ed032008

On the homepage

Sidcast

Sidcast: He runs the entire gamut this week

Out There

Health care

Bachmann leads rally against health plan

Movies

'A Christmas Carol' cluttered with 3D

Home | Opinion Exchange | Editorials | The I-35W bridge collapse

Editorial: NTSB should hold hearing about I-35W

Openness would help ensure public's trust in investigation.

Last update: March 19, 2008 - 7:00 PM

Print this story

Follow Opinion Exchange on Twitter

Minnesota bridges rated: An interactive map of bridges that are "structurally deficient," "functionally obsolete" or have gusset plates like those on the I-35W bridge.

BOTH SIDES

For more on the NTSB's decision not to hold a public hearing on the I-35W bridge collapse, go to

www.startribune.com/a4168.

•••

To read the dissent from board members Deborah A. P. Hersman and Kathryn O'Leary Higgins, go to www.startribune.com/a4167.

More from Editorials

When a plane crashes, a train derails or other transportation disasters strike, a call goes out to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). The agency's deep expertise and the trust earned by its thorough, evenhanded approach have made it the international gold standard for accident investigation.

That's why Tuesday's announcement that the NTSB won't hold an interim public hearing on the Interstate 35W bridge collapse investigation is troubling. Two of the NTSB's own officials agree, stating their support for a hearing in a strongly worded dissent.

"We believe we would be abandoning our important duty to educate and reassure the traveling public of an independent, transparent, credible investigation after a traffic accident of national scope,'' wrote Safety Board members Deborah A.P. Hersman and Kathryn O'Leary Higgins.

A hearing is often part of an NTSB investigation into major disasters. The agency conducted one when TWA Flight 800 crashed in 1996. Hearings were also part of the investigations of four other far less serious bridge collapses.

The mission of such hearings is a key reason why one is merited in this investigation. Typically held near the disaster site or at the NTSB's own facilities, hearings provide a public glimpse into the agency's workings and produce valuable testimony from witnesses.

There's also a public awareness factor that may be especially needed in this situation. A hearing's intense media coverage could disseminate new information about what went wrong, potentially alerting others who safeguard the nation's bridges.

The NTSB's main objections to holding a hearing involve concerns that it would fan political debate, entangling investigators and substantially delaying a final report. That's a legitimate concern, but in this case openness trumps expedience.

The I-35W collapse called into question the safety of thousands of aging U.S. bridges, and the public deserves a full and open investigation of the cause. As for steering clear of politics, the agency already crossed that line in January when it released preliminary findings putting a tight focus on underdesigned gusset plates and seemingly dismissing maintenance issues.

The NTSB is working in other ways to provide the transparency critical to maintaining the public's trust. Reports from technical investigative groups are posted on the Web. The board's meetings are webcast.

The public's faith in the agency's conclusions depends on its confidence in how the board conducted its work. Holding an open hearing is a logical next step in reassuring and educating the public.

Despite pressure to complete the final report quickly, the NTSB should reverse its decision.

Recent Editorials stories

Editorial: Air passengers deserve explanation - March 19, 2008

Editorial: Air passengers deserve explanation - Reasons for six-hour fiasco in Rochester still unclear. More

Comment on this story | Be the first to comment | Hide reader comments

New ideas for the public sector

THERE'S NEVER BEEN A BETTER TIME to create a more efficient Minnesota. Facing large budget deficits at the state, county and local levels, Minnesotans are seeing with new clarity that the public sector must adapt to new economic realities. Only the smartest, most strategic reinvention will ensure that our tax dollars are spent on the best programs and services. Read more

About Opinion Exchange

Opinion Exchange is produced by the Editorial Department, which is dedicated to hosting the discussion on a range of issues of interest to Star Tribune readers online and in print. In its new format, it's our hope that Opinion Exhange will create a more dynamic dialogue between Star Tribune readers and the Editorial Board. Many individual posts will be written and signed by members of the Editorial Board and will reflect their own opinions. Daily editorials will continue to represent the institutional voice of the newspaper and be researched and written by the Editorial Department, which is independent of the newsroom.

Subscribe to RSS|Learn more about RSS