|
Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System |
|
Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No.45 (For September 2019) |
|
3RS |
Three-Runway System |
|
AAHK |
Airport Authority Hong Kong |
|
AECOM |
AECOM Asia Company Limited |
|
AFCD |
Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department |
|
AIS |
Automatic Information System |
|
ANI |
Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphins |
|
APM |
Automated People Mover |
|
AW |
Airport West |
|
BHS |
Baggage Handling System |
|
C&D |
Construction and Demolition |
|
CAP |
Contamination Assessment Plan |
|
CAR |
Contamination Assessment Report |
|
CNP |
Construction Noise Permit |
|
CWD |
Chinese White Dolphin |
|
DCM |
Deep Cement Mixing |
|
DEZ |
Dolphin Exclusion Zone |
|
DO |
Dissolved Oxygen |
|
EAR |
Ecological Acoustic Recorder |
|
EIA |
Environmental Impact Assessment |
|
EM&A |
Environmental Monitoring & Audit |
|
EP |
Environmental Permit |
|
EPD |
Environmental Protection Department |
|
ET |
Environmental Team |
|
FCZ |
Fish Culture Zone |
|
HDD |
Horizontal Directional Drilling |
|
HKBCF |
Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities |
|
HKIA |
Hong Kong International Airport |
|
HOKLAS |
Hong Kong Laboratory Accreditation Scheme |
|
HSF |
High Speed Ferry |
|
HVS |
High Volume Sampler |
|
IEC |
Independent Environmental Checker |
|
LKC |
Lung Kwu Chau |
|
MMHK |
Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited |
|
MMWP |
Marine Mammal Watching Plan |
|
MSS |
Maritime Surveillance System |
|
MTRMP-CAV |
Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for Construction and Associated Vessel |
|
NEL |
Northeast Lantau |
|
NWL |
Northwest Lantau |
|
PAM |
Passive Acoustic Monitoring |
|
PVD |
Prefabricated Vertical Drain |
|
SC |
Sha Chau |
|
SCLKCMP |
Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park |
|
SS |
Suspended Solids |
|
SSSI |
Site of Special Scientific Interest |
|
STG |
Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphin Sightings |
|
SWL |
Southwest Lantau |
|
T2 |
Terminal 2 |
|
The Project |
The Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System |
|
The SkyPier Plan |
Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for High Speed Ferries of SkyPier |
|
The Manual |
The Updated EM&A Manual |
|
TSP |
Total Suspended Particulates |
|
WL |
West Lantau |
|
WMP |
Waste Management Plan |
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 45th Construction Phase
Monthly EM&A Report for the Project which summarises the monitoring results
and audit findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1
to 30 September 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, and seawall construction. Land-side works involved mainly airfield
works, 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 monthly EM&A programme was
undertaken in accordance with the Manual of the Project. Summary of the
monitoring activities during this reporting period is presented as below:
|
Monitoring Activities |
Number of Sessions |
|
1-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) air quality monitoring |
30 |
|
Noise monitoring |
16 |
|
Water quality monitoring |
12 |
|
Vessel line-transect surveys for Chinese White Dolphin (CWD) monitoring |
2 |
|
Land-based theodolite tracking survey effort for CWD monitoring |
3 |
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 Maritime 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 EM&A Activities in the
Reporting Period
|
|
|
|
|
Community Liaison Group Meeting to Enhance Communication with the Community in a Proactive Way |
Impact Noise Monitoring Conducted by ET in Man Tung Road Park |
Contract Progress Meeting Conducted by AAHK, ET and Contractor to Discuss Site Environmental Issues |
Results of Impact Monitoring
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 did not trigger the
corresponding Action and Limit Levels in the reporting period.
The water quality monitoring results for
turbidity, total alkalinity, 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), suspended solids (SS),
and nickel, some testing results triggered the relevant Action Levels, and the
corresponding investigations were conducted accordingly. The investigation
findings concluded that the cases were 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.
Summary of Upcoming Key Issues
Advanced Works:
Contract P560 (R) Aviation Fuel Pipeline
Diversion Works
● Stockpiling of
compressed materials
DCM Works:
Contract 3205 DCM works
● DCM works
Reclamation Works:
Contract 3206 Main Reclamation Works
● Land base ground improvement works;
● Seawall construction; and
● Marine filling.
Airfield Works:
Contract 3301 North Runway
Crossover Taxiway
● Cable ducting works;
● Subgrade compaction and
paving works;
● Drainage construction
works;
● Operation of aggregate
mixing facility; and
● Precast of duct bank and
fabrication of steel works.
Contract 3302 Eastern Vehicular
Tunnel Advance Works
● Site survey and cable
laying;
● Pavement removal works;
● Backfilling and
reinstatement works; and
● Site establishment.
Contract 3303 Third Runway and
Associated Works
● Plant and equipment
mobilisation; and
● Site establishment.
Third Runway Concourse and Integrated Airport Centres Works:
Contract 3402 New Integrated
Airport Centres Enabling Works
● Superstructure works;
● Lateral supports and
excavation works;
● Drawpit and duct laying
works;
● Manhole and pipe
construction works; and
● Site establishment.
Terminal 2 Expansion Works:
Contract 3501 Antenna Farm and
Sewage Pumping Station
● Drainage works;
● Boring works; and
● Pipe installation.
Contract 3502 Terminal 2 Automated
People Mover (APM) Depot Modification Works
● Site clearance.
Contract 3503 Terminal 2
Foundation and Substructure Works
● Site establishment;
● Utilities, drainage, and road work;
and
● Piling and structure works.
Automated People Mover (APM) Works:
Contract
3602 Existing APM System Modification Works
● Site establishment; and
● Modification works at
APM depot.
Airport Support
Infrastructure & Logistic Works:
Contract 3801 APM and BHS Tunnels
on Existing Airport Island
● Site establishment;
● Cofferdam installation
for box culvert;
● Rising main
installation;
● Drilling and grouting
works;
● Piling and foundation
works
● Demolition works; and
● Site clearance.
The
following table summarises the key findings of the EM&A programme during
the reporting period:
|
Yes |
No |
Details |
Analysis / Recommendation / Remedial Actions |
|
|
Breach of Limit Level^ |
|
√ |
No breach of Limit Level was recorded. |
Nil |
|
Breach of Action Level^ |
|
√ |
No breach of Action Level was recorded. |
Nil |
|
|
√ |
No construction activities-related complaint was received |
Nil |
|
|
Notification of any summons and status of prosecutions |
|
√ |
No notification of summons or prosecution was received.
|
Nil |
|
Change that affect the EM&A |
|
√ |
There was no change to the construction works that may affect the EM&A. |
Nil |
Note:
^ 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 45th Construction Phase
Monthly EM&A Report for the Project which summarises the key findings of
the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 to 30 September 2019.
1.3
Project
Organisation
The Project’s organisation structure presented
in Appendix B of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No.1 remained
unchanged during the reporting period. Contact details of the key personnel are
presented in Table 1.1.
Table 1.1: Contact Information of Key Personnel
|
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
|
Project Manager’s Representative (Airport Authority Hong Kong) |
Principal Manager, Environment |
Lawrence Tsui |
2183 2734 |
|
Environmental Team (ET) (Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited) |
Environmental Team Leader |
Terence Kong |
2828 5919 |
|
|
Deputy Environmental Team Leader |
Heidi Yu |
2828 5704 |
|
|
Deputy Environmental Team Leader |
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 3205 DCM (Package 5) (Bachy Soletanche - Sambo Joint Venture) |
Deputy Project Director |
Min Park |
9683 0765 |
|
Environmental Officer |
William Chan |
5408 3045 |
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 (T2) Expansion Works:
|
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
|
Contract 3501 Antenna Farm and Sewage Pumping Station (Build King Construction Ltd.) |
Contracts 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) |
Project 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 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, and seawall construction. Land-side works involved mainly airfield
works, foundation and substructure work for Terminal 2 expansion, modification
and tunnel work for Automated People Mover (APM) and Baggage Handling System
(BHS) systems, 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 key construction
activities are presented in Figure 1.1. Figure 1.2 presents the latest layout
of enhanced silt curtain deployed and a section of enhanced silt curtain phased
out in this reporting period. In accordance with the Silt Curtain Deployment
Plan, when a certain section of seawalls were partially completed with rock
core to high tide mark and filter layer on the inner side, and an overlapping
length of at least 150m for seawall and enhanced silt curtain was maintained,
the enhanced silt curtain would be phased out.
1.5
Summary
of EM&A Programme Requirements
The status for all environmental
aspects are presented in Table 1.2.
The EM&A requirements remained unchanged during the reporting period and
details can be referred to Table 1.2 of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A
Report No. 1.
Table 1.2: Summary of status for all environmental
aspects under the Updated EM&A
Manual
|
Parameters |
Status |
|
Air Quality |
|
|
Baseline Monitoring |
The baseline air quality monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4. |
|
Impact Monitoring |
On-going |
|
Noise |
|
|
Baseline Monitoring |
The baseline noise monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4. |
|
Impact Monitoring |
On-going |
|
Water Quality |
|
|
General Baseline Water Quality Monitoring for reclamation, water jetting and field joint works |
The baseline water quality monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4. |
|
General Impact Water Quality Monitoring for reclamation, water jetting and field joint works |
On-going |
|
Initial Intensive Deep Cement Mixing (DCM) Water Quality Monitoring |
The Initial Intensive DCM Monitoring Report was submitted and approved by EPD in accordance with the Detailed Plan on DCM. |
|
Regular DCM Water Quality Monitoring |
On-going |
|
Waste Management |
|
|
Waste Monitoring |
On-going |
|
Land Contamination |
|
|
Supplementary Contamination Assessment Plan (CAP) |
The Supplementary CAP was submitted to EPD pursuant to EP Condition 2.20. |
|
Contamination Assessment Report (CAR) for Golf Course |
The CAR for Golf Course was submitted to EPD. |
|
Terrestrial Ecology |
|
|
Pre-construction Egretry Survey Plan |
The Egretry Survey Plan was submitted and approved by EPD under EP Condition 2.14. |
|
Ecological Monitoring |
The terrestrial ecological monitoring at Sheung Sha Chau was completed in January 2019. |
|
Marine Ecology |
|
|
Pre-Construction Phase Coral Dive Survey |
The Coral Translocation Plan was submitted and approved by EPD under EP Condition 2.12. |
|
Coral Translocation |
The coral translocation was completed. |
|
Post-Translocation Coral Monitoring |
The post-translocation monitoring programme according to the Coral Translocation Plan was completed in April 2018. |
|
Chinese White Dolphins (CWD) |
|
|
Vessel Survey, Land-based Theodolite Tracking and Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) |
|
|
Baseline Monitoring |
Baseline CWD results were reported in the CWD Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD in accordance with EP Condition 3.4. |
|
Impact Monitoring |
On-going |
|
Landscape & Visual |
|
|
Landscape & Visual Plan |
The Landscape & Visual Plan was submitted to EPD under EP Condition 2.18 |
|
Baseline Monitoring |
The baseline landscape & visual monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4. |
|
Impact Monitoring |
On-going |
|
Environmental Auditing |
|
|
Regular site inspection |
On-going |
|
Marine Mammal Watching Plan (MMWP) implementation measures |
On-going |
|
Dolphin Exclusion Zone (DEZ) Plan implementation measures |
On-going |
|
SkyPier High Speed Ferries (HSF) implementation measures |
On-going |
|
Construction and Associated Vessels Implementation measures |
On-going |
|
Complaint Hotline and Email channel |
On-going |
|
Environmental Log Book |
On-going |
Taking into account the construction works in
this reporting period, impact monitoring of air quality, noise, water quality,
waste management, landscape & visual, and CWD were carried out in the
reporting period.
The EM&A programme also involved weekly
site inspections and related auditing conducted by the ET for checking the
implementation of the required environmental mitigation measures recommended in
the approved EIA Report. To promote the environmental awareness and
enhance the environmental performance of the contractors, environmental
trainings and regular environmental management meetings were conducted
during the reporting period, which are summarised as below:
● Eight environmental management
meetings for EM&A review with works contracts: 6, 18, 19, 23, 25, and 26
September 2019
The EM&A programme has been following the
recommendations presented in the approved EIA Report and the Manual. A summary
of implementation status of the environmental mitigation measures for the
construction phase of the Project during the reporting period is provided in Appendix A.
2
Air Quality Monitoring
Air quality monitoring of 1-hour Total
Suspended Particulates (TSP) was conducted three times every six days at two
representative monitoring stations in the vicinity of air sensitive receivers
in Tung Chung and villages in North Lantau in accordance with the Manual. Table 2.1 describes
the details of the monitoring stations. Figure 2.1 shows the locations of the
monitoring stations.
Table 2.1:
Locations of Impact Air Quality Monitoring Stations
|
Monitoring Station |
Location |
|
AR1A |
Man Tung Road Park |
|
AR2 |
Village House at Tin Sum |
2.1 Action and Limit Levels
In accordance with the Manual, baseline air
quality monitoring of 1-hour TSP levels at the two air quality monitoring
stations were established as presented in the Baseline Monitoring Report. The
Action and Limit Levels of the air quality monitoring stipulated in the
EM&A programme for triggering the relevant investigation and follow-up
procedures under the programme are provided in Table 2.2.
Table 2.2: Action and Limit Levels of Air
Quality Monitoring
|
Monitoring Station |
Action Level (mg/m3) |
Limit Level (mg/m3) |
|
AR1A |
306 |
500 |
|
AR2 |
298 |
2.2
Monitoring
Equipment
Portable direct reading dust meter was used to
carry out the air quality monitoring. Details of equipment used in the
reporting period are given in Table
2.3.
Table 2.3: Air Quality Monitoring
Equipment
|
Brand and Model |
Last Calibration Date |
Calibration Certificate Provided in |
|
|
Portable direct reading dust meter (Laser dust monitor) |
SIBATA LD-3B-2 (Serial No. 296098) |
16 Oct 2018 |
Monthly EM&A Report No. 35, Appendix D |
|
|
SIBATA LD-3B-1 |
19 Sep 2019
|
2.3
Monitoring Methodology
2.3.1
Measuring
Procedure
The
measurement procedures involved in the impact air quality monitoring can be
summarised as follows:
a.
The portable direct
reading dust meter was mounted on a tripod at a height of 1.2m above the
ground.
b.
Prior to the
measurement, the equipment was set up for 1 minute span check and 6 second
background check.
c.
The one hour dust
measurement was started. Site conditions and dust sources at the nearby area
were recorded on a record sheet.
d.
When the measurement
completed, the “Count” reading per hour was recorded for result calculation.
2.3.2
Maintenance
and Calibration
The portable direct reading dust
meter is calibrated every year against high volume sampler (HVS) to check the
validity and accuracy of the results measured by direct reading method. The
calibration record of the HVS provided in Appendix D, and
the calibration certificates of portable direct reading dust meters listed in Table 2.3 are valid
in the reporting period.
The air quality monitoring schedule involved in the reporting period is
provided in Appendix B.
The air
quality monitoring results in the reporting period are summarised in Table 2.4. Detailed
impact monitoring results are presented in Appendix C.
Table 2.4: Summary of Air Quality Monitoring Results
|
Monitoring Station |
1-hr TSP Concentration Range (mg/m3) |
Action Level (mg/m3) |
Limit Level (mg/m3) |
|
AR1A |
6 –75 |
306 |
500 |
|
AR2 |
15 –129 |
298 |
The monitoring results were within the
corresponding Action and Limit Levels at all monitoring stations in the
reporting period.
General meteorological conditions throughout
the impact monitoring period were recorded. Wind data including wind speed and
wind direction for each monitoring day were collected from the Chek Lap Kok
Wind Station.
2.4
Conclusion
No dust emission source from Project activities
was observed during impact air quality monitoring. No major sources of dust was
observed at the monitoring stations during the monitoring sessions. It is
considered that the monitoring work in the reporting period is effective and
there was no adverse impact attributable to the Project activities.
3 Noise Monitoring
Noise monitoring in the form of 30-minute
measurements of Leq, L10, and L90 levels was
conducted once per week between 0700 and 1900 on normal weekdays at four
representative monitoring stations in the vicinity of noise sensitive receivers
in Tung Chung and villages in North Lantau in accordance with the Manual. Table 3.1 describes
the details of the monitoring stations. Figure 2.1 shows the locations of the
monitoring stations.
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(2) |
Site Office |
Facade |
|
NM4 |
Ching Chung Hau Po Woon Primary School |
Free field |
|
NM5 |
Village House in Tin Sum |
Free field |
|
NM6 |
House No. 1, Sha Lo Wan |
Free field |
Note:
(1) As described in Section 4.3.3 of the Manual, noise monitoring at NM2
will only commence after occupation of the future Tung Chung West Development.
(2) According to
Section 4.3.3 of the Manual, the noise monitoring at NM3A was temporarily
suspended starting from 1 September 2018 and would be resumed with the
completion of the Tung Chung East Development.
3.1
Action
and Limit Levels
In accordance
with the Manual, baseline noise levels at the noise monitoring stations were
established as presented in the Baseline Monitoring Report. The Action and
Limit Levels of the noise monitoring stipulated in the EM&A programme for
triggering the relevant investigation and follow-up procedures under the
programme are provided in Table
3.2.
Table 3.2: Action and Limit Levels for Noise Monitoring
|
Monitoring Stations |
Time Period |
Action Level |
Limit Level, Leq(30mins) dB(A) |
|
NM1A, NM2, NM3A, NM4, NM5 and NM6 |
0700-1900 hours on normal weekdays |
When one documented complaint is received from any one of the sensitive receivers |
75dB(A)(1) |
Note:
(1) The Limit Level for NM4 is reduced to 70dB(A) for being an educational
institution. During school examination period, the Limit Level is further
reduced to 65dB(A).
3.2
Monitoring Equipment
Noise monitoring was performed using sound
level meter at each designated monitoring station. The sound level meters
deployed comply with the International Electrotechnical Commission Publications
651:1979 (Type 1) and 804:1985 (Type 1) specifications. Acoustic calibrator was
used to check the sound level meters by a known sound pressure level for field
measurement. Details of equipment used in the reporting period are given
in Table 3.3.
Table 3.3: Noise Monitoring
Equipment
|
Equipment |
Brand and Model |
Last Calibration Date |
Calibration Certificate Provided in |
|
Integrated Sound Level Meter |
NTi XL2 (Serial No. A2A-14829-E0) |
14 Jul 2019 |
Monthly EM&A Report No. 43, Appendix D |
|
Rion NL-52 (Serial No. 01287679) |
21 Sep 2019 |
||
|
Acoustic Calibrator |
Casella CEL-120/1 (Serial No. 2383737) |
21 Sep 2019 |
|
|
Castle GA607 (Serial No. 040162) |
14 Jul 2019 |
Monthly EM&A Report No. 43, Appendix D |
3.3
Monitoring Methodology
3.3.1
Monitoring
Procedure
The
monitoring procedures involved in the noise monitoring can be summarised as
follows:
a. The sound level meter was set on a tripod at
least a height of 1.2m above the ground for free-field measurements at
monitoring stations NM1A, NM4, NM5 and NM6. A correction of +3dB(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 1dB(A), the
measurement would be considered invalid and repeat of noise measurement would
be required after re-calibration or repair of the equipment.
e. During the monitoring period, Leq, L10
and L90 were recorded. In addition, site conditions and noise
sources were recorded on a record sheet.
f. Noise measurement results were
corrected with reference to the baseline monitoring levels.
g. Observations were recorded when high intrusive
noise (e.g. dog barking, helicopter noise) was observed during the monitoring.
3.3.2
Maintenance
and Calibration
The
maintenance and calibration procedures are summarised below:
a. The microphone head of the sound level meter
was cleaned with soft cloth at regular intervals.
b. The meter and calibrator were sent to the
supplier or laboratory accredited under Hong Kong Laboratory Accreditation
Scheme (HOKLAS) to check and calibrate at yearly intervals.
Calibration certificates of the
sound level meters and acoustic calibrators used in the noise monitoring listed
in Table 3.3 are valid in
the reporting period.
3.4
Summary
of Monitoring Results
The noise monitoring schedule involved in the reporting period is
provided in Appendix B.
The noise monitoring results in the reporting
period are summarised in Table
3.4.
Detailed impact monitoring results are presented in Appendix C.
Table 3.4: Summary of Construction Noise Monitoring Results
|
Monitoring Station |
Noise Level Range, dB(A) Leq (30 mins) |
Limit Level, dB(A) Leq (30 mins) |
|
NM1A(1) |
66 – 72 |
75 |
|
NM4(1) |
63 – 66 |
70(2) |
|
NM5(1) |
53 – 58 |
75 |
|
NM6(1) |
64 – 71 |
75 |
Notes:
(1)
+3dB(A) Façade
correction included;
(2)
Reduced to 65dB(A)
during school examination periods at NM4. No school examination took place
during this reporting period.
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.
3.5
Conclusion
As the construction activities were far away
from the monitoring stations, major sources of noise dominating the monitoring
stations observed during the construction noise impact monitoring were traffic
noise near NM1A, school activities at NM4 and aircraft noise near NM6 during
this reporting period. It is considered that the monitoring work during the
reporting period was effective and there was no adverse impact attributable to
the Project activities.
4
Water Quality Monitoring
Water quality monitoring of DO, pH,
temperature, salinity, turbidity, suspended solids (SS), total alkalinity,
chromium, and nickel was conducted three days per week, at mid-ebb and
mid-flood 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 water quality sensitive receivers around the
airport island in accordance with the Manual. The
purpose of water quality monitoring at the IM stations is to promptly capture
any potential water quality impact from the Project before it could become
apparent at sensitive receivers (represented by the SR stations). Table 4.1 describes the details of the
monitoring stations. Figure 4.1 shows the locations of the
monitoring stations.
Table 4.1: Monitoring Locations and Parameters of 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 |
|
|
SR6A(5) |
Tai Ho Bay, Near Tai Ho Stream SSSI |
814739 |
817963 |
|
|
SR7 |
Ma Wan Fish Culture Zone (FCZ) |
823742 |
823636 |
|
|
SR8(6) |
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. To better reflect the water quality in the immediate vicinity of the
intake, the monitoring location of SR1A has been shifted closer to the intake
starting from 5 January 2019.
(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) As the access to
SR6 was obstructed by the construction activities and temporary structures for
Tung Chung New Town Extension, the monitoring location has been relocated to
SR6A starting from 8 August 2019.
(6)
The monitoring location for SR8 is subject to further
changes due to silt curtain arrangements and the progressive relocation of this
seawater intake.
4.1
Action
and Limit Levels
In accordance with the Manual, baseline water
quality levels at the above-mentioned representative water quality monitoring
stations were established as presented in the Baseline Water Quality Monitoring
Report. The
Action and Limit Levels of general water quality monitoring and regular DCM
monitoring stipulated in the EM&A programme for triggering the relevant
investigation and follow-up procedures under the programme are provided in Table 4.2. The control
and impact stations during ebb tide and flood tide for general water quality
monitoring and regular DCM monitoring are presented in Table 4.3.
Table 4.2: Action and Limit Levels for General Water Quality Monitoring
and Regular DCM Monitoring
|
Parameters |
Action Level (AL) |
Limit Level (LL) |
|||
|
Action and Limit Levels for general water quality monitoring and regular DCM monitoring (excluding SR1A & SR8) |
|||||
|
General Water Quality Monitoring |
DO in mg/L (Surface, Middle & Bottom) |
Surface and Middle 4.5mg/L |
Surface and Middle 4.1mg/L 5mg/L for Fish Culture Zone (SR7) only |
||
|
Bottom 3.4mg/L |
Bottom 2.7mg/L |
||||
|
Suspended Solids (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 |
|||
|
Regular DCM Monitoring |
Total Alkalinity in ppm |
95 |
99 |
||
|
Representative Heavy Metals for regular DCM monitoring (Chromium) in µg/L |
0.2 |
0.2 |
|||
|
Representative Heavy Metals for regular DCM monitoring (Nickel) in µg/L |
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,
non-compliance occurs when monitoring result is lower than the limits.
(2) For parameters other than DO, non-compliance of
water quality results when monitoring results is higher than the limits.
(3) Depth-averaged results are used unless
specified otherwise.
(4)
Details of selection criteria for the two heavy metals for regular DCM
monitoring refer to the Detailed Plan on Deep Cement Mixing available on the
dedicated 3RS website (http://env.threerunwaysystem.com/en/ep-submissions.html)
(5) The Action and
Limit Levels for the two representative heavy metals chosen will be the same as
that for the intensive DCM monitoring.
Table 4.3: The Control and Impact
Stations during Flood Tide and Ebb Tide for General Water Quality Monitoring
and Regular DCM Monitoring
|
Control Station |
Impact Stations |
|
Flood Tide |
|
|
C1 |
IM1, IM2, IM3, IM4, IM5, IM6, IM7, IM8, SR3 |
|
SR2(1) |
IM7, IM8, IM9, IM10, IM11, IM12, SR1A, SR3, SR4A, SR5A, SR6A, SR8 |
|
Ebb Tide |
|
|
C1 |
SR4A, SR5A, SR6A |
|
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 September
2016 onwards.
4.2
Monitoring
Equipment
Table
4.4 summarises the equipment
used in the reporting period for monitoring of specific water quality
parameters under the water quality monitoring programme.
Table 4.4: Water Quality Monitoring Equipment
|
Brand and Model |
Last Calibration Date |
Calibration Certificate Provided in |
|
|
Multifunctional Meter (measurement of DO, pH, temperature, salinity and turbidity) |
YSI ProDSS (Serial No. 17E100747) |
25 Jun 2019 |
Monthly EM&A Report No. 42, Appendix E |
|
YSI ProDSS (Serial No. 15M100005) |
25 Jun 2019 |
||
|
YSI 6920V2 (Serial No. 0001C6A7) |
24 Jul 2019 |
Monthly EM&A Report No. 43, Appendix D |
|
|
YSI 6920V2 (Serial No. 00019CB2) |
24 Jul 2019 |
||
|
YSI 6920V2 (Serial No. 18A104824) |
2 Aug 2019 |
Monthly EM&A Report No. 44, Appendix D |
|
|
YSI ProDSS (Serial No. 17H105557) |
27 Sep 2019 |
||
|
YSI ProDSS (Serial No. 16H104233) |
27 Sep 2019 |
||
|
Digital Titrator (measurement of total alkalinity) |
Titrette Digital Burette 50ml Class A (Serial No. 10N65665) |
19 Jun 2019 |
Monthly EM&A Report No. 44, Appendix D
|
|
Titrette Digital Burette 50ml Class A (Serial No. 10N64701) |
9 Sep 2019 |
||
Other equipment used as part of the impact
water quality monitoring programme are listed in Table 4.5.
Table 4.5:
Other Monitoring Equipment
|
Equipment |
Brand and Model |
|
Water Sampler |
Van Dorn Water Sampler |
|
Positioning Device (measurement of GPS) |
Garmin eTrex Vista HCx |
|
Current Meter (measurement of current speed and direction, and water depth) |
Sontek HydroSurveyor |
4.3 Monitoring Methodology
4.3.1
Measuring
Procedure
Water quality monitoring samples
were taken at three depths (at 1m below surface, at mid-depth, and at 1m above
bottom) for locations with water depth >6m. For locations with water depth
between 3m and 6m, water samples were taken at two depths (surface and bottom).
For locations with water depth <3m, only the mid-depth was taken. Duplicate water samples
were taken and analysed.
The water samples for all monitoring parameters
were collected, stored, preserved and analysed according to the Standard
Methods, APHA 22nd ed. and/or other methods as agreed by the EPD.
In-situ measurements at monitoring locations including temperature, pH, DO,
turbidity, salinity, alkalinity and water depth were collected by equipment
listed in Table 4.4
and Table 4.5.
Water samples for heavy metals and SS analysis were stored in high density
polythene bottles with no preservative added, packed in ice (cooled to 4ºC
without being frozen), delivered to the laboratory within 24 hours of
collection.
4.3.2
Maintenance
and Calibration
Calibration
of In-situ Instruments
Wet bulb calibration for a DO meter was carried
out before commencement of monitoring and after completion of all measurements
each day. Calibration was not conducted at each monitoring location as daily
calibration is adequate for the type of DO meter employed. A zero check in
distilled water was performed with the turbidity probe at least once per
monitoring day. The probe was then calibrated with a solution of known NTU. In
addition, the turbidity probe was calibrated at least twice per month to establish
the relationship between turbidity readings (in NTU) and levels of SS (in
mg/L). Accuracy check of the digital titrator was performed at least once
per monitoring day.
Calibration certificates of the monitoring
equipment used in the reporting period listed in Table 4.4 are still valid.
4.3.3 Laboratory Measurement / Analysis
Analysis of SS and heavy metals have
been carried out by a HOKLAS accredited laboratory, ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd
(Reg. No. HOKLAS 066). Sufficient water samples were collected at all the monitoring
stations for carrying out the laboratory SS and heavy metals determination. The
SS and heavy metals determination works were started within 24 hours after
collection of the water samples. The analysis of SS and heavy metals have
followed the standard methods summarised in Table
4.6. The QA/QC procedures for laboratory measurement/ analysis
of SS and heavy metals were presented in Appendix F of the Construction Phase
Monthly EM&A Report No.8.
Table 4.6: Laboratory Measurement/
Analysis of SS and Heavy Metals
|
Parameters |
Instrumentation |
Analytical Method |
Reporting Limit |
|
SS |
Analytical Balance |
APHA 2540D |
2mg/L |
|
Heavy Metals |
|
|
|
|
Chromium (Cr) |
ICP-MS |
USEPA 6020A |
0.2µg/L |
|
Nickel (Ni) |
ICP-MS |
USEPA 6020A |
0.2µg/L |
4.4
Summary
of Monitoring Results
The water
quality monitoring schedule for the reporting period is updated and provided in
Appendix B.
The water quality monitoring results for
turbidity, total alkalinity and chromium obtained during the reporting period
were within their corresponding Action and Limit Level. The detailed monitoring results are presented in Appendix C.
For DO, SS and nickel, some of the
testing results triggered the corresponding Action Levels, and investigations
were conducted accordingly.
Table 4.7 presents the summary of the DO compliance
status at IM and SR stations during mid-flood tide for the reporting period.
Table 4.7: Summary of DO (Surface and
Middle) Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)
|
Note: Detailed results are presented in Appendix C. |
|
|
Legend: |
|
|
|
The monitoring results were within the corresponding Action and Limit Levels |
|
|
Monitoring result triggered the Action Level at monitoring station located upstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow |
|
|
Upstream station with respect to the Project during the respective tide based on dominant tidal flow |
Monitoring results triggered the
corresponding Action Levels on 10 September 2019. Both cases at SR5A and SR6A
were located upstream of the Project during flood tide and were considered not
related to the Project. Table
4.8 and Table 4.9
present the summary of the SS compliance status at IM and SR stations during mid-ebb
and mid-flood tide for the reporting period.
Table 4.8: Summary of SS Compliance
Status (Mid-Ebb Tide)
Table 4.9: Summary of SS
Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)
|
Legend: |
|
|
|
The monitoring results were within the corresponding Action and Limit Levels |
|
|
Monitoring result triggered the Action Level at monitoring station located upstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow |
|
D |
Monitoring result triggered the Action Level at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow |
|
|
Upstream station with respect to the Project during the respective tide based on dominant tidal flow |
Action
Levels were triggered on 3 and 28 September 2019. Some cases occurred at
monitoring station upstream of the Project during respective tide and would
unlikely be affected by the Project.
Investigation
focusing on the cases that occurred at monitoring stations located downstream
of the Project was carried out. Details of the Project’s marine construction
activities and site observations on the concerned monitoring days were
collected and findings were summarised in Table 4.10.
Table 4.10: Summary of
Findings from Investigation of SS Monitoring Results
|
Date |
Marine construction works nearby |
Approximate distance from marine construction works
|
Status of water quality measures (if applicable) |
Construction vessels in the vicinity |
Turbidity / Silt plume observed near the monitoring station |
Action or Limit Level triggered due to Project |
|
03/09/2019 |
Marine filling and DCM works |
Around 0.5km |
Localised and enhanced silt curtain deployed |
No |
No |
No |
|
28/09/2019 |
Marine filling |
Around 0.5km |
Enhanced silt curtain deployed |
No |
No |
No |
The
investigation confirmed that DCM works and marine filling were operating
normally with localised and enhanced silt curtain deployed. The localised and
enhanced silt curtains were maintained properly and checked by ET regularly.
Contractor had followed up and carried out silt curtain maintenance when
defects were identified by ET Contractor.
For the
case at IM1 on 3 September 2019 during mid-ebb tide and at IM9 on 28 September
2019 during mid-flood tide, both cases were considered isolated cases with no
trigger of Action Level at other downstream IM stations. Similar trigger of
Action Levels were also recorded at the two stations during the earlier
monitoring session on the same day when they were located upstream of the
Project area, and this suggested the presence of external factors which might
affect the SS concentration near the stations.
Table 4.11 presents the summary of the nickel
compliance status at IM stations during mid-ebb tide for the reporting period.
Table 4.11:
Summary of Nickel Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide)
|
Note: Detailed results are presented in Appendix C. |
|
|
Legend: |
|
|
|
The monitoring results were within the corresponding Action and Limit Levels |
|
D |
Monitoring result triggered the Action Level at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow |
|
|
Upstream station with respect to the Project during the respective tide based on dominant tidal flow |
Monitoring result
triggered the corresponding Action Levels on 12 September 2019. Details of the
Project’s marine construction activities and site observations on the concerned
monitoring day were collected. The findings are summarised in Table 4.12.
Table 4.12:
Summary of Findings from Investigation of Nickel Monitoring Results
|
Date |
Marine construction works nearby |
Approximate distance from marine construction works
|
Status of water quality measures (if applicable) |
Construction vessels in the vicinity |
Turbidity / Silt plume observed near the monitoring station |
Action or Limit Level triggered due to Project |
|
12/09/2019 |
Marine filling and DCM works |
Around 2km |
Localised and enhanced silt curtain deployed |
No |
No |
No |
Regarding
the investigation findings, it was confirmed that DCM and marine filling works
on 12 September 2019 were operating normally with localised and enhanced silt
curtains deployed. The silt curtains were maintained properly and checked by ET
regularly.
Nickel is
a representative heavy metal that indicates the potential for release of
contaminants from contaminated mud pits due to the disturbance of marine
sediment within the pits by DCM activities, elevated nickel concentration due
to these activities should be associated with similar elevated SS levels. SS
results at all IM stations on 12 September 2019 were within their corresponding
Action and Limit Levels. It implies that active DCM works had limited or
insignificant influence on water quality in this period. Taking into account
the fact that no silt plume during marine works were observed and mitigation
measures were properly implemented, the case was considered not due to Project.
4.5 Conclusion
During the reporting period, it is noted that
the vast majority of monitoring results were within their corresponding Action
and Limit Levels, while only a minor number of results triggered the
corresponding Action Levels, and investigations were conducted accordingly.
Based on the investigation findings, all
results that triggered the corresponding Action Levels were not due to the
Project. Therefore, the Project did not cause adverse impact at the water
quality sensitive receivers. All required actions under the Event and Action
Plan were followed. These cases appeared to be due to natural fluctuation or
other sources not related to the Project.
Nevertheless, as part of the EM&A
programme, the construction methods and mitigation measures for water quality
will continue to be monitored and opportunities for further enhancement will
continue to be explored and implemented where possible, to strive for better
protection of water quality and the marine environment.
In the meantime, the contractors were reminded
to implement and maintain all mitigation measures during weekly site inspection
and regular environmental management meetings. These include maintaining
mitigation measures properly for reclamation works including DCM works, marine
filling, and seawall construction as recommended in the Manual.
5 Waste Management
In accordance with the Manual, the waste
generated from construction activities was audited once per week to determine
if wastes are being managed in accordance with the Waste Management Plan (WMP)
prepared for the Project, contract-specific WMP, and any statutory and
contractual requirements. All aspects of waste management including waste
generation, storage, transportation and disposal were assessed during the
audits.
5.1
Action
and Limit Levels
The Action and Limit Levels of the construction
waste are provided in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1:
Action and Limit Levels for Construction Waste
|
Monitoring Stations |
Action Level |
Limit Level |
|
Construction Area |
When one valid documented complaint is received |
Non-compliance of the WMP, contract-specific WMPs, any statutory and contractual requirements |
5.2
Waste
Management Status
Weekly monitoring on all works contracts were
carried out by the ET to check and monitor the implementation of proper waste
management practices during the construction phase.
Recommendations made included provision and
maintenance of 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 information provided by
contractors, construction waste generated in the reporting period is summarised
in Table 5.2.
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 5.2: Construction Waste Statistics
|
|
C&D(1) 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) |
|
August 2019(2)(3) |
*6,483 |
*6,798 |
0 |
3,447 |
200 |
7,200 |
827 |
|
September 2019(2)(4) |
3,704 |
798 |
460 |
3,963 |
75 |
3,600 |
748 |
|
Notes: (1) C&D refers to Construction and Demolition. (2) Metals, paper and/or plastics were recycled in the reporting period. (3) Updated figures in the past month are reported and marked with an asterisk (*). Updated figures for earlier months will be reported in the forthcoming Annual EM&A Report. (4) The data was based on the information provided by contractors up to the submission date of this Monthly EM&A Report, and might be updated in the forthcoming Monthly EM&A Report. |
|||||||
6 Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring
In accordance with the Manual, CWD monitoring by small vessel
line-transect survey supplemented by land-based theodolite tracking survey and
passive acoustic monitoring should be conducted during construction phase.
The small vessel line-transect survey should be
conducted at a frequency of two full surveys per month, while land-based
theodolite tracking survey should be conducted at a frequency of one day per
month per station at Sha Chau (SC) and Lung Kwu Chau (LKC) during the
construction phase as stipulated in the Manual. Supplemental theodolite
tracking survey of one additional day has also been conducted at LKC, i.e. in
total twice per month at the LKC station.
6.1
Action
and Limit Levels
The Action and Limit Levels for CWD monitoring
were formulated by the action response approach using the running quarterly
dolphin encounter rates STG and ANI derived from the baseline monitoring data,
as presented in the CWD Baseline Monitoring Report. The derived values of
Action and Limit Levels for CWD monitoring were summarised in Table 6.1.
Table 6.1: Derived Values of Action
and Limit Levels for Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring
|
|
NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL as a Whole |
|
Action Level(3) |
Running quarterly(1) STG < 1.86 & ANI < 9.35 |
|
Limit Level(3) |
Two consecutive running quarterly(2) (3-month) STG < 1.86 & ANI < 9.35 |
|
Notes: (referring to the baseline monitoring report) (1) Action Level – running quarterly STG & ANI will be calculated from the three preceding survey months. (2) Limit Level – two consecutive running quarters mean both the running quarterly encounter rates of the preceding month and the running quarterly encounter rates of this month. (3) Action Level and/or Limit Level will be triggered if both STG and ANI fall below the criteria. |
|
6.2
CWD
Monitoring Transects and Stations
6.2.1
Small
Vessel Line-transect Survey
Small vessel line-transect surveys
were conducted along the transects covering Northeast Lantau (NEL), Northwest
Lantau (NWL), Airport West (AW), West Lantau (WL) and Southwest Lantau (SWL)
areas as proposed in the Manual, which are consistent with the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation
Department (AFCD) long-term monitoring programme (except the addition of AW).
The AW transect has not been previously surveyed in the AFCD programme due to
the restrictions of HKIA Approach Area, nevertheless, this transect was
established during the EIA of the 3RS Project and refined in the Manual with
the aim to collect project specific baseline information within the HKIA
Approach Area to fill the data gap that was not covered by the AFCD programme.
This also provided a larger sample size for estimating the density, abundance
and patterns of movements in the broader study area of the project.
The planned vessel survey transect lines follow
the waypoints set for construction phase monitoring as proposed in the Manual
and depicted in Figure 6.1 with the waypoint coordinates of
all transect lines given in Table
6.2, which are subject to on-site refinement based on the actual
survey conditions and constraints.
Table 6.2:
Coordinates of Transect Lines in NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL Survey Areas
|
Waypoint |
Easting |
Northing |
Waypoint |
Easting |
Northing |
|
NEL |
|||||
|
1S |
813525 |
820900 |
6N |
818568 |
824433 |
|
1N |
813525 |
824657 |
7S |
819532 |
821420 |
|
2S |
814556 |
818449 |
7N |
819532 |
824209 |
|
2N |
814559 |
824768 |
8S |
820451 |
822125 |
|
3S |
815542 |
818807 |
8N |
820451 |
823671 |
|
3N |
815542 |
824882 |
9S |
821504 |
822371 |
|
4S |
816506 |
819480 |
9N |
821504 |
823761 |
|
4N |
816506 |
824859 |
10S |
822513 |
823268 |
|
5S |
817537 |
820220 |
10N |
822513 |
824321 |
|
5N |
817537 |
824613 |
11S |
823477 |
823402 |
|
6S |
818568 |
820735 |
11N |
823477 |
824613 |
|
NWL |
|||||
|
1S |
804671 |
814577 |
5S |
808504 |
821735 |
|
1N |
804671 |
831404 |
5N |
808504 |
828602 |
|
2Sb |
805475 |
815457 |
6S |
809490 |
822075 |
|
2Nb |
805476 |
818571 |
6N |
809490 |
825352 |
|
2Sa |
805476 |
820770 |
7S |
810499 |
822323 |
|
2Na |
805476 |
830562 |
7N |
810499 |
824613 |
|
3S |
806464 |
821033 |
8S |
811508 |
821839 |
|
3N |
806464 |
829598 |
8N |
811508 |
824254 |
|
4S |
807518 |
821395 |
9S |
812516 |
821356 |
|
4N |
807518 |
829230 |
9N |
812516 |
824254 |
|
AW |
|||||
|
1W |
804733 |
818205 |
2W |
805045 |
816912 |
|
1E |
806708 |
818017 |
2E |
805960 |
816633 |
|
WL |
|||||
|
1W |
800600 |
805450 |
7W |
800400 |
811450 |
|
1E |
801760 |
805450 |
7E |
802400 |
811450 |
|
2W |
800300 |
806450 |
8W |
800800 |
812450 |
|
2E |
801750 |
806450 |
8E |
802900 |
812450 |
|
3W |
799600 |
807450 |
9W |
801500 |
813550 |
|
3E |
801500 |
807450 |
9E |
803120 |
813550 |
|
4W |
799400 |
808450 |
10W |
801880 |
814500 |
|
4E |
801430 |
808450 |
10E |
803700 |
814500 |
|
5W |
799500 |
809450 |
11W |
802860 |
815500 |
|
5E |
801300 |
809450 |
12S/11E |
803750 |
815500 |
|
6W |
799800 |
810450 |
12N |
803750 |
818500 |
|
6E |
801400 |
810450 |
|
|
|
|
SWL |
|||||
|
1S |
802494 |
803961 |
6S |
807467 |
801137 |
|
1N |
802494 |
806174 |
6N |
807467 |
808458 |
|
2S |
803489 |
803280 |
7S |
808553 |
800329 |
|
2N |
803489 |
806720 |
7N |
808553 |
807377 |
|
3S |
804484 |
802509 |
8S |
809547 |
800338 |
|
3N |
804484 |
807048 |
8N |
809547 |
807396 |
|
4S |
805478 |
802105 |
9S |
810542 |
800423 |
|
4N |
805478 |
807556 |
9N |
810542 |
807462 |
|
5S |
806473 |
801250 |
10S |
811446 |
801335 |
|
5N |
806473 |
808458 |
10N |
811446 |
809436 |
6.2.2
Land-based
Theodolite Tracking Survey
Land-based theodolite tracking
survey stations were set up at two locations, one facing east/south/west on the
southern slopes of Sha Chau (SC), and the other facing
north/northeast/northwest at Lung Kwu Chau (LKC). The stations (D and E) are depicted in Figure 6.2 and shown in Table 6.3 with position coordinates, height
of station and approximate distance of consistent theodolite tracking
capabilities for CWD.
Table 6.3:
Land-based Theodolite Survey Station Details
|
Stations |
Location |
Geographical Coordinates |
Station Height (m) |
Approximate Tracking Distance (km) |
|
D |
Sha Chau (SC) |
22° 20’ 43.5” N 113° 53’ 24.66” E |
45.66 |
2 |
|
E |
Lung Kwu Chau (LKC) |
22° 22’ 44.83” N 113° 53’ 0.2” E |
70.40 |
3 |
6.3
CWD
Monitoring Methodology
6.3.1 Small Vessel Line-transect Survey
Small vessel line-transect surveys provided
data for density and abundance estimation and other assessments using
distance-sampling methodologies, specifically, line-transect methods.
The surveys involved small vessel line-transect
data collection and have been designed to be similar to, and consistent with,
previous surveys for the AFCD for their long-term monitoring of small cetaceans
in Hong Kong. The survey was designed to provide systematic, quantitative
measurements of density, abundance and habitat use.
As mentioned in Section 6.2.1, the
transects covered NEL, NWL covering the AW, WL and SWL areas as proposed in the
Manual and are consistent with the AFCD long-term monitoring programme (except
AW). There are two types of transect lines:
● Primary transect lines: the parallel
and zigzag transect lines as shown in Figure 6.1; and
● Secondary transect lines: transect
lines connecting between the primary transect lines and going around islands.
All data collected on both primary and
secondary transect lines were used for analysis of sighting distribution, group
size, activities including association with fishing boat, and mother-calf
pairs. Only on-effort data collected under conditions of Beaufort 0-3 and
visibility of approximately 1200 m or beyond were used for analysis of the CWD
encounter rates.
A 15-20m vessel with a flying bridge
observation platform about 4 to 5m 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 15km per
hour), one using 7X handheld binoculars and the other using unaided eyes and
recording data.
During on-effort survey periods, the survey
team recorded effort data including time, position (waypoints), weather
conditions (Beaufort sea state and visibility) and distance travelled in each
series with assistance of a handheld GPS device. The GPS device also
continuously and automatically logged data including time, position (latitude
and longitude) and vessel speed throughout the entire survey.
When CWDs were seen, the survey team was taken
off-effort, the dolphins were approached and photographed for photo-ID
information (using a Canon 7D [or similar] camera and long 300 mm+ telephoto
lens), then followed until they were lost from view. At that point, the
boat returned (off effort) to the survey line at the closest point after
obtaining photo records of the dolphin group and began to survey on effort
again.
Focal follows of dolphins would be used for
providing supplementary information only 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 would involve the boat following (at
an appropriate distance to minimise disturbance) an identifiable individual
dolphin for an extended period of time, and collecting detailed data on its
location, behaviour, response to vessels, and associates.
6.3.2 Photo Identification
CWDs can be identified by their unique features
like presence of
scratches, nick marks, cuts, wounds, deformities of their dorsal fin and
distinguished colouration and spotting patterns.
When CWDs were observed, the survey team was
taken off-effort, the
dolphins were approached and photographed for photo-ID information (using a
Canon 7D [or similar] camera and long 300 mm+ telephoto lens). The survey team
attempted to photo both sides of every single dolphin in the group as the
colouration and spotting pattern on both sides may not be identical. The photos
were taken at the highest available resolution and stored on Compact Flash
memory cards for transferring into a computer.
All photos taken were initially examined to
sort out those containing potentially identifiable individuals. These
sorted-out images would then be examined in detail and compared to the CWD
photo-identification catalogue established for 3RS during the baseline
monitoring stage.
6.3.3 Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey
Land-based theodolite
tracking survey obtains fine-scale information on the time of day and movement
patterns of the CWDs. A digital theodolite (Sokkia/Sokkisha Model DT5 or
similar equipment) with 30-power
magnification and 5-s precision was used to obtain the vertical and horizontal angle of each
dolphin and vessel position. Angles
were converted to geographic coordinates (latitude and longitude) and
data were recorded using Pythagoras software, Version 1.2. This
method delivers precise positions of multiple
spatially distant targets in a short period of time. The
technique is fully non-invasive, and allows for time and cost-effective
descriptions of dolphin habitat use patterns at all times of daylight.
Three surveyors (one theodolite operator, one
computer operator, and one observer) were involved in each survey. Observers
searched for dolphins using unaided eyes and handheld binoculars (7X50).
Theodolite tracking sessions were initiated whenever an individual CWD or group
of CWDs was located. Where possible, a distinguishable individual was
selected, based on colouration, within the group. The focal individual
was then continuously tracked via the theodolite, with a position recorded each
time the dolphin surfaced. In case an individual could not be positively
distinguished from other members, the group was tracked by recording positions
based on a central point within the group whenever the CWD surfaced. Tracking
continued until animals were lost from view; moved beyond the range of reliable
visibility (>1-3km, 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 2-3km of the station were
tracked, with effort made to obtain at least two positions for each vessel.
Theodolite tracking included focal follows of
CWD groups and vessels. Priority was given to tracking individual or groups of
CWD. The survey team also attempted to track all vessels moving within 1 km of
the focal CWD.
6.4
Monitoring
Results and Observations
6.4.1 Small Vessel Line-transect Survey
Within this reporting period, two complete sets
of small vessel line-transect surveys were conducted on the 9, 11, 12, 16, 17,
18, 23 and 25 September 2019, covering all transects in NEL, NWL, AW, WL and
SWL survey areas for twice.
A total of around 450.83km of survey effort was
collected from these surveys, with around 94.4% 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 are given in
Appendix C.
Sighting
Distribution
In September 2019, 19 sightings with 75
dolphins were sighted. Details of cetacean sightings are presented in Appendix C.
Distribution of all CWD sightings recorded in
September 2019 is illustrated in Figure 6.3. In WL, CWD sightings were recorded from waters near Hong
Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link Road to Fan Lau. In SWL, CWD sightings
were located near Shui Hau and the waters between Lantau Island and Soko
Islands. No sightings of CWD were recorded in NEL, NWL or in close vicinity to
3RS Works Area.
Figure 6.3: Sightings Distribution
of Chinese White Dolphins
Remarks: Please
note that there are 19 pink circles on the map indicating the sighting
locations of CWDs. Some of them were very close to each other and therefore may
appear overlapped on this distribution map.
Encounter Rate
Two types of dolphin encounter rates were
calculated based on the data from September 2019. 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. The formulae used for calculation
of the encounter rates are shown below:
Encounter Rate by Number of Dolphin
Sightings (STG)
Encounter Rate by Number of Dolphins
(ANI)
(Notes:
Only data collected under Beaufort 3 or below condition were used)
In September 2019, a total of around 425.53km
of survey effort were conducted under Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with
favourable visibility, whilst a total number of 19 on-effort sightings with 75
dolphins were sighted under such condition. Calculation of the encounter rates
in September 2019 are shown in Appendix C.
For the running quarter of the reporting period
(i.e., from July 2019 to September 2019), a total of around 1287.69km of survey
effort were conducted under Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with favourable
visibility, whilst a total number of 69 on-effort sightings and a total number
of 283 dolphins from on-effort sightings were obtained under such condition.
Calculation of the running quarterly encounter rates are shown in Appendix C.
The STG and ANI of CWD in the whole survey area
(i.e. NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL) during the month of September 2019 and during
the running quarter are presented in Table 6.4 below and compared with the Action Level. The running quarterly
encounter rates STG and ANI did not trigger Action Level.
Table 6.4: Comparison of CWD Encounter
Rates of the Whole Survey Area with Action Levels
|
|
Encounter Rate (STG) |
Encounter Rate (ANI) |
|
September 2019 |
4.47 |
17.63 |
|
Running Quarter from July 2019 to September 2019(1) |
5.36 |
21.98 |
|
Action Level |
Running quarterly(1) STG < 1.86 & ANI < 9.35 |
|
|
Note: (1) Running quarterly encounter rates STG & ANI were calculated from data collected in the reporting period and the two preceding survey months, i.e. the data from July 2019 to September 2019, containing six sets of transect surveys for all monitoring areas. Action Level will be triggered if both STG and ANI fall below the criteria. |
||
Group Size
In September 2019, 19 groups with 75 dolphins
were sighted, and the average group size of CWDs was 4.0 dolphins per group.
Sightings with small group size (i.e. 1-2 dolphins) were dominant. There was
one CWD sighting with large group size (i.e. 10 or more dolphins) recorded in
WL.
Activities
and Association with Fishing Boats
Four sightings of CWDs were recorded engaging
in feeding activities in September 2019 in WL and SWL survey areas. No CWD
sightings were observed in association with operating fishing boat in the
reporting month.
Mother-calf Pair
In September 2019, there were five sightings of
CWD with the presence of mother-and-unspotted calf or mother-and-unspotted
juvenile pair.
6.4.2
Photo
Identification
In September 2019, a total number of
39 different CWD individuals were identified for totally 47 times. A summary of
photo identification works is presented in Table 6.5. Representative photos of these
individuals are given in Appendix C.
Table 6.5: Summary of Photo Identification
|
Individual ID |
Date of Sighting (dd-mmm-yy) |
Sighting Group No. |
Area |
|
Individual ID |
Date of Sighting (dd-mmm-yy) |
Sighting Group No. |
Area |
|
NLMM015 |
9-Sep-19 |
6 |
SWL |
|
WLMM043 |
25-Sep-19 |
6 |
WL |
|
|
12-Sep-19 |
1 |
WL |
|
WLMM049 |
25-Sep-19 |
5 |
WL |
|
NLMM020 |
9-Sep-19 |
6 |
SWL |
|
WLMM054 |
9-Sep-19 |
1 |
SWL |
|
NLMM043 |
25-Sep-19 |
1 |
WL |
|
WLMM056 |
9-Sep-19 |
6 |
SWL |
|
NLMM063 |
12-Sep-19 |
1 |
WL |
|
WLMM060 |
12-Sep-19 |
3 |
WL |
|
SLMM002 |
25-Sep-19 |
9 |
WL |
|
WLMM062 |
25-Sep-19 |
2 |
WL |
|
SLMM003 |
12-Sep-19 |
2 |
WL |
|
WLMM065 |
12-Sep-19 |
3 |
WL |
|
|
|
3 |
WL |
|
|
25-Sep-19 |
5 |
WL |
|
SLMM007 |
12-Sep-19 |
2 |
WL |
|
WLMM067 |
25-Sep-19 |
9 |
WL |
|
|
25-Sep-19 |
9 |
WL |
|
WLMM071 |
12-Sep-19 |
5 |
WL |
|
SLMM012 |
9-Sep-19 |
6 |
SWL |
|
WLMM075 |
25-Sep-19 |
2 |
WL |
|
SLMM022 |
25-Sep-19 |
8 |
WL |
|
WLMM078 |
25-Sep-19 |
8 |
WL |
|
|
|
9 |
WL |
|
WLMM079 |
12-Sep-19 |
2 |
WL |
|
SLMM027 |
25-Sep-19 |
9 |
WL |
|
|
|
3 |
WL |
|
SLMM045 |
12-Sep-19 |
5 |
WL |
|
WLMM090 |
12-Sep-19 |
1 |
WL |
|
SLMM049 |
25-Sep-19 |
9 |
WL |
|
WLMM094 |
25-Sep-19 |
2 |
WL |
|
SLMM053 |
25-Sep-19 |
8 |
WL |
|
WLMM106 |
25-Sep-19 |
9 |
WL |
|
SLMM058 |
25-Sep-19 |
7 |
WL |
|
WLMM114 |
25-Sep-19 |
9 |
WL |
|
WLMM001 |
25-Sep-19 |
7 |
WL |
|
WLMM133 |
25-Sep-19 |
2 |
WL |
|
WLMM004 |
12-Sep-19 |
2 |
WL |
|
WLMM146 |
12-Sep-19 |
2 |
WL |
|
|
|
3 |
WL |
|
WLMM147 |
12-Sep-19 |
2 |
WL |
|
WLMM005 |
25-Sep-19 |
8 |
WL |
|
|
|
3 |
WL |
|
WLMM007 |
25-Sep-19 |
9 |
WL |
|
WLMM148 |
12-Sep-19 |
4 |
WL |
|
WLMM027 |
9-Sep-19 |
2 |
SWL |
|
|
|
|
|
6.4.3
Land-based
Theodolite Tracking Survey
Survey
Effort
Land-based theodolite tracking
surveys were conducted at LKC on 9 and 16 September 2019 and at SC on 20 September 2019, with a
total of three days of land-based theodolite tracking survey effort
accomplished in this reporting period. Five CWD groups were tracked at LKC
station during the surveys. Information of survey effort and CWD groups sighted
during these land-based theodolite tracking surveys are presented in Table 6.6. Details of the survey effort and
CWD groups tracked are presented in Appendix C. The first sighting locations of
CWD groups tracked at LKC station during land-based theodolite tracking surveys
in September 2019 were depicted in Figure 6.4. No CWD group was sighted from SC station in this reporting month.
Table 6.6:
Summary of Survey Effort and CWD Group of Land-based Theodolite Tracking
|
Land-based Station |
|
No. of Survey Sessions |
Survey Effort (hh:mm) |
No. of CWD Groups Sighted |
CWD Group Sighting per Survey Hour |
|
Lung Kwu Chau |
|
2 |
12:00 |
5 |
0.42 |
|
Sha Chau |
|
1 |
6:00 |
0 |
0 |
|
TOTAL |
|
3 |
18:00 |
5 |
0.28 |
Figure
6.4: Plots of First Sightings of All CWD Groups obtained from Land-based
Stations
6.5
Progress Update on Passive Acoustic Monitoring
Underwater
acoustic monitoring using Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) should be
undertaken during land formation related construction works. In this reporting
period, the Ecological Acoustic Recorder (EAR) was retrieved on 11 September
2019 and subsequently redeployed and positioned at south of Sha Chau Island
inside the SCLKCMP with 20% duty cycle (Figure 6.5). The EAR deployment is generally
for 6 weeks prior to data retrieval for analysis. Acoustic data is reviewed to
give an indication of CWDs occurrence patterns and to obtain anthropogenic
noise information simultaneously. Analysis (by a specialised team of
acousticians) involved manually browsing through every acoustic recording and
logging the occurrence of dolphin signals. All data will be re-played by
computer as well as listened to by human ears for accurate assessment of
dolphin group presence. As the period of data collection and analysis takes
more than four months, PAM results could not be reported in monthly intervals
but report for supplementing the annual CWD monitoring analysis.
6.6
Site
Audit for CWD-related Mitigation Measures
During the reporting period, silt curtains were
in place by the contractor for marine filling , in which dolphin observers were
deployed by contractor in accordance with the MMWP. Overall, 5 to 8 dolphin
observation stations and teams of at least two dolphin observers were deployed
by the contractors for continuous monitoring of the DEZ for DCM works and
seawall construction 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 679 individuals being trained and the training records kept by the ET. From
the contractors’ MMWP observation records, no dolphin or other marine mammals
were observed within or around the silt curtains. As for DEZ monitoring
records, no dolphin or other marine mammals were observed within or around the
DEZs in this reporting month. These contractors’ records were also audited by
the ET during site inspection.
Audits of acoustic decoupling measures for
construction vessels were carried out during weekly site inspection and the
observations are summarised in Section 7.1. Audits of SkyPier high speed
ferries route diversion and speed control and construction vessel management
are presented in Section 7.2 and Section 7.3 respectively.
6.7
Timing of Reporting CWD Monitoring Results
Detailed analysis of CWD monitoring results
collected by small vessel line-transect survey will be provided in future
quarterly reports. Detailed analysis of CWD monitoring results collected by
land-based theodolite tracking survey and PAM will be provided in future annual
reports after a larger sample size of data has been collected.
6.8
Summary
of CWD Monitoring
Monitoring of CWD was conducted with
two complete sets of small vessel line-transect surveys and three days of
land-based theodolite tracking survey effort as scheduled. The running quarterly encounter rates STG and
ANI in the reporting period did not trigger the Action Level for CWD
monitoring.
7 Environmental Site Inspection and Audit
7.1
Environmental
Site Inspection
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.
The weekly site inspection schedule of the construction works is provided in Appendix B. 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 observed in site
inspections during the reporting period. Advice 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 organised 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 summarised in Appendix A.
A summary of implementation status
of the environmental mitigation measures for the construction phase of the
Project during the reporting period is provided in Appendix A.
7.2
Audit
of SkyPier High Speed Ferries
The Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan
for High Speed Ferries of SkyPier (the SkyPier Plan) was submitted to the
Advisory Council on the Environment for comment and subsequently submitted to
and approved by EPD in November 2015 under EP Condition 2.10. The approved
SkyPier Plan is available on the dedicated website of the Project. In the
SkyPier Plan, AAHK has committed to implement the mitigation measure of
requiring HSFs of SkyPier travelling between HKIA and Zhuhai / Macau to start
diverting the route with associated speed control across the area, i.e. Speed
Control Zone (SCZ), with high CWD abundance. The route diversion and speed
restriction at the SCZ have been implemented since 28 December 2015.
Key audit findings for the SkyPier HSFs
travelling to/from Zhuhai and Macau against the requirements of the SkyPier
Plan during the reporting period are summarised in Table 7.1. The daily movements of all
SkyPier HSFs in this reporting period (i.e., 76 to 95 daily movements were
within the maximum daily cap of 125 daily movements. Status of compliance with
the annual daily average of 99 movements will be further reviewed in the annual
EM&A Report.
In total, 600 ferry movements between HKIA
SkyPier and Zhuhai / Macau were recorded in September 2019 and the data are
presented in Appendix G. The time spent by the SkyPier
HSFs travelling through the SCZ in September 2019 were presented in Figure 7.1.
It will take 9.6 minutes to travel through the SCZ when the SkyPier HSFs adopt
the maximum allowable speed of 15 knots within the SCZ. Figure 7.1 shows
that all of the SkyPier HSFs spent more than 9.6 minutes to travel through the
SCZ.
Figure
7.1: Duration of the SkyPier HSFs travelling through the SCZ for September 2019
Note: Data above the red line indicated that the time
spent by the SkyPier HSFs travelling through the SCZ is more than 9.6 minutes,
which is in compliance with the SkyPier Plan.
A total of three ferries were recorded with
route deviation on 1 September (2 cases) and 20 September 2019 (1 case).
Notices were sent to the ferry operator and the cases are under investigation
by ET.
As reported in the Construction Phase Monthly
EM&A Report No. 44, two ferries were recorded with route deviation on 15
and 29 August 2019. ET’s investigation found that one of the deviations
was due to giving way to vessel in order to avoid collision and the other was
due to emergency condition (failure at one of the HSF’s engines).
Table 7.1: Summary of Key Audit Findings
against the SkyPier Plan
|
Requirements in the SkyPier Plan |
1 to 30 September 2019 |
|
Total number of ferry movements recorded and audited |
600 |
|
Use diverted route and enter / leave SCZ through Gate Access Points |
3 deviations |
|
Speed control in speed control zone |
The average speeds of all HSFs travelling through the SCZ ranged from 10.8 to 14.2 knots. All HSFs had travelled through the SCZ with average speeds under 15 knots in compliance with the SkyPier Plan. The time used by HSFs to travel through SCZ is presented in Figure 7.1. |
|
Daily Cap (including all SkyPier HSFs)
|
76-95 daily movements (within the maximum daily cap - 125 daily movements). |
7.3 Audit of Construction and Associated Vessels
ET carried out the following actions during the
reporting period:
- Four skipper training sessions
were held by contractors’ Environmental Officers. Competency tests were
subsequently conducted with the trained skippers by ET. The list of all
trained skippers was properly recorded and maintained by ET.
- In this reporting period, 10
skippers were trained by contractors’ Environmental Officers. In total,
1181 skippers were trained from August 2016 to September 2019.
- The MSS automatically recorded
deviation cases such as speeding, entering no entry zone and not
travelling through the designated gate. ET conducted checking to ensure
the MSS records deviation cases accurately.
- Deviations such as speeding in
the works area, entered no entry zone, and entering from non-designated
gates were identified. All the concerned contractors were reminded to
comply with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV during the bi-weekly MTCC
audit.
- Three-month rolling programmes
(one month record and three months forecast) for construction vessel
activities were received from the contractors in order to help maintain
the number of construction and associated vessels on site to a practicable
minimal level.
7.4
Implementation of Dolphin Exclusion Zone
During the reporting period, ET was notified
that no dolphin sightings were recorded within the DEZ by the contractors. The ET checked the relevant records by the contractors and
conducted competence checking to audit the implementation of DEZ.
7.5 Status of Submissions under Environmental Permits
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 |
|
|
2.16 |
Spill Response Plan |
|
|
2.17 |
Detailed Plan on Deep Cement Mixing |
|
|
2.18 |
Landscape & Visual Plan |
Submitted to EPD |
|
2.19 |
Waste Management Plan |
Accepted / approved by EPD |
|
2.20 |
Supplementary Contamination Assessment Plan |
|
|
3.1 |
Updated EM&A Manual |
|
|
3.4 |
Baseline Monitoring Reports |
7.6 Compliance with Other Statutory Environmental Requirements
During the reporting period, environmental
related licenses and permits required for the construction activities were
checked. No non-compliance with environmental statutory requirements was
recorded. The environmental licenses and permits which are valid in the
reporting period are presented in Appendix E.
7.7 Analysis and Interpretation of Complaints, Notification of Summons and
Status of Prosecutions
7.7.1
Complaints
No
construction activities-related complaint was received during the reporting
period.
7.7.2
Notifications
of Summons or Status of Prosecution
Neither notification of summons nor prosecution
was received during the reporting period.
7.7.3 Cumulative Statistics
Cumulative
statistics on complaints, notifications of summons and status of prosecutions
are summarised in Appendix F.
8
Future Key Issues and Other EIA & EM&A Issues
8.1
Construction
Programme for the Coming Reporting Period
Key
activities anticipated in the next reporting period for the Project will
include the following:
Contract P560 (R) Aviation Fuel Pipeline
Diversion Works
● Stockpiling of
compressed materials
DCM Works:
Contract 3205 DCM works
● DCM works
Reclamation Works:
Contract 3206 Main Reclamation Works
● Land base ground improvement works;
● Seawall construction; and
● Marine filling.
Airfield Works:
Contract 3301 North Runway
Crossover Taxiway
● Cable ducting works;
● Subgrade compaction and
paving works;
● Drainage construction
works;
● Operation of aggregate
mixing facility; and
● Precast of duct bank and
fabrication of steel works.
Contract 3302 Eastern Vehicular
Tunnel Advance Works
● Site survey and cable
laying;
● Pavement removal works;
● Backfilling and
reinstatement works; and
● Site establishment.
Contract 3303 Third Runway and
Associated Works
● Plant and equipment
mobilisation; and
● Site establishment.
Third Runway Concourse and Integrated Airport Centres Works:
Contract 3402 New Integrated
Airport Centres Enabling Works
● Superstructure works;
● Lateral supports and
excavation works;
● Drawpit and duct laying
works;
● Manhole and pipe
construction works; and
● Site establishment.
Terminal 2 Expansion Works:
Contract 3501 Antenna Farm and
Sewage Pumping Station
● Drainage works;
● Boring works; and
● Pipe installation.
Contract 3502 Terminal 2 Automated
People Mover (APM) Depot Modification Works
● Site clearance.
Contract 3503 Terminal 2
Foundation and Substructure Works
● Site establishment;
● Utilities, drainage, and road work;
and
● Piling and structure works.
Automated People Mover (APM) Works:
Contract
3602 Existing APM System Modification Works
● Site establishment; and
● Modification works at
APM depot.
Airport Support
Infrastructure & Logistic Works:
Contract 3801 APM and BHS Tunnels
on Existing Airport Island
● Site establishment;
● Cofferdam installation
for box culvert;
● Rising main
installation;
● Drilling and grouting
works;
● Piling and foundation
works
● Demolition works; and
● Site clearance.
8.2
Key
Environmental Issues for the Coming Reporting Period
The key environmental issues for the Project in
the coming reporting period expected to be associated with the construction
activities include:
● Generation of dust from construction
works and stockpiles;
● Noise from operating equipment and
machinery on-site;
● Generation of site surface runoffs
and wastewater from activities on-site;
● Water quality from DCM works and
marine filling;
● DEZ monitoring for ground
improvement works (DCM works) and seawall construction;
● Implementation of MMWP for silt
curtain deployment;
● Sorting, recycling, storage and
disposal of general refuse and construction waste;
● Management of chemicals and
avoidance of oil spillage on-site; and
● Acoustic decoupling measures for
equipment on marine vessels.
The implementation of required mitigation
measures by the contractors will be monitored by the ET.
8.3 Monitoring Schedule for the Coming Reporting Period
A tentative schedule of the planned
environmental monitoring work in the next reporting period is provided in Appendix B.
8.4
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.
9
Conclusion and Recommendation
The key activities of the Project
carried out in the reporting period included reclamation works and land-side
works. Reclamation works included DCM works, marine filling and seawall
construction. Land-side works involved mainly airfield works, foundation and
substructure work for Terminal 2 expansion, modification and tunnel work for
APM and BHS systems, 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.
All 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 did not trigger the corresponding Action and
Limit Levels during the reporting period.
The water quality monitoring results for
turbidity, total alkalinity, 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 DO, SS 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.
Weekly site inspections of the construction
works were carried out by the ET to audit the implementation of proper
environmental pollution control and mitigation measures for the Project.
Bi-weekly site inspections were also conducted by the IEC. Site inspection
findings were recorded in the site inspection checklists and provided to the
contractors to follow up.
On the implementation of the SkyPier Plan, the
daily movements of all SkyPier HSFs in September 2019 were in the range of 76
to 95 daily movements, which are within the maximum daily cap of 125 daily
movements. A total of 600 HSF movements under the SkyPier Plan were recorded in
the reporting period. The average speeds of all HSFs travelling through the SCZ
ranged from 10.8 to 14.2 knots. All HSFs had travelled through the SCZ with
average speeds under 15 knots in compliance with the SkyPier Plan. Three deviations
from the diverted route in September 2019 were recorded in the HSF monitoring
and is under investigation by the ET. In summary, the ET and IEC have audited
the HSF movements against the SkyPier Plan and conducted follow up
investigations or actions accordingly.
On the implementation of MTRMP-CAV, the MSS
automatically recorded the deviation case such as speeding, entering no entry
zone and not travelling through the designated gates. ET conducted checking to
ensure the MSS records all deviation cases accurately. Training has been
provided for the concerned skippers to facilitate them in familiarising with
the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV. Deviations including speeding in the works
area, entered no entry zone, and entry from non-designated gates were reviewed by
ET. All the concerned captains were reminded by the contractor’s MTCC
representative to comply with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV. The ET
reminded contractors that all vessels shall avoid entering the no-entry zone,
in particular the Brothers Marine Park and the Sha
Chau & Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park. Three-month rolling programmes for
construction vessel activities, which ensures the proposed vessels are
necessary and minimal through good planning, were also received from contractors.
[1] The Manual is available on the
Project’s dedicated website (accessible at: http://env.threerunwaysystem.com/en/index.html).