Pawlenty: Experts Did Not Warn Of Collapse
Tim Pawlenty just appeared on KSTP to answer questions about the bridge collapse yesterday afternoon. As I noted earlier, the Pioneer Press and other local news outlets have begun to report that the bridge had been rated as "structurally deficient", which would normally have flagged it for higher-priority maintenance or possibly replacement. Governor Pawlenty told KSTP that the experts had not recommended either:
Q: I understand that you're waiting to hear from President Bush. What kind of federal help do you expect to receive?A: We've received offers of help from the federal government, and I'm sure that will take the form of cash, assistance, and personnel. We have federal officials already on site, and more coming. But we just want everybody to know across the country and across Minnesota that our thoughts and prayers are first and foremost with the families who have lost a loved one, somebody that was injured; we want them to know that we are thinking of them. We're also proud of the first responders, bystanders, and good samaritans that helped out in the minutes and hours after this event. It was an amazing response. ...
[skipping silly exchange on personal impact of the images]
Q: From your briefings with public safety officials, do they know yet -- do they have a handle on the number of missing? We keep hearing 20, Mayor Rybak said it's 20. What are you hearing?
A: Well, we don't know for sure. The best estimates we're getting are -- originally, we heard that it may be 20 to 50, now we're hearing that it may be closer to 20. We don't know for sure, it''s probably at least 20. It could be somewhat higher than that, Tom.
Q: They've also lowered the confirmed death toll from 7 to 4. Are you aware of that, and if so, do you know why they've done that?
A: I was just informed of that, but I was somewhat perplexed, because just last night, they had certified, or I should say confirmed, seven fatalities. I can't explain why it would be reduced overnight. ....
A: We had this bridge inspected in 2005 and 2006, and while there were some deficiencies noted, they did not call for closing or replacing the bridge immediately. This is a situation where had the engineers done that, obviously the bridge would have been closed. But that's not the case. The designation that this bridge has is shared by 80,000 other bridges in the country, and some bridges even have a worse designation. These deficiencies did not rise to a level of closing the bridge or repairing or replacing it immediately, in the eyes of the experts who looked at it in the inspections.
Obviously the contents of those inspections and the recommendations made will be the center of the focus for this investigation. If the inspectors missed the structural degradation that caused this collapse, then the state and federal DoTs will come under heavy fire. If the reports recommended action that did not get taken, the political leadership of both parties in Minnesota will be answering angry questions from their constituents. It sounds as though the lines are already being drawn.
Governor Pawlenty warned in the interview that it would take quite a while to remove the debris from the river and to get a new bridge designed and approved. It will take longer than a year to replace the collapsed structure, which will mean long delays and heavy frustration with traffic here in the Twin Cities. Today, though, it looks like many people have opted to take a day off to give the state some time to adjust.
Posted by Ed Morrissey on August 2, 2007 7:28 AM | Comments (20) | TrackBacks (2)
Comments (20)
Posted by rbj | August 2, 2007 8:37 AM
Looks like lots more money is going to be needed to upgrade/repair the infrastructure throughout the country. There is no need for earmarked pork, put the money towards this.
I say probably 1 year for investigating the collapse, then probably 2 more years to design a new bridge & 3 years to build it. Here in Toledo it's taken 5 years just to build the new Veterans Glass City Skyway bridge.
http://www.lookuptoledo.org/
1999 to 2007.
Posted by tmi3rd | August 2, 2007 8:37 AM
The casualty overstatement has happened recently as well in a dragster accident in southeast Tennessee... from a media/public relations perspective, this can happen if you've got people calling various hospitals simultaneously and running with "close enough" as opposed to death certificates. A lot of public information staffers acting all at once can be awfully quick on the trigger.
In any event, the fact that as of this morning, there are only four fatalities can be considered nothing short of an all-out miracle.
tmi3rd
Posted by MarkW | August 2, 2007 9:13 AM
I've stated for years that I would be willing to support a 5 to 10 cent/gallon gas tax increase, but if and only if, the money goes towards maintaining and improving the road infrastructure, and not to build more bike paths.
Posted by Labamigo | August 2, 2007 9:16 AM
Although I live in South Texas, I have driven that bridge many times while visiting the hospital at the UMinn.
As with many other tragedies, the dems will try to exploit this as justification for raising taxes.
Want to wager as to who the first donkey will be to call for a massive multi billion dollar Federal progarm to re-build the nation's infrastructure?
Posted by Glenn | August 2, 2007 9:28 AM
The main reason it took so long to build the Toledo bridge is that the contractor was making very very good time in constructing the approach ramps.
They were doing so well because they weren't using the cranes correctly. Eventually, it caught up with them and four ironworkers died. (A fifth was killed some time later in an unrelated accident.)
The downtime from the accident investigation and subsequent changes in policies and procedures cost them far more time than they saved by cutting corners.
I expect the lawsuits to last a while, but the bridge is (mostly) done...
Posted by rbj | August 2, 2007 9:46 AM
Glenn, there was actually a second accident where a carpenter fell to his death. The bridge construction has been slow even without them. That's why I think it'll be a good 6 years before there's a new I-35 bridge.
Posted by azlibertarian | August 2, 2007 10:02 AM
"...long delays and heavy frustration with traffic here in the Twin Cities...."
Not to compare these tragedies, because I'm not, but the Salt River through Phoenix had three successive years of 100-year flooding between '78 and '80. The Salt does run year-round, but it is dammed upstream of Phoenix and the run-off is completely diverted for primarily agricultural uses... it is normal for the river in Phoenix to be dry. At the time, many of the "river" crossings through Phoenix were simply paved roads through the "dry" riverbed, and during the flooding were therefore unavailable for travel.
When these 100-year floods occurred, many folks found that they lived on one side of the river and worked on the other. The traffic delays over the-then few bridge crossings meant that many ended up renting apartments on their "work" side of the river and commuted to their nearby homes on the weekends.
Posted by hermie | August 2, 2007 10:18 AM
The Gov may not have been aware of the problem. Engineers' reports get analyzed by the applicable State agency. If the bureaucracy in the agency thought it wasn't worth reporting further up, then that agency's personnel need serious butt kicking and dismissal.
Posted by RBMN | August 2, 2007 10:25 AM
Part of the problem has to be a basic design problem. They didn't anticipate either the deterioration rate (if that's the problem) or some dangerous peak of stress on the structure. Bridges are supposed to be overbuilt--enough to compensate for a lot of both types of design miscalculation. It was built when people were still using slide rules to figure out design features.
Posted by Darren | August 2, 2007 10:29 AM
This is what you get when the government owns and maintains the roads. What they ought to do (and I'm not sure what the rules are currently in MN), is allow a private business to build and operate a new bridge as a private toll bridge. It would be built faster, better, and probably at less overall cost. There is no inherent reason why government should own roads. No one has a natural right to drive on a particular road--roads are limited resources and, as such, should be privately owned.
Posted by jacko | August 2, 2007 11:35 AM
In Ca. our Goverment (both state and local) has been much too busy ensuring in-state tuition for illeagle immigrants, free health car for all and protection for Butterflys to care about silly things such as bridges, Dams, sewers, levees ,roads or overpasses .
Who needs that stuff when you have hate crimes to press against lunch break joke tellers .
Posted by KMan | August 2, 2007 12:02 PM
On a serious note - Capt, you and the other locals are in my thoughts.
On a somewhat serious note, I'm surprised that I have yet to hear Bush blamed for this, but perhaps the normal MSM idiots are just getting ready to gear up. Isn't anything bad that happens anywhere and anytime Bush's fault?
Posted by Darren | August 2, 2007 12:12 PM
Well, if the federal government does happen to provide rapid and effective assistance for this disaster (not that I believe that's something the federal government should be doing), I expect to see lots of charges from the Jesse Jacksons of the world about the 'racism' and 'classism' of the Bush administration for helping out the rich whities so fast compared to the poor blacks of New Orleans. Wait for it...wait for it...
Posted by Darren | August 2, 2007 12:24 PM
Well, if the federal government does happen to provide rapid and effective assistance for this disaster (not that I believe that's something the federal government should be doing), I expect to see lots of charges from the Jesse Jacksons of the world about the 'racism' and 'classism' of the Bush administration for helping out the rich whities so fast compared to the poor blacks of New Orleans. Wait for it...wait for it...
Posted by Darren | August 2, 2007 12:27 PM
Well, if the federal government does happen to provide rapid and effective assistance for this disaster (not that I believe that's something the federal government should be doing), I expect to see lots of charges from the Jesse Jacksons of the world about the 'racism' and 'classism' of the Bush administration for helping out the rich whities so fast compared to the poor blacks of New Orleans. Wait for it...wait for it...
Posted by Darren | August 2, 2007 12:30 PM
Crud. Multiple post.
Posted by RichardCook | August 2, 2007 1:06 PM
As tragic as this is, why is the federal government getting involved at all? This seems more like a state level occurance. What kind of "robust" federal response would be effective? At what level do we really need a federal response. I get a bad feeling about every bad thing requireing a federal response. The only federal response should be in the context of nationwide infrastructure,but, from what I have read a 40 year old bridge should not have collapsed. So how do this even fit in the context of nationwide infrastructure?
Posted by RichardCook | August 2, 2007 1:08 PM
As tragic as this is, why is the federal government getting involved at all? This seems more like a state level occurance. What kind of "robust" federal response would be effective? At what level do we really need a federal response. I get a bad feeling about every bad thing requireing a federal response. The only federal response should be in the context of nationwide infrastructure,but, from what I have read a 40 year old bridge should not have collapsed. So how does this even fit in the context of nationwide infrastructure?
Posted by Del Dolemonte | August 2, 2007 3:09 PM
RichardCook asked:
"As tragic as this is, why is the federal government getting involved at all? This seems more like a state level occurance."
A couple of guesses:
1. All states get Federal highway money.
2. This was an Interstate Highway; since the Feds originally built the Interstate system for national defense, they have a vested interest in keeping these highways open.
Posted by fourpointer | August 2, 2007 3:11 PM
On a somewhat serious note, I'm surprised that I have yet to hear Bush blamed for this, but perhaps the normal MSM idiots are just getting ready to gear up. Isn't anything bad that happens anywhere and anytime Bush's fault?
KMan, your wish is granted.
Hey Cap'n, I don't know what they do in Minnesooota, but I'm from upstate New York, and during winter the NYSDOT would lay down about a foot of salt for every 6" of snow. Needless to say, the primary color of most cars was "rust". Do they do the same thing there? And has anybody considered this a possible factor?