Laserfiche WebLink
<br />components into a system, while assuring physical compatibility, <br />could result in inefficient use of resources because of system <br />effects, data uncertaint~and the possibility that all components <br />may not be implemented. It is proposed that the "best" system be <br />considered to be: <br />(1) The system that includes the obviously good com- <br />ponents (satisfy criteria below) while preserving flexibility for <br />modification of components at future dates. <br /> <br />(2) The system which could be implemented at a number <br />of stages, if staging is possible, such that each stage could stand <br />on its own merits (be of social value) if no more components were to <br />be added. <br /> <br />b. Criteria Elements. - General guidance for.formulation <br /> <br />criteria are contained in the recently published Principles and <br /> <br />Standards(2). The criteria of economic efficiency from the national <br /> <br />viewpoint has existed for some time (3)(4), and has been reemphasized <br /> <br />in (2). This criteria has been interpreted to require that each com- <br /> <br />ponent in a system should be incrementally justified, that is, each <br /> <br />component addition to a system should add to the value (net benefits) <br /> <br />(2) Principles and Standards for Planning Water and Related Land <br />Resources, Water Resources Council, publiShed in the Federal <br />Register, The National Archives of the United States, September <br />10, 1973. <br />(3) Proposed practices for economic analysis of river basin projects, <br />a report to the Inter-Agency Committee on Water Resources by its <br />Subcommittee on Evaluation Standards, May 1958, "Green Book". <br />(4) Policies, Standards and Procedures in the Formulation, Evaluation <br />and Review of Plans for Use and Development of Water and Related <br />Land Resources, 87th Congress, 2d Session, Senate Document 97, 1962. <br /> <br />17 <br />