Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~', . <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />analyticar process} any plans that provide a smaller output level than the selected plan; This <br />process.ofrecalculating incremental cost per incremental unit for each remaining plan over the <br />last selected Best Buy plan is reiterat~d unm the incremental unit cost for the last remaining plan. <br />has been recalculated. The number of iterations is dependent upon the: number of plans and .on the <br />respective cost and output data of each, The purpose ofthe iterative process is not to eliminate <br />plans from the possibility of being selected, but rather to identify those plans (and their <br />. corresponding level of output) where there is 'a marked increase in production costs. By . <br />identifyingwhere significant increases in production costs. occur as output levels are increased, . <br />better information' is provided to assist in determining desirable project scale. . <br /> <br />(7) The final step in the CE/ICA process will be to tibulateand graph the incremental costs. It is <br />not necessary to'display all such' iterations in ecosystem restoration report documentation. What <br />. will be provided, however, is a table that summarizes the pertinen~ incremental cost and output <br />informationassociated with the in~reasing size (in te~s of output) of the Best Buy plans. . <br />Graphing th~Best Buy plans can help visually display the relationship between the increasing. <br />financial investment requiJ:ed for increasing environmental outputs. .. ... . <br /> <br />. . . - - '. . <br />. . . <br />. . . <br />. The r~sultsof c.ost effectiveness and incremental cost analyses are intended to help decision <br />makers make better informed decisions. In all but the most unusual cases, the NER Plan should. <br />be derived from the final set ofB.est Buy so'lutions. Other sOlutions, id~ntified asnon-cost <br />'. effective in cost etfectiv'eness analysis; as well as cost effective plans.identifie4 asrelativelyless <br />efficient in production ("non-Best Buys") in incremental analysis, may continue to be considered. <br />for selection. In some cases~ the economic and environmental models used to estimate the effects <br />of ecosystem restoration plans are not capable of capturing the full range of such effects, or . <br />. considerable uncertainty may accOmpany the estimates of such effects. Otherevaluation criteria, <br />such as environmental significance, acceptability, completeness, and effectiveness also impactthe <br />dfX::ision process. For example, concerns about endangered species, support by a local sponsor or <br />other interest group, unintended effects on other economic and ecological resources, and other . <br />factors may lead to the continuing c()nsideration and selection of solutions that may not be the <br />most' cost effective, or that may incur substai1tial incremental costs. <br /> <br />- - . <br />, .' . <br />Significance of Ecosystem Outputs and Cost Worthiness <br /> <br />'. .' ,". . <br />Information on the sign ifica~ceof ecosystem outputs will help detennine whether the proposed <br />environmental investment is worth its cost and whether a particular alternative should be <br />recommended. Statements of significance will be prepared for alternative plans in order to <br />provide qualitative information to help decision-makers evaluate whether the value of the <br />resources of any given restOration alternative are worth the costs incurred to produce them. The . <br />significance ()f restoration outputswill be recognized in terms" of institutional, publ ic, and/or <br />, technical i!1lportance.This basically means that someone, some entity, some. <br />law/policy/regulatioJi,or scientific evidence in~icatesthata particular ~esource is important. How <br />todetennineand characterize institutional, public, and/or technical significance is an important. <br />point and explained in greater detail in Appendix E of ER 1105-2-100 on pages 159-162. <br />Procedures for determining and describing the sigiiificimce of environmenbll'resource(s)~ <br />including a hypothetiCal restoration study example as well as sample signiticancestatements, is <br />found inIWR Report 97-R-4, Resource SigniflcanceProtocolfor Environmental Project <br />Planning found at www.iwr.usace.army.mil <http://www.iwr.usace;aOny:mil>. An effective <br />significance.statement is one that convincingly answers the question: Why are theJ:esources <br />associated.with the prdposed proiect sign ificant enough for this proiect to receive Federal <br />funding? . <br /> <br />8 <br />