Laserfiche WebLink
<br />prices prevailing during the planning study will be assumed to hold <br />generally lor the l\:ture, except where specific ltu<:lie5 and consider- <br />ations indica.te otherwi8e. <br /> <br />plan formulation sbould analyze the alternative Ichedules Ol imple- <br />mcntation to identiLy the schedule that would result in the mOlt <br />dcsirable nUx of cont!"ibutions to the objectivel when the beneficial <br />!.r.d adverlle effects of a plan are appropriately discOWlted. <br /> <br />D, The Discount or Interest Rate <br /> <br />H. Rhk and Uncertainty <br /> <br />The disc"ount rate will be 11IItablished in accordance with the <br /><:oncept that the Government'!; investment decisions are related to <br />the CO!t of Federal borrowing. <br /> <br />RiI!Ik is cbaracterbed by a distribution Ol events occurring accord. <br />ing to reasonably well-known probabilities, even though their set;juence <br />and time of occurren<:e cannot be determined. Frequency analysi8 in <br />hydrology, where long records are available or can be mathematically <br />simulated, is an example of predictable risk. In such situation!, it <br />may be necesnry to choose between pla.nning for average or probable <br />conditions and planning for cxtreme events. When thil!l ill done, th~ <br />nature of the choice and it8 relationship to the objectives will be <br />clearly stated. Predictable risk; bas~d upon past exptorience, should <br />not be divorced !rom predictable or forelleeable trends Which would <br />alter probabilitiel baled Bolely upon previoull' e):"perience. <br /> <br />E. Consideration and Compa"rieon of Alternatives <br /> <br />A range of possible alternatives capable oE application by various <br />level I of i!;overnment and by nongovernmel'ltal interest&!, should be <br />studied. These alternatives should be evaluated or judged as to their <br />contributions to tbe objective&!. <br /> <br />Ph.n!, or increment&! theret.o, will not be recouunended {or <br />Federal development that, although they have beneficial effects on the <br />objectives, would physically or economically preclude alternative nOn- <br />Fedel'al plans which would likely be Wldet"taken in the OIb_e.nl;C of the <br />Fede:r-al phn and which would more effectively contribute to the ob- <br />jectivelll whe!"'l comparably evaluated according to these principles. <br /> <br />. Uncerta.inty ill characterized by the absence of any known pro- <br />l babUity distribution of eventll. This is often the situation in water <br />resoUrces planning. The nature of Wl.certainty associated with the <br />: planning study, strategies proposed to deal with uncertainty. and <br />their impact on the objectives Ihould be reported. In addition. <br />I senlliUvity analyei8 may be employed to analy:te uncertai.n situations. <br /> <br />F. Period Ol Analvsis <br /> <br />The period of .:l.nalysis win be the lesser of (I) the period of time <br />over which tbe plan can reasona.bly be expected to serve a uB.eful pur- <br />pose conSidering probable technological trends affecting various <br />alternat.ives, or ill the period of time when further discounting of <br />beneficial and adve:rse effects will ha\'e no apprecia.ble effects on <br />design. Appropriate consideration will he g1Ven .to long-term en- <br />vironmental and socia1" well.being effects which may extend beyond <br />periods significant for a!'lalysis of national economic development or <br />regional development beneficial and adverse effects. <br /> <br />1. Sensitivity Analvsis <br /> <br />Plans should be e:rc.amined to determine their senlliti"ity to data <br />availability and to alternative assumptions as to future economic. <br />I demographic, envirOnmental, and technologic trends. Selecled pro- <br />t jectio:u and assumptions of alternative futurcs that are reasonably <br />probablc and that, if reali2:ed, would appreciably affect plan design <br />OJ:' scheduling should be analyzed. <br /> <br />J. Updating Plans <br /> <br />G. Scheduling <br /> <br />Becauee, of rapid change in socia.l economic, envirOnmental, <br />technOlogic, physical, and other factors, a plan that is l.1.ot imple- <br />meuted witb.in .. reasonable time after compI-etion shoulq. be reviewed <br />a8 provided in the standards to asce:rtai.n whether it continues to be <br />the beet alternative to achieve the objectives. <br /> <br />Plans should be scbeduled for implementation in relation to need8 <br />80 that d~sired beneficial effects are achieved. e!~:ciently. Beneficial <br />and adverse effects occurring according to different patteJ:lls in time <br />are alfected differ~nt1y by the discount process when plans are <br />scheduled for implementation at alternative future times. Therefore. <br /> <br />11 <br /> <br />12 <br /> <br />FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 38, NO. 174-MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 1973 <br /> <br />=-' <br /> <br />'" <br />... <br />..., <br />00 <br />... <br /> <br />c <br />o <br /> <br />c.... <br /> <br />c> <br />c..;1 <br />U1 <br /> <br />z <br />o <br />~ <br />n <br />m <br />'" <br />