Expansion of Hong Kong |
Construction Phase Quarterly EM&A Report No.16 (1 October to 31 December 2019) |
|
||||
3RS |
Three-Runway System |
AAHK |
Airport Authority Hong Kong |
AECOM |
AECOM Asia Company Limited |
AFCD |
Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department |
AIS |
Automatic Information System |
ANI |
Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphins |
APM |
Automated People Mover |
AW |
Airport West |
BHS |
Baggage Handling System |
CAP |
Contamination Assessment Plan |
CAR |
Contamination Assessment Report |
CTP |
Coral Translocation Plan |
CWD |
Chinese White Dolphin |
DCM |
Deep Cement Mixing |
DEZ |
Dolphin Exclusion Zone |
DO |
Dissolved Oxygen |
EAR |
Ecological Acoustic Recorder |
EIA |
Environmental Impact Assessment |
EM&A |
Environmental Monitoring & Audit |
EMIS |
Environmental Mitigation Implementation Schedule |
EP |
Environmental Permit |
EPD |
Environmental Protection Department |
ET |
Environmental Team |
FCZ |
Fish Culture Zone |
HKBCF |
Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities |
HKIA |
Hong Kong International Airport |
HSF |
High Speed Ferry |
IEC |
Independent Environmental Checker |
LKC |
Lung Kwu Chau |
MTCC |
Marine Traffic Control Centre |
MMHK |
Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited |
MMWP |
Marine Mammal Watching Plan |
MSS |
Maritime Surveillance System |
MTRMP-CAV |
Updated Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for Construction and Associated Vessel |
NEL |
Northeast Lantau |
NWL |
Northwest Lantau |
PAM |
Passive Acoustic Monitoring |
SC |
Sha Chau |
SCZ |
Speed Control Zone |
SCLKCMP |
Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park |
SS |
Suspended Solids |
STG |
Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphin Sightings |
SWL |
Southwest Lantau |
The Manual |
The Updated EM&A Manual |
The Project |
The Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System |
The SkyPier Plan |
Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for High Speed Ferries of SkyPier |
TSP |
Total Suspended Particulates |
WL |
West Lantau |
WMP |
Waste Management Plan |
The “Expansion of Hong Kong International
Airport into a Three-Runway System” (the Project) serves to meet the future air
traffic demands at Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA). On 7 November 2014,
the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report (Register No.: AEIAR-185/2014)
for the Project was approved and an Environmental Permit (EP) (Permit No.: EP-489/2014)
was issued for the construction and operation of the Project.
Airport Authority Hong Kong (AAHK) commissioned
Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited (MMHK) to undertake the role of Environmental
Team (ET) for carrying out the Environmental Monitoring & Audit (EM&A)
works during the construction phase of the Project in accordance with the
Updated EM&A Manual (the Manual).
This is the 16th Construction Phase
Quarterly EM&A Report for the Project which summarises the monitoring
results and audit findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting
period from 1 October 2019 to 31 December 2019.
Key Activities in the Reporting Period
The key activities of the Project carried out in the reporting period
included reclamation works and land-side works. Reclamation works included deep
cement mixing (DCM) works, marine filling, and seawall construction. Land-side
works involved mainly foundation and substructure work for Terminal 2
expansion, modification and tunnel work for Automated People Mover (APM) and
Baggage Handling System (BHS), and preparation work for utilities, with
activities including site establishment, site office construction, road and
drainage works, cable ducting, demolition, piling, and excavation works.
EM&A
Activities Conducted in the Reporting Period
The EM&A programme was undertaken in
accordance with the Manual of the Project. Summary of the monitoring activities
during this reporting period is presented as below:
Monitoring Activities |
Number of Sessions |
1-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) air quality monitoring |
96 |
Noise monitoring |
56 |
Water quality monitoring |
40 |
Vessel line-transect surveys for Chinese White Dolphin (CWD) monitoring |
6 |
Land-based theodolite tracking survey effort for CWD monitoring |
9 |
Environmental auditing works, including weekly
site inspections of construction works conducted by the ET and bi-weekly site
inspections conducted by the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC), audit of SkyPier High Speed Ferries (HSF), audit of construction and
associated vessels, and audit of implementation of Marine Mammal Watching Plan
(MMWP) and Dolphin Exclusion Zone (DEZ) Plan, were conducted in the reporting
period. Based on information including ET’s observations, records of Maritime
Surveillance System (MSS), and contractors’ site records, it is noted that
environmental pollution control and mitigation measures were properly
implemented and construction activities of the Project in the reporting period
did not introduce adverse impacts to the sensitive receivers.
Snapshots of Good Environmental
Practices in the Reporting Period
|
|
|
Marine Traffic Control Centre for Monitoring Construction Vessels |
Toolbox Training Conducted by Contractor |
Sorting Facility on the Existing Airport Island |
Key examples of good site practices
implemented in the Project are highlighted here:
1. Contractors’ representatives were stationed in
Marine Traffic Control Centre to ensure their construction vessels comply with
the requirements of the Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for
Construction and Associated Vessels (MTRMP-CAV) including speed control and
predefined routes.
2. Regular Toolbox Trainings were conducted by
contractors to enhance the understanding of their frontline staff on the
regulatory requirements of environmental related issues and provide information
on practical measures to minimise environmental impacts.
3. Sorting facilities were set up on the existing
airport island to step up the reuse of excavated materials from 3RS and other
AAHK’s contracts.
Summary Findings of the EM&A Programme
The
monitoring works for construction dust, construction noise, water quality,
construction waste, landscape & visual, and CWD were conducted during the
reporting period in accordance with the Manual.
Monitoring
results of construction dust, construction noise, construction waste, and CWD
monitoring did not trigger the corresponding Action and Limit Levels in the
reporting period.
The water
quality monitoring results for dissolved oxygen (DO), turbidity, total
alkalinity, nickel and chromium obtained during the reporting period were
within the corresponding Action and Limit Levels stipulated in the EM&A
programme. Relevant investigation and follow-up actions will be conducted
according to the EM&A programme if the corresponding Action and Limit
Levels are triggered. For suspended solid (SS), some testing results triggered
the relevant Action or Limit Level, and the corresponding investigations were
conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded that the case was
not related to the Project. To conclude, the construction activities in the
reporting period did not introduce adverse impact to all water quality
sensitive receivers.
The key
findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period is summarised as
below:
|
Yes |
No |
Details |
Analysis / Recommendation / Remedial Actions |
Breach of Limit Level^ |
|
√ |
No breach of Limit Level was recorded. |
Nil |
Breach of Action Level^ |
|
√ |
No breach of Action Level was recorded. |
Nil |
Complaints Received |
|
√ |
No construction activities-related complaint was received |
Nil |
Notification of any summons and status of prosecutions |
|
√ |
No notification of summons or prosecution were received. |
Nil |
Changes that affect the EM&A |
|
√ |
There was no change to the construction works that may affect the EM&A. |
Nil |
Remarks:
^Only
triggering of Action or Limit Level found related to Project works is counted
as Breach of Action or Limit Level.
On 7
November 2014, the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report (Register No.:
AEIAR-185/2014) for the “Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a
Three-Runway System” (the Project) was approved and an Environmental Permit
(EP) (Permit No.: EP-489/2014) was issued for the construction and operation of
the Project.
Airport Authority Hong Kong (AAHK) commissioned
Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited (MMHK) to undertake the role of Environmental
Team (ET) for carrying out the Environmental Monitoring & Audit (EM&A)
works during the construction phase of the Project in accordance with the
Updated EM&A Manual (the Manual) submitted under EP Condition 3.1[1]. AECOM Asia Company Limited (AECOM) was employed by AAHK as
the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) for the Project.
The Project covers the expansion of the
existing airport into a three-runway system (3RS) with key project components
comprising land formation of about 650 ha and all associated facilities and
infrastructure including taxiways, aprons, aircraft stands, a passenger
concourse, an expanded Terminal 2, all related airside and landside works and
associated ancillary and supporting facilities. The submarine aviation fuel
pipelines and submarine power cables also require diversion as part of the
works.
Construction of the Project is to proceed in
the general order of diversion of the submarine aviation fuel pipelines,
diversion of the submarine power cables, land formation, and construction of
infrastructure, followed by construction of superstructures.
The updated overall phasing programme of all
construction works was presented in Appendix A of the Construction Phase
Monthly EM&A Report No. 7 and the contract information was presented in
Appendix A of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 46.
This is the 16th Construction Phase Quarterly EM&A Report
for the Project which summarises the key findings of the EM&A programme
during the reporting period from 1 October 2019 to 31 December 2019.
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 |
Daniel Sum |
2585 8495 |
|
Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) (AECOM Asia Company Limited) |
Independent Environmental Checker |
Jackel Law |
3922 9376
|
Deputy Independent Environmental Checker |
Roy Man |
3922 9141
|
Advanced Works: |
|
|
|
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Contract P560(R) Aviation Fuel Pipeline Diversion Works (Langfang Huayuan Mechanical and Electrical Engineering Co., Ltd.) |
Project Manager |
Wei Shih |
2117 0566 |
Environmental Officer |
Lyn Liu |
5172 6543 |
Deep Cement Mixing (DCM) Works: |
|||
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Contract 3205 DCM (Package 5) (Bachy Soletanche - Sambo Joint Venture) |
Deputy Project Director |
Min Park |
9683 0765 |
Environmental Officer |
William Chan |
5408 3045 |
Reclamation Works: |
|
|
|
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Contract 3206 Main Reclamation Works (ZHEC-CCCC-CDC Joint Venture) |
Project Manager |
Kim Chuan Lim |
3763 1509 |
Environmental Officer |
Kwai Fung Wong |
3763 1452 |
Airfield Works: |
|||
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Contract 3301 North Runway Crossover Taxiway (FJT-CHEC-ZHEC Joint Venture) |
Deputy Project Director |
Kin Hang Chung |
9800 0048 |
Environmental Officer |
Joe Wong |
6182 0351 |
|
Contract 3302 Eastern Vehicular Tunnel Advance Works (China Road and Bridge Corporation)
|
Project Manager |
Wan Cheung Lee |
6100 6075 |
Environmental Officer |
Dennis Ho |
5645 0563 |
|
Contract 3303 Third Runway and Associated Works (SAPR Joint Venture) |
Project Manager |
Andrew Keung |
6277 6628 |
Environmental Officer |
Pan Fong |
9436 9435 |
Third Runway Concourse and Integrated Airport Centres Works: |
|||
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Contract 3402 New Integrated Airport Centres Enabling Works (Wing Hing Construction Co., Ltd.) |
Contract Manager |
Michael Kan |
9206 0550 |
Environmental Officer |
Lisa He |
5374 3418 |
Terminal 2 Expansion Works: |
|||
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Contract 3501 Antenna Farm and Sewage Pumping Station (Build King Construction Ltd.) |
Project Manager |
Vincent Kwan |
9833 1313 |
Environmental Officer |
Edward Tam |
9287 8270 |
|
Contract 3502 Terminal 2 APM Depot Modification Works (Build King Construction Ltd.) |
Project Manager |
David Ng |
9010 7871 |
Environmental Officer |
Chun Pong Chan |
9187 7118 |
|
Contract 3503 Terminal 2 Foundation and Substructure Works (Leighton – Chun Wo Joint Venture) |
Construction Manager |
Eric Wu |
3973 1718 |
Environmental Officer |
Malcolm Leung |
3973 0850 |
Automated People Mover (APM) Works: |
|||
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Contract 3602 Existing APM System Modification Works (Niigata Transys Co., Ltd.) |
Project Manager |
Kunihiro Tatecho |
9755 0351 |
Environmental Officer |
Yolanda Gao |
5399 3509 |
Baggage Handling System (BHS) Works: |
|||
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Contract 3603 3RS Baggage Handling System (VISH Consortium) |
Project Manager |
Andy Ng |
9102 2739 |
Environmental Officer |
Eric Ha |
9215 3432 |
Airport Support Infrastructure and Logistic Works: |
|||
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Contract 3721 Construction Support Infrastructure Works (China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Ltd.) |
Site Agent |
Thomas Lui |
9011 5340 |
Environmental Officer |
Gary Hong |
6015 0795 |
|
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 |
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 |
|
|
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) |
The key activities of the Project carried out
in the reporting period included reclamation works and land-side works.
Reclamation works included deep cement mixing (DCM) works, marine filling, and
seawall construction. Land-side works involved mainly foundation and
substructure work for Terminal 2 expansion, modification and tunnel work for
Automated People Mover (APM) and Baggage Handling System (BHS), and preparation
work for utilities, with activities include site establishment, site office
construction, road and drainage works, cable ducting, demolition of existing
facilities, piling, and excavation works.
The locations of the key construction
activities are presented in Figure 1.1.
The status for all environmental aspects is
presented in Table 1.3. The EM&A requirements
remained unchanged during the reporting period.
Table
1.3: Summary of
Status for All Environmental Aspects under the Updated EM&A Manual
Parameters |
EM&A Requirements |
Status |
Air Quality |
|
|
Baseline Monitoring |
At least 14 consecutive days before commencement of construction work |
The baseline air quality monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4. |
Impact Monitoring |
At least 3 times every 6 days |
On-going |
Noise |
|
|
Baseline Monitoring |
Daily for a period of at least two weeks prior to the commencement of construction works |
The baseline noise monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4. |
Impact Monitoring |
Weekly |
On-going |
Water Quality |
|
|
General Baseline Water Quality Monitoring for reclamation, water jetting and field joint works |
Three days per week, at mid-flood and mid-ebb tides, for at least four weeks prior to the commencement of marine works. |
The baseline water quality monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4. |
General Impact Water Quality Monitoring for reclamation, water jetting and field joint works |
Three days per week, at mid-flood and mid-ebb tides. |
On-going |
Initial Intensive Deep Cement Mixing (DCM) Water Quality Monitoring |
At least four weeks |
The Initial Intensive DCM Monitoring Report was submitted and approved by EPD in accordance with the Detailed Plan on DCM. |
Regular DCM Water Quality Monitoring |
Three times per week until completion of DCM works. |
On-going |
Waste Management |
|
|
Waste Monitoring |
At least weekly |
On-going |
Land Contamination |
|
|
Supplementary Contamination Assessment Plan (CAP) |
At least 3 months before commencement of any soil remediation works. |
The Supplementary CAP was submitted and approved by EPD pursuant to EP condition 2.20. |
Contamination Assessment Report (CAR) |
CAR to be submitted for golf course |
The CAR for Golf Course was submitted to EPD. |
CAR to be submitted for Terminal 2 Emergency Power Supply System No.1 (Volume 1) |
The CAR for Terminal 2 Emergency Power Supply System No.1 (Volume 1) was submitted to EPD pursuant to EP Condition 1.9. |
|
Programme for submission of supplementary CAR at the other areas to be agreed. |
On-going |
|
Terrestrial Ecology |
|
|
Pre-construction Egretry Survey Plan |
Once per month in the breeding season between April and July, prior to the commencement of HDD drilling works. |
The Egretry Survey Plan was submitted and approved by EPD under EP Condition 2.14. |
Ecological Monitoring |
Monthly monitoring during the HDD construction works period from August to March. |
The terrestrial ecological monitoring at Sheung Sha Chau was completed in January 2019. |
Marine Ecology |
|
|
Pre-Construction Phase Coral Dive Survey |
Prior to marine construction works |
The Coral Translocation Plan was submitted and approved by EPD under EP Condition 2.12. |
Coral Translocation |
- |
The coral translocation was completed on 5 January 2017. |
Post-translocation Monitoring |
As per an enhanced monitoring programme based on the Coral Translocation Plan |
The post-translocation monitoring programme according to the Coral Translocation Plan was completed in April 2018. |
Chinese White Dolphins (CWD) |
|
|
Baseline Monitoring |
6 months of baseline surveys before the commencement of land formation related construction works. Vessel line transect surveys: Two full surveys per month; Land-based theodolite tracking surveys: Two days per month at the Sha Chau station and two days per month at the Lung Kwu Chau station; and Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM): For the whole duration of baseline period. |
Baseline CWD results were reported in the CWD Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD in accordance with EP Condition 3.4. |
Impact Monitoring |
Vessel line transect surveys: Two full surveys per month; Land-based theodolite tracking surveys: One day per month at the Sha Chau station and one day per month at the Lung Kwu Chau station; and PAM: For the whole duration for land formation related construction works. |
On-going |
Landscape and Visual |
|
|
Landscape and Visual Plan |
At least 3 months before the commencement of construction works on the formed land of the Project. |
The Landscape & Visual Plan was submitted to EPD under EP Condition 2.18 |
Baseline Monitoring |
One-off survey within the Project site boundary prior to commencement of any construction works |
The baseline landscape & visual monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4. |
Impact Monitoring |
Weekly |
On-going |
Environmental Auditing |
|
|
Regular site inspection |
Weekly |
On-going |
Marine Mammal Watching Plan (MMWP) implementation measures |
Monitor and check |
On-going |
Dolphin Exclusion Zone (DEZ) Plan implementation measures |
Monitor and check |
On-going |
SkyPier High Speed Ferries (HSF) implementation measures |
Monitor and check |
On-going |
Construction and Associated Vessels implementation measures |
Monitor and check |
On-going |
Complaint Hotline and Email Channel |
Construction phase |
On-going |
Environmental Log Book |
Construction phase |
On-going |
Taking into account the construction works in the
reporting period, impact monitoring of air quality, noise, water quality, waste
management, landscape & visual, and CWD were carried out in the reporting
period.
The EM&A programme also involved weekly
site inspections and related auditing conducted by ET for the checking of
implementation of required environmental mitigation measures recommended in the
approved EIA Report. To promote the environmental awareness and enhance the
environmental performance of the contractors, environmental trainings and
regular environmental management meetings were conducted during the reporting
period which are summarised as below:
● Ten skipper trainings provided by
ET;
● Twenty-eight environmental
management meetings for EM&A review with works contracts
The EM&A programme has been following the
recommendations presented in the approved EIA Report and the Manual. A summary
of implementation status of the environmental mitigation measures for the
construction phase of the Project during the reporting period is provided in Appendix B.
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 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 |
The air quality
monitoring results in the reporting period are summarised in Table
2.2 and the graphical plot is presented in Appendix C.
Table 2.2: Percentage of Air Quality
Monitoring Results within Action and Limit Levels
|
AR1A |
AR2 |
Oct 2019 |
100% |
100% |
Nov 2019 |
100% |
100% |
Dec 2019 |
100% |
100% |
Overall |
100% |
100% |
Note: The percentages are calculated by dividing the number of monitoring results within their corresponding Action and Limit Levels by the total number of monitoring results. |
All monitoring results were
within their corresponding Action and Limit Levels at all monitoring stations
in the reporting period.
General meteorological
conditions in the last month of the previous quarter and this reporting period
were recorded and summarised in Table 2.3.
Table 2.3: General Meteorological Condition
during Impact Air Quality Monitoring
|
Weather |
Dominant Wind Direction |
Sep 2019 |
Sunny to Drizzle |
Northwest |
Oct 2019 |
Sunny to Cloudy |
Southeast |
Nov 2019 |
Sunny to Cloudy |
Northwest |
Dec 2019 |
Sunny to Cloudy |
Northwest |
No dust emission source from Project and other
activities was observed at the monitoring stations during impact air quality
monitoring. It is considered that the monitoring work in the reporting period
was effective and there was no adverse impact attributable to the Project
activities.
Impact noise monitoring was
conducted at four representative monitoring stations once per week during 0700
and 1900 in the reporting period. The locations of monitoring stations are
described in Table 2.4 and presented in Figure 2.1.
The Action and Limit Levels of the noise
monitoring stipulated in the EM&A programme for triggering the relevant
investigation and follow-up procedures under the programme are provided in Table 2.4 for
reference.
Table 2.4: Impact Noise Monitoring Stations
Monitoring Station |
Location |
Action Level |
Limit Level |
NM1A |
Man Tung Road Park |
When one documented complaint is received from any one of the sensitive receivers |
75 dB(A) |
NM4 |
Ching Chung Hau Po Woon Primary School |
65dB(A) / 70 dB(A) (i) |
|
NM5 |
Village House in Tin Sum |
75 dB(A) |
|
NM6 |
House No. 1, Sha Lo Wan |
75 dB(A) |
|
Note: (i) The Limit Level for NM4 is reduced to 70dB(A) for being an educational institution. During school examination period, the Limit Level is further reduced to 65dB(A). |
The noise monitoring results in the reporting
period are summarised in Table
2.5 and the graphical plot is presented in Appendix C.
Table 2.5: Percentage of Noise Monitoring
Results within Action and Limit Levels
|
NM1A |
NM4 |
NM5 |
NM6 |
Oct 2019 |
100% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
Nov 2019 |
100% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
Dec 2019 |
100% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
Overall |
100% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
Note: The percentages are calculated by dividing the number of monitoring results within their corresponding Action and Limit Levels by the total number of monitoring results. |
No complaints were received from any sensitive
receiver that triggered the Action Level. All monitoring results were also
within the corresponding Limit Levels at all monitoring stations in the
reporting period.
General meteorological conditions in the last
month of the previous quarter and this reporting period were recorded and
summarised in Table 2.6.
Table 2.6: General Meteorological Condition during
Impact Noise Monitoring
|
Weather |
Sep 2019 |
Sunny to Drizzle |
Oct 2019 |
Sunny to Cloudy |
Nov 2019 |
Sunny to Cloudy |
Dec 2019 |
Sunny to Cloudy |
As the construction activities were far away
from the monitoring stations, major sources of noise dominating the monitoring
stations observed during the monitoring sessions were traffic noise near NM1A,
school activities at NM4, and aircraft noise near NM1A, NM5 and NM6. It is considered that the monitoring work in the
reporting period was effective and there was no adverse impact attributable to
the Project activities.
During the reporting period, water quality
monitoring was conducted three days per week, at mid-flood and mid-ebb tides,
at a total of 23 water quality monitoring stations, comprising 12 impact (IM)
stations, 8 sensitive receiver (SR) stations, and 3 control (C) stations in the
vicinity of the water quality sensitive receivers around the existing airport
island in accordance with the Manual. The purpose of water quality monitoring
at the IM stations is to promptly capture any potential water quality impacts
from the Project before the impacts could become apparent at sensitive
receivers (represented by the SR stations). Table 2.7 describes the details of the
monitoring stations. Figure 2.2 shows the locations of the
monitoring stations.
Table 2.7: Monitoring Locations and
Parameters for Impact Water Quality Monitoring
Description |
Coordinates Easting Northing |
Parameters |
||
|
|
|||
C1 |
Control Station |
804247 |
815620 |
General Parameters DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS
DCM Parameters Total Alkalinity, Heavy Metals(2) |
C2 |
Control Station |
806945 |
825682 |
|
C3(3) |
Control Station |
817803 |
822109 |
|
IM1 |
Impact Station |
807132 |
817949 |
|
IM2 |
Impact Station |
806166 |
818163 |
|
IM3 |
Impact Station |
805594 |
818784 |
|
IM4 |
Impact Station |
804607 |
819725 |
|
IM5 |
Impact Station |
804867 |
820735 |
|
IM6 |
Impact Station |
805828 |
821060 |
|
IM7 |
Impact Station |
806835 |
821349 |
|
IM8 |
Impact Station |
808140 |
821830 |
|
IM9 |
Impact Station |
808811 |
822094 |
|
IM10 |
Impact Station |
809794 |
822385 |
|
IM11 |
Impact Station |
811460 |
822057 |
|
IM12 |
Impact Station |
812046 |
821459 |
|
SR1A(1) |
Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF) Seawater Intake for cooling |
812660
|
819977 |
General Parameters DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS |
SR2(3) |
Planned marine park / hard corals at The Brothers / Tai Mo To |
814166 |
821463 |
General Parameters DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS
DCM Parameters Total Alkalinity, Heavy Metals(2)(4) |
SR3 |
Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park / fishing and spawning grounds in North Lantau |
807571 |
822147 |
General Parameters DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS
|
SR4A |
Sha Lo Wan |
807810 |
817189 |
|
SR5A |
San Tau Beach SSSI |
810696 |
816593 |
|
SR6A(5) |
Tai Ho Bay, Near Tai Ho Stream SSSI |
814739 |
817963 |
|
SR7 |
Ma Wan Fish Culture Zone (FCZ) |
823742 |
823636 |
|
SR8(6) |
Seawater Intake for cooling at Hong Kong International Airport (East) |
811623 |
820390 |
Notes:
(1) With the operation of HKBCF, water quality monitoring at SR1A station
was commenced on 25 October 2018.
(2) Details of selection criteria for the two heavy metals
for regular DCM monitoring refer to the Detailed Plan on Deep Cement Mixing
available on the dedicated 3RS website (http://env.threerunwaysystem.com/en/ep-submissions.html). DCM specific water quality monitoring parameters
(total alkalinity and heavy metals) were only conducted at C1 to C3, SR2, and
IM1 to IM12.
(3)
According to the Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Report, C3 station is
not adequately representative as a control station of impact/ SR stations
during the flood tide. The control reference has been changed from C3 to SR2
from 1 September 2016 onwards.
(4)
Total alkalinity and heavy metals results are collected at SR2 as a
control station for regular DCM monitoring.
(5)
As the access to SR6 was obstructed by the construction activities and
temporary structures for Tung Chung New Town Extension, the monitoring location
has been relocated to SR6A starting from 8 August 2019.
(6)
The monitoring location for SR8 is subject to further changes due to
silt curtain arrangements and the progressive relocation of this seawater
intake.
The Action and Limit Levels for general water
quality monitoring and regular DCM monitoring stipulated in the EM&A
programme for triggering the relevant investigation and follow-up procedures
under the programme are presented in Table 2.8. The control and IM stations
during flood tide and ebb tide for general water quality monitoring and regular
DCM monitoring are presented in Table
2.9.
Table 2.8: Action and Limit Levels for
General Water Quality Monitoring and Regular DCM Monitoring
Parameters |
Action Level |
Limit Level |
||
Action and Limit Levels for general water quality monitoring and regular DCM monitoring (excluding SR1A & SR8) |
||||
DO in mg/L (Surface, Middle & Bottom) |
Surface and Middle 4.5 mg/L |
Surface and Middle 4.1 mg/L 5 mg/L for Fish Culture Zone (SR7) only |
||
Bottom 3.4 mg/L |
Bottom 2.7 mg/L |
|||
SS in mg/L |
23 |
or 120% of upstream control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher |
37 |
or 130% of upstream control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher |
Turbidity in NTU |
22.6 |
36.1 |
||
Total Alkalinity in ppm |
95 |
99 |
||
Representative Heavy Metals for regular DCM monitoring (Chromium) |
0.2 |
0.2 |
||
Representative Heavy Metals for regular DCM monitoring (Nickel) |
3.2 |
|
3.6 |
|
Action and Limit Levels SR1A |
|
|
|
|
SS (mg/l) |
33 |
42 |
||
Action and Limit Levels SR8 |
|
|
|
|
SS (mg/l) |
52 |
|
60 |
|
Notes:
1. For DO measurement, Action or Limit Level is triggered when monitoring
result is lower than the limits.
2. For parameters other than DO, Action or Limit Level of water quality
results is triggered when monitoring results is higher than the limits.
3. Depth-averaged results are used unless specified otherwise.
4. Details of selection criteria for the two heavy metals for regular DCM
monitoring refer to the Detailed Plan on Deep Cement Mixing available on the
dedicated 3RS website http://env.threerunwaysystem.com/en/ep-submissions.html)
5. The Action and Limit Levels for the two representative heavy metals
chosen will be the same as that for the intensive DCM monitoring.
Table
2.9: The Control
and Impact Stations during Flood Tide and Ebb Tide for General Water Quality
Monitoring and Regular DCM Monitoring
Control Station |
Impact Stations |
Flood Tide |
|
C1 |
IM1, IM2, IM3, IM4, IM5, IM6, IM7, IM8, SR3 |
SR21 |
IM7, IM8, IM9, IM10, IM11, IM12, SR1A, SR3, SR4A, SR5A, SR6, SR6A, SR8 |
Ebb Tide |
|
C1 |
SR4A, SR5A, SR6, SR6A |
C2 |
IM1, IM2, IM3, IM4, IM5, IM6, IM7, IM8, IM9, IM10, IM11, IM12, SR1A, SR2, SR3, SR7, SR8 |
Note:
1. As per findings of Baseline Water Quality Monitoring
Report, the control reference has been changed from C3 to SR2 from 1 Sep 2016
onwards.
The summary or results within their
corresponding Action and Limit Levels in the reporting period are presented in Table 2.10. The
weather and sea conditions in the last month of the previous quarter and this
reporting period were recorded and summarised in Table 2.11.
Table 2.10: Percentage of Water Quality
Monitoring Results within Action and Limit Levels
|
General Water Quality Monitoring |
Regular DCM Monitoring |
|||||
DO (Surface and Middle) |
DO (Bottom) |
SS |
Turbidity |
Alkalinity |
Chromium |
Nickel |
|
Oct 2019 |
100% |
100% |
99.1% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
Nov 2019 |
100% |
100% |
99.8% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
Dec 2019 |
100% |
100% |
98.8% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
Overall |
100% |
100% |
99.2% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
Note: The percentages are calculated by dividing the number of depth-averaged results complying with their corresponding Action and Limit Levels by the total number of depth-averaged results.
|
Table 2.11: General Weather Condition and Sea
Condition during Impact Water Quality Monitoring
|
Weather |
Sea Condition |
Sep 2019 |
Sunny to Cloudy |
Calm to Rough |
Oct 2019 |
Sunny to Cloudy |
Calm to Rough |
Nov 2019 |
Sunny to Cloudy |
Calm to Rough |
Dec 2019 |
Sunny to Rainy |
Calm to Rough |
The monitoring results for DO, turbidity, total
alkalinity, nickel and chromium obtained in the reporting period were within
their corresponding Action and Limit Levels stipulated in the EM&A
programme. Relevant investigation and follow-up actions will be conducted
according to the EM&A programme if the corresponding Action and Limit
Levels are triggered. For SS, some of the testing results triggered the
relevant Action or Limit Level in the reporting period, and investigations were
conducted accordingly.
Summaries of results triggering Action or Limit
Level for SS are presented in Table
2.12 to Table
2.13.
Details of the investigation findings were
presented in Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 46, 47 and 48,
which concluded that all results triggering the Action or Limit Level were not
related to the Project.
Table
2.12: Summary of
SS Results Triggering Action or Limit Level (Mid-Ebb Tide)
IM1 |
IM2 |
IM3 |
IM4 |
IM5 |
IM6 |
IM7 |
IM8 |
IM9 |
IM10 |
IM11 |
IM12 |
SR1A |
SR2 |
SR3 |
SR4A |
SR5A |
SR6A |
SR7 |
SR8 |
|
29/10/2019 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16/11/2019 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28/12/2019 |
|
D |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No. of result triggering Action or Limit Level |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Table 2.13:
Summary of SS Results Triggering Action or Limit Level (Mid-Flood Tide)
IM1 |
IM2 |
IM3 |
IM4 |
IM5 |
IM6 |
IM7 |
IM8 |
IM9 |
IM10 |
IM11 |
IM12 |
SR1A |
SR3 |
SR4A |
SR5A |
SR6A |
SR7 |
SR8 |
|
15/10/2019 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29/10/2019 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D |
D |
|
|
|
|
D |
|
|
|
|
|
17/12/2019 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
D |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28/12/2019 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No. of result triggering Action or Limit Level |
0 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Legend: |
|
|
Result within corresponding Action and Limit Levels |
|
Result triggered the Action Level at monitoring station located upstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow |
D |
Result triggered the Action Level at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow |
|
Result triggered the Limit Level at monitoring station located upstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow |
|
Upstream station with respect to the Project during the respective tide based on dominant tidal flow |
|
Downstream station with respect to the Project during the respective tide based on dominant tidal flow |
In the reporting period, it is noted that most
monitoring results were within their corresponding Action and Limit Levels,
while only a minor number of results triggered their corresponding Action or
Limit Level, and investigations were conducted accordingly. Based on the
findings presented in Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 46, 47 and
48, all cases that triggered the corresponding Action or Limit Level were not
related to the Project; hence, the Project did not introduce adverse impact to
all water quality sensitive receivers. All required actions under the Event and
Action Plan were followed.
Nevertheless, the non-project related triggers
were attended to and initiated corresponding action and measures. As part of
the EM&A programme, the construction methods and mitigation measures for
water quality will continue to be monitored and opportunities for further
enhancement will continue to be explored and implemented where possible, to
strive for better protection of water quality and the marine environment.
In the
meantime, the contractors were reminded to implement and maintain all
mitigation measures during weekly site inspections and regular environmental
management meetings. These include maintaining mitigation measures properly for
reclamation works including DCM works, marine filling, and seawall construction
as recommended in the Manual.
In accordance with the Manual, waste generated
from construction activities was audited once per week to determine if wastes
were being managed in accordance with the Waste Management Plan (WMP) prepared
for the Project, contract-specific WMP, and any
statutory and contractual requirements. All aspects of waste management
including waste generation, storage, transportation, and disposal were assessed
during the audits.
The Action and Limit Levels of the construction
waste are provided in Table
2.14.
Table 2.14: 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 monitoring of the Project construction
works was carried out by the ET in the reporting period to check and monitor
the implementation of proper waste management practices.
Recommendations made by the ET included
provision and maintenance of proper chemical waste storage area, as well as
handling, segregation, and regular disposal of general refuse. The contractors
had taken actions to implement the recommended measures.
Based on updated contractors’ information,
summary of construction waste generated in the reporting period is presented in
Table 2.15.
There were no complaints, non-compliance of the
WMP, contract-specific WMPs, statutory and contractual
requirements that triggered Action and Limit Levels in the reporting period.
Table 2.15: Construction Waste Statistics
|
C&D1 Material Stockpiled for Reuse or Recycle (m3) |
C&D Material Reused in the Project (m3) |
C&D Material Reused in other Projects (m3) |
C&D Material Transferred to Public Fill (m3) |
Chemical Waste (kg) |
Chemical Waste (L) |
General Refuse (tonne) |
Oct 20192, 3 |
1,948 |
*19,316 |
*0 |
3,600 |
0 |
3,000 |
796 |
Nov 20192 |
1,403 |
26,774 |
0 |
3,380 |
90 |
6,600 |
680 |
Dec 20192 |
835 |
30,475 |
0 |
3,027 |
70 |
7,000 |
779 |
Total |
4,186 |
76,565 |
0 |
10,007 |
160 |
16,600 |
2,255 |
|
Notes: 1. C&D refers to Construction and Demolition. 2. Paper, metals and/or plastics were recycled in the reporting period. 3. Updated figures in the past month are reported and marked with an asterisk (*). Updated figures for earlier months will be reported in the forthcoming Annual EM&A Report. |
CWD monitoring was conducted by
vessel line transect survey at a frequency of two full surveys per month,
supplemented by land-based theodolite tracking survey and PAM. The frequency of
the land-based theodolite tracking survey during the construction phase was one
day per month at both Sha Chau (SC) and Lung Kwu Chau
(LKC) stations as stipulated in the Manual. Since January 2019, additional
theodolite tracking survey for one day at LKC station was conducted on a
voluntary basis to collect supplementary information for the Project, such that
a total of one tracking day at SC station and two tracking days at LKC station
were conducted per month. The vessel survey transects followed the transect
lines proposed in the Manual and are consistent with those used in the Agriculture, Fisheries and
Conservation Department (AFCD) long-term CWD monitoring programme. The transect
locations of CWD monitoring by vessel line transect survey conducted from
October to December 2019 are shown in Figure 2.3, whilst the land-based
theodolite tracking survey stations are described in Table 2.16 and depicted in Figure 2.4. The location of the PAM
device is shown in Figure 2.10.
Table 2.16: Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey Station
Details
Stations |
Location |
Geographical Coordinates |
Station Height (m) |
Approximate Tracking Distance (km) |
D |
Sha Chau (SC) |
22° 20’ 43.5” N 113° 53’ 24.66” E |
45.66 |
2 |
E |
Lung Kwu Chau (LKC) |
22° 22’ 44.83” N 113° 53’ 0.2” E |
70.40 |
3 |
The Action Level and Limit Level for CWD
monitoring were formulated by an action response approach using the running
quarterly dolphin encounter rates (STG and ANI) derived from baseline
monitoring data, as presented in the CWD Baseline Monitoring Report. The
derived values of Action and Limit Levels for CWD monitoring are shown in Table 2.17.
Table 2.17: Derived Values of Action Level and
Limit Level for Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring
|
NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL as a Whole |
Action Level |
Running quarterly STG < 1.86 & ANI < 9.35 |
Limit Level |
Two consecutive running quarterly (3-month) STG < 1.86 & ANI < 9.35 |
Survey
Effort
During the October to December
2019 reporting period, a total of six sets of vessel line transect survey
covering all transects in Northeast Lantau (NEL), Northwest Lantau (NWL), Airport West (AW), West
Lantau (WL) and Southwest Lantau (SWL) survey areas were conducted at a
frequency of twice per month, in each survey area.
A total of around 1,362 km of
survey effort was collected from these surveys, with around 96.9% 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 C.
CWD
Sighting
From October to December 2019,
there were a total of 38 sightings of CWDs, with 110 dolphins sighted (Table 2.18). Amongst these
sightings, 37 sightings with 108 dolphins were recorded during on-effort
searches under favourable weather condition.
When breaking down the sightings
by survey areas, 10 sightings with 26 dolphins, 21 sightings with 71 dolphins
and 7 sightings with 13 dolphins were recorded in NWL (including AW transects),
WL and SWL survey areas respectively during the current reporting period. No
CWD was sighted in NEL survey area.
Compared with the last quarter
(i.e. July to September 2019), there is an overall decrease in terms of both
number of CWD sightings and number of dolphins (decreased by around 45% and 61%
respectively). WL and SWL both showed drastic decreases in terms of both number
of CWD sightings and number of dolphins, and such decreases were most
remarkable in SWL as the number of CWD sightings and number of dolphins
decreased by around 72% and 87% respectively. On the other hand, NWL
experienced an observable increase in terms of both number of CWD sightings and
number of dolphins by 200% and 375% respectively.
Compared with the same quarter of
last year in 2018 (i.e. October to December 2018), there is an overall decrease
in both number of CWD sightings and number of dolphins by 10% and 21%
respectively. The decrease is mainly contributed by NWL and WL areas.
Table
2.18 below shows the
comparison of the numbers of sightings and dolphins amongst the current
reporting period, last quarter, and the same quarter of year 2018.
Table 2.18: Summary of Number of CWD Sightings and Number
of Dolphins for the Same Quarter Last Year, Previous Quarter, and Current
Reporting Period
|
Same Quarter of Last Year |
Previous Reporting Period |
Current Reporting Period |
|
October to December 2018 |
July to September 2019 |
October to December 2019 |
NEL |
1 (1) |
0 (0) |
0 (0) |
NWL |
12 (35) |
3 (4) |
9 (19) |
AW |
0 (0) |
0 (0) |
1 (7) |
WL |
24 (89) |
41 (182) |
21 (71) |
SWL |
5 (15) |
25 (97) |
7 (13) |
Total |
42 (140) |
69 (283) |
38 (110) |
Note: Values in ( ) represent number
of dolphins
The distribution of CWD sightings
recorded from October to December 2019 is illustrated in Figure 2.5.
In NWL survey area including AW transects, CWD sightings were mostly recorded
around Lung Kwu Chau and at the southwestern part of
NWL survey area, around the waters between the 3RS works area and the coast of
Northwest Lantau. In WL, CWD sightings distributed from the northernmost part
of the survey area to the south off Fan Lau, with the majority recorded between
Tai O and Peaked Hill. In SWL, CWD sightings distributed along the coast from
Fan Lau to Lo Kei Wan. No CWD sightings were recorded in NEL survey area.
Details of the sighting data are presented in Appendix C.
Figure 2.5:
Sightings Distribution of Chinese White Dolphins from Oct to Dec 2019
Remarks: Please note that there are 38 pink circles on the
map indicating the sighting locations of CWD. Some of them were very close to
each other and therefore appear overlapped on this sighting distribution map.
Encounter Rate
The dolphin encounter rates for
the number of on-effort dolphin sightings per 100 km survey effort (STG) and
for the total on-effort number of dolphins per 100 km survey effort (ANI) in
the whole survey area (i.e. NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL) for October, November and
December 2019 are summarised in Table
2.19.
In this reporting period, the
monthly STG and ANI decreased from October to November, especially remarkable
for ANI (from 12.00 to 5.46), but then remained relatively steady in December
2019. The running quarterly STG and ANI decreased from October to December.
Although the running quarterly ANI in December fell below the action level
(i.e. ANI < 9.35), the running quarterly STG remained above the action level
(i.e. STG ≥ 1.86), therefore the Action Level for CWD
monitoring was not triggered.
Compared with the previous
reporting period, there are drastic decreases in both running quarterly STG
(from 5.36 to 2.80) and running quarterly ANI (from 21.98 to 8.18). While comparing with the same quarter of
last year (i.e. October to December 2018), both the running quarterly STG and
ANI slightly decreased from 3.16 to 2.80 and from 10.36 to 8.18 respectively.
As there is no significant change in deployment of works vessels and barges in
this quarter comparing with the same quarter of last year (although there were
comparatively more marine filling barges and reduced ground improvement works
barges operating in this year), there is no obvious relationship between 3RS
marine works activities and the decrease of running quarterly encounter rates
in this reporting period. It is also important to note that dolphins move
around within their habitat across the Pearl River Estuary Region due to both
natural and anthropogenic factors and thus there is possible fluctuations of
CWD numbers from year to year. Detailed analysis will be provided in the Annual
Report.
Table 2.19: Summary of Monthly and Running
Quarterly STG and ANI of Chinese White Dolphin for the Same Quarter Last Year,
Previous Quarter, and Current Reporting Period
|
Same Quarter of Last Year |
Previous Reporting Period |
Current Reporting Period |
||||||
|
Oct 18 |
Nov 18 |
Dec 18 |
Jul 19 |
Aug 19 |
Sep 19 |
Oct 19 |
Nov 19 |
Dec 19 |
Monthly STG |
3.07 |
4.85 |
1.67 |
7.64 |
3.95 |
4.47 |
3.33 |
2.50 |
2.56 |
Monthly ANI |
8.97 |
14.28 |
8.10 |
31.72 |
16.50 |
17.63 |
12.00 |
5.46 |
6.98 |
Running Quarterly STG |
4.19 |
4.29 |
3.16 |
4.37 |
4.92 |
5.36 |
3.91 |
3.42 |
2.80 |
Running Quarterly ANI |
13.71 |
13.19 |
10.36 |
17.72 |
19.69 |
21.98 |
15.32 |
11.63 |
8.18 |
Note: For detailed calculations of
encounter rates STG and ANI for the current reporting period, please refer to
the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 46, 47 and 48.
Group Size
Between October and December
2019, the group size of CWD sightings ranged from 1 to 14 dolphins. The average
group size of CWDs was 2.9 dolphins per group which is smaller than that of the
last quarter which was 4.1. The average group size of CWDs in this reporting
quarter is also smaller than that of the same quarter of last year (3.3
dolphins per group).
In this reporting quarter, CWD
sightings with small group size (i.e. 1-2 dolphins) were dominant. Amongst all
38 sightings, there was only one sighting with large group size (i.e. 10 or
more dolphins). The large CWD group was sighted in WL.
There were no distinct
distribution patterns of small-sized and medium-sized CWD groups observed in
the current reporting period. 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
Activities and Association with Fishing Boats
During October to December 2019,
four sightings of CWDs were recorded with feeding activities. One of
these sightings was observed in association with operating gillnetter in SWL.
The number of sightings with
feeding recorded in the current reporting period is much lower than the last
reporting period (18 sightings involved feeding activities without association
with fishing boat between July and September 2019). The number of CWD sightings
with feeding activities is also lower compared with the data in the same
quarter of last year (i.e. 10 sightings between October and December 2018).
The sighting locations of CWDs
engaged in different behaviour during the current
reporting period are illustrated in Figure 2.7.
Figure
2.7: Sighting Locations of Chinese White Dolphins Engaged in Different
Behaviours
Mother-calf Pairs
From October to December 2019,
three sightings of CWDs were recorded with the presence of mother-and-unspotted
calf and/or mother-and-unspotted juvenile, which is fewer than that of the last
reporting quarter (i.e. 11 sightings between July and September 2019). The
number is also fewer than that recorded in the same quarter of last year (i.e.
six sightings between October and December 2018). All these sightings were
recorded in WL survey area.
The locations of CWD sightings
with the presence of mother-and-unspotted calf and/or mother-and-unspotted
juvenile are shown in Figure
2.8.
Figure 2.8: Sighting Locations of Mother-calf Pairs
Photo
Identification
During October to December 2019, a total number
of 56 different CWD individuals were identified altogether for 83 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 56 different CWD individuals, 20 animals (i.e. NLMM004, NLMM006,
NLMM013, NLMM016, NLMM018, NLMM019, SLMM003, SLMM010, SLMM012, SLMM014,
SLMM028, SLMM037, SLMM049, SLMM052, SLMM053, SLMM060, WLMM007, WLMM008, WLMM029
and WLMM054) were sighted for more than once.
Seven individuals including NLMM004, NLMM018,
NLMM019, SLMM010, SLMM012, SLMM049 and WLMM054 were re-sighted in different
survey areas during this reporting period. NLMM004, NLMM018 and NLMM019 had
cross-area movement between NWL (including AW transects) and WL survey areas,
while the others had cross-area movement between WL and SWL survey areas. The
most frequently re-sighted individual in this reporting quarter was NLMM004
which has been encountered altogether for 5 times. The number of re-sighted CWD
individuals and the number of CWD individuals showing cross-area movement from
October to December 2019 are both lower than those of the last reporting
quarter (36 and 14 individuals respectively).
A summary of photo identification
works is presented in Table 2.20.
Representative photos of the 56 identified individuals and figures depicting
the sighting locations of the aforementioned 20 re-sighted individuals recorded
in this reporting period are presented Appendix C.
Table 2.20: Summary of Photo Identification
Individual ID |
Date of sighting |
Sighting Group No. |
Area |
|
Individual |
Date of sighting |
Sighting Group No. |
Area |
NLMM001 |
18-Dec-19 |
3 |
WL |
|
SLMM037 |
3-Oct-19 |
7 |
WL |
NLMM004 |
3-Oct-19 |
1 |
AW |
|
12-Nov-19 |
1 |
WL |
|
2 |
WL |
|
SLMM044 |
18-Dec-19 |
3 |
WL |
||
10-Oct-19 |
3 |
NWL |
|
SLMM049 |
3-Oct-19 |
8 |
WL |
|
11-Nov-19 |
3 |
NWL |
|
22-Nov-19 |
6 |
SWL |
||
16-Dec-19 |
3 |
NWL |
|
SLMM050 |
18-Dec-19 |
3 |
WL |
|
NLMM006 |
10-Oct-19 |
3 |
NWL |
|
SLMM052 |
3-Oct-19 |
4 |
WL |
16-Dec-19 |
2 |
NWL |
|
12-Nov-19 |
1 |
WL |
||
NLMM013 |
10-Oct-19 |
3 |
NWL |
|
SLMM053 |
3-Oct-19 |
8 |
WL |
11-Nov-19 |
3 |
NWL |
|
22-Nov-19 |
4 |
WL |
||
16-Dec-19 |
2 |
NWL |
|
SLMM060 |
2-Oct-19 |
3 |
SWL |
|
NLMM016 |
3-Oct-19 |
6 |
WL |
|
21-Nov-19 |
2 |
SWL |
|
18-Dec-19 |
2 |
WL |
|
WLMM001 |
22-Nov-19 |
2 |
WL |
|
NLMM018 |
3-Oct-19 |
1 |
AW |
|
WLMM003 |
10-Dec-19 |
3 |
SWL |
2 |
WL |
|
WLMM006 |
22-Nov-19 |
2 |
WL |
||
NLMM019 |
3-Oct-19 |
1 |
AW |
|
WLMM007 |
3-Oct-19 |
8 |
WL |
11-Nov-19 |
1 |
NWL |
|
18-Dec-19 |
5 |
WL |
||
22-Nov-19 |
4 |
WL |
|
WLMM008 |
22-Nov-19 |
5 |
WL |
|
NLMM020 |
11-Nov-19 |
1 |
NWL |
|
18-Dec-19 |
5 |
WL |
|
NLMM023 |
10-Oct-19 |
2 |
NWL |
|
WLMM011 |
3-Oct-19 |
6 |
WL |
NLMM052 |
3-Oct-19 |
1 |
AW |
|
WLMM018 |
3-Oct-19 |
8 |
WL |
NLMM053 |
3-Oct-19 |
1 |
AW |
|
WLMM027 |
18-Dec-19 |
1 |
WL |
NLMM063 |
16-Dec-19 |
3 |
NWL |
|
WLMM029 |
3-Oct-19 |
8 |
WL |
NLMM068 |
3-Oct-19 |
1 |
AW |
|
22-Nov-19 |
2 |
WL |
|
NLMM071 |
3-Oct-19 |
1 |
AW |
|
WLMM049 |
10-Oct-19 |
1 |
NWL |
NLMM072 |
16-Dec-19 |
3 |
NWL |
|
WLMM054 |
4-Oct-19 |
5 |
SWL |
SLMM003 |
3-Oct-19 |
7 |
WL |
|
11-Oct-19 |
1 |
WL |
|
12-Nov-19 |
1 |
WL |
|
2 |
WL |
|||
SLMM010 |
3-Oct-19 |
8 |
WL |
|
18-Dec-19 |
1 |
WL |
|
10-Dec-19 |
2 |
SWL |
|
WLMM056 |
21-Nov-19 |
4 |
SWL |
|
SLMM011 |
11-Nov-19 |
1 |
NWL |
|
WLMM063 |
22-Nov-19 |
2 |
WL |
SLMM012 |
21-Nov-19 |
4 |
SWL |
|
WLMM065 |
18-Dec-19 |
3 |
WL |
18-Dec-19 |
3 |
WL |
|
WLMM067 |
18-Dec-19 |
3 |
WL |
|
SLMM014 |
3-Oct-19 |
8 |
WL |
|
WLMM071 |
3-Oct-19 |
5 |
WL |
18-Dec-19 |
4 |
WL |
|
WLMM073 |
3-Oct-19 |
7 |
WL |
|
SLMM022 |
3-Oct-19 |
8 |
WL |
|
WLMM078 |
3-Oct-19 |
8 |
WL |
SLMM025 |
3-Oct-19 |
8 |
WL |
|
WLMM079 |
3-Oct-19 |
7 |
WL |
SLMM028 |
3-Oct-19 |
8 |
WL |
|
WLMM104 |
3-Oct-19 |
3 |
WL |
22-Nov-19 |
1 |
WL |
|
WLMM107 |
3-Oct-19 |
6 |
WL |
|
SLMM029 |
3-Oct-19 |
8 |
WL |
|
WLMM131 |
3-Oct-19 |
7 |
WL |
SLMM031 |
21-Nov-19 |
4 |
SWL |
|
WLMM132 |
3-Oct-19 |
7 |
WL |
|
|
|
|
WLMM149 |
3-Oct-19 |
6 |
WL |
Survey Effort
During October to December 2019,
a total of nine days of land-based theodolite tracking survey effort were
completed, including six days on Lung Kwu Chau and
three days on Sha Chau. In total, 10 CWD groups were tracked from the Lung Kwu Chau station while no CWD groups were tracked from the
Sha Chau station, with an overall 0.19 CWD groups sighted per survey hour.
Information on survey effort and
CWD groups sighted during land-based theodolite tracking surveys are presented
in Table 2.21. Details on the survey
effort and CWD groups tracked are presented in Appendix C. The first sighting locations
of CWD groups tracked between October and December 2019 are shown in Figure 2.9.
Table 2.21: Summary of Survey Effort and CWD Group of
Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey
Land-based Station |
# of Survey Sessions |
Survey Effort (hh:mm) |
# CWD Groups Sighted |
CWD Group Sighting per Survey Hour |
October 2019 |
||||
Lung Kwu Chau |
2 |
12:00 |
5 |
0.42 |
Sha Chau |
1 |
06:00 |
0 |
0 |
TOTAL |
3 |
18:00 |
5 |
0.28 |
November 2019 |
||||
Lung Kwu Chau |
2 |
12:00 |
2 |
0.17 |
Sha Chau |
1 |
06:00 |
0 |
0 |
TOTAL |
3 |
18:00 |
2 |
0.11 |
December 2019 |
||||
Lung Kwu Chau |
2 |
12:00 |
3 |
0.25 |
Sha Chau |
1 |
06:00 |
0 |
0 |
TOTAL |
3 |
18:00 |
3 |
0.17 |
OVERALL |
9 |
54:00 |
10 |
0.19 |
Figure 2.9: Plots of
First Sightings of All CWD Groups from Land-based Stations
An Ecological Acoustic Recorder (EAR) has been
deployed and positioned to the south of Sha Chau Island inside the SCLKCMP (Figure 2.10) with 20% duty cycle, while
data from the EAR intended primarily to supplement the data collected from the
land-based theodolite tracking survey station on Sha Chau. In this reporting
period, the EAR has been retrieved on 23 October and 6 December 2019 for data
collection and subsequently redeployed. The EAR deployment is generally for 6
weeks prior to data retrieval for analysis. As the period of data collection
and analysis takes more than four months, PAM results could not be reported in
quarterly intervals but report for supplementing the annual CWD monitoring
analysis.
During the reporting period, silt
curtains were in place by the contractors for marine filling works (similar to the previous reporting period), in which dolphin
observers were deployed by each contractor in accordance with the Marine Mammal
Watching Plan (MMWP). Teams of at least two dolphin observers were deployed at
3 to 8 dolphin observation stations by the contractors for continuous
monitoring of the DEZ by all contractors for DCM works and seawall construction
that were similar to the previous reporting period in
accordance with the DEZ Plan. Trainings for the proposed dolphin observers on
the implementation of MMWP and DEZ monitoring were provided by the ET prior to
the aforementioned works, with a cumulative total of
679 individuals being trained and the training records were kept by the ET.
From the contractors’ MMWP observation records, no dolphin or other marine
mammals were observed within or around the silt curtains. As for DEZ monitoring
records, no dolphin or other marine mammals were observed within the DEZs in
this reporting period, whilst there was one record of dolphin sighting outside
the DEZ of DCM works in December 2019. 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 HSFs route diversion and
speed control and construction vessel management are presented in Section 2.7
and Section 2.8
respectively.
Site inspections of the construction
works were carried out on a weekly basis to monitor the implementation of
proper environmental pollution control and mitigation measures for the Project.
Bi-weekly site inspections were also conducted by the IEC. Besides, ad-hoc
site inspections were conducted by ET and IEC if environmental problems were
identified, or subsequent to receipt of an environmental complaint, or as part
of the investigation work. These site inspections provided a direct means to
reinforce the specified environmental protection requirements and pollution
control measures in construction sites.
During site inspections, environmental
situation, status of implementation of pollution control and mitigation
measures were observed. Environmental documents and site records, including
waste disposal record, maintenance record of environmental equipment, and
relevant environmental permit and licences, were also checked on-site. Observations
were recorded in the site inspection checklist and passed to the contractor
together with the appropriate recommended mitigation measures where necessary in order to advise contractors on
environmental improvement, awareness and on-site enhancement measures.
The observations were
made with reference to the following information during the site inspections:
· The EIA and EM&A requirements;
· Relevant environmental protection
laws, guidelines, and practice notes;
· The EP conditions and other
submissions under the EP;
· Monitoring results of EM&A
programme;
· Works progress and programme;
· Proposal of individual works;
· Contract specifications on
environmental protection; and
· Previous site inspection results.
Good site practices were implemented in the
project to enhance environmental performance. Key examples are highlighted
here:
1. Contractors’ representatives were stationed in
Marine Traffic Control Centre to ensure the travelling of their vessels in the
vicinity of the Project Area comply with the requirements of MTRMP-CAV
including speed control and predefined routes.
2. Regular Toolbox training on the control of the
air exhaust from the marine vessel operation was conducted by contractor to
enhance the understanding of their frontline staffs on the regulatory
requirements of environmental related issues and provide information on
practical measures to minimise environmental impacts from the operation of
machineries.
3. Sorting facilities were set up on the existing
airport island to step up the reuse of excavated materials from 3RS and other
AAHK’s contracts, thus reducing C&D waste being transferred to public fill
facilities.
|
|
|
Marine Traffic Control Centre for Monitoring Construction Vessels |
Toolbox Training Conducted by Contractor |
Sorting Facility on the Existing Airport Island |
Besides, advices were given when
necessary to ensure the construction workforce were familiar with relevant
procedures, and to maintain good environmental performance on site. Regular
toolbox talks on environmental issues were organised for the construction
workforce by the contractors to ensure understanding and proper implementation
of environmental protection and pollution control mitigation measures.
During the reporting period, implementation of
recommended landscape and visual mitigation measures (CM1 – CM10) where
applicable was monitored weekly in accordance with the Manual and no non-conformity
was recorded. In case of non-conformity, specific recommendations will be made,
and actions will be proposed according to the Event and Action Plan. The
monitoring status is summarised in Appendix B.
A summary of implementation status
of the environmental mitigation measures for the construction phase of the
Project during the reporting period is provided in Appendix B.
In total, 1,571 ferry
movements between HKIA SkyPier and Zhuhai / Macau
were audited in the reporting period. The daily movements of all SkyPier HSFs in the reporting period ranged between 78 and
102, which fell within the maximum daily cap number of 125.
The average speeds of
all HSFs travelling through the Speed Control Zone (SCZ) ranged from 10.4 to
14.0 knots. All HSFs travelled through the SCZ with average speed within 15
knots in compliance with the Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for High
Speed Ferries of SkyPier (the SkyPier
Plan).
One ferry movement was
recorded with deviation
from the diverted route. Notice of deviation was sent
to the ferry operator and the case was investigated. The case was
due to strong tidal
wave and current. The summary of the SkyPier
Plan monitoring result is presented in Graph
1.
Insufficient AIS data
cases were received from some HSFs during the reporting period. After
investigation, it was found that AIS data for the concerned ferries were
missing due to signal interference as reported by the ferry operators after
checking the condition of the AIS transponders. Vessel captains were requested
to provide the radar track photos which indicated the vessels entered the SCZ
through the gate access points and there was no speeding in the SCZ. Ferry
operators’ explanations were accepted.
Graph 1: Summary of SkyPier
High Speed Ferries Monitoring Results
On the implementation of the updated Marine Travel Routes and Management
Plan for Construction and Associated Vessels (MTRMP-CAV), the Maritime Surveillance System (MSS) automatically recorded deviation
cases such as speeding, entering no entry zone, and not traveling through the
designated gates. ET conducted bi-weekly audit of
relevant information including AIS data, vessel tracks and other relevant
records to ensure sufficient information were provided
by the system and the contractors complied with the requirements of the
MTRMP-CAV. The contactors submitted 3-month rolling vessel plans for
construction vessel activities to AAHK in order to help maintain the number of
construction vessels to a practicable minimum. The IEC also performed audit on
the compliance of the requirements as part of the EM&A programme.
During the reporting
period, deviations including speeding within the works area, entry from
non-designated gates, and entering no-entry zones were identified. After
investigation by the contractor’s Marine Traffic Control Centre (MTCC) representatives,
all the concerned captains were reminded to comply with the requirements of the
MTRMP-CAV.
A total of 10 skipper training workshops were
held by ET during the reporting period with 94
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 5 skipper training
workshops were held with 9 captains by contractors’ Environmental Officers and
competency tests were conducted subsequently with the trained captains by ET.
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.
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.
No construction activities-related
complaint was received during the reporting period.
No
notification of summons nor prosecution was received during the reporting
period.
Cumulative statistics on valid exceedance,
non-compliance, complaints, notifications of summons and status of prosecutions
are summarised 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 Level |
0 |
0 |
|
Limit Level |
0 |
0 |
Noise |
Action Level |
0 |
0 |
|
Limit Level |
0 |
0 |
Waste |
Action Level |
0 |
0 |
|
Limit Level |
0 |
0 |
Water |
Action Level |
0 |
0 |
|
Limit Level |
0 |
0 |
CWD |
Action Level |
0 |
0 |
|
Limit Level |
0 |
0 |
Remark: Non-project
related triggers of Action or Limit Level 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 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
From 28 December 2015 to end of the reporting period |
0 |
17 |
1 |
1 |
In this quarterly period from 1 Oct 2019 to 31
December 2019, the EM&A programme has been implemented as planned,
including 96 sets of air quality measurements, 56 sets of construction noise
measurements, 40 sets of water quality measurements, 6 complete sets of vessel
line transect surveys and 9 days of land-based theodolite tracking survey
effort for CWD 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 reclamation works and land-side works.
Reclamation works included DCM works, marine filling and seawall construction.
Land-side works involved mainly foundation and substructure work for Terminal 2
expansion, modification and tunnel work for APM and BHS, and preparation work
for utilities, with activities include site establishment, site office
construction, road and drainage works, cable ducting, demolition of existing
facilities, piling, and excavation works.
Monitoring
results of construction dust, construction noise, construction waste, and CWD
did not trigger the corresponding Action and Limit Levels 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 DO, turbidity, total alkalinity, nickel and chromium obtained
during the reporting period were within the corresponding Action and Limit
Levels stipulated in the EM&A programme. Relevant investigation and
follow-up actions will be conducted according to the EM&A programme if the
corresponding Action and Limit Levels are triggered. For SS, some testing
results triggered the relevant Action or Limit Levels, and the corresponding
investigations were conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded
that the cases were not related to the Project. To conclude, the construction
activities in the reporting period did not introduce adverse impact to all
water quality sensitive receivers.
In
total, 1,571 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 in compliance with the SkyPier Plan. One ferry movement had minor deviation from the
diverted route during the reporting period. ET
investigated the deviation case and confirmed that the case was related to
strong tidal wave and current.
During the reporting period, ET
conducted bi-weekly audit of the MSS to ensure the system recorded all deviation cases
accurately and the contractors fully complied with
the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV. A total
of 5 skipper training workshops were held by contractors’ Environmental
Officers and competency tests were conducted subsequently with the trained
captains by ET.
On the implementation of MMWP,
dolphin observers were deployed by the contractors for laying of silt curtains
for marine filling works 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 or within the DEZ in this reporting
period. Nevertheless, ET was notified by the contractor that there was one
record of dolphin sighting outside the DEZ of DCM works by the contractor. Audits
of acoustic decoupling for construction vessels were also carried out by ET.
The recommended environmental mitigation
measures, as included in the EM&A programme, were effectively implemented
during the reporting period. Also, the EM&A programme implemented by the ET
has effectively monitored the construction activities and ensured the proper
implementation of mitigation measures.
[1] The Manual is available on the
Project’s dedicated website (accessible at: http://env.threerunwaysystem.com/en/index.html)