Comment on: Scientists point to better way to safer drilling: An editorial

I have the profoundest respect and admiration for Bob Bea but I'm afraid he and his team have missed the major root cause and the proven solution.

The Corps' IPET took several years to figure out that the root cause of the Katrina failures was that our flood protection system was a "system in name only" and that to ensure the future safety of all the flood protection stakeholders, the flood protection systems (in name only) had to turn it into a real system with high integrity and resilience. Unfortunately those lessons have been rejected by the Corps, the Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority and our local levee boards who explicitly refuse to use a systems engineering approach

Dr Bea's team has given us a laundry list of specific actions some of which have some very imprecise measures of success such as sufficient, comprehensive, and effective. They suggest fixing the specific defects in operators safety cultures in the short term. That shows a poor understanding of how difficult and time-consuming it is to change a culture that lionizes risk takers to one that puts safety first.

But the bigest fault of the team is its failure to identify or promote a total systems approach as the most important and essential ingredient in creating even a modestly resilient off-shore drilling technology and its supporting life-cycle culture. Recent research into the discipline of resilience systems engineering has established that, in the face of low frequency-high consequence risks, resilience can never be achieve without a fully integrated systems solution driven by a deep understanding of the risks that confront all stakeholders. This includes the interests of residents of New Orleans who have seen the barriers to high winds and storm surges substantially (but unquantifiably) diminished by the spill.

Will BP establish a Road Home Program when our polluted wetlands are inevitably unable to protect ourselves and our homes?

I firmly support Bea's long term recommendation, enhanced with best systems engineering practices such as systems architecting, interface management, stakeholder focus, to name a few, as a minimally acceptable state to permit continued high risk offshore drilling.

Posted on Scientists point to better way to safer drilling: An editorial on July 31, 2010, 2:57PM

Comment on: Robert Dudley, incoming CEO of BP, sees long road ahead

We now know that the moratorium will last considerably longer because BP's leadership still thinks in terms accidents not science or best practices.

The accidents Dudley is talking about are low consequence slips and falls rather than the high consequences of multiple deaths along with economic, environmental and cultural devastation that accompanies major blow-outs and spills in our waters. What he and government stewards should be saying is that so long as there is a remote chance of an high consequence devestation, he will NOT drill.

If BP had any sense, they would be following the Dutch flood water strategy of putting safety first and using a systems approach which is the only repeatable way of protecting against these kinds of risks. I would suspect that were anyone to examine the BP design and operation from a systems perspective, they, like the Corps of Engineers after Katrina, would find that BP's deepwater operations were a "system in name only"

There is an emerging subdiscipline within systems engineering called resilience systems engineering that has examined the Columbia shuttle disaster and Katrina, among othes, and found that you can actually design, build and operate a systems with resilience at a level comensurate with the actual risk and consequences of hurricanes- and oil drilling-induced catastrophes.

So long as BP and others believe that accidents "just happen" and the tooth fairy, it will be unsafe to drill in deep water. It's time to start transforming the way corporations and citizens think. That's a whole lot harder than buying a few tools.

Posted on Robert Dudley, incoming CEO of BP, sees long road ahead on July 28, 2010, 9:37AM

Comment on: Spill doesn't justify broad moratorium: A letter to the editor

The NASA equivilent I submitted was the Columbia shuttle disaster and not the Challenger O rings. The point I was trying to make was that the Columbia investigation concluded that NASA's culture was a equally as responsible for the diaster as any technical fators.

I see that Bob Bea's second report found the same problem - a culture that didn't promote the safety of workers or the Gulf. A bigger problem was that the MMS and Coast Guard were not able to tell the difference between a safe and an unsafe culture. I suspect it will take a significant amout of time to be able to detect unsafe cultures and even more time to transform the unsafe actors to safe actors. My experience in the systems engineering world is that such cultural transformations take years and don't always succeed.

The choice is clear - safety or jobs. It is clear which one the author has chosen.

Posted on Spill doesn't justify broad moratorium: A letter to the editor on July 26, 2010, 12:16PM

Comment on: Sen. Mary Landrieu complains of mixed messages on role of presidential oil spill commission

When Mary said "This was a rogue incident", she confirmed that she'll do anything to bolster oil company profits - and that's very sad.




Is "rougue" a term of science or art? Was Katrina a rougue never to be repeated? Was the Columbia space shuttle a rougue accident.



When it comes to distubances that can happen, however infrequently, and that may present grave (high consequence) risks to life and property, the engineering motto is to be conservative and not take risks. The rule should be "put safety first ahead of growth or profits."



When it comes to man-made intervention in nature, the rule should be "Don't do it if you don't fully understand it." Niether BP nor its regulatory minders understood the conditions under which an untrolled blowout could occur. The moratorium needs to remain in place untill everyone has a shared understanding of these risks.


A quicker answer would be to require that the insurance industry cover these risks with acuarially realistic premiums and not allow self-insurance where high consequences are possible. I believe such a solution would allow the market to drive high risk drilling out of the Gulf.

Mary, lets use science and engineering to meeting our challenges rather that wild animal behavior patterns.

Posted on Sen. Mary Landrieu complains of mixed messages on role of presidential oil spill commission on July 13, 2010, 2:33PM

Comment on: News comment: Wish we had a commission after Hurricane Katrina

Another reason we needed (and still) need a national bipartisan commission is that had we had a timely and sound analysis we would have perhaps prevented the Deepwater Horizon event because both it and Katrina had the same rood causes. Safety was not put first and neither followed a systems approach.




These same two strategy elements were suggested by the Dutch and by the IPET's final report. Both elements have been explicitly rejected by the Corps, every level of local and state government. Before we can begin to solve the root problems we have to promote the right values (safety over growth) and a total systems view of the problem and the solution.


It's not surprising that Louisinan has no higher level program in systems engineering and that risk management, central to systems engineering and Bob Bea's recommentations, in the oil business is left to businessmen's guts and to not engineers.

This is a much knotier problem than just reforming the Corps or tightening up some flood gates. It has to reach down to include how residents decide where to live and how to build.

Posted on News comment: Wish we had a commission after Hurricane Katrina on July 13, 2010, 11:38AM

Comment on:Court of Appeals should expedite case on drilling moratorium: An editorial

When you talk about requiring oil CEOs to be criminally liable, you are citing reporting in an David Hammer article in the news. David also quotes Lee Hunt, president of the International Association of Drilling Contractors as saying thatthe issue of CEO liability, something that companies are used to when certifying their financial statements, is a bit more difficult.

Hunt goes on to say "It will take some time to ensure the same protocols exists to give oil company CEOs confidence in the specific engineering procedures on rigs"

In my view the use of criminal liability will provide the ultimate protection for out safety. It will motivate companies to do the kind of research that will ensure works (like levees) will have adequately engineered resilience (reliability, safety, readiness, etc).

As David Hammer observed, the moratorium is a moot point with these forms of assurance in place. As far as I'm concered, its in industry's corner to get peer reviews and make serious assurances that bad things won't happen.

Posted on Court of Appeals should expedite case on drilling moratorium: An editorial on July 08, 2010, 2:59PM

Comment on: Corps delivers overdue Category 5 hurricane protection study to Congress

From what I can gather about the report and the NRC issues is that nobody has read the Corps of Engineers own lessons learned document prepared by it Iteragency Performance Evaluation Team. The teams most stinking acusation was that the flood protect system was "a system in name only". They also ignored the strongest recommendation which is; if they ever build it again they should use a comprehensive systems approach.

The plan appears to offer an array of disjointed projects with out any systems "glue" to ensure that they do it right with real requirements of real stakeholders and the kind of resiliency needed to hold the pieces together.

What I see is a plan to build things and not a plan to protect people and their property.

Posted on Corps delivers overdue Category 5 hurricane protection study to Congress on July 01, 2010, 12:56PM

Comment on: The president isn't at fault: A letter to the editor

As I see it, the moratorum needs to remain in place until such time as we know the root causes of this mess and that the instustry has the knowledge and capability to prevent and rapidly (1 day) respond to blow outs and leaks in the funture. In addition the government needs to be able to inspect that this capability is the right one and it works.

Anyone want to take a guess at how long this will take. For my money it won't start until BP replaces its full page adds of committed local claims guys with credible information that will assure the public that it won't happen again. I'm waiting

Posted on The president isn't at fault: A letter to the editor on June 28, 2010, 4:36PM

Comment on: Oily words can't hide the sticky truth: Jarvis DeBerry

Now that we have (some) consensus of what went wrong, engineering and inspections, its time to focus on how to fix it.

Systems engineers (remember "system in name only" have a practice, apparently unknown to the wildcating oil and gas industry or MMS, called resilience systems engineering, that deal with risks that are complicated , low frequency and very high (safety) consequences. The heart of resilience systems engineering is, like the Dutch flood protection policy: to put safety first; and use a disciplined, risk-centered systems approach.

Making quick fixes is the more challenging because it will, like NASA in the Columbia disaster, require a radical cultural transformation. Such transformations require a lot of time and some hard rethinking which won't start until the players recognize they need to change.

Look up resilience systems engineering to find out more about the only viable solution to preventing , surviving and recovering from a Katrina or a Deepwater Horizon - http://www.resilience-engineering.org/

Posted on Oily words can't hide the sticky truth: Jarvis DeBerry on June 25, 2010, 11:48AM

Comment on: BP's Doug Suttles says company 'threw everything' at gushing oil well

Mr. Suttles is confusing quantity with quality. Efficacy is what we need. Their plan was efficacious and niether was the improvisations.

So far, the benefit to the world is in the form of a new case study on how NOT to prevent or respond to oil spills. The continuing crime is denying that anything needs to be learned before we put put lives and property on the line.

And then there's our Govenor. I can't believe that workers didn't know they were putting their lives and the future of the industry at risk by working under unsafe conditions. All of them made a bet and lost. The smart ones should have been looking for better safety conditions or new careers for years. The Governor's proposal to keep workers on the job in high risk conditions is a bailout with the life and property of residents of coastal Louisiana as the poker chips.

From the New Orleans City Council to the LA Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority to the Governor, all local and state politicians will place growth before safety any and every day

Posted on BP's Doug Suttles says company 'threw everything' at gushing oil well on June 25, 2010, 10:06AM

Comment on: Salazar seeks to reimpose drilling moratorium

Not!

Insurance premiums (a non-regulated industry) have gone up more than 50% since the explosion. If anybody figures what operators will have to do to make their response and recovery plans acceptable the cost will be astronomical.

Of course we could lower the liability limits on deep water drillers so that the tax payers would bail them out.

Posted on Salazar seeks to reimpose drilling moratorium on June 23, 2010, 12:12PM

Comment on: Salazar seeks to reimpose drilling moratorium

What new safety regs? What reports states that anyone knows how to stop a ddep well from exploding or that there won't be any spill? The root cause of the deep water horizon calamity is, like other catastrophe's like Katrina and the Columbia shuttle, as much due to cultural deficiencies throughout the industry. These can't be reduced until the industry, and its regulators, admit that it is broken and comes up with ways to make the essential cultural transformations along with fixing the broken technology and processes.

I see no precedent for that happening in less than 6 months.

What we are "enjoying" now with the threatened collapses of the oil & gas insdustry are the consequences of poor, unethical safety-related engineering practices. There's only one rule that industry and the T-P editorial staff need to be remined of - put safety first. What the judge should have done is require companies to prove that safety of all elements is first. The resoning he did use threatens the lives and properties

Posted on Salazar seeks to reimpose drilling moratorium on June 23, 2010, 11:47AM

Comment on: Judge issues preliminary injunction blocking federal deepwater drilling moratorium

So we have substituted legal judgement for sound, responsible engineering judgement that says if you don't understand your risks or have credible plans to prevent or instantly mitigate them you should stop until you do.

Civil engineers have a cannon of ethics that requres them to put safety first. I guess petroleum engineers and federal judges don't have this belief

If you want insight go read the 6/21 NY Times article at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/21/us/21blowout.html You probably won't read it in the T-P.

Posted on Judge issues preliminary injunction blocking federal deepwater drilling moratorium on June 22, 2010, 1:38PM

Comment on: Levee officials to review Corps of Engineers plans for New Orleans canals

The narrow focus on civil engineering works to solve all our flood problems is evident in the report. Will the Corps build a system in more than name only to address the threats to New Orleans residents? It sure doesn't sound like it.

Posted on Levee officials to review Corps of Engineers plans for New Orleans canals on June 22, 2010, 12:29PM

Comment on: Obama administration has drilling moratorium myopia

One of the missing elements in the T-P's consideration is the immorality of continued deep water drilling when no one has a clue how to establish a resilient technology applyed by resilient institutions. Rather touting their ability to play claims, BP should be using it's full page adds in the T-P to tell us how they plan to prevent such a disasterous spill next time.

From another moral perspective, demanding preamature drilling is equivilent to saying that Hitler's death camps were a jobs program whose continuence was justified by the guards' payrolls as well as those that manufactured the gas. If economics trumps morality we are indeed in deep trouble.

The Times-Picayune continues to ignore the undisputable fact that BP was culturally (morally) incapable of putting safety first and that it must go through a major cultural transfomation before its should be trusted with any kind of technology. When that occurs deep Gulf oil with be so costly because companies will have to have real prevention and real response resources in place which none of them do now.

Posted on Obama administration has drilling moratorium myopia: An editorial on June 20, 2010, 2:19PM

The most critical thing about recovering from a catastrophe is that you must build in things that ensure you won't get whacked again when the next one happens. No one, not the Corps, not the State and not the Parish have done some of the key tasks to fill the gaping hole.

While it is important to note that most homes in flooded areas have not been elevated, a key resilience measure, the thing that is really missing was the one really important finding from the IPET. New Orleans flood protection was a systems IN NAME ONLY. Nothing has been done to creat a real system that integrates all of our flood protection measures and adds the resilence we need to ensure they work together.

What we need is a full, high performance systems approach to protecting our flood plain. As a professional sysems engineer I can tell that I haven't met anyone in this state that understands what a systems approach is. None of our institutions of higher learning teach it let alone award

As the authors of the IPET said, we must use a systems approach if we are to survive. Along with this approach, we need to make one simple change to our cultural values and that's to put safety first before the growth machine, before reelection. If we aren't safe we can;t grow except in an uncertain short (term limited) time frame. Of my native New Orleanian neighbors who didn't or couldn't elevate the unanimous say "If it happens again, I'm out of here

Posted on Louisiana Recovery Authority expects to fold with millions unspent on March 12, 2010, 9:29AM

Comment on: $100 million in work planned to bolster three New Orleanson canals

Stepping back a bit we have to remember why, according to IPET, the flood protection system failed and that was because it was a system in name only. Well guess what? It's still a system in name only even though its been renamed as a risk reduction system.

IPET went on to say that if its ever built again it should use a "systems approach." That ain't happening! There's no integration with non-structural measures such as elevation or relocation which might be cheaper than drive good piles after bad ones. There's no coordination with grant programs to rebuild or elevate. This fiasco is about steel and concrete and deception rather than about safety and a systems approach.

As long as the Corps and all the other governmental parterns in delusion continue to use 19th century project management as the basis for assuring our safety, we will remain at risk. What we need is what the Dutch do: safety first and a systems approach

Posted on $100 million in work planned to bolster three New Orleanson  canals March 02, 2010, 1:19PM

Comment on: David Vitter files bill to stop updating flood maps

There's only one thing needed for our communities to survive let alone thrive and that's for all governments and residetnts to put safety (protection and defense) first - always. This is what Vitter is NOT doing. Engineers have a rule of thumb backed up by their cannon of ethics which is be conservative when it comes safety. Erring on the side of optimism, as Vitter and his supporters do is bad engineering and is going to get some one killed or washed out of their homes. Being cautious is responsible, prudent and safe. Increasing flood premiums until we know we're safe is the right thing to do.


As I see it, the Corps and all levels of government have done everthing to warrant our distrust and nothing that should improve our trust. Recovery, under Vitter's "leadership" is proceding as if nothing has changed. I feel significantly less secure in my house in NOLA than I did when I thouht that the Corps was the gold standard for professional civil engineering and the government was truely concerned about our common safety

Posted on David Vitter files bill to stop updating flood maps on March 02, 2010, 12:42PM

Comment on: LSU professor Ivor van Heerden sues university, says free speech rights violated in his firing

This is about academic freedom and responsibility. I you can go to an academicly acredited institution of higher learning and buy your view of the objective facts that institution should be immediately discredited and shuned by every professional organization committed to exposing the truth. This is a lose-lose for LSU. Customers buy objective truth rather a beauty context. Otherwise, academe would be just like a business with the credibility of a soap commercial.

My own research along entirely different lines that those used by Ivor indicated that the Corps was not using and has rejected using world class best practices for flood control which are to 1) put safety first and 2) to use a systems approach. As a result the Corps has ignored its own task force begin_of_the_skype_highlighting end_of_the_skype_highlighting whith found the flood protection system to be a system in name only. They have since removed the term or anything pertaining to system from their plans and doctrine and are still, along with the LA Office of Costal Restoration and Protection, following the failed and piecemeal protect planning process

Ivor is following a principled path which has safety critical consequences for those of us who live in threatened flood planes

Posted on LSU professor Ivor van Heerden sues university, says free speech rights violated in his firing on February 10, 2010, 6:07PM  on February 10, 2010, 6:07PM

Coalition pushing issues as New Orleans elections approach: An editorial

No wait! The city and its citizens are 100% responsible for their safety against all threats - particularly the ones we know about. The fact that the Corps has dramatically dropped its engagement and commitment to our safety by renaming what was the flood protections system to the flood risk reduction system is evidence.

At this point no one is in charge and every one looks out for themselves as they see the threat. Groups like Forward New Orleans give the view that Katrina never happened and won't ever again. They appear to view growth as a high priority for the city than safety.

It would help to dispell this view if Forward New Orleans adopted a platform plank that stated a commitment to safety first and called for the new mayor to reverse putting growth before safety. This could be done by prohibiting buldings from being built or renovated below the Katrina high water mark and not use the politically negotiated Base Flood Elevation.

The BFE was unsafe before Katrina and less safe now. The Corps has withdrawn and the state is more concerned about wild life in wetlands than citizen safety.

Posted on Coalition pushing issues as New Orleans elections approach: An editorial on January 11, 2010, 3:09PM

Comment on: Jarvis DeBerry: Did a corrupt Orleans Levee Board cause flooding? Will a corrupt Corps of Engineers?

Inadequate funding is a choice we and our leadership make, the consequences of this choice are not to just sit here and do nothing but elevate or relocate. Staying put with inadequate protection is both dumb and irresponsible and American taxpayers shouldn't stand for it. Do Louisianaians really want to base their safety on handouts?

It wasn't so much construction and maintenance as design and leadership that sank New Orleans. As the Corp's IPET study concluded. Flood protection was, and remains, a system in name only. The Corps' calling it's new approach a flood "risk reduction" system is an oxymoron. Real systems deal with 100% of the risk and allocate it to solutions with stakeholder (resident) understanding and concurrence.

And it isn't just the Corps. No one, at any level, has stood up and said the problem that must be solved is safety of people and property and I own that problem. The state's latest focus on wetlands recovery shows that safety isn't even on their radar.

If there's one real fault for which the Corps, as an institution of professionakl civil engineers, is squarely to blame is that all these engineers, at all levels have utterly disregarded their prime ethical cannon to hold safety paramount.

If the Corps' professional staff would just remember and act on that creed, New Orleans could once more expect a straight story about affordable safety. Until then it is each resident's obligation to act wisely and responsibly because no one will do it for us.

Posted on Jarvis DeBerry: Did a corrupt Orleans Levee Board cause flooding? Will a corrupt Corps of Engineers? on August 18, 2009, 11:24AM

Comment on: Posted on Bob Marshall: LSU ouster of Ivor van Heerden removes most honest appraiser of city's levee failures

Bob Marshall's views on Van Heerden's firing and the sorry state of flood protection in SE Louisiana are right on the money.

Van Heerden should be reinstated with a public appology and commendation for his high ethical standards.

The Times Picayuine should also continue to assess the safety of SE Louisiana as it has aound Katrina but has lapsed in recent times. Even those faults acknolwedged by the Corps' IPET study, such as system-in-name-only, no one's in charge, informed public, and safety criticality, have not been adequately addressed let alone remedied.

The real solution was suggested to us by the Dutch: put safety first and use a systems approach when safety is on the line. Anything less condems us to drown again and again.

Posted on Bob Marshall: LSU ouster of Ivor van Heerden removes most honest appraiser of city's levee failures on April 15, 2009, 9:08AM

Comment on: Gulf Coast recovery chief Janet Woodka discusses plans for office

If Ms Woodka wants to take on real Intractable problems let her try the grand daddy of them all, the one motivated them all -- flood protectio for greater New Orleans. Our protection will need get the city, state and many Federal agencies to work as smart as the Dutch. It will require engineers, adminstrators a total solution that is better than the system in name only that we had, have now and will have if we don'heed the lessons of Katrina.
Charity and other isolated recovery issues will be for naught if we flood again and don't have a real flood system with appropriate structural, non-structural and wetlands subsystems in place

Posted on Gulf Coast recovery chief Janet Woodka discusses plans for office on April 08, 2009,

Comment on: St. Charles council refuses to adopt new flood maps

Here we go again!

Starting with Cameron and now St Charles, one by one our parish governments are chosing the short term economic interests of their residents over their long term safety. This exactly what St. Charles decision to not adopt more scientific digital flood insurance rate maps. In the medium term these decisions will result in another Katrina in terms of unmitigated consequnces.

Although the New Orleans city government is following its consistent line of non-transparency by not informing resident about new risk information, it appears inevitable that they take a position that compromises our safety.

The Times-Picayune appears to be clearly on the side of ignoring risk and supporting the cities anti-elevation position. It is left to individual citizens to speak out of crtical safety issues.

Posted on St. Charles council refuses to adopt new flood maps on January 23, 2009, 8:32AM

Comment on: End the stonewalling: Army Corps of Engineers needs urgency on Category 5 plans on January

The Time-Picayune's call for speed versus quality has three tragic implications: First it shifts the focus away from the quality of the methods the Corps is using, secondly, it promotes individual, potential un-integrated projects that resulted in a "system in name only". And thirdly it assumes that Louisiana "officials" have the near and long term safety of citizens as their highest priority. Neither of these options is in the interest of Louisiana's citizens.

Regarding the Corps methods, the process the Corps adopted for decision making was not only complex it was fatally flawed by modern standards of best requirements engineering practices. Whereas the Corps asked Corps- and self-selected observers to evaluate a total system in terms of Congressional "results of value" such as return on investment and national ecology objectives, they should have identify the "real" stakeholders and asked them to identify THEIR stakes or needed results of value. This wasn't done and needs to be redone.

In it's IPET report, the Corps admitter that one of the root causes of the failure of the flood protection systems was it that was not an integrated system calling it a "system in name only". There is absolutely no evidence that the Corps has taken this to heart and looked for best practices, such as Systems Engineering for an approach to a safety-critical systems. Systems Engineering provides explicit mechanisms for managing risk, interfaces, requirements, and sustainability. None of these practices were in place and few of them have been correctly applied post-Katrina

Finally, Louisiana officials are as responsible for the Katrina failures as the Corps and despite the cosmetic shuffling of levee boards, continue to abrogate their responsibility for total system management Instead we find parish officials returning to form by denying real safety risks in the form of uncertified levees and blocking needs for home elevations.

The Road Home adopted a documented, official policy of speed before quality and wound up taking longer and costing more. Our levees are super-critical to our survival as a state where the quality of our safety protection is so low that national insurance companies will no longer write home owner policies. The Times-Picayune should strongly behind doing things right when it comes to risks to our person and properties.

Posted on End the stonewalling: Army Corps of Engineers needs urgency on Category 5 plans on January 20, 2009, 9:14AM