Regulatory decisions on remediation should consider affected communities’ needs and values, and how these might be impacted by remedial options; this process requires that diverse stakeholders are able to engage in a transparent consideration of value trade‐offs and of the distribution of risks and benefits associated with remedial actions and outcomes. The Stakeholder Values Assessment (SVA) tool was developed to evaluate remedial impacts on environmental quality, economic viability, and social equity in the context of stakeholder values and priorities. Stakeholder values were linked to the pillars of sustainability and also to a range of metrics to evaluate how sediment remediation affects these values. Sediment remedial alternatives proposed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) for the Portland Harbor Superfund Site were scored for each metric, based upon data provided in published feasibility study (FS) documents. Metric scores were aggregated to generate scores for each value; these were then aggregated to generate scores for each pillar of sustainability. In parallel, the inferred priorities (in terms of regional remediation, restoration, planning, and development) of diverse stakeholder groups (SGs) were used to evaluate the sensitivity and robustness of the values‐based sustainability assessment to diverse SG priorities. This approach, which addresses social indicators of impact and then integrates them with indicators of environmental and economic impacts, goes well beyond the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act's (CERCLA) 9 criteria for evaluating remedial alternatives because it evaluates how remedial alternatives might be ranked in terms of the diverse values and priorities of stakeholders. This approach identified trade‐offs and points of potential contention, providing a systematic, semiquantitative, transparent valuation tool that can be used in community engagement. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2018;14:43–62. © 2017 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC)

No abstract

The present paper describes a methodology for evaluating impacts of Superfund remedial alternatives on the regional economy in the context of a broader sustainability evaluation. Although economic impact methodology is well established, some applications to Superfund remedial evaluation have created confusion because of seemingly contradictory results. This confusion arises from failure to be explicit about 2 opposing impacts of remediation expenditures: 1) positive regional impacts of spending additional money in the region and 2) negative regional impacts of the need to pay for the expenditures (and thus forgo other expenditures in the region). The present paper provides a template for economic impact assessment that takes both positive and negative impacts into account, thus providing comprehensive estimates of net impacts. The paper also provides a strategy for identifying and estimating major uncertainties in the net impacts. The recommended methodology was applied at the Portland Harbor Superfund Site, located along the Lower Willamette River in Portland, Oregon, USA. The US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) developed remedial alternatives that it estimated would cost up to several billion dollars, with construction durations possibly lasting decades. The economic study estimated regional economic impacts-measured in terms of gross regional product (GRP), personal income, population, and employment-for 5 of the USEPA alternatives relative to the "no further action" alternative. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2018;14:32-42. © 2017 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).