Executive Summary
The Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao
Bridge (HZMB) Hong Kong Link Road (HKLR) serves to connect the HZMB Main Bridge
at the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Boundary and the HZMB
Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF) located at the north eastern
waters of the Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA).
The HKLR project has been
separated into two contracts. They are Contract No. HY/2011/03 Hong
Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link Road-Section between Scenic Hill and
Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (hereafter referred to as the Contract)
and Contract No. HY/2011/09 Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge
Hong Kong Link Road-Section between HKSAR Boundary and Scenic Hill.
China State Construction
Engineering (Hong Kong) Ltd. was awarded by Highways Department as the
Contractor to undertake the construction works of Contract No. HY/2011/03. The
main works of the Contract include land tunnel at Scenic Hill, tunnel
underneath Airport Road and Airport Express Line, reclamation and tunnel to the
east coast of the Airport Island, at-grade road connecting to the HKBCF and
highway works of the HKBCF within the Airport Island and in the vicinity of the
HKLR reclamation. The Contract is
part of the HKLR Project and HKBCF Project, these
projects are considered to be ¡§Designated Projects¡¨, under Schedule 2 of the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Ordinance (Cap 499) and Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA) Reports (Register No. AEIAR-144/2009 and
AEIAR-145/2009) were prepared for the Project. The current Environmental Permit (EP)
EP-352/2009/D for HKLR and EP-353/2009/H for HKBCF were issued on 22 December
2014 and 19 January 2015, respectively. These documents are available through
the EIA Ordinance Register. The construction phase of Contract was
commenced on 17 October 2012.
BMT Asia Pacific Limited
has been appointed by the Contractor to implement the Environmental Monitoring
& Audit (EM&A) programme for the Contract in accordance with the
Updated EM&A Manual for HKLR (Version 1.0) and will be providing
environmental team services to the Contract.
This is the thirty-third Monthly
EM&A report for the Contract which summaries the monitoring results and
audit findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 to
30 June
2015.
Environmental
Monitoring and Audit Progress
The monthly EM&A
programme was undertaken in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual for
HKLR (Version 1.0). A summary of
the monitoring activities in this reporting month is listed below:
1-hr TSP
Monitoring
|
2, 8, 12, 18, 24 and 29 June 2015
|
24-hr TSP
Monitoring
|
1, 5, 11, 17, 23 and 26 June 2015
|
Noise
Monitoring
|
2, 8, 18, 24 and 29 June 2015
|
Water Quality
Monitoring
|
1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 17, 19, 22, 24, 26 and 29 June 2015
|
Chinese White
Dolphin Monitoring
|
2, 10, 24 and 26 June 2015
|
Mudflat
Monitoring (Ecology)
|
6, 14,15, 16, 17 and 20 June 2015
|
Mudflat
Monitoring (Sedimentation Rate)
|
14 June 2015
|
Site
Inspection
|
3, 10, 17 and
26 June 2015
|
Due
to the change of tide pattern and weather condition, mudflat monitoring
(ecology) was rescheduled from 13 to 15 June 2015 and from 21 to 17 June 2015.
Due
to the boat availability issue, the dolphins monitoring was rescheduled from 16
June to 24 June 2015 and from 23 June 2015 to 26 June 2015.
Breaches of Action and Limit Levels
A summary of environmental
exceedances for this reporting month is as follows:
Environmental Monitoring
|
Parameters
|
Action Level (AL)
|
Limit Level (LL)
|
Air Quality
|
1-hr TSP
|
0
|
0
|
24-hr TSP
|
0
|
0
|
Noise
|
Leq (30 min)
|
0
|
0
|
Water Quality
|
Suspended solids level (SS)
|
0
|
0
|
Turbidity level
|
0
|
0
|
Dissolved oxygen level (DO)
|
0
|
0
|
Complaint
Log
There were no complaints
received in relation to the environmental impacts during the reporting period.
Notifications
of Summons and Prosecutions
There were no notifications
of summons or prosecutions received during this reporting month.
Reporting
Changes
This report has been
developed in compliance with the reporting requirements for the subsequent
EM&A reports as required by the Updated EM&A Manual for HKLR (Version
1.0).
The proposal for the change
of Action Level and Limit Level for suspended solid and turbidity was approved
by EPD on 25 March 2013.
The revised Event and
Action Plan for dolphin Monitoring was approved by EPD on 6 May 2013.
The original monitoring
station at IS(Mf)9 (Coordinate- East:813273, North 818850) was observed inside
the perimeter silt curtain of Contract HY/2010/02 on 1 July 2013, as such the
original impact water quality monitoring location at IS(Mf)9 was temporarily
shifted outside the silt curtain. As advised by the Contractor of HY/2010/02 in
August 2013, the perimeter silt curtain was shifted to facilitate safe
anchorage zone of construction barges/vessels until end of 2013 subject to
construction progress. Therefore,
water quality monitoring station IS(Mf)9 was shifted
to 813226E and 818708N since 1 July 2013.
According to the water quality monitoring team¡¦s observation on 24 March
2014, the original monitoring location of IS(Mf)9 was
no longer enclosed by the perimeter silt curtain of Contract HY/2010/02. Thus,
the impact water quality monitoring works at the original monitoring location
of IS(Mf)9 has been resumed since 24 March 2014.
Future
Key Issues
The future key issues
include potential noise, air quality, water quality and ecological impacts and
waste management arising from the following construction activities to be
undertaken in the upcoming month:
¡P
Dismantling/trimming of Temporary 40mm Stone Platform for Construction of
Seawall at Portion X;
¡P
Filling Works behind Stone Platform at Portion X;
¡P
Construction of Seawall at Portion X;
¡P
Loading and Unloading Filling Material at Portion X;
¡P
Temporary Stone Platform Construction at Portion X;
¡P
Pipe Piling at Portion X;
¡P
Excavation and Lateral Support Works at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut &
Cover Tunnel) at Portion X;
¡P
Laying blinding layer for tunnel box structure at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut
& Cover Tunnel) at Portion X;
¡P
Construction of tunnel box structure at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut &
Cover Tunnel) at Portion X.
¡P
Socket H-Piling work at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel) at
Portion X;
¡P
Excavation Works for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel at Portion X;
¡P
Socket H-Piling work for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel East (Cut &Cover
Tunnel) at Portion X;
¡P
Pipe Piling works for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel East (Cut &Cover Tunnel)
at Portion X;
¡P
Works for Diversion of Airport Road;
¡P
Utilities Detection at Airport Road / Airport Express Line/ East Coast
Road;
¡P
Establishment of Site Access at Airport Road / Airport Express Line/East
Coast Road;
¡P
Canopy Pipe Drilling underneath Airport Express Line;
¡P
Excavation and Lateral Support Works at shaft 3 extension north shaft
& south shaft at Kwo Lo Wan Road;
¡P
Excavation and Lateral Support Works for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel West (Cut
& Cover Tunnel) at Airport Road;
¡P
Utility Culvert Excavation at Portion Y;
¡P
Highway Operation and Maintenance Area Building Foundation Works at
Portion Y;
¡P
Excavation for Scenic Hill Tunnel at West Portal; and
¡P
Ventilation Building Foundation Works at West Portal.
1.1.2
The HKLR project has been
separated into two contracts. They
are Contract
No. HY/2011/03 Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link Road-Section
between Scenic Hill and Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (hereafter
referred to as the Contract) and Contract No. HY/2011/09 Hong
Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link Road-Section between HKSAR Boundary and
Scenic Hill.
1.1.3
China State Construction
Engineering (Hong Kong) Ltd. was awarded by Highways Department (HyD) as
the Contractor to undertake the construction works of Contract No. HY/2011/03. The Contract is part of the HKLR Project and HKBCF Project,
these projects are considered to be ¡§Designated Projects¡¨, under Schedule 2 of
the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Ordinance (Cap 499) and Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA) Reports (Register No. AEIAR-144/2009 and
AEIAR-145/2009) were prepared for the Project. The current Environmental Permit (EP)
EP-352/2009/D for HKLR and EP-353/2009/H for HKBCF were issued on 22 December
2014 and 19 January 2015, respectively. These documents are available through
the EIA Ordinance Register. The construction phase of
Contract was commenced on 17 October 2012.
Figure
1.1 shows the project site
boundary. The works areas are shown in Appendix O.
1.1.4
The Contract includes
the following key aspects:
¡P
New reclamation along
the east coast of the approximately 23 hectares.
¡P
Tunnel of Scenic
Hill (Tunnel SHT) from Scenic Hill to the new reclamation, of approximately 1km
in length with three (3) lanes for the east bound carriageway heading to the
HKBCF and four (4) lanes for the westbound carriageway heading to the HZMB Main
Bridge.
¡P
An abutment of the
viaduct portion of the HKLR at the west portal of Tunnel SHT and associated
road works at the west portal of Tunnel SHT.
¡P
An at grade road on
the new reclamation along the east coast of the HKIA to connect with the HKBCF,
of approximately 1.6 km along dual 3-lane carriageway with hard shoulder for
each bound.
¡P
Road links between
the HKBCF and the HKIA including new roads and the modification of existing roads
at the HKIA, involving viaducts, at grade roads and a Tunnel HAT.
¡P
A highway operation
and maintenance area (HMA) located on the new reclamation, south of the Dragonair Headquarters Building, including the construction
of buildings, connection roads and other associated facilities.
¡P
Associated civil,
structural, building, geotechnical, marine, environmental protection,
landscaping, drainage and sewerage, tunnel and highway electrical and
mechanical works, together with the installation of street lightings, traffic
aids and sign gantries, water mains and fire hydrants, provision of facilities
for installation of traffic control and surveillance system (TCSS), reprovisioning works of affected existing facilities,
implementation of transplanting, compensatory planting and protection of
existing trees, and implementation of an environmental monitoring and audit
(EM&A) program.
1.1.5
This is the thirty-third Monthly EM&A report for the Contract which summarizes the monitoring
results and audit findings of the EM&A programme
during the reporting period from 1 to 30 June 2015.
1.1.6 BMT Asia Pacific Limited has been
appointed by the Contractor to implement the EM&A programme
for the Contract in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual for HKLR
(Version 1.0) for HKLR and will be providing environmental team services to the
Contract. Ramboll Environ Hong Kong Ltd. was employed by HyD as the Independent
Environmental Checker (IEC) and Environmental Project Office (ENPO) for the
Project. The project organization with regard to the
environmental works is as follows.
1.2.1 The project organization structure and lines of
communication with respect to the on-site environmental management structure is
shown in Appendix A. The key personnel contact names and
numbers are summarized in Table 1.1.
Table 1.1 Contact
Information of Key Personnel
Party
|
Position
|
Name
|
Telephone
|
Fax
|
Supervising Officer¡¦s Representative
(Ove Arup & Partners Hong
Kong Limited)
|
(Chief
Resident Engineer, CRE)
|
Robert Antony
Evans
|
3968 0801
|
2109 1882
|
Environmental Project Office /
Independent Environmental Checker
(Ramboll Environ Hong Kong Limited)
|
Environmental Project Office Leader
|
Y. H. Hui
|
3465
2888
|
3465
2899
|
Independent Environmental Checker
|
Antony Wong
|
3465
2888
|
3465
2899
|
Contractor
(China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Ltd)
|
Project Manager
|
S. Y. Tse
|
3968
7002
|
2109
2588
|
Environmental Officer
|
Federick Wong
|
3968
7117
|
2109
2588
|
Environmental Team
(BMT Asia Pacific)
|
Environmental Team Leader
|
Claudine Lee
|
2241
9847
|
2815
3377
|
24
hours complaint hotline
|
---
|
---
|
5699
5730
|
---
|
1.3
Construction Programme
1.3.1 A copy
of the Contractor¡¦s construction programme is
provided in Appendix
B.
1.4
Construction Works
Undertaken During the Reporting Month
1.4.1 A
summary of the construction activities undertaken during this reporting month
is shown in Table 1.2.
Table 1.2 Construction
Activities During Reporting Month
Description
of Activities
|
Site
Area
|
Dismantling/trimming
of temporary 40mm stone platform for construction of seawall
|
Portion X
|
Filling works behind
stone platform
|
Portion X
|
Construction of
seawall
|
Portion X
|
Loading and
unloading of filling materials
|
Portion X
|
Temporary stone
platform construction
|
Portion X
|
Excavation and
lateral support works for Scenic Hill
Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Socket H-Piling work
for Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Laying blinding
layer for tunnel box structure at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Construction of
tunnel box structure at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel) at
Portion X
|
Portion X
|
Excavation for HKBCF
to Airport Tunnel
|
Portion X
|
Excavation for
Scenic Hill Tunnel
|
West Portal
|
Ventilation building foundation works
|
West Portal
|
Works for diversion
of Airport Road
|
Airport Road
|
Utilities detection
|
Airport Road/ Airport Express Line/ East
Coast Road
|
Establishment of
Site Access
|
Airport Road/ Airport Express Line/ East
Coast Road
|
Canopy pipe drilling
underneath Airport Express Line
|
Airport Express Line
|
Excavation and
lateral support works at shaft 3 extension north shaft & south shaft
|
Kwo
Lo Wan Road
|
Excavation and Lateral Support Works for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel West
(Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Airport Road
|
Utility culvert
excavation
|
Portion Y
|
Highway Operation and Maintenance Area Building Foundation Works
|
Portion Y
|
2.1
Monitoring Requirements
2.1.1 In
accordance with the Contract Specific EM&A Manual, baseline 1-hour and
24-hour TSP levels at two air quality monitoring stations were
established. Impact 1-hour TSP
monitoring was conducted for at least three times every 6 days, while impact
24-hour TSP monitoring was carried out for at least once every 6 days. The
Action and Limit Level for 1-hr TSP and 24-hr TSP are provided in Table 2.1 and Table 2.2, respectively.
Table 2.1 Action
and Limit Levels for 1-hour TSP
Monitoring
Station
|
Action Level,
µg/m3
|
Limit Level,
µg/m3
|
AMS 5 ¡V Ma Wan Chung Village (Tung Chung)
|
352
|
500
|
AMS 6 ¡V Dragonair /
CNAC (Group) Building (HKIA)
|
360
|
Table 2.2 Action
and Limit Levels for 24-hour TSP
Monitoring
Station
|
Action Level,
µg/m3
|
Limit Level,
µg/m3
|
AMS 5 ¡V Ma Wan Chung Village (Tung Chung)
|
164
|
260
|
AMS 6 ¡V Dragonair /
CNAC (Group) Building (HKIA)
|
173
|
260
|
2.2.1 24-hour
TSP air quality monitoring was performed using High Volume Sampler (HVS)
located at each designated monitoring station. The HVS meets all the
requirements of the Contract Specific EM&A Manual. Portable direct reading
dust meters were used to carry out the 1-hour TSP monitoring. Brand and model of the equipment is
given in Table 2.3.
Table 2.3
Air Quality Monitoring Equipment
Equipment
|
Brand and
Model
|
Portable direct reading
dust meter (1-hour TSP)
|
Sibata Digital Dust Monitor
(Model No. LD-3B)
|
High Volume Sampler
(24-hour TSP)
|
Tisch Environmental Mass
Flow Controlled Total Suspended Particulate (TSP) High Volume Air Sampler
(Model No. TE-5170)
|
2.3.1 Monitoring
locations AMS5 and AMS6 were set
up at the proposed locations in accordance with Contract Specific EM&A
Manual.
2.3.2 Figure 2.1 shows
the locations of monitoring stations. Table
2.4 describes the details of the monitoring stations.
Table
2.4 Locations
of Impact Air Quality Monitoring Stations
Monitoring Station
|
Location
|
AMS5
|
Ma Wan Chung Village
(Tung Chung)
|
AMS6
|
Dragonair / CNAC (Group)
Building (HKIA)
|
2.4.1 Table 2.5 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency
and duration of impact TSP monitoring.
Table 2.5 Air
Quality Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
Parameter
|
Frequency and Duration
|
1-hour TSP
|
Three times every 6
days while the highest dust impact was expected
|
24-hour TSP
|
Once every 6 days
|
2.5.1 24-hour
TSP Monitoring
(a) The HVS was installed in the vicinity of the air
sensitive receivers. The following criteria were considered in the installation
of the HVS.
(i) A horizontal platform with appropriate support to
secure the sampler against gusty wind was provided.
(ii) The distance between the HVS and any obstacles,
such as buildings, was at least twice the height that the obstacle protrudes
above the HVS.
(iii) A minimum of 2 meters separation from walls,
parapets and penthouse for rooftop sampler was provided.
(iv) No furnace or incinerator flues are nearby.
(v) Airflow around the sampler was unrestricted.
(vi) Permission was obtained to set up the samplers and access to
the monitoring stations.
(vii) A secured supply of electricity was obtained to
operate the samplers.
(viii) The sampler was located more than 20 meters from any
dripline.
(ix) Any wire fence and gate, required to protect the
sampler, did not obstruct the monitoring process.
(x) Flow control accuracy was kept within ¡Ó2.5%
deviation over 24-hour sampling period.
(b) Preparation of Filter Papers
(i) Glass fibre filters, G810 were labelled and
sufficient filters that were clean and without pinholes were selected.
(ii) All filters were equilibrated in the conditioning
environment for 24 hours before weighing. The conditioning environment
temperature was around 25 ¢XC
and not variable by more than ¡Ó3 ¢XC;
the relative humidity (RH) was < 50% and not variable by more than ¡Ó5%. A convenient working RH was 40%.
(iii) All filter papers were prepared and analysed by ALS
Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd., which is a HOKLAS
accredited laboratory and has comprehensive quality assurance and quality
control programmes.
(c) Field Monitoring
(i) The power supply was checked to ensure the HVS
works properly.
(ii) The filter holder and the area surrounding the
filter were cleaned.
(iii) The filter holder was removed by loosening the four
bolts and a new filter, with stamped number upward, on a supporting screen was
aligned carefully.
(iv) The filter was properly aligned on the screen so that
the gasket formed an airtight seal on the outer edges of the filter.
(v) The swing bolts were fastened to hold the filter
holder down to the frame. The
pressure applied was sufficient to avoid air leakage at the edges.
(vi) Then the shelter lid was closed and was secured with
the aluminium strip.
(vii) The HVS was warmed-up for about 5 minutes to
establish run-temperature conditions.
(viii) A new flow rate record sheet was set into the flow
recorder.
(ix) On site temperature and atmospheric pressure
readings were taken and the flow rate of the HVS was checked and adjusted at
around 1.1 m3/min, and complied with the range specified in the
Updated EM&A Manual for HKLR (Version 1.0) (i.e. 0.6-1.7 m3/min).
(x) The programmable digital timer was set for a
sampling period of 24 hours, and the starting time, weather condition and the
filter number were recorded.
(xi) The initial elapsed time was recorded.
(xii) At the end of sampling, on site temperature and
atmospheric pressure readings were taken and the final flow rate of the HVS was
checked and recorded.
(xiii) The final elapsed time was recorded.
(xiv) The sampled filter was removed carefully and folded
in half length so that only surfaces with collected particulate matter were in
contact.
(xv) It was then placed in a clean plastic envelope and
sealed.
(xvi) All monitoring information was recorded on a standard
data sheet.
(xvii) Filters were then sent to ALS Technichem
(HK) Pty Ltd. for analysis.
(d) Maintenance and Calibration
(i) The HVS and its accessories were maintained in good
working condition, such as replacing motor brushes routinely and checking
electrical wiring to ensure a continuous power supply.
(ii) 5-point calibration of the HVS was conducted using
TE-5025A Calibration Kit prior
to the commencement of baseline monitoring. Bi-monthly 5-point calibration of
the HVS will be carried out during impact monitoring.
(iii) Calibration certificate of the HVSs are provided in
Appendix C.
2.5.2 1-hour
TSP Monitoring
(a) Measuring Procedures
The measuring procedures of
the 1-hour dust meter were in accordance with the Manufacturer¡¦s Instruction
Manual as follows:-
(i)
Turn
the power on.
(ii) Close the air collecting opening cover.
(iii) Push the ¡§TIME SETTING¡¨ switch to [BG].
(iv) Push ¡§START/STOP¡¨ switch to perform background
measurement for 6 seconds.
(v) Turn the knob at SENSI ADJ position to insert the
light scattering plate.
(vi) Leave the equipment for 1 minute upon ¡§SPAN CHECK¡¨ is
indicated in the display.
(vii) Push ¡§START/STOP¡¨ switch to perform automatic
sensitivity adjustment. This measurement takes 1 minute.
(viii) Pull out the knob and return it to MEASURE
position.
(ix) Push the ¡§TIME SETTING¡¨ switch the time set in the
display to 3 hours.
(x) Lower down the air collection opening cover.
(xi) Push ¡§START/STOP¡¨ switch to start measurement.
(b) Maintenance and Calibration
(i) The
1-hour TSP meter was calibrated at 1-year intervals against a Tisch Environmental Mass Flow Controlled Total Suspended
Particulate (TSP) High Volume Air Sampler. Calibration certificates of the
Laser Dust Monitors are provided in Appendix C.
2.6.1 The
schedule for air quality monitoring June 2015 is provided in Appendix D.
2.7.1
The monitoring results for 1-hour TSP and
24-hour TSP are summarized in Tables 2.6
and 2.7 respectively. Detailed
impact air quality monitoring results and relevant graphical plots are
presented in Appendix
E.
Table 2.6 Summary of 1-hour TSP
Monitoring Results During the Reporting Month
Monitoring Station
|
Average (mg/m3)
|
Range (mg/m3)
|
Action Level (mg/m3)
|
Limit Level (mg/m3)
|
AMS5
|
66
|
55 - 92
|
352
|
500
|
AMS6
|
65
|
55 - 76
|
360
|
500
|
Table 2.7 Summary
of 24-hour TSP Monitoring Results During the
Reporting Month
Monitoring
Station
|
Average (mg/m3)
|
Range (mg/m3)
|
Action
Level (mg/m3)
|
Limit Level (mg/m3)
|
AMS5
|
18
|
13 - 23
|
164
|
260
|
AMS6
|
37
|
26 - 46
|
173
|
260
|
2.7.2
No Action and Limit Level exceedances of 1-hour TSP and 24-hour TSP were recorded at AMS5 and AMS6 during the reporting month.
2.7.3
The event action plan is annexed in Appendix
F.
2.7.4
The wind data obtained from
the on-site weather
station during the
reporting month is shown in Appendix G.
3.1.1 In
accordance with the Contract Specific EM&A Manual, impact noise monitoring
was conducted for at least once per week during the construction phase of the
Project. The Action and Limit level of the noise monitoring is provided in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1 Action
and Limit Levels for Noise during Construction Period
Monitoring Station
|
Time Period
|
Action Level
|
Limit Level
|
NMS5 ¡V Ma Wan
Chung Village (Ma Wan Chung Resident Association) (Tung Chung)
|
0700-1900
hours on normal weekdays
|
When one
documented complaint is received
|
75 dB(A)
|
3.2.1 Noise
monitoring was performed using sound level meters at each designated monitoring
station. The sound level meters
deployed comply with the International Electrotechnical
Commission Publications (IEC) 651:1979 (Type 1) and 804:1985 (Type 1)
specifications. Acoustic calibrator
was deployed to check the sound level meters at a known sound pressure
level. Brand and model of the
equipment are given in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2 Noise
Monitoring Equipment
Equipment
|
Brand and Model
|
Integrated
Sound Level Meter
|
B&K 2238
|
Acoustic
Calibrator
|
B&K 4231
|
3.3.1
Monitoring location NMS5 was set
up at the proposed locations in accordance with Contract Specific EM&A
Manual.
3.3.2
Figure 2.1 shows
the locations of monitoring stations. Table
3.3
describes the details of the monitoring stations.
Table 3.3 Locations
of Impact Noise Monitoring Stations
Monitoring Station
|
Location
|
NMS5
|
Ma Wan Chung
Village (Ma Wan Chung Resident Association) (Tung Chung)
|
3.4.1 Table 3.4
summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and duration of impact noise
monitoring.
Table 3.4 Noise
Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
Parameter
|
Frequency and Duration
|
30-mins
measurement at each monitoring station between 0700 and 1900 on normal
weekdays (Monday to Saturday). Leq, L10
and L90 would be recorded.
|
At least once
per week
|
3.5.1 Monitoring
Procedure
(a) The sound level
meter was set on a tripod at a height of 1.2 m
above the podium for free-field
measurements at NMS5. A correction
of +3 dB(A) shall be made to the free field
measurements.
(b) The battery
condition was checked to ensure the correct functioning of the meter.
(c)
Parameters such
as frequency weighting, the time weighting and the measurement time were set as
follows:-
(i) frequency weighting: A
(ii) time weighting: Fast
(iii) time measurement: Leq(30-minutes) during non-restricted
hours i.e. 07:00 ¡V 1900 on normal weekdays
(e) Prior to and
after each noise measurement, the meter was calibrated using the acoustic
calibrator for 94.0 dB(A) at 1000 Hz. If the difference in the calibration
level before and after measurement was more than 1.0 dB(A),
the measurement would be considered invalid and repeat of noise measurement
would be required after re-calibration or repair of the equipment.
(f) During the
monitoring period, the Leq, L10
and L90 were recorded.
In addition, site conditions and noise sources were recorded on a
standard record sheet.
(g) Noise
measurement was paused during periods of high intrusive noise (e.g. dog
barking, helicopter noise) if possible. Observations were recorded when
intrusive noise was unavoidable.
(h) Noise monitoring
was cancelled in the presence of fog, rain, wind with a steady speed exceeding 5m/s, or wind with gusts exceeding 10m/s. The wind speed shall be checked with a
portable wind speed meter capable of measuring the wind speed in m/s.
3.5.2 Maintenance
and Calibration
(a) The microphone
head of the sound level meter was cleaned with soft cloth at regular intervals.
(b) The meter and
calibrator were sent to the supplier or HOKLAS laboratory to check and
calibrate at yearly intervals.
(c) Calibration
certificates of the sound level meters and acoustic calibrators are provided in
Appendix C.
3.6.1 The
schedule for construction noise monitoring in June 2015 is provided in Appendix D.
3.7.1 The
monitoring results for construction noise are summarized in Table 3.5 and the monitoring results
and relevant graphical plots are provided in Appendix E.
Table 3.5 Summary
of Construction Noise Monitoring Results During the Reporting Month
Monitoring Station
|
Average Leq
(30 mins), dB(A)
|
Range of Leq
(30 mins), dB(A)
|
Limit Level Leq
(30 mins), dB(A)
|
NMS5
|
68
|
64 ¡V 70
|
75
|
*A correction factor of +3dB(A) from free field
to facade measurement was included.
3.7.2
There were no Action and Limit Level exceedances for noise during
daytime on normal weekdays of the reporting month.
3.7.3 Major
noise sources during the noise monitoring included construction activities of
the Contract, nearby traffic and insect noise.
3.7.4 The event
action plan is annexed in Appendix F.
4
Water Quality Monitoring
4.1.1 Impact
water quality monitoring was carried out to ensure that any deterioration of
water quality was detected, and that timely action was taken to rectify the
situation. For impact water quality
monitoring, measurements were taken in accordance with the Contract Specific
EM&A Manual. Table 4.1 shows the
established Action/Limit Levels for the environmental monitoring works. The ET proposed to amend the Acton Level
and Limit Level for turbidity and suspended solid and EPD approved ET¡¦s
proposal on 25 March 2013. Therefore,
Action Level and Limit Level for the Contract have been changed since 25 March
2013.
4.1.2 The
original and revised Action Level and Limit Level for turbidity and suspended
solid are shown in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1 Action
and Limit Levels for Water Quality
Parameter (unit)
|
Water Depth
|
Action Level
|
Limit Level
|
Dissolved
Oxygen (mg/L) (surface, middle and bottom)
|
Surface and
Middle
|
5.0
|
4.2 except 5
for Fish Culture Zone
|
Bottom
|
4.7
|
3.6
|
Turbidity
(NTU)
|
Depth average
|
27.5 or 120%
of upstream control station¡¦s turbidity at the same tide of the same day;
The action
level has been amended to ¡§27.5 and 120% of upstream control
station¡¦s turbidity at the same tide of the same day¡¨ since 25 March 2013.
|
47.0 or 130%
of turbidity at the upstream control station at the same tide of same day;
The limit
level has been amended to ¡§47.0 and 130% of turbidity at the
upstream control station at the same tide of same day¡¨ since 25 March 2013.
|
Suspended
Solid (SS) (mg/L)
|
Depth average
|
23.5 or 120%
of upstream control station¡¦s SS at the same tide of the same day;
The action
level has been amended to ¡§23.5 and 120% of upstream control
station¡¦s SS at the same tide of the same day¡¨ since 25 March 2013.
|
34.4 or 130%
of SS at the upstream control station at the same tide of same day and 10mg/L
for Water Services Department Seawater Intakes;
The limit
level has been amended to ¡§34.4 and 130% of SS at the upstream
control station at the same tide of same day and 10mg/L for Water Services
Department Seawater Intakes¡¨ since 25 March 2013
|
Notes:
(1) Depth-averaged
is calculated by taking the arithmetic means of reading of all three depths.
(2) For DO,
non-compliance of the water quality limit occurs when monitoring result is lower
that the limit.
(3) For SS
& turbidity non-compliance of the water quality limits occur when
monitoring result is higher than the limits.
(4) The change
to the Action and limit Levels for Water Quality Monitoring for the EM&A
works was approved by EPD on 25 March 2013.
4.2.1 Table 4.2
summarises the equipment used in the impact water quality monitoring programme.
Table 4.2 Water
Quality Monitoring Equipment
Equipment
|
Brand and Model
|
DO and
Temperature Meter, Salinity Meter, Turbidimeter and
pH Meter
|
YSI Model 6820
V2-M, 650
|
Positioning
Equipment
|
DGPS ¡V KODEN :
KGP913MkII, KBG3
|
Water Depth
Detector
|
Layin Associates: SM-5 & SM5A
|
Water Sampler
|
Wildlife
Supply Company : 5487-10
|
4.3.1
Table 4.3 summarises the monitoring parameters, frequency
and monitoring depths of impact water quality monitoring as required in the
Contract Specific EM&A Manual.
Table 4.3 Impact
Water Quality Monitoring Parameters and Frequency
Monitoring Stations
|
Parameter, unit
|
Frequency
|
No. of depth
|
Impact Stations:
IS5, IS(Mf)6, IS7, IS8, IS(Mf)9
& IS10,
Control/Far Field
Stations:
CS2 & CS(Mf)5,
Sensitive Receiver
Stations:
SR3, SR4, SR5, SR10A &
SR10B
|
¡P
Depth, m
¡P
Temperature, oC
¡P
Salinity, ppt
¡P
Dissolved Oxygen
(DO), mg/L
¡P
DO Saturation, %
¡P
Turbidity, NTU
¡P
pH
¡P Suspended Solids (SS), mg/L
|
Three times per week
during mid-ebb and mid-flood tides (within ¡Ó 1.75 hour of the predicted time)
|
3
(1 m below water surface,
mid-depth and 1 m above sea bed, except where the water depth is less than 6
m, in which case the mid-depth station may be omitted. Should the water
depth be less than 3 m, only the mid-depth station will be monitored).
|
4.4.1 In
accordance with the Contract Specific EM&A Manual, thirteen stations (6 Impact
Stations, 5
Sensitive Receiver Stations and 2 Control
Stations) were designated for impact water quality monitoring. The six Impact
Stations (IS) were chosen on the basis of their proximity to the reclamation
and thus the greatest potential for water quality impacts, the five
Sensitive Receiver Stations (SR) were chosen as they are close to the key
sensitive receives and the two Control Stations (CS) were chosen to facilitate
comparison of the water quality of the IS stations with less influence by the
Project/ ambient water quality conditions.
4.4.2 The
locations of these monitoring stations are summarized in Table 4.4 and shown in Figure 2.1.
Table 4.4 Impact
Water Quality Monitoring Stations
Monitoring Stations
|
Description
|
Coordinates
|
Easting
|
Northing
|
IS5
|
Impact Station
(Close to HKLR construction site)
|
811579
|
817106
|
IS(Mf)6
|
Impact Station
(Close to HKLR construction site)
|
812101
|
817873
|
IS7
|
Impact Station
(Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
812244
|
818777
|
IS8
|
Impact Station
(Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
814251
|
818412
|
IS(Mf)9
|
Impact Station
(Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
813273
|
818850
|
IS10
|
Impact Station
(Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
812577
|
820670
|
SR3
|
Sensitive
receivers (San Tau SSSI)
|
810525
|
816456
|
SR4
|
Sensitive
receivers (Tai Ho Inlet)
|
814760
|
817867
|
SR5
|
Sensitive
receivers (Artificial Reef In NE Airport)
|
811489
|
820455
|
SR10A
|
Sensitive
receivers (Ma Wan Fish Culture Zone)
|
823741
|
823495
|
SR10B
|
Sensitive
receivers (Ma Wan Fish Culture Zone)
|
823686
|
823213
|
CS2
|
Control
Station (Mid-Ebb)
|
805849
|
818780
|
CS(Mf)5
|
Control
Station (Mid-Flood)
|
817990
|
821129
|
4.5
Monitoring Methodology
4.5.1 Instrumentation
(a) The
in-situ water quality parameters including dissolved oxygen, temperature,
salinity and turbidity, pH were measured by multi-parameter meters.
4.5.2 Operating/Analytical
Procedures
(a) Digital Differential Global Positioning
Systems (DGPS) were used to ensure that the correct location was selected prior
to sample collection.
(b) Portable, battery-operated echo sounders
were used for the determination of water depth at each designated monitoring
station.
(c) All in-situ measurements were taken at 3
water depths, 1 m below water surface, mid-depth and 1 m above sea bed, except
where the water depth was less than 6 m, in which case the mid-depth station
was omitted. Should the water depth be less than 3 m, only the mid-depth
station was monitored.
(d) At each measurement/sampling depth, two
consecutive in-situ monitoring (DO concentration and saturation, temperature,
turbidity, pH, salinity) and water sample for SS. The probes were retrieved out
of the water after the first measurement and then re-deployed for the second
measurement. Where the difference in the value between the first and second
readings of DO or turbidity parameters was more than 25% of the value of the
first reading, the reading was discarded and further readings were taken.
(e) Duplicate samples from each independent
sampling event were collected for SS measurement. Water samples were collected
using the water samplers and the samples were stored in high-density polythene
bottles. Water samples collected were well-mixed in the water sampler prior to
pre-rinsing and transferring to sample bottles. Sample bottles were pre-rinsed
with the same water samples. The sample bottles were then be packed in
cool-boxes (cooled at 4oC without being frozen), and delivered to
ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. for the analysis of
suspended solids concentrations. The laboratory determination work would be
started within 24 hours after collection of the water samples. ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. is a HOKLAS accredited laboratory
and has comprehensive quality assurance and quality control programmes.
(f) The analysis method and detection limit for
SS is shown in Table 4.5.
Table 4.5 Laboratory Analysis for Suspended Solids
Parameters
|
Instrumentation
|
Analytical Method
|
Detection Limit
|
Suspended
Solid (SS)
|
Weighting
|
APHA 2540-D
|
0.5mg/L
|
(g) Other relevant data were recorded, including
monitoring location / position, time, water depth, tidal stages, weather
conditions and any special phenomena or work underway at the construction site
in the field log sheet for information.
4.5.3 Maintenance
and Calibrations
(a) All in situ monitoring
instruments would be calibrated by ALS Technichem
(HK) Pty Ltd. before use and at 3-monthly intervals throughout all stages of
the water quality monitoring programme. The
procedures of performance check of sonde and testing
results are provided in Appendix C.
4.6.1 The
schedule for impact water quality monitoring in June 2015 is provided in Appendix D.
4.7.1 Impact
water quality monitoring was conducted at all designated monitoring stations
during the reporting month. Impact water quality monitoring results and relevant
graphical plots are provided in Appendix E.
4.7.2
For marine water quality monitoring, no Action Level and Limit
Level exceedance of turbidity level, dissolved
oxygen level and suspended solid level were recorded during the reporting month.
4.7.1
Water quality impact
sources during the water quality monitoring were the construction activities of
the Contract, nearby construction activities by other parties and
nearby operating vessels by other parties.
4.7.2
The event action plan
is annexed in Appendix
F.
5.1.1 Impact
dolphin monitoring is required to be
conducted by a qualified dolphin specialist team to evaluate whether there have been any effects on the dolphins.
5.1.2
The Action Level and Limit Level for dolphin
monitoring are shown in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1 Action
and Limit Levels for Dolphin Monitoring
|
North Lantau Social Cluster
|
NEL
|
NWL
|
Action Level
|
STG < 4.2 & ANI < 15.5
|
STG < 6.9
& ANI < 31.3
|
Limit Level
|
(STG < 2.4
& ANI < 8.9) and (STG < 3.9 & ANI < 17.9)
|
Remarks:
1. STG means quarterly encounter rate of number of dolphin sightings.
2. ANI means quarterly encounter rate of total number of dolphins.
3. For North Lantau Social Cluster, AL will be trigger if either NEL or NWL fall below the criteria; LL will
be triggered if both NEL and NWL
fall below the criteria.
5.1.3
The revised Event and Action
Plan for dolphin Monitoring was approved by EPD in 6 May 2013. The revised
Event and Action Plan is annexed in Appendix F.
Vessel-based Line-transect Survey
5.2.1 According to the requirements of
the Updated EM&A Manual for HKLR (Version 1.0), dolphin monitoring programme should cover all transect lines in NEL and NWL
survey areas (see Figure 1 of Appendix H) twice per month. The co-ordinates of all
transect lines are shown in Table 5.2.
Table 5.2 Co-ordinates
of Transect Lines
Line No.
|
Easting
|
Northing
|
|
Line No.
|
Easting
|
Northing
|
1
|
Start Point
|
804671
|
814577
|
|
13
|
Start Point
|
816506
|
819480
|
1
|
End Point
|
804671
|
831404
|
|
13
|
End Point
|
816506
|
824859
|
2
|
Start Point
|
805475
|
815457
|
|
14
|
Start Point
|
817537
|
820220
|
2
|
End Point
|
805477
|
826654
|
|
14
|
End Point
|
817537
|
824613
|
3
|
Start Point
|
806464
|
819435
|
|
15
|
Start Point
|
818568
|
820735
|
3
|
End Point
|
806464
|
822911
|
|
15
|
End Point
|
818568
|
824433
|
4
|
Start Point
|
807518
|
819771
|
|
16
|
Start Point
|
819532
|
821420
|
4
|
End Point
|
807518
|
829230
|
|
16
|
End Point
|
819532
|
824209
|
5
|
Start Point
|
808504
|
820220
|
|
17
|
Start Point
|
820451
|
822125
|
5
|
End Point
|
808504
|
828602
|
|
17
|
End Point
|
820451
|
823671
|
6
|
Start Point
|
809490
|
820466
|
|
18
|
Start Point
|
821504
|
822371
|
6
|
End Point
|
809490
|
825352
|
|
18
|
End Point
|
821504
|
823761
|
7
|
Start Point
|
810499
|
820690
|
|
19
|
Start Point
|
822513
|
823268
|
7
|
End Point
|
810499
|
824613
|
|
19
|
End Point
|
822513
|
824321
|
8
|
Start Point
|
811508
|
820847
|
|
20
|
Start Point
|
823477
|
823402
|
8
|
End Point
|
811508
|
824254
|
|
20
|
End Point
|
823477
|
824613
|
9
|
Start Point
|
812516
|
820892
|
|
21
|
Start Point
|
805476
|
827081
|
9
|
End Point
|
812516
|
824254
|
|
21
|
End Point
|
805476
|
830562
|
10
|
Start Point
|
813525
|
820872
|
|
22
|
Start Point
|
806464
|
824033
|
10
|
End Point
|
813525
|
824657
|
|
22
|
End Point
|
806464
|
829598
|
11
|
Start Point
|
814556
|
818449
|
|
23
|
Start Point
|
814559
|
821739
|
11
|
End Point
|
814556
|
820992
|
|
23
|
End Point
|
814559
|
824768
|
12
|
Start Point
|
815542
|
818807
|
|
|
|
|
|
12
|
End Point
|
815542
|
824882
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.2.2 The survey team used standard
line-transect methods (Buckland et al. 2001) to conduct the systematic vessel
surveys, and followed the same technique of data collection that has been
adopted over the last 16 years of marine mammal monitoring surveys in Hong Kong
developed by HKCRP (see Hung 2012, 2013).
For each monitoring vessel survey, a 15-m inboard vessel with an open
upper deck (about 4.5 m above water surface) was used to make observations from
the flying bridge area.
5.2.3 Two experienced observers (a data
recorder and a primary observer) made up the on-effort survey team, and the
survey vessel transited different transect lines at a constant speed of 13-15
km per hour. The data recorder
searched with unaided eyes and filled out the datasheets, while the primary
observer searched for dolphins and porpoises continuously through 7 x 50 Fujinon marine binoculars. Both observers searched the sea ahead of
the vessel, between 270o and 90o (in relation to the bow,
which is defined as 0o).
One to two additional experienced observers were available on the boat
to work in shift (i.e. rotate every 30 minutes) in order to minimize fatigue of
the survey team members. All
observers were experienced in small cetacean survey techniques and identifying
local cetacean species.
5.2.4 During on-effort survey periods,
the survey team recorded effort data including time, position (latitude and
longitude), weather conditions (Beaufort sea state and visibility), and
distance travelled in each series (a continuous period of search effort) with
the assistance of a handheld GPS (Garmin eTrex Legend).
5.2.5 Data including time, position and
vessel speed were also automatically and continuously logged by handheld GPS
throughout the entire survey for subsequent review.
5.2.6 When dolphins were sighted, the
survey team would end the survey effort, and immediately record the initial
sighting distance and angle of the dolphin group from the survey vessel, as
well as the sighting time and position.
Then the research vessel was diverted from its course to approach the
animals for species identification, group size estimation, assessment of group
composition, and behavioural observations. The perpendicular distance (PSD) of the
dolphin group to the transect line was later calculated from the initial
sighting distance and angle.
5.2.7
Survey effort being conducted along the parallel transect lines that
were perpendicular to the coastlines (as indicated in Figure 1 of Appendix H) was labeled as ¡§primary¡¨ survey effort,
while the survey effort conducted along the connecting lines between parallel
lines was labeled as ¡§secondary¡¨ survey effort. According to HKCRP long-term dolphin
monitoring data, encounter rates of Chinese white dolphins deduced from effort
and sighting data collected along primary and secondary lines were similar in
NEL and NWL survey areas.
Therefore, both primary and secondary survey effort were presented as on-effort
survey effort in this report.
5.2.8 Encounter rates of Chinese White
Dolphins (number of on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort and number
of dolphins from all on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort) were
calculated in NEL and NWL survey areas in relation to the amount of survey
effort conducted during each month of monitoring survey. Only data collected under Beaufort 3 or
below condition would be used for encounter rate analysis. Dolphin encounter rates were calculated
using primary survey effort alone, as well as the combined survey effort from
both primary and secondary lines.
Photo-identification Work
5.2.9 When a group of Chinese White
Dolphins were sighted during the line-transect survey, the survey team would
end effort and approach the group slowly from the side and behind to take
photographs of them. Every attempt
was made to photograph every dolphin in the group, and even photograph both
sides of the dolphins, since the colouration and
markings on both sides may not be symmetrical.
5.2.10 A professional digital cameras
(Canon EOS 7D and 60D models), equipped with long telephoto lenses (100-400 mm
zoom), were available on board for researchers to take sharp, close-up
photographs of dolphins as they surfaced.
The images were shot at the highest available resolution and stored on
Compact Flash memory cards for downloading onto a computer.
5.2.11 All digital images taken in the
field were first examined, and those containing potentially identifiable
individuals were sorted out. These
photographs would then be examined in greater detail, and were carefully
compared to the existing Chinese White Dolphin photo-identification catalogue
maintained by HKCRP since 1995.
5.2.12 Chinese White Dolphins can be
identified by their natural markings, such as nicks, cuts, scars and deformities
on their dorsal fin and body, and their unique spotting patterns were also used
as secondary identifying features (Jefferson 2000).
5.2.13 All photographs of each
individual were then compiled and arranged in chronological order, with data
including the date and location first identified (initial sighting),
re-sightings, associated dolphins, distinctive features, and age classes
entered into a computer database.
Detailed information on all identified individuals will be further
presented as an appendix in quarterly EM&A reports.
Vessel-based Line-transect Survey
5.3.1
During the month of June 2015,
two sets of systematic line-transect vessel surveys were conducted on 2nd,
10th, 24th and 26th to cover
all transect lines in NWL and NEL survey areas twice. The survey routes of each
survey day are presented in Figures 2 to
5
of Appendix H.
5.3.2
From these
surveys, a total of 301.30
km of survey
effort was collected, with 91.6%
of the total
survey effort being conducted under favourable weather conditions (i.e.
Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with good visibility)
(Annex I of Appendix H).
Among the two
areas, 115.90
km and 185.40
km of survey effort
were collected from NEL and NWL survey areas respectively. Moreover, the total survey effort
conducted on primary lines was 220.07
km, while the
effort on secondary lines was 81.23
km.
5.3.3
During the two sets of monitoring surveys
in June 2015,
three groups
of 15 Chinese
White Dolphins were sighted. (Annex II of Appendix H).
Two sightings were made in NWL, while one
sighting of a lone dolphin was made in NEL. In fact, this lone dolphin was the only
one sighted in NEL waters since July 2014.
5.3.4
During June¡¦s
surveys, all three dolphin sightings
were made on primary lines during
on-effort search, and none of
the dolphin groups was associated with operating fishing
vessel.
5.3.5
Distribution of these dolphin sightings
made in June 2015 is
shown in Figure 6 of Appendix H. Both
sightings made in NWL were located near Lung Kwu
Chau, while the lone dolphin sighted in NEL was found to the east of Siu Mo To (Figure
6 of Appendix H).
5.3.6
Notably, none of the three sightings was made
in the proximity of the HKLR03 and HKBCF reclamation sites, as well as the
HKLR09 and TMCLKL alignments (Figure 6 of Appendix H).
5.3.7
During June¡¦s surveys, encounter rates of Chinese White Dolphins deduced
from the survey effort and on-effort sighting data made under favourable conditions (Beaufort 3 or below) are shown in Table 5.3
and Table 5.4.
5.3.8
The average group size of Chinese White
Dolphins in June 2015 was 5.00 individuals per group. This average was higher than
previous months of dolphin monitoring, which was mainly attributed by the large
group of 10 dolphins sighted during the first monitoring survey in June near
Lung Kwu Chau.
Table 5.3 Individual Survey Event Encounter Rates
|
Encounter rate (STG)
(no. of on-effort
dolphin sightings per 100 km of survey effort)
|
Encounter rate (ANI)
(no. of dolphins from
all on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort)
|
Primary Lines Only
|
Primary Lines Only
|
NEL
|
Set 1: June 2nd / 10th
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
Set 2: June 24th / 26th
|
2.6
|
2.6
|
NWL
|
Set 1: June 2nd / 10th
|
1.5
|
15.2
|
Set 2: June 24th / 26th
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
Remarks:
1. Dolphin Encounter Rates Deduced from the Two
Sets of Surveys (Two Surveys in Each Set) in June 2015 in Northeast (NEL) and Northwest Lantau
(NWL).
Table 5.4 Monthly
Average Encounter Rates
|
Encounter
rate (STG)
(no. of on-effort
dolphin sightings per 100 km of survey effort)
|
Encounter rate (ANI)
(no. of dolphins from all on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey
effort)
|
Primary Lines Only
|
Both Primary and
Secondary Lines
|
Primary Lines Only
|
Both Primary and
Secondary Lines
|
Northeast Lantau
|
1.3
|
0.9
|
1.3
|
0.9
|
Northwest Lantau
|
0.8
|
0.6
|
7.8
|
6.2
|
Remarks:
1.
Monthly Average Dolphin Encounter Rates (Sightings Per 100 km of
Survey Effort) from All Four Surveys Conducted in June 2015 on Primary Lines only as well as Both
Primary Lines and Secondary Lines in Northeast (NEL) and Northwest Lantau
(NWL).
Photo-identification Work
5.3.9 Eleven
individual dolphins were sighted 13 times during June¡¦s surveys. Almost all of them were sighted only
once, except two individuals (NL202 and NL286) that were sighted twice during
the monitoring month (Annex III and IV
of Appendix H).
5.3.10
Notably, two of the 11 individual dolphins
(NL104 and NL202) were accompanied with their calves during their
re-sightings. These mother-calf pairs
have been sighted repeatedly throughout the HKLR03 construction period.
Conclusion
5.3.11
During this month of dolphin
monitoring, no adverse impact from the activities of this construction project
on Chinese White Dolphins was noticeable from general observations.
5.3.12 Due to monthly variation in dolphin occurrence within the study
area, it would be more appropriate to draw conclusion on whether any impacts on
dolphins have been detected related to the construction activities of this
project in the quarterly EM&A report, where comparison on distribution,
group size and encounter rates of dolphins between the quarterly impact
monitoring period (June ¡V August 2015) and baseline monitoring period
(3-month period) will be made.
5.4.1
Buckland, S. T., Anderson, D. R., Burnham,
K. P., Laake, J. L., Borchers,
D. L., and Thomas, L. 2001. Introduction to distance sampling:
estimating abundance of biological populations. Oxford University Press, London.
5.4.2
Hung, S. K. 2012. Monitoring of Marine Mammals in Hong
Kong waters: final report (2011-12).
An unpublished report submitted to the Agriculture, Fisheries and
Conservation Department, 171 pp.
5.4.3
Hung, S. K. 2013. Monitoring of Marine Mammals in Hong Kong waters: final report (2012-13). An unpublished report submitted to the
Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, 168 pp.
5.4.4
Jefferson, T. A. 2000. Population biology of the Indo-Pacific
hump-backed dolphin in Hong Kong waters.
Wildlife Monographs 144:1-65.
Methodology
6.1.1 To avoid
disturbance to the mudflat and nuisance to navigation, no fixed
marker/monitoring rod was installed at the monitoring stations. A high
precision Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) real time location fixing
system (or equivalent technology) was used to locate the station in the
precision of 1mm, which is reasonable under flat mudflat topography with uneven
mudflat surface only at micro level.
This method has been used on Agricultural Fisheries and Conservation
Department¡¦s (AFCD) project, namely Baseline Ecological Monitoring Programme
for the Mai Po Inner Deep Bay Ramsar Site for
measurement of seabed levels.
6.1.2 Measurements
were taken directly on the mudflat surface. The Real Time Kinematic GNSS (RTK GNSS)
surveying technology was used to measure mudflat surface levels and 3D
coordinates of a survey point. The
RTK GNSS survey was calibrated against a reference station in the field before
and after each survey. The
reference station is a survey control point established by the Lands Department
of the HKSAR Government or traditional land surveying methods using
professional surveying instruments such as total station, level and/or geodetic
GNSS. The coordinates system was in
HK1980 GRID system. For this contract,
the reference control station was surveyed and established by traditional land
surveying methods using professional surveying instruments such as total
station, level and RTK GNSS. The
accuracy was down to mm level so that the reference control station has
relatively higher accuracy. As the
reference control station has higher accuracy, it was set as true evaluation
relative to the RTK GNSS measurement.
All position and height correction were adjusted and corrected to the
reference control station.
Reference station survey result and professional land surveying
calibration is shown as Table 6.1:
Table 6.1 Reference
Station Survey result and GNSS RTK calibration result of Round 1
Reference
Station
|
Easting
(m)
|
Northing
(m)
|
Baseline
reference elevation (mPD) (A)
|
Round
1 Survey (mPD) (B)
|
Calibration
Adjustment (B-A)
|
T1
|
811248.660mE
|
816393.173mN
|
3.840
|
3.817
|
-0.023
|
T2
|
810806.297mE
|
815691.822mN
|
4.625
|
4.653
|
+0.028
|
T3
|
810778.098mE
|
815689.918mN
|
4.651
|
4.660
|
+0.009
|
T4
|
810274.783mE
|
816689.068mN
|
2.637
|
2.709
|
+0.072
|
6.1.3 The
precision of the measured mudflat surface level reading (vertical precision
setting) was within 10 mm (standard deviation) after averaging the valid survey
records of the XYZ HK1980 GRID coordinates. Each survey record at each station was
computed by averaging at least three measurements that are within the above
specified precision setting. Both digital data logging and written records were
collected in the field. Field data
on station fixing and mudflat surface measurement were recorded.
Monitoring Locations
6.1.4 Four
monitoring stations were established based on the site conditions for the
sedimentation monitoring and are shown in Figure 6.1.
Monitoring Results
6.1.5 The
baseline sedimentation rate monitoring was in September 2012 and impact
sedimentation rate monitoring was undertaken on 14
June 2015. The mudflat surface levels at the four
established monitoring stations and the corresponding XYZ HK1980 GRID
coordinates are presented in Table 6.2
and Table 6.3.
Table 6.2 Measured
Mudflat Surface Level Results
|
Baseline
Monitoring (September 2012)
|
Impact
Monitoring (June 2015)
|
Monitoring Station
|
Easting (m)
|
Northing (m)
|
Surface Level
(mPD)
|
Easting (m)
|
Northing (m)
|
Surface Level
(mPD)
|
S1
|
810291.160
|
816678.727
|
0.950
|
810291.164
|
816678.734
|
1.033
|
S2
|
810958.272
|
815831.531
|
0.864
|
810958.282
|
815831.519
|
0.953
|
S3
|
810716.585
|
815953.308
|
1.341
|
810716.562
|
815953.324
|
1.440
|
S4
|
811221.433
|
816151.381
|
0.931
|
811221.466
|
816151.504
|
1.094
|
Table 6.3 Comparison
of measurement
|
Comparison
of measurement
|
Remarks and Recommendation
|
Monitoring
Station
|
Easting
(m)
|
Northing
(m)
|
Surface
Level
(mPD)
|
S1
|
0.004
|
0.006
|
0.083
|
Level continuously
increased
|
S2
|
0.010
|
-0.012
|
0.089
|
Level continuously increased
|
S3
|
-0.023
|
0.016
|
0.099
|
Level continuously
increased
|
S4
|
0.033
|
0.122
|
0.163
|
Level continuously
increased
|
6.1.6 This measurement result was
generally and relatively higher than the baseline measurement at S1, S2, S3 and
S4. The mudflat level is continuously increased.
6.2.1 The
mudflat monitoring covered water quality monitoring data. Reference was made to the water quality
monitoring data of the representative water quality monitoring station (i.e.
SR3) as in the EM&A Manual. The
water quality monitoring location (SR3) is shown in Figure 2.1.
6.2.2 Impact
water quality monitoring in San Tau (monitoring station SR3) was conducted in
June 2015. The monitoring
parameters included dissolved oxygen (DO), turbidity and suspended solids (SS).
6.2.3 The
Impact monitoring results for SR3 were extracted and summarised below:
Table 6.4 Impact
Water Quality Monitoring Results (Depth Average)
Date
|
Mid Ebb
Tide
|
Mid Flood
Tide
|
DO (mg/L)
|
Turbidity
(NTU)
|
SS (mg/L)
|
DO (mg/L)
|
Turbidity
(NTU)
|
SS (mg/L)
|
1-Jun-15
|
6.65
|
8.70
|
7.50
|
6.55
|
8.50
|
6.05
|
3-Jun-15
|
6.31
|
13.10
|
17.00
|
6.33
|
5.00
|
4.75
|
5-Jun-15
|
5.86
|
9.55
|
10.65
|
6.74
|
6.20
|
5.20
|
8-Jun-15
|
6.98
|
5.40
|
8.05
|
7.07
|
3.15
|
7.15
|
10-Jun-15
|
7.07
|
4.55
|
4.75
|
8.10
|
3.90
|
5.05
|
12-Jun-15
|
7.53
|
5.55
|
9.35
|
9.96
|
2.75
|
7.40
|
15-Jun-15
|
6.56
|
7.80
|
3.30
|
8.98
|
6.05
|
9.10
|
17-Jun-15
|
7.29
|
6.15
|
4.25
|
7.38
|
4.95
|
4.30
|
19-Jun-15
|
6.75
|
6.60
|
6.40
|
6.79
|
7.15
|
4.45
|
22-Jun-15
|
6.76
|
6.45
|
8.45
|
7.06
|
3.85
|
5.25
|
24-Jun-15
|
6.48
|
7.30
|
5.15
|
6.33
|
4.80
|
3.95
|
26-Jun-15
|
5.88
|
5.15
|
3.20
|
6.68
|
3.90
|
3.10
|
29-Jun-15
|
8.20
|
6.65
|
3.65
|
10.29
|
7.30
|
3.90
|
Average
|
6.79
|
7.15
|
7.05
|
7.56
|
5.19
|
5.36
|
Sampling Zone
6.3.1 In order to collect baseline information of mudflats in the study
site, the study site was divided into three sampling zones (labeled as TC1, TC2, TC3) in Tung Chung Bay and
one zone in San Tau (labeled as ST) (Figure 2.1 of Appendix
I). The
horizontal length of sampling zones TC1, TC2, TC3 and ST
were about 250 m, 300 m, 300 m and 250 m, respectively. Survey of horseshoe
crabs, seagrass beds and intertidal communities were conducted in every
sampling zone. The present survey was conducted in June 2015
(totally 6 sampling days between 6th and 20th June 2015).
Horseshoe Crabs
6.3.2 Active search method was conducted for horseshoe crab monitoring by two experienced surveyors at every sampling zone. During the search period, any accessible and potential area would
be investigated for any horseshoe crab individuals within 2-3 hours in low tide period (tidal level
below 1.2 m above Chart Datum (C.D.)). Once a horseshoe crab individual was found, the species was identified
referencing to Li (2008). The prosomal width, inhabiting substratum and respective GPS coordinate were recorded. A photographic
record was taken for future investigation. Any
grouping behavior of individuals, if found, was recorded. The horseshoe crab surveys were
conducted on 16th (for TC3 and ST) and 17th (for TC1 and
TC2) June 2015. The weather was hot and sunny on both survey days.
Seagrass Beds
6.3.3 Active search method was conducted for seagrass
bed monitoring by two experienced surveyors at every sampling zone. During the search period, any accessible and potential area would
be investigated for any seagrass beds within 2-3 hours in low tide period. Once seagrass bed was found, the species, estimated area, estimated coverage percentage and respective GPS coordinate were recorded. A photographic
record was taken for future investigation. The seagrass beds surveys were
conducted on 16th (for TC3 and ST) and 17th (for TC1 and
TC2) June 2015. The weather was hot and sunny on both survey days.
Intertidal Soft Shore Communities
6.3.4 The intertidal soft shore
community surveys were conducted in low tide period on 6th (for ST),
14th (for TC2), 15st (for TC3) and 20thJune
2015 (for TC1). At each sampling zone, three 100 m horizontal transects were laid
at high tidal level (H: 2.0 m above C.D.), mid tidal level (M: 1.5 m above C.D.) and
low tidal level (L: 1.0 m above C.D.). Along every horizontal transect, ten random quadrats
(0.5 m x 0.5m) were placed.
6.3.5 Inside a quadrat, any visible epifauna were
collected and were in-situ identified to the lowest
practical taxonomical resolution. Whenever possible a hand core sample (10 cm internal diameter ´ 20 cm depth) of sediments was collected
in the quadrat. The core sample was gently washed through a sieve of mesh size
2.0 mm in-situ. Any visible infauna
were collected and identified. Finally the top 5 cm surface sediments were dug for visible infauna in the quadrat regardless of hand core sample was
taken.
6.3.6 All collected fauna were released after recording except some tiny
individuals that are too small to be identified on site. These
tiny individuals were taken to laboratory for identification under dissecting microscope.
6.3.7 The taxonomic classification was conducted in accordance to the
following references: Polychaetes: Fauchald
(1977), Yang and Sun (1988); Arthropods: Dai and Yang (1991), Dong (1991); Mollusks: Chan and Caley (2003),
Qi (2004).
Data Analysis
6.3.8
Data collected from direct search and core
sampling was pooled in every quadrat for data analysis. Shannon-Weaver
Diversity Index (H¡¦) and Pielou¡¦s Species Evenness
(J) were calculated for every quadrat using the formulae below,
H¡¦= -£U ( Ni / N ) ln
( Ni / N ) (Shannon and Weaver, 1963)
J = H¡¦
/ ln S, (Pielou, 1966)
where S is the total number of species in the
sample, N is the total number of individuals, and Ni is the number of
individuals of the ith species.
6.4.1
In the event of the impact monitoring results
indicating that the density or the distribution pattern of intertidal fauna and
seagrass is found to be significant different to the baseline condition (taking
into account natural fluctuation in the occurrence and distribution pattern
such as due to seasonal change), appropriate actions should be taken and
additional mitigation measures should be implemented as necessary. Data should then be re-assessed and the
need for any further monitoring should be established. The action plan, as given in Table 6.5 should be undertaken within a
period of 1 month after a significant difference has been determined.
Table
6.5 Event and
Action Plan for Mudflat Monitoring
Event
|
ET Leader
|
IEC
|
SO
|
Contractor
|
Density or the distribution pattern of
horseshoe crab, seagrass or intertidal soft shore communities recorded in the
impact or post-construction monitoring are significantly lower than or different
from those recorded in the baseline
monitoring.
|
Review historical data to ensure
differences are as a result of natural variation or previously observed
seasonal differences;
Identify source(s) of impact;
Inform the IEC, SO and Contractor;
Check monitoring data;
Discuss additional monitoring and any other
measures, with the IEC and Contractor.
|
Discuss monitoring with the ET and the
Contractor;
Review proposals for additional monitoring
and any other measures submitted by the Contractor and advise the SO
accordingly.
|
Discuss with the IEC additional monitoring
requirements and any other measures proposed by the ET;
Make agreement on the measures to be
implemented.
|
Inform the SO and in writing;
Discuss with the ET and the IEC and propose
measures to the IEC and the ER;
Implement the agreed measures.
|
Notes:
ET ¡V Environmental Team
IEC ¡V Independent Environmental Checker
SO ¡V Supervising Officer
Horseshoe Crabs
6.5.1 In general, two species of horseshoe crab Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda
(total 66 ind.) and Tachypleus tridentatus (total 18 ind.) were recorded in the survey area. All individuals
were mainly found on fine sand or soft mud substrata. The group size varied
from 2 to 8 individuals for every sight record. Although less number of Tachypleus tridentatus
was recorded, the average body size was larger than that of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda.
Photo records were shown in Figure 3.1
of Appendix I while the complete records of horseshoe crab survey in every sampling
zone were shown in Annex II of Appendix I.
6.5.2 Table 3.1 of Appendix
I summarizes the survey
results of horseshoe crab in present survey. For Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda, it could be found in all sampling zones while more individuals were
recorded in TC1 and TC3 (TC1: 24 ind., TC2: 1 ind., TC3: 34 ind., ST: 7 ind.). The search record was 6.0 ind. hr-1 person-1, 0.3 ind. hr-1 person-1, 5.7 ind. hr-1 person-1,
1.2 ind. hr-1
person-1 in TC1, TC2, TC3 and ST respectively. Relatively TC3 was highest in number
of individuals but lots of individuals were smaller in size (mean prosomal width: 27.81 mm). Less numbers of
individuals were found in TC1 and ST but most of them were larger in size (TC1:
40.01 mm, ST: 48.96 mm). The largest individual reached 92.05 mm in TC1.
6.5.3 For Tachypleus tridentatus, it could be found in TC3 and ST only. There were 9 individuals found in
both sampling zones while search record was 1.5 ind. hr-1
person-1. The mean prosomal widths were
similar between two sampling zones (TC3: 50.31 mm, ST: 63.67 mm). The largest individual reached 118.34 mm in ST (Figure 3.1 of Appendix I).
6.5.4 In the previous survey of Mar.
2015, there was one important finding that a mating pair of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda was found in ST (prosomal width: male 155.1 mm, female 138.2 mm) (Figure 3.2 of Appendix I). It indicated the importance of ST as a breeding ground of horseshoe crab.
Moreover, two moults of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda were found in TC1 with similar prosomal width 130-140 mm (Figure 3.2 of Appendix I). It reflected that a certain numbers of moderately sized individuals
inhabited the sub-tidal habitat of Tung Chung Wan after its nursery period on
soft shore. These individuals might move onto soft shore during high tide for
feeding, moulting and breeding. Then it would return
to sub-tidal habitat during low tide. Because the mating pair should be inhabiting sub-tidal habitat in most of the time. The record
was excluded from the data analysis to avoid mixing up with juvenile population
living on soft shore.
6.5.5 No marked individual of horseshoe crab was recorded in present survey. Some marked
individuals were found in previous surveys conducted in September 2013, March
2014 and September 2014. All of them were released through a conservation programme conducted by Prof. Paul Shin (Department of
Biology and Chemistry, The City University of Hong Kong (CityU)).
It was a re-introduction trial of artificial bred horseshoe crab juvenile at
selected sites. So that the horseshoe crabs population might be restored in the
natural habitat. Through a personal conversation with Prof. Shin, about 100
individuals were released in the sampling zone ST on 20 June 2013. All of them
were marked with color tape and internal chip detected by specific chip sensor.
There should be second round of release between June and September 2014 since
new marked individuals were found in the survey of September 2014.
6.5.6 The artificial bred individuals, if found, would be excluded from the
results of present monitoring programme in order to
reflect the changes of natural population. However, the mark on their prosoma
might have been detached during moulting after a
certain period of release. The artificially released individuals were no longer
distinguishable from the natural population without the specific chip sensor.
The survey data collected would possibly cover both natural population and
artificially bred individuals.
Population difference among
the sampling zones
6.5.7 Figures 3.3 and 3.4 of Appendix I show the changes of number of individuals, mean prosomal width and search record of
horseshoe crabs Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda
and Tachypleus tridentatus respectively in every sampling
zone along the sampling months. In general, higher search records (i.e. number of individuals)
of both species were always found in ST followed by TC3 from September 2012 to
September 2014. Then the search record in TC3 was even higher than that in ST
from March 2015 to June 2015. For TC1, the search record was at low to medium
level and fluctuated slightly along the sampling months. In contrast,
much lower search record was found in TC2 (2 ind. in
Sep. 2013, 1 ind. in Mar., Jun., Sep. 2014, Mar. and
Jun 2015). Although there was no obvious spatial difference of horseshoe crab
size (prosomal width) among the sampling zones, larger individuals (prosomal
width > 80 mm) were usually found in TC1 and ST.
6.5.8
Throughout the monitoring period conducted, it was obvious that TC3 and ST (western
shore of Tung Chung Wan) was an important nursery ground for horseshoe crab
especially newly hatched individuals due to larger area of suitable substratum
(fine sand or soft mud) and less human disturbance (far from urban district).
Relatively, other sampling zones were not a suitable nursery ground especially
TC2. Possible factors were less area of suitable substratum (especially TC1)
and higher human disturbance (TC1 and TC2: close to urban district and easily
accessible). In TC2, large daily salinity fluctuation was a possible factor
either since it was flushed by two rivers under tidal inundation. The
individuals found in TC1 and TC2 were believed migrating from TC3 and ST during
high tide while it might leave over a certain period of time. It accounted for
the variable search records in the sampling zones along the sampling months.
For example, few individuals of Tachypleus tridentatus were found in TC1 only between
September 2012 and September 2013. However it no longer appeared while few
individuals of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda were found after March 2014..
Seasonal variation
of horseshoe crab population
6.5.9
Throughout the monitoring period conducted, the search record of
horseshoe crab declined obviously during dry season especially December (Figures 3.3 and 3.4 of Appendix I). No individual of horseshoe crabwas found in the survey of December 2013. Next year, 2 individuals of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda and 8 individuals of Tachypleus tridentatus were found only in December
2014. As mentioned, the
horseshoe crabs were inactive and burrowed in the sediments during cold weather
(<15 ºC).
Similar results of low search record in dry season were reported in a previous
territory-wide survey of horseshoe crab. For example, the search records in
Tung Chung Wan were 0.17 ind. hr-1 person-1and 0 ind. hr-1 person-1in wet season and dry season respectively (details see Li, 2008). After
the dry season, the search record increased with the warmer climate.
6.5.10 Between the sampling months
September 2012 and December 2013, Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda was a less common species relative to Tachypleus tridentatus. Only 4 individuals were ever
recorded in ST in December 2012. This species had ever been believed of very
low density in ST hence the encounter rate was very low. Since March 2014, it
was found in all sampling zones with higher abundance in ST. Based on its
average size (mean prosomal width 39.28-49.81 mm), it
indicated that breeding and spawning of this species had occurred 3-4 years ago
along the coastline of Tung Chun Wan. However, these individuals were still
small while their walking trails were inconspicuous. Hence there was no search
record in previous sampling months. From March 2014 to June 2015, more
individuals were recorded due to larger size and higher activity. Focused on
June 2015 (present survey), more small sized individuals (prosomal width 10-20
mm) were found in TC3 (specifically soft mud area between TC3 and ST), it
indicated another round of successful breeding and spawning of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda
along the western shore of Tung Chung Wan. It matched with the previous mating
record in March 2015.
6.5.11 For Tachypleus tridentatus, sharp increase of
number of individuals was recorded in ST with wet season (from March to September
2013). According to a personal conversation with Prof. Shin (CityU), his monitoring team had recorded similar increase
of horseshoe crab population during wet season. It was believed that the
suitable ambient temperature increased its conspicuousness. However similar
pattern was not recorded during the wet season of 2014. The
number of individuals increased in March and June 2014 followed by a rapid
decline in September 2014. The number of individuals showed a general
decreasing trend from March 2014 to June 2015. Apart from natural mortality,
migration from nursery soft shore to subtidal habitat was another possible
cause. Since the mean prosomal width of Tachypleus tridentatus continued to grow and reached
about 50 mm in March 2014. Then it varied slightly between 50-65 mm from
September 2014 to June 2015. Most of the individuals might have reached a
suitable size strong enough to forage in sub-tidal habitat.
6.5.12 Since TC3 and ST were regarded as
important nursery ground for horseshoe crab, box plots of prosomal width of two
horseshoe crab species were constructed to investigate the changes of
population in details.
Box plot of horseshoe
crab populations in TC3
6.5.13 Figure 3.5 of Appendix I shows the changes of prosomal width of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda and Tachypleus tridentatus in TC3. As mentioned above, Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda was rarely found between
September 2012 and December 2013 hence the data were lacking. In March 2014, the
major size (50% of
individual records between upper and lower quartile) ranged 40-60 mm while only
few individuals were found. From June 2014 to June 2015, the size of major
population decreased and ranged 20-40 mm while more individuals were recorded.
Such decline was possibly due to variable encounter rate influenced by weather.
6.5.14 For Tachypleus tridentatus, the major size ranged
20-50 mm while the number of individuals found fluctuated from September 2012
to June 2014. Then a slight but consistent growing trend was observed. The
prosomal width increased from 25-35 mm in September 2014 to 35-65 mm in June
2015. As mentioned, the large individuals might have reached a suitable
size for migrating from the nursery soft shore to subtidal habitat. It
accounted for the declined population in TC3.
Box plot of horseshoe
crab populations in ST
6.5.15 Figure 3.6 of Appendix I shows the changes of prosomal width of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda and Tachypleus tridentatus in ST. As mentioned above, Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda was rarely found between
September 2012 and December 2013 hence the data were lacking. From March 2014
to June 2015, the size of major population (50% records between upper and lower quartile) fluctuated
between 30-40 mm and 45-60
mm. Similar to TC3, such fluctuation should be due to variable encounter
rate influenced by weather.
6.5.16 For Tachypleus tridentatus, a consistent growing
trend was observed for the major population from December 2012 to December. 2014 regardless of change of search record. The prosomal
width increased from 15-30 mm to 55-70 mm. As mentioned, the large individuals might have reached a
suitable size for migrating from the nursery soft shore to subtidal habitat.
From March to June 2015, the size of major population decreased slightly with
prosomal width 40-60 mm. It further indicated some of order individuals might
have migrated to sub-tidal habitat.
Impact of the HKLR project
6.5.17 The present survey was the 11th
time of the EM&A programme during the
construction period. Based on the results, impact of
the HKLR project could not be detected on horseshoe crabs considering the
factor of natural, seasonal variation. In
case, abnormal phenomenon (e.g. very few numbers of horseshoe crab individuals
in warm weather, large number of dead individuals on the shore)
is observed, it would be reported as soon as possible.
Seagrass Beds
6.5.18 In general, two species of
seagrass Halophila ovalis and Zostera japonica were
recorded in ST only. Both species were found on sandy substratum nearby the seaward side of
mangrove vegetation at 2.0 m above C.D. Photo records were shown in Figure 3.7 of Appendix I while the complete records of seagrass beds survey were shown in Annex III of Appendix I.
6.5.19 Table 3.2 of Appendix I summarize the results of seagrass beds survey in ST. Two long strands (11.8-24.2 m) of Zostera japonica were found. The total seagrass bed area was about 90.0 m2 (average area 45.0 m2)
while
the estimated vegetation coverage was 50-80%. For Halophila ovalis, three small patches (1.0-3.4 m2) were found coinhabiting with the long strand of Zostera japonica. The total seagrass bed area was 6.8 m2 (average area 2.3 m2) while the estimated vegetation coverage was 50-80%.
Temporal variation of seagrass beds
6.5.20 Figure 3.8 of Appendix I shows the changes of estimated total area of seagrass beds in ST along the sampling months. For Zostera japonica, it was not recorded in the 1st and 2nd surveys
of monitoring programme. Seasonal recruitment of few,
small patches (total seagrass area: 10 m2) was found in March 2013
that grew within the large patch of seagrass Halophila ovalis. Then the patch size increased and merged gradually with the warmer
climate from March to June 2013 (15 m2). However the patch size
decreased sharply and remained similar from September 2013 (4 m2) to
March 2014 (3 m2). In June 2014, the patch size increased obviously
again (41 m2) with warmer climate. Similar to previous year, the
patch size decreased again and remained similar September 2014 (2 m2)
to December 2014 (5 m2). From March to June 2015, the patch size
increased sharply again (90.0 m2) and became the dominant seagrass
in ST. It might be due to the disappearance of the originally dominant seagrass
Halophila ovalis resulting in less competition
for substratum and nutrients.
6.5.21
For Halophila ovalis, it was recorded as 3-4 medium
to large patches (area 18.9-251.7 m2; vegetation coverage 50-80%)
beside the mangrove vegetation at tidal level 2 m above C.D in the September
2012 (First survey). The
total seagrass bed area grew steadily from 332.3 m2 in September
2012 to 727.4 m2 in December 2013. Flowers could be observed in the
largest patch during its flowering period in December 2013. In March 2014, 31 small to
medium patches were newly recorded (variable area 1-72 m2 per patch,
vegetation coverage 40-80% per patch) in lower tidal zone between 1.0 and 1.5 m
above C.D. The total seagrass area increased further to 1350 m2. In
June 2014, these small and medium patches grew and extended to each others.
These patches were no longer distinguishable and were covering a significant
mudflat area of ST. It was generally grouped into 4 large areas (1116 ¡V 2443 m2)
of seagrass beds characterized of patchy distribution, variable vegetable
coverage (40-80%) and smaller leaves. The total seagrass bed area increased
sharply to 7629 m2. In September 2014, the total seagrass area
declined sharply to 1111 m2. There were only 3-4 small to large
patches (6-253 m2) at high tidal level and 1 patch at low tidal
level (786 m2). Typhoon or strong water current
was a possible cause
(Fong, 1998). In September 2014, there were two tropical cyclone records in
Hong Kong (7th-8th September: no cyclone name, maximum
signal number 1; 14th-17th September: Kalmaegi
maximum signal number 8SE) before the seagrass survey dated 21st
September 2014. The strong water current caused by the cyclone, Kalmaegi especially, might have given damage to the
seagrass beds. In addition, natural heat stress and grazing force were other
possible causes reducing seagrass beds area. Besides, Halophila ovalis could be found in other mud flat area surrounding the single patch.
But it was hardly distinguished into patches due to very low coverage (10-20%)
and small leaves.
6.5.22 In December 2014, all the seagrass patches of Halophila ovalis disappeared in ST. Figure 3.9 of Appendix I shows the difference of the original seagrass beds area nearby the
mangrove vegetation at high tidal level between June 2014 and December 2014.
Such rapid loss would not be seasonal phenomenon because the seagrass beds at
higher tidal level (2.0 m above C.D.) were present and normal in December 2012
and 2013. According to Fong (1998), similar incident had occurred in ST in the
past. The original seagrass area had declined significantly during the
commencement of the construction and reclamation works for the international
airport at Chek Lap Kok in
1992. The seagrass almost disappeared in 1995 and recovered gradually after the
completion of reclamation works. Moreover, incident of rapid loss of seagrass
area was also recorded in another intertidal mudflat in Lai Chi Wo in 1998 with
unknown reason. Hence Halophila ovalis was regarded as a short-lived
and r-strategy seagrass that can
colonize areas in short period but disappears quickly under unfavourable
conditions (Fong, 1998).
Unfavourable conditions to seagrass Halophila ovalis
6.5.23 Typhoon or strong water current was
suggested as one unfavourable condition to Halophila ovalis (Fong, 1998). As mentioned above, there were two tropical cyclone
records in Hong Kong in September 2014. The strong water current caused by the
cyclones might have given damage to the seagrass beds.
6.5.24 Prolonged light deprivation due to turbid water would be another unfavouable condition. Previous studies reported that Halophila ovalis had little tolerance to light deprivation. During experimental darkness,
seagrass biomass declined rapidly after 3-6 days and seagrass died completely
after 30 days. The rapid death might be due to shortage of available
carbohydrate under limited photosynthesis or accumulation of phytotoxic end
products of anaerobic respiration (details see Longstaff
et al., 1999). Hence the seagrass bed
of this species was susceptible to temporary light deprivation events such as
flooding river runoff (Longstaff and Dennison, 1999).
6.5.25 In order to investigate any
deterioration of water quality (e.g. more turbid) in ST, the water quality
measurement results at two closest monitoring stations SR3 and IS5 of the
EM&A programme were obtained from the water
quality monitoring team. Based on the results from June to December 2014, the
overall water quality was in normal fluctuation except there was one exceedance
of suspended solids (SS) at both stations in September. On 10th
September, 2014, the SS concentrations measured at mid-ebb tide at stations SR3
(27.5 mg/L) and IS5 (34.5 mg/L) exceeded the Action Level (≤23.5 mg/L and 120%
of upstream control station¡¦s reading) and Limit Level (≤34.4 mg/L and 130% of
upstream control station¡¦s reading) respectively. The turbidity readings at SR3
and IS5 reached 24.8-25.3 NTU and 22.3-22.5 NTU respectively. The temporary
turbid water should not be caused by the runoff from upstream rivers. Because
there was no rain or slight rain from 1st to 10th
September 2014 (daily total rainfall at the Hong Kong International Airport:
0-2.1 mm; extracted from the climatological data of Hong Kong Observatory). The
effect of upstream runoff on water quality should be neglectable
in that period. Moreover the exceedance of water quality was considered
unlikely to be related to the contract works of HKLR according to the
¡¥Notifications of Environmental Quality Limits Exceedances¡¦ provided by the
respective environmental team. The respective construction of seawall and stone
column works, which possibly caused turbid water, were
carried out within silt curtain as recommended in the EIA report. Moreover
there was no leakage of turbid water, abnormity or malpractice recorded during
water sampling. In general, the exceedance of suspended solids concentration
was considered to be attributed to other external factors, rather than the
contract works.
6.5.26
Based on the weather condition and water quality results in ST, the
co-occurrence of cyclone hit and turbid waters in September 2014 might have
combined the adverse effects on Halophila ovalis that leaded to disappearance of this short-lived and r-strategy seagrass species. Fortunately
Halophila ovalis was a fast-growing species (Vermaat et al.,
1995). Previous studies showed that the seagrass bed could be recovered to the
original sizes in 2 months through vegetative propagation after experimental
clearance (Supanwanid, 1996). Moreover it was
reported to recover rapidly in less than 20 days after dugong herbivory (Nakaoka and Aioi, 1999). As
mentioned, the disappeared seagrass in ST in 1995 could recover gradually after
the completion of reclamation works for international airport (Fong, 1998). The
seagrass beds of Halophila ovalis might recolonize the mudflat of ST through seed reproduction as long
as there was no unfavourable condition in the coming
months.
6.5.27
From March to June 2015, 2-3 small
patches of Halophila ovalis were
newly found coinhabiting with another seagrass
species Zostera japonica. But its
total patch area was still very low relative to the previous records. The
recolonization rate was low while cold weather and insufficient sunlight were
possible factors between December 2014 and March 2015. Moreover, it would need
to complete with more abundant seagrass Zostera
japonica for substratum and nutrient. Since Zostera japonica had
extended and had covered the original seagrass bed of Halophila ovalis at certain degree. Therefore it was too early to conclude if Halophila ovalis would recolonize to its original
size. Or the dominance of seagrass bed would be replaced by Zostera
japonica. Regular monitoring was necessary.
6.5.28 In previous survey of Mar. 2015,
labelled sticks were inserted in the area where used to be the seagrass patch
of highest coverage. Through informal enquiry with AFCD staffs on site, the
sticks were used to trace the recolonization pattern of seagrass after the
rapid disappearance reported in December 2014. However, all labeled sticks were
removed and were no longer seen in present survey (June 2015)
Impact of the HKLR project
6.5.29
The present survey was the 11th survey of the EM&A programme during the construction period. According to the
results of present survey, there was recolonization of both
seagrass species Halophila ovalis and Zostera japonica in ST. The seagrass patches
were predicted to increase in the coming warm season. Hence the negative impact of HKLR project on the seagrass was not
significant. In case, adverse phenomenon (e.g.
reduction of seagrass patch size, abnormal change of leave colour) is observed again, it would
be reported as soon as possible.
Intertidal Soft Shore Communities
6.5.30 Table 3.3 and figure 3.10 of Appendix I show
the types of substratum along the horizontal transect at every tidal level in every sampling zone. The relative distribution of different substrata was
estimated by categorizing the substratum types (Gravels & Boulders / Sands /
Soft mud) of the ten random quadrats
along the horizontal transect. The distribution of
substratum types varied among tidal levels and sampling:
¡P In TC1, high
percentage of ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦ was recorded (80-100%) at high and mid
tidal levels. But the substratum type was diverse relatively at low tidal level.
Higher percentage of ¡¥Sands¡¦ (50%) was recorded followed by ¡¥Gravels and
Boulders¡¦ (30%) and ¡¥Soft mud¡¦ (20%).
¡P In TC2, the substratum
distribution was similar at high and mid tidal levels. Higher percentage of
¡¥Sands¡¦ (60%) was recorded followed by ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦ (30%). At low
tidal level, the major substratum was ¡¥Soft mud¡¦ (90%).
¡P In TC3, the substratum type was
clearly different between high-mid tidal level and low tidal level. ¡¥Sands¡¦ was the main substratum type (100%) at high and mid tidal
levels while ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦ was the main substratum type (90%) at low
tidal level.
¡P In ST, the substratum type was
clearly different between high-mid tidal level and low tidal level. ¡¥Gravels
and Boulders¡¦ (100%) was the main substratum at high and mid tidal levels. The
main substratum type was either ¡¥Soft mud¡¦ (50%) and ¡¥Sands¡¦ (40%) at low tidal
level.
6.5.31 There was neither consistent vertical nor horizontal zonation
pattern of substratum type in all sampling zones. Such heterogeneous variation should be caused by
different hydrology (e.g. wave in different direction and intensity) received
by the four sampling zones.
6.5.32 Table 3.4 of Appendix I lists
the total abundance, density and number of taxon of every phylum in
this survey. A total of 13359 individuals
were recorded. Mollusca
was significantly the
most abundant phylum (total individuals 12895, density 430 ind.
m-2, relative abundance 96.5%).
The second abundant phylum was Arthropoda (272 ind., 9 ind. m-2, 2.0%). The third and fourth abundant phyla were Annelida
(84 ind., 3 ind. m-2, 0.6%) and Sipuncula (62 ind., 2 ind. m-2, 0.5%). Relatively other phyla were very low in abundances (density £1 ind. m-2, relative abundance £0.2%). Moreover, the most diverse phylum was Mollusca (37 taxa)
followed by Arthropoda
(12 taxa) and Annelida (8 taxa). There were 1-2
taxa recorded only for other phyla. The
complete list of collected specimens is shown in Annex V of Appendix I.
6.5.33 Table 3.5 of Appendix
I show
the number of individual, relative abundance and density of each phylum in every sampling zone. The total abundance (3194-4481 ind.) varied among the four sampling zones while the phyla distributions were
similar. In general, Mollusca was the
most dominant phylum (no. of individuals: 3119-4357
ind.; relative abundance
96.6-97.7%; density 416-581 ind. m-2). Other phyla were significantly lower in number of individuals. Arthropoda was the second abundant phylum (23-90 ind.; 0.7-2.6%; 3-12 ind.
m-2). Annelida was the third abundant phylum (20-31 ind.;
0.5-0.9%; 3-4 ind. m-2) in TC1, TC2 and
TC3. Sipuncula was the third or fourth abundant phylum (20-24 ind.; 0.6-0.7%; 3 ind. m-2)
in TC3 and ST. Cnidaria (sea anemone) was the fourth
abundant phylum (14 ind.; 0.4%; 2 ind.
m-2) in ST. Relatively, other phyla were low in abundance among the
four sampling zones (≤ 0.3%).
Dominant species in every sampling zone
6.5.34 Table 3.6 of Appendix
I lists
the abundant species (relative abundance >10%) in every sampling
zone. In TC1, gastropod Batillaria
multiformis
was the most abundant clearly (698 ind. m-2,
relative abundance 82%) at high tidal level (major substratum: ¡¥Gravels
and Boulders¡¦). It was also the most abundant species at moderate-high density (264 ind. m-2, 45%) at
mid tidal level (major substratum: ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦). Gastropod Monodonta labio (60-117 ind. m-2, 17-20%) was
the second abundant species at low to moderate density at mid and low tidal
levels. Gastropod Cerithidea djadjariensis
(80 ind. m-2,
13%) was
the third abundant species at low density at mid tidal level. At low tidal
level (major substratum: ¡¥Sands¡¦), rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (111 ind. m-2,
32%, attached on boulders) was the most abundant at
moderate density at low tidal level. Gastropod Batillaria zonalis (41 ind. m-2, 12%) was
the third abundant species at low density at low tidal level.
6.5.35
At TC2, gastropod Cerithidea djadjariensis (198 ind.
m-2, 45%) was the most abundant at moderate density at high tidal level (major
substratum: ¡¥Sands¡¦). Rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata
(70 ind. m-2, 16%) and gastropod Cerithidea cingulata (58 ind. m-2,
13%) were the second and third abundant species
at low density. Relative to high tidal level, the density of every taxon was
much lower and similar at mid and low tidal levels. No dominant species was
determined. At mid tidal level (major substratum: ¡¥Sands¡¦), rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata
(66 ind. m-2, 25%), gastropods
Cerithidea djadjariensis (57 ind. m-2,
21%) and Batillaria zonalis (35 ind. m-2, 13%) were commonly
occurring at low density. At low tidal level (major substratum: ¡¥Soft mud¡¦), rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata
(27 ind. m-2, 21%), gastropods
Cerithidea djadjariensis (30 ind. m-2,
23%), Batillaria zonalis (25 ind. m-2, 19%) and
barnacle Balanus amphitrite (13 ind. m-2, 10%,
attached on boulders) were commonly
occurring at low density.
6.5.36 At TC3, gastropod
Cerithidea djadjariensis was the most abundant at moderate-high density (192-298 ind. m-2,
60-64%) at high and mid tidal levels (major
substratum: ¡¥Sands¡¦)
followed by gastropod Cerithidea cingulata (58-116 ind. m-2,
19-24%) at
low to moderate density. Besides Batillaria multiformis (52 ind. m-2,
11%) was the third abundant species at high tidal
level at low density. At
low tidal level (major substratum: ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦), gastropod
Monodonta labio
(255 ind. m-2,
40%) and rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (229 ind. m-2,
36%) were both dominant and at moderate-high
density.
6.5.37 At ST, gastropod Batillaria
multiformis
was most abundant (276 ind. m-2,
42%) at high tidal level (major substratum:
¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦) followed by gastropod Monodonta labio (194 ind. m-2, 17%). Both
dominant species were at moderate-high density. At mid tidal level (major
substratum: ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦), gastropod Monodonta
labio (154 ind. m-2, 31%) was
the most abundant at moderate density. Other less abundant species were rock
oyster Saccostrea cucullata (89 ind. m-2, 18%) and gastropod Lunella coronata (56 ind. m-2,
11%) at low densities. At low tidal level (major
substrata: ¡¥Sands¡¦ and ¡¥Soft mud¡¦), gastropods Lunella
coronata (30 ind. m-2,
22%), Batillaria zonalis (21 ind. m-2, 15%), Cerithidea djadjariensis (16 ind. m-2,
12%), Batillaria bornii (13 ind. m-2,
10%) and rock oyster Saccostrea
cucullata (20 ind. m-2,
15%) were common taxa at low densities.
6.5.38 There was no consistent zonation pattern of
species distribution observed across all sampling
zones and tidal levels. The species distribution should be
affected by the type of substratum primarily. In general, gastropods Batillaria multiformis
(total number of individuals: individuals: 3454 ind.,
relative abundance 25.9%), Cerithidea djadjariensis (2395
ind., 17.9%) and Cerithidea cingulata (781 ind., 5.8%) were the most commonly occurring species on
sandy and soft mud substrata. Rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (1923 ind., 14.4%) and gastropod Monodonta
labio (2227 ind.,
16.7%) were commonly occurring species inhabiting
gravel and boulders substratum.
Biodiversity and abundance of soft
shore communities
6.5.39 Table 3.7 of Appendix
I shows the mean values of
number of species, density, biodiversity index H¡¦ and species evenness J of soft shore communities at every tidal level and in every sampling zone. Among the sampling zones, the
number of species (7-13 spp. 0.25 m-2) in ST was relatively higher
than other sampling zones (6-11 spp. 0.25 m-2). The mean H¡¦ (1.66) and J (0.74) in ST were relatively higher than that in TC1, TC2 and TC3
(H¡¦: 1.08-1.48; J: 0.54-0.76). The mean densities were highly variable and ranged
129-849 ind. m-2. No general difference
was observed among the sampling zones.
6.5.40 Across the tidal levels, there
was no consistent difference of the mean number of species, H¡¦ and J in all sampling zones. For the mean density, a general decreasing
trend was observed from high tidal level to low tidal level at TC1, TC2 and ST.
At TC3, the mean density at low tidal level was higher than that at high and
mid tidal levels. As mentioned, the variation of mean density should be
determined by the type of substratum primarily.
6.5.41 Figures 3.11 to 3.14 of Appendix I show the temporal changes of mean number of species, mean density,
H¡¦ and J at every tidal level and in every sampling
zone along the sampling months. No consistent temporal change of any biological
parameters was observed. All the parameters were under slight and natural
fluctuation with the seasonal variation.
Impact of the HKLR project
6.5.42 The present survey was the 11th
survey of the EM&A programme during the construction period. Based on the results, impacts
of the HKLR project were not detected on intertidal soft shore community. In
case, abnormal phenomenon (e.g. large reduction of fauna densities and species
number) is observed, it would be reported as soon as possible.
6.6.1 Chan, K.K., Caley, K.J., 2003.
Sandy Shores, Hong Kong Field Guides 4. The Department of Ecology &
Biodiversity, The University of Hong Kong. pp 117.
6.6.2 Dai, A.Y., Yang, S.L., 1991. Crabs of the China Seas. China Ocean
Press. Beijing.
6.6.3 Dong, Y.M.,
1991. Fauna of ZheJiang Crustacea. Zhejiang Science and
Technology Publishing House. ZheJiang.
6.6.4 EPD, 1997. Technical
Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (1st edition).
Environmental Protection Department, HKSAR Government.
6.6.5 Fauchald, K., 1977. The
polychaete worms. Definitions
and keys to the orders, families and genera. Natural
History Museum of Los Angeles County, Science Series 28. Los Angeles,
U.S.A.
6.6.6 Fong, C.W., 1998. Distribution of Hong Kong seagrasses. In: Porcupine! No. 18.
The School of Biological Sciences, The University of Hong Kong, in
collaboration with Kadoorie Farm & Botanic Garden
Fauna Conservation Department, p10-12.
6.6.7 Li, H.Y., 2008. The Conservation of Horseshoe Crabs in Hong Kong. MPhil Thesis, City University of Hong Kong, pp 277.
6.6.8 Longstaff, B.J., Dennison, W.C., 1999.
Seagrass survival during pulsed turbidity events: the effects of light
deprivation on the seagrasses Halodule pinifolia and Halophila ovalis. Aquatic Botany 65 (1-4), 105-121.
6.6.9 Longstaff, B.J., Loneragan,
N.R., O¡¦Donohue, M.J., Dennison, W.C., 1999. Effects of light deprivation on the survival and recovery of the
seagrass Halophila ovalis (R.
Br.) Hook. Journal of Experimental Marine
Biology and Ecology 234 (1), 1-27.
6.6.10 Nakaoka, M., Aioi,
K., 1999. Growth of seagrass Halophila ovalis at dugong trails compared to
existing within-patch variation in a Thailand intertidal flat. Marine
Ecology Progress Series 184, 97-103.
6.6.11 Pielou, E.C., 1966. Shannon¡¦s formula
as a measure of species diversity: its use and misuse. American Naturalist 100,
463-465.
6.6.12 Qi, Z.Y., 2004. Seashells of China. China Ocean Press.
Beijing, China.
6.6.13 Qin, H., Chiu, H., Morton, B.,
1998. Nursery beaches for Horseshoe Crabs in Hong Kong.
In: Porcupine! No.
18. The School of Biological Sciences, The University of Hong Kong, in
collaboration with Kadoorie Farm & Botanic Garden
Fauna Conservation Department, p 9-10.
6.6.14 Shannon, C.E., Weaver, W., 1963. The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Urbana:
University of Illinois
Press, USA.
6.6.15 Shin, P.K.S.,
Li, H.Y., Cheung, S.G., 2009. Horseshoe Crabs in Hong Kong:
Current Population Status and Human Exploitation. Biology and
Conservation of Horseshoe Crabs (part 2), 347-360.
6.6.16 Supanwanid, C., 1996. Recovery
of the seagrass Halophila ovalis after
grazing by dugong. In: Kuo, J., Philips, R.C.,
Walker, D.I., Kirkman, H. (eds), Seagrass biology: Proc
Int workshop, Rottenest Island, Western Australia.
Faculty of Science, The University of Western
Australia, Nedlands, 315-318.
6.6.17 Vermaat, J.E., Agawin,
N.S.R., Duarte, C.M., Fortes, M.D., Marba. N., Uri,
J.S., 1995. Meadow maintenance, growth and productivity of a
mixed Philippine seagrass bed. Marine Ecology Progress Series 124,
215-225.
6.6.18 Yang, D.J, Sun,
R.P., 1988. Polychaetous annelids commonly seen from the Chinese waters (Chinese version).
China Agriculture Press, China.
7
Environmental Site
Inspection and Audit
7.1.1 Site
Inspections were carried out on a weekly basis to monitor the implementation of
proper environmental pollution control and mitigation measures for the Project.
During the reporting month, four site inspections were carried out on 3, 10, 17
and 26 June 2015.
7.1.2 Particular
observations during the site inspections and the follow up actions
taken by the Contractor are described below.
3 June 2015
(a)
A few patches of
concrete waste was observed on the ground at N20. This
observation was found on 30 April 2015. The Contractor was reminded
to remove the concrete waste at N20 as soon as possible.
(b)
The length of wheel washing bay at N20 is too
short. This observation was found on 29 May 2015. The Contractor was reminded
to modify the wheel washing bay.
(c)
Gap was found at the silt curtain. The gap was
filled with an additional silt curtain at Portion X. This
observation was found on 29 May 2015 and closed on 3 June 2015.
(d)
Chemical containers were not properly stored on
Vessel Shun Tat 82. The chemical containers were removed at Shun Tat 82.
This observation was found on 29 May 2015 and closed on 3 June 2015.
(e)
Sand bags along the water barrier at Airport
Road were insufficient. Sand bags were
provided along the entire site boundary at Airport Road to avoid water seepage
at N20. This observation was found on 29 May 2015 and
closed on 3 June 2015.
(f)
Stagnant water was observed at the surface
channel at N20. The stagnant water was removed at the surface channel at N20. This
observation was found on 29 May 2015 and closed on 3 June 2015.
(g)
The gully was exposed at N20. A cover was
provided for the gully at N20 to avoid washing away of silt or other objects
into the drainage system. This observation was found on 29 May 2015 and
closed on 3 June 2015.
(h)
Muddy water was
discharged without any treatment at S7. The muddy water was cleaned at S7. This
observation was found on 3 June 2015 and closed on 10 June 2015.
(i)
Rubbish was
accumulated at S16. The rubbish was removed by a truck at S16. This
observation was found on 3 June 2015 and closed on 10 June 2015.
(j)
Construction waste
near abandoned cement mixing plant was not removed at S15. The construction
waste near abandoned cement mixing plant was removed at S15. This
observation was found on 3 June 2015 and closed on 10 June 2015.
(k)
Abandoned water barriers and rubbish were placed
near the resting station at N4. The abandoned water barriers and rubbish were
removed at N4. This observation was found on 3 June 2015 and
closed on 10 June 2015.
(l)
Silt curtains were
not maintained in accordance with the design plan at Portion X. The silt
curtains were maintained in accordance with the design plan at Portion X. This
observation was found on 3 June 2015 and closed on 10 June 2015.
(m)
A diesel container
was observed without a drip tray at N4. The diesel container was removed at N4.
This observation was found on 3 June 2015 and
closed on 10 June 2015.
10 June 2015
(a)
A few patches of
concrete waste was observed on the ground at N20. This
observation was found on 30 April 2015. The Contractor was reminded
to remove the concrete waste at N20 as soon as possible.
(b)
The length of wheel washing bay at N20 is too
short. This observation was found on 29 May 2015. The Contractor was reminded
to modify the wheel washing bay.
(c)
A green screen used
to cover sand stockpile was broken at N1. A new green screen of sand stockpile
was provided at N1. This observation was found on 10 June 2015
and closed on 17 June 2015.
(d)
Unpaved road and stockpiles were observed to be
dry at S15. The unpaved road and
stockpiles were sprayed with water at S15. This
observation was found on 10 June 2015 and closed on 17 June 2015.
(e)
A sand stockpile was
observed to be dry at S22. The sand stockpile was removed at S22. This
observation was found on 10 June 2015 and closed on 17 June 2015.
(f)
No water spraying was provided for the
percussive activity at S8-9. Water
spraying was provided for the percussive activity at S8-9. This observation was
found on 10 June 2015 and closed on 17 June 2015.
(g)
Silt curtains were
not maintained in accordance with the design plan at Portion X. The silt
curtains were maintained in accordance with the design plan at Portion X. This
observation was found on 10 June 2015 and closed on 26 June 2015.
17 June 2015
(a)
A few patches of
concrete waste was observed on the ground at N20. This
observation was found on 30 April 2015. The Contractor was reminded
to remove the concrete waste at N20 as soon as possible.
(b)
The length of wheel washing bay at N20 is too
short. This observation was found on 29 May 2015. The Contractor was reminded
to modify the wheel washing bay.
(c)
An inadequate wheel washing facility was provided
at the entrance/exit of N1. This observation was found on 17 June 2015. The Contractor was reminded
to provide standard wheel washing facility at N1.
(d)
Concrete waste was observed on the ground at N1.
This observation was
found on 17 June 2015. The Contractor was reminded to remove the concrete waste
at N1.
(e)
Water spraying system did not function at S15.
Water spraying system was used at S15. This observation was found on 17 June 2015 and
closed on 26 June 2015.
(f)
Rubbish was accumulated at S16. Accumulated
rubbish at S16 was cleared. This observation was found on 17 June 2015 and closed on 26 June 2015.
(h)
Silt curtains were
not maintained in accordance with the design plan at Portion X. The silt
curtains were maintained in accordance with the design plan at Portion X. This
observation was found on 17 June 2015 and closed on 26 June 2015.
26 June 2015
(a)
A few patches of
concrete waste was observed on the ground at N20. This
observation was found on 30 April 2015. The Contractor was reminded
to remove the concrete waste at N20 as soon as possible.
(b)
The length of wheel washing bay at N20 is too
short. This observation was found on 29 May 2015. The Contractor was reminded
to modify the wheel washing bay.
(c) An inadequate wheel washing facility was provided at the entrance/exit
of N1. This observation was found on 17 June 2015. The Contractor was reminded
to provide standard wheel
washing facility at N1.
(d) Concrete waste was observed on the ground at N1. This observation was found
on 17 June 2015. The Contractor was reminded to remove the concrete waste at
N1.
(e) Construction materials along the
deck of barge was observed at
Harbour Sky No. 68 at Portion X. The Contractor was reminded to clean up the
construction materials at Harbour Sky No. 68.
(f)
Stagnant water was found at
surface channel at site access of N1. The Contractor was reminded to remove
stagnant water at site access of N1.
(g)
Uneven ground was observed at
N1. The Contractor was reminded to level the ground to avoid accumulation of
water at N1.
(h)
Uneven ground was observed at
S19 site access. The Contractor was reminded to level the ground to avoid
accumulation of water at S19 site access.
The
Contractor has rectified most of the observations as
identified during environmental site inspections during the reporting month. Follow-up
actions for outstanding observations will be inspected during the next site
inspections.
7.2
Advice on the Solid and Liquid Waste Management Status
7.2.1 The
Contractor registered as a chemical waste producer for the Project. Sufficient
numbers of receptacles were available for general refuse collection and
sorting.
7.2.2
Monthly summary of waste flow table is detailed
in Appendix J.
7.2.3 The
Contractor was reminded that chemical waste containers should be properly
treated and stored temporarily in designated chemical waste storage area on
site in accordance with the Code of Practise on the Packaging, Labelling and
Storage of Chemical Wastes.
7.3.1 The valid
environmental licenses and permits during the reporting month are summarized in
Appendix L.
7.4.1 In
response to the site audit findings, the Contractors have rectified most of the observations as
identified during environmental site inspections during the reporting month.
Follow-up actions for outstanding observations will be inspected during the
next site inspections.
7.4.2 A summary
of the Implementation Schedule of Environmental Mitigation Measures (EMIS) is
presented in Appendix M. Most of
the necessary mitigation measures were implemented properly.
7.4.3
Regular marine travel route for
marine vessels were implemented properly in accordance to the submitted plan
and relevant records were kept properly.
7.4.4
Dolphin Watching Plan was
implemented during the reporting month. No dolphins inside the silt curtain
were observed. The relevant records were kept properly.
7.5.1 No Action and Limit Level exceedances of 1-hour TSP and 24-hour TSP were recorded at AMS5 and AMS6 during the reporting month.
7.5.2
For construction noise, no Action and Limit Level exceedances were
recorded at the monitoring stations during the reporting month.
7.5.3 For marine water quality monitoring, no Action Level and Limit
Level exceedances of turbidity level, dissolved
oxygen level and suspended solid level were recorded during the reporting
month.
7.6
Summary of Complaints, Notification of Summons and
Successful Prosecution
7.6.1 There were no complaints received during the reporting month. The details of cumulative
statistics of Environmental Complaints are provided in Appendix K.
7.6.2 No
notification of summons and prosecution was received during the reporting
period.
7.6.3 Statistics
on notifications of summons and successful prosecutions are summarized in Appendix N.
8.1.1 As
informed by the Contractor, the
major construction activities for July 2015 are summarized in Table 8.1.
Table 8.1 Construction
Activities for July 2015
Site
Area
|
Description
of Activities
|
Portion X
|
Dismantling/Trimming of Temporary 40mm Stone
Platform for Construction of Seawall
|
Portion X
|
Filling Works behind Stone Platform
|
Portion X
|
Construction
of Seawall
|
Portion X
|
Loading and
Unloading of Filling Material
|
Portion X
|
Temporary Stone Platform
Construction
|
Portion X
|
Pipe Piling
|
Portion X
|
Excavation and Lateral
Support Works at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Laying blinding layer for
tunnel box structure at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Construction of tunnel
box structure at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Socket H-Piling work at
Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel
|
Portion X
|
Excavation works for
HKBCF to Airport Tunnel
|
Portion X
|
Socket H-Piling work for
HKBCF to Airport Tunnel East (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Pipe Piling works for
HKBCF to Airport Tunnel East (Cut &Cover Tunnel)
|
Airport Road
|
Works for
Diversion of Airport Road
|
Airport Road / Airport Express
Line/East Coast Road
|
Utilities Detection
|
Airport Road / Airport
Express Line/East Coast Road
|
Establishment of Site
Access
|
Airport Express Line
|
Canopy Pipe Drilling
underneath Airport Express Line
|
Kwo Lo Wan Road
|
Excavation and Lateral
Support Works at shaft 3 extension north shaft & south shaft
|
Airport Road
|
Excavation and Lateral
Support Works for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel West (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion Y
|
Utility Culvert
Excavation
|
Portion Y
|
Highway Operation and
Maintenance Area Building
Foundation Works
|
West Portal
|
Excavation for Scenic
Hill Tunnel
|
West Portal
|
Ventilation Building
Foundation Works
|
8.2
Environmental Monitoring Schedule for the
Coming Month
8.2.1
The tentative schedule for environmental monitoring in July 2015 is
provided in Appendix D.
9.1.1 The
construction phase and EM&A programme of the Contract commenced on 17
October 2012.
Air Quality
9.1.2
No Action and Limit Level
exceedances of 1-hour
TSP and 24-hr TSP level were recorded at AMS5 and AMS6 during the reporting
month.
Noise
9.1.3 For
construction noise, no Action and Limit Level exceedances were recorded at the
monitoring stations during the reporting month.
Water Quality
9.1.4
For marine water quality monitoring, no Action Level and Limit
Level exceedances of turbidity level, dissolved
oxygen level and suspended solid level were recorded during the reporting month.
Dolphin
9.1.5
During the June¡¦s surveys of the Chinese White
Dolphin, no adverse impact from the activities of this construction project on Chinese White Dolphins was
noticeable from general observations.
9.1.6
Due to monthly variation in dolphin occurrence within the study area, it
would be more appropriate to draw conclusion on whether any impacts on dolphins
have been detected related to the construction activities of this project in
the quarterly EM&A report, where comparison on distribution, group size and
encounter rates of dolphins between the quarterly impact monitoring period (June 2015 ¡V August 2015) and
baseline monitoring period (3-month period) will be made.
Mudflat
9.1.7 This measurement result was
generally and relatively higher than the baseline measurement at S1, S2, S3 and
S4. The mudflat level is continuously increased.
9.1.8 The June 2015 survey results
indicate that the impacts of the HKLR project could not
be detected on horseshoe crabs and intertidal soft shore community. Based on
the results, there was recolonization of both seagrass species Halophila ovalis and Zostera japonica in ST. The seagrass patches
were predicted to increase in the coming warm season. Hence the negative impact of HKLR project on the seagrass was not
significant.
Environmental Site
Inspection and Audit
9.1.9
Environmental site inspection
was carried out on 3, 10, 17, and 26 June 2015. Recommendations on remedial actions were
given to the Contractors for the deficiencies identified during the site
inspections.
9.1.10 There were no complaints received in relation to the environmental impact during the
reporting period.
9.1.11
No
notification of summons and prosecution was received during the reporting
period.