CC MIN 1969 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

� 9 Operations Committee . He then reviewed the background of Congressional interest in federal involvement in areas of potential geological hazard . He noted that the Government Accounting Office in 1967 and 1968 reported that it was not satisfied with the operations of FHA , that FHA was not using the information being collected , and that it also appeared the VA was accepting one set of criteria and FHA another . The Congressman stated that GAO took the statements of FHA at face value , that FHA would require a Corps of Engineers Study and USGS study , but that FHA nevertheless granted approval of Unit No . 1 in Redwood Shores without the two studies . The Congressman continued with the comments that the real difficulty came when , in the May , 1968 , hearings , FHA Assistant Secretary Ross testified that FHA had not applied standards of earth embankment safety at the ratio of 1 . 5 : 1 which had been recommended to FHA as early as 1965 . He then noted that the Corps of Engineers , which has been the expert in Levee and dike stability since 1899 , had always accepted the 1 : 1 standard , and he noted that in the Corps of Engineers report just issued that three of the dikes along Steinberger Slough do meet the 1 : 1 safety factor . However , because of the standard accepted by FHA during the hearings , and independent of action by the GOC , the FHA issued a circular in August that they would adopt a 1 . 5 : 1 standard . He related , however , that following several discussions with Mr . Moore , USGS engineers , the Corps of Engineers personnel , there is a reasonable likelihood that FHA will withdraw from the 1 . 5 : 1 dike safety i standard . He noted that it might be impossible to meet the 1 . 5 : 1 standard , either here or anywhere else in California . Mr . Moore stated that even Oroville Dam could not meet the standard . Congressman McCloskey stated further that when FHA adopted their 1 . 5 : 1 standard , they were not sure whether this would include earthquake hazards , which added to the confusion . The Congressman acknowledged that the 1965 Seismic Study undertaken by the City prior to development of Redwood Shores was as thorough as could be conducted . He then referred to other studies relating to seismic motion and noted that the present situation also involved a difference of opinion between USGS and FHA as to whether additional studies are necessary in the Redwood Shores area . With reference to requests to him to ask for formal hearings before the Subcommittee of the GOC , he advised that such hearings could result in making Redwood Shores a major focal point in the matter of earthquake research , and that one result of such hearings could be that FHA would not proceed with insuring mortgages until completion of a USGS study , which is expected to take a year . Mr . Degenkolb responded that the Seismic Board knew about the problems regarding potential geological hazards which were referred to by Congressman McCloskey , at the time the Board prepared its report for the City , and that its report took these matters into consideration . He stated that he had read the Corps report in detail and felt that the conclusions of the engineers were based mainly on theory because of lack of full knowledge , and that geological 10 24 g