Laserfiche WebLink
<br />W <br />"-l <br />0) <br />::n <br /> <br />V. PLAN FORMULATION <br /> <br />A. Procedure and Criteria <br /> <br />Pl an <br />meet <br />four <br /> <br />formulation is the <br />a specified goal. <br />following tests: <br /> <br />process of evaluating comparable alternatives to <br />The alternatives to be implemented must meet the <br /> <br />Effective <br />Effi ci ent <br />Complete <br />Accept ab 1 e <br /> <br />The four tests may be briefly identified as follows: (1) completeness is <br />the extent to which an alternative plan provides and accounts for necessary <br />investments or other actions to ensure the realization of the planned <br />effects, (.2) effectiveness is the extent to which an alternative alleviates <br />the speci~ied problem and achieves the desired results, (3) efficiency <br />is the extent to which an alternative is cost-effective, and (4) accepta- <br />bil ity i sthe workabil ity and vi abil ity of the alternative in respect to <br />acceptance by the public and adherence to existing laws and regulations. <br /> <br />The effectiveness, efficiency, and completeness of the alternatives were <br />evaluated by Federal, State, and private technical personnel. The accepta~ <br />bility of the various alternative~ for saline water use and disposal was <br />determi ned' through pub 1 i c i nvo 1 vement. Because of the 1 imited data, <br />personnel, and time available for this study, the analysis was limited in <br />scope, <br /> <br />1, Mea~urement for Cost-Effectiveness <br /> <br />Pursuant to precedent adopted in the Clean Water Act Amendments of 1972 <br />(Public Law 92-500) and the Colorado River 8asin Salinity Control Act <br />(Public Law 93-320), the economic justification of various salinity <br />control:measures in the Colorado River 8asin is displayed in terms of <br />their r~lative cost-effectiveness, which is defined as the annual <br />equivalent cost associated with an incremental change in salinity of <br />I mg/L at Imperial Dam. <br /> <br />Under Colorado River Water Quality Improvement Program, an approach has <br />been established to prioritize construction so that the most cost- <br />effective measures will be implemented to meet program goals. For <br />evaluation 'purposes, the incremental cost-effectiveness of a potential <br />salinity control measure is compared against the cost-effectiveness of <br />other possible control measures to determine whether the specific <br />measure'shou1d be implemented. <br /> <br />2, Est imated Costs <br /> <br />The costs of each alternative are presented in terms of investment costs <br />and annual equivalent costs. Investment costs are the costs of designing <br />and con$tructing the alternative, plus the interest that accrues during <br /> <br />V-I <br /> <br />J <br /> <br />K. <""..... <br /> <br />