Why the SQP Should Not Sign the Relevant Person Declaration
- Christian Atkinson
- Aug 18
- 3 min read
In Queensland, the submission of a contaminated land investigation document (CLID) under the Environmental Protection Act 1994 (Qld) (EP Act) requires two distinct declarations: one from the Suitably Qualified Person (SQP) and one from the relevant person. These declarations serve different legal and procedural purposes—and they must not be conflated.
Who Is the Relevant Person?
Section 390(3) of the EP Act defines the relevant person as the person who “gives” the CLID to the administering authority. But the approved form ESR/2023/6339 clarifies that:
“In this sense, ‘gives’ does not simply mean delivers. Rather, the relevant person causes the CLID to be given to the department. The relevant person may be the SQP responsible for the CLID.” (Page 3 ESR/2023/6339)
This means the relevant person is the one who initiates or authorises the submission—not merely the person who prepares, emails or physically sends the document.
Why the SQP Is Usually Not the Relevant Person
In practice, the SQP is typically an independent consultant engaged to prepare the CLID. They are not the landowner, nor do they have a controlling interest in the land. If the SQP were to “cause” the submission of the CLID, they would be stepping beyond their independent role and into a position of interest—potentially creating a conflict of interest.
This is why, although the form allows that the SQP may be the relevant person, this is only appropriate if the SQP is also the landowner or otherwise directly responsible for the submission. In most cases, they are not.
The Chain of Responsibility
The EP Act makes it clear that the relevant person is responsible for engaging an SQP to conduct the investigation and prepare the CLID. This is supported by:
Section 564 of the EP Act, which defines a Suitably Qualified Person as someone with prescribed qualifications and experience to perform a regulatory function.
Section 565 of the EP Act, which states:
“A regulatory function may only be performed by a suitably qualified person.”
Preparing a CLID is a regulatory function. Therefore, only an SQP can prepare a CLID.
This is reinforced in the approved form ESR/2023/6339, which states:
“Parts A, B, and C and Appendices 1 and 2 of this form must be completed by the relevant person (see s. 390(3) of the EP Act) and the responsible suitably qualified person (SQP).” (Page 1)
And again in Part C:
“Section 566 of the EP Act requires the suitably qualified person(s) to make this declaration.” (Page 12)
Why the Declarations Must Be Separate
The SQP declaration confirms that the CLID is factually correct and prepared by someone with the appropriate expertise. The relevant person declaration confirms that the person submitting the CLID has:
Not knowingly given false or misleading information to the auditor.
Provided all relevant information to the auditor.
This means the relevant person must have received and reviewed the CLID from the SQP and passed it on to the auditor without omission or alteration.
Importantly, the auditor has no direct relationship with the SQP. The auditor relies on the relevant person to ensure the integrity of the submission. This is why the declarations are structured this way.
Why This Matters
If the SQP signs both declarations—as is often the case in practice—there may be no declaration from the actual relevant person. This breaks the intended accountability structure of the EP Act. It also undermines the auditor’s ability to rely on the submission, since the auditor has no direct relationship with the SQP, and the SQP declaration makes no reference to the provision of the document to the auditor or any assurance that the auditor received the full and final version.
The relationship is always mediated through the relevant person.
Final Thoughts
To comply with the EP Act and maintain the integrity of the contaminated land assessment process:
The SQP should only sign the SQP declaration.
The relevant person—typically the landowner or their authorised agent—must sign the relevant person declaration.
Auditors and regulators should ensure both declarations are present and correctly attributed.
This distinction is not just procedural—it’s foundational to the independence and reliability of the contaminated land investigation process.
Christian Atkinson is a contaminated land auditor and a suitably qualified person for contaminated land assessment in Queensland with more than 30 years of experience. Any discussion is general and does not consider your specific circumstances. If you are considering acting on any matters discussed, you should seek advice from qualified and experienced professionals.
Comments