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 ˇ§Designated Projectsˇ¨, under Schedule 2 of the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Ordinance (Cap 499) and Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA) Reports (Register No. AEIAR-144/2009 and
AEIAR-145/2009) were prepared for the Project. The current Environmental Permit (EP)
EP-352/2009/D for HKLR and EP-353/2009/K for HKBCF were issued on 22 December
2014 and 11 April 2016, respectively. These documents are available through the
EIA Ordinance Register. The construction phase of Contract was commenced on 17 October 2012.
BMT Asia Pacific Limited
has been appointed by the Contractor to implement the Environmental Monitoring
& Audit (EM&A) programme for the Contract in accordance with the
Updated EM&A Manual for HKLR (Version 1.0) and will be providing
environmental team services to the Contract.
This is the fifty-fourth Monthly EM&A report for the Contract which summarizes the monitoring
results and audit findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting
period from 1 to 31 March 2017.
Environmental
Monitoring and Audit Progress
The monthly EM&A
programme was undertaken in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual for HKLR
(Version 1.0). A summary of the
monitoring activities during this reporting month is listed below:
1-hr TSP Monitoring
|
1,
7, 13, 17, 23 and 29 March 2017
|
24-hr TSP Monitoring
|
6, 10, 16, 22 and 28 March 2017
|
Noise Monitoring
|
1,
7, 13, 23 and 29 March 2017
|
Water Quality Monitoring
|
1,
3, 6, 8, 10, 13, 15, 17, 20, 22, 24, 27, 29 and 31 March 2017
|
Mudflat Monitoring (Mudflat)
|
3,
4, 10 and 14 March 2017
|
Mudflat Monitoring (Sedimentation Rate)
|
28 March 2017
|
Chinese White Dolphin
Monitoring
|
2, 7, 16 and 28 March
2017
|
Site Inspection
|
8, 15, 22 and 31 March
2017
|
Due to boat
availability, the dolphin monitoring schedule was rescheduled from 6 March 2017
to 7 March 2017. Due to weather condition, the dolphin monitoring schedule was
rescheduled from 15 March 2017 to 16 March 2017. Due to resource arrangement,
the dolphin monitoring schedule was rescheduled from 20 March 2017 to 28 March
2017. The water quality monitoring on 31 March 2017 during mid-ebb tide was
cancelled for safety reason as the thunderstorm signal was hoisted by Hong Kong
Observatory and lightning was recorded at the WQM stations. Due to enough
manpower for surveys at the same time, the mudflat monitoring was rescheduled
from 11 March 2017 to 4 March 2017 and from 13 March 2017 to 4 March 2017.
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)
|
3
|
3
|
Turbidity level
|
2
|
0
|
Dissolved oxygen level (DO)
|
0
|
0
|
Complaint Log
For Environmental Complaint
No. COM-2017-108 mentioned in
previously Monthly EM&A Report for February 2017, it was considered that
the complaint was unlikely related to Contract No. HY/2011/03.
There was one complaint received
in relation to the environmental impacts during the reporting period. It was considered that the
complaint was unlikely related to Contract No. HY/2011/03. A summary of environmental
complaints for this reporting month is as follows:
Environmental Complaint No.
|
Date of Complaint Received
|
Description of Environmental Complaints
|
COM-2017-112
|
27 March 2017
|
Noise and Water
Quality
|
Notifications
of Summons and Prosecutions
There were no notifications of summons or
prosecutions received during this reporting month.
Reporting
Changes
This report has been
developed in compliance with the reporting requirements for the subsequent
EM&A reports as required by the Updated EM&A Manual for HKLR (Version
1.0).
The proposal for the change
of Action Level and Limit Level for suspended solid and turbidity was approved
by EPD on 25 March 2013.
The revised Event and
Action Plan for dolphin monitoring was approved by EPD on 6 May
2013.
The original monitoring
station at IS(Mf)9 (Coordinate: 813273E, 818850N) was observed inside the
perimeter silt curtain of Contract HY/2010/02 on 1 July 2013, as such the
original impact water quality monitoring location at IS(Mf)9 was temporarily
shifted outside the silt curtain. As
advised by the Contractor of HY/2010/02 in August 2013, the perimeter silt
curtain was shifted to facilitate safe anchorage zone of construction
barges/vessels until end of 2013 subject to construction progress. Therefore, water quality monitoring
station IS(Mf)9 was shifted to 813226E and 818708N
since 1 July 2013. According to the
water quality monitoring teamˇ¦s observation on 24 March 2014, the original
monitoring location of IS(Mf)9 was no longer enclosed
by the perimeter silt curtain of Contract HY/2010/02. Thus, the impact water
quality monitoring works at the original monitoring location of IS(Mf)9 has been resumed since 24 March 2014.
Transect lines 1, 2, 7, 8,
9 and 11 for dolphin monitoring have been revised due to the obstruction of the
permanent structures associated with the construction works of HKLR and the
southern viaduct of TM-CLKL, as well as provision of adequate buffer distance
from the Airport Restricted Areas.
The EPD issued a memo and confirmed that they had no objection on the
revised transect lines on 19 August 2015.
The water quality
monitoring stations at IS10 (Coordinate: 812577E, 820670N) and SR5 (811489E,
820455N) are located inside Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA) Approach
Restricted Areas. The previously granted Vessel's Entry Permit for accessing
stations IS10 and SR5 were expired on 31 December 2016. During the permit
renewing process, the water quality monitoring location was shifted to IS10(N) (Coordinate: 813060E, 820540N) and SR5(N)
(Coordinate: 811430E, 820978N) on 2, 4 and 6 January 2017 temporarily. The
permit has been granted by Marine Department on 6 January 2017. Thus, the
impact water quality monitoring works at original monitoring location of IS10 and
SR5 has been resumed since 9 January 2017.
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:
ˇP
Stockpiling at WA7;
- Dismantling/trimming
of Temporary 40mm Stone Platform for Construction of Seawall at Portion X;
- Construction of
Seawall at Portion X;
- Loading and Unloading
Filling Materials at Portion X;
- Backfilling at Scenic
Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel) at Portion X;
- Construction of Tunnel
Box Structure at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel) at Portion X;
- Excavation for HKBCF
to Airport Tunnel & Construction of Tunnel Box Structure at Portion X;
- Excavation for
Diversion of Culvert PR9 and PR14 at Portion X;
ˇP
Works for Diversion of
Airport Road;
- Utilities Detection at
Airport Road / Airport Express Line/ East Coast Road;
- Establishment of Site
Access at Airport Road / Airport Express Line/East Coast Road;
- Mined Tunnel
Excavation / Box Jacking underneath Airport Road and Airport Express Line;
ˇP
Construction of Tunnel Box Structure at Package T1.12.1 near Kwo Lo Wan Road;
ˇP
Construction of Tunnel Box Structure at Shaft 3 Extension South
Shaft;
- Excavation and Lateral
Support Works & Construction of Tunnel Box Structure for HKBCF to
Airport Tunnel West (Cut & Cover Tunnel) at Airport Road;
- Excavation and Lateral
Support Works & Construction of Tunnel Box Structure for HKBCF to
Airport Tunnel East (Cut & Cover Tunnel) at Portion X;
- Sub-structure & Superstructure
Works for Highway Operation and Maintenance Area Building at Portion X;
and
ˇP
Superstructure Works for
Scenic Hill Tunnel West Portal Ventilation building at West Portal.
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 ˇ§Designated Projectsˇ¨, under Schedule 2 of
the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Ordinance (Cap 499) and Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA) Reports (Register No. AEIAR-144/2009 and
AEIAR-145/2009) were prepared for the Project. The current Environmental Permit (EP)
EP-352/2009/D for HKLR and EP-353/2009/K for HKBCF were issued on 22 December
2014 and 11 April 2016, respectively. These documents are available through the
EIA Ordinance Register. The construction
phase of Contract was commenced on 17
October 2012. Figure 1.1 shows the project site boundary. The works areas are shown in Appendix O.
1.1.4
The Contract
includes the following key aspects:
ˇP
New reclamation
along the east coast of the approximately 23 hectares.
ˇP
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.
ˇP
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.
ˇP
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.
ˇP
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.
ˇP
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.
ˇP
Associated civil,
structural, building, geotechnical, marine, environmental protection,
landscaping, drainage and sewerage, tunnel and highway electrical and
mechanical works, together with the installation of street lightings, traffic
aids and sign gantries, water mains and fire hydrants, provision of facilities
for installation of traffic control and surveillance system (TCSS), reprovisioning works of affected existing facilities,
implementation of transplanting, compensatory planting and protection of
existing trees, and implementation of an environmental monitoring and audit
(EM&A) program.
1.1.6 BMT Asia Pacific Limited has been
appointed by the Contractor to implement the EM&A programme
for the Contract in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual for HKLR
(Version 1.0) for HKLR and will be providing environmental team services to the
Contract. Ramboll Environ Hong Kong Ltd. was employed by HyD
as the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) and Environmental Project Office
(ENPO) for the Project. The project
organization with regard to the environmental works is as follows.
1.2.1
The project
organization structure and lines of communication with respect to the on-site
environmental management structure is shown in Appendix A. The key
personnel contact names and numbers are summarized in Table 1.1.
Table 1.1 Contact
Information of Key Personnel
Party
|
Position
|
Name
|
Telephone
|
Fax
|
Supervising Officerˇ¦s Representative
(Ove Arup & Partners Hong Kong Limited)
|
(Chief Resident Engineer,
CRE)
|
Robert Antony Evans
|
3968 0801
|
2109 1882
|
Environmental Project Office / Independent
Environmental Checker
(Ramboll Environ Hong Kong Limited)
|
Environmental Project Office Leader
|
Y. H. Hui
|
3465 2888
|
3465 2899
|
Independent Environmental Checker
|
Antony Wong
|
3465 2888
|
3465 2899
|
Contractor
(China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Ltd)
|
Project Manager
|
S. Y. Tse
|
3968 7002
|
2109 2588
|
Environmental Officer
|
Federick Wong
|
3968 7117
|
2109 2588
|
Environmental Team
(BMT Asia Pacific)
|
Environmental Team Leader
|
Claudine Lee
|
2241 9847
|
2815 3377
|
24 hours
complaint hotline
|
---
|
---
|
5699 5730
|
---
|
1.3
Construction
Programme
1.3.1 A copy of the Contractorˇ¦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
|
Stockpiling
|
WA7
|
Dismantling/trimming
of temporary 40mm stone platform for construction of seawall
|
Portion X
|
Construction
of seawall
|
Portion X
|
Loading
and unloading of filling materials
|
Portion X
|
Construction
of tunnel box structure at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Backfilling
at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Excavation for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel &
construction of tunnel box structure
|
Portion X
|
Excavation
for diversion of culvert PR9 and PR14
|
Portion X
|
Works for diversion
|
Airport Road
|
Utilities detection
|
Airport Road/ Airport
Express Line/ East Coast Road
|
Establishment of site access
|
Airport Road/ Airport
Express Line/ East Coast Road
|
Mined tunnel excavation/ box jacking
underneath Airport Road and
Airport Express Line
|
Airport Road and Airport Express Line
|
Construction
of Tunnel box structure at Package T1.12.1
|
Near Kwo
Lo Wan Road
|
Construction
of Tunnel box structure
|
Shaft 3 Extension South
Shaft
|
Excavation
and lateral support works & Construction of Tunnel Box Structure for
HKBCF to Airport Tunnel West (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Airport Road
|
Excavation
and lateral support works & construction of tunnel box structure for
HKBCF to Airport Tunnel East (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Sub-structure
& superstructure works for Highway Operation and Maintenance Area
Building
|
Portion X
|
Superstructure
works for Scenic Hill Tunnel West Portal Ventilation building
|
West Portal
|
2.1
Monitoring Requirements
2.1.1 In accordance with
the Contract Specific EM&A Manual, baseline 1-hour and 24-hour TSP levels
at two air quality monitoring stations were established. Impact 1-hour TSP monitoring was
conducted for at least three times every 6 days, while impact 24-hour TSP
monitoring was carried out for at least once every 6 days. The Action and Limit Level for 1-hr TSP
and 24-hr TSP are provided in Table 2.1 and
Table 2.2, respectively.
Table
2.1 Action
and Limit Levels for 1-hour TSP
Monitoring Station
|
Action Level, µg/m3
|
Limit Level, µg/m3
|
AMS 5 ˇV Ma Wan Chung Village (Tung Chung)
|
352
|
500
|
AMS 6 ˇV 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 ˇV Ma Wan Chung Village (Tung Chung)
|
164
|
260
|
AMS 6 ˇV Dragonair / CNAC (Group) Building
(HKIA)
|
173
|
260
|
2.2.1 24-hour TSP air
quality monitoring was performed using High Volume Sampler (HVS) located at
each designated monitoring station. The HVS meets all the requirements of the Contract
Specific EM&A Manual. Portable
direct reading dust meters were used to carry out the 1-hour TSP
monitoring. Brand and model of the
equipment is given in Table 2.3.
Table 2.3 Air
Quality Monitoring Equipment
Equipment
|
Brand and Model
|
Portable direct reading dust meter (1-hour
TSP)
|
Sibata Digital Dust Monitor (Model No. LD-3B)
|
High Volume Sampler
(24-hour TSP)
|
Tisch Environmental Mass Flow Controlled Total
Suspended Particulate (TSP) High Volume Air Sampler (Model No. TE-5170)
|
2.3.1 Monitoring locations
AMS5 and AMS6 were set up at the proposed locations in accordance
with Contract Specific EM&A Manual.
2.3.2
Figure 2.1 shows the locations
of monitoring stations. Table 2.4
describes the details of the monitoring stations.
Table
2.4 Locations
of Impact Air Quality Monitoring Stations
Monitoring
Station
|
Location
|
AMS5
|
Ma Wan Chung Village (Tung Chung)
|
AMS6
|
Dragonair / CNAC (Group) Building (HKIA)
|
2.4.1 Table 2.5
summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and duration of impact TSP
monitoring.
Table 2.5 Air
Quality Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
Parameter
|
Frequency
and Duration
|
1-hour TSP
|
Three times every 6 days while the highest dust impact was expected
|
24-hour TSP
|
Once every 6 days
|
2.5.1 24-hour
TSP Monitoring.
(a) The HVS was installed in the vicinity of the air sensitive receivers.
The following criteria were considered in the installation of the HVS.
(i) A horizontal platform with appropriate support to secure the sampler
against gusty wind was provided.
(ii) The distance between the HVS and any obstacles, such as buildings, was
at least twice the height that the obstacle protrudes above the HVS.
(iii) A minimum of 2 meters separation from walls, parapets and penthouse for
rooftop sampler was provided.
(iv) No furnace or incinerator flues are nearby.
(v) Airflow around the sampler was unrestricted.
(vi) Permission was obtained to set up the samplers and access to the monitoring
stations.
(vii) A secured supply of electricity was obtained to operate the samplers.
(viii) The sampler was located more than 20 meters from any dripline.
(ix) Any wire fence and gate, required to protect the sampler, did not
obstruct the monitoring process.
(x) Flow control accuracy was kept within ˇÓ2.5% 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 ˇÓ3 ˘XC; the relative humidity (RH) was < 50%
and not variable by more than ˇÓ5%. 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 Manufacturerˇ¦s Instruction
Manual as follows:-
(i)
Turn the power on.
(ii)
Close the air collecting opening cover.
(iii)
Push the ˇ§TIME SETTINGˇ¨ switch to [BG].
(iv) Push
ˇ§START/STOPˇ¨ 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 ˇ§SPAN CHECKˇ¨ is indicated in the display.
(vii)
Push ˇ§START/STOPˇ¨ 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 ˇ§TIME SETTINGˇ¨ switch the time set in the display to 3 hours.
(x)
Lower down the air collection opening cover.
(xi)
Push ˇ§START/STOPˇ¨ 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 March 2017 is provided in Appendix D.
2.7.1 The monitoring
results for 1-hour TSP and 24-hour TSP are summarized in Tables 2.6 and 2.7 respectively.
Detailed impact air quality monitoring results and relevant graphical plots are
presented in Appendix E.
Table 2.6 Summary
of 1-hour TSP Monitoring Results During the Reporting
Month
Monitoring Station
|
Average (mg/m3)
|
Range (mg/m3)
|
Action Level (mg/m3)
|
Limit Level (mg/m3)
|
AMS5
|
87
|
35 ˇV 249
|
352
|
500
|
AMS6
|
109
|
59 ˇV 225
|
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
|
84
|
50 ˇV 143
|
164
|
260
|
AMS6
|
88
|
68 ˇV 108
|
173
|
260
|
2.7.2
No Action and
Limit Level exceedances of 1-hr TSP and 24-hr TSP
were recorded at AMS5 and AMS6 during the reporting month.
2.7.3
The event action plan is annexed in Appendix F.
2.7.4 The wind data obtained from the
on-site weather station during the reporting month is shown in Appendix G.
3.1.1
In accordance with the Contract Specific EM&A
Manual, impact noise monitoring was conducted for at least once per week during
the construction phase of the Project. The Action and Limit level of the noise
monitoring is provided in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1 Action
and Limit Levels for Noise during Construction Period
Monitoring Station
|
Time Period
|
Action Level
|
Limit Level
|
NMS5 ˇV Ma Wan Chung
Village (Ma Wan Chung Resident Association) (Tung Chung)
|
0700-1900 hours on normal
weekdays
|
When one documented
complaint is received
|
75 dB(A)
|
3.2.1
Noise monitoring was performed using sound level meters
at each designated monitoring station.
The sound level meters deployed comply with the International Electrotechnical Commission Publications (IEC) 651:1979
(Type 1) and 804:1985 (Type 1) specifications. Acoustic calibrator was deployed to
check the sound level meters at a known sound pressure level. Brand and model of the equipment are
given in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2 Noise
Monitoring Equipment
Equipment
|
Brand and Model
|
Integrated Sound Level
Meter
|
B&K 2238
|
Acoustic Calibrator
|
B&K 4231
|
3.3.1 Monitoring location
NMS5 was set up at the proposed locations in
accordance with Contract Specific EM&A Manual.
3.3.2 Figure
2.1 shows the locations
of monitoring stations. Table 3.3 describes the details of the monitoring
stations.
Table 3.3 Locations
of Impact Noise Monitoring Stations
Monitoring Station
|
Location
|
NMS5
|
Ma Wan Chung Village (Ma
Wan Chung Resident Association) (Tung Chung)
|
3.4.1 Table 3.4 summarizes the
monitoring parameters, frequency and duration of impact noise monitoring.
Table 3.4 Noise
Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration
Parameter
|
Frequency and Duration
|
30-mins measurement at
each monitoring station between 0700 and 1900 on normal weekdays (Monday to
Saturday). Leq, L10 and L90
would be recorded.
|
At least once per week
|
3.5.1 Monitoring Procedure
(a) The sound level meter was
set on a tripod at a height of 1.2 m
above the podium for free-field
measurements at NMS5. A correction of +3 dB(A)
shall be made to the free field measurements.
(b)
The battery condition was
checked to ensure the correct functioning of the meter.
(c)
Parameters such as
frequency weighting, the time weighting and the measurement time were set as
follows:-
(i) frequency weighting: A
(ii) time
weighting: Fast
(iii) time measurement: Leq(30-minutes)
during non-restricted hours i.e. 07:00 ˇV 1900 on normal weekdays
(d)
Prior to and after each
noise measurement, the meter was calibrated using the acoustic calibrator for
94.0 dB(A) at 1000 Hz. If the difference in the calibration
level before and after measurement was more than 1.0 dB(A),
the measurement would be considered invalid and repeat of noise measurement
would be required after re-calibration or repair of the equipment.
(e)
During the monitoring
period, the Leq, L10 and L90
were recorded. In addition, site
conditions and noise sources were recorded on a standard record sheet.
(f)
Noise measurement was
paused during periods of high intrusive noise (e.g. dog barking, helicopter
noise) if possible. Observations were recorded when intrusive noise was
unavoidable.
(g)
Noise monitoring was
cancelled in the presence of fog, rain, wind with a steady speed exceeding 5m/s, or wind with gusts exceeding 10m/s. The wind speed shall be checked with a
portable wind speed meter capable of measuring the wind speed in m/s.
3.5.2 Maintenance and
Calibration
(a) The microphone head of the sound
level meter was cleaned with soft cloth at regular intervals.
(b) The meter and calibrator
were sent to the supplier or HOKLAS laboratory to check and calibrate at yearly
intervals.
(c) Calibration certificates
of the sound level meters and acoustic calibrators are provided in Appendix C.
3.6.1 The schedule for
construction noise monitoring in March 2017 is provided in Appendix
D.
3.7.1
The monitoring results for construction noise are
summarized in Table 3.5 and the
monitoring results and relevant graphical plots are provided in Appendix
E.
Table 3.5 Summary
of Construction Noise Monitoring Results During the
Reporting Month
Monitoring Station
|
Average Leq (30 mins), dB(A)
|
Range of Leq (30 mins), dB(A)
|
Limit Level Leq (30 mins), dB(A)
|
NMS5
|
59
|
55 ˇV 62
|
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.
3.7.4 The event action
plan is annexed in Appendix
F.
4
Water Quality Monitoring
4.1.1 Impact water quality
monitoring was carried out to ensure that any deterioration of water quality is
detected, and that timely action is taken to rectify the situation. For impact water quality monitoring,
measurements were taken in accordance with the Contract Specific EM&A
Manual. Table 4.1 shows the
established Action/Limit Levels for the environmental monitoring works. The ET proposed to amend the Acton Level
and Limit Level for turbidity and suspended solid and EPD approved ETˇ¦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
stationˇ¦s turbidity at the same tide of the same day;
The action level has been
amended to ˇ§27.5 and 120% of upstream control stationˇ¦s turbidity at the same
tide of the same dayˇ¨ 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 ˇ§47.0 and 130% of turbidity at the upstream control station at the
same tide of same dayˇ¨ since 25 March 2013.
|
Suspended Solid (SS)
(mg/L)
|
Depth average
|
23.5 or 120% of upstream control
stationˇ¦s SS at the same tide of the same day;
The action level has been
amended to ˇ§23.5 and 120% of upstream control stationˇ¦s SS at the same tide of
the same dayˇ¨ 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 ˇ§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 Intakesˇ¨ since
25 March 2013
|
Notes:
(1) Depth-averaged
is calculated by taking the arithmetic means of reading of all three depths.
(2) For DO,
non-compliance of the water quality limit occurs when monitoring result is
lower that the limit.
(3) For SS
& turbidity non-compliance of the water quality limits occur when
monitoring result is higher than the limits.
(4) The change
to the Action and limit Levels for Water Quality Monitoring for the EM&A
works was approved by EPD on 25 March 2013.
4.2.1
Table 4.2 summarizes the
equipment used in the impact water quality monitoring programme.
Table 4.2 Water
Quality Monitoring Equipment
Equipment
|
Brand and Model
|
DO and Temperature Meter,
Salinity Meter, Turbidimeter and pH Meter
|
YSI Model 6820 V2-M, 650
|
Positioning Equipment
|
DGPS ˇV KODEN :
KGP913MkII, KBG3
|
Water Depth Detector
|
Layin Associates: SM-5 &
SM5A
|
Water Sampler
|
Wildlife Supply Company :
5487-10
|
4.3.1 Table 4.3 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and
monitoring depths of impact water quality monitoring as required in the Contract
Specific EM&A Manual.
Table 4.3 Impact
Water Quality Monitoring Parameters and Frequency
Monitoring Stations
|
Parameter, unit
|
Frequency
|
No. of depth
|
Impact Stations:
IS5, IS(Mf)6, IS7, IS8, IS(Mf)9 & IS10,
Control/Far Field
Stations:
CS2 & CS(Mf)5,
Sensitive Receiver
Stations:
SR3, SR4, SR5, SR10A & SR10B
|
ˇP
Depth, m
ˇP
Temperature, oC
ˇP
Salinity, ppt
ˇP
Dissolved Oxygen
(DO), mg/L
ˇP
DO Saturation, %
ˇP
Turbidity, NTU
ˇP
pH
ˇP Suspended Solids (SS), mg/L
|
Three times per week
during mid-ebb and mid-flood tides (within ˇÓ 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 March 2017 is provided in Appendix
D.
4.7.1
Impact water quality monitoring was conducted at all
designated monitoring stations during the reporting month. Impact water quality
monitoring results and relevant graphical plots are provided in Appendix
E.
4.7.2 Water quality impact sources
during water quality monitoring were the construction activities of the
Contract, nearby construction activities by other parties and nearby operating
vessels by other parties.
4.7.3
For marine water quality
monitoring, no Action Level and Limit Level exceedances
of dissolved oxygen level, no
Limit Level exceedances of turbidity were recorded
during the reporting month. 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
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
IS(Mf)6
|
Action Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
Limit Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
IS7
|
Action Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
Limit Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
IS8
|
Action Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
24 Mar 2017
|
24 and 27 Mar
2017
|
--
|
2
|
1
|
Limit Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
24 Mar 2017
|
0
|
1
|
IS(Mf)9
|
Action Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
Limit Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
IS10
|
Action Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
Limit Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
SR3
|
Action Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
Limit Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
0
|
SR4
|
Action Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
24 Mar 2017
|
--
|
--
|
0
|
1
|
Limit Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
24 Mar 2017
|
24 Mar 2017
|
1
|
1
|
SR5
|
Action Level
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
3 Mar 2017
|
0
|
1
|
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
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
5**
|
Limit
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
2
|
3**
|
Notes:
S: Surface;
M: Mid-depth;
** The
total number of exceedances
4.7.1 For marine water quality monitoring, an Action Level exceedance
of suspended solid was recorded at station SR5
during mid-flood tide on 3 March 2017. Removal of surcharge and box culvert
construction at Zones 1 and 2, drilling of pipe pile at Zone 1, seawall
construction at Zones 2 and 3A, and transportation of fill material at Zone 3A
were carried out within the properly deployed silt curtain as recommended in
the EIA Report. There was no marine transportation at Zones 1, 2, and 3A. There
were no specific activities recorded during the monitoring period that would
cause any significant impacts on the monitoring results. No marine works was
conducted near monitoring station SR5 which is located outside the site
boundary of HKLR03 Contract. Also,
there was no muddy plume observed at station SR5 during sampling exercise. No
leakage of turbid water or any abnormity or malpractice for all contract works
was observed during the sampling exercise.
4.7.2 Two
Action Level exceedances of turbidity level were
recorded at stations SR4 and IS8 on 24 March 2017. Also an Action Level exceedance of suspended solid was recorded at station IS8
during mid-ebb tide and Three Limit Level exceedances
of suspended solid were record at station SR4 during mid-ebb tide and at
stations IS8 and SR4 during mid-flood tide on 24 March 2017. Removal of
surcharge and box culvert construction at Zones 1 and 2, seawall construction
at Zones 2 and 3A and transportation of fill material at Zone 3A were carried
out within the properly deployed silt curtain as recommended in the EIA Report.
Yellow-brown color of water was observed at stations IS8 and SR4 during
sampling exercise. However, there was no marine transportation at Zones 1, 2,
and 3A and no marine works was conducted near monitoring stations SR4 and IS8
which are located outside the site boundary of HKLR03 Contract. There were no
water quality exceedances at monitoring stations IS7
and IS(Mf)6 which are located closer to active work of
the HKLR03 Contract than monitoring stations IS8 and SR4. No leakage of turbid
water or any abnormity or malpractice for the contract works was observed during
the sampling exercise.
4.7.3 On 27
March 2017, an Action Level exceedance of suspended
solid was recorded at station IS8 during mid-ebb tide. Removal of surcharge and
box culvert construction at Zones 1 and 2, seawall construction at Zones 2 and
3A and transportation of fill material at Zone 3A were carried out within the
properly deployed silt curtain as recommended in the EIA Report. There was no
marine transportation at Zones 1, 2, and 3A and no marine work was conducted
near monitoring station IS8 which is located outside the site boundary of HKLR03
Contract. There were no specific
activities recorded during the monitoring period that would cause any
significant impacts on the monitoring results. Also, there was no muddy plume
observed at station IS8 during sampling exercise. No leakage of turbid water or
any abnormity or malpractice for the contract works was observed during the
sampling exercise.
4.7.4 The exceedances of
suspended solids level and turbidity level recorded during reporting period were
considered to be attributed to other external factors such as sea condition,
rather than the contract works. Therefore, the exceedances
were considered as non-contract related. Records of
ˇ§Notification of Environmental Quality Limit Exceedancesˇ¨
are provided in Appendix N.
4.7.5
The event action plan is annexed in Appendix F.
5.1.1 Impact dolphin
monitoring is required to be conducted
by a qualified dolphin specialist team to evaluate whether there have been any effects on the dolphins.
5.1.2 The Action
Level and Limit Level for dolphin monitoring are shown in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1 Action
and Limit Levels for Dolphin Monitoring
|
North Lantau
Social Cluster
|
NEL
|
NWL
|
Action
Level
|
STG < 4.2 & ANI < 15.5
|
STG < 6.9 & ANI <
31.3
|
Limit Level
|
(STG < 2.4 & ANI
< 8.9) and (STG < 3.9 & ANI < 17.9)
|
Remarks:
1. STG means quarterly encounter rate of number of dolphin sightings.
2. ANI means quarterly encounter rate of total number of dolphins.
3. For North Lantau Social Cluster, AL will be
trigger if either NEL or NWL fall
below the criteria; LL will be triggered if both NEL and NWL fall below the criteria.
5.1.3 The revised Event and Action Plan
for dolphin Monitoring was approved by EPD in 6 May 2013. The revised Event and Action
Plan is annexed in Appendix
F.
Vessel-based Line-transect Survey
5.2.1
According to the requirements of the Updated EM&A Manual for HKLR
(Version 1.0), dolphin monitoring programme should
cover all transect lines in NEL and NWL survey areas (see Figure 1 of Appendix H) twice per month. The
co-ordinates of all transect lines are shown in Table 5.2. The coordinates of several starting
points have been revised due to the obstruction of the permanent structures
associated with the construction works of HKLR and the southern viaduct of
TM-CLKL, as well as provision of adequate buffer distance from the Airport
Restricted Areas. The EPD issued a memo and
confirmed that they had no objection on the revised transect lines on 19 August
2015, and the revised coordinates are in red and marked with an asterisk in Table 5.2.
Table 5.2 Co-ordinates
of Transect Lines
Line No.
|
Easting
|
Northing
|
|
Line No.
|
Easting
|
Northing
|
1
|
Start Point
|
804671
|
815456*
|
|
13
|
Start Point
|
816506
|
819480
|
1
|
End Point
|
804671
|
831404
|
|
13
|
End Point
|
816506
|
824859
|
2
|
Start Point
|
805475
|
815913*
|
|
14
|
Start Point
|
817537
|
820220
|
2
|
End Point
|
805477
|
826654
|
|
14
|
End Point
|
817537
|
824613
|
3
|
Start Point
|
806464
|
819435
|
|
15
|
Start Point
|
818568
|
820735
|
3
|
End Point
|
806464
|
822911
|
|
15
|
End Point
|
818568
|
824433
|
4
|
Start Point
|
807518
|
819771
|
|
16
|
Start Point
|
819532
|
821420
|
4
|
End Point
|
807518
|
829230
|
|
16
|
End Point
|
819532
|
824209
|
5
|
Start Point
|
808504
|
820220
|
|
17
|
Start Point
|
820451
|
822125
|
5
|
End Point
|
808504
|
828602
|
|
17
|
End Point
|
820451
|
823671
|
6
|
Start Point
|
809490
|
820466
|
|
18
|
Start Point
|
821504
|
822371
|
6
|
End Point
|
809490
|
825352
|
|
18
|
End Point
|
821504
|
823761
|
7
|
Start Point
|
810499
|
820880*
|
|
19
|
Start Point
|
822513
|
823268
|
7
|
End Point
|
810499
|
824613
|
|
19
|
End Point
|
822513
|
824321
|
8
|
Start Point
|
811508
|
821123*
|
|
20
|
Start Point
|
823477
|
823402
|
8
|
End Point
|
811508
|
824254
|
|
20
|
End Point
|
823477
|
824613
|
9
|
Start Point
|
812516
|
821303*
|
|
21
|
Start Point
|
805476
|
827081
|
9
|
End Point
|
812516
|
824254
|
|
21
|
End Point
|
805476
|
830562
|
10
|
Start Point
|
813525
|
820872
|
|
22
|
Start Point
|
806464
|
824033
|
10
|
End Point
|
813525
|
824657
|
|
22
|
End Point
|
806464
|
829598
|
11
|
Start Point
|
814556
|
818853*
|
|
23
|
Start Point
|
814559
|
821739
|
11
|
End Point
|
814556
|
820992
|
|
23
|
End Point
|
814559
|
824768
|
12
|
Start Point
|
815542
|
818807
|
|
|
|
|
|
12
|
End Point
|
815542
|
824882
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note:
Co-ordinates in red and marked with asterisk are revised co-ordinates of
transect line.
5.2.2 The
survey team used standard line-transect methods (Buckland et al. 2001) to
conduct the systematic vessel surveys, and followed the same technique of data
collection that has been adopted over the last 18 years of marine mammal
monitoring surveys in Hong Kong developed by HKCRP (see Hung 2015). For each monitoring vessel survey, a
15-m inboard vessel with an open upper deck (about 4.5 m above water surface)
was used to make observations from the flying bridge area.
5.2.3 Two
experienced observers (a data recorder and a primary observer) made up the
on-effort survey team, and the survey vessel transited different transect lines
at a constant speed of 13-15 km per hour.
The data recorder searched with unaided eyes and filled out the
datasheets, while the primary observer searched for dolphins and porpoises
continuously through 7 x 50 Fujinon marine binoculars. Both observers searched the sea ahead of
the vessel, between 270o and 90o (in relation to the bow,
which is defined as 0o).
One to two additional experienced observers were available on the boat
to work in shift (i.e. rotate every 30 minutes) in order to minimize fatigue of
the survey team members. All
observers were experienced in small cetacean survey techniques and identifying
local cetacean species.
5.2.4 During on-effort survey periods, the survey team recorded effort
data including time, position (latitude and longitude), weather conditions
(Beaufort sea state and visibility), and distance traveled in each series (a
continuous period of search effort) with the assistance of a handheld GPS (Garmin eTrex
Legend).
5.2.5 Data
including time, position and vessel speed were also automatically and
continuously logged by handheld GPS throughout the entire survey for subsequent
review.
5.2.6 When
dolphins were sighted, the survey team would end the survey effort, and
immediately record the initial sighting distance and angle of the dolphin group
from the survey vessel, as well as the sighting time and position. Then the research vessel was diverted
from its course to approach the animals for species identification, group size
estimation, assessment of group composition, and behavioural
observations. The perpendicular
distance (PSD) of the dolphin group to the transect line was later calculated
from the initial sighting distance and angle.
5.2.7 Survey
effort being conducted along the parallel transect lines that were
perpendicular to the coastlines (as indicated in Figure 1 of Appendix H) was labeled as
ˇ§primaryˇ¨ survey effort, while the survey effort conducted along the connecting
lines between parallel lines was labeled as ˇ§secondaryˇ¨ survey effort. According to HKCRP long-term dolphin
monitoring data, encounter rates of Chinese white dolphins deduced from effort
and sighting data collected along primary and secondary lines were similar in
NEL and NWL survey areas.
Therefore, both primary and secondary survey effort were presented as
on-effort survey effort in this report.
5.2.8 Encounter
rates of Chinese white dolphins (number of on-effort sightings per 100 km of
survey effort and number of dolphins from all on-effort sightings per 100 km of
survey effort) were calculated in NEL and NWL survey areas in relation to the
amount of survey effort conducted during each month of monitoring survey. Only data collected under Beaufort 3 or
below condition would be used for encounter rate analysis. Dolphin encounter rates were calculated
using primary survey effort alone, as well as the combined survey effort from
both primary and secondary lines.
Photo-identification Work
5.2.9 When a
group of Chinese White Dolphins were sighted during the line-transect survey,
the survey team would end effort and approach the group slowly from the side
and behind to take photographs of them.
Every attempt was made to photograph every dolphin in the group, and
even photograph both sides of the dolphins, since the colouration
and markings on both sides may not be symmetrical.
5.2.10 A
professional digital camera (Canon
EOS 7D or 60D model), equipped with long telephoto lenses (100-400 mm zoom),
were available on board for researchers to take sharp, close-up photographs of
dolphins as they surfaced. The
images were shot at the highest available resolution and stored on Compact
Flash memory cards for downloading onto a computer.
5.2.11 All
digital images taken in the field were first examined, and those containing
potentially identifiable individuals were sorted out. These photographs would then be examined
in greater detail, and were carefully compared to the existing Chinese White
Dolphin photo-identification catalogue maintained by HKCRP since 1995.
5.2.12 Chinese
White Dolphins can be identified by their natural markings, such as nicks,
cuts, scars and deformities on their dorsal fin and body, and their unique
spotting patterns were also used as secondary identifying features (Jefferson
2000).
5.2.13
All photographs of each individual were then
compiled and arranged in chronological order, with data including the date and
location first identified (initial sighting), re-sightings, associated
dolphins, distinctive features, and age classes entered into a computer
database. Detailed information on
all identified individuals will be further presented as an appendix in
quarterly EM&A reports.
Vessel-based Line-transect Survey
5.3.1 During the month of March 2017, two sets of systematic line-transect
vessel surveys were conducted on the 2nd, 7th, 16th
and 28th 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 283.50
km of survey effort was collected, with 82.9% 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, 119.20 km and 164.30
km of survey effort were collected from NEL and NWL survey areas
respectively. Moreover, the total
survey effort conducted on primary lines was 204.80 km, while the effort on
secondary lines was 78.70 km.
5.3.3 During the two sets of monitoring
surveys in March 2017, two groups
of 20
Chinese White Dolphins were sighted (see
Annex II of Appendix H). Both
dolphin sightings were made in NWL, while none was sighted in NEL.
5.3.4 For the surveys conducted in March 2017, both
dolphin groups were sighted during on-effort search, while one of the two
on-effort sightings were made on primary lines (Annex II
of Appendix H). One
of the two dolphin groups was associated with an
operating fishing vessel (a purse-seiner) just to the east of Sha Chau.
5.3.5 Distribution of these dolphin
sightings made in March 2017 is shown in Figure
6 of Appendix H. The two dolphin groups were sighted at the
northwest corner of Lung Kwu Chau
and to the east of Sha Chau
respectively (Figure 6 of Appendix H).
5.3.6 Notably, the
two dolphin groups were sighted far away from the HKLR03/ HKBCF reclamation
sites as well as the HKLR09/TMCLKL alignments (Figure 6 of Appendix H).
5.3.7 During
the Marchˇ¦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: March 2nd / 7th
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
Set
2: March 16th / 28th
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
NWL
|
Set
1: March 2nd / 7th
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
Set
2: March 16th / 28th
|
2.0
|
24.4
|
Remarks:
1. Dolphin Encounter Rates Deduced from the Two
Sets of Surveys (Two Surveys in Each Set) in March 2017 in Northeast Lantau
(NEL) and Northwest Lantau (NWL).
Table 5.4 Monthly
Average Encounter Rates
|
Encounter rate (STG)
(no.
of on-effort dolphin sightings per 100 km of survey effort)
|
Encounter rate (ANI)
(no.
of dolphins from all on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort)
|
Primary Lines Only
|
Both Primary and Secondary Lines
|
Primary Lines Only
|
Both Primary and Secondary Lines
|
Northeast
Lantau
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
Northwest
Lantau
|
1.0
|
1.5
|
11.6
|
15.1
|
Remarks:
1.
Monthly Average Dolphin Encounter Rates (Sightings Per 100 km of
Survey Effort) from All Four Surveys Conducted in March 2017 on Primary Lines only as well as Both Primary
Lines and Secondary Lines in Northeast Lantau (NEL)
and Northwest Lantau (NWL).
5.3.8 The
average dolphin group size in March 2017 was 10.0 individuals
per group, which was much higher than the ones in previous months of monitoring
surveys despite the very small sample size (i.e. only two dolphin groups
sighted in March 2017). Both dolphin
groups were large, with eight and twelve dolphins respectively.
Photo-identification Work
5.3.9 Fourteen known individual dolphins were sighted 16 times during Marchˇ¦s
surveys (Annex
III and IV of Appendix H). All except two (NL123
and NL202 were both re-sighted twice) were re-sighted only once during the
monthly surveys in March.
5.3.10 Notably, two of these individual dolphins (NL104 and NL202) were
accompanied with their older calves (NL321 and NL286 respectively) during their
re-sightings in March 2017, as in previous monitoring months
Conclusion
5.3.11 During this month of dolphin
monitoring, no adverse impact from the activities of this construction project
on Chinese White Dolphins was noticeable from general observations.
5.3.12 Due to monthly variation in
dolphin occurrence within the study area, it would be more appropriate to draw
conclusion on whether any impacts on dolphins have been detected related to the
construction activities of this project in the quarterly EM&A report, where
comparison on distribution, group size and encounter rates of dolphins between
the quarterly impact monitoring period (March 2017 ˇV May 2017) and baseline
monitoring period (3-month period) will be made.
5.4.1
Buckland, S. T., Anderson, D. R., Burnham,
K. P., Laake, J. L., Borchers,
D. L., and Thomas, L. 2001. Introduction to distance sampling:
estimating abundance of biological populations. Oxford University Press, London.
5.4.2
Hung, S. K.
2015. Monitoring of Marine
Mammals in Hong Kong waters: final report (2014-15). An unpublished report submitted to the
Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, 198 pp.
5.4.3
Jefferson, T. A. 2000. Population biology of the Indo-Pacific
hump-backed dolphin in Hong Kong waters.
Wildlife Monographs 144:1-65.
Methodology
6.1.1
To avoid disturbance to the mudflat and nuisance to
navigation, no fixed marker/monitoring rod was installed at the monitoring
stations. A high precision Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) real time
location fixing system (or equivalent technology) was used to locate the
station in the precision of 1mm, which is reasonable under flat mudflat
topography with uneven mudflat surface only at micro level. This method has been used on
Agricultural Fisheries and Conservation Departmentˇ¦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 28
March 2017. 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
(March 2017)
|
Monitoring
Station
|
Easting
(m)
|
Northing
(m)
|
Surface
Level
(mPD)
|
Easting
(m)
|
Northing
(m)
|
Surface
Level
(mPD)
|
S1
|
810291.160
|
816678.727
|
0.950
|
810291.163
|
816678.732
|
1.129
|
S2
|
810958.272
|
815831.531
|
0.864
|
810958.261
|
815831.516
|
0.992
|
S3
|
810716.585
|
815953.308
|
1.341
|
810716.590
|
815953.300
|
1.468
|
S4
|
811221.433
|
816151.381
|
0.931
|
811221.411
|
816151.399
|
1.118
|
Table 6.3 Comparison
of measurement
|
Comparison of measurement
|
Remarks and Recommendation
|
Monitoring
Station
|
Easting
(m)
|
Northing
(m)
|
Surface
Level
(mPD)
|
S1
|
0.003
|
0.005
|
0.179
|
Level continuously increased
|
S2
|
-0.011
|
-0.015
|
0.128
|
Level continuously increased
|
S3
|
0.005
|
-0.008
|
0.127
|
Level continuously increased
|
S4
|
-0.022
|
0.018
|
0.187
|
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 March 2017.
The monitoring parameters included dissolved oxygen (DO), turbidity and
suspended solids (SS).
6.2.3
The Impact monitoring results for SR3 were extracted
and summarised below:
Table 6.4 Impact
Water Quality Monitoring Results (Depth Average)
Date
|
Mid Ebb Tide
|
Mid Flood Tide
|
DO (mg/L)
|
Turbidity (NTU)
|
SS (mg/L)
|
DO (mg/L)
|
Turbidity (NTU)
|
SS (mg/L)
|
1-Mar-17
|
7.75
|
9.55
|
14.75
|
7.69
|
8.50
|
10.65
|
3-Mar-17
|
7.80
|
8.45
|
16.15
|
7.72
|
8.65
|
18.05
|
5-Mar-17
|
7.73
|
4.25
|
5.75
|
7.76
|
3.70
|
3.20
|
8-Mar-17
|
7.58
|
3.70
|
6.65
|
7.75
|
4.30
|
5.95
|
10-Mar-17
|
7.66
|
6.00
|
10.15
|
7.60
|
5.45
|
11.60
|
13-Mar-17
|
7.39
|
10.30
|
20.90
|
7.44
|
11.60
|
21.45
|
15-Mar-17
|
7.56
|
10.50
|
17.10
|
7.38
|
9.95
|
19.85
|
17-Mar-17
|
7.53
|
9.25
|
17.75
|
7.44
|
9.35
|
19.10
|
20-Mar-17
|
7.59
|
6.15
|
9.95
|
7.53
|
7.60
|
8.60
|
22-Mar-17
|
7.47
|
3.40
|
9.50
|
7.77
|
4.50
|
7.40
|
24-Mar-17
|
7.58
|
5.15
|
8.45
|
7.86
|
5.10
|
8.30
|
27-Mar-17
|
7.48
|
6.75
|
10.90
|
7.20
|
6.00
|
8.10
|
29-Mar-17
|
7.14
|
10.50
|
13.40
|
7.28
|
8.80
|
10.20
|
31-Mar-17
|
See Remark 1
|
See Remark 1
|
See Remark 1
|
7.15
|
11.25
|
18.20
|
Average
|
7.56
|
7.23
|
12.42
|
7.54
|
7.48
|
12.19
|
Remark:
1) The water
quality monitoring (WQM) on 31 March 2017 during mid-ebb tide was cancelled
for safety reason as the thunderstorm signal was hoisted by Hong Kong
Observatory and lightning was recorded at the WQM stations.
|
Sampling Zone
6.3.1 In order to collect baseline
information of mudflats in the study site, the study site was divided into
three sampling zones (labeled as TC1, TC2, TC3) in Tung Chung Bay and one zone
in San Tau (labeled as ST) (Figure 2.1
of Appendix I). The horizontal shoreline of
sampling zones TC1, TC2, TC3 and ST were about 250 m, 300 m, 300 m and 250 m
respectively (Figure 2.2 of Appendix I).
Survey of horseshoe crabs, seagrass beds and
intertidal communities were conducted in every sampling zone. The present
survey was conducted in March 2017 (totally 5 sampling days between 3rd
and 14th March 2017).
6.3.2 Since the field survey of Jun.
2016, increasing number of trashes and even big trashes (Figure 2.3 of Appendix I) were found in every sampling zone. It
raised a concern about the solid waste dumping and current-driven waste issues
in Tung Chung Wan. Respective measures (e.g. manual clean-up) should be
implemented by responsible units.
Horseshoe Crabs
6.3.3
Active search method was conducted for
horseshoe crab monitoring by two experienced surveyors in every sampling zone.
During the search period, any accessible and potential area would be
investigated for any horseshoe crab individuals within 2-3 hours of low tide
period (tidal level below 1.2 m above Chart Datum (C.D.)). Once a horseshoe
crab individual was found, the species was identified referencing to Li (2008).
The prosomal width, inhabiting substratum and
respective GPS coordinate were recorded. A photographic record was taken for
future investigation. Any grouping behavior of individuals, if found, was
recorded. The horseshoe crab surveys were conducted on 5th (for
TC1), 12th (for TC2) and 14th (for TC3 and ST) March
2017. The weather was generally warm on 5th March while it was windy on 12th
and 14th March.
Seagrass Beds
6.3.4 Active
search method was conducted for seagrass bed
monitoring by two experienced surveyors in every sampling zone. During the
search period, any accessible and potential area would be investigated for any seagrass beds within 2-3 hours of low tide period. Once seagrass bed was found, the species, estimated area,
estimated coverage percentage and respective GPS coordinates were recorded. The
seagrass beds surveys were conducted on 5th
(for TC1), 12th (for TC2) and 14th (for TC3 and ST) March
2017. The weather was generally warm on 5th March while it was windy
on 12th and 14th March.
Intertidal Soft Shore Communities
6.3.5
The intertidal soft shore community surveys
were conducted in low tide period on 4th (for ST), 5th
(for TC1), 11th (for TC3) and 12th (for TC2) March 2017.
In every sampling zone, three 100m horizontal transect lines were laid at high
tidal level (H: 2.0 m above C.D.), mid tidal level (M: 1.5 m above C.D.) and
low tidal level (L: 1.0 m above C.D.). Along every horizontal transect line, ten random quadrats (0.5 m x
0.5 m) were placed.
6.3.6
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.
6.3.7
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.
6.3.8
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
6.3.9
Data collected from direct search and core sampling
was pooled in every quadrat for data analysis.
Shannon-Weaver Diversity Index (Hˇ¦) and Pielouˇ¦s
Species Evenness (J) were calculated for every quadrat
using the formulae below,
Hˇ¦= -ŁU ( Ni
/ N ) ln ( Ni / N ) (Shannon and Weaver, 1963)
J = Hˇ¦ / 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 ˇV Environmental Team
IEC ˇV Independent
Environmental Checker
SO ˇV Supervising Officer
Horseshoe Crabs
6.5.1 In the present survey, two species of
horseshoe crab Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda
(total 44 ind.) and Tachypleus tridentatus (total 16 ind.) were recorded. For one sight record, grouping of 2-8
individuals was observed at same locations with similar substratum (fine sand
or soft mud). Photo records were shown in Figure
3.1 of Appendix I while the complete survey records were listed in Annex II of Appendix I.
6.5.2 Table 3.1 of Appendix I summarizes the survey results of
horseshoe crab in present survey. For Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda, very few individuals were found in TC1 (4
ind.) and TC2 (1 ind., prosomal width 48.30 mm) only resulting in very low search
record (0.3-1.0 ind. hr-1 person-1).
The average body size was 48.98 mm (prosomal width
ranged 29.62-65.76 mm) in TC1. Relatively more individuals were found in TC3
(16 ind.) and ST (23 ind.). The search record of TC3 was 2.7 ind. hr-1 person-1
with average body size 37.59 mm (prosomal width
ranged 16.89-70.29 mm). The search record of ST was the higher (3.8 ind. hr-1 person-1) while the average
body size was 47.08 mm (prosomal width ranged
27.98-107.04 mm).
6.5.3 For Tachypleus tridentatus,
there were only 5 and 11 individuals in TC3 and ST respectively. For TC3, the
search record was 0.8 ind. hr-1
person-1 while the average body size was 40.99 mm (prosomal width ranged 29.54-50.66 mm). For ST, the search
record was higher (1.8 ind. hr-1 person-1)
while the average body size was 51.05 mm (prosomal
width ranged 28.95-81.94 mm).
6.5.4 In the
previous survey of Mar. 2015, there was one important finding that a mating
pair of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda
was found in ST (prosomal width: male 155.1 mm,
female 138.2 mm) (Figure 3.2 of Appendix
I). It indicated the importance of ST as a breeding ground of horseshoe
crab. Moreover, two moults of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda
were found in TC1 with similar prosomal width 130-140
mm (Figure 3.2 of Appendix I). It
reflected that a certain numbers of moderately sized individuals inhabited the
sub-tidal habitat of Tung Chung Wan after its nursery period on soft shore.
These individuals might move onto soft shore during high tide for foraging, moulting and breeding. Then it would return to sub-tidal
habitat during ebb tide. Because the mating pair should be inhabiting
sub-tidal habitat in most of the time. The record was excluded from the data
analysis to avoid mixing up with juvenile population living on soft shore. In
another previous survey of Jun. 2016, the records of the two big individuals of
Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda
(prosomal width 117.37 mm and 178.17 mm) in TC1 were
excluded from data analysis according to the same principle.
6.5.5
No
marked individual of horseshoe crab was recorded in present survey. Some marked
individuals were found in previous surveys conducted in Sep. 2013, Mar. 2014
and Sep. 2014. All of them were released through a conservation programme conducted by Prof. Paul Shin (Department of
Biology and Chemistry, The City University of Hong Kong (CityU)).
It was a re-introduction trial of artificial bred horseshoe crab juvenile at
selected sites. So that the horseshoe crabs population might be restored in the
natural habitat. Through a personal conversation with Prof. Shin, about 100
individuals were released in the sampling zone ST on 20 June 2013. All of them
were marked with color tape and internal chip detected by specific chip sensor.
There should be second round of release between June and September 2014 since
new marked individuals were found in the survey of September 2014.
6.5.6
The
artificial bred individuals, if found, would be excluded from the results of
present monitoring programme in order to reflect the
changes of natural population. However, the mark on their prosoma
might have been detached during moulting after a
certain period of release. The artificially released individuals were no longer
distinguishable from the natural population without the specific chip sensor.
The survey data collected would possibly cover both natural population and
artificially bred individuals.
Population difference among the sampling
zones
6.5.7
Figures
3.3 and 3.4 of Appendix I show
the changes of number of individuals, mean prosomal
width and search record of horseshoe crabs Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda and
Tachypleus tridentatus
respectively in every sampling zone throughout the monitoring period.
6.5.8
For TC3 and ST, medium to high search records (i.e. number of
individuals) of both species were always found in wet season (Jun. and Sep.).
The search record of ST was higher from Sep. 2012 to Jun. 2014 while it was
replaced by TC3 from Sep. 2014 to Jun. 2015. The search records were similar
between two sampling zones from Sep. 2015 to Jun. 2016. In Sep. 2016, the
search record of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda
in ST was much higher than TC3. In the present survey (Mar. 2017), the search
records of both species were similar again between two sampling zones. It
showed a natural variation of horseshoe crab population in these two zones due
to weather condition and tidal effect during the survey.
6.5.9
For TC1, the search record was at low to medium level throughout the
monitoring period. The change of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda was relatively more variable than that of Tachypleus tridentatus.
Relatively, the search record was very low in TC2 (2 ind.
in Sep. 2013; 1 ind. in Mar., Jun., Sep. 2014, Mar.
and Jun. 2015; 4 ind. in Sep. 2015; 6 ind. in Jun. 2016; 1 ind. in Sep.
2016 and Mar. 2017).
6.5.10 About
the body size, larger individuals of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda were usually found in ST and TC1 relative
to those in TC3. For Tachypleus tridentatus,
larger individuals were usually found in ST followed by TC3 and TC1.
Throughout
the monitoring period, it was obvious that TC3 and ST (western shore of Tung
Chung Wan) was an important nursery ground for horseshoe crab especially newly
hatched individuals due to larger area of suitable substratum (fine sand or
soft mud) and less human disturbance (far from urban district). Relatively,
other sampling zones were not a suitable nursery ground especially TC2. Possible
factors were less area of suitable substratum (especially TC1) and higher human
disturbance (TC1 and TC2: close to urban district and easily accessible). In
TC2, large daily salinity fluctuation was a possible factor either since it was
flushed by two rivers under tidal inundation. The individuals inhabiting TC1
and TC2 were confined in small foraging area due to limited area of suitable
substrata.
Seasonal variation of horseshoe crab population
6.5.11
Throughout the monitoring period conducted,
the search record of horseshoe crab declined obviously during dry season
especially December (Figures 3.3 and 3.4
of Appendix I). In Dec. 2012, 4 individuals of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda
and 12 individuals of Tachypleus tridentatus
were found only. In Dec. 2013, no individual of horseshoe crab was found. In
Dec. 2014, 2 individuals of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda and 8 individuals of Tachypleus tridentatus were found only. In Dec.
2015, 2 individuals of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda,
6 individuals of Tachypleus tridentatus
and one newly hatched, unidentified individual were found only. The horseshoe
crabs were inactive and burrowed in the sediments during cold weather (<15
ºC). Similar results of low search record in dry season were reported in a
previous territory-wide survey of horseshoe crab. For example, the search
records in Tung Chung Wan were 0.17 ind.
hr-1 person-1 and 0.00 ind.
hr-1 person-1 in wet season and dry season respectively
(details see Li, 2008). Relatively the search records were much higher in Dec.
2016. There were totally 70 individuals of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda
and 24 individuals of Tachypleus tridentatus
in TC3 and ST. Because the survey was arranged in early December while the
weather was warm with sunlight (~22 ºC during dawn according to Hong Kong
Observatory database, Chek Lap Kok
station on 5 Dec). In contrast, there was no search record in TC1 and TC2
because the survey was conducted in mid December with colder and cloudy weather
(~20 ºC during dawn on 19 Dec). The horseshoe crab activity would decrease
gradually with the colder climate. In present survey (Mar. 2017), there were
only 44 individuals of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda
and 16 individuals of Tachypleus tridentatus
recorded in Tung Chung Wan. All the surveys were conducted at night while the
ambient temperature was still low. Hence majority of horseshoe crabs remained
burrowing in sediments. Moreover, there was large scaled recruitment of filamentious algae covering significant area of intertidal
mudflat in Tung Chung Wan (Figure 3.5 of
Appendix I). The algal cover would reduce the succesful
rate of active searching.
6.5.12
From Sep. 2012 to Dec. 2013, Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda
was a less common species relative to Tachypleus tridentatus. Only 4 individuals were ever recorded in
ST in Dec. 2012. This species had ever been believed of very low density in ST
hence the encounter rate was very low. Since Mar. 2014, it was found in all
sampling zones with higher abundance in ST. Based on its average size (mean prosomal width 39.28-49.81 mm), it
indicated that breeding and spawning of this species had occurred about 3 years
ago along the coastline of Tung Chun Wan. However, these individuals were still
small while their walking trails were inconspicuous. Hence there was no search
record in previous sampling months. Since Mar. 2014, more individuals were
recorded due to larger size and higher activity (i.e. more conspicuous walking
trail).
6.5.13 For Tachypleus
tridentatus, sharp increase of number of
individuals was recorded in ST during the wet season of 2013 (from Mar. to
Sep.). According to a personal conversation with Prof. Shin (CityU), his monitoring team had recorded similar increase
of horseshoe crab population during wet season. It was believed that the
suitable ambient temperature increased its conspicuousness. However similar
pattern was not recorded in the following wet seasons. The
number of individuals increased in Mar. and Jun. 2014 followed by a rapid
decline in Sep. 2014. Then the number of individuals fluctuated slightly
in TC3 and ST until Mar. 2017 (present survey). Apart from natural mortality,
migration from nursery soft shore to subtidal habitat
was another possible cause. Since the mean prosomal
width of Tachypleus tridentatus
continued to grow and reached about 50 mm since Mar. 2014. Then it varied
slightly between 35-65 mm from Sep. 2014 to Mar. 2017. Most of the individuals
might have reached a suitable size (e.g. prosomal
width 50-60 mm) strong enough to forage in sub-tidal habitat.
6.5.14
Recently, Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda
was a more common horseshoe crab species in Tung Chung Wan. It was recorded in
the four sampling zones while the majority located in TC3 and ST. Tachypleus tridentatus
was a less common species while its distribution was confined in TC3 and ST
only. Since TC3 and ST were regarded as important nursery ground for both
horseshoe crab species, box plots of prosomal width
of two horseshoe crab species were constructed to investigate the changes of
population in details.
Box plot of horseshoe crab populations in TC3
6.5.15 Figure
3.6 of Appendix I shows the changes of prosomal
width of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda and Tachypleus
tridentatus in TC3. As mentioned above, Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda
was rarely found between Sep. 2012 and Dec. 2013 hence the data were lacking.
In Mar 2014, the major size (50% of individual records between upper and lower
quartile) ranged 40-60 mm while only few individuals were found. From Mar. 2014
to Mar. 2017 (present survey), the size of major population decreased and more
small individuals were recorded after Mar. of every year. It indicated new
rounds of successful breeding and spawning of Carcinoscorpius
rotundicauda in TC3. It matched with the previous
mating record in ST in Mar. 2015. Also there were slight increasing trends of
body size from Jun. to Mar. of next year since 2015. It indicated a stable
growth of individuals. Focused on much larger individuals (circle dots above
the box in the box plots), the size range was quite variable (prosmal width 60-90 mm) along the sampling months. It was
yet to determine their size of migrating to sub-tidal habitat in TC3. Or larger
individuals might migrate northward to ST gradually.
6.5.16 For Tachypleus
tridentatus, the major size ranged 20-50 mm while
the number of individuals fluctuated from Sep. 2012 to Jun. 2014. Then a slight
but consistent growing trend was observed from Sep. 2014 to Jun. 2015. The prosomal width increased from 25-35 mm to 35-65 mm. As
mentioned, the large individuals might have reached a suitable size for
migrating from the nursery soft shore to subtidal
habitat. It accounted for the declined population in TC3. From Mar. to Sep.
2016, slight increasing trend of major size was noticed again. From Dec. 2016
to Mar. 2017 (present survey), the major size decreased to 25-45 mm. Across the
monitoring period, the maximum prosomal width of
major population ranged 60-80 mm. It reflected individuals reaching this size
would gradually migrate to sub-tidal habitats.
Box plot of horseshoe crab populations in ST
6.5.17 Figure
3.7 of Appendix I shows the changes of prosomal
width of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda and Tachypleus
tridentatus in ST. As mentioned above, Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda was
rarely found between Sep. 2012 and Dec. 2013 hence the data were lacking. From
Mar. 2014 to Sep. 2016, the size of major population decreased and more small
individuals (i.e. circle dots below the box in the box plots) were recorded
after Jun. of every year. It indicated new round of successful spawning in ST.
It matched with the previous mating record in ST in Mar. 2015. Also there were
slight increasing trends of body size from Sep. to Jun. from 2014 to 2016. It
indicated a stable growth of individuals. Across the whole monitoring period,
the maximum prosomal width (i.e. circle dots above
the box in the box plots) usually ranged 70-80 mm except Mar. 2017 (present
survey). It reflected individuals reaching this size would gradually migrate to
sub-tidal habitats. In Mar. 2017, a large individual (prosomal
width 107.04 mm) was recorded that was believed a sub-tidal inhabitant move to
intertidal shore occasionally for foraging at night.
6.5.18 For Tachypleus tridentatus, a consistent growing trend
was observed for the major population from Dec. 2012 to Dec. 2014 regardless of
change of search record. The prosomal width increased
from 15-30 mm to 55-70 mm. As mentioned, the large individuals might have
reached a suitable size for migrating from the nursery soft shore to subtidal habitat. From Mar. to Sep. 2015, the size of major
population decreased slightly to a prosomal width
40-60 mm. At the same time, the number of individuals decreased gradually. It
further indicated some of large individuals might have migrated to sub-tidal
habitat, leaving the smaller individuals on shore. There was an overall growth
trend. In Dec. 2015, two big individuals (prosomal
width 89.27 mm and 98.89 mm) were recorded only while it could not represent
the major population. From Dec. 2015 to Mar. 2016, the number of individual was
very few in ST that no boxplot could be produced. In
Jun. 2016, the prosomal width of major population
ranged 50-70 mm. But it dropped clearly to 30-40 mm in Sep. 2016 followed by an
increase to 40-50 mm in Dec. 2016 and further to 40-70 mm in Mar. 2017 (present
survey). Based on overall higher number of small individuals recorded in Jun.
and Sep. 2016, it indicated new round of successful spawning in ST. Throughout
the monitoring period, the maximum prosomal width of
major population ranged 60-80 mm. It reflected individuals reaching this size
would gradually migrate to sub-tidal habitats, similar to the finding in TC3.
6.5.19 As a summary for horseshoe crab
populations in TC3 and ST, there was successful spawning of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda
from 2014 to 2016 while the spawning time should be in spring. There were
consistent, increasing trends of population size in these two sampling zones.
For Tachypleus tridentatus,
small individuals were rarely found in TC3 and ST from 2014 to 2015. It was
believed no occurrence of successful spawning. The existing individuals (that
recorded since 2012) grew to a mature size and migrated to sub-tidal habitat.
Hence the number of individuals decreased gradually. In 2016, new round of
successful spawning was recorded in ST while increasing number of individuals
and body size was noticed.
Impact of the HKLR project
6.5.20 It was
the 18th survey of the EM&A programme
during the construction period. Based on the results, impact of the HKLR
project could not be detected on horseshoe crabs. The population change was
mainly determined by seasonal variation while successful spawnings
were observed for both species. In case, abnormal phenomenon (e.g. very few
numbers of horseshoe crab individuals in wet season, large number of dead
individuals on the shore) is found, it would be reported as soon as possible.
Seagrass Beds
6.5.21 In the
present survey, seagrass species Halophila ovalis and Zostera japonica were recorded in TC3 and ST. Photo records were shown in Figure 3.8 of Appendix I while
the complete records of seagrass beds survey were
shown in Annex III of Appendix I.
6.5.22 Table
3.2 of Appendix I summarizes the results of seagrass
beds survey. In TC3, one small patch of Halophila ovalis was found in soft mud area at 0.5-1.0 m above
C.D. while the total seagrass bed area and vegetation
coverage were about 43.3 m2 and 20% respectively.
6.5.23 In ST,
four patches of Halophila ovalis were
found while the total seagrass bed area was about
12437.5 m2. The seagrass bed area was
highly variable among patches. In the soft mud area at 0.5-1.5 m above C.D.,
the largest patch was an extensive, horizontal strand with area ~6521.9 m2
and vegetation coverage 20%. It had covered significant portion of the mud flat
area in ST. At vicinity, there was another extensive patch (3131.3 m2,
coverage 50%). At higher tidal level (1.5-2.0 m above C.D.), there were two seagrass patches in the sandy area nearby the seaward
mangrove boundary. There were two horizontal strand,
medium patches with area 1345.4-1438.9 m2 and vegetation coverage
50%.
6.5.24 For Zostera
japonica, there were two small patches only in the sandy area nearby the
seaward mangrove boundary. The seagrass bed area and
vegetation coverage were 4.1-76.4 m2 and
50-100%.
6.5.25 Since majority of seagrass
bed was confined in ST, the temporal change of both seagrass
species were investigated in details.
Temporal variation of seagrass
beds
6.5.26 Figure
3.9 of Appendix I shows the changes of estimated total area of
seagrass beds in ST along the sampling months. For Zostera japonica, it was not recorded in the
1st and 2nd surveys of monitoring programme. Seasonal
recruitment of few, small patches (total seagrass
area: 10 m2) was found in Mar. 2013 that grew within the large patch
of seagrass Halophila
ovalis. Then the patch size increased and merged
gradually with the warmer climate from Mar. to Jun. 2013 (15 m2).
However the patch size decreased and remained similar from Sep. 2013 (4 m2)
to Mar. 2014 (3 m2). In Jun. 2014, the patch size increased
obviously again (41 m2) with warmer climate followed by a decrease
between Sep. 2014 (2 m2) and Dec. 2014 (5 m2). From Mar.
to Jun. 2015, the patch size increased sharply again (90 m2). It
might be due to the disappearance of the originally dominant seagrass Halophila ovalis resulting in less competition for substratum and
nutrients. From Sep.2015 to Jun.2016, it was found coexisting with seagrass Halophila ovalis with steady increasing patch size (from 44 m2
to 115 m2) and variable coverage. In Sep. 2016, the patch size
decreased again to (38 m2) followed by an increase to a horizontal
strand (80 m2) in Mar. 2017 (present survey). And it was no longer
co-exisitng with Halophila
ovalis. From Sep. 2014 to Mar. 2017, an
increasing trend was noticed from Sep. to Jun. of next year followed by a rapid
decline to Sep. It was possibly the causes of heat stress, typhoon and stronger
grazing pressure during wet season.
6.5.27
For
Halophila ovalis,
it was recorded as 3-4 medium to large patches (area 18.9-251.7 m2;
vegetation coverage 50-80%) beside the mangrove vegetation at tidal level 2 m
above C.D. in Sep. 2012 (first survey). The total seagrass
bed area grew steadily from 332.3 m2 in Sep. 2012 to 727.4 m2
in Dec. 2013. Flowers were observed in the largest patch during its flowering
period. In Mar. 2014, 31 small to medium patches were newly recorded (variable
area 1-72 m2 per patch, vegetation coverage 40-80% per patch) in
lower tidal zone between 1.0 and 1.5 m above C.D. The total seagrass
area increased further to 1350 m2. In Jun. 2014, these small and
medium patches grew and extended to each other. These patches were no longer
distinguishable and were covering a significant mudflat area of ST. It was
generally grouped into 4 large patches (1116 ˇV 2443 m2) of seagrass beds characterized of patchy distribution,
variable vegetable coverage (40-80%) and smaller leaves. The total seagrass bed area increased sharply to 7629 m2.
In Sep. 2014, the total seagrass area declined
sharply to 1111 m2. There were only 3-4 small to large patches
(6-253 m2) at high tidal level and 1 patch at low tidal level (786 m2).
Typhoon or strong water current was a possible cause (Fong, 1998). In Sep.
2014, there were two tropical cyclone records in Hong Kong (7th-8th Sep.: no
cyclone name, maximum signal number 1; 14th-17th Sep.: Kalmaegi,
maximum signal number 8SE) before the seagrass survey
dated 21st Sep. 2014. The strong water current caused by the cyclone, Kalmaegi especially, might have given damage to the seagrass beds. In addition, natural heat stress and grazing
force were other possible causes reducing seagrass
beds area. Besides, very small patches of Halophila
ovalis could be found in other mud flat area in
addition to the recorded patches. But it was hardly distinguished due to very
low coverage (10-20%) and small leaves.
6.5.28 In
Dec. 2014, all the seagrass patches of Halophila ovalis
disappeared in ST. Figure 3.10 of
Appendix I shows the difference of the original seagrass beds area nearby the mangrove vegetation at high
tidal level between Jun. 2014 and Dec. 2014. Such rapid loss would not be
seasonal phenomenon because the seagrass beds at
higher tidal level (2.0 m above C.D.) were present and normal in December 2012 and
2013. According to Fong (1998), similar incident had occurred in ST in the
past. The original seagrass area had declined
significantly during the commencement of the construction and reclamation works
for the international airport at Chek Lap Kok in 1992. The seagrass almost
disappeared in 1995 and recovered gradually after the completion of reclamation
works. Moreover, incident of rapid loss of seagrass
area was also recorded in another intertidal mudflat in Lai Chi Wo in 1998 with unknown reason. Hence Halophila ovalis was regarded as a short-lived and
r-strategy seagrass that could colonize areas in
short period but disappears quickly under unfavourable
conditions (Fong, 1998).
Unfavourable conditions to seagrass
Halophila
ovalis
6.5.29 Typhoon or strong water current was suggested as one unfavourable
condition to Halophila ovalis (Fong,
1998). As mentioned above, there were two tropical cyclone records in Hong Kong
in Sep. 2014. The strong water current caused by the cyclones might have given
damage to the seagrass beds.
6.5.30 Prolonged light deprivation due to turbid
water would be another unfavouable condition.
Previous studies reported that Halophila ovalis had little tolerance to light deprivation. During
experimental darkness, seagrass biomass declined
rapidly after 3-6 days and seagrass died completely
after 30 days. The rapid death might be due to shortage of available
carbohydrate under limited photosynthesis or accumulation of phytotoxic end products of anaerobic respiration (details
see Longstaff et al., 1999). Hence the seagrass bed of this species was susceptible to temporary light
deprivation events such as flooding river runoff (Longstaff
and Dennison, 1999).
6.5.31
In order to investigate any deterioration of
water quality (e.g. more turbid) in ST, the water quality measurement results
at two closest monitoring stations SR3 and IS5 of the EM&A programmewere obtained from the water quality monitoring
team. Based on the results from June to December 2014, the overall water
quality was in normal fluctuation except there was one exceedance
of suspended solids (SS) at both stations in September. On 10th Sep., 2014, the
SS concentrations measured during mid-ebb tide at stations SR3 (27.5 mg/L) and
IS5 (34.5 mg/L) exceeded the Action Level (≤23.5 mg/L and 120% of upstream
control stationˇ¦s reading) and Limit Level (≤34.4 mg/L and 130% of upstream
control stationˇ¦s reading) respectively. The turbidity readings at SR3 and IS5
reached 24.8-25.3 NTU and 22.3-22.5 NTU respectively. The temporary turbid
water should not be caused by the runoff from upstream rivers. Because there
was no rain or slight rain from 1st to 10th Sep. 2014
(daily total rainfall at the Hong Kong International Airport: 0-2.1 mm;
extracted from the climatological data of Hong Kong
Observatory). The effect of upstream runoff on water quality should be neglectable in that period. Moreover the exceedance of water quality was considered unlikely to be
related to the contract works of HKLR according to the ˇĄNotifications of
Environmental Quality Limits Exceedancesˇ¦ provided by
the respective environmental team. The respective construction of seawall and
stone column works, which possibly caused turbid water, were
carried out within silt curtain as recommended in the EIA report. Moreover
there was no leakage of turbid water, abnormity or malpractice recorded during
water sampling. In general, the exceedance of
suspended solids concentration was considered to be attributed to other
external factors, rather than the contract works.
6.5.32
Based on the weather condition and water
quality results in ST, the co-occurrence of cyclone hit and turbid waters in
Sep. 2014 might have combined the adverse effects on Halophila ovalis that leaded to disappearance of
this short-lived and r-strategy seagrass species.
Fortunately Halophila ovalis was a
fast-growing species (Vermaat et al., 1995). Previous studies showed that the seagrass
bed could be recovered to the original sizes in 2 months through vegetative
propagation after experimental clearance (Supanwanid,
1996). Moreover it was reported to recover rapidly in less than 20 days after
dugong herbivory (Nakaoka
and Aioi, 1999). As mentioned, the disappeared seagrass in ST in 1995 could recover gradually after the
completion of reclamation works for international airport (Fong, 1998). The seagrass beds of Halophila ovalis might recolonize the
mudflat of ST through seed reproduction as long as there was no unfavourable condition in the coming months.
Recolonization of seagrass
beds
6.5.33 Figure
3.10 of Appendix I shows the recolonization
of seagrass bed area in ST from Dec. 2014 to Dec.
2016. From Mar. to Jun. 2015, 2-3 small patches of Halophila
ovalis were newly found coinhabiting
with another seagrass species Zostera
japonica. But its total patch area was still very low relative to the
previous records. The recolonization rate was low
while cold weather and insufficient sunlight were possible factors between Dec.
2014 and Mar. 2015. Moreover, it would need to compete with seagrass
Zostera japonica for substratum and
nutrient. Since Zostera japonica had
extended and had covered the original seagrass bed of
Halophila ovalis
at certain degree. From Jun. 2015 to Mar. 2016, the total seagrass
area of Halophila ovalis
had increased rapidly from 6.8 m2 to 230.63 m2. It had recolonized its original patch locations and covered Zostera japonica. In Jun. 2016, the total seagrass area increased sharply to 4707.3 m2.
Similar to the previous records of Mar to Jun. 2014, the original patch area
increased further to a horizontally long strand. Another large seagrass beds colonized the lower tidal zone (1.0-1.5 m
above C.D.). In Sep. 2016, this patch extended much and covered significant
soft mud area of ST, resulting in sharp increase of total area (24245 m2).
It indicated the second extensive colonization of this r-strategy seagrass. In Dec. 2016, this extensive seagrass
patch decreased in size and had separated into few, undistinguishable patches.
Moreover, the horizontal strand nearby the mangrove vegetation decreased in
size (Figure 3.10 of Appendix I).
The total seagrass bed decreased to 12550 m2.
In Mar. 2017 (present survey), the seagrass bed area
remained stable (12438 m2) while the vegetation coverage decreased
clearly (20-50%). Such decline of seagrass bed area
might be similar to the record in Sep-Dec. 2014.
Impact of the HKLR
project
6.5.34
It was the 18th survey of the
EM&A programme during the construction period.
According to the results of present survey, there was clear recolonization
of both seagrass species Halophila ovalis and Zostera japonica in ST. Hence the negative impact of HKLR project on the seagrass was not significant. From Dec. 2016 to Mar. 2017
(present survey), a decline of seagrass bed was noted
again but it was yet to deduce the presence of stress factors. In case unfavourable phenomenon (e.g. reduction of seagrass patch size, abnormal change of leave colour) is found presistent, it
would be reported as soon as possible.
Intertidal Soft Shore Communities
6.5.35 Table 3.3 and Figure 3.11 of Appendix I show the types of substratum
along the horizontal transect at every tidal level in all sampling zones. The
relative distribution of different substrata was estimated by categorizing the
substratum types (Gravels & Boulders / Sands / Soft mud) of the ten random quadrats along the horizontal transect. The distribution of
substratum types varied among tidal levels and sampling zones:
ˇP In TC1, high percentages of ˇĄGravels and Bouldersˇ¦ (80-90%) were
recorded at all tidal levels. The
minor substratum types were 'Sands' (10-20% at high and mid tidal levels) and
'Soft mud' (10% at low tidal level).
ˇP In
TC2, the major substratum types were ˇĄSandsˇ¦ (90% at high tidal level) and
'Soft mud' (60-80% at mid and low tidal levels). The minor substratum types
were ˇĄGravels and Bouldersˇ¦ (30%) at mid tidal level and 'Sands' (20%) at low
tidal level.
ˇP In
TC3, ˇĄSandsˇ¦ (50%) and 'Soft mud' (50%) were the usual substratum types at high
tidal level. Higher percentage of ˇĄSandsˇ¦(70%) was
recorded followed by 'Soft mud' (20%) at mid tidal level. At low tidal level,
the major substratum type was ˇĄGravels and Bouldersˇ¦ (100%).
ˇP In ST, high percentages of ˇĄGravels and Bouldersˇ¦ (80-100%) were
recorded at high and mid tidal levels. At
low tidal level, the major substratum type was ˇĄSoft mudˇ¦ (60%) followed by '
Gravels and Bouldersˇ¦ (30%).
6.5.36 There was neither consistent
vertical nor horizontal zonation pattern of
substratum type in all sampling zones. Such heterogeneous variation should be
caused by different hydrology (e.g. wave in different direction and intensity)
received by the four sampling zones.
6.5.37 Table 3.4 of Appendix I lists the total abundance,
density and number of taxon of every phylum in this
survey. A total of 11451 individuals were recorded. Mollusca was clearly the
most abundant phylum (total abundance 11153 ind.,
density 372 ind. m-2, relative abundance
97.4%). The second and third abundant phya were Arthropoda (182 ind., 6 ind. m-2, 1.6%) and Annelida
(61 ind., 2 ind. m-2,
0.5%) respectively. Relatively other phyla were very low in abundances (density
£1 ind.
m-2, relative abundance £0.2%). Moreover, the most diverse
phylum was Mollusca (35 taxa)
followed by Arthropoda (11 taxa)
and Annelida (7 taxa).
There was 1-2 taxa recorded only for other phyla. The
taxonomic resolution and complete list of collected specimens are shown in Annexes IV and V of Appendix I respectively.
6.5.38 Table 3.5 of Appendix I shows the number of individual,
relative abundance and density of each phylum in every sampling zone. The total
abundance (1435-4154 ind.) varied among the four
sampling zones while the phyla distributions were similar. In general, Mollusca was the most dominant phylum (no. of individuals:
1373-4074 ind.; relative abundance 95.7-98.1%;
density 183-543 ind. m-2). Other phyla
were significantly lower in number of individuals. Arthropoda
was the second abundant phylum (29-59 ind.; 1.2-2.2%;
4-8 ind. m-2). Annelida
was the third abundant phylum in TC1, TC2 and TC3 (14-27 ind.;
0.3-1.9%; 2-4 ind. m-2) while Cnidaria (i.e. sea anemone) was the third abundant phylum
in ST (12 ind.; 0.6%; 2 ind.
m-2). Relatively other phyla were low in abundance in all sampling
zones (≤ 0.5%).
Dominant species in every sampling zone
6.5.39
Table 3.6 of Appendix I lists the abundant species
(relative abundance >10%) in every sampling zone. In the present survey,
most of the listed abundant species were of low to moderate densities (50-250 ind. m-2). There was one dominant species of
very high density (594 ind. m-2)
at certain tidal level in one sampling zone. Other listed species of lower
density (< 50 ind. m-2) were regared as common species.
6.5.40
In TC1, gastropod Batillaria multiformis
was highly dominant at very high density (594 ind. m-2,
relative abundance 76%) at high tidal level (major substratum: ˇĄGravels and
Bouldersˇ¦). At mid tidal level (major substratum: ˇĄGravels and Bouldersˇ¦),
gastropods Batillaria multiformis
(240 ind. m-2, 49%), Monodonta
labio (74 ind. m-2,
15%) and rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (78
ind. m-2, 16%, attached on boulders) were
abundant at low-moderate densities. At low tidal level (major substratum:
ˇĄGravels and Bouldersˇ¦), rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (117 ind. m-2,
30%) was abundant at moderate density followed by gastropods Monodonta labio (82 ind. m-2, 21%) and Batillaria multiformis (62 ind.
m-2, 16%).
6.5.41
In TC2, gastropods Cerithidea djadjariensis (265 ind. m-2, 64%) was abundant at moderate
densities at high tidal level (major substratum: 'Sands'). Gastropods Cerithidea cingulata (48
ind. m-2, 12%) and Batillaria zonalis (41 ind.
m-2, 10%) were common species at high tidal level. There was no
clearly abundant species at mid and low tidal levels. Rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata
(5-38 ind. m-2, 19-29%) and gastropod Batillaria zonalis
(10-38 ind. m-2, 29-38%) were common at
mid and low tidal levels (major substratum: ˇĄSoft mudˇ¦). Besides gastropod Cerithidea djadjariensis
(14 ind. m-2, 11%)
and polychaete Maldanidae
spp. (4 ind. m-2, 13%) were also common at
mid and low tidal levels respectively.
6.5.42 In TC3, gastropods Cerithidea
djadjariensis (238 ind.
m-2, 44%) and Batillaria multiformis (235 ind.
m-2, 43%) were abundant at moderate densities at high tidal
level (major substrata: ˇĄSandsˇ¦ and 'Soft mud'). At mid tidal level (major
substratum: ˇĄSandsˇ¦), gastropod Cerithidea djadjariensis (268 ind. m-2,
57%) was abundant at moderate density followed by gastropods Batillaria multiformis
(88 ind. m-2, 19%) and Cerithidea
cingulata (49 ind. m-2,
10%). At low tidal level (major substratum: ˇĄGravels and Bouldersˇ¦), rock
oyster Saccostrea cucullata
(217 ind. m-2, 41%) was the most
abundant at moderate-high density followed by gastropod Monodonta
labio (152 ind. m-2,
29%).
6.5.43 In ST, gastropod Batillaria multiformis
was abundant at moderate density (113 ind.
m-2, 33%) followed by Monodonta labio (66 ind. m-2,
19%) and rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (57
ind. m-2, 17%) at high tidal level (major
substratum: ˇĄGravels and Bouldersˇ¦). At mid tidal level (major
substratum: ˇĄGravels and Bouldersˇ¦), rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (124 ind.
m-2, 34%) was abundant at moderate density followed by common
gastropods Monodonta labio (46 ind. m-2, 13%) and Lunella coronata (42 ind.
m-2, 12%). No single species was abundant at low tidal level (major
substratum: ˇĄSoft mudˇ¦). The common species were rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (31
ind. m-2, 29%) and gastropods Lunella coronata (16 ind. m-2, 15%) and Batillaria zonalis (14 ind. m-2, 13%).
6.5.44 In general, there was no
consistent zonation pattern of species distribution
across all sampling zones and tidal levels. The species distribution should be
determined by the type of substratum primarily. In general, gastropods Batillaria multiformis
(total number of individuals: 3531 ind., relative
abundance 30.8%), Cerithidea djadjariensis
(2326 ind., 20.3%), Cerithidea cingulata (447 ind.,
3.9%) and Batillaria zonalis (423 ind., 3.7%) were the most commonly occurring species on
sandy and soft mud substrata. Rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (1760 ind.,
15.4%), gastropods Monodonta labio (1178 ind., 10.3%) and Lunella coronata (396 ind., 3.5%)
were commonly occurring species inhabiting gravel and boulders substratum.
Biodiversity and abundance of soft shore communities
6.5.45 Table 3.7 of Appendix I shows
the mean values of species number, density, biodiversity index Hˇ¦ and species
evenness J of soft shore communities at every tidal level and in every sampling
zone. As mentioned above, the differences among sampling zones and tidal levels
were determined by the major type of substratum primarily.
6.5.46 Among the sampling zones, the mean species number of TC1 and ST (10-11
spp. 0.25 m-2) were slightly higher than that of TC2 and TC3 (6-8
spp. 0.25 m-2). The mean densities of TC1 and TC3 (513-554 ind. m-2) were higher than TC2 and ST (191-269 ind. m-2). Since the species distribution of ST
was more even relatively, the mean Hˇ¦
(1.6) and J (0.8) were higher than
that of TC1, TC2 and TC3 (H':
1.1-1.4, J: 0.5-0.7).
6.5.47 Across the tidal levels, there was no consistent difference of the mean
species number and H' in all sampling
zones. For the mean density, there were generally decreasing trends in TC1, TC2
and ST from high to low tidal level. For the mean J, there was a slightly increasing trend from high to low tidal
level in all sampling zones.
6.5.48 Figures 3.12 to 3.15 of Appendix
I show the temporal changes of mean species number, mean density, Hˇ¦ and J at every tidal level and in every sampling zone along the
sampling months. In general, all the biological parameters fluctuated
seasonally throughout the monitoring period. Lower mean species number and
density were recorded in dry season (Dec.) but the mean H' and J fluctuated
within a stable range.
6.5.49 Focusing on the changes of mean density in ST, there were decreasing
trends regardless of tidal levels. It might be an unfavourable change that
reflected environmental stresses. Since the total abundances might restore
after spring. More consolidated statements would be made after the next wet
season monitoring (Jun. 2017).
Impact
of the HKLR project
6.5.50 It was
the 18th 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. As mentioned
above, environmental stresses were yet to be confirmed based on the decreasing
trends of mean density in ST. The coming wet season survey results were
important. In case of other abnormal phenomena (e.g. rapid or consistent
decline of fauna densities and species number) are observed, it would be
reported as soon as possible.
6.6.1
Chan, K.K., Caley,
K.J., 2003. Sandy Shores, Hong Kong Field Guides 4. The Department of Ecology
& Biodiversity, The University of Hong Kong. pp 117.
6.6.2
Dai, A.Y., Yang, S.L., 1991. Crabs of the China Seas. China Ocean
Press. Beijing.
6.6.3
Dong, Y.M., 1991. Fauna of ZheJiang Crustacea.
Zhejiang Science and Technology Publishing House. ZheJiang.
6.6.4
EPD, 1997. Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process
(1st edition). Environmental Protection Department,
HKSAR Government.
6.6.5
Fauchald, K.,
1977. The polychaete worms. Definitions and keys to the orders, families and genera. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Science Series 28.
Los Angeles, U.S.A..
6.6.6
Fong, C.W., 1998. Distribution
of Hong Kong seagrasses. In: Porcupine! No. 18. The School of Biological Sciences, The University of
Hong Kong, in collaboration with Kadoorie Farm &
Botanic Garden Fauna Conservation Department, p10-12.
6.6.7
Li, H.Y., 2008. The
Conservation of Horseshoe Crabs in Hong Kong. MPhil Thesis, City University of
Hong Kong, pp 277.
6.6.8
Longstaff,
B.J., Dennison, W.C., 1999. Seagrass survival during
pulsed turbidity events: the effects of light deprivation on the seagrasses Halodule pinifolia and Halophila ovalis. Aquatic Botany 65 (1-4), 105-121.
6.6.9
Longstaff,
B.J., Loneragan, N.R., Oˇ¦Donohue,
M.J., Dennison, W.C., 1999. Effects of light deprivation on
the survival and recovery of the seagrass Halophila ovalis (R.
Br.) Hook. Journal of Experimental Marine
Biology and Ecology 234 (1), 1-27.
6.6.10 Nakaoka, M., Aioi, K., 1999. Growth of seagrass Halophila ovalis at dugong trails compared to
existing within-patch variation in a Thailand intertidal flat. Marine
Ecology Progress Series 184, 97-103.
6.6.11 Pielou,
E.C., 1966. Shannonˇ¦s formula as a measure of species diversity: its use and
misuse. American Naturalist 100, 463-465.
6.6.12 Qi,
Z.Y., 2004. Seashells of China. China
Ocean Press. Beijing, China.
6.6.13 Qin,
H., Chiu, H., Morton, B., 1998. Nursery beaches for Horseshoe
Crabs in Hong Kong. In: Porcupine! No. 18. The
School of Biological Sciences, The University of Hong Kong, in collaboration
with Kadoorie Farm & Botanic Garden Fauna
Conservation Department, p9-10.
6.6.14 Shannon,
C.E., Weaver, W., 1963. The Mathematical Theory of
Communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, USA.
6.6.15 Shin, P.K.S., Li, H.Y., Cheung, S.G., 2009.
Horseshoe Crabs in Hong Kong: Current Population Status and Human Exploitation.
Biology and Conservation of Horseshoe Crabs (part 2),
347-360.
6.6.16 Supanwanid, C.,
1996. Recovery of the seagrass Halophila ovalis after
grazing by dugong. In: Kuo, J., Philips, R.C.,
Walker, D.I., Kirkman, H. (eds), Seagrass biology:
Proc Int workshop, Rottenest Island, Western
Australia. Faculty of Science, The University of
Western Australia, Nedlands, 315-318.
6.6.17 Vermaat,
J.E., Agawin, N.S.R., Duarte, C.M., Fortes, M.D., Marba. N., Uri, J.S., 1995. Meadow
maintenance, growth and productivity of a mixed Philippine seagrass
bed. Marine Ecology Progress Series 124, 215-225.
6.6.18 Yang, D.J, Sun, R.P., 1988. Polychaetous
annelids commonly seen from the Chinese waters (Chinese version). China Agriculture Press, China.
7.1.1 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 8, 15, 22 and 31
March 2017.
7.1.2
A summary of observations found during the site
inspections and
the follow up actions taken by the Contractor are described in Table 7.1.
Table 7.1 Summary
of Environmental Site Inspections
Date of Audit
|
Observations
|
Actions Taken by
Contractor / Recommendation
|
Date of Observations
Closed
|
28 Feb 2017
|
1. Enclosure
was not provided for grouting station at N26. However, the grouting
station was not in operation.
2. Drip
tray was not provided for a chemical drum at N26.
3. Drip
tray was not provided for chemical drums at N26.
4. Drip
tray was not provided for chemical drum at N26.
|
1.
An
enclosure was provided for the grouting at N26.
2.
The
chemical drum was removed from N26.
3.
The
chemical drums were removed from N26.
4.
The
chemical drum was removed from N26.
|
8 Mar 2017
|
8 Mar 2017
|
1.
More than 20 bags of cement were
not covered at HMA.
2.
Blue hoses were not properly
placed at S9.
3.
Gap of silt curtain was observed
at Portion X.
4.
Waste was accumulated at N1.
5.
The checklist of wet separator
was note updated at N1.
6.
Waste was accumulated at
Ventilation Building.
7. Waste was accumulated
at WA6.
|
1.
The cement bags
were covered by impervious sheeting at HMA.
2.
The blue hoses were removed from S9.
3.
The silt curtain was maintained at Portion
X.
4.
The waste was removed from N1.
5.
The checklist for wet separator was
updated.
6.
The waste was removed
from Ventilation Building.
7.
The waste was removed from WA6.
|
15 Mar 2017
|
15 Mar 2017
|
1.
No
drip tray was provided for the chemical containers at C&C.
2.
Waste
was accumulated at C&C.
3.
More
than 20 bags of cement were not covered at C&C.
4.
Waste
was accumulated at HMA.
5.
Unused
cement and cement bags were not handling properly at HMA.
6.
Gap
of silt curtain was observed at Portion X.
7.
No drip tray was
provided for oil drums at PR9.
8.
Waste
was accumulated at PR14.
9.
Waste
was accumulated at S25.
10. Waste was accumulated at Ventilation
Building.
|
1.
The chemical containers were
removed from C&C.
2.
The
waste was removed from C&C.
3.
The
cement bags were cover by impervious sheeting at C&C.
4.
The
waste was removed from HMA.
5.
The
unused cement and cement bags were removed from HMA.
6.
The
silt curtain was repaired at Portion X.
7.
The
oil drums were removed from PR9.
8.
The
waste was removed from PR14.
9.
The
waste was removed from S25.
10. The waste was removed from Ventilation
Building.
|
22 Mar 2017
|
22 Mar 2017
|
1. General
waste was accumulated at HMA.
2. Concrete
waste was accumulated at HMA.
3. Gap of
silt curtain was observed at Portion X.
4. Waste
was accumulated in a skip at S9.
5. General
waste was accumulated outside the Ventilation Building.
6. Construction
waste was accumulated inside the Ventilation Building.
7.
No drip tray was provided for the chemical
containers at Ying Lee Workshop.
|
1. The general
waste was removed from HMA.
2. The concrete waste was removed from HMA.
3.
The silt
curtain was maintained properly at Portion X.
4.
The waste
accumulated in the skip was removed from S9.
5.
The general
waste was removed from the Ventilation Building.
6.
The
construction waste was removed from the Ventilation Building.
7.
The chemical containers were removed from
Ying Lee Workshop.
|
31 Mar 2017
|
31 Mar 2017
|
1. More
than 20 bags of cement were not properly covered at the Ventilation Building.
2. No drip
tray was provided for a chemical container at the Ventilation Building.
3. No drip
tray was provided for a chemical drum at the Ventilation Building.
4. Waste
was accumulated at N1.
5.
Waste was accumulated at S25.
|
The Contractor was recommended to:
1. Cover the cement bags properly with impervious
sheeting at the Ventilation Building.
2. Provide drip tray for the chemical container at the
Ventilation Building.
3. Provide drip tray for the chemical drum at the
Ventilation Building.
4. Remove the waste accumulated at N1.
5.
Remove the waste
accumulated at S25.
|
Follow-up actions for the observations
issued for the last weekly site inspection of the
reporting month will be inspected during the next site inspections
|
7.1.3
The Contractor has rectified most of the observations
as identified during environmental site inspections within the reporting month.
Follow-up actions for outstanding observations will be inspected during the
next site inspections.
7.2
Advice on the Solid and Liquid Waste
Management Status
7.2.1
The Contractor registered as a chemical waste producer
for the Project. Sufficient numbers of receptacles were available for general
refuse collection and sorting.
7.2.2 Monthly summary of
waste flow table is detailed in Appendix
J.
7.2.3
The Contractor was reminded that chemical waste containers should be
properly treated and stored temporarily in designated chemical waste storage
area on site in accordance with the Code of Practice on the Packaging, Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes.
7.3.1 The valid
environmental licenses and permits during the reporting month are summarized in
Appendix L.
7.4
Implementation
Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures
7.4.1
In response to the site audit findings, the Contractors have rectified most of the observations as identified during environmental site
inspections during the reporting month. Follow-up actions for outstanding
observations will be inspected during the next site inspections.
7.4.2
A summary of the Implementation Schedule of
Environmental Mitigation Measures (EMIS) is presented in Appendix
M. Most of the necessary mitigation measures were
implemented properly.
7.4.3
Regular marine travel route for marine vessels were implemented properly
in accordance to the submitted plan and relevant records were kept properly.
7.4.4
Dolphin Watching Plan was implemented during the reporting month. No
dolphins inside the silt curtain were observed. The relevant records were kept
properly.
7.5
Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality Performance
Limit
7.5.1
No Action and
Limit Level exceedances of 1-hr TSP and 24-hr TSP
were recorded at AMS5 and AMS6 during the reporting month
7.5.2
For construction noise, no Action and Limit Level exceedances
were recorded at the monitoring station during the reporting month.
7.5.3
For marine water quality monitoring, no Action Level and Limit Level exceedances of dissolved oxygen level, no Limit Level exceedances of turbidity level were recorded during the
reporting month. Two Action Level exceedances of turbidity level, three Action Level exceedances of suspended solid level and three Limit Level exceedances of suspended solid level were recorded during
the reporting month.
7.6
Summary of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful
Prosecution
7.6.1 For Environmental
Complaint No. COM-2017-108 mentioned in previously Monthly EM&A Report for February
2017, complaint investigation was undertaken. During ETˇ¦s observation on 3 and 13 March
2017, properly functioning wheel washing facilities were provided to wash all
vehicles prior to leaving the site. The section of road between the wheel washing
facilities and the site access (S25) was hard paved and no mud/ silt was observed at the concerned road section and the site
access. As the ground level of site boundary of HY/2011/03 adjoining the East
Coast Road is lower than that of East Coast Road, the possibility of muddy
water seepage from S25 to East Coast Road is low. It was considered that the complaint
was unlikely related to Contract No. HY/2011/03
7.6.2 There was one complaint received
in relation to the environmental impacts during the reporting month. The
summary of environmental complaint is presented in Table 7.2. The details of cumulative
statistics of Environmental Complaints are provided in Appendix K.
Table
7.2 A Summary of Environmental Complaint for the Reporting Month
Environmental
Complaint No.
|
Date
of Complaint Received
|
Description
of Environmental Complaint
|
COM-2017-112
|
27 March 2017
|
Noise and Water
Quality near the artificial island
|
7.6.3 Based on the information provided
by the Contractor, it was noted that the Contractor undertook concreting works
at Zone 3A of Scenic Hill Tunnel during the period between 19:00 hrs and 22:50 hrs
on 26 March 2017. The Contractor also undertook box jacking works at Shaft 3 of
Scenic Hill Tunnel during the period between 00:00 hrs to 05:00 hrs on 27 March
2017. The Contractor had complied with the conditions laid down in CNPs No. GW-RS-1135-16 and GW-RS0016-17. Moreover, the distance
between the noise sources and living place of complainant is over 1km. The
noise generated from the Contract was distant away from the living place of
complainant. Regarding the complaint against water quality, the Contractor
confirmed that no vessels under Contract No. HY/2011/03 travelled at the
vicinity of the concerned waters on 26 and 27 March 2017. The water discharge
outlets under Contract No. HY/2011/03 were far from
the concerned waters and no discharge of muddy water from the outlets were
observed. Based on our investigation result, it was considered
that the complaint (Environmental Complaint No. COM-2017-112) was
unlikely related to Contract No. HY/2011/03.
7.6.4
No notification of summons and prosecution was
received during the reporting period. Statistics on notifications of summons
and successful
prosecutions are summarized in Appendix N.
8.1.1
As informed by the Contractor, the major
construction activities for April 2017 are summarized in Table 8.1.
Table 8.1 Construction
Activities for April 2017
Site Area
|
Description of
Activities
|
WA7
|
Stockpiling
|
Portion X
|
Dismantling/Trimming of Temporary 40mm Stone Platform for Construction
of Seawall
|
Portion X
|
Construction of Seawall
|
Portion X
|
Loading and Unloading of
Filling Materials
|
Portion X
|
Backfilling at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Construction of Tunnel Box Structure at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut &
Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Excavation for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel & Construction of Tunnel Box
structure
|
Portion X
|
Excavation for Diversion of Culvert PR9 and PR14
|
Airport Road
|
Works for Diversion of
Airport Road
|
Airport Road / Airport Express Line / East Coast Road
|
Utilities Detection
|
Airport Road / Airport Express Line/ East Coast Road
|
Establishment of Site Access
|
Airport Road / Airport Express Line
|
Mined Tunnel Excavation / Box Jacking underneath Airport Road and
Airport Express Line
|
Near Kwo Lo Wan Road
|
Construction of Tunnel Box Structure at Package T1.12.1
|
Shaft 3 Extension South Shaft
|
Construction of Tunnel Box Structure
|
Airport Road
|
Excavation and Lateral Support Works & Construction of Tunnel Box
Structure for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel West (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Excavation and Lateral Support Works & Construction of Tunnel Box
Structure for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel East (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
|
Portion X
|
Sub-structure & Superstructure Works for Highway Operation and
Maintenance Area Building
|
West Portal
|
Superstructure Works for Scenic Hill Tunnel West Portal Ventilation
building
|
8.2
Environmental Monitoring Schedule for the
Coming Month
8.2.1
The tentative schedule for environmental monitoring in April 2017 is
provided in Appendix D.
9.1.1 The construction
phase and EM&A programme of the Contract commenced on 17 October 2012. This is the fifty-fourth Monthly
EM&A report for the Contract which summarizes the monitoring results and
audit findings of the EM&A programme during the
reporting period from 1 to 31 March 2017.
Air Quality
9.1.2 No Action and Limit Level exceedances
of 1-hr TSP and 24-hr TSP were recorded at AMS5 and AMS6 during the reporting
month.
Noise
9.1.3
For construction noise, no Action and Limit Level exceedances were recorded at the monitoring station during
the reporting month.
Water Quality
9.1.4 For marine water
quality monitoring, no Action Level and Limit Level exceedances
of dissolved oxygen level, no Limit Level exceedances
of turbidity level were recorded during the reporting month. Two Action Level exceedances of turbidity level, three Action Level exceedances of suspended solid level and three Limit Level exceedances of suspended solid levels were recorded during
the reporting month.
Dolphin
9.1.5
During the Marchˇ¦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
(March 2017 ˇV May 2017) 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 March
2017 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 inspections
were carried out on 8, 15, 22 and 31 March 2017. Recommendations on remedial
actions were given to the Contractors for the deficiencies identified during
the site inspections.
9.1.10 For
Environmental Complaint No. COM-2017-108 mentioned in previously
Monthly EM&A Report for February 2017, it was considered that the complaint
was unlikely related to Contract No. HY/2011/03.
9.1.11 There was one complaint
(Environmental Complaint No. COM-2017-112) received in relation to the
environmental impact during the reporting period. Complaint investigation was undertaken,
it was considered that the complaint was unlikely related to Contract No. HY/2011/03.
9.1.12
No
notification of summons and prosecution was received during the reporting
period.