| Perspective - Colonel Lewis F. Setliff III |
|
|
| Jun 14 2007 | |
|
Page 3 of 4
Advertisement:
We also had a very complicated social and political environment that we were dancing around in. I work for the President, who was actively engaged and monitored our progress on a weekly basis. He visited New Orleans frequently, and was very concerned about how Task Force Guardian, assigned by the Corps of Engineers, would do this engineering work. The people who worked for and with me are the reason I got up every morning. We had people on our project sites just about every day — residents who had lost everything. They were there to make sure that when we were doing this construction — which was at breakneck speed — we weren’t sacrificing quality to meet our schedule. We were under intense media scrutiny, and we welcomed it, understanding that this city evacuated three-quarters of its population, if not more. We welcomed the media to assist us in telling our story and how our progress was coming along. People had to make some very difficult decisions, weighing their level of risk in order to come back to this city and recover. The predominant factor in their risk assessment was the status of the levees and floodwalls that protected the city. More Than EngineeringSo we had more than engineering challenges. We also had a significant time constraint. Looming in front of us was June 1, 2006, which was the beginning of the next hurricane season. We didn’t know in the fall, winter, and spring that there would not be a hurricane in 2006. Our assumption going in was that on June 2, there would be a hurricane. We had thousands of contractors and hundreds of government employees who were all aligned with the same vision: repair this hurricane protection system and make those repairs before that hurricane we expected on June 2. I know as engineers we’re always being tested. I would be happy to never have the work we actually did be tested. But what this vision required us to do was throw out the playbook, redesign, rebuild, and reengineer the repairs we had to make, simultaneously. Sometimes it required us to take four steps forward and a step back, but it was absolutely necessary because we did not want to rebuild what was there before; we wanted to rebuild something better and stronger.There were lots of initiatives being undertaken by universities and government agencies to determine why the hurricane protection system in New Orleans failed. It was absolutely imperative that if someone was doing a study on why a particular floodwall failed and reached a conclusion, we had better find out why during the process of our project execution. We spiraled in multiple times the findings of several groups that were doing analyses across New Orleans on why things failed. There were three technologies we
used in our work. First, there was an
extensive amount of computer modeling
that was done to determine primarily
what forces were exerted on the existing
hurricane protection system.
Second, we used supercomputers to try
and figure out what forces and how
much storm surge hit New Orleans and
the entire Gulf Coast. And we used
scaled modeling of the 17th Street canal.
This was all in an attempt to figure out
where we had those breaches and why
they occurred. When we found the
answers, we got designers, engineers,
and contractors who were doing the
work in a room, at a table, and made
sure that what they were building would
account for what we identified had
caused those breaches. |

















