My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP01328
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
WSP01328
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/28/2009 11:21:01 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 10:20:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8030
Description
Section "D" General Correspondence - Other Organizations/Agencies (Alpha, not Basin Related)
Date
12/21/1971
Author
WRC
Title
Proposed Principles and Standards for Planning Water and Related Land Resources-Notice of Public Hearing, Water Resources Council
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
55
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 />24168 <br /> <br />in the compar1son of the alternative 1m- <br />plementation schedules should repI'E;!sen't <br />the present value of the beneoflclal and <br />adverse elfect<; tx>ward the multlobJec- <br />tiVe5 for each alternative 1mplementa:.. <br />t10n schedule at a common point In time. <br /> <br />H. RISK AND UNCERTAINTY <br /> <br />Since future events' cannot be pre- <br />dicted with certainty, beneficial and ad- <br />verse elfect<; actually realized In the <br />future ma,y dJ.1Ier from the values ex- <br />pected of them at the present. In some <br />~. the range of va.r1ation can be an- <br />ticipated and the sensitivity of proposed <br />plans or projects to future contingen- <br />cies can be- evaluated. <br />Risk may be characterized as being <br />reasonably predictable, &ince bases are <br />avaUable to calculate the probabllit,y or <br />frequl>llCY of l=es associated with lie <br />occurrence. Fbr example, average losses <br />from _, storms,' pest<;, and di5eases <br />can be mt1nui.ted with reasonable assur- <br />ance, Thus, the v8Jue attached to risk <br />may be converted Jnto a. .rea.son&bly cer- <br />1la1n annual allowance. The net returns <br />of a project should exclude all predict- <br />able risk, either by deducting the allow- <br />&nee therefor tram the beneficial effects <br />or adding such allowance to the project <br />costs. 'The basis ' for making a risk allow- <br />ance In estimatlng the benellcial and <br />adveme etfects af. a program or project <br />should be clearly stated. <br />Uncertainty is characterized by the ab- <br />sence of 8 ba.sis for predicting the prob- <br />abll1ty of occurrences. Uncertainties may <br />result In estimating benellclal and ad- <br />verse eflects from such factors as fluctu- <br />ations In the levels of economic activity, <br />lechnolog:Iea.I changes or innovatlons, <br />and unforeseeable developments. Allow- <br />ances for uncertainties must be based <br />largely .upon Judgment, since informa- <br />tion 18 not available for calculating a <br />value. The nature of the uncertainty <br />thought to surround beneficial and ad- . <br />verse effects should be discu.ssed in plan- <br />ning reports, and specific strategies, such <br />88 flexibility In project designs, recom- <br />mended to COPe with it. In addition. sen- <br />sitlvil;y analysis may be employed to <br />analyze uncertain situations. <br /> <br />I. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS <br /> <br />Pla.nn1ng -organizations should exam- <br />Ine the sensitivity of plans to data avall_ <br />abll1ty and to key Items for which al- <br />ternative assumptiOIlB might be appro- <br />priate. Examples of such iteIWi inclUde <br />prices: discount rates; and economic, <br />demographic, an,d technological trends. <br />selected alternative projects and 8.S- <br />oumptlOIl8 that are likely and that, if <br />realized. would appreciably affect plan <br />design or scheduling should be analyzed. <br /> <br />J. UPDATING PLANS <br /> <br />Because of rapid change in social, eco- <br />nom1c, technolo"g1c, physical, .and other <br />factors, a plan' for a project prepared <br />under these standards that 18 not 1mple- <br />mented w1h1n 10 years after completion <br />should be reviewed to ascertain whether <br />It continues to be the best altemattve <br />to achieve the multlobJecth'"" <br /> <br />F <br /> <br />NOTICES <br /> <br />Plans for regions and river basins pre- <br />pared under these Standards w1ll be con- <br />tinUally updated as implementing actions <br />are considered. In addi tian. such plans <br />should be completely reviewed at least <br />every 20 years. <br /> <br />v. PLAN FORMULAnoN <br /> <br />A. INTRODUCTION <br /> <br />As set fort.h in principles. the formula- <br />tIon of plans will be dlrected to meeting <br />current and projected needs and prob- <br />lelIlB as 1dentifled by the desires of peo- <br />ple in such 8 manner that improved <br />contributions are made to society's pref- <br />erences for natlonal economic develop- <br />ment and envirorunental Quallty and <br />where approved in advance for regional <br />deVelopment. <br />1. Maior steps in plan fonp.ulaticm. <br />Plan formulation 1s a. series of steps <br />starting with the IdentificatIon at needs <br />and problems and cu1m1nating in a rec- <br />ommended plan of action. The process <br />involves an orderly and systematic ap- <br />proach to making determinations and <br />decisions at each step so that: the inter- <br />ested pubUc and decis1Qnmakers in the <br />planning organization can be fully aware <br />of the basic assumptions employed, the <br />data and information analyzed, the rea- <br />sons and ratlonales used, and the full <br />range of implloa.t.l:ons ot each aJternative <br />plan of action. 'lb1s process should be <br />described in enough detail in the report <br />of the study so that it may be repltc!lted. <br />by others, <br /> <br />. The plan fonnulation. process consists <br />of the following major steps:~ . <br />1. Specify components 01 the mult1- <br />objectives relevant to the planning set- <br />ting; <br />2. EValuate resource capabilities and <br />expected condttions without any plan; <br />3. Formulate alternative plans to <br />achieve varYing levels of contributions <br />to the specified components of the multi- <br />Objectives; <br />4. Analyze the differences among alter- <br />native plans to show tradeoffs among. the <br />speci:tled components of the multi- <br />Objectives; <br />5. Review and reconsider. if necessary, <br />the spec1Jled components for the plan- <br />ning sett1ng and formulate additional al- <br />temative~lans as appropriate; and <br />6. Select a recommended plan from <br />among the alternatives based upon an <br />evaluation of' the tradeo1fs amQng the <br />various objectives. . <br />In the subseQ.uent parts of this sec- <br />tion each of these steps is described in <br />more detaU. The major steps involved in <br />this process are shown schematically at <br />the end of this subsection. It should be <br />noted that the plan formulation process <br />described hereIn !s not Just 8 once- <br />through process but may be reiterated <br />several times. with each reiteration be- <br />Ing somewhat more det&Ued than the <br />previoW! one. The plan formulation <br />process must be taUored to flt a given <br />planning B1tuatlon and lIIe detoJJ and <br />depth of analyslj! will """"""amy, vary <br />with each level 01 planning. <br /> <br />THE PLANNING PROCESS <br /> <br />--) <br />, <br />" <br />: <br /> <br />1. SpecU'y component. of Iha maUl- <br />o'bJoct1<ru I'cloYaDt to plamIlos .ettma <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Z.. Evaluate I'OIOUl'ce capabWtle. he! <br />apected COl1diHotl. without &Of plaIl <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />1__.. <br /> <br />5. BeTlrtr aM 1'eeouWft Iha apte!4e4 <br />COII:IpoctODb 1UU!1o:n:nu11de ~ <br />&U:ematlvepl,aGa <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />s. .ozmulata a1ten:ltlve pbu to adl!e... <br />T&I'y:!tIB 1.ewb: of COl:1tributlou to the <br />'P8eU1d. Cotapoaent. of tMo <br />ZDtili:iobJutl,,'U . <br /> <br />... <br /> <br />4. Malyu.th.l!SUoHDCQ amoql1te:r- <br />~YOo pWw to Now tndeo& ImOIII <br />.. ItpOC1fl.ed compoDem. o! tbo <br />malJ;Iobjec:t1'IM <br /> <br />2. Levels of planning. The standards <br />for plan formulation apply to the prep- <br />aration of framewotk studies and assess- <br />ments. regional or rh'er basln studJes, and <br />implementing studles, TIle Important <br />differences in the applicatJon of these <br />plan formulation standards to different <br />levels ot planning are the re)evant com- <br /> <br />6. Select.. %ecommended plan from ~DI <br />Ul" .Uerttatln. l1ued II"pon am IlnIlm- <br />tton of the tradeoU. amoog the Ta%knLa <br />objecu'vu <br /> <br />ponent needs, lIIe level of detail with re- <br />spect to beneflc1al and adverse elfects In <br />the decision process, and the types of, <br />altema.Uve courses of action that B.ft <br />considered. <br />a. Framework Itudles and asseS&- <br />ments. Framework studies and assess-- <br />ments w1l1 evaluate or appraise on a <br /> <br />FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 36, NO. 245-TUESDAY, DECEMBER 21, 1971 <br /> <br />) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.