# Presentation: 109812

## Southeast LouisianaFlood and Hurricane Protection Current Status

*** ******Briefing by Headquarters US Army Corps of Engineers for ***
***Subcommitee on Hydrology ***
***12 January 2006***

**Notes:**
Event Name with As of Date

## Topics

- Status of Reconstruction Efforts
- Recent Funding and Reconstruction Guidance/Direction
- Interagency Performance Evaluation Team

## Background

- Hurricane damaged approximately 64% of the system.
- ASA(CW) approved one time deviation from policy to under take permanent rehabilitation of federal and non-federal projects at full federal expense using FCCE funds & fund acquisition of lands, easements, rights-of-way, and disposal or borrow areas needed for rehabilitation.
- Restoration of damaged federal protection systems by 1 June 2006

## Challenges

- No Flood Fighting During the Event!
- Security Concerns
- Communication Obstacles
- Atypical Flooding – no drainage
- Lack of Access
- Data Scarcity
- Information Crush

## Today:  Recovery from Katrina and Rita Continue

***Summary as of 28 December 2005:***
- Corps personnel deployed:  **1,734**
- FEMA mission assignments:  **$4,401,167,000**
- Temporary roofs : **209,211 **completed
- Water; **4,979** truckloads ordered/distributed
- Ice:**  5,276** truckloads ordered/distributed
- Generators installed:  **910** (Kat & Rita); de-installed:  **910***** ***
- Debris: **33, 066,429 **CY removed; ***51,240,000***** CY** estimated

## Command Arrangements

***Relevant, Ready, Responsive, Reliable***

**(Sharing **
**Staff )**

**Housing Area Command**

- FEST-A: Baton Rouge, LA

- JFO AL – Mr. Sherman

- Montgomery, AL** **

- JFO MS – Mr. Carwile

- Jackson, MS

- Baton Rouge, LA

**MVD**

- JFO LA  (FWD)

- Baton Rouge, LA

- JFO LA – Mr. Lokey

**MVK**

- Location:** **Vicksburg, MS** **

**SAM**

- Location:** **Mobile, AL

**MVS**

- Location:** **St. Louis MO

**BG Grisoli**

**J-7 BG Berwick**

**MG Riley**

**BG Crear**

**BG Walsh**

**COL Seitliff**

**COL Gapinski**

**COL Smithers**

**COL Vesay**

**COL Taylor**

**SWF**

- Fort Worth, TX

**COL Minahan**

**SWG**

- Galveston, TX

**COL  Haustein**

**JFO-Wells**

- Austin TX** **

**PFO**
**RADM Hereth**
** **

- Austin TX

- TF

**JTF Rita: LTG Clark**

- J-7 Loc: Ft Sam Houston

**J-7 BG Schroedel**

## New Orleans Levee System

## -20

**NORMAL LAKE 1.0 FT LEVEL**

**SPH DESIGN ELEV 11.5 FT**

**17.5 FT**

**HURRICANE**

**PROTECTION LEVEE**

**& FLOODWALL**

**AVG ANNUAL HIGHWATER 14 FT**

**18 FT PROJECT FLOWLINE**

**23 FT**

**FLOODWALL ALONG**

**MISSISSIPPI RIVER**

**GENTILLY**

**RIDGE**

**UNO**

**UNO SIDE OF**

**WAINRIGHT DR**

**WAINRIGHT DR**

**AT L.C. SIMON**

**ST. ANTHONY AT**

**WILDAIR DR**

**DILLARD UNIV**

**CAMPUS**

**GENTILLY BLVD**

**AT ALLEN**

**DERBIGNY AT I-10**

**ESPLANADE AT**

**ST. CLAUDE**

**ST. LOUIS**

**CATHEDRAL**

**CANAL ST AT RIVER**

**ELEVATIONS IN FEET NGVD**

**-20**

**-10**

**0**

**10**

**20**

**30**

**-20**

**-10**

**0**

**10**

**20**

**30**

- B

**LAKE**

**PONTCHARTRAIN**

**SHORE**

**RIVER BANK**

**MISSISSIPPI**

- A

**Notes:**
New Orleans is a bowl. Anything that falls into it, must be pumped out. 

## Status of Funding for Repairs

- Reference news conference of Thursday, 15 Dec 05
- $1.6B Restore Previous Levels of Protection
- $1.5B Additional Safety & Security Measures
- Reconciling Scope of Work Issues and Priorities

## Current Conditions

- Damaged and/or Breached Federally constructed levees and floodwalls.
- Floodwalls and levees with minor damage that have settled below design grade.
- Damaged non-Federal pump stations, other flood control works and levees.

## System Flooding

**Notes:**
Map indicating the primary areas of inundation were Orleans East Bank, both Metro and Citrus areas, and Chalmette areas of St Bernards. Jefferson, St. Charles – not impacted as badly.
Plaquemines Parish, East and West, heavily damaged with numerous levee breaches.  

All total about 20 storm induced breaches, and about half-dozen deliberate breaches. 

38 miles of levees and 28 miles of floodwalls with either damaged or degraded levels of protection. Majority of major pumping stations were inundated and have damaged motors, auxillary power, and controls.

## Requirements for Achieving Authorized Level of Protection

- Authorized level of Protection:
- Repair and raise Federal projects to current design grade (incorporation IPET findings)
- Repair Federally built or modified Pumping Stations
- Repair non-federal pumping stations and levees

## Slide 13

## Interagency Performance Evaluation Team: Organization

**National Research **
**Council Independent **
**Review Panel ***

**Public **
**Forums**

**ASCE External**
**Review Panel # **

**Interagency Performance **
**Evaluation Task Force #**

***GET THE FACTS***

***VERIFY THE FACTS***

***SYNTHESIZE THE FACTS***

*** Physical performance only**

**# Physical performance, consequences & Risk**

## IPET Teams and Leadership

| Item | Task Force | Leader |
| --- | --- | --- |
|  | Project Director | Ed Link – U of Maryland |
|  | Technical Director | John Jaeger - CELRH |
|  | Project Manager | Jeremy Stevenson - CELRH |
|  | Team | Co-leaders |
| 1 | Data Collection and Management – Perishable, systems data, info management | Reed Mosher – ERDC- GSL
Denise Martin – ERDC - ITL |
| 2, 3
 | Interior Drainage Numerical Models
 | Jeff Harris – IWR – HEC
Steve Fitzgerald, Harris County FCD |
| 4
 | Numerical Model of Hurricane Katrina surge and wave environment
 | Bruce Ebersole – ERDC - CHL
Dr. Joannes Westerkink, U of Notre Dame |
| 5a | Storm Surge & Wave Physical Model – Hydrodynamic Forces
 | Don Resio – ERDC – CHL
Dr. Bob Dean, U of Florida |
| 5b | Storm Surge & Wave Physical Model – Centrifuge Breaching | Mike Sharp – ERDC – CHL
Scott Steedman – Cambridge University |
| 6
 | Geodetic Vertical Survey Assessment
 | Jim Garster – ERDC - TEC
Dave Zilkowski – NOAA/NGS |
| 7
 | Analysis of Floodwall and Levee Performance
 | Reed Mosher – ERDC – GSL
Dr. Mike Duncan – Virginia Tech University |
| 8 | Pumping Station Performance | Brian Moentenich – CENWP-HDC
Bob Howard – South Florida WMD |
| 9
 | Consequence Analysis of Hurricane Katrina
 | Dave Moser – IWR
Pat Canning - USDA |
| 10 | Engineering and Operation Risk and Reliability Analysis
 | Jerry Foster – HQUSACE
Bruce Muller – USBR
 |

## Participation

**Federal Agencies**
- IPET Members
- Corps of Engineers (Lead agency)
-         MVD/MVN
- FEMA (team member)
- NOAA (team co-lead)
- USBR (team co-lead)
- USDA (team co-lead)
- Collaboration
- EPA
- FHWA
- USGS
- NSF
- DOC (NIST)
- DOL (BLS)
**International**
- Japan
- Netherlands
- Belgium
- Romania

**Academia**
- University of Maryland
- Louisiana State University
- UC Berkeley
- Utah State University
- Penn State University
- University of Norte Dame (Team Co-Lead)
- Stanford University
- Cambridge University (Team Co-lead)
**Professional Societies**
- ASCE
- NRC
- ASFPM
**State and Local Government**
- New Orleans Levee and Drainage Districts
- Louisiana DOT
- South Florida Water Management District (Team Co-Lead)
- Harris County Flood Control District, TX (Team Co-Lead)

**Notes:**
DOE (ORNL)=Oak Ridge National Lab
NAS=National Academy of Science
ASFPM=Association of State Floodplain Managers
DOC=Department of Commerce
	National Institute of Standards and Technology
	Economics and Statistics Administration
DOL=Department of Labor
	Bureau of Labor Statistics

## Systems Approach

**Integrated Data Base**

**Vertical Datum**

**Input**

**Response**

**Output**

**Storm**
**Environment**

**Storm **
**Forces**

**Structural **
**Response**

**Interior **
**Flooding**

**Pump **
**Response**

**Consequences**

**Risk and**
**Reliability**

***Systems Approach***

**Rain**

## Modeling Hydrologic Conditions

- Coordinated Effort Between USACE, USGS, NOAA, and FEMA
- Considerations:
- Understand Storm Events Much Better
- Improved Techniques and Technologies for Prediction
- Changed Physical Environment
- Level of Rigor:
- Initially Rudimentary
- Increasingly Rigorous as Input Data Improves

## Incorporation of IPET Results (to date)

- Strengthening of transition zones where levees and floodwalls abut – longer transition zones, hardened scour zones, deeper piles
- Revise floodwall designs – Replace I wall with T or L wall
- Harden surfaces susceptible to scour
- Harden surfaces around points where pipelines penetrate levees

## The Path Ahead

- Congressional Briefings
- Interim Levels of Protection Dec 05
- Complete Repairs to Levees to Pre-Storm Conditions Jun 06
- Uncertainties:
- Upgrades to Levels of Protection?
- Supplemental?
- Coastal Policy?
- Levee Portfolio?
- Conduct System Performance Analysis

**Notes:**
We are in close communication with locals on our progress in closing breaches and the associated levels of protection.

Our goal is to complete reconstruction of levees to pre-storm conditions ASAP – contracts will be let in October for this work with repair to last several months. 

Expect to be asked to provide a conceptual plan for raising the level of protection to CAT V. 

We are prepared to launch a comprehensive system analysis that will examine breach mechanisms and would include considerable outside assistance and peer review – awaiting direction on this action. We are sharing data with LSU, ASCE, and NSF in their efforts at independent assessments. 

## Questions?