The morning RGJ tells us, "Freeway takes form in hills south of Reno." It's such a benign headline for such an infuriating subject.

The article says the new contractor is doing a great job on the bridges for the I-580 freeway extension through Pleasant Valley (between Reno and Carson City). The quote from the NDOT PR guy is, "We're making a lot of progress every day."

The article includes a brief overview of the contract dispute between the state and the original contractor, Edward Kraemer & Sons. Kraemer "alleged the state's design left the structure vulnerable to collapse from high winds during construction." Some significant information is left out.

What I think is significant is that Kraemer suggested alternative construction methods to the state, and the state refused to make any changes in the construction design at all. Now NDOT is letting the new contractor use one of the alternative methods.

I heard that at least one contractor prequalified to bid on the bridges decided not to bid on the new contract because of the liability related to the construction design Kraemer refused to use. Fisher Sand and Gravel, the contractor eventually chosen, was not on NDOT's list of prequalified contractors on June 28, 2006. NDOT extended the bid deadline to October 12 and awarded the bid to Fisher in November. (I was not able to find the original deadline.)

Now there is an entirely new construction plan. At what point after terminating Kraemer's contract did NDOT either change the design on its own or allow the new contractor to? Supposedly covering Galena Creek with fill and using the fill to support the bridge during construction couldn't be considered in 2005 and early 2006 because of environmental concerns. How did the environmental concerns disappear so quickly?

According to the NDOT project Web site, Kraemer's contract, for "Part A" of the project, was for $79 million. According to this morning's RGJ article, the contract with the new company is for $393.3 million, but it includes more work. Because the contracts are not for the same work, it's impossible to compare the amounts. A skeptical taxpayer has to wonder whether that was intentional.

I can give you a specific example of money that was wasted in the switch, though. Kramer had already started building false work at what I heard was a cost of $4.5 million. I also heard that when Kraemer's contract was terminated, the state decided the steel was "defective" and had it cut up and hauled away at cost of another $1 million or so. I didn't see that reported anywhere (or included in any NDOT news release).

As for the cost in time, the timeline on the project Web page shows all of 2006 spent on "construction repackaging" while Pleasant Valley residents and Highway 395 commuters had to look at the apparently abandoned, partially constructed bridges every day.

It would be helpful if reporters would dig a little deeper and ask a few more questions instead of helping the NDOT PR guy earn his pay.