🌍🌊 Land vs Maritime UXO Clearance: Same Threat, Different Worlds

UXO is a legacy threat both onshore and offshore—but how we manage it depends heavily on where it’s found.

Let’s explore the key differences between land-based and maritime UXO clearance in the UK:

🧭 1. Detection Methods

🔹 Land UXO Surveys Use walkover magnetometry, Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR), and probe-based intrusive methods (e.g., borehole magnetometry). Ideal for:

• Urban redevelopment

• Infrastructure foundations

• Former MoD training grounds

🔹 Marine UXO Surveys Rely on multi-beam sonar, sub-bottom profilers, side-scan sonar, and magnetometry. Delivered via:

• Towfish

• ROVs (remotely operated vehicles)

• Diver inspections in shallow or complex areas

⚙️ 2. Access and Clearance Tools

🔸 Land: Intrusive plant (e.g., piling rigs), hand excavation, mechanical diggers 🔸 Maritime: ROV-based clearance, diver-delivered disposal, or surface-level mitigation (e.g., avoidance or controlled detonation)

📋 3. Regulatory Landscape

• Land: Guided by CIRIA C681, HSE expectations, and local authority planning.

• Marine: Governed by CIRIA C785, MMO licensing, DEFRA, and marine spatial planning frameworks.

📊 4. Environmental and Safety Constraints

• On land, constraints often involve proximity to utilities, buildings, or public roads.

• Offshore, issues include marine wildlife protection, tidal/weather windows, and UXO mobility on the seabed.

At Capreae, we bring assurance across both domains—applying context-specific oversight to ensure ALARP is achieved without overspend or under-protection.

Because while UXO might look the same on a sonar image or in a borehole, how we deal with it must reflect the environment, risk profile, and stakeholder expectations.

🧠 Final blog in this series coming up: Innovation in UXO risk management—how tech is reshaping our approach.