PROJ00040 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CHAPTER V COMPARISON OF PLANS Section I: Introduction Apparently the principal obstacle in implementing any of the numerous alternative plans formulated by the USBR for irrigation improvements in the Tongue Creek basin was the high cost of the plans in comparison with benefits. In view of past experience with plans which were too costly to be economically and financially viable, the consultant determined that a principal criterion for selection of a plan at this time must be its cost effectiveness. A plan is considered to be "cost effective" if it is the least costly means of achieving the proposed project benefits. As a corollary of cost effectiveness, it is also necessary to establish and specify the level of project benefits which are sought. A plan formulated to provide a very high level of benefits can be "cost effective" in the sense that no less costly means exist to achieve that level of benefits, but the plan in question could nevertheless be too costly in comparison with the amount of funding likely to be available. In such circumstance, formulation of a plan intended to achieve a more moderate level of benefits would be appropriate. The level of benefits of an irrigation plan is a function of several variables including degree of firmness of water supply and whether the project is designed to meet minimum water requirements (calculated crop irrigation requirements) or some different interpretation of water require- ments. The alternative plans presented in this chapter were designed to meet the minimum water requirement. One standard in evaluating any plan is completeness. A complete plan is one which includes all of the important components necessary for obtaining the expected benefits. Conversely, an incomplete plan is one which has omitted one or more important components. All of the plans evaluated in this chapter are complete plans. V-I