|
|
Contents
1.4 Contact information for the Project
1.5 Summary of Construction Works
1.6 Summary of EM&A Programme Requirements
2 Environmental Monitoring and Auditing
2.1.2 Summary of Monitoring Results
2.2.2 Summary of Monitoring Results
2.3.2 Summary of Monitoring Results
2.4.2 Summary of Monitoring Results
2.4.3 Marine Sediment Management
2.5 Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring
2.5.2 Summary of Monitoring Results
2.6.1 Brief Summary of the Agreed Method
2.6.2 Desk-Based Monitoring Result
2.7 Environmental Site Inspection
2.7.1 Landscape and Visual Mitigation Measures
2.7.2 Land Contamination Assessment
2.8 Audit of SkyPier High Speed Ferries
2.9 Audit of Construction and Associated Vessels
2.10 Review of the Key Assumptions Adopted in the EIA Report
3 Report on Non-compliance, Complaints, Notifications of Summons and Prosecutions
3.1 Compliance with Other Statutory Environmental Requirements
3.2 Analysis and Interpretation of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Status of Prosecutions
3.2.2 Notifications of Summons or Status of Prosecution
4 Conclusion and Recommendation
Tables
Table 1.1: Contact Information of Key Personnel
Table 1.2: Contact Information of the Project
Table 1.3: Summary of Status for All Environmental Aspects under the Updated EM&A Manual
Table 2.1: Impact Air Quality Monitoring Stations
Table 2.2: Percentage of Air Quality Monitoring Results within Action and Limit Levels
Table 2.3: General Meteorological Condition during Impact Air Quality Monitoring
Table 2.4: Impact Noise Monitoring Stations
Table 2.5: Percentage of Noise Monitoring Results within Action and Limit Levels
Table 2.6: General Meteorological Condition during Impact Noise Monitoring
Table 2.7: Monitoring Locations and Parameters for Impact Water Quality Monitoring
Table 2.8: Action and Limit Levels for General Water Quality Monitoring
Table 2.10: Percentage of Water Quality Monitoring Results within Action and Limit Levels
Table 2.11: General Weather Condition and Sea Condition during Impact Water Quality Monitoring
Table 2.12: Summary of SS Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)
Table 2.13: Action and Limit Levels for Construction Waste
Table 2.14: Construction Waste Statistics
Table 2.15: Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey Station Details
Table 2.16: Derived Values of Action Level and Limit Level for Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring
Table 2.19: Summary of Photo Identification
Table 2.20: Summary of Survey Effort and CWD Group of Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey
Table 2.21: Landscape and Visual – Construction Phase Audit Summary
Table 2.23: Summary of the Tree Status Updated in the Reporting Period
Table 2.24: Summary of the Transplanted Trees Updated in the Reporting Period
Table 2.25: Photos of the Existing Transplanted Trees Inspected in the Reporting Period
Table 3.1: Summary of Environmental Complaints
Table 3.2: Statistics for Valid Exceedances for the Environmental Monitoring
Table 3.3: Statistics for Non-compliance, Complaints, Notifications of Summons and Prosecution
Figures
Appendices
Environmental Mitigation Implementation Schedule (EMIS) for Construction Phase |
|
3RS |
Three-Runway System |
AAHK |
Airport Authority Hong Kong |
AECOM |
AECOM Asia Company Limited |
AFCD |
Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department |
AIS |
Automatic Information System |
ANI |
Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphins |
APM |
Automated People Mover |
AW |
Airport West |
BHS |
Baggage Handling System |
C&D |
Construction and Demolition |
CAP |
Contamination Assessment Plan |
CAR |
Contamination Assessment Report |
CTCC |
Construction Traffic Control Centre |
CWD |
Chinese White Dolphin |
DCM |
Deep Cement Mixing |
DEZ |
Dolphin Exclusion Zone |
DO |
Dissolved Oxygen |
EIA |
Environmental Impact Assessment |
EM&A |
Environmental Monitoring & Audit |
EMIS |
Environmental Mitigation Implementation Schedule |
EP |
Environmental Permit |
EPD |
Environmental Protection Department |
EPSS |
Emergency Power Supply Systems |
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 |
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 |
T2 |
Terminal 2 |
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 28th 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 2022 to 31 December 2022.
Key Activities in the Reporting Period
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 |
54 |
Water quality monitoring |
38 |
Vessel line-transect surveys for Chinese White Dolphin (CWD) monitoring |
6 |
Land-based theodolite tracking survey effort for CWD monitoring |
6 |
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 the 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.
In accordance with Section 6.2.1.1 of the Manual, the methodology of annual sewage flow monitoring for the existing gravity sewer from the airport discharge manhole to Tung Chung Sewage Pumping Station (TCSPS) should be prepared and submitted to EPD one year before the scheduled commencement of operation of the proposed third runway. As such, the sewage flow monitoring methodology paper was prepared, submitted and subsequently approved by EPD on 21 June 2021. The annual sewage flow monitoring has also been started since June 2021. According to the daily flow monitoring record of Sewage Pumping Station 1 (SPS-1) located at the Airport from October to December 2022 (see Appendix C), the daily average flow of 12,442 m3/day for October 2022, 13,711 m3/day for November 2022 and 12,645 m3/day for December 2022 were well below 80% of pipe full flow capacity of 53,395.2 m3/day. The sewage flows recorded from June 2021 to December 2022 are all below 80% of the pipe full flow capacity and AAHK has initiated to start planning construction of the gravity sewer from the airport discharge manhole to TCSPS according to Section 6.2.1.1 of the Manual. As the purpose of the sewage flow monitoring is to inform the timing of commencement of planning for the sewer upgrading works, and considering that AAHK has initiated to start planning its construction, the annual monitoring was completed in 2022.
Snapshots of Good Environmental Practices in the Reporting Period
|
|
|
Use of silt curtain for seawall construction |
Provision of manual wheel washing for on-site vehicle |
Provision of chemical spill drill for site personnel |
Key examples of good site practices implemented in the Project are highlighted as below:
1. Silt curtain was deployed to minimise potential water quality impact during seawall construction.
2. Manual wheel washing with high pressure water jet was provided to on-site vehicles for dust suppression purpose.
3. Chemical spill drill was provided to workers for proper chemical waste management and spill response procedures.
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 all parameters, except suspended solids (SS), 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 EM&A programme if the corresponding Action and Limit Levels are triggered. For SS, one testing result in November triggered the relevant Action Level, and an investigation was 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 are 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 |
√ |
|
A complaint regarding dust issue at Tuen Mun Public Cargo Working Area (TMPCWA) was received on 3 October 2022. |
ET requested the relevant contractor to provide information related to the complaint. During regular site inspections and ad-hoc site inspections, wheel washing facility was observed malfunctioning at Western Quay and manual wheel washing with high pressure water jet for vehicles was deployed. The contractor was reminded to repair the wheel washing facility and also to ensure the cleanliness of the deck of RoRo barge. During an off-site inspection at TMPCWA, it was observed the wheels of disembarking vehicles from 3RS RoRo barges were noted washed and the general condition of TMPCWA was dusty. Nevertheless, all 3RS contractors were reminded to ensure the wheels and body of their vehicles are washed before leaving their respective site boundaries. Hence, the case was considered closed. |
√ |
|
A complaint regarding alleged muddy water discharge from 3RS construction site was received on 16 November 2022. |
ET requested the relevant contractor to provide information related to the complaint. During a regular site inspection, localized muddy water was observed at the concerned location and was rectified by the related contractor afterwards. No observation regarding muddy water discharge was recorded during the subsequent joint site inspections and regular site inspections. All contractors were reminded to properly implement water quality mitigation measures in their works sites in accordance with the implementation schedule in the Updated EM&A Manual. Hence, the case was considered closed. |
|
√ |
|
A complaint regarding dust nuisance was received on 19 December 2022. |
The complaint was under investigation. Findings would be reported in the next Quarterly EM&A Report. |
|
Notification of any summons and status of prosecutions |
|
√ |
No notification of summons nor prosecution was 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 summary of construction works programme can be referred to the corresponding Monthly EM&A Reports. Description of relevant contracts in the reporting period was presented in Appendix A of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 81.
This is the 28th 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 2022 to 31 December 2022.
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, Environmental Compliance, Sustainability |
Lawrence Tsui |
2183 2734 |
Environmental Team (ET) (Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited) |
Environmental Team Leader |
Terence Kong |
2828 5919 |
Deputy Environmental Team Leaders |
Heidi Yu |
2828 5704 |
|
Ken Wong |
2828 5817 |
||
Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) (AECOM Asia Company Limited) |
Independent Environmental Checker |
Roy Man |
3922 9376
|
Deputy Independent Environmental Checker |
Jackel Law |
3922 9141
|
Reclamation Works:
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Contract 3206 Main Reclamation Works (ZHEC-CCCC-CDC Joint Venture) |
Project Manager |
Alan Mong |
3763 1352
|
Environmental Officer |
Zhang Bin Wang |
3763 1525 |
Airfield Works:
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Contract 3302 Eastern Vehicular Tunnel Advance Works (China Road and Bridge Corporation) |
Project Manager |
Dickey Yau |
5699 4503 |
Environmental Officer |
Dennis Ho |
5645 0563 |
|
Contract 3305 Airfield Ground Lighting System (ADB Safegate Hong Kong Limited) |
Project Manager |
Allam Al-Turk |
2944 9725 |
Environmental Officer |
Ivan Ting |
9222 9490 |
|
Contract 3306 Observation Facility Control System Supporting Interim 2RS and 3RS (Chinney Alliance Engineering Limited) |
Project Director |
Dennis Yam |
9551 9920 |
Environmental Officer |
Richard Liu |
9216 8990 |
|
Contract 3307 Fire Training Facility (Paul Y. Construction Company Limited) |
Project Manager |
Ken Tang |
9640 5397 |
Environmental Officer
|
Ferddy Leung |
5585 6746 |
|
Contract 3308 Foreign Object Debris Detection System (DAS Aviation Services Group) |
Project Manager |
Jeffrey Yau |
9873 7422 |
Contract 3310 North Runway Modification Works (China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Ltd.) |
Project Manager |
Kingsley Chiang |
9424 8437 |
Environmental Officer |
Federick Wong |
9842 2703 |
Third Runway Concourse:
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Contract 3402 New Integrated Airport Centres Enabling Works (Wing Hing Construction Co., Ltd.) |
Project Manager |
Wyman Lau |
6112 9753 |
Health Safety Environmental Manager |
Mike Leung |
6625 2550 |
|
Contract 3403 New Integrated Airport Centres Building and Civil Works (Sun Fook Kong Construction Limited) |
Project Manager |
Alice Leung |
9220 3162 |
Environmental Officer |
Ray Cheung |
9785 1566 |
|
Contract 3404 Integrated Airport Control System (Shun Hing Systems Integration Co., Ltd.) |
Project Manager |
Andy Ng |
9102 2739 |
Safety Officer |
Keith Chau |
9620 7515 |
|
Contract 3405 Third Runway Concourse Foundation and Substructure Works (China Road and Bridge Corporation – Bachy Soletanche Group Limited – LT Sambo Co., Ltd. Joint Venture) |
Project Manager |
Francis Choi |
9423 3469 |
Environmental Officer |
Jacky Lai |
9028 8975 |
|
Contract 3408 Third Runway Concourse and Apron Works (Beijing Urban Construction Group Company Limited and Chevalier (Construction) Company Limited Joint Venture) |
Assistant Project Manager |
Qian Zhang |
5377 7976 |
Environmental Officer |
Malcolm Leung |
7073 7559 |
Terminal 2 (T2) Expansion:
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Contract 3508 Terminal 2 Expansion Works (Gammon Engineering & Construction Company Limited) |
Project Director |
Richard Ellis |
6201 5637 |
Environmental Officer |
Fanny Law |
6184 4650 |
Automated People Mover (APM) and Baggage Handling System (BHS):
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Contract 3601 New Automated People Mover System (TRC Line) (CRRC Puzhen Bombardier Transportation Systems Limited and CRRC Nanjing Puzhen Co., Ltd. Joint Venture) |
Project Manager |
Hongdan Wei |
158 6180 9450 |
Environmental Officer
|
H Y Yue
|
9185 8186 |
|
Contract 3602 Existing APM System Modification Works (Niigata Transys Co., Ltd.) |
Project Manager |
Kunihiro Tatecho |
9755 0351 |
Environmental Officer |
Y M Tong |
5316 9801 |
|
Contract 3603 3RS Baggage Handling System (VISH Consortium) |
Project Manager |
K C Ho |
9272 9626 |
Environmental Officer |
Richard Ng |
9802 9577 |
Construction Support (Facilities):
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Contract 3721 Construction Support Infrastructure Works (China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Ltd.) |
Senior Project Manager |
Thomas Lui |
9011 5340 |
Environmental Officer |
John Mak |
6273 8703 |
|
Contract 3723 Eastern Support Area – Construction Support Facilities (Tapbo Construction Company Limited and Konwo Modular House Ltd. Joint Venture.) |
Deputy Project Director |
Philip Kong |
9337 8700 |
Environmental Officer |
Eddie Suen
|
6338 8862 |
|
Contract 3728 Minor Site Works (Shun Yuen Construction Company Limited) |
Contract Manager |
C K Liu |
9194 8739 |
Environmental Officer |
Dan Leung |
6856 5899 |
|
Contract 3733 Emergency Repair Service (Wing Hing Construction Co., Ltd.)
|
Project Manager |
Michael Kan |
9206 0550 |
SHE Manager |
Mike Leung |
6625 2550 |
Airport Support Infrastructure:
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Contract 3801 APM and BHS Tunnels on Existing Airport Island (China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Ltd.) |
Project Manager |
Kingsley Chiang |
9424 8437 |
Environmental Officer |
Eunice Kwok |
9243 1331 |
|
Contract 3802 APM and BHS Tunnels and Related Works (Gammon Construction Limited) |
Project Director |
John Adams |
6111 6989 |
Environmental Officer |
Phoebe Ng |
9869 1105 |
|
Contract 3804 East and Landside Fire Stations (Beijing Urban Construction Group Construction Limited - Beijing Urban Construction International Construction Limited - Kin Shing (Leung's) General Contractors Ltd Joint Venture) |
Project Manager |
Mr. Zhang Xianda |
4661 6818 |
Environmental Officer |
Ms. Kimberly Wong |
5542 1669
|
Construction Support (Services / Licences):
Party |
Position |
Name |
Telephone |
Contract 3901A Concrete Batching Facility (K. Wah Concrete Company Limited) |
Project Manager |
Benedict Wong |
9553 2806 |
Environmental Officer |
C P Fung |
9874 2872 |
|
Contract 3901B Concrete Batching Facility (Gammon Construction Limited) |
General Manager |
Gabriel Chan |
2435 3260 |
Environmental Officer |
Rex Wong |
2695 6319 |
|
Contract 3913 Asphalt Batching Plant (SPR Joint Venture) |
Project Manager |
Xie Yi Sheng |
6580 6005 |
Environmental Officer |
Kenneth Chan |
9300 2182 |
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-based works. Works in the reclamation areas included seawall construction, filling and land-based ground improvement works, together with runway, taxiways, concourse and associated works. Land-based works on existing airport island involved mainly airfield works, Terminal 2 expansion works, modification and tunnel work for APM and BHS systems, and preparation work for utilities, with activities include road and drainage works, cable ducting, demolition, 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 for reclamation works. General impact water quality monitoring for water jetting works was completed on 23 May 2017. |
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. |
Due to the completion of all marine-based DCM works within April 2022, regular DCM monitoring was ceased at all monitoring stations starting from 28 April 2022 and would be resumed if there are marine-based DCM works in the coming future. |
Sewerage and Sewage Treatment |
||
Methodology for carrying out annual sewage flow monitoring for concerned gravity sewer |
Methodology to be prepared and submitted to EPD one year before the scheduled commencement of operation of the proposed third runway. |
The proposed methodology of the annual sewage flow monitoring was approved by EPD. The annual flow monitoring was started from June 2021 and completed in 2022. |
Details of the routine H2S monitoring system for the sewerage system of 3RS |
Details to be prepared and submitted to EPD at least one year before commencement of the operation of 3RS. |
The details of the routine H2S monitoring system will be prepared and submitted to EPD at least one year before commencement of operation of 3RS. |
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 under EP condition 2.20. |
Contamination Assessment Report (CAR) for Golf Course |
CAR to be submitted for golf course |
The CAR for Golf Course was submitted and accepted by EPD. |
CAR for Terminal 2 Emergency Power Supply System |
CAR to be submitted for Terminal 2 Emergency Power Supply Systems
|
The CARs for Terminal 2 Emergency Power Supply Systems were submitted and accepted by 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 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 and approved by 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 |
Silt Curtain Deployment Plan implementation measures |
Monitor and check |
On-going |
Spill Response Plan 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:
● Fifty-two 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 2022 |
100% |
100% |
Nov 2022 |
100% |
100% |
Dec 2022 |
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 2022 |
Sunny |
South to Southwest |
Oct 2022 |
Sunny |
Northeast to Southeast |
Nov 2022 |
Sunny to Drizzle |
Northwest to Northeast |
Dec 2022 |
Sunny to Cloudy |
Northwest to Northeast |
No dust emission source was observed at the monitoring stations during the monitoring sessions. As the sensitive receivers were far away from the construction activities, with the implementation of dust control measures, there was no adverse impact at the sensitive receivers attributable to the works of the Project.
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 2022 |
100% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
|
Nov 2022 |
100% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
|
Dec 2022 |
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.
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 2022 |
Sunny |
Oct 2022 |
Sunny |
Nov 2022 |
Sunny to Drizzle |
Dec 2022 |
Sunny to Cloudy |
Major sources of noise dominating the monitoring stations observed during the construction noise impact monitoring were traffic noise near NM1A, school activities near NM4, and aircraft noise near NM6. As the sensitive receivers were far away from the construction activities, with the implementation of noise control measures, there was no adverse impact at the sensitive receivers attributable to the works of the Project.
During the reporting period, water quality monitoring was conducted three days per week, at mid-flood and mid-ebb tides. Water quality monitoring was undertaken at a total of 14 water quality monitoring stations, comprising 6 impact (IM) stations, 5 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
Monitoring Station |
Description |
Coordinates |
Parameters |
|
|
|
Easting |
Northing |
|
C1 |
Control Station |
804247 |
815620 |
General Parameters DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS
|
C2 |
Control Station |
806945 |
825682 |
|
C3(2) |
Control Station |
817803 |
822109 |
|
IM1(4) |
Impact Station |
806458 |
818351 |
|
IM2(4) |
Impact Station |
806236 |
819183 |
|
IM7(4) |
Impact Station |
806835 |
821349 |
|
IM10(4) |
Impact Station |
809838 |
822240 |
|
IM11(4) |
Impact Station |
810545 |
821501 |
|
IM12(4) |
Impact Station |
811519 |
821162 |
|
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 |
Planned marine park / hard corals at The Brothers / Tai Mo To |
814166 |
821463 |
General Parameters DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS
|
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 |
|
SR8(3) |
Seawater Intake for cooling at Hong Kong International Airport (East) |
811623 |
820390 |
Notes:
(1) With the operation of HKBCF, water quality monitoring at SR1A station was commenced on 25 October 2018. To better reflect the water quality in the immediate vicinity of the intake, the monitoring location of SR1A has been shifted closer to the intake starting from 5 January 2019.
(2) 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.
(3) The monitoring location for SR8 is subject to further changes due to silt curtain arrangements and the progressive relocation of this seawater intake.
(4) With the seawall completion and removal of enhanced open sea silt curtains, these monitoring stations were relocated back to their original locations. For IM2, there was minor adjustment of the monitoring location.
The Action and Limit Levels for general water quality 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 are presented in Table 2.9.
Table 2.8: Action and Limit Levels for General Water Quality Monitoring
Parameters |
Action Level (AL) |
Limit Level (LL) |
|||
Action and Limit Levels for general water quality monitoring (excluding SR1A & SR8) |
|||||
General Water Quality Monitoring |
DO in mg/l (Surface, Middle & Bottom) |
Surface and Middle 4.5mg/l |
Surface and Middle 4.1mg/l |
||
Bottom 3.4mg/l |
Bottom 2.7mg/l |
||||
Suspended Solids (SS) in mg/l |
23 |
or 120% of upstream control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher |
37 |
or 130% of upstream control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher |
|
Turbidity in NTU |
22.6 |
36.1 |
|||
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.
Table 2.9: The Control and Impact Stations during Flood Tide and Ebb Tide for General Water Quality Monitoring
Control Station |
Impact Stations |
Flood Tide |
|
C1 |
IM1, IM2, IM7, SR3 |
SR21 |
IM7, IM10, IM11, IM12, SR1A, SR3, SR4A, SR8 |
Ebb Tide |
|
C1 |
SR4A |
C2 |
IM1, IM2, IM7, IM10, IM11, IM12, SR1A, SR2, SR3, SR8 |
Notes:
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 |
||||
DO (Surface and Middle) |
DO (Bottom) |
SS |
Turbidity |
|
Oct 2022 |
100% (204/204) |
100% (204/204) |
100% (252/252) |
100% (204/204) |
Nov 2022 |
100% (204/204) |
100% (204/204) |
99.6% (251/252) |
100% (204/204) |
Dec 2022 |
100% (238/238) |
100% (238/238) |
100% (294/294) |
100% (238/238) |
Overall |
100% |
100% |
99.9% |
100% |
(1) 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.
(2) The number in the bracket under the percentage represents the total number of depth-averaged results complying with their corresponding Action and Limit Levels over 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 2022 |
Sunny to Rainy |
Calm to Rough |
Oct 2022 |
Sunny to Rainy |
Calm to Rough |
Nov 2022 |
Sunny to Rainy |
Calm to Rough |
Dec 2022 |
Sunny to Rainy |
Calm to Rough |
The monitoring results for all parameters, except suspended solid (SS), obtained during the reporting period were within their corresponding Action and Limit Levels stipulated in the EM&A programme. The detailed monitoring results are presented in Appendix C. 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, one testing result in November triggered the corresponding Action Level during the reporting period, and an investigation was conducted accordingly. Summaries of results triggering Action Levels for SS are presented in Table 2.12.
Details of the investigation findings were presented in Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 83, which concluded that the result triggering the Action Levels was not related to the Project.
Table 2.12: Summary of SS Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)
IM1 |
IM2 |
IM7 |
IM10 |
IM11 |
IM12 |
SR1A |
SR3 |
SR4A |
SR8 |
|
24/11/2022 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No. of result triggering Action or Limit Level |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Note: The monitoring results compiled with their corresponding Action or Limit Levels are presented in Appendix C.
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 |
|
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 |
During the reporting period, it is noted that all the monitoring results were within their corresponding Action and Limit Levels except one testing result in November triggered the corresponding Action Levels, and an investigation was conducted accordingly. Based on the findings presented in Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 83, the case that triggered the corresponding Action Level was 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 trigger was 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 filling, seawall construction and ground improvement works 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 2.13.
Table 2.13: 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. Waste management audits were carried out by ET according to the requirement of the Waste Management Plan, Updated EM&A Manual and the implementation schedule of the waste management mitigation measures in Appendix B.
Based on updated contractors’ information, summary of construction waste generated in the reporting period is presented in Table 2.14. ET and IEC have carried out site audits regularly and reviewed the trip ticket system.
Table 2.14: Construction Waste Statistics
|
C&D(1) Material Stockpiled for Reuse or Recycle (m3) |
C&D Material Reused in the Project (m3) |
C&D Material Reused in other Projects (m3) |
C&D Material Transferred to Public Fill(2) (m3) |
Chemical Waste (kg) |
Chemical Waste (l) |
General Refuse (tonne) |
Oct 2022 |
1,358 |
3,122 |
6,524 |
6,009 |
1,100 |
2,800 |
2,108 |
Nov 2022 |
1,364 |
1,667 |
745 |
5,515 |
210 |
0 |
2,493 |
Dec 2022 |
1,687 |
0 |
676 |
6,799 |
800 |
2,000 |
2,503 |
Total |
4,409 |
4,789 |
7,945 |
18,323 |
2,110 |
4,800 |
7,104 |
Notes: 1. C&D refers to Construction and Demolition. 2. C&D materials not suitable for reuse on-site, including asphalt waste and sediment slurry, were transferred to public fill during the reporting period. |
There were no complaints, non-compliance of the WMP, contract-specific WMPs, statutory and contractual requirements that triggered Action and Limit Levels in this reporting period.
Marine sediment is managed according to the EIA Report, Updated EM&A Manual and Waste Management Plan and the proposal of Further Development on Treatment Level / Details and the Reuse Mode for Marine Sediment (hereinafter referred to as “Further Development Proposal”) of the Project. The sampling process, storage conditions of the excavated marine sediment, treatment process, final backfilling location as well as associated records were inspected and checked by ET and verified by IEC to ensure they were in compliance with the requirements as stipulated in the Waste Management Plan and Further Development Proposal.
Sampling works and backfilling works for marine sediment generated from the reclaimed land area were conducted during the reporting period. The details of the marine sediment sampling, treatment and backfilling can be referred to Annual EM&A Reports No.6.
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. 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 are shown in Figure 2.3, whilst the land-based theodolite tracking survey stations are described in Table 2.15 and depicted in Figure 2.4. The location of the PAM device is shown in Figure 2.10.
Table 2.15: 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 2.16.
Table 2.16: 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 2022 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 1,353 km of survey effort was collected from these surveys, with around 89.0% 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 2022, there were a total of 32 sightings of CWD, with 90 dolphins sighted (Table 2.17). Amongst these sightings, 30 sightings with 81 dolphins were recorded during on-effort searches under favourable weather condition.
When breaking down the sightings by survey areas, two sightings with a total of 3 dolphins, 25 sightings with a total of 74 dolphins and five sightings with a total of 13 dolphins were recorded in NWL, WL and SWL respectively during the current reporting period. No CWD was sighted in AW transects or NEL survey area.
Compared with the previous quarter (i.e. July to September 2022), both the total number of CWD sightings and total number of the dolphins decreased observably by 45% and 52% respectively. These results were attributed by a notable decline of the dolphin sightings in SWL survey area and an observable decrease of the number of dolphins in WL survey area.
Compared with the same quarter of last year (i.e. October to December 2021), both the total number of sightings and the total number of dolphins and also the breakdown of different survey areas all remain similar.
Table 2.17 below shows the comparison of the numbers of sightings and dolphins amongst the current reporting period, last quarter, and the same quarter of last year.
Table 2.17: 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 2021 |
July to September 2022 |
October to December 2022 |
NEL |
0 (0) |
0 (0) |
0 (0) |
NWL |
1 (1) |
2 (3) |
2 (3) |
AW |
0 (0) |
0 (0) |
0 (0) |
WL |
22 (70) |
24 (101) |
25 (74) |
SWL |
6 (20) |
32 (82) |
5 (13) |
Total |
29 (91) |
58 (186) |
32 (90) |
Note: Values in ( ) represent number of dolphins
The distribution of CWD sightings recorded from October to December 2022 is illustrated in Figure 2.5. In NWL, two CWD sightings were recorded to the west of Lung Kwu Chau. In WL, CWD sightings were mostly evenly scattered over the waters from Yi O to Fan Lau. There were also few CWD sightings recorded at waters off Tai O and north of Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge. In SWL, CWD sightings were scattered at the western part of the survey area. No CWD sightings were recorded in NEL survey area during the reporting period. Details of the sighting data are presented in Appendix C.
Figure 2.5: Sightings Distribution of Chinese White Dolphins from October to December 2022
Remarks: (1) Please note that there are 32 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. (2) Marine park excludes land area and the landward boundary generally follows the high water mark along the coastline.
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 2022 are summarised in Table 2.18.
In this reporting period, both the monthly STG and ANI decreased from October to December 2022 (STG: from 3.46 to 1.47; ANI: from 10.66 to 4.65), causing a similar course in running quarterly STG and ANI. No Action Level for CWD monitoring was triggered during the reporting period.
Compared with the previous reporting period (i.e. July to September 2022), it is observed that the decrease trends in both monthly and quarterly encounter rates start from July and continued in this reporting quarter. While comparing with the same quarter of last year (i.e. October to December 2021), both the running quarterly STGs and ANIs were in similar levels. Encounter rates for these periods are summarised in Table 2.18 and graphical presentation is provided in Appendix C.
Table 2.18: 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 21 |
Nov 21 |
Dec 21 |
Jul 22 |
Aug 22 |
Sep 22 |
Oct 22 |
Nov 22 |
Dec 22 |
||
Monthly STG |
3.71 |
2.16 |
1.59 |
7.24 |
3.59 |
2.32 |
3.46 |
2.68 |
1.47 |
||
Monthly ANI |
11.42 |
8.63 |
4.51 |
20.31 |
14.82 |
7.42 |
10.66 |
5.59 |
4.65 |
||
Running Quarterly STG |
2.77 |
3.15 |
2.46 |
5.30 |
4.87 |
4.37 |
3.11 |
2.77 |
2.49 |
||
Running Quarterly ANI |
9.05 |
10.84 |
8.11 |
18.29 |
17.07 |
14.18 |
11.03 |
7.67 |
6.73 |
||
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 Nos. 82, 83, and 84.
Group Size
Between October and December 2022, the group size of CWD sightings ranged from one to seven dolphins. The average group size of CWD was 2.81 dolphins per group, which is smaller than that of the last quarter (3.21 dolphins per group). The average group size of CWD in this reporting quarter is also smaller than that of the same quarter of last year (3.14 dolphins per group).
In this reporting quarter, more than half of the CWD sightings are with small group size (i.e. 1-2 dolphins). There were no CWD sightings with large group size (i.e. 10 or more dolphins) recorded in this reporting period.
The distribution of small-sized dolphin groups in WL extended a bit in both northward and southward directions when comparing with that of medium-sized dolphin groups which is more confined to Tai O in north and Fan Lau in South respectively. In SWL, the medium groups appeared to distribute closer to the Soko Islands. In NWL, only small-sized dolphin groups were observed. 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
Remarks: (1) Please note that there are 32 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. (2) Marine park excludes land area and the landward boundary generally follows the high water mark along the coastline.
Activities and Association with Fishing Boats
From October to December 2022, 10 sightings of CWD were recorded with foraging activities. Amongst them, two sightings were observed associated with operating gillnetter in SWL survey area.
The number of sightings with foraging recorded in the current reporting period is smaller than that in the previous reporting period (i.e. 15 sightings involved foraging activities between July and September 2022). The number of CWD sightings with foraging activities in this reporting period is also smaller than that in the same quarter of last year (i.e. 14 sightings between October and December 2021).
The sighting locations of CWDs engaged in different behaviours during the current reporting period are illustrated in Figure 2.7.
Figure 2.7: Sighting Locations of Chinese White Dolphins Engaged in Different Behaviours
Remarks: Marine park excludes land area and the landward boundary generally follows the high water mark along the coastline.
Mother-calf Pairs
From October to December 2022, four sightings of CWD were recorded with the presence of mother-and-unspotted juvenile pairs, which is lower than that recorded in the previous reporting quarter (i.e. eight sightings between July and September 2022). The number of CWD sightings with the presence of mother-calf pairs is also lower than that recorded in the same quarter of last year (i.e. six sightings between October and December 2021). These four sightings with the presence of mother-calf pairs recorded during the current reporting period were all recorded in WL survey area.
The locations of CWD sightings with the presence of mother-calf pairs are shown in Figure 2.8.
Figure 2.8: Sighting Locations of Mother-calf
Pairs
Remarks: (1) Please note that there are four circles on the
map indicating the sighting locations of Mother-Calf pairs. (2) Marine park
excludes land area and the landward boundary generally follows the high water
mark along the coastline.
Photo Identification
Between October and December 2022, a total number of 35 different CWD individuals were identified altogether for 50 times. Re-sighting information of CWD individuals provides an initial idea of their range use and apparent connection between different areas of Lantau waters. Amongst these 35 different CWD individuals, 12 animals (i.e. SLMM002, SLMM014, SLMM023, SLMM031, SLMM035, SLMM037, SLMM044, SLMM049, SLMM058, WLMM001, WLMM029 and WLMM152) were sighted for more than once.
Three individuals including SLMM014, SLMM023 and WLMM029 were re-sighted in different survey areas during this reporting period. The most frequently re-sighted individuals in this reporting quarter are SLMM023, SLMM035, and WLMM029, while all of them were successfully identified for three times each. Both the number of CWD individuals re-sighted more than once and the number of CWD individuals showing cross-area movement were lower than those of the last reporting period from July to September 2022.
A summary of photo identification works is presented in Table 2.19. Representative photos of the 35 identified individuals and figures depicting the sighting locations of the aforementioned three individuals re-sighted in different survey areas in this reporting period are presented in Appendix C.
Table 2.19: Summary of Photo Identification
Individual ID |
Date of sighting |
Sighting Group No. |
Area |
|
Individual
|
Date of sighting |
Sighting Group No. |
Area |
NLMM023 |
11-Nov-22 |
1 |
NWL |
|
SLMM059 |
17-Nov-22 |
2 |
WL |
NLMM027 |
17-Nov-22 |
1 |
WL |
|
SLMM060 |
9-Nov-22 |
4 |
WL |
SLMM002 |
3-Oct-22 |
8 |
WL |
|
SLMM074 |
17-Nov-22 |
1 |
WL |
|
20-Oct-22 |
3 |
WL |
|
WLMM001 |
20-Oct-22 |
2 |
WL |
SLMM007 |
3-Oct-22 |
5 |
WL |
|
|
21-Dec-22 |
2 |
WL |
SLMM014 |
27-Oct-22 |
3 |
SWL |
|
WLMM005 |
29-Dec-22 |
1 |
WL |
|
17-Nov-22 |
6 |
WL |
|
WLMM007 |
3-Oct-22 |
6 |
WL |
SLMM023 |
3-Oct-22 |
7 |
WL |
|
WLMM018 |
3-Oct-22 |
6 |
WL |
|
17-Nov-22 |
2 |
WL |
|
WLMM028 |
21-Dec-22 |
2 |
WL |
|
28-Dec-22 |
2 |
SWL |
|
WLMM029 |
17-Nov-22 |
1 |
WL |
SLMM025 |
3-Oct-22 |
6 |
WL |
|
|
28-Dec-22 |
2 |
SWL |
SLMM031 |
18-Nov-22 |
4 |
SWL |
|
|
|
3 |
SWL |
|
28-Dec-22 |
2 |
SWL |
|
WLMM049 |
21-Dec-22 |
2 |
WL |
SLMM035 |
18-Nov-22 |
4 |
SWL |
|
WLMM052 |
3-Oct-22 |
4 |
WL |
|
28-Dec-22 |
2 |
SWL |
|
WLMM063 |
21-Dec-22 |
2 |
WL |
|
|
3 |
SWL |
|
WLMM071 |
20-Oct-22 |
1 |
WL |
SLMM037 |
20-Oct-22 |
3 |
WL |
|
WLMM109 |
3-Oct-22 |
7 |
WL |
|
17-Nov-22 |
6 |
WL |
|
WLMM114 |
20-Oct-22 |
2 |
WL |
SLMM044 |
21-Dec-22 |
2 |
WL |
|
WLMM118 |
3-Oct-22 |
6 |
WL |
|
29-Dec-22 |
1 |
WL |
|
WLMM131 |
3-Oct-22 |
8 |
WL |
SLMM049 |
17-Nov-22 |
4 |
WL |
|
WLMM152 |
3-Oct-22 |
5 |
WL |
|
|
5 |
WL |
|
|
|
6 |
WL |
SLMM052 |
3-Oct-22 |
6 |
WL |
|
WLMM163 |
29-Dec-22 |
1 |
WL |
SLMM058 |
3-Oct-22 |
3 |
WL |
|
WLMM168 |
20-Oct-22 |
1 |
WL |
|
17-Nov-22 |
1 |
WL |
|
WLMM176 |
3-Oct-22 |
4 |
WL |
Survey Effort
Between October and December 2022, a total of six days of land-based theodolite tracking survey effort were completed, including three days on Lung Kwu Chau and three days on Sha Chau. During the reporting quarter, four CWD groups were tracked from the Lung Kwu Chau station while no CWD group was tracked from the Sha Chau station, with an overall 0.11 CWD group sighted per survey hour.
Information on survey effort and CWD groups sighted during land-based theodolite tracking surveys are presented in Table 2.20. 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 2022 are shown in Figure 2.9.
Table 2.20: 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 2022 |
||||
Lung Kwu Chau |
1 |
06:00 |
0 |
0 |
Sha Chau |
1 |
06:00 |
0 |
0 |
TOTAL |
2 |
12:00 |
0 |
0 |
November 2022 |
||||
Lung Kwu Chau |
1 |
06:00 |
4 |
0.67 |
Sha Chau |
1 |
06:00 |
0 |
0 |
TOTAL |
2 |
12:00 |
4 |
0.33 |
December 2022 |
||||
Lung Kwu Chau |
1 |
06:00 |
0 |
0 |
Sha Chau |
1 |
06:00 |
0 |
0 |
TOTAL |
2 |
12:00 |
0 |
0 |
OVERALL |
6 |
36:00 |
4 |
0.11 |
Figure 2.9: Plots of First Sightings of All CWD Groups from Land-based Stations
PAM device has been deployed and positioned to the south of Sha Chau island within the SCLKCMP (Figure 2.10) to supplement the detection of CWD presence in the south Sha Chau area that are not recorded visually by the land-based theodolite tracking survey and to coincide the theodolite data when there is sighting from the land-based station at Sha Chau. Both C-POD and F-POD are considered as effective PAM devices in detecting CWD occurrence, and F-POD was the main PAM device deployed where feasible. In this reporting period, the F-POD was retrieved on 20 October 2022 and 30 December 2022 for data collection and subsequently re-deployed. 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.
Audits of acoustic decoupling for construction vessels were carried out during weekly site inspection and summarised in Section 2.7. Summary of audits of SkyPier HSFs route diversion and speed control and construction vessel management are presented in Section 2.8 and Section 2.9 respectively.
In accordance with the approved EIA Report (AEIAR-185/2014) for Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System (3RS), the gravity sewer from the airport discharge manhole to TCSPS was recommended to be upgraded by AAHK to cater for the ultimate design sewage flow from the expanded airport. It was recommended in section 6.2.1.1 of the Manual that AAHK should conduct annual monitoring for the sewage flow build-up of the gravity sewer from the airport discharge manhole to TCSPS one year before the scheduled commencement of operation of the proposed third runway. The annual monitoring results shall inform the timing of commencement of the planning of the sewer upgrading works. The sewage flow monitoring methodology paper (the Paper) was prepared, submitted and subsequently approved by EPD on 21 June 2021.
With reference to the Paper, the existing sewer to be monitored is the section between FMH7042035 (reference point A) and FMH7043286 (reference point C). A schematic diagram of the sewage system between reference point A and C is presented in Figure 2.11. The locations of these reference points are presented in Figure 2.12. To determine if the threshold of 80% of the design capacity is being reached, an approach using the Colebrook-White equation was used.
Two pipe segments between reference points A and C were identified with the lowest flow capacity and therefore selected as the benchmark for comparing the actual sewage flow of the sewers for the flow monitoring:
● Segment 1: for sewage pipelines serving the airport – the critical segment is the 1050mm sewer between manholes FMH7042032 and FMH7042033, where the 80% threshold of full flow capacity is 53,395.2 m3/day; and
● Segment 2: for the sewage pipelines serving the airport and catchment L4 – the critical segment is the 1050mm sewer between manholes FMH7043288 and FMH7043287, where the of 80% threshold of full flow capacity is 57,628.8 m3/day.
According to the Paper, segment 1 would reach its 80% full flow capacity before segment 2. Hence, segment 1 was considered the critical segment within the section between reference points A and C, and it was agreed to conduct sewage flow monitoring for segment 1 only. With the daily flow rate of SPS-1, which collects sewage arising from the Airport, is available from AAHK, desk-based flow monitoring would be conducted by comparing the daily average flow rate of SPS-1 (i.e. Q1) against the threshold of 80% of pipe capacity of segment 1 (i.e. 53,395.2 m3/day) in accordance with the following criteria:
● If Q1 ≤ 53,395.2 m3/day, planning of sewerage upgrading works can be on hold until results of next annual monitoring; and
● If Q1 > 53,395.2 m3/day, planning of sewerage upgrading works shall be considered to start and annual monitoring shall be discontinued.
Within the monitoring period, if the daily average flow rate of SPS-1 (i.e. Q1) is higher than the threshold of 53,395.2 m3/day, planning of sewerage upgrading works shall be considered to start and the annual monitoring shall be discontinued. The above approach was agreed to be adopted as part of annual monitoring for the sewage flow increment of the concerned gravity sewer in 2021 and 2022.
To fulfil the requirements as mentioned in previous section, the annual sewage flow monitoring has been started since June 2021. According to the daily flow monitoring record of SPS-1 from October to December 2022 (see Appendix C), the daily average flow of 12,442 m3/day for October 2022, 13,711 m3/day for November 2022 and 12,645 m3/day for December 2022 were well below the above-mentioned threshold of 53,395.2 m3/day.
The sewage flows recorded from June 2021 to December 2022 are all below 80% of the pipe full flow capacity and AAHK has initiated to start planning construction of the gravity sewer from the airport discharge manhole to TCSPS according to Section 6.2.1.1 of the Manual. As the purpose of the sewage flow monitoring is to inform the timing of commencement of planning for the sewer upgrading works, and considering that AAHK has initiated to start planning its construction, the annual monitoring was completed in 2022.
Site inspections of the construction works to audit the implementation of proper environmental pollution control and mitigation measures for the Project were conducted by ET and IEC on a weekly and bi-weekly basis, respectively. Besides, ad-hoc site inspections were also 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 implemented in the Project are highlighted as below:
1. Silt curtain was deployed to minimise potential water quality impact during seawall construction.
2. Manual wheel washing with high pressure water jet was provided to on-site vehicles for dust suppression purpose.
3. Chemical spill drill was provided to workers for proper chemical waste management and spill response procedures.
|
|
|
Use of silt curtain for seawall construction |
Provision of manual wheel washing for on-site vehicle |
Provision of chemical spill drill for site personnel |
Besides, advice was 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.
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.
Implementation of applicable landscape and visual mitigation measures (reference to the environmental protection measures CM1 – CM10 in Appendix B) is monitored regularly in accordance with the Manual. The implementation status of the environmental protection measures is summarised in The cumulative total number of transplanted trees of the Project remained unchanged (i.e. 26 nos.) comparing with previous reporting quarter. Details of the summary of transplanted trees is shown in Table 2.24. Photos of the transplanted trees are presented in Table 2.25.
Table 2.21. For trees which were managed under the Project during the reporting period, relevant measures (i.e., CM1 – CM9) have been implemented by Contracts 3302, 3508 and 3801. For CM10, it has been implemented by Contract 3303 in October and November 2022 as the advanced hydroseeding works around taxiways and runways were partially completed in December 2022 and would resume in next phase. The total number of retained trees, transplanted trees and to-be-transplanted trees under the management of Project are summarized in Table 2.22.
The total number of retained trees of the Project as of December 2022 was 49. Compared to 36 retained trees reported in the previous reporting period, the change in number was due to the following reasons:
· A works area with 13 nos. of trees next to East Coast Road were handed over to Contract 3508 and the status of those trees were shifted from provisional retained trees to retained trees (+13 nos).
Table 2.23 lists the affected tree ID together with the reasons for change of retained tree status of the Project.
For the total number of provisional retained trees, it was reduced to 0 as compared to the 50 trees reported in the previous reporting period. The change in number was because those trees were either handed over to contractor, confirmed missing during the initial tree survey or outside of 3RS works area. The total number of provisional transplanted trees was also reduced from 10 to 0 as the recommendation of those trees was changed from “Transplant” to “Fell” due to conflict with works and transplanting was not recommended due to poor health condition and low amenity value.
The cumulative total number of transplanted trees of the Project remained unchanged (i.e. 26 nos.) comparing with previous reporting quarter. Details of the summary of transplanted trees is shown in Table 2.24. Photos of the transplanted trees are presented in Table 2.25.
Table 2.21: Landscape and Visual – Construction Phase Audit Summary
Landscape and Visual Mitigation Measures during Construction Implementation Status |
Implementation Status |
Relevant Contract(s) in the Reporting Period |
CM1- The construction area and contractor’s temporary works areas shall be minimised to avoid impacts on adjacent landscape. |
The implementation of mitigation measures were checked by ET during weekly site inspection and clarified by the Contractors during the monthly Environmental Management Meetings. Implementation of the measures CM5, CM6 and CM7 by Contractors was observed. |
All works contracts |
CM2 – Reduction of construction period to practical minimum. |
||
CM3 – Phasing of the construction stage to reduce visual impacts during the construction phase. |
||
CM4 – Construction traffic (land and sea) including construction plants, construction vessels and barges shall be kept to a practical minimum. |
||
CM5 – Erection of decorative mesh screens or construction hoardings around works areas in visually unobtrusive colours. |
||
CM6 – Avoidance of excessive height and bulk of site buildings and structures |
||
CM7 – Control of night-time lighting by hooding all lights and through minimisation of night working periods |
||
CM8 – All existing trees shall be carefully protected during construction. Detailed Tree Protection Specification shall be provided in the Contract Specification. Under this specification, the Contractor shall be required to submit, for approval, a detailed working method statement for the protection of trees prior to undertaking any works adjacent to all retained trees, including trees in contractor’s works areas |
Tree Protection Specifications have been provided in the relevant Contract Specifications respectively for implementation by the Contractors under the Project.
The Contractors’ performance on the implementation of the trees maintenance and protection measures were observed and checked by the ET weekly during construction period. |
3302, 3508, 3801
|
CM9 – Trees unavoidably affected by the works shall be transplanted where practical. A detailed Tree Transplanting Specification shall be provided in the Contract Specification, if applicable. Sufficient time for necessary tree root and crown preparation periods shall be allowed in the project programme |
Tree Transplanting Specifications have been provided in the relevant Contract Specifications respectively for implementation by the Contractors under the Project where trees will unavoidably be affected by the construction works.
The Contractors were required to submit Method Statements for tree transplanting prior to the transplanting works. Tree inspections were conducted by ET to check the tree transplanting works implemented by the Contractors on site.
The Contractors’ performance on the implementation of trees maintenance and protection measures on transplanted trees were observed and checked by the ET bi-monthly during the 12-month establishment period after the completion of each batch of transplanting works. Long term management of the transplanted trees were currently monitored by ET annually. |
3508, 3801 |
CM 10 – Land formation works shall be followed with advanced hydroseeding around taxiways and runways as soon as practical |
As of November 2022, the Contractor’s performance on the implementation of advanced hydroseeding works was observed and checked by the ET during weekly site inspection. |
3303 |
Table 2.22: Summary of the Number of Retained, Transplanted and To-be-transplanted Trees in the Reporting Period
Existing |
|
|
|
|
Contract |
Retained (nos.) |
Transplanted (nos.) |
To-be-transplanted (nos.) |
|
Establishment Period |
Maintenance Period |
|||
3302 |
9 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
3503 |
0 |
0 |
9 |
0 |
3508 |
37 |
0 |
12 |
0 |
3602 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
3801 |
3 |
0 |
5 (1) |
0 |
Grand Total |
49 |
26 |
0 |
Notes:
(1) Three transplanted trees (CT1194, CT1794 and CT1795) were subsequently fell after transplantation. Please refer to Table 2.24 for details.
Table 2.23: Summary of the Tree Status Updated in the Reporting Period
Tree ID(s) |
Contract
|
Previous Status (September 2022) |
Current Status (December 2022) |
Remarks |
Impact to Retained Tree Number |
T1381A, T1382A, T1384A, T1385A, T1386A, T1387A, T1388A, T1389A, T1390A, T1391A, T1392A, A3, A4 |
3508 |
Provisional Retain |
Retain |
A works area with 13 nos. of trees next to East Coast Road were handed over to Contract 3508 and the status of those trees were shifted from provisional retained trees to retained trees. |
+ 13 nos. |
Table 2.24: Summary of the Transplanted Trees Updated in the Reporting Period
Tree ID |
Transplant Date |
Management Stage |
Management Agency |
Remarks |
CT276 |
3 May 2018 |
Long Term Management period Jun 2019 – May 2028 |
Southern Landside Petrol Filling Station |
Next inspection will be conducted in February 2023. Photos of the last inspection in February 2022 can be referred to Table 7.7 of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No.74. |
CT1253 |
4 May 2018 |
Long Term Management period Jun 2019 – May 2028 |
Southern Landside Petrol Filling Station |
|
T835 |
22 Jan 2020 |
Long Term Management period Feb 2021 – Jan 2030 |
AAHK
|
Next inspection will be conducted in February 2023. Photos of the last inspection in February 2022 can be referred to Table 7.7 of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No.74. |
T836 |
13 Dec 2019 |
Long Term Management period Feb 2021 – Jan 2030 |
AAHK |
|
T838 |
22 Jan 2020 |
Long Term Management period Feb 2021 – Jan 2030 |
AAHK |
|
T812 |
21 Dec 2020 |
Long Term Management period Jan 2022 – Dec 2031 |
AAHK
|
Next inspection will be conducted in December 2023. Photos of the last inspection in December 2022 were shown in Table 2.25. |
T814 |
20 Dec 2020 |
Long Term Management period Jan 2022 – Dec 2031 |
AAHK |
|
T815 |
15 Dec 2020 |
Long Term Management period Jan 2022 – Dec 2031 |
AAHK |
|
T829 |
18 Dec 2020 |
Long Term Management period Jan 2022 – Dec 2031 |
AAHK |
|
T830 |
14 Dec 2020 |
Long Term Management period Jan 2022 – Dec 2031 |
AAHK |
|
T831 |
19 Dec 2020 |
Long Term Management period Jan 2022 – Dec 2031 |
AAHK |
|
T1493 |
6 Jul 2021 |
Long Term Management period Aug 2022 – Jul 2031 |
Contract 3508
|
Next inspection will be conducted in July 2023. Photos of the last inspection in July 2022 can be referred to Table 7.7 of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No.79. |
T1494 |
6 Jul 2021 |
Long Term Management period Aug 2022 – Jul 2031 |
Contract 3508
|
|
T1495 |
10 Jul 2021 |
Long Term Management period Aug 2022 – Jul 2031 |
Contract 3508
|
|
T1496 |
5 Jul 2021 |
Long Term Management period Aug 2022 – Jul 2031 |
Contract 3508
|
|
T1497 |
5 Jul 2021 |
Long Term Management period Aug 2022 – Jul 2031
|
Contract 3508
|
|
T1498 |
29 Jun 2021 |
Long Term Management period Aug 2022 – Jul 2031 |
Contract 3508
|
|
T1499 |
29 Jun 2021 |
Long Term Management period Aug 2022 – Jul 2031 |
Contract 3508 |
|
T1500 |
30 Jun 2021 |
Long Term Management period Aug 2022 – Jul 2031 |
Contract 3508 |
|
T1501 |
30 Jun 2021 |
Long Term Management period Aug 2022 – Jul 2031 |
Contract 3508 |
|
T1502 |
5 Jul 2021 |
Long Term Management period Aug 2022 – Jul 2031 |
Contract 3508
|
|
T1503 |
6 Jul 2021 |
Long Term Management period Aug 2022 – Jul 2031 |
Contract 3508
|
|
T1504 |
24 Jun 2021 |
Long Term Management period Aug 2022 – Jul 2031 |
Contract 3508 |
|
CT1194 |
4 May 2018 |
Long Term Management period Jun 2019 – May 2028 |
Southern Landside Petrol Filling Station |
Uprooted and collapsed due to Typhoon Higos on 18 August 2020. Tree removal was conducted as recommended by tree specialist of the contractor of Southern Landside Petrol Filing Station. |
CT1794 |
3 May 2018 |
Long Term Management period Jun 2019 – May 2028
|
AsiaWorld-Expo |
The tree within the land parcel was acquired by the government for construction of emergency hospital to handle COVID19 pandemic at AsiaWorld-Expo. The tree was felled in late 2020. |
CT1795 |
3 May 2018 |
Long Term Management period Jun 2019 – May 2028 |
AsiaWorld-Expo |
The tree within the land parcel was acquired by the government for construction of emergency hospital to handle COVID19 pandemic at AsiaWorld-Expo. The tree was felled in late 2020. |
Table 2.25: Photos of the Existing Transplanted Trees Inspected in the Reporting Period
Under 10-year Long-term Management: |
||
|
|
|
T812 |
T814 |
T815 |
|
|
|
T829 |
T830 |
T831 |
The Supplementary CAP was submitted to EPD pursuant to EP Condition 2.20. The CARs for Golf Course and T2 Emergency Power Supply Systems (EPSS) were submitted to EPD in accordance with EP Condition 1.9 and the Supplementary CAP in which no land contamination issues were identified. EPD has issued no further comment for aforesaid CARs. No leakage was found after the removal of underground fuel pipelines and all required additional photos have been submitted to EPD.
According to the approved supplementary CAP, there are 3 remaining locations where site re-appraisal / additional site investigation are proposed. Based on the latest construction information, which has been presented in Appendix A Implementation Schedule of the approved CARs for T2 EPSS, there is no development programme for these locations at this stage. As such, the status of site re-appraisal/ additional site investigation will be further updated upon latest development programme is available.
The Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for High Speed Ferries of SkyPier (the SkyPier Plan) was submitted to the Advisory Council on the Environment for comment and subsequently submitted to and approved by EPD in November 2015 under EP Condition 2.10. The approved SkyPier Plan is available on the dedicated website of the Project. In the SkyPier Plan, AAHK has committed to implement the mitigation measure of requiring HSFs of SkyPier travelling between HKIA and Zhuhai / Macau to start diverting the route with associated speed control across the area, i.e. Speed Control Zone (SCZ), with high CWD abundance. The route diversion and speed restriction at the SCZ have been implemented since 28 December 2015.
Ferry service between HKIA SkyPier and Macau has been resumed on 30 December 2022. In total, 1 ferry movement between HKIA SkyPier and Macau was audited in the reporting period. The daily movements of all SkyPier HSFs in the reporting period, including those not using the diverted route, ranged between 2 and 6, which fell within the maximum daily cap number of 125.
The average speed of the HSF travelling through the Speed Control Zone (SCZ) was 12.5 knots, which is within 15 knots and therefore in compliance with the Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for High Speed Ferries of SkyPier (the SkyPier Plan). The summary of the SkyPier Plan monitoring result is presented in Graph 1.
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 Construction Traffic Control Centre (CTCC) representatives, all the concerned captains were reminded to comply with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV.
A total of 2 skipper training workshops were held with 2 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.
Three environmental complaints were received during the reporting period. All were attended to and investigations were conducted by the ET in accordance with the Manual and the Complaint Management Plan. A summary of the complaints and analyses is presented in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1: Summary of Environmental Complaints
Date of Complaint Received |
Details |
Analysis/ Remedial Actions |
Status |
3 October 2022 |
A complaint regarding dust issue at Tuen Mun Public Cargo Working Area (TMPCWA) was received. |
A complaint regarding dust issue at Tuen Mun Public Cargo Working Area (TMPCWA) was received on 3 October 2022. The case was investigated by ET in accordance with the Manual and the Complaint Management Plan of the Project. The ET recognized the location, identified a related contractor and requested them to provide information regarding the complaint. According to the information received, the wheel washing facility at Western Quay (WQ) was reported as out of order and manual wheel washing with high pressure water jet was deployed during the alleged period. The contractor confirmed that the wheels and body of the concerned concrete lorry were all manually washed before embarking on RoRo barge. At ET’s weekly site inspections and ad-hoc site inspection, wheel washing facility was observed malfunctioning at WQ and manual wheel washing with high pressure water jet for vehicles was deployed. The contractor was reminded to repair the wheel washing facility and no observation related to the wheel washing facility at North Eastern Quay (NEQ) was recorded in the checklist. At the subsequent ad-hoc site inspection, it was noted that the wheel washing facility at WQ was still out of order and manual wheel washing with high pressure water jet was provided to vehicles before they embarked on RoRo barge. Having said that, the contractor was reminded to ensure the cleanliness of the deck of RoRo barge and no observation related to the wheel washing facility at NEQ was recorded. During an off-site inspection at TMPCWA, the wheels of disembarking vehicles were noted washed and the general condition of TMPCWA was observed dusty. ET would continue to monitor the related contractor’s performance on wheel washing at WQ and the cleanliness of the decks of RoRo barges, and remind all 3RS contractors to ensure the wheels and body of their vehicles are washed before leaving their respective site boundaries. Hence, the case was considered closed. |
Closed |
16 November 2022 |
A complaint regarding alleged muddy water discharge from 3RS construction site was received. |
A complaint regarding alleged muddy water discharge from 3RS construction site was received on 16 November 2022. The case was investigated by ET in accordance with the Manual and the Complaint Management Plan of the Project. The ET recognized the location, identified a related contractor and requested them to provide information regarding the complaint. According to the information received, no incident related to muddy water discharge occurred at the concerned location during the alleged period. The contractor reported they would continuously implement water quality mitigation measures in their works site and maintain proper records regarding incidents related to muddy water observed. As a precautionary measure, the contractor conducted a refresher training with their frontline staff regarding water quality mitigation measures. At ET’s weekly site inspection, localized muddy water was observed at the concerned location and was rectified by the related contractor afterwards. At subsequent joint site inspections and ET’s weekly site inspections, no observation regarding muddy water discharge was recorded. ET would continue to monitor the related contractor’s performance on their on-going mitigation measures, and remind all 3RS contractors to properly implement water quality mitigation measures in their works sites in accordance with the implementation schedule in the Updated EM&A Manual. Hence, the case was considered closed. |
Closed |
19 December 2022 |
A complaint regarding dust nuisance was received. |
The complaint was under investigation during the reporting period. Findings would be reported in the next Quarterly EM&A Report. |
|
Neither 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 3.2 and Table 3.3.
Table 3.2: 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 |
1 |
|
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 3.3: 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 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
From 28 December 2015 to end of the reporting period |
0 |
58 |
2 |
2 |
In the fourth quarter of 2022, the EM&A programme has been implemented as planned, including 96 sets of air quality measurements, 54 sets of construction noise measurements, 38 sets of water quality measurements, 6 complete sets of vessel line transect surveys and 6 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-based works. Works in the reclamation areas included seawall construction, filling and land-based ground improvement works, together with runway, taxiways, concourse and associated works. Land-based works on existing airport island involved mainly airfield works, Terminal 2 expansion works, modification and tunnel work for Automated People Mover (APM) and Baggage Handling System (BHS), and preparation work for utilities, with activities include road and drainage works, cable ducting, demolition, piling, and excavation works.
Monitoring results of construction dust, construction noise, construction waste and CWD monitoring did not trigger the corresponding Action and Limit Levels during the reporting period.
For water quality, the water quality monitoring results for all parameters, except SS, 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, one testing result in November triggered the relevant Action Level, and the corresponding investigation was conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded that the cases were not related to the Project. In summary, the construction activities undertaken during the reporting period did not introduce adverse impact to all water quality sensitive receivers.
Site inspections of the construction works to audit the implementation of proper environmental pollution control and mitigation measures for the Project were conducted by ET and IEC on a weekly and bi-weekly basis, respectively. Site inspection findings were recorded in the site inspection checklists and provided to the contractors to follow up.
On the implementation of the SkyPier Plan, the daily movements of all SkyPier HSFs in the reporting period, including those not using the diverted route, were in the range of 2 to 6 daily movements, which are within the maximum daily cap of 125 daily movements. A total of 1 HSF movement under the SkyPier Plan was recorded in the reporting period. The average speed of the HSF travelling through the SCZ was 12.5 knots. The HSF had travelled through the SCZ with average speed under 15 knots in compliance with the SkyPier Plan. In summary, the ET and IEC have audited the HSF movements against the SkyPier Plan and conducted follow up investigations or actions accordingly.
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 2 skipper training workshops were held by contractors’ Environmental Officers during the reporting period and competency tests were conducted subsequently with the trained skippers by ET.
On the implementation of MMWP and DEZ Plan, dolphin observers were deployed by the contractors in accordance with the plans. No dolphin or other marine mammals were observed within or around the DEZ in this reporting period. Audits of contractors’ implementation and records, and also acoustic decoupling for construction vessels were carried out by the ET during site inspection.
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)