11.1.1 This Project is a Designated Project in accordance with Item 1 of Part II, Schedule 2 of the EIAO, which specifies “Decommissioning of airports, including fuelling and fuel storage, the aircraft maintenance and repair facilities”. This EIA Report has provided an assessment of the potential environmental impacts associated with the Project, with the consideration of the potential cumulative impact from other projects. Specific mitigation measures requirements for the Project, as well as an environmental monitoring and auditing programme, have been developed during the assessment of the proposed Project.

11.1.2 A summary of the environmental impacts associated with the Project are presented in Table 11.1. The key assessment assumptions, limitation of assessment methodologies and all relevant prior agreements with the EPD on individual environmental media assessment components are given in Appendix 11.1. The Implementation Schedule of the recommendations is presented in Section 12. The key environmental outcomes arising from the EIA study and the principal findings of the study are summarized in Section 13.

11.2 Land Contamination Impact

11.2.1 Findings and site investigations results from three contamination assessment studies conducted at south apron, runway and the narrow strip of north apron, and ex-Government Flying Service (ex-GFS) apron area, have been reviewed and studied in this EIA study.

11.2.2 Based on the investigation results, some individuals areas in the south apron were identified with metals and/or petroleum hydrocarbons (in terms of TPH) contamination. In addition, an small area in the narrow strip of the north apron near the Kai Tak Tunnel was also found contaminated with benzo(a)pyrene. Furthermore, the supplementary investigation undertaken at the ex-GFS apron area revealed that the site was contaminated with metals, TPH, ethylbenzene and xylenes. No contamination was found in the runway area and therefore construction works for any future development in the runway area could be proceeded accordingly without the need of prior decontamination.

11.2.3 There would be no adverse impacts identified for airport runway to be developed in parallel with the proposed decontamination works considering there is no contamination found and the physical separation between the airport runway and the identified contamination areas (at the south apron area, the ex-GFS apron area and the narrow strip of the north apron) by Kai Tak Approach Channel (KTAC). In addition, there would be no adverse impacts for the commencement of permanent construction in the ex-GFS apron area upon completion of free product recovery and excavation of contaminated soil.

11.2.4 Results of the groundwater risk assessment indicate that the concentrations of the chemical-of-concerns (COCs) in the groundwater, including metals (including barium, cadmium, copper, molybdenum, lead, tin, zinc, thallium, vanadium, antimony, chromium, cobalt and nickel), VOCs (benzene, ethylbenzene, xylenes) and SVOCs (benzo(a)pyrene, phenanthrene and naphthalene) do not exceed risk-based criteria for remediation. However, floating free products were recorded in the ex-GFS apron area. In order to reduce the safety and health risk, it is proposed that free product shall be recovered and collected by a licensed chemical waste collector for proper disposal.

11.2.5 Based on the site investigations findings, the estimated soil volumes by different soil contaminant types are (1) metals only: 467.1m³; (2) TPH / VOCs / SVOC only: 17,707.9m³ and (3) both TPH and metals: 113.2m³. After review of various remediation methods, biopiling is proposed to treat TPH / VOCs / SVOC contaminated soil. Biopile cleanup progress monitoring and closure assessment are proposed for biopiling to ensure a satisfactory cleanup progress and that all the target contaminants have been treated to below the cleanup targets. Solidification / stabilization is proposed to treat the soil contaminated with metals. For soil contaminated with metals and TPH, it is suggested to treat the contaminated soil by biopiling first and followed by solidification / stabilization.

11.2.6 No adverse impacts would be anticipated from the decontamination works, including free product recovery, excavation, biopiling and solidification / stabilization with the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures.

11.2.7 All the decontamination works including biopiling and solidification / stabilization are proposed to be carried out in the decontamination works area located at the northern part of the South Apron.

11.2.8 It is recommended that the soil treated by biopiling should be reused on-site as fill material as far as practical. For soil treated by solidification / stabilization, the treated soil should be backfilled on-site and then covered by 1m of clean fill.

11.2.9 No adverse residual environmental impact in respect of land contamination is anticipated upon completion of the recommended remediation actions.

11.3 Waste Management Implications

11.3.1 Wastes generated by the decommissioning works are likely to include C&D material from demolition of the remaining structures within the Project boundary, general refuse from the workforce and chemical waste from the maintenance of construction plant and equipment and from the soil remediation process. Provided that these identified waste arisings are handled, transported and disposed of using approved methods and that the recommended good site practices are strictly followed, adverse environmental impacts would not be expected during the decommissioning works and from the soil remediation process of the Project.

11.4 Water Quality Impact

11.4.1 Water quality impacts from the land-based decontamination works, associated with leachate and contaminated runoff, can be controlled to acceptable levels by implementing the recommended mitigation measures. All the effluents and runoff generated from the works areas shall be treated and their quality be monitored before discharged. No unacceptable water quality impacts would be expected from the land-based decommissioning activities.

11.4.2 The proposed method for decommissioning of the disused fuel dolphin would not involve any dredging and in view that the works area would be small, any potential marine water quality impact arising from the decommissioning works would be minor and localized and no unacceptable marine water quality impact would be expected.

11.4.3 Site inspections should be undertaken routinely to inspect the works areas in order to ensure the recommended mitigation measures are properly implemented.

11.5 Air Quality Impact

11.5.1 The Project site area covers south apron, runway and a narrow strip of north apron of the former Kai Tak Airport, however, the demolition works will only be limited to those areas with remaining existing structures / buildings and abandoned facilities of the former Kai Tak Airport. With the implementation of the requirements stipulated in the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation during demolition works, transportation & unloading of excavated contaminated soil and mixing process in solidification, adverse dust impact would not be expected. No cumulative dust impacts from the concurrent projects in the proximity of the study area would be anticipated.

11.5.2 Regarding the air pollutant emission from decontamination works, insignificant amount of pollutant emissions during excavation from the identified contaminated spots within the South Apron area (except ex-GFS apron area) and North Apron area would be expected in view of the small and localized excavation areas. For the contaminated areas at the ex-GFS apron area, the potential air emissions concerned during excavation include TPH, ethylbenzene and xylenes. The modelling results indicated that the predicted air pollutant concentrations would comply with and are far below the respective criteria at the nearest ASRs and no exceedances of the respective criteria are predicted at the excavation work boundary.

11.5.3 No adverse air quality impact would be expected during transportation and unloading of excavated contaminated soil with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures. The contaminated soil would be treated on site by solidification and biopiling. As there would be limited amount of heavy metal contaminated soil for the mixing process during solidification and carbon absorber with 99% removal efficiency would be installed at biopile facilities to treat off-gas prior to discharge, adverse air quality impact from decommissioning other than dust impact is therefore not anticipated. Dust and VOC monitoring and audit programme is proposed to ensure proper implementation of mitigation measures.

11.5.4 Insignificant odour impact (petroleum / kerosene smell) is anticipated during soil excavation as the excavation area would be limited and would be backfilled with clean and/or treated soil shortly after excavation, and the excavated soils would be covered with impermeable liner to minimise odour emission.

11.5.5 No adverse health risk from dust emission attached with heavy metals would be anticipated in view of small amount of soils contaminated by heavy metals and implementation of dust suppression measures during excavation, transportation and unloading and decontamination works.

11.6 Noise Impact

11.6.1 The construction noise impacts associated with the Project as well as the concurrent projects were identified and assessed. In the absence of mitigation measures, results indicated that no adverse construction noise impact would be expected at the representative noise assessment points. Appropriate good site practices are proposed to further ameliorate the construction noise impacts.

11.7 Impact on Cultural Heritage

11.7.1 The Study Area for the Project contains several heritage resources associated with the former Kai Tak Airport which include three wind poles, the airport pier, Fire Station B and associated pier and Fire Station C, seawall and runway. None of the heritage resources examined will be affected by this Project, no mitigation is required.

11.7.2 Based on the findings of the desk based study and the built heritage field survey, all the three wind poles are of low cultural heritage significance. A full cartographic and photographic survey of the wind poles has been undertaken in their existing locations.

11.7.3 Fire Station B and the associated pier are evaluated to have low cultural heritage significance. However, the Fire Station B is located in an area that is compatible with current development plans. If the future use of Fire Station B is identified, it is worth considering incorporating the Fire Station B into the Kai Tak Development for educational and tourism purposes. Fire Station B has undergone full cartographic and photographic survey.

11.7.4 Based upon the above evaluation, Fire Station C and the Airport Pier all have low cultural heritage significance. All of the resources have been fully recorded by cartographic and photographic survey.

11.7.5 The heritage significance of the remaining runway and seawall structure is considered to be low based upon the evaluation carried out under this study. In order to maintain the shape of the runway, unnecessary disturbance to the seawall outside the project area of the proposed cruise terminal at Kai Tak should be avoided as far as practicable. There are no other structural elements of the runway that contain heritage value.

11.8 Marine Ecological Impact

11.8.1 Literature reviews of existing information with supplement findings from recent field surveys indicated that identified marine habitats within the assessment area are of generally very low ecological value. There are no ecological sensitive receivers, such as SSSIs and Marine Parks and / or Reserves and other areas of ecological importance or conservation interest, in and within the immediate vicinity of the assessment area.

11.8.2 Marine habitats within the assessment area include soft bottom seabed, artificial seawalls, subtidal habitats and feeding ground of waterbirds. All the identified habitats are considered to have generally very low of ecological value due to their highly artificial and disturbed nature. Species diversity and abundance in these habitats were generally low and no rare or restricted species was recorded. The species of conservation interest recorded within the assessment area only include single species of hard coral (Oulastrea crispata) (but all colonies found are small in size, sparsely distributed and in very low coverage) and few species of waterbirds such as Little Egret and Great Egret. All these species of conservation interest recorded within the assessment area are common and widespread in other Hong Kong waters.

11.8.3 Direct and indirect ecological impacts arising from the Project during construction phase were identified and evaluated. The Project will result in the permanent loss of small area of subtidal hard substratum of the disused fuel dolphin and no adverse impact is expected. No coral colonies were found at the hard subtidal substrate of the disused fuel dolphin. Potential direct disturbance on benthic habitats and associated marine life would be resulted from the proposed marine works. Considering that the benthic habitats within the assessment area are of very low ecological value, no adverse impact is expected also.

11.8.4 Other indirect impacts arsing from the Project would be temporary and considered as negligible in nature. Overall, no significant and unacceptable ecological impact on marine resource was anticipated in this assessment.

11.9 Conclusion

11.9.1 This EIA has been conducted based on the best and latest information available during the course of the EIA study. The findings of this EIA have provided information on the nature and extent of environmental impacts arising from the Project. The EIA has, where appropriate, identified mitigation measures to ensure compliance with environmental legislation and standards.

11.9.2 Overall, this EIA has demonstrated the general acceptability of the residual impacts from the Project and the protection of the population and environmentally sensitive resources. Environmental monitoring and audit mechanisms have been recommended during the course of the proposed Project, where necessary, to verify the accuracy of the EIA predictions and the effectiveness of recommended mitigation measures. A summary of the environmental impacts associated with the Project is presented in Table 11.1.

^Table
11.1^{Summary of Environmental Impacts Associated with the Project}

Sensitive Receivers/ Assessment Points	Impact Prediction Results	Relevant Standards/ Criteria		Extents of Exceedances Predicted	Impact Avoidance Measures/ Mitigation Measures Proposed	Residual Impacts
Land Contamination Impact
Construction Workers exposed to the contaminants materials during decommissioning / decontamination works via direct ingestion of and dermal contact with contaminated soils and inhalation of volatile contaminants.	South Apron Area l Based on the site investigations findings, contaminants such as total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) and/or metals, exceeding Dutch B criteria, were identified in the south apron area (see Appendix 3.2a).	l ProPECC PN3/94 – “Contaminated Land Assessment and Remediation”; l Guidance Notes for Investigation and Remediation of Contaminated Sites of Petrol Filling Stations, Boatyards and Car Repair/ Dismantling Workshop;		South Apron Area l As identified in the site investigations, eight contaminative areas were identified within the south apron and the Study Area as shown in Drawing 3.7. Approximately 600m³of soil were found contaminated with TPH and/or metals and the breakdown is summarized as follows: (i) TPH contaminated soil: 169.8m³ (ii) Metals contaminated soil: 311.3m³ (iii)TPH and metals contaminated soil: 113.2m³	South Apron Area l All the contaminated soil identified in the south apron area is suggested to be excavated for the following on-site treatment methods as proposed in the attached CAR/RAP (see Appendix 3.2a): (i) Biopiling for TPH contaminated soil (ii) Solidification/ stabilization for metals contaminated soil (iii)Biopiling and then solidification / stabilization for TPH and metals contaminated soil.	l After appropriate remediation actions (as detailed in Sections 3.9 - 3.11 in this EIA report) have been completed, the identified contaminated sites will be cleaned up to acceptable standards and no adverse impact would be envisaged
Construction Workers exposed to the contaminants during decommissioning and decontamination works via ingestion are regarded as the most sensitive receptor due to groundwater contamination.	Runway Area and the Narrow Strip of the North Apron l Based on the site investigation findings, no contamination was found in the airport runway area. However, SVOC (benzo(a)pyrene) was found exceeding Dutch B criteria within the narrow strip of the north apron (near to the Kai Tak Tunnel) (see Appendix 3.2b). Ex-Government Flying Service (Ex-GFS) Apron Area l Based on the site investigation findings, TPH, metals, VOCs (ethylbenzene and xylenes) were found exceeding Dutch B criteria within the ex-GFS apron area (see Appendix 3.2c). South Apron Area, Runway Area and the Narrow Strip of the North Apron The risk assessment results (as discussed in Sections 3.7.14 - 3.7.18 in this EIA report) showed that the concentrations of all COCs do not exceed the risk-based criteria for remediation in the south apron area, runway area and the narrow strip of the north apron. Ex-GFS Apron Area l The risk assessment results (as discussed in Sections 3.7.14 - 3.7.18 in this EIA report) showed that the concentrations of all COCs do not exceed the risk-based criteria for remediation except TPH. l Floating free product was found in three groundwater samples (see Appendix 3.2c). The free product was tested to be identical to petroleum hydrocarbons with resemblance to Kerosene. In addition, the risk assessment for groundwater showed that the maximum concentrations of TPH exceed the calculated ‘allowable’ concentration (i.e. 213mg/L) for remediation.	l Not applicable l The ‘allowable’ concentration for TPH derived from the risk assessment of groundwater is 213 mg/L. The remediation criterion for TPH should be interpreted as no free product.		Runway Area and the Narrow Strip of the North Apron) l Based on site investigations findings, no contamination was found in the airport runway area. However, an area near the Kai Tak Tunnel as shown in Drawing 3.7 was contaminated with SVOC (benzo(a)pyrene) and the estimated volume of the contaminated soil is about 49.5m³. Ex-GFS Apron Area l Site investigation identified that the ex-GFS apron area as shown in Drawing 3.7 was contaminated with TPH, metals and VOCs (ethylbenzene and xylenes) and the breakdown is summarized as follows: (i) TPH / VOCs contaminated soil: ～17,488.6m³ (ii) Metals contaminated soil: 155.8m³ l Not applicable l As provided in Appendix 3.2c in this EIA report, floating oil / free product (of TPH) has been found in Boreholes B02 (in vicinity of refuelling pit 8), B06 and B06A (in vicinity of refuelling pit 4) of the ex-GFS apron area, with the thickness of about 16cm, 17cm and 39cm. No free product was recorded in other groundwater wells and thus it is considered that the free product is likely to be localized and the quantity of the free product would be small (about 6.8m³).	Runway Area and the Narrow Strip of the North Apron l The soil contaminated with SVOC (benzo(a)pyrene) is suggested to be excavated and treated by biopiling as proposed in the attached CAR/RAP (see Appendix 3.2b). Ex-GFS Apron Area l All the contaminated soil is suggested to be excavated for the following on-site treatment methods as proposed in the attached CAR/RAP (see Appendix 3.2c): (i) Biopiling for TPH/VOCs contaminated soil (ii) Solidification/ stabilization for metals contaminated soil l Not applicable l It is proposed that where free product is detected at the groundwater surface at excavated areas within the ex-GFS apron area, free product recovery should be performed to remove the free product. The free product could be skimmed off from water surface. The skimmed free product should be then drummed properly and collected by a licensed chemical waste collector for proper disposal. The storage of skimmed free product should comply with the requirements in the Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation including the type of drum and containment measures. (See Sections 3.8.17 - 3.8.20 and Appendix 3.2c in this EIA report).	l None l After appropriate remediation actions (as detailed in Sections 3.8.17 -3.8.20 and 3.11 in this EIA report) have been completed, the risk of petroleum hydrocarbons in groundwater will be acceptable and no adverse impact to the construction workers for decontamination would be envisaged.
Waste Management Implications
Not applicable	l C&D materials from demolition of the remaining structures with a total volume of approx. 4100 m³. l Chemical waste such as cleaning fluids, solvents, lubrication oil, fuel, and used carbon filters may be generated from the operation, maintenance and servicing of construction, decontamination treatment plant and equipment maintenance, and from remediation process. It is anticipated that the quantity of chemical waste would be small and in order of a few cubic metres per month. l General refuse from the workforce	l Waste Disposal Ordinance (Cap. 354) l Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation (Cap. 354C) l Waste Disposal (Charges for Disposal of Construction Waste) Regulation (Cap.354N) l Code of Practice on the Packaging, Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes. l Land (Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance (Cap. 28) l Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance (Cap. 132) - Public Cleansing and Prevention of Nuisances Regulation l Annexes 7 & 15 of Environmental Impact Assessment –Technical Memorandum (EIAO- TM)		l Not applicable	l C&D materials shall be sorted on-site into (1) inert C&D materials (～200m³) and C&D waste(～3900m³). The C&D materials shall be disposed of to public fill reception facilities while the C&D waste shall be reuse/recycle as far as possible and as a last resort, disposed of to landfills. l Chemical wastes shall be recycled on-site or disposed of to chemical waste treatment facility by licensed collectors. l General Refuse: Refuse collection points shall be provided on-site and disposed of to landfill by volume reduction (compaction and containerisation) at refuse transfer station.	l None
Water Quality Impact
Sensitive receivers identified within 300m from the Project boundary include coral communities identified at the southwest boundary of the former airport runway and breakwaters of to Kwa Wan Typhoon Shelter	l The decontamination works areas are located at least 500 m away from the identified sensitive receivers. Impact from site effluents and runoff generated from other decommissioning works such as building demolition would be localized as their quantity should be small and can be controlled by implementing proper mitigation measures. Also, the proposed method for decommissioning of the disused fuel dolphin would not involve any dredging and the works area for the dolphin removal site would be small. No unacceptable marine water quality impact would be expected upon the identified sensitive receivers.	l Water Pollution Control Ordinance (WPCO) l Technical Memorandum on Standards for Effluents Discharged into Drainage and Sewerage Systems, Inland and Coastal Waters (TM-DSS) l Practice Note for Professional Persons ProPECC PN 1/94		l Not Applicable	l Practices outlined in ProPECC PN 1/94 should be followed to avoid impact from surface runoff l Good site practices have been recommended to avoid impacts from accumulation of solid waste, accidental spillage and sewage generated from workforce l Mitigation measures have been recommended to avoid impacts from groundwater recharge, leachate and contaminated runoff during the decontamination processes l All the site effluents and runoff generated from the decommissioning works shall be treated and their quality be monitored before discharged.	l None
Air Quality Impact
Air Sensitive Receivers identified within 500m from the project boundary including ASR A1 – A17 (refer to Drawing 6.1)	l No adverse construction dust impacts arising from demolition works, excavation works, transportation, loading and unloading of contaminated soils, and mixing process in solidification expected at the representative ASRs l No adverse air quality impacts from volatile organic compounds or soil gas emissions arising from excavation, transportation, loading and unloading of contaminated soil, decontaminated works and treatment process (cement solidification and biopiling) would be expected. The predicted 1-hour average air pollutant concentrations would comply with its chemical criteria.	l Hong Kong Air Quality Objectives (AQOs) l Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, California, l California Air Resources Board, 2001		l Not Applicable	Measures for dust and VOCs impact during excavation, transportation, loading and unloading of contaminated soil: · Excavation profiles should be properly designed and executed. · The excavation area should be limited to as small in size as possible and backfilled with clean and/or treated soil shortly after excavation work. · The top layer soils shall be sprayed with fine misting of water immediately before the excavation. · Stockpiling site(s) shall be lined with impermeable sheeting and bunded. Stockpiles shall be fully covered by impermeable sheeting to reduce dust and other air pollutants emission. · Misting for the dusty material shall be carried out before being loaded into the vehicle. · Any vehicle with an open load carrying area shall have properly fitted side and tail boards. · Material having the potential to create dust shall not be loaded from a level higher than the side and tail boards and shall be dampened and covered by a clean tarpaulin. · The tarpaulin shall be properly secured and shall extent at least 300 mm over the edges of the sides and tailboards. The material shall also be dampened if necessary before transportation. · The vehicles shall be restricted to maximum speed of 10 km per hour and confined haulage and delivery vehicle to designated roadways insider the site. On-site unpaved roads shall be compacted and kept free of lose materials. · Vehicle washing facilities should be provided at every vehicle exit point. · The area where vehicle washing takes place and the section of the road between the washing facilities and the exit point should be paved with concrete, bituminous materials or hardcores. · Every main haul road should be scaled with concrete and kept clear of dusty materials or sprayed with water so as to maintain the entire road surface wet. · Every stock of more than 20 bags of cement should be covered entirely by impervious sheeting placed in an area sheltered on the top and the three sides. · Every vehicle should be washed to remove any dusty materials from its body and wheels before leaving the construction sites. · Works sites of contaminated soil treatment facilities: Solidification / stabilization · The solidification pit/area shall be provided with dust suppression measures. · Handling and mixing of cement shall follow Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation to limit cement emission. · The bin should be covered during residence period after mixing process. Biopiling · During the course of biopile formation, the stockpiled soils at the biopiles shall be covered by tarpaulin or low permeable sheet to avoid fugitive emissions of dust or any air pollutants from the biopiles affecting the surrounding environment and to minimise runoff from the stockpiled soils. Biopile(s) shall be covered by impermeable sheeting (such that no longer than 5m of a biopile shall be exposed to open air) to avoid fugitive emissions of dust or any pollutants from the biopile(s). · Upon formation of a biopile, the biopile shall be covered by low permeable geotextiles to prevent dust emission and runoff. · During the operation of biopile, the biopiles shall be fully covered to control the extraction of VOCs. · Carbon absorber with 99% control efficiency shall be installed for the biopiling system to treat the off-gas prior to discharge and the location of the exhaust of the carbon filter should be sited as far away as possible from the nearby ASRs. · Spent activated carbon of the carbon absorber shall be replaced regularly such that the VOC emission rate from the system is acceptable (i.e the measured TVOC is below 20 ppm). The carbon adsorption system should also be monitored regularly to check the performance of the carbon filter. · Gas samples at the exhaust of the carbon filter for benzene and VOCs should be monitored regularly. The biopile operation shall be terminated when unacceptable air quality is monitored at the site boundary. Resumption of biopiling will only be allowed after confirmation and implementation of appropriate mitigation measures.	l None
Noise Impact
Noise Sensitive Receivers identified within 300 from project boundary including NSR N1 – N3 (refer to Drawing 7.1)	l Any construction activities taking place within 300m of a given noise assessment point are considered in the assessment. As shown in Drawing 7.1 and in Appendix 7.1, only noise assessment points N1 and N2 are located within 300m of Works Area 4 and are thus considered in this assessment. Whereas NSR N3 which is located over 400m from the nearest works area was excluded in the assessment. For the other works areas, the representative noise assessment points are all located at more than 400m away l Predicted construction noise levels at NSR N1 and N2 which are nearest to work site would be about 62.5 – 62.6 dB(A), i.e. complying with EIAO-TM criteria of 75 dB(A). No adverse construction noise impact arising from the Project predicted.	l EIAO-TM		l Not Applicable	l Good site practices (refer to Section 7.8.2)	l None

Impact on Cultural Heritage
Several heritage resources associated with the former Kai Tak Airport including three wind poles (WP-1, WP-2 and WP-3); the airport pier, Fire B and associated pier, Fire Station C, and seawall and runway.	Impact on cultural heritage are discussed in Section 8.7 in this EIA report and summarized as follows: l No direct and indirect impacts on the identified heritage resources by the proposed decommissioning and decontamination works under the Project. l All the assessed heritage resources are evaluated to be of low cultural heritage significance.	l Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (CAP 53) l Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (CAP 499) l Annexes 10 and 19 of the Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO TM) l Criteria for Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment issued by the Antiquities and Monuments Office l Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines (Chapter 10)	l Not Applicable		l None	l None
Marine Ecological Impact					-
Ecological resources at and near the Project site	l Direct impacts to the marine ecological resources would include permanent loss of small area of subtidal hard substratum habitat as well as direct disturbance on benthic habitats and associated marine life. Considering that the benthic and subtidal habitats affected are of generally very low ecological value, no adverse impact is expected. l Indirect impacts on the marine ecology would be associated with changes of water quality due to seabed disturbance arising from the proposed marine works as well as site runoff from land-based construction works. There is no significant change of water quality predicted in the water quality assessment in and within the close vicinity of the assessment area. Therefore, no significant indirect impact on existing marine habitats and marine life would be anticipated. l During the construction works, increased marine traffic and noise generated from construction plant could cause disturbance impacts to the associated wildlife including the waterbirds of conservation interest. It is expected that displacement of waterbirds to the nearby waters for roosting and feeding area may occur temporarily but adverse impact is not anticipated.	l EIAO-TM Annex 8 and 16	l Not applicable		l As no significant ecological impact on marine habitats and associated wildlife is predicted, no necessary mitigation measure is considered as required in this assessment.	l Permanent loss of small area of subtidal hard substratum of very low ecological significance.