FLOOD00075 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Quulification ff)" the Colomdo Water Conservation Board _ --i;;;;;;;;;---iiiiiiiiii;---=; proval by the CWCB. Services to be provided. at a minimum, include Items I, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 as listed in the CWCB' s Notice of Interest dated March 7, 2000, This section describes the steps proposed for providing these services. Project Initiation One key aspect of this project is that the CWCB has already developed procedures and criteria for conducting these reviews, and the most efficient use of resources will be to quickly transfer the technology of conducting these re- views to the engineers who will perform the re- views, It is proposed that a training session co- ordinated by our project manager and Tom Browning be conducted early in the project. Our proposal for initiating this project 1S that three or more hydraulic engineers with two to six years' experience will be "trained" to per- form the majority of work in conducting these reviews, Hopefully this training can be a coop- erative effort by CWCB and the project man- ager. Following the development of checklists and review procedures, the training can be con, ducted and each review can be assigned to one of the primary reviewers. By spreading the work, up to six or more reviews can be com- pleted simultaneously in order to efficiently ac- cumulate several completed reviews before each CWCB board meeting. Staffing Another key aspect of this project is that these reviews will be assigned to Parsons ES over time, but once assigned, they should be completed as efficiently as possible, It is ex- pected that three to six reviews will be requested within any CWCB board meeting cycle, The work is not full-time, but each of the assigned reviews should be started and completed without interruption in order to prevent stop-and-start inefficiencies. Parsons ES's approach for initial staffing of these reviews is to have each of three primary - m-l7WJ.doc "-- reviewers pc form the work. They would begin by examinin, all the collected information and developing a thorough understandmg of the lo- cale, study n: ethods. and results presented in the study, An effective review cannot bt' conducted until one pe'son acquires a perspective of the situation nearly matching that of the contractor or entity that conducted the study, Once the reviews are assigned, a telephone conlact will be made with the local official(s), This will id"'tify which local official(s) will act as a representative of the community; who con- dueted the study; the history of flooding and floodplain designations; and whether other offi- cials" agencies, engineers. or citizens may have additional infomlation. Personal travel to in- spect the loede under review is not anticipated, Another technique learned from our experi- ence is that each primary review should be done without interruption by work on other projects, To the extent poss.ible, the portion of each re- view to be completed by the primary engineer will not be initiated until the subtasks can be completed without pause, Temn Review It is Parsons ES's philosophy that the experi- ence and ins ght of other engineers can usually enhance the e'valuadon by one primary reviewer. Once the gathered material has been absorbed by the primary n~viewer, he or she will compare the study with th,~ adopted checklist and identify any discrepancies or issues, Following the primary review, a secondary review will be conducted involving a brief meeting with the other study reviewers. the project manager. and possibly a CWeB repre,;entati ve. During this meeting, the primary reviewer will "'present' the study, summarize his or her findmgs. and request comments and input by the others before drafting the written report for the CWC13. If a1 all possible, these "presentations" can be scheduled and coordinated to include participation by a eWeB representati ve on the ------. -- ~PARSDNS 2-4