Determination of Maximum Permissible Noise Levels for Construction Work

17 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) how are the current specified maximum permissible noise levels for construction work determined; (b) how are the noise levels measured; and (c) when were the noise limits and penalties last reviewed.

The Minister of State for Sustainability and the Environment (Mr Desmond Tan) (for the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment): Mr Speaker, NEA stipulates maximum permissible noise limits for construction sites in order to protect public health. The noise limits take reference from the World Health Organization's guidelines and are further tailored to local context. To minimise noise nuisance to residents, the noise limits are further differentiated based on the time bands, with more stringent limits imposed at night from 7 pm and 7 am and on Sundays and public holidays, when most of our residents are resting.

To measure the noise levels generated from their worksites, construction companies must install noise meters at the nearest affected buildings and monitor the noise levels regularly. For larger projects of contract value more than $3 million or those which involve demolition and piling, contractors are required to install noise monitoring systems, which allow real-time monitoring of the noise levels by both the contractors as well as by NEA.

My Ministry regularly reviews the construction noise limits and penalty regime. For instance, NEA tightened the noise controls and implemented the no-work rule in 2011 to prohibit work activities at construction sites located within 150 metres of residential premises and noise-sensitive premises, such as the hospitals and nursing homes, on Sundays as well as on public holidays. The penalty regime was also reviewed in 2014. And NEA is working with other agencies and industry stakeholders on an on-going review of the construction noise limits and penalty regime.

Mr Speaker: Dr Tan Wu Meng.

Dr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): I thank the Minister of State for his answer. I would like to raise two supplementary questions regarding his answer.

The first is whether, as part of the on-going review, the post COVID environment will be considered, in particular, new features, such as working from home, students doing home learning and furthermore, looking at the built density of our HDB estates. I raise this because, especially during the recent and on-going examination season, a number of residents in Clementi have been very worried about noise from nearby construction developments.

Secondly, Mr Speaker, I would also like to ask the Minster of State, whether as part of the review of the penalties framework, they can also consider the economic levers that may be applied to the construction firm. I raise this because when a private development generates noise and disamenities to residents, such as residents along Clementi Avenue 1 and in the Faber Hills area, these disamenities are socialised, whereas in many cases, a private development results in privatisation of gains from the construction.

Mr Desmond Tan: I thank the Member for the supplementary questions. Certainly, in our on-going review, we will take into consideration the current situation and, of course, the economic conditions that we are going through. I have to remind Members of the House that noise management has to be considered in view of the cost as well as the duration of the construction time. It is of our most important interest to make sure that public health is being protected, to make sure that noise levels do not exceed the noise levels that are prescribed by the World Health Organization.

We will take into account the current as well as future conditions. We have to work closely with the built environment and the industry to ensure that whatever penalty regime as well as noise limits that are imposed will first has to protect the public health of our people and at the same time, also to ensure that our construction work continues to be completed within the time frame and within the cost that is stipulated. So, we will take into account the current and future conditions.

The second question that was being raised was about the economic levers. Today, we have a penalty regime that has been reviewed over the years and it has been effective in bringing down the number of feedback as well as enforcement actions. So, for instance, in 2012, we saw that the number of feedback per construction site was about 2.7. And last year, it has dropped to about 1.6. And also, in terms of the enforcement action, it has also dropped from 1.6 in 2012 to about 0.8 per 10 sites in 2019.

However, we will continue to look at how this penalty regime will have an impact on the construction noise and in particular for repeated offenders, as in construction sites, that have been given the same warning over and over again. So, these are the things that we look at in our on-going review – the noise limits, the ability to measure them as well as the penalty regime. These are the three areas we will look at in the on-going review.

Mr Speaker: Order. End of Question Time. Introduction of Government Bill. Second Minister for Finance.

[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), Written Answers to Question Nos 19, 21-23 and 25 on the Order Paper are reproduced in the Appendix. Question Nos 18, 20, 24 and 26 have been postponed to the sitting of Parliament on 15 October 2020.]

1.30 pm