Section 61 Prior Consent: What You Need to Know for Dust and Noise

Section 61 Prior Consent is a legal requirement that confuses many site managers. You know you need it. You know it’s about dust and noise. But what exactly does Section 61 require? What does “active management” actually mean? What documentation proves you’re complying?

Section 61 doesn’t prevent construction dust and noise. It requires you to manage it actively and document that management with evidence. The regulation exists because regulators understand that construction is inherently dusty and noisy—the question isn’t whether dust will occur, but whether you’re identifying problems and responding to them intelligently.

Understanding Section 61 in detail transforms it from a bureaucratic burden into an operational framework that actually protects your compliance.

Legal Requirements Under Section 61

Section 61 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 requires construction sites to notify local authorities before commencing work. The notification includes your dust management plan—how you’ll control dust and noise, what mitigation measures you’ve deployed, how you’ll monitor compliance.

Local authorities review your plan and either grant consent (possibly with conditions) or refuse it. If granted, you’re permitted to proceed with the specified mitigation. Your job is to prove you implemented it.

The critical phrase in Section 61 is “active management.” The regulation doesn’t require you to eliminate all dust (impossible) or to prevent any exceedances (unrealistic). It requires “active management” of dust and noise—meaning you identify problems and respond to them proportionately.

What does “active management” mean in practice? It means: You’re monitoring continuously. You detect problems when they occur. You understand what’s causing them. You deploy controls proportionate to the cause. You document all of this. If exceedances occur, you explain what caused them and what you did about it. Regulators see evidence of intelligent response, not just data.

Why Data Alone Doesn’t Satisfy “Active Management”

Many sites interpret Section 61 compliance as data collection. They deploy sensors, record readings, and assume that proves compliance. Regulators reviewing your documentation want to see something different: evidence of cause and response.

Scenario: Your monitoring data shows a PM10 exceedance at 14:32 on Tuesday. You’ve satisfied the data collection part of Section 61. But the regulator asks: “What caused this exceedance? What did you do about it?” If your answer is “we don’t know what caused it” and “we deployed generic water suppression across the site,” the regulator sees passive documentation, not active management.

If your answer is “Concrete crushing caused it—visible in camera footage at 14:18, correlating with dust spike at 14:23, we deployed suppression directly to crusher area at 14:25, readings normalised by 14:39,”—now the regulator sees active, intelligent management. Documentation with evidence.

Source identification provides the evidence component that transforms monitoring data into active management documentation, fulfilling Section 61 intent rather than just the letter of the regulation.

Active Management Documentation Checklist

Planning Phase: Dust management plan submitted to and approved by local authority. Plan identifies dust sources specific to your project. Mitigation measures documented for each source type. Monitoring approach described—location, frequency, parameters measured.

During Construction: Continuous monitoring data maintained. Timestamped records of dust/noise events. For each exceedance: date, time, magnitude, source activity (if identified), suppression deployed, time to normalisation. Written explanations of cause and response for significant events.

Incident Response: Evidence that you responded rapidly to exceedances. Records of decisions made—was the cause addressed, or was it external? What prevented similar incidents going forward? Regulators want to see decision-making, not just reactive water deployment.

Complaint Response: If neighbours complained, documentation of your investigation and response. Can you prove the dust came from your site or external sources? Can you provide specific mitigation details deployed because of the complaint?

Regulatory Meetings: When local authority inspectors visit, can you show them timestamped data, video evidence, and documented responses? Can you explain specific incidents with evidence rather than generalities?

FAQ: Section 61 Compliance Questions

Q: Do we need Section 61 Prior Consent for all construction projects?

A: Section 61 applies to most construction, demolition, and site preparation works. Small projects may be exempt (check with your local authority). Demolition, large excavation, crushing, and long-duration projects almost always require it.

Q: What happens if we don’t get Section 61 Prior Consent?

A: Local authorities can serve enforcement notices requiring you to cease work until proper consent is obtained. Failure to comply can result in fines up to £20,000 (unlimited in some cases). It’s a serious breach that should never be ignored.

Q: Can we modify our dust management plan after getting consent?

A: Yes, but you typically need to notify the local authority of significant changes. Minor adjustments (increasing suppression, modifying monitoring locations) usually don’t require formal re-approval. Major changes (changing construction methods, extending duration significantly) may require formal variation.

Q: What should our plan include if we expect exceedances?

A: Honesty and realism in planning is better than optimistic plans you won’t meet. If your project is in an urban area where some exceedances are likely despite mitigation, acknowledge this in the plan. Explain how you’ll respond—rapid notification, investigation, escalation of controls. Regulators prefer realistic plans with documented response protocols to optimistic plans you can’t meet.

Q: How detailed should incident documentation be for exceedances?

A: Detailed enough to explain cause and response. Timestamp, measured level, source activity, mitigation deployed, outcome. If you can provide video evidence, even better. Regulators understand that perfect compliance is impossible—they want to see intelligent response to violations, not perfect prevention.

Next Steps

Section 61 Prior Consent exists to ensure that construction sites manage dust and noise actively, not just passively. “Active management” means identifying problems and responding to them with intelligence and evidence.

If your project needs to demonstrate active management for Section 61 compliance, contact EMSOL to discuss monitoring approaches that generate the evidence documentation regulators expect.