Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Army Corp of Engineers to blame for NOLA flooding

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-26-07 08:09 AM
Original message
Army Corp of Engineers to blame for NOLA flooding
during Hurricane Katrina, according to a 475-page report commissioned by the state Department of Transportation and Development that was released Wednesday. The five major findings of the report by "Team Louisiana":
1) The Army Corps failed to follow the 1965 Congressional mandate to protect against the "most severe combination of meteorological conditions reasonably expected." This mandate specified a "1 in 100 year storm" that the New Orleans levee system must protect against, which was set as a Category 2 hurricane with winds of 107 mph. In 1972, the National Weather Service adjusted the expected "1 in 100 year storm" to be a Category 3 hurricane with 129 mph winds. This was adjusted again in 1979 to a Category 4 hurricane with 140 mph winds. The Army Corp never revised their protection plans based on these new estimates, despite their mandate to do so and their awareness of the requirement to do so.

2) The New Orleans levees were built 1-2 feet too low, because the Army Corps used elevation estimates taken in 1929 to design the levees. The city has sunk over the years, and was already 1.3-1.6 feet lower than the 1929 elevation estimates in 1965 when the levee system was designed. Continued subsidence of the land resulted in levees that were up to five feet too low when Katrina struck. The Corps was aware of the subsidence issue, but did not correct for it. The levees being too low caused many of the failures that flooded New Orleans, the report asserts: Crown elevation deficiencies ranging up to 5 feet at the time Katrina struck resulted in prolonged overtopping of floodwalls and levees along the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal (IHNC) and to the east in the Lake Borgne funnel that otherwise would have been overtopped only briefly. Prolonged overtopping led to catastrophic breaches into the Lower 9th Ward on the east and into Orleans Metro on the west, and contributed to the early failures of levees along the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW)and MRGO. Early failure of the MRGO levee allowed the 32,000 acre wetland buffer between MRGO and 40 Arpent back levee to fill and overtop the 40 Arpent back levee while the surge was still rising, and resulted in catastrophic flooding in St.Bernard to an elevation of 11 ft.

3) The Army Corp did not follow existing engineering practice and guidance for construction of levees and floodwalls.

4) The free-flowing deep draft navigation channel on the east side (MRGO and GIWW channels) compromised system performance.

5) The levee system was "managed like a circa 1965 flood control museum", and was not maintained or upgraded properly.


http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=639&tstamp=200703

Full report
http://www.publichealth.hurricane.lsu.edu/TeamLA.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
SaveAmerica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-26-07 08:30 AM
Response to Original message
1. That's a steaming pile of BS, in my opinion the number one reason
for flooding in New Orleans after Katrina is a result of the lack of funding that was supposed to go toward fixing the levees. This funding didn't make it to New Orleans and to the levees. I have a book's worth of articles that I printed out after Katrina and that information is in that pile, I don't have a link, sorry. Maybe someone else does. Were they supposed to do fundraisers to fix the levees?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-26-07 08:37 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. It does seem fishy to me as well
IT seems like they are finding an organization they can piss on and passing the blame off to them.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveAmerica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-26-07 08:45 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. Here's one article
Edited on Mon Mar-26-07 08:52 AM by SaveAmerica
http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=32144&dcn=todaysnews

(This even goes beyond taking some of the funding away but shows the Bush Administration forcing the resignation of a Republican Congressman because he had the nerve to tell them they could be a part of the destruction of a city because of their actions)

As levees burst and floods continued to spread across areas hit by Hurricane Katrina yesterday, a former chief of the Army Corps of Engineers disparaged senior White House officials for "not understanding" that key elements of the region's infrastructure needed repair and rebuilding.

....

"One time I took two pieces of steel into Mitch Daniels' office," Parker recalled. "They were exactly the same pieces of steel, except one had been under water in a Mississippi lock for 30 years, and the other was new. The first piece was completely corroded and falling apart because of a lack of funding. I said, 'Mitch, it doesn't matter if a terrorist blows the lock up or if it falls down because it disintegrates -- either way it's the same effect, and if we let it fall down, we have only ourselves to blame.' It made no impact on him whatsoever.

....

Parker -- who, along with members of his family, was forced to evacuate his Mississippi farm on Sunday night -- drew media attention (and the White House's ire) in 2002 by telling the Senate Budget Committee that a White House proposal to cut just over $2 billion from the Corps' $6 billion budget request would have a "negative impact" on the national interest. Parker also noted that cuts would mean the end of scores of contracts and the loss of tens of thousands of jobs.

After Parker's Capitol Hill appearance, Daniels wrote an angry memo to President Bush, writing that Parker's testimony "reads badly. . . on the printed page," and that "Parker. . . distancing actively from the administration." Parker, a former Republican congressman from Mississippi, was forced to resign shortly thereafter.

Edited to add there are more links at this blog (thanks to the blogger for the collection) that I'm not able to read because you have to register http://community.livejournal.com/sos_usa/1816019.html.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gollygee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-26-07 08:40 AM
Response to Original message
3. The administration is doing everything possible
to turn attention away from their terrible response to Katrina. The president PERSONALLY was, what, eating cake or something instead of dealing with it? Like at a birthday party?

I've heard so many reasons why it happened not related to Bush or the people he appointed - they're just shooting in every direction away from themselves hoping that they'll hit some target somewhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire Walk With Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-26-07 08:47 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. The more they weaken government services, the more they can privatize
and cash in on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 05:09 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC