NTSB report on I-5 Skagit River Bridge collapse

[roadman]

http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2014/HAR1401.pdf

[jeffandnicole]

Key Findings, IMO, that mostly laid fault at the Trucking company and Pilot/Escort driver...although the state and feds were not fully innocent either...

5. Mullen Trucking LP did not adequately consider the vertical clearance or the reduced width of the travel lanes on the Skagit River Bridge when planning the route of the oversize combination vehicle.

6. By not communicating any information about the narrow lane widths on the bridge or the reduced overhead clearance in the right lane of travel to the oversize combination vehicle driver before they reached the Skagit River Bridge, the pilot/escort vehicle driver failed to fulfill the duties of a pilot/escort driver.

7. The pilot/escort vehicle driver was distracted by her hands-free cell phone conversation, which reduced her attention to her escort duties.

10. A permitting process that enables a carrier to self-issue a permit via an online procedure, without engaging the state in any technical review of the requested permit, does not motivate carriers to conduct route surveys before transporting oversize loads.

[jakeroot]

It was a Canadian truck, right?

[Bruce]

The sooner every "functionally obsolete" bridge is replaced, the better! The Nisqually River Bridges and southbound Stillaguamish River Bridge on I-5 are particularly in need of total replacement.

[kkt]

The sooner every "functionally obsolete" bridge is replaced, the better! The Nisqually River Bridges and southbound Stillaguamish River Bridge on I-5 are particularly in need of total replacement.

Well, yeah, but is replacing those bridges really more important than anything else the state could be doing with that money?  Finish 6-laning I-5 between Olympia and Longview?  Widen it to 8 lanes from Everett to Marysville?  Pay the overruns on SR 99 and 520?

Maybe human review of routes for oversize vehicles would be more effective than replacing the remaining bridges.

[roadman]

@KKT - I think you meant to say "Maybe State DOT employee review of requested routings for oversized vehicles would be more effective".

[kkt]

@KKT - I think you meant to say "Maybe State DOT employee review of requested routings for oversized vehicles would be more effective".

That works too. 

[New to Seattle]

Well, yeah, but is replacing those bridges really more important than anything else the state could be doing with that money?  Finish 6-laning I-5 between Olympia and Longview?  Widen it to 8 lanes from Everett to Marysville?  Pay the overruns on SR 99 and 520?

Maybe human review of routes for oversize vehicles would be more effective than replacing the remaining bridges.

I'm certainly no bridge expert, but intuitively it seems like a bridge capable of collapsing like the Skagit bridge did is an unacceptable hazard. It's a good idea to reduce that particularly means of provoking the problem, but it seems like just fixing the oversize truck problem wouldn't be enough to avert a disaster, potentially much worse.

Am I missing something?

[707]

It's a shame Washington allows some of its freeways, roads and bridges to deteriorate to this condition. I studied a bit of the history behind the Skagit River Bridge. It was built in 1955 as part of the then new "US 99 Expressway", built to bypass the older route and provide a high speed connector around places like Mount Vernon to the Canadian border. Of course, the new US 99 became I-5 in 1957. Knowing Washington, maintenance is only done on a large scale when something happens (no offense to anyone who feels defensive of WSDOT). The Eels Street Bridge in Fife (again, old US 99) is another example of one ready to fail at a moment's notice. When I lived in Washington, I remembered watching a report on it from KOMO 4 news, showing some of the I-Beams and rivets holding the 1920's/30's vintage bridge together rusted through. I've traveled across both bridges quite a few times. Honestly, I wasn't surprised to hear about its collapse. Furthermore, I once talked to someone who's mother worked for WSDOT, stating she was involved in a test on an old bridge to simulate a failure, when the bridge collapsed due to structural failure before the test could conclude.

[Bruce]

All of the bridges on I-5 with overhead structures need to be replaced. Off the top of my head, there's three in the region: the Skagit River Bridge, the southbound Stillaguamish River Bridge, and both Nisqually River Bridges.

[myosh_tino]

All of the bridges on I-5 with overhead structures need to be replaced. Off the top of my head, there's three in the region: the Skagit River Bridge, the southbound Stillaguamish River Bridge, and both Nisqually River Bridges.

Call me sentimental, but I like the old cantilever bridges on I-5 in Washington.  When we'd drive up to visit family in Seattle, seeing these types of bridges was always something I looked forward too.  To see them replaced with concrete causeways would take away from a lot of I-5's charm.  Just my two cents.

[Brandon]

All of the bridges on I-5 with overhead structures need to be replaced. Off the top of my head, there's three in the region: the Skagit River Bridge, the southbound Stillaguamish River Bridge, and both Nisqually River Bridges.

They need to be signed, not necessarily replaced.

[kkt]

The bridges are fine.  It's the vending machine style approval of oversize load permits that's the problem.

[707]

All of the bridges on I-5 with overhead structures need to be replaced. Off the top of my head, there's three in the region: the Skagit River Bridge, the southbound Stillaguamish River Bridge, and both Nisqually River Bridges.

Call me sentimental, but I like the old cantilever bridges on I-5 in Washington.  When we'd drive up to visit family in Seattle, seeing these types of bridges was always something I looked forward too.  To see them replaced with concrete causeways would take away from a lot of I-5's charm.  Just my two cents.

May I suggest a compromise in the form of Oregon's bridge maintenance? I've heard that ORDOT has a method of renovating and keeping Conde B. McCullough's old bridges in good shape structurally. Perhaps Washington could adopt the system and repair the old bridges and keep them up to good standards rather than eliminate them? Someone please correct me if this idea is stupid.

[jakeroot]

All of the bridges on I-5 with overhead structures need to be replaced. Off the top of my head, there's three in the region: the Skagit River Bridge, the southbound Stillaguamish River Bridge, and both Nisqually River Bridges.

Call me sentimental, but I like the old cantilever bridges on I-5 in Washington.  When we'd drive up to visit family in Seattle, seeing these types of bridges was always something I looked forward too.  To see them replaced with concrete causeways would take away from a lot of I-5's charm.  Just my two cents.

May I suggest a compromise in the form of Oregon's bridge maintenance? I've heard that ORDOT has a method of renovating and keeping Conde B. McCullough's old bridges in good shape structurally. Perhaps Washington could adopt the system and repair the old bridges and keep them up to good standards rather than eliminate them? Someone please correct me if this idea is stupid.

WSDOT will adopt solutions that cost the least amount of money. In most cases, bridges are well past the point of return and money would be better spent building new bridges altogether.

From a political perspective, the state doesn't want to appear to be compromising the safety of its citizens because some roadgeeks get a hard-on from old bridges. WSDOT has been scrutinized plenty in the last decade, from the 520 pontoon leaks to the Alaskan Way Tunnel; we cannot make any more decisions that aren't favored by the public. It hurts me to say that, but if we keep on ignoring the people, Olympia will reduce road works funding substantially, something we cannot afford. I've always held the belief that people don't know what they want until they see it, but DOTs are publicly-funded agencies. If the public turns against us, we lose.

In short, if the public comes out in support of the old bridges, then we keep them. However, if they don't (which I personally find most likely), the old bridges get the axe.