Laserfiche WebLink
MAR-08-00 THU 11:55 AM ~ ASSOCIATES FAX NO. 1254810 <br />„. Jam.... "_" . `~-`-~... <br />nssocrnrRs <br />,l~A~' Transmittar <br />M Pagts (including cover sheer) 2 Date March 9, 2000 <br />To D1na Olive Fsn N, (713) 513-4197 <br />Frorn: Mike $umgardner <br />]ob Na~ae Bayport '!'erminal Projeu ]'obN <br />Coinmesus <br />I have provided a 171odification of the budget that was sent to you yesterday. This budget <br />removes costs for '!'ask 3 (Review of the Draft EIS) and places the proposed additional cost <br />for review of the proponent's document (32 hours) in the original budget. The cost for <br />review of the Draft EIS therefore increases by $3,360, The budget that you now have for <br />development of the air quality analysis in the EA, if implemented in total, would replace <br />the previous budget for air quality in Subtask 2.2. Therefore, the cost for conducting the <br />more detailed air quality analysis in the EA is only $26,000 (instead of the $8,560 proposed <br />in our original SOW or the $31,920 proposed in Brewstcr's budget <br />In suminary, the Task 3 budget would increase by $3,630 and the Task 2 budget would <br />increase by $26,000. X,astly, Brewster has estimated that a similar level. of analysis for the <br />Texas City site would cost approximately $10,000 since tllero would be some economy of <br />scale. Please call me if you have any questiolxs. <br />Plcasc notify to irnmediately iF not rcreivrd properly <br />Originals of tide ~ tansmission will be sent by mail: no <br />P. O1 <br />1200 Second 5t•recr Suise 200 Sacru~uaco CA 95814 Tekphnne 916 325.4800 Fiusfmile 916 325.4810 <br />