136
edits
Changes
mLine 312:
Line 312: − + + + Line 320:
Line 322: − +
→Annual Frequency
===== Annual Frequency =====
===== Annual Frequency =====
Sometimes the regulatory text will explicitly state how often stakeholders must conduct a regulatory activity (e.g., "do Activity X twice per year" or "do Activity X every 6 months"). Other times, the regulatory text may state that an activity must be conducted every time some other event happens (e.g., "do Activity X every time Event Y happens"). An example of the latter is a requirement to report the importation of goods containing a certain chemical: this could happen 1 time, 2 times, or 1,000 times per year.
Sometimes the regulatory text will explicitly state how often stakeholders must conduct a regulatory activity (e.g., "do Activity X once per year" or "do Activity X every 6 months"). Other times, the regulatory text may state that an activity must be conducted every time some other event happens (e.g., "do Activity X every time Event Y happens"). An example of the latter is a requirement to report the importation of goods containing a certain chemical: this could happen 1 time, 2 times, or 1,000 times per year.
Choosing the frequency for a regulatory activity determines how many periods there are in each year in the analysis. The number of periods per year affects the undiscounted impact estimates because it affects how often the RCC estimates the stakeholder count, and the undiscounted impacts depend on how many stakeholders are in the market at any given time. The number of periods per year also affects the discounted impact estimates because each subsequent period happens later in the analytical timeframe and is therefore discounted to a greater extent.
Frequencies in the RCC can be grouped into three categories:
Frequencies in the RCC can be grouped into three categories:
# frequency < 1
# frequency < 1
If the annual frequency is set to 1, then there will be 1 period per year, and therefore 10 total periods over a 10-year timeframe. This is the easy case where the analytical framework probably aligns with how you set up your main CBA (e.g., 10 years spread over 10 columns).
If the frequency is set to 1 then the RCC will more closely align with how you probably set up your main CBA (e.g., 10 years of impact estimates spread over 10 columns). Recall from above that upfront activities are always assumed to have an annual frequency of 1 and that upfront impacts are assumed to be incurred at the beginning of every period. Upfront activities that start at the start of the analytical period will have 11 total periods over a 10-year timeframe (0 ,1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10). Conversely, ongoing costs are assumed to be incurred at the end of every period, so an ongoing cost with a frequency of 1 that lasts 10 years will have 10 total periods.
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.
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.