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/K for HKBCF were issued on 22 December
2014 and 11 April 2016, 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 forty-fifth 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 2016.
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 during this reporting month is listed below:
1-hr TSP
Monitoring
|
6, 10, 16, 22 and 28 June 2016
|
24-hr TSP
Monitoring at AMS5
|
3, 8, 14, 20, 24 and 30
June 2016
|
24-hr TSP
Monitoring at AMS6
|
7, 8, 14, 20, 24 and 30
June 2016
|
Noise
Monitoring
|
6, 16, 22 and 28 June 2016
|
Water Quality
Monitoring
|
1, 3, 6, 8, 10, 13, 15, 17, 20, 22, 24, 27 and 29 June 2016
|
Chinese White
Dolphin Monitoring
|
1, 6, 13 and 17 June 2016
|
Mudflat
Monitoring (Sedimentation Rate)
|
2 June 2016
|
Mudflat
Monitoring (Ecology)
|
4, 5, 6, 18 and 19 June 2016
|
Site
Inspection
|
1, 8, 15, 22
and 28 June 2016
|
Due to power interruption and malfunction of HVS at
station AMS5, the 24-hr TSP monitoring at AMS5 was rescheduled from 3 June 2016
to 7 June 2016.
Due to clash of schedule, the dolphin monitoring
schedule was rescheduled from 20 June 2016 to 17 June 2016.
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 was one complaint
received in relation to the environmental impacts during the reporting period.
A summary of environmental
complaints for this reporting month is as follows:
Environmental Complaint No.
|
Date of Complaint Received
|
Description of Environmental Complaints
|
COM-2016-087
|
28 June 2016
|
Water Quality
|
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.
Transect lines 1, 2, 7, 8,
9 and 11 for dolphin monitoring have been revised due to the obstruction of the
permanent structures associated with the construction works of HKLR and the
southern viaduct of TM-CLKL, as well as provision of adequate buffer distance
from the Airport Restricted Areas.
The EPD issued a memo and confirmed that they had no objection on the
revised transect lines on 19 August 2015.
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:
- Dismantling/trimming
of Temporary 40mm Stone Platform for Construction of Seawall at Portion X;
- Filling Works behind
Stone Platform at Portion X;
- Construction of
Seawall at Portion X;
- Loading and Unloading
Filling Material at Portion X;
- Pipe Piling at Portion
X;
- Excavation and Lateral
Support Works at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel) at Portion X;
- Construction of Tunnel
Box Structure at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel) at Portion X;
- Pipe Piling, Sheet
Piling and Jet Grouting Works for Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover
Tunnel) at Portion X and Y;
¡P
Lateral support works at shaft
3 extension north shaft (Package T1.12.1) at Kwo Lo Wan Road;
- Excavation for HKBCF
to Airport Tunnel at Portion X;
- Excavation for
Diversion of culvert PR9 and PR14 at Portion X;
¡P
Works for Diversion of
Airport Road;
- Utilities Detection at
Airport Road / Airport Express Line/ East Coast Road;
- Establishment of Site
Access at Airport Road / Airport Express Line/East Coast Road;
- Pipe Roofing Drilling/
Mined Tunnel Excavation / Box Jacking underneath Airport Road and Airport
Express Line;
- Excavation and Lateral
Support Works for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel East (Cut & Cover Tunnel) at
Portion X;
- Excavation and Lateral
Support Works for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel West (Cut & Cover Tunnel) at
Airport Road;
¡P
Canopy pipe installation for
HKBCF to Airport Tunnel West (Cut & Cover Tunnel) at Airport Road;
- Utility Culvert
Excavation at Portion Y;
- Sub-structure &
superstructure works for Highway Operation and Maintenance Area Building
at Portion Y;
- Excavation for Scenic
Hill Tunnel at West Portal; and
¡P
Superstructure works for Scenic Hill Tunnel
West Portal Ventilation building 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/K for HKBCF were issued on 22 December
2014 and 11 April 2016, 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.
1.1.6 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
|
Pipe piling
|
Portion X
|
Excavation and lateral support works for Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut &
Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Construction of tunnel box structure at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut &
Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Pipe piling and
sheet piling works for Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X and Y
|
Excavation for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel
|
Portion X
|
Works for diversion
|
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 / Box Jacking underneath
Airport Express Line
|
Airport
Express Line
|
Pipe roofing drilling / Mined Tunnel
excavation underneath Airport Road
|
Airport Road
|
Lateral support works at shaft 3 extension
north shaft & south shaft (Package T1.12.1)
|
Kwo Lo Wan
Road
|
Excavation and Lateral Support Works for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel West
(Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Airport Road
|
Excavation and Lateral Support Works for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel East
(Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Utility culvert excavation
|
Portion Y
|
Sub-structure & superstructure works for Highway Operation and
Maintenance Area Building
|
Portion Y
|
Superstructure works for Scenic Hill Tunnel West Portal Ventilation
building
|
West Portal
|
Excavation for Scenic Hill Tunnel
|
West Portal
|
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 in June
2016 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
|
93
|
83 - 108
|
352
|
500
|
AMS6
|
98
|
84 - 153
|
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
|
36
|
22 - 79
|
164
|
260
|
AMS6
|
42
|
26 - 63
|
173
|
260
|
2.7.2 No Action and Limit Level exceedances of 1-hr TSP
and 24-hr 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
(d) 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.
(e) 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.
(f) 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.
(g) 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 2016 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
|
65
|
61 ¡V 71
|
75
|
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 is detected, and that timely
action is 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
summarizes 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 summarizes 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 2016 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 exceedances of turbidity level, dissolved
oxygen level and suspended solid level were recorded during the reporting month.
4.7.3 Water
quality impact sources during water quality monitoring were the construction
activities of the Contract, nearby construction activities by other parties and
nearby operating vessels by other parties.
4.7.4
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. The coordinates of several starting
points have been revised due to the obstruction of the permanent structures
associated with the construction works of HKLR and the southern viaduct of
TM-CLKL, as well as provision of adequate buffer distance from the Airport
Restricted Areas. The EPD issued a memo and
confirmed that they had no objection on the revised transect lines on 19 August 2015, and the revised coordinates are in red and marked with
an asterisk in Table 5.2.
Table 5.2 Co-ordinates
of Transect Lines
Line No.
|
Easting
|
Northing
|
|
Line No.
|
Easting
|
Northing
|
1
|
Start Point
|
804671
|
815456*
|
|
13
|
Start Point
|
816506
|
819480
|
1
|
End Point
|
804671
|
831404
|
|
13
|
End Point
|
816506
|
824859
|
2
|
Start Point
|
805475
|
815913*
|
|
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
|
820880*
|
|
19
|
Start Point
|
822513
|
823268
|
7
|
End Point
|
810499
|
824613
|
|
19
|
End Point
|
822513
|
824321
|
8
|
Start Point
|
811508
|
821123*
|
|
20
|
Start Point
|
823477
|
823402
|
8
|
End Point
|
811508
|
824254
|
|
20
|
End Point
|
823477
|
824613
|
9
|
Start Point
|
812516
|
821303*
|
|
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
|
818853*
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note:
Co-ordinates in red and marked with asterisk are revised co-ordinates of
transect line.
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 18 years of marine mammal
monitoring surveys in Hong Kong developed by HKCRP (see Hung 2015). 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
2016, two sets of systematic line-transect
vessel surveys were conducted on the 1st,
6th, 13th and 17th 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 296.49
km of survey effort was collected, with
86.0% 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, 112.39
km and 184.10
km of survey effort were collected from
NEL and NWL survey areas respectively. Moreover,
the total survey effort conducted on primary lines was
217.54 km, while the effort on secondary lines
was 78.95
km.
5.3.3
During the two
sets of monitoring surveys in June 2016, only a single Chinese White Dolphin
was sighted in NEL waters, while no dolphins were sighted at all in NWL (Annex II of Appendix H). Notably, this is the second consecutive
months with no dolphin sightings made in NWL waters during the HKLR03
monitoring surveys, while the lone NEL sighting was the only one made since
June 2015.
5.3.4
During the June¡¦s surveys, the
single dolphin was sighted during off-effort search, and it was not associated
with any operating fishing vessel.
5.3.5
Distribution of
this lone dolphin sighting made in June 2016 is shown in Figure 6 of Appendix H.
The lone dolphin occurred near the stretch of coastline between Sham Shui Kok
and Yam O, and was observed only briefly before it disappeared. (Figure 6 of Appendix H).
5.3.6
This dolphin sighting was located far away
from the HKLR03/HKBCF reclamation sites as well as the HKLR09/TMCLKL
alignments. (Figure 6 of
Appendix H).
5.3.7 During
the 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.
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 1st / 6th
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
Set 2: June 13th / 17th
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
NWL
|
Set 1: June 1st / 6th
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
Set 2: June 13th / 17th
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
Remarks:
1. Dolphin Encounter Rates Deduced from the Two
Sets of Surveys (Two Surveys in Each Set) in June 2016 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
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
Northwest Lantau
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
Remarks:
1.
Monthly Average Dolphin Encounter Rates (Sightings Per 100 km of
Survey Effort) from All Four Surveys Conducted in June 2016 on Primary Lines only as well as Both Primary
Lines and Secondary Lines in Northeast (NEL) and Northwest Lantau (NWL).
Photo-identification Work
5.3.8
Attempt was unsuccessful in
obtaining photos from the lone dolphin occurred in NEL waters during this
monitoring month, as its behaviour was quite cryptic and the animal disappeared
quickly after being sighted.
Conclusion
5.3.9 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.
5.3.10 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 - August 2016) 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. 2015. Monitoring of Marine Mammals in Hong
Kong waters: final report (2014-15).
An unpublished report submitted to the Agriculture, Fisheries and
Conservation Department, 198 pp.
5.4.3 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 2
June 2016. 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 2016)
|
Monitoring Station
|
Easting (m)
|
Northing (m)
|
Surface Level
(mPD)
|
Easting (m)
|
Northing (m)
|
Surface Level
(mPD)
|
S1
|
810291.160
|
816678.727
|
0.950
|
810291.141
|
816678.735
|
1.073
|
S2
|
810958.272
|
815831.531
|
0.864
|
810958.261
|
815831.556
|
0.989
|
S3
|
810716.585
|
815953.308
|
1.341
|
810716.670
|
815953.302
|
1.468
|
S4
|
811221.433
|
816151.381
|
0.931
|
811221.408
|
816151.338
|
1.104
|
Table 6.3 Comparison
of measurement
|
Comparison
of measurement
|
Remarks and Recommendation
|
Monitoring
Station
|
Easting
(m)
|
Northing
(m)
|
Surface
Level
(mPD)
|
S1
|
-0.019
|
0.008
|
0.123
|
Level continuously
increased
|
S2
|
-0.011
|
0.025
|
0.125
|
Level continuously
increased
|
S3
|
0.085
|
-0.006
|
0.127
|
Level continuously
increased
|
S4
|
-0.025
|
0.006
|
0.173
|
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 2016. 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-16
|
9.01
|
6.85
|
4.80
|
10.30
|
5.35
|
10.60
|
3-Jun-16
|
9.55
|
6.45
|
3.15
|
8.60
|
8.70
|
7.60
|
6-Jun-16
|
5.79
|
5.75
|
5.15
|
5.66
|
5.70
|
5.50
|
8-Jun-16
|
5.14
|
6.80
|
3.95
|
5.39
|
2.55
|
7.35
|
10-Jun-16
|
7.81
|
2.20
|
4.65
|
6.64
|
2.35
|
3.00
|
13-Jun-16
|
5.90
|
2.80
|
2.40
|
6.23
|
2.70
|
5.05
|
15-Jun-16
|
6.86
|
4.75
|
4.65
|
6.64
|
5.05
|
6.15
|
17-Jun-16
|
7.39
|
4.90
|
2.75
|
7.86
|
4.50
|
3.95
|
20-Jun-16
|
6.89
|
5.65
|
5.95
|
7.73
|
5.80
|
8.10
|
22-Jun-16
|
6.18
|
6.65
|
7.75
|
7.51
|
4.30
|
6.20
|
24-Jun-16
|
6.14
|
6.10
|
3.90
|
7.58
|
4.25
|
4.40
|
27-Jun-16
|
9.43
|
7.10
|
9.05
|
8.70
|
4.25
|
8.10
|
29-Jun-16
|
6.01
|
5.55
|
5.25
|
7.32
|
4.20
|
5.70
|
Average
|
7.08
|
5.50
|
4.88
|
7.39
|
4.59
|
6.28
|
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 250m, 300m, 300m and 250m, respectively. Survey of horseshoe crabs,
seagrass beds and intertidal communities were conducted in every sampling zone.
The present survey was conducted in June 2016 (totally 6 sampling days between 4th and 19th June 2016).
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 of 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 4th (for TC2), 6th (for TC3 and ST) and 19th
(for TC1) June 2016. The weather was generally cloudy with intermittent rains
on 4th June 2016. It was sunny and hot on 6th and 19th
June 2016.
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 of low tide period. Once seagrass bed was found, the species, estimated area, estimated coverage percentage and respective GPS coordinates were recorded. The seagrass beds surveys were
conducted 4th (for TC2), 6th (for TC3 and ST) and 19th
(for TC1) June 2016. The weather was generally cloudy with intermittent rains
on 4th June. It was sunny and hot on 6th and 19th
June 2016.
Intertidal Soft Shore Communities
6.3.4
The intertidal soft shore community surveys were conducted on 4th
(for TC2), 5th (forTC3), 18th (for ST) and 19th
(for TC1) June 2016. In every sampling zone, three 100 m horizontal transect
lines 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 line, 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 the present survey, two
species of horseshoe crab Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda (total 181 ind.) and Tachypleus tridentatus (total 47 ind.) were recorded. For one sight record, grouping of
2-31 individuals was observed at same locations with similar substratum (fine sand or soft mud). Photo records were shown in Figure 3.1 of Appendix I while the complete records of horseshoe crab 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, there were 20, 6, 66 and 89
individuals in TC1, TC2, TC3 and ST respectively. For ST, the search record was the highest (14.8 ind. hr-1 person-1) while the average body size was 40.30 mm (prosomal width ranged
12.00-75.41 mm). TC3 had the second highest search record (11.0 ind. hr-1 person-1) but the average body size was lowest (mean prosomal width 30.42 mm;
range 11.76-86.54 mm). For TC1, the search record was much lower (5.0 ind. hr-1
person-1) while the average body
size was 49.57 mm (prosomal width ranged 15.24-142.72 mm). For TC2, the
search record was the lowest (1.5 ind. hr-1 person-1) while the average body size was 42.43 mm (prosomal width ranged 30.38
¡V 74.17 mm).
6.5.3 For Tachypleus tridentatus, there were 2, 18 and 27 individuals in TC1, TC3 and ST respectively.
For ST, the
search record was 4.5 ind. hr-1 person-1 while the average body size was 60.28 mm (prosomal width ranged
43.16-80.03 mm). For TC3, the search record was 3.0 ind.
hr-1 person-1
while the average body size was 45.16 mm (prosomal width ranged 28.89-54.58 mm). For TC1, the
search record was very low (0.5 ind. hr-1 person-1) while the average body size was 44.74 mm (prosomal width ranged
35.77-53.71 mm). No individual was
found in TC2.
6.5.4 In the previous survey of March
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. In present survey the records of
the two big individuals of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda (prosomal width 117.37 mm and
178.17 mm) were excluded from data analysis according to the same principle.
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 throughout the monitoring
period. In general, higher
search records (i.e. number of individuals) of both species were always found
in ST and TC3. The search record of ST was higher from Sep. 2012 to Jun. 2014
while it was replaced by TC3 from Sep. 2014 to Jun. 2015. The search records
were similar between two sampling zones from Sep. 2015 to Jun. 2016 (present
survey). For TC1, the search record was at low to medium level throughout the
monitoring period. The change of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda was relatively more variable than that of Tachypleus tridentatus. Relatively, the search record was
very low in TC2 (2 ind. in Sep. 2013; 1 ind. in Mar., Jun., Sep. 2014, Mar. and
Jun. 2015; 4 ind. in Sep. 2015; 6 ind. in Jun. 2016). For the body size, larger
individuals of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda were usually found in ST and TC1
relative to those in TC3. For Tachypleus tridentatus, larger
individuals were also found in ST followed by TC3 and TC1.
6.5.8
Throughout the monitoring 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 inhabiting TC1 and TC2 were
confined in small foraging area due to limited area of suitable substrata.
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). In December 2013, no
individual of horseshoe crab was found. In December 2014, 2 individuals
of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda and 8 individuals of Tachypleus tridentatus were found only. In December 2015, 2 individuals of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda, 6 individuals of Tachypleus tridentatus and one newly hatched,
unidentified individual were found only. 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-1 and 0.00 ind. hr-1 person-1 in 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
From September 2012 to 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 about 3 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 September 2015, more individuals were
recorded due to larger size and higher activity (i.e. more conspicuous walking
trail).
6.5.11
For Tachypleus tridentatus, sharp increase of
number of individuals was recorded in ST during the wet season of 2013 (from
March to September). 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. Then the
number of individuals fluctuated slightly in TC3 and ST until June 2016
(present survey). 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 since March 2014. Then it
varied slightly between 50-65 mm from September 2014 to June 2016 (present survey). 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 March 2014 to June 2016 (present survey), the size of
major population decreased and more small individuals were recorded after March
of every year. It indicated new rounds of successful breeding and
spawning of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda
in TC3. It matched with the previous mating record in ST in March 2015.
Moreover, several large individuals (prosomal width 60-90 mm) were recorded in
Jun 2016 (present survey) indicating a stable growth of older individuals.
6.5.14
For Tachypleus tridentatus, the major size ranged
20-50 mm while the number of individuals fluctuated from September 2012 to June
2014. Then a slight but consistent growing trend was observed from Septemer
2014 to June 2015. The prosomal width increased from 25-35 mm to 35-65 mm. 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. From March to June 2016 (present survey), slight increasing
trend of major size was noticed again.
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 September 2015, the
size of major population decreased and more small individuals were recorded
after June of every year. It indicated new rounds of successful breeding
and spawning of Carcinoscorpius
rotundicauda in ST. It matched with the previous mating record in ST in
March 2015. From March to June 2016 (present survey), slight increasing trend
of major size was noticed similar to previous two years. Few small individuals
(prosomal width 10-20 mm) were found in June 2016 while there might be new
round of spawning similar to TC3.
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 September 2015, the size of major population decreased slightly
to a prosomal width 40-60 mm. At the same time, the number of individuals
decreased gradually. It further indicated some of large individuals might have
migrated to sub-tidal habitats, leaving the smaller individuals on shore. In
December 2015, two big individuals (prosomal width 89.27 mm and 98.89 mm) were
recorded only while it could not represent the major population. From December
2015 to March 2016, the number of horseshoe crab recorded was very few in ST
that no boxplot could be produced. In June 2016 (present survey), the prosomal
width of major population ranged 50-70 mm. There was an overall growth trend
throughout the monitoring period.
6.5.17 As a summary for horseshoe crab
populations in TC3 and ST, there was successful spawning of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda from 2014
to 2016 while the spawning time should be in spring. There were consistent,
increasing trends of population size in these two sampling zones. For Tachypleus tridentatus, small individuals were rarely found TC3 and ST from 2014 to 2015.
It was believed no occurrence of successful spawning. The existing individuals
(that recorded since 2012) grew to a mature size and migrated to sub-tidal
habitat. Hence the number of individuals decreased gradually. It was expected
the population would remain at low level until new round of successful
spawning.
Impact of the HKLR project
6.5.18 The present survey was the 15th
survey 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 wet season, large number of dead individuals on the shore)
is observed, it would be reported as soon as possible.
Seagrass Beds
6.5.19 In the present survey, seagrass
species Halophila ovalis and Zostera japonica were recorded in ST only. 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.
6.5.20 Table 3.2 of Appendix I summarizes the results of seagrass beds survey in ST. Four patches of Halophila ovalis were found while the total seagrass bed area was about 4707.3 m2 (average area 1176.8 m2). The largest patch was
a horizontal strand with seagrass bed area 4162.7 m2 on soft mud at 1.0-1.5
m above C.D. with coverage 70%. At vicinity, there were two small, irregular
patches with seagrass bed area 28.5-45.6 m2 and coverage 60-80%. These three patches
were not recorded in previous survey reflecting a new colonization between
March to June 2016.
6.5.21 Moreover, there was a horizontal strand with seagrass bed area 470.5 m2 nearby the seaward side of
mangrove vegetation at 2.0 m above C.D.. It coexisted with another
seagrass species Zostera japonica with variable coverage (10-100%).
6.5.22 For Zostera japonica, there was only one horizontal strand coexisting with Halophila ovalis at 2.0 m above C.D. The estimated
total area and coverage were 114.9 m2 and 70% respectively.
6.5.23 Since majority of seagrass bed was confined in ST, the temporal change
of both seagrass species were investigated in details.
Temporal variation of seagrass beds
6.5.24 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).
It might be due to the disappearance of the originally dominant seagrass Halophila ovalis resulting in less competition
for substratum and nutrients. From September 2015 to June 2016 (present
survey), it was found coexisting with seagrass Halophila ovalis with steady increasing patch size and
variable coverage.
6.5.25
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 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 patches (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, very small patches of Halophila ovalis could be found in other mud flat area in addition to surrounding the
recorded patches. But it was hardly distinguished due to very low coverage
(10-20%) and small leaves.
6.5.26 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 could
colonize areas in short period but disappears quickly under unfavourable
conditions (Fong, 1998).
Unfavourable conditions to seagrass Halophila
ovalis
6.5.27 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.
6.5.28 Prolonged light deprivation due to turbid water would be another
unfavourable 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).
6.5.29 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.
6.5.30
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.
Recolonization of seagrass beds
6.5.31
Figure 3.9 of Appendix I shows the recolonization of seagrass bed area in ST from December 2014
to June 2016 (present survey). 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 compete 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. From June to March 2016, the total seagrass area of Halophila ovalis had increased rapidly
from 6.8 m2 to 230.63 m2. It had recolonized its original
patch locations and covered Zostera japonica.
In June 2016, the total seagrass area increased sharply to 4707.3 m2. Similar to the previous records of March-June 2014, the original patch
area increased further to a horizontally long strand. Another large seagrass
beds colonized the lower
tidal zone (1.0-1.5 m above C.D.). It indicated the second extensive
colonization of this r-strategy
seagrass. However it was not appropriate to predict a rapid decline of seagrass
area in the coming sampling months based on the previous results (September and
December 2014).
Impact of the HKLR project
6.5.32
The present survey was the 15th survey of the EM&A
programme during the construction period. According to the results of present
survey, there was clear recolonization of both
seagrass species Halophila
ovalis
and Zostera japonica in ST. 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
6.5.33 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
zones:
¡P In TC1, high percentage of
¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦ (80-90%) was recorded at all tidal levels followed by
¡¥Sands¡¦ (10-20%).
¡P In TC2, the major substrata types
were ¡¥Soft mud¡¦ (50%) and ¡¥Sands¡¦ (40%) at the high tidal level. ¡¥Sands¡¦ was
the major substratum type (60%) at the mid and low tidal levels followed by
¡¥Soft mud¡¦ (20-30%).
¡P In TC3, high percentage of
¡¥Sands¡¦ (70-100%) was recorded at the high and mid tidal levels. The major
substratum type was ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦ (70%) at the low tidal level
followed by ¡¥Soft mud¡¦ (20%).
¡P In ST, high percentage of
¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦ (80-100%) was recorded at the high and mid tidal levels.
The major substrata types were ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦ (40%) and ¡¥Soft mud¡¦
(40%) at the low tidal level.
6.5.34 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.
6.5.35 Table 3.4 of Appendix I lists the total abundance, density
and number of taxon of every phylum in this
survey. A total of 15304 individuals were recorded. Mollusca was
significantly the most abundant phylum (total individuals 14722, density 491 ind. m-2, relative abundance 96.2%). The second and third abundant phya were Arthropoda (328 ind.,
11 ind. m-2, 2.1%) and Annelida (123 ind., 4 ind. m-2, 0.8%) respectively. Relatively other phyla were very
low in abundances (density £1 ind. m-2, relative
abundance £0.3%). Moreover, the most diverse phylum was Mollusca (40 taxa)
followed by Arthropoda (18 taxa)
and Annelida (14 taxa). There were 1-2 taxa recorded only for other phyla. The taxonomic resolution and complete list of collected specimens are shown
in Annex IV and V of Appendix I respectively.
6.5.36 Table 3.5 of
Appendix I shows the number of individual, relative abundance and density of each
phylum in every sampling zone. The total abundance (2686-4777 ind.) varied
among the four sampling zones while the phyla distributions were similar. In general, Mollusca was the
most dominant phylum (no. of individuals: 2513-4662
ind.; relative abundance 93.6-97.6%; density 335-622 ind. m-2). Other phyla were significantly lower in number of individuals. Arthropoda was the
second abundant phylum (51-110
ind.; 1.1-3.7%; 7-15 ind. m-2). Annelida was the third abundant phylum in TC2 and
TC3 (25-67 ind.; 0.5-2.5%; 3-9 ind. m-2) while it was the fourth
abundant in TC1 and ST (15-16 ind.; 0.3-0.5%; 2 ind. m-2). Sipuncula
was the third abundant phylum (22 ind.; 0.5%; 3 ind. m-2) in TC1. Cnidaria (sea anemone) was the third abundant phylum (36 ind.; 1.1%; 5 ind. m-2) in ST. Relatively other phyla were low in abundance
in all sampling zones (≤ 0.3%).
Dominant species in every sampling zone
6.5.37
Table 3.6 of Appendix I lists the abundant species (relative abundance >10%) in every sampling zone. In TC1, the abundant species were
different between tidal levels. Gastropod Batillaria
multiformis was the
most abundant species of very high density (413 ind. m-2, relative
abundance 54%) at the high tidal level (major substratum:
¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦) followed by gastropods Cerithidea cingulata (165 ind. m-2, 22%) and Cerithidea djadjariensis (110 ind. m-2, 14%). At the
mid tidal level (major substratum: ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦), gastropods Monodonta labio (119 ind. m-2, 22%), Cerithidea
cingulata (109
ind. m-2, 20%), Batillaria
multiformis (88 ind. m-2, 16%) and rock oyster Saccostrea
cucullata (75 ind. m-2, 14%, attached on boulders) were
abundant species of low-moderate densities. At the low tidal level (major
substratum: ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦), gastropod Monodonta
labio (144 ind. m-2, 24%) and rock oyster Saccostrea
cucullata (139 ind. m-2, 23%) were
the abundant species of moderate densities.
6.5.38
At TC2, the abundant species were
different between tidal levels. Gastropod Cerithidea
djadjariensis (322 ind. m-2, 51%) was the most abundant at high density followed by gastropod Cerithidea
cingulata (167 ind. m-2, 27%) at the high tidal level (major
substratum: ¡¥Soft mud¡¦). At the mid tidal level (major substratum: ¡¥Sands¡¦),
gastropods Cerithidea djadjariensis (85 ind. m-2, 28%), Batillaria zonalis (56 ind. m-2, 18%), Cerithidea
cingulata (34
ind. m-2, 11%) and rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (75 ind. m-2, 25%,
attached on boulders) were
the abundant species at low-moderate densities. At the low tidal level (major
substratum: ¡¥Sands¡¦), gastropods Batillaria zonalis (36 ind. m-2, 25%), Cerithidea djadjariensis (20 ind. m-2, 14%) and rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (35 ind. m-2, 24%) were
the common species at low densities.
6.5.39 At TC3, gastropods Batillaria
multiformis (203 ind. m-2, 33%), Cerithidea djadjariensis (195 ind. m-2, 32%) and Cerithidea cingulata (192 ind. m-2, 31%) were
the abundant species of moderate densities at the high tidal level (major substratum: ¡¥Sands¡¦). At the mid
tidal level (major substratum: ¡¥Sands¡¦), gastropods Cerithidea djadjariensis (282 ind. m-2, 45%) and Cerithidea cingulata (220 ind. m-2, 35%) were
the abundant species at moderate-high densities. At the low tidal level (major
substratum: ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦), the abundant species were at moderate
densities including rock
oyster Saccostrea cucullata (202 ind. m-2, 34%,
attached on boulders), gastropods
Monodonta labio (147 ind. m-2, 25%) and Cerithidea djadjariensis (106 ind. m-2, 18%).
6.5.40 At ST, abundant gastropods Monodonta labio (186 ind. m-2, 36%) and Batillaria multiformis (123 ind. m-2, 23%) were
of moderate densities followed by limpet Cellana toreuma (61 ind. m-2, 12%) and rock oyster Saccostrea
cucullata (60 ind. m-2, 11%,
attached on boulders) at
the high tidal level (major substratum: ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦). At the mid
tidal level (major substratum: ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦), gastropod Monodonta labio (158 ind. m-2, 28%) and rock oyster Saccostrea
cucullata (111 ind. m-2, 20%) were
abundant at moderate densities. At the low tidal level (major substrata: ¡¥Soft
mud¡¦ and ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦), gastropods Cerithidea
cingulata (49 ind. m-2, 22%), Cerithidea djadjariensis (43 ind. m-2, 20%), Lunella
coronate (29 ind. m-2, 13%) and
rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (26 ind. m-2, 12%) were
common species at low densities.
6.5.41 In general, there was no consistent zonation
pattern of species distribution across all sampling
zones and tidal levels. The species distribution should be determined by the type of substratum primarily. In general, gastropods Cerithidea djadjariensis (total
number of individuals: 3231 ind., relative abundance 21.1%), Cerithidea cingulata (2530 ind., 16.5%) and Batillaria
multiformis (2410 ind., 15.7%) were the most
commonly occurring species on sandy and soft mud substrata. Gastropod Monodonta
labio (2051 ind., 13.4%) and rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (1953 ind.,
12.8%) were commonly occurring species inhabiting
gravel and boulders substratum.
Biodiversity
and abundance of soft shore communities
6.5.42 Table 3.7 of
Appendix I shows the mean values of species number,
density, biodiversity index (H¡¦) and species evenness (J) of soft shore communities at every tidal level and in every sampling zone. The variations among sampling
zones and tidal levels were determined by the type of
substratum primarily mentioned above.
6.5.43 Among the sampling zones, the
mean species numbers of TC1 and ST (12-13 spp. 0.25 m-2) were higher
than that of TC2 and TC3 (8-9 spp. 0.25 m-2). The mean density of
TC1 and TC3 (612-637 ind. m-2) were higher than that of TC2 and ST
(358-433 ind. m-2). The mean H¡¦
of TC1, TC2 and ST (1.5-1.7) were slightly higher than that of TC3 (1.2).
However the mean J values were
similar among the sampling zones.
6.5.44 Across the tidal levels, there
was no consistent difference of the mean species number, density and J in all sampling zones. For the mean H¡¦, there was a slightly increasing
trend from high to low tidal level.
6.5.45 Figures 3.11 to 3.14 of Appendix I show the temporal changes of mean species number, mean density,
H¡¦ and J at every tidal level and in every sampling
zone along the sampling months. Overall no consistent trend of any biological
parameters was observed throughout the monitoring period. All the parameters
fluctuated naturally with the seasons.
Impact of the HKLR project
6.5.46 The present survey was the 15th
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. rapid or consistent decline 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,
five site inspections were carried out on 1, 8, 15,
22 and 28 June 2016.
7.1.2 A summary
of observations found during the site inspections and the follow up actions
taken by the Contractor are described in Table 7.1.
Table 7.1 Summary
of Environmental Site Inspections
Date
of Audit
|
Observations
|
Actions
Taken by Contractor / Recommendation
|
Date
of Observations Closed
|
4
May 2016
|
1.
Accumulation of refuse
was observed at S8.
2.
Stagnant water was found
inside a drip tray provided for a generator at HMA.
|
1.
The accumulated refuse at
S8 was removed.
2.
The stagnant water at HMA was removed.
|
1 Jun 2016
|
18 May 2016
|
3.
No drip tray was provided
for chemical drums at S7.
4. Accumulation
of refuse was observed at S16.
|
1.
The chemical drums at S7
were removed from site.
2.
The accumulated refuse at
S16 was removed.
|
1 Jun 2016
|
27 May 2016
|
1.
Gap of silt curtains were observed at Portion X.*
2.
Accumulated waste was observed at Western Portal.
3.
No drip tray was provided for chemical containers
at Western Portal.
4.
Stagnant water was observed at Western
Portal.
5.
Stagnant water inside the drip tray and no
chemical label for chemical containers was observed at Western Portal.
6.
Chemicals leakage was observed at Western
Portal.
7.
Rubbish was observed at Western Portal.
|
1.
The Contractor was
recommended to maintain the silt curtain properly at Portion X.
2.
The accumulated waste at
Western Portal was removed.
3.
The chemical containers
were removed from Western Portal.
4.
The stagnant water at
Western Portal was removed.
5.
Stagnant water inside the
drip tray at Western Portal was removed and chemical labels were displayed on
the containers.
6.
The chemical leakage at
Western Portal was cleaned up.
7.
The rubbish at Western
Portal was removed.
|
All observations were closed
on 1 June
2016 except the outstanding observation (Item 1).
|
1 Jun
2016
|
1.
Mud was accumulated inside
the U-channel at N4.
2.
Stagnant water was
observed at N4.
3.
Accumulation of waste was
observed at N4.
4.
Silt curtain was
misaligned at S11.
5.
Stagnant water was
observed inside a drip tray at S7.
6.
No NRMM label was
displayed on a mobile crane at S9.
7.
Stagnant water was
observed at S15.
|
1.
The mud inside the
U-channel was removed at N4.
2.
The stagnant water was
removed at N4.
3.
The accumulated waste was
removed at N4.
4.
The silt curtain was
maintained properly at S11.
5.
The drip tray and the
chemical drum were removed from site at S7.
6.
The NRMM label was displayed
on the mobile crane at S9.
7.
The stagnant water at S15 was removed.
|
8 Jun 2016
|
8.
Stagnant water was
observed at S7.
|
8.
Stagnant water was
cleared at S7.
|
28 Jun 2016
|
8 Jun
2016
|
1.
Stagnant water was
observed at C & C.
2.
Accumulation of refuse
was observed at C & C.
3.
The wastewater treatment
facility was damaged at N26.
4.
Mud was found next to the
seafront of S7.
5.
Accumulation of refuse was
observed at S11.
6.
Water pressure of wheel
washing facility was insufficient at WA4.
7.
Stagnant water was observed
at WA4.
|
1.
The stagnant water at C
& C was removed.
2.
The accumulated refuse at
C & C was removed.
3.
The wastewater treatment
facility at N26 was repaired.
4.
The accumulated mud at S7
was removed.
5.
The accumulated refuse at S11
was removed.
6.
The water pressure of the
wheel washing facility was maintained to a normal level at WA4.
7.
The stagnant water at WA4
was removed.
|
15 Jun 2016
|
8.
Gaps between of earth
bunds was observed at along the seafront of S7.
|
8.
Proper bunding was
provided along the seafront of S7.
|
28 Jun 2016
|
15 Jun 2016
|
1.
Slit curtain was
misaligned at Portion X.
2.
Stagnant water was
observed at A2.
3.
Exposed stockpile of sand
was observed at N20.
4.
Stagnant water was
observed at S11.
5.
Oil stain was observed at
S11.
6.
Untreated runoff flowing
into the gully outside S15 was observed.
7.
No drip tray was provided
for chemical containers at S15.
|
1.
The silt curtain was
maintained at portion X.
2.
The stagnant water was
removed at A2.
3.
The stockpile of sand was
covered by tarpaulin at N20.
4.
The stagnant water was
removed at S11.
5.
The oil stain was cleaned
up at S11.
6.
The discharge of
untreated runoff into the gully was stopped.
7. A
drip tray was provided for the chemical containers at S15.
|
22 Jun 2016
|
8. No NRMM label was
displayed on generator at S15.
|
8.
A NRMM label was
displayed on the generator at S15.
|
28 Jun 2016
|
22
Jun 2016
|
1.
No NRMM label was displayed
on a generator at N30.
2.
Stagnant water was found
at S8.
3.
The cement mixing station
was not completely enclosed at S11.
4.
More than 20 bags of
cement were not covered with tarpaulin at S11.
5.
Stagnant water was
observed inside a drip tray at S11.
6.
Stagnant water was found
at S11.
7.
Accumulation of rubbish
was observed at S25.
8.
Accumulation of rubbish
was observed at West Portal.
|
1.
NRMM label was provided
for the generator at N30.
2.
The stagnant water at S8
was removed.
3.
The cement mixing station
was covered at top and 3-side with impervious tarpaulin.
4.
The bags of cement were
covered with tarpaulin at S11.
5.
The stagnant water was
cleared at S11.
6.
The accumulated rubbish
was removed at S25.
7. The
accumulated rubbish was removed at West Portal.
|
28 Jun 2016
|
28 Jun 2016
|
1.
Silt curtains were not
properly aligned at Portion X.
2.
Stagnant water was
observed at HMA.
3.
No drip tray was provided
for chemical containers at HMA.
4.
General refuse was
accumulated at HMA.
5.
Chemical label was not
provided for chemical containers at HMA.
6.
Wheel washing facilities
were not operating at N30.
7.
General refuse was
accumulated at N30.
|
The Contractor was recommended to:
1. maintain
and check the silt curtains regularly at Portion X.
2. clear
the stagnant water to avoid mosquito breeding at HMA.
3. provide
drip trays for the chemical containers at HMA.
4. remove
the general refuse promptly at HMA.
5. provide
chemical labels for the chemical containers at HMA.
6. operate
wheel washing facilities properly at all times at N30.
7.
remove the general refuse promptly at N30.
|
Follow-up actions for the observations issued for the last weekly site
inspection of the reporting month will be inspected during the next site
inspections.
|
Notes:
* Outstanding
observations.
7.1.3 The
Contractor has rectified most of the observations as identified during
environmental site inspections within 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 Practice 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-hr TSP and 24-hr 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 station 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 was one complaint received during the reporting month. The summary of environmental
complaint is presented in Table 7.2.
The details of cumulative
statistics of Environmental Complaints are provided in Appendix K.
Table 7.2 A
Summary of Environmental Complaint for the Reporting Month
Environmental Complaint
No.
|
Date of Complaint Received
|
Description of
Environmental Complaint
|
COM-2016-087
|
28 June 2016
|
Water Quality
|
7.6.2 Complaint investigations were
undertaken and no non-compliance was identified.
7.6.3 No notification of summons and prosecution was received during the
reporting period.
7.6.4 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 2016 are summarized in Table 8.1.
Table 8.1 Construction
Activities for July 2016
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
|
Pipe Piling
|
Portion X
|
Excavation and Lateral
Support Works at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Construction of Tunnel Box
Structure at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X and Y
|
Pipe Piling, Sheet Piling and Jet Grouting
works for Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Kwo
Lo Wan Road
|
Lateral
support works at shaft 3 extension north shaft
(Package T1.12.1)
|
Portion X
|
Excavation for Diversion of culvert PR9 and
PR14
|
Portion X
|
Excavation for HKBCF to Airport 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 Road/Airport
Express Line
|
Pipe Roofing Drilling/
Mined Tunnel Excavation/ Box Jacking underneath Airport Road and Airport
Express Line
|
Portion X
|
Excavation
and Lateral Support Works for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel East (Cut & Cover
Tunnel)
|
Airport Road
|
Excavation and Lateral
Support Works for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel West (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Airport Road
|
Canopy
pipe installation for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel West (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion Y
|
Utility Culvert
Excavation
|
Portion Y
|
Sub-structure & superstructure works for Highway Operation and
Maintenance Area Building
|
West Portal
|
Excavation for Scenic
Hill Tunnel
|
West Portal
|
Superstructure works for Scenic Hill Tunnel West Portal
Ventilation building
|
8.2
Environmental Monitoring Schedule for the
Coming Month
8.2.1 The tentative schedule for
environmental monitoring in July 2016 is provided in Appendix D.
9.1.1 The
construction phase and EM&A programme of the Contract commenced on 17
October 2012. This is the forty-fifth 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 June2016.
Air Quality
9.1.2
No Action and Limit
Level exceedances of 1-hr TSP and 24-hr TSP 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 station 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 ¡V August 2016) 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 2016 survey results indicate that the impacts
of the HKLR project could not be detected on horseshoe crabs, seagrass and
intertidal soft shore community.
Environmental Site
Inspection and Audit
9.1.9
Environmental site inspection
was carried out on 1, 8, 15, 22 and 28 June 2016. Recommendations on remedial
actions were given to the Contractors for the deficiencies identified during
the site inspections.
9.1.1
There was one complaint
received in relation to the environmental impact during the reporting period. Complaint investigations were undertaken
and no non-compliance was identified.
9.1.2 No notification of summons and prosecution was
received during the reporting period.