NEBA strategies are designed to balance risks, benefits and tradeoffs associated with competing alternatives. EPS incorporates NEBA strategies to support decision making. These applications help our clients reduce and manage costs, manage site/action risks and maximize benefits to the environment and the public. Formal quantification of the effect of remedial actions on ecosystem services is rarely considered in remedial decision making. Consequently, tangible metrics that can describe the detriment or benefits associated with different remedial alternatives—and, subsequently, overall site cleanup—are lacking. Therefore, the potential exists for a remedial action to cause more harm to the ecosystem than the harm that is predicted by the risk assessment that drove the remedial action in the first place (i.e., create or increase natural resource liability) or provide a lower marginal benefit than the effort expended.
In developing a remedial action plan, stakeholders and decision makers must understand the potential benefits (i.e., gains in ecosystem service value) and costs (i.e., losses in ecosystem service value) associated with the implementation of various remedial alternatives and their relationship to predicted ecosystem service injury that is suggested by a risk assessment.