Subscribe to the CL:AIRE general eAlert

If you or your employer are a CL:AIRE Member, log in to subscribe to the Members' eAlert from your dashboard.

Please Note: During this time when the government has requested people to work from home where possible, the best way to contact us is via the Help Desk.

Thank you for your understanding.
The CL:AIRE Team

Your cart is empty

In Spring 2019, CL:AIRE undertook an industry wide consultation to gather stakeholders feedback about a proposed development of a gas protection verification accreditation scheme. The scheme seeks to raise standards in membrane verification and provide all stakeholders involved in land contamination management with enough confidence that risks associated with ground gases have been adequately managed.

The consultation was widely advertised across brownfield practitioners, environmental regulators and building control practitioners.

CL:AIRE received thirty eight responses directly to the consultation questions and one from an industry group as a separate letter.  The responses were spread generally evenly between regulators (including building control), consultants and consultant/gas membrane verifiers.

From the responses received there was resounding support for the scheme of 89% in favour and only 11% not in favour.  Of those that indicated that they were not in favour there were points of clarification required rather than not supporting the scheme wholesale.

Of the regulators that responded most felt that the scheme would be beneficial, and they would link to the scheme and therefore encourage its use.

Of the practitioners that responded,58% indicated that they would likely or very likely sign up to the scheme,16% undecided or 50/50, only 16% unlikely or not likely and 6% not providing a response.

Most respondents (84%) agreed with the eligibility criteria /capabilities for the fundamental level of accreditation practitioner and a further 82% agreed with the eligibility criteria for advanced level practitioner.

The application process of accreditation was fully supported with 82% of respondents indicating their support and to link the scheme to the current industry standards.

The consultation also described the scrutineering process of prospective candidates.  This again was supported with 74% of respondents felt that the scrutineering process of candidates was appropriate, however only 11 people volunteered to be scrutineers (29%).  Enquiries will be made for additional initial scrutineers.

74% of respondents agreed with the declaration of compliance approach and provided some additional points to consider to be included on the declaration to make it even more robust.

Respondents have provided some extremely useful general feedback and thoughts on the proposed scheme.  These are now being considered and built in where possible whilst the scheme moves forward to development.