(f) The test is based on the following principles:
- (1) Since the standard non-Federal cost-share is substantially less than full costs in every case, the ability to pay test should be structured so that reductions in the level of cost-sharing will be granted in only a limited number of cases of severe economic hardship.
- (2) The test should depend not only on the economic circumstances within a project area, but also on the conditions of the state(s) in which the project area is located. Although states' policies with respect to supporting local interests on flood control projects are not uniform, the state represents a potential source of financial assistance which should be considered in the analysis.
- (3) The alternative level of cost-sharing determined under the ability to pay principle should be governed in part by project benefits. If, as a result of the project, local beneficiaries receive more income, or are required to use fewer resources on flood damage repair or replacement, or on flood insurance, a portion of these resources should be available to pay for the non-Federal share, even in those cases where an analysis of current economic conditions indicates that there are relatively limited resources in the project area and its state.
- (4) Since project benefits represent availability of resources in the future, but not the present, project sponsors should be permitted to defer a certain percentage of the non-Federal share whenever current economic circumstances suggest that non-Federal resources may be limited.