Highway Bridge Conditions: Issues for Congress (CRS Report for Congress)
Premium Purchase PDF for $24.95 (21 pages)
add to cart or
subscribe for unlimited access
Pro Premium subscribers have free access to our full library of CRS reports.
Subscribe today, or
request a demo to learn more.
| Release Date |
Revised Sept. 16, 2014 |
| Report Number |
R43103 |
| Report Type |
Report |
| Authors |
Robert S. Kirk, Specialist in Transportation Policy; William J. Mallett, Specialist in Transportation Policy |
| Source Agency |
Congressional Research Service |
| Older Revisions |
-
Premium Dec. 19, 2013 (18 pages, $24.95)
add
|
Summary:
Of the 608,000 public road bridges in the United States, about 64,000 (10%) were classified as structurally deficient in 2013, and another 84,000 (14%) were classified as functionally obsolete. The number of structurally deficient and functionally obsolete bridges has been declining steadily for more than two decades, and those that remain are not necessarily unsafe. Nonetheless, several high-profile bridge failures, including the 2013 collapse of a bridge on Interstate 5 in Washington State, have drawn public attention to the condition of bridges on federal-aid highways.
As it debates reauthorization of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21; P.L. 112-141), the 2012 law which reauthorized federal surface transportation programs, Congress may consider mandating increased spending on bridge improvements. The choice Congress makes will largely determine how quickly deficient and obsolete bridges will be replaced or improved. At the spending level of 2010, which included a significant amount of money provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) estimates that the bridge investment backlog (in dollar terms) would be reduced by 93% by 2030. Reducing the backlog to near zero during the same period is estimated to require an annual spending rate about 2% higher than the 2010 level.
MAP-21 eliminated the former Highway Bridge Program, which distributed federal money specifically for bridge improvements. States may use funds received under two major FHWA programs, the National Highway Performance Program and the Surface Transportation Program, for bridge repairs or construction, but the decision about how much of its funding to devote to bridges rather than roadway needs is up to each state. FHWA enforces certain planning requirements and performance standards established in MAP-21, but it does not make the determination as to which bridges should benefit from federal funding.
Congressional issues regarding the nation's highway bridge infrastructure include
Given the steady decline in the number of structurally deficient bridges during recent decades, should Congress accelerate work on the remaining deficient bridges?
Should Congress encourage the states to spend more of their federal funds on their deficient bridges, potentially reducing the flexibility states were granted under MAP-21?
Given large projected shortfalls in highway trust fund revenues relative to authorized spending, should Congress encourage increased use of tolling and public-private partnerships (P3s) to improve bridges?
Should Congress redirect spending away from off-system bridges to more heavily used bridges on the designated federal-aid highways?
Congressional oversight of bridge conditions could be complicated by the absence of a freestanding program. How quickly can FHWA develop the MAP-21 performance measures to report to Congress on progress on bridge conditions?
A brief CRS video on this subject may be viewed at http://www.crs.gov/video/detail.aspx?PRODCODE=WVB00009&Source=search.
