Cost-benefit analysis agencies

Cost/Benefit Analysis Since any change or modification in the process requires additional capital, operation, and maintenance cost, a cost analysis must be included to help management make informed decisions. These factors may include cost avoidance, enhanced productivity, and decreased liability risks from the pollution prevention effort. Federal and state agencies have provided matching grants to small industries to implement source reduction programs. 

The Chemical Industry Position As this paper has shown, cost-benefit analysis has now been incorporated into the regulatory process of many, though not all, agencies dealing with health, safety and the environment. The American chemical industry is, of course, profoundly affected by those agencies, since their rules deal with its operations, its products, its wastes and its relation to the conmunities in which chemical plants are located. It is therefore worthwhile to examine what the position of the industry is toward cost-benefit analysis in regulatory impact determinations. 

Some conclusions can nevertheless be drawn. It seems clear from the survey research data that the American public is concerned over the increase in social regulation, and that there is growing interest in introducing the cost factor into agency considerations. It can reasonably be concluded that, so long as Executive Order 12291 requires regulatory impact analysis, cost-benefit analysis will play that function. Nevertheless, the nature of the debate is very likely to change in ways not yet anticipated by the present participants. 

American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, role In formalizing risk assessments, 148 American regulatory agencies and cost-benefit analysis, 162 American Society for Testing... 

It is probably safe to say that the more people or interior area a building protection system saves from exposure to a release, the better the system is. It is not plausible to say unequivocally that the cheaper the system, the more desirable it is, or vice versa. For cost to be used as a criterion for evaluation, it has to be considered in terms of benefits received. This is known as cost-benefit analysis and is used frequently in the decision-making process by federal agencies (White House, 1992). A detailed discussion of cost and its role in risk assessment, risk management, and decision making can be found in Chapter 6. 

Application of these measures to reduce the frequency of reanalysis required in the radioanalytical chemistry laboratory can be justified by a cost-benefit analysis. The general purpose of supporting acceptance of analytical results has a less determinate economic benefit. The time and effort devoted to QA has increased from about 10% of the total analytical workload to 25-30% at present, as regulatory agencies have required more quality control (QC) measurements and more supporting documents. This increasing cost includes QC measurements, organization and actions instituted to ensure correct and defensible data output. The costs and benefits of QA are considered in Section 11.4. 

Thus, the Executive Order requires that agencies affected by the order employ cost-benefit criteria in developing and issuing regulations. The tool to be applied for that purpose is the Regulatory Impact Analysis. 

---