Engineering: October 2009 Archives

Construction crews from Sacramento-based MCM Construction and Caltrans are repairing the damaged section of the Bay Bridge but aren't sure exactly what day and at what time the bridge will re-open to traffic.  Engineering expert witnesses around Northern California offered cautions but also said the failure of the Labor Day solution doesn't mean bridges can't be fixed quickly.  Civil engineering expert Dauwn Cheng, assistant professor of civil engineering at UC Davis, said she was "shocked" by the failure.

Caltrans officials closed the bridge Tuesday when a newly installed 100-foot-long steel rod snapped, pulling another rod and part of a 6,000-pound steel clamp down onto the roadway during the evening commute, damaging three vehicles but causing only minor injuries.  Wednesday, Caltrans officials acknowledged the design did not work. They said they believe high winds caused the patch's 100-foot-long metal rods to vibrate and rub against other, causing one to break.

Source: www.sacbee.com.

Plainfield Township, IL, residents have filed a lawsuit against the Lakelands Community Homeowners Association over a Lakelands subdivision berm that they say will put their property under water during heavy storms. A temporary restraining order halting work on the DuPage River block was issued last week by a Will County judge, and a preliminary injunction that would stop construction until the matter is settled in court is being sought.  The plaintiffs have hired Joliet attorney Carl Buck and expect to hire an engineering expert witness to testify that while the berm will prevent the river from flooding the Lakelands subdivision, the water it diverts will flood property farther down river.

The proof, they say, is the flooding that occurred after heavy storms in September 2008. Lakelands used sandbags to create a temporary berm, which the plaintiffs say created higher river levels elsewhere and resulted in an overflow of water onto their land. "They may have a right to block the water on their property, but they don't have a right to divert it and push it back onto other property," plaintiff Carl Bryant said.

Excerpted from www.chicagosuburbannews.com.

A False Claims Act whistleblower lawsuit against the prime contractors for the Coast Guard’s $26 billion Deepwater acquisition program will go to trial in November 2010, a U.S. District Court judge has ruled.  Deepwater is the Coast Guard’s largest acquisition program and  includes the production of new assets including national security cutters and patrol boats. Former Lockheed Martin Corp. engineer Michael J. DeKort filed the complaint against Integrated Coast Guard Systems, a joint venture of Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman Corp. DeKort accused the companies of being seriously deficient in carrying out the contract and caused major safety, security and national security problems and wasted taxpayers' money.

On Oct. 5, U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor of U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas issued a schedule for pleadings, naming of expert witnesses, identifying evidence, and a trial. He also instructed the parties to hire a mediator and attempt to come to an agreement to resolve the case. The trial will take place upon two days’ notice at any time during the four weeks that start Nov. 1, 2010.

The Coast Guard has acknowledged several significant problems with the program, and in 2007 the service rejected eight new patrol boats due to structural problems with the hulls. The Coast Guard is seeking a refund for $96 million for unsound patrol boats produced under Deepwater.

Excerpted from washingtontechnology.com.

After five years of litigation including the testimony of hydrology expert witnesses, finality may be in sight for three Camp Verde, AZ, area families battling Salt River Project over wells on their property.  In 2004, SRP filed suit against 11 Verde Valley water users for pumping well water they believe to be surface water, belonging to downstream water users.  Eight of the parties reached settlements with the Phoenix area water provider.

But three, the Kovacovich, Wiertezema and Jordan families, have fought on, arguing that what constitutes surface water and what constitutes groundwater should be determined as part of the statewide settlement of water rights and not as individual cases.  Last April, during a summary judgment hearing, in which all three asked Judge Eddward Ballinger to have their cases dismissed, the judge found probable cause to dismiss two of the cases, the Kovacovich's and the Wiertezema's.  However, he delayed final dismissal pending additional information.

Excerpted from verdenews.com.