Introduction

The Definition of Waste: Development Industry Code of Practice (DoW CoP) sets out good practice for industry to follow in the management of excavated materials. It describes an auditable system to demonstrate that the DoW CoP has been applied correctly. CL:AIRE introduced the auditing of projects applying the DoW CoP in 2019 to support its commitment to maintaining and improving industry standards.This work comprises 3 types of audits:

• Ongoing Project Audits: continuous, randomised auditing of Projects applying the DoW CoP.
• Whistleblower Audits: targeted auditing of Projects applying the DoW CoP, which have been flagged to CL:AIRE by a concerned third party.
• Qualified Person (QP) Audits: annual auditing following the QP renewal period, to ensure requirements of the QP role are met.

To provide users of the DoW CoP with more transparency and an understanding of what to expect when selected for audit, the following pages provide a summary of the auditing procedures followed by CL:AIRE.

  Ongoing Project Auditing Procedures 

1. Randomly select project for audit

   1. Auditing is carried out on an annual basis.
   2. Projects will be randomly selected from the preceding year’s:
      • completed projects (those which have submitted a Verification Report), and
      • projects with outstanding VRs (those which have not submitted their report by the date indicated in the Declaration and have not responded to any reminders).
   3. Number of selected projects (sample size) will be proportionally representative of the number of scenarios in the selection pool described in section 1.2 of this procedure.

2. Request project documents for audit

   1. The Project Team representative (by default the person who submitted the Verification Report) will be contacted to either:
      • Upload the project documents following the provided instructions; or
      • Provide alternative relevant contact details for the Project Team.
   2. As a minimum CL:AIRE expect the following to be submitted for audit:
      • Materials Management Plan;
      • Desk Top Study / Site Investigation Reports (for both Donor and Receiver sites);
      • Risk Assessment;
      • Remediation Strategy / Design Statement (depending on whether Route A or Route B);
      • Verification Plan;
      • Tracking system;
      • Mass balance calculations;
      • Communication pack (liaison with Local Authority / Regulator etc.); and
      • Verification Report (usually uploaded to the CL:AIRE website as part of CL:AIRE’s Verification Report procedures), or
      • in the event that the project is still ongoing, an equivalent of “Interim Verification Report” (summarising the project’s most recent updates) will be required as part of the audit documentation.
   3. The Project Team will be asked to identify the documents they wish to be considered for audit on a DoW CoP Audit Request Document Reference Form.

3. Assess Documents

   1. Tier 1 - Document screening (~10% of the audit work).
      • Checking all required documents have been submitted.
   2. Tier 2 – Industry guidance compliance review (~15% of audit work).
      • Reviewing the supporting documentation against relevant industry guidance / standards (Land Contamination Risk Management (LCRM), July 2023; BS 10175:2011+A2:2017; and BS 5930:2015+A1 2020 etc.).
   3. Tier 3 - DoW CoP compliance review (~75% of the audit work).
      • Assessing how well the project accords with DoW CoP requirements as set out in the DoW CoP Main Document, Version 2, March 2011 and the DoW CoP FAQs.

4. Audit Report

   1. The Audit Report documents the project audit.
   2. The individual lines of evidence and supporting documents / reports are each graded on how well they accord with the DoW CoP and relevant industry guidance. From this, an overall grade is assigned to the project.
   3. There are currently three grading categories (Good, Improvement Possible and Non-Conformant); the description for each is provided below in Table 1.

5. Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA / QC)

   1. A proportion of the projects selected for audit undergo a QA / QC review.
   2. There are two types of QA / QC review:
      • Internal review:
        • undertaken by a senior member of staff at CL:AIRE;
        • notes and observations are available to the reviewer; and
        • approximately 30% of the total number of audits completed are reviewed
      • External review:
        • undertaken by an experienced, independent reviewer;
        • blind review - no notes or observations from the initial audit are available to the reviewer; and
        • approximately 5-10% of the total number of audits completed are reviewed.
   3. Discrepancy review.
      • Any discrepancies between the original grading and the QA / QC grading(s) are discussed, and a final grade is agreed upon.

6. Outcomes and Feedback

   1. For projects that are graded as ‘Good’ or ‘Improvement Possible’, no further action is taken.
   2. Projects that do not reply to audit requests and that are found to be ‘Non-Conformant’ may trigger the use of CL:AIRE’s Qualified Person or Project Team Disciplinary & Grievance Procedures.
   3. CL:AIRE does not provide specific feedback to Project Teams or QPs on the outcome of the audits.
   4. Generalised feedback will be provided in an annual Audit Report which will be made available to the industry.
   5. All audit outcomes are made available to the regulators on request.

Table 1 Current Grading System

Qualified Person (QP) Auditing Procedures

1. Requirements for maintaining a QP status

1. As part of the approval process, Qualified Person (QP) applicants are required to pass an online Assessment.
2. Re-testing and submission of a QP Professional Report (implemented in 2024, see requirement on CL:AIRE website) is required every 5 years for all registered QPs to ensure knowledge of the DoW CoP is maintained.
3. Annually, QPs are required to log a minimum of 30 hours of Continuing Professional Development (CPD) on the planning, management, regulation or oversight of DoW CoP, remediation or other projects involving materials management.
   • QPs can either log their CPD directly on the CL:AIRE Website or simply upload their logs recorded on alternative platforms to avoid duplication
4. QPs must be able to demonstrate their active Chartered status with an appropriate professional body.
5. QPs are required to renew their QP status annually.

2. Selection of QPs for Audit

   1. Approximately 10% of renewed QPs are randomly selected for audit each year.
   2. Selected QPs are checked against the previous year's audit to ensure individuals are not audited in consecutive years.

3. QP Audit

   1. The audit will assess the evidence provided at the QP renewal, as listed in section 1. This includes:
      • the CPD,
      • active chartership with a relevant professional institution.
   2. Where QPs have two previous failed attempts at the online Assessment, the audit considers any additional agreed arrangements (i.e., extra CPD hours, DoW CoP refresher training) between CL:AIRE and the individual and that these arrangements have been completed.
   3. During and between the QP Assessment years, the QP Assessment result and Professional Report will be checked during the audit.

4. Outcomes

   1. The outcome of this audit will suggest whether the QP meets the requirements listed in section 1 and will be given a grading as: 
      • Conformant, or
      • Non-Conformant.
   2. If a QP did not upload their CPD log / the chartership evidence on time, or the outcomes suggest the evidence did not meet the requirements, they will be contacted to submit / update the provided evidence within 21 days.
      • The QP should update their CPD log or provide any required evidence and inform CL:AIRE once they have done so.
      • If the required evidence is not provided within the agreed period, the QP will be temporarily suspended from the QP Register.
      • The QP will be notified of the suspension.
      • The final grading of the audit will be updated accordingly based on the quality of the evidence provided.
   3. Audit outcomes are held on CL:AIRE’s records.
   4. General feedback, anonymous, will be provided in the annual Audit Report, which will be made available to the industry.

 Last updated (QP Audits section): 30 January 2025.

Introduction

CL:AIRE aims to help QPs understand what the rules and procedures are for the Definition of Waste: Development Industry Code of Practice (DoW COP) and how they are to be used to manage disciplinary and grievance situations which may arise.

Fairness and transparency must always be promoted through clear, specific rules and procedures.

Where formal action is needed, it must be reasonable, fair and justified depending on the circumstances.

This will be achieved by considering the following:

1. CL:AIRE and QPs must raise and deal with issues promptly and should not unreasonably delay meetings, decisions or confirmation of those decisions.
2. CL:AIRE and QPs must act consistently.
3. CL:AIRE must carry out any necessary reviews, to establish the facts of any situation arising.
4. CL:AIRE must inform QPs of the basis of any problem(s) and give them an opportunity to put their case in response before any decisions are made.

Definitions

In the usage of this Procedure:

Complainant means any person or persons who have made a written allegation of improper conduct (for example see section 6) against a QP.

Respondent means the QP against whom a written allegation of improper conduct has been made to CL:AIRE.

The Chair is the Chair of CL:AIRE.

An Investigation Panel is a panel which may comprise a member of the CL:AIRE Executive or Board and a representative (or nominated representative) of the Environment Agency (EA) or Natural Resources Wales (NRW), depending on the geographical location,  that is appointed to decide whether or not there are grounds for a detailed examination of a specific allegation made by the Complainant against a QP. As such all members of the panel will have significant experience of use or management of the DoW CoP.

A Disciplinary Panel is a panel comprising not less than one representative of the CL:AIRE Executive, one independent representative QP, and may also include one representative of the EA / NRW which is convened for the purpose of a Disciplinary Meeting. Disciplinary panel members will not have acted on the Investigation Panel.

A Disciplinary Meeting is a hearing organised by the Disciplinary Panel, at which the Complainant and Respondent are invited to present their case.

Review meeting is a meeting which may be held in advance of a “Disciplinary Meeting” with the Qualified Person to help establish the facts of any complaint.

Appeal Panel acts in the event of an appeal to the decision of the Disciplinary Panel and can uphold or overturn or vary. 

Disciplinary Procedure

Establishing the facts

A complaint that a QP has behaved contrary to the expected manner required by the DoW CoP, must be submitted in writing to CL:AIRE outlining the details. Such a complaint can be made by any individual or organisation.

Complaints will be reviewed by the Investigation Panel, which may –

• dismiss the complaint,
• seek to resolve the issue without requiring more formal procedures, or
• decide to hold a Disciplinary Meeting.

In coming to its decision, the Investigation Panel may call for submissions from either the Complainant or the QP or both.

It is important to carry out necessary reviews of disciplinary matters without unreasonable delay when establishing the facts of the situation. In some cases this will require holding a review meeting with the QP before proceeding to any disciplinary meeting. In others, the review stage will be the collation of evidence by CL:AIRE for use at any disciplinary meeting.

Inform the QP of the problem

If it is decided that there is a disciplinary case to answer, the QP should be notified of this in writing. This notification will contain information about the alleged misconduct or poor performance to enable the QP to prepare to answer the case at a disciplinary meeting.

The Respondent and the Complainant shall be notified of the process by which the allegations are to be dealt with.

The Respondent shall be given 21 working days from the date by which CL:AIRE informs of the details of the allegations made by the Complainant, to respond in writing to the allegations (including submitting evidence).

Hold a Disciplinary Meeting with the QP

Meetings will be held without unreasonable delay whilst allowing the QP adequate time to prepare their response. CL:AIRE shall give 21 working days notice of a disciplinary meeting. The notice shall be issued in writing and shall outline the allegations. Reasonable steps will be taken to agree a convenient date, time and location for the meeting and arrange any special needs of the attendees (online meeting facilities may be used if most convenient for all parties).

The following steps will be taken prior to a disciplinary panel meeting:-

1. CL:AIRE will inform the QP of the names of the disciplinary panellists in the notice given.
2. The QP will have the right to flag concerns they might have with the individuals nominated e.g. prior interactions, points of conflict.
3. Equally, disciplinary panellists will be informed of the QP name who is being called to the meeting and should self-exclude themselves for any of the same reasons.
4. CL:AIRE will assess these concerns, and if necessary appoint an alternative disciplinary panellist.
5. No further information will be released to any party until no conflict has been confirmed.

The QP will make every effort to attend the meeting, at which CL:AIRE will explain the complaint against the QP and go through the evidence that has been gathered. The QP will be allowed to set out their case and answer any allegations that have been made. The QP will be given a reasonable opportunity to ask questions and present evidence or witnesses.

Allow the QP to be accompanied at the meeting

The QP has the right to be accompanied by no more than one representative or advisor. They must be agreed in advance of the meeting with CL:AIRE for practical purposes e.g. venue size, accessibility. A request to be accompanied should provide enough time for CL:AIRE to make the necessary arrangements with regards venue size and facilities for the companion’s attendance at the meeting.

The companion should be allowed to address the meeting, to put and sum up the QP’s case, respond on behalf of the QP to any views expressed at the meeting and confer with the QP during the meeting. The companion does not, however, have the right to answer questions on the QP’s behalf, address the meeting if the QP does not wish it or prevent CL:AIRE from explaining their case.

The QP may submit supplementary evidence to the disciplinary meeting. This must be received by the Disciplinary Panel not less than 5 working days before the date set for the meeting.

The Disciplinary Panel will determine the procedure to be followed in the presentation of the documentation prior to, during, and in the conduct of the meeting. The decision of the Disciplinary Panel will be final in such matters in determining the conduct of the meeting which shall be in accord with natural justice.

The Disciplinary Panel shall consider the case, may call for independent technical advice, and shall determine whether the complaint against the Respondent has been made out or not.

The Panel may reach a decision in absentia if a Respondent refuses to attend the meeting.

Decide on appropriate action

After the meeting, the Disciplinary Panel will decide whether or not disciplinary or any other action is justified and inform the QP accordingly in writing.

If the finding is that the complaint has been made out, the Panel may:

• Issue the QP with a written warning and provide advice as to future conduct including requiring training or mentoring; or
• Issue the QP with a written warning & suspend the QP from the Register for a specified period and give advice as to future conduct including requiring training or mentoring; or
• Remove the QP permanently from the Register.

Where misconduct is confirmed, or the QP is found to be performing unsatisfactorily, it is usual to give the QP a written warning. A further act of misconduct or failure to improve performance within a set period would normally result in a final written warning.

A first or final written warning should set out the nature of the misconduct or poor performance and the change in behaviour or improvement in performance required (with timescale). The QP should be told how long the warning will remain current.

The QP should be informed of the consequences of further misconduct, or failure to improve performance, within the set period following a final warning. For instance that it may result in dismissal from the QP register.

If a QPs first misconduct or unsatisfactory performance is sufficiently serious (termed gross misconduct), it may be appropriate to move directly to a dismissal from the QP Register without notice for a first offence. This might occur where the QP’s actions have had, or are liable to have, a serious or harmful impact on the DoW CoP.

A decision to dismiss from the QP register should be taken by the CL:AIRE Board of Trustees. The QP should be informed as soon as possible of the reasons for the dismissal, the date on which their QP status will end, and the appropriate period of notice.

Upon removing a QP from the Register, CL:AIRE will also notify their Professional Institute of this action and their employer.

Appeals

The Qualified Person has the right to appeal on the following grounds:

• that additional evidence (which was not available at the time of the hearing) has subsequently become available and that this evidence could have materially affected the decision of the Disciplinary Panel;
• that the provisions of this procedure were not followed in a material respect resulting in prejudice to the Respondent's ability to defend him/herself;

Any appeal shall be made in writing to the CL:AIRE Executive, setting out the grounds, to be received within 21 working days of the date of notification of the decision of the Disciplinary Panel. An appeal shall include any new evidence if this ground is relied upon.

Upon receipt of an appeal, the Executive shall appoint an Appeal Panel to consist of three appropriate persons who may not include any person who was a member of the Investigation Panel or Disciplinary Panel sitting for the case in question (for example members of the CL:AIRE Technology & Research Group, Trustees, legal advisor).

The Appeal Panel shall consider the appeal and shall determine whether the decisions of the Disciplinary Panel should stand in whole or part or not. Generally the Appeal Panel will deal with matter based on written representations by the appellant.

The decision of the Appeal Panel, which may be taken by simple majority, shall be binding and shall be communicated to the CL:AIRE Executive. Such a decision may be to uphold or overturn or vary; the decision and/or sanction of the Disciplinary Panel and shall be final.

The CL:AIRE Executive shall inform the Respondent and the Complainant in writing of the decision of the Appeal Panel.

Confidentiality and making the Decision Known

The proceedings of the Investigation Panel, Disciplinary Panel and Appeals Panel shall remain confidential to the CL:AIRE Executive and members of the panels and shall not be disclosed to third parties, other than to the Respondent and Complainant, their representatives and regulators (EA / NRW).

Where the final decision results in the complaint being upheld and removal of the QP permanently from the Register, the outcome may be made public on the CL:AIRE website. Furthermore, the QPs Professional Institute and employer will also be notified of the decision.

Where a complaint is found not to be upheld, the proceedings and outcome will not be made public unless the Respondent specifically requests this.

If the Respondent tenders their resignation as a QP from the Register during the main or appeals procedure, the process will be continued to a conclusion. If the complaint is upheld, the result may be made public on the CL:AIRE website and the QPs Professional Institute and employer will also be notified of the decision.

Triggering the Procedure

Non-exhaustive List of Actions Which Could Trigger These Procedures

• Declaration completed without minimum required documents / checks
• Declaration completed with documents not in accordance with guidance documents
• Breach of independence requirements
• Chartership status lapses
• Regular submission of Declarations with missing / vague information e.g. +3 Declarations returned by CL:AIRE with comments
• Declaration submitted where QP has knowledge of regulator concerns
• Declaration submitted by 'inactive' QP e.g. not annual registered
• QP fails to disclose criminal conviction relevant to waste management during or after application

Introduction

CL:AIRE aims to help Project Teams understand what the rules and procedures are for the CL:AIRE Definition of Waste: Development Industry Code of Practice (DoW CoP) and how they are to be used to manage disciplinary and grievance situations which may arise, either during or after a project.

Fairness and transparency must be promoted through clear, specific rules and procedures.

Where formal action is needed, it must be reasonable, fair and justified depending on the circumstances.

This will be achieved by consideration of the following:

• CL:AIRE and Project Teams must raise and deal with issues promptly and should not unreasonably delay meetings, decisions or confirmation of those decisions;
• CL:AIRE and Project Teams must act consistently;
• CL:AIRE must carry out any necessary reviews, to establish the facts of any situation arising and
• CL:AIRE must inform Project Teams of the basis of any problem(s) and give them an opportunity to put their case in response before any decisions are made.

Definitions

In the usage of this Disciplinary & Grievance Procedure:

• Complainant means any person or persons who have made a written allegation of improper conduct (for example see section 6) against a Project Team using the DoW CoP.
• Respondent means the Project Team against whom a written allegation of improper conduct has been made to CL:AIRE.
• Project Team refers to a group of multiple organisations or singular who are using the CL:AIRE Definition of Waste: Development Industry Code of Practice.
• An Investigation Panel is a panel which may comprise a member of the CL:AIRE Executive team and a representative (or nominated representative) of the Environment Agency (EA) or Natural Resources Wales (NRW), depending on the geographical location, that is appointed to decide whether or not there are grounds for a detailed examination of a specific allegation made by the Complainant against a Project Team.
• A Disciplinary Panel is a panel comprising not less than one representative of the CL:AIRE Executive, one representative of the EA / NRW and an independent representative Qualified Person (QP), convened for the purpose of a Disciplinary Meeting. Disciplinary Panel members will not have acted on the Investigation Panel.
• A Disciplinary Meeting is a hearing organised by the Disciplinary Panel, at which the Complainant and Respondent are invited to present their case.
• A Review Meeting is a meeting which may be held in advance of a Disciplinary Meeting with the Qualified Person to help establish the facts of any complaint.
• An Appeal Panel acts in the event of an appeal to the decision of the Disciplinary Panel and can uphold or overturn or vary.

Disciplinary Procedure

Establishing the facts

A complaint that a Project Team has behaved contrary to the expected manner required by the DoW CoP, must be submitted in writing to CL:AIRE outlining the details. Such a complaint can be made by any individual or organisation and this procedure will be followed to its conclusion.

Complaints will be reviewed by the Investigation Panel, which may –

• dismiss the complaint,
• seek to resolve the issue without requiring more formal procedures, or
• decide to hold a Disciplinary Meeting.

In coming to its decision, the Investigation Panel may call for submissions from either the Complainant or the Project Team / Organisation or both.

It is important to carry out necessary reviews of disciplinary matters without unreasonable delay when establishing the facts of the situation. In some cases this will require holding a Review Meeting with the Project Team before proceeding to any disciplinary meeting. In others, the review stage will be the collation of evidence by CL:AIRE for use at any Disciplinary Meeting.

Inform the Project Team of the problem

If it is decided that there is a disciplinary case to answer, the Project Team should be notified of this in writing as soon as practicable. This notification will contain information about the alleged misconduct or poor performance to enable the Project Team to prepare to answer the case at a disciplinary meeting.

The Respondent and the Complainant shall be notified of the process by which the allegations are to be dealt with.

The Respondent shall be given 21 working days from the date by which CL:AIRE informs of the details of the allegations made by the Complainant, to respond in writing to the allegations (including submitting evidence). No response will automatically trigger the need for a Disciplinary Meeting.

Hold a Disciplinary Meeting with the Project Team

Meetings will be held without unreasonable delay whilst allowing the Project Team adequate time to prepare their response. CL:AIRE shall give 21 days notice of a Disciplinary Meeting. The notice shall be issued in writing and shall outline the allegations. Reasonable steps will be taken to agree a convenient date, time and location for the meeting and arrange any special needs of the required attendees (online meeting facilities may be used if most convenient for all parties).

The following steps will be taken prior to a disciplinary panel meeting:-

1. CL:AIRE will inform the Project Team of the names of the disciplinary panellists in the notice given.
2. The Project Team will have the right to flag concerns they might have with the individuals nominated for the Disciplinary Panel e.g. prior interactions, points of conflict.
3. Equally, the individuals nominated will be informed of the Project Team name(s) who are being called to the meeting and should self-exclude themselves for any of the same reasons.
4. CL:AIRE will assess these concerns, and if necessary appoint an alternative individual.
5. No further information will be released to any party until no conflict has been confirmed.

The Project Team will make every effort to attend the meeting, at which CL:AIRE will explain the complaint against them and present the evidence that has been gathered. The Project Team will be allowed to set out their case and answer any allegations that have been made. The Project Team will be given a reasonable opportunity to ask questions and present evidence or witnesses.

Allow the Project Team to be accompanied at the meeting

The Project Team has the right to be accompanied by no more than one representative or advisor. They must be agreed in advance of the meeting with CL:AIRE for practical purposes e.g. venue size, accessibility. A request to be accompanied should provide enough time for CL:AIRE to make the necessary arrangements with regards venue size and facilities for the companion’s attendance at the meeting.

The companion should be allowed to address the meeting, to put and sum up the Project Team case, respond on behalf of the Project Team to any views expressed at the meeting and confer with the Project Team during the meeting. The companion does not, however, have the right to answer questions on behalf of the Project Teams, nor address the meeting if the Project Team does not wish it or prevent CL:AIRE from explaining their case.

The Project Team may submit supplementary evidence to the Disciplinary Meeting. This must be received by the Disciplinary Panel not less than 5 working days before the date set for the meeting.

The Disciplinary Panel will determine the procedure to be followed in the presentation of the documentation prior to, during, and in the conduct of the meeting. The decision of the Disciplinary Panel will be final in such matters in determining the conduct of the meeting which shall be in accord with natural justice.

The Disciplinary Panel shall consider the case, may call for independent technical advice, and shall determine whether the complaint against the Respondent has been made out or not.

The Panel may reach a decision in absentia if a Respondent refuses to attend the meeting.

Decide on appropriate action

After the meeting, the Disciplinary Panel will decide whether or not disciplinary or any other action is justified and inform the Project Team accordingly in writing.

If the finding is that the complaint has been made out, the Panel may:

• Issue the Project Team with a written warning and provide advice as to future conduct including requiring training or mentoring; or
• Issue the Project Team with a written warning & suspend them from using the DoW CoP for a specified period and give advice as to future conduct including requiring training or mentoring; or
• Permanently refuse future use of the DoW CoP by the Project Team.

Where misconduct is confirmed, or the Project Team is found to be performing unsatisfactorily, it is usual to give them a written warning and inform the relevant regulator. A further act of misconduct or failure to improve performance within a set period would normally result in a final written warning.

A first or final written warning should set out the nature of the misconduct or poor performance and the change in behaviour or improvement in performance required (with timescale). The Project Team shall be told how long the warning will remain current.

The Project Team shall be informed of the consequences of further misconduct, or failure to improve performance, within the set period following a final warning. For instance that it may result in restriction of future use of the DoW CoP.

If a Project Teams first misconduct or unsatisfactory performance is sufficiently serious (termed gross misconduct), it may be appropriate to move directly to restriction of future use of the DoW CoP without notice for a first offence. This might occur where the Project Teams actions have had, or are liable to have, a serious or harmful impact on the DoW CoP.

A decision to restrict future use of the DoW CoP should be taken by the CL:AIRE Board of Trustees. The Project Team be informed as soon as possible of the reasons for the dismissal, the date on which their use of the DoW CoP will end, and the appropriate period of notice. The restriction will apply to the organisation(s) in question, not individuals e.g. should individuals move to a different organisation not involved, the restriction will not apply to them.

Appeals

The Respondent has the right to appeal on the following grounds:

• that additional evidence (which was not available at the time of the hearing) has subsequently become available and that this evidence could have materially affected the decision of the Disciplinary Panel;
• that the provisions of this procedure were not followed in a material respect resulting in prejudice to the Respondent's ability to defend themselves;

Any appeal shall be made in writing to the CL:AIRE Executive, setting out the grounds, to be received within 21 days of the date of notification of the decision of the Disciplinary Panel. An appeal shall include any new evidence if this ground is relied upon.

Upon receipt of an appeal, the CL:AIRE Executive shall appoint an Appeal Panel to consist of three appropriate persons (for example members of the CL:AIRE Technology & Research Group, Trustees, legal advisor) who may not include any person who was a member of the Investigation Panel or Disciplinary Panel sitting for the case in question.

The Appeal Panel shall consider the appeal and shall determine whether the decisions of the Disciplinary Panel should stand in whole or part or not. Generally the Appeal Panel will deal with matter based on written representations by the appellant.

The decision of the Appeal Panel, which may be taken by simple majority, shall be binding and shall be communicated to the CL:AIRE Executive. Such a decision may be to uphold, overturn or vary the decision and/or sanction of the Disciplinary Panel shall be final.

The CL:AIRE Executive shall inform the Respondent and the Complainant in writing of the decision of the Appeal Panel.

Confidentiality and Making the Decision Known

The proceedings of the Investigation Panel, Disciplinary Panel and Appeals Panel shall remain confidential to the CL:AIRE Executive and members of the Panels and shall not be disclosed to third parties, other than to the Respondent and Complainant, their representatives and regulators (EA / NRW) who may notify HMRC.

Where the final decision results in the complaint being upheld and restriction of future use of the DoW CoP, the outcome may be made public on the CL:AIRE website.

Where a complaint is found not to be upheld, the proceedings and outcome will not be made public unless the Respondent specifically requests this.

Non-exhaustive list of actions that could trigger this procedure -

• Persistent submission of supporting documents not generally according with best-practice documents referenced in the DoW CoP e.g. CLR 11, BS 10175:2011+A2:2017.
• Materials Management Plans demonstrably not followed or appropriately redeclared.
• Verification Report(s) not submitted to CL:AIRE.
• Use of DoW CoP in restricted scenarios.
• Application of fees at Receiver sites not associated with costs of applying DoW CoP without regulator liaison.
• Retrospective use of the DoW CoP.
• Beginning works before a Declaration receipt is issued.

To download the main DoW CoP guidance document click this link -

The DoW CoP (launched in September 2008) has significantly increased the sustainability of land remediation and development projects.

It has become a common approach for the management of excavated materials on development sites.

The DoW CoP enables the direct transfer and reuse of clean naturally occurring soil materials between sites.

It supports the establishment and operation of fixed soil treatment facilities and it enables the reuse of both contaminated and uncontaminated materials on their site of origin, and between sites within defined Cluster projects.