Equipment World Digital Magazine
Issue link: https://read.dmtmag.com/i/894232
EquipmentWorld.com | November 2017 27 for Caltrans. California completed 12 state highway bridges and started another 36 last fiscal year, while another five bridges are being planned. The Idaho legislature passed a $320 million-plus road bill authorizing $300 million in bonds that allow the state to borrow against its future federal highway allocations to fund big projects now. In addition, the bill diverted 1 percent of state sales tax revenues – expected to be $15 million in 2018 – to roadwork. In August, Oregon's governor signed a bill autho- rizing $5.3 billion in transportation funding to be spread over 10 years, while incrementally increas- ing the state's gas tax by 10 cents per gallon over seven years. And in Tennessee, legislators increased the gas tax by 6 cents per gallon over the next three years. The initial 4-cent increase started in July. The legis- lation will provide transportation funds in a three- pronged approach: $250 million to the Tennes- see Department of Transportation, $70 million to counties and $35 million to cities. "This dedicates funding to a specific list of priority projects on state and local roads," says Ted Kniazewycz with the state's DOT. Other states increasing funding this year include Indiana, Montana, West Virginia and South Carolina. Transitioning from SD to Poor The Federal Highway Administration is transitioning from defining bridges of concern as "Structurally De- ficient" (SD) to "Poor" under its newer Good/Fair/ Poor condition rating system. Also being transitioned out are the terms "functionally obsolete" and "suf- ficiency rating." The definition of the term "fracture critical" (now classified as "a steel member in ten- sion, or with a tension element, whose failure would probably cause a portion of or the entire bridge to collapse") will be updated. The goal is to eliminate "sometimes confusing, unclear, misleading or alarming terms from the language of bridge engineers," said Joey Hartmann, FHWA director of the Office of Bridges and Struc- tures, in a presentation to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in June. While this language served engineers well, FHWA now recognizes they do "not translate well in a transparent world," Hartman said. In addition, on May 20th, FHWA published the final rule establishing performance measures based on deck area for state DOTs to use in managing pavement and bridge performance on the National Highway System. This will require state DOTs to establish two- and four-year targets by May 20, 2018, Bridge coding ratings in transition W orking with the states, the Federal Highway Administra- tion has assigned a sufficiency rating to each inventoried bridge measuring 20 feet or longer. The FHWA is now asking states to transition away from rating bridges as structurally deficient/functionally obsolete (SD/FO) to classifying bridges as "Good," "Fair" or "Poor." To reflect this, the 2017 Equipment World Better Roads Bridge Inventory questionnaire dropped the "Functionally Obsolete" question, which in the past indicated a bridge did not meet current designs and standards. Because not all states have transitioned to the newer Good/Fair/Poor classifica- tion system, in this year's inventory we asked both about the number of bridges that are rated structurally deficient (SD) and also added questions about the incoming Good/Fair/Poor classification system. Next year, we will no longer ask about SD bridges and go entirely to the Good/Fair/Poor classification In the past, a bridge was given an SD rating when its components – including the deck, substructure, superstructure or culvert – showed advanced signs of deterioration. It did not imply that the bridge is not safe. As mentioned, the bridges formerly rated as SD will in the future be rated "Poor," which means they received a rating of 4 or less on the following 0-to-9 scale: GOOD 9: Excellent 8: Very good – No problems noted 7: Good – Some minor problems FAIR 6: Satisfactory – Structural elements show some minor deterioration. 5: Fair – All primary structural elements are sound but may have minor section loss, cracking, spalling, or scour. May include minor erosion on bridge piers. POOR 4: Poor – Advanced corrosion, deterioration, cracking or chip- ping. Also significant erosion of concrete bridge condition piers. 3: Serious – Loss of section, deterioration, spalling, or scour have seriously affected primary structural components. Local failures are possible. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present. 2: Critical – Advanced deterioration of primary structural ele- ments. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present or scour may have removed substructure support. Unless closely monitored, it may be necessary to close the bridge until corrective action is taken. 1: Imminent Failure – Major deterioration or section loss present in critical structural components, or obvious loss present in critical structural components, or obvious vertical or horizontal movement affecting structural stability. Bridge is closed to traffic, but corrective action may be sufficient to put the bridge back in light service. 0: Failed condition – Bridge is out of service and be- yond corrective action.