Figure 1.1- 1.2	Key Construction Areas in this Reporting Period
Figure 2.1	Locations of Air and Noise Monitoring Stations and Chek Lap Kok Wind Station
Figure 3.1	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 1 – 31 March 2018

Appendices

Appendix A	Environmental Mitigation Implementation Schedule (EMIS) for Construction Phase
Appendix B	Monitoring Schedule
Appendix C	Monitoring Results
Appendix D	Calibration Certificates
Appendix E	Status of Environmental Permits and Licences
Appendix F	Cumulative Statistics on Exceedances, Environmental Complaints, Notification of Summons and Status of Prosecutions
Appendix G	Data of SkyPier HSF Movements to/from Zhuhai and Macau (between 1 and 31 March 2018)

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 27^th 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 31 March 2018.

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, seawall construction, laying of sand blanket, and prefabricated vertical drain (PVD) installation. Land-side works included horizontal directional drilling (HDD) works, site establishment, site office construction, road and drainage works, cable ducting, demolition and modification of existing facilities, 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	36
Noise monitoring	20
Water quality monitoring	14
Vessel line-transect surveys for Chinese White Dolphin (CWD) monitoring	2
Land-based theodolite tracking survey effort for CWD monitoring	5
Terrestrial ecology monitoring	1

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 operation 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


Environmental Management Meeting for EM&A Review with Works Contracts	Dolphin Observer Training Conducted by ET	Small Vessel Line-transect Survey of Chinese White Dolphin

Results of Impact Monitoring

The monitoring works for construction dust, construction noise, water quality, construction waste, terrestrial ecology, 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 in the reporting period.

The water quality monitoring results for dissolved oxygen (DO), turbidity, total alkalinity, and chromium obtained during the reporting period complied with their corresponding Action and Limit Levels stipulated in the EM&A programme for triggering the relevant investigation and follow-up procedures under the programme if being triggered. For suspended solids (SS) and nickel, some of the testing results triggered the relevant Action or Limit Level, and the corresponding investigations were conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded that the cases were not related to the Project. To conclude, the construction operation in the reporting period did not introduce adverse impact to all water quality sensitive receivers.

The monthly terrestrial ecology monitoring on Sheung Sha Chau observed that HDD works were conducted at the daylighting location and there was no encroachment upon the egretry area nor any significant disturbance to the ardeids at Sheung Sha Chau by the works.

Summary of Upcoming Key Issues

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

Advanced Works:

Contract P560 (R) Aviation Fuel Pipeline Diversion Works

● Pipeline testing and commissioning; and

● Stockpiling of excavated materials from previous HDD operation.

DCM Works:

Contract 3201 to 3205 DCM Works

● DCM works; and

● Seawall construction.

Reclamation Works:

Contract 3206 Main Reclamation Works

● Laying of sand blanket;

● PVD installation; and

● Seawall construction.

Airfield Works:

Contract 3301 North Runway Crossover Taxiway

● Cable ducting works;

● Subgrade works;

● Operation of aggregate mixing facility; and

● Precast of duct bank and fabrication of steel works.

Terminal 2 Expansion Works:

Contract 3501 Antenna Farm and Sewage Pumping Station

● Excavation works;

● Pipe installation;

● Piling works; and

● Builders works of antenna farm.

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

● Removal of existing concrete;

● Formwork erection and concreting works; and

● Steel platform erection.

Contract 3503 Terminal 2 Foundation and Substructure Works

● Site establishment;

● Electrical and mechanical (E&M), drainage, and road work; and

● Piling works

APM works:

Contract 3602 Existing APM System Modification Works

● Site office establishment; and

● Concrete plinth construction.

Baggage Handling System (BHS) works:

Contract 3603 3RS Baggage Handling System

● Site establishment.

Airport Support Infrastructure & Logistic Works:

Contract 3801 APM and BHS Tunnels on Existing Airport Island

● Erection of hoarding;

● Diversion of underground utilities;

● Piling works; and

● Demolition of footbridge.

The key environmental issues will be associated with construction dust, construction noise, water quality, construction waste management, and CWD. The implementation of required mitigation measures by the contractor will be monitored by the ET.

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 summon 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 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 (The Manual is available on the Project’s dedicated website (accessible at: http://env.threerunwaysystem.com/en/index.html)). 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 existing 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 of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 25.

1.2 Scope of this Report

This is the 27^th 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 31 March 2018.

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	Keith Chau	2972 1721
Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) (AECOM Asia Company Limited)	Independent Environmental Checker	Jackel Law	3922 9376
	Deputy Independent Environmental Checker	Roy Man	3922 9376

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

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	Alan Tam	6119 3107
Contract 3202 DCM (Package 2) (Samsung-BuildKing Joint Venture)	Project Manager	Ilkwon Nam	9643 3117
	Environmental Officer	Dickson Mak	9525 8408
Contract 3203 DCM (Package 3) (Sambo E&C Co., Ltd)	Project Manager	Eric Kan	9014 6758
	Environmental Officer	David Hung	9765 6151
Contract 3204 DCM (Package 4) (CRBC-SAMBO Joint Venture)	Project Manager	Kyung-Sik Yoo	9683 8697
	Environmental Officer	Kanny Cho	6799 8226
Contract 3205 DCM (Package 5) (Bachy Soletanche - Sambo Joint Venture)	Deputy Project Director	Min Park	9683 0765
	Environmental Officer	Margaret Chung	9130 3696

Reclamation Works:
Party	Position	Name	Telephone
Contract 3206 (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)	Project Manager	Kin Hang Chung	9412 1386

Terminal 2 (T2) Expansion Works:
Party	Position	Name	Telephone
Contract 3501 Antenna Farm and Sewage Pumping Station (Build King Construction Ltd.)	Project Manager	Raymond Au	6985 8860
	Environmental Officer	Edward Tam	9287 8270
Contract 3502 Terminal 2 APM Depot Modification Works (Build King Construction Ltd.)	Project Manager	Kivin Cheng	9380 3635
	Environmental Officer	Chun Pong Chan	9187 7118
Contract 3503 Terminal 2 Foundation and Substructure Works (Leighton – Chun Wo Joint Venture)	Construction Manager	Stephen O’Donoghue	9732 6787
	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

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 DCM works, seawall construction, laying of sand blanket, and PVD installation. Land-side works included HDD works, site establishment, site office construction, road and drainage works, cable ducting, demolition and modification of existing facilities, piling, and excavation works.

The locations of the works area are presented in Figure 1.1 to 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 and approved by 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	On-going
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	On-going
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
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, terrestrial ecology, 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:

● One dolphin observer training provided by ET: 21 Mar 2018

● Three skipper trainings provided by ET: 7, 8 and 21 Mar 2018

● Eight environmental management meetings for EM&A review with works contracts: 13, 21, 22, 27 and 28 Mar 2018

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 A.

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-001 (Serial No. 934393)	11 Oct 2017	Monthly EM&A Report No. 22, Appendix E
	SIBATA LD-3B-002 (Serial No. 974350)	11 Sep 2017
	SIBATA LD-3B-003 (Serial No. 276018)	11 Sep 2017

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 E of the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report No. 22, 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 B.

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

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	13 – 56	306	500
AR2	13 – 184	298	500

The monitoring results complied with 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 five 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. As described in Section 4.3.3 of the Manual, monitoring at NM2 will commence when the future residential buildings in Tung Chung West Development become occupied.

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	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.

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	B&K 2238 (Serial No. 2800932)	17 Jul 2017	Monthly EM&A Report No. 19, Appendix E
Integrated Sound Level Meter	B&K 2238 (Serial No. 2808432)	30 Aug 2017	Monthly EM&A Report No. 21, Appendix E
Acoustic Calibrator	B&K 4231 (Serial No. 3003246)	16 May 2017	Monthly EM&A Report No. 17, Appendix D
Acoustic Calibrator	B&K 4231 (Serial No. 3004068)	17 Jul 2017	Monthly EM&A Report No. 19, Appendix E

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 B.

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

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⁾	71 – 73	75
NM3A	61 – 63	75
NM4⁽¹⁾	60 – 66	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 took place from 15 to 21 March 2018 in this reporting period.

The monitoring results complied with the corresponding Action and 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 road traffic noise at NM1A, and aircraft and helicopter noise at NM3A, NM4, NM5 and NM6 during this reporting period. It is considered that the monitoring work during the reporting period is effective and there was no adverse impact attributable to the Project activities.

4 Water Quality Monitoring

Water quality monitoring of DO, turbidity, total alkalinity, chromium, and nickel was conducted three days per week, at mid-ebb and mid-flood tides, at a total of 22 water quality monitoring stations, comprising 12 impact (IM) stations, 7 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 3.1 shows the locations of the monitoring stations.

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

Monitoring	Description	Coordinates		Parameters
Station		Easting	Northing
C1	Control Station	804247	815620	DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS, Total Alkalinity, Heavy Metals⁽²⁾
C2	Control Station	806945	825682
C3⁽³⁾	Control Station	817803	822109
IM1	Impact Station	806458	818351
IM2	Impact Station	806193	818852
IM3	Impact Station	806019	819411
IM4	Impact Station	805039	819570
IM5	Impact Station	804924	820564
IM6	Impact Station	805828	821060
IM7	Impact Station	806835	821349
IM8	Impact Station	807838	821695
IM9	Impact Station	808811	822094
IM10	Impact Station	809838	822240
IM11	Impact Station	810545	821501
IM12	Impact Station	811519	821162
SR1⁽¹⁾	Future Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF) Seawater Intake for cooling	812586	820069	DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS
SR2⁽³⁾	Planned marine park / hard corals at The Brothers / Tai Mo To	814166	821463	DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS, Total Alkalinity, Heavy Metals⁽²⁾⁽⁴⁾
SR3	Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park / fishing and spawning grounds in North Lantau	807571	822147	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)	811418 (from July 2017 onwards)	820246

Notes:

(1) The seawater intakes of SR1 for the future HKBCF is not yet in operation, hence no water quality impact monitoring was conducted at this station. The future permanent location for SR1 during impact monitoring is subject to finalisation after the HKBCF seawater is commissioned.

(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^(1)(2)(3)		Limit Level^(1)(2)(3)
Action and Limit Levels for general water quality monitoring and regular DCM monitoring (excluding SR1& SR8)
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
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
Total Alkalinity in ppm	95		99
Representative Heavy Metals for regular DCM monitoring (Chromium)⁽⁴⁾⁽⁵⁾	0.2		0.2
Representative Heavy Metals for regular DCM monitoring (Nickel)⁽⁴⁾⁽⁵⁾	3.2		3.6
Action and Limit Levels SR1
SS (mg/l)	To be determined prior to its commissioning		To be determined prior to its commissioning
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 6920 V2 (Serial No. 00019CB2)	7 Dec 2017	Monthly EM&A Report No. 24, Appendix D
	YSI ProDSS (Serial No. 15M100005)	6 Feb 2018	Appendix D
	YSI ProDSS (Serial No. 16H104233)	6 Feb 2018
	YSI ProDSS (Serial No. 16H104234)	6 Feb 2018
	YSI ProDSS (Serial No. 17E100747)	1 Feb 2018
	YSI ProDSS (Serial No. 17H105557)	6 Feb 2018
	YSI 6920 V2 (Serial No. 0001C6A7)	2 Mar 2018
	YSI 6920 (Serial No. 000109DF)	2 Mar 2018
Digital Titrator (measurement of total alkalinity)	Titrette Digital Burette 50ml Class A (Serial No. 10N65665)	18 Dec 2017	Monthly EM&A Report No. 24, Appendix D
Digital Titrator (measurement of total alkalinity)	Titrette Digital Burette 50ml Class A (Serial No. 10N60623)	22 Feb 2018	Appendix D

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 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 B. The sea conditions varied from calm to rough, and the weather conditions varied from sunny to rainy during the monitoring period. The water quality monitoring results for DO, turbidity, total alkalinity, and chromium obtained during the reporting period were within their corresponding Action and Limit Levels. For SS and nickel, some of the testing results triggered the corresponding Action or Limit Level, and investigations were conducted accordingly.

Table 4.7 presents a summary of the SS compliance status at IM and SR stations during mid-ebb tide for the reporting period.

Table 4.7: Summary of SS Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide)

Note: Detailed results are presented in Appendix C.
Legend:
	The monitoring results complied with 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
	Upstream station with respect to the Project during the respective tide based on dominant tidal flow

Monitoring results triggered the corresponding Action Levels on two monitoring days. However, the cases occurred at monitoring stations which were located upstream of the Project during ebb tide, that would unlikely be affected by the Project. Therefore, the cases were possibly due to natural fluctuation in the vicinity of the monitoring stations, and considered not due to the Project.

Table 4.8 presents a summary of the SS compliance status at IM and SR stations during mid-flood tide for the reporting period.

Table 4.8: Summary of SS Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)

Note: Detailed results are presented in Appendix C.
Legend:
	The monitoring results complied with 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
	Upstream station with respect to the Project during the respective tide based on dominant tidal flow

Monitoring results triggered the corresponding Action Levels on three monitoring days. Some of the cases occurred at monitoring stations located upstream of the Project during flood tide, that would unlikely be affected by the Project. Therefore, investigations focusing on cases occurred at monitoring stations located downstream of the Project were carried out.

As part of the investigation on the downstream events, details of the Project’s marine construction activities on the concerned monitoring days were collected, as well as any observations during the monitoring. The findings are summarized in Table 4.9.

Table 4.9: Summary of Findings from Investigations of SS Monitoring Results (Mid-Flood Tide)

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
03/03/2018	DCM works Sand blanket laying	Around 500m	Silt curtain deployed	No	No	No
20/03/2018	DCM works Sand blanket laying	Around 500m	Silt curtain deployed	No	No	No

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

03/03/2018

DCM works

Sand blanket laying

Around 500m

Silt curtain deployed

20/03/2018

DCM works

Sand blanket laying

Around 500m

Silt curtain deployed

According to the investigation findings, it was confirmed that both DCM and sand blanket laying activities were operating normally with silt curtains deployed. The silt curtains were maintained properly.

For the monitoring results at IM5, IM6, and IM7 on 3 March 2018, these stations were located downstream of the Project during flood tide, which might be affected by Project’s construction activities. However, it was noticed that Action Level was also triggered at IM4, a nearby IM station located upstream of the Project. This station, while being unlikely to be affected by the Project, might affect the water quality at the downstream IM stations in the vicinity. Besides, during the monitoring session conducted on 3 March 2018, no specific observation was made regarding any water quality impact due to Project activities. As there was no evidence of SS release due to Project activities from site observations and all mitigation measures were carried out properly, the cases were considered not due to the Project.

For the monitoring result at IM5, IM6, IM7, IM8, and IM9 on 20 March 2018, these monitoring stations were located downstream of the Project during flood tide, which might be affected by Project’s construction activities. However, it was noticed that the SS levels at IM5, IM6, and IM7 were within the baseline levels. Besides, during the monitoring session conducted on 20 March 2018, no specific observation was made regarding any water quality impact due to Project activities. As there was no evidence of SS release due to Project activities from site observations and all mitigation measures were carried out properly, the cases were considered not due to the Project.

Table 4.10 presents a summary of the nickel compliance status at IM and SR stations during mid-flood tide for the reporting period.

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

Note: Detailed results are presented in Appendix C.
Legend:
	The monitoring results complied with the corresponding Action and Limit Levels
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 Limit Level on one monitoring day. As the result was collected at a station located downstream of the Project, which might be affected by Project’s construction activities, investigation was carried out.

As part of the investigation on the downstream event, details of the Project’s marine construction activities on the concerned monitoring day was collected, as well as any observations during the monitoring. The findings are summarized in Table 4.11.

Table 4.11: Summary of Findings from Investigations of Nickel Monitoring Results (Mid-Flood Tide)

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
29/03/2018	DCM works Sand blanket laying	Around 500m	Silt curtain deployed	No	No	No

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

29/03/2018

DCM works

Sand blanket laying

Around 500m

Silt curtain deployed

The monitoring result at IM9 on 29 March 2018 appeared to be an isolated case with no observable temporal and spatial trend to indicate any effect due to Project activities. The monitoring results was also marginally above the Limit Level (3.8 µg/L compared to Limit Level of 3.6 µg/L based on the results derived from baseline monitoring data). Based on the investigation of in-situ water quality monitoring at the nearest DCM barge, three out of four monitoring points in the immediate downstream of the DCM rigs were below the Action and Limit Levels specified in the Baseline Monitoring Report. This suggests that there was no leakage of contaminants from the contaminated mud pits due to DCM activities.

Therefore, the case was considered not due to the Project and may be due to natural fluctuation or other sources not related to 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 their corresponding Action or Limit level, and investigations were conducted accordingly.

Based on the investigation findings, all results that triggered the corresponding Action or Limit Level 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, the non-project related triggers have been attended to and have initiated corresponding actions and measures. 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 for DCM works and sand blanket laying works properly 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 and chemical waste. 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.

The monitoring results complied with the Action or Limit Levels during the reporting period.

Table 5.2: Construction Waste Statistics

	Excavated Material (m³)⁽¹⁾	C&D⁽²⁾ Material Reused in the Project (m³)	C&D Material Reused in other Projects (m³)	C&D Material Disposed of as Public Fill (m³)	Chemical Waste (kg)	Chemical Waste (L)	General Refuse (tonne)
Mar 2018⁽³⁾	1,236	563	0	1,689	165	8,000	258
Notes: (1) The excavated materials were temporarily stored at stockpiling area and will be reused in the Project. (2) C&D refers to Construction and Demolition (3) Paper and plastics were recycled in the reporting period.

Excavated Material (m³)⁽¹⁾

C&D⁽²⁾ Material Reused in the Project (m³)

C&D Material Reused in other Projects (m³)

C&D Material Disposed of as Public Fill (m³)

Chemical Waste (kg)

Chemical Waste (L)

General Refuse (tonne)

Mar 2018⁽³⁾

1,236

563

1,689

165

8,000

258

Notes:

(1) The excavated materials were temporarily stored at stockpiling area and will be reused in the Project.

(2) C&D refers to Construction and Demolition

(3) Paper and 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 as proposed in the Manual 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 during the construction phase. In addition to the land-based theodolite tracking survey required for impact monitoring as stipulated in the Manual, supplemental theodolite tracking surveys have also been conducted during the implementation for the SkyPier HSF diversion and speed control in order to assist in monitoring the effectiveness of these measures, i.e. in total twice per month at the Sha Chau station and three times per month at the Lung Kwu Chau 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. For CWD monitoring for March 2018, data from 1 January 2018 to 31 March 2018 will be used to calculate the running quarterly encounter rates STG & ANI; (2) Limit Level – two consecutive running quarters mean both the running quarterly encounter rates of the preceding month February 2018 (calculated by data from December 2017 to February 2018) and the running quarterly encounter rates of this month (calculated by data from January 2018 to March 2018). (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 same location of the survey line where dolphins were spotted as far as practicable and began to survey on effort again.

Focal follows of dolphins were conducted 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 involved 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 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 21, and 22 March 2018, covering all transects in NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL survey areas for twice.

A total of around 454.57 km of survey effort was collected from these surveys, with around 91.57% 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 C.

Sighting Distribution

In March 2018, 18 sightings with 46 dolphins were sighted. Details of cetacean sightings are presented in Appendix C.

Distribution of all CWD sightings recorded in March 2018 is illustrated in Figure 6.3. In NWL, the majority of the CWD sightings were recorded within and around Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park, particularly at the waters northern and northeastern off Lung Kwu Chau. Two sightings were recorded on Urmston Road between Lung Kwu Chau and Castle Peak Power Station. One off-effort sighting with two dolphins were sighted just outside the open-sea silt curtain at the northwestern tip of the 3RS works area. In WL, a few CWD sightings were recorded scattering from Tai O to Fan Lau. In SWL, only one CWD sighting was encountered at the coastal waters between Tai Long Wan and Fan Lau Tung Wan . No sightings of CWDs were recorded in NEL survey area.

Figure 6.3: Sightings Distribution of Chinese White Dolphins

Remarks: Please note that there are 18 pink circles on the map indicating the sighting locations of CWD. Some of them were very close to each other and therefore appear overlapped on this distribution map.

Encounter Rate

Two types of dolphin encounter rates were calculated based on the data from March 2018. 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 March 2018, a total of around 416.26 km of survey effort were conducted under Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with favourable visibility, whilst a total number of 16 on-effort sightings with 43 dolphins were sighted under such condition. Calculation of the encounter rates in March 2018 are shown in Appendix C.

For the running quarter of the reporting period (i.e., from January 2018 to March 2018), a total of around 1256.20 km of survey effort were conducted under Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with favourable visibility, whilst a total number of 60 on-effort sightings and a total number of 195 dolphins from on-effort sightings were obtained under such condition. Calculation of the running quarterly encounter rates are shown in Appendix C.

The STG and ANI of CWD in the whole survey area (i.e. NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL) during the month of March 2018 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 the Action Level (i.e., remained above the Action Level).

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

	Encounter Rate (STG)	Encounter Rate (ANI)
March 2018	3.84	10.33
Running Quarter from January 2018 to March 2018⁽¹⁾	4.78	15.52
Action Level	Running quarterly⁽¹⁾ < 1.86	Running quarterly⁽¹⁾ < 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 January to March 2018, containing six sets of transect surveys for all monitoring areas.

Group Size

In March 2018, 18 groups with 46 dolphins were sighted, and the average group size of CWDs was 2.56 dolphins per group. Sightings with small group size (i.e. 1-2 dolphins) were dominant. One sighting with large group size of 10 dolphins was recorded in WL.

Activities and Association with Fishing Boats

Seven out of 18 sightings of CWDs were recorded engaging in feeding activities in March 2018. CWDs from one out of these seven sightings were observed associating with operating purse seiner at the waters northeastern off Lung Kwu Chau.

Mother-calf Pair

In March 2018, one mother-and-spotted juvenile pair and one mother-and-unspotted juvenile pair were recorded in WL and NWL respectively.

6.4.2 Photo Identification

In March 2018, a total number of 31 different CWD individuals were identified for totally 36 times. A summary of photo identification works is presented in Table 6.5. Representative photos of these individuals are given in Appendix C.

Table 6.5: Summary of Photo Identification

Individual ID	Date of Sighting (dd/mm/yy)	Sighting Group No.	Area	Individual ID	Date of Sighting (dd/mm/yy)	Sighting Group No.	Area
NLMM002	22-Mar-18	1	NWL	WLMM001	12-Mar-18	2	WL
NLMM004	22-Mar-18	1	NWL	WLMM003	13-Mar-18	3	WL
NLMM009	22-Mar-18	1	NWL	WLMM007	12-Mar-18	1	WL
NLMM018	22-Mar-18	1	NWL	WLMM018	12-Mar-18	1	WL
NLMM043	22-Mar-18	1	NWL	WLMM026	14-Mar-18	1	NWL
NLMM063	22-Mar-18	1	NWL			3	NWL
NLMM065	14-Mar-18	4	NWL	WLMM027	14-Mar-18	1	NWL
		6	NWL			3	NWL
SLMM003	12-Mar-18	1	WL	WLMM028	13-Mar-18	3	WL
SLMM014	12-Mar-18	1	WL	WLMM029	13-Mar-18	3	WL
		3	SWL	WLMM046	14-Mar-18	4	NWL
SLMM023	13-Mar-18	3	WL	WLMM065	14-Mar-18	2	NWL
SLMM025	12-Mar-18	1	WL	WLMM066	14-Mar-18	2	NWL
SLMM027	12-Mar-18	1	WL	WLMM073	12-Mar-18	1	WL
SLMM031	13-Mar-18	5	WL	WLMM078	13-Mar-18	1	WL
SLMM034	12-Mar-18	2	WL	WLMM079	12-Mar-18	1	WL
	13-Mar-18	2	WL	WLMM080	14-Mar-18	4	NWL
SLMM049	12-Mar-18	1	WL	WLMM114	12-Mar-18	1	WL

6.4.3 Land-based Theodolite Tracking Survey

Survey Effort

Land-based theodolite tracking surveys were conducted at LKC on 12, 22 and 23 March 2018 and at SC on 26 and 27 March 2018, with a total of five days of land-based theodolite tracking survey effort accomplished in this reporting period. A total number of 19 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 C. The first sighting locations of CWD groups tracked at LKC station during land-based theodolite tracking surveys in March 2018 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	3	18:00	19	1.06
Sha Chau	2	12:00	0	0
TOTAL	5	30:00	19	0.63

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) has been retrieved on 6 March 2017 and subsequently redeployed and positioned at south of Sha Chau Island inside the SCLKCMP with 20% duty cycle (Figure 6.5). The EAR deployment is generally for 4-6 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 two months, PAM results could not be reported in monthly intervals.

6.6 Site Audit for CWD-related Mitigation Measures

During the reporting period, silt curtains were in place by the contractors for sand blanket laying works, in which dolphin observers were deployed by each contractor in accordance with the MMWP. Teams of at least two dolphin observers were deployed at 20 to 24 dolphin observation stations by the contractors for continuous monitoring of the DEZ by all contractors for ground improvement works (DCM works and 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 605 individuals being trained and the training records kept by the ET. From the contractors’ MMWP observation records and DEZ monitoring records, no dolphin or other marine mammals were observed within or around the silt curtains, whilst there were three records of dolphin sighting within the DEZ of DCM works in this reporting period. According to the contractor’s site record, relevant DCM works were suspended in the dolphin sighting events until the DEZ was clear of dolphin for a continuous period of 30 minutes. Details for the implementation of DEZ during the incident of dolphin sighting within the DEZ of DCM works are mentioned in Section 7.4. 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 five 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

Weekly site inspections of construction works were carried out by the ET to audit 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 B. Bi-weekly site inspections were also conducted by the IEC. Observations have been recorded in the site inspection checklists and provided to the contractors together with the appropriate follow-up actions where necessary.

The key observations from site inspection and associated recommendations were related to display of appropriate permits and labels; provision and maintenance of drip trays, spill kits, and chemical waste storage area; proper deployment and maintenance of silt curtains; proper handling, segregation, and regular disposal of general refuse and chemical waste; proper implementation of dust suppression, acoustic decoupling measures, wastewater treatment, dark smoke prevention, tree protection, and runoff prevention measures; as well as proper implementation DEZ and marine traffic monitoring.

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 A.

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., 84 to 90 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, 884 ferry movements between HKIA SkyPier and Zhuhai / Macau were recorded in March 2018 and the data are presented in Appendix G. The time spent by the SkyPier HSFs travelling through the SCZ in March 2018 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 March 2018

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.

One ferry was recorded with minor deviation from the diverted route on 5 March 2018. Notices were sent to the ferry operators and the cases are under investigation by ET. The investigation result will be presented in the next monthly EM&A report.

Six ferries were recorded with minor deviation from the diverted route in February 2018. For the two cases on 5 February 2018, ET’s investigation found that the vessel captains of the two cases had to give way to a large container vessel and a small fishing boat respectively to ensure safety. For the case on 17 February 2018, ET’s investigation found that the vessel captain had to give way to a large container vessel to ensure safety. For the cases on 18 February 2018, 20 February 2018 and 24 February 2018, ET’s investigation found that the vessel captains for all three cases had to give way to a vessel to avoid collision. After the minor deviation, all HSFs returned to the diverted route following the SkyPier Plan.

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

Requirements in the SkyPier Plan	1 March to 31 March 2018
Total number of ferry movements recorded and audited	884
Use diverted route and enter / leave SCZ through Gate Access Points	1 deviation.
Speed control in speed control zone	The average speeds taken within the SCZ by all HSFs were within 15 knots (10.0 knots to 13.9 knots), which complied 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)	84 to 90 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:

Two 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.
Eight skipper training sessions were held by contractor’s Environmental Officer. Competency tests were subsequently conducted with the trained skippers by ET.

In this reporting period, eight skippers were trained by ET and nine skippers were trained by contractor’s Environmental Officer. In total, 893 skippers were trained from August 2016 to March 2018.
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 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 ground improvement works (DCM works and PVD installation) 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 on three records of dolphin sighting within the DEZ of DCM works by the contractor. The ET checked the dolphin sighting records and the contractor’s site records to audit the implementation of DEZ. Details of the sightings are summarized in Table 7.2. DCM installation works on DCM barges within the DEZ were ceased by the contractor, and not resumed until the DEZ was clear of dolphin for a continuous period of at least 30 minutes in accordance with the DEZ Plan.

Table 7.2: Summary of Dolphin Sightings within the DEZ

Date	Works Area⁽¹⁾ and Type of Works Suspended	Location of the DEZ Monitoring Station	Time of Initial Sighting of Dolphin Group	Time of Last Sighting of Dolphin Group
08 Mar 2018	DCM works at Area G4	22°18.443N, 113°53.502E	16:47	17:10
09 Mar 2018	DCM works at Area G4	22°18.428N, 113°53.504E	13:35	16:40
18 Mar 2018	DCM works at Area G4	22°18.437N, 113°53.494E	09:03	09:12
Note: (1) Please refer to Figure 1.2 for the location of works area.

7.5 Ecological Monitoring

In accordance with the Manual, ecological monitoring shall be undertaken monthly at the Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) daylighting location on Sheung Sha Chau Island during the HDD construction works period from August to March to identify and evaluate any impacts with appropriate actions taken as required to address and minimise any adverse impact found. During the reporting period, the monthly ecological monitoring at the HDD daylighting location on Sheung Sha Chau observed that HDD works were ongoing under the Contract P560(R) at the daylighting location, and there was no encroachment of any works upon the egretry area nor any significant disturbance to the ardeids on the island by the works. Signs of early breeding activities by Black-crowned Night Heron and Little Egret were observed on trees located further east of the previously identified egretry area where it is at the southern side of Sheung Sha Chau Island. At the HDD daylighting location, neither nest nor breeding activity of ardeids were found during the monthly ecological monitoring and weekly site inspections in the reporting period. The location map and site photos regarding the monthly ecological monitoring for the HDD works and egretry area are provided in Appendix C for reference. All the HDD construction works on Sheung Sha Chau had been completed and retreated on 29 March 2018 No construction works will be conducted on Sheung Sha Chau Island during the ardeid’s breeding season.

7.6 Status of Submissions under Environmental Permits

The current status of submissions under the EP up to the reporting period is presented in Table 7.3.

Table 7.3: 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
2.19	Waste Management Plan
2.20	Supplementary Contamination Assessment Plan
3.1	Updated EM&A Manual
3.4	Baseline Monitoring Reports

7.7 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 E.

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

7.8.1 Complaints

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

7.8.2 Notifications of Summons or Status of Prosecution

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

7.8.3 Cumulative Statistics

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

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

● Pipeline testing and commissioning; and

● Stockpiling of excavated materials from previous HDD operation.

DCM Works:

Contract 3201 to 3205 DCM Works

● DCM works; and

● Seawall construction.

Reclamation Works:

Contract 3206 Main Reclamation Works

● Laying of sand blanket;

● PVD installation; and

● Seawall construction.

Airfield Works:

Contract 3301 North Runway Crossover Taxiway

● Cable ducting works;

● Subgrade works;

● Operation of aggregate mixing facility; and

● Precast of duct bank and fabrication of steel works.

Terminal 2 Expansion Works:

Contract 3501 Antenna Farm and Sewage Pumping Station

● Excavation works;

● Pipe installation;

● Piling works; and

● Builders works of antenna farm.

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

● Removal of existing concrete;

● Formwork erection and concreting works; and

● Steel platform erection.

Contract 3503 Terminal 2 Foundation and Substructure Works

● Site establishment;

● Electrical and mechanical (E&M), drainage, and road work; and

● Piling works

APM works:

Contract 3602 Existing APM System Modification Works

● Site office establishment; and

● Concrete plinth construction.

Baggage Handling System (BHS) works:

Contract 3603 3RS Baggage Handling System

● Site establishment.

Airport Support Infrastructure & Logistic Works:

Contract 3801 APM and BHS Tunnels on Existing Airport Island

● Erection of hoarding;

● Diversion of underground utilities;

● Piling works; and

● Demolition of footbridge.

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 laying of sand blankets and DCM works;

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

● Implementation of MMWP for silt curtain deployment by the contractors’ dolphin observers;

● 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 B.

9 Conclusion and Recommendation

All the monitoring works for construction dust, construction noise, water quality, construction waste, terrestrial ecology, 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 DO, turbidity, total alkalinity, and chromium obtained during the reporting period were within their corresponding Action and Limit Levels stipulated in the EM&A programme for triggering the relevant investigation and follow-up procedures under the programme if being exceeded. For SS and nickel, some of the testing results triggered the relevant Action or Limit Level, and the corresponding investigations were conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded that the cases were not related to the Project. To conclude, the construction operation during the reporting period did not introduce adverse impact to all water quality sensitive receivers.

The monthly terrestrial ecology monitoring on Sheung Sha Chau Island observed that HDD works were conducted at the daylighting location and there was no encroachment upon the egretry area nor any significant disturbance to the egrets at Sheung Sha Chau by the works.

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 MMWP, dolphin observers were deployed by the contractors for laying of open sea silt curtain and laying of silt curtains for sand blanket works in accordance with the MMWP. On the implementation of DEZ Plan, dolphin observers at 20 to 24 dolphin observation stations were deployed for continuous monitoring of the DEZ by all contractors for ground improvement works (DCM works and PVD installation) and seawall construction in accordance with the DEZ Plan. Trainings for the proposed dolphin observers were provided by the ET prior to the aforementioned works, with the training records kept by the ET. From the contractors’ MMWP observation records and DEZ monitoring records, no dolphin or other marine mammals were observed within or around the silt curtains, whilst there were three records of dolphin sighting within the DEZ of DCM works in this reporting month. The concerned DCM installation works were temporarily ceased by the contractor in accordance with the DEZ Plan. The contractor’s record was checked by the ET during site inspection. Audits of acoustic decoupling measures for construction vessels were also carried out by the ET, and relevant recommendations were made during regular site inspections.

On the implementation of the SkyPier Plan, the daily movements of all SkyPier high speed ferries (HSFs) in March 2018 were in the range of 84 to 90 daily movements, which are within the maximum daily cap of 125 daily movements. A total of 884 HSF movements under the SkyPier Plan were recorded in the reporting period. All HSFs had travelled through the SCZ with average speeds under 15 knots (10.0 to 13.9 knots), which were in compliance with the SkyPier Plan. One deviation from the diverted route in March 2018 is recorded in the High Speed Ferry Monitoring System. In summary, the ET and IEC have audited the HSF movements against the SkyPier Plan and conducted follow up investigation or actions accordingly.

On the implementation of MTRMP-CAV, the MSS automatically recorded the deviation case such as speeding, entering no entry zone, 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 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. 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.