Revision History

 

 

 

Content

 

1.     Basic Project Information. 7

2.     Marine Water Quality Monitoring. 16

3.     Noise Monitoring. 29

4.     Waste. 34

5.     Coral 36

6.     Marine Mammal 51

7.     White-Bellied Sea Eagle. 64

8.     Summary of Monitoring Exceedance, Complaints, Notification of Summons and Prosecutions 68

9.     EM&A Site Inspection. 73

10.   Future Key Issues 75

11.   Conclusion and Recommendations 76

 

Appendix A	Master Programme
Appendix B	Summary of Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation
Appendix C	Impact Monitoring Schedule of the Reporting Month
Appendix D	Water Quality Monitoring Data
Appendix E	HOKLAS Laboratory Certificate
Appendix F	Water Quality Equipment Calibration Certificate
Appendix G	Event/ Action Plan for Water Quality Exceedance
Appendix H	Noise Monitoring Equipment Calibration Certificate
Appendix I	Event/Action Plan for Noise Exceedance
Appendix J	Noise Monitoring Data
Appendix K	Waste Flow Table
Appendix L	Event/Action Plan for Coral Monitoring
Appendix M	Event/Action Plan for White-bellied Sea Eagle Monitoring
Appendix N	Exceedance Report
Appendix O	Complaint Log
Appendix P	Impact Monitoring Schedule of Next Reporting Month

 

 

Executive Summary

Introduction

A1.      The Project, Integrated Waste Management Facility (IWMF), is a Designated Project under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (Cap. 499) (EIAO) and is currently governed by a Further Environmental Permit (FEP No. FEP-01/429/2012/A) for the construction and operation of the Project.

A2.      In accordance with the Updated Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) Manual for the Project, EM&A works for marine water quality, noise, waste management and ecology should be carried out by Environmental Team (ET), Acuity Sustainability Consulting Limited (ASCL), during the construction phase of the Project.

A3.      This is the 6th Monthly EM&A Report, prepared by ASCL, for the Project summarizing the monitoring results and audit findings of the EM&A programme at and around Shek Kwu Chau (SKC) during the reporting period from 1 December 2018 to 31 December 2018.

Summary of Main Works Undertaken & Key Mitigation Measures Implemented

A4.      Key activities carried out in this reporting period for the Project included the following:

·          Marine Site Investigation Works

·          Coring of DCM samples conducted at site trial location

·          Coring of DCM samples conducted at DCM Static Loading Test sites

·          Coring for Instrumentation at DCM Static Loading Test sites

·          Laying of Geotextile and Sand Blanket for DCM Injection Works

·          DCM Installation Works

A5.      The major environmental impacts brought by the above construction activities include:

·          Water quality impact from DCM installation and laying of sand blanket

·          Disturbance and possible trapping of Finless Porpoise by silt curtains

A6.      The key environmental mitigation measures implemented for the Project in this reporting period associated with the construction activities include:

·          Reduction of noise from equipment and machinery on-site;

·          Installation of silt curtains for DCM installation and sand blanket laying works;

·          Sorting and storage of general refuse and construction waste;

·          Management of chemicals and avoidance of oil spillage on-site; and

·          Implementation of cluster MMEZ (Marine Mammal Exclusion Zone) and inspection of enclosed environment within silt curtains as per DMPFP (Detailed Monitoring Programme of Finless Porpoise)

 

Summary of Exceedance & Investigation & Follow-up

A7.      The EM&A works for construction noise, water quality, construction waste, coral, marine mammal and White-Bellied Sea Eagle (WBSE) were conducted during the reporting period in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual.

A8.      No exceedance of the Action or Limit Levels in relation to the construction noise, construction waste, coral and WBSE monitoring was recorded in the reporting month.

A9.      Eighty-eight of the water quality monitoring results for Suspended Solid (SS) obtained during the reporting period had exceeded the relevant Action or Limit Levels, where findings from investigations carried out immediately for each of the exceedance cases had showed that these exceedances were unrelated to the Project, except for the exceedances on 27, 29 and 31 December 2018, where the investigation is undergoing and those corresponding incident reports would be marked as interim incident report. The investigation results on 27, 29 & 31 December 2018 will be presented in the next monthly report.

A10.   No project-related Action Level & Limit Level exceedance was recorded from 1 to 19 December 2018.

A11.   Weekly site inspections of the construction works by ET were carried out on 4, 14, 18 & 27 December to audit the mitigation measures implementation status. Monthly joint site inspection was carried out on 18 December 2018 by ET and IEC. Observations have been recorded in the site inspection checklists and provided to the contractors together with the appropriate follow-up actions where necessary.

Complaint Handling and Prosecution

A12.   No project-related environmental complaint was received during the reporting period.

A13.   Neither notifications of summons nor prosecution was received for the Project.

Reporting Change

A14.   There were no changes to be reported that may affect the on-going EM&A programme.

Summary of Upcoming Key Issues and Key Mitigation Measures

A15.   Key activities anticipated in the next reporting period for the Project will include the following:

·          Marine Site Investigation Works

·          Coring of DCM samples conducted at site trial location

·          Coring of DCM samples conducted at DCM Static Lading Test sites

·          Coring for Instrumentation at DCM Static Lading Test sites

·          Laying of Geotextile and Sand Blanket for DCM Injection Works

·          DCM Installation Works

·          Construction of Rockfill Rubble Mound

A16.   The major environmental impacts brought by the above construction activities will include:

·          Water quality impact from laying of sand blanket

·          Disturbance and possible trapping of Finless Porpoise by silt curtains

A17.   The key environmental mitigation measures for the Project in the coming reporting period associated with the construction activities will include:

·          Reduction of noise from equipment and machinery on-site;

·          Installation of silt curtains for the sand blanket laying works;

·          Sorting, recycling, storage and disposal of general refuse and construction waste;

·          Management of chemicals and avoidance of oil spillage on-site, especially under heavy rains and adverse weather; and

·          Implementation of cluster MMEZ and inspection of enclosed environment within silt curtains as per DMPFP

 

 

1.        Basic Project Information 1.1         Background 1.1.1        The Government of Hong Kong SAR will develop the Integrated Waste Management Facilities (IWMF) Phase 1 (hereafter “the Project”) with incineration to achieve substantial bulk reduction of unavoidable municipal solid waste (MSW) and to recover energy from the incineration process. The IWMF will be on an artificial island to be formed by reclamation at the south-western coast of Shek Kwu Chau. Keppel Seghers – Zhen Hua Joint Venture (KSZHJV) was awarded the contract under Contract No. EP/SP/66/12 Integrated Waste Management Facilities Phase 1 to construct and operate the Project. 1.1.2        An environmental impact assessment (EIA) study for the Project has been conducted and the EIA Report was approved under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance on 17 January 2012. An Environmental Permit (EP) (EP No.: EP-429/2012) was granted to EPD on 19 January 2012 for the construction and operation of the Project. Subsequently, the EP was amended (EP No.: EP-429/2012/A) and a further EP (FEP) (EP No.: FEP-01/429/2012/A) was granted to the Keppel Seghers – Zhen Hua Joint Venture (KSZHJV) on 27 December 2017. 1.1.3        The key design and construction elements of the Project include the Design and the Works including but not limited to the design, engineering procurement, construction, testing and commissioning of the Facility including:

·          Ground Treatment works;

·          Seawall and Breakwater construction;

·          Non-dredged Reclamation;

·          Other Marine works and Harbour and Port Facilities,

·          Site formation,

·          Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Treatment Processes,

·          Energy Recovery for Power Generation and Surplus Electricity export,

·          Wastewater treatment process,

·          Desalination and water treatment process,

·          Civil works;

·          Building and Structural works,

·          Electrical and Mechanical works,

·          Building Services,

·          Architectural and Landscaping works, and

·          All other design and works required for the operation and maintenance of the Facility

·          according to the Contract requirements

1.1.4        The location of the IWMF near Shek Kwu Chau (SKC) and general layout of IWMF are shown in Figure 1.1 and Figure 1.2 respectively.

Figure 1.1 Location of the IWMF at the Artificial Island near SKC

Figure 1.2 General Layout of the IWMF at the Artificial Island near SKC

1.2         The Reporting Scope 1.2.1        This is the 6th Monthly EM&A Report for the Project which summarizes the key findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 December 2018 to 31 December 2018. 1.3         Project Organization 1.3.1        The Project Organization structure for Construction Phase is presented in Figure 1.3.

Figure 1.3 Project Organization Chart

1.3.2        Contact details of the key personnel are presented in Table 1.1 below:

Table 1.1 Contact Details of Key Personnel

Party	Position	Name	Telephone no.
Keppel Seghers – Zhen Hua Joint Venture	Project Manager	Kenny Yu	2192-0606
Acuity Sustainability Consulting Limited	Environmental Team Leader	Robin Ho	2698-6833
ERM-Hong Kong, Limited	Independent Environmental Checker	Mandy To	2271-3000

1.4         Summary of Construction Works 1.4.1        Details of the major construction activities undertaken in this reporting period are shown in Table 1.2 and Figure 1.4 below. The construction programme is presented in Appendix A.

Table 1.2 Summary of the Construction Activities Undertaken during the Reporting Month

Location of works	Construction activities undertaken	Remarks on progress
Seawall and breakwater locations	·     Marine site investigation works	·     56 out of 62 drill holes were completed
Location of DCM Site Trial	·     Coring of DCM samples	·     Completed
Seawall locations	·     Collecting of Marine Sediment Samples	·     Completed
Location of DCM Static Loading Test	·     DCM installation	·     Completed
Seawall and breakwater locations	·     Laying of Geotextile and Sand Blanket	·     42 out of 48 geotextiles were laid ·     On-going for sand blanket laying
Seawall and berth area	·     DCM installation	·     On-going

Figure 1.4 Location of Major Construction Activities Undertaken during the Reporting Month

1.5         Summary of Environmental Status 1.5.1        A summary of the valid permits, licences, and /or notifications on environmental protection for this Project is presented in Table 1.3

Table 1.3 Summary of the Status of Valid Environmental Licence, Notification, Permit and Documentations

Permit/ Licences/ Notification	Reference	Validity Period	Remarks
Variation of Environmental Permit	EP-429/2012/A	Throughout the Contract
Further Environmental Permit	FEP-01/429/2012/A	Throughout the Contract
Notification of Construction Works under the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation (Form NA)	Ref No.: 428778	15/12/2017-22/09/2024
Wastewater Discharge Licence	-	-	Under Application
	-	-	Under Application
Chemical Waste Producer Registration	WPN0017-933-K3301-01	Throughout the Contract
	WPN5213-961-K3301-02	Throughout the Contract
Construction Noise Permit	GW-RS0534-18	22/06/2018 – 20/12/2018
Construction Noise Permit	GW-RS1184-18	20/12/2018 – 18/06/2019
Construction Noise Permit (24 hours)	-	-	Under Application
Billing Account for Disposal of Construction Waste	A/C No.:7029768	Throughout the Contract

1.5.2        The status for all environmental aspects is presented Table 1.4.

Table 1.4 Summary of Status for Key Environmental Aspects under the Updated EM&A Manual

Parameters	Status
Water Quality
Baseline Monitoring under Updated EM&A Manual and Detailed Plan on DCM	The baseline water quality monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under FEP Condition 3.4
Impact Monitoring	On-going
Regular DCM Monitoring	On-going
Initial Intensive DCM Monitoring	To be commenced according to the Detailed Plan on DCM
Baseline Water Quality of wet season	Being carried out from 13 August 2018 to 7 September 2018
Noise
Baseline Monitoring	The baseline niose monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under FEP Condition 3.4
Impact Monitoring	On-going
Waste Management
Mitigation Measures in Waste Monitoring Plan	On-going
Coral
Pre-translocation Survey and Coral Mapping	The Coral Translocation Plan was submitted and approved by EPD under EP Condition 2.12
Coral Translocation	Completed on 28 March 2018
Post-Translocation Coral Monitoring	On-going, survey affected by missing of translocated and tagged coral colonies after typhoons in September 2018
Pre-construction Coral Survey and Tagging	Completed on 26 June 2018
Tagged Coral Monitoring	Survey obstructed due to missing of tagged coral colonies after typhoons in September 2018
Coral Survey and Re-tagging	Re-tagging at Indirect Impact Site was conducted on 23 November and Re-tagging at Control Site was conducted on 3 December 2018.
Post Re-tagging Coral Monthly Monitoring	Post Re-tagging Monthly Coral Survey at both Indirect Impact Site and Control Site was conducted on 14 January 2019.
Marine Mammal
Baseline Monitoring	The baseline marine mammal monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under FEP Condition 3.4
Impact Monitoring	On-going
White-bellied Sea Eagle
Baseline Monitoring	The baseline WBSE monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under FEP Condition 3.4
Impact Monitoring	On-going
Environmental Audit
Site Inspection covering Measures of Air Quality, Noise Impact, Water Quality, Waste, Ecological Quality, Fisheries, Landscape and Visual	On-going
Mitigation Measures in Marine Mammal Watching Plan (MMWP)	On-going
Mitigation Measures in Detailed Monitoring Programme on Finless Porpoise (DMPFP)	On-going
Mitigation Measures in Vessel Travel Details	On-going

1.5.3        Other than the EM&A works by ET, environmental briefings, trainings and regular environmental management meetings were conducted, in order to enhance environmental awareness and closely monitor the environmental performance of the contractors. 1.5.4        The EM&A programme has been implemented in accordance with the recommendations presented in the approved EIA Report and the Updated EM&A Manual. A summary of implementation status of the environmental mitigation measures for the construction phase of the Project during the reporting period is provided in Appendix B.

2.        Marine Water Quality Monitoring

2          

2.1         Water Quality Requirements 2.1.1        To ensure no adverse water quality impact, water quality monitoring is recommended to be carried out at the nearby water sensitive receivers (WSRs) during construction phase including proposed reclamation, breakwater construction, etc. 2.1.2        In accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual, impact water quality monitoring were conducted 3 days per week at mid-flood and mid-ebb tide to obtain impact water quality levels at the eleven monitoring stations during general water quality monitoring and fourteen monitoring stations during regular DCM monitoring for the construction period. 2.2         Water Quality Parameters, Time, Frequency 2.2.1        Dissolved Oxygen (DO), Turbidity, Suspended Solids (SS), Salinity and pH have been undertaken at the eleven monitoring stations during general water quality monitoring. Beside the above parameters, monitoring for Total Alkalinity, Current Velocity and Current Direction have been undertaken at all fourteen monitoring stations (including S1, S2 and S3) during regular DCM monitoring. While the same parameters monitored during regular DCM monitoring would be undertaken at twelve immediate upstream and downstream area to the DCM works location during intensive DCM monitoring. Intensive DCM monitoring was not undertaken during the reporting period. 2.2.2        Current velocity and direction, DO , temperature, salinity, turbidity and pH have been measured in-situ and the SS, Total Alkalinity have been assayed in a HOKLAS laboratory. 2.2.3        In associate with the water quality parameters, other relevant data were also measured, such as monitoring location/position, time, water depth, sampling depth, tidal stages, weather conditions and any special phenomena or work underway nearby were also recorded. The monitoring schedule is provided in Appendix C. 2.2.4        Impact water quality monitoring was conducted 3 days per week in the reporting period. All parameters were monitored during mid-flood and mid-ebb tides at three water depths for general water quality monitoring. The interval between two sets of monitoring has not been less than 36 hours. 2.2.5        Table 2.1 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and duration of the impact water quality monitoring during construction phase.

 Table 2.1 Water Quality Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

Parameter, unit	Frequency	No. of Depths
·        Water Depth(m) ·        Temperature(oC) ·        Salinity(ppt) ·        pH (pH unit) ·        Dissolved Oxygen (DO)(mg/L and % of saturation) ·        Turbidity(NTU) ·        Suspended Solids (SS), mg/L ·        Total alkalinity ·        Current velocity ·        Direction	Impact monitoring: 3 days per week, at mid-flood and mid-ebb tides	3 water depths: 1m below sea surface, mid-depth and 1m above sea bed. If the water depth is less than 3m, mid-depth sampling only. If water depth less than 6m, mid-depth may be omitted.

2.3         Water Quality Monitoring Locations 2.3.1        Impact water quality monitoring was conducted at eleven monitoring locations (B1-B4, H1, C1, C2, F1, CR1, CR2 & M1) during general water quality monitoring and was conducted at fourteen water monitoring locations (B1-B4, H1, C1, C2, F1, S1-S3, CR1, CR2 & M1) during regular DCM monitoring, as shown in Figure 2.1.

Figure 2.1 Water monitoring locations at Artificial Island near SKC

2.3.2        B1 to B4 are located at 4 beaches respectively at the southern shore of Lantau Island. Monitoring station H1 is located at the horseshoe crab habitat at northern SKC, while CR1 and CR2 are located at the coral communities at southwestern shore of SKC. Monitoring station F1 is located at the Cheung Sha Wan Fish Culture Zone while monitoring station M1 is located at Tung Wan at Cheung Chau. S1, S2 and S3 are located at the northern landing site, midway and southern landing site of the proposed submarine cable, respectively. S1, S2 and S3 are required for monitoring due to the laying of submarine cable. Control stations C1 and C2 at far field locations are for comparison. 2.3.3        Fourteen monitoring stations are listed in Table 2.2:

Table 2.2 - Locations of Marine Water Quality Stations

Monitoring station	Description	Easting	Northing
B1	Beach - Cheung Sha Lower	813342	810316
B2	Beach - Pui O	815340	811025
B3	Beach - Yi Long Wan	817210	808395
B4	Beach - Tai Long Wan	817784	808682
H1	Horseshoe Crab - Shek Kwu Chau	816477	806953
C1	Control Station	810850	806288
C2	Control Station	819421	808053
F1	Cheung Sha Wan Fish Culture Zone	818631	810966
S1	Submarine Cable Landing Site	814245	810335
S2	Submarine Cable	815076	807747
S3	Submarine Cable Landing Site	816420	805621
CR1	Coral	817144	805597
CR2	Coral	816512	805882
M1	Tung Wan	821572	807799

2.3.4        For initial intensive DCM monitoring, mobile impact monitoring stations shall be located within fixed distances from the DCM group works area to obtain water quality information in the immediate upstream and downstream area. A total of 12 nos. monitoring stations will be deployed with the following arrangement and illustrated in Figure 2.2:

·          Two monitoring stations upstream and at 150 m envelope of DCM group works area (Representative Control stations).

·          Five monitoring stations downstream and at 150 m envelope of DCM group works area (Impact 1 stations).

·          Five monitoring stations downstream and at 250 m envelope of DCM group works area (Impact 2 stations).

·          Monitoring stations should be at least 50 m apart;

·          Downstream monitoring stations should be perpendicular to the tidal direction.

Figure 2.2 Water monitoring locations during intensive DCM monitoring

2.4         Impact Monitoring Methodology 2.4.1        General water quality monitoring was conducted three days per week, at mid-flood and mid-ebb tides, at the designated water quality monitoring stations during the reporting period. 2.4.2        The interval between 2 sets of monitoring was not less than 36 hours. Sampling was collected at three water depths, namely, 1m below water surface, mid-depth and 1m above seabed, except where the water depth is less than 6m, the mid-depth was omitted. If the water depth was less than 3m, only the mid-depth station was monitored. 2.4.3        All observations and results were recorded in the data record sheets in Appendix D. Duplicate in-situ measurements and water sampling were carried out in each sampling event. The monitoring probes were retrieved out of water after the first measurement and then redeployed for the second measurement. When the difference in value between the first and second readings of DO or turbidity is more than 25% of the value of the first reading, the reading was discarded and further readings were taken.

In-situ Measurement

2.4.4        Levels of DO, pH, temperature, turbidity and salinity would be measured in-situ by portable and weatherproof measuring instrument, e.g. YSI ProDSS and Horiba U-53 Multiparameter complete with cable and sensor. (Refer to http://www.ysi.com/ProDSS for YSI ProDSS technical specification and http://www.horiba.com/process-environmental/products/water-treatment-environment/details/u-50-multiparameter-water-quality-checker-368/ for Horiba U-53 technical specification ). Water current velocity and Water Current direction would be measured by portable and weatherproof current meter, e.g. SonTek Hydrosurveyor (Refer to https://www.sontek.com/media/pdfs/riversurveyor-s5-m9-brochure.pdf for SonTek Hydrosurveyor M9 technical specification). Parameters measured by in-situ measurement is tabulated in Table 2.3

Table 2.3 - Parameters Measured by In-situ Measurement

Parameter	Resolution	Range
Temperature	0.1 oC	-5-70 oC
Dissolved Oxygen (DO)	0.01 mg/L	0-50.0 mg/L
Turbidity	0.1 NTU	0-1000 NTU
pH	0.01 pH	pH 0-14
Salinity	0.01 ppt	0-40 ppt
Water Current Velocity	0.001m/s	±20m/s
Water Current Direction	±1o	±2o

 

Laboratory Analysis

2.4.5        Analysis of Total Alkalinity and SS should be carried out in a HOKLAS accredited laboratory, as shown in Appendix E. Sufficient water samples shall be collected at the monitoring stations for carrying out the laboratory determinations. The determination work should be started within 24 hours after collection of the water samples.  Analytical methods and detection limits for SS and total alkalinity are present in Table 2.4.

 

Table 2.4 - Analytical Methods Applied to Water Quality Samples

Parameter	Analytical method	Detection Level
Suspended Solids, SS	APHA 2540 Di	1 mg/L
Total Alkalinity	APHA 2320	0.01 mg/L

Footnote:  

        i.          "APHA 2540 D" stands for American Public Health Association Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 23rd Edition.

 

Field Log

2.4.6        Other relevant data was recorded, such as: monitoring location / position, time, water depth, weather conditions and any special phenomena underway near the monitoring station. 2.5         Monitoring Equipment 2.5.1        Equipment used in the impact water quality monitoring programme is summarized in Table 2.5 below. Calibration certificates for the water quality monitoring equipment are attached in Appendix F.

Table 2.5 Impact Water Quality Monitoring Equipment

Monitored Parameter	Equipment	Brand and Model
DO, Temperature, Salinity, pH and Turbidity	Multi-functional Meter	YSI ProDSS
Coordinates	Positioning Equipment	Garmin GPSMAP 78s
Water depth	Water Depth Detector	Hummingbird 160 Portable
SS	Water Sampler	Wildco 2 L Water Sampler with messenger

2.5.2        Dissolved Oxygen and Temperature Measuring Equipment

The instrument was a portable and weatherproof DO probe mounted on the multi-functional meter complete with cable and sensor, and use a DC power source.  The equipment was capable of measuring:

 

l   A DO level in the range of 0 ‑ 50 mg/L; and

l   Temperature of -5 ‑ 70 degree Celsius.

2.5.3        Turbidity Measurement Instrument

The instrument was a portable and weatherproof turbidity-measuring probe mounted on the multi-functional meter using a DC power source. It had a photoelectric sensor capable of measuring turbidity between 0 - 1000 NTU.

2.5.4        pH Measurement Instrument

The probe was consisted of a potentiometer, a glass electrode, a reference electrode and a temperature-compensating device mounted on the multi-functional meter.  It was readable to 0.1 pH in a range of 0 to 14. Standard buffer solutions of at least pH 7 and pH 10 were used for calibration of the instrument before and after use.

2.5.5        Salinity Measurement Instrument

A portable salinometer mounted on the multi-functional meter capable of measuring salinity in the range of 0-40 parts per thousand (ppt) was provided for measuring salinity of the water at each monitoring location.

2.5.6        Sampler

The water sampler comprised a transparent PVC cylinder, with a capacity of not less than 2 litres, which can be effectively sealed with latex cups at both ends.  The sampler have a positive latching system to keep it open and prevent premature closure until released by a messenger when the sampler is at the selected water depth.

2.5.7        Sample Containers and Storage

Water samples for SS were stored in high density polythene bottles with no preservative added, packed in ice (cooled to 4°C without being frozen) and delivered to the laboratory and analysed as soon as possible after collection.  Sufficient volume of samples was collected to achieve the detection limit stated in Table 2.4.

2.5.8        Water Depth Detector

A portable, battery-operated echo sounder was used for the determination of water depth at each designated monitoring station.  This unit could either be hand held or affixed to the bottom of the work boat, if the same vessel is to be used throughout the monitoring programme.

2.5.9        Monitoring Position Equipment

Hand-held digital Differential Global Positioning System (DGPS) with way point bearing indication and Radio Technical Commission for maritime (RTCM) Type 16 error message ‘screen pop-up’ facilities (for real-time auto-display of error messages and DGPS corrections from the Hong Kong Hydrographic Office) was provided and used to ensure that the water sampling locations were correct during the water quality monitoring work.

2.6         Maintenance and Calibration 2.6.1        The multi-functional meters were checked and calibrated before use. Multi-functional meters were certified by a laboratory accredited under HOKLAS or any other international accreditation scheme, and subsequently re-calibrated at three monthly intervals throughout all stages of the water quality monitoring. Responses of sensors and electrodes were checked with certified standard solutions before each use. Wet bulb calibration for a DO meter was carried out before commencement of monitoring and after completion of all measurements each day. Calibration was not conducted at each monitoring location as daily calibration is adequate for the type of DO meter employed. 2.6.2        Sufficient stocks of spare parts were provided and maintained for replacements when necessary. Backup monitoring equipment was prepared for uninterrupted monitoring during equipment maintenance or calibration during monitoring. 2.7         Action and Limit Levels 2.7.1        The Action and Limit Levels have been set based on the derivation criteria specified in the Updated EM&A Manual and Detailed DCM Plan, as shown in Table 2.6 below.

Table 2.6  Criteria of Action and Limit Levels for Water Quality

Parameters	Action	Limit
Construction Phase Impact Monitoring
DO in mg/L	≤ 5 %-ile of baseline data	≤ 4
SS in mg/L	≥ 95 %-ile of baseline data or 120% of control station’s SS at the same tide of the same day of measurement, whichever is higher	≥ 99 %-ile of baseline data or 130% of control station's SS at the same tide of the same day of measurement, whichever is higher
Turbidity in NTU	≥ 95 %-ile of baseline data or 120% of control station’s turbidity at the same tide of the same day of measurement, whichever is higher	≥ 99 %-ile of baseline data or 130% of control station's turbidity at the same tide of the same day of measurement, whichever is higher
Temperature in°C	1.8°C above the temperature recorded at representative control station at the same tide of the same day	2°C above the temperature recorded at representative control station at the same tide of the same day
Total Alkalinity in mg/L	≥ 95 %-ile of baseline data or 120% of representative control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher	≥ 99 %-ile of baseline data or 130% of representative control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher

2.7.2        Based on the baseline monitoring data and the derivation criteria specified above, the Action/Limit Levels have been derived and are presented in Table 2.7 and Table 2.8 for both dry seasons (October – March) and wet seasons (April – September).

Table 2.7  Derived Action and Limit Levels for Water Quality Monitoring (Dry Season)

Parameters	Action	Limit
Construction Phase Impact Monitoring
DO in mg/L	≤ 7.13	≤ 4
SS in mg/L	≥ 8 or 120% of control station’s SS at the same tide of the same day of measurement, whichever is higher	≥ 10 or 130% of control station's SS at the same tide of the same day of measurement, whichever is higher
Turbidity in NTU	≥ 5.6 or 120% of control station’s turbidity at the same tide of the same day of measurement, whichever is higher	≥ 12.8 or 130% of control station's turbidity at the same tide of the same day of measurement, whichever is higher
Temperature in°C	1.8°C above the temperature recorded at representative control station at the same tide of the same day	2°C above the temperature recorded at representative control station at the same tide of the same day
Total Alkalinity in mg/L	≥116 or 120% of control station’s Total Alkalinity at the same tide of the same day of measurement, whichever is higher	≥ 118 or 130% of control station’s Total Alkalinity at the same tide of the same day of measurement, whichever is higher

Notes:  

        i.          "Depth-averaged" is calculated by taking the arithmetic means of reading of all three depths.

       ii.          For DO, non-compliance of the water quality limits occurs when monitoring result is lower than the limits.

     iii.          For turbidity, SS and Salinity, non-compliance of the water quality limits occurs when monitoring result is higher than the limits.

Table 2.8  Derived Action and Limit Levels for Water Quality (Wet Season)

Parameters	Action	Limit
Construction Phase Impact Monitoring
DO in mg/L	≤ 5.28	≤ 4
SS in mg/L	≥ 12 or 120% of control station’s SS at the same tide of the same day of measurement, whichever is higher	≥ 14 or 130% of control station's SS at the same tide of the same day of measurement, whichever is higher
Turbidity in NTU	≥ 4.0 or 120% of control station’s turbidity at the same tide of the same day of measurement, whichever is higher	≥ 4.3 or 130% of control station's turbidity at the same tide of the same day of measurement, whichever is higher
Temperature in°C	1.8°C above the temperature recorded at representative control station at the same tide of the same day	2°C above the temperature recorded at representative control station at the same tide of the same day
Total Alkalinity in mg/L	≥ 116 mg/L or 120% of representative control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher	≥ 118 mg/L or 130% of representative control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher

Notes:

        i.          "Depth-averaged" is calculated by taking the arithmetic means of reading of all three depths.

       ii.          For DO, non-compliance of the water quality limits occurs when monitoring result is lower than the limits.

      iii.          For turbidity, SS and Salinity, non-compliance of the water quality limits occurs when monitoring result is higher than the limits.

2.7.3        If exceedances were found during water quality monitoring, the actions in accordance with the Event and Action Plan shall be carried out according to Appendix G. 2.8         Monitoring Results and Observations 2.8.1        During the reporting period, general water quality monitoring was conducted on 3, 5 & 7 December 2018 at all the eleven monitoring station and regular DCM monitoring including monitoring station S1, S2 and S3 were conducted on 10, 12, 15, 17, 19, 21, 24, 27, 29 & 31 December 2018. Monitoring results of 7 key parameters: Salinity, DO, turbidity, SS, pH, temperature and total alkalinity in this reporting month, are summarized in Table 2.9, and details results are presented in Appendix D.

 

Table 2.9  Summary of Impact Water Quality Monitoring Results

Locations		Parameters
		Salinity (ppt)	Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)		pH	Turbidity (NTU)	Suspended Solids (mg/L)	Temp. (oC)	Total Alkalinity (mg/L)  note ii
			Surface & Middle	Bottom
B1	Avg.	30.12	8.69	8.69	8.08	4.1	9.21	21.5	113.4
	Min.	29.11	7.70	7.70	8.00	1.1	3.00	17.1	111.0
	Max.	30.99	9.39	9.47	8.20	8.6	24.00	24.9	116.0
B2	Avg.	30.10	8.76	8.76	8.10	4.1	9.48	21.5	113.3
	Min.	29.00	7.81	7.86	8.00	1.1	2.00	17.1	111.0
	Max.	31.00	9.81	9.76	8.20	8.8	23.00	24.9	115.0
B3	Avg.	30.01	8.70	8.69	8.08	4.1	8.33	21.5	113.3
	Min.	28.62	7.72	7.72	8.00	1.0	2.00	17.1	111.0
	Max.	30.94	9.55	9.48	8.20	7.8	16.00	24.9	115.0
B4	Avg.	30.11	8.75	8.75	8.09	4.1	8.28	21.5	113.3
	Min.	28.91	7.73	7.68	8.00	1.0	2.00	17.1	111.0
	Max.	31.88	9.41	9.45	8.20	7.9	17.00	24.9	115.0
C1	Avg.	29.97	8.71	8.70	8.09	4.1	8.52	21.5	113.1
	Min.	27.53	7.77	7.74	8.00	1.1	2.00	17.1	110.0
	Max.	30.96	9.60	9.49	8.20	8.4	22.00	24.9	116.0
C2	Avg.	30.13	8.65	8.66	8.10	4.2	7.73	21.5	113.3
	Min.	28.91	7.88	7.92	8.00	1.1	2.00	17.1	111.0
	Max.	31.50	9.32	9.46	8.20	8.6	15.00	24.9	115.0
CR1	Avg.	30.11	8.75	8.74	8.09	4.1	10.20	21.5	113.3
	Min.	28.95	7.94	8.03	8.00	1.1	2.00	17.1	110.0
	Max.	30.94	9.65	9.50	8.20	8.4	24.00	24.9	115.0
CR2	Avg.	30.10	8.67	8.69	8.09	4.1	10.10	21.5	113.4
	Min.	28.91	7.64	7.61	8.00	1.0	2.00	17.1	111.0
	Max.	30.98	9.41	9.39	8.20	8.6	25.00	24.9	115.0
F1	Avg.	30.09	8.75	8.75	8.09	4.1	8.14	21.5	113.2
	Min.	28.98	7.88	7.85	8.00	1.1	2.00	17.1	111.0
	Max.	31.05	9.66	9.56	8.20	8.1	18.00	24.9	115.0
H1	Avg.	30.06	8.78	8.79	8.09	4.1	8.30	21.5	113.4
	Min.	27.49	7.68	7.70	8.00	1.0	2.00	17.1	111.0
	Max.	31.49	9.62	9.63	8.20	7.9	19.00	24.9	116.0
M1	Avg.	30.13	8.83	8.83	8.09	4.1	9.07	21.5	113.4
	Min.	28.91	7.88	7.91	8.00	1.2	2.00	17.1	111.0
	Max.	31.18	9.67	9.60	8.20	7.6	18.00	24.9	117.0
S1	Avg.	30.11	8.91	8.90	8.10	4.3	10.77	20.9	113.1
	Min.	28.60	7.72	7.76	8.00	1.3	2.00	17.1	111.0
	Max.	31.17	9.63	9.65	8.20	8.8	24.00	24.9	116.0
S2	Avg.	30.06	8.89	8.89	8.09	4.4	10.56	20.9	113.2
	Min.	28.24	7.85	7.92	8.00	1.2	2.00	17.1	111.0
	Max.	31.00	9.65	9.67	8.20	8.3	24.00	24.9	116.0
S3	Avg.	30.15	8.87	8.86	8.11	4.3	10.73	20.9	113.4
	Min.	29.43	7.79	7.86	8.00	1.2	2.00	17.1	111.0
	Max.	31.61	9.45	9.44	8.20	8.0	26.00	24.9	117.0

Notes:  

        i.          "Avg", “Min” and “Max” is the average, minimum and maximum respectively of the data from measurements conducted under mid-flood and mid-ebb tides at three water depths, except that of DO where the data for “Surface & Middle” and “Bottom” are calculated separately.

       ii.          Total alkalinity test only conducted on DCM working day with referring master programme in Appendix A.

      iii.          Monitoring at S1, S2 and S3 shall only be conducted during DCM work period referring to master programme in Appendix A.

2.8.2        The weather conditions during the monitoring period were mainly sunny and cloudy. Sea conditions for the majority of monitoring days were either light or moderate. No major pollution source and extreme weather which might affect the results were observed during the impact monitoring. 2.8.3        During the impact monitoring period for December 2018, eighty-eight of the water quality monitoring results for Suspended Solid (SS) obtained during the reporting period had exceeded the relevant Action or Limit Levels, where findings from investigations during 1 to 19 December 2018 carried out immediately for each of the exceedance cases had showed that these exceedances were unrelated to the Project, however, environmental deficiencies of the Contractor on the implementation of silt curtain deployment system were spotted. For the exceedances on 27, 29 and 31 December 2018, the investigation is undergoing and those corresponding incident reports would be marked as interim incident report. The investigation results on 27, 29 & 31 December 2018 will be presented in the next monthly report. Details of the exceedance are presented in Section 8. 2.8.4        Implemented mitigation measures minimizing the adverse impacts on water are listed in the implementation schedule given in Appendix B.

 

3.        Noise Monitoring

3          

3.1         Monitoring Requirements 3.1.1        To ensure no adverse noise impact, noise monitoring is recommended to be carried out at the nearby noise sensitive receivers (NSRs) during construction phase. 3.1.2        In accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual, baseline noise level at the noise monitoring stations was established as presented in the Baseline Monitoring Report. Impact nois e monitoring was conducted once per week in the form of 30-minutes measurements Leq, L10 and L90 levels recorded at each monitoring station between 0700 and 1900 on normal weekdays. 3.2         Noise Monitoring Parameters, Time, Frequency 3.2.1        Impact noise monitoring was conducted weekly in the reporting period between 0700-1900 on normal weekdays. 3.2.2        Construction noise level measured in terms of the A-weighted equivalent continuous sound pressure level (LAeq). Leq 30min was used as the monitoring parameter for the time period between 0700 and 1900 hours on normal weekdays. Table 3.1 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and duration of the impact noise monitoring. The monitoring schedule is provided in Appendix C.

 Table 3.1 Noise Monitoring Parameters, Time, Frequency and Duration

Monitoring Station	Time	Duration	Parameters
M1/ N_S1, M2/ N_S2, M3/ N_S3	Daytime: 0700-1900 hrs (during normal weekdays, not include Sunday or general holiday)	Once per week Leq 5min/Leq 30min (average of 6 consecutive Leq 5min)	Leq, L10 & L90

3.3         Noise Monitoring Locations 3.3.1        Three noise monitoring locations for impact monitoring at the nearby sensitive receivers are shown in Figure 3.1

Figure 3.1 Noise monitoring locations at SKC

3.3.2        M1, M2 and M3 are Shek Kwu Chau Treatment and Rehabilitation Centre Hostel 1, 2 and 3 respectively of The Society for the Aid and Rehabilitation of Drug Abusers (SARDA) located at southern part of Shek Kwu Chau. 3.3.3        Measurement at M1, M2 and M3 were conducted at a point 1m from the exterior of the sensitive receivers building façade and at a position 1.2m above the ground. The noise monitoring stations are summarized in Table 3.2 below.

Table 3.2 Noise Monitoring Location

Station	NSR ID in EIA Report	Noise Monitoring Location	Type of sensitive receiver(s)	Measurement Type
M1	N_S1	Shek Kwu Chau Treatment & Rehabilitation Centre Hostel 1	Residential	Façade
M2	N_S2	Shek Kwu Chau Treatment & Rehabilitation Centre Hostel 2	Residential	Façade
M3	N_S3	Shek Kwu Chau Treatment & Rehabilitation Centre Hostel 3	Residential	Façade

3.4         Impact Monitoring Methodology 3.4.1        At each designated monitoring location, measurements of six 5-minutes A-weighted equivalent sound pressure level [“Leq 5min”] was carried out between 0700 and 1900 for daytime measurements on a normal weekdays (exclude Sunday or general holiday). The measured six impact noise levels at each monitoring location shall then be averaged in logarithmic scale and expressed in terms of the 30 minutes A-weighted equivalent continuous sound pressure level (Leq 30min) for the time period between 0700 and 1900 hours on normal weekdays.   3.4.2        The monitoring procedures are as follows:

l   The microphone head of the lead level meter was normally positioned 1m exterior of the noise sensitive façade and lowered sufficiently so that the building’s external wall acts as a reflecting surface.

l   The battery condition was checked to ensure good functioning of the meter.

l   Parameters such as frequency weighting, the time weighting and the measurement time were set as follows:

-            Frequency weight: A

-            Time weighting: Fast

-            Measurement time: 5 minutes

l   Prior to and after noise measurement, the meter was calibrated using the calibrator for 94.0 dB at 1000Hz. If the difference in the calibration level before and after measurement is more than 1.0 dB, the measurement was considered invalid and repeat of noise measurement was required after re-calibration or repair of the equipment.

l   Noise monitoring was carried out for 30 mins by sound level meter. At the end of the monitoring period, noise levels in term of Leq, L10,and L90 were recorded. In addition, site conditions and noise sources were recorded when the equipment were checked and inspected.

l   All the monitoring data within the sound level meter system was downloaded through the computer software.

3.5         Monitoring Equipment 3.5.1        Integrated sound level meter was used for the noise monitoring.  The meter shall be in compliance with the International Electrotechnical Commission Publications 651: 1979 (Type 1) and 804: 1985 (Type 1) specifications. 3.5.2        Equipment used in the impact noise monitoring programme is summarized in Table 3.3 below. Calibration certificates for the noise monitoring equipment are attached in Appendix H.

Table 3.3 Impact Noise Monitoring Equipment

Equipment	Brand and Model
Sound Level Meter	Nti XL2
Sound Level Meter Calibrator	Pulsar 105

3.6         Maintenance and Calibration 3.6.1        The maintenance and calibration procedures were as follows:

l   The microphone head of the sound level meter and calibrator were cleaned with a soft cloth at quarterly intervals.

l   The sound level meter and calibrator were checked and calibrated at yearly intervals

l   Immediately prior to and following each noise measurement the accuracy of the sound level meter shall be checked using an acoustic calibrator generating a known sound pressure level at a known frequency. Measurements may be accepted as valid only if the calibration levels from before and after the noise measurement agree to within 1.0dB.

3.7         Action and Limit Levels 3.7.1        The Action/Limit Levels in line with the criteria of Practice Note for Professional Persons (ProPECC PN 2/93) “Noise from Construction Activities – Non-statutory Controls” and Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process issued by HKSAR Environmental Protection Department [“EPD”] under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance, Cap 499, S.16 are presented in Table 3.4.

Table 3.4  Action and Limit Levels for Noise

Time Period	Action	Limit (dB(A))
0700-1900 hrs on normal weekdays	When one documented complaint is received	75 dB(A)

3.7.2        If exceedances were found during noise monitoring. The actions in accordance with the Event and Action Plan shall be carried out according to Appendix I. 3.8         Monitoring Results and Observations 3.8.1        Impact monitoring for noise impact was carried out on 3, 10, 17, 24 & 31 December 2018. The impact noise levels at Noise Monitoring Stations at SKC (i.e. M1/ N_S1 to M3/ N_S3) are summarized in Table 3.6. Details of noise monitoring results are presented in Appendix J. 3.8.2        Major construction activity, major noise source and extreme weather which might affect the results were recorded during the impact monitoring. 3.8.3        According to our field observations, the major noise source identified at the designated noise monitoring station in the reporting month are summarised in Table 3.5:

Table 3.5 Summary of Field Observation

Monitoring Station	Major Noise Source
M1	Nil
M2	Nil
M3	Air-conditioning units nearby

 

3.8.4        No data from impact monitoring has exceeded the stipulated limit level at 75 dB(A).

Table 3.6  Summary of Impact Noise Monitoring Results

Location	Noise in dB(A)
	Range of Leq 30min	Range of L10 5min	Range of L90 5min
M1	50.2 – 52.4	50.2 – 55.9	45.2 – 48.1
M2	53.9 – 55.8	55.2 – 61.2	48.1 – 54.2
M3	49.7 – 52.9	52.0 – 55.0	45.2 – 48.5

 

 

4.        Waste

4          

4.1         The waste generated from this Project includes inert construction and demolition (C&D) materials, and non-inert C&D materials. Non-inert C&D materials are made up of general refuse, vegetative wastes and recyclable wastes such as plastics and paper/cardboard packaging waste. Steel materials generated from the project are also grouped into non-inert C&D materials as the materials were not disposed of with other inert C&D materials. 4.2         As advised by the Contractor, 0 m3 of C&D material was generated on site in the reporting month. For C&D waste, no metals was generated and collected by registered recycling collector. No paper cardboard packing were generated on site and collected by registered recycling collector. No plastic waste was collected by registered recycling collector. 870L and 200kg of chemical waste were collected by the licensed chemical waste collector. 0 m3 of other types of wastes (e.g. general refuse) were generated on site and disposed of at Landfill. 59,070.9 m3 of sand was imported during the reporting period. 4.3         Chemical waste generated from the cleaning of oil stain and leakage on deck of barges was now stored in the chemical waste storage area on the barges. The Contractor has reported that the chemical waste was collected by licensed collector on 14 December 2018. 4.4         With reference to relevant handling records and trip tickets of this Project, the quantities of different types of waste generated in the reporting month are summarised in Table 4.1. Details of cumulative waste management data are presented as a waste flow table in Appendix K.

Table 4.1 Quantities of Waste Generated from the Project

Notes:

1.      Broken concrete for recycling into aggregates.

2.      Plastic refer to plastic bottles / containers, plastic sheets / foam from packaging materials.

3.      Use the conversion factor: 1 full load of dumping truck being equivalent to 6.5m3 by volume.

 

4.5         Although there is not much waste generation anticipated in the coming month from the Project, the Contractor is advised to sort and store any solid and liquid waste on-site properly prior to disposal.

5.        Coral

5          

5.1         Coral Monitoring Requirements 5.1.1        To monitor the health condition of corals during different phases, corals located within areas likely to be affected by the Project, corals located at control sites (areas unlikely to be affected by the Project), the trans-located coral colonies as well as the tagged natural coral colonies at the recipient site were chosen, in order to identify any adverse indirect impact from the marine works. The size, percentage cover and health condition of corals (i.e. any sign of abnormal appearance, such as layer of mucus, bleaching, partial mortality etc.) at representative transects should be recorded during each monitoring. 5.2         Coral Monitoring Parameters, Time, Frequency 5.2.1        Rapid Ecological Assessment (REA) survey was conducted on 26 June 2018 at the suggested control site and indirect impact site within two week before commencement of the construction work which was 29 June 2018. 10 selected hard coral colonies with the similar species were tagged at both control and indirect impact site. Following coral translocation in the recipient site R3, 16 coral colonies attached to rocks less than 50 cm in diameter were translocated and tagged, as well as 10 selected natural coral colonies, at the recipient site. One additional REA survey was conducted in December 2018 to further assess the seabed condition at Indirect Impact Site after Typhoon Mangkhut. 5.2.2        Tagged coral colonies at the suggested control site and indirect impact site are being monitored weekly for the first month and followed by monthly monitoring for two months. Quarterly monitoring will be carried out after the first three-months monthly monitoring for until the end of the construction phase. The selected Control Site is located at Yuen Kong Chau of Soko Islands about 7 km away from the project area. Tagged coral colonies at the proposed recipient site are being monitored quarterly for one year. The selected recipient site R3 is located the opposite side of the Project area at about 2 km away. The detailed survey of the Control Site and Impact Site were conducted before the commencement of the Construction Phase. 5.2.3        Monitoring recorded the following parameters (using the same methodology adopted during the pre-translocation survey); the size, presence, health conditions (percentage of mortality/bleaching) and percentage of sediment of each tagged coral colony. The general environmental conditions including weather, sea, and tidal conditions of impact site, control site and recipient site were monitored. 5.2.4        Table 5.1 summarizes the monitoring locations, time and frequency of the tagged coral colonies monitoring. The monitoring schedule is provided in Appendix C.

 Table 5.1 Tagged Coral Monitoring Locations, Time and Frequency

Monitoring Location	Monitoring Month/Year	Frequency	No. of Monitoring Survey
10 selected hard coral colonies at control site / indirect impact site	1st Month	Weekly Survey	4
	2nd to 3th Months	Monthly Survey	2
	4th Month (postponed to 5th month due to diver accident in Shek Kwu Chau in October 2018)	Re-tagging of Coral Colonies in Indirect Impact Site after Typhoon Mangkhut
	4th Month (postponed to 5th month due to diver accident in Shek Kwu Chau in October 2018 and further postpone to 6th month due to adverse weather)	Re-tagging of Coral Colonies in Control Site after Typhoon Mangkhut
	5th Month (postponed to 6th month due to diver accident in Shek Kwu Chau and further postponed to 7th month due to delay of re-tagging activities at both Indirect Impact Site and Control Site)	Post Re-tagging Monthly Survey	1
	7th to 76th Months (postponed to 8th to 76th month due to diver accident in Shek Kwu Chau in October 2018)	Quarterly Survey	23
16 translocated hard coral colonies and 10 selected natural hard coral colonies at recipient site R3	1st Year	Quarterly Survey	4

5.3         Coral Monitoring Locations 5.3.1        Location of the ten tagged coral colonies at each of the proposed indirect impact site (re-tagging after typhoon Mangkhut), control site (baseline), the recipient site R3 and REA transect at proposed indirect impact site are shown in Figure 5.1, Figure 5.2, Figure 5.3 and Figure 5.4 respectively:

 

Figure 5.1 Tagged Natural Corals at Indirect Impact Site Near SKC for re-tagging after typhoon Mangkhut

Figure 5.2 Tagged Natural Corals at Control Site Near Yuen Kong Chau for re-tagging after typhoon Mangkhut

Figure 5.3 Tagged Translocation Corals at Recipient Site R3 near SKC

Figure 5.4 REA Transect at Indirect Impact Site near SKC

5.3.2        The GPS coordinates of the tagged coral colonies and retagged coral colonies were shown in Table 5.2, Table 5.3, Table 5.3 and Table 5.4 respectively.

Table 5.2 Tagged Natural Corals during Baseline at Control Site near Yuen Long Chau

Coral #	GPS Coordinates
1	N22°09’45.96”	E113°54’57.81”
2	N22°09’45.88”	E113°54’57.89”
3	N22°09’45.81”	E113°54’57.78”
4	N22°09’45.70”	E113°54’57.95”
5	N22°09’45.83”	E113°54’57.81”
6	N22°09’45.75”	E113°54’58.02”
7	N22°09’45.65”	E113°54’57.94”
8	N22°09’45.53”	E113°54’57.90”
9	N22°09’46.23”	E113°54’54.70”
10	N22°09’46.40”	E113°54’57.79”

 

Table 5.3  Tagged Natural Corals during Baseline at Indirect Impact Site near SKC

Coral #	GPS Coordinates
11	N22°11’29.12”	E113°59’08.98”
12	N22°11’29.08”	E113°59’09.06”
13	N22°11’29.01”	E113°59’09.21”
14	N22°11’29.01”	E113°59’09.29”
15	N22°11’29.00”	E113°59’09.37”
16	N22°11’29.00”	E113°59’09.50”
17	N22°11’28.94”	E113°59’09.48”
18	N22°11’28.99”	E113°59’09.36”
19	N22°11’28.95”	E113°59’09.29”
20	N22°11’29.00”	E113°59’09.18”

 

Table 5.4 Re-tagged Natural Corals after Typhoon Manghkut at Control Site near Yuen Long Chau

Coral # note i	GPS Coordinates
2R	N22°11’29.12”	E113°59’09.01”
5R	N22°11’29.10”	E113°59’09.18”
7R	N22°11’29.17”	E113°59’08.86”
10R	N22°11’29.18”	E113°59’08.91”

Notes:

i.              The re-tagged corals were marked as ##R.

 

Table 5.5  Re-tagged Natural Corals after Typhoon Manghkut at Indirect Impact Site near SKC

Coral # note i	GPS Coordinates
11R	N22°11’29.14”	E113°59’08.92”
12R	N22°11’29.12”	E113°59’09.01”
13R	N22°11’29.11”	E113°59’09.07”
14R	N22°11’29.13”	E113°59’09.12”
15R	N22°11’29.10”	E113°59’09.18”
16R	N22°11’29.07”	E113°59’09.23”
17R	N22°11’29.17”	E113°59’08.86”
18R	N22°11’29.14”	E113°59’08.94”
19R	N22°11’29.20”	E113°59’08.81”
20R	N22°11’29.18”	E113°59’08.91”

Notes:

i.              The re-tagged corals were marked as ##R.

 

5.4         Impact Monitoring Methodology 5.4.1        Health status of coral was assessed by the following criteria:

·          Hard coral: Percentage of surface area exhibiting partial mortality and blanched/bleached area of each coral colony and degree of sedimentation.

5.5         Action and Limit Levels 5.5.1        Monitoring result was reviewed and compared against the below Action Level and Limit Level (AL/LL) as set with the below Table 5.6 and Table 5.7.

Table 5.6  Action and Limit Levels for Construction Phase Coral Monitoring

Parameter	Action Level	Limit Level
Mortality	If during Impact Monitoring a 15% increase in the percentage of partial mortality on the corals occurs at more than 20% of the tagged indirect impact site coral colonies that is not recorded on the tagged corals at the control site, then the Action Level is exceeded.	If during Impact Monitoring a 25% increase in the percentage of partial mortality on the corals occurs at more than 20% of the tagged indirect impact site coral colonies that is not recorded on the tagged corals at the control site, then the Limit Level is exceeded.

Table 5.7  Action and Limit Levels for Post-Translocation Coral Monitoring

Parameter	Action Level	Limit Level
Mortality	If during Post-Translocation Monitoring a 15% increase in the percentage of partial mortality on the corals occurs at more than 20% of the translocated coral colonies that is not recorded on the original corals in the recipient site, then the Action Level is exceeded.	If during Post-Translocation Monitoring a 25% increase in the percentage of partial mortality on the corals occurs at more than 20% of the translocated coral colonies that is not recorded on the original corals in the recipient site, then the Limit Level is exceeded.

5.5.2        If exceedance was found during coral monitoring. The actions in accordance with the Event and Action Plan should be carried out according to Appendix L. 5.6         Monitoring Results and Observations 5.6.1        The coral re-tagging activity at Indirect Impact Site (Figure 5.1) was conducted in November 2018, however, the scheduled coral re-tagging activity at control site in November 2018 was postponed due to high swell condition, then rescheduled and  conducted on 3 December 2018 (Figure 5.2); and the weather condition was summarized in Table 5.8. After the re-tagging at Indirect Impact Site and Control Site are both finished, one more additional monthly monitoring survey will be conducted in January 2019 which shown in Appendix P.

Table 5.8  Weather Condition for the Re-tagging Coral Colonies at Control Site

Date	Condition	Average Underwater Visibility
3 December 2018	-        North force 2 to 3 -        Sunny period	Less than 0.5m

5.6.2        Four hard coral colonies were re-tagged at Control Site (Figure 5.2) and their size and health condition were shown in Table 5.12. The six remained hard coral colonies at Control Site will be scheduled to monitor in January 2019 which shown in Appendix P. The GPS coordinates of the re-tagged coral colonies were shown in Table 5.4. Photographs of each re-tagged coral colonies were taken and shown in Photo Plate 5.1. All re-tagged coral are common species in Hong Kong. In general, all re-tagged colonies are in good condition. 5.6.3        The third Post-Translocation Monitoring was performed on 3 December 2018 for the Recipient Site R3 (Figure 5.3) and the weather conditions were summarized in Table 5.9. Seven (7) translocated and nine (9) natural hard coral colonies were remained to monitor after the typhoon Mangkhut. The general health conditions (size, condition, mortality, bleaching and sediment) at Recipient Site were recorded and summarized in Table 5.13 and Table 5.14 respectively. Photos of each tagged corals colonies were taken and shown in Photo Plates 5.2 and 5.3.

Table 5.9 Weather Condition for the Re-tagging Coral Colonies at Recipient Site R3

Date	Condition	Average Underwater Visibility
3 December 2018	-        North force 2 to 3 -        Sunny period	Less than 0.5m

5.6.4        The REA surveys were performed on 3 December 2018 at Indirect Impact Site and the weather condition was summarized in Table 5.10.

Table 5.10        Weather condition for the REA survey

Date	Condition	Average Underwater Visibility
3 December 2018	-        North force 2 to 3 -        Sunny period	Less than 0.5m

5.6.5        A 100m transect was laid at the Indirect Impact site (Figure 5.4). GPS coordinates of REA Transect starting and ending points, maximum depth and bottom substrate of the site were summarized in Table 5.11.

Table 5.11        GPS coordinates of REA Transect Starting and Ending points, maximum depth and bottom substrate at Indirect Impact Site

Site	GPS Location at Starting Point	GPS Location at Ending Point	Max. Depth	Bottom Substrate
Indirect Impact Site	E 113°59’08.19”	E 113°59’11,511”	3.5 m	Natural Bedrock and Boulders
	N 22°11’29.09”	N 22°11’28.45”

 

Table 5.12        Sizes, Condition, Mortality, Bleaching and Sediment of 4 Re-tagged Natural Coral Colonies at Control Site

Tag #	Species	Size (cm) – Max. Diameter	Condition	Mortality (%)	Bleaching (%)	Sediment (%)
2R	Goniopora stutchburyi	10	Good	0	0	0
5R	Goniopora stutchburyi	18	Good	0	0	0
7R	Coscinaraea sp.	15	Good	0	0	0
10R	Goniopora stutchburyi	20	Good	0	0	0

 

 

Table 5.13        Sizes, Condition, Mortality, Bleaching and Sediment of 7 Translocated Coral Colonies at Recipient Site for 3rd Post-Translocation Coral Monitoring

Coral #	Species	Size (cm) – Max. Diameter/ Height	Mortality (%)		Bleaching (%)		Sediment (%)
			Baseline	3-Dec	Baseline	3-Dec	Baseline	3-Dec
1	Psammocora superficialis	35	0	15	0	0	0	0
2	Psammocora superficialis	N/A	35	N/A	0	N/A	0	N/A
3	Psammocora superficialis	N/A	0	N/A	0	N/A	0	N/A
4	Turbinaria peltata	9	0	10	0	0	0	0
5	Goniopora stutchburyi	N/A	0	N/A	0	N/A	0	N/A
6	Psammocora superficialis	26	0	15	0	0	0	0
7	Psammocora superficialis	23	0	5	0	0	5	0
8	Psammocora superficialis	N/A	0	N/A	0	N/A	0	N/A
9	Goniopora stutchburyi	N/A	0	N/A	0	N/A	0	N/A
10	Coscinaraea n sp.	21	0	5	0	0	1	0
11	Psammocora superficialis	13	0	0	0	0	0	0
12	Psammocora superficialis	N/A	0	N/A	0	N/A	0	N/A
13	Psammocora superficialis	N/A	0	N/A	0	N/A	0	N/A
14	Psammocora superficialis	N/A	0	N/A	0	NA	0	N/A
15	Goniopora stutchburyi	N/A	0	N/A	0	N/A	0	N/A
16	Psammocora superficialis	26	0	10	0	N/A	0	0

*N/A: Non Applicable as coral colonies were missing.

 

Table 5.14        Sizes, Condition, Mortality, Bleaching and Sediment of 9 Natural Control Coral Colonies at Recipient Site for 3rd Post-Translocation Coral Monitoring

Coral #	Species	Size (cm) – Max. Diameter/ Height	Mortality (%)		Bleaching (%)		Sediment (%)
			Baseline	3-Dec	Baseline	3-Dec	Baseline	3-Dec
1	Coscinaraea n sp.	16	0	0	0	0	0	0
2	Psammocora superficialis	24	0	0	0	0	0	0
3	Psammocora superficialis	23	0	0	0	0	0	0
4	Coscinaraea n sp.	15	0	0	0	0	0	0
5	Cyphastrea serailia	42	0	0	0	0	0	0
6	Cyphastrea serailia	12	0	0	0	0	0	0
7	Cyphastrea serailia	46	0	0	0	0	0	0
8	Psammocora superficialis	21	0	0	0	0	0	0
9	Psammocora superficialis	19	0	0	0	0	0	0
10	Goniopora stutchburyi	N/A	0	N/A	0	N/A	0	N/A

*N/A: Non Applicable as coral colonies were missing.
Table 5.15        Ecological and Substratum Attributes of Indirect Impact Site

Ecological Attributes	Rank
Hard Corals	0.5
Dead Coral	0
Octocoral	0
Sea anemone beds	0
Dead Standing Corals	0
Other Benthos	1
Macroalgae	0
Substratum Attributes	Rank
Bedrock	5
Boulders (diameter >50cm)	4
Cobbles (diameter <50cm)	0
Rubble (dead corals)	0
Sand with gravel	0
Mud & Silt	0

 

Table 5.16        Taxon Abundance of Indirect Impact Site

Benthic Communities	Abundance in the Site
Corals
Goniopora stutchburyi	1
Psammocora superficialis	1
Favites chinensis	1
Other Benthos
Thais luteostoma	1
Septifer virgatus	1
Anthocidaris crassispina	1

 

 

Photo Plate 5.1 Re-tagged Corals at Control Site

Tag #	3 December 2018
#2R
#5R
#7R
#10R

Photo Plate 5.2 Seven (7) Translocated Corals at Recipient Site

Coral #01	Coral #04
Coral #06	Coral #07
Coral #10	Coral #11
Coral #16

Photo Plate 5.3 Nine (9) Natural Control Corals at Recipient Site

Coral #01	Coral #02
Coral #03	Coral #04
Coral #05	Coral #06
Coral #07	Coral #08
	Missing
Coral #09	Coral #10

 

Photo Plate 5.4 Representative photo records during the REA survey

 

5.6.6        The first post-translocation coral monitoring was carried out on 26 June 2018. Sixteen (16) movable hard coral colonies were monitored at the recipient site R3. However, 9 translocated coral colonies were missing during the monitoring survey and only 7 left.  The remaining seven translocated coral colonies also showed an increased mortality from 5% to 15%. The missing colonies probably were swept away by the strong wave action caused by the Super Typhoon Mangkhut hitting Hong Kong on 15th and 16th September 2018. 5.6.7        Nine (9) remaining natural hard coral colonies were monitoring at the recipient site as control and 1 coral colony was missing during the monitoring survey. Similar to the translocated coral colonies, the missing tagged coral colony probably was swept away by the strong wave action caused by the Super Typhoon Mangkhut hitting Hong Kong on 15th and 16th September 2018. 5.6.8        The mortality of 2 translocated coral colonies had reached to 15%. Since 9 translocated coral colonies were missing due to the hitting of super typhoon Mangkhut in mid-September 2018, only 12.5% of translocated coral colonies had reached to 15% mortality, thus the AL/LL limit level for post-translocation coral monitoring in Table 5.7 was not exceeded. 5.6.9        The REA survey was carried out in on 3 December 2018 in the Indirect Impact Site. Only three species of hard coral were recorded during the survey and most of them are in fair condition after the typhoon. Some common coral colonies still appeared in shallow water which are suitable for re-tagging during the construction phase monitoring. All the coral colonies recorded along the transect were all common hard coral species in Hong Kong (Photo Plate 5.4). 5.6.10     From the REA survey, the monitoring site was mainly composed of natural bedrock and big boulders down to 3.5 meters water depth along the surveyed route (Table 5.15). Scattered hard coral colonies were recorded along the REA transect and only 3 species of hard coral were recorded. The abundance of hard coral species recorded along the transect was shown in Table 5.16. Besides, some invertebrates such as common sea snail: Thais luteostoma, Sea urchins: Anthocidaris crassispina and common green mussel: Septifer virgatus were found at the surface of the boulders. 5.6.11     This site supported a sparse and patchy cover (<1%) of hard corals. All the recorded coral colonies grow on the big boulders and bedrock surfaces. All hard coral colonies recorded along the transect were common hard coral species in Hong Kong water and in fair health condition. 5.6.12     Post-translocation monitoring survey will be continued to monitor the remaining tagged coral colonies for both translocated coral and natural coral colonies. 5.6.13     Construction phase monitoring survey will be carried out to audit any effect to the health of tagged coral colonies during the whole construction period at both sites.
5.6.14      

6.        Marine Mammal

6          

6.1         Monitoring Requirements 6.1.1        The marine mammal monitoring programme would focus on Finless Porpoise, as the study area near Shek Kwu Chau has been identified as a hotspot for this species, while the Chinese White Dolphins rarely occurred there in the past. 6.1.2        The monitoring would verify the predicted impacts on marine mammals, and examine whether the mitigation measures recommended in the EIA report have been effectively implemented to protect marine mammals from negative impacts from construction activities. 6.1.3        The Vessel-based Line-transect Survey, the Passive Acoustic Monitoring and the Land-based Theodolite Tracking will be conducted to provide systematic, quantitative measurements of occurrence, encounter rate, habitat use, movement and behavioural patterns of marine mammals within or near the Project Area during construction and operational phases. 6.1.4        The mammal monitoring works during construction consist of the following three survey methods:

·          Vessel-based Line-transect Survey – to monitor the occurrence of Finless Porpoises (and Chinese White Dolphins) in the study area during construction works, by comparing with the findings of the pre-construction marine mammal monitoring;

·          Passive Acoustic Monitoring – to study the usage of the Project Area and two control sites in South Lantau Waters by Finless Porpoise during construction works, in reference with the baseline findings of the pre-construction marine mammal monitoring; and

·          Land-based Theodolite Tracking – to study the movement and behavioral pattern of Finless Porpoise within and around the Project Area during construction works.

6.1.5        The marine mammal observation works of Marine Mammal Exclusion Zone (MMEZ) and Marine Mammal Watching as two of the specific mitigation measures recommended in the approved EIA report shall be fully and properly implemented for the Project to minimize disturbance on Finless Porpoise during construction and operational phases. 6.2         Survey Methods 6.2.1        Vessel-based Line-transect Survey For the vessel-based marine mammal surveys, the monitoring team adopted the standard line-transect method (Buckland et al. 2001) as same as that adopted during the EIA study and pre-construction phase monitoring to allow fair comparison of marine mammal monitoring results. Eight transect lines are set at Southeast Lantau survey area, including Shek Kwu Chau, waters between Shek Kwu Chau and the Soko Islands, inshore waters of Lantau Island (e.g. Pui O Wan) as well as southwest corner of Cheung Chau as shown in Figure 6.1 below:

Figure 6.1 Line Transects for Marine Mammal Surveys

The surveys should cover all 4 seasons in order to take natural fluctuation and seasonal variations into account for data analysis of distribution, encounter rate, density and habitat use of both porpoises and dolphins (if any).  In comparison to the baseline monitoring results, results from the analysed construction phase monitoring data would allow the detection of any changes of their usage of habitat, in response to the scheduled construction works. The monitoring surveys shall be conducted throughout the construction phase involving marine construction work with the frequency shown in Table 6.1 below:

 Table 6.1 Vessel-based Line-transect Survey Frequency

Season	Months	Frequency
Peak Season	December, January, February, March, April & May	Twice per month
Non-peak Season	June, July, August, September, October & November	Once per month

For each vessel survey, a 15-m inboard vessel with an open upper deck (about 4.5 m above water surface) would be used to make observations from the flying bridge area. Two experienced marine mammal observers (a data recorder and a primary observer) would make up the on-effort survey team, and the survey vessel would transit different transect lines at a constant speed of 13-15 km per hour. The data recorder shall search with unaided eyes and fill out the datasheets, while the primary observer shall search for dolphins and porpoises continuously through 7 x 50 marine binoculars. Both observers shall search the sea ahead of the vessel, between 270o and 90o (in relation to the bow, which is defined as 0o). Two additional experienced observers shall be 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 shall be experienced in small cetacean survey techniques and identifying local cetacean species with extensive training by marine mammal specialist of the ET During on-effort survey periods, the survey team shall record effort data including time, position (latitude and longitude), weather conditions (Beaufort sea state and visibility), and distance travelled in each series (a continuous period of search effort) with the assistance of a handheld GPS (Garmin eTrex Legend). Data including time, position and vessel speed would also be automatically and continuously logged by handheld GPS throughout the entire survey for subsequent review. When porpoises or dolphins are sighted, the survey team shall end the survey effort, and immediately record the initial sighting distance and angle of the porpoise or dolphin group from the survey vessel, as well as the sighting time and position. Then the research vessel shall be diverted from its course to approach the animals for species identification, group size estimation, assessment of group composition, behavioural observations, and collection of identification photos (feasible only for Chinese White Dolphin). The perpendicular distance (PSD) of the porpoise or dolphin group to the transect line would then be calculated from the initial sighting distance and angle, which shall be used in the line-transect analysis for density and abundance estimation. The line-transect survey data shall be integrated with a Geographic Information System (GIS) to visualize and interpret different spatial and temporal patterns of porpoise and dolphin distribution using their sighting positions collected from vessel surveys. Location data of porpoise and dolphin groups would be plotted on map layers of Hong Kong using a desktop GIS (e.g. ArcView© 3.1) to examine their distribution patterns in details. The encounter rate could be used as an indicator to determine areas or time periods of importance to porpoises within the study area. For encounter rate analysis of finless porpoises, only survey data collected under Beaufort 2 or below condition would be used for encounter rate analysis. To take into account of the variations of survey effort across different sections within survey area, the quantitative grid analysis of habitat use would be conducted to examine finless porpoise usage among 1-km2 grids within the Southeast Lantau survey area. For the grid analysis, SPSE (sighting density) and DPSE (porpoise density) values would be deduced for evaluation on level of porpoise usage. First, positions of on-effort porpoise sightings from the study period are plotted onto 68 grids (1 km x 1 km each) within the survey area. Sighting density grids and porpoise density grids shall then be normalized with the amount of survey effort conducted within each grid. The total amount of survey effort spent on each grid shall be calculated by examining the survey coverage on each line-transect survey to determine how many times the grid had been surveyed during study period. With the amount of survey effort calculated for each grid, the sighting density and porpoise density of each grid shall be further normalized (i.e. divided by the unit of survey effort). The newly-derived unit for sighting density was termed SPSE, representing the number of on-effort sightings per 100 units of survey effort. In addition, the derived unit for actual porpoise density was termed DPSE, representing the number of dolphins/porpoise per 100 units of survey effort. Among the 1-km2 grids that were partially covered by land, the percentage of sea area was calculated using GIS tools, and their SPSE and DPSE values were adjusted accordingly. The following formulae shall be used to estimate SPSE and DPSE in each 1-km2 grid within the study area:

SPSE = ((S / E) x 100) / SA%

DPSE = ((D / E) x 100) / SA%

 

where         S = total number of on-effort sightings

D = total number of dolphins/porpoises from on-effort sightings

E = total number of units of survey effort

SA% = percentage of sea area   

6.2.2        Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) The PAM aims to study the usage of an area by Finless Porpoise by using an array of automated static porpoise detectors (e.g. C-POD) which would be deployed at different locations to detect the unique ultra-high frequency sounds produced by Finless Porpoise. During the construction period, the PAM survey will be conducted including placement of two passive porpoise detectors outside the Project Area as control site (i.e. within Pui O Wan and to the south of Tai A Chau) and one porpoise detector within the Project Area (i.e. near Shek Kwu Chau) as shown in Figure 6.2 below.

Figure 6.2 Locations of Passive Acoustic Monitoring

6.2.3        These three detectors will be deployed on-site to carry out 24-hours monitoring for a period listed as Table 6.2 below during the construction phase.

Table 6.2 PAM Deployment Period

Season	Months	Deployment Period
Peak Season	December, January, February, March, April or May	At least 30 days during the peak months of porpoise occurrence in South Lantau waters

The automated static porpoise detectors shall detect the presence and number of finless porpoise and Chinese White Dolphins respectively over the deployment period, with the false signal such as boat sonar and sediment transport noise distinguished and filtered out. The detectors shall be deployed and retrieved by professional dive team on the seabed of the three selected location shown in Figure 6.2. During each deployment, the C-POD unit serial numbers as well as the time and date of deployments shall be recorded.  Information including the GPS positions and water depth at each of the deployment locations shall also be obtained. The diel patterns (i.e. 24-hour activity pattern) of finless porpoise occurrence among the three sites at Shek Kwu Chau, Tai A Chau and Pui O Wan shall be analyzed.  Peaks and troughs of finless porpoise occurrence per hour of day would be identified and compared with the results obtained from pre-construction monitoring. 6.2.4        Land-based Theodolite Tracking The Land-based Theodolite Tracking study would use the same station as in the AFCD monitoring study(same as the baseline monitoring location), which is situated at the southwest side of Shek Kwu Chau (GPS position: 22o11.47’ N and 113o59.33’ E) as shown in below Figure 6.3. The station was selected based on its height above sea level (at least 20 metres), close proximity to shore, and relatively unobstructed views of the entire Project Area to the southwest of Shek Kwu Chau. The height of the Shek Kwu Chau Station established by the HKCRP team is 74.6 m high at mean low water, and only a few hundred metres to the IWMF reclamation site, which is ideal for the purpose for the present behavioural and movement monitoring of finless porpoises as well during construction phase considering there as an un-obstructed vantage point at a height above the Project Site.

Figure 6.3 Locations of Land-based Theodolite Tracking

During the construction phase, Land-based Theodolite Tracking will be carried out for approximately six hours of tracking for each day of field work for a period listed as Table 6.3 below, preferably at the initial stage of the construction period (i.e. December 2018 to May 2019).

Table 6.3 Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey Period

Season	Months	Survey Period
Peak Season	December, January, February, March, April or May	30 days during the peak months of porpoise occurrence in South Lantau waters

The monitoring period for land-based theodolite tracking will be proposed to be overlapped with the  PAM. The monitoring team consists of one experienced theodolite operator and at least two field observers for assistance. To conduct theodolite tracking, our observers will search systematically for Finless Porpoise using the unaided eye and 7 x 50 handheld binoculars on each survey day throughout the study area. When an individual or group of porpoises is located, a theodolite tracking session will be initiated and focal follow methods will be used to track the porpoise(s). Behavioural state data (i.e. resting, milling, travelling, feeding and socializing) shall also be recorded every 5 minutes for the focal individual or group. Positions of porpoises and boats shall be measured using a digital theodolite connected to a laptop computer. This tracking survey will be conducted during the peak season between December 2018 and May 2019 for 30 surveys spanning across 15-16 weeks during the peak season to provide good temporal coverage during the initial stage of the construction period. 6.3         Specific Mitigation Measures 6.3.1        Monitored exclusion zones During the installation/re-installation/relocation process of floating type silt curtains, in order to avoid the accidental entrance and entrapment of marine mammals within the silt curtains, a monitored exclusion zone of 250 m radius from silt curtain should be implemented.  The exclusion zone should be closely monitored by an experienced marine mammal observer (MMO) for at least 30 minutes before the start of installation/re-installation/relocation process. If a marine mammal is noted within the exclusion zone, all marine works should stop immediately and remain idle for 30 minutes, or until the exclusion zone is free from marine mammals. The experienced marine mammal observer should be well trained to detect marine mammals. Binoculars should be used to search the exclusion zone from an elevated platform with unobstructed visibility. The marine mammal observer(s) shall be independent of the construction contractor and shall form part of the Environmental Team and have the power to call-off construction activities. According to the Condition 2.25 of the FEP, MMEZ should be implemented during the installation/re-installation/relocation process of floating type silt curtains in order to avoid the accidental entrance and entrapment of marine mammals within the silt curtains. Also, marine construction works expected to produce underwater acoustic disturbance as per Condition 2.27 of the FEP, especially within December and May, would require the implementation of MMEZ, which currently all those specific construction activities have been replaced by less acoustically disturbing construction methods such as Deep Cement Mixing (DCM) and Precast Concrete Blocks Installation as discussed in Section 5.3 of the Detailed Monitoring Programme on Finless Porpoise, however, MMEZ would also be implemented for precautionary purpose for DCM works. A MMEZ with 250 m distance from the boundary of a work area shall be established during the above situation. A typical MMEZ is indicated in Figure 6.4 for reference. The MMEZ serves as a monitoring approach to provide appropriate and immediate actions once finless porpoise or Chinese White Dolphin is sighted within the MMEZ. All MMEZ will be monitored by competent Marine Mammal Observers (MMOs) to be provided by the Environmental Team (ET) for the IWMF and trained by the Marine Mammal Monitoring Specialist of the ET who is independent from JV. Prior to the commencement of construction activity, our MMOs shall ensure the boundary of a marine work area and setting up of the MMEZ for the work area and get access to the monitoring location on a barge or a lookout point where there is no obstructed views for monitoring the MMEZ during the construction activity. The MMEZ shall be scanned thoroughly by a MMO for any presence of marine mammal e.g. finless porpoise for an initial period of 30 minutes. Construction activity shall only be commenced after the MMO has confirmed that the MMEZ is clear of the marine mammal for the initial period of 30 minutes. The MMO shall then inform the construction superintendent through mobile phone or handheld transceivers to certify the commencement of construction activity. The MMEZ monitoring shall be carried on throughout the period for all active construction activities requiring implementation of MMEZ. When any mammal marine, e.g. Finless Porpoise, is detected by the MMO within the MMEZ during construction, the MMO shall inform the construction superintendent immediately through mobile phone or handheld transceivers to cease construction activity within the MMEZ. Construction activity shall not be re-commenced until the MMO confirms that the MMEZ is continuously clear of marine mammal for a period of 30 minutes. The MMO shall then inform the construction superintendent through mobile phone or handheld transceivers to certify the re-commencement of construction activity. As there could be a number of Contractors working at the same time within a work area for the IWMF project, a full contact list of MMEZ monitoring team members of the ET and the relevant responsible construction superintendents of the Contractor at the site shall be prepared, updated regularly and circulated to all parties involved in the MMEZ monitoring. With a full contact list, our MMOs shall be able to find out the contacts of corresponding persons in case of marine mammal sighting within and near the MMEZ or emergent occurrence of any unpredictable impact on marine mammal. If a marine mammal is still observed in close vicinity but outside the MMEZ, the MMO shall inform the construction superintendent about the presence of marine mammal. The MMO shall remain in position and closely observe the movement of the marine mammal as well as searching for the appearance of any other marine mammal within the MMEZ. No matter the marine mammal is observed within or in close vicinity but outside the MMEZ, the construction superintendent or relevant persons shall inform all vessel captains involved in construction activities around the MMEZ to pay special attention of the presence of the marine mammal in order to reduce chance of collision with them. In case of injury or live-stranded marine mammal being found within the MMEZ, the marine mammal observer shall immediately inform the construction superintendent to suspend construction activities within the works area and contact AFCD through “1823” marine mammal stranding hotline. 6.3.2        Marine mammal watching plan Upon the completion of silt curtain installation/re-installation/relocation, all marine works would be conducted within a fully enclosed environment within the silt curtain. Hence exclusion zone monitoring would no longer be required.  Subsequently, a marine mammal watching plan would be implemented. Before commencement of dredging/sand blanket laying work at each designated area, a trained MMO shall check whether position frame silt curtains are ready, well prepared and operated without any obvious damage. Also, the MMO shall confirm the presence of the relevant frontline staff of the main contractor or its sub-contractors and engineers on board to ensure the effective communication, coordination and implementation of the response plan in relation to any incidents involving marine mammals within the waters surrounded by the position frame type silt curtains and the work areas. Also, there are lookout points at an elevated level on each barge, clear and safe access at the edges of the derrick lighter/ flag-top barge for inspection during dredging/sand blanket laying works, provision of sufficient lighting is required if working at night. During the operation, the inspection will be conducted daily. The MMO will walk along the edge of derrick lighter (DL) and flag-top barge (FB) along the position frame silt curtain or proper location without obstacles where appropriate to inspect the position frame silt curtain with naked eyes, the MMO will check that the position frame silt curtains are maintained in the correct positions with no obvious defects / entanglement and there is no observable muddy water passing through the position frame silt curtain system. Any floating refuse trapped by the silt curtain shall be removed as part of the regular inspection. For night inspection, spotlight will be used to provide sufficient brightness to assist the inspection in dark condition. For the localized silt curtain re-deployment, MMO will conduct visual inspection to confirm that there is no presence of marine mammal within the localized silt curtain. Visual inspection will be conducted every an hour by MMO till confirming that there is not any marine mammal observed in the surrounding area of the frame type silt curtain. The duration will be subject to various conditions, e.g. weather or angle of observation. The works can only commence after confirming that the surrounding waters of the localized silt curtains has not contain any marine mammal. Thereafter, frontline staff, i.e. foremen, site agent, superintendents and engineers will assist our MMO in implementing the plan from the active work fronts within the waters surrounded by the silt curtains throughout the work period. The MMO will conduct regular check every 60 minutes to observe the presence of any marine mammal around the localized silt curtain or being trapped by the localized silt curtain. The MMOs will also check if the localized silt curtains are in correct positions.. The MMO shall fill up our Marine Mammal Sighting Record Sheet. After inspection, those records should be kept properly and submitted to the project team. In case there is any marine mammal being found, the MMO should carry out the response actions and communicate with relevant parties to stop and then resume work after the discovered marine mammal leaves. After lifting up and mobilization of silt curtain, the MMO will repeat the procedures of regular and visual inspection until the end of the construction works. Each lookout point will have an unobstructed view to waters around the DL and FB. The MMO will move around the DL and FB to establish a clear and unobstructed view as much as they can without compromising the safety concern. When appropriate, the lookout point can be replaced by a proper location if unobstructed view can be assured. 6.4         Results and Observations 6.4.1        Vessel-based Line-transect Survey The monthly survey was conducted on 6 and 20 December 2018. As this is the designated peak season (December - May), two surveys were completed. A total on effort (transects only) survey length of 79.5 km was completed, 78.6 km at Beaufort Sea State 2 or better (Table 6.4). Five finless porpoise sightings were recorded, three (3) “on effort” and two (2) while transiting between transect lines (referred to as secondary line in AFCD reports (Table 6.5, Figure 6.5).

Table 6.4 Summary of Vessel-based Line-transect Survey Effort

Date	Area*	Beaufort	Effort (km)	Season	Vessel	Effort Type**
06-12-18	SEL	1	8.9	WINTER	SMRUHK	P
06-12-18	SEL	2	29.9	WINTER	SMRUHK	P
06-12-18	SEL	3	0.9	WINTER	SMRUHK	P
20-12-18	SEL	0	0.8	WINTER	SMRUHK	P
20-12-18	SEL	1	29.4	WINTER	SMRUHK	P
20-12-18	SEL	2	9.6	WINTER	SMRUHK	P

*         As shown in Figure. 6.1

**       P (from AFCD) denotes the ON EFFORT survey on the transect line, not the adjoining passages

 

Table 6.5 Sightings recorded during December 2018 Vessel-based Line-transect Survey

Date	Species	Sighting No.	Time	Group Size	PSD	Behaviour	Latitude	Longitude	Area	Effort Type	Season
06-12-18	Finless Porpoise	2	11:30	1	N/A	Travel	22.1645	113.9681	SEL	IMPACT	WINTER
06-12-18	Finless Porpoise	3	12:37	2	3	Travel	22.1804	113.993	SEL	IMPACT	WINTER
20-12-18	Finless Porpoise	4	01:38	1	N/A	Unknown	22.2127	113.9557	SEL	IMPACT	WINTER
20-12-18	Finless Porpoise	5	11:26	2	52	Travel	22.2097	113.9541	SEL	IMPACT	WINTER
20-12-18	Finless Porpoise	6	12:53	1	65	Travel	22.1724	113.9853	SEL	IMPACT	WINTER

Figure 6.5         Location of sightings recorded during December 2018 Vessel-based Line-transect Survey

Figure 6.6        Photo taken of sighting recorded during December 2018 Vessel-based Line-transect Survey

A review of the long term AFCD marine mammal monitoring programme, the EIA and the pre-construction baseline monitoring report for this project was conducted. Both the EIA and the pre-construction baseline monitoring were conducted during the peak porpoise months (Dec 2008 to May 2009 and Feb-April 2018, respectively). Only the AFCD long term monitoring data could be compared directly to the December 2018 Impact Survey results.   A review of the Beaufort Sea state December survey conditions between 2009 and 2017 (only data available from AFCD at time of writing; (AFCD 20181; 20172; 20163; 20154; 20145; 20136; 20127; 20118; 20109)) show that between 33.1% and 100% of survey effort has been conducted at Beaufort Sea State 2 or better in the past. For this project in December 2018, 98.9% of the survey was conducted at Beaufort Sea State 2 or better and, as such, survey conditions in December 2018 were within the % limits of previous AFCD surveys. A review of all the porpoise sightings in the survey area for December between 2009-2017 indicate that there are fluctuations between the numbers of sightings usually recorded in December. For all weather conditions, and for the nine years data available, 2 years recorded no (0) sightings (2011 and 2012),2 years recorded 1 sighting (2010, 2015), 2 years recorded two (2) sightings (2016, 2017), 1 year recorded three (3) sightings (2013), 1 year recorded four (4) sightings (2009) and 1 year recorded five (5) sightings (2014). Effort varied considerably between years and the average number of sightings (per km) varied between 0 and 0.06 km-1. There is no trend in encounter rates recorded by the AFCD long term monitoring programme, i.e., the highest encounter rate was recorded in 2009 and 2014 at 0.06 sightings km-1 (4 and 5 sightings, respectively), with encounter rates of 0 sightings km-1, in 2011 and 2012. For December 2018, an encounter rate of 0.05 sightings km-1 is calculated, which is slightly less than the highest encounter rate recorded for this month previously, with reference to the AFCD long term marine mammal monitoring data (and higher than the December average 0.03 sightings km-1). It must be highlighted that the very small survey area conducted for this monitoring typically result in 0 to 1 sightings per survey. It is difficult to draw conclusions with regards to impacts on marine mammals as predicted in the EIA and the effectiveness of project mitigation measures during the initial phase of construction activities when porpoise sightings are typically absent or very low during the survey month. As surveys continue for this project, data shall be constantly re-evaluated across survey months to discern trends and impacts, if any. It is noted that an increase in sightings in the month of December is in agreement with the trend detailed in AFCD long term monitoring data. 6.4.2        PAM and Land-based Theodolite Tracking These tracking surveys will be conducted during the peak season between December 2018 and May 2019 for 30 surveys during the peak season to provide good temporal coverage during the initial stage of the construction period. 6.4.3        Specific Mitigation Measures Silt curtains were deployed for sand blanket laying works and DCM trial during the reporting period. Teams of two MMO were on duty for continuous monitoring of the Marine Mammal Exclusion Zone (MMEZ) for DCM works, cluster MMEZ installation/re-installation/relocation process of silt curtains, and the marine mammal trapping checking and silt curtains inspection in accordance with the Detailed Monitoring Programme of Finless Porpoise and Marine Mammal Watching Plan respectively. Trainings for the MMO were provided by the ET prior to the aforementioned works, with a cumulative total of 63 individuals being trained and the training records kept by the ET. From the Marine Mammal observation records and MMEZ monitoring log records, sightings of Finless Porpoise were observed within the cluster MMEZ on 29 December 2018 during this reporting month. The sightings of finless porpoise were first seen at 08:25 and last seen 08:55 on 29 December 2018. After the first observation of finless porpoise by MMO, all construction activities were ceased until 09:25 which was 30 minutes later the last seen of finless porpoise.

 

6.4.4        References

1.      Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) 2018. Annual Marine Mammal Monitoring Programme April 2017-March 2018) The Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Government of the Hong Kong SAR.

http://www.afcd.gov.hk/english/conservation/con_mar/con_mar_chi/con_mar_chi_chi/con_mar_chi_chi.html

 

2.      Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) 2017. Annual Marine Mammal Monitoring Programme April 2016-March 2017) The Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Government of the Hong Kong SAR.

http://www.afcd.gov.hk/english/conservation/con_mar/con_mar_chi/con_mar_chi_chi/con_mar_chi_chi.html

 

3.      Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) 2016. Annual Marine Mammal Monitoring Programme April 2015-March 2016) The Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Government of the Hong Kong SAR.

http://www.afcd.gov.hk/english/conservation/con_mar/con_mar_chi/con_mar_chi_chi/con_mar_chi_chi.html

 

4.      Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) 2015. Annual Marine Mammal Monitoring Programme April 2014-March 2015) The Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Government of the Hong Kong SAR.

http://www.afcd.gov.hk/english/conservation/con_mar/con_mar_chi/con_mar_chi_chi/con_mar_chi_chi.html

 

5.      Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) 2014. Annual Marine Mammal Monitoring Programme April 2013-March 2014) The Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Government of the Hong Kong SAR.

http://www.afcd.gov.hk/english/conservation/con_mar/con_mar_chi/con_mar_chi_chi/con_mar_chi_chi.html

 

6.      Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) 2013. Annual Marine Mammal Monitoring Programme April 2012-March 2013) The Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Government of the Hong Kong SAR.

http://www.afcd.gov.hk/english/conservation/con_mar/con_mar_chi/con_mar_chi_chi/con_mar_chi_chi.html

 

7.      Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) 2012. Annual Marine Mammal Monitoring Programme April 2011-March 2012) The Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Government of the Hong Kong SAR.

http://www.afcd.gov.hk/english/conservation/con_mar/con_mar_chi/con_mar_chi_chi/con_mar_chi_chi.html

 

8.      Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) 2011. Annual Marine Mammal Monitoring Programme April 2010-March 2011) The Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Government of the Hong Kong SAR.

http://www.afcd.gov.hk/english/conservation/con_mar/con_mar_chi/con_mar_chi_chi/con_mar_chi_chi.html

 

9.      Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) 2010. Annual Marine Mammal Monitoring Programme April 2009-March 2010) The Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Government of the Hong Kong SAR.

http://www.afcd.gov.hk/english/conservation/con_mar/con_mar_chi/con_mar_chi_chi/con_mar_chi_chi.html