the reporting period from 1 to 31 August 2016:
|
Yes |
No |
Details |
Analysis / Recommendation / Remedial Actions |
Breaches of Limit Level^ |
|
ü |
No exceedance of project-related limit level was recorded. |
Nil |
Breaches of Action Level^ |
|
ü |
No exceedance of project-related action level was recorded. |
Nil |
Complaints Received |
|
ü |
No construction activities related complaints were received. |
Nil |
Notification of any summons and status of prosecutions |
|
ü |
Neither notifications of summons nor prosecution were received. |
Nil |
Changes that affect the EM&A |
|
ü |
There were no changes to the construction works that may affect the EM&A |
Nil |
Remarks:
^ only exceedance of action/ limit level related to Project works will be
highlighted.
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.
The Manual is available on the Project’s dedicated website (accessible at: http://env.threerunwaysystem.com/en/index.html).
AECOM Asia Company Limited (AECOM) was employed by AAHK as the Independent
Environmental Checker (IEC) for the Project.
The Project covers the expansion of the
existing airport into a three-runway system (3RS) with key project components
comprising land formation of about 650 ha and all associated facilities and
infrastructure including taxiways, aprons, aircraft stands, a passenger
concourse, an expanded Terminal 2, all related airside and landside works and
associated ancillary and supporting facilities. The existing submarine
aviation fuel pipelines and submarine power cables also require diversion as
part of the works.
Construction of the Project is to proceed in
the general order of diversion of the submarine aviation fuel pipelines,
diversion of the submarine power cables, land formation, and construction of
infrastructure, followed by construction of superstructures.
The land-based construction works of the
Contract P560(R) Aviation Fuel Pipeline Diversion Works (Contract P560(R))
commenced on 28 December 2015 on the airport island.
The commencement of initial reclamation works
was announced on 1 August 2016. The updated overall phasing
programme of all construction works was presented in Appendix A of the
Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 7. Contracts awarded in August
2016 are presented in Appendix
A.
This is the 8th Construction Phase
Monthly EM&A Report for the Project which summarizes the key findings of
the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 to 31 August 2016.
The Project’s organization structure remained
unchanged during the reporting month. The Project’s organization structure can
be referred to Appendix B of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report
No.1. Contact details
of the key personnel have been updated and is presented in Table 1.1.
Table 1.1: Contact Information of
Key Personnel
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Project Manager’s Representative (Airport Authority Hong Kong) |
Senior 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 |
Joanne Tsoi |
3922 9423 |
Advanced Works Contract: |
|
|
|
Contract P560(R) Aviation Fuel Pipeline Diversion Works (Langfang Huayuan Mechanical and Electrical Engineering Co., Ltd.) |
Project Manager
|
Shih Wei
|
2117 0566
|
|
Environmental Coordinator |
Ivy Tam
|
2151 2090
|
DCM Works Contracts: |
|
|
|
Contract 3201 DCM (Package 1) (Penta-Ocean-China State-Dong-Ah Joint Venture) |
Project Director
|
Mr. Tsugunari SUZUKI
|
9178 9689 |
|
Environmental Officer
|
Mr. Kanny CHO
|
9019 1962 |
Contract 3202 DCM (Package 2) (Samsung-BuildKing Joint Venture) |
Project Manager
|
Mr. Ilkwon Nam
|
9643 3117 |
|
Environmental Officer
|
Mr. Dickson Mak
|
9525 8408 |
Contract 3203 DCM (Package 3) (Sambo E&C Co.,Ltd) |
Deputy Project Manager
|
Mr. Park Seong Jae
|
9683 8693 |
|
Environmental Officer
|
Mr. Leung Min Pong
|
9203 5820 |
Contract 3204 DCM (Package 4) (CRBC-SAMBO Joint Venture) |
Project Manager
|
Mr. Allan Tam
|
9703 0256
|
|
Environmental Officer
|
Mr. David Man |
6421 3238 |
Other Works contract: |
|
|
|
Contract 3213 CLP Cable Diversion Enabling Works (Wing Hing Construction Company) |
Project Manager |
Mr. Wyman Lau |
6112 9753 |
During the reporting period, no construction
work was carried out by DCM works contracts and CLP cable diversion enabling
works contract. Key construction activities of the Project were related to the
Contract P560(R) Aviation Fuel Pipeline Diversion Works (Contract P560(R))
which involved drilling of HDD pilot hole at the HDD launching site located at
the west part of the airport and site clearance and preparation works at Sheung
Sha Chau.
The excavated materials from HDD operation were
stockpiled at the stockpile area located near Chun Ming Road adjacent to
Tradeport Logistic Centre on the airport island.
The HDD launching site and stockpiling area are
around 3 km and 900m away respectively from the nearest air and noise sensitive
receivers in Tung Chung and the villages in North Lantau. The locations of the
works areas are presented in Figure
1.1 to Figure 1.2. Some site investigation
works were carried out during the reporting period.
As presented in the Updated EM&A Manual,
the environmental aspects of interest for the Project include air quality,
noise, water quality, waste management, land contamination, terrestrial
ecology, marine ecology, fisheries, landscape & visual, sewage and
sewerage, and hazard to human life.
The status for all environmental
aspects is presented Table 1.2. The EM&A
requirements remained unchanged during the reporting period and details can be
referred to Table 1.2 of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 1.
Table 1.2: Summary of status for all
environmental aspects under the Updated EM&A Manual
Parameters |
Status |
Air Quality |
|
Baseline Monitoring |
The baseline air quality monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report (Version 1) and submitted to EPD on 14 December 2015 under EP Condition 3.4. |
Impact Monitoring |
On-going |
Noise |
|
Baseline Monitoring |
The baseline noise monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report (Version 1) and submitted to EPD on 14 December 2015 under EP Condition 3.4. |
Impact Monitoring |
On-going |
Water Quality |
|
General Baseline Water Quality Monitoring for reclamation, water jetting and field joint works |
The baseline water quality monitoring result has been reported in Water Quality Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4. |
General Impact Water Quality Monitoring for reclamation, water jetting and field joint works |
The general water quality monitoring commenced on 4 August 2016 as scheduled, although there were no marine construction works. |
Initial Intensive Deep Cement Mixing (DCM) Water Quality Monitoring |
To be commenced according to the detailed plan on DCM |
Early/ Regular DCM Water Quality Monitoring |
The early regular DCM water quality monitoring commenced on 4 August 2016 as scheduled, although there were no marine construction works. |
Waste Management |
|
Waste Monitoring |
On-going |
Land Contamination |
|
Supplementary Contamination Assessment Plan (CAP) |
To be submitted with the relevant construction works |
Contamination Assessment Report (CAR) for Golf Course |
The CAR for Golf Course was submitted to EPD on 17 March 2016. EPD had no adverse comment on the CAR for Golf Course on 6 April 2016. |
Terrestrial Ecology |
|
Pre-construction Egretry Survey Egretry Survey Plan |
The revised Egretry Survey Plan was submitted and approved by EPD on 25 April 2016 under EP Condition 2.14. |
Ecological Monitoring |
On-going |
Marine Ecology |
|
Pre-Construction Phase Coral Dive Survey |
The Coral Translocation Plan was approved by EPD on 6 June 2016 under EP Condition 2.12. |
Chinese White Dolphins (CWD) |
|
Vessel survey, land-based theodolite track and passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) |
|
Baseline Monitoring |
Baseline CWD results were reported in the CWD Baseline Monitoring Report as submitted to EPD on 15 July 2016 in accordance with EP Condition 3.4. The CWD Baseline Monitoring Report was approved by EPD on 25 July 2016. |
Impact Monitoring |
Monitoring of CWDs commenced in August 2016 as schedueled , although there were no marine construction works. |
Landscape & Visual |
|
Baseline Monitoring |
The baseline landscape & visual monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report (Version 1) and submitted to EPD on 14 December 2015 under EP Condition 3.4. |
Impact Monitoring |
On-going |
Environmental Auditing |
|
Regular site inspection |
On-going |
SkyPier High Speed Ferries (HSF) implementation measures |
On-going |
Construction and Associated Vessels Implementation measures |
On-going |
Complaint Hotline and Email channel |
On-going |
Environmental Log Book |
On-going |
Taking into account the construction works in
this reporting month, impact monitoring of air quality, noise, waste
management, ecology and landscape & visual were carried out in the
reporting month. No marine construction works was conducted during the
reporting period. Water quality monitoring and CWD monitoring were conducted as
scheduled although there were no marine construction works during the reporting
period. The EM&A programme also involved weekly site inspections and
related auditings conducted by the ET for checking the implementation of the
required environmental mitigation measures recommended in the approved EIA
Report.
The EM&A programme has been following the
recommendations presented in the approved EIA Report and the Updated EM&A
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.
Air quality monitoring was conducted at two
representative monitoring stations in the vicinity of air sensitive receivers
in Tung Chung and villages in North Lantau in accordance with the Updated
EM&A Manual. Table 2.1 describes the details
of the monitoring stations. Figure
2.1 shows the locations of the monitoring stations.
Table 2.1:
Locations of Impact Air Quality Monitoring Stations
Monitoring Station |
Location |
AR1A |
Man Tung Road Park |
AR2 |
Village House at Tin Sum |
In accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual,
baseline 1-hour total suspended particulate (TSP) levels at the two air quality
monitoring stations were established as presented in the Baseline Monitoring
Report (Version 1 dated December 2015). Impact 1-hour TSP monitoring was
conducted for three times every 6 days. The Action and Limit Levels of the air
quality monitoring are provided in Table 2.2.
The scheduled impact 1-hour TSP monitoring at
AR1A on 2 August 2016 was cancelled due to adverse weather. The monitoring at
AR1A on 2 August 2016 was rescheduled to 3 August 2016.
The air quality monitoring schedule involved in
the reporting period is provided in Appendix
D.
Table 2.2: Action and Limit Levels for
1-hour TSP
Monitoring Station |
Action Level (mg/m3) |
Limit Level (mg/m3) |
AR1A |
306 |
500 |
AR2 |
298 |
Portable
direct reading dust meter was used to carry out the 1-hour TSP
monitoring. The brand and model of the equipment are given in Table 2.3.
Table 2.3:
Air Quality Monitoring Equipment
Equipment |
Brand and Model |
Portable direct reading dust meter (Laser dust monitor) |
SIBTA LD-3B-002 (Serial No. 974350) |
The
measurement procedures involved in the impact 1-hr TSP monitoring can be
summarised as follows:
a.
The portable direct
reading dust meter was mounted on a tripod at a height of 1.2 m above the
ground.
b.
Prior to the
measurement, the equipment was set up for 1 minute span check and 6 second
background check.
c.
The one hour dust
measurement was started. Site conditions and dust sources at the nearby area
were recorded on a record sheet.
d.
When the measurement
completed, the “Count” reading per hour was recorded for result calculation.
The
portable direct reading dust meter is calibrated every year against high volume
sampler (HVS) to check the validity and accuracy of the results measured by
direct reading method. The calibration certificates of the portable direct
reading dust meter are provided in Appendix
C. The corresponding calibration record of the HVS is also given in Appendix
C.
The
monitoring results for 1-hour TSP are summarized in Table
2.4. Detailed impact monitoring results are presented in Appendix
E.
Table 2.4:
Summary of 1-hour TSP Monitoring Results
Monitoring Station |
1-hr TSP Concentration Range (mg/m3) |
Action Level (mg/m3) |
Limit Level (mg/m3) |
AR1A |
20 - 150 |
306 |
500 |
AR2 |
17 - 90 |
298 |
No
exceedance of the Action /Limit Level was recorded at all monitoring stations
in the reporting period.
General meteorological conditions throughout
the impact monitoring period were recorded. Wind data for each monitoring day
including wind speed and wind direction was collected from the Chek Lap Kok
Wind Station.
Noise monitoring was conducted at five
representative monitoring stations in the vicinity of noise sensitive receivers
in Tung Chung and villages in North Lantau in accordance with the Updated
EM&A Manual. Figure
2.1 shows the locations of the monitoring stations and these are
described in Table 3.1 below. As described in
Section 4.3.3 of the Updated EM&A Manual, monitoring at NM2 will commence
when the future residential buildings in Tung Chung West Development become
occupied.
Table 3.1: Locations of Impact Noise
Monitoring Stations
Monitoring Station |
Location |
Type of measurement |
NM1A |
Man Tung Road Park |
Free field |
NM2(1) |
Tung Chung West Development |
To be determined |
NM3A |
Site Office |
Facade |
NM4 |
Ching Chung Hau Po Woon Primary School |
Free field |
NM5 |
Village House in Tin Sum |
Free field |
NM6 |
House No. 1, Sha Lo Wan |
Free field |
Note: (1) As
described in Section 4.3.3 of the Updated EM&A Manual, noise monitoring at
NM2 will only commence after occupation of the future Tung Chung West
Development.
In accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual,
baseline noise levels at the noise monitoring stations were established as
presented in the Baseline Monitoring Report (Version 1 dated December 2015).
Impact noise monitoring was conducted once per week in the form of 30-minute
measurements of Leq, L10 and L90 levels
recorded at each monitoring station between 0700 and 1900 on normal weekdays.
The Action and Limit levels of the noise monitoring are provided in Table 3.2. The construction noise monitoring
schedule involved in the reporting period is provided in Appendix
D.
Table 3.2: Action and Limit Levels
for Construction Noise
Monitoring Stations |
Time Period |
Action Level |
Limit Level, Leq(30mins) dB(A) |
NM1A, NM2, NM3A, NM4, NM5 and NM6 |
0700-1900 hours on normal weekdays |
When one documented complaint is received from any one of the sensitive receivers |
75 dB(A)(i) |
Note: (i)
reduce to 70dB(A) for school and 65dB(A) during school examination periods.
Noise monitoring was performed using sound
level meter at each designated monitoring station. The sound level meters
deployed comply with the International Electrotechnical Commission Publications
651:1979 (Type 1) and 804:1985 (Type 1) specifications. Acoustic
calibrator was used to check the sound level meters by a known sound pressure
level for field measurement. The brand and model of the equipment are
given in Table 3.3.
Table 3.3: Noise Monitoring
Equipment
Equipment |
Brand and Model |
Integrated Sound Level Meter |
B&K 2238 (Serial No. 2800932) B&K 2238 (Serial No. 2684503) B&K 2238 (Serial No. 2381580) B&K 2238 (Serial No. 2808432) |
Acoustic Calibrator |
B&K 4231 (Serial No. 3003246) B&K 4231 (Serial No. 3004068) |
The
monitoring procedures involved in the noise impact monitoring can be summarised
as follows:
a.
The sound level meter
was set on a tripod at least a height of 1.2 m above the ground for free-field
measurements at monitoring stations NM1A, NM4, NM5 and NM6. A correction of +3
dB(A) was applied to the free field measurements.
b.
Façade measurements
were made at the monitoring station NM3A.
c.
Parameters such as
frequency weighting, time weighting and measurement time were set.
d.
Prior to and after each
noise measurement, the meter was calibrated using the acoustic
calibrator. If the difference in the calibration level before and after
measurement was more than 1 dB(A), the measurement would be considered invalid
and repeat of noise measurement would be required after re-calibration or
repair of the equipment.
e.
During the monitoring
period, Leq, L10 and L90 were recorded.
In addition, site conditions and noise sources were recorded on a record sheet.
f.
Noise measurement
results were corrected with reference to the baseline monitoring levels.
g.
Observations were
recorded when high intrusive noise (e.g. dog barking, helicopter noise) was
observed during the monitoring.
The
maintenance and calibration procedures are summarised below:
a.
The microphone head of
the sound level meter was cleaned with soft cloth at regular intervals.
b.
The meter and
calibrator were sent to the supplier or laboratory accredited under Hong Kong
Laboratory Accreditation Scheme (HOKLAS) to check and calibrate at yearly
intervals.
Calibration
certificates of the sound level meters and acoustic calibrators used in the
noise monitoring are provided in Appendix
C.
The
construction noise monitoring results are summarized in Table
3.4 and the detailed monitoring data are provided in Appendix
E.
Table 3.4:
Summary of Construction Noise Monitoring Results
Monitoring Station |
Noise Level Range, dB(A) Leq (30 mins) |
Limit Level, dB(A) Leq (30 mins) |
NM1A(i) |
68 - 72 |
75 |
NM3A |
60 - 63 |
75 |
NM4(i) |
63 - 65 |
70(ii) |
NM5(i) |
53 - 59 |
75 |
NM6(i) |
67 - 71 |
75 |
Note: (i) +3 dB(A) Façade correction
included;
(ii) Reduced to 65 dB(A) during school examination periods.
As the construction activities were far away
from the monitoring stations, major sources of noise dominating the monitoring
stations observed during the construction noise impact monitoring were aircraft
noise at NM3A and NM5, aircraft noise and helicopter noise at NM6, road traffic
noise at NM1A and school activities at NM4 in this reporting month.
No
exceedance of the Action/ Limit Level was recorded at all monitoring stations
in the reporting period.
Water quality monitoring was conducted at a
total of 22 water quality monitoring stations, comprising 12 impact stations,
seven sensitive receiver stations and three control stations in the vicinity of
water quality sensitive receivers around the airport island in accordance with
the Updated EM&A Manual. Table 4.1 describes
the details of the monitoring stations. Figure
3.1 shows the locations of the monitoring stations.
Table 4.1:
Monitoring Locations and Parameters for Impact Water Quality Monitoring
Monitoring Stations |
|
Coordinates |
|
|
Description |
Easting |
Northing |
Parameters |
|
C1 |
Control |
804247 |
815620 |
|
C2 |
Control |
806945 |
825682 |
|
C3 |
Control |
817803 |
822109 |
|
IM1 |
Impact |
806458 |
818351 |
DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS, Total Alkalinity, Heavy Metals(2) |
IM2 |
Impact |
806193 |
818852 |
|
IM3 |
Impact |
806019 |
819411 |
|
IM4 |
Impact |
805039 |
819570 |
|
IM5 |
Impact |
804924 |
820564 |
|
IM6 |
Impact |
805828 |
821060 |
|
IM7 |
Impact |
806835 |
821349 |
|
IM8 |
Impact |
807838 |
821695 |
|
IM9 |
Impact |
808811 |
822094 |
|
IM10 |
Impact |
809838 |
822240 |
|
IM11 |
Impact |
810545 |
821501 |
|
IM12 |
Impact |
811519 |
821162 |
|
SR1(1) |
Future Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF) Seawater Intake for cooling |
812586 |
820069 |
DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS
|
SR2 |
Planned marine park / hard corals at The Brothers / Tai Mo To |
814166 |
821463 |
|
SR3 |
Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park / fishing and spawning grounds in North Lantau |
807571 |
822147 |
|
SR4A |
Sha Lo Wan |
807810 |
817189 |
|
SR5A |
San Tau Beach SSSI |
810696 |
816593 |
|
SR6 |
Tai Ho Bay, Near Tai Ho Stream SSSI |
814663 |
817899 |
|
SR7 |
Ma Wan Fish Culture Zone (FCZ) |
823742 |
823636 |
|
SR8 |
Seawater Intake for cooling at Hong Kong International Airport (East) |
811593 |
820417 |
Notes:
(1) the seawater intakes of SR1 for the future
HKBCF is not yet in operation, the future permanent location for SR1
during impact monitoring is subject to finalisation after the HKBCF
seawater is commissioned.
(2) According to
the Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Report, Chromium and Nickel are the
representative heavy metals for early regular DCM monitoring. DCM specific
water quality monitoring parameters (total alkalinity and heavy metals) were
only conducted at C1 to C3, IM1 to IM12 .
In accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual,
baseline water quality levels at the abovementioned representative water
quality monitoring stations were established as presented in the Baseline Water
Quality Monitoring Report.
General and early regular DCM water quality
monitoring was conducted three days per week, at mid-flood and mid-ebb tides,
at the 22 water quality monitoring stations during the reporting period,
although there were no marine construction works. The sea condition varied from
clam to rough, and the weather varied from fine to rainy during the monitoring
period.
The scheduled water quality monitoring on 2
August 2016 during ebb and flood tides and 18 August 2016 during ebb tide were
cancelled due to adverse weather. The water quality monitoring schedule for the
reporting period is provided in Appendix
D.
The Action and Limit Levels levels for general
water quality monitoring and regular DCM monitoring are presented in Table 4.2. The control and impact stations during
flood tide and ebb tide for general water quality monitoring and regular DCM
monitoring are presented in Table 4.3.
Table 4.2:
Action and Limit Levels for general water quality monitoring and regular DCM
monitoring
Parameters |
Action Level (AL) |
Limit Level (LL) |
||
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 4.8 mg/L |
Surface and Middle 4.1 mg/L 5 mg/L for Fish Culture Zone (SR7) only |
||
Bottom 3.1 mg/L |
Bottom 2.3 mg/L |
|||
Suspended Solids (SS) in mg/L |
25 |
or 120% of upstream control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher |
36 |
or 130% of upstream control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher |
Turbidity in NTU |
26.0 |
41.4 |
||
Total Alkalinity in ppm |
95 |
98 |
||
Representative Heavy Metals for early regular DCM monitoring (Chromium) |
0.2 |
0.2 |
||
Representative Heavy Metals for early regular DCM monitoring (Nickel) |
3.2 |
|
3.4 |
|
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 |
|
Note:
1. For DO measurement, non-compliance occurs when monitoring result is
lower than the limits.
2. For parameters other than DO, non-compliance of water quality results
when monitoring results is higher than the limits.
3. Depth-averaged results are used unless specified otherwise.
4. Details of selection criteria for the two heavy metals for early regular
DCM monitoring refer to the Detailed Plan on Deep Cement Mixing available on
the dedicated 3RS website http://env.threerunwaysystem.com/en/ep-submissions.html)
5. The action and limit levels for the two representative heavy metals
chosen will be the same as that for the intensive DCM monitoring.
Table 4.3: The Control and Impact
stations during flood tide and ebb tide for general water quality monitoring
and regular DCM monitoring
Control Station |
Impact Stations |
Flood Tide |
|
C1 |
IM1, IM2, IM3, IM4, IM5, IM6, IM7, IM8, SR3 |
SR2^1 |
IM7, IM8, IM9, IM10, IM11, IM12, SR1A, SR3, SR4A, SR5A, SR6, SR8 |
Ebb Tide |
|
C1 |
SR4A, SR5A, SR6 |
C2 |
IM1, IM2, IM3, IM4, IM5, IM6, IM7, IM8, IM9, IM10, IM11, IM12, SR1A, SR2, SR3, SR7, SR8 |
^1 As
per findings of Baseline Water Quality Report, the control reference will be
changed from C3 to SR2 from 1 Sep 2016 onwards.
Table 4.4 summarises the equipment used in the impact water quality monitoring
programme.
Table 4.4:
Water Quality Monitoring Equipment
Equipment |
Brand and Model |
Water Sampler |
Van Dorn Water Sampler |
Positioning Device (measurement of GPS) |
Garmin eTrex Vista HCx |
Water Depth Detector (measurement of water depth) |
Lowrance Mark 5x |
Multifunctional Meter (measurement of DO, pH, temperature, salinity and turbidity) |
YSI 6920 V2 (serial no. 000109DF and 00019CB2) |
Current Meter (measurement of current speed and direction) |
Sontek HydroSurveyor |
Digital Titrator (measurement of total alkalinity) |
Titrette Digital Burette 50ml Class A (serial no.10N64701 and 10N60623) |
Water quality monitoring samples were taken at
three depths (at 1m below surface, at mid-depth, and at 1m above bottom) for
locations with water depth >6m. For locations with water depth between 3m
and 6m, water samples were taken at two depths (surface and bottom). For
locations with water depth <3m, only the surface depth was taken. Duplicate
water samples were taken and analysed.
The water samples for all monitoring parameters
were collected, stored, preserved and analysis according to the Standard
Methods, APHA 22nd ed. and/or other methods as agreed by the EPD.
In-situ measurements at monitoring locations including temperature, pH, DO,
turbidity, salinity and water depth were collected by equipment listed in the
following. Water samples for heavy metals and SS analysis were stored in high
density polythene bottles with no preservative added, packed in ice (cooled to
4 şC without being frozen), delivered to the laboratory within 24 hours of
collection.
Calibration
of In-situ instruments
All in-situ monitoring instrument were checked,
calibrated and certified by a laboratory accredited under HOKLAS before use.
Responses of sensors and electrodes were checked with certified standard
solutions before each use.
Wet bulb calibration for a DO meter was carried
out before commencement of monitoring and after completion of all measurements
each day. Calibration was not conducted at each monitoring location as daily
calibration is adequate for the type of DO meter employed. A zero check in
distilled water was performed with the turbidity probe at least once per
monitoring day. The probe should then be calibrated with a solution of known
NTU. In addition, the turbidity probe was calibrated at least twice per month to
establish the relationship between turbidity readings (in NTU) and levels of
suspended solids (in mg/L). Accuracy check of the digital titrator was
performed at least once per monitoring day.
Calibration
certificates of the monitoring equipment used in the monitoring are provided in
Appendix
D.
Analysis of SS and heavy metals have been
carried out by a HOKLAS accredited laboratory, ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd
(Reg. No. HOKLAS 066). Sufficient water samples were collected at all the
monitoring stations for carrying out the laboratory SS and heavy metals
determination. The SS and heavy metals determination works were started within
24 hours after collection of the water samples. The analysis of SS and heavy
metals have followed the standard methods summarised in Table
4.5. The QA/QC procedures for laboratory measurement/ analysis of SS
and heavy metals were followed and presented in Appendix
F.
Table 4.5: Laboratory measurement/
analysis of SS and heavy metals
Parameters |
Instrumentation |
Analytical Method |
Reporting Limit |
Suspended Solid (SS) |
Analytical Balance |
APHA 2540D |
2 mg/L |
Heavy Metals |
|
|
|
Chromium (Cr) |
ICP-MS |
USEPA 6020A |
0.2 µg/L |
Nickel (Ni) |
ICP-MS |
USEPA 6020A |
0.2 µg/L |
The commencement of initial reclamation works
was announced on 1 August 2016. Four DCM contracts were awarded in August
2016. The key activity of the four marine DCM contracts was only mobilization
and off-site plant fabrication. No marine construction works was
conducted during the reporting period.
The general water quality monitoring was
completed as scheduled and the results showed that some parameter such as DO
was appeared to reflect the seasonal low of surrounding water body according to
EPD’s long-term marine water quality monitoring data. As the water quality
monitoring results were collected before the commencement of marine
construction works, the measurement data collected in August 2016 may take into
account for reviewing the baseline water quality condition.
Water quality monitoring results and graphical
presentations are provided in Appendix
E.
In accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual,
the waste generated from construction activities was audited once per week to
determine if wastes are being managed in accordance with the Waste Management
Plan (WMP) prepared for the Project, contract-specific WMP, and any statutory
and contractual requirements. All aspects of waste management including waste
generation, storage, transportation and disposal were assessed during the
audits. The Action and Limit levels of the construction waste are provided in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1: Action and Limit Levels
for Construction Waste
Monitoring Stations |
Action Level |
Limit Level |
Construction Area |
When one valid documented complaint is received |
Non-compliance of the WMP, contract-specific WMPs, any statutory and contractual requirements |
No construction work for four DCM contracts and
CLP cable diversion enabling works was undertaken and hence no waste was
generated during the reporting period.
Weekly monitoring of Contract P560(R) Aviation
Fuel Pipeline Diversion Works was carried out by the ET on 3, 10, 17, 24 and 31
August 2016 to check and monitor the implementation of proper waste management
practices during the construction phase.
For Contract P560(R) Aviation Fuel Pipeline
Diversion Works, recommendations were provided during monitoring including
provision of drip tray for the oil drums on 24 August 2016, removal of oil
stain on ground as chemical waste on 17, 24 and 31 August 2016. The contractor
had followed up with implementation of mitigation measures.
The P560(R)
Contractor was advised to properly maintain a recording system, maximize the
reuse of C&D materials and properly maintain site tidiness.
Based on the updated information, about 210 m3
excavated materials were produced from the HDD launching site in August 2016.
The generated excavated materials were temporarily stored at storage and
stockpiling area at Chun Ming Road adjacent to Tradeport Logistic Centre on the
airport island. The excavated material will be reused in the Project.
In addition, metals, paper and plastic were
recycled during the reporting month. 3.9 tonnes of general refuse were disposed
of to the West New Territories (WENT) Landfill and 0.16 tonnes of chemical
waste was disposed of to the Tsing Yi Chemical Waste Treatment Centre in August
2016. No Construction and Demolition (C&D) material was disposed off-site
during the reporting month.
No
exceedances of the Action and Limit Levels were recorded in the reporting
period.
In accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual,
CWD monitoring by small vessel line-transect survey supplemented by land-based
theodolite tracking should be conducted during construction phase. The
monitoring was completed in the reporting period, although there were no marine
construction works.
The small vessel line-transect survey as
proposed in the Updated EM&A Manual should be conducted at a frequency of
two full survey per month while land-based theodolite tracking should be
conducted at a frequency of one day per month per station during the
construction phase. In addition to the land-based theodolite tracking required
for impact monitoring as stipulated in the EM&A Manual, some supplemental
theodolite tracking have also been taken during the initial implementation
period for the SkyPier HSF diversion and speed control in order to assist in
monitoring the effectiveness of these measures, i.e. in total twice per month
at the Sha Chau station and three times per month at the Lung Kwu Chau station.
The Action Level (AL) and Limit Level (LL) for
CWD monitoring were formulated by the 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 AL and LL for CWD monitoring were summarized in Table 6.1.
Table 6.1:
Derived Values of Action Level (AL) and Limit Level (LL) for Chinese White
Dolphin Monitoring
|
NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL as a Whole |
Action Level |
Running quarterly* STG < 1.86 & ANI < 9.35 |
Limit Level |
Two consecutive running quarterly^ (3-month) STG < 1.86 & ANI < 9.35 |
[Notes for Table 6.1 (referring to the baseline monitoring report):
*Action Level – running quarterly STG & ANI would
be calculated from the three preceding survey months, e.g. works commenced on 1
August 2016,this CWD impact monitoring report reviewed the data from 18 May to
17 June 2016 covering two sets of transect surveys for all monitoring areas,
and the data collected in July and August 2016 (also with two sets of transect
surveys for all monitoring areas) for calculating the quarterly encounter rates
STG & ANI. For CWD impact monitoring for September 2016, data from 1 July
to 30 September 2016 will be used to calculate the quarterly encounter rates
STG & ANI;
^Limit Level – two consecutive running quarters mean
since works commenced on 1 August 2016, the first running quarter for reporting
will be 18 May to 17 June 2016, July 2016 to August 2016, and the second
running quarter will be July 2016 to September 2016.
AL and/or LL will be exceeded if both
STG and ANI fall below the criteria.]
Small vessel line-transect surveys
were conduct along the transects covering Northeast Lantau (NEL), Northwest
Lantau (NWL), Airport West (AW), West Lantau (WL) and Southwest Lantau (SWL),
as proposed in the Updated EM&A Manual and being consistent with the AFCD
long-term monitoring programme (except AW). The AW transect has not been previously
surveyed in the AFCD programme due to the restrictions of HKIA Exclusion Zone,
nevertheless, this transect was established during the EIA of the 3RS project
with the aim to collect project specific baseline information within the HKIA
Approach Area to fill the data gap that was not covered by the AFCD programme.
This provided a larger sample size for estimating the densities and patterns of
movements in the broader study area of the project.
For the NWL area, there was no physical
demarcation of the 3RS works area yet during CWD monitoring survey in the
reporting period, therefore the works area of the 3RS project was still
accessible and the transect lines followed the waypoints and lengths conducted
for baseline monitoring. These transect lines were depicted in Figure
6.1 while the coordinates of all transect lines are shown in Table 6.2.
Table 6.2: Coordinates of Transect
Lines in NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL Survey Areas
Waypoint |
Easting |
Northing |
Waypoint |
Easting |
Northing |
NEL |
|||||
1S |
813525 |
820900 |
6N |
818568 |
824433 |
1N |
813525 |
824657 |
7S |
819532 |
821420 |
2S |
814556 |
818449 |
7N |
819532 |
824209 |
2N |
814559 |
824768 |
8S |
820451 |
822125 |
3S |
815542 |
818807 |
8N |
820451 |
823671 |
3N |
815542 |
824882 |
9S |
821504 |
822371 |
4S |
816506 |
819480 |
9N |
821504 |
823761 |
4N |
816506 |
824859 |
10S |
822513 |
823268 |
5S |
817537 |
820220 |
10N |
822513 |
824321 |
5N |
817537 |
824613 |
11S |
823477 |
823402 |
6S |
818568 |
820735 |
11N |
823477 |
824613 |
NWL |
|||||
1S |
804671 |
814577 |
5N |
808504 |
828602 |
1N |
804671 |
831404 |
6S |
809490 |
820590 |
2S |
805475 |
815457 |
6N |
809490 |
825352 |
2N |
805476 |
830562 |
7S |
810499 |
820950 |
3S |
806464 |
819550 |
7N |
810499 |
824613 |
3N |
806464 |
829598 |
8S |
811508 |
821250 |
4S |
807518 |
819900 |
8N |
811508 |
824254 |
4N |
807518 |
829230 |
9S |
812516 |
821250 |
5S |
808504 |
820250 |
9N |
812516 |
824254 |
AW |
|||||
1W |
804730 |
818220 |
2W |
805051 |
817156 |
1E |
806519 |
818271 |
2E |
806913 |
817076 |
WL |
|||||
1W |
800600 |
805450 |
7W |
800400 |
811450 |
1E |
801760 |
805450 |
7E |
802400 |
811450 |
2W |
800300 |
806450 |
8W |
800800 |
812450 |
2E |
801750 |
806450 |
8E |
802900 |
812450 |
3W |
799600 |
807450 |
9W |
801500 |
813550 |
3E |
801500 |
807450 |
9E |
803120 |
813550 |
4W |
799400 |
808450 |
10W |
801880 |
814500 |
4E |
801430 |
808450 |
10E |
803700 |
814500 |
5W |
799500 |
809450 |
11W |
802860 |
815500 |
5E |
801300 |
809450 |
12S/11E |
803750 |
815500 |
6W |
799800 |
810450 |
12N |
803750 |
818500 |
6E |
801400 |
810450 |
|
|
|
SWL |
|||||
1S |
802494 |
803961 |
6S |
807467 |
801137 |
1N |
802494 |
806174 |
6N |
807467 |
808458 |
2S |
803489 |
803280 |
7S |
808553 |
800329 |
2N |
803489 |
806720 |
7N |
808553 |
807377 |
3S |
804484 |
802509 |
8S |
809547 |
800338 |
3N |
804484 |
807048 |
8N |
809547 |
807396 |
4S |
805478 |
802105 |
9S |
810542 |
800423 |
4N |
805478 |
807556 |
9N |
810542 |
807462 |
5S |
806473 |
801250 |
10S |
811446 |
801335 |
5N |
806473 |
808458 |
10N |
811446 |
809436 |
Land-based theodolite tracking
stations were set up at two locations, one facing east/south/west on the
southern slopes of Sha Chau (SC), and the other facing
north/northeast/northwest at Lung Kwu Chau. The stations (D and E) are depicted
in Figure
6.2 and shown in Table 6.3 with position
coordinates, height of station and approximate distance of consistent
theodolite tracking capabilities for CWD.
Table 6.3: Land-based 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 |
Small vessel line-transect surveys provided
data for density and abundance estimation and other assessments using
distance-sampling methodologies, specifically, line-transect methods.
The surveys involved small vessel line-transect
data collection and have been designed to be similar to, and consistent with,
previous surveys for the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department
(AFCD) for their long-term monitoring of small cetaceans in Hong Kong. The
survey was designed to provide systematic, quantitative measurements of
density, abundance and habitat use.
As mentioned in Section 6.2.1, the transects
covered Northeast Lantau (NEL), Northwest Lantau (NWL) covering the Airport
West (AW), West Lantau (WL) and Southwest Lantau (SWL) as proposed in the
Updated EM&A Manual and are consistent with the AFCD long-term monitoring
programme (except AW). There are two types of transect lines:
● Primary transect lines: the parallel
and zigzag transect lines as shown in Figure
6.1; and
● Secondary transect lines: transect
lines connecting between the primary transect lines and crossing islands.
All on-effort data collected under conditions
of Beaufort 0-3 and visibility of approximately 1200 m or beyond, on both
primary and secondary transect lines, were used for analysis.
A 15-20 m vessel with a flying bridge
observation platform about 4 to 5 m above water level and unobstructed forward
view, and a team of three to four observers were deployed to undertake the
surveys. Two observers were on search effort at all times when following
the transect lines with a constant speed of 7 to 8 knots (i.e. 13 to 15 km per
hour), one using 7X handheld binoculars and the other using unaided eyes and
recording data.
During on-effort survey periods, the survey
team recorded effort data including time, position (waypoints), weather
conditions (Beaufort sea state and visibility) and distance travelled in each
series with assistance of a handheld GPS device. The GPS device also
continuously and automatically logged data including time, position (Latitude
and longitude) and vessel speed throughout the entire survey.
When CWDs were seen, the survey team was taken
off-effort, the dolphins were approached and photographed for photo-ID
information (using a Canon 7D [or similar] camera and long 300 mm+ telephoto
lens), then followed until they left the study area or were lost. At that
point, the boat returned (off effort) to the next survey line and began to
survey on effort again.
Focal follows of dolphins were conducted where
practicable (i.e. when individual dolphins or small stable groups of dolphins
with at least one member that could be readily identifiable with unaided eyes
during observations and weather conditions are favourable). These
involved the boat following (at an appropriate distance to minimize
disturbance) an identifiable individual dolphin for an extended period of time,
and collecting detailed data on its location, behaviour, response to vessels,
and associates.
Chinese White Dolphins can be identified by
their unique features like
presence of scratches, nick marks, cuts, wounds, deformities of their dorsal
fin and distinguished colouration and spotting patterns.
When CWDs were observed, the survey team was
taken off-effort, the
dolphins were approached and photographed for photo-ID information (using a
Canon 7D [or similar] camera and long 300 mm+ telephoto lens). The survey team
attempted to photo both sides of every single dolphin in the group as the
colouration and spotting pattern on both sides may not be identical. The photos
were taken at the highest available resolution and stored on Compact Flash
memory cards for transferring into a computer.
All photos taken were initially examined to
sort out those containing potentially identifiable individuals. These
sorted-out images would then be examined in detail and compared to the CWD
photo-identification catalogue established for 3RS during the baseline
monitoring stage.
Three surveyors (one theodolite operator, one
computer operator, and one observer) were involved in each survey. Observers
searched for dolphins using unaided eyes and handheld binoculars (7X50).
Theodolite tracking sessions were initiated whenever an individual CWD or group
of CWDs was located. Where possible, a distinguishable individual was
selected, based on colouration, within the group. The focal individual
was then continuously tracked via the theodolite, with a position recorded each
time the dolphin surfaced. In case an individual could not be positively
distinguished from other members, the group was tracked by recording positions
based on a central point within the group whenever the CWD surfaced. Tracking
continued until animals were lost from view, moved beyond the range of reliable
visibility (>1-3 km, depending on station height), or environmental
conditions obstructed visibility (e.g., intense haze, Beaufort sea state >4,
or sunset), at which time the research effort was terminated. In addition
to the tracking of CWD, all vessels that moved within 2-3 km of the station
were tracked, with effort made to obtain at least two positions for each
vessel.
Theodolite tracking included focal follows of
CWD groups and vessels. Priority was given to tracking individual or groups of
CWD. The survey team also attempted to track all vessels moving within 1 km of
the focal CWD.
Survey
Effort
Within the monitoring month of August 2016, two
complete sets of small vessel line-transect surveys were conducted on the 5th
, 9th 10th, 15th, 19th, 22nd,
24th and 25th August 2016, covering all transects in NEL,
NWL, AW, WL and SWL survey area for twice.
A total of 469.08 km of survey effort was
collected from these surveys, with 91.8% 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 may refer to Appendix E.
Sighting
Distribution
In August 2016, 19 groups of CWD with 69
individuals were sighted. Amongst the sightings of CWD, 15 groups with 61
individuals were made during on-effort search under favourable weather
condition (i.e. Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with favourable visibility). For
details of cetacean sightings refer to Appendix E.
Distribution of CWD sightings recorded in
August 2016 is illustrated in Figure
6.3. The
sightings were mainly located east of Lung Kwu Chau and in Urmston Road near
Castle Peak Power Station in the NWL survey area, and Tai O, Yi O and Peaked
Hill in the WL survey area. No sightings of CWDs were recorded within or in
close proximity to the 3RS land-formation footprint.
Figure
6.3: Sightings Distribution of Chinese White Dolphins
[Pink circle: Sighting
locations of CWD, White line: Vessel survey transects, Blue polygon: Sha Chau
and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park (SCLKCMP), Red polygon: 3RS land-formation
footprint]
Note: Only
on-effort sightings under Beaufort 3 or below were presented in the figure.
Encounter Rate
Two types of dolphin encounter rates were
calculated based on the data from August 2016. They included the number of
dolphin sightings per 100km survey effort (STG) and total number of dolphins
per 100km survey effort (ANI) in the whole survey area (i.e. NEL, NWL, AW, WL
and SWL). In the calculation of dolphin encounter rates, only survey data
collected under favourable weather condition (i.e. Beaufort Sea State 3 or
below with favourable visibility) were used. Formulations of the encounter
rates are shown as below:
Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphin
Sightings (STG)
Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphins (ANI)
(Notes: Only data
collected under Beaufort 3 or below condition was used)
In August 2016, a total of 430.61 km of survey
effort was collected under Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with favourable
visibility, whilst total no. of 15 on-effort sightings and total number of 61
dolphins from on-effort sightings were collected under such condition.
Calculation of the encounter rates in August 2016 are shown as below:
Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphin
Sightings (STG) in August 2016
Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphins (ANI) in
August 2016
For the reporting month, in the running quarter
a total of 1195.86 km of survey effort was collected under Beaufort Sea State 3
or below with favourable visibility, whilst total no. of 59 on-effort sightings
and total number of 246 dolphins from on-effort sightings were collected under
such condition. Calculation of the running quarterly encounter rates are shown
as below:
Running Quarterly Encounter Rate of
Number of Dolphin Sightings (STG)
Running Quarterly Encounter Rate of Number of
Dolphins (ANI)
The STG and ANI of CWD in the whole survey area
(i.e. NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL) of August 2016 and the running quarterly STG
and ANI calculated from the three preceding survey months are presented
in Table
6.4 below.
Table 6.4:
STG and ANI of Chinese White Dolphin of the Whole Survey Area in August 2016
and Running Quarterly STG and ANI
|
Encounter Rate (STG) |
Encounter Rate (ANI) |
August 2016 |
3.48 |
14.17 |
Running Quarterly* |
4.93 |
20.57 |
*Running quarterly encounter rates STG &
ANI for reporting were calculated from the three preceding survey months, i.e.
the data from 18 May to 17 June 2016, the data in July 2016 and August 2016,
containing six sets of transect surveys for all monitoring areas.
Group Size
In August 2016, the average group size of CWDs
was 4.1 individuals per group. The majority of the CWD groups were medium in
size with 3-9 individuals. Five groups out of 15 were small in size with 1-2
individuals. No large CWD groups with 10 or more individuals were sighted in
August 2016.
Activities and Association with Fishing Boats
No CWDs were sighted with association with
operating fishing boats in August 2016.
Mother-calf Pair
Three pairs of mother-and-calf and
mother-and-spotted juvenile (SJ) pairs were sighted. Two pairs were sighted in
the WL survey area while the remaining pair was sighted in the NWL survey area.
In August 2016, a total number of 22 different
CWD individuals were identified. Amongst these 22 identified individuals, seven
(NLMM028, NLMM035, NLMM036, NLMM037, NLMM038, SLMM011 and SLMM015) were sighted
for twice and one (NLMM002) was sighted three times in August. A summary of
photo identification works is presented in Table 6.5. Representative photos of these
individuals may refer to Appendix E.
Table 6.5: Summary of Photo
Identification in August 2016
Individual ID |
No. of times sighted |
Date of sighting (yyyymmdd) |
Individual ID |
No. of times sighted |
Date of sighting (yyyymmdd) |
WLMM030 |
1 |
20160809 |
WLMM043 |
1 |
20160809 |
WLMM046 |
1 |
20160809 |
NLMM002 |
3 |
20160819, 20160824 |
NLMM035 |
2 |
20160819 |
NLMM036 |
2 |
20160819 |
NLMM037 |
2 |
20160819 |
NLMM004 |
1 |
20160819 |
NLMM028 |
2 |
20160822, 20160824 |
NLMM038 |
2 |
20160822, 20160824 |
WLMM038 |
1 |
20160822 |
WLMM047 |
1 |
20160822 |
WLMM048 |
1 |
20160822 |
WLMM049 |
1 |
20160822 |
NLMM005 |
1 |
20160822 |
NLMM019 |
1 |
20160822 |
SLMM015 |
2 |
20160822 |
SLMM010 |
1 |
20160822 |
SLMM011 |
2 |
20160822, 20160825 |
NLMM006 |
1 |
20160824 |
NLMM010 |
1 |
20160824 |
NLMM013 |
1 |
20160824 |
Survey
Effort
Land-based theodolite tracking surveys at Lung
Kwu Chau were conducted on 5th, 11th and 23rd
August 2016 and at Sha Chau on 1st and 9th August 2016. A
total of 5 days of land-based theodolite tracking survey effort have been
accomplished in August 2016. A total number of 12 CWD groups were tracked
during the surveys. Information of survey effort and CWD groups sighted
during these land-based theodolite tracking surveys are presented in Table 6.6. Details of the survey effort and
CWD groups tracked are presented in Appendix E. The first sighting locations of
CWD groups tracked during land-based theodolite tracking surveys in August 2016
were depicted in Figure
6.4.
Table 6.6:
Summary of Survey Effort and CWD Group of Land-based Theodolite Tracking
Land-based Station |
# of Survey Sessions |
Survey Effort (hh:mm) |
# CWD Groups Sighted |
CWD Group Sighting per Survey Hour |
Lung Kwu Chau |
3 |
18:11 |
11 |
0.607 |
Sha Chau |
2 |
12:10 |
1 |
0.083 |
TOTAL |
5 |
30:21 |
12 |
0.395 |
Figure
6.4: Plots of First Sightings of All CWD Groups obtained from Land-based
Stations
[Green
triangle: LKC station; Green square: CWD group off LKC; Yellow triangle: SC
station; Yellow square: CWD group off SC; Blue line: SCLKCMP boundary; Red
line: 3RS land-formation footprint]
Underwater acoustic monitoring using Passive
Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) should also be undertaken within the whole duration
for land formation related construction works. An Ecological Acoustic Recorder
(EAR) has been deployed and positioned at south of Sha Chau Island with 20%
duty cycle (Figure
6.5). The PAM deployment is generally last for4-6 weeks prior to data
retrieval as one batch of data for analysis. Acoustic data will be gathered to
listen for CWDs occurrence patterns and to obtain anthropogenic noise
information simultaneously. Analysis (by a specialized team of acousticians)
involved manually browsing through every acoustic recording and logging the
occurrence of dolphin signals. All data will be re-played by computer and
listened to by human ears for accurate assessment of dolphin group presence. As
the period of data collection and analysis takes more than two months, PAM
results could not be reported in monthly intervals.
The EAR was deployed on 15 August 2016 in this
reporting period and scheduled to be retrieved on 12 September 2016. Data
transfer and analysis of this batch of PAM data are tentatively scheduled for
completion by end of November 2016.
There were no marine construction activities
underway in the reporting month. Contract-specific Marine Mammal Watching Plan
and Dolphin Exclusion Zone Plan were still under preparation by contractors in
this time-period, therefore audits of acoustic decoupling and dolphin exclusion
zone implementation were not applicable during this reporting period.
Audits of SkyPier High Speed Ferries route
diversion and speed control and construction vessel management are presented in
Section 7.2 and Section 7.3 respectively.
For indication, detailed analysis of CWD
monitoring results collected by small vessel line-transect survey (such as
distribution of group size, activities/boat association, mother-calf pairs and
re-sightings) will be provided in future quarterly reports. Detailed analysis
of CWD monitoring results collected by land-based theodolite tracking (such as
time of day or year, group size, behavioural state and vessel activity) and PAM
will be provided in future yearly reports when a larger sample size of
data be collected for supplementing the findings from vessel based monitoring.
No marine construction works was conducted
during the reporting period. CWD monitoring was conducted as scheduled although
no marine construction works was carried out during the reporting period. The
baseline conditions for the CWD will be reviewed and the Event and Action Plan
will be further reviewed when 12-month CWD data be collected.
No construction work for four DCM contracts and
CLP cable diversion enabling works was undertaken during the reporting period,
thus no weekly site inspection for those contracts was conducted during the
reporting period.
Weekly site inspection of the construction
works for P560(R) was carried out by the ET on 3, 10, 17, 24 and 31 August 2016
to monitor the implementation of proper environmental pollution control and
mitigation measures for the Project. Site inspections were also conducted
independently by the Project’s Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) on 5 and
17 August 2016. Observations have been recorded in the site inspection
checklists and passed to the Contractor together with the appropriate recommended
mitigation measures where necessary.
The key observations from site inspection and
associated recommendations were related to the improvement of efficiency of
sedimentation tank, provision of drip tray for chemical containers, proper
maintenance of drip tray, and removal of oil stains on ground as chemical
waste.
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.
The Marine Travel Routes and
Management Plan for High Speed Ferries of SkyPier (the SkyPier Plan) has been
submitted to the Advisory Council on the Environment (ACE) for comment and
subsequently submitted to and approved by EPD in November 2015 under EP Condition
2.10. The approved SkyPier Plan is available on the dedicated website of the
Project. In the SkyPier Plan, AAHK committed to implementing the mitigation
measure of requiring high speed ferries (HSFs) of SkyPier travelling between
HKIA and Zhuhai / Macau to start diverting the route with an associated speed
control across an area (i.e. Speed Control Zone (SCZ)) with high Chinese White
Dolphin (CWD) abundance. The route diversion and speed restriction at the
SCZ have been implemented since 28 December 2015.
Key audit findings for the SkyPier HSFs
travelling to/from Zhuhai and Macau against the requirements of the SkyPier
Plan during the reporting period are summarized in Table
7.1. The daily movements of all SkyPier HSFs in August 2016 were
within the maximum daily cap number (i.e. 10 to 94 daily movements, which are
within maximum daily cap of 125 daily movements). There are fewer ferry
movements on 1st and 2nd August 2016 (52 and 10
movements respectively ) due to Typhoon. Status of compliance with annual
daily average of 99 movements will be further reviewed in the annual EM&A
Report.
In total, 809 ferry movements between HKIA
SkyPier and Zhuhai / Macau were recorded in August 2016 and the data are
presented in Appendix
I. The time spent for the SkyPier HSFs travelled through the SCZ in
August were presented in Figure 7‑1.
It will take 9.6 minutes to travel through the SCZ when the SkyPier HSFs adopt
the maximum allowed speed of 15-knot within the SCZ. Figure
7‑1 shows that all the SkyPier HSFs spent more than 9.6 minutes
to travel through the SCZ.
Figure 7‑1 Duration of the SkyPier HSFs
travelled through the SCZ for 1 – 31 August 2016
Seven ferry movements were recorded with minor
deviation of diverted route on 3, 4, 14, 15, 18, 26 and 28 August 2016. Notices
were sent to the ferry operators and the investigation results revealed that
they were related to safety / emergency situations presented as follows:
● Cases on 3 and 15 August 2016: HSF
captains reported that they had to give way to other vessels for safety reason
and were not able to enter the SCZ through the gate access points. Then the HSF
returned to the normal route following the SkyPier Plan.
● Case on 4 and 18 August 2016: HSF
captains reported that
the deviation was due to strong tidal wave and current.
● Case on 14, 26 and 28
August 2016: These cases are under investigation.
Cases of minor route deviation in July 2016
have been followed up. For the cases on 1, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 15 July 2016,
similar minor deviations of diverted route were observed. The six cases were
recorded with the same ferry. Repeated deviations were recorded with the same
captain for the five cases on 8, 9, 11, 12 and 15 July 2016 and another captain
is responsible for the remaining case on 1 July 2016. The ferry operator
reported that the deviations were due to strong tidal wave and current and
wrong reference points of SCZ were applied. The instantaneous speeds of all the
above cases were within the 15-knot speed limit. Warning letter has been issued
to the concerned ferry operator to prevent reoccurrence. The ferry operator is
also recommended to check the coordinates of SCZ plotted on the radar.
Refresher training to the two concerned vessel captains will be provided by
experienced captain of the concerned ferry operator to ensure the captains are
familiarised with the SkyPier Plan requirements.
For the case on 22 July 2016, investigation
found that the vessel captain was required to give way to other vessels for
safety reason. After that, the HSF returned to the normal route following the
SkyPier Plan.
Table 7.1: Summary of Key Audit Findings
against the SkyPier Plan
Requirements in the SkyPier Plan |
1 August to 31 August 2016 |
Total number of ferry movements recorded and audited |
809 |
Use diverted route and enter / leave SCZ through Gate Access Points |
7 deviations (FO were requested to provide further supporting evidence for investigation) |
Speed control in speed control zone |
All HSFs were within 15 knots (5.7 knots to 14.6 knots), which complied with the SkyPier Plan. The time used by HSF to travel through SCZ is presented in Figure 7‑1. |
Daily Cap (including all SkyPier HSFs)
|
10 to 94 daily movements (within maximum daily cap - 125 daily movements) There are fewer ferry movements on 1st and 2nd August 2016 (52 and 10 movements respectively ) due to Typhoon. |
The Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan
for Construction and Associated Vessel (MTRMP-CAV) has been submitted and
approved in December 2015 by EPD under EP Condition 2.9. The approved Plan is
available on the dedicated website of the Project.
Although no major construction activities were
conducted in August 2016, skipper training workshops have been held with
concerned captains of construction vessels associated with Contract P560(R) Aviation Fuel Pipeline Diversion
Works and the four DCM 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.
The ET will work with new Contractors
mobilising for 3RS works on reviewing and helping them familiarise with the
requirements of the MTRMP-CAV.
ET has audited of all the relevant information,
including AIS data, vessel tracks, record of potential deviations and the
responses provided by concerned captain, to ensure full compliance with the
requirements of the MTRMP-CAV. Weekly audits have been conducted in August to
ensure that sufficient information has been provided by Marine Traffic Control
Center (MTCC). The IEC of the Project has also performed audit on the
compliance of the requirements as part of the EM&A programme.
In accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual,
ecological monitoring shall be undertaken monthly at the HDD daylighting
location on Sheung Sha Chau Island to identify and evaluate any impacts with
appropriate actions taken as required to address and minimise any adverse
impact found. Monthly ecological monitoring on Sheung Sha Chau Island observed
one suspected late breeding/nursery activitiy of egret at the southern side of
the island and confirmed that there was no construction works at Sheung Sha Chau
and thus no direct encroachment or disturbance to the identified egretry area.
The current
status of submissions under the EP up to the reporting period is presented in Table 7.2.
Table 7.2: Status of Submissions
under Environmental Permit
EP Condition |
Submission |
Status |
2.1 |
Complaint Management Plan |
Accepted / approved by EPD |
2.4 |
Management Organizations |
|
2.5 |
Construction Works Schedule and Location Plans |
|
2.7 |
Marine Park Proposal |
|
2.8 |
Marine Ecology Conservation Plan |
|
2.9 |
Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for Construction and Associated Vessels |
|
2.10 |
Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for High Speed Ferries of SkyPier |
|
2.11 |
Marine Mammal Watching Plan |
|
2.12 |
Coral Translocation Plan |
|
2.13 |
Fisheries Management Plan |
|
2.14 |
Egretry Survey Plan |
|
2.15 |
Silt Curtain Deployment Plan |
|
2.17 |
Detailed Plan on Deep Cement Mixing |
|
2.16 |
Spill Response Plan |
|
2.19 |
Waste Management Plan |
|
3.1 |
Updated EM&A Manual |
|
3.4 |
Baseline Monitoring Report |
During the reporting period, environmental
related licenses and permits required for the construction activities were
checked. No non-compliance with environmental statutory requirements was
recorded. The environmental licenses and permits which are valid in the
reporting month are presented in Appendix
G.
During the reporting period, no construction
activities related complaints were received.
During the
reporting period, neither notifications of summons nor prosecution were
received.
Cumulative
statistics on complaints, notifications of summons and status of prosecutions
are summarized in Appendix
H.
Major
site activities anticipated in the next reporting period for the Project will
be under the following contracts including:
Advance
works Contract:
Contract P560 (R) Aviation Fuel Pipeline Diversion Works
● HDD pilot hole drilling;
● Stockpiling of excavated
materials from HDD operation; and
● Site clearance and
construction work at Sheung Sha Chau.
DCM Contracts:
Contract 3201 to 3204 Deep Cement Mixing Works
● Mobilization;
● Off-site plant
fabrication; and
● Site survey and
investigation.
Other Contracts:
Contract 3213 CLP Cable Diversion
Enabling Works
● Land-based site
preparation works.
Site
investigation works will continue to carry out to support design process.
The key environmental issues for the Project in
the coming reporting period are expected to be associated with the construction
activities include:
● Generation of dust from construction
works;
● Noise impact from operating
equipment and machinery on-site;
● Generation of site surface runoffs
and wastewater from activities on-site;
● Management of stockpiles;
● Sorting, recycling, storage and
disposal of general refuse and construction waste;
● Management of chemicals and
avoidance of oil spillage on-site; and
● Acoustic decoupling measures for
equipment on marine vessel.
The
implementation of required mitigation measures by the Contractor will be
monitored by the ET.
A tentative schedule of the planned
environmental monitoring work in the next reporting period is provided in Appendix
D.
The key construction activities of the Project
carried out in the reporting month were related to Contract P560(R) which
involved drilling of HDD pilot hole, stockpiling of excavated materials from
HDD operation and site clearance and preparation works at Sheung Sha Chau.
Works under the other four DCM contracts involved mobilization and off-site
plant fabrication, and CLP cable diversion enabling work involved site
preparation works. Some site investigation works were also carried out
during the reporting period.
Construction dust, noise, waste and ecological
monitoring were carried out in the reporting period.
As observed on site and confirmed by the
contractor, no marine construction works was conducted during the reporting
period. The water quality monitoring and CWD monitoring were completed as
scheduled although no marine construction works was carried out during the
reporting period.
No breach of the Action or Limit Levels in
relation to the air quality, construction noise, waste and ecological
monitoring were recorded in the reporting month. 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.
On the implementation of the SkyPier Plan, the
daily movements of all SkyPier HSFs in August 2016 were 10 to 94 daily
movements, which are within the maximum daily cap of 125 daily movements.
A total of 809 HSF movements under SkyPier Plan were recorded in August 2016.
All HSFs had travelled through the SCZ with prevailing speed under 15 knots
(5.7 to 14.6 knots) in compliance with the SkyPier Plan. Seven ferry movements
showed minor deviations from the diverted route. Four of the cases were due to
public safety and the remaining three cases are under investigation. In
summary, the ET and IEC have audited the HSF movements against the SkyPier Plan
and conducted follow up investigation or actions accordingly.
On the implementation of the Marine Travel
Routes and Management Plan for Construction and Associated Vessel (MTRMP-CAV),
skipper training workshops have been held with concerned captains of
construction vessels to familiarise them with the requirements of the
Plan. The ET is working with contractors to familiarise with the
requirements of the MTRMP-CAV .