I-195 Bridge Closure, R.I. 10

[Sym P. le]

"Critical failure" closes I-195 west on Washington Bridge in Providence, Rhode Island - CBS

Casey Jones - Youtube has already done a review - Why does it take three days to close a bridge?

The failed anchor rod is part of the center span. I don't know which pier is involved. There is an east and west span so it will be interesting to learn if deterioration is similar on the alternate span.

Google Street View

 

[FacEngrPE]

No bids? A seriously dysfunctional bidding environment.

 

[Sym P. le]

That could be a good thing for R.I. given all the garbage that's been constructed over the years. Maybe a time of introspection is what the doctor ordered.

 

[MTNClimber]

From what I’ve been told, the contract increased the risk/liability for the Design-Build team. A major sticking point was the required two-year schedule for substantial completion, with fines for going past that date. I’m guessing the two years had to do with the gubernatorial election and were not rooted in reality. A bridge project like this will take more than two years to design and construct, so no one took the bait.

Also, what the hell? Not only are they wasting time asking for ridiculous things, but even if a contractor placed a bid, they would have to budget for going over the impossible schedule, which would just drive up the cost of the project without getting it done any faster. I hope the governor and director get the boot next election cycle.

RIDOT issued an RFI for contractor feedback on what was wrong with the RFP.

 

[MintJulep]

This will encourage more companies to bid on the new bridge.

Rhode Island files lawsuit against 13 companies that worked on troubled Washington Bridge

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory...awsuit-13-companies-worked-troubled-112904179

 

[Brian Malone]

This will encourage more companies to bid on the new bridge

Is this said in jest? If there are truly failures by the companies named in the lawsuit, then isn't attempting to hold them accountable the correct thing to do? Or is this lawsuit a political ploy and irrelevant to the root cause? If the comment is stated with sarcasm, I find it hard to believe any lawsuit by the RI administration would desuade companies (after the dust settles for the finger pointing) for vying for public works projects - the lure of revenue and resource utilization over many years is a carrot too big to pass on.

 

[JStephen]

More detail here and in other articles:

https://www.providencejournal.com/s...wsuit-peter-neronha-rhode-island/74825680007/

"From 2015 until the bridge was closed in December of 2023, five engineering firms − each and every one of the companies the DOT hired to inspect the bridge − failed to identify the problems within its concrete, the suit said."
So yeah, they may have trouble finding people to work for them in the future.

 

[3DDave]

PDF of lawsuit. Rather far reaching.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25048332-complaint-final-8-16-2024?responsive=1&title=1

The trick is going to be to show that the contracts, as let, were not satisfied. The term "void for vagueness" seems likely to show up on numerous terms of those contracts.

I'm sure the sarcasm is in view of the overall handling of this by RIDOT and the attempted response of the RI legislature and the very stupid RFP followed by the equally stupid RFI.

 

[waross]

five engineering firms − each and every one of the companies the DOT hired to inspect the bridge − failed to identify the problems within its concrete, the suit said."

So yeah, they may have trouble finding people to work for them in the future.

It sounds as if they have no difficulty hiring people to accept payment.
The problem already exists.
Finding competent people to work the assigned task.

--------------------
Ohm's law
Not just a good idea;
It's the LAW!

 

[FacEngrPE]

Attorney General Neronha, Governor McKee announce lawsuit against Washington Bridge contractors(Official State of Rhode Island website)

In its complaint, the State brings claims of breach of contract, fiduciary duty, and negligence against the following, with specific claims varying among the defendants: AECOM Technical Services, Inc.; Aetna Bridge Company; Aries Support Services, Inc.; Barletta Heavy Division, Inc.; Barletta/Aetna I-195 Washington Bridge North Phase 2 JV; Collins Engineers, Inc.: Commonwealth Engineers Consultants, Inc.; Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc.; Michael Baker International, Inc.; Prime AE Group, Inc.; Steere Engineering, Inc.; Transystems Corporation; and Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc.

Are there any large bridge builders not party to the suit remaining in RI?

The complaint is attached.

 

[hokie66]

With that many players involved, it is no wonder that the game was error-plagued. Design by committee, built by committee.

 

[Sym P. le]

I purchased my FORD motor vehicle product in 1968. I fixed or repaired it on a regular basis until one day my neighbour mentioned that it looked a little rusty. Upon further inspection, decay was found to be so extensive as to render the vehicle unfit for service. Many design and manufacturing flaws were also noted. I had to find other means of transportation at substantial cost to myself until such time that I could secure a replacement vehicle. In the process, I have been subjected to much ridicule and my pride has been injured.

Cry me a river!

In reality, the litigation pertains to contract performance as in "I see your FORD, I am knowledgeable about your FORD, I can and will extend the life of your FORD" all the while veiling critical issues and hindering critical maintenance leading to substantial failure of said FORD prematurely.

 

[MTNClimber]

I don't have all the information, but it appears to me and others I've talked to that this is simply a money grab and could be considered an attack on our local industry. The state's lawyers even alluded to the fact that they couldn't get money from RIDOT employees, so they're chasing anyone who has touched the bridge in the past 10 years and still has insurance.

It’s hard to believe all five qualified engineering firms missed the broken tie-down rods.

Here's a summary of the entities in the lawsuit with some minor commentary from myself.

AECOM Technical Services, Inc. - Inspected the bridge in 2015, 2019, 2020, and 2023. If there was one company that may have recently missed the broken tie-down rods, they seem like they would be at the top of the list. But, they also provided a design in 2016 to rehab the bridge, which RIDOT did not proceed with due to concerns on impact on traffic, which is ironic considering the traffic issues now. I’m unsure if the rehab design addressed any tie-down rods.

Aetna Bridge Company – Local Bridge contractor that originally constructed the bridge, which opened in 1968. They were repairing the bridge when VHB, their lead designer, found the failed tie-down rods. How are they at fault? I’m not sure.

Aries Support Services, Inc.- They were part of the 2013-2016 AECOM team to design the Rehab of the bridge. They likely provided bridge inspection and testing services since they provide traffic control, safety equipment, concrete coring and testing, pavement coring, chloride ion analysis, and half-cell potential testing.

Barletta Heavy Division, Inc. – A local bridge contractor that initially constructed the Washington Bridge, which opened in 1968. They were repairing the bridge when VHB, their lead designer, found the failed tie-down rods. How are they at fault? I’m not sure. They also have some past “history” with RIDOT. I wouldn’t be shocked if RIDOT was trying to get back at them.

Barletta/Aetna I-195 Washington Bridge North Phase 2 JV – See above.

Collins Engineers, Inc. Inspected the bridge in 2017. It seems like a stretch to say they indefinitely missed broken tie-down rods.

Commonwealth Engineers Consultants, Inc. – Local engineering firm. I’m not sure how they are involved.

Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. - Inspected the bridge in 2021

Michael Baker International, Inc. - Inspected the bridge in 2018. It seems too long ago to say they absolutely missed broken tie-down rods. They also inspected in 2011, which seemed to kick RIDOT in the butt to try to rehab the structure. AECOM provided a rehab construction plan set in 2016. It never ended up getting performed.

Prime AE Group, Inc. is an AE firm located throughout the eastern US. I’m not sure how they are involved.

Steere Engineering, Inc. – They helped AECOM with the 2013-2016 rehab design project, which never went into construction, thanks to RIDOT pulling the plug due to traffic concerns. They don’t seem like they would be at fault, but they probably got roped in since they were AECOM’s sub-consultants.

Transystems Corporation - Inspected the bridge in 2016 and 2022

Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc – VHB was the lead designer of the 2021 DB team to repair the bridge but did not address the tie-down rods, which failed. VHB found the broken tiedown rods and noticed the bridge structure was bouncing during the execution of their contract. They notified RIDOT. They should be thanked for avoiding a travesty. On the surface, suing them seems wrong and sets a bad precedent.

If I remember correctly, the contractors who submitted questions for the recent bid request for the bridge replacement were out-of-towners who hadn’t worked with RIDOT before. American Bridge, Kiewit, and Halmar. So yes, there is interest in still working with RIDOT… but it appears that it’s going to cost more than usual.

 

[3DDave]

It's not clear that anything but demolition of the bridge would have saved it. The failures were in parts buried deep in the bridge structure or fundamental to the bridge structure. The only thing that would have helped is not dumping a megaton of salt on it every year.

I also think that "get what you paid for" may also apply. It may take looking at what they spent in the past vs what they spent to see the current condition of the bridge. If they paid for a visual inspection and the problems generally required x-raying the entire structure, there's going to be a cost difference, so we need to know what the rejected high-bidders proposed.

Obviously the last guy in line wasn't doing a great job if it took a curious intern to climb up for a better look rather than a planned action, but it's better than the inspection company that missed a five foot long crack that was found visible in photographs going back years taken by passersby.

Based on currently released info, I am leaning to 70% liability with RIDOT, 30% with some of the engineering/inspection firms. That may change, but after the initial explanation of the mystery heavy truck I give RIDOT no benefit of the doubt.

 

[IRstuff]

It's human nature to skimp on maintenance, particularly when government budgets are always tight

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[3DDave]

It just gets better:

Can Rhode Island Sue Their Way to a New Washington Bridge?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rzJUOnuf5s

 

[JStephen]

"In the course of engineering business, there's some key concepts to limit your liability. The first is client selection..."- from the video above.

One thing I'm curious about, though, does the RI DOT ever do their own inspections? They mention these different inspections by consultants, which were years apart, did they not do any inspection at all in between there? Or are they just leaving all that out?

 

[3DDave]

RIDOT would need specialized equipment to do those inspections. For example, human eyes attached to human brains.

Those things are expensive.

What is inexpensive is plausible deniability.