Choice of remediationS
6.—(1) The reasonable remedial options should be evaluated, using best available technologies, based on the following criteria—
(a)the effect of each option on public health and safety;
(b)the cost of implementing the option;
(c)the likelihood of success of each option;
(d)the extent to which each option will prevent future damage, and avoid collateral damage as a result of implementing the option;
(e)the extent to which each option benefits to each component of the natural resource or service;
(f)the extent to which each option takes account of relevant social, economic and cultural concerns and other relevant factors specific to the locality;
(g)the length of time it will take for the restoration of the environmental damage to be effective;
(h)the extent to which each option achieves the restoration of the site of the environmental damage; and
(i)the geographical linkage to the damaged site.
(2) When evaluating the different identified remedial options, primary remedial measures that do not fully restore the damaged water or protected species or natural habitat to baseline or that restore it more slowly can be chosen. This decision can be taken only if the natural resources or services foregone at the primary site as a result of the decision are compensated for by increasing complementary actions to provide a similar level of natural resources or services as were foregone. This will be the case, for example, when the equivalent natural resources or services could be provided elsewhere at a lower cost. These additional remedial measures shall be determined in accordance with the rules set out in paragraph 5(2).
(3) The competent authority may at any time decide that no further remedial measures should be taken if—
(a)the remedial measures already taken secure that there is no longer any significant risk of adversely affecting human health, water or protected species and natural habitats; and
(b)the cost of the remedial measures that should be taken to reach baseline condition or similar level would be disproportionate to the environmental benefits to be obtained.