ktr00095

8/14/2019 KTR00095

1/14

SUZANNE HAWES 4/17/2008

JOHNS PENDLETON COURT REPORTERS 800 562-128

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

IN RE: KATRINA CANAL BREACHES CIVIL ACTIONCONSOLIDATED LITIGATION

NO. 05-4182 "K" (2)PERTAINS TO MRGO (Robinson) JUDGE DUVAL

(No. 06-2268) MAG. WILKINSON

-------------------------------------------------------

TRANSCRIPT OF THE VIDEOTAPE DEPOSITION OF

SUZANNE HAWES

Given at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,

New Orleans District Office, 7400 Leake Avenue, New

Orleans, Louisiana 70118-3651, on April 17, 2008,

commencing at 9:00 a.m.

Reported By:

Estella O. Champion, CRR, CCR

Certified Court Reporter (Certificate #76003)

8/14/2019 KTR00095

2/14



2 (Pages 2 to 5)

Page 2

1 APPEARANCES2 FOR PLAINTIFFS:3 LAMBERT & NELSON, A LAW CORPORATION

(BY: HUGH LAMBERT, ESQ.)4 631 ST. CHARLES AVENUE

NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA 701305 -AND-

BRUNO & BRUNO6 (BY: FLORIAN BUCHLER, ESQUIRE)

855 BARONNE STREET7 NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA 70113

-AND-8 SHER, GARNER, CAHILL, RICHTER, KLEIN &

HILBERT, LLC9 (BY: R. SCOTT HOGAN, ESQUIRE)

909 POYDRAS STREET, 28TH FLOOR10 NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA 70112-103311 FOR THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS:12 CORPS OF ENGINEERS, OFFICE OF COUNSEL:

(BY: RITA TROTTER, ESQUIRE)13 7400 LEAKE AVENUE

NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA 70118-365114

FOR THE DEFENDANT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:15

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE16 TORTS BRANCH, CIVIL DIVISION

(BY: JESSICA SULLIVAN, ESQUIRE)17 (BY: MICHELE GREIF, ESQUIRE)

(BY: KARA MILLER, ESQUIRE)18 P.O. BOX 888

BENJAMIN FRANKLIN STATION19 WASHINGTON, D.C. 2004420 ALSO PRESENT:21 RYAN MALONE, ESQUIRE

ANDRE LAGARDE22 KEA SHERMAN

ERIC GOLDBERG (Via I-DEP)23 WILLIAM GARDNER (Via I-DEP)

BRIAN RYCKMEN (Via I-DEP)24

VIDEOGRAPHER:25 GILLEY DELORIMIER (DEPO-VUE)

Page 3

1 INDEX PAGE

2 TESTIMONY OF SUZANNE HAWES

3 DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR.LAMBERT ........... 5

4 * * *

5 INDEX OF EXHIBITS

6 EXHIBIT PAGE

7 Plaintiffs # 1 Curriculum Vitae ..................9

8 Plaintiffs # 2 Background of Mrs. Hawes .........19

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

1718

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Page 4

1 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: One moment please.

2 This is the videotape deposition of

3 Suzanne Hawes. This deposition is being held

4 today at 7400 Leake Avenue in New Orleans,

5 Louisiana on April 17, 2008. The time is

6 9:07 a.m.

7 Would counsel present please now

8 introduce themselves and which party they

9 represent.

10 MS. MILLER: My name is Kara Miller for the

11 United States.

12 MS. SULLIVAN: Jessica Sullivan for the

13 United States.

14 MS. GREIF: Michele Greif for the United

15 States.

16 MS. TROTTER: Lanie Trotter for the Corps.

17 MR. MALONE: Ryan Malone, EJLD AND LBLD, also

18 present.

19 MS. SHERMAN: Kea Sherman, Jefferson Parish.20 MR. LAGARDE: Andre Lagarde for the Orleans

21 Levee District.

22 MR. BUCHLER: Florien Buchler for the

23 plaintiffs.

24 MR. LAMBERT: My name is Hugh Lambert and I

25 represent the plaintiffs.

Page 5

1 MR. HOGAN: Scott Hogan for the plaintiffs.

2 MR. LAMBERT: All right. Would you swear in

3 the witness, please.

4 WHEREUPON, SUZANNE HAWES, having been

5 duly sworn, testified as follows:

6 DIRECT EXAMINATION

7 BY MR. LAMBERT:

8 Q. Mrs. Hawes, my name is Hugh Lambert and I

9 represent plaintiffs in connection with a lawsuit

10 brought involving the flooding in connection with the

11 MRGO. Do you understand that?

12 A. Uh-huh.

13 Q. Okay. And your name has appeared on a

14 witness list, and therefore you are here so I can find

15 out what it is that you're likely that you're to

16 testify about. All right?

17 A. All right.18 Q. Have you given a deposition before, ma'am?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Okay. So you're familiar with the process?

21 A. Yes. Before we start, I have a unique health

22 problem.

23 Q. Okay.

24 A. I had throat cancer. They radiated my mouth

25 and my salivary glands died. About three months ago

8/14/2019 KTR00095

3/14



3 (Pages 6 to 9)

Page 6

1 they came back, which is good news. The bad news is

2 they secrete mucous, so I have to wipe my mouth out

3 regularly. So please bear with me. It's rather gross.

4 Q. Well, you know, I'll share with you,

5 Mrs. Hawes, that a few years ago for no good reason I

6 had a broken jaw, and my mouth was wired shut for about

7 eight weeks.

8 A. Yes. Yes.

9 Q. And so I walked around like this with my

10 teeth completely wired together.

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And I could only drink things. And by the

13 time my session ended, I had gotten pretty comfortable,

14 so I did things that were sort of foolish. For

15 example, I stopped at a McDonalds, got a chocolate

16 shake and a cheeseburger, threw them in the blender,

17 ground them up and tried to drink it. My kids thought

18 it was entertaining, but it really did plug up all of

19 the -- yes, it was bad.20 A. Yes. I did that.

21 Q. Yes, I understand that.

22 A. I've been there.

23 Q. So I share your sympathy. Or I sympathize

24 with your situation, though mine was short lived.

25 A. Yes.

Page 7

1 Q. We're going to be brief today.2 A. Good.3 Q. I'm going to try and find out what it is that4 the U.S. Government finds it necessary to put you on a5 witness list for. And when I have finished doing that,6 we're going to quit. Okay?7 A. Okay.8 Q. Good.9 Now, first of all, I see your counsel has

10 provided me with a curriculum vitae, which shows that11 you were educated at a number of universities,12 Stanford, Brown, botany at Brown University, and you13 also attended UNO.14 A. Uh-huh.15 Q. And when I flipped through the publications,16 I see that you coauthored with two gentlemen; one is

17 named Day, John W. Day, and another Gary Shaffer. Do18 you remember that?19 A. Uh-huh. Yes.20 Q. And was that good?21 A. Yes.22 Q. How are those guys?23 MS. MILLER: Objection.24 THE WITNESS: They are my friends.25 BY MR. LAMBERT:

Page 8

1 Q. Okay. Do you respect them --2 A. Yes.3 Q. -- from a professional standpoint?4 A. Yes.5 Q. All right. Do you believe that they are6

truthful and straightforward people?7 MS. MILLER: Objection.8 MR. LAMBERT: How could you possibly object9 to that question?

10 THE WITNESS: I sometimes disagreed with11 them.12 BY MR. LAMBERT:13 Q. Okay. But you believe they are truthful in14 terms of their opinions?15 MS. MILLER: Objection.16 THE WITNESS: They believed their opinions17 but most people believe their opinions.18 BY MR. LAMBERT:

19 Q. I understand. I have no problem with people20 that believe their opinions. I have a problem with21 people that give opinions that are not supported.22 A. Yes.23 Q. Okay. And your belief is that these24 gentlemen are credible; let's put it that way.25 MS. MILLER: Objection.

Page 9

1 THE WITNESS: I will answer you: Yes, I do.2 BY MR. LAMBERT:3 Q. Okay, good. All right.4 Now I'm going to ask you: Have you reviewed5 your curriculum vitae?6 A. Yes.7 Q. And is it accurate?8 A. Yes.9 Q. We're going to attach it to the deposition so

10 we don't have to spend a lot of time with that.11 A. Yes.12 Q. Now, what is it -- what is it Mrs. Hawes that13 you believe the government intends to call you for as a14 witness? What is it that you believe that you're going15 to be asked to testify about?16 A. Frankly, I'm not sure.

17 Q. Okay.18 A. I think maybe about the part I wrote about19 the effects of MRGO.20 Q. Okay.21 A. That's -- I don't know.22 Q. And do I have that report?23 A. I don't know.24 Q. Tell me about the report. When was it25 written?

8/14/2019 KTR00095

4/14



4 (Pages 10 to 13)

Page 10

1 A. About 1998. Let's see. It might have been

2 '99. '99.

3 Q. Okay.

4 A. And I was rotating with -- EPA had a sub, a

5 committee in St. Bernard Parish. I was on the

6 environmental subcommittee, and we divided up the work,

7 and I was asked to write a report about the impacts of

8 building MRGO.

9 Q. Okay. Why don't you -- I don't have that

10 report.

11 MR. LAMBERT: I'm going to ask the government

12 to provide me with a copy of it.

13 MS. MILLER: I believe you have a copy of it,

14 of plaintiff's notice to 30(b)(6) with it

15 attached recently.

16 MR. LAMBERT: Oh, really?

17 Have we got it?

18 MR. BUCHLER: Well, we haven't received it

19 yet, if it was just recently.20 MS. MILLER: You all provided it to us

21 recently via e-mail.

22 MR. BUCHLER: Oh, okay. Good. That PSA

23 thing.

24 MR. LAMBERT: Okay. Well, then, maybe you

25 can get him on the phone and see if we can

Page 11

1 get a copy of it.2 Do you have a copy of it here, since we3 gave it to you?4 MS. GREIF: No, I don't think so.5 MR. LAMBERT: Okay. Let me get this6 straight: You guys are going to use this7 witness to testify with regard to a report8 that you don't have here?9 MS. TROTTER: Yes. I mean, you're the one

10 taking the deposition.11 MR. LAMBERT: Yes, I would like to know what12 it is that she's doing. I mean, we've got --13 THE WITNESS: I'm finding this amusing, but14 anyway.15 BY MR. LAMBERT:16 Q. It is amusing. I have to tell you, we asked

17 for documents in this case, and the government was kind18 enough to fill up a whole room in the Texaco building.19 And for me to find your report in that room is like20 looking for a needle in a haystack.21 But I understand that the report has22 surfaced, so I'm going to rely on your memory to tell23 me as best you can what you got in that report --24 A. Okay.25 Q. -- that has to do with the MRGO. All right?

Page 12

1 A. All right.

2 My copy is at home because I was reading it

3 the other night to refresh my memory or I would offer

4 it to you.

5 Q. All right. Thank you.

6 MS. MILLER: Object to the question being

7 vague.

8 BY MR. LAMBERT:

9 Q. Go ahead and answer it.

10 THE WITNESS: Is it okay if I tell him?

11 MS. MILLER: Yes.

12 THE WITNESS: What I did first was they had

13 what we call a footprint.

14 BY MR. LAMBERT:

15 Q. Okay.

16 A. When they dug MRGO, what did we change. And

17 so I found old quadrangle maps, the oldest I could in

18 the fifties or sixties.

19 Q. All right.20 A. And then I laid out on the maps, drew on the

21 maps where MRGO, the channel was, where the disposal

22 area was. And then I lifted -- the quadrangle maps had

23 habitat on them. They distinguished between water,

24 marsh and swamp, and I calculated the number of acres

25 that were covered or changed by MRGO.

Page 13

1 Q. Okay.

2 A. And frankly I don't remember numbers very

3 well. I thought you would have them.

4 Q. No. I agree. I wish I had.

5 A. About 20,000 acres were changed. I

6 distinguished between what was water that became land,

7 what was swamp that became water, what was marsh that

8 became water, swamp that became spoil, and marsh that

9 became spoil. And I then calculated the erosion

10 between 1965 and 1990. And I got a number of 15 feet a

11 year from an older report; and I measured a few places,

12 and it appeared to be fifteen feet.

13 Now I know that was wrong because in 1993

14 someone very carefully measured it, and it goes up to

15 40 feet a year. But I made a mistake in my report. I

16 underestimated the amount of erosion that I calculated,

17 you know, what I believed was erosion.18 And then MRGO also brought in saltwater. And

19 there was a ridge, the Bayou la Loutre Ridge. And it

20 is right here -- it's this ridge (indicating).

21 Q. Okay.

22 A. And it, before MRGO, it separated the Gulf of

23 Mexico from Lake Borgne.

24 Q. All right.

25 A. There was this ridge, that if a little surge

8/14/2019 KTR00095

5/14



5 (Pages 14 to 17)

Page 14

1 came up from the Gulf, it would hit a ridge that was

2 then probably six to eight feet high and stop. So gulf

3 water could get into Lake Borgne south. MRGO severed

4 that and so saltwater came in.

5 And there used to be cypress in this area in

6 here we called the Central Wetlands.

7 Q. All right. And you're indicating in this

8 area here. Just so the map is clear, that's sort of in

9 the --

10 A. Well, it's near -- it's from here up to the

11 canal (indicating).

12 Q. Okay. The whole reach where St. Bernard is?

13 A. Yes, the whole area --

14 MS. MILLER: Objection.

15 THE WITNESS: -- west of MRGO. Between MRGO,

16 and what they called the 40-Arpent Levee,

17 which was this levee, the Harvey central

18 records.

19 BY MR. LAMBERT:20 Q. All right. Now, Mrs. Hawes, let me do this

21 right quick because that map is not on our camera and

22 I'm going to get one right here.

23 A. Okay.

24 That's even better.

25 Q. Let's start off with the ridge. And the

Page 15

1 reason I'm talking loud now is because I don't have my2 microphone.3 A. Yes.4 Q. All right. So let's start off with showing5 us where the ridge was.6 A. This is Bayou la Loutre Ridge, and it goes7 over that way.8 Q. Hold on one second. I'm going to get another9 one.

10 Here it is.11 A. There it is, yes.12 Q. Kind of get these together.13 A. Yes. It is this ridge, that it's obviously a14 different color.15 Q. Right.16 A. It's higher. And that ridge MRGO cut across.

17 Q. Okay. And then show us where that cypress18 swamp area was.19 MS. MILLER: Objection.20 THE WITNESS: It's all on this, so you don't21 need that one, because these overlap.22 BY MR. LAMBERT:23 Q. Okay.24 A. It was actually in here.25 Q. All right.

Page 16

1 A. And some of it came out.2 Q. All right. And with the severing of the3 ridge by MRGO, that let the saltwater come in?4 A. Yep.5 Q. And what effect did that have on this swamp6

area?7 MS. MILLER: Objection.8 THE WITNESS: It killed the cypress.9 BY MR. LAMBERT:

10 Q. It killed the cypress.11 I was driving along Highway 310 yesterday on12 the way down to New Iberia; and when you come off the13 freeway there and go west, on the west end of --14 A. 310.15 Q. On 310, going on the west end of the16 airport --17 A. Going south.18 Q. -- going south, right. There's a beautiful

19 cypress swamp.20 A. Yes, there's even an eagle nest.21 Q. What?22 A. An eagle nest.23 Q. Yes. In that area?24 A. Yes.25 Q. I've been told that.

Page 17

1 A. There is.2 Q. I didn't spot it, but it's a beautiful3 cypress swamp.4 A. Yes.5 Q. Is that sort of the way that swamp looked in6 St. Bernard before the --7 MS. MILLER: Objection.8 MR. LAMBERT: May I finish my question?9 MS. MILLER: Sorry. I thought you were

10 finished.11 BY MR. LAMBERT:12 Q. -- before the MRGO was cut through the ridge?13 MS. MILLER: Objection, calls for14 speculation.15 THE WITNESS: I don't know because I never16 saw the swamp in St. Bernard.

17 BY MR. LAMBERT:18 Q. Did you see photos?19 A. I don't think so.20 Q. Okay.21 A. I've seen some old photos of MRGO, but it's22 all about dredging it, so ...23 Q. Okay. All right.24 The maps that you told us about a minute ago25 that show the areas of the swamp that were converted as

8/14/2019 KTR00095

6/14



6 (Pages 18 to 21)

Page 18

1 a result of the saltwater and so on --2 A. Uh-huh.3 Q. -- do you have those at your house?4 A. No.5 Q. They are here?6

A. I think they are here. I mean, I --7 unfortunately, when I was writing this, I barely could8 talk because my throat was radiated. And so I just did9 my own thing, and I did not realize I could have had

10 the maps scanned in. That was stupid but that's life.11 And so I just have Xeroxes. And I am not sure; the12 originals are down somewhere in St. Bernard Parish. I13 don't know where. They got lost. But I gave them the14 colored originals with my markings on them.15 Q. Okay.16 A. And no one knows what happened to them.17 Q. Yes. St. Bernard took a pretty good hit with18 Katrina.

19 A. Yes, yes. And Junior is chairman of the20 Subcommittee I was on.21 Q. Junior Rodrigue?22 A. Yes.23 Q. And so he would be the person who you would24 probably ask about those maps?25 A. I guess. You know, I don't know that he

Page 19

1 would remember. He has had a few other things to worry

2 about since then.

3 Q. No. I understand. I understand.

4 Okay. I have a document which I'm going to

5 mark for identification as Exhibit Number 2, which is a

6 fairly complimentary look at --

7 A. Okay.

8 Q. -- at your background.

9 MS. MILLER: Do you have an extra copy of

10 that?

11 MR. LAMBERT: I sure do, just for you.

12 MS. MILLER: Thank you.

13 BY MR. LAMBERT:

14 Q. And it looks to me like you've been pretty15 interested in the importance of wetlands for quite some

16 time.

17 MS. MILLER: Objection, vague.18 THE WITNESS: Yes.

19 BY MR. LAMBERT:

20 Q. I also guess, based on your curriculum vitae,

21 that you do not think that the government will ask you

22 to comment on any sort of hydraulic calculations.

23 A. Absolutely not.

24 Q. Okay. But in general --

25 A. I drink water. That's it.

Page 20

1 Q. I understand.2 A. I sip water.3 Q. I understand.4 It seems to me like in general you would5 agree with me that the cutting of the ridge by the MRGO6

and the accompanying saltwater intrusion that killed7 the cypress swamp area in St. Bernard would have a8 negative effect in terms of preventing surge into that9 area?

10 MS. MILLER: Objection, vague. Calls for11 speculation.12 THE WITNESS: No, I would not agree with you13 that I'm not an expert.14 BY MR. LAMBERT:15 Q. Okay. So let's put it this way: You do not16 expect to be asked questions with regard to surge?17 A. I don't think so. If I were a -- now --18 Q. Let me ask you this, is that your area of

19 expertise?20 A. No.21 Q. So you could tell us what saltwater does in22 terms of destroying a cypress swamp; correct?23 MS. MILLER: Objection.24 THE WITNESS: Uh-huh.25 BY MR. LAMBERT:

Page 21

1 Q. And you agree with me that it did?

2 A. Yes.


4 BY MR. LAMBERT:

5 Q. But you do not feel like it is part of your

6 area of expertise to comment on what effect that would

7 have from a hydrological standpoint on a surge?


9 THE WITNESS: That is correct.

10 BY MR. LAMBERT:

11 Q. That's correct. Okay.

12 Now, can you tell me about the mechanism

13 for --

14 And any time you want to take a break, we can

15 take a break.

16 A. Uh-huh.

17 Q. Can you tell me about the mechanism for the18 effect of saltwater intruding into a freshwater or a

19 brackish water swamp? And you can distinguish between

20 groups or types of swamp --

21 A. I didn't know --

22 MS. MILLER: Objection --

23 BY MR. LAMBERT:

24 Q. -- in your answer if you would like.

25 Go ahead and answer it, please.

8/14/2019 KTR00095

7/14



7 (Pages 22 to 25)

Page 22

1 THE WITNESS: Can I answer it?2 MS. MILLER: You may.3 THE WITNESS: First of all there's only one4 kind of swamp.5 BY MR. LAMBERT:6

Q. Okay.7 A. Swamp is cypress trees and tupelo trees. And8 then marsh is wetlands with no trees; and there are9 different kinds of marshes: Fresh, intermediate,

10 brackish and saline. But swamps are -- swamps are11 swamps.12 Q. Okay. Swamp is a cypress-tupelo swamp?13 A. Yes.14 Q. Let's start with that. How does saltwater15 effect the cypress-tupelo swamp?16 MS. MILLER: Objection.17 THE WITNESS: In some ways that's -- I'm not18 a -- I'm not sure what you would call it, but

19 someone that I know what the effect is. Too20 much salt kills the cypress. Now, there are21 people that can give you all sorts of details22 about why.23 BY MR. LAMBERT:24 Q. The mechanism, they will tell me about the25 botany?

Page 23

1 A. Yes. The botany is. Seawater is 33 parts2 per thousand of salt. That's sort of a standard.3 Anything over six to eight parts per thousand for very4 long will kill cypress. And it goes to eight parts per5 thousand at times to kill cypress. And you can6 still -- now the cypress -- when you kill marsh grass,7 it dies, falls over and disintegrates.8 Q. It dies, falls over and disintegrates.9 A. But then, when you kill cypress, it dies, but

10 the trees stand there. So they have those swamps where11 there are dead trees just standing. And so you can in12 many ways see where the cypress used to be in13 St. Bernard because you can see the dead trees.14 Q. Right. And I have been there and there are15 some dead trees left, but there are some that aren't16 there anymore.

17 A. They have fallen over.18 Q. Right.19 A. But that's what's interesting, St. Bernard20 pumps out, I don't know if it's treated sewerage or21 storm water, in two places and there are live, little22 crescents of live cypress there. They freshened it23 enough. It's right at the brink. They freshened it24 enough that there is cypress back. So that is25 interesting.

Page 24

1 Q. I see. So, in other words, with treated

2 sewerage and freshwater, storm runoff in that area,

3 just to the east of the 40-Arpent Canal --

4 A. Yes. There are two places they pump it out.

5 You can see little rings of cypress.

6 Q. Coming back?

7 A. Yes. Yes.

8 Q. That's interesting.

9 Do you agree with me that there's hope in

10 terms of --

11 MR. LAMBERT: You need to wait until I'm

12 finished my questions before you start

13 interrupting because it's not right.

14 MS. MILLER: I'm sorry.

15 MR. LAMBERT: And I'll finish my question

16 and --

17 MR. BUCHLER: Why can't we make the objection

18 continuing?

19 MR. LAMBERT: No, no. We're not going to do20 that. I'll be happy to, you know, give you

21 an opportunity to make your objection, but

22 interrupting isn't appropriate for either one

23 of us.

24 MS. MILLER: I'm sorry. It's been difficult

25 to tell when you're finishing.

Page 25

1 MR. LAMBERT: Well, I'll let you know when

2 I'm finished with my question. Okay? Good.

3 MS. MILLER: Okay.

4 MR. LAMBERT: Now I'm going to go back to my

5 question.

6 BY MR. LAMBERT:

7 Q. Do you agree with me that there is hope for

8 projects which use technology to introduce freshwater

9 and materials, sometimes pumped or dredged materials,

10 to recreate marsh and then hopefully swamp? Do you

11 agree with that?

12 A. Yes. Yes.

13 MS. MILLER: Objection, vague and compound

14 question.

15 BY MR. LAMBERT:

16 Q. Go ahead and answer.

17 A. Yes.18 Q. Okay.

19 A. So you can hear, yes.

20 Q. Okay. Good.

21 My counsel on the other side of the table

22 here, of which there are four, will speak through this

23 young lady right next to you, and they are interposing

24 objections to some of my questions so that the record

25 is preserved, so that a judge -- not them, and not

8/14/2019 KTR00095

8/14



8 (Pages 26 to 29)

Page 26

1 me -- will decide whether that objection is2 appropriate.3 You're to answer the questions, unless you're4 instructed by counsel not to, and she will make it5 clear if she doesn't want you to answer. And then the6 judge gets to decide whether the objection is7 appropriate or fair or not. And because you've8 answered the question, it will be there so we don't9 have to come back and ask you again. That's the reason

10 why this charade is going on here right now.11 A. I hear you.12 MS. MILLER: Mr. Lambert, would it be okay to13 take a break?14 MR. LAMBERT: If you would like. Would you15 like a break?16 THE WITNESS: Yes.17 MR. LAMBERT: Okay. Be happy to.18 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the record, it is

19 9:32.20 (Recess taken.)21 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Returning to the record,22 it is 9:40.23 BY MR. LAMBERT:24 Q. All right. I was explaining to you the25 objection situation so that you're clear that the

Page 27

1 answers are appropriate for the record, unless you're2 asked not to, not to answer by the attorney.3 Now, I had attached for the record this4 document as Exhibit Number 2 -- which shows back in --5 gosh, I think this was --6 A. April 2005.7 Q. Right. There you go. Thank you.8 April 2005, your activities in terms of the9 New Orleans District and so on. You are still active

10 with the Corps of Engineers?11 A. Yes.12 Q. And your current position is what, please?13 A. Project manager for the environment.14 Q. Okay. And that's the area that I'm going to15 confine my questions to, pretty much the environment.16 Now, I saw in some documents -- and I'm not

17 going to dig them out individually -- that one of the18 concerns you had were for various species of animals19 protected by, or, I'm sorry, that used the marsh and20 swamp areas as a habitat.21 MS. MILLER: Objection, vague.22 BY MR. LAMBERT:23 Q. Correct?24 A. Yes.25 Q. Okay. Once the ridge was penetrated by MRGO,

Page 28

1 did you become aware of the salinity in the marshes and2 swamps rising?3 MR. LAMBERT: Objection, vague.4 THE WITNESS: Yes.5 BY MR. LAMBERT:6

Q. And you've explained to us that the cypress7 swamp can live with six to eight parts per thousand of8 salinity, and that seawater is 33 in general.9 A. 32.

10 Q. 32, okay.11 So obviously there's a significant effect to12 a large tidal waterway being introduced into a marsh13 area?14 MS. MILLER: Objection.15 THE WITNESS: It did not make it 32 parts per16 thousand. It just raised it slightly, and17 the slightly was enough.18 BY MR. LAMBERT:

19 Q. I understand.20 Now, would you agree that if the channel in21 the land cut -- not out in Lake Borgne, but in the land22 cut north of the ridge -- if the channel had been23 maintained with banks and spoil on each side, rather24 than being allowed to erode so that it became a much25 wider presence and also a more direct pathway for

Page 29

1 saltwater into the marsh, that the marsh would not have2 been as severely affected?3 MS. MILLER: Objection.4 THE WITNESS: Not -- isn't within my area of5 expertise.6 BY MR. LAMBERT:7 Q. Okay. All right.8 You would agree with me that the higher the9 salinity in the marsh and swamp areas, the more

10 significant the effect?11 MS. MILLER: Objection.12 THE WITNESS: Well, I mean, some marsh can13 take higher salinity.14 BY MR. LAMBERT:15 Q. Okay.16 A. Some marsh was there that withstood the

17 salinity and did not change.18 Q. Okay. Tell me about -- you told me there was19 only one swamp, and then I think you said there were20 three kinds of marshes.21 A. Yes, four.22 Q. Four. Okay. Let's go through those. What23 are they?24 A. There's fresh, intermediate, brackish and25 saline.

8/14/2019 KTR00095

9/14



9 (Pages 30 to 33)

Page 30

1 Q. All right. What effect does saltwater

2 encrosion have on freshwater marshes?


4 THE WITNESS: Well, it isn't good. It kills

5 it. But there wasn't any freshwater marsh in

6 St. Bernard.

7 BY MR. LAMBERT:

8 Q. All right. How about between, I guess

9 between Lake Borgne and the MRGO, that was also at

10 least a brackish swamp?

11 A. It was a brackish marsh.

12 Q. Marsh.

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Okay. I've been told by some fishermen that

15 the areas, some areas north of the MRGO, between the

16 MRGO and Lake Borgne also had cypress trees.

17 A. On the maps that I saw, very little. It was

18 like, when we built MRGO, we destroyed maybe 60 acres

19 of swamp that were -- I'm not sure of that number, but20 it was about that -- that was out that far.

21 Q. Well, these fishermen friends of mine tell me

22 that there are still stumps as you've described,

23 cypress stumps on the north side.

24 A. I don't recall seeing any. There could be.

25 I don't know.

Page 31

1 Q. Okay.2 A. There's certainly no trees left. There may3 be stumps.4 Q. Okay.5 A. But I would have noticed trees, I think.6 Q. What about, are there any -- you said:7 Fresh, intermediate, brackish and saline?8 A. Uh-huh.9 Q. In the area where the MRGO was dug -- and I'm

10 going to focus now on the area through the land cut.11 And we can start with the -- by the way, let me back up12 one second. The ridge that we just discussed --13 A. Uh-huh.14 Q. -- is that the ridge where the closure is15 proposed?16 A. Yes, yes.

17 MS. MILLER: Objection.18 BY MR. LAMBERT:19 Q. So that's sort of the natural high area, and20 that's where the proposed -- and I say closure. It's21 called a de-authorization plan -- intends --22 A. It is -- part of the de-authorization plan is23 to build a closure at the Bayou la Loutre Ridge.24 Q. And that's the ridge that you've told us25 about that was sort of the surge barrier?

Page 32

1 A. Uh-huh, yes.2 Q. Okay.3 MS. MILLER: Objection.4 THE WITNESS: I didn't say it was a surge --5 I did say for low surges. I mean, it was6

only 6 to 8 feet high.7 BY MR. LAMBERT:8 Q. I understand.9 A. And hurricane surges, from what I've read,

10 can be twenty, so ...11 Q. Well, that all depends on who you talk to and12 as far as its effects go. The, quote, speed bump13 effect or the buffer effect, all that stuff I14 understand to be outside of your area of expertise.15 A. Right. But I do know that it entered16 St. Bernard Parish, therefore it had to be over 17 feet17 high, so ...18 Q. All because the design height of the --

19 A. Yes.20 Q. -- hurricane protection structures?21 A. Yes. Yes.22 Q. Okay. Now you don't know what effect that23 wave wash had, do you?24 A. No.25 Q. You don't know whether or not the

Page 33

1 configuration of the MRGO and the lack of swamp and2 marshland led to wave propagation, which then attacked3 the levee and overtopped it? That's not your area of4 expertise?5 A. No.6 MS. MILLER: Objection.7 BY MR. LAMBERT:8 Q. Describe for me, if you would please, Hawes,9 the type of swamp and marsh that existed in the land

10 cut of the MRGO.11 MS. MILLER: Objection.12 BY MR. LAMBERT:13 Q. Pre-MRGO.14 A. From memory, there was a strip of15 intermediate marsh adjacent to the 40-Arpent Levee in16 sort of the middle of the Central Wetlands. The rest

17 of the area north of the ridge was brackish marsh, both18 on the north side of where MRGO ended up being and in19 the Central Wetlands. South of the ridge there was20 some saline marsh at the south end, and then brackish21 marsh.22 Q. Okay. And the swamp that you described23 was --24 A. The swamp was sort of scattered through25 batches. The man that mapped the wetlands in 1949 did

8/14/2019 KTR00095

10/14



10 (Pages 34 to 37)

Page 34

1 not indicate swamp. Don't ask me why. He indicated

2 marsh types.

3 When I looked at the quadrangle maps, they

4 showed where the cypress was.

5 Q. The what kind of maps?

6 A. The quadrangle maps.

7 Q. Quadrangle?

8 A. Yes.

9 And then also I had data from the U.S.G.S,

10 that when we wrote Coast 2050, we divided the coast

11 into what we called mapping units that were areas of

12 similar vegetation, and one of the mapping units was

13 the Central Wetlands. And we had, when we did 2050, we

14 had U.S.G.S. go back and, from aerial photographs,

15 attempt to identify what kind of plants were there.

16 And so I had a spreadsheet that said, in the

17 Central Wetlands in 1956, there were these kind of

18 acres of swamp, marsh, et cetera. Then I had the same

19 data for 1976, I think it was, and 1990.20 Q. All right.

21 A. And those are available in Coast 2050 --

22 well, not really. They weren't available as

23 spreadsheets. They were described in words in Coast

24 2050.

25 Q. Okay. And that's your report?

Page 35

1 A. I was a coauthor among many, many people.2 Q. Okay. All right.3 Okay. Now, the -- you've already shared with4 us what effect the MRGO had on the swamp.5 A. Uh-huh.6

7 Q. Okay. And I would like for you to tell us if8 you would, please, in general terms what effect it had9 on the intermediate marsh.

10

11 MS. MILLER: Objection. Vague.12 THE WITNESS: Well, that gets interesting13 because it -- some years there was no14 intermediate marsh in the Central Wetlands.15 Other years there was, after MRGO. It16 depends on rainfall. It depends on the way

17 the wind blows, depends on a whole bunch of18 things. And so intermediate marsh has come19 and gone in the Central Wetlands since MRGO.20 BY MR. LAMBERT21 Q. When you say "Central Wetlands," what are we22 talking about?23 A. I'm talking about an area from the Bayou la24 Loutre Ridge here, up to the Inner Harbor Canal on the25 north and south essentially, and between the 40-Arpent

Page 36

1 Levee and MRGO on the east and west.2 Q. Okay.3 A. Except it really isn't east and west and4 north and south.5 MR. LAMBERT: Florien, would you please get6

this map and hold it up so Mrs. Hawes can7 show us.8 THE WITNESS: Yes, the Central Wetlands go9 from here, like that. It's these

10 (indicating).11 BY MR. LAMBERT12 Q. Okay. Central Wetlands. Okay. And what's13 the area around Lake Borgne referred to?14 A. This mapping unit was I think called from --15 I'm not sure. I think from here down to the ridge was16 called South Lake Borgne, and this was the land bridge17 up that way. I'm not sure. I think this piece is in18 South Lake Borgne. I don't remember.

19 Q. Okay. And when you say "land bridge," what20 area --21 A. This one from here over to the Rigolets is22 called the Pontchartrain-Borgne land bridge.23 Q. Okay. All right. All right.24 And because we don't have a map, and I want25 to make sure the record is real clear, I would like for

Page 37

1 you to show -- to slowly describe where the cypress

2 swamp area was before the MRGO was cut.

3 A. Again, it's been a while since I looked at

4 the map. There was some down -- there was some in here

5 (indicating).

6 Q. All right.

7 A. There was some here (indicating). Then I

8 think there was some out here (indicating), and maybe a

9 little -- there were two places I think it extended

10 out, maybe not where we dug MRGO, but where we put the

11 spoil at.

12 Q. Okay. All right. Thank you.

13 A. It wasn't much.

14 Q. Okay. Now, you told us that during the

15 cutting of the MRGO, you estimated a loss of

16 approximately 60 acres.

17 MS. MILLER: Objection.18 THE WITNESS: Right, of cypress swamp, yes.

19 BY MR. LAMBERT

20 Q. Yes. There was a significant amount, an

21 additional amount of marsh that was cut?

22 A. Yes. Yes.

23 Q. Can you estimate for me what that was?

24 A. As I recall, when I totaled land that was

25 wetlands that either became water or spoil, it was just

8/14/2019 KTR00095

11/14



11 (Pages 38 to 41)

Page 38

1 under 20,000 acres. I think 19,400. And also because

2 of erosion. There was three causes.

3 Q. Okay. Now, in later reports, like the

4 Reconnaissance Report of 1988, and again the bank, I

5 think it was called St. Bernard Parish --

6 A. You didn't let me finish about the other

7 impacts.

8 Q. I'm sorry.

9 A. I estimated the changes in habitat type

10 caused by MRGO that swamp became -- the swamp died.

11 The intermediate marsh came in under it. So the swamp

12 became -- or brackish. I took from the numbers

13 U.S.G.S. had and calculated how many acres of what

14 switched to what: This many acres of intermediate

15 marsh became brackish marsh, this many acres of

16 brackish marsh became saline. I did the acreages and

17 had that as impacts of MRGO in my report also.

18 Q. The two reports that I just mentioned to

19 you -- and I don't want to get them out. They are that20 high. One of them is an Erosion Reconnaissance Report

21 done in 1988.

22 A. Yes. Yes.

23 Q. And then there's another one done in 1994.

24 A. '94, okay.

25 Q. A reconnaissance report on bank erosion.

Page 39

1 A. Yes.2 Q. And then there was also, back in the 80s,3 there were design memorandums having to do with4 foreshoring along the south side of the MRGO in the5 area of Chalmette.6 A. Uh-huh.7 Q. Okay. Those discussed what I think you told8 us about was the erosion, and your original9 calculations were 15 feet per year?

10 A. Yes. I got that from the 1988 report.11 Q. And then later you found out it was12 significantly greater?13 MS. MILLER: Objection.14 THE WITNESS: Right. It varies tremendously.15 BY MR. LAMBERT16 Q. On where?

17 A. Along MRGO.18 Q. Yes.19 A. Some places it is 15 feet a year.20 Q. Right.21 A. Some places it's -- I think 43 was the22 biggest number I remember. But they actually measured23 it from area photos.24 Q. You would agree with me that, after the25 construction of the MRGO, in the late fifties, that

Page 40

1 there was continuing erosion along the canal?2 A. Mostly on the north bank.3 MS. MILLER: Objection.4 BY MR. LAMBERT5 Q. On the north bank, correct. And a6

significant part of that erosion was attributable to7 ship wake?8 A. I don't want to go there. I have been told9 very clearly that is not my area of expertise.

10 Q. Okay. I understand. Let me describe to you11 a phenomena.12 Well, before I do that, let me ask you a13 question about this situation: Sea level rise, okay?14 A. Yes.15 Q. I've heard it called "global warming"; I've16 heard it called "climate change"; I've heard it17 called -- depends on what the spin is. But the18 question is: Does a rise in sea level -- and I'm

19 talking about a reasonable estimate of rise, which you20 probably know from a figure standpoint more than I21 do -- what effect -- or let's put it this way: How is22 a swamp able to manage that?23 MS. MILLER: Objection, vague. Calls for24 speculation.25 BY MR. LAMBERT

Page 41

1 Q. And let me give you some more parameters.2 Let's say there's no saline increase. In other words,3 let's just keep the salinity the same for the purposes4 of the question. And my question is, and I'm starting5 with the swamp, tupelo-type-cypress swamp, which I6 now -- every day I learn something -- now I know7 there's only one kind of swamp. I'm happy to hear8 that.9 A. And you learned it from the Corps.

10 Q. I did, absolutely.11 So how does that handle a .4-inch sea rise in12 however many years?13 MS. MILLER: Objection, vague. Calls for14 speculation, expert opinion.15 BY MR. LAMBERT16 Q. Okay. Go ahead and answer it.

17 A. The mature trees really don't care. They18 just keep on growing.19 Q. Okay.20 A. But for a young cypress, for a cypress seed21 to sprout and grow, it needs the tip of its head above22 water.23 Q. Okay.24 A. And so when the water gets too high, no more25 young cypress come. And so you have happily growing

8/14/2019 KTR00095

12/14



12 (Pages 42 to 45)

Page 42

1 mature trees, but there's no regeneration.2 Q. Okay.3 A. You know, as sea level rising, it's a very4 slow phenomenon, because some seeds will be a little5 bit higher and will be able to grow. But eventually6

you get to where there's no regeneration.7 Q. Okay. So if I understand it, it would8 probably more be a factor of rate of change; and if the9 rate of change is slow enough so that the little

10 cypress, the sapling can keep its head out of the11 water --12 MS. MILLER: Same objection.13 THE WITNESS: Well, you have a dry area,14 other than cypress pop up.15 BY MR. LAMBERT16 Q. -- or a dry year, then as long as it can17 germinate to the point where it gets high enough so18 that it can handle the delta, the change in water

19 height --20 A. Yes.21 Q. -- then it's going to be all right?22 MS. MILLER: Objection.23 THE WITNESS: Yes.24 BY MR. LAMBERT25 Q. All right. What about the brackish marsh?

Page 43

1 MS. MILLER: Objection.2 BY MR. LAMBERT3 Q. How does that handle sea level rise?4 MS. MILLER: Same objection.5 THE WITNESS: Fairly well. I mean, when you6 talk about why the marshes are disappearing,7 there's many, many reasons. One of them is8 sea level; you know, part of the problem is9 sea level rise. So it's just marsh can

10 handle a certain amount of flooding and11 handle it fairly well.12 MR. LAMBERT: Okay.13 MS. MILLER: I'd just like to make a14 continuing objection to the line of15 questioning asking her for expert opinions in16 this area.

17 MR. LAMBERT: Dandy.18 MS. MILLER: She is being produced as a fact19 witness here.20 MR. LAMBERT: I understand.21 MS. MILLER: All right.22 MR. LAMBERT: I'm learning. Okay.23 BY MR. LAMBERT24 Q. So now I understand. What is it that25 affects, negatively affects a marsh, if not sea level

Page 44

1 rise?

2 A. Sea level. Nutria sometimes eat it up. You

3 can get, not -- get no nutrients perhaps. When waves

4 come in, sometimes they bring nutrients from the bottom

5 of the lake or bay. Lack of sediments. Again, there's

6 a whole bunch of things, and they all add up.

7 Q. Okay. Let me describe to you a phenomenon

8 which I believe relates to facts, a factual

9 circumstance given to me by a fisherman. And maybe

10 you've experienced the same thing; I don't know.

11 He tells me that when he fishes along the

12 MRGO, or used to fish along the MRGO, in shallow water,

13 meaning along the banks, that he would put his anchor

14 out and they would fish in the shallow water. And this

15 is where he bumped into the cypress swamp or stumps

16 situation. He had to know where they were to get in

17 there.

18 A. Yep.

19 Q. And he said that when they would see a large20 ship coming, they would have to pull up the anchor

21 right quick and scoot out into the deeper water

22 because, as the ship approached, the following

23 occurred: First of all there was a downward motion of

24 the water. In other words, I think it's called

25 "downdraft" or down-something-or-other.

Page 45

1 A. Uh-huh.

2 Q. Depends, of course, on the size of the ship

3 and the weight and so on. But he said, if it's a big

4 ship and it's coming pretty quick, it would be two or

5 more feet of downward water motion. And then the next

6 thing that would happen would be a 6-foot wave would

7 come from the ship wake and wash into the, over the --

8 over the berm and into the swamp. And then that wave

9 would come back into the MRGO. And he said that after

10 that first one, then there would be a few others from

11 the wake that did the same thing, and that you could

12 see the sediment coming from the brackish swamp area

13 into the canal.

14 Have you seen that phenomenon?15 MS. MILLER: Objection. Foundation,

16 incomplete.

17 THE WITNESS: To tell the truth, yes.18 BY MR. LAMBERT

19 Q. And of course the Corps spent 10 to 14 or 15

20 million dollars a year dredging the channel, and other

21 witnesses have told us that part of that sediment that

22 they would have to continually dredge from the MRGO

23 probably came from that process.

24 Would that sort of phenomena have a negative

25 effect on the health of the brackish swamp?

8/14/2019 KTR00095

13/14



13 (Pages 46 to 49)

Page 46

1 MS. MILLER: Objection, vague. Calls for2 speculation.3 THE WITNESS: Not my area of expertise.4 Other than someone that's seen it, yes, it5 would.6

And, by the way, there is no brackish7 swamp.8 BY MR. LAMBERT9 Q. Excuse me.

10 A. You are untrainable.11 Q. I'm sorry. Brackish marsh, I'm sorry.12 Correct.13 Let me tell you how bad this guy said it was.14 He said a friend of his didn't move his anchor and he15 was sitting in his boat, and the downdraft came and the16 boat was beached.17 A. Yes.18 Q. Now he can't move. He said the next thing he

19 sees is a 6-foot wave breaking, which then broke into20 the boat. He said he learned his lesson.21 A. I can believe it.22 Q. The hard way, right.23 MS. MILLER: Just object to the stories about24 the unidentified witness.25 MR. LAMBERT: I agree with you. It can be

Page 47

1 stricken.2 THE WITNESS: He didn't say that.3 BY MR. LAMBERT4 Q. Right.5 This outline, Exhibit 2, of your experience6 mentions your activities, not only with regard to the7 wetlands themselves, but also the wetlands as a8 habitat.9 And, by the way, I'm sorry about your loss,

10 your husband.11 A. Thank you.12 Q. I saw something about turtle takings. Is13 that something that happens with dredging sometimes?14 MS. MILLER: Objection.15 THE WITNESS: That isn't my area of expertise16 at all, but yes.

17 MR. LAMBERT: Okay.18 MS. MILLER: Would you like to take a minute19 to read this?20 THE WITNESS: I read fast.21 MS. MILLER: Okay.22 THE WITNESS: Yes.23 BY MR. LAMBERT24 Q. Now, in terms of wetland, particularly25 brackish marsh, can brackish marsh remain healthy --

Page 48

1 and again, we're doing a level salinity. We're not2 going to introduce salinity into the question right3 now.4 A. Uh-huh.5 Q. -- if there is subsidence?6

MS. MILLER: Objection.7 THE WITNESS: It depends how bad.8 BY MR. LAMBERT9 Q. Well, exactly. As long as it's a moderate or

10 a minimal subsidence on a rate basis?11 MS. MILLER: Objection. Vague, calls for12 speculation.13 THE WITNESS: I don't know. Too much14 subsidence and it becomes open water, but I15 don't know how much too much is.16 BY MR. LAMBERT17 Q. Okay. It's not your area of expertise for18 what effect a cypress-tupelo swamp will have with

19 regard to wind? No.20 A. I would assume they stop winds.21 Q. Right.22 A. But so does a marsh to a degree, so ...23 Q. Okay. I see. I understand.24 A healthy cypress swamp is able to withstand25 wind in terms of a tree being blown down. Correct?

Page 49

1 MS. MILLER: Objection.2 THE WITNESS: Well, Katrina took a few down.3 So ...4 BY MR. LAMBERT5 Q. Right. But not all of them?6 A. No. I don't know.7 MS. MILLER: Objection.8 BY MR. LAMBERT9 Q. Okay. All right.

10 A. I haven't been out in the swamp much since11 Katrina.12 Q. A healthy cypress swamp has the13 characteristics of being able to withstand wind; I14 mean, up to a degree obviously?15 MS. MILLER: Objection, vague.16 THE WITNESS: Yes, I mean, you can withstand

17 wind up to a degree and then it blows over.18 BY MR. LAMBERT19 Q. That's right. And the fact that they exist20 for a long period of time through various weather21 conditions is a testament to their ability to withstand22 whatever they withstood in that timeframe. Correct?23 MS. MILLER: Objection, vague, speculative.24 THE WITNESS: Probably.25 BY MR. LAMBERT

8/14/2019 KTR00095

14/14



14 (Pages 50 to 52)

Page 50

1 Q. All right. Let me just look through my notes

2 here for a second.

3 With the exception of asking you where I can

4 find -- because I've got to look for some of this

5 historical stuff that you've told me about, these maps?

6 A. They are in my report.

7 Q. Okay.

8 A. They are not very good copies, but they are

9 in the report.

10 Q. Okay. Let me ask you if you could do this

11 for us: If you would provide to your counsel a copy of

12 your report, because the ones I've got have been

13 scanned and Xeroxed and e-mailed and every other thing.

14 A. Mine has, too.

15 Q. Well, it's probably to --

16 A. Now I think it's on the Web somewhere in a

17 fairly decent form.

18 Q. Okay.

19 A. I would have to make a phone call.20 Q. Okay. Could you get me that?

21 A. Yes, I will.

22 Q. However.

23 A. I will give it to her.

24 Q. The link. Give it to her and she will give

25 it to me.

Page 51

1 A. All right.

2 MR. LAMBERT: Let's go off the record a

3 minute. I'm going to talk to my colleagues,

4 I think we're finished.

5 THE WITNESS: Okay.

6 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the record, it is

7 10:15.

8 (Brief recess.)

9 MR. LAMBERT: Mrs. Hawes, thank you very much

10 for your patience with us, and I don't have

11 any further questions.

12 THE WITNESS: Okay.

13 MR. LAMBERT: Thank you.

14 Anybody have a question?

15 MS. SULLIVAN: No.

16 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: That concludes this

17 deposition at 10:16.18 (Reporter's Note. Logged in through

19 IDEP are Eric Goldberg, William Gardner

20 and Brian Ryckmen.)

21 * * *

22

23

24

25

Page 52

1 R E P O R T E R ' S C E R T I F I C A T E2

3 I, Estella O. Champion, a Certified Court4 Reporter (Certificate # 76003) in good standing with5 the State of Louisiana, as the officer before whom this6

testimony was taken, do hereby certify that SUZANNE7 HAWES, after having been duly sworn by me upon8 authority of R.S. 37:2554, did testify as hereinbefore9 set forth in the foregoing 51 pages; that this

10 testimony was reported by me in the stenotype reporting11 method; and transcribed thereafter by me on computer or12 under my personal direction and supervision, and that13 same is a true and correct transcript to the best of my14 ability and understanding; that I am not of Counsel,15 nor related to counsel or the parties hereto, and in no16 way interested in the outcome of this event.17 MAY 2, 200818

1920 ______________________________21 ESTELLA O. CHAMPION, RDR-CRR22 * * *23

24

25

ktr00095

Documents