Attachment 4

The Impact of Load Rating Methods on Federal Bridge Program Funding
FHWA May 2005 (revised February 2006)

Deficient Bridge area and potential for deck area change based on variations of value for NBI Item 67
Data Base data 12/31/2004	Total Number Bridges	Total Bridge Area for all the Bridges	No. Bridges Deficient and SR ≤ 80	Deck area of Deficient and SR ≤ 80	No. Deficient & SR greater than 80	Deck area of Deficient and SR greater than 80	Bridges that are deficient do to item 67 only: Area that could be lost.			Bridges not deficient with Item 67 = 4. Area that could become eligible.
							% area eligible do to 67only < 4			% deck area with item 67=4
							Count	Area	vs total eleg.	Count	Area	vs total eleg.
AL	15,648	8,354,026	4,099	1,616,457	244	165,801	720	83,838	5.19%	2,214	205,411	12.71%
AK	1,187	622,198	299	133,220	47	28,074	17	2,205	1.66%	12	3,192	2.40%
AZ	7,125	4,244,440	468	314,998	242	261,230	24	6,467	2.05%	72	19,310	6.13%
AR	12,459	5,728,266	2,883	933,481	120	174,740	393	53,801	5.76%	1,981	326,472	34.97%
CA	23,960	26,363,821	4,098	4,843,333	2377	3,556,088	113	48,184	0.99%	464	149,408	3.08%
CO	8,183	3,883,856	1,117	541,170	236	199,482	110	28,983	5.36%	276	66,787	12.34%
CT	4,167	3,200,242	824	684,120	504	538,867	8	3,525	0.52%	13	3,989	0.58%
DE	850	928,814	80	182,233	35	39,581	2	234	0.13%	10	1,970	1.08%
DC	251	566,691	112	249,566	33	84,836	0	0	0.00%	1	246	0.10%
FL	11,470	13,935,170	1,560	1,194,645	452	849,482	95	74,999	6.28%	241	87,839	7.35%
GA	14,461	8,209,447	2,767	1,238,830	70	79,705	240	103,179	8.33%	614	513,813	41.48%
HI	1,100	1,128,496	441	167,889	29	38,495	34	14,554	8.67%	49	38,053	22.67%
ID	4,047	1,521,054	535	204,276	175	71,442	37	5,342	2.61%	71	13,333	6.53%
IL	25,727	12,033,865	3,407	1,794,691	628	730,453	135	14,561	0.81%	186	76,724	4.28%
IN	18,171	6,877,130	3,316	827,638	604	424,261	120	13,854	1.67%	199	40,565	4.90%
IA	24,902	7,441,950	6,435	1,427,389	216	136,982	853	160,048	11.21%	2,017	412,433	28.89%
KS	25,531	7,688,783	5,236	1,235,217	384	296,082	1,415	195,599	15.84%	2,480	449,770	36.41%
KY	13,518	5,114,747	3,586	961,012	333	150,408	100	9,688	1.01%	954	51,317	5.34%
LA	13,362	14,775,039	3,692	3,361,822	385	709,834	250	33,508	1.00%	501	77,390	2.30%
ME	2,371	1,159,229	719	274,338	59	49,970	9	2,064	0.75%	70	32,423	11.82%
MD	5,066	4,532,784	1,128	955,404	284	373,740	30	5,032	0.53%	69	20,725	2.17%
MA	4,955	3,520,511	1,594	1,162,766	747	610,888	54	46,404	3.99%	104	46,947	4.04%
MI	10,818	6,033,450	2,577	1,613,278	428	365,605	105	51,196	3.17%	234	76,890	4.77%
MN	13,026	5,779,573	1,440	549,411	157	140,547	32	4,995	0.91%	138	37,325	6.79%
MS	16,840	7,695,073	4,440	1,289,855	85	86,930	582	77,864	6.04%	724	193,154	14.97%
MO	23,791	9,493,281	7,546	2,194,736	600	410,985	1,834	277,098	12.63%	3,458	532,621	24.27%
MT	5,045	1,892,138	849	266,076	197	101,328	141	15,957	6.00%	171	34,999	13.15%
NE	15,455	3,690,580	3,798	546,086	112	53,482	1,079	119,794	21.94%	1,088	166,460	30.48%
NV	1,611	1,151,183	91	64,299	99	67,276	2	779	1.21%	10	1,083	1.68%
NH	2,357	1,023,788	655	155,094	93	47,077	75	10,371	6.69%	105	20,838	13.44%
NJ	6,484	6,247,234	1,718	1,347,364	489	485,142	40	24,429	1.81%	88	59,521	4.42%
NM	3,839	1,534,309	595	267,033	112	85,727	2	595	0.22%	21	4,234	1.59%
NY	17,301	12,814,527	4,899	4,618,916	1344	1,533,082	120	34,827	0.75%	260	97,082	2.10%
NC	17,340	7,373,820	4,669	1,578,801	237	193,005	366	73,712	4.67%	730	125,345	7.94%
ND	4,507	1,141,371	999	156,839	37	9,524	270	29,435	18.77%	280	46,897	29.90%
OH	27,908	12,307,507	5,612	2,247,206	1256	1,148,726	295	56,023	2.49%	658	161,241	7.18%
OK	23,316	7,625,386	8,120	1,904,962	254	267,563	1,063	103,888	5.45%	1,228	203,417	10.68%
OR	7,261	4,574,631	1,557	1,237,902	228	270,382	107	56,859	4.59%	226	111,041	8.97%
PA	22,253	11,977,705	8,297	4,207,536	733	461,018	115	162,136	3.85%	249	116,324	2.76%
RI	749	733,725	304	375,933	73	48,662	2	50	0.01%	6	8,731	2.32%
SC	9,201	5,797,235	1,886	1,013,928	156	164,240	61	20,688	2.04%	574	145,969	14.40%
SD	5,961	1,680,073	1,306	247,920	116	57,999	245	22,801	9.20%	263	36,625	14.77%
TN	19,688	8,549,303	3,842	1,296,952	507	286,409	62	8,509	0.66%	102	30,397	2.34%
TX	48,952	35,361,564	7,795	4,551,998	1924	2,328,911	399	38,014	0.84%	1,568	300,910	6.61%
UT	2,805	1,635,021	355	164,824	128	81,147	17	3,513	2.13%	56	10,909	6.62%
VT	2,690	801,691	885	243,230	47	13,381	2	152	0.06%	5	1,218	0.50%
VA	13,161	8,199,200	2,974	1,228,005	333	253,546	43	11,269	0.92%	194	78,336	6.38%
WA	7,563	6,431,198	1,642	1,814,549	340	379,780	70	74,589	4.11%	245	220,744	12.17%
WV	6,887	3,164,721	2,164	584,633	341	153,219	23	8,401	1.44%	130	37,742	6.46%
WI	13,611	5,836,304	1,847	722,912	253	218,102	120	15,180	2.10%	250	52,611	7.28%
WY	3,035	1,213,818	388	113,472	220	129,694	23	2,074	1.83%	73	9,405	8.29%
PR	2,135	1,881,242	890	318,505	125	201,363	15	13,083	4.11%	65	25,527	8.01%
TOTALS	594,101	325,471,211	132,536	61,226,750	19228	19,614,291	12,069	2,224,346	3.63%	25,797	5,585,714	9.12%

<< Previous

Main

Next >>

Bridge Technology		Search FHWA:
	FHWA > Infrastructure > Bridge > The Impact of Load Rating Methods on Federal Bridge Program Funding > Attachment 4

The Impact of Load Rating Methods on Federal Bridge Program FundingFHWA May 2005 (revised February 2006)

Attachment 4

The Impact of Load Rating Methods on Federal Bridge Program Funding
FHWA May 2005 (revised February 2006)