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 sixty-eighth 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 2018.
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
|
4, 8, 14, 20, 26 and 28 June 2018
|
24-hr TSP
Monitoring
|
1,
7, 13, 19, 25 and 27 June 2018
|
Noise
Monitoring
|
4, 14, 20, and 26 June 2018
|
Water Quality
Monitoring
|
1, 4, 6, 8, 11, 13, 15, 18, 20, 22, 25, 27 and 29 June 2018
|
Chinese White
Dolphin Monitoring
|
5, 13, 19 and 27 June 2018
|
Mudflat Monitoring (Sedimentation Rate)
|
15 June 2018
|
Mudflat
Monitoring (Ecology)
|
2, 3, 16, 17 and 27 June 2018
|
Site
Inspection
|
6, 13, 20 and 29 June 2018
|
Due to adverse weather
condition (hoisting Tropical Cyclone Warning Signal, No. 1, Thunderstorm
Warning and Amber Rainstorm Warning Signal), water quality monitoring for ebb
tide on 6 June 2018 was cancelled due to safety reasons. The water quality
monitoring for flood tide on 6 June 2018 was also cancelled except at stations
SR10B(N2) and SR10A(N).
Due to adverse weather
condition (hoisting of Strong Wind Signal, No. 3), water quality monitoring for
both ebb and flood tides on 8 June 2018 were cancelled due to safety reasons.
Due to boat unavailability
on 12 June 2018, the dolphin monitoring was rescheduled from 12 June 2018 to 13
June 2018.
Due to unstable weather on
13 June 2018, the sedimentation rate monitoring was rescheduled from 13 June
2018 to 15 June 2018.
Thunderstorm Warning and
Amber Rainstorm Warning Signal were issued by Hong Kong Observatory in the
afternoon of 22 June 2018. The water quality monitoring for flood tide on 22
June 2018 was cancelled due to safety reason.
Due to the mechanical
failure in the boat engine, the dolphin monitoring was rescheduled from 26 June
2018 to 27 June 2018.
Due to poor weather on 12
and 13 June 2018, the mudflat monitoring was rescheduled to 16 and 27 June 2018
respectively.
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
|
1
|
Noise
|
Leq (30 min)
|
1
|
0
|
Water Quality
|
Suspended solids level (SS)
|
0
|
0
|
Turbidity level
|
0
|
0
|
Dissolved oxygen level (DO)
|
1
|
0
|
Complaint
Log
There was one complaint received
in relation to the environmental impacts (Noise impact) during reporting month.
Complaint investigation is being undertaken. A summary of environmental
complaint for reporting month is as follows:
Environmental Complaint No.
|
Date
of Complaint Received
|
Description of Environmental Complaint
|
Complaint No COM-2018-142
|
EPD (ENPO referred the email to SOR,
Contractor and ET)
|
Noise
|
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: 813273E, 818850N) 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.
The water quality
monitoring stations at IS10 (Coordinate: 812577E, 820670N) and SR5 (811489E,
820455N) are located inside Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA) Approach
Restricted Areas. The previously granted Vessel's Entry Permit for accessing
stations IS10 and SR5 were expired on 31 December 2016. During the permit
renewing process, the water quality monitoring location was shifted to IS10(N)
(Coordinate: 813060E, 820540N) and SR5(N) (Coordinate: 811430E, 820978N) on 2,
4 and 6 January 2017 temporarily. The permit has been granted by Marine
Department on 6 January 2017. Thus, the impact water quality monitoring works
at original monitoring location of IS10 and SR5 has been resumed since 9
January 2017.
Transect lines 2, 3, 4, 5,
6 and 7 for dolphin monitoring have been revised and transect line 24 has been
added due to the presence of a work zone to the north of the airport platform
with intense construction activities in association with the construction of
the third runway expansion for the Hong Kong International Airport. The EPD
issued a memo and confirmed that they had no objection on the revised transect
lines on 28 July 2017. The alternative dolphin transect lines are adopted
starting from August¡¦s dolphin monitoring.
A
new water quality monitoring team has been employed for carrying out water
quality monitoring work for the Contract starting from 23 August 2017. Due to marine work of the Expansion of Hong Kong
International Airport into a Three-Runway System (3RS Project), original
locations of water quality monitoring stations CS2, SR5 and IS10 are enclosed
by works boundary of 3RS Project. Alternative impact water quality monitoring
stations, naming as CS2(A), SR5(N) and IS10(N) was approved on 28 July 2017 and
were adopted starting from 23 August 2017 to replace the original locations of
water quality monitoring for the Contract.
The role and responsibilities as the ET Leader of the Contract was
temporarily taken up by Mr Willie Wong instead of Ms Claudine Lee from 25
September 2017 to 31 December 2017.
Water quality
monitoring station SR10A(N) (Coordinate: 823644E, 823484N) was unreachable on 4
October 2017 during flood tide as fishing activities were observed. As such,
the water monitoring at station SR10A(N) was conducted at Coordinate: 823484E,
823593N during flood tide on 4 October 2017 temporarily.
The topographical condition of the water monitoring
stations SR3 (Coordinate: 810525E, 816456N), SR4 (Coordinate: 814760E,
817867N), SR10A (Coordinate: 823741E, 823495N) and SR10B (Coordinate: 823686E,
823213N) cannot be accessed safely for undertaking water quality monitoring.
The water quality monitoring has been temporarily conducted at alternative
stations, namely SR3(N) (Coordinate 810689E, 816591N), SR4(N) (Coordinate:
814705E, 817859N) and SR10A(N) (Coordinate: 823644E, 823484N) since 1 September
2017. The water quality monitoring at station SR10B was temporarily conducted
at Coordinate: 823683E, 823187N on 1, 4, 6, 8 September 2017 and has been
temporarily fine-tuned to alternative station SR10B(N2) (Coordinate: 823689E,
823159N) since 11 September 2017. Proposal for permanently relocating the
aforementioned stations was approved by EPD on 8 January 2018.
The future key issues
include potential noise, air quality, water quality and ecological impacts and
waste management arising from the following construction activities to be
undertaken in the upcoming month:
¡P Dismantling/trimming
of Temporary 40mm Stone Platform for Construction of Seawall at Portion X;
¡P Construction
of Seawall at Portion X;
¡P Loading
and Unloading Filling Materials at Portion X;
¡P Backfilling
at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel) at Portion X;
¡P Works
for Diversion of Airport Road;
¡P Establishment
of Site Access at Airport Road / Airport Express Line/ East Coast Road;
¡P E&M/
Backfilling/ Bitumen works for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel West (Cut & Cover
Tunnel) at Airport Road;
¡P E&M/
Backfilling/ Bitumen works for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel East (Cut & Cover
Tunnel) at Portion X;
¡P Finishing
Works for Highway Operation and Maintenance Area Building at Portion X; and
¡P Finishing
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. The works area WA7 was handed over
to other party on 31 January 2018. 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 Hong Kong Limited 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 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
|
Environmental Team
(BMT Asia Pacific)
|
Deputy Environmental Team Leader
|
Willie Wong
|
2241 9821
|
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
|
Construction of seawall
|
Portion X
|
Loading and unloading of filling materials
|
Portion X
|
Backfilling at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Works for diversion
|
Airport Road
|
Establishment of site access
|
Airport Road/
Airport Express Line/ East Coast Road
|
E&M/ Backfilling/ Bitumen works for HKBCF to
Airport Tunnel West (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Airport Road
|
E&M/ Backfilling/ Bitumen works for HKBCF to
Airport Tunnel East (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Finishing works for Highway Operation and Maintenance Area Building
|
Portion X
|
Finishing works for Scenic Hill Tunnel West Portal Ventilation
building
|
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
2018 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
|
25
|
6 ¡V 74
|
352
|
500
|
AMS6
|
27
|
14 ¡V 57
|
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
|
33
|
18 ¡V 55
|
164
|
260
|
AMS6
|
116
|
32 ¡V 382
|
173
|
260
|
2.7.2
No
Action and Limit Level exceedances of 1-hr TSP were recorded at AMS5 and AMS6
during the reporting month. No Action and Limit Level exceedances of 24-hr TSP
were recorded at AMS5 during the reporting month. No Action Level exceedance of 24-hr TSP was recorded
at AMS6 during the reporting month. A Limit Level exceedance of 24-hr TSP was
recorded at AMS6 during the reporting month. Records of ¡§Notification of
Environmental Quality Limit Exceedances¡¨ are provided in Appendix
N.
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 2018 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
|
57
|
55 ¡V 59
|
75
|
3.7.2
An Action
Level exceedance was recorded as a complaint was received during reporting
month. No Limit Level exceedances were recorded at the monitoring station 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 and nearby traffic.
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
|
Positioning
Equipment
|
JRC DGPS 224
Model JLR-4341 with J-NAV 500 Model NWZ4551
|
Water Depth
Detector
|
Eagle Cuda-168
and Lowrance x-4
|
Water Sampler
|
Kahlsio Water
Sampler (Vertical) 2.2 L with messenger
|
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
A new
water quality monitoring team has been employed for carrying out water quality
monitoring work for the Contract starting from 23 August 2017. Due to marine
work of the Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway
System (3RS Project), original locations of water quality monitoring stations
CS2, SR5 and IS10 are enclosed by works boundary of 3RS Project. Alternative
impact water quality monitoring stations, naming as CS2(A), SR5(N) and IS10(N)
was approved on 28 July 2017 and were adopted starting from 23 August 2017 to
replace the original locations of water quality monitoring for the Contract.
4.4.3
The
topographical condition of the water monitoring stations SR3 (Coordinate:
810525E, 816456N), SR4 (Coordinate: 814760E, 817867N), SR10A (Coordinate:
823741E, 823495N) and SR10B (Coordinate: 823686E, 823213N) cannot be accessed
safely for undertaking water quality monitoring. The water quality monitoring
has been temporarily conducted at alternative stations, namely SR3(N)
(Coordinate 810689E, 816591N), SR4(N) (Coordinate: 814705E, 817859N) and
SR10A(N) (Coordinate: 823644E, 823484N) since 1 September 2017. The water
quality monitoring at station SR10B was temporarily conducted at Coordinate:
823683E, 823187N on 1, 4, 6, 8 September 2017 and has been temporarily
fine-tuned to alternative station SR10B(N2) (Coordinate: 823689E, 823159N)
since 11 September 2017. Proposal for permanently relocating the aforementioned
stations was approved by EPD on 8 January 2018.
4.4.4 The
locations of water quality monitoring stations during the reporting period 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(N)
|
Impact Station
(Close to HKBCF construction site)
|
812942
|
820881
|
SR3(N)
|
Sensitive
receivers (San Tau SSSI)
|
810689
|
816591
|
SR4(N)
|
Sensitive
receivers (Tai Ho Inlet)
|
814705
|
817859
|
SR5(N)
|
Sensitive
Receivers (Artificial Reef in NE Airport)
|
812569
|
821475
|
SR10A(N)
|
Sensitive
receivers (Ma Wan Fish Culture Zone)
|
823644
|
823484
|
SR10B(N2)
|
Sensitive
receivers (Ma Wan Fish Culture Zone)
|
823689
|
823159
|
CS2(A)
|
Control
Station (Mid-Ebb)
|
805232
|
818606
|
CS(Mf)5
|
Control
Station (Mid-Flood)
|
817990
|
821129
|
Remark: Due to rough sea condition, the water
quality monitoring at station SR10B(N2) (coordinate: 823159N, 823689E) was
temporarily conducted at coordinate: 823155N, 823734E during ebb tide on
25 June 2018.
|
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 2018 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
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.
4.7.3
For marine water quality monitoring, no Action Level and Limit Level exceedances
of suspended solids level and turbidity level were recorded during the
reporting month. No Limit Level exceedance of dissolved oxygen level was
recorded during the reporting month. An Action Level exceedance of dissolved
oxygen level was recorded during the reporting month.
4.7.4
Number
of exceedances recorded during the reporting month at each impact station are
summarized in Table 4.6.
Table 4.6 Summary of Water Quality
Exceedances
Station
|
Exceedance Level
|
DO
(S&M)
|
DO
(Bottom)
|
Turbidity
|
SS
|
Total number of exceedances
|
Ebb
|
Flood
|
Ebb
|
Flood
|
Ebb
|
Flood
|
Ebb
|
Flood
|
Ebb
|
Flood
|
IS5
|
Action Level
|
--
|
--
|
29-6-2018
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
1
|
0
|
Limit Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
IS(Mf)6
|
Action Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
Limit Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
IS7
|
Action Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
Limit Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
IS8
|
Action Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
Limit Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
IS(Mf)9
|
Action Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
Limit Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
IS10(N)
|
Action Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
Limit Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
SR3(N)
|
Action Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
Limit Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
SR4(N)
|
Action Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
Limit Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
SR5(N)
|
Action Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
Limit Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
SR10A(N)
|
Action Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
Limit Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
SR10B(N2)
|
Action Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
Limit Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
Total
|
Action
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1**
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0**
|
Notes:
S: Surface;
M: Mid-depth;
** The total number of exceedances
4.7.5
The exceedance of dissolved oxygen level
recorded during reporting period was considered to be attributed to other
external factors such as sea condition, rather than the contract works.
Therefore, the exceedances were considered as non-contract related. Records of
¡§Notification of Environmental Quality Limit Exceedances¡¨ are provided in Appendix N.
4.7.6
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 requirement of the updated EM&A manual, dolphin
monitoring programme should cover all transect lines in NEL and NWL survey
areas (see Figure 1 of Appendix H) twice per month throughout the entire construction period. The co-ordinates of all transect lines
are shown in Table 5.2. The
coordinates of several starting and ending points have been revised due to the
presence of a work zone to the north of the airport platform with intense
construction activities in association with the construction of the third
runway expansion for the Hong Kong International Airport. The EPD issued a memo and confirmed that
they had no objection on the revised transect lines on 28 July 2017, 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
|
805476
|
820800*
|
|
14
|
Start Point
|
817537
|
820220
|
2
|
End Point
|
805476
|
826654
|
|
14
|
End Point
|
817537
|
824613
|
3
|
Start Point
|
806464
|
821150*
|
|
15
|
Start Point
|
818568
|
820735
|
3
|
End Point
|
806464
|
822911
|
|
15
|
End Point
|
818568
|
824433
|
4
|
Start Point
|
807518
|
821500*
|
|
16
|
Start Point
|
819532
|
821420
|
4
|
End Point
|
807518
|
829230
|
|
16
|
End Point
|
819532
|
824209
|
5
|
Start Point
|
808504
|
821850*
|
|
17
|
Start Point
|
820451
|
822125
|
5
|
End Point
|
808504
|
828602
|
|
17
|
End Point
|
820451
|
823671
|
6
|
Start Point
|
809490
|
822150*
|
|
18
|
Start Point
|
821504
|
822371
|
6
|
End Point
|
809490
|
825352
|
|
18
|
End Point
|
821504
|
823761
|
7
|
Start Point
|
810499
|
822000*
|
|
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
|
821176
|
|
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
|
|
24*
|
Start
Point
|
805476*
|
815900*
|
12
|
End Point
|
815542
|
824882
|
|
24*
|
End
Point
|
805476*
|
819100*
|
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 20
years of marine mammal monitoring surveys in Hong Kong developed by HKCRP (see
Hung 2017). 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 traveled 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 camera (Canon EOS 7D model), 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 2018, two sets of systematic line-transect vessel
surveys were conducted on the 5th, 13th, 19th and 27th 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 254.94 km of survey effort was collected, 95.8% 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 survey areas, 93.78 km and 161.16
km of survey
effort were collected from NEL and NWL survey areas respectively. Moreover, the total survey
effort conducted on primary lines was 190.66 km, while the
effort on secondary lines was 64.28 km.
5.3.3
During the two sets of monitoring in June 2018, two groups of seven Chinese White Dolphins were sighted (see Annex
II of Appendix H). Both
dolphin sightings were made in NWL, while none was sighted in NEL.
Moreover, the two dolphin groups were sighted during on-effort
search, and one of the two on-effort sightings were made on primary lines (Annex II of Appendix H). Notably, none of the dolphin groups was associated with any operating fishing
vessel.
5.3.4
Distribution of the two dolphin sightings
made in June 2018 is shown in Figure 6 of Appendix H. The two sightings were made at the
mouth of Deep Bay and adjacent to Lung Kwu Chau respectively (Figure 6 of Appendix H).
5.3.5
Notably, both
dolphin groups were sighted very far away from the HKLR03/HKBCF reclamation
sites as well as the HKLR09/TMCLKL alignments (Figure 6 of Appendix H).
5.3.6
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 Tables 5.3 and 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 5th / 13th
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
Set 2: June 19th / 27th
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
NWL
|
Set 1: June 5th / 13th
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
Set 2: June 19th / 27th
|
1.9
|
3.8
|
Remark:
1. Dolphin Encounter Rates Deduced from the Two
Sets of Surveys (Two Surveys in Each Set) in June 2018 in Northeast Lantau
(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
|
0.9
|
1.3
|
1.8
|
4.7
|
Remark:
1.
Monthly Average Dolphin
Encounter Rates (Sightings Per 100 km of Survey Effort) from All Four Surveys
Conducted in June 2018 on Primary Lines only as well as Both Primary
Lines and Secondary Lines in Northeast Lantau (NEL) and Northwest Lantau (NWL).
5.3.7
The
average dolphin group in June 2018 was only 3.5 individuals per group,
which was similar to the averages in the previous monitoring months. One of the
two groups was quite small with two animals only, while another group was
medium in size with five animals (Annex II of Appendix
H).
Photo-identification Work
5.3.8
Five known individual dolphins were sighted six
times in total during the June¡¦s surveys (Annexes III and IV of Appendix
H), Four of them were re-sighted only
once during the monthly surveys, while CH34 was re-sighted twice on both June
13th and 27th.
5.3.9
Notably, during their re-sightings in June 2018,
none of the identified individuals was sighted with any young calf.
Conclusion
5.3.10
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.
5.3.11
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 2018) 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.
2017. Monitoring of Marine
Mammals in Hong Kong waters: final report (2016-17). An unpublished report submitted to the
Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, 162 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 15 June 2018. 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 2018)
|
Monitoring
Station
|
Easting
(m)
|
Northing
(m)
|
Surface
Level
(mPD)
|
Easting
(m)
|
Northing
(m)
|
Surface
Level
(mPD)
|
S1
|
810291.160
|
816678.727
|
0.950
|
810291.165
|
816678.761
|
1.143
|
S2
|
810958.272
|
815831.531
|
0.864
|
810958.270
|
815831.565
|
1.006
|
S3
|
810716.585
|
815953.308
|
1.341
|
810716.596
|
815953.309
|
1.459
|
S4
|
811221.433
|
816151.381
|
0.931
|
811221.379
|
816151.359
|
1.130
|
Table 6.3 Comparison
of measurement
|
Comparison of measurement
|
Remarks and
Recommendation
|
Monitoring Station
|
Easting (m)
|
Northing (m)
|
Surface Level
(mPD)
|
S1
|
0.005
|
0.034
|
0.193
|
Level
continuously increased
|
S2
|
-0.002
|
0.034
|
0.142
|
Level
continuously increased
|
S3
|
0.011
|
0.001
|
0.118
|
Level
continuously increased
|
S4
|
-0.054
|
-0.022
|
0.199
|
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(N)) as in the EM&A Manual.
The water quality monitoring location (SR3(N)) is shown in Figure 2.1.
6.2.2 Impact
water quality monitoring in San Tau (monitoring station SR3(N)) was conducted
in June 2018. The monitoring parameters included dissolved oxygen (DO),
turbidity and suspended solids (SS).
6.2.3 The
Impact monitoring results for SR3(N) 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)
|
01-Jun-18
|
6.6
|
3.4
|
6.2
|
6.2
|
4.5
|
3.4
|
04-Jun-18
|
6.0
|
2.4
|
5.0
|
6.0
|
1.3
|
4.3
|
06-Jun-18
|
See Remark 1
|
See Remark 1
|
See Remark 1
|
See Remark 1
|
See Remark 1
|
See Remark 1
|
08-Jun-18
|
See Remark 2
|
See Remark 2
|
See Remark 2
|
See Remark 2
|
See Remark 2
|
See Remark 2
|
11-Jun-18
|
6.4
|
3.3
|
4.1
|
6.5
|
3.1
|
5.3
|
13-Jun-18
|
5.3
|
4.1
|
7.5
|
5.3
|
2.8
|
6.4
|
15-Jun-18
|
5.0
|
4.8
|
6.2
|
5.2
|
8.1
|
10.0
|
18-Jun-18
|
5.8
|
7.4
|
5.2
|
5.2
|
5.8
|
5.2
|
20-Jun-18
|
6.0
|
7.4
|
7.1
|
5.8
|
7.1
|
7.5
|
22-Jun-18
|
5.8
|
5.0
|
8.2
|
See Remark 3
|
See Remark 3
|
See Remark 3
|
25-Jun-18
|
5.8
|
4.4
|
5.5
|
5.6
|
9.3
|
14.6
|
27-Jun-18
|
5.8
|
6.6
|
6.1
|
5.9
|
7.5
|
6.9
|
29-Jun-18
|
7.4
|
8.0
|
13.2
|
5.5
|
6.4
|
6.2
|
Average
|
6.0
|
5.1
|
6.8
|
5.7
|
5.6
|
7.0
|
Remarks:
1) Due to
adverse weather condition (hoisting Tropical Cyclone Warning Signal, No. 1, Thunderstorm
Warning and Amber Rainstorm Warning Signal), water quality monitoring for ebb
tide and flood tide at station SR3 on 6 June 2018 was cancelled due to safety
reasons.
2) Due to
adverse weather condition (hoisting of Strong Wind Signal, No. 3), water
quality monitoring for both ebb and flood tides on 8 June 2018 were cancelled
due to safety reasons.
3)
Thunderstorm Warning and Amber Rainstorm Warning Signal were issued by Hong
Kong Observatory in the afternoon of 22 June 2018. The water quality monitoring
for flood tide on 22 June 2018 was cancelled due to safety reason.
|
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 shoreline of sampling
zones TC1, TC2, TC3 and ST were about 250 m, 300 m, 300 m and 250 m
respectively (Figure 2.2 of Appendix I).
Survey of horseshoe crabs, seagrass beds and intertidal communities were
conducted in every sampling zone. The present survey was conducted in June 2018
(totally 5 sampling days between 2nd and 27th June 2018).
6.3.2
Since
the field survey of Jun. 2016, increasing number of trashes and even big
trashes (Figure 2.3 of Appendix
I) were found in every sampling zone. It raised a concern about the solid
waste dumping and current-driven waste issues in Tung Chung Wan. Respective
measures (e.g. manual clean-up) should be implemented by responsible government
agency units.
Horseshoe Crabs
6.3.3 Active search method was conducted for horseshoe crab monitoring by two
experienced surveyors in 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
2nd (for TC2), 16th (for TC1) and 27th (for
TC3 and ST) June 2018. The weather was generally hot and sunny on all survey
days.
6.3.4
In Jun. 2017, a big horseshoe crab was tangled
by a trash gill net in ST mudflat (Figure
2.3 of Appendix
I). It was released to sea once after photo
recording. The horseshoe crab of such size should be inhabiting sub-tidal
environment while it forages on intertidal shore occasionally during high tide
period. If it is tangled by the trash net for few days, it may die due to
starvation or overheat during low tide period. These trash gill nets are
definitely ¡¥fatal trap¡¦ for the horseshoe crabs and other marine life. Manual
clean-up should be implemented as soon as possible by responsible government
agency units.
Seagrass Beds
6.3.5
Active
search method was conducted for seagrass bed monitoring by two experienced
surveyors in 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 on 2nd (for TC2), 16th
(for TC1) and 27th (for TC3 and ST) June 2018. The weather was
generally hot and sunny on all survey days.
Intertidal Soft Shore Communities
6.3.6
The
intertidal soft shore community surveys were conducted in low tide period on 2nd
(for TC2), 3rd (for TC3), 16th (for TC1) and 17th
(for ST) June 2018. In every sampling zone, three 100m 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 0.5 m) were placed.
6.3.7
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 was dug for
visible infauna in the quadrat regardless of hand core sample was taken.
6.3.8
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.
6.3.9
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), AFCD (2018).
Data Analysis
6.3.10
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 84 ind.) and Tachypleus tridentatus
(total 39 ind.) were recorded. The recorded individuals were mainly distributed
along the shoreline from TC3 to ST. Grouping of 2-10 individuals was usually observed on similar substratum (fine
sand or
soft mud, slightly submerged). Photo records were shown in Figure 3.1 of Appendix I while the complete survey records were listed in Annex II of Appendix I.
6.5.2
Table 3.1 of
Appendix I summarizes the survey results of
horseshoe crab in the present
survey. For
Carcinoscorpius
rotundicauda,
14 individuals were found in TC1 with average body size 33.10 mm (prosomal
width ranged 11.00-55.55 mm) while low search record (3.5 ind. hr-1 person-1) was
resulted. In TC2, there were only 3 indviduals with average body size 60.99 mm
(47.04-74.44 mm), resulting in very low search record (0.8 ind. hr-1
person-1). In TC3, there was 27 individuals with
average body size 40.54 mm (14.95-67.33 mm). In ST, 40 individuals were found with average body
size 41.43 mm (15.09-70.68
mm). Both
TC3 and ST were low-moderate in search record (4.5-6.7
ind. hr-1 person-1).
6.5.3 Similar survey results were found for Tachypleus tridentatus. Two individuals were found in TC1 with
average body size 48.20 mm (prosomal width ranged 47.29-49.11 mm), resulting in
very low search record (0.5
ind. hr-1 person-1). In
TC3, there were 18 individuals with average body size 60.24 mm (prosomal width
ranged 36.52-82.99 mm). In ST, 19 individuals were found with average body size 57.55 mm (36.04-78.41 mm). Both TC3 and ST were low in
search
record (3.0-3.2 ind.
hr-1 person-1). No individual was found in TC2.
6.5.4 In the previous
survey of Mar. 2015, there was one important finding that a mating pair of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda was found
in ST (prosomal width: male 155.1 mm, female 138.2 mm) (Figure 3.2 of Appendix I). It indicated the importance of ST as a
breeding ground of horseshoe crab. In Jun. 2017, mating pairs of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda were also
found in TC2 (male 175.27 mm, female 143.51 mm) and TC3 (male 182.08 mm, female
145.63 mm) (Figure 3.2
of Appendix I). In Dec. 2017 and Jun. 2018
(present survey), one mating pair was of Carcinoscorpius
rotundicauda was found in TC3 (Dec. 2017: male
127.80 mm, female 144.61 mm; Jun. 2018: male
139 mm, female 149
mm). Figure 3.2 of Appendix I
shows the photographic records of all mating pairs found.
The recorded mating pairs were found nearly burrowing in soft mud at low tidal
level (0.5-1.0 m above C.D.). The smaller male was holding the opisthosoma
(abdomen carapace) of larger female from behind. These
mating pairs indicated that breeding of horseshoe crab could be possible along
the coast of Tung Chung Wan rather than ST only, as long as suitable substratum
was available. Based on the frequency of encounter, the shoreline
between TC3 and ST should be more suitable mating ground. Moreover
suitable breeding period was believed in wet season (Mar - Sep.) because tiny
individuals (i.e. newly hatched) were usually recorded in Jun. and Sep. every
year.
6.5.5 Despite
of mating piar, there were occasional records of large individuals of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda (prosomal
width ranged 114.45- 178.67 mm, either single or in pair) and Tachypleus tridentatus (prosomal width 103 mm) (Figure 3.3 of Appendix I). Based on their sizes, it indicated that
individuals of promsomal width larger than 100 mm would progress its nursery
stage from intertidal habitat to sub-tidal habitat of Tung Chung Wan. These
large individuals might move onto intertidal shore occasionaly during high tide
for foraging and breeding. Because they should be inhabiting sub-tidal habitat
most of the time. Their records were excluded from the data analysis to avoid
mixing up with juvenile population living on intertidal habitat.
6.5.6
No marked
individual of horseshoe crab was recorded in the present survey. Some marked
individuals were found in the previous surveys of Sep. 2013, Mar. 2014 and Sep.
2014. All of them were released through a conservation programme in charged 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 crab 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 Sep.
2014.
6.5.7
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
6.5.8
Figures 3.4 and
3.5 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.
6.5.9
For TC3
and ST, medium to high search records (i.e. number of individuals) of both
species were always found in wet season (Jun. and Sep.). 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. In Sep. 2016, the search record of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda in ST was
much higher than TC3. From Mar. to Jun. 2017, the search records of both
species were similar again between two sampling zones. It showed a natural
variation of horseshoe crab population in these two zones due to weather
condition and tidal effect. No obvious difference of horseshoe crab
population was noted between TC3 and ST. In Sep. 2017, the search records of
both horseshoe crab species decreased except the Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda
in TC3. The survey results were different from previous findings that there
were usually higher search records in Sep.. One possible reason was that the
serial cyclone hit decreased horseshoe crab activity (totally 4 cyclone records
between Jun. and Sep. 2017, to be discussed in 'Seagrass survey'section). From Dec.
2017 to Jun. 2018 (present survey), the search
records of both species increased again to low-moderate level in
TC3 and ST.
6.5.10
For
TC1, the search record was at low to moderate
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.-Sep. 2014, Mar.-Jun. 2015; 4 ind.
in Sep. 2015; 6 ind. in Jun. 2016; 1 ind. in Sep. 2016, 1 ind. from Mar.-Sep.
2017; 3 ind. in Jun. 2018).
6.5.11
About the body size, larger individuals of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda were usually found in ST and TC1 relative to
those in TC3 from Sep. 2012 to Jun. 2017. But the body size was higher in TC3
and ST followed by TC1 from Sep. 2017 to Jun. 2018. For Tachypleus tridentatus, larger
individuals were usually found in ST and TC3 followed by TC1 throughout the
monitoring period.
6.5.12
In
general, 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.
Although a mating pair of Carcinoscorpius
rotundicauda was once found in TC2, the hatching rate and
survival rate of newly hatched individuals were believed very low.
Seasonal
variation of horseshoe crab population
6.5.13 Throughout the
monitoring period, the search record of horseshoe crab declined obviously
during dry season especially December (Figures
3.3 and 3.4 of Appendix I). 4 individuals of Carcinoscorpius
rotundicauda
and 12 individuals of Tachypleus
tridentatus
were found only. In Dec. 2013, no individual of horseshoe crab was found. In Dec. 2014, 2 individuals of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda and 8 individuals of Tachypleus tridentatus were found only. In Dec. 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). Relatively the serach records were much higher in Dec.
2016. There were totally 70 individuals of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda and 24 individuals of Tachypleus tridentatus in TC3 and ST.
Because the survey was arranged in early December while the weather was warm with sunlight (~22 ¢XC
during dawn according to Hong Kong Observatory database, Chek Lap Kok station
on 5 Dec). In
contrast, there was no search record in TC1 and TC2 because the survey was
conducted in mid December with colder and cloudy weather (~20 ¢XC
during dawn on 19 Dec).
The horseshoe crab activity would decrease gradually with the colder climate.
In Dec. 2017, the weather was cold (13-15 ºC during dawn) that very few
individuals of both species could be found as mentioned above.
6.5.14 From Sep. 2012 to
Dec. 2013, Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda
was a less common species relative to Tachypleus
tridentatus. Only
4 individuals were ever recorded in ST in Dec. 2012. This species had ever been
believed of very low density in ST hence the encounter rate was very low. In
Mar. 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. Since Mar. 2014, more individuals were recorded
due to larger size and higher activity (i.e. more conspicuous walking trail).
6.5.15
For Tachypleus tridentatus,
sharp increase of number of individuals was recorded in ST during the wet
season of 2013 (from Mar. to Sep.). 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 in the following wet seasons. The number of individuals increased
in Mar. and Jun. 2014 followed by a rapid decline in Sep. 2014. Then the number
of individuals fluctuated slightly in TC3 and ST until Mar. 2017. 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 Mar. 2014. Then it varied slightly between 35-65 mm from Sep. 2014 to
Mar. 2017. Most of the individuals might have reached a suitable size (e.g.
prosomal width 50-60 mm) strong enough to forage in sub-tidal habitat. In Jun.
2017, the number of individuals increased sharply again in TC3 and ST. Although
mating pair of Tachypleus
tridentatus
was not found in previous surveys, there should be new round of spawning in the
wet season of 2016. The individuals might have grown to a more conspicuous size
in 2017 accounting for higher search record. From Sep. 2017 to Jun. 2018
(present survey), moderate numbers of individual were found in TC3 and ST
indicating a stable population size. Lower population size compared with that
in Jun. 2017 was believed the cause of natural mortality.
6.5.16 Recently, Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda was a more
common horseshoe crab species in Tung Chung Wan. It was recorded in the four
sampling zones while the majority of population located in TC3 and ST. Due to
potential breeding last year, Tachypleus
tridentatus became common again and distributed in TC3 and ST only. Since
TC3 and ST were regarded as important nursery ground for both horseshoe crab
species, 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
6.5.17
Figure 3.6 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 Sep. 2012 and Dec.
2013 hence the data were lacking. In Mar 2014, the major size (50% of individual records
between upper (top of red box) and lower quartile (bottom of blue box)) ranged
40-60 mm while only few individuals were found. From Mar. 2014 to Jun. 2018,
the median prosomal width (middle line of whole box) and major size (whole box)
decreased after Mar. of every year. It was due to more small individuals found.
It indicated new rounds of spawning. Also, there were slight increasing
trends of body size from Jun. to Mar. of next year since 2015. It indicated a
stable growth of individuals. Focused on larger juveniles (upper whisker), the
size range was quite variable (prosomal width 60-90 mm) along the sampling
months. Juveniles reaching this size might gradually migrate to sub-tidal
habitats.
6.5.18
For Tachypleus tridentatusthe major size ranged 20-50 mm while the
number of individuals fluctuated from Sep. 2012 to Jun. 2014. Then a slight but
consistent growing trend was observed from Sep. 2014 to Jun. 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 Mar. to Sep. 2016, slight
increasing trend of major size was noticed again. From Dec. 2016 to Jun. 2017,
similar increasing trend of major size was noted with much higher number of
individuals. It reflected new round of spawning. In Sep. 2017, the major size
decreased while the trend was different from previous two years. Such decline
might be the cause of serial cyclone hit between Jun. and Sep. 2017 (to be
discussed in the 'Seagrass survey' section). From Dec. 2017 to Jun. 2018
(present survey), increasing trend was noted again. Across the whole monitoring period, the
larger juveniles (upper whisker) usually reached 60-80 mm in prosomal width,
even 90 mm occasionally. Juveniles reaching this size might gradually migrate
to sub-tidal habitats.
Box plot of horseshoe crab populations in ST
6.5.19
Figure 3.7 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 Sep. 2012 and Dec.
2013 hence the data were lacking. From Mar. 2014 to Sep. 2017, the size of major population
decreased and more small individuals (i.e. lower whisker) were recorded after
Jun. of every year. It indicated new round of spawning. Also there were
similar increasing trends of body size from Sep. to Jun. of next year between
2014 and 2017. It indicated a stable growth of individuals. Across the whole
monitoring period, the larger juveniles (i.e. upper whisker) usually ranged 60-80 mm in prosomal width
except one individual (prosomal
width 107.04 mm) found in Mar. 2017. It reflected juveniles reaching
this size would gradually migrate to sub-tidal habitats.
6.5.20
For Tachypleus tridentatusa
consistent growing trend was observed for the major population from Dec. 2012
to Dec. 2014 regardless of change of search record. The prosomal width
increased from 15-30 mm to 60-70 mm. As mentioned, the large juveniles might have reached a suitable size for
migrating from the nursery soft shore to subtidal habitat. From Mar. to Sep.
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 juveniles might have migrated to sub-tidal habitat,
leaving the smaller individuals on shore. There was an overall growth trend. In
Dec. 2015, two big individuals (prosomal width 89.27 mm and 98.89 mm) were
recorded only while it could not represent the major population. In Mar. 2016,
the number of individual was very few in ST that no boxplot could be produced.
In Jun. 2016, the prosomal width of major population ranged 50-70 mm. But it
dropped clearly to 30-40 mm in Sep. 2016 followed by an increase to 40-50 mm in
Dec. 2016, 40-70 mm in Mar. 2017 and 50-60mm in Jun. 2017. Based on overall
higher number of small individuals from Jun. 2016 to Sep. 2017, it indicated
new round of spawning. From Sep. 2017 to Jun. 2018 (present survey), the major
size range increased slightly from 40-50 mm to 45-60 mm indicating a continuous
growth. Throughout the monitoring period, the larger junveniles ranged 60-80 mm
in prosomal width. Juveniles reaching this size would gradually migrate to
sub-tidal habitats.
6.5.21
As a
summary for horseshoe crab populations in TC3 and ST, there were spawning of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda from 2014
to 2018 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 in both zones 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. From 2016 to 2018, new rounds of spawning
were recorded in ST while increasing number of individuals and body size was
noticed.
Impact
of the HKLR project
Seagrass Beds
6.5.23
Since
the commencement of the EM&A monitoring programme, two species of seagrass Halophila ovalis and Zostera
japonica were recorded in TC3 and ST (Figure
3.8 of Appendix I). In general, Halophila ovalis was occasionally found in TC3 in few, small to
medium patches. But it was commonly found in ST in medium to large seagrass
bed. Moreover, it had grown extensively and covered significant mudflat area at
0.5-2.0 m above C.D.
between TC3 and ST. Another seagrass species Zostera japonica was found in ST only. It
was relatively lower in vegetation area and was co-existing with Halophila ovalis nearby the mangrove strand at 2.0 m above C.D.
6.5.24
Table 3.2 of
Appendix I summarizes the results of seagrass beds survey. In TC3, one very small patch of Halophila ovalis was found in
soft mud area at
2.0 m above C.D. while the total seagrass bed area and
vegetation coverage were about 0.3 m2 and ~20% respectively. In
ST, three small-medium sized patches of Halophila
ovalis were found while the total seagrass bed area was about 1072.0 m2. The largest patch was a
horizontal strand with area ~990 m2 and
highly variable vegetation coverage 20-100%, located nearby seaward size of
mangrove plantation at 2.0 m above C.D.. At vicinity, there was a medium,
horizontal strand (~80 m2, coverage 20-100%) and a very small patch (~2 m2, coverage 40%) at
2.0 m above C.D.. Another seagrass species Zostera
japonica was
not found in present survey. Appendix III shows the complete record of seagrass
survey.
6.5.25
According
to the previous results, majority of seagrass bed was confined in ST, the
temporal change of both seagrass species were investigated in details:
Temporal
variation of seagrass beds
6.5.26
Figure 3.10 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 Mar. 2013 that grew within the large patch of seagrass Halophila ovalis. Then the patch size increased and merged
gradually with the warmer climate from Mar. to Jun. 2013 (15 m2).
However, the patch size decreased and remained similar from Sep. 2013 (4 m2)
to Mar. 2014 (3 m2). In Jun. 2014, the patch size increased
obviously again (41 m2) with warmer climate followed by a decrease
between Sep. 2014 (2 m2) and Dec. 2014 (5 m2). From Mar.
to Jun. 2015, the patch size increased sharply again (90 m2). It
might be due to the disappearance of the originally dominant seagrass Halophila ovalis resulting in less competition for
substratum and nutrients. From Sep. 2015 to Jun. 2016, it was found coexisting
with seagrass Halophila ovalis with steady increasing patch size (from 44 m2 to 115 m2)
and variable coverage. In Sep. 2016, the patch size decreased again to (38 m2)
followed by an increase to a horizontal strand (105.4 m2) in
Jun. 2017. And it was no longer co-exisitng with Halophila ovalis.
Between Sep. 2014 and Jun. 2017, an increasing trend was noticed from Sep. to
Jun. of next year followed by a rapid decline in Sep. of next year. It was
possibly the causes of heat stress, typhoon and stronger grazing pressure
during wet season. From Sep. 2017 to Jun. 2018 (present survey), no seagrass
patch of Zostera japonica was
found.
6.5.27
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 Sep. 2012 (first survey). The total seagrass bed area grew
steadily from 332.3 m2 in Sep. 2012 to 727.4 m2 in Dec.
2013. Flowers were observed in the largest patch during its flowering
period. In Mar. 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 Jun. 2014, these small and medium patches grew and extended to each other.
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 Sep. 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 large patch at low
tidal level (786 m2). Typhoon or strong water current was a
possible cause (Fong,
1998). In Sep. 2014, there were two tropical cyclone records in Hong Kong (7th-8th
Sep.: no cyclone name, maximum signal number 1; 14th-17th
Sep.: Kalmaegi, maximum signal number 8SE) before the seagrass survey dated 21st
Sep. 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 the recorded patches. But it was hardly distinguished due to very
low coverage (10-20%) and small leaves.
6.5.28
In Dec. 2014, all the seagrass patches of Halophila ovalis disappeared in ST. Figure 3.10 of Appendix I shows
the difference of the original seagrass beds area nearby the mangrove vegetation
at high tidal level between Jun. 2014 and Dec. 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
6.5.29
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 Sep.
2014. The strong water current caused by the cyclones might have given damage
to the seagrass beds.
6.5.30 Prolonged light deprivation due to turbid water
would be another unfavouable condition. Previous studies reported that Halophila
ovalis had little tolerance to light deprivation. During experimental darkness, seagrass
biomass declined rapidly after 3-6 days and seagrass died completely after 30
days. The rapid death might be due to shortage of available carbohydrate under
limited photosynthesis or accumulation of phytotoxic end products of anaerobic
respiration (details see Longstaff et al.,
1999). Hence the seagrass bed of this species was susceptible to temporary
light deprivation events such as flooding river runoff (Longstaff and Dennison, 1999).
6.5.31 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 Sep., 2014, the
SS concentrations measured during 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 Sep. 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.
6.5.32 Based on the
weather condition and water quality results in ST, the co-occurrence of cyclone hit and
turbid waters in Sep. 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
6.5.33
Figure
3.10 of Appendix
I shows
the recolonization of seagrass bed area in ST from Dec. 2014 to Jun.
2017. From Mar.
to Jun. 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
Dec. 2014 and Mar. 2015. Moreover, it would need to compete with 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 Jun. 2015 to Mar.
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 Jun. 2016, the total seagrass area increased sharply to 4707.3 m2. Similar to the previous records of Mar to
Jun. 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.). In Sep.
2016, this patch extended much and covered significant soft mud area of ST,
resulting in sharp increase of total area (24245 m2). It indicated
the second extensive colonization of this r-strategy seagrass. In Dec. 2016, this extensive seagrass patch
decreased in size and had
separated into few, undistinguishable patches. Moreover, the horizontal strand
nearby the mangrove vegetation decreased in size (Fig. 3.10). The total
seagrass bed decreased to 12550 m2. From Mar. to Jun. 2017, the
seagrass bed area remained generally stable (12438-17046.5 m2) but
the vegetation coverage fluctuated (20-50% in Mar. 2017 to 80-100% in Jun.
2017).
Re-disappearance of seagrass bed
6.5.34
In Sep 2017, the whole seagrass bed of Halophila ovalis disappeared again along
the shore of TC3 and ST (Figure 3.11 of Appendix I).
It was similar to the case between Sep. and Dec. 2014. As mentioned, strong
water current (e.g. cyclone) or deteriorated water quality (e.g. high
turbidity) were the possible causes.
6.5.35
Between the survey periods of Jun. and Sep.
2017, there were four tropical cyclone records in Hong Kong (Merbok in 12-13th,
Jun.; Roke in 23rd, Jul.; Hato in 22-23rd, Aug.; Pakhar
in 26-27th, Aug.) (online database of Hong Kong Observatory). All of
them reaches signal 8 or above especially Hato (highest signal 10).
6.5.36
According to the water quality monitoring
results (Jul. to Aug. 2017) of the two closest monitoring stations SR3 and I5
of the respective EM&A programme, the overall water quality was in normal
fluctuation. There was one exceedance of suspended solids (SS) at SR3 on 12
Jul. 2017. The SS concentration reached 24.7 mg/L during mid-ebb tide. It
exceeded the Action Level (≤23.5 mg/L) but
was far below the Limit Level (≤34.4 mg/L).
Since such exceedance was slight and temporary, its effect to seagrass bed
should be minimal.
6.5.37
Overall, the disappearance of seagrass beds in ST
was believed the cause of serial cyclone hit in Jul and Aug. 2017. Based on
previous findings, the seagrass beds of both species were expected to
recolonize the mudflat as long as the vicinal water quality was normal. The
whole recolonization process (from few, small patches to extensive strand)
would be gradual lasting 1.5 to 2 years. From Dec. 2017 to Mar. 2018, there was
still no recolonization of few, small patches of seagrass at the usual
location. It was different from previous re-colonization (Mar. 2015 - Jun.
2017). Until Jun. 2018 (present survey), new, small-medium seagrass patches
were found at the usual location (seaward side of mangrove plantation at 2.0 m
C.D.) again (Fig. 3.11). It showed the recolonization of seagrass bed while it
was expected to grow to an extensive seagrass bed in 1.5-2 years.
Impact of the HKLR project
6.5.38 It was the 23rd
survey of the EM&A programme during the construction period. Throughout
the monitoring period, the disappearance of seagrass beds was believed the
cause of cyclone hits rather than impact of HKLR project. In present survey,
new seagrass beds were found showing gradual recolonization of seagrass.
Intertidal Soft Shore Communities
6.5.39
Table 3.3 and Figure 3.12 of Appendix I show the substratum types along the
horizontal transect at every tidal level in all sampling zones.
The relative distribution of substratum types 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
percentages of ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦ (80-100%) were recorded at all tidal levels.
Low distribution of ¡¥Sands¡¦ (20%) was recorded at high and low tidal levels.
¡P
In
TC2,
high percentage of ¡¥Sands¡¦ (70%) was recorded at high tidal level followed by
¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦ (20%). At mid tidal level, there was even distribution
of ¡¥Sands¡¦ (50%) and ¡¥Soft mud¡¦ (40%). At low tidal level, the major substratum
type was 'Soft mud' (70%) followed by ¡¥Sands¡¦ (30%).
¡P
In
TC3, high percentages of ¡¥Sands¡¦
(70-100%) were recorded at high and mid tidal levels. Low percentage of ¡¥Soft
mud¡¦ (30%) was recorded at high tidal level. At low tidal level, the major
substratum type was ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦ (80%).
¡P
In ST, ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦ was the main substratum (100%) at high
tidal level. At mid tidal level, there was high percentage of ¡¥Gravels
and Boulders¡¦ (80%) followed by 'Sands' (20%). At low tidal level, the main substratum
was 'Sands' (100%).
6.5.40
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.
6.5.41
Table 3.4 of Appendix I lists the total abundance, density and number of taxon of
every phylum in this
survey. A total of
15814 individuals were recorded. Mollusca was clearly the most abundant phylum
(total abundance 15275 ind., density
509 ind. m-2, relative abundance 96.6 %). The second and
third abundant phya
were Arthropoda
(388
ind., 13
ind. m-2, 2.5 %) and Annelida (78
ind., 3
ind. m-2, 0.5 %) respectively. Relatively other phyla were
very low in abundances
(density £1 ind. m-2, relative abundance £0.2
%). Moreover,
the most diverse phylum was
Mollusca
(37 taxa)
followed by Arthropoda (14 taxa) and Annelida (8 taxa). There was 1 taxon
recorded only for other phyla.
6.5.42
The taxonomic resolution and complete list of recorded fauna are shown in Annexes
IV and V of Appendix I respectively. According to the
latest identification key of potamidid snails in Hong Kong mangroves published
by Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (details see AFCD, 2018),
the names of following gastropod species were revised:
¡P Cerithidea
cingulata was revised as Pirenella
asiatica
¡P Cerithidea
djadjariensis was revised as Pirenella incisa
¡P Cerithidea
rhizophorarum was revised as Cerithidea
moerchii
6.5.43
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 (2913-5756 ind.) varied
among the four sampling zones while the phyla distributions were similar. In
general, Mollusca
was the most dominant phylum (no. of individuals: 2838-5613 ind.; relative abundance 92.6-98.0 %; density 378-748 ind. m-2).
Other phyla were much
lower in
number of individuals. Arthropoda (48-197 ind.; 1.5-6.0 %; 6-26 ind. m-2) was the
second abundant phylum. Annelida (30-32 ind.; 0.5-1.0 %; 4 ind. m-2) was the third abundant phylum in TC2 and TC3. Sipuncula was common but in low abundance in
TC1, TC2 and TC3 (7-13 ind.; 0.2-0.3 %; 1-2 ind. m-2). Similarly,
Cnidaria (sea anemone) was common in ST (11 ind.; 0.4%; 1 ind. m-2).
Relatively other phyla were very low in abundance in all sampling zones.
Dominant species in every sampling zone
6.5.44 Table
3.6 of Appendix I lists the abundant species (relative abundance >10 %) in
every sampling zone. In
the present survey, most of the listed abundant species were of low to moderate
densities (50-250 ind. m-2). Few listed species of high or very high
density (> 250 ind. m-2) were regarded as dominant species. Other
listed species of lower density (< 50 ind. m-2) were regarded as
common species.
6.5.45 In TC1, the substratum was mainly ¡¥Gravels and
Boulders¡¦ at all tidal levels. It was dominated by gastropod Batillaria
multiformis (264 ind. m-2,
relative abundance 55 %) at high density followed by gastropod Pirenella
incisa (115 ind. m-2, 24 %) at low-moderate density. At mid
tidal level, there were few gastropods Batillaria
multiformis (180 ind. m-2,
33 %), Monodonta labio (106 ind. m-2, 19 %), Pirenella incisa (70 ind. m-2,
13 %) at low-moderate densities. And the rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (119
ind. m-2, 22 %, attached on boulders) was also abundant. At low
tidal level, rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (158 ind. m-2,
30 %) was abundant with other abundant gastropods Monodonta labio (111 ind. m-2, 21 %) and Pirenella
incisa (57 ind. m-2, 11 %).
6.5.46 In TC2, the substratum was mainly 'Sands' at high tidal level.
Gastropod Pirenella incisa
was clearly dominant at high density (301 ind. m-2, 54 %). At mid
tidal level (main substratum types 'Sands' and 'Soft mud'), gastropods Pirenella
incisa (124 ind. m-2, 25 %), Batillaria zonalis (89 ind.
m-2, 18 %) and rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (122 ind. m-2,
24 %, attached on boulders) were abundant at low-moderate densities. At low
tidal level (main substratum type ¡¥Soft mud¡¦), rock oyster Saccostrea
cucullata was abundant at low-moderate density (72 ind. m-2, 29
%) followed by common gastropods Pirenella incisa (41 ind. m-2,
16 %), Batillaria zonalis
(41 ind. m-2, 16 %) and barnacle Balanus
amphitrite
(31 ind. m-2, 12 %, attached on
boulders).
6.5.47 In TC3, the major substratum types were mainly ¡¥Sands¡¦ at high
and mid tidal levels. Gastropod Pirenella incisa (369-383 ind. m-2, 42-56 %) was dominant followed by other
abundant gastropods Batillaria multiformis (136-158 ind. m-2, 18-20 %) and Pirenella asiatica (120-223 ind. m-2, 18-26 %). At
low tidal level (major substratum: ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦), rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (301
ind. m-2, 40 %, attached on boulders) was dominant at
high density followed by gastropod Monodonta
labio (180 ind. m-2, 24 %).
6.5.48
In ST, the
major substratum types were mainly ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦ at high and mid tidal
levels. At high tidal level, gastropods Monodonta labio (163 ind. m-2, 31 %), Batillaria
multiformis (102 ind. m-2, 20 %), rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (73
ind. m-2, 14 %, attached on boulders) and limpet Cellana toreuma (62
ind. m-2, 12 %) were abundant at low-moderate densities. At mid
tidal level, rock
oyster Saccostrea cucullata (174 ind. m-2, 33%) and Monodonta labio (88 ind. m-2, 17 %) were abundant
at low-moderate densities followed by common gastropod Pirenella incisa
(50 ind. m-2, 10 %). At low tidal level (major substratum
type: ¡¥Sands¡¦), there were three common species including gastropods Pirenella
incisa (31 ind. m-2, 25
%), Batillaria zonalis (16 ind. m-2, 13 %) and rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (26
ind. m-2, 21%).
6.5.49
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 Pirenella incisa (total number of individuals:
3953 ind., relative abundance 25.0 %), Batillaria multiformis (2516 ind., 15.9
%), Pirenella asiatica (1333 ind., 8.4
%) and Batillaria
zonalis
(670 ind., 4.2 %) were the most
commonly occurring species on sandy and soft mud substrata. Rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (2830 ind., 17.9
%), gastropod Monodonta labio (1888 ind., 11.9 %) and limpet Cellana
toreuma (391 ind., 2.5 %) were
the commonly occurring
species inhabiting gravel and boulders substratum.
Biodiversity and abundance of soft shore
communities
6.5.50
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. As
mentioned above, the differences among sampling zones and tidal levels were
determined by the major type of substratum primarily.
6.5.51
Among the sampling
zones, there
was no obvious difference of mean species number regardless of tidal levels.
The mean species numbers ranged 10-11 spp. 0.25 m-2 among all
sampling zones. The mean density of TC3 (767 ind. m-2) were higher
than TC1 (517 ind. m-2) followed by TC2 and ST (388-436 ind. m-2).
The higher mean density of TC3 was mainly accounted by one dominant
gastropod at high and mid tidal levels. Such dominance resulted in lower H¡¦ (1.3) in TC3 compared to other
sampling zones (1.5-1.6). The J was
similar (0.6-0.7) among all sampling zones.
6.5.52
Across the tidal
levels, there
were slightly increasing trends of mean species number and density from high to
low tidal level in TC1 and TC3 but vice versa in TC2 and ST. For the mean H¡¦, there were generally increasing
trends from high to low tidal level in TC1, TC2 and TC3. But there was no consistent
difference of J observed across the
tidal levels. In general, the spatial differences of these biological
parameters were highly related to substratum types.
6.5.53
Figures 3.13 to 3.16 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. In general, all the biological parameters fluctuated
seasonally throughout the monitoring period. Lower mean species number and
density were recorded in dry season (Dec.) but the mean H' and J fluctuated
within a stable range. .
6.5.54
From
Jun. to Dec. 2017, there were steady decreasing trends of mean species number
and density in TC2, TC3 and ST regardless of tidal levels. It might be an
unfavourable change reflecting environmental stresses. The heat stress and
serial cyclone hit were believed the causes during the wet season of 2017. From
Mar. to Jun. 2018 (present survey), increases of mean species number and density
were observed in all sampling zones. It indicated the recovery of intertidal
community.
Impact of the
HKLR project
6.6.1
AFCD,
2018. Potamidid Snails in Hong Kong Mangrove. Agriculture, Fisheries and
Conservation Department Newsletter - Hong Kong Biodiversity Issue #25, 2-11
6.6.2
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.
6.6.3
Dai, A.Y., Yang, S.L., 1991. Crabs of the China
Seas. China Ocean Press. Beijing.
6.6.4
Dong, Y.M., 1991. Fauna of ZheJiang Crustacea.
Zhejiang Science and Technology Publishing House. ZheJiang.
6.6.5
EPD, 1997. Technical Memorandum on Environmental
Impact Assessment Process (1st edition). Environmental Protection Department,
HKSAR Government.
6.6.6
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..
6.6.7
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.
6.6.8
Li, H.Y., 2008. The Conservation of Horseshoe Crabs
in Hong Kong. MPhil Thesis, City University of Hong Kong, pp 277.
6.6.9
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.
6.6.10
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.
6.6.11
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.
6.6.12
Pielou, E.C., 1966. Shannon¡¦s formula as a measure
of species diversity: its use and misuse. American Naturalist 100, 463-465.
6.6.13
Qi, Z.Y., 2004. Seashells of China. China Ocean
Press. Beijing, China.
6.6.14
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, p9-10.
6.6.15
Shannon, C.E., Weaver, W., 1963. The Mathematical
Theory of Communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, USA.
6.6.16
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.
6.6.17
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.
6.6.18
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.
6.6.19
Yang, D.J, Sun, R.P., 1988. Polychaetous annelids
commonly seen from the Chinese waters (Chinese version). China Agriculture
Press, China.
7
Environmental
Site Inspection and Audit
7.1.1
Site
Inspections were carried out on a weekly basis to monitor the implementation of
proper environmental pollution control and mitigation measures for the Project.
During the reporting month, four site inspections were carried out on 6, 13, 20
and 29 June 2018.
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
|
29 May 2018
|
1.
Waste was observed at plant room of S15.
2.
Waste was observed next to the plant room of S15.
3.
Mud was observed
near the gully at N30.
4. An oil drum was observed at S7.
|
1.
The waste was
removed from plant room of S15.
2.
The waste was
removed next to the plant room of S15.
3. The mud was removed near gully at N30.
4. The oil drum was removed from S7.
|
6 Jun 2018
|
6 Jun 2018
|
1.
Waste was observed at fuel filling station of S9.
2.
Stagnant water was found within a drip tray at S9.
3.
Waste was observed at N1.
4.
Stagnant water was observed inside a container at N1.
|
1.
The waste was removed at the fuel filling station of S9.
2.
The drip tray was removed from S9.
3.
The waste was removed from N1.
4.
The container was removed at N1.
|
1 Jun 2018
|
13 Jun 2018
|
1.
Waste was observed at HMA.
2.
Chemical containers were found without drip tray at S9.
3.
Waste was observed at S9.
4.
Stagnant water was observed inside a steel beam at S9.
5.
Waste was observed on the ground at S15.
6.
Gaps of silt curtain was observed at Portion X.
|
1.
The waste was
removed from HMA.
2.
The chemical
containers were removed from S9.
3.
The waste was
removed from S9.
4.
The steel beam was
removed from S9.
5.
The waste was
removed on the ground from S15.
6.
The silt curtains
were maintained properly at Portion X.
|
20 Jun 2018
|
20 Jun 2018
|
1.
Chemicals containers were observed at N4.
2.
Waste was observed at S15.
3.
Stagnant water was observed inside a drip tray at S15.
|
1.
The chemical
containers were removed at N4.
2.
The waste was
removed from S15.
3.
The stagnant water
was removed from the drip tray at S15.
|
29 Jun 2018
|
29 Jun 2018
|
1.
Waste was observed on the ground at S9.
2.
Mud was accumulated in wheel washing bay at S7.
3.
Waste was observed at plant room of S15.
|
The
Contractor was recommended to:
1. remove the waste on the ground at S9.
2. clear the mud in wheel washing bay at S7
regularly.
3. clear the waste at plant room of S15.
|
Follow-up actions for
the observations issued for the last weekly site inspection of
the reporting month will be inspected during the next site inspection.
|
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
inspection.
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
Implementation Status of Environmental
Mitigation Measures
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
For air
quality, no Action and Limit Level exceedances of 1-hr TSP were recorded at
AMS5 and AMS6 during the reporting month. No Action and Limit Level exceedances
of 24-hr TSP were recorded at AMS5 during the reporting month. No Action Level exceedance of 24-hr TSP was
recorded at AMS6 during the reporting month. A Limit Level exceedance of 24-hr
TSP was recorded at AMS6 during the reporting month. Records of ¡§Notification of Environmental
Quality Limit Exceedances¡¨ are provided in Appendix
N.
7.5.2
For
construction noise, an Action Level exceedance was recorded as a
complaint was received during reporting month. No Limit Level exceedances were
recorded at the monitoring station during daytime on normal weekdays of the
reporting month.
7.5.3
For
marine water quality monitoring, no Action Level and Limit Level exceedances of
suspended solids level and turbidity level were recorded during the reporting
month. No Limit Level exceedance of dissolved oxygen level was recorded during
the reporting month. An Action Level exceedance of dissolved oxygen level was
recorded during the reporting month. The exceedance of dissolved oxygen level
was considered to be attributed to other external factors such as sea
condition, rather than the contract works. Therefore, the exceedance was
considered as non-contract related. Records of ¡§Notification of Environmental
Quality Limit Exceedances¡¨ are provided in Appendix
N.
7.6
Summary
of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecution
7.6.1
There was one complaint received in relation to the environmental impacts
during the reporting month. Complaint investigation is being undertaken and
will be reported in next reporting month. A summary of environmental complaint
during the reporting month is presented in Table
7.2.
Table 7.2 A
Summary of Environmental Complaint during the Reporting Month
Environmental Complaint No.
|
Date of Complaint
Received
|
Description of
Environmental Complaint
|
Complaint No COM-2018-142
|
EPD (ENPO referred the email to SOR,
Contractor and ET)
|
Noise
|
7.6.2
The
details of cumulative statistics of Environmental Complaints are provided in Appendix K.
7.6.3
No notification of summons and prosecution was
received during the reporting period. 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 2018 are summarized in Table 8.1.
Table
8.1 Construction
Activities for July 2018
Site Area
|
Description of
Activities
|
Portion X
|
Dismantling/Trimming of Temporary
40mm Stone Platform for Construction of Seawall
|
Portion X
|
Construction of Seawall
|
Portion X
|
Loading and Unloading of Filling Materials
|
Portion X
|
Backfilling at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut &
Cover Tunnel)
|
Airport Road
|
Works for Diversion of
Airport Road
|
Airport Road / Airport Express Line/ East Coast
Road
|
Establishment of Site Access
|
Airport Road
|
E&M/ Backfilling/ Bitumen works for HKBCF
to Airport Tunnel West (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
E&M/ Backfilling/ Bitumen works for HKBCF
to Airport Tunnel East (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Finishing works for Highway Operation and
Maintenance Area Building
|
West Portal
|
Finishing Works for Scenic Hill Tunnel West
Portal Ventilation building
|
8.2.1
The
tentative schedule for environmental monitoring in July 2018 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 sixty-eighth 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 2018.
Air Quality
9.1.2
No
Action and Limit Level exceedances of 1-hr TSP were recorded at AMS5 and AMS6
during the reporting month. No Action and Limit Level exceedances of 24-hr TSP
were recorded at AMS5 during the reporting month. No Action Level exceedance of 24-hr TSP was
recorded at AMS6 during the reporting month. A Limit Level exceedance of 24-hr
TSP was recorded at AMS6 during the reporting month.
Noise
9.1.3 For
construction noise, an Action Level exceedance was recorded as a complaint was
received during reporting month. No Limit Level exceedances were recorded at
the monitoring station during daytime on normal weekdays of the reporting
month.
Water Quality
9.1.4
For marine water quality monitoring, no Action Level and Limit Level exceedances
of suspended solids level and turbidity level were recorded during the
reporting month. No Limit Level exceedance of dissolved oxygen level was
recorded during the reporting month. An Action Level exceedance of dissolved
oxygen level was recorded during the reporting month. The exceedance of
dissolved oxygen level was considered to be attributed to other external
factors such as sea condition, rather than the contract works. Therefore, the
exceedance was considered as non-contract related.
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 2018)
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.
Environmental Site Inspection and Audit
9.1.9
Environmental
site inspections were carried out on 6, 13, 20 and 29 June 2018. Recommendations on remedial actions were
given to the Contractors for the deficiencies identified during the site
inspections.
9.1.10
There was one complaint received in relation to the environmental impacts during
reporting period. Complaint investigation is being undertaken and will be
reported in next reporting month.
9.1.11
No
notification of summons and prosecution was received during the reporting
period.