Multimedia News

World AIDS Day: Observing a global epidemic
20 photos
Children from the Andile School choir sing du...
This weekend in sports
20 photos
Venezuela's boxer Jorge Linares, left, exchan...
Holiday gift ideas: Toys, games and more
20 photos
A child holds a newly released mobile phone c...
Black Friday frenzy
20 photos
Early bird shoppers run into a Target store i...
Mumbai massacre
20 photos
A police officer watches the Taj Hotel, Mumba...

Bay Bridge bumper bits lost

Nov 29, 2007 3:00 AM (369 days ago) by John Upton, The Examiner
This story ranks Not ranked
Related Topics: SAN FRANCISCO
Jim Britton of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers looks at a piece of the fender from the Bay Bridge tower that was struck earlier this month.
(Cindy Chew/The Examiner)
Jim Britton of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers looks at a piece of the fender from the Bay Bridge tower that was struck earlier this month.
SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - Massive hunks of black plastic have eluded authorities in San Francisco Bay since they were torn off a Bay Bridge tower earlier this month by the Cosco Busan, according to a federal official with the Army Corps of Engineers.

The bases of the Bay Bridge’s towers are surrounded by patchworks of wood, hard plastic and steel that reduce damage from ship collisions. When the 900-foot container ship scraped against one of the towers, it tore open its hull, allowing 58,000 gallons of shipping fuel to escape, and it blasted some of the bridge’s protective fender system into the Bay.

Most of the debris from the fender was never found, despite an intensive search, according to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers local operations chief Mike Dillabough.

There’s a “remote chance” some is still floating in the Bay, he said, adding that it could resurface in the Bay, where it could cause an accident if it collides with a ship or a boat.

This story continues below
Advertisement

“We were able to gather the wood,” Dillabough said. “The only things that were missing were these massive constructions of rubber that do not break apart.”

“It floats about 3 or 4 inches below the water and it’s black,” he said. “It’s black stuff in black water. We only picked up one section, and it was very difficult to find.”

Dillabough estimated that the roughly 15 tons of plastic collected was about one-third of what fell in the water. He said the plastic would have been easier to find if contractors had used a brighter color.

Some of the rest could have floated out to sea on high tides that followed the crash, Dillabough said, and some could have sunk and become lodged in mud, especially since some of it was bound to steel.

How much plastic fell into the water is unknown, because it’s hard to estimate how much remained on the bridge, according to a spokesman for the company that upgraded the fender last year and was called on this month by the California Department of Transportation to replace the broken section.

About 33 tons of steel and 43 tons of black “plastic lumber,” made from recycled plastic, will be used to build the new section of fender, according to Robert Ikenberry of Pleasanton-based California Engineering Contractors. He said wood would be left out of the new design.

Removal of the damaged fender is scheduled to begin today, according to Department of Transportation spokeswoman Lauren Wonder, and the new fender is expected to be in place by mid-January.

Until then, a barge is stationed next to the tower to act as a barrier, according to Wonder, although it will sometimes leave the tower to pick up fender supplies.

Hearing on crash

The state Senate’s Natural Resources Committee will hold an investigative hearing — called by state Sen. Carole Migden — into the Cosco Busan crash at 9 a.m. Friday at the state Capitol, Room 4203, in Sacramento.

jupton@examiner.com

Add a Comment


Name: (required)
Comments:
characters left
Comments are regulated by the Terms of Use.

Comments from Examiner Readers

6:17 AM MST on Sat., Dec. 29, 2007 re: "Cosco Busan owners pay $80M to leave"

Examiner Reader said:
Examiner Reader said: The ship's destination was QINQDAO (Tsingtao), China, not Korea as reported above. 7 agree | 6 disagree Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree How does one disagree with a statement of provable fact?

153 agree | 143 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

6:12 AM MST on Sat., Dec. 29, 2007 re: "Tests show Bay water is clean"

Examiner Reader said:
"Additionally, state officials said that tests conducted by a California Department of Fish and Game biologist last week that found what seemed to be oil found in local herring fisheries were “inclusive,” according to Lt. Rob Roberts of the Department of Fish and Game’s Office of Spill Prevention and Response." Perhaps "inconclusive" was intended

130 agree | 107 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
11:56 PM MST on Thu., Dec. 20, 2007 re: "Cosco Busan owners pay $80M to leave"

Examiner Reader said:
The ship's destination was QINQDAO (Tsingtao), China, not Korea as reported above.

162 agree | 166 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
1:23 PM MST on Thu., Dec. 20, 2007 re: "Group turns oil into food for ’shrooms"

Examiner Reader said:
The Coast Guard did not turn away the Fire Department boat that came to investigate. That is false. The Coast Guard did, inform them of the 100 yard safey zoen around the Cosco Busan after the incident occurred. The statement implies that the Coast Guard is covering up this incident, which is ridiculous.

197 agree | 151 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
10:30 AM MST on Tue., Dec. 11, 2007 re: "Bay spill lawsuits pour in"

Examiner Reader said:
Hey, SFoff, I live in SF and yes my county did fail miserably in their response. I just wonder if Dennis Herrera is really going to believe that he will get 25K for each day of the spill from Captain Cota.

141 agree | 145 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
1:50 PM MST on Tue., Dec. 4, 2007 re: "Supervisor slams response to oil spill"

SFoff said:
Dear Examiner reader (first grade level, apparently)12:40pm. There was no mention of S.F. being the only county affected by the spill. The article was from a San Francisco Newspaper, regarding San Francisco's response to the oil spill. Not very obscure. It's all clear in context. Nobody was wondering why SF. "was not kept in the loop". He is questioning why S.F. did not enter the loop of it's own accord, considering how much "training and partnership" had been established. Are we supposed to be happy with our particular cities response because your county also failed miserably to do anything in time to prevent this problem? And BTW, S.F. is not the center of the Universe, just the Solar System, but thanks for the exaggeration!

161 agree | 172 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
12:40 PM MST on Tue., Dec. 4, 2007 re: "Supervisor slams response to oil spill"

Examiner Reader said:
... and San Francisco was the only city, the only county affected by this spill. It seems that SF is to self-centered in this incident, wondering why it was not kept in teh loop. It seems that many other cities and counties were affected by this incident. way to go SF. Show you true colors. If ross Mirkirami wants to be mayor in 2012 then he should just come out and proclaim that San Francisco is in fact, the center of the universe. Then he will get my vote

164 agree | 150 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
12:00 PM MST on Tue., Dec. 4, 2007 re: "Supervisor slams response to oil spill"

Examiner Reader said:
Seems strange that we would be knocking ourselves up for something we had little control over and had misleading info about. One would think you can rely on the Coast Guard to provide accurate info, since this IS their jurisdiction, but to get the info wrong hours later and even when others are pointing out that it's a LARGE spill (and to ignore this emergency) seems unconscionable. This, to me, should be about the ship crashing into the bridge tower and the bungled response of the Coast Guard, their effect on the greater Bay Area and effective preventive measures.

163 agree | 146 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
9:34 PM MST on Thu., Nov. 29, 2007 re: "Waters now safe, fishing to resume"

Examiner Reader said:
Its my understanding two-thirds of the 58,000 gallons of oil is unaccounted for and will remain so. The water quality of San Francisco Bay was questionable before this event. Some sort of blanket statement regarding the "safeness" of the bay water seems a bit dubious to me.

322 agree | 171 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
9:32 AM MST on Thu., Nov. 29, 2007 re: "Bay Bridge bumper bits lost"

Examiner Reader said:
Having said that black made it harder to find the missing pieces of plastic lumber, they're going to use black again for the replacement?!! Foolish.

396 agree | 141 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
11:34 AM MST on Mon., Nov. 26, 2007 re: "Birds death toll continues climb following oil spill"

Examiner Reader said:
Very self indulgent of you to equate an oil spill dead birds and your situation. Get over it already.

250 agree | 190 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Advertisement