Should Bridges Come With Warning Labels?

Aug. 4, 2007 — -- As questions about how the I-35W bridge collapsed Wednesday in Minneapolis remain unanswered, people across the U.S. are wondering how to tell if the bridges they travel everyday are safe.

States and municipalities have a responsibility to inform motorists about a span's potential problems, Nick Coleman wrote in a an column in the Minneapolis-St. Paul StarTribune. Noting that the collapsed bridge was classified "structurally deficient" and received a 50 percent rating on a state report, Coleman asked: "Would you drive your kids or let your spouse drive over a bridge that had a sign saying, "CAUTION: Fifty-Percent Bridge Ahead"?

Warnings are everywhere these days, from hot cups of coffee to neighborhood sex-offender alerts. Why not bridges?

Authorities contacted by ABC News.com dismissed such an idea as ineffective.

"I think the idea of signs is absurd," said John Hooks, director of the Bridge Management Information Systems Laboratory at the U.S. Department of Transportation's Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center.

"The average driver wouldn't understand anything that was meaningful, that would really indicate if the bridge was safe. Even saying 'structurally deficient' wouldn't help much. Structurally deficient very infrequently means the bridge is in danger of any collapse. It is an administrative tool to determine if federal funds should be used for repairs. It indicates a level of condition, but doesn't directly reflect the risk of collapse," he said.

Furthermore, he said, there already are signs that indicate whether a bridge is in poor condition.

"Bridges that can't handle the legal load limit have signs. Load limits mean a bridge has a condition problem or was designed a long time ago, before the legal load limit was increased. Load limits are easily understood by laymen and engineers," he said.

Enforcement of the current load limit signs, and not new signs are the answer to keeping bridges safe, said Robert Sinclair, a spokesman for the American Automobile Association.

"It makes sense to indicate weight limit, but the problem comes with enforcement. Unless you have a guy with scales at the bridge, overweight trucks create wear and tear and do the most serious damage," Sinclair said.

Tear This Bridge Down

Bridges that are unsafe don't need signs warning drivers -- they need to be torn down, said Jeffrey Denner, who sued the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority on behalf of the family of a woman killed when roof tiles fell in a tunnel in Boston.

"If something is unsafe, it shouldn't be used," Denner told ABC News.com.

"This is the greatest and wealthiest country on earth. We shouldn't need to classify bridges into those that are in 'A' shape or 'D' shape. … We should be able to safely travel through every bridge and tunnel without having to decipher the meaning of signs," he said.

"It shouldn't be up to motorists to assume risk, people are not experts. It would be like going to the doctor and in the middle of surgery he asked if I wanted him to remove my liver, I'm not trained enough to know."

For now, information on the safety of bridges nationwide is difficult to come by. Some state transportation departments will release reports on request for specific bridges, but most information remains off limits to the public.

Federal reports listing the country's least safe bridges that have been reported on frequently since the Minnesota collapse needed to be purchased.