Changes

Note that the stakeholder count must be estimated in every period of the analysis, and costs incurred in every period must be discounted back to the present-value base year. The frequency determines how many analytical periods there are in each year of the analysis, and hence the total amount of periods throughout the analysis. This means that if you have a lot of periods, the RCC will be estimating the stakeholder count many times and doing a lot of sub-annual discounting. This can be computationally intensive and could hinder the performance of the RCC.   

Note that the stakeholder count must be estimated in every period of the analysis, and costs incurred in every period must be discounted back to the present-value base year. The frequency determines how many analytical periods there are in each year of the analysis, and hence the total amount of periods throughout the analysis. This means that if you have a lot of periods, the RCC will be estimating the stakeholder count many times and doing a lot of sub-annual discounting. This can be computationally intensive and could hinder the performance of the RCC.   

   

   

If the annual frequency is 1, then there will be 1 period per year, and 10 total periods over a 10-year timeframe. This is the easy case and the analytical framework will align with what you probably have in your main CBA. However, if you enter an annual frequency of 1,200, then you are telling the RCC that you want to split every single year into 1,200 evenly spaced periods, in which the stakeholder count must be estimated and impacts must be discounted back to the PV base. Is that really what you want to do? That is probably not how you set up your main CBA. With 1,200 evenly spaced periods that means the RCC will estimate the stakeholder count more than 3 times per day. There is nothing mathematically wrong with this, however it is computationally intensive and it may not be necessary.  

If the annual frequency is 1, then there will be 1 period per year, and 10 total periods over a 10-year timeframe. This is the easy case and the analytical framework will align with what you probably have in your main CBA. However, if you enter an annual frequency of 1,200, then you are telling the RCC that you want to split every single year into 1,200 evenly spaced periods, in which the stakeholder count must be estimated and impacts must be discounted back to the PV base. Is that really what you want to do? That is probably not how you set up your main CBA. With 1,200 evenly spaced periods that means the RCC will estimate the stakeholder count more than 3 times per day. There is nothing mathematically wrong with this, however it is computationally intensive and it may not be necessary.

 

 

The most easily understood frequencies are annually, bi-annually, quarterly, monthly, and weekly. If you are trying to do anything beyond this it is possible that you are making a mistake. Check the message in the Error Check column and consult your TBS analyst if you are unsure what to do.   

The most easily understood frequencies are annually, bi-annually, quarterly, monthly, and weekly. If you are trying to do anything beyond this it is possible that you are making a mistake. Check the message in the Error Check column and consult your TBS analyst if you are unsure what to do.   

You could also have a frequency less than 1. For instance, maybe stakeholders have to do an activity every other year, or every 3 years. The way the RCC handles these cases depends on the stakeholder growth rate.   

You could also have a frequency less than 1. For instance, maybe stakeholders have to do an activity every other year, or every 3 years. The way the RCC handles these cases depends on the stakeholder growth rate.