home > about > archive > other documents > survey 2004

SAFEGROUNDS Good Practice Guidance for the Management of Contaminated Land on Nuclear and Defence sites

Survey of Experience

Thank you for assisting CIRIA with its survey of people’s experience with the guidance. Its development through extensive stakeholder dialogue was an important step towards improved practice. Your feedback will be crucial in helping us build an understanding of its take-up and where we need to raise further awareness. It will also help us assess its effectiveness and where it needs improving.

Please answer these questions to tell us something about your organisation and its experience with the guidance however extensive or limited that might be. Links to the guidance are provided below. If you would like to discuss any aspects of this survey please call Jeff Kersey at CIRIA on 020 7549 3300.

1 About your organisation

Please note that the details within sections 1.1 to 1.7 will remain confidential being only retained by CIRIA, and not shown on any case study material within the SAFEGROUNDS website.

1.1 Your name
1.2 Your job title
1.3 Your email address
1.4 Your telephone number
1.5 Name of your organisation

1.6 Type of organisation

site owner/operator
regulator
local authority
NGO
community based organisation
government department
consultant
contractor
other (please specify)		(1.7)

Type of site of interest

Tick one or both

1.8 Nuclear-licensed
1.9 Defence

1.10 Have you or your organisation been directly involved with the SAFEGROUNDS project?

Yes

2 About your overall level experience with the guidance

Select one of the following and proceed to the relevant section.

Experience level	Description	Your level	Now go to
1	Aware of the guidance but not familiar with its contents and have never used it		Section 3
2	Familiar with the contents of the guidance but have never used it in practice		Section 4
3	Familiar with the contents of the guidance and have used it in practice at least once		Section 5

3 For organisations that are aware of the guidance but are not familiar with its content and have never used it

Tick any statements that are true for your organisation

Extent and nature of distribution of the guidance in your organisation

3.1 it has been distributed directly to named individuals
3.2 it has been distributed via intranet
3.3 it has been distributed as the full version
3.4 it has been distributed as the 4 page summary
3.5 it has not been distributed

Reasons for lack of familiarity with its content

3.6 contaminated land issues do not arise that often and the guidance has not been needed yet
3.7 my organisation has other guidance (internal or regulatory) and the guidance seems superfluous
3.8 the guidance is not suitable for my organisation to use because it is too long
3.9 the guidance is not suitable for my organisation to use because it is too theoretical
3.10 the guidance is not suitable for my organisation to use because it is not accepted by enough stakeholders
3.11 the guidance is not suitable for my organisation to use for reasons other than those listed above (please state)

Next...

4 For organisations that are familiar with the contents of the guidance but have never used it in practice

Tick any statements that are true for your organisation

Extent and nature of distribution of the guidance in your organisation

4.1 it has been distributed directly to named individuals
4.2 it has been distributed via intranet
4.3 it has been distributed as the full version
4.4 it has been distributed as the 4 page summary
4.5 it has not been distributed

Status the guidance has within your organisation

4.6 it is incorporated in our own guidance or standards		OR it is referenced in our own guidance or standards
4.7 it is mandatory for our contractors		OR it is advisory for our contractors
4.8 it is a primary reference		OR it is just one document that is potentially useful
4.9 other (please state)

Reasons for lack of use

4.10 contaminated land issues do not arise that often and the guidance has not been needed yet
4.11 my organisation has other guidance (internal or regulatory) and the guidance seems superfluous
4.12 the guidance is not suitable for my organisation to use because it is too long
4.13 the guidance is not suitable for my organisation to use because it is too theoretical
4.14 the guidance is not suitable for my organisation to use because it is not accepted by enough stakeholders
4.15 the guidance is not suitable for my organisation to use for reasons other than those listed above (please state)

Next...

5 For organisations that are familiar with the contents of the guidance and have used it in practice at least once

Tick any statements that are true for your organisation

Extent and nature of distribution of the guidance in your organisation

5.1 it has been distributed directly to named individuals
5.2 it has been distributed via intranet
5.3 it has been distributed as the full version
5.4 it has been distributed as the 4 page summary
5.5 it has not been distributed

Status the guidance has within your organisation

5.6 it is incorporated in our own guidance or standards		OR it is referenced in our own guidance or standards
5.7 it is mandatory for our contractors		OR it is advisory for our contractors
5.8 it is a primary reference		OR it is just one document that is potentially useful
5.9 other (please state)

Example(s) of use of the guidance

	Example 1	Example 2 (optional)
5.10 Outline of the Contaminated Land Issue name and location of the site where the land is, whether it is a nuclear-licensed site or defence site (omit name and location if you do not wish the site to be identified) how contamination was discovered (eg routine environmental monitoring, initial site characterisation exercise) nature and extent of contamination (radionuclides / chemicals, approximate area and depth) did it pose risks to workers or the public or biota?	(You may enter up to 255 characters.) You have characters left.	(You may enter up to 255 characters.) You have characters left.
5.11 Use of the Key Principles in the Guidance please state which key principles were used and how you made use of the guidance that amplifies them (Section 3 in the guidance).	(You may enter up to 255 characters.) You have characters left.	(You may enter up to 255 characters.) You have characters left.
5.12 Approach to the Management of the Contaminated Land what approach was used and how did it relate to the approach recommended in Section 4.1 of the guidance? how were objectives for managing the land established and was Section 4.2 of the guidance used? how was funding secured (see Section 4.3 of the guidance)?	(You may enter up to 255 characters.) You have characters left.	(You may enter up to 255 characters.) You have characters left.
5.13 Identifying the Preferred Option for Managing the Land what process was used to identify the preferred option and how did it relate to the process recommended in Section 5 of the guidance (and the relevant parts of the appendices)?	(You may enter up to 255 characters.) You have characters left.	(You may enter up to 255 characters.) You have characters left.
5.14 Deciding on the Land Management Option to be Implemented what process was used to decide on the option to be implemented? was Section 6 of the guidance or the appendices helpful?	(You may enter up to 255 characters.) You have characters left.	(You may enter up to 255 characters.) You have characters left.
5.15 Implementing the Chosen Management Option which parts of Section 7 of the guidance (or the appendices) were used when implementing the chosen option?	(You may enter up to 255 characters.) You have characters left.	(You may enter up to 255 characters.) You have characters left.
5.16 Validating the Chosen Management Option which parts of Section 8 of the guidance (or the appendices) were used when validating the chosen option?	(You may enter up to 255 characters.) You have characters left.	(You may enter up to 255 characters.) You have characters left.
5.17 Successes and Failures of the Guidance which parts of the guidance worked best and which worst? which things were done differently to previous practice because of the guidance? what gaps in the guidance were identified? what barriers & opportunities could be identified with regard to more widespread use of the guidance throughout nuclear licensed and defence sites?	(You may enter up to 255 characters.) You have characters left.	(You may enter up to 255 characters.) You have characters left.
5.18 Are you interested in expanding on this information to provide a more detailed case study of your experiences for the SAFEGROUNDS website?	Yes	No

...continued

6 Do you have any comments on this survey form?

(You may enter up to 255 characters.)
You have characters left.

CIRIA - March 2004

sitemap