New Search
the City's request, we conducted the preliminary hydraulic analysis using the remaining <br /> budget from the original contract. <br /> In May 2001, we completed the preliminary hydraulic analysis for the Diversion Channel <br /> levee. The UNET model results were summarized in a brief technical memorandum to the <br /> City dated May 9, 2001. Our preliminary hydraulic modeling results coincided with the <br /> Corps' predictions regarding the performance of the Diversion Channel levee. The levee <br /> system downstream of Royal is unlikely to provide protection for the 100-year design storm. <br /> Based on this result, the City decided not to proceed with levee certification for the Diversion <br /> Channel. <br /> In June 2001, we had several conference calls with the City to discuss the implications of <br /> levee certifications on the project and how to proceed with the hydraulic analyses. We also <br /> had conversations with several FEMA staff and technical reviewers from Michael Baker on <br /> the approach to be applied in the LOMR study. During this period, the City decided that they <br /> would still like to pursue a floodway delineation for the A Channel, the Diversion Channel <br /> and the Greenhill Tributary. <br /> Based on the preliminary decisions on the 1135 project levee, the Diversion Channel levee <br /> and the floodway, the hydraulic analyses will be performed corresponding to the scope of <br /> work for Scenario 3, as described in the first draft of the contract addendum dated November <br /> 2000. Under this scenario, we will use the HEC-RAS program to perform both a floodplain <br /> <br /> tom,- and floodway analysis for all three channels (A Channel, Diversion Channel and Greenhill <br /> Tributary). We will also perform the hydraulic analysis for the Diversion Channel under four <br /> different levee configurations. <br /> Since most of the uncertainties described in previous contract addendum have been clarified <br /> and we now have a better understanding of the approach to apply in the hydraulic analyses, <br /> we would like to re-visit and finalize the contract addendum. The following paragraphs <br /> provide a detailed description of the current project status, especially with respect to the <br /> remaining tasks and their budget implications. <br /> Current Proiect Status <br /> The current project status regarding the work that has been completed and budget information <br /> for each task aze summarized in Table 1. The estimated additional budget needed to complete <br /> each of the tasks with respect to the new scope of work is listed in Table 2. As shown in <br /> Table 1, the budget spent as of July 6, 2000 is $57,500. Given the total budget of $59,500 as <br /> provided in the original contract, the remaining budget is $2,000. A more detailed summary <br /> of remaining work is provided below for each task. <br /> s:~proj94~945042°~amazonFEMAkontractaddendum.doc <br /> 07/13/01 <br /> 2 <br /> <br />