8.2 Relevant Legislations, Standards & Guidelines. 141

8.4 Description of Existing Condition of the Project Area. 142

8.5 Future Land Use. 143

8.6 Identification and Evaluation of Potential Impacts. 143

8.7 Site Investigation. 149

8.8 Precautionary Measures to Be Undertaken during Construction. 149

8.9 Residual Environmental Impact 149

8.10 Conclusion. 149

List of Appendices

Appendix 8-1

Final Contamination Assessment Plan

8. Land Contamination

8.2 Relevant Legislations, Standards & Guidelines

8.2.1. According to Annex 19 of the EIAO-TM, if a site with historical land uses which have the potential to cause or have caused land contamination, a Contamination Assessment Plan (CAP) will be required to be submitted as part of the EIA report to be submitted to the EPD, for their endorsement prior to conducting a contamination assessment for the Project.

8.2.2. The land contamination assessment results should be documented in a Contamination Assessment Report (CAR), and if land contamination is identified, a Remediation Action Plan (RAP) should be prepared and submitted with the CAR as a combined report for EPD’s approval.

8.2.3. Upon receiving the EPD approval of the combined CAR and/or RAP, the Project should be remediated in accordance with the approved RAP prior to undertaking any form of development activities.

8.2.4. The CAP, CAR and RAP reports shall be prepared in accordance with the following EPD issued publications applicable to land contamination:

· Guidance Note for Contaminated Land Assessment and Remediation (“Guidance Note”);

· Guidance Manual for Use of Risk-based Remediation Goals (“RBRGs”) for Contaminated Land Management (“Guidance Manual”); and

· Practice Guide for Investigation and Remediation of Contaminated Land (“Practice Guide”).

8.2.5. The Guidance Note sets out the EPD requirements for the assessment and management of potentially contaminated sites, provides guidelines on how site assessments should be conducted and suggests practical remedial measures that can be adopted for the remediation of a contaminated site.

8.2.6. The Guidance Manual provides the background of the use of the RBRGs and presents instructions for the comparison of soil and groundwater data that may be collected to the appropriate RBRGs.

8.2.7. The Practice Guide outlines the process for conducting land contamination assessments and remediation projects in Hong Kong. The Practice Guide presents the standard investigation methods and remediation strategies for the range of potential contaminated sites and the contaminants that are typically encountered in Hong Kong.

8.3 Assessment Methodology

8.3.1. In order to identify land lot(s) / site(s) within the Project area that are potential contaminated sites and to evaluate the land contamination impacts, the following approach was adopted for the land contamination assessment:

· Conduct of a desktop study to review the current and historical land uses and identify any potential contaminated land uses, if any, within the Project area; and

· Undertake site visits to identify the existing land uses and confirm the general environmental conditions associated with each of the identified sites. The following sources of information have been collected and reviewed:

8.3.2. The following sources of information have been collected and reviewed:

· Historical aerial photographs obtained from the Lands Department (LandsD) and taken between 1970 and 2014;

· Outline Zoning Plan (OZPs) and previous applications for planning permission at the Town Planning Board;

· Information pertinent to the Project area related to potential land contamination, from the Environmental Protection Department (EPD) and the Fire Services Department (FSD).

· Records and photographs taken during site visits to the Project area.

8.3.3. Potential contaminants and the associated potential hazardous risks to the land users and the surrounding environment will be evaluated with reference to the Guidance Note, Guidance Manual and the Practice Guide.

8.4 Description of Existing Condition of the Project Area

8.4.1. Descriptions of the works areas at the four villages, namely Ha Che (HC), Tai Wo (TW), Lin Fa Tei (LFT) and Sung Shan New Village (SSNV), are presented below. Site inspections were first conducted in January and February 2015. Follow-up site inspection was later conducted in January and May 2019. Photograph records taken during site inspection are presented in Appendix A of CAP (see Appendix 8-1).

Ha Che

8.4.2. The Project area at this village is situated along an existing stream near Fan Kam Road. In 2015, at the immediate surroundings of the Project area located on the eastern side of Fan Kam Road mainly comprise village type residential development and open storage whereas those located on the western side of Fan Kam Road mainly comprise residential developments. In 2019, most of the land use remain unchanged except for some of the previous open storage. Some of the previous open storages were developed into residential houses. The location of the Project area at Ha Che is presented in Figures 1.3a and 1.3b of CAP (see Appendix 8-1).

Tai Wo

8.4.3. The Project area at Tai Wo is situated along an existing footpath. According to site inspection in 2015, the Project surrounding area was considered to be village type residential development and agricultural land. In 2019, the land use in Tai Wo was observed remain unchanged. The location of the Project area at Tai Wo is presented in Figure 1.4 of CAP (see Appendix 8-1).

Lin Fa Tei

8.4.4. During site inspection in 2015, the Project area at Lin Fa Tei is situated along a footpath near Kam Sheung Road and along the existing Shui Tsan Tin stream at Lin Fa Tei. The Lin Fa Tei area mainly comprises village type residential development and agricultural land. In 2019, some new villages house had been constructed. Land use observed in Lin Fai Tei was similar to previous inspection in 2015. The location of the Project area at Lin Fa Tei is presented in Figures 1.5a and 1.5b of CAP (see Appendix 8-1).

Sung Shan New Village

8.4.5. The Project area at this village is situated along an existing stream near Sung Shan New Village. During site inspection in 2015, the Sung Shan New Village area was considered to be residential developments and open storages. The land lots between the existing stream and Tai Shu Ha Road East are mainly open storage and warehouses. In 2019, land use observed in Sung Shan New Village was similar to previous inspection in 2015. The location of the Project area at Sung Shan New Village is presented in Figure 1.6 of CAP (see Appendix 8-1).

8.5 Future Land Use

8.5.1. The Project involves drainage improvement works. The future land use of the proposed Project area will be considered as public utilities. Based on the future land use, RBRGs of “Industrial” land use will be adopted for any contamination assessment.

8.6 Identification and Evaluation of Potential Impacts

8.6.1. One chemical spillage incident was reported by the EPD. The leaked liquid chemical was removed by EPD and no sign of further leakage was spotted by EPD. The location of spillage is situated outside Project Boundary. It is anticipated that land contamination issue is not likely to be arise from this incident. The correspondence with EPD is provided in Appendix C of CAP (see Appendix 8-1).

8.6.2. A response was received from the FSD regarding the Dangerous Good License record and incident record. FSD has indicated that No Dangerous Good License was recorded in the areas. Seven Incidents were recorded. None of them located near the Project area, except one incident in Sung Shan New Village. The incident at Sung Shan New Village was classified as “Special Service” which would be any service other than fire service. The correspondence from the FSD is provided in Appendix D of CAP (see Appendix 8-1).

8.6.3. Site visits were conducted in January 2015, February 2015, January 2019 and May 2019 to identify potential land contaminating land uses within the Project area. With reference to previous land use obtained from the desktop study and site walk, details of potential contaminated sites are provided in Table 3-1 and Figures 5.1 to 5.4 of CAP (see Appendix 8-1). A summary of potential contaminated sites are presented in Table 8‑1 below. These sites include four sites in Ha Che, namely Sites HC-A, HC-C, HC-D and HC-I, five sites in Lin Fa Tei, namely Sites LFT-A, LFT-B, LFT-C, LFT-D and LFT-E, and one site in Sung Shan New Village, namely Site SSNV-A.

8.6.4. For Ha Che, the identified potential contaminated sites did not encroach the Project area and migration of land contaminants, if any, from these sites to Project works area is considered to be unlikely. Therefore contamination potential arising from the Project works is not anticipated. Further investigation at Ha Che is not considered necessary.

8.6.5. For Lin Fa Tei, the identified sites were located near the Project area and with some partial and minor overlapping areas. The potential of land contamination issues that may be caused by the Project is reviewed and discussed in the following paragraphs.

8.6.6. At Site LFT-A, the previous open storage areas within this site boundary were identified to be outside the proposed Project areas based on the review of historical aerial photographs. The overlapping areas showed no particular storage activities and were generally vegetated areas and migration of land contaminants, if any, from this site to Project works area is considered to be unlikely. Therefore contamination potential arising from the Project works is not anticipated.

8.6.7. Likewise for Sites LFT-B, LFT-C, LFT-D and LFT-E, the site boundary may partially overlap the Project areas. However, the potential land contaminative land uses (open storage) at these sites were identified to be outside the Project areas (Figures 7.2a and 7.2b of CAP, see Appendix 8-1). The migration of land contaminant, if any, from these sites to Project works area is considered to be unlikely. Therefore, land contamination impacts arising from the Project works are not anticipated.

8.6.8. Further site investigation at Sites LFT-A to LFT-E is considered not necessary.

8.6.9. For Sung Shan New Village, the identified potential contaminated site SSNV-A did not encroach the Project area and migration of land contaminants, if any, from these sites to Project works area is considered to be unlikely. Therefore contamination potential arising from the Project works is not anticipated. Further investigation at Sung Shan New Village is not considered necessary.

Table 8‑1 Detailed Findings of Potential Land Contaminating Sites

Location	Potential Land Contaminating Land Use	Potential Contaminant	Overlapping with proposed Project area?	Recommended for Further Investigation
Ha Che
HC-A	During site visit in 2015, this site was not accessible for detailed site walk. No personnel was available for interview. The site was well-established with hoarding and completely paved. Parking of vehicles (mobile crane trucks, dump trucks, water trucks, etc) was observed on site. The site was considered to be a storage and parking lot for construction service company. Vehicle maintenance area and storage of chemical drum was observed on site. Migration of land contaminant from this site to Project works area is not likely as: · The entire site was paved with concrete and surface runoff was directed to surface drainage instead of soaking away. (See Photos HC-A1 and HC-A3 in Figure 6.1a of CAP (see Appendix 8-1)). · No licensed dangerous goods store (e.g. underground storage tank) was present in the areas according to FSD record. · No sign of migration of contaminant (such as any stain, discoloration, or stressed vegetation) was observed at the site boundary adjacent to the stream. (See Photo HC-A5 in Figure 6.1a of CAP (see Appendix 8-1)) The site details are provided in Figure 6.1a of CAP (see Appendix 8-1). During site visit in 2019, it is considered that this site is not in close proximity to the Project Works Area. Therefore, this site was not assessed.	Potential Contaminants · Volatile Organic Chemicals · Semi-Volatile Organic Chemicals · Metals · Petroleum Carbon Ranges	No	No
HC-C	During site visit in 2015, the site was not accessible for detailed site walk. The site was fenced off by hoarding and completely paved with concrete. Modification of lorry bed and installation of crane to lorry were observed on site. Metal works was observed on site and no oil stain was seen on the pavement on site. Migration of land contaminant from this site to Project works area is not likely as: · No oil stain was observed on pavement on site and near the hoarding area adjacent to the stream. (See Photo HC-C1 in Figure 6.1b of CAP (see Appendix 8-1)) · The local topography is sloping down to the steam. No sign of migration of contaminant (such as any stain, or stressed vegetation) was observed at the site boundary adjacent to the stream. (See Photo HC-C2 in Figure 6.1b of CAP (see Appendix 8-1)) The site details are provided in Figure 6.1b of CAP (see Appendix 8-1). During site visit in 2019, it is considered that this site is not in close proximity to the Project Works Area. Therefore, this site was not assessed.	Potential Contaminants · Volatile Organic Chemicals · Semi-Volatile Organic Chemicals · Metals · Petroleum Carbon Ranges	No	No
HC-D	During site visit in 2015, the site was not accessible for detailed site walk. No personnel was available for interview. The site was well-established with hoarding and was completely paved with concrete. Massive storage of I-beam bar was observed on site. Compressed gas bottles, welding (electrical arc) machines were also observed. The site was an off-site workshop for construction works such as excavation and lateral support. Metal welding (electrical arc) and gas (ethylene) cutting were expected to be carried on site area overlapping with the Project area. The site was paved with concrete for I-beam storage and fabrication. Some rusting stain was observed on pavement which was typical for steel I-beam storage. No metal processing works (painting, galvanization or electroplating) are anticipated in the site. No sign of migration of contaminant (such as discoloration or stressed vegetation) was observed at the site boundary adjacent to the stream. Since all metal are fabricated in metallic status with hard pavement, no land contamination is anticipated from metal fabrication and storage. The site details are provided in Figure 6.1b of CAP (see Appendix 8-1). During site visit in 2019, site condition was similar to the previous findings. The site details are provided in Figure 6.1c of CAP (see Appendix 8-1).	Potential Contaminants from off-site workshop for construction works · Volatile Organic Chemicals · Semi-Volatile Organic Chemicals · Metals · Petroleum Carbon Ranges	No	No
HC-I	During site visit in 2015, the site was an open storage for a vehicle parts trading company. The company imports demolished car parts from overseas and repacks it for sale. The site occupant was in charge of site HC-H and HC-I. An interview was conducted with the occupant for these two sites. This site is used as an open storage for imported car engines and other internal parts. The site was fenced off by hoarding and concrete paved. As reported by the site occupant, all imported car parts are free of any oil (e.g. engine oil, diesel) for environmental and safety concern during international trading. However, dark staining was still observed at the site. The site occupant reported that the dark stain was result of tyre mark from the forklift on site. Vegetation and stream were not observed to be impacted (refer to Photo HC-I 2 in Figure 6.1h of CAP (see Appendix 8-1)). No sign of migration of contaminant was observed near the site boundary adjacent to the stream. The site details are provided in Figure 6.1h of CAP (see Appendix 8-1). During site visit in 2019, Sites HC-H and HC-I were still under the same occupant. Site condition was similar to the previous findings. Vegetation and stream were not observed to be impacted (refer to Photo HC-I 7 in Figure 6.1i). No sign of migration of contaminant was observed near the site boundary adjacent to the stream. The site details are provided in Figure 6.1i of CAP (see Appendix 8-1).	Potential Contaminants · Volatile Organic Chemicals · Semi-Volatile Organic Chemicals · Metals · Petroleum Carbon Ranges	No	No
Lin fa Tei
LFT-A	During site visit in 2015, the site was identified to be a construction site for village type housing. The site was not assessable for detailed site walk. No personnel was available for interview. According to aerial photo, the site was open storage area previously (from 1990 to 2000). The extent of previous open storage with reference to aerial photos was provided in Figures 7.1a and 7.1b of CAP (see Appendix 8-1). The previous open storage was outside the proposed Project works area. Land contamination at proposed Project works area is not anticipated from the previous open storage. The site was vacant after 2000. The site was not paved and deposition of fill material may have been undertaken before construction. No clear boundary of the previous open storage was identified during site inspection. Vegetation and stream were not observed to be impacted (refer to Photos LFT-A3, LFT-A4 and LFT-A5 in Figure 6.2a of CAP (see Appendix 8-1)). No sign of migration of contaminant was observed near the site boundary adjacent to the stream. The site details are provided in Figure 6.2a of CAP (see Appendix 8-1). During site visit in 2019, the site was developed into a low-rise residential development. No construction activities were observed on-site. The site details are provided in Figure 6.2b of CAP (see Appendix 8-1).	Land Contamination from previous open storage Potential Contaminants · Volatile Organic Chemicals · Semi-Volatile Organic Chemicals · Metals · Petroleum Carbon Ranges	No	No
LFT-B, LFT-C & LFT-E	During site visit in 2015, these sites were vacant land. According to the review of aerial photo (1990 to 2011), they were previously used for open storage. The extent of previous open storage with reference to aerial photo was provided in Figures 7.2a and 7.2b of CAP (see Appendix 8-1). The previous open storage was outside the proposed Project works area. These sites were unfenced and site walk was undertaken. Possible fill material deposition had been carried out lately. Migration of land contaminant from this site to Project works area is not likely as: · No observation of land contamination hotspot was identified during site inspection. · No licensed dangerous goods store (e.g. underground storage tank) was present in the areas according to FSD record. No disused underground storage tank was found on site during inspection. · No sign of migration of contaminant (such as any stain, discoloration, or stressed vegetation) was observed at the site boundary adjacent to the stream. (See Photos LFT-B 2, LFT-C 1 and LFT-E 1 in Figure 6.2b of CAP (see Appendix 8-1)) The site details are provided in Figure 6.2c of CAP (see Appendix 8-1). During site visit in 2019, sites LFT-B and LFT-E were developed into a low-rise residential development while site LFT-C was remained vacant. The site details are provided in Figure 6.2d of CAP (see Appendix 8-1).	Land Contamination from previous open storage Potential Contaminants · Volatile Organic Chemicals · Semi-Volatile Organic Chemicals · Metals · Petroleum Carbon Ranges	No	No
LFT-D	During site visit in 2015, this site was a residential development. According to the review of aerial photo (1990 to 2011), it was previously used for open storage. The site was fenced off and not assessable for detail site walk. No personnel was available for interview. The extent of previous open storage with reference to aerial photo was provided in Figures 7.2a and 7.2b of CAP (see Appendix 8-1). The previous open storage was outside the proposed Project works area. Land contamination at proposed Project works area is not anticipated from the previous open storage. Migration of land contaminant from this site to Project works area is not likely as: · No licensed dangerous goods store (e.g. underground storage tank) was present in the areas according to FSD record. · No sign of migration of contaminant (such as any stain, discoloration, or stressed vegetation) was observed at the site boundary adjacent to the stream. (See Photos LFT-D 1, LFT-D 2 and LFT-D 3 in Figure 6.2c of CAP (see Appendix 8-1)) The site details are provided in Figure 6.2c of CAP (see Appendix 8-1). During site visit in 2019, site condition was similar to the previous findings. The site details are provided in Figure 6.2d of CAP (see Appendix 8-1).	Land Contamination from previous open storage Potential Contaminants · Volatile Organic Chemicals · Semi-Volatile Organic Chemicals · Metals · Petroleum Carbon Ranges	No	No
Sung Shan New Village
SSNV-A	During site visit in 2015, the site was used as a recycle yard. The site was not assessable for detailed site walk. No personnel was available for interview. Material storage was observed on site. The site was concrete paved and no stain was observed on the pavement. The site details are provided in Figure 6-3a of CAP (see Appendix 8-1). During site visit in 2019, site condition was similar to the previous findings. The site details are provided in Figure 6.3b of CAP (see Appendix 8-1).	Land Contamination from recycling activities (such as storage and processing of waste materials) Potential Contaminants · Volatile Organic Chemicals · Semi-Volatile Organic Chemicals · Metals; and · Petroleum Carbon Ranges	No	No

8. Land Contamination

8.1 Introduction

8.1.2. This assessment has been based on the guidelines for evaluation and assessment of potential contaminated land as stated in Annex 19 of the EIAO-TM and has covered the scope outlined in Clause 3.4.6.1 and 3.4.6.2 of the EIA Study Brief.