My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP01521
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
WSP01521
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:31:28 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 10:30:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8443.400
Description
Narrows Unit Reports
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
1
Date
6/15/1974
Author
US DOL BOR
Title
Draft Social Assessment of the Proposed Narrows Unit and Alternatives Thereto
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
263
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 />1.3.12 !:.~eparin9 Con"luslons and Recommendations <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />035C Preparing the Conclusions and Recommendatton _Pr,ocess <br /> <br />involved a ,number of considerations. ,In order. to finalize <br />.. -,., - 1 <br /> <br />the overview process three types of analyses were completed. <br /> <br />The first step involved a comparison of the relative social <br />merits and liabilities under each of the alternatives, according <br /> <br /> <br />to the impacts on Quality of Life, Social Well Being, and Rela- <br /> <br /> <br />tive Social position. The second involved a cross-modular <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />comparison of the notable positive and negative, direct and <br />indirect social impacts. The third step involved assessing <br />the socio-economic and socio-environmental benefits on costs. <br /> <br />Together these three analyses provided a fairly comprehensive <br />picture of the situation. <br /> <br />'. <br /> <br />The next stage was to reach a conclusion as to whether, <br /> <br />in an overall social sense, the benefits of having a project <br />outweighed the benefits of not having a project. Before com- <br />paring the two with-project alternatives, it had first to be <br />demonstrated that, from a social perspective, it was desirable <br /> <br />to have a project at all. (If the answer were no, then no <br /> <br />further comparisons would be necessary.) If the answer were <br /> <br />yes, then the question becomes which of the projects is, on <br />balance, the most socially desirable. However, it is also <br />possible that various combinations of costs and benefits are <br />revealed and this could lead to a decision that either project <br />could be chosen from a social point of view, depending upon <br />which social benefits one values most, and which social costs <br /> <br />., <br /> <br />45 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.