|
Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System |
|
Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No.22 (For October 2017) |
Contents
The “Expansion of Hong Kong
International Airport into a Three-Runway System” (the Project) serves to meet
the future air traffic demands at Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA).
On 7 November 2014, the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report (Register
No.: AEIAR-185/2014) for the Project was approved and an Environmental Permit
(EP) (Permit No.: EP-489/2014) was issued for the construction and operation of
the Project.
Airport Authority Hong Kong (AAHK)
commissioned Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited (MMHK) to undertake the role of
Environmental Team (ET) for carrying out the Environmental Monitoring &
Audit (EM&A) works during the construction phase of the Project in
accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual (the Manual).
This is the 22nd
Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report for the Project which summarizes the
monitoring results and audit findings of the EM&A programme during the
reporting period from 1 to 31 October 2017.
Key Activities in the Reporting Period
The key activities of
the Project carried out in the reporting period included reclamation works and
land-side works. Reclamation works included deep cement mixing (DCM) works, laying of sand blanket, seawall construction and
prefabricated vertical drain (PVD) installation. Land-side works included
horizontal directional drilling (HDD) works, site office establishment, cable
ducting, concrete removal works, 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. During
the reporting period, the
ET conducted 30 sets of construction dust measurements, 21 sets of construction
noise measurements, 13 events of water quality measurements, 1 round of
terrestrial ecology monitoring on Sheung Sha Chau Island, 2 complete sets of small vessel line-transect surveys and 5
days of land-based theodolite tracking survey effort for Chinese White Dolphin
(CWD) monitoring and waste monitoring.
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 Independent Environmental
Checker (IEC). Observations have been recorded in the site inspection
checklists and provided to the contractors together with the appropriate
follow-up actions where necessary.
On the implementation of
Marine Mammal Watching Plan (MMWP), dolphin observers were deployed by the contractors
for laying of open sea silt curtain and laying of silt
curtains for sand blanket in accordance with the plan. On the implementation of
Dolphin Exclusion Zone (DEZ) Plan, dolphin observers at 15 to 19 dolphin
observation stations were deployed for continuous monitoring of the DEZ by all
contractors for ground improvement works (DCM works and PVD installation) and
seawall construction in accordance with the DEZ Plan. Trainings for the
proposed dolphin observers were provided by the ET prior to the aforementioned
works, with the training records kept by the ET. From the contractors’
MMWP observation records and DEZ monitoring records, no dolphin or other marine
mammals were observed within or around the silt curtains or the DEZs in this
reporting month. Audits of acoustic decoupling for construction vessels were
also carried out by the ET.
On the
implementation of the Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for High Speed
Ferries of SkyPier
(the SkyPier Plan), the daily movements of all SkyPier high speed ferries (HSFs) in October 2017 were in
the range of 1 to 87 daily movements, which are within the maximum daily cap of
125 daily movements. A total of 693 HSF movements under the SkyPier
Plan were recorded in the reporting period. All HSFs had travelled through the
Speed Control Zone (SCZ) with average speeds under 15 knots (9.3 to 14.0
knots), which were in compliance with the SkyPier
Plan. Two ferry movements with minor deviation from the diverted route are
under investigation by ET. The investigation result will be presented in the
next monthly EM&A report. In summary, the ET and IEC have audited the HSF
movements against the SkyPier Plan and conducted
follow up investigation or actions accordingly.
On the implementation of the Marine
Travel Routes and Management Plan for Construction and Associated Vessel
(MTRMP-CAV), the Marine Surveillance System (MSS) automatically recorded the
deviation case such as speeding, entering no entry zone, not traveling through
the designated gate. 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, entry from non-designated
gates, and entering no-entry zones were reviewed by ET. All the concerned
captains were reminded by the contractor’s Marine Traffic Control Centre (MTCC)
representative to comply with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV. ET reminded
contractors that all vessels shall avoid entering the no-entry zone, in
particular the Brothers Marine Park. 3-month rolling
programmes for construction vessel activities, which ensures the proposed
vessels are necessary and minimal through good planning, were also received
from contractors.
Results of Impact Monitoring
The monitoring works for
construction dust, construction noise, water quality, construction waste,
terrestrial ecology, and CWD were conducted during the reporting period in
accordance with the Manual.
No exceedance of the Action or Limit
Levels in relation to construction dust, construction noise, construction
waste, and CWD monitoring was recorded in the reporting period.
The water quality monitoring results
for DO, turbidity, total alkalinity, chromium, and nickel obtained during the
reporting period did not trigger their corresponding Action and Limit Levels
stipulated in the EM&A programme for triggering the relevant investigation
and follow-up procedures under the programme if being exceeded. For SS, some of
the testing results exceeded the relevant Action Levels, and the corresponding
investigations were conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded
that the exceedances were not due to the Project.
The monthly terrestrial ecology
monitoring on Sheung Sha Chau observed that HDD works were conducted at the
daylighting location and there was no encroachment upon the egretry area nor any significant disturbance to the
egrets foraging at Sheung Sha Chau by the works.
Summary of Upcoming Key Issues
Key activities anticipated in the
next reporting period of the Project include the following:
Advanced Works:
Contract P560 (R) Aviation Fuel
Pipeline Diversion Works
● HDD works; and
● Stockpiling of excavated materials
from HDD operation.
DCM Works:
Contract 3201 to 3205
DCM Works
● Laying of sand blanket;
● DCM works; and
● Seawall construction.
Reclamation Works:
Contract 3206 Main Reclamation Works
● Laying of sand blanket;
and
● Prefabricated Vertical Drain (PVD)
installation.
Airfield Works:
Contract 3301 North
Runway Crossover Taxiway
● CLP cable ducting work;
and
● Precast of duct bank and
fabrication of steel works.
Terminal 2 Expansion Works:
Contract 3501 Antenna
Farm and Sewage Pumping Station
● Excavation and piling
works.
Contract 3502 Terminal 2
Automated People Mover (APM) Depot Modification Works
● Removal of existing concrete.
APM works:
Contract 3602 Existing
APM System Modification Works
● Site office establishment.
Airport Support
Infrastructure & Logistic Works:
Contract 3801 APM and
BHS Tunnels on Existing Airport Island
● Erection of hoarding.
The
key environmental
issues will be associated with construction dust, construction noise, water
quality, construction waste management, CWD and terrestrial ecology on Sheung
Sha Chau. The implementation of required mitigation measures by the contractor
will be monitored by the ET.
|
|
|
|
|
Terrestrial Ecological Monitoring |
Environmental Training provided by the Contractor |
Land-Based Theodolite Tracking Survey for CWD at Sha Chau |
Summary
Table
The
following table summarizes the key findings of the EM&A programme during
the reporting period:
|
|
Yes |
No |
Details |
Analysis / Recommendation / Remedial Actions |
|
Exceedance of Limit Level^ |
|
ü |
No exceedance of project-related limit level was recorded. |
Nil |
|
Exceedance of Action Level^ |
|
ü |
No exceedance of project-related action level was recorded. |
Nil |
|
Complaints Received |
|
ü |
No construction activities-related complaint was received. |
Nil |
|
Notification of any summons and status of prosecutions |
|
ü |
No notification of summon or prosecution was received. |
Nil |
|
Changes that affect the EM&A |
|
ü |
There was no change to the construction works that may affect the EM&A |
Nil |
Remark: ^Only
exceedance of Action or Limit Level related to Project works is counted as
Breaches 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. The Manual is available on the Project’s dedicated website
(accessible at: http://env.threerunwaysystem.com/en/index.html).
AECOM Asia Company Limited (AECOM) was employed by AAHK as the Independent
Environmental Checker (IEC) for the Project.
The Project covers the expansion of
the existing airport into a three-runway system (3RS) with key project
components comprising land formation of about 650 ha and all associated
facilities and infrastructure including taxiways, aprons, aircraft stands, a
passenger concourse, an expanded Terminal 2, all related airside and landside
works and associated ancillary and supporting facilities. The existing
submarine aviation fuel pipelines and submarine power cables also require
diversion as part of the works.
Construction of the Project is to
proceed in the general order of diversion of the submarine aviation fuel
pipelines, diversion of the submarine power cables, land formation, and
construction of infrastructure, followed by construction of superstructures.
The 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.
1.2
Scope
of this Report
This is the 22nd Construction
Phase Monthly EM&A Report for the Project which summarizes the key findings
of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 to 31 October
2017.
1.3
Project
Organisation
The Project’s organization structure
presented in Appendix B of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A
Report No.1 remained unchanged during the reporting period. Contact
details of the key personnel have been updated and is presented in Table 1.1.
Table
1.1: Contact
Information of Key Personnel
|
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
|
Project Manager’s Representative (Airport Authority Hong Kong) |
Principal Manager, Environment |
Lawrence Tsui |
2183 2734 |
|
Environmental Team (ET) (Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited) |
Environmental Team Leader |
Terence Kong |
2828 5919 |
|
|
Deputy Environmental Team Leader |
Heidi Yu |
2828 5704 |
|
|
Deputy Environmental Team Leader |
Keith Chau |
2972 1721 |
|
Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) (AECOM Asia Company Limited) |
Independent Environmental Checker |
Jackel Law |
3922 9376
|
|
|
Deputy Independent Environmental Checker |
Roy Man |
3922 9376 |
|
Advanced Works: |
|
|
|
|
Contract P560(R) Aviation Fuel Pipeline Diversion Works (Langfang Huayuan Mechanical and Electrical Engineering Co., Ltd.) |
Project Manager
|
Wei Shih
|
2117 0566
|
|
|
Environmental Officer |
Lyn Liu
|
5172 6543
|
|
Deep Cement Mixing (DCM) Works: |
|||
|
Contract 3201 DCM (Package 1) (Penta-Ocean-China State-Dong-Ah Joint Venture) |
Project Director
|
Tsugunari Suzuki
|
9178 9689 |
|
|
Environmental Officer
|
Alan Tam
|
6119 3107 |
|
Contract 3202 DCM (Package 2) (Samsung-BuildKing Joint Venture) |
Project Manager |
Ilkwon Nam
|
9643 3117 |
|
|
Environmental Officer
|
Dickson Mak
|
9525 8408 |
|
Contract 3203 DCM (Package 3) (Sambo E&C Co., Ltd) |
Project Manager
|
Eric Kan
|
9014 6758 |
|
|
Environmental Officer
|
David Hung
|
9765 6151 |
|
Contract 3204 DCM (Package 4) (CRBC-SAMBO Joint Venture) |
Project Manager |
Kyung-Sik Yoo
|
9683 8697
|
|
|
Environmental Officer |
Kanny Cho |
6799 8226 |
|
Contract 3205 DCM (Package 5) (Bachy Soletanche - Sambo Joint Venture) |
Deputy Project Director |
Min Park |
9683 0765 |
|
|
Environmental Officer |
Margaret Chung |
9130 3696 |
|
Reclamation Works: |
|
|
|
|
Contract 3206 (ZHEC-CCCC-CDC Joint Venture) |
Project Manager |
Kim Chuan Lim
|
3693 2288 |
|
|
Environmental Officer |
Kwai Fung Wong |
3693 2252 |
|
Airfield Works |
|
|
|
|
Contract 3301 North Runway Crossover Taxiway (FJT-CHEC-ZHEC Joint Venture) |
Project Manager |
Kin Hang Chung |
9412 1386 |
|
Terminal 2 (T2) Expansion Works: |
|||
|
Contract 3501 Antenna Farm and Sewage Pumping Station (Build King Construction Ltd.) |
Project Manager
|
Osbert Sit
|
9079 7030
|
|
|
Environmental Officer |
Kelvin Cheung |
9305 6081 |
|
Contract 3502 Terminal 2 APM Depot Modification Works (Build King Construction Ltd.) |
Project Manager |
Kivin Cheng |
9380 3635 |
|
|
Environmental Officer |
Chun Pong Chan |
9187 7118 |
|
Automated People Mover (APM) Works: |
|||
|
Contract 3602 Existing APM System Modification Works (Niigata Transys Co., Ltd.) |
Project Manager |
Kunihiro Tatecho |
9755 0351 |
|
|
Environmental Officer |
Arthur Wong |
9170 3394 |
|
Airport Support Infrastructure and Logistic Works: |
|||
|
Contract 3801 APM and BHS Tunnels on Existing Airport Island (China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Ltd.) |
Project Manager |
Tony Wong |
9642 8672 |
|
|
Environmental Officer |
Fredrick Wong |
9842 2703 |
1.4 Summary of Construction Works
The key activities of the Project carried out in the reporting period
included reclamation works and land-side works. Reclamation works included deep
cement mixing (DCM) works, laying of sand blanket,
seawall construction and prefabricated vertical drain (PVD) installation.
Land-side works included horizontal directional drilling (HDD) works, site
office establishment, cable ducting, concrete removal works, piling and
excavation works.
1.5
Summary
of EM&A Programme Requirements
The status
for all environmental aspects is 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 |
Completed in May 2017 and data analysis in-progress. |
|
Early/ 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 |
On-going |
|
Marine Ecology |
|
|
Pre-Construction Phase Coral Dive Survey |
The Coral Translocation Plan was submitted and approved by EPD under EP Condition 2.12. |
|
Coral Translocation |
The coral translocation was completed. |
|
Post-Translocation Coral Monitoring |
On-going |
|
Chinese White Dolphins (CWD) |
|
|
Vessel Survey, Land-based Theodolite Tracking and Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) |
|
|
Baseline Monitoring |
Baseline CWD results were reported in the CWD Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD in accordance with EP Condition 3.4. |
|
Impact Monitoring |
On-going |
|
Landscape & Visual |
|
|
Baseline Monitoring |
The baseline landscape & visual monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4. |
|
Impact Monitoring |
On-going |
|
Environmental Auditing |
|
|
Regular site inspection |
On-going |
|
Marine Mammal Watching Plan (MMWP) implementation measures |
On-going |
|
Dolphin Exclusion Zone Plan (DEZP) implementation measures |
On-going |
|
SkyPier High Speed Ferries (HSF) implementation measures |
On-going |
|
Construction and Associated Vessels Implementation measures |
On-going |
|
Complaint Hotline and Email channel |
On-going |
|
Environmental Log Book |
On-going |
Taking into account the construction
works in this reporting period, impact monitoring of air quality, noise, water
quality, waste management, terrestrial ecology, landscape & visual and CWD
were carried out in the reporting period.
The EM&A programme also involved
weekly site inspections and related auditing conducted by the ET for checking
the implementation of the required environmental mitigation measures
recommended in the approved EIA Report. In order to enhance environmental
awareness and closely monitor the environmental performance of the contractors,
environmental briefings and regular environmental management meetings were
conducted.
The EM&A programme has been following the recommendations presented in the
approved EIA Report and the Manual. A summary of implementation status of the
environmental mitigation measures for the construction phase of the Project
during the reporting period is provided in Appendix B.
2
Air Quality Monitoring
2.1
Monitoring
Stations
Air quality monitoring was conducted
at 2 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 |
2.2 Monitoring Requirements and Schedule
In accordance with the Manual,
baseline 1-hour total suspended particulate (TSP) levels at the two air quality
monitoring stations were established as presented in the Baseline Monitoring
Report. Impact 1-hour TSP monitoring was conducted for three times every 6
days. 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.
The air quality monitoring schedule
involved in the reporting period is provided in Appendix C.
Table 2.2: Action and Limit Levels
for 1-hour TSP
|
Monitoring Station |
Action Level (mg/m3) |
Limit Level (mg/m3) |
|
AR1A |
306 |
500 |
|
AR2 |
298 |
2.3
Monitoring
Equipment
Portable direct reading dust meter
was used to carry out the 1-hour TSP monitoring. Details of equipment are given
in Table 2.3.
Table 2.3: Air Quality Monitoring
Equipment
|
Equipment |
Brand and Model |
Last Calibration Date |
Calibration Certificate Provided in |
|
Portable direct reading dust meter (Laser dust monitor) |
SIBATA LD-3B-001 (Serial No. 934393) |
11 Oct 2017 |
|
|
SIBATA LD-3B-002 (Serial No. 974350) |
11 Sep 2017 |
||
|
SIBATA LD-3B-003 (Serial No. 276018) |
11 Sep 2017 |
2.4 Monitoring Methodology
2.4.1 Measuring Procedure
The
measurement procedures involved in the impact 1-hr TSP monitoring can be
summarised as follows:
a.
The portable direct
reading dust meter was mounted on a tripod at a height of 1.2 m above the
ground.
b.
Prior to the
measurement, the equipment was set up for 1 minute span check and 6 second
background check.
c.
The one hour dust
measurement was started. Site conditions and dust sources at the nearby area
were recorded on a record sheet.
d.
When the measurement
completed, the “Count” reading per hour was recorded for result calculation.
2.4.2 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 is provided in Appendix E. The calibration certificates of
portable direct reading dust meters listed in Table 2.3 are also provided in Appendix E.
2.5
Analysis
and Interpretation of Monitoring Results
The monitoring
results for 1-hour TSP are summarized in Table
2.4. Detailed impact monitoring results are presented in Appendix D.
Table 2.4: Summary of 1-hour TSP
Monitoring Results
|
Monitoring Station |
1-hr TSP Concentration Range (mg/m3) |
Action Level (mg/m3) |
Limit Level (mg/m3) |
|
AR1A |
17 – 70 |
306 |
500 |
|
AR2 |
21 – 93 |
298 |
No exceedance of the Action or Limit
Level was recorded 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.
3 Noise Monitoring
3.1
Monitoring
Stations
Noise monitoring was conducted at 5
representative monitoring stations in the vicinity of noise sensitive receivers
in Tung Chung and villages in North Lantau in accordance with the Manual. Figure 2.1 shows the locations of the
monitoring stations and these are described in Table 3.1 below. As described in Section
4.3.3 of the Manual, monitoring at NM2 will commence when the future
residential buildings in Tung Chung West Development become occupied.
Table 3.1:
Locations of Impact Noise Monitoring Stations
|
Monitoring Station |
Location |
Type of measurement |
|
NM1A |
Man Tung Road Park |
Free field |
|
NM2(1) |
Tung Chung West Development |
To be determined |
|
NM3A |
Site Office |
Facade |
|
NM4 |
Ching Chung Hau Po Woon Primary School |
Free field |
|
NM5 |
Village House in Tin Sum |
Free field |
|
NM6 |
House No. 1, Sha Lo Wan |
Free field |
Note: (1) As
described in Section 4.3.3 of the Manual, noise monitoring at NM2 will only
commence after occupation of the future Tung Chung West Development.
3.2
Monitoring
Requirements and Schedule
In accordance with the Manual, baseline noise levels at the noise
monitoring stations were established as presented in the Baseline Monitoring
Report. Impact noise monitoring was conducted once per week in the form of
30-minute measurements of Leq, L10
and L90 levels recorded at each monitoring station between 0700 and
1900 on normal weekdays. The Action and Limit Levels of the noise monitoring
stipulated in the EM&A programme for triggering the relevant investigation
and follow-up procedures under the programme are provided in Table 3.2. The construction noise monitoring
schedule involved in the reporting period is provided in Appendix C.
Table 3.2: Action and Limit Levels
for Construction Noise
|
Monitoring Stations |
Time Period |
Action Level |
Limit Level, Leq(30mins) dB(A) |
|
NM1A, NM2, NM3A, NM4, NM5 and NM6 |
0700-1900 hours on normal weekdays |
When one documented complaint is received from any one of the sensitive receivers |
75 dB(A)(i) |
Note: (i)
Reduced to 70dB(A) for school and 65dB(A) during
school examination periods.
3.3
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 are given in Table 3.3.
Table 3.3:
Noise Monitoring Equipment
|
Equipment |
Brand and Model |
Last Calibration Date |
Calibration Certificate Provided in |
|
Integrated Sound Level Meter |
B&K 2238 (Serial No. 2800932) |
17 Jul 2017 |
Monthly EM&A Report No. 19, Appendix E |
|
B&K 2238 (Serial No. 2808432) |
30 Aug 2017 |
Monthly EM&A Report No. 21, Appendix E |
|
|
B&K 2238 (Serial No. 2684503) |
30 Aug 2017 |
Monthly EM&A Report No. 21, Appendix E |
|
|
Acoustic Calibrator |
B&K 4231 (Serial No. 3003246) |
16 May 2017 |
Monthly EM&A Report No. 17, Appendix D |
|
B&K 4231 (Serial No. 3004068) |
17 Jul 2017 |
Monthly EM&A Report No. 19, Appendix E |
3.4 Monitoring Methodology
3.4.1 Monitoring Procedure
The
monitoring procedures involved in the noise impact monitoring can be summarised
as follows:
a. The sound level meter was set on a tripod at
least a height of 1.2 m above the ground for free-field measurements at
monitoring stations NM1A, NM4, NM5 and NM6. A correction of +3 dB(A) was applied to the free field measurements.
b. Façade measurements were made at the monitoring
station NM3A.
c. Parameters such as frequency weighting, time
weighting and measurement time were set.
d. Prior to and after each noise measurement, the
meter was calibrated using the acoustic calibrator. If the difference in
the calibration level before and after measurement was more than 1 dB(A), the measurement would be considered invalid and
repeat of noise measurement would be required after re-calibration or repair of
the equipment.
e. During the monitoring period, Leq, L10 and L90 were
recorded. In addition, site conditions and noise sources were recorded on
a record sheet.
f. Noise measurement results were
corrected with reference to the baseline monitoring levels.
g. Observations were recorded when high intrusive
noise (e.g. dog barking, helicopter noise) was observed during the monitoring.
3.4.2 Maintenance and Calibration
The
maintenance and calibration procedures are summarised below:
a. The microphone head of the sound level meter
was cleaned with soft cloth at regular intervals.
b. The meter and calibrator were sent to the
supplier or laboratory accredited under Hong Kong Laboratory Accreditation
Scheme (HOKLAS) to check and calibrate at yearly intervals.
Calibration certificates of the sound
level meters and acoustic calibrators used in the noise monitoring listed in Table 3.3 are still
valid.
3.5
Analysis
and Interpretation of Monitoring Results
The construction noise monitoring results are
summarized in Table 3.4 and the detailed monitoring data are provided
in Appendix D.
Table 3.4: Summary of Construction
Noise Monitoring Results
|
Monitoring Station |
Noise Level Range, dB(A) Leq (30 mins) |
Limit Level, dB(A) Leq (30 mins) |
|
NM1A(i) |
72 |
75 |
|
NM3A |
61 |
75 |
|
NM4(i) |
60 – 65 |
70(ii) |
|
NM5(i) |
53 – 58 |
75 |
|
NM6(i) |
66 – 70 |
75 |
Notes: (i) +3 dB(A) Façade correction included;
(ii) Reduced to 65 dB(A) during school examination
periods at NM4. School examination took place from 23 to
27 October 2017 in the reporting period.
As the construction activities were
far away from the monitoring stations, major sources of noise dominating the
monitoring stations observed during the construction noise impact monitoring
were road traffic noise at NM1A, aircraft noise at NM3A, road traffic noise and
student activities at NM4, aircraft and helicopter noise at NM5, and noise from
aircraft, helicopter, marine vessel, and construction activities from other
projects at NM6 in this reporting period.
No exceedance of the Action or Limit
Level was recorded at all monitoring stations in the reporting period.
4
Water Quality Monitoring
4.1
Monitoring
Stations
Water
quality monitoring was conducted at a total of 22 water quality monitoring
stations, comprising 12 impact (IM) stations, 7 sensitive receiver (SR)
stations and 3 control stations in the vicinity of water quality sensitive
receivers around the airport island in accordance with the Manual. Table 4.1 describes the details of the
monitoring stations. Figure 3.1 shows the locations of the
monitoring stations.
Table 4.1: Monitoring Locations and Parameters for Impact Water Quality
Monitoring
|
Monitoring |
Description |
Coordinates |
Parameters |
|
|
Station |
|
Easting |
Northing |
|
|
C1 |
Control |
804247 |
815620 |
DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS, Total Alkalinity, Heavy Metals(2) |
|
C2 |
Control |
806945 |
825682 |
|
|
C3(3) |
Control |
817803 |
822109 |
|
|
IM1 |
Impact |
806458 |
818351 |
|
|
IM2 |
Impact |
806193 |
818852 |
|
|
IM3 |
Impact |
806019 |
819411 |
|
|
IM4 |
Impact |
805039 |
819570 |
|
|
IM5 |
Impact |
804924 |
820564 |
|
|
IM6 |
Impact |
805828 |
821060 |
|
|
IM7 |
Impact |
806835 |
821349 |
|
|
IM8 |
Impact |
807838 |
821695 |
|
|
IM9 |
Impact |
808811 |
822094 |
|
|
IM10 |
Impact |
809838 |
822240 |
|
|
IM11 |
Impact |
810545 |
821501 |
|
|
IM12 |
Impact |
811519 |
821162 |
|
|
SR1(1) |
Future Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF) Seawater Intake for cooling |
812586 |
820069 |
DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS
|
|
SR2(3) |
Planned marine park / hard corals at The Brothers / Tai Mo To |
814166 |
821463 |
|
|
SR3 |
Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park / fishing and spawning grounds in North Lantau |
807571 |
822147 |
|
|
SR4A |
Sha Lo Wan |
807810 |
817189 |
|
|
SR5A |
San Tau Beach SSSI |
810696 |
816593 |
|
|
SR6 |
Tai Ho Bay, Near Tai Ho Stream SSSI |
814663 |
817899 |
|
|
SR7 |
Ma Wan Fish Culture Zone (FCZ) |
823742 |
823636 |
|
|
SR8(4) |
Seawater Intake for cooling at Hong Kong International Airport (East) |
811418 (from July 2017 onwards) |
820246 |
|
Notes:
(1) The seawater intakes of SR1 for the future
HKBCF is not yet in operation, hence no water quality impact monitoring was conducted
at this station. The future permanent location for SR1 during impact monitoring
is subject to finalisation after the HKBCF seawater is commissioned.
(2) Details
of selection criteria for the two heavy metals for early regular DCM monitoring
refer to the Detailed Plan on Deep Cement Mixing available on the dedicated 3RS
website (http://env.threerunwaysystem.com/en/ep-submissions.html). DCM
specific water quality monitoring parameters (total alkalinity and heavy
metals) were only conducted at C1 to C3, SR2, and IM1 to IM12.
(3)
According to the Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Report, C3 station is not
adequately representative as a control station
of impact/ SR stations during the flood tide. The control reference has been
changed from C3 to SR2 from 1 September 2016 onwards.
(4) The
monitoring location for SR8 is subject to further changes due to silt curtain
arrangements and the progressive relocation of this seawater intake.
4.2 Monitoring Requirements and Schedule
In accordance with the Manual,
baseline water quality levels at the abovementioned representative water
quality monitoring stations were established as presented in the Baseline Water
Quality Monitoring Report.
General water quality monitoring and
early regular DCM water quality monitoring were conducted three days per week,
at mid-flood and mid-ebb tides, at the 22 water quality monitoring stations
during the reporting period. The sea conditions varied from calm to rough, and the weather conditions varied from sunny to rainy
during the monitoring period.
The water quality monitoring schedule
for the reporting period is updated and provided in Appendix C.
4.2.1 Action and
Limit Levels for Water Quality Monitoring
The Action and Limit Levels for general water
quality monitoring and regular DCM monitoring stipulated in the EM&A
programme for triggering the relevant investigation and follow-up procedures
under the programme are presented in Table 4.2. The control and impact stations during flood
tide and ebb tide for general water quality monitoring and regular DCM
monitoring are presented in Table
4.3.
Table 4.2: Action and Limit Levels for General Water Quality Monitoring
and Regular DCM Monitoring
|
Parameters |
Action Level (AL) |
Limit Level (LL) |
||
|
Action and Limit Levels for general water quality monitoring and regular DCM monitoring (excluding SR1& SR8) |
||||
|
DO in mg/L (Surface, Middle & Bottom) |
Surface and Middle 4.5 mg/L |
Surface and Middle 4.1 mg/L 5 mg/L for Fish Culture Zone (SR7) only |
||
|
Bottom 3.4 mg/L |
Bottom 2.7 mg/L |
|||
|
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 |
||
|
Total Alkalinity in ppm |
95 |
99 |
||
|
Representative Heavy Metals for early regular DCM monitoring (Chromium) |
0.2 |
0.2 |
||
|
Representative Heavy Metals for early regular DCM monitoring (Nickel) |
3.2 |
|
3.6 |
|
|
Action and Limit Levels SR1 |
|
|
|
|
|
SS (mg/l) |
To be determined prior to its commissioning |
To be determined prior to its commissioning |
||
|
Action and Limit Levels SR8 |
|
|
|
|
|
SS (mg/l) |
52 |
|
60 |
|
Notes:
(1) For DO measurement, non-compliance
occurs when monitoring result is lower than the limits.
(2) For parameters other than DO,
non-compliance of water quality results when monitoring results is higher than
the limits.
(3) Depth-averaged results are used
unless specified otherwise.
(4)
Details of selection criteria for the two heavy metals for early regular
DCM monitoring refer to the Detailed Plan on Deep Cement Mixing available on
the dedicated 3RS website (http://env.threerunwaysystem.com/en/ep-submissions.html)
(5) The Action and Limit Levels for the
two representative heavy metals chosen will be the same as that for the
intensive DCM monitoring.
Table 4.3: The
Control and Impact Stations during Flood Tide and Ebb Tide for General Water
Quality Monitoring and Regular DCM Monitoring
|
Control Station |
Impact Stations |
|
Flood Tide |
|
|
C1 |
IM1, IM2, IM3, IM4, IM5, IM6, IM7, IM8, SR3 |
|
SR2^1 |
IM7, IM8, IM9, IM10, IM11, IM12, SR1A, SR3, SR4A, SR5A, SR6, SR8 |
|
Ebb Tide |
|
|
C1 |
SR4A, SR5A, SR6 |
|
C2 |
IM1, IM2, IM3, IM4, IM5, IM6, IM7, IM8, IM9, IM10, IM11, IM12, SR1A, SR2, SR3, SR7, SR8 |
^1 As per findings of Baseline Water
Quality Monitoring Report, the control reference has been changed from C3 to
SR2 from 1 Sep 2016 onwards.
4.3
Monitoring
Equipment
Table 4.4 summarises the equipment used for monitoring of
specific water quality parameters under the impact water quality monitoring
programme.
Table 4.4: Water Quality Monitoring
Equipment
|
Equipment |
Brand and Model |
Last Calibration Date |
Calibration Certificate Provided in |
|
Multifunctional Meter (measurement of DO, pH, temperature, salinity and turbidity) |
YSI ProDSS (Serial No. 16J101716) |
12 Sep 2017 |
Monthly EM&A Report No. 21, Appendix E |
|
YSI ProDSS (Serial No. 17E102521) |
12 Sep 2017 |
||
|
YSI 6920 V2 (Serial No. 00019CB2) |
12 Sep 2017 |
||
|
YSI 6920 V2 (Serial No. 000109DF) |
12 Sep 2017 |
||
|
Digital Titrator (measurement of total alkalinity) |
Titrette Digital Burette 50ml Class A (Serial No.10N64701) |
18 Sep 2017 |
Monthly EM&A Report No. 21, Appendix E |
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 |
4.4 Monitoring Methodology
4.4.1 Measuring Procedure
Water
quality monitoring samples were taken at three depths (at 1m below surface, at
mid-depth, and at 1m above bottom) for locations with water depth >6m. For
locations with water depth between 3m and 6m, water samples were taken at two
depths (surface and bottom). For locations with water depth <3m, only the mid-depth was taken. Duplicate water
samples were taken and analysed.
The water samples for all monitoring
parameters were collected, stored, preserved and analysed according to
the Standard Methods, APHA 22nd ed. and/or other methods as agreed
by the EPD. In-situ measurements at monitoring locations including temperature,
pH, DO, turbidity, salinity and water depth were collected by equipment listed
in Table 4.4 and
Table 4.5.
Water samples for heavy metals and SS analysis were stored in high density
polythene bottles with no preservative added, packed in ice (cooled to 4 ºC
without being frozen), delivered to the laboratory within 24 hours of
collection.
4.4.2 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
suspended solids (in mg/L). Accuracy check of the digital titrator was
performed at least once per monitoring day.
Calibration certificates of the
monitoring equipment used in the reporting period listed in Table 4.4 are still valid.
4.4.3
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 |
|
Suspended Solid (SS) |
Analytical Balance |
APHA 2540D |
2 mg/L |
|
Heavy Metals |
|
|
|
|
Chromium (Cr) |
ICP-MS |
USEPA 6020A |
0.2 µg/L |
|
Nickel (Ni) |
ICP-MS |
USEPA 6020A |
0.2 µg/L |
4.5
Analysis
and Interpretation of Monitoring Results
4.5.1 Summary of Monitoring Results
The water quality monitoring results for DO,
turbidity, total alkalinity, chromium, and nickel obtained during the reporting
period did not trigger their corresponding Action and Limit Levels stipulated
in the EM&A programme for triggering the relevant investigation and
follow-up procedures under the programme if being exceeded. For SS, some of the
testing results exceeded the relevant Action Levels, and the corresponding
investigations were conducted accordingly. It should be noted that Severe
Typhoon Khanun hit Hong Kong during the reporting
period. The water quality monitoring results might be affected by this weather
event. Detailed analysis of the exceedances are
presented in Section 4.5.2.
4.5.2 Summary of Findings for Investigation of Exceedances
During the reporting
period, water quality monitoring was conducted at 12 IM stations, 7 SR
stations, and 3 control stations 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).
During the monitoring
period, testing results exceeding the corresponding Action or Limit Levels were
recorded on 3 monitoring days. Details of the exceedance cases are presented
below.
Findings for SS Exceedances (Mid-Ebb
Tide)
Table
4.7 presents a summary of
the SS compliance status at IM and SR stations during mid-ebb tide for the
reporting period.
Table 4.7: Summary of SS Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide)
|
Note: Detailed results are presented in Appendix D. |
|
|
|
No exceedance of Action and Limit Level |
|
|
Exceedance of Action Level recorded at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow |
|
|
Exceedance of Action Level recorded 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 |
Exceedances of Action Level was recorded on three monitoring days.
As some of the exceedances occurred at a station located downstream of the
Project, which might be affected by Project’s construction activities,
exceedance investigation focused on these events was carried out.
As part of the investigation on
downstream exceedance events, details of the Project’s marine construction
activities on the concerned monitoring days were collected, as well as any
observations during the monitoring. The findings are summarized in Table 4.8.
Table 4.8:
Summary of Findings from Investigations of SS Exceedances
|
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 |
Exceedance due to Project |
|
19/10/2017 |
DCM works Sand blanket laying |
Around 500m |
Silt curtain deployed |
No |
No |
No |
|
24/10/2017 |
DCM works |
Around 500m |
Silt curtain deployed |
No |
No |
No |
|
* This refers to the approximate distance between the marine construction works and the nearest monitoring stations with exceedance. |
||||||
According to the investigation
findings, it was confirmed that both DCM and sand blanket laying activities
were operating normally with silt curtains deployed as additional measures. The
silt curtains were maintained properly.
For the exceedances at IM11 on 19
and 24 October 2017, the exceedances appeared to be isolated cases with no
observable temporal and spatial trend to indicate any effect due to Project
activities. As there was no evidence of SS release due to project activities
from site observations and all mitigation measures were carried out properly,
the exceedances were possibly due to natural fluctuation in the vicinity of the
monitoring station, and considered not due to the Project.
Findings
for SS Exceedances (Mid-Flood Tide)
Table 4.9 presents a summary of the SS compliance status at
IM and SR stations during mid-flood tide for the reporting period.
Table 4.9:
Summary of SS Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)
|
Note: Detailed results are presented in Appendix D. |
|
|
Legend: |
|
|
|
No exceedance of Action and Limit Level |
|
|
Exceedance of Action Level recorded 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 |
An exceedance of Action Level was
recorded on one monitoring day. However, the exceedance occurred at a
monitoring station which was located upstream of the Project during flood tide,
that would unlikely be affected by the Project. Therefore, the exceedance was
possibly due to natural fluctuation in the vicinity of the monitoring station,
and considered not due to the Project.
Conclusions
Based on the findings of the
exceedance investigations, it is concluded that the exceedances were not due to
the Project. Hence no SR was adversely affected by the Project. All required
actions under the Event and Action Plan were followed. Exceedances appeared to
be due to natural fluctuation or other sources not related to the Project.
Nevertheless, recognising that the
IM stations represent a ‘first line of defence’, the non-project related
exceedances identified at IM stations were attended to as a precautionary
measure. As part of the EM&A programme, the construction methods and
mitigation measures for water quality will continue to be monitored and
opportunities for further enhancement will continue to be explored and
implemented where possible, to strive for better protection of water quality
and the marine environment.
In the meantime, the contractors
were reminded to implement and maintain all mitigation measures during weekly
site inspection and regular environmental management meetings. These include
maintaining mitigation measures for DCM works and sand blanket laying works
properly as recommended in the Manual.
5 Waste Management
5.1
Monitoring
Requirements
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. 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 including provision
and maintenance of drip trays, as well as regular segregation and removal of
waste. The contractors had taken actions to implement the recommended measures.
Based on the updated
information, 200kg and 1,200L of chemical waste were collected by licensed chemical waste collector,
and around 138 tonnes of general refuse was disposed of to the designated
landfill in September 2017. Also, around 20m3
of Construction and Demolition (C&D) materials was reused in another
contract in September 2017.
According to the Contractor’s
information, about 371m3 of excavated materials were produced from
the HDD and excavation works in the reporting period. The generated excavated
materials were temporarily stored at the stockpiling area. The excavated
material will be reused in the Project.
In addition, metal and paper were
recycled in the reporting month. Around 149 tonnes of general refuse was
disposed of to the designated landfill, 30kg and 11,400L of chemical waste were
collected by licensed chemical waste collector in October 2017. Besides, around
50m3 of Construction and Demolition (C&D) materials was reused
in another contract and around 3m3 of C&D material was disposed
of as public fill in the reporting period.
No exceedances of the Action or
Limit Levels were recorded in the reporting period.
6
Chinese White Dolphin
Monitoring
6.1 CWD Monitoring Requirements
In accordance with the Manual, CWD
monitoring by small vessel line-transect survey supplemented by land-based
theodolite tracking and passive acoustic monitoring should be conducted during
construction phase.
The small vessel line-transect
survey as proposed in the Manual should be conducted at a frequency of two full
surveys per month while land-based theodolite tracking should be conducted at a
frequency of one day per month per station during the construction phase. In
addition to the land-based theodolite tracking required for impact monitoring
as stipulated in the Manual, supplemental theodolite tracking surveys have also
been conducted during the implementation for the SkyPier
HSF diversion and speed control in order to assist in monitoring the
effectiveness of these measures, i.e. in total twice per month at the Sha Chau
station and three times per month at the Lung Kwu
Chau station.
The Action Level (AL) and Limit
Level (LL) for CWD monitoring were formulated by the action response approach
using the running quarterly dolphin encounter rates STG and ANI derived from
the baseline monitoring data, as presented in the CWD Baseline Monitoring
Report. The derived values of AL and LL for CWD monitoring were summarized in Table 6.1.
Table 6.1: Derived Values of Action Level
(AL) and Limit Level (LL) for Chinese White Dolphin
Monitoring
|
|
NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL as a Whole |
|
Action Level |
Running quarterly* STG < 1.86 & ANI < 9.35 |
|
Limit Level |
Two consecutive running quarterly^ (3-month) STG < 1.86 & ANI < 9.35 |
[Notes for Table
6.1 (referring to the baseline
monitoring report):
^Limit
Level – two consecutive running quarters mean both the running quarterly
encounter rates of the preceding month September 2017 (calculated by data from
July 2017 to September 2017) and the running quarterly encounter rates of this
month (calculated by data from August 2017 to October 2017).
AL and/or LL will be exceeded if both STG and ANI fall below
the criteria.]
6.2 CWD Monitoring Transects and Stations
6.2.1 Small Vessel Line-transect Survey
Small
vessel line-transect surveys were conducted along the transects covering
Northeast Lantau (NEL), Northwest Lantau (NWL), Airport West (AW), West Lantau
(WL) and Southwest Lantau (SWL) areas as proposed in the Manual, which are consistent with the
Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) long-term monitoring
programme (except the addition of AW). The AW transect has not been previously
surveyed in the AFCD programme due to the restrictions of HKIA Approach Area,
nevertheless, this transect was established during the EIA of the 3RS Project
and refined in the Manual with the aim to collect project specific baseline
information within the HKIA Approach Area to fill the data gap that was not
covered by the AFCD programme. This provided a larger sample size for
estimating the density, abundance and patterns of movements in the broader
study area of the project.
The planned vessel survey transect
lines follow the waypoints set for construction phase monitoring as proposed in
the Manual and depicted in Figure 6.1 with the waypoint coordinates of
all transect lines given in Table
6.2, which are subject to on-site refinement based on the actual
survey conditions and constraints.
Table 6.2: Coordinates of Transect Lines in NEL, NWL,
AW, WL and SWL Survey Areas
|
Waypoint |
Easting |
Northing |
Waypoint |
Easting |
Northing |
|
NEL |
|||||
|
1S |
813525 |
820900 |
6N |
818568 |
824433 |
|
1N |
813525 |
824657 |
7S |
819532 |
821420 |
|
2S |
814556 |
818449 |
7N |
819532 |
824209 |
|
2N |
814559 |
824768 |
8S |
820451 |
822125 |
|
3S |
815542 |
818807 |
8N |
820451 |
823671 |
|
3N |
815542 |
824882 |
9S |
821504 |
822371 |
|
4S |
816506 |
819480 |
9N |
821504 |
823761 |
|
4N |
816506 |
824859 |
10S |
822513 |
823268 |
|
5S |
817537 |
820220 |
10N |
822513 |
824321 |
|
5N |
817537 |
824613 |
11S |
823477 |
823402 |
|
6S |
818568 |
820735 |
11N |
823477 |
824613 |
|
NWL |
|||||
|
1S |
804671 |
814577 |
5S |
808504 |
821735 |
|
1N |
804671 |
831404 |
5N |
808504 |
828602 |
|
2Sb |
805475 |
815457 |
6S |
809490 |
822075 |
|
2Nb |
805476 |
818571 |
6N |
809490 |
825352 |
|
2Sa |
805476 |
820770 |
7S |
810499 |
822323 |
|
2Na |
805476 |
830562 |
7N |
810499 |
824613 |
|
3S |
806464 |
821033 |
8S |
811508 |
821839 |
|
3N |
806464 |
829598 |
8N |
811508 |
824254 |
|
4S |
807518 |
821395 |
9S |
812516 |
821356 |
|
4N |
807518 |
829230 |
9N |
812516 |
824254 |
|
AW |
|||||
|
1W |
804733 |
818205 |
2W |
805045 |
816912 |
|
1E |
806708 |
818017 |
2E |
805960 |
816633 |
|
WL |
|||||
|
1W |
800600 |
805450 |
7W |
800400 |
811450 |
|
1E |
801760 |
805450 |
7E |
802400 |
811450 |
|
2W |
800300 |
806450 |
8W |
800800 |
812450 |
|
2E |
801750 |
806450 |
8E |
802900 |
812450 |
|
3W |
799600 |
807450 |
9W |
801500 |
813550 |
|
3E |
801500 |
807450 |
9E |
803120 |
813550 |
|
4W |
799400 |
808450 |
10W |
801880 |
814500 |
|
4E |
801430 |
808450 |
10E |
803700 |
814500 |
|
5W |
799500 |
809450 |
11W |
802860 |
815500 |
|
5E |
801300 |
809450 |
12S/11E |
803750 |
815500 |
|
6W |
799800 |
810450 |
12N |
803750 |
818500 |
|
6E |
801400 |
810450 |
|
|
|
|
SWL |
|||||
|
1S |
802494 |
803961 |
6S |
807467 |
801137 |
|
1N |
802494 |
806174 |
6N |
807467 |
808458 |
|
2S |
803489 |
803280 |
7S |
808553 |
800329 |
|
2N |
803489 |
806720 |
7N |
808553 |
807377 |
|
3S |
804484 |
802509 |
8S |
809547 |
800338 |
|
3N |
804484 |
807048 |
8N |
809547 |
807396 |
|
4S |
805478 |
802105 |
9S |
810542 |
800423 |
|
4N |
805478 |
807556 |
9N |
810542 |
807462 |
|
5S |
806473 |
801250 |
10S |
811446 |
801335 |
|
5N |
806473 |
808458 |
10N |
811446 |
809436 |
6.2.2 Land-based Theodolite Tracking
Land-based
theodolite tracking stations were set up at two locations, one facing
east/south/west on the southern slopes of Sha Chau (SC), and the other facing
north/northeast/northwest at Lung Kwu Chau (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 Survey Station Details
|
Stations |
Location |
Geographical Coordinates |
Station Height (m) |
Approximate Tracking Distance (km) |
|
D |
Sha Chau (SC) |
22° 20’ 43.5” N 113° 53’ 24.66” E |
45.66 |
2 |
|
E |
Lung Kwu Chau (LKC) |
22° 22’ 44.83” N 113° 53’ 0.2” E |
70.40 |
3 |
6.3 CWD Monitoring Methodology
6.3.1
Small
Vessel Line-transect Survey
Small vessel line-transect surveys
provided data for density and abundance estimation and other assessments using
distance-sampling methodologies, specifically, line-transect methods.
The surveys involved small vessel
line-transect data collection and have been designed to be similar to, and
consistent with, previous surveys for the AFCD for their long-term monitoring
of small cetaceans in Hong Kong. The survey was designed to provide systematic,
quantitative measurements of density, abundance and habitat use.
As mentioned in Section 6.2.1,
the transects covered NEL, NWL covering the AW, WL and SWL areas as proposed in
the Manual and are consistent with the AFCD long-term monitoring programme
(except AW). There are two types of transect lines:
● Primary transect lines: the parallel
and zigzag transect lines as shown in Figure 6.1; and
● Secondary transect
lines: transect lines connecting between the primary transect lines and
crossing islands.
All data collected on both primary
and secondary transect lines were used for analysis of sighting distribution,
group size, activities including association with fishing boat, and mother-calf
pair. Only on-effort data collected under conditions of Beaufort 0-3 and
visibility of approximately 1200 m or beyond were used for analysis of the CWD
encounter rates.
A 15-20 m vessel with a flying
bridge observation platform about 4 to 5 m above water level and unobstructed
forward view, and a team of three to four observers were deployed to undertake
the surveys. Two observers were on search effort at all times when
following the transect lines with a constant speed of 7 to 8 knots (i.e. 13 to
15 km per hour), one using 7X handheld binoculars and the other using unaided
eyes and recording data.
During on-effort survey periods, the
survey team recorded effort data including time, position (waypoints), weather
conditions (Beaufort sea state and visibility) and distance travelled in each
series with assistance of a handheld GPS device. The GPS device also
continuously and automatically logged data including time, position (latitude
and longitude) and vessel speed throughout the entire survey.
When CWDs were seen, the survey team
was taken off-effort, the dolphins were approached and photographed for
photo-ID information (using a Canon 7D [or similar] camera and long 300 mm+
telephoto lens), then followed until they were lost from view. At that
point, the boat returned (off effort) to the same location of the survey line
where dolphins were spotted as far as practicable and began to survey on effort
again.
Focal follows of dolphins were
conducted where practicable (i.e. when individual dolphins or small stable
groups of dolphins with at least one member that could be readily identifiable
with unaided eyes during observations and weather conditions are favourable).
These involved the boat following (at an appropriate distance to minimize
disturbance) an identifiable individual dolphin for an extended period of time,
and collecting detailed data on its location, behaviour, response to vessels,
and associates.
6.3.2
Photo
Identification
CWDs can be identified by their unique features like presence of scratches, nick
marks, cuts, wounds, deformities of their dorsal fin
and distinguished colouration and spotting patterns.
When CWDs were observed, the survey team was taken off-effort, the dolphins were approached and
photographed for photo-ID information (using a Canon 7D [or similar] camera and
long 300 mm+ telephoto lens). The survey team attempted to photo both sides of
every single dolphin in the group as the colouration and spotting pattern on
both sides may not be identical. The photos were taken at the highest available
resolution and stored on Compact Flash memory cards for transferring into a
computer.
All photos taken were initially
examined to sort out those containing potentially identifiable individuals.
These sorted-out images would then be examined in detail and compared to the
CWD photo-identification catalogue established for 3RS during the baseline
monitoring stage.
6.3.3
Land-based
Theodolite Tracking
Land-based
monitoring obtains fine-scale information on the time of day and movement
patterns of the CWDs. A digital theodolite (Sokkia/Sokkisha
Model DT5 or similar equipment) with 30-power
magnification and 5-s precision was used to obtain the vertical and horizontal angle of each
dolphin and vessel position. Angles
were converted to geographic coordinates (latitude and longitude) and
data were recorded using Pythagoras software, Version 1.2. This
method delivers precise positions of multiple
spatially distant targets in a short period of time. The
technique is fully non-invasive, and allows for time and cost-effective
descriptions of dolphin habitat use patterns at all times of daylight.
Three surveyors (one theodolite operator,
one computer operator, and one observer) were involved in each survey.
Observers searched for dolphins using unaided eyes and handheld binoculars
(7X50). Theodolite tracking sessions were initiated whenever an individual CWD
or group of CWDs was located. Where possible, a distinguishable
individual was selected, based on colouration, within the group. The
focal individual was then continuously tracked via the theodolite, with a
position recorded each time the dolphin surfaced. In case an individual could
not be positively distinguished from other members, the group was tracked by
recording positions based on a central point within the group whenever the CWD
surfaced. Tracking continued until animals were lost from view; moved beyond
the range of reliable visibility (>1-3 km, depending on station height); or
environmental conditions obstructed visibility (e.g., intense haze, Beaufort sea state >4, or sunset), at which time the research
effort was terminated. In addition to the tracking of CWD, all vessels
that moved within 2-3 km of the station were tracked, with effort made to
obtain at least two positions for each vessel.
Theodolite tracking included focal
follows of CWD groups and vessels. Priority was given to tracking individual or
groups of CWD. The survey team also attempted to track all vessels moving
within 1 km of the focal CWD.
6.4 Monitoring Results and Observations
6.4.1
Small
Vessel Line-transect Survey
Survey Effort
Within this reporting period, two complete sets of small vessel
line-transect surveys were conducted on the 9th, 18th, 19th,
23rd, 24th, 25th, 26th and 27th
October 2017, covering all transects in NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL survey areas
for twice.
A total of around 457.94 km of survey effort was collected from
these surveys, with around 91.30% 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 D.
Sighting Distribution
In October 2017, 19 sightings of CWDs with 67 individuals were
sighted. All these sightings were recorded during on-effort search under favourable weather conditions (i.e. Beaufort Sea State 3 or
below with favourable visibility). Details of
cetacean sightings are presented in Appendix D.
Distribution of all CWD sightings recorded in October 2017 is
illustrated in Figure 6.3. In NWL, three
sightings of CWD were recorded within SCLKCMP. In WL, CWDs were recorded from
northern part of the survey area to Fan Lau, with more sightings located around
Tai O and Yi O. In SWL, there were four CWD sightings recorded in coastal
waters, one was recorded around Fan Lau Tung Wan while others were found at Lo
Kei Wan. No sightings of CWDs were recorded in NEL and also the vicinity of or
within the 3RS land-formation footprint.
Figure 6.3: Sightings Distribution of Chinese White Dolphins
[Pink circle: Sighting locations of CWD; Black line: Vessel survey
transects; Blue polygon: Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau
Marine Park (SCLKCMP); Green polygon: Brothers Marine Park (BMP); Red polygon:
3RS land-formation footprint; Yellow line: 3RS temporary works area boundary]
Remarks: Please note that
there are 19 pink circles on the map indicating the sighting locations of CWD.
Some of them were very close to each other and therefore appear overlapped on
this distribution map.
Encounter Rate
Two types of dolphin encounter rates were calculated based on the
data from October 2017. They included the number of dolphin sightings per 100
km survey effort (STG) and total number of dolphins per 100 km survey effort
(ANI) in the whole survey area (i.e. NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL). In the
calculation of dolphin encounter rates, only survey data collected under favourable weather condition (i.e. Beaufort Sea State 3 or
below with favourable visibility) were used. The
formulae used for calculation of the encounter rates are shown below:
Encounter Rate by Number of Dolphin
Sightings (STG)
Encounter Rate by Number of Dolphins
(ANI)
(Notes:
Only data collected under Beaufort 3 or below condition was used)
In October 2017, a total of around 418.11 km 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 a total number
of 67 dolphins from on-effort sightings were obtained under such condition.
Calculation of the encounter rates in October 2017 are shown in Appendix D.
For the running quarter of the reporting period (i.e., from August
2017 to October 2017), a total of around 1170.33 km 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 223 dolphins from on-effort sightings were obtained under such condition.
Calculation of the running quarterly encounter rates are shown in Appendix D.
The STG and ANI of CWD in the whole survey area (i.e. NEL, NWL, AW,
WL and SWL) during the month of October 2017 and during the running quarter are
presented in Table
6.4 below and compared with the Action Level. The running quarterly
encounter rates STG and ANI did not trigger the Action Level (i.e., remained
above the Action Level).
Table 6.4: Comparison of CWD Encounter
Rates of the Whole Survey Area with Action Levels
|
|
Encounter Rate (STG) |
Encounter Rate (ANI) |
|
October 2017 |
4.54 |
16.02 |
|
Running Quarter from August 2017 to October 2017* |
5.90 |
19.05 |
|
Action Level |
Running quarterly* < 1.86 |
Running quarterly* < 9.35 |
*Running
quarterly encounter rates STG & ANI were calculated from data collected in
the reporting period and the two preceding survey months, i.e. the data from
August 2017 to October 2017, containing six sets of transect surveys for all
monitoring areas.
Group Size
In October 2017, 19 groups of CWDs with 67 individuals were sighted,
and the average group size of CWDs was 3.53 individuals per group. Sightings with medium group size (i.e. 3-9) was dominated.
No sighting with large group size (i.e. 10 or more individuals) was recorded in
this reporting period.
Activities
and Association with Fishing Boats
Eight out of 19 sightings of CWDs were recorded engaging in feeding
activities in October 2017. Amongst these eight sightings, two were associated
with operating gillnetter in WL and SWL whilst another one was associated with
operating shrimp trawler near Hong Kong boundary in WL.
Mother-calf Pair
In October 2017, five sightings of CWDs were recorded with the
presence of mother-and-spotted calf or mother-and-unspotted juvenile pairs.
Four of these sightings were recorded in WL while the remaining one was
recorded in SWL.
6.4.2 Photo Identification
In October 2017, a total number of 33 different CWD individuals were
identified for totally 39 times. A summary of
photo identification works is presented in Table 6.5. Representative photos of these individuals are given in Appendix D.
Table 6.5:
Summary of Photo Identification
|
Date of Sighting (dd/mm/yyyy) |
Sighting Group No. |
Area |
|
Individual ID |
Date of Sighting (dd/mm/yyyy) |
Sighting Group No. |
Area |
|
|
NLMM002 |
25/10/2017 |
1 |
NWL |
WLMM030 |
25/10/2017 |
2 |
NWL |
|
|
NLMM010 |
25/10/2017 |
1 |
NWL |
WLMM054 |
26/10/2017 |
1 |
WL |
|
|
NLMM015 |
27/10/2017 |
3 |
WL |
WLMM056 |
27/10/2017 |
1 |
WL |
|
|
NLMM027 |
25/10/2017 |
1 |
NWL |
WLMM062 |
26/10/2017 |
5 |
WL |
|
|
NLMM028 |
25/10/2017 |
1 |
NWL |
WLMM065 |
26/10/2017 |
4 |
WL |
|
|
NLMM033 |
25/10/2017 |
2 |
NWL |
6 |
WL |
|||
|
NLMM051 |
25/10/2017 |
2 |
NWL |
27/10/2017 |
2 |
WL |
||
|
SLMM015 |
19/10/2017 |
2 |
SWL |
WLMM066 |
26/10/2017 |
4 |
WL |
|
|
SLMM018 |
23/10/2017 |
2 |
SWL |
6 |
WL |
|||
|
SLMM021 |
19/10/2017 |
2 |
SWL |
27/10/2017 |
2 |
WL |
||
|
SLMM023 |
26/10/2017 |
8 |
WL |
WLMM075 |
27/10/2017 |
2 |
WL |
|
|
SLMM030 |
19/10/2017 |
1 |
SWL |
WLMM091 |
26/10/2017 |
7 |
WL |
|
|
26/10/2017 |
1 |
WL |
WLMM093 |
26/10/2017 |
7 |
WL |
||
|
SLMM031 |
26/10/2017 |
10 |
SWL |
WLMM094 |
26/10/2017 |
7 |
WL |
|
|
SLMM037 |
26/10/2017 |
2 |
WL |
WLMM100 |
24/10/2017 |
1 |
NWL |
|
|
WLMM019 |
24/10/2017 |
1 |
NWL |
WLMM104 |
26/10/2017 |
2 |
WL |
|
|
25/10/2017 |
1 |
NWL |
WLMM105 |
26/10/2017 |
8 |
WL |
||
|
WLMM021 |
27/10/2017 |
1 |
WL |
WLMM106 |
26/10/2017 |
8 |
WL |
|
|
WLMM026 |
26/10/2017 |
1 |
WL |
WLMM107 |
26/10/2017 |
8 |
WL |
|
|
WLMM027 |
26/10/2017 |
1 |
WL |
|
|
|
|
|
6.4.3 Land-based Theodolite Tracking
Survey Effort
Land-based theodolite
tracking surveys were conducted at LKC on 20th,
23rd and 27th October 2017 and at SC on 25th
and 27th October 2017, with a total of five days of land-based
theodolite tracking survey effort accomplished in this reporting period. A
total number of 16 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 D. The first sighting locations of
CWD groups tracked at LKC station during land-based theodolite tracking surveys
in October 2017 were depicted in Figure 6.4. No CWD group was
sighted from SC station in this reporting month.
Table 6.6:
Summary of Survey Effort and CWD Group of Land-based Theodolite Tracking
|
Land-based Station |
No. of Survey Sessions |
Survey Effort (hh:mm) |
No. of CWD Groups Sighted |
CWD Group Sighting per Survey Hour |
|
Lung Kwu Chau |
3 |
18:00 |
16 |
0.89 |
|
Sha Chau |
2 |
12:00 |
0 |
0 |
|
TOTAL |
5 |
30:00 |
16 |
0.53 |
Figure 6.4: Plots of First Sightings of All CWD
Groups obtained from Land-based Stations
[Green triangle: LKC station; Green circle: CWD group
off LKC; Blue line: SCLKCMP boundary]
6.5
Progress Update on Passive Acoustic Monitoring
Underwater acoustic monitoring using
Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) should be undertaken during land formation
related construction works. In this reporting period, the Ecological Acoustic
Recorder (EAR) has been retrieved and re-deployed on 6 October 2017 and
positioned at south of Sha Chau Island inside the SCLKCMP with 20% duty cycle (Figure 6.5). The EAR deployment is generally
for 4-6 weeks prior to data retrieval for analysis. Acoustic data is reviewed
to give an indication of CWDs occurrence patterns and to obtain anthropogenic
noise information simultaneously. Analysis (by a specialized team of
acousticians) involved manually browsing through every acoustic recording and
logging the occurrence of dolphin signals. All data will be re-played by
computer as well as listened to by human ears for accurate assessment of
dolphin group presence. As the period of data collection and analysis takes
more than two months, PAM results could not be reported in monthly intervals.
6.6
Site Audit for CWD-related Mitigation Measures
During the reporting period, silt curtains were in place by the
contractors for sand blanket laying works, in which dolphin observers were
deployed by each contractor in accordance with the Marine Mammal Watching Plan
(MMWP). Teams of at least two dolphin observers were deployed at 15 to 19 dolphin
observation stations by the contractors for continuous monitoring of the
Dolphin Exclusion Zone (DEZ) by all contractors for ground improvement works (DCM works and PVD installation) 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 493 individuals being trained and the training records kept by the ET.
Observations were recorded on DEZ monitoring in this reporting period during
site inspection by the ET and IEC. The contractors had taken actions to
implement the recommended measures. From the contractors’ MMWP observation records and DEZ monitoring
records, no dolphin or other marine mammals were observed within or around the
silt curtains or the DEZs in this reporting month. These contractors’ records
were also audited by the ET during site inspection.
Audits of acoustic decoupling for
construction vessels were carried out during weekly site inspection and the
observations are summarised in Section 7.1. Audits of SkyPier high speed ferries route diversion and speed
control and construction vessel management are presented in Section 7.2
and Section 7.3 respectively.
6.7
Timing of Reporting CWD Monitoring Results
Detailed analysis of CWD monitoring
results collected by small vessel line-transect survey will be provided in
future quarterly reports. Detailed analysis of CWD monitoring results collected
by land-based theodolite tracking and PAM will be provided in future annual
reports after a larger sample size of data has been collected.
6.8
Summary
of CWD Monitoring
Monitoring
of CWD was conducted with two complete sets of small vessel line-transect
surveys and five days of land-based theodolite tracking survey effort as
scheduled. The running quarterly encounter rates STG and ANI in the
reporting period did not trigger the Action Level for CWD monitoring.
7 Environmental Site Inspection and Audit
7.1
Environmental
Site Inspection
Weekly site inspections of
construction works were carried out by the ET to audit the implementation of
proper environmental pollution control and mitigation measures for the Project.
The weekly site inspection schedule of the construction works is provided in Appendix C. Bi-weekly site inspections were
also conducted by the IEC. Observations have been recorded in the site
inspection checklists and provided to the contractors together with the
appropriate follow-up actions where necessary.
The key observations from site
inspection and associated recommendations were related to display of licenses and
permits at works area, provision and maintenance of drip trays, proper
implementation of noise mitigation, dust suppression, wastewater treatment,
tree protection, and runoff prevention measures, as well as regular segregation
and disposal of waste. In addition, recommendations were also provided during
site inspection on barges, which included provision and maintenance of drip
trays and chemical storage area, implementation of dust suppression, acoustic
decoupling, and runoff prevention measures, implementation of silt plume
mitigation and prevention measures, ensuring the effectiveness of silt
curtains, and implementation of wastewater collection and treatment.
A summary of implementation
status of the environmental mitigation measures for the construction phase of
the Project during the reporting period is provided in Appendix B.
7.2
Audit
of Route Diversion and Speed Control of the 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 (ACE) for comment and subsequently submitted to and
approved by EPD in November 2015 under EP Condition 2.10. The approved SkyPier Plan is available on the dedicated website of the
Project. In the SkyPier Plan, AAHK has committed to
implementing the mitigation measure of requiring high speed ferries (HSFs) of SkyPier travelling between HKIA and Zhuhai / Macau to start
diverting the route with associated speed control across the area, i.e. Speed
Control Zone (SCZ), with high CWD abundance. The route diversion and
speed restriction at the SCZ have been implemented since 28 December 2015.
Key audit findings for the SkyPier HSFs travelling to/from Zhuhai and Macau against
the requirements of the SkyPier Plan during the
reporting period are summarized in Table
7.1. The daily movements of all SkyPier
HSFs in October 2017 (i.e., 1 to 87 daily movements) were within the maximum
daily cap of 125 daily movements. There was only one ferry movement on 15
October 2017 due to typhoon. Status of compliance with the annual daily average
of 99 movements will be further reviewed in the annual EM&A Report.
In total, 693 ferry movements
between HKIA SkyPier and Zhuhai / Macau were recorded
in October 2017 and the data are presented in Appendix H. The time spent
by the SkyPier HSFs travelling through the SCZ in
October 2017 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 October 2017
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.
Two ferries were recorded with minor
deviation from the diverted route on 7 and 30 October 2017. Notices were sent
to the ferry operator (FO) and the cases are under investigation by ET. The
investigation result will be presented in the next monthly EM&A report.
Table 7.1:
Summary of Key Audit Findings against the SkyPier
Plan
|
Requirements in the SkyPier Plan |
1 October to 31 October 2017 |
|
Total number of ferry movements recorded and audited |
693
|
|
Use diverted route and enter / leave SCZ through Gate Access Points |
2 deviations, which are under investigation. |
|
Speed control in speed control zone |
The average speeds taken within the SCZ of all HSFs were within 15 knots (9.3 knots to 14.0 knots), which complied with the SkyPier Plan. The time used by HSFs to travel through SCZ is presented in Figure 7.1. |
|
Daily Cap (including all SkyPier HSFs)
|
1 to 87 daily movements (within the maximum daily cap - 125 daily movements). |
7.3
Audit of Construction and Associated Vessels
The updated Marine Travel Routes and
Management Plan for Construction and Associated Vessel (MTRMP-CAV) was
submitted and approved in November 2016 by EPD under EP Condition 2.9. The
approved Plan is available on the dedicated website of the Project.
ET carried out the following actions
during the reporting period:
- Four
skipper training sessions were held for
contractors’ concerned skippers of relevant construction vessels to
familiarize them with the predefined routes; general education on local
cetaceans; guidelines for avoiding adverse water quality impact; the
required environmental practices / measures while operating construction
and associated vessels under the Project; and guidelines for operating
vessels safely in the presence of CWDs. The list of all trained skippers
was properly recorded and maintained by ET.
- One
skipper training session was held by contractor’s Environmental Officer.
Competency test was subsequently conducted with the trained skipper by ET.
- 20 skippers were trained by ET and 1 skipper was trained by
contractor’s Environmental Officer in October 2017. In total, 771 skippers
were trained from August 2016 to October 2017.
- The
Marine Surveillance System (MSS) automatically recorded deviation cases
such as speeding, entering no entry zone, not traveling through the
designated gate. ET conducted checking to ensure the MSS records deviation
cases accurately.
- Deviations
such as speeding in the works area, entering from non-designated gates and
entering no-entry zones were identified. All the concerned contractors
were reminded to comply with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV during the
bi-weekly MTCC audit.
- 3-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.
The IEC of the Project had performed
audit on the compliance of the requirements as part of the EM&A programme.
7.4 Implementation of Dolphin Exclusion Zone
During
the reporting period, ET has been notified that no dolphin sightings were
recorded within the DEZ by the contractors. ET has checked the relevant records
by the contractors to audit the implementation of DEZ. Observations were
recorded on DEZ monitoring in this reporting period during site inspection by
the ET and IEC. The contractors had taken actions to implement the recommended
measures.
7.5
Ecological
Monitoring
In accordance with the Manual,
ecological monitoring shall be undertaken monthly at the Horizontal Directional
Drilling (HDD) daylighting location on Sheung Sha Chau Island during the HDD
construction works period from August to March to identify and evaluate any
impacts with appropriate actions taken as required to address and minimise any
adverse impact found. During the reporting
period, the monthly ecological monitoring at the HDD daylighting
location on Sheung Sha Chau observed that HDD works were ongoing under the
Contract P560(R) at the daylighting location, and there was no
encroachment of any works upon the egretry area nor
any significant disturbance to the egrets on the island by the works. No signs
of nursery activities were observed. At the HDD daylighting location, neither
nest nor breeding activity of bird were found during
the monthly ecological monitoring and weekly site inspections in the reporting
period. The site photos and location map regarding the monthly ecological
monitoring for the HDD works and egretry area are
provided in Appendix D for reference.
7.6 Status of Submissions under Environmental Permits
The current status of submissions
under the EP up to the reporting period is presented in Table 7.2.
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 |
|
|
2.19 |
Waste Management Plan |
|
|
3.1 |
Updated EM&A Manual |
|
|
3.4 |
Baseline Monitoring Reports |
7.7
Compliance with Other Statutory Environmental
Requirements
During the reporting period,
environmental related licenses and permits required for the construction activities
were checked. No non-compliance with environmental statutory requirements was
recorded. The environmental licenses and permits which are valid in the
reporting period are presented in Appendix F.
7.8 Analysis and Interpretation of Complaints, Notification of Summons and
Status of Prosecutions
7.8.1 Complaints
No construction activities-related complaint was
received during the reporting period.
7.8.2 Notifications of Summons or Status of Prosecution
Neither notification of summons nor
prosecution was received during the reporting period.
7.8.3 Cumulative Statistics
Cumulative
statistics on complaints, notifications of summons and status of prosecutions are
summarized in Appendix G.
8
Future Key Issues and Other EIA & EM&A Issues
8.1
Construction
Programme for the Coming Reporting Period
Key activities anticipated in the next
reporting period for the Project will include the following:
Advanced Works:
Contract P560 (R)
Aviation Fuel Pipeline Diversion Works
● HDD works; and
● Stockpiling of excavated materials
from HDD operation.
DCM Works:
Contract 3201 to 3205
DCM Works
● Laying of sand blanket;
● DCM works; and
● Seawall construction
Reclamation Works:
Contract 3206 Main
Reclamation Works
● Laying of sand blanket;
and
● PVD installation.
Airfield Works Contract:
Contract 3301 North
Runway Crossover Taxiway
● CLP cable ducting work;
and
● Precast of duct bank and
fabrication of steel works.
Terminal 2 Expansion Works:
Contract 3501 Antenna
Farm and Sewage Pumping Station
● Excavation and piling
works.
Contract 3502 Terminal 2
APM Depot Modification Works
● Removal of existing concrete.
APM Works:
Contract 3602 Existing
APM System Modification Works
● Site office establishment.
Airport Support Infrastructure & Logistic Works:
Contract 3801 APM and
BHS Tunnels on Existing Airport Island
● Erection of hoarding.
8.2
Key
Environmental Issues for the Coming Reporting Period
The key environmental issues for the
Project in the coming reporting period expected to be associated with the
construction activities include:
● Generation of dust from construction
works and stockpiles;
● Noise from operating equipment and
machinery on-site;
● Generation of site surface runoffs
and wastewater from activities on-site;
● Water quality from laying of sand blankets and DCM works;
● DEZ monitoring for ground
improvement works (DCM works and PVD installation) and seawall construction;
and implementation of MMWP for silt curtain deployment by the contractors’
dolphin observers;
● Sorting, recycling, storage and
disposal of general refuse and construction waste;
● Management of chemicals and
avoidance of oil spillage on-site; and
● Acoustic decoupling measures for equipment on
marine vessels.
The implementation of required
mitigation measures by the contractors will be monitored by the ET.
8.3
Monitoring Schedule for the Coming Reporting Period
A
tentative schedule of the planned environmental monitoring work in the next
reporting period is provided in Appendix C.
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, laying
of sand blanket, seawall construction and PVD installation. Land-side works
included HDD works, site office establishment, cable ducting, concrete removal
works, piling and excavation works.
All the monitoring works for
construction dust, construction noise, water quality, construction waste,
terrestrial ecology, and CWD were conducted during the reporting period in
accordance with the Manual.
No
exceedance of the Action or Limit Levels in relation to construction dust,
construction noise, construction
waste and CWD monitoring was recorded in the reporting period.
The water quality monitoring results
for DO, turbidity, total alkalinity, chromium, and nickel obtained during the
reporting period did not trigger their corresponding Action and Limit Levels
stipulated in the EM&A programme for triggering the relevant investigation
and follow-up procedures under the programme if being exceeded. For SS, some of
the testing results exceeded the relevant Action Levels, and the corresponding
investigations were conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded
that the exceedances were not due to the Project.
The monthly terrestrial ecology
monitoring on Sheung Sha Chau Island observed that HDD works were conducted at
the daylighting location and there was no encroachment upon
the egretry area nor any significant
disturbance to the egrets at Sheung Sha Chau by the works.
Weekly site inspections of the
construction works were carried out by the ET to audit the implementation of
proper environmental pollution control and mitigation measures for the Project.
Bi-weekly site inspections were also conducted by the IEC. Observations
have been recorded in the site inspection checklists which have been provided
to the contractors together with the appropriate follow-up actions where
necessary.
On the implementation of MMWP,
dolphin observers were deployed by the contractors for laying
of open sea silt curtain and laying of silt curtains for sand blanket in
accordance with the plan. On the implementation of
DEZ Plan, dolphin observers at 15 to 19 dolphin observation
stations were deployed for continuous monitoring of
the DEZ by all contractors for ground
improvement works (DCM works and PVD installation) and seawall construction in
accordance with the DEZ Plan. Trainings for the proposed dolphin observers were
provided by the ET prior to the aforementioned works, with the training records
kept by the ET. From the contractors’ MMWP observation records and DEZ
monitoring records, no dolphin or other marine mammals were observed within or
around the silt curtains or the DEZs in this reporting month. DCM works were suspended in the dolphin sighting events
until the DEZ was clear of dolphin for a continuous period of 30 minutes. The
contractor’s record was checked by the ET during site inspection. Audits of
acoustic decoupling for construction vessels were also carried out by the
ET.
On the implementation of the Marine
Travel Routes and Management Plan for High Speed Ferries of SkyPier
(the SkyPier Plan), the daily movements of all SkyPier high speed ferries (HSFs) in October 2017 were in
the range of 1 to 87 daily movements, which are within the maximum daily cap of
125 daily movements. A total of 693 HSF movements under the SkyPier
Plan were recorded in the reporting period. All HSFs had travelled through the
Speed Control Zone (SCZ) with average speeds under 15 knots (9.3 to 14.0
knots), which were in compliance with the SkyPier
Plan. Two ferry movements with minor deviation from the diverted route are
under investigation by ET. The investigation result will be presented in the
next monthly EM&A report. In summary, the ET and IEC have audited the HSF
movements against the SkyPier Plan and conducted
follow up investigation or actions accordingly.
On the implementation of the
MTRMP-CAV, the MSS automatically recorded the deviation case such as speeding,
entering no entry zone, not traveling through the designated gate. 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, entry from non-designated gates, and entering no-entry zones were
reviewed by ET. All the concerned captains were reminded by the contractor’s
MTCC representative to comply with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV. ET
reminded contractors that all vessels shall avoid entering the no-entry zone,
in particular the Brothers Marine Park. 3-month rolling
programmes for construction vessel activities, which ensures the proposed
vessels are necessary and minimal through good planning, were also received
from contractors.