Independent technical review that keeps the UXO risk assessment, the survey and clearance methodology, contractor documentation and the planned works aligned, from the first desk study to the residual-risk sign-off.
Unexploded ordnance (UXO) lies on the seabed, in port basins and in the ground beneath construction sites across Central and Northern Europe. It comes from wartime bombing, former battlefields and military training areas, minefields and post-war sea dumping of munitions.
The environment changes the equipment and the contractors. The management logic stays the same: understand the hazard, relate it to the planned intervention, choose proportionate mitigation and prove that the residual risk is acceptable. BTC checks each of these steps independently, on the client's side.
Seabed works far from shore, where survey data are the only view of what lies on and below the seabed.
Shallow water and the coastline, where marine and land methods meet and responsibilities easily blur.
Construction sites where piling, excavation and drilling pass through ground that may contain bombs, shells or buried munitions.
We review documents and decisions against recognised guidance. It gives the client, the contractor and the reviewer a common language and a defensible basis for every conclusion.
A staged approach for onshore construction: preliminary risk assessment, detailed risk assessment, risk mitigation and implementation. We use it to check that each stage rests on the one before it.
The framework for marine projects, including the ALARP principle and the chain from risk assessment through survey and target investigation to the residual-risk sign-off.
Standards for non-technical and technical survey, land release, clearance requirements, quality management and risk management. We use them as the reference for evidence, quality assurance and quality control, and for decisions to reduce or release areas.
Guidance only protects a project once it reaches the method statements, permits to work, survey specifications and acceptance criteria used on site. That is where we focus our review.
The stages follow the CIRIA approach. We can review a single stage or follow the whole process.
A desk study of historical and site data answering one question: is there a credible UXO hazard? We check the sources, the study area and whether the conclusion covers the planned footprint.
Hazard by ordnance type, depth and likelihood of encounter, related to each planned activity. We check the assumptions on burial depth, seabed migration and the activities assessed.
Proportionate measures: avoidance, survey, target investigation, clearance or an EOD watching brief. We review the survey specification, detection capability, acceptance criteria and method statements.
Fieldwork, anomaly disposition, deviations and closure records. We check traceability and whether the evidence supports the ALARP or residual-risk statement and its stated limits.
The assessment covers one footprint or depth, while the final construction method reaches beyond it.
Line spacing, detection assumptions or target criteria are not tested against the actual plant, tools and tolerances.
A conclusion made for one task or location is treated as assurance for the wider site or for later project phases.
A route, borehole, dredge depth, pile position or sequence changes, but the UXO basis is not formally re-assessed.
Independent review of the hazard basis, assumptions, spatial limits, depth criteria and the link to the planned works.
Whether the proposed method, coverage, equipment, acceptance criteria and verification steps fit the project task.
Review of the evidence behind the conclusion, its stated limitations and the conditions under which it remains valid.
Checks of reports, survey records, anomaly disposition, traceability, deviations and closure evidence against the agreed scope.
Clear, structured findings for investors, project teams and contractors, including open issues and required actions.
Technical review when UXO, suspect items or scope changes challenge the original risk basis or project assumptions.
Support can cover a single review, a critical project stage or a wider client-side assurance role.
To define a defensible scope, information requirements, deliverables and acceptance criteria.
To verify that the contractor's method and controls match the project risk basis.
When location, depth, tools, sequence or construction method change after the original assessment.
To establish what the discovery means for earlier assumptions, adjacent work areas and the next project decisions.
Independent review of UXO risk assessments, specifications, RAMS and closure reports.
Learn more →Client-side monitoring and sampling inspections of UXO survey and clearance.
Learn more →UXO risk support for wind farm foundations, cables and landfalls in the Baltic and North Sea.
Learn more →A UXO risk assessment establishes whether unexploded ordnance may be present on a site and what risk it poses to the planned works. It should be completed before any intrusive activity such as piling, drilling, excavation, dredging, trenching or anchoring. The best time is the feasibility or design stage, when mitigation is cheapest to plan.
CIRIA C681 is a guide for managing UXO risk on onshore construction projects. CIRIA C754 covers the assessment and management of UXO risk in the marine environment, including offshore and nearshore works. Both follow a staged approach from preliminary risk assessment to mitigation and sign-off.
ALARP stands for "as low as reasonably practicable". A residual UXO risk is ALARP when further reduction would require effort or cost grossly disproportionate to the benefit. An ALARP statement is valid only for the area, depth, activity and assumptions it was made for.
IMAS were written for humanitarian mine action. Their principles of non-technical and technical survey, evidence-based land release, clearance requirements and quality management are widely used as a reference for survey and clearance on commercial projects.
BTC provides independent review and technical assurance on the client's side. Survey and clearance are carried out by specialist contractors and, where the law requires it, by state authorities.
Send a short description of the location, the planned works and the current project stage. We will propose a focused review or a broader technical assurance scope.