Skip Navigation

Institute for Crisis, Disaster and Risk Management

Executive Summary

This study was conducted by the George Washington University (GWU) Institute for Crisis, Disaster, and Risk Management (ICDRM) to provide an external assessment to the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) in its internal review to assess and evaluate response operations relative to Emergency Support Function (ESF) #3 support to the September 11, 2001 disasters at the Pentagon and World Trade Center (WTC).  The general objectives of this study were: (1) to identify and document the Geospatial Technologies (GTs) that were used at the WTC by the Federal, state and local organizations, as well as by the private sector and Non-government Organizations, and assess the usefulness of these GTs; (2) to find out the type of improvements that can be made either to these technologies or their use so that they can be best utilized for future response operations of the USACE; and, (3) through this assessment, provide an input to the USACE and Federal Emergency Management (FEMA) Remedial Action Program.

The scope of this study was limited to the assessment of the use of GTs such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS), Remote Sensing, spatially explicit modeling and geographic data during the response operations conducted for engineering and public works (ESF#3), in support to information and planning (ESF#5) and in support to urban search and rescue (ESF#9) related tasks. The main method employed to collect primary data was personal and telephone interviews. The research team analyzed and synthesized information gathered through these interviews.  In addition to the interview notes, the GWU team also relied on secondary sources of information such as after-action meeting reports, notes, and other documents.

The findings in this report include a description of the GTs that were used, their mission context, and their organization proponents. The report also includes the GWU team’s observations on availability, timeliness, accuracy, usefulness, and interoperability issues as well as suggested improvements.

The findings and observations must, however, be qualified by the fact that the physically impacted area was confined to a relatively small and highly urbanized geographic area.  This, combined with the abundance of local response and recovery resources, did not require nor allow the USACE or other support organizations to use GTs to their fullest potential. During the response to the attacks on WTC, the role of the USACE was to support Urban Search and Rescue (US&R) teams, provide temporary emergency power to critical facilities, provide technical assistance for the debris removal operations and assist in the management of the landfill operations. The ESF#3 USACE mission required the use of GTs primarily for:  (1) tracking, monitoring, and cataloguing stability of buildings:  and (2) quantification of debris for reduction, removal and disposal.  For debris estimates, building drawings, floor plans, maps, aerial orthophotos, LIDAR and various 3D GIS models of the area surrounding the WTC were used but the direct use of GT by the ESF#3 Team on the ground at WTC was minimal.

Despite the limitations on GT use, the analysis of the primary and secondary sources of information collected during this study led to the following recommendations (listed in descending priority) for the USACE and its future missions:

  1. For a large-scale disaster, assign (a) GIS Action Officer(s) to the ESF#3 teams to assist in translating operational requirements to GT products and providing those products.  GIS Action Officers identified for this type of assignment (a cadre of deployable GIS Action Officers) should receive ESF#3 Assistant Team Leader and Planning and Response Team (PRT) training.
  2. Encourage USACE District GIS Personnel to support local government infrastructure data collection. Conduct a pilot program to determine resource impacts before making support of local data collection efforts a requirement.
  3. The USACE should monitor, and when possible, participate in the multiple on-going and future efforts to collect and catalog infrastructure data that supports USACE missions.  This will be a very personnel intensive effort requiring central coordination and a division of labor amongst technical personnel.
  4. The USACE should model, and update as necessary, the all hazard threat profile.  The model would allow prioritization and resource allocation in support of the need to collect and catalog infrastructure data.
  5. Acquiring the data to support the modeling efforts is critical to mission success. No matter how good the GT models are, they have little use unless the data to populate the model is timely and accurate. The USACE should devise plans to acquire timely and accurate data for mission success.
  6. The USACE should utilize District GIS personnel in support roles during response operations to capitalize on existing local relationships.
  7. The USACE should develop a GIS specific style guide to include guidelines such as map size, map material (waterproof and ability to mark up the map), map colors, etc. with the goal of maximizing the utility of GT products for operational personnel.
  8. The USACE should work towards reducing the hardcopy output and providing portable electronic devices, i.e. handheld devices (PDA) with map display capabilities using wireless and cell phone connections that allow operational personnel to view and mark up digital maps in order to eliminate paperwork and provide custom and timely information.
  9. If FEMA and the USACE are to use different GIS software, those USACE personnel who may be detailed to support ESF#5 should be trained and proficient in both ESRI and MapInfo products. USACE should also consider pre-identifying and prioritizing those personnel who will potentially support ESF#5 for more in-depth training.