TO: Guy Gugliotta, Washington Post Staff Writer
FROM: Winston International Corporation
SUBJECT: Washington Post Article, Capital Notebook, April 1, 1997
Message: Comments on FEMA's Inane Quoted Comments in Subject Article
Referring to the Winston Land-locked Floating House, Morrie Goldman, a Federal Emergency Management Agency spokesman, is quoted in the subject article, "we don't like it, period, and We will never accept it, this would be a waste of taxpayer money." Mr. Goldman, you have it backwards. It is FEMA who is costing the taxpayers billions of dollars with their outdated policies. For example, the FEMA relocated town of Grafton, Illinois cost $16,000,000 to rebuild, and 4 years later, nobody lived there. An earthquake damaged house in Los Angeles made of glass bottles (which had been condemned by the city,) was targeted for repair at the tune of $450,000, while other homes damaged by the same quake were being overlooked by FEMA. In Houston, TX, FEMA funded $600,000 for annual repairs for a flood-damaged home valued at approximately $25,000. John Stossel reported in the Wall Street Journal, FEMA annually pays up to $350,000 to replace flood-damaged beach houses (including his own) in Long Island, NY. How many more cases like this go on without taxpayer knowledge? FEMA pays out taxpayer dollars daily to advertise their insurance program by promising new memories. The WLFH can save their old memories at no cost to the taxpayer for advertising.
FEMA has resisted federal legislation that has directed them "to be accommodating to the testing of such (floodproofing) technologies"1. How can Morrie Goldman tell the nation, the President, and the Congress that FEMA does not have to obey the law? Is FEMA such a powerful bureaucracy that they are above the law and can defy our elected representatives? No federal agency who disobeys the law should be funded by taxpayer money!
Statements such as: "It's scientifically unsound (who knows whether the pilings will telescope properly after they have lain idle for 50 years?)". Neither Goldman or any other FEMA individual has made the effort to investigate the WLFH technology. They have no way of knowing Winston has perfected a scientifically-sound, simple, and positive method of testing the workability of the telescoping piers at any time without disruption of any other elements. Similar hydraulic lifts have been set underground to raise automobiles for decades.
Mr. Goldman makes the ill-advised statement, "Fatally shortsighted (what happens when the flood recedes and the house settles on an uprooted tree?") Fatally shortsighted? Really, Mr. Goldman, isn't it cheaper to remove an object than to replace an entire house that has been destroyed? When you review the testing of Winston prototypes, you will recognize that, even if FEMA has not done their homework, Winston has! The WLFH -- even though it will not be constructed in the middle of rivers -- is protected from impacts of floating objects which will be diverted away from the anchored home. If, in the extremely unlikely event an uprooted tree or other object should find it's way under the house, the pliable pontoons will wrap around an object as large as 4 feet, and the house will remain level. The system even allows the structure to be left in suspension until any object is removed.
The diatribe continues, "It's also expensive (when Floating House residents disconnect water, gas, sewer and electricity as waters rise, the lines get fouled and FEMA has to reconnect.)" If these bureaucratic "experts" could spend a little more energy to research the availability of new technology, instead of wasting their time criticizing, they could learn about new techniques such as the automatic utility disconnects that are installed on WLFH technology. These disconnects seal the line in such a way that no pollution can enter the lines. Further, the electric and gas meters rise with the house far above any flood level. No person will be required to disconnect any utility, and FEMA will not be called upon to reconnect. This is the responsibility of local utility companies.
Mr. Goldman is quoted further, "[It's also] dangerous. (What happens when relief officials evacuate a town only to find that Floating House residents have stayed behind to ride out the storm?)" FEMA's current flood mitigating factors include permanent elevation of lowest floors at or above base flood elevations. FEMA insists the residents in these homes must leave before floods rise. This suggests that these elevated homes are less safe than the WLFH models. They think WLFH residents will feel more secure in a flood and remain. Winston does not encourage residents to remain during flood events. However, it would be much safer to remain in a house whose lowest floor is 2 feet above any flood height than sitting on the roof of an elevated home when the flood rises above predictable base flood elevations. 85% of fatalities occur when people are fleeing their homes after warnings of incoming floods, and while they are travelling over inundated highways.
The cost to FEMA for damages following any flood -- which rises above the lowest floor level of any building -- is far greater than flood damage expense to a WLFH. The anticipated costs to a WLFH will be limited largely to landscape items. Homes, automobiles, and personal possessions will be protected from floods at little or no expense.
Criticisms of the WLFH, such as Goldman's and other FEMA officials, began after a one-week review of promotional marketing material outlining the Winston technology. This material was delivered to FEMA, November 15, 1993. Five business days later, FEMA reacted with a negative response. Since then, Winston research continued with qualified marine and structural engineers and architects, and the systems were refined and detailed. The entire system was then successfully computer-tested by two independent testing agencies. During this time, FEMA directed no questions to any Winston designer, engineer, or testing agency, although for nearly 3 decades they have been urged by statute and their own documents to seek "smarter housing" and innovative technologies.
FEMA's blatant attempts to discredit a proven new technology will cause suffering to millions of flood victims and waste billions of taxpayer dollars. For the past 3½ years, FEMA has announced in national and international media, their opposition to Winston's development of this floodproofing technology. They have defied legislation by producing a completely false and unknowledgeable "evaluation" to several Senators who have directed them to adhere to the law. The legislation specifically required them to accommodate the testing, not to write libelous untruths about the technology!
FEMA refuses to follow the direction of Public Law #103-325 that Congress has enacted. We the people elect our representatives to establish the law, and no bureaucracy has the right to override this law. FEMA's spokesman publicly stated "we will never accept it, [this new technology.]" If any federal or private sector employee defies Public Law in this flagrant manner they should be impeached. Since when can a bureaucracy such as FEMA tell the nation, the President, and the Congress that they are above the law? If they cannot follow Congressional legislation, they should not receive appropriation money from the taxpayers to disobey the law.