ktr00026

8/14/2019 KTR00026

1/24

Page 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTEASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

234 IN RE: KATRINA CANAL CIVIL ACTION

BREACHES CONSOLIDATED5 LITIGATION NO. 05-4182 "K" (2)6 JUDGE DUVAL

PERTAINS TO: LEVEE7 MAG. WILKINSON8 FILED IN:

9 05-4181, 05-4182, 05-4191,05-4568, 05-5237, 05-6073,0 05-6314, 05-6324, 05-6327,

05-6359, 06-0020, 06-1885,1 06-0225, 06-0886, 06-11208,

06-2278, 06-2287, 06-2346,2 06-2545, 06-3529, 06-4065,

06-4389, 06-4634, 06-4931,3 06-5032, 06-5042, 06-5159,

06-5163, 06-5367, 06-5471,4 06-5771, 06-5786, 06-5937,

06-7682, 07-0206, 07-0647,5 07-0993, 07-1284, 07-1286,

07-1288, 07-1289678

Deposition of CHAD A. MORRIS, 545 Shady

9 Lake Parkway, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70810,taken in the offices of Bruno & Bruno, 85520 Baronne St., Third Floor, New Orleans,

Louisiana on Thursday, the 23rd day of21 August, 2007 at 8:43 a.m.22232425

Page 2

23 APPEARANCES:4567 LAMBERT & NELSON

(By: Hugh P. Lambert, Esquire)8 701 Magazine St.

New Orleans, Louisiana 701309 (504) 581-1750

Attorneys for Plaintiffs0123 SUTTON LAW FIRM, LLC

(By: Charles E. Sutton, Jr., Esquire)4 2101 N. Hwy. 190

Suite 1055 Covington, Louisiana 70433

(985) 249-59916 Attorneys for Defendant,

Orleans Levee District789

LABORDE & NEUNER20 (By: Ben L. Mayeaux, Esquire)

One Petroleum Center, Suite 20021 1001 West Pinhook Road

Lafayette, Louisiana 7050322 (337) 237-7000

Attorneys for Defendant,23 Orleans Levee District2425

Page 3

12 APPEARANCES (continued):34. DUPLASS, ZWAIN, BOURGEOIS, MORTON,5 PFISTER & WEINSTOCK. (By: Gary M. Zwain, Esquire)6 3838 N. Causeway Blvd., Suite 2900. Metairie, Louisiana 700027 (504) 832-3700. Attorneys for Defendant,

8 Board of Commissioners for the. East Jefferson Levee District9 and Lake Borgne Levee District10111213 CHRISTOVICH & KEARNEY. (By: Elizabeth Cordes, Esquire)14 Pan American Life Center. 601 Poydras St.15 New Orleans, Louisiana 70130-6078. (504) 593-427216 Attorneys for Defendant,. Sewerage and Water Board of New17 Orleans181920

. BURGLASS & TANKERSLEY, L.L.C.21 (By: Monica Waldron, Esquire)

. 5213 Airline Drive22 Metairie, Louisiana 70001. (504) 836-222023 Attorneys for Defendant,. Parish of Jefferson2425

Page 4

12 APPEARANCES (continued):

3

4

5 JONES DAY. (By: Amy Payne, Esquire)6 2727 North Harwood Street

. Dallas, Texas 75201-1515

7 (214) 220-3939

. Attorneys for Washington Group8 International, Inc.

9

10

1112 LEAKE & ANDERSSON, L.L.P.

. (By: Marc Devenport, Esquire)

13 Suite 1700

. 1100 Poydras St.14 New Orleans, Louisiana 70163-1701

. (504) 585-7500

15 Attorneys for National Union

. Insurance Company1617

18

19 ALSO PRESENT:

2021

. MAPLES & KIRWAN

22 (By: Todd Campbell, Esquire)

. 902 Julia St.23 New Orleans, Louisiana 70113

. (504) 569-8732

24

25

Chad Morris on date 08/23/2007

Printed on 1/6/2009 6:05:33 PM Pa

8/14/2019 KTR00026

2/24

Page 5

2 ALSO PRESENT (continued):

3

4

5

John Wadsworth, CLVS

6 Hart Video of Louisiana, L.L.C.

(866) 649-4278

78

9

0

1

2 REPORTED BY:

3 MARGARET MCKENZIE, CCR, RPR, CMR, CRR

Certified Court Reporter

4

5

6

7

8

9

2021

22

23

24

25

Page 6

I N D E X

2

3 EXAMINATION BY:

4

5 MS. PAYNE.................................10

6

7 MR. SUTTON................................77

8

9

0 EXHIBITS:

1

2 Exhibit 1.................................16

3

4 Exhibit 2.................................30

5

6 Exhibit 3.................................357

8 Exhibit 4.................................45

9

20 Exhibit 5.................................59

21

22 Exhibit 6.................................62

23

24 Exhibit 7.................................71

25

Page 7

1 S T I P U L A T I O N

2 It is stipulated and agreed by and

3 between counsel for the parties hereto that

4 the deposition of the aforementioned witness

5 is hereby being taken under the Federal Rules

6 of Civil Procedure, for all purposes, in

7 accordance with law;

8 That the formalities of reading and9 signing are specifically not waived;

10 That the formalities of sealing,

11 certification and filing are specifically

12 waived;

13 That all objections, save those as to

14 the form of the question and the

15 responsiveness of the answer, are hereby

16 reserved until such time as this deposition,

17 or any part thereof, may be used or sought to

18 be used in evidence.

19

20 * * * * *

21

22 MARGARET MCKENZIE, Certified Court

23 Reporter, in and for the Parish of Orleans,

24 State of Louisiana, officiated in

25 administering the oath to the witness.

Page 8

1 CHAD A. MORRIS,

2 545 Shady Lake Parkway, Baton Rouge,

3 Louisiana 70810, after having been first duly

4 sworn by the above-mentioned court reporter,

5 did testify as follows:

6 VIDEOGRAPHER:

7 This is the video deposition of

8 Charles Morris given at 855 Baronne

9 Street in New Orleans, Louisiana.

10 Today is August 23, 2007. My name

11 is John Wadsworth with Hart Video,

12 LLC. The court reporter is

13 Margaret McKenzie with Johns

14 Pendleton & Associates.

15 Would the court reporter, please,

16 swear in the witness.17 CHAD A. MORRIS,

18 545 Shady Lake Parkway, Baton Rouge,

19 Louisiana 70810, after having been first duly

20 sworn by the above-mentioned court reporter,

21 did testify as follows:

22 MR. LAMBERT:

23 For the record, my name is Hugh

24 Lambert and I represent the

25 plaintiffs.


Printed on 1/6/2009 6:05:33 PM Pa

8/14/2019 KTR00026

3/24

Page 9

MS. PAYNE:

2 Amy Payne representing defendant,

3 Washington Group.

4 MR. SUTTON:

5 Charles Sutton for Orleans Levee

6 District.

7 MR. ZWAIN:

8 Gary Zwain, East Jefferson Levee9 District and Lake Borgne Basin

0 Levee District.

1 MR. MAYEAUX:

2 Ben Mayeaux, Orleans Levee

3 District.

4 MR. LAMBERT:

5 Also present --

6 MS. CORDES:

7 Elizabeth Cordes, Sewerage and

8 Water Board of New Orleans.

9 MR. SUTTON:

20 Also present is Mike Flores of

21 G.C.R. & Associates.

22 MR. LAMBERT:

23 And Mr. Flores is an expert?

24 MR. SUTTON:

25 A consulting expert.

Page 10

MR. LAMBERT:

2 Consulting.

3 And just so the record is clear,

4 we're reserving objections except

5 as to the form.

6 MS. PAYNE:

7 Okay. Thanks.

8 EXAMINATION BY MS. PAYNE:

9 Q. Good morning, Mr. Morris.

0 A. Good morning.

1 Q. We met earlier.

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. I represent defendant Washington

4 Group, but today I'm asking questions on

5 behalf of all defendants on the MRGO side of

6 the litigation. How are you?

7 A. I'm fine.

8 Q. I understand you've been deposed

9 before, but just a reminder about a couple

20 things. If you don't understand one of my

21 questions, let me know and I'll try to

22 clarify it.

23 A. Okay.

24 Q. And if you want to take a break at

25 any time, just let me know.

Page 11

1 A. Okay.

2 Q. Let's start off just talking a

3 little bit about your background. Can you

4 describe your educational background for me.

5 A. I have a Bachelor of Science Degree

6 in Surveying and Mapping from the University

7 of Florida.

8 Q. And you got that degree in 1991?9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And after you received your degree

11 where did you start working then?

12 A. In Baton Rouge for a company called

13 Hydro Consultants. We did all different

14 types of surveying, mostly industrial,

15 industrial surveying in plants and

16 hydrographic surveying and pipeline

17 surveying, topographic boundaries.

18 Q. And about how many employees did

19 that company have?

20 A. Thirty.

21 Q. And what job were you hired for,

22 what was your title?

23 A. Initially, I was the project

24 coordinator and later operations manager.

25 Q. When did you become operations

Page 12

1 manager?

2 A. I would have to look back at the

3 date. It was a -- probably shortly after I

4 became registered as a professional land

5 surveyor.

6 Q. And why did you leave that job?

7 A. For other opportunities.

8 Q. Was that the LandSource, Inc.?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And tell me about that.

11 A. LandSource is primarily a

12 commercial firm. And I was bringing the

13 industrial side to that, to that firm.

14 Q. Can you explain that, bringing the

15 industrial side to that --

16 A. My background was in, with17 industrial clients, so my -- I essentially

18 brought the ability to work for industrial

19 clients.

20 Q. Okay. Did you have any kind of

21 ownership interest in that company?

22 A. No.

23 Q. Just -- you were just an employee

24 of that?

25 A. Yes.


Printed on 1/6/2009 6:05:33 PM Pa

8/14/2019 KTR00026

4/24

Page 13

Q. And you were vice-president, is

2 that right?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Did you start out as vice-president

5 or was that a move you made later?

6 A. I wasn't there very long. I

7 started out as vice-president.

8 Q. Okay. And why did you leave that9 company?

0 A. To start my own company.

1 Q. And that's the CMor Consulting?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And when did you start that

4 company? I know it was 2006. When in 2006?

5 A. I believe it was in August.

6 Q. Do you have any employees?

7 A. No.

8 Q. You're the sole owner?

9 A. Yes.

20 Q. Can you describe the general nature

21 of your business.

22 A. A combination of industrial

23 surveying and legal services. The bulk of my

24 industrial work is done through a company

25 called Becht Engineering, who typically hire

Page 14

retired Exxon personnel. I essentially

2 retired 30 years early and did my work

3 through them.

4 Q. About what percentage of your work

5 is the legal services?

6 A. Half.

7 Q. And for the legal services side,

8 what kinds of things do you do?

9 A. Expert witness in survey-related

0 matters and anything that requires mapping.

1 Q. So you have -- can you tell me

2 about your experience as an expert in

3 litigation?

4 A. I guess the first couple of cases

5 were relatively small. There was a case with

6 Schlumberger having to do with marsh damage.

7 And there was a case with Entergy that was

8 relatively simple, had to do with a property

9 line and a guy anchor over a property line.

20 Probably the biggest case was Murphy Oil.

21 And I'm currently working on this and some

22 work up at Coffeyville on the oil spill.

23 Q. Let's start with the Schlumberger

24 case. That was in 2001?

25 A. Yes, I believe so.

Page 15

1 Q. And who hired you for that case?

2 What was the attorney or law firm?

3 A. I would have to look back. I was

4 actually hired through a company called

5 CK Associates. They were an environmental

6 firm that were hired to work on the case and

7 they needed a surveyor and they hired me. At

8 that time I was working with Hydro9 Consultants.

10 Q. Can you just generally describe

11 what kind of work you did on that case.

12 A. The case had to do with marsh buggy

13 and airboat tracks through an area of marsh

14 and damage. Basically we went out in

15 helicopters and flew into these remote areas

16 and measured the size of the tracks and the

17 depth of the depressions, tied them to

18 geodetic datums and went through some

19 depositions and it settled.

20 Q. So were you deposed in that case?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Just once?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Is that the September 17, 2001 date

25 on your CV?

Page 16

1 A. It sounds right.

2 Q. I'll go ahead and introduce a copy

3 of, this is Exhibit 1. It's, for the record,

4 Bates number MORR-000013-REL.

5 MR. LAMBERT:

6 That's the CV?

7 MS. PAYNE:

8 Yes. Here's a copy for you.

9 MR. LAMBERT:

10 Thank you.

11 THE WITNESS:

12 Yes. I would say that that date

13 was probably the date I was

14 deposed.


16 Q. Okay. And then the Entergy case,

17 can you describe that, the work you did in

18 that case for me.

19 A. We researched the legal records for

20 the servitude information, adjoining tracts.

21 It really was relatively simple. There was a

22 guy anchor that was across their property

23 line and there were some legal issues on

24 whether or not they had the right to have it

25 there based on how long it had been there.


Printed on 1/6/2009 6:05:33 PM Pa

8/14/2019 KTR00026

5/24

Page 17

My role was pretty simple, how far across the

2 property line was it and make a map and

3 depict that.

4 Q. And do you know what the result was

5 in that case?

6 A. I believe the judge decided that

7 Entergy owed someone some money.

8 Q. And were you deposed in that case?9 A. I don't think they did a

0 deposition, no. It was just testimony in

1 court. I could be wrong, but it was, again,

2 it was relatively simple.

3 Q. When you testified in court, was

4 that during a trial?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Was that -- is that the July 27,

7 2004 date on your CV?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And then do you remember who

20 retained you in that case?

21 A. Entergy.

22 Q. Yes.

23 A. Entergy.

24 Q. Oh, okay. Do you remember the law

25 firm that you were working with?

Page 18

A. I would -- I'd have to look.

2 Q. Okay. Moving on to Murphy Oil.

3 A. Okay.

4 Q. Do you remember the law firm or

5 attorney who retained you in that case?

6 A. George Frilot with Frilot Partridge

7 at the time.

8 Q. And can you describe for me the

9 work you did in that case?

0 A. Basically mapping everything

1 related to the levees, their tank, the oil

2 spill, the levees in the area that protected

3 the area. Lots of details on the tank

4 itself. 3D laser scanning of the tank inside

5 and out. And then preparation of maps and

6 exhibits and everything that was needed to

7 support other experts' work.

8 Q. And what was the general

9 geographical area that you were mapping?

20 A. St. Bernard Parish.

21 Q. And the dates given on your CV for

22 that case, January through September of 2006,

23 did you -- were you deposed during that time?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Did you give testimony in court

Page 19

1 during that time?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Do you recall approximately those

4 dates?

5 A. It was the class certification

6 hearing as far as the testimony and the -- I

7 don't remember the date.

8 Q. Okay.9 A. I'm sure we can find it though.

10 Q. Is this CV that's Exhibit 1, is

11 that up-to-date?

12 A. Yes. Although the Murphy case, I

13 guess, the dates could be continued. That's

14 still ongoing in some ways.

15 Q. Okay. Tell me about the oil spill

16 case in Coffeyville. Is that something that

17 you just started working on recently?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And what kind of work are you doing

20 in that case?

21 A. I'm working for Coffeyville

22 Resources on mapping, surveying details of,

23 you know, physical details of things in the

24 vicinity to help document what happened.

25 Q. And how big of a geographical area

Page 20

1 are you looking at?

2 A. Most of my work so far has been in

3 the refinery, but we've done some work to

4 capture aerial photography that extends

5 farther.

6 Q. Have you been actually there

7 on-site doing work?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. On your CV under the Publications,

10 I see Louisiana Engineer & Surveyor Journal,

11 2003-2004. Did you have an article in that

12 publication?

13 A. Several articles.

14 Q. Several articles. What were they

15 about?

16 A. The articles relate to my time as

17 President of the Louisiana Society of

18 Professional Surveyors. Basically the

19 president has an article that he or she

20 writes each time the publication is put

21 together. So sometimes it was discussing

22 things we need to do to promote surveying.

23 Probably the most interesting article, at

24 least I think the most interesting article,

25 related to wetland loss and what this area


Printed on 1/6/2009 6:05:33 PM Pa

8/14/2019 KTR00026

6/24

Page 21

will look like in the future if the

2 subsidence continues and nothing is done

3 about the wetlands.

4 Q. Mr. Morris, how are you being

5 compensated in this case, by the hour?

6 A. By the hour.

7 Q. And what is your hourly rate?

8 A. Two hundred seventy-five dollars.9 Q. Is that rate the same for

0 deposition and court testimony?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. I want to move on to your role in

3 the case, in this case.

4 A. Okay.

5 Q. What is your understanding of that

6 role?

7 A. That's a good question. I guess it

8 is assisting the group with physical data,

9 whether it be hard survey data, LIDAR data,

20 photogrammetry, mapping, software packages,

21 things like that.

22 Q. What was your specific assignment

23 for the case?

24 A. One of the initial specific

25 assignments had to do with the assisting in

Page 22

the modeling effort. And that was to provide

2 the hard data that the modelers needed to do

3 their work. Mapping the levee system,

4 mapping the breaches. And those were, I

5 guess, the initial primary objectives.

6 Q. When you refer to modeling, are you

7 talking about the model that the Delft team

8 put together?

9 A. Yes.

0 Q. Have you seen the Delft team's

1 expert report?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Did you provide input to that

4 report?

5 A. I provided some of the raw data.

6 Q. Aside from the raw data, did you

7 provide any other comments on the report or

8 feedback?

9 A. Some issues relating to datum,

20 making sure that when you referred to an

21 elevation, that the right datum was referred

22 to, but, other than that, very little.

23 Q. Did you provide data to anyone

24 other than or any experts or anyone other

25 than the Delft team?

Page 23

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Who else did you provide data to?

3 A. Bob Bea, Ivor, Paul Kemp, Shea

4 Penland. I guess that's about it.

5 Q. When you say Ivor, do you mean Ivor

6 Van Heerden?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. What data did you provide to Bob9 Bea?

10 A. Basically all the same data.

11 LIDAR, mapping of levees, breaches. It just

12 went to more than one person.

13 Q. Oh, the same -- so you copied these

14 other people on the data that --

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Okay. We're starting to talk over

17 each other a little bit.

18 A. I'm sorry.

19 Q. No. It's easy to do because you

20 forget that the court reporter has to take

21 everything down. I do. So -- okay. Was

22 there any data that you provided to Bob Bea,

23 Ivor Van Heerden, Shea Penland or Paul Kemp

24 other than the data you provided to Delft?

25 A. There was some historical

Page 24

1 photography that I sent to Bob Bea and that

2 was a, basically in the vicinity of the major

3 breaches. I talked to some of the local

4 photogrammetric firms and asked them to look

5 in their archives and find photography that

6 covered those areas on different dates.

7 Q. And --

8 A. And that was, I sent that to Bob

9 Bea and not to everyone else.

10 Q. About how far back did some of

11 those pictures go?

12 A. I would say the fifties or sixties

13 roughly.

14 Q. Was there any other data that you

15 provided to anyone else?

16 A. Not that I can remember right now.

17 Q. Had you worked with Paul Kemp

18 before this case?

19 A. No.

20 Q. Did Paul Kemp provide you with any

21 data?

22 A. He provided me with some data that

23 I sent on to the Delft team.

24 Q. Did you do any work on that data or

25 did you just pass it on?


Printed on 1/6/2009 6:05:33 PM Pa

8/14/2019 KTR00026

7/24

Page 25

A. I just passed it on.

2 Q. Do you know what that data was?

3 A. It related to the water heights

4 outside the levee system. A spreadsheet.

5 Q. Did Mr. Kemp provide you with any

6 data about the breaches?

7 A. No.

8 Q. What about Dr. Van Heerden, had you9 worked with him before this case?

0 A. No, I hadn't.

1 Q. And did you provide -- I mean --

2 sorry. Strike that. Did he provide you with

3 any data?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. I know about the eyewitness type

6 reports.

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Anything other than the eyewitness

9 accounts that you refer to in your expert

20 report?

21 A. Nothing that I would think of as

22 data, as hard data. More just discussions

23 of, I guess, levee systems and, you know,

24 areas that were high and low and things like

25 that, where he needed or wanted information.

Page 26

Q. Can you tell me a little bit more

2 about those discussions?

3 A. They were interested in the height

4 of the levees pre-Katrina, whether or not

5 hard data existed on that. They had done

6 some work in the Team Louisiana report that

7 attempted to document some of the major

8 breaches, but there wasn't a lot of hard

9 data, so they were interested in more

0 information that was, could be obtained that

1 would help refine some of that. I guess it

2 kind of related to those issues.

3 Q. It sounds like he was one of the

4 people giving you your assignments or

5 explaining what all you needed to do for the

6 case?

7 A. No. I wouldn't characterize it

8 that way. He was more one of the -- all of

9 the experts had a needs list or a wants list

20 or a wish list I guess would be the better

21 way to put it. And they would ask me whether

22 or not I could obtain that data, Bob Bea,

23 Paul Kemp, all of them. And, you know,

24 things that they wished they had, information

25 they wished they had. And I was one of the

Page 27

1 people they came to to see whether or not I

2 could obtain that data for them.

3 Q. Was there any data that some of the

4 experts on the team wanted that you couldn't

5 get?

6 A. The pre-Katrina levee height has

7 been an issue. The details of exactly how

8 high everything was pre-Katrina.9 Q. Why has that been an issue?

10 A. Because it took a long time for us

11 to get the Corps' data on that.

12 Q. So it was just a matter of not

13 having access to the data?

14 A. Primarily.

15 Q. Do you have access to that data

16 now?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. On the pre-Katrina levee heights?

19 A. Yes. At least what the Corps had

20 in their database.

21 Q. Is there any data on pre-Katrina

22 levee height that you were looking for that

23 still, that you still don't have?

24 A. There may be some more data that

25 has been surveyed. Some of it might have

Page 28

1 been surveyed post-Katrina, but still would

2 be meaningful pre-Katrina if there wasn't

3 damage in the area.

4 Q. With the data that you have

5 available to you now, do you feel like you

6 have a good picture of the pre-Katrina levee

7 heights?

8 A. It can always be better, but I

9 think pretty good, yes.

10 Q. When you say it could always be

11 better, can you give me any specific

12 examples?

13 A. I would love to have someone to

14 come up with a survey that was done by

15 professional surveyors that are reputable for

16 every inch of the levee system. I don't

17 think that will happen, but it doesn't mean

18 we will stop looking.

19 Q. Have you met or spoken with John

20 Kilpatrick?

21 A. Kilpatrick. Help me. Who is he?

22 Q. Another expert in the case. You

23 may not have.

24 A. I don't believe so, unless he was

25 on a conference call or something.


Printed on 1/6/2009 6:05:33 PM Pa

8/14/2019 KTR00026

8/24

Page 29

Q. Okay.

2 A. Not in any detail.

3 Q. So my understanding is that other

4 than providing the hard data, the input for

5 the models and other data to the various

6 experts, you're not offering any other

7 opinions in the case?

8 A. I would think that there are places9 where I will eventually offer opinions as

0 they relate to datums and survey-related

1 issues. I haven't to this point, I haven't

2 been asked to to this point, but I have those

3 skills if they are required.

4 Q. Okay. So some day you might be,

5 but right now you're not, is that right?

6 A. I think that's probably fair.

7 Q. Okay. I have a couple things here

8 that I'm pretty sure you didn't provide

9 information on, I just want to confirm this.

20 You didn't provide any information on timing

21 of breaches, right?

22 A. No.

23 Q. Correct?

24 MS. CORDES:

25 Excuse me. Could I ask you both to

Page 30

speak up just a little bit louder,

2 please?

3 THE WITNESS:

4 Sure.


6 Q. I'll ask it again louder. Just

7 confirming, you didn't provide any

8 information on timing of the breaches, is

9 that correct?

0 A. That's correct.

1 Q. And you didn't provide any

2 information on the development of the

3 breaches over time, how they may have

4 progressed?

5 A. That's also correct.

6 Q. Mr. Morris, I'm handing you what7 has been marked as Exhibit No. 2

8 (indicating). It's a Re-Notice of Videotaped

9 Deposition for today for your deposition.

20 Have you seen this document before?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Can you turn -- when have you seen

23 it?

24 A. In e-mails, I would assume. It was

25 sent to me shortly after it was received. I

Page 31

1 saw it again yesterday.

2 Q. Okay. Can you turn with me to the

3 last page, Exhibit A. This is just a list of

4 materials, documents that have been

5 requested. Have you looked at this list

6 before?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Have you gathered the materials9 requested on this list?

10 A. I believe it's, that this data has

11 been provided. We can certainly go through

12 the details of it.

13 Q. So, as far as you know, all the

14 data on this list has already been provided?

15 A. I think so.

16 Q. Okay.

17 A. I don't know whether or not you've

18 received copies of all invoices or those

19 details.

20 Q. Okay. Well, we might just go

21 through it real quick.

22 A. Okay.

23 Q. All the materials that you've

24 considered or relied upon in the litigation

25 as far as you know have been provided to the

Page 32

1 defendants?

2 A. Yes, I think so. Obviously, every

3 textbook I ever read wasn't provided, but I

4 think the pertinent data was provided.

5 Q. Okay. And are there any updates to

6 your report? I think this actually has the

7 July 28, it's the wrong date, it should be

8 July 30th report.

9 A. No. It has not been updated.

10 Q. Okay. Do you have any documents

11 pertaining to the model, the Kok and Vrijling

12 model, that you haven't already produced?

13 A. No.

14 Q. I'm looking at number 5 on the

15 list. Any and all documents or data provided

16 by the deponent to the Delft University of17 Technology team. So have we received

18 everything that, have the defendants received

19 everything that you provided to Delft?

20 A. I believe so.

21 Q. And number 6, the communications

22 between yourself and Delft University. Have

23 we received those as well, as far as you

24 know?

25 A. Most of those communications were


Printed on 1/6/2009 6:05:33 PM Pa

8/14/2019 KTR00026

9/24

Page 33

verbal. It's essentially asking for

2 information, asking for data. I don't know

3 the details of which you need that or what

4 information you need on that.

5 Q. Okay. So the invoices, number 10,

6 the invoices prepared and submitted by you

7 for work performed in connection with the

8 litigation and maybe the travel records,9 that's the only thing that we don't have?

0 A. I wouldn't -- since I live in Baton

1 Rouge, I don't have a great deal in terms of

2 travel records. Typically -- last night was

3 an exception, I spent the night here, but

4 typically I just drive back and forth. So

5 it's not like I'm flying in from the

6 Netherlands.

7 Q. So there might be some invoices and

8 that's about it?

9 A. Yes.

20 Q. Okay.

21 A. Now, I should say, and it was

22 provided, at least referred to, the biggest

23 piece of information that was not used in the

24 reports here is the Corps data. And we

25 received that a week before these were due.

Page 34

And it's 500 gigabytes worth of data. So

2 there is a bunch of information there that

3 may be used in the future, but is not in

4 these documents (indicating).

5 Q. Okay.

6 A. And I assume you have access to

7 that same information.

8 Q. Okay. I'm going to come back and

9 talk a little bit more about the Corps data

0 in a while, but thanks for mentioning that.

1 When were you first contacted about

2 working on this case?

3 A. April or May of this year.

4 Q. And do you remember who contacted

5 you?

6 A. Someone in Joe Bruno's office. I

7 think Flo called me.

8 Q. Do you know Flo's last name?

9 A. Florian Buecler. I hope that's

20 close.

21 Q. Do you know how to spell it?

22 A. No, ma'am.

23 Q. Okay. And what was the assignment,

24 the initial assignment, at that time?

25 A. They basically knew they needed a

Page 35

1 surveyor and wanted to know whether or not I

2 was interested in helping them.

3 Q. Did they provide you any data to

4 get started with, any materials?

5 A. No. They were more asking me for

6 information, what I could help with.

7 Q. Who all have you met with or had

8 conference calls with in connection with this9 case other than the people we've already

10 discussed in preparing your report?

11 A. Other than the experts, a whole

12 bunch of lawyers. And I wouldn't say in

13 connection with preparing the report, but

14 that's who I've been dealing with for the

15 last, you know, since May. And really just

16 primarily the small group of experts.

17 Q. Do you have an estimate of about

18 how many hours you've spent working on this

19 matter since then?

20 A. Certainly not full time, but a

21 substantial number of hours since May. I

22 would -- maybe half time, something like

23 that, 20 hours a week, maybe a little more.

24 Q. Okay. Mr. Morris, I'm handing you

25 a copy of what's been marked as Exhibit 3

Page 36

1 (indicating). This is your expert report

2 from this case dated July 30, 2007. Is this

3 a complete copy of your report?

4 A. It appears to be.

5 Q. So I just want to go through some

6 things in your report. Start at the

7 beginning, I think, here on the first page of

8 text. On section 1.0, the LIDAR data, are

9 there any sources besides the IPET website

10 for the LIDAR data?

11 A. Yes. There's Atlas, atlas.lsu.edu,

12 but it's the same data.

13 Q. It's exactly the same identical

14 data?

15 A. Well, the Atlas data has not been

16 adjusted to the 2004.65 datum. So the stuff17 on the IPET site is better for the purposes

18 of this case.

19 Q. Okay. And how many sets of LIDAR

20 data are on the IPET website?

21 A. Several. There's the

22 pre-Katrina -- well, I guess we can just run

23 through these. The 5 meter resolution

24 pre-Katrina data. There's 1 foot resolution

25 pre-Katrina data of just the levees. There


Printed on 1/6/2009 6:05:33 PM Pa

8/14/2019 KTR00026

10/24

Page 37

is some 3 foot resolution pre-Katrina data of

2 portions of Metro New Orleans. And there's 2

3 foot resolution post-Katrina data of some of

4 the levees. And there's 3 foot resolution

5 post-Katrina data of other portions of the

6 levees.

7 Q. So the sets that you've listed here

8 in your report, are those all of the data9 sets available on IPET?

0 A. There's also -- it's not really

1 LIDAR, but there is bathymetry data.

2 Q. What is that?

3 A. That's hydrographic survey data.

4 Q. Okay. So out of the LIDAR data

5 that's available on IPET, you looked at it

6 and used all of that data?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. In the first, the 5 meter

9 resolution pre-Katrina data of the entire

20 area, what encompasses entire area?

21 A. It's available for the whole State.

22 Q. The whole State. And do you know

23 when the pre-Katrina LIDAR data was taken?

24 A. 2002, I believe.

25 Q. Is that for both the 5 meter

Page 38

resolution pre-Katrina and the 1 foot

2 resolution pre-Katrina data?

3 A. No. I think the 1 foot was much

4 later.

5 Q. Oh, okay. Do you know what date

6 that was?

7 A. I don't have that metadata in front

8 of me, but it can be obtained from the IPET

9 site.

0 Q. And the post-Katrina LIDAR data, do

1 you know when that data was taken?

2 A. No. We'd have to look on the site

3 for the metadata information.

4 Q. Can you describe just generally how

5 the LIDAR data works?

6 A. Greatly over simplified, a flying7 airplane with a sensor in it and the sensor

8 maps the ground and it maps the elevations of

9 the ground. I'm sure it's -- it's either

20 phase based or time-of-flight based, but it

21 sends a signal out and waits for it to return

22 and measures how long it took and calculates

23 the distance from the airplane to the ground

24 feature.

25 Q. Do you know what the error factor

Page 39

1 is to LIDAR data?

2 A. My understanding is that they spec

3 it to a half a foot. And my experience has

4 been that it's typically a little better than

5 that, but you wouldn't want to count on it

6 better than about a half a foot.

7 Q. When you say half a foot, does that

8 mean half a foot either way? Like it might9 be a half a foot higher or lower or do you

10 mean --

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Okay.

13 A. I believe that's the spec. It's

14 kind of like national mapping standards

15 though for photogrammetric firms. That's

16 what they say they can do, and in reality you

17 can usually glean a little bit more

18 information from it, but they can't testify

19 that it's any better than that.

20 Q. On the list of the LIDAR data sets,

21 why the different 2 foot resolution and 3

22 foot resolution? For example, the difference

23 between D and E, are those different portions

24 of the levee or are they two different --

25 A. They cover different portions of

Page 40

1 the levee system.

2 Q. Do you know which portions are --

3 strike that. For the 2 foot resolution data,

4 do you know which portions of the levees that

5 covers?

6 A. I don't remember.

7 Q. Was LIDAR intended to be used for

8 anything other than modeling or measuring the

9 ground features?

10 A. It's used for lots of things these

11 days.

12 Q. What other kinds of things is LIDAR

13 used for?

14 A. There's -- they are trying to get

15 to where they can measure underwater with

16 forms of it. The applications are like

17 anything else that's new or relatively new,

18 the applications could be endless in how it's

19 utilized. Each -- it depends on who is

20 looking at the data set and what they are

21 trying to accomplish. Obviously, you need to

22 understand and recognize the limitations of

23 the data set, but how it can be used, that's

24 an open-ended question in my mind.

25 Q. When you say recognize the


Printed on 1/6/2009 6:05:33 PM Pag

8/14/2019 KTR00026

11/24

Page 41

limitations in the data set, what type of

2 limitations do you mean?

3 A. One of them is certainly the

4 accuracy issue that you brought up. There's

5 resolution issues depending on the quality of

6 the data and what you can see in the data.

7 Q. So if it's say 5 meter

8 resolution --9 A. You are not going to pick a

0 floodwall off of that data set.

1 Q. The 1 foot and, you know, and 2, 3

2 foot resolution of the levees, both

3 pre-Katrina and post-Katrina, do you know

4 whether that data picks up the interior

5 levees, like other than the ones around the

6 entire polder, like, for example, the 40

7 Arpent, St. Bernard back levee that runs

8 through the middle of that polder?

9 A. They're not included in those data

20 sets. That levee is not included in the

21 post-Katrina LIDAR data sets.

22 Q. Is it included in the pre-Katrina

23 sets?

24 A. In the 5 meter. Not in the 1

25 meter. Except at the ends where it might tie

Page 42

into another levee.

2 Q. The 5 meter resolution, is that a

3 small enough resolution to pick up those

4 interior local levees?

5 A. You can -- yes. There are

6 limitations though. You wouldn't want to

7 assume that it's perfect.

8 Q. When you say limitations --

9 A. Well, a 5 meter square is 15 feet

0 square, and if you're looking at a levee that

1 is only 10 feet wide at the top, you cannot

2 assume that at every location that you're

3 going to get a data point that is at the top

4 and accurately represents the top of that

5 levee. It's a matter of pixel size.

6 Q. So some of the parts of the levee

7 system, like the floodwalls and sheet piling

8 that runs along the top of those systems, are

9 all of those picked up -- those aren't all

20 picked up by the LIDAR, right?

21 A. Many of those are difficult to map

22 in the LIDAR, difficult to obtain elevations

23 on the LIDAR. That's one of the things, one

24 of the reasons we were looking for the

25 additional data, Corps data, to help with

Page 43

1 some of the pre-Katrina heights.

2 Q. Okay. Well, post-Katrina as well

3 for the sheet piling and the floodwalls?

4 A. To some extent, but in most cases

5 post-Katrina we're looking at damaged areas

6 which are wider and bigger, so we're not

7 looking at -- we're not as concerned with the

8 height of an existing standing wall. We're9 more looking at damaged areas which are

10 easier to pick up.

11 Q. Okay. I want to move on to the

12 section 2.0 in aerial photography. The first

13 sentence there says: "Aerial photography of

14 the area was obtained from several sources."

15 Are there any sources other than those that

16 are listed here that you obtained aerial

17 photography from?

18 A. Yes. Not for use in the, not for

19 use in the model, but what I referred to

20 before on the detailed kind of historical

21 stuff that was done for Bob Bea.

22 Q. Okay. But as far as what you used,

23 what you provided to the Delft team, it's

24 just from these two sources listed?

25 A. Yes, I think so.

Page 44

1 Q. The pre-Katrina 2005 aerials,

2 they're listed on subheading A under section

3 2.0, do you know when in 2005 those were

4 taken?

5 A. Again, we'd have to look at the

6 metadata. It was pre-Katrina though, so --

7 Q. And the post-Katrina aerial

8 photography, did that come from only those

9 two dates that you listed in your report?

10 A. It may have been inclusive. I

11 think I have some data on that. I can look.

12 There were problems with the air space

13 immediately following Katrina relating to

14 Presidential overflights and things like that

15 that limited when photogrammetric firms could

16 be up there just doing what they wanted to

17 do. It appears that the photography flown by

18 GE in the vicinity of New Orleans were just

19 those two dates.

20 Q. So that's August 31, 2005 and

21 September 2, 2005?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. So in section 3.0, Flood Protection

24 System, in describing your work for preparing

25 the maps and what you provided to the Delft



8/14/2019 KTR00026

12/24

Page 45

team, the Esri ArcView software, I didn't

2 have that software, so I had somebody who did

3 have software printout a PDF which is

4 supposed to depict what the files show. And

5 I want to show that to you and see if --

6 A. Okay.

7 MS. PAYNE:

8 Are we on Exhibit 4?9 COURT REPORTER:

0 Yes.

1 THE WITNESS:

2 Yes. We should be on 4.


4 Q. So I'm handing you what's been

5 marked as Exhibit 4. Does that look like an

6 accurate depiction of what was on the files

7 that had to be read by ArcView software

8 (indicating)?

9 A. Yes. That looks like it.

20 Q. So essentially you just were

21 mapping the levee footprint of the area and

22 then the sill elevation of the breaches?

23 A. That's right.

24 Q. Okay.

25 A. And the width of the breaches.

Page 46

Q. And did you also provide data to

2 the Delft team about the topographical

3 elevations for the whole area?

4 A. The pre-Katrina 5 meter LIDAR.

5 Q. Do you know whether that data has

6 been provided to the defendants?

7 A. It's available on the IPET site.

8 Q. Okay. So you haven't, that you

9 know of, given defendants a copy of exactly

0 what you gave to Delft, but it's exactly

1 what's on the IPET site?

2 A. Yes. As long as you use the

3 adjusted data. There are different pieces of

4 data available there. You want the stuff

5 that's adjusted to the 2004.65 datum to be

6 consistent.

7 Q. I want to back up just for a minute

8 to that first section, the introductory

9 paragraph of your report on the first page.

20 The first sentence refers to survey data,

21 spatial data, aerial photography, LIDAR data,

22 et cetera, related to the hurricane

23 protection system in the Greater New Orleans

24 area. We talked about the LIDAR data and the

25 aerial photography. What survey data are you

Page 47

1 referring to here?

2 A. There is some survey data available

3 in the IPET report and also in the hard drive

4 that was provided that shows levee heights,

5 for instance, in some areas. And there's

6 bathometric survey data showing hydrographic

7 surveys of the canals. So those are two

8 examples.9 Q. And is that data that you have

10 provided to the Delft team or expect to

11 provide in the future?

12 A. Both.

13 Q. What format did you provide that

14 survey data that you've already provided to

15 the Delft team?

16 A. One format would have been a

17 spreadsheet of levee, top of levee

18 elevations.

19 Q. Any other formats?

20 A. There were, in the vicinity of some

21 of the canals, there was data in the IPET

22 report relating to the levee heights that

23 would have been provided as copies of those

24 pages essentially.

25 Q. Copies of the pages out of the IPET

Page 48

1 report?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. So part of the time you were giving

4 them like the ArcView files and you actually

5 did the mapping yourself of the levee

6 footprint and then part of the time you were

7 just giving them data that they could modify

8 what you'd given them before? I'm confused

9 about how all the data fits together.

10 A. Can you ask that again? I'm not

11 sure what the question is.

12 Q. Yeah.

13 MR. LAMBERT:

14 Let me do an objection to that

15 question.


17 Q. That was a terrible question. Let

18 me ask it again. I guess I'm a little

19 confused about how, about who was mapping,

20 for example, the pre-Katrina levee system.

21 You were giving them the data that's read by

22 the ArcView software and the various files,

23 but then you also were giving them hard

24 copies, pages of the IPET report. Did they

25 have the ability to go in and modify what you



8/14/2019 KTR00026

13/24

Page 49

had done with the ArcView files or did you,

2 were you giving them different versions?

3 MR. LAMBERT:

4 Objection.


6 Q. I'm probably not asking -- do you

7 understand what I'm getting at?

8 MR. LAMBERT:9 Who's they?

0 MS. PAYNE:

1 The Delft team.

2 MR. LAMBERT:

3 Okay.

4 THE WITNESS:

5 In my view, I was providing them

6 raw data. How they used it in

7 their modeling system is above my

8 head, and I'm not a modeler, but I

9 would provide the best data that I

20 could, whether it was the work that

21 was done mapping the levee

22 footprints. And if there was data

23 that would supplement that, like

24 data in the IPET report, pages that

25 show the height of floodwalls that

Page 50

cannot easily be extracted from the

2 LIDAR data, I'd view that as a

3 supplement that they would utilize

4 in their modeling.


6 Q. Okay. That answered my question,

7 which is amazing considering how poorly I

8 asked the question to start with, so thanks.

9 So the spatial data that you refer

0 to in the first paragraph of your report,

1 what kind of data is that referring to?

2 A. Spatial data is really a broad

3 term. It's, I guess, the ability to take

4 photography, LIDAR, survey data and put them

5 all together in a way that you can glean

6 meaningful information from them. So it's

7 just a broad term that basically says you can

8 handle this stuff and put it into the right

9 coordinate system and handle the datum and

20 all those issues and be able to extract

21 meaningful information from them.

22 Q. Okay. And then when you refer to

23 just the et cetera here in that first

24 sentence, is there any other data that you

25 were providing to them that we haven't

Page 51

1 already talked about? When I say them, I

2 mean the Delft team.

3 A. I don't think there is anything

4 else that I provided to them, but this

5 sentence kind of talks about what I've been

6 asked to do in a broader sense. And there's

7 other data. A lot of it's in the 500 gigs

8 that I'm really in the process of going9 through.

10 Q. Okay. So back to the section 3.0

11 of your report about the flood protection

12 system. The map of the levee and floodwall

13 structures that you prepared, did that

14 include the interior local levee in St.

15 Bernard Parish that runs along the 40 Arpent

16 Canal and the Florida Canal?

17 A. No. I don't think we mapped that.

18 We were focused on the exterior.

19 Q. Okay. But then those interior

20 levees may have been picked up in the 5 meter

21 resolution LIDAR data for the interior?

22 A. Certainly they were in the LIDAR.

23 Q. But subject to the limitations we

24 discussed earlier that --

25 A. In terms of the height, yes. In

Page 52

1 terms of the location, it's pretty easy to

2 see where they are on the LIDAR.

3 Q. Did you use any other information

4 besides the LIDAR to determine the height of

5 those interior levees?

6 A. The 40 Arpent levee?

7 Q. Yes.

8 A. I've surveyed them, portions of it,

9 during the work on Murphy.

10 Q. Did you use any of that information

11 for this case?

12 A. We -- they asked a general

13 question, how high is this levee. And I

14 looked at the LIDAR, I looked at some of the

15 work I'd done previously and picked a number

16 that was reasonable. I believe the number we

17 used was 6 and a half feet. And then that

18 levee, that levee varies, as all levees do.

19 So if you wanted to argue and say there are

20 some areas that are 7 feet, you'd be right.

21 If you wanted to argue and say there are some

22 areas that are as low as 6 feet, you would

23 also be right, but 6 and a half feet was a

24 reasonable average. And to the extent that,

25 yes, I did look back at some other data other



8/14/2019 KTR00026

14/24

Page 53

than the LIDAR to come up with that number,

2 but I didn't provide a detailed top of levee

3 profile. It was a pick a number that was a

4 good representative average essentially of

5 that levee.

6 Q. Okay. Do you know the size of the

7 geographical areas for the different basins,

8 like the St. Bernard basin, for example?9 A. They are very easy to calculate. I

0 don't know them off the top of my head.

1 Q. Okay. I want to move on to section

2 4.0 of your report, Breach Mapping. What

3 exactly is sill height?

4 A. Sill height, my understanding is

5 the average height of the bottom of the

6 breach.

7 Q. Okay. So would that be -- it would

8 just always be the top of where the levee or

9 the floodwall was? And so if it was a

20 section that didn't have a breach, it would

21 just be the top of the levee and then, if

22 there was a breach, it would be the new top,

23 however far down that went?

24 A. I think that's a fair

25 characterization.

Page 54

Q. And for purposes of mapping the

2 breaches, what did you consider a breach?

3 A. The definition we used was any

4 visible, whether in the LIDAR or in the

5 photography, we put the two together,

6 anyplace that there was a lowering of the

7 crown elevations. And that's why you see 200

8 of them here. And in other reports, the IPET

9 report, for instance, they call it one big

0 area. It is just we went through pretty

1 meticulously looking at these. And, you

2 know, how they were utilized later, that gets

3 into whether or not someone needed that level

4 of detail, but for this, for the mapping that

5 we did, we essentially called anyplace that

6 the crown of the levee was broken a breach.

7 And if that crown -- lots of these things --

8 it is not a tabletop. There are places where

9 it's lower, lower, kind of comes up a little

20 bit, goes back down a little bit

21 (indicating). If it comes back up to a

22 crown, that's where we ended a breach and

23 went along until we found another one.

24 Q. So for the LIDAR data, for example,

25 would you compare the pre-Katrina

Page 55

1 measurements with the post-Katrina

2 measurements and see where the crown level

3 differed?

4 A. No. You can go through the LIDAR

5 data and very clearly see the undisturbed

6 areas and also very clearly see locations

7 where there are breaches.

8 Q. So it's not --9 A. Especially coupled with the

10 photography. You put the two together and

11 you can visually see those locations. And

12 that's how we did our mapping.

13 Q. I'm trying to get an idea of how

14 small a breach would have to be for it not to

15 be picked up on your mapping. I mean, you

16 know, how much a levee would have to have

17 gone down.

18 A. I think we would have picked up

19 anything that was more than a couple of feet.

20 If it was -- and it depends on the feature.

21 If we're dealing with an earthen levee, it's

22 pretty easy to see the top of that. If

23 you're dealing with a floodwall that leaned

24 over a little bit, that's certainly more

25 difficult.

Page 56

1 Q. So back to this paragraph under

2 section 4.0 in your report. The second

3 sentence, "It should be noted that the

4 elevation of the sill could not be mapped in

5 this manner on breaches which extended below

6 the water level at the time of the LIDAR

7 flight." That's, I think we were talking

8 about this earlier, that's because the LIDAR

9 doesn't --

10 A. It stops at the water.

11 Q. So you can't see anything --

12 A. All meaningful data is wherever it

13 hits the water, that's what it calls the

14 ground essentially.

15 Q. Okay. And since the LIDAR, when

16 the LIDAR flights were taken, there was still

17 water covering up some of the breach sites,

18 right?

19 A. Some of the breaches went below sea

20 level.

21 Q. And so the next sentence of your

22 report says: "For those breaches, we

23 utilized eyewitness accounts of the depths of

24 the breaches, which were provided by Dr. Ivor

25 Van Heerden." Can you explain to me how that



8/14/2019 KTR00026

15/24

Page 57

process worked?

2 A. Basically, I pointed out areas

3 where we had problems. We didn't have data.

4 In the spreadsheet that we put together we

5 just tagged them with a zero elevation.

6 Essentially we had no data on 17th Street,

7 some of the other big breaches that went

8 below where the water was when the flight was9 done. And we talked to the Team Louisiana

0 people who had been on the ground and they

1 were able to provide data that was, I would

2 characterize it at the time, it was their

3 best estimate of that sill height elevation.

4 Q. What do you know about how the Team

5 Louisiana people, how they went about

6 arriving at those best estimates?

7 A. It was -- I think it was a

8 combination of they had photographs on a

9 particular day. They knew that the water

20 height was say around a 2 and the waters

21 barely getting across this area, so call it a

22 1. There was, I think, some areas where they

23 were out there with a tape, but it was not

24 what I would characterize as something that

25 was done by a professional surveyor and was

Page 58

extremely accurate. It was the best

2 information that was available at the time.

3 We now have additional information in the 500

4 gigs of Corps data.

5 Q. And that would be the sonar survey?

6 A. Some of it's the hydrographic

7 survey, yes.

8 Q. Hydrographic?

9 A. Yes. And in my view, there's

0 potentially room for refinement of the model

1 if the differences are deemed to be

2 significant.

3 Q. I have another question about sill

4 height. I guess you would have some breaches

5 where the lowest part or the bottom part of

6 the breach is pretty much a horizontal line,

7 so the sill height would be the same from the

8 beginning of, from one end of the breach to

9 the other breach, if that makes sense in

20 theory?

21 A. I would -- in theory, yes, but as I

22 alluded to before in a practical matter,

23 certainly nothing's a tabletop. We, in

24 looking at these breaches, we went through

25 and picked a few elevations and essentially

Page 59

1 picked an average, kind of what I referred to

2 when I talked about that levee. We did not

3 go through and do an extremely detailed cross

4 section of the top of the sill on every

5 breach.

6 Q. Okay. So for one breach, let's say

7 it's like half of an oval, I mean, it is not

8 a flat bottom, then the sill height wouldn't9 necessarily be the lowest point or the

10 highest point, it would be more of an

11 average?

12 A. Yes. That's what we attempted to

13 do, more of an average.

14 Q. Okay.

15 MR. LAMBERT:

16 Do you want a coffee break?

17 THE WITNESS:

18 I'm fine.

19 MR. LAMBERT:

20 Keep going.


22 Q. I'm handing you what's been marked

23 as Exhibit 5.

24 Counsel, here is a copy for you

25 (indicating).

Page 60

1 This, for the record, has a Bates

2 number of MORR-00001-REL. Mr. Morris, this

3 was one of the, I think this was an Excel

4 spreadsheet that was produced to the

5 defendants in the case. Can you describe for

6 us what this is?

7 A. This is a simplified version of the

8 Shape file that we provided that had the

9 breach locations and the sill heights.

10 Essentially it's really everything that is

11 in the Shape file, except instead of having a

12 beginning and ending line segment it has a

13 center location. So it -- the center

14 locations and State plane coordinates would

15 allow somebody that knows how to use mapping

16 software and what these coordinates mean to

17 pin down this location in the world.

18 Q. So the x-y coordinates on this

19 spreadsheet are what you referred to on this

20 first page of your report, those are the

21 coordinates for the Louisiana State Plane

22 Coordinate System, South Zone, NAD83?

23 A. Yes. And the unit is U.S. survey

24 flood.

25 Q. So the breach ID number listed in



8/14/2019 KTR00026

16/24

Page 61

the left-hand column of this table, do those

2 breach ID numbers correspond with the first

3 figure, 4.1 or 4-1, in your report?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Okay. So, just for example, it

6 looks like on figure 4-1 of your report, the

7 breach sites or breach ID numbers 9 and 10,

8 those are the two breaches on the east side9 of the Industrial Canal?

0 A. Yes.

1 Q. That go into the Lower Ninth Ward

2 there?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Okay. And so those numbers then

5 correspond with the breach ID numbers on this

6 chart?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Okay. So for breach ID 2 on this

9 chart, for example, I notice that the sill

20 elevation is marked negative 3.5. I guess

21 that's feet, right?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Do you know the source of the

24 negative numbers for this chart that you did?

25 A. When the LIDAR was flown in some of

Page 62

these areas they had done some work to, when

2 I say they, the Corps or whoever was making

3 repairs, had done some work that isolated the

4 breach, essentially sandbagging the canal,

5 and it exposed the breach to the LIDAR. So

6 in some places we have data that is below sea

7 level in the LIDAR.

8 Q. Okay.

9 A. Because they exposed it through the

0 work that they did to get the water out.

1 Q. Okay.

2 A. So this would have come from the

3 LIDAR data.

4 Q. Mr. Morris, I'm handing you what's

5 been marked as Exhibit 6 (indicating). For

6 the record, the Bates number on this document

7 is MORR-000002-REL. Mr. Morris, do you

8 recognize this document?

9 A. Yes.

20 Q. This is an e-mail from you to Mr.

21 Kok from June 28, 2007.

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Can you describe for me, what the

24 purpose of the e-mail?

25 A. These were what were recognized to

Page 63

1 be places that had been underwater, breaches

2 that had been underwater, and these were

3 areas where I received information on these

4 sill heights from Ivor Van Heerden and

5 relayed that information to the Delft team.

6 And, as you can see, number 2 is a minus 3

7 here. And we picked up from the LIDAR minus

8 3 and a half. So a slight difference, but in9 my mind that tells us that, you know, both

10 numbers were pretty accurate because you

11 could certainly try to poke holes in the

12 difference in a half a foot, but I would

13 think that either source was no better than a

14 half a foot from a relative precision.

15 Q. So when we were talking earlier

16 about the eyewitness accounts that you got

17 from Dr. Van Heerden, are all of those

18 reflected in this e-mail?

19 A. Yes. In terms of the height of

20 breaches that we recognized to be potential

21 problem breaches because they were known to

22 have been underwater.

23 Q. So, as I understand it, the Exhibit

24 No. --

25 A. 5 is the spreadsheet and 6 is the

Page 64

1 e-mail.

2 Q. So Exhibit No. 5 is the data that

3 you essentially got from the LIDAR readings?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And then the only changes to that

6 were the eyewitness accounts from Dr. Van

7 Heerden in Exhibit No. 6?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Okay. So when I looked at this the

10 other day, I noticed some of these numbers

11 from the LIDAR went down, and that made sense

12 to me because I know LIDAR doesn't see below

13 water level. I mean, that's the main

14 explanation for why the sill height was

15 actually lower than what was reflected in

16 LIDAR, is that right?

17 A. Basically, when we went through

18 with the LIDAR, if we -- in hindsight, I wish

19 we would have done it slightly differently.

20 If we couldn't get any information, we just

21 called it a zero. And so if you see things

22 in here that are zeros, unless there was some

23 really odd coincidence that it actually had a

24 zero height, we essentially had no data. In

25 hindsight I wish we would have put no data



8/14/2019 KTR00026

17/24

Page 65

when we sent it, but if it was a zero and it

2 went down, yes, it came from the table. If

3 in this initial spreadsheet (indicating), I

4 mean, starting from the top, we get down to,

5 you know, through the first ten or eleven you

6 see that there are some negative numbers

7 there. That was done based on LIDAR and it

8 was essentially, if it was exposed when the9 airplane flew over, we can get data there.

0 That's how it was done.

1 Q. So for breach IDs 9 and 10, I

2 notice that the original measurement from the

3 LIDAR is a negative number, negative 0.8 for

4 breach ID 9 and negative 2.5 for breach ID

5 10. And then from the eyewitness account

6 from Dr. Van Heerden it's changed to a

7 positive one. What would make the sill

8 height, the change be higher than what the

9 LIDAR picked up?

20 A. It can be imprecision in an

21 eyewitness account and it can also be an

22 imprecision in what we're going to call an

23 average. We're talking about a breach that

24 is, for number 9, is 800 feet long. Picking

25 an average number for a breach that long is,

Page 66

you know, it is imprecise. So it could be a

2 combination of either of those.

3 Q. So were breaches 9 and 10 breaches

4 that you identified as there potentially

5 being a problem with those two?

6 A. I wouldn't say a problem, but more

7 in the -- we knew that they had potentially

8 been underwater, and so we asked for

9 information, hey, do you guys know how high

0 these were. While we can pick some data off

1 the LIDAR, there is also construction

2 activities that had been going on in this

3 time frame. So, you know, if an area -- and

4 there are some areas that we knew we couldn't

5 get any data because the whole thing is is

6 full of sandbags, it had been -- work had7 been done. So -- and again, it's just a

8 quest for the best available data.

9 Perfect data would have been, okay,

20 no one do anything, let's get a great

21 hydrographic survey of this before we put any

22 sandbags in. We know that's not reality. So

23 we're trying to find the best available data

24 and use that.

25 Q. Did Dr. Van Heerden or his team

Page 67

1 provide eyewitness accounts for any breach

2 sites where you didn't ask for additional

3 data?

4 A. Not that related to sill heights.

5 Q. Was it related to something else?

6 A. There was one area at the south end

7 of the Orleans Canal where they, it didn't

8 breach, it still looks the same today as it9 did before Katrina, but they didn't build the

10 floodwall there. There's an area where the

11 floodwall just stops. And that was an area

12 that his team pointed out and provided some

13 information on in terms of the, you know, how

14 long it was. It is something that I

15 subsequently also went out and looked at, but

16 I think that's the only one that comes to my

17 mind that was kind of a -- it didn't really

18 fit the definition of a breach, yet it

19 certainly was an area that water came

20 through.

21 Q. You talked about going out and

22 looking at that site. Were there any other

23 breach sites where you actually went out and

24 did independent verification of the

25 measurements?

Page 68

1 A. Most of these sites have changed

2 and had changed substantially by the time I

3 was involved in April or May of this year. I

4 did see some of the sites, some of the breach

5 locations, earlier just because of my work

6 down in St. Bernard Parish and also just

7 being a surveyor and being in the area, I saw

8 the 17th Street Canal. I didn't see anything

9 that was more detailed than what we can all

10 see in photographs, but I have visited some

11 of the sites.

12 Q. But not in connection with this

13 actual project?

14 A. No. Basically the data, there was

15 no meaningful data to be gathered in most

16 locations.17 Q. We were talking a little bit

18 earlier about the places where the sandbags

19 were dropped or they were doing other

20 emergency repairs. Are there any other steps

21 that you took to make sure that the LIDAR

22 measurements weren't thrown off by things

23 like that?

24 A. We looked at it. I mean,

25 essentially we have photography that was



8/14/2019 KTR00026

18/24

Page 69

taken very shortly after the storm. We have

2 the LIDAR data itself. And it's pretty easy

3 to see if you have, if you're looking at

4 sandbags. So, I guess, yes. We certainly

5 didn't pick an area that hadn't been

6 sandbagged and call that a sill height, but

7 other than just through visual observation of

8 the available data, no, we didn't do anything9 else at the time of this report. And we have

0 more data again that supplements some of

1 this information.

2 Q. What about the places -- my

3 understanding is that some of the levees or

4 floodwalls may have been cut later to let

5 water drain out of the polders. Did you

6 account for any of that in your measurements?

7 A. I know that they blew a hole in the

8 40 Arpent Canal levee to let the water out of

9 St. Bernard Parish. And I just knew that

20 through the work I had done previously. We

21 certainly didn't map that as a breach. That

22 is, I think, the only one that I know of in

23 particular. So if others of these breaches

24 were cut to let water out, we could have a

25 breach that does not apply, but I don't have

Page 70

any information on that to think that they

2 certainly in the outside levee system, that

3 they were cutting holes. I think they were

4 more in the mode of filling holes.

5 Q. I have a question about figure 4.

6 or 4-4. The caption is St. Bernard Breaches.

7 Do you know where these, exactly where these

8 were taken, these photographs, what those are

9 of?

0 A. I believe just southeast of Bayou

1 Bienvenu.

2 Q. Okay. If you turn with me to

3 section 5.0 of your report, Pumping Station

4 Data. What pumping station data exactly did

5 you provide to the Delft team?

6 A. Just the file that's listed.

7 Q. Okay. And that's from IPET?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Did you give them any information

20 on when the pumps were working?

21 A. No. Well, I think some of that

22 data may be in here.

23 Q. Other than what was in that file?

24 A. I didn't, no.

25 Q. Okay. And how did you come to be

Page 71

1 collecting the pumping station data?

2 A. They had a need. They asked me if

3 I had the data. I came up with the data and

4 I provided it.

5 MS. PAYNE:

6 I think this might be a good time

7 to take a break.

8 MR. LAMBERT:9 Good.

10 VIDEOGRAPHER:

11 Off the record.

12 (OFF THE RECORD)

13 VIDEOGRAPHER:

14 We are on the record.


16 Q. Okay. Back from break. I want to

17 show you what's been marked as Exhibit 7.

18 MR. LAMBERT:

19 You are so kind.


21 Q. This is an affidavit that I think

22 you submitted in July of 2007. You can take

23 a minute to look at that.

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Look familiar?

Page 72

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. When I was looking at this I was

3 interested in paragraphs 5 and 6. 5 says:

4 "Among the data which is necessary for

5 affiant to complete his work is data

6 describing elevations of sheet pile and

7 floodwall structures that surround the

8 metropolitan area. The LIDAR data to which

9 affiant has access does not allow affiant to

10 ascertain elevations of sheet pile and flood

11 walls due to the narrow width of those

12 structures." Is that what we were talking

13 about earlier whenever you were saying that

14 sometimes the LIDAR wouldn't pick up certain

15 things because of the resolution not being --

16 A. That's right.

17 Q. And did you obtain some of this

18 data in the 500 gigs from the --

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Okay. Is there any other data that

21 you're still waiting on along these lines?

22 A. My understanding is there may be

23 some additional survey data. I just heard

24 about it yesterday. I haven't pursued it. I

25 don't even know where I'm going to get it,



8/14/2019 KTR00026

19/24

Page 73

but I was told that someone said, hey, there

2 might be some survey data that's available.

3 It might come back and end up being the exact

4 same information again, but there's nothing

5 else concrete that I know about. That

6 certainly doesn't mean we'll stop looking.

7 Q. Okay. On the very last page of

8 your report you have a note here I wanted to9 talk about. "Please note that we received

0 almost 500 gigs of data from the U.S. Army

1 Corps of Engineers this past week and have

2 just started going through it. This report

3 will be updated as pertinent data sets are

4 made available and reviewed." So the 500

5 gigs that we've been talking about throughout

6 the deposition, that's what you are referring

7 to here?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And you got that the week of July

20 23?

21 A. We got it in about four or five

22 different versions. The first version we

23 got, and I don't want to sound like it was

24 intentional, but it was scrambled. I think

25 they, a service that tried to essentially

Page 74

just Bates number it inadvertently made it

2 useless. Shape files consist of four or five

3 files that have to be together to be

4 meaningful. That's just one example. In

5 addition, all the names, all the directories

6 were changed. So we received some data as

7 much as probably three or four weeks earlier

8 than that, but we finally got the unscrambled

9 full version the week that these reports were

0 due.

1 Q. Okay. Do you remember the exact

2 date that you received that?

3 A. No.

4 Q. How much of it have you reviewed up

5 until now?

6 A. I haven't been focusing on it.

7 I've been focused on other tasks. It's on

8 the to-do list.

9 Q. Have you started looking through

20 the 500 gigs?

21 A. Yes, I've looked through it, and

22 I've come up with some information, but

23 certainly not an exhaustive search through

24 the whole thing.

25 500 gigs of data, for reference, is

Page 75

1 roughly akin to three or four floors of a

2 major university library in terms of the

3 amount of data that's there. So not all the

4 data is meaningful or pertinent or I don't

5 care about it, but certainly there's -- it's

6 no small task to go through that data set.

7 Q. Do you have an idea, once you start

8 working on it and focusing on it, how long9 it's going to take you to go through that and

10 pull out the things you need?

11 A. Whether or not those things are

12 needed depends on the, in my view, depends on

13 the relevance. If a foot or two matters in a

14 sill height and it's a sill that was

15 underwater and it becomes a very important

16 one for some reason, then we have to focus on

17 it. If it doesn't matter or we already have

18 the information that we need for, you know,

19 what's pertinent for modeling, then I

20 probably won't look as, you know, in as much

21 detail at that feature. So I don't know if

22 that answers your question very well. It's

23 more a I've got a library full of

24 information, if there is some piece of

25 information that I'm asked to obtain, I'm

Page 76

1 going to look in the library and see if I can

2 find it.

3 Q. Have you been asked to look for

4 anything so far from that new 500 gigs?

5 A. Nothing in particular other than

6 the things that like in this affidavit. I

7 need the best available elevation data and

8 I've found what I think is available, at

9 least on an initial look through that hard

10 drive. I'm sure there is certainly more

11 information that will be utilized off of that

12 hard drive, but nothing that I've been asked

13 to pursue yet.

14 Q. Do you have definite plans to

15 update the pre-Katrina flood protection

16 system like with the sheet piling and, you

17 know, the different things that LIDAR may not

18 have picked up? Are there definite plans to

19 update that data?

20 A. No. I wouldn't call them definite

21 plans. In my view, some of the things that

22 were, that we provided, that I provided, can

23 be refined. I don't know whether or not

24 those things meet the threshold of need to be

25 refined.



8/14/2019 KTR00026

20/24

Page 77

Q. I see. So you're waiting to hear

2 from the Delft team whether they need those

3 things for the model?

4 A. I think that's fair.

5 Q. Do you have any plans right now to

6 issue a supplemental report?

7 A. No.

8 Q. Have you been asked to prepare any9 type of supplemental report?

0 A. No.

1 MS. PAYNE:

2 Mr. Morris, those are all of my

3 questions. Mr. Sutton has a few.

4 THE WITNESS:

5 Okay.

6 EXAMINATION BY MR. SUTTON:

7 Q. Good morning, Mr. Sutton. How are

8 you?

9 A. Good morning.

20 MR. LAMBERT:

21 Mr. Sutton, you're questioning on

22 behalf of --

23 MR. SUTTON:

24 I'm sorry?

25 MR. LAMBERT:

Page 78

Your questions are behalf of who?

2 MR. SUTTON:

3 The levee defendants and the MRGO

4 defendants as well. Just a few

5 follow-up actually.


7 Q. I'm going to hand you, Mr. Morris,

8 the Delft team report.

9 A. Do you want to put an exhibit

0 number on it?

1 MR. LAMBERT:

2 8?

3 MR. SUTTON:

4 It would be 8. Sure. We can mark

5 the report.

6 MR. LAMBERT:

7 You know, it was marked in the last

8 deposition. Do you want to keep it

9 simple?

20 MR. SUTTON:

21 Yeah. Let's just keep it simple

22 right now.


24 Q. I'm not going to question you

25 extensively about the report, but you did

Page 79

1 testify earlier that you have had a chance to

2 read the report, is that correct?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Could you turn with me to page 17

5 of the report.

6 MR. LAMBERT:

7 Just so I'm clear on this, just

8 protocol, my understanding was is9 that one lawyer was going to

10 question with regard to MRGO and

11 one lawyer was going to question

12 with regard to levee. And you're

13 going to ask questions for MRGO,

14 but --

15 MR. SUTTON:

16 I've probably got five minutes of

17 questions.

18 MR. LAMBERT:

19 I heard that before. Okay. You're

20 on.

21 MR. SUTTON:

22 Maybe ten.

23 MR. HUGHES:

24 Five minutes.

25 MR. SUTTON:

Page 80

1 I'm going to finish my questions,

2 but I'm telling you I don't have

3 extensive questions.

4 MR. LAMBERT:

5 I understand.


7 Q. Okay. The section is at section

8 3.2 entitled what-if scenarios. Do you see

9 that, Mr. Morris?

10 A. 3.2. Yes.

11 Q. And there are eight sites depicted

12 in figure 3.5. And these are locations that

13 were chosen in what's called the Metro bowl.

14 And I simply want to know did you have any

15 participation in choosing or selecting those

16 sites depicted in figure 3.5?

17 A. None.

18 Q. Did you perform any type of mapping

19 or georeferencing of those particular

20 locations that are depicted in figure 3.5?

21 A. No.

22 Q. Are you aware of any mapping or

23 georeferencing of any of the locations

24 depicted in figure 3.5?

25 A. No.



8/14/2019 KTR00026

21/24

Page 81

Q. If you could, Mr. Morris, turn with

2 me to page 33 of the report. And actually,

3 that section begins on the previous page.

4 It's section 4.2. It's a what-if scenarios

5 section concerning the New Orleans East area.

6 And my same questions apply to this diagram

7 and the locations chosen on this diagram.

8 Did you have any participation in the9 selection of those sites?

0 A. No.

1 Q. Did you perform any mapping or

2 georeferencing of those sites?

3 A. No.

4 Q. And do you know or have any

5 knowledge of any mapping or georeferencing

6 that has been performed of those sites?

7 A. No, I don't. My understanding is

8 these are representative areas that they

9 tried to select. Certainly, if more detailed

20 information is available, that can be done.

21 Q. And when you say that they

22 selected, are you referring specifically to

23 members of the Delft team?

24 A. Yes. I would assume that they

25 selected these areas.

Page 82

Q. But as you sit here today, you

2 simply have no information as to what

3 particular x-y coordinates that are

4 represented by any of these particular sites,

5 is that a fair statement?

6 A. I would assume that in their

7 modeling they could provide x-y coordinates,

8 but I was not involved, no.

9 Q. Okay. The same thing, finally, if

0 you don't mind, on page 44 of the report.

1 I'll just represent that the section actually

2 begins on page 43 of the report at section

3 5.2, "what-if scenarios." And this pertains

4 to the St. Bernard bowl. The same few

5 questions. You didn't have any participation

6 in the selection of the sites on figure 5.5,7 correct?

8 A. That's right.

9 Q. And you didn't perform any mapping

20 or georeferencing of those sites?

21 A. That's right.

22 Q. And you have no knowledge or

23 information as to any mapping or

24 georeferencing of those sites that may have

25 been performed?

Page 83

1 A. That's correct.

2 Q. Okay. If I could, if you could

3 turn with me briefly now to your report. I

4 think it's Exhibit, is it 2? I think you

5 have it right there in front of you.

6 A. Yes. Exhibit 3.

7 Q. Exhibit 3. I'm sorry. Section 6.0

8 of the report, the Other Images section. The9 first sentence you state that you have also

10 started reviewing numerous images contained

11 on the recently provided Corps if Engineers

12 database. Is that the 500 gigabyte database

13 or is this other information that we're

14 talking about?

15 A. 500 gigs.

16 Q. Okay. And then you referred to a,

17 let's see, a flythrough and you refer to

18 figure 6.1. You say it includes a diagram of

19 a flythrough of a hydrographic survey data in

20 the 17th Street Canal. This data was

21 obtained from the IPET website, correct?

22 A. No. This was on the hard drive.

23 Q. On the IPET hard drive?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Okay. Then you have a couple of

Page 84

1 sentences at the very end of section 6.1.

2 "The vast majority of the canal is relatively

3 shallow, but the area where the breach

4 occurred was dredged to a depth of

5 approximately 18 feet. The relationship of

6 dredging this deep in the immediate vicinity

7 of shallow sheet piles is something that will

8 be investigated further." Let me ask you

9 this. Have you, Mr. Morris, personally

10 conducted any such further investigation?

11 A. No.

12 Q. Okay. Do you know of any such

13 further investigation that has been performed

14 by anyone?

15 A. I simply know that it's an area of

16 interest.

17 Q. Okay. But you don't know of any

18 further investigation having been performed?

19 A. No.

20 Q. Okay. And you haven't been asked

21 to perform any further investigation?

22 A. I was asked to prepare some cross

23 sections of bathometric data.

24 Q. Relative to what?

25 A. On the IPET website you or anyone



8/14/2019 KTR00026

22/24

Page 85

else could download, in addition to that

2 LIDAR data, you could download the

3 bathometric data, which is survey data that

4 was performed in these canals. 17th Street

5 is one of those canals. And I was asked to

6 cut some cross sections.

7 Q. Okay.

8 A. And I did that.9 Q. And have you provided that

0 information to anyone in particular?

1 A. I sent that information to Mr.

2 Bruno.

3 Q. None of the experts?

4 A. No. I don't think it was anything

5 that was related to the modeling effort.

6 Q. All right. If you could take just

7 a quick look at a couple of exhibits. I

8 think they are 5 and 6.

9 A. Yes. I have them. 5 is the

20 spreadsheet, 6 is the e-mail.

21 MS. PAYNE:

22 Yes, that's right.


24 Q. On the spreadsheet, breach number,

25 let's see, 3, which is, I believe the breach,

Page 86

the southern London Avenue Canal breach,

2 correct?

3 A. Yes.

4 MR. LAMBERT:

5 Which number is this?

6 MR. SUTTON:

7 Number 5, Hugh.

ktr00026

Documents