OCR Text |
Show The detriments to the general welfare should be described in each instance and appraised as being unimportant, important, or crucial. 4. The investment statement should contain an estimate of the following benefits: A. The direct benefits resulting from: (1) Prevention of flood damage that other- wise would occur, and from increases in the ex- pected net income from use of the property made possible by flood control or watershed treatment; (2) Increase in net income of farm families from additional production of farm products as a result of irrigation, drainage, or other forms of land reclamation. (3) Savings in transportation costs on exist- ing traffic by waterways as compared with move- ment by alternative means, and the differential in cost of moving new traffic made possible by navi- gation improvements. (4) Value of electric power which users would be willing to purchase from power installations. (5) Increases in expected net income of land affected by watershed treatment. (6) Increases in value of fish and wildlife re- sources expected as a result of the project. (7) Value of water supply which would be consumed in municipal and rural areas. (8) Savings in the cost of water treatment and gains in the industrial value of streams through the abatement of water pollution. (9) Other measurable benefits. B. The secondary economic benefits which should be added to the direct benefits to arrive at an approximation of the total increase in na- tional income expected to result from the pro- gram. All interested Federal agencies should estimate these benefits according to uniform pro- cedures to be developed jointly with the approval of the Board of Review. The Commission be- lieves that a practicable means can be found to* assign monetary value to the contributions which a project may be expected to make to national and regional economic development. 5. The investment appraisal statement also* should contain an estimate of the general welfare benefits which would accrue through (a) safe- guarding the public health, (b) expanding rec- reational facilities, and (c) preserving the re- sources base. As a minimum the prospective benefits in each of these areas should be appraised as being unimportant, important, or crucial. If, in a given project or program, the total direct and indirect costs exceed the total direct and secondary benefits, and the responsible agency be- lieves it merits consideration for authorization, the agency should include a categorical and de- tailed statement as to whether or not those general welfare benefits which are appraised as important or crucial outweigh the detriments to the general welfare similarly appraised and are of sufficient; additional value to warrant construction of the project. 6. The investment appraisal statement for all projects and programs should contain appropriate data to demonstrate that each project and each separable segment of a project or program is more economical than any available alternative existing or potential means of accomplishing the same or similar results. The alternative means to be considered under this criterion are confined to those which would be precluded from develop- ment now or in the future if the project were undertaken. 7. The investment statement for every project should include appraisal of the project's relation and contribution to the physical, economic, and social objectives of an accepted regional or basin program. 65 |