Contact us<\/a> to discuss how we can support your next project with practical, data-driven solutions.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Challenge: Delivering a Geotechnical Framework for a Remote Island Construction Project GeoEnviro Solutions Ltd (GES) provided ground investigation support and worked in collaboration with engineering teams on St Helena to develop a geotechnical framework and earthworks specification for upcoming infrastructure projects, including the planned new correctional facility. St Helena\u2019s remote location in the South Atlantic […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":13,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"off","_et_pb_old_content":"\n
By Andrew Dickinson, Associate Director at GeoEnviro Solutions<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\nFollowing the introduction of Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, local authorities have been legally obligated to identify and manage land affected by contamination. The primary mechanism for addressing this issue has been through the planning system, utilizing conditions attached to planning approvals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Understanding Land Contamination vs. Contaminated Land<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
It is important to clarify terminology. While many refer to 'contaminated land,' this term has a strict legal definition under Part 2A, requiring mandatory remediation overseen by the Environment Agency. To avoid confusion, professionals in the field refer to 'land contamination' or 'land containing contamination.'<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Evolution of Guidance: From CLR11 to LCRM<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Government guidance dictates the application and management of contamination conditions. Previously, this was outlined in CLR11 (Contaminated Land Report No. 11), but since October 2020, it has been replaced by LCRM (Land Contamination Risk Management), which remains in force. Despite this change, industry terminology such as \"Phase I\" is still commonly used.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Step-by-Step LCRM Process<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
LCRM establishes a structured approach to land contamination assessment:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Stage 1: Risk Assessment<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n\n- Preliminary Risk Assessment<\/strong> (PRA):\n
\n- Historical data review (e.g., Ordnance Survey maps, regulatory data)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Site reconnaissance visit (walkover)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Online portal data analysis (e.g., Coal Authority, Environment Agency, UXO search)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Development of a Conceptual Site Model (CSM) to evaluate pollutant linkages<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Outcome: Determine whether risks are acceptable or if further investigation is needed<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Generic Qualitative Risk Assessment<\/strong> (GQRA) (commonly known as Phase II Site Investigation):\n
\n- Soil sampling and chemical analysis<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Hazardous gas monitoring<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Validation against Soil Guidance Values (SGVs)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Outcome: If contamination is negligible, no further action is needed; otherwise, remediation may be required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Detailed Quantitative Risk Assessment<\/strong> (DQRA):\n
\n- Rarely required but involves in-depth risk modeling<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Often bypassed in favor of moving directly to remediation<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
Stage 2: Options Appraisal<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n\n- Identification of feasible remediation options<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Detailed evaluation of each option<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Selection of the most effective and cost-efficient remediation strategy<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
Stage 3: Remediation and Verification<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n\n- Implementation of the selected remediation strategy<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Comprehensive record-keeping of remediation activities<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Production of a Validation Report<\/strong> for regulatory approval<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
The Validation Report is essential in confirming that the site has been appropriately remediated. Even if no contamination was found, planning authorities often require documentation verifying that no previously unidentified contamination was encountered.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Compliance and Competency Requirements<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
To conduct land contamination assessments, a 'Competent Person'<\/strong> is required, as defined in Paragraph 189 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). A Competent Person must meet one or more of the following criteria:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n- A Suitably Qualified Person (SQP)<\/strong> under the National Quality Mark Scheme (NQMS)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Accreditation from the SoBRA<\/strong> scheme<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Recognition as a Specialist in Land Condition (SiLC)<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Membership in a professional organization relevant to land contamination<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Certification under the Gas Protection Verification Scheme (GPVS)<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Demonstrated experience in managing land contamination<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
Why Choose GeoEnviro Solutions?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
At GeoEnviro Solutions, we meet and exceed these competency requirements. As leaders in the field, we align our remediation and validation strategies with guidance from the Yorkshire and Lincolnshire Pollution Advisory Group (YALPAG)<\/strong>\u2014a trusted authority comprised of local government contaminated land teams. Our extensive industry experience enables us to provide effective, regulatory-compliant, and cost-efficient solutions for land contamination issues.<\/p>\n\n\n\nFor expert consultation on land contamination assessments, contact GeoEnviro Solutions<\/strong> today. Our team ensures compliance with planning regulations while optimizing risk management strategies for developers and stakeholders alike.<\/p>\n","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[12],"tags":[80,70,83,67,82,81],"class_list":["post-2275","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-case-study","tag-engineered-earthworks","tag-geoenviro-solutions","tag-geotechnical-consultancy","tag-geotechnical-engineering","tag-soil-compaction","tag-st-helena"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/growth-labs.dev\/geobu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2275","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/growth-labs.dev\/geobu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/growth-labs.dev\/geobu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/growth-labs.dev\/geobu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/13"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/growth-labs.dev\/geobu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2275"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/growth-labs.dev\/geobu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2275\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2319,"href":"https:\/\/growth-labs.dev\/geobu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2275\/revisions\/2319"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/growth-labs.dev\/geobu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2275"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/growth-labs.dev\/geobu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2275"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/growth-labs.dev\/geobu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2275"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![\"Ground](\"http:\/\/growth-labs.dev\/geobu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/WhatsApp-Image-2025-09-11-at-09.32.56-1-300x225.jpeg\")
![\"Ground](\"http:\/\/growth-labs.dev\/geobu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/WhatsApp-Image-2025-09-12-at-19.20.32-300x225.jpeg\")
![\"Ground](\"http:\/\/growth-labs.dev\/geobu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/WhatsApp-Image-2025-09-12-at-19.20.35-300x225.jpeg\")
![\"Ground](\"http:\/\/growth-labs.dev\/geobu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/WhatsApp-Image-2025-09-12-at-19.20.30-1-300x225.jpeg\")
![\"Ground](\"http:\/\/growth-labs.dev\/geobu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/WhatsApp-Image-2025-09-11-at-09.32.55-2-300x225.jpeg\")
![\"Ground](\"http:\/\/growth-labs.dev\/geobu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/WhatsApp-Image-2025-09-12-at-19.20.30-1024x768.jpeg\")