_files/image002.gif)
_files/image004.gif)
|
Document reference: |
420831 | D4 | O |
|
Information class: |
Standard |
|
This document is issued for the party which commissioned it and for specific purposes connected with the above-captioned project only. It should not be relied upon by any other party or used for any other purpose. We accept no responsibility for the consequences of this document being relied upon by any other party, or being used for any other purpose, or containing any error or omission which is due to an error or omission in data supplied to us by other parties. This document contains confidential information and proprietary intellectual property. It should not be shown to other parties without consent from us and from the party which commissioned it. |
_files/image006.gif)
_files/image008.gif)
Contents
2 EP
Requirements and Proposed Review Process
2.3 Other
Aircraft Noise related EP Conditions and Updated EM&A Manual requirements
2.3.3
Relevant Updated EM&A Manual Requirements
2.4 Quarterly
Reviews and Annual Reporting Process
3 Review
of Aircraft Noise Monitoring Data
3.1.1
Noise Monitoring in current I-2RS Operation
3.1.2
Noise Monitoring in planned 3RS Operation
3.2 Monitoring
Equipment and Method
3.3 Quarterly
Reviews of Aircraft Noise Monitoring Data
3.4 Preparation
of Annual Review Report
3.5 Event
and Action Plan for Review of Aircraft Noise Monitoring Data
3.5.1
Planned Actions related to the Action Level by AAHK
3.5.2
Planned Actions related to the Limit Level by AAHK
4 Review
of Implementation Status of Aircraft Noise Mitigation Measures
4.1 Overview
of Aircraft Noise Mitigation Measures
4.2 Monitoring
of Implementation Status of Aircraft Noise Mitigation Measures
4.4.1
Key Metrics and Calculations
4.4.2
Presentation of Monitoring Results
4.5 West
Lamma Channel Departures during East Flow Operation
4.5.1
Key Metrics and Calculations
4.5.2
Presentation of Monitoring Results
4.6 Quarterly
Reviews and Annual Reporting Process
4.7 Event
and Action Plan for Review of Implementation Status of Aircraft Noise
Mitigation Measures
4.7.1
Planned Actions related to the Action Level by AAHK
4.7.2
Planned Actions related to the Limit Level by AAHK
Appendices
B.
Methodology for Aircraft Noise Calculation
C.
Proforma for reporting Aircraft Noise Monitoring Results
D.
Establishment of Action Level
E.
Review of Aircraft Noise Monitoring Data – Flow Diagram for illustrating
the Process
F.
Aeronautical Information Circular (AIC) 20/23 dated 21 August 2023
G.
Proformas for reporting Achievement Rates of Aircraft Noise Mitigation
Measures
H.
Example of Achievement Rates Presentation
Tables
Table 3.1: Noise Monitoring Locations
Table 3.2: Event and Action Plan for Review of Aircraft
Noise Monitoring Data
Table 4.1: Implementation Status of Aircraft Noise
Mitigation Measures for I-2RS and 3RS 13
Figures
Figure 1.1: Runway Operation Configuration
Figure 3.1: Locations of existing and new NMTs
established for I-2RS operation
Figure 3.2: Locations of existing and planned NMTs for
3RS operation
Figure 3.3: Locations of Representative NMTs
Tables -
Appendices
Table A.1: Implementation Schedule
Table D.1: Annual Total ATM under Previous 2RS
Operation from 2015 to 2021
Figures -
Appendices
|
2RS |
Two-Runway System |
|
3RS |
Three-Runway System |
|
AAHK |
Airport Authority Hong Kong |
|
AEDT |
Aviation Environmental Design Tool |
|
AIC |
Aeronautical Information Circular |
|
AIP |
Aeronautical Information Publication |
|
ANFTMS |
Aircraft Noise and Flight Track Monitoring System |
|
ANM&A |
Aircraft Noise Monitoring and Audit |
|
ANMP |
Aircraft Noise Monitoring Plan |
|
ANP |
Aircraft Noise and Performance |
|
AODB |
Airport Operational Database |
|
ATM |
Air Traffic Movement |
|
CAD |
Civil Aviation Department |
|
CDA |
Continuous Descent Approach |
|
DNL |
Day-Night Average Sound Level |
|
EIA |
Environmental Impact Assessment |
|
EIAO |
Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance |
|
EIAO-TM |
Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process |
|
EM&A |
Environmental Monitoring and Audit |
|
EP |
Environmental Permit |
|
EPD |
Environmental Protection Department |
|
EPNL |
Effective Perceived Noise Level |
|
ETL |
Environmental Team Leader |
|
FAA |
Federal Aviation Administration |
|
HKIA |
Hong Kong International Airport |
|
HKO |
Hong Kong Observatory |
|
I-2RS |
Interim Two-Runway System |
|
ICAO |
International Civil Aviation Organization |
|
IEC |
Independent Environmental Checker |
|
INM |
Integrated Noise Model |
|
MM |
Mott MacDonald |
|
NADP |
Noise Abatement Departure Procedure |
|
NEF |
Noise Exposure Forecast |
|
NMT |
Noise Monitoring Terminal |
|
NSR |
Noise Sensitive Receiver |
|
PANS-OPS |
Procedures for Air Navigation Services – Aircraft Operations |
|
RNP |
Required Navigation Performance |
|
RNP-AR |
Required Navigation Performance – Authorization Required |
|
SEL |
Sound Exposure Level |
|
T2 Building |
Terminal 2 Building |
|
In Appendix J: |
|
|
ARP |
Office of Airports in the U.S. |
|
DOT |
Department of Transport in the U.S. |
|
EA |
Environmental Assessment |
|
EIS |
Environmental Impact Statement |
|
FICON |
Federal Interagency Committee on Noise in the U.S. |
|
FONSI |
Finding of No Significant Impact |
|
NEPA |
National Environmental Policy Act in the U.S. |
|
ROD |
Record of Decision |
|
USC |
United States Code |
1 Introduction
1.1
Background
Under the Environmental Impact Assessment
Ordinance (EIAO), the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report and the
Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) Manual (Register No.:
AEIAR-185/2014) prepared for the “Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport
into a Three-Runway System” (hereafter as the Project or the “3RS Project”)
have been approved by the Environmental Protection Department (EPD), and an
Environmental Permit (EP) (Permit No.: EP-489/2014) has been issued for the
Project.
The Project is located on a new land formation
area immediately north of the original Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA)
in North Lantau, covering a permanent footprint of approximately 650 ha. As
stated in the approved 3RS EIA Report, the Project primarily comprises:
● New third runway with associated
taxiways, aprons and aircraft stands;
● New passenger concourse building;
● Expansion of the existing Terminal 2
(T2) building; and
● Related airside and landside works, and associated ancillary and supporting facilities.
As presented in the approved 3RS EIA Report,
the runway operational configuration will be implemented in phases as shown in Figure 1.1 below. Upon completion of the new third
runway and associated taxiways and with operation familiarisation of the runway
started on 8 July 2022 and formal commencement of operation started since 25
November 2022, the previous north runway is temporarily closed for modification
works. During this interim period as described in the approved 3RS EIA Report,
the existing South Runway and the new third runway (which is designated as the
new North Runway) are currently in operation, and this is hereafter referred to
as the interim two-runway (I-2RS) operation. Upon completion of all essential
infrastructure and facilities, the airport will be operated under the 3RS,
which is hereafter referred to as the 3RS operation.
|
|
|
|
Interim 2RS (I-2RS) Operation |
3RS Operation |
_files/image010.jpg)
_files/image012.jpg)
The aircraft noise impact assessment completed
as part of the approved 3RS EIA Report had assessed the aircraft noise impact
associated with the above-mentioned I-2RS and 3RS operation. These
covered both the Worst Operation Scenario and Design Capacity Scenario as two
assessment scenarios for the 3RS operation in addition to the Interim Phase
Scenario for the I-2RS operation. Relevant aircraft noise mitigation
measures had been recommended and adopted as operational assumptions in the
detailed aircraft noise modelling undertaken for the above-mentioned assessment
scenarios.
Taking into account the EIA recommendations and
the EP requirements, pursuant to EP Condition 2.23, the Airport Authority Hong
Kong (AAHK) is required to submit an Aircraft Noise Monitoring Plan (ANMP) for
the Project to the Director of Environmental Protection (DEP, or hereafter
referred to as the Director) for approval no later than 3 months before the
operation of the Project (i.e., no later than 3 months before the 3RS
operation). Mott MacDonald (MM) has been appointed by AAHK as the
Consultant to provide consultancy services for the 3RS Project, which include,
among others, the preparation of this Plan.
1.2
Purpose of the Plan
This
ANMP has been prepared to fulfil the aircraft noise monitoring requirements set
out under EP Condition 2.23 for the 3RS operation.
1.3
Structure of this Plan
Following
this introductory section, this Plan is structured as follows:
Section
2 EP Requirements and
Proposed Review Process
Section
3 Review of Aircraft
Noise Monitoring Data
Section 4
Review of Implementation
Status of Aircraft Noise Mitigation Measures
2
EP Requirements and Proposed
Review Process
2.1
Introduction
This submission is for compliance with the
requirements stipulated under EP Condition 2.23 on submission of an Aircraft
Noise Monitoring Plan. The Plan sets out the methodologies, quarterly
reviews and annual reporting process planned by AAHK to review the available
noise data and to assess the effectiveness of the aircraft noise mitigation
measures implemented for meeting the relevant requirements. Further
details are presented in Sections 2.2 and 2.4 below.
There are also other aircraft noise
related submission requirements stipulated under EP Conditions 2.21 and 2.22
and in the Updated EM&A Manual, which are also elaborated for information
in Section 2.3 below.
2.2
EP Condition 2.23
Specifics of EP Condition 2.23 are
reproduced in italics below:
The Permit Holder shall, no later
than 3 months before the operation of the Project, submit an Aircraft Noise
Monitoring Plan (The Plan) to the Director for approval. The Plan shall
include monitoring aircraft noise at representative locations in Tung Chung, Ma
Wan, Tsing Yi, Tsuen Wan, Ting Kau, Siu Lam and Tuen Mun. The Plan shall
make use of the available aircraft noise and flight track monitoring data
including measured noise levels in terms of dB(A) and their distribution,
flight tracks, aircraft fleet mix data and other relevant information at these
locations. The Plan shall also include an action plan, as approved by
Director-General of Civil Aviation, to review the noise data to assess the
effectiveness of the mitigation measures and to take appropriate action with
reference to the prevailing internationally recognized standards in aircraft
noise mitigation.
In preparing The Plan, the Permit Holder shall
confirm with the Director-General of Civil Aviation on the implementation of
restrictions on specific aircraft types to follow the guidelines laid down by
the International Civil Aviation Organization to tackle the problem of aircraft
noise problems at source.
2.3
Other Aircraft Noise related EP Conditions and Updated
EM&A Manual requirements
2.3.1
EP Condition 2.21
In addition to the above-mentioned EP Condition
2.23, EP Condition 2.21 has also specified the need for a Submission of
Procedures for Mitigation of Aircraft Noise no later than 3 months before
the operation of the third runway of the Project (i.e., no later than 3 months
before I-2RS operation) to DEP for approval.
This required Submission of Procedures for
Mitigation of Aircraft Noise was made by AAHK in March 2022 under the EP
Condition 2.21 before the I-2RS operation. The Submission has now been
updated for the planned 3RS operation.
2.3.2
EP Condition 2.22
In addition to EP Conditions 2.23 and 2.21
mentioned above, there is the separate EP Condition 2.22 that requires AAHK to
review the operational data annually after the submission of an updated Noise
Exposure Forecast (NEF) 25 contour for the first full year of the Project
(i.e., the 3RS operation), and AAHK shall update the NEF 25 contour if there
are major deviations from the assumptions adopted in the approved 3RS EIA
Report.
2.3.3
Relevant Updated EM&A Manual Requirements
The requirements set out in Section 4.1.4 of
the Updated EM&A Manual regarding the annual review and reporting process
involves the analysis of available radar data, operational noise data, wind
record, etc. collected from the relevant parties. These requirements are in
line with those stipulated in EP Conditions 2.22 and 2.23. The annual
review and reporting process will allow AAHK to measure exactly how it stands
compared to predicted operations adopted at the 3RS EIA stage.
2.4 Quarterly Reviews and Annual Reporting Process
The available aircraft noise and
flight track monitoring data including measured noise levels in terms of dB(A)
and their distribution, flight tracks, aircraft fleet mix data and other relevant information will
be collected by AAHK and reviewed on a quarterly basis, with a Review Report to
be prepared on an annual basis.
AAHK has planned to carry out the review of
aircraft noise monitoring data and also the review of
implementation status of aircraft noise mitigation measures on a quarterly
basis so that necessary action, if required, can be identified earlier in the
quarterly reviews before completion of the annual review. The quarterly
reviews are considered adequate for identifying the trends and patterns of the
aircraft noise monitoring results and also the
implementation status of aircraft noise mitigation measures for purpose of
assessing any potential significant effect on the NEF 25 contour. Findings of
the quarterly reviews and the Annual Review Reports shall be submitted to EPD.
The relevant processes and procedures with
respect to the quarterly reviews of aircraft noise monitoring data and
quarterly reviews of aircraft noise mitigation measures, and actions that
should be taken by AAHK in the event where relevant environmental quality
performance limits, set out as the action and limit levels as defined in Annex
21 of the Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment (EIAO-TM),
are exceeded are detailed in Section 3 and Section 4 respectively. The action plans presented
as part of the Event and Action Plans in Sections 3.5 and
4.7 have been approved by the Director-General of
Civil Aviation in accordance with EP Condition 2.23. Also, it has been
confirmed with the Director-General of Civil Aviation that the implementation
of restrictions on specific aircraft types is in accordance with the guidelines
laid down by the International Civil Aviation Organization to tackle the
problem of aircraft noise problems at source. The Implementation Schedule
of aircraft noise mitigation measures as presented in Table 20.1 of the approved
3RS EIA Report and also Appendix C of the Updated
EM&A Manual under the EM&A requirements is set out in Appendix A.
3 Review of Aircraft Noise Monitoring Data
3.1
Aircraft Noise Monitoring
The noise caused by aircraft operations is
currently monitored through a computerised Aircraft Noise and Flight Track
Monitoring System (ANFTMS) established by the Civil Aviation Department (CAD).
The ANFTMS is comprised of multiple outdoor noise monitoring terminals (NMTs)
which are located along or close to the flight paths operating into and out of
the HKIA to collect noise data, and a computer system which correlates noise
data collected with actual aircraft flight tracks detected by CAD’s radar system.
3.1.1
Noise Monitoring in current I-2RS Operation
The flight tracks adopted in the current I-2RS
operation are similar to those used in the previous
2RS operation. Yet, with the new North Runway in operation together with
the South Runway while the previous north runway is closed for modification
works, the flight path associated with the arrivals to the new North Runway has
been shifted north, as illustrated in Figure 3.1.
In view of the commencement of operation familiarisation of the North Runway
from 8 July 2022 and formal commencement of operation started since 25 November
2022, the ANFTMS has been expanded through the installation of additional NMTs
at locations close to the flight paths of the North Runway i.e., two new NMTs
in Siu Lam (SL) and Tuen Mun (TM) as illustrated in Figure
3.1.
|
Figure 3.1: Locations of existing and new NMTs established for I-2RS operation |
|
|
_files/image013.jpg)
3.1.2
Noise Monitoring in planned 3RS Operation
The planned 3RS operation will involve the use
of existing flight tracks that are already in use in the previous 2RS operation
or the current I-2RS operation, as well as updated flight tracks. To
ensure the effective monitoring of the aircraft noise situation under the 3RS
operation, additional NMTs will be installed at locations close to the updated
flight tracks and operated as part of the ANFTMS. Figure
3.2 shows the locations of the existing and planned NMTs.
It can be noted that among the existing and
planned NMTs shown in Figure 3.2, seven of the
existing NMTs are situated close to the NEF 25 contour obtained under the Worst
Operation Scenario or the Design Capacity Scenario of the aircraft noise impact
assessment undertaken for the 3RS operation in the approved 3RS EIA Report.
These seven NMTs, namely N1 to N7, are further illustrated in Figure 3.3 and summarised in Table
3.1. There are 5 other NMTs, namely F1 to F5 as also illustrated
in Figure 3.3 and listed as part of Table 3.1 and these involve NMTs that are situated
further away from the NEF 25 contour, but have been specifically named in EP
Condition 2.23. The remaining NMTs, namely O1 to O6 and P1 to P4 as shown
in Figure 3.3 and listed in Table
3.1, are located far away from the NEF 25 contour.
|
Figure 3.2: Locations of existing and planned NMTs for 3RS operation |
|
|
_files/image015.jpg)
|
|
_files/image016.jpg)
Table
3.1: Noise Monitoring Locations
|
NMT ID. |
Location of existing NMTs |
|
Representative NMT locations situated close to the NEF 25 contour |
|
|
N1 |
Sha Lo Wan (SLW) |
|
N2 |
Tung Chung (TC) |
|
N3 |
Sunny Bay (SB) |
|
N4 |
Ma Wan (MW) |
|
N5 |
Tsing Lung Tau (TLT) |
|
N6 |
Tai Lam Chung (TLC) |
|
N7 |
Siu Lam (SL) |
|
Representative NMT locations situated further away from the NEF 25 contour, but have been specifically named in EP Condition 2.23 |
|
|
F1 |
Ting Kau (TK) |
|
F2 |
Tsuen Wan (TW) |
|
F3 |
Tsing Yi #1 (TY1) |
|
F4 |
Tsing Yi #2 (TY2) |
|
F5 |
Tuen Mun (TM) |
|
Other NMT locations situated far away from the NEF 25 contour |
|
|
O1 |
Kwai Chung (KC) |
|
O2 |
Tai Wai (TWA) |
|
O3 |
Mid-Levels (ML) |
|
O4 |
North Point (NP) |
|
O5 |
Jardine’s Lookout (JL) |
|
O6 |
Shau Kei Wan (SKW) |
|
NMT ID. |
Planned locations of new NMTs |
|
P1 |
Tai Mo Shan (TMS) |
|
P2 |
Tsz Wan Shan (TWS) |
|
P3 |
Ma Liu Shui (MLS) |
|
P4 |
Clear Water Bay (CWB) |
3.2
Monitoring Equipment and Method
The NMTs are generally equipped with
a wind shielded microphone mounted on a mast erected at a distance from nearest
hard surface together with a bird spike and lightening rod. The microphone is
connected via weatherproof cabling to a sound meter housed in a weatherproof
cabinet with peripheral equipment for power supply and telecommunication,
including a backup battery. The noise meters are in
compliance with the International Electrotechnical Commission
Publications 651:1979 (Type 1) and 804:1985 (Type 1) or of comparable
professional quality. The NMTs are designed to operate 24-hours a day.
Real-time noise data are streamed to the
ANFTMS, either via wireless or fixed-line network connection. A computer system
operated and maintained as part of the ANFTMS allows correlation of the
available noise data monitored with actual aircraft flight tracks detected by
the radar system for identification of aircraft noise events. A regular
maintenance programme (e.g. preventive maintenance, calibration tests, etc.)
for the ANFTMS is in place to ensure the serviceability and proper
functionality of the system.
3.3
Quarterly Reviews of Aircraft Noise Monitoring Data
AAHK shall obtain the following data from the
relevant parties including the Hong Kong Observatory (HKO) and CAD for
conducting the quarterly reviews:
● Measured noise levels of aircraft noise events at representative
locations including Tung Chung, Ma Wan, Tsing Yi, Tsuen Wan, Ting Kau, Siu
Lam and Tuen Mun obtained via the ANFTMS;
● Radar data including available information on but not limited to the
following:
– Flight tracks;
– Aircraft fleet mix data;
– Flight track utilisation;
– Flight tracks dispersion (inherent in radar data); and
– Runway modes of operation and utilisation, etc.
● Meteorological data measured and reported by HKO;
● Details of any unexpected events affecting flight and runway operations.
All aforementioned data
shall be requested from the relevant parties on a regular basis for conducting
an initial checking and analysis upon receipt of the data. This shall include
but not limited to the checking and analysis of the radar data against
available data from the Airport Operational Database (AODB) of AAHK for
consistency of the available data and identification of any missing data,
information gap and/or abnormalities in the available data. Any
information gap, abnormalities or unforeseen circumstances should be addressed
via engaging in further discussions and coordination with the relevant parties
providing the data.
In addition, pre-processing of the data shall
take place to facilitate the undertaking of the quarterly reviews, which
includes:
● Removal of irrelevant radar data,
such as those related to helicopter, military and government operations; and
● Removal of aircraft operated within
the terminal area but did not arrive at or depart from HKIA.
The measured noise levels of aircraft noise
events obtained at representative locations, including the distribution of the
measured noise levels, shall be analysed for examining and identifying any
potential trends and patterns in the aircraft noise monitoring results.
Specifically, taking into account that the NEF is the only aircraft noise
criterion stipulated in the EIAO-TM, the quarterly reviews of noise levels
measured at the NMTs shall focus on representative locations which are close to
the NEF 25 contour (i.e., NMT ID. N1 to N7), while the noise levels measured at
other representative locations situated at areas further away from the NEF 25
contour but have been specifically named in EP Condition 2.23 shall also be
reviewed (i.e., NMT ID. F1 to F5). At the remaining locations that are
situated far from the NEF 25 contour (i.e., NMT ID. O1 to O6 and P1 to P4), the
available noise data may also be referenced as needed when analysing the
potential trends and patterns of the aircraft noise monitoring results obtained
at the representative locations.
The available noise data of aircraft noise
events collected at the representative locations shall be analysed on a rolling
12-month basis in each quarterly review. As the NEF aircraft noise
criterion adopted under the EIAO-TM is based on the Effective Perceived Noise
Level (EPNL) as the single event sound level descriptor, and while it is not
practicable to carry out routine noise monitoring in EPNL, the annual daily
average of Leq (24 hours) may be calculated from available sound exposure level
(SEL) data obtained at the NMTs. SEL is a measure of the total sound energy of
each aircraft noise event, which is normalised to a reference duration of one
second and can be used to derive the Leq (24 hours) metric (see Appendix B for the relevant calculation
method). The review of the annual daily average of Leq (24 hours) on a
quarterly basis will facilitate a good understanding of the trends and patterns
of the aircraft noise monitoring results.
3.4
Preparation of Annual Review Report
With consideration of the findings from the
quarterly reviews using the noise metric proposed above, a Review Report shall
be prepared on an annual basis and this shall present
the following information to facilitate readers’ understanding of the trends
and patterns of the aircraft noise monitoring results obtained at the
representative locations for the 3RS operation:
● Reporting of the annual daily average of Leq (24 hours) noise levels
calculated from available SEL data of noise events at representative locations
(i.e., at NMT ID. N1 to N7 and also NMT ID. F1 to F5
as mentioned above); and
● Identification of any significant differences or abnormalities in the
above-mentioned analysis.
The quarterly reviews of aircraft noise
monitoring data and the annual reporting process may continue throughout the
3RS operation. A proforma illustrating how the
noise monitoring results, presented in form of the annual daily average of Leq
(24 hours) noise levels obtained at representative locations, may be presented
is set out in Appendix C.
Relevant figures may be presented to visualise the changes over time, based on
the results obtained from the quarterly reviews.
3.5 Event and Action Plan for Review of Aircraft Noise Monitoring Data
A flow diagram that has summarised the process
involved in the quarterly reviews of aircraft noise monitoring data and annual
reporting process as described in Sections 3.3 to 3.4, together with the Event and Action Plan presented
in this section is set out in Appendix E.
3.5.1
Planned Actions related to the Action Level by AAHK
As set out in Section 4.1.5 of the Updated
EM&A Manual, AAHK has made a commitment to have the NEF 25 contour updated
at least every 5 years using actual flight data obtained from the local Air
Traffic Control radar systems.
The quarterly reviews and annual reporting of
aircraft noise monitoring data, when analyzed and presented in terms of the
annual daily average of Leq (24 hours) noise levels monitored at the
representative locations, will help track the trends and patterns of aircraft
noise experienced at the Noise Sensitive Receivers (NSRs) situated close to the
NEF 25 contour in years before the next updated NEF 25 contour will be
presented under the 5-year reporting cycle.
Accordingly, as detailed as part of the Event
and Action Plan presented in Table 3.2, where
major variances, discrepancies or abnormalities are identified in the annual
daily average of Leq (24 hours) noise levels monitored at the representative
locations (i.e., when the highest value of the latest rolling 12-month annual
daily average of Leq (24 hours) noise levels obtained at the representation
locations has increased by 1.5 dB(A) or more above the baseline noise level
(see Appendix D for details of the
baseline noise level and the basis of the proposed action level), the action
level is considered to be triggered and an early investigation should be
launched by AAHK with a view to identifying the possible causes of the
variances, discrepancies or abnormalities, including the need to assess for any
significant effect on the NEF 25 contour by undertaking relevant noise contour
analysis. Based on the analysis results, AAHK should then evaluate the
need for any improvement actions and liaise with the relevant parties for
actions.
3.5.2
Planned Actions related to the Limit Level by AAHK
As NEF is the only aircraft noise criterion
stipulated in the EIAO-TM, the limit level is considered to
be triggered at such time it is determined that the NEF 25 contour may
start to encroach onto any additional NSRs, or when it is considered that there
are major deviations from the assumptions adopted in the approved 3RS EIA
Report. Under these circumstances, additional analysis will also be
necessary to update the NEF 25 contour for confirming if there are any
encroachment onto any new NSRs. If required, the need and feasibility of
introducing additional mitigation measures as remedial actions shall be
assessed and AAHK shall discuss with the relevant parties for implementation of
the additional measures.
Table
3.2: Event and Action Plan for Review of Aircraft Noise Monitoring Data
|
Event |
Actions by AAHK |
|
Action Level |
|
|
Major variances / discrepancies / abnormalities identified in the trends of the aircraft noise monitoring results obtained at representative locations from the quarterly reviews i.e., when the highest value of the latest rolling 12-month annual daily average of Leq (24 hours) noise levels obtained at the representative locations has increased by 1.5 dB(A) or more above the baseline noise level as mentioned in Appendix D *
|
(a) Launch an early investigation to examine the major variances / discrepancies / abnormalities identified at the representative locations, with a view to identifying the possible causes and these may include but not limited to: ● Identification of any unexpected events affecting airport and flight operation; ● Review and identification of any potential seasonal variations; ● Review of wind records from nearest relevant meteorological station operated by HKO; ● Identification of any aircraft noise mitigation measure(s) that would be potentially affecting the aircraft noise monitoring results obtained at the representative locations, followed by a review of any variances / discrepancies / abnormalities in the trends or patterns of achievement rates of the concerned mitigation measure(s); ● Review and identification of any potential correlation between specific overflights and contribution to noise events, with the use of the aircraft data (e.g., fleet mix); ● Review and analysis of measured noise levels obtained at all relevant representative locations; ● Carry out early analysis to update the NEF 25 contour to confirm that there is no encroachment onto any new NSRs other than those predicted in the approved 3RS EIA Report. (b) Based on the investigation results, evaluate the need for any improvement actions and liaise with relevant parties for actions. |
|
Limit Level |
|
|
NEF 25 (as specified in Annex 5 of the EIAO-TM) |
Based on the available airport operational data and with consideration of the findings of the action level related investigation presented above, if it is determined that the NEF 25 contour may start to encroach onto any additional NSRs, or when it is considered that there are major deviations from the assumptions adopted in the approved 3RS EIA Report, the limit level is considered to be triggered and the following actions shall be taken: ● Update the NEF 25 contour to confirm if there are any encroachments onto new NSRs other than those predicted in the approved 3RS EIA Report; ● Assess the need and feasibility of introducing any additional mitigation measures that may need to be in place as remedial actions; and ● Discuss with the relevant parties for implementation of the additional mitigation measures. |
* See Appendix D for the basis of the proposed
action level. Both the action and limit level events are proposed by AAHK
in accordance with the criteria set out in Annex 21 of the EIAO-TM. The action
level shall be reviewed and refined as appropriate after the first year of 3RS
operation, when the first updated NEF25 contour for 3RS operation is produced
based on actual airport operational data.
4 Review of Implementation Status of Aircraft Noise
Mitigation Measures
4.1 Overview of Aircraft Noise Mitigation Measures[1]
Sections
7.3.3.11 and 7.3.5.3 of the approved 3RS EIA Report have recommended a number of direct noise mitigation measures for the future
3RS operation, including the following which have been included and listed
under EP Condition 2.21, as reproduced in italics below:
(i) putting the existing south runway on
standby where possible at night between 2300 hours and 0659 hours;
(ii) requiring departures to take the
southbound route via West Lamma Channel during east flow at night between 2300
hours and 0659 hours, subject to acceptable operational and safety consideration;
(iii) assigning a new arrival Required Navigation
Performance Track 6 for preferential use in the runway 25 direction between
2300 hours and 0659 hours;
(iv) implementing a preferential runway use
programme when wind conditions allow such that west flow is used when
departures dominate while east flow is used when arrivals dominate during
night-time.
In addition to the direct noise mitigation
measures listed above, Section 7.3.5.4 of the approved 3RS EIA Report has also
recommended that the existing noise abatement good practices, including the use
of noise abatement take-off procedures (also known as Noise Abatement
Departure Procedures (NADPs)) and Continuous Descent Approach (CDA), which have
been implemented at HKIA since the previous 2RS operation and in the current
I-2RS operation, to continue to be applied in the 3RS operation. These
measures have accordingly been included and also
listed under EP Condition 2.21, as reproduced in italics below:
(v) adopting the noise abatement
take-off procedures stipulated by International Civil Aviation Organization
(ICAO) for aircraft departing to the northeast so long as safe flight
operations permit;
(vi) adopting the Continuous Descent Approach (CDA)
for all aircrafts on approach to the Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA)
from the northeast between 2300 hours and 0700 hours.
As summarised in Table
4.1 below, three of the above-listed measures, including items (ii),
(v) and (vi), have already been implemented in the current I-2RS operation and all of the six measures are planned for the 3RS
operation.
Regarding item (iii) of the measures i.e., the
arrival Required Navigation Performance (RNP) Track 6, an Aeronautical
Information Circular (AIC) 20/23 of 21 August 2023 titled “Preferential Use of RNP Y (AR)
APCH Procedures to Runway 25 at Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA) during
noise mitigation period” (reproduced in Appendix
F) was issued on 21 August 2023 to promote the increased use of the
arrival RNP Track 6 effective from 3 September 2023. AAHK is also
considering introducing a relevant incentive scheme at HKIA to promote the
increased use of the RNP Track 6. It is expected that the use of the RNP
Track 6 may increase progressively as assumed in the approved 3RS EIA Report
with airlines increasingly equipping themselves with the necessary capabilities
to meet the more stringent requirements[2].
Besides, regarding item (iv) of the measures
i.e., the Preferential Runway Use Programme, it can be noted that the existing
noise mitigation measure implemented in the current I-2RS operation and the
previous 2RS operation mainly relies on preferential use of the 07 runways as
specified under Clause 2.3.1 in AD2.21 of the Hong Kong Aeronautical
Information Publication (AIP Hong Kong) published by CAD and also described in
Section 7.3.3.25 of the approved 3RS EIA Report. For the 3RS operation,
relevant aircraft noise modelling undertaken for both the Worst Operation
Scenario and Design Capacity Scenario at the 3RS EIA stage were based on a
forecast where the air traffic movements (ATMs) at HKIA would grow beyond the
maximum practicable capacity of 420,000 ATMs per year applicable to the I-2RS
and previous 2RS operation towards the 607,480 ATMs per year under the Worst
Operation Scenario and 620,000 ATMs per year under the Design Capacity
Scenario. A number of aircraft noise mitigation
measures as mentioned in the 3RS EP would need to be implemented to mitigate
the predicted aircraft noise impact.
Specifically, the introduction of the planned
Preferential Runway Use Programme (such that west flow is used when departures
dominate while east flow is used when arrivals dominate during night-time when
wind conditions allow), when identified to be necessary for the 3RS operation,
will enable the majority of traffic to arrive from or
depart towards the western side of HKIA over water during night-time. As
already pointed out under the sub-section on Control of night flight
movement over residential area in Section 7.3.4.9 of the approved 3RS EIA
Report, for arrivals to HKIA in the runway 25 direction, together with
increased use of the arrival RNP Track 6 designed for preferential use that
will allow suitably equipped aircraft to reduce the portion of their approach
path over populated areas, the implementation of the Preferential Runway Use
Programme will also reduce the number of arriving aircraft overflying populated
residential areas.
The introduction of the Preferential Runway Use
Programme will be dependent on a
number of factors, inter alia, air traffic growth, night-time schedule
demand and patterns, on-time performance of night flights, air traffic control
procedures, usage and impact of different flight tracks, etc. The quarterly reviews of
aircraft noise monitoring data, with details presented in Section 3, will provide data on trends and
patterns of aircraft noise. All relevant factors will need to be carefully
considered, taking into account the findings of the
quarterly reviews, in order to decide when the Preferential Runway Use Programme will be
required and can be implemented in the most appropriate manner, with a view to
ensuring that the NEF 25 contour would not be encroaching onto any new
NSRs. AAHK will closely monitor the situation and provide updates as
appropriate.
Table
4.1: Implementation Status of Aircraft Noise Mitigation Measures for I-2RS and
3RS
|
Item |
Measure |
Description |
Implementation Status |
|
|
I-2RS |
3RS |
|||
|
i. |
South Runway on Standby |
Putting existing south runway on standby where possible at night between 2300 and 0659 hours. |
Not applicable* |
Planned for implementation |
|
ii. |
West Lamma Channel Departures |
Departures to take southbound West Lamma Channel during east flow at night between 2300 and 0659 hours, subject to acceptable operational and safety considerations. |
Under implementation |
Planned for implementation |
|
iii. |
RNP |
Assigning a new arrival Required Navigation Performance (RNP) Track 6 for preferential use in the runway 25 direction (i.e., west flow) between 2300 and 0659 hours. |
Not applicable** |
Planned for implementation** |
|
iv. |
Preferential Runway Use |
Preferential runway use programme when wind conditions allow such that west flow is used when departures dominate while east flow is used when arrivals dominate during night-time. |
Not applicable |
Planned for implementation *** |
|
v. |
NADP to the Northeast |
Adopting noise abatement departure procedures for aircraft departing to the northeast as long as safe flight operations permit. |
Under implementation |
Planned for implementation |
|
vi. |
CDA from the Northeast |
Adopting CDA for all aircraft on approach from the northeast between 2300 and 0700 hours. |
Under implementation |
Planned for implementation |
|
* South Runway on Standby not operationally feasible with 2 runways in I-2RS. |
||||
|
** Taking into account the level of aircraft / aircrew capability and air traffic considerations, the existing RNP Track 6 had been assigned for use in the west flow direction for suitably equipped aircraft only when circumstances permit during the I-2RS operation. To effect the increased use of the RNP Track 6 progressively in the 3RS operation as assumed in the approved 3RS EIA Report, an Aeronautical Information Circular (AIC) 20/23 of 21 August 2023 (reproduced in Appendix F) had been issued to promote the increased use of the RNP Track 6 from 3 September 2023. AAHK is also considering introducing a relevant incentive scheme at HKIA to promote the increased use of the RNP Track 6. It is expected that the use of the RNP Track 6 may increase progressively as assumed in the approved 3RS EIA Report with airlines increasingly equipping themselves with the necessary capabilities to meet the more stringent requirements. |
||||
|
*** The introduction of the Preferential Runway Use Programme will be dependent on a number of factors, inter alia, air traffic growth, night-time schedule demand and patterns, on-time performance of night flights, air traffic control procedures, usage and impact of different flight tracks, etc. The quarterly reviews of aircraft noise monitoring data will provide data on trends and patterns of aircraft noise. All relevant factors will need to be carefully considered in order to decide when the Preferential Runway Use Programme will be required and can be implemented in the most appropriate manner, with a view to ensuring that the NEF 25 contour would not be encroaching onto any new NSRs. AAHK will closely monitor the situation and provide updates as appropriate. |
||||
4.2 Monitoring of Implementation Status of Aircraft Noise Mitigation
Measures
Taking into account the nature and implementation
status of the aircraft noise mitigation measures as described above, it is
considered that the quarterly reviews of implementation status, including the
reporting of the rolling 12-month average achievement rates of the mitigation
measures on a quarterly basis, should first focus on the following measures in
the 3RS operation and
the monitoring plans are set out in the sections that follow.
● Putting the existing south runway on
standby where possible at night between 2300 hours and 0659 hours;
● Requiring departures to take the southbound route via West Lamma Channel
during east flow at night between 2300 hours and 0659 hours, subject to
acceptable operational and safety consideration.
As part of the annual reporting process, AAHK
shall provide an update of the latest status in the planning of the incentive
scheme to promote the use of the RNP Track 6, including details of the
incentive scheme once it is developed and the latest update on the
implementation status of the scheme, as appropriate. Also, as mentioned in Section 4.1, all relevant factors will need to be
carefully considered, taking into account the findings of the quarterly
reviews, in order to decide when the Preferential Runway Use Programme will be
required and can be implemented in the most appropriate manner, with a view to
ensuring that the NEF 25 contour would not be encroaching onto any new NSRs.
AAHK will need to closely monitor the situation and will provide further
updates on the implementation status of the following mitigation measures, as
appropriate.
● Assigning a new arrival RNP Track 6 for preferential use in the runway
25 direction between 2300hours and 0659 hours;
● Implementing a preferential runway use programme when wind conditions
allow such that west flow is used when departures dominate while east flow is
used when arrivals dominate during night-time.
Concerning the adoption of NADPs for aircraft
departing to the northeast, and also CDA for all
aircraft on approach from the northeast during night-time, there are a number
of factors such as weather conditions, aircraft weight, engine settings, etc.
that can lead to variations in flight profiles of NADPs and CDA.
Therefore, the exact procedures applied can differ among aircraft operators,
aircraft types and individual pilot performance. As such, it is
considered that while the proactive monitoring on a quarterly basis for
adoption of these good practices may not be the most effective means to obtain
the latest update on the implementation status, AAHK may liaise with the
airlines to understand the implementation status, where necessary.
4.3
Data Collection Process
To examine the performance of the applicable
aircraft noise mitigation measures that are implemented during night-time as
described in Section 4.2 above, the following
airport operation related data shall be collected from the relevant parties on
a regular basis (with relevant data already described in Section 3.3) for conducting the quarterly
reviews:
● Basic flight data / attributes for all flights from existing databases:
– Call-signs, arrival / departure, aircraft types;
– Actual take-off time and actual landing time;
– Runway used;
● Meteorological data;
● Radar data containing information on flight tracks, aircraft types, etc.
Besides, as already described in Section 3.3, there shall be an initial checking
and analysis of the data once these are received, including the need to check
and analyse the radar data against available data from the AODB of AAHK for
confirming the consistency of the data and identification of any missing data,
information gap and/or abnormalities in the available data.
Other data and calculations required for
monitoring of the implementation of the above listed mitigation measures are
further detailed in the sections below.
4.4 South Runway on Standby
Putting the south runway on standby
where possible at night between 2300 and 0659 hours will minimise the aircraft
noise impact on Sha Lo Wan and other village houses along the Lantau shorelines
that would be located within the NEF 25 contour given their proximity to the
runway, as predicted and presented in Section 7.3.4.9 of the approved 3RS EIA
Report. This measure can only be implemented when the 3RS operation commences
with an extra runway to allow the South Runway to be put on standby, while the
remaining two runways rotate between operational and maintenance modes.
Besides, taking into account operational requirements
such as recovering from an incident or other major operational disruption
(e.g., typhoon), it was assumed in the 3RS EIA stage that the south runway
would only be used for 1% of total yearly night period in the aircraft noise modelling
undertaken for both the Worst Operation Scenario and Design Capacity Scenario.
4.4.1
Key Metrics and Calculations
The key metric to be considered for this
mitigation measure in the quarterly reviews is the rolling 12-month average
percentage of flight movements operating on the other two runways, namely the
North and Centre Runways between 2300 and 0659 hours. To calculate the
percentage, the following numbers shall be derived from the raw data collected
(see Section 4.3) between 2300 hours and 0659:
● Total number of flights;
● Number of flights operated on the North and Centre Runways; and
● Number of flights operated on the South Runway.
Hence, the percentage achievement (monthly, and also the rolling 12-month average) = Number of flights
operated on the North and Centre Runways / Total number of flights. A proforma
for calculating and recording the percentage achievement is given in Table
G.1 in Appendix G.
4.4.2
Presentation of Monitoring Results
4.5
West Lamma Channel Departures during East Flow
Operation
This
measure aims at reducing the number of aircraft
overflying populated areas during east flow operation between 2300 and
0659 hours, by requiring all departing flights to, instead of flying over the
city via their normal daytime tracks, route away from the main populated residential areas by initially taking the
southbound track via West Lamma Channel, subject to acceptable operational and
safety consideration, before turning east or north over open waters.
For the monitoring of the implementation of
this mitigation measure in the planned 3RS operation, relevant airport
operational data including available radar data will be obtained from the
relevant parties for analysis. The use of the procedure would be determined on the basis of each departing aircraft’s ground track as
recorded by the radar data.
4.5.1
Key Metrics and Calculations
The key metric to be considered for this
mitigation measure is the rolling 12-month average percentage of departures
following the West Lamma Channel out of all departures during east flow
operation between 2300 and 0659 hours. To calculate the percentage, the
following numbers shall be derived from the raw data collected (see Section 4.3) between 2300 hours and 0659:
● Total number of departures in East Flow; and
● Number of departures following West Lamma Channel in East Flow.
Hence, the percentage achievement (monthly, and also the rolling 12-month average) = number of
departures following West Lamma Channel in East Flow / total number of
departures in East Flow. A proforma for calculating and
recording the percentage achievement is given in Table G.2 in Appendix G.
4.5.2
Presentation of Monitoring Results
The percentage achievement can be
compared to previous years’ results. Additionally, plotting the monthly metrics
of West Lamma Channel departures as a percentage of all east flow night
departures (as illustrated in Figure H.1 of Appendix H) can allow greater understanding of
particular periods and events which may have led to discrepancies in
performance when compared to previous Annual Review Reports.
4.6 Quarterly Reviews and Annual Reporting Process
Similar to the review of monitored noise levels
at representative locations, AAHK has planned to review the implementation
status of the aircraft noise mitigation measures described in Section 4.4 and Section 4.5 above
on a quarterly basis, using the collected data as listed in Section
4.3. Relevant analysis may be undertaken on a rolling 12-month
basis in each quarterly review for identification of the following:
● Any irregular achievement rates;
● Any abnormalities or significant differences in the rolling 12-month
average achievement rates when compared to historical data; and
● Any unexpected significant deviations from the relevant assumptions made
in the approved 3RS EIA Report.
The findings from the quarterly reviews shall
be presented as part of the Review Report to be prepared on an annual basis.
The comparison of achievement rates of mitigation measures against previous
achievement rates may continue throughout the 3RS operation.
4.7
Event and Action Plan for Review of Implementation
Status of Aircraft Noise Mitigation Measures
A flow diagram that has summarised the process
involved in the quarterly reviews of implementation status of aircraft noise
mitigation measures and the annual reporting process as described in Sections
4.3 to 4.6, together
with the Event and Action Plan presented in this section is set out in Appendix I.
4.7.1
Planned Actions related to the Action Level by AAHK
As part of the quarterly reviews of the
aircraft noise mitigation measures, where major variances, discrepancies or
abnormalities are identified in the trends of achievement rates of aircraft
noise mitigation measures (i.e., when the latest rolling 12-month average
achievement rate of any of the specific mitigation measures has decreased by
more than 10% when compared with that recorded in the previous reporting year),
the action level is considered to be triggered and an early investigation
should be launched, including the need to assess for any significant effect on
the NEF 25 contour by undertaking relevant noise contour analysis (see Table 4.2 for details of the relevant Event and Action
Plan). Based on the analysis results, AAHK should then evaluate the need
for any improvement actions and liaise with the relevant parties for actions.
4.7.2
Planned Actions related to the Limit Level by AAHK
Details of the actions that should be taken are
the same as that described in Section 3.5.2.
Table
4.2: Event and Action Plan for Review of Implementation Status of Aircraft
Noise Mitigation Measures
|
Event |
Actions by AAHK |
|
Action Level |
|
|
i.e., when the latest rolling 12-month average achievement rates of any of the specific mitigation measures have decreased by more than 10% when compared with that of the previous reporting year *. |
(a) Launch an early investigation to examine the major variances / discrepancies / abnormalities identified of the concerned mitigation measure(s), with a view to identifying the possible causes and these may include but not limited to: ● Identification of any unexpected events affecting airport and flight operation; ● Review and identification of any potential seasonal variations; ● Identification of representative location(s) that is/ are susceptible to the concerned mitigation measure(s), with consideration of available noise data obtained at all relevant representative locations for cross-checking of any potential impacts on the monitored noise levels during the time of identified variances / discrepancies / abnormalities in the collected data; and ● Carry out early analysis to update the NEF 25 contour to confirm that there is no encroachment onto any new NSRs other than those predicted in the approved 3RS EIA Report. (b) Based on the investigation results, evaluate the need for any improvement actions, and initiate early discussion with relevant parties for actions. |
|
Limit Level |
|
|
NEF 25 (as specified in Annex 5 of the EIAO-TM) |
Please refer to Section 3.5.2 for details on the actions that should be taken. |
* Both the action
and limit level events are proposed by AAHK in accordance with the criteria set
out in Annex 21 of the EIAO-TM. The action level shall be reviewed and refined
as appropriate after the first year of 3RS operation, when the first updated NEF25
contour for 3RS operation is produced based on actual airport operational data.
[1] For details of the implementation of aircraft noise mitigation measures
for the 3RS operation, please refer to the Submission under EP Condition 2.21 –
Procedures for Mitigation of Aircraft Noise.
[2] RNP-Authorization Required
(“RNP-AR”) capabilities are required for the use of Track 6. In order to perform RNP-AR for using Track 6, the aircraft
must have a high level of navigation performance as they need to navigate
precisely along the predetermined path over complex terrain; and the flight
crew must also meet specific training requirements. In addition,
authorization from relevant civil aviation authorities is required.