Angelle Bergeron More than a dozen folks waited to grill Maj. Tim Kurgan, chief public affairs office for the Corps’ New Orleans District, about the recommended proposals, but mainly to express discontent with the process, the plans, the Corps and federal funding of the projects.

Distrust of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers dominated a recent meeting on proposed actions for permanent pump structures at New Orleans’ three outfall canals.

The Corps scheduled the Oct. 22 public meeting to present a synopsis of Individual Environmental Report 5, Outfall Canal Closure Structures. Such meetings are required by the National Environmental Policy Act for all major Federal actions. Their purpose is to explain proposals and elicit public input.

“The proposed permanent pump structures will reduce risk to residents and businesses in Orleans and Jefferson parishes,” says Dan Bradley says, senior project manager. Bradley made a brief presentation detailing the maximum footprint of site locations for permanent gate closure and pump structures at the 17th Street, Orleans and London outfall canals.

USACE Kendrick answers questions

For the next two hours, more than a dozen members of the ritzy lakefront communities surrounding the proposed sites spent the bulk of their speaking time berating the Corps for past performance and its alleged insincerity in receiving public input.

“I see citizens removed from the process,” says Jesse Cannon, a resident. When Cannon asked how the public can be confident his comments are being “entertained and weighed with some value,” Major Timothy Kurgan, chief public affairs officer for the New Orleans District replied that getting that public input was the purpose for the meeting. “Why should we believe you? I don’t think anybody in this audience is going to trust you to do this on your own,” Cannon said. Applause followed.

+ click to enlarge

USACE For the 17th Street Canal proposal, most of the property to be acquired for either temporary or permanent use is publicly held. The site offers plenty of area and access for staging and construction.

+ click to enlarge

USACE The footprint of construction of the recommended permanent closure structure at Orleans Avenue involves only publicly-held property. It will have limited impact on levees and floodwalls.

+ click to enlarge

USACE The recommended proposed permanent structure on the London Avenue canal will be in the widest part of the canal, which makes construction phasing easier.

Bradley encouraged Cannon and all of those present to try to see themselves included in the process, and to do so by participating in public meetings. “Again, the IER is not finalized. It is still in draft form, and we are still awaiting comments,” Bradley says. “We have meetings scheduled for public comments, but we would be happy to schedule more meetings if anyone wants.”

However, once the requests for proposals are sought, public input will have less impact, he says. “Once the RFP is out, and we start considering proposals, any changes will come at a cost.”

Congress has appropriated $804 million for the three permanent pump/closure structures, says Gib Owens, a Corps project manager for the NEPA process. The Corps plans to release a draft of IER 5, including proposed action and site locations, by December, followed by a 30-day public comment period. The Corps plans to have a final decision report signed by January or February 2009. The permanent structures are scheduled for completion by 2013.

All three projects will be let as design-build, in hopes of obtaining the best technical solution from industry, says Richmond Kendrick, chief for program execution for the Corps’ Hurricane Protection Office. “Our schedule is to get a sources-sought notice out in December or January.”

One resident argued that the design-build process sounded to her like “privatization of our safety.” Kendrick explained the process, how the Corps feeds “Mr. Contractor” basic guidelines for performance and location, and why design-build offers the Corps the opportunity to win the “best technical solution” that industry can provide.

Corps representatives reiterated numerous times that the maximum footprint outlines of the three structures are “recommended proposed actions” that won’t be finalized until the NEPA process is complete. However, residents insisted their voices aren’t being heard, and their input is being ignored. They argued against large structures that would devalue their property, be aesthetically offensive to their neighborhoods and destroy the view of Lake Pontchartrain.

“I don’t care what you put, but how high will they be,” says resident Jim Cortez, who also appealed to the Corps to consider committees of neighborhood representatives to be included in the design/construction process. “These people are not on your side,” Cortez says. “If you allow these committees to participate, we will be on your side.”

Owen explained how the Federal Advisory Committee Act prohibits that sort of citizen involvement, but attendees weren’t assuaged.

“Legislation dictates that we move parallel protection to the lake and provide for evacuation of water,” Kendrick says. “We are seeking the best solution that meets technical needs and meets the needs of the greatest number of aspects being considered.”

Despite the Congressional dictates, residents repeatedly asked why a permanent structure must be located at the mouth of the outfall canals. One woman even questioned why such a structure is needed near her home on the Orleans outfall canal when the levees there didn’t breach during Katrina. “It’s about the system,” Kurgan says. “It’s about the whole city. If the system is not complete, it is not a system.”