“hey, we here at the department of Transportation know how to stonewall a information request but not how to stonewall a bridge. Thanks for your interest, MDOT”. Really enjoy your videos.
they dont want to be blamed for their lack of oversight. Infrastructure is major state and federal responsibility which we have been complaining about for years while being ignored
It feels like they did everything so half assed that they don’t want anyone to actually scrutinize their work. No wonder we have issues with transparency and accountability today. Smh Thank you Casey 🙏
Public info request typically result in some level of malicious compliance. You get a response that's unresponsive. Remember when police body worn cameras were a good idea - fast forward to today most request result in a cost estimate for the per-frame redaction of the subject film. The cost are of course astronomical and no data is ever provided. Just assume every redaction reveals some aspect of an inadequate design. You won't see the requested info until a lengthy civil suit discovery process. The bridge was obviously inadequate and the supporting facts will come out in court and the guilty will hide behind the various forms of immunity granted to public officials.
I'm not blaming the original designer at all I'm blaming the state for not retrofitting this bridge when there were numerous episodes of ships colliding with bridges that should have been instructive to them.
As a resident, and taxpayer of the state of Maryland, and a professional engineer, I will send letters to my state senators and delegates to resolve this issue. I think it is important to avoid recriminations. I want to know what drove those decisions and whether the decision making process needs to be re-examined. We don't need detailed technical data, we need to understand how these decisions came to be, and if needed, how we can improve.
@@serdneb You could probably get some bipartisan support depending on whether or they think it's likely to reflect poorly on their party. Written letters will get their attention tho - ppl just don't write letters anymore so that will be definitely be noticed. lol
In Australia (where I live) most major works have a website for the work getting done, where you can download all the specs etc. Therefor no need to beg for info about the projects at hand.
This is common in the US too, but isn't a federal requirement, so it's up to the local agencies and their personal opinions about transparency. The idea of perfect transparency is appealing, but especially In the case of bridges, I think the national security argument unfortunately holds water
My basic thought is that the gound (bottom of harbor) be raised enough around the dolfins, so that a deep draft vessel (big ships) will run aground and stop before hitting the dolfin. Being a Marine engineer, not a civil engineer, I don't know how feasible that is.
Thanks for your investigation! And sharing what you know with us.Even before the collapse of the Francis Scott Key bridge, every time I was on a bridge with large ships beneath, I fantasized about what would happen if that ship ran into the bridge support. Shivers up and down my spine-every time.
Your observations are spot on, here in Norfolk we have to spend BILLIONS on tunnels and have more tunnels than my home town, in the Allegheny mountains, Pittsburgh has, why? Because the US NAVY since the 1950s has required the state build TUNNELS to cross all the channels going to the Hampton Roads, Chesapeake Bay, or Atlantic Ocean fearing a collapsed bridge would trap the fleet inside the harbor. These include channels going down the ELizabeth River to the Norfolk Naval Shipyard which is in Portsmouth Va (to differentiate it from the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in New England) . Charleston SC saw it's naval facilities closed because of the Ravenel Bridge not being tall enough to allow the largest naval ships to pass during all tide cycles and the fear of a downed bridge closing the base. Maryland cheaped out and built bridges and this year they rolled the dice and came up snake eyes. The Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel, to the Eastern Shore had it's trestle taken down by a large ship decades ago even though the tunnels were unaffected, vehicle traffic was detoured for a year. Now the quasi public toll corporation has built dual trestles and is doubling the tunnels so a total loss of access will be almost impossible. Because of the fear of taking a trestle out, the anchorage was moved from off of Cape Henry to off of Cape Charles to protect the trestles from storm pushed ships. I don't dislike cable stay bridges, at first they appeared awesome, but coming from Pittsburgh, we came to appreciate all the different types of bridges inventive designers have created, but now we no longer get bow string truss bridges like the ones at tbe point, or the bSmithfield which is a very rare double truss, or the 3 sisters, which are beam and eyelet suspension bridges (similar to the collapsed Silver Bridge) or the calalever Glenwood Bridge where part of the structure peaks up over the roadway. In a word, cable stay bridges are no longer different, or notable. The dual bridges over the Delaware Canal that take SR 1 and US 13 over it show us how much designs have changed in the decades. But to your point, politicians don't spend money on "maybes" they have too many palms out and "necessessities" to finance without raising taxes, so until the Key Bridge fell, protection was in the back of their minds but they hoped the problem would not rear it's ugly head until the next Governor or Transportation Secy was in office.
See: Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel I-64 Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel I-664 Monitor-Merrimac Memorial Bridge-Tunnel No bridge over the shipping channel that can be hit by ships or bombed during war.
Back in the day of Walter Winchell and Walter Cronkite that idea might of worked. But with the state of "journalism" these days............ehhhhh I don't know.
@@jamesbuckingham8073 The real problem is that there ain't no money. I can see the reasoning behind (or argument for) holding the state and DOT responsible for this lack of collision protection. But in the end it was up to the state General Assembly, and, for the better or worse, there's no mechanism to hold lawmakers responsible for their voting and appropriations. So the buck stops there, but there's no blame left in it. :/
The Homeland Security secrecy aspect might have been a cause of the Millennium Tower (SF) and 161 Maiden Lane (NYC) leaning towers. If it were easy to get details of the footings of these buildings curious/nosy neighbors, even without any engineering background, might have been alarmed by footings not extending to bedrock. The condition of the bridge that collapsed in Pittsburgh might also have been kept secret.
@@CaseyJones-Engineer Given secrecy, a certain type of person, or perhaps any person, will be unable to resist temptation. I personally think that the builders were competent, they just decided to take a businessman's risk, which did not work out.
I was glad to see Kiewit awarded the prelim engineering phase contract hopefully they have a great team and will move the project toward completion quickly. I tend to agree with your statement on federally funded Phase I studies. It is required by NEPA. It also depends on the state's requirements to fulfill NEPA. I do these studies for a living and it can be time consuming. Obviously there is some political will to move this project forward, so a Categorical Exclusion is the easiest way to do this.
I think they've conveniently overlooked the provision in GP 4-352 (b): "The custodian may deny inspection of a part of a public record under subsection (a) of this section only to the extent that the inspection would: ... " given that the bridge is gone. I've had similar frustrations in Australia. The legislation seems to be saying that the information will be provided, and presumably that's what the legislators thought they were legislating for. Yet, somehow agencies contort the meaning so as to allow them to avoid releasing anything of interest. Sometimes I've gone through the steps to appeal against decisions, and got additional documents, or unredacted text, only to find myself wondering why they bothered to try to keep it secret. There's always the Public Access Ombudsman, though they may be so underfunded as to be ineffective in practice.
The New "Gordie Howe" bridge is between Windsor and Detroit, and is of the Cable Stayed design. the supports are both sides on LAND so their is NOTHING in the shipping channel. I suspect that Detroit gets more Snow than Baltimore.
I expect the information requested is in a filing cabinet warehouse - taken there after the switch to digital systems (paper reduction act of 1995). These storage warehouses are containers without heating or cooling so the non vellum paper files have slowly fallen apart or worse moved to a trash bin
Thanks for the information, or maybe the lack thereof! What’s with all the redactions? Why would bridge protection merit all that black ink? What are they afraid might get out? 🤔 You are certainly to be commended for your persistence getting as much as you did!👍🏻👏🙏 Keep the pressure on 💪🏻
Thank you so much. It has been a time-consuming process to get what little I have, but I think it is interesting that there are at least 4 other bridges that are vulnerable to ship impacts that that they have done nothing about. Just like they did nothing about upgrading protections for FSK Bridge. I will keep at it.
@@CaseyJones-Engineer Aside from the Bay Bridge, the other spans are under far less hazard, as the traffic under them is largely barges, tugs, and fishing boats. (I've allided with the Bay Bridge, but it was under no threat from my sailboat!)
Drove across the William Preston Lane Jr. Bridge yesterday and significant construction is taking place in the water just to the south of the first span.
Thanks Casey, think you have hit upon a cover up to deflect liability away from them and onto ship owners, or in this case the ship owner! It's my feelings that Maryland should be held as the primary responsible party in the Frances Scott Key case, for their lack of providing proper protection to begin with!
So, by extension, do we think DOTs should be liable for the consequences of traffic accidents, too? In some cases it may be possible to demonstrate actual negligence, but generally? Isn’t it ironic that, in this case, the “smoking gun” that would lay the blame squarely on the DOT would be the (unredacted) studies, commissioned by the same body, presumably in an attempt to identify and quantify the very risks they may would be accused of failing to address. I am wondering how - in the rush to lay blame on gov’t institutions (I’m not saying they are all blameless) - we can take into account the changing whims of an electorate who, over time, may have chosen to gut and starve these very same institutions? Go ahead and sue the gov’t. Maybe there are criminal actions in the mix that need to be brought to light. But it’s the taxpayers who will pay the bill and voters who are ultimately accountable. Thanks for sharing of info, thoughts and opinions.
Casey, Your video was spot-on regarding what information was and wasn't provided. I spent five years in Alaska post-EXXON VALDEZ. I represented ARCO Marine, Inc., from 1991 to 1995. I was ARCO Marine's liaison between the Alyeska Pipeline Co., the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, the Prince William Sound Regional Citizens Advisory Committee, and the other tanker operators. The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA'90) brought changes ranging from double-hulled tankers, to tanker escorts, to expanded oil spill contingency planning, and to Polar Tanker's (formerly known as ARCO Marine, Inc.) new double-hulled tankers with twin fully redundant engine rooms including twin rudders. OPA'90 also created Regional Citizens Advisory Committees. After my stint in Alaska I was the Manager of Design and Construction for Polar Tanker's new tankers. If MDOT was smart they would answer the questions being asked now. It is all too easy to write and pass legislation that mandates the participation of Citizens' Advisory Committees. Bob
Hijacking a cargo ship would probably be easier today than a plane was in 2001. A careful analysis of essential military transportation hubs could inspire the taking out of 3 or 4 bridges that would severely hamper any military response requiring massive deployment of troops or materiel. Similarly evaluating the economic importance of major bridges could lead to devastating attacks on our economy.
You have to be careful with Google Earth, when I looked the Key Bridge up on Google Maps the dolphins were not there, but on Streetview and other satellite/aerial views show them. It seems the programing sees them as moving boats and erases them.
Another great presentation, thanks. Hopefully, the current State of Maryland political leadership will seek Federal level support to improve our critical infrastructure from damage by acts of nature & mankind.
The challenge has increased in the last few years. Modern container ships are bigger than they used to be, but they also have a modified hull design, with a very wide flared bow to hold more containers forward. Thus the upper bow overhangs the lower hull like an aircraft carrier deck, meaning that dolphins or linear fenders must protrude much further away from the bridge piers to keep the overhang clear. This appears to be what happened with Dali. After bypassing the tiny cell, by the time the hull hit the fendering around the bridge pier, the top of the bow had already hit the pier and knocked it down. Note that there have been a large number of cases where a container ship approaching a dock overhangs the dock, and knocks down container cranes due to the overhang of the deck forward. A couple days ago, a container ship wiped the masts off a sail training ship in Australia.
As a retired 40-year contract engineering designer. I had worked for Kiewit on two occasions. They are very good for delivery on time and often times over delivering on expectations with road and bridge building projects. But they are a terrible organization to work for. They are well known for heavy handedness with salaried employees requiring 60 and 70 hours per week. As a contractor, I insisted on hourly pay so they limited my weeks to 40 hours. LOL. Sometime rebellion occurred within and people walk out in middle of projects making it worse for the remaining staff. They learned a big lesson when they took on a couple projects (industrial process work) lacking process system expertise. This should be interesting to track.
Yes I've heard that too that Kiewit puts their staff through the meat grinder especially the 0 to 5 year folks. A lot of Kiewit people say if you can make it 5 years you will be there for the long haul.
@@CaseyJones-Engineer I like to say that working for Kiewit isn't a job, it's a lifestyle! In my experience, they hire good people who can do projects well and aren't punitive with claims.
@@mtgibbs Kiewit sounds a lot like big law, consulting, or investment banking. Made worthwhile by (hopefully) good pay (which per actual hour worked isn't that great for 0-5 years) and promises of a very lucrative future career for those who put up with it.
SINCE THE KEY BRIDGE DISASTER, I HAVE SEEN INTERESTING DESIGN IN THE CHICAGO AREA AND THE DAUPHINS WERE CONSIDERABLY LARGER AND SHAPED DIFFERENTLY. FSK SHOULD LOOK AT THAT. PLUS THERE ARE MORE ELECTRONICS SAFETY SIGNALS KEY BRIDGE AREA LIKELY DOES NOT HAVE.
Since the closing of Wiley's ship yard in Port Deposit MD there's no commercial marine traffic traveling under the I-95 Tidings Bridge. There is tug/barge traffic under the US-40 Hatem Bridge. Thank you for covering this important topic. The more you push the MDOT for information the more they look like they're conducting a cover up.
Regarding infrastructure protection, is there any sort of "reasonable disclosure" concept for physical vulnerabilities like there is for cyber infrastructure vulnerabilities? If a friendly third party can look at some infrastructure and, using publicity available information, identify a viable attack but is unable to convince the owner to do anything more than "hope nobody else notices" what can legally be done by the third party? In software there is precedent that the correct (and legally protected) process is to privately inform the owner and give them a "if I don't hear back I'll publish this on $DATE" and it's expected that the reporting party will eventually publish regardless but will hold off as long as the owner is making good faith efforts to address the issue. It would seem that establishing a similar legal precedent (likely with variations in things like expected timelines) would be worthwhile for physical infrastructure. FWIW, when I think about it, it's a bit terrifying to think how few people I'd need to suborn to cause a lot of havoc. Even more worrisome is that it would take a huge amount of work to avoid the countermeasures being more harmful than an attack.
The "homeland security" concerns aren't in good faith, rather they're an excuse for covering up negligence by the Maryland government. Nobody is truly worried about potential future attacks against a no longer existing bridge. The best approach to get the information is probably to work with one or more Maryland media outlets. They have deeper pockets for a legal battle and a larger audience of local voters watching when they ask important questions like: "is MDOT really worried about attacks on a bridge that doesn't exist anymore, or are they covering up their own negligence?", and "what are your plans to protect the other large bridges in Maryland to prevent similar accidents in the future".
In case I wasn't clear: the strategy here is to embarrass the politicians until public outrage forces them to release the data. Election season would be an especially good time to do this as the politicians can sweep the issue under the rug and hope it goes away before the next election.
Can you make a video about the new proposed I55 bridge in Memphis that is being proposed sometime in the future. I'm curious about the modern approach to making a modern bridge in a seismic zone over a massive river like the Ms river with a major barge channel. Always enjoy your thoughts around this kind of engineering.
Did you receive the documents electronically. Many people don't redact info electronically in the correct way, not realizing that the black they put on top of the text just hides it, and doesn't remove it from the electronic file. It may be worth trying to remove the redactions from the electronic document, assuming it's a PDF or maybe Word.
It's been demonstrated that the pier protection was inadequate - since an unpowered / adrift ship managed to strike it. We both know that there are provisions for ship impact in AASHTO BDM. It should, then, be the DOT's responsibility to have provided for this event in conformance with the BDM - especially since they appear to have commissioned relatively recent studies to take a fresh look at it. I will guess that the redactions in the documents provided (and omission of those that were not) are in part due to the lawsuit(s) over the cost of replacement of the bridge. I'd bet a nice lunch that the legal action(s) will draw on the same materials you requested to determine if the protection was consistent with the design provisions and later studies with the goal of the ship's insurers to put as much of the cost a possible back on the DOT and designer for providing inadequate collision protection.
Thank you very much. I think your comments are right on target in each case. The DOT knows that they have shared liability here for not properly protecting this bridge.
Some of these bridges go to other states. Do you think the reports was sent to those states? Maybe a request to those states for information would yield results.
Thanks for the follow up. Great channel, I especially like your coverage of the Washington St Bridge in Providence RI. This fallow up reminded me that just a few days after the FSK bridge collapsed the Governor of RI came out and said the 3 big bridges in RI , the Newport Bridge, Jamestown Bridge and the Mt. Hope Bridge were safe from this type of event. Did you look into them while researching for you RI video and do you have any comment on them.
Never thought about the icing that can occur on the cables. That seems like a legitimate concern. Many years ago we had a extreme ice storm where I live. Large icycles were forming on power lines that span our interstate. As the temperature started rising, sheets of ice would drop on the roads. Dangerous as heck.
We really need open government so that FOI requests are not necessary or the rare last resort after openness has failed. But, already having a little accountability makes running a government more expensive than a business. Voters like tax cuts. Most people value efficiency above accountability.
@@CaseyJones-Engineer Are there some states that do a good job of publishing infrastructure information? (without an FOI) Do you have an information wish list? That would be an interesting comparison -- what some states publish and others hide.
Maybe I am mistaken, but it seemed that some reports had the title or other identifying info redacted. Could this mean the unredacted reports are already on the shelves of technical libraries, and they didn't want to help you find them?
Your insights into management of critical infrastructure, and how dangerous those nefarious actors tossing monkey wrenches can be, would make for an interesting guest appearance on Bret Weinstein’s Darkhorse podcast.
Have you tried to select text on these documents? On a number of occasions I had redactions with either black text on black background or just a black rectangle drawn over the text... Give select all, copy then "paste without formatting" a try. It will not work on scanned documents but may on Word or PowerPoint exported to PDF...
Look up recent Info Act suits in your Circuit. Use them as a template, file your own suit Pro Se, make them explain to a Federal Judge why they shouldn't cough them up. The law is clear.
@CaseyJones-Engineer local news organizations also may have tips, if they do investigations. First Amendment auditors on TH-cam are also experts at pro se info requests.
Both the Hatem and Tidings bridges are over the Susquehanna river which is not navigable to large ships. The channel is only 8' deep leading to the main shipping channel in the Bay.
The fact that the cost/benefit data was redacted says EVERYTHING! How can releasing that data endanger homeland security? Cost/benefit analysis of public safety is everyone's business!
Thanks for the info. Let’s be fair … yes, the pier protection is inadequate for todays circumstances. It’s was built nearly 50 years ago when cargo ships were MUCH much smaller and much less volume.
Yep, welcome to Maryland. It gets even worse the more local the jurisdiction (I'm looking at you, Baltimore City...). Almost like they aren't employed to serve the public or bound by laws or something...
My first career was in highway engineering. I have repeatedly tried to dialog with MDTA and they provide little if any real feedback. I looked at the CATEX document. Actually they got it right with four lanes (2 each way). Average daily traffic has been flat at about 32,000 since 2006. The eastern part of I-695 is four lanes and won't be widened any time soon. They also got it right with 230 feet of vertical navigational clearance. The former was 185 feet. The Bay Bridge is 186 feet but that will be replaced sometime in the future. Same 4% grade as before, which is too steep for heavy trucks trying to maintain the speed limit. The total length is 2.4 miles (former was 1.6 miles). 10 foot right shoulders which is appropriate. The main span would be 1,400 feet. The former span of 1,200 feet proved that totally inadequate to protect from large ships. Building another vulnerable and unsafe bridge is not the answer. The safe way to build a bridge there that is protected from ships is what I said. A suspension bridge with a main span of 5,200 feet between the two causeways. That is 1,000 feet longer than the Golden Gate Bridge main span. I could support that but I would like to see an engineering cost estimate first.
@@CaseyJones-Engineer Hopefully enough citizens will speak out to the officials that they will change the design to either a tunnel or a bridge with no piers in the water.
@@scottkozel1519 I think I have heard that this route had hazardous truck transport which I understand would not be permitted through a tunnel. I suppose a hybrid solution would be to build the tunnel for cars and trucks which keeps the channel clear and then permanently reroute the hazardous transport. I don't know how much this option was considered.
@@CaseyJones-Engineer The HAZMAT route now is the western loop of I-695 and certain surface roads around the harbor. Shippers are saying that a lot of transport of HAZMAT is needed between the two sides of the Patapsco River, and that those routes take much longer and are much less efficient. I have been unable to get any definitive answer from MDTA about the issue. They simply have not discussed a tunnel and don't reply to my comments about it. This is where FHWA should step in with the NEPA EIS process. Like you I do not think the CATEX is appropriate. It is an extensive review but no alternatives analysis is required. I have my opinion on what alternative should be selected, but the most important thing is to engage the public and the associated resource agencies, and to lay out the alternatives before them and then to make an informed decision by the highway agencies.
Conduct full NEPA EIS process 1) State highway agency prepares Draft EIS -- compile comments from associated resource agencies, prepare a full range of feasible alternatives, evaluate environmental impacts 2) State highway agency conducts public hearings where alternatives are presented, with a public comment period. 3) State highway agency selects preferred alternative 4) State highway agency prepares Final EIS 5) FHWA approves or disapproves Final EIS 6) State highway agency prepares Record of Decision 7) FHWA approves or disapproves Record of Decision
The ship collision and bridge collapse in and of itself is a catastrophic event to both the natural environment and the human built environment.
Building a replacement crossing that will prevent such events in the future, is also relevant to protecting the natural environment and the human built environment.
Therefore I strongly urge that FHWA require a full NEPA EIS on the project.
The Leonard P. Zakim Bunker Hill Memorial Bridge in Boston is a 21+ year old cable stayed bridge. Coastal New England has a harsher winter environment than coastal Maryland.
The funny thing is Maryland is among the richer states in the union. Maryland is not a poor state like West Virginia or Mississippi. Maryland could easily afford to protect its bridges. The problem with Maryland is it is cheap and the politicians running the state are uncaring, reckless and terminally stupid!
@@jamesandrewsinclair7488 If you want to b;lame the current Maryland Governor you are so wrong. Maryland has ALWAYS been a very cheap state. Back in the 1930's the then new University Hospital building was erected. 6 floors tall. Then only after a few more years was another six floors added. More recently the Baltimore Central Maryland Light Rail line was only partially built. Single tracked light rail lines north and south of Baltimore were bottle necks for years well before our current government. The bridges referred to were all built and ill protected years before our current governor. Maryland voters have been cheap since Maryland's founding. Maryland will talk a lot but won't fix anything!
@@AUTISTICLYCAN Thanks for the thoughtful reply - I was just making a cheap crack at the American culture of today. As someone else hinted in another comment, we need a way to process the events like this, complete with historical nuances, with an eye to doing better. Laying blame - though sometimes necessary - maybe doesn’t really solve the problem. Can we agree Casey is doing a great service by pointing out where due diligence is being done where maybe it I was not? Cheers!
Barely better than nothing, but the Nice bridge has 2 protections around the center-most pillars where I assume ships will pass. Edit: That bridge was JUST rebuilt with only those two protections.
How does the Cellular Coffer Dam provide protection? In general, what types of peir protection are out there. Perhaps a video providing info on bridge protection, in general, would be found to be interesting by most of your audience.
I cannot speak to the State of Maryland; I can only speak to Freedom of Information Act requests in Michigan. I once read that a journalist outfit in Lansing recommended that: A. In lieu of a FOIA request, try to contact the person in state government who actually has direct access to the information and ask if they will mail it over; or B. Limit the scope of the FOIA request as much as possible. However, based on what Mr. Jones has shown, I fear that what I have related above is not applicable.
A causeway with closely spaced piers will require dolphins along the entire length. That will be costly, and may impede the waterway currents. This will change the economics of construction of causeways versus medium and long span bridges.
I remember the first time I saw those dolphins at the Key Bridge, I thought that they must've been some kind of moorings, as I clearly saw how inadequate they would've been to deflect large ships from colliding with the bridge supports. The small size combined with the totally unsuitable positioning of them seemed obvious to me? Now, you see the powers that be, trying to cover their own arses!
I am a retired professional engineer. I was lucky enough to have practiced almost exclusively in private, for profit enterprise where accountability for failure is certain and swift. Transportation department stonewalling exists for one reason, to protect civil service bureaucrats from disclosure of their lethargy, as if we didn’t already know. I would hazard a guess that most of the study reports of vulnerability were not written by government officials, but rather contractors, the officials being too busy trying to look busy and make it to a guaranteed retirement not enjoyed by the contractors with the expertise to perform work.
Reminds me of the lack of storefront protection. Vehicles crash through storefronts killing and injuring people 60 times per day in the USA and no once seems to care about fixing the problem.
@@alanstevens1296 Usually people will install bollard posts. Also, parking lots can be designed to point vehicles away from the fronts of stores instead of pointing at the stores.
You may want to contact an attorney with Sunshine Act/FOIA laws. In many states, a willful refusal to provide document carries penalties against the official and comes with an award of attorney fees. And although most government employees err on the side of not releasing, most laws are require doubt to be resolved in favor or release. I've personally seen records custodians fined (paid by employer) for failing to respond even when they had a government attorney advising them not to release.
Thank you for the update on the repair process. I do disagree with your premise that protecting bridges from attack is worth the risk of damaging a bridge by constructing the protections for supports below deck, considering bridges are more vulnerable from above, Regarding hazard and risk assessment from shipping accidents, the old formula will apply to each bridge: The Hazard level = frequency of exposure to risk * potential damage from risk
As a student of WWII history, I could send Maryland DOT a whole list of ways on how to destroy bridges and other critical infrastructure. Ever hear of the 'Normandy' dry dock in St Nazaire France?
There are bridges near me that go over a major US river that would be child's play to sabotage with the right equipment (perhaps some drills and H.E.). Our infrastructure is highly vulnerable to a determined person. For example, there are some pretty large bridges on Roosevelt Blvd (12 lane city street carrying at least a million cars a day) in Philadelphia that go over creeks/parks. The whole understructure of the bridges are in public parks and fully accessible to anyone. The under parts of these bridges are loaded with graffiti. But that graffiti could just as easily be H.E. and a timer for maximum effect. Hell, it's probably highly vulnerable to a few guys with 100 batteries, 10 grinders and 100 cutoff wheels. The amount of damage that could be done to the steel support beams with such common equipment is just astounding.
I don't expect that the MD DOT can answer your request if they wanted to. The documents that you seek are over fifty years old and well before digital storage. The records would be scattered over numerous companies and agencies, stored in a hap-hazard manner, and nearly impossible to gather up.
Growing up less than 20 minutes from both the Hatem Bridge and the Tydings Bridge, I can say that that part of the Susquehanna River near Havre De Grace and Perryville is not accessible by any sizable vessel. Seeing those piers in person from the perspective of a pleasure boat, which make up most of the boat traffic under the two, I would find it hard to believe that either need much protection just because of the comparatively minuscule inertia that would be involved in any crash with a vessel small enough to traverse under them, versus that of a container ship or any other large vessel. I am not a professional engineer, though I am in my fifth year of mechanical engineering technology and recognize the need for digging deeper than intuition. I would love to see the state government be more transparent about the results of these studies though, as well as see more similar studies. Other bridges in the area, namely the Rt. 213 Chesapeake City bridge over the C&D Canal, definitely have a need for a significant amount of protection. I cannot recall if this bridge has anything protecting its piers, but that canal sees an extremely significant amount of tidal current in both directions in addition to large vessels crossing between the two bays. I wonder if this bridge is well enough protected.
“hey, we here at the department of Transportation know how to stonewall a information request but not how to stonewall a bridge. Thanks for your interest, MDOT”. Really enjoy your videos.
Thank you! Great comparison.
@@CaseyJones-Engineer I think your only chance of getting anything is allying with a traditional media to get them to ram down the wall.
Ouch.
Engineers like you are a check on officialdom's work. Thanks for pursuing the facts and helping keep us safe!
I appreciate that!
they dont want to be blamed for their lack of oversight. Infrastructure is major state and federal responsibility which we have been complaining about for years while being ignored
The problem with the dolphins was a complete lack of porpoise.
@@neilhales4693 Love it!🤣
It feels like they did everything so half assed that they don’t want anyone to actually scrutinize their work.
No wonder we have issues with transparency and accountability today. Smh
Thank you Casey 🙏
Thank you.
In hindsight.
@@AlbertHess-xy7kyand some foresight
Public info request typically result in some level of malicious compliance. You get a response that's unresponsive. Remember when police body worn cameras were a good idea - fast forward to today most request result in a cost estimate for the per-frame redaction of the subject film. The cost are of course astronomical and no data is ever provided. Just assume every redaction reveals some aspect of an inadequate design. You won't see the requested info until a lengthy civil suit discovery process. The bridge was obviously inadequate and the supporting facts will come out in court and the guilty will hide behind the various forms of immunity granted to public officials.
I think you're right. They're worried about the pending lawsuits and know they've got huge liability in this situation.
Good luck getting anything from anyone in Maryland. It could be an explicit requirement in the state code, and they'd still resist and stonewall.
I don't think civil suits against MDOT or the State of Maryland will get anywhere - they'd be quickly dismissed on grounds of Sovereign Immunity.
Your utube provides the public with information not only for education but public awareness. Human capital is a nations strength .
Thank you!
Yes our nations strength is diminished by heavily redacted responses to requests of accomplished engineers like Jones.
Don't blame the designer/architect for the lack of a feature the bureaucrats weren't willing to fund.
I'm not blaming the original designer at all I'm blaming the state for not retrofitting this bridge when there were numerous episodes of ships colliding with bridges that should have been instructive to them.
The first design was for a tunnel instead of a bridge but Maryland opted for the bridge because it was cheaper.
As a resident, and taxpayer of the state of Maryland, and a professional engineer, I will send letters to my state senators and delegates to resolve this issue. I think it is important to avoid recriminations. I want to know what drove those decisions and whether the decision making process needs to be re-examined. We don't need detailed technical data, we need to understand how these decisions came to be, and if needed, how we can improve.
I think this is the play!! Get a politician involved that wants to gain votes!! Although unlikely a bipartisan support cause.
@@serdneb You could probably get some bipartisan support depending on whether or they think it's likely to reflect poorly on their party.
Written letters will get their attention tho - ppl just don't write letters anymore so that will be definitely be noticed. lol
The Harry Nice bridge has been replaced and the original structure was demolished in 2023. The new bridge does have some pier protection.
Thank you, I will look in to that further.
In Australia (where I live) most major works have a website for the work getting done, where you can download all the specs etc. Therefor no need to beg for info about the projects at hand.
What a concept! In Canada we still hide the stuff under our office chairs so that it is 'hard to find'.
This is common in the US too, but isn't a federal requirement, so it's up to the local agencies and their personal opinions about transparency. The idea of perfect transparency is appealing, but especially In the case of bridges, I think the national security argument unfortunately holds water
My basic thought is that the gound (bottom of harbor) be raised enough around the dolfins, so that a deep draft vessel (big ships) will run aground and stop before hitting the dolfin.
Being a Marine engineer, not a civil engineer, I don't know how feasible that is.
Thanks for your investigation! And sharing what you know with us.Even before the collapse of the Francis Scott Key bridge, every time I was on a bridge with large ships beneath, I fantasized about what would happen if that ship ran into the bridge support. Shivers up and down my spine-every time.
Your observations are spot on, here in Norfolk we have to spend BILLIONS on tunnels and have more tunnels than my home town, in the Allegheny mountains, Pittsburgh has, why? Because the US NAVY since the 1950s has required the state build TUNNELS to cross all the channels going to the Hampton Roads, Chesapeake Bay, or Atlantic Ocean fearing a collapsed bridge would trap the fleet inside the harbor. These include channels going down the ELizabeth River to the Norfolk Naval Shipyard which is in Portsmouth Va (to differentiate it from the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in New England) . Charleston SC saw it's naval facilities closed because of the Ravenel Bridge not being tall enough to allow the largest naval ships to pass during all tide cycles and the fear of a downed bridge closing the base. Maryland cheaped out and built bridges and this year they rolled the dice and came up snake eyes. The Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel, to the Eastern Shore had it's trestle taken down by a large ship decades ago even though the tunnels were unaffected, vehicle traffic was detoured for a year. Now the quasi public toll corporation has built dual trestles and is doubling the tunnels so a total loss of access will be almost impossible. Because of the fear of taking a trestle out, the anchorage was moved from off of Cape Henry to off of Cape Charles to protect the trestles from storm pushed ships. I don't dislike cable stay bridges, at first they appeared awesome, but coming from Pittsburgh, we came to appreciate all the different types of bridges inventive designers have created, but now we no longer get bow string truss bridges like the ones at tbe point, or the bSmithfield which is a very rare double truss, or the 3 sisters, which are beam and eyelet suspension bridges (similar to the collapsed Silver Bridge) or the calalever Glenwood Bridge where part of the structure peaks up over the roadway. In a word, cable stay bridges are no longer different, or notable. The dual bridges over the Delaware Canal that take SR 1 and US 13 over it show us how much designs have changed in the decades. But to your point, politicians don't spend money on "maybes" they have too many palms out and "necessessities" to finance without raising taxes, so until the Key Bridge fell, protection was in the back of their minds but they hoped the problem would not rear it's ugly head until the next Governor or Transportation Secy was in office.
Thank you for your comments. There's a lot of insight there and I agree with you.
See:
Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel
I-64 Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel
I-664 Monitor-Merrimac Memorial Bridge-Tunnel
No bridge over the shipping channel that can be hit by ships or bombed during war.
Casey, maybe you could team up with local news media to publicize your investigation.
Thank you, that's a good suggestion.
Follow the money; that's where you'll find the cracks
Back in the day of Walter Winchell and Walter Cronkite that idea might of worked.
But with the state of "journalism" these days............ehhhhh I don't know.
@@jamesbuckingham8073 The real problem is that there ain't no money. I can see the reasoning behind (or argument for) holding the state and DOT responsible for this lack of collision protection. But in the end it was up to the state General Assembly, and, for the better or worse, there's no mechanism to hold lawmakers responsible for their voting and appropriations. So the buck stops there, but there's no blame left in it. :/
The Homeland Security secrecy aspect might have been a cause of the Millennium Tower (SF) and 161 Maiden Lane (NYC) leaning towers. If it were easy to get details of the footings of these buildings curious/nosy neighbors, even without any engineering background, might have been alarmed by footings not extending to bedrock. The condition of the bridge that collapsed in Pittsburgh might also have been kept secret.
Interesting point. I'm inclined to believe it was just simple incompetence paired with the desire to save money.
@@CaseyJones-Engineer Given secrecy, a certain type of person, or perhaps any person, will be unable to resist temptation. I personally think that the builders were competent, they just decided to take a businessman's risk, which did not work out.
I was glad to see Kiewit awarded the prelim engineering phase contract hopefully they have a great team and will move the project toward completion quickly. I tend to agree with your statement on federally funded Phase I studies. It is required by NEPA. It also depends on the state's requirements to fulfill NEPA. I do these studies for a living and it can be time consuming. Obviously there is some political will to move this project forward, so a Categorical Exclusion is the easiest way to do this.
I think they've conveniently overlooked the provision in GP 4-352 (b): "The custodian may deny inspection of a part of a public record under subsection (a) of this section only to the extent that the inspection would: ... " given that the bridge is gone.
I've had similar frustrations in Australia. The legislation seems to be saying that the information will be provided, and presumably that's what the legislators thought they were legislating for. Yet, somehow agencies contort the meaning so as to allow them to avoid releasing anything of interest. Sometimes I've gone through the steps to appeal against decisions, and got additional documents, or unredacted text, only to find myself wondering why they bothered to try to keep it secret.
There's always the Public Access Ombudsman, though they may be so underfunded as to be ineffective in practice.
Thank you. I think I will file an appeal but I'm not going tohold out much hope in this case.
"We have met the enemy, and it is us."
The New "Gordie Howe" bridge is between Windsor and Detroit, and is of the Cable Stayed design. the supports are both sides on LAND so their is NOTHING in the shipping channel. I suspect that Detroit gets more Snow than Baltimore.
Great point. Cool bridge too!
Very informative channel which I appreciate. The Harry Nice bridge has been replaced. I look forward to your review of the new structure.
Keep hammering on this project
Thank you so much!
I expect the information requested is in a filing cabinet warehouse - taken there after the switch to digital systems (paper reduction act of 1995). These storage warehouses are containers without heating or cooling so the non vellum paper files have slowly fallen apart or worse moved to a trash bin
That may be true but they didn't say the information was unavailable. They just said they weren't going to give it to me.
Good job very interesting content thank you for keeping us updated on all this information good show take care
Thanks, you too!
Always interesting to tune into one of your podcasts.
Thank you!
Have a look at the Astoria Megler and Lewis and Clark bridges, both on the Columbia River access to several ports on the River!
Thanks for the information, or maybe the lack thereof! What’s with all the redactions? Why would bridge protection merit all that black ink? What are they afraid might get out? 🤔
You are certainly to be commended for your persistence getting as much as you did!👍🏻👏🙏
Keep the pressure on 💪🏻
Thank you so much. It has been a time-consuming process to get what little I have, but I think it is interesting that there are at least 4 other bridges that are vulnerable to ship impacts that that they have done nothing about. Just like they did nothing about upgrading protections for FSK Bridge. I will keep at it.
red tape justifying red tape
I can't think of any reason to redact a 20 or more year old report other than CYA. It is simply ludicrous.
@@CaseyJones-Engineer Aside from the Bay Bridge, the other spans are under far less hazard, as the traffic under them is largely barges, tugs, and fishing boats. (I've allided with the Bay Bridge, but it was under no threat from my sailboat!)
Drove across the William Preston Lane Jr. Bridge yesterday and significant construction is taking place in the water just to the south of the first span.
Interesting. I will look into that some more.
Here in nyc the Willis ave bridge on the east river has dolfins going out 20 feet
Thanks!
Thank you!
Thanks Casey, think you have hit upon a cover up to deflect liability away from them and onto ship owners, or in this case the ship owner! It's my feelings that Maryland should be held as the primary responsible party in the Frances Scott Key case, for their lack of providing proper protection to begin with!
Thank you, I think you are exactly right!
So, by extension, do we think DOTs should be liable for the consequences of traffic accidents, too? In some cases it may be possible to demonstrate actual negligence, but generally?
Isn’t it ironic that, in this case, the “smoking gun” that would lay the blame squarely on the DOT would be the (unredacted) studies, commissioned by the same body, presumably in an attempt to identify and quantify the very risks they may would be accused of failing to address.
I am wondering how - in the rush to lay blame on gov’t institutions (I’m not saying they are all blameless) - we can take into account the changing whims of an electorate who, over time, may have chosen to gut and starve these very same institutions?
Go ahead and sue the gov’t. Maybe there are criminal actions in the mix that need to be brought to light. But it’s the taxpayers who will pay the bill and voters who are ultimately accountable.
Thanks for sharing of info, thoughts and opinions.
They don't want to reveal any of their mistakes even though they are blatantly obvious. Good Video. Good Luck, Rick
Thank you! It sure does seem that way it doesn't it!
Casey,
Your video was spot-on regarding what information was and wasn't provided. I spent five years in Alaska post-EXXON VALDEZ. I represented ARCO Marine, Inc., from 1991 to 1995. I was ARCO Marine's liaison between the Alyeska Pipeline Co., the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, the Prince William Sound Regional Citizens Advisory Committee, and the other tanker operators. The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA'90) brought changes ranging from double-hulled tankers, to tanker escorts, to expanded oil spill contingency planning, and to Polar Tanker's (formerly known as ARCO Marine, Inc.) new double-hulled tankers with twin fully redundant engine rooms including twin rudders. OPA'90 also created Regional Citizens Advisory Committees. After my stint in Alaska I was the Manager of Design and Construction for Polar Tanker's new tankers.
If MDOT was smart they would answer the questions being asked now. It is all too easy to write and pass legislation that mandates the participation of Citizens' Advisory Committees.
Bob
Hijacking a cargo ship would probably be easier today than a plane was in 2001. A careful analysis of essential military transportation hubs could inspire the taking out of 3 or 4 bridges that would severely hamper any military response requiring massive deployment of troops or materiel. Similarly evaluating the economic importance of major bridges could lead to devastating attacks on our economy.
You have to be careful with Google Earth, when I looked the Key Bridge up on Google Maps the dolphins were not there, but on Streetview and other satellite/aerial views show them. It seems the programing sees them as moving boats and erases them.
Thank you that's a great point.
Another great presentation, thanks. Hopefully, the current State of Maryland political leadership will seek Federal level support to improve our critical infrastructure from damage by acts of nature & mankind.
The challenge has increased in the last few years. Modern container ships are bigger than they used to be, but they also have a modified hull design, with a very wide flared bow to hold more containers forward. Thus the upper bow overhangs the lower hull like an aircraft carrier deck, meaning that dolphins or linear fenders must protrude much further away from the bridge piers to keep the overhang clear. This appears to be what happened with Dali. After bypassing the tiny cell, by the time the hull hit the fendering around the bridge pier, the top of the bow had already hit the pier and knocked it down. Note that there have been a large number of cases where a container ship approaching a dock overhangs the dock, and knocks down container cranes due to the overhang of the deck forward. A couple days ago, a container ship wiped the masts off a sail training ship in Australia.
As a retired 40-year contract engineering designer. I had worked for Kiewit on two occasions. They are very good for delivery on time and often times over delivering on expectations with road and bridge building projects. But they are a terrible organization to work for. They are well known for heavy handedness with salaried employees requiring 60 and 70 hours per week. As a contractor, I insisted on hourly pay so they limited my weeks to 40 hours. LOL. Sometime rebellion occurred within and people walk out in middle of projects making it worse for the remaining staff. They learned a big lesson when they took on a couple projects (industrial process work) lacking process system expertise. This should be interesting to track.
Yes I've heard that too that Kiewit puts their staff through the meat grinder especially the 0 to 5 year folks. A lot of Kiewit people say if you can make it 5 years you will be there for the long haul.
@@CaseyJones-Engineer I like to say that working for Kiewit isn't a job, it's a lifestyle! In my experience, they hire good people who can do projects well and aren't punitive with claims.
@@mtgibbs Kiewit sounds a lot like big law, consulting, or investment banking. Made worthwhile by (hopefully) good pay (which per actual hour worked isn't that great for 0-5 years) and promises of a very lucrative future career for those who put up with it.
Our homeland security is most threatened by our governments and their secrets.
I'm glad they bypassed the studies if only because the loss of the bridge has made traffic in this area even more unbearable than it already was
Sometimes redactions can be removed with a pdf editor.
I tried it and it didn't work on this one.
Thanks for the update.
You bet.
SINCE THE KEY BRIDGE DISASTER, I HAVE SEEN INTERESTING DESIGN IN THE CHICAGO AREA AND THE DAUPHINS WERE CONSIDERABLY LARGER AND SHAPED DIFFERENTLY. FSK SHOULD LOOK AT THAT. PLUS THERE ARE MORE ELECTRONICS SAFETY SIGNALS KEY BRIDGE AREA LIKELY DOES NOT HAVE.
Since the closing of Wiley's ship yard in Port Deposit MD there's no commercial marine traffic traveling under the I-95 Tidings Bridge. There is tug/barge traffic under the US-40 Hatem Bridge.
Thank you for covering this important topic. The more you push the MDOT for information the more they look like they're conducting a cover up.
Regarding infrastructure protection, is there any sort of "reasonable disclosure" concept for physical vulnerabilities like there is for cyber infrastructure vulnerabilities? If a friendly third party can look at some infrastructure and, using publicity available information, identify a viable attack but is unable to convince the owner to do anything more than "hope nobody else notices" what can legally be done by the third party?
In software there is precedent that the correct (and legally protected) process is to privately inform the owner and give them a "if I don't hear back I'll publish this on $DATE" and it's expected that the reporting party will eventually publish regardless but will hold off as long as the owner is making good faith efforts to address the issue. It would seem that establishing a similar legal precedent (likely with variations in things like expected timelines) would be worthwhile for physical infrastructure.
FWIW, when I think about it, it's a bit terrifying to think how few people I'd need to suborn to cause a lot of havoc. Even more worrisome is that it would take a huge amount of work to avoid the countermeasures being more harmful than an attack.
The "homeland security" concerns aren't in good faith, rather they're an excuse for covering up negligence by the Maryland government. Nobody is truly worried about potential future attacks against a no longer existing bridge. The best approach to get the information is probably to work with one or more Maryland media outlets. They have deeper pockets for a legal battle and a larger audience of local voters watching when they ask important questions like: "is MDOT really worried about attacks on a bridge that doesn't exist anymore, or are they covering up their own negligence?", and "what are your plans to protect the other large bridges in Maryland to prevent similar accidents in the future".
In case I wasn't clear: the strategy here is to embarrass the politicians until public outrage forces them to release the data. Election season would be an especially good time to do this as the politicians can sweep the issue under the rug and hope it goes away before the next election.
Can you make a video about the new proposed I55 bridge in Memphis that is being proposed sometime in the future. I'm curious about the modern approach to making a modern bridge in a seismic zone over a massive river like the Ms river with a major barge channel. Always enjoy your thoughts around this kind of engineering.
You might contact The Institute for Justice. They might put some legal muscle behind getting access to those documents.
Did you receive the documents electronically. Many people don't redact info electronically in the correct way, not realizing that the black they put on top of the text just hides it, and doesn't remove it from the electronic file. It may be worth trying to remove the redactions from the electronic document, assuming it's a PDF or maybe Word.
Thank you that's a good point. I tried that but I wasn't able to remove the redactions.
Looking forward to future drone footage
Thank you.
It's been demonstrated that the pier protection was inadequate - since an unpowered / adrift ship managed to strike it. We both know that there are provisions for ship impact in AASHTO BDM. It should, then, be the DOT's responsibility to have provided for this event in conformance with the BDM - especially since they appear to have commissioned relatively recent studies to take a fresh look at it. I will guess that the redactions in the documents provided (and omission of those that were not) are in part due to the lawsuit(s) over the cost of replacement of the bridge. I'd bet a nice lunch that the legal action(s) will draw on the same materials you requested to determine if the protection was consistent with the design provisions and later studies with the goal of the ship's insurers to put as much of the cost a possible back on the DOT and designer for providing inadequate collision protection.
Thank you very much. I think your comments are right on target in each case. The DOT knows that they have shared liability here for not properly protecting this bridge.
Some of these bridges go to other states. Do you think the reports was sent to those states? Maybe a request to those states for information would yield results.
Thanks.
Find a non-profit open records group in the state. The are use to going after agencies for open records.
Ah governments-they all practice CYA first no matter what the impact may be. It's like squeezing blood from a stone to get the truth.
Thanks for the follow up. Great channel, I especially like your coverage of the Washington St Bridge in Providence RI. This fallow up reminded me that just a few days after the FSK bridge collapsed the Governor of RI came out and said the 3 big bridges in RI , the Newport Bridge, Jamestown Bridge and the Mt. Hope Bridge were safe from this type of event. Did you look into them while researching for you RI video and do you have any comment on them.
Thank you. No, I that wasn't on my radar so I will check into it. I am skeptical about anything this governor or RiDOT director says.
How many of the 4 bridges have shipping passing?
Never thought about the icing that can occur on the cables. That seems like a legitimate concern. Many years ago we had a extreme ice storm where I live. Large icycles were forming on power lines that span our interstate. As the temperature started rising, sheets of ice would drop on the roads. Dangerous as heck.
Morning °~•.☆.•~° Thank you!
Thank you too!
I would imagine the information was highly incriminating to current officials and thus was super-redacted😅
I think you're right about that!
Thx for the links!
@@robvale1 Certainly!
3:01 don't you mean 'Homeland Insecurity'?
More like 'Homeland Insanity'. Best to you~
the officials secrets act is not there to protect secrets, it's there to protect officials....
We really need open government so that FOI requests are not necessary or the rare last resort after openness has failed. But, already having a little accountability makes running a government more expensive than a business. Voters like tax cuts. Most people value efficiency above accountability.
Well I think part of the reason they don't provide the requested information is specifically to avoid any accountability.
@@CaseyJones-Engineer Are there some states that do a good job of publishing infrastructure information? (without an FOI)
Do you have an information wish list?
That would be an interesting comparison -- what some states publish and others hide.
20 years later
I drove across the Chesapeake bay bridge a couple weeks ago and the first thing i thought was hoping a ship wouldn't lose control.
Maybe I am mistaken, but it seemed that some reports had the title or other identifying info redacted. Could this mean the unredacted reports are already on the shelves of technical libraries, and they didn't want to help you find them?
That's an interesting thought. I'll have to look into that.
Your insights into management of critical infrastructure, and how dangerous those nefarious actors tossing monkey wrenches can be, would make for an interesting guest appearance on Bret Weinstein’s Darkhorse podcast.
Thank you for the suggestion!
Thank you for your Key report, from a Key descendent. 🍺
Certainly!
Thanks for the 411 but still waiting on that CN RAIL ROAD BIDGE FAILURE update 👍
I'm working on it!
@@CaseyJones-Engineer 🤷♂️ wasn’t trying to rush ya! Jus’ saying 🤭 ✌️🤙
Have you tried to select text on these documents? On a number of occasions I had redactions with either black text on black background or just a black rectangle drawn over the text...
Give select all, copy then "paste without formatting" a try.
It will not work on scanned documents but may on Word or PowerPoint exported to PDF...
That's a great suggestion I tried it but it didn't work on this document.
Always send a copy of your request to the Attorney General’s office that doesn’t take a lawyer, but lets them know that you’re serious
That is a great suggestion, thank you!
Look up recent Info Act suits in your Circuit. Use them as a template, file your own suit Pro Se, make them explain to a Federal Judge why they shouldn't cough them up. The law is clear.
Thank you very much those are great suggestions!
@CaseyJones-Engineer local news organizations also may have tips, if they do investigations. First Amendment auditors on TH-cam are also experts at pro se info requests.
Detroit's new cable stayed bridge going over to Canada is opening next year. This is in addition to the existing traditional bridge just up river.
I dont know what day you took those screenshots of the traffic on google maps but thats the most green i ever seen for the DMV area.
Both the Hatem and Tidings bridges are over the Susquehanna river which is not navigable to large ships. The channel is only 8' deep leading to the main shipping channel in the Bay.
The fact that the cost/benefit data was redacted says EVERYTHING! How can releasing that data endanger homeland security?
Cost/benefit analysis of public safety is everyone's business!
Thanks for the info. Let’s be fair … yes, the pier protection is inadequate for todays circumstances. It’s was built nearly 50 years ago when cargo ships were MUCH much smaller and much less volume.
Yes, and they had 50 years to do an upgrade and chose not to. Other owners retrofitted their bridges with such protection though.
Yep, welcome to Maryland. It gets even worse the more local the jurisdiction (I'm looking at you, Baltimore City...).
Almost like they aren't employed to serve the public or bound by laws or something...
My first career was in highway engineering. I have repeatedly tried to dialog with MDTA and they provide little if any real feedback.
I looked at the CATEX document.
Actually they got it right with four lanes (2 each way).
Average daily traffic has been flat at about 32,000 since 2006.
The eastern part of I-695 is four lanes and won't be widened any time soon.
They also got it right with 230 feet of vertical navigational clearance. The former was 185 feet. The Bay Bridge is 186 feet but that will be replaced sometime in the future.
Same 4% grade as before, which is too steep for heavy trucks trying to maintain the speed limit.
The total length is 2.4 miles (former was 1.6 miles).
10 foot right shoulders which is appropriate.
The main span would be 1,400 feet. The former span of 1,200 feet proved that totally inadequate to protect from large ships.
Building another vulnerable and unsafe bridge is not the answer.
The safe way to build a bridge there that is protected from ships is what I said.
A suspension bridge with a main span of 5,200 feet between the two causeways.
That is 1,000 feet longer than the Golden Gate Bridge main span.
I could support that but I would like to see an engineering cost estimate first.
Thank you, those are all excellent points!
@@CaseyJones-Engineer
Hopefully enough citizens will speak out to the officials that they will change the design to either a tunnel or a bridge with no piers in the water.
@@scottkozel1519 I think I have heard that this route had hazardous truck transport which I understand would not be permitted through a tunnel. I suppose a hybrid solution would be to build the tunnel for cars and trucks which keeps the channel clear and then permanently reroute the hazardous transport. I don't know how much this option was considered.
@@CaseyJones-Engineer
The HAZMAT route now is the western loop of I-695 and certain surface roads around the harbor.
Shippers are saying that a lot of transport of HAZMAT is needed between the two sides of the Patapsco River, and that those routes take much longer and are much less efficient.
I have been unable to get any definitive answer from MDTA about the issue. They simply have not discussed a tunnel and don't reply to my comments about it.
This is where FHWA should step in with the NEPA EIS process.
Like you I do not think the CATEX is appropriate. It is an extensive review but no alternatives analysis is required.
I have my opinion on what alternative should be selected, but the most important thing is to engage the public and the associated resource agencies, and to lay out the alternatives before them and then to make an informed decision by the highway agencies.
Conduct full NEPA EIS process
1) State highway agency prepares Draft EIS -- compile comments from associated resource agencies, prepare a full range of feasible alternatives, evaluate environmental impacts
2) State highway agency conducts public hearings where alternatives are presented, with a public comment period.
3) State highway agency selects preferred alternative
4) State highway agency prepares Final EIS
5) FHWA approves or disapproves Final EIS
6) State highway agency prepares Record of Decision
7) FHWA approves or disapproves Record of Decision
The ship collision and bridge collapse in and of itself is a catastrophic event to both the natural environment and the human built environment.
Building a replacement crossing that will prevent such events in the future, is also relevant to protecting the natural environment and the human built environment.
Therefore I strongly urge that FHWA require a full NEPA EIS on the project.
The Leonard P. Zakim Bunker Hill Memorial Bridge in Boston is a 21+ year old cable stayed bridge. Coastal New England has a harsher winter environment than coastal Maryland.
The funny thing is Maryland is among the richer states in the union. Maryland is not a poor state like West Virginia or Mississippi. Maryland could easily afford to protect its bridges. The problem with Maryland is it is cheap and the politicians running the state are uncaring, reckless and terminally stupid!
Kudos to Maryland voters!
@@jamesandrewsinclair7488 If you want to b;lame the current Maryland Governor you are so wrong. Maryland has ALWAYS been a very cheap state. Back in the 1930's the then new University Hospital building was erected. 6 floors tall. Then only after a few more years was another six floors added. More recently the Baltimore Central Maryland Light Rail line was only partially built. Single tracked light rail lines north and south of Baltimore were bottle necks for years well before our current government. The bridges referred to were all built and ill protected years before our current governor. Maryland voters have been cheap since Maryland's founding. Maryland will talk a lot but won't fix anything!
@@AUTISTICLYCAN Thanks for the thoughtful reply - I was just making a cheap crack at the American culture of today. As someone else hinted in another comment, we need a way to process the events like this, complete with historical nuances, with an eye to doing better. Laying blame - though sometimes necessary - maybe doesn’t really solve the problem. Can we agree Casey is doing a great service by pointing out where due diligence is being done where maybe it I was not? Cheers!
Thanks for recommending "Catastrophe Theory" by Neale Martin. I bought if for Kindle and it was a great read.
I'm glad you enjoyed it. He's coming out with another book soon with the same main characters.
Barely better than nothing, but the Nice bridge has 2 protections around the center-most pillars where I assume ships will pass. Edit: That bridge was JUST rebuilt with only those two protections.
Thank you all I will look more into that.
How does the Cellular Coffer Dam provide protection? In general, what types of peir protection are out there. Perhaps a video providing info on bridge protection, in general, would be found to be interesting by most of your audience.
Thank you I covered that topic in some detail in my previous videos on the Francis Scott Key bridge.
My guess is that these unelected bureaucrats would rather protect themselves from liability than the public from danger!
I cannot speak to the State of Maryland; I can only speak to Freedom of Information Act requests in Michigan. I once read that a journalist outfit in Lansing recommended that:
A. In lieu of a FOIA request, try to contact the person in state government who actually has direct access to the information and ask if they will mail it over; or
B. Limit the scope of the FOIA request as much as possible.
However, based on what Mr. Jones has shown, I fear that what I have related above is not applicable.
A causeway with closely spaced piers will require dolphins along the entire length. That will be costly, and may impede the waterway currents. This will change the economics of construction of causeways versus medium and long span bridges.
True, but what about the economic impacts of a collapsed bridge?
@@CaseyJones-Engineer
Hydrologic problems are not analyzed under economics. They are a unacceptable environmental problem.
I remember the first time I saw those dolphins at the Key Bridge, I thought that they must've been some kind of moorings, as I clearly saw how inadequate they would've been to deflect large ships from colliding with the bridge supports. The small size combined with the totally unsuitable positioning of them seemed obvious to me?
Now, you see the powers that be, trying to cover their own arses!
I am a retired professional engineer. I was lucky enough to have practiced almost exclusively in private, for profit enterprise where accountability for failure is certain and swift. Transportation department stonewalling exists for one reason, to protect civil service bureaucrats from disclosure of their lethargy, as if we didn’t already know. I would hazard a guess that most of the study reports of vulnerability were not written by government officials, but rather contractors, the officials being too busy trying to look busy and make it to a guaranteed retirement not enjoyed by the contractors with the expertise to perform work.
The gaped maw of the Bureaucracy will swallow us whole .....
Don’t look here, look over there. Nothing to see people.
Reminds me of the lack of storefront protection. Vehicles crash through storefronts killing and injuring people 60 times per day in the USA and no once seems to care about fixing the problem.
Should storefronts have a Jersey barrier to prevent vehicles from crashing into the store?
Great point. Gas station pumps have protective bollards but for buildings, they only seem to be at Federal properties.
@@alanstevens1296 Usually people will install bollard posts. Also, parking lots can be designed to point vehicles away from the fronts of stores instead of pointing at the stores.
@@CaseyJones-Engineer
Those store bollards won't stop a large truck.
They are expensive. They take up lot space.
You may want to contact an attorney with Sunshine Act/FOIA laws. In many states, a willful refusal to provide document carries penalties against the official and comes with an award of attorney fees. And although most government employees err on the side of not releasing, most laws are require doubt to be resolved in favor or release. I've personally seen records custodians fined (paid by employer) for failing to respond even when they had a government attorney advising them not to release.
Thank you for the update on the repair process. I do disagree with your premise that protecting bridges from attack is worth the risk of damaging a bridge by constructing the protections for supports below deck, considering bridges are more vulnerable from above,
Regarding hazard and risk assessment from shipping accidents, the old formula will apply to each bridge:
The Hazard level = frequency of exposure to risk * potential damage from risk
As a student of WWII history, I could send Maryland DOT a whole list of ways on how to destroy bridges and other critical infrastructure.
Ever hear of the 'Normandy' dry dock in St Nazaire France?
There are bridges near me that go over a major US river that would be child's play to sabotage with the right equipment (perhaps some drills and H.E.). Our infrastructure is highly vulnerable to a determined person. For example, there are some pretty large bridges on Roosevelt Blvd (12 lane city street carrying at least a million cars a day) in Philadelphia that go over creeks/parks. The whole understructure of the bridges are in public parks and fully accessible to anyone. The under parts of these bridges are loaded with graffiti. But that graffiti could just as easily be H.E. and a timer for maximum effect. Hell, it's probably highly vulnerable to a few guys with 100 batteries, 10 grinders and 100 cutoff wheels. The amount of damage that could be done to the steel support beams with such common equipment is just astounding.
I don't expect that the MD DOT can answer your request if they wanted to. The documents that you seek are over fifty years old and well before digital storage. The records would be scattered over numerous companies and agencies, stored in a hap-hazard manner, and nearly impossible to gather up.
That's probably true but I suspect that they've got records from looking at potential upgrades in the last 20 years.
Given the impact to the port, perhaps this was a missed opportunity to de-bridge the port opening.
Growing up less than 20 minutes from both the Hatem Bridge and the Tydings Bridge, I can say that that part of the Susquehanna River near Havre De Grace and Perryville is not accessible by any sizable vessel. Seeing those piers in person from the perspective of a pleasure boat, which make up most of the boat traffic under the two, I would find it hard to believe that either need much protection just because of the comparatively minuscule inertia that would be involved in any crash with a vessel small enough to traverse under them, versus that of a container ship or any other large vessel. I am not a professional engineer, though I am in my fifth year of mechanical engineering technology and recognize the need for digging deeper than intuition. I would love to see the state government be more transparent about the results of these studies though, as well as see more similar studies. Other bridges in the area, namely the Rt. 213 Chesapeake City bridge over the C&D Canal, definitely have a need for a significant amount of protection. I cannot recall if this bridge has anything protecting its piers, but that canal sees an extremely significant amount of tidal current in both directions in addition to large vessels crossing between the two bays. I wonder if this bridge is well enough protected.