џWPC"Џ ћџ2Ž ZB—œе3†HP DeskJet 500єdў6X@ЩQє@ Winston HarringtonџЫ џб#Xxў6X@ЩQX@#баав ШX0УУФФУУФФШX0УУФФУУФФ вfootnote reffootnote referenceггггУУФФггггћџ2Є”Р€T”д<hfootnote texfootnote text ааггггггггаа_Equation Ca_Equation Captionггггггггcaptioncaption ааггггггггааtoa headingtoa headingђ ш ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА(#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааггггггггааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ` И hРpШ xа (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааааћџ2Ц<ж< <N <Š index 2index 2ђ ш ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ` (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ`ААааггггггггааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ` И hРpШ xа (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааааindex 1index 1ђ ш ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааггггггггааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ` И hРpШ xа (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааааtoc 9toc 9ђш ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА(#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ`ААааггггггггааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ` И hРpШ xа (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааааtoc 8toc 8 ђш ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА(#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ ААааггггггггааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ` И hРpШ xа (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааааћџ2@ ”ј <Œ <Ш <toc 7toc 7  ааггггггггааtoc 6toc 6 ђш ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА(#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ ААааггггггггааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ` И hРpШ xа (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааааtoc 5toc 5 ђш ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџh(#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааггггггггааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ` И hРpШ xа (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааааtoc 4toc 4 ђш ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџИ (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааггггггггааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ` И hРpШ xа (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааааћџ2Ќ<r<Ў<ъ†&toc 3toc 3ђш ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ` И (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааггггггггааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ` И hРpШ xа (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааааtoc 2toc 2ђш ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ` (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ`ААааггггггггааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ` И hРpШ xа (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааааtoc 1toc 1ђш ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА(#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ`ААааггггггггааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ` И hРpШ xа (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааааendnote refeendnote reference!"ггггУУФФггггћџ2цЎ”о€r0єŽђџџendnote textendnote text#$ ааггггггггааDefault ParaDefault Paragraph Font%&ггггггггЋєdў6X@ЩQє@<ў6X9€`("Courier New (TT)єXxў6X@ЩQX@<ў6X9€`("Courier New (TT)XXxў6X@ЩQX@<ў6X9€`("Courier New (TT)XXxў6X@ЩQX@<ў6X9€`("Courier New (TT)XєCє\  PŽQєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXxў6X@ЩQX@<ў6X9€`("Courier New (TT)XXPє\  PŽQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XАЁє\  PŽQАPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)АXPє\  PŽQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XXxў6X@Щ QX@<ў6X9€`("Courier New (TT)XXPє\  PŽ QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽ QєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXxў6X@Щ QX@<ў6X9€`("Courier New (TT)XXxў6X@Щ QX@<ў6X9€`("Courier New (TT)XXPє\  PŽQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽQєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXxў6X@ЩQX@<ў6X9€`("Courier New (TT)XXxў6X@ЩQX@<ў6X9€`("Courier New (TT)XXPє\  PŽQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽQєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXxў6X@ЩQX@<ў6X9€`("Courier New (TT)XXxў6X@ЩQX@<ў6X9€`("Courier New (TT)XXPє\  PŽQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽQєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXxў6X@ЩQX@<ў6X9€`("Courier New (TT)XXxў6X@ЩQX@<ў6X9€`("Courier New (TT)XXPє\  PŽQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽQєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXxў6X@ЩQX@<ў6X9€`("Courier New (TT)XМ^є\  PŽQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽ QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽ!QМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽ"QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽ#QМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽ$QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽ%QМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽ&QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽ'QМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽ(QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽ)QМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽ*QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽ+QєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PŽ,QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽ-QМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽ.QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽ/QєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PŽ0QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽ1QМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽ2QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽ3QМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽ4QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽ5QМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽ6QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽ7QМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽ8QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽ9QМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽ:QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽ;QМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽ<QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽ=QМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽ>QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽ?QМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽ@QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽAQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽBQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽCQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽDQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽEQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽFQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽGQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽHQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XXXф2МPБIQXP%ф2МA€`Arial (TT)XXPє\  PŽJQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XXXф2МPБKQXP%ф2МA€`Arial (TT)XXPє\  PŽLQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XXXф2МPБMQXP%ф2МA€`Arial (TT)XXPє\  PŽNQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽOQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽPQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽQQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽRQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XТ<є\  PŽSQТPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)ТXPє\  PŽTQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XXXф2МPБUQXP%ф2МA€`Arial (TT)XXPє\  PŽVQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽWQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽXQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XXXф2МPБYQXP%ф2МA€`Arial (TT)XXPє\  PŽZQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XXXф2МPБ[QXP%ф2МA€`Arial (TT)XXPє\  PŽ\QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XXXф2МPБ]QXP%ф2МA€`Arial (TT)XXPє\  PŽ^QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XXXф2МPБ_QXP%ф2МA€`Arial (TT)XXPє\  PŽ`QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XТ<є\  PŽaQТPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)ТXPє\  PŽbQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XТ<є\  PŽcQТPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)ТXPє\  PŽdQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XТ<є\  PŽeQТPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)ТXPє\  PŽfQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽgQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽhQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽiQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽjQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XE,є\  PŽkQEPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)EXPє\  PŽlQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XXXф2МPБmQXP%ф2МA€`Arial (TT)XXPє\  PŽnQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XXXф2МPБoQXP%ф2МA€`Arial (TT)XXPє\  PŽpQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XXXф2МPБqQXP%ф2МA€`Arial (TT)XXPє\  PŽrQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽsQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽtQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XE,є\  PŽuQEPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)EXPє\  PŽvQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XE,є\  PŽwQEPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)EXPє\  PŽxQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XE,є\  PŽyQEPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)EXPє\  PŽzQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XE,є\  PŽ{QEPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)EXPє\  PŽ|QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XE,є\  PŽ}QEPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)EXPє\  PŽ~QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽ€QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PށQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽ‚QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽƒQєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PŽ„QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XXCE 9PX…QXPE 9A€`Arial (TT)XXPє\  PކQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PއQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽˆQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PމQєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PŽŠQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽ‹QєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PŽŒQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽQєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PŽŽQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽQєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PސQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽ‘QєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PŽ’QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽ“QєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PŽ”QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽ•QєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PŽ–QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽ—QєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PŽ˜QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽ™QєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PŽšQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽ›QєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PŽœQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽQєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PŽžQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽŸQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽ QXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽЁQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽЂQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽЃQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽЄQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽЅQєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)є„yє\  PŽІQ„Pє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)„М^є\  PŽЇQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽЈQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽЉQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽЊQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽЋQєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PŽЌQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽ­QєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PŽЎQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽЏQєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PŽАQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽБQєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PŽВQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XXxў6X@ЩГQX@<ў6X9€`("Courier New (TT)XXPє\  PŽДQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽЕQєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXxў6X@ЩЖQX@<ў6X9€`("Courier New (TT)XXXф2МPБЗQXP%ф2МA€`Arial (TT)XXPє\  PŽИQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XXXф2МPБЙQXP%ф2МA€`Arial (TT)XXPє\  PŽКQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XXXф2МPБЛQXP%ф2МA€`Arial (TT)XXPє\  PŽМQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽНQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽОQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽПQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽРQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽСQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽТQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽУQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽФQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽХQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽЦQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽЧQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽШQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽЩQєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єМ^є\  PŽЪQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽЫQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽЬQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽЭQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XМ^є\  PŽЮQМPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)МXPє\  PŽЯQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽаQєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PŽбQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽвQєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PŽгQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)XєCє\  PŽдQєPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)єXPє\  PŽеQXPє\  €`*Times New Roman (TT)Xћџ2Џ Џ3|xб#Xxў6X@ЩQX@#ба АА8˜ аа ААА8 аеЕб#Xxў6X@ЩQX@#ба А8А8 аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#єCє\  PŽQєP#бгг Design for an Integrated Assessment Framework for SAMI б#Xxў6X@ЩQX@#бЕеааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм4Œ ф <”ьDœє xа (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#XPє\  PŽQXP#бггNote: Due to platform conversion, figures are not available in this electronic version. For complete copy of report, contact Rebecca Kemp. й УУУ У йУУУУУ УDesign for an IntegratedЉФФФ ФФФб#АЁє\  PŽQАP#б а А8Аš аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџм4Œ ф <”ьDœє xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааAssessment Framework for the Southern Appalachian Mountain Initiative аOаб#XPє\  PŽQXP#бУУУ УIntegratedЉAssessment Framework Phase I Report: ФФФ Ф УУУ УDraft ФФи 3 1, 4 иФ Ф а АšАж аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм4Œ ф <”ьDœє xа (#€%џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа а@аа АжАš аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџм4Œ ф <”ьDœє xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ УLumina Decision Systems, Inc.:Ф Ф а Аšмš аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџм4Œ ф <”ьDœєLЄџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмааMax Henrion Љ Los Altos, California Deborah Amaral Љ Mebane, North Carolina Rich Sonnenblick Љ Los Altos, California а мšАš аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ УResources for the Future, Inc.:Ф Ф а Аšмš аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџм4Œ ф <”ьDœєLЄџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмааAlan Krupnick Љ Washington, D. C. Winston Harrington Љ Washington, D. C. Dallas Burtraw Љ Washington, D. C. а мšмT аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ+%џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ`АмааУУУ УContentsФ ФФФ а мTАT аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмџ#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ`ААааТмммТС€АА С A.ССExecutive SummaryСС2 ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмпџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТпппТС€мм СС€АА СССA.1ССBackground2 A.2.ССRecommended methodology for SAMI's integrated assessmentСС2 A.3. Effects and criteria for evaluation of EMOsСС3 A.4ССModules of an Integrated Assessment FrameworkСС4 A.5 The baseline or reference caseСС7 A.6.ССEmission Management OptionsСС7ŒеБб#Xxў6X@Щ QX@#бб#XPє\  PŽ QXP#ба АTм8 аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџм4Œ ф <”ьDœєLЄџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџм4Œ ф <”ьDœєLЄќ!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмааб#єCє\  PŽ QєP#бDesign for an Integrated Assessment Framework for SAMI а м8АT аб#Xxў6X@Щ QX@#бБеA.7.СС Recommendations for building an IAFСС7 ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмџ#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ`ААааТмммТС€АА СУ У1.ССObjectives and background12Ф Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмпџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТпппТС€мм СС€АА ССС1.1 ССSAMI12 1.2ССIntegrated assessmentСС13 1.3ССOrganization of this reportСС14 ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмџ#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ`ААааТмммТС€АА СУ У2.ССRecommended methodology for SAMI's integrated assessment15Ф Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмпџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТпппТС€мм СС€АА ССС2.1ССLessons for SAMI from other integrated assessments 15 2.2ССProgressive refinementСС17 2.3ССPeer reviewСС18 2.4ССReducedЉform models and their alternativesСС18 2.5ССAccommodation to changing scienceСС19 2.6ССHierarchical influence diagramsСС20 2.7ССRepresentation and analysis of uncertaintyСС21 2.8ССSoftware tools for integrated assessmentСС22 ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмџ#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ`ААааТмммТС€АА СУ У3. Effects and criteria for evaluation of EMOs25Ф Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмпџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТпппТС€мм СС€АА ССС3.1ССIntermediate effects, final effects, and objectives 25 3.2ССMeasures of successСС26 3.3ССReorganization of into hierarchy of Intermediate and Final Effects СС30 3.4ССPriorities for assessment activitiesСС31 3.5ССCommunicating resultsСС33 ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмџ#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ`ААааТмммТС€АА СУ У4.ССModules of an Integrated Assessment Framework36Ф Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмпџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТпппТС€мм СС€АА ССС4.1 ССDefining model aggregation36Œ4.2ССEmissions inventoryСС38 4.3ССDirect costs of emissions reductionsСС40 4.4ССAtmosphericЉtransport and chemistry modelsСС43 4.5ССPrimary environmentalЉeffects modelsСС46 ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАюŒ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТюююТТŒ Œ Œ ТС€ююСС€АА ССС4.5.1.ССVisibility46 4.5.2 ССAquatic EffectsСС48 4.5.3.ССTerrestrial effectsСС50 ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмпџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТпппТС€мм СС€АА ССС4.6ССSecondaryЉenvironmentalЉeffects models52 ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАюŒ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТюююТТŒ Œ Œ ТС€ююСС€АА ССС4.6.1.ССHuman health53 4.6.2.ССMaterialsСС55 4.6.3.ССCrops and commercial forestryСС55 4.6.4.ССUrban visibilityСС56 4.6.5.ССGlobal warmingСС56 4.6.6.ССOther EffectsСС56 ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмпџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТпппТС€мм СС€АА ССС4.7ССSocioeconomic effects56 ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАюŒ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТюююТТŒ Œ Œ ТС€ююСС€АА ССС4.7.1.ССValuation of environmental benefits57 4.7.2.ССRecreation (use) benefitsСС57 4.7.3.ССExistence valuesСС58 4.7.4.ССBenefit transferСС59 4.7.5.ССConcentrated effects of environmental changeСС60 4.7.6.СС Concentrated effects of economic changesСС 60 4.7.7.ССMacroeconomic effects‘СС61 ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмпџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТпппТС€мм СС€АА ССС4.8ССVisualization and communication of results63 4.9 Choosing the level of complexity for each moduleСС64 ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмџ#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ`ААааТмммТС€АА СУ У5.ССThe baseline or reference case66Ф Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмпџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТпппТС€мм СС€АА ССС5.1ССIntroduction66 5.2ССThe SAMI reference caseСС66 ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмџ#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ`ААааТмммТС€АА СУ У6.ССEmission Management Options70Ф Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмпџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТпппТС€мм СС€АА ССС6.1ССMaking EMOs Concrete70 6.2ССModeling RequirementsСС71 ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмџ#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ`ААааТмммТС€АА СУ У7.СС Recommendations for building an IAF72Ф Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмпџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТпппТС€мм СС€АА ССС7.1 Tasks for the integratedЉassessment contractor72 7.2 Ways for SAMI to extend its budget for IAСС73 7.3 Plan scopes and budgetsСС74 ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАюŒ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТюююТТŒ Œ Œ ТС€ююСС€АА ССС7.3.1. A $250,000 plan74 7.3.2. A $500,000 planСС75 7.3.3. A $1 million planСС76 7.3.4. A $4 million planСС76 ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмпџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТпппТС€мм СС€АА ССС7.4 Sample budgets by plan77 7.4.Timeline for Phases I, II, and IIIСС78 7.5 Coordination of contracts with the IAF planСС79 7.6 Potential contractors for IAF modulesСС80 ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмџ#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ`ААааТмммТС€АА СУ УReferences81Ф Ф ТмммТС€АА СУ УAcronyms and Glossary82Ф Ф ТмммТС€АА ССС еЉб#Xxў6X@Щ QX@#бб#XPє\  PŽQXP#ба АTм8 аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмџ#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ`ААааа м8мš аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџм4Œ ф <”ьDœєLЄџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмааб#єCє\  PŽQєP#бDesign for an Integrated Assessment Framework for SAMI а мšАš аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#Xxў6X@ЩQX@#бЉееxyб#Xxў6X@ЩQX@#бб#XPє\  PŽQXP#ба Аšм8 аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмџ#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ`ААааа м8мš аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџм4Œ ф <”ьDœєLЄџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмаа ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ•$џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмааб#єCє\  PŽQєP#бLumina У УDraftФ Ф и 3 1, 4 и Page ии а мšАš аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#Xxў6X@ЩQX@#бxееХб#Xxў6X@ЩQX@#бб#XPє\  PŽQXP#ба Аšм8 аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмџ#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ`ААааааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџм4Œ ф <”ьDœєLЄќ!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмааб#єCє\  PŽQєP#бDesign for an Integrated Assessment Framework for SAMI а м8Аš аааб#Xxў6X@ЩQX@#бХее šб#Xxў6X@ЩQX@#бб#XPє\  PŽQXP#ба Аšм8 аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмџ#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ`ААааа м8мš аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџм4Œ ф <”ьDœєLЄџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмаа а мšАš аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмьџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТС€АА Сб#єCє\  PŽQєP#бPage ииУ УСЪ ь$СDraftФ Ф и 3 1, 4 иƒ Lumina ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#Xxў6X@ЩQX@#б еаOаа АšАš аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТС€АА СУУУ УA.ССExecutive SummaryФ Ф ФФ аа The purpose of this project is to design an integratedЉassessment framework (IAF) for the Southern Appalachian Mountain Initiative (SAMI). У УIntegrated assessment Ф Фis a comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach to environmental decision making that integrates all relevant areas of science, economics, and policy into a unified modeling framework. It combines both quantitative and qualitative methods, as appropriate to the state of understanding and to the needs of the decision. This executive summary consists primarily of recommendations drawn from the body of the report. Consult the full report for the background and justification of these recommendations. The section numbers in this summary correspond to the chapter numbers in the report. б#М^є\  PŽQМP#бУ УA.1ССBackgroundФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽQXP#бУ УSAMIФ Ф is a volunteer organization consisting of representatives from the environmental departments of the eight member states from the southeast, community environmental groups, industry, and federal agencies. Its mission is to develop and recommend reasonable emissionsЉmanagement options (EMOs) to remedy existing and prevent future adverse effects from humanЉinduced air pollution, primarily those of Class I parks and wilderness areas, weighing the environmental and socioeconomic implications. The design presented here describes У Уboth a product and a processФ Ф. The product will be a flexible framework for evaluation of opportunities to reduce the effects of air pollution in the SAMI region. The process consists of the steps to be taken by SAMI, and its contractors to build the framework, and apply it to assess candidate emissionsЉmanagement options (EMOs). б#М^є\  PŽQМP#бУ УA.2.ССRecommended methodology for SAMI's integrated assessment Ф Ф б#XPє\  PŽ QXP#б SAMI can benefit from the experience of У Уprevious integrated assessment projects,Ф Ф including the following lessons: ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА СССР$РССThe integrated assessment framework (IAF) should guide all research and analysis in У Уa coordinated programФ Ф. Р$РССThe IAF should У Уfocus on the policy issuesФ Ф Р"Р the EMOs in SAMIРРs case. ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА СССР$РССThe use of У УreducedЉform modelsФ Ф (RFMs) lets components be integrated into a single flexible computer program that can run on a personal computer ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА СССР$РССA У Уshared software environmentФ Ф can let multiple teams work together to create an integrated model. ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА СССР$РССA У Уflexible, interactive computer modelФ Ф to analyze new policy options can facilitate more rapid and informed decision making by groups with diverse interests. ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА СССР$РССReducedЉform models should be based on У Уcredible scientific data and modelsФ Ф. ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА СССР$РССPrevious studies of the external costs of electrical power have found that human health effects, employment impacts, fiscal effects, and fuel transportation are often important relative to the more obvious environmental effects and direct costs. ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА СССР$РССEnvironmental effects such as ecological stability and global warming are so poorly understood that they may best be treated qualitatively. ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА СССР$РССThe У Уcosts of conducting integrated assessmentsФ Ф have been in the range of $1 million to $10 million, and appear to be declining with experience ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа The following summarize our recommendations for the integratedЉassessment methodology: ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА СССР$Р ССAdopt У Уprogressive refinementФ Ф as SAMIРРs approach to integrated assessment, developing the assessment model as a series of versions of progressively increasing refinement. This approach is more flexible in responding to new scientific results, changing policy priorities, and funding than singleЉpass methods. It will also provide a usable results earlier in the process. Р$Р ССConduct У Уpeer reviewФ Ф of the IAF and its modules to ensure scientific credibility in Phases II and III. Р$Р ССWhere there exist large amounts of data or detailed computer models, develop rУ УeducedЉform models Ф Ф(RFMs)У У Ф Фfor use as modules in the IAF. Р$РССTo accommodate unexpected changes in the science, use RFMs to keep the IAF small, flexible, and easy to update. Р$Р ССUse У Уhierarchical influence diagramsФ ФУУ ФФto specify and communicate IAF and module structures in qualitative terms Р$Р ССRepresent У УuncertaintyФ Ф about all key quantities using У Уprobability distributionsФ Ф, based on observed data where available, and otherwise on expert judgment. Р$Р ССPropagate probabilistic uncertainties through computer models using Monte Carlo, or related sampling techniques. Р$Р ССConduct systematic У Уsensitivity and uncertainty analysisФ Ф to identify those inputs that contribute most to the uncertainty in the results. Р$РССEmploy a У Уcommon software environment Ф Фto be used by all contractors for developing and integrating modules of the IAF. Candidates are standard У Уspreadsheet applicationsФ Ф, У УAnalyticaФ ФР)Р from Lumina, or a customЉbuilt software program. Р$РССApply softwareЉengineering techniques to specify У Уmodule interfaces Ф Фto ensure successful integration of the products of independent teams. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#М^є\  PŽ!QМP#бУ УA.3. ССEffects and criteria for evaluation of EMOsФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽ"QXP#б It is helpful to classify effects into intermediate effects and final effects, which directly influence objectives of the decision maker. Following convention, we classify objectives into two groups, У УEnvironmental benefits Ф Фand У Уeconomic costsФ Ф, even though some environmental effects may give rise to costs, and some economic effects may give rise to benefits. TheУ У costЉeffectivenessФ ФУУ ФФof an EMO is the ratio of some measurable effect, such as emissions reductions, to the cost of implementation. Emissions costЉeffectiveness is easy to compute, but less informative than a costЉbenefit analysis. CostЉeffectiveness can be used to rank EMOs with similar patterns of emissions. But, it cannot tell you whether even the most costЉeffective EMO is worth adopting. SAMI should instruct the Phase II contractors to identify disadvantaged groups that need special consideration, and to provide separate estimates of the effects of EMOs on those groups. All potential primary and indirect final objectives should have standing in the evaluation of EMOs. Each potential objective should be subject to a screening process that assesses the value to SAMI of additional information about that issue. SAMIРРs research activities should be prioritized according to this screening process. The IAF should summarize results in an optionЉeffects table, an optionЉvalues table, and an optionЉdecision table, to help SAMI decide on recommendations for EMOs. б#М^є\  PŽ#QМP#бУ УA.4ССModules of an Integrated Assessment FrameworkФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽ$QXP#б A critical task in the design of an IA is to choose the У Уlevel of detailФ Ф for modeling each component, balancing the need for accuracy against the limits on data and computational resources. Key dimensions to be specified for each module include pollutant species or pathway, e.g. SOx, NOx, and O3, spatial scale, e.g., state, grid square, county, or selected site, and temporal scale, e.g. decade, year, season, or day. As far as У Уgeographic scopeФ Ф is concerned, for receptors we need only consider the SAMI region. For emissions, we need to consider emissions sites in much of the US, which can affect the SAMI region. We recommend a 25 year У Уtime horizonФ Ф (to the year 2020) for forecasting and evaluation of primary effects, with a 50 year horizon (to the year 2045) for assessment of effects with long time constants or risk of irreversible effects, such as longterm ecosystem damage or species extinction. We define У Уfour levels of complexityФ Ф for modules, to define options for designing the IAF. The first level is a purely qualitative description. We progress through levels 1 to 3 of quantitative detail. For each module, we attempt to specify three levels of complexity to structure the design options. У УA.4.4ССEmissions inventoryФ Ф The discussion of approaches for projecting emissions is inconclusive as to the best approach given alternative budgets. The RFP for Phase II work should require proposers to be more specific about their recommended approach and to critique the Pechan analysis. All other contractors, particularly the airЉmodeling group, should carefully review for compatibility the work of the emissionsЉinventory contractor .The Phase II contractor should define an explicit set of criteria and offer a more structured judgment on the models. In the event that Pechan and Associates is awarded the Phase II contract, some peer review is needed of the Pechan models and other substitute models. The main role of such review would be to address possible future criticisms about the narrow focus of the Phase I review and to indicate to the contractor where improvements in the models are required. The Phase II cost contractor should be asked to specify how leastЉcost approaches to У Уemissions reductionsФ Ф will be estimated, using the ERCAM model results as input. Insights gained from examining simple, lowЉquality, information can be used to guide the selection of scope and scale. SAMI should use the results of other ongoing efforts to study air quality in the region. SAMI should select a meteorology model to match its approach to modeling air quality. SAMI should use simple proportional analysis and the use of statistical models of field data as a level 1 approach to У Уmodeling transport and transformation of air pollution Ф Фin the SAMI region. This approach could be a reasonable step to guide SAMIРРs choices about the scope and scale of higherЉlevel modeling efforts., Transfer matrices based on trajectory models such as ASTRAP, and use of the ozone chemistry model EKMA, are recommended for application at Level II. The greatest accuracy in prediction can be obtained at the highest price. SAMI should invest in the development of comprehensive models only at level 3 primarily for narrow conditions, such as shortЉterm episodes.УУУ У ФФФ ФSAMI could benefit greatly from the work of others in this area, possibly by making small investments in ongoing modeling efforts for other purposes, to obtain additional results specific to SAMIРРs purpose. ReducedЉform versions of the comprehensive models would offer less accuracy, but a more affordable approach to the representation of the more complex atmospheric transport and chemical processes that the comprehensive models provide. SAMI and the У УvisibilityЉmodeling Ф Фcontractor must decide onУУ receptor sites:ФФ those sites where visibility should be evaluated in the assessment. SAMI must decide whether to estimate monetary losses from visibility degradation. Regardless of the outcome of this decision, the visibilityЉeffects module should provide SAMI with a quantifiable estimate of visibility degradation or improvement. У УTerrestrialЉeffects modelsФ Ф should have a lower priority for development, because the level of effects appears likely to be low, and because they are not likely to be reduced easily by the proposed EMOs. If sufficient funding is available to develop or adapt terrestrialЉeffects models, SAMI should give priority to modeling the effects of ozone on crops, including timber resources. For Phase II at moderate funding levels, SAMI should consider a single contractor to model У Уeffects on vegetationФ Ф, rather than separate contractors for У УacidЉdeposition effects and ozone effectsФ Ф, as in Phase I. Given higher levels of funding, SAMI should support models of effects at different levels of biological organization, such as the forest as habitat for wildlife, which might justify an additional terrestrialЉeffects contractor. There is probably greater consensus about the effects of air pollution on У Уhuman healthФ Ф than about any other airЉpollutionР!Рenvironment linkages, although, as in any science, researchers disagree about the details. RFF has a healthЉbenefits model, which could be used as the health module for SAMI. Given the easy availability and low cost of use, we suggest SAMI consider including human health effects for the mid and high budget scenarios. For a highЉbudget plan, consider a У Уhealth moduleФ Ф that can compare the effects of assuming no У УthresholdsФ Ф, or of using thresholds that appear in other healthЉbenefits studies. Although several studies have attempted to estimate У Уmaterials damageФ Ф avoided through airЉpollutionР!Рcontrol policy, in our judgment they are not of sufficient quality and reliability to use in the SAMI process. We see no justification, other than budgetary, for ignoring the benefits of У Уozone precursor reductions on cropsФ Ф in the SAMI region. Decisions on estimating damages to У Уcommercial forestsФ Ф should be deferred until the terrestrialЉcontractor report is in. Because there are so many people who could be affected by У УurbanЉvisibility improvementsФ Ф, this category could well contribute more to the benefits of emissions reductions than would visibility improvements in class 1 areas, even if an average individual would value more heavily the improvements in class 1 areas . We recommend that У Уglobal warmingФ Ф not receive quantitative treatment. We recommend that У Уother secondary environmental effects Ф Фnot be treated quantitatively, including direct effects on terrestrial wildlife, birds, grasses and shrubs, and the effects on animals, fish, and humans of air pollutants falling in surface waters and infiltrating groundwater. У УA.4.9ССSocioeconomic effectsФ Ф At all levels of funding, SAMI should У Уavoid monetization of existence valuesФ Ф unless independent studies targeted precisely at existence values of interest are available. Hire a contractor to consider У Уsocioeconomic effectsФ Ф. It may be efficient to assign analysis of socioeconomic effects to the IA contractor, if the latter has appropriate expertise, due to the central role of socioeconomic effects in the IAF, and the need to interact with all the physical effects contractors. At low levels of funding, monitor У Уdistributional aspectФ Фs by identifying primary constituents who will benefit or lose from policy changes. Delegate this task to a socioeconomic contractor, who should work with physicalЉeffects modelers to identify these constituents. At mid and high levels of funding, have the socioeconomic contractor review data available from the Park Service and elsewhere to construct a model that profiles the characteristics of users of benefit effects. Develop models of У Уdynamic macroeconomic effectsФ Ф only given high levels of funding. Use У Уscenario analysisФ Ф to examine the effect of future regional economic growth. Invest SAMI resources in the use of national economic models (drivers) only if SAMI obtains a high level of funding. Include estimates of state and regional level У Уemployment effectsФ Ф making use of inputЉoutput tables in the assessment at all levels of funding. The geographic detail of these estimates and the detail of affected industries can vary with the level of funding available to SAMI. IncludeУ У fiscal effectsФ Ф for all levels of funding in the assessment, but pursue greater levels of detail with higher levels of funding. У УA.4.10ССVisualization and communication of resultsФ Ф Design the IAF so that it uses У УgeographicЉinformation systemsФ Ф to present the results of the analyses of the EMOs over space and time. Continue to work closely with SAA and SAMAB to develop capability in geographicЉinformation systems. Develop visualization capabilities to aid in selecting EMOs and to support educational and outreach work. SAMI could use the У Уanimated visualizationsФ Ф directly in making decisions about the selection of EMOs, and also could use them to develop educational and outreach materials, such as videos for distribution. б#М^є\  PŽ%QМP#бУ УA.5 The baseline or reference caseФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽ&QXP#б In order to predict the effects of an EMO we need to be able to predict the baseline or reference case of what would happen without that EMO. Prediction of the baseline requires assumptions about compliance with current environmental regulations, future demographic and economic trends, and the lifetime of existing plant. Developing a complete specification is hard. Many of these assumptions are uncertain. Accordingly, we suggest expressing this uncertainty by developing three reference cases: most likely, optimistic, and pessimistic. To avoid the complications of assessing a reference case, we can assess the consequences of EMOs У УrelativeФ Ф to the consequences of not adopting the EMO, rather than in У УabsoluteФ Ф terms. Relative consequences are easier to assess and more accurate than absolute consequences. б#М^є\  PŽ'QМP#бУ УA.6.ССEmission Management OptionsФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽ(QXP#б A range of sample EMOs should be selected for analysis early on in the IAF development. This set of EMOs will help the IA team Р Рkeep their eyes on the prizeРР, by maintaining their focus on developing a tool to compare and assess EMOs. Many EMOs lack specificity in their original form, and will require considerable translation into concrete terms to analyze their implications. We suggest that the IA contractor be given the task working with the relevant SAMI PC and TOC to refine the definitions of EMOs where necessary. The IA should be defined to include two additional discrete sets of tasks for (i) translating EMOs into concrete terms and (ii) performing Р РpreЉprocessingРР analyses on the EMOРРs, as appropriate. б#М^є\  PŽ)QМP#бУ УA.7.СС Recommendations for building an IAFФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽ*QXP#б The У УIA contractorФ Ф, in addition to developing the IA framework, should have primary responsibility for У Уcoordinating Ф Фthe work of the other contractors to ensure that all modules work together effectively. Given adequate budget, the RFM module should be built by the specialist contractors. For a limited budget, it may be more economical for much of this work to be assigned to the IA contractor. The IA contractor can also work with SAMI to apply the IAF to selected EMOs. A final task would be to develop a version of the IAF that is an У Уeducational simulationФ Ф to help people understand the issues faced by SAMI, and explore the implications of alternative solutions themselves. If SAMI has difficulty in obtaining sufficient funds, there are a number of ways to make a limited budget go further. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТС€АА СР$Р ССKeep the number of contractors small, to minimize the overhead costs of management, and coordination. Р$Р ССHire contractors who have already developed reducedЉform models for important modules, and who do not have to develop new ones from scratch. Р$Р ССReuse and adapt an existing publicЉdomain IAF, such as TAF under development for NAPAP. Р$Р ССSeek inЉkind contributions of data collection, research, and analysis from other organizations. For example, seek information and analysis on relevant topics from SAMAB, EPA, or TVA. Р$Р ССEncourage organizations with related missions to share their work on common tasks. For example, encourage NAPAP to select receptor sites of importance to SAMI for aquatic and visibility effects, in NAPAPРРs 1996 assessment. Or reuse data from runs of RADM or other atmospheric models conducted for other purposes. Р$Р ССDo not attempt to develop quantitative models for effects for which the science is poorly understood, for effects for which adequate data will not be available, or that are not likely to be substantially important in discriminating among alternative EMOs. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа We propose four plans for four budget levels, as follows: У УThe $250,000 plan includes:Ф Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАп` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТТТпппТС€СС€АА СССР$РССIAF borrowed directly from TAF with modest adaptations Р$РССLimited emissions inventory and forecast. Р$РССLimited work on the costs of EMOs Р$РССIA contractor doing much of the work on component modules, instead of specialist contractors Р$РССNew sourceЉreceptor matrices for SOx and NOx focusing on receptors in SAMI regionŒР$РССCostЉeffectiveness assessment to compare EMOs that affect similar sources Р$РССQuantitative assessment of visibility effects at one location. Р$РССLimited peer review ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ УThe $250,000 plan omits:Ф Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАп` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТТТпппТС€СС€АА СССР$Р ССPhase III, the secondЉyear refinement of the IAF Р$РССQuantitative assessment of aquatic and terrestrial effects Р$РССHealth and materials damage effects Р$РССValuation of environmental effects Р$РССSocioeconomic assessment Р$РССCostР!Рbenefit analysis, because environmental benefits are not valued Р$РССSAMI IAF software for communication and education ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ УThe $500,000 plan includes, in addition:Ф Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАп` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТТТпппТС€СС€АА СССР$РССModestly improved estimation of direct costs of EMOs Р$РССEffects of EMOs on ozone estimated from simple correlation studies Р$РССQuantification of visibility and aquatic effects Р$РССQuantification of health effects using RFF healthЉeffects model Р$РССValuation of visibility, aquatic, and health effects based on national averages Р$РССLimited costР!Рbenefit analysis using benefit estimates ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ УThe $1 million plan includes, in addition:Ф Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАп` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТТТпппТС€СС€АА СССР$РССA limited second refinement in Phase III extending over a second year. Р$РССSubstantially improved estimation of direct costs of EMOs Р$РССImproved model for predicting ozone concentrations Р$РССImproved models to assess primary environmental effects, including a limited model for terrestrial effects Р$РССImproved ability to value of environmental effects Р$РССAbility to estimate indirect socioeconomic effects, including those on jobs Р$РССImproved ability to perform costР!Рbenefit analysis for selected EMOs, using direct and indirect costs Р$РССSAMI IAF software for communication and education Р$РССMore substantial peer review with resulting increased scientific credibility of models ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ УThe $4 million plan includes, in addition:Ф Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАп` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТТТпппТС€СС€АА СССР$РССEnhanced Phase III, a substantial additional iteration of the IAF over an extra year, producing enhanced scientific credibility and improved ability to address SAMI's needs Р$РССSubstantially improved modules for environmental effects (aquatic, terrestrial, and visibility), collecting more locationЉspecific data and developing more detailed and credible scientific modelsŒР$РССMore credible and regionЉspecific valuation of environmental effects Р$РССSubstantial improvement in ability to estimate indirect socioeconomic effects Р$РССExtensive peer review to establish credibility of models and to obtain expert advice on improving them Р$РССSubstantially more sophisticated and polished SAMI IAF software that can be distributed to SAMI participants, scientists, policy makers, and high schools for communication and education й K й в h Аxц ттёт@@@@@ Аxц ттёт@@@@@h вм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—яG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#єCє\  PŽ+QєP#бй K йУ УTotal budgetй x йммаа$250,000й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа$500,000 ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа $1 millionмм $4 millionм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—яG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Ф Фмм м"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—яG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааEmissions forecastingммааР$Рй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааР$РммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Р$РР$Рмм Р$РР$РР$Рм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—яG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааDirect costsммааР$Рй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааР$РммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Р$РР$Рмм Р$РР$РР$Рм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И hРџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааAtmospheric chemistry & transportааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа SOx, NOx, and PMммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџяЦ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааР$Рй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммР$РммР$РР$РммР$РР$РР$Рм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Ozone, .....ммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџяЦ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааoй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммР$РммР$РР$РммР$РР$РР$Рм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааVisibility effectsммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџяЦ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааР$Рй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммР$РммР$РР$РммР$РР$РР$Рм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааAquatics effectsммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџяЦ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааoй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммР$РммР$РР$РммР$РР$РР$Рм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааTerrestrial effectsммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџяЦ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааoй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммoммР$РммР$РР$РР$Рм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааHuman healthммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџяЦ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааoй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммР$РммР$РР$РммР$РР$Рм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааProperty and materialsммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџяЦ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааoй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммoммoммР$РР$РР$Рм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааValuation of env effectsммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџяЦ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааoй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммР$РммР$РммР$РР$РР$Рм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааIndirect socioЉeconomic effectsммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџяЦ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааoй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммoммР$РммР$РР$РР$Рм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааDevelopment of IAFммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџяЦ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааР$Рй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммР$РммР$РР$РммР$РР$РР$Рн"ŠŠ"нммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааModules by IA contractorммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџяЦ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааР$РР$Рй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммР$РР$РммР$РммР$РР$РР$Рм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааProject coordinationммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџяЦ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааР$Рй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммР$РР$РммР$РР$РммР$РР$РР$Рм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааApplication to EMOsммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџяЦ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааР$Рй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммР$РммР$РР$РммР$РР$РР$Рм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааSAMI educational softwareммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџяЦ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааoй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммoммР$РммР$РР$РР$Рм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааPeer reviewммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџяЦ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааР$Рй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммР$РммР$РР$РммР$РР$РР$Рм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ УKeyй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммммм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааФ ФммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааOmittedммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааoй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммммм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааLimitedммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааР$Рй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммммм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааModerateммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааР$РР$Рй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммммм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАяЦ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааSubstantialммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааР$РР$РР$Рй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммммй - йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАп` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай й б#XPє\  PŽ,QXP#б Organize the IA process into two further Phases, II and III, to follow the current Phase I. Phase III would be funded only for budgets greater than $500,000. Divide Phase II and III each into three cycles of progressive refinement, at approximately 4Љmonth intervals. а Аšмš аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџм4Œ ф <”ьDœєLЄџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмааУУ.ФФ а мšАš аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааFigure AЉ1: Outline schedule for IAF Design and four plans аа ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ УPhase II: Initial implementation and application of IAFФ Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` Œ И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТТТ` ` ` ТТŒ Œ Œ ТС€` ` СС€СС€мм СС€АА СССNo 95ССSelection of Phase II contractors for IAF, emissions cost, and transport modules Dec 95ССStart of Phase II contracts for IAF, emissions cost, and transport Dec 95ССSelection of Phase II contractors for other modules Jan 96ССStart of Phase II contracts for other modules Jan 96ССKickoff meeting of all contractors and SAMI to finalize specifications for modules Apr 96ССPhase II.1 draft integrated model with specified scope and dimensions, but some dummy data; peer review of design Sep 96ССPhase II.2 integrated model with real data for all phase II modules; sample application to selected EMOs Oct 96ССPeer review and sensitivity analysis of Phase II.2 model, to identify priorities for which modules should be refined or added in Phase III, and to assess potential value of additional work Jan 97ССMeeting to present Phase II.3 refined integrated model with applications to more EMOs to SAMI (date suggested by SAMI) ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ УPhase III: Refinement and application of IAFФ Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` Œ И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТТТ` ` ` ТТŒ Œ Œ ТС€` ` СС€СС€мм СС€АА СССNov 96ССSelection of contractors for Phase III Jan 96ССStart of Phase III contracts Jan 97ССPhase III kickoff meeting to finalize specifications for Phase III new and refined modules. Apr 97ССPhase III.1 draft revised integrated model, and initial peer review Oct 97ССPhase III.2 integrated model with real data for all phase II modules; sample application to selected EMOs; peer review Jan 98ССMeeting to present Phase III.3 integrated model with applications to more EMOs to SAMI. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Effective management of the IA process requires careful specification and coordination of tasks for specialist contractors: ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАп` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТТТпппТС€СС€АА СССР$РССEnsure that the statements of work (SOWs) and schedules for specialist contractors developing components of the IAF coordinate with the general plans and schedule. Р$РССFor high budget scenarios, ensure that contractors develop, verify, and calibrate a reducedЉform version of their module, Р$РССDevelop RFPs (requests for a proposal) and SOWs in consultation with the IA contractor, where possible. Р$РССDesign RFPs to request contractors to specify the best refinement or level of detail for the module for two phases, at suggested levels of funding. but also allowing proposals for other funding levels. аOаааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУУУ У1.ССObjectives and backgroundФ Ф ФФ аа The purpose of this project is to design an integratedЉassessment framework (IAF) for the Southern Appalachian Mountain Initiative (SAMI). Integrated assessment is a comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach to environmental decision making that integrates all relevant areas of science, economics, and policy into a unified modeling framework. It combines both quantitative and qualitative methods, as appropriate to the state of understanding and to the resources available. This report represents a collaboration among the authors, SAMI, and SAMI's other contractors between July and October, 1995, to design a framework with which SAMI can more effectively fulfill its mission in assessing and recommending proposed emissionsЉmanagement options (EMOs). The design presented in this report is a description of both a product and a process; it is a flexible framework for evaluation of opportunities to reduce the effects of air pollution in the SAMI region, and a description of the steps to be taken by SAMI to build the framework. Through this process, SAMI will gain insights about the scientific, economic, and social relationships involved in protecting visibility and aquatic and terrestrial resources. Using the framework, SAMI will be able to assess candidate EMOs accurately, considering and evaluating a comprehensive range of environmental and socioeconomic effects, and thus to provide a clear justification for the EMOs that it recommends. б#М^є\  PŽ-QМP#бУ У1.1 ССSAMIФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽ.QXP#б The Southern Appalachian Mountains Initiative (SAMI) is a volunteer organization created by the chief environmental officials from the states of Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina, Kentucky, Virginia, and West Virginia. Each state provides a member to SAMI's Governing Body; exЉofficio members of the Governing Body are derived from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the National Park Service, the U.S. Forest Service, environmental groups, and industry. Article III of the bylaws of SAMI states the mission of SAMI as follows: ТТС€АА ССС УУThrough a cooperative effort, identify and recommend reasonable measures to remedy existing and to prevent future adverse effects from humanЉinduced air pollution on the air quality related values (AQRVs) of the Southern Appalachians, primarily those of Class I parks and wilderness areas, weighing the environmental and socioeconomic implications of any recommendations.ФФ а АšАќ аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа To assist in the assessment project, SAMI created an Integrated Assessment Work Group (IAWG) from its Technical Oversight Committee (TOC) and Policy Committee (PC). The mission of the IAWG is to: а АќАš аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТТС€АА ССС УУ support the Technical Oversight Committee, the Policy Committee, and other SAMI committees and subcommittees by (1) developing the necessary methods to perform an integrated assessment, and (2) performing an integrated assessment of EMOs in the context of a baseline defined by compliance with the Clean Air Act and other legal requirements for the SAMI region.ФФ а АšАќ аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа The airЉquality related values (AQRVs)and indices of air quality now under investigation are the effects of acid deposition and ozone on ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАп` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТТТпппТС€СС€АА ССС(1) aquatic ecosystems, (2) terrestrial ecosystems, and (3) visibility impairment. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа As a result, the emissions of interest are NOx, VOCs, SOб#єCє\  PŽ/QєP#бУУ2ФФб#XPє\  PŽ0QXP#б, and PM (particulate matter) including PMЉ2.5, EC, OC, and TSP. б#М^є\  PŽ1QМP#бУ У1.2ССIntegrated assessmentФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽ2QXP#бAs we use the term here, an УУintegratedЉassessment framework (IAF)ФФ is the analytical structure used to bring together the relevant scientific information; to digest that information with agreedЉon algorithms to produce agreedЉon outputs; and to display those outputs so that patterns, relationships, and associations can be discerned. The framework will support a comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach to environmental decision making that integrates all relevant areas of science, economics, and policy into a unified modeling framework. It combines both quantitative and qualitative methods, as appropriate to the state of understanding and the resources available. IntegratedЉassessment methods have arisen partly in response to criticisms of partial analyses that consider only a subset of the effects and issues of proposed policies. The goals of integrated assessment are to: ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТС€АА СР$РССBring to bear the most upЉtoЉdate and appropriate science on the problem. ТмммТС€АА СР$РССConsider all major pathways by which policy decisions may affect issues of importance to society, including environmental health and socioeconomic consequences. ТмммТС€АА СР$РССWhere practical, develop quantitative models to forecast the magnitude of these consequences. Р$РССAssess explicitly the credibility and uncertainty of all models and forecasts. Given that SAMI is charged with recommending environmental policies that respond to the longЉterm concerns of society as a whole, and that it consists of representatives with diverse interests, it is appropriate that SAMI should adopt integrated assessment as its methodology of choice. In 1993, the National Research Council (NRC) published definitions and a conceptual framework for an integrated approach to ecological risk assessment. In light of the lessons learned from that initiative, and of other resources and experiences, SAMI wants to assemble an IAF that can Р"Р once filled with substantive modules prepared by others Р"Р forecast a baseline, and can quantify where possible and qualify where necessary what any given EMO would do to cause the deviations from that baseline. Those deviations would be measured by the enhancements to the AQRVs of the class 1 areas in the southern Appalachians, and by the costs and other socioeconomic consequences needed to achieve those enhancements. By the proper merger of computational techniques and reliance on qualitative information and expert judgment, SAMI will be able to create the right balance of quantitative or qualitative analyses to pursue its mission. In doing so, SAMI will use scientific knowledge where the latter exists, encourage consensus building where there is no knowledge, and, in the process, promote sound risk identification and environmentalЉmanagement decisions. The IAF that will best serve SAMI will be one that integrates models of physical, biological, chemical, economic, energy, and social systems within a flexible decisionЉsupport system. The models capture the processes and rely on the input necessary to produce information consistent with the effects of concern to SAMI; the decisionЉsupport system organizes relevant information in light of uncertainties in the input data and of methods and criteria for selection of alternative EMOs. б#М^є\  PŽ3QМP#бУ У1.3ССOrganization of this reportФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽ4QXP#б The executive summary contains the key recommendations, whose background and justifications are provided in the body of the report. The body of the report consists of seven chapters. ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССWe emphasize our key recommendations in the body of the report as bulleted paragraphs in italics, like this one.ФФ This first chapter introduces SAMI, the purpose and organization of the report. Chapter 2 outlines the recommended methodology for SAMI to follow in developing its integrated assessment. It also discusses methods, such as progressive refinement, the representation of uncertainty, and the use of reducedЉform models. Chapter 3 treats the effects and criteria for evaluation of EMOs. It presents various ways in which results can be evaluated, aggregated, and displayed to support the selection of EMOs. Chapter 4 concerns the modules that comprise the framework itself. It presents each of the modules with discussion of alternative models, levels of accuracy, and the work involved in developing it. Chapter 5 describes the process for selecting and using a reference for evaluation of the EMOs. The organization and preparation EMOs are the subject of Chapter 6. In Chapter 7, we propose four plans to develop the IAF to suit different budget levels, with timelines and budgets, along with suggestions for coordinating the work with contractors. аOаУУУ У2.ССRecommended methodology for SAMI's integrated assessment Ф Ф ФФ аа In this chapter, we summarize lessons from previous integrated assessments that will be of value for SAMI. We then express and explain a series of recommendations on the choice of methods for creating and conducting the assessment. б#М^є\  PŽ5QМP#бУ У2.1ССLessons for SAMI from other integrated assessmentsФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽ6QXP#б The design of an IAF for SAMI can benefit substantially from the experience of previous integratedЉassessment projects. In this section, we identify specific lessons of relevance to SAMI from several such projects. У У2.1.1.ССNAPAP 1990Ф Ф One of the most substantial previous attempts at integrated assessments was conducted by the National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP) and its contractors. This work, as part of NAPAP's УУState of Science Reports ФФ(NAPAP, 1990) summarizes almost $1 billion of research into air pollution and the origins and effects of acidic deposition, conducted during the decade of 1980 to 1990. A major goal of this work was to provide input to the legislative process that resulted in the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990. It has been argued, however, that, due to problems of timetable and the focus of the assessment, as well as the exigencies of the political process, the CAAA 1990 benefited little from this research in general, and from NAPAP's integrated assessment in particular (Rubin, Morgan, and Lave, 1991). One reason suggested was that it proved extremely hard to integrate the component databases and models to provide coherent projections of the implications of alternative policies. Reviews of this project provide a number of important lessons for subsequent integrated assessments. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТ` ` ` ТС€мм СС€АА СУУССLesson: ФФССDevelop an integratedЉassessment framework early in the process, rather than leave the integration until late in the project, when the pieces may prove harder to tie together. Having a clear IAF at the beginning of the process can help to guide the research and to ensure that the research program can be coordinated, avoiding gaps and ensuring that the research components will fit together as part of a coherent whole. SAMI can obtain these benefits by using the IAF design presented here as the basis for prioritizing and structuring future projects and contracts for research and analysis. Œ™ТмммТТ` ` ` ТС€мм СС€АА СУУССLesson: ФФССDesign the IAF to focus on the policy issues of most concern, so that the research priorities properly reflect the questions on the policy agenda. SAMIРРs existing list of EMOs gives SAMI a head start on this matter. The IAF that we propose for SAMI gains its focus by concentrating on the assessment of specific EMOs. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ У2.1.2.ССTAF: The Tracking and Analysis Framework for NAPAPФ Ф TAF is an IAF under development for NAPAP, designed and coordinated by Lumina. The focus of TAF is the evaluation of the consequences of CAAA 1990, Title IV, including Phase I and Phase II caps on SOx and NOx emissions from power plants and the allowance trading. NAPAP explicitly learned from its earlier experiences in the conduct of this new integratedЉassessment process. The TAF project started in September 1994, with its first prototype phase due for completion in December 1995. TAF involves 10 groups (contractors, universities and national laboratories) who are developing modules in LuminaРРs Demos software, which are being integrated by Lumina into a single model. TAF employs reducedЉform models for each component, which, in most cases, are fitted to detailed model output or empirical observations, but are small and flexible to allow their integration into a single model that can be executed on a desktop computer. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТ` ` ` ТС€мм СС€АА СУУССLesson: ФФССReducedЉform models can provide important insights, grounded in detailed scientific models and data, yet are small enough to be comprehensible, flexible, and combinable into a single integrated model. ТмммТТ` ` ` ТС€мм СС€АА СУУССLesson: ФФССThe use of a common software environment to support modular development lets multiple teams of scientists develop component modules that can be integrated to work together effectively. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ У2.1.3.ССRAINS modelФ Ф The RAINS model is a model of pollutant emissions, transport, and effects in Europe. It was developed initially at the International Institute of Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) in Austria by a group of European scientists. It played a central role in the design and negotiation of a major international treaty on sulfur emissions in Europe, the Sulfur Protocol. RAINS has been criticized severely, especially in the United States, on the grounds that some of its assumptions are only loosely based on widely accepted, scientific data and understanding. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТ` ` ` ТС€мм СС€АА СУУССLesson: ФФССA concise, comprehensible model can be used successfully as the basis for designing major policy proposals and for negotiating agreement among decision makers. For SAMI, there is precedent that a small, interactive computer model can help a complex, voluntary, diverse organization to arrive at agreement on important environmental issues. ТмммТТ` ` ` ТС€мм СС€АА СУУССLesson: ФФССReducedЉform models that are not directly based on detailed scientific data or models may have limited scientific credibility. SAMI should ensure that, wherever possible, its component models are based on or validated against peerЉreviewed scientific data and models. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ У2.1.4.ССStudies of external costs of electricity fuel cyclesФ Ф Three major studies have codified the scientific and economic literature relating air pollution to various effects, including the New York State Externality Study (NYSES), the Department of Energy (DOE)Р!Рsponsored study on the External Costs of Electricity Fuel Cycles (ECEFC), and a study sponsored by the European Community (EC) that followed nearly identical protocols to the DOE study. These studies have provided, among other results, useful insights about the relative importance of different pathways, and the present state of the science. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТ` ` ` ТС€мм СС€АА СУУССLesson: ФФССAmong environmental pathways that can be reliably monetized, health effects stand out as significantly important. Uncertainties in the health models are small compared to uncertainties in other pathways. УУLesson: ФФССNonenvironmental pathways can be fully as important as environmental ones. Employment effects and fiscal effects of policies aimed at reducing powerЉplant emissions have been found to be important. ТмммТТ` ` ` ТС€мм СС€АА СУУССLesson: ФФССFuel transportation for electricity generation is also an important pathway, including fatalities and injuries associated with rail transportation, and damage to roadway surfaces from heavy trucks. To the extent that policy changes alter the transportation of fuel, this matter will be important. ТмммТТ` ` ` ТС€мм СС€АА СУУССLesson: ФФССMonetization of УУconventional environmental concerns ФФhas been conducted in a consistent and reliable manner across studies, forming a basis for comparison with those pathways listed above. ТмммТТ` ` ` ТС€мм СС€АА СУУССLesson: ФФССWe have only a limited understanding of nonconventional environmental pathways, such as ecological stability (habitat preservation and endangered species) and global warming. At present, these pathways can be described most effectively in qualitative terms. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ У2.1.5.ССCosts of integrated assessment:Ф Ф NAPAPРРs 1990 assessment was based on almost one billion dollars of research relating to acid deposition between 1980 and 1990. The cost of the integrated assessment is hard to separate out, but believed to be in the range of $5 to $10 million over about three years. The ongoing TAF project for NAPAP includes expenditure of about $1.5M for FY 1995 to develop a prototype, with more anticipated in subsequent years. The Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission (GCVTC) study is currently spending above $1 million over about two years. The New York State Externality Study cost $1.5 Million over two years. The Department of EnergyЉsponsored study on the External Costs of Electricity Fuel Cycles and the European Community sponsored study each cost above $2 million over three year periods. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТ` ` ` ТС€мм СС€АА СУУССLesson: ФФССCosts of other integrated assessments have varied between about $1 million and $10 million. As analysts have gained experience, and frameworks have become better accepted, the costs for performing integrated assessments appear to be declining. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#М^є\  PŽ7QМP#бУ У2.2ССProgressive refinementФ Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТС€АА Сб#XPє\  PŽ8QXP#бУУР$Р ССAdopt progressive refinement as SAMIРРs approach to integrated assessment, developing the assessment model as a series of versions of progressively increasing refinement. ФФ ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа With УУprogressive refinement,ФФ SAMI and its contractors can apply experience obtained from building and analyzing each version of the model to refine the design and focus of the succeeding version. Where they uncover unexpectedly large uncertainties or gaps in coverage, they can apply more resources to refine the model. Where they find that initial uncertainties or assumptions have little effect on the results, they will not need to apply more resources. Progressive refinement stands in contrast to the conventional УУsingleЉpass approach, ФФin which analysts work through each stage of specifying, designing, constructing, and analyzing the assessment model only once. A singleЉpass approach will be successful only if the initial judgments about the priorities and approaches to assessment all turn out to be correct. Progressive refinement allows more flexibility to handle new science and changing policy issues. We recommend that SAMI adopt progressive refinement over a singleЉpass approach for the following reasons. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАп` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТТТпппТС€СС€АА С ССР$РСС Progressive refinement provides a usable initial assessment model early in the process, rather than requiring that the team wait until the end of the project before any assessment is practical. Р$РСС Progressive refinement allows the rapid incorporation of new scientific results about effect mechanisms or about the relative sizes of effects that become known after the start of the process. Р$РСС Progressive refinement allows greater scope for SAMI to provide input and guidance to the assessment process while the latter is in progress. ТТТпппТС€СС€АА СССР$РСС Progressive refinement is more flexible in adapting to unexpected cuts or increases in funds. Even if the process is terminated early, a usable model should exist. If additional funds are available, the process will provide updated priorities identifying what additional work will be most valuable. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#М^є\  PŽ9QМP#бУ У2.3ССPeer reviewФ Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТС€АА Сб#XPє\  PŽ:QXP#бУУР$Р ССConduct peer review of the IAF and its modules to ensure scientific credibility in Phases II and III.ФФ ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа It is important that the IAF and its components be seen as credible by the scientific community. The most effective way to achieve this acceptance is to subject individual modules and the overall IAF to peer review. We suggest that peer reviewers be identified early during each phase; that they be provided an opportunity to comment on the IAF design and draft implementations, early in each Phase, and on the fuller versions, later in each Phase of refinement, allowing time for the IA team to respond to their comments before the final milestones in each Phase. The reviewers should be chosen from scientists and policy analysts who have direct experience of integrated assessment, and so understand the need to focus the scientific models on the assessment issues. б#М^є\  PŽ;QМP#бУ У2.4ССReducedЉform models and their alternativesФ Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТС€АА Сб#XPє\  PŽ<QXP#бУУР$РССWhere there exist large numbers of data or detailed computer models, develop reducedЉform models for use as modules in the IAF.ФФ In some areas, such as emissions inventories, meteorology, or some biological field observations, there are large databases of potential relevance to SAMI. In other areas, such as atmospheric transport and chemical conversion of pollutant species, there exist vast computer models derived from elaborate scientific models, which require supercomputers to execute and produce enormous quantities of data. These databases and models often run on many different computer platforms, using different kinds of software. They are often at different levels of aggregation, and are based on different assumptions. A major stumbling block for some past attempts at integrated assessment has been to integrate these data and models in a meaningful way. The large quantities of data and incompatible computer environments have made the task cumbersome or, often, intractable. As a result, past integrated assessments have often resorted to performing the integration in a largely qualitative fashion on paper, rather than creating a single integrated computer model. In some cases, modelers have defined output and input files in a common format to allow transfer of data from one component to another on a different computer. Typically, this approach has made it extremely expensive to do each run of the entire model, and has made it difficult to reconfigure the model to run new scenarios or address new issues. An alternative approach that is rapidly gaining popularity is to develop УУreducedЉform models (RFMs)ФФ that summarize the data and model results at a higher level of aggregation. These RFMs are far more compact, flexible, and comprehensible than the data from which they are derived; and they can be developed on a common computer software and hardware platform so that they can be designed for easy integration and specifically to focus on the issues of interest for the assessment. Small RFMs can be run quickly and efficiently for many input scenarios, either for a random sample of, say, 100 scenarios to propagate and analyze uncertainty using Monte Carlo, or to test new scenarios for new proposed EMOs Р"Р an exercise that is usually impractical for the detailed models. Some early RFMs Р"Р for example, as used in the RAINS model Р"Р have been criticized for not being directly based on credible science or data. For this reason, we recommend that the RFMs be created on the basis of aggregations or statistical fitting to data or model results. For example, the atmosphericЉtransport module of TAF consists of sourceР!Рreceptor matrices that are generated by ASTRAP. ASTRAP is a large atmosphericЉtransport model that uses detailed meteorological data and chemicalЉtransformation processes to model SOx and NOx formation, transport, and deposition [Shannon, 1984, 1990]. It has been subject to extensive peer review and calibration. Another example is the Direct Distribution Model (DDM) [Small, et al, 1993] for aquatic effects of acid precipitation that is an RFM calibrated against the results of MAGIC [Cosby et al]. MAGIC is a detailed scientific model, and is probably the most widely respected such model among aquaticЉeffects scientists. The credibility of DDM derives from the close empirical fit to MAGIC that it demonstrates. Some scientists have been concerned that such RFMs do not represent the detailed physical, chemical, or biological mechanisms that are known to exist in the systems of interest. However, the RFMs are intended to derive their credibility not from explicit representation of these mechanisms, but rather from the quality of their empirical fit to data or results that are considered credible. In practice, it turns out that relatively simple RFMs can usually produce a good fit to such data. Typically, the approximation introduced by the simplification inherent in an RFM is dwarfed by the uncertainty inherent in the original detailed data or model. Œ™б#М^є\  PŽ=QМP#бУ У2.5ССAccommodation to changing scienceФ Ф ТмммТС€АА Сб#XPє\  PŽ>QXP#бУУР$РССTo accommodate unexpected changes in the science, use RFMs to keep the IAF small, flexible, and easy to update; schedule regular scientific reviews; and allow for progressive refinement of the models.ФФ Although the pace of research on air pollution has slackened somewhat since the decade of the 1980s, new results continue to surface. For example, there are indications that the cost of emissions reductions of SOx for CAAA will be much less than anticipated just a few years ago. This trend is reflected by that fact that the current allowance price of about $150 per ton of SO2 is much less than the $300 to $400 per ton expected by most analysts. Part of the reason may be the increased use of lowЉsulfur coal from the west, such as the Powder River Basin in Wyoming, available at low price due to the substantially reduced price of rail transport since railroad deregulation. Another finding that may be emerging is that the time constants for lake acidification, at least in the Adirondacks, are relatively long, and show relatively low sensitivity to reductions in acid deposition. If these early results hold up, they suggests that current and anticipated reductions in acid deposition are unlikely to produce noticeable reductions in the number of acidified lakes within the next decade. It is impossible to anticipate what other new findings may emerge during the next few years. The best recourse is to develop an IAF that is small, flexible, and easy to update, by use of RFMs; to schedule regular reviews by research scientists; and to plan on progressive refinement of the model in a series of versions. б#М^є\  PŽ?QМP#бУ У2.6ССHierarchical influence diagramsФ Ф ТмммТС€АА Сб#XPє\  PŽ@QXP#бУУР$РССUse hierarchical influence diagrams to specify and communicate IAF and module structures in qualitative termsФФ ХХ а АќА8 аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xа (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ УFigure 2Љ1: Ф ФAn influence diagram depicting the draft IA framework. The rectangle, УУEmission Management Options,ФФ depicts the decision variable. The hexagon, УУBenefitЉcost comparisonФФ, denotes the objective criterion. All the other nodes depict intermediate calculations. The thick outlines of nodes denote modules, that can be opened up to show more detailed influence diagrams.ХХ а А8Аќ аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа УУInfluence diagrams ФФare a widely used graphical notation developed by decision analysts for creating and communicating decision models. They facilitate communication of the essential elements and relationships in a model in an intuitive form that can be easily understood without special training. In УУhierarchical ФФinfluence diagrams, each node may contain a submodel with its own influence diagram representing more detail. Hierarchical diagrams can organize a complex model, containing hundreds of variables, into a set of component diagrams, or modules, each of which is small enough to be clear and comprehensible. Hierarchical influence diagrams were developed by Lumina, and are implemented in the Demos and Analytica software packages. Figure 2Љ1 shows an initial influence diagram for the entire IAF. б#М^є\  PŽAQМP#бУ У2.7ССRepresentation and analysis of uncertaintyФ Ф ТмммТС€АА Сб#XPє\  PŽBQXP#бУУР$РССRepresent uncertainty about all key quantities using probability distributions, based on the variability of observed data where available, and otherwise on expert judgment.ФФ Virtually every quantity in the quantitative components of SAMI's IAF, like those in any integratedЉassessment model, will be uncertain. This uncertainty may arise from lack of data, incomplete scientific understanding, approximations in models, or some combination of these sources. Explicit representation of uncertainty makes a clear statement about the reliability of quantitative forecasts and assessments. It allows scientists and modelers to be frank about the precision of their models. It helps policy makers to understand how much credence and weight to give to these results. In practice, the expressed uncertainty is usually a lower bound on the actual uncertainty, because there are often and unavoidably sources of uncertainty for which scientists fail to account. To assess the precision or uncertainty in a result, we find it helpful to represent explicitly the uncertainty in all inputs, and to propagate the uncertainty through the model. In a few cases, there will be distributions of observations of the quantity of interest. More often, such distributions will not be available, and the probability distributions will need to be assessed directly by expert judgment. We suggest the use of standard probabilityЉelicitation methods, with the assistance of a specialist in probabilistic modeling. We recommend probabilistic representations over fuzzy sets and other formalisms, because probabilistic methods are better understood and more widely accepted as sound among the decisionЉanalysis and riskЉanalysis communities, and are less subject to controversy. ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССUse Monte Carlo, or related sampling techniques, to propagate probabilistic uncertainties through computer models ФФ DecisionЉtree methods, often used by decision analysts, become computationally intractable for large models with dozens of uncertain variables. For predictive models, of the type to be developed for SAMI, Monte Carlo and related sampling techniques, such as Latin hypercube sampling, are far more efficient for large models (Morgan & Henrion, 1990). They are easy to use, given appropriate software tools, such as Crystal BallР)Р from Decisioneering, @RiskР)Р from Palisades Corporation, or DemosР)Р and AnalyticaР)Р from Lumina. ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССConduct systematic sensitivity and uncertainty analysis to identify those inputs that contribute most to the uncertainty in the results.ФФ Sensitivity analysis and УУuncertainty analysisФФ are methods in which inputs are varied to examine the latter's relative effect on the outputs. Uncertainty analysis takes into account the probability distribution representing the uncertainty in the input, and that distribution's contribution to the resulting uncertainty in the output (Morgan & Henrion, 1990). These methods are valuable in identifying which input uncertainties matter, and which do not matter and so do not need further refinement. The software programs just mentioned all provide means for uncertainty analysis with Monte Carlo sampling methods. б#М^є\  PŽCQМP#бУ У2.8ССSoftware tools for integrated assessmentФ Ф ТмммТС€АА Сб#XPє\  PŽDQXP#бУУР$РССEmploy a common software environment to be used by all contractors for developing and integrating modules of the IAF. The software should support a visual modeling interface, hierarchical modular development, multidimensional arrays, and uncertainty analysis. ФФ We suggest that each contractor be primarily responsible for creating the module for its component to be integrated into the IAF. Clearly, they should all use a common software environment, so that the modules can be integrated satisfactorily. The primary candidates for the software environment appear to be these: ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАп4` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТТТпппТТ444ТС€ппСС€СС€АА СССР$РУ УССMicrosoftФ Ф У УExcelФ ФР)Р or У УLotus 123Ф ФР)Р spreadsheet applications, with У УCrystal BallФ ФР)Р from Decisioneering or У У@RiskФ ФР)Р from Palisades Corporation, which can be added in to these spreadsheets to support Monte Carlo simulation. ТТТпппТТ444ТС€ппСС€СС€АА СССР$РУ УССAnalyticaФ ФР)Р, which will shortly be released by Lumina as a successor to У УDemosФ ФР)Р. ТТТпппТТ444ТС€ппСС€СС€АА СССР$РССA software tool customЉbuilt for SAMI based on existing modeling or decisionЉanalysis code. ТТТпппТТ444ТС€ппСС€СС€АА ССС ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа All options allow analysis of uncertainty, although the last would probably use decisionЉtree methods that can only deal with a limited number of uncertain variables. Spreadsheets have these advantages: ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАп4` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТТТпппТТ444ТС€ппСС€СС€АА СССР$РССThey are widely known and understood. ТТТпппТТ444ТС€ппСС€СС€АА СССР$РССThey run on most platforms, including Microsoft Windows and Macintosh. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Analytica, and its predecessor, Demos, have these advantages over spreadsheets: ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАп4` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТТТпппТТ444ТС€ппСС€СС€АА СССР$РССThey were conceived and designed specifically as tools to support integrated assessment of complex environmental issues. They have been used successfully for several such applications, including TAF for NAPAP, the ICAM (Integrated Climate Assessment Model) developed at Carnegie Mellon, the PISCES model for EPRI. Р$РССThey provide УУinfluence diagramsФФ to visualize, communicate, and document qualitative model structures Р$РССThey support distributed УУmodular developmentФФ and integration, with the hierarchical structure of the influence diagrams, and handling of modules as separate files. ТТТпппТТ444ТС€ппСС€СС€АА СССР$РССThey provide УУsmart arrays ФФto represent, analyze, and display multidimensional data and results simply and powerfully. Smart arrays allow easy changes to levels of aggregation. ТТТпппТТ444ТС€ппСС€СС€АА СССР$РССThey run faster than the spreadsheet applications with Monte Carlo addins by a factor of 2 to 5 on comparable computers. Р$РССThey provide УУstructured documentationФФ as an integral part of a computer module. ТТТпппТТ444ТС€ппСС€СС€АА СССР$РССDemonstration versions of the software are available at no cost and allow reviewers to examine, modify, and run a model, but not to save modifications. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа The complete version of Analytica currently runs on Macintosh computers. A runЉtime version is also available for Windows. A complete Windows version of Analytica is planned for release in 1996. The third option, a software tool customЉbuilt for SAMI, could do anything, but would probably be significantly more expensive to develop than the other two options. It would probably require the IA contractor to do all programming on construction of the IA model, and would preclude other contractors from developing components that could be directly integrated. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССBecause Lumina, as the developer of Demos and Analytica, is an interested party, obtain advice from a third party on the choice of software environment.ФФ ТмммТС€АА СУУ2.9ССCoordination of module developmentФФ ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССApply softwareЉengineering techniques to specify module interfaces and manage multiple versions to ensure successful integration of the products of independent teams.ФФ Coordinating an IA team, in which each group must provide a module to be integrated into the overall framework, is a much more challenging task than coordinating the development of a paper study with multiple authors. Each module must mesh precisely with its linked modules if the integrated model is to run correctly, Software engineers have developed techniques for ensuring that software products can be successfully built up of independently constructed modules. It is essential that the team agree early on about the specifications of each module. A module specification consists of a list of input variables and output variables. The input variables are all the information a module requires that will be provided by other modules. Similarly, the outputs are all the variables computed by one module that may be used by others. For each input or output variable, the module specification provides information on : ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` Œ И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТТТ` ` ` ТТŒ Œ Œ ТС€` ` СС€СС€мм СС€АА СУУССVariable Class: ФФССFor example, Decision, Chance variable, Index, or Objective. Title: ССUp to 36 chars. Comprehensible, mixed upper/lowercase. Name: ССUp to 20 chars. Must be unique, without spaces or punctuation, starting with a letter. Should be reasonably comprehensible. Units: ССSuch as $ millions, tons/year, micrograms/cubic meter Description:СС As many lines as needed explaining what this variable represents, so that it is unambiguous. Dimensions: ССMost variables are tables or arrays of data. The dimensions are specified as a list of index variables, such as source regions, time periods, or pollutant species. Range: ССThe range of values considered valid for this variable. A specification is treated like a legal contract, that is negotiated between the supplier (the module that generates the output) and the consumers (modules that use it as an input). Once the specification is agreed, each module developer knows precisely what they have to provide, and the integration team knows that they will be able to integrate the module, if it meets the specification. аOаУУУ У3. Effects and criteria for evaluation of EMOsФ Ф ФФ аа Three УУairЉqualityР!Рrelated values (AQRVs)ФФР"Рaquatics, visibility, and terrestrial effectsР"Рare central to SAMIРРs policy assessment. In this section, we describe a framework for evaluating policy options for these AQRVs. In Section 3.1, we describe a taxonomy for organizing the objectives that people may find important. The taxonomy is introduced by way of a hypothetical example pertaining to one particular pathway linking a potential EMO to particular environmental effects. We continue development of this taxonomy in Section 3.2, describing techniques to measure the performance of policy options. In Section 3.3, we apply this framework to organize the УУcriteria for evaluation of policies ФФthat have been discussed in various SAMI documents and conversations. Finally, in Section 3.4, based on these criteria and others that have proved important in other contexts, we suggest ways to prioritize activities for the assessment, given the information available to us at the time of writing this report. б#М^є\  PŽEQМP#бУ У3.1ССIntermediate effects, final effects, and objectivesФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽFQXP#б Specific effects, such as reduced acidity of precipitation, are only of importance to the extent that they affect peopleРРs objectives. An aquatic scientist may be concerned about what are the effects of acidification on microЉorganisms, but the many others may not find this problem compelling compared to how to shuttle the kids to Little League baseball. However, the health of microЉorganisms may have a close bearing on fish populations and thereby on recreational opportunities along a popular waterway, or to the stability of an ecosystem; these are effects about which people are likely to care directly. Hence, to evaluate a policy option, we concentrate on assessing how people feel about УУobjectives, ФФissues about which they care directlyУУ ФФР"Р in our example, improvements in recreational opportunities and ecological stability, rather than intermediate УУeffectsФФ. ŒХХааа АќА аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` Œ И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ УFigure 3Љ1: Pathway linking intermediate and final effects.Ф Ф а ААЄ ааа ааа АЄАќ аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` Œ И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Figure 3Љ1 is an influence diagram that shows the relationships that we would be considered in assessing the influence of an EMO on aquatic environments. The two shaded objects in the figure are the objectives. We flesh out influence diagrams by working backward from these concerns to make explicit the relationships between the EMO and both the effects and the objectives. The chain of relationships depicted in the figure constitutes a УУpathway ФФthat links those intermediate and final effects that influence the ultimate objectives.ХХ ХХа Аќё аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџё2IЁ Э љ QЉYБ aЙ!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАёааУ УFigure 3Љ2: Part of the larger influence diagram from 2Љ1, showing the links between environmental effects and benefits.Ф Ф а ёАЄ аааХХ а АЄАќ аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа In Figure 3Љ2, a part of the influence diagram on the cover, the primary AQRVРРs, aquatic effects, terrestrial effects, and visibility directly influence the environmental benefits. More careful thought suggests that these effects are probably not final effects or objectives in themselves. They affect objectives by influencing the fishing, the beauty and range of the view, which in turn, influence the quality of the recreation. We can expand this part of the diagram to produce Figure 3Љ3, in which these final effects and objectives are shown explicitly. ХХааа АќА аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ УFigure 3Љ3: The relationship between effects and objectives.Ф Ф а ААЄ ааа ааа АЄАќ аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа It is important for the assessment to identify carefully the various intermediate effects, for the obvious reason that their characterization is essential if we are to quantify the magnitude of changes in final effects. A second reason is that a careful articulation of pathways helps to avoid double counting. Since microЉorganisms ultimately affect recreational opportunities, it would be a mistake to ascertain the public benefits from protecting microЉorganisms (indeed, if it were possible to do so directly!), and to add these benefits to those accrued from recreation.ХХ б#М^є\  PŽGQМP#бУ У3.2ССMeasures of successФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽHQXP#бУ У3.2.1.ССCostЉeffectiveness: The least costly way of meeting an objectiveФ Ф The УУcostЉeffectiveness ФФof an EMO is the ratio of some measurable effect, such as emissions reductions, to the cost of implementation (e.g., abatement plus administrative costs). Emissions costЉeffectiveness is easy to compute, since it requires only an estimate of the cost and of the reduction in emissions. It does not require estimation of any other effects, environmental or economic, and it does not require direct valuation of the emissions reduction or analysis of its consequences. Only a small fraction of the total influence diagram need be considered, as shown in Figure 3Љ4. ХХ а Аќ аааУ УFigure 3Љ4: Emissions costЉeffectiveness depends only on emissions reduction and direct costs. It does not require evaluation of any environmental effects or other costs, and so is much easier and cheaper to compute than costЉbenefit. However, it provides correspondingly less information.Ф ФХХ а АЄ аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа а АЄАќ аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа This approach has limitations: First, emissions from sources at different locations can have markedly different effects on acid deposition, and EMOs that are most costЉeffective at reducing emissions would not necessarily be most costЉeffective for reducing deposition. Second, SAMI is concerned about other pollutants, such as ozone and particulates. Because of the multiplicity of locations and pollutants of interest, costЉeffectiveness analysis is most useful for ranking EMOs that have the same effect on the spatial and temporal pattern of emissions. For example, all EMOs that encourage energy conservation Р"Р whether by voluntary measures, mandatory adoption of energyЉsaving technology or energy taxes Р"Р have proportional effects on emissions, since they all reduce electricЉpower use and electrical energy is fungible. Therefore, a costЉeffectiveness comparison of these measures is meaningful. Only one calculation of net benefits needs to be done: the net benefits per unit of reduction of electric power use. The net benefit of each of the EMOs in this class is a multiple of this unit number. The second limitation of costЉbenefit analysis, is that even if you can legitimately rank a set of EMOs, it does not address the question of whether even the topЉranked EMO is worth adopting. To answer this question, we need to compare the benefits of the emissions reduction directly with the costs, and see which is larger. In other words, we must perform costЉbenefit analysis. Despite these caveats, we recommend the estimation of costЉeffectiveness ratios for all EMOs, at all levels of analysis. Usually, these ratios will reveal differences among policy alternatives that are of 1 order of magnitude or more. In such a case, it is rare for the less costЉeffective option to turn out to offer greater net benefits. This approach thus can act as a useful screen to focus attention on the EMOs that have real promise. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССEMOs should be classified into groups that have similar environmental effects, such as energy conservation, or emission reductions from vehicles in use. They should also be evaluated initially according to the costЉeffectiveness criterion. This evaluation will be helpful both as an initial screening device and as a way of determining the costЉeffectiveness ranking of EMOs within each group.ФФ У У3.2.2.ССWillingness to pay or accept: Calculation of net benefits Ф Ф Willingness to pay or accept provide methods to monetize environmental benefits. In a market economy, the УУvalueФФ of any goods or service is the maximum amount that you are willing to pay (WTP) to acquire it or, if you already possess the good, the minimum amount you are willing to accept (WTA) to give it up. In a market setting, therefore, the price at which a transaction takes place signals a lower bound for the buyerРРs WTP (and an upper bound of the sellerРРs WTA). One of the basic tenets of environmental economics is that WTP and WTA also have meaning for valuing goods that do not trade in markets. For instance, other things being equal, most people would be willing to have lower incomes or to pay higher prices to live in a community with clean air, compared to the alternative of living in dirty air. These valuations, when aggregated, provide a way of measuring the benefits of environmental improvement. Measurement of WTP and WTA for nonmarket goods is greatly complicated by the fact that there are no transactions to observe. Two classes of valuation techniques have been developed: ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА СССР$РУУССIndirect methods.ФФ We can draw inferences on the value of environmental assets by observing transactions in related market goods. The main categories are as follows: ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм4` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТТТ444ТС€СС€мм СС€АА СУУССССР$РССTravelЉcost ФФstudies value amenity resources for recreation by examining how far people at the site have traveled to enjoy the resource. ТмммТТТТ444ТС€СС€мм СС€АА СУУССССР$РССHedonic pricing ФФstudies value the individual attributes of market goods that consist of inseparable bundles of attributes. For example, housing prices are affected by air quality, and statistical studies of housing prices can separate out air qualityРРs value from the value of a fourth bedroom, the local school district, and the like. Hedonic pricing studies also have been used in wage studies (to infer the value of mortality risk) and in motorЉvehicleР!Рpricing studies (to estimate consumer acceptance of alternative fuel vehicles). ТмммТТТТ444ТС€СС€мм СС€АА СУУССССР$РССAverting behaviorФФ studies put a lower bound on the value of an environmental insult by estimating the cost of the measures that people take to avoid or protect themselves from that insult. These methods have been used to value health effects and materials damages from airЉpollution exposure. ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА СССР$РУУССDirect methods.ФФ We can rely on surveys that describe a hypothetical situation involving a change in environmental quality, and that ask people what they would be willing to pay to ensure (or to avoid) the change. Compared to the indirect methods, these approaches suffer the considerable disadvantage of relying on stated preferences, rather than revealed preferences. ТмммТТТТ444ТТ` ` ` ТС€44СС€СС€мм СС€АА СССССССThey also have important advantages: ТмммТТТТ444ТС€СС€мм СС€АА СССССР$РССThe environmental resource being valued can be described and delimited with a precision limited only by the skill of the questionnaire designer. When we use indirect methods, in contrast, the correspondence between the resource implicitly being valued and the resource for which we desire a value is often inexact. ТмммТТТТ444ТС€СС€мм СС€АА СССССР$РССWhen we use direct methods, we can be explicit about whether WTP or WTA is being used for valuation. In inferential studies, this issue is often unclear. ТмммТТТТ444ТС€СС€мм СС€АА СССССР$РССFor certain important situations, direct methods are the only possible means of eliciting a value. The most prominent of these situations is the estimation of existence values. Direct methods for valuation have had to climb a mountain of skepticism. Nonetheless, recognizing their potential value in cases involving naturalЉresource damage, the Department of Interior (DOI) recently convened a panel of eminent economists to review the use of the method, and to develop guidelines on its use for valuation. As a result of this review, contingent valuation and other direct methods have gained a measure of official approval for use in environmental valuation. Theory suggests, and empirical studies tend to confirm, that WTA should exceed WTP, perhaps only by a little for market goods or environmental goods with ready substitutes, but possibly by a lot for unique or unusual environmental assets. Many of the environmental resources at stake in SAMI fall into this category, so it makes a great difference whether WTP or WTA is the valuation criterion. As suggested by the buyerЉseller example above, the appropriate concept depends on who is considered to Р РownРР the resources at stake. Yet environmental resources are usually ones for which clear property rights were never defined, so the appropriate benefit concept is far from evident. Nonetheless, two practical considerations tend to favor the use of willingness to pay over willingness to accept: ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА СССР$РССThe residents who will enjoy an increase in environmental amenities as a result of SAMI implementation are to a considerable extent the same people who will be subject to the increased electricity rates that will make it possible. Regardless of the appropriate allocation of property rights, they will necessarily be paying for the environmental improvements. This situation makes WTP the appropriate valuation concept. ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА СССР$РССResearch has shown that estimates based on WTP are more replicable, and show less frequent outliers, than are estimates of WTA. This difference may occur because methods for eliciting WTP are more developed. Nonetheless, in its review of the use of contingent valuation, the DOI review panel recommended that WTP be used whenever possible. ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССThe Phase II contractor should prepare a comprehensive literature review of the benefit studies in each category, and, where possible, benefit estimates should be based on benefit transfers from completed studies elsewhere. The contractor task will not be overly burdensome as there are several major studies of the social cost of electricity and transportation that contain extensive reviews of this literature.ФФ У У3.2.3.ССEquityФ Ф Equity has two aspects. УУProceduralФФ УУequityФФ is concerned with what the decisionЉmaking procedure is, and whether participants believe that their concerns were treated fairly by others and that they had a chance to make their case. We leave this form of equity to the SAMI governing board. УУDistributionalФФ УУequity ФФis concerned with the effects of various outcomes on less fortunately endowed segments of society. Usually, these segments are defined by income, but, under certain circumstances, they could also be defined by race or disability. ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССSAMI should instruct the Phase II contractors to identify disadvantaged groups that need special consideration, and to provide separate estimates of the effects of EMOs on those groups.ФФ У У3.2.4.ССAdministrative easeФ Ф We suggest the following criteria for inclusion as constraints. ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА Сб#XXф2МPБIQXP#бССР$Рб#XPє\  PŽJQXP#бССDoes the EMO require new legislation at either the federal or state level, or can it be implemented by a change in state regulation? ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА Сб#XXф2МPБKQXP#бССР$Рб#XPє\  PŽLQXP#бССDoes the EMOУ У Ф Фrequire administrative agencies to adopt new or unfamiliar procedures? ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА Сб#XXф2МPБMQXP#бССР$Рб#XPє\  PŽNQXP#бССHow difficult is it to monitor compliance or performance? б#М^є\  PŽOQМP#бУ У3.3ССReorganization of SAMI criteria into hierarchy of Intermediate and Final Effects and Measures of SuccessФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽPQXP#б In the previous sections, we established a framework for organizing the УУcriteriaФФ that have been suggested to guide the SAMI process. We have identified three broad categories for various criteria: intermediate effects, final effects, and measures of success. In Figure 3Љ5, we associate SAMIРРs various criteria with these categories, and indicate primary relationships between each of them. These options have two types of effects: those that lead to УУenvironmental benefitsФФ and those that lead to УУeconomic costsФФ. It is conventional to refer to the environmental effects of emissions reduction as УУbenefitsФФ, even though a few may actually be costs or УУdisФФЉbenefits Р"Р for example, reduced acidification could worsen swimming conditions in some lakes. Similarly, a few economic effects of reduced emissions may be benefits Р"Р for example, an some energy efficiency measures may reduce overall costs, and an improved environment may increase tourism and consequent economic benefits. Hence, each general category Р"Р environmental benefits and economic costs Р"Р includes positive and negative entries. On the benefits side, as the arrows indicate, policies affect emissions, which in turn have a variety of intermediate and final effects. Note that we place the primary AQRVs of SAMI in intermediate effects. In attempting to calculate environmental benefits, we must articulate the ultimate effects about which people care. Following the example we constructed to introduce this framework, individuals are unlikely to care about aquatic conditions directly, but they are likely to care about the final effects that aquatic conditions have on recreation and ecology. On the far right, these pathways lead to an aggregation of benefits and costs for evaluation according to socioeconomic measures of performance. One aspect of this evaluation is the calculation of net benefits where possible. Clearly however, it will not be possible to monetize benefits (or costs) for every pathway. There is a variety of other socioeconomic measures that we can combine with physical measures of performance for each pathway to arrive at policy recommendations. ХХ а АќА аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм4` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ УFigure 3Љ5: Extending the diagram to show computation of benefit weights, and combining economic costs and environmental benefits.Ф Ф а ААЄ аааХХ а АЄАќ аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм4` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#М^є\  PŽQQМP#бУ У3.4ССPriorities for assessment activities Ф Ф ТмммТС€АА Сб#XPє\  PŽRQXP#бУУР$РССAll potential primary and indirect final objectives should have standing in the evaluation of EMOs.ФФ Р$РССEach potential objective should be subject to a screening process that assesses the value to SAMI of additional information about that issue. SAMIРРs research activities should be prioritized according to this screening process. Each environmental or socioeconomic effect is important to the SAMI process, if a participant finds it important. However, clearly some effects are more important than others. With limited resources, some prioritization is required. We propose a screening process to assess the value to SAMI of additional information about that effect. Previous integrated assessments have illustrated the importance of establishing consistent criteria for prioritizing activities, and of applying these criteria rigorously. An initial approach at such a screening process is summarized in Table 3Љ1. In the left column, we list criteria for prioritizing the assessment. Across the top, we list broad categories of effects that may deserve SAMIРРs attention and resources. To the extent possible, we have attempted an initial evaluation of the screening criteria, based on previous integrated assessments but prior to receiving reports from effects contractors. We suggest that an immediate task in further SAMI deliberations should be to ratify the criteria that will be used in such a screening process. In addition, an early task for the IA contractor should be to complete this screening evaluation and to report to SAMI. Given this information, SAMI would be poised to assign priorities and to allocate funds for the assessment. ХХааа Аќ аааУ УTable 3Љ1: Process for screening effects for inclusion in the IAF.Ф Ф а АЄ аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм4` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааХХ й % й в ^ Аx Ю Д  @@@@ Аx Ю Д  @@@@^ вмˆ    ˆ    мммааб#Т<є\  PŽSQТP#бй % йУ УEffectsФ Фй x йммааPrimary AQRVsй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџвў*VЎ ^ Ж fОџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџшА@˜№ H џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааOther Environmental EffectsммSocioeconomic Effectsммв Ў Аx *u/п%XXH\АА@@@@@@@@@@@@ Аx *u/п%XXH\АА@@@@@@@@@@@@Ў вм>˜            ˜            >мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм4` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааAquaticsй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџвў*VЎ ^ Ж џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ,„АмџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааTerrestrialммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџgПo Ч wЯџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа VisibilityммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџшА@џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааHealthммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ aАЙџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааMaterialsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьDœ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Cropsмм Otherмм Direct й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааCostsй x йм мааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЄАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааIndirect Costsм мDistribution of costsааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЄАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммв Є Аx *u/п%XX9aa@@@@@@@@@@@ Аx *u/п%XX9aa@@@@@@@@@@@Є вм:– – :мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм4` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ УPrioritization Criteria:ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџвў*VЎ ^ Ж џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ,„АмџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџgПo Ч wЯџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџшА@џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ aАЙџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьDœ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа мм ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа м мааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџГАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааФ Фм мм:– – :мммClass I areasммYй й ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџвў*VЎ ^ Ж џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ,„АмџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааYммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџgПo Ч wЯџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа YммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџшА@џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааLммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ aАЙџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьDœ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа мм ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа м мааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџГАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаам мм:– – :мммOther inЉregion effectsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџвў*VЎ ^ Ж џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ,„АмџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџgПo Ч wЯџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџшА@џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ aАЙџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьDœ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа мм ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа м мааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџГАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаам мм:– – :мммOutЉofЉregion effectsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџвў*VЎ ^ Ж џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ,„АмџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџgПo Ч wЯџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџшА@џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ aАЙџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьDœ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа мм ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа м мааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџГАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаам мм:– – :мммImportant to decision makerммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџвў*VЎ ^ Ж џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ,„АмџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџgПo Ч wЯџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџшА@џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ aАЙџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьDœ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа мм ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа м мааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџГАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаам мм:– – :мммRelevant to EMOsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџвў*VЎ ^ Ж џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ,„АмџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџgПo Ч wЯџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџшА@џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ aАЙџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьDœ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа мм ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа м мааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџГАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаам мм:– – :мммSize of effectммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџвў*VЎ ^ Ж џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ,„АмџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџgПo Ч wЯџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџшА@џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ aАЙџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьDœ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа мм ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа м мааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџГАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаам мм:– – :мммExisting quantitative modelsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџвў*VЎ ^ Ж џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ,„АмџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџgПo Ч wЯџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџшА@џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ aАЙџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьDœ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа мм ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа м мааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџГАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаам мм:– – :мммEffort for Credible Modelммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџвў*VЎ ^ Ж џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ,„АмџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџgПo Ч wЯџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџшА@џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ aАЙџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьDœ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа мм ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа м мааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџГАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаам мм:– – :мммScientific consensusммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџвў*VЎ ^ Ж џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ,„АмџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџgПo Ч wЯџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџшА@џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ aАЙџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьDœ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа мм ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа м мааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџГАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаам мм:– – :мммLinkage to Final Effectsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџвў*VЎ ^ Ж џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ,„АмџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџgПo Ч wЯџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџшА@џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ aАЙџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьDœ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа мм ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа м мааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџГАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаам мн:–           –           :нммOverall priorityммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџвў*VЎ ^ Ж џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ,„АмџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџgПo Ч wЯџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџшА@џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ aАЙџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьDœ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа мм ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ<”ьџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа м мааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџГАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаам мй й й - йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм4` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#XPє\  PŽTQXP#бй - йУ У3.4.1.ССProcess for refining criteria and prioritizing assessment activitiesФ Фй й The SAMI Governing Body is responsible for accepting or rejecting the recommendations set forth. We recommend that the Body begin by reaffirming or reidentifying its primary mission, expressed in terms of Final Objectives for the integrated assessment. However, one task that is not presented as a recommendation for the Body is the refinement of the criteria for the ultimate evaluation of EMOs. We suggest that it is beyond the capabilities of the Body and beyond good policy analysis for the Body to finalize a list of criteria before commencing on the integrated assessment. Instead, after identification of the primary objectives by SAMI, the refinement of criteria should proceed in two steps. ТмммТС€АА СУУ1.ССthe Phase II IA contractor should formalize a screening process, and the result should be considered and ratified by SAMI.ФФ б#XXф2МPБUQXP#б2.б#XPє\  PŽVQXP#бССThe contractor should be charged with applying this screening process to endpoints that are suggested by SAMI participants, by the scientific literature (including previous integrated assessments), and over the course of the analysis. б#М^є\  PŽWQМP#бУ У3.5ССCommunicating resultsФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽXQXP#б The integrated assessment has the potential to generate a tremendous amount of information. SAMIРРs investment will be worthwhile only if this information is organized in a digestible and insightЉprovoking form. In this section, we describe several ways to organize and present the results generated by these models to help assess and compare EMOs. These results can be summarized in three sets of tables: an optionsЉeffects table, an optionsЉvalues table, and an optionsЉdecision table. У У3.5.1.ССOptionЉeffects tableФ Ф Each optionЉeffects table applies to a single EMO (Table 3Љ2). There are as many of these tables as there are EMOs considered. Each table summarizes the changes in physical measures predicted to occur as a result of implementation of an EMO in the context of the reference case. Uncertainties in effects are expressed as a range of effects (see Section 2) provided in added columns. The physical measures include ТмммТТТТ444ТС€СС€мм СС€АА Сб#XXф2МPБYQXP#бССССР$Рб#XPє\  PŽZQXP#бССIУ Уntermediate effectsФ Ф ТмммТТТТ444ТС€СС€мм СС€АА Сб#XXф2МPБ[QXP#бССССР$Рб#XPє\  PŽ\QXP#бССMost important У Уfinal effectsФ Ф ТмммТТТТ444ТС€СС€мм СС€АА Сб#XXф2МPБ]QXP#бССССР$Рб#XPє\  PŽ^QXP#бССPhysical expressions of У УsocioeconomicФ Ф У УeffectsФ Ф ТмммТТТТ444ТС€СС€мм СС€АА Сб#XXф2МPБ_QXP#бССССР$Рб#XPє\  PŽ`QXP#бССInformation on the У Уdistributional effectsФ Ф These measures could include, for instance, the average change in visibility in deciviews in Class I areas, changes in employment, changes in morbidity endpoints by region and income group, changes in park visits, and any other physical measures deemed important.ŒХХ а АЄА ааа Table 3Љ2: OptionsЉeffects for EMO 1. а ААЄ ааа й K й в ^ АZZx€€@ @@@@ АZZx€€@ @@@@^ вмˆ  ˆ  мммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ^ Ж џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#Т<є\  PŽaQТP#бй K йУ УMEASURESй й аа й x йммааPrimary areasй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ-Y…н5 х =•эEџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ХХ й x йммааSecondary areasй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ eН m Х џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааSpatial detailsй й аа й x йммв † АZZxРРРРРРР@@@@@@@@ АZZxРРРРРРР@@@@@@@@† вм.        .мммХХааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ^ Ж џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ-…н5 х =•эџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааMeanй й аа й x йммааVarianceй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџuАЭџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџuЭ%} е -…нџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааMeanй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ eН m Х џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааVarianceй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЅ§АU­џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЅ§U­ ] џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааRegion 1й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ•эАEџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ•эEџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа...й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ-…нџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааRegion nй й аа й x йм.  .мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТьььТС€РР СPrimary final objectivesммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ-Y…АџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммммммФ Фммм.    .мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Visibilityммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ-Y…АџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммммммммм.    .мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Forest effectsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ-Y…АџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммммммммм.    .мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ-Y…АџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммммммммм.    .мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ-Y…АџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммммммммм.    .мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ-Y…АџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммммммммм.    .мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Aquatic effectsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ-Y…АџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммммммзSTARTSELECTзммм.    .мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа У УIзENDOFSELECTзммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ-Y…АџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммммммФ Фммм.    .мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Health effectsХХй й й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ-Y…АџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммммммммм.    .мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТьььТС€РР СУ УSocioeconomic measuresммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ-Y…АџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммммммФ Фммм.    .мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Direct costsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ-Y…АџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммммммммм.    .мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Indirect costsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ-Y…АџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммммммммм.              .мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Employment effectsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ-Y…АџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммммммммй - йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм4` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай й ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#XPє\  PŽbQXP#бУ У3.5.2.ССOptionЉvalues tableФ Ф The optionsЉvalues table (Table 3Љ3) is organized and defined similarly to the optionsЉeffect table, except that the physical measures are expressed in monetary terms, to the extent possible, and in any other terms acceptable for weighting. Thus, the change in deciviews appearing on the optionsЉeffects table is now be expressed as the willingness to pay for the change in deciviews. The costs of the EMO, both direct and indirect, are be added to this table.ŒХХ а АЄА ааа Table 3Љ3: OptionsЉvalues for EMO 1. а ААЄ ааа й K й в r АZZxУЌVЙx@@@@@@ АZZxУЌVЙx@@@@@@r вм&Œ  Œ  &мммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџVЎ ^ Ж џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#Т<є\  PŽcQТP#бй K йУ УMeasuresй й аа ХХ й x йммааLow $ valuesй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџыCА›џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџыC›ѓK Ѓ ћSџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааMid $ valuesй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџяGŸїO Ї џWЏџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааHigh $ valuesй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ-…н5 х =•џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааAlternative value measuresй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡п7ч ? џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааDistribution.....Ф Фй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йм&Œ Œ &мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТьььТС€РР СEffectsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџыCАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммм&Œ  Œ  &мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа VisibilityммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџыCАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммм&Œ  Œ  &мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Deciviewsй й Primary Secondaryй x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџыCАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммм&Œ  Œ  &мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТьььТС€РР СForestммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџыCАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммм&Œ  Œ  &мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа etc.ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџыCАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммм&Œ  Œ  &мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа AquaticsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџыCАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммм&Œ  Œ  &мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ObjectivesммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџыCАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммм&Œ  Œ  &мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа etc.ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџыCАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммм&Œ  Œ  &мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа COSTSммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџыCАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммм&Œ  Œ  &мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Directй й Indirect Socialй x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџыCАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммм&Œ  Œ  &мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТьььТС€РР СOTHER SOCIOECONЉOMIC MEASURESммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџыCАџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммй - йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай й б#XPє\  PŽdQXP#бУ У3.5.3.ССOptionsЉdecisions tableФ Ф The optionsЉdecisions table brings together in one summary table the key measures of performance needed to judge the EMOs (Table 3Љ4). Each column of the table contains measures for a particular EMO; each row is a particular measure. The measures can be denominated in physical or monetary units. Key measures are ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТС€АА СР$РССThe У Уaggregate environmental benefitsФ Ф of the EMOs (in monetary and/or other units) Р$РССThe У Уeconomic costs Ф Фof the EMOs Р$РССThe УУУ УnetФФ benefitsФ Ф of the EMOs Р$РССThe У УcostЉeffectivenessФ Ф of the EMOs ТмммТС€АА СР$РССIndications of whether EMOs meet the У Уminimum targets Ф Ф(constraints) required Р$РССIndications of У Уperformance, Ф Фin terms of equity, administrative ease, and political feasibilityŒР$РССAny У Уother measuresФ Ф (physical or monetary) deemed important to the decision. ХХ а АЄА ааа Table 3Љ4. OptionsЉdecisions. а ААЄ ааа й K й в h АZZx6ЅЊЅЊ@@@@@ АZZx6ЅЊЅЊ@@@@@h вм"Š  Š  "мммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ў ^ Ж џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#Т<є\  PŽeQТP#бй K йУ УPERFORMANCE MEASURES AND KEY ADDITIONAL MEASURESй й аа й x йммааEMO #1й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџxаА(€џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџл3А‹уџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааEMO #2ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџс9А‘щџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааEMO #3ммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџс9‘щA ™ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааEMO #4Ф Фй й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџс9А‘щџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай x йм"Š  Š  "мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТьььТС€РР СAGGREGATE BENEFITSммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџxЄаА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммм"Š  Š  "мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа MonetaryХХй й Alternative Unittй x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџxЄаА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммм"Š  Š  "мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТьььТС€РР СAGGREGATE COSTS (direct plus indirect)ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџxЄаА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммм"Š  Š  "мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа NET BENEFITSй й й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџxЄаА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммм"Š  Š  "мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТьььТС€РР СCOSTЉEFFECTIVENESSммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџxЄаА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммм"Š  Š  "мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Measure ofй й Effectivenessй x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџxЄаА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммм"Š  Š  "мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТьььТС€РР С Deciviewsй й Forested acres etc. й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџxЄаА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммм"Š  Š  "мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТьььТС€РР СCONSTRAINTS MET? (Y/N)ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџxЄаА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммм"Š  Š  "мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Constraint #1й й Constraint #2й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџxЄаА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммм"Š  Š  "мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТьььТС€РР СEQUITY й й й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџxЄаА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммм"Š  Š  "мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТьььТС€РР С Descriptor #1й й Descriptor #2 й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџxЄаА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммм"Š  Š  "мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТьььТС€РР СADMINISTRATIVE EASEммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџxЄаА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммм"Š  Š  "мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Descriptor #1й й Descriptor #2 й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџxЄаА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммн"Š  Š  "нммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТьььТС€РР СPOLITICAL FEASIBILITYммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџxЄаА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммм"Š    Š    "мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџV‚Ўк ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Descriptor #1й й Descriptor #2й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџxЄаА` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммммммй - йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаай й аOаааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУУУ У4.ССModules of an Integrated Assessment FrameworkФ Ф ФФ ааб#XPє\  PŽfQXP#б Figure 2Љ1, and the figure on the front cover, show the proposed IAF in the form of an influence diagram. The rectangle, titled УУEmissions Management OptionsФФ, denotes the key decision variable, the selection of which EMOs to recommend. The rounded nodes with bold outlines denote the key modules, which are prime candidates for the development of explicit models for incorporation within the overall integrated assessment model. In the rest of this chapter, we will discuss each of these modules in turn, to assess the current state of science and modeling, and the options for developing a model. We have drawn on material from other SAMI contractors where available, for emissions inventory and atmospheric modeling. For environmental effects, their results are mostly not yet available, so we have relied on other sources. б#М^є\  PŽgQМP#бУ У4.1 ССDefining model aggregationФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽhQXP#б A critical task in the design of an IA is to choose the level of detail for modeling each component, balancing the need for accuracy against the limits on data and computational resources. Our first task is to outline the dimensions of aggregation and then to define levels of complexity to be used in discussing the specific modules that follow. У У4.1.1. ССDimensions of aggregation or detailФ Ф In the design of each module, we must make choices about each of the following: ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` Œ И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТТТ` ` ` ТТŒ Œ Œ ТС€` ` СС€СС€мм СС€АА СУ УССSpecies and pathways: Ф ФFor each component there may be several chemical or biological species of concern, and several pathways for environmental damage, or socioЉeconomic effects. Since we probably cannot model all of them, we must select just the most important. У УSpatial scale: Ф ФThe level of resolution can be by state, by grid square (e.g. 20 kilometer), by county, or by selected sites, such as point sources of emissions, or sensitive lakes or forest areas. У УSpatial scope: Ф ФThe scope of modeling, whether limited to around sensitive areas, to the entire eightЉstate SAMI region, or to the entire US. Since pollutants are no respecters of state boundaries, adequate forecasting of future pollutant concentrations and depositions requires modeling of emissions and transport from much or all of North America. У УTemporal scale: Ф Ф The level of time resolution can be by decade, year, season, month, or day. Some effects, such as visibility have substantial diurnal variation. Others, such as forest damage may be highly episodic in nature, requiring some shortЉscale modeling. For others, seasonal or annual time scales may be adequate. У УTemporal scope: Ф ФWe must also choose the time horizon Р"Р the year of completion.Œ™У У4.1.2. ССFour levels of detail for each moduleФ Ф For each module,. we must decide on the appropriate level of detail for modeling. The first level is purely qualitative consideration, based. It is convenient to divide the quantitative models into three levels of complexity. We define these levels as follows: ТмммТТТТ` ` ` ТТŒ Œ Œ ТС€` ` СС€СС€мм СС€АА СУ УССQualitative: Ф ФССDevelop a qualitative analysis of this issue, to determine the relative qualitative effects of EMOs, based on a review of the best available data and science, but without any explicit quantitative analysis. У УLevel 1: Ф ФССDevelop a simple quantitative analysis of this issue, based on existing, widely available data, which could fit on the proverbial "back of the envelope" or, at most, a small spreadsheet. У УLevel 2: Ф ФССDevelop a mediumЉlevel quantitative model ЉЉ for example, aggregated at the state level (or comparable spatial detail at five to ten sites or regions), in some cases calibrated against limited siteЉspecific data. У УLevel 3:Ф Ф ССDevelop a detailed quantitative model, with spatial disaggregation substantially greater than the medium level, such as by county or smaller spatial detail, calibrated against extensive siteЉspecific data. The exact definition of these levels will vary for each module, as described in each section below. See Table 4Љ1 for example definitions. In principle, the greater the level of detail, the more precise and reliable will be the assessment. However, models at greater level details will, of course, require more effort and resources to create. In some cases, such as the terrestrial effects, the scientific understanding also limits the practical level of detail. Due to limits in SAMI's resources and in current scientific understanding and available models, it will certainly not be possible to treat all components at the most detailed level. The decision about the appropriate level of detail for each module depends on the total resources available to SAMI, and its priorities. In this chapter, we try to summarize these options, where applicable, for the key modules. In the final chapter, we discuss how SAMI can make a balanced decision about these levels as a function of the resources available. У У4.1.3.ССTime horizon for analysisФ Ф ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССWe recommend a 25 year horizon (to the year 2020) for forecasting and evaluation of primary effects, with a 50 year horizon (to the year 2045) for assessment of effects with long time constants or risk of irreversible effects, such as longterm ecosystem damage or species extinction.ФФ Any analysis must select some time horizon Р"Р some point in the future Р"Р at which to cut off further analysis. A more distant time horizon lets us consider consequences further into the future, at the cost of additional modeling effort, and, generally, at the cost of reduced credibility, because uncertainty about forecasts generally increases with time. For the issues of importance to SAMI, a time horizon of between 25 and 50 years is desirable. The lifetime of power plants, and of pollutant cleanup technology such as sulfur scrubbers is of the order of 40 years or more. The capital cost of such equipment is amortized over this lifetime. Acidication effects on aquatic and terrestrial systems may have characteristic time constants of decades, in some cases. On the other hand, changes in technology, including power generation and transmission, pollutant control, manufacturing, and transportation, are so rapid that it is extremely difficult to forecast what will be their effects on the environment more than 20 years hence. Forecasting models generally assume quantitative extrapolation of existing trends, and ignore major qualitative changes. Such technologies as new energy technologies, green design for reduced resource usage, electric cars, superconducting transmission, hydrogen as a medium for energy storage and transmission are all real possibilities on that time scale. Social changes may further change technology adoption and be affected by it Р"Р such as increased telecommuting, changes in recreation and tourism, and even changes in cultural values Р"Р and are still harder to predict. Accordingly, forecasts beyond 25 years are of very limited reliability. For effects whose consequences are currently unclear, if significant negative effects become clearly apparent in the future, it will often be possible to take corrective action before major damage and longterm negative consequences are incurred. Our key longterm concern should be with environmental effects that can be prevented now, but which may become irreversible in the future. Species extinction is the most salient of these effects. There is some evidence that lake acidification in some areas, if not permanent, may take a long time to reverse. Primary reason for concern about global warming also arises from fears of nonlinearities and irreversibilities in global climatic systems. In such cases, the importance of a long view, and early prevention is much more important. These effects may justify a longer modeling horizon. б#М^є\  PŽiQМP#бУ У4.2ССEmissions inventoryФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽjQXP#б An УУemissions inventory ФФis a detailed accounting of emissions from specific sources or source categories, for specific time periods, and for specific locations. Such an inventory is essential for defining baseline conditions, because it provides estimates of emissions in the base year, and projections of emissions for future years in the absence of new policy interventions. The emissionsЉinventory work in the SAMI process is headed by the Emission Inventory Subcommittee, which issued the following missions statement: а АЄАš аТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА ССССС УУThe Emissions Inventory Subcommittee will support the TOC, the PC and other SAMI subcommittees by assessing and providing information and data on the historic, present, and projected future air emissions within the SAMI region and other geographic areas of interest.ФФ а АšАќ аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` Œ И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа To accomplish this mission, Pechan and Associates was engaged to review and gather existing data on emissions inventories in the eightЉstate SAMI region and the source region (within 100 km of class 1 regions), to assess the data quality, and to recommend ways to fill in data gaps. The contract explicitly excluded providing a baseЉyear inventory and projections consistent with that inventory. The contract has been completed, with the following materials provided to SAMI: ТмммТС€АА СР$РССA review of three existing emissions inventories to serve as a baseЉyear inventory for SAMI ТмммТС€АА С Р$РССIdentification of data gaps and ongoing studies to fill them ТмммТС€АА СР$РССA review of methods to project baseЉyear inventories forward to develop the reference case ТмммТС€АА СР$РССA 1990 emissions inventory by SAMI state, by pollutant, by sector, and by point and mobile sources У У4.2.1.ССEmission inventoriesФ Ф Here, we review the elements of the emissions sections of the report provided to SAMI. We also make recommendations for further work needed, as appropriate: ТмммТС€АА СР$РУУССChoice among inventories.ФФ The analysis of the three inventories is artificial, in the sense that, as the contractor says, Р Рdifferences between these inventories have largely disappeared, primarily as a result of the US EPAРРs [efforts].РР (pg. 3) and because Р Рongoing efforts should provide a means for melding these inventories together to provide a composite inventory.РР ТмммТС€АА СР$РУУССPollutants. ФФ These inventories are extensive, but are missing elemental and organic carbon, biogenics, offЉroad SOб#E,є\  PŽkQEP#бУУ2ФФб#XPє\  PŽlQXP#б , and some other minor variables. ТмммТС€АА СР$РУУССAveraging times.ФФ The times are no shorter than seasonal, except for ozone precursors, which have daily times. ТмммТС€АА СР$РУУССGeographic areas. ФФThese areas include the SAMI region, and the rest of the eastern United States and southern Canada, to the extent covered by the NAPAP and ROM inventories. ТмммТС€АА СР$РУУССGeographic resolution of emissions data. ФФThis measure is by county for most sources and pollutants (except lead and NHУУ3ФФ). ТмммТС€АА СР$РУУССSource categories.ФФ These are comprehensive (point, area, mobile, and natural). ТмммТС€АА СР$РУУССMethods for developing the 1990 estimates. ФФ The contractor notes problems for emissions estimates from nonutility pointЉsource emissions because the latter are based on projections from a 1985 database. The suggestion that an effort be made to update the database as appropriate is reasonable. The contractor has recommended an approach for building the SAMI emissions inventory in the next phase of the project. This approach appears well thought out and doable. У У4.2.2.ССEmissions projectionsФ Ф ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССThe discussion of approaches for projecting emissions is inconclusive as to the best approach given alternative budgets. The RFP for Phase II work should require proposers to be more specific about their recommended approach and to critique the Pechan analysis.ФФ The approaches reviewed for projecting baseЉyear emissions include the following: а АќАš аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` Œ И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА Сб#XXф2МPБmQXP#бССР$Рб#XPє\  PŽnQXP#бУУССApplying growth factors to baseЉyear emissions estimates.ФФ With this approach, the baseЉyear emissions are tied to socioeconomic variables, such as population, personal income, employment, or earnings. Projections of these variables are used to scale emissions into the future. Economic projections from the BEA are made using national economic models, with the results disaggregated by region in a second step. EPAРРs EЉGAS model also is used; it is based on the Wharton model, or BLS forecasts and the REMI model for regional forecasting of economic activity. These models feed into sectorЉspecific models for predicting growth factors. The time horizon for the projections is tied to the time horizons available from the macroeconomic and demographic projections. The BEA and EЉGAS models are compared by the contractor, with EЉGAS favored. ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА Сб#XXф2МPБoQXP#бССР$Рб#XPє\  PŽpQXP#бУУССUsing emissionЉprojection models. ФФ ERCAM can project emissions based on the BEA growth factors, but could be converted to using EЉGAS. The MPS application is used by state agencies to help in developing SIP projections and approaches to attainment. Growth factors from EЉGAS are used by MPS. Other models are judged inferior. ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА Сб#XXф2МPБqQXP#бССР$Рб#XPє\  PŽrQXP#бУУССUsing available emissions projections.ФФ EPAРРs Trends Report contains projections developed by Pechan and Associates. а АšАќ аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` Œ И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа The emissions inventory needs to be tied directly to the airЉquality modeling, which itself needs to be tied to the effects modeling. The original work statement did not emphasize sufficiently the need for feedback from the airЉquality modeling and effects groups to the emissionsЉinventory contractor. ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССAll other contractors, particularly the airЉmodeling group, should carefully review for compatibility the work of the emissionsЉinventory contractor .ФФ The emissions inventory also needs to be closely matched to the cost module. The choice of Pechan and Associates as the Phase I contractor was appropriate, in this regard, as that firm has a dominant position in both areas, with its national emissionsЉinventory and cost models closely linked. У У4.2.3.ССLevels of complexityФ Ф Level 1 could be the stateЉbyЉstate inventories presented in the contractorЉreport appendix, with projections taken from EPAРРs УУEmissions Trends ReportФФ. Additional states would need to be added beyond the SAMI states. Level 2 could use EЉGAS to make projections of emissions. Level 3 could augment the information and models with SAMI regionЉspecific data. Œ™б#М^є\  PŽsQМP#бУ У4.3ССDirect costs of emissions reductionsФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽtQXP#б When a polluting industrial plant or an individual is required to reduce its emissions, these activities will come at a cost, in the economistРРs sense that there is no free lunch; that is, if we wish to get something, we must give up something else. In the case of pollution reductions, abatement equipment may need to be purchased and operated, land may need to be set aside for pollutionЉcontrol activities, labor may need to be allocated to abatement activities, or production processes may need to be changed, to name a few typical pollutionЉreduction responses. These responses have a cost to the firm or to the individual, a УУdirect cost,ФФ which can be measured conveniently in terms of a money metric (rather than in terms of resources Р"Р such as land, labor, and capital Р"Р given up). These responses may also have a cost to other sectors, called УУindirect costs,ФФ and to society in general, calledУУ social costs, ФФdiscussed below. In this section, we address only direct costs. For the SAMI project, two categories of information from the cost module are needed: ТмммТС€АА СР$РССEstimates of the direct costs and emissions reductions associated with EMOs are needed to help discriminate among these options. ТмммТС€АА СР$РССEstimates of the emissionsЉreduction activities in place over the study period in the absence of SAMI initiatives are needed to help define the reference case, and to serve as a starting point for predicting the additional pollutionЉreduction activities to be induced by SAMI initiatives. The same approaches to modeling the costs of EMOs are used to project activities under the reference case. У У4.3.1.ССThe costs of EMOsФ Ф Each EMO may affect emissionЉreduction activities covering many different types of existing and new sources. These include a variety of industries (such as power plants and paper mills), mobile sources, and areawide sources (such as residential heating). Some EMOs may prescribe particular emissionЉreduction activities for particular sources, whereas other EMOs may provide sources with the incentives and the flexibility to choose an emissionsЉreduction approach. A national example of such an approach is EPAРРs SOб#E,є\  PŽuQEP#бУУ2ФФб#XPє\  PŽvQXP#б Љallowance trading program. Particularly in the latter case, the cost module must provide estimates of direct costs (along with the associated emissions reductions) for a variety of emissionЉreduction activities at each source, and must contain a reasonable approach for selecting the appropriate activities. With this information, the responses of the source to the policy, as well as the policyРРs costs and effectiveness, can be gauged. There are two types of abatement activities. The first, УУend of stack, ФФseeks to reduce emissions once they are produced. Scrubbers to remove SOб#E,є\  PŽwQEP#бУУ2ФФб#XPє\  PŽxQXP#б emissions from power plants, and catalytic converters to reduce VOCs and NOx from auto exhausts, are two examples. Estimation of these costs is not a new or particularly speculative task. AbatementЉequipment technologies are fairly well developed, and information on their costs and effectiveness is readily available, although it can become out of date quickly. The second type of abatement activity involves УУchanging production processes or products.ФФ Recycling materials in the making of paper, changing the chemicals and other features used to make a particular type of paper, or changing the type of paper produced are all examples. The estimation of the cost of such activities is much more difficult. For instance, the benefits of such changes generally are not unique to, say, air emissions, but may include a host of other environmental benefits and other factors, making it difficult to allocate costs to any one factor. Few environmentalЉcost databases deal with this type of activity, except for changes in the quality of fuel inputs (e.g., substituting lowЉsulfur for highЉsulfur coal in producing electricity). Estimation of such costs may be even more difficult when we consider pollution by individuals. Consider the production process of driving a car, an activity that produces the output of enjoying the benefit of reaching a destination. What are the costs to the individual of a policy Р"Р say, a congestion toll Р"Р that increases the costs of driving? If the individual still chooses to drive as before, the cost is the toll, which is offset somewhat by the faster traveling time. But the costs to the drivers who take another route to work, or leave home later when there is no toll, or take the bus, also are important and are difficult to estimate. A final issue concerns projecting costs into the future. The cost of a given piece of abatement equipment, for instance, may change in the future because of changing market conditions (which themselves may be affected by government regulations, including the SAMI process). Advances in technology may also lead to changes in costs and costЉeffectiveness. To gauge the response of polluters to SAMI initiatives, we must build into the cost module changes in the cost and performance features of key emissionsЉreducing activities. У У4.3.2.ССThe costЉestimation model reviewФ Ф As defined in the workplan, the contractor is to perform a detailed literature review of costЉestimation models for their suitability to the SAMI project. The TOC has responsibility for overseeing the work, which was contracted to E.H. Pechan and Associates. They surveyed three largeЉscale cost models: (1) a set of multisectoral, multipollutant models constructed for NAPAP; (2) PechanРРs own multisectoral, multipollutant spreadsheet model (ERCAM); and their AIRCOST/PC optimization model for SOб#E,є\  PŽyQEP#бУУ2ФФб#XPє\  PŽzQXP#б abatement in the electricЉutility sector. In addition, they reviewed procedures developed by EPAРРs OAQPS for constructing cost and performance estimates for new abatement technologies. The contractor concludes that two of their products ЉЉ ERCAM and AIRCOST/PC ЉЉ are Р Рthe most adaptable modelsРР with Р Рthe most current control informationРР for SAMIРРs purposes.Œ The contractor also includes costs and performance data for many sectors and for VOCs, NOx, PM, CO, and ammonia. This information is taken from a variety of sources, including the ERCAM model, other Pechan and Associates reports, and EPA reports. Our principle concerns with this review are its lack of explicit criteria for judging the models and the narrow scope of products reviewed (the focus is Pechan and Associate products). ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССThe Phase II contractor should define an explicit set of criteria and offer a more structured judgment on the models.ФФ In spite of these issues, the dominance of Pechan and Associates in the costЉestimation and emissionsЉinventory fields, the importance of a clean linkage between the emissionsЉinventory and cost modules, and the existence of such a linkage between Pechan and Associates products makes these models promising candidates for the Phase II cost analysis. ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССIn the event that Pechan and Associates is awarded the Phase II contract, some peer review is needed of the Pechan models and other substitute models. The main role of such review would be to address possible future criticisms about the narrow focus of the Phase I review and to indicate to the contractor where improvements in the models are required.ФФ Note that the contractor discusses several significant problems with its own products Р"Р problems that we believe are solvable. The principle problem with the ERCAM model is that the latter does not contain approaches for manipulating the cost information, for instance, to find the combination of control activities across various industrial sectors that minimizes the aggregate cost of a given reduction in emissions. However, an approach to do these and other manipulations can be fashioned by the IA contractor (see Chapter 6 for more on this issue). ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССThe Phase II cost contractor should be asked to specify how leastЉcost approaches to emissions reductions will be estimated, using the ERCAM model results as input.ФФ Another noted problem is that NOx emissionЉ reduction activities from electric utilities are not included in the AIRCOST/PC utility model, and SOб#E,є\  PŽ{QEP#бУУ2ФФб#XPє\  PŽ|QXP#б control strategies are not adequately addressed for nonutility sectors. ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССGiven the importance of NOx emissionsЉcontrol strategies, the Phase II contractor should be required to add NOx control technologies to the AIRCOST/PC model, and to add SOб#E,є\  PŽ}QEP#бУУ2ФФб#XPє\  PŽ~QXP#б control strategies to ERCAM for sectors with major contributions to the SAMI emissions inventory. ФФ Another problem is that there is too much reliance on cost estimates embodied in the large cost models, particularly for mobile sources. ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССFor major cost categories, the contractor should survey the more specialized literature for more accurate cost estimatesФФ ŒУ У4.3.3.ССLevels of complexityФ Ф The modeling approaches reviewed by Pechan and Associates may be classified as level 2 in complexity. Level 1 would be a backЉofЉtheЉenvelope analysis that used experience with certain policies in other areas, as documented by analyses, to come up with ballpark estimates of costs and effectiveness of particular classes of EMOs, but that lack spatial and sectoral detail. The level 2 analysis has reasonable sectoral detail, but no spatial detail for the abatement strategies or cost factors. A level 3 analysis would involve obtaining plantЉ or firmЉspecific emission reduction options within the SAMI domain. У У4.3.4.ССAbsolute versus relative costsФ Ф SAMI emphasizes heavily that the contractor estimates the costs of meeting current regulations, under, for instance, the CAAA of 1990. We deem such estimates irrelevant. We need an estimate of the emissions reductions (net emissions) as a result of current regulations, and an idea of what abatement measures are already being taken to meet current regulations, so the new control measures from SAMI will be incremental to this control baseline. б#М^є\  PŽQМP#бУ У4.4ССAtmosphericЉtransport and chemistry modelsФ Ф ТмммТС€АА Сб#XPє\  PŽ€QXP#бУУР$РССInsights gained from examining simple, lowЉquality, information can be used to guide the selection of scope and scale.ФФ Р$РССSAMI should use the results of other ongoing efforts to study air quality in the region. AtmosphericЉtransport and chemistry models link the changes in emissions from pollution sources resulting from the EMOs to the changes in effects on aquatic and terrestrial receptors. A wide variety of models exists, and is available to SAMI, but the models have characteristics that will make a significant difference to SAMI in terms of accuracy and resource requirements. Since SAMI is interested in understanding the relationship between emissions of several pollutants and effects of several types, different models probably will be useful for different specific purposes. The modeling project has been organized by the Modeling Subcommittee of the Technical Oversight Committee. The Subcommittee is providing guidance and support to help establish an acceptable modeling protocol. EARTH TECH and Radian have performed a review for SAMI of the existing models, and have provided two reports: Р РSAMI ЉР"Р Evaluation of Existing Information and Specifying Models,РР and Р РCase Studies of Expenses Involved in Regional Modeling.РР The reports review models based on field observations of pollution levels, meteorology models that estimate winds and weather, trajectory models that predict the fate of emissions from a source as the latter are dispersed, and comprehensive models for the transport and transformation of pollutants throughout a region. SAMI is interested in understanding the potential consequences of changes in emissions of SOx, NOx, and volatile organic carbon compounds that generate ozone and form particulate matter. The emissions that might lead to effects in the SAMI region are generated by a variety of sources, in diverse forms, and across widely distributed locations. The aquatic and terrestrial resources, and the regions in which visibility reductions are of concern, are also widely distributed and diverse in nature. For example, the УУspatial scale ФФof an effect might be local (0 to 20 km), intermediate (20 to 200 km), or regional (200 to 2000 km), to use a convention developed by NAPAP. The УУtemporal scaleФФ of an effect might be short term (such as might result from an episode of high exposure lasting a few days). The УУspatial scopeФФ of an effect might be one mountain top or valley, for an extremely valuable, perhaps unique, resource, or it might be the entire eightЉstate SAMI region. The УУtemporal scope ФФwould be the period of time over which the consequences would be expected to occur, or over which SAMI would like to make estimates. This scope is often called the УУtime horizon. ФФWhen these dimensions have been set, we can begin to identify the appropriate tools to use to evaluate the consequences of the EMOs. In the review of existing models, EARTH TECH offered several recommendations to SAMI in making a final selection of assessment tools: ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССThe full scope of SAMIРРs assessment questions should be specified to characterize the EMOs, and to identify and select pollutants, averaging times, episodes, and regional scale.ФФ Р$РССSAMI should monitor closely the progress of the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission study. Research and regulatory programs, such as the GCVTC study, taking place inside and outside of the SAMI region can contribute to meeting SAMIРРs needs for models and data, and SAMI can avoid some duplication of effort. Р$РССUse caution when using models developed and adjusted on the basis of historical observations, as the substantial emissions changes resulting from the 1990 CAAA could also change the relationships that the models seek to predict. In this section, we review the findings of the EARTH TECH reports, and offer additional suggestions for SAMI to consider in making its selection of an approach to modeling the relationship between EMOs and effects. У У4.4.1.ССMeteorologyФ Ф ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССSAMI should select a meteorology model to match its approach to modeling air quality.ФФ AirЉquality simulations will require meteorological inputs, and, in some cases, will require a preprocessor to put them in a form that will be useful to the airЉquality models. Three types of models were identified and evaluated by Earth Tech: (1) simple interpolation schemes, (2) mass consistent windЉfield models, and (3) dynamic meteorological models. The simple schemes, such as used in MESOPAC II, use inverse distanceЉsquared interpolations to fill in winds on a grid, and take other parameters, such as precipitation from the nearest observing station. In a region such as SAMIРРs, evaluations have shown that such approaches perform poorly. The mass consistent windЉfield models correct some of the errors produced by the simple interpolation models by ensuring that mass is conserved, and by representing complex terrain. The meteorology model selection depends in part on the selection of the model to represent atmospheric transport and chemistry. In some cases, the airЉquality model is bundled with its own meteorology model, but it may also be possible to make a custom selection to meet specific needs, such as might be imposed by the complex terrain of the mountains. У У4.1.1.ССProportional Analysis and ObservationФ Ф ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССSAMI should use simple proportional analysis and statistical models of field data as a level 1 approach to modeling transport and transformation of air pollution in the SAMI region. This approach could be a reasonable step to guide SAMIРРs choices about the scope and scale of higherЉlevel modeling efforts.ФФСС To ensure the least investment of resources, and to obtain quick, lowЉquality information, SAMI could examine the emission inventories, and could estimate proportional contributions to emissions from the various sources to infer a direct relationship between emission reductions and effects. Such an estimate would not be based on theory or observation, beyond the notion that Р Рwhat goes up, must come down," but could be a starting point for identifying the scope and scale dimensions that will be necessary for further selection of models. Similarly, statistically based techniques could be employed to estimate the relationship between emissions and the observed concentrations of specific pollutants in the region. When the relationships are directly proportional, this approach could yield reasonable estimates. Unfortunately, the best scientific information available suggests that the relationship between emissions and pollutant concentrations is not directly proportional, due to complex, nonlinear chemical reactions in the atmosphere. Because this statistical approach is not supported by current theories about the mechanisms of the chemical reactions, it has severely limited validity for use in predicting the consequences of the EMOs. This problem is much more marked for ozone concentration than for acid deposition. Other serious problems with the use of observationЉbased models are that the data records are often incomplete, are highly variable, and yield implausible relationships. Earth Tech recommends against using such models in the SAMI assessment, yet acknowledges that they may have a minor role in supporting theory development, and in making preliminary source attributions. У У4.1.2.ССTrajectory ModelsФ Ф ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССTransfer matrices based on trajectory models such as ASTRAP, and use of the ozone chemistry model EKMA, are recommended for application at level 2.ФФ Earth Tech reviewed seven models of this type for SAMI, and noted that many of them have not had recent widespread use, because they are being superceded by the more comprehensive models. In most cases, the models use simple massЉconservation equations, joining models of dispersion of pollution in the atmosphere with models of the chemical reactions, and models of the removal of pollution from the air by precipitation and other processes. This type of model tends to be limited in its ability to represent pollution near to the source, and also does a poor job of representing the complexity of the atmospheric chemical reactions. Also, none of the trajectory models would be adequate for an evaluation of ozone by SAMI. Another older model, EKMA, would offer a similar level of quality for investigations of ozone levels. These models could be used by SAMI to develop transfer matrices, relating emissions to concentrations at specific locations in the SAMI region. The transfer matrices would then be used to examine how changes in emissions resulting from the implementation of a given EMO might change the concentration of various air pollutants at a receptor site. У У4.1.3.ССComprehensive modelsФ Ф ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССThe greatest accuracy in prediction can be obtained at the highest price. SAMI should invest in the development of comprehensive models only at level 3 primarily for narrow conditions, such as shortЉterm episodes.ФФ УУР$РССSAMI could benefit greatly from the work of others in this area, possibly by making small investments in ongoing modeling efforts for other purposes, to obtain additional results specific to SAMIРРs purpose. Р$РССReducedЉform versions of the comprehensive models would offer less accuracy, but a more affordable approach to the representation of the more complex atmospheric transport and chemical processes that the comprehensive models provide.ФФ Earth Tech reviewed 11 comprehensive models, of which three are reducedЉform representations of fully comprehensive models, and are still under development. Models such as RADM, ADOM, and SAQM can be used to represent acid deposition and ozone. б#М^є\  PށQМP#бУ У4.5ССPrimary environmentalЉeffects modelsФ ФŒ™б#XPє\  PŽ‚QXP#бУ У4.5.1.ССVisibilityФ Ф ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССSAMI must decide on receptor sites: those sites where visibility should be evaluated in the assessment.ФФ Р$РССSAMI must choose how the results of the visibility analysis would be most usefully reported, as distances or other quantitative units, or using visual images, such as photographs. The visibility module will be designed to estimate changes in visibility based on changes in ambient concentrations of pollutants and meteorological factors. Effects can be expressed in terms of УУvisible rangeФФ, a measure of the greatest distance at which it is possible to see and identify a dark object during the day and a moderately intense, unfocused light source at night; or of УУdeciviewsФФ, a logarithmic measure of visibility. The module will focus on scattering and adsorption of light, resulting in haze, rather than on point sources of visibility degradation, such as smokestacks, that create plume blight. A valuation module could then use data on changes in visible range or deciviews to calculate economic losses. The most important air pollutants affecting visibility in the SAMI region are УУsulfatesФФ. Depending on species and module construction, the concentrations of this and other pollutants may be input as micrograms/m3, or parts per million. TwentyЉfourР!Рhour, hourly concentration data would provide the highest level of resolution in results, but could be averaged by week, by month, or by season to reduce module complexity at a loss of resolution. Receptor locations should be targeted according to (1) knowledge of class 1 sites with current visibility problems, (2) sites where visibility is a key component of the economy (i.e., scenic destinations), and (3) availability of meteorological data for a site. Meteorological data must include hourly relative humidity (%) information. Humidity data must be on an hourly basis because of their critical contribution to visibility degradation, and because of their diurnal variability. У У4.5.1.1.ССScienceФ Ф A visibility module will be constructed based on empirical and theoretical knowledge of Raleigh and Mie Scattering and related optical phenomena. Extinction coefficients describing the contribution of each pollutant to visibility degradation are calculated using polynomials fit to empirical pollutant and concentration data. У У4.5.1.2.ССTime horizon of modelФ Ф Visibility effects are not cumulative, so the module does not require a timeЉseries component. У У4.5.1.3.ССModel complexityФ Ф Limited data from the airЉquality module may constrain the visibility module to a subset of the visibilityЉaffecting pollutants. In terms of total contributions to visibility degradation, Trijonis (1982) found that, in California, light absorption by NOб#єCє\  PŽƒQєP#бУУ2ФФб#XPє\  PŽ„QXP#б contributed 7 to 11% of total extinction throughout the state. Sulfate accounted for 40 to 70% of total extinction in Los Angeles and San Diego, and for 15 to 35% in the remainder of California. Nitrates apparently contributed 10 to 40% of total extinction in northern California, but the nitrate contribution to visual haze is unlikely to be this great in the SAMI region. The Denver winter haze study (Groblicki et al., 1981) suggested that approximately 40% of the visibility degradation was due to carbon species, with nitrous and sulfurous species contributing about 20% apiece. The visibility contractor has noted that Sisler et al. (1993) estimates that twoЉthirds of visibility reduction in the Appalachians is the result of highly hygroscopic sulfate aerosols. Although, this estimate remains controversial, especially for the southern Appalachians. ХХ ааа Аќ аааУ УFigure 4Љ2: Ф Фб#XCE 9PX…QXP#бInfluence diagram for visibility model а АЄ аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` Œ И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ХХ ааа АЄАќ аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` Œ И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#XPє\  PކQXP#бУ У4.5.1.5.ССModeling levels for visibilityФ Ф A level 1 model might address only one receptor site, perhaps Shenandoah, only S,N inputs (as seasonal averages), modeled relative humidity, and use standard, textbook extinction coefficients A level 2 should address three to five receptor sites, use daily inputs including S, N, PM, TSP; actual daily average (or daily maximum) relative humidity data, and calibrate extinction coefficients to each receptor site's ambient concentration, humidity, and visibility data A level 3 model might address many receptor sites, both within and beyond Class I areas, use hourly Inputs including S,N,PM, TSP, and actual hourly humidity data; and calibrate extinction coefficients with data from each receptor site's ambient concentration, humidity, visibility data, species morphology. particle size distributions. It should take account of Incorporation of non dVЉrelated factors that affect perceptions visibility: Angle of sun, elevation, distances of landmarks, etc. У У4.5.2 ССAquatic EffectsФ Ф ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССRegional effects will need to be extrapolated from estimates of local effects, with careful attention to the need to represent the diversity of watershed responsesФФŒР$РССSome effects will be difficult to quantify, but could be represented as indices such as the stress index developed by NAPAP. SAMI has contracted with researchers at the Oregon State University and the University of Virginia to provide a review of approaches to representing aquatic effects in the assessment of EMOs. Their assessment of methodologies is due to SAMI in November 1995, and so has not been completed at this time. The investigators have contributed a description of aquatic processes for use in this design phase of the integrated assessment, and their contribution is included here. Watershed processes are the major factor controlling streamwater chemical response to acidic deposition. In fact, on a regional scale, there is no relationship between deposition and streamwater chemistry (Baker et al., 1990a). Deposition is a necessary driver to the system, but processes in the watershed are the major controls on streamwater chemistry. This points out the need for some kind of regionalization scheme in the SAMI assessment of aquatic effects. Two watersheds a mile apart can have vastly different responses to acidic deposition; one can be acidic and the other be so well buffered that itРРs not a problem. Thus, the effects of acidic deposition need to be related to itРРs effect on the population of streams in the study region (be it the Southern Appalachians or the Class I areas). Understanding the effects on any one stream will tell very litle about the effects across the region. The deposition of air pollution to aquatic receptors is usually expressed in amount per surface area, usually kg/ha or meq/m2. Direct measurements are useually only available from a small number of sites (5Љ20) in a region and spatially exrapolated to specific study areas. Wet deposition is known to a much greater extent than dry deposition. Depending on need, resolution can vary from daily to annual. An extremely complex and interrelated set of watershed processes control streamwater chemical response to acidic deposition. A large number of models have been proposed and developed to relect these processes. They vary in complexity from simple steadyЉstate models based on a single empirical constant (FЉfactor) to complex dynamic models with short time steps and massive data input requirements. For the NAPAP assessment, it was shown that dynamic models were necessary (Thornton et al., 1990). The output of these models are streamwater chemistry at varying levels of resolution (hourly to annual average). Some models output all necessary constitutents. Others only look at sulfuate and pH. Streamwater concentrations are usually expressed in РРeq/L (РРg/L for aluminum), pH is the Љlog of the molar hydrogen ion concentration. The level of relolution will depend on the assessment needs. Often the worstЉcase episodic (storm event) conditions are important controls on biotic effects (Wigington et al., 1990; Baker et al., 1990b). Spring baseflow chemistry reflects worstЉcase chronic conditions. The three major variables controlling the effects of acidic deposition to biota are pH, calcium and inorganic monomeric aluminum (Baker et al., 1990b). Biotic effects can be expressed in anumber of ways; % mortality, changes in species richness or diversity, or changes in species assemblages. There is not a real good way to model (quantify) these effects at the present time. Effects are very species dependent and much of the work is based on laboratory assays. The most quantiative model that came out of NAPAP was an acid stress index that reflects % fish mortality based on pH, calcium and aluminum for three classes of fish; sensitive, intermediate, and tolerant. Figure 4.3 illustrates the relationships to be modelled when assessing effects from air pollution on aquatic resources. ХХа Аќ аааУ УFigure 4.3 Influence Diagram Illustrating the Relationships in the Aquatics ModuleФ Ф а АЄ аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` Œ И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ХХ а АЄАќ аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` Œ И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ У4.5.3.ССTerrestrial effectsФ Ф ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССTerrestrialЉeffects models should have a lower priority for development, because the level of effects appears likely to be low, and because they are not likely to be reduced easily by the proposed EMOs.ФФ Р$РССIf sufficient funding is available to develop or adapt terrestrialЉeffects models, SAMI should give priority to modeling the effects of ozone on crops, including timber resources. Р$РССFor Phase II at moderate funding levels, SAMI should consider a single contractor to model effects on vegetation, rather than separate contractors for acidЉdeposition effects and ozone effects, as in Phase I. Р$РССGiven higher levels of funding, SAMI should support models of effects at different levels of biological organization, such as the forest as habitat for wildlife, which might justify an additional terrestrialЉeffects contractor. SAMI has ongoing Phase I contracts to identify current terrestrialЉeffects models for ozone and acid deposition, but these models are in their early stages. The technical report on acidЉdeposition terrestrial effects is expected near the end of October 1995, and the ozone report is expected in early January 1996. The discussion here is based primarily on our own knowledge and literature review. Air pollution interacts with the terrestrial ecosystem through a series of complex processes involving direct contact with plant and animal tissue, and indirect contact by way of the soils. In the SAMI region, the primary effect of concern is the decline of the forest resources, particularly of the highЉelevation trees. Damage has been documented in past forest surveys in the Smokies, the National Forests, and the Black Mountains of the Southern Appalachians. A variety of confounding factors, such as drought and introduced pests, has made it difficult for forest researchers to quantify the relationship between airЉpollution levels and forest decline. Figure 4Љ1 is an influence diagram depicting several of the complex interactions that lead to forest damage. ХХ а АќА8 аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` Œ И hРpШ xа (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ УFigure 4Љ1: Ф Ф Influence diagram depicting relationship of air pollution to terrestrial effects. а А8Аќ аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` Œ И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ХХ Acid deposition can affect trees not only through contact with the leaves, but also through interaction with processes taking place in the soil. Acid deposition can increase the rate at which nutrients are leached from foliage. It can also acidify the soil, thereby mobilizing metals such as aluminum, which can have a toxic effect on plants, and leaching soil nutrients. Acid deposition to soil can inhibit the uptake of nutrients and water by plants, and inhibit the growth of fine roots and the beneficial fungi that grow in association with roots (mycorrhizae). Sulfur dioxide and ozone at high concentrations can also cause direct damage to foliage. Damage to foliage interferes with metabolic processes, disrupting plant photosynthesis and respiration, and eventually affecting the distribution of nutrients in a plant. When combined with other threats Р"Р such as extreme climatic events, pathogens, or insects Р"Р acid deposition and ozone can contribute to the weakening of plants, which may then experience decline in growth, or even death. Significant levels of forest mortality could also alter the function of the forest ecosystem. Increased mortality of forests due directly to acid deposition has not been documented for the southern Appalachians. NAPAP reviewed and evaluated nine models of terrestrial effects for suitability in their planned integrated assessment (NAPAP 1989). The models were BRANCH/FOLIAGE3 (BF3), Simple Whole Tree (SWT), Response of Plants to Interacting Stress (ROPIS), MAESTRO, AIRPTAEDA, NuCM.BETA, AIRSILVA, and NCLAN. The last is a model of crop response to ozone. BF3 and SWT model pinaceae, loblolly pine, and red spruce; MAESTRO models loblolly pine canopies; and AIRPTAEDA models loblolly pine stands. ROPIS models the response of plants to integrated stress; two versions were examined. NuCM.BETA is a nutrientЉcycling model, and AIRSILVA models individual tree lifecycle in a mixedЉspecies environment. The NAPAP review of terrestrialЉeffects models makes four points about the status of forestry modeling: ТмммТС€АА С1.ССNo one model will cover all relevant levels of biological organization. Thus, a collection of models will be needed, and the results across different models will need to be interpreted qualitatively. 2.ССModels derived for other purposes may provide useful insights into the ecosystem processes affected by air pollution, and may provide a structured reminder of the factors involved. 3.ССThe uncertainty in the science of fundamental physiological and ecological mechanisms is as great as is the uncertainty in the science of airЉpollution effects. 4.ССResearch has caused these models to be refined continuously. Thus, any given version of a model is not likely to have been applied and evaluated extensively. Each of the models reviewed by NAPAP in 1989 could be used to assess ozone effects, at different levels of organization. Several of the models reviewed could also be used to assess acidЉdeposition effects, and effects on vegetation other than trees, such as crops. For modeling purposes, the ozoneЉeffects project may need to examine shortЉterm episodes of peak exposures, or seasonal exposures, whereas the acidЉdeposition project will be more concerned with longerЉterm averages of exposures, such as annual averages. Data on forest characteristics (e.g., oil, elevation, and moisture) will be required. It is possible that findings could be extrapolated by landscape types within the region. б#М^є\  PއQМP#бУ У4.6ССSecondaryЉenvironmentalЉeffects modelsФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽˆQXP#б SAMI has identified certain aquatic, terrestrial, and visibility effects as being of primary concern. It has, accordingly, funded work in each of these areas to survey the literature and to point the way for module development in Phase II. As SAMI has recognized, there are many other types of environmental effects associated with air emissions reductions from the implementation of an EMO. As noted in Chapter 3, several major, recent studies of the social costs of electricity have developed such lists, and have demonstrated which types of effects are amenable to quantification and to valuation, and which of these are the most important (in terms of a money metric). The studies conclude that the health effects of air pollution are quantifiable and, in monetary terms, may dominate other effects, but that visibility effects, particularly in urban areas, and where they cause damages to crops, also are important. However, none of the studies focused on the SAMI region or attempted to zero in on the Class 1 areas of primary concern to SAMI. Here, we review the state of the models and science regarding major types of effects that SAMI has not elevated to the class of primary effects. У У4.6.1.ССHuman healthФ Ф There is probably greater consensus about the effects of air pollution on health than about any other airЉpollutionР!Рenvironment linkages, although, as in any science, researchers disagree about the details. The effects of air pollutants on the risk of premature death and morbidity (including the development of chronic respiratory and cardiopulmonary disease, the exacerbation of existing chronic disease, and the development of acute respiratory symptoms and illness) have been thoroughly studied, evaluated, and codified in periodic reports, called УУCriteria DocumentsФФ, issued by the Environmental Protection Agency as part of the process of setting National Ambient Air Quality Standards under the Clear Air Act. The rich epidemiological literature has been drawn on in many studies to estimate the health effects of a wide variety of emissionsЉreduction policies. And several largeЉscale models are available that as input take airЉpollution concentrations, and that offer as output estimates of physical health effects. The activity and consensus seen in the airЉpollution health literature is seen to a much lower degree in the economics literature, providing values for changes in health effects, primarily because funding of these studies comes nowhere near that for epidemiological, clinical, and toxicological research. Nevertheless, there is a growing codification of such values in the literature, and several models are available that integrate the health effects and valuation literatures to develop estimates of the benefits of environmental improvements. One such model is the RFF healthЉbenefits model, which could be used as the health module for SAMI. One highly contentious area in the airЉpollution health literature concerns the existence and level of thresholds in the health responses to air pollution. Assumptions about thresholds can have dramatic effects on estimates of health effects and benefits. ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССTwo sets of results should be presented: one assuming no thresholds, and another using thresholds that appear in other healthЉbenefits studies.ФФ У У4.6.1.1.ССThe RFF healthЉbenefits modelФ Ф The RFF healthЉbenefits model is designed to estimate the health effects of air pollution, and to value these effects. .Effects are expressed in terms of the number of days of acute morbidity of various types, the number of chronicЉdisease cases, and the number of lifeyears lost to premature death. Health effects, the willingness to pay (WTP) to avoid them, and the aggregate monetary benefits from airЉpollutionР!Рcontrol scenarios are outputs of the model. Inputs consist of ambient concentrations of pollutants and demographic information on the population of interest. The ambientЉconcentration data may include any* combination of the following pollutants: ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАп` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТТТпппТС€СС€АА СССNOx (micrograms/mб#єCє\  PމQєP#бУУ3ФФб#XPє\  PŽŠQXP#б) SOб#єCє\  PŽ‹QєP#бУУ2ФФб#XPє\  PŽŒQXP#б (micrograms/mб#єCє\  PŽQєP#бУУ3ФФб#XPє\  PŽŽQXP#б)) ТТТпппТС€СС€АА СССPM10 (micrograms/mб#єCє\  PŽQєP#бУУ3ФФб#XPє\  PސQXP#б)) (including secondary particulates, such as nitrates and sulfates) ТТТпппТС€СС€АА СССTSP (micrograms/mб#єCє\  PŽ‘QєP#бУУ3ФФб#XPє\  PŽ’QXP#б)) Pb (micrograms/mб#єCє\  PŽ“QєP#бУУ3ФФб#XPє\  PŽ”QXP#б)) Oб#єCє\  PŽ•QєP#бУУ3 ФФб#XPє\  PŽ–QXP#б(ppm or ppb) ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа *Note: At least one pollutant must be present. PM10 has the greatest number of health effects, and correspondingly the greatest associated dollar value. The population data must include the following for each region: ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАп` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТТТпппТС€СС€АА СССССTotal population ССAverage household size ТТТпппТС€СС€АА СССССFraction of population in each of these age categories (in years): under 5, 5 Р!Р17, 18Р!Р24, 25Р!Р34, etc., to 84, and fraction 85+ ТТТпппТС€СС€АА СССССMale fraction of population ССBaseline mortality and birth rates ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа The health model uses doseЉresponse functions specific to each pollutant and each associated health endpoint, or effect. These functions take as input doses of pollution received, expressed in terms of the ambient concentration of the pollutant, and give as output the excess number of incidents of the acute endpoints, increased number of cases of chronic endpoints, and number of human lifeyears lost to increased mortality. The following is a list of typical health effects resulting from the pollutants listed previously. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАп` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТТТпппТС€СС€АА СССNO x ЉЉ phlegm days (acute) ТТТпппТС€СС€АА СССSOб#єCє\  PŽ—QєP#бУУ2ФФб#XPє\  PŽ˜QXP#б ЉЉ chest discomfort (acute); emergencyЉroom visits (acute); mortality ТТТпппТС€СС€АА СССOб#єCє\  PŽ™QєP#бУУ3 ФФб#XPє\  PŽšQXP#бЉЉ asthma attacks (acute); bronchitis (chronic); mortality ТТТпппТС€СС€АА СССPb ЉЉ hypertension (chronic); coronary heart disease ; increased mortality ТТТпппТС€СС€АА СССTSP ЉЉ same as PM10 ТТТпппТС€СС€АА СССPM10 ЉЉ bronchitis (chronic); respiratory hospital admissions (acute); mortality ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ У4.6.1.2.ССDoseЉResponse Functions Ф Ф The doseЉresponse functions have been derived from the clinical and epidemiological literature (see Morton and Krupnick (1987), Schwartz and Dockery (1993); Whittemore and Korn (1988)). У У4.6.1.3.ССValuationФ Ф Dollar values (or ranges of values specified as probability distributions) taken from the environmentalЉeconomics literature (Lee et al, 1995) are available to match each endpoint. Valuation techniques are the subject of controversy. У У4.6.1.4.ССLinkagesФ Ф The module will compute effects and values at any level of spatial resolution (national, regional, county, etc.) and for periods as short as 1 day. The airЉqualityР!Рsimulation models provide the input data for changes in concentrations. No dynamic interaction between the airЉquality model and the health module is required. Baseline airЉquality and population data are required and must be consistent with the data being used by all other modules.Œ™У У4.6.1.5.ССModule ComplexityФ Ф Use of a model such as the RFF health benefits model in the SAMI process would require no developmental resources. In complexity, such a model might be classified as a У Уlevel 2Ф Ф model. A more sophisticated, У Уlevel 3Ф Ф, model can be envisioned, if funds are available for development of such a model. This model would replace the versions of the doseЉresponse functions with the original nonlinear versions of these functions. New doseЉresponse and valuation studies could be added to keep the literature in the module up to date. Economic values could be adjusted to fit more accurately the socioeconomic profile of the population of the SAMI region. As the healthЉbenefits model already exists and is running in the Demos framework, there is no need to consider a У Уlevel 1 Ф Фoption. У У4.6.2.ССMaterialsФ Ф Materials may be damaged through soiling, or may undergo chemical transformations that damage or degrade them. Materials are of two basic types: УУcultural ФФand УУhistorical materialsФФ (e.g., statues and other works of art), and УУeconomic materialsФФ (e.g., materials that are traded in markets, such as garments, and those embodied in buildings). Obviously, there is overlap in this classification; some buildings may be considered works of art, for example. The literature is primarily limited to laboratory and field studies of the effects of air pollutants on materials. The primary gaps are in reasonably complete materials inventories (i.e., in data identifying what is susceptible to damage) and in survey and other data on how individuals and institutions respond to damages to these materials Р"Р information necessary for estimating willingness to pay. Although several studies have attempted to estimate materials damage avoided through airЉpollutionР!Рcontrol policy, in our judgment they are not of sufficient quality and reliability to use in the SAMI process. У У4.6.3.ССCrops and commercial forestryФ Ф The effects of air pollution on yields of commercial crops and forests could be significant in the SAMI region. Ambient ozone is likely to be the only air pollutant causing significant effects on crops, according to several summaries of this literature. DoseЉresponse functions for ozone exposure are available for most major agronomic crops and for certain specialty crops from EPAРРs NCLAN program. Numerous studies have used these functions, and standard economic data and models, to estimate the monetary losses from such damage; they have found such damage to be a nontrivial fraction of total damage from air pollution. Estimation of the effect of an EMO on crops would require modest data collection on the number and location of acres planted in various ozoneЉsensitive crops, plus standard agricultural economic data. The effects of air pollution on commercial forestry have not been as well or as successfully studied, owing to the greater complexity of the problem. However, there is a variety of economic models that could be used to translate change in forest yields to economic losses. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССWe see no justification, other than budgetary, for ignoring the benefits of ozone precursor reductions on crops in the SAMI region. Decisions on estimating damages to commercial forests should be deferred until the terrestrialЉcontractor report is in.ФФ У У4.6.4.ССUrban visibilityФ Ф Although SAMI has identified improved visibility in class 1 areas as a primary objective, there has been little discussion of consequences of airЉpollution reductions (particularly sulfates) for urban visibility. Because there are so many people who could be affected by urbanЉvisibility improvements, this category could well contribute more to the benefits of emissions reductions than would visibility improvements in class 1 areas, even if an average individual would value more heavily the improvements in class 1 areas . The literature and models used to estimate visibility reductions in class 1 areas could apply to urban areas as well. The valuation literature covers visibility in recreational, rural, and urban settings. Several studies have valued the benefits of visibility improvements in urban areas. У У4.6.5.ССGlobal warmingФ Ф Global warming through the buildup of greenhouse gases (predominantly COб#єCє\  PŽ›QєP#бУУ2ФФб#XPє\  PŽœQXP#б) in the atmosphere could affect coastal resources, agriculture, forests, water resources, infrastructure, and human health. However, the uncertainty associated with the relationship between GHG emissions and global warming, and between global warming and effects on the earth, is large. For these reasons, none of the major socialЉcosting studies has included this category of damages in its quantification (other than as an estimate of the tons of COб#єCє\  PŽQєP#бУУ2ФФб#XPє\  PŽžQXP#б reduced by the policy). ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССWe recommend that global warming not receive quantitative treatment.ФФ У У4.6.6.ССOther EffectsФ Ф There are several categories of airЉpollution effects that have been noted in the recent comprehensive studies estimating the social costs of electricity: direct effects on terrestrial wildlife, birds, grasses and shrubs, and the effects on animals, fish, and humans of air pollutants falling in surface waters and infiltrating groundwater. These studies argue that such effects, except in highly specialized cases, are likely to be small and nonquantifiable. The cumulative effects of air pollutants on ecosystems, and on particularly sensitive plant or animal species, may be large. There is, however, too much uncertainty about the science, and too sparse a reliable valuation literature, to treat these categories quantitatively.ŒТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССWe recommend that these other environmental effects not be treated quantitatively.ФФ б#М^є\  PŽŸQМP#бУ У4.7ССSocioeconomic effectsФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽ QXP#б In previous sections, we outlined models of physical effects and direct economic costs. Quantitative evaluation of these effects is possible in units natural to each effect, such as miles of fishable streams or of visual range, acres of hardwood forest or wildlife habitat, or simply dollars in the case of economic costs. In some cases, only qualitative evaluation of these effects will be possible. In this section, we extend these models in three important directions. First, we set forth an approach to monetary valuation that provides a single dimension along which diverse indices, such as those listed previously, can be compared in like manner. In all likelihood, SAMI will want to consider monetized benefits and costs not as the sole basis for policy evaluation, but rather as data informing that evaluation. The monetary approach has holes and uncertainties that may require that certain physical effects be considered in their own natural units. Second, whether effects are considered in physical or monetary units, there is a variety of sociological issues that apply to their evaluation. For instance, physical effects may occur concentrated in space or time, raising concerns about equity. Third, direct environmental benefits and economic costs of policies have a variety of indirect effects on the economy. Some of these effects occur in secondary industries in the present; some are manifest as changes in the pattern of economic development and growth over time. У У4.7.1.ССValuation of environmental benefitsФ Ф The first task is to enumerate the value categories associated with SAMI's primary objectivesР"Рthe improvement in visibility and the preservation of aquatic and forest ecosystems in class 1 areas Р"Р and secondary objectives. For purposes of discussion, we will consider the principal useЉvalue category to be УУrecreation ФФ(defined loosely to consist of hunting, fishing, hiking, camping, sightЉseeing and other activities that bring tourists to the region, but including the participation in those activities by local residents). The principal nonuseЉvalue category will be УУecosystem damage. ФФ У У4.7.2.ССRecreation (use) benefitsФ Ф УУ ФФImproved environmental quality in the region can create benefits at recreation sites in two ways: (1) it can increase the quality and enjoyment of each recreational experience, as, for example, improved visibility would do; and (2) it can also increase the quantity of recreation opportunity offered in the region, by increasing the opportunities available at existing sites or by making new sites suitable for recreation. For example, waterЉquality improvements may increase the number of miles of streams capable of supporting highЉquality fishing. Increased recreation opportunity would mean that individuals could enjoy comparable recreation experience at new sites less crowded or closer to their homes, or at existing sites capable of supporting larger crowds. Numerous methods have been developed to estimate the value of recreation sites, relying on inferences from the sacrifices people are observed to make the visit the site (such as incur the expense and bother of travel), and on people's responses to hypothetical questions designed to reveal what affects their stated visitation frequency. These studies can also be used to estimate the change in value of the sites associated with a change in environmental quality. EnvironmentalЉquality improvements will also stimulate private realЉestate development as the region becomes more attractive generally. In addition, studies that relate differences in property values to differences in environmental quality can be used to estimate the effect of environmental improvements on private property. The tricky part is to aggregate the total benefits over all public and private lands. There are at least two problems. First, recreationЉbenefit estimation has traditionally focused on estimating the benefits of improved environmental quality at a single recreation site. Although the better studies do take into account the availability of recreation opportunities provided at nearby sites, usually the quantity and quality of recreation offered at those sites have been held constant. Techniques for estimating benefits accruing to an entire region, where environmental quality and recreation opportunity is improving at many sites, are much less well developed. Second, a strategy of estimating benefits to public lands by using travelЉcost methods and to private lands by using hedonic pricing will have to take into account the interactions between the two. For example, privateЉland value will be enhanced not only by the environmentalЉquality improvements on the site, but also by improvements at nearby recreation areas. Likewise, much of the increase in visitation at recreation sites in the region probably will be generated by firstЉ or secondЉhome residential development. Most of what we know about largeЉscale aggregation of benefits has come from the various exercises in estimation of theУУ social costsФФ of electricЉpower production. Those studies have effectively addressed health effects because the additional morbidity or mortality risk faced by any individual can be assumed to be additive over individuals when estimating aggregate benefits. For areawide estimation of recreation benefits, this additivity assumption is questionable. Instead, we need a regionwide behavioral model of the demand and supply of recreation designed to take into account the interaction effects described here. ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССLowЉlevel funding should involve no original research and will characterize amenity resources at a high level of aggregation.ФФ Р$РССAt low levels of funding, SAMI should assume additivity in the valuation of improvements in physical inputs to the recreation experience, such as improvements in recreational area, in visual range, or in fish populations. No additional economic modeling should be performed. Р$РССAt mid levels of funding, SAMI should fund a new study that would examine appropriate aggregation techniques while avoiding double counting in a single, representative application. The techniques developed could be applied throughout the region. Р$РССHighЉlevel funding will rely heavily on highly disaggregated de novo benefit studies. Р$РССAt high levels of funding, SAMI should replicate the modeling recommended for the mid level, and should sponsor the construction of a regional model of recreation that will incorporate linkages between different sites. У У4.7.3.ССExistence values Ф Ф The preservation and enhancement of natural environments in the southern Appalachians will have an importance and value that transcend recreational benefits and enhancement of property values in the region. Although the estimation of УУexistence values, ФФalso known as УУnonuse valuesФФ, is an active area of research in environmental economics, where numerous tools have been developed for the conversion of such values into monetary units, both the notion of a measurable existence value and the estimates produced are highly controversial. Given that a primary purpose of the integrated assessment is to help resolve controversy and to build consensus, SAMI might be well advised to avoid estimation of existence values. ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССAt all levels of funding, SAMI should avoid monetization of existence values unless independent studies targeted precisely at existence values of interest are available.ФФ У У4.7.4.ССBenefit transferФ Ф The valuation of recreation and other use benefits at a site can be achieved either via new valuation studies or by the adaptation to the site in question of studies completed elsewhere. This latter approach has been denoted УУbenefit transfer. ФФ To use it, a researcher searches the literature to find benefit studies conducted elsewhere from which she can extract a functional relationship between benefits and certain observable inputs, such as the initial environmental state; the degree of improvement; the uses of the resource; the availability of substitutes; and the age, income, and other sociodemographic data of nearby residents and other users of the resource. To transfer the benefits estimate to a resource to be valued in the SAMI process, she applies this function to a set of SAMIЉspecific arguments. These arguments consist of the basic socioeconomic data from the region plus the outputs of physical effects modules developed as part of the integrated assessment. Using the benefitЉtransfer process is presumably less costly, both in time and resource expenditure, than is acquiring like information from new benefit studies. The disadvantage is that studies done at a different time and place may not be easy to adapt; the characteristics of the site and the people who use it may be too different for studies done elsewhere to be applied, or there may be a mismatch between the data required for the benefitЉestimation transfer and the physical and economic input data collected at the site. Nonetheless, it is important to keep in mind that the choice here is not between the use of benefit transfer and the conduct of new benefit studies. It is logistically impossible to conduct detailed benefit studies at all relevant sites in the SAMI region; at best, original studies will be done at only a relatively small number of sites. For the rest, the question is, of the available studies both inside and outside the region, which are the best for benefits transfer? The appropriate question to ask about doing benefit studies УУde novoФФ at a site concerns not so whether there exist suitable studies for benefits transfer, but rather whether a study at the site in question will facilitate benefits transfer elsewhere in the region. For example, even if a benefit study on Mount Mitchell has been done, its results may or may not be more useful for benefits transfer to Mount Rogers than a study done previously in the Adirondacks. The value added by original benefit studies is largely their value for benefits transfer in the region, and this value will depend largely on the heterogeneity within the region. If it is high, then original studies may offer much improvement over what already exists. ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССAt low levels of funding, fund a literature review of studies available for benefits transfer in the region.ФФ Р$РССAt low levels of funding, have valuation rely on benefits transfer, using simple models for transferring estimates and assumptions of additivity among benefit categories. Р$РССAt mid and high levels of funding, consider funding original studies based on whether such studies would have high value for benefit transfer. У У4.7.5.ССConcentrated effects of environmental changeФ Ф The aggregate of the total benefits associated with environmental improvement is the standard measure of value, yet we should also note how those benefits are distributed. People in the region may be differentially affected by such improvements for a mixture of two reasons. First, they may have different access to environmental improvement; for example, airЉquality changes resulting from EMOs might be different in Richmond and Atlanta. Second, people may have the same access, but may value it differently. Part of the task of the socioeconomic assessment is to characterize the distribution of access and resource valuation in the region, taking care to note effects on particular populations that may have been identified previously for equity reasons. This undertaking is what we call a УУnormal ФФdistributional analysis. In addition, the assessment should take into account that certain groups will experienceз TEMPF8 з УУconcentratedФФ effects of environmental change that go far beyond the distributional effects normally cataloged. For example, environmental resources may be an important source of food for some people in the region, and a source of livelihood for others. One of the tasks of the socioeconomic assessment is to identify groups that may experience especially large effects from environmental change. These changes could be adverse Р"Р if, for example, the growth of tourism crowds out other activities. ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССHire a contractor to consider socioeconomic effects. It may be efficient to assign analysis of socioeconomic effects to the IA contractor, if the latter has appropriate expertise, due to the central role of socioeconomic effects in the IAF, and the need to interact with all the physical effects contractors.ФФ Р$РССAt low levels of funding, monitor distributional aspects of changes in physical effects monitored by identifying primary constituents who will benefit or lose from policy changes. Delegate this task to a socioeconomic contractor (perhaps the IA contractor), who should work with physicalЉeffects modelers to identify these constituents. Р$РССAt mid and high levels of funding, have the socioeconomic contractor review data available from the Park Service and elsewhere to construct a model that profiles the characteristics of users of benefit effects. У У4.7.6.СС Concentrated effects of economic changesФ Ф Positive changes in environmental assets can have negative effects if they cause boomЉtown conditions that stimulate economic growth, possibly undermining traditional lifestyles. Similarly, if the costs of environmental policies are borne narrowly by facilities that constitute a large percentage of local employment, these policies can create localized busts. These concentrated effects are important not only because of equity considerations, but also because they can have ancillary economic costs that would not attend effects dispersed more generally through the economy. For example, if a person in the city of Atlanta becomes unemployed, he may be reasonably able to locate alternative employment without having to move to another location. But if unemployment strikes in a small town, there will be fewer employment alternatives, and consequently many families will have to uproot, altering familial and social relationships. Also, people remaining in the community may experience dramatic losses in economic activity, local tax revenues, and so on. Hence, the transitory effects of economic change can be much larger when the change is concentrated. The integrated assessment should be sensitive to the potential boomЉorЉbust cycle that may afflict local areas due to changes in environmental policy. The IA contractor should catalog the degree of concentration of economic changes that are expected. It can do this task by conferring with state economicЉdevelopment officials and local Chambers of Commerce about the distribution and concentration of employment changes that are expected. ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССAt low levels of funding, monitor distributional aspects of changes in economic effects by identifying primary constituents who will benefit or lose from policy changes. This task should be delegated to a socioeconomic contractor (perhaps the IA contractor). ФФ Р$РССAt low levels of funding, identify distributional aspects of economic changes strictly from information provided by physical effects contractors (especially emissions and costs) and by examination of inputЉoutput tables, paying attention to occupational categories, associated wages, and geographic concentration of affected industries. Р$РССAt mid levels of funding, assess the concentration of economic changes expected by conferring with state economic development officials and local Chambers of Commerce about the expected distribution of affected industries and the employment changes. Р$РССAt high levels of funding, conduct more precise cataloging of economic changes according to distributional effect. Original modeling and sociological studies may be recommended on the basis of information that becomes available. У У4.7.7.ССMacroeconomic effectsФ Ф Changes in public policy can have a variety of effects beyond those experienced by people bearing the direct benefits or costs of those policies. Some indirect economic effects have been discussed elsewhere. In this section, we discuss several additional indirect effects at the state, regional, or national level associated with changes in environmental conditions. First, we discuss ways to account for expected future changes in emissions. Next, we discuss employment and fiscal effects at the state and regional levels. Finally, we discuss dynamic changes in the macroeconomy that stem from changes in public policy. ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССDevelop models of dynamic macroeconomic effects only given high levels of funding.ФФ У У4.7.7.1.ССProjection of economic growthФ Ф Emissions will change over time even in the absence of changes in economic policy, due to changes in levels of economic activity in the region. Several firms that do largeЉscale economic modeling maintain economic models (drivers) that can be used to project future economic activity in the region and nation. These projections are important in a variety of scenarios. The environment may benefit from a downturn in economic activity, and environmental policies targeted at specific goals may be unnecessary in this scenario. Indeed, such policies may exacerbate economic conditions. On the other hand, if the region grows at exceptional rates, current policies could be insufficient to maintain the integrity of environmental assets. Even more important and more relevant than these examples are shifts in activities among industries in the region. The major problem with largeЉscale economic modeling is that it is a highly uncertain venture. In addition, there is a false precision associated with such projections stemming from the precise answers that such models report. SAMI would be better served to solicit a scenario analysis depicting economic activity and emissions associated with low, midpoint, and high levels of economic activity. ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССUse scenario analysis to examine the effect of future regional economic growth. Invest SAMI resources in the use of national economic models (drivers) only if SAMI obtains a high level of funding.ФФ У У4.7.7.2.ССStateЉ and regionalЉlevel employment effectsФ Ф Beyond the immediately affected industries that benefit from and pay for policy changes, policies have secondary effects on other industries. Reduced activity at a power plant, for example, may cause reduced coal mining, and the powerЉplant workers and coal miners may then spend less at local restaurants. Standard techniques for estimating these effects make use of inputР!Рoutput tables maintained by the Bureau of Economic Analysis of the U.S. Department of Commerce and other organizations. These tables are limited in that the economic relationships that they describe are rigid and do not change over time (see below). However, they have the advantages of being detailed, and of being available at any level of aggregation (county, state, or region) for only a small fee. The inputР!Рoutput tables provide information about the number of jobs and the amount of earnings associated with changes in directly affected industries. However, a higher degree of resolution in the model is achieved if the data fed in (change in output) are highly specific with respect to the directly affected industries. For example, we could specify a change in production in automobile manufacturing, or a change in production at a automobile plant, or the changes in inputs particular to that plant. Hence, the inputР!Рoutput models lend themselves to various levels of funded work for SAMI. ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССInclude estimates of state and regional level employment effects making use of inputЉoutput tables in the assessment at all levels of funding. The geographic detail of these estimates and the detail of affected industries can vary with the level of funding available to SAMI.ФФ У У4.7.7.3.ССStateЉ and regionalЉlevel fiscal effectsФ Ф It is straightforward to move from changes in state and regional levels of employment to changes in fiscal effects at the state or multi state level. The inputР!Рoutput tables provide earnings estimates that we can compare with average tax rates for each jurisdiction to estimate changes in fiscal revenues. We can complete this exercise at varying levels of detail to check, for example, whether wages vary by locality from the average wages for occupational categories incorporated into the inputР!Рoutput tables. In addition, the estimates can be augmented by estimates of the drain on fiscal resources if there are changes in the levels of unemployment. ТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССInclude fiscal effects for all levels of funding in the assessment, but pursue greater levels of detail with higher levels of funding.ФФ У У4.7.7.4.ССDynamic macroeconomic effectsФ Ф The aggregate willingnessЉtoЉpay measure already described in the valuation section is based on a snapshot of the values that people place presently on environmental assets. Similarly, measures of direct and indirect costs associated with a policy are snapshots, reflecting current patterns of economic behavior and technological relationships. In one sense, measures of benefits and costs account for foregone future opportunities. For example, a personРРs currentЉperiod willingness to pay for environmental benefits reflects her consideration of current and future benefits that she hopes to enjoy; cost estimates are present discounted values of future streams of costs. In another sense, however, currentЉperiod estimates typically fail to account for the future, because both rely on extrapolations of future patterns of resource use based on current behavior and conditions. For instance, benefit estimates typically fail to account for population changes that may increase the number of people affected by a policy. Population growth may be accompanied by greater congestion, and individual willingness to pay for environmental assets may rise accordingly. й (Krutilla) йOn the other hand, static cost estimates typically fail to anticipate technological innovations and other changes that may make compliance less expensive in the future. (Porter) Just as important, they fail to account for remote changes in investment and economic activity that are not reflected in static measures of indirect costs. For instance, investment capital drawn into pollution prevention is drawn away from other areas of investment that presumably have higher rates of return. As a consequence, SAMIРРs regional economy is placed on a lower path of economic growth. й (Kopp) й Although these macroeconomic effects can be important, their estimation is shrouded in a higher level of uncertainty than that characterizing other economic aspects of the assessment. Their estimation requires regional generalЉequilibrium models, or at least large econometric models adapted to consider the investment demands and behavioral responses of specific policy options. Consequently, we recommend that consideration of dynamic macroeconomic effects be reserved for high levels of funding by SAMI. For low and medium levels of funding, these issues can be reasonably ignored, unless an effect can be identified that is particularly concentrated in one sector of the economy, or unless extremely broad policies are considered. In the latter case, low or medium levels of funding for the assessment may be inappropriate. б#М^є\  PŽЁQМP#бУ У4.8ССVisualization and communication of resultsФ Ф ТмммТС€АА Сб#XPє\  PŽЂQXP#бУУР$РССHave the IAF use geographicЉinformation systems to present the results of the analyses of the EMOs over space and time.ФФ Р$РССContinue to work closely with SAA and SAMAB to develop capability in geographicЉinformation systems. Р$РССDevelop visualization capabilities to aid in selecting EMOs and to support educational and outreach work. The Southern Appalachian Man and Biosphere program (SAMAB) and the Southern Appalachian Assessment (SAA) are putting together databases in a geographicalЉinformation system, ARCINFO, that will permit mapping of changes in the resources of the southern Appalachian region. The results that are presented in the optionsЉeffects are used to support further aggregation in subsequent analyses (such as costР!Рbenefit weighting). It would be desirable to have a capability for visualizing these outcomes before aggregation and summarization in the table. At level 1, this task might be accomplished through simple mapping; at level 2, larger databases for the results could be used as inputs to software such as ARCINFO and ARCVIEW, and processed to show the changes projected in resources for the EMOs being considered. At level 3, an investment in producing series of changes in effects over time could yield animated representations of the model outputs from the assessment. Simple software to make animations, such as QuickTime movies, is currently available and is being used to visualize the results of largeЉscale airЉquality models. SAMI could use the animated visualizations directly in making decisions about the selection of EMOs, and also could use them to develop educational and outreach materials, such as videos for distribution. б#М^є\  PŽЃQМP#бУ У4.9 Choosing the level of complexity for each moduleФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽЄQXP#б In most of the sections in this chapter, we have tried to suggest three levels of detail and sophistication for developing a quantitative model for that aspect of the problem. Table 4Љ1 below summarizes these three levels for most of these modules. These suggestions are based on our teams judgment. We expect that the SAMI contractors may be able to help here, but most have not been able so far to help. We propose, in Section 7.7 below, to obtain better estimates from specialist consultants on the level of detail that is possible or desirable for various levels of funding. а АќА8 аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xа (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#єCє\  PŽЅQєP#б Table 4Љ1: Approach to developing a model at three levels of complexity for each module. These are illustrative specifications and approaches, to be refined with input from contractors. а А8Аќ аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа а АќА8 аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xа (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й K й в ^ А<<xА` ` ` @@@@ А<<xА` ` ` @@@@^ вмˆ    ˆ    мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџt Ь$ | д џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Moduleй x йммааLevel 1й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ№tЬ$ | д ,„м4џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x ймм Level 2ммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџр8ш$ | д џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАЬааLevel 3й й аа й x ймˆˆмммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ’ОъB š ђ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааEmissions inventory and forecastsммBy state,й й ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ:’ъB š ђ JЂњRџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТц ц ц ТС€Ž Ž СССby major sectors Тц ц ц ТС€Ž Ž ССС1990 and 2010, Тц ц ц ТС€Ž Ž СССSOx, NOx, VOCs, PM, CO2, published emissions projectionsй x йммBy state, by major sector, plus selected local sources near sensitive receptors.й й ТFFFТС€юю(ССС1 year intervals. projections modeled й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ:’ъ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааBy county, plus comprehensive local sources near sensitive receptors,й й ТІІІТС€NN<СССby season й x ймˆ ˆ мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ’ОъB š ђ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааAtmospheric transport and depositionммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ:’ъB š ђ JЂњRџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТц ц ц ТС€Ž Ž СССProportional attribution and correlationРРsй й Тц ц ц ТС€Ž Ž СССSource and receptor by state Тц ц ц ТС€Ž Ž ССС5 year intervalsй x йммSourceЉreceptor matrices from runs of trajectory atmospheric modelй й ТFFFТС€юю(СССReceptors by state plus few sensitive sites ТFFFТС€юю(СССAnnual average for acid dep, peaks for O3 e.g. ASTRAP, EKMA й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ:’ъ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааSourceЉreceptor matrices from runs of field atmospheric modelй й ТІІІТС€NN<СССReceptors by county plus many sensitive sites ТІІІТС€NN<СССSeasonal, episodes ТІІІТС€NN<СССe.g. RADM, ROM, UAMй x ймˆ ˆ мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ’ОъB š ђ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааEmissions control costs (direct)ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ:’ъB š ђ JЂњRџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааCost estimates adapted from other studiesммAs in current Pechan contractor report.ммRegional modifications of cost estimatesмˆ ˆ мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ’ОъB š ђ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааVisibility effectsммSingle receptor siteй й Only SOx, NOx inputs (seasonal averages) Model relative humidity ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ:’ъB š ђ JЂњRџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТц ц ц ТС€Ž Ž СССTextbook extinction coefficientsй x йммFew sitesй й Daily Inputs for SOx, NOx, PM, TSP Actual daily av. RH data ТFFFТС€юю(СССCalibrate extinction coefficients by site conc, humidity, and visibilityй x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ:’ъ` И џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааMany receptor sitesй й hourly inputs and actual hourly RH data. Calibrate for each site for conc, humidity, and visibilityй x ймˆ ˆ мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ’ОъB š ђ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааAquatic effectsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ:’ъB š ђ JЂњRџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТц ц ц ТС€Ž Ž СССReduced form model, based on MAGIC, for 1 representative region.ммReduced form model, based on MAGIC, for 3 to 5 selected receptors, fitted to new dataммNew calibration runs of MAGIC to create new RFMs for many representative lakes and streams in each region.мˆ ˆ мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ’ОъB š ђ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааTerrestrial effectsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ:’ъB š ђ JЂњRџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаамммммˆ ˆ мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ’ОъB š ђ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааHuman health effectsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ:’ъB š ђ JЂњRџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааApply RFF Health benefits model by stateммApply RFF Health benefits model by countyммHealth benefits model with nonlinear doseЉresponse functions.нˆ ˆ нммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ’ОъB š ђ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааValuation of environ.й й effectsй x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ:’ъB š ђ JЂњRџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааSimple transfer models based on existing literature: Average unit values.ммComplex transfer models: Valuation functions ммAreaЉspecific studies for benefit transferмˆ ˆ мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ’ОъB š ђ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааEquityммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ:’ъB š ђ JЂњRџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааIdentify disproportionately affected populationsммUse inputЉoutput tables to add populations affected indirectlyммDevelop normative guidelinesмˆ ˆ мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ’ОъB š ђ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааRegional macroЉeconomic modelммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ:’ъB š ђ JЂњRџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааScenario analysisммRefined scenario analysisммRegional economic modelмˆ ˆ мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ’ОъB š ђ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааFiscal effectsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ:’ъB š ђ JЂњRџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааUse inputЉoutput tables and public documentsммRegionalized analysisмммˆ    ˆ    мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ’ОъB š ђ џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааJobsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ:’ъB š ђ JЂњRџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааuse inputЉoutput tables at coarse level of detailммrefine description of affected industriesммй - йммаOаа А8Аќ аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#„yє\  PŽІQ„P#бй - йУ У5.ССThe baseline or reference caseФ Фй й ааб#М^є\  PŽЇQМP#бУ У5.1ССIntroductionФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽЈQXP#б If we are to justify and gauge the effects of an EMO, we must have an understanding of current conditions and projections about what the future will hold in the absence of that policy. In an integrated assessment, the current and projected conditions absent the policy are called УУbaseline conditions;ФФ the set of baseline conditions are called by SAMI and others the УУreference case.ФФ The effects of a particular policy (e.g., its costs, effects, and benefits are assessed as the difference between conditions without the policy (the baseline or reference case) and conditions with the policy, over the relevant time period. The reference case lays the foundation for the policy analysis to come. It sets the scope of the project. In terms of the SAMI process, it establishes the polluting sectors to be considered, the environmental pathways to be addressed, and the time period for the analysis. It contains the assessment of current conditions ЉЉ how severe the problems are, and what units of measurement are to be used to gauge the conditions' deterioration or improvement. Because future conditions without the policy must be projected, the process of establishing the baseline requires the use of analytical and modeling tools, some or all of which will be used in the policy analysis. The SAMI operating and work plans embody an appreciation of the importance of the reference case. Much attention has been devoted to establishing the dimensions of the problem, and to tracking and projecting the status of resources in the future. This is particularly true of the emissionsЉinventory contractor (Pechan and Associates), which has been charged with surveying current emissionsЉinventory models and methods for projecting how this inventory will change in the future in response to socioeconomic and demographic trends, as well as to current and SAMIЉspecific regulatory options. In addition, the УУCriteria for Evaluation of the EMOs by SAMIФФ recognizes that it may be difficult or even impossible to distinguish conditions with an EMO from conditions in the reference case, particularly in light of the uncertainties associated with developing both the policy and reference cases. б#М^є\  PŽЉQМP#бУ У5.2ССThe SAMI reference caseФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽЊQXP#б The reference case to be developed as part of the SAMI project has not yet been fully specified in SAMI documentation. Probably, the most important decisions with respect to any reference case concern assumptions about compliance with current regulations; assumptions or estimates of future population and economic growth; estimates of the pace and direction of technological change; assumptions about the lifetime of existing plant and equipment, such as coalЉfired power plants; and assumptions or estimates about future states of the environment. We shall discuss each of these in turn. У У5.2.1.ССCompliance with current regulationsФ Ф A statement in УУCriteria for Evaluation of the EMOs by SAMI ФФprovides the most detail about the first of these assumptions: а АќАš аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТТТ` ` ` ТС€СС€мм СС€АА ССССССС УУ...reference case defined by compliance with federal and state requirements, such as the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. (p. 5)ФФ а АšАќ аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа This statement has major implications for estimating future visibility and the health of aquatic, terrestrial, and human resources in the southeastern mountain areas. Starting with the CAAA of 1990, full compliance with Title IV of the Act (which establishes an aggregate cap on SOб#єCє\  PŽЋQєP#бУУ2ФФб#XPє\  PŽЌQXP#б emissions and permits trading of SOб#єCє\  PŽ­QєP#бУУ2ФФб#XPє\  PŽЎQXP#б emissions allowances among electric utilities) is likely to result in at least a 50% reduction in SOб#єCє\  PŽЏQєP#бУУ2ФФб#XPє\  PŽАQXP#б emissions from electric utilities. An excellent compliance record so far with this Title is evidence for the realism of this assumption of full compliance, although the final reductions in SOб#єCє\  PŽБQєP#бУУ2ФФб#XPє\  PŽВQXP#б emissions are not slated to occur until the year 2000. An important issue for SAMI, however, is the potential relocation of emissions within the national cap to the southeast, which could dampen the benefits of national emission reductions from a regional perspective. ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА СУУР$РССMake acceptance of this assumption explicit. Be sure, however, that emission inventories reflect the relocation of emissions that already have occurred or are likely to occur under Title IV.ФФ Full compliance with Title I, in contrast, is highly unlikely. Title I provides strategies and deadlines for attaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Almost 20 years of implementing restrictions on smokestack and tailpipe emissions have reduced pollution, but the major cities in the eightЉstate SAMI area still violate current standards for ozone and, in some cases, for particulates ЉЉ and do so by wide margins in some areas, such as Atlanta. Further, as ozone (and acid rain) in the southeast are caused to a significant Р"Р if uncertain Р"Р degree by sources outside the region, the ability of southeastern cities to attain these standards is significantly beyond those cities' control. The final complication regarding the assumption of compliance with the Clean Air Act involves whether we assume that УУregulations implementing the Act ФФare unchanged in the future. Although this assumption is a standard one in developing a reference case, it may be misleading for the SAMI process. In particular, EPA is currently engaged in a courtЉmandated process to review, and, if appropriate, to revise the NAAQS for ozone and particulates. Although no one knows whether these standards will change over the study period, it is highly likely that EPA will issue new regulations for the ozone standard by summer 1997. If this standard is tightened, as it may be, the time path and magnitude of ozone reductions, under an assumed compliance with the current law, could be affected dramatically. ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА СУУР$РССConsider multiple reference cases to address such issues.ФФ Regarding other federal and state regulations, none have been singled out for special treatment in the reference case development. ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА СУУР$Р Conduct an inventory of regulations that do not now have full compliance, but with which compliance would significantly improve resource values in the SAMI region.ФФ У У5.2.2.ССDemographic and economic projectionsФ Ф The second key set of assumptions undergirding the development of a reference case concerns future population and economic growth. These assumptions are important because they affect estimates of future emissions and the costs of reducing emissions. Economic downturns Р"Р particularly secular slowdowns in economic growth Р"Р can reduce emissions and improve resource quality, although transitory downturns can perhaps be ignored for the reference case. Estimates of future changes in the composition of economic activity Р"Р say, to more service oriented and, therefore, less polluting sectors Р"Р should be incorporated in the baseline. In addition, sectoralЉspecific changes should be examined, including possible environmental consequences of the coming restructuring of the electricЉpower sector and the pace and character of technological changes in processes, energy production, and abatement that may occur without further policy stimulus from SAMI. In a complex referenceЉcase analysis, typically a national economic forecasting model or national economic and demographic forecasts are used to project basic national socioeconomic trends into the future at some degree of sectoral detail. Then, another model, or a set of assumptions, is used to regionalize these trends consistently. Then, with these regional projections in hand, emissions can be forecasted. Adjustments can then be made to the emissions if special localized information in known that is not captured in the national or regional models. У У5.2.3.ССOther key elements of the reference caseФ Ф Questions about the pace and type of technological change and plant and equipment lifetimesлfootnote refлггггУУллв X0УУФФУУФФX0УУФФУУФФ вФФжЪџџб#Xxў6X@ЩГQX@#бб#XPє\  PŽДQXP#ба АќАќ аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаалfootnote texлаагггглла АќА„ аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџXА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#єCє\  PŽЕQєP#б These are important assumptions because in the calculation of costs, the initial costs of the piece of equipment or plant construction are generally annualized. The calculation of annual cost is highly sensitive to the plant or equipment lifetime assumed.б#Xxў6X@ЩЖQX@#бЪжУУФФ are taken up in the cost module. Assumptions or estimates concerning the state of the environmental and health resources whose protection is the objective of SAMI are obviously critical. Contractors for phase I have begun to develop models and to survey literature useful for describing the current state of these resources and for projecting the resources' states into the future. However, a quantitative assessment is needed that takes into account the emissions profile (temporal, spatial, and pollutantЉspecific) for the reference case(s) being developed by the emissionsЉinventory contractor. ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА СУУР$РССGiven the expected uncertainty in resource projections, develop three reference cases: most likely, optimistic, and pessimistic.ФФ У У5.2.4.ССAbsolute versus relative analysis of EMOsФ Ф ТмммТТТС€мм СС€АА СУУР$РССTo avoid the complications of assessing a reference case, we can assess the consequences of EMOs relative to the consequences of not adopting the EMO, rather than in absolute terms.ФФ Most EMOs will, even if adopted, make have only modest effects, environmental and economic, relative to the effects of the base case. To compare the costs and benefits of such an EMO does not necessarily require precise prediction of the reference case. We can analyze the effects of the EMO in relative terms, as increments or decrements to the basecase effects, without providing a precise calculation of the basecase. With this approach, we can provide a comprehensive analysis of the EMO without spending excessive effort on the reference case. The only drawback to this approach is that we cannot provide reasonable predictions of the absolute effects of the EMO, and it will be hard to compare predictions with observations. У У5.2.5.ССLevels of complexityФ Ф The SAMI ground rules already introduce much complexity into the referenceЉcase analysis. The simplest approach would be to focus the analysis on a baseЉyear, investigating the effects of EMOs on only that yearРРs emissions, effects, and costs. However, SAMI requires an analysis over time. Given this requirement, a level 1 analysis might involve making simple assumptions about the rate of change in baseЉyear regional economic projections, at a cost of possible inconsistency with national trends and an inability to do sensitivity analysis on key variables (e.g., federalЉreserve interestЉrate policies) at the national level. A level 2 analysis would use a national economic model or forecasts to set baseЉyear conditions, and would use a regional model or forecasts to regionalize these trends, but would not make any systematic further adjustments based on specialized knowledge of changes predicted for industry sectors or other polluting sources. A level 3 analysis would seek to particularize the baseline projections for the SAMI region and sectors. аOаУУУ У6.ССEmission Management OptionsФ Ф ФФ аа SAMI has been actively engaged in generating possible emission management options (EMOs) for use in attaining SAMIРРs objectives. This list has grown to 87 separate options, identified by the name of the submitter, the title, whether it could be implemented in the near, intermediate, or longЉterm, and whether it needs further evaluation by the Technical Oversight Committee (TOC). An integrated assessment would only be performed on some, but, not necessarily all, of the EMOs sent to the TOC. At its June 10th meeting, the Board of Governors approved 12 nearЉterm EMOs. There are at least three issues associated with EMOРРs that are relevant for the integrated assessment: ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА(м4` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТ(((ТТмммТТТТ444ТС€СС€мм СС€(( СС€АА Сб#XXф2МPБЗQXP#бССССССР$Рб#XPє\  PŽИQXP#бССThe criteria/process for choosing EMOРРs for an integrated assessment Т(((ТТмммТТТТ444ТС€СС€мм СС€(( СС€АА Сб#XXф2МPБЙQXP#бССССССР$Рб#XPє\  PŽКQXP#бССThe requirements for translating a description of an EMO into a concrete policy amenable to modeling with integrated assessment tools. Т(((ТТмммТТТТ444ТС€СС€мм СС€(( СС€АА Сб#XXф2МPБЛQXP#бССССССР$Рб#XPє\  PŽМQXP#бССThe modeling requirements associated with analyzing different types of EMOs The first of these issues is essentially being handled by the SAMI Policy Committee (PC), which identifies EMOs needing Technical Oversight Committee support. Together, these two committees will decide which EMOs need Р РlongЉtermРР review. Presumably most of these will require an integrated assessment. б#М^є\  PŽНQМP#бУ У6.1ССMaking EMOs ConcreteФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽОQXP#б Few of the 87 EMOs being considered by the PC contain more than a cursory description of the design of the EMO. To actually analyze the detailed consequences of an EMO for emissions, impacts, values, and costs requires much more specificity about the nature of the EMO. For instance, consider the policy is No.7 on the SAMI list, УУNOx cap below existing levelsФФ. To subject such a policy to an integrated assessment requires that a specified emissions level for the cap be set, a time path or deadline for reaching the cap be determined, rules be developed for the types of sources permitted to trade, assumptions be made about degree of compliance, and a host of other elements be specified. These determinations could be the responsibility of the IA contractor or the submitter. We recommend the IA contractor because of its greater understanding of the entire IA model, i.e., to know which assumptions are crucial and which are not. Even a wellЉspecified EMO will generally need much Р РpreЉprocessingРР before it can be subjected to analysis of its environmental effects and even its cost. Taking the NOx trading case again, the NOx cap sets a limit on NOx emissions, but where the associated emissions reductions (from baseline) take place is difficult to estimate, yet crucial for gauging the effects on ozone and particulate concentrations. In what sectors and with what technological and behavioral responses emissions are reduced is also difficult to estimate yet crucial for gauging costs. None of the models being considered by SAMI or its contractors (Pechan in this case) will provide these estimates, although all provide information needed to make such estimates. Thus, a contractor must make such estimates through a separate Р РoffЉlineРР effort. OffЉline efforts would also be needed to model the cost and emissions reductions associated with EMO No. 6, УУNOx RACT for Stationary Sources. ФФThis is an easier task than that required for emissions trading, but it still requires a careful use of the cost data and emissions inventories to be provided by the appropriate contractor. Finally, consider a required conservation plan for electric utilities or other sectors. It could be relatively straightforward to specify the design elements of such a policy and even to determine or assume the programs that will actually be offered. But, determining the response of energy users to these programs is no simple task. The literature provides ample evidence of fundamental disagreements over the evaluation of the success of existing programs; simulating the adoption of energy conservation measures, and the cost and pollution savings may be an even more controversial exercise. Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СУУР$РССA range of sample EMOs should be selected for analysis early on in the IAF development. This set of EMOs will help the IA team Р Рkeep their eyes on the prizeРР, by maintaining their focus on developing a tool to compare and assess EMOs.ФФ УУР$РССThe IA should be defined to include two additional discrete sets of tasks for (i) translating EMOs into concrete terms and (ii) performing Р РpreЉprocessingРР analyses on the EMOРРs, as appropriate. ФФ б#М^є\  PŽПQМP#бУ У6.2ССModeling RequirementsФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽРQXP#б The discussion above highlighted the need for analytical work outside of the process of an integrated assessment as it has heretofore been defined. Here, we raise the issue that some EMOРРs will require much less of an integrated assessment than others. The clearest distinction in analytical requirements is between EMOs that are comparable in their effectiveness (e.g.., they affect only one pollutant) and EMOs that are not comparable in their effectiveness. In the former case, evaluation of EMOs could be limited to costЉeffectiveness analysis. If one policy results in twice the reduction in NOx as another policy (but with approximately the same spatial and temporal distribution of reductions) the two policies could be usefully compared in terms of the cost per ton NOx reduced. In this case, there would be no need to estimate the environmental consequences of the policies, resulting in a streamlined integrated assessment. аOаУУУ У7.СС Recommendations for building an IAFФ Ф ФФ аа In this chapter, we propose plans for building and applying the IAF. We start by outlining the role of the IA contractor, as coordinator of the IA process, as well as building of the IAF. In case SAMI faces limited budgets, we list some ideas for making a small budget go further. Based on these ideas, we propose the plans for the IAF to fit four budgets, from a quarter million to four million dollars. We provide a draft budget breakdown and timeline for each plan. Finally, we provide some recommendations for specifying SOWs for contractors ensure that their work coordinates harmoniously with the IA process. б#М^є\  PŽСQМP#бУ У7.1 Tasks for the integratedЉassessment contractorФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽТQXP#б The IA contractor, in addition to developing the IA framework, should have primary responsibility for coordinating the work of the other contractors to ensure that their modules fit together effectively, and make compatible assumptions. Given adequate budget, it is desirable for specialist contractors to develop the RFM modules to be integrated by the IA contractor. The specialist contractor, being chosen for its scientific expertise in the topic, usually will be better able to construct and calibrate a scientifically credible module, than will the IA contractor. In this case, the IA contractor should provide training and support to specialist contractors in developing RFMs, treating uncertainty, and producing module. For lowЉbudget scenarios, however, it may be preferable for the IA contractor to develop some of the modules, because their greater familiarity with the IA process and reduced organizational overhead will allow the IA contractor to develop modules more rapidly and at lower cost. There is a risk, however, that the resulting modules will be less closely tied to the science. The following summarizes the potential tasks for the IA contractor: Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССRefine IAF design, starting from product of Phase I. Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССLead and coordinate the process of developing Phase II specifications for the interfaces and internal assumptions of each module. Р$РССIdentify software and hardware computer platforms for developing and applying the IA models. Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССProvide training and technical support to other contractors on the use of influence diagrams, reducedЉform modeling, the representation of uncertainty, and selected modeling software. Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССIntegrate modules provided by other contractors into the overall framework. Р$РССDevelop reducedЉform models where necessary for budgetary reasons or where module developers do not have requisite skills.ŒР$РССDesign and implement an input module that allows users to specify input scenarios and assumptions for EMO assessment. Р$РССDesign and implement an output module that provides tables, graphs, and maps to communicate the results of EMO assessment. Р$РССConduct sensitivity and uncertainty analysis of the IA model to identify critical assumptions and sources of uncertainty. Р$РССManage the schedule of, and review deliverables from, other contractors. Р$РССArrange and facilitate meetings of the IA team, including other contractors and SAMI. Р$РССProvide SAMI with regular overview of progress and results, and facilitate SAMI in providing review and guidance to the IA team. Р$РССApply the IAF to assess EMOs specified by SAMI, and facilitate SAMI in reviewing the results and implications. The task of applying the IAF to assess EMOs could be carried out by another organization. There would be some advantage in having a separate group apply the IAF; however, the IA contractor, due to its familiarity with the framework and modules ,may be able to perform this task more rapidly and efficiently. We propose a final task to be assigned to the IA contractor, given a medium to high budget. Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССDevelop a SAMI software tool, structured as an educational simulation to allow semitechnical and nontechnical end users to understand the assumptions and recommendations of the assessment. The tool must be visually appealing, easy and fun to use by people who have minimal computer skills, and educational. It might be used by SAMI participants, other policy makers, and their staff, and as an educational tool in universities and high schools. The tool might be accessible on a CDЉROM and/or via the World Wide Web. б#М^є\  PŽУQМP#бУ У7.2 Ways for SAMI to extend its budget for IAФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽФQXP#б If SAMI has difficulty in obtaining sufficient funds, there are a number of ways in which it might make a limited budget go further. Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СУУР$Р ССKeep the number of contractors small, to minimize the overhead costs of management, coordination, and travel for the contractors and SAMI. Assign related tasks to a single contractor with an appropriate mix of skills, instead of to multiple contractors.ФФ Р$Р ССDevelop SOWs for contractors that are carefully specified and coordinated with the overall IA plan as to deliverables and schedule. Р$Р ССHire contractors who have already developed reducedЉform models for important modules, and who do not have to develop new ones from scratch. Р$Р ССReuse and adapt an existing publicЉdomain IAF, such as TAF under development for NAPAP.ŒР$Р ССSeek inЉkind contributions of data collection, research, and analysis from other organizations. For example, seek information and analysis on relevant topics from SAMAB, EPA, or TVA. Р$Р ССEncourage organizations with related missions to share their work on common tasks. For example, encourage NAPAP to select receptor sites of importance to SAMI for aquatic and visibility effects, in NAPAPРРs 1996 assessment. Or reuse data from runs of RADM or other atmospheric models conducted for other purposes. Р$Р ССDo not attempt to develop quantitive models for effects for which the science is poorly understood, for effects for which adequate data will not be available, or that are not likely to be substantially important in discriminating among alternative EMOs. Р$Р ССConcentrate on costР!Рeffectiveness rather than costР!Рbenefit analysis to compare EMOs. Note that doing so, however, severely limits the value of the analysis. б#М^є\  PŽХQМP#бУ У7.3 Plan scopes and budgetsФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽЦQXP#б We were asked to provide plans with target budgets of $250,000, $1 million, and $4 million. Because we believe that it will be difficultto conduct a satisfactory assessment for $250,000, we have added an intermediate plan with $500,000 budget. У У7.3.1. A $250,000 planФ Ф We believe that it will be difficult to conduct an assessment adequate for SAMI's need for $250,000. In any case, for a small budgets, it will be necessary to rely largely on existing models and analysis, and other measures suggested in the previous section. We suggest direct reuse and adaptation of TAF (the Tracking and Analysis Framework) developed for NAPAP as the most appropriate and adaptable framework that is or will be in the public domain. Coordination with NAPAP and the TAF developers will allow maximal sharing of resources. The 1995 version of TAF focuses on the Adirondacks for aquatic effects, and on Shenandoah and the Grand Canyon for visibility effects. It does not address terrestrial effects, other than acidification of soils. It addresses SOx and NOx, but not the production, transport, or effects of ozone. TAF does include models for human health effects, crops, and valuation of effects on visibility, aquatic resources, health, and crops. For modest funds, it would be probably possible to develop a new set of sourceР!Рreceptor matrices for SOx, NOx, and PM, specific for the southeast, with specific receptors in class 1 areas, using ASTRAP from Argonne National Laboratories, as used for TAF, or a similar atmospheric transport model. For treatment of ozone, a simple level 1 model might be feasible, but not using sourceР!Рreceptor matrices. It might be difficult to develop credible aquatics models calibrated for SAMI class 1 areas, such as the Smokies and MidЉAppalachians, unless most of this work was supported by NAPAP or other sources as part of the 1996 NAPAP assessment. SAMI could save funds by tasking the IA contractor to develop or adapt some of the IAF modules for it rather than have specialist contractors do all these tasks. The greater familiarity of the IA contractor with IA modeling, and the reduced projectЉmanagement work from having fewer participants, will reduce overall costs. This approach carries the risk that the scientific credibility of modules may be less than those produced by a specialist contractor. CostЉeffectiveness analysis requires estimation only of the costs and the emissions reduction to compare EMOs that reduce emissions from similar sources. For example, EMOs to improve efficiency of use of electrical power can be compared in terms of their lifecycle dollar cost per kilowattЉhour reduced, or dollars per unit reduction in SOx and NOx emissions. This analysis obviates the need for predicting or valuing the environmental effects of reduced emissions, significantly reducing the cost of the analysis. CostЉeffectiveness analysis can rank similar EMOs; however, it cannot compare EMOs that affect different kinds of emissions Р"Р such as powerЉplant emissions versus automobile emissions Р"Р and it cannot provide an overall justification for recommending an EMO, in the way that costР!Рbenefit analysis can. У УThe $250,000 plan includes:Ф Ф Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССIAF borrowed directly from TAF with modest adaptations Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА С Р$РССLimited emissions inventory and forecast, based on existing report from Pechan and Associates. Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССLimited work on the costs of EMOs Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССIA contractor doing much of the work on component modules, instead of specialist contractors Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССNew sourceЉreceptor matrices for SOx and NOx focussing on receptors in SAMI region, providing atmospheric concentration and deposition of acid precursors by state and selected receptors Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССCostЉeffectiveness assessment to compare EMOs that affect similar sources Р$РССQuantitative assessment of visibility effects at one to three locations in class 1 areas Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССLimited peer review У УThe $250,000 plan omits:Ф Ф Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$Р ССPhase III, the secondЉyear refinement of the IAF Р$РССQuantitative assessment of aquatic and terrestrial effects Р$РССHealth and materials damage effects Р$РССValuation of environmental effectsŒР$РССSocioeconomic assessment Р$РССCostР!Рbenefit analysis, because environmental benefits are not valued Р$РССSAMI IAF software for communication and education У У7.3.2. A $500,000 planФ Ф The $500,000 plan would also extend to only Phase II, over a single year, and would also concentrate on ways to keep costs low. It would include a simple model to predict changes in ozone concentration. It would ,however, include modest work to develop quantitative models of the visibility and aquatics effects, and economic models to value those effects. We do not suggest developing a quantitative model of terrestrial effects due to the limited scientific understanding. We do suggest employing a model to quantify and value health effects, since an existing model can be used with modest effort. У УThe $500,000 plan includes, in addition:Ф Ф Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССModestly improved estimation of direct costs of EMOs Р$РССEffects of EMOs on ozone estimated from simple correlation studies Р$РССQuantification of visibility and aquatic effects Р$РССQuantification of health effects using RFF healthЉeffects model Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССValuation of visibility, aquatic, and health effects based on national averages Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССLimited costР!Рbenefit analysis using benefit estimates У У7.3.3. A $1 million plan Ф Ф The $1 million plan should allow the development of substantially more credible models that cover effects over a wider area of the SAMI region. It should support a 2Љyear IAF program, continuing on to Phase III. Phase II of the the $1 million plan should be similar to the $500,000 plan, but should also include starting the new modules. The most promising and important modules should be expanded in Phase III. Modules that do not appear promising, or that have already demonstrated adequate credibility relative to their importance to the results, will not need continued development during Phase III, freeing up resources for the most critical modules. For this plan, we suggest substantially improving the scope and coverage of models for estimating direct costs, ozone concentrations, and environmental effects, including, for the first time, a model of terrrestrial effects. У УThe $1 million plan includes, in addition:Ф Ф Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССA limited second refinement in Phase III extending over a second year. Р$РССSubstantially improved estimation of direct costs of EMOs Р$РССImproved model for predicting ozone concentrations Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССImproved models to assess primary environmental effects, including a limited model for terrestrial effects Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССImproved ability to value of environmental effects Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССAbility to estimate indirect socioeconomic effects, including those on jobs Р$РССImproved ability to perform costР!Рbenefit analysis for selected EMOs, using direct and indirect costs Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССSAMI IAF software for communication and education Р$РССMore substantial peer review with resulting increased scientific credibility of models У У7.3.4. A $4 million plan Ф Ф For a budget of $4 million , it will be possible to develop more credible modules, better able to pass scientific review, and more specifically focused on the issues of concern to SAMI. If the availability of a $4 million budget is known at the inception of Phase II, we suggest that the $1 million Phase II plan described above be executed with a modest expansion during 1996. The main difference during 1996 would be commencement of work on additional modules. During fall 1997, version II.2 will be subject to careful review and uncertainty analysis to identify the modules that are priorities for refinement in Phase III. This plan would include research to develop models for secondary environmental benefits, including effects on crops, and cultural materials. У УThe $4 million plan includes, in addition:Ф Ф Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССEnhanced Phase III, a substantial additional iteration of the IAF over an extra year, producing enhanced scientific credibility and ability to address SAMI's needs Р$РССSubstantially improved modules for environmental effects (aquatic, terrestrial, and visibility), collecting more locationЉspecific data and developing more detailed and credible scientific models Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССMore credible and regionЉspecific valuation of environmental effects Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА СР$РССSubstantial improvement in ability to estimate indirect socioeconomic effects Р$РССExtensive peer review to establish credibility of models and to obtain expert advice on improving them Р$РССSubstantially more sophisticated and polished SAMI IAF software that can be distributed to SAMI participants, scientists, policy makers, and high schools for communication and education б#М^є\  PŽЧQМP#бУ У7.4 Sample budgets by planФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽШQXP#б We provide sample budget breakdowns in Table 7Љ1, following the plans just described. They are based on our own rough cost estimates for moduleЉdevelopment costs, since the current SAMI contractors have not been able to supply us with their own cost estimates. These numbers should be regarded as illustrative, to be refined in the light of more detailed cost estimates for each module to be provided by candidate contractors, as described below in Section 7.5, and by a refined articulation of SAMIРРs priorities.ŒХХа А„А8 аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА(м4` И hРpШ xа (#џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ УTable 7Љ1: Ф ФSpending breakdown for four plans а А8Аќ аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА(м4` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й K й в h Аxц ттёт@@@@@ Аxц ттёт@@@@@h вм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#єCє\  PŽЩQєP#бй K йУ УBudget ($ thousands)й x йммаа$250й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа$500 ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа $1,000 мм $4,000 Ф Фм"ŠŠ"мммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааPhase II (1996)й й аай x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа$250 ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа$500 ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа $500 мм $2,000 м"ŠŠ"мммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааPhase III (1997)й й аай x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа $500 мм $2,000 м"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ УBy task:ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Ф Фмм м"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааEmissions forecastingммаа$10й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа$20 ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа $60 мм $200 м"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааDirect costsммаа$40й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа$50 ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа $100 мм $450 м"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџWџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааAtmospheric chemistry & transportммммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа мм м"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа SOx, NOx, and PMммаа$20й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа$25 ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа $30 мм $100 м"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Ozone, .....ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙiС q Щ!yџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа$40й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа $80 мм $200 м"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааVisibility effectsммаа$20й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа$40 ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа $80 мм $300 м"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааAquatics effectsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙiС q Щ!yџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа$50й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа $100 мм $300 м"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааTerrestrial effectsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡п7ч ? —џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа$50й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x ймм $300 м"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааHuman healthммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙiС q Щ!yџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа$10й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа $20 мм $50 м"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааProperty and materialsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ммаа$300й й аа й x йм"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџWџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааValuation of environmental effectsмм$40й й ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа $60 мм $200 м"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааIndirect socioЉeconomic effectsммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡п7ч ? —џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа$60й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x ймм $500 м"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааDevelopment of IAFммаа$50й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа$70 ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа $90 мм $200 м"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааWork on modules by IA contractorммаа$60й й ‘ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа$50 ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа $30 мм $100 н"ŠŠ"нммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааProject coordinationммаа$20й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа$50 ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа $100 мм $200 м"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааApplication of IAF to EMOsммаа$20й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа$40 ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа $60 мм $300 м"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааSAMI educational softwareммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааммааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡п7ч ? —џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа$50й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x ймм $200 м"ŠŠ"мммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ—УяG Ÿ ї OЇџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааPeer reviewммаа$10й й ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЙАiСџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа й x йммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ‡пА7џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа$15 ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџU­]Е џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа $30 ммааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџlФ` џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа $100ХХй й й - йммХХааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА(м4` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#М^є\  PŽЪQМP#бй - йУ У7.4.Timeline for Phases I, II, and IIIФ ФХХй й Т(((ТТмммТС€(( СС€АА Сб#XPє\  PŽЫQXP#бУУР$РССOrganize the IA process into two further Phases, II and III, to follow the current Phase I. Phase III would be funded only for budgets of $1,000,000, or greaterФФ а Аќм8 аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџмT4` Œ ф <”ьDœєLЄќ!џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАмааУУ.ФФ а м8Аќ аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА(м4` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа ХХааа Аќ аааУ УFigure 7Љ1: Outline schedule for IAF Design and four plansФ Ф а АЄ аааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА(м4` И hРpШ xа џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааХХ ааа АЄАќ аааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА(м4` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа The following is the schedule for the current phase, due to end in October 1995. У УPhase I: Design of integratedЉassessment framework (IAF)Ф Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА(м4` Œ И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТ(((ТТмммТТТТ444ТТ` ` ` ТТŒ Œ Œ ТС€` ` СС€44СС€СС€мм СС€(( СС€АА СССССJun 9_12, 95ССSAMI Greenville meeting; Initial presentation of outline for IAF design July 14ССContract start for Phase I IAF design. July 19Љ20ССWorkshop in Atlanta on integrated assessment and socioeconomic effects Sep 7ССDraft report sent to SAMI Sep 14Р!Р15ССMeeting to review draft IAF design Sep 26ССReview of IAF design by SAMI Governing Body Oct 10ССFinal comments due to Lumina Oct 31ССFinal IAF design due to SAMI. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ УKickoff meetingФ Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССRequire all contractors to attend a kickoff meeting early in Phase II to establish a common vision of the project, and to negotiate module specifications. ФФ ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа The goal of the kickoff meeting is to make sure that all participants share a common vision about the goals and conduct of the IA project, and that explicit specifications for all modules are understood and agreed by all concerned parties.ŒааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССDivide Phase II and III each into three cycles of progressive refinement, at approximately 4Љmonth intervals. ФФ ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа These cycles will result in two interim versions and a final version of the modules and integration within each phase. Peer reviewers will examine the secondЉcycle model during the early fall, so that there is time for contractors to respond to their comments by the end of the Phase. У УPhase II: Initial implementation and application of IAFФ Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` Œ И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТТТ` ` ` ТТŒ Œ Œ ТС€` ` СС€СС€мм СС€АА СССNov 95ССSelection of Phase II contractors for IAF, emissions cost, and transport modules Dec 95ССStart of Phase II contracts for IAF, emissions cost, and transport Dec 95ССSelection of Phase II contractors for other modules Jan 96ССStart of Phase II contracts for other modules Jan 96ССKickoff meeting of all contractors and SAMI to finalize specifications for modules Apr 96ССPhase II.1 draft integrated model with specified scope and dimensions, but some dummy data; peer review of design Sep 96ССPhase II.2 integrated model with real data for all phase II modules; sample application to selected EMOs Oct 96ССPeer review and sensitivity analysis of Phase II.2 model, to identify priorities for which modules should be refined or added in Phase III, and to assess potential value of additional work Jan 97ССMeeting to present Phase II.3 refined integrated model with applications to more EMOs to SAMI (date suggested by SAMI) ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУ УPhase III: Refinement and application of IAFФ Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` Œ И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТТТ` ` ` ТТŒ Œ Œ ТС€` ` СС€СС€мм СС€АА СССNov 96ССSelection of contractors for Phase III Jan 96ССStart of Phase III contracts Jan 97ССPhase III kickoff meeting to finalize specifications for Phase III new and refined modules. Apr 97ССPhase III.1 draft revised integrated model, and initial peer review Oct 97ССPhase III.2 integrated model with real data for all phase II modules; sample application to selected EMOs; peer review Jan 98ССMeeting to present Phase III.3 integrated model with applications to more EMOs to SAMI. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааб#М^є\  PŽЬQМP#бУ У7.5 Coordination of contracts with the IAF planФ Ф ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТС€АА Сб#XPє\  PŽЭQXP#бУУР$РССEnsure that the statements of work (SOWs) and schedules for specialist contractors developing components of the IAF coordinate with the general plans and schedule. ФФŒааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Several past integratedЉassessment projects have suffered from not coordinating the SOWs, deliverables, and schedules for contractors with the overall plan for integration. As a small example, the present IAF design might have been able to benefit more from the work of other SAMI contractors had their SOWs and schedules been more closely coordinated with the IAF design project. In Phase II and III of the SAMI IAF, it is important that their deliverables and dates mesh with the overall plan and schedule outlined in this document. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССWhere possible, develop RFPs (requests for a proposal) and SOWs in consultation with the IA contractor.ФФ ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Since the IA contractor is responsible for integrating component modules and maintaining the project schedule, it may be helpful for SAMI to obtain its input to the specification of tasks, deliverables, and schedules to ensure a coherent plan for integration. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССFor high budget scenarios, ensure that contractors' deliverables include a reducedЉform version of their module, implemented in the chosen software environment to meet agreed interface specifications.ФФ Р$РССContractors should be responsible for verifying that each delivered version of their module matches the specifications, produces credible results, and, where possible, is calibrated against observations or detailed model results. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа The contractor is in the best position to verify the integrity of its module implementation. It should test the module against a range of input scenarios. Where modules are reducedЉform models, fitted against empirical data or calibrated versus detailed model results, the contractor must verify the quality of the fit or calibration, and must provide clear documentation of the method used and its results. Peer review of the credibility of each module will rely on such verification and documentation. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТС€АА С УУР$РССRFPs should request contractors to specify the best refinement or level of detail for the module that they can produce for two or three cycles, and at the proposed levels of funding.ФФ ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Candidate contractors are in the best position to estimate their cost and abilities for developing a module to match the level of detail outlined in Table 4Љ1. Requesting options for level and/or cost in an RFP will provide more reliable estimates, since they will form part of a competitive proposal. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТС€АА СУУР$РССRFPs should request proposals for two phases, Phase II and Phase III, making clear that the results of Phase II should stand by themselves, if Phase III does not occur.ФФ Р$Р ССThe RFPs should propose levels of funding for each phase, and should request that the proposer specify the best module for each funding level, allowing the option to propose alternative funding levels. ааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААаа Given the tight budget consequent on the low funding levels, it will be helpful to provide guidance in RFPs of potential levels of funding. However, it is desirable to provide contractors with the option of providing proposals for other levels of funding, in case they wish to suggest other options that may be of value to SAMI. б#М^є\  PŽЮQМP#бУ У7.6 Potential contractors for IAF modulesФ Ф б#XPє\  PŽЯQXP#б To be provided. аOаУУУ УReferencesФ Ф ФФ ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТС€АА СAmaral, Deborah, Parker Reist, et al., 1995, УУA Study of Visibility Improvements in the Southern Appalachians: An Unsolicited Report for The Southern Appalachian Mountain InitiativeФФ, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, April, 108 pages. ТмммТС€АА СEuropean Commission, 1994, УУExternalities of Fuel Cycles: Р РExternE Project,РР Working Documents 1Љ8. ФФ ТмммТС€АА СGregory, Robin and Ralph L. Keeney, 1994, Р РCreating Policy Alternatives Using Stakeholder Values,РР УУManagement ScienceФФ, Vol. 40, No. 8, August, pp. 1035Р!Р1048. ТмммТС€АА СGroblicki, P.J., Wolff, G.T., and Countess, R.J., 1981,Р РVisibilityЉReducing Species in the Denver РРBrown Cloud'ЉI. Relationships Between Extinction and Chemical Composition,РР УУAtmos.Environ., ФФVol. 15, pp. 2473Р!Р2484. Morgan, M. Granger and Max Henrion, 1990, УУUncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy AnalysisФФ, with a chapter by Mitchell Small, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 332 pages. а АќА аТмммТС€АА СNational Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP), 1991УУ, National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program: 1990 Integrated Assessment ReportФФ, The NAPAP Office of the Director,Washington, D.C., November, 520 pages. ТмммТС€АА СNational Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP), 1989УУ, Models Planned for Use in the NAPAP Integrated AssessmentФФ, The NAPAP Office of the Director, Washington, D.C., December, 195 pages. ТмммТС€АА СOak Ridge National Laboratory and Resources for the Future, 1994 and forthcoming,УУ Findings of Fuel Cycle Externalities Studies Reports 2Љ8ФФ , prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy and the Commission of the European Communities contract DEЉAC05Љ84OR21400, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN and McGraw Hill/Utility Data Institute, Washington, D.C. ТмммТС€АА СRCG, HaglerЉBailly, 1994, УУNew York State Environmental Externalities Cost StudyФФ, draft reports 1Р!Р4, prepared for Empire State Electric Energy Research Corporation and New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, prepared by RCG/Hagler, Bailly, Boulder, CO. а А Аќ аТмммТС€АА СSisler, J.F., Huffman, D. and D.A. Latimer, 1993, УУSpatial and Temporal Patterns and the Chemical Composition of Haze in the United States: An Analysis of the IMPROVE Network, 1988Р!Р1991ФФ, Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere, Colorado State University, CO. ТмммТС€АА СTrijonis, J., Cass, G.R., McRae, G., Horie, Y., Lim, W., Chang, N., and Cahill, T., 1982, УУAnalysis of Visibility/Aerosol Relationships and Visibility Modeling/Monitoring Alternatives for CaliforniaФФ, Final Report to California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, CA. аOаааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџА` И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааУУУ УAcronyms and GlossaryФ Ф ФФ ааааџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџАм` Œ И hРpШ xџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџААааТмммТТТТ` ` ` ТТŒ Œ Œ ТС€` ` СС€СС€мм СС€АА СССAQRVССAirЉQualityР!РRelated Value. ТмммТТТТ` ` ` ТТŒ Œ Œ ТС€` ` СС€СС€мм СС€АА СССAnalyticaССA software program developed by Lumina Decision Systems, as a successor to Demos, to support risk analysis, decision analysis, engineeringР!Рeconomic modeling, and integrated assessment. ASTRAPССAn atmospheric transport model developed at Argonne National Laboratory, used as a basis for the sourceР!Рreceptor matrices in TAF. CAAAССThe Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. DeciviewsССA logarithmic measure of visibility. DemosССDecision Modeling System ЉЉ A software program developed by Lumina Decision Systems to support risk analysis, engineeringР!РEconomic modeling, and integrated assessment. DoEССDepartment of Energy. EMOССEmissionЉManagement Option. One of a number of (currently about 80) options identified by SAMI as candidate policy for reducing or mitigating emissions of atmospheric pollutants. EPAССEnvironmental Protection Agency. Existence valueССSee nonuse value GISССGeographic information system Р"Р computer software for representing, searching, displaying, and analyzing geographic information, especially in map formats. IAССIntegrated assessment. IAFССIntegratedЉassessment framework. IAWGССIntegrated Assessment Working Group of SAMIРРs TOC. LuminaССLumina Decision Systems, Inc., the contractor for the Phase I design of the IAF. NAPAPССThe National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program, a federal interagency program, created in 1980 to conduct and coordinate research and assessment of issues of acid precipitation. Nonuse valueССThe value of a state of the world, such as the health of trees on the ridges of Great Smokey Mountains or the continued existence of a species, to a person who knows about the situation but who never directly experiences or Р РusesРР it. Also known as an existence value. NOxССNitrogen oxides, including nitrogen dioxide (NOб#єCє\  PŽаQєP#бУУ2)ФФб#XPє\  PŽбQXP#б, which are atmospheric pollutants that are a byproduct of combustion of fossil fuels and can lead to acid precipitation. OCССOrganic carbon, a class of air pollutants. PCССPolicy Committee of SAMI.ŒpHССA measure of acidity. A higher pH value indicates lower acidity. PM 10ССParticulate material as atmospheric dust, with particles of diameter less than 10 microns. RFFССResources for the Future, a nonprofit organization based in Washington D.C.; RFF is part of Lumina's team conducting the Phase I IAF Design for SAMI. RFMССReducedЉform model. A smallЉ to mediumЉsized computer model that is fitted to empirical data or outputs from a detailed model. RFPССRequest for a proposal from SAMI to potential contractors. SAMIССThe Southern Appalachian Mountain Initiative, a consortium of eight states, with representatives from the state environmental agencies, utility companies, community environmental organizations, and federal agencies, whose goal is to consider and recommend actions to improve air quality in the eightЉstate region, with focus on the class 1 areas of National Parks and wilderness areas. SEWGССSocioЉEconomic Working Group of the TOC of SAMI. SOWССStatement of work, specifying tasks, and deliverables, and schedule for a SAMI contractor. SOxССSulfur oxides, including sulfur dioxide (SOб#єCє\  PŽвQєP#бУУ2ФФб#XPє\  PŽгQXP#б), and sulfates, with SOб#єCє\  PŽдQєP#бУУ4ФФб#XPє\  PŽеQXP#б ions ЉЉ atmospheric pollutants that are a byproduct of combustion of fossil fuels. TAFССThe Tracking and Analysis Framework, an integratedЉassessment model designed by Lumina for NAPAP to monitor and evaluate the environmental and economic effects of the CAAA Title IV. TOCССThe Technical Oversight Committee of SAMI. TSPССTotal suspended particulates Р"Р a measure of the concentration of particulate air pollution.