23rd June 2008, 09:15 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by darksider
TMSARCH - how would you know that the whole length of the pipeline was made ground?
Are you using borehole and trial hole data, taken every 100m to account for this information?
What if the material wasnt spread evenly?
What happens if the pipeline needs to bench the route and remove more soil than the topsoil strip?
Its not that cut and dried as you suggest I am afraid. There is always the potential for locating archaeological remains as we all know and the construction companys do not always follow their own method statements for the soil removal work. Therefore the safest option on 'large linear schemes' is to monitor the work.
Thoughts?
Count Dooku Consultants
Environmental Advisors to the Separatist Movement
"The dark side of the Force is a pathway to many abilities some consider to be unnatural".
Thanks for the reply, I certainly wasn't suggesting the issue was cut and dry - quite the opposite. It is also not as cut and dry to suggest that there should be a blanket watching brief along the whole of every pipeline route, mitigation needs to be tailored to the individual case.
In my example (which I very much generalised - not wanting to go into too much detail - was based on a recent real life scheme in the south-east (coincidence?)) the made-ground was reasonably well documented (or perhaps sufficiently well documented - don't want to open a debate on what is reasonable!), as highlighted by the dba, and due to its nature was subject to thorough test-pitting and boreholes exercise (by the engineers onto which the archaeological work 'piggybacked'). No the material was not evenly spread, but the tolerances were such that the decision could be taken not to monitor a significant portion of the route and that archaeological resources could be better spent. This was a decision which was subject to a lot of discussion and analysis, but I feel the correct one was reached in the end. Yes the scheme was monitored, but not a blanket watching brief along the whole route.
I do not agree that there 'is always the potential for locating archaeological remains as we all know', this might generally be the case but there are exceptions.
I would say in the majority of cases a watching brief along the whole of the pipeline should be implemented. But if I were asked should there ALWAYS be a watching brief along the length of a pipeline? I would say no.