Questions and Answers on the National Bridge Inspection Standards, 23 CFR Part 650, Subpart C
Except for any cited statutes or regulations, the contents of these Q&As do not have the force and effect of law and are not meant to bind the public in any way. These Q&As are intended only to provide information regarding existing requirements under the law or agency policies.
650.307 Bridge inspection organization responsibilities
Q307-1 Who is responsible for ensuring all bridges are inspected in accordance with the NBIS in a State? (Updated 3/01/2023)
A307-1 A State is ultimately responsible for the inspection of all public highway bridges that are fully or partially located within the State’s boundaries, including those owned by local agencies or other public authorities, except for those that are federally or tribally owned (23 U.S.C. 144 and 23 CFR 650.307(a)).
A State may delegate certain functions of these standards, however, such delegation does not relieve the State transportation department of any of its responsibilities under the NBIS (23 CFR 650.307(f)).
Q307-2 Who is responsible for the inspection of city and county owned bridges? (Updated 3/01/2023)
A307-2 Under the NBIS, FHWA holds the State responsible for the inspection of public highway bridges that are owned by local agencies (23 CFR 650.307(a)). The State may delegate certain functions of these standards to local agencies, such as cities or counties, however this does not relieve the State of any of its responsibilities under the NBIS (23 CFR 650.307(f)). Because of the fundamental relationship established in title 23, U.S.C., between FHWA and a State, if the inspections by a city or county were not done in accordance with the NBIS, the FHWA could take action against the State for failure to comply with Federal laws and regulations (23 CFR 1.36).
Q307-3 Who is responsible for inspecting federally owned bridges? (Updated 3/01/2023)
A307-3 Federal agencies that have jurisdiction over public highway bridges are responsible for ensuring these bridges are inspected in accordance with the NBIS (23 CFR 650.307(b)). A Federal agency may delegate certain functions of these standards, however, such delegation does not relieve the Federal agency of any of its responsibilities (23 CFR 650.307(f)).
Q307-4 Who is responsible for inspecting Tribally owned bridges? (New 3/01/2023)
A307-4 Tribal governments that have jurisdiction over public highway bridges are responsible for ensuring these bridges are inspected in accordance with the NBIS (23 CFR 650.307(c)). However, Tribal governments may delegate their bridge inspection functions and responsibilities to the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) or FHWA. This delegation must be documented in a formal written agreement between the Tribal government and the BIA or FHWA (23 CFR 650.307(f)).
Q307-5 Who is responsible for inspecting a private bridge that is subject to the NBIS? (New 3/01/2023)
A307-5 State transportation departments, Federal agencies, and Tribal governments are responsible for ensuring these bridges are inspected in accordance with the NBIS (23 CFR 650.307(a)-(c) & (f)). This does not mean that they must physically perform the inspection with their personnel; however, they must ensure that the owner has inspected the private bridge in accordance with the NBIS (23 CFR 650.303).
Q307-6 Is a joint written agreement required for border bridges? If so, what should be included in a joint written agreement? (New 3/01/2023)
A307-6 Yes, there must be a written agreement that describes each agency’s role in performing the NBIS-related responsibilities for each border bridge (23 CFR 650.307(d)). This is to help ensure that timely bridge inspections and follow-up actions are accomplished in accordance with these standards. Joint written agreements are only required where a bridge crosses a border between a State transportation department, Federal agency, or Tribal government jurisdiction.
Written agreements should explain each agency’s responsibility for items listed in 23 CFR 650.307(e) and should identify the lead agency, agencies supporting these roles, and any delegated responsibilities as appropriate. FHWA recommends a border bridge agreement include not just NBIS inspection responsibilities, but all aspects involved with the bridge such as maintenance and financing.
Q307-7 For bridges that cross a border, why do both owners have to submit inventory data? (New 3/01/2023)
A307-7 Both owners submit border bridge information because they are both responsible for bridges that are fully or partially located within the State’s boundary, and Federal agency or Tribal government’s jurisdiction (23 CFR 650.307(a)-(c)). Further, the National Performance Management Measures, 23 CFR part 490, subpart D, require all border bridges on the NHS be included in both State NBI data submissions. The Specifications for the National Bridge Inventory (SNBI) (incorporated by reference, 23 CFR 650.317(b)(1)) provide some relief because the SNBI only requires the lead State to submit a full bridge record, and the non-lead State may submit an abbreviated bridge record (SNBI, Page 21).
Q307-8 Is a registry of nationally certified bridge inspectors required? (New 3/01/2023)
A307-8 Yes, each State transportation department, Federal agency, and Tribal government must maintain their own specific registry of certified inspectors who perform or have performed inspections on their bridges (23 CFR 650.307(e)(2)). This requirement is consistent with the National Tunnel Inspection Standards (NTIS) regulation.
Q307-9 What is required in a registry of nationally certified bridge inspectors? (New 3/01/2023)
A307-9 The registry must include a method to positively identify each inspector (23 CFR 650.307(e)(2)), but the State transportation department, Federal agency, and Tribal government determines the identification method to be used. For example, a State may use a unique numbering system or naming convention as an identification method of qualified inspectors within their respective organization.
Records must be maintained in the registry for each inspector showing how they meet the qualification requirements (23 CFR 650.307(e)(2)). Records will vary depending on how the inspector is qualified. But this could include a summary of bridge inspection experience, verification of State Professional/Structural Engineer license, verification of passage of Fundamentals of Engineering examination, copies of academic degree(s) or transcript(s), and copies of training course completion certificates. Each Team Leader must provide this information to the Program Manager (23 CFR 650.309(b)(4)).
The registry must contain current contact information for each inspector (23 CFR 650.307(e)(2)). This should include phone number(s), email address, mailing address, and name of employer.
The registry must contain detailed information about adverse actions that may affect the good standing of an inspector that occurred within the State transportation department, Federal agency, or Tribal government’s jurisdiction (23 CFR 650.307(e)(2)). Including information about adverse actions in the registry is intended to ensure that the ability of an inspector to perform assigned inspection activities is not in question. The level of detail to be included in the registry is left to the judgement of the program manager.
Agency-specific requirements for inspectors may be incorporated into a registry. Information in the registry should be stored in a centralized, accessible location within the State transportation department, Federal agency, or Tribal government.
Q307-10 Are State transportation departments, Federal agencies, or Tribal governments required to publish or share their registries with other entities? (New 3/01/2023)
A307-10 No, the NBIS does not require State transportation departments, Federal agencies, or Tribal governments to publish or share their registry of nationally certified bridge inspectors with other entities. However, registry information must be provided to FHWA as necessary for conducting the annual compliance review (23 CFR 650.313(r)).
Q307-11 Are State transportation departments, Federal agencies, and Tribal governments allowed to delegate bridge inspection organization functions? (New 3/01/2023)
A307-11 Yes, certain functions of these standards, as described in 23 CFR 650.307(f) may be delegated to other units of government such as a city or county. However, for State transportation departments and Federal agencies, such delegation does not relieve them of any of their responsibilities (23 CFR 650.307(f)). Tribal governments may, with BIA or FHWA concurrence via a formal written agreement, delegate their functions and responsibilities to the BIA or FHWA (23 CFR 650.307(f)).
Q307-12 Do bridge inspection organization functions that are delegated have to be documented? (Updated 3/01/2023)
A307-12 Yes, functions of a bridge inspection organization that are delegated must be documented in the State transportation department, Federal agency, or Tribal government’s bridge inspection policies and procedures (23 CFR 650.307(f)). FHWA also encourages documenting delegated functions in an agreement to ensure both parties have a consistent understanding of the functions being delegated and to serve as a record that both parties agree to the delegation. Ultimate responsibility for the inspection of highway bridges rests with the delegating State transportation department, Federal agency, or Tribal government (23 CFR 650.307(a)-(c)).
Q307-13 Can a consultant perform functions delegated to a local agency? (New 3/01/2023)
A307-13 Yes, but this does not relieve the State transportation department of any of its responsibilities under the NBIS (23 CFR 650.307(f)).
Q307-14 May a consultant perform the Program Manager role under the NBIS? (New 3/01/2023)
A307-14 No, the State transportation department, Federal agency, and Tribal government must employ a bridge inspection Program Manager (23 CFR 650.307(g)).
Q307-15 Can there be more than one Program Manager? (New 3/01/2023)
A307-15 A State transportation department, Federal agency, or Tribal government may have more than one individual with program manager responsibilities. But to alleviate confusion with the intent of the final rule, there must be one individual who has the overall responsibility for the program (23 CFR 650.307(g)). The intent is that the Program Manager provides overall leadership and guidance for the inspection organization.