GAO blasts FEMA costs for trailers

November 17, 2007
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

JACKSON --What will $229,000 cover in the Mississippi real estate market?

Try a five-bedroom, 2,000-square-foot home in the capital city of Jackson. Or a 280-square-foot temporary FEMA trailer on the Katrina-ravaged Coast.

A government report issued Friday says "ineffective oversight" by FEMA caused about $30 million in "wasteful and improper or potentially fraudulent payments" to contractors between June 2006 and January 2007, including expenses for some temporary trailer sites.

Some FEMA trailers are on private property, such as the front yards of people's homes. Others are in group sites, or temporary trailer parks, that were set up after the storm to provide shelter to people who lost apartments or rental homes.

Katrina damaged or destroyed 134,000 homes and 10,000 rental units in Mississippi, according to the report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office. The report does not include spending or provide statistics for Louisiana.

The GAO report says FEMA will spend an average of $30,000 on each Katrina trailer on a private site through March 2009, when the government plans to close the temporary housing.

But at a temporary trailer park set up after Katrina at Port Bienville Park in Hancock County, the report says expenses for one trailer could hit $229,000. That covers costs for FEMA to buy, haul and install each trailer and to lay out, construct and maintain the group site.

"Part of the reason for this expense is that FEMA placed only eight trailers at the Bienville site," the GAO said. "FEMA wastes money when it operates sites with such a small number of trailers because GSM (group-site maintenance) costs are fixed whether a site contains 1 or 50 trailer pads."

The GAO compared the cost of a Port Bienville trailer to a five-bedroom home in Jackson.

FEMA responded it agrees with all of the GAO's recommendations in the report, including one to evaluate whether money can be saved in the placement and maintenance of trailers.

Steven J. Pecinovsky, director of the Departmental Audit Liaison Office for FEMA, wrote that most people who receive temporary housing after a disaster want to stay close to where they had lived.

"As some of the disaster victims are renters, the agency does set up group sites and utilizes existing commercial sites in order to house them in their pre-disaster community," Pecinovsky wrote in the FEMA response, which was included in the GAO report.

The GAO says FEMA gave contracts for group-site maintenance to two companies that did not appear to have met a requirement to submit independent bids. The companies had the same president and accountant, and the companies shared price information before submitting proposals to FEMA, the GAO says.

Pecinovsky said FEMA will evaluate whether contractors were overpaid.


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Bush’s FEMA Smells Kinda Fishy

by Ana Maria

Since moving into the White House in January 2001, the Bush Administration has been spending our tax dollars like drunken sailors on leave for a weekend in the French Quarter. Drunk with stupidity or the arrogance of power or both, Bush’s FEMA wants to be let off the hook when it comes to the costs for restocking the New Orleans Aquarium. Their refusal just didn’t pass the smell test, and now we find out just how fishy Bush’s FEMA is.

Bush’s White House is used to overpaying its high roller campaign contributors. Katrina’s aftermath provided another pond into which Bush, Cheney and their high-roller supporters could fish for the most inflatable opportunities. FEMA’s formaldehyde-filled trailers are one such example.

In south Mississippi at one point we had 40,000 people living in FEMA trailers, we're grateful for every one of them. But those trailers were delivered by a friend of the president by the name of Riley Bechtel, a major contributor to Bush administration. He got $16,000 to haul a trailer the last 70 miles from Purvis, Miss., down to the Gulf Coast, hook it up to a garden hose, hook it up to a sewer tap, and plug it in, $16,000.

Congressman Gene Taylor (D-MS)
House of Representatives debate, March 22, 2007

[Watch the video in which Taylor expertly filets Republican Congressman Tom Price on yet another pathetically uncompassionate proposal from that side of the aisle.]

OVERbilling is the kind of innovative and creative skills Bush and Cheney’s Administration reward. In the case of the New Orleans Aquarium, the Aquarium’s innovative and creative skills led them to go out to sea and catch the fish "the old fashioned way, hooks and nets." The cost? $90,000.

What keeps rolling around in my head is this line.

FEMA would have been willing to pay more than $600,000 for the fish if they had been bought from commercial suppliers.

What?! This is so nuts. Yes, I know that this is THE most corrupt and incompetent administrations in my lifetime. Thankfully, their corruption and incompetence hasn’t tarnished my internal compass of what I expect and desire—and am willing to work on behalf of—in public officials be they elected or appointed.

What gets me is that I know full well that the reason stupid decisions or foot-dragging at the lower levels of any government agency happens for one primary reason: management at the top tolerates, excepts, and/or promotes it. This administration is the poster child for this lesson in organizational behavior being set at the top and rolling down hill.

The New Orleans Aquarium is a major tourist attraction to this much beloved city. New Orleanians take great pride in it. Residents like my precious niece and her father—my brother—spend their precious free time volunteering for hours on end to help the city’s tourists enjoy this beautiful place.

Clearly, FEMA’s rationale for questioning these Aquarium costs is more than a bit fishy. Quite simply, FEMA’s foot dragging, nay-saying, red-tape creating, and obstacle course to reimbursing legitimate costs for the Aquarium as well as cities, states, and families smells to high heaven.

Requiring any of us to OVERSPEND tax dollars as if we are Bush’s best campaign buddies sucking at the government teat—to put it bluntly—stinks like dead fish.

© 2007 Ana Maria Rosato. All rights reserved.
Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Aquarium tanks are full, but bill remains unpaid

Christina Nguyen takes a snapshot of a shark as friends Huy Nguyen and Tony Nguyen, all of New Orleans, visit the restocked Gulf of Mexico exhibit at the Aquarium last month.
STAFF PHOTO BY ELIOT KAMENITZ

By Mark Schleifstein
Staff writer
November 12, 2007

When black smoke stopped streaming from an emergency generator atop the Audubon Nature Institute's Aquarium of the Americas three days after Hurricane Katrina, it marked the death of more than 8,000 of the aquarium's occupants, from huge sharks to tiny jellyfish.

Without electricity, pumps used to supply oxygen to watery exhibits throughout the aquarium went quiet, and suffocated fish quickly bobbed upside down on the surface of tanks throughout the building.

More than two years later, after an outpouring of donations from the public and from sister aquariums across the United States, the fish are swimming again in the wide variety of exhibits within the restored jewel on New Orleans' riverfront.

But aquarium officials say they're now drowning in federal bureaucracy, still wading through a series of nonsensical Federal Emergency Management Agency decisions that have held up requests for reimbursement of $90,000 in costs associated with restocking the exhibits with marine life.


Off Big Pine Key in Florida, Elizabeth Hayes captures a juvenile grunt for the Aquarium of the Americas in April 2006. Aquarium officials say FEMA decisions have held up reimbursement of $90,000 in costs associated with restocking the exhibits.

STAFF FILE PHOTO BY MICHAEL DeMOCKER

One of the city's top tourist attractions should be treated like other businesses devastated by Katrina, and allowed to recoup at least part of the cost of collecting the replacement specimens, said Audubon chief operating officer Dale Stastny.

At first, FEMA officials likened dead fish to irreplaceable works of art, like paintings lost in the flood, and declared them thus ineligible for reimbursement. Audubon officials quickly lobbied the agency to explain that, yes, fish die all the time at aquariums across the country, and are just as routinely replaced.

"We told them that, though emotionally it's true each fish is a unique living animal, none of them lives forever. And when they die, we replace them," he said.

The aquarium also showed FEMA officials where the federal agency reimbursed a Texas university for the cost of replacing a laboratory's stable of test rats killed in a similar flood -- at a much greater cost than the aquarium's fish expenses, Stastny said.

FEMA reluctantly relented, and aquarium officials then submitted a bill for expenses that had not already been reimbursed by insurance or through donations of fish by other aquariums.

That included the New Orleans aquarium's cost of transporting jellyfish from the New England Aquarium in Boston, and aquariums in Monterey, Calif., and Baltimore; five large sand tiger sharks from the Ripley's Aquarium in Myrtle Beach, S.C.; and a school of more than 100 blue runner fish donated by the Tennessee Aquarium in Chattanooga.

But the second sticking point for FEMA officials, apparently, came over excursions to the Florida Keys, the Bahamas and Chesapeake Bay, where Audubon staffers donned swimsuits, snorkels and scuba equipment -- and suntan oil -- to collect a wide variety of exotic fish ranging from gaudy tropical reef species and nurse sharks.

Stastny said buying the same fish on the open market, if they were available, would have cost close to $500,000 -- compared with the $90,000 in expenses they're trying to collect.

"Obviously, they're not going to pay us for what other aquariums gave us," Stastny said. "But what we're requesting is reimbursement of our staff time and the use of our equipment to go collect the fish."

FEMA spokesman Bob Josephson said the agency has not yet dismissed the aquarium's request.

"I do know that there are some expenses that are being looked at, and that could be deemed eligible to being reimbursed," Josephson said. "It was denied the first time, but they have the appeals process to go through, and it's being looked at.

"We're optimistic that that will result in a conclusion that both we and the aquarium can be happy with," he said.

Stastny remains guardedly optimistic.

"They did reimburse us for some of our other cleanup expenses," he said. "Now the task is helping them understand that -- if they can get past the idea of fish as a living collection of art, irreplaceable or not -- it's no different than debris removal."

Mark Schleifstein can be reached at mschleifstein@timespicayune.com or at (504) 826-3327.


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

FEMA wants to be let off the hook for reimbursement

Tuesday, November 13, 2007

By Mark Schleifstein

Staff writer

When black smoke stopped streaming from an emergency generator atop the Audubon Nature Institute's Aquarium of the Americas three days after Hurricane Katrina, it marked the death of more than 8,000 of the aquarium's occupants, from huge sharks to tiny jellyfish.

But aquarium officials say they're now drowning in federal bureaucracy, still wading through a series of nonsensical Federal Emergency Management Agency decisions that have held up requests for reimbursement of $90,000 in costs associated with restocking the exhibits with marine life.

One of the city's top tourist attractions should be treated like other businesses devastated by Katrina, and allowed to recoup at least part of the cost of collecting the replacement specimens, said Audubon chief operating officer Dale Stastny.

At first, FEMA officials likened dead fish to irreplaceable works of art, like paintings lost in the flood, and declared them thus ineligible for reimbursement. Audubon officials quickly lobbied the agency to explain that, yes, fish die all the time at aquariums across the country, and are just as routinely replaced.

"We told them that, though emotionally it's true each fish is a unique living animal, none of them lives forever. And when they die, we replace them," he said.

The aquarium also showed FEMA officials where the federal agency reimbursed a Texas university for the cost of replacing a laboratory's stable of test rats killed in a similar flood -- at a much greater cost than the aquarium's fish expenses, Stastny said.

FEMA reluctantly relented, and aquarium officials then submitted a bill for expenses that had not already been reimbursed by insurance or through donations of fish by other aquariums.

That included the New Orleans aquarium's cost of transporting jellyfish from the New England Aquarium in Boston, and aquariums in Monterey, Calif., and Baltimore; five large sand tiger sharks from the Ripley's Aquarium in Myrtle Beach, S.C.; and a school of more than 100 blue runner fish donated by the Tennessee Aquarium in Chattanooga.

But the second sticking point for FEMA officials, apparently, came over excursions to the Florida Keys, the Bahamas and Chesapeake Bay, where Audubon staffers donned swimsuits, snorkels and scuba equipment -- and suntan oil -- to collect a wide variety of exotic fish ranging from gaudy tropical reef species and nurse sharks.

Stastny said buying the same fish on the open market, if they were available, would have cost close to $500,000 -- compared with the $90,000 in expenses they're trying to collect.

"Obviously, they're not going to pay us for what other aquariums gave us," Stastny said. "But what we're requesting is reimbursement of our staff time and the use of our equipment to go collect the fish."

FEMA spokesman Bob Josephson said the agency has not yet dismissed the aquarium's request.

"I do know that there are some expenses that are being looked at, and that could be deemed eligible to being reimbursed," Josephson said. "It was denied the first time, but they have the appeals process to go through, and it's being looked at.

"We're optimistic that that will result in a conclusion that both we and the aquarium can be happy with," he said.

Stastny remains guardedly optimistic.

"They did reimburse us for some of our other cleanup expenses," he said. "Now the task is helping them understand that -- if they can get past the idea of fish as a living collection of art, irreplaceable or not -- it's no different than debris removal."

. . . . . . .

Mark Schleifstein can be reached at mschleifstein@timespicayune.com or at (504) 826-3327.

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

N.O aquarium denied $$: FEMA doesn't like fish freshly caught

11/13/2007, 4:19 p.m. CST
By JOHN MORENO GONZALES
The Associated Press

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — In what some see as another bureaucratic absurdity after Hurricane Katrina, FEMA is refusing to pick up the cost of restocking New Orleans' aquarium because of how the new fish were obtained: straight from the sea.

FEMA would have been willing to pay more than $600,000 for the fish if they had been bought from commercial suppliers. But the agency is balking because the Audubon Aquarium of the Americas went out and replaced the dead fish the old fashioned way, with hooks and nets. That expedition saved the taxpayers a half-million dollars but did not comply with FEMA regulations.

"You get to the point where the red tape has so overwhelmed the process that there's not a lot you can do to actually be effective," Warren Eller, associate director of the Stephenson Disaster Management Institute at Louisiana State University, said of FEMA's actions.

Katrina knocked out power to the tourist attraction at the edge of the French Quarter in August 2005, and the staff returned days four days later to find sharks, tropical fish, jellyfish and thousands of other creatures dead in their tanks.

Aquarium officials wanted to reopen the place quickly. So even before the $616,000 commitment from the Federal Emergency Management Agency came through, they sent a team on an expedition to the Gulf of Mexico, the Florida Keys and Bahamas, where they caught 1,681 fish for $99,766.

Despite the clear savings, the dispute has dragged on for 17 months.

"FEMA does not consider it reasonable when an applicant takes excursions to collect specimens," FEMA quality control manager Barb Schweda wrote in a 2006 e-mail. "They must be obtained through a reputable sources where, again, the item is commercially available."

FEMA's refusal to reimburse the aquarium is grounded in the Stafford Act, the federal law governing disaster aid that has been criticized as inadequate for Katrina recovery. The Stafford Act says facilities can only be returned to their pre-disaster condition, not improved. Under those rules, the aquarium would have to buy fish of the approximate age and size of the lost specimens.

State experts and others counter that acquiring thousands of duplicates in the marketplace is nearly impossible, and a waste of public money.

"You can go out in the commercial market and buy a clownfish. You can also go out and capture it. And if you're capturing fish to fill an aquarium, it is much more cost-effective. Talk about being good stewards of the taxpayer dollar," said Rick Patterson, a specialist with James Lee Witt Associates, a firm that mediates Louisiana's disputes with FEMA. The firm is led by Witt, FEMA director during the Clinton administration.

Mark Smith, a spokesman with the Gov.'s Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness, complained that all too often, FEMA does not reward innovation or cost-saving ways to rebuild.

"It's relatively typical that when Louisiana, or an applicant, finds a unique way to solve a problem that FEMA comes in and throws a flag and says, `No, you can't do that,'" Smith said.

Local officials have complained that FEMA has applied the rules with maddening literal-mindedness, insisting on itemizing smashed buildings down to every last light fixture, doorknob and hinge when awarding rebuilding aid.

Bob Josephson, FEMA's director of external affairs in Louisiana, was alerted to the case by The Associated Press and reviewed it recently. He suggested FEMA may have made a mistake, but did not promise quick resolution.

"There are approximately 35,000 projects in the system and although we work very hard to ensure we get them right the first time around, undoubtedly, some will be misjudged," he said.

About a dozen aquarium staffers went fishing, snorkeling and scuba diving between January and May 2006, catching tiny highhat fish, yellowtail snapper, jackfish and others. The staffers worked 12-hour days but put in for only eight hours a day, according to invoices.

The catch was placed in a 1,000-gallon tank fitted to a flatbed trailer for the trip to New Orleans. TV crews and a local newspaper reporter tagged along on some trips but paid their own bills.

Most of the fish were caught in Florida waters for one-fifth the price charged by online vendors and specialty stores — suppliers FEMA recommended using.

"That is exactly the most prudent way to do it," Steve Feldman, spokesman for the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, said of the fishing trip.

The aquarium also received donations from other institutions, including stingrays from Sea World in Orlando, Fla.

With the aquarium's 900,000 annual visitors a linchpin of the city's tourism-dependent economy, the state asked FEMA in May 2006 for rebuilding help for the private institution even though the fish had already been caught. It is not unusual for the state to ask for assistance after a project has been completed.

The fish were put on display in mid-2006 and have proved to be healthy. But the aquarium had to lay off 80 percent of its workers after Katrina and attendance is only 70 percent of what it was before the storm, spokeswoman Melissa Lee said.

"When those numbers drop, the revenue drops," she said. "That's money that could go to feeding animals and increasing staff. That's money we need back from FEMA."

The firm mediating the dispute has pressed on with its effort to secure FEMA help, arguing that salmon hatcheries in Oregon and lab rats in Texas were replaced with FEMA money after disasters hit there in 1994 and 2001.

The New Orleans case has been appealed to FEMA offices in Texas and Washington. The dispute could wind up in federal court.


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Engineers cut from storm suits

• Firm that helped State Farm with claims reaches settlement

By Michael Kunzelman
The Associated Press
November 14, 2007

NEW ORLEANS — An engineering firm has reached a settlement with attorneys who have filed hundreds of lawsuits against State Farm Insurance Cos. on behalf of policyholders whose claims were denied by the insurer after Hurricane Katrina.

Under terms of the settlement, Forensic Analysis and Engineering Corp., which helped State Farm adjust policyholder claims in Mississippi, would be dropped from a federal lawsuit that accuses the insurer of engaging in a "pattern of racketeering" after the storm.

Forensic would be dismissed from several of those suits, including one filed in June that accuses Bloomington, Ill.-based State Farm of violating the civil Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization Act, or RICO, in its handling of claims after the Aug. 29, 2005, hurricane.

Zach Scruggs, one of the attorneys who filed the RICO case against Forensic, State Farm and engineering firm E.A. Renfroe & Company Inc., said the settlement will "better enable us to prosecute our cases against State Farm." Scruggs said he couldn't elaborate, however, because the terms of the deal are confidential.


In a related development this past week, a federal magistrate in Gulfport agreed to lift a court order that had barred Scruggs from providing a federal grand jury with a Forensic employee's computer hard drive.

U.S. Attorney Dunn Lampton, whose jurisdiction includes Mississippi's Gulf Coast, served Scruggs with a subpoena for the hard drive. Lampton has convened a grand jury that is believed to be investigating the insurance industry's handling of claims after Katrina.

Forensic had persuaded U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert Walker to block Scruggs from complying with the subpoena. Now that Walker has lifted the order, Scruggs said his firm is "making arrangements" to turn over the hard drive it obtained from Forensic employee Nellie Williams in July.

An attorney for Raleigh, N.C.-based Forensic and a State Farm spokesman said they couldn't immediately comment on Forensic's settlement.

Scruggs and other policyholders' attorneys have accused State Farm of pressuring its engineers into altering their conclusions in reports on storm-damaged homes so claims could be denied. To support that claim, Scruggs' firm cited a series of e-mails exchanged by Forensic officials in October 2005.

In one e-mail, Forensic President and CEO Robert Kochan describes complaints about the firm's work made by Alexis King, a State Farm manager in Mississippi. Randy Down, who was the firm's vice president of engineering services, responded, "I really question the ethics of someone who wants to fire us simply because our conclusions don't match hers."

Forensic also is named as a defendant in a separate lawsuit the Scruggs Katrina Group's attorneys filed against several insurance companies, accusing them of overbilling the federal government for flood damage from Katrina.

The U.S. Department of Justice has until Jan. 31 to decide whether to intervene in that suit. In the meantime, Scruggs said his firm doesn't have the authority to dismiss Forensic from the case.

"That's kind of in a holding pattern now," he said.




Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Renters struggle for assistance

Rigid rules abandon needy families


By ANITA LEE
calee@sunherald.com

D'IBERVILLE --Before Hurricane Katrina, Susan Anderson and her 10-year-old son, Tyler, evacuated from Arbor View Apartment Homes with their most treasured possessions, including photographs of Tyler from infancy to boyhood.

Those possessions are stacked in a dozen boxes against freshly painted blank walls at Arbor View.

"I'm not comfortable enough to put a nail in a wall and hang something up," Susan Anderson said recently. "It will hurt so much if I have to take it down."

The Andersons are among those who struggled to make ends meet before Hurricane Katrina and now find themselves one step from homelessness despite more than $3.2 billion in government and charity assistance for Mississippians hit by Katrina.

Their story illustrates how survivors can be mistreated and mismanaged when their needs fail to dovetail with recovery's rigid rules. It also raises questions about how smooth the transition will be for more than 10,000 households still in FEMA trailers, as Anderson and Tyler were until their apartment was renovated.

More than 50 percent of those households rented before the hurricane. The Andersons were among the vast majority - 99.4 percent - who managed without public housing assistance, according to FEMA.

Anderson dissolves into tears when she describes the way FEMA has treated her.

She said, "I think their job is to demean you, insult you and accuse you of trying to rip them off."

FEMA refused to discuss her case for privacy reasons but said it is under review.

Anderson has received about $15,000 in FEMA assistance but no money to help with rent despite the fact that individuals are eligible for up to $26,200. Relief organizations have also been unable to assist, although Mercy Housing and Human Development agreed Friday to take on the case because 49-year-old Anderson is disabled.

FEMA eventually put them up at a Holiday Inn in Orange Beach, Ala. The Andersons spent their $2,000 in emergency funds on transportation, laundry, food and cell phone minutes.

The FEMA workers kept telling Anderson to find an apartment. But she saw no sense in searching for a rental in a small resort community where she had no support system and no transportation.

Tyler, desperate to return home, finally told her, "Just get a car, Momma, and we can drive it as close as we can to home and sleep in it until they have something ready for us."

The stress was getting to Tyler. He finally had to confess to his overburdened mother that he was having problems. His health insurance, through the state of Mississippi, covered his medical costs. He needed testing and treatment.

Anderson rented a car, hoping a personal visit to the FEMA disaster relief center would help them secure a trailer in D'Iberville.

On their second trip to the Mississippi Coast in a rental car, the Andersons were once again informed by FEMA that there was no trailer for them in D'Iberville. But they had seen vacant spots at one of the parks there.

Susan Anderson pitched a fit. The relief worker got on the telephone. Within 30 minutes, they were handed the keys to a FEMA trailer in D'Iberville.

They moved in after Christmas 2005. Tyler returned to D'Iberville Elementary School, where he was a fourth-grader. In February, Laura Bush visited. She wanted to know what made the children feel safe. Tyler drew a picture of the Holiday Inn employees in front of the hotel. They had surprised his mom and him at Christmas with a tree and gifts. He got a new bicycle and a PlayStation 2.

That night on television, Laura Bush mentioned his drawing and talked about how important it was for children to feel safe. Susan Anderson could tell from the look on her son's face how happy he was that someone - the first lady, no less - had cared enough to listen.

How to help

If you would like to help Susan Anderson and her 10-year-old son, Tyler, call Mercy Housing and Human Development, Monday through Friday, at 896-1945.


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Accused firm could settle in Scruggs case

By ANITA LEE

GULFPORT -- Forensic notice of settlement

The Scruggs Katrina Group has settled its differences with an engineering firm accused of criminal activity in handling of Hurricane Katrina claims, according to a notice filed in U.S. District Court.

If the settlement is finalized, Forensic Analysis & Engineering Corp. will be dismissed as a defendant in a racketeering lawsuit the Scruggs group filed on behalf of 21 policyholders from Pascagoula to Waveland.

Terms of the settlement were not disclosed.

The lawsuit alleges State Farm insurance companies conspired with vendors to minimize or deny policyholder claims by blaming Katrina damage on tidal surge covered by federal flood insurance rather than the wind damage State Farm covers.


State Farm and the vendors, including Forensic and independent adjusting firm E.A. Renfroe & Co., have denied the allegations.

Forensic also is under federal scrutiny. In a policyholder lawsuit filed by the Scruggs group, Forensic was forced to turn over the personal computer hard drive of employee Nellie Williams, who exchanged e-mails with company engineers assigned to State Farm claims.

The U.S. Attorney's Office in Jackson subpoenaed the computer hard drive from the Scruggs group, asking that it be delivered to a grand jury in Gulfport. Forensic at first fought the subpoena, which the Scruggs group wanted to give federal prosecutors. The two sides settled their disagreement over the hard drive on Nov. 9, the same day Forensic entered a notice that a settlement was at hand in the racketeering case.

Forensic e-mails previously obtained by the Scruggs group for the racketeering case show State Farm manager Alexis "Lecky" King was unhappy when engineers concluded wind had damaged property, insisting water was the cause. King at first "fired" Forensic, the e-mails indicated, but decided to give the company another chance if two contested reports were reworked.

King has been identified as a "target" of the federal investigation, but her attorney says she has done nothing wrong. In cases where she has been forced to offer pretrial testimony, King has refused to answer many questions, invoking her Fifth Amendment right to avoid self-incrimination.

State Farm maintains it was simply seeking "dependable, accurate engineering reports."

Forensic attorney Larry Canada of New Orleans could not be reached to comment.

The racketeering lawsuit filed by the Scruggs group on behalf of policyholders has been assigned to Judge William H. Barbour Jr. in Jackson and has tentatively been set for trial Oct. 20, 2008.

• Federal subpoena for Forensic hard drive

• Forensic, Scruggs joint motion regarding subpoenaed records


Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Mother, son struggling to keep roof over heads

Posted on Tue, Nov. 13, 2007
By ANITA LEE
calee@sunherald.com

D'IBERVILLE -- Susan Anderson watched her recovery money dwindle as she tried to keep herself and her son, Tyler, afloat after Hurricane Katrina.

In early 2006, they finally secured a temporary home in a FEMA trailer off Lamey Bridge Road, a few miles from the D'Iberville apartment complex where they had lived before the storm.

Anderson worked the phones, trying to find help. She desperately needed a car. Her son had taken ill after the hurricane and had weekly appointments with two different doctors. A cab ride to one of those appointments was $38.

A FEMA counselor referred Anderson to the Harrison County Long Term Recovery Coalition, whose flier said the agency helped with unmet needs such as housing and vehicles.

She filled out an application with the Harrison County group, but did not hear back. As 2006 wore on, Anderson was running out of options. FEMA had given her $9,000 for furniture, but she and Tyler didn't need furniture for the trailer. FEMA could not give her money for a car because the two she lost in Katrina had been in family members' names.

She finally decided to use the FEMA money as a downpayment on a car. She bought a new Toyota Corolla because she feared a used car might be a flooded Katrina wreck. Her decision to buy a car with the furniture money was a no-no. From that point, relief workers began speaking to her as if she were a thief.

"Why can a mother not get her child medical treatment?" Anderson said recently. "What was I supposed to do? Flap my arms, turn into a bird and fly him to his medical appointments?"

What the various relief workers failed to understand was that Anderson and her son had not been sitting in their trailer, piling up relief loot. They had lost their food stamps because they had a FEMA trailer. Their transportation expenses had skyrocketed. Laundromat washers and dryers ate lots of quarters.

Anderson documented her expenses, including the weekly doctor's appointments.

By March of 2007, apartments had been restored at Arbor View, where the Andersons lived before the storm. She and Tyler moved home, away from the FEMA park where drug addicts loitered and strangers bunked with the neighbors.

Anderson's rent is slightly higher and the apartment smaller than before the storm, but the complex is kid-friendly, secure and well maintained. Anderson has received no FEMA assistance for the move or the rent. FEMA caps individual assistance at $26,200, but Anderson said she has received only about $15,000.

The Salvation Army gave the Andersons vouchers for two mattresses and box springs. Anderson called the Harrison County Long Term Recovery again to see why no caseworker had been in touch and if they could help with furniture. The woman who answered said Anderson could be prosecuted for duplication of benefits.

"She told me I should have saved my FEMA money for furniture," Anderson said.

FEMA refused to acknowledge that her benefits would not be duplicated if an agency helped her. Anderson decided to visit the FEMA office in Biloxi.

"Security is everywhere," Anderson said. "It's locked up tighter than Fort Knox." She said a fellow named Buddy was sent up front to talk to her. Buddy told her to copy her records and resubmit them, including all her rental car receipts. They were duly submitted, but her request for further assistance was denied.

She said Buddy told her: "As far as I can see, you're doing pretty good. You've got a brand new car, you've got a new apartment. It's the end of the line for you, lady."

On Aug. 16, Anderson penned a letter to U.S. Sen. Trent Lott. The letter was 10 pages organized as 17 points. The 11th point: "We have fallen so far behind on just the most basic living expenses, we are going to lose everything."

Point 15, in part: "I have not gotten rich from this situation. We have had to seek assistance for food and to pay electricity over the past several months. I sold my jewelry. It wasn't worth much but had sentimental value to me (I salvaged it from mud and water after Katrina). My son has even sold his video games.

"I've heard words like 'donor intent' from charitable groups. I don't think donors would mind if their donations went toward helping a mother get her child to his doctor. As far as FEMA is concerned, I don't understand why they seem to be enjoying the fact that I will lose everything again. It seems like such a waste of taxpayer dollars because a lot has been spent on housing for us up to this point."

Anderson has received no response.

As for FEMA, the agency could not discuss Anderson's case because of privacy issues. Instead, FEMA released this statement: "Her case is still under review. The review process is still continuing."

Anderson doubts she and Tyler could find a cheaper place to live. Their rent at Arbor View is $835 a month for a two-bedroom apartment.

"I'm not saying I can't pay rent," Anderson said. "Right now, I'm just saying there's not a lot to choose from. I'll never have any money for furniture now."

Besides the beds, they have a couch and love seat loaned to them by a woman from one of the churches. Anderson also bought a washer and dryer. They have no tables. Tyler points to a plastic storage box when asked where he eats.

Still, he is thriving in school and happy to be home. Best of all, he has completed his medical treatments and feels much better, although he is still very anxious.

"I worry that we're not going to be able to live here," said Tyler, who has bright blue eyes. "I want to live here more than anything."

How to help

If you would like to help Susan Anderson and her son, call Mercy Housing and Human Development at 896-1945.


© 2007 Sun Herald. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.sunherald.com

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......

Toxic gas pervasive in FEMA units, tests show

Nearly all trailers, mobile homes exceed long-term formaldehyde standard

Daisy Carmouche reads the Bible on her couch where she spends most of her time since her medical condition deteriorated after moving into the FEMA-provided mobile home in Picayune, Miss. Sean Gardner / for MSNBC

By Mike Brunker

Projects Team editor

MSNBC

updated 5:07 a.m. CT, Mon., Nov. 12, 2007

More than two years after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita battered the Mississippi Gulf Coast, private tests of FEMA travel trailers and mobile homes provided to storm victims indicate that high levels of formaldehyde gas in the units is much more widespread than the government has acknowledged.

The previously undisclosed test results from nearly 600 units, reviewed by msnbc.com, found that 95 percent of the temporary housing units provided by FEMA measured at least twice the CDC’s maximum recommended level for long-term exposure to the toxic gas. In some extreme cases, the levels were 70 times the long-term standard.

The tests were conducted by the Sierra Club and a Galveston, Texas, law firm that is involved in federal litigation against the manufacturers of the travel trailers and mobile homes that FEMA distributed.

The federal government promised to test inhabited travel trailers and mobile homes but has not yet followed through.

Many of the trailers and mobile homes have been occupied for two years which makes the high formaldehyde levels a scientific mystery, since those levels typically decline significantly when units are ventilated by residents.

‘I really can't account for it’
“It’s really surprising,” said Mary DeVany, an industrial hygienist whose Vancouver, Wash., firm has conducted more than 100 of the tests. “I really can’t account for it.”

The results for mobile homes are especially puzzling, as the units had been presumed to be safer than travel trailers. Mobile homes, which are mounted on a permanent chassis and contain at least 320 square feet of living space, are intended for long-term occupancy. The level of formaldehyde in building materials used in their manufacture is regulated by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency has halted distribution of travel trailers - described as campers no more than 45 feet in length — for temporary housing because of formaldehyde concerns and said it is working to move all 52,520 households currently residing in travel trailers nationwide into permanent housing. It also said it will provide temporary housing to anyone who expresses a desire to move out of travel trailers because of formaldehyde.

But the agency continues to provide mobile homes to disaster victims, including 50 it sent to people left homeless by last month’s wildfires in Southern California, according to FEMA spokeswoman Mary Margaret Walker. The agency also has agreed to donate up to 2,000 unused mobile homes to native American tribes, Sen. Tim Johnson, D-S.D., announced in June.

Walker did not respond to queries about the number of people on the Gulf Coast living in FEMA- provided mobile homes, but it is believed to be substantially lower than those in travel trailers.

Formaldehyde, a chemical used in a wide variety of products, is considered a human carcinogen, or cancer-causing substance, by the International Agency for Research on Cancer and a probable human carcinogen by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

An array of ailments
But apart from little-understood long-term health risks, many residents say the gaseous form of the chemical causes immediate ailments, including bloody noses, respiratory distress such as asthma, sinus infections and bronchitis, skin rashes and burning eyes. The gas is emitted by composite wood and plywood panels in the FEMA units.

Joseph Carmouche, 82, and his 75-year-old wife, Daisy, of Picayune, Miss., are among those who wonder if the gas is harming them.

The Carmouches, who lost their home to Hurricane Katrina, have had a rash of health problems since they moved into a FEMA-provided mobile home in December 2005. Joseph Carmouche said his emphysema worsened significantly and he suffered an outbreak of bullous pemphigoid, a chronic autoimmune skin disease. His wife developed asthma severe enough to prompt her general practitioner to refer her to a pulmonologist.

When they had the mobile home tested for formaldehyde in July, more than a year and a half after they moved in, the reading came back at 0.186 parts per million (ppm) or more than 23 times the long-term maximum exposure level of 0.008 recommended by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, a unit of the federal Centers for Disease Control.

The couple was in the midst of negotiations with FEMA to buy the mobile home at the time, but they have put any deal on hold until they get answers from the agency.

“We don’t know if we should attribute our health problems to the air quality or not, since we’re not experts,” Joseph Carmouche said. “We’re just curious and concerned.”

Carmouche and thousands of other residents in the temporary housing units continue to wait for the answers that might be provided by government-sanctioned testing.

Testing of occupied units delayed
The EPA, acting at FEMA’s behest, tested 96 unoccupied travel trailers on the Gulf Coast in October 2006, finding formaldehyde levels high enough to “cause acute symptoms in some people.”

But FEMA postponed a planned second round of testing of occupied FEMA travel trailers and mobile homes early this month, saying it needed additional time to decide what level of exposure would be acceptable and what thresholds would trigger specific actions. Walker, the FEMA spokeswoman, told msnbc.com that the postponement of the testing of the occupied trailers was expected to be a short one.

The delay came 3 ½ months after the release at a congressional hearing of internal FEMA e-mail indicating that the agency had suppressed warnings about the health problems associated with formaldehyde exposure and had resisted testing since March 2006, in part because of fears over legal liability.

One June 2006 e-mail stated that FEMA’s Office of General Counsel "has advised that we do not do testing" because this "would imply FEMA's ownership of this issue." Another agency attorney advised "[d]o not initiate any testing until we give the OK. While I agree we should conduct testing we should not do so until we are fully prepared to respond to the results. Once you get results and should they indicate some problem, the clock is running on our duty to respond to them."

In the absence of government testing, two private entities — the Sierra Club and the Buzbee Law Firm of Galveston, Texas — have stepped in.

“What we’re doing is confirming what our clients have been telling us is true, that they’re sick and the trailers are full of substances that are making them sick,” said Tony Buzbee, whose firm is involved in a federal lawsuit against the travel trailer and mobile home manufacturers filed on behalf of more than 3,200 residents of FEMA-provided housing.

Nine out of 580 meet long-term standard
The law firm alone has tested more than 580 travel trailers and mobile homes provided by FEMA to storm victims in Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas. The results, which have not previously been made public, indicate that the scope of the formaldehyde problem is much broader than FEMA has acknowledged.

DeVany, the industrial hygienist who has conducted many of the tests, said that only 23 of the tested trailers and mobile homes “were at less than twice the acceptable long-term exposure limit” of 0.008 ppm and, of those, only nine were lower than the standard.

The vast majority of the units tested were travel trailers – some of which came back with readings as high as 0.56 ppm, or 70 times the long-term standard. DeVany said that mobile homes, while generally showing lower concentrations of formaldehyde than the travel trailers, also came in well above the threshold, in some cases higher than 0.1 ppm.

She said that suggests that manufacturers didn’t adhere to the HUD standard – 0.2 ppm for plywood and 0.3 ppm for particleboard at the time of manufacture - as they rushed to meet the demand for the units after Katrina and Rita ravaged the Gulf Coast in August and October 2005, respectively.

“The results are too high to ever have met the HUD standard during manufacturing,” she said. “… We shouldn’t be seeing the levels we’re seeing a year and a half or two years later.”

But Peter Taafe, an attorney with Buzbee's law firm, said he has no firm evidence yet that manufacturers did not use "low-emitting" building materials as they rushed to meet demand.

Jesse Fineran, a former FEMA contractor in Mississippi who said he was fired after repeatedly urging his supervisors to address the formaldehyde problem, told msnbc.com that installation practices and the oppressive heat and humidity of the Gulf Coast also may be contributing to the problem.

‘Don't step there or you'll fall right through’
“These trailers were not designed to be perfectly level ... and when you level them, it breaks all the seams,” he said, referring to the standard practice of placing the travel trailers on blocks. “So water gets into the trailer and into the particle board and the wood and starts to break them down, and then the formaldehyde breaks down into a powder and gets back into the air. That’s why some of the ones that have been lived in have higher reading than the new ones.”

DeVany said she has seen anecdotal evidence to support that theory while making the rounds to place and retrieve formaldehyde test kits.

“In many of these units, the floors are falling apart,” she said. “You go in and the occupants say, ‘Don’t step there or you’ll fall right through.’”

HUD spokesman Lemar Wooley declined to comment on the specifics of the private testing, but said his agency has no reason to believe that the mobile home manufacturers violated the HUD standard.

“We are confident that manufactured homes that are regulated by HUD meet the standards set forth in Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standard,” he said in a written response to questions submitted by msnbc.com. “… These standards were not waived in this instance or in any other.”

Bruce Savage, a spokesman for the Manufactured Housing Institute, which represents the mobile home industry, said the organization could not comment on the test results without additional details on the methodologies used to obtain them.

“Our technical staff still feels that the information provided is too limited and does not provide us with enough context to be able to adequately evaluate and comment on this issue,” he said. “We stand by the statement … that manufactured homes are built in compliance with the HUD code, which sets limits on formaldehyde.”

‘They are intended for long-time use’
Walker, the FEMA spokeswoman, did not respond to a request for comment on the test results. But in reply to an earlier inquiry she said, “In mobile homes, the amount of formaldehyde in the construction supplies is governed by a HUD standard and all the mobile homes meet or exceed that standard. They are intended for long-time use.”

Becky Gillette, a spokeswoman for the Sierra Club, said FEMA’s response echoes the denials it made when the environmental organization first publicized the formaldehyde problem in travel trailers.

“We notified them of the problem with travel trailers a year ago March and got absolutely no response other than statements that there was no cause for concern,” she said.

The final determination on whether the formaldehyde levels have harmed the trailer and mobile home occupants may be rendered in a federal court in New Orleans, where the consolidated lawsuit against the travel trailer and mobile home manufacturers will be heard starting in January.

Buzbee, the Texas attorney involved in the lawsuit, said he expects the case will be long and complex, and predicted that the defendants will attack the use of the CDC’s standard for long-term exposure to formaldehyde.

“A case like this, that’s going to be one of 50 arguments they’ll make,” he said. “They’ll argue that as government contractors they should be immune. They’ll argue that the testing is faulty. You can only imagine how many defenses they’ll throw up when there are more than 3,000 plaintiffs and the exposure they face could be in the billions of dollars.”

With any resolution of the legal case years away, the Huckabees of Kiln, Miss., and many others in similar situations see no short-term alternative to living in a FEMA mobile home that they believe has made them sick.

‘Formaldehyde free’ home exceeds workplace standard
Lindsay Huckabee, who testified before Congress in July about the health problems she and her husband, Steven, and five children have experienced in two FEMA mobile homes, said the couple was assured by FEMA officials that the second one — the one they still occupy — would be “formaldehyde free.”

But after the family moved in, the new unit tested at 0.108 ppm for formaldehyde, higher than the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health’s 0.1 ppm standard for one-time workplace exposure. “They basically said ‘this one is lower than the other one, so we’re good, right?’” Huckabee said.

She said that fresh air and the use of two donated air purifiers had eased their symptoms over the summer, but they returned recently when they began using the heat again.

“Everyone’s waking up with sore throats again,” she said. “I’m guessing it’s the ducts heating up the boards and releasing more of the formaldehyde.”

Much scarier are the strange symptoms their youngest son, Michael, who will be 2 in January, has begun exhibiting.

“He was in the hospital three weeks ago because his lips kept turning blue,” Huckabee said. “It only happens for a few seconds at a time, but it’s frequent enough to where it started to scare me a bit. ... His doctor said he’s got something similar to carbon monoxide poisoning. Now we’re trying to figure out if formaldehyde exposure might exhibit similar symptoms.”

Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said stories like that make it clear that FEMA must immediately test the occupied travel trailers and mobile homes.

“‘FEMA officials in Washington have repeatedly failed to take the steps needed to protect the thousands of families living in trailers and mobile homes,” he said. “FEMA should start following through on its promise to test the trailers and start making the health and safety of these families a priority.”

© 2007 MSNBC Interactive

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21725858/

---

MSN Privacy . Legal

© 2007 MSNBC.com

Return to A.M. in the Morning! Home

Read More......