CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.

4/4/2008 Page 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

IN RE: KATRINA CANAL BREACHES CONSOLIDATED LITIGATION PERTAINS TO: MRGO-ROBINSON

CIVIL ACTION NO. 05-4182 "K" (2) JUDGE DUVAL MAG. WILKINSON

FILED IN: 05-4181, 05-4182, 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 CHRISTOPHER JOHN ACCARDO, JR., 85 Dogwood Drive, Kenner, Louisiana 70065, taken in the offices of the Corps of Engineers, 7400 Leake Avenue, New Orleans, Louisiana 70118, on Friday, the 4th day of April, 2008. JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.
Page 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

4/4/2008
Page 4

APPEARANCES: LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH M. BRUNO (BY: JOSEPH M. BRUNO, ESQ. FLORIAN BUCHLER, ESQ.) 855 Baronne Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70113 PLAINTIFFS LIAISON COUNSEL SHER, GARNER, CAHILL, RICHTER, KLEIN & HILBERT (BY: CHRISTOPHER T. CHOCHELES, ESQ.) 909 Poydras Street Suite 2800 New Orleans, Louisiana 70112 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS SUTTON LAW FIRM (BY: CHARLES E. SUTTON, JR., ESQ. Suite 105 2101 North Highway 190 Covington, Louisiana 70433 ATTORNEYS FOR THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR THE ORLEANS LEVEE DISTRICT (ALSO PRESENT) DUPLASS, ZWAIN, BOURGEOIS, MORTON, PFISTER & WEINSTOCK (BY: RYAN MALONE, ESQ.) Suite 2900 3838 North Causeway Boulevard Metairie, Louisiana 70002 ATTORNEYS FOR THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR THE LAKE BORGNE BASIN LEVEE DISTRICT (ALSO PRESENT)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Page 3

STIPULATION It is stipulated and agreed by and between counsel for the parties hereto that the deposition of the aforementioned witness is hereby being taken under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for all purposes, in accordance with law; That the formalities of reading and signing are specifically not waived; That the formalities of certification and filing are specifically waived; That all objections, save those as to the form of the question and the responsiveness of the answer, are hereby reserved until such time as this deposition, or any part thereof, may be used or sought to be used in evidence. * * * * ROGER D. JOHNS, RDR, CRR, Certified Court Reporter for the State of Louisiana, officiated in administering the oath to the witness.
Page 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

APPEARANCES CONTINUED: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CIVIL DIVISION TORTS BRANCH (BY: PAUL LEVINE, ESQ. KEITH LIDDLE, ESQ.) Post Office Box 888 Benjamin Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044 ATTORNEYS FOR UNITED STATES BURGLASS & TANKERSLEY (BY: KEA SHERMAN, ESQ.) 5213 Airline Drive Metairie, Louisiana 70001 ATTORNEYS FOR JEFFERSON PARISH JENNIFER LABOURDETTE, ESQ. 7400 Leake Avenue New Orleans, Louisiana 70118 ATTORNEY FOR UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS CHAFFE, MCCALL LLP (BY: TOM FORBES, ESQ.) Suite 2300 Energy Center New Orleans, Louisiana 70163 ATTORNEYS FOR LAFARGE NORTH AMERICA (ALSO PRESENT) VIDEOTAPED BY: Gilly Delorimier Depo-Vue, Inc. REPORTED BY: ROGER D. JOHNS, RMR, CRR, RDR, CSR Certified Court Reporter State of Louisiana

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

INDEX PAGE Accardo 1................................... 8 Coletti Number 2........................... 12 Accardo 2.................................. 58 Accardo Number 3........................... 59 Accardo Number 4........................... 59

2 (Pages 2 to 5) JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.
Page 6

4/4/2008
Page 8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

VIDEO OPERATOR: This is the videotaped deposition of Chris Accardo. This deposition is being held today at 7400 Leake Avenue in New Orleans, Louisiana on April the 4th, 2008. The time is 9:05 A.M. Would Counsel present please introduce themselves. MR. LEVINE: Paul Levine for the United States. MR. LIDDLE: Keith Liddle for the United States. MS. LABOURDETTE: Jennifer Labourdette, United States Army Corps of Engineers. MR. MALONE: Ryan Malone, also present on behalf of the East Jefferson Levee District. MR. SUTTON: Charles Sutton, also present on behalf of the Orleans Levee District. MR. CHOCHELES:
Page 7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. Okay. Good morning again, Mr. Accardo. A. Good morning. Q. And thank you for giving us the C.V. Why don't we start with that and just get -- have you tell us -- Let's see. You graduated from the University of New Orleans. (Exhibit Accardo Number 1 marked for identification.) A. I did. Q. And you received a civil engineering degree? A. Yeah, I hold two degrees from the University of New Orleans. I have a civil engineering degree, a Bachelor's degree, that I obtained in 1980, I believe; and I went back recently -- when I say recently, a few years ago, and obtained an engineering -- a Master's degree in engineering management. Q. All right. What is engineering management? A. Engineering management is not -It's not a technical field. It's more of how you manage an engineering program, like how
Page 9

Chris Chocheles from Sher, Garner law firm, Plaintiffs in the various levee cases. MR. FORBES: Tom Forbes from Chaffe, McCall, representing LNA. MR. BUCHLER: Florian Buchler for Plaintiffs. MR. BRUNO: And Joe Bruno, Plaintiffs Liaison Counsel. Good morning, Mr. Accardo. I think the Court Reporter will swear you in now. CHRISTOPHER JOHN ACCARDO, JR., 85 Dogwood Drive, Kenner, Louisiana 70065, after being duly sworn, did testify as follows: MR. BRUNO: I neglected to mention that Eric Goldberg from Goodwin, Procter is logged in as well as Chris Thatch from Jones, Day, representing I guess -Obviously Goldberg's got Lafarge and Thatch has WGI.

you manage -- It's more of management in an engineering environment. It's the direction of people more so with less emphasis on the design and technical aspects of engineering. Q. I understand. Are you a licensed engineer? A. I am a Licensed Professional Engineer in the state of Louisiana, yes, I am. Q. And for how long have you been so licensed? A. I obtained my P.E., my Professional Engineering license, about four years after graduating from UNO in 1980. So it's probably about 1984. I can get the actual date, but it's around the '84 time frame. Q. All right. Now, Mr. Accardo, the reason why you have been selected for this great honor this morning is because your name appears on a witness list provided to us by your Counsel. Let me show it to you just so you can see -A. Sure. Q. -- why you're so lucky. Okay. You can see -A. Okay.

3 (Pages 6 to 9) JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.
Page 10

4/4/2008
Page 12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. -- that what they have indicated below there for the subject is the maintenance of the MRGO. All right? A. Okay. Q. So I was thinking to myself there's two ways we can -- We can run through your C.V., which we probably should do, or -- Well, let's do that. Let's run through your C.V., and what I would like for you to do, if you don't mind, is tell me when in your tenure you may have had something to do with the maintenance of the MRGO. Fair enough? A. Yeah. I can tell you -Q. So let's -- You want to give me -Well, it sounds to me like it's a specific time. Maybe that'll shorten it. Why don't you tell me what you were about to say. A. Okay. If you look at my resume, you will notice that I have held several positions within the New Orleans District. Q. Yes. A. And I have held several project management, operation management positions within my -- within my career here at the New Orleans District. However, at no time was I
Page 11

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

-A. Now, do I have knowledge of what happened, but I was not the main player. Q. All right. Let's talk about then where you are now. You are the Manager of the Operations Division; correct? Is that right? A. I am Chief of the Operations Division, correct. Q. The Chief. A. Under the Chief there are Operation Managers that handle specific projects like the Mississippi River, the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet. Q. Right. And as I said, we've -- we have an organization -- Let me just show you the organizational chart and I don't know, we marked this previously as Coletti Number 2. I don't know that we have to attach it. I am happy to if you would like. But take a quick peek and see if that organizational chart as it relates to the Op -- I'm sorry, Division Manager -- Division Branch? A. Operations Division. Q. Division. Tell me if it looks like it is accurate. I think Mr. Coletti said, in
Page 13

ever the Manager for the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet. But in my -- in my term now as Chief of Operations Division, I do have oversight of that Operation Manager of the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet and that -- I assumed the role as Chief of Operations Division right after Hurricane Katrina. About -- It'll be in here. The first -- You see work experience number 1, that's when I became the Chief of Operations. So as the Chief of operations, all the dredging and all the maintenance in south Louisiana comes under my authority. But I was never the point of contact or the main -- your first stop as far as technical information on the MRGO. Now, I have held that position for several other waterways in south Louisiana, but I don't know if that is a disappointment or not, but that's the truth. Q. I understand. Unfortunately, it's not disappointment. It makes my job more difficult, because now I have to try to figure out what's in the mind of the Counsel for the United States in selecting you as a witness. So we'll have to go through, I suppose, your

fairness to you, that there's two things missing, two -A. Well, it's accurate in terms of the departments within Operation Division. Some of the people that are now occupying the Chief positions have switched. For instance, my name will be at the top where it says Chief of Operations Division. But it's listed me as Chief Physical Support Branch, which I did occupy that position prior to the one I have now. Q. Well, he suggested to us that it did not include the completed projects group and it didn't include something else. I forgot. But it is on page -- It's on a later page in the -- in that document. A. It does have some of the Operation Managers here. But it doesn't have all of them. You're right. It's not as complete as it could be. I could give you something that's a little more accurate than this. Q. All right. If you wouldn't mind on a break maybe I would like that, but not now. A. Okay. Q. Okay. But generally today, you have

4 (Pages 10 to 13) JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.
Page 14

4/4/2008
Page 16

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

a Technical Support Branch, you have got a Readiness Branch, you got a Physical Support Branch, Regulatory Branch, Management Support Branch, and then you've got your various -A. Operation Managers. Q. Operation Managers. Okay. We've seen that the United States Army Corps of Engineers has received permission, and this may or may not be the accurate way to say this, to close the MRGO. Is that the right way to say that? A. We have received -- We have received authority and funds to close the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet. That's correct. Q. All right. Did you participate in any way in any of the process by which a recommendation was made to the Congress for closure? A. No. No. Q. Okay. Who, which -- Well, before I get to which branch within the District, perhaps I should ask you whether or not anybody from this District office, if you know, had anything to do with that recommendation.
Page 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. That didn't come from Operations Division. And if that was the document -- It may be. I don't know. Q. Right. That's fine. Do you know who I should talk to? A. Yeah. I would refer you to Greg Miller. He would be the smarter one than I on that. Q. More -A. It's a different department within the Corps. Q. Not smarter. Just have more information. A. There you go. Q. Be careful about a record, you understand? It always comes back to bite you. A. Well, on that subject. Q. There you go. Fair enough. On that subject. And what -- Do you know what section he's in? A. Greg works in the PPPMD. What do they call it, Planning Program and Project Management Department. They're involved with
Page 17

MR. LEVINE: Just for the record, you're talking about the MRGO 3-D study, the deep draft deauthorization? MR. BRUNO: Yes. MR. LEVINE: Okay. MR. BRUNO: If that's the right -- I didn't know the right words. MR. LEVINE: Okay. MR. BRUNO: It's the -- Please say it. MR. LEVINE: Deep draft deauthorization study. MR. BRUNO: Deep draft deauthorization study. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. Is that the document, for lack of a better word, which was used to ask the Congress for authority to deauthorize and obtain funding for that?

the studies types. See, my role is once a contract has been let, it's been built in construction, we take over the operation and maintenance of it. What you're talking about there, it hasn't gotten to my department. Nothing's been built yet. So there's nothing to maintain. Q. Right. Exactly. And you, as you've told us already, you became Chief after Katrina. A. What happened there is during -before Katrina, the Chief of Operations Division had just recently been moved from the Chief of Operation to the Deputy District Engineer with the Executive Office. Greg Greerwood. He had just moved, so the position was vacant. Mike Park was the assistant and I was the Chief of Physical Support Branch. So immediately after Katrina hit, you know, obviously Greg had already vacated the position; Mike Park was sent to the RFO to handle debris type collection and I was asked to step in and assume the role as Chief of Operations Division, and I was put in that in a temporary position for pretty much the first

5 (Pages 14 to 17) JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.
Page 18

4/4/2008
Page 20

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

year and I became permanent thereafter. Q. All right. Well, okay. Then I guess again, as I said, I don't know what the -- what Counsel for the United States has in mind or had in mind when they listed you as a witness, so let's just walk through your resume and see if we can figure it out. You started with the Corps, it appears, on March -- in March of '83? A. Yes. MR. LEVINE: You're on which page here? MR. BRUNO: Well, no, I may be wrong about that. I was on page 8, but perhaps I should start on page 9. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. You were, in June of '80 to January of '81, you were also with the Corps. A. Yes. During that time I was -(Whereupon a discussion was held off the record.) EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. All right. I'm sorry. Let's -A. Let me start -- -Page 19

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

hurricane protection structures in New Orleans East and in and around the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal. Okay? A. (Witness nods head affirmatively.) Q. So let me just ask you if during that period of time, from '83 to '88, you had anything to do with any of those structures. MR. LEVINE: Make one quick objection. We'll make it a standing objection if you don't mind. MR. BRUNO: Oh, about the lock navigation? MR. LEVINE: About the -MR. BRUNO: Absolutely. MR. LEVINE: We consider that not part of this case. It's not part of the claim -MR. BRUNO: Let me tell you this. We recognize that the government takes the position that the pleadings do not include an allegation that relates to
Page 21

(Whereupon a discussion was held off the record.) EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. All right. Let's see. (Whereupon a discussion was held off the record.) EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. Okay. Let's try one more time. A. Okay. What you're reading there, I was a student, still going to school and I was employed with the Waterways Section of the District doing student type stuff. Q. Right. A. And I was working on that before I got my degree. Q. So your first real employment with the Corps was in fact in March of '83? A. That's correct. Q. And let's see. From '83 to '88, about five years, you were in the Design Branch. A. That's correct. Q. And, of course, as you know, we are here to discuss the MRGO hurricane protection structures along that waterway as well as the

the navigation lock project and that you believe that questions in that area are irrelevant. We understand that there is that controversy and we will not hold it against you if you don't object every single time we bring it up. MR. LEVINE: Thank you. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. Now, having said that, again, in an effort to try to walk through this as quickly as we can so we can get you back to work, did you have anything to do with, during this tenure, '83 to '88, any of those -A. No. Q. -- things? Okay. There you go. How easy is that? All right. Generally it looks to me like you did design work. Huh? A. Yes. During that time frame I was a designer mainly focused on navigation structures along the Mississippi River. Q. All right. So after '88 you received a promotion?

6 (Pages 18 to 21) JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.
Page 22

4/4/2008
Page 24

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. Yes. Q. And you became the Civil Engineer Project Manager in the Navigation Section of the Operations Division. And you served in that capacity from '88 to '90, roughly three years. A. Correct. Q. All right. And let me just ask you if you would answer the same question. A. Okay. During that time frame, I was introduced to dredging, to be involved with dredging type projects. None -- I was not assigned to MRGO, but I was doing dredging on similar type projects. So that would be the. Q. All right. So let me ask you a few questions there then because it may relate. A. Okay. Q. Is it true that the main purpose of dredging is to clear the channel for shipping? A. Yes. It's a navigation. Q. It's a navigation issue? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And so does it logically follow that the depth to which one dredges is related to the shipping traffic you would
Page 23

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

dredge it deeper than 45 feet, knowing it's going to shoal in, but we're still preserving that 45 foot depth. Q. Okay. A. So it's called advanced maintenance. Q. I understand. And again, I am just a layman, right? I don't know that I understand what goes into the process. I mean, it sounds to me like you just call a guy on the phone and say, you know, "I need to go dredge some -- the bottom of this channel." What is involved with -A. It's a lot more involved than calling a guy on the phone. Okay? Q. Well could, you share with me then the process? A. Okay. We have certain waterways in south Louisiana that Congress has given us the authority to maintain. Every year we get a budget and each one of those projects has a certain amount of dollars associated with it. And using the authority that we have already been granted and the funds that are provided by Congress, we do the best we can to maintain those projects, the project -- the project
Page 25

anticipate in that channel? A. Well, no. The depth at which we dredge is determined by the project dimensions given to us by Congress. Now, those dimensions are determined based on shipping needs, but we don't try and figure out what shipping needs are. We dredge according to Congressional mandates. Q. Okay. And I am only asking this because, as I said, you're not the first guy we have deposed. We have learned over these days that there is some leeway there allowed for -- I am not sure that I recall the word, but you could dredge a little too much or too little, there was a tolerance there. What is that called? A. It's advanced dredging -- advanced maintenance. In other words, the project, the Mississippi River, the project dimension is 45 feet. We tell navigation folks that we're going to maintain a 45 foot channel for use so that when they're loading their ships in Africa or Venezuela or wherever, when they get to the mouth of the river, we're going to give them 45 feet. Now, when we dredge it, we

dimensions and the channels that we have already been given authority to maintain. Also we maintain the locks associated with those channels and try to keep the wishes of Congress -- trying to keep that open using the money that we have. Q. All right. A. So that's how it works. Q. Okay. It sounds to me like it starts with the authority granted by Congress. A. Right. Q. Okay. And to understand -- Is it necessary for you then to know or understand, -- and "you" is the broader "you" in the context of this dredging business that we're talking about. I am not talking about the Corps, but a guy who is doing your job -- to know what the scope of the authority is? A. Yes, it's important for me to know the scope. Q. All right. And I guess, and tell me if I am saying something wrong here, but the scope seems to be limited by the project dimensions.

7 (Pages 22 to 25) JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.
Page 26

4/4/2008
Page 28

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. When we dredge a channel, we're limited to those project dimensions. I can't -- If the project dimensions are 20 feet for the particular channel, I can't go out and dredge it to 50 feet. That's correct. Q. Now, you're referring to depth. A. Depth, correct. Q. Is there also a project dimension for width? A. There is. That's correct. In authorization language, it'll say we are authorized to maintain a specific channel to this depth and this width. Yes. Q. Okay. Now, I can figure out that if you are authorized to go to a certain depth, you ought not go a whole lot lower, but what I am curious to know is, with regard to width now, not the depth, are you authorized to go wider? A. No. Not in the sense that we would be with depth. When we put out a contract, we tell a contractor "You're going to cut to a certain depth and a certain width" and we pay them according to that cut. So it is of no benefit to them to go beyond those dimensions
Page 27

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

may conclude by that statement that nobody really cared if the dredging to the authorized depth in fact caused erosion of the waterway. Is that a fair conclusion for some third party to -A. No, it's not fair -- It's not that we didn't care. It's that we didn't have authority to address it. Q. Okay. A. We all cared. In fact, some of the erosion probably contributed to the dredging that we had to do, and that happens all the time. So we all cared. But I didn't have an authority or specific pot of money to go out and address it. The only way I could address something like that is if I could demonstrate it would lessen the amount of dredging I had to do to maintain the project dimensions. I had to tie it in to the authority that Congress had given me. But I did not have specific authority to go out and protect a bank. Q. Okay. That sounds like a cost-benefit analysis. In other words, am I right?
Page 29

because we wouldn't pay them for that. Q. I understand. Okay. Now, you certainly know that we're here in this litigation -- I hope you know. Maybe you don't -- discussing erosion. Okay? Is it at all relevant to the folks doing what you did as a civil engineer in assisting with the dredging of a particular channel to think about whether or not what you're doing may cause erosion of the channel bank? A. In the operation and maintenance end of things, no. Let me explain why. Q. Okay. A. We were given the authority by Congress to maintain these channels for navigation. Every channel in south Louisiana suffers from erosion because of the nature of dredging and providing a navigation channel. So it was not within our authority to question erosion. It was -- It was within our authority to provide channel dimensions for that particular project. Q. All right. I am not intending this to be a nasty question, but it sounds like, or at least it may -- it may -- some other person

A. No. No. A cost-benefit analysis was done on the channel to determine whether it was in the best interests of the Federal government to assume the role of maintenance for that navigation channel. Now, if you want to do a benefit-cost ratio on bank protection, I guess you could, but that was never -- to my knowledge, there was never any kind of analysis like that. Q. Okay. That was my mistake. I thought that in listening to you say, "Well, if I could show that lessening erosion would mean I had to do less dredging, then perhaps I could maybe do something with the Congress." A. Okay. Q. I took that to be, -A. Okay. Q. -- maybe I was wrong, sort of a cost-benefit analysis. A. Okay. In that sense, yeah. I wouldn't have called it cost-benefit, but you're right. That's right. You were just trying to demonstrate that the cost of protecting the bank would somehow lessen your dredging cost. And if you can do that, then

8 (Pages 26 to 29) JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.
Page 30

4/4/2008
Page 32

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

you would have authority -- the existing authority will help you do that. For instance, in the Mississippi River we have authority to build pile dikes that go across. That helps us minimize the amount of dredging. So the investment we put in the pile dikes eventually translate into less dredging costs and they pay for themselves. Q. All right. Okay. So let me see if I could see where this takes us. I mean, I am just thinking to myself as I listen to you and again, you know, I understand the business of authorization. But you got a fellow that owns a house and the house is on the bank, and you are authorized to dredge, Congress told you it, fine, and the channel is eroding to the point where it's getting awfully close to this guy's house. And you know it may in fact damage the house. Is there some procedure whereby the Corps, not necessarily your department, but somebody at the Corps tries to determine whether or not this dredging-related erosion -- and I know that erosion comes from a variety of sources, okay, but since you have told me you're a dredging guy I am going to
Page 31

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. Okay. But in fairness to my question, I asked is there a procedure within the Corps for the Corps to do this? And I think your answer described a process by which the homeowner does something. So -A. Yes. Q. -- I want to know is there something or is there some procedure or practice within the Corps to address the potential for this kind of problem? A. There is -MR. LEVINE: Same objection. Go ahead. THE WITNESS: Sorry. There is. It's called the CAP program, Continuing Authorities Program, but they have limitations. Now, Falcom Hall with the Corps could speak to you more about the CAP program. It's -- The monetary value associated with those is relatively small compared to some of the work that would -- you know, that some folks would like done, but
Page 33

stick to that, is there somebody who tries to monitor whether or not the dredging-related erosion may cause some problem to somebody's property? MR. LEVINE: Objection, compound, hypothetical. Go ahead and answer. THE WITNESS: Okay. There is a process by which we can do work like that. And we have done it when I was a Manager in the Lake Charles area. Congress -The homeowner can actually go to Congress and say give the Corps of Engineers the authority and the money to provide the protection that you're suggesting, and once they have provided that, we can do it. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. Okay. A. And, in fact, I did it in Lake Charles area. But it's not within the existing authorities that we have on a routine basis.

-EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. All right. Very quickly, then, because it sounds like there's another person that I should speak to, if you would first of all just tell me if you know what is the CAP program and who's the gentleman that I should talk to about it? A. Okay. The CAP program is Continuing Authority Program. I believe Falcom Hall is the point of contact with that. He could -If it's not him, he would know who that is. And that program is a mechanism within the Corps where we could do things that you just described that go beyond the authorities that I have. Q. Now, again, I am listening to your answer. It sounds like the CAP program is a -(Whereupon a discussion was held off the record.) EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. The CAP program is a program apparently which allows the Corps to actually spend some money to do something to deal with

9 (Pages 30 to 33) JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.
Page 34

4/4/2008
Page 36

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

those kinds of issues. Am I correct? A. That's correct. MR. LEVINE: Objection, vague. Go ahead and answer. THE WITNESS: The CAP program gives us a little more flexibility other than the authorities that we have. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. All right, now. I understand the notion of the constraint to do because it costs money to do. Okay? I want to talk now, though, about simply the business of communicating the information to Congress. I mean, Congress is your boss; right? MR. LEVINE: Objection. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. I mean, those are the guys that tell you what to do? A. Well, Colonel Lee is my boss. But I mean, you're right. Q. Right. A. You're right.
Page 35

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Objection. Ambiguous, calls for legal conclusion. Go ahead and answer. THE WITNESS: Yeah, I don't know who would pay for the guy's house that fell into the water. I don't know. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. Well, the reason I asked you is because, you know, I -- You would agree with me that if you were an employer and your employees were driving company trucks, you would expect those employees not to run their trucks into other people because you don't want those other people to visit liability on you as the employer. MR. LEVINE: Object. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. That's all I am saying. MR. LEVINE: Objection. Ambiguous, vague. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. Do you understand what I am saying? A. I understand what you're saying, but
Page 37

Q. The Corps. In the context of what you're authorized to do or not do, the body which gives you that authority is the Congress. A. Yes. I would agree. Q. All right. And would you agree with me that if, you know, whether intentional or not, the Corps breaks something, the person who has to pay for the breakage is the Congress? MR. LEVINE: Objection. Go ahead and answer. THE WITNESS: I am not understanding -- The Corps breaks something? I am not sure I -EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. I was just being -- I was trying to be as general as possible. In other words, if you dredge and you erode and the guy's house falls in the water, it's the Congress that has to pay for it if some Court decides that that was the wrong thing to do. MR. LEVINE:

I don't know that you can tie the two together. What we were doing was operating in accordance with Congress. Q. Right. A. And if we operated within those rules, then we were doing what we were supposed to do. And we weren't running into people with trucks. We were doing -- carrying out their mandate. And if an adverse effect of the dredging caused a house falling in, it was not anybody's responsibility here to tell Congress "You have got us doing the wrong thing here." We can make them aware that this is an adverse effect of what we're doing. But nobody from here would have stopped doing what Congress wanted us to do because of any adverse effect. Okay? Q. I understand. But recall my question. Okay? I specifically moved away from the business of you all failing to act or act, because you told me already. That's a money thing and it's an authority thing. I was limiting my question to just information. Okay? And what I am trying to understand is, you know, and maybe I am wrong, I was trying

10 (Pages 34 to 37) JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.
Page 38

4/4/2008
Page 40

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

to put it in the context of what we do every day, and that is, we try to avoid liability if we can, because we don't like liability. And so I was trying to see whether or not there is any interest in advising the Congress, "Hey, Congress, we have a situation down here which may reach the point where somebody or somebody's property may be damaged or even some person might get hurt." Do you understand my question? Am I making any sense? MR. LEVINE: Objection, vague, compound. Go ahead and answer. THE WITNESS: Let me try and answer. Okay. We don't lobby Congress to do anything. The Corps doesn't. However, if I had a landowner whose house was getting ready to fall into the channel, I would advise the landowner, "This is the steps I would take to go ahead and get your problem addressed." And he may -- One of the steps he may take is to notify Congress. But that
Page 39

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. Okay. Then let's go to the next position that you held, which seems to be Civil Engineer Project Manager, GS-12, and you had that position for about, again, two years maybe? A. Okay. You're in the middle of page 7? Q. Yes. It's Roman numeral X. A. Okay. Yeah, at this point -Q. Actually, it one year. I'm sorry. It's one year. A. Yeah. I went to work for a different department within the Corps. Now, instead of working on maintenance dredging, I was working on new construction dredging, trying to get the Mississippi River authorized to a deeper depth. So at this point it was in the planning stage, not the actual maintenance stage. Q. Okay. So I have to ask, because you just told me you don't lobby, so why were you trying to get an authorization to dredge to a deeper depth? A. This is -- Before we can dredge to a deeper depth, it goes through our Construction
Page 41

notification generally wouldn't be done from the Corps straight to Congress. It would be done from the landowner maybe to a local government, state government, and then it would come back to us and we may support the claim that the landowner has and work with Congress. But we wouldn't go straight to Congress and say, "You need to fix this." EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. All right. Now, I think we can move from here. You have told me in this capacity -MR. LEVINE: What page are you on now? MR. BRUNO: We were on page 7, I think. MR. LEVINE: Okay. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. You had a little exposure to dredging, but you didn't really do any dredging on the MRGO. A. That's correct.

General Program where studies are done to determine whether it's actually feasible to go ahead and do that. Okay? So I am not lobbying at that point. We're providing documents that suggest is the benefit-cost favorable to doing this sort of thing. So we're putting this package together. Now, the lobbying would have taken place by the local interest before us getting involved in this and then it comes down to us as an assignment to package this so that Congress, when they stamp it approved, it makes sense to them. Q. All right. Where did the motivation come from to even make the inquiry about a deeper dredge depth? A. A deeper dredge depth generally comes from the navigation users, the folks that are using the channel. It was 40 feet before; they were requesting that it go 45 feet. Ships are getting bigger; more profits can be made if they can draw more water. So generally the requests for any time you want a deeper channel comes from those who are using the channel at the time. Q. All right. So the folks using, in

11 (Pages 38 to 41) JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.
Page 42

4/4/2008
Page 44

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

this case the river, came to the Corps and they told the Corps, "Look, our ships are getting bigger. We need more depth." Is that how it occurred? A. It -- I don't know specifically how this went. Generally what they would do is go to Congress, ask for the money so that the Corps can study this; Congress would supply the study money; and that's when this would kick off. Q. All right. Then -- And no work on the MRGO during this time; right? A. No. I was strictly river. Q. Let's go to the next position that you hold, which seems to be Roman numeral IX, Civil Engineer Project Manager, GS-13. You are here for -- that's '92, '9- -- about three years. What did you do in this capacity? A. Okay. I came back to Operations Division and at this time I served as an Operation Manager managing projects that not only had dredging, but had some locks associated with them. So it was -- You had the lock piece as well as the navigation dredging of channel piece.
Page 43

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

that's why I was placed. I was really there in a managerial position, not as a technical biologist. Q. Okay. Any connection with the MRGO or the IHNC? A. The only connection that may have been with the MRGO is this section would have been responsible for providing environmental clearances with regard to any maintenance dredging going on. Q. All right. A. That's it. Q. Recognizing that this was a cross-training assignment, I'll just ask you if you feel comfortable in explaining what the environmental permitting would have been. A. Well, what it was is any kind of dredging that would have been performed in the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet, it would have been this section's responsibility to make sure all the NEPA compliances were in order to proceed with the dredging. Q. NEPA is? A. National Environmental Policy Act. Q. Okay. Are you familiar with the
Page 45

Q. All right. Did you do anything in connection with the MRGO or the IHNC? I should ask you that, too. A. No. Q. It's getting easier and easier. Although it's only Roman numeral VIII. Okay. Let's go to the next one, which was Chief of the Environmental Projects Section, GS-13. You're here it looks to be about a year. A. Yes. Q. And you first phrase it as a cross-training assignment. So tell us what you did in this -- during this time. A. Okay. At that time we were -- some of the middle managers in the District were participating in a cross-training environment to try to expose folks and to become more well-rounded in the work that the Corps did. I was tasked with working with the Environmental Projects Section, which is mainly a section that exists to obtain environmental clearance on Corps-related projects. Now, although most of these folks are biologists, the powers to be felt I could pull it off with the knowledge I had, so

requirements of NEPA? A. To some degree. I won't pretend to be an expert on it again. Q. It sounds like I should speak to someone. Who would -- Who should I speak to about the requirements of NEPA in the context of granting permits for dredging in compliance with it? A. Right now Beth Wiggins is Chief of the Environmental Branch. Q. Beth Wiggins? A. Beth Wiggins. However, she may defer you to someone with her staff that may be more knowledgeable. Q. Thank you. That's fine. We'll do that. Let's go to Roman numeral VII. You're the Assistant Chief, Operations Division, '99 -- only six months. So what did you do during this period of time? A. Okay. At this point in time I'm starting to bounce around in my career. They're moving me almost like troubleshooting positions, people that are not there. So I moved into here to just work as the Assistant

12 (Pages 42 to 45) JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.
Page 46

4/4/2008
Page 48

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Chief of Operation. What the Assistant Chief of Operations Division does, it's actually the Assistant position I hold now, and then more administrative type stuff within Operations Division. Not the detailed guy for any projects, but trying to provide oversight to the folks who are most intimate with the projects. Q. Okay. Any work with the MRGO that you can recall? I mean, it's a brief period of time. A. Yeah. Not that I can recall. Q. How about the IHNC? A. The same thing. No. Not that -Q. Let's go to Roman numeral VI. You are Chief of the -- I guess I am a little confused. A. The Civil Branch. Q. The Civil Branch. I don't recall that on the chart. A. That's not in Operations Division now. At this point I moved from Operations to Engineering Division. Q. Okay. I meant the entire chart. Oh, civil engineer, Civil Branch. All right.
Page 47

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. Yes. Q. That's right. All right. Let's go to Roman numeral IV. You are the Supervisory Chief Engineer of the Operations -A. Supervisory civil engineer, Operations Manager. Q. All right. Let's see. Where would you have been on the chart? A. It would be -- I would be Tracey Faulk on that chart as Calcasieu River. Q. Oh, I see. Okay. That's what that -- Okay. You were one of the Project Managers? A. Well, we called them Operation Managers at that time. But you're right. Project Manager, Operation Manager. Q. And clearly that had nothing to do with the MRGO or the IHNC? A. No, the only -- I don't want to -You keep -- You're right, it had nothing to do with IHNC and MRGO. However, I was doing similar type work on other related projects. Q. Well, and the reason I haven't -because I don't know that much about Calcasieu, but I guess I'll just ask it this
Page 49

A. See, like I said, I'm being bounced all over the District at this point. Q. I got you. And my memory is that the -- That really didn't have anything to do with the MRGO or the IHNC. A. No. Q. Okay. Then you were long-term training participant. Was that even in New Orleans? A. Yes. That's when I went back to the University of New Orleans and obtained a Master's degree. Q. Okay. And were you allowed to be a full time student or did you have to -A. No, I was allowed to be a full time student. Q. Man, that's all right. A. It's a sweetheart deal. Q. This is good. MR. LEVINE: They paid you, too? THE WITNESS: They paid my salary, too. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. This is very good.

way. I mean, you know, we have got the -- You have got the map here. Let's just kind of get to cases and see if -- I don't know if you've had a chance to see this, but this is a satellite picture, so I don't think anybody can fault its accuracy. We've had, in fairness to you, some discussion over this past week as to whether these mile markers are still good. I mean, I'm not suggesting that they're bad. They may have changed over time. But generally this is where the MRGO is (indicating). Are you familiar with its location in Louisiana? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And you can see, or at least anyone can see, and would ask if you would concede, that it goes through the marsh? A. Yes. Q. All right. And so, heck, I don't know, do you know if this marsh is privately owned? A. I don't know. I don't know who owns the marsh. Q. Okay. Now, the reason I asked about ownership is this. You and I talked about the

13 (Pages 46 to 49) JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.
Page 50

4/4/2008
Page 52

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

business of the, you know, the homeowner obviously having an interest in preserving his own property and, therefore, making observations of erosion or things like that and wanting to keep that from happening. Well, in the case of the marsh, it's a different situation. Don't you agree? Because you don't have -- You don't have -He's going to want to object. MR. LEVINE: Yes. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. You don't have a little house in the middle of the marsh with a little guy sitting on the front porch who's watching the ebb and flow of the MRGO and the potential erosion to the land. Just a very -- In the very broadest general sense I am wondering if you would agree with me that there is some difference between that and the guy sitting on his porch and watching the land erode away. MR. LEVINE: Objection, compound. Calls for hypothetical, vague, ambiguous. You go ahead and answer.
Page 51

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

figure out in my little -- I mean, let's get to cases. We allege in our Complaint against the United States of America that the MRGO caused the erosion of the marsh, one; two, caused the death of trees and swamps and things like that and in essence reduced the capacity of the marsh to act as a buffer for surge. That's our allegation. Okay? To be fair with you, that's what we're saying. And what I am trying to figure out is does the Corps really have any interest in ascertaining, first, whether or not as they continued to dredge this MRGO they are in fact contributing to the loss of that buffer? That's the question, to be honest with you. MR. LEVINE: Objection, vague, ambiguous. Go ahead and answer. THE WITNESS: We were doing what Congress told us to do. The authorization -- The channel was authorized for navigation purposes. The navigation industry needed that channel to exist. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
Page 53

EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. IV. MR. LEVINE: IV. MR. BRUNO: IV. We've got VI. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. Go ahead. A. All right. Marsh is good because it provides a buffer for any area that's located inland from the Gulf of Mexico. It may not be worth, from a real estate standpoint, a subdivision where you have a house that you talked about, but the value of marsh is good. Q. Right. A. Now, I don't know if that answers your question or not. Q. Well, not really. In other words, I think what you just told us is marsh has value in terms of the hurricane buffer. It keeps the surge away from the areas where people live. A. Correct. Q. No, what I was trying to suggest -what I was trying to -- sort of trying to

Q. Right. A. So it was not whether I felt we were hurting the marsh or the Project Manager felt they were hurting the marsh. It was irrelevant. Congress of the United States says, "You will dredge that channel and provide project dimensions for the navigation industry." It was not anybody within Operations Division to question and say, "But we're destroying the marsh." Now, those questions were raised by State folk and local interests many years prior to today. Q. Right. We know. A. This is not a -- This is not a new -Q. We have the documents. Right. A. Okay. And Congress was aware of what we were doing and why we were doing it. However, prior to Katrina, Congress told us loud and clear, "You will continue to dredge the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet", and the reason why they told us that is because they kept providing us millions of dollars each year to do that. Q. Do you know whether or not the

14 (Pages 50 to 53) JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.
Page 54

4/4/2008
Page 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Congress was put on notice by the Corps, and again this is a general question and I know, Counsel, this is -- You are just one guy. Okay? And I am asking this in the context of what you know, -A. Okay. Q. -- to be fair to you. I am not asking you to be a witness for the Corps. But do you know, do you know whether or not the Corps put the Congress on notice, "Hey, guys, we're killing -- we are doing some damage to the marsh"? MR. LEVINE: Objection, vague. Go ahead and answer. THE WITNESS: I don't know if anybody from the Corps ever said something directly to Congress. I don't know that. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. Okay. Do you know if there is a mechanism by which, that is, a process, a paper that may be filled out by the Corps and sent to Congress for this purpose? That is, putting the Congress on notice of problems
Page 55

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

role from August, let's see, -A. At two different time frames. Q. Okay. Both relatively brief, though? A. Yes. Q. So what did you do? A. At that point I'm working as the Assistant to the Commander with the New Orleans District. At this point in time I'm really stepping even away from the role of Operation Manager -- I mean Operations end of things and looking at the District more globally. Q. All right. And Roman numeral II, you're the Chief of the Physical Support Branch and you're there from June to October -- Oh, you're there from '02 to '05. So '3, '4, '5 -- about three years. A. Correct. Q. Okay. And that's why your name actually shows up on the chart. And we learned from Mr. Coletti about the work of the Operations Branch -- I'm sorry, the Physical Support Branch and basically he told us that this is the dredge outside and it's -- this
Page 57

like this? MR. LEVINE: The same objection. Go ahead and answer. THE WITNESS: Generally the way it works is Congress gets notified of this kind of problem through the local interests and then Congress comes to us and hears our version of the story. Generally we don't go to Congress and flag problems to them. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. All right. Good. We're almost there. We're at III, Roman numeral III? No. Let's see. Where were we? A. Yeah, I think -MR. LEVINE: Right. THE WITNESS: Well, we were at IV. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. We were at IV? We covered IV? Let's go to III. You are Deputy District Engineer and you are that -- you're in that

group does some actual work. I mean, actual -- I don't mean you guys don't do any work. What I mean is you actually do some repair work through this group. A. Yeah, the branch is comprised of three sections. One section caters to the Dredge WHEELER, which is the hopper dredge under the jurisdiction of the New Orleans District. The other two are a Shops Section and -- which is a Facility section, and a Maintenance Section, where those folks, it's a wage grade, a blue collar type environment, where they actually -- the bread and butter of their work is to fix the locks throughout south Louisiana. So at this point there's really no work tied to the MRGO either. Q. Okay. And then finally you are now a Chief of the Operations Division and you have already told us that you took that position post-Katrina. And I think we've asked you questions about that. (Whereupon a discussion was held off the record.) EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. Let's take a little break. I have

15 (Pages 54 to 57) JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.
Page 58

4/4/2008
Page 60

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

got some documents that, unfortunately, have your name on them -A. Okay. Q. -- which I am going to ask you about and hopefully shortly thereafter we'll be done. A. Okay. VIDEO OPERATOR: Off the record. It's 10:01. (Recess.) VIDEO OPERATOR: Returning to the record, it's 10:16. MR. LEVINE: All right. The witness has provided us with a more recent copy of the organizational chart. The paper clip is the Operations Division. What are we marking this as? What are we on? MR. BRUNO: We're on 2 or 3? 2. MR. LEVINE: 2. MR. BRUNO:
Page 59

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

guys love acronyms. Anyway, you now which one I'm talking with. It says "To LMVPD". A. Yes. Q. All right. And take a moment just to look at it and for the purposes of ascertaining whether or not you remember the document or have any other recollection. A. Can you tell me where my name is in this stack? Q. It's actually on Accardo 4. This is the document that shows up right before. So I thought in fairness I would show you both of them and we can -- While you're sitting there, you can look at Accardo 4, because your name is on the last page. No, I'm sorry, the second-to-last page. I apologize. Under paragraph one where it says "Reference" and then the little A, "Recent conversations between Mr. Jay Warren, Mr. Al Naomi, Mr. Accardo, and Mr. Demette." So I guess the first question is, do you think that's you? A. Yes, that is me. Q. All right. Well, then, take a moment and then see if any -- you recollect anything about it.
Page 61

Okay. Accardo 2. MR. LEVINE: Accardo 2. (Whereupon a discussion was held off the record.) EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. All right. Okay. So we're good? A. Yes. Q. All right. In front of you, I don't know where we have -- There it is. Okay. I have marked -- There's two documents. So it's not a lot. One of them is dated 2 March '87. I have marked that as Accardo Number 3. And the other one is dated 4 August, '87. I have marked that Accardo Number 4. So if you don't mind, Mr. Accardo, would you look at the one that's dated 2 March '87? A. I got one dated 6 -- Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. I see. Okay. Q. You with me? A. Yes. Yes. Q. Well, there's -A. There's two dates on it. Q. There's dates all over the place. There's also acronyms all over the place. You

A. Okay. To answer your question, no, I don't recall anything about this. At that time I would have been working in Engineering Division, which was early in my career. Apparently there was some study that was being investigated here and apparently I had a conversation with some folks, but I don't recall anything specific on this. Q. Okay. Well, then, let me ask you then just some general questions. First of all, going back to Accardo Number 3, the first page, -A. Okay. Q. -- you will see the subject, colon, "Initiation of MS," presumably Mississippi, "River Gulf Outlet," open paren, "MRGO", close paren, "bank erosion reconnaissance study". First question, the use of the words "Reconnaissance study", is that a phrase which has any meaning or special meaning here at the New Orleans District? MR. LEVINE: Objection. My objection is he's not testifying as to the whole New Orleans District, but just for

16 (Pages 58 to 61) JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.
Page 62

4/4/2008
Page 64

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

himself, but -EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. Oh, yes. And I meant by that -MR. LEVINE: Sure. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. -- you know, based upon your own personal knowledge having been here this many years, does that, you know, does that have a particular meaning in this office? A. Yes. Q. What is a reconnaissance study? A. A reconnaissance study is a very preliminary study that is totally funded by the Corps of Engineers. In other words, at this point in time we're just trying to find out whether there's some action that needs to be taken here. It's not cost shared. It's a very -- It's a study in its infant stage to see if something should progress for a more serious study. Q. Okay. Now, in light of what you have told us this morning about Congressional authorization, okay, out of what budget column, I guess, does the reconnaissance study
Page 63

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

his expertise to figure out where the money comes from. Q. Okay. Are reconnaissance studies done for each and every project that the Corps has -- that the Corps is working on or is managing or maintaining? MR. LEVINE: Objection, compound. Go ahead and answer. THE WITNESS: No. No. A recon study is just a -- is an effort just to take a look at a specific issue on a particular project. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. Okay. A. Just to see if it merits -- if there's a chance of, say, a positive B-C ratio to go further with a more intent study. It's more of a quick, almost like back of the envelope look, say is this -- does this really have a chance of being worthwhile. Q. Okay. The next question is are you familiar with the reconnaissance study that's referenced on this paper, which apparently has
Page 65

come from? If you know. A. Yeah, at this time I don't know. I don't know. And again, let me clari- -- I am not an expert here. Q. Sure. A. This is not -- In other words, it's not coming from Operation and Maintenance funds. It's coming from more of the study funds, the GI type study funds. Q. GI? I'm sorry. A. General investigation type funds. Falcom Hall would be more the point of contact for that. Okay? Q. That's the same fellow who has the knowledge -A. The CAP study. Q. About the CAP? A. Right. Q. Okay. What does he do? A. Well, Falcom works with these type of studies. He's more of the study guy in the District. Q. Okay. A. And we're talking about a recon study or CAP study, he's the -- it's within

something to do with bank erosion and the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet? A. The answer is no. Q. All right. And I really don't want to beat a dead horse. So you really don't know who initiated this study? Right? A. No. I don't know. Q. You don't know why it was initiated? A. No, I don't know. Q. All right. Well, in that case, let me just pick your brain a little bit so I can get some acronyms explained to me. A. Okay. Q. And I am only going to ask you to do that because I promise not to be too much longer in this deposition. Okay. It says "To LMVPD". Do you know what that means? A. At that time LMV was Lower Mississippi Valley Planning Division. Q. All right. "From LMVRE"? A. Lower Mississippi Valley Real Estate Division. Q. Now, are those folks in the New Orleans District or is that a higher -- higher

17 (Pages 62 to 65) JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.
Page 66

4/4/2008
Page 68

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

on the food chain, as they say? A. No, this is not the New Orleans District. LMV, Lower Mississippi Valley, is our Division office. Q. And where is that? A. Vicksburg. Q. Okay. And am I guessing correctly that there's a real estate office in Vicksburg? A. Well, what happens is, there are six districts right now that report to a Division Office. Division Office is located in Vicksburg. New Orleans District is one of the Districts. There's not a -- There's a Real Estate office -- a big Real Estate office within the Districts and there's a few folks in the Division -- The Divisions kind of have oversight over the Districts. Q. All right. So there is a Real Estate Division -- I'm sorry. There's a Real Estate Section in the Division in Vicksburg, but it's just a few folks? A. Right. That's correct. Q. And they really, I am just guessing, are kind of the center of the wheel, if you
Page 67

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

THE WITNESS: Oh, I'm sorry. Let's see. MR. BRUNO: The third sentence of the first paragraph. THE WITNESS: Okay. "LMNED", Lower Mississippi Division. Again, the "N" is New Orleans District. "ED", Engineering Division, dash D, would have been a branch within Engineering Division in the District. Is that -EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. I got you. Good. A. So the LM puts you in the Vicksburg Division. And then the next letter refers to what District. Q. Okay. That'll help us a great deal. Thank you. Let's see. Number 2 says "The block 10/29/87 entitled 'Get --' And I don't know if that's "LCA" or "ICA from locals". A. LCA. Local Cooperation Agreement. Q. What is that? A. A Local Cooperation Agreement is a
Page 69

will, for these Real Estate Sections in the various District offices? A. Correct. Q. That's what I am hearing you say. All right. Now, it says at paragraph -Okay. Paragraph 1, "As we interpret the critical path, the alternate -- alternatives formulated flow to --" God bless -A. Okay. "LMNPD-MR", is that what we're trying to figure out? Q. Yes. A. Okay. LMN would have been Lower Mississippi Valley New Orleans District. Q. Okay. A. That's us now. And PD would have been Planning Division. So that symbol is an office within the New Orleans District. Q. I see. Okay. So the "dash D" means what? D -- What's D? A. I don't see "dash D". I see "LMNPD-MR" and "LMNPD-E". MR. LEVINE: Where are you guys reading from? MR. BRUNO: The third sentence.

document that defines what it is both the Federal government and the local government would do in partnership on a particular project. Q. Okay. All right. And then "LMNRE" is -- LMN. A. Okay. Q. That's the Lower -- That's the New Orleans District again, Real Estate; right? A. Right. That's right. That puts you into the Real Estate Department within the New Orleans District. Q. Okay. "While outside the function of Real Estate, it appears feasible that we might consider the research and results of field tests performed by --" (Whereupon a discussion was held off the record.) EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. All right. A. You were on I think paragraph 3 when you trying -Q. Yes. I'm not going to go line by line. We'll be here all week. Let's go -- I think where I need a

18 (Pages 66 to 69) JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.
Page 70

4/4/2008
Page 72

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

little help is the last page of this document. "The MRGO erosion recon study critical path". You see that? A. Yes. Q. First of all, help me. What is the critical path? What does that mean? A. When you're -- On any project, there are certain milestones to be accomplished in that project. And a lot of things are going on at the same time. But when you start from the beginning of the project to the end, there is a path by which, if one of those milestones is delayed, it affects the final date. Okay. For instance, when you're building a house, for instance, putting in the cabinets can be done at the same time that maybe you're sheetrocking the walls, for instance. Okay? So putting in the cabinets may not be on the critical path, but pouring the slab is. So there's a delay with pouring the slab, it affects the end date, whereas putting in the cabinets may not affect the end date. Q. I get it. A. Okay. Q. All right.
Page 71

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Thanks. I appreciate it. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. Well, let's look at number 4 real quick. And really what I am looking for help with is an understanding of the chart -- I am sorry, the table on page 2. Does that look like, you know, sort of something you guys use maybe? I know you don't have a lot of connection with MRGO, but maybe just generally this business of "maintenance" dredging estimates and land cut area and bank with project both sides annual without project"? A. It's not a chart that we typically use, but I don't know what the folks who are handling the study were looking for. Q. Okay. A. Because this is not a chart that's customary. Q. Okay. So I want to be fair with you. Can you help me with it or you would be just guessing? A. Well, I can -- Apparently they -They wanted to reach in miles and the distance. Okay. Then they wanted the cubic yards. In other words, the cubic yards, how
Page 73

MR. BRUNO: And, Counsel, if you don't mind, I know if you could somehow get us a better copy of this at some point, and I know you're limited by what you got, but if you would make an effort I'd appreciate it. MR. LEVINE: Can we get a Bates number on the bottom? MR. BRUNO: Well, yes. Well, I can't read the Bates number either. MR. LEVINE: I can't read the Bates number. And I have to say the Bates number is probably put on by -MR. BRUNO: By Khaki. MR. LEVINE: By Khaki, and usually their Bates numbers are pretty legible. So I will take this document back and see what we can find. MR. BRUNO:

many -- I am guessing again. I don't want to guess here. That's the cubic yards. Q. If you tell us you're guessing, that's cool. We'll know. A. I don't know. I don't know. I mean, I don't know exactly. I'm thinking that they were trying to generate some kind of table that gives the amount of cubic yards that were removed per year from this particular mile reach. Q. Yes. Well, let's see. One's a rate and then there's an annual total. So it looks like number of cubic yards per mile per year and then cubic yards per year. Well, again, I -- You're just guessing. I won't make you do this. That's not going to be helpful to either side. Any idea who I might ask to help me with this chart? A. Well, let's see. It would have been -- You might want to ask -- I don't know if you deposed him yet -- Edmond Russo, if he -and he wasn't -MR. BUCHLER: Yes, he's coming up.

19 (Pages 70 to 73) JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.
Page 74

4/4/2008
Page 76

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

THE WITNESS: So he would not have been here at this time, but he may have some knowledge of it. The guys that are on this memo on the last page, Larry Demette has passed away. EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: Q. Naomi is here. We're doing him next week. A. You can try Al, too, to see if this recalls -- he recalls anything here. Q. All right. These are not my questions. A. Okay. Q. Chain link fences on hurricane protection structures made of earth, do you know anything about that subject? A. I'm sorry, chain link -Q. Chain link fences on earth berm hurricane protection structures. A. I have no idea what you're talking about. Q. Well, you know what a chain link fence is. A. Yeah, I know what a chain link fence is.
Page 75

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

THE WITNESS: Okay. MR. BRUNO: Okay? VIDEO OPERATOR: Off the record, it's 10:36. (Recess.) VIDEO OPERATOR: Returning to the record, it's 10:40. MR. BRUNO: Okay. That's all we have. Thank you very much. MR. LEVINE: Read and sign. VIDEO OPERATOR: Off the record, it is 10:40. * * *

Page 77
WITNESS'S CERTIFICATE I, CHRISTOPHER JOHNS ACCARDO, JR., read or have had the preceding testimony read to me, and hereby certify that it is a true and correct transcription of my testimony, with the exception of any attached corrections or changes. _____________________ (Witness' Signature) ____________ DATE SIGNED DEPONENT PLEASE INITIAL ONE: _____ Read with no corrections _____ Read and correction sheet attached DATE TAKEN: APRIL 4, 2008

Q. And you know what an earth berm hurricane protection structure is. A. Yes. Q. They're put in the top. I am just wondering if you know whether or not that's -it's permitted, not permitted, whether it's a hazard or not a hazard to the hurricane protection structure itself. MR. LEVINE: Objection, compound. Go ahead and answer. THE WITNESS: We have chain link fences in some of our levees that go up against, say, a pumping station to try to prevent the public from access. As far as the chain link fence being a detriment to the performance of the levee, I would not think that would be a problem. But I think we -- I have seen that just for security purposes. MR. BRUNO: All right. Let's take one more break. I need to check something with Roger and then we'll be done.

20 (Pages 74 to 77) JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285

CHRISTOPHER ACCARDO, JR.
Page 78

4/4/2008

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE I, ROGER D. JOHNS, RMR, RDR, CRR, Certified Court Reporter, do hereby certify that the above-named witness, after having been first duly sworn by me to testify to the truth, did testify as hereinabove set forth; that the testimony was reported by me in shorthand and transcribed under my personal direction and supervision, and is a true and correct transcript, to the best of my ability and understanding; that I am not of counsel, not related to counsel or the parties hereto, and not in any way interested in the outcome of this matter.

ROGER D. JOHNS CERTIFIED COURT REPORTER STATE OF LOUISIANA

21 (Page 78) JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-1285