The Coast Guard saved
tens of thousands of lives during and in the aftermath of Hurricane
Katrina. Most of the response was carried out with "legacy" assets:
planes and ships that are increasingly outdated, worn out, and
inadequate.
If Deepwater, the Coast
Guard's modernization program, had been implemented more
aggressively, the service would have had a much greater capacity to
conduct search and rescue missions and to coordinate the
operations of other federal, state, and city responders working in
the disaster area. As a result, the federal disaster response would
have seemed less of a disaster. Yet Deepwater is still not fully
supported in Washington. Congress and the Administration need to
accelerate implementation and fully fund the program at about $1.5
billion per year.
In the Eye of the
Storm
According to the White
House report on the federal response to Hurricane Katrina, "Coast
Guard teams alone ultimately rescued and evacuated over 33,000
people." After the second landfall of Katrina, "Coast Guard assets
began conducting rescue operations immediately," four hours before
the next available outside responders-Army National Guard units-
arrived on the scene.[1]
In addition to saving
24,000 lives during search and rescue operations, the Coast Guard
assisted in the medical evacuation of 9,000 more. The Coast Guard
also provided food, water, shelter, and medical supplies to
survivors and managed the response to environmental threats,
such as cleaning up oil spills.[2]
The Coast Guard was
also able to provide leadership at the federal level, "close
to the disaster scene," coordinating the activities of
responders.[3] Admiral
Thad Allen, principal federal officer during Katrina
operations and current Commandant of the Coast Guard, noted in a
later interview:
[D]isaster-relief
supplies were flowing in, but there was nobody to take control of
them and deploy them to where they were needed most. Someone needed
to take tactical operational control to organize the relief
mission.[4]
By September 9,
Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff had appointed Allen
to replace Federal Emergency Management Agency Director Michael
Brown. On September 7, Allen had already moved the headquarters of
the forward-operating joint force operation (JFO, which included
NORTHCOM and state and local officials) to the USS Iwo Jima
in New Orleans. This move "rapidly increased the effectiveness of
the Federal response by providing a Federal unified command close
to the disaster scene.… Allen's appointments ultimately
proved critical for energizing the JFO and the entire Federal
response to Hurricane Katrina."[5]
The Bad News
Equipment limitations
plagued the Coast Guard throughout the response and recovery
effort. Communications proved particularly challenging, as the
service had limited assets. The Integrated Support Command New
Orleans and Station Gulf Port were completely destroyed. The Coast
Guard offset this shortfall somewhat by prepositioning cutters with
Deepwater communications upgrades outside of New Orleans before the
storm. This strengthened and helped to maintain command and
control, enabling the Coast Guard both to perform its missions
and to work in conjunction with other federal, state, and
local agencies.[6]
During the storm, the
Coast Guard used 62 of its aircraft, including three HH-65C
helicopters that had undergone Deepwater modernization.[7] The
helicopters played a large role in the highly publicized
rescue of thousands of people, with the three HH-65Cs able to carry
twice as many people as similar aircraft that had not been
modernized. The small number of modernized helicopters, however,
limited the Coast Guard's ability to respond.
The Coast Guard's
response to Katrina was also limited by its fleet, which is
inadequate for performing the range of security, safety, and
law enforcement missions tasked to the Coast Guard.[8] This
should not be surprising since the service has never had a coherent
modernization program.
Today, the U.S. Coast
Guard fleet is the 37th oldest of the world's 39 existing
fleets.[9] On
average, because of maintenance issues, only 34 percent of the
cutters and 75 percent of the aircraft are operational at one
time. Currently, 88 of the cutters and 64 aircraft need to be
replaced or modernized. This includes the entire deepwater cutter
fleet and 34 percent of Coast Guard aircraft. Under the current
schedule, decommissioning them or modernizing many of them will not
even begin until 2008.[10]
Thinking the
Unthinkable
Despite the limitations
of its equipment, in a few days, the Coast Guard managed to surge
to six times its annual workload of search and rescue operations.[11] That is
exactly the kind of surge capacity that the federal government
needs to provide large-scale emergency response.
In a catastrophic
disaster like Katrina, tens or hundreds of thousands of lives are
immediately at risk. State and local resources are exhausted from
the onset, and government leaders are unable to determine or
communicate their priority needs. National resources need to show
up in hours, not days, in unprecedented amounts regardless of the
difficulties. This is much different from mounting a national
response to a "normal" disaster. Katrina demonstrated convincingly
that the United States does not have adequate means to assist state
and local responders in the critical first few days after
large-scale disasters.[12]
As the Coast Guard
fleet continues to age, it will have greater difficulty providing
the surge capacity needed for large-scale disasters. Likewise, the
service needs new capabilities so that it can provide the
command, control, communications, and surveillance required to
organize and integrate other responders to meet all the maritime
needs of catastrophic disaster response.
The Deepwater
Difference
Even before September
11, 2001, the Coast Guard fleet was widely regarded as too old and
too expensive to operate and maintain and poorly suited to 21st
century homeland security threats. In addition, since the service
never had a systematic program for buying and replacing its
ships and planes, virtually the entire fleet (most of it fielded in
the 1960s) was in danger of becoming obsolete and
unusable.
Since replacing
everything at the same time would be impractical and prohibitively
expensive, the Coast Guard undertook a sweeping review of its
requirements in 1995. The result was the Deepwater Program.
Deepwater is designed to replace ships and planes incrementally and
to add new capabilities like unmanned aerial vehicles, other
sensors, and communications equipment that would enable Coast Guard
assets to "network" with each other, military assets, and civilian
law enforcement agencies and emergency responders.
By 2002, a plan to
replace and upgrade the fleet was in place. Implementation,
however, has been slow. After 9/11, it soon became apparent that
the Coast Guard's increasing operational tempo and expanding
homeland security missions were wearing out the fleet even
faster than anticipated.[13]
Although the terrorist
attacks on New York and Washington focused increased attention on
homeland security, the service's modernization budget received
scant notice. The Coast Guard intended replacement systems to be
funded at an annual rate of $530 million (in 1998 dollars) in the
following budgets. This level of funding would have meant a fiscal
year (FY) 2004 budget of $579 million in current dollars, but
the budget request for Deepwater was $500 million-substantially
less than initial projections and a decline in real spending of
about $9 million from the $500 million in FY 2003.[14]
The service's
modernization budget has been increased in recent years, and the FY
2007 budget request was about $950 million.[15]
However, increased funding has not sufficiently accelerated the
program to meet the post-9/11 demands. In 2005, the Deepwater
program included approximately $700 million in unfunded
priorities.[16]
Congress is reluctant to fund the program more aggressively,
as reflected in current Senate Appropriations Committee
proposals, and both the House Appropriations Committee and the
White House Office of Management and Budget lack confidence in
the program's management.
A series of Government
Accountability Office (GAO) reports have examined Coast Guard
oversight and the service's implementation of GAO
recommendations. A 2004 GAO report detailed concerns over
management practices for contractors that ranged from human
capital shortfalls to a lack of performance measures for contract
evaluation, but a 2005 report noted progress in improving
program management.[17]
The Coast Guard has
continued to strengthen oversight of the program. In February 2006,
it announced revised plans for the Deepwater Program that
reflected a better mix of assets for its homeland security
missions, established models to control contracting costs, and
included a timeline for rollout of various program components.[18]
Despite concerns over
funding and management, Deepwater has already begun to
demonstrate its merit. During the Katrina response, Deepwater
assets made a noteworthy difference in how the service
responded. Admiral Allen concluded that Deepwater's "operational
benefits were apparent during the Coast Guard's response to
Hurricane Katrina."[19] For
example, the three upgraded HH-65C helicopters can hoist 280 more
pounds and stay on scene longer than their predecessors. This
enhanced capability allowed them to fly 85 sorties and save 305
lives.[20] In
addition, the Coast Guard cutters with upgraded communication
equipment were able to provide effective on-scene coordination
of rescue operations with other military units, federal agencies,
and local first responders.[21]
If a greater number of
modernized HH-65C helicopters had been available and deployed,
the Coast Guard's ability to respond to calls after the storm would
have been greater. However, the cutters deployed for Katrina also
limited the deployment of additional modernized aircraft. The
cutters had upgraded communications systems, but each cutter
could support only one helicopter. The planned Maritime Security
Cutter (medium), also known as Offshore Patrol Cutter, could have
supported one helicopter and two unmanned air vehicles (UAVs).[22] UAVs
could have helped in a myriad of ways, from monitoring the New
Orleans levees for breaks and traffic during the evacuation to
helping law enforcement control crime to assessing damage after the
storm had passed.
Worth the
Cost
Deepwater assets
deployed during Hurricane Katrina demonstrated the merit of
replacing and upgrading the Coast Guard's older assets. The new
capabilities that would have been available from an accelerated
program suggest the potential to improve significantly the
service's capacity to respond to natural disasters and perform its
other missions.
A 2003 Coast Guard
study comparing the costs of implementing the program over 20 years
versus the costs over 10 years shows that the accelerated 10-year
program would save $4 billion. The longer the program
implementation is extended, the more money it will cost. After the
10-year plan is complete, costs drop off dramatically.[23] A
10-year plan is not the silver bullet for every asset, but a close
look at which parts of the program could be implemented more
quickly and efficiently is warranted.
A 2004 RAND study
concluded that accelerating Deepwater is not only feasible, but
would achieve cost savings by retiring equipment that is more
expensive to operate.[24] The
study further found that the implementation costs are manageable
and recommended fully implementing Deepwater.[25] Optimal
funding for the Deepwater program (i.e., the level that would
provide the most assets the most quickly and at the least cost)
will require sustained annual investments of about $1.5
billion.[26]
Congress should
reconsider the plan for Deepwater implementation and
accelerate the program and its funding to about $1.5 billion per
year. An accelerated Deepwater program would provide better
assets not just for catastrophic disaster response, but also for
the full range of Coast Guard missions from drug interdiction to
search and rescue. Fully funding Deepwater this year and for the
next nine years should be a budget priority to ensure that the
transformation continues and that America does not leave the Coast
Guard with an inadequate fleet.
James Jay Carafano,
Ph.D., is Senior Research Fellow for National
Security and Homeland Security and Laura P. Keith is a Research
Assistant in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign
Policy Studies, a division of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom
Davis Institute for International Studies, at The Heritage
Foundation.
[1]The White House, The
Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina: Lessons Learned,
February 23, 2006, p. 38, at
(June 19, 2006).
[2]Ibid., p. 61.
[3]Ibid., pp. 47 and 57.
[4]James Kitfield, "The
Coast Guard's New Captain," National Journal, June 3, 2006,
p. 55, at
www.uscg.mil/comdt/about_commandant/nationaljournalinterview.pdf
(June 29, 2006).
[5]The White House, The
Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina, p. 47.
[6]Maryann Lawlor, "Coast
Guard Communications Weather the Storm," Signal,December
2005, at
www.afcea.org/signal/articles/templates/SIGNAL_Article_Template.asp?articleid=1063&zoneid=169
(July 5, 2006), and U.S. Coast Guard, "Deepwater Assets Respond to
Hurricane Katrina," Deepwater News, December 2005, p. 5, at
(June 30, 2006).
[7]U.S. Coast Guard,
"Hurricane Response to Katrina and Rita," June 7, 2006, at (June 30,
2006).
[8]For example, in
addition to responding to two major hurricanes in FY 2005, the
Coast Guard was also required to attend to its other missions,
including worldwide assistance missions such as those that were
initiated after the Southeast Asian tsunami. In FY 2005, it seized
a record 299,579 pounds of cocaine, made 364 arrests, and seized 66
smuggling vessels involved in trafficking narcotics. It took the
initiative in cooperating on an international level with other
organizations and governments, including implementing and fostering
the International Port Security program. Gordon Peterson, "United
States Coast Guard Year in Review: 'A Shining Light' During
Katrina's Darkest Hours," in The Year in Defense (Tampa,
Fla.: Faircount, 2006).
[9]U.S. Coast Guard,
"Deepwater Briefing 101: Introduction to United States Coast Guard
Integrated Deepwater System Program," April 2006,at (April
4, 2006).
[10]U.S. Coast Guard, "Deepwater
Implementation Plan Review," February 2006, pp. A1-B7 and
D1-D13.
[11]John Birkler, Brien
Alkire, Robert Button, Gordon Lee, Raj Raman, John Schank, and Carl
Stephens, The U.S. Coast Guard's Deepwater Force Modernization
Plan: Can It Be Accelerated? Will It Meet Changing Security
Needs? Rand Corporation, National Security Research Division,
2004, at
www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2004/RAND_MG114.pdf
(June 29, 2006).
[12]James Jay Carafano,
Ph.D., "Improving the National Response to Catastrophic Disaster,"
testimony beforethe Committee on
Government Reform, U.S. House of Representatives, September 15,
2005, at
www.heritage.org/Research/HomelandDefense/tst091505a.cfm
(June 29, 2006).
[13]James Jay Carafano,
Ph.D., "Congress Must Act to Link Navy and Coast Guard to Future
Needs," Heritage Foundation WebMemo No. 294, June 13, 2003,
at
(February 6, 2006).
[14]James Jay Carafano,
Ph.D., "Budgets and Threats: An Analysis of Strategic Priorities
for Maritime Security," Heritage Foundation Lecture No.
791, June 16, 2003, at www.heritage.org/Research/index_hl2003.cfm
(June 29, 2006).
[15]U.S. Department of Homeland
Security, "U.S. Coast Guard 2007 Budget in Brief," February 2006,
p. A3.
[16]Hearing, Deepwater
Implementation, Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime
Security, Committee on Transportation, U.S. House of
Representatives, 109th Cong., 1st Sess., April 20, 2005, at
(June 30, 2006).
[17]For a description, see
Admiral Thad Allen, "Statement of Admiral Thad Allen, Commandant,
on the Integrated Deepwater System," testimony before the
Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation, Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. House of
Representatives, June 14, 2006, at
www.uscg.mil/comdt/About_Commandant/14June_Statement_DeepWater.pdf
(June 22, 2006).
[18]For a summary of the
earlier GAO reports, see U.S. Government Accountability Office,
Coast Guard: Changes to Deepwater Plan Appear Sound, and Program
Management Has Improved, But Continued Monitoring Is Warranted,
GAO-06-546, April 2006, at (July 5,
2006).
[19]Admiral Thad Allen,
"Statement on the Fiscal Year 2007 President's Budget: Coast
Guard," testimony before the Subcommittee on Fisheries and
Coast Guard, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
U.S. Senate, June 15, 2006, at
(June 22, 2006).
[20]
Ibid.
[21]Jeff Murphy and Gordon
Peterson, "Deepwater Assets Respond to Hurricane Katrina," in
USCG: Hurricane Katrina: The U.S. Coast Guard at Its Best
(Tampa, Fla.: Faircount, November 2005), p. 18.
[22]For example, see Dan
Gouré, "Hurricanes and the Coast Guard," Lexington Institute
Issue in Brief, June 6, 2006, at (June
30, 2006).
[23]U.S. Coast Guard, "Report to
Congress on the Feasibility of Accelerating the Integrated
Deepwater System,"March 2003, pp. 5-6, at www.uscg.mil/deepwater/pdf/IDSReport.pdf
(June 30, 2006).
[24]Birkler et al.,
The U.S. Coast Guard's Deepwater Force Modernization
Plan.
[25]
Ibid.
[26]For cost layout, see
U.S. Government Accountability Office, Coast
Guard.