EP 1165-2-1
30 Jul 99
or the plan for multi-purpose economic and environmental restoration
projects, is to be recommended unless there are believed to be
overriding reasons favoring the selection of another alternative which
would justify an exception by ASA(CW). In cases where local interests
strongly favor a plan other than the Federally supportable plan (NED
plan, plan for single purpose environmental restoration, plan for
multi-purpose economic and environmental restoration projects, or
ASA(CW) granted exception ) the locally preferred plan may be
recommended subject to special cost sharing.
a. ASA(CW) Exceptions. ASA(CW) granted exceptions are cost
shared on the same basis as the NED plan (i.e., in accordance with
project cost sharing as outlined in Chapter 6) and becomes a Federally
supportable plan. Circumstances which would support a recommendation
for such an ASA(CW) exception and in which such exception would most
likely be granted are:
(1) When another justified plan, less costly than the NED plan,
is the locally preferred plan.
(2) When the local sponsor prefers a plan more costly than the
NED plan and the incremental costs for the increased development are
not justified, that plan may be recommended if the sponsor is willing
to pay 100 percent of the difference in costs between the Federally
supportable plan and the locally preferred plan. (The balance of
costs would be shared in accordance with policies outlined in Chapter
6.) The increment of cost between the Federally supportable plan and
the locally preferred plan will not be included in the benefit-cost
ratio calculation for the recommended project, but designated as a
sponsor's adjunct costs. Also, the locally preferred plan must have
outputs similar in-kind, and equal to or greater than, the outputs of
the Federally supportable plan.
5-10. Indian Lands. Indian Tribal Lands, which have been set aside
by treaty, may be acquired by eminent domain only where there is a
clear expression of congressional intent to abrogate or modify the
treaty. Pre-authorization reports must clearly identify Indian Tribal
Lands to be acquired to ensure that sufficient congressional authority
is stated.
5-11.
Cost Allocation.
a. Objective. The objective of the cost allocation is to
divide the project costs among the purposes served so that all
purposes share equitably in the savings realized from multipurpose
construction. In order to obtain an equitable distribution, the
project costs are allocated so that it can be determined that the
share of the costs to any purpose does not exceed its benefits and
that each purpose will carry at least its separable cost. A
preliminary cost allocation will be included in the feasibility
report.
b. Legislation. There is no uniform cost allocation method
established by law. For the hydropower function, Section 5 of the
1944 Flood Control Act established that power costs should be repaid
through revenues. For municipal and industrial (M&I) water supply,
the Water Supply Act of 1958, as amended, allows for repayment over a
period of thirty years. However, current policy is for investment
cost allocated to hydropower and water supply to be paid during
construction. Existing law does not assign responsibility to any one
agency for making allocations of cost, except for a few projects
5-13
Previous Page
