Figure 1.1- 1.2	Locations of Key Construction Activities in this reporting period
Figure 2.1	Locations of Air and Noise Monitoring Stations and Chek Lap Kok Wind Station
Figure 2.2	Locations of Water Quality Monitoring Stations
Figure 2.3	Vessel based Dolphin Monitoring Transects in Construction, Post-construction and Operation Phases
Figure 2.4	Land based Dolphin Monitoring Locations
Figure 2.5	Sightings Distribution of Chinese White Dolphins
Figure 2.6	Sighting Locations of Chinese White Dolphins with Different Group Sizes
Figure 2.7	Sighting Locations of Chinese White Dolphins Engaged in Different Behaviours
Figure 2.8	Sighting Locations of Mother-calf Pairs
Figure 2.9	Plots of First Sightings of All CWD Groups from Land-based Stations
Figure 2.10	Location for Passive Acoustic Monitoring

Appendices

Appendix A	Project Organization Chart
Appendix B	Environmental Mitigation Implementation Schedule (EMIS) for Construction Phase
Appendix C	Graphical Plots of Water Quality Monitoring Results
Appendix D	Summary of Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring Results

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 6^th Construction Phase Quarterly 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 April 2017 to 30 June 2017.

Key Activities in the Reporting Period

Key activities of the Project carried out in the reporting period included deep cement mixing (DCM) trials and works, laying of geotextile and sand blanket, site office establishment, horizontal directional drilling (HDD) works, and submarine cable diversion associated works.

EM&A Activities Conducted in the Reporting Period

The EM&A programme was undertaken in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual of the Project. A summary of the monitoring and audit activities during this reporting period is presented as below. Construction works on Sheung Sha Chau Island was suspended during the ardeid’s breeding season (between April and July). The ecological monitoring is therefore suspended.

Monitoring/ Audit Activities	Number of Sessions
1-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) Air Quality Monitoring	105
Noise Monitoring	65
Water Monitoring	37
Vessel line-transect surveys for Chinese White Dolphin (CWD) monitoring	6
Land-based theodolite tracking survey effort for CWD monitoring	15


Marine Traffic Control Centre (MTCC) in Operation in the Site Office	Photo Shoot for Photo Identification of CWD	Chemical Spill Drill conducted by the Contractor

In total, 2,543 ferry movements between HKIA SkyPier and Zhuhai / Macau were audited in the reporting period. Except one High Speed Ferry (HSF), all HSFs travelled through the Speed Control Zone (SCZ) with average speed within 15 knots, which complied with the Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for High Speed Ferries of SkyPier (the SkyPier Plan). Nine ferry movements had minor deviations from the diverted route during the reporting period. ET investigated the speeding and deviation cases and all of them are related to public safety / emergency situations. Three meetings were held with ferry operator (FO) representatives in the reporting period to review and discuss the deviation cases as well as to share experience and recommendations to further strengthen the implementation of the SkyPier Plan.

On the implementation of the Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for Construction and Associated Vessel (MTRMP-CAV), the upgraded Marine Surveillance System (MSS) launched in March 2017 automatically recorded deviation cases such as speeding, entering no entry zone, and not travelling through the designated gates. ET conducted bi-weekly audit of the system to ensure sufficient information has been provided and the contractors complied with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV. Trainings were provided for the concerned skippers to facilitate them in familiarising with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV. Deviations including speeding in the works area, entry from non-designated gates and entering no-entry zones 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. Monthly 3-month rolling vessel plan for construction-related vessels were provided by contractors for checking to ensure the proposed deployment is necessary and minimal.

On the implementation of Marine Mammal Watching Plan (MMWP), silt curtains were in place by the contractors for sand blanket laying works and dolphin observers were deployed in accordance with the plan. On the implementation of Dolphin Exclusion Zone (DEZ) Plan, teams of at least two dolphin observers, were deployed at 9 to 13 dolphin observation stations for continuous monitoring of the DEZ by the contractors for DCM and water jetting works for submarine cable diversion 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 or the DEZs in this reporting period. Audits of acoustic decoupling for construction vessels were also carried out by ET.

Review of Environmental Quality Performance Limits (Action and Limit levels)

Three Limit Level exceedance cases of 1-hour total suspended particulate (TSP) were recorded in the reporting period, and the corresponding investigations were conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded that the exceedances were likely due to the adverse ambient air quality, but not due to the Project.

The water quality monitoring results for total alkalinity obtained during the reporting period did not exceed 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 DO, turbidity, suspended solids (SS), chromium, and nickel, some of the testing results exceeded the relevant Action or Limit Levels in the reporting period, and the corresponding investigations were conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded that the exceedances were not due to the Project.

No breach of Action or Limit Levels in relation to construction noise, waste and CWD monitoring was recorded during the reporting period.

Implementation Status and Review of Environmental Mitigation Measures

Weekly site audits were carried out during the reporting period to confirm the implementation measures undertaken by the contractors. Environmental issues related to construction activities, including construction dust, construction noise, construction waste, and CWD were monitored and/or reviewed.

Recommended environmental mitigation measures, as included in the EM&A programme, were implemented properly during the reporting period. The EM&A programme effectively monitored the construction activities and ensured proper implementation of the mitigation measures.

Summary Findings of the EM&A Programme

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

	Yes	No	Details	Analysis / Recommendation / Remedial Actions
Breaches of Limit Level^		ü	No project-related Limit Level exceedance was recorded.	Nil
Breaches of Action Level^		ü	No project-related Action Level exceedance was recorded.	Nil
Complaints Received	ü		Three complaints were received on 24 April, 9 May, and 22 May 2017 respectively.	Complaint investigations were carried out in accordance with the Complaint Management Plan. The investigation details are presented in S3.2.1.
Notification of any summons and status of prosecutions	ü		Summons were received in June 2017 regarding the aviation fuel pipeline diversion works in December 2016.	Judicial process underway.
Changes that affect the EM&A		ü	There was no change to the construction works that may affect the EM&A	Nil

Remarks: ^Only exceedance of Action or Limit Level related to Project works is counted as Breaches 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.15.

1.2 Scope of this Report

This is the 6^th Construction Phase Quarterly EM&A Report for the Project which summarizes the key findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 April 2017 to 30 June 2017.

1.3 Project Organisation

The Project’s organisation structure and the contact details of the key personnel are provided in Appendix A and Table 1.1 respectively.

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	Joanne Tsoi	3922 9423
Advanced Works:
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 Lau	5172 6543
Contract 3212 11kV Submarine Cable Diversion	Project Director	Colman Chan	6193 4729
	Environmental Officer	Samantha Kong	3995 8141
DCM Works:
Contract 3201 DCM (Package 1) (Penta-Ocean-China State-Dong-Ah Joint Venture)	Project Director	Tsugunari Suzuki	9178 9689
	Environmental Officer	Sze Ming Chan	9384 5494
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	Seong Jae Park	9683 8693
	Environmental Officer	Calvin Leung	9203 5820
Contract 3204 DCM (Package 4) (CRBC-SAMBO Joint Venture)	Project Manager	Kyung-Sik Yoo	9683 8697
	Environmental Officer	Kanny Cho	9724 6254
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:
Contract 3206 (ZHEC-CCCC-CDC Joint Venture)	Project Manager	Kim Chuan Lim	3693 2288
	Environmental Officer	Kwai Fung Wong	3693 2252

1.4 Contact information for the Project

The contact information for the Project is provided in Table 1.2. The public can contact us through the following channels if they have any queries and comments on the environmental monitoring data and project related information.

Table 1.2: Contact Information of the Project

Channels	Contact Information
Hotline	3908 0354
Email	env@3rsproject.com
Fax	3747 6050
Postal Address	Airport Authority Hong Kong HKIA Tower 1 Sky Plaza Road Hong Kong International Airport Lantau Hong Kong Attn: Environmental Team Leader Mr Terence Kong c/o Mr Lawrence Tsui (TRD)

1.5 Summary of Construction Works

Key activities of the Project carried out in the reporting period included DCM trials and works, laying of geotextile and sand blanket, site office establishment, HDD works, and submarine cable diversion associated works.

The locations of the works areas are presented in Figure 1.1 to Figure 1.2. Some site investigation works were carried out during the reporting period.

1.6 Summary of EM&A Programme Requirements

The status for all environmental aspects is presented in Table 1.3. The EM&A requirements remained unchanged during the reporting period.

Table 1.3: Summary of Status for All Environmental Aspects under the Updated EM&A Manual

Parameters	EM&A Requirements	Status
Air Quality
Baseline Monitoring	At least 14 consecutive days before commencement of construction work	The baseline air quality monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4.
Impact Monitoring	At least 3 times every 6 days	On-going
Noise
Baseline Monitoring	Daily for a period of at least two weeks prior to the commencement of construction works	The baseline noise monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4.
Impact Monitoring	Weekly	On-going
Water Quality
General Baseline Water Quality Monitoring for reclamation, water jetting and field joint works	Three days per week, at mid-flood and mid-ebb tides, for at least four weeks prior to the commencement of marine 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	Three days per week, at mid-flood and mid-ebb tides.	On-going
Initial Intensive Deep Cement Mixing (DCM) Water Quality Monitoring	At least four weeks	Completed in May 2017. Data analysis in-progress.
Regular DCM Water Quality Monitoring	Three times per week until completion of DCM works.	On-going
Waste Management
Waste Monitoring	At least weekly	On-going
Land Contamination
Supplementary Contamination Assessment Plan (CAP)	At least 3 months before commencement of any soil remediation works.	To be submitted with the relevant construction works.
Contamination Assessment Report (CAR) for Golf Course	CAR to be submitted for golf course first; programme for submission of supplementary CAR at the other areas to be agreed.	The CAR for Golf Course was submitted to EPD.
Terrestrial Ecology
Pre-construction Egretry Survey Plan	Once per month in the breeding season between April and July, prior to the commencement of HDD drilling works.	The revised Egretry Survey Plan was submitted and approved by EPD under EP Condition 2.14.
Ecological Monitoring	Monthly monitoring during the HDD construction works period from August to March.	Construction works on Sheung Sha Chau Island was suspended during the ardeid’s breeding season (between April and July). The ecological monitoring is therefore suspended.
Marine Ecology
Pre-Construction Phase Coral Dive Survey	Prior to marine construction works	The Coral Translocation Plan was submitted and approved by EPD under EP Condition 2.12.
Coral Translocation	-	The coral translocation was completed on 5 January 2017.
Post-translocation Monitoring	As per an enhanced monitoring programme based on the Coral Translocation Plan	On-going
Chinese White Dolphins (CWD)
Baseline Monitoring	6 months of baseline surveys before the commencement of land formation related construction works. Vessel surveys: Two full surveys per month; Land-based theodolite tracking: Two days per month at the Sha Chau station and two days per month at the Lung Kwu Chau Station; and PAM: For the whole duration of baseline period.	Baseline CWD results were reported in the CWD Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD in accordance with EP Condition 3.4.
Impact Monitoring	Vessel surveys: Two full surveys per month; Land-based theodolite tracking: One day per month at the Sha Chau station and one day per month at the Lung Kwu Chau Station; and PAM: For the whole duration for land formation related construction works.	On-going
Landscape and Visual
Baseline Monitoring	One-off survey within the Project site boundary prior to commencement of any construction works	The baseline landscape & visual monitoring result has been reported in Baseline Monitoring Report and submitted to EPD under EP Condition 3.4.
Impact Monitoring	Weekly	On-going
Environmental Auditing
Regular site inspection	Weekly	On-going
Marine Mammal Watching Plan (MMWP) implementation measures	Monitor and check	On-going
Dolphin Exclusion Zone Plan (DEZP) implementation measures	Monitor and check	On-going
SkyPier High Speed Ferries (HSF) implementation measures	Monitor and check	On-going
Construction and Associated Vessels implementation measures	Monitor and check	On-going
Complaint Hotline and Email Channel	Construction phase	On-going
Environmental Log Book	Construction phase	On-going

Taking into account the construction works during the reporting period, impact monitoring of air quality, noise, water quality, waste management, and CWD were carried out in the reporting period. Upon completion of coral translocation in January 2017, a summary of the ensuing post-translocation monitoring is reported quarterly.

The EM&A programme also involved weekly site inspections and related auditing conducted by ET for the checking of implementation of required environmental mitigation measures recommended in the approved EIA Report. In order to enhance environmental awareness and closely monitor the environmental performance of the contractors, environmental briefings and regular environmental management meetings were conducted.

The EM&A programme has been following the recommendations presented in the approved EIA Report and the Manual. A summary of implementation status of the environmental mitigation measures for the construction phase of the Project during the reporting period is provided in Appendix B.

2 Environmental Monitoring and Auditing

2.1 Air Quality Monitoring

Impact 1-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) monitoring was conducted three times every six days at two representative monitoring stations during the reporting period. The locations of monitoring stations are described in Table 2.1 and presented in Figure 2.1. 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 also provided in Table 2.1 for reference.

Table 2.1: Impact Air Quality Monitoring Stations

Monitoring Station	Location	Action Level (mg/m³)	Limit Level (mg/m³)
AR1A	Man Tung Road Park	306	500
AR2	Village House at Tin Sum	298	500

The graphical plot of impact air quality monitoring results during the reporting period is presented in Graph 1.

Graph 1: Graphical Plot of 1-hour TSP concentration at AR1A and AR2 during the Reporting Period

Three Limit Level exceedance cases of air quality monitoring were recorded at AR2 on 10 May 2017 in the 1-hour TSP monitoring. Actions were taken accordingly based on the established Event and Action Plan as presented in the Manual. No major construction dust emission source was observed from the field investigation. It was also confirmed with the contractors that no major dusty construction works was undertaken when the exceedances were recorded. Dust suppression measures were properly implemented by relevant contractors during the monitoring period. Investigation found that Hong Kong was being affected by an airstream with high background pollutant concentration and poor atmospheric conditions for pollutant dispersion on the monitoring day, thus the exceedances were likely due to the adverse ambient air quality, but not due to Project activities.

The weather varied from sunny to rainy during the reporting period. Wind direction was mainly south or southwest in the reporting period.

The key activities of the Project carried out in the reporting period are summarised in Section 1.5. Those works were not likely to cause adverse dust pollution.

The active construction site is around 3 km away from the nearest air sensitive receiver in Tung Chung. The major dust sources during the reporting period were observed to be local air pollution and nearby traffic emissions. It is considered that the monitoring work in the reporting period was effective and there was no adverse impact attributable to the works of the Project.

2.2 Noise Monitoring

Impact noise monitoring was conducted at five representative monitoring stations once per week during 0700 and 1900 during the reporting period. The locations of monitoring stations are described in Table 2.2 and presented in Figure 2.1. 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 2.2 for reference.

The graphical plot of impact noise quality monitoring results during the reporting period is presented in Graph 2.

Table 2.2: Impact Noise Quality Monitoring Stations

Monitoring Station	Location	Action Level	Limit Level
NM1A	Man Tung Road Park	When one documented complaint is received from any one of the sensitive receivers	75 dB(A)
NM3A	Site Office		75 dB(A)
NM4⁽ⁱ⁾	Ching Chung Hau Po Woon Primary School		65dB(A) / 70 dB(A)
NM5	Village House in Tin Sum		75 dB(A)
NM6	House No. 1, Sha Lo Wan		75 dB(A)
Note: ⁽ⁱ⁾ Reduced to 70dB(A) for school and 65dB(A) during school examination periods.

Graph 2: Graphical Plot of Leq _(30min) at NM1A, NM3A, NM4, NM5 and NM6 during the Reporting Period

Note: School examination took place from 5 to 9 June 2017 in the reporting period.

No exceedance of the Action and Limit Level was recorded at all monitoring stations in the reporting period.

The key activities of the Project carried out in the reporting period are summarised in Section 1.5. Those works were not likely to cause adverse noise impact.

The active construction work is around 900 m away from the nearest noise sensitive receivers in the villages in North Lantau. The major noise sources during the reporting period were observed to be road traffic at NM1A, aircrafts and helicopters at NM3A, school activities at NM4, helicopters at NM5, and aircrafts, helicopters, and marine vessels at NM6. It is considered that the monitoring work in the reporting period was effective and there was no adverse impact attributable to the works of the Project.

2.3 Water Quality Monitoring

During the reporting period, water quality monitoring was conducted at a total of 23 water quality monitoring stations, comprising 12 impact (IM) stations, one mobile IM station, seven sensitive receiver (SR) stations, and three control stations in the vicinity of the 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 impacts from the Project before the impacts could become apparent at sensitive receivers (represented by the SR stations). Table 2.3 describes the details of the monitoring stations. Figure 2.2 shows the locations of the monitoring stations.

Table 2.3: Monitoring Locations and Parameters for Impact Water Quality Monitoring

Monitoring Stations	Description	Coordinates		Parameters
		Easting	Northing
C1	Control	804247	815620
C2	Control	806945	825682
C3⁽³⁾	Control	817803	822109
IM1	Impact	806458	818351	DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS, Total Alkalinity, Heavy Metals⁽²⁾
IM2	Impact	806193	818852
IM3	Impact	806019	819411
IM4	Impact	805039	819570
IM5	Impact	804924	820564
IM6	Impact	805828	821060
IM7	Impact	806835	821349
IM8	Impact	807838	821695
IM9	Impact	808811	822094
IM10	Impact	809838	822240
IM11	Impact	810545	821501
IM12	Impact	811519	821162
IM13	Impact (for submarine 11 kV cable diversion)	Mobile station (500 m envelope of water jetting works)		DO, pH, Temperature, Salinity, Turbidity, SS
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
SR3	Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park / fishing and spawning grounds in North Lantau	807571	822147
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	Seawater Intake for cooling at Hong Kong International Airport (East)	811593	820417

Notes:

⁽¹⁾The seawater intakes of SR1 for the future HKBCF are 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 intake 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 IM / SR stations during the flood tide. The control reference has been changed from C3 to SR2 from 1 September 2016 onwards.

2.3.1 Monitoring Schedule

During the reporting period, general water quality monitoring and regular DCM water quality monitoring were conducted three days per week, at mid-flood and mid-ebb tides, at the 23 water quality monitoring stations.

As confirmed by Contract 3212, the 11kV submarine cable diversion and associated works were conducted in the period of 1 to 10 April, 14 to 17 April, 8 to 19 May, and 21 to 23 May 2017. The cable diversion and associated works were substantially completed on 23 May 2017. Therefore, general water quality monitoring was conducted at the mobile impact station of IM13 at mid-flood and mid-ebb tides during the construction period and ceased after 23 May 2017.

2.3.2 Action and Limit Levels for Water Quality Monitoring

The Action and Limit Levels for 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 presented in Table 2.4. The control and IM stations during flood tide and ebb tide for general water quality monitoring and regular DCM monitoring are presented in Table 2.5.

Table 2.4: Action and Limit Levels for General Water Quality Monitoring and Regular DCM Monitoring

Parameters	Action Level (AL)		Limit Level (LL)
Action and Limit Levels for general water quality monitoring and regular DCM monitoring (excluding 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
Suspended Solids (SS) in mg/L	23	or 120% of upstream control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher	37	or 130% of upstream control station at the same tide of the same day, whichever is higher
Turbidity in NTU	22.6		36.1
Total Alkalinity in ppm	95		99
Representative Heavy Metals for early regular DCM monitoring (Chromium)	0.2		0.2
Representative Heavy Metals for early regular DCM monitoring (Nickel)	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 early 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 2.5: 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, IM13, 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, IM13, SR1A, SR2, SR3, SR7, SR8

^{^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.

2.3.3 Summary of Monitoring Results

The monitoring results for total alkalinity obtained during the reporting period did not exceed 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 DO, turbidity, suspended solids (SS), chromium, and nickel, some of the testing results exceeded the relevant Action or Limit Levels in the reporting period, and the corresponding investigations were conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded that the exceedances were not due to the Project. Summaries of DO, turbidity, SS, chromium, and nickel compliance status are presented in Table 2.6 to Table 2.15.

Findings for DO Exceedances

Table 2.6, Table 2.7 and Table 2.8 present a summary of the DO compliance status at IM and SR stations during mid-ebb and mid flood tide for the reporting period.

Table 2.6: Summary of DO (Surface and Middle) Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide)

	IM1	IM2	IM3	IM4	IM5	IM6	IM7	IM8	IM9	IM10	IM11	IM12	SR2	SR3	SR4A	SR5A	SR6	SR7
20/06/2017
22/06/2017
24/06/2017
No. of Exceedance	3	1	1	1	1	2	2	1	1	0	2	1	0	3	2	0	0	3

Table 2.7: Summary of DO (Bottom) Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide)

	IM1	IM2	IM3	IM4	IM5	IM6	IM7	IM8	IM9	IM10	IM11	IM12	SR2	SR3	SR4A	SR5A	SR6	SR7
20/06/2017
22/06/2017
No. of Exceedance	0	1	2	0	1	1	0	1	0	2	0	1	0	1	1	0	0	1

Table 2.8: Summary of DO (Surface and Middle) Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)

	IM1	IM2	IM3	IM4	IM5	IM6	IM7	IM8	IM9	IM10	IM11	IM12	SR2	SR3	SR4A	SR5A	SR6	SR7
20/06/2017
22/06/2017
24/06/2017
No. of Exceedance	0	1	0	0	0	1	2	3	2	1	2	1	0	3	0	0	0	3

Note: The monitoring results on monitoring dates not presented in the above tables did not exceed their corresponding Action or Limit Levels. Detailed results are presented in Appendix C.

Legend:
	No exceedance of Action and Limit Level
	Exceedance of Action Level recorded at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow
	Exceedance of Action Level recorded at monitoring station located upstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow
	Exceedance of Limit Level recorded at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow
	Exceedance of Limit Level recorded 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

Investigations were conducted for each of the exceedances and details of the investigation findings are presented in the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report no. 18. All exceedances were found not due to the Project.

The monitoring results, including results from repeat measurements, showed that DO (Surface and Middle) and DO (Bottom) results at the control stations as well as some upstream impact stations were low (and mostly below Action or Limit Level) from 20 to 25 June 2017. This indicates that low DO was occurring over a larger area including areas well outside the influence of the Project’s activities, which suggests the likelihood of sources and/or causes originating outside of the Project boundaries. Besides, the DO pattern as shown in Appendix C which shows a widespread decline in DO levels across all monitoring stations from 15 June 2017 onwards appears to be a result of the aftermath of a severe weather condition (i.e. Severe Tropical Storm Merbok followed by a period of continuous rainfall) in Hong Kong between 12 and 21 June 2017.

Separately, investigations were carried out and confirmed that both DCM and sand blanket laying activities were operating normally with silt curtains deployed as additional measures. No construction vessel nor silt plume was observed in the vicinity of the monitoring stations when exceedances were recorded.

Combining the monitoring results during ebb and flood tides from 15 June 2017 onwards, as well as the observations during water quality monitoring, it is concluded that the patterns of exceedances indicate a macro-scale event affecting the DO concentration in the north Lantau water, rather than local sources. Therefore, the exceedances were considered not due to the Project.

Findings for Turbidity Exceedances

Table 2.9 presents a summary of the turbidity compliance status at IM and SR stations during mid-ebb tide for the reporting period.

Table 2.9: Summary of Turbidity Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide)

	IM1	IM2	IM3	IM4	IM5	IM6	IM7	IM8	IM9	IM10	IM11	IM12	SR2	SR3	SR4A	SR5A	SR6	SR7
24/06/2017
No. of Exceedance	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0

Note: The monitoring results on monitoring dates not presented in the above table did not exceed their corresponding Action or Limit Levels. Detailed results are presented in Appendix C.

Legend:
	No exceedance of Action and Limit Level
	Exceedance of Action Level recorded at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow
	Exceedance of Action Level recorded 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

Investigation was conducted for the exceedance and details of the investigation findings are presented in the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report no. 18. The exceedance was found not due to the Project.

The Action Level exceedance occurred at a monitoring station which was located upstream of the Project during ebb tide, which would unlikely be affected by the Project. Therefore, the exceedance was considered not due to the Project.

Findings for SS Exceedances

Table 2.10 and Table 2.11 present a summary of the SS compliance status at IM and SR stations during mid-ebb and mid-flood tide for the reporting period.

Table 2.10: Summary of SS Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide)

	IM1	IM2	IM3	IM4	IM5	IM6	IM7	IM8	IM9	IM10	IM11	IM12	IM13	SR2	SR3	SR4A	SR5A	SR6	SR7	SR8
01/04/2017
No. of Exceedance	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0

Table 2.11: Summary of SS Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)

	IM1	IM2	IM3	IM4	IM5	IM6	IM7	IM8	IM9	IM10	IM11	IM12	IM13	SR2	SR3	SR4A	SR5A	SR6	SR7	SR8
01/04/2017
29/04/2017
No. of Exceedance	0	0	0	2	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	1	0	0

Note: The monitoring results on monitoring dates not presented in the above table did not exceed their corresponding Action or Limit Levels. Detailed results are presented in Appendix C.

Legend:
	No exceedance of Action and Limit Level
	Exceedance of Action Level recorded at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow
	Exceedance of Action Level recorded 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
	No water quality monitoring conducted at IM13 when Contract 3212 had no water jetting works

Investigations were conducted for each of the exceedances and details of the investigation findings are presented in the Construction Phase monthly EM&A Report no. 16. All exceedances were found not due to the Project.

Some exceedances occurred at monitoring stations which were located upstream of the Project. As such upstream stations would unlikely be affected by the Project, the investigation focused on the exceedances at stations located downstream of the Project and hence might be affected by the Project’s activities.

For the exceedance at SR2 on 1 April 2017 during mid-ebb tide, no exceedance was recorded at all downstream IM stations which were located closer to the active works by the Project. Therefore, the exceedance was unlikely to be affected by the Project.

For the exceedance at IM6 on 29 April 2017 during mid-flood tide, it appeared to be an isolated case with neither temporal nor spatial trend to indicate any effect due to Project activities. Taking into account the investigation findings, the details of which are reported in the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report no. 16, the exceedance was considered not due to the Project.

Findings for Chromium Exceedances

Table 2.12 and Table 2.13 present a summary of the chromium compliance status at IM stations during mid-ebb and mid-flood tide for the reporting period.

Table 2.12: Summary of Chromium Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide)

	IM1	IM2	IM3	IM4	IM5	IM6	IM7	IM8	IM9	IM10	IM11	IM12
04/06/2017
No. of Exceedance	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0

Table 2.13: Summary of Chromium Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)

	IM1	IM2	IM3	IM4	IM5	IM6	IM7	IM8	IM9	IM10	IM11	IM12
01/04/2017
No. of Exceedance	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0

Note: The monitoring results on monitoring dates not presented in the above table did not exceed their corresponding Action or Limit Levels. Detailed results are presented in Appendix C.

Legend:
	No exceedance of Action and Limit Level
	Exceedance of Action Level recorded at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow
	Exceedance of Action Level recorded 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

Investigations were conducted for each of the exceedances and details of the investigation findings are presented in the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report no. 16 and 18. All exceedances were found not due to the Project

For the exceedance at IM7 during mid-ebb tide on 4 June 2017, as the exceedance occurred at a monitoring station located upstream during ebb tide, it was considered not due to the Project.

For the exceedance at IM7 during mid-flood tide on 1 April 2017, it appeared to be an isolated case with no observable temporal and spatial trend to indicate any effect due to Project activities. Furthermore, no exceedance was recorded at other downstream monitoring station located closer to active DCM works during the same monitoring period. Based on these findings, the exceedance was considered not due to the Project.

Findings for Nickel Exceedances

Table 2.14 and Table 2.15 presents a summary of the nickel compliance status at IM stations during mid-ebb and mid-flood tide for the reporting period.

Table 2.14: Summary of Nickel Compliance Status (Mid-Ebb Tide)

	IM1	IM2	IM3	IM4	IM5	IM6	IM7	IM8	IM9	IM10	IM11	IM12
23/05/2017
No. of Exceedance	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0

Table 2.15: Summary of Nickel Compliance Status (Mid-Flood Tide)

IM1

IM2

IM3

IM4

IM5

IM6

IM7

IM8

IM9

IM10

IM11

IM12

04/04/2017

08/04/2017

09/05/2017

18/05/2017

25/05/2017

20/06/2017

24/06/2017

No. of Exceedance

Note: The monitoring results on monitoring dates not presented in the above table did not exceed their corresponding Action or Limit Levels. Detailed results are presented in Appendix C.

Legend:
	No exceedance of Action and Limit Level
	Exceedance of Action Level recorded at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow
	Exceedance of Action Level recorded at monitoring station located upstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow
	Exceedance of Limit Level recorded at monitoring station located downstream of the Project based on dominant tidal flow
	Exceedance of Limit Level recorded 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

Investigations were conducted for each of the exceedances and details of the investigation findings are presented in the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report no. 16, 17, and 18. All exceedances were found not due to the Project.

For the exceedance at IM10 during mid-ebb tide on 23 May 2017, as the exceedance occurred at a monitoring station located upstream during ebb tide, it was considered not due to the Project.

For the exceedance events during mid-flood tide, it was observed that overall these occurred dis-continuously (i.e. no repeated exceedances during consecutive monitoring days), while some of the exceedances (those recorded on 4 and 8 April, 18 and 25 May, and 24 June 2017) were also isolated (singular) cases with no observable trend to indicate any effect due to Project activities.

For the exceedances recorded on 9 May and 20 June 2017, it is noted that no SS exceedance was recorded during the same monitoring period. As nickel is a representative heavy metal that indicates the potential for release of contaminants from contaminated mud pits due to the disturbance of marine sediment in contaminated mud pits by DCM activities, the low SS levels indicate that the active DCM works had limited or insignificant effect on downstream water quality. In addition, some of the exceedance events occurred at upstream stations in the reporting period, which might indicate potential nickel source originating from areas outside of the project boundary.

Nevertheless, all exceedances were investigated and taking into account the investigation findings, the details of which are reported in the Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report nos. 16, 17 and 18, the exceedances were considered not due to the Project.

Conclusions

Based on the findings of the exceedance investigations presented in Construction Phase Monthly EM&A Report no. 16, 17, and 18, it was concluded that the exceedances during this reporting period were not due to the Project; hence, no SR stations were adversely affected by the Project. All required actions under the Event and Action Plan had been followed. Exceedances appeared due to natural fluctuation or other sources not related to the Project.

Nevertheless, recognising that the IM stations represent a ‘first line of defence’, the non-project related exceedances identified at IM stations have been attended to as triggers of precautionary measures. As part of the EM&A programme, the construction methods and mitigation measures for water quality will continue to monitor and opportunities for further enhancement will continue to explored and implement 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. These include maintaining the silt curtain for sand blanket laying properly and maintaining the levels of materials on barges to avoid overflow as recommended in the Manual.

2.4 Waste Monitoring

In accordance with the Manual, the waste generated from construction activities was audited once per week to determine if wastes were 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. The Action and Limit Levels of the construction waste are provided in Table 2.16.

Table 2.16: 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

Weekly waste monitoring of the Project construction works was carried out by the ET to check and monitor the implementation of proper waste management practices during the construction phase during the reporting period.

Recommendations were provided during monitoring, including provision and maintenance of spill kits and drip trays, and provision of proper storage area for general refuse, chemical and chemical waste. In addition, relevant contractors were reminded to provide recycling bins for the segregation of recyclables from general refuse. The contractors had taken actions to implement the recommended measures.

Based on the contractor’s information, about 2,203 m³ of excavated materials were produced from the HDD launching site under P560(R) during the reporting period. The generated excavated materials were temporarily stored at the stockpiling area. The excavated material will be reused in the Project.

In addition, metal and paper were recycled during the reporting period. Around 292 tonnes of general refuse was disposed of to the West New Territories (WENT) Landfill by the advance works contract and DCM contracts, 0.08 tonnes and 1,600 litres of chemical waste were collected by licensed chemical waste collector. Around 1,281 m3 of Construction and Demolition (C&D) material generated from the DCM contracts was disposed of as public fill in the reporting period.

No exceedance of the Action or Limit Levels was recorded in the reporting period.

2.5 CWD Monitoring

2.5.1 Summary of Monitoring Requirements

CWD monitoring was conducted by vessel line-transect survey at a frequency of two full survey per month, supplemented by land-based theodolite tracking and Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM). The frequency of the theodolite tracking during the construction phase was one day per month at both Sha Chau (SC) and Lung Kwu Chau (LKC) stations as stipulated in the Manual requirement. Additional theodolite tracking at SC station and LKC station (in total 2 tracking days and 3 tracking days per month at respective stations) were also conducted on a voluntary basis to collect supplementary information for the project. Monitoring was fully completed in the reporting period. The vessel survey transect lines were in line with those proposed in the Manual, which are consistent with the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) long-term monitoring programme. The locations of CWD monitoring by vessel survey transect conducted from April to June 2017 are shown in Figure 2.3, whilst the land-based survey stations are described in Table 2.17 and depicted in Figure 2.4. Location of Passive Acoustic Monitoring is shown in Figure 2.10.

Table 2.17: Land-based 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

The Action Level (AL) and Limit Level (LL) for CWD monitoring were formulated by an action response approach using the running quarterly dolphin encounter rates (STG and ANI) derived from baseline monitoring data, as presented in the CWD Baseline Monitoring Report. The derived values of AL and LL for CWD monitoring are shown in Table 2.18.

Table 2.18: Derived Values of Action Level (AL) and Limit Level (LL) for Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring

	NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL as a Whole
Action Level	Running quarterly STG < 1.86 & ANI < 9.35
Limit Level	Two consecutive running quarterly (3-month) STG < 1.86 & ANI < 9.35

2.5.2 Summary of Monitoring Results

Vessel Line-transect Survey

Survey Effort

During the reporting period, six complete sets of vessel line-transect surveys were conducted from April to June 2017 to cover all transects in Northeast Lantau (NEL), Northwest Lantau (NWL), Airport West (AW), West Lantau (WL) and Southwest Lantau (SWL) survey area twice per month.

A total of around 1,344 km of survey effort was collected from these surveys, with around 88.6% 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 data were presented in Appendix D.

CWD Sighting

From April to June 2017, there were total 58 groups of CWDs with 226 individuals sighted (Table 2.19). Amongst the sightings of CWDs, 53 groups with 210 individuals were made during on-effort search under favourable weather condition.

When breaking down the sightings by survey areas, 5 sightings with 10 individuals, 30 sightings with 153 individuals and 23 sightings with 63 individuals were recorded in NWL, WL and SWL respectively during the current reporting period. No CWD was sighted in NEL and AW survey areas. Compared to both last quarter (i.e. January to March 2017) and the same quarter in year 2016 (i.e. April to June 2016), there was an observable increase in CWD records in SWL. Table 2.19 below shows the comparison of the numbers of sightings and individuals between the current reporting period, last quarter and the same quarter of year 2016.

Table 2.19: Summary of Number of CWD Sightings and Number of CWD Individuals for Previous Quarters and Current Reporting Period

	Apr to Jun 2016	Jan to Mar 2017	Apr to Jun 2017
NEL	0 (0)	0 (0)	0 (0)
NWL	4 (20)	5 (16)	5 (10)
AW	0 (0)	2 (5)	0 (0)
WL	30 (123)	33 (126)	30 (153)
SWL	12 (42)	14 (38)	23 (63)
Total	46 (185)	54 (185)	58 (226)

Note: Values in ( ) represent number of CWD individuals

Distribution of CWD sightings recorded from April to June 2017 are illustrated in Figure 2.5. In NWL, CWD sightings were mainly recorded near the coastal waters northwestern off Lung Kwu Chau and also the waters between Lung Kwu Chau and Black Point (Lan Kok Tsui). In WL survey area, CWD sightings were distributed in coastal waters from Tai O to Fan Lau and also off-shore waters from Tai O to Peaked Hill. In SWL waters, CWDs sighting locations ranged from Fan Lau to Tong Fuk particularly the waters around Fan Lau Tung Wan and also the waters between Soko Islands and Lantau. Details of the sighting data were presented in Appendix D.

Figure 2.5: Sightings Distribution of Chinese White Dolphins

[Pink circle: Sighting locations of CWD, White line: Vessel survey transects, Blue polygon: Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park (SCLKCMP), Green polygon: Brothers Marine Park (BMP), Red polygon: 3RS land-formation footprint, Yellow line: 3RS temporary works area boundary]

Encounter Rate

The dolphin encounter rates for the number of dolphin sightings per 100 km survey effort (STG) and for the total number of dolphins per 100 km survey effort (ANI) in the whole survey area (i.e. NEL, NWL, AW, WL and SWL) for April, May and June 2017 are summarized in Table 2.20.

In this reporting period, the monthly encounter rate STG increase from April to June 2017 while the monthly encounter rate ANI increase from April to May 2017 followed by a decline in June 2017. Comparing with the previous reporting period, both the running quarterly STG and ANI increases from 4.02 to 4.45 and from 14.85 to 17.65 respectively.

Table 2.20: Summary of Monthly and Running Quarterly STG and ANI of Chinese White Dolphin for Previous and Current Reporting Periods

	Previous Reporting Period			Current Reporting Period
	Jan 17	Feb 17	Mar 17		Apr 17	May 17	Jun 17
Monthly STG	4.41	6.08	1.99		2.96	4.21	6.30
Monthly ANI	15.78	21.12	8.97		8.88	25.49	18.64
Running Quarterly STG	3.96	5.04	4.02		3.49	3.06	4.45
Running Quarterly ANI	13.02	17.31	14.85		12.33	14.46	17.65

Notes: For detailed calculations of encounter rates STG and ANI, please refer to the Monthly EM&A Reports No. 16, No. 17 and No. 18.

Group Size

Between April and June 2017, the group size of CWDs ranged from 1 to 13 individuals per group. The average group size of CWDs was 3.9 individuals per group while that of last quarter was 3.4. Half of the CWD sightings (i.e. 29 groups) were in medium group size (i.e. 3-9 individuals). There were three CWD sightings with large group size (i.e. 10 or above individuals) in this reporting period and they were recorded in WL.

In NWL, CWD sightings with small group size (i.e. 1-2 individuals) dominated in this reporting period. While in WL, CWD groups with medium group size were dominant. In SWL, more small-sized CWD groups were recorded. Sighting locations of CWD groups with different group sizes were depicted in Figure 2.6.

Figure 2.6: Sighting Locations of Chinese White Dolphins with Different Group Sizes

[Pink circle: Sighting locations of CWD with group size from 1 to 2 individuals, Green circle: Sighting locations of CWD with group size from 3 to 9 individuals, Red circle: Sighting locations of CWD with group size of 10 or above, White line: Vessel survey transects, Blue polygon: Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park (SCLKCMP), Green polygon: Brothers Marine Park (BMP), Red polygon: 3RS land-formation footprint, Yellow line: 3RS temporary works area boundary]

Activities and Association with Fishing Boats

During April to June 2017, 21 groups of CWDs were sighted with feeding activities. Amongst these 21 groups of feeding CWDs, only one group was observed in association with operating fishing boat (purse seiner) in SWL. The sighting locations of CWDs engaged in different behaviours during the reporting period were illustrated in Figure 2.7.

Figure 2.7: Sighting Locations of Chinese White Dolphins Engaged in Different Behaviours

[Indigo rhombus: Foraging, Green circle: Socializing, Pink square: Milling/Resting, Yellow triangle: Travelling, White line: Vessel survey transects, Blue polygon: Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park (SCLKCMP), Green polygon: Brothers Marine Park (BMP), Red polygon: 3RS land-formation footprint, Yellow line: 3RS temporary works area boundary]

Mother-calf Pairs

From April to June 2017, 15 sightings of CWDs were recorded with the presence of mother-and-calf, mother-and-unspotted juvenile and/or mother-and-spotted juvenile pairs. Most of these mother-calf pairs were sighted in WL. The record in NWL was the mother-and-spotted juvenile pair (NLMM006 and NLMM013). This pair has not been re-sighted since December 2016 and was sighted again in June 2017. The sighting locations of mother-calf pairs were shown in Figure 2.8.

Figure 2.8: Sighting Locations of Mother-calf Pairs

[Pink circle: Sighting locations of mother-calf pairs, White line: Vessel survey transects, Blue polygon: Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park (SCLKCMP), Green polygon: Brothers Marine Park (BMP), Red polygon: 3RS land-formation footprint, Yellow line: 3RS temporary works area boundary]

Photo Identification

During April to June 2017, a total number of 67 different CWD individuals were identified altogether 101 times. Re-sighting information of CWD individuals provides an initial idea of their range use and apparent connection between different areas around Lantau. Amongst these 67 different CWD individuals, 24 animals (i.e. NLMM004, NLMM016, SLMM011, SLMM014, SLMM022, SLMM023, SLMM027, SLMM028, SLMM052, WLMM004, WLMM007, WLMM008, WLMM009, WLMM030, WLMM043, WLMM060, WLMM068, WLMM071, WLMM076, WLMM078, WLMM079, WLMM082, WLMM084 and WLMM086) were sighted more than once. Nine individuals including NLMM016, SLMM011, SLMM027, SLMM052, WLMM004, WLMM008, WLMM009, WLMM076 and WLMM078 were re-sighted in different survey areas within this reporting period. NLMM016 has cross-area movement in NWL and WL while others have cross-area movement in WL and SWL. The number of CWD individuals re-sighted more than once was slighted higher than last quarter (i.e. January to March 2017) while the number of CWD individuals re-sighted in different survey areas during the current reporting period remain unchanged compared with last quarter.

A summary of photo identification works is presented in Table 2.21. Representative photos of the 67 identified individuals and figures depicting the sighting locations of the aforementioned 24 re-sighted individuals recorded in this reporting period are presented Appendix D.

Table 2.21: Summary of Photo Identification

Individual ID	Date of sighting	Sighting Group No.	Area	Individual ID	Date of sighting	Sighting Group No.	Area
NLMM001	11-May-17	3	WL	WLMM009	09-Jun-17	4	SWL
NLMM004	05-Apr-17	1	NWL		28-Jun-17	8	WL
		2	NWL	WLMM018	11-May-17	8	WL
NLMM006	08-Jun-17	1	NWL	WLMM027	22-Jun-17	4	SWL
NLMM013	08-Jun-17	1	NWL	WLMM030	18-Apr-17	2	WL
NLMM016	05-Apr-17	1	NWL			3	WL
		2	NWL	WLMM040	09-Jun-17	1	WL
	18-Apr-17	1	WL	WLMM042	11-May-17	3	WL
NLMM023	11-May-17	1	WL	WLMM043	05-May-17	1	WL
SLMM007	11-May-17	9	WL		09-Jun-17	1	WL
SLMM010	11-May-17	10	SWL	WLMM052	28-Jun-17	2	WL
SLMM011	11-May-17	11	SWL	WLMM060	18-Apr-17	2	WL
	28-Jun-17	5	WL			3	WL
SLMM014	22-Jun-17	2	SWL	WLMM063	07-Jun-17	2	SWL
		3	SWL	WLMM064	26-Apr-17	3	SWL
		6	SWL	WLMM068	18-Apr-17	2	WL
		7	SWL			3	WL
SLMM015	04-May-17	1	SWL	WLMM070	11-May-17	11	SWL
SLMM021	26-Apr-17	1	SWL	WLMM071	18-Apr-17	2	WL
SLMM022	05-May-17	4	WL			3	WL
		5	WL	WLMM072	18-Apr-17	2	WL
SLMM023	05-May-17	4	WL	WLMM073	11-May-17	8	WL
		5	WL	WLMM075	18-Apr-17	2	WL
	11-May-17	3	WL	WLMM076	05-May-17	1	WL
		8	WL		22-Jun-17	1	SWL
SLMM027	11-May-17	3	WL	WLMM077	05-May-17	1	WL
		8	WL	WLMM078	05-May-17	1	WL
	07-Jun-17	2	SWL		22-Jun-17	1	SWL
SLMM028	18-Apr-17	5	WL	WLMM079	05-May-17	4	WL
	05-May-17	5	WL			5	WL
SLMM031	07-Jun-17	1	SWL	WLMM080	11-May-17	2	WL
SLMM036	07-Jun-17	3	SWL	WLMM081	11-May-17	2	WL
SLMM040	22-Jun-17	1	SWL	WLMM082	11-May-17	2	WL
SLMM047	11-May-17	8	WL			4	WL
SLMM052	05-May-17	4	WL	WLMM083	11-May-17	2	WL
		5	WL	WLMM084	11-May-17	3	WL
	11-May-17	10	SWL			7	WL
	07-Jun-17	2	SWL	WLMM085	11-May-17	4	WL
SLMM054	18-Apr-17	7	SWL	WLMM086	11-May-17	5	WL
SLMM055	26-Apr-17	4	SWL		09-Jun-17	1	WL
SLMM056	11-May-17	11	SWL			3	WL
SLMM057	22-Jun-17	1	SWL	WLMM087	11-May-17	5	WL
SLMM058	22-Jun-17	5	SWL	WLMM088	11-May-17	8	WL
WLMM004	05-May-17	4	WL	WLMM089	11-May-17	8	WL
		5	WL	WLMM090	09-Jun-17	1	WL
	07-Jun-17	2	SWL	WLMM091	28-Jun-17	3	WL
WLMM007	05-May-17	1	WL	WLMM092	28-Jun-17	3	WL
	11-May-17	6	WL	WLMM093	28-Jun-17	6	WL
WLMM008	11-May-17	7	WL	WLMM094	28-Jun-17	6	WL
	22-Jun-17	1	SWL	WLMM095	28-Jun-17	6	WL
				WLMM096	28-Jun-17	8	WL

Land-based Theodolite Tracking

Survey Effort

During April to June 2017, a total of 15 days of land-based theodolite tracking survey effort were completed, including nine days on Lung Kwu Chau and six days on Sha Chau. In total, 17 CWD groups were tracked from the Lung Kwu Chau station, with 0.19 CWD groups sighted per survey effort hour. No CWDs were sighted from the Sha Chau station during the current reporting period.

Information on survey effort and CWD groups sighted during land-based theodolite tracking surveys are presented in Table 2.22. Details on the survey effort and CWD groups tracked are presented in Appendix D. The first sighting locations of CWD groups tracked between April and June 2017 are shown in Figure 2.9.

Table 2.22: Summary of Survey Effort and CWD Group of Land-based Theodolite Tracking

Land-based Station	# of Survey Sessions	Survey Effort (hh:mm)	# CWD Groups Sighted	CWD Group Sighting per Survey Hour
April 2017
Lung Kwu Chau	3	18:00	6	0.33
Sha Chau	2	12:00	0	0
TOTAL	5	30:00	6	0.20
May 2017
Lung Kwu Chau	3	18:00	2	0.11
Sha Chau	2	12:00	0	0
TOTAL	5	30:00	2	0.07
June 2017
Lung Kwu Chau	3	18:03	9	0.50
Sha Chau	2	12:00	0	0
TOTAL	5	30:03	9	0.30
OVERALL	15	90:03	17	0.19

Figure 2.9: Plots of First Sightings of All CWD Groups from Land-based Stations

[Green triangle: LKC station; Green square: CWD group off LKC; Blue line: SCLKCMP boundary]

Progress Update on Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM)

An Ecological Acoustic Recorder (EAR) has been deployed and positioned to the south of Sha Chau Island with 20% duty cycle (Figure 2.10) with data from the EAR intended primarily to supplement the data collected from the land-based theodolite station on Sha Chau. The EAR deployment generally lasts around 4-6 weeks followed by a period of data retrieval for subsequent analysis. As the data analysis takes more than two months after retrieval, PAM results are not suitable for reporting in quarterly reports. Detailed analysis of PAM data will be presented in the annual CWD report to coincide and supplement the data collected from the land-based theodolite survey station at Sha Chau.

Site Audit for CWD-related Mitigation Measures

During this reporting period, silt curtains were in place by the contractors for sand blanket laying works, in which at least two dolphin observers were deployed by each contractor in accordance with the MMWP. Teams of at least two dolphin observers were deployed for continuous monitoring of the DEZ by the contractors for DCM and water jetting works for submarine cable diversion 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 408 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 DEZ or silt curtains in this reporting period. These contractors’ records were also audited by the ET during site inspection.

Audits of acoustic decoupling for construction vessels were carried out during weekly site inspection and summarised in Section 2.6. Summary of audits of SkyPier High Speed Ferries route diversion and speed control and construction vessel management are presented in Section 2.8 and Section 2.9 respectively.

2.6 Weekly Environmental Site Inspection

Site inspections of the construction works were carried out on a weekly basis to monitor the implementation of proper environmental pollution control and mitigation measures for the Project. Bi-weekly site inspections were also conducted by the IEC. Observations have been recorded in the site inspection checklist and passed to the contractor together with the appropriate recommended mitigation measures where necessary.

The key observations from site inspection and associated recommendations were related to:

● provision and maintenance of drip trays, spill kits, and chemical storage area; and

● implementation of dust suppression and noise mitigation measures.

In addition, recommendations were provided during site inspection on construction vessels, which include:

● display of relevant permit and licenses on barges;

● display of Non-Road Mobile Machinery (NRMM) labels for relevant mechanical equipment;

● provision and maintenance of storage area for general refuse, chemicals, and chemical waste;

● segregation of recyclables from general refuse;

● proper implementation of acoustic decoupling measures, wastewater treatment, DEZ monitoring, dust suppressing measures, spill and runoff preventive measures, and dark smoke preventive measures; and

● proper installation and maintenance of silt curtains.

The daily visual inspection checklists for silt curtains and bi-weekly diver inspection records which were implemented by the contractors in accordance with the Silt Curtain Deployment Plan had been checked during site inspection and reviewed at the end of the reporting period, summarizing that the silt curtains were maintained in the correct positions and intact without obvious defects or damage.

A summary of implementation status of the environmental mitigation measures for the construction phase of the Project during the reporting period is provided in Appendix B.

2.7 Ecological Monitoring

No works were conducted on Sheung Sha Chau Island during the ardeid’s breeding season in the reporting period in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual. No ecological monitoring was conducted during the reporting period.

2.8 Audit of the SkyPier Plan

In total, 2,543 ferry movements between HKIA SkyPier and Zhuhai / Macau were audited in the reporting period. The daily movements of all SkyPier HSFs in the reporting period ranged between 56 and 97, which falls within the maximum daily cap number of 125.

Except one HSF, all HSFs travelled through the SCZ with average speed within 15 knots (7.8 knots to 14.3 knots), which complied with the SkyPier Plan. Nine ferry movements had minor deviations from the diverted route during the reporting period. Notices of speeding and routing deviation were sent to the FOs and the cases have been investigated. The speeding case and all the deviation cases from the diverted route were due to public safety considerations or emergency situations, i.e., giving way to other vessels, and the HSFs had returned to the normal route following the SkyPier Plan as soon as practicable. The summary of the SkyPier Plan monitoring result (March 2017 to June 2017) is presented in Graph 3.

Insufficient Automatic Identification System (AIS) data were received from some HSFs during the reporting period. After investigation, it was found that missing of AIS data for the concerned ferries were due to interference effect of AIS signal as reported by the FO after checking the condition of the AIS transponders. Vessel captains were requested to provide the radar track photos which indicated the vessel entered the SCZ though the gate access points and no speeding in the SCZ. Ferry operator’s explanation has been accepted.

Three meetings were held with FO representatives in June 2017 to review and discuss the deviation cases happened in the past few months as well as to share experience and recommendations to further strengthen the implementation of SkyPier Plan.

Graph 3: Summary of SkyPier Plan Monitoring Results (March 2017 to June 2017)

2.9 Audit of Construction and Associated Vessels

On the implementation of the Marine Travel Routes and Management Plan for Construction and Associated Vessel (MTRMP-CAV), the upgraded Marine Surveillance System (MSS) automatically recorded deviation cases such as speeding, entering no entry zone, and not traveling through the designated gate. ET conducted bi-weekly audit of relevant information including AIS data, vessel tracks and other relevant records to ensure sufficient information has been provided by the system and the contractors complied with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV. The contactors have submitted endorsed 3-month rolling vessel plan for construction vessel activities to AAHK in order to help maintain the number of construction vessels to a practicable minimum. The IEC has also performed audit on the compliance of the requirements as part of the EM&A programme.

Between April and June 2017, deviations including speeding in the works area, entry from non-designated gates and entering no-entry zones were identified. All the concerned captains were reminded by the contractor’s MTCC representative to comply with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV.

A total of 11 skipper training workshops have been held by ET between April and June 2017 with 91 concerned captains of construction vessels associated with the 3RS Contracts to familiarise 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. Another 18 skipper training workshops have been held with 32 concerned captains by contractor’s Environmental Officer (EO) and competency test had been conducted subsequently with the trained captains by ET.

2.10 Coral Post-Translocation Monitoring

In accordance with the approved Coral Translocation Plan (CTP), gorgonian corals suitable for translocation were translocated to the recipient site at Yam Tsai Wan, which was completed in January 2017. Since then the post-translocation monitoring program has been commenced according to the CTP. Details of the coral translocation works and the results of the first three rounds of post-translocation monitoring conducted in the period from January to March 2017 are presented in the Quarterly EM&A Report No. 5.

Monitoring Results

According to the CTP, the fourth round of post-translocation monitoring was conducted on 5 and 6 April 2017 (about three months after completion of translocation). The results of the fourth round of post-translocation monitoring are summarized in Table 2.23. It was found in the fourth round of monitoring that an significant increase in partial mortality (PM) was recorded in both the translocated corals (tagged) and the control corals (tagged), as well as deterioration in health conditions. However, as the changes in PM were found at both translocated and control corals (tagged), the action/ limit levels as defined in the CTP were not triggered.

Nonetheless, the CTP stipulates that if observations of any die-off / abnormal conditions of the translocated corals are made during post-translocation monitoring, the ET shall inform AAHK, IEC and AFCD and liaise with AFCD to investigate any mitigation measures needed. The ET is also required to identify the source of the impact causing die-off / abnormal conditions of the translocated corals and if it is related to the Project. To this end, the ET has been investigating the significant change in PM identified from the monitoring in April 2017 and has had a meeting with AFCD and EPD in June 2017 to discuss the issue and the planned follow-up actions.

The investigation works completed or currently undertaken by the ET include:

● Ad-hoc initial check of the coral conditions;

● Ad-hoc monitoring of all translocated (tagged and untagged) and control corals;

● Ad-hoc dive check of natural corals in Yam Tsai Wan, Sham Shui Kok and Tai Mo To;

● Ad-hoc water quality monitoring;

● Review of weather conditions, red tide, water quality monitoring data;

● Substrate check and review of sediment deposition;

● Review of other projects and their translocated corals; and

● Consultation with coral experts on the potential cause(s) of the significant change in PM.

Based on preliminary findings, the condition of corals in May and June are not worsening compared to those in April. As the investigation works are still underway, details of the investigation results together with the ad-hoc monitoring results will be presented in the next Quarterly EM&A Report.

Table 2.23: Summary of the Post-Translocation Monitoring Surveys Completed in this Reporting Period

	Colony Height (cm)	General Health Conditions^(a)	% Change in Partial Mortality^{(b) (c)}	Exceedance of Action Level^(d)	Exceedance of Limit Level^(e)
Fourth Round of Survey in April 2017
Control gorgonian corals (tagged)	7-59	0-3 (Average: 1.9)	≤25% change for 5% of the tagged corals and >25% change for 95% of the tagged corals (Average PM: 73%)	No	No
Translocated gorgonian corals (tagged)	5-44	1-4 (Average: 2.0)	≤25% change for 4.7% of the tagged corals and >25% change for 94.1% of the tagged corals (Average PM: 73%)	No	No

Notes:

(a) General health conditions of coral were measured on an ordinal scale of 0 to 5 (0=dead, 5=very healthy).

(b) The percentage change in partial mortality of the tagged translocated and control corals are both determined by comparing the partial mortality recorded during each post-translocation monitoring with reference to the partial mortality observed during the baseline conditions, as represented by the tagged coral survey results.

(d) As defined in the approved CTP, the Action Level is exceeded if during monitoring a 15% increase in the percentage of partial mortality occurs at more than 20% of the translocated coral colonies that is not recorded on the original (control) corals at the recipient site.

(e) As defined in the approved CTP, the Limit Level is exceeded if during monitoring a 25% increase in the percentage of partial mortality occurs at more than 20% of the translocated coral colonies that is not recorded on the original (control) corals at the recipient site.

2.11 Review of the Key Assumptions Adopted in the EIA Report

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

3 Report on Non-compliance, Complaints, Notifications of Summons and Prosecutions

3.1 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.

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

3.2.1 Complaints

An environment-related complaint was received on 24 April 2017 regarding dolphin watching arrangement for implementation of Dolphin Exclusion Zone (DEZ) in area of Contract 3204 for the period since early March 2017. Investigation was conducted by the ET in accordance with the Manual and the Complaint Management Plan (CMP) of the Project. The ET’s review of checking records indicated that the DEZ monitoring arrangements of Contract 3204 for March and April 2017 were reviewed by the ET and IEC, based on the requirements of the DEZ Plan and prior to the Contractor’s implementations and noted the arrangements had followed the DEZ Plan. Furthermore, the implementation of DEZ was checked by the ET on-site during the regular and ad-hoc site inspections for Contract 3204 and noted the site practices had followed the proposed DEZ monitoring arrangements and in line with the DEZ Plan. Based on the investigation results, it is concluded that the 3204 Contractor deployed sufficient dolphin watching arrangements for implementation of DEZ during March and April 2017 and had followed the DEZ Plan. The complaint case was considered unfounded. Regular monitoring and mitigation measures continue.

Another environment-related complaint was received on 9 May 2017 regarding the intermittent release of exhaust air emissions from marine construction vessels of the Project. Investigation was conducted by the ET in accordance with the Manual and the CMP of the Project. The anonymous complainant did not provide any information on the case (e.g. date/time) or any details of the mentioned vessel types. There were no observations of dark smoke during ET’s site inspection in May 2017. ET will continue the regular auditing, which involves weekly and ad-hoc site inspections to, among other matters, check for any dark smoke emission from construction vessels, and to inspect vessels’ maintenance records. In case where dark smoke emission from a construction vessel is observed, the ET will require the concerned contractor to take immediate action to rectify the situation.

Lastly, an environment-related complaint was received on 22 May 2017 regarding alleged cement discharges from a construction vessel during reclamation activities of the Project. Investigation was conducted by the ET in accordance with the Manual and the CMP of the Project. The anonymous complainant did not provide any information on the case (e.g. date/time of the observation) or any details of the vessel (e.g. name, description or characteristics of the vessel, etc.). The ET recognized the concerned vessel as a DCM barge. Review of the water quality monitoring results in April and May 2017 indicated that there were no exceedances of Action or Limit levels for total alkalinity in those two months, hence no indications suggesting significant discharge of cement into the marine environment. Also, there were no discharge out of the site boundary of the Project observed during the water quality monitoring events. Nevertheless, the ET has reminded and reiterated to the DCM contractors to ensure proper implementation of the relevant precautionary/ mitigation measures including the deployment of primary silt curtains installed on their DCM barges and maintaining good housekeeping to avoid spillage/leakage of untreated wastewater/materials into the surrounding marine environment. The ET observed that the relevant precautionary/ mitigation measures had been carried out by the DCM contractors. The ET continues to monitor the implementation and effectiveness of the relevant precautionary/ mitigation measures during the regular and ad-hoc site inspections.

3.2.2 Notifications of Summons or Status of Prosecution

Summons were received in June 2017 alleging use of powered mechanical equipment outside the permitted hours for the aviation fuel pipeline diversion works in December 2016.

3.3 Cumulative Statistics

Cumulative statistics on exceedance, non-compliance, complaints, notifications of summons and status of prosecutions are summarized in Table 3.1 and Table 3.2.

Table 3.1: Statistics for Valid Exceedances for the Environmental Monitoring

		Total No. Recorded in the Reporting Period	Total No. Recorded since the Project Commenced
1-hr TSP	Action	0	0
	Limit	0	0
Noise	Action	0	0
	Limit	0	0
Waste	Action	0	0
	Limit	0	0
Water	Action	0	0
	Limit	0	0
CWD	Action	0	0
	Limit	0	0

Remark: Exceedances which are not project related are not shown in this table.

Table 3.2: Statistics for Non-compliance, Complaints, Notifications of Summons and Prosecution

Reporting Period	Cumulative Statistics
	Non-compliance	Complaints	Notifications of Summons	Prosecutions
This reporting period	0	3	1	0
From 28 December 2015 to end of the reporting period	0	5	1	0

4 Conclusion and Recommendation

In this quarterly period from 1 April 2017 to 30 June 2017, the EM&A programme has been implemented as planned, including 105 sets of air quality measurements, 65 sets of construction noise measurements, 37 sets of water quality measurements, 6 complete sets of vessel line-transect surveys and 15 days of land-based theodolite tracking survey effort for CWD monitoring, as well as environmental site inspections and waste monitoring for the Project’s construction works.

Three Limit Level exceedance cases of 1-hour TSP were recorded in the reporting period, and the corresponding investigations were conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded that the exceedances were likely due to the adverse ambient air quality, but not due to the Project.

For water quality, the water quality monitoring results for total alkalinity obtained during the reporting period did not exceed 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 DO, turbidity, SS chromium, and nickel, some of the testing results exceeded the relevant Action or Limit Levels in the reporting period, and the corresponding investigations were conducted accordingly. The investigation findings concluded that the exceedances were not due to the Project.

No breach of the Action or Limit Levels in relation to the construction noise, waste and CWD monitoring were recorded during the reporting period. All site observations made by the ET were recorded in the site inspection checklists and passed to the contractor together with the recommended follow-up actions.

In total, 2,543 ferry movements between HKIA SkyPier and Zhuhai / Macau were audited in the reporting period. Except one HSF, all HSFs travelled through the SCZ with average speed within 15 knots, which complied with the SkyPier Plan, except one HSF. Nine ferry movements had minor deviations from the diverted route during the reporting period. ET investigated the speeding and deviation cases and all of them are related to public safety / emergency situations.

Between April and June 2017, ET has conducted bi-weekly audit of the MSS to ensure the system records all deviation cases accurately and the contractors fully complied with the requirements of the MTRMP-CAV. A total of 11 skipper training workshops have been held by ET between April to June 2017 with concerned captains of construction vessels associated with 3RS contracts. Another 18 skipper training workshops have been held by contractors’ EO and competency test had been conducted subsequently with the trained captains by ET.

On the implementation of MMWP, silt curtains were in place by the contractors for laying of sand blanket and dolphin observers were deployed in accordance with the plan. On the implementation of DEZ Plan, dolphin observers were deployed for continuous monitoring of the DEZ by the contractors for DCM and water jetting works for submarine cable diversion 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 in this reporting period.

Subsequent to completion of the coral translocation works according to the approved CTP, a summary of the ensuing post-translocation monitoring is reported quarterly.

The recommended environmental mitigation measures, as included in the EM&A programme, have been effectively implemented during the reporting period. Also, the EM&A programme implemented by the ET has effectively monitored the construction activities and ensure the proper implementation of mitigation measures.