Table 2. Federal participation in shore protection projects that include recreation facilities or generate recreational benefits.
| Item | Case 1 | Case 2 | Case 3 | Case 4 | Case 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|||||
| Hurricane and Storm Damage Reduction (H&SDR) Benefits | >50% | >50% | <50% | <50% | <50% |
| recreational benefits | <50% | <50% | >50% | >50% | >50% |
| Annual Charges ($) | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
|
(10) | (6) | (9) | (10) | (10) |
|
(0) | (0) | (0) | (0) | (0) |
|
(0) | (4) | (1) | (0) | (0) |
| Annual Charges ($) | 11 | 12 | 11 | 23 | 12 |
|
(6) | (7) | (4) | (11) | (6) |
|
(5) | (0) | (4) | (12) | (7);(6) a/ |
|
(0) | (5) | (3) | (0) | (0) |
| BCR | 1.1 | 1.2 | 1.1 | 2.3 | 1.2 |
|
(0.6) | (1.2) | (0.4) | (1.1) | (0.6) |
|
(1.1) | (1.2) | (0.9) | (2.3) | (1.2) |
|
(0) | (1.3) | (3.0) | (0) | (0) |
| Net Annual Benefits ($) | +1 | +2 | +1 | +13 | +2 |
| Federal (Corps) Participation | Yes | Yes-H&SDR No-Rec. (S) |
No | Yes | Yes |
a/ Benefits limited to the level of primary (H&SDR) benefits, or limited to an equivalent amount of primary (H&SDR) benefits.
CASE 1 - Federal participation in this recreation benefit generating shore protection (SP) project is warranted since the recreational benefits are incidental, comprise less than 50 percent of total benefits, and, when combined with the primary H∧SDR benefits, produce an economically justified project (i.e., project is not justified on H&SDR benefit alone).
CASE 2 - Federal participation in this recreation benefit generating SP project is limited to the portion that generates primary H&SDR benefits (i.e., H&SDR portion of overall project is separably economically justified). Federal participation in the separable recreation of the overall project is restricted by Army budgetary policy even though it is separably justified.
CASE 3 - Federal participation in this recreation benefit generating SP project is not warranted since separable recreational benefits are necessary to justify the overall project (i.e., project is not justified based on primary H∧SDR benefits alone, or on the combination of H&SDR and incidental recreational benefits, with incidental recreational benefits limited to an equivalent amount of H∧SDR benefits).
CASE 4 - Federal participation in this recreation benefit generating SP project is warranted since the recreational benefits are incidental and, even though they comprise over 50 percent of total benefits, they are not necessary for project justification (i.e., project is justified based on primary H∧SDR benefits alone).
CASE 5 - Federal participation in this recreation benefit generating SP project is warranted since recreational benefits are incidental, and, when combined with and limited to an equivalent amount of primary H∧SDR benefits, they produce an economically justified project.
Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Headquarters, Washington D.C., Engineering Regulation 1165-2-130, 15 June 1989.