Figure 1.1	Locations of Key Construction Activities
Figure 1.2	Latest Layout of the Enhanced Silt Curtain
Figure 2.1	Locations of Air and Noise Monitoring Stations and Chek Lap Kok Wind Station
Figure 4.1	Water Quality Monitoring Stations
Figure 6.1	Vessel based Dolphin Monitoring Transects in Construction, Post-construction and Operation Phases
Figure 6.2	Land based Dolphin Monitoring in Baseline and Construction Phases
Figure 6.3	Sightings Distribution of Chinese White Dolphins
Figure 6.4	Plots of First Sightings of All CWD Groups obtained from Land-based Stations
Figure 6.5	Location for Autonomous Passive Acoustic Monitoring
Figure 7.1	Duration of the SkyPier HSFs travelled through the SCZ for June 2019

Appendices

Appendix A	Contract Description
Appendix B	Environmental Mitigation Implementation Schedule (EMIS) for Construction Phase
Appendix C	Monitoring Schedule
Appendix D	Monitoring Results
Appendix E	Calibration Certificates
Appendix F	Status of Environmental Permits and Licences
Appendix G	Cumulative Statistics on Exceedances, Environmental Complaints, Notification of Summons and Status of Prosecutions
Appendix H	Data of SkyPier HSF Movements to/from Zhuhai and Macau (between 1 and 30 June 2019)

Abbreviations

3RS	Three-Runway System
AAHK	Airport Authority Hong Kong
AECOM	AECOM Asia Company Limited
AFCD	Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department
AIS	Automatic Information System
ANI	Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphins
APM	Automated People Mover
AW	Airport West
BHS	Baggage Handling System
C&D	Construction and Demolition
CAP	Contamination Assessment Plan
CAR	Contamination Assessment Report
CNP	Construction Noise Permit
CWD	Chinese White Dolphin
DCM	Deep Cement Mixing
DEZ	Dolphin Exclusion Zone
DO	Dissolved Oxygen
EAR	Ecological Acoustic Recorder
EIA	Environmental Impact Assessment
EM&A	Environmental Monitoring & Audit
EP	Environmental Permit
EPD	Environmental Protection Department
ET	Environmental Team
FCZ	Fish Culture Zone
HDD	Horizontal Directional Drilling
HKBCF	Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities
HKIA	Hong Kong International Airport
HOKLAS	Hong Kong Laboratory Accreditation Scheme
HSF	High Speed Ferry
HVS	High Volume Sampler
IEC	Independent Environmental Checker
LKC	Lung Kwu Chau
MMHK	Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited
MMWP	Marine Mammal Watching Plan
MSS	Marine Surveillance System
MTRMP-CAV	Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for Construction and Associated Vessel
NEL	Northeast Lantau
NWL	Northwest Lantau
PAM	Passive Acoustic Monitoring
PVD	Prefabricated Vertical Drain
SC	Sha Chau
SCLKCMP	Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park
SS	Suspended Solids
SSSI	Site of Special Scientific Interest
STG	Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphin Sightings
SWL	Southwest Lantau
T2	Terminal 2
The Project	The Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System
The SkyPier Plan	Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for High Speed Ferries of SkyPier
The Manual	The Updated EM&A Manual
TSP	Total Suspended Particulates
WL	West Lantau
WMP	Waste Management Plan

Executive Summary

The “Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System” (the Project) serves to meet the future air traffic demands at Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA). On 7 November 2014, the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report (Register No.: AEIAR-185/2014) for the Project was approved and an Environmental Permit (EP) (Permit No.: EP-489/2014) was issued for the construction and operation of the Project.

This is the 42^nd Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report for the Project which summarizes the monitoring results and audit findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 to 30 June 2019.

Key Activities in the Reporting Period

The key activities of the Project carried out in the reporting period included reclamation works and land-side works. Reclamation works included deep cement mixing (DCM) works, marine filling, seawall construction, and prefabricated vertical drain (PVD) installation. Land-side works involved mainly foundation and substructure work for Terminal 2 expansion, modification and tunnel work for Automated People Mover (APM) and Baggage Handling System (BHS), and preparation work for utilities, with activities include site establishment, site office construction, road and drainage works, cable ducting, demolition, piling, and excavation works.

EM&A Activities Conducted in the Reporting Period

The monthly EM&A programme was undertaken in accordance with the Manual of the Project. Summary of the monitoring activities during this reporting period is presented as below:

Monitoring Activities	Number of Sessions
1-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) air quality monitoring	30
Noise monitoring	16
Water quality monitoring	13
Vessel line-transect surveys for Chinese White Dolphin (CWD) monitoring	2
Land-based theodolite tracking survey effort for CWD monitoring	3

Environmental auditing works, including weekly site inspections of construction works conducted by the ET and bi-weekly site inspections conducted by the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC), audit of SkyPier High Speed Ferries (HSF), audit of construction and associated vessels, and audit of implementation of Marine Mammal Watching Plan (MMWP) and Dolphin Exclusion Zone (DEZ) Plan, were conducted in the reporting period. Based on information including ET’s observations, records of Marine Surveillance System (MSS), and contractors’ site records, it is noted that environmental pollution control and mitigation measures were properly implemented and construction activities of the Project in the reporting period did not introduce adverse impacts to the sensitive receivers.

Snapshots of EM&A Activities in the Reporting Period


Training and QA/QC Check of Surveyors by CWD Experts	Land-Based Theodolite Tracking Survey for CWD at Lung Kwu Chau	Cleaning Along the Seawall Conducted by Contractor

Results of Impact Monitoring

The monitoring works for construction dust, construction noise, water quality, construction waste, landscape & visual, and CWD were conducted during the reporting period in accordance with the Manual.

Monitoring results of construction dust, construction noise, water quality, construction waste, and CWD did not trigger the corresponding Action and Limit Levels in the reporting period.

The water quality monitoring results for turbidity, total alkalinity, SS, and chromium obtained during the reporting period were within the corresponding Action and Limit Levels stipulated in the EM&A programme. Relevant investigation and follow-up actions will be conducted according to the EM&A programme if the corresponding Action and Limit Levels are triggered. For dissolved oxygen (DO) and nickel, some testing results triggered the relevant Action or Limit Levels, and the corresponding investigations were conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded that the case was not related to the Project. To conclude, the construction activities in the reporting period did not introduce adverse impact to all water quality sensitive receivers.

Summary of Upcoming Key Issues

Advanced Works:

Contract P560 (R) Aviation Fuel Pipeline Diversion Works

● Stockpiling of compressed materials

DCM Works:

Contract 3201 and 3205 DCM Works

● DCM works

Reclamation Works:

Contract 3206 Main Reclamation Works

● Land base ground improvement works;

● Seawall construction; and

● Marine filling.

Airfield Works:

Contract 3301 North Runway Crossover Taxiway

● Cable ducting works;

● Subgrade compaction and paving works;

● Drainage construction works;

● Operation of aggregate mixing facility; and

● Precast of duct bank and fabrication of steel works.

Contract 3302 Eastern Vehicular Tunnel Advance Works

● Site survey and cable laying; and

● Site establishment.

Contract 3303 Third Runway and Associated Works

● Site establishment.

Third Runway Concourse and Integrated Airport Centres Works:

Contract 3402 New Integrated Airport Centres Enabling Works

● Site establishment;

● Installation of sheet and pipe piles; and

● Manhole and pipe construction works.

Terminal 2 Expansion Works:

Contract 3501 Antenna Farm and Sewage Pumping Station

● Drainage works;

● Boring works; and

● Pipe installation.

Contract 3502 Terminal 2 Automated People Mover (APM) Depot Modification Works

● Site clearance; and

● Painting and fitting out works.

Contract 3503 Terminal 2 Foundation and Substructure Works

● Site establishment;

● Demolition works;

● Utilities, drainage, and road work; and

● Piling and structure works.

Automated People Mover (APM) Works:

Contract 3602 Existing APM System Modification Works

● Site establishment; and

● Modification works at APM depot.

Airport Support Infrastructure & Logistic Works:

Contract 3801 APM and BHS Tunnels on Existing Airport Island

● Site establishment;

● Cofferdam installation and construction of box culvert;

● Rising main installation;

● Drilling and grouting works;

● Piling and foundation works

● Demolition works; and

● Site clearance.

Summary Table

The following table summarizes the key findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period:

	Yes	No	Details	Analysis / Recommendation / Remedial Actions
Breach of Limit Level^		√	No breach of Limit Level was recorded.	Nil
Breach of Action Level^		√	No breach of Action Level was recorded.	Nil
Complaint Received		√	No construction activities-related complaint was received	Nil
Notification of any summons and status of prosecutions		√	No notification of summons or prosecution was received.	Nil
Change that affect the EM&A		√	There was no change to the construction works that may affect the EM&A	Nil

Note:

^ Only triggering of Action or Limit Level found related to Project works is counted as Breach of Action or Limit Level.

1 Introduction

1.1 Background

On 7 November 2014, the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report (Register No.: AEIAR-185/2014) for the “Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System” (the Project) was approved and an Environmental Permit (EP) (Permit No.: EP-489/2014) was issued for the construction and operation of the Project.

Airport Authority Hong Kong (AAHK) commissioned Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited (MMHK) to undertake the role of Environmental Team (ET) for carrying out the Environmental Monitoring & Audit (EM&A) works during the construction phase of the Project in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual (the Manual) submitted under EP Condition 3.1. AECOM Asia Company Limited (AECOM) was employed by AAHK as the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) for the Project.

The Project covers the expansion of the existing airport into a three-runway system (3RS) with key project components comprising land formation of about 650 ha and all associated facilities and infrastructure including taxiways, aprons, aircraft stands, a passenger concourse, an expanded Terminal 2, all related airside and landside works and associated ancillary and supporting facilities. The submarine aviation fuel pipelines and submarine power cables also require diversion as part of the works.

Construction of the Project is to proceed in the general order of diversion of the submarine aviation fuel pipelines, diversion of the submarine power cables, land formation, and construction of infrastructure, followed by construction of superstructures.

The updated overall phasing programme of all construction works was presented in Appendix A of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 7 and the contract information was presented in Appendix A.

1.2 Scope of this Report

This is the 42^nd Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report for the Project which summarizes the key findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 to 30 June 2019.

1.3 Project Organisation

The Project’s organization structure presented in Appendix B of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No.1 remained unchanged during the reporting period. Contact details of the key personnel are presented in Table 1.1.

Table 1.1: Contact Information of Key Personnel

Party	Position	Name	Telephone
Project Manager’s Representative (Airport Authority Hong Kong)	Principal Manager, Environment	Lawrence Tsui	2183 2734
Environmental Team (ET) (Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited)	Environmental Team Leader	Terence Kong	2828 5919
	Deputy Environmental Team Leader	Heidi Yu	2828 5704
	Deputy Environmental Team Leader	Daniel Sum	2585 8495
Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) (AECOM Asia Company Limited)	Independent Environmental Checker	Jackel Law	3922 9376
	Deputy Independent Environmental Checker	Roy Man	3922 9141

Advanced Works:

Party	Position	Name	Telephone
Contract P560(R) Aviation Fuel Pipeline Diversion Works (Langfang Huayuan Mechanical and Electrical Engineering Co., Ltd.)	Project Manager	Wei Shih	2117 0566
	Environmental Officer	Lyn Liu	5172 6543

Party

Position

Name

Telephone

Contract P560(R) Aviation Fuel Pipeline Diversion Works

(Langfang Huayuan Mechanical and Electrical Engineering Co., Ltd.)

Project Manager

Wei Shih

2117 0566

Environmental Officer

Lyn Liu

5172 6543

Deep Cement Mixing (DCM) Works:

Party	Position	Name	Telephone
Contract 3201 DCM (Package 1) (Penta-Ocean-China State-Dong-Ah Joint Venture)	Project Director	Tsugunari Suzuki	9178 9689
	Environmental Officer	Hiu Yeung Tang	6329 3513
Contract 3202 DCM (Package 2) (Samsung-BuildKing Joint Venture)	Project Manager	Ilkwon Nam	9643 3117
Contract 3203 DCM (Package 3) (Sambo E&C Co., Ltd)	Project Manager	Eric Kan	9014 6758
Contract 3204 DCM (Package 4) (CRBC-SAMBO Joint Venture)	Project Manager	Kyung-Sik Yoo	9683 8697
Contract 3205 DCM (Package 5) (Bachy Soletanche - Sambo Joint Venture)	Deputy Project Director	Min Park	9683 0765
	Environmental Officer	Lawrence Chan	5107 5961

Reclamation Works:

Party	Position	Name	Telephone
Contract 3206 Main Reclamation Works (ZHEC-CCCC-CDC Joint Venture)	Project Manager	Kim Chuan Lim	3763 1509
	Environmental Officer	Kwai Fung Wong	3763 1452

Party

Position

Name

Telephone

Contract 3206 Main Reclamation Works

(ZHEC-CCCC-CDC Joint Venture)

Project Manager

Kim Chuan Lim

3763 1509

Environmental Officer

Kwai Fung Wong

3763 1452

Airfield Works:

Party	Position	Name	Telephone
Contract 3301 North Runway Crossover Taxiway (FJT-CHEC-ZHEC Joint Venture)	Deputy Project Director	Kin Hang Chung	9800 0048
	Environmental Officer	Nelson Tam	9721 3942
Contract 3302 Eastern Vehicular Tunnel Advance Works (China Road and Bridge Corporation)	Project Manager	Wan Cheung Lee	6100 6075
	Environmental Officer	Wilmer Ng	3919 9421
Contract 3303 Third Runway and Associated Works (SAPR Joint Venture)	Project Manager	Steven Meredith	6109 1813
	Environmental Officer	Pan Fong	9436 9435

Third Runway Concourse and Integrated Airport Centres Works:

Party	Position	Name	Telephone
Contract 3402 New Integrated Airport Centres Enabling Works (Wing Hing Construction Co., Ltd.)	Contract Manager	Michael Kan	9206 0550
	Environmental Officer	Lisa He	5374 3418

Party

Position

Name

Telephone

Contract 3402 New Integrated Airport Centres Enabling Works

(Wing Hing Construction Co., Ltd.)

Contract Manager

Michael Kan

9206 0550

Environmental Officer

Lisa He

5374 3418

Terminal 2 (T2) Expansion Works:

Party	Position	Name	Telephone
Contract 3501 Antenna Farm and Sewage Pumping Station (Build King Construction Ltd.)	Project Manager	Vincent Kwan	9833 1313
	Environmental Officer	Edward Tam	9287 8270
Contract 3502 Terminal 2 APM Depot Modification Works (Build King Construction Ltd.)	Project Manager	David Ng	9010 7871
	Environmental Officer	Chun Pong Chan	9187 7118
Contract 3503 Terminal 2 Foundation and Substructure Works (Leighton – Chun Wo Joint Venture)	Project Manager	Eric Wu	3973 1718
	Environmental Officer	Stephen Tsang	5508 6361

Automated People Mover (APM) Works:
Party	Position	Name	Telephone
Contract 3602 Existing APM System Modification Works (Niigata Transys Co., Ltd.)	Project Manager	Kunihiro Tatecho	9755 0351
	Environmental Officer	Arthur Wong	9170 3394

Baggage Handling System (BHS) Works:
Party	Position	Name	Telephone
Contract 3603 3RS Baggage Handling System (VISH Consortium)	Project Manager	Andy Ng	9102 2739
Contract 3603 3RS Baggage Handling System (VISH Consortium)	Environmental Officer	Eric Ha	9215 3432

Airport Support Infrastructure and Logistic Works:
Party	Position	Name	Telephone
Contract 3801 APM and BHS Tunnels on Existing Airport Island (China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Ltd.)	Project Manager	Tony Wong	9642 8672
	Environmental Officer	Fredrick Wong	9842 2703

1.4 Summary of Construction Works

The key activities of the Project carried out in the reporting period included reclamation works and land-side works. Reclamation works included deep cement mixing (DCM) works, marine filling, seawall construction, and prefabricated vertical drain (PVD) installation. Land-side works involved mainly foundation and substructure work for Terminal 2 expansion, modification and tunnel work for Automated People Mover (APM) and Baggage Handling System (BHS) systems, and preparation work for utilities, with activities include site establishment, site office construction, road and drainage works, cable ducting, demolition of existing facilities, piling, and excavation works.

The locations of key construction activities are presented in Figure 1.1. Latest layout of the enhanced silt curtain deployed is presented in Figure 1.2.

1.5 Summary of EM&A Programme Requirements

The status for all environmental aspects are presented in Table 1.2. The EM&A requirements remained unchanged during the reporting period and details can be referred to Table 1.2 of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 1.

Table 1.2: Summary of status for all environmental aspects under the Updated EM&A Manual

Parameters	Status
Air Quality
Baseline Monitoring	The baseline air quality monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4.
Impact Monitoring	On-going
Noise
Baseline Monitoring	The baseline noise monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4.
Impact Monitoring	On-going
Water Quality
General Baseline Water Quality Monitoring for reclamation, water jetting and field joint works	The baseline water quality monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4.
General Impact Water Quality Monitoring for reclamation, water jetting and field joint works	On-going
Initial Intensive Deep Cement Mixing (DCM) Water Quality Monitoring	The Initial Intensive DCM Monitoring Report was submitted and approved by EPD in accordance with the Detailed Plan on DCM.
Regular DCM Water Quality Monitoring	On-going
Waste Management
Waste Monitoring	On-going
Land Contamination
Supplementary Contamination Assessment Plan (CAP)	The Supplementary CAP was submitted to EPD pursuant to EP Condition 2.20.
Contamination Assessment Report (CAR) for Golf Course	The CAR for Golf Course was submitted to EPD.
Terrestrial Ecology
Pre-construction Egretry Survey Plan	The Egretry Survey Plan was submitted and approved by EPD under EP Condition 2.14.
Ecological Monitoring	The terrestrial ecological monitoring at Sheung Sha Chau was completed in January 2019.
Marine Ecology
Pre-Construction Phase Coral Dive Survey	The Coral Translocation Plan was submitted and approved by EPD under EP Condition 2.12.
Coral Translocation	The coral translocation was completed.
Post-Translocation Coral Monitoring	The post-translocation monitoring programme according to the Coral Translocation Plan was completed in April 2018.
Chinese White Dolphins (CWD)
Vessel Survey, Land-based Theodolite Tracking and Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM)
Baseline Monitoring	Baseline CWD results were reported in the CWD Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD in accordance with EP Condition 3.4.
Impact Monitoring	On-going
Landscape & Visual
Landscape & Visual Plan	The Landscape & Visual Plan was submitted to EPD under EP Condition 2.18
Baseline Monitoring	The baseline landscape & visual monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4.
Impact Monitoring	On-going
Environmental Auditing
Regular site inspection	On-going
Marine Mammal Watching Plan (MMWP) implementation measures	On-going
Dolphin Exclusion Zone (DEZ) Plan implementation measures	On-going
SkyPier High Speed Ferries (HSF) implementation measures	On-going
Construction and Associated Vessels Implementation measures	On-going
Complaint Hotline and Email channel	On-going
Environmental Log Book	On-going

Taking into account the construction works in this reporting period, impact monitoring of air quality, noise, water quality, waste management, landscape & visual, and CWD were carried out in the reporting period.

The EM&A programme also involved weekly site inspections and related auditing conducted by the ET for checking the implementation of the required environmental mitigation measures recommended in the approved EIA Report. To promote the environmental awareness and enhance the environmental performance of the contractors, environmental trainings and regular environmental management meetings were conducted during the reporting period, which are summarized as below:

● Nine environmental management meetings for EM&A review with works contracts: 6, 12, 21, 25, 26, 27, and 28 June 2019

The EM&A programme has been following the recommendations presented in the approved EIA Report and the 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 Air Quality Monitoring

Air quality monitoring of 1-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) was conducted three times every six days at two representative monitoring stations in the vicinity of air sensitive receivers in Tung Chung and villages in North Lantau in accordance with the Manual. Table 2.1 describes the details of the monitoring stations. Figure 2.1 shows the locations of the monitoring stations.

Table 2.1: Locations of Impact Air Quality Monitoring Stations

Monitoring Station	Location
AR1A	Man Tung Road Park
AR2	Village House at Tin Sum

2.1 Action and Limit Levels

In accordance with the Manual, baseline air quality monitoring of 1-hour TSP levels at the two air quality monitoring stations were established as presented in the Baseline Monitoring Report. The Action and Limit Levels of the air quality monitoring stipulated in the EM&A programme for triggering the relevant investigation and follow-up procedures under the programme are provided in Table 2.2.

Table 2.2: Action and Limit Levels of Air Quality Monitoring

Monitoring Station	Action Level (mg/m³)	Limit Level (mg/m³)
AR1A	306	500
AR2	298	500

2.2 Monitoring Equipment

Portable direct reading dust meter was used to carry out the air quality monitoring. Details of equipment used in the reporting period are given in Table 2.3.

Table 2.3: Air Quality Monitoring Equipment

Equipment	Brand and Model	Last Calibration Date	Calibration Certificate Provided in
Portable direct reading dust meter (Laser dust monitor)	SIBATA LD-3B-1 (Serial No. 597337)	2 Oct 2018	Monthly EM&A Report No. 35, Appendix D
SIBATA LD-3B-2 (Serial No. 296098)	16 Oct 2018

Equipment

Brand and Model

Last Calibration Date

Calibration Certificate Provided in

Portable direct reading dust meter (Laser dust monitor)

SIBATA LD-3B-1
(Serial No. 597337)

2 Oct 2018

Monthly EM&A Report No. 35, Appendix D

SIBATA LD-3B-2

(Serial No. 296098)

16 Oct 2018

2.3 Monitoring Methodology

2.3.1 Measuring Procedure

The measurement procedures involved in the impact air quality monitoring can be summarised as follows:

a. The portable direct reading dust meter was mounted on a tripod at a height of 1.2 m above the ground.

b. Prior to the measurement, the equipment was set up for 1 minute span check and 6 second background check.

c. The one hour dust measurement was started. Site conditions and dust sources at the nearby area were recorded on a record sheet.

d. When the measurement completed, the “Count” reading per hour was recorded for result calculation.

2.3.2 Maintenance and Calibration

The portable direct reading dust meter is calibrated every year against high volume sampler (HVS) to check the validity and accuracy of the results measured by direct reading method. The calibration record of the HVS provided in Appendix D of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 35, and the calibration certificates of portable direct reading dust meters listed in Table 2.3 are still valid.

2.4 Summary of Monitoring Results

The air quality monitoring schedule involved in the reporting period is provided in Appendix C.

The air quality monitoring results in the reporting period are summarized in Table 2.4. Detailed impact monitoring results are presented in Appendix D.

Table 2.4: Summary of Air Quality Monitoring Results

Monitoring Station	1-hr TSP Concentration Range (mg/m³)	Action Level (mg/m³)	Limit Level (mg/m³)
AR1A	9 – 41	306	500
AR2	10 – 39	298	500

The monitoring results were within the corresponding Action and Limit Levels at all monitoring stations in the reporting period.

General meteorological conditions throughout the impact monitoring period were recorded. Wind data including wind speed and wind direction for each monitoring day were collected from the Chek Lap Kok Wind Station.

2.5 Conclusion

No dust emission source from Project activities was observed during impact air quality monitoring. Major sources of dust observed at the monitoring stations during the monitoring sessions were local air pollution and nearby traffic emissions. It is considered that the monitoring work in the reporting period is effective and there was no adverse impact attributable to the Project activities.

3 Noise Monitoring

Noise monitoring in the form of 30-minute measurements of L_eq, L₁₀, and L₉₀ levels was conducted once per week between 0700 and 1900 on normal weekdays at four representative monitoring stations in the vicinity of noise sensitive receivers in Tung Chung and villages in North Lantau in accordance with the Manual. Table 3.1 describes the details of the monitoring stations. Figure 2.1 shows the locations of the monitoring stations.

Table 3.1: Locations of Impact Noise Monitoring Stations

Monitoring Station	Location	Type of measurement
NM1A	Man Tung Road Park	Free field
NM2⁽¹⁾	Tung Chung West Development	To be determined
NM3A⁽²⁾	Site Office	Facade
NM4	Ching Chung Hau Po Woon Primary School	Free field
NM5	Village House in Tin Sum	Free field
NM6	House No. 1, Sha Lo Wan	Free field

Note:

(1) As described in Section 4.3.3 of the Manual, noise monitoring at NM2 will only commence after occupation of the future Tung Chung West Development.

(2) According to Section 4.3.3 of the Manual, the noise monitoring at NM3A was temporarily suspended starting from 1 Sep 2018 and would be resumed with the completion of the Tung Chung East Development.

3.1 Action and Limit Levels

In accordance with the Manual, baseline noise levels at the noise monitoring stations were established as presented in the Baseline Monitoring Report. The Action and Limit Levels of the noise monitoring stipulated in the EM&A programme for triggering the relevant investigation and follow-up procedures under the programme are provided in Table 3.2.

Table 3.2: Action and Limit Levels for Noise Monitoring

Monitoring Stations	Time Period	Action Level	Limit Level, L_eq(30mins) dB(A)
NM1A, NM2, NM3A, NM4, NM5 and NM6	0700-1900 hours on normal weekdays	When one documented complaint is received from any one of the sensitive receivers	75 dB(A)⁽¹⁾

Monitoring Stations

Time Period

Action Level

Limit Level, L_eq(30mins) dB(A)

NM1A, NM2, NM3A, NM4, NM5 and NM6

0700-1900 hours on normal weekdays

When one documented

complaint is received from

any one of the sensitive

receivers

75 dB(A)⁽¹⁾

Note:

(1) Reduced to 70dB(A) for school and 65dB(A) during school examination periods for NM4.

3.2 Monitoring Equipment

Noise monitoring was performed using sound level meter at each designated monitoring station. The sound level meters deployed comply with the International Electrotechnical Commission Publications 651:1979 (Type 1) and 804:1985 (Type 1) specifications. Acoustic calibrator was used to check the sound level meters by a known sound pressure level for field measurement. Details of equipment used in the reporting period are given in Table 3.3.

Table 3.3: Noise Monitoring Equipment

Equipment	Brand and Model	Last Calibration Date	Calibration Certificate Provided in
Integrated Sound Level Meter	NTi XL2-M2211 (Microphone Serial No.7681; Capsule Serial No.72079)	28 Aug 2018	Monthly EM&A Report No. 36, Appendix E
Integrated Sound Level Meter	Rion NL-52 (Serial No. 01287679)	6 Feb 2019	Monthly EM&A Report No. 39, Appendix D
Acoustic Calibrator	Castle GA607 (Serial No. 040162)	7 Aug 2018	Monthly EM&A Report No. 35, Appendix D
Acoustic Calibrator	Casella CEL-120/1 (Serial No. 2383737)	17 Oct 2018	Monthly EM&A Report No. 35, Appendix D

3.3 Monitoring Methodology

3.3.1 Monitoring Procedure

The monitoring procedures involved in the noise monitoring can be summarised as follows:

a. The sound level meter was set on a tripod at least a height of 1.2 m above the ground for free-field measurements at monitoring stations NM1A, NM4, NM5 and NM6. A correction of +3 dB(A) was applied to the free field measurements.

b. Façade measurements were made at the monitoring station NM3A.

c. Parameters such as frequency weighting, time weighting and measurement time were set.

d. Prior to and after each noise measurement, the meter was calibrated using the acoustic calibrator. If the difference in the calibration level before and after measurement was more than 1 dB(A), the measurement would be considered invalid and repeat of noise measurement would be required after re-calibration or repair of the equipment.

e. During the monitoring period, L_eq, L₁₀ and L₉₀ were recorded. In addition, site conditions and noise sources were recorded on a record sheet.

f. Noise measurement results were corrected with reference to the baseline monitoring levels.

g. Observations were recorded when high intrusive noise (e.g. dog barking, helicopter noise) was observed during the monitoring.

3.3.2 Maintenance and Calibration

The maintenance and calibration procedures are summarised below:

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

b. The meter and calibrator were sent to the supplier or laboratory accredited under Hong Kong Laboratory Accreditation Scheme (HOKLAS) to check and calibrate at yearly intervals.

Calibration certificates of the sound level meters and acoustic calibrators used in the noise monitoring listed in Table 3.3 are still valid.

3.4 Summary of Monitoring Results

The noise monitoring schedule involved in the reporting period is provided in Appendix C.

The noise monitoring results in the reporting period are summarized in Table 3.4. Detailed impact monitoring results are presented in Appendix D.

Table 3.4: Summary of Construction Noise Monitoring Results

Monitoring Station	Noise Level Range, dB(A) L_{eq (30 mins)}	Limit Level, dB(A) L_{eq (30 mins)}
NM1A⁽¹⁾	72 – 73	75
NM4⁽¹⁾	63 – 64	70⁽²⁾
NM5⁽¹⁾	53 – 62	75
NM6⁽¹⁾	66 – 73	75

Notes:

(1) +3 dB(A) Façade correction included;

(2) Reduced to 65 dB(A) during school examination periods at NM4. School examination and Territory-wide System Assessment (TSA) took place from 1 to 6 June and from 11 to 12 June in this reporting period respectively.

No complaints were received from any sensitive receiver that triggered the Action Level. All monitoring results were also within the corresponding Limit Levels at all monitoring stations in the reporting period.

3.5 Conclusion

As the construction activities were far away from the monitoring stations, major sources of noise dominating the monitoring stations observed during the construction noise impact monitoring were traffic noise near NM1A, school activities near NM4, aircraft and helicopter noise near NM5 and NM6 during this reporting period. It is considered that the monitoring work during the reporting period was effective and there was no adverse impact attributable to the Project activities.

4 Water Quality Monitoring

Water quality monitoring of DO, pH, temperature, salinity, turbidity, suspended solids (SS), total alkalinity, chromium, and nickel was conducted three days per week, at mid-ebb and mid-flood tides, at a total of 23 water quality monitoring stations, comprising 12 impact (IM) stations, 8 sensitive receiver (SR) stations and 3 control (C) stations in the vicinity of water quality sensitive receivers around the airport island in accordance with the Manual. The purpose of water quality monitoring at the IM stations is to promptly capture any potential water quality impact from the Project before it could become apparent at sensitive receivers (represented by the SR stations). Table 4.1 describes the details of the monitoring stations. Figure 4.1 shows the locations of the monitoring stations.

Table 4.1: Monitoring Locations and Parameters of Impact Water Quality Monitoring

Monitoring Station	Description	Coordinates		Parameters
		Easting	Northing
C1	Control Station	804247	815620	General Parameters DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS DCM Parameters Total Alkalinity, Heavy Metals⁽²⁾
C2	Control Station	806945	825682
C3⁽³⁾	Control Station	817803	822109
IM1	Impact Station	807132	817949
IM2	Impact Station	806166	818163
IM3	Impact Station	805594	818784
IM4	Impact Station	804607	819725
IM5	Impact Station	804867	820735
IM6	Impact Station	805828	821060
IM7	Impact Station	806835	821349
IM8	Impact Station	808140	821830
IM9	Impact Station	808811	822094
IM10	Impact Station	809794	822385
IM11	Impact Station	811460	822057
IM12	Impact Station	812046	821459
SR1A⁽¹⁾	Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF) Seawater Intake for cooling	812660	819977	General Parameters DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS
SR2⁽³⁾	Planned marine park / hard corals at The Brothers / Tai Mo To	814166	821463	General Parameters DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS DCM Parameters Total Alkalinity, Heavy Metals⁽²⁾⁽⁴⁾
SR3	Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park / fishing and spawning grounds in North Lantau	807571	822147	General Parameters DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS
SR4A	Sha Lo Wan	807810	817189
SR5A	San Tau Beach SSSI	810696	816593
SR6	Tai Ho Bay, Near Tai Ho Stream SSSI	814663	817899
SR7	Ma Wan Fish Culture Zone (FCZ)	823742	823636
SR8⁽⁵⁾	Seawater Intake for cooling at Hong Kong International Airport (East)	811623	820390

Notes:

(1) With the operation of HKBCF, water quality monitoring at SR1A station was commenced on 25 October 2018. To better reflect the water quality in the immediate vicinity of the intake, the monitoring location of SR1A has been shifted closer to the intake starting from 5 January 2019.

(2) Details of selection criteria for the two heavy metals for regular DCM monitoring refer to the Detailed Plan on Deep Cement Mixing available on the dedicated 3RS website (http://env.threerunwaysystem.com/en/ep-submissions.html). DCM specific water quality monitoring parameters (total alkalinity and heavy metals) were only conducted at C1 to C3, SR2, and IM1 to IM12.

(3) According to the Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Report, C3 station is not adequately representative as a control station of impact/ SR stations during the flood tide. The control reference has been changed from C3 to SR2 from 1 September 2016 onwards.

(4) Total alkalinity and heavy metals results are collected at SR2 as a control station for regular DCM monitoring.

(5) The monitoring location for SR8 is subject to further changes due to silt curtain arrangements and the progressive relocation of this seawater intake .

4.1 Action and Limit Levels

In accordance with the Manual, baseline water quality levels at the abovementioned representative water quality monitoring stations were established as presented in the Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Report. The Action and Limit Levels of general water quality monitoring and regular DCM monitoring stipulated in the EM&A programme for triggering the relevant investigation and follow-up procedures under the programme are provided in Table 4.2. The control and impact stations during ebb tide and flood tide for general water quality monitoring and regular DCM monitoring are presented in Table 4.3.

Table 4.2: Action and Limit Levels for General Water Quality Monitoring and Regular DCM Monitoring

Parameters		Action Level (AL)		Limit Level (LL)
Action and Limit Levels for general water quality monitoring and regular DCM monitoring (excluding SR1A & SR8)
General Water Quality Monitoring	DO in mg/L (Surface, Middle & Bottom)	Surface and Middle 4.5 mg/L		Surface and Middle 4.1 mg/L 5 mg/L for Fish Culture Zone (SR7) only
	DO in mg/L (Surface, Middle & Bottom)	Bottom 3.4 mg/L		Bottom 2.7 mg/L
	Suspended Solids (SS) in mg/L	23	or 120% of upstream control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher	37	or 130% of upstream control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher
	Turbidity in NTU	22.6		36.1
Regular DCM Monitoring	Total Alkalinity in ppm	95		99
	Representative Heavy Metals for regular DCM monitoring (Chromium) in µg/L	0.2		0.2
	Representative Heavy Metals for regular DCM monitoring (Nickel) in µg/L	3.2		3.6
Action and Limit Levels SR1A
SS (mg/l)		33		42
Action and Limit Levels SR8
SS (mg/l)		52		60

Notes:

(1) For DO measurement, non-compliance occurs when monitoring result is lower than the limits.

(2) For parameters other than DO, non-compliance of water quality results when monitoring results is higher than the limits.

(3) Depth-averaged results are used unless specified otherwise.

(4) Details of selection criteria for the two heavy metals for regular DCM monitoring refer to the Detailed Plan on Deep Cement Mixing available on the dedicated 3RS website (http://env.threerunwaysystem.com/en/ep-submissions.html)

(5) The Action and Limit Levels for the two representative heavy metals chosen will be the same as that for the intensive DCM monitoring.

Table 4.3: The Control and Impact Stations during Flood Tide and Ebb Tide for General Water Quality Monitoring and Regular DCM Monitoring

Control Station	Impact Stations
Flood Tide
C1	IM1, IM2, IM3, IM4, IM5, IM6, IM7, IM8, SR3
SR2⁽¹⁾	IM7, IM8, IM9, IM10, IM11, IM12, SR1A, SR3, SR4A, SR5A, SR6, SR8
Ebb Tide
C1	SR4A, SR5A, SR6
C2	IM1, IM2, IM3, IM4, IM5, IM6, IM7, IM8, IM9, IM10, IM11, IM12, SR1A, SR2, SR3, SR7, SR8

Note:

(1) As per findings of Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Report, the control reference has been changed from C3 to SR2 from 1 Sep 2016 onwards.

4.2 Monitoring Equipment

Table 4.4 summarises the equipment used in the reporting period for monitoring of specific water quality parameters under the water quality monitoring programme.

Table 4.4: Water Quality Monitoring Equipment

Equipment	Brand and Model	Last Calibration Date	Calibration Certificate Provided in
Multifunctional Meter (measurement of DO, pH, temperature, salinity and turbidity)	YSI ProDSS (Serial No. 00019CB2)	27 Mar 2019 ⁽¹⁾	Monthly EM&A Report No. 39, Appendix D
	YSI ProDSS (Serial No. 17H105557)	30 Apr 2019	Monthly EM&A Report No. 41, Appendix D
	YSI ProDSS (Serial No. 16H104233)	30 Apr 2019
	YSI ProDSS (Serial No. 16H104234)	30 Apr 2019
	YSI ProDSS (Serial No. 17E100747)	25 Jun 2019	Appendix E
	YSI ProDSS (Serial No. 15M100005)	25 Jun 2019	Appendix E
Digital Titrator (measurement of total alkalinity)	Titrette Digital Burette 50ml Class A (Serial No. 10N65665)	20 May 2019	Monthly EM&A Report No. 41, Appendix D
Note: (1) The monitoring equipment was not used in the reporting period after the expiry date of the calibration certificate.

Other equipment used as part of the impact water quality monitoring programme are listed in Table 4.5.

Table 4.5: Other Monitoring Equipment

Equipment	Brand and Model
Water Sampler	Van Dorn Water Sampler
Positioning Device (measurement of GPS)	Garmin eTrex Vista HCx
Current Meter (measurement of current speed and direction, and water depth)	Sontek HydroSurveyor

4.3 Monitoring Methodology

4.3.1 Measuring Procedure

Water quality monitoring samples were taken at three depths (at 1m below surface, at mid-depth, and at 1m above bottom) for locations with water depth >6m. For locations with water depth between 3m and 6m, water samples were taken at two depths (surface and bottom). For locations with water depth <3m, only the mid-depth was taken. Duplicate water samples were taken and analysed.

The water samples for all monitoring parameters were collected, stored, preserved and analysed according to the Standard Methods, APHA 22^nd ed. and/or other methods as agreed by the EPD. In-situ measurements at monitoring locations including temperature, pH, DO, turbidity, salinity, alkalinity and water depth were collected by equipment listed in Table 4.4 and Table 4.5. Water samples for heavy metals and SS analysis were stored in high density polythene bottles with no preservative added, packed in ice (cooled to 4 ºC without being frozen), delivered to the laboratory within 24 hours of collection.

4.3.2 Maintenance and Calibration

Calibration of In-situ Instruments

All in-situ monitoring instrument were checked, calibrated and certified by a laboratory accredited under HOKLAS before use. 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. A zero check in distilled water was performed with the turbidity probe at least once per monitoring day. The probe was then calibrated with a solution of known NTU. In addition, the turbidity probe was calibrated at least twice per month to establish the relationship between turbidity readings (in NTU) and levels of SS (in mg/L). Accuracy check of the digital titrator was performed at least once per monitoring day.

Calibration certificates of the monitoring equipment used in the reporting period listed in Table 4.4 are still valid.

4.3.3 Laboratory Measurement / Analysis

Analysis of SS and heavy metals have been carried out by a HOKLAS accredited laboratory, ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd (Reg. No. HOKLAS 066). Sufficient water samples were collected at all the monitoring stations for carrying out the laboratory SS and heavy metals determination. The SS and heavy metals determination works were started within 24 hours after collection of the water samples. The analysis of SS and heavy metals have followed the standard methods summarised in Table 4.6. The QA/QC procedures for laboratory measurement/ analysis of SS and heavy metals were presented in Appendix F of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No.8.

Table 4.6: Laboratory Measurement/ Analysis of SS and Heavy Metals

Parameters	Instrumentation	Analytical Method	Reporting Limit
SS	Analytical Balance	APHA 2540D	2 mg/L
Heavy Metals
Chromium (Cr)	ICP-MS	USEPA 6020A	0.2 µg/L
Nickel (Ni)	ICP-MS	USEPA 6020A	0.2 µg/L

4.4 Summary of Monitoring Results

The water quality monitoring schedule for the reporting period is updated and provided in Appendix C. Due to adverse weather and thunderstorm warning in force, the general water quality monitoring and regular DCM monitoring session during mid-ebb tide on 13 June 2019 was cancelled.

The water quality monitoring results for turbidity, SS, total alkalinity, and chromium obtained during the reporting period were within their corresponding Action and Limit Level. The detailed monitoring results are presented in Appendix D.

For DO and nickel, some of the testing results triggered the corresponding Action or Limit Levels, and investigations were conducted accordingly.

Table 4.7 to Table 4.10 present summaries of the DO compliance status at IM and SR stations during mid-ebb and mid-flood tide for the reporting period.

Table 4.7: Summary of DO (Surface and Middle) Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide)

Table 4.8: Summary of DO (Bottom) Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide)

Table 4.9: Summary of DO (Surface and Middle) Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)

Table 4.10: Summary of DO (Bottom) Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)

Note: Detailed results are presented in Appendix D.
Legend:
	The monitoring results were within the corresponding Action and Limit Levels
	Monitoring result triggered the Action Level at monitoring station located upstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow
D	Monitoring result triggered the Action Level at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow
	Monitoring result triggered the Limit Level at monitoring station located upstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow
D	Monitoring result triggered the Limit Level at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow
	Upstream station with respect to the Project during the respective tide based on dominant tidal flow

Monitoring results triggered the corresponding Action and Limit Levels on four monitoring days. Repeat measurement were conducted on 16, 25, 28, and 30 June 2019 respectively according to the Manual. Some cases occurred at monitoring stations upstream of the Project during respective tide and would unlikely be affected by the Project. Investigation was therefore focused on cases that occurred at monitoring station located downstream of the Project. Details of the Project’s marine construction activities and site observations on the concerned monitoring days were collected. The findings are summarized in Table 4.11.

Table 4.11: Summary of Findings from Investigation of DO Monitoring Results

Date	Marine construction works nearby	Approximate distance from marine construction works	Status of water quality measures (if applicable)	Construction vessels in the vicinity	Turbidity / Silt plume observed near the monitoring station	Action or Limit Level triggered due to Project
15/06/2019	Marine filling and DCM works	Around 2 km	Localised and enhanced silt curtain deployed	No	No	No
25/06/2019	Marine filling and DCM works	Around 500m	Localised and enhanced silt curtain deployed	No	No	No
27/06/2019	Marine filling and DCM works	Around 500m	Localised and enhanced silt curtain deployed	No	No	No
29/06/2019	Marine filling and DCM works	Around 2 km	Localised and enhanced silt curtain deployed	No	No	No

The investigation confirmed that marine filling and DCM works were operating normally with localised and enhanced silt curtain deployed. The localised and enhanced silt curtains were maintained properly and checked by ET regularly.

On 15 June 2019, it was noted that the DO concentration recorded at control station C2 was lower than that at the downstream impact and sensitive receiver stations IM11, IM12, and SR7. This suggested the presence of external sources that may affect DO concentrations around the Project area.

On 25 June 2019, it was found that DO exceedances were also recorded at upstream impact stations IM2, IM3, and IM4, which were unlikely to be affected by Project activities. IM5 and IM6 were located downstream of these stations and were potentially influenced by these external sources. With no silt plume observed at the monitoring stations and mitigation measures implemented properly, the cases recorded at these impact stations were considered not caused by the Project.

On 27 and 29 June 2019, it was found that the DO concentration at some of the impact and sensitive receiver stations (namely IM3, IM4, IM11, IM12, SR5A, and SR7) were higher than that recorded at their respective control station C1 or C2. The DO concentration at IM2, IM3, IM4, SR4A, and SR7 were also within their corresponding baseline ranges during baseline monitoring of the Project. With no silt plume observed at the monitoring stations and mitigation measures implemented properly, the cases recorded at these impact and sensitive receiver stations were considered not caused by the Project.

Table 4.12 presents a summary of the Nickel compliance status at IM stations during mid-ebb tide for the reporting period

Table 4.12: Summary of Nickel Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide)

Table 4.13 presents a summary of the Nickel compliance status at IM stations during mid-flood tide for the reporting period

Table 4.13: Summary of Nickel Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)

Note: Detailed results are presented in Appendix D.
Legend:
	The monitoring results were within the corresponding Action and Limit Levels
D	Monitoring result triggered the Action Level at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow
D	Monitoring result triggered the Limit Level at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow
	Upstream station with respect to the Project during the respective tide based on dominant tidal flow

Nickel monitoring results triggered the corresponding Action and Limit Level on 11 June 2019. Details of the Project’s marine construction activities on the concerned monitoring day was collected and findings are summarized in Table 4.14.

Table 4.14: Summary of Findings from Investigation of Nickel Monitoring Results

Date	Marine construction works nearby	Approximate distance between nearest marine construction works and concerned monitoring stations	Status of water quality measures (if applicable)	Construction vessels in the vicinity	Turbidity / Silt plume observed near the monitoring station	Action or Limit Level triggered due to Project
11/6/2019	Marine filling and DCM works	Around 1 km	Localised and enhanced silt curtain deployed	No	No	No

Date

Marine construction works nearby

Approximate distance between nearest marine construction works and concerned monitoring stations

Status of water quality measures (if applicable)

Construction vessels in the vicinity

Turbidity / Silt plume observed near the monitoring station

Action or Limit Level triggered due to Project

11/6/2019

Marine filling and DCM works

Around 1 km

Localised and enhanced silt curtain deployed

Nickel is a representative heavy metal that indicates the potential for release of contaminants from contaminated mud pits due to the disturbance of marine sediment within it by DCM activities. Elevated nickel concentration due to these activities should be associated with similar elevated SS levels. The SS results at IM8 and IM11 were within the Action and Limit Levels and they were located 1.5km and 2km away from the closest active DCM barge respectively. These indicate that active DCM works had limited influence on water quality when monitoring were conducted at these monitoring stations. The nickel concentration recorded at IM8 was also within the baseline range during baseline monitoring of the Project. Considering that no silt plume was observed at the monitoring stations and mitigation measures were implemented properly, the cases recorded at these impact stations were considered not caused by the Project.

4.5 Conclusion

During the reporting period, it is noted that the vast majority of monitoring results were within their corresponding Action and Limit Levels, while only a minor number of results triggered the corresponding Action and Limit Levels, and investigations were conducted accordingly.

Based on the investigation findings, all results that triggered the corresponding Action or Limit Levels were not due to the Project. Therefore, the Project did not cause adverse impact at the water quality sensitive receivers. All required actions under the Event and Action Plan were followed. These cases appeared to be due to natural fluctuation or other sources not related to the Project.

Nevertheless, as part of the EM&A programme, the construction methods and mitigation measures for water quality will continue to be monitored and opportunities for further enhancement will continue to be explored and implemented where possible, to strive for better protection of water quality and the marine environment.

In the meantime, the contractors were reminded to implement and maintain all mitigation measures during weekly site inspection and regular environmental management meetings. These include maintaining mitigation measures properly for reclamation works including DCM works, marine filling, and seawall construction as recommended in the Manual.

5 Waste Management

In accordance with the Manual, the waste generated from construction activities was audited once per week to determine if wastes are being managed in accordance with the Waste Management Plan (WMP) prepared for the Project, contract-specific WMP, and any statutory and contractual requirements. All aspects of waste management including waste generation, storage, transportation and disposal were assessed during the audits.

5.1 Action and Limit Levels

The Action and Limit Levels of the construction waste are provided in Table 5.1.

Table 5.1: Action and Limit Levels for Construction Waste

Monitoring Stations	Action Level	Limit Level
Construction Area	When one valid documented complaint is received	Non-compliance of the WMP, contract-specific WMPs, any statutory and contractual requirements

Monitoring Stations

Action Level

Limit Level

Construction Area

When one valid documented complaint is

received

Non-compliance of the WMP, contract-specific

WMPs, any statutory and contractual

requirements

5.2 Waste Management Status

Weekly monitoring on all works contracts were carried out by the ET to check and monitor the implementation of proper waste management practices during the construction phase.

Recommendations made included provision and maintenance of proper chemical waste storage area, as well as handling, segregation, and regular disposal of general refuse. The contractors had taken actions to implement the recommended measures.

Based on updated information provided by contractors, construction waste generated in the reporting period is summarized in Table 5.2.

There were no complaints, non-compliance of the WMP, contract-specific WMPs, statutory and contractual requirements that triggered Action and Limit Levels in the reporting period.

Table 5.2: Construction Waste Statistics

		C&D⁽¹⁾ Material Stockpiled for Reuse or Recycle (m³)		C&DMaterial Reused in the Project (m³)		C&D Material Reused in other Projects (m³)		C&D Material Transferred to Public Fill (m³)		Chemical Waste (kg)		Chemical Waste (L)		General Refuse (tonne)
May 2019⁽²⁾⁽³⁾			13,616		*10,284		0		5,617		230		18,000		242
June 2019⁽³⁾			9,690		4,166		0		5,570		150		15,400		354
	Notes: (1) C&D refers to Construction and Demolition. (2) Updated figures in the past month are reported and marked with an asterisk (*). Updated figures for earlier months will be reported in the forthcoming Annual EM&A Report. (3) Metals, paper and/or plastics were recycled in the reporting period.

6 Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring

In accordance with the Manual, CWD monitoring by small vessel line-transect survey supplemented by land-based theodolite tracking survey and passive acoustic monitoring should be conducted during construction phase.

The small vessel line-transect survey should be conducted at a frequency of two full surveys per month, while land-based theodolite tracking survey should be conducted at a frequency of one day per month per station at Sha Chau (SC) and Lung Kwu Chau (LKC) during the construction phase as stipulated in the Manual. Supplemental theodolite tracking survey of one additional day has also been conducted at LKC, i.e. in total twice per month at the LKC station.

6.1 Action and Limit Levels

The Action and Limit Levels for CWD monitoring were formulated by the action response approach using the running quarterly dolphin encounter rates STG and ANI derived from the baseline monitoring data, as presented in the CWD Baseline Monitoring Report. The derived values of Action and Limit Levels for CWD monitoring were summarized in Table 6.1.

Table 6.1: Derived Values of Action and Limit Levels for Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring

	NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL as a Whole
Action Level⁽³⁾	Running quarterly⁽¹⁾ STG < 1.86 & ANI < 9.35
Limit Level⁽³⁾	Two consecutive running quarterly⁽²⁾ (3-month) STG < 1.86 & ANI < 9.35
Notes: (referring to the baseline monitoring report) (1) Action Level – running quarterly STG & ANI will be calculated from the three preceding survey months. (2) Limit Level – two consecutive running quarters mean both the running quarterly encounter rates of the preceding month and the running quarterly encounter rates of this month. (3) Action Level and/or Limit Level will be triggered if both STG and ANI fall below the criteria.

6.2 CWD Monitoring Transects and Stations

6.2.1 Small Vessel Line-transect Survey

Small vessel line-transect surveys were conducted along the transects covering Northeast Lantau (NEL), Northwest Lantau (NWL), Airport West (AW), West Lantau (WL) and Southwest Lantau (SWL) areas as proposed in the Manual, which are consistent with the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) long-term monitoring programme (except the addition of AW). The AW transect has not been previously surveyed in the AFCD programme due to the restrictions of HKIA Approach Area, nevertheless, this transect was established during the EIA of the 3RS Project and refined in the Manual with the aim to collect project specific baseline information within the HKIA Approach Area to fill the data gap that was not covered by the AFCD programme. This also provided a larger sample size for estimating the density, abundance and patterns of movements in the broader study area of the project.

The planned vessel survey transect lines follow the waypoints set for construction phase monitoring as proposed in the Manual and depicted in Figure 6.1 with the waypoint coordinates of all transect lines given in Table 6.2, which are subject to on-site refinement based on the actual survey conditions and constraints.

Table 6.2: Coordinates of Transect Lines in NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL Survey Areas

Waypoint	Easting	Northing	Waypoint	Easting	Northing
NEL
1S	813525	820900	6N	818568	824433
1N	813525	824657	7S	819532	821420
2S	814556	818449	7N	819532	824209
2N	814559	824768	8S	820451	822125
3S	815542	818807	8N	820451	823671
3N	815542	824882	9S	821504	822371
4S	816506	819480	9N	821504	823761
4N	816506	824859	10S	822513	823268
5S	817537	820220	10N	822513	824321
5N	817537	824613	11S	823477	823402
6S	818568	820735	11N	823477	824613
NWL
1S	804671	814577	5S	808504	821735
1N	804671	831404	5N	808504	828602
2Sb	805475	815457	6S	809490	822075
2Nb	805476	818571	6N	809490	825352
2Sa	805476	820770	7S	810499	822323
2Na	805476	830562	7N	810499	824613
3S	806464	821033	8S	811508	821839
3N	806464	829598	8N	811508	824254
4S	807518	821395	9S	812516	821356
4N	807518	829230	9N	812516	824254
AW
1W	804733	818205	2W	805045	816912
1E	806708	818017	2E	805960	816633
WL
1W	800600	805450	7W	800400	811450
1E	801760	805450	7E	802400	811450
2W	800300	806450	8W	800800	812450
2E	801750	806450	8E	802900	812450
3W	799600	807450	9W	801500	813550
3E	801500	807450	9E	803120	813550
4W	799400	808450	10W	801880	814500
4E	801430	808450	10E	803700	814500
5W	799500	809450	11W	802860	815500
5E	801300	809450	12S/11E	803750	815500
6W	799800	810450	12N	803750	818500
6E	801400	810450
SWL
1S	802494	803961	6S	807467	801137
1N	802494	806174	6N	807467	808458
2S	803489	803280	7S	808553	800329
2N	803489	806720	7N	808553	807377
3S	804484	802509	8S	809547	800338
3N	804484	807048	8N	809547	807396
4S	805478	802105	9S	810542	800423
4N	805478	807556	9N	810542	807462
5S	806473	801250	10S	811446	801335
5N	806473	808458	10N	811446	809436

6.2.2 Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey

Land-based theodolite tracking survey stations were set up at two locations, one facing east/south/west on the southern slopes of Sha Chau (SC), and the other facing north/northeast/northwest at Lung Kwu Chau (LKC). The stations (D and E) are depicted in Figure 6.2 and shown in Table 6.3 with position coordinates, height of station and approximate distance of consistent theodolite tracking capabilities for CWD.

Table 6.3: Land-based Theodolite Survey Station Details

Stations	Location	Geographical Coordinates	Station Height (m)	Approximate Tracking Distance (km)
D	Sha Chau (SC)	22° 20’ 43.5” N 113° 53’ 24.66” E	45.66	2
E	Lung Kwu Chau (LKC)	22° 22’ 44.83” N 113° 53’ 0.2” E	70.40	3

Stations

Location

Geographical Coordinates

Station Height (m)

Approximate Tracking Distance (km)

Sha Chau (SC)

22° 20’ 43.5” N

113° 53’ 24.66” E

45.66

Lung Kwu Chau (LKC)

22° 22’ 44.83” N

113° 53’ 0.2” E

70.40

6.3 CWD Monitoring Methodology

6.3.1 Small Vessel Line-transect Survey

Small vessel line-transect surveys provided data for density and abundance estimation and other assessments using distance-sampling methodologies, specifically, line-transect methods.

The surveys involved small vessel line-transect data collection and have been designed to be similar to, and consistent with, previous surveys for the AFCD for their long-term monitoring of small cetaceans in Hong Kong. The survey was designed to provide systematic, quantitative measurements of density, abundance and habitat use.

As mentioned in Section 6.2.1, the transects covered NEL, NWL covering the AW, WL and SWL areas as proposed in the Manual and are consistent with the AFCD long-term monitoring programme (except AW). There are two types of transect lines:

● Primary transect lines: the parallel and zigzag transect lines as shown in Figure 6.1; and

● Secondary transect lines: transect lines connecting between the primary transect lines and going around islands.

All data collected on both primary and secondary transect lines were used for analysis of sighting distribution, group size, activities including association with fishing boat, and mother-calf pairs. Only on-effort data collected under conditions of Beaufort 0-3 and visibility of approximately 1200 m or beyond were used for analysis of the CWD encounter rates.

A 15-20 m vessel with a flying bridge observation platform about 4 to 5 m above water level and unobstructed forward view, and a team of three to four observers were deployed to undertake the surveys. Two observers were on search effort at all times when following the transect lines with a constant speed of 7 to 8 knots (i.e. 13 to 15 km per hour), one using 7X handheld binoculars and the other using unaided eyes and recording data.

During on-effort survey periods, the survey team recorded effort data including time, position (waypoints), weather conditions (Beaufort sea state and visibility) and distance travelled in each series with assistance of a handheld GPS device. The GPS device also continuously and automatically logged data including time, position (latitude and longitude) and vessel speed throughout the entire survey.

When CWDs were seen, the survey team was taken off-effort, the dolphins were approached and photographed for photo-ID information (using a Canon 7D [or similar] camera and long 300 mm+ telephoto lens), then followed until they were lost from view. At that point, the boat returned (off effort) to the survey line at the closest point after obtaining photo records of the dolphin group and began to survey on effort again.

Focal follows of dolphins would be used for providing supplementary information only where practicable (i.e. when individual dolphins or small stable groups of dolphins with at least one member that could be readily identifiable with unaided eyes during observations and weather conditions are favourable). These would involve the boat following (at an appropriate distance to minimize disturbance) an identifiable individual dolphin for an extended period of time, and collecting detailed data on its location, behaviour, response to vessels, and associates.

6.3.2 Photo Identification

CWDs can be identified by their unique features like presence of scratches, nick marks, cuts, wounds, deformities of their dorsal fin and distinguished colouration and spotting patterns.

When CWDs were observed, the survey team was taken off-effort, the dolphins were approached and photographed for photo-ID information (using a Canon 7D [or similar] camera and long 300 mm+ telephoto lens). The survey team attempted to photo both sides of every single dolphin in the group as the colouration and spotting pattern on both sides may not be identical. The photos were taken at the highest available resolution and stored on Compact Flash memory cards for transferring into a computer.

All photos taken were initially examined to sort out those containing potentially identifiable individuals. These sorted-out images would then be examined in detail and compared to the CWD photo-identification catalogue established for 3RS during the baseline monitoring stage.

6.3.3 Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey

Land-based theodolite tracking survey obtains fine-scale information on the time of day and movement patterns of the CWDs. A digital theodolite (Sokkia/Sokkisha Model DT5 or similar equipment) with 30-power magnification and 5-s precision was used to obtain the vertical and horizontal angle of each dolphin and vessel position. Angles were converted to geographic coordinates (latitude and longitude) and data were recorded using Pythagoras software, Version 1.2. This method delivers precise positions of multiple spatially distant targets in a short period of time. The technique is fully non-invasive, and allows for time and cost-effective descriptions of dolphin habitat use patterns at all times of daylight.

Three surveyors (one theodolite operator, one computer operator, and one observer) were involved in each survey. Observers searched for dolphins using unaided eyes and handheld binoculars (7X50). Theodolite tracking sessions were initiated whenever an individual CWD or group of CWDs was located. Where possible, a distinguishable individual was selected, based on colouration, within the group. The focal individual was then continuously tracked via the theodolite, with a position recorded each time the dolphin surfaced. In case an individual could not be positively distinguished from other members, the group was tracked by recording positions based on a central point within the group whenever the CWD surfaced. Tracking continued until animals were lost from view; moved beyond the range of reliable visibility (>1-3 km, depending on station height); or environmental conditions obstructed visibility (e.g., intense haze, Beaufort sea state >4, or sunset), at which time the research effort was terminated. In addition to the tracking of CWD, all vessels that moved within 2-3 km of the station were tracked, with effort made to obtain at least two positions for each vessel.

Theodolite tracking included focal follows of CWD groups and vessels. Priority was given to tracking individual or groups of CWD. The survey team also attempted to track all vessels moving within 1 km of the focal CWD.

6.4 Monitoring Results and Observations

6.4.1 Small Vessel Line-transect Survey

Survey Effort

Within this reporting period, two complete sets of small vessel line-transect surveys were conducted on the 4, 6, 11, 17, 18, 19, 26 and 27 June 2019, covering all transects in NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL survey areas for twice.

A total of around 457.38 km of survey effort was collected from these surveys, with around 86.9% of the total survey effort being conducted under favourable weather condition (i.e. Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with favourable visibility). Details of the survey effort are given in Appendix D.

Sighting Distribution

In June 2019, 12 sightings with 40 dolphins were sighted. Details of cetacean sightings are presented in Appendix D.

Distribution of all CWD sightings recorded in June 2019 is illustrated in Figure 6.3. In NWL, CWD sightings were recorded near Black Point and at the northern waters of Lung Kwu Chau respectively. In WL, CWD sightings were recorded from Tai O to Peaked Hill. In SWL, CWD sightings was scattered from the coastal water near Fan Lau to the coastal water near Lo Kei Wan. No sightings of CWD were recorded in NEL or in close vicinity to 3RS Works Area.

Figure 6.3: Sightings Distribution of Chinese White Dolphins

Encounter Rate

Two types of dolphin encounter rates were calculated based on the data from June 2019. They included the number of dolphin sightings per 100 km survey effort (STG) and total number of dolphins per 100 km survey effort (ANI) in the whole survey area (i.e. NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL). In the calculation of dolphin encounter rates, only survey data collected under favourable weather condition (i.e. Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with favourable visibility) were used. The formulae used for calculation of the encounter rates are shown below:

Encounter Rate by Number of Dolphin Sightings (STG)

Encounter Rate by Number of Dolphins (ANI)

(Notes: Only data collected under Beaufort 3 or below condition were used)

In June 2019, a total of around 397.40 km of survey effort were conducted under Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with favourable visibility, whilst a total number of 12 on-effort sightings with 40 dolphins were sighted under such condition. Calculation of the encounter rates in June 2019 are shown in Appendix D.

For the running quarter of the reporting period (i.e., from April 2019 to June 2019), a total of around 1281.10 km of survey effort were conducted under Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with favourable visibility, whilst a total number of 35 on-effort sightings and a total number of 135 dolphins from on-effort sightings were obtained under such condition. Calculation of the running quarterly encounter rates are shown in Appendix D.

The STG and ANI of CWD in the whole survey area (i.e. NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL) during the month of June 2019 and during the running quarter are presented in Table 6.4 below and compared with the Action Level. The running quarterly encounter rates STG and ANI did not trigger Action Level.

Table 6.4: Comparison of CWD Encounter Rates of the Whole Survey Area with Action Levels

	Encounter Rate (STG)	Encounter Rate (ANI)
June 2019	3.02	10.07
Running Quarter from April 2019 to June 2019⁽¹⁾	2.73	10.54
Action Level	Running quarterly⁽¹⁾ STG < 1.86 & ANI < 9.35
Note: (1) Running quarterly encounter rates STG & ANI were calculated from data collected in the reporting period and the two preceding survey months, i.e. the data from April 2019 to June 2019, containing six sets of transect surveys for all monitoring areas. Action Level will be triggered if both STG and ANI fall below the criteria.

Group Size

In June 2019, 12 groups with 40 dolphins were sighted, and the average group size of CWDs was 3.3 dolphins per group. The number of sightings with medium group size (i.e. 3.-9 dolphins) is slightly higher than that with small group size (i.e. 1-2 dolphins). No CWD sightings with large group size (i.e. 10 or more dolphins) were recorded in June 2019.

Activities and Association with Fishing Boats

Six sightings of CWDs were recorded engaging in feeding activities in June 2019 in NWL, WL and SWL survey areas. One CWD sighting was observed in association with operating purse seiner in SWL.

Mother-calf Pair

In June 2019, there were three sightings of CWD with the presence of mother-and-unspotted juvenile pair.

6.4.2 Photo Identification

In June 2019, a total number of 20 different CWD individuals were identified for totally 21 times. A summary of photo identification works is presented in Table 6.5. Representative photos of these individuals are given in Appendix D.

Table 6.5: Summary of Photo Identification

Individual ID	Date of Sighting (dd-mmm-yy)	Sighting Group No.	Area	Individual ID	Date of Sighting (dd-mmm-yy)	Sighting Group No.	Area
NLMM019	19-Jun-19	1	NWL	WLMM043	6-Jun-19	2	WL
NLMM021	19-Jun-19	1	NWL		26-Jun-19	1	WL
NLMM027	19-Jun-19	1	NWL	WLMM052	26-Jun-19	1	WL
NLMM034	26-Jun-19	1	WL	WLMM068	6-Jun-19	1	WL
NLMM046	26-Jun-19	1	WL	WLMM073	26-Jun-19	2	WL
NLMM070	26-Jun-19	1	WL	WLMM078	18-Jun-19	2	SWL
SLMM011	18-Jun-19	2	SWL	WLMM079	18-Jun-19	3	SWL
SLMM025	26-Jun-19	2	WL	WLMM083	6-Jun-19	2	WL
SLMM028	18-Jun-19	1	SWL	WLMM122	26-Jun-19	1	WL
WLMM027	18-Jun-19	2	SWL	WLMM131	6-Jun-19	3	WL
				WLMM138	6-Jun-19	2	WL

6.4.3 Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey

Survey Effort

Land-based theodolite tracking surveys were conducted at LKC on 5 and 21 June 2019 and at SC on 18 June 2019, with a total of three days of land-based theodolite tracking survey effort accomplished in this reporting period. Three CWD groups were tracked at LKC station during the surveys. Information of survey effort and CWD groups sighted during these land-based theodolite tracking surveys are presented in Table 6.6. Details of the survey effort and CWD groups tracked are presented in Appendix D. The first sighting locations of CWD groups tracked at LKC station during land-based theodolite tracking surveys in June 2019 were depicted in Figure 6.4. No CWD group was sighted from SC station in this reporting month.

Table 6.6: Summary of Survey Effort and CWD Group of Land-based Theodolite Tracking

Land-based Station	No. of Survey Sessions	Survey Effort (hh:mm)	No. of CWD Groups Sighted	CWD Group Sighting per Survey Hour
Lung Kwu Chau	2	12:00	3	0.25
Sha Chau	1	6:00	0	0
TOTAL	3	18:00	3	0.17

Figure 6.4: Plots of First Sightings of All CWD Groups obtained from Land-based Stations

6.5 Progress Update on Passive Acoustic Monitoring

Underwater acoustic monitoring using Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) should be undertaken during land formation related construction works. In this reporting period, the Ecological Acoustic Recorder (EAR) was remained underwater and positioned at south of Sha Chau Island inside the SCLKCMP with 20% duty cycle (Figure 6.5). The EAR deployment is generally for 6 weeks prior to data retrieval for analysis. Acoustic data is reviewed to give an indication of CWDs occurrence patterns and to obtain anthropogenic noise information simultaneously. Analysis (by a specialized team of acousticians) involved manually browsing through every acoustic recording and logging the occurrence of dolphin signals. All data will be re-played by computer as well as listened to by human ears for accurate assessment of dolphin group presence. As the period of data collection and analysis takes more than four months, PAM results could not be reported in monthly intervals but report for supplementing the annual CWD monitoring analysis.

6.6 Site Audit for CWD-related Mitigation Measures

During the reporting period, silt curtains were in place by the contractor for marine filling, in which dolphin observers were deployed by contractor in accordance with the MMWP. Overall, 4 to 14 dolphin observation stations and teams of at least two dolphin observers were deployed by the contractors for continuous monitoring of the DEZ for DCM works, PVD installation, and seawall construction in accordance with the DEZ Plan. Trainings for the proposed dolphin observers on the implementation of MMWP and DEZ monitoring were provided by the ET prior to the aforementioned works, with a cumulative total of 677 individuals being trained and the training records kept by the ET. From the contractors’ MMWP observation records, no dolphin or other marine mammals were observed within or around the silt curtains. As for DEZ monitoring records, no dolphin or other marine mammals were observed within or around the DEZs in this reporting month. These contractors’ records were also audited by the ET during site inspection. Audits of acoustic decoupling measures for construction vessels were carried out during weekly site inspection and the observations are summarised in Section 7.1. Audits of SkyPier high speed ferries route diversion and speed control and construction vessel management are presented in Section 7.2 and Section 7.3 respectively.

6.7 Timing of Reporting CWD Monitoring Results

Detailed analysis of CWD monitoring results collected by small vessel line-transect survey will be provided in future quarterly reports. Detailed analysis of CWD monitoring results collected by land-based theodolite tracking survey and PAM will be provided in future annual reports after a larger sample size of data has been collected.

6.8 Summary of CWD Monitoring

Monitoring of CWD was conducted with two complete sets of small vessel line-transect surveys and three days of land-based theodolite tracking survey effort as scheduled. The running quarterly encounter rates STG and ANI in the reporting period did not trigger the Action Level for CWD monitoring.

7 Environmental Site Inspection and Audit

7.1 Environmental Site Inspection

Site inspections of the construction works were carried out on a weekly basis to monitor the implementation of proper environmental pollution control and mitigation measures for the Project. The weekly site inspection schedule of the construction works is provided in Appendix C. Bi-weekly site inspections were also conducted by the IEC. Besides, ad-hoc site inspections were conducted by ET and IEC if environmental problems were identified, or subsequent to receipt of an environmental complaint, or as part of the investigation work. These site inspections provided a direct means to reinforce the specified environmental protection requirements and pollution control measures in construction sites.

During site inspections, environmental situation, status of implementation of pollution control and mitigation measures were observed. Environmental documents and site records, including waste disposal record, maintenance record of environmental equipment, and relevant environmental permit and licences, were also checked on site. Observations were recorded in the site inspection checklist and passed to the contractor together with the appropriate recommended mitigation measures where necessary in order to advise contractors on environmental improvement, awareness and on-site enhancement measures. The observations were made with reference to the following information during the site inspections:

· The EIA and EM&A requirements;

· Relevant environmental protection laws, guidelines, and practice notes;

· The EP conditions and other submissions under the EP;

· Monitoring results of EM&A programme;

· Works progress and programme;

· Proposal of individual works;

· Contract specifications on environmental protection; and

· Previous site inspection results.

Good site practices were observed in site inspections during the reporting period. Advice were given when necessary to ensure the construction workforce were familiar with relevant procedures, and to maintain good environmental performance on site. Regular toolbox talks on environmental issues were organized for the construction workforce by the contractors to ensure understanding and proper implementation of environmental protection and pollution control mitigation measures.

During the reporting period, implementation of recommended landscape and visual mitigation measures (CM1 – CM10) where applicable was monitored weekly in accordance with the Manual and no non-conformity was recorded. In case of non-conformity, specific recommendations will be made, and actions will be proposed according to the Event and Action Plan. The monitoring status is summarized in Appendix B.

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.

7.2 Audit of SkyPier High Speed Ferries

The Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for High Speed Ferries of SkyPier (the SkyPier Plan) was submitted to the Advisory Council on the Environment for comment and subsequently submitted to and approved by EPD in November 2015 under EP Condition 2.10. The approved SkyPier Plan is available on the dedicated website of the Project. In the SkyPier Plan, AAHK has committed to implement the mitigation measure of requiring HSFs of SkyPier travelling between HKIA and Zhuhai / Macau to start diverting the route with associated speed control across the area, i.e. Speed Control Zone (SCZ), with high CWD abundance. The route diversion and speed restriction at the SCZ have been implemented since 28 December 2015.

Key audit findings for the SkyPier HSFs travelling to/from Zhuhai and Macau against the requirements of the SkyPier Plan during the reporting period are summarized in Table 7.1. The daily movements of all SkyPier HSFs in this reporting period (i.e., 82 daily movements were within the maximum daily cap of 125 daily movements. Status of compliance with the annual daily average of 99 movements will be further reviewed in the annual EM&A Report.

In total, 630 ferry movements between HKIA SkyPier and Zhuhai / Macau were recorded in June 2019 and the data are presented in Appendix H. The time spent by the SkyPier HSFs travelling through the SCZ in June 2019 were presented in Figure 7.1. It will take 9.6 minutes to travel through the SCZ when the SkyPier HSFs adopt the maximum allowable speed of 15 knots within the SCZ. Figure 7.1 shows that all of the SkyPier HSFs spent more than 9.6 minutes to travel through the SCZ.

Figure 7.1: Duration of the SkyPier HSFs travelling through the SCZ for June 2019

Note: Data above the red line indicated that the time spent by the SkyPier HSFs travelling through the SCZ is more than 9.6 minutes, which is in compliance with the SkyPier Plan.

A total of two ferries were recorded with minor route deviations on 10 and 17 June 2019. Notices were sent to the ferry operators and the cases are under investigation by ET.

As reported in the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 41, two ferries were recorded with minor route deviation cases on 11 and 20 May 2019. ET’s investigation found that all the deviations were due to giving way to vessels in order to avoid collision.

Table 7.1: Summary of Key Audit Findings against the SkyPier Plan

Requirements in the SkyPier Plan	1 to 30 June 2019
Total number of ferry movements recorded and audited	630
Use diverted route and enter / leave SCZ through Gate Access Points	2 deviations
Speed control in speed control zone	The average speeds of all HSFs travelling through the SCZ ranged from 9.5 to 13.9 knots. All HSFs had travelled through the SCZ with average speeds under 15 knots in compliance with the SkyPier Plan. The time used by HSFs to travel through SCZ is presented in Figure 7.1.
Daily Cap (including all SkyPier HSFs)	82 daily movements (within the maximum daily cap - 125 daily movements).

7.3 Audit of Construction and Associated Vessels

The updated Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for Construction and Associated Vessel (MTRMP-CAV) was submitted and approved in November 2016 by EPD under EP Condition 2.9. The approved Plan is available on the dedicated website of the Project.

ET carried out the following actions during the reporting period:

Skipper training sessions were held for contractors’ concerned skippers of relevant construction vessels to familiarize them with the predefined routes; general education on local cetaceans; guidelines for avoiding adverse water quality impact; the required environmental practices / measures while operating construction and associated vessels under the Project; and guidelines for operating vessels safely in the presence of CWDs. The list of all trained skippers was properly recorded and maintained by ET.
Three skipper training sessions were held by contractors’ Environmental Officers. Competency tests were subsequently conducted with the trained skippers by ET.

In this reporting period, no skippers were trained by ET and four skippers were trained by contractors’ Environmental Officers. In total, 1155 skippers were trained from August 2016 to June 2019.
The Marine Surveillance System (MSS) automatically recorded deviation cases such as speeding, entering no entry zone and not travelling through the designated gate. ET conducted checking to ensure the MSS records deviation cases accurately.
Deviations such as speeding in the works area, entered no entry zone, and entering from non-designated gates were identified. All the concerned contractors were reminded to comply with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV during the bi-weekly MTCC audit.
Three-month rolling programmes (one month record and three months forecast) for construction vessel activities were received from the contractors in order to help maintain the number of construction and associated vessels on site to a practicable minimal level.

7.4 Implementation of Dolphin Exclusion Zone

The DEZ Plan was submitted in accordance with EP Condition 3.1 (v) requirement and Section 10.3 of the Manual, and approved in April 2016 by EPD. The 24-hour DEZs with a 250m radius for marine works were established and implemented by the contractors for DCM works and seawall construction according to their Method Statement for DEZ Monitoring that followed the specifications and requirements of the DEZ Plan.

During the reporting period, ET was notified that no dolphin sightings were recorded within the DEZ by the contractors. The ET checked the relevant records by the contractors and conducted competence checking to audit the implementation of DEZ.

7.5 Status of Submissions under Environmental Permits

The current status of submissions under the EP up to the reporting period is presented in Table 7.2.

Table 7.2: Status of Submissions under Environmental Permit

EP Condition	Submission	Status
2.1	Complaint Management Plan	Accepted / approved by EPD
2.4	Management Organizations
2.5	Construction Works Schedule and Location Plans
2.7	Marine Park Proposal
2.8	Marine Ecology Conservation Plan
2.9	Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for Construction and Associated Vessels
2.10	Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for High Speed Ferries of SkyPier
2.11	Marine Mammal Watching Plan
2.12	Coral Translocation Plan
2.13	Fisheries Management Plan
2.14	Egretry Survey Plan
2.15	Silt Curtain Deployment Plan
2.16	Spill Response Plan
2.17	Detailed Plan on Deep Cement Mixing
2.18	Landscape & Visual Plan	Submitted to EPD
2.19	Waste Management Plan	Accepted / approved by EPD
2.20	Supplementary Contamination Assessment Plan
3.1	Updated EM&A Manual
3.4	Baseline Monitoring Reports

7.6 Compliance with Other Statutory Environmental Requirements

During the reporting period, environmental related licenses and permits required for the construction activities were checked. No non-compliance with environmental statutory requirements was recorded. The environmental licenses and permits which are valid in the reporting period are presented in Appendix F.

7.7 Analysis and Interpretation of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Status of Prosecutions

7.7.1 Complaints

No construction activities-related complaint was received during the reporting period.

7.7.2 Notifications of Summons or Status of Prosecution

Neither notification of summons nor prosecution was received during the reporting period.

7.7.3 Cumulative Statistics

Cumulative statistics on complaints, notifications of summons and status of prosecutions are summarized in Appendix G.

8 Future Key Issues and Other EIA & EM&A Issues

8.1 Construction Programme for the Coming Reporting Period

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

Advanced Works:

Contract P560 (R) Aviation Fuel Pipeline Diversion Works

● Stockpiling of compressed materials

DCM Works:

Contract 3201 and 3205 DCM Works

● DCM works

Reclamation Works:

Contract 3206 Main Reclamation Works

● Land base ground improvement works;

● Seawall construction; and

● Marine filling.

Airfield Works:

Contract 3301 North Runway Crossover Taxiway

● Cable ducting works;

● Subgrade compaction and paving works;

● Drainage construction works;

● Operation of aggregate mixing facility; and

● Precast of duct bank and fabrication of steel works.

Contract 3302 Eastern Vehicular Tunnel Advance Works

● Site survey and cable laying; and

● Site establishment.

Contract 3303 Third Runway and Associated Works

● Site establishment.

Third Runway Concourse and Integrated Airport Centres Works:

Contract 3402 New Integrated Airport Centres Enabling Works

● Site establishment;

● Installation of sheet and pipe piles; and

● Manhole and pipe construction works.

Terminal 2 Expansion Works:

Contract 3501 Antenna Farm and Sewage Pumping Station

● Drainage works;

● Boring works; and

● Pipe installation.

Contract 3502 Terminal 2 Automated People Mover (APM) Depot Modification Works

● Site clearance; and

● Painting and fitting out works.

Contract 3503 Terminal 2 Foundation and Substructure Works

● Site establishment;

● Demolition works;

● Utilities, drainage, and road work; and

● Piling and structure works.

Automated People Mover (APM) Works:

Contract 3602 Existing APM System Modification Works

● Site establishment; and

● Modification works at APM depot.

Airport Support Infrastructure & Logistic Works:

Contract 3801 APM and BHS Tunnels on Existing Airport Island

● Site establishment;

● Cofferdam installation and construction of box culvert;

● Rising main installation;

● Drilling and grouting works;

● Piling and foundation works

● Demolition works; and

● Site clearance.

8.2 Key Environmental Issues for the Coming Reporting Period

The key environmental issues for the Project in the coming reporting period expected to be associated with the construction activities include:

● Generation of dust from construction works and stockpiles;

● Noise from operating equipment and machinery on-site;

● Generation of site surface runoffs and wastewater from activities on-site;

● Water quality from DCM works and marine filling;

● DEZ monitoring for ground improvement works (DCM works) and seawall construction;

● Implementation of MMWP for silt curtain deployment;

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

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

● Acoustic decoupling measures for equipment on marine vessels.

The implementation of required mitigation measures by the contractors will be monitored by the ET.

8.3 Monitoring Schedule for the Coming Reporting Period

A tentative schedule of the planned environmental monitoring work in the next reporting period is provided in Appendix C.

8.4 Review of the Key Assumptions Adopted in the EIA Report

With reference to Appendix E of the Manual, it is noted that the key assumptions adopted in approved EIA report for the construction phase are still valid and no major changes are involved. The environmental mitigation measures recommended in the approved EIA Report remain applicable and shall be implemented in undertaking construction works for the Project.

9 Conclusion and Recommendation

The key activities of the Project carried out in the reporting period included reclamation works and land-side works. Reclamation works included DCM works, marine filling, seawall construction, and prefabricated vertical drain (PVD) installation. Land-side works involved mainly foundation and substructure work for Terminal 2 expansion, modification and tunnel work for APM and BHS systems, and preparation work for utilities, with activities include site establishment, site office construction, road and drainage works, cable ducting, demolition of existing facilities, piling, and excavation works.

All the monitoring works for construction dust, construction noise, water quality, construction waste, landscape & visual, and CWD were conducted during the reporting period in accordance with the Manual.

Monitoring results of construction dust, construction noise, construction waste, and CWD did not trigger the corresponding Action and Limit Levels during the reporting period.

The water quality monitoring results for turbidity, total alkalinity, SS, and chromium obtained during the reporting period were within the corresponding Action and Limit Levels stipulated in the EM&A programme. Relevant investigation and follow-up actions will be conducted according to the EM&A programme if the corresponding Action and Limit Levels are triggered. For DO and nickel, some testing results triggered the relevant Action or Limit Levels, and the corresponding investigations were conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded that the case was not related to the Project. To conclude, the construction activities in the reporting period did not introduce adverse impact to all water quality sensitive receivers.

Weekly site inspections of the construction works were carried out by the ET to audit the implementation of proper environmental pollution control and mitigation measures for the Project. Bi-weekly site inspections were also conducted by the IEC. Site inspection findings were recorded in the site inspection checklists and provided to the contractors to follow up.

On the implementation of the SkyPier Plan, the daily movements of all SkyPier HSFs in June 2019 were in the range of 82 daily movements, which are within the maximum daily cap of 125 daily movements. A total of 630 HSF movements under the SkyPier Plan were recorded in the reporting period. The average speeds of all HSFs travelling through the SCZ ranged from 9.5 to 13.9 knots. All HSFs had travelled through the SCZ with average speeds under 15 knots in compliance with the SkyPier Plan. Two deviations from the diverted route in June 2019 were recorded in the HSF monitoring and are under investigation by the ET. In summary, the ET and IEC have audited the HSF movements against the SkyPier Plan and conducted follow up investigations or actions accordingly.

On the implementation of MTRMP-CAV, the MSS automatically recorded the deviation case such as speeding, entering no entry zone and not travelling through the designated gates. ET conducted checking to ensure the MSS records all deviation cases accurately. Training has been provided for the concerned skippers to facilitate them in familiarising with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV. Deviations including speeding in the works area, entered no entry zone, and entry from non-designated gates were reviewed by ET. All the concerned captains were reminded by the contractor’s MTCC representative to comply with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV. The ET reminded contractors that all vessels shall avoid entering the no-entry zone, in particular the Brothers Marine Park and the Sha Chau & Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park. Three-month rolling programmes for construction vessel activities, which ensures the proposed vessels are necessary and minimal through good planning, were also received from contractors.