EP 1165-2-502
30 Sep 99
benefits. However, any monetary incidental benefits which are anticipated from proposed
ecosystem restoration projects, and relevant to the particular circumstances associated with the
study, should be displayed to aide in decision making.
(2) Cost effectiveness and incremental cost analyses. An ecosystem restoration plan should
represent a cost effective means of addressing the restoration problem or opportunity. It should be
determined that a plan's restoration outputs cannot be produced more cost effectively by another
alternative plan. Cost effectiveness analysis is performed to identify least cost plans for producing
alternative levels of environmental outputs expressed in non-monetary terms. Incremental cost
analysis identifies changes in costs for increasing levels of environmental output. It is used to help
assess whether it is worthwhile to incur additional costs in order to gain increased environmental
outputs.
b. Significance. A recommended ecosystem restoration plan must make a justified
contribution to addressing the specified ecosystem restoration problems or opportunities.
Information regarding resource significance and the significance of expected restoration outputs is
used in conjunction with information from cost effectiveness and incremental cost analyses to help
determine whether an alternative is justified. Discussions concerning significance should address
the following:
- relevant recognition of the environmental resources in terms of institutional, public, and/or
technical importance,
- effects on the resources in terms of differences between estimated future without- and with-
plan conditions, and,
characteristics, such as reversibility, retrievability, and the relationships to long-term productivity
(P&G).
(1) Input from partnerships can be important in defining project outputs, scale, or location, as
well as other information important to formulation, evaluation and justification. Relevant
partnership relationships, interests and input are significant and should be discussed. The roles of
the non-Federal sponsor(s) in sharing study and project costs, along with collaboration with any
state, tribal, and Federal resource agencies or non-governmental entities should be discussed as
part of the material provided for decision making. Any contributions which the project will make
to regional or national interagency programs should be noted. Some examples include: the North
American Waterfowl Management Plan, the Coastal America Partnership, the Chesapeake Bay
Program, the National Estuary Program, American Heritage Rivers, the Clean Water Action Plan
(e.g., contributions to state or tribal watershed restoration priorities), the Marine Fish Habitat
Restoration Agreement, the Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force, and
the Brownfields Cleanup and Redevelopment Initiative.
23
Previous Page
