WaPost: Levees weren't overtopped, experts blame faulty levees...

[Geoff_M]

As another example as to why it's way too early to start saying "what happened" and "why", the Washington Post has a story that may totally re-write the initial notions as to why NO flooded. Conventional wisdom was that the storm surge was too great and exceeded NO levee system's design. But now that engineers have had time to go around and look at the evidence, they now say the surge was much smaller than first throught and the NO levee system should have had only modest trouble holding back the waters.Experts blame flooding on faulty levees
Katrina's waters did not overtop New Orleans barriers, they say
By Michael Grunwald and Susan B. Glasser
The Washington Post
Updated: 12:07 a.m. ET Sept. 21, 2005

NEW ORLEANS - Louisiana's top hurricane experts have rejected the official explanations for the floodwall collapses that inundated much of New Orleans, concluding that Hurricane Katrina's storm surges were much smaller than authorities have suggested and that the city's flood-protection system should have kept most of the city dry.

The Army Corps of Engineers has said that Katrina was just too massive for a system that was not intended to protect the city from a storm greater than a Category 3 hurricane, and that the floodwall failures near Lake Pontchartrain were caused by extraordinary surges that overtopped the walls.

But with the help of complex computer models and stark visual evidence, scientists and engineers at Louisiana State University's Hurricane Center have concluded that Katrina's surges did not come close to overtopping those barriers. That would make faulty design, inadequate construction or some combination of the two the likely cause of the breaching of the floodwalls along the 17th Street and London Avenue canals — and the flooding of most of New Orleans.

In the weeks since Katrina drowned this low-lying city, there has been an intense focus on the chaotic government response to the flood. But Ivor van Heerden, the Hurricane Center's deputy director, said the real scandal of Katrina is the "catastrophic structural failure" of barriers that should have handled the hurricane with relative ease.

'Never overtopped'
"We are absolutely convinced that those floodwalls were never overtopped," said van Heerden, who also runs LSU's Center for the Study of Public Health Impacts of Hurricanes.

In an interview Tuesday, Corps spokesman Paul Johnston said the agency still believes that storm surges overtopped the concrete floodwalls near the lake, then undermined the earthen levees on which they were perched, setting the stage for the breaches that emptied the lake into the city.

Johnston said the Corps intends to launch an investigation to make sure it is correct about that scenario. But he emphasized that Katrina was a Category 4 hurricane when it smashed into the Gulf Coast, whereas Congress authorized the Corps to protect New Orleans against a storm only up to Category 3. "The event exceeded the design," Johnston said.

The center's researchers agree that Katrina's initial surge from the southeast overwhelmed floodwalls along the New Orleans Industrial Canal, flooding the city's Lower Ninth Ward as well as St. Bernard Parish. They believe that a little-used Army Corps navigation canal known as the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet helped amplify that surge, although they acknowledge that this surge was larger than the system was designed to control.

But the researchers have strong evidence that Katrina's subsequent surge from the north was several feet shy of the height that would have been necessary to overtop the 17th Street and London Avenue floodwalls. It was the failures of those floodwalls that emptied the lake into the rest of the city, filling most of New Orleans like a soup bowl.

On a tour Tuesday, researchers showed numerous indications that Katrina's surge was not as tall as the lakefront's protections. They showed a "debris line" that indicates the top height of Katrina's waves was at least four feet below the crest of Lake Pontchartrain's levees. They also pointed out how the breached floodwalls near the lake showed no signs of overtopping — no splattering of mud, no drip lines and no erosion at their bases. They contended that the pattern of destruction behind the breaches was consistent with a localized "pressure burst," rather than widespread overtopping.

The center has also completed a computerized "hindcast" of Katrina, which has confirmed the evidence before their eyes. Their model indicates that most of the surge around the lake and its nearby canals was less than 11 feet above sea level, and that none of it should have been greater than 13 feet. The Army Corps' flood-protection system for New Orleans was designed to handle surges of more than 14 feet above sea level.

"This should not have been a big deal for these floodwalls," said oceanographer G. Paul Kemp, a hurricane expert who runs LSU's Natural Systems Modeling Laboratory. "It should have been a modest challenge. There's no way this should have exceeded the capacity."

The center's researchers said that it is too early to say whether the breaches were caused by poor design, faulty construction or some combination. But van Heerden said the floodwalls at issue— massive concrete slabs mounted on steel sheet pilings — looked more like the sound barriers found on major highways. He also suggested that the slabs should have been interlocked, and that the canals they were supposed to protect should have had floodgates to keep out water from the lake.

Former representative Bob Livingston, (R-La.), who helped lead the charge for Corps projects in Louisiana when he chaired the House Appropriations Committee, noted that the earthen levees along Lake Pontchartrain had all held, while concrete floodwalls had failed. He was especially concerned about the 17th Street barrier, saying it "shouldn't have broken."

Contractor 'has a problem'
"I don't know if it's bad construction or bad design, but whoever the contractor is has a problem," said Livingston, now a lobbyist on Capitol Hill.

Former senator J. Bennett Johnston (D-La.) said he remembers numerous briefings from Corps officials about the danger of a hurricane overtopping the New Orleans levees. But he says he never envisioned a scenario like this one. "This came as a surprise," he said.

The Corps has not identified the contractors who built the floodgates that failed; Paul Johnston said there will be a full investigation into the breaches.

John M. Barry — who criticized the Corps in "Rising Tide," a history of the Mississippi River flood of 1927 — said that if Katrina did not exceed the design capacity of the New Orleans levees, the federal government may bear ultimate responsibility for this disaster.

"If this is true, then the loss of life and the devastation in much of New Orleans is no more a natural disaster than a surgeon killing a patient by failing to suture an artery would be a natural death," Barry said. "And that surgeon would be culpable."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9419053/

[bsnyder]

The New York Times also has a piece about this today (registration required):

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/21/national/nationalspecial/21walls.html?hp

Interesting that no one here has any comment when "conventional wisdom" is challenged.

[snappy]

The silence is deafening, isn't it?

[ThAnswr]

As another example as to why it's way too early to start saying "what happened" and "why", the Washington Post has a story that may totally re-write the initial notions as to why NO flooded. Conventional wisdom was that the storm surge was too great and exceeded NO levee system's design. But now that engineers have had time to go around and look at the evidence, they now say the surge was much smaller than first throught and the NO levee system should have had only modest trouble holding back the waters.

What is your point? What happened shouldn't have happened? Gee, ya think?

No matter how you want to spin it, New Orleans was flooding while Bush was playing the guitar the day after he was enjoying a piece of birthday cake while the Gulf coast was reduced to matchsticks.

Or are you going to find an article that it was really Bush's double and he was putting those NG pilot skills to work (:rotfl2: Broke myself up with that one) and really flying rescue missions on the Gulf coast.

You people are killing me today.

[wvrevy]

:confused3

Umm...The levees failed. What difference does it make that they were not "overtopped", but instead failed due to structural or engineering faults ?

Not sure exactly why the "silence is deafening"...Why is this any kind of big deal at all ? :confused3

[Laugh O. Grams]

Yet another reason for an unbiased, objective, independent investigation like the one Sen. Clinton prescribed.

[bsnyder]

:confused3

Umm...The levees failed. What difference does it make that they were not "overtopped", but instead failed due to structural or engineering faults ?

Not sure exactly why the "silence is deafening"...Why is this any kind of big deal at all ? :confused3

It's not, if you don't want to find out what actually went wrong, why all those people died and why 80% of NOLA flooded, and how to prevent that in the future.

As you say, no big deal at all.

[bsnyder]

Yet another reason for an unbiased, objective, independent investigation like the one Sen. Clinton prescribed.

Why? The two most rabid Bush-Derangement-Syndrome sufferers on this board don't think it matters at all.

[Geoff_M]

Why is this any kind of big deal at all ? For starters, a major assumption as to the cause of the flooding has been seriously challenged. For another, it appears that the assumption that NO's flooding defenses can handle a Cat 3 storm (even if the levees breaches are fully repaired) is now every much in doubt. This has long term implications for the city as well as short term ones. It may also lead to questions about the workmanship of the contractor(s).

The "surprise" about the lack of interest in this topic, in my case, is that it appears that unless a topic has anti-Bush angle it stands little chance of getting much attention around here lately. But I suppose you can hope that the contractor that built the levee was Halliburton, no?

[ThAnswr]

The "surprise" about the lack of interest in this topic, in my case, is that it appears that unless a topic has anti-Bush angle it stands little chance of getting much attention around here lately. But I suppose you can hope that the contractor that built the levee was Halliburton, no?

What kind of attention would you like? Fact is what happened, shouldn't have happened. DUH!

As far as Halliburton building the levee, holy crow wouldn't that be a doozy.

[wvrevy]

Why? The two most rabid Bush-Derangement-Syndrome sufferers on this board don't think it matters at all.
Oh, for crying out loud... :rolleyes: (Glad you don't resort to insults. :rotfl: )

What I was asking was, why the "silence is deafening" type comments, and you know it. Besides...I think the emphasis should be on the city, state, and federal government response, not on why the city flooded. Yes, it is important to find out what happened there...but it's more important nationally to find out what went wrong with crisis management, and what can be done to fix it. What caused the levees to break really isn't a big concern in terms of the nation's interest.

[ThAnswr]

Why? The two most rabid Bush-Derangement-Syndrome sufferers on this board don't think it matters at all.

You don't do coy well, Bet.

Name names and get it over with.

[sodaseller]

Interesting, but not especially new, IMO. I think we don't yet fully understand the physics of Katrina. I say that because there has been a discussion of the fact that barometric pressure matched the lowest on record but wind speed was well short. Usually, Hurricane 'strength" which I will clumsily define as the amount of raw energy it can impart, is correlated with maximum wind speed. But not in this instance. Structures that had withstood Camille's 30 ft (from memory) storm surge and 190 mph winds crumpled to Katrina. The surge seems far more powerful in this instance. I speculate that we will learn that the surge had much greater mass in this instance due to the size and speed of the storm and some other variable not yet considered. I state that because the destruction seems far greater than what was expected based upon past storms like Camille. Energy is also a product of Mass, as we know, and I believe the mass of water was greater, creating pressure just from mass. But that's just speculation.

Applying that to the levee issue, not sure why earthen levees held better, but what I thought I read (don't know where) is that the levee first failed because the earthen support below the concrete washed out, as opposed to concrete failure. The bottow line (got interrupted and lost train of thought while typing) is that the storm surge Katrina brought is beyond prior storm surges in terms of power. Though there may be an engineering or construction failure, I'm not sure this particular pheomenon can be evaluated simply by wave heigth and presuming that is the only relevant variable

[bsnyder]

What kind of attention would you like? Fact is what happened, shouldn't have happened. DUH!



Then why do we need any kind of commission (Congressional or otherwise)?

[Charade]

:confused3

Umm...The levees failed. What difference does it make that they were not "overtopped", but instead failed due to structural or engineering faults ?



Because one indicates a design or construction fault, the other (topped) doesn't because they weren't designed to handle a Cat 4 or 5 hurricane. That would lend itself to someone being at fault moreso than an expected result. But you could ask, why didn't they build them to withstand a Cat 4 or 5? Because that really doesn't allow for finger pointing.

[bsnyder]

Applying that to the levee issue, not sure why earthen levees held better, but what I thought I read (don't know where) is that the levee first failed because the earthen support below the concrete washed out, as opposed to concrete failure.

I had read that too, I believe they called it "scouring".

[ThAnswr]

Oh, for crying out loud... :rolleyes: (Glad you don't resort to insults. :rotfl: )

What I was asking was, why the "silence is deafening" type comments, and you know it. Besides...I think the emphasis should be on the city, state, and federal government response, not on why the city flooded. Yes, it is important to find out what happened there...but it's more important nationally to find out what went wrong with crisis management, and what can be done to fix it. What caused the levees to break really isn't a big concern in terms of the nation's interest.

The point is..........on second thought, what is the point? The levees didn't hold up. Oh wow, I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.

If it was crappy workmanship, sure people should be prosecuted.

But in no way, shape, or form does that absolve anyone of what happened later on and "Brownie" was NOT doing a fantastic job.

There are no good guys in this mess, at least not among most of the elected officials.

[wvrevy]

Because one indicates a design or construction fault, the other (topped) doesn't because they weren't designed to handle a Cat 4 or 5 hurricane. That would lend itself to someone being at fault moreso than an expected result. But you could ask, why didn't they build them to withstand a Cat 4 or 5? Because that really doesn't allow for finger pointing.
And that's fine...If I was a resident of New Orleans, I would certainly be very interested in the answer to those questions. But as a US citizen living elsewhere in the country, my biggest concern regards the response of the government to a major crisis in a large city. Why the levee failed isn't really all that big of a concern on the national level. What was done after that certainly is.

[ThAnswr]

Then why do we need any kind of commission (Congressional or otherwise)?

You're killing me today.

[sodaseller]

I disagree that there was any assumption regarding overtopping - the fact that there was breach has been known from the outset. In fact, some used it to defend Bush's statement that "no one anticipated a breach" by pointing to the fact that most warnings regarded overtopping. So that's nothing new.

As to whether this shows that the levees could not withstand Cat 3, see my other point, posted before I saw yours. But even if there was negligent workmanship, not sure what impact that has backward looking on the performance of ACE. I think they were also responsible for evaluating the system, even the portions that predated their involvement. Whether they will claim that had they had more funds they would have found the weakness (they will say that for sure), it remains to be seen whether any additional funding would have in fact resulted in the "flaw" being discovered and corrected. I would be skeptical of that absent overwhelming evidence, and note that my primary hypothesis is that there was no flaw in construction - that we are underestimating the true power of Katrina. In any event, I don't see that this new data has any impact on the evaluation of the Administration's role, as it is nothing new. I'm surprised it was spun that way. I think it interesting but not especially novel in terms of the basic facts we understood two weeks ago, at least the summary provided

[Qwackertoo]

I read a week or so ago that the Corps of Engineers were thinking that after reviewing years of satellite images and other pertinent data that the levee's could NOT even withstand a Category 3 . . . and this is due to the levees having s-l-o-w-l-y sunk below their orignal constructed levels and thus providing LESS protection than was currently stated. I'll have to search through my many "saved" links to try to find additional documentation and will post them when I locate.


Deana

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predictions_of_hurricane_risk_for_New_Orleans

years and years of studies, predictions and FACTS without the spin.

[bsnyder]

But in no way, shape, or form does that absolve anyone of what happened later on and "Brownie" was NOT doing a fantastic job.

There are no good guys in this mess, at least not among most of the elected officials.

ITA! :) :) :)

[ThAnswr]

As another example as to why it's way too early to start saying "what happened" and "why", the Washington Post has a story that may totally re-write the initial notions as to why NO flooded. Conventional wisdom was that the storm surge was too great and exceeded NO levee system's design. But now that engineers have had time to go around and look at the evidence, they now say the surge was much smaller than first throught and the NO levee system should have had only modest trouble holding back the waters.

Okay, I'll admit it. I jumped the gun. It appears the OP was to share information.

My apologies, Geoff.

[Charade]

You're killing me today.

Are you a cat? You must be because you appear to have nine lives. :rotfl2:

[Lisa loves Pooh]

:confused3

Umm...The levees failed. What difference does it make that they were not "overtopped", but instead failed due to structural or engineering faults ?

Not sure exactly why the "silence is deafening"...Why is this any kind of big deal at all ? :confused3


To me the difference is big.

It was said they would withstand a Cat 2 or 3....well the hurricane that hit NOLA...was of the cat 2 or 3 variety. It didn't get the cat 4/5 storm surge that was expected...that went to their neighbors in Biloxi.

It failed to meet the minimum expectation and it BROKE.

The topping of levees was an expected event if the conditions created that event...the levees totally breaking in places....was not expected. NOLA would have been "doomed" if it had taken a direct hit from a Cat 2 "minor" storm and the city was not as "safe" as was once thought.



I don't get the silence comment either. People I guess assume that everyone sits by waiting for each new topic to pop up and an immediate response. :rolleyes:

[Lisa loves Pooh]

What caused the levees to break really isn't a big concern in terms of the nation's interest.

No it isn't. But as with any disaster on a local level...it matters to the people who have homes and businesses in the city.

Everyone is caught up in some statements about the unexpected nature of the destruction that took place in New Orleans.

While it doesn't excuse the slow response....it further explains why what happened was indeed unexpected.

They knew it wouldn't hold up to a 5. They thought it would hold up to less. "They" were wrong.

[Lisa loves Pooh]

If it was crappy workmanship, sure people should be prosecuted.

But in no way, shape, or form does that absolve anyone of what happened later on and "Brownie" was NOT doing a fantastic job.

There are no good guys in this mess, at least not among most of the elected officials.

Agreed

[Charade]

If it was crappy workmanship, sure people should be prosecuted.

But in no way, shape, or form does that absolve anyone of what happened later on and "Brownie" was NOT doing a fantastic job.

There are no good guys in this mess, at least not among most of the elected officials.


So if your house caught fire because the electrical work was faulty, you're more interested in why it took so long for the fire department to show up?

[gina2000]

Is it crappy workmanship or crappy maintenance?

And if it's crappy maintenance, who's in charge of it?


This all goes back to infrastructure in the US. And it's failing badly unless we start to look at our structures, their age and their viability regularly. AND FIX THEM!

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Is it crappy workmanship or crappy maintenance?


I would think both.

Some postings in the past month or so about how money that was supposed to be spent on maintaining/upgrading the levees was spent elsewhere.

ETA: I don't know how the maintenance works..but since it is an international port.....I think a combination of state, city, and federal.

Kind of like the interstate....it may run through your town, but your town isn't the one responsible for fixing it.

[gina2000]

I would think both.

Some postings in the past month or so about how money that was supposed to be spent on maintaining/upgrading the levees was spent elsewhere.

ETA: I don't know how the maintenance works..but since it is an international port.....I think a combination of state, city, and federal.

Kind of like the interstate....it may run through your town, but your town isn't the one responsible for fixing it.

Ultimately, if it is a maintenance issue, those in charge of maintenance and its funding are clearly in the hot seat.


NO is a port....as I understand it, the levees have nothing to do with the port side of the city. I may be wrong, though.

None of this excuses response time on a federal, state or local level. We're talking about two entirely different issues here....both which have long term implications for everyone.

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Ultimately, if it is a maintenance issue, those in charge of maintenance and its funding are clearly in the hot seat.


NO is a port....as I understand it, the levees have nothing to do with the port side of the city. I may be wrong, though.

None of this excuses response time on a federal, state or local level. We're talking about two entirely different issues here....both which have long term implications for everyone.

Right--but from a city rebuild standpoint....the responses don't matter on the rebuild....the levees due. If they cannot be built and guaranteed a minimum standard...then what's the point.

There are levees throughout the Mississippi River...at least in Lousiana. One of the levees that broke was near the industrial canal. Not sure if port deliveries are their...but it looked kind of that it would be a location for that.

Ships travel up and down the river.

I know the purpose is different...but saying that only the city is responsible for it...is like saying the city is responsible for the guardrails....the state or feds will only take care of the road.

[gina2000]

It depends on who received monetary appropriations to maintain the levees. They are the people responsible for maintenance. If they're not, then why give them the money or the title?

Ultimately, the buck stopped somewhere. Where? Was it used to maintain the levees? Was it used somewhere else? Why? We already know that federal monies were not approved to strengthen the levees. Clearly a problem on a federal level. However, was federal money appropriated to be used to maintain them? And if so, was it done and by whom?

There is a monetary paper trail that should also be examined if this is a maintenance problem. Someone (and perhaps everyone) dropped the ball.

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Gina--I think it is the state...based on some stuff posted and that I had read about prior.

[sodaseller]

Gina--I think it is the state...based on some stuff posted and that I had read about prior.
I would be surprised if that were the case, since the Mississippi is navigable, and that's traditionally federal. Plus, the ACE has been involved in big controversies up river (arond the Dakotas) on the channelling of te Mississippi. Think that is usually their bailiwick, but could be wrong

[wvrevy]

So if your house caught fire because the electrical work was faulty, you're more interested in why it took so long for the fire department to show up?
Not to answer for TheAnswr, but if it was my house, of course I would want to know what caused it and all of those details. But if it was a house across town, and I was served by the same fire department, you can absolutely bet I'd be more interested in why that fire department didn't do it's job.

[bsnyder]

Orleans Levee District, a quasi-governmental body, is resposponsible for 129 miles of earthen levees, floodwalls, 190 floodgates, 2 flood control structures, and 100 valves. The governor appoints six of the board's eight members, and they serve at his pleasure. When a storm approaches it is responsible for closing the hundreds of hurricane protection floodgates and valves on levees surrounding the city. All residents outside of these levees evacuate.

The District's General Fund accounts for all operating funds for the daily operations of the Administrative Offices, Field Forces, Law Enforcement and support operations necessary to maintain the Board's level of services for flood protection and public safety.

The District's Special Levee Improvement Projects Fund (SLIP) accounts for the capital funds for major maintenance and/or capital improvements of all physical property and plant owned by the Board that is identified as directly related to flood protection.

The District's General Improvement Fund accounts for the capital funds for major maintenance or capital improvement of all physical property and plant owned by the Board that is not identified as directly related to flood protection. These projects relate to land reclamation, commercial buildings, improvements (other than buildings), and infrastructure.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/ops/hurricane-risk-new-orleans.htm

[Geoff_M]

I would be surprised if that were the case, since the Mississippi is navigable, and that's traditionally federal. Plus, the ACE has been involved in big controversies up river (arond the Dakotas) on the channelling of te Mississippi. Think that is usually their bailiwick, but could be wrongThe ACE may be the ones doing the work, but I don't think they can act unilaterally around NO. The Orleans Levee District has (had?) a Levee Board (not sure if the positions were appointed or elected) that I think had final say over the levee work in their area of influence. Here's their website (http://www.orleanslevee.com/)

[Charade]

Not to answer for TheAnswr, but if it was my house, of course I would want to know what caused it and all of those details. But if it was a house across town, and I was served by the same fire department, you can absolutely bet I'd be more interested in why that fire department didn't do it's job.

Of course I would want to know too but the fire dept. did do it's job. Just not in the expected time frame. It's job is to put out fires (and rescue people if needed) as soon as possible. Just because there was a abnormal delay, doesn't mean they completed neglected their duties. If they hadn't shown up at all, then you could claim they didn't do their job. Of course that can have explanation as well like mechanical failure, traffic jam, etc.

But the notion that Feds didn't do their "job" is a dishonest assertion. They just didn't get there in the expected time. When they did get there, things happened rather quickly and probably as best as possible. There are no absolutes when responding to a disaster like this. Especially one of this magnitude.

[bsnyder]

But the notion that Feds didn't do their "job" is a dishonest assertion. They just didn't get there in the expected time. When they did get there, things happened rather quickly and probably as best as possible. There are no absolutes when responding to a disaster like this. Especially one of this magnitude.

Yep, that's why I take offense to the "complete and total failure" posturing.

[sodaseller]

The ACE may be the ones doing the work, but I don't think they can act unilaterally around NO. The Orleans Levee District has (had?) a Levee Board (not sure if the positions were appointed or elected) that I think had final say over the levee work in their area of influence. Here's their website (http://www.orleanslevee.com/)
Fair enough - they seem to have maintenance responsibility. But I thought I read in some of the hullabaloo over ACE funding that some of their funding would be to rebuild certain problematic levees. What I suspect is than they go to the feds if they need serious funding. So, presuming inadequate maintenance is the issue (which I still doubt, they would be responsible on small items, but if the levees were failed were some that were slated for major work (think not), then maybe ACE. And ACE may be responsible for the testing. Who knows? As I said, I think the issue is moot, pending further evidence

[wvrevy]

Of course I would want to know too but the fire dept. did do it's job. Just not in the expected time frame. It's job is to put out fires (and rescue people if needed) as soon as possible. Just because there was a abnormal delay, doesn't mean they completed neglected their duties. If they hadn't shown up at all, then you could claim they didn't do their job. Of course that can have explanation as well like mechanical failure, traffic jam, etc.

But the notion that Feds didn't do their "job" is a dishonest assertion. They just didn't get there in the expected time. When they did get there, things happened rather quickly and probably as best as possible. There are no absolutes when responding to a disaster like this. Especially one of this magnitude.
So, to continue the analogy, if a small fire began, the department was called, and by the time they got around to responding, the house had burned to the ground...you would be satisfied that they simply sprayed the smoldering remains ?

Yes...once the government (not just the federal government, but all levels) finally got moving, it did do the job. Not sure I've seen anyone say otherwise. The problem was in the time it took for them to get started in the first place. If they'd prepared before Katrina the way they are, now, before Rita, nobody would have any reason to complain. Agreed ? But lack of foresight and lack of planning - again, at all levels - led to a response that was delayed more than it should have been. In that respect, they all failed...miserably.

[Geoff_M]

So, presuming inadequate maintenance is the issue (which I still doubt, they would be responsible on small items, but if the levees were failed were some that were slated for major work (think not), then maybe ACE.Your doubt is well founded. The ACE is on record as saying the levees that failed had not been part of those identified as needing upgrading. Link (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0509020195sep02,1,1457842.story?ctrack=1&cset=true)

[ThAnswr]

So if your house caught fire because the electrical work was faulty, you're more interested in why it took so long for the fire department to show up?

I'd be interested in both, at dfferent times.

My immediate problem would be why it took the fire department so long especially when you know there's going to be another fire across town.

Did you catch that analogy, Charade. ;)

Of course, if the wire was faulty, I'd want to know, but that would not absolve the fire department for their slow response.

And I realize no good deed goes unpunished around here, but you are aware I apologized to Geoff for jumping the gun and not seeing his post for what it was: informational.

[bsnyder]

So, to continue the analogy, if a small fire began, the department was called, and by the time they got around to responding, the house had burned to the ground...you would be satisfied that they simply sprayed the smoldering remains ?

Yes...once the government (not just the federal government, but all levels) finally got moving, it did do the job. Not sure I've seen anyone say otherwise. The problem was in the time it took for them to get started in the first place. If they'd prepared before Katrina the way they are, now, before Rita, nobody would have any reason to complain. Agreed ? But lack of foresight and lack of planning - again, at all levels - led to a response that was delayed more than it should have been. In that respect, they all failed...miserably.

I don't think we know yet that the federal government has done anything differently for Rita than they did (or didn't do) for Katrina. I'd be curious as to what you see as the differences, at this point in the Rita timeline?

[ThAnswr]

Are you a cat? You must be because you appear to have nine lives. :rotfl2:

There's a joke in there somewhere.

[bsnyder]

And I realize no good deed goes unpunished around here, but you are aware I apologized to Geoff for jumping the gun and not seeing his post for what it was: informational.

I saw it and I apologize for not acknowledging it.

[ThAnswr]

Is it crappy workmanship or crappy maintenance?

And if it's crappy maintenance, who's in charge of it?


This all goes back to infrastructure in the US. And it's failing badly unless we start to look at our structures, their age and their viability regularly. AND FIX THEM!

AND PAY FOR THEM.

[Tigger_Magic]

So, to continue the analogy, if a small fire began, the department was called, and by the time they got around to responding, the house had burned to the ground...you would be satisfied that they simply sprayed the smoldering remains ?

Yes...once the government (not just the federal government, but all levels) finally got moving, it did do the job. Not sure I've seen anyone say otherwise. The problem was in the time it took for them to get started in the first place. If they'd prepared before Katrina the way they are, now, before Rita, nobody would have any reason to complain. Agreed ? But lack of foresight and lack of planning - again, at all levels - led to a response that was delayed more than it should have been. In that respect, they all failed...miserably. ::yes:: And Rita is giving everyone at every level now another opportunity to either rise to the occasion or fail. FEMA's going to have to hit at least a triple, if not a home run, this time. It won't make up for Katrina, but sometime this weekend they will have the chance to show that they are capable of handling a cat 4 or 5 hurricane.

[ThAnswr]

I saw it and I apologize for not acknowledging it.


No problem. I jumped the gun, pure and simple.

[ThAnswr]

::yes:: And Rita is giving everyone at every level now another opportunity to either rise to the occasion or fail. FEMA's going to have to hit at least a triple, if not a home run, this time. It won't make up for Katrina, but sometime this weekend they will have the chance to show that they are capable of handling a cat 4 or 5 hurricane.

Exactly.

[Laugh O. Grams]

::yes:: And Rita is giving everyone at every level now another opportunity to either rise to the occasion or fail. FEMA's going to have to hit at least a triple, if not a home run, this time. It won't make up for Katrina, but sometime this weekend they will have the chance to show that they are capable of handling a cat 4 or 5 hurricane.
Absolutely!! I hate that we have to experience another storm to check on FEMA's latest response time and how state and local governments handle their parts, but as the Bush Administration says "The Lord works in mysterious ways".

[Brainhammer]

The New York Times also has a piece about this today (registration required):

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/21/national/nationalspecial/21walls.html?hp

Interesting that no one here has any comment when "conventional wisdom" is challenged.

Is the suggestion that the levees could have breached even on a calm, sunny day, catching everyone by surprise?

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Not to answer for TheAnswr, but if it was my house, of course I would want to know what caused it and all of those details. But if it was a house across town, and I was served by the same fire department, you can absolutely bet I'd be more interested in why that fire department didn't do it's job.

But on that note--wouldn't you want to know why the fire happened to know whether or not you need to make changes in your own home? Like was it something obvious or was it a hidden factor that your home could have?

[Lisa loves Pooh]

::yes:: And Rita is giving everyone at every level now another opportunity to either rise to the occasion or fail. FEMA's going to have to hit at least a triple, if not a home run, this time. It won't make up for Katrina, but sometime this weekend they will have the chance to show that they are capable of handling a cat 4 or 5 hurricane.

They're already in a quandry before Rita even hits....they've got 2 states to contend with that are still disaster areas.....

If the follow up for RITA is improved....good for Texas...but then someone somewhere is standing waiting for FEMA to come back.

[Tigger_Magic]

They're already in a quandry before Rita even hits....they've got 2 states to contend with that are still disaster areas.....

If the follow up for RITA is improved....good for Texas...but then someone somewhere is standing waiting for FEMA to come back. They cannot afford to be in a quandry... now or ever. They've got to step up to the plate and perform much better than last time. If FEMA blows the management of Rita, the repercussions will be enormous and far-reaching. It's the bottom of the ninth inning, bases loaded and the call is 4 balls and 2 strikes. FEMA has one pitch left. They can't afford to blow this one, even with the 2 or 3 other disaster areas to deal with. This is what FEMA was tasked to do.

[bsnyder]

They cannot afford to be in a quandry... now or ever. They've got to step up to the plate and perform much better than last time. If FEMA blows the management of Rita, the repercussions will be enormous and far-reaching. It's the bottom of the ninth inning, bases loaded and the call is 4 balls and 2 strikes. FEMA has one pitch left. They can't afford to blow this one, even with the 2 or 3 other disaster areas to deal with. This is what FEMA was tasked to do.

I'm curious, can you quantify what "much better" would look like? I'm just wondering what your expectations are?

[Charade]

They cannot afford to be in a quandry... now or ever. They've got to step up to the plate and perform much better than last time. If FEMA blows the management of Rita, the repercussions will be enormous and far-reaching. It's the bottom of the ninth inning, bases loaded and the call is 4 balls and 2 strikes. FEMA has one pitch left. They can't afford to blow this one, even with the 2 or 3 other disaster areas to deal with. This is what FEMA was tasked to do.

On that note, I'd sure hate to be the new guy in charge!!

[Lisa loves Pooh]

They cannot afford to be in a quandry... now or ever. They've got to step up to the plate and perform much better than last time. If FEMA blows the management of Rita, the repercussions will be enormous and far-reaching. It's the bottom of the ninth inning, bases loaded and the call is 4 balls and 2 strikes. FEMA has one pitch left. They can't afford to blow this one, even with the 2 or 3 other disaster areas to deal with. This is what FEMA was tasked to do.


I agree...but they'll have to leave many players on the bench. They're toast!

They only have so many employees--and so many volunteers.

If it is going to flow as smoothly as everyone would like---which for some is about the pace of "Beam me up scotty" and more realistically--within 24-48 hours everything is secure and people aren't trapped anywhere and have access to ice and water....

Many in LA and MS will get abandandoned for this effort. Poor Mississippi was left alone while New Orleans got rescued....and then they'll just get left alone again.

Resources right now are stretched. They may have a better game plan..but it just won't be good enough for anyone anywhere.

There is going to be disappointment--by those with valid complaints..and by those who just dont' have enough patience to just hold their britches.

[Charade]

There's a joke in there somewhere.


Yeah, I crack myself up sometimes. :banana:

[swilphil]

So if your house caught fire because the electrical work was faulty, you're more interested in why it took so long for the fire department to show up?

If you answer this question theoretically, you may get one answer. When you're faced with the reality, it could be another. My husband's best friend died in a fire at his workplace that was reportedly caused by faulty electrical work. The fire department, as well as the building management, botched the evacuation (to make a very long story short). His widowed wife and grieving family members are least concerned with the cause of the fire.

[Tigger_Magic]

I'm curious, can you quantify what "much better" would look like? I'm just wondering what your expectations are? FEMA should already have supplies ready in Texas ready to roll into wherever Rita hits as soon as "she" makes landfall. FEMA needs to act first and act fast, without waiting around for emergency declarations or requests from governors or mayors. The NOAA is fairly good at tracking and predicting where hurricanes will hit, and although it's not an exact science, we can and should be prepared to react, so that they can respond within a few hours of wherever Rita strikes land.

My expectations would be to see FEMA in place, ready to hand out supplies and start taking info from victims within a few hours of the hurricane's landfall -- not days later.

[Geoff_M]

My expectations would be to see FEMA in place, ready to hand out supplies and start taking info from victims within a few hours of the hurricane's landfall -- not days later.Then I'm afraid that you will find FEMA to be a "miserable failure" again. That has never been FEMA's MO... even back in the "good old days" of the organization. You are effectively asking FEMA to be a "first responder" if you expect them to be operational within a few hours.

[Tigger_Magic]

Then I'm afraid that you will find FEMA to be a "miserable failure" again. That has never been FEMA's MO... even back in the "good old days" of the organization. You are effectively asking FEMA to be a "first responder" if you expect them to be operational within a few hours. What part of "Emergency Management" do they not comprehend? :scratchin

I'm afraid you will be right regardless of what the President or the acting director of FEMA says. There is too much bureaucracy in the way for them to act with anything remotely resembling efficiency. Sadly, once again, whoever ends up in Rita's wake will be on their own for awhile at least.

[Charade]

What part of "Emergency Management" do they not comprehend? :scratchin

I'm afraid you will be right regardless of what the President or the acting director of FEMA says. There is too much bureaucracy in the way for them to act with anything remotely resembling efficiency. Sadly, once again, whoever ends up in Rita's wake will be on their own for awhile at least.


As Geoff stated, FEMA is not a first responder. The local and state agencies take on that roll so if anyone is left "on their own" for awhile, it's not FEMAs fault. In fact, if anyone stayed and didn't prepare, it's THEIR fault!!

[Tigger_Magic]

As Geoff stated, FEMA is not a first responder. The local and state agencies take on that roll so if anyone is left "on their own" for awhile, it's not FEMAs fault. In fact, if anyone stayed and didn't prepare, it's THEIR fault!! This is interesting because according to FEMA's own website The Federal Emergency Management Agency - a former independent agency that became part of the new Department of Homeland Security in March 2003 - is tasked with responding to, planning for, recovering from and mitigating against disasters. We can parse this directive to death regarding whether or not it indicates "first" or "second" or even "third" responder, but the point is FEMA's reason for existence is threefold: disaster preparedness, mitigation and recovery. As they state on their website As it has for more than 20 years, FEMA's mission remains: to lead America to prepare for, prevent, respond to and recover from disasters with a vision of "A Nation Prepared." They are not going to accomplish this mission by sitting back on their haunches waiting to see what "someone else" is going to do first.

I don't know about you, but if I were ever the victim of a hurricane, I seriously doubt that -- facing a lack of water, power, food, functional toilets, etc. -- I would give one whit whether the "first responder" came from my town, my county, my state or the federal gov't. Just as I wouldn't question whether the Red Cross workers were from my local chapter or the national organization. The point is: in a disaster it doesn't matter who responds first. All that matters is that there is an effective and fast response.

If FEMA can't fulfill its mission, then I have to wonder why it's around. It's beginning to look like the United Nations of disaster response and recovery... a huge bloated entity that is no longer relevant or useful.

[wvrevy]

The problem with trying to claim that FEMA isn't a "first responder" is that there are some situations - such as a terrorist attack or major natural disaster - in which the people that would ordinarily fill that role - local police, fire, EMT...even the national guard - could be completely overwhelmed. As we saw with Katrina, it simply wasn't possible for the local authorities to handle the situation. The job was just too big for them.

That was one of the very reasons that FEMA was rolled into the Department of Homeland Security. DHS has the authority to deploy response teams and supplies immediately, without waiting on local requests. It's this authority - which was not used in the Katrina crisis - that has caused many people to ask why it took so long for federal aid to arrive.

Historically, you guys are right...FEMA was not a "first responder" agency. But that changed the moment they were rolled into DHS. They not only have the authority to come in when local resources are unable to handle a disaster, but they have the responsibility to do so.

[Geoff_M]

The Federal Emergency Management Agency - a former independent agency that became part of the new Department of Homeland Security in March 2003 - is tasked with responding to, planning for, recovering from and mitigating against disasters.Seriously, I'm not saying this to be flip about it. I urge you to contact your local EOC office and see if you can get a tour of their facilities and learn more about the disaster response process. If you do this as part of a group, you'll likely get a "yes" to your request. Ours really likes to show off their center.

Also, ask them if you can get into their CERT program. CERT is a FEMA sponsored emergency response program for civilians. Here's a link for more INFO (http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/CERT). I went through the program with a local scout troop and it as an educational look at the "business" of disaster response.

FEMA has always relied on local and state partnerships for disaster response. They can't be all things to everyone. They also know that local knowledge is something that's envaluable in the case of a disaster. The Feds can't march in at first daylight and know what's best for that area. They support the locals in advance with grants and resources in an effort to get the agencies prepared to handle the initial response. Post-9/11 our EOC was outfitted with computers, Large flat screen TV monitors, and sat phones with FEMA grant money. Grant money was also given to our county to develop disaster and mitigation plans for the area. This covered everything from tanker spills on the Interstate, natural gas pipeline ruptures, tornadoes, etc.

Historically, you guys are right...FEMA was not a "first responder" agency. But that changed the moment they were rolled into DHS.That may make sense logically, but pratically that doesn't work. In a terrorist attack there is no time to preposition resources. FEMA can't stock equipment and staff in every major city for every possible event. Local and state agencies are even more critical when it comes to first responses in homeland security related events. FEMA's job is to partner with the locals and try and prepare them to respond. FEMA's job in the response is to be a secondary/long-haul responder.