TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3

1 introduction 5

1.1 Background 5

1.2 Scope of Report 5

1.3 Contract Organization 6

1.4 Summary of Construction Works 7

2 Summary of EM&A Programme Requirements 8

2.1 Monitoring Parameters 8

2.2 Environmental Quality Performance (Action/Limit Levels) 10

2.3 Environmental Mitigation Measures 10

3 MONITORING Results 11

3.1 Air Quality Monitoring 11

3.2 Noise Monitoring 13

3.3 Water Quality Monitoring 14

3.4 Dolphin Monitoring 20

3.5 Environmental Site Inspection and Audit 21

4 Advice on the Solid and Liquid Waste Management Status 23

4.1 Summary of Solid and Liquid Waste Management 23

5 Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures 24

5.1 Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures 24

6 Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality Performance Limit 31

6.1 Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality Performance Limit 31

7 Summary of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecutions 32

7.1 Summary of Environmental Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecutions 32

8 Comments, recommendations and Conclusions 33

8.1 Comments on mitigation measures 33

8.2 Recommendations on EM&A Programme 34

8.3 Conclusions 35

List of Tables

Table 1.1 Contact Information of Key Personnel

Table 3.1 Summary of Number of Monitoring Events for 1-hr & 24-hr TSP Concentration

Table 3.2 Summary of Number of Exceedances for 1-hr & 24-hr TSP Monitoring

Table 3.3 Summary of Number of Monitoring Events for Impact Noise

Table 3.4 Summary of Number of Monitoring Exceedances for Impact Noise

Table 3.5 Summary of Water Quality Exceedances in December 2015 ¡V February 2016

Table 3.6 Summary of Key Dolphin Survey Findings in December 2015 ¡V February 2016

Table 3.7 Summary of STG and ANI encounter rates in December 2015 ¡V February 2016

Figures

Figure 1 General Contract Layout Plan

Figure 2 Impact Air Quality and Noise Monitoring Stations and Wind Station

Figure 3 Impact Water Quality Monitoring Stations

Figure 4 Impact Dolphin Monitoring Line Transect Layout Map

Figure 5 Environmental Complaint Handling Procedure

List of Appendices

Appendix A Contract Organization for Environmental Works

Appendix B Three Month Rolling Construction Programmes

Appendix C Implementation Schedule of Environmental Mitigation Measures (EMIS)

Appendix D Summary of Action and Limit Levels

Appendix E Graphical Presentation of Impact Air Quality Monitoring Results

Appendix F Graphical Presentation of Impact Daytime Construction Noise Monitoring Results

Appendix G Graphical Presentation of Impact Water Quality Monitoring Results

Appendix H Impact Dolphin Monitoring Survey Findings and Analysis

Appendix I Quarterly Summary of Waste Flow Table

Appendix J Cumulative Statistics on Exceedances, Complaints, Notifications of Summons and Successful Prosecutions

Appendix K Event Action Plan

Appendix L Incident Report on Action Level or Limit Level Non-compliance for Impact Dolphin Monitoring

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Contract No. HY/2010/02 ¡V Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities ¡V Reclamation Works (here below, known as ¡§the Contract¡¨) mainly comprises reclamation at the northeast of the Hong Kong International Airport of an area of about 130-hectare for the construction of an artificial island for the development of the Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF), and about 19-hectare for the southern landfall of the Tuen Mun - Chek Lap Kok Link (TMCLKL). It is a designated Project and is governed by the current permits for the Project, i.e. the amended Environmental Permits (EPs) issued on 11 April 2016 (EP-353/2009/K) and 13 March 2015 (EP-354/2009/D) (for TMCLKL Southern Landfall Reclamation only).

Ove Arup & Partners Hong Kong Limited (Arup) was appointed by Highways Department (HyD) as the consultants for the design and construction assignment for the Project¡¦s reclamation works (i.e. the Engineer for the Contract).

China Harbour Engineering Company Limited (CHEC) was awarded by HyD as the Contractor to undertake the construction work of the Contract.

Ramboll Environ Hong Kong Limited. was employed by HyD as the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) and Environmental Project Office (ENPO) for the Project.

AECOM Asia Co. Ltd. (AECOM) was appointed by CHEC to undertake the role of Environmental Team for the Contract for carrying out the environmental monitoring and audit (EM&A) works.

The construction phase of the Project under the EPs was commenced on 12 March 2012 and will be tentatively completed by early Year 2017. The EM&A programme, including air quality, noise, water quality and dolphin monitoring and environmental site inspections, was commenced on 12 March 2012.

This report documents the findings of EM&A works conducted in the period between 1 December 2015 and 29 February 2016. As informed by the Contractor, major activities in the reporting quarter were:-

Marine-base

- Rock fill

- Conforming Sloping Seawalls

- Maintenance of silt curtain & silt screen at sea water intake of HKIA

- Rubble Mound Seawall

Land-base

- Earthwork fill

- Surcharge removal  & laying

- Deep Cement Mixing

- Removal of Temporary Seawall

- Vertical Band Drains

- Installations of Precast Culverts except sloping outfalls

- Geotechnical Instrumentation Works

- Maintenance works of Site Office at Works Area WA2

- Maintenance works of Public Works Regional Laboratory at Works Area WA3

- Maintenance of Temporary Marine Access at Works Area WA2

A summary of monitoring and audit activities conducted in the reporting quarter is listed below:

24-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) monitoring 1-hour TSP monitoring	17 sessions 17 sessions
Noise monitoring	14 sessions
Impact water quality monitoring	38 sessions
Impact dolphin monitoring	6 surveys
Joint Environmental site inspection	13 sessions

Breaches of Action and Limit Levels for Air Quality

All 1-Hour TSP and 24-Hour TSP results were below the Action and Limit Level in the reporting quarter.

Breaches of Action and Limit Levels for Noise

For construction noise, no exceedance was recorded at all monitoring stations in the reporting quarter.

Breaches of Action and Limit Levels for Water Quality

For water quality monitoring, one (1) action level impact water quality monitoring exceedance at monitoring station IS(Mf)11 has been recorded on 28 December 2015 during flood tide. After investigation, there is no adequate information to conclude the recorded exceedance is related to this Contract; 2 limit level exceedances of turbidity level were recorded at monitoring station SR4(N) and IS8 respectively on 5 February 2016; 2 action level exceedances of suspended solids were recorded at monitoring station SR4(N) and IS8 respectively on 5 February 2016. No exceedance at other monitoring stations in the reporting quarter. After investigation, there is no adequate information to conclude the recorded exceedances are related to this Contract.

Breaches of Action and Limit Levels for Impact Dolphin Monitoring

One (1) Limit Level exceedance of dolphin monitoring was recorded in the reporting quarter. After investigation, it was concluded that the HZMB works is one of the contributing factors affecting the dolphins. It was also concluded the contribution of impacts due to the HZMB works as a whole (or individual marine contracts) cannot be quantified nor separate from the other stress factors. Event Action Plan for Impact Dolphin Monitoring was triggered. For detail of investigation, please refer to appendix L.

Implementation Status and Review of Environmental Mitigation Measures

Most of the recommended mitigation measures, as included in the EM&A programme, were implemented properly in the reporting quarter.

The recommended environmental mitigation measures effectively minimize the potential environmental impacts from the Project. The EM&A programme effectively monitored the environmental impacts from the construction activities and ensure the proper implementation of mitigation measures. No particular recommendation was advised for the improvement of the programme.

Moreover, regular review and checking on the construction methodologies, working processes and plants were carried out to ensure the environmental impacts were kept minimal and recommended environmental mitigation measures were implemented effectively.

Complaint, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecution

A water quality complaint was referred to the ENPO at 10:22 am on the 4 December 2015 by EPD; ENPO referred this complaint to this Contract on the same day. With referred to the information provided by ENPO, EPD has contacted the complainant, and obtained the additional information from the complainant and it is suspected that the incident happened in the afternoon on 28 November 2015. A video was provided by the complainant who shows that turbid water behind a barge, the incident is suspected to be happened in the afternoon on 28 November 2015. After investigation, it is considered not related to this Contract.

No notification of summons or prosecution was received in the reporting period

1 introduction

1.1 Background

1.1.1 Contract No. HY/2010/02 ¡V Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities ¡V Reclamation Works (here below, known as ¡§the Contract¡¨) mainly comprises reclamation at the northeast of the Hong Kong International Airport of an area of about 130-hectare for the construction of an artificial island for the development of the Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities (HKBCF), and about 19-hectare for the southern landfall of the Tuen Mun - Chek Lap Kok Link (TMCLKL).

1.1.2 The environmental impact assessment (EIA) reports (Hong Kong ¡V Zhuhai ¡V Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities ¡V EIA Report (Register No. AEIAR-145/2009) (HKBCFEIA) and Tuen Mun ¡V Chek Lap Kok Link ¡V EIA Report (Register No. AEIAR-146/2009) (TMCLKLEIA), and their environmental monitoring and audit (EM&A) Manuals (original EM&A Manuals), for the Project were approved by Environmental Protection Department (EPD) in October 2009.

1.1.3 EPD subsequently issued the Environmental Permit (EP) for HKBCF in November 2009 (EP-353/2009) and the Variation of Environmental Permit (VEP) in June 2010 (EP-353/2009/A), November 2010 (EP-353/2009/B), November 2011 (EP-353/2009/C), March 2012 (EP-353/2009/D), October 2012 (EP-353/2009/E), April 2013 (EP-353/2009/F), August 2013 (EP-353/2009/G), January 2015 (EP-353/2009/H), July 2015 (EP-353/2009/I), February 2016 (EP-353/2009/J) and April 2016 (EP-353/2009/K). Similarly, EPD issued the Environmental Permit (EP) for TMCLKL in November 2009 (EP-354/2009) and the Variation of Environmental Permit (VEP) in December 2010 (EP-354/2009/A), January 2014 (EP-354/2009/B), December 2014 (EP-354/2009/C) and March 2015 (EP-354/2009/D).

1.1.4 The Project is a designated Project and is governed by the current permits for the Project, i.e. the amended EPs issued on 11 April 2016 (EP-353/2009/K) and 13 March 2015 (EP-354/2009/D) (for TMCLKL Southern Landfall Reclamation only).

1.1.5 A Contract Specific EM&A Manual, which included all Contract -relation contents from the original EM&A Manuals for the Contract, was issued in May 2012.

1.1.6 Ove Arup & Partners Hong Kong Limited (Arup) was appointed by Highways Department (HyD) as the consultants for the design and construction assignment for the Project¡¦s reclamation works (i.e. the Engineer for the Contract).

1.1.7 China Harbour Engineering Company Limited (CHEC) was awarded by HyD as the Contractor to undertake the construction work of the Contract.

1.1.8 Ramboll Environ Hong Kong Limited was employed by HyD as the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) and Environmental Project Office (ENPO) for the Project.

1.1.9 AECOM Asia Co. Ltd. (AECOM) was appointed by CHEC to undertake the role of Environmental Team for the Contract for carrying out the EM&A works.

1.1.10 The construction phase of the Project under the EPs was commenced on 12 March 2012 and will be tentatively completed by early Year 2017.

1.1.11 According to the Contract Specific EM&A Manual, there is a need of an EM&A programme including air quality, noise, water quality and dolphin monitoring and environmental site inspections. The EM&A programme of the Contract commenced on 12 March 2012.

1.2 Scope of Report

1.2.1 This is the sixteenth quarterly EM&A Report under the Contract No. HY/2010/02 Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities ¡V Reclamation Works. This report presents a summary of the environmental monitoring and audit works, list of activities and mitigation measures proposed by the ET for the Contract from 1 December 2015 to 29 February 2016.

1.3 Contract Organization

1.3.1 The Contract organization 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
Engineer¡¦s Representative (ER) (Ove Arup & Partners Hong Kong Limited)	Chief Resident Engineer	Paul Appleton	3698 5889	2698 5999
IEC / ENPO (Ramboll Environ Hong Kong Limited)	Independent Environmental Checker	Raymond Dai	3465 2888	3465 2899
	Environmental Project Office Leader	Y. H. Hui	3547 2133	3465 2899
Contractor (China Harbour Engineering Company Limited)	Environmental Officer	Louie Chan	36932254	2578 0413
	24-hour Hotline	Alan C.C. Yeung	9448 0325	--
ET (AECOM Asia Company Limited)	ET Leader	Echo Leong	3922 9280	2317 7609

1.4 Summary of Construction Works

1.4.1 The construction phase of the Project under the EP commenced on 12 March 2012.

1.4.2 As informed by the Contractor, details of the major works carried out in the reporting quarter are listed below:-

Marine-base

- Rock fill

- Conforming Sloping Seawalls

- Maintenance of silt curtain & silt screen at sea water intake of HKIA

- Rubble Mound Seawall

Land-base

- Earthwork fill

- Surcharge removal  & laying

- Deep Cement Mixing

- Removal of Temporary Seawall

- Vertical Band Drains

- Installations of Precast Culverts except sloping outfalls

- Geotechnical Instrumentation Works

- Maintenance works of Site Office at Works Area WA2

- Maintenance works of Public Works Regional Laboratory at Works Area WA3

- Maintenance of Temporary Marine Access at Works Area WA2

1.4.3 The 3-month rolling construction programme of the Contract is shown in Appendix B.

1.4.4 The general layout plan of the Contract site showing the detailed works areas is shown in Figure 1.

1.4.5 The environmental mitigation measures implementation schedule are presented in Appendix C.

2 Summary of EM&A Programme Requirements

2.1 Monitoring Parameters

2.1.1 The Contract Specific EM&A Manual designated 4 air quality monitoring stations, 2 noise monitoring stations, 21 water monitoring stations (9 Impact Stations, 7 Sensitive Receiver Stations and 5 Control/Far Field Stations) to monitor environmental impacts on air quality, noise and water quality respectively. Pre-set and fixed transect line vessel based dolphin survey was required in two AFCD designated areas (Northeast and Northwest Lantau survey areas). The impact dolphin monitoring at each survey area should be conducted twice per month.

2.1.2 For impact air quality monitoring, monitoring locations AMS2 (Tung Chung Development Pier) and AMS7 (Hong Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel) were set up at the proposed locations in accordance with Contract Specific EM&A Manual. The conditional omission of Monitoring Station AMS6 was effective since 19 November 2012. For monitoring location AMS3 (Ho Yu College), as proposed in the Contract Specific EM&A Manual, approval for carrying out impact monitoring could not be obtained from the principal of the school. Permission on setting up and carrying out impact monitoring works at nearby sensitive receivers, like Caribbean Coast and Coastal Skyline, was also sought. However, approvals for carrying out impact monitoring works within their premises were not obtained. Impact air quality monitoring was conducted at site boundary of the site office area in Works Area WA2 (AMS3B) respectively. Same baseline and Action Level for air quality, as derived from the baseline monitoring data recorded at Ho Yu College, was adopted for this alternative air quality location.

2.1.3 For impact noise monitoring, monitoring locations NMS2 (Seaview Crescent Tower 1) was set up at the proposed locations in accordance with Contract Specific EM&A Manual. However, for monitoring location NMS3 (Ho Yu College), as proposed in the Contract Specific EM&A Manual, approval for carrying out impact monitoring could not be obtained from the principal of the school. Permission on setting up and carrying out impact monitoring works at nearby sensitive receivers, like Caribbean Coast and Coastal Skyline, was also sought. However, approvals for carrying out impact monitoring works within their premises were not obtained. Impact noise monitoring was conducted at site boundary of the site office area in Works Area WA2 (NMS3B) respectively. Same baseline noise level, as derived from the baseline monitoring data recorded at Ho Yu College was adopted for this alternative noise monitoring location. Reference is made to ET¡¦s proposal of relocation of air quality monitoring station (AMS7) dated on 2 February 2015, with no further comment received from IEC on 2 February 2015 and no objection received from EPD on 5 February 2015, the impact air quality monitoring station AMS7 (Hong Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel) has been relocated to AMS7A (Chu Kong Air-Sea Union Transportation Company Limited) on 3 February 2015. Action Level for air quality, as derived from the baseline monitoring data recorded at Hong Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel, was adopted for this alternative air quality location.

2.1.4 As informed by the premises owner of (AMS7A) - Chu Kong Air-Sea Union Transportation Co. LTD would not grant us the permission to install air quality monitoring equipment (High volume sampler) and conduct 1-hour TSP/24 hour TSP monitoring at the premises of Chu Kong Air-Sea Union Transportation Co. LTD after December 2015. In order to fulfil the EM&A requirement of this Contract, as permission to conduct impact air quality monitoring at the premise of Hong Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel has been granted in December 2015, ET proposed relocation of air quality monitoring station (AMS7A) on 15 December 2015, with no further comment received from IEC on 15 December 2015 and no particular comment received from EPD on 21 December 2015, the impact air quality monitoring station AMS7A (Chu Kong Air-Sea Union Transportation Company Limited) has been relocated to AMS7 (Hong Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel) on 30 December 2015. The impact air quality monitoring for December 2015 was conducted before the relocation of AQM Station from AMS7A to AMS7. The impact air quality monitoring for January and February 2016 were conducted at AMS7 (Hong Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel), Action Level for air quality, as derived from the baseline monitoring data recorded at Hong Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel will be adopted for this air quality monitoring location.

2.1.5 In accordance with the Contract Specific EM&A Manual, twenty-one stations were designated for impact water quality monitoring. The nine Impact Stations (IS) were chosen on the basis of their proximity to the reclamation and thus the greatest potential for water quality impacts, the seven Sensitive Receiver Stations (SR) were chosen as they are close to the key sensitive receives and the five Control/ Far Field 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.

2.1.6 Due to safety concern and topographical condition of the original locations of SR4 and SR10B, alternative impact water quality monitoring stations, naming as SR4(N) and SR10B(N), were adopted, which are situated in vicinity of the original impact water quality monitoring stations (SR4 and SR10B) and could be reachable. Same baseline and Action Level for water quality, as derived from the baseline monitoring data recorded, were adopted for these alternative impact water quality monitoring stations.

2.1.7 The monitoring locations used during the reporting quarter are depicted in Figures 2, 3 and 4 respectively.

2.1.8 The Contract Specific EM&A Manual also required environmental site inspections for air quality, noise, water quality, chemical, waste management, marine ecology and landscape and visual impact.

2.2 Environmental Quality Performance (Action/Limit Levels)

2.2.1 The environmental quality performance limits (i.e. Action and/or Limit Levels) of air and water quality monitoring were derived from the baseline air and water quality monitoring results at the respective monitoring stations, while the environmental quality performance limits of noise monitoring were defined in the EM&A Manual.

2.2.2 The environmental quality performance limits of air quality, noise and water monitoring are given in Appendix D.

2.3 Environmental Mitigation Measures

2.3.1 Relevant environmental mitigation measures were stipulated in the Particular Specification and EPs (EP-353/2009/K and EP-354/2009/D) (for TMCLKL Southern Landfall Reclamation only) for the Contractor to adopt. A list of environmental mitigation measures and their implementation statuses are given in Appendix C.

3 MONITORING Results

3.1 Air Quality Monitoring

3.1.1 In accordance with the Contract Specific EM&A Manual, impact 1-hour Total Suspended Particulates (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 at the 4 monitoring stations (AMS2, AMS3B, AMS6 and AMS7A/AMS7).

3.1.2 The monitoring locations for impact air quality monitoring are depicted in Figure 2. However, for AMS6 (Dragonair/CNAC (Group) Building), permission on setting up and carrying out impact monitoring works was sought, however, access to the premise has not been granted yet on this report issuing date.

3.1.3 As informed by the premises owner of (AMS7A) - Chu Kong Air-Sea Union Transportation Co. LTD would not grant us the permission to install air quality monitoring equipment (High volume sampler) and conduct 1-hour TSP/24 hour TSP monitoring at the premises of Chu Kong Air-Sea Union Transportation Co. LTD after December 2015. In order to fulfil the EM&A requirement of this Contract, as permission to conduct impact air quality monitoring at the premise of Hong Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel has been granted in December 2015, ET proposed relocation of air quality monitoring station (AMS7A) on 15 December 2015, with no further comment received from IEC on 15 December 2015 and no particular comment received from EPD on 21 December 2015, the impact air quality monitoring station AMS7A (Chu Kong Air-Sea Union Transportation Company Limited) has been relocated to AMS7 (Hong Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel) on 30 December 2015. The impact air quality monitoring for December 2015 was conducted before the relocation of AQM Station from AMS7A to AMS7. The impact air quality monitoring for January and February 2016 were conducted at AMS7 (Hong Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel), Action Level for air quality, as derived from the baseline monitoring data recorded at Hong Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel will be adopted for this air quality monitoring location.

3.1.4 The weather was mostly fine and sunny, with occasional cloudy in the reporting quarter. The major dust source in the reporting quarter included construction activities from the Project, as well as nearby traffic emissions.

3.1.5 The number of monitoring events and exceedances recorded in each month of the reporting quarter are presented in Table 3.1 and Table 3.2 respectively.

Table 3.1 Summary of Number of Monitoring Events for 1-hr & 24-hr TSP Concentration

Monitoring Parameter	Location	No. of monitoring events
		December 15	January 16	February 16
1-hr TSP	AMS2	18	18	15
	AMS3B	18	18	15
	AMS7A/7	18	18	15
24-hr TSP	AMS2	6	6	5
	AMS3B	6	6	5
	AMS7A/7	6	6	5

Table 3.2 Summary of Number of Exceedances for 1-hr & 24-hr TSP Monitoring

Monitoring Parameter	Location	Level of Exceedance	Numbers of Exceedance
			December 15	January 16	February 16
1-hr TSP	AMS2	Action	0	0	0
		Limit	0	0	0
	AMS3B	Action	0	0	0
		Limit	0	0	0
	AMS7A/7	Action	0	0	0
		Limit	0	0	0
		Total	0	0	0
24-hr TSP	AMS2	Action	0	0	0
		Limit	0	0	0
	AMS3B	Action	0	0	0
		Limit	0	0	0
	AMS7A/7	Action	0	0	0
		Limit	0	0	0
		Total	0	0	0

3.1.6 All 24-Hour TSP and 1-Hour TSP results were below the Action and Limit Level in the reporting quarter.

3.1.7 The event action plan is annexed in Appendix K.

3.1.8 Meteorological information collected from the wind station during the monitoring periods on the monitoring dates, as shown in Figure 2, including wind speed and wind direction, is annexed in Appendix H of monthly EM&A report December 2015, January 2016 and February 2016 respectively.

3.2 Noise Monitoring

3.2.1 Impact noise monitoring was conducted at the 2 monitoring stations (NMS2 and NMS3B) for at least once per week during 07:00 ¡V 19:00 in the reporting quarter.

3.2.2 The monitoring locations used during the reporting quarter are depicted in Figure 2.

3.2.3 No Action or Limit Level Exceedance of construction noise was recorded in the reporting quarter.

3.2.4 Major noise sources during the noise monitoring included construction activities of the Project and nearby traffic noise.

3.2.5 The number of impact noise monitoring events and exceedances are summarized in Table 3.3 and Table 3.4 respectively.

Table 3.3 Summary of Number of Monitoring Events for Impact Noise

Monitoring Parameter	Location	No. of monitoring events
		December 15	January 16	February 16
	NMS2	5	4	5
	NMS3B	5	4	5

Table 3.4 Summary of Number of Monitoring Exceedances for Impact Noise

Monitoring Parameter	Location	Level of Exceedance	Level of Exceedance
			December 15	January 16	February 16
	NMS2	Action	0	0	0
		Limit	0	0	0
	NMS3B	Action	0	0	0
		Limit	0	0	0
		Total	0	0	0

3.2.6 The graphical plots of the trends of the monitoring results are provided in Appendix F. No specific trend of the monitoring results or existence of persistent pollution source was noted.

3.2.7 The event action plan is annexed in Appendix K.

3.3 Water Quality Monitoring

3.3.1 The monitoring locations used during the reporting quarter are depicted in Figure 3.

Table 3.5 Summary of Water Quality Exceedances in December 2015 ¡V February 2016

Station	Exceedance Level	DO (S&M)		DO (Bottom)		Turbidity		SS		Total
		Ebb	Flood	Ebb	Flood	Ebb	Flood	Ebb	Flood	Ebb	Flood
IS5	Action	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Limit	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
IS(Mf)6	Action	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Limit	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
IS7	Action	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Limit	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
IS8	Action	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	(1) 5 Feb 16	0	(1) 5 Feb 16
	Limit	0	0	0	0	0	(1) 5 Feb 16	0	0	0	(1) 5 Feb 16
IS(Mf)9	Action	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Limit	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
IS10	Action	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Limit	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
IS(Mf)11	Action	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	(1) 28 Dec 15	0	(1) 28 Dec 15
	Limit	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
IS(Mf)16	Action	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Limit	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
IS17	Action	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Limit	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
SR3	Action	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Limit	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
SR4(N)	Action	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	(1) 5 Feb 16	0	(1) 5 Feb 16
	Limit	0	0	0	0	0	(1) 5 Feb 16	0	0	0	(1) 5 Feb 16
SR5	Action	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Limit	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
SR6	Action	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Limit	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
SR7	Action	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Limit	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
SR10A	Action	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Limit	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
SR10B (N)	Action	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Limit	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Total	Action	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	3
	Limit	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	0	2

Note: S: Surface;

M: Mid-depth;

3.3.2 One action level impact water quality monitoring exceedance has been recorded on 28 December 2015.

3.3.2.1 Layout map below shows the construction activities conducted during flood tide on 28 December 2015, no marine work or barge was working at north of HKBCF reclamation works near the sea area or area where IS(Mf)11 is located, therefore the construction activities was considered unlikely to cause the SS exceedances recorded at IS(Mf)11 during mid-flood tide on 28 December 2015.

3.3.2.2 Exceedance recorded at IS(Mf)11 during mid-flood tide are unlikely due to marine based construction activities of the Project because:

3.3.2.3 With reference to the silt curtain checking record, defects such as disconnection of the silt curtain was not observed at north part of the perimeter silt curtain which are close to the IS(Mf)11.

3.3.2.4 Furthermore, no filling activities was observed in progress at the sea area north to HKBCF reclamation works and no silt plume was observed to flow from the inside of the perimeter silt curtain to the outside of the perimeter silt curtain when monitoring was conducted at IS(Mf)11. Also refer to the below photo record taken at sea area located north of HKBCF reclamation works on 28 December 2015 for reference of sea condition on 28 December 2015, which shows that no silt plume was observed.

3.3.2.5 Photo record which shows the sea condition at southern part of the HKBCF reclamation works on 28 December 2015. No silt plume was observed.

3.3.2.6 The turbidity data obtained on 28 December 2015 from monitoring station IS10 and IS(Mf)11, SR7 and IS17 which located at/near the vicinity of sea area at north of HKBCF reclamation works, did not exceed the action and limit level. This indicates the turbidity level at/near IS(Mf)11 was not adversely affected.

3.3.2.7 As such, the exceedance was likely due to local effects in the vicinity of IS(Mf)11.

3.3.2.8 Action taken under the action plan:

1. Not applicable as SS was not measured in situ;

2. After considering the above mentioned investigation results, it appears that it was unlikely that the SS exceedances were attributed to active construction activities of this Contract;

3. IEC, contractor and ER were informed via email;

4. Monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor's working methods were checked;

5. Since it is considered that the SS exceedance is unlikely to be Project related, as such, actions 5-7 under the EAP are not considered applicable.

3.3.2.9 Nevertheless, the Contractor was reminded to ensure provision of ongoing maintenance to the silt curtains and to carry out maintenance work once defects were found.

3.3.2.10 Maintenance work of the silt curtain was carried out by the Contractor on a daily basis except Sunday and public holiday.

3.3.3 For water quality monitoring, 2 limit level exceedances of turbidity level were recorded at monitoring station SR4(N) and IS8 respectively on 5 February 2016; 2 action level exceedances of suspended solids were recorded at monitoring station SR4(N) and IS8 respectively on 5 February 2016. No exceedance at other monitoring stations in the reporting quarter.

3.3.3.1 Exceedances recorded at SR4(N) and IS8 during mid-flood tide are unlikely due to marine based construction activities of the Contract because:

3.3.3.2 With reference to the silt curtain checking record, no defect was observed at southern and southeastern parts of the perimeter silt curtain which are facing SR4(N) and IS8.

3.3.3.3 With referred to the layout map below, marine based construction works such box culverts and seawall construction were conducted at Portion D and Portion A respectively, however no silt plume was observed to flow from the inside of the perimeter silt curtain to the outside of the perimeter silt curtain when monitoring was conducted during flood tide. (Also see below Photo record for sea condition observed on 5 February 2016 during flood tide.)

3.3.3.4 Photo record below which shows the sea condition at southern and southeastern part of the HKBCF reclamation works during flood tide on 5 February 2016.

3.3.3.5 Also, turbidity and suspended solids levels recorded at IS7, IS(Mf)9 and IS(Mf)16 were below the action and limit level. This indicates that the turbidity and suspended solids levels recorded at monitoring stations closer to the active works, were not adversely affected. As such, the exceedances recorded at SR4(N) and IS8 were unlikely attribute to the active works of this Contract.

3.3.3.6 With referred to the photo record taken at monitoring station IS8 on 5 February 2016 (also see below photo record) turbid water was observed at this area. However, with referred to the below photo record taken at southern and southeastern part of the HKBCF reclamation works during flood tide on 5 February 2016, turbid water was not noted. The photo record below shows that vessel activities was observed when monitoring was conducted at monitoring location IS8, as confirmed with the Contractor of HY/2010/02, this Contract did not have any construction vessels working outside the site boundary of Contract HY/2010/02 on 5 February 2016 (also refer to the below layout map).

3.3.3.7 Photo record below shows the sea condition taken on 5 February 2016 at monitoring location IS8 and facing monitoring station SR4(N), turbid water was observed at this area.

3.3.3.8 As shown below by the photo record taken on the 16 February 2016, the latest silt curtain position is within the area of the complete seawall and no more reclamation filling will be conducted by this Contract at the concerned area.

3.3.3.9 The exceedances were likely due to local effects in the vicinity of SR4(N) and IS8.

3.3.3.10 After investigation, there is no adequate information to conclude the recorded exceedances are related to this Contract.

3.3.3.11 Action taken under the action plan:

1. In situ measurement was repeated to confirm findings of the exceedance of turbidity.

2. After considering the above mentioned investigation results, it appears that it is unlikely that the turbidity and suspended solids exceedances were attributed to active construction activities of this Contract;

3. IEC, contractor and ER were informed via email;

4. Monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor's working methods were checked;

5-7. Since it is considered that the turbidity and suspended solid exceedances are unlikely to be contract related, as such, actions 5-7 under the EAP are not considered applicable.

3.3.3.12 Nevertheless, the Contractor was reminded to ensure provision of ongoing maintenance to the silt curtains and to carry out maintenance work once defects were found.

3.3.3.13 Maintenance work of the silt curtain was carried out by the Contractor on a daily basis except Sunday and public holiday.

3.3.3.14 The Contractor was reminded to adhere to the environmental permit requirement and undertake the necessary mitigation measures after the realignment of the perimeter silt curtain near southeastern corner of HKBCF Reclamation Works, as necessary.

3.3.4 The event action plan is annexed in Appendix K.

3.4 Dolphin Monitoring

3.4.1 In accordance with the Contract Specific EM&A Manual, pre-set and fixed transect line vessel based dolphin survey was required in two AFCD designated areas (Northeast Lantau (NEL) and Northwest Lantau (NWL) survey areas). The impact dolphin monitoring at each survey area should be conducted twice per month.

3.4.2 The impact dolphin monitoring conducted is vessel-based and combines line-transect and photo-ID methodology, which have adopted similar survey methodologies as that adopted during baseline monitoring to facilitate comparisons between datasets.

3.4.3 The layout map of impact dolphin monitoring have been provided by AFCD and is shown in Figure 4.

3.4.4 The effort summary and sighting details during the reporting quarter are shown in the Appendix H. A summary of key findings of the dolphin surveys completed during the reporting quarter is shown below:

Table 3.6 Summary of Key Dolphin Survey Findings in December 2015 ¡V February 2016

Number of Impact Surveys Completed^	6
Survey Distance Travelled under Favourable On- Effort Condition	642.4km
Number of Sightings	7 sightings (5 sightings are ¡¨on effort¡¨ (which are all under favourable condition), 2 sightings are ¡§opportunistic¡¨)
Number of dolphin individual sighted	23 individuals (the best estimated group size)
Dolphin Encounter Rate#	NEL: 0 NWL: 1.2
Dolphin Group Size	Average of NEL: 0 Average of NWL: 3.3 Varied from 1-8 individuals
Most Often frequent dolphin sighting area	Northern Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park, the western limit of NWL and Tai O area.

Remarks:
^ Completion of line transect survey of NEL and NWL survey area once was counted as one complete survey.

# Dolphin Encounter Rate = (Sum of 1^st 2^nd, 3^rd month¡¦s total sighting/ Sum of 1^st , 2^nd, 3^rd month¡¦s total effort)*100km (encounter rates are calculated using on effort sightings made under favourable conditions only.)

3.4.5 One (1) Limit Level exceedance of dolphin monitoring was recorded in the reporting quarter. After investigation, it was concluded that the HZMB works is one of the contributing factors affecting the dolphins. It was also concluded the contribution of impacts due to the HZMB works as a whole (or individual marine contracts) cannot be quantified nor separate from the other stress factors. Event Action Plan for Impact Dolphin Monitoring was triggered. For detail of investigation, please refer to appendix L.

Table 3.7 Summary of STG and ANI encounter rates in December 2015 ¡V February 2016
	NEL	NWL	Level Exceeded
STG*	0	1.2	Limit
ANI**	0	4.5

*Quarterly Average Encounter Rate of Number of Dolphin Sightings (STG) presents averaged encounter rates of the three monitored months in terms of groups per 100km per survey event.

STG Encounter rate = (Average of (total number sighting/total effort) of 1st and 2nd completed survey# of 1st month+ Average of (total number sighting/total effort) of 1st and 2nd completed survey# of 2nd month + Average of (total number sighting/total effort) of 1st and 2nd completed survey# of 3rd month)/3*100km

**Quarterly Average Encounter Rate of Total Number of Dolphins (ANI) presents averaged encounter rates of the three monitored months in terms of individuals per 100km per survey event.

ANI Encounter rate = (Average of (total number of Individual/total effort) of 1st and 2nd completed survey# of 1st month+ Average of (total number of Individual/total effort) of 1st and 2nd completed survey# of 2nd month + Average of (total number of Individual/total effort) of 1st and 2nd completed survey# of 3rd month +)/3*100km

3.4.6 Details of the comparison and analysis methodology and their findings and discussions are annexed in Appendix H.

3.5 Environmental Site Inspection and Audit

3.5.1 Site Inspections were carried out on a weekly basis to monitor the implementation of proper environmental pollution control and mitigation measures for the Project. In the reporting quarter, 13 site inspections were carried out. Recommendations on remedial actions were given to the Contractors for the deficiencies identified during the site audits.

3.5.2 Particular observations during the site inspections are described below:

Air Quality

3.5.3 Dark smoke was observed at portion C2a when a vessel was in operation. The Contractor was reminded to prevent. (Reminder)

3.5.4 Two idling generators were found at Portion B without proper NRMM labels.The Contractor was reminded to label the generator properly. Subsequently, the Contractor properly labelled one of the generator and the Contractor was reminded to label the another generator properly. As informed by the Contractor, another idle generator was provided with NRMM label and removed from site. (Closed)

Noise

3.5.5 No relevant adverse impact was observed in the reporting quarter.

Water Quality

3.5.6 Insufficient sand bund was observed at Portion C2b when DCM was conducted. The Contractor was reminded to provide sufficient bunding to prevent potential runoff. The Contractor subsequently enhanced sand bund at the works area. (Closed)

3.5.7 The Contractor was reminded to continue to carry out maintenance as necessary and ensure integrity of the perimenter silt curtain at all time. (Reminder)

Chemical and Waste Management

3.5.8 Chemical container was observed placing on bare ground at Portion C2b.The Contractor should provide drip trays as proper chemical container storage measure. Subsequently, the Contractor provided drip tray to oil drums. (Closed)

3.5.9 General refuse was observed on site, on ground at Portion D and on ground at portion C2a, the Contractor was reminded to clear the general refuse and keep the site clean and tidy. Subsequently, the Contractor collected and cleared the general refuse and kept the site clean and tidy. (Closed)

3.5.10 Bags of waste was observed, the Contractor was reminded to regularly clear bags of waste to keep the site clean and tidy.(Reminder)

3.5.11 Generator was observed without drip tray on barge San Han Bo 210, the Contractor was reminded to provide mitigation measure such as drip tray or bunding to generator. The Contractor subsequently provided bunding to the generator. (Closed)

3.5.12 Oil drums was observed without drip tray at Portion C2b, on barge ®¶©ú93 and on barge´äÀs, the Contractor was reminded to provided drip tray to oil drums. The Contractor subsequently removed the oil drums from the concerned area. (Closed)

3.5.13 A moveable lighting was observed without drip tray, the Contractor was reminded to provide preventive measures such as trip tray to the machine. The Contractor subsequently removed the machine from the area. (Closed)

3.5.14 Oil water mixture was observed accumulated inside bunding. The Contractor was reminded to regularly clear the oil water mixture accumulated inside drip tray. Subsequently, the Contractor removed the oil water mixture accumulated inside drip tray. (Closed)

3.5.15 Chemical container was observed without bunding. The Contractor was reminded to store chemical in bunded area. The Contractor subsequently removed the chemical container from the area. (Closed)

3.5.16 Wood materials were observed scattered at Portion C2a. The Contractor was reminded to regualrly clear the materials and keep the site tidy. The Contractor subsequently assigned area for temporary storage of wood materials. (Closed)

Landscape and Visual Impact

3.5.17 No relevant adverse impact was observed in the reporting quarter.

Others

3.5.18 Rectifications of remaining identified items are undergoing by the Contractor. Follow-up inspections on the status on provision of mitigation measures will be conducted to ensure all identified items are mitigated properly.

4 Advice on the Solid and Liquid Waste Management Status

4.1 Summary of Solid and Liquid Waste Management

4.1.1 The Contractor registered as a chemical waste producer for this project. Sufficient numbers of receptacles were available for general refuse collection and sorting.

4.1.2 As advised by the Contractor, 81646.2m³ of fill were imported for the project use in the reporting period. 252kg of paper/cardboard packaging, 6,080kg of plastics, 800kg of chemical waste and 188.5m³ of general refuse were generated and disposed of in the reporting period. Monthly summary of waste flow table is detailed in Appendix I.

4.1.3 The Contractor is advised to properly maintain on site C&D materials and wastes collection, sorting and recording system, dispose of C&D materials and wastes at designated ground and maximize reuse / recycle of C&D materials and wastes. The Contractor is reminded to properly maintain the site tidiness and dispose of the wastes accumulated on site regularly and properly.

4.1.4 The Contractor is 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.

4.1.5 The treated marine sediment and/or treated excavated filling material specified by Contract no.  HY/2013/01 has been received as public fill for Contract no.  HY/2010/02¡¦s reclamation filling works since January 2015. As informed by the Contractor in the reporting quarter, such site arrangement has been discontinued since 24 February 2016.

5 Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures

5.1 Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures

5.1.1 In response to the site audit findings, the Contractors carried out corrective actions.

5.1.2 A summary of the Implementation Schedule of Environmental Mitigation Measures (EMIS) is presented in Appendix C. Most of the recommended mitigation measures are being upheld. Moreover, regular review and checking on the construction methodologies, working processes and plants were carried out to ensure the environmental impacts were kept minimal and recommended environmental mitigation measures were implemented effectively.

5.1.3 Training of marine travel route for marine vessels operator was given to relevant staff and relevant records were kept properly.

5.1.4 Regarding the implementation of dolphin monitoring and protection measures (i.e. implementation of Dolphin Watching Plan, Dolphin Exclusion Zone and Silt Curtain integrity Check), regular checks were conducted by experienced MMOs within the works area to ensure that no dolphins were trapped by the silt curtain area. There were no dolphins spotted within the silt curtain during this quarter. The relevant procedures were followed and all measures were well implemented. The silt curtains were also inspected in accordance to the submitted plan.

5.1.5 Acoustic decoupling measures on noisy plants on construction vessels were checked regularly and the Contractor was reminded to ensure provision of ongoing maintenance to noisy plants and to carry out improvement work once insufficient acoustic decoupling measures were found.

5.1.6 Frequency of watering per day on exposed soil was checked; with reference to the record provided by the Contract, watering was conducted at least 8 times per day on reclaimed land. The frequency of watering is the mainly refer to water truck. Sprinklers are only served to strengthen dust control measure for busy traffic at the entrance of Portion D. As informed by the Contractor, during the mal-function period of sprinkler, water truck will enhance watering at such area. The Contractor was reminded to ensure provision of watering of at least 8 times per day on all exposed soil within the reporting period.

5.1.7 As informed by the Contractor, 1 (one) number of any combination of floating concrete batching plants and floating grout production facilities was in operation between 25 Feb 2016 and 29 Feb 2016.

5.1.8 As informed by the Contractor on 23 December 2015, an oil spillage incident was observed near Cell No. 28 on 23 December 2015. For the location of the oil spillage recorded on 23 December 2015, also refer to the map shown below.

5.1.8.1 Details of the oil spillage incident (23 December 2015) including size, location, time of the spillage and Contractor¡¦s actions taken in response to the spill incident have been reviewed and summarised as follow:

- Oil on sea was observed on sea area near Cell No. 28 within perimeter silt curtain at 09:30 a.m. on 23 December 2015 by the Contractor and RSS (also refer to below layout map).

- The Contractor organised manpower to identify the spill source, but the source of oil spill was not identified.  

- The Contractor equipped people involved in the cleanup works with personal protective equipment such as gloves prior to the removal of any leaked chemical or chemical waste.

- Pads and Pillow of the Spill Kit were applied to absorb and remove the spillage.

5.1.8.2 Impact water quality monitoring records of 23 December 2015 have been reviewed.

5.1.8.3 Observations and Results:

- Oil on sea was observed on sea area near Cell No. 28 within perimeter silt curtain at 09:30 a.m. on 23 December 2015 by the Contractor and RSS (also refer to above layout map).

- The following photo record shows the sea condition when the oil spillage on sea was observed.

5.1.8.4 The following actions were taken by the Contractor:

- The Contractor organized manpower to identify the spill source. During inspection, no construction vessel was observed around the concerned area and the source of oil spill was not identified.  

- The oil spill was identified during inspection conducted by the Contractor and RSS on 23 December 2015 as discrete, non-continuous source with approximately 50m² spread. The below photo shows that the Contractor deployed absorption booms to remove the floating oil from water.

5.1.8.5 The below photos shows that the used absorption booms were collected using disposal bags as part of the spill kits item. The used absorption booms were disposed of as chemical waste by the Contractor.

5.1.8.6 The oil stain observed was limited at nearby southern sea area within the silt curtain.

5.1.8.7 No more sign of oil spillage was found on the nearby water after the clean-up.

5.1.8.8 Review of impact water quality monitoring data of 23 December 2015:

5.1.8.9 Monitoring stations IS7, IS(Mf)9, IS8, IS(Mf)6 and SR4(N) are the monitoring stations close to location of observed oil spill (also refer to above layout map). Impact water quality monitoring data recorded at monitoring station, IS7, IS(Mf)9, IS8, IS(Mf)6 and SR4 on 23 December 2015 were reviewed. There was no water quality exceedance recorded at IS7, IS(Mf)9, IS8, IS(Mf)6 and SR4(N) on 23 December 2015.

5.1.8.10 The Contractor was reminded to continue to follow the spill response plan when oil is observed on sea.

5.1.9 As informed by the Contractor, the perimeter silt curtain near Portion B of HKBCF has been arranged on 3 February 2016, IEC/ENPO was informed by ET on 3 February 2016. IEC/ENPO reminded the Project team on 18 Feb 2016 that notification to EPD should be made prior to each further removal of the perimeter silt curtain. On 22 February 2016, IEC/ENPO commented that water quality impact as a result of the concerned shifting of the perimeter silt curtain should be reviewed. ET reviewed the IWQM data and site condition at the concerned area.

5.1.9.1 The impact water quality monitoring data obtained after 3 February 2016 was reviewed and no Project related exceedance was observed.

5.1.9.2 As shown below by the photo record taken on the 16 February 2016 and it shows that the latest silt curtain position is within the area of the complete seawall. As informed by the Contractor, no more reclamation filling will be conducted by this Contract at the concerned area.

5.1.9.3 The situation is under ET¡¦s further review in the reporting period and a notification on the concerned site arrangement of the perimeter silt curtain of Contract HY/2010/02 will be given to the authority when the review is completed.

5.1.10 Oil spillage observed on 17 February 2016 at Sea surface near cell no.109

5.1.10.1 Details of the oil spillage incident (17 Feb 2016) including size, location, time of the spillage and Contractor¡¦s actions taken in response to the spill incident have been reviewed and summarised as follow:

- The oil on sea was observed on 17 Feb 2016 by RSS and the Contractor. The incident was reported to ET, IEC and RSS.

- The Contractor organised manpower to identify the spill source, but the source of oil spill was not identified.  

- The Contractor equipped people involved in the cleanup works with personal protective equipment such as gloves prior to the removal of any leaked chemical or chemical waste.

- Pads and Pillow of the Spill Kit were applied to absorb and remove the spillage.

5.1.10.2 Impact water quality monitoring records of 17 February 2016 have been reviewed.

5.1.10.3 Oil was observed on sea surface near steel cell no.109 within silt curtain at 11:00 a.m. on 17 Feb 2016 by the Contractor and the RSS. The following actions were taken by the Contractor:

5.1.10.4 The Contractor organised manpower to identify the spill source, the vessel (Luen Hing 638) located close to the oil spill was inspected but the source of oil spill was not identified.  

5.1.10.5 The oil spill was identified during join site inspection conducted by the Contractor and RSS on 17 Feb 2016 as discrete, non-continuous source with approximately 20m² spread. Also refer to photo below:

5.1.10.6 The Contractor deployed absorption booms to remove the floating oil from water and the used absorption booms were collected using disposal bags as part of the spill kits item. The used absorption booms were disposed of as chemical waste by the Contractor. (Also refer to photo record below).

5.1.10.7 Photo record shows that oil on sea was no longer observed at sea area near Cell 109. (Also refer to photo record below)

5.1.10.8 Monitoring stations IS10, SR5 and IS(Mf)11 are the monitoring stations close to location of observed oil spill. Impact water quality monitoring data record of IS10, SR5 and IS(Mf)11 during flood tide have been reviewed. There is no water quality exceedance recorded at IS10, SR5 and IS(Mf)11 on 17 February 2016 during flood tide.

5.1.10.9 The contractor was reminded to continue to follow the spill response plan when oil is observed on sea.

6 Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality Performance Limit

6.1 Summary of Exceedances of the Environmental Quality Performance Limit

6.1.1 All 1-Hour TSP and 24-Hour TSP results were below the Action and Limit Level in the reporting quarter.

6.1.2 For construction noise, no exceedance was recorded at all monitoring stations in the reporting quarter.

6.1.3 For water quality monitoring, one (1) action level impact water quality monitoring exceedance at monitoring station IS(Mf)11 has been recorded on 28 December 2015 during flood tide. After investigation, there is no adequate information to conclude the recorded exceedance is related to this Contract; 2 limit level exceedances of turbidity level were recorded at monitoring station SR4(N) and IS8 respectively on 5 February 2016; 2 action level exceedances of suspended solids were recorded at monitoring station SR4(N) and IS8 respectively on 5 February 2016. No exceedance at other monitoring stations in the reporting quarter. After investigation, there is no adequate information to conclude the recorded exceedances are related to this Contract.

6.1.4 One (1) Limit Level exceedance of dolphin monitoring was recorded in the reporting quarter. After investigation, it was concluded that the HZMB works is one of the contributing factors affecting the dolphins. It was also concluded the contribution of impacts due to the HZMB works as a whole (or individual marine contracts) cannot be quantified nor separate from the other stress factors. Event Action Plan for Impact Dolphin Monitoring was triggered. For detail of investigation, please refer to appendix L.

6.1.5 A water quality complaint was referred to the ENPO at 10:22 am on the 4 December 2015 by EPD; ENPO referred this complaint to this Contract on the same day. With referred to the information provided by ENPO, EPD has contacted the complainant, and obtained the additional information from the complainant and it is suspected that the incident happened in the afternoon on 28 November 2015. A video was provided by the complainant who shows that turbid water behind a barge, the incident is suspected to be happened in the afternoon on 28 November 2015. After investigation, it is considered not related to this Contract.

6.1.6 Cumulative statistics on exceedances is provided in Appendix J.

7 Summary of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecutions

7.1 Summary of Environmental Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecutions

7.1.1 The Environmental Complaint Handling Procedure is annexed in Figure 5.

7.1.2 A water quality complaint was referred to the ENPO at 10:22 am on the 4 December 2015 by EPD; ENPO referred this complaint to this Contract on the same day. With referred to the information provided by ENPO, EPD has contacted the complainant, and obtained the additional information from the complainant and it is suspected that the incident happened in the afternoon on 28 November 2015.

7.1.2.1 A video was provided by the complainant, the following photo is captured from the video which shows that turbid water was seem behind a barge, the incident is suspected to be happened in the afternoon on 28 November 2015.

7.1.2.2 Investigation actions:

¡P Review of the information (video and photo) provided by the complainant

¡P Checking whether there barge which is required to work at the concerned area for Contract HY/2010/02 HKBCF Reclamation Works in the afternoon on 28 November 2015.

7.1.2.3 Investigation results:

¡P By tracing the turbid water showed on the above photo, the source of turbid seawater is not from the inside or the near the site boundary Contract HY/2010/02 HKBCF Reclamation Works.

¡P In addition, after checking with the Contractor, there are no derrick/flat top barges travelled to or from the sea area adjacent to the north of Tung Chung Waterfront Road in the afternoon of 28 Nov 2015, as such, it is considered not related to this Contract.

7.1.2.4 Nevertheless, the Contractor was reminded to continue to fully maintain all water quality mitigation measures.

7.1.3 No notification of summons or prosecution was received in the reporting quarter.

7.1.4 Statistics on complaints, notifications of summons and successful prosecutions are summarized in Appendix N.

8 Comments, recommendations and Conclusions

8.1 Comments on mitigation measures

8.1.1 According to the environmental site inspections performed in the reporting quarter, the following recommendations were provided:

Air Quality Impact

¡P All working plants and vessels on site should be regularly inspected and properly maintained to avoid dark smoke emission.

¡P All vehicles should be washed to remove any dusty materials before leaving the site.

¡P Haul roads should be sufficiently dampened to minimize fugitive dust generation.

¡P Wheel washing facilities should be properly maintained and reviewed to ensure properly functioning.

¡P Temporary exposed slopes and open stockpiles should be properly covered.

¡P Enclosure should be erected for cement debagging, batching and mixing operations.

¡P Water spraying should be provided to suppress fugitive dust for any dusty construction activity.

¡P Regular review and provide maintenance to dust control measures such as sprinkler system.

Construction Noise Impact

¡P Quieter powered mechanical equipment should be used as far as possible.

¡P Noisy operations should be oriented to a direction away from sensitive receivers as far as possible.

¡P Proper and effective noise control measures for operating equipment and machinery on-site should be provided, such as erection of movable noise barriers or enclosure for noisy plants. Closely check and replace the sound insulation materials regularly

¡P Vessels and equipment operating should be checked regularly and properly maintained.

¡P Noise Emission Label (NEL) shall be affixed to the air compressor and hand-held breaker operating within works area.

¡P Acoustic decoupling measures should be properly implemented for all existing and incoming construction vessels with continuous and regularly checking to ensure effective implementation of acoustic decoupling measures.

Water Quality Impact

¡P Regular review and maintenance of silt curtain systems, drainage systems and desilting facilities in order to make sure they are functioning effectively.

¡P Construction of seawall should be completed as early as possible.

¡P Regular inspect and review the loading process from barges to avoid splashing of material.

¡P Silt, debris and leaves accumulated at public drains, wheel washing bays and perimeter u-channels and desilting facilities should be cleaned up regularly.

¡P Silty effluent should be treated/ desilted before discharged. Untreated effluent should be prevented from entering public drain channel.

¡P Proper drainage channels/bunds should be provided at the site boundaries to collect/intercept the surface run-off from works areas.

¡P Exposed slopes and stockpiles should be covered up properly during rainstorm.

Chemical and Waste Management

¡P All types of wastes, both on land and floating in the sea, should be collected and sorted properly and disposed of timely and properly. They should be properly stored in designated areas within works areas temporarily.

¡P All chemical containers and oil drums should be properly stored and labelled.

¡P All plants and vehicles on site should be properly maintained to prevent oil leakage.

¡P All kinds of maintenance works should be carried out within roofed, paved and confined areas.

¡P All drain holes of the drip trays utilized within works areas should be properly plugged to avoid any oil and chemical waste leakage.

¡P Oil stains on soil surface and empty chemical containers should be cleared and disposed of as chemical waste.

¡P Regular review should be conducted for working barges and patrol boats to ensure sufficient measures and spill control kits were provided on working barges and patrol boats to avoid any spreading of leaked oil/chemicals.

Landscape and Visual Impact

¡P All existing, retained/transplanted trees at the works areas should be properly fenced off and regularly inspected.

¡P Control night-time lighting and glare by hooding all lights.

8.2 Recommendations on EM&A Programme

8.2.1 The impact monitoring programme for air quality, noise, water quality and dolphin ensured that any deterioration in environmental condition was readily detected and timely actions taken to rectify any non-compliance. Assessment and analysis of monitoring results collected demonstrated the environmental impacts of the Project. With implementation of recommended effective environmental mitigation measures, the Project¡¦s environmental impacts were considered as environmentally acceptable. The weekly environmental site inspections ensured that all the environmental mitigation measures recommended were effectively implemented.

8.2.2 The recommended environmental mitigation measures, as included in the EM&A programme, effectively minimize the potential environmental impacts from the Project. Also, the EM&A programme effectively monitored the environmental impacts from the construction activities and ensure the proper implementation of mitigation measures. No particular recommendation was advised for the improvement of the programme.

8.3 Conclusions

8.3.1 The construction phase and EM&A programme of the Project commenced on 12 March 2012.

8.3.2 All 1-Hour TSP and 24-Hour TSP results were below the Action and Limit Level in the reporting quarter.

8.3.3 For construction noise, no exceedance was recorded at all monitoring stations in the reporting quarter.

8.3.4 For water quality monitoring, one (1) action level impact water quality monitoring exceedance at monitoring station IS(Mf)11 has been recorded on 28 December 2015 during flood tide. After investigation, there is no adequate information to conclude the recorded exceedance is related to this Contract; 2 limit level exceedances of turbidity level were recorded at monitoring station SR4(N) and IS8 respectively on 5 February 2016; 2 action level exceedances of suspended solids were recorded at monitoring station SR4(N) and IS8 respectively on 5 February 2016. No exceedance at other monitoring stations in the reporting quarter. After investigation, there is no adequate information to conclude the recorded exceedances are related to this Contract.

8.3.5 One (1) Limit Level exceedance of dolphin monitoring was recorded in the reporting quarter. After investigation, it was concluded that the HZMB works is one of the contributing factors affecting the dolphins. It was also concluded the contribution of impacts due to the HZMB works as a whole (or individual marine contracts) cannot be quantified nor separate from the other stress factors. Event Action Plan for Impact Dolphin Monitoring was triggered. For detail of investigation, please refer to appendix L.

8.3.6 Environmental site inspection was carried out 13 times in the reporting quarter. Recommendations on remedial actions were given to the Contractors for the deficiencies identified during the site audits.

8.3.7 A water quality complaint was referred to the ENPO at 10:22 am on the 4 December 2015 by EPD; ENPO referred this complaint to this Contract on the same day. With referred to the information provided by ENPO, EPD has contacted the complainant, and obtained the additional information from the complainant and it is suspected that the incident happened in the afternoon on 28 November 2015. A video was provided by the complainant who shows that turbid water behind a barge, the incident is suspected to be happened in the afternoon on 28 November 2015. After investigation, it is considered not related to this Contract.

8.3.8 No notification of summons or prosecution was received in the reporting quarter.

8.3.9 Apart from the above mentioned monitoring, most of the recommended mitigation measures, as included in the EM&A programme, were implemented properly in the reporting quarter.

8.3.10 The recommended environmental mitigation measures effectively minimize the potential environmental impacts from the Contract. The EM&A programme effectively monitored the environmental impacts from the construction activities and ensure the proper implementation of mitigation measures. No particular recommendation was advised for the improvement of the programme.

8.3.11 Moreover, regular review and checking on the construction methodologies, working processes and plants were carried out to ensure the environmental impacts were kept minimal and recommended environmental mitigation measures were implemented effectively.