This document is issued for the party which commissioned it and for specific purposes connected with the above-captioned project only. It should not be relied upon by any other party or used for any other purpose. We accept no responsibility for the consequences of this document being relied upon by any other party, or being used for any other purpose, or containing any error or omission which is due to an error or omission in data supplied to us by other parties. This document contains confidential information and proprietary intellectual property. It should not be shown to other parties without consent from us and from the party which commissioned it.
This report has been prepared solely for use by the party which commissioned it (the ‘Client’) in connection with the captioned project. It should not be used for any other purpose. No person other than the Client or any party who has expressly agreed terms of reliance with us (the ‘Recipient(s)’) may rely on the content, information or any views expressed in the report. We accept no duty of care, responsibility or liability to any other recipient of this document. This report is confidential and contains proprietary intellectual property. No representation, warranty or undertaking, express or implied, is made and no responsibility or liability is accepted by us to any party other than the Client or any Recipient(s), as to the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this report. For the avoidance of doubt this report does not in any way purport to include any legal, insurance or financial advice or opinion. We disclaim all and any liability whether arising in tort or contract or otherwise which it might otherwise have to any party other than the Client or the Recipient(s), in respect of this report, or any information attributed to it. We accept no responsibility for any error or omission in the report which is due to an error or omission in data, information or statements supplied to us by other parties including the client (‘Data’). We have not independently verified such Data and have assumed it to be accurate, complete, reliable and current as of the date of such information. Forecasts presented in this document were prepared using Data and the report is dependent or based on Data. Inevitably, some of the assumptions used to develop the forecasts will not be realised and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur. Consequently Mott MacDonald does not guarantee or warrant the conclusions contained in the report as there are likely to be differences between the forecasts and the actual results and those differences may be material. While we consider that the information and opinions given in this report are sound all parties must rely on their own skill and judgement when making use of it. Under no circumstances may this report or any extract or summary thereof be used in connection with any public or private securities offering including any related memorandum or prospectus for any securities offering or stock exchange listing or announcement.

Executive summary

This Monthly Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) Report is prepared for Contract No. HY/2013/04 “Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities – Infrastructure Works Stage II (Southern Portion)” (hereafter referred to as “the Contract”) for the Highways Department of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR). The Contract was awarded to China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Limited (hereafter referred to as “the Contractor”) and Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited (MMHK) was appointed as the Environmental Team (ET) by the Contractor.

The Contract is part of the “Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities” (HZMB HKBCF) Project which is a “Designated Project” under Schedule 2 of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Ordinance (Cap. 499) and for which an EIA Report (Register No. AEIAR-145/2009) was prepared and approved. The current Environmental Permit (EP) for HKBCF, namely No. EP-353/2009/K, was issued on 11 April 2016. These documents are available through the EIA Ordinance Register. Commencement of the Contract took place on 13 March 2015 and the construction works commenced on 13 July 2015.

Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited has been appointed by the Contractor to implement the Environmental Monitoring & Audit (EM&A) programme for the Contract in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0) and will be providing environmental team services for the Contract.

This is the 49^th Monthly EM&A Report for the Contract which summarises findings of the EM&A works during the reporting period from 1 to 31 July 2019 (the “reporting period”).

Landscape Checklist for HyD Contract No. HY/2013/01, HY/2013/02, HY/2013/03 and HY/2014/05 are shown in Appendix N.

Environmental Monitoring and Audit Progress

The monthly EM&A programme was undertaken in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0).

The remaining air quality, noise, water quality and dolphin monitoring works under Contract No. HY/2013/01 “HZMB HKBCF – Passenger Clearance Building” were temporarily suspended from 1 October 2018. The ET of Contract No. HY/2013/04 is required and continues the full implementation of environmental monitoring commencing on 1 October 2018.

Air quality monitoring stations AMS2, AMS3C and AMS7B are covered by this Contract. It should be noted that the air quality monitoring station AMS6 is covered by Contract No. HY/2011/03 “Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link Road (HZMB HKLR) – Section between Scenic Hill and HKBCF”. If the impact air quality monitoring at AMS6 is no longer covered under Contract No. HY/2011/03, it is required to continue such monitoring at AMS6 as part of EM&A programme However, this is subject to ENPO’s final decision on which ET should carry out the monitoring work at these stations.

Noise monitoring stations NMS2 and NMS3C, water quality monitoring works and dolphin monitoring works under HZMB HKBCF are covered by this Contract.

The monitoring reports for landscape establishment for Contract Nos. HY/2013/01, HY/2013/02, HY/2013/03 and HY/2014/05 were covered in this EM&A report.

A summary of the monitoring activities during the reporting period are listed below:

● 1-hour TSP Monitoring: 2, 8, 13, 18, 24 and 30 July 2019

● 24-hour TSP Monitoring: 2, 8, 13, 18, 24 and 30 July 2019

● Noise Monitoring: 2, 8, 18, 24 and 30 July 2019

● Water Quality Monitoring: 22 July 2019^

● Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring: 16, 18, 22 and 24 July 2019*

● Environmental Site Inspection: 5, 10, 17 and 22 July 2019

Remarks:

^ Monthly impact operation phase water quality monitoring in accordance with Section 9.9 of the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0) was conducted during the reporting month.

* Post-construction dolphin monitoring in accordance with Section 10.7 of the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF was conducted during the reporting month.

Breaches of Action and Limit Levels

A summary of environmental exceedances for the reporting period as recorded by the Environmental Team of this Contract are listed below:

Environmental Monitoring	Parameters	Action Level	Limit Level
Air Quality	1-hour TSP	-	-
	24-hour TSP	-	-
Noise	L_eq_{(30 min)}	-	-

Complaint Log

There were no complaints received in relation to the environmental impact during the reporting period.

Notifications of Summons and Successful Prosecutions

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

Reporting Changes

The monitoring reports for landscape establishment for Contract Nos. HY/2013/01, HY/2013/02, HY/2013/03 and HY/2014/05 were covered in this EM&A report.

Future Key Issues

The future key issues to be undertaken in the upcoming month are:

● Erection of sign gantries (land-based)

● Construction of parapets for bridge structures (land-based)

● Construction of Retaining Wall RW16N and RW16S (land-based)

● Construction of Bridge Deck D16 in-situ deck (land-based)

● Construction of utilities cross-over frame under Bridge D9c (land-based)

● Backfilling of retaining walls and formation of fill slopes and road embankment (land-based)

● Drainage works and watermains laying (land-based)

● Roadworks and road furniture (land-based)

● Maintenance of temporary traffic arrangements (TTA) associated with the commissioning of HKBCF and Tuen Mun – Chek Lap Kok Link Southern Connection (TM-CLKLSC) (land-based)

1 Introduction

1.1 Background

On 13 March 2015, Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited (MMHK) was commissioned by China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Limited (also referred to as “the Contractor”) to undertake the Environmental Team (ET) services (including environmental monitoring and audit (EM&A)) for Contract No. HY/2013/04 “Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities – Infrastructure Works Stage II (Southern Portion)” (“the Contract”) for the Highways Department of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR).

This is the 49^th Monthly EM&A Report summarising the findings of EM&A activities conducted under the Contract from 1 to 31 July 2019 (the “reporting period”) and is submitted to fulfil Condition 5.4 of the EP.

The Highways Department of HKSAR, the Contractor and MMHK consent to the requirements under the current EP for HZMB HKBCF to submit EM&A reports to the Environmental Protection Department (EPD) for public inspection.

1.2 Project Description

The Proposed works under this Contract comprise the following:

● Construction of vehicular bridge and at-grade roads at the southern portion of Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities;

● Construction of associated street lighting, street furniture, road marking, road signage, box culverts and outfalls, drainage, sewerage, fresh water and flushing water supply, irrigation, landscape, electrical and mechanical (E&M), utilities and services works;

● Provisioning of civil engineering works and power supply for Traffic Control and Surveillance System (TCSS); and

● Other works in accordance with the Contract.

1.3 Project Organisation

The organisation chart and lines of communication with respect to the on-site environmental management structure together with the contact information of the key personnel are shown in Appendix B. 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 or Engineer’s Representative (AECOM Asia Co. Ltd.)	Senior Resident Engineer	Peter Lee	3958 7465	3748 8900
Environmental Project Office / Independent Environmental Checker (Ramboll Hong Kong Limited)	Environmental Project Office Leader	Y H Hui	3465 2888	3465 2899
	Independent Environmental Checker	Ray Yan	3465 2836 / 5181 8401	3465 2899
	Environmental Site Supervisor	Harris Wong	3465 2805 / 5181 8709	3465 2899
Contractor (China State Construction Engineering (Hong Kong) Limited)	Site Agent	Jason Chung	9127 8369	2459 4336
	Environmental Officer	Xavier Lam	9493 2944	2459 4336
		K P Ng	9626 9961	2459 4336
Environmental Team (Mott MacDonald Hong Kong Limited)	Environmental Team Leader	Gary Chow	2828 5874	2827 1823
24-hour Complaint Hotline	-	-	5236 7111	-

1.4 Construction Programme

The Construction Works Programme of the Project is provided in Appendix C.

1.5 Construction Works undertaken during the Reporting Period

A summary of the construction activities undertaken during this reporting period is shown below:

● Erection of sign gantries

● Construction of parapets for bridge structures

● Construction of Retaining Wall RW16N and RW16S

● Construction of Bridge Deck D16 in-situ deck

● Construction of utilities cross-over frame under Bridge D9c

● Backfilling of retaining walls and formation of fill slopes and road embankment

● Drainage works and watermains laying

● Roadworks and road furniture

● Maintenance of temporary traffic arrangements (TTA) associated with the commissioning of HKBCF and TM-CLKLSC

● No marine-based segment delivery (all segments stored at segment storage yard on HKBCF island site)

● No generation of excavated marine sediment

During this reporting period, temporary soft landscaping works were conducted and marine-based outfall works had not commenced.

2 Air Quality Monitoring

2.1 Introduction

In accordance with the Contract Specific EM&A Manual, baseline 1-hour and 24-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) levels at air quality monitoring stations AMS6 and AMS7 were established. Also, baseline 1-hour and 24-hour Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) levels at air quality monitoring stations AMS2 and AMS3 were established under other HKBCF contracts. Impact 1-hour TSP monitoring was conducted for at least three times every 6 days, while impact 24-hour TSP monitoring was carried out for at least once every 6 days.

2.2 Monitoring Locations

Monitoring locations AMS2, AMS3, AMS6 and AMS7 were set up at the proposed locations in accordance with the relevant Contract Specific EM&A Manual. 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) before being relocated to Ying Tung Estate Market Rooftop (AMS3C) on 20 August 2018 under this Contract. The 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.

It should be noted that the air quality monitoring works for the Contract at AMS6 (Dragonair/CNAC (Group) Building) are covered by Contract No. HY/2011/03 “Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Hong Kong Link Road (HZMB HKLR) – Section between Scenic Hill and HKBCF”.

The ET of the Contract or another ET of the HZMB project is required to conduct impact air quality monitoring at AMS6 as part of EM&A programme if this air quality monitoring station is no longer covered under Contract No. HY/2011/03.

Table 2.1 describes the details of the monitoring stations and Figure 2.1 shows the locations of air monitoring stations.

Table 2.1: Construction Dust Monitoring Locations

Identification No.	Location Description
AMS2	Tung Chung Development Pier
AMS3C	Ying Tung Estate Market Rooftop
AMS6⁽¹⁾	Dragonair/CNAC (Group) Building
AMS7B	3RS Site Offices

Remarks: (1) The ET of this Contract should conduct impact air quality monitoring at station AMS6 listed in the table as part of EM&A programme according to latest notification from ENPO when the monitoring station(s) is/are no longer covered by another ET of the HZMB project.

2.3 Monitoring Action and Limit Levels

The Action and Limit Levels for 1-hr TSP and 24-hr TSP are provided in Table 2.2 and Table 2.3 respectively. The same baseline and Action/Limit Levels for air quality, as derived from the baseline monitoring data recorded at and AMS3 and AMS7, apply with the abovementioned relocations to AMS3C and AMS7B respectively.

Table 2.2: Action and Limit Levels for 1-hour TSP

Monitoring Station	Action Level, µg/m³	Limit Level, µg/m³
AMS2 – Tung Chung Development Pier	374	500
AMS3C – Ying Tung Estate Market Rooftop	368	500
AMS6 – Dragonair / CNAC (Group) Building (HKIA)	360	500
AMS7B – 3RS Site Offices	370	500

Table 2.3: Action and Limit Levels for 24-hour TSP

Monitoring Station	Action Level, µg/m³	Limit Level, µg/m³
AMS2 – Tung Chung Development Pier	176	260
AMS3C – Ying Tung Estate Market Rooftop	167	260
AMS6 – Dragonair / CNAC (Group) Building (HKIA)	173	260
AMS7B – 3RS Site Offices	183	260

The event and action plan is provided in Appendix D.

If exceedance(s) at these stations is/are recorded by the ET of the Contract or referred by the other ET under the HZMB project to the Contract, the ET of the Contract will carry out an investigation and findings will be reported in the monthly EM&A Report.

2.4 Monitoring Station AMS6

The monitoring requirements, monitoring equipment, monitoring parameters, frequency and duration, monitoring methodology and monitoring schedule for air quality monitoring station AMS6 are detailed in the monthly EM&A Reports prepared for Contract No. HY/2011/03.

2.5 Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Period

The schedule for air quality monitoring at AMS2, AMS3C and AMS7B in the reporting period is presented in Appendix I.

2.6 Monitoring Equipment

24-hour TSP air quality monitoring was performed using High Volume Sampler (HVS) located at each designated monitoring station. The HVS meets all the requirements of the Contract Specific EM&A Manual. Portable direct reading dust meters were used to carry out the 1-hour TSP monitoring. Brand and model of the equipment used for air quality monitoring stations AMS2, AMS3C and AMS7B under this Contract is given in Table 2.4.

Table 2.4: Air Quality Monitoring Equipment

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

Equipment

Brand

Model No.

Portable direct reading dust meter

(1-hour TSP)

Sibata Digital Dust Monitor

LD-3B

High Volume Sampler

(24-hour TSP)

Tisch Environmental Mass Flow Controlled Total Suspended Particulate (TSP) High Volume Sampler

TE-5170

2.7 Monitoring Methodology

24-hour TSP Monitoring

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

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

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

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

iv. No furnace or incinerator flues are nearby.

v. Airflow around the sampler was unrestricted.

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

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

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

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

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

b. Preparation of Filter Papers

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

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

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

c. Field Monitoring

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

xi. The initial elapsed time was recorded.

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

xiii. The final elapsed time was recorded.

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

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

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

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

d. Maintenance and Calibration

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

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

iii. Calibration certificate of the HVSs are provided in Appendix J.

1-hour TSP Monitoring

a. Measuring Procedures

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

i. Turn the power on.

ii. Close the air collecting opening cover.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

x. Lower down the air collection opening cover.

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

b. Maintenance and Calibration

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

2.8 Monitoring Results

The monitoring results for 1-hour and 24-hour TSP at AMS2, AMS3C and AMS7B are summarized in Table 2.5 and Table 2.6 respectively. Detailed impact air quality monitoring results are presented in Appendix K.

Table 2.5: Summary of 1-hour TSP Monitoring Results During the Reporting Period

Monitoring Station	Average, µg/m³	Range, µg/m³	Action Level, µg/m³	Limit Level, µg/m³
AMS2	35	18 – 81	374	500
AMS3C	37	16 – 74	368	500
AMS7B	35	13 – 94	370	500

Table 2.6: Summary of 24-hour TSP Monitoring Results During the Reporting Period

Monitoring Station	Average, µg/m³	Range, µg/m³	Action Level, µg/m³	Limit Level, µg/m³
AMS2	47	26 – 98	176	260
AMS3C	47	25 – 73	167	260
AMS7B	67	46 – 139	183	260

There was no Action and Limit Level exceedance of 1-hr TSP level and 24-hr TSP level recorded at station AMS2, AMS3C and AMS7B by the Environmental Team of this Contract during the reporting period.

The monitoring results for AMS6 are reported in the monthly EM&A Reports prepared for Contract No. HY/2011/03.

Summary of Action and Limit Level exceedance of 1-hr TSP level and 24-hr TSP level at AMS6 shall be referred to the monthly EM&A report prepared by Contract No. HY/2011/03.

The wind data obtained from the on-site wind station (as shown in Figure 2.1) during the reporting period is provided in Appendix M.

3 Noise Monitoring

3.1 Introduction

In accordance with the Contract Specific EM&A Manual, impact noise monitoring was conducted at least once per week for each noise monitoring location during the construction phase of the Contract.

3.2 Monitoring Locations

Approval for carrying out impact monitoring at NMS3 (Ho Yu College), as proposed in the Contract Specific EM&A Manual, could not be obtained from the principal of school. Permission on setting up and carry 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) before being relocated to Ying Tung Estate Market Rooftop (NMS3C) on 20 August 2018 under this Contract. The same baseline noise level (as derived from the baseline monitoring data recorded at Ho Yu College) and Limit Level were adopted for this alternative noise monitoring location.

Table 3.1 describes the details of the monitoring stations and Figure 3.1 shows the locations of noise monitoring stations.

Table 3.1: Construction Noise Monitoring Locations

Identification No.	Location Description
NMS2	Seaview Crescent
NMS3C⁽¹⁾	Ying Tung Estate Refuse Collection Point

Remarks: (1) The Action and Limit Levels for schools will be applied for this alternative monitoring location.

3.3 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

Table 3.2 summarises the monitoring parameters, frequency and duration of impact TSP monitoring.

Table 3.2: Noise Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

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

Parameter

Frequency and Duration

30-minutes measurement at each monitoring station between 0700 and 1900 on normal weekdays (Monday to Saturday).

L_eq, L₁₀ and L₉₀ would be recorded.

At least once per week

3.4 Action and Limit Levels

The Action and Limit Levels for construction noise are defined in Table 3.3.

Table 3.3: Action and Limit Level for Construction Noise

Monitoring Station	Time Period	Action Level	Limit Level
NMS2	07:00 – 19:00 hours on normal weekdays	When one documented complaint is received	70 dB(A)
NMS3C	07:00 – 19:00 hours on normal weekdays	When one documented complaint is received	70/65 dB(A)*

Remark: Limit Level for schools will be applied for NMS3C. Day time noise Limit Level of 70 dB(A) applies to education institutions, while 65 dB(A) applies during the school examination period.

The event and action plan is provided in Appendix D.

3.5 Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Period

The schedule for noise monitoring in the reporting period is presented in Appendix I.

3.6 Monitoring Equipment

Noise monitoring was performed using sound level meters at each designed monitoring station. The sound level meters deployed comply with the International Electrotechnical Commission Publications (IEC) 651:1979 (Type 1) and 804:1985 (Type 1) specifications. Acoustic calibrator was deployed to check the sound level meters at a known sound pressure level. Brand and model of the equipment used for noise monitoring under this Contract is given in Table 3.4.

Table 3.4: Noise Monitoring Equipment

Equipment	Brand	Model No.
Integrated Sound Level Meter	Rion	NL-52
Acoustic Calibrator	Larson Davis	CAL200

3.7 Monitoring Methodology

1. Monitoring Procedure

a. The measurement at NMS3C was free-field measurement and NMS2 was façade measurement. A correction of +3dB(A) shall be made to the free-field measurement.

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

c. Parameters such as frequency weighting, the time weighting and the measurement time were set as follows:

i. frequency weighting: A

ii. time weighting: Fast

iii. time measurement: L_eq (30-minutes) during non-restricted hours i.e. 0700-1900 on normal workdays.

d. Prior to and after each noise measurement, the meter was calibrated using the acoustic calibrator for 94dB(A) at 1000 Hz. If the difference in the calibration level before and after measurement was more than 1 dB(A), the measurement would be considered invalid and repeat of noise measurement would be required after re-calibration or repair of the equipment.

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

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

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

2. Maintenance and Calibration

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

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

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

3.8 Monitoring Results

The monitoring results for construction noise are summarized in Table 3.5. Detailed impact noise monitoring results and relevant graphical plots are presented in Appendix K.

Table 3.5: Summary of Construction Noise Monitoring Results During the Reporting Period

Monitoring Station	Average, dB(A) L_eq_{(30 mins)}	Range, dB(A) L_eq_{(30 mins)}	Limit Level, dB(A) L_eq_{(30 mins)}
NMS2	64	63 – 66	75
NMS3C	64	62 – 67	70/65*

Monitoring Station

Average, dB(A)

L_eq_{(30 mins)}

Range, dB(A)

L_eq_{(30 mins)}

Limit Level, dB(A)

L_eq_{(30 mins)}

NMS2

63 – 66

NMS3C

62 – 67

70/65*

Remark: (*) The Limit Level for schools will be applied for NMS3C. Daytime noise Limit Level of 70 dB(A) applies to education institutions, while 65 dB(A) applies during the school examination period.

No noise exceedances were recorded at stations NMS2 and NMS3C by the ET of this Contract during the reporting period.

School calendar of Ho Yu College was checked against noise monitoring days at NMS3C.

4 Water Quality Monitoring

4.1 Introduction

Upon completion of all marine-based construction activities, a post-project monitoring exercise on water quality shall be carried out for 4 weeks in the same manner as the Baseline monitoring and was conducted during May 2019. An impact operational phase monitoring exercise on water quality shall also be carried out monthly during the first year of Project operation at all designated monitoring stations including control stations; this was commenced in June 2019. For post-construction and impact operational phase water quality monitoring, measurement was taken in accordance with the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0).

4.2 Monitoring Locations

During the reporting period, the impact operational phase water quality monitoring works were covered by this Contract. A total of four stations (two Sensitive Receiver Stations and two Control Stations) are covered for impact operational phase monitoring by the current EM&A programme.

The two Sensitive Receiver Stations (SR) were chosen as they are close to the key sensitive receivers and the two Control Stations (CS) were chosen to facilitate comparison of the water quality of the SR stations with less influence by the Project/ ambient water quality conditions.

During impact construction water quality monitoring, the water quality monitoring station at SR3 was not available for water sampling due to safety reason, thus, monitoring station was changed to SR3(N) (Coordinate: 810689E, 816591N) and was justified by the ET Leader of Contract No. HY/2013/01 on 8 November 2017 and verified by the IEC on 13 November 2017; and submitted to EPD on 29 November 2017 and it was approved by EPD on 22 December 2017. Also, the water quality monitoring station at CS2 (Coordinate: 805849E, 818780N) was occupied by the marine work of a designated project – “Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System” (3RS Project) – thus, monitoring station was changed to CS2(A) (Coordinate: 805232E, 818606N) and was justified by the ET Leader of HZMB HLKR Contract No. HY/2011/09, and verified by the IEC; and submitted to EPD on 12 July 2017 and it was approved by EPD on 28 July 2017 for implementation with effect from 31 July 2017.

Application of the alternative water quality monitoring stations at SR3(N) and CS2(A) to impact operational phase water quality monitoring was justified by the ET Leader of this Contract on 14 May 2019, verified by the IEC on 15 May 2019 and submitted to EPD for record on 15 May 2019 for implementation with effect from June 2019.

Table 4.1 and Figure 4.1 shows the locations of water quality monitoring stations.

Table 4.1: Impact Operational Phase Water Quality Monitoring Stations

Station	Description	East	North
SR2(A)	Sensitive receivers (Sha Lo Wan)	807810	817189
SR3(N)	Sensitive receivers (San Tau SSSI)	810689	816591
CS2(A)	Control Station	805232	818606
CS(Mf)5	Control Station	817990	821129

4.3 Monitoring Parameters, Frequency and Duration

Table 4.2 summarizes the monitoring parameters, frequency and monitoring depths of impact operational phase water quality monitoring in the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0).

Table 4.2: Impact Operational Phase Water Quality Monitoring Parameters and Frequency

Monitoring Stations	Parameter, Unit	Frequency	No. of Depths Measured
Control Stations: CS2(A), CS(Mf)5 Sensitive Receiver Stations: SR2(A), SR3(N)	● Depth, m ● Temperature, °C ● Salinity, ppt ● Dissolved Oxygen (DO), mg/L ● DO Saturation, % ● Turbidity, NTU ● pH ● Suspended Solids (SS), mg/L	Once monthly, during mid-ebb and mid-flood tides of the same monitoring day (within ±1.75 hour of the predicted time)	3 (1m below water surface, mid-depth and 1m above sea bed, except where the water depth is less than 6m, in which case the mid-depth station may be omitted. Should the water depth be less than 3m, only the mid-depth station will be monitored.)

Monitoring Stations

Parameter, Unit

Frequency

No. of Depths Measured

Control Stations:

CS2(A), CS(Mf)5

Sensitive Receiver Stations:

SR2(A), SR3(N)

● Depth, m

● Temperature, °C

● Salinity, ppt

● Dissolved Oxygen (DO), mg/L

● DO Saturation, %

● Turbidity, NTU

● pH

● Suspended Solids (SS), mg/L

Once monthly, during mid-ebb and mid-flood tides of the same monitoring day

(within ±1.75 hour of the predicted time)

(1m below water surface, mid-depth and 1m above sea bed, except where the water depth is less than 6m, in which case the mid-depth station may be omitted. Should the water depth be less than 3m, only the mid-depth station will be monitored.)

4.4 Monitoring Action and Limit Levels

The Action and Limit Levels for impact water quality monitoring are provided in Table 4.3 for reference.

Table 4.3: Action and Limit Levels for Impact Water Quality Monitoring

Parameters	Action	Limit
DO in mg L^-1 (Surface, Middle & Bottom)	Surface and Middle 5.0 Bottom 4.7	Surface and Middle 4.2 (except 5 mg/L for FCZ) Bottom 3.6
SS in mg L^-1 (depth-averaged) at all monitoring stations and control stations	23.5 and 120% of upstream control station's SS at the same tide of the same day*	34.4 and 130% of upstream control station's SS at the same tide of the same day and 10mg/L for WSD Seawater intakes*
Turbidity in NTU (depth-averaged)	27.5 and 120% of upstream control station's turbidity at the same tide of the same day*	47.0 and 130% of upstream control station's

Remarks:

* Reference is made to EPD approval of adjustment of water quality assessment criteria issued and became effective on 18 February 2013.

Notes:

1. “depth-averaged” is calculated by taking the arithmetic means of reading of all three depths.

2. For DO, non-compliance of the water quality limits occurs when monitoring result is lower than the limits.

3. For turbidity, SS, non-compliance of the water quality limits occurs when monitoring result is higher than the limits.

4. All the figures given in the table are used for reference only and the EPD may amend the figures whenever it is considered as necessary.

5. The 1%-ile of baseline data for dissolved oxygen (surface and middle) and dissolved oxygen (bottom) are 4.2 mg/L and 3.6 mg/L respectively.

The event and action plan is provided in Appendix D.

4.5 Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Period

Monthly impact operational phase water quality monitoring in accordance with Section 9.9 of the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0) commenced in June 2019 and was conducted during the reporting month on 22 July 2019.

The schedule for impact operational phase water quality monitoring in the reporting period is presented in Appendix I.

4.6 Monitoring Equipment

Table 4.4 summaries the equipment used in the impact operational phase water quality monitoring programme.

Table 4.4: Water Quality Monitoring Equipment

Equipment	Brand and Model	Serial Number
DO and Temperature Meter, Salinity Meter, Turbidity Meter & pH Meter	YSI ProDSS	16H104233 / 16H104234 / 17H105557

4.7 Monitoring Methodology

4.7.1 Instrumentation

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

4.7.2 Operating/Analytical Procedures

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

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

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

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

e. Duplicate samples from each independent sampling event were collected for SS measurement. Water samples were collected using the water samplers and the samples were stored in high density polythene bottles. Water samples collected were well-mixed in the water sampler prior to pre-rinsing and transferring to sample bottles. Sample bottles were pre-rinsed with the same water samples. The sample bottles were then be packed in cool-boxes (cooled at 4°C without being frozen), and delivered to ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. for the analysis of suspended solids concentrations. The laboratory determination work would be started within 24 hours after collection of the water samples. ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. is a HOKLAS accredited laboratory and has comprehensive quality assurance and quality control programmes. For QA/QC procedures, one duplicate samples of every batch of 20 samples was analyzed.

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

Table 4.5: Laboratory Analysis for Suspended Solids

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

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

4.7.3 Maintenance and Calibration

a. All in situ monitoring instruments would be calibrated and calibrated by ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. before use and at 3-monthly intervals throughout all stages of the water quality monitoring programme. Calibration details are provided in Appendix J.

b. The dissolved oxygen probe of YSI 6820 was calibrated by wet bulb method. Before the calibration routine, the sensor for dissolved oxygen was thermally equilibrated in water-saturated air. Calibration cup is served as a calibration chamber and it was loosened from airtight condition before it is used for the calibration. Calibration at ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. was carried out once every three months in a water sample with a known concentration of dissolved oxygen. The sensor was immersed in the water and after thermal equilibration, the known mg/L value was keyed in and the calibration was carried out automatically.

c. The turbidity probe of YSI 6820 is calibrated two times a month. A zero check in distilled water was performed with the turbidity probe of YSI 6820 once per monitoring day. The probe will be calibrated with a solution of known NTU at ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Ltd. once every three months.

4.8 Monitoring Results

Impact operational phase water quality monitoring results and graphical plots are presented in Appendix K.

5 Dolphin Monitoring

5.1 Introduction

Vessel based surveys for the Chinese White Dolphin (CWD), Sousa chinensis, are to be conducted by a dedicated team comprising a qualified marine mammal ecologist and experienced marine mammal observers (MMOs). The purpose of the surveys is to evaluate the impact of the HKBCF reclamation and, if deemed detrimental, to take appropriate action as per the EM&A Manual. During the reporting period, the ET of Contract No. HY/2011/03 continued the implementation of dolphin monitoring and collection of monitoring data, with the reporting by the ET of this Contract.

5.2 Monitoring Locations

5.2.1 Vessel-based Line-transect Survey

According to the requirement of the updated EM&A Manual, the dolphin monitoring programme should adopt line-transect vessel survey method. The survey follows pre-set and fixed transect lines in the two areas defined by AFCD as: Northeast Lantau (NEL) survey area; and Northwest Lantau (NWL) survey area.

Table 5.1 shows the co-ordinates for the transect lines and layout map. The layout map showing the transect lines have been provided by AFCD and are shown in Figure 5.1.

Table 5.1: Post-Construction Dolphin Monitoring Line Transect Co-ordinates (Provided by AFCD)

Transect	HK Grid System		Long Lat in WGS84
	X	Y	Long	Lat
1^#	804671	815456	113.870287	22.277678
	804671	831404	113.869975	22.421696
2^#^	805476	820800	113.877995	22.325951
	805476	826654	113.877882	22.378815
3^	806464	821150	114.030267	22.196697
	806464	822911	114.047344	22.196712
4^	807518	821500	114.033651	22.206219
	807518	829230	114.108618	22.206267
5^	808504	821850	114.037037	22.215126
	808504	828602	114.102523	22.215169
6^	809490	822150	114.039938	22.224033
	809490	825352	114.070995	22.224056
7^#^	810499	822000	114.038474	22.233143
	810499	824613	114.063820	22.233163
8^#	811508	821123	113.936539	22.328966
	811508	824254	113.936486	22.357241
9^#	812516	821303	113.946320	22.330606
	812516	824254	113.946279	22.357255
10*	813525	820827	113.956112	22.326321
	813525	824657	113.956066	22.360908
11^#	814556	818853	113.966155	22.304858
	814556	820992	113.966125	22.327820
12	815542	818807	113.975726	22.308109
	815542	824882	113.975647	22.362962
13	816506	819480	113.985072	22.314192
	816506	824859	113.985005	22.362771
14	817537	820220	113.995070	22.320883
	817537	824613	113.995018	22.360556
15	818568	820735	114.005071	22.325550
	818568	824433	114.005030	22.358947
16	819532	821420	114.014420	22.331747
	819532	824209	114.014390	22.356933
17	820451	822125	114.023333	22.338117
	820451	823671	114.023317	22.352084
18	821504	822371	114.033556	22.340353
	821504	823761	114.033544	22.352903
19	822513	823268	114.043340	22.348458
	822513	824321	114.043331	22.357971
20	823477	823402	114.052695	22.349680
	823477	824613	114.052686	22.360610
21	805476	827081	113.877878	22.382668
	805476	830562	113.877811	22.414103
22	806464	824033	113.887520	22.355164
	806464	829598	113.887416	22.405423
23	814559	821739	113.966142	22.334574
	814559	824768	113.966101	22.361920
24^	805476	815900	113.979368	22.187721
	805476	819100	114.010398	22.187756

Remarks:

(a) * Due to the presence of deployed silt curtain systems at the site boundaries of the Contract, some of the transect lines shown in Figure 5.1 could not be fully surveyed during the regular survey. Transect 10 is reduced from 6.4km to approximately 3.6km in length due to the HKBCF construction site. Therefore the total transect length for both NEL and NWL combined is reduced to approximately 108km.

(b) # Coordinates for transect lines 1, 2, 7, 8, 9 and 11 have been updated in respect to the Proposal for Alteration of Transect Line for Dolphin Monitoring approved by EPD on 19 August 2015.

(c) ^ Due to marine works of the Expansion of Hong Kong International Airport into a Three-Runway System (3RS Project), the change of transect lines 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 and new transect line 24 were justified and verified by the ET Leader for Contract No. HY/2010/02 and the IEC respectively on 24 March 2017 and it was approved by EPD on 12 May 2017.

The survey team used standard line-transect methods (Buckland et al., 2001) to conduct the systematic vessel surveys, and followed the same technique of data collection that has been adopted over the last 22 years of marine mammal monitoring surveys in Hong Kong developed by HKCRP (see Hung, 2017, 2018). For each monitoring vessel survey, a 15-m inboard vessel with an open upper deck (about 4.5 m above water surface) was used to make observations from the flying bridge area.

Two experienced observers (a data recorder and a primary observer) made up the on-effort survey team, and the survey vessel transited different transect lines at a constant speed of 13-15 km per hour. The data recorder searched with unaided eyes and filled out the datasheets, while the primary observer searched for dolphins and porpoises continuously through 7 x 50 Fuinon marine binoculars.

Both observers searched the sea ahead of the vessel, between 270° and 90° (in relation to the bow, which is defined as 0°). One to two additional experienced observers were available on the boat to work in shift (i.e. rotate every 30 minutes) in order to minimize fatigue of the survey team members. All observers were experienced in small cetacean survey techniques and identifying local cetacean species.

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

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

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

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

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

5.2.2 Photo-identification Work

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

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

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

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

All photographs of each individual were then compiled and arranged in chronological order, with data including the date and location first identified (initial sighting), re-sightings, associated dolphins, distinctive features, and age classes entered into a computer database.

5.3 Action and Limit Levels for Dolphin Monitoring

The Action and Limit Levels for Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring are provided in Table 5.2 and Table 5.3, respectively.

Table 5.2: Action and Limit Levels for Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring - Approach to Define Action Level (AL) and Limit Level (LL)

	North Lantau Social Cluster
	NEL	NWL
Action Level	(STG < 70% of baseline) & (ANI < 70% of baseline)	(STG < 70% of baseline) & (ANI < 70% of baseline)
Limit Level	[(STG < 40% of baseline) & (ANI < 40% of baseline)] AND [(STG < 40% of baseline) & (ANI < 40% of baseline)]

Table 5.3: Derived Value of Action Level (AL) and Limit Level (LL) for Chinese White Dolphin Monitoring

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

The event and action plan is provided in Appendix D.

If exceedance(s) at these survey transect(s) is/are recorded by the ET of the Contract or referred by the other ET under the HZMB project to the Contract, the ET of the Contract will carry out an investigation and findings will be reported in the monthly EM&A Report.

5.4 Monitoring Schedule for the Reporting Period

Post-construction dolphin monitoring in accordance with Section 10.7 of the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF commenced in March 2019 and was conducted during the reporting month.

The schedule for dolphin monitoring for the reporting period is provided in Appendix I.

5.5 Monitoring Results

5.5.1 Vessel-based Line-transect Survey

Two sets of systematic line-transect vessel surveys were conducted under the HKBCF dolphin monitoring programme on 16, 18, 22 and 24 July 2019, to cover all transect lines in NWL and NEL survey areas twice. The survey routes of each survey day are presented in Figures 2 to 5 of Appendix L.

A total of 259.58 km of survey effort was collected, with 100% of the total survey effort being conducted under favourable weather conditions (i.e. Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with good visibility) during the reporting period’s surveys (Annex I of Appendix L).

Among the two areas, 94.18 km and 165.40 km of survey effort were conducted respectively. The total survey effort conducted on primary and secondary lines were 191.36 km and 68.22 km respectively (Annex I of Appendix L).

During the two sets of monitoring surveys in the reporting period, only two groups of three Chinese White Dolphins were sighted (Annex II of Appendix L). Both dolphin groups were sighted in NWL, while no dolphin was sighted at all in NEL. Only one of the two dolphin sightings was made on secondary line during on-effort search, and the other one was an off-effort sighting made after the on-effort search in NWL was completed on 24 July 2019. Neither group was associated with any operating fishing vessel (Annex II of Appendix L).

Distribution of the two dolphin sightings made in the reporting period is shown in Figure 6 of Appendix L. They were made near Black Point and at the southwestern corner of NWL survey area (i.e. between Shum Wat and Tai O) respectively (Figure 6 of Appendix L). Both sightings were located very far away from the HKBCF work site.

During the reporting period’s surveys, the encounter rates of Chinese White Dolphins deduced from the survey effort and on-effort sighting data made under favourable conditions (Beaufort 3 or below) are shown in Table 5.4 and Table 5.5.

Table 5.4: Dolphin encounter rates deduced from the two sets of HKBCF surveys (two surveys in each set) during the reporting period in Northeast (NEL) and Northwest Lantau (NWL)

		Encounter rate (STG)	Encounter rate (ANI)
		(no. of on-effort dolphin sightings per 100 km of survey effort)	(no. of dolphins from all on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort)
		Primary Lines Only	Primary Lines Only
NEL	Set 1: July 16^th / 18^th	0.0	0.0
NEL	Set 2: July 22^nd / 24^th	0.0	0.0
NWL	Set 1: July 16^th / 18^th	0.0	0.0
NWL	Set 2: July 22^nd / 24^th	0.0	0.0

Table 5.5: Overall dolphin encounter rates (sightings per 100 km of survey effort) from all four HKBCF surveys conducted during the reporting period on primary lines only as well as both primary lines and secondary lines in NEL and NWL

	Encounter rate (STG)		Encounter rate (ANI)
	(no. of on-effort dolphin sightings per 100 km of survey effort)		(no. of dolphins from all on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort)
	Primary Lines Only	Both Primary and Secondary Lines	Primary Lines Only	Both Primary and Secondary Lines
NEL	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0
NWL	0.0	0.6	0.0	1.2

The average group size of dolphins sighted during July’s monitoring surveys was only 1.5 individuals per group, as both dolphin groups were very small with only one and two animals respectively (Annex II of Appendix L).

5.5.2 Photo-identification Work

During the two sets of surveys conducted during the reporting period, only one known individual was identified from the photo-identification catalogue, which was re-sighted only once (Annex III and IV of Appendix L). The individual dolphin was not sighted with any young calf during her re-sighting.

6 Environmental Site and Audit

6.1 Site Inspection

Site Inspections were carried out on a weekly basis to monitor the implementation of proper environmental pollution control mitigation measures for the project. During the reporting period, site inspections were carried out on 5, 10, 17 and 22 July 2019.

When permanent soft landscaping works within the site boundaries of the Contract are commenced, construction phase landscape and visual mitigation measures would be implemented in accordance with the EP, EIA and EM&A Manual. Monitoring and audit of landscape and visual mitigation measures would be conducted bi-weekly in accordance with Section 14.2 of the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0). Permanent soft landscaping works within the Contract site had not commenced during the reporting period.

Particular observations during the site inspections and corrective actions undertaken by the Contractor are described below.

17 June 2019

a. General refuse was observed scattered on ground. Subsequently, while the concerned areas in last site inspection was cleared, general refuse was still observed on the ground in other area. Subsequently, the general refuse was cleared accordingly. The observation was closed on 10 July 2019.

5 July 2019

a. No observations were made.

10 July 2019

a. An oil container without drip tray was observed. Subsequently, the oil containers was removed from site. The observation was closed on 17 July 2019.

17 July 2019

a. The exposed work areas and haul roads were observed dry and dusty. Subsequently, water spraying was implemented to exposed works areas and haul roads for dust suppression. The observation was closed on 22 July 2019.

22 July 2019

a. Oil/chemical containers wre observed on ground without secondary containment. The Contractor should ensure provision of drip tray for all oil/chemical containers onsite. Follow-up action for the outstanding observation will be inspected during the upcoming site inspections and reported in the coming reporting period.

6.2 Landscape Establishment Monitoring

As coordinated between IEC and EPD, the monitoring reports for landscape establishment for Contract Nos. HY/2013/01, HY/2013/02, HY/2013/03 and HY/2014/05 were covered in this EM&A report.

During the reporting period, bi-monthly landscape establishment monitoring for Contract No. HY/2013/02 was conducted on 26 July 2019. The corresponding landscape monitoring report is presented in Appendix N.

6.3 Advice on the Solid and Liquid Waste Management Status

The Contractor registered as a chemical waste producer for the Contract. Sufficient numbers of receptacles were available for general refuse collection and sorting. As a practical means, the disposal operation is managed by a single HKBCF contractor who is also responsible for applying dumping permit and its subsequent extension applications from EPD. Contract No. HY/2013/03 has been assigned to coordinate and arrange for disposal of extracted marine sediment from this Contract.

There was no generation of excavated sediment for treatment during this reporting period. Any treatment of excavated marine sediment will be conducted using cement solidification/ stabilization (Cement S/S) techniques and the treated sediment will be reused onsite for either backfilling or landscaping (e.g. berm material).

The monthly summary of waste flow table is detailed in Appendix E.

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

6.3.1 Disposal of Marine Sediment Extracted from Bored Piling Works

6.3.1.1 Background

After the acceptance of the review of the approved Sediment Quality Report (SQR) for this Project under EPD letter dated 19 August 2015, an approval to dispose the marine sediment extracted from bored piling for this Project was then approved under memo from Secretary, Marine Fill Committee of CEDD dated 20 August 2015 for the disposal of marine sediment extracted from bored piling works. The disposal sites allocated to this Project are the Mud Pit CMP2 of the Confined Marine Sediment Disposal Facility to the South of The Brothers (or at the East of Sha Chau). As advised by CEDD in the memo dated 19 February 2016, from 00:00 on 22 March 2016 onward, the disposal space at CMP2 of the South of The Brothers is closed and all disposal of contaminated sediment is to be carried out at CMP Vd to the East of Sha Chau (ESC).

As Contract No. HY/2013/01 has commenced treatment of the extracted marine sediment, treatment will continue and the treated marine sediment will be re-used within the HKBCF Island. On the other hand, Contract Nos. HY/2013/02, HY/2013/03 and HY/2013/04 have not commenced the treatment of extracted marine sediment. Therefore, the marine sediment extracted from these three Contracts will be disposed to the allocated disposal sites directly without treatment. As a practical means, the disposal operation is managed by one contractor who is also responsible for applying dumping permit and its subsequent extension applications from EPD. Contract No. HY/2013/03 has been assigned to coordinate and arrange for disposal of extracted marine sediment from all three Contracts.

The SQR was further reviewed in mid-2016. EPD has no comment to extend the validity of the SQR to August 2017 under letter dated 18 August 2016.

Based on the actual piling operation, the estimated quantity of marine sediment to be extracted has been revised from 85,000 m³ to 126,000 m³(bulk volume). EPD has no comments on the request as in the letter dated 20 October 2016. The Secretary of Marine Fill Committee, CEDD approved the increasing quantity in the memo dated 10 November 2016.

During the course of reviewing the SQR, it was noted that the contamination level of the marine sediment extracted from the inner part of the HKBCF Island was not identified during the previous sampling and testing. As requested by EPD, sampling and testing are required. The Sediment Sampling and Testing Proposal (SSTP) for the inner area of the HKBCF Island was approved by EPD on 2 June 2016.

As in the agreed SSTP for the inner area of the HKBCF Island, samples were taken from the seventeen batches of stockpiled marine sediments and from five boreholes each in one of the five sampling grids. After conducting chemical tests on samples, six batches of stockpiled samples under Contract No. HY/2013/03 and all eight batches of stockpiled samples under Contract No. HY/20013/04 are classified as Category L sediment. The Secretary of Marine Fill Committee of CEDD allocated disposal sites under memo dated 24 October 2016 and dated 22 November 2016 for disposal of a total of 9,500 m³ in-situ volume of Category L sediment (using a bulk factor of 1.3). The Category L sediment was disposed in December 2016.

One sample from the batch of stockpiled marine sediment under Contract No. HY/2013/03 and samples from all five sampling grids had contamination levels exceeding the Lower Chemical Exceedance Levels (LCEL) and biological screenings were carried out. All samples passed the biological screenings and are classified as Category Mp sediment and to be disposed off site using Type II confined marine disposal method the same method used for marine sediment extracted from other part of the HKBCF Island.

6.3.1.2 Dumping Arrangements

The barge for disposal of marine sediment will morn at the temporary loading and unloading at the east shore of the HKBCF Island, which has been being used by reclamation contractor (Contract No. HY/2010/02) for reclamation activities. In terms of safety consideration, each dumping date will be allocated to one Contract. The quantity of marine sediment disposed on the date is from one Contract.

During dumping, each Contractor is responsible for transporting the marine sediment from his site area to the barge. The estimated quantity of marine sediment in each truck is confirmed by Resident Site Staff of each Contract. The trip tickets for transportation and disposal of marine sediment are collected and checked. Contract No. HY/2013/03 as the dumping permit holder is responsible for reporting to EPD the quantity disposed of as the condition stipulated in the dumping permit.

6.3.1.3 Reporting

AECOM has confirmed that the disposal of excavated marine sediments to allocated dumping site via Contract No. HY/2013/03 has been completed with the last batch disposal on 30 August 2017. The total quantities disposed are presented in the following table (Table 6.1):

Table 6.1: Summary of Marine Sediment disposed to Dumping Site via Contract No. HY/2013/03

	Type of Sediment and Quantity Disposed (m³)
	Cat. L (in Type I)	Type II
Total	3,570	39,814

Note: For monthly breakdown of these quantities, please refer to the waste flow table in Appendix E.

6.4 Environmental Licenses and Permits

The valid environmental licenses and permits during the reporting period are summarized in Appendix F.

6.5 Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures

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

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

Implementation status of the Regular Marine Travel Route Plan (RMTRP) was checked by ET. Training of marine travel route for marine vessel operator was given to relevant staff and relevant records were kept properly.

According to the Contractor of HY/2013/04, all marine-based segment deliveries were completed in January 2018 and no marine-based works were conducted under the contract during the reporting period. The localised silt curtains under this Contract were removed on 4 January 2019.

6.6 Summary of Exceedance of the Environmental Quality Performance Limit

Air Quality

No Action and Limit Level exceedances of 1-hour and 24-hour TSP level were recorded at AMS2, AMS3C and AMS7B during the reporting period.

Summary of Action and Limit Level exceedance of 1-hour TSP level and 24-hour TSP level at AMS6 shall be referred to the monthly EM&A report prepared by Contract No. HY/2011/03.

Noise

No Action and Limit Level exceedances were recorded at NMS2 and NMS3C during the reporting period.

Water Quality

Chinese White Dolphin

Post-construction dolphin monitoring in accordance with Section 10.7 of the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0) commenced in March 2019.

During the reporting period, dolphin surveys were conducted on 16, 18, 22 and 24 July 2019. A total of 259.58 km of survey effort was collected, with 100% of the total survey effort being conducted under favourable weather conditions. Only two groups of three Chinese White Dolphins were sighted (Annex II of Appendix L). Both dolphin groups were sighted in NWL, while no dolphin was sighted at all in NEL. Only one of the two dolphin sightings was made on secondary line during on-effort search, and the other one was an off-effort sighting made after the on-effort search in NWL was completed on 24 July.

6.7 Summary of Complaints, Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecution

Complaints

There were no complaints received in relation to the environmental impact during the reporting period.

Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecution

No notification of summons or prosecutions was received during the reporting period.

Statistics on notifications of summons and successful prosecutions are summarized in Appendix H.

7 Future Key Issues

7.1 Construction Programme for the Coming Months

As informed by the Contractor, the major construction activities for August 2019 are summarized in Table 7.1.

Table 7.1: Construction Activities for August 2019

Site Area	Description of Activities
HKBCF	● Erection of sign gantries (land-based) ● Construction of parapets for bridge structures (land-based) ● Construction of Retaining Wall RW16N and RW16S (land-based) ● Construction of Bridge Deck D16 in-situ deck (land-based) ● Construction of utilities cross-over frame under Bridge D9c (land-based) ● Backfilling of retaining walls and formation of fill slopes and road embankment (land-based) ● Drainage works and watermains laying (land-based) ● Roadworks and road furniture (land-based) ● Maintenance of temporary traffic arrangements (TTA) associated with the commissioning of HKBCF and Tuen Mun – Chek Lap Kok Link Southern Connection (TM-CLKLSC) (land-based)

Site Area

Description of Activities

HKBCF

● Erection of sign gantries (land-based)

● Construction of parapets for bridge structures (land-based)

● Construction of Retaining Wall RW16N and RW16S (land-based)

● Construction of Bridge Deck D16 in-situ deck (land-based)

● Construction of utilities cross-over frame under Bridge D9c (land-based)

● Backfilling of retaining walls and formation of fill slopes and road embankment (land-based)

● Drainage works and watermains laying (land-based)

● Roadworks and road furniture (land-based)

● Maintenance of temporary traffic arrangements (TTA) associated with the commissioning of HKBCF and Tuen Mun – Chek Lap Kok Link Southern Connection (TM-CLKLSC) (land-based)

7.2 Environmental Site Inspection and Monitoring Schedule for the Coming Month

The tentative schedule for weekly site inspection and monitoring for air quality, noise, water quality and Chinese White Dolphin for August 2019 is provided in Appendix I.

8 Conclusions

8.1 Conclusions

General

Commencement of the Contract took place on 13 March 2015 and the construction works of the Contract commenced on 13 July 2015.

The air quality, noise, water quality and dolphin monitoring works under Contract No. HY/2013/01 were suspended on 1 October 2018. From 1 October 2018 onwards, the ET of Contract No. HY/2013/04 has continued the same implementation of air quality, noise and water quality environmental monitoring (including air quality and noise monitoring already under its implementation) while the ET of Contract No. HY/2011/03 has continued the same implementation of dolphin monitoring, with the reporting of all environmental monitoring continued by the ET of Contract No. HY/2013/04.

Moreover, post-construction dolphin monitoring in accordance with Section 10.7 of the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0) commenced in March 2019 and was conducted during the reporting period.

Landscape Checklist for HyD Contract No. HY/2013/01, HY/2013/02, HY/2013/03 and HY/2014/05 are shown in Appendix N.

Breaches of Action and Limit Levels

Air Quality

No Action and Limit Level exceedances of 1-hour and 24-hour TSP level were recorded at AMS2, AMS3C and AMS7B during the reporting period.

Summary of Action and Limit Level exceedance of 1-hour TSP level and 24-hour TSP level at AMS6 shall be referred to the monthly EM&A report prepared by Contract No. HY/2011/03.

Noise

No Action and Limit Level exceedances were recorded at the NMS2 and NMS3C during the reporting period.

Water Quality

Chinese White Dolphin

Post-construction dolphin monitoring in accordance with Section 10.7 of the Updated EM&A Manual for HKBCF (Version 1.0) commenced in March 2019.

Environmental Site Inspections

Environmental site inspections were carried out on 5, 10, 17 and 22 July 2019. Recommendations on remedial actions were given to the Contractor for the deficiencies identified during the site inspections.

Complaints

There were no complaints received in relation to the environmental impact during the reporting period.

Notifications of Summons and Successful Prosecutions

There were no notifications of summons or prosecutions received during the reporting period.