RBI-HUA-21-13599_Draft.pdf

RBI-HUA-21-13599

Routine Bridge Inspection Report

Facility Number: 13599

NBI Structure No.: DAPTRAHUA013599

Ft. Huachuca, AZ Eric Sessums

Inspection Date: 19 March 2021

Report Date: September 2021

Requests for this document shall be referred to the Commander USAG Fort Huachuca, ATTN:DPW, Bldg.

22422, 3040 Butler Road, Fort Huachuca, AZ, 85613.

DRAFT

DISCLAIMER: The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising, publication, or promotional purposes. Citation of trade names does not constitute an official endorsement or approval of the use of such commercial products. All product names and trademarks cited are the property of their respective owners. The findings of this report are not to be construed as an official

Department of the Army position unless so designated by other authorized documents.

PREFACE

This report presents a routine inspection for facility number 13599 at Ft. Huachuca, AZ. The inspection was performed in accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 23, Part 650, Subpart C - National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS), Code of Federal Regulations, Title 49, Part

237, Bridge Safety Standards, and satisfies the requirements specified in Army Regulation (AR) 420-

1 “Army Facility Management”, Chapter 7 “Transportation Infrastructure and Dams.”

The Army Bridge Inspection Program is sponsored by the Army Dams and Transportation

Infrastructure Program (ADTIP) of the Headquarters Installation Management Command (IMCOM), San Antonio, TX. The IMCOM provided funding for this investigation. Questions shall be directed to

Michael R. Andres, IMCOM ADTIP Program Manager, michael.r.andres.civ@mail.mil.

Personnel of the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC), Geotechnical and

Structures Laboratory (GSL), Vicksburg, MS, prepared this publication. The required field inspection was conducted in June 2019. The evaluation team consisted of Gerardo Velazquez, Team Leader, Eric Sessums, and Trey Smith, Structural Engineering Branch (StEB), GSL. Mr. Gerardo Velazquez, StEB, GSL, was the Project Lead.

The Installation POC is Dustin D. Minor, (520)-533-1865, dustin.d.minor.civ@mail.mil

The numbering convention for reporting purposes is from left to right looking from upstream to downstream or from the north and the west. All units of measure in this report are in U.S. (English) units unless noted otherwise.

mailto:michael.r.andres.civ@mail.mil

Inspection Team Leader:

Gerardo I. Velazquez, (601) 634-3265, gerardo.i.velazquez.civ@mail.mil

Report Reviewer:

Gerardo I. Velazquez, (601) 634-3265, gerardo.i.velazquez.civ@mail.mil

Report Approver:

Edgardo Ruiz, PE, (601) 634-2549, edgardo.ruiz.civ@mail.mil mailto:gerardo.i.velazquez.civ@mail.mil mailto:gerardo.i.velazquez.civ@mail.mil

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

BRIDGE ID & DESCRIPTION

IDENTIFICATION

STRUCTURE TYPE

AGE & INSPECTIONS

STRUCTURE CAPACITY

CHANNEL SCOUR

FRACTURE CRITICAL

UNDERWATER INSPECTION

SPECIAL INSPECTION

SKETCHES

INSPECTION RECORD

ITEM # 72: APPROACH FEATURES

ITEM #36: TRAFFIC SAFETY FEATURES

ITEM #58: DECK FEATURES

ITEM # 59: SUPERSTRUCTURE FEATURES

ITEM #60: SUBSTRUCTURE FEATURES

ITEM # 61: CHANNEL/CHANNEL PROTECTION

INSTALLATION STATUS REPORT (ISR)

STRUCTURE INVENTORY AND APPRAISAL FORM ......................................................................... 32 DRAFT

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A routine inspection was performed at structure number 13599 on 19 March. The previous NBIS inspection was performed on 26 February 2021. Subsequent routine NBIS safety inspections should be performed at regular intervals not to exceed twenty-four months in accordance with the NBIS.

The structure is in fair (6) condition overall. This condition has not changed significantly since the previous inspection. Following is a list of the most significant findings.

• No load rating document on record.

• No approach rails installed but required for the structure.

• Approach 2 at the upstream side does not have an end treatment.

• Railing has many post which have heavy oxidation; one is perforated.

• Bays have spalls with exposed rebar;

• Overhang has spalls with exposed rebar

• Beam 1 has honeycombing with exposed rebar

• Abutment 2 has approx. 20” of scour exposing toe

• Scour hole with undermining of channel lining

• Both embankments downstream have undercutting

• Downstream has 3 downed trees restricting flow

Corrective action should be taken as outlined in this report to prevent the possible development of more serious or costly problems in the future.

None of the deficiencies at this bridge are considered critical, so no immediate corrective actions are needed. Current repair/maintenance recommendations include the following (described in more detail in Table 1 & 2):

• Perform and document load rating calculations.

• Replace bridge rails, install rails with end treatments

• Clean rebar, patch with suitable material.

• Regrade channel, and add Riprap

The bridge is currently not posted for weight restrictions and does not require posting at this time.

Consult the load rating documentation for further details.

BRIDGE ID & DESCRIPTION

IDENTIFICATION

Site: Ft. Huachuca

RPA UID: 1005172

ABIS No.: DAPTRAHUA013599

Facility No.: 13599

Latitude: 31°34' 01.88" N

Longitude: 110°23' 44.92" W

STRUCTURE TYPE

Main Span Material: Reinforced Concrete Max. Span Length: 27.83 feet

Main Span Type: T-Beam Structure Total Length: 27.83 feet

No. of Main Spans: 1 Skew Angle: 0°

Lanes on: 2

Deck Type: Concrete Deck Width: 24.54 ft

Wearing Surface: Bituminous Curb to Curb Width: 23.83 ft

Approach Roadway Width: 23.83 ft

Abutment Type: Wall Abutment Material: Concrete

Pier Type(s): N/A Pier Material: N/A

AGE & INSPECTIONS

Year Built: 1960 Year Reconstructed: N/A

Inspection Date: 19 March 2019 Inspection Frequency: 24 months

Structure Repair History: 2010- he end treatments were replaced and an erosion hole filled. 2014-

Aggradation under the bridge was removed DRAFT

STRUCTURE CAPACITY

1) Is there an existing load rating / military load classification (MLC) document?

Yes ☒ No ☐ N/A ☐

If yes, provide the report no. reference: LR-HUA-20-13599

2) Based on this inspection, is a review by a load rating engineer recommended?

Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A ☐

If yes, explain why: There is not an Engineer load rating on file

3) Is there a civilian load / MLC posting on structure?

Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A ☐

Does this match the recommendation of the load rating /MLC document?

Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A ☐

If no, explain why: Structure needs MLC signage

CHANNEL SCOUR

1) Existing scour assessment?

Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A ☐

If yes, provide the report no. reference: None

NBI Item #113 from existing scour assessment: 8P (Concrete bottom)

2) Based on this inspection should NBI Item #113 be revised? An update of NBI Item #113 is necessary when:

• Rating = 4 – Bridge foundations are exposed and require armoring countermeasures, but scour conditions are not producing a scenario that certainly lead to a loss event.

• Rating = 2 – Scour condition are likely to produce a bridge failure. The general scour condition rating is equal to 3 or 2.

• Rating = 1 or 0 – Bridge is closed due to scour conditions

Yes ☒ No ☐ N/A ☐

If yes, recommend NBI Item #113 (4, 2, 1 or 0): N/A

Provide an explanation for your recommendation: N/A

FRACTURE CRITICAL

1) Is this a fracture critical structure?

Yes ☐ No ☒

If yes, please provide the reference for the FC Plan: N/A

UNDERWATER INSPECTION

1) Does this structure require an underwater inspection?

If yes, please provide the reference for the last UW inspection: N/A

SPECIAL INSPECTION

1) Has this structure required a special inspection in the past?

If yes, please provide the reference for the last special inspection: N/A

Figure 1. Bridge Location Map

Figure 2. Satellite View

Figure 3. Elevation View Looking Northeast

Figure 4. Elevation View Looking Southwest

Figure 5. Approach Looking North

Figure 6. Approach Looking South

Figure 7. Upstream View

Figure 8. Downstream View

Figure 9. Underside View

SKETCHES

SUMMARY OF CRITICAL FINDINGS/DEFICIENCIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Table 1 shows all critical findings that require immediate attention. Table 2 shows the deficiencies and recommendations for the bridge that should be completed over the next two years, or for larger rehabilitation or replacement projects where planning and design should begin. The estimates in

Tables 1 and 2 are approximate costs based on materials and labor required to complete the recommended repair, in U.S. dollars. These should only be used as a reference. Although they represent the costs for individual repair activities, they do not represent the total cost of a complete repair/rehabilitation project.

Table 1: Critical Findings

FIGURE

NO.

DEFICIENCY RECOMMENDATION

POA

REQ.

(Y/N)

QTY

AMOUNT

($K)

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $0.0

TOTAL : $0.0

Table 2: Deficiencies & Recommendations

FIGURE

NO.

DEFICIENCY RECOMMENDATION

POA

REQ.

(Y/N)

QTY

AMOUNT

($K)

3, 4 The rail post spacings are inadequate. Replace bridge rails, install rails with end treatments

5, 6 No approach rails installed but required for the structure.

Replace bridge rails, install rails with end treatments

Approach 2 at the upstream side does not have an end treatment.

Replace bridge rails, install rails with end treatments

Railing has many post which have heavy oxidation; one is perforated.

Replace bridge rails, install rails with end treatments

NP Rail spacing block is twisted Replace bridge rails, install rails with end treatments

N LS $36.8

5, 6

The approach pavements have longitudinal and transverse cracks and some map cracking.

Clean out cracks, fill with suitable material

N 60 LF $0.08

The wearing surface has longitudinal and transverse cracks along with some map cracking.

Clean out cracks, fill with suitable material

N 60 LF $0.08

Beams have stress cracks and flexural cracks

Monitor for further widening and lengthening. Will reassess next inspection.

N - -

Wing-walls have vertical and diagonal cracks

Monitor for further widening and lengthening. Will reassess next inspection.

N - -

Bays have spalls with exposed rebar;

Overhang has spalls with exposed

Clean rebar, patch with suitable material.

N 8 SF $0.3

FIGURE

NO.

DEFICIENCY RECOMMENDATION

POA

REQ.

(Y/N)

QTY

AMOUNT

($K) rebar

Beam 1 has honeycombing with exposed rebar

Clean rebar, patch with suitable material.

N 2 SF $0.09

Breast walls have honeycombing and efflorescence

Monitor for formation of cracks, delamination, and spalling. Will reassess next inspection

N - -

There is aggradation in front of the wing-walls.

Monitor for further aggradation. Will reassess next inspection.

N - -

There is aggradation in front of abutment 1.

Regrade channel, and add Riprap N 1 CY $0.3

Abutment 2 has approx. 20” of scour exposing toe Regrade channel, and add Riprap N 4 CY $1.0

Scour hole with undermining of channel lining Regrade channel, and add Riprap N 4 CY $1.0

Both embankments downstream have undercutting Regrade channel, and add Riprap N 20 CY $9.7

Downstream has 3 downed trees restricting flow Remove trees from channel N 4 CY $0.2

TOTAL : $51.0

Figure 10. Heavily oxidized post and spalling of overhang

Figure 11. Cracks on wearing surface

Figure 12. Stress cracks in beams

Figure 13. Wing-wall cracks and aggradation

Figure 14. Bays with exposed rebar

Figure 15. Beam spall with exposed rebar

Figure 16. Breast wall with spalls and efflorescence

Figure 17. Aggradation in front of abutment

Figure 18. Scour in front of abutment

Figure 19. Scour hole with undermining of channel lining

Figure 20. Undermining of channel and downed trees blocking flow

INSPECTION RECORD

ITEM # 72: APPROACH FEATURES

Rating Guidelines

Code Description

8 Speed reduction is NOT required.

6 A VERY MINOR speed reduction is required.

3 A SUBSTANTIAL speed reduction is required.

Components Rating

Rating Component Remarks

3 1. Horizontal Alignment The structure is located on a sharp curve.

3 2. Vertical Alignment Structure is located at bottom of hills, of both approaches

3 General Appraisal Rating (NBI ITEM #72)

ITEM # 72: APPROACH FEATURES (CONTINUED)

Rating Guidelines

Code Description

N NOT APPLICABLE

9 EXCELLENT CONDITION

8 VERY GOOD CONDITION: No problems noted.

7 GOOD CONDITION: Some minor problems.

6 SATISFACTORY CONDITION: Structural elements show some minor deterioration.

5 FAIR CONDITION: All primary structural elements are sound but may have minor section loss, cracking, spalling or scour.

4 POOR CONDITION: Advanced section loss, deterioration, spalling or scour.

SERIOUS CONDITION: Loss of section, deterioration, spalling or scour has seriously affected primary structural components. Local failures are possible. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present.

CRITICAL CONDITION: Advanced deterioration of primary structural elements. 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.

IMMINENT FAILURE CONDITION: Major deterioration or section loss present in critical structural components or obvious vertical or horizontal movement affecting structure stability. Bridge is closed to traffic but corrective action may put back in light service.

0 FAILED CONDITION: Out of service – beyond corrective action.

Rating Component Unit Amt Remarks

N 1. Relief Joints LF 0 None

N

2. Approach:

a) Guardrail LF 0 None

7 b) Pavement SF 1380 The approach pavements have longitudinal and transverse cracks and some map cracking.

7 c) Embankment EA 4 None

N 3. Load Posting Sign EA 0 None

6 4. Hazard Markers EA 4 None

ITEM #36: TRAFFIC SAFETY FEATURES

Rating Guidelines

Code Description

1 Inspected feature MEETS currently acceptable standards.

0 Inspected feature DOES NOT currently meet acceptable standards or a safety feature is required and NONE IS PROVIDED.

N NOT APPLICABLE

0 1. Bridge Rails LF 106 The rail post spacings are inadequate.

N 2. Transition EA 0 None

0 3. Approach Rails LF 0 No approach rails installed but required for the structure.

0 4. End Treatments EA 3 Approach 2 at the upstream side does not have an end treatment.

ITEM #58: DECK FEATURES

Rating Guidelines

Code Description

N NOT APPLICABLE

9 EXCELLENT CONDITION

8 VERY GOOD CONDITION: No problems noted.

7 GOOD CONDITION: Some minor problems.

6 SATISFACTORY CONDITION: Structural elements show some minor deterioration.

5 FAIR CONDITION: All primary structural elements are sound but may have minor section loss, cracking, spalling or scour.

4 POOR CONDITION: Advanced section loss, deterioration, spalling or scour.

SERIOUS CONDITION: Loss of section, deterioration, spalling or scour has seriously affected primary structural components. Local failures are possible. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present.

CRITICAL CONDITION: Advanced deterioration of primary structural elements. 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.

IMMINENT FAILURE CONDITION: Major deterioration or section loss present in critical structural components or obvious vertical or horizontal movement affecting structure stability. Bridge is closed to traffic but corrective action may put back in

6 1. Wearing Surface SF 664 The surface has longitudinal and transverse cracks along with some map cracking.

2. Deck Structural

Condition

SF 684

Bay 2: 2’x2’x2” spall with exposed rebar and honeycombing

Full-length longitudinal crack with efflorescence at cent of bay

Bay 3: 1’x3’ spall with exposed rebar and honeycombing

Downstream overhang has several spall; one of which is 2’x2’ with exposed rebar

N 3. Curbs LF 0 None

N 4. Median SF 0 None

N 5. Sidewalk SF 0 None

N 6. Parapet LF 0 None

4 7. Railing LF 106

Railing has many post which have heavy oxidation; one is perforated.

Rail spacing block is twisted

One of railing post lag bolts is in a spall on the downstream overhang

N 8. Drains EA 0 None

N 9. Lighting EA 0 None

7 10. Utilities EA 2 Utility pipes have minor debris

N 11. Expansion Joints LF 0 None

4 General Condition Rating (NBI ITEM # 58)

ITEM # 59: SUPERSTRUCTURE FEATURES

Rating Guidelines

Code Description

N NOT APPLICABLE

9 EXCELLENT CONDITION

8 VERY GOOD CONDITION: No problems noted.

7 GOOD CONDITION: Some minor problems.

6 SATISFACTORY CONDITION: Structural elements show some minor deterioration.

5 FAIR CONDITION: All primary structural elements are sound but may have minor section loss, cracking, spalling or scour.

4 POOR CONDITION: Advanced section loss, deterioration, spalling or scour.

SERIOUS CONDITION: Loss of section, deterioration, spalling or scour has seriously affected primary structural components. Local failures are possible. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present.

CRITICAL CONDITION: Advanced deterioration of primary structural elements. 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.

IMMINENT FAILURE CONDITION: Major deterioration or section loss present in critical structural components or obvious vertical or horizontal movement affecting structure stability. Bridge is closed to traffic but corrective action may put back in

N 1. Bearing Devices EA 0 None

2. Girders/Beams

A. General

LF 112

The beams at abutment 1 side and beams 3 and 4 on abutment 2 side have shear cracks approx. 0.016”. There are also stress cracks at mid-span propagating towards the abutments.

Beam 1 has honeycombing with exposed rebar

Beam 3 has a flexural crack at mid-span

N B. Cross Frame EA 0 None

N C. Bracing EA 0 None

N 3. Floor Beams EA 0 None

N

4. Arch

a) Barrel LF 0 None

N

b) Spandrel Wall

/Columns SF 0 None

N 5. Paint LF 0 None

5 General Condition Rating (NBI ITEM # 59)

ITEM #60: SUBSTRUCTURE FEATURES

Rating Guidelines

Code Description

N NOT APPLICABLE

9 EXCELLENT CONDITION

8 VERY GOOD CONDITION: No problems noted.

GOOD CONDITION: Some minor problems. Channel Profile has naturally balanced itself, a change less than 1 ft. is apparent (∆ < 1ft)

6 SATISFACTORY CONDITION: Structural elements show some minor deterioration.

FAIR CONDITION: All primary structural elements are sound but may have minor section loss, cracking, spalling or scour.

Channel Profile have change more than 1 ft. less than 3 ft. (1ft < ∆ < 3ft)

4 POOR CONDITION: Advanced section loss, deterioration, spalling or scour.

SERIOUS CONDITION: Loss of section, deterioration, spalling or scour has seriously affected primary structural components. Local failures are possible. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present. Channel

Profile has change more than 3 ft. (∆ > 3ft).

CRITICAL CONDITION: Advanced deterioration of primary structural elements. 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.

IMMINENT FAILURE CONDITION: Major deterioration or section loss present in critical structural components or obvious vertical or horizontal movement affecting structure stability. Bridge is closed to traffic but corrective action may put back in

1. Abutments

a) Wings SF Unk

Upstream: Wing-backwall interface has a vertical crack

Wing-wall 2 has a diagonal crack

Downstream: Both wing-walls have minor cracking

N b) Backwall SF Unk Not visible.

N c) Bearing Seats EA 2 Not visible.

d) Breast Wall /

Bulkhead

SF 240

Both breast walls have honeycombing

Breast wall 1 has efflorescence throughout the bottom

N e) Footing SF 0 None

N f) Piles EA 0 None

N g) Bracing LF 0 None

5 h) Scour / Erosion

All wing-walls have aggradation of embankment material in front of them

Abutment 1 has aggradation

Abutment 2 has approx. 20” of scour exposing toe

7 i) Settlement None

ITEM #60: SUBSTRUCTURE FEATURES (CONTINUED)

Rating Guidelines

Code Description

N NOT APPLICABLE

9 EXCELLENT CONDITION

8 VERY GOOD CONDITION: No problems noted.

GOOD CONDITION: Some minor problems. Channel Profile has naturally balanced itself, a change less than 1 ft. is apparent (∆ < 1ft)

6 SATISFACTORY CONDITION: Structural elements show some minor deterioration.

FAIR CONDITION: All primary structural elements are sound but may have minor section loss, cracking, spalling or scour.

Channel Profile have change more than 1 ft. less than 3 ft. (1ft < ∆ < 3ft)

4 POOR CONDITION: Advanced section loss, deterioration, spalling or scour.

SERIOUS CONDITION: Loss of section, deterioration, spalling or scour has seriously affected primary structural components. Local failures are possible. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present. Channel

Profile has change more than 3 ft. (∆ > 3ft).

CRITICAL CONDITION: Advanced deterioration of primary structural elements. 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.

IMMINENT FAILURE CONDITION: Major deterioration or section loss present in critical structural components or obvious vertical or horizontal movement affecting structure stability. Bridge is closed to traffic but corrective action may put back in

N

2. Piers / Bents / Piles

a) Caps EA 0 None

N b) Bearing Seats EA 0 None

N c) Column, Stem, Wall SF 0 None

N d) Footing SF 0 None

N e) Piles EA 0 None

N f) Bracing EA 0 None

N g) Scour / Erosion None

N h) Settlement None

5 General Condition Rating (NBI ITEM # 60)

ITEM # 61: CHANNEL/CHANNEL PROTECTION

Rating Guidelines

Code Description

N NOT APPLICABLE: Use when bridge is not over a waterway (channel).

9 EXCELLENT CONDITION: There are no noticeable or noteworthy deficiencies, which affect the condition.

VERY GOOD CONDITION: Banks are protected or well vegetated. River control devices such as spur dikes and embankment protection are not required or are in a stable condition.

GOOD CONDITION: Some minor problems. Bank protection is in need of minor repairs. River control devices and embankment protection have a little minor damage. Banks and/or channel have minor amounts of drift.

SATISFACTORY CONDITION: Elements show some minor deterioration. Bank is beginning to slump. River control devices and embankment protection have widespread minor damage. There is minor streambed movement evident. Debris is restricting the channel slightly.

FAIR CONDITION: Bank protection is being eroded. River control devices and/or embankment have major damage. Trees and brush restrict the channel.

POOR CONDITION: Advanced deterioration. Bank and embankment protection is severely undermined. River control devices have severe damage. Large deposits of debris are in the channel.

SERIOUS CONDITION: Bank protection has failed. River control devices destroyed. Streambed aggradation, degradation or lateral movement has changed the channel to now threaten the bridge and/or approach roadway.

CRITICAL CONDITION: Advanced deterioration. Unless closely monitored it may be necessary to close the bridge until corrective action is taken. The channel has changed to the extent the bridge is near a state of collapse.

IMMINENT FAILURE CONDITION: Major deterioration. Bridge closed to traffic because of channel failure. Corrective action may put back in light service.

0 FAILED CONDITION: Bridge closed because of channel failure. Replacement necessary.

Rating Component Remarks

4 1. Channel Scour Upstream has a 2.5’ scour hole approx. 15’ from deck edge, with approx. 3.5’ of undermining under concrete lining.

5 2. Embankment Erosion Both embankments downstream have undercutting

6 3. Waterway Obstructions Downstream has 3 downed trees restricting flow.

7 4. Vegetation A tree is growing on embankment 1 and 2 on the downstream side

N 5. Channel Protection None

6 General Condition Rating (NBI ITEM #61)

INSTALLATION STATUS REPORT (ISR)

Recommended component values for ISR

Table 3: ISR Mission Functional

Green Amber Red N/A

CAPABILITY

- Bridge capacity is sufficient for current mobilization requirements based on a valid load rating or engineering judgement document.

- Bridge can be strengthened to meet current mobilization requirements with minimal rehabilitation.

- Bridge capacity is insufficient or unable to be rehabilitated to meet current requirements.

BRIDGE RESTRICTIONS

- Bridge has sufficient width, horizontal and vertical clearance for current mobilization requirements.

☒ - N/A [No Amber Condition]

- Bridge width or clearances are insufficient or unable to be rehabilitated to meet current requirements.

BRIDGE SAFETY FEATURES

- All features of Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA) NBI Item #36 rated 1 or N (Bridge rail, transitions, approach guardrails, and end treatments)

- Any feature of FHWA Item

#36 rated 0 but there is a valid project shown during the inspection that addresses deficiencies and is being scheduled.

- Any feature of FHWA Item #36 rated 0, with no upgrade actions planned.

INSPECTION FREQUENCY

- Inspections are conducted within the required frequency (routine: 24-months, maintenance: 12-months).

- Routine bridge inspection over 24-month-old or maintenance inspections are over 12 months old.

- No routine or special inspections have been conducted. ☐ ☐

MILITARY LOAD CLASSIFICATION (MLC)

- Complete MLC signs posted on both ends of the bridge if required. ☐

- Incomplete MLC signs or missing at one end, if required.

☐ - MLC is not posted, if required. ☐ ☒

BRIDGE RECORDS

- Complete bridge records are maintained. Items required are:

*Inventory/Routine/Special/Fracture

Critical/Underwater Inspections.

*Drawings. *Load Ratings.

*Scour Evaluations.

*Plan of Actions (for scour, critical findings, repairs, etc.)

*Maintenance & Repair Records

(DD1354, DA4283, DD1391)

*Opening/Closures of structures.

*Accidents & ADT data.

*ISR data. *LHCs reviews.

- Partial records maintained. ☒ - No records are available. ☐ ☐

BRIDGE MARKINGS

- Bridge and underpass are marked for weight limit, overhead clearances, speed, traffic markers, and width restrictions if needed.

- Bridge is marked for civilian weight limit, overhead clearance, speed, traffic markers, and width restrictions.

- Underpass is not marked.

☐ - No bridge or underpass markings. ☐ ☒

LHC’S REVIEWS

Green Amber Red N/A

- LHC’s engineer has conducted an on-site review of bridge inspections within the last 3 years.

- LHC’s engineer has conducted an on-site inspection within the last 5 years.

- LHC’s engineer has not inspected bridges on-site in over 5 years. ☐ ☒

PEDESTRIANS

- Bridge has a separated pedestrian walkway where required

- Roadway is used by pedestrians; walkway could be built to accommodate pedestrians

- Roadway is used by pedestrians;

walkway cannot be built to accommodate pedestrians

Table 4: ISR Quality

Green Amber Red N/A

VEHICLE BRIDGE DECK

- Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA) NBI

Item # 58 condition rating is good or better at 7, 8, 9, for this element.

- FHWA Item # 58 is in fair condition with an inspection rating of 5, or 6.

-If BRIDGE CONDITION is RED but there is a project shown during the inspection that addresses the deficiencies with funding being requested, then rate the element Amber.

- FHWA Item # 58 is in poor condition with an inspection rating of 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4.

VEHICLE BRIDGE SUPERSTRUCTURE

- Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA) NBI

Item #59 condition rating is good or better at 7, 8, 9, for this element.

- FHWA Item # 59 condition rating of fair with an inspection rating of 5, or 6.

-If BRIDGE CONDITION is RED but there is a project shown during the inspection that addresses the deficiencies with funding being requested, then rate the element Amber.

- FHWA Item # 59 condition rating of poor with an inspection rating of 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4.

VEHICLE BRIDGE SUBSTRUCUTRE - ABUTMENTS

- Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA) NBI

Item #59 condition rating is good or better at 7, 8, 9, for this element.

- FHWA Item # 59 condition rating of fair with an inspection rating of 5, or 6.

-If BRIDGE CONDITION is RED but there is a project shown during the inspection that addresses the deficiencies with funding being requested, then rate the element Amber.

- FHWA Item # 59 condition rating of poor with an inspection rating of 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4.

VEHICLE BRIDGE SUBSTRUCUTRE – PIER CAPS

- Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA) NBI

Item #59 condition rating is good or better at 7, 8, 9, for this element.

- FHWA Item # 59 condition rating of fair with an inspection rating of 5, or 6.

-If BRIDGE CONDITION is RED but there is a project shown during the inspection that addresses the deficiencies with funding being requested, then rate the element Amber.

- FHWA Item # 59 condition rating of poor with an inspection rating of 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4.

VEHICLE BRIDGE SUBSTRUCUTRE – PIER COLUMNS

- Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA) NBI

Item #59 condition rating is good or better at 7, 8, 9, for this element.

- FHWA Item # 59 condition rating of fair with an inspection rating of 5, or 6.

-If BRIDGE CONDITION is RED but there is a project shown during the inspection that addresses the deficiencies with funding being requested, then rate the element Amber.

- FHWA Item # 59 condition rating of poor with an inspection rating of 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4.

VEHICLE BRIDGE SUBSTRUCUTRE – PIER FOOTING

- Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA) NBI

Item #59 condition rating is good or better at 7, 8, 9, for this element.

- FHWA Item # 59 condition rating of fair with an inspection rating of 5, or 6.

-If BRIDGE CONDITION is RED but there is a project shown during the inspection that addresses the deficiencies with funding being requested, then rate the element Amber.

- FHWA Item # 59 condition rating of poor with an inspection rating of 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4.

☐ ☐ DRAFT

Green Amber Red N/A

VEHICLE BRIDGE SUBSTRUCUTRE – BENT CAPS

- Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA) NBI

Item #59 condition rating is good or better at 7, 8, 9, for this element.

- FHWA Item # 59 condition rating of fair with an inspection rating of 5, or 6.

-If BRIDGE CONDITION is RED but there is a project shown during the inspection that addresses the deficiencies with funding being requested, then rate the element Amber.

- FHWA Item # 59 condition rating of poor with an inspection rating of 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4.

VEHICLE BRIDGE SUBSTRUCUTRE – BENTS

- Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA) NBI

Item #60 condition rating is good or better at 7, 8, 9, for this element.

- FHWA NBI Item #60 condition rating of fair with an inspection rating of 5, or 6.

-If BRIDGE CONDITION is RED but there is a project shown during the inspection that addresses the deficiencies with funding being requested, then rate the element Amber.

- FHWA NBI Item #60 condition rating of poor with an inspection rating of 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4.

VEHICLE BRIDGE - CULVERTS

- Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA) NBI

Item #62 condition rating is good or better at 7, 8, 9, for this element.

- FHWA NBI Item #62 condition rating of fair with an inspection rating of 5, or 6.

-If BRIDGE CONDITION is RED but there is a project shown during the inspection that addresses the deficiencies with funding being requested, then rate the element Amber.

- FHWA NBI Item #62 condition rating of poor with an inspection rating of 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4.

STRUCTURE INVENTORY AND APPRAISAL FORM