Contract No. HY/2011/03

Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link Road

Section between Scenic Hill and Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities

 

 

 

 

 

 

Monthly EM&A Report No.24 (September 2014)

 

16 October 2014

 

Revision 1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Main Contractor                                                                                                                     Designer

 

 

 


 

 

Contents

Executive Summary

1....... Introduction.. 1

1.1                          Basic Project Information. 1

1.2                          Project Organisation. 2

1.3                          Construction Programme. 2

1.4                          Construction Works Undertaken During the Reporting Month. 2

2....... Air Quality Monitoring.. 4

2.1                          Monitoring Requirements. 4

2.2                          Monitoring Equipment 4

2.3                          Monitoring Locations. 4

2.4                          Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration. 5

2.5                          Monitoring Methodology. 5

2.6                          Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month. 7

2.7                          Monitoring Results. 7

3....... Noise Monitoring.. 9

3.1                          Monitoring Requirements. 9

3.2                          Monitoring Equipment 9

3.3                          Monitoring Locations. 9

3.4                          Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration. 9

3.5                          Monitoring Methodology. 10

3.6                          Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month. 10

3.7                          Monitoring Results. 11

4....... Water Quality Monitoring.. 12

4.1                          Monitoring Requirements. 12

4.2                          Monitoring Equipment 13

4.3                          Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration. 13

4.4                          Monitoring Locations. 13

4.5                          Monitoring Methodology. 14

4.6                          Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month. 15

4.7                          Monitoring Results. 15

5....... Dolphin Monitoring.. 16

5.1                          Monitoring Requirements. 16

5.2                          Monitoring Methodology. 17

5.3                          Monitoring Results. 19

5.4                          Reference. 20

6....... Mudflat Monitoring.. 22

6.1                          Sedimentation Rate Monitoring. 22

6.2                          Water Quality Monitoring. 23

6.3                          Mudflat Ecology Monitoring Methodology. 24

6.4                          Event and Action Plan for Mudflat Monitoring. 25

6.5                          Mudflat Ecology Monitoring Results and Conclusion. 26

6.6                          Reference. 30

7....... ENVIRONMENTAL SITE INSPECTION AND AUDIT.. 32

7.1                          Site Inspection. 32

7.2                          Advice on the Solid and Liquid Waste Management Status. 34

7.3                          Environmental Licenses and Permits. 34

7.4                          Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures. 34

7.5                          Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality Performance Limit 34

7.6                          Summary of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecution. 34

8....... FUTURE KEY ISSUES.. 36

8.1                          Construction Programme for the Coming Months. 36

8.2                          Environmental Monitoring Scheme for the Coming Month. 36

9....... CONCLUSION.. 37

9.1                          Conclusions. 37

 

 

Figures

 

Figure 1.1         Location of the Site

Figure 2.1         Environmental Monitoring Stations

Figure 6.1         Mudflat Survey Area

 

                           

Appendices

Appendix A       Environmental Management Structure

Appendix B       Construction Programme

Appendix C       Calibration Certificates

Appendix D       Monitoring Schedule

Appendix E       Monitoring Data and Graphical Plots

Appendix F       Event and Action Plan

Appendix G      Wind Data

Appendix H       Dolphin Monitoring Results

Appendix I         Mudflat Monitoring Results

Appendix J        Waste Flow Table

Appendix K       Cumulative Statistics on Complaints

Appendix L       Environmental Licenses and Permits 

Appendix M      Implementation Schedule of Environmental Mitigation Measures 

Appendix N       Record of ¡§Notification of Environmental Quality Limit Exceedances¡¨ and Record of ¡§Notification of Summons and Prosecutions¡¨

Appendix O      Location of Works Areas

 


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/C for HKLR and EP-353/2009/G for HKBCF were issued on 5 September 2013 and 6 August 2013, 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 twenty-fourth Monthly EM&A report for the Contract which summaries the monitoring results and audit findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 to 30 September 2014.

Environmental Monitoring and Audit Progress

The monthly EM&A programme was undertaken in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual for HKLR (Version 1.0).  A summary of the monitoring activities in this reporting month is listed below:

1-hr TSP Monitoring at AMS5

4, 10, 18, 22, 26 and 30 September 2014

1-hr TSP Monitoring at AMS6

4, 10, 16, 22, 26 and 30 September 2014

24-hr TSP Monitoring at AMS5

2, 10, 12, 18, 24 and 30 September 2014

24-hr TSP Monitoring at AMS6

2, 8, 17, 18, 24 and 30 September 2014

Noise Monitoring

4, 10, 18, 22 and 30 September 2014

Water Quality Monitoring

1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 17, 19, 22, 24, 26 and 29 September 2014

Mudflat Monitoring (Ecology)

6, 7, 8, 9, 20 and 21 September 2014

Mudflat Monitoring (Sedimentation rate)

6 September 2014

Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring

2, 11, 19 and 22 September 2014

Site Inspection

3, 10, 17 and 26 September 2014

Due to the power interruption on 8 September 2014, the 24-hr air monitoring undertaken at AMS5 was less than 24 hours.  Therefore, the 24-hr TSP monitoring result on 8 September 2014 was considered invalid and the 24 hrs dust monitoring was rescheduled from 8 September 2014 to 10 September 2014.

As Strong Wind Signal No. 3 was hoisted by HKO on 15 September 2014, the water quality monitoring for mid-ebb tide of 15 September 2014 was cancelled for safety reason.

Due to the motor failure of the high volume sampler, the 24 hrs air monitoring result at AMS6 on 12 September 2014 was considered invalid. The 24 hrs dust monitoring was rescheduled from 12 September 2014 to 17 September 2014.

As Tropical Cyclone Warning Signal No. 8 was hoisted on 16 September 2014, the 1 hour TSP monitoring at AMS5 and noise monitoring at NMS5 were rescheduled from 16 September to 18 September 2014.

Due to Strong Wind Signal No. 3 was hoisted by HKO on 15 September 2014, the dolphins monitoring was rescheduled to 19 September 2014.

As 1 and 2 October 2014 were bank holidays, 1hr dust monitoring at AMS5 and AMS6 were rescheduled to 30 September 2014.

Breaches of Action and Limit Levels

A summary of environmental exceedances for this reporting month is as follows:

Environmental Monitoring

Parameters

Action Level (AL)

Limit Level (LL)

Air Quality

1-hr TSP

0

0

24-hr TSP

0

0

Noise

Leq (30 min)

0

0

Water Quality

Suspended solids level (SS)

1

1

Turbidity level

0

0

Dissolved oxygen level (DO)

0

0

 

A Limit Level exceedance of suspended solids at station IS5 and an Action Level exceedance of suspended solids at station SR3 were recorded during mid-ebb tide on 10 September 2014.  According to the information provided by the Contractor, marine construction activities were carried out within silt curtain as recommended in the EIA Report. There were no specific activities recorded during the monitoring period that would cause any significant impacts on monitoring results. Therefore, the exceedances were considered non-contract related.  

Complaint Log

There were no complaints received in relation to the environmental impact during the reporting period.

Notifications of Summons and Prosecutions

There were no notifications of summons or prosecutions received during this reporting month.

Reporting Changes

This report has been developed in compliance with the reporting requirements for the subsequent EM&A reports as required by the Updated EM&A Manual for HKLR (Version 1.0). 

The proposal for the change of Action Level and Limit Level for suspended solid and turbidity was approved by EPD on 25 March 2013.

The revised Event and Action Plan for dolphin Monitoring was approved by EPD on 6 May 2013.

The original monitoring station at IS(Mf)9 (Coordinate- East:813273, North 818850) was observed inside the perimeter silt curtain of Contract HY/2010/02 on 1 July 2013, as such the original impact water quality monitoring location at IS(Mf)9 was temporarily shifted outside the silt curtain.  As advised by the Contractor of HY/2010/02 in August 2013, the perimeter silt curtain was shifted to facilitate safe anchorage zone of construction barges/vessels until end of 2013 subject to construction progress.  Therefore, water quality monitoring station IS(Mf)9 was shifted to 813226E and 818708N since 1 July 2013.  According to the water quality monitoring team¡¦s observation on 24 March 2014, the original monitoring location of IS(Mf)9 was no longer enclosed by the perimeter silt curtain of Contract HY/2010/02. Thus, the impact water quality monitoring works at the original monitoring location of IS(Mf)9 has been resumed since 24 March 2014.

Future Key Issues

The future key issues include potential noise, air quality, water quality and ecological impacts and waste management arising from the following construction activities to be undertaken in the upcoming month:

¡P       Dismantling/trimming of Temporary 40mm Stone Platform for Construction of Seawall at
Portion X;

¡P       Stone Column Installation at Portion X;

¡P       Filling Works behind Stone Platform at Portion X;

¡P       Band Drains Installation at Portion X;

¡P       Construction of Seawall at Portion X;

¡P       Loading and Unloading Filling Material at Portion X;

¡P       Temporary Stone Platform Construction at Portion X;

¡P       Temporary Diversion of Existing Box Culvert at Portion X;

¡P       Sheet Piling & Jet Grouting at Portion X;

¡P       Excavation and Lateral Support Works at SHT C&CT at Portion X;

¡P       Works for Diversion of Airport Road and Kwo Lo Wan Road at Kwo Lo Wan / Airport Road;

¡P       Pre-grouting and Pipe Piling Works for AEL Access Shafts at Airport Express Line;

¡P       Utilities Detection at Kwo Lo Wan / Airport Road / Airport Express Line/ East Coast Road;

¡P       Establishment of Site Access at Airport Road / Airport Express Line/East Coast Road;

¡P       Excavation and Lateral Support Works at shaft 3 extension north shaft at Kwo Lo Wan Road;

¡P       Access Shaft Construction for HAT Tunnel at Portion Y;

¡P       Pipe Piling Cofferdam Works for HAT West C&C tunnel at Airport Road;

¡P       Utility Culvert Excavation at Portion Y;

¡P       Pipe roofing installation for HAT tunnel at Portion Y

¡P       Excavation for Tunnel SHT at West Portal;

¡P       Abutment Construction at West Portal; and

¡P       Transformer Room Construction at West Portal, East Coast Road and Kwo Lo Wan Road.

 


1.1.1       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).

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/C for HKLR and EP-353/2009/G for HKBCF were issued on 5 September 2013 and 6 August 2013, respectively. These documents are available through the EIA Ordinance Register. The construction phase of Contract was commenced on 17 October 2012.  Figure 1.1 shows the project site boundary. The works areas are shown in Appendix O.

1.1.4       The Contract includes the following key aspects:

¡P                     New reclamation along the east coast of the approximately 23 hectares.

¡P                     Tunnel of Scenic Hill (Tunnel SHT) from Scenic Hill to the new reclamation, of approximately 1km in length with three (3) lanes for the east bound carriageway heading to the HKBCF and four (4) lanes for the westbound carriageway heading to the HZMB Main Bridge.

¡P                     An abutment of the viaduct portion of the HKLR at the west portal of Tunnel SHT and associated road works at the west portal of Tunnel SHT.

¡P                     An at grade road on the new reclamation along the east coast of the HKIA to connect with the HKBCF, of approximately 1.6 km along dual 3-lane carriageway with hard shoulder for each bound.

¡P                     Road links between the HKBCF and the HKIA including new roads and the modification of existing roads at the HKIA, involving viaducts, at grade roads and a Tunnel HAT.

¡P                     A highway operation and maintenance area (HMA) located on the new reclamation, south of the Dragonair Headquarters Building, including the construction of buildings, connection roads and other associated facilities.

¡P                     Associated civil, structural, building, geotechnical, marine, environmental protection, landscaping, drainage and sewerage, tunnel and highway electrical and mechanical works, together with the installation of street lightings, traffic aids and sign gantries, water mains and fire hydrants, provision of facilities for installation of traffic control and surveillance system (TCSS), reprovisioning works of affected existing facilities, implementation of transplanting, compensatory planting and protection of existing trees, and implementation of an environmental monitoring and audit (EM&A) program.

1.1.5       This is the twenty-fourth Monthly Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) report for the Contract which summaries the monitoring results and audit findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 to 30 September 2014.

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.  ENVIRON Hong Kong Ltd. was employed by HyD as the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) and Environmental Project Office (ENPO) for the Project.  The project organization with regard to the environmental works is as follows.

1.2.1       The project organization structure and lines of communication with respect to the on-site environmental management structure is shown in Appendix A.  The key personnel contact names and numbers are summarized in Table 1.1. 

Table 1.1          Contact Information of Key Personnel

Party

Position

Name

Telephone

Fax

Supervising Officer¡¦s Representative
(Ove Arup & Partners
Hong Kong Limited)

(Chief Resident Engineer, CRE)

Robert Antony Evans

3968 0801

2109 1882

Environmental Project Office / Independent Environmental Checker
(Environ Hong Kong Limited)

Environmental Project Office Leader

Y. H. Hui

3465 2888

3465 2899

Independent Environmental Checker

Antony Wong

3465 2888

3465 2899

Contractor
(China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Ltd)

Project Manager

S. Y. Tse

3968 7002

2109 2588

Environmental Officer

Federick Wong

3968 7117

2109 2588

Environmental Team
(BMT Asia Pacific)

Environmental Team Leader

Claudine Lee

2241 9847

2815 3377

24 hours complaint hotline

---

---

5699 5730

---

1.3                Construction Programme

1.3.1       A copy of the Contractor¡¦s construction programme is provided in Appendix B. 

1.4                Construction Works Undertaken During the Reporting Month

1.4.1       A summary of the construction activities undertaken during this reporting month is shown in Table 1.2.


 

Table 1.2          Construction Activities During Reporting Month

Description of Activities

Site Area

Dismantling/trimming of temporary 40mm stone platform for construction of seawall

Portion X

Stone column installation

Portion X

Filling works behind stone platform

Portion X

Temporary stone platform construction

Portion X

Band drains Installation

Portion X

Sheet piling and jet grouting

Portion X

Pipe roofing installation and excavation for tunnel SHT

West Portal

Works for diversion of Airport Road and Kwo Lo Wan Road

Kwo Lo Wan / Airport Road

Pipe Piling Cofferdam Works for HAT West C&C tunnel

Airport Road;

Pre-grouting and pipe piling works for AEL access shafts

Airport Express Line

Utilities detection

Kwo Lo Wan/ Airport Road/ Airport Express Line

Excavation and lateral support works at shaft 3 extension north shaft

Kwo Lo Wan Road

Access shaft construction for SHT & HAT

Portion Y

Pipe roofing installation for Tunnel HAT

Portion Y

Utility culvert excavation

Portion Y

 


 

2        Air Quality Monitoring

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.

(iv)        No furnace or incinerator flues 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 September 2014 is provided in Appendix D.

2.7                Monitoring Results

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

45

8 - 117

352

500

AMS6

38

16 -77

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

44

15-93

164

260

AMS6

92

40-132

173

260

 

2.7.2       No Action and Limit Level exceedances were recorded at all monitoring stations during this reporting month.

2.7.3       The event action plan is annexed in Appendix F.

2.7.4       There was technical problem of the on-site weather station from 30 September 2014. As the wind data could not be monitored, the wind data during this period were reference to the wind data obtained from Hong Kong Observatory¡¦s Chek Lap Kok weather station. 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                Monitoring Equipment

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                Monitoring Locations

3.3.1       Monitoring location NMS5 was set up at the proposed locations in accordance with Contract Specific EM&A Manual.

3.3.2       Figure 2.1 shows the locations of monitoring stations. Table 3.3 describes the details of the monitoring stations.

Table 3.3          Locations of Impact Noise Monitoring Stations

Monitoring Station

Location

NMS5

Ma Wan Chung Village (Ma Wan Chung Resident Association) (Tung Chung)

3.4.1       Table 3.4 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and duration of impact noise monitoring.


 

Table 3.4         Noise Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

Parameter

Frequency and Duration

30-mins measurement at each monitoring station between 0700 and 1900 on normal weekdays (Monday to Saturday). Leq, L10 and L90 would be recorded.

At least once per week

 

3.5.1       Monitoring Procedure

(a)        The sound level meter was set on a tripod at a height of 1.2 m above the podium for free-field measurements at NMS5. A correction of +3 dB(A) shall be made to the free field measurements.

(b)        The battery condition was checked to ensure the correct functioning of the meter.

(c)        Parameters such as frequency weighting, the time weighting and the measurement time were set as follows:-

(i)            frequency weighting: A

(ii)           time weighting: Fast

(iii)          time measurement: Leq(30-minutes) during non-restricted hours i.e. 07:00 ¡V 1900 on normal weekdays

(e)        Prior to and after each noise measurement, the meter was calibrated using the acoustic calibrator for 94.0 dB(A) at 1000 Hz.  If the difference in the calibration level before and after measurement was more than 1.0 dB(A), the measurement would be considered invalid and repeat of noise measurement would be required after re-calibration or repair of the equipment.

(f)        During the monitoring period, the Leq, L10 and L90 were recorded.  In addition, site conditions and noise sources were recorded on a standard record sheet.

(g)        Noise measurement was paused during periods of high intrusive noise (e.g. dog barking, helicopter noise) if possible. Observations were recorded when intrusive noise was unavoidable.

(h)        Noise monitoring was cancelled in the presence of fog, rain, wind with a steady speed exceeding 5m/s, or wind with gusts exceeding 10m/s. The wind speed shall be checked with a portable wind speed meter capable of measuring the wind speed in m/s.

3.5.2       Maintenance and Calibration

(a)          The microphone head of the sound level meter was cleaned with soft cloth at regular intervals.

(b)           The meter and calibrator were sent to the supplier or HOKLAS laboratory to check and calibrate at yearly intervals.

(c)        Calibration certificates of the sound level meters and acoustic calibrators are provided in Appendix C.

3.6.1       The schedule for construction noise monitoring in September 2014 is provided in Appendix D.


 

3.7                Monitoring Results

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

56

53 ¡V 57

75

*A correction factor of +3dB(A) from free field to facade measurement was included. 

3.7.2       There were no Action and Limit Level exceedances for noise during daytime on normal weekdays of the reporting month.

3.7.3       Major noise sources during the noise monitoring included construction activities of the Contract and nearby traffic noise.

3.7.4       The event action plan is annexed in Appendix F.


4        Water Quality Monitoring

4.1.1       Impact water quality monitoring was carried out to ensure that any deterioration of water quality was detected, and that timely action was taken to rectify the situation.  For impact water quality monitoring, measurements were taken in accordance with the Contract Specific EM&A Manual. Table 4.1 shows the established Action/Limit Levels for the environmental monitoring works.  The ET proposed to amend the Acton Level and Limit Level for turbidity and suspended solid and EPD approved ET¡¦s proposal on 25 March 2013.  Therefore, Action Level and Limit Level for the Contract have been changed since 25 March 2013.

4.1.2       The original and revised Action Level and Limit Level for turbidity and suspended solid are shown in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1          Action and Limit Levels for Water Quality

Parameter (unit)

Water Depth

Action Level

Limit Level

Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) (surface, middle and bottom)

Surface and Middle

5.0

4.2 except 5 for Fish Culture Zone

Bottom

4.7

3.6

Turbidity (NTU)

Depth average

27.5 or 120% of upstream control station¡¦s turbidity at the same tide of the same day;

The action level has been amended to ¡§27.5 and 120% of upstream control station¡¦s turbidity at the same tide of the same day¡¨ since 25 March 2013.

47.0 or 130% of turbidity at the upstream control station at the same tide of same day;

The limit level has been amended to ¡§47.0 and 130% of turbidity at the upstream control station at the same tide of same day¡¨ since 25 March 2013.

Suspended Solid (SS) (mg/L)

Depth average

23.5 or 120% of upstream control station¡¦s SS at the same tide of the same day;

The action level has been amended to ¡§23.5 and 120% of upstream control station¡¦s SS at the same tide of the same day¡¨ since 25 March 2013.

34.4 or 130% of SS at the upstream control station at the same tide of same day and 10mg/L for Water Services Department Seawater Intakes;

The limit level has been amended to ¡§34.4 and 130% of SS at the upstream control station at the same tide of same day and 10mg/L for Water Services Department Seawater Intakes¡¨ since 25 March 2013

Notes:

               (1)    Depth-averaged is calculated by taking the arithmetic means of reading of all three depths.

               (2)    For DO, non-compliance of the water quality limit occurs when monitoring result is lower that the limit.

               (3)    For SS & turbidity non-compliance of the water quality limits occur when monitoring result is higher than the limits.

               (4)    The change to the Action and limit Levels for Water Quality Monitoring for the EM&A works was approved by EPD on 25 March 2013.

4.2.1       Table 4.2 summarises the equipment used in the impact water quality monitoring programme.

Table 4.2          Water Quality Monitoring Equipment

Equipment      

Brand and Model

DO and Temperature Meter, Salinity Meter, Turbidimeter and pH Meter

YSI Model 6820 V2-M, 650

Positioning Equipment

DGPS ¡V KODEN : KGP913MkII, KBG3

Water Depth Detector

Layin Associates: SM-5 & SM5A

Water Sampler

Wildlife Supply Company : 5487-10

4.3.1       Table 4.3 summarises the monitoring parameters, frequency and monitoring depths of impact water quality monitoring as required in the Contract Specific EM&A Manual.

Table 4.3          Impact Water Quality Monitoring Parameters and Frequency

Monitoring Stations

Parameter, unit

Frequency

No. of depth

Impact Stations:
IS5, IS(Mf)6, IS
7, IS8, IS(Mf)9 & IS10,

 

Control/Far Field Stations:
CS
2 & CS(Mf)5,

 

Sensitive Receiver Stations:
SR3, SR4, SR
5, SR10A & SR10B

¡P    Depth, m

¡P    Temperature, oC

¡P    Salinity, ppt

¡P    Dissolved Oxygen (DO), mg/L

¡P    DO Saturation, %

¡P    Turbidity, NTU

¡P    pH

¡P   Suspended Solids (SS), mg/L

Three times per week during mid-ebb and mid-flood tides (within ¡Ó 1.75 hour of the predicted time)

3

(1 m below water surface, mid-depth and 1 m above sea bed, except where the water depth is less than 6 m, in which case the mid-depth station may be omitted.  Should the water depth be less than 3 m, only the mid-depth station will be monitored).

 

4.4.1       In accordance with the Contract Specific EM&A Manual, thirteen stations (6 Impact Stations, 5 Sensitive Receiver Stations and 2 Control Stations) were designated for impact water quality monitoring.  The six Impact Stations (IS) were chosen on the basis of their proximity to the reclamation and thus the greatest potential for water quality impacts, the five Sensitive Receiver Stations (SR) were chosen as they are close to the key sensitive receives and the two Control Stations (CS) were chosen to facilitate comparison of the water quality of the IS stations with less influence by the Project/ ambient water quality conditions.

4.4.2       The locations of these monitoring stations are summarized in Table 4.4 and shown in
Figure 2.1.

Table 4.4         Impact Water Quality Monitoring Stations

Monitoring Stations

Description

Coordinates

Easting

Northing

IS5

Impact Station (Close to HKLR construction site)

811579

817106

IS(Mf)6

Impact Station (Close to HKLR construction site)

812101

817873

IS7

Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)

812244

818777

IS8

Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)

814251

818412

IS(Mf)9

Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)

813273

818850

IS10

Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)

812577

820670

SR3

Sensitive receivers (San Tau SSSI)

810525

816456

SR4

Sensitive receivers (Tai Ho Inlet)

814760

817867

SR5

Sensitive receivers (Artificial Reef In NE Airport)

811489

820455

SR10A

Sensitive receivers (Ma Wan Fish Culture Zone)

823741

823495

SR10B

Sensitive receivers (Ma Wan Fish Culture Zone)

823686

823213

CS2

Control Station (Mid-Ebb)

805849

818780

CS(Mf)5

Control Station (Mid-Flood)

817990

821129

4.5                Monitoring Methodology

4.5.1       Instrumentation

(a)        The in-situ water quality parameters including dissolved oxygen, temperature, salinity and turbidity, pH were measured by multi-parameter meters.

4.5.2       Operating/Analytical Procedures

(a)        Digital Differential Global Positioning Systems (DGPS) were used to ensure that the correct location was selected prior to sample collection.

(b)        Portable, battery-operated echo sounders were used for the determination of water depth at each designated monitoring station.

(c)        All in-situ measurements were taken at 3 water depths, 1 m below water surface, mid-depth and 1 m above sea bed, except where the water depth was less than 6 m, in which case the mid-depth station was omitted. Should the water depth be less than 3 m, only the mid-depth station was monitored.

(d)        At each measurement/sampling depth, two consecutive in-situ monitoring (DO concentration and saturation, temperature, turbidity, pH, salinity) and water sample for SS. The probes were retrieved out of the water after the first measurement and then re-deployed for the second measurement. Where the difference in the value between the first and second readings of DO or turbidity parameters was more than 25% of the value of the first reading, the reading was discarded and further readings were taken.

(e)        Duplicate samples from each independent sampling event were collected for SS measurement. Water samples were collected using the water samplers and the samples were stored in high-density polythene bottles. Water samples collected were well-mixed in the water sampler prior to pre-rinsing and transferring to sample bottles. Sample bottles were pre-rinsed with the same water samples. The sample bottles were then be packed in cool-boxes (cooled at 4oC without being frozen), and delivered to ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. for the analysis of suspended solids concentrations. The laboratory determination work would be started within 24 hours after collection of the water samples. ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. is a HOKLAS accredited laboratory and has comprehensive quality assurance and quality control programmes.

(f)        The analysis method and detection limit for SS is shown in Table 4.5.

Table 4.5    Laboratory Analysis for Suspended Solids

Parameters

Instrumentation

Analytical Method

Detection Limit

Suspended Solid (SS)

Weighting

APHA 2540-D

0.5mg/L

 

(g)        Other relevant data were recorded, including monitoring location / position, time, water depth, tidal stages, weather conditions and any special phenomena or work underway at the construction site in the field log sheet for information.

4.5.3       Maintenance and Calibrations

(a)        All in situ monitoring instruments would be calibrated by ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. before use and at 3-monthly intervals throughout all stages of the water quality monitoring programme. The procedures of performance check of sonde and testing results are provided in Appendix C.

4.6.1       The schedule for impact water quality monitoring in September 2014 is provided in Appendix D.

4.7                Monitoring Results

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       Number of exceedances recorded during the reporting month at each impact station are summarised 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

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

0

0

Limit Level

--

--

--

--

--

--

10 Sep 2014

--

1

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

Action Level

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

0

0

Limit Level

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

0

0

SR3

Action Level

--

--

--

--

--

--

10 Sep 2014

--

1

0

Limit Level

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

0

0

SR4

Action Level

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

0

0

Limit Level

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

0

0

SR5

Action Level

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

0

0

Limit Level

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

0

0

SR10A

Action Level

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

0

0

Limit Level

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

0

0

SR10B

Action Level

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

0

0

Limit Level

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

0

0

Total

Action

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1**

Limit

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1**

 

Notes:

S: Surface;

M: Mid-depth;

**   The total number of exceedances

 

4.7.3       During the reporting month, a Limit Level exceedance of suspended solids at station IS5 and an Action Level exceedance of suspended solids at station SR3 were recorded during mid-ebb tide on 10 September 2014.

4.7.4       On 10 September 2014, construction of seawall and stone column works at Zone 1 were carried out within silt curtain as recommended in the EIA Report. There were no specific activities recorded during the monitoring period that would cause any significant impacts on the monitoring results. The exceedance of suspended solids was considered to be attributed to other external factors, rather than the contract works. Therefore, the exceedance was considered as non-contract related.

4.7.5       Water quality impact sources during the water quality monitoring were the construction activities of the Contract, nearby construction activities by other parties and nearby operating vessels by other parties.

4.7.6       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 requirements of the Updated EM&A Manual for HKLR (Version 1.0), dolphin monitoring programme should cover all transect lines in NEL and NWL survey areas (see Figure 1 of Appendix H) twice per month. The co-ordinates of all transect lines are shown in Table 5.2.

Table 5.2          Co-ordinates of Transect Lines

Line No.

Easting

Northing

 

Line No.

Easting

Northing

1

Start Point

804671

814577

 

13

Start Point

816506

819480

1

End Point

804671

831404

 

13

End Point

816506

824859

2

Start Point

805475

815457

 

14

Start Point

817537

820220

2

End Point

805477

826654

 

14

End Point

817537

824613

3

Start Point

806464

819435

 

15

Start Point

818568

820735

3

End Point

806464

822911

 

15

End Point

818568

824433

4

Start Point

807518

819771

 

16

Start Point

819532

821420

4

End Point

807518

829230

 

16

End Point

819532

824209

5

Start Point

808504

820220

 

17

Start Point

820451

822125

5

End Point

808504

828602

 

17

End Point

820451

823671

6

Start Point

809490

820466

 

18

Start Point

821504

822371

6

End Point

809490

825352

 

18

End Point

821504

823761

7

Start Point

810499

820690

 

19

Start Point

822513

823268

7

End Point

810499

824613

 

19

End Point

822513

824321

8

Start Point

811508

820847

 

20

Start Point

823477

823402

8

End Point

811508

824254

 

20

End Point

823477

824613

9

Start Point

812516

820892

 

21

Start Point

805476

827081

9

End Point

812516

824254

 

21

End Point

805476

830562

10

Start Point

813525

820872

 

22

Start Point

806464

824033

10

End Point

813525

824657

 

22

End Point

806464

829598

11

Start Point

814556

818449

 

23

Start Point

814559

821739

11

End Point

814556

820992

 

23

End Point

814559

824768

12

Start Point

815542

818807

 

 

 

 

 

12

End Point

815542

824882

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.2.2       The survey team used standard line-transect methods (Buckland et al. 2001) to conduct the systematic vessel surveys, and followed the same technique of data collection that has been adopted over the last 16 years of marine mammal monitoring surveys in Hong Kong developed by HKCRP (see Hung 2012, 2013).  For each monitoring vessel survey, a 15-m inboard vessel with an open upper deck (about 4.5 m above water surface) was used to make observations from the flying bridge area.

5.2.3       Two experienced observers (a data recorder and a primary observer) made up the on-effort survey team, and the survey vessel transited different transect lines at a constant speed of 13-15 km per hour.  The data recorder searched with unaided eyes and filled out the datasheets, while the primary observer searched for dolphins and porpoises continuously through 7 x 50 Fujinon marine binoculars.  Both observers searched the sea ahead of the vessel, between 270o and 90o (in relation to the bow, which is defined as 0o).  One to two additional experienced observers were available on the boat to work in shift (i.e. rotate every 30 minutes) in order to minimize fatigue of the survey team members.  All observers were experienced in small cetacean survey techniques and identifying local cetacean species.

5.2.4       During on-effort survey periods, the survey team recorded effort data including time, position (latitude and longitude), weather conditions (Beaufort sea state and visibility), and distance travelled in each series (a continuous period of search effort) with the assistance of a handheld GPS (Garmin eTrex Legend).

5.2.5       Data including time, position and vessel speed were also automatically and continuously logged by handheld GPS throughout the entire survey for subsequent review.

5.2.6       When dolphins were sighted, the survey team would end the survey effort, and immediately record the initial sighting distance and angle of the dolphin group from the survey vessel, as well as the sighting time and position.  Then the research vessel was diverted from its course to approach the animals for species identification, group size estimation, assessment of group composition, and behavioural observations.  The perpendicular distance (PSD) of the dolphin group to the transect line was later calculated from the initial sighting distance and angle.

5.2.7       Survey effort being conducted along the parallel transect lines that were perpendicular to the coastlines (as indicated in Figure 1 of Appendix H) was labeled as ¡§primary¡¨ survey effort, while the survey effort conducted along the connecting lines between parallel lines was labeled as ¡§secondary¡¨ survey effort.  According to HKCRP long-term dolphin monitoring data, encounter rates of Chinese white dolphins deduced from effort and sighting data collected along primary and secondary liens were similar in NEL and NWL survey areas.  Therefore, both primary and secondary survey effort were presented as on-effort survey effort in this report.

5.2.8       Encounter rates of Chinese White Dolphins (number of on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort and number of dolphins from all on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort) were calculated in NEL and NWL survey areas in relation to the amount of survey effort conducted during each month of monitoring survey.  Only data collected under Beaufort 3 or below condition would be used for encounter rate analysis.  Dolphin encounter rates were calculated using primary survey effort alone, as well as the combined survey effort from both primary and secondary lines.

Photo-identification Work

5.2.9       When a group of Chinese White Dolphins were sighted during the line-transect survey, the survey team would end effort and approach the group slowly from the side and behind to take photographs of them.  Every attempt was made to photograph every dolphin in the group, and even photograph both sides of the dolphins, since the colouration and markings on both sides may not be symmetrical.

5.2.10    A professional digital cameras (Canon EOS 7D and 60D models), equipped with long telephoto lenses (100-400 mm zoom), were available on board for researchers to take sharp, close-up photographs of dolphins as they surfaced.  The images were shot at the highest available resolution and stored on Compact Flash memory cards for downloading onto a computer.

5.2.11    All digital images taken in the field were first examined, and those containing potentially identifiable individuals were sorted out.  These photographs would then be examined in greater detail, and were carefully compared to the existing Chinese White Dolphin photo-identification catalogue maintained by HKCRP since 1995.

5.2.12    Chinese White Dolphins can be identified by their natural markings, such as nicks, cuts, scars and deformities on their dorsal fin and body, and their unique spotting patterns were also used as secondary identifying features (Jefferson 2000).

5.2.13    All photographs of each individual were then compiled and arranged in chronological order, with data including the date and location first identified (initial sighting), re-sightings, associated dolphins, distinctive features, and age classes entered into a computer database.  Detailed information on all identified individuals will be further presented as appendix in the quarterly EM&A report.

Vessel-based Line-transect Survey

5.3.1       During the month of September 2014, two sets of systematic line-transect vessel surveys were conducted on 2nd, 11th, 19th and 22nd 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 298.52 km of survey effort was collected, with 100% of the total survey effort being conducted under favourable weather conditions (i.e. Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with good visibility) (Annex I of Appendix H).  Among the two areas, 116.40 km and 182.12 km of survey effort were collected from NEL and NWL survey areas respectively.  In addition, the total survey effort conducted on primary lines was 214.57 km, while the effort on secondary lines was 83.95 km.

5.3.3       During the two sets of monitoring surveys in September 2014, a total of 8 groups of 34 Chinese White Dolphins were sighted (Annex II of Appendix H). All sightings were made in NWL during the two sets of surveys in September, with no dolphin being sighted at all in NEL.  All except one sighting were made on primary lines during on-effort search, and none of the dolphin groups was associated with operating fishing vessel.

5.3.4       Distribution of these dolphin sightings made in September 2014 is shown in Figure 6 of Appendix H.  The dolphin groups were scattered near Lung Kwu Chau and to the west of Sha Chau, while a few sightings were also made to the north of the airport platform (Figure 6 of Appendix H). No sighting was made in the eastern portion of North Lantau waters.

5.3.5       Notably, none of these eight sightings was made in the proximity of the HKLR03 and HKBCF reclamation sites, as well as the HKLR09 and TMCLKL alignments (Figure 6 of Appendix H). 

5.3.6       During September¡¦s surveys encounter rates of Chinese White Dolphins deduced from the survey effort and on-effort sighting data made under favourable conditions (Beaufort 3 or below) are shown in Table 5.3 and Table 5.4.


 

Table 5.3          Individual Survey Event Encounter Rates

 

Encounter rate (STG)

(no. of on-effort dolphin sightings per 100 km of survey effort)

Encounter rate (ANI)

(no. of dolphins from all on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort)

Primary Lines Only

Primary Lines Only

NEL

Set 1: September 2nd/11th

0.0

0.0

Set 2: September 19th/22nd

0.0

0.0

NWL

Set 1: September 2nd/11th

5.7

28.6

Set 2: September 19th/22nd

4.3

18.8

Remarks:

1.     Dolphin Encounter Rates Deduced from the Two Sets of Surveys (Two Surveys in Each Set) in September 2014 in Northeast (NEL) and Northwest Lantau (NWL).

Table 5.4          Monthly Average Encounter Rates

 

Encounter rate (STG)

(no. of on-effort dolphin sightings per 100 km of survey effort)

Encounter rate (ANI)

(no. of dolphins from all on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort)

Primary   Lines Only

Both Primary and Secondary Lines

Primary   Lines Only

Both Primary and Secondary Lines

Northeast Lantau

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Northwest Lantau

5.0

3.8

23.7

18.1

Remarks:

1.     Monthly Average Dolphin Encounter Rates (Sightings Per 100 km of Survey Effort) from All Four Surveys Conducted in September 2014 on Primary Lines only as well as Both Primary Lines and Secondary Lines in Northeast (NEL) and Northwest Lantau (NWL).

 

5.3.7       The average group size of Chinese White Dolphins in September 2014 was 4.25 individuals per group, which was higher than the ones in previous months of dolphin monitoring.  Three dolphin groups were composed of 1-3 animals, while five dolphin groups were composed of 5-6 animals with slightly larger group size.

Photo-identification Work

5.3.8       Thirteen individual dolphins were sighted 14 times during September¡¦s surveys.  Only one individual, NL233, were sighted more than once during the monitoring month (Annex III and IV of Appendix H).

5.3.9       Three well-recognized females, NL104, NL182 and NL233, were accompanied with their older calves during their re-sightings. These mother-calf pairs have also been sighted repeatedly in previous months of HKLR03 dolphin monitoring surveys.

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 (September-November 2014) and baseline monitoring period (3-month period) will be made.

5.4                Reference

5.4.1       Buckland, S. T., Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P., Laake, J. L., Borchers, D. L., and Thomas, L.  2001.  Introduction to distance sampling: estimating abundance of biological populations.  Oxford University Press, London.

5.4.2       Hung, S. K.  2012.  Monitoring of Marine Mammals in Hong Kong waters: final report  (2011-12).  An unpublished report submitted to the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, 171 pp.

5.4.3       Hung, S. K.  2013.  Monitoring of Marine Mammals in Hong Kong waters: final report (2012-13).  An unpublished report submitted to the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, 168 pp.

5.4.4       Jefferson, T. A.  2000.  Population biology of the Indo-Pacific hump-backed dolphin in Hong Kong waters.  Wildlife Monographs 144:1-65.


 

Methodology

6.1.1       To avoid disturbance to the mudflat and nuisance to navigation, no fixed marker/monitoring rod was installed at the monitoring stations. A high precision Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) real time location fixing system (or equivalent technology) was used to locate the station in the precision of 1mm, which is reasonable under flat mudflat topography with uneven mudflat surface only at micro level.  This method has been used on Agricultural Fisheries and Conservation Department¡¦s (AFCD) project, namely Baseline Ecological Monitoring Programme for the Mai Po Inner Deep Bay Ramsar Site for measurement of seabed levels.

6.1.2       Measurements were taken directly on the mudflat surface.  The Real Time Kinematic GNSS (RTK GNSS) surveying technology was used to measure mudflat surface levels and 3D coordinates of a survey point.  The RTK GNSS survey was calibrated against a reference station in the field before and after each survey.  The reference station is a survey control point established by the Lands Department of the HKSAR Government or traditional land surveying methods using professional surveying instruments such as total station, level and/or geodetic GNSS.  The coordinates system was in HK1980 GRID system.  For this contract, the reference control station was surveyed and established by traditional land surveying methods using professional surveying instruments such as total station, level and RTK GNSS.  The accuracy was down to mm level so that the reference control station has relatively higher accuracy.  As the reference control station has higher accuracy, it was set as true evaluation relative to the RTK GNSS measurement.  All position and height correction were adjusted and corrected to the reference control station.  Reference station survey result and professional land surveying calibration is shown as Table 6.1:

Table 6.1         Reference Station Survey result and GNSS RTK calibration result of Round 1

Reference Station

Easting (m)

Northing (m)

Baseline reference elevation (mPD) (A)

Round 1 Survey (mPD) (B)

Calibration Adjustment (B-A)

T1

811248.660mE

816393.173mN

3.840

3.817

-0.023

T2

810806.297mE

815691.822mN

4.625

4.653

+0.028

T3

810778.098mE

815689.918mN

4.651

4.660

+0.009

T4

810274.783mE

816689.068mN

2.637

2.709

+0.072

 

6.1.3       The precision of the measured mudflat surface level reading (vertical precision setting) was within 10 mm (standard deviation) after averaging the valid survey records of the XYZ HK1980 GRID coordinates.  Each survey record at each station was computed by averaging at least three measurements that are within the above specified precision setting. Both digital data logging and written records were collected in the field.  Field data on station fixing and mudflat surface measurement were recorded.

Monitoring Locations

6.1.4       Four monitoring stations were established based on the site conditions for the sedimentation monitoring and are shown in Figure 6.1. 

Monitoring Results

6.1.5       The baseline sedimentation rate monitoring was in September 2012 and impact sedimentation rate monitoring was undertaken on 6 September 2014. 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 (September 2014)

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

816678.754

1.030

S2

810958.272

815831.531

0.864

810958.261

815831.522

0.940

S3

810716.585

815953.308

1.341

810716.593

815953.320

1.450

S4

811221.433

816151.381

0.931

811221.424

816151.402

1.146

 

Table 6.3         Comparison of measurement 

Comparison of measurement

Remarks and Recommendation

Monitoring Station

Easting (m)

Northing (m)

Surface Level

(mPD)

S1

0.005

0.027

0.080

Level continuously increased

S2

-0.011

-0.009

0.076

Level continuously increased

S3

0.008

0.011

0.109

Level continuously increased

S4

-0.009

0.021

0.215

Level continuously increased

 

6.1.6       This measurement result was generally and relatively higher than the baseline measurement at S1, S2, S3 and S4. The mudflat level is continuously increased.

6.2.1       The mudflat monitoring covered water quality monitoring data.  Reference was made to the water quality monitoring data of the representative water quality monitoring station (i.e. SR3) as in the EM&A Manual.  The water quality monitoring location (SR3) is shown in Figure 2.1. 

6.2.2       Impact water quality monitoring in San Tau (monitoring station SR3) was conducted in September 2014.  The monitoring parameters included dissolved oxygen (DO), turbidity and suspended solids (SS).

6.2.3       The Impact monitoring results for SR3 were extracted and summarised below:


 

Table 6.4         Impact Water Quality Monitoring Results (Depth Average)

Date

Mid Ebb Tide

Mid Flood Tide

DO (mg/L)

Turbidity (NTU)

SS (mg/L)

DO (mg/L)

Turbidity (NTU)

SS (mg/L)

01-Sep-14

6.48

6.50

5.20

6.01

7.35

6.50

03-Sep-14

6.17

3.45

1.95

7.36

3.15

3.70

05-Sep-14

5.96

5.35

4.50

8.40

5.80

6.80

08-Sep-14

6.19

7.50

10.95

6.48

7.30

6.45

10-Sep-14

5.49

25.05

27.50

5.44

9.10

8.55

12-Sep-14

5.76

17.05

17.10

5.71

12.20

12.50

15-Sep-14

-

-

-

5.65

5.25

5.65

17-Sep-14

6.00

5.85

6.20

6.50

6.45

6.30

19-Sep-14

6.28

4.30

2.60

7.18

3.05

5.20

22-Sep-14

6.98

8.55

5.50

6.82

8.30

8.90

24-Sep-14

6.34

9.30

8.70

6.60

8.90

9.25

26-Sep-14

5.78

12.35

17.50

5.88

13.40

22.05

29-Sep-14

5.98

12.30

12.35

6.02

5.80

6.60

Average

6.12

9.80

10.00

6.46

7.39

8.34

Remarks: As Strong Wind Signal No. 3 was hoisted by HKO on 15 September 2014, the water quality monitoring for mid-ebb tide of 15 September 2014 was cancelled for 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 length of sampling zones TC1, TC2, TC3 and ST were about 250 m, 300 m, 300 m and 250 m respectively. Survey of horseshoe crabs, seagrass beds and intertidal communities were conducted in every sampling zone. The present survey was conducted in September 2014 (totally 6 sampling days between 6th and 21st September 2014).

Horseshoe Crabs

6.3.2       Active search method was conducted for horseshoe crab monitoring by two experienced surveyors at every sampling zone. During the search period, any accessible and potential area would be investigated for any horseshoe crab individuals within 2-3 hours in low tide period (tidal level below 1.2 m above Chart Datum (C.D.)). Once a horseshoe crab individual was found, the species was identified referencing to Li (2008). The prosomal width, inhabiting substratum and respective GPS coordinate were recorded. A photographic record was taken for future investigation. Any grouping behavior of individuals, if found, was recorded. The horseshoe crab surveys were conducted on 8th (for TC1 and TC2) and 21st (for TC3 and ST) September 2014. The weather was cloudy and windy on both survey days.

Seagrass Beds

6.3.3       Active search method was conducted for seagrass bed monitoring by two experienced surveyors at every sampling zone. During the search period, any accessible and potential area would be investigated for any seagrass beds within 2-3 hours in low tide period. Once seagrass bed was found, the species, estimated area, estimated coverage percentage and respective GPS coordinate were recorded. A photographic record was taken for future investigation. The seagrass beds surveys were conducted on 8th (for TC1 and TC2) and 21st (for TC3 and ST) September 2014. The weather was cloudy and windy on both survey days.

Intertidal Soft Shore Communities

6.3.4       The intertidal soft shore community surveys were conducted in low tide period on 6th (for TC3), 7th (for ST), 9th (for TC2) and 20 September 2014 (for TC1). At each sampling zone, three 100 m horizontal transects were laid at high tidal level (H: 2.0 m above C.D.), mid tidal level (M: 1.5 m above C.D.) and low tidal level (L: 1.0 m above C.D.). Along every horizontal transect, ten random quadrats (0.5 m x 0.5m) were placed.

6.3.5       Inside a quadrat, any visible epifauna were collected and were in-situ identified to the lowest practical taxonomical resolution. Whenever possible a hand core sample (10 cm internal diameter ´ 20 cm depth) of sediments was collected in the quadrat. The core sample was gently washed through a sieve of mesh size 2.0 mm in-situ. Any visible infauna were collected and identified. Finally the top 5 cm surface sediments was dug for visible infauna in the quadrat regardless of hand core sample was taken.

6.3.6       All collected fauna were released after recording except some tiny individuals that are too small to be identified on site. These tiny individuals were taken to laboratory for identification under dissecting microscope.

6.3.7       The taxonomic classification was conducted in accordance to the following references: Polychaetes: Fauchald (1977), Yang and Sun (1988); Arthropods: Dai and Yang (1991), Dong (1991); Mollusks: Chan and Caley (2003), Qi (2004).

Data Analysis

6.3.8       Data collected from direct search and core sampling was pooled in every quadrat for data analysis. Shannon-Weaver Diversity Index (H¡¦) and Pielou¡¦s Species Evenness (J) were calculated for every quadrat using the formulae below,

H¡¦= -£U ( Ni / N ) ln ( Ni / N ) (Shannon and Weaver, 1963)

J = H¡¦ / ln S, (Pielou, 1966)

 

where S is the total number of species in the sample, N is the total number of individuals, and Ni is the number of individuals of the ith species.

6.4.1       In the event of the impact monitoring results indicating that the density or the distribution pattern of intertidal fauna and seagrass is found to be significant different to the baseline condition (taking into account natural fluctuation in the occurrence and distribution pattern such as due to seasonal change), appropriate actions should be taken and additional mitigation measures should be implemented as necessary.  Data should then be re-assessed and the need for any further monitoring should be established.  The action plan, as given in Table 6.5 should be undertaken within a period of 1 month after a significant difference has been determined. 

Table 6.5          Event and Action Plan for Mudflat Monitoring

Event

ET Leader

IEC

SO

Contractor

Density or the distribution pattern of horseshoe crab, seagrass or intertidal soft shore communities recorded in the impact or post-construction monitoring are  significantly lower than or different from those recorded in the baseline monitoring.

 

Review historical data to ensure differences are as a result of natural variation or previously observed seasonal differences;

Identify source(s) of impact;

Inform the IEC, SO and Contractor;

Check monitoring data;

Discuss additional monitoring and any other measures, with the IEC and Contractor.

Discuss monitoring with the ET and the Contractor;

Review proposals for additional monitoring and any other measures submitted by the Contractor and advise the SO accordingly.

 

Discuss with the IEC additional monitoring requirements and any other measures proposed by the ET;

Make agreement on the measures to be implemented.

 

Inform the SO and in writing;

Discuss with the ET and the IEC and propose measures to the IEC and the ER;

Implement the agreed measures.

 

 

Notes:

ET ¡V Environmental Team

IEC ¡V Independent Environmental Checker

SO ¡V Supervising Officer

 

Horseshoe Crabs

6.5.1       Table 3.1 and Figure 3.1 of Appendix I shows the records of horseshoe crab survey at every sampling zone. In general, Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda was found in all sampling zones (TC1: 21 ind., TC2: 1 ind., TC3: 58 ind., ST: 43 ind.) while Tachypleus tridentatus was found in sampling zones TC1 (1 ind.), TC3 (11 ind.) and ST (4 ind.). Most of individuals were found on fine sand substratum followed by soft mud. Grouping was observed from both species while the group size ranged 2-14 individuals.

6.5.2       Table 3.2 of Appendix I summarizes the survey results of horseshoe crab at every sampling zone. For Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda, the search records were 5.3 ind. hr-1 person-1 (mean prosomal width: 40.73 mm), 0.3 ind. hr-1 person-1 (45.82 mm), 14.5 ind. hr-1 person-1 (27.81 mm), 10.8 ind. hr-1 person-1 (38.39 mm) at TC1, TC2, TC3 and ST respectively. According to Li (2008), the prosomal width of recorded individuals ranged 15.39¡Ð70.93 mm that was about 2.7-11.3 years old. For Tachypleus tridentatus, the search record was 0.3 ind. hr-1 person-1 (30.48 mm), 2.8 ind. hr-1 person-1 (32.48 mm) and 0.7 ind. hr-1 person-1 (49.93 mm) at TC1, TC3 and ST respectively. The prosomal width of recorded individuals ranged 27.33¡Ð66.74 mm that was about 3.5¡V7.8 years old.

6.5.3       Besides, marked individuals of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda (2 ind.) and Tachypleus tridentatus (1 ind.) were recorded in ST in present survey. Similar findings had been recorded in previous surveys conducted in Sep. 2013 and Mar. 2014. All of them were released through a conservation programme conducted by Prof. Paul Shin (Department of Biology and Chemistry, The City University of Hong Kong (CityU)). It was a re-introduction trial of artificial bred horseshoe crab juvenile at selected sites. So that the horseshoe crabs population might be restored in the natural habitat. Through a personal conversation with Prof. Shin, about 100 individuals were released in the sampling zone ST on 20 June 2013. All of them were marked with color tape and internal chip detected by specific chip sensor.

6.5.4       The artificial bred individuals were 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 in the past one year. 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. Besides, the three marked individuals in present survey were possibly released in the new round of the programme.

6.5.5       Figure 3.2 and 3.3 of Appendix I shows the changes of number of individuals, mean prosomal width and search record of horseshoe crab Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda and Tachypleus tridentatus respectively in every sampling zone along the sampling months. In general, higher search records (i.e. number of individuals) of both species were always found in ST in active season. But the highest search record was found in TC3 in the present survey. In contrast, much lower search record was found in other sampling zones especially TC2 (2 ind. in Sep. 2013, 1 ind. in Mar., Jun. and Sep. 2014). There was no spatial difference of horseshoe crab size (prosomal width) among the sampling zones.

6.5.6       It was obvious that ST 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 suitable for nursery of horseshoe crab especially TC2. Possible factors were less area of suitable substratum (especially TC1) and higher human disturbance (TC1, TC2 and TC3: close to urban district and easily accessible). In TC2, large daily salinity fluctuation was a possible factor either since it was flushed by two rivers under tidal inundation. The individuals found in TC1, TC2 and TC3 were believed foraging from the ST during high tide while it might return to ST over a certain period of time. It accounted for the variable search records in the three sampling zones along the sampling months. For example, few individuals of Tachypleus tridentatus were found in TC1 only between Sep. 2012 and Sep. 2013. However it no longer appeared while individuals of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda were found after Mar. 2014.

6.5.7       During the survey period, the search record of horseshoe crab declined obviously during dry season especially December (Figures 3.2 and 3.3 of Appendix I). Furthermore no individual was found in Dec. 2013. As mentioned, the horseshoe crabs were inactive and burrowed in the sediments during cold weather (<15 ºC). Similar results of low search record in dry season were reported in a previous territory-wide survey of horseshoe crab. For example, the search records in Tung Chung Wan were 0.17 ind. hr-1 person-1 and 0 ind. hr-1 person-1 in wet season and dry season respectively (details see Li, 2008). After the dry season, the search record increased with the warmer climate.

6.5.8       Between the sampling months Sep. 2012 and 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 been believed of very low density in ST hence the encounter rate was very low. Until 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 3-4 years ago along the coastline of Tung Chun Wan. However, these individuals were still small while their walking trails were inconspicuous. Hence there was no search record in previous sampling months. From Mar. to Sep. 2014, more individuals were recorded due to larger size and higher activity.

6.5.9       For Tachypleus tridentatus, sharp increase of number of individuals was recorded in ST with wet season (from Mar. to Sep. 2013). According to a personal conversation with Prof. Shin (CityU), his monitoring team had recorded similar increase of horseshoe crab population during wet season. It was believed that the suitable ambient temperature increased its conspicuousness. However similar pattern was not recorded during the period of this year. The number of individuals increased in Mar. and Jun. 2014 followed by a rapid decline in Sep. 2014. Apart from natural mortality, migration from nursery soft shore to subtidal habitat was another possible cause. Since the mean prosomal width of Tachypleus tridentatus continued to grow and reached about 50 mm in this year. Most of the individuals might have reached a suitable size strong enough to forage in subtidal habitat.

6.5.10    Figure 3.4 of Appendix I shows the changes of prosomal width of horseshoe crab Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda and Tachypleus tridentatus in ST where was regarded as an important nursery ground. As mentioned above, Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda was rarely found between Sep. 2012 and Dec. 2013 hence the data were limiting. From Mar. to Sep. 2014, the size of major population (50% records between upper and lower quartile) fluctuated between 30-40 mm and 45-60 mm. Such fluctuation should be due to variable encounter rate influenced by weather. For Tachypleus tridentatus, a consistent growing trend was observed for the major population from Dec. 2012 to Sep. 2014. The prosomal width increased from 10-20 mm to 40-60 mm. As mentioned, the large individuals might have reached a suitable size for migrating from the nursery soft shore to subtidal habitat.

6.5.11    The present survey was the eighth time of the EM&A programme during the construction period. Based on the results, impact of the HKLR project could not be detected on horseshoe crabs considering the factor of natural, seasonal variation. In case, abnormal phenomenon (e.g. very few numbers of horseshoe crab individuals in warm weather, large number of dead individuals on the shore) is observed, it would be reported as soon as possible.

Seagrass Beds

6.5.12    Table 3.3 of Appendix I show the records of seagrass beds survey at every sampling zone. Two species of seagrass Halophila ovalis and Zostera japonica were recorded in ST only. In general the number of patches and area of Halophila ovalis were significantly higher (Table 3.4 of Appendix I). For Halophila ovalis, the area of highest coverage consisted of one large and one medium patch on sandy substratum beside the mangrove vegetation at tidal level 2 m above C.D. (Figure 3.5(A) of Appendix I). The estimated total seagrass area was about 305.9 m2 with vegetation coverage 85%.

6.5.13    However, the largest seagrass bed of Halophila ovalis located on soft mud in patchy distribution between 1.0 m and 1.5 m above C.D. (Figure 3.5(B) of Appendix I). Such large area of seagrass bed was merged by numerous smaller patches recruited seasonally in the past. In Dec. 2013, flowers could be observed during its reproductive period (Figure 3.6 of Appendix I). In Mar. 2014, 31 small to medium patches were recorded (variable area 1-72 m2 per patch, vegetation coverage 40-80% per patch). In Jun. 2014, these small and medium patches grew and extended to each others. These patches were no longer distinguishable and were covering a significant mudflat area of ST. It was generally grouped into 4 large areas (1116.3 ¡V 2442.6 m2) of seagrass beds characterized of patchy distribution, variable vegetable coverage (40-80%) and smaller leaves. In present survey (Sep. 2014), the seagrass area declined sharply while there was only one single patch (785.9 m2) recorded in that mudflat area. But this patch was of higher coverage (70%) and larger leaves. Besides, Halophila ovalis could be found in other mud flat area surrounding the single patch. But it was hardly distinguished into patches due to very low coverage (10-20%) and small leaves.

6.5.14    Two small patches of Zostera japonica were found within the long strand of Halophila ovalis (Figure 3.5 of Appendix I). The estimated area ranged 0.5-1.6 m2 while the estimated coverage was about 50-55%.

6.5.15    Figure 3.7 of Appendix I shows the changes of estimated total area of seagrass beds at ST along the sampling months. For Halophila ovalis, the total area and estimated coverage increased gradually from Sep. 2012 to Mar. 2014. It showed that the seagrass was in scattered patches on the shore during dry season of 2012. Then it grew larger and became numerous patches of varying sizes during 2013. In Jun. 2014, the total seagrass bed area increased sharply due to merging of the patches. However the vegetation was in patchy distribution with highly variable coverage. In the present survey (Sep. 2014), the total seagrass area declined rapidly. The natural heat stress and grazing force were the possible causes during the hot, wet season (Jun to Sep 2014).

6.5.16    For Zostera japonica, it was not recorded in the 1st and 2nd surveys of monitoring programme. Seasonal recruitment of few patches was found in Mar. 2013. Then the patch size increased and merged gradually with the warmer climate from Mar. to Jun. 2013. However the patch size decreased sharply and remained similar from Sep. 2013 to Mar. 2014. In Jun. 2014, the patch size increased obviously again with warmer climate. Similar to previous year, the patch size decreased again in Sep. 2014.

6.5.17    The present survey was the eighth survey of the EM&A programme during the construction period. Based on the results, impacts of the HKLR project could not be detected on seagrass considering the factor of natural, seasonal variation. In case, abnormal phenomenon (e.g. rapid reduction of seagrass patch size, abnormal change of leave colour) is observed, it would be reported as soon as possible.

Intertidal Soft Shore Communities

6.5.18    Table 3.5 and Figure 3.8 of Appendix I show the types of substratum along the horizontal transect at every tidal level of every sampling zone. The relative distribution of different substrata was estimated by categorizing the substratum types (Gravels & Boulders / Sands / Soft mud) of the ten random quadrats along the horizontal transect.

6.5.19    The distribution of substratum types varied among tidal levels and sampling zones. At TC1, high percentages of ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦ (70-90%) were recorded at all tidal levels while the remaining substratum type was ¡¥Sands¡¦(10-30%). At TC2, high percentages of ¡¥Sands¡¦ (70-90%) were recorded at high and mid tidal levels followed by ¡¥Soft mud¡¦ (10-30%). Conversely, high percentage of ¡¥Soft mud¡¦ (70%) was recorded at low tidal level followed by ¡¥Sands¡¦ (30%). At TC3, high percentages of ¡¥Sands¡¦ (70-80%) were recorded at high and mid tidal levels followed by ¡¥Soft mud¡¦ (20-30%). ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦ was the major substratum type (80%) at low tidal level. At ST, ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦ (100%) was the major substratum at high and mid tidal levels. ¡¥Sands¡¦ (70%) was mainly recorded at low tidal level followed by ¡¥Soft mud¡¦ (20%) and ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦ (10%).

6.5.20    There was neither consistent vertical nor horizontal zonation pattern of substratum type 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.

6.5.21    Table 3.6 of Appendix I lists the total abundance, density and number of taxon of every phylum in the present survey. A total of 14402 individuals were recorded. Mollusca was significantly the most abundant phylum (total individuals 13923, density 464 ind. m-2, relative abundance 96.7%). The second abundant phylum was Arthropoda (312 ind., 10 ind. m-2, 2.2%). The third and forth abundant phyla were Annelida (77 ind., 3 ind. m-2, 0.5%) and Sipuncula (63 ind., 2 ind. m-2, 0.4%). Relatively other phyla were very low in abundances (density £1 ind. m-2, relative abundance £0.1%). Moreover, the most diverse phylum was Mollusca (40 taxa) followed by Arthropoda (16 taxa) and Annelida (8 taxa). The taxa of other phyla were relatively less (1-2 taxa). The complete list of collected specimens is shown in Annex III of Appendix I.

6.5.22    Table 3.7 of Appendix I shows the number of individual, relative abundance and density of each phylum in every sampling zone. The results were similar among the four sampling zones. In general, Mollusca was the most dominant phylum (no. of individuals: 3234-3717 ind., relative abundance 95.3-97.9%). Arthropoda was the second abundant phylum (61-117 ind., 1.6-3.0%) although the number of individuals was significantly lower than that of mollusks. For TC2, Annelida was the third abundant phylum (32 ind., 1.0%). Relatively, other phyla were low in abundance among the four sampling zones (< 1%).

6.5.23    Table 3.8 of Appendix I lists the abundant species (relative abundance >10%) in every sampling zone. In TC1, gastropod Batillaria multiformis was the most abundant (173-175 ind. m-2, relative abundance 36-40%) at high and mid tidal levels (major substratum: ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦). Gastropods Cerithidea cingulata (106 ind. m-2, 25%) and Cerithidea djadjariensis (74 ind. m-2, 17%) were the second and third abundant taxa at high tidal level. At mid tidal level, the less dominant species were rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (102 ind. m-2, 21%, attached on boulders), gastropods Monodonta labio (80 ind. m-2, 16%) and Cerithidea djadjariensis (62 ind. m-2, 13%). At low tidal level (major substratum: ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦), the dominant gastropods Monodonta labio (160 ind. m-2, 28%), Batillaria multiformis (102 ind. m-2, 18%) and rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (144 ind. m-2, 25%) were even in density at low tidal levels.

6.5.24    At TC2, gastropods Cerithidea djadjariensis (331 ind. m-2, 52%) and Cerithidea cingulata (179 ind. m-2, 28%) were highly abundant at high tidal level (major substratum: ¡¥Sands¡¦). At mid and low tidal levels (major substrata: ¡¥Soft mud¡¦ & ¡¥Sands¡¦), gastropod Cerithidea djadjariensis was still the most abundant taxon but the mean densities were much lower (53-160 ind. m-2, 29-31%). Rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (45-119 ind. m-2, 23-25%) and gastropod Batillaria zonalis (37-60 ind. m-2, 12-20%) were the second and third abundant taxa at mid and low tidal levels. Gastropod Cerithidea cingulata (56 ind. m-2, 11%) was the forth abundant at mid tidal levels.

6.5.25    At TC3, gastropods Cerithidea djadjariensis (199-227 ind. m-2, 36-42%) and Cerithidea cingulata (153-181 ind. m-2, 28-33%) were highly abundant at high and mid tidal levels (major substratum: ¡¥Sands¡¦) followed by less abundant gastropod Batillaria multiformis (74-91 ind. m-2, 14-17%). At low tidal level (major substratum: ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦), rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (212 ind. m-2, 45%) was the most abundant followed by gastropod Monodonta labio at much lower density (92 ind. m-2, 19%).

6.5.26    At ST gastropod Batillaria multiformis was highly abundant (206 ind. m-2, 38%) at high tidal level (major substratum: ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦) followed by much less abundant gastropod Monodonta labio (127 ind. m-2, 23%) and rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (66 ind. m-2, 12%). At mid tidal level (major substratum: ¡¥Gravels and Boulders¡¦), gastropod Monodonta labio (146 ind. m-2, 25%) and rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (102 ind. m-2, 17%) were higher in abundances. Other less abundant taxa were gastropods Cerithidea djadjariensis (71 ind. m-2, 12%) and Batillaria multiformis (56 ind. m-2, 10%). At low tidal level (major substratum: ¡¥Sands¡¦), rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (50 ind. m-2, 22%), gastropods Lunella coronata (42 ind. m-2, 18%), Cerithidea djadjariensis (37 ind. m-2, 16%) and Batillaria zonalis (25 ind. m-2, 11%) were abundant taxa at lower densities relative to that at high and mid tidal levels.

6.5.27    There was no consistent zonation pattern of species distribution observed across all sampling zones and tidal levels. The species distribution should be affected by the type of substratum primarily. In general, gastropods Cerithidea djadjariensis (total number of individuals: 3189 ind., relative abundance 22.1%), Batillaria multiformis (2398 ind., 16.7%), and Cerithidea cingulata (1958 ind., 13.6%) were the most commonly occurring species on sandy substratum. In previous surveys, the most dominant taxon was usually gastropod Batillaria multiformis. Its abundance declined and was replaced by gastropod Cerithidea djadjariensis in the present survey. Moreover rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (2278 ind., 15.8%) and gastropod Monodonta labio (1653 ind., 11.5%) were commonly occurring species inhabiting gravel and boulders substratum.

6.5.28    Table 3.9 of Appendix I shows the mean values of number of species, density, biodiversity index H¡¦ and species evenness J of soft shore communities at every tidal level and in every sampling zone. Among the sampling zones, there was no clear difference in the mean number of species (7-16 spp. 0.25 m-2) and densities (182-640 ind. m-2). The mean H¡¦ (1.76) and J (0.74) in ST were relatively higher than that in TC1, TC2 and TC3 (H¡¦: 1.33-1.44, J: 0.64-0.69).

6.5.29    Across the tidal levels, there was no consistent difference for the mean number of species and H¡¦ in all sampling zones. In TC1 and TC3, the mean densities ranged 433-575 ind. m-2 and were similar among the three tidal levels. In TC2 and ST, the mean densities at high and mid tidal levels (518-640 ind. m-2) were much higher than that at low tidal level (182-230 ind. m-2). Higher J was usually observed at mid and low tidal tidal levels.

6.5.30    Figure 3.9 to 3.12 of Appendix I show the temporal changes of mean number of species, mean density, H¡¦ and J at every tidal level and in every sampling zone along the sampling months. No significant temporal change of any biological parameters was observed. All the parameters were under slight and natural fluctuation with the seasonal variation.

6.5.31    The present survey was the eighth survey of the EM&A programme during the construction period. Based on the results, impacts of the HKLR project were not detected on intertidal soft shore community. In case, abnormal phenomenon (e.g. large reduction of fauna densities and species number) is observed, it would be reported as soon as possible.  

6.6.1       Chan, K.K., Caley, K.J., 2003. Sandy Shores, Hong Kong Field Guides 4. The Department of Ecology & Biodiversity, The University of Hong Kong. pp 117.

6.6.2       Dai, A.Y., Yang, S.L., 1991. Crabs of the China Seas. China Ocean Press. Beijing.

6.6.3       Dong, Y.M., 1991. Fauna of ZheJiang Crustacea. Zhejiang Science and Technology Publishing House. ZheJiang.

6.6.4       EPD, 1997. Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (1st edition). Environmental Protection Department, HKSAR Government.

6.6.5       Fauchald, K., 1977. The polychaete worms. Definitions and keys to the orders, families and genera. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Science Series 28. Los Angeles, U.S.A.

6.6.6       Li, H.Y., 2008. The Conservation of Horseshoe Crabs in Hong Kong. MPhil Thesis, City University of Hong Kong, pp 277.

6.6.7       Pielou, E.C., 1966. Shannon¡¦s formula as a measure of species diversity: its use and misuse. American Naturalist 100, 463-465.

6.6.8       Qi, Z.Y., 2004. Seashells of China. China Ocean Press. Beijing, China.

6.6.9       Shannon, C.E., Weaver, W., 1963. The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, USA.

6.6.10    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.

6.6.11    Yang, D.J, Sun, R.P., 1988. Polychaetous annelids commonly seen from the Chinese waters (Chinese version). China Agriculture Press, China.

 


 

7        ENVIRONMENTAL SITE INSPECTION AND AUDIT

7.1.1       Site Inspections were carried out on a weekly basis to monitor the implementation of proper environmental pollution control and mitigation measures for the Project. During the reporting month, four site inspections were carried out on 3, 10, 17 and 26 September 2014. 

7.1.2       Particular observations during the site inspections are described below.

3 September 2014

(a)     Stagnant water was found in the recesses of the concrete block at N4. The recesses of concrete blocks were filled up to prevent accumulation of stagnant water at N4. (This observation was found on 30 July 2014 and closed on 3 September 2014.)

(b)     Stagnant water was found inside the H-beam and N4. The stagnant water was removed from the H-beam at N4. (This observation was found on 30 July 2014 and closed on 3 September 2014.)

(c)     A stockpile of concrete debris was found dry at N4. The stockpile of concrete debris was sprayed with water at N4. (This observation was found on 30 July 2014 and closed on 3 September 2014.)

(d)     Lubricant oil drums were found without chemical labels at N4. Chemical labels were provided for the lubricant oil drums at N4. (This observation was found on 30 July 2014 and closed on 3 September 2014.)

(e)     Stagnant water was found at the abutment at N1.  The Contractor removed the stagnant water from the abutment at N1. (This observation was found on 30 July 2014 and closed on 3 September 2014.)

(f)    An improper wheel washing facility was provided at the exit of N20 since the site inspection undertaken on 16 July 2014.  Proper wheel washing facility was provided at entrance/exit of N20. (This observation was found on 16 July 2014 and closed on 3 September 2014.)  

(g)   An improper wheel washing facility was provided at the entrance/exit at S22 since the site inspection on 25 July 2014. Proper wheel washing facility was provided at entrance/exit of N20. (This observation was found on 25 July 2014 and closed on 3 September 2014.)  

(h)   Chemical containers were found without drip trays and chemical labels at vessel Shun Tak 82. The unknown lubricant drums were removed from the deck of vessel Shun Tak 82. (This observation was closed on 10 September 2014.)

(i)     Stagnant water was found in the H-beam at N4. Stagnant water in the H-beam at N4 was cleared. (This observation was closed on 10 September 2014.)

(j)     Stagnant water was found on the ground at N13. The stagnant water on the ground was cleared at N3. (This observation was closed on 10 September 2014.)

(k)   Cement bags were found without cover at N20. The cement bags and unknown lubricant drum were removed by the Contractor at N20. (This observation was closed on 10 September 2014.)

(l)     A chemical container was found without drip tray and chemical label at N20. Proper labels were affixed to the diesel tanks at N20. (This observation was closed on 10 September 2014.)

(m)  A cement mixing plant was found without proper cover at N20. The cement mixing plant was removed by the Contractor at N20. (This observation was closed on 10 September 2014.)

(n)   Chemical containers were found without chemical labels at N20. Proper labels were provided for the chemical containers at N20. (This observation was closed on 10 September 2014.)

10 September 2014

(a)     There were soils on the deck of barges at S7.  No fill materials were found on the edge of the barge. (This observation was closed on 17 September 2014.)

(b)     Fugitive dust emission was generated from the drilling activity at N4 even water spraying was provided. Water spray was provided to suppress the fugitive dust emission generated from the drilling activity at N4. (This observation was closed on 17 September 2014.)

(c)     More than 20 bags of cement bags were not covered properly at S15. A proper cover was provided for the cement bags at S15. (This observation was closed on 17 September 2014.)

(d)     No proper labels were affixed to chemical drums; at S11. The chemical drums without chemical labels were removed at S11. (This observation was closed on 17 September 2014.)

(e)     Fugitive dust emission was generated from the drilling activity at S15 even water spraying was provided. Water spray was provided to suppress the fugitive dust emission generated from the drilling activity at S15 and no dust emissions were observed. (This observation was closed on 17 September 2014.)

(f)      No stopper was provided for the drain hole of the drip tray at S19. A stopper was provided for the drain hole of the drip tray at S19. (This observation was closed on 17 September 2014.)

(g)     The gap between silt curtains was observed at Portion X. The gap between silt curtains were enclosed at Portion X. (This observation was closed on 17 September 2014.)

17 September 2014

(a)   The stockpiles of dusty materials were found dry at N13. The stockpiles of dusty materials were observed wet. (This observation was closed on 26 September 2014.)

(b)   No instruction or sign was provided for the wheel washing facility at N13. A worker was provided to instruct drivers of vehicles to use wheel washing facility at N13. (This observation was closed on 26 September 2014.) 

(c)   High pressure water jet was not provided for the wheel washing facility at N20. A high pressure water jet was provided for the wheel washing facility at N20. (This observation was closed on 26 September 2014.) 

(d)   High pressure water jet was not provided for the wheel washing facility at N4. A high pressure water jet was provided for the wheel washing facility at N4. (This observation was closed on 26 September 2014.)

(e)   Chemical drums were found without drip trays at S15-S16. Chemical drums were removed at S15 ¡VS16. (This observation was closed on 26 September 2014.)

(f)    The mechanical cover of dump truck (licence plate: CF 1078) was found broken at S15-S16. The mechanical cover of dump truck was repaired. (This observation was closed on 26 September 2014.)

(g)   High pressure water jet was not provided for wheel washing facility at S22. A high pressure water jet was provided at S22. (This observation was closed on 26 September 2014.) 

26 September 2014

(a)     A gap was observed at the silt curtain. The Contractor was reminded to fix the silt curtain and avoid any gaps at the silt curtain.

(b)     Soil at the walkway of vessels Hai Bo 8 and Harbor Sky 68 were observed. The Contractor was reminded to clean the walkway of vessels Hai Bo 8 and Harbor Sky 68.  

(c)     It was observed on the vessel Hai Bo 8 that the kerb of a drip tray was broken. The Contractor was reminded to repair the kerb of the drip tray on the vessel Hai Bo 8.

(d)     There was stagnant water on a tarpulin sheet at N1. The Contractor was reminded to clear the stagnant water at N1.

The Contractor has rectified most of the observations as identified during environmental site inspections during the reporting month. Follow-up actions for outstanding observations will be inspected during the next site inspections. 

7.2.1       The Contractor submitted application form for registration as a chemical waste producer for the Project. Sufficient numbers of receptacles were available for general refuse collection and sorting.

7.2.2       Monthly summary of waste flow table is detailed in Appendix J. 

7.2.3       The Contractor was reminded that chemical waste containers should be properly treated and stored temporarily in designated chemical waste storage area on site in accordance with the Code of Practise on the Packaging, Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes.

7.3.1       The valid environmental licenses and permits during the reporting month are summarized in Appendix L.

7.4.1       In response to the site audit findings, the Contractors carried out corrective actions.

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 1-hour TSP and 24-hour TSP, no Action and Limit Level exceedances were recorded at AMS 5 and AMS 6 during the reporting month.   

7.5.2       For construction noise, no Action and Limit Level exceedances were recorded at the monitoring stations during the reporting month.

7.5.3       For marine water quality monitoring, a Limit Level exceedance of suspended solids at station IS5 and an Action Level exceedance of suspended solids at station SR3 were recorded during mid-ebb tide on 10 September 2014. No Action and Limit Level exceedance of turbidity and dissolved oxygen level were recorded during the reporting month.

7.6               Summary of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecution

7.6.1       There were no complaints received during the reporting month. The details of cumulative statistics of Environmental Complaints are provided in Appendix K.

7.6.2       No notification of summons and prosecution was received during the reporting period.

7.6.3       Statistics on notifications of summons and successful prosecutions are summarized in Appendix N.


8        FUTURE KEY ISSUES

8.1.1       As informed by the Contractor, the major construction activities for October 2014 are summarized in Table 7.1.

Table 7.1          Construction Activities for October 2014

Site Area

Description of Activities

Portion X

Dismantling/Trimming of Temporary 40mm Stone Platform for Construction of Seawall

Portion X

Stone Column Installation

Portion X

Filling Works behind Stone Platform

Portion X

Band Drains Installation

Portion X

Construction of Seawall

Portion X

Loading and Unloading of Filling Material

Portion X

Temporary Stone Platform Construction

Portion X

Temporary Diversion of Existing Box Culvert

Portion X

Sheet Piling & Jet Grouting

Portion X

Excavation and Lateral Support Works at SHT C&CT

Kwo Lo Wan / Airport Road

Works for Diversion of Airport Road and Kwo Lo Wan Road

Airport Express Line

Pre-grouting and Pipe Piling Works for AEL Access Shafts

Kwo Lo Wan / Airport Road / Airport Express Line/East Coast Road

Utilities Detection

Airport Road / Airport Express Line/East Coast Road

Establishment of Site Access

Kwo Lo Wan Road

Excavation and Lateral Support Works at shaft 3 extension north shaft

Airport Road

Pipe Piling Cofferdam Works for HAT West C&C tunnel

Portion Y

Access Shaft Construction for HAT Tunnel

Portion Y

Utility Culvert Excavation

Portion Y

Pipe Roofing Installation for HAT tunnel

West Portal

Excavation for Tunnel SHT

West Portal

Abutment Construction

West Portal/East Coast Road/ Kwo Lo Wan Road

Transformer Room Construction


8.2.1       The tentative schedule for environmental monitoring in October 2014 is provided in Appendix D.


 

9.1.1       The construction phase and EM&A programme of the Contract commenced on 17 October 2012.

Air Quality

9.1.2       For 1-hour TSP and 24-hour TSP, no Action and Limit Level exceedances were recorded at AMS 5 and AMS 6 during the reporting month.   

Noise

9.1.3       For construction noise, no Action and Limit Level exceedances were recorded at the monitoring station during the reporting month.

Water Quality

9.1.4       For marine water quality monitoring, a Limit Level exceedance of suspended solids at station IS5 and an Action Level exceedance of suspended solids at station SR3 were recorded during mid-ebb tide on 10 September 2014. No Action and Limit Level exceedance of turbidity and dissolved oxygen level were recorded during the reporting month.

Dolphin

9.1.5       During the September¡¦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 (September- November 2014) and baseline monitoring period (3-month period) will be made.

Mudflat

9.1.7       This measurement result was generally and relatively higher than the baseline measurement at S1, S2, S3 and S4. The mudflat level is continuously increased.

9.1.8       The September 2014 survey results indicate that the impacts of the HKLR project could not be detected on horseshoe crabs, seagrass and intertidal soft shore community.

Environmental Site Inspection and Audit

9.1.9       Environmental site inspection was carried out on 3, 10, 17 and 26 September 2014.  Recommendations on remedial actions were given to the Contractors for the deficiencies identified during the site inspections.

9.1.10    There were no complaints received during the reporting month.

9.1.11    No notification of summons and prosecution was received during the reporting period.


Figures

 


 

Appendix A

Environmental Management Structure

Appendix B

Construction Programme


 

Appendix C

Calibration Certificates


 

Appendix D

Monitoring Schedule


 

Appendix E

Monitoring Data


 

Appendix F

Event and Action Plan


 

Appendix G

Wind Data


 

Appendix H

Dolphin Monitoring Results


 

Appendix I

Mudflat Monitoring Results

Appendix J

Waste Flow Table

 


 

 Appendix K

Cumulative Statistic on Complaints

 

 


 

Appendix L

Environmental Licenses and Permits

 

 


 

Appendix M

Implementation Schedule of Environmental Mitigation Measures

Appendix N

Record of ¡§Notification of Environmental Quality Limit Exceedances¡¨ & ¡§Notification of Summons and Prosecutions¡¨


 

Appendix O

Location of Works Areas