FLOOD02551 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Gildersleeve or Doug Williams. Prior to starting any reviews, we anticipate meeting with the CWCB to discuss the overall long term objectives of the State's role and then strategize how best to utilize the contract. A second objective of the initial meeting will be to confilID criteria for accepting or rejecting submittals. Once the procedures and criteria have been established, we believe a trial review submittal would be appropriate. This would present the our review techniques and procedures, and allow CWCB input into refining our process. Our general approach to conducting the reviews will be to first establish a special room at our office dedicated solely for the purpose of processing the reviews. This room will hold our library of FEMA documents, and a complete file of all FIRMs relative to the study area and any technical data that we have regarding current floodplains. The room will also house a computer work station having all necessary computer programs to aid in the review process, including a DSL internet connection. All work on the contract will be conducted in this room, and documents received will not be allowed outside of the room. This will preserve the chain of custody for all review documents, and help maintain compliance with FEMA mandated procedures for storage of revision data. When we receive a call from the CWCB regarding a new review request, we will arrange to pick up the documents immediately, and will confirm received documents with a detailed transmittal letter. The case number assigned which will serve as the basis of our job number which is used to track all time and expenditures. Once every week we will prepare a detailed spreadsheet showing all assigned projects, progress made and any issues needing resolution. ICON will be responsible for the review of technical, scientific, and other administrative support data prepared and submitted as a part of the floodplain study. Each review will typically consist of ensuring that all support data received are complete, technically adequate, are in general compliance with CWCB rules and regulations, are in compliance with FEMA or UDFCD supplemental requirements (if applicable), and are sufficient to support an accurate floodplain study. When first contacted about a submittal, we will inventory the material and conduct our initial review to ascertain if all needed materials have been submitted. In the interest of speeding up reviews, we will use the initial submittal to determine the advisability of requesting a briefing by the engineer or community that prepared the study, and/or the need for a site visit. A briefing could be by phone (with full documentation) with the purpose being to confirm the intent of the submittal and discuss any apparent deficiencies. Needs for site visits will be discussed with the CWCB, in that it may not be required if CWCB persormel have direct knowledge regarding the particular submittal. Once all submittal materials received, we will conduct the reviews using check lists that we will modify based upon the current lists used by FEMA TEe's. The checklist will be customized to best-fit CWCB needs and to add in ICON's perspective of what items need to be critically reviewed. Changes and/or corrections to submitted information will be requested only if informal sensitivity analyses conductcd by our semor engineers indicates that the "ends justify the means." Conflicts of Interest Over the past several years, ICON Engineering, Inc., has prepared many LOMC's for clients throughout the state. Many of these have been prepared under direct contracts with the UDFCD. We have also prepared several FHAD's. Our firm's single largest client is UDFCD, and we need to preserve a working relationship that allows ICON to serve as the reviewing consultant for LOMC submittals, while still allowing ICON to t6