Revision History

 

Contents

 

1.    Basic Project Information. 7

2.    Marine Water Quality Monitoring. 17

3.    Noise Monitoring. 29

4.    Waste. 37

5.    Coral 39

6.    Marine Mammal 45

7.    White-Bellied Sea Eagle. 60

8.    Summary of Monitoring Exceedance, Complaints, Notification of Summons and Prosecutions  63

9.    EM&A Site Inspection. 65

10.  Future Key Issues. 66

11.  Conclusion and Recommendations. 68

 

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 22nd 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 April 2020 to 30 April 2020.

Summary of Main Works Undertaken & Key Mitigation Measures Implemented

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

·             Sand Blanket Laying

·             Cone Penetration Test

·             DCM Installation Works

·             Coring of DCM cluster

·             Installation of Caisson

·             Dredging and Sediment Disposal

·             Installation of Prefabricated Vertical Drain

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

·             Water quality impact from DCM installation

·             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;

·             Installation process of silt curtain according to approved Silt Curtain Deployment Plan;

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

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

·             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);

·             Daily site audit and monitoring by ET during dredging work as stipulated in FEP Clause 2.21A;

·             Regulation on rate and means for dredging works as stipulated in FEP Clause 2.17 – 2.21 or the approved Supporting Document for Reviewing Dredging Rate and Filling Rate, whichever is applicable;

·             Storage, handling and disposal of dredged materials according to Dumping At Sea Ordinance (DASO);

·             Confirmation of the absence of silt content in the rock filling material and the filling work is properly conducted.

Summary of Exceedance & Investigation & Follow-up

A7.       The EM&A works for water quality, construction waste, 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 water quality, construction waste and WBSE monitoring was recorded in the reporting month.

A9.       No project-related Action Level & Limit Level exceedance was recorded from 1 April 2020 to 30 April 2020.

A10.   Weekly site inspections of the construction work by ET were carried out on 7, 14, 21, 28 April 2020 to audit the mitigation measures implementation status. Monthly joint site inspection was carried out on 21 April 2020 by ET and IEC. Observations were recorded in the site inspection checklists and provided to the contractors together with the appropriate follow-up actions where necessary.

Complaint Handling and Prosecution

A11.   No project-related environmental complaint was received during the reporting period.

A12.   Neither notifications of summons nor prosecution was received for the Project.

Reporting Change

A13.   There was no change to be reported that may affect the on-going EM&A programme.

Summary of Upcoming Key Issues and Key Mitigation Measures

A14.   Key activities anticipated in the next reporting period for the Project will include the following:

·         DCM Installation Works;

·         Coring of DCM samples;

·         Cone Penetration Test;

·         Dredging Works and Sediment Disposal;

·         Rock Filling of Foundation;

·         Leveling Works for the Foundation of Seawall and Berth Area;

·         Caisson Laying;

·         Rubble Mound Laying;

·         Installation of Prefabricated Vertical Drain;

·         Sand Blanket and Geotextile Laying. 

A15.   The major environmental impacts brought by the above construction activities will include:

·         Water quality impact from the DCM installation, laying of sand blanket and dredging operation;

·         Disturbance and possible trapping of Finless Porpoise by silt curtains.

A16.   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 DCM installation, sand blanket laying works and dredging works;

·             Installation process of floating silt curtain according to approved Silt Curtain Deployment Plan;

·             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;

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

·             Regulation on rate and means for dredging works as stipulated in FEP Clause 2.17 – 2.21 or the approved Supporting Document for Reviewing Dredging Rate and Filling Rate, whichever is applicable;

·             Daily site audit and monitoring by ET during dredging work as stipulated in FEP Clause 2.21A;

·             Storage, handling and disposal of dredged materials according to Dumping At Sea Ordinance (DASO);

·             Confirmation of the absence of silt content in the rock filling material and the filling work is properly conducted.

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        A further EP (FEP) (EP No.: FEP-02/429/2012/A) on Submarine Cable for the Development of the Project was granted to CLP Power Hong Kong Limited (CLP) on 17 Jan 2020. 1.1.4        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.

1.1.5        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.

1.2         The Reporting Scope 1.2.1        This is the 22nd Monthly EM&A Report for the Project which summarizes the key findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 April 2020 to 30 April 2020. 1.3         Project Organization 1.3.1        The Project Organization structure for Construction Phase is presented in Figure 1.3. 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	Jacky Leung	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
Breakwater	·      Sand blanket laying   ·      DCM installation works	·      On-going   ·      On-going
Reclamation area	·      Sand blanket laying	·      On-going
Seawall portion	·      DCM installation works   ·      Coring of DCM cluster   ·      Dredging and Sediment Disposal             ·      Cone Penetration Test   ·      Installation of caisson   ·      Installation of Prefabricated Vertical Drain	·      Completed   ·      On-going   ·      72,156.7042 m3 of dredged sediment in bulk quantity was dumped at relevant dumping site in total up to 30 April 2020.   ·      On-going   ·      On-going   ·      On-going

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	WT00033787-2019	22/08/2019 – 31/08/2024
Chemical Waste Producer Registration	WPN0017-933-K3301-01	Throughout the Contract
	WPN5213-961-K3301-02	Throughout the Contract
Construction Noise Permit (24 hours)	GW-RS0088-20	26/02/2020 – 25/08/2020
Billing Account for Disposal of Construction Waste	A/C No.:7029768	Throughout the Contract
Marine Dumping Permit	EP/MD/20-125	20/02/2020 – 19/08/2020

1.5.2        The status for all environmental aspects is presented in 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	Conducted from 11 February 2019 to 10 March 2019, to be resumed whenever DCM related parameter exceeded the AL/LL
Baseline Water Quality of wet season	Completed over 13 August 2018 to 7 September 2018
Noise
Baseline Monitoring	The baseline noise 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	Survey affected by missing of translocated and tagged coral colonies after typhoons in September 2018, completed on 28 March 2019.
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 Monitoring	On-going
Marine Mammal
Vessel-based Line-transect Survey Baseline Monitoring	The baseline marine mammal monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under FEP Condition 3.4
Vessel-based Line-transect Survey Impact Monitoring	On-going
Land-based Theodolite Tracking	30 days of theodolite surveys were started on 21 Feb 2019 and completed in May 2019.
Passive Acoustic Monitoring	30 days of PAM surveys were started on 1 May 2019 and completed until the end of May 2019.
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
Daily Site Audit and Monitoring for Dredging Work	On-going

1.5.3        Other than the EM&A work 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. Besides the above parameters, monitoring for Total Alkalinity, Current Velocity and Current Direction have been undertaken at all fourteen monitoring stations (including S1, S2A 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 (mg/L) ·         Current velocity (m/s) ·         Direction	General water quality monitoring and Regular DCM 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. As per the relocation proposal verified by IEC and approved by EPD, the monitoring location C1, C2, S2, F1 are relocated at C1A, C2A, S2A, F1A as equivalent points respectively to clear up the concerns from stakeholders.  

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. Monitoring station F1A is relocated for F1 at the Cheung Sha Wan Fish Culture Zone. S1, S2 and S3 are located at the northern landing site, midway and southern landing site of the proposed submarine cable, respectively. S2A is the relocated monitoring station of S2 which represents the midway landing site of the proposed submarine cable. S1, S2/S2A 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. Control stations C1A and C2A are relocated for C1 and C2 respectively as equivalent far field locations 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 (note i)	810850	806288
C1A	Relocated Control Station	812823	806300
C2	Control Station (note ii)	819421	808053
C2A	Relocated Control Station	818869	806808
F1	Cheung Sha Wan Fish Culture Zone (note iii)	818631	810966
F1A	Cheung Sha Wan Fish Culture Zone	819109	810924
S1	Submarine Cable Landing Site	814245	810335
S2	Submarine Cable (note iv)	815076	807747
S2A	Submarine Cable	814808	808515
S3	Submarine Cable Landing Site	816420	805621
CR1	Coral	817144	805597
CR2	Coral	816512	805882
M1	Tung Wan	821572	807799

Note:

               i.     Relocated to C1A in Mar 2019

             ii.     Relocated to C2A in Mar 2019

           iii.     Relocated to S2A in Mar 2019

           iv.     Relocated to F1A in Mar 2019

2.4         Impact Monitoring Methodology 2.4.1        General and regular DCM 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 would be discarded and further readings would be 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	pH 0.01	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 shall 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 shall be started within 24 hours after collection of the water samples.  Analytical methods and detection limits for SS and total alkalinity are presented 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 Horiba U-53
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 is a portable and weatherproof DO probe mounted on the multi-functional meter complete with cable and sensor and is powered by a DC supply 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 is a portable and weatherproof turbidity-measuring probe mounted on the multi-functional meter and is powered by a DC supply source. The instrument is equipped with a photoelectric sensor which is capable of measuring turbidity between 0 – 1000 NTU.

2.5.4        pH Measurement Instrument

The probe consists of a potentiometer, a glass electrode, a reference electrode and a temperature-compensating device mounted on the multi-functional meter.  It is 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 comprises 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 has 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 at all the eleven monitoring stations and regular DCM monitoring including monitoring stations S1, S2A and S3 were conducted on 1, 3, 6, 8, 10, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 27 & 29 April 2020. 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

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 is only conducted on DCM working day with reference to master programme in Appendix A.

      iii.            Monitoring at S1, S2A 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 mainly 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 April 2020, none of the General & Regular DCM water quality monitoring results obtained had exceeded Action Level and Limit Level. 2.8.4        Details of the exceedance are presented in Section 8. 2.8.5        Mitigation measures minimizing the adverse impacts on water implemented 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 noise 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 hours on normal weekdays. 3.1.3        In accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual, additional weekly impact monitoring should be carried out during respective restricted hours period (1900 – 0700 hours) if the construction works were conducted at evening and night time. Additional weekly noise monitoring was conducted once per week in the form of 5-minutes measurements Leq, L10 and L90 levels recorded at each monitoring station between 1900 and 0700 hours as well as public holidays and Sundays. 3.2         Noise Monitoring Parameters, Time, Frequency 3.2.1        Impact noise monitoring was conducted weekly in the reporting period between 0700-1900 hours on normal weekdays. Additional impact noise monitoring was conducted weekly in the reporting period between 1900-0700 hours on all days as well as public holidays and Sundays. 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. Leq 5mins was used as the monitoring parameter for the time period between 1900 and 0700 hours as well as public holidays and Sundays. Table 3.1 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and duration of the impact noise monitoring and additional 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	Day time: 0700-1900 hrs (during normal weekdays)	Once per week Leq 5min/Leq 30min (average of 6 consecutive Leq 5min)	Leq, L10 & L90
	Evening time: 1900-2300 hrs (including normal weekdays, also public holidays and Sundays)	Once per week Leq 5min (3 sets of Leq 5min)	Leq, L10 & L90
	Night time: 2300-0700 hrs (including normal weekdays, also public holidays and Sundays)	Once per week Leq 5min (3 sets of Leq 5min)	Leq, L10 & L90
Alternative location (MA)	Day time: 0700-1900 hrs (during normal weekdays)	Once per week until further notification Leq 5min/Leq 30min (average of 6 consecutive Leq 5min)	Leq, L10 & L90
	Evening time: 1900-2300 hrs (including normal weekdays, also public holidays and Sundays)	Once per week until further notification Leq 5min (3 sets of Leq 5min)	Leq, L10 & L90
	Night time: 2300-0700 hrs (including normal weekdays, also public holidays and Sundays)	Once per week until further notification Leq 5min (3 sets of Leq 5min)	Leq, L10 & L90

3.3         Noise Monitoring Locations 3.3.1        Three noise monitoring locations for impact monitoring and additional 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        Based on the concern of novel coronavirus since Feb 2020, the Society for the Aid and Rehabilitation of Drug Abusers (SARDA) issued a notice on rejection of access for noise monitoring practice effective from 31 Jan 2020. Hence, the weekly noise monitoring at the selected noise sensitive receivers (M1, M2 & M3) as per the monitoring schedule were suspended starting from February 2020. 3.3.4        Considering the absence of noise sensitive receivers except SARDA in close proximity of the Project site. ET proposed and IEC agreed to perform the alternative noise monitoring at the farthest barge (MA) available “i.e. FTB-17 or equivalent barge subject to site condition” outside the site boundary with no construction works as shown in Figure 3.2 below.

Figure 3.2 Proposed alternative noise monitoring location at barge FTB-17 at Shek Kwu Chau

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
MA	-	The farthest barge outside the site boundary with no construction works subject to site condition	-	Free field

Note (*): Temporary suspended due to denied access from SARDA 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 hours 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        At each designated monitoring location, measurements of three 5-minutes A-weighted equivalent sound pressure level [“Leq 5min”] was carried out between 1900 and 0700 hours for evening time and night time measurements. 3.4.3        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   If there is a problem with the access to the normal monitoring position, an alternative may be chosen and appropriate correction would be applied according to acoustic principle when necessary. For reference, +3 dB(A) correction would be made for free-filed measurements.

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   For Noise monitoring was carried out for 30 mins by sound level meter. At the end of the monitoring period, noise levels in terms 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 comply 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	SVANTEK 971
Sound Level Meter Calibrator	Rion NC-74

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 is presented in Table 3.4.

Table 3.4 Action and Limit Levels for Noise per Updated EM&A Manual

Notes:  If works are to be carried out during restricted hours, the conditions stipulated in the Construction Noise Permit (CNP) issued by the Noise Control Authority have to be followed.

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 for daytime was carried out on 7, 15, 25 & 29 April 2020. Impact monitoring for noise impact for evening time and night time was carried out on 7&8, 15&16, 24&25, 28&29 April 2020. For reference, the noise levels at alternative monitoring location (i.e. MA) are summarized in Table 3.6, Table 3.7 and Table 3.8 respectively. Details of noise monitoring results are presented in Appendix J. 3.8.2        A correction of +3 dB(A) would be made to the free-field measurements. 3.8.3        Major construction activity, major noise source and extreme weather which might affect the results were recorded during the impact monitoring. 3.8.4        According to our field observations, the major noise source identified at the alternative noise monitoring station in the reporting month are summarised in Table 3.5. No noticeable noise source was found near the monitoring stations MA.

Table 3.5 Summary of Field Observation

Monitoring Station	Major Noise Source
MA	Sound of sea waves

Applicable mitigation measures for construction works are fully implemented as shown in Appendix B, where double-glazed windows and air conditioning system were also installed and confirmed operable for the NSRs (N_S1, N_S2 & N_S3).

Data from impact monitoring during evening time and night time were compared with the NCO criteria. Where site inspection and auditing on Contractor’s record have shown that the conditions stipulated in the Construction Noise Permit (CNP) issued by the Noise Control Authority for construction works during restricted hours were followed. No inappropriate practice was spotted during evening time and night time construction works, thus the stipulated requirement on noise impact control during night time and evening time was achieved.

Table 3.6 Summary of Impact Noise Monitoring Results during Day Time (0700 – 1900 hours)

Note(*): A façade correction of +3 dB(A) was applied.

 

Table 3.7 Summary of Additional Impact Noise Monitoring Results during Evening Time (1900 – 2300 hours)

Note(*): A façade correction of +3 dB(A) was applied.

 

Table 3.8 Summary of Additional Impact Noise Monitoring Results during Night Time (2300 – 0700 hours)

Note(*): A façade correction of +3 dB(A) was applied.

  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 were generated and collected by registered recycling collector. 0 kg of paper was generated on site and collected by the registered recycling collector. No plastic waste was collected by registered recycling collector. 0 L of chemical waste was collected by the licensed chemical waste collector. 19.5 m3 of other types of wastes (e.g. general refuse) were generated on site and disposed of at designated landfill. 10,182.5 m3 of fill rock and 12,780.0 m3 of fill sand were imported during the reporting period. 4.3         5,277.82 m3 of dredged sediment in bulk quantity was dumped according to its dumping permit (EP/MD/20-125) during the reporting period. 4.4         Chemical waste generated from the cleaning of oil stain and leakage on deck of barges was stored in the chemical waste storage area on the barges. 4.5         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 during April 2020

Notes:     (1) Broken concrete for recycling into aggregates.

(2) Plastics 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.

4.6         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 weeks 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 sites. 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 at 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) and recipient site R3 (translocation) are shown in Figure 5.1, Figure 5.2 and Figure 5.3 respectively: 5.3.2        The GPS coordinates of the tagged coral colonies, retagged coral colonies and recipient site were shown in Table 5.2, Table 5.3 and Table 5.4 respectively.

Table 5.2 Tagged Natural Corals during Baseline and Re-tagged Natural Corals after Typhoon Manghkut at Control Site near Yuen Long Chau

Coral #	GPS Coordinates
1	N22°09’45.96”	E113°54’57.81”
2R	N22°11’29.12”	E113°59’09.01”
3	N22°09’45.81”	E113°54’57.78”
4	N22°09’45.70”	E113°54’57.95”
5R	N22°11’29.10”	E113°59’09.18”
6	N22°09’45.75”	E113°54’58.02”
7R	N22°11’29.17”	E113°59’08.86”
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”
10R	N22°11’29.18”	E113°59’08.91”

Notes:

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

Table 5.3 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.

 

Table 5.4 GPS Coordinates of Recipient Site R3

Site	GPS Coordinates
R3	N22°11’43.69”	E113°28.99”

 

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 5.5 and Table 5.6.

Table 5.5 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 5.6 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        No coral monitoring survey had been done during the reporting period and the 6th quarterly coral monitoring during construction phase at both Indirect Impact Site and Control Site would be schedule in June 2020.

 

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 will 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

6.2.1.1       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.

 

6.2.1.2       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:

 

6.2.1.3       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

 

6.2.1.4       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 0°). 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.

 

6.2.1.5       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.

 

6.2.1.6       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.

 

6.2.1.7       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.

 

6.2.1.8       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).

 

6.2.1.9       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.

 

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

 

6.2.3.1       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.

 

6.2.3.2       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

6.2.4.1       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.

 

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

 

6.2.4.2       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, the 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 was 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

6.3.1.1       A MMEZ with 250 m distance from silt curtain shall be established during the above situation. If 3 or more construction vessels are required with MMO’s duty and operating in close proximity, for the purpose of avoiding accidental entrance to the works area by Marine Mammal, a cluster MMEZ plan will be implemented to form a MMEZ with 250 m distance from the boundary of a work area as indicated in Figure 1 for reference. A team of MMO (i.e. at least two MMOs per day/night shift teams) would be arranged at the out-lying construction vessels to form the cluster MMEZ. 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 for the IWMF and trained by the Marine Mammal Monitoring Specialist of the ET who is independent from KSZHJV. 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.

 

6.3.1.2       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.

 

6.3.1.3       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 KSZHJV.

 

 

6.3.1.4       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.

 

6.3.1.5       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.

 

6.3.1.6       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.

 

6.3.1.7       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

6.3.2.1       Upon the completion of silt curtain installation/re-installation/relocation, the marine works would be conducted within an enclosed environment within the silt curtain. Subsequently, Visual Inspection of the Waters Surrounded by Silt Curtains (Section 2.1, MMWP) and Regular Inspection of Deployed Silt Curtain (Section 2.2, MMWP) inspection under Marine Mammal Watching Plan would be implemented (where applicable, Marine Mammal Exclusion Zone shall be conducted at the meantime).

 

6.3.2.2       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.

 

6.3.2.3       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.

 

6.3.2.4       For the re-deployment of the localized silt curtains (frame-type, cage-type or enclosed floating-type silt curtains), MMO will conduct visual inspection to confirm that there is no presence of marine mammal within the localized silt curtains (frame-type, cage-type or enclosed floating-type silt curtains). Visual inspection will be conducted every an hour by MMO for confirming that there is no any marine mammal observed in the surrounding area of the deployed silt curtain during re-deployment of localized silt curtains (frame-type, cage-type or enclosed floating-type silt curtains). 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.

 

6.3.2.5       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.

 

6.3.2.6       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

6.4.1.1       The monthly survey was conducted on 16 & 28 April 2020. As this is the designated peak season (December – May), two surveys were completed. A total of 81.1 km on effort (transects only) survey length was completed, 45.6 km was conducted at Beaufort Sea State 2 or better (Table 6.4). Fifteen finless porpoise sightings were recorded, thirteen were on effort and two were opportunistic. (Table 6.5, Figure 6.5 & 6.6).   

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

*         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 April 2020 Vessel-based Line-transect Survey

 

  

 Figure 6.5  Location of sightings recorded during April 2020 Vessel-based Line-transect Survey

6.4.1.2       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. Pre-construction baseline monitoring was conducted in Feb - Apr 2018 and the EIA was conducted during the peak porpoise months (Dec 2008 to May 2009). The AFCD long term monitoring data, the EIA information, April 2018 baseline survey and April 2019 impact survey result could be compared directly to April 2020 Impact Survey results. It was noted that the 10th month of impact monitoring is April 2019 and these data were included.

A review of the Beaufort Sea State in April survey conditions between 2009 and 2019 (only data available from AFCD at time of writing; (AFCD 20181; 20172; 20163; 20154; 20145; 20136; 20127; 20118; 20109), EIA 2009 and Baseline 2018 & Impact 2019) show that between 31.4 % and 100 % of survey effort had been conducted at Beaufort Sea State 2 or better in the past. During the EIA, 77.8 % of the survey effort was conducted at Beaufort 2 or better. During April 2019 Impact monitoring, 73.6% of the survey effort was conducted at Beaufort 2 or better. For this project in April 2020, 56.2 % of the survey was conducted at Beaufort Sea State 2 or better and, as such, survey conditions in April 2020 were within the % limits of previous AFCD surveys.

6.4.1.3       A review of the porpoise sightings in the survey area for April between 2009-2019 indicated that there were fluctuations between the number of sightings usually recorded. For all weather conditions, and for the nine years data available, 2 years  recorded two (2) sightings (2009 conducted by AFCD & Impact 2019 conducted by ET), 1 year recorded three (3) sightings (2015 conducted by AFCD),1 year recorded four (4) sightings (2010 conducted by AFCD), 3 years recorded seven (7) sightings (2009 conducted by EIA; 2011 & 2012 conducted by AFCD), 2 years recorded nine (9) sightings (2013 & 2014 conducted by AFCD), 1 year recorded ten (10) sightings (2016 conducted by AFCD), 1 year recorded thirteen (13) sightings (Baseline 2018 conducted by AFCD) and 1 year recorded fourteen (14) sightings (2017 conducted by AFCD). For impact monitoring in 2020 conducted by ET, fifteen (15) finless porpoise sightings were made, two (2) were opportunistic and thirteen (13) were on effort. Effort varied considerably between years and the average number of sightings (per km) varied between 0.02 and 0.28 km-1. For April 2019, the calculated encounter rate was 0.02 sightings 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 2013 (9 sightings in only 31.66 km of effort) and the lowest in 2009 & 2015 (0.6 per km). For the baseline survey, the encounter rate for April 2018 was 0.10 sightings km-1 and the EIA (2009) survey encounter rate was 0.12 km-1. For April 2020, an encounter rate of 0.16 sightings km-1 was calculated, which was higher than the average when compared to other years (pre impact survey period) and other survey types. The inherent variability for surveys focused on relatively small populations of highly mobile individuals was highlighted.

6.4.1.4       The impacts of the Project on marine mammals as predicted in the EIA were that construction activities would cause individuals to move away from the area. With only a small area being surveyed by vessels, with no control area, and as porpoise density was obviously low in such a small area, it was difficult to discern significant changes in sightings occurrence from vessel surveys alone. The sightings data presented in AFCD long term monitoring reports indicated that a sighting rate of 6.4 (per 40 km) for the month of April was higher than the average recorded, 5.4 sightings per 40km, since 2009 (all survey types), pre-construction phase, finless porpoise sightings ranged between 2.4 and 11.4 sightings per 40km, however, there was no significant trend within these years. Since construction commenced, there was a marked decrease (1.0 sighting per 40km in 2019) and then a considerable increase (6.4 sightings per 40 km in 2020) when compared to the baseline survey in 2018 (4.1 sightings per 40km). As porpoise were easier to detect acoustically rather than visually, this larger data set provided more details of porpoise occurrence during vessel-based surveys. Impact monitoring theodolite tracking data supported baseline monitoring data conclusions that indicated a correlation between construction site activities and porpoise occurrence. The high number of sightings in April 2020 also indicated that porpoise had remained in the area adjacent to the Project site in numbers comparable to previous AFCD monitoring.

6.4.1.5       This observation was only for daylight hours, and visual detection. The analyses of the static PAM dataset provided detailed information on diurnal occurrence patterns. Each static PAM station recorded porpoise at each site every day of the PAM study and therefore, showed that the area immediately adjacent to the Project site has not been abandoned during parts of the designated peak season for porpoise. It was noted that the encounter rate for April 2020 was higher than the impact monitoring result of April 2019, prior to early construction stage at SKC.

6.4.2        PAM and Land-based Theodolite Tracking

6.4.2.1       30 days of PAM surveys were started at 1 May 2019 and completed until the end of May 2019. Multiple PAM systems were deployed at three sites. The PAM system located at the IWMF was lost, however, an alternative data set had been identified. The PAM systems at the two control sites Tai A Chau and Pui O were recovered on 3 August 2019.  A summary of marine mammal detections showed that porpoise were recorded every day of deployment at each site, but at varying frequencies. The detailed theodolite result was presented in 17th Monthly EM&A report (November 2019) while detailed PAM result was presented in 18th Monthly EM&A report (December 2019).

6.4.2.2       For the baseline study, the DPM for each site was 11,160 (Shek Kwu Chau), 16,089 (Tai A Chau) and 3645 (Pui O Wan), totalling 30,894 DPM across all three sites, compared to DPMs of 4740 (Shek Kwu Chau), 7725 (Tai A Chau) and 23,986 (Pui O Wan), totalling 36,451 DPM, for the impact phase study. As the impact phase study was longer than the baseline study, it is not appropriate to directly compare total counts of DPM, however, the DPM rate (the average number of detections per day) for each site can be more directly compared. During the baseline study, Shek Kwu Chau averaged 338.2 DPM per day compared to 124.8 DPM per day, during the impact phase study. This showed a decrease in the daily average of porpoise detection at Shek Kwu Chau. During the baseline study, Tai A Chau averaged 487.6 DPM per day compared to 179.7 DPM per day, during the impact phase study. This showed a decrease in the daily average of porpoise detection at Tai A Chau. During the baseline study, Pui O Wan averaged 98.5 DPM per day compared to 557.8 DPM per day, during the impact phase study. This showed a significant increase in the daily average of porpoise detections at Pui O Wan.

6.4.2.3       Overall, the PAM study showed that porpoise continue to consistently utilise the Shek Kwu Chau habitat immediately adjacent to the IWMF construction activities, although to a lesser degree than that prior to construction activities. In addition, the Pui O Wan site, which is 2.5 km away from the IWMF construction area, was also consistently utilised during the impact phase PAM study. A continued assessment of fine scale habitat use, particularly through PAM which yielded large quantities of data, would allow a more comprehensive assessment of the EIA predictions.

6.4.2.4       Theodolite surveys were completed in May 2019. In total, thirty four days of theodolite tracking were completed between February - May 2019, comprising 167 hours and 49 minutes of observation. No Chinese white dolphin was observed and only one finless was recorded. The finless porpoise encounter rate was calculated as 0.006 finless porpoise per hour, in all weather conditions.

6.4.2.5       A total of 2620 vessels of ten different types were observed and tracked within or in the proximity of the IWMF construction site. These comprised fishing boats (236), speed boats (29), container boats (155), government boats (22), high speed ferries (53), others (13) and IWMF-Related construction platforms (974), tug boats(240), transportation boats (363), construction boats (531 and approximately 8 buoys were present marking the site boundary.

6.4.2.6       The baseline theodolite tracking was conducted immediately prior to and during the site preparation activities of the site. The baseline data records a decrease in porpoise sightings as site preparation activities commenced and notes that the decrease was most likely due to the onset of site preparation activities. The impact theodolite tracking conducted for this study records a marked increase in the number of Project related vessels and platforms and, in agreement with baseline conclusions, shows a concomitant decrease in finless porpoise sightings.

6.4.3        Specific Mitigation Measures Silt curtains were deployed for DCM 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 98 individuals being trained and the training records kept by the ET. From the Marine Mammal Watching observation records and MMEZ monitoring log records, no Finless Porpoise or other marine mammals were observed within or around the MMEZ and silt curtains in the reporting month. 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

  7.     White-Bellied Sea Eagle

7          

7.1         Monitoring Requirement 7.1.1        On Shek Kwu Chau Island, a nest of WBSE is located about 60 m above ground within a hillside shrubland habitat, 130 m in-land from shore, about 550 m away from the proposed reclaimed land, with no human access. 3 phases monitoring programme will be comprised of pre-construction phase, construction phase and operation phase. 7.1.2        The Pre-Construction WBSE monitoring was started on 30 January 2018 and the location of WBSE nest was confirmed on 21 February 2018 and it is located at the western part of SKC Island (Figure 7.1). Two adults and two chicks were also recorded on 5th March 2018 survey till the end of the Pre-construction monitoring on 15th May 2018. Construction Phase monitoring were carried out followed by the commencement of the Construction Phase on 28th June 2018. 7.2         WBSE Monitoring Parameters, Time, Frequency 7.2.1        The objective of the construction phase monitoring should be to verify the utilisation of the area by WBSE, their responses to construction disturbance, as well as the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures. Throughout the construction phase, field surveys should be conducted twice per month during their core breeding season (from December to May), and once per month outside their core breeding season (from June to November). The monitoring frequency should be increased to weekly during the incubation period of each year.  In order to confirm their foraging ground near the construction site, it is necessary to conduct daily monitoring during the first week of nestling period in each year. 7.2.2        Since the location of the WBSE nest was located at the southwest of SKC within the hillside shrubland, it is impossible to observe the eggs during incubation period. Therefore, monitoring with increased frequency during incubation period could not be carried out. Daily monitoring will be carried out once any chick is recorded during the monitoring day. The monitoring schedule during the reporting period is provided in Appendix C. 7.3         Monitoring Location 7.3.1        Since there are no suitable land footings along the coast of SKC, only boat surveys were conducted. On Shek Kwu Chau Island, a nest of WBSE is located about 60 m above ground within a hillside shrubland habitat, 130 m in-land from shore, about 550 m away from the proposed reclaimed land, with no human access. 7.4         Monitoring Methodology 7.4.1        Information to be collected included feeding, perching/roosting, preening, soaring, flying, nesting and territorial guarding and the time spent on each activity.  The responses and reactions to any disturbance to the WBSEs were also recorded and examined in conjunction with the construction noise and/or other events in the vicinity. Other disturbances such as weather condition, or invasion by other fauna species were also recorded. 7.4.2        Binocular, scope, camera, lens and GPS device used are summarized as Table 7.1 below:

Table 7.1 List of Equipment Used during Construction Phase Monitoring

7.4.3        If event such as absence of White-bellied Sea Eagle during a whole day of monitoring was found during WBSE monitoring, the actions in accordance with the Event and Action Plan should be carried out according to Appendix M. 7.5         Results and Observations 7.5.1        To verify the utilization of the area by WBSE, their responses to construction disturbance, as well as the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures.  Since there is no landing point along the western part of SKC, boat survey was used for the monitoring survey. In order to increase the chance of finding the WBSEs, monitoring survey was carried out early in the morning. The weather condition of monitoring survey was shown in Table 7.2.

Table 7.2 Weather Conditions during the WBSE Monitoring

7.5.2        No abnormal behavior of the recorded adults during the Apr 2020 construction phase monitoring. Only two adults of WBSE (Figure 7.2) were only recorded during the morning surveys. All marine works during the monitoring period did not show any affects to the WBSE. 7.5.3        Since the incubation period was finished in March 2020, the monthly construction phase monitoring (twice per month) will be resumed during the breeding season (between December to May) in order to monitor the incubation period, utilization of the area by WBSE and their responses to construction disturbance. The nest will be inspected daily during the first week of nesting period when the chick was recorded according to the updated EM&A Manual. 7.5.4        No disturbances from anthropogenic activities on the island were recorded during the monitoring survey. However, fishing boats moving close to the shore were recorded.  Since the nesting tree is about 160m away from the shore and it is not accessible, fishing boat activities didn’t show any direct disturbance to the WBSE nest. No invasion of other fauna species was recorded as well.   7.5.5        Photo record of WBSE from the survey this month is shown below:

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

8          

8.1         The Environmental Complaint Handling Procedure is shown in below Figure 8.1:

Figure 8.1 Environmental Complaint Handling Procedures

 

8.2         No exceedance of the Action and Limit Levels of the regular coral and WBSE monitoring was recorded during the reporting period. 8.3         None of the General & Regular DCM water quality monitoring results during the reporting period had exceeded Action and Limit Level. 8.4         No project-related Action Level & Limit Level exceedance was recorded from the reporting period as shown in Appendix N. 8.5         The Contractor has been reminded that all measures recommended in the deposited Silt Curtain Deployment Plan shall be fully and properly implemented for the Project as per Clause 2.6A of the FEP. 8.6         No notification of summons and prosecution was received in the reporting period. 8.7         Statistics on complaints, notifications of summons and successful prosecutions are summarized in Appendix O.

 

9.     EM&A Site Inspection

9          

9.1         Site inspections were carried out on a weekly basis to monitor the implementation of proper environmental pollution control and mitigation measures under the Contract. In the reporting period, site inspections were carried out on 7, 14, 21 & 28 April 2020 at the site portions list in Table 9.1 below.

Table 9.1 Site Inspection Record

Date	Inspected Site Portion	Time
7 April 2020	Portion 1, 1A & 1B (near SKC)	10:30 – 11:40 AM
14 April 2020	Portion 1, 1A & 1B (near SKC)	10:40 – 11:25 AM
21 April 2020	Portion 1, 1A & 1B (near SKC)	10:30 – 11:40 AM
28 April 2020	Portion 1, 1A & 1B (near SKC)	10:40 – 11:35 AM

9.2         One joint site inspection with IEC was carried out on 21 April 2020. 9.3         Environmental deficiencies were observed during weekly site inspection. Key observations during the site inspections and during the reporting period are summarized in Table 9.2.

Table 9.2 Site Observations

Date	Environmental Observations	Follow-up Status
7 April 2020 (Site inspection)	Observation(s) and Recommendation(s) 1.      On GD851, paints in use should be placed on drip tray.	1.      Paints had been stored inside the cabin.
14 April 2020 (Site inspection)	Observation(s) and Recommendation(s) 1.      On ESC750, the chemical waste cabinet was not locked up. 2.      On ESC61, the broken chemical waste cabinet should be replaced.	1.      The chemical waste cabinet had been locked. 2.      The chemical waste cabinet had been repaired.
21 April 2020 (Site inspection)	Observation(s) and Recommendation(s) 1.      On 三航210, stagnant water was found on the drip tray. 2.      On 三航210, oil stain was observed on the sand bags and package of waste.	1.      Stagnant water and debris had been cleaned. 2.      The plastic sacking and the garb age bag had been cleared.
28 April 2020 (Site inspection)	Observation(s) and Recommendation(s) No major observation was found.	Nil

9.4         The Contractor had rectified all the observations identified during environmental site inspections in the reporting period. 9.5         According to the EIA Study Report, Environmental Permit, contract documents and Updated EM&A Manual, the mitigation measures detailed in the documents are implemented as much as practical during the reporting period. An updated Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures (EMIS) is provided in Appendix B.
10.         Future Key Issues

10      

10.1     Works to be undertaken in the next reporting month are:

·         DCM Installation Works;

·         Coring of DCM samples;

·         Cone Penetration Test;

·         Dredging Works and Sediment Disposal;

·         Rock Filling of Foundation;

·         Leveling Works for the Foundation of Seawall and Berth Area;

·         Caisson Laying;

·         Rubble Mound Laying;

·         Installation of Prefabricated Vertical Drain;

·         Sand Blanket and Geotextile Laying.

10.2     Potential environmental impacts arising from the above construction activities are mainly associated with water quality, construction noise, waste management and ecology. 10.3     The key environmental mitigation measures for the Project in the coming reporting period expected to be associated with the construction activities include:

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

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

·             Regulation on rate and means for dredging works as stipulated in FEP Clause 2.17 – 2.21 or the approved Supporting Document for Reviewing Dredging Rate and Filling Rate, whichever is applicable;

·             Daily site audit and monitoring by ET during dredging work as stipulated in FEP Clause 2.21A;

·             Storage, handling and disposal of dredged materials according to Dumping At Sea Ordinance (DASO);

·             Confirmation of the absence of silt content in the rock filling material and the filling work is properly conducted;

·             Installation process of floating silt curtain according to approved Silt Curtain Deployment Plan

10.4     The tentative schedule of regular construction noise, water quality and ecology monitoring in the next reporting period is presented in Appendix P. The regular construction noise, water quality and ecology monitoring will be conducted at the same monitoring locations in the next reporting period.   

  11.        Conclusion and Recommendations

11      

11.1     This 22nd monthly Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) Report presents the EM&A works undertaken during the period from 1 April to 30 April 2020, in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual and the requirement under EP-429/2012/A and FEP-01/429/2012/A. 11.2     Construction noise, water quality, construction waste, marine mammal and WBSE monitoring were carried out in the reporting period. No project-related exceedance of the Action and Limit Level was recorded during the reporting period. 11.3     Weekly environmental site inspections were conducted during the reporting period. Environmental deficiencies were observed during site inspection and were rectified. 11.4     According to the environmental site inspections performed in the reporting month, the Contractor was reminded to pay attention on on-site housekeeping and the proper storage of the chemicals and construction waste. 11.5     Regarding to the deployment of silt curtains as a principal water quality impact mitigation measures on various marine works, the Contractor has been reminded to follow strictly to the design and checking procedure as specified in the Silt Curtain Deployment Plan. Although the scale of DCM works will be minimised in the coming months, the Contractor is still reminded to pay attention on the status of deployed silt curtain. The Contractor is reminded that all measures recommended in the deposited silt curtain deployment plan shall be fully and properly implemented for the Project as per EP condition 2.6 of the FEP. 11.6     As dredging works was conducted in the reporting month, the Contractor had been reminded to follow strictly to the design and checking procedure as specified in the Silt Curtain Deployment Plan for the dredging works. The Contractor had been reminded to follow the regulation on rate and means for dredging works as stipulated in FEP Clause 2.17 – 2.21 or the approved Supporting Document for Reviewing Dredging Rate and Filling Rate, whichever is applicable. The Contractor is reminded to follow Dumping At Sea Ordinance (DASO) for the storage, handling and disposal of dredged materials. 11.7     No environmental complaint was received in the reporting period. 11.8     No notification of summon or prosecution was received since commencement of the Contract. 11.9     The ET will keep track of the construction works to confirm compliance of environmental requirements and the proper implementation of all   necessary mitigation measures.