AbstractBest value remedial design combines traditional design by prescriptive specification with the use of open competition to determine design elements specified by performance requirements. Compelling reasons to use best value remedial design include the potential realization of life cycle cost savings, an inherent flexibility that can accommodate changing public priorities as well as evolving innovative technologies, and the ability to provide a protective remedial action. Best value challenges include technical issues such as the selection of the “best” technology from the proposals received during the open competition aspect of the process. A major administrative challenge is the development of a partnering relationship which fosters trust between project stakeholders. The best value approach is appropriate for most projects where the stakeholders have a genuine desire to pursue environmental restoration in an effective, open, and cost‐effective manner. It is conceivable that the state of the practice will evolve in terms of effectiveness and cost savings as a result of the best value approach because environmental professionals will be required to consider critical nontechnical elements during the pre‐design and design stages of a