WSP00873 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r'J r-- ..-' INTRODUCTION TO COMPARATIVE ANALYSES Compal'ative analyses, comparative appraisals and comparative alternatives are synonyms used by the Bureau of Reclamation to describe preliminary fi~ancial and economic studies performed on a set of project plans that have not received detailed evaluation. These are generally referred to as reconnaissance level studies -- which means they are not adequate to deter- mine feasibility. Curves, charts, tables, averages, semi-detail and cri- tical period hydrology are terms used to describe the methods, procedures and techniques applied in obtaining appraisal data. Comparative alternative arrayals (see attached table) are used to elimin- ate plans that do not merit detail study or warrant additional investigation time. Justification of a plan is not found in the benefit-cost ratios generally arrayed at the bottom of a table. An Arrayal may show all plans above or below unity but this neither corroborates or shows lack ~f justi- fication. It simply illustrates the relative attractiveness among the plans arrayed. The arrayal attached is an economic tool for assisting us in sizing or scoping the project. Our task is to array alternatives that appear practi- cal and select a preliminary plan or plan concept that appears worthy of more detailed consideration. Ultimately a single set of facilities must be selected on which to complete a detailed investigation so feasibility can be determined, allocations made and repayment contracts signed. In summary, the following should be kept in mind when working with compara- tive studies: 1. Comparative studies provide a common basis for evaluating all reason- able alternatives. 2. Comparative studies are used to select the best engineering system that will satisfy project objectives. 3. Comparative studies do not determine project feasibility. PROJECT FEASIBILITY The above discussion leads one to question what is required for project feasibility. Briefly outlined below are the criteria for project feasibi- lity which must be met to construct a Federally financed multi-purpose water development project. 1. Economic Justification - Very simply the benefit-cost ratio must exceed unity. 2. Repayment Ability - Water users must be able to repay their share of the cost of the project. 3. Willingness to Repay - Water users must sign a repayment contract prior to construction.