Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act: Highway Bridges
link to page 1 link to page 1 
May 6, 2022
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act: Highway Bridges
The United States has approximately 620,000 bridges on
Figure 1. Highway Bridges in Poor Condition, 2012-
public roads subject to the National Bridge Inspection
2021
Standards (NBIS) mandated by Congress (23 U.S.C. §144).
About 48% of these bridges are owned by state
governments and 50% by local governments. State
governments generally own the larger and more heavily
traveled bridges, such as those on the Interstate Highway
system. Less than 2% of highway bridges are owned by the
federal government, primarily those on federal land.
The number of bridges classified as poor has declined
gradually for many years. However, about 44,000 bridges
remain in poor condition and this has led to recent changes
in federal bridge policy intended to speed up the rate of
bridge improvement. The Infrastructure Investment and
Jobs Act (IIJA; P.L. 117-58), enacted on November 15,
2021, authorized and appropriated funding for surface
Source: Federal Highway Administration.
transportation programs for FY2022-FY2026. The IIJA
created new bridge funding programs and increased federal
States vary widely in the proportion of poor condition
funding for highway programs that also can fund bridges.
bridges measured by deck area (Table 1).
Bridge Conditions
Table 1. Poor Condition Highway Bridges, by State,
2021
The NBIS require states to inspect public road bridges
periodically and to report their findings to the Federal
(% of deck area)
Highway Administration (FHWA) National Bridge
Greatest % Poor
Least % Poor
Inventory (NBI). This information permits FHWA to
characterize the existing condition of bridges as good, fair,
Rhode Island
19.5%
Delaware
3.1%
or poor. A bridge is considered in good condition if the
deck, superstructure, and substructure are rated at least 7 on
West Virginia
14.8%
Maryland
3.1%
a 0-to-9 scale. If any of these bridge elements is rated 5 or
Illinois
12.2%
Florida
2.6%
6, a bridge is considered in fair condition. A bridge is
considered in poor condition if any element is rated 4 or
Massachusetts
11.3%
Hawaii
2.5%
less. A bridge classified as poor is not necessarily unsafe,
New York
10.5%
Alabama
1.5%
but may require the posting of a vehicle weight restriction.
When officials determine that a bridge is unsafe, it is closed
South Dakota
9.7%
Arizona
1.3%
to traffic.
Iowa
9.7%
Nevada
1.2%
In 2021, 278,000 (45%) public road bridges were
Maine
8.9%
Texas
1.1%
considered good, 298,000 (48%) fair, and 44,000 (7%)
poor. The number of poor bridges has dropped by about
Wyoming
8.6%
Georgia
1.1%
13,000 from 2012 to 2021, whereas the number of bridges
Louisiana
8.5%
Utah
0.9%
in good condition dropped by 9,000 and the number of
Source: Federal Highway Administration.
bridges in fair condition increased by 35,000. About 80% of
the bridges in poor condition in 2021 were located in rural
Federal and State Roles
areas.
Federal bridge funding shares the basic attributes of federal
Urban bridges in poor condition are generally much larger
aid to highways. Most funding is apportioned by formula to
and carry more traffic than those in rural areas and,
the states. Projects are selected and developed by the state
therefore, are more expensive to fix. In 2021, 58% of the
departments of transportation (state DOTs). State DOTs
total deck area of bridges in poor condition was in urban
execute the contracts, oversee the construction process, and
areas. The amount of deck area in poor condition has
provide for the inspection of bridges. In addition, there are
dropped by about the same amount in urban and rural areas
discretionary (competitive grant) programs whose grants
over the past decade, nearly 30% (Figure 1).
are awarded by FHWA or the Office of the Secretary of
Transportation. Applications for these competitive grants
are open not only to the states but also to governmental
https://crsreports.congress.gov
link to page 2 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act: Highway Bridges
entities below the state level. Most bridge projects receive a
Distribution and Eligibility
federal cost share of 80%, but for Interstate Highways, the
BFP funds are distributed to states (including the District of
share is generally 90%. However, bridge spending, unlike
Columbia and Puerto Rico) based on each state’s cost to
road spending, is not restricted to designated Federal-Aid
replace its poor condition bridges and cost to rehabilitate its
Highways and may be used on any bridge listed in the NBI.
fair condition bridges, relative to the total nationwide cost.
The minimum amount a state will receive is $45 million
Sources of Federal Bridge Funding
annually. At least 15% of each state’s funds is required to
The IIJA both reauthorized spending authority from the
be spent on off-system bridges, and $165 million is set
Highway Trust Fund for surface transportation programs at
aside annually for bridges on tribal lands (23 U.S.C.
an increased level and provided an additional boost to
§202(d)). Bridges not on the federal-aid system, so-called
infrastructure spending via multiyear supplemental
off-system bridges, owned by sub-state government entities
appropriations from the Treasury general fund. The act
or federally recognized tribes, are eligible for 100% federal
funds bridges through both ongoing highway programs and
share.
new programs dedicated to bridge spending.
The BIP funds competitive grants for bridge replacement,
Ongoing Program Sources of Bridge Funding
rehabilitation, preservation, or resiliency improvements for
Broad sources of funding for states to improve their bridges
bridges on the NBI. These funds also may be used to
existed prior to the IIJA. States are authorized to use
replace or rehabilitate culverts for flood control or to
funding primarily from two formula programs, the Surface
improve habitat connectivity for aquatic species. The IIJA
Transportation Block Grant Program and the National
reserved 50% of funding for large projects (over $100
Highway Performance Program. Funding from other
million) at a maximum 50% federal share. Non-large
formula programs also can be used, depending on the
projects are funded at not more than 80% federal share,
specifics of the project. According to FHWA data, in
with some exceptions, and $40 million is set aside annually
FY2021, $8.6 billion was obligated for bridge projects from
for tribal bridges. States, sub-state governmental entities,
all federal highway program sources. These programs were
metropolitan planning organizations with populations over
extended through FY2026 at increased funding levels under
200,000, federal land management agencies, and tribal
the IIJA and remain available to the states for bridge
governments may apply. Eligible entities apply directly to
projects. Competitive grant programs, for example, the
the U.S. Department of Transportation.
Nationally Significant Multimodal Freight & Highway
Projects (INFRA) grants, also may be used for bridges.
Other new IIJA discretionary programs also may be sources
of highway bridge funding. For example, the PROTECT
New Bridge Funding Under the IIJA
discretionary grants may be used for bridge resiliency
No stand-alone bridge program existed from FY2013 to the
projects and the Rural Surface Transportation Grant
IIJA’s enactment. The IIJA created two new stand-alone
Program funds may be used for bridges in rural areas. The
programs dedicated to bridge projects: the Bridge
IIJA also included a number of multimodal programs that
Replacement, Rehabilitation, Preservation, Protection, and
can be used for bridge projects. For example, National
Construction Program, called the Bridge Formula Program
Infrastructure Investments (also referred to as MEGA
(BFP), for short; and the Bridge Investment Program (BIP)
grants) may be used for large bridge projects. Further, the
for competitive grants. The IIJA makes available $40
IIJA created a new Culvert Removal, Replacement, and
billion in budget authority for the new programs over five
Restoration Program that funds projects that improve or
years and authorizes an additional $3.265 billion subject to
restore passage of anadromous fish (such as salmon).
future appropriations (see Table 2). Assuming that the
states maintain their bridge funding effort from the ongoing
Tolling
sources at the FY2021 level, these new IIJA programs
Currently, any toll-free federal-aid highway bridge may be
would roughly double average annual spending (unadjusted
converted to tolling and receive federal highway aid if the
for inflation) on highway bridges above this FY2021
conversion is related to the reconstruction or replacement of
baseline.
the bridge. Also, new bridges may be tolled. Further, the
IIJA provided $50 million annually to the Congestion
Table 2. New Highway Bridge Programs: IIJA Funding
Relief Program for congestion solutions, including the
(budget authority in millions of nominal dollars)
imposition of tolls for congestion pricing. Revenues from
Annual Average Program Total
bridge tolls make such bridges attractive to private entities
Program
(FY2022-FY2026)
(FY2022-FY2026)
that are interested in participating in a public-private
Highway Bridge
partnership. Tolling also can help projects become eligible
$5,500
$27,500
Formula Program (SA)
for a Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation
loan. Most bridges have insufficient traffic to make tolling
Bridge Investment
2,500
12,500
financially feasible, however. Tolling is often unpopular
Program (CA, SA)
with travelers, particularly on previously untolled facilities.
Bridge Investment
653
3,265
Program (STA)
Robert S. Kirk, Specialist in Transportation Policy
Total
$8,653
$43,265
William J. Mallett, Specialist in Transportation Policy
Source: Federal Highway Administration.
IF12099
Notes: CA=Highway Trust Fund Contract Authority; SA=multi-year
Supplemental Appropriations; STA=Subject to Appropriations
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act: Highway Bridges
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF12099 · VERSION 1 · NEW
May 6, 2022
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act: Highway Bridges
The United States has approximately 620,000 bridges on
Figure 1. Highway Bridges in Poor Condition, 2012-
public roads subject to the National Bridge Inspection
2021
Standards (NBIS) mandated by Congress (23 U.S.C. §144).
About 48% of these bridges are owned by state
governments and 50% by local governments. State
governments generally own the larger and more heavily
traveled bridges, such as those on the Interstate Highway
system. Less than 2% of highway bridges are owned by the
federal government, primarily those on federal land.
The number of bridges classified as poor has declined
gradually for many years. However, about 44,000 bridges
remain in poor condition and this has led to recent changes
in federal bridge policy intended to speed up the rate of
bridge improvement. The Infrastructure Investment and
Jobs Act (IIJA; P.L. 117-58), enacted on November 15,
2021, authorized and appropriated funding for surface
Source: Federal Highway Administration.
transportation programs for FY2022-FY2026. The IIJA
created new bridge funding programs and increased federal
States vary widely in the proportion of poor condition
funding for highway programs that also can fund bridges.
bridges measured by deck area (Table 1).
Bridge Conditions
Table 1. Poor Condition Highway Bridges, by State,
2021
The NBIS require states to inspect public road bridges
periodically and to report their findings to the Federal
(% of deck area)
Highway Administration (FHWA) National Bridge
Greatest % Poor
Least % Poor
Inventory (NBI). This information permits FHWA to
characterize the existing condition of bridges as good, fair,
Rhode Island
19.5%
Delaware
3.1%
or poor. A bridge is considered in good condition if the
deck, superstructure, and substructure are rated at least 7 on
West Virginia
14.8%
Maryland
3.1%
a 0-to-9 scale. If any of these bridge elements is rated 5 or
Illinois
12.2%
Florida
2.6%
6, a bridge is considered in fair condition. A bridge is
considered in poor condition if any element is rated 4 or
Massachusetts
11.3%
Hawaii
2.5%
less. A bridge classified as poor is not necessarily unsafe,
New York
10.5%
Alabama
1.5%
but may require the posting of a vehicle weight restriction.
When officials determine that a bridge is unsafe, it is closed
South Dakota
9.7%
Arizona
1.3%
to traffic.
Iowa
9.7%
Nevada
1.2%
In 2021, 278,000 (45%) public road bridges were
Maine
8.9%
Texas
1.1%
considered good, 298,000 (48%) fair, and 44,000 (7%)
poor. The number of poor bridges has dropped by about
Wyoming
8.6%
Georgia
1.1%
13,000 from 2012 to 2021, whereas the number of bridges
Louisiana
8.5%
Utah
0.9%
in good condition dropped by 9,000 and the number of
Source: Federal Highway Administration.
bridges in fair condition increased by 35,000. About 80% of
the bridges in poor condition in 2021 were located in rural
Federal and State Roles
areas.
Federal bridge funding shares the basic attributes of federal
Urban bridges in poor condition are generally much larger
aid to highways. Most funding is apportioned by formula to
and carry more traffic than those in rural areas and,
the states. Projects are selected and developed by the state
therefore, are more expensive to fix. In 2021, 58% of the
departments of transportation (state DOTs). State DOTs
total deck area of bridges in poor condition was in urban
execute the contracts, oversee the construction process, and
areas. The amount of deck area in poor condition has
provide for the inspection of bridges. In addition, there are
dropped by about the same amount in urban and rural areas
discretionary (competitive grant) programs whose grants
over the past decade, nearly 30% (Figure 1).
are awarded by FHWA or the Office of the Secretary of
Transportation. Applications for these competitive grants
are open not only to the states but also to governmental
https://crsreports.congress.gov
link to page 2 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act: Highway Bridges
entities below the state level. Most bridge projects receive a
Distribution and Eligibility
federal cost share of 80%, but for Interstate Highways, the
BFP funds are distributed to states (including the District of
share is generally 90%. However, bridge spending, unlike
Columbia and Puerto Rico) based on each state’s cost to
road spending, is not restricted to designated Federal-Aid
replace its poor condition bridges and cost to rehabilitate its
Highways and may be used on any bridge listed in the NBI.
fair condition bridges, relative to the total nationwide cost.
The minimum amount a state will receive is $45 million
Sources of Federal Bridge Funding
annually. At least 15% of each state’s funds is required to
The IIJA both reauthorized spending authority from the
be spent on off-system bridges, and $165 million is set
Highway Trust Fund for surface transportation programs at
aside annually for bridges on tribal lands (23 U.S.C.
an increased level and provided an additional boost to
§202(d)). Bridges not on the federal-aid system, so-called
infrastructure spending via multiyear supplemental
off-system bridges, owned by sub-state government entities
appropriations from the Treasury general fund. The act
or federally recognized tribes, are eligible for 100% federal
funds bridges through both ongoing highway programs and
share.
new programs dedicated to bridge spending.
The BIP funds competitive grants for bridge replacement,
Ongoing Program Sources of Bridge Funding
rehabilitation, preservation, or resiliency improvements for
Broad sources of funding for states to improve their bridges
bridges on the NBI. These funds also may be used to
existed prior to the IIJA. States are authorized to use
replace or rehabilitate culverts for flood control or to
funding primarily from two formula programs, the Surface
improve habitat connectivity for aquatic species. The IIJA
Transportation Block Grant Program and the National
reserved 50% of funding for large projects (over $100
Highway Performance Program. Funding from other
million) at a maximum 50% federal share. Non-large
formula programs also can be used, depending on the
projects are funded at not more than 80% federal share,
specifics of the project. According to FHWA data, in
with some exceptions, and $40 million is set aside annually
FY2021, $8.6 billion was obligated for bridge projects from
for tribal bridges. States, sub-state governmental entities,
all federal highway program sources. These programs were
metropolitan planning organizations with populations over
extended through FY2026 at increased funding levels under
200,000, federal land management agencies, and tribal
the IIJA and remain available to the states for bridge
governments may apply. Eligible entities apply directly to
projects. Competitive grant programs, for example, the
the U.S. Department of Transportation.
Nationally Significant Multimodal Freight & Highway
Projects (INFRA) grants, also may be used for bridges.
Other new IIJA discretionary programs also may be sources
of highway bridge funding. For example, the PROTECT
New Bridge Funding Under the IIJA
discretionary grants may be used for bridge resiliency
No stand-alone bridge program existed from FY2013 to the
projects and the Rural Surface Transportation Grant
IIJA’s enactment. The IIJA created two new stand-alone
Program funds may be used for bridges in rural areas. The
programs dedicated to bridge projects: the Bridge
IIJA also included a number of multimodal programs that
Replacement, Rehabilitation, Preservation, Protection, and
can be used for bridge projects. For example, National
Construction Program, called the Bridge Formula Program
Infrastructure Investments (also referred to as MEGA
(BFP), for short; and the Bridge Investment Program (BIP)
grants) may be used for large bridge projects. Further, the
for competitive grants. The IIJA makes available $40
IIJA created a new Culvert Removal, Replacement, and
billion in budget authority for the new programs over five
Restoration Program that funds projects that improve or
years and authorizes an additional $3.265 billion subject to
restore passage of anadromous fish (such as salmon).
future appropriations (see Table 2). Assuming that the
states maintain their bridge funding effort from the ongoing
Tolling
sources at the FY2021 level, these new IIJA programs
Currently, any toll-free federal-aid highway bridge may be
would roughly double average annual spending (unadjusted
converted to tolling and receive federal highway aid if the
for inflation) on highway bridges above this FY2021
conversion is related to the reconstruction or replacement of
baseline.
the bridge. Also, new bridges may be tolled. Further, the
IIJA provided $50 million annually to the Congestion
Table 2. New Highway Bridge Programs: IIJA Funding
Relief Program for congestion solutions, including the
(budget authority in millions of nominal dollars)
imposition of tolls for congestion pricing. Revenues from
Annual Average Program Total
bridge tolls make such bridges attractive to private entities
Program
(FY2022-FY2026)
(FY2022-FY2026)
that are interested in participating in a public-private
Highway Bridge
partnership. Tolling also can help projects become eligible
$5,500
$27,500
Formula Program (SA)
for a Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation
loan. Most bridges have insufficient traffic to make tolling
Bridge Investment
2,500
12,500
financially feasible, however. Tolling is often unpopular
Program (CA, SA)
with travelers, particularly on previously untolled facilities.
Bridge Investment
653
3,265
Program (STA)
Robert S. Kirk, Specialist in Transportation Policy
Total
$8,653
$43,265
William J. Mallett, Specialist in Transportation Policy
Source: Federal Highway Administration.
IF12099
Notes: CA=Highway Trust Fund Contract Authority; SA=multi-year
Supplemental Appropriations; STA=Subject to Appropriations
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act: Highway Bridges
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF12099 · VERSION 1 · NEW