Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
CASE STUDY

“In some areas of research there were also significant time savings. You get to what you are looking for more quickly, which all goes to the value of the product.”

Harper Mcleod

Access all documents on Significant contaminant linkage

Significant contaminant linkage meaning

What does Significant contaminant linkage mean?
In practice, a significant contaminant linkage is a source–pathway–receptor connection on land where the risk is serious enough to justify determining the land as contaminated. In England and Wales and in Scotland, this arises under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. The statutory term is significant pollutant linkage in Defra and Scottish statutory guidance. A linkage is significant only where a contaminant (pollutant), a viable pathway and a relevant receptor all exist and the combined risk meets the statutory tests: significant harm or a significant possibility of significant harm to human health or other receptors, or significant pollution of controlled waters (England and Wales) or of the water environment (Scotland). Without such a linkage, land should not be determined as contaminated land under Part 2A. Where present, local authorities may determine the land and secure remediation, with liability allocated to appropriate persons. The term is also used in planning, environmental due diligence and risk assessment (including LCRM/CLR11) to scope and prioritise remediation. Northern Ireland and Ireland do not have an identical Part 2A regime, but the source–pathway–receptor and significant linkage approach is widely used in policy and practice.
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

View the related Practice Notes about Significant contaminant linkage

PRACTICE NOTES
Contaminated land liability: characterising and allocating remediation actions (single-linkage, shared, common, collective) under section 78F, Part IIA Environmental Protection Act 1990 (England, Wales and Scotland)

Determining liability Enforcing authorities are expected to make use of the five-step process set out in the statutory guidance when determining liability under section 78F of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA 1990). Not every stage of that process will be applicable in all cases. See Practice Note: Contaminated land—process for determining liability. Step two applies only where a site has more than one significant contaminant linkage (SCL). At that point, the enforcing authority must identify which remediation actions correspond to each SCL present on the site. For details, see: Contaminated land—risk assessment—What is a contaminant linkage?...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
Contaminated Land: Apportioning Liability between Members of Class A and Class B Groups under Part IIA EPA 1990: Principles, Approaches and Case Law

Determining liability Enforcing authorities should adhere to the five-step procedure set out in the statutory guidance for deciding liability under section 78F of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA 1990). Not every stage of that approach will be relevant in all matters. See Practice Note: Contaminated land—process for determining liability. At step five, the enforcing authority must divide liability between the remaining members of each liability group. If a liability group has only one remaining member, that person is responsible for the whole of the costs allocated to that group. If a liability group has two or more remaining members, the enforcing authority should apply the guidance on apportionment. Different considerations apply to Class A liability groups and Class B liability groups. Class A persons General principles When apportioning liability within a single Class A liability group, the enforcing authority must decide the proportion of costs each member should bear, having regard to the relative degree to which each...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
Contaminated land: attributing and apportioning costs of common and collective remediation actions between Class A and Class B groups under EPA 1990 s78F

Determining liability Enforcement bodies are to use the statutory guidance’s five-step method for deciding liability under section 78F of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA 1990). Not every stage will be applicable in every matter. Refer to Practice Note: Contaminated land—process for determining liability. At step three, the authority must apportion responsibility for shared actions among liability groups. This step is not relevant where there is: a single significant contaminant linkage (SCL), as that group must meet the entire cost of any remediation; an orphan linkage, because the authority may undertake the remediation itself at its own expense; a single-linkage action, as that liability group is liable for all remediation costs. ‘Attribution’ is engaged where a single remediation measure is a ‘shared action’ tied to two or more SCLs...

Read More Right Arrow