New Search
As far as the FEMA issues, I wouldn't send the payment just yet. I'm in the process of preparing a response to them but <br /> I need to get a couple of questions answered first. They generally have some folks do a routine preliminary screening to <br /> make° sure afl the items are included before digging into the technical part -sounds like the preliminary reviewer may have <br /> missed some of the explanations in the documents. I've got a call in to the reviewer to check whether they are challenging <br /> the exempt status or whether they missed that the project is federally funded. The list of fees on their website <br /> (ham://www.fema•govlfhm/frm fees.shtm) includes the following exemption: <br /> . Federally sponsored flood-control projects where 50 percent or more of the project's costs are federally funded; <br /> They may be making the argument that despite the federal funding, it's not technically a flood control project because of the <br /> 206 funding. We've never had an issue with that in the past, but they may be cracking down on the specific language of <br /> that exemption to generate some additional revenue. I'll let you know as soon as I hear back from them. <br /> The license part is not an issue. It takes the engineering board some time to process the renewals, and it may not have <br /> been updated yet when they first checked it. The expiration date currently listed on the www:osbeels.org website is <br /> 12/31 /2006. <br /> As far as their item #2 about the increase in base flood elevation, the entire premise of our submittal is based on a <br /> comparison of the adopted flood elevations vs. post-project flood elevations (rather than a comparison of revised pre- <br /> project vs post project flood elevations). They may have missed that point, but again, I've got a call in to them to make sure <br /> they understood the difference. I'll keep you posted on what I find out from them and cc you on any correspondence. <br /> Thanks, <br /> Krey <br /> Krey H. Price, P.E. <br /> .Project Engineer <br /> Tetra Tech Inc. <br /> 1020 sw Taylor St., Ste. 530 <br /> Portland, OR 97205 <br /> ,,.Tel. (503) 223-5388 x224 <br /> Fax (503) 228-8631 <br /> krey.price@tetratech.com <br /> www.tetratech.com <br /> From: FINNEY Kevin P [mailto:Kevin.P.FINNEY@ci.eugene.or.us] <br /> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 9:41 AM <br /> To: 'Price, Krey Tt, Inc.' <br /> Subject: Two issues: gauge and FEMA, was FW: River gauge at mouth of Debri ck slough <br /> Krey: We're running into a problem with getting the readings from the gauge at the mouth of the slough. See Lauri's note <br /> below and her supervisor's response. Now critical is this data now? If we know that a peak event is on the way, maybe we <br /> could make some special arrangements to get a group together to go down there. I'm reluctant to make too much of an <br /> effort if it looks like the data is not critical. The river has been very low . <br /> I got the notice from FEMA about the filing fee and the license issues, etc. Do you have any advice about how we pay the <br /> fee? I will have a check drawn up. Do you have any advice, e.g. should we send the check and additional info they <br /> requested together?, etc. <br /> Thanks, <br /> Kevin <br /> -----Original Message----- <br /> From: TAYLOR Trevor H <br /> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 8:40 AM <br /> To: MULLEN Lauri H; FINNEY Kevin P <br /> <br /> 3/24/2005 <br /> <br />