This might be done at the level of plans or programmes, in which case a strategic focus is needed that should capture views from relevant parties, or at a project level where a greater emphasis on specific techniques is necessary. Within the UK, the primary vehicle for demonstrating optimisation in the context of environmental decisions is a Best Available Techniques (BAT) or Best Practicable Means (BPM) study. Such a process needs to be consistent with regulatory optimisation principles as well as other sources of best practice guidance. Such guidance is not prescriptive in terms of how an optimisation assessment should be undertaken, but it establishes expectations regarding the processes that are intended to support building consensus in a proposed solution.

Quintessa has considerable experience of developing and applying options assessment approaches to a range of situations. We have supported options assessments for national programmes such as the UK’s Committee of Radiative Waste Management (CoRWM) and has led, or had a leading role in high-profile options assessments and optimisation studies for the design of radioactive waste repositories, for the treatment of sludge wastes for legacy facilities, and the management of diverse sets of hazardous decommissioning wastes. We have also supported site end-state decisions, major investment portfolio choices, and site selection for radioactive waste repositories and underground CO2 storage systems.

Also, Quintessa has contributed to the SAFEGROUNDS project to develop best practice guidance for the management ofcontaminated land on nuclear and defence sites, and supported the development of regulatory guidance on the assessment of BPEO (now BAT).

Lead Image: Evaluation of options against criterion. Image courtesy of J. Penfold.