KTR00078

NANCY POWELL 4/14/2008
Page 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
IN RE: KATRINA CANAL BREACHES CIVIL ACTION

CONSOLIDATED LITIGATION
NO. 05-4182
"K" (2)
PERTAINS TO: MRGO-ROBINSON JUDGE DUVAL
FILED IN: 05-4181, 05-4182, MAG. WILKINSON
05-5237, 05-6073, 05-6314,
05-6324, 05-6327, 05-6359,
06-0225, 06-0886, 06-1885,
06-2152, 06-2278, 06-2287,
06-2824, 06-4024, 06-4065,
06-4066, 06-4389, 06-4634,
06-4931, 06-5032, 06-5155,
06-5159, 06-5161, 06-5162,
06-5260, 06-5771, 06-5786,
06-5937, 07-0206, 07-0621,
07-1073, 07-1271, 07-1285
Videotaped Deposition of
NANCY JEANNE POWELL,
3412 Massachusetts Avenue, Kenner, Louisiana
70065, taken in the offices of the Corps of
Engineers, 7400 Leake Avenue, New Orleans,
Louisiana 70118, on Monday, the 14th day of
April, 2008.
JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

Page 2 Page 4
1 APPEARANCES:
2
1 STIPULATION
3 LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH M. BRUNO 2
(BY: JOSEPH M. BRUNO, ESQ.
4 FLORIAN BUCHLER, ESQ.) 3 It is stipulated and agreed by and between
855 Baronne Street
5 New Orleans, Louisiana 70113 4 counsel for the parties hereto
PLAINTIFFS LIAISON COUNSEL
6
5 that the deposition of the aforementioned
7 LAMBERT & NELSON 6 witness is hereby being taken under the
(BY: HUGH P. LAMBERT, ESQ.)
8 701 Magazine Street 7 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for all
New Orleans, Louisiana 70130
9 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS
8 purposes, in accordance with law;
10
SHER, GARNER, CAHILL, RICHTER, KLEIN &
9 That the formalities of reading and
11 HILBERT 10 signing are specifically not waived;
(BY: R. SCOTT HOGAN, ESQ.)
12 909 Poydras Street 11 That the formalities of certification and
Suite 2800
13 New Orleans, Louisiana 70112
12 filing are specifically waived;
14
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS 13 That all objections, save those as to the
15 SUTTON LAW FIRM 14 form of the question and the responsiveness of
(BY: CHARLES E. SUTTON, JR., ESQ.
16 Suite 105 15 the answer, are hereby reserved until such
17
2101 North Highway 190
Covington, Louisiana 70433
16 time as this deposition, or any part thereof,
ATTORNEYS FOR THE BOARD OF 17 may be used or sought to be used in evidence.
18 COMMISSIONERS FOR THE
ORLEANS LEVEE DISTRICT 18
19 (ALSO PRESENT)
20
19 * * * *
DUPLASS, ZWAIN, BOURGEOIS, MORTON, 20
21 PFISTER & WEINSTOCK
(BY: RYAN MALONE, ESQ.) 21 ROGER D. JOHNS, RDR, CRR, Certified Court
22 Suite 2900
3838 North Causeway Boulevard 22 Reporter for the State of Louisiana,
23 Metairie, Louisiana 70002
ATTORNEYS FOR THE BOARD OF
23 officiated in administering the oath to the
24 COMMISSIONERS FOR THE LAKE BORGNE 24 witness.
BASIN LEVEE DISTRICT
25 (ALSO PRESENT) 25
Page 3 Page 5
1
APPEARANCES CONTINUED:
1 INDEX
2 2
3 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
CIVIL DIVISION 3 PAGE
4 TORTS BRANCH
(BY: MICHELE GREIF, ESQ. 4
5 KARA MILLER, ESQ.)
Post Office Box 888
5 Powell Number 1............................ 13
6 Benjamin Franklin Station
Washington, D.C. 20044
6 MVD-007-000002668.......................... 44
7 ATTORNEYS FOR UNITED STATES 7 2688....................................... 44
8
BURGLASS & TANKERSLEY 8 Coletti Number 2........................... 48
9 (BY: KEA SHERMAN, ESQ.)
5213 Airline Drive
9 MVD-007-000002526.......................... 97
10 Metairie, Louisiana 70001 10 2537....................................... 97
ATTORNEYS FOR JEFFERSON PARISH
11 11 Powell 2................................... 98
12 FRANK LUPO, ESQ.
7400 Leake Avenue
12 Powell 3.................................. 124
13 New Orleans, Louisiana 70118
ATTORNEY FOR UNITED STATES ARMY
13 Powell 4.................................. 128
14 CORPS OF ENGINEERS 14
15
CHAFFE, MCCALL LLP 15
16 (BY: ROBERT FISHER, ESQ. 16
JOHN ROBERT, ESQ.)
17 Suite 2300 Energy Center 17
New Orleans, Louisiana 70163
18 ATTORNEYS FOR LAFARGE NORTH AMERICA 18
(ALSO PRESENT)
19 19
20
VIDEOTAPED BY:
20
21 Gilly Delorimier 21
Depo-Vue, Inc.
22 22
23
REPORTED BY:
23
24 ROGER D. JOHNS, RMR, CRR, RDR, CSR 24
Certified Court Reporter
25 State of Louisiana 25
2 (Pages 2 to 5)
Page 6 Page 8
1 VIDEO OPERATOR: 1 been selected for this honor is because your
2 This is the videotaped deposition 2 name appears on a witness list which has been
3 of Nancy Powell. This deposition is 3 filed by the government and your name appears
4 being taken today at 7400 Leake Avenue 4 on that witness list as a person that they
5 in New Orleans, Louisiana on April the 5 have suggested to us they may call at the
6 14th, 2008. The time is 9:44 A.M. 6 trial. Do you understand that?
7 Would Counsel present please 7 A. Yes.
8 introduce themselves. 8 Q. Okay. Now, they have also indicated
9 MS. GREIF: 9 the subject matter of your testimony; and they
10 Michele Greif for the United 10 have indicated that the subject matter will be
11 States. 11 the hydrology of the MRGO. Did you know
12 MS. MILLER: 12 that?
13 Kara Miller for the United 13 A. No.
14 States. 14 Q. Okay. Have they discussed with you
15 MR. LUPO: 15 the testimony that you will be offering at
16 Frank Lupo, U.S. Army Corps of 16 trial?
17 Engineers. 17 A. No.
18 MR. SUTTON: 18 Q. Well, the reason why I am taking
19 Charles Sutton, Orleans Levee 19 your deposition is because I would like to try
20 District, also present. 20 to figure out what it is that you're going to
21 MR. FISHER: 21 say at trial so that I can prepare.
22 Robert Fisher, Lafarge North 22 Now, I know you gave a deposition
23 America, also present. 23 in the Tommaseo case and unfortunately we were
24 MS. SHERMAN: 24 not able to get a copy of the transcript, so
25 Kea Sherman, Jefferson Parish. 25 you'll forgive me in advance if we ask some of
Page 7 Page 9
1 MR. MALONE: 1 the same questions. And I don't know what
2 Ryan Malone on behalf of EJLD and 2 they asked you so I can't avoid it. All
3 LBLD, also present. 3 right?
4 MR. HOGAN: 4 A. All right.
5 Scott Hogan on behalf of 5 Q. Now, let's start with, since you are
6 Plaintiffs. 6 going to testify about hydrology, would you
7 MR. LAMBERT: 7 tell us --
8 Hugh Lambert on behalf of the 8 MS. GREIF:
9 Plaintiffs. 9 Objection.
10 MR. BUCHLER: 10 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
11 Florian Buchler, Plaintiffs. 11 Q. -- what hydrology is? She will --
12 MR. BRUNO: 12 If she doesn't make these objections, she'll
13 And Joseph Bruno, Plaintiffs 13 get fired.
14 Liaison Counsel. 14 A. Okay.
15 VIDEO OPERATOR: 15 Q. So they makes these objections --
16 Swear the witness, please. 16 A. Fine.
17 NANCY JEANNE POWELL, 17 Q. -- and the way it work is this. She
18 3412 Massachusetts Avenue, Kenner, Louisiana 18 is protecting the record.
19 70065, after being duly sworn, did testify as 19 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively).
20 follows: 20 Q. And if she doesn't make any
21 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 21 objection at all, then somebody might suggest
22 Q. Good morning, Ms. Powell. 22 that she didn't --
23 A. Morning. 23 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively).
24 Q. My name is Joseph Bruno, again. And 24 Q. -- preserve the objection. So she's
25 the reason why you're lucky enough to have 25 doing that to preserve the objection on the
3 (Pages 6 to 9)
Page 10 Page 12
1 record. Now, the objections that must be made 1 Q. Okay.
2 on the record are the ones that relate to 2 A. -- or manage a project, construct a
3 form, because that would allow me to change 3 project. As a hydraulic engineer, I look at
4 the form of the question if that was 4 the volume of water in context with the type
5 appropriate. But all other objections are 5 of project that is being designed.
6 reserved like, whatever they are, -- 6 Q. Okay.
7 MR. LAMBERT: 7 A. I don't study the volume of water
8 Relevance, materiality. 8 for the science sake. I apply that knowledge
9 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 9 of hydrology to, you know, how do we design a
10 Q. Relevance, stuff like that. So 10 channel, how do we design what the Corps of
11 that's what that's about. 11 Engineers does.
12 A. All right. 12 Q. Okay. Let's learn then a little bit
13 Q. So you are required to answer the 13 about your educational background and your
14 question unless, of course, your Counsel says 14 experience. Let's see. You have been kind
15 "Do not answer this question," in which case 15 enough to give us, which I now know to be an
16 then I'll be yelling and screaming and calling 16 outdated curriculum vitae, and if you would --
17 the Judge and all of that stuff. So we hope 17 I would like to attach this, but if you would
18 we don't go there. But the bottom line is 18 prefer to give us a more updated one, I'm
19 generally you must answer the question because 19 happy to attach that one.
20 I am entitled to know what you know. And as I 20 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively).
21 told you, that's what this is all about. So 21 Q. I'll leave the choice to you. Or
22 she'll be making all of these objections, 22 you could let us attach this one and you could
23 it'll be fine, you'll pause and you'll stop 23 indicate --
24 and you'll look at her and see what she has to 24 A. I can indicate.
25 say. Okay? 25 Q. -- where the updates need to be.
Page 11 Page 13
1 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively). 1 How about that?
2 Q. All right. Let's start all over 2 A. That would be good.
3 again. If you would be so kind, can you tell 3 Q. Okay.
4 us what is hydrology? 4 MR. BRUNO:
5 A. Hydrology is the study of the volume 5 Do we have a clean copy?
6 of water and its sources. 6 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
7 Q. Okay. Do you regard yourself as an 7 Q. We'll just mark yours --
8 expert in the field of hydrology? 8 A. Okay.
9 MS. GREIF: 9 Q. -- as Powell Number 1.
10 Objection. 10 MS. GREIF:
11 THE WITNESS: 11 I'll give you a sticker.
12 I consider myself an expert in 12 THE WITNESS:
13 hydrologic engineering. 13 Oh. Write "Powell Number 1"?
14 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 14 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
15 Q. Okay. Which prompts me to ask what 15 Q. Yes, if you don't mind. This is an
16 is hydrologic engineering? 16 example of our technological advancements in
17 A. It's the application of hydrology in 17 the field of law. We apply the sticker and we
18 an engineering field. 18 write "Powell Number 1".
19 Q. Okay. Can you help me understand 19 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively).
20 that a little bit better? The application of 20 Q. All right. You, it appears,
21 the study of the volume of water -- 21 graduated from the Virginia Polytechnic
22 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively). 22 Institute and State University at Blacksburg,
23 Q. -- to engineering, which is what? 23 Virginia and you graduated with distinction,
24 A. Well, engineers generally design 24 --
25 something -- 25 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively).
4 (Pages 10 to 13)
Page 14 Page 16
1 Q. -- obtaining a Bachelor of Science 1 Headquarters office in Washington.
2 in civil engineering in June of 1978. Is that 2 Q. Okay. Then, let's see, you
3 right? 3 graduated Tulane with a Master's --
4 A. That's correct. 4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Okay. And did you take any specific 5 Q. -- in 1986 with a terrific GPA,
6 courses that related to hydrology or 6 3.9. And once again with an emphasis on
7 hydrologic engineering at that time? 7 hydraulics, hydrology, and geotechnical
8 A. Yes. 8 engineering.
9 Q. Okay. Was that a specialty within 9 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively).
10 your degree that you pursued or was it just 10 Q. Right? Okay. Now, so let's see.
11 one of the many courses that you took? 11 When did you start working, your first job?
12 A. One of the many courses I took. 12 A. After I graduated?
13 Q. Okay. Now, it says that "with 13 Q. Well, that's why I asked the
14 completion of the Cooperative Education 14 question. You apparently were working
15 Program". Would you tell us a little bit 15 before.
16 about -- what is that? 16 A. I worked while I went to school and
17 A. The Cooperative Education Program is 17 then I worked after I graduated, yes.
18 a program where you work in an organization 18 Q. Did you work in hydrology at that
19 for part of the time and then you go to school 19 time?
20 for part of the time. 20 A. I worked while I was going to school
21 Q. Okay. Now, you say that the 21 for Fairfax County Department of Public Works
22 emphasis on hydraulics, hydrology and 22 in their Drainage Department.
23 environmental engineering. 23 Q. Okay. And for how long did you work
24 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively). 24 for them?
25 Q. Now, that's in connection with your 25 A. Through the co-op program, it would
Page 15 Page 17
1 study at Virginia? 1 have been a four-year program.
2 A. At Virginia Tech. 2 Q. Okay.
3 Q. All right. So you just chose as an 3 A. Here again, part time.
4 a focus courses in those subjects; right? 4 Q. And then after that?
5 A. Yes. 5 A. After I graduated?
6 Q. Okay. And so early on you chose to 6 Q. After you graduated, which was '78
7 be knowledgeable about hydraulics and 7 -- See, I see -- Maybe I am reading it the
8 hydrology; right? 8 wrong way. You first worked for the Corps I
9 A. Yes. 9 guess was in '82?
10 Q. That's something that you have been 10 A. No, that's where this is incomplete.
11 interested in for a long time? 11 Q. Okay.
12 A. Yes, uh-huh. 12 A. I worked for Greenhorn and Omara
13 Q. Okay. How did you become interested 13 after I graduated in 1978 and worked for them
14 in the field? 14 for a little less than a year. Then --
15 A. My father was a hydraulic engineer. 15 Q. What is -- Tell us real quick,
16 Q. Ah, okay. And who did he work for? 16 Greenhorn, what is that?
17 A. He worked for the Corps of 17 A. Greenhorn and Omara is an
18 Engineers. 18 engineering consulting firm.
19 Q. For how long? 19 Q. And what did you do for them?
20 A. 50 plus years. 20 A. I reviewed flood insurance studies.
21 Q. Was he associated with this office? 21 Q. Okay. And the purpose of that was
22 A. No. 22 what, the review?
23 Q. Where was he employed; which office? 23 A. They were a contractor for FEMA and
24 A. He worked part -- part of his career 24 other organizations would prepare the flood
25 in Portland and part of his career at the 25 insurance study and we would do the technical
5 (Pages 14 to 17)
Page 18 Page 20
1 review. 1 Q. That's okay. That's fine. I just
2 Q. What is a flood insurance study? 2 wanted just the most general description. I
3 A. The flood insurance study is the 3 do appreciate that.
4 analysis that is used to develop the 100 year 4 All right. One year. There, the
5 flood elevation and from which FEMA maps the 5 next job?
6 overflow and from which the government will 6 A. Started work for the Corps of
7 set Federal flood insurance. 7 Engineers in April of 1979.
8 Q. All right. Those 100 year floods, I 8 Q. Okay. Right. This is the part
9 have always been curious about that, because 9 that's not on here.
10 it doesn't really take into consideration 10 A. Right.
11 flooding from overtopping of levees and the 11 Q. Let's run through that. What did
12 like, does it? 12 you do first, where?
13 A. It can. 13 A. At the New Orleans District.
14 Q. I see. In New Orleans it does not? 14 Q. So you have been at the New Orleans
15 A. I have no personal knowledge. 15 District for your whole career?
16 Q. Fine. Fair enough. Sometimes they 16 A. Since 1979.
17 take into consideration flooding from 17 Q. Okay. Great. Where is our -- our
18 overtopping and sometimes they don't on these 18 chart, organizational chart. I know it's not
19 flood maps? 19 the chart that was in place. I'll tell you
20 A. It depends on the area that you're 20 that now. It's the chart we've got. And it's
21 in and whether you have overtopping or not. 21 a chart which shows Colonel Richard Wagenaar
22 It's -- It's a case by case basis. 22 as the Commander. So I only say that to you
23 Q. I see. When you say "whether you 23 to give you some sense of time. All right?
24 have overtopping or not", can you -- what does 24 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively).
25 that mean? Does that mean within a -- with a 25 Q. Did you go directly into the
Page 19 Page 21
1 certain frequency or within a certain period 1 Engineering Division?
2 of time or what? 2 A. Yes.
3 A. I am not a subject matter expert for 3 Q. All right. And did you go directly
4 FEMA. I just know what I have read. 4 into the Hydraulics Branch?
5 Q. Okay. What you have read is fine. 5 A. The Hydraulics and Hydrologic
6 A. The -- FEMA will map your flood zone 6 Branch, yes.
7 depending if there's a presence or an absence 7 Q. So you have been in the Hydraulics
8 of a levee. You know, some parts of the 8 Branch for your whole tenure at the Corps?
9 country don't have levees, some parts do. For 9 A. Yes.
10 example, if you're on the Mississippi River 10 Q. Okay. What was your entry level
11 and you have a levee, you're up in Tennessee, 11 position?
12 you know, on the river, there will be a 12 A. I was a GS-7 engineer.
13 calculation of the 100 year flood and there 13 Q. All right. Are you professionally
14 will be an assessment as to whether that 14 licensed?
15 elevation exceeds the levee height or if the 15 A. Yes.
16 500 year exceeds the levee height. 16 Q. And when did you obtain your
17 Q. I see. 17 license?
18 A. And FEMA will map the interior 18 A. In 2000.
19 differently depending on, you know, whether 19 Q. 2000.
20 that water level does exceed or not. 20 A. Okay. That's one of the things that
21 Q. I see. 21 needs to be noted on here. It said I took the
22 A. They do have some very defined 22 exam in 2000. I passed in 2000 and have been
23 processes and rules which I'm now struggling 23 licensed since 2000.
24 to tell you because it's beyond, you know, 24 Q. All right. If you want to make
25 what I do now. 25 notes to yourself about changes. We're -- Not
6 (Pages 18 to 21)
Page 22 Page 24
1 on that one. Let me give you a piece of 1 Q. All right. If you could just bring
2 paper. Because I know -- 2 us up to 19- -- I suppose, let's see, bring us
3 MR. LAMBERT: 3 up to '82? And I think that we will just rely
4 Let her correct that one. 4 on your resume for the rest.
5 MR. BRUNO: 5 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively).
6 Oh, yes. Yes. 6 Q. So let's get that done. So '78 to
7 THE WITNESS: 7 '82, were you in the same position?
8 I was just going to scratch out 8 A. Yes.
9 the word "exam". 9 Q. Okay. You supervised technicians
10 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 10 responsible for stages and discharge
11 Q. That's a great idea. 11 publication?
12 A. Can I -- 12 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively).
13 Q. No, no. No, no. Every now and then 13 Q. Streamlined processes, introduced
14 my co-Counsel has a reasonably good idea. 14 new technology, and increased technician
15 A. It's going to read "Registered 15 responsibilities. Right?
16 Professional Engineer, Civil Engineer, New 16 A. That was beginning in 1982.
17 Orleans, Louisiana, October, 2000". 17 Q. Oh, okay. Well, let's -- Then just
18 MR. BRUNO: 18 generally describe --
19 Kudos. 19 A. Okay.
20 THE WITNESS: 20 Q. -- then --
21 I'll just scratch that out. I'll 21 A. From --
22 even initial it if you want. 22 Q. -- from '78 to '82, since that's
23 MR. LAMBERT: 23 missing.
24 It only happens like once a year, 24 A. '78 and '79 was with Greenhorn and
25 so it's no big deal. 25 Omara. 1979, started work for the Corps of
Page 23 Page 25
1 MR. BRUNO: 1 Engineers here in New Orleans; was a GS-7
2 No, it should require a notation 2 hydraulic/civil engineer; got a promotion to
3 on this record. That's what it -- 3 GS-9 one year later; and a promotion to a
4 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 4 GS-11 one year later; and stayed in the
5 Q. I'm sorry, I wasn't thinking. And 5 organization from 1979 to 1982 when I got this
6 any other changes that you want to note on 6 developmental assignment.
7 there is fine, too. I was thinking to myself 7 Q. In '82?
8 you might want to do this, to change your 8 A. In '82.
9 resume when you're done. That's why I got 9 Q. All right. As I'm sure you know,
10 sideways. But anyway, this is good. All 10 this litigation regards allegations made by
11 right. So a licensed -- 11 the Plaintiffs about the MRGO. You know
12 MR. LAMBERT: 12 that? Do you know that? No?
13 Should we talk some more about 13 A. No.
14 that? 14 Q. All right. So you don't know what
15 MR. BRUNO: 15 the allegations that are made by the
16 We could. 16 Plaintiffs in the case?
17 (Whereupon a discussion was held 17 A. I may have read them. I am not
18 off the record.) 18 familiar with them.
19 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 19 Q. Okay. Well, that's fine. And you
20 Q. Okay. So licensed in 2000. 20 don't need to have done that. I don't mean to
21 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively). 21 suggest by the question. What I want to do is
22 Q. All right. Your entry level job 22 alert you to three broad areas that we'll be
23 title, what was that? 23 talking about. Okay?
24 A. I was either hydraulic engineer or 24 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively).
25 civil engineer. I am not quite sure. 25 Q. The first is the reconnaissance
7 (Pages 22 to 25)
Page 26 Page 28
1 feasibility authorization and the work done by 1 A. Yes.
2 the Corps following that with regard to the 2 Q. Okay. What data -- What data points
3 MRGO. Okay? Which would include the 3 would those be?
4 navigation lock project on the Industrial 4 A. There's a gauge at Shell Beach in
5 Canal. That's one general area. The second 5 proximity of the MRGO. There's also a gauge
6 general area is the Lake Pontchartrain and 6 at the IHNC lock. One on the Mississippi
7 Vicinity Hurricane Protection Project. Okay? 7 River and the one on the Industrial Canal
8 From reconnaissance feasibility authorization 8 channel side.
9 and the like. Okay? And I guess the third is 9 Q. Okay.
10 the reconnaissance of the erosion issues 10 A. There are other gauges present
11 related to the MRGO. Because It's my 11 today, but I don't know if they were there
12 understanding that didn't ever get to the 12 back in 1982.
13 feasibility stage. Okay? So what I am 13 MR. LAMBERT:
14 interested in knowing is whether or not 14 Just so my hearing is okay, you
15 between '79 and '82 you had any association 15 said one at Shell Beach and there's
16 with either the MRGO or the navigation lock 16 two in the IHNC and --
17 project or the hurricane protection project. 17 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
18 A. I had no association. 18 Q. This is a good time to pull out my
19 Q. Great. I don't have to ask you any 19 maps.
20 questions then. 20 A. Okay. There's one on the river side
21 So in '82 you became the Chief of 21 of the Mississippi River. There's a gauge on
22 the Gauges and Observation Section. Does that 22 that side.
23 have anything to do with the MRGO? 23 MR. LAMBERT:
24 A. Not directly. 24 Each end of the lock?
25 Q. Okay. 25 THE WITNESS:
Page 27 Page 29
1 A. There are some gauges at some of the 1 And there's a gauge on the
2 locations in the vicinity of the MRGO and the 2 Industrial Canal side.
3 IHNC so we would have handled that data. 3 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
4 Q. Okay. What is the gauging that you 4 Q. I'm going to go through that again.
5 did as the Chief? How would you describe it? 5 Let me show you this map if you don't mind.
6 A. I would not have done any direct 6 Because we may be using this, it's probably a
7 gauging. I would have supervised the 7 good time to orient us. I'm going to hold it
8 technicians in the office that would have 8 because it tends to fall on your head.
9 processed the data and entered it into the 9 First of all, this is, as you can
10 computer. 10 see, a satellite picture.
11 Q. Okay. Would you tell us what data 11 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively).
12 it is that they're gathering and then entering 12 Q. Does this area look familiar to you
13 into the computer? 13 at all?
14 A. The New Orleans District is 14 A. Yes.
15 responsible for many gauges that measure water 15 Q. Okay. Can you see the MRGO
16 level and also discharge measurements 16 portrayed in this photograph?
17 throughout the District boundaries. 17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Okay. 18 Q. All right. There was a suggestion
19 A. And that would be the type of data 19 in one of the previous depositions -- and let
20 that would have been processed and entered 20 me share with you, obviously the legend tells
21 into the computer. 21 us what the marks are. You can see what's
22 Q. Good. Can you tell me what 22 been added to the satellite photograph. Well,
23 locations would be -- I think the word that 23 mile markers, survey stations, top of the
24 you chose to use was associated with the 24 channel design width, and the 2005 shoreline.
25 MRGO? 25 And those were added by this company,
8 (Pages 26 to 29)
Page 30 Page 32
1 Environmental Science Services, Inc. Are you 1 Sorry. I don't mean to make you stretch.
2 familiar with these guys? 2 A. Okay. This looks like the Shell
3 A. No. 3 Beach area (indicating).
4 Q. Okay. Have you heard of a fellow by 4 Q. All right. It says Yscloskey?
5 the name of Shay Penland? 5 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively).
6 A. Yes. 6 Q. Do you see that? I'm sorry.
7 Q. Are you familiar with him? 7 MR. LAMBERT:
8 A. Yeah. 8 You need to talk a little louder,
9 Q. His work? 9 please
10 A. I have met him. 10 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
11 Q. You have met him. Is he regarded as 11 Q. Can you see this? Right there
12 somebody who has any specialized expertise -- 12 (indicating).
13 MS. GREIF: 13 A. You have better eyes than I do.
14 Objection. 14 Q. Well, there's a channel and some
15 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 15 slips.
16 Q. -- in this area -- 16 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively). Okay.
17 MS. GREIF: 17 Q. And there's another channel and some
18 Objection. 18 slips right there. All right. This is
19 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 19 indicated as mile marker 44. Does that seem
20 Q. -- of mapping? 20 right?
21 MS. GREIF: 21 A. I have no idea.
22 You can answer. 22 Q. That's fine. Anyway, so where is
23 THE WITNESS: 23 Shell Beach on the map? And if we can try to
24 I have no direct knowledge that 24 get this on the video. I'm going to ask you
25 he has expertise in mapping. 25 to step back just a little bit so the
Page 31 Page 33
1 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 1 videographer can get it and you can point
2 Q. All right. That's fine. 2 since this is a movie.
3 MR. LAMBERT: 3 A. Oh.
4 Chocolate cake. 4 Q. Just point with your pen if you
5 MR. BRUNO: 5 don't mind.
6 Just let that slide. 6 A. Okay. It's going to be in this area
7 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 7 (indicating).
8 Q. Anyway, it's been suggested that 8 Q. Okay. Now, the gauge itself, does
9 maybe the mile markers as reflected on this 9 it gauge water in the MRGO or Lake Borgne?
10 satellite map may or may not be correct. Do 10 A. It's been too long.
11 you have any -- As you look at it, I know you 11 Q. Okay.
12 don't have any of your maps or books or charts 12 A. It gauges water I believe in one of
13 or anything, but if we go -- could you show us 13 the channels off of the MRGO.
14 where Shell Beach is? 14 Q. All right. Now, I think you -- We
15 A. It's off the map. 15 can put this down. You indicated other gauges
16 Q. Okay. 16 are located at or around the Industrial
17 A. (Indicating). 17 Canal. One at the river?
18 Q. We have two maps. 18 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively). Yes.
19 A. Okay. 19 Q. And then one at the lock?
20 Q. And again, this is the second of two 20 A. On the other side of the lock.
21 maps and it's another satellite picture. 21 Q. Which would be like right about
22 A. I can't see it. Maybe it wasn't off 22 there (indicating)?
23 the map. A hard time finding the community of 23 A. You would have one on this side of
24 Shell Beach. 24 the lock, on the river side, and one on the
25 Q. Let me bring it down to you. 25 Industrial Canal side of the lock
9 (Pages 30 to 33)
Page 34 Page 36
1 (indicating). 1 the hurricane protection structures?
2 Q. Okay. And there's another one I 2 A. I did not work on either of those
3 think you said? 3 projects while I was at the Division office.
4 A. There are gauges that are out there 4 Q. Good. Let's go to '92-'93. You're
5 today. I am not aware if they were -- 5 the Basin Captain of the Coastal Wetlands
6 Q. Back then. Okay. 6 Planning Protection and Restoration Act. You
7 A. -- back then. 7 reported directly to the District Commander
8 Q. All right. Then July to December, 8 here in New Orleans. Right?
9 '91, just about six months, let's see, Water 9 A. Correct. Yes.
10 Control Division, Engineering Directorate of 10 Q. Tell us what you did as the Basin
11 LMVD. Well, that would be at Vicksburg; 11 Captain.
12 right? 12 A. My responsibility was to bring a
13 A. Yes. 13 team together to formulate plans to restore,
14 Q. So you left the District for a 14 protect, and increase the acres of coastal
15 little while? 15 wetlands in the Atchafalaya coastal area.
16 A. It was a developmental assignment up 16 Q. Okay. And that's an area where
17 in Vicksburg, yes. 17 generally in Louisiana?
18 Q. Training? 18 A. That is I would call south central
19 A. A developmental assignment. 19 Louisiana, south of Morgan City.
20 Q. That's not training? 20 Q. All right. And I can guess, but
21 A. No. 21 just for the record, it had nothing to do with
22 Q. Okay. Well, then what is a 22 the MRGO or the Lake Pontchartrain and
23 developmental assignment? 23 Vicinity Hurricane Protection Projects, right?
24 A. It's an assignment where you go and 24 A. That is correct. Nothing to do with
25 work in an organization to learn about that 25 it.
Page 35 Page 37
1 organization and what that organization does. 1 Q. Okay. Let's go then to '93 to
2 Q. Okay. So what do they do? 2 2003. This is a ten year period. So you are
3 MS. GREIF: 3 the field -- or were a field review group
4 Objection, vague. 4 member for the Corps R and D -- Research and
5 THE WITNESS: 5 development? Is that correct?
6 The Water Control Division up at 6 A. That's correct.
7 our Division office is responsible for 7 Q. -- for flood control channels and
8 the water control program of all the 8 structures. Okay. Tell us what -- I guess
9 Districts within the Division, 9 what the field review group did in that period
10 primarily the Mississippi River. They 10 of time.
11 support the Mississippi River 11 A. Here again, this is a special
12 Commission in providing information to 12 assignment. We met once a year to review the
13 the Commission. 13 Corps' research and development program and
14 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 14 make suggestions and recommendations as to
15 Q. Okay. Did that have anything to do 15 what new research was needed.
16 with the MRGO -- 16 Q. To do -- To accomplish what end?
17 A. No. 17 A. To accomplish better designs of
18 Q. -- or the Industrial Canal? 18 flood control channels and structures.
19 A. No. 19 Q. When you say better, would that
20 Q. By the way, I am going to say 20 include more efficient?
21 Industrial Canal from time to time. You know 21 A. I would use the term "more
22 I mean the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal, to 22 effective".
23 be precise. Okay? 23 Q. More effective. All right. So that
24 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively). 24 you guys were not involved in trying to find
25 Q. Would that have anything to do with 25 cheaper materials or methods; right?
10 (Pages 34 to 37)
Page 38 Page 40
1 A. No. We weren't. Not from a 1 Because you can't see.
2 hydraulic perspective. 2 MR. LAMBERT:
3 Q. Okay. Just for perspective 3 Yes.
4 purposes, are you familiar with the E-99 sheet 4 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
5 pile test in the Atchafalaya Basin? 5 Q. All right. So from '92 to '06,
6 A. I have heard about it, yes. 6 you're the Chief of the Hydrologic Engineering
7 Q. All right. Is that something that 7 Section.
8 would have been included in this kind of 8 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively).
9 review? 9 Q. And that's, I guess, if you will, a
10 A. No. 10 piece of the Hydrologic -- Hydraulics and
11 Q. And just to help me understand, why 11 Hydrologic Branch?
12 is that? Why would that be either in or out 12 A. Correct.
13 of this kind of review? 13 Q. How many -- Let me see if there's --
14 A. My understanding of the E-99 sheet 14 Do we have a page 17 on this on this trusty
15 pile is the geotechnical engineering test or 15 chart?
16 analysis, and that's outside the scope of 16 All right. I've got my trusty
17 hydraulics and hydrologic engineering. 17 chart. So it looks to me like -- Let's see
18 Q. Okay. 18 here -- within the Engineering Division we
19 A. A different field. 19 have Hydraulics -- sorry, wrong page. Got to
20 Q. Even though both may have been 20 be to page 10. And then on page 10, under the
21 related to flood control, one was really a 21 Hydraulics Branch, I see a Hydraulic
22 soils issue, and you were focused on the water 22 Engineering Section -- Let me show you. I'm
23 issues? 23 sorry. Where you're the Chief.
24 A. That's correct. 24 A. (Indicating). Yes.
25 Q. Good. Okay. And I gather from now 25 Q. And then there is a Coastal
Page 39 Page 41
1 reading the couple of paragraphs above it, 1 Engineering Section where Mr. at least Weiner
2 this was a duty that you had on top of your 2 at the time of this thing was the Chief?
3 day-to-day obligations as part of your job? 3 A. Yes.
4 A. That's correct. 4 Q. And there is a Hydra Modeling
5 Q. Okay. Let's go then to -- Let's see 5 Section, and at the time of this chart a
6 if I can figure this out. So -- 6 Mizland, Misland, Misland?
7 MR. LAMBERT: 7 A. Mizland.
8 That last job was '93 to when? 8 Q. Mizland was the Chief?
9 MR. BRUNO: 9 A. Yes.
10 That was a '93 to 2003. 10 Q. All right. If you would, what is
11 MR. LAMBERT: 11 the Hydra Modeling Section supposed to do?
12 Okay. 12 What do those guys do?
13 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 13 A. Their mission was to work in water
14 Q. And I guess where I am getting a 14 quality analysis, hydrodynamic modeling
15 little confused here is that now we go to 15 associated with water quality, primarily
16 1996. So -- to 2003. So that's within that 16 salinity.
17 ten year period. So what, I guess, was your 17 MR. LAMBERT:
18 day job from '93 to '96? 18 Primarily what?
19 A. On the first page. 19 THE WITNESS:
20 Q. Oh, this page. Oh, okay. I see. 20 Salinity.
21 Okay. 21 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
22 MR. LAMBERT: 22 Q. Salinity.
23 I don't have a sheet you people 23 A. Sorry. They did most of our
24 are reading so maybe I don't see it. 24 multi-dimensional modeling.
25 MR. BRUNO: 25 Q. What kinds -- What software do these
11 (Pages 38 to 41)
Page 42 Page 44
1 guys use for their multi-dimensional modeling? 1 No, the time of the chart is the
2 A. Primarily TABS. 2 time that Wagenaar was the Commander.
3 Q. And what does that model do? 3 That's an A. Mizler.
4 A. It's a hydrodynamic model. It has 4 MS. GREIF:
5 different components, but there's a 5 Do you have a date on that chart?
6 hydrodynamic component that does study 6 MR. BRUNO:
7 multi-dimensional flow. You can do 7 I don't. But you guys -- You
8 two-dimensional or three-dimensional. And 8 know, for the record, it is
9 there's another component that will model 9 MVD-007-000002668 is the first
10 constituents such as salinity and sediment. 10 number. And the last number in
11 Q. Okay. Is wind a variable in those 11 seriatim is 2688. And I am sorry
12 models? 12 there's no date.
13 A. In TABS, I don't think so. If you 13 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
14 were going to do wind, you would do something 14 Q. Would you happen to know when
15 else. 15 Commander Wagenaar -- Am I saying that right?
16 Q. Right. Okay. Do they do anything 16 MR. LAMBERT:
17 else? We talked about measure the salinity, 17 Yes.
18 they do the multi-dimensional modeling, in 18 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
19 connection with water quality. Anything 19 Q. Wagenaar? Wagenaar?
20 else? Generally. I mean, I am not trying to, 20 A. That's right.
21 you know, test you here. 21 Q. Wagenaar? Okay? When was he the
22 MR. LAMBERT: 22 Commander? Roughly.
23 Joe, -- Go ahead. Excuse me. 23 A. 2005 to 2007. Late 2007.
24 THE WITNESS: 24 Q. All right. So we can -- so this
25 I didn't work there in that 25 chart is probably reasonably accurate for
Page 43 Page 45
1 office. 1 2005?
2 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 2 A. Yes.
3 Q. That's fine. 3 MS. GREIF:
4 A. So -- 4 Objection.
5 Q. So give me your best effort here. 5 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
6 MS. GREIF: 6 Q. All right. Now, having established
7 Objection. 7 that --
8 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 8 A. For the hydraulics part.
9 Q. You don't really know all that it 9 Q. Sure. Do you -- Well, you were --
10 entails? 10 you're Chief for fifteen years before the
11 A. That's the primary functions. They 11 storm. What interaction, if any, as the Chief
12 may have done other studies as they needed 12 did you have with the Hydra Modeling Section?
13 work. 13 A. On occasion people that I supervised
14 Q. Right. 14 would work with people in that organization on
15 MR. LAMBERT: 15 projects.
16 Who was in charge of that? 16 Q. All right. Did you, as the Chief,
17 MR. BRUNO: 17 have to account for the time expended by the
18 Well, it depends on the time. 18 folks in your section?
19 MR. LAMBERT: 19 A. Yes.
20 Oh, okay. 20 Q. How does that work? Does each
21 MR. BRUNO: 21 person keep track of the hours that they spend
22 The time of the chart it was -- 22 working on things?
23 MR. LAMBERT: 23 A. Yes.
24 '92 to '06. 24 Q. And then how is it categorized? In
25 MR. BRUNO: 25 other words, how do you know whether to charge
12 (Pages 42 to 45)
Page 46 Page 48
1 your time to this project or that project? 1 being performed, but that number can be tied
2 A. We have a labor number assigned, so 2 back to a particular project?
3 when you're given a project, you're given a 3 A. Yes.
4 labor number. So when you work on that 4 Q. Am I saying that correctly?
5 project, you use that labor number for the 5 A. Yes.
6 hours that you worked on it. 6 Q. Okay. Thank you.
7 Q. Okay. Does the labor number refer 7 MS. GREIF:
8 to the project that your section is 8 Can I just ask, was that chart
9 undertaking or does the labor number refer to 9 used as an exhibit in a different
10 the project for which the engineering 10 deposition?
11 assistance is being provided? 11 MR. BRUNO:
12 A. I'm not clear on the distinction in 12 Yes. It's been used in all the
13 your question. 13 depositions.
14 Q. Well, I can see, you know -- one 14 MS. GREIF:
15 thing, lawyers are sometimes required to do is 15 Okay.
16 keep a record of their time. 16 MR. BRUNO:
17 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively). 17 In fact, it's marked as Coletti
18 Q. And we may, for example, take the 18 Number 2 for your reference.
19 time that we spend in this deposition and bill 19 MR. LAMBERT:
20 it to the case. 20 Are there different -- See if
21 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively). 21 there's different letters or numbers
22 Q. But then there may be a project 22 so you could, in this labor number
23 within the case like taking this deposition or 23 where you can have --
24 doing a research brief or the like. So I make 24 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
25 the distinction in terms of the question as 25 Q. Okay. Can you maybe describe, just
Page 47 Page 49
1 between the MRGO project, for example, or the 1 for example, as somebody dear to my heart
2 Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity Hurricane 2 would say, the number, in the number itself
3 Protection Project as another example. So is 3 sometimes there will be a component of the
4 the project, the labor number, is that per 4 number that you could look at and say -- I
5 project -- I'm sorry, per work effort, if you 5 mean, for example, you all use all of these
6 will, or is it a project number that refers 6 acronyms; y'all love these acronyms with the
7 back to the MRGO project or Lake Pontchartrain 7 LPV and MPV; you have a lot of acronyms here,
8 and Vicinity project or some other project? 8 --
9 A. The labor numbers are set up where, 9 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively).
10 if I have the task of performing the water 10 Q. -- right? You can look at it here
11 quality, for example, for the Houma Navigation 11 and know whether it was a District reference
12 Canal project, there would be a labor number 12 or a Division reference by just simply looking
13 set up to perform that task under that 13 at the acronym. I am wondering if this labor
14 project. 14 number is constructed in such a way that I
15 Q. Okay. 15 could just look at the number and I could
16 A. There would be a different labor 16 determine whether it was, for example, the
17 number set up for the geotechnical engineer 17 MRGO project or, you know, some other
18 who might be doing -- 18 project. Is that how the number -- Is the
19 Q. I got you. 19 number constructed in that way?
20 A. -- the stability analysis of the 20 A. No.
21 channel. 21 Q. Okay.
22 Q. Okay. I see. 22 MR. LAMBERT:
23 A. But it all goes back to one project. 23 That would make it too easy.
24 Q. Of course. All right. So the labor 24 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
25 number refers generally to the type of work 25 Q. I am not making any value
13 (Pages 46 to 49)
Page 50 Page 52
1 judgments. I'm sorry. I'm not going to do 1 hourly rates for leave is appropriate.
2 it. 2 Q. Okay. And what happens if there's
3 MR. LAMBERT: 3 not enough time available in the budget?
4 How is it constructed? 4 A. If --
5 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 5 Q. In other words, -- I don't mean
6 Q. Do you know how the numbers are 6 before, obviously. That's the whole purpose
7 issued? 7 of having this discussion. You have approved
8 A. It's my understanding that the 8 a budget and the work is being accomplished
9 accounting system randomly generates them. 9 and at some point someone says "I am not
10 Q. Okay. Is there, given that you're 10 finished and I am out of time." Is there a
11 required to keep your time, is there a limit 11 procedure to address that?
12 on the amount of time that a person can spend 12 A. We would go to the Project Manager
13 working on a particular project? 13 and lay out why the time and the budget didn't
14 A. There can be. 14 match for whatever reason and secure
15 Q. Okay. How is that communicated to 15 additional funds to finish the work.
16 the person who's doing the work? 16 Q. Okay. But you have to have
17 A. The person doing the work normally 17 authority or some authorization to do the
18 will prepare a budget, a cost estimate to 18 extra work; right?
19 perform the work; and that cost estimate is 19 A. Yes.
20 agreed upon. Then we execute for that amount 20 Q. And that authorization doesn't come
21 of money. 21 from the Engineering Division; it comes from
22 Q. Okay. And at what level -- I am not 22 the Project Manager, right or, perhaps the --
23 asking that correctly. Who participates in 23 I forgot the name. It comes from either the
24 the discussion of the budget? Is it the level 24 Operations Division or the Planning Division
25 of the Chief of the Section or is it lower 25 really. Right?
Page 51 Page 53
1 than that or higher than that? 1 A. Those two organizations have the
2 A. It can be higher and lower and at 2 managers in them, yes.
3 that level, yes. 3 Q. Right. And if they don't approve,
4 Q. Okay. I guess it depends on the 4 the work just stops?
5 nature of the work? 5 A. That's correct.
6 A. Yes. 6 Q. Okay. Let's talk about the Coastal
7 Q. Okay. What kinds of things or 7 Engineering Section. Do you know what they
8 projects would require the Chief of the 8 do?
9 Section to participate with regard to 9 A. I am familiar with what the Coastal
10 budgeting? 10 Engineering Section did, yes.
11 A. The Chief of the Section normally 11 Q. Okay. What did they do?
12 reviews -- 12 A. They worked on coastal protection
13 MS. GREIF: 13 projects, hurricane protection projects,
14 Objection. 14 coastal restoration, shoreline protection or
15 THE WITNESS: 15 gauges, office was organized into that
16 -- the budget -- 16 section. They did other work that came up if
17 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 17 they weren't busy, such as flood insurance
18 Q. Okay. 18 studies. But their primary focus was coastal
19 A. -- to make sure it looks reasonable 19 protection and coastal navigation projects.
20 for the work that we're being requested to do; 20 Q. Okay. Finally, then, you -- I'm
21 that we've considered all factors that might 21 sorry. Did you have any, during your tenure
22 affect how much time is going to be spent. 22 interaction with the Coastal Engineering
23 Q. Okay. 23 Section?
24 A. That the hourly rates are the 24 A. On occasion, yes.
25 appropriate rates to use, the burdens on those 25 Q. And what would those occasions be?
14 (Pages 50 to 53)
Page 54 Page 56
1 A. In the course of working on our 1 questions or somebody came to me and
2 projects we would use gauge data, again, that 2 asked me a question on the MRGO, I
3 was stored and processed by the organization 3 went to Harley Weiner.
4 that was now -- that's now in Coastal that 4 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
5 processes gauge data and we may again also 5 Q. How about the Lake Pontchartrain and
6 share a common project where we would work on 6 Vicinity Hurricane Protection project?
7 one aspect and that office would work on 7 A. I would have gone to Janice Hote.
8 another. 8 Q. Can you spell her name, please?
9 Q. Okay. And then finally now, let's 9 A. H O T E.
10 talk about the Hydrologic Engineering 10 Q. Okay. And is she is in the Coastal
11 Section. What kind of work do you guys do? 11 Engineering Section? I'm sorry, was she in
12 A. We primarily worked on projects in 12 the Coastal Engineering Section?
13 the Atchafalaya Basin, flood control, 13 A. She was.
14 navigation, and environmental restoration. 14 Q. Okay. Good. And what was her
15 Q. I'm sorry, when you said flood 15 title?
16 control, navigation, and then environmental 16 A. She was a hydraulic engineer.
17 restoration, did you mean to connect that with 17 Q. All right. Now, let's see. While
18 the Atchafalaya Basin? 18 you're the Chief, since we're on that subject,
19 A. Yes. 19 you had four hydraulic engineers, one
20 Q. You weren't -- I got you. 20 hydraulic engineer PT --
21 A. Yes. 21 MS. GREIF:
22 Q. All right. So then I have to ask 22 Objection, foundation.
23 you, during -- Well, let's see how to do 23 MR. BRUNO:
24 this. If there's a way to do this more 24 I'm reading the chart.
25 efficiently. As the Chief of the Section, did 25 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
Page 55 Page 57
1 you have any or did you do any work in 1 Q. -- and three hydraulic engineers.
2 connection with the MRGO? 2 And I guess the distinction I'm seeing here,
3 A. No. 3 is one's GS-12s and GS-11s. Is there some
4 Q. So that's from '92 -- That's the 4 difference between the work that these folks
5 whole fifteen years from 1992. Okay. How 5 did?
6 about the Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity 6 A. Yes.
7 Hurricane Protection Plan? 7 Q. What would be the distinction?
8 A. You're talking about during '92 to 8 A. The complexity of the work and the
9 2006? 9 -- If it was modeling, you know, the more
10 Q. Yes, ma'am. Yes, ma'am. 10 complex tools were normally used by the GS-12
11 A. No, I did not work on that. 11 engineers.
12 Q. Would that have been within the 12 Q. Okay. Help me understand. What
13 ambit of the Coastal Engineering Section? 13 does the GS stand for?
14 A. Yes. 14 A. General Schedule.
15 Q. Okay. And the MRGO would also fall 15 Q. Okay. And then the numbers? How
16 within their section, too? 16 does that relate?
17 A. Yes. 17 A. Just where you are in the General
18 Q. Was there a person or persons who 18 Schedule.
19 would be, you know, the MRGO person during 19 MR. LAMBERT:
20 that period in the Coastal Engineering 20 It's a pay scale.
21 Section? 21 THE WITNESS:
22 MS. GREIF: 22 Yes.
23 Objection, vague. 23 MS. GREIF:
24 THE WITNESS: 24 It's a government pay scale.
25 I generally, if I had any 25 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
15 (Pages 54 to 57)
Page 58 Page 60
1 Q. It's a pay scale? All right. So 1 Q. Okay. Did your section do any
2 the larger the number, the more what? 2 ADCIRC modeling?
3 MR. LAMBERT: 3 A. No.
4 Money. 4 Q. Where would I go to find the section
5 MR. BRUNO: 5 or the group who might have done ADCIRC
6 I know that, silly. 6 modeling?
7 MS. GREIF: 7 A. During the '92 to 2006 time frame?
8 Not necessarily. 8 Q. Yes, ma'am.
9 THE WITNESS: 9 A. The Coastal Engineering Section.
10 That is true. Not necessarily. 10 Q. Okay. That makes sense. What does
11 MS. GREIF: 11 the HEC-RAS model do?
12 Because within the -- there are 12 A. It's a one-dimensional hydraulic
13 different levels. 13 model that does backwater calculations, step
14 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 14 backwater.
15 Q. Different levels? 15 Q. Okay.
16 MS. GREIF: 16 A. Normally used for rivers.
17 With each of them, yes. 17 Q. HEC-6? What does that model do?
18 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 18 A. Sediment transport model, a
19 Q. I hate to use the word "competence", 19 one-dimensional sediment transport model.
20 but expertise? Is that a better word? Does 20 Here again, normally used for rivers.
21 the number relate to competence? 21 Q. Okay. HAS?
22 A. Not necessarily. It relates to the 22 A. HMS.
23 function of that position and the complexity 23 Q. HMS. I'm sorry. I can't read my
24 of the work that that position is required to 24 own handwriting.
25 perform. 25 A. That is a hydrologic model that does
Page 59 Page 61
1 Q. Now, you referenced modeling just a 1 the rainfall runoff calculations as input into
2 moment ago. What models would you in your 2 the other two models.
3 section, and your section have employed? 3 Q. All right. TABS? I think we have
4 A. In my -- 4 already talked about that one.
5 MS. GREIF: 5 A. Yeah.
6 Objection, vague. 6 Q. And the CH-3D?
7 THE WITNESS: 7 A. CH-3D-SED.
8 In my office, we would use models 8 Q. Got it.
9 such as HEC-RAS. 9 A. That is a multi-dimensional sediment
10 MR. LAMBERT: 10 transport model.
11 Say it again? HEC? 11 Q. All right. And that then -- That
12 THE WITNESS: 12 handles that. Let's talk about, let's see,
13 HEC-RAS. 13 '85 now to '92. Let's go -- No, never mind.
14 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 14 I got myself screwed up. I was trying to go
15 Q. Okay. 15 oldest to more recent and then I got caught up
16 A. HEC-6. HEC- and the number 6. 16 in your special assignments, which is where I
17 HMS. TABS. And we had contractors work in -- 17 got confused.
18 ERDEC working on models such as CH-3D-SED, 18 A. Yeah.
19 which is a multi-dimensional sediment 19 Q. Let's go back to now, let's see now,
20 transport model. 20 '83 to '85. You were the Chief of the MR&T
21 MR. LAMBERT: 21 unit --
22 I didn't get past the dash. 22 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively).
23 THE WITNESS: 23 Q. -- which is within the Hydraulic
24 S E D, SED. 24 Engineer Section. Right?
25 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 25 A. The Hydraulic Design Section.
16 (Pages 58 to 61)
Page 62 Page 64
1 Q. Okay. What is the MR&T? 1 THE WITNESS:
2 A. That's Mississippi River and 2 What I know about the hydrology
3 tributaries. And we were the unit responsible 3 of MRGO is based on what I have read
4 for modeling of the Mississippi River and the 4 in the design documents since Katrina.
5 Atchafalaya River. 5 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
6 Q. All right. That would not have 6 Q. All right. I take it then that you
7 included the MRGO? 7 have read the design documents.
8 A. That's correct. 8 A. I have read portions of them, yes.
9 Q. And -- 9 Q. Okay. First, may I ask why did you
10 A. It would not. 10 read those documents?
11 Q. And would not have included 11 A. I was part of the IPET team, and
12 hurricane protection or flood control 12 part of my role was to review those -- the
13 projects? 13 Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity and the West
14 A. That is correct, it would not. 14 Bank and Vicinity and New Orleans to Venice
15 Q. Okay. Then we can go to '85 to 15 Hurricane Protection Project documents and
16 '92. You're the Chief of the Hydrology unit, 16 summarize pertinent hydraulic and hydrologic
17 still in the Hydraulic Engineering Section; 17 information from those documents.
18 right? 18 Q. All right. I got the Lake
19 A. That's in the Hydrologic Engineering 19 Pontchartrain and Vicinity Hurricane
20 Section. 20 Protection Project, but I didn't hear you say
21 Q. Okay. And let's see. What did you 21 MRGO. Was that also something you were asked
22 do while you were there? 22 to review?
23 A. Again, continued to work on 23 A. As part of IPET we were reviewing
24 Atchafalaya projects, subfeatures of the 24 documents pertaining to Lake Pontchartrain and
25 Atchafalaya Basin floodway, and may have 25 Vicinity Project.
Page 63 Page 65
1 started initiating some of the work for 1 Q. Right. Did that get into MRGO?
2 Morganza to the Gulf Hurricane Protection 2 A. That got me into the levee adjacent
3 Project from the interior drainage 3 to the MRGO. So I knew where the MRGO was.
4 perspective. 4 Q. Right.
5 Q. All right. Well, that kind of 5 A. And we were -- the IPET team was
6 covers your tenure up until Katrina; right? 6 addressing issues related to surge and the
7 A. Yes. 7 landscape and how the landscape would have
8 Q. All right. So up until Katrina you 8 affected surge.
9 really had nothing to do with the MRGO? 9 Q. Okay. I'm with you. But does that
10 A. That is correct. 10 mean then that you in fact reviewed design
11 Q. And up until Katrina you had really 11 documents relative to the MRGO?
12 nothing to do with the Lake Pontchartrain and 12 A. I reviewed portions of one or two of
13 Vicinity Hurricane Protection Project? 13 the old documents. I was asked questions like
14 A. That is correct. 14 what was the channel size of the MRGO during
15 Q. All right. 15 Hurricane Betsy or if the MRGO actually
16 (Whereupon a discussion was held 16 existed during Hurricane Betsy. So I'd go and
17 off the record.) 17 dig through the documents and give information
18 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 18 to the IPET team.
19 Q. All right. Let's see now. Having 19 Q. Okay. By the way, any time you want
20 established that, I am told that you are going 20 a break, just wave your hand. The deponent in
21 to talk to us about the hydrology of the 21 my book is always the boss of breaks.
22 MRGO. So what do you know about the hydrology 22 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively).
23 of the MRGO? 23 Q. Okay. In the meantime, when you say
24 MS. GREIF: 24 channel size, what -- in your world, what
25 Objection, vague. 25 dimensions would define channel size?
17 (Pages 62 to 65)
Page 66 Page 68
1 A. In my world the channel size is from 1 then what I am referring to then when I say
2 bank to bank in the whole cross-sectional 2 Reach 2?
3 area. 3 A. Okay.
4 Q. All right. Bank to bank. Now, the 4 Q. Okay. Good.
5 reason I ask the question is because we know 5 (Whereupon a discussion was held
6 that, you know, a channel has a bottom, it's 6 off the record.)
7 got sides, and it has a surface. Right? 7 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
8 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively). 8 Q. Okay. For the purposes of my
9 Q. And we also know from having 9 questions, so that you and I are on the same
10 reviewed some of the MRGO documents that the 10 page, let's refer to Reach 2 as the channel
11 original authorization called for a specific 11 between the Intracoastal Waterway, okay?
12 bottom channel width. Right? 12 A. (Indicating).
13 A. Called for a navigation channel 13 Q. There, and the point at which the
14 width. Yes. 14 MRGO channel ends at the Gulf. I am not
15 Q. Well, a channel width, and it was 15 referring to that part of the channel which is
16 reflected as a width on the bottom is what I 16 in the Gulf. Okay?
17 mean. 17 A. Okay.
18 A. But that would be the navigation 18 Q. You with me? All right. And I'll
19 channel. For example, on the Mississippi 19 tell you, the reason for the distinction is
20 River, the navigation channel is a much 20 we're going to be talking about the width
21 smaller component of the larger hydraulic 21 between the banks, and obviously in the Gulf
22 channel. 22 there are no banks.
23 Q. I understand that. But the MRGO was 23 A. That's correct.
24 dug specifically to be a navigation channel, 24 Q. Okay. And that's why I am making
25 right? It wasn't there before it got dug. 25 that distinction. I'm told that some folks
Page 67 Page 69
1 MS. GREIF: 1 may refer to that is as a different reach,
2 Objection. Vague. 2 maybe Reach 3, but we're not going to be
3 THE WITNESS: 3 asking questions about that I don't believe,
4 Parts -- My understanding, parts 4 so let's focus on Reach 2 as I have defined
5 of the GIWW channel was there before 5 it. Okay?
6 the MRGO channel. 6 A. Okay.
7 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 7 Q. Now, having established that, we do
8 Q. Okay. That's right. Well, let me 8 know that -- Here we have the document --
9 reference specifically the Reach 2. Do you 9 MS. GREIF:
10 know what I mean by Reach 2? 10 What is the document?
11 A. No. 11 MR. BRUNO:
12 Q. All right. For the purposes of 12 It's the wrong one. Just bear
13 these questions, let me show to you, someone, 13 with me. I am going to get to the
14 I don't know who, divided this into two parts, 14 right document.
15 Reach 1 and Reach 2. I just kind of go along 15 Give me the Reach 2 document, 1-B,
16 with the program. You know? But Reach 1 has 16 please. Thank you. I don't mean to
17 been referred to as the section from the IHNC 17 be so brusk.
18 to the turn (indicating). 18 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
19 A. Okay. 19 Q. This is the document. I am going to
20 Q. And then Reach 2 is the part from 20 show you --
21 the turn all the way out to the Gulf 21 MR. BRUNO:
22 (indicating). 22 I'm sorry, it doesn't have a
23 A. Okay. 23 Bates number.
24 Q. All right? So let me, having 24 MS. GREIF:
25 established that -- Is that fair? You'll know 25 Okay.
18 (Pages 66 to 69)
Page 70 Page 72
1 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 1 (indicating). Okay? Do you know this, the
2 Q. But it is Design Memorandum number 2 name of this waterway that crosses here?
3 1-B, channels, mile 39 point -- I guess that's 3 A. No.
4 a 01 dash mile 63.77. Okay? 4 Q. Anyway, that's the mile. And the
5 MS. GREIF: 5 other number what is? The front -- The top.
6 Is this going to be an exhibit? 6 A. 63.77.
7 MR. BRUNO: 7 Q. Here is 63 (indicating).
8 No. I am not -- Unless you want 8 MS. GREIF:
9 me to attach it. I'm happy -- I hate 9 Did you already say that the mile
10 -- I don't like to burden the record 10 markers on this may not be correct?
11 with a bunch of copies. 11 MR. BRUNO:
12 MR. LAMBERT: 12 No. Well, they are correct, but
13 It's in a bunch of depositions. 13 somebody suggested that they're not,
14 MR. BRUNO: 14 but we confirmed that the mile markers
15 It's in a ton of depositions. 15 do in fact correspond with the design
16 Yes. 16 memo. That's been confirmed.
17 MS. GREIF: 17 MS. GREIF:
18 Okay. 18 You have compared it to the
19 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 19 design memo?
20 Q. And here's -- And you can use it as 20 MR. BRUNO:
21 a reference point. Let's first talk about the 21 With a witness.
22 mile, the mile markers. It says mile marker 22 MS. GREIF:
23 39.01, which starts on this one. Which is 23 Okay.
24 about right here (indicating) on the map. 24 MR. BUCHLER:
25 MR. LAMBERT: 25 With Baumy, I think.
Page 71 Page 73
1 Wait. The witness wasn't 1 MS. GREIF:
2 looking. 2 Okay. With which --
3 MR. BRUNO: 3 MR. BRUNO:
4 Okay. 4 Yes. The reason -- I'll tell
5 MS. GREIF: 5 you, so you'll know -- Who was it that
6 Do you want to look through this 6 said it was --
7 document right now? Review it? 7 MR. LAMBERT:
8 THE WITNESS: 8 Walter Baumy.
9 Yeah. 9 MR. BRUNO:
10 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 10 No, no, no. Who was the one that
11 Q. If you want to, take your time. 11 suggested they were wrong?
12 A. I am not familiar with it. 12 MR. BUCHLER:
13 MS. GREIF: 13 Mr. Broussard.
14 Okay. 14 MR. BRUNO:
15 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 15 Mr. Broussard, in fairness to
16 Q. We're not there yet. I'm on the 16 you, Mr. Broussard looked at it and
17 first page. I want to orient you first and 17 said "I don't know if these are right"
18 that way, maybe it'll allow you to make sense 18 and then that's what provoked me to
19 of the document a little quicker. Because as 19 take the chart and compare it to the
20 you know, there are different documents for 20 --
21 different sections. So let's just orient us 21 MR. LAMBERT:
22 on the map first. Okay? 22 Design memo.
23 A. Okay. 23 MR. BRUNO:
24 Q. It says mile -- just the front page, 24 Take the design memo and compare
25 mile 39.01, which is about right here 25 it to the chart, and they line up.
19 (Pages 70 to 73)
Page 74 Page 76
1 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 1 MS. GREIF:
2 Q. Okay? And in fact, that's the -- 2 Well, objection. What do you
3 A. Yeah. 3 mean by authorized?
4 Q. There it is. 4 MR. BRUNO:
5 A. They start at Paris Road. 5 Now you sound like Russo. Let me
6 Q. And there's the -- Go down. 6 ask the witness.
7 A. And I found Shell Beach 7 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
8 (indicating). 8 Q. Does the word "authorized" have any
9 Q. There you go. Okay? All right. So 9 particularized meaning within the Corps?
10 anyway, are we comfortable that we know what 10 A. Yes.
11 section of the MRGO Reach 2 we're talking 11 Q. What does it mean?
12 about? 12 A. It means Congress authorized the
13 A. We're talking about mile 39.01 to 13 Corps of Engineers to do something.
14 63.77. 14 Q. Okay.
15 Q. Now, having established that, if you 15 A. Gave them the authority.
16 want to take a few moments to look at it -- 16 Q. Now, when it comes to a channel like
17 MR. LAMBERT: 17 the MRGO, the authorization, and as we see, we
18 Joe, can we take a break? 18 have it before you, at page -- let's --
19 MR. BRUNO: 19 Actually, let's go to the table of contents,
20 Yes, we can take a break. 20 probably the safest thing to do.
21 MR. LAMBERT: 21 MS. GREIF:
22 Thank you. 22 Just so the record is clear.
23 MR. BRUNO: 23 Miss Powell is looking at the Design
24 Which is what I was going to 24 Memorandum number 1-B, channels mile
25 suggest before you said that. But 25 39.01 to mile 63.77. It's dated
Page 75 Page 77
1 that's okay. 1 September, 1958, revised May, 1959.
2 MR. LAMBERT: 2 MR. BRUNO:
3 Joe? 3 Right. We had done that before
4 MR. BRUNO: 4 the break. But that's okay.
5 All right. It's okay. 5 MS. GREIF:
6 VIDEO OPERATOR: 6 Well, on the record.
7 We're off the record. It's 7 MR. BRUNO:
8 10:53. 8 It was on the record.
9 (Recess.) 9 MS. GREIF:
10 VIDEO OPERATOR: 10 Oh, okay.
11 Returning to the record, it's 11 MR. LAMBERT:
12 11:23. 12 That's good.
13 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 13 MR. BRUNO:
14 Q. Let's see. Where were we. We were 14 That's good. We do it again.
15 talking about the authorization for the MRGO 15 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
16 and we were at the point where we were talking 16 Q. Anyway. If we go to the table of
17 about the authorization and was asking you 17 contents, which is about one --
18 whether or not you recall whether or not the 18 MS. GREIF:
19 MRGO was in fact a channel authorized to be 19 I'm sorry, but this is not an
20 built for the purpose of navigation. Is that 20 authorization.
21 accurate? 21 MR. BRUNO:
22 A. I am not that familiar with it, but 22 What? Never said it was.
23 I would say that would be a fair statement. 23 MS. GREIF:
24 That is a navigation channel. 24 You just referred to this as the
25 Q. All right. And -- 25 authorization.
20 (Pages 74 to 77)
Page 78 Page 80
1 MR. BRUNO: 1 channel width and depth.
2 No, I didn't. No, no, no, no, 2 Q. Right. Well, anyway, would you
3 no, no, no. If I do something wrong, 3 agree with me that the channel design criteria
4 you can call me down. But no, I did 4 as indicated on page 2 shows a channel width
5 not. I asked her to define 5 of 500 feet and a channel depth of 36 feet
6 "authorization"; she did; and then I 6 with a channel side slope of one-on-two?
7 asked a question about authorization 7 A. Channel width authorized 500 feet,
8 which I withdrew and suggested that we 8 channel depth authorized 36 feet below Mean
9 go to the table of contents to read 9 Low Gulf, and the channel side slope of
10 the first sentence, which says -- I'm 10 one-on-two, yes.
11 sorry, not sentence, but the first 11 Q. All right. Now, this may or may not
12 subtitle "Project authorization." 12 be within your area, so just tell me, you
13 THE WITNESS: 13 know, "Joe, this is not my subject," but when
14 Uh-huh (affirmatively). 14 the Congress authorizes the Corps to build a
15 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 15 channel and they give the Corps these
16 Q. You with me? You see where it says 16 dimensions, are you authorized to build
17 that there? 17 something larger than the dimensions of the
18 A. In the table of contents, yes. 18 authorizations? For example, larger than 500
19 Q. Yes, ma'am. All right. Now, and if 19 feet, deeper than 36 feet, with a different
20 we go to paragraph 1 under "General", it says 20 channel slope?
21 "Project authorization". Does that generally 21 MS. GREIF:
22 describe the project that's authorized by the 22 Objection, vague.
23 Congress there at page -- There's no page 23 THE WITNESS:
24 number. I'm sorry. This is two pages further 24 It's beyond my area of work.
25 along in the document. Do yours have Bates 25 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
Page 79 Page 81
1 numbers? No. No? 1 Q. Good. All right. Who should I ask
2 A. No. Page 2. This is page 1. 2 that question to?
3 Q. Page 1? Good. You're right. Page 3 MS. GREIF:
4 1. You see that? 4 Objection.
5 A. I see paragraph one, yes. 5 THE WITNESS:
6 Q. Okay. Is that -- Does that describe 6 My first reaction would be to ask
7 the project authorization? 7 the manager, either the Project
8 A. That is a summary of the project 8 Manager or the Operation Manager.
9 authorization. 9 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
10 Q. All right. Now, go to page 2, we 10 Q. All right. By the way, who was the
11 have the channel design criteria. Okay? Now, 11 Project Manager of the MRGO? I don't know if
12 you'll remember this should have all began 12 we have established that. Do you know?
13 when I asked you about channel size. Okay? 13 A. No.
14 And then you were explaining to me that in 14 Q. We have already talked to the op
15 existing rivers like the Mississippi, the 15 manager. There's a whole different branch.
16 channel size could be something smaller than 16 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively).
17 the river itself. Right? 17 Q. We have covered that, so we'll leave
18 A. Correct. 18 that alone.
19 Q. Now, in this instance, though, this 19 All right. Now, there's a whole
20 is a channel that's being dug for the first 20 section on hydrology. Do you see that?
21 time, so the channel size should equal the 21 A. Yes.
22 channel. Right? 22 Q. Which is more in your area; right?
23 A. Beyond my area of expertise. I 23 A. Right.
24 don't -- I come up with the channel size, but 24 Q. Okay. Now, there are, under
25 there are other factors that come up with the 25 "Hydrology", a paragraph called "General", a
21 (Pages 78 to 81)
Page 82 Page 84
1 paragraph called "Tidal fluctuation," 1 A. I don't know what offices existed in
2 "Drainage and reclamation", "Salinity", 2 '58. It may have been just one organization.
3 "Beach Erosion Board". Those are the areas; 3 Q. Maybe I wasn't artfully asking my
4 right? 4 question. In fact, your section and the other
5 A. Yes. 5 sections within the Branch are called upon
6 Q. Okay. I am just curious to know 6 from time to time to provide technical
7 whether -- which of these subtitles, and again 7 assistance to the Operations Branch; right?
8 as those subtitles appear in the document, 8 A. Yes.
9 okay, would fall within the subject matter of 9 Q. And the Operations Manager of the
10 the Hydrologic Engineering Section. For 10 MRGO may from time to time call upon your
11 example, would tidal fluctuations, would that 11 group for technical advice?
12 fall within the Hydrologic Section or the 12 A. Yes.
13 Coastal Engineering Section or the Hydra 13 Q. All right. So what I am -- I was
14 Modeling Section? 14 really not talking about when it was built,
15 MS. GREIF: 15 but these issues as they relate to the MRGO
16 Objection, vague. 16 generally. Okay? I mean, these are issues
17 THE WITNESS: 17 that would not be just a one-time thing.
18 It could fall under the Coastal 18 Right? I mean, they wouldn't --
19 Engineering Section or the Hydrologic 19 A. Yeah, tides don't go away.
20 Engineering Section. 20 Q. Right. And the salinity issue --
21 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 21 A. Salt is salt, yes.
22 Q. Okay. 22 Q. And drainage and reclamation is what
23 A. This is -- It addresses tidal 23 it is, and beach erosion is what it is.
24 fluctuations, which is more Coastal. 24 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively).
25 Q. All right. But again, you, when you 25 Q. It's in that context, and I perhaps
Page 83 Page 85
1 were Chief, you didn't address these issues 1 should have told you that, but in that context
2 with regard to the MRGO; right? 2 that I am asking which of these sections might
3 A. That's correct. 3 be called upon. So salinity would be possibly
4 Q. Then that's why I asked the 4 Coastal Section, probably Hydra Modeling
5 question, to be candid with you. 5 Section?
6 Number 10 says "Drainage and 6 A. That would be a correct statement,
7 reclamation". Would that be something that 7 yes.
8 might be done by the Hydraulic Engineering 8 Q. And finally Beach Erosion Board,
9 group or the Coastal or the Hydro? Which of 9 would that even fall within any one of these
10 the three? 10 sections?
11 A. Again, it could be done by the 11 A. The Beach Erosion Board is a
12 Coastal Engineering or the Hydrologic 12 different organization. It's more of a
13 Engineering Section. 13 Corps-wide board. It would not necessarily
14 Q. Okay. But, in fact, during your 14 have to do with the New Orleans District.
15 tenure as relates to the MRGO, it was done by 15 Q. All right.
16 the Coastal Engineering; right? 16 A. The name has also changed over time.
17 A. Yes. 17 It's no longer called the Beach Erosion Board.
18 Q. Okay. Good. Number 11 is 18 Q. What's it called? How about this?
19 "Salinity" and I think you have already 19 What was it called shortly before Katrina?
20 testified that probably would have been done 20 Let's use that as a frame of reference.
21 by the Hydra Modeling Section? 21 A. My understanding, it was the Coastal
22 A. The Coastal Engineering Section may 22 Engineering Research Board, the CERB.
23 have been involved, but -- You know, this is 23 Q. Okay. And that is -- that is a
24 -- this was written in 1958. 24 board which -- does it cover an area larger
25 Q. Right. 25 than the Region, Vicksburg Region?
22 (Pages 82 to 85)
Page 86 Page 88
1 A. Yes. It's national. 1 that's related to ship traffic?
2 Q. Oh, it's national. All right. 2 A. Yeah, there are techniques to reduce
3 Which of these three sections, if any at all, 3 bank erosion from ship traffic, barge traffic,
4 would address erosion issues as they might 4 or natural river flow.
5 relate to the MRGO? 5 Q. And for how long has that technology
6 A. I'd have to ask for clarification. 6 been available?
7 Erosion in context with what? 7 A. I think there's revetments that are
8 Q. Bank erosion. 8 on the Mississippi since Mark Twain days.
9 A. Bank erosion? And its cause? 9 Q. Okay. And it's possible to, if the
10 Q. Yes. And prevention. 10 channel has widened, to put the revetment in
11 A. And prevention? I have to guess. I 11 such a location that you can put spoil behind
12 don't know. 12 the revetment and reclaim the land that may
13 Q. Okay. That's -- 13 have been eroded before the revetment was
14 A. I would assume it would be the 14 placed?
15 Coastal Engineering Section. 15 A. That is techniques that have been
16 Q. Truthfully, I should have asked it 16 used, yes.
17 differently, but I was just trying to make 17 Q. All right. Do you know if those
18 certain that it wasn't in your area. 18 techniques were used on the MRGO at any time
19 A. No, it's not in my area. 19 up until Katrina?
20 Q. Not in your area. How about land 20 A. I have no direct knowledge.
21 reclamation as it relates to the MRGO; would 21 Q. Who should I ask?
22 that be within your area of expertise or 22 A. The Operation Manager, our Waterways
23 within the Hydrologic Engineering Section? 23 Section, which would be Rick Broussard.
24 A. I would not say not, not in this 24 Q. All right. Well, and really, I am
25 context. 25 trying to frankly confirm that it's okay for
Page 87 Page 89
1 Q. Okay. 1 me to leave this area, to be candid with you.
2 A. Because we deal with -- dealt more 2 So let's see if we can just round it out. You
3 with an area as opposed to reclaiming swamp 3 said that the context of your review of some
4 land. That's how I read this paragraph. It's 4 MRGO documents related to what again? Help me
5 talking about reclaiming swamp land. 5 remember. I'm sorry.
6 Q. Right. Let me ask you this. In the 6 MS. GREIF:
7 Atchafalaya, were there -- did you encounter a 7 Objection, vague.
8 situation where there was bank erosion and 8 THE WITNESS:
9 part of the effort overseen by your office may 9 I testified that, you know, I
10 have included the prevention of the erosion of 10 would get a call from somebody that
11 the banks of any, you know, particular 11 was on the IPET team and they would
12 waterway or channel or the like in the 12 ask me, "Well, what was the channel
13 Atchafalaya Basin? 13 size during this hurricane?" Or "What
14 A. There's some minor erosion in the 14 was the channel size -- where was the
15 first 55 miles of the channel, but that 15 channel? Did the channel exist during
16 channel's now revetted so the erosion is very 16 Hurricane Betsy?"
17 minor. 17 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
18 Q. Okay. Revetted means? 18 Q. All right.
19 A. The bank is protected by concrete 19 A. Those types of information, and I
20 revetment along the bank to prevent erosion 20 would just relay them to a particular document
21 from vessel traffic or high velocities from 21 or try to find the information for them.
22 river flow. 22 Q. Okay. Well, in answer, how would
23 Q. All right. So I gather then that 23 you go about answering what was the channel
24 there are technologies available that can 24 size? And I guess were they asking about
25 address bank erosion, at least bank erosion 25 channel size immediately before Katrina or
23 (Pages 86 to 89)
Page 90 Page 92
1 were they asking for some other point in time? 1 at a particular location?
2 MS. GREIF: 2 MS. GREIF:
3 Objection. 3 Objection, vague.
4 THE WITNESS: 4 THE WITNESS:
5 Both. 5 The particular instance that I
6 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 6 recall, it was the channel size in the
7 Q. Both. All right. So if I were to 7 GIWW reach, which is not so much Reach
8 ask you about a point in time, can you just 8 2.
9 kind of walk me through the process by which 9 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
10 you would find the answer to what's the 10 Q. But Reach 1?
11 channel size? And let's just pick a date 11 A. More Reach 1. Although, you know,
12 arbitrarily. June, '05. What would you do? 12 beyond the east side of the Paris Road bridge
13 MS. GREIF: 13 is still considered Reach 2 from your
14 Objection, speculative. 14 definition.
15 THE WITNESS: 15 Q. Right.
16 June, 2005, I would go up to our 16 A. I did get a request to find the
17 Waterways Section and ask them for a 17 channel size there prior to the construction
18 cross section. 18 of the MRGO.
19 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 19 Q. Okay. And again, just to make
20 Q. Okay. 20 certain that the record is crystal clear, you
21 A. To see if they have cross sections. 21 would have a two-dimensional picture; right?
22 And if they're not available, go to the 22 And it would be across the width of the
23 Operation Manager. 23 channel. And the two dimensions would be the
24 Q. All right. The first thing I want 24 width and the depth, showing, you know, the
25 to understand is, when we say channel size, I 25 contours of the bottom? Right?
Page 91 Page 93
1 am just curious to know what dimensions would 1 A. Right. We would go, you know,
2 you report? 2 depending on what the survey showed and
3 A. I would generally provide a cross 3 depending on what information I could find,
4 section usually. 4 the goal would be to find something that went
5 Q. And again, for the record, a cross 5 from top of bank, down the bank of the
6 section would be a slice of the width of the 6 channel, all the way across to the other side,
7 channel -- 7 come up the bank, and to the top of bank. You
8 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively). 8 know, it depends on the records. You may not
9 Q. -- showing the depth? 9 find that complete information. They may not
10 A. The context of the people that would 10 have been documented.
11 ask me these questions would be more toward 11 Q. Okay. As I have been told, and
12 putting the information in a model, so they 12 perhaps I am wrong, but there are -- those
13 will need the complete size, you know, not 13 kinds of materials or data are maintained in
14 just the -- if it's -- if it -- here again, go 14 connection with the dredging of the MRGO. Is
15 back to the Mississippi River. You got the 15 that not true?
16 navigation channel, you got the 16 A. To the best of my knowledge, they
17 channel-channel. 17 will maintain records at least of the size of
18 Q. Right. 18 the navigation channel and may not necessarily
19 A. And if you're going to model it, you 19 be the whole channel.
20 need to know the exact shape -- 20 Q. Okay.
21 Q. Of the whole thing? 21 A. I don't know.
22 A. -- of the whole thing. 22 Q. All right. Did you go to those
23 Q. And so I am wondering, though, 23 folks in order to answer the question posed by
24 whether or not they're looking for the whole 24 the IPET people?
25 -- the channel size for the entire length or 25 A. I went to documents.
24 (Pages 90 to 93)
Page 94 Page 96
1 Q. All right. And again, just to round 1 A. Okay.
2 it out, you told me the two places that you 2 Q. (Counsel hands document to Witness.)
3 went. One was the -- What was it? Which 3 Let's just short circuit it.
4 group did you go to first to find the data? 4 A. Okay. I can see where you're coming
5 A. For information on channel sizes I 5 from.
6 would normally go to the Waterways Section. 6 Q. Okay.
7 Q. Waterways. That's what it was. 7 A. I was responsible for taking
8 A. And then the Operation Manager. 8 information out of existing documents on the
9 Q. All right. The Waterways, where are 9 Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity, West Bank and
10 the Waterways folks in this chart? And you 10 Vicinity, and New Orleans to Venice projects
11 can flip backwards and forwards, obviously. 11 and summarizing information on the design
12 MS. GREIF: 12 hurricane and the hydrology and hydraulics
13 The organization chart. 13 from those documents --
14 MR. BRUNO: 14 Q. Okay.
15 Yes. 15 A. -- into the IPET report.
16 THE WITNESS: 16 Q. All right.
17 They would be under the Civil 17 MS. GREIF:
18 Branch (indicating). 18 Wait. Wait. What is this
19 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 19 document you just handed her?
20 Q. Of the Engineering Division? 20 THE WITNESS:
21 A. Of the Engineering Division. 21 This is --
22 Q. All right. And then, of course, the 22 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
23 Ops guy is under the Operations Branch; 23 Q. Go ahead and tell her. That's
24 right? 24 fine. Please. Help us out.
25 A. Yeah, one of these branches is Ops. 25 A. This is the outline for one of the
Page 95 Page 97
1 Q. Okay. 1 volumes of the IPET report.
2 A. Operation manager MRGO (indicating). 2 MS. GREIF:
3 Q. All right. Thank you. That pretty 3 Okay. And it's Bates stamped
4 much -- that sums up your association with the 4 MVD-007-000002526 and then ending
5 MRGO; right? 5 2537.
6 A. Yes. 6 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
7 Q. Okay. So the other thing that you 7 Q. Okay. Let me ask you one more
8 did for the IPET was to assist them in 8 question about MRGO at the urging of
9 calculating -- Well, I don't know if you did 9 co-Counsel.
10 any calculating or not. I need to ask you 10 You don't recall ever having been
11 that. But you assisted them in their analysis 11 asked by the IPET folks to get the cross
12 of the design of the levees along the MRGO 12 sectional information or channel information
13 reach; right? 13 as relates to -- I am going to call it Reach
14 A. No. 14 2, but limiting it to after the bend, for the
15 Q. You did not? 15 IPET folks?
16 A. (Witness shakes head negatively.) 16 A. No, I don't recall. Just the GIWW
17 Q. Well, you, I thought, had the role 17 area.
18 of assisting with the design hurricane -- or 18 Q. All right. Let's go back to this
19 was that maybe -- is that -- Did you? 19 now. Which is -- Okay. I was listening to
20 A. Can you ask that again? 20 the question and you all -- You have explained
21 MS. GREIF: 21 what this document is.
22 Objection. 22 MR. BRUNO:
23 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 23 Do you want to attach it? I
24 Q. Let me just show you the document. 24 don't care.
25 How about that? 25 MS. GREIF:
25 (Pages 94 to 97)
Page 98 Page 100
1 Yes. Can we? 1 A. John Jaeger, who is one of the, I
2 MR. BRUNO: 2 guess for lack of a better term, leads of
3 Yes. We are on Powell 2. Do we 3 IPET.
4 have a clean one? 4 Q. And he's with the Corps?
5 MR. BUCHLER: 5 A. He's with the Corps, yes.
6 No. Maybe we can make a copy and 6 MR. LAMBERT:
7 then attach a copy. 7 His last name again?
8 MR. BRUNO: 8 THE WITNESS:
9 Yes. 9 Jaeger.
10 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 10 MR. LAMBERT:
11 Q. Anyway, so the point is, the outline 11 Spell it?
12 reflects your role with regard to IPET. 12 THE WITNESS:
13 A. Yes. 13 J A E G E R. J E E J A R.
14 Q. Okay. And again, this may seem 14 Something.
15 obvious, but it allows me to ask fewer 15 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
16 questions. Your contact with the MRGO started 16 Q. Did we get his title? What's his
17 after Hurricane Katrina? Isn't that true? 17 title?
18 A. Yes. 18 A. I don't know.
19 MS. GREIF: 19 Q. You may have -- Okay. Good. I'm
20 Objection. 20 losing my mind. I thought I missed it.
21 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 21 I'll let you do your honors
22 Q. And with regard to the Lake 22 because your penmanship is so much better than
23 Pontchartrain and Vicinity Hurricane Project, 23 mine. This is Powell 2, right?
24 any, you know, knowledge of that occurred 24 MR. LAMBERT:
25 after the Hurricane Katrina? 25 Should be.
Page 99 Page 101
1 A. Yes. 1 MS. MILLER:
2 Q. Okay, now. And really, your 2 Yes.
3 association with either of these two things is 3 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
4 the result of the work that you provided -- 4 Q. All right. Now, before Katrina, Ms.
5 I'm sorry, the assistance that you provided to 5 Powell, did you understand what the
6 the IPET team; right? 6 relationship was between a Standard Project
7 A. That's correct. 7 Hurricane and hurricane structure design?
8 Q. Now, were you actually a member of 8 A. No.
9 the IPET team? 9 Q. Since Katrina have you come to
10 A. I was considered a member, yes. 10 understand the connection, if any, between a
11 Q. Okay. Who appointed the IPET team? 11 Standard Project Hurricane and the design of a
12 A. It's my understanding that General 12 hurricane protection structure?
13 Strock. 13 A. I have come to understand what
14 Q. And who is General Strock, just for 14 Standard Project Hurricane is and I have come
15 the record? 15 to understand how we design protection systems
16 A. He was the Chief of Engineers at the 16 today.
17 time of Katrina. 17 Q. Okay. Today meaning post-Katrina?
18 Q. All right. For the whole Corps? 18 A. Yes.
19 A. For the whole Corps, yes. 19 Q. All right. So you are not able to
20 Q. All right. So he made the 20 testify about how the Corps designed hurricane
21 appointment? 21 protection structures before Katrina. Is that
22 A. That's my understanding, yes. 22 fair?
23 Q. All right. And he appointed you? 23 A. I did not do the work. Therefore, I
24 A. No. 24 could not testify. Yes.
25 Q. Well, who appointed you? 25 Q. All right. So what you are able to
26 (Pages 98 to 101)
Page 102 Page 104
1 testify about -- Well, let me -- You know, I 1 Lake Pontchartrain, is it your understanding
2 am trying to find the artful way to ask this 2 that it was just one Standard Project
3 question. You didn't have anything to do with 3 Hurricane? And before I allow you to answer,
4 the original designs. We already know that. 4 let me clarify what I mean. By Standard
5 So your role was to do research to find out 5 Project Hurricane, I am describing a hurricane
6 how they did it? Or were you trying to 6 with a certain track, a certain pressure, and
7 recreate the Standard Project Hurricane? 7 certain winds. So in the context of the Lake
8 A. My role in this context was to read 8 Pontchartrain and Vicinity Hurricane
9 the documents, the historical documents, the 9 Protection Project, is it your current
10 GDMs and design documents, and extract 10 understanding that in the past there was one
11 information on the Standard Project Hurricane 11 or more than one Standard Project Hurricane?
12 and the hydrology and hydraulics that went 12 A. Under what you just described as the
13 into the design of the hurricane system. 13 definition, then there would be more than one
14 Q. All right. Do you feel that you, 14 Standard Project Hurricane.
15 based upon the effort that you have expended 15 Q. All right. Now, are you able to
16 in researching those documents, are competent 16 tell us how many?
17 to testify about how the Standard Project 17 A. As I recall for the Lake
18 Hurricane was created -- 18 Pontchartrain and Vicinity, there may have
19 MS. GREIF: 19 been three. There's three different tracks.
20 Objection. 20 Q. Okay. Right. Now, let's -- and if
21 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 21 I say the Chalmette -- I think the references
22 Q. -- at the time that the hurricane 22 are to the Chalmette area. Is that accurate?
23 protection structures were designed in the 23 To describe the area where we find the MRGO?
24 Chalmette area? 24 A. That would be a fair statement.
25 MS. GREIF: 25 That's how they -- they broke out the reaches
Page 103 Page 105
1 Objection. 1 back then, yes.
2 THE WITNESS: 2 Q. All right. Is it true that what the
3 I could testify as to what I 3 designers were trying to understand was what
4 read. 4 was the worst hurricane that could be expected
5 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 5 to hit that area so that one could have an
6 Q. Okay. 6 understanding of the still water height
7 A. And how I understood what I read. 7 coupled with some calculation for wave action
8 Q. All right. Have you learned that 8 so that they then could design a structure to
9 the Standard Project Hurricane was not 9 keep that water out?
10 necessarily the same project hurricane for 10 MS. GREIF:
11 each hurricane protection structure? 11 Objection, compound. Calls for
12 MS. GREIF: 12 speculation.
13 Objection, vague. 13 THE WITNESS:
14 THE WITNESS: 14 You referred back to the worst
15 My understanding is Lake 15 hurricane?
16 Pontchartrain and Vicinity Project has 16 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
17 a Standard Project Hurricane, and West 17 Q. Yes. I think that's the words.
18 Bank and Vicinity has a different 18 A. Because that's not the definition of
19 Standard Project Hurricane. Morganza 19 Standard Project Hurricane.
20 to the Gulf does not have Standard 20 Q. Okay. Let me show you this document
21 Project Hurricane because that concept 21 and ask if you recall ever having seen it.
22 is no longer used by the Corps of 22 Please allow me to keep my finger there if you
23 Engineers. 23 don't mind. There you go.
24 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 24 MS. GREIF:
25 Q. All right. Well, with regard to 25 What is this document?
27 (Pages 102 to 105)

Page 106 Page 108
1 MR. BRUNO: 1 Q. Right. Okay. And I will submit --
2 Before -- I'm going to let her 2 But you don't recall ever having read the
3 look at it and see if she has any 3 document that's in front of you?
4 knowledge of it first, and then, 4 A. I have read House Document 208. I
5 you're right, we'll go to the next 5 don't -- It may have been an earlier version
6 question, which is what it is. At 6 of this.
7 least what I understand it to be. 7 Q. What is Document 208? What is your
8 THE WITNESS: 8 understanding of what 208 is?
9 Is this House Document 208? 9 A. My understanding, it was one of the
10 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 10 original documents put together prior to
11 Q. Yes, ma'am. 11 Hurricane Betsy and then it was revised after
12 MR. BUCHLER: 12 Hurricane Betsy, but I could be wrong.
13 No. 13 Q. All right. Well, the document that
14 MR. BRUNO: 14 you read, do you know whether or not that
15 No? 15 document actually became the approved plan by
16 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 16 the Congress?
17 Q. 203. 17 MS. GREIF:
18 MR. BUCHLER: 18 Objection.
19 231. 19 THE WITNESS:
20 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 20 It's my understanding that the
21 Q. 231. Okay. This is a test. 21 document that I read was not the
22 A. Okay. I am not familiar with 231. 22 approved plan. There were changes
23 Q. But you know what 231 is? Right? 23 made after that document was created.
24 A. I'm not familiar with House Document 24 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
25 231. 25 Q. All right. Well, do you recall
Page 107 Page 109
1 MR. BUCHLER: 1 having read the approved plan?
2 Say it again. 2 A. I don't recall reading the approved
3 MR. BRUNO: 3 plan.
4 Maybe we all got it wrong. 4 Q. All right. Well, --
5 What's the number? The letter from 5 A. I don't think I did.
6 the Chief. 6 Q. -- I am forced to ask, why would you
7 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 7 have read the non-approved plan in view of the
8 Q. This is the Lake Pontchartrain and 8 fact that it wasn't what Congress actually
9 Vicinity Hurricane Protection Plan. 9 authorized the Corps to do?
10 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively). 10 A. Availability of the document. We
11 Q. And I forgot which House Number -- 11 were looking for all documents and I read the
12 which House document number it is. Because I 12 ones that I was able to find --
13 just don't remember it. But you recall that 13 Q. Okay.
14 the original authorization of the Lake 14 A. -- at the time.
15 Pontchartrain and Vicinity Hurricane 15 Q. Well, how did you satisfy yourself
16 Protection Act authorizes the Corps to build a 16 that the document that you read was relevant
17 hurricane protection system pursuant to a 17 to the determination of the Standard Project
18 particular House document number? 18 Hurricane by the Corps when the hurricane
19 MS. GREIF: 19 protection structures for Chalmette were
20 Object. Objection. 20 done?
21 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 21 A. I would have read DM Number 1, --
22 Q. Right? Do you recall that? 22 Q. Okay.
23 A. We would have -- There would be a 23 A. -- which is a more complete document
24 House document that goes with the 24 on the Standard Project Hurricane and the
25 authorization. 25 analysis that was done for the Chalmette area,
28 (Pages 106 to 109)

Page 110 Page 112
1 which is beyond this document. 1 Q. All right.
2 Q. All right. But just to round it 2 A. This says "considered reasonably
3 out, would you please go to page 46? 3 characteristic of the region", not actually,
4 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively). 4 you know, within all possibility.
5 Q. I will represent to you and ask you 5 Q. I am trying to understand the
6 to assume that this is the actual plan 6 disconnect. Because I, in my question
7 approved by Congress. 7 suggested the region. I said that.
8 MR. LAMBERT: 8 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively), but you said
9 Of the -- 9 the worst.
10 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 10 Q. That had been experienced over
11 Q. Of the Lake Pontchartrain -- 11 time. Maybe I am -- This was my question. My
12 MR. LAMBERT: 12 question was, in fact, didn't the Standard
13 Right. 13 Project Hurricane, wasn't it supposed to be an
14 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 14 understanding of the worst storm that could
15 Q. -- and Vicinity Hurricane Protection 15 affect an area based upon a study of
16 Plan. 16 hurricanes that had affected the area over
17 MR. LAMBERT: 17 time?
18 Page? 18 A. And I would say no, I would not
19 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 19 categorize the SPH as you define it.
20 Q. And at page 46 you see at paragraph 20 Q. All right. Well, in fact, didn't
21 9 something called the Standard Project 21 the Corps look to the Weather Service for data
22 Hurricane. Okay? 22 on hurricanes that had hit the New Orleans
23 A. I see on page 46 paragraph 9, 23 area? Did you understand that?
24 Standard Project Hurricane. Yes. 24 A. Yes.
25 Q. All right. And the first sentence 25 Q. They did that?
Page 111 Page 113
1 -- and you'll remember I asked the question 1 A. Yes, they consulted with the U.S.
2 if in fact your reading allowed you to 2 Weather Bureau, which is now the National
3 conclude that the Standard Project Hurricane 3 Weather Service.
4 was supposed to be an indication of the worst 4 Q. And, in fact, they used a time frame
5 storm anticipated for an area like Chalmette, 5 1900 to 1956.
6 and with that in mind, please read the first 6 A. That's correct.
7 sentence and -- period. 7 Q. Do you know why they did that?
8 A. "A Standard Project Hurricane SPH is 8 A. Well, 1956, at the time of this
9 one that may be expected from the most severe 9 analysis, would have been the latest year.
10 combination of meteorological conditions that 10 Q. Okay.
11 are considered reasonably characteristic of 11 A. 1900 was probably, from what I read,
12 the region." 12 I concluded that the information that they
13 Q. Now, in fact, the design memo says 13 could derive storm parameters was not
14 the same thing, doesn't it? 14 available with any kind of reliability prior
15 A. DM Number 1? 15 to 1900.
16 Q. Yes. 16 Q. Well, --
17 A. It probably uses similar language, 17 A. So they did not -- they chose not to
18 yes. 18 use storms that occurred prior to 1900.
19 Q. All right. So am I -- my question, 19 Q. Now, it further says that "The
20 does it mischaracterize then what Standard 20 general SPH that is characteristic for the
21 Project Hurricane is? That is, the most 21 coastal region of Louisiana was developed in
22 severe hurricane that one could expect for the 22 cooperation with the Hydro-meteorological
23 particular area? 23 section of the U.S. Weather Bureau --"
24 A. I would still say that that is not a 24 MS. GREIF:
25 complete characterization of -- 25 You're still on the same page?
29 (Pages 110 to 113)

Page 114 Page 116
1 MR. BRUNO: 1 A. Correct.
2 Yes, and I am in the same 2 Q. Okay. Thank you. And that, in
3 paragraph as well and the next 3 fact, reflects that there are this hurricane
4 sentence. 4 data going back to 1901. And in fact, there's
5 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 5 another hurricane dated 1886, but it really
6 Q. "And corresponds to one having a 6 doesn't hit New Orleans. You can see it
7 frequency of once in about 200 years." You 7 (indicating).
8 see that? 8 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively). It has a
9 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively). Yes. 9 map that shows 1886 hurricane. I don't know
10 Q. All right. Do you know how one 10 if it has all the detailed information on that
11 calculates the one in 200 year hurricane? 11 hurricane in there. It may just be a summary
12 A. Based on reviewing the documents for 12 of some of the information. For example, on
13 IPET, particularly DM-1 and other DMs that 13 page 7, they talk about Grand Isle area and
14 were done for Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity, 14 hurricanes that had major damage or minor
15 it's my understanding that that frequency 15 damage and they give one central pressure and
16 corresponded to the water level that occurred 16 a maximum gradient wind and a forward speed
17 as a result of this design storm, and the 17 for that one storm.
18 water level had a frequency of about once 18 Q. All right. So do you know what data
19 every 200 years. 19 the Corps got from the Weather Service?
20 Q. Let me show you this document and 20 A. The Corps of Engineers would have
21 see if you have ever seen it before and then 21 gotten information on the parameters of the
22 I'll identify it for the record. 22 hurricane as it moves closer on that track.
23 MS. GREIF: 23 Q. On that track which, again, for the
24 Can we make this an exhibit 24 record, would you agree with me is reflected
25 (indicating)? 25 on page 47? This -- Let's see. I don't know
Page 115 Page 117
1 MR. BRUNO: 1 if you can see it. You see that sentence that
2 Of course. In fact, we'll just 2 begins "The SPH critical to the Chalmette
3 -- We'll have to make some more. 3 area"? You see that?
4 MR. BUCHLER: 4 A. Yes.
5 Can we keep it here though so we 5 Q. All right. "The SPH critical to the
6 don't have to make one for each day? 6 Chalmette area, the Back Levees of Citrus and
7 MR. BRUNO: 7 New Orleans East and from the Lake Borgne side
8 How about this? You want the 8 in the vicinity of the Rigolets and the Chef
9 whole document or maybe we could just 9 Menteur Pass has a translational speed of
10 do the cover page? 10 eleven knots." Do you see that?
11 MS. GREIF: 11 A. Yes.
12 I think I would like the whole 12 Q. All right. What is a translational
13 document. 13 speed of eleven knots, if you know?
14 MR. BRUNO: 14 A. I don't know.
15 Okay. We'll let them make a 15 Q. This hurricane approaches from the
16 copy. I'll let you make a copy during 16 east, traverses the coast east of the
17 the break. 17 Mississippi River Delta, and south of Lake
18 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 18 Borgne and curves slightly northward, passing
19 Q. Have you ever seen that document? 19 to the west of Lake Maurepas." All right.
20 A. I don't know if I have seen this 20 Did you attempt to recreate that track in --
21 actual one. I may have seen updates. 21 A. There's -- In DM-1 and maybe even in
22 Q. All right. And for the record, 22 this document there's a map that shows the
23 that's a history of hurricane occurrences 23 track. I know there's one in DM-1.
24 along the coast of Louisiana dated August, 24 Q. All right. Now, would that be A --
25 1972. 25 A. Chalmette track F.
30 (Pages 114 to 117)

Page 118 Page 120
1 Q. What plate are you on? I'm trying 1 A. If waves are present, there would be
2 -- 2 a wave characteristics and a wave height and
3 A. Plate A-7. 3 wave period calculated.
4 Q. A-7. All right. That's A-7 of the 4 Q. All right. Do you know how they
5 document we just referred to. And F? 5 calculated the wave height for the Standard
6 A. F follows the 1947 hurricane and 6 Project Hurricane for the design of the
7 goes and diverges when you get a little bit to 7 hurricane protection structures in the
8 the west-southwest of Lake Pontchartrain. 8 Chalmette area?
9 Q. Okay. I see. All right. So the 9 A. I would have pulled it out of the
10 1947 hurricane then is a pretty good 10 document and placed it in the IPET report.
11 indication of what we can expect at least -- 11 Q. Okay.
12 if we look back at the hurricane in 1947, that 12 A. I just don't recall exactly what it
13 track is very close to the track used to 13 said. You --
14 assess the Chalmette area. Right? 14 Q. I have got the -- (Indicating).
15 A. That was the track that was 15 A. Okay.
16 considered in the design, yes. 16 Q. Is it -- Might I find it in here?
17 Q. Okay. Do we know what wind speed 17 A. No. I don't know that it would be
18 was considered? 18 in this document.
19 A. That would be in DM Number 1. 19 Q. Okay. I guess what I am trying to
20 Q. Okay. Do you remember it? 20 do, to kind of assist us in getting through
21 A. No. 21 this, is to learn what section or what volume
22 Q. Do you know how it relates to the 22 of IPET you contributed to.
23 '47 hurricane? 23 A. That would be the --
24 A. No. 24 Q. According to the -- Let's see.
25 Q. Do you know how the Central Pressure 25 What's our exhibit?
Page 119 Page 121
1 Index of the SPH for Chalmette relates to the 1 A. Yes, it says volume 3.
2 '47 hurricane? 2 Q. Volume 3?
3 A. No. 3 A. But I don't know that -- I don't
4 Q. Now, once you have got your Standard 4 know that its date is volume 3. That's what I
5 Project Hurricane, what do you do, or what did 5 am struggling with. Do you have a list of all
6 they do with that information is a better 6 the volumes?
7 question? 7 Q. Yes, right there. Can I see that
8 MS. GREIF: 8 again, please, if you don't mind? Let see.
9 Objection, speculative. 9 Your outline says --
10 THE WITNESS: 10 A. It would be volume 3.
11 Once you get the storm 11 Q. Volume 3, the hurricane protection
12 parameters, then you're going to use 12 system.
13 your equation -- back at this point in 13 A. Yes.
14 time you would have used your 14 Q. Okay.
15 equations along with the track 15 A. Yes, volume 3.
16 information to generate the water 16 Q. I just have the summary there, the
17 level that would occur as a result of 17 executive summary in order to kind of make it
18 that hurricane following that track. 18 easier for us to deal with. But volume 3
19 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 19 regards the system itself. And the section of
20 Q. All right. Is that still water 20 the system that you would have assisted in
21 level? 21 contributing relates to how the Standard
22 A. They would call it -- they may call 22 Project Hurricane was developed as a component
23 it still water level, yes. 23 of the design. Right?
24 Q. And then there's some calculation of 24 A. I would write what the diff- -- take
25 wave height on top of that; right? 25 out of the DMs what Standard Project Hurricane
31 (Pages 118 to 121)

Page 122 Page 124
1 parameters and track were used for each area 1 Q. Which we marked as -- we're going to
2 and summarize how the designers, the hydraulic 2 mark --
3 designers went from those different parameters 3 MS. GREIF:
4 that make up the Standard Project Hurricane, 4 Number 3. It should be marked --
5 wind speed, radius of maximum winds, those 5 MR. BRUNO:
6 types of parameters, going through their 6 Yes, it'll be marked 3, yes, once
7 equations to calculate what the surge level 7 we make it.
8 would be and what the wave characteristics and 8 MR. LAMBERT:
9 the run-up would be. 9 That's the design memo?
10 Q. All right. Good. Do you know how 10 MR. BRUNO:
11 the still water height was calculated for the 11 No, it's not.
12 Chalmette area? 12 THE WITNESS:
13 A. As I recall, it was based on some 13 No. This is --
14 equations that were used at that time in the 14 MS. GREIF:
15 design. 15 The House Number 231.
16 Q. But what was the process? In other 16 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
17 words, what information was taken and how did 17 Q. All right. Now, --
18 they -- If you want, we can go to -- Let me 18 A. This is just some examples of how it
19 just show you volume 1, page 29, which is the 19 was calculated. They have got an example on
20 executive summary again, and -- 20 page 106.
21 MR. BRUNO: 21 Q. Now, Ms. Powell, this is all the
22 Do we have a copy for her? 22 business of calculating surge. That is, how
23 Okay. Great. 23 high the water got. But it excludes the wave
24 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 24 action; right?
25 Q. Okay. You can see -- Here we go. 25 A. This is how, back in this time
Page 123 Page 125
1 You can continue looking at that if you want 1 period, that surge heights would have been
2 to. 2 calculated.
3 A. There's a sample in here 3 Q. Okay.
4 (indicating). 4 A. And it would have excluded the --
5 Q. Okay. That's page -- Where are 5 the waves would have been a separate
6 you? 6 calculation.
7 A. Let me get you -- Starting on page 7 Q. And we have learned from this
8 101. 8 document and the review of this document that
9 Q. Okay. 9 there was an exercise by which past storms and
10 A. If you want to skip around, it does 10 the surge produced by those storms was
11 talk about the historical storms used for 11 analyzed; correct?
12 verification of the methods. 12 A. That would have been part of the
13 Q. Right. 13 process, to look at historical storms, yes.
14 A. The synthetic storms, which is SPH 14 Q. Now, this may be obvious, but I just
15 is a synthetic storm. On page 103, they have 15 want to see if I can establish for the
16 got the equations to get the maximum 16 record. Clearly, then, the land masses, that
17 theoretical gradient wind. And then on page 17 is, the locations of the shoreline, the
18 104, they have the equation from which the 18 existence of swamp, the existence of trees and
19 surge heights are calculated. 19 all of that would have been as those things
20 MR. LAMBERT: 20 were at the time of those historical storms;
21 Page 104? 21 right?
22 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 22 A. Well, the land in 1947 would have
23 Q. Of the -- this is of the House 23 been the land in 1947.
24 document. 24 Q. Exactly. And you would agree --
25 A. Yeah. 25 and, of course, we all know that marsh, land,
32 (Pages 122 to 125)

Page 126 Page 128
1 trees provide hurricane buffers; right? 1 Okay.
2 MS. GREIF: 2 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
3 Objection, foundation. 3 Q. First, we will attach -- Have you
4 THE WITNESS: 4 seen that document before? I'm going to mark
5 I wouldn't say that that was a 5 this as Powell Number 4. We already have a
6 completely factual statement. 6 copy.
7 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 7 A. I have seen the Morgan City,
8 Q. What's inaccurate about it? 8 Louisiana and Vicinity Hurricane Study, yes.
9 A. For example, there's been modeling 9 Q. All right. Are you familiar with
10 done where -- ADCIRC modeling done where you 10 the chart within that study that I have opened
11 have 20 foot of water on top of a marsh that's 11 for you?
12 one foot high versus marsh that may be half a 12 A. Yes.
13 foot high, and the magnitude of the difference 13 Q. You are? What does that chart
14 in the surge for the same storm, the same 14 depict?
15 path, whatever, is -- is not significant. 15 A. That chart depicts how a storm, as
16 Q. All right. So what you're saying to 16 it hits landfall -- my understanding of it is
17 me is that there are certain circumstances 17 that this chart is of -- they used high water
18 under which or within which the marsh does not 18 marks to define how you translate your storm
19 act as a buffer? Right? 19 once it hits what's known as the surge
20 A. I think -- I believe that, you know, 20 reference line, and that surge reference line
21 some of the science is still not completely 21 may be the coast, it may not be the coast.
22 known. 22 When you are making calculations of how the
23 Q. Okay. 23 surge propagates beyond that surge reference
24 A. I think there's some research that's 24 line, --
25 ongoing right now as to the effects of, you 25 Q. Right.
Page 127 Page 129
1 know, whether you have 40 square miles of land 1 A. -- you -- there has to be a way to
2 or five square miles of land; whether you have 2 take the equations that are in -- that were
3 five square miles of land but 35 square miles 3 done in the analysis and account for the
4 of very shallow water, how that relates to 40 4 effects of the land on the wind, for example.
5 square miles of land. There's a lot of 5 So there was some analysis -- some initial
6 ongoing research that's being done -- 6 analysis based on high water marks --
7 Q. Right. 7 Q. Right.
8 A. -- to better define that. 8 A. -- so that they could do what I
9 Q. Well, certainly, though, before 9 would -- I think the term now is called
10 Hurricane Katrina the United States Army Corps 10 "filling", you know, how the storm changes as
11 of Engineers used to believe that the average 11 it moves across from the coast line to your
12 surge decrease that could be anticipated for 12 area of interest.
13 each 2.75 miles of land was about a foot. 13 Q. All right. So --
14 MS. GREIF: 14 A. Or what we would call the surge
15 Objection, foundation. 15 reference line, your area of interest.
16 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 16 Q. So would you tell us on this chart,
17 Q. Isn't that true? 17 which is plate A-4, and at the last page of
18 A. I would not say that's true. 18 the document that we have just marked as
19 Q. Let me show you the document. 19 Powell Number 4, what does that mean? Average
20 MS. GREIF: 20 surge decrease, one foot for each 2.75 miles?
21 What is that document? 21 What does that mean?
22 MR. BRUNO: 22 MS. GREIF:
23 I'm going to show it to her first 23 Objection, speculative.
24 and we'll get there. 24 THE WITNESS:
25 MS. GREIF: 25 It's my understanding that this
33 (Pages 126 to 129)

Page 130 Page 132
1 would be used to look at -- starting 1 A. A little easier to see it as words.
2 at your surge reference line, if you 2 Q. Yes. Well, read -- Well, take your
3 have got your levee so many miles 3 time. (Counsel hands document to witness.)
4 away, that you need -- that you're 4 A. Okay. You got "Coastal wetlands
5 looking at what they're calling a 5 absorb large amounts of wave energy and hold
6 weighted mean decrease in surge 6 large quantities of water that would otherwise
7 heights inland. 7 allow storms to do much more damage inland."
8 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 8 That's the sentence?
9 Q. Right. Essentially what that means 9 Q. Correct. And my question is do you
10 is, is that if you have calculated a surge 10 agree or disagree?
11 height and you know that that surge is going 11 A. I agree to some extent. It will
12 to pass over land, for purposes of designing 12 depend on the content of the wetlands.
13 your levee you will decrease the surge height 13 Q. Sure.
14 by one foot for every 2.75 miles of land. 14 A. The wave energy you have, the
15 Right? That's what that stands for? 15 surge. If your wetlands are completely
16 A. Yes. 16 inundated, it's going to respond differently.
17 Q. Okay. And that's because when this 17 I'm talking you know, ten, twenty feet of
18 chart was developed, the Corps was of the 18 inundation that has a different effect on wave
19 opinion that marsh and land acted as a buffer 19 energy, than, for example, if you had
20 to surge. Isn't that correct? 20 inundation of maybe a foot over the wetlands.
21 MS. GREIF: 21 Has a lot to do with the friction effects and
22 Objection, speculative. 22 whether you in fact have -- the waves have
23 THE WITNESS: 23 already broken, because they will break along
24 I wouldn't say that that was a 24 the coastline --
25 true statement, a completely true 25 Q. Sure.
Page 131 Page 133
1 statement. 1 A. -- and they can reform and,
2 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 2 depending on how they reform, the wet- -- the
3 Q. All right. 3 wetlands may or may not have an effect. I
4 MR. BRUNO: 4 find the statements that are here are more or
5 Let me have the reconnaissance 5 less written by somebody that's just wanting
6 report, please. 6 to put some general terms here to talk about.
7 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 7 Q. Right.
8 Q. I'll give that to you. All right. 8 A. Potential environmental benefits.
9 I'm going to ask to ask you -- In fairness to 9 Q. Well, you would agree that both of
10 you, ma'am, I am reading from the Mississippi 10 those sentences are generally true?
11 River-Gulf Outlet St. Bernard Parish Bank 11 MS. GREIF:
12 Erosion Reconnaissance Report dated January, 12 Objection. Asked and answered
13 1994 and I am going to read from page B-31, 13 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
14 and all I want to know is whether you agree or 14 Q. Right?
15 disagree with this statement. "Marshes 15 A. I think there's parts of the
16 provide hurricane and storm surge buffering 16 statements that for certain situations can be
17 capacity." Do you agree or disagree? 17 considered true, but then --
18 A. I disagree. 18 Q. Sure.
19 Q. Okay. "Coastal wetlands absorb 19 A. -- for other situations these
20 large amounts of wave energy and hold large 20 statements are not true.
21 quantities of water that would otherwise allow 21 Q. Right.
22 storms to do much more damage inland." Do you 22 MR. LAMBERT:
23 agree or disagree? 23 Joe, would you just for the
24 A. Could I see that? 24 record put the document that's been
25 Q. Yes, of course. 25 read, for those reading it, on the
34 (Pages 130 to 133)

Page 134 Page 136
1 record? 1 where there's a problem?
2 MR. BRUNO: 2 MS. GREIF:
3 I already did. 3 Objection.
4 MR. LAMBERT: 4 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
5 No, this -- 5 Q. Right?
6 THE WITNESS: 6 A. Also the limit. You're going to --
7 This one. 7 Q. Time?
8 MR. BRUNO: 8 A. -- reach a lim- -- No, I'm talking
9 Yes, I already did. I already 9 about there's a limit depending on the storm
10 did. I gave the title and I gave the 10 size and the marsh and wetlands configuration,
11 page. 11 where, you know, you raise the elevation a
12 MR. LAMBERT: 12 foot and -- or you extend your land out and
13 All right. 13 it's not going to have an effect.
14 MS. GREIF: 14 Q. Right.
15 Well, so it's clear, what page is 15 A. The physics is such that, you know,
16 it. 16 you have to look at the physics of the storm
17 THE WITNESS: 17 and how the -- the -- the waves and the surge
18 B-31. 18 propagate through that area.
19 MR. BRUNO: 19 Q. Right. That would relate to how
20 B-31. 20 fast the storm travels through the area as
21 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 21 well. Isn't that true?
22 Q. All right. So they're not false 22 MS. GREIF:
23 statements; right? 23 Objection, vague.
24 MS. GREIF: 24 THE WITNESS:
25 Objection. Asked and answered. 25 You're getting beyond my area of
Page 135 Page 137
1 THE WITNESS: 1 expertise.
2 I said parts of the statements 2 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
3 for certain situations are true and 3 Q. Oh, okay. Well, does the speed with
4 parts of them for other situations are 4 which a storm passes through an area at all
5 not true. 5 relate to what you do in your field? Or I
6 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 6 should say this. How about this? The time
7 Q. All right. So what you would 7 during which one has a certain level of wind,
8 suggest is that there be an elaboration of 8 in other words, if it's an hour versus two
9 both of those statements so that one can 9 hours versus a day versus a week, does that
10 understand that those statements were not true 10 have anything to do with hydrology?
11 for all circumstances? Right? 11 MS. GREIF:
12 A. Right. 12 Objection, vague.
13 Q. There are certain circumstances 13 THE WITNESS:
14 wherein those statements may not be accurate? 14 The field of hydrology that I
15 Right? 15 practice, I don't -- I don't do
16 A. That would be -- 16 coastal processes or hurricanes.
17 MS. GREIF: 17 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
18 Objection. 18 Q. Oh, you don't. All right. All
19 THE WITNESS: 19 right. You don't do coastal processes and you
20 -- a fair statement. 20 don't do hurricanes. But you could for a
21 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 21 given moment in time calculate wave height;
22 Q. All right. In other words, there is 22 right?
23 some buffering capacity, but the extent to 23 A. I could dig out my textbook and do
24 which one could expect the buffering capacity 24 that, yes.
25 to be the same under all circumstances is 25 Q. All right. Well, maybe you can tell
35 (Pages 134 to 137)

Page 138 Page 140
1 us what a fetch is. Do you know what a fetch 1 231.
2 is? 2 MR. BRUNO:
3 A. Oh, my brain. When you start 3 Is it 231?
4 looking at open water, it's the distance that 4 MR. BUCHLER:
5 the wave has the opportunity to grow and 5 Yes.
6 develop. You have areas of, like Lake 6 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
7 Pontchartrain, large open water body, you can 7 Q. It's 231. All right.
8 get waves that form that are much bigger than, 8 A. Which page again?
9 for example, a very small area or an area that 9 Q. 104.
10 doesn't have that kind of open water. You get 10 (Whereupon a discussion was held
11 waves on the Mississippi River, for example, 11 off the record.)
12 and the fetch length that the wind is coming 12 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
13 across the river, it's a very short fetch 13 Q. All right. Let's see. It says here
14 length of open water from which the wave can 14 that the September, 1947 hurricane had a
15 build, as opposed to, if it's going up the 15 Central Pressure Index of 28.57. Right?
16 river where you would have, you know, -- 16 A. Yeah.
17 Q. Much longer? 17 Q. Do we know what Katrina's Central
18 A. -- a much longer length and -- 18 Pressure Index was?
19 Q. Do I gather that it's the amount of 19 A. At landfall?
20 space needed at a certain wind velocity for a 20 Q. Yes.
21 wave to develop to a certain height? Is that 21 A. Yes. I don't know what the number
22 accurate? 22 is offhand, but that's known.
23 A. There's probably more physics than 23 Q. Okay. You don't know it?
24 that, yes, but that's -- you know, my sim- -- 24 A. No.
25 Here again, this is out of my field, so that's 25 Q. Do you know if it's higher or lower
Page 139 Page 141
1 my understanding of -- of part of it. But 1 than 28.57?
2 there's probably other things that would 2 A. I would say it was lower.
3 influence how that wave builds and grows and 3 Q. By any number?
4 develops, including its history. 4 A. I would be speculating.
5 Q. All right. As promised, this is our 5 Q. Speculating. Okay. Fine.
6 lunch break. So we will see you at 12:00 -- 6 Do you know the radius of the
7 I'm sorry, 1:30 -- 7 maximum winds of Katrina?
8 A. Okay. 8 A. Again, that's known. I'd be
9 Q. -- and I just got to figure out when 9 speculating again to tell you if it was larger
10 this phone call with Robin is supposed to be. 10 or smaller.
11 But I don't think that we have a whole lot 11 Q. Do you know the forward speed of
12 more anyway. Okay? 12 Katrina?
13 VIDEO OPERATOR: 13 A. That's also known. Don't know its
14 Off the record, it's 12:32. 14 relationship to 1947.
15 (Recess.) 15 Q. All right. Do you know what VX over
16 VIDEO OPERATOR: 16 miles per hour is? It's the last column of
17 Returning to the record, it is 17 table A-1.
18 1:35. 18 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively). According
19 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 19 to page 103, V sub X is the estimated wind
20 Q. Back on the record. Miss Powell, if 20 speed 30 feet above the ground.
21 you would turn to page 104 of the -- 21 Q. Okay. And do you know Katrina's VX
22 A. This (indicating)? 22 over MPH?
23 Q. I forgot what this document number. 23 A. Not in that context, no.
24 803? I don't remember now. 24 Q. All right. Now, I am just trying to
25 MR. BUCHLER: 25 get an understanding of what your contribution
36 (Pages 138 to 141)

Page 142 Page 144
1 was to the IPET, and if we can -- and again 1 A. That's why I said I didn't write
2 recognizing that this is not volume 3, but 2 this part.
3 it's, rather, the summary or, I'm sorry, the 3 Q. Right. You have told us that the --
4 executive summary, and you told us that you 4 there were three tracks, storm tracks. The
5 dealt with the system -- All right. Anyway, 5 one that was used for the Chalmette area was
6 if you could look at volume 1, page 29, and do 6 the '47 storm --
7 you know who wrote this? 7 A. Right.
8 A. You mean wrote page 129? 8 Q. -- with a little bit of change.
9 Q. Yes. 9 A. For Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity,
10 A. I don't know. 10 they had an SPH storm as the design storm; and
11 Q. And do you know -- 11 for Chalmette area it was track F, which was
12 MR. LAMBERT: 12 similar to 1947.
13 Which page? 13 Q. All right. So at least as it
14 MR. BRUNO: 14 relates to Chalmette, is this sentence correct
15 I-29. 15 or incorrect?
16 MR. LAMBERT: 16 A. You would have used the SPH as we
17 I got you. 17 defined it with the track F to calculate the
18 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 18 maximum water levels, yes.
19 Q. All right. What was your 19 Q. All right. Now, it talks about --
20 contribution to this section? I mean, you 20 And I guess maybe the next sentence, if you
21 told us about getting documents and providing 21 would look at it quickly for me, would you
22 information, but did you do anything more than 22 have contributed any information to allow for
23 that? 23 this sentence to have been written?
24 A. I had no part of the first volume. 24 A. I am not sure if it's even true. I
25 Q. Well, insofar as the first volume 25 don't know where they got their information.
Page 143 Page 145
1 summarizes volume 3. This is supposed to be 1 MR. LAMBERT:
2 an executive summary. 2 Read the sentence?
3 A. Right. 3 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
4 Q. And this is entitled "The system" 4 Q. Yes.
5 and it says "For more information, see volumes 5 A. "This amounted to, based on the 1900
6 2 and 3." So I am just using this rather than 6 to 1956 hurricane period, a 100 year level
7 the big fat volume. I'm trying to do a 7 severity storm that, considering the geometry
8 condensing version. Okay? The first sentence 8 of the Gulf, has a likelihood of 1 to 200 to 1
9 says "The design criteria for these structures 9 to 300 of hitting the New Orleans area each
10 was based upon the maximum water level --" 10 year, hence, a 200 to 300 year protection."
11 I'm sorry, "The maximum water elevations 11 Q. All right. And you have a view that
12 expected from the SPH as previously described 12 this is possibly not accurate?
13 for each project." Okay? Is that true? 13 A. Based on my readings of DM-1, the
14 Based upon your understanding? 14 frequency was assigned to the surge elevation,
15 A. Which structures? 15 not the likelihood of the storm. I may be
16 Q. Well, it says "Describe for each 16 misinterpreting this sentence here, but I read
17 project." 17 the sentence as the storm has a likelihood of
18 A. SPH was not the storm used for New 18 1 in 200.
19 Orleans to Venice. It was a different design 19 Q. All right. I understand.
20 storm. So I don't know that I can make that 20 A. And the frequency is different.
21 statement completely true. 21 Q. Right. Well, the truth of it is
22 Q. Okay. 22 that the protection was designed to deal with
23 A. And the report talked about all 23 a particular surge, so your interpretation is
24 three protection projects. 24 likely more accurate. Don't you agree?
25 Q. Okay. So I am confused. 25 A. As I read the DMs, we looked at the
37 (Pages 142 to 145)

Page 146 Page 148
1 surge frequency curves and that was where the 1 Category 3 storm at landfall, generated
2 surge elevation comes out. So yeah. 2 substantially higher surges than Camille, a
3 Q. All right. Now, it says "The 3 Category 5 storm at landfall in the area where
4 hurricane hazard of today, described in more 4 they both made a direct hit." Did you have
5 detail in volume VIII, is quite different and 5 anything to contribute to that?
6 presents a much more severe challenge to the 6 A. No.
7 hurricane protection system." Is that an 7 Q. Okay. The next sentence, "Whereas
8 accurate statement? 8 the Saffer Simpson scale is a good predictor
9 A. I am not sure of the basis for the 9 of wind levels and damage from hurricanes, it
10 statement so I can't tell you if it's true or 10 is not a particularly good predictor of the
11 not true. 11 surge and wave generation potential for these
12 Q. Fine. Do you know what 12 storms." Did you contribute to that
13 characteristics of Katrina were different from 13 conclusion?
14 storms that have been encountered by this area 14 A. No.
15 in the past? 15 Q. All right. "Surge and wave levels
16 MS. GREIF: 16 are particularly sensitive to the path the
17 Objection, foundation. 17 storm takes, the geometry of the coastline and
18 MR. BRUNO: 18 the Continental Shelf and the offshore
19 That's why I asked "Do you 19 character of the storm." Did you contribute
20 know". 20 to that conclusion?
21 THE WITNESS: 21 A. No.
22 I know that hurricane Betsy had a 22 Q. "Hurricane Katrina had much greater
23 different track. 23 wave and storm surge generation potential than
24 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 24 the Standard Project Hurricane storms used to
25 Q. Right. 25 design the HPS." Did you contribute to that
Page 147 Page 149
1 A. I know that Hurricane Camille had a 1 conclusion?
2 different track. 2 A. No.
3 Q. Okay. 3 Q. While I'm here, may I ask you if you
4 A. That's about the extent of my 4 would agree that wetlands restoration is
5 knowledge. 5 important?
6 Q. Okay. I understand. 6 MS. GREIF:
7 A. And it may have been different 7 Objection.
8 parameters, different speeds, different time 8 THE WITNESS:
9 in the Gulf, different location in the Gulf 9 I believe wetland -- wetland
10 where the storm went across. 10 restoration is important to the
11 Q. All right. 11 environment of Louisiana.
12 A. But I have not studied them in great 12 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
13 detail to be able to tell you the similarities 13 Q. All right. And why is it important
14 or differences. 14 to the environment of Louisiana?
15 Q. This was not your contribution -- 15 A. The wetlands are the nursery for our
16 A. That is correct. 16 fish and shrimp; and without wetlands, we
17 Q. -- to IPET? Okay. 17 don't have, you know, the -- the seafood that
18 You didn't address hurricane 18 we enjoy.
19 protection structure construction either? 19 Q. Okay.
20 A. No. 20 A. The culture that we enjoy.
21 Q. No? That wasn't your deal. Okay. 21 Q. All right. Is it important to
22 All right. How about -- Let's talk about a 22 regenerate the wetlands for the purposes of
23 subject you may have had something to do with, 23 creating buffer for storms and/or hurricanes?
24 and that is at page 33 if you want to follow 24 Is that one of the reasons for coastal
25 along with me. Okay? It says "Katrina, a 25 restoration?
38 (Pages 146 to 149)

Page 150 Page 152
1 A. I wouldn't make that statement. 1 called USGS to get their -- whatever
2 Q. Okay. Does the depth of the water 2 gauges they had functional and
3 relate in any way to the height of the wave? 3 provided that information to IPET. We
4 A. Yes. 4 extracted the data from the Weather
5 Q. And is it a limiting factor? That 5 Service gauge which is on the
6 is, the shallower the water, the lower the 6 Causeway, which functioned more or
7 wave height? 7 less throughout Katrina in bits and
8 A. Generally that -- There may be some 8 pieces, and provided that
9 minor exceptions, but that's generally true. 9 information. And similar gauges of
10 Q. Is it true that in shallow water, 10 ours and others, you know, just pulled
11 the depth of the water is the limiter of the 11 the records and furnished them and let
12 height of the wave? In other words, the wave 12 them evaluate the data.
13 cannot be higher than the depth of the water 13 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
14 in shallow water? 14 Q. All right. Now at page 35. "Winds
15 A. Based on my understanding of the 15 from Katrina generated a record wave
16 theory, the wave could not be greater than the 16 environment. "Did you contribute to that?
17 depth of the water. 17 A. No.
18 Q. Okay. Is that true only of shallow 18 Q. "Again, the lack of measurements
19 water or is it always -- is it true no matter 19 caused the IPET to model the wind-generated
20 how deep the water is? 20 waves to determine the conditions created by
21 A. That's beyond my expertise. 21 the storm." Did you contribute to that?
22 Q. Is there some kind of formula with 22 A. No.
23 regard to water depth? In other words, I had 23 Q. Okay. Do you work with the WAM
24 heard, and I don't know this to be accurate or 24 model at all?
25 inaccurate, but that in larger depth water, 25 A. No.
Page 151 Page 153
1 that wave can be no higher than one-quarter of 1 Q. Do you work with the ST Wave model?
2 the depth of the water. Does that make sense 2 A. No.
3 to you? 3 Q. Okay. What is the WAM model, if you
4 A. I would think the deep water waves 4 know?
5 are different than shallow water waves in 5 A. It's an offshore wave model. It
6 their formation and propagation, so any kind 6 will basically take waves from the Gulf of
7 of conclusion like that might be different. 7 Mexico and bring them to the near shore. It
8 But again, that's not my area of expertise. 8 doesn't go -- You know, it's primarily deep
9 Q. Okay. And I only ask this because 9 water.
10 of your brief tenure monitoring gauges, but it 10 Q. Okay. How about ST Waves?
11 says at page 35, if you want to follow with 11 A. ST Wave is a software package that
12 me, "Literally all of the gauging instruments 12 the ERDEC has developed, Engineering Research
13 to measure water conditions were destroyed by 13 and Development Center, and it's for near
14 Katrina." Did you contribute to that? 14 shore shallow wave.
15 A. We provided the records, what little 15 Q. Okay. Do you happen to know the
16 records that existed, to IPET. 16 water depth of Lake Borgne?
17 Q. Okay. 17 A. Not offhand, no.
18 MR. LAMBERT: 18 Q. All right. Let's see. It says "The
19 What does that mean? 19 resulting wave heights," from the models, "and
20 THE WITNESS: 20 wave periods are shown in figure 10 to 13.
21 For example, if a gauge -- The 21 They demonstrate that the Katrina-generated
22 Carrollton gauge was working up almost 22 wave environment was severe." Did you
23 to the time of the peak water level in 23 contribute to that?
24 the Mississippi River, so we extracted 24 A. No.
25 the record and sent it to IPET. I 25 Q. Okay. "The most significant finding
39 (Pages 150 to 153)

Page 154 Page 156
1 was that the waves along the GIWW, St. 1 has hired his -- Well, his company is a sub
2 Bernard, MRGO and Plaquemine levees were 2 under a contract that we have with Evans and
3 ocean-generated waves with wave period in the 3 Graves, and we have hired -- we, the Corps,
4 15 to 16 second range, much more capable of 4 have hired Evans and Graves to help with the
5 overtopping structures in the design assumed 5 building of the hurricane protection system
6 wave waves with periods of five to six 6 and he provides quality assurance review --
7 seconds." Did you contribute to that? 7 Q. All right.
8 A. No. 8 A. -- and expertise to --
9 Q. All right. Do you have expertise 9 Q. Okay. Maybe I can ask the question
10 about wave periods? Is that your field? 10 this way to help us all have an opportunity to
11 A. No. 11 go outside and enjoy the weather. How does
12 Q. Who's the wave person? Who do we go 12 your expertise relate to this particular
13 to to get the scoop on waves in the Corps 13 section of the IPET report? And I think we
14 here? 14 said "The system". Not exactly what you did
15 A. Our area -- center of expertise 15 or didn't do, but your field of expertise.
16 would be ERDEC. We have people here at the 16 A. I would probably just say on the
17 District that would understand waves, but 17 peripheral, my expertise in being able to read
18 they're not experts in waves. 18 and interpret Corps of Engineers documents
19 Q. Okay. So where is your ERDEC? I'm 19 based on my experiences working here for
20 sorry. 20 almost 30 years.
21 A. That's up in Vicksburg. It's the 21 Q. Okay. Historian really?
22 Engineering and Research Development Center. 22 A. Historian. Because I don't -- You
23 Q. So we have to go to Vicksburg to get 23 know, I did not work on the hurricane
24 some expertise on waves. 24 protection system up until after Katrina.
25 A. If you want experts. 25 Q. All right.
Page 155 Page 157
1 Q. All right. We have some guys and 1 MR. BRUNO:
2 gals around here who know about waves, and who 2 Mr. Lambert?
3 are they? 3 (Whereupon a discussion was held
4 A. I have a couple of contractors. 4 off the record.)
5 In-house people would be Bob Bass, would be 5 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
6 our primary person. 6 Q. Let me ask you about the accounting
7 Q. Who are your contractors? 7 system, and this is -- I am going to tell you
8 A. Matisse Von Leden, who's with Royal 8 why I am asking this so that you'll know. We
9 Haskoning, a Dutch company, and also Janice 9 have been given about 800 billion documents,
10 Hote, who retired and we hired her back as a 10 believe me, and we were thinking that maybe if
11 contractor. 11 we understood the system it might help us
12 Q. Okay. 12 through the process. We have about 20
13 MR. LAMBERT: 13 libraries of information. Can you help me
14 Janice what? 14 understand that system? I mean, is it simply
15 THE WITNESS: 15 a random allotment of a number, or is there
16 Hote. 16 anything about the number that would help us
17 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 17 in ascertaining, you know, what project it's
18 Q. Hote, H -- 18 associated with or even the year, for example,
19 A. O T E. 19 even the calendar year? You know, sometimes
20 Q. -- O T E. And so the Corps, does it 20 the first two numbers are the year.
21 have a regular relationship with Mr. Von 21 A. My understanding of the number
22 Leden? 22 that's generated, it's -- it's just a number.
23 A. He's a contractor. 23 Q. Just a randomly allotted number?
24 Q. Okay. Tell me what that means. 24 A. Yeah.
25 A. That means the Corps of Engineers 25 MR. LAMBERT:
40 (Pages 154 to 157)

Page 158 Page 160
1 There's an index. 1 MRGO project or its maintenance
2 THE WITNESS: 2 project. The other one has to do with
3 There may be an index in the 3 --
4 financial management system. I don't 4 MR. BRUNO:
5 deal with that on a day-to-day basis 5 Gauges?
6 so I don't know what's available in 6 MR. LAMBERT:
7 it. 7 Gauges, yes, the three gauges.
8 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 8 What were they? What -- Describe
9 Q. All right. 9 them.
10 MR. BRUNO: 10 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
11 Could you all look at that for us 11 Q. Oh, the gauges that you -- what did
12 and see if we can get a look at the 12 the gauges measure? Was it simply water
13 index with those numbers? 13 height, wave height?
14 MS. GREIF: 14 A. The gauges that I referred to this
15 An index of what numbers? I'm 15 morning measure water level.
16 unclear. 16 Q. Just water level. Just like the one
17 MR. BRUNO: 17 outside here?
18 The accounting numbers -- 18 A. Yeah.
19 MS. GREIF: 19 MR. LAMBERT:
20 The accounting numbers? 20 And how are the records kept?
21 MR. BRUNO: 21 How are those records kept?
22 -- that Miss Powell has just 22 THE WITNESS:
23 talked to us about. You know, when 23 The gauge itself has a chip in it
24 she gets -- When the Engineering 24 that records and that is downloaded
25 Department is asked to do a job, they 25 onto a computer by the person who goes
Page 159 Page 161
1 have a number. And I guess it's on a 1 and routinely services, make sure it's
2 per -- per job. 2 functional. And then that record is
3 MR. LAMBERT: 3 processed and stored into a database
4 Labor number. 4 that the H and H Branch office
5 MR. BRUNO: 5 maintains.
6 Labor number is what she called 6 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
7 it. Okay? 7 Q. Okay. Do you know if the Corps has
8 MS. MILLER: 8 gauge readings from the time of each of the
9 I would think if there is an 9 hurricanes that are, you know, listed on page
10 index, it should have been produced 10 104 of the thing? You know, the September,
11 with the other documents. 11 1915, September, 1947, et cetera?
12 MR. BRUNO: 12 A. We may have records of the 1947. We
13 Again, in the 14 libraries of 13 may have scattered records of 1915. I'm not
14 information that we would have to go 14 sure. Some of these gauges may not have been
15 through to find it and know what it 15 in place. There's a -- There's a Gauge and
16 was when we saw it. 16 Discharge publication that we used to put out
17 MS. GREIF: 17 that would -- from that you can tell if there
18 So you're interested in 18 was a gauge during that period of record.
19 determining if there's an index of -- 19 Q. I'm sorry, you can tell what?
20 MR. BRUNO: 20 A. For example, if you look at the
21 Of the numbers, of the labor 21 Carrollton gauge, Carrollton gauge was there
22 numbers. 22 in 1947, and the gauge may have been there in
23 MR. LAMBERT: 23 1915. I am not sure. But the gauge has
24 So, for example, we could find 24 historically been a very old gauge. You
25 out what numbers are related to the 25 contrast that with a gauge that maybe we
41 (Pages 158 to 161)

Page 162 Page 164
1 recently put out in Buffalo Cove in the 1
2 Atchafalaya. It's only been there for ten 2 WITNESS'S CERTIFICATE
3
3 years. And this gauge book would tell you 4 I, NANCY POWELL, read or have had
4 when the gauge was installed, its location, 5 the preceding testimony read to me, and hereby
5 and how long it's been there. 6 certify that it is a true and correct
6 Q. Do you know -- If you go to page 40, 7 transcription of my testimony, with the
7 there's some surge data there on figure 14. 8 exception of any attached corrections or
8 A. Okay. 9 changes.
10
9 Q. Okay. You see how it says
11
10 "Katrina"? _____________________
11 A. Uh-huh (affirmatively). 12 (Witness' Signature)
12 Q. Now, most of the gauges were 13 ____________
13 destroyed, so do you know how these numbers DATE SIGNED
14 were obtained? 14
15 A. There would be two different ways. 15 DEPONENT PLEASE INITIAL ONE:
16
16 I can't tell you which way was used. One way _____ Read with no corrections
17 would be to collect a high water mark. 17
18 Generally inside buildings -- 18 _____ Read and correction sheet attached
19 Q. Right. 19
20 A. -- or in areas, for example, that 20
21 there are no buildings, then it was calculated DATE TAKEN: APRIL 14, 2008
21
22 from the storm surge modeling that IPET did. 22
23 Q. The ADCIRC? 23
24 A. The ADCIRC modeling. 24
25 Q. Okay. I think actually IPET says 25
Page 163 Page 165
1 that. 1
2 MR. BRUNO: 2 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
3 Do we have anything else we 3
4 need? Skip? 4 I, ROGER D. JOHNS, RMR, RDR, CRR,
5 MR. LAMBERT: 5 Certified Court Reporter, do hereby certify
6 No. 6 that the above-named witness, after having
7 MR. BRUNO: 7 been first duly sworn by me to testify to the
8 Okay. Thank you very much. 8 truth, did testify as hereinabove set forth;
9 That's all I have. 9 that the testimony was reported by me in
10 * * * 10 shorthand and transcribed under my personal
11 11 direction and supervision, and is a true and
12 12 correct transcript, to the best of my ability
13 13 and understanding; that I am not of counsel,
14 14 not related to counsel or the parties hereto,
15 15 and not in any way interested in the outcome
16 16 of this matter.
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20 ROGER D. JOHNS
21 21 CERTIFIED COURT REPORTER
22 22 STATE OF LOUISIANA
23 23
24 24
25 25
42 (Pages 162 to 165)


KTR00078

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

KTR00078

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NANCY POWELL 4/14/2008

IN RE: KATRINA CANAL BREACHES CIVIL ACTION

JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

27 (Pages 102 to 105)

28 (Pages 106 to 109)

29 (Pages 110 to 113)

30 (Pages 114 to 117)

31 (Pages 118 to 121)

32 (Pages 122 to 125)

33 (Pages 126 to 129)

34 (Pages 130 to 133)

35 (Pages 134 to 137)

36 (Pages 138 to 141)

37 (Pages 142 to 145)

38 (Pages 146 to 149)

39 (Pages 150 to 153)

40 (Pages 154 to 157)

41 (Pages 158 to 161)

42 (Pages 162 to 165)

You might also like