Contract No. HY/2011/03

Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link Road

Section between Scenic Hill and Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities

Monthly EM&A Report No.67 (April 2018)

14 May 2018

Revision 1

Main Contractor Designer

Contents

Executive Summary

1....... Introduction. 1

1.1 Basic Project Information.. 1

1.2 Project Organisation.. 2

1.3 Construction Programme.. 2

1.4 Construction Works Undertaken During the Reporting Month.. 2

2....... Air Quality Monitoring.. 4

2.1 Monitoring Requirements. 4

2.2 Monitoring Equipment 4

2.3 Monitoring Locations. 4

2.4 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration.. 5

2.5 Monitoring Methodology.. 5

2.6 Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month.. 7

2.7 Monitoring Results. 7

3....... Noise Monitoring.. 9

3.1 Monitoring Requirements. 9

3.2 Monitoring Equipment 9

3.3 Monitoring Locations. 9

3.4 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration.. 9

3.5 Monitoring Methodology.. 10

3.6 Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month.. 10

3.7 Monitoring Results. 11

4....... Water Quality Monitoring.. 12

4.1 Monitoring Requirements. 12

4.2 Monitoring Equipment 13

4.3 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration.. 13

4.4 Monitoring Locations. 13

4.5 Monitoring Methodology.. 14

4.6 Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month.. 15

4.7 Monitoring Results. 15

5....... Dolphin Monitoring. 17

5.1 Monitoring Requirements. 17

5.2 Monitoring Methodology.. 17

5.3 Monitoring Results. 19

5.4 Reference.. 21

6....... Environmental Site Inspection and Audit 22

6.1 Site Inspection.. 22

6.2 Advice on the Solid and Liquid Waste Management Status. 23

6.3 Environmental Licenses and Permits. 23

6.4 Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures. 23

6.5 Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality Performance Limit 24

6.6 Summary of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecution.. 24

7....... Future Key Issues. 25

7.1 Construction Programme for the Coming Months. 25

7.2 Environmental Monitoring Schedule for the Coming Month.. 25

8....... Conclusions. 26

8.1 Conclusions. 26

Figures

Figure 1.1 Location of the Site

Figure 2.1 Environmental Monitoring Stations

Appendices

Appendix A Environmental Management Structure

Appendix B Construction Programme

Appendix C Calibration Certificates

Appendix D Monitoring Schedule

Appendix E Monitoring Data and Graphical Plots

Appendix F Event and Action Plan

Appendix G Wind Data

Appendix H Dolphin Monitoring Results

Appendix I Waste Flow Table

Appendix J Cumulative Statistics on Complaints

Appendix K Environmental Licenses and Permits

Appendix L Implementation Schedule of Environmental Mitigation Measures

Appendix M Record of “Notification of Environmental Quality Limit Exceedances” and Record of “Notification of Summons and Prosecutions”

Appendix N Location of Works Areas

Executive Summary

The Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge (HZMB) Hong Kong Link Road (HKLR) serves to connect the HZMB Main Bridge at the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Boundary and the HZMB Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF) located at the north eastern waters of the Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA).

The HKLR project has been separated into two contracts. They are Contract No. HY/2011/03 Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link Road-Section between Scenic Hill and Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (hereafter referred to as the Contract) and Contract No. HY/2011/09 Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link Road-Section between HKSAR Boundary and Scenic Hill.

China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Ltd. was awarded by Highways Department as the Contractor to undertake the construction works of Contract No. HY/2011/03. The main works of the Contract include land tunnel at Scenic Hill, tunnel underneath Airport Road and Airport Express Line, reclamation and tunnel to the east coast of the Airport Island, at-grade road connecting to the HKBCF and highway works of the HKBCF within the Airport Island and in the vicinity of the HKLR reclamation. The Contract is part of the HKLR Project and HKBCF Project, these projects are considered to be “Designated Projects”, under Schedule 2 of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Ordinance (Cap 499) and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Reports (Register No. AEIAR-144/2009 and AEIAR-145/2009) were prepared for the Project. The current Environmental Permit (EP) EP-352/2009/D for HKLR and EP-353/2009/K for HKBCF were issued on 22 December 2014 and 11 April 2016, respectively. These documents are available through the EIA Ordinance Register. The construction phase of Contract was commenced on 17 October 2012.

BMT Asia Pacific Limited has been appointed by the Contractor to implement the Environmental Monitoring & Audit (EM&A) programme for the Contract in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual for HKLR (Version 1.0) and will be providing environmental team services to the Contract.

This is the sixty-seventh Monthly EM&A report for the Contract which summarizes the monitoring results and audit findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 to 30 April 2018.

Environmental Monitoring and Audit Progress

The monthly EM&A programme was undertaken in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual for HKLR (Version 1.0). A summary of the monitoring activities during this reporting month is listed below:

1-hr TSP Monitoring	4, 10, 16, 20 and 26 April 2018
24-hr TSP Monitoring	3, 9, 13, 19, 25 and 30 April 2018
Noise Monitoring	4, 10, 16 and 26 April 2018
Water Quality Monitoring	2, 4, 6, 9, 11, 13, 16, 18, 20, 23, 25, 27 and 30 April 2018
Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring	10, 17, 19 and 25 April 2018
Site Inspection	4,11, 18 and 27 April 2018

Due to the boat unavailability, the dolphin monitoring was rescheduled from 24 April 2018 to 25 April 2018.

Breaches of Action and Limit Levels

A summary of environmental exceedances for this reporting month is as follows:

Environmental Monitoring	Parameters	Action Level (AL)	Limit Level (LL)
Air Quality	1-hr TSP	0	0
	24-hr TSP	0	0
Noise	Leq (30 min)	0	0
Water Quality	Suspended solids level (SS)	1	0
	Turbidity level	0	0
	Dissolved oxygen level (DO)	0	0

Complaint Log

A complaint (complaint no. COM-2018-132) and a follow-ups of complaint no. COM-2018-132 were received for previous reporting months (February 2018 and March 2018). Based on our investigation result, the complaint was related to Contract No. HY/2011/03. A summary of environmental complaint for previous reporting months is as follows:

Environmental Complaint No.	Date of Complaint Received	Description of Environmental Complaint
COM-2018-132	HyD (SOR referred the email from HyD to Contractor and ET on 13 February 2018) and EPD (ENPO referred the email from EPD to SOR, SOR sent the email to Contractor and ET on 14 February 2018)	Complaint about Dust, Water Quality, Construction Waste, Noise and Vibration for the Contract
Follow-ups of Complaint No COM-2018-132	HyD (SOR referred the email from HyD to the Contractor and ET on 16 March) and EPD (ENPO referred the email from EPD to SOR, who sent the email to the Contractor and ET on 21 March 2018)	Dust and Construction Waste

There was no complaint received in relation to the environmental impacts during this reporting month.

Notifications of Summons and Prosecutions

There were no notifications of summons or prosecutions received during this reporting month.

Reporting Changes

This report has been developed in compliance with the reporting requirements for the subsequent EM&A reports as required by the Updated EM&A Manual for HKLR (Version 1.0).

The proposal for the change of Action Level and Limit Level for suspended solid and turbidity was approved by EPD on 25 March 2013.

The revised Event and Action Plan for dolphin monitoring was approved by EPD on 6 May 2013.

The original monitoring station at IS(Mf)9 (Coordinate: 813273E, 818850N) was observed inside the perimeter silt curtain of Contract HY/2010/02 on 1 July 2013, as such the original impact water quality monitoring location at IS(Mf)9 was temporarily shifted outside the silt curtain. As advised by the Contractor of HY/2010/02 in August 2013, the perimeter silt curtain was shifted to facilitate safe anchorage zone of construction barges/vessels until end of 2013 subject to construction progress. Therefore, water quality monitoring station IS(Mf)9 was shifted to 813226E and 818708N since 1 July 2013. According to the water quality monitoring team’s observation on 24 March 2014, the original monitoring location of IS(Mf)9 was no longer enclosed by the perimeter silt curtain of Contract HY/2010/02. Thus, the impact water quality monitoring works at the original monitoring location of IS(Mf)9 has been resumed since 24 March 2014.

Transect lines 1, 2, 7, 8, 9 and 11 for dolphin monitoring have been revised due to the obstruction of the permanent structures associated with the construction works of HKLR and the southern viaduct of TM-CLKL, as well as provision of adequate buffer distance from the Airport Restricted Areas. The EPD issued a memo and confirmed that they had no objection on the revised transect lines on 19 August 2015.

The water quality monitoring stations at IS10 (Coordinate: 812577E, 820670N) and SR5 (811489E, 820455N) are located inside Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA) Approach Restricted Areas. The previously granted Vessel's Entry Permit for accessing stations IS10 and SR5 were expired on 31 December 2016. During the permit renewing process, the water quality monitoring location was shifted to IS10(N) (Coordinate: 813060E, 820540N) and SR5(N) (Coordinate: 811430E, 820978N) on 2, 4 and 6 January 2017 temporarily. The permit has been granted by Marine Department on 6 January 2017. Thus, the impact water quality monitoring works at original monitoring location of IS10 and SR5 has been resumed since 9 January 2017.

Transect lines 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 for dolphin monitoring have been revised and transect line 24 has been added due to the presence of a work zone to the north of the airport platform with intense construction activities in association with the construction of the third runway expansion for the Hong Kong International Airport. The EPD issued a memo and confirmed that they had no objection on the revised transect lines on 28 July 2017. The alternative dolphin transect lines are adopted starting from August’s dolphin monitoring.

A new water quality monitoring team has been employed for carrying out water quality monitoring work for the Contract starting from 23 August 2017. Due to marine work of the Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System (3RS Project), original locations of water quality monitoring stations CS2, SR5 and IS10 are enclosed by works boundary of 3RS Project. Alternative impact water quality monitoring stations, naming as CS2(A), SR5(N) and IS10(N) was approved on 28 July 2017 and were adopted starting from 23 August 2017 to replace the original locations of water quality monitoring for the Contract.

The role and responsibilities as the ET Leader of the Contract was temporarily taken up by Mr Willie Wong instead of Ms Claudine Lee from 25 September 2017 to 31 December 2017.

Water quality monitoring station SR10A(N) (Coordinate: 823644E, 823484N) was unreachable on 4 October 2017 during flood tide as fishing activities were observed. As such, the water monitoring at station SR10A(N) was conducted at Coordinate: 823484E, 823593N during flood tide on 4 October 2017 temporarily.

The topographical condition of the water monitoring stations SR3 (Coordinate: 810525E, 816456N), SR4 (Coordinate: 814760E, 817867N), SR10A (Coordinate: 823741E, 823495N) and SR10B (Coordinate: 823686E, 823213N) cannot be accessed safely for undertaking water quality monitoring. The water quality monitoring has been temporarily conducted at alternative stations, namely SR3(N) (Coordinate 810689E, 816591N), SR4(N) (Coordinate: 814705E, 817859N) and SR10A(N) (Coordinate: 823644E, 823484N) since 1 September 2017. The water quality monitoring at station SR10B was temporarily conducted at Coordinate: 823683E, 823187N on 1, 4, 6, 8 September 2017 and has been temporarily fine-tuned to alternative station SR10B(N2) (Coordinate: 823689E, 823159N) since 11 September 2017. Proposal for permanently relocating the aforementioned stations was approved by EPD on 8 January 2018.

The future key issues include potential noise, air quality, water quality and ecological impacts and waste management arising from the following construction activities to be undertaken in the upcoming month:

· Dismantling/trimming of Temporary 40mm Stone Platform for Construction of Seawall at Portion X;

· Construction of Seawall at Portion X;

· Loading and Unloading Filling Materials at Portion X;

· Backfilling at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel) at Portion X;

· Works for Diversion of Airport Road;

· Establishment of Site Access at Airport Road / Airport Express Line/ East Coast Road;

· E&M/ Backfilling/ Bitumen works for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel West (Cut & Cover Tunnel) at Airport Road;

· E&M/ Bitumen works for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel East (Cut & Cover Tunnel) at Portion X;

· Finishing Works for Highway Operation and Maintenance Area Building at Portion X; and

· Finishing Works for Scenic Hill Tunnel West Portal Ventilation building at West Portal.

1 Introduction

1.1 Basic Project Information

1.1.1 The Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge (HZMB) Hong Kong Link Road (HKLR) serves to connect the HZMB Main Bridge at the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Boundary and the HZMB Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF) located at the north eastern waters of the Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA).

1.1.2 The HKLR project has been separated into two contracts. They are Contract No. HY/2011/03 Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link Road-Section between Scenic Hill and Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (hereafter referred to as the Contract) and Contract No. HY/2011/09 Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link Road-Section between HKSAR Boundary and Scenic Hill.

1.1.3 China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Ltd. was awarded by Highways Department (HyD) as the Contractor to undertake the construction works of Contract No. HY/2011/03. The Contract is part of the HKLR Project and HKBCF Project, these projects are considered to be “Designated Projects”, under Schedule 2 of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Ordinance (Cap 499) and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Reports (Register No. AEIAR-144/2009 and AEIAR-145/2009) were prepared for the Project. The current Environmental Permit (EP) EP-352/2009/D for HKLR and EP-353/2009/K for HKBCF were issued on 22 December 2014 and 11 April 2016, respectively. These documents are available through the EIA Ordinance Register. The construction phase of Contract was commenced on 17 October 2012. The works area WA7 was handed over to other party on 31 January 2018. Figure 1.1 shows the project site boundary. The works areas are shown in Appendix N.

1.1.4 The Contract includes the following key aspects:

· New reclamation along the east coast of the approximately 23 hectares.

· Tunnel of Scenic Hill (Tunnel SHT) from Scenic Hill to the new reclamation, of approximately 1km in length with three (3) lanes for the east bound carriageway heading to the HKBCF and four (4) lanes for the westbound carriageway heading to the HZMB Main Bridge.

· An abutment of the viaduct portion of the HKLR at the west portal of Tunnel SHT and associated road works at the west portal of Tunnel SHT.

· An at grade road on the new reclamation along the east coast of the HKIA to connect with the HKBCF, of approximately 1.6 km along dual 3-lane carriageway with hard shoulder for each bound.

· Road links between the HKBCF and the HKIA including new roads and the modification of existing roads at the HKIA, involving viaducts, at grade roads and a Tunnel HAT.

· A highway operation and maintenance area (HMA) located on the new reclamation, south of the Dragonair Headquarters Building, including the construction of buildings, connection roads and other associated facilities.

· Associated civil, structural, building, geotechnical, marine, environmental protection, landscaping, drainage and sewerage, tunnel and highway electrical and mechanical works, together with the installation of street lightings, traffic aids and sign gantries, water mains and fire hydrants, provision of facilities for installation of traffic control and surveillance system (TCSS), reprovisioning works of affected existing facilities, implementation of transplanting, compensatory planting and protection of existing trees, and implementation of an environmental monitoring and audit (EM&A) program.

1.1.5 This is the sixty-seventh Monthly EM&A report for the Contract which summarizes the monitoring results and audit findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 to 30 April 2018.

1.1.6 BMT Asia Pacific Limited has been appointed by the Contractor to implement the EM&A programme for the Contract in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual for HKLR (Version 1.0) for HKLR and will be providing environmental team services to the Contract. Ramboll Hong Kong Limited was employed by HyD as the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) and Environmental Project Office (ENPO) for the Project. The project organization with regard to the environmental works is as follows.

1.2 Project Organisation

1.2.1 The project organization structure and lines of communication with respect to the on-site environmental management structure is shown in Appendix A. The key personnel contact names and numbers are summarized in Table 1.1.

Table 1.1 Contact Information of Key Personnel

Party	Position	Name	Telephone	Fax
Supervising Officer’s Representative (Ove Arup & Partners Hong Kong Limited)	(Chief Resident Engineer, CRE)	Robert Antony Evans	3968 0801	2109 1882
Environmental Project Office / Independent Environmental Checker (Ramboll Hong Kong Limited)	Environmental Project Office Leader	Y. H. Hui	3465 2888	3465 2899
	Independent Environmental Checker	Antony Wong	3465 2888	3465 2899
Contractor (China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Ltd)	Project Manager	S. Y. Tse	3968 7002	2109 2588
	Environmental Officer	Federick Wong	3968 7117	2109 2588
Environmental Team (BMT Asia Pacific)	Environmental Team Leader	Claudine Lee	2241 9847	2815 3377
Environmental Team (BMT Asia Pacific)	Deputy Environmental Team Leader	Willie Wong	2241 9821	2815 3377
24 hours complaint hotline	---	---	5699 5730	---

1.3 Construction Programme

1.3.1 A copy of the Contractor’s construction programme is provided in Appendix B.

1.4 Construction Works Undertaken During the Reporting Month

1.4.1 A summary of the construction activities undertaken during this reporting month is shown in Table 1.2.

Table 1.2 Construction Activities During Reporting Month

Description of Activities	Site Area
Dismantling/trimming of temporary 40mm stone platform for construction of seawall	Portion X
Construction of seawall	Portion X
Loading and unloading of filling materials	Portion X
Backfilling at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel)	Portion X
Works for diversion	Airport Road
Utilities detection	Airport Road/ Airport Express Line/ East Coast Road
Establishment of site access	Airport Road/ Airport Express Line/ East Coast Road
E&M/ Backfilling/ Bitumen works for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel West (Cut & Cover Tunnel)	Airport Road
E&M/ Backfilling/ Bitumen works for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel East (Cut & Cover Tunnel)	Portion X
Finishing works for Highway Operation and Maintenance Area Building	Portion X
Finishing works for Scenic Hill Tunnel West Portal Ventilation building	West Portal

2 Air Quality Monitoring

2.1 Monitoring Requirements

2.1.1 In accordance with the Contract Specific EM&A Manual, baseline 1-hour and 24-hour TSP levels at two air quality monitoring stations were established. Impact 1-hour TSP monitoring was conducted for at least three times every 6 days, while impact 24-hour TSP monitoring was carried out for at least once every 6 days. The Action and Limit Level for 1-hr TSP and 24-hr TSP are provided in Table 2.1 and Table 2.2, respectively.

Table 2.1 Action and Limit Levels for 1-hour TSP

Monitoring Station	Action Level, µg/m^3	Limit Level, µg/m^3
AMS 5 – Ma Wan Chung Village (Tung Chung)	352	500
AMS 6 – Dragonair / CNAC (Group) Building (HKIA)	360

Table 2.2 Action and Limit Levels for 24-hour TSP

Monitoring Station	Action Level, µg/m^3	Limit Level, µg/m^3
AMS 5 – Ma Wan Chung Village (Tung Chung)	164	260
AMS 6 – Dragonair / CNAC (Group) Building (HKIA)	173	260

2.2 Monitoring Equipment

2.2.1 24-hour TSP air quality monitoring was performed using High Volume Sampler (HVS) located at each designated monitoring station. The HVS meets all the requirements of the Contract Specific EM&A Manual. Portable direct reading dust meters were used to carry out the 1-hour TSP monitoring. Brand and model of the equipment is given in Table 2.3.

Table 2.3 Air Quality Monitoring Equipment

Equipment	Brand and Model
Portable direct reading dust meter (1-hour TSP)	Sibata Digital Dust Monitor (Model No. LD-3B)
High Volume Sampler (24-hour TSP)	Tisch Environmental Mass Flow Controlled Total Suspended Particulate (TSP) High Volume Air Sampler (Model No. TE-5170)

2.3 Monitoring Locations

2.3.1 Monitoring locations AMS5 and AMS6 were set up at the proposed locations in accordance with Contract Specific EM&A Manual.

2.3.2 Figure 2.1 shows the locations of monitoring stations. Table 2.4 describes the details of the monitoring stations.

Table 2.4 Locations of Impact Air Quality Monitoring Stations

Monitoring Station	Location
AMS5	Ma Wan Chung Village (Tung Chung)
AMS6	Dragonair / CNAC (Group) Building (HKIA)

2.4 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

2.4.1 Table 2.5 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and duration of impact TSP monitoring.

Table 2.5 Air Quality Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

Parameter	Frequency and Duration
1-hour TSP	Three times every 6 days while the highest dust impact was expected
24-hour TSP	Once every 6 days

2.5 Monitoring Methodology

2.5.1 24-hour TSP Monitoring

(a) The HVS was installed in the vicinity of the air sensitive receivers. The following criteria were considered in the installation of the HVS.

(i) A horizontal platform with appropriate support to secure the sampler against gusty wind was provided.

(ii) The distance between the HVS and any obstacles, such as buildings, was at least twice the height that the obstacle protrudes above the HVS.

(iii) A minimum of 2 meters separation from walls, parapets and penthouse for rooftop sampler was provided.

(iv) No furnace or incinerator flues are nearby.

(v) Airflow around the sampler was unrestricted.

(vi) Permission was obtained to set up the samplers and access to the monitoring stations.

(vii) A secured supply of electricity was obtained to operate the samplers.

(viii) The sampler was located more than 20 meters from any dripline.

(ix) Any wire fence and gate, required to protect the sampler, did not obstruct the monitoring process.

(x) Flow control accuracy was kept within ±2.5% deviation over 24-hour sampling period.

(b) Preparation of Filter Papers

(i) Glass fibre filters, G810 were labelled and sufficient filters that were clean and without pinholes were selected.

(ii) All filters were equilibrated in the conditioning environment for 24 hours before weighing. The conditioning environment temperature was around 25 °C and not variable by more than ±3 °C; the relative humidity (RH) was < 50% and not variable by more than ±5%. A convenient working RH was 40%.

(iii) All filter papers were prepared and analysed by ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd., which is a HOKLAS accredited laboratory and has comprehensive quality assurance and quality control programmes.

(c) Field Monitoring

(i) The power supply was checked to ensure the HVS works properly.

(ii) The filter holder and the area surrounding the filter were cleaned.

(iii) The filter holder was removed by loosening the four bolts and a new filter, with stamped number upward, on a supporting screen was aligned carefully.

(iv) The filter was properly aligned on the screen so that the gasket formed an airtight seal on the outer edges of the filter.

(v) The swing bolts were fastened to hold the filter holder down to the frame. The pressure applied was sufficient to avoid air leakage at the edges.

(vi) Then the shelter lid was closed and was secured with the aluminium strip.

(vii) The HVS was warmed-up for about 5 minutes to establish run-temperature conditions.

(viii) A new flow rate record sheet was set into the flow recorder.

(ix) On site temperature and atmospheric pressure readings were taken and the flow rate of the HVS was checked and adjusted at around 1.1 m³/min, and complied with the range specified in the Updated EM&A Manual for HKLR (Version 1.0) (i.e. 0.6-1.7 m³/min).

(x) The programmable digital timer was set for a sampling period of 24 hours, and the starting time, weather condition and the filter number were recorded.

(xi) The initial elapsed time was recorded.

(xii) At the end of sampling, on site temperature and atmospheric pressure readings were taken and the final flow rate of the HVS was checked and recorded.

(xiii) The final elapsed time was recorded.

(xiv) The sampled filter was removed carefully and folded in half length so that only surfaces with collected particulate matter were in contact.

(xv) It was then placed in a clean plastic envelope and sealed.

(xvi) All monitoring information was recorded on a standard data sheet.

(xvii) Filters were then sent to ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. for analysis.

(d) Maintenance and Calibration

(i) The HVS and its accessories were maintained in good working condition, such as replacing motor brushes routinely and checking electrical wiring to ensure a continuous power supply.

(ii) 5-point calibration of the HVS was conducted using TE-5025A Calibration Kit prior to the commencement of baseline monitoring. Bi-monthly 5-point calibration of the HVS will be carried out during impact monitoring.

(iii) Calibration certificate of the HVSs are provided in Appendix C.

2.5.2 1-hour TSP Monitoring

(a) Measuring Procedures

The measuring procedures of the 1-hour dust meter were in accordance with the Manufacturer’s Instruction Manual as follows:-

(i) Turn the power on.

(ii) Close the air collecting opening cover.

(iii) Push the “TIME SETTING” switch to [BG].

(iv) Push “START/STOP” switch to perform background measurement for 6 seconds.

(v) Turn the knob at SENSI ADJ position to insert the light scattering plate.

(vi) Leave the equipment for 1 minute upon “SPAN CHECK” is indicated in the display.

(vii) Push “START/STOP” switch to perform automatic sensitivity adjustment. This measurement takes 1 minute.

(viii) Pull out the knob and return it to MEASURE position.

(ix) Push the “TIME SETTING” switch the time set in the display to 3 hours.

(x) Lower down the air collection opening cover.

(xi) Push “START/STOP” switch to start measurement.

(b) Maintenance and Calibration

(i) The 1-hour TSP meter was calibrated at 1-year intervals against a Tisch Environmental Mass Flow Controlled Total Suspended Particulate (TSP) High Volume Air Sampler. Calibration certificates of the Laser Dust Monitors are provided in Appendix C.

2.6 Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month

2.6.1 The schedule for air quality monitoring in April 2018 is provided in Appendix D.

2.7 Monitoring Results

2.7.1 The monitoring results for 1-hour TSP and 24-hour TSP are summarized in Tables 2.6 and 2.7 respectively. Detailed impact air quality monitoring results and relevant graphical plots are presented in Appendix E.

Table 2.6 Summary of 1-hour TSP Monitoring Results During the Reporting Month

Monitoring Station	Average (mg/m^3)	Range (mg/m^3)	Action Level (mg/m^3)	Limit Level (mg/m^3)
AMS5	48	13 – 93	352	500
AMS6	49	20 – 88	360	500

Table 2.7 Summary of 24-hour TSP Monitoring Results During the Reporting Month

Monitoring Station	Average (mg/m^3)	Range (mg/m^3)	Action Level (mg/m^3)	Limit Level (mg/m^3)
AMS5	60	32 – 84	164	260
AMS6	94	50 – 122	173	260

2.7.2 No Action and Limit Level exceedances of 1-hr TSP were recorded at AMS5 and AMS6 during the reporting month. No Action and Limit Level exceedances of 24-hr TSP were recorded at AMS5 and AMS6 during the reporting month.

2.7.3 The event action plan is annexed in Appendix F.

2.7.4 The wind data obtained from the on-site weather station during the reporting month is shown in Appendix G.

3 Noise Monitoring

3.1 Monitoring Requirements

3.1.1 In accordance with the Contract Specific EM&A Manual, impact noise monitoring was conducted for at least once per week during the construction phase of the Project. The Action and Limit level of the noise monitoring is provided in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1 Action and Limit Levels for Noise during Construction Period

Monitoring Station	Time Period	Action Level	Limit Level
NMS5 – Ma Wan Chung Village (Ma Wan Chung Resident Association) (Tung Chung)	0700-1900 hours on normal weekdays	When one documented complaint is received	75 dB(A)

3.2 Monitoring Equipment

3.2.1 Noise monitoring was performed using sound level meters at each designated monitoring station. The sound level meters deployed comply with the International Electrotechnical Commission Publications (IEC) 651:1979 (Type 1) and 804:1985 (Type 1) specifications. Acoustic calibrator was deployed to check the sound level meters at a known sound pressure level. Brand and model of the equipment are given in Table 3.2.

Table 3.2 Noise Monitoring Equipment

Equipment	Brand and Model
Integrated Sound Level Meter	B&K 2238
Acoustic Calibrator	B&K 4231

3.3 Monitoring Locations

3.3.1 Monitoring location NMS5 was set up at the proposed locations in accordance with Contract Specific EM&A Manual.

3.3.2 Figure 2.1 shows the locations of monitoring stations. Table 3.3 describes the details of the monitoring stations.

Table 3.3 Locations of Impact Noise Monitoring Stations

Monitoring Station	Location
NMS5	Ma Wan Chung Village (Ma Wan Chung Resident Association) (Tung Chung)

3.4 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

3.4.1 Table 3.4 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and duration of impact noise monitoring.

Table 3.4 Noise Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

Parameter	Frequency and Duration
30-mins measurement at each monitoring station between 0700 and 1900 on normal weekdays (Monday to Saturday). Leq, L10 and L90 would be recorded.	At least once per week

3.5 Monitoring Methodology

3.5.1 Monitoring Procedure

(a) The sound level meter was set on a tripod at a height of 1.2 m above the podium for free-field measurements at NMS5. A correction of +3 dB(A) shall be made to the free field measurements.

(b) The battery condition was checked to ensure the correct functioning of the meter.

(c) Parameters such as frequency weighting, the time weighting and the measurement time were set as follows:-

(i) frequency weighting: A

(ii) time weighting: Fast

(iii) time measurement: L_{eq(30-minutes)} during non-restricted hours i.e. 07:00 – 1900 on normal weekdays

(d) Prior to and after each noise measurement, the meter was calibrated using the acoustic calibrator for 94.0 dB(A) at 1000 Hz. If the difference in the calibration level before and after measurement was more than 1.0 dB(A), the measurement would be considered invalid and repeat of noise measurement would be required after re-calibration or repair of the equipment.

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

(f) Noise measurement was paused during periods of high intrusive noise (e.g. dog barking, helicopter noise) if possible. Observations were recorded when intrusive noise was unavoidable.

(g) Noise monitoring was cancelled in the presence of fog, rain, wind with a steady speed exceeding 5m/s, or wind with gusts exceeding 10m/s. The wind speed shall be checked with a portable wind speed meter capable of measuring the wind speed in m/s.

3.5.2 Maintenance and Calibration

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

(b) The meter and calibrator were sent to the supplier or HOKLAS laboratory to check and calibrate at yearly intervals.

(c) Calibration certificates of the sound level meters and acoustic calibrators are provided in Appendix C.

3.6 Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month

3.6.1 The schedule for construction noise monitoring in April 2018 is provided in Appendix D.

3.7 Monitoring Results

3.7.1 The monitoring results for construction noise are summarized in Table 3.5 and the monitoring results and relevant graphical plots are provided in Appendix E.

Table 3.5 Summary of Construction Noise Monitoring Results During the Reporting Month

Monitoring Station	Average Leq (30 mins), dB(A)	Range of Leq (30 mins), dB(A)	Limit Level Leq (30 mins), dB(A)
NMS5	60	57 – 63	75

*A correction factor of +3dB(A) from free field to facade measurement was included.

3.7.2 There were no Action and Limit Level exceedances for noise during daytime on normal weekdays of the reporting month.

3.7.3 Major noise sources during the noise monitoring included construction activities of the Contract and nearby traffic.

3.7.4 The event action plan is annexed in Appendix F.

4 Water Quality Monitoring

4.1 Monitoring Requirements

4.1.1 Impact water quality monitoring was carried out to ensure that any deterioration of water quality is detected, and that timely action is taken to rectify the situation. For impact water quality monitoring, measurements were taken in accordance with the Contract Specific EM&A Manual. Table 4.1 shows the established Action/Limit Levels for the environmental monitoring works. The ET proposed to amend the Acton Level and Limit Level for turbidity and suspended solid and EPD approved ET’s proposal on 25 March 2013. Therefore, Action Level and Limit Level for the Contract have been changed since 25 March 2013.

4.1.2 The original and revised Action Level and Limit Level for turbidity and suspended solid are shown in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1 Action and Limit Levels for Water Quality

Parameter (unit)	Water Depth	Action Level	Limit Level
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) (surface, middle and bottom)	Surface and Middle	5.0	4.2 except 5 for Fish Culture Zone
	Bottom	4.7	3.6
Turbidity (NTU)	Depth average	27.5 or 120% of upstream control station’s turbidity at the same tide of the same day; The action level has been amended to “27.5 and 120% of upstream control station’s turbidity at the same tide of the same day” since 25 March 2013.	47.0 or 130% of turbidity at the upstream control station at the same tide of same day; The limit level has been amended to “47.0 and 130% of turbidity at the upstream control station at the same tide of same day” since 25 March 2013.
Suspended Solid (SS) (mg/L)	Depth average	23.5 or 120% of upstream control station’s SS at the same tide of the same day; The action level has been amended to “23.5 and 120% of upstream control station’s SS at the same tide of the same day” since 25 March 2013.	34.4 or 130% of SS at the upstream control station at the same tide of same day and 10mg/L for Water Services Department Seawater Intakes; The limit level has been amended to “34.4 and 130% of SS at the upstream control station at the same tide of same day and 10mg/L for Water Services Department Seawater Intakes” since 25 March 2013

Notes:

(1) Depth-averaged is calculated by taking the arithmetic means of reading of all three depths.

(2) For DO, non-compliance of the water quality limit occurs when monitoring result is lower that the limit.

(3) For SS & turbidity non-compliance of the water quality limits occur when monitoring result is higher than the limits.

(4) The change to the Action and limit Levels for Water Quality Monitoring for the EM&A works was approved by EPD on 25 March 2013.

4.2 Monitoring Equipment

4.2.1 Table 4.2 summarizes the equipment used in the impact water quality monitoring programme.

Table 4.2 Water Quality Monitoring Equipment

Equipment	Brand and Model
DO and Temperature Meter, Salinity Meter, Turbidimeter and pH Meter	YSI Model 6820
Positioning Equipment	JRC DGPS 224 Model JLR-4341 with J-NAV 500 Model NWZ4551
Water Depth Detector	Eagle Cuda-168 and Lowrance x-4
Water Sampler	Kahlsio Water Sampler (Vertical) 2.2 L with messenger

4.3 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

4.3.1 Table 4.3 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and monitoring depths of impact water quality monitoring as required in the Contract Specific EM&A Manual.

Table 4.3 Impact Water Quality Monitoring Parameters and Frequency

Monitoring Stations	Parameter, unit	Frequency	No. of depth
Impact Stations: IS5, IS(Mf)6, IS7, IS8, IS(Mf)9 & IS10, Control/Far Field Stations: CS2 & CS(Mf)5, Sensitive Receiver Stations: SR3, SR4, SR5, SR10A & SR10B	· Depth, m · Temperature, ^oC · Salinity, ppt · Dissolved Oxygen (DO), mg/L · DO Saturation, % · Turbidity, NTU · pH · Suspended Solids (SS), mg/L	Three times per week during mid-ebb and mid-flood tides (within ± 1.75 hour of the predicted time)	3 (1 m below water surface, mid-depth and 1 m above sea bed, except where the water depth is less than 6 m, in which case the mid-depth station may be omitted. Should the water depth be less than 3 m, only the mid-depth station will be monitored).

4.4 Monitoring Locations

4.4.1 In accordance with the Contract Specific EM&A Manual, thirteen stations (6 Impact Stations, 5 Sensitive Receiver Stations and 2 Control Stations) were designated for impact water quality monitoring. The six Impact Stations (IS) were chosen on the basis of their proximity to the reclamation and thus the greatest potential for water quality impacts, the five Sensitive Receiver Stations (SR) were chosen as they are close to the key sensitive receives and the two Control Stations (CS) were chosen to facilitate comparison of the water quality of the IS stations with less influence by the Project/ ambient water quality conditions.

4.4.2 A new water quality monitoring team has been employed for carrying out water quality monitoring work for the Contract starting from 23 August 2017. Due to marine work of the Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System (3RS Project), original locations of water quality monitoring stations CS2, SR5 and IS10 are enclosed by works boundary of 3RS Project. Alternative impact water quality monitoring stations, naming as CS2(A), SR5(N) and IS10(N) was approved on 28 July 2017 and were adopted starting from 23 August 2017 to replace the original locations of water quality monitoring for the Contract.

4.4.3 The topographical condition of the water monitoring stations SR3 (Coordinate: 810525E, 816456N), SR4 (Coordinate: 814760E, 817867N), SR10A (Coordinate: 823741E, 823495N) and SR10B (Coordinate: 823686E, 823213N) cannot be accessed safely for undertaking water quality monitoring. The water quality monitoring has been temporarily conducted at alternative stations, namely SR3(N) (Coordinate 810689E, 816591N), SR4(N) (Coordinate: 814705E, 817859N) and SR10A(N) (Coordinate: 823644E, 823484N) since 1 September 2017. The water quality monitoring at station SR10B was temporarily conducted at Coordinate: 823683E, 823187N on 1, 4, 6, 8 September 2017 and has been temporarily fine-tuned to alternative station SR10B(N2) (Coordinate: 823689E, 823159N) since 11 September 2017. Proposal for permanently relocating the aforementioned stations was approved by EPD on 8 January 2018.

4.4.4 The locations of water quality monitoring stations during the reporting period are summarized in Table 4.4 and shown in Figure 2.1.

Table 4.4 Impact Water Quality Monitoring Stations

Monitoring Stations	Description	Coordinates
		Easting	Northing
IS5	Impact Station (Close to HKLR construction site)	811579	817106
IS(Mf)6	Impact Station (Close to HKLR construction site)	812101	817873
IS7	Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)	812244	818777
IS8	Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)	814251	818412
IS(Mf)9	Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)	813273	818850
IS10(N)	Impact Station (Close to HKBCF construction site)	812942	820881
SR3(N)	Sensitive receivers (San Tau SSSI)	810689	816591
SR4(N)	Sensitive receivers (Tai Ho Inlet)	814705	817859
SR5(N)	Sensitive Receivers (Artificial Reef in NE Airport)	812569	821475
SR10A(N)	Sensitive receivers (Ma Wan Fish Culture Zone)	823644	823484
SR10B(N2)	Sensitive receivers (Ma Wan Fish Culture Zone)	823689	823159
CS2(A)	Control Station (Mid-Ebb)	805232	818606
CS(Mf)5	Control Station (Mid-Flood)	817990	821129

4.5 Monitoring Methodology

4.5.1 Instrumentation

(a) The in-situ water quality parameters including dissolved oxygen, temperature, salinity and turbidity, pH were measured by multi-parameter meters.

4.5.2 Operating/Analytical Procedures

(a) Digital Differential Global Positioning Systems (DGPS) were used to ensure that the correct location was selected prior to sample collection.

(b) Portable, battery-operated echo sounders were used for the determination of water depth at each designated monitoring station.

(c) All in-situ measurements were taken at 3 water depths, 1 m below water surface, mid-depth and 1 m above sea bed, except where the water depth was less than 6 m, in which case the mid-depth station was omitted. Should the water depth be less than 3 m, only the mid-depth station was monitored.

(d) At each measurement/sampling depth, two consecutive in-situ monitoring (DO concentration and saturation, temperature, turbidity, pH, salinity) and water sample for SS. The probes were retrieved out of the water after the first measurement and then re-deployed for the second measurement. Where the difference in the value between the first and second readings of DO or turbidity parameters was more than 25% of the value of the first reading, the reading was discarded and further readings were taken.

(e) Duplicate samples from each independent sampling event were collected for SS measurement. Water samples were collected using the water samplers and the samples were stored in high-density polythene bottles. Water samples collected were well-mixed in the water sampler prior to pre-rinsing and transferring to sample bottles. Sample bottles were pre-rinsed with the same water samples. The sample bottles were then be packed in cool-boxes (cooled at 4^oC without being frozen), and delivered to ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. for the analysis of suspended solids concentrations. The laboratory determination work would be started within 24 hours after collection of the water samples. ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. is a HOKLAS accredited laboratory and has comprehensive quality assurance and quality control programmes.

(f) The analysis method and detection limit for SS is shown in Table 4.5.

Table 4.5 Laboratory Analysis for Suspended Solids

Parameters	Instrumentation	Analytical Method	Detection Limit
Suspended Solid (SS)	Weighting	APHA 2540-D	0.5mg/L

(g) Other relevant data were recorded, including monitoring location / position, time, water depth, tidal stages, weather conditions and any special phenomena or work underway at the construction site in the field log sheet for information.

4.5.3 Maintenance and Calibrations

(a) All in situ monitoring instruments would be calibrated by ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. before use and at 3-monthly intervals throughout all stages of the water quality monitoring programme. The procedures of performance check of sonde and testing results are provided in Appendix C.

4.6 Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Month

4.6.1 The schedule for impact water quality monitoring in April 2018 is provided in Appendix D.

4.7 Monitoring Results

4.7.1 Impact water quality monitoring was conducted at all designated monitoring stations during the reporting month. Impact water quality monitoring results and relevant graphical plots are provided in Appendix E.

4.7.2 Water quality impact sources during water quality monitoring were the construction activities of the Contract, nearby construction activities by other parties and nearby operating vessels by other parties.

4.7.3 For marine water quality monitoring, no Action Level and Limit Level exceedances of dissolved oxygen level and turbidity level were recorded during the reporting month. No Limit Level exceedances of suspended solids level were recorded during the reporting month. An Action Level exceedance of suspended solids level was recorded during the reporting month. Number of exceedances recorded during the reporting month at each impact station are summarized in Table 4.6.

Table 4.6 Summary of Water Quality Exceedances

Station	Exceedance Level	DO (S&M)		DO (Bottom)		Turbidity		SS		Total number of exceedances
		Ebb	Flood	Ebb	Flood	Ebb	Flood	Ebb	Flood	Ebb	Flood
IS5	Action Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
	Limit Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
IS(Mf)6	Action Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	1
	Limit Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
IS7	Action Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
	Limit Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
IS8	Action Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
	Limit Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
IS(Mf)9	Action Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
	Limit Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
IS10(N)	Action Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
	Limit Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
SR3(N)	Action Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
	Limit Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
SR4(N)	Action Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
	Limit Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
SR5(N)	Action Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
	Limit Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
SR10A(N)	Action Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
	Limit Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
SR10B(N2)	Action Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
	Limit Level	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0	0
Total	Action	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1**
	Limit	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0**

Notes:

S: Surface;

M: Mid-depth;

** The total number of exceedances

4.7.4 The exceedance of suspended solids level recorded during reporting period was considered to be attributed to other external factors such as sea condition, rather than the contract works. Therefore, the exceedance was considered as non-contract related. Records of “Notification of Environmental Quality Limit Exceedances” are provided in Appendix M.

4.7.5 The event action plan is annexed in Appendix F.

5 Dolphin Monitoring

5.1 Monitoring Requirements

5.1.1 Impact dolphin monitoring is required to be conducted by a qualified dolphin specialist team to evaluate whether there have been any effects on the dolphins.

5.1.2 The Action Level and Limit Level for dolphin monitoring are shown in Table 5.1.

Table 5.1 Action and Limit Levels for Dolphin Monitoring

	North Lantau Social Cluster
	NEL	NWL
Action Level	STG < 4.2 & ANI < 15.5	STG < 6.9 & ANI < 31.3
Limit Level	(STG < 2.4 & ANI < 8.9) and (STG < 3.9 & ANI < 17.9)

Remarks:

1. STG means quarterly encounter rate of number of dolphin sightings.

2. ANI means quarterly encounter rate of total number of dolphins.

3. For North Lantau Social Cluster, AL will be trigger if either NEL or NWL fall below the criteria; LL will be triggered if both NEL and NWL fall below the criteria.

5.1.3 The revised Event and Action Plan for dolphin Monitoring was approved by EPD in 6 May 2013. The revised Event and Action Plan is annexed in Appendix F.

5.2 Monitoring Methodology

Vessel-based Line-transect Survey

5.2.1 According to the requirement of the updated EM&A manual, dolphin monitoring programme should cover all transect lines in NEL and NWL survey areas (see Figure 1 of Appendix H) twice per month throughout the entire construction period. The co-ordinates of all transect lines are shown in Table 5.2. The coordinates of several starting and ending points have been revised due to the presence of a work zone to the north of the airport platform with intense construction activities in association with the construction of the third runway expansion for the Hong Kong International Airport. The EPD issued a memo and confirmed that they had no objection on the revised transect lines on 28 July 2017, and the revised coordinates are in red and marked with an asterisk in Table 5.2.

Table 5.2 Co-ordinates of Transect Lines

Line No.		Easting	Northing	Line No.		Easting	Northing
1	Start Point	804671	815456	13	Start Point	816506	819480
1	End Point	804671	831404	13	End Point	816506	824859
2	Start Point	805476	820800*	14	Start Point	817537	820220
2	End Point	805476	826654	14	End Point	817537	824613
3	Start Point	806464	821150*	15	Start Point	818568	820735
3	End Point	806464	822911	15	End Point	818568	824433
4	Start Point	807518	821500*	16	Start Point	819532	821420
4	End Point	807518	829230	16	End Point	819532	824209
5	Start Point	808504	821850*	17	Start Point	820451	822125
5	End Point	808504	828602	17	End Point	820451	823671
6	Start Point	809490	822150*	18	Start Point	821504	822371
6	End Point	809490	825352	18	End Point	821504	823761
7	Start Point	810499	822000*	19	Start Point	822513	823268
7	End Point	810499	824613	19	End Point	822513	824321
8	Start Point	811508	821123	20	Start Point	823477	823402
8	End Point	811508	824254	20	End Point	823477	824613
9	Start Point	812516	821303	21	Start Point	805476	827081
9	End Point	812516	824254	21	End Point	805476	830562
10	Start Point	813525	821176	22	Start Point	806464	824033
10	End Point	813525	824657	22	End Point	806464	829598
11	Start Point	814556	818853	23	Start Point	814559	821739
11	End Point	814556	820992	23	End Point	814559	824768
12	Start Point	815542	818807	24*	Start Point	805476*	815900*
12	End Point	815542	824882	24*	End Point	805476*	819100*

Note:
Co-ordinates in red and marked with asterisk are revised co-ordinates of transect line.

5.2.2 The survey team used standard line-transect methods (Buckland et al. 2001) to conduct the systematic vessel surveys, and followed the same technique of data collection that has been adopted over the last 20 years of marine mammal monitoring surveys in Hong Kong developed by HKCRP (see Hung 2017). For each monitoring vessel survey, a 15-m inboard vessel with an open upper deck (about 4.5 m above water surface) was used to make observations from the flying bridge area.

5.2.3 Two experienced observers (a data recorder and a primary observer) made up the on-effort survey team, and the survey vessel transited different transect lines at a constant speed of 13-15 km per hour. The data recorder searched with unaided eyes and filled out the datasheets, while the primary observer searched for dolphins and porpoises continuously through 7 x 50 Fujinon marine binoculars. Both observers searched the sea ahead of the vessel, between 270^o and 90^o (in relation to the bow, which is defined as 0^o). One to two additional experienced observers were available on the boat to work in shift (i.e. rotate every 30 minutes) in order to minimize fatigue of the survey team members. All observers were experienced in small cetacean survey techniques and identifying local cetacean species.

5.2.4 During on-effort survey periods, the survey team recorded effort data including time, position (latitude and longitude), weather conditions (Beaufort sea state and visibility), and distance traveled in each series (a continuous period of search effort) with the assistance of a handheld GPS (Garmin eTrex Legend).

5.2.5 Data including time, position and vessel speed were also automatically and continuously logged by handheld GPS throughout the entire survey for subsequent review.

5.2.6 When dolphins were sighted, the survey team would end the survey effort, and immediately record the initial sighting distance and angle of the dolphin group from the survey vessel, as well as the sighting time and position. Then the research vessel was diverted from its course to approach the animals for species identification, group size estimation, assessment of group composition, and behavioural observations. The perpendicular distance (PSD) of the dolphin group to the transect line was later calculated from the initial sighting distance and angle.

5.2.7 Survey effort being conducted along the parallel transect lines that were perpendicular to the coastlines (as indicated in Figure 1 of Appendix H) was labeled as “primary” survey effort, while the survey effort conducted along the connecting lines between parallel lines was labeled as “secondary” survey effort. According to HKCRP long-term dolphin monitoring data, encounter rates of Chinese white dolphins deduced from effort and sighting data collected along primary and secondary lines were similar in NEL and NWL survey areas. Therefore, both primary and secondary survey effort were presented as on-effort survey effort in this report.

5.2.8 Encounter rates of Chinese white dolphins (number of on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort and number of dolphins from all on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort) were calculated in NEL and NWL survey areas in relation to the amount of survey effort conducted during each month of monitoring survey. Only data collected under Beaufort 3 or below condition would be used for encounter rate analysis. Dolphin encounter rates were calculated using primary survey effort alone, as well as the combined survey effort from both primary and secondary lines.

Photo-identification Work

5.2.9 When a group of Chinese White Dolphins were sighted during the line-transect survey, the survey team would end effort and approach the group slowly from the side and behind to take photographs of them. Every attempt was made to photograph every dolphin in the group, and even photograph both sides of the dolphins, since the colouration and markings on both sides may not be symmetrical.

5.2.10 A professional digital camera (Canon EOS 7D model), equipped with long telephoto lenses (100-400 mm zoom), were available on board for researchers to take sharp, close-up photographs of dolphins as they surfaced. The images were shot at the highest available resolution and stored on Compact Flash memory cards for downloading onto a computer.

5.2.11 All digital images taken in the field were first examined, and those containing potentially identifiable individuals were sorted out. These photographs would then be examined in greater detail, and were carefully compared to the existing Chinese White Dolphin photo-identification catalogue maintained by HKCRP since 1995.

5.2.12 Chinese White Dolphins can be identified by their natural markings, such as nicks, cuts, scars and deformities on their dorsal fin and body, and their unique spotting patterns were also used as secondary identifying features (Jefferson 2000).

5.2.13 All photographs of each individual were then compiled and arranged in chronological order, with data including the date and location first identified (initial sighting), re-sightings, associated dolphins, distinctive features, and age classes entered into a computer database. Detailed information on all identified individuals will be further presented as an appendix in quarterly EM&A reports.

5.3 Monitoring Results

Vessel-based Line-transect Survey

5.3.1 During the month of April 2018, two sets of systematic line-transect vessel surveys were conducted on the 10^th, 17^th, 19^th and 25^th to cover all transect lines in NWL and NEL survey areas twice. The survey routes of each survey day are presented in Figures 2 to 5 of Appendix H.

5.3.2 From these surveys, a total of 267.09 km of survey effort was collected, with 100% of the total survey effort being conducted under favourable weather conditions (i.e. Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with good visibility) (Annex I of Appendix H). Among the two survey areas 97.20 km and 169.89 km of survey effort were collected from NEL and NWL survey areas respectively. Moreover, the total survey effort conducted on primary lines was 194.96 km, while the effort on secondary lines was 72.13 km.

5.3.3 During the two sets of monitoring in April 2018, three groups of four Chinese White Dolphins were sighted (see Annex II of Appendix H). All dolphin sightings were made in NWL, while none was sighted in NEL. Moreover, all three dolphin groups were sighted during on-effort search, while two of the three on-effort sightings were made on primary lines(Annex II of Appendix H). Notably, none of the dolphin groups was associated with any operating fishing vessel.

5.3.4 Distribution of the three dolphin sightings made in April 2018 is shown in Figure 6 of Appendix H. Two sightings were made to the east of Lung Kwu Chau, while another sighting was made near Black Point (Figure 6 of Appendix H). Notably, all dolphin groups were sighted far away from the HKLR03/HKBCF reclamation sites as well as the HKLR09/TMCLKL alignments (Figure 6 of Appendix H).

5.3.5 During the April’s surveys, encounter rates of Chinese White Dolphins deduced from the survey effort and on-effort sighting data made under favourable conditions (Beaufort 3 or below) are shown in Tables 5.3 and 5.4.

Table 5.3 Individual Survey Event Encounter Rates

		Encounter rate (STG) (no. of on-effort dolphin sightings per 100 km of survey effort)	Encounter rate (ANI) (no. of dolphins from all on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort)
		Primary Lines Only	Primary Lines Only
NEL	Set 1: April 10^th / 17^th	0.0	0.0
	Set 2: April 19^th / 25^th	0.0	0.0
NWL	Set 1: April 10^th / 17^th	0.0	0.0
	Set 2: April 19^th / 25^th	3.2	4.9

Remark:

1. Dolphin Encounter Rates Deduced from the Two Sets of Surveys (Two Surveys in Each Set) in April 2018 in Northeast Lantau (NEL) and Northwest Lantau (NWL).

Table 5.4 Monthly Average Encounter Rates

	Encounter rate (STG) (no. of on-effort dolphin sightings per 100 km of survey effort)		Encounter rate (ANI) (no. of dolphins from all on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort)
	Primary Lines Only	Both Primary and Secondary Lines	Primary Lines Only	Both Primary and Secondary Lines
Northeast Lantau	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0
Northwest Lantau	1.6	1.8	2.5	2.4

Remark:

1. Monthly Average Dolphin Encounter Rates (Sightings Per 100 km of Survey Effort) from All Four Surveys Conducted in April 2018 on Primary Lines only as well as Both Primary Lines and Secondary Lines in Northeast Lantau (NEL) and Northwest Lantau (NWL).

5.3.6 The average dolphin group size in April 2018 was only 1.3 individuals per group, which was much lower than the averages in the previous monitoring months. All three groups were composed of very small groups of 1-2 animals only (Annex II of Appendix H).

Photo-identification Work

5.3.7 Four known individual dolphins were sighted four times during the April’s surveys (Annexes III and IV of Appendix H), and all of them were re-sighted only once during the monthly surveys.

5.3.8 Notably, during their re-sightings in April 2018, none of the identified individuals was sighted with any calf.

Conclusion

5.3.9 During this month of dolphin monitoring, no adverse impact from the activities of this construction project on Chinese White Dolphins was noticeable from general observations.

5.3.10 Due to monthly variation in dolphin occurrence within the study area, it would be more appropriate to draw conclusion on whether any impacts on dolphins have been detected related to the construction activities of this project in the quarterly EM&A report, where comparison on distribution, group size and encounter rates of dolphins between the quarterly impact monitoring period (March - May 2018) and the 3-month baseline monitoring period will be made.

5.4 Reference

5.4.1 Buckland, S. T., Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P., Laake, J. L., Borchers, D. L., and Thomas, L. 2001. Introduction to distance sampling: estimating abundance of biological populations. Oxford University Press, London.

5.4.2 Hung, S. K. 2017. Monitoring of Marine Mammals in Hong Kong waters: final report (2016-17). An unpublished report submitted to the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, 162 pp.

5.4.3 Jefferson, T. A. 2000. Population biology of the Indo-Pacific hump-backed dolphin in Hong Kong waters. Wildlife Monographs 144:1-65.

6 Environmental Site Inspection and Audit

6.1 Site Inspection

6.1.1 Site Inspections were carried out on a weekly basis to monitor the implementation of proper environmental pollution control and mitigation measures for the Project. During the reporting month, five site inspections were carried out on 4, 11, 18 and 27 April 2018.

6.1.2 A summary of observations found during the site inspections and the follow up actions taken by the Contractor are described in Table 6.1.

Table 6.1 Summary of Environmental Site Inspections

Date of Audit	Observations	Actions Taken by Contractor / Recommendation	Date of Observations Closed
27 Mar 2018	1. Waste was observed at HAT. 2. Mechanical cover of truck was not applied during transportation at S7. 3. Oil stain was observed at S7. 4. Waste was observed at S7. 5. Gap of the silt curtain was observed at Portion X.	1. The waste was removed from HAT. 2. The mechanical cover of the truck was covered during transportation at S7. 3. The oil stain was cleared at S7. 4. The waste was cleared at S7. 5. The silt curtains were maintained properly at Portion X.	4 Apr 2018
4 Apr 2018	1. Waste was observed near HMA at S15. 2. Waste was accumulated on the ground near plant room at S15. 3. Chemical containers were observed without drip tray near plant room at S15. 4. A chemical container was observed without drip tray at S7.	1. The waste was cleared near HMA at S15. 2. The waste was cleared near plant room at S15. 3. The chemical container was removed from the plant room at S15. 4. The chemical container was removed from S7.	11 Apr 2018
11 Apr 2018	1. Waste was observed at S9. 2. Gaps of silt curtain were observed at Portion X. 3. Waste was accumulated on the ground at S22. 4. Wheel washing facilities were observed insufficient at S7. 5. General refuse was scattered on the ground at S15.	1. The waste was cleared from S9. 2. The silt curtains were maintained at Portion X. 3. The waste was cleared on the ground at S22. 4. Wheel washing facilities with high pressure water jet was provided to clean the vehicles before leaving the work area at S7. 5. The general refuse on the ground was cleared at S15.	18 Apr 2018
18 Apr 2018	1. Waste was observed at S7. 2. Wheel washing facilities were observed insufficient at S16. 3. Waste was observed at N1.	1. The waste was removed from S7. 2. Wheel washing facilities with high pressure water jet was provided to clean the vehicles before leaving the work area at S16. 3. The waste was removed on the ground from N1.	27 Apr 2018
27 Apr 2018	1. No drip tray was provided for oil container at S9. 2. No drip tray was provided for chemical container at S15. 3. Waste was observed at S15. 4. Waste was observed at S9.	The Contractor was recommended to: 1. Provide drip tray for the oil container at S9. 2. Provide drip tray for the chemical container at S15. 3. remove the waste from S15. 4. remove the waste from S9.	Follow-up actions for the observations issued for the last weekly site inspection of the reporting month will be inspected during the next site inspection.

6.1.3 The Contractor has rectified most of the observations as identified during environmental site inspections within the reporting month. Follow-up actions for outstanding observations will be inspected during the next site inspection.

6.2 Advice on the Solid and Liquid Waste Management Status

6.2.1 The Contractor registered as a chemical waste producer for the Project. Sufficient numbers of receptacles were available for general refuse collection and sorting.

6.2.2 Monthly summary of waste flow table is detailed in Appendix I.

6.2.3 The Contractor was reminded that chemical waste containers should be properly treated and stored temporarily in designated chemical waste storage area on site in accordance with the Code of Practice on the Packaging, Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes.

6.3 Environmental Licenses and Permits

6.3.1 The valid environmental licenses and permits during the reporting month are summarized in Appendix K.

6.4 Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures

6.4.1 In response to the site audit findings, the Contractors have rectified most of the observations as identified during environmental site inspections during the reporting month. Follow-up actions for outstanding observations will be inspected during the next site inspections.

6.4.2 A summary of the Implementation Schedule of Environmental Mitigation Measures (EMIS) is presented in Appendix L. Most of the necessary mitigation measures were implemented properly.

6.4.3 Regular marine travel route for marine vessels were implemented properly in accordance to the submitted plan and relevant records were kept properly.

6.4.4 Dolphin Watching Plan was implemented during the reporting month. No dolphins inside the silt curtain were observed. The relevant records were kept properly.

6.5 Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality Performance Limit

6.5.1 For air quality, no Action and Limit Level exceedances of 1-hr TSP were recorded at AMS5 and AMS6 during the reporting month. No Action and Limit Level exceedances of 24-hr TSP were recorded at AMS5 and AMS6 during the reporting month.

6.5.2 For construction noise, no Action and Limit Level exceedances were recorded at the monitoring station during the reporting month.

6.5.3 For marine water quality monitoring, no Action Level and Limit Level exceedances of dissolved oxygen level and turbidity level were recorded during the reporting month. No Limit Level exceedances of suspended solids level were recorded during the reporting month. An Action Level exceedance of suspended solids level was recorded during the reporting month. The exceedance of suspended solid level is considered to be attributed to other external factors such as sea condition, rather than the contract works. Therefore, the exceedance was considered as non-contract related. Records of “Notification of Environmental Quality Limit Exceedances” are provided in Appendix M.

6.6 Summary of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecution

6.6.1 A complaint (complaint no. COM-2018-132) and a follow-ups of complaint no. COM-2018-132 were received for previous reporting months (February 2018 and March 2018). A summary of environmental complaint for previous reporting months (February 2018 and March 2018) is presented in Table 6.2. The details of cumulative statistics of Environmental Complaints are provided in Appendix J.

Table 6.2 A Summary of Environmental Complaint for Previous Reporting Month (February 2018 and March 2018)

Environmental Complaint No.	Date of Complaint Received	Description of Environmental Complaint
COM-2018-132	HyD (SOR referred the email from HyD to Contractor and ET on 13 February 2018) and EPD (ENPO referred the email from EPD to SOR, SOR sent the email to Contractor and ET on 14 February 2018)	Complaint about Dust, Water Quality, Construction Waste, Noise and Vibration for the Contract
Follow-ups of Complaint No COM-2018-132	HyD (SOR referred the email from HyD to the Contractor and ET on 16 March) and EPD (ENPO referred the email from EPD to SOR, who sent the email to the Contractor and ET on 21 March 2018)	Dust and Construction Waste

6.6.2 Based on our investigation result, the complaint was related to Contract No. HY/2011/03. The Contractor has been continuously reminded to properly implement Environmental Mitigation Measures as per the EM&A Manual. The Contractor was also reminded to remove the concerned stockpile of the fill materials as soon as possible to minimize the potential nuisance caused to the nearby sensitive receivers.

6.6.3 There was no complaint received in relation to the environmental impacts during the reporting month.

6.6.4 No notification of summons and prosecution was received during the reporting period. Statistics on notifications of summons and successful prosecutions are summarized in Appendix M.

7 Future Key Issues

7.1 Construction Programme for the Coming Months

7.1.1 As informed by the Contractor, the major construction activities for May 2018 are summarized in Table 7.1.

Table 7.1 Construction Activities for May 2018

Site Area	Description of Activities
Portion X	Dismantling/Trimming of Temporary 40mm Stone Platform for Construction of Seawall
Portion X	Construction of Seawall
Portion X	Loading and Unloading of Filling Materials
Portion X	Backfilling at Scenic Hill Tunnel (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
Airport Road	Works for Diversion of Airport Road
Airport Road / Airport Express Line/ East Coast Road	Establishment of Site Access
Airport Road	E&M/ Backfilling/ Bitumen works for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel West (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
Portion X	E&M/ Bitumen works for HKBCF to Airport Tunnel East (Cut & Cover Tunnel)
Portion X	Finishing works for Highway Operation and Maintenance Area Building
West Portal	Finishing Works for Scenic Hill Tunnel West Portal Ventilation building

7.2 Environmental Monitoring Schedule for the Coming Month

7.2.1 The tentative schedule for environmental monitoring in May 2018 is provided in Appendix D.

8 Conclusions

8.1 Conclusions

8.1.1 The construction phase and EM&A programme of the Contract commenced on 17 October 2012. This is the sixty-seventh Monthly EM&A report for the Contract which summarizes the monitoring results and audit findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 to 30 April 2018.

Air Quality

8.1.2 No Action and Limit Level exceedances of 1-hr TSP were recorded at AMS5 and AMS6 during the reporting month. No Action and Limit Level exceedances of 24-hr TSP were recorded at AMS5 and AMS6 during the reporting month.

Noise

8.1.3 For construction noise, no Action and Limit Level exceedances were recorded at the monitoring station during the reporting month.

Water Quality

8.1.4 For marine water quality monitoring, no Action Level and Limit Level exceedances of dissolved oxygen level and turbidity level were recorded during the reporting month. No Limit Level exceedances of suspended solids level were recorded during the reporting month. An Action Level exceedance of suspended solids level was recorded during the reporting month. The exceedance of suspended solid level was considered to be attributed to other external factors such as sea condition, rather than the contract works. Therefore, the exceedance was considered as non-contract related.

Dolphin

8.1.5 During the April’s surveys of the Chinese White Dolphin, no adverse impact from the activities of this construction project on Chinese White Dolphins was noticeable from general observations.

8.1.6 Due to monthly variation in dolphin occurrence within the study area, it would be more appropriate to draw conclusion on whether any impacts on dolphins have been detected related to the construction activities of this project in the quarterly EM&A report, where comparison on distribution, group size and encounter rates of dolphins between the quarterly impact monitoring period (March – May 2018) and 3-month baseline monitoring period will be made.

Environmental Site Inspection and Audit

8.1.7 Environmental site inspections were carried out on 4, 11, 18 and 27 April 2018. Recommendations on remedial actions were given to the Contractors for the deficiencies identified during the site inspections.

8.1.8 A complaint (complaint no. COM-2018-132) and a follow-ups of complaint no. COM-2018-132 were received for previous reporting months. Based on our investigation result, the complaint was related to Contract No. HY/2011/03.

8.1.9 There was no complaint received in relation to the environmental impacts during the reporting month. No notification of summons and prosecution was received during the reporting period.