
Troubled welds on the Bay Bridge - kevin818
http://www.sacbee.com/static/sinclair/sinclair.jquery/baybridge/index.html
======
ChuckFrank
What a fiasco. This story just keeps getting bigger and bigger. So many
lessons to be learned about a flawed bidding and construction process. And
from what I see, it's immune to politics. No party can take the higher ground.
Public sector graft and private sector lying, cheating and thieving, both need
to be stopped and big, small government, or running government like a business
doesn't seem to help. Instead, working towards an ethical and just society
with clear and equitable consequences for all does seem to help. So in this
case, follow the money, retrieve all that was gotten through ill gotten gains,
and hand out jail sentences. As for the rest of us, we still have a bridge to
deal with.

~~~
Shivetya
I am trying to understand how this fiasco is any different from Boston's big
dig? Are we just posturing because it was a Chinese company? Neither was
bid/priced right and both have/had safety problems.

Welcome to the world of government contracts, big projects tend to be vastly
different than what is proposed or agreed too.

Hence I am confused as to why the controversy this time.

~~~
dandelany
So your argument is, because government projects are _usually_ problematic, we
should not be calling attention to new problematic projects? Doesn't that seem
a little... fatalistic?

~~~
Shivetya
I am not aware of many if any actually big government projects that are not
problematic. However I do think the story was full of underhanded/indirect
Chinese bashing, if not just plain foreigner bashing; like the quote
"unaccustomed to the rigor of American construction rules". I guess they are
just too stupid to do business in the real world, and this in the state that
wants to waste billions on a train to nowhere.

Frankly I am amazed at how much oversight there isn't on billion dollar plus
projects. You would think there should be more than one agency, in particular
neutral non government agencies that should be required to sign off on
projects that crest a certain dollar amount.

This is not to say that big government projects are all bad, they do lay
ground work for many private companies to build on. Look as Space X, it would
not be where it is today if not for NASA but it is a better choice for many
things that NASA because of its big government mentality are not good at
anymore. We only have to look at the recent boondoggle that was the ACA's main
website to understand that oversight by non politically aligned, no government
groups, is warranted.

TL;DR.

Yes, a lot of China bashing going on, to redirect the ire from its rightful
spot, inept government with no real oversight. There needs to be "civilian"
oversight on large government projects, appointed by industry experts.

------
jacques_chester
I feel that the title is misleading.

Caltrans faulted by practicing terrible project management.

If someone underbids the next contractor by _$250 million_ on a job they've
never done before, you're supposed to politely laugh them out of the room.

Edit: for the benefit of those now arriving, the title and link have been
changed.

~~~
techsupporter
> If someone underbids the next contractor by $250 million on a job they've
> never done before, you're supposed to politely laugh them out of the room.

Most of the time, you can't, at least not for government projects. Because of
procurement laws and rules (designed, among other things, to allegedly be
transparent and to provide accountability), a government body is required to
accept the lowest bid from the contractor that met all of the requirements.
Seeking an "experienced contractor" is usually seen as code for "we want to
use our friends" by a skeptical legislative body, so things like tenure and
past projects can't be considered.

~~~
div
Odd. I've been involved in a few government bidding processes in Europe, and
detailing past projects was always a major part of what we'd get graded on.

~~~
Someone
Indeed. Typically, being able to build the thing is a requirement, and that is
typically made objectively measurable by stating that you must have
successfully built similar projects.

That has its downsides, too. A common complaint in the EU is that there is no
way for small building companies to become large companies. Reason is that, to
become a large company, you have to do large projects, and to get large
projects, you have to have done large projects.

In the EU, when comparing offers, one doesn't have to pick the absolutely
cheapest that meets the requirements, either. A slightly more expensive offer
that more than meets the requirements (for example by having much less
environmental impact, by requiring less closure time of a road, or by
producing something that has lower maintenance costs) can windhover one that
just meets the requirements.

------
ChuckFrank
Having studied in China, and worked in construction, all I can say is that
this smells, far and wide, like there was some kickback somewhere in this
process. I'm guessing on the Chinese soil end of things. From first hand
experience, I know it happens on American soil all the time as well, but, from
what little I saw in 1999 the Chinese culture of kickback in China takes it to
a whole new level.

Also, can somebody explain to me those flight prices? Spending over 10K on
flights to Shanghai within a single month seems outrageous.

~~~
manifesto
I just searched on Delta.com. If you book a week ahead, the price for a round
trip ticket in First/business class ranges from $6,000 to $11,000, so spending
10k in a month is "normal".

~~~
ChuckFrank
Why would you need to book a week ahead? And why would you go first/business
class?

It's a huge project, there's got to be scheduled client side meetings, and
those should be scheduled months in advance.

~~~
vacri
The answer to this question: "And why would you go first/business class?"

Is this statement: "It's a huge project"

Apart from getting far enough along in your career to be handling huge
projects and therefore probably entitled to some cream, it also just doesn't
make sense from a business point of view - save a few thousand on a flight,
but the extra fatigue makes good decision-making harder.

Put another way: who should be using business class, if the decision-makers of
a huge project shouldn't be?

~~~
User9812
Agree on this one. I imagine they factored the prices of business class
flights into their bid on the project. People that are higher up in any
industry want a few perks. I can't imagine telling someone that's at the top
in the industry you'll need to send them on 64 flights to Shanghai, in economy
class. That's basically a form of torture, so you need to put them up in
business class and a decent hotel, otherwise they'll be walking out the door.

~~~
msandford
I would completely agree with all of this if the guy running the project was
competent. If he was a licensed PE and he got the bridge built correctly, shit
give him double for the travel expenses. But he was a lawyer bossing engineers
around and making decisions far outside his realm of expertise. As such the
criticism stands.

------
swampthing
It seems like the author is trying to make the assertion that all sorts of
poor decisions were made - it'd be helpful to have a comparison to other
similar projects, in order to make that determination. Otherwise, these could
be completely routine issues for all I know (as a layperson). If you took any
software engineering project, and described it by detailing all the mistakes
in isolation, it would look like a complete disaster.

~~~
ChuckFrank
The weld is really the key difference here. For welds to be structurally
sound, and for them to work in the calculations that have been performed for
the structural integrity of the structure, they have to meet a certain
standard. These welds didn't. The company said that they themselves would
state whether those standards were met. So this would be more akin to a
computer chip manufacturer, where every Nth chip is faulty, and then still
inserting them into a computer. This isn't about detailing mistakes in
isolation. Nor is this about a software program where good enough is
sufficient. This is more like the NASA launch controls where it has to be
perfect (or however close NASA claims it needs to get to clear a launch
program.)

Though I'm not sure that answers your question. Since I'm not showing similar
projects.

~~~
angersock
Yep. The big reason that the convenient approximations (lies) we use in
mechanical and civil engineering work is that it is expected that the
implementer of our designs (elaborate lies) doesn't use the wrong parts--there
are _exhaustive_ specifications on things as boring as bolts and threads and
welds _specifically_ to ensure that the behavior they exhibit is within the
realm of what the designer expects.

It's nice to see software engineering practices being backported to more
conservative and stagnant forms of engineering. 8)

~~~
jacquesm
> It's nice to see software engineering practices being backported to more
> conservative and stagnant forms of engineering. 8)

Hehe, I had to read that three times before the coin dropped :)

------
jessaustin
I've never been involved in bridge contracts, but all the highway construction
contracts I've seen have specified performance bonds sufficient to finish the
project in case of problems. I thought this was a requirement for any project
that gets federal money (which is effectively any highway project at all).
It's surprising that an article this long wouldn't even mention whether the
bonds proved sufficient, how much the insurer tried to weasel out of the
bonds, whether the insurer insisted on hiring a new contractor, etc.

That this topic hasn't even come up, leads me to believe that the state
inspectors have completely failed in their duties. With all due respect to
Hanlon, the simplest explanation for such total failure is _not_ "gosh they
must be stupid!"

~~~
acomjean
I was involved in a lot of state landfill construction (my Civil Engineering
days). That Bond was a big deal for a lot of companies.

The owners (county and village) were good and wouldn't release payment for
work that didn't meet the spec. The prospect of payment or lack thereof is a
great motivator. Contractors knew the rules up front and it made our lives as
inspectors for the owners much easier. Not that they didn't test you
continually to see what they could get away with. These things start at the
top.

Oragne County landfill Expansion (a landfill they built and then had to stop
and restore wetlands) was before my time but companies lost a lot of money on
it and it was a good cautionary tale. Google seems to have very little
knowledge about it.

------
dba7dba
The article is focused on faulty management/supervision. It should've focused
on HOW the contract went to the Chinese firm in the first place. I'm sure they
build find cranes for ports but they never built a bridge.

Obviously I have no link to point to or solid proof but here's what someone
told me. Hearsay it may be but I will just throw it out there.

Initially it looked like a Japanese company was going to get the contract.
However after a Californian trade mission to China (headed by ex-Gov Arnold
Schwarzenegger) returned, the bid went to the Chinese firm. I was told it was
quite unexpected.

Not saying Arnold Schwarzenegger was somehow convinced otherwise but I think
it's possible one of his advisors were convinced otherwise and than convinced
Arnold Schwarzenegger to give the contract to a chinese firm.

Hopefully the truth will come out in a formal inquiry. Hopefully.

------
zaroth
Love the pictures of the bridge. The scale is amazing. Wouldn't it be nice if
these were projects we could be proud of?

It is a little hard to understand how serious it all really is. It sounds like
inspections were quite rigorous. Past half way down the article, there's two
pictures, one of the internals of a box girder, and right below it, a 10mm
crack in a tack weld. I mean, the scale differential of the two images is
amazing. I can't imagine cracks in the tack welds make a bit of difference in
a bridge like that. The bridge looks incredible.

~~~
aragot
I find there aren't enough incriminating pictures/infography in the article.
This kind of technical detail only speaks to people with a mechanics
background.

For example, a pole will be much weaker if there is an abrupt section change
in the middle, even if it's a bigger section. This is counter-intuitive until
you learn what the forces look like in metal.

Same goes for welding and cracks. Do you know what happens when a 19-ton
propeller has a crack? It breaks while spinning and launches the weighted wing
at a few dozen m/s. The French aircraft carrier is lucky the wing was sent to
the bottom of the ocean [1].

Which leads me to the next topic: Will politicians state that welds are too
complicated for them just like computer things?

[1]
[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/1325...](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/1325965/French-
calamity-carrier-heads-for-sea-again.html)

~~~
wazoox
> _Do you know what happens when a 19-ton propeller has a crack?_

The story of these propellers is interesting. They were to be cast from a
single piece of metal, and were precisely of the largest dimension fit for the
largest metallurgy facility in France (because it's a top secret design, they
had to be made in a domestic factory). However, the project was so delayed
that the factory closed its doors several years before it to be able to build
the propellers...

So another company got to build them, but they were so large that they had to
cast them in several parts and weld them together instead of a single cast,
which is apparently NOT best practice and hadn't been ever done before.

------
eots
Totally off-topic, but did anybody else notice the chocolate-starfish graffiti
on one of the beams pictured in the article?

~~~
alxndr
I think that sort of graffiti/art for-and-by the workers is common on bridges
in the Bay Area, if not elsewhere...

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_Bridge_Troll](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_Bridge_Troll)

------
vishaldpatel
Boy, it'd be great to know more about each commentator before reading their
expert opinion on the subjects of project management, procurements, bridge-
building, government agency function and anything else relevant to the topic.

------
wil421
>The California Department of Transportation agreed to contract the company
known as ZPMC in 2006 because it had established a reputation as fast and
cost-effective, offering savings of about $250 million compared to the
competing bidder.

This is absolutely crazy. What kind of person hires a company to build a
bridge that usually builds cranes? (A politician)

When I was still in college I met a Project Manager who was building a new
building for my University. The project was going very wrong because they
hired a residential building company to build a commercial building.

Dont force a square peg in a round hole. (No amount of money will help it fit)

------
trhway
>"Caltrans overrode bridge welding codes"

that is my favorite here. Sounds like poetry.

>"Tony Anziano, chief executive for toll-bridge work, made at least 64 visits
to Shanghai, stayed in one of the city’s most luxurious hotels and spent more
than $300,000 on travel during construction."

if tales of Chinese corruption and kickbacks is even a bit true (and knowing
Russian corruption i tend to believe in Chinese too :) these $300K are juts
unrecognizable under microscope peanuts compare to what was most probably
transferred to some accounts on Cayman Islands and in some other peculiar
jurisdictions.

------
bagosm
Ok I have a very serious question that none seems to dress, so I must be
missing something. Please I really want to be enlightened because I am puzzled
by this.

I don't even buy a toaster without some kind of guarantee for the coming years
and some kind of maintenance available.

Why doesn't the bridge contract have that?

------
crahrah
Seems the fact that the company was Chinese is pretty irrelevant - and yet
it's repeated over an over.

China is the new bogeyman.

~~~
literalusername
Not at all. You apparently didn't read the article.

"Caltrans employees and U.S. contractors who supervised the job lived fulltime
in Shanghai, and top officials flew there often. Tony Anziano, toll bridge
program manager, alone spent more than $300,000 on travel.

"Part of that cost was for Anziano’s room at the five-star JW Marriott
Shanghai Tomorrow Square for up to $470 per night, according to his expense
reports."

The travel costs are an obscene waste of American tax dollars. Moreover, the
fact that so many tax dollars were paid to a foreign company is offensive.
Even if that company was at all competent, it shows a disregard for the
American economy. For a project that puts American lives at risk, a
demonstrated concern for the wellbeing of Americans is rather important.

~~~
swampthing
I don't actually find the hotel price to be necessarily offensive in the
absence of any other information... in foreign countries, you often have to
pay a premium to get American-standard lodging (if it's even available).

~~~
slashedzero
The idea of requiring (and then paying for) "American-standard" lodging seems
ridiculous when we outsource it for developing country prices.

~~~
swampthing
I don't think people outsource to developing countries because they think
they'll get cheaper hotels there... it's more about the cost of the services /
goods being delivered.

------
vinhboy
"As delays dragged on, Caltrans approved paying the contractors an additional
$6.5 million to boost efficiency and quality, and to catalog the work."

WTF... I know a lot of us here are contractors. Tell me the last time you got
paid MORE because you weren't doing your job.

~~~
bowlofpetunias
Any major IT consultancy company. Especially those working for the government.

But the modus operandus is standard even for small agencies.

You get to bid for a project. If your bid is anywhere near realistic, there's
no way you'll ever get it, because the competition will bid way, way lower.

So you put in a bid that you know will never get the project completed and/or
will reduce quality well below what will ever be acceptable. However, the
contract will be full of loopholes that will allow you to get away with it.
You know that once your in, and once the project is far enough along, the
client will have no choice but to pay you extra to do what actually needed to
be done in the first place.

No, the client is not getting screwed. Especially when it comes to governments
and major corporations, everyone knows this is going to happen. It's just
impossible to get the project started for anywhere near the real price tag.

But even on a smaller scale, for instance a web agency with a 20K project, if
you put in an honest bid you'll either never get the job or be forced to build
crap.

From web shopping carts to bridges, people don't value good engineering and
planning. Or at least not until they are confronted with the results of bad
engineering and planning.

So there's the original budget and there's reality, and an entire cult of
rituals surrounding bridging the huge gap between the two. And it is this
ritual in which people on both ends take a considerable percentage of the top,
so all the decision makers are vested in keeping this ritual going despite all
of the well publicized failures.

If you are a contractor and you're not getting at least 50% more out of a gig
than the original contract, you're not playing the game very well.

~~~
7952
I wonder if these kind of contract arrangments are just a consequence of lack
of communication. You have to agree on a single cost because it is impossible
to audit and check everything the contractor does. But the client will
inevatably have to check everything anyway but in a delayed fashion. So why
not assume from the outset that the client is just another part of the team
and must sign-of on everything every single day. Give the client complete
access to all data about the project. With sufficient communication the
contractor could prove they are working correctly and the client justs pay
them for the time and materials they use.

------
brohoolio
Original story -

[http://www.sacbee.com/static/sinclair/sinclair.jquery/baybri...](http://www.sacbee.com/static/sinclair/sinclair.jquery/baybridge/index.html)

It's a pet peeve of mine when it's really a story about a story.

~~~
clarkm
I really love the progress bar on the top of the page. I wish more long form
articles were like that.

~~~
debaserab2
Lucky for you, it's baked in to every modern web browser in existence - just
look to the right for a built in progress bar that even lets you click to a
particular section of the article based on it's progress.

~~~
clarkm
I know it's hard to resist making snarky comments, but you jumped on it a bit
too early, and I'm afraid you missed the point.

My comment was specifically about It's about the fact that the bar is at the
_top_ of the page. It's a completely different user experience than the
standard scroll bar.

~~~
debaserab2
How is it a completely different user experience?

------
pijsong
i see same thing from my company outsourcing lead development to an indian
company

