EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This is the first EM & A Report for the project of Footbridge and Improvements to Ap Lei Chau Bridge Road & Ap Lei Chau Drive.

This report mainly presents the EM & A works undertaken for the above project from 1 May 2003 to 31 May 2003 in accordance with the EM & A Manual and the Environmental Permit (EP 130/2002) under the Appendix H of the Particular Specification.

Breach of AL Levels

L_{eq (30min)} noise level measurement was performed at four monitoring points namely M1, M2, M3 and M4. M1 is for the Ap Lei Chau Baptist Kindergarten (NSR Ref. no.10). M2 is for the Harbour Mission Church and Yan Oi Kindergarten (NSR Ref. no. 12). M3 is for the Hong Kong True Light College (NSR Ref. no. 17). M4 is for the Shan On House (NSR Ref. no. 20). Since the sensitive receivers on M1, M2 and M3 are for educational uses, the limit level is 70 dB(A) during normal school hours and 65 dB(A) during examination period. For the sensitive receiver on M4, the limit level is 75 dB(A) as it is a domestic premise.

Since the operation of the major construction plant commenced in mid May 2003, construction noise monitoring was conducted on the 17^th and 24^th of May 2003. An additional monitoring was performed on 19^th May for the Harbour Mission Church & Yan Oi Kindergarten (M2).

All the measured noise levels at the three monitoring stations (M1, M3 and M4) are below the noise limit level. On 24 May 2003, the noise level of M2 was found to be 72.7 dB(A) which exceeded the noise limit level during school hours. The notification of noise limit exceedance was issued to the Contractor. An investigation into the exceedance is currently being undertaken.

Complaint log

One verbal complaint was made by the principal of the Harbour Mission Church and Yan Oi Kindergarten on 19 May 2003. It was found that the demolition works started at 9:15 am on that day. The complaint was received by the Contractor at 9:25 am concerning the noise generated from the demolition works. Hence, the complaint is considered to be valid and due to the works of this project. Immediate mitigation measures were taken including stopping the works at once. An adhoc meeting was held in the kindergarten amongst the principal and the site agent of the Contractor during which the sound level generated from the demolition works was demonstrated and recorded. Although the L_{eq (30min)} had been demonstrated to be within the contractual requirement of 70 dB(A) during the operation of one breaker, it was still not acceptable by the principal of the kindergarten.

As such, the contractor shifted the working hour for the demolition works, starting from 5:15 pm and ending at 7:00 pm. During a further meeting among the ER, Contractor and the principal of the kindergarten on 27 May 2003, it was agreed that demolition works for lower 1.2 m portion of the retaining wall would proceed within normal working hours, excluding from 12:00 to 3:30 which is the sleeping time for the kindergarten children, provided that the equivalent noise limit level is below 70 dB(A).

Others

No notifications of summons, no successful prosecutions were received during the reporting period.

Future Key Issues

Adverse influence on both air quality and noise level is anticipated from future construction activities, such as demolition works for the existing CF1 retaining wall by the breakers. The Contractor should carry out good site practice to minimise the potential air pollution and noise pollution.

Since the summer season is coming, the Contractor should exert himself to eliminate the presence of accumulation of stagnant water to avoid the breeding of mosquitoes and the spread of dengue fever.

To improve the hygiene condition of the site, the Contractor should remove the rubbish within the site area.

1.0 BASIC PROJECT INFORMATION

1.1 Background

Highways Department proposes to improve the traffic condition at Ap Lei Chau Bridge Road and Ap Lei Chau Drive through junction improvement works at Ap Lei Chau Bridge Road/ Ap Lei Chau Drive, Ap Lei Chau Drive/ Lei Tung Estate Road and Ap Lei Chau Drive/ Ap Lei Chau Coastal Road, widening of Ap Lei Chau Drive and construction of a footbridge at western approach of Ap Lei Chau Bridge Road to replace the existing at-grade pedestrian crossing. These works are included in the Public Works Programme (PWP) Item No. B130Tb – “Footbridge and Improvements to Ap Lei Chau Bridge Road and Ap Lei Chau Drive” (hereinafter called “the Project”).

The Project includes the following works:

· Widening of the section of Ap Lei Chau Drive between Ap Lei Chau Bridge Road and Lei Tung Estate Road from 3 lanes to 4 lanes and that section between Lei Tung Estate Road and AP Lei Chau Praya Road from 2 lanes to 3 lanes plus a GMB/ taxi lay-by of about 75m on the northern side;

· Widening of the approaches on Ap Lei Chau Bridge Road at its junction with Ap Lei Chau Drive;

· Widening of the approach on Lei Tung Estate Road at its junction with Ap Lei Chau Drive;

· Construction of a mini-roundabout at the junction of Ap Lei Chau Drive/ Ap Lei Chau Praya Road;

· Construction of a footbridge with clear width of 2/5m on the western approach of Ap Lei Chau Bridge Road;

· Signalization of the junction of Ap Lei Chau Drive/ Lei Tung Estate Road; and

· Associated geotechnical works and modifications to footpath, central reserves and pedestrian refuge islands.

Peako Engineering Co. Ltd was commissioned by the Highways Departments to execute the Project.

Babtie Asia Ltd was employed by the Contractor to act as the Environmental Team for this project. The Independent Environmental Checker is BMT Asia Pacific Limited.

The purpose of this report is to report the Environmental Monitoring & Audit (EM & A) works in the period between 1 May 2003 and 31 May 2003.

1.2 Project Organization & Contact Details of Key Personnel

Titles, names and contact telephone numbers of the key personnel of the captioned project are tabulated below:

Title	Name	Contact Number
Engineer’s Representative (Highways Department)	Mr. W. M. Chan	2231 5722
EPD	Mr. Elvis Au	2835 1964
Project Director (Contractor)	Mr. Ronnie Lo	9144 8398
Project Manager (Contractor)	Mr. Steve C L Liu	9551 1401
Site Agent (Contractor)	Mr. C. P. Lam	8206 8280
Environmental Team Leader (Babtie Asia Limited)	Mr. Mark Cheung	2880 9788
Independent Environmental Checker (BMT Asia Pacific Limited)	Ms. Lyn Ip	2241 9812

The project organization and lines of communication with respect to the environmental monitoring works is shown below.

The responsibilities of the Contractor are:

· to employ an Environmental Team (ET) to undertake monitoring, analysis and reporting of environmental monitoring and audit;

· to provide assistance to ET in carrying out monitoring;

· to submit proposals on mitigation measures in case of exceedances of Action and Limit Levels in accordance with the Event and Action Plan;

· to implement measures to reduce impact where Action and Limit Levels exceeded; and

· adhere to the procedures for carrying out complaint investigation in accordance with Section 4.3 of the EM & A Manual

The Engineer’s Representative (ER) shall appoint an appropriate member of the resident site staff who shall:

· monitor the Contractor’s compliance with contract specifications including the effective implementation and operation of mitigation measures;

· instruct the Contractor to follow the agreed protocols or those in the Contract Specifications in the event of exceedances or complaints;

· comply with the agreed Event and Action Plan in the event of any exceedances;

· employ an Independent Checker (Environmental) (IEC) to audit the results of the EM & A works carried out by the ET; and

· adhere to the procedures for carrying out complaint investigation in accordance with Section 4.3 of the EM & A Manual.

Appropriate staff shall be included in the Environmental Team (ET), under the supervision of the ET Leader, to fulfil the EM & A duties of the ET Leader. Basically, the duties comprise the following:

· monitor the various environmental parameters as required in the EM & A Manual;

· analyse the environmental monitoring and audit data and to review the success and effectiveness of the EM & A programme;

· confirm the adequacy of mitigation measures implemented and the validity of the EIA predictions and to identify any adverse environmental impact arising;

· carry out site inspection to investigate and audit the Contractor’s site practice, use of equipment and work methodologies with respect to pollution control and environmental mitigation, and anticipate environmental issues for proactive action before problem arise;

· audit and prepare audit reports on the environmental monitoring data and the site environmental conditions;

· report on the environmental monitoring and audit results to the Contractor, IEC, the ER and the EPD;

· recommend suitable mitigation measures to the contractor in the case of exceedance of Action and Limit Levels in accordance with the Event and Action Plans; and

· adhere to the procedures for carrying out complaint investigation in accordance with Section 4.3 of the EM & A Manual.

The independent environmental checker (IEC) is responsible for

· reviewing the EM & A works performed by the ET;

· auditing the monitoring activities and results;

· reporting the audit results to the ER and the EPD in parallel;

· reviewing the EM & A reports submitted by the ET;

· reviewing the proposal on mitigation measures submitted by the Contractor in accordance with the Event and Action Plans; and

· adhere to the procedures for carrying out complaint investigation in accordance with Section 4.3 of the EM & A Manual.

1.3 Construction Programme

The whole project will involve four key construction stages:

· footbridge construction;

· retaining wall construction;

· road construction; and

· drainage works

The overall construction period will be about 20 months. Night-time works are not expected during the construction phase of the Project.

The latest construction programme is attached in Appendix A. This construction programme is subject to continuous refinement.

1.4 Site Management Structure

The site organization chart is shown as Appendix B.

1.5 Works undertaken during the month

The works for this project are divided into five major items

Item 1 – junction improvements to J/O Ap Lei Chau Bridge Road / Ap Lei Chau Drive, Ap Lei Chau Drive / Ap Lei Chau Praya Road, and widening of Ap Lei Chau Drive.

Item 2 – construction / modification of the footpaths and central reserves at Ap Lei Chau Bridge Road, Ap Lei Chau Drive, and Lei Tung Estate Road.

Item 3 – construction / modification of the retaining walls at Ap Lei Chau Bridge Road for the construction of a staircase, a ramp and an elevated footpath.

Item 4 – construction of a footbridge at Ap Lei Chau Bridge Road.

Item 5 – Ancillary works including slope works, landscaping works and drainage works.

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS

2.1 Works undertaken during the reporting period with illustrations

The works undertaken in May 2003 were as follow:

· Tree felling and transplanting works

· Erection of temporary works and hoarding

· Demolition of Existing Counterfort Wall at CF1

· Construction of Mass Retaining Wall MW4

The photos showing the above works are shown in Appendix C.

2.2 Project Area, Sensitive Receivers & Monitoring Locations

The drawings showing the project area, noise sensitive receivers (NSRs) and the locations of the monitoring stations are shown in Appendix D.

The construction noise monitoring stations are M1, M2, M3 and M4.

M1 is for the Ap Lei Chau Baptist Kindergarten (NSR Ref. no.10). M2 is for the Harbour Mission Church and Yan Oi Kindergarten (NSR Ref. no. 12). M3 is for the Hong Kong True Light College (NSR Ref. no. 17). M4 is for the Shan On House (NSR Ref. no. 20).

It is noted that the locations of the monitoring stations are the same as those adopted in the Noise Baseline Monitoring.

3.0 SUMMARY OF EM & A REQUIREMENTS

3.1 Air Quality

Dust would be the major air pollutant during the construction phase of the Project. Major dust generating activities associated with the retaining wall construction, road construction and drainage works are identified to be material handling, excavation, road openings and filling of road base.

According to the Section 2.2.1 of the EM & A Manual, judging from the scale of works on Ap Lei Chau Bridge Road and Ap Lei Chau Drive, the volume of excavated material and the rate of excavation were anticipated to be low. In order to ensure the environmental performance of construction works, environmental control and mitigation measures in accordance with the Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation have been recommended. No environmental monitoring on air quality was required.

3.2 Noise Monitoring Parameters

According to Section 2.3.1 of the EM & A Manual, the noise monitoring parameters are:

1) A-weighted equivalent continuous sound pressure level L_eq(30 mins) for the time period between 0700 and 1900 hours on normal weekdays.

2) L_A10 and L_A90, defined as the levels that have been exceeded the 10% and 90% of the measurement time in decibels respectively

3.3 Action and Limit Noise Levels

Action and Limit (AL) Levels are defined levels of impact recorded during the course of EM & A, which represent levels at which a prescribed response is required. These levels are quantitatively defined in the relevant sections of this Manual and described in principle below:

· Action Levels: beyond which there is a clear indication of a deteriorating ambient environment for which appropriate remedial actions are likely to be necessary to prevent environmental quality from falling outside the Limit Levels; and

· Limit Level: statutory and / or agreed contract limits stipulated in the relevant pollution control ordinances, HKPSG or Environmental Quality Objectives established by the EPD. If these are exceeded, works should not proceed without appropriate remedial action, including a critical review of plant and working methods.

According to Section 3.7 of the EM & A Manual, the Action and Limit Noise Levels are summarised in the following table:

Time Period	Action Level	Limit Level
0700-1900 hours on normal weekdays	When one documented complaint is received	75 dB(A) for domestic premises
0700-1900 hours on normal weekdays		70 dB(A) for educational uses during normal school hours
0700-1900 hours on normal weekdays		65 dB(A) for educational uses during examination period

To account for cases where ambient noise levels as identified by baseline monitoring approaches or exceeds the stipulated Limit Level prior to commencement of construction, an Exceedance Level may be defined and agreed with the EPD, which incorporates the baseline noise level and the Limit Level given in the above table. The Exceedance Level will therefore be greater than the Limit Level and represents the maximum acceptable noise level at each monitoring station.

For the purposes of compliance checking, after taking into account of any adjustments agreed with the EPD, the measured noise level will be checked against either the Limit or Exceedance Level to identify any likely noise nuisance arising from the Project.

3.4 Event and Action Plan for Construction Noise

Should any non-compliance of the action and limit noise level criteria stipulated in Section 3.7 of the EM & A Manual occurs, the ET Leader, the IEC, the ER (Engineer’s Representative) and the Contractor shall undertake relevant actions in accordance with the Event and Action Plan for noise tabulated below:

EVENT

ACTION

ET Leader

IEC

Action Level

1. Notify IEC and Contractor

2. Carry out investigation

3. Report the results of investigation to the IEC and Contractor

4. Discuss with the Contractor and formulate remedial measures

5. Increase monitoring frequency to check the effectiveness of mitigation measures

1. Review the analysed results submitted by the ET

2. Review the proposed remedial measures by the Contractor and advise the ER accordingly

3. Supervise the implementation of remedial measures

EVENT

ACTION

ET Leader

IEC

Limit Level

1. Notify IEC, ER, EPD and Contractor;

2. Identify source

3. Repeat measurement to confirm findings

4. Increase monitoring frequency

5. Carry out analysis of Contractor’s working procedures to determine possible mitigation to be implemented

6. Inform IEC, ER and EPD the causes & actions taken for the exceedances

7. Assess effectiveness of Contractor’s remedial actions and keep IEC, the EPD and ER informed of the results

8. If exceedance stops, cease additional monitoring

1. Discuss amongst ER, ET and Contractor on the potential remedial actions

2. Review Contractor’ remedial actions whenever necessary to assure their effectiveness and advise the ER accordingly

3. Supervise the implementation of remedial measures.

EVENT	ACTION
EVENT	ER	Contractor
Action Level	1. Confirm receipt of notification of failure in writing 2. Notify Contractor 3. Require Contractor to propose remedial measures for the analysed noise problem 4. Ensure remedial measures are properly implemented	1. Submit noise mitigation proposals to IEC 2. Implement noise mitigation proposals
Limit Level	1. Confirm receipt of notification of failure in writing 2. Notify Contractor 3. Require Contractor to propose remedial measures for the analysed noise problem 4. Ensure remedial measures are properly implemented 5. If exceedance continues, consider what portion of work is responsible and instruct the Contractor to stop that portion of work until the exceedance is abated	1. Take immediate action to avoid further exceedance 2. Submit proposals for remedial actions to IEC within 3 working days of notification 3. Implement the agreed proposals 4. Resubmit proposals if problem still not under control 5. Stop the relevant portion of works as determined by the ER until the exceedance is abated

3.5 Environmental Mitigation Measures for Noise Impact

Noise emissions from construction sites can be minimised through good site practice, selecting quiet plant and adopting quiet working methods and restriction on the use of noisy equipment on site.

The Contractor may develop a different package of environmental control measures to meet the required noise standards, but the following illustrates a feasible approach to mitigate the predicted noise impacts during the construction phase.

Good Site Practice

Good site practice and noise management can considerably reduce the impact of construction site activities on nearby NSRs. The following package of measures should be followed during each phase of construction:

1. Only well-maintained plant should be operated on-site and plant should be serviced regularly during the construction works;

2. Machines and plant that may be in intermittent use should be shut down between work periods or should be throttled down to a minimum;

3. Plant known to emit noise strongly in one direction, should, where possible, be orientated to direct noise away from nearby NSRs;

4. Silencers or mufflers on construction equipment should be utilised and should be properly maintained during the construction works;

5. Mobile plant should be sited as far away from NSRs as possible; and

6. Material stockpiles and other structures should be effectively utilised, where practicable, to screen noise from on-site construction activities.

Although it is difficult to quantify the noise reduction achieved, the environmental performance of the works would be improved through these control practices.

Selecting Quieter Plant and Working Methods

The use of quiet plant is identified to be a feasible solution to tackle the adverse impacts associated with the construction works. The Contractor may be able to obtain particular models of plant that are quieter than standard types given in the GW-TM. The benefits achieved in this way will depend on the details of the Contractors’ chosen methods of working, and it is considered too restrictive to specify that a Contractor has to use specific items of plant for the construction operations, It is therefore both preferable and practical to specify an overall plant noise performance specification to apply to the total SWL of all plant on the site so that the Contractor is allowed some flexibility to select plant to suit his needs.

Quiet plant is defined as PME whose actual SWL is less than the value specified in GW-TM for the same piece of equipment. Examples of SWLs for specific silenced PME taken from a British Standard, namely Noise Control on Construction and open Sites, BS 5228: Part 1: 1997. The table 5.2c of the EIA Report gives the detail information.

It should be noted that various types of silenced equipment can be found in Hong Kong. However, the EPD, when processing a CNP application, will apply the noise levels contained in the GW-TM, unless the noise emission of a particular piece of equipment can be validated by certificate or demonstration.

By considering the above methods of mitigation it is possible to develop a mitigation package, which can be adopted to minimise potential noise impacts.

3.6 Environmental Requirements in Contract Documents

According to the particular specification 1.60 and 1.61, hardwood shall not be used for project signboards, site hoardings, falseworks or the shoring of trenches and pits. The Contractor shall use metallic project signboards and site hoardings in order to reduce the amount of timber used on construction sites.

According to the particular specification 1.62, the Contractor shall comply with the “Particular Specification on Pollution Control” given in the Appendix G of the particular specification.

According to the particular specification 1.63 subclause (1), measures shall be taken to prevent excavated material, silt or debris from being deposited in existing drainage system or watercourses. If at any time such measures are proven to be ineffective the Contractor shall take such additional measures as the Engineer or Engineer’s Representative may deem necessary and shall remove all excavated material, silt or debris which may have accumulated in the drainage system or watercourses whether within the Site or not.

According to the particular specification 1.63 subclause (2), the Contractor shall set up dedicated teams for routine inspection and cleaning of any existing drainage and sewerage systems at all times, including removal of solids in sand trips, manholes gullies and stream beds.

According to the particular specification 1.63 subclause (3), the Contractor shall discharge surface run-off from the Site into storm drains via adequately designed sand/ silt removal facilities such as sand traps and sediment basins. Channels or sandbag barriers shall be provided on Site to properly direct the storm water to such silt removal facilities.

According to the particular specification 1.63 subclause (4), water pumped out from trenches under construction shall be discharged into storm drains through desilting facilities.

According to the particular specification 1.63 subclause (5), the Contractor shall maintain the desilting facilities, channels and manholes and remove the deposited silt and grit regularly, at the onset and after each rainstorm to ensure that these facilities are functioning properly at all times.

According to the particular specification 1.64, without prejudice to the generality of GCC 30, any vehicles with an open load compartment used for transferring dusty materials off Site shall have properly fitted side and tail boards. Dusty materials shall

not be loaded to a level higher than the side and rail boards, and shall be covered by a suitable tarpaulin (or any other impervious covering material as approved by the Engineer) in good condition before leaving the Site. The tarpaulin shall be properly secured and extended at least 300 mm over the edges of the side and tail boards and be properly secured and maintained throughout the journey to the off-loading destination. For the purpose of PS 1.61, “dusty materials” include cement, earth, pulverized fuel ash, aggregates, silt, stonefines, sand, debris, saw dust and wooden chips.

According to the particular specification 1.67, the waste management shall be established and carried out by the Contractor with reference to the waste management plan approved by the Engineer.

4.0 IMPLEMENTATION STATUS

4.1 Construction Phase

Impacts on the nearby sensitive receivers were identified during various construction stages. Appropriate mitigation measures such as use of quiet plant, reducing percentage on time, avoidance of simultaneous noisy activities have been recommended to reduce the associated impacts.

According to the EIA report, the following should be implemented during the construction period.

Location

Reference Section

Recommended Environmental Protection Measures

Responsibility

Construction Noise Mitigation Measures

Various Locations and work sites within the project limit

Section 5.2.4 & 5.2.5 of EIA Report

Reduce the nuisance from Construction Noise

· Adopt good site practice and proper site management, e.g. plant shall be well maintained and mobile plant shall be sited away from NSRs;

· Use of quiet plant, such as dump truck, grader, breaker and excavator, and working methods;

· Control the number of equipment operating concurrently;

· Reduce the operating time of particular noisy plant on site, e.g. shutting down machines between work periods;

· Monitor noise levels from particularly noisy activities; and if non-compliance with EIAO-TM standards is observed, Contractor shall reduce the number of operating plant or re-adjust working schedule to reduce the impact.

Highways Department

and

Contractor

4.2 Advice on the Implementation Status of Environmental Protection & Pollution Control / Mitigation Measures

4.2.1 Construction Noise Mitigation Measures

The Contractor should use silencers or mufflers on construction equipment such as pneumatic breaker and air compressor to avoid exceeding the noise limit and causing nuisance to the nearby sensitive receivers.

Regular maintenance of the construction plant is strongly encouraged to avoid black smoke and excessive noise production. The machines and plant should be shut down or throttled down to a minimum when they are in intermittent use.

The plant known to emit noise strongly in one direction should be orientated to direct noise away from nearby noise sensitive receivers. The mobile plants should be sited as far away from the noise sensitive receivers as possible.

It is important to control the simultaneous operation of the construction plant on site to avoid the potential noise limit exceedance and the annoyance to the nearby sensitive receivers especially for those who are for educational purpose.

5.0 MONITORING RESULTS

5.1 Monitoring Methodology

The construction noise monitoring was carried out by using a Sound Level Meter to ensure that exceedance in noise levels could be readily identified and timely action taken to reduce the noise levels within allowable limits.

The sound lever meter was mounted on a tripod at a height of 1.2m above the ground level. This was positioned at least 1m away from any nearby reflective surfaces. During the noise data collection, a portable wind speed meter is adopted to check the wind speed.

Noise monitoring was cancelled in the presence of fog, rain and wind with a steady speed exceeding 5 m/s, or wind with gusts exceeding 10 m/s.

At the end of the monitoring period, the L_eq, L₁₀ and L₉₀ were recorded. The site conditions and noise sources were recorded on a standard record sheet.

5.2 Noise Monitoring Equipment

The approved integrating Sound Level Meter, Model No. NA-27, in compliance with the International Electrotechnical Commission Publication 651:1979 (Type 1) and 804:1985 (Type 1) specification as referred to in the Technical Memorandum issued under the Noise Control Ordinance (NOC), was used for construction noise measurement.

5.3 Calibration Details

A sound level calibrator, Model No. NC-73, was used to calibrate the Sound Level Meter before and after the measurement on site.

A copy of calibration certificates issued by RION Co., Ltd for the Sound Level Meter and the Sound Calibrator is attached in the Appendix E.

5.4 Noise Parameters

The construction noise levels were measured in terms of equivalent A-weighted sound pressure level (L_eq) measured in decibels (dB).

L_eq(30min) was used as the monitoring parameter for the time period between (0700 to 1900) hours on normal weekdays.

The two statistical sound levels L_A10 and L_A90, the level exceeded for 10 and 90 percent of the measurement time respectively, were also recorded as supplementary information for reference.

5.5 Monitoring Locations

The noise baseline monitoring was conducted at four noise sensitive receivers as stated below.

Monitoring Location	Noise Sensitive Receiver	Ref. No. in the EIA Report
M 1	Ap Lei Chau Baptist Kindergarten	10
M 2	The Harbour Mission Church and Yan Oi Kindergarten	12
M 3	The Hong Kong True Light College	17
M 4	Shan On House	20

All the monitoring points are at façade. Hence, no correction of data is required.

Locations of construction noise monitoring stations and photos are shown in Appendix D.

5.6 Monitoring Date, Time, Frequency and Duration

The monitoring frequency will depend on the scale of the construction activities. The following was adopted as an initial arrangement of measurement on the regular monitoring frequency for each station on a per week basis when noise generating activities are underway:

(a) one set of measurements between 0700 – 1900 hours on normal weekdays;

(b) one set of measurements between 1900 – 2300 hours;

(d) one set of measurements between 0700 – 1900 hours on holidays

During the reporting period, the construction noise monitoring was conducted on 17^th and 24^thMay and followed the scheme (a). An additional monitoring was carried out on 19^th May and followed the scheme (a) as well. The time and duration of measurement are shown in the Appendix F.

5.7 Noise Monitoring Results

The data for noise monitoring is presented in Appendix F.

For M1, the results show that during the reporting period, the noise level is in average 68.2 dB(A) which is below the noise limit level 70 dB(A).

For M2, the data on 24^th May 2003 show that during the school hour, the noise level was 72.7 dB(A) which exceeded the noise limit level 70 dB(A). For other non school hours, the average noise level is 71.0 dB(A). As no sensitive receiver exists out of the school hours, it is considered to be acceptable.

For M3, the average noise level is 76.0 dB(A) during non school hours. As no sensitive receiver exists out of the school hours, it is considered to be acceptable.

For M4, the results show that during the reporting period, the noise level is in average 64.9 dB(A), which is below the noise limit level 75 dB(A).

The major noise sources during the reporting period include the electric breaker for the demolition works of the CF1 retaining wall and construction works for MW 4. Traffic also contributed to the noise.

5.8 Graphical plots of the monitored parameters

The graphical presentations of the monitored parameters during the reporting period are shown in Appendix G.

5.9 Weather Conditions

The weather conditions were mainly sunny, and did not affect the environmental monitoring works during the reporting period. The weather conditions during the period are shown in the Appendix H.

5.10 Influencing Factors

Other noise sources include the in-house air-conditioning fixing up works using an electric drill at the Ap Lei Chau Baptist Kindergarten by other contractor near M2, the piling works from the site of Architectural Services Department, and the maintenance works at the end of Sun Shi Street by the Highways Department.

6.0 RECORD OF NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE ACTION AND LIMIT LEVELS, COMPLAINTS, NOTIFICATIONS OF SUMMONS AND SUCCESSFUL PROSECUTIONS

6.1 Non-compliance of the Action and Limit Levels

6.1.1 Noise

All the measured noise levels at the three monitoring stations (M1, M3 and M4) are below the noise limit level. On 24 May 2003, the noise level of M2 was found to be 72.7 dB(A) which exceeded the noise limit level during school hours. The notification of noise limit exceedance was issued to the Contractor. In the meantime, the ET Leader has contacted the Contractor to identify the site activities which were underway on the day the exceedance was recorded. An investigation is currently being undertaken.

6.2 Written Complaints and Verbal Complaints

One verbal complaint was made by the principal of the Harbour Mission Church and Yan Oi Kindergarten, who is the sensitive receiver for M2. The details are as follows:

Case No. Received Date	*EC 2003/01* 19 May 2003
Complaint Mode	Direct Contact with the ER of the project
Description of Complaint	Noise Pollution due to the Demolition Works at the Site
Investigation	It was found that the demolition works by the Contractor started at 9:15 am on that day. The complaint was received by the Contractor at 9:25 am concerning the noise generated from the demolition works. Hence, the complaint is considered to be valid and due to the works of this project. Immediate mitigation measures were taken including stopping the works at once. An ad hoc meeting was held in the kindergarten amongst the principal and the site agent of the Contractor during which the sound level generated from the demolition works was demonstrated and recorded. Although the L_{eq (30min)} had been demonstrated to be within the contractual requirement of 70 dB(A) during the operation of one breaker, it was still not acceptable by the principal of the kindergarten.
Follow-up Actions	To abate the noise pollution for the kindergarten, the Contractor shifted the working hour for the demolition works, starting from 5:15 pm and ending at 7:00 pm. During a further meeting among the ER, Contractor and the principal of the kindergarten on 27 May 2003, it was agreed that demolition works for lower 1.2 m portion of the retaining wall were to proceed within normal working hours, excluding from 12:00 to 3:30 which is the sleeping time for the kindergarten children, provided that the equivalent noise limit level is below 70 dB(A).
Recommended Mitigation Measures	Only well-maintained plant should be operated on-site and plant should be serviced regularly during the construction works. Machines and plant that may be in intermittent use should be shut down between work periods or should be throttled down to a minimum The plant that is known to emit noise strongly in one direction should, where possible, be orientated to direct noise away from nearby noise sensitive receivers. Silencers or mufflers on construction equipment should be utilised and properly maintained during the construction works. Mobile plant should be sited as far away from NSRs as possible. Material stockpiles and other structures should be effectively utilised, where practicable, to screen noise from on-site construction activities. Simultaneous operation of noisy plant and equipment at places close to schools should be avoided. As the last resort, the working hours of the noisy plant may be shifted to the non-school hours to protect the sensitive receivers for educational purposes. School hours should be confirmed by the principals.
Status/ Remarks	Closed.

The following table shows the summary for all the complaints received since the commencement of the Contract.

TOTAL NO. OF COMPLAINT	NO. OF COMPLAINT RECEIVED WITHIN REPORTING PERIOD	NO. OF COMPLAINT THAT IS STILL UNDER INVESTIGATION	NO. OF CLOSED COMPLAINT
1	1	0	1

The statistics for environmental complaint is shown in Appendix I.

1.0 BASIC PROJECT INFORMATION

1.1 Background

1.2 Project Organization & Contact Details of Key Personnel

1.3 Construction Programme

1.4 Site Management Structure

1.5 Works undertaken during the month

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS

2.1 Works undertaken during the reporting period with illustrations

2.2 Project Area, Sensitive Receivers & Monitoring Locations

3.0 SUMMARY OF EM & A REQUIREMENTS

3.1 Air Quality

3.2 Noise Monitoring Parameters

3.3 Action and Limit Noise Levels

3.4 Event and Action Plan for Construction Noise

3.5 Environmental Mitigation Measures for Noise Impact

3.6 Environmental Requirements in Contract Documents

4.0 IMPLEMENTATION STATUS

4.1 Construction Phase

4.2 Advice on the Implementation Status of Environmental Protection & Pollution Control / Mitigation Measures

5.0 MONITORING RESULTS

5.1 Monitoring Methodology

5.2 Noise Monitoring Equipment

5.3 Calibration Details

5.4 Noise Parameters

5.5 Monitoring Locations

5.6 Monitoring Date, Time, Frequency and Duration

5.7 Noise Monitoring Results

5.8 Graphical plots of the monitored parameters

5.9 Weather Conditions

5.10 Influencing Factors

6.0 RECORD OF NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE ACTION AND LIMIT LEVELS, COMPLAINTS, NOTIFICATIONS OF SUMMONS AND SUCCESSFUL PROSECUTIONS

6.1 Non-compliance of the Action and Limit Levels

6.2 Written Complaints and Verbal Complaints

6.3 &nbs