My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01373
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD01373
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:01:08 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:54:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
9/10/2002
Description
CF Section - CRRP - Review Scope of Work
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Memo
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br />- 8 - <br /> <br />Water quality implications, <br /> <br />Operational flexibility, <br /> <br />Estimated costs for planning studies, legal activities, environmental mitigation and <br />enhancement, pennitting, design, construction and project operation and management, <br /> <br />Economic feasibility defined as all costs and all benefits resulting from a particular action <br />regardless of to whom they may accrue, <br /> <br />Financial feasibility defined as the ability of sponsoring entities to finance and pay all costs <br />associated with the project or action, and <br /> <br />The degree of uncertainty associated with each configuration, <br /> <br />8b. Conduct a "fatal Daw" analysis as a first step in the screening process, <br /> <br />8c. Conduct a second and, if necessary, a third screening process to narrow the range of <br />configurations. <br /> <br />8d. With input from the Technical Committee and the CWCB staff select one or more preferred <br />configurations or recommend the proj ect as not feasible, <br /> <br />Task 9 - Documentation and Justification of Selected Configurations <br /> <br />, <br />1<ot""'yzt'l:;' <br /> <br />Justify the selection of the preferred project configuration as it compares to other gc!\(;,ally 3<.;<.;"pted-l.4. <br /> <br />water development alternatives, Document the advantages and disadvantages of the preferred <br /> <br />configurations over the other gORerally a",,<;;J'tr~water development alternatives With, regard to <br /> <br />incremental cost differences and benefits. , <br />I~ tj 6'1 ' , <br />()", Z)~1 <br /> <br />9a, Compare the costs and benefits of the preferred project configuration to other geaernlty <br /> <br />aeccpted water development alternatives. <br /> <br />9b, Document all input used in the analysis of the alternatives. <br /> <br />Task 10 - Proiect Development Strategies <br /> <br />; J-+,:r;C7~ ><",J <br /> <br />Detennine project developme rategies for the implementation of the preferred configurations, <br />The strategies will include nput from prospective project users, measures that could be taken on a <br />local, regional or state-wide basis such as new or revised institutional arrangements, statutory <br />revisions, policy changes of various agencies or organizations, and new or revised water project <br />funding methods, Tradeoffs and uncertainties involved in each strategy will be described and <br />compared, <br /> <br />Flood Protection. Water Project Plarming and Financing. Stream and Lake Protection <br />Water Supply Protection. Consenration Planning <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.