Figure 1.1- 1.2	Locations of Key Construction Activities in this reporting period
Figure 2.1	Locations of Air and Noise Monitoring Stations and Chek Lap Kok Wind Station
Figure 2.2	Locations of Water Quality Monitoring Stations
Figure 2.3	Vessel based Dolphin Monitoring Transects in Construction, Post-Construction, and Operation Phases
Figure 2.4	Land based Dolphin Monitoring Locations in Baseline and Construction Phases
Figure 2.5	Sightings Distribution of Chinese White Dolphins
Figure 2.6	Sighting Locations of Chinese White Dolphins with Different Group Sizes
Figure 2.7	Sighting Locations of Chinese White Dolphins Engaged in Different Behaviours
Figure 2.8	Sighting Locations of Mother-calf Pairs
Figure 2.9	Plots of First Sightings of All CWD Groups from Land-based Stations
Figure 2.10	Location for Passive Acoustic Monitoring
Figure 2.11	Locations of Six Coral Dive Survey Sites

Appendices

Appendix A	Project Organization Chart
Appendix B	Environmental Mitigation Implementation Schedule (EMIS) for Construction Phase
Appendix C	Graphical Plots of Water Quality Monitoring Results
Appendix D	Summary of Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring Results
Appendix E	Summary of Ecological Monitoring Results
Appendix F	Selected Photos of Tagged Corals from Ad-hoc Monitoring

Executive Summary

The “Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System” (the Project) serves to meet the future air traffic demands at Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA). On 7 November 2014, the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report (Register No.: AEIAR-185/2014) for the Project was approved and an Environmental Permit (EP) (Permit No.: EP-489/2014) was issued for the construction and operation of the Project.

This is the 7^th Construction Phase Quarterly EM&A Report for the Project which summarizes the monitoring results and audit findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 July 2017 to 30 September 2017.

Key Activities in the Reporting Period

The key activities of the Project carried out in the reporting period included deep cement mixing (DCM) works and trials, laying of geotextile and sand blanket, site preparation works, site office establishment, seawall construction, horizontal directional drilling (HDD) works, concrete removal works, piling, and excavation works.

EM&A Activities Conducted in the Reporting Period

The EM&A programme was undertaken in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual of the Project. A summary of the monitoring and audit activities during this reporting period is presented as below. Construction works, and thus terrestrial ecological monitoring on Sheung Sha Chau Island was resumed in August 2017 after the end of the ardeid’s breeding season (between April and July).

Monitoring/ Audit Activities	Number of Sessions
1-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) Air Quality Monitoring	102
Noise Monitoring	65
Water Monitoring	40
Vessel line-transect surveys for Chinese White Dolphin (CWD) monitoring	6
Land-based theodolite tracking survey effort for CWD monitoring	15
Terrestrial ecology monitoring	2


Chemical Spill Drill conducted by Contractor	Dolphin Exclusion Zone (DEZ) Monitoring for DCM Works conducted by Contractor	Dolphin Observer Training

In total, 2,170 High Speed Ferry (HSF) movements between HKIA SkyPier and Zhuhai / Macau were audited in the reporting period. All HSFs travelled through the Speed Control Zone (SCZ) with average speed within 15 knots, which complied with the Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for High Speed Ferries of SkyPier (the SkyPier Plan). Two ferry movements had minor deviations from the diverted route during the reporting period. ET investigated the deviation cases and confirmed that all of them are related to public safety / emergency situations.

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 deviation cases such as speeding, entering no entry zone, and not travelling through the designated gates. ET conducted bi-weekly audit of the system to ensure sufficient information has been provided and the contractors complied with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV. Trainings were 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. Monthly 3-month rolling programmes for construction vessel activities were provided by contractors for checking to ensure the proposed deployment is necessary and minimal through good planning.

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 DEZ Plan, dolphin observers at 12 to 16 dolphin observation stations were deployed for continuous monitoring of the DEZ by the contractors for DCM works 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, whilst there were four records of dolphin sighting within the DEZ of DCM works in this reporting period. Audits of acoustic decoupling for construction vessels were also carried out by ET.

Review of Environmental Quality Performance Limits (Action and Limit levels)

No exceedance of 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 total alkalinity and chromium 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 DO, turbidity, suspended solids (SS), and nickel, some of the testing results exceeded the relevant Action or Limit Levels in the reporting period, and the corresponding investigations were conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded that the exceedances were not due to the Project.

Implementation Status and Review of Environmental Mitigation Measures

Weekly site audits were carried out during the reporting period to confirm the implementation measures undertaken by the contractors. Environmental issues related to construction activities, air quality, noise, water quality, waste management, terrestrial ecology, landscape & visual and CWD were monitored and/ or reviewed.

Recommended environmental mitigation measures, as included in the EM&A programme, were implemented properly during the reporting period. The EM&A programme effectively monitored the construction activities and ensured proper implementation of the mitigation measures.

Summary Findings of the EM&A Programme

The following table summarizes the key findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period:

	Yes	No	Details	Analysis / Recommendation / Remedial Actions
Breaches of Limit Level^		√	No project-related Limit Level exceedance was recorded.	Nil
Breaches of Action Level^		√	No project-related Action Level exceedance was recorded.	Nil
Complaints Received	√		Two complaints were received on 8 August and 5 September 2017 respectively.	Complaint investigations were carried out in accordance with the Complaint Management Plan. Investigation details are presented in S3.2.1.
Notification of any summons and status of prosecutions		√	No notification of summons or prosecution were received.	Nil
Changes that affect the EM&A		√	There was no change to the construction works that may affect the EM&A	Nil

Remarks: ^Only 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 of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 21.

1.2 Scope of this Report

This is the 7^th Construction Phase Quarterly EM&A Report for the Project which summarizes the key findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 July 2017 to 30 September 2017.

1.3 Project Organisation

The Project’s organisation structure is provided in Appendix A. Contact details of the key personnel have been updated and provided in 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-Build King 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
Contract 3203 DCM (Package 3) (Sambo E&C Co., Ltd.)	Environmental Officer	David Hung	9765 6151
Contract 3204 DCM (Package 4) (CRBC-SAMBO Joint Venture)	Project Manager	Kyung-Sik Yoo	9683 8697
Contract 3204 DCM (Package 4) (CRBC-SAMBO Joint Venture)	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
Contract 3206 (ZHEC-CCCC-CDC Joint Venture)	Environmental Officer	Kwai Fung Wong	3693 2252
Terminal 2 Expansion Works:
Contract 3501 Antenna Farm and Sewage Pumping Station (Build King Construction Ltd.)	Project Manager	Osbert Sit	9079 7030
	Environmental Officer	Kelvin Cheung	9305 6081
Contract 3502 Terminal 2 APM Depot Modification Works (Build King Construction Ltd.)	Project Manager	Kivin Cheng	9380 3635
	Environmental Officer	Chun Pong Chan	9187 7118
Automated People Mover (APM) Works:
Contract 3602 Existing APM System Modification Works (Niigata Transys Co., Ltd.)	Project Manager	Kunihiro Tatecho	9755 0351
	Environmental Officer	Arthur Wong	9170 3394
Airport Support Infrastructure and Logistic Works:
Contract 3801 APM and BHS Tunnels on Existing Airport Island (China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Ltd.)	Project Manager	Tony Wong	9642 8672
	Environmental Officer	Fredrick Wong	9842 2703

1.4 Contact information for the Project

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

Table 1.2: Contact Information of the Project

Channels	Contact Information
Hotline	3908 0354
Email	env@3rsproject.com
Fax	3747 6050
Postal Address	Airport Authority Hong Kong HKIA Tower 1 Sky Plaza Road Hong Kong International Airport Lantau Hong Kong Attn: Environmental Team Leader Mr Terence Kong c/o Mr Lawrence Tsui (TRD)

1.5 Summary of Construction Works

Key activities of the Project carried out in the reporting period included DCM works and trials, laying of geotextile and sand blanket, site preparation works, site office establishment, HDD works, concrete removal works, piling, and excavation works.

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

1.6 Summary of EM&A Programme Requirements

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

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

Parameters	EM&A Requirements	Status
Air Quality
Baseline Monitoring	At least 14 consecutive days before commencement of construction work	The baseline air quality monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4.
Impact Monitoring	At least 3 times every 6 days	On-going
Noise
Baseline Monitoring	Daily for a period of at least two weeks prior to the commencement of construction works	The baseline noise monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4.
Impact Monitoring	Weekly	On-going
Water Quality
General Baseline Water Quality Monitoring for reclamation, water jetting and field joint works	Three days per week, at mid-flood and mid-ebb tides, for at least four weeks prior to the commencement of marine works.	The baseline water quality monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4.
General Impact Water Quality Monitoring for reclamation, water jetting and field joint works	Three days per week, at mid-flood and mid-ebb tides.	On-going
Initial Intensive Deep Cement Mixing (DCM) Water Quality Monitoring	At least four weeks	Completed in May 2017. Data analysis in-progress.
Regular DCM Water Quality Monitoring	Three times per week until completion of DCM works.	On-going
Waste Management
Waste Monitoring	At least weekly	On-going
Land Contamination
Supplementary Contamination Assessment Plan (CAP)	At least 3 months before commencement of any soil remediation works.	To be submitted with the relevant construction works.
Contamination Assessment Report (CAR) for Golf Course	CAR to be submitted for golf course first; programme for submission of supplementary CAR at the other areas to be agreed.	The CAR for Golf Course was submitted to EPD.
Terrestrial Ecology
Pre-construction Egretry Survey Plan	Once per month in the breeding season between April and July, prior to the commencement of HDD drilling works.	The Egretry Survey Plan was submitted and approved by EPD under EP Condition 2.14.
Ecological Monitoring	Monthly monitoring during the HDD construction works period from August to March.	The ecological monitoring has been resumed since August 2017.
Marine Ecology
Pre-Construction Phase Coral Dive Survey	Prior to marine construction works	The Coral Translocation Plan was submitted and approved by EPD under EP Condition 2.12.
Coral Translocation	-	The coral translocation was completed on 5 January 2017.
Post-translocation Monitoring	As per an enhanced monitoring programme based on the Coral Translocation Plan	On-going
Chinese White Dolphins (CWD)
Baseline Monitoring	6 months of baseline surveys before the commencement of land formation related construction works. Vessel surveys: Two full surveys per month; Land-based theodolite tracking: Two days per month at the Sha Chau station and two days per month at the Lung Kwu Chau station; and Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM): For the whole duration of baseline period.	Baseline CWD results were reported in the CWD Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD in accordance with EP Condition 3.4.
Impact Monitoring	Vessel surveys: Two full surveys per month; Land-based theodolite tracking: One day per month at the Sha Chau station and one day per month at the Lung Kwu Chau station; and PAM: For the whole duration for land formation related construction works.	On-going
Landscape and Visual
Baseline Monitoring	One-off survey within the Project site boundary prior to commencement of any construction works	The baseline landscape & visual monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4.
Impact Monitoring	Weekly	On-going
Environmental Auditing
Regular site inspection	Weekly	On-going
Marine Mammal Watching Plan (MMWP) implementation measures	Monitor and check	On-going
DEZ Plan implementation measures	Monitor and check	On-going
SkyPier High Speed Ferries (HSF) implementation measures	Monitor and check	On-going
Construction and Associated Vessels implementation measures	Monitor and check	On-going
Complaint Hotline and Email Channel	Construction phase	On-going
Environmental Log Book	Construction phase	On-going

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

The EM&A programme also involved weekly site inspections and related auditing conducted by ET for the checking of implementation of required environmental mitigation measures recommended in the approved EIA Report. 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 Environmental Monitoring and Auditing

2.1 Air Quality Monitoring

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

Table 2.1: Impact Air Quality Monitoring Stations

Monitoring Station	Location	Action Level (mg/m³)	Limit Level (mg/m³)
AR1A	Man Tung Road Park	306	500
AR2	Village House at Tin Sum	298	500

The graphical plot of impact air quality monitoring results during the reporting period is presented in Graph 1.

Graph 1: Graphical Plot of 1-hour TSP concentration at AR1A and AR2 during the Reporting Period

No exceedance of Action or Limit Level was recorded at all monitoring stations in the reporting period.

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

The key activities of the Project carried out in the reporting period are summarised in Section 1.5. The active construction site is around 3 km away from the nearest air sensitive receiver in Tung Chung. The major dust sources during the reporting period were observed to be local air pollution and nearby traffic emissions. It is considered that the monitoring work in the reporting period was effective and there was no adverse impact attributable to the works of the Project.

2.2 Noise Monitoring

Impact noise monitoring was conducted at five representative monitoring stations once per week during 0700 and 1900 during the reporting period. The locations of monitoring stations are described in Table 2.2 and presented in Figure 2.1. The Action and Limit Levels of the noise monitoring stipulated in the EM&A programme for triggering the relevant investigation and follow-up procedures under the programme are provided in Table 2.2 for reference.

The graphical plot of impact noise quality monitoring results during the reporting period is presented in Graph 2.

Table 2.2: Impact Noise Quality Monitoring Stations

Monitoring Station	Location	Action Level	Limit Level
NM1A	Man Tung Road Park	When one documented complaint is received from any one of the sensitive receivers	75 dB(A)
NM3A	Site Office		75 dB(A)
NM4⁽ⁱ⁾	Ching Chung Hau Po Woon Primary School		65dB(A) / 70 dB(A)
NM5	Village House in Tin Sum		75 dB(A)
NM6	House No. 1, Sha Lo Wan		75 dB(A)
Note: ⁽ⁱ⁾ Reduced to 70dB(A) for school and 65dB(A) during school examination periods.

Graph 2: Graphical Plot of Leq _(30min) at NM1A, NM3A, NM4, NM5 and NM6 during the Reporting Period

No exceedance of the Action and Limit Level was recorded at all monitoring stations in the reporting period.

The key activities of the Project carried out in the reporting period are summarised in Section 1.5. The active construction work is around 900 m away from the nearest noise sensitive receivers in the villages in North Lantau. The major noise sources during the reporting period were observed to be road traffic and helicopters at NM1A, aircrafts and helicopters at NM3A, helicopters and construction activities from a nearby school at NM4, aircrafts and helicopters at NM5, and aircrafts, helicopters, and marine vessels at NM6. It is considered that the monitoring work in the reporting period was effective and there was no adverse impact attributable to the works of the Project.

2.3 Water Quality Monitoring

During the reporting period, water quality monitoring was conducted 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 the water quality sensitive receivers around the airport island in accordance with the Manual. The purpose of water quality monitoring at the IM stations is to promptly capture any potential water quality impacts from the Project before the impacts could become apparent at sensitive receivers (represented by the SR stations). Table 2.3 describes the details of the monitoring stations. Figure 2.2 shows the locations of the monitoring stations.

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

Monitoring Stations	Description	Coordinates		Parameters
		Easting	Northing
C1	Control	804247	815620
C2	Control	806945	825682
C3⁽³⁾	Control	817803	822109
IM1	Impact	806458	818351	DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS, Total Alkalinity, Heavy Metals⁽²⁾
IM2	Impact	806193	818852
IM3	Impact	806019	819411
IM4	Impact	805039	819570
IM5	Impact	804924	820564
IM6	Impact	805828	821060
IM7	Impact	806835	821349
IM8	Impact	807838	821695
IM9	Impact	808811	822094
IM10	Impact	809838	822240
IM11	Impact	810545	821501
IM12	Impact	811519	821162
SR1⁽¹⁾	Future Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF) Seawater Intake for cooling	812586	820069	DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS
SR2⁽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 are 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 intake is commissioned.

⁽²⁾ Details of selection criteria for the two heavy metals for regular DCM monitoring refer to the Detailed Plan on Deep Cement Mixing available on the dedicated 3RS website (http://env.threerunwaysystem.com/en/ep-submissions.html). DCM specific water quality monitoring parameters (total alkalinity and heavy metals) were only conducted at C1 to C3, SR2, and IM1 to IM12.

⁽³⁾ According to the baseline water quality monitoring report, C3 station is not adequately representative as a control station of IM / SR stations during the flood tide. The control reference has been changed from C3 to SR2 from 1 September 2016 onwards.

⁽⁴⁾The monitoring station for SR8 is subject to future changes due to silt curtain arrangements and the progressive relocation of this seawater intake.

2.3.1 Monitoring Schedule

During the reporting period, general water quality monitoring and regular DCM water quality monitoring were conducted three days per week, at mid-flood and mid-ebb tides, at the 23 water quality monitoring stations.

The flood tide monitoring session on 1 July 2017 was cancelled due to marine police blockade of the monitoring area. In addition, the flood tide monitoring session on 22 August 2017 was cancelled due to hoisting Strong Wind Signal No. 3 and adverse sea condition, and the ebb tide monitoring session on 30 September 2017 was cancelled due to hoisting Thunderstorm Signal and adverse sea condition.

2.3.2 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 2.4. The control and IM stations during flood tide and ebb tide for general water quality monitoring and regular DCM monitoring are presented in Table 2.5.

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

Parameters	Action Level (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
DO in mg/L (Surface, Middle & Bottom)	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 2.5: The Control and Impact Stations during Flood Tide and Ebb Tide for General Water Quality Monitoring and Regular DCM Monitoring

Control Station	Impact Stations
Flood Tide
C1	IM1, IM2, IM3, IM4, IM5, IM6, IM7, IM8, SR3
SR2^{^1}	IM7, IM8, IM9, IM10, IM11, IM12, SR1A, SR3, SR4A, SR5A, SR6, SR8
Ebb Tide
C1	SR4A, SR5A, SR6
C2	IM1, IM2, IM3, IM4, IM5, IM6, IM7, IM8, IM9, IM10, IM11, IM12, SR1A, SR2, SR3, SR7, SR8

^{^1}As per findings of Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Report, the control reference has been changed from C3 to SR2 from 1 Sep 2016 onwards.

2.3.3 Summary of Monitoring Results

The monitoring results for total alkalinity and chromium obtained during the reporting period did not exceed 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 DO, turbidity, SS, and nickel, some of the testing results exceeded the relevant Action or Limit Levels in the reporting period, and the corresponding investigations were conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded that the exceedances were not due to the Project. Summaries of DO, turbidity, SS, and nickel compliance status are presented in Table 2.6 to Table 2.15.

Findings for DO Exceedances

Table 2.6 to Table 2.9 present a summary of the DO compliance status at IM and SR stations during mid-ebb and mid flood tide for the reporting period.

Table 2.6: Summary of DO (Surface and Middle) Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide)

	IM1	IM2	IM3	IM4	IM5	IM6	IM7	IM8	IM9	IM10	IM11	IM12	SR2	SR3	SR4A	SR5A	SR6	SR7
06/07/2017
05/08/2017
22/08/2017
No. of Exceedance	2	0	0	0	0	1	2	2	2	1	0	0	0	1	3	0	0	1

Table 2.7: Summary of DO (Bottom) Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide)

	IM1	IM2	IM3	IM4	IM5	IM6	IM7	IM8	IM9	IM10	IM11	IM12	SR2	SR3	SR4A	SR5A	SR6	SR7
06/07/2017
05/08/2017
22/08/2017
No. of Exceedance	2	1	0	0	0	0	2	1	1	0	0	0	0	1	2	0	0	0

Table 2.8: Summary of DO (Surface and Middle) Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)

	IM1	IM2	IM3	IM4	IM5	IM6	IM7	IM8	IM9	IM10	IM11	IM12	SR3	SR4A	SR5A	SR6	SR7
06/07/2017
No. of Exceedance	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0

Table 2.9: Summary of DO (Bottom) Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)

	IM1	IM2	IM3	IM4	IM5	IM6	IM7	IM8	IM9	IM10	IM11	IM12	SR3	SR4A	SR5A	SR6	SR7
06/07/2017
No. of Exceedance	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

Note 1: The monitoring results on monitoring dates not presented in the above tables did not exceed their corresponding Action or Limit Levels. Detailed results are presented in Appendix C.

Note 2: Standby Signal No. 1 was in force when exceedances were recorded at IM1 and SR4A on 22 August 2017.

Legend:
	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
	Exceedance of Limit Level recorded at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow
	Exceedance of Limit 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

Investigations were conducted for each of the exceedances and details of the investigation findings are presented in the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report no. 19 and 20. All exceedances were found not due to the Project.

It was observed that some of the DO exceedances occurred at stations located upstream of the 3RS Project. Such exceedances at upstream stations would unlikely be affected by the Project, so the investigation focused on exceedance events that occurred at downstream stations.

As part of the investigation on downstream exceedance events, details of the Project’s marine construction activities on the concerned monitoring days were collected and presented in the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report no. 19 and 20. It was confirmed that both DCM and sand blanket laying activities were operating normally with silt curtains deployed. No construction vessel nor silt plume was observed in the vicinity of the monitoring stations when exceedances were recorded.

Mid-Ebb Tide

Downstream exceedance events occurred at IM1, IM2, SR4A, and SR7. It was noticed that on the concerned monitoring days, no exceedance was recorded at other downstream monitoring stations, such as IM3 and IM12, which were located closer to active marine construction activities. Lower DO concentrations were also recorded during baseline monitoring at some of these monitoring stations. Based on these findings, the exceedances were possibly due to natural fluctuation in the vicinity of these monitoring stations, and considered not due to the Project.

Mid-Flood Tide

Downstream exceedance events occurred at IM8, IM9, and SR3. It was noted that the DO concentration at surface and middle level at C1, the corresponding control station for IM8 and SR3, was also below Action Level during the same tide. Besides, no exceedance was recorded at other monitoring stations, such as IM7 and IM10, which were also located around 500 m from active marine construction activities. Based on these findings, the exceedances were possibly due to natural fluctuation in the vicinity of these monitoring stations, and considered not due to the Project.

Findings for Turbidity Exceedances

Table 2.10 and Table 2.11 presents a summary of the turbidity compliance status at IM and SR stations during mid-ebb and mid flood tide for the reporting period.

Table 2.10: Summary of Turbidity Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide)

	IM1	IM2	IM3	IM4	IM5	IM6	IM7	IM8	IM9	IM10	IM11	IM12	SR2	SR3	SR4A	SR5A	SR6	SR7
26/08/2017
No. of Exceedance	0	0	0	1	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0

Table 2.11: Summary of Turbidity Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)

	IM1	IM2	IM3	IM4	IM5	IM6	IM7	IM8	IM9	IM10	IM11	IM12	SR3	SR4A	SR5A	SR6	SR7
26/08/2017
No. of Exceedance	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	1	1	1	0	0	0	0	0

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

Legend:
	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

Investigations were conducted for each of the exceedances and details of the investigation findings are presented in the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report no. 20. All exceedances were found not due to the Project.

It was observed that some of the turbidity exceedances occurred at stations located upstream of the 3RS Project. Such exceedances at upstream stations would unlikely be affected by the project, so the investigation focused on exceedance events that occurred at downstream stations.

As part of the investigation on downstream exceedance events, details of the Project’s marine construction activities on the concerned monitoring days were collected and presented in the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report no. 20. It was confirmed that both DCM and sand blanket laying activities were operating normally with silt curtains deployed as additional measures. A construction vessel was observed travelling in the vicinity when monitoring was conducted during mid-flood tide at IM6 on 26 August 2017. No construction works and no leakage of construction material from the vessel was observed.

Mid-Ebb Tide

Downstream exceedance events occurred at IM4 and SR4A. It was noticed that the exceedances appeared to be isolated cases with no temporal trend and no clear spatial trend to indicate turbidity rising due to Project activities. It was also noted that no exceedance was recorded at monitoring station IM3, which is located similarly downstream and close to active construction works on 26 August 2017 during ebb tide, while no exceedances were identified in the repeat turbidity measurements. Based on the above, the exceedances were considered not due to the Project, and were possibly due to natural fluctuation in vicinity of IM4 and SR4A.

Mid-Flood Tide

Downstream exceedance events occurred at IM6 and IM10. It was noticed that the turbidity level at bottom levels of IM6 and IM10 were significantly higher than that at surface and middle levels. Similar observations were also found at nearby upstream and downstream impact stations. The observation above suggests that the exceedances were due to high turbidity level at bottom sea level at a broad area regardless of the location relative to active works. It was also noted that the phenomenon coincided with adverse weather condition (Severe Typhoon Hato and Severe Tropical Storm Pakhar) in the period of 22 to 27 August 2017, which could potentially affect the hydrodynamic and sediment transport conditions at bottom sea levels over a wide region. Based on the above, the exceedances were considered not due to the Project, and were possibly due to natural fluctuation in vicinity of IM6 and IM10.

Findings for SS Exceedances

Table 2.12 and Table 2.13 present a summary of the SS compliance status at IM and SR stations during mid-ebb and mid-flood tide for the reporting period.

Table 2.12: Summary of SS Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide)

	IM1	IM2	IM3	IM4	IM5	IM6	IM7	IM8	IM9	IM10	IM11	IM12	IM13	SR2	SR3	SR4A	SR5A	SR6	SR7	SR8
13/07/2017
24/08/2017
26/08/2017
09/09/2017
No. of Exceedance	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	1	0	0	0	0	1	0	1	0	0

Table 2.13: Summary of SS Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)

	IM1	IM2	IM3	IM4	IM5	IM6	IM7	IM8	IM9	IM10	IM11	IM12	IM13	SR3	SR4A	SR5A	SR6	SR7	SR8
24/08/2017
26/08/2017
09/09/2017
No. of Exceedance	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	1	2	3	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

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

Legend:
	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
	Exceedance of Limit Level recorded at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow
	Exceedance of Limit 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

Investigations were conducted for each of the exceedances and details of the investigation findings are presented in the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report no. 19, 20, and 21. All exceedances were found not due to the Project.

It was observed that some of the SS exceedances occurred at stations located upstream of the 3RS Project. Such exceedances at upstream stations would unlikely be affected by the project, so the investigation focused on exceedance events that occurred at downstream stations.

As part of the investigation on downstream exceedance events, details of the Project’s marine construction activities on the concerned monitoring days were collected and presented in the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report no. 20 and 21. It was confirmed that both DCM and sand blanket laying activities were operating normally with silt curtains deployed as additional measures. No construction vessel nor silt plume was observed in the vicinity of the monitoring stations when exceedances were recorded.

Mid-Ebb Tide

Downstream exceedance events occurred at IM11, SR4A, and SR6. For the exceedance events at SR4A and SR6, no exceedance was recorded at all impact stations, which were closer to the active works, during the same tide on the same day. For the exceedance event at IM11, there was no observable temporal and spatial trend to indicate any effect due to Project. As there is no evidence of SS release due to Project activities from site observations and all mitigation measures were carried out properly, the exceedances were considered not due to the Project, and were possibly due to natural fluctuation in vicinity of IM11, SR4A, and SR6.

Mid-Flood Tide

Downstream exceedance events occurred at IM9 and IM10. It was found that similar or higher SS levels were apparent at IM11 and IM12 during the same tide on the same day. The investigation also found that the SS levels at bottom sea level were significantly higher and the phenomenon occurred at a broad area regardless of the location relative to active works. The phenomenon also coincided with adverse weather conditions (Severe Typhoon Hato and Severe Tropical Storm Pakhar), which could potentially affect the hydrodynamic and sediment transport conditions at bottom sea levels over a wide region. Based on the above, the exceedances were considered not due to the Project.

Findings for Nickel Exceedances

Table 2.14 and Table 2.15 presents a summary of the nickel compliance status at IM stations during mid-ebb and mid-flood tide for the reporting period.

Table 2.14: Summary of Nickel Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide)

	IM1	IM2	IM3	IM4	IM5	IM6	IM7	IM8	IM9	IM10	IM11	IM12
06/07/2017
18/07/2017
29/08/2017
31/08/2017
No. of Exceedance	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	3	1	0	1

Table 2.15: Summary of Nickel Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)

	IM1	IM2	IM3	IM4	IM5	IM6	IM7	IM8	IM9	IM10	IM11	IM12
06/07/2017
18/07/2017
20/07/2017
22/07/2017
17/08/2017
19/08/2017
31/08/2017
02/09/2017
05/09/2017
09/09/2017
12/09/2017
14/09/2017
No. of Exceedance	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	8	6	4	3	0

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

Legend:
	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
	Exceedance of Limit Level recorded at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow
	Exceedance of Limit 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

It was observed that some of the nickel exceedances occurred at stations located upstream of the 3RS Project. Such exceedances at upstream stations would unlikely be affected by the project, so the investigation focused on exceedance events that occurred at downstream stations.

As part of the investigation on downstream exceedance events, details of the Project’s marine construction activities on the concerned monitoring days were collected and presented in the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report no. 19, 20 and 21. It was confirmed that both DCM and sand blanket laying activities were operating normally with silt curtains deployed as additional measures. No construction vessel nor silt plume was observed in the vicinity of the monitoring stations when exceedances were recorded.

Mid-Ebb Tide

Downstream exceedance events occurred at IM2, IM3, and IM12. 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 contaminated mud pits by DCM activities. Therefore, elevated nickel concentration due to these activities should be associated with similar elevated SS levels. For these exceedance events, the SS level at these stations were well below the Action and Limit Level, which indicates that the active DCM works had limited or insignificant effect on downstream water quality. Based on the above, the exceedances were considered not due to the Project, and were possibly due to natural fluctuation in vicinity of IM2, IM3, and IM12.

Mid-Flood Tide

Downstream exceedance events occurred at IM6, IM7, IM8, IM9, and IM10. For all exceedance events, the SS level recorded in the same station during the same tide on the same day were well below their corresponding Action or Limit Level. Based on the explanation presented earlier (for mid-ebb tide exceedances), a lack of elevated SS indicates that the active DCM works had limited or insignificant effect on downstream water quality. Therefore, the exceedances were considered not due to the Project, and were possibly due to natural fluctuation in vicinity of IM6, IM7, IM8, IM9, and IM10 respectively.

Conclusions

Based on the findings of the exceedance investigations presented in Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report no. 19, 20, and 21, it was concluded that the exceedances during this reporting period were not due to the Project; hence, no SR stations were adversely affected by the Project. All required actions under the Event and Action Plan had been followed. Exceedances appeared 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 have been attended to as triggers of precautionary measures. As part of the EM&A programme, the construction methods and mitigation measures for water quality will continue to monitor and opportunities for further enhancement will continue to explore and implement where possible, to strive for better protection of water quality and the marine environment.

In the meantime, the contractors were reminded to implement and maintain all mitigation measures during weekly site inspection. These include maintaining the silt curtain for sand blanket laying properly and maintaining the levels of materials on barges to avoid overflow as recommended in the Manual.

2.4 Waste Monitoring

In accordance with the Manual, the waste generated from construction activities was audited once per week to determine if wastes were being managed in accordance with the Waste Management Plan (WMP) prepared for the Project, contract-specific WMP, and any statutory and contractual requirements. All aspects of waste management including waste generation, storage, transportation, and disposal were assessed during the audits. The Action and Limit Levels of the construction waste are provided in Table 2.16.

Table 2.16: 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

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

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

Based on the contractor’s information, about 1,856 m³ of excavated materials were produced from the HDD and excavation works in the reporting period. The excavated materials were temporarily stored at the stockpiling area and will be reused in the Project.

In addition, metal and paper were recycled during the reporting period. In the reporting period, around 416 tonnes of general refuse were disposed of to the West New Territories (WENT) Landfill, 395 kg and 9,000 litres of chemical waste were collected by licensed chemical waste collector, around 88 m³ of Construction and Demolition (C&D) material generated from the reclamation contract and Terminal 2 expansion works contract was disposed of as public fill, and around 575 m³ of C&D material was reused in other contracts.

No exceedance of the Action or Limit Levels was recorded in the reporting period.

2.5 CWD Monitoring

2.5.1 Summary of Monitoring Requirements

CWD monitoring was conducted by vessel line-transect survey at a frequency of two full surveys per month, supplemented by land-based theodolite tracking and PAM. The frequency of the theodolite tracking during the construction phase was one day per month at both Sha Chau (SC) and Lung Kwu Chau (LKC) stations as stipulated in the Manual. Additional theodolite tracking at the SC station and the LKC station (in total 2 tracking days and 3 tracking days per month at respective stations) were also conducted on a voluntary basis to collect supplementary information for the project. Monitoring was fully completed in the reporting period. The vessel survey transect lines matched those proposed in the Manual and transect lines are consistent with those used in the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) long-term CWD monitoring programme. The locations of CWD monitoring by vessel survey transect conducted from July to September 2017 are shown in Figure 2.3, whilst the land-based survey stations are described in Table 2.17 and depicted in Figure 2.4. The location of the PAM device is shown in Figure 2.10.

Table 2.17: 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

Stations

Location

Geographical Coordinates

Station Height (m)

Approximate Tracking Distance (km)

Sha Chau (SC)

22° 20’ 43.5” N

113° 53’ 24.66” E

45.66

Lung Kwu Chau (LKC)

22° 22’ 44.83” N

113° 53’ 0.2” E

70.40

The Action Level (AL) and Limit Level (LL) for CWD monitoring were formulated by an action response approach using the running quarterly dolphin encounter rates (STG and ANI) derived from baseline monitoring data, as presented in the CWD Baseline Monitoring Report. The derived values of AL and LL for CWD monitoring are shown in Table 2.18.

Table 2.18: 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

2.5.2 Summary of Monitoring Results

Vessel Line-transect Survey

Survey Effort

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

A total of around 1,340 km of survey effort was collected from these surveys, with around 84.9% of the total survey effort being conducted under favourable weather condition (i.e. Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with favourable visibility). Details of the survey effort data are presented in Appendix D.

CWD Sighting

From July to September 2017, there were in total 93 groups of CWDs with 266 individuals sighted (Table 2.19). Amongst the sightings of CWDs, 76 groups with 227 individuals were made during on-effort searches during favourable weather conditions.

When breaking down the sightings by survey areas, 16 sightings with 40 individuals, one sighting with a single individual, 42 sightings with 116 individuals and 34 sightings with 109 individuals were recorded in NWL, AW, WL and SWL survey areas respectively during the current reporting period. No CWD was sighted in NEL survey area.

Compared to last quarter (i.e. April to June 2017), there are observable increases in CWD records in NWL and SWL. Although there is an increase in number of CWD sightings in WL by 40%, the number of CWD individuals recorded in WL declined by around 24.2%. Overall, there is an observable increase in CWD records in the current reporting quarter (i.e. from July to September 2017) from the last quarter.

Comparison between the current reporting quarter and the same quarter of last year (i.e. July to September 2016) revealed that the overall CWD records in terms of number of CWD individuals is similar although there is an increase in overall number of sightings.

Table 2.19 below shows the comparison of the numbers of sightings and individuals between the current reporting period, last quarter and the same quarter of year 2016.

Table 2.19: Summary of Number of CWD Sightings and Number of CWD Individuals for Previous Quarters and Current Reporting Period

	July to September 2016	April to June 2017	July to September 2017
NEL	0 (0)	0 (0)	0 (0)
NWL	12 (55)	5 (10)	16 (40)
AW	1 (2)	0 (0)	1 (1)
WL	32 (118)	30 (153)	42 (116)
SWL	21 (101)	23 (63)	34 (109)
Total	66 (276)	58 (226)	93 (266)

Note: Values in ( ) represent number of CWD individuals

Distribution of CWD sightings recorded from July to September 2017 are illustrated in Figure 2.5. In NWL, CWD sightings were mostly recorded in the northwestern part of the survey area, particularly around the western side of Lung Kwu Chau as well as the waters between Lung Kwu Chau and Lung Kwu Tan. Two sightings were recorded in the southwestern part of NWL, one was in close vicinity to the 3RS temporary works area, while another was close to Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge Hong Kong Link Road. In WL, the majority of the CWD sightings were located along the coastal waters from Tai O to Fan Lau, especially the waters around Tai O, Yi O, Peaked Hill (Kai Yet Kok) and Fan Lau. While in SWL, CWD sightings mainly distributed on the transects in the western and central part of the survey area on both coastal and off-shore waters, particularly around the waters from Fan Lau to Fan Lau Tung Wan and the waters west to Soko Islands. Details of the sighting data are presented in Appendix D.

Figure 2.5: 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 93 pink circles on the map indicating the sighting locations of CWD. Some of them were very close to each other and therefore appear overlapped on this sighting distribution map.

Encounter Rate

The dolphin encounter rates for the number of dolphin sightings per 100 km survey effort (STG) and for the total number of dolphins per 100 km survey effort (ANI) in the whole survey area (i.e. NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL) for July, August and September 2017 are summarized in Table 2.20.

In this reporting period, the monthly encounter rates for STG and ANI both increase from July to August 2017 followed by a drop in September 2017. Comparing with the previous reporting period, both the running quarterly STG and ANI increase from 4.45 to 6.68 and from 17.65 to 19.97 respectively.

Table 2.20: Summary of Monthly and Running Quarterly STG and ANI of Chinese White Dolphin for Previous and Current Reporting Periods

	Previous Reporting Period			Current Reporting Period
	Apr 17	May 17	Jun 17		Jul 17	Aug 17	Sep 17
Monthly STG	2.96	4.21	6.30		6.76	8.11	5.32
Monthly ANI	8.88	25.49	18.64		18.45	24.06	17.73
Running Quarterly STG	3.49	3.06	4.45		5.73	7.03	6.68
Running Quarterly ANI	12.33	14.46	17.65		20.95	20.30	19.97

Notes: For detailed calculations of encounter rates STG and ANI, please refer to the Monthly EM&A Reports No. 19, No. 20 and No. 21.

Group Size

Between July and September 2017, the group size of CWDs ranged from 1 to 15 individuals per group. The average group size of CWDs was 2.9 individuals per group while that of the last quarter was 3.9. Over half of the CWD sightings (i.e. 54 groups) were of small group size (i.e. 1-2 individuals). There was only one CWD sighting with a large group size (i.e. 10 or more individuals) in this reporting period, recorded in NWL.

In NWL and WL, small CWD group size sightings dominated in this reporting period. While in SWL, the number of medium CWD group size sightings (i.e. 3-9 individuals) is slightly higher than sightings with small group size. Sighting locations of CWD groups with different group sizes are depicted in Figure 2.6.

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

[Pink circle: Sighting locations of CWD with group size from 1 to 2 individuals; Green circle: Sighting locations of CWD with group size from 3 to 9 individuals; Red circle: Sighting locations of CWD with group size of 10 or above; 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

Activities and Association with Fishing Boats

During July to September 2017, 12 groups of CWDs were sighted with feeding activities. Amongst these 12 groups of feeding CWDs, two groups were observed in association with operating fishing boat (gill netter) in SWL. The sighting locations of CWDs engaged in different behaviours during the reporting period are illustrated in Figure 2.7.

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

[Indigo rhombus: Foraging; Green circle: Socializing; Yellow triangle: Travelling; 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]

Mother-calf Pairs

From July to September 2017, 12 sightings of CWDs were recorded with the presence of mother-and-calf, mother-and-unspotted juvenile and/or mother-and-spotted juvenile pairs. Two-thirds of these mother-calf pairs were sighted in WL. The sighting locations of mother-calf pairs are shown in Figure 2.8.

Figure 2.8: Sighting Locations of Mother-calf Pairs

[Pink circle: Sighting locations of mother-calf pairs; 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 12 pink circles on the map indicating the locations of the sightings with the presences of mother-and-calf, mother-and-unspotted juvenile and/or mother-and-spotted juvenile pairs. Some of them were very close to each other and therefore appear overlapped on this sighting distribution map.

Photo Identification

During July to September 2017, a total number of 76 different CWD individuals were identified altogether 118 times. Re-sighting information of CWD individuals provides an initial idea of their range use and apparent connection between different areas around Lantau. Amongst these 76 different CWD individuals, 31 animals (i.e. NLMM019, NLMM020, NLMM023, NLMM033, NLMM034, NLMM051, NLMM052, SLMM012, SLMM015, SLMM017, SLMM023, SLMM034, SLMM040, SLMM045, SLMM050, SLMM054, WLMM001, WLMM003, WLMM006, WLMM008, WLMM009, WLMM011, WLMM015, WLMM020, WLMM027, WLMM028, WLMM043, WLMM046, WLMM079, WLMM100 and WLMM101) were sighted for more than once.

Thirteen individuals including NLMM019, NLMM020, NLMM023, NLMM052, SLMM023, WLMM001, WLMM003, WLMM006, WLMM009, WLMM011, WLMM027, WLMM046 and WLMM079 were re-sighted in different survey areas within this reporting period. Amongst these 13 animals, NLMM019, NLMM020, NLMM023, NLMM052 and WLMM027 have cross-area movement between NWL (including AW) and WL or SWL survey area. Whilst SLM023, WLMM001, WLMM003, WLMM006, WLMM009, WLMM011, WLMM046 and WLMM079 have cross-area movement in WL and SWL. Two animals, NLMM020 and NLMM023, have been identified in every month in this reporting period and they are the only animals showing cross-area movement between NWL, WL and SWL during this reporting period. The number of CWD individuals re-sighted for more than once and the number of CWD individuals showing cross-area movement are both higher than last quarter (i.e. April to June 2017).

A summary of photo identification works is presented in Table 2.21. Representative photos of the 76 identified individuals and figures depicting the sighting locations of the aforementioned 31 re-sighted individuals recorded in this reporting period are presented Appendix D.

Table 2.21: Summary of Photo Identification

Individual ID	Date of sighting	Sighting Group No.	Area	Individual ID	Date of sighting	Sighting Group No.	Area
NLMM005	18/09/2017	2	NWL	SLMM059	26/07/2017	5	SWL
NLMM013	14/07/2017	1	NWL	SLMM060	15/08/2017	2	SWL
NLMM019	12/07/2017	1	NWL	SLMM061	15/08/2017	3	SWL
	12/09/2017	4	WL	SLMM062	15/08/2017	5	SWL
		5	WL	SLMM063	15/08/2017	7	SWL
	18/09/2017	1	NWL	SLMM064	21/08/2017	5	SWL
NLMM020	12/07/2017	1	NWL	WLMM001	11/07/2017	10	WL
	21/08/2017	4	SWL			13	SWL
	12/09/2017	4	WL	WLMM003	11/07/2017	13	SWL
		5	WL		22/08/2017	7	WL
	18/09/2017	1	NWL	WLMM006	11/07/2017	12	SWL
NLMM022	18/09/2017	1	NWL		20/07/2017	3	WL
NLMM023	11/07/2017	13	SWL	WLMM008	26/07/2017	3	SWL
	12/09/2017	5	WL		22/08/2017	11	SWL
	18/09/2017	1	NWL	WLMM009	11/07/2017	12	SWL
NLMM027	22/08/2017	7	WL		20/07/2017	3	WL
NLMM028	22/08/2017	7	WL	WLMM011	22/08/2017	8	WL
NLMM033	22/08/2017	3	WL			10	SWL
		6	WL		20/09/2017	3	SWL
NLMM034	11/07/2017	2	WL	WLMM013	21/07/2017	2	WL
		5	WL	WLMM015	11/07/2017	9	WL
NLMM037	18/09/2017	3	NWL		21/07/2017	2	WL
NLMM040	22/08/2017	6	WL	WLMM019	19/09/2017	2	WL
NLMM041	22/08/2017	6	WL	WLMM020	15/08/2017	5	SWL
NLMM042	18/09/2017	1	NWL			7	SWL
NLMM050	14/07/2017	2	NWL	WLMM027	21/08/2017	2	SWL
NLMM051	22/08/2017	3	WL		22/08/2017	1	AW
		6	WL		20/09/2017	3	SWL
	19/09/2017	1	WL	WLMM028	11/07/2017	10	WL
NLMM052	18/09/2017	1	NWL		19/09/2017	6	WL
	20/09/2017	1	SWL	WLMM029	19/09/2017	6	WL
NLMM053	18/09/2017	1	NWL	WLMM032	19/09/2017	6	WL
SLMM003	26/07/2017	4	SWL	WLMM038	11/07/2017	5	WL
SLMM010	20/07/2017	1	SWL	WLMM043	21/07/2017	5	WL
SLMM011	20/07/2017	1	SWL			7	WL
SLMM012	20/09/2017	1	SWL	WLMM046	21/08/2017	3	SWL
		2	SWL		19/09/2017	1	WL
SLMM014	22/08/2017	9	WL	WLMM047	21/07/2017	7	WL
SLMM015	21/08/2017	1	SWL	WLMM049	20/09/2017	1	SWL
	11/09/2017	2	SWL	WLMM051	14/08/2017	3	WL
SLMM017	11/09/2017	2	SWL	WLMM053	18/09/2017	1	NWL
	20/09/2017	1	SWL	WLMM056	20/09/2017	1	SWL
		2	SWL	WLMM067	11/07/2017	12	SWL
SLMM023	21/08/2017	1	SWL	WLMM076	26/07/2017	5	SWL
	22/08/2017	9	WL	WLMM078	26/07/2017	5	SWL
SLMM030	21/07/2017	7	WL	WLMM079	11/07/2017	7	WL
SLMM034	15/08/2017	3	SWL		26/07/2017	4	SWL
	21/08/2017	1	SWL		12/09/2017	3	WL
SLMM036	20/09/2017	3	SWL	WLMM089	22/08/2017	7	WL
SLMM037	20/09/2017	1	SWL	WLMM096	19/09/2017	1	WL
SLMM040	11/07/2017	7	WL	WLMM097	11/07/2017	1	WL
	21/07/2017	5	WL	WLMM098	11/07/2017	1	WL
SLMM045	21/07/2017	7	WL	WLMM099	11/07/2017	3	WL
	22/08/2017	2	WL	WLMM100	11/07/2017	10	WL
SLMM050	20/09/2017	1	SWL		12/09/2017	3	WL
		2	SWL	WLMM101	22/08/2017	4	WL
SLMM054	15/08/2017	1	SWL		19/09/2017	1	WL
	19/09/2017	8	SWL	WLMM102	19/09/2017	1	WL
SLMM057	15/08/2017	5	SWL	WLMM103	19/09/2017	2	WL

Land-based Theodolite Tracking

Survey Effort

During July to September 2017, a total of 15 days of land-based theodolite tracking survey effort were completed, including nine days on Lung Kwu Chau and six days on Sha Chau. In total, 43 CWD groups were tracked from the Lung Kwu Chau station while two CWD groups were tracked from the Sha Chau station, with an overall 0.50 CWD groups sighted per survey effort hour.

Information on survey effort and CWD groups sighted during land-based theodolite tracking surveys are presented in Table 2.22. Details on the survey effort and CWD groups tracked are presented in Appendix D. The first sighting locations of CWD groups tracked between July and September 2017 are shown in Figure 2.9.

Table 2.22: Summary of Survey Effort and CWD Group of Land-based Theodolite Tracking

Land-based Station	# of Survey Sessions	Survey Effort (hh:mm)	# CWD Groups Sighted	CWD Group Sighting per Survey Hour
July 2017
Lung Kwu Chau	3	18:10	9	0.50
Sha Chau	2	12:00	0	0
TOTAL	5	30:10	9	0.30
August 2017
Lung Kwu Chau	3	18:00	11	0.61
Sha Chau	2	12:00	2	0.17
TOTAL	5	30:00	13	0.43
September 2017
Lung Kwu Chau	3	18:00	23	1.28
Sha Chau	2	12:00	0	0
TOTAL	5	30:00	23	0.77
OVERALL	15	90:10	45	0.50

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

[Green triangle: LKC station; Yellow triangle: SC station; Green circle: CWD group off LKC; Yellow circle: CWD group off SC; Blue line: SCLKCMP boundary; Yellow line: 3RS temporary works area; Red line: 3RS land-formation footprint]

Progress Update on PAM

An Ecological Acoustic Recorder (EAR) has been deployed and positioned to the south of Sha Chau Island with 20% duty cycle with data from the EAR intended primarily to supplement the data collected from the land-based theodolite station on Sha Chau. The EAR has been shifted to a position south of Sha Chau Island inside the SCLKCMP since 2 August 2017 due to marine safety (Figure 2.10). The EAR deployment generally lasts around 4-6 weeks followed by a period of data retrieval for subsequent analysis. As the data analysis takes more than two months after retrieval, PAM results are not suitable for reporting on a quarterly basis. Rather, detailed analysis of PAM data will be presented in annual CWD reports.

Site Audit for CWD-related Mitigation Measures

During the reporting period, silt curtains were in place by the contractors for sand blanket laying works, in which dolphin observers were deployed by each contractor in accordance with the Marine Mammal Watching Plan (MMWP). Teams of at least two dolphin observers were deployed at 12 to 16 dolphin observation stations 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 470 individuals being trained and the training records kept by the ET. Observations were recorded on DEZ monitoring in this reporting period during site inspection by the ET and IEC. The contractors had taken actions to implement the recommended measures. From the contractors’ MMWP observation records and DEZ monitoring records, no dolphin or other marine mammals were observed within or around the silt curtains, whilst there were four records of dolphin sighting within the DEZ of DCM works in this reporting period. According to the contractors’ site records, relevant DCM works were suspended in the dolphin sighting events until the DEZ was clear of dolphin for a continuous period of 30 minutes. The contractors’ records were also audited by the ET during site inspection.

Audits of acoustic decoupling for construction vessels were carried out during weekly site inspection and summarised in Section 2.6. Summary of audits of SkyPier High Speed Ferries route diversion and speed control and construction vessel management are presented in Section 2.8 and Section 2.9 respectively.

2.6 Weekly Environmental Site Inspection

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

The key observations from site inspection and associated recommendations were related to:

● display of relevant permit, licenses, and labels;

● provision and maintenance of drip trays and chemical storage area;

● implementation of noise mitigation, dust suppression, and surface runoff prevention measures; and

● segregation of waste for recycling and disposal.

In addition, recommendations were provided during site inspection on construction vessels, which include:

● provision and maintenance of drip tray, general refuse storage area, and chemical storage area;

● proper implementation of acoustic decoupling, wastewater treatment, DEZ monitoring, dust suppression, spill and runoff preventive measures, and dark smoke preventive measures;

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

● ensuring the effectiveness of silt curtains.

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

A summary of implementation status of the environmental mitigation measures for the construction phase of the Project during the reporting period is provided in Appendix B.

2.7 Ecological Monitoring

In accordance with the Manual, ecological monitoring shall be undertaken monthly at the HDD daylighting location on Sheung Sha Chau Island during the HDD construction works period from August to March to identify and evaluate any impacts with appropriate actions taken as required to address and minimise any adverse impact found.

No construction works was carried out at Sheung Sha Chau in July 2017 (i.e. during the ardeid's breeding season). Monthly ecological monitoring was carried out in August and September 2017 on Sheung Sha Chau Island. No encroachment of any works upon the egretry area nor any significant disturbance to the egrets on the island by the works was recorded during ecological monitoring. Sign of nursery activities by Little Egret was observed in August and September 2017 on trees located at the previously identified egretry area at the southern side of Sheung Sha Chau Island. At the HDD daylighting location, neither nest nor breeding activity of birds were found during the monthly ecological monitoring and weekly site inspections in the reporting period. The site photos and location map regarding the ecological monitoring for HDD works and egretry area are provided in Appendix E for reference.

2.8 Audit of the SkyPier Plan

In total, 2,170 ferry movements between HKIA SkyPier and Zhuhai / Macau were audited in the reporting period. No vessel operated to or from Zhuhai in September 2017 as the pier facility in Zhuhai was damaged due to typhoon in late August 2017. The daily movements of all SkyPier HSFs in the reporting period ranged between 11 and 93, which falls within the maximum daily cap number of 125.

All HSFs travelled through the SCZ with average speed within 15 knots (9.6 knots to 14.1 knots), which complied with the SkyPier Plan. Two ferry movements had minor deviations from the diverted route during the reporting period. Notices of deviation were sent to the ferry operators (FOs) and the cases have been investigated. All the deviation cases from the diverted route were due to public safety considerations or emergency situations, i.e., giving way to other vessels, and the HSFs had returned to the normal route following the SkyPier Plan as soon as practicable. The summary of the SkyPier Plan monitoring result (July 2017 to September 2017) is presented in Graph 3.

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

Graph 3: Summary of SkyPier Plan Monitoring Results (July 2017 to September 2017)

2.9 Audit of Construction and Associated Vessels

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

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

A total of 11 skipper training workshops have been held by ET between July and September 2017 with 52 concerned captains of construction vessels associated with the 3RS Contracts to familiarise them with the predefined routes, general education on local cetaceans, guidelines for avoiding adverse water quality impact, the required environmental practices / measures while operating construction and associated vessels under the Project, and guidelines for operating vessels safely in the presence of CWDs. Another 8 skipper training workshops have been held with 11 concerned captains by contractor’s Environmental Officer (EO) and competency test had been conducted subsequently with the trained captains by ET.

2.10 Coral Post-Translocation Monitoring

In accordance with the approved Coral Translocation Plan (CTP), gorgonian corals suitable for translocation were translocated to the recipient site at Yam Tsai Wan (YTW), with translocation completed in January 2017. Since then the post-translocation monitoring program has been undertaken according to the CTP. Details of the coral translocation works and the results of the first four rounds of post-translocation monitoring conducted in the period from January to March 2017 and in April 2017 are presented in the Quarterly EM&A Reports No. 5 and No. 6 respectively.

In the survey conducted in April 2017, a significant change of partial mortality (PM) and deterioration in health condition was noted in both the translocated coral (tagged) and the control corals (tagged), however, the Action/ Limit Levels as defined in the CTP were not triggered due to the PM and health deterioration occurred in both translocated and control corals. The summary of the 4^th post-translocation monitoring survey conducted in April 2017 is presented in Table 2.23. Investigation actions were subsequently initiated as per the CTP, which stipulates that investigations shall be undertaken if observations of any die-off/ abnormal conditions are made.

Table 2.23: Summary of the 4^th Post-Translocation Monitoring Surveys Completed in April 2017

	Colony Height (cm)	General Health Conditions^(a)	% Change in Partial Mortality^{(b) (c)}	Exceedance of Action Level^(d)	Exceedance of Limit Level^(e)
Fourth Round of Survey in April 2017
Control gorgonian corals (tagged)	7-59	0-3 (Average: 1.9)	<25% change for 5% of the tagged corals and ≥25% change for 95% of the tagged corals (Average PM: 73%)	No	No
Translocated gorgonian corals (tagged)	5-44	1-4 (Average: 2.0)	<25% change for 4.7% of the tagged corals and ≥25% change for 94.1% of the tagged corals (Average PM: 73%)	No	No

Notes:

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

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

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

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

To this end, it was proposed to investigate the cause(s) of the situation, i.e. the factors leading to high PM being recorded. The following actions have been undertaken to investigate the potential cause of the mortality:

· Review of weather conditions, red tide, water quality monitoring data

· Substrate check and review of sediment deposition

· Review of other projects and their translocated corals

· Ad-hoc monthly monitoring of all translocated and control corals

· Ad-hoc dive check of natural corals in Yam Tsai Wan, Sham Shui Kok and Tai Mo To

· Ad-hoc water quality monitoring

Another focus of the action is to investigate whether the high mortality is related to the 3RS construction works. It was investigated through the actions review of water quality monitoring data, and dive check of natural corals in adjacent areas, including other sites outside recipient site in Yam Tsai Wan. Investigation works looking at the potential causes of the significant change in PM were undertaken and are continuing with the initial findings summarized below.

Monitoring Results

Ad-hoc monitoring of all translocated and control corals at recipient site

After a general check of the condition of all the translocated corals in May 2017, three rounds of ad-hoc coral dive surveys (on top of the CTP’s post-translocation monitoring requirements) were conducted for both translocated corals (tagged and untagged) and control corals (tagged) at the recipient site in June, July and September 2017 The key results of the ad-hoc surveys are summarized in Table 2.24, which shows the health conditions and changes in PM of the tagged translocated corals are largely stabilized. Selected photos of tagged controls and translocated corals from the ad-hoc monitoring are shown in Appendix F.

Table 2.24: Summary of Ad-hoc Monitoring of Tagged Corals at Recipient Site

	Colony Height (cm)	General Health Conditions^(a)	% Change in Partial Mortality^{(b) (c)}	Exceedance of Action Level^(d)	Exceedance of Limit Level^(e)
Ad-hoc Monitoring in June 2017
Control gorgonian corals (tagged)	7-59	0-4 (Average: 2.1)	<25% change for 5% of the tagged corals and ≥25% change for 95% of the tagged corals (Average PM: 73.5%)	No	No
Translocated gorgonian corals (tagged)	5-44	0-4 (Average: 2.0)	<25% change for 5.9% of the tagged corals and ≥25% change for 94.1% of the tagged corals (Average PM: 73.8%)	No	No
Ad-hoc Monitoring in July 2017
Control gorgonian corals (tagged)	7-59	0-5 (Average: 2.9)	<25% change for 10% of the tagged corals and ≥25% change for 90% of the tagged corals (Average PM: 68.8%)	No	No
Translocated gorgonian corals (tagged)	5-44	0-5 (Average: 3.0)	<25% change for 5.9% of the tagged corals and ≥25% change for 94.1% of the tagged corals (Average PM: 72.7%)	No	No
Ad-hoc Monitoring in September 2017
Control gorgonian corals (tagged)	7-59	0-5 (Average: 2.7)	<25% change for 10% of the tagged corals and ≥25% change for 90% of the tagged corals (Average PM: 67.8%)	No	No
Translocated gorgonian corals (tagged)	5-44	0-4 (Average: 2.3)	<25% change for 5.9% of the tagged corals and ≥25% change for 94.1% of the tagged corals (Average PM: 76.9%)	No	No

Notes:

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

Ad-hoc Dive Surveys of Natural Corals at Yam Tsai Wan, Sham Shui Kok and Tai Mo To

In addition to the ad-hoc surveys at the recipient site in YTW (RT2), natural coral monitoring was also conducted at three other locations in YTW (namely, RT1, RT3 and RT4), Tai Mo To (TMT) and Sham Shui Kok (SSK), each with 20 tagged coral colonies, in June, July and September 2017 for comparison with the survey findings at the recipient site. The locations of all the survey sites are as illustrated in Figure 2.11. The monitoring results of these five localities are compared with those of the control (natural) corals at the recipient site RT2, as summarized in Table 2.25 and presented graphically in Graph 4. It can be seen from the comparison that while the two survey locations at TMT and SSK are much closer to the 3RS project site than the four locations at YTW (RT1, RT2, RT3 and RT4), the average PM levels of natural corals (tagged) at TMT and SSK are generally lower than those at the four YTW locations. Hence, it is evident from the comparison of findings that the relatively high PM levels at YTW not likely to be related to the 3RS marine works activities but, rather, seem to have been a discrete incident.

Figure 2.11: Locations of Six Coral Dive Survey Sites

Table 2.25: Comparison of tagged natural coral survey results at six survey sites

	TMT		SSK	RT1	RT2 (recipient site)	RT3		RT4
Distance from 3RS project site boundary		3.5km	7.0km	8.2km	8.5km		8.7km		9.0km
Average Partial Mortality
June 2017	10.0%		32.1%	92.8%	73.5%	58.8%		29.8%
July 2017	6.8%		33.3%	89.5%	68.8%	87.0%		57.3%
September 2017	12.3%		33.8%	91.0%	67.8%	89.0%		61.3%
Average Health Condition
June 2017	4.8		3.7	0.9	2.1	3.2		4.0
July 2017	4.7		4.5	1.2	2.9	3.0		3.5
September 2017	3.2		1.8	1.2	2.7	1.4		2.3

Graph 4: Comparison of Average Partial Mortality of Tagged Natural Corals at Six Survey Sites

Review of Various Environmental Conditions

As part of the follow up investigations, a number of environmental factors and conditions were investigated covering the periods before and after the significant change in the tagged and control corals PM at the recipient site were reviewed. Review findings at the time of compiling this quarterly report are summarised as follows:

● Review of weather conditions: Relevant information available from the Hong Kong Observatory was reviewed and no obvious weather events, e.g. strong monsoon signal, typhoon and cold weather warning, that could potentially affect coral health conditions were identified during the period January to April 2017, before the significant change of PM was identified.

● Review of any reported red tides/ algal blooms that may have affected Yam Tsai Wan: According to information available from AFCD, no red tides were reported during the period from January to April 2017, before the significant change of PM. However, according to a University of Hong Kong coral specialist consulted by the ET, algal bloom incidents were observed at Kap Shui Mun, Sham Wat and Tai O during the coral specialist’s dive survey in January 2017. The bloom resembles Microcystis sp. which is known to produce hepatoxins and these have been found to have chronic harmful effects on fish and shellfish. These observations suggest that harmful algal blooms may have occurred in some parts of north Lantau waters quite close to Yam Tsai Wan and might have residual effect to the site, and there is a possibility that these may have been associated with the significant change of PM at the recipient site.

● Review of water quality: Relevant water quality parameters including pH, DO, temperature, salinity and total alkalinity, were measured at all the six survey sites in June, July and September 2017 in conjuncture with the coral monitoring. Most of the parameters (including SS, turbidity, pH, salinity, DO and temperature) at the six sites with ad-hoc water quality monitoring generally fell within natural fluctuations at Station C3 in between January and September 2017. Results indicated that rate of salinity drop was higher in 2017 as compared to 2016 in the area surrounding recipient site, and higher water temperature was recorded in 2017 than 2016. There was also a decrease in DO in wet season. Hence the corals might have been exposed to an interplay of environmental stresses, including salinity, DO and thermal stresses that created unfavourable conditions for them.

● Review of sediment deposition: sediment trap data was retrieved in late September and the analysis works are undertaken in October which will be report in next reporting period.

2.11 Review of the Key Assumptions Adopted in the EIA Report

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

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

3.1 Compliance with Other Statutory Environmental Requirements

During the reporting period, environmental related licenses and permits required for the construction activities were checked. No non-compliance with environmental statutory requirements was recorded.

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

3.2.1 Complaints

Two environment-related complaints were received on 8 August and 5 September 2017 regarding sand filling materials of Contract 3206. Apart from the investigation conducted by AAHK under the contractual aspect, investigation on environmental aspect was also conducted by the ET in accordance with the Complaint Management Plan of the Project. According to the EP condition 2.26, a maximum of 10% fines content should be adopted for sand blanket. The ET has been conducting checking of test reports on particle size distribution of sand materials and witnessing sand sampling of the Project on a regular basis. The ET also reviewed water quality monitoring results of the 3RS EM&A programme obtained 3 months preceding the complaint (i.e. May, June and July 2017) to check for any exceedance cases of suspended solids close to the location of sand blanket laying activities of Contract 3206. It was found that there were no exceedances of Action or Limit levels for suspended solids at all impact monitoring stations from May to July 2017. The ET had checked and would continue to check the test reports on particle size distribution of sand materials and to witness sand sampling of the Project on a regular basis. To date, no non-compliance against the EP condition of a maximum of 10% fines content was identified.

3.2.2 Notifications of Summons or Status of Prosecution

Neither notification of summons now prosecution was received during the reporting period.

3.3 Cumulative Statistics

Cumulative statistics on exceedance, non-compliance, complaints, notifications of summons and status of prosecutions are summarized in Table 3.1 and Table 3.2.

Table 3.1: Statistics for Valid Exceedances for the Environmental Monitoring

		Total No. Recorded in the Reporting Period	Total No. Recorded since the Project Commenced
1-hr TSP	Action	0	0
	Limit	0	0
Noise	Action	0	0
	Limit	0	0
Waste	Action	0	0
	Limit	0	0
Water	Action	0	0
	Limit	0	0
CWD	Action	0	0
	Limit	0	0

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

Table 3.2: Statistics for Non-compliance, Complaints, Notifications of Summons and Prosecution

Reporting Period	Cumulative Statistics
	Non-compliance	Complaints	Notifications of Summons	Prosecutions
This reporting period	0	2	0	0
From 28 December 2015 to end of the reporting period	0	7	1	0

4 Conclusion and Recommendation

In this quarterly period from 1 July 2017 to 30 September 2017, the EM&A programme has been implemented as planned, including 102 sets of air quality measurements, 65 sets of construction noise measurements, 40 sets of water quality measurements, 6 complete sets of vessel line-transect surveys and 15 days of land-based theodolite tracking survey effort for CWD monitoring, 2 rounds of terrestrial ecology monitoring, as well as environmental site inspections and waste monitoring for the Project’s construction works.

The key activities of the Project carried out in the reporting period included DCM works and trials, laying of geotextile and sand blanket, site preparation works, site office establishment, seawall construction, HDD works, concrete removal works, piling, and excavation works.

No exceedance of Action or Limit Levels in relation to construction dust, construction noise, construction waste, and CWD monitoring was recorded in the reporting period. All site observations made by the ET were recorded in the site inspection checklists and passed to the contractor together with the recommended follow-up actions.

For water quality, the water quality monitoring results for total alkalinity and chromium obtained during the reporting period did not exceed 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 DO, turbidity, SS, and nickel, some of the testing results exceeded the relevant Action or Limit Levels in the reporting period, and the corresponding investigations were conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded that the exceedances were not due to the Project.

In total, 2,170 ferry movements between HKIA SkyPier and Zhuhai / Macau were audited in the reporting period. All HSFs travelled through the SCZ with average speed within 15 knots, which complied with the SkyPier Plan. Two ferry movements had minor deviations from the diverted route during the reporting period. ET investigated the deviation cases and all of them are related to public safety / emergency situations.

Between July and September 2017, ET has conducted bi-weekly audit of the MSS to ensure the system records all deviation cases accurately and the contractors fully complied with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV. A total of 11 skipper training workshops have been held by ET between July to September 2017 with concerned captains of construction vessels associated with 3RS contracts. Another 8 skipper training workshops have been held by contractors’ EO and competency test had been conducted subsequently with the trained captains by ET.

On the implementation of MMWP, dolphin observers were deployed by the contractors for laying of open sea silt curtain and laying of silt curtains for sand blanket in accordance with the plan. On the implementation of DEZ Plan, dolphin observers were deployed for continuous monitoring of the DEZ by the contractors for DCM works 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, whilst there were four records of dolphin sighting within the DEZ of DCM works in this reporting period. Audits of acoustic decoupling for construction vessels were also carried out by ET.

Subsequent to completion of the coral translocation works, in accordance with the approved CTP, a summary of the post-translocation monitoring and findings is reported quarterly.

The recommended environmental mitigation measures, as included in the EM&A programme, have been effectively implemented during the reporting period. Also, the EM&A programme implemented by the ET has effectively monitored the construction activities and ensure the proper implementation of mitigation measures.