Step
6 Developing Alternatives |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Having eliminated options with fatal
flaws , we now recombine our list of viable
options to formulate desirable alternatives.
|
|
|
|
Purpose
|
|
- To combine options into implementable, comprehensive
alternatives that will meet the
identified needs
- To develop a full range
of alternatives,
including no action.
- To demonstrate that the process considered a reasonable
range of alternatives
|
|
|
|
Why?
|
|
Steps 1 through 5 have laid a strong basis
for developing alternatives. Incremental combinations, summations,
or subtractions of options allow us to create alternatives that
respond to many different objectives and needs. These alternatives
are not unsupported conjecture--they are based on sound supportable
data and represent real possibilities. These could not only
meet local and regional needs and objectives but also achieve
the primary purposes for Reclamation's
involvement. |
|
|
|
How?
|
How far to go in considering alternatives
will be determined by the context of the process. For
a full comparison and evaluation
, develop a no action alternative. At times, it may be
necessary to analyze extreme alternatives which you would
never implement (e.g., a single purpose alternative to
examine one aspect of the program or an action that is
politically or legally expedient to analyze). |
|
|
|
Most likely, there will be pressure to limit
the process of developing alternatives to those which are most
"reasonable" or those which only satisfy the objectives of some
special or local interest group. Differing views and considerable
subjectivity on what constitutes the notion of reasonableness
come into play here. While there may be some strong sentiments
arising from the general public, the most likely source of pressure
to limit alternatives will be from other government entities,
organized special interest groups, and political interest groups.
Work closely with these pressure groups
to show this is a fair way of solving the problem. This may
persuade them not to actively oppose your process.
The political importance of such demands cannot be overlooked--and
may well constitute some of evaluation criteria to be applied
later. But limiting alternatives at this time may exclude valid
and implementable alternatives which could contribute important
aspects to the future process of evaluation
, tradeoff, and compromise leading to
selecting an alternative. Affected publics need
time for education, to weigh choices, view possible consequences,
and participate in responsible judgment. Take this opportunity
to demonstrate that you are listening
and considering all views. This will help elicit future public
support and help avoid potentially
serious conflict . |
|
Combine
Options Into Alternatives
|
Keep the purpose and need
clearly in view as you develop alternatives. |
|
|
|
Combine the options remaining from the screening
process. Add or subtract any options or ideas to form a range
of alternatives that meet the broad range of identified needs
and objectives. (Remember to put the new options through the
same screening process as the original options!) Carefully name
the alternatives so that participants can clearly talk about
them. In general, participants will associate with more descriptive
names related to what the alternative does rather than some
vague number or letter. For example, "Desalting and Wetlands"
is easier to understand than "Alternative 1-A."
The process of developing alternatives is similar for both
simple and complex projects. View options as a cafeteria line
where you pick from your developed list and combine them to
form alternatives. Numerous combinations are possible. Compare
this list with the alternatives to make sure they are complete--all
objectives have been addressed and identified needs have been
met.
|
|
Examine
Interactions
|
Remember: Administrative decisions may
also affect the environment. |
|
|
|
Examining the interaction of specific options
(now components of alternatives), can sometimes find combinations
that enhance the overall effectiveness. This can also reveal
potential problems or adverse impacts which must either be avoided
or mitigated. An influence diagram can help examine interactions.
|
|
Consider
Benefits
|
|
Benefits are a summary of public values and
national interests. Considering these benefits as you assemble
alternatives provides specific insights about:
- What concerns have the greatest value
- How to assemble solutions to create high value alternatives
|
|
Consider
Costs and Constraints |
|
Considering resources and constraints
allows illuminates important effects that should be considered
during future evaluation to develop equitable alternatives.
No alternative is painless--solving problems for the long
run requires upfront costs and sacrifices. Ask who will i mplement
the solution and how it will be paid for. Talk with potential
implementors to get a rough idea of
costs. (Not all costs are measured in dollars!) Consider partnerships,
reciprocal agreements, and other innovative, diverse sources
of funding.
Consider the Environment
Both the Department of the Interior and Reclamation are committed
to the policy of responsible environmental planning. Therefore,
as you assemble alternatives, consider:
Good groundwork here will help establish the evaluation
criteria to be used later in the process and in NEPA/CEQ
compliance. Remember, future resource conditions under the
no action alternative (not current conditions) are the basis
for determining project-related effects. Incorrect comparisons
can affect the level of mitigation and enhancement. Careful
attention to the details of these conditions now will save considerable
time and effort during evaluation, selection, and implementation.
|
|
Develop the No Action Alternative
|
By examining the no action alternative,
participants can determine how serious the problem really
is--and decide whether or not to make the sacrifices necessary
to deal with it. |
|
|
|
Don't forget to develop the concept of a no action alternative,
or future without condition. The no action alternative describes the
most likely future condition that could be expected if you don't
take action. It serves as a yardstick to compare other alternatives
to determine the magnitude of benefits and adverse effects.
Although the no action alternative may contain a fatal flaw
(e.g., violates a law, does not meet the need) it is still developed
as a comparison. The no action alternative includes any actions
which are certain as well as changes that would occur regardless
of any proposed alternative.
Clearly describing the future without project condition
provides the frame of reference necessary to evaluate changes
caused by the alternatives. A clear definition of the future
without condition allows you to form positive response alternatives.
The no action alternative can be described as a condition
where no alternative is selected for implementation. The without-project
condition is the most likely condition expected to exist in
the future in the absence of any developed alternative, including
known changes in law or public policy. The without-project condition
includes water projects or other actions that are under construction
or authorized and likely to be constructed during the forecast
period (this includes actions by all entities). Usually, participants
estimate the no action alternative by projecting current conditions,
resource trends, and probable actions by others through a period
of time commensurate with the anticipated lifespan of the action
alternatives.
To figure out the most likely future without cndition on
any project, you need to examine different sets of scenarios
(e.g., high and low water years, ranges of funding or staff).
Viewing a range of possible conditions rather than a single
set of assumptions will allow you to address the future far
more objectively.
|
|
Document
Alternatives
|
|
Once you have defined alternatives, describe
them in a document (factsheet, newsletter, action plan update,
etc.). Be sure to add a brief section on which options dropped
out and why. For an EIS or EA this document can
become Chapter 2: Alternatives.
Disseminate this document to all participants for comment
and review to avoid potential gaps and fatal flaws. Keep it
on hand to share with new players so they can understand your
process. A summary table of alternatives showing basic components
can help decisionmakers and other participants get an overview
of the range of alternatives.
|
|
|
|
Tools
|
|
Options can be combined in many ways to form
alternatives, so use tools that can show groups and relationships
among options. Useful tools include:
- Affinity grouping.
Write each option on a separate yellow sticky and put them
together into groups to form alternatives. You'll have to
write some options on more than one sticky so they can be
used in more than one alternative.
- Matrix tables. Write
objectives across the top and options along the sides. For
each option, check what objectives it meets. This will make
it easier to combine options to meet all
- Force field analysis.
Determine which forces will work for and against the options.
Develop components to take advantage of strengths and counter
weaknesses.
|
|
People
With Expertise |
|
Your team and participants
should represent a variety of disciplines, or you should at
least have access to and consult with those disciplines essential
to your study. In some cases, it may be appropriate to involve
specialists from other agencies, contractors, or special interest
groups. Specialists can interact to identify interrelationships
among objectives
|
|
|
|
Look Forward
|
|
|
|
Re-Examine
Your Work
|
The Public Involvement
Charge : Under NEPA/CEQ , the
Department of the Interior Manual, and other
regulatory and authorizing legislation, Reclamation
is charged with showing how public input was used to develop
alternatives. Partner and coordinate
with other agencies as a logical way of doing business
and avoiding problems. |
|
|
|
Having developed all potential alternatives,
you should be able to:
- Identify any continued need for a Reclamation role
- Show how the range responds to the objectives, issues,
concerns, and needs previously identified
- Examine a range of alternatives (including a no action
alternative) that has been developed
Report how public involvement was used and in what ways
it contributed to developing your alternatives.
|
|
Refine
Alternatives
|
|
As you go through the decision process, these alternatives
will become more and more defined. By the selection phase, these
alternatives should have all the nitty-gritty details necessary
to implement them. Keep asking:
- Who would do what with what money?
- How would the components work?
- How would the components interact?
- In what order would work need to be done? What preliminary
steps and permits would be needed?
|
|
|
|
Go On
|
|
Executive
Summary and Process Tours:
Screening Criteria <---->
Evaluation |
|
|
|
|