19. Conclusion

19.1 General

19.1.1.1 In accordance with the EIA Study brief (No. ESB-250/2012) issued under the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Ordinance for this Project, an assessment of the potential environmental impacts associated with construction and operation of the third runway has been conducted. Environmental issues covered in this EIA include:

¡ Air quality impact

¡ Hazard to human life

¡ Noise impact

¡ Water quality impact

¡ Sewerage and sewage treatment implications

¡ Waste management implications

¡ Land contamination

¡ Terrestrial ecology

¡ Marine ecology

¡ Fisheries impact

¡ Landscape and visual impact

¡ Cultural heritage

¡ Health impact

19.1.1.2 The findings of this EIA study has determined the likely nature and extent of environmental impacts and identified environmental control measures for incorporation into the planning and design of the proposed third runway to ensure compliance with environmental legislation and standards during construction and operation phase. The implementation schedule for the recommended mitigation measures are presented in Chapter 20.

19.2 Summary of Key Environmental Outcomes

19.2.2 Minimisation of Environmental Impacts

Environmentally Friendly Options and Designs Considered and Incorporated

19.2.2.1 The major environmentally friendly options and designs considered and incorporated in the third runway project which would minimise environmental impacts due to the project include the following:

Minimising Land Formation Footprint

19.2.2.2 After detailed evaluation of a range of airport layout options, a preferred option has been selected to achieve the best balance among various key environmental factors, operational efficiency considerations and engineering constraints. Nevertheless, further enhancements have been made to the preferred option, which include, among others, substantial reduction of the land formation area from approximately 827 ha to approximately 650 ha with refinements to the land formation edges. A key driver for reducing the land formation footprint to a bare minimum was to minimise associated impacts on marine habitat and its marine life, including Chinese White Dolphins.

Avoiding / Minimising Construction Phase Impacts

19.2.2.3 Non-dredge ground improvement methods (e.g., deep cement mixing) will be used for land formation in order to completely avoid bulk removal and disposal of any dredged materials as well as to minimise suspended solids and contaminants release. The use of this method will substantially reduce the potential impacts to surrounding marine water quality and marine ecology, including Chinese White Dolphins.

19.2.2.4 Horizontal directional drill (HDD) method will be deployed for diversion of the submarine fuel pipelines from the airport island to Sha Chau to avoid dredging of any seabed, thereby eliminating any impacts on marine water quality and marine ecology including impacts on the Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park. In addition, the daylighting location of the fuel pipelines (i.e. the point where the pipelines surface at ground level) on the Sheung Sha Chau Island has been carefully selected to avoid or minimise disturbance to the breeding birds on the island.

19.2.2.5 Water jetting method will be adopted to lay new submarine 11 kV cables for connection to the existing cables at over 500 m from the boundary of the Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park. The use of this method will minimise the generation and disposal of marine sediment and avoid disturbance to the seabed inside the Marine Park.

19.2.2.6 During the design and construction planning process, priority was given to maximise, as far as practicable, the reuse of inert construction and demolition (C&D) materials generated by the project, including rock armour from removal of the existing northern seawall, for the land formation works. This will minimise off-site delivery of the surplus inert C&D materials and the associated environmental impacts. Optimising the use of C&D materials on site will be balanced with maximising, as far as practicable, the use of public fill materials from the government’s public fill reception facilities (unwanted fill materials from other projects in Hong Kong) for the land formation works of the project.

19.2.2.7 All marine sediments that would be excavated as a result of the various construction works on the expanded airport island will be treated and reused on-site as backfilling materials for the project, in accordance with the relevant requirements. This approach avoids the need for off-site disposal, which could result in impacts on the marine environment

Minimising Airport-operation related Emissions and the associated Potential Health Impact

19.2.2.8 AAHK is committed to reducing the potential air quality and health impacts associated with airport activities and its associated operations. As such, a number of initiatives have already been in place to minimise emission of air pollutants. These initiatives include the provision of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) fueling point for airside vehicles and ground service equipment; enforcing the use of fuel-efficient airside vehicles through mandatory requirement in licensing process; provision of cleanest diesel and gasoline at the airfield; requiring all AAHK’s diesel vehicles to use biodiesel (B5); promoting increased use of electric vehicles and electric ground service equipment at HKIA by provision of charging infrastructure; and banning all idling engines on the airside with the exemption of certain vehicles and equipment due to safety and operational considerations.

19.2.2.9 Furthermore, AAHK is increasingly prohibiting aircraft with idling engines at parking stands and promoting the use of fixed ground power and pre-conditioned air systems. AAHK is also in the process of replacing the entire vehicle fleet with electric or fuel-efficient / hybrid vehicles, with the aim to replace all saloon vehicles on the airside by electric vehicles by 2017

Minimising Aircraft Noise and its Potential Health Impact

19.2.2.10 In order to minimise aircraft noise and the associated health impact, the future standard operational procedures of the three-runway system would be incorporated with a number of aircraft noise mitigation measures, which include:

¡ Assigning the existing South Runway as standby mode wherever practicable during the night-time period (2300 to 0659) to minimise aircraft noise impact and its potential health impacts on the residents in North Lantau area including Tung Chung;

¡ Requiring departures to take the southbound route via West Lamma Channel during east flow at night from 2300 to 0659, which is an arrangement that is consistent with the existing requirement in the operation of the two-runway system at night, subject to acceptable operational and safety consideration;

¡ Relocating arrivals to runways for west flow direction (i.e., 25 Runways) via new arrival Track 6 from straight-in Tracks 4 and 5; and

¡ When wind directions allow without compromising air traffic safety, implementing a preferential runway use programme such that west flow is used when departures dominate while east flow is used when arrivals dominate during night-time.

Mitigation of Any Unavoidable Impacts

19.2.2.11 While environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of the project will be minimised by implementing the aforementioned key environmental conservation initiatives, the project will inevitably give rise to some impacts on the environment. Therefore, detailed and comprehensive assessment of the environmental impacts has been carried out and, where necessary, appropriate mitigation measures have been established to further alleviate the impacts. Highlights of the impact assessment findings are presented in the following sections. Details of specific mitigation measures for identified issues are included in the relevant sections of the main EIA report.

Environmental Benefits of Protection / Mitigation Measures Recommended

19.2.2.12 In addition, mitigation measures have been recommended to further reduce the environmental impacts due to construction and operation of the project. Key recommended mitigation measures and their associated benefits include:

Air Quality

¡ Implementing relevant control measures as required in the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation to minimise dust generation

¡ Applying frequent water spraying of 12 times a day or once every two hours for 24-hour working and covering 80% of the stockpiling area with impervious sheets for effective dust control

¡ Adopt best practices as stipulated in the Guidance Note on the Best Practicable Means for Cement Works (Concrete Batching Plant), Tar and Bitumen Works (Asphaltic Concrete Plant) and Mineral Works (Stone Crushing Plants) for emission control

Hazard to Human Life

¡ Implementing appropriate marine traffic management system to minimise risk of collision

¡ Pigging should be used to check the integrity of the new submarine pipeline during testing and commission to ensure the new pipeline is fit for operation

¡ Regular checking of whether any subsidence occurs along the underground pipeline to minimise the risk of leakage

¡ Improvement audit to reinforce existing refuelling practices and to achieve better compliance.

Noise

¡ In addition to the aircraft noise mitigation measures that will be implemented as standard HKIA operating procedures of the 3RS as described in Section 19.2.2.10, consideration of land-use planning such as imposing land use constraints for planned land use to avoid affecting new NSRs

¡ Providing a noise enclosure for the engine run-up facility to reduce noise emission

¡ Selection of quieter plant and use of noise barriers / acoustic shed / noise insulating fabric during construction phase to reduce construction noise impacts to nearby NSRs

Water Quality

¡ Limiting construction activities at Sha Chau and providing containment around the daylighting point to minimise runoff / leakage

¡ Implementing a ‘zero discharge’policy for activities at Sha Chau to avoid polluting the marine environment

¡ Use of closed grabs for field joint excavation for diversion of submarine 11 kV cables and construction of runway approach lights / Hong Kong International Airport Approach Area marker beacons to minimise SS and contaminant release

¡ Implementing the mitigation measures recommended for control of suspended solids release

¡ Implementing site practices as outlined in ProPECC Note PN 1/94 to control and minimise site runoff and drainage

¡ Install and maintain roadside gullies and oil / grease interceptors for removal of pollutants from stormwater

¡ Implementing a ‘spill trap containment system’ and an emergency spill response plan for minimising the potential water quality impacts due to spillage events

Sewage

¡ Upgrade the existing gravity sewer, the Tung Chung Sewage Pumping Station and the Shiu Ho Wan Sewage Treatment Works to ensure proper handling of sewage flow from the expanded airport under the worst case scenario

Waste Management

¡ Good waste management and control practices to avoid generation of excessive amount of waste materials

¡ Good site practices to alleviate impacts related to waste management such as dust, odour and noise

¡ Implementation of a trip-ticket system promulgated under DEVB TC(W) No. 6/2010 to monitor off-site delivery of surplus inert C&D materials and to control fly tipping

¡ Maximise the use of suitable fill materials available from other concurrent projects and the Government’s PFRF for the land formation works

¡ Handling of chemical wastes in accordance with the Code of Practice on the Packaging, Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes, and disposal of chemical wastes at licensed chemical waste recycling/ treatment facilities

¡ Proper design of the artificial seawall of the expanded airport island to achieve a shoreline without any sharp turns or abrupt indentation where floating refuse would easily trapped or accumulated

¡ Employ reputable licensed waste collectors for disposal of general refuse and floating refuse

Terrestrial Ecology

¡ The daylighting location of the diverted submarine pipelines to be positioned away from the boundary of the egretry on Sheung Sha Chau Island in order to avoid direct impact to the egretry

¡ Timing the pipeline connection works in the vicinity of the egretry outside the ardeid’s breeding season (April - July)

Marine Ecology

¡ Strict enforcement of no-dumping policy and good site practices during construction phase

¡ Pre-construction dive survey to check the status of coral to be affected by the project and review the feasibility in translocating the corals

¡ Deployment of dolphin exclusion zone of 250 m in radius during marine works at both daytime and night-time to minimise impacts to dolphins during construction phase

¡ Noisy construction equipment mounted on steel barges to be acoustically-decoupled to reduce its potential noise impacts on cetaceans

¡ Avoiding peak calving seasons of CWD for bored piling works

¡ Implementing construction vessel speed limits as well as speed restriction and route diversion for the SkyPier high speed ferries to alleviate the potential impacts on CWD

¡ Establishment of new marine park of approximately 2,400 ha linking the existing / planned marine parks and the extended HKIAAA to alleviate the potential impacts on CWD

Fisheries

¡ Establishment of new marine park of approximately 2,400 ha linking the existing / planned marine parks and the extended HKIAAA

Landscape and Visual

¡ Minimising construction areas, construction period and construction traffic as far as practical

¡ Erection of decorative mesh screens or construction hoardings around works areas in visually unobtrusive colours to minimise visual intrusion

¡ Sensitive landscape design of land formation edge, as well as buildings and structures

¡ Implement greening measures, including vertical greening, green roofs, road verge planting and peripheral screen planting where practical to improve the landscape and visual aesthetics

¡ Compensatory Tree Planting for all felled trees to replace affected trees

¡ Sensitive design of streetscapes (e.g. paving, signage, street furniture, lighting etc.) and viaduct structures to minimise visual intrusion

19.2.3 Estimated Population Protected from Various Environmental Impacts and Environmentally Sensitive Areas Protected

19.2.3.1 Sensitive areas in the vicinity of the project including Sha Lo Wan, Tung Chung, Ma Wan, San Tau, Sham Wat, Siu Ho Wan and Tap Shek Kok area as well as the Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park and the Sha Chau egretry on Sheung Sha Chau Island. Avoidance and / or minimisation of environmental impacts due to the construction and operation of the project has been a key consideration during the early stages of the project.

19.2.3.2 As a result of adoption of the environmentally friendly options and designs, the following populations and environmentally sensitive areas have been protected:

¡ Adverse air quality and noise impacts on air and noise sensitive receivers within the assessment areas have been minimised

¡ Approximately 270,000 residential population within the operational air quality assessment area will not be affected

¡ About 370 village houses / licensed structures along north Lantau shoreline have been protected by provision of indirect noise mitigation measures

¡ An overall reduction in future population that would be subject to annoyance and self-reported sleep disturbance (with about 10% and 50% reduction of population affected respectively), with implementation of the third runway in the assessment area

¡ 1,200 ha of marine environment within the Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park

¡ Breeding population of ardeids at the Sha Chau egretry

¡ 18 out of 19 nos. of LRs and 10 out of 11 nos. of LCAs within the defined landscape study area; and 77 out of 79 nos. of potential existing and planned VSRs within the visual envelope of the project and associated works.

19.2.4 Key Environmental Problems Avoided

19.2.4.1 A number of environmental assessments were conducted at the early stages of the project with the aim of identifying environmental impacts and alternative strategies in advance. As such, the following environmental problems have been avoided or minimised:

¡ Use of non-dredge ground improvement methods for land formation will completely avoid bulk removal and disposal of any dredged materials and minimise SS and contaminants release into marine environment, and hence minimised impacts on marine ecology and fisheries.

¡ Use of horizontal directional drill (HDD) method for submarine fuel pipelines diversion will completely avoid dredging of seabed, thereby eliminating any impacts on marine water quality and marine ecology including impacts on the Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park.

¡ Disturbance to the breeding ardeids in the Sha Chau egretry will be minimised by proper selection of the daylighting location of fuel pipeline.

¡ Use of water jetting method to lay the new 11 kV cable for connection to the existing cable at over 500 m from the boundary of the Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park will minimise generation and disposal of any marine sediment and avoid disturbing the seabed inside the Marine Park

¡ Reuse of inert construction and demolition (C&D) materials as far as practicable to minimise off-site delivery of surplus inert C&D materials and the associated environmental impacts.

¡ Excavated marine sediments will be treated and reused on-site as backfilling materials, thereby avoiding the need for off-site disposal.

¡ Aircraft emissions and aircraft noise will be minimised by improved airport operational efficiency; and proper management including control on use of runways and flight tracks; and prohibiting aircraft with idling engines at parking stands.

¡ Air quality and health impacts will be minimised by enforcing the use of fuel-efficient airside vehicles; provision of cleanest diesel and gasoline at the airfield; and increase use of electric vehicles and etc.

¡ Impacts on the adjacent landscape including LRs, LCAs and VSRs will be minimised by appropriate landscape and visual appearance designs.

19.2.5 Compensation Areas Included

19.2.5.1 Designation of a new marine park (about 2,400 ha in area) connecting the existing Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park, the planned Brothers Island Marine Park and the planned and existing HKIAAA has been proposed to compensate for habitat loss for marine ecology including CWD and fisheries.

19.2.5.2 Trees are expected to be felled or transplanted due to the third runway project. The landscape impact assessment has proposed compensatory tree planting. As the project is expected to transplant or fell trees, compensation within the project site boundary will be undertaken.

19.2.5.3 The conclusions of individual technical assessments are presented in Sections 19.3 to 19.15.

19.3 Air Quality Impact

19.3.1 Construction Phase

19.3.1.1 With implementation of the recommended mitigation measures as well as the relevant control requirements as stipulated in the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation, EPD’s Guidance Note on the Best Practicable Means for Cement Works (Concrete Batching Plant) BPM 3/2(93), Guidance Note on the Best Practicable Means for Tar and Bitumen Works (Asphaltic Concrete Plant) BPM 15 (94) and Guidance Note on the Best Practicable Means for Mineral Works (Stone Crushing Plants) BPM 11/1 (95), it has been assessed that the hourly TSP criterion would be complied with at all ASRs, and compliance with the AQOs for daily RSP, daily FSP, annual RSP and annual FSP would be achieved at all ASRs.

19.3.1.2 With the recommended mitigation measures, no adverse residual TSP, RSP or FSP impacts are anticipated at all ASRs during the construction phase of the project.

19.3.1.3 During the proposed DCM process as part of the ground improvement works for the land formation, cement powder will be transferred from the supporting vessel to DCM barges through piping in closed loop or a totally enclosed manner. There will be no open storage of cement on the DCM barges or the supporting vessels. Hence, no adverse residual dust impacts due to cement transfer or storage are anticipated.

19.3.1.4 There would be potential emission of bitumen fumes from the proposed asphalt batching plants at the airport expansion area. Given their large separation distances from ASRs (at least 3.1 km from the nearest ASR) and with implementation of the various emission control measures as given in the EPD’s Guidance Note on the Best Practicable Means for Tar and Bitumen Works (Asphaltic Concrete Plant) BPM 15 (94), adverse residual air quality impacts due to the bitumen fume emission are not anticipated.

19.3.2 Operation Phase

19.3.2.1 The operational air quality assessment has determined the worst year for LTO emission, updated the emission inventory for 2RS (i.e. without project scenario) and 3RS scenarios at the worst year with respect to the forecast activities and technology advancement, assessed the cumulative air quality impact for 3RS and its incremental change with regard to the 2RS scenario and considered a number of initiatives aimed at further reducing air emissions from airport activities and operations.

19.3.2.2 The emission inventories of NO_x, RSP, FSP, SO₂, and CO in the highest aircraft emission year (i.e. Year 2031) from different airport and associated facilities operations have been established. The worst assessment year was determined in Year 2031 under the 3RS scenario. Table 19.1 shows a comparison of the key pollutants emission inventory in the Year 2011 scenario, Year 2031 2RS scenario and Year 2031 3RS scenario.

Table 19.1: Emission Inventory for 2011 scenario, 2031 (3RS) scenario and 2031 (2RS) scenario

Year	Total Annual Emission (kg)
Year	NOx	RSP	FSP
2011	~ 7,500,000	~ 220,000	~ 150,000
2031 (3RS)	~ 9,500,000	~ 220,000	~ 91,000
2031 (2RS)	~ 6,700,000	~ 163,000	~ 67,000

Note [1]: Emission inventory based on Table 5.3.59 and Appendix 5.3.19-1

19.3.2.3 It can be noted from the comparison of the emissions inventory presented above that while the number of ATM that may be served at HKIA will be greatly increased (from the existing 970 ATM on the busy day in year 2011 to 1,787 ATM in year 2031) in the presence of the third runway, the associated increase in NO_xemission would be less significant (around 30 %) considering the anticipated technology advancement. Besides, it is anticipated that there would not be any significant change in RSP emissions, and FSP emissions would also be reduced for the same reason of technology advancement and the key factors include the following:

¡ Continuous improvement in engine technology to fulfil ICAO aviation emission standard;

¡ Improvement in fuel efficiency;

¡ Banning the use of APU at the stands; and

¡ Adoption of the latest international airside and landside vehicular emission standard.

19.3.2.4 Both the 3RS and 2RS (i.e. without project) scenarios were simulated. A model validation against year 2011 monitoring data at PH5 and TC monitoring station was conducted and the results showed that the current modelling approach is conservative.

19.3.2.5 The model results for Year 2031 3RS scenario indicate that cumulative NO₂, RSP, FSP SO₂, and CO levels (i.e. airport related emission, proximity infrastructure emission and regional emission) comply with the AQOs at all ASRs. On comparing the annual pollutant levels of 3RS scenario with those of the 2RS scenario (i.e., without project case), the increase in annual NO₂, RSP and FSP are less than 1mg/m³, 0.2 mg/m³ and 0.1 mg/m³ respectively, indicating relatively insignificant changes.

19.3.2.6 With respect to the incremental changes in the annual concentration of NO₂ in Sha Lo Wan (i.e., 3RS – 2RS), which is downwind of the airport (the prevailing wind at the airport is easterly), a decrease in concentration is predicted. This suggests that the 3RS will bring environmental benefit to the receivers at Sha Lo Wan:

¡ Shifting of dominant aircraft departure from the South Runway (2RS scenario) to the Centre Runway (3RS scenario); and

¡ Assigning the existing South Runway as standby mode wherever practicable during the night-time period between 2300 and 0659.

19.3.2.7 NO_x is the key emission pollutant for airport. The emission sources breakdown for the cumulative NO₂ impact at the key sensitive area under the 3RS scenario is shown in Table 19.2. The dominant emission sources are from the ambient emission, which contributes in most cases more than 60% of the total concentration. Except for Sha Lo Wan, this is followed by proximity infrastructure emission (10 – 30%) and airport emission (< 10%).

Table19.2: Concentration Breakdown for the Cumulative NO₂ Impact at the Key Sensitive Area under the 3RS scenario

Area	ASR	Airport Related Emission (mg/m3)	Proximity Infrastructure Emission (mg/m3)	Ambient (mg/m3)	Cumulative Impact (mg/m3)
Tung Chung	TC-22	2	9	22	33
Tung Chung West	TC-P7	2	6	22	30
Tung Chung East	TC-P12	2	4	22	28
Sha Lo Wan	SLW-1	12	4	20	36
Tuen Mun^[1]	TM-10	2 [1]	9	27	38

Note:

[1] Airport related emission is included in ambient in PATH model for Tuen Mun area.

19.3.2.8 AAHK has been implementing a number of measures and initiatives aimed at further reduction in air emissions from airport activities and operations and air quality will remain a key focus of AAHK’s rolling environmental plan, including:

¡ Banned all idling vehicle engines on the airside since 2008, except for certain vehicles that are exempted (This measure has already been incorporated in the model for 2031 3RS scenario simulation)

¡ Banning the use of APU for all aircraft at frontal stands by end 2014 (This measure has already been incorporated in the model for 2031 3RS scenario simulation)

¡ Requiring all saloon vehicles as electric vehicles by end 2017 (This measure has already been incorporated in the model for 2031 3RS scenario simulation)

¡ Increasing charging stations for EVs and electric GSE to a total of 290 by end 2018

¡ Conducting review on existing GSE emission performance and explore measures to further control air emissions

¡ Exploring with franchisees feasibility of expediting replacement of old airside vehicles and GSE with cleaner ones during tender or renewal of contracts

¡ Requiring all new airside vehicles to be fuel-efficient and making it a prerequisite for the licensing process;

¡ Providing the cleanest diesel and gasoline at the airfield;

¡ Requiring all of the AAHK’s diesel vehicles to use biodiesel (B5);

¡ Promoting increased use of electric vehicles and electric ground service equipment at HKIA by provision of charging infrastructure; and

¡ Providing a liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) fuelling point for airside vehicles and ground service equipment.

19.3.2.9 In addition to continuous outdoor air quality monitoring, AAHK also monitors the indoor air quality to maintain a good indoor air quality environment for the passengers and staff. Terminal 1, Terminal 2, SkyPier and North Satellite Concourse have already received “Good Class” Indoor Air Quality Certification from the “IAQ Certification Scheme for Offices and Public Places” of EPD.

19.3.2.10 With the implementation of these measures by AAHK in the existing and future operation of HKIA, air emissions associated with the operation of the 3RS will be further reduced.

19.4 Hazard to Human Life

19.4.1.1 A quantitative risk assessment has been conducted to cover the hazardous provisions / operations under the scope of the 3RS project as required by the EIA Study Brief.

19.4.1.2 According to the results, the individual risk is estimated to be 1E-8/yr during construction phase, 1E-7/yr for aviation fuel hydrant system and 1E-6/yr for airside vehicle filling station during operation phase. The offsite individual risks are below the 1E-5/yr criterion.

19.4.1.3 For societal risk, the risk level for construction phase is within the Acceptable region and it is dominated by the potential tunnel construction impact to the existing submarine pipeline and underground pipeline in the T1 area. For operation phase, the total risk level is within ALARP region, which is dominated by the risk from the hydrant pit valve operation.

19.4.1.4 Potential risk mitigations for the construction and operation phase have been identified in the HAZID workshop and they will be implemented in the project. Several additional cost effective mitigation measures have been identified to lower the risk of the aircraft refuelling operation. Hence, the risk is considered As Low As Reasonably Practicable and comply with the Risk Guidelines.

19.5 Noise Impact

19.5.1 Aircraft Noise

19.5.1.1 Aircraft noise from the Project was evaluated by using the FAA’s Integrated Noise Model (INM) and taking into account airport operational data, assumptions and design measures in the modelling for three scenarios, namely Worst Operation Mode, Interim Phase and Design Capacity, as well as for the Prevailing Aircraft Noise Environment.

19.5.1.2 By introducing the use of a number of aircraft noise mitigation measures as part of the future standard operational procedures for the 3RS, which include putting the existing south Runway on standby where possible at night; requiring departures to take the southbound route via West Lamma Channel during east flow at night, subject to acceptable operational and safety consideration; relocating arrivals to the 25 runways at night from the straight-in tracks to the new arrival RNP Track 6 for preferential use; and implementing a preferential runway use programme when wind conditions allow such that west flow is used when departures dominate while east flow is used when arrivals dominate during night-time, it is expected that aircraft noise impact would be improved in general, especially along North Lantau shorelines. However, in view of geographical location with the airport, it is unavoidable that certain NSRs would still be situated within the NEF 25 contour line. Nevertheless, with the introduction of additional direct mitigation measures through consideration of aircraft noise in the design of the Master Layout Plan for the planned Comprehensive Development Area site in Lok On Pai, and given that village houses in and around Sha Lo Wan and along the North Lantau shorelines will be offered the provision of noise insulation and air-conditioning before the operation of the third runway, no residual aircraft noise impact is identified to be associated with the operation of the project. For future village houses, they should be planned in accordance with the prevailing government policy and guidelines.

19.5.2 Fixed Noise Sources

19.5.2.1 Noise impact from planned fixed plant could be effectively mitigated by implementing noise control measure at source during the detailed design stage. With the adoption of the proposed maximum permissible SWLs for the proposed fixed plant as well as the proposed mitigation measures for the operation of aircraft engine run-up facilities, the impact noise levels at all representative NSRs complies with the relevant noise criteria for the daytime/evening and night-time periods. Therefore, adverse fixed plant noise impact to the existing / planned NSRs is not anticipated.

19.5.3 Construction Noise

19.5.3.1 Assessments have been based on the latest information obtained, with the implementation of the mitigation measures in form of quiet plant, movable noise barrier and enclosure, the construction noise levels at all NSRs are predicted to comply with the noise standards stipulated in the EIAO-TM. Adverse residual construction noise impacts are therefore not anticipated in this project.

19.5.4 Road Traffic Noise

19.5.4.1 As the NSRs are all found to be located beyond the 300 m assessment area, adverse road traffic noise impact from the proposed road alignments is not anticipated.

19.5.5 Marine Traffic Noise

19.5.5.1 As the NSR is found to be located beyond the 1350 m assessment area and more than 1,700 m from the manoeuvring route, adverse marine traffic noise impact is not anticipated.

19.6 Water Quality Impact

19.6.1 Construction Phase

19.6.1.1 Quantitative assessment of water quality impacts associated with SS release during construction of the project has been undertaken. The findings have shown that with the implementation of mitigation measures, there will be no exceedance of the SS criteria at any WSR due to project activities. However, when combined with the assumptions of SS release from concurrent projects, cumulative exceedance is predicted at a few WSRs. Nevertheless, the findings show that the cumulative exceedances are primarily due to the very conservative assumptions for concurrent projects rather than due to the contributions from this project. Therefore, adverse residual water quality impacts due to the project are not anticipated.

19.6.1.2 Based on the findings of the quantitative assessments for dissolved oxygen, nutrients and contaminant, no adverse water quality impacts associated with the submarine 11 kV cable diversion, ground improvement via DCM and surcharge of the land formation are anticipated, hence no specific mitigation measures for dissolved oxygen, nutrients and contaminant release are required.

19.6.1.3 Other specific construction activities including diversion of the submarine aviation fuel pipelines, construction of stormwater outfalls, piling for the new runway approach lights and HKIAAA marker beacons, as well as general construction site drainage and sewage effluent from the construction workforce are not anticipated to result in adverse water quality impacts with the implementation of mitigation measures.

19.6.2 Operation Phase

19.6.2.1 Quantitative assessment of water quality impacts associated with operation of the project has been undertaken. The findings show that despite minor exceedances in SS, TIN and NH₃ were predicted at some WSRs, these were all identified as not attributed to the project. Therefore, implementation of the project will not result in significant changes to the water quality of the study area, and thus adverse water quality impacts as a result of implementation of the project are not predicted.

19.6.2.2 Other operation phase activities including sewage discharge, reuse of treated greywater and accidental fuel spillage are not anticipated to result in significant water quality impacts with the proposed design / precautionary measures in place. Based on the sedimentation results, maintenance dredging of the navigable waters north of HKIA is not required due to implementation of the project.

19.7 Sewerage and Sewage Treatment Implications

19.7.1.1 Under the worst case scenario, the project will generate a total sewage flow of 43,500 m³/day during the ultimate design scenario year of 2038 (i.e., 15 years after the planned commencement of operation of the 3RS in 2023). On this basis, the impacts arising from the project on the existing sewerage and sewage treatment system have been assessed.

19.7.1.2 The planned sewerage system will be designed in accordance with all the relevant standards and guidelines published by DSD. The planned and existing sewerage network are maintained and operated by AAHK in accordance with the Sewerage Manual published by DSD. In addition to continuing the odour control arrangements currently undertaken by AAHK, maintaining the design maximum retention time of the planned pumping station to not more than 2 hours, monitoring the hydrogen sulphide (H₂S) level once the 3RS is in operation and adoption of active septicity management measures that can effectively contain any future septicity problems will be included in the design for the planned 3RS sewerage system. With the inclusion of active septicity management measures as part of the design, maintenance and operation of the planned sewerage system, no adverse impacts in respect of septicity and odour from the HKIA new sewerage system are anticipated.

19.7.1.3 According to the hydraulic assessment results, the existing gravity sewers from the airport discharge manhole to TCSPS would reach full capacity by 2027. AAHK therefore proposed to construct a new gravity sewer with a diameter of 1,200 mm adjacent to the existing gravity sewer (1,050 mm in diameter) and then to divert the sewage flow arising from the airport and other sub-catchment in Tung Chung to the new gravity sewer. AAHK will consider to study the feasibility to keep the proposed abandoned sewer (i.e., the existing gravity sewer of 1,050 mm in diameter) in place as a spare sewer with an overflow system for the emergency discharge subject to future deign of the new gravity sewer. This sewer upgrading work will be able to provide sufficient design capacity in the sewer in order to deliver the sewage arising from the project to the TCSPS. The sewer upgrading work shall be completed by 2026 (allowing a buffer period of about one year before the full capacity is reached), with the planning work to commence in 2022 (assuming one year for planning plus three years for design and construction).

19.7.1.4 While AAHK undertakes to implement and complete the mitigation works for the affected gravity sewers by 2026, the discharge of additional sewage will start upon commissioning of the project and the sewage build up may be at a more rapid rate than that predicted. Therefore, it is recommended that AAHK should monitor the sewage flow build-up as a part of the EM&A for the project and start planning construction of the upgrading works in 2022 or when the sewage flow in the affected gravity sewer exceeds 80% of the design capacity of the sewer, whichever is earlier, so as to ensure timely completion of the mitigation works before the flow would exceed the design capacity of the sewer.

19.7.1.5 Based on the assessment findings, the total peak sewage flow from the airport and the relevant PDZ would exceed the existing design peak flow of TCSPS in 2023, subject to future development of TCNTE. A government project under the Agreement No.CE6/2012 is currently underway to investigate, design and construct an additional sewage rising main between TCSPS and SHWSTW to enhance the operation reliability of the sewerage system. Under the project, it is planned to commence the construction in 2015 and complete the works by end 2022. According to the latest information from DSD, twin 1,200 mm diameter rising main will be adopted for conveying the planned sewage flow from Tung Chung and the airport to the SHWSTW, which is sufficient for the estimated ultimate design sewage flow of 3,648 L/s. [Note: EPD has agreed to reserve 43,500 m³/day (ADWF) at the TCSPS for the total sewage discharge from the expanded airport and AAHK will closely liaise with EPD and DSD to ascertain a smooth interface with the upgrading works for TCSPS.] AAHK will monitor the situation closely and take appropriate action to handle the excess sewage arising in case there is any programme mismatch.

19.7.1.6 In view of the assessment findings, it is considered that the design capacity of the existing SHWSTW is sufficient to handle the estimated total ADWF from the project and the relevant PDZ during the ultimate design scenario year of 2038. However, it is estimated that the design peak flow of SHWSTW would be exceeded after 2026. It is understood that SHWSTW will be upgraded by the relevant government departments to cater for the sewage treatment demand arising from future developments within the relevant sewerage catchment areas including the expanded airport and TCNTE. It is understood that EPD will monitor the sewage flow build-up and coordinate the necessary upgrading works for the SHWSTW when needed in due course.

19.7.1.7 With implementation of the upgrading works for the gravity sewer, TCSPS and SHWSTW, there is no need to establish any central pre-treatment facilities or separate sewage treatment plant for the project. Provided the upgrading of the gravity sewer, TCSPS and SHWSTW will be completed by respectively 2026, end 2022 and 2026, no interim sewage treatment facilities will be required for the project.

19.8 Waste Management Implication

19.8.1 Construction Phase

19.8.1.1 The major waste types generated by the construction activities will include inert C&D materials from excavation works, demolition works, seawall modification, piling works and superstructure construction works on the existing airport island/ proposed land formation area as well as from HDD during diversion of the existing submarine pipelines; non-inert C&D materials from site clearance at the golf course area, demolition works for the Terminal 2 (T2) expansion and various superstructure construction works; marine sediments dredged from the cable field joint area; contaminated mud pits (CMP) and marine sediments excavated from the foundation/ piling/ basement/ excavation works for constructing the various tunnels, facilities and buildings; chemical waste from maintenance and servicing of construction plant and equipment; general refuse from the workforce; and floating refuse trapped/ accumulated on the newly constructed seawall.

19.8.1.2 Every effort would be made to minimise the extent of excavation and to ensure that as much of the inert C&D materials generated by the project will be reused on-site as practicable. Based on the initial scheme design estimates, it is anticipated that a total of about 9,543,500 m³of inert C&D materials will be generated from 2015 to 2022, the majority of which would be from excavation works for Automated People Mover (APM) and Baggage Handling System (BHS) tunnels, new APM depot and airside tunnels, and piling works for Third Runway Concourse (TRC) and other facilities. Of this total amount of inert C&D materials, about 3,639,230 m³ (or about 38%) will be reused on-site as public fill materials for the proposed land formation works, and the remaining 5,904,270 m³ (or about 62%) will be delivered off-site to any identified projects that would require fill materials and/or the Public Fill Reception Facilities (PFRF) for beneficial use by any other projects in Hong Kong. Despite the on-site reuse of inert C&D materials, the project would require importing of about 10,911,770 m³ of public fill materials from other concurrent projects and/or the PFRF for proposed land formation works during the period from 2016 to 2018.

19.8.1.3 Based on initial scheme design information, it is estimated that approximately 96,200 m³ of non-inert C&D materials would be generated during the period from 2016 to 2021. The contractor should separate the non-inert C&D materials from the inert C&D materials on site. Any recyclable materials (e.g., metal) should be segregated from the non-inert C&D materials for collection by reputable licensed recyclers. The remaining non-recyclable waste materials will be disposed of at designated landfill sites by a reputable licensed waste collector.

19.8.1.4 It is estimated that totally around 777,860 m³ of marine sediments will be generated by the various construction activities from 2015 to 2022. Majority of this total amount of marine sediments, i.e., about 767,660 m³ (or about 98.7%), would be generated from the foundation / piling works for the tunnels, buildings, approach lights and new HKIAAA beacons as well as excavation works for the new APM depot. These marine sediments will be treated and reused on-site as backfilling materials, thus avoiding the need for disposal of the sediments off-site. The remaining minority, i.e., about 10,200 m³ (or about 1.3%), would be generated during the advance works in 2015/16 and would require open sea disposal (for Category L sediments) or open sea disposal at dedicated sites (for Category M_p sediments). This is because such sediments cannot be treated and reused as backfilling materials on-site due to mis-match with the overall construction programme (i.e., the estimated time of generation of such sediments would be over one year before majority of the filling works for the proposed land formation work is scheduled to begin).

19.8.1.5 The daily general refuse arising from the construction workforce would be up to 9,100 kg. Recycling bins should be provided at the site to maximise waste recycling whereas the non-recycling waste will be disposed of at designated landfill sites. With proper design of the future artificial seawall of the proposed airport expansion area to avoid or minimise any trapped or accumulated refuse, it is estimated that roughly 65 m³ of floating refuse will be collected from the newly constructed seawall during each year of construction. The floating refuse will be properly disposed of at designated landfill sites. A small quantity of chemical waste will be generated from the project, which should be properly handled, stored, labelled and disposed of in accordance with the Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation.

19.8.1.6 Provided that all the identified wastes are handled, transported and reused/ disposed of in strict accordance with the relevant legislative and recommended requirements and that the recommended good site practices and mitigation measures are properly implemented, no adverse environmental impact is expected during the construction phase.

19.8.2 Operation Phase

19.8.2.1 During the operation phase, the key waste types generated will include general refuse from operation of passenger concourses, aircraft cabins, terminal buildings, offices, commercial establishments (e.g., restaurants from various restaurants, retail outlets, etc.) and various airport infrastructure facilities as well as chemical waste from maintenance, servicing and repairing of various electrical and mechanical (E&M) equipment. There would also be entrapment or accumulation of floating refuse on the artificial seawall of the expanded airport island. With the proposed installation of a new greywater treatment plant, sludge from the proposed treatment plant will be generated and disposed of in accordance with the relevant guidance and regulations.

19.8.2.2 It is estimated that around 46,190 tons of general refuse would be generated by the project in 2038 (i.e., 15 years after the planned commencement of operation of the 3RS in 2023). AAHK’s current initiatives in segregating recyclable waste materials (such as cardboard, paper, metals, plastics, glass bottles, food waste, etc.) from general refuse for recycling should be extended to cover the expanded airport. The non-recyclable waste will be disposed of at designated landfill sites.

19.8.2.3 The new artificial seawall has been properly designed to achieve a shoreline that does not have any sharp turns or abrupt indentation in order to avoid or minimise any trapped or accumulated refuse. With the proper seawall design, it is estimated that roughly 65 m³ of floating refuse will be collected from the new artificial seawall of the proposed airport expansion area every year. The floating refuse will be disposed of at designated landfill sites.

19.8.2.4 It is difficult to quantify the amount of chemical waste that will arise during operation phase of the project at this stage since it will be dependent on the equipment maintenance requirements and the amount of equipment utilised. All the chemical waste should be properly handled, stored, labelled and disposed of in accordance with the Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation.

19.8.2.5 Based on the operation records of the existing greywater treatment facility, it can be estimated that the quantity of dewatered sludge from the proposed new greywater treatment plant would be approximately 0.23 ton/day. The dewatered sludge will be stored in tight containers or skips and delivered to the designated landfill sites for final disposal by a reputable licensed waste collector. The sludge generated should be carefully handled and properly managed to minimise the adverse impact of odour and potential health risks to the operators by attracting pests and other disease vectors.

19.8.2.6 Provided that all the identified wastes are handled, transported and disposed of in strict accordance with the relevant legislative requirements and the recommended mitigation measures are properly implemented, no adverse environmental impact is expected during the operation phase.

19.9 Land Contamination

19.9.1.1 The land contamination assessment has been conducted by reviewing past and present land uses, desktop review and reconnaissance site surveys. Other relevant information was also collected from the relevant Government Departments.

19.9.1.2 Based on the findings of the site appraisal on the present and past land uses in the land contamination assessment areas, none of the assessment areas are identified as the potential contaminative land use types listed in Table 2.3 of the Practice Guide except the golf course area and the underground and above-ground fuel storage tank areas, emergency power generation units, fuel tank rooms, airside petrol filling station. Further, no potential sources or signs of contamination was observed at the assessment areas except the golf course area, the underground and above-ground fuel storage tank areas, emergency power generation units, fuel tank rooms and airside petrol filling station.

19.9.1.3 There was no record of chemical waste spillage or leakage in all the assessment areas, according to the information obtained from EPD. As a result, no land contamination due to spillage or leakage of chemical waste within these assessment areas would be anticipated. Based on Fire Service Department (FSD)’s provided information, none of the dangerous goods (DG) spillage or leakage incidents were recorded within the assessment areas. The reconnaissance site surveys did not identify any potential source or sign of land contamination within the assessment areas except the golf course area, the underground and above-ground fuel storage tank areas, emergency power generation units, fuel tank rooms and airside petrol filling station.

19.9.1.4 According to the Environmental Permit (EP) of the golf course, artificial chemical fertilisers and pesticides are not allowed to be used on the golf course and turf area. While no sign of land contamination was observed at the golf course maintenance facility, the maintenance activities are still on-going, which may potentially cause land contamination when the site is returned to AAHK. The EP requires that Airport Management Services Ltd. (AMSL) should carry out the post-operation soil sampling and testing works in order to identify any land contamination issues and if necessary, to decontaminate the site. AMSL will then undertake all the necessary testing and remediation works, if required, after the expiry of operation of the golf course. Therefore, it is anticipated that upon return of the golf course area to AAHK there would be no land contamination issues or any land contamination would have been satisfactorily cleaned up. Therefore, no unacceptable impact due to land contamination is anticipated.

19.9.1.5 For T2 building expansion area, two underground fuel storage tanks, two above-ground fuel storage tanks and two emergency power generation units to the north and south of T2 were identified. Two more above-ground fuel storage tanks within T2 building will be demolished. For the existing airside facilities, the petrol filling station and fuel tank room were identified to be relocated. The sampling and testing plan, including number of sampling locations and depths, is recommended. All sampling and testing works will be conducted prior to commencement of any construction works at these areas.

19.9.1.6 Since some of the assessment areas were not accessible for site reconnaissance, site investigation (SI) locations are proposed for the potential land contaminative areas based on the relevant drawings. Further site reconnaissance would be conducted once these areas are accessible in order to identify any land contamination concern for the areas. Subject to the further site reconnaissance findings, a supplementary CAP for additional SI (if necessary) may be prepared and submitted to EPD for endorsement prior to the commencement of SI and any construction works at these areas. Nevertheless, it is anticipated that any potential land contamination concern related to possible leakage / spillage of fuel from such areas will not cause any insurmountable impact.

19.9.1.7 After completion of the SI, the CAR will be prepared and submitted to EPD for approval prior to start of the proposed construction works at the golf course, the underground and above-ground fuel storage tank areas, emergency power generation units, airside petrol filling station and fuel tank room. Should remediation be required, RAP and RR will be prepared for EPD’s approval prior to commencement of the proposed remediation and any construction works respectively. As a result, no unacceptable impact due to land contamination is anticipated.

19.9.1.8 Mitigation measures for handling and transportation of contaminated materials (if any), and regular site audits are recommended to minimise the potential adverse impacts on workers’ health and safety and disposal of potentially contaminated materials.

19.10 Terrestrial Ecology

19.10.1.1 The study area for terrestrial ecology covers the area between the airport island, North Lantau and Sha Chau. Literature reviews were conducted to identify ecologically sensitive terrestrial habitats in the study area. The literature review was supplemented with terrestrial field surveys to fill any information gap and to provide updated information. In relation to the gap of knowledge on the flying activities of birds in the land formation area and adjacent sea, tailored avifauna field surveys, including boat transect and land-based surveys for a 12-month period were conducted to study the birds’ activities in the concerned area. Other surveys conducted include terrestrial habitat mapping and flora surveys as well as macroinvertebrate, herpetofauna and aquatic fauna surveys at off-site habitat located within the study area.

19.10.1.2 The field survey results together with the literature review findings suggest that ardeid is the major bird group recorded in the open waters to North Lantau. Although widespread sightings were recorded, the land formation area is not particularly important to this bird group. Aggregation of seabirds was recorded in the open waters of North Lantau but not in the land formation area. For waterbirds and landbirds, the land formation area is not generally important. The marine associated Black Kite was widely recorded in the waters of north Lantau although the land formation area is not particularly important to this species. Low frequency of flight movement in and adjacent to the land formation area was found, whilst no prominent flight path or migratory route of birds was determined. Due to the absence of significant bird conservation area and migratory route, the project is unlikely to cause interruption and disorientation to bird’s flight movement.

19.10.1.3 High abundance of breeding ardeids was found in the Sha Chau egretry located on Sheung Sha Chau Island where the submarine fuel pipeline to be diverted by HDD method will be daylighted. However, the egretry would not be directly encroached by the daylighting location.

19.10.1.4 Impact assessment has been made based on literature reviews and field survey findings. Based on the assessment findings, it can be concluded that the loss of 650 ha of open sea area to the north of existing airport island due to the land formation works would not cause any direct loss of terrestrial habitat. The loss of 5.9 km of artificial seawall along north coast of the existing airport due to the land formation works will be reinstated after construction of the new and longer artificial seawall (13 km in total length) as an early part of the land formation process. Interruption to bird’s flight movement is negligible owing to the absence of important avifauna habitats or migration passage near the land formation area. Given the large distances between ecologically sensitive areas in north Lantau (including Tai Ho Stream SSSI and San Tau Beach SSSI) and the project area, construction and operation of the proposed project would not significantly affect the ecological resources in north Lantau.

19.10.1.5 It is concluded that the identified impacts to the terrestrial ecology in the study area would all be low or negligible during both construction and operation phases of the project, except the construction phase impact to Sha Chau egretry. As part of the submarine fuel pipeline diversion work, the pipeline daylighting location/ works area on Sheung Sha Chau Island would potentially affect the Sha Chau egretry with moderate degree of impact. However, with the recommended mitigation measures in place, the impact is anticipated to become low. As result, no adverse residual impacts are anticipated during both construction and operation phases.

19.11 Marine Ecology

19.11.1.1 A comprehensive baseline ecological review has been conducted for the identification of information gaps. Marine ecological surveys specific to the proposed project footprint, especially within the existing HKIAAA have been conducted, covering the intertidal, sub-tidal soft bottom and hard bottom habitats and marine waters. Updated verification surveys along the northern Lantau coast, Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park (SCLKCMP) and the Brothers have also been taken, where appropriate, reference sites with similar ecological attributes to the habitats within the project footprint have also been carried out to facilitate the ecological valuation. The habitats within the project footprint are generally of low or moderate-low ecological value except for the marine waters. The marine waters within the existing HKIAAA are of moderate-high value due to the less disturbed environment and the usage by marine fishes and Chinese White Dolphins. The marine waters outside the existing HKIAAA are of moderate value due to the usage by marine fishes and Chinese White Dolphins. The Construction and operation phase impacts associated with land formation and other marine works will cause permanent loss of 672 ha seabed and the marine environment for marine fishes, CWDs, associated marine benthos and 5.9 km of artificial seawall with low coverage of gorgonians. The potential impacts on the marine fauna other than CWDs are considered to be low to moderate. Apart from the implementation of water quality mitigation measures and implementation of good site practices, other ecological enhancement measures (including eco-enhancement designs of seawall that would help re-colonisation of intertidal and sub-tidal fauna as well as recruitment of juvenile fishes, as well as extension of HKIAAA with restricted vessel entry which would help to protect the marine fauna) would enable the affected species to recover in long-term and reduce the residual impact in operation phase to insignificant level. The cumulative loss of approximate 1,384 ha of marine habitats is considered as a significant impact. With the compensation of the marine park and implementation of ecological enhancement measures including vessel speed limitation mitigation, no residual impacts are anticipated.

19.11.1.2 This chapter presents a detailed assessment of the expected marine ecological impacts of the development of the expanded Hong Kong International Airport into a Three Runway System (3RS). The primary species of ecological interest in this respect is the CWD, which is resident in Hong Kong’s western waters and has been shown to be declining in abundance in Hong Kong in recent years. Based upon the literature review, data gaps were identified and focussed marine ecological surveys undertaken over a 14-month period. In terms of the CWD, construction and operation phase impacts associated with land formation and associated marine works on habitat loss, travel areas and disturbance to CWDs behaviour have been assessed. It has been concluded that the 3RS development will likely have a number of significant impacts on the CWD population that occurs in Hong Kong’s waters, largely related to the large amount of CWD habitat that will become unavailable, the effects on CWD travel areas and the impacts of high speed vessels. In addition to avoidance and minimisation measures, a range of mitigation measures have been proposed, including the establishment of a large new marine park which will provide approximately 2,400 ha of new protected waters and critical linkages with the planned Brothers Marine Park and the existing Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park as well as with the significant area of HKIAAA marine exclusion zone. SkyPier ferry speed and route restrictions are expected to minimise impacts of vessel traffic on the animals, in addition to the benefits provided by the 10-knots speed limit once the marine park is established. As such, predicted impacts would be expected to be reduced to acceptable levels and the residual impacts are expected to comply with the TM-EIAO.

19.12 Fisheries Impact

19.12.1.1 The fisheries impact assessment has been conducted based on the information gathered from literature review and the completed fisheries surveys to fill the identified information gaps, especially within HKIAAA (Area 3) where vessel is restricted to enter for security purpose. Fisheries surveys on marine habitats which would potentially be affected by the third runway project were carried out. Surveys included fish trawl, purse seine, gill net, hand line, artificial reefs and fisheries interview to update and supplement the status of fisheries resources and fishing activities within the study area for a robust fisheries impact assessment.

19.12.1.2 Eight areas were identified as sites of fisheries importance that required for fisheries impact assessment. These included the spawning ground of commercial fisheries resources in northern Lantau waters, Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park (SCLKCMP), artificial reefs (ARs) at SCLKCMP and proposed AR deployment at the planned BMP, Ma Wan Marine Fish Culture Zone (FCZ), oyster production area at Deep Bay mudflat, area of high production of capture fisheries off Tai O and the planned BMP.

19.12.1.3 The fisheries surveys indicated that fisheries resources of commercial and non-commercial values were found within the proposed land formation footprint, but the dominant species in terms of yield are mainly fishes of low commercial values.

19.12.1.4 The fisheries interview survey indicated that the proposed land formation footprint would be moderately used by fishermen for capture fisheries. However, the land formation footprint would not be the major fishing grounds for most of the interviewee, as they would also operate in other waters to the west or south of Hong Kong. Nevertheless, the loss of fishing ground of size around 1,392 ha during construction phase and 768 ha upon completion of construction will have moderate impact significance on fishing ground.

19.12.1.5 There will be a permanent loss of 672 ha fisheries habitats which is considered to be of moderate significance with the project alone and with concurrent projects in place. It is proposed to compensate for the loss of fisheries habitats / fishing ground by designating a Marine Park to connect with the existing SCLKCMP, the planned BMP, the Pearl River Chinese White Dolphin Nature Reserve and the existing / future HKIAAA to improve the ecological connectivity. With implementation of the proposed compensation measures, there will be positive synergistic effect on marine ecology and fisheries resources conservation.

19.12.1.6 Managed fishing through a permit system will be allowed in the proposed Marine Park, with the improved fisheries resources, hence no adverse secondary impact on loss of fishing ground will be anticipated. Nonetheless, a Fisheries Enhancement Strategy with Fisheries Enhancement Fund is proposed in addition to the marine park establishment to provide support for the sustainable development of the fisheries industry.

19.12.1.7 There will be disturbance to fisheries activities during construction and operation of the project as a result of narrowing of fishing ground between the third runway footprint and SCLKCMP. Conflict of usage with other marine users especially construction vessels will result in low impact on the disturbance to fisheries activities. No fisheries specific mitigation measure is considered required, but the proposed establishment of new Marine Park would generally enhance the fishing efficiency by improving the fisheries resources, the disturbance impact on fisheries activities will also be further reduced.

19.12.1.8 With the implementation of the recommended water quality mitigation measures during construction and operation phases as well as the proposed establishment of new Marine Park to compensate the permanent loss of fisheries habitats (and resources), no adverse residual impact on fisheries is anticipated. Environmental monitoring programme for water quality covering the sites of fisheries importance would provide an indication of the effectiveness of the water quality mitigation measures that could reduce fisheries impact. Therefore, specific environmental monitoring programme for fisheries is considered not necessary.

19.12.1.9 While no adverse residual impact on fisheries due to the proposed project is anticipated, a number of fisheries monitoring and enhancement measures are proposed through the Fisheries Enhancement Strategy in addition to the recommended mitigation measures, with a view to further improving the fisheries resources in the western Hong Kong waters and supporting the sustainable development of the fisheries industry.

19.13 Landscape and Visual Impact

19.13.1 Landscape Impacts

19.13.1.1 The principle landscape impacts will be on the Coastal waters of North Lantau. The physical impact upon the Coastal waters of North Lantau is ‘Substantial’ in relation to the entire resource as a whole; however the impact upon the Coastal waters of North Lantau would remain ‘Substantial’ during the operation phase as the loss of 650 ha of coastal waters cannot be mitigated.

19.13.1.2 It is anticipated all other LRs and LCAs, that have not been described above, after the construction phase would largely be restored to their pre-construction state. Mitigation measures including compensatory tree, shrub and groundcover planting would minimise the residual impacts on the airport landscape. The reduction of construction period to a practical minimum and the immediate grassing and treatment of disturbed areas would help restore the landscape to its pre-construction quality. With the implementation of mitigation measures, the residual impact has been assessed as slight and insubstantial.

19.13.1.3 It is anticipated that the majority of trees affected by the 3RS will be young to semi-mature trees of common species and will either be felled or transplanted if suitable. No OVTs are located within the project site boundary. To mitigate the loss of the existing trees and to restore the landscape to its existing condition, compensatory tree planting is proposed according to the relevant Technical Circulars.

19.13.2 Visual Impacts

19.13.2.1 The primary visual impacts of the 3RS would result from the construction of a 650 ha land formation north of the HKIA. The 3RS would likely have minimal residual visual impacts as the major geomorphic features of the North Lantau and Tuen Mun Region, such as the ridge lines of Castle Peak, Lantau Island and Tai Lam Country Park would remain intact thus preserving the overall landscape character of area. The implementation of operation phase mitigation measures such as the sensitive design of the airport buildings and facilities in terms of scale, height, visual weight, lighting, materials and colours as well as greening measures such as screening, green walls and green roofs will help reduce the residual impacts of the new T2 expansion and associated facilities.

19.13.2.2 The presence of the 3RS would have slight and insubstantial residual visual impacts on the surrounding VSRs as the form and character will be consistent with that of the existing HKIA. The greatest visual impacts will be experienced by REC13 (Passengers / Drivers of recreational marine craft users in North Lantau Waters and Urmston Road) who are transient in nature, and REC21 (Recreational users of Sha Chau islands) who are very few in number, and are predicted to experience a moderate impact significance.

19.13.3 Overall Conclusion

19.13.3.1 Based on the above, it is therefore considered that in accordance to the criteria and guidelines for evaluating and assessing impacts as stated in Annex 10 and 18 of the TM- EIAO, the overall residual landscape and visual impacts of the proposed 3RS are marginally acceptable with mitigation during the construction and operation phases.

19.14 Cultural Heritage

19.14.1.1 A marine archaeological investigation (MAI) was conducted to ascertain the marine archaeological potential of the study area. The MAI included a desktop review, geophysical surveys and diver surveys. The findings of the MAI established that no resources of marine archaeological value is located within the study area.

19.14.1.2 Findings from the terrestrial archaeological assessment showed that no sites of archaeological interest or potential archaeological deposits will be impacted by the project. The findings of the built heritage assessment also identified that there will be no impact on built heritage resources due to implementation of the project. As such, no mitigation measures are required.

19.15 Health Impact

19.15.1 Aircraft Emission

19.15.1.1 The short-term (i.e., 1-hour / 24-hour) and long-term (i.e., annual) TAP concentrations due to the operation of 3RS modeled at all potential human receptors would comply with the respective acute and chronic non-carcinogenic risk criteria. The acute risk and non-carcinogenic chronic risk due to 3RS are considered as acceptable.

19.15.1.2 The maximum increase in carcinogenic health risk due to TAP is around 1.14 x 10^-⁵ for the 3RS. The increase in carcinogenic health risk due to the 3RS is considered as acceptable.

19.15.1.3 For short-term exposure to criteria pollutants, the short term concentrations of CO (1-hour), NO₂ (1-hour) and SO₂ (10-minute) are well below the AQO in the assessment areas. Moreover, the estimated largest yearly increases in risks of hospital admission and premature death (short-term mortality risk) associated with short-term exposure to NO₂, RSP and SO₂ due to the operation of the 3RS compared with 2RS are relatively small. Hence, the short-term health risk associated with short-term exposure of the concerned criteria pollutants is considered as acceptable.

19.15.1.4 The incremental change arising from the operation of 3RS against 2RS for annual concentrations of NO₂ (-2.65 mg/m³ to 0.58 mg/m³, i.e., -6.9 to 1.9%), RSP ( -0.05 mg/m³ to 0.22 mg/m³, i.e., -0.1 to 0.5%), FSP (0.01 mg/m³ to 0.04 mg/m³, i.e., 0.0 to 0.1%) and SO₂ (-0.04 mg/m³ to 0.17 mg/m³, i.e., -0.5 to 2.6%), in the assessment areas. Besides, the estimated largest yearly increase in premature death (long-term mortality risk) associated with long-term exposure to FSP due to the operation of the 3RS compared with 2RS is relatively small. Hence, the long-term health impact associated with long-term exposure of the concerned criteria pollutants is considered as acceptable.

19.15.2 Aircraft Noise

19.15.2.1 There will be an overall reduction in future population that would be subject to annoyance and self-reported sleep disturbance (with about 10% and 50% reduction of population affected respectively), with the implementation of third runway in the assessment area.

19.15.2.2 Considering cognitive effect on children by aircraft noise, it is noted that one kindergarten is within the noise band of 55 to 60 dB within the assessment area in Siu Lam under the three-runway scenario. However, it is considered that cognitive effects on students in this institute would unlikely be significant, as the aircraft noise levels would be masked by the background noise levels of 60 dB measured onsite.

19.15.2.3 Considering the overall improvements in the identified assessment area with respect to both annoyance and self-reported sleep disturbance by implementation of the third runway while cognitive effect on children arising from the operation of the project is not apparent, it is concluded that the overall health impact associated with aircraft noise from the project in the assessment area is minimal.

19.16 Key Assessment Assumptions, Limitations of Assessment Methodologies and Prior Agreements

19.16.1.1 A summary of key assessment assumptions, limitation of assessment methodologies and related prior agreements with relevant Government Departments is presented in Table 19.3.

Table 19.3: Key Assessment Assumptions, Limitations of Assessment Methodologies and Prior Agreements

Assessment Methodology	Key Assessment Assumptions	Limitations of Assessment Methodology / Assumptions	Prior Agreements with the Director or other Authorities	Proposed Alternative Assessment Tools / Assumptions (if applicable)	Justification / Supporting Documents for Alternative Assessment Tools / Assumptions (if applicable)
Air Quality Impact – Construction Phase
§ Annex 12 of the EIAO-TM; § EPD’s Guidelines on Choice of Models and Model Parameters § EPD’s Guidelines on Assessing the 'TOTAL' Air Quality Impacts § EPD’s Guidelines on the Estimation of PM2.5 for Air Quality Assessment in Hong Kong § Prediction of background RSP and FSP during construction phase by using PATH model for simulation of far-field background emissions; as well as using AERMOD, EMFAC-HK and Caline4 models for simulation of near-field background emissions § FDM for simulation of cumulative construction dust emissions	§ Details of construction programme, plant inventories and working hours and days used for estimating % active construction areas and relevant dust emission rates are as provided by the Scheme Design Consultants. § Various dust emission factors for heavy construction activities, wind erosion, paved haul road, loading and unloading of dusty materials are based on the USEPA’s Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors (AP-42), 5th Edition (Jan 2011 Edition). § Typical ratio of RSP to TSP for heavy construction activities is taken as 0.3:1 based on the USEPA document Estimating Particulate Matter Emissions from Construction Operations, 1999. § 3% of TSP emissions from heavy construction activities are assumed to be FSP based on the publication by Thompson G. Pace, USEPA. Examination of the Multiplier Used to Estimate PM2.5 Fugitive Dust Emissions from PM10, April 2005. § 37% and 14% of TSP emissions from concrete batching plants are assumed to be respectively RSP and FSP based on the published paper by R.K. Gupta, et al., Particulate matter and Elemental Emission from a Cement Kiln, Fuel Processing Technology, 2012. The same percentages are conservatively adopted for asphalt batching plants. § 30% and 3% of TSP emissions from crushing plants are assumed to be respectively RSP and FSP, i.e., adopting the same proportions used for RSP and FSP emissions from heavy construction activities due to similar nature of materials handled by crushing plants. § TSP emissions from concrete batching plants are estimated based on the emission limit of 50 mg/m³ based on the Guidance Note on the Best Practicable Means for Cement Works (Concrete Batching Plant) BPM 3/2 (93). § TSP emissions from asphalt batching plants are estimated based on the emission limit of 50 mg/m³ based on the Guidance Note on the Best Practicable Means for Tar and Bitumen Works (Asphaltic Concrete Plant) BPM 15 (94). § TSP emissions from crushing plants are estimated based on the emission limit of 50 mg/m³ based on the Guidance Note on the Best Practicable Means for Mineral Works (Stone Crushing Plants) BPM 11/1 (95). § Hourly meteorological data in 2010 as extracted from relevant grids (depending on ASRs) of PATH model is adopted for modelling. § Surface roughness values are estimated according to EPD’s Guidelines on Choice of Models and Model Parameters and with reference to USEPA’s User Guide for the Fugitive Dust Model (Revised), EPA-910/9-88-202R, Jan 1991.	Gaussian models are designed for use in simple terrain under uniform flow. Steady-state Gaussian plume models have been shown to produce conservative results for short (less than 100m) or low level sources, and are more likely to over-predict rather than under-predict ground-level concentrations.	Air Sensitive Receivers and key modelling approach and assumptions agreed with EPD	N/A	N/A
Air Quality Impact – Operation Phase
§ Annex 12 of the EIAO-TM § EPD’s Guidelines on Choice of Models and Model Parameters § EPD’s Guidelines on Assessing the 'TOTAL' Air Quality Impacts § EPD’s Guidelines on the Estimation of PM2.5 for Air Quality Assessment in Hong Kong § Three tier air quality modelling: - PATH model for ambient concentration simulation - Caline4 and EMFAC-HK model for vehicular emission simulation - AERMOD model for airport related emission, marine emission and industrial emission simulation	§ Emission factors referenced from - EDMS v5.1.4.1 developed by FAA - EMFAC-Hong Kong v2.6 - IATA Emission Forecast Report - Guidance on the Determination of Helicopter Emissions published by Swiss Federal Office of Civil Aviation (FOCA) - FOCA Aircraft Piston Engine Emissions Summary Report - USEPA AP42 Chapter 7.1 - EPD’s Study on Marine Vessels Emission Inventory (2012) - USEPA Non-road emission standards - Road Tunnels: Vehicle Emissions and Air Demand for Ventilation published by the Permanent International Association of Road Congressess (PIARC, 2012) - Approved EIA Studies / SP Licenses § Ozone Limiting Method (OLM) for conversion of NO_x to NO₂ - 5.3%, 5.3%, 15% and 37.5% for takeoff, climbout, approach and idling mode of aircraft engine respectively - 7.5% for vehicular tailpipe emission sources - 10% for all emission sources except tailpipe emission § Emission project for PRDEZ and HKSAR Emission - JWGSDEP 12^th Meeting - Air Pollution Control Ordinance (Cap 311) - Historical data from Census and Statistics Department - 2009-TPEDM - Port of Hong Kong Statistics - Marine Traffic Impact Assessment Report under HKIA Master Plan 2030 § Aircraft Time-In-Mode - Take-off: Based on site observation and Year 2011 Radar Data from CAD, different ICAO aircraft size classes have different take-off time - Climb-out: ICAO’s definition of 2.2 min is on more conservative side and hence is adopted. - Approach: The average approach time determined from Year 2011 radar and ICAO’s definition are both 4 min, and hence is adopted. - Taxi-in and-out: Based on TAAM model output. § Aircraft engine deterioration based on ICAO Air Quality Manual 2011 § Aircraft engine emission correction for meteorological conditions based on Boeing Fuel Flow Method 2, which is adopted by EDMS v5.1.4.1 (i.e. FAA)	According to the modeling verification exercise, the model results tend to over-estimate the predicted concentration.	Air Sensitive Receivers and key modelling approach and assumptions agreed with EPD	N/A	N/A
Hazard to Human Life – Construction Phase
The hazard assessment was conducted in accordance with the agreed methodology paper. The acceptance of the evaluated individual and societal risk levels were compared against with the criteria specified in Annex 4 of EIAO-TM.	Third party interference is considered as the potential cause of damage to the existing facility. The corresponding failure frequency is made reference to other historical accident database.	Since the airport is a restricted area, any construction work happened inside the airport will be strictly controlled. Therefore, the use of historical failure rate is deemed conservative.	Methodology Paper agreed by EPD	N/A	N/A
Hazard to Human Life – Operation Phase
The hazard assessment was conducted in accordance with the agreed methodology paper. The acceptance of the evaluated individual and societal risk levels were compared against with the criteria specified in Annex 4 of EIAO-TM.	The percentage of aircraft refuelling operation with passengers onboard is assumed to be 8%. The population data inside the buildings within 150m from the airside petrol filling station were estimated based on best available data, relevant studies or engineering judgement.	The 8% assumption is referenced to Atkins 2000 study for UK airports. The risk level is largely dominated by the aircraft refuelling operation and the accuracy of the population data near the airside petrol filling station will not have a significant impact on the overall risk result.	Methodology Paper agreed by EPD	N/A	N/A
Noise Impact – Aircraft Noise
Aircraft Noise § Assessment area of whole Hong Kong territory § Using latest FAA’s INM version 7.0dsu1 (released in September 2013) with its associated international accepted aircraft noise calculation methodologies ICAO Doc 9911, SAE-AIR-1845, SAE-AIR-5662, SAE-ARP-866A, and ECAC Doc 29)	§ Air traffic forecast by International Air Transport Association (IATA) § Total Airspace and Airport Modeler (TAAM) simulations by NATS § Day / night distribution § Runway maintenance closure period § South runway in standby mode at night § Runway mode of operation § Runway utilisation § East / west distribution § Flight tracks and flight track utilisation § Other parameters such as meteorological conditions	Certain future aircraft be substituted by existing aircraft with similar noise footprints	§ Computational model and assessment area agreed by DEP § Assumptions and data adopted for assessment, inventory of noise sources, operation mode of scenarios, and direct mitigation measures confirmed with CAD § Site constraints for planned noise sensitive land use confirmed with relevant parties including PlanD and LandsD	N/A	N/A
Noise Impact – Fixed Noise Sources
The noise impact assessment for the project follows Annex 5 and Annex 13 of the EIAO-TM. For project fixed noise source, in the absence of any detailed information and noise specification for the proposed fixed plant, the maximum permissible noise emission levels at the shaft/ exhaust openings was determined for future detailed design of the fixed plant. This was determined by adopting standard acoustics principles For those existing fixed plant noise sources, the design information were made reference to the relevant approved EIA Reports or obtained from the relevant authorities. Site visits and noise measures were carried out to determine the locations of the fixed sources and regarding sound power levels where information was not available. The noise impact from these sources would then be assessed with the use of the same methodology as stated above for the project fixed noise sources.	The noise level of planned fixed noise sources was referenced from relevant EIA studies or the best available information from AAHK. It was assumed that the noise levels presented in those EIA reports would be the maximum allowable Sound Power Level (SWL). The worst case condition that all intake/exhaust fans are operated at each ventilation building was adopted for assessment.	The fans and damper arrangement at each ventilation building may be refined in detailed design. The correction of directivity was excluded in the assessment.	Determination of assessment area; Location of representative noise sensitive receivers.	N/A	N/A
Noise Impact – Construction Noise
The noise impact assessment for the project follows Annex 5 and Annex 13 of the EIAO-TM. Assessment approach to the noise impact is in line with the Guidance Note titled “Preparation of Construction Noise Impact Assessment under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance” (GN 9/2010). The assessment of construction noise impact was based on standard acoustic principles, and the guidelines given in GW-TM issued under the NCO where appropriate. Where no sound power level (SWL) could be found in the relevant TM, reference was made to BS 5228 Part 1:2009 or noise emission levels measured for PME used in previous projects in Hong Kong.	The assumption of all PME items required for a particular construction activity would be located at the notional or probable source position where the activity is to be performed was adopted when assessing the potential construction noise impact. The planned NSRs included for construction noise impact assessment are selected by assuming the construction programme and phasing of development is strictly followed. In addition, cumulative SWL of PME was assumed to be used for each location within the project site.	The prediction of construction noise impact was based on the methodology described in the GW-TM under the NCO. There would be limitations of the methodology such as the accuracy of the predictive base data for future (e.g. plant inventory for proposed construction works). Quantitative uncertainties in this assessment of impacts should be considered when drawing conclusions form the assessment. In carrying out the assessment, realistic worse case assumptions have been made in order to provide a conservative assessment of noise impacts. The construction noise impact was assessed based on conservative estimates for the types and quantities of plant and construction methods.	Determination of assessment area; Location of representative noise sensitive receivers.	N/A	N/A
Noise Impact – Traffic Noise
The noise impact assessment for the project follows Annex 5 and Annex 13 of the EIAO-TM. For marine traffic noise, noise measurements were carried out at SkyPier during afternoon peak hours to capture the worst case scenario based on the ferry schedule. Summation of the L_eq_(60min)of all different events will then give the overall marine traffic noise impact level. Appropriate distance and façade corrections would be taken into account for the assessment of the noise impact at the planned NSRs if necessary. Background noise levels at NSRs have been adopted for identifying potential nuisance raised by marine traffic.	For marine traffic noise, the assessment area has been established which the predicted marine traffic noise at the boundary of area is below 10 dB(A) of prevailing background noise level at the nearest NSR.	For the marine traffic noise assessment, the schedule of ferry services may be subjected to change upon the completion of the third runway project or other developments in the area.	Determination of assessment area; Location of representative noise sensitive receivers.	N/A	N/A
Water Quality Impact – Construction Phase
The construction phase water quality impact assessment has been prepared in accordance with the EIAO-TM Annex 6 & 14 and Section 3.4.6, Appendix D1, Appendix D1-1 of the EIA Study Brief. Hydrodynamic and water quality modelling is based on the validated 3-dimensional hydrodynamic model - Western Harbour Model (WHM) derived from the Update Model by Deltares in 2000-2001, with local refinement for the project area. The models adopted include: § Delft3D-FLOW for hydrodynamic simulations § Delft3D-PART for sediment plume and tracer dilution simulations	§ Year 2016 and 2017 identified as worst case scenarios for sediment plume models; § Plant numbers and sediment loss based on productivity for Q1 2016 and Q1 2017; § Assumptions adopted for sediment release from concurrent projects	§ The large coverage extent of the original WHM makes it impractical to refine the entire grid to achieve the desired resolution within the study area, hence local refinement was adopted; § Due to the large coverage area of the WSRs and model stability constraints, the model grid resolution at some WSRs will be larger than 75m x 75m, particularly those located furthest away from the project.	Methodology paper agreed with EPD, including: § Model grid schematisation, validation and modelling parameters; § Assessment criteria; § Methodology, assumptions and calculations for worst case scenarios (e.g. sediment loss rates and contaminant release rates); and § Cumulative impacts.	N/A	N/A
Water Quality Impact – Operation Phase
The operation phase water quality impact assessment has been prepared in accordance with the EIAO-TM Annex 6 & 14 and Section 3.4.6, Appendix D1, Appendix D1-1 of the EIA Study Brief. Hydrodynamic and water quality modelling is based on the validated 3-dimensional hydrodynamic model - Western Harbour Model (WHM) derived from the Update Model by Deltares in 2000-2001, with local refinement for the project area. The models adopted include: § Delft3D-FLOW for hydrodynamic simulations § Delft3D-WAQ for whole year operation simulations of “with” and “without” Project scenarios § Delft3D-PART for residual chlorine and biocide (amine) simulations; A pollution loading inventory was compiled for the operation phase (taken as 2026)	§ Coastline and bathymetry for Year 2026; § Discharge sources and pollutant concentrations in pollution loading inventory. § Design loads of spent cooling discharge from the project;	§ The large coverage extent of the original WHM makes it impractical to refine the entire grid to achieve the desired resolution within the study area, hence local refinement was adopted; § Due to the large coverage area of the WSRs and model stability constraints, the model grid resolution at some WSRs will be larger than 75m x 75m, particularly those located furthest away from the project; § Annual simulation prepared from the dry and wet season hydrodynamics for the dry and wet season periods with a combined (interpolated) hydrodynamics using the dry and wet season hydrodynamics for the intermediate seasons for whole year simulations.	Methodology paper agreed with EPD, including: § Model grid schematisation, validation and modelling parameters; § Assessment criteria; § Operation year for assessment; § Methodology, assumptions and calculations for pollution loading inventory and spent cooling discharge from the project; § Cumulative impacts; and § Fuel spillage modelling not required (based on the proposed design for submarine aviation fuel pipelines).	N/A	N/A
Sewerage and Sewage Treatment Implication
Carry out a desktop study to collect relevant information for the assessment. Investigate and review the capacity of the existing and planned public sewerage networks and sewage treatment facilities in North Lantau. Review the maximum sewerage flow (Maximum Development Flow) to be generated by the project in different phases. Study the need and assess the impacts of discharging sewage arising from the project to the existing / planned public sewerage systems in Tung Chung and Siu Ho Wan Sewage Treatment Works (SHWSTW). Formulate measures to mitigate any forecasted shortfalls in the sewerage system as a result of the project and provide recommendations on the design, operation and maintenance requirements for the proposed sewerage system.	Historical records of sewage flow from existing Airport island TPEDM-2009 incorporated with updated information from Airport and Tung Chung New Town Extension	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Waste Management Implication – Construction Phase
§ Analysis of activities and waste generation; § Development of proposals for waste management; and § Identification of any need for dredging / excavation, filling and dumping.	The amount of general refuse and floating refuse were estimated based on best available data, relevant studies or engineering judgement.	N/A	Sediment Sampling and Testing Plan agreed by EPD.	N/A	N/A
Waste Management Implication – Operation Phase
§ Analysis of activities and waste generation; § Development of proposals for waste management; and § Identification of any need for dredging / excavation, filling and dumping.	The amount of general refuse and floating refuse were estimated based on best available data, relevant studies or engineering judgement.	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Land Contamination – Construction Phase
§ Review of relevant information from government departments; § Review of historical aerial photographs; § Review of previous site investigations records; and § Site reconnaissance surveys.	The study area was designed to ensure 100% coverage of any areas with potential impact.	None	Contamination Assessment Plan agreed by EPD	N/A	N/A
Land Contamination – Operation Phase
N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Terrestrial Ecological Impact – Construction and Operation Phases
Literature review supplemented with avifauna surveys, egretry surveys, freshwater fish surveys and other terrestrial ecology surveys. The terrestrial ecological impact assessment follows the guidelines stated in Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance – Technical Memorandum (EIAO-TM) on Environmental Impact Assessment Process, particularly Annexes 8 and 16.	N/A	N/A	Relevant survey methodology paper agreed by AFCD	N/A	N/A
Marine Ecological Impact – Construction and Operation Phases
Literature review supplemented with vessel-based; land-based and passive acoustic monitoring surveys for CWD, intertidal surveys, coral dive surveys, benthic surveys, estuarine fish surveys and supplemented with marine fish surveys conducted under fisheries impact assessment. The marine ecological impact assessment follows the guidelines stated in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Ordinance (EIAO) – Technical Memorandum (TM) on Environmental Impact Assessment Process, particularly Annexes 8 and 16.	N/A	N/A	Relevant survey methodology paper agreed by AFCD	N/A	N/A
Fisheries Impact – Construction and Operation Phase
Literature review supplemented with fisheries and aquaculture interview surveys; fish trawl surveys, purse seine, gill net & hand line surveys, fish larvae & post-larvae surveys and artificial reef surveys. The fisheries impact assessment follows the guidelines stated in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Ordinance (EIAO) – Technical Memorandum (TM) on Environmental Impact Assessment Process, particularly Annexes 9 and 17.	N/A	N/A	Relevant survey methodology paper agreed by AFCD	N/A	N/A
Landscape and Visual Impact – Construction Phase
This methodology has been structured around the requirements of the EIAO TM Annexes 10 and 18 as well as EIAO Guidance Note 8/2010. An assessment of the landscape and visual impacts using existing available information and study reports has been adopted. Wherever possible, the landscape and visual impacts have been assessed based on quantified data in accordance with the EIAO Guidance Note 8/2010.	At the time of preparation of the LVIA, specific details on various aspects of the development are unconfirmed or subject to revision. This includes; landside extent of works (on Chek Lap Kok and within the Shau Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park), the precise form and appearance of airport facility buildings, and other proposed features of the 3RS. It is assumed that funding, implementation, management and maintenance of the landscape and visual mitigation proposals of the 3RS can be satisfactorily resolved according to the principles in ETWB TCW No. 2/2004. In accordance with EIAO Guidance Note 8/2010 (paragraph 3.7(a)) approved projects should form part of the baseline conditions. Therefore, the landscape and visual outcomes (including proposed landscape and visual mitigation measures) of approved projects currently under construction, including HKBCF, associated HKLR, the Southern Connection of Tuen Mun – Chek Lap Kok Link (TM-CLKL), Residential/Commercial Development at Tung Chung (Area 55a), Residential Development at Tung Chung (Area 55b) and the Residential Development at Tung Chung (Area 56) are included as part of the baseline conditions for the 3RS.	Assessment of Sensitivity of Receivers and the Magnitude of Change of the project works are inherently subjective. Additional mitigation measures introduced during detail design may assist in the reduction of residual impacts. No detail data exists for future planned projects or for the concurrent projects other than described in the Report. Changes to these may affect the evaluated impacts of the project.	N/A	N/A	N/A
Landscape and Visual Impact – Operation Phase
This methodology has been structured around the requirements of the EIAO TM Annexes 10 and 18 as well as EIAO Guidance Note 8/2010. An assessment of the landscape and visual impacts using existing available information and study reports has been adopted. Wherever possible, the landscape and visual impacts have been assessed based on quantified data in accordance with the EIAO Guidance Note 8/2010.	At the time of preparation of the LVIA, specific details on various aspects of the development are unconfirmed or subject to revision. This includes; landside extent of works (on Chek Lap Kok and within the Shau Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park), the precise form and appearance of airport facility buildings, and other proposed features of the 3RS. It is assumed that funding, implementation, management and maintenance of the landscape and visual mitigation proposals of the 3RS can be satisfactorily resolved according to the principles in ETWB TCW No. 2/2004. In accordance with EIAO Guidance Note 8/2010 (paragraph 3.7(a)) approved projects should form part of the baseline conditions. Therefore, the landscape and visual outcomes (including proposed landscape and visual mitigation measures) of approved projects currently under construction, including HKBCF, associated HKLR, the Southern Connection of Tuen Mun – Chek Lap Kok Link (TM-CLKL), Residential / Commercial Development at Tung Chung (Area 55a), Residential Development at Tung Chung (Area 55b) and the Residential Development at Tung Chung (Area 56) are included as part of the baseline conditions for the 3RS.	Assessment of Sensitivity of Receivers and the Magnitude of Change of the project works are inherently subjective. Additional mitigation measures introduced during detail design may assist in the reduction of residual impacts. No detail data exists for future planned projects or for the concurrent projects other than described in the Report. Changes to these may affect the evaluated impacts of the project.	N/A	N/A	N/A
Cultural Heritage Impact – Construction Phase
The cultural heritage impact assessment follows the requirements of Annexes 10 and 19 of the EIAO-TM. The Marine Archaeological Investigation follows the Guidelines set out in Appendix I of the EIA study brief.	None	None	Marine Archaeological Investigation report accepted by AMO.	N/A	N/A
Cultural Heritage Impact – Operation Phase
The cultural heritage impact assessment follows the requirements of Annexes 10 and 19 of the EIAO-TM.	None	None	N/A	N/A	N/A
Health Impact – Aerial Emissions
§ TAP: Heath risk determination based on acute and chronic non-cancer risks, and cancer risk § Criteria Pollutants: Relative Risk (RR) estimates associated with hospital admission and premature death		According to our modeling verification exercise, the model results will over-estimate the predicted concentration, which in turn overestimate the risk In determining the total hospital admission and premature death, the hospital admission and premature death of each individual criteria pollutant is summed. Due to the synergic effect of these pollutants, this may overestimate the risk The Yr 2011 monitoring data has been adopted as background. This cannot reflect the improvement in air quality due to the implementation of short term and long term control measures by the Government. This may overestimate the risk. The toxicity criteria adopted from agencies (WHO, IRIS, etc) would introduce uncertainty to the assessment. These toxicity criteria are used as single-point estimates throughout the analysis with uncertainty and variability associated with them. The application of safety factor to short term toxicity criteria for derivation of toxicity criteria for long term toxicity is another source of uncertainty. This uncertainty may overestimate or underestimate the risk.	Agreed with EPD and DoH	N/A	N/A
Health Impact – Aircraft Noise
§ Based on literature review § Definition of health end points § Selection of noise metrics § Identification of exposure-response relationships § Estimation of populations affected § Comparison with future no-project scenario	Local health situation follows the international exposure-response relationships	No direct comparison with noise metric of NEF as specified in EIAO-TM	Approach and methodology to be adopted agreed with DEP	N/A	N/A

Table 19.4: Summary of Environmental Impacts

Assessment Points	Results of Impact Predictions	Relevant Standards / Criteria	Extent of Exceedances Predicted	Impact Avoidance Measures Considered	Mitigation Measures Proposed	Residual Impacts
Air Quality Impact – Construction Phase
Air Sensitive Receivers within 500 m Assessment area	§ Compliance with the hourly TSP criterion as well as the AQOs for daily RSP and daily FSP at all ASRs under the mitigated scenario § Compliance with the AQO for annual RSP and annual FSP at all ASRs under the mitigated scenario	§ Annexes 4 and 12 of EIAO-TM § Air Pollution Control Ordinance § AQO	With the mitigation measures in place, the predicted cumulative TSP, RSP and FSP levels at all ASRs would comply with the relevant TSP criterion as well as the relevant AQO for RSP and FSP.	N/A	§ Relevant measures stipulated in Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation § Water spraying for heavy construction activities at all active works areas, at a frequency of 12 times a day or once every two hours for a 24-hour working period § 80% of the stockpiling area covered by impervious sheets and all dusty materials sprayed with water immediately prior to any loading transfer operation § Good practices for dust control § Relevant measures stipulated in EPD’s Guidance Note on the Best Practicable Means for Cement Works (Concrete Batching Plant) BPM 3/2(93) § Relevant measures stipulated in EPD’s Guidance Note on the Best Practicable Means for Tar and Bitumen Works (Asphaltic Concrete Plant) BPM 15 (94) § Relevant measures stipulated in EPD’s Guidance Note on the Best Practicable Means for Mineral Works (Stone Crushing Plants) BPM 11/1 (95)	Adverse residual impact is not anticipated.
Air Quality Impact – Operation Phase
Air sensitive receivers within 5km assessment area	NO₂, RSP, FSP SO₂, and CO levels would comply with the AQO at all ASRs	§ Annexes 4 and 12 of EIAO-TM § Air Pollution Control Ordinance § AQO	No non-compliance of AQO was predicted on identified ASRs	AAHK has already been implementing a number of initiatives aimed at reducing air emissions from airport activities and operations, including: § Banned all idling vehicle engines on the airside since 2008, except for certain vehicles that are exempted ; § Banning the use of APU for all aircraft at frontal stands by end-2014; § Requiring all airside saloon vehicles to be electric by end-2017; § Increasing charging stations for EVs and electric GSE to a total of 290 by end-2018; § Conducting a review on existing GSE emissions performance and exploring measures to further control air emissions; § Exploring with franchisees the feasibility of expediting replacement of old airside vehicles and GSE with cleaner ones during tender or renewal of contracts; § Requiring all new airside vehicles to be fuel-efficient, and making it a prerequisite for the licensing process; § Providing the cleanest diesel and gasoline at the airfield; § Requiring all of the AAHK’s diesel vehicles to use biodiesel (B5); and § Providing an LPG fuelling point for airside vehicles and GSE.	N/A	Adverse residual impact is not anticipated.
Hazard to Human Life – Construction Phase
Risk due to construction works near: § Existing aviation fuel pipeline; and § Storage facilities	§ The individual risk level is below 1 x 10^-5 per year; and § Societal risk level is in the acceptable region	Annex 4 of EIAO-TM	N/A	Mitigation measure is not necessary due to the fact that the societal risk level is in the acceptable region	Although mitigation measure is not required due to the fact that the societal risk level is in the acceptable region, the following measures have been recommended for general best practice: § Precaution measures should be established to request barges to move away during typhoons; § An appropriate marine traffic management system should be established to minimise risk of collision, which could lead to sinking or dropped objects; and § Location of all existing hydrant networks should be clearly identified prior to any construction works.	Adverse residual impact is not predicted.
Hazard to Human Life – Operation Phase
Risk due to the operation of: § New aviation fuel pipelines (submarine and underground); § New fuel hydrant systems for aircraft refuelling operation at the new aircraft stands in the airport expansion area; and § Airside petrol filling station	§ The individual risk level is below 1 x 10^-5 per year; and § Societal risk level is in ALARP region	Annex 4 of EIAO-TM	N/A	§ A similar coating standard shall be applied to the new submarine pipelines as for the existing pipelines § Checks on the integrity of the new submarine pipeline should be conducted during testing and commission § Before the commencement of any construction works, as-built drawings showing the alignment and level of the underground aviation fuel pipelines for the work area will be provided to the third party construction contractors § Third party construction contractors are required to undertake underground pipeline detection works to ascertain the exact alignment of the underground pipeline before the commencement of works § Monitoring of underground pipelines by the Leak Detection System should be provided § Study should be conducted to ensure the new pipeline can withstand the planned future loading § New pressure surge calculations are required for the hydrant network § Appropriate pressure drop calculations should be undertaken for the new system	§ Improvement audit to reinforce existing refuelling practices and to achieve better compliance § During refuelling process, four cones are to be put in place to indicate the refuelling zone from aircraft fuelling point for the new fuel hydrant system where practicable. AAHK will communicate this recommendation to airlines and their refuelling operators as appropriate. Proper implementation of this recommendation will be checked in AAHK’s future safety audits.	§ The individual risk level is below 1 x 10^-5 per year; and § Societal risk level is in ALARP region.
Noise Impact – Aircraft Noise
Aircraft Noise Whole Hong Kong territory	NEF 25 and NEF 30 contours	NEF25 for all domestic premises, hotels, educational institutions, places of worship, courts of law and hospitals; and NEF 30 for offices (Ref. Table 1A, Annex 5 of EIAO-TM)	A portion of land use in Lok On Pai under planning	The following noise abatement practices currently adopted for the existing airport operation will be continued and maintained for the future airport operation: § aircraft departing to the northeast are required to adopt the noise abatement take-off procedures stipulated by ICAO so long as safe flight operations permit; and § all aircraft on approach to the HKIA from the northeast between 11:00 pm to 07:00 am are encouraged to adopt the Continuous Descent Approach.	§ Putting the South Runway on standby where possible at night between 2300 and 0659; § Requiring departures to take the southbound route via the West Lamma Channel during east flow at night from 2300 to 0659, subject to acceptable operational and safety consideration. This is an arrangement that is consistent with the existing requirement in the operation of the two-runway system at night; § A new arrival RNP Track 6 has been designed for preferential use in the west flow direction (i.e., runway 25 direction) between 2300 and 0659 and it is assumed that up to 95% of flights may preferentially use this new Track 6 instead of the existing straight-in tracks by year 2030; § Implementing a preferential runway use programme when wind conditions allow, such that west flow is used when departures dominate while east flow is used when arrivals dominate during night-time; and § Direct measures – when developing the MLP for the CDA site at Lok On Pai, the alignment of the NEF25 contour line should be taken into account to ensure that no noise sensitive uses are situated within the NEF25 contour in the planned development[1].	N/A
Noise Impact – Fixed Noise Sources
Assessment area boundary has been established against the criteria of 70 dB(A) (for daytime/evening periods) or 60 dB(A) (for night-time period) under several worst assumptions.	With the recommended avoidance and mitigation measures in place, the cumulative mitigated noise levels due to fixed noise sources, including ground noise sources associated with the aircraft taxiing as well as the operations of aircraft engine run-up facilities and APUs, would comply with the relevant daytime/evening and night-time criteria at all representative NSRs.	§ Noise Control Ordinance; § EIAO-TM; relevant Guidance Notes under EIAO; and § Technical Memorandum for the Assessment of Noise from Places other than Domestic Premises, Public Places or Construction Sites.	With the avoidance and mitigation measures in place, no exceedance of the relevant noise criteria at any representative NSRs was predicted.	Specification of the maximum permissible SWLs of the project’s fixed plants during daytime/evening and night-time should be followed.	Noise enclosure with noise reduction of at least 15 dB(A) at the ERUFs is required to comply with the relevant day & evening and night-time fixed noise criteria.	Adverse residual impact is not anticipated.
Noise Impact – Construction Noise
The first layer of NSRs (nearest to the noise sources in various directions) has been selected as the assessment points.	With the recommended avoidance and mitigation measures in place, the cumulative mitigated noise levels would comply with the daytime construction noise criterion at all representative NSRs.	§ Noise Control Ordinance; § EIAO-TM; relevant Guidance Notes under EIAO; and § Technical Memorandum on Noise from Construction Work other than Percussive Piling.	With the avoidance and mitigation measures in place, no exceedance of the daytime construction noise criterion at any representative NSRs was predicted.	Good site practice to limit noise emissions at source as follows: § Only well-maintained plant to be operated on-site, and plant should be serviced regularly during the construction works § Machines and plant that may be in intermittent use to be shut down between work periods, or throttled down to a minimum § Plant known to emit noise strongly in one direction should, where possible, be orientated to direct noise away from the NSRs § Mobile plant should be sited as far away from NSRs as possible § Material stockpiles and other structures to be effectively utilised, where practicable, to screen noise from on-site construction activities	§ Selection of quieter plant § Use of movable noise barrier § Use of noise enclosure / acoustic shed	Adverse residual impact is not anticipated.
Noise Impact – Traffic Noise
For road traffic noise, assessment shall generally include areas within 300 m from the boundary of the project and the works of the project. For marine traffic noise, the assessment area has been established against the standard where the predicted marine traffic noise at the boundary of area is 10 dB(A) below the prevailing background noise level at the nearest NSR.	For road traffic noise, adverse noise impact from the proposed road alignments is not anticipated as the nearby NSRs are all found to be located beyond the 300m assessment area for the proposed road alignments of 3RS project For marine traffic noise, adverse noise impact is not anticipated as the nearby NSRs are all found to be located outside the assessment area.	§ Noise Control Ordinance; and § EIAO-TM; relevant Guidance Notes under EIAO	N/A	N/A	N/A	Adverse road traffic noise impact is not anticipated. Adverse marine traffic noise impact is not anticipated.
Water Quality Impact – Construction Phase
WSRs within: § North Western WCZ; § North Western Supplementary WCZ; § Deep Bay WCZ; and § Western Buffer WCZ	§ No exceedance of sedimentation criteria § No adverse water quality impact due to depletion of dissolved oxygen at WSRs from submarine cable diversion § No adverse water quality impact due to release of contaminants from submarine cable diversion § No adverse water quality impact due to release of contaminated pore water from DCM activities § No adverse water quality impact due to release of contaminated pore water from surcharge § No exceedance of depth-averaged SS criteria due to the project under the mitigated scenario; however, exceedance of depth-averaged SS criteria at some WSRs under the mitigated cumulative scenario (primarily due to conservative assumptions of marine construction activities by other concurrent projects) § For all other construction activities (e.g. drilling for submarine aviation fuel pipelines, construction / modification of stormwater outfalls, piling for new runway approach lights and HKIAAA marker beacons, construction site runoff and drainage, sewage effluent from construction workforce and general construction activities), no adverse water quality impacts are anticipated with the implementation of the proposed design / construction methods and the recommended mitigation measures where applicable.	§ EIAO-TM Annex 6 & 14 § Water Pollution Control Ordinance (WPCO) § North Western WCZ WQO § North Western Supplementary WCZ WQO § Deep Bay WCZ WQO § Western Buffer WCZ WQO § WSD’s water quality criteria for flushing water intake § Sediment Deposition and SS Criteria for Corals, “Standards and Criteria for Pollution Control in Coral Reef Areas” § UK Council Directive on the quality required of shellfish waters (Shellfish Waters Directive) § Directive 2008/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on environmental quality standards in the field of water policy § The US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Criteria Maximum Concentration (CMC) § The USEPA Criteria Continuous Concentration (CCC)	For mitigated SS due to the project only: § No exceedances of the depth-averaged SS criteria at all WSRs. For mitigated cumulative SS, no exceedance of the depth-averaged SS criteria at all WSRs except the following: § C20 – WSD seawater intake at Tsing Yi – up to 2.5 mg/l above criteria (mainly due to concurrent projects) § CR3 – Hard corals at The Brothers islands – up to 1.26 mg/l above criteria (primarily due to conservative assumptions for concurrent projects[2]) § C7a – cooling water intake at HKIA (North) – up to 16.91 mg/l above criteria (no exceedance after further mitigation) § C8 – future cooling water intake at HKBCF – up to 1.23 mg/l above criteria (no exceedance after further mitigation) § E12 – Sham Shui Kok – up to 4.4 mg/l above criteria (primarily due to conservative assumptions for the concurrent Lantau Logistics Park (LLP) project. However, there is currently no implementation programme for this concurrent project, and the future project at this site will require an EIA which will minimise the potential water quality impacts associated with this concurrent project)	§ Use of non-dredge ground improvement methods for land formation for avoidance of SS and contaminants release; § Use of horizontal directional drill (HDD) method for submarine aviation fuel pipelines diversion; § Only welding works will be carried out on the floating platform, and bulk storage of chemicals is not required at the daylighting point at Sha Chau; § No dewatering of pipe at Sha Chau; § Provision of a small concrete bund wall around the high side of the pit, and a cover to prevent rain entry at the daylighting point at Sha Chau to prevent muddy runoff; § Drilling is conducted via a closed-loop system at the launching point at airport island, and drilling fluid is reconditioned and reused; § Use of water jetting method and closed grabs for field joint excavation for diversion of submarine 11kV cables to minimise SS and contaminant release; and § Connection works for outfalls to be undertaken during dry season.	§ Capping of daily maximum production rates of relevant land formation works to those assumed in the water quality assessment; § Restricting the fines content for sand blanket and marine filling activities; § 200m advanced / partially completed seawall prior to marine filling operations; § Double layer silt curtain system around selected active works areas; § Double layer silt curtain and/or silt screen system around selected WSRs; § Use of closed grabs and silt curtains for field joint excavation activities; § Use of closed grabs, steel casing and silt curtains for piling activities; § Implementation of guidelines set in Practice Note for Professional Persons on Construction Site Drainage (ProPECC Note PN 1/94) ; § Provision of chemical toilets for construction workforce; § Treatment of wastewater per WPCO requirements prior to discharge; § Treatment of chemical wastes in accordance to Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation and Code of Practice on the Packaging, Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes; and § ‘Zero discharge’ policy for activities at Sha Chau.	Adverse residual impact is not predicted.
Water Quality Impact – Operation Phase
WSRs within: § North Western WCZ; § North Western Supplementary WCZ; § Deep Bay WCZ; and § Western Buffer WCZ	§ No adverse water quality impacts anticipated due to changes in hydrodynamics , but minor exceedances in water quality criteria at some WSRs; § No adverse water quality impacts anticipated due to embayment of water at western end of HKIA; § No adverse water quality impacts anticipated due to sewage discharge; § No adverse water quality impacts anticipated due to spent cooling water discharge; § No adverse water quality impacts anticipated due to stormwater discharge; § No adverse water quality impacts anticipated due to greywater reuse with the proposed design measures in place; § No adverse water quality impacts anticipated due to accidental fuel spillage with the proposed design and contingency measures in place; and § No need for maintenance dredging of the navigable waters north of HKIA.	§ EIAO-TM Annex 6 & 14 § WPCO § North Western WCZ WQO § North Western Supplementary WCZ WQO § Deep Bay WCZ WQO § Western Buffer WCZ WQO § WSD’s water quality criteria for flushing water intake § Criteria for cooling water discharge (e.g. USEPA CCC and ecotoxicology study by Ma et al. (1998))	Minor exceedances were predicted for the below parameters and stations: SS (monthly depth-averaged value) C3 – up to 12.0 mg/l C5 – up to 13.2 mg/l C6 – up to 14.9 mg/l TIN (annual depth-averaged value) C1 – up to 0.62 mg/l C9 – up to 1.05 mg/l E1 – up to 3.61 mg/l NH₃ (annual depth-averaged value) C9 – up to 0.026 mg/l E1 – up to 0.134 mg/l Although exceedances were predicted, they were assessed as not attributable to the implementation of the project, but due to the high background levels.	§ Connection of sewage of network for treatment of sewage at SHWSTW; § Reuse of treated greywater to reduce sewage effluent and fresh water usage; § Placement of submarine aviation fuel pipelines under seabed rocks to avoid possible damage from marine vessels and fuel leakage; § Appropriate design of the land formation to avoid major changes in local and regional hydrodynamics; and § Restrict operation of the fuel supply and refuelling systems to qualified and trained personnel.	§ Treatment of wastewater per WPCO requirements prior to discharge; § Treatment of chemical wastes in accordance with Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation and Code of Practice on the Packaging, Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes; § Install and maintain roadside gullies to trap and remove silt and grit from stormwater; § Install and maintain oil/grease and oil/grease interceptors at storm drains; § Intercept and discharge runoff from aircraft and vehicle washing activities to foul sewer or divert to temporary storage for treatment off-site; § Fuel pipelines and hydrant systems should be designed with adequate protection and pressure / leakage detection systems; § Provision of a ‘spill trap containment system’ at aircraft apron and stand areas; and § Implement an emergency spill response plan for spillage events.	Adverse residual impact is not predicted
Sewerage and Sewage Treatment Implication – Construction Phase
Refer to the relevant parts of the Water Quality Impact – Construction Phase
Sewerage and Sewage Treatment Implication – Operation Phase
§ Gravity sewer from airport discharge manhole to Tung TCSPS § TCSPS § Sewage rising main from TCSPS to SHWSTW § SHWSTW	§ The existing gravity sewers from the airport discharge manhole to TCSPS would reach its full capacity by 2027 § Pump capacity of TCSPS would be exceeded in 2023 § No adverse impact to the sewage rising main from TCSPS to SHWSTW § No adverse impact to the daily treatment capacity of SHWSTW § Peak flow capacity of SHWSTW would be exceeded from year 2026	§ Guidelines for Estimating Sewage Flows for Sewage Infrastructure Planning Version 1.0 published by EPD (GESF) § Sewerage Manual – Part 1 published by DSD (SM1)	N/A	N/A	§ The sewerage system for 3RS will be designed, operated and maintained by AAHK in accordance with all the relevant standards and guidelines published by DSD. In addition to continuing the odour control arrangements, AAHK will monitor the H₂S level and adopt active septicity management measures that can effectively contain any future septicity problems in the design for the 3RS sewerage system. § AAHK undertakes to implement and complete the upgrading works for the affected gravity sewer by 2026 (allowing a buffer period of about one year before the full capacity is reached), with the planning work to commence in 2022 (assuming one year for planning plus three years for design and construction). AAHK should also monitor the sewage flow build-up as a part of the EM&A for the project and start planning construction of the upgrading works in 2022, or when the sewage flow in the affected gravity sewer exceeds 80% of the design capacity of the sewer, whichever is earlier, so as to ensure timely completion of the mitigation works before the flow would exceed the design capacity of the sewer. § A government project under Agreement No.CE6/2012 is currently underway by DSD to investigate, design and construct an additional sewage rising main between TCSPS and SHWSTW, which would enhance the operational reliability of the sewerage system. Construction is planned to commence in 2015 and complete the works by end 2022. The TCSPS is sufficient to cater for the ultimate design sewage flow arising from the project after the completion of construction under Agreement No. CE6/2012[3]. § EPD will monitor the sewage flow build-up and coordinate the necessary upgrading works for the SHWSTW when needed in due course.	No adverse residual impacts would be anticipated.
Waste Management Implication – Construction Phase
Project area	§ Inert C&D materials of about 9,543,500m³ (in-situ volume) generated from excavation works, piling works, demolition works on the existing airport island / proposed land formation area as well as from HDD during diversion of the existing submarine pipelines; § Non-inert C&D materials of about 96,200m³ (in-situ volume) generated from site clearance of the golf course area, demolition works for the T2 expansion, and various superstructure construction works; § Marine sediment of about 10,200m³ (in-situ volume) generated from excavation at the cable field joint area; § Marine sediment of about 767,660m³ (in-situ volume) generated from the foundation / piling / excavation works for constructing various tunnels, facilities, buildings and APM depot; § Small quantity of chemical waste from maintenance and servicing of construction plant and equipment; § General refuse of maximum daily arising of up to 9,100kg from construction workforce; and § Floating refuse of about 65m³ to be collected from the newly constructed seawall per year.	§ Annex 7 and 15 of EIAO-TM; § Waste Disposal Ordinance (Cap. 354); § Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation (Cap. 354C); § Waste Disposal (Charges for Disposal of Construction Waste) Regulation (Cap. 354N); § Building Ordinance (Cap.123); § Land (Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance (Cap. 28); § Dumping at Sea Ordinance (Cap. 466); and § Public Cleansing and Prevention of Nuisances Regulation (Cap. 132BK).	N/A	§ The use of non-dredge methods for ground improvement will completely avoid bulk removal and disposal of any dredged materials; § Most sloping seawall options can allow for the reuse of rock armour from the existing northern seawall to minimise waste generation; § Priority will be given to maximise the use of suitable fill materials available from other concurrent projects and the Government’s PFRF; § Minimise the extent of excavation and maximise on-site reuse of the inert C&D materials generated as far as practicable. The relevant construction activities (particularly for the tunnel works) and construction programme have been carefully planned and developed; § All marine sediments to be generated from the foundation / piling / excavation works for constructing various tunnels, facilities, buildings and APM depot will be treated and reused on-site as backfilling materials, thus avoiding the need for disposal of the sediments; § Using HDD method to construct the new pipeline will avoid dredging of seabed; and § Use of water jetting method to lay the new cable will avoid generation and disposal of any marine sediment.	§ Good site practices and waste reduction measures for C&D materials § Marine disposal of marine sediments from the cable field joint excavation § Handling of chemical wastes in accordance with the Code of Practice on the Packaging, Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes, and disposal of chemical wastes at licensed chemical waste recycling/ treatment facilities § Employ a reputable licensed waste collector for disposal of general refuse and floating refuse at designated landfill sites	No adverse residual impacts would be anticipated.
Waste Management Implication – Operation Phase
Project area	§ About 46,190 tons/year of general refuse from the operation of the passenger concourse, aircraft cabins, terminal buildings, offices, commercial establishments and various airport infrastructure facilities; § Chemical waste from maintenance, servicing and repairing of various E&M equipment; § Floating refuse of about 65m³ to be collected from the new artificial seawall per year; and § About 0.23 ton/day of dewatered sludge from the proposed greywater treatment plant	§ Waste Disposal Ordinance (Cap. 354); and § Waste Disposal (Chemical Waste) (General) Regulation (Cap. 354C).	N/A	§ The initiatives currently implemented at HKIA in segregating recyclable waste materials (such as cardboard, paper, metals, plastics, glass bottles, food waste, etc.) from general refuse for recycling should be extended to cover the expanded airport; and § The artificial seawall of the expanded airport island has been properly designed to achieve a shoreline without any sharp turns or abrupt indentation where floating refuse would easily be trapped or accumulated.	§ Employ a reputable licensed waste collector to collect general refuse on a daily basis and dispose of the general refuse at designated landfill sites § Handling of chemical wastes in accordance with the Code of Practice on the Packaging, Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes, and disposal of chemical wastes at licensed chemical waste recycling/ treatment facilities § Regular cleaning of floating refuse trapped or accumulated on the artificial seawall, and disposal of the floating refuse together with general refuse at designated landfill sites § Employ a reputable licensed waste collector to dispose of the dewatered sludge (stored in tight containers or skips) at designated landfill sites	No adverse residual impacts would be anticipated.
Land Contamination – Construction Phase
Potential land contaminative areas within the project	Land contamination impacts were identified by carrying out land contamination assessment of the past / present land uses of potential contaminative areas. The potential land contaminative areas include: § Golf course area § T2 expansion area (underground and above-ground fuel tank areas, and emergency power generation units) § Existing airside facilities (petrol filling station and fuel tank room)	§ Section 3 of Annex 19 of EIAO-TM; § Guidance Note for Contaminated Land Assessment and Remediation; § Guidance Manual for Use of Risk-based Remediation Goals for Contaminated Land Management; and § Practice Guide for Investigation and Remediation of Contaminated Land.	N/A (As all potential land contaminative areas are still under operation, all sampling and testing works will be conducted prior to commencement of any construction works at these areas.)	N/A	§ The contaminated soil identified (if any) should be excavated and treated on-site; and § The recommended environmental mitigation and safety measures, progress monitoring and / or confirmation sampling / testing recommended should be implemented.	No adverse residual impacts would be anticipated.
Land Contamination – Operation Phase
N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Terrestrial Ecological Impact – Construction and Operation Phases
Tai Ho Stream SSSI, San Tau Beach SSSI, Lung Kwu Chau, Tree Island and Sha Chau SSSI; Open sea to the north of the existing airport island in relation to the investigation of birds’ activities over the land formation area and the adjacent waters; All land areas within 500 m from the coastline of North Lantau from Sham Wat Wan to Tai Ho Wan; and All land areas within the boundary of SCLKCMP.	Low or negligible impacts to the terrestrial habitats, flora and fauna species in the study area during construction and operation phases	§ Annexes 8 and 16 of EIAO-TM.	N/A	N/A	N/A	None
Sha Chau Egretry	Sha Chau egretry: moderate impact due to the fuel pipeline installation works; but no impact during operation phase	§ EIAO-TM, particularly Annexes 8 and 16.	N/A	§ Avoidance of direct impact to egretry – the daylighting location should be outside egretry boundary § Construction activities at Sheung Sha Chau Island should avoid night-time and the ardeid’s breeding season (April – July).	§ Preservation of Nesting Vegetation – the vegetation used by ardeids for nesting should be preserved.	None
Marine Ecological Impact – Construction and Operation Phase
San Tau Beach SSSI, SCLKCMP , planned BMP and potential SWLMP, intertidal, sub-tidal hard bottom, sub-tidal soft bottom and open marine waters habitats	Temporary/ permanent loss of habitats due to land formation and associated works: § Low-moderate for intertidal and sub-tidal hard bottom habitats; § Moderate for open marine waters; § Low for rocky shore at SCLKCMP; § Insignificant to moderate for sub-tidal soft bottom habitats; § Insignificant for open marine waters around Sha Chau, and two ends and northwestern waters of the 3RS Loss of carrying capacity and habitat fragmentation, changes in species distribution, abundance and patterns of habitat use: § Low impacts Release of SS and associated changes in water quality: § Low-moderate for corals § Insignificant to low for other habitats Release of contaminants from pore water, oil/chemical spillage, change in hydrodynamics, changes in water quality associated with change in hydrodynamics, indirect disturbance of habitats due to deterioration of water quality: § Insignificant to low impacts Importation and transportation of marine fill and filling activities, piling activities and associated underwater noise: § Low impacts Impingement and entrainment due to seawater intakes, indirect disturbance of marine fauna due to aircraft noise: § Insignificant to low impacts	§ Annexes 8 and 16 of EIAO-TM § WPCO § North Western WCZ WQO § North Western Supplementary WCZ WQO § Deep Bay WCZ WQO § Western Buffer WCZ WQO § Sediment Deposition and SS Criteria for Corals, “Standards and Criteria for Pollution Control in Coral Reef Areas”	No exceedances are predicted	Relevant avoidance measures as detailed above for the water quality aspect	§ Minimisation of land formation area § Use of construction methods with minimal risk / disturbance § Consideration of alternative alignment for pipeline diversion with minimal risk / disturbance § Consideration of alternative treatment to existing pipelines after diversion § Strict enforcement of no-dumping policy § Good construction site practices § Relevant water quality mitigation measures during construction and operation phases as detailed above § Pre-construction phase coral dive survey to review the feasibility of translocating coral species § Spill response plan § Proposed establishment of new marine park of approximately 2,400 ha linking the planned BMP and the existing SCLKCMP [4]	No adverse residual impact is anticipated.
CWD habitats at north of airport island, around Sha Chau, marine waters between airport and Sha Chau	Temporary and permanent loss of dolphin habitats due to land formation and associated construction: § Low to high for marine waters north of airport island § Insignificant at other locations Loss of carrying capacity: § Moderate for marine waters and CWD habitat Habitat fragmentation: § Moderate for marine waters and CWD habitat Loss of CWD travelling area and connectivity between core CWD habitat areas: § Moderate for travel areas north of airport island Loss of prey resources for CWD as a result of temporary loss of benthic habitat: § Low for marine waters Disturbance to the CWD use of travelling area and connectivity between core CWD habitat areas: § Moderate for travel area north of existing airport island Changes to species distribution, abundance and habitat use: § Moderate Changes in water quality: § Insignificant to low Impacts to marine life from the importation and transportation of marine fill and filling activities: § Low Increased acoustic disturbance from construction works: § Insignificant for 11kV cable and fuel pipeline diversion; low for bored piling for approach lights and marker beacons; low-moderate for general construction works. Increased disturbance from night-time construction works: § Moderate Increased acoustic disturbance from changes to marine vessels and ferry traffic: § Low to moderate during construction phase, Moderate-high during operation phase Increased risk of injury/mortality to CWDs from marine traffic § Low for construction vessels; High for HSFs. Changes to CWD movement patterns as a result of marine traffic: § Low to moderate during construction phase, Moderate-high during operation phase Disturbance to the function and quality of Marine Parks: § Low-moderate for SCLKCMP; low for potential SWLMP; moderate for planned BMP Changes to the hydrodynamic regime and water quality as a result of the new land formation: § Low Secondary impacts of the proposed new marine park and extension of HKIAAA on CWDs: · Positive secondary impacts	· Annexes 8 and 16 of EIAO-TM · WPCO · North Western WCZ WQO · North Western Supplementary WCZ WQO · Deep Bay WCZ WQO · Western Buffer WCZ WQO · Sediment Deposition and SS Criteria for Corals, “Standards and Criteria for Pollution Control in Coral Reef Areas”	N/A	Relevant avoidance measures as detailed above for the water quality aspect	§ Relevant water quality mitigation measures during construction and operation phases as detailed above § Acoustic decoupling of construction equipment mounted on barges § Dolphin Exclusion Zones § Avoid peak calving seasons of CWD for bored piling works § Spill response plan § Construction vessel speed limits and skipper training § Establishment of new marine park of approximately 2,400 ha linking the planned BMP and the existing SCLKCMP § SkyPier HSFs’ speed restrictions and route diversions	No adverse residual impact is anticipated.
Fisheries Impact – Construction Phase
North Western WCZ; North Western Supplementary WCZ; Deep Bay WCZ; and Western Buffer WCZ	· Direct loss of fishing ground from construction works are of low significance from commencement to moderate. · Direct loss of fisheries habitats (and resources) from construction works are of low significance from commencement to moderate. · Direct loss of fisheries habitats (and resources) from diversion of submarine 11 kV cables and submarine fuel pipelines is insignificant. · Low impact significance for the direct loss of spawning and nursery ground. · Insignificant to low impact for indirect disturbance due to deterioration of water quality. · Insignificant for indirect impact on aquaculture sites. · Low for the indirect impact on artificial reef. · Low for the impact of fishing activities. · Low impact significance for the disturbance to fisheries resources associated with underwater sound.	· Annexes 9 and 17 of EIAO-TM · Fisheries Protection Ordinance · Marine Fish Culture Ordinance · Marine Parks Ordinance	N/A	Relevant avoidance measures as detailed above for the water quality aspect	§ Relevant water quality mitigation measures during construction phase as detailed above § Minimisation of land formation area § Use of construction methods with minimal risk / disturbance § Consideration of alternative alignment for pipeline diversion with minimal risk / disturbance § Consideration of alternative treatment to existing pipelines after diversion § Strict enforcement of no-dumping policy § Good construction site practices	No adverse residual impact is anticipated.
Fisheries Impact – Operation Phase
North Western WCZ; North Western Supplementary WCZ; Deep Bay WCZ; and Western Buffer WCZ	· Moderate impact significance for the direct loss of fishing ground. · Low impact significance for the disturbance of fishing activities. · Moderate impact significance for the direct loss of fisheries habitats (and resources). · Low for the direct loss of spawning and nursery grounds. · Low impact significance for the change in hydrodynamics and tidal influence. · Insignificant for the indirect disturbance of fisheries habitats due to deterioration of water quality. · Low impact significance for the impingement and entrainment due to seawater intakes. · Insignificant for the indirect disturbance due to aircraft noise. · Positive impact on fisheries resources conservation, low impact significance on fishing activities with the implementation of the proposed new marine park together with extension of HKIAAA for the project.	· Annexes 9 and 17 of EIAO-TM · Fisheries Protection Ordinance · Marine Fish Culture Ordinance · Marine Parks Ordinance	N/A	Relevant avoidance measures as detailed above for the water quality aspect	§ Relevant water quality mitigation measures during operation phase as detailed above § Proposed establishment of new marine park of approximately 2,400 ha linking the existing/planned marine parks and the extended HKIAAA[5]	No adverse residual impact is anticipated.
Landscape and Visual Impact – Construction Phase
Identified LRs, LCAs and VSRs that may be affected by the project	After the implementation of mitigation measures during the construction phase, all LRs and LCAs are anticipated to experience residual impacts of slight or insubstantial significance or are not anticipated to be affected by the 3RS, except the following: · Coastal waters of North Lantau and inshore water landscape are anticipated to experience residual impacts of substantial significance · Roadside amenity planting within the assessment area is anticipated to experience impacts of moderate significance After the implementation of mitigation measures during the construction phase, all VSRs are anticipated to experience residual impacts of slight or insubstantial significance or are not anticipated to be affected by the 3RS, except the followings: · Passengers / drivers of recreational marine craft in North Lantau waters and Urmston Road and recreational users of Sha Chau Islands are anticipated to experience residual impacts of substantial significance · Residents of Tung Chung, including Tung Chung Crescent, Seaview Crescent, Caribbean Coast, Area 53 to Area 56, residents along south coast of Tuen Mun, Hong Kong Gold Coast and Siu Lam; visitors to AsiaWorld Expo, Hong Kong SkyCity Marriott Hotel, Hong Kong Airport Passenger Terminal and to Regal Airport Hotel; passengers of Cable Cars of Ngong Ping 360; hikers of Nei Lak Shan, Fung Wong Shan (Lantau Peak), Tai Tung Shan (Sunset Peak), Lantau North Country Park, Lantau South Country Park and Scenic Hill are anticipated to experience residual impacts of moderate significance. · Passengers / drivers of vehicles and MTR along Cheong Wing Road; passengers of commercial aircraft, passengers / drivers of the proposed Hong Kong Link Road; and passengers of ferries in North Lantau waters and Urmston Road are anticipated to experience residual impacts of moderate significance.	· Annexes 3, 10, 11, 18, 20 and 21 of EIAO-TM; · Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines; · Hong Kong 2030 Planning Vision and Strategy Final Report; · Landscape Value Mapping of Hong Kong; · EIAO Guidance Note No. 8/2010; · Town Planning Ordinance; · Forests and Countryside Ordinance; · Country Parks Ordinance; · Foreshore and Sea-bed (reclamations) Ordinance; · Marine Parks Ordinance; · Protection of Endangered Species of Animals And Plants Ordinance; · Approved Chek Lap Kok OZP No. S/I-CLK/12; · Approved Tung Chung Town Centre Area OZP No. S/I-TCTC/18; · SILTech Publication (1991) – Tree Planting and Maintenance in Hong Kong (Standing Interdepartmental Landscape Technical Group) [11-23]; · GEO publication (1/2009) – Prescriptive Measures for Man-made Slopes and Retaining Walls; · GEO 1/2011 – Technical Guidelines on Landscape Treatment for Slopes Land Administration Office Instruction (LAOI) Section D-12 – Tree Preservation; · LDPN 7/2007 - Tree Preservation and Tree Removal Application for Building Development in Private Projects; · DEVB TC (W) No.2/2012 Allocation of Space for Quality Greening on Roads; · DEVB TC (W) No.3/2012 Site Coverage of Greenery for Government Building Projects; · DEVB TC (W) No.2/2013 Greening on Footbridges and Flyovers; · ETWB TCW No. 2/2004 – Maintenance of Vegetation and Hard Landscape Features; · ETWB TCW No. 29/2004 – Registration of Old and Valuable Trees, and Guidelines for their Preservation; · ETWB TCW No. 36/2004 The Advisory Committee on the Appearance of Bridges and Associated Structures (ACABAS); · ETWB TCW No. 5/2005 – Protection of Natural Streams/Rivers from Adverse Impacts Arising from Construction Works; · ETWB TCW No. 10/2013 - Tree Preservation; · WBTC No. 25/93 – Control of Visual Impact of Slopes; · WBTC No. 17/2000 – Improvement to the Appearance of slopes in connection with WBTC 25/93; · WBTC No. 7/2002 – Tree Planting in Public Works; · Latest Proper Planting Practices and other relevant guidelines issued by Development Bureau (Greening, Landscape and Tree Management Section); and · Latest Hong Kong International Airport Approved Plant Species List.	N/A	· The construction area and contractor’s temporary works areas should be minimised to avoid impacts on adjacent landscape; · Reduction of construction period to practical minimum; · Control of night-time lighting by hooding all lights and through minimising night working periods; and · All existing trees shall be carefully protected during construction.	· Phasing of the construction stage to reduce visual impacts during the construction phase; · Construction traffic (land and sea) including construction plants, construction vessels and barges should be kept to a practical minimum; · Erection of decorative mesh screens or construction hoardings around works areas in visually unobtrusive colours; · Trees unavoidably affected by the works shall be transplanted where practical; · Avoidance of excessive height and bulk of site buildings and structures; and · Land formation works shall be followed with advanced hydroseeding around taxiways and runways as soon as practical.	In accordance with the relevant criteria and guidelines for evaluating and assessing impacts, it is considered that the overall residual landscape and visual impacts of the project are marginally acceptable with mitigation.
Landscape and Visual Impact – Operation Phase
Identified LRs, LCAs and VSRs that may be affected by the project	After the implementation of mitigation measures during the operation phase, all LRs and LCAs are anticipated to experience residual impacts of slight or insubstantial significance or are not anticipated to be affected by the 3RS, except the following: · Impacts on coastal waters of North Lantau and inshore water landscape are anticipated to remain substantial in the operation phase. After the implementation of mitigation measures during the operation phase, all VSRs are anticipated to experience residual impacts of slight or insubstantial significance, or are not anticipated to be affected by the 3RS, except the following: · Passengers / drivers of recreational marine craft in north Lantau waters and Urmston Road and recreational users of Sha Chau Islands are anticipated to experience residual impacts of moderate significance.	Same as for the Construction Phase.	N/A	Lighting units to be directional and minimise unnecessary light spill and glare.	· Sensitive landscape design of land formation edge; · All above ground structures, including Vent Shafts, Emergency and Firemen’s Accesses etc. shall sensitively designed; · Sensitive design of buildings and structures in terms of scale, height and bulk (visual weight); · Use appropriate building materials and colours in built structures to create cohesive visual mass; · Greening measures, including vertical greening, green roofs, road verge planting and peripheral screen planting, shall be implemented; · Compensatory Tree Planting for all felled trees shall be provided to the satisfaction of relevant Government departments; · Streetscape (e.g. paving, signage, street furniture, lighting, etc.) shall be sensitively designed; · All streetscape areas and hard and soft landscape areas disturbed during construction shall be reinstated to equal or better quality (with implementation of screen planting, road verge planting etc.); · Aesthetic improvement planting of viaduct structure; and · Sensitive design of footbridges, noise barriers and enclosures with greening (screen planting / climbers / planters) and chromatic measures.	In accordance with the relevant criteria and guidelines for evaluating and assessing impacts, it is considered that the overall residual landscape and visual impacts of the project are marginally acceptable with mitigation.
Cultural Heritage Impact – Construction Phase
Cultural heritage within the marine archaeological assessment area and within the 500 m assessment area for terrestrial cultural heritage	No impacts predicted	Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment MAI Guidelines for MAI	None	N/A	None required	N/A
Cultural Heritage Impact – Operation Phase
Cultural heritage within the marine archaeological assessment area and within the 500 m assessment area for terrestrial cultural heritage	No impacts predicted	Guidelines for Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment MAI Guidelines for MAI	None	N/A	None required	N/A
Health Impact – Aerial Emissions
Human receptors within 5km Assessment area	Levels of acute and chronic exposure due to TAP comply with the respective international guideline values. Maximum increase of carcinogenic risk due to TAP is around 1.14x10^-5 which is considered acceptable. For criteria pollutants, the estimated risks of hospital admission and premature death for short-term exposure are relatively small. The estimated risk of premature death for long-term exposure is also relatively small.	· International guidelines values (such as WHO, IRIS, OEHHA, etc.) · Health risk / impact assessment guidelines (such as WHO)	N/A	Those adopted for alleviating potential air quality impacts during operation phase	Those adopted for mitigating potential air quality impacts during operation phase	N/A
Health Impact – Aircraft Noise
Populated areas located adjacent to the NEF 25 contour line	Changes in populations affected relative to “without project” scenario: · Annoyance: approximately 10% less · Sleep disturbance: approximately 50% less	Health risk / impact assessment guidelines (such as WHO and EEA)	N/A	Those adopted for alleviating potential aircraft noise impacts	Those adopted for mitigating potential aircraft noise impacts	N/A

[1] AAHK will offer the provision of window insulation and air-conditioning for all houses situated within the newly affected villages before the operation of the third runway in order to alleviate the potential aircraft noise impact on the residents.

[2] Conservative assumptions are based on the maximum allowable SS release rates of the relevant concurrent project. However based on the available information, the actual SS release rates are much lower than the maximum allowable release rates.

[3] EPD has agreed to reserve 43,500 m³/day (ADWF) at the TCSPS for the total sewage discharge from the expanded airport, and AAHK will closely liaise with EPD and DSD to ascertain a smooth interface with the upgrading works for TCSPS.

[4] In addition to the proposed mitigation measures, environmental enhancement measures have also been recommended, including deployment of artificial reefs; provision of eco-enhancement designs for part of the seawall; establishment of a marine research programme to support conservation of marine ecology; promotion of environmental education and eco-tourism; and setting up of environmental enhancement fund.

[5] In addition to the proposed mitigation measures, a number of fisheries enhancement measures are proposed to further improve the fisheries resources in the western Hong Kong waters and support sustainable fisheries operation, including eco-enhancement design of part of the seawalls within the future extended HKIAAA which restricts vessel entry including fishing vessels; potential deployment of artificial reefs at appropriate locations to promote juvenile fish recruitment; implementation of a FES; and setting up of a Fisheries Enhancement Fund.