Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout031714_ca12Department of Public Works O Consent Agenda Page 1 of 1 Jefferson County Board of Commissioners Consent Agenda Request To: Board of Commissioners Philip Morley, County Administrator From: Monte Reinders, Public Works Director/ County Engineer/ Agenda Date: March 17, 2014 Subject: Digital Submittal Certification - County Road Administration Board - Reports for 2013 Statement of Issue: The County Road Administration Board (CRAB) requires the periodic submittal of forms and documents related to Jefferson County's management of its road system and road fund. By April 1, 2014, the County must submit the following in digital format: (1) Traffic Law Enforcement Expenditure Certification, (2) Fish Passage Barrier Removal Certification, (3) Annual Certification (with attachments), (4) Annual Construction Report, (5) County Arterial Preservation Report, and (6) Maintenance Management Certification. The first three of these items requires the certification of the Chair of the Board of Commissioners via signatures on a "Digital Submittal Certification" form for mailing to CRAB. Analysis / Strategic Goals / Pros £t Cons: CRAB establishes Standards of Good Practice for the administration of the County roads program and road fund. CRAB monitors compliance with these standards via the County's regular submittal of data and certifications. The County Engineer and Board of Commissioners must certify that required standards are being met. Annual issuance of a "Certificate of Good Practice" from CRAB is required in order for the County to receive its annual Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax allocation. Fiscal Impact /Cost Benefit Analysis: Public Works has prepared the required documents with assistance from the Auditor's office and the Sheriff's office. The Certificate of Good Practice is required to receive Jefferson County's annual allocation of approximately $1.3 million in Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax. Recommendation: Authorize the Chair to sign and date the "Digital Submittal Certification" form in the two 1p aces for the signature of "Chair / Executive." Return to Public Works for processing. Department Contact: Monte Reinders P.E., Public Works Director /County Engineer 385 -9242 RO"vt �jr: C ? 4? xy Pfiilip Morley] Co ty WEIMMistratior Date DIGITAL SUBMITTAL CERTIFICATION- COUNTY ROAD ADMINISTRATION BOARD REPORTS FOR 2013 County # 16 Required Submittal Date: County Name April 1, 2014 JEFFERSON The County Engineer checks each box, confirming the forms have been certified by the listed signatures and submitted to and accepted by the County Road Administration Board, then sends this completed form to CRAB via regular mail. ************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** ❑X Traffic Law Enforcement Certif ication 2013 (Engineer Check) I hereby certify that the above report is true and accurate p6fFaNave reviewed and approved the report for submission to the County Road Admini5tra n Board in accordance th WAC 1 o nt Sheriff ate County Auditor Date Chair / Executive Date ************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** F-X I Fish Passaqe Barrier Removal Certification 2013 (Engineer Check) FXI Annual Certification 2013 (Engineer Check) I hereby certify that the Fish Passage Barrier Removal and Annual Certifications are true and accurate and that I have reviewed and approved the report for submission to the County Road Administration Board in accordance with WAC 136. Cha' cutive: Date County Engineer: Date ************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** 5-1 Annual Construction Report for 2013 (Engineer Check) F-X I County Arterial Preservation Report for 2013 (Engineer Check) F-X I Maintenance Manaqement Cert. for 2013 (Engineer Check) I hereby certify that the Annual Construction Report, CAPP Report, and Maintenance Management Certification are true and accurate and that I have reviewed and approved the report for submission to the County Road Administration Board in accordance with WAC 136. 3•?•// County Engineer: Date 101116EngrCertforApr.As STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY ROAD ADMINISTRATION BOARD RURAL ARTERIAL PROGRAM CERTIFICATION OF ROAD FUND EXPENDITURES FOR TRAFFIC LAW ENFORCEMENT WAC 136 - 150 -022 Submitting County: Jefferson Total Road Levy: Valuation: Levy Rate ($/Thousand): Revenue Produced (Computed): Actual Revenue Produced: Traffic Law Enforcement Paid by Road Levy Diversion: Diverted Levy Rate ($ /Thousand): Revenue Produced (Computed): Actual Revenue Produced: AND /OR Traffic Law Enforcement Paid by Road Fund Expenditures: Budgeted Operating Transfer Amount: Actual Amount Transferred From Road Fund: AND /OR Budgeted Cost Reimbursement Amount Actual Reimb Amt Paid From Road Fund for Services Total Road Portion Traffic Law Enforcement Expenditures: Budget Year: 2013 $ 3,179,598,235.00 ---------------------------------------- 1.2799900000 $ 4,069,853.94 .--------------------------------------- $ 4,053,703.21 ---------------------------------- - - - - -- _0.2264400000 $ 719, 988.22 ---------------------------------------- $ 717,847.65 •--------------------------------- - - - - -- $ - $ - $ - •--------------------------------- - - - - -- $ 717,847.65 Total Traffic Law Enforcement Expense (ALL COUNTY FUNDS): $ 780,390.68 RCW 36.79.140 provides that only those counties that during the preceding twelve months have spent all revenues collected for road purposes only for such purposes, including traffic law enforcement, as are allowed by Article II, Section 40 of the Washington State Constitution, are eligible to receive funds from the Rural Arterial Trust Account. This form must be reviewed and certified (on the "Engineer's Certification Form ") by: County Sheriff County Auditor Countv Executive Due Date: April 1, 2014 WASHINGTON STATE COUNTY ROAD ADMINISTRATION BOARD Certification of Road Fund Expenditures for Fish Passage Barrier Removal Submitting County: Jefferson Budget Year: WAC 136- 150 -023 Due Date: April 1, 201A Fish Passage Barrier Removal Projects: Cost for Work Outside of County Project Name: Total Cost: Right -of -Way: 1 Alder Creek Tributary Culvert $ 601,253.37 $ - 2 Snow Creek Culvert MP3.8 $ 72,593.31 $ - 3 Donkey Creek Culvert $ 2,206.92 $ - 4 West Uncas Rd Culvert MP0.80 $ 1,880.85 $ - 5 6 7 8 Attach additional sheets if more space is needed. Total Expenditures for Fish Passage Barrier Removal Outside County Riqhts -of -Way Total Annual Road Construction Budget 2013 % Of Total Cost: 0% 0% 0% $ 5,725,824.00 X 0.005 1/2 % of Total Annual Road (Limit of "Outside of Right of Way" expense.) _ $ 28,629.12 Total Expenditure for Fish Passage Barrier Removal Outside County Right -of -Way $0.00 RCW 36.79.140 provides that only those counties that during the preceding twelve months have spent all revenues collected for road purposes only for such purposes, including removal of barriers to fish passage and accompanying streambed and stream bank repair as specified and limited by RCW 36.82.070, as are allowed by Article Il, Section 40 of the Washington State Constitution, are eligible to receive funds from the Rural Arterial Trust Account. 1 130829FishPassageCert.x1s JEFFERSON COUNTY ANNUAL CERTIFICATION FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2013 (WAC 136 -04) MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION (If the answer to any question except "8" is No, please attach an explanation.) A. During 2013 the County Engineer performed the duties and had the responsibilities specified X Yes No in RCW 36.80.030. B. At any time during 2013 was there a vacancy in the position of county Engineer? Yes X No If so, were the procedures in WAC 136 -12 followed? Yes No C. The processing of County Road Accident Reports during 2013 complied with WAC 136 -28. X Yes No D. Priority Programming techniques were applied to the ranking of all potential projects on the C Yes ❑ No arterial road system in 2013 per WAC 136 -14 -020. E. As of December 31, 2013 the management of the county road department was in accordance with policies set by the county legislative authority including, but not limited to, the following specific policies required by WAC 136 -50 -050: POLICY WAC DATE OF CURRENT VERSION Re: Organization 136 -50 -051 11- Oct -04 Re: Personnel Practices 136 -50 -052 15- Dec -03 Re: Complaint Handling 136 -50 -053 28- Dec -01 Re: Work for Others 136 -50 -054 8- Jan -01 Re: Utility Accommodation 136 -50 -055 3- Jan -00 Re: Priority Programming 136 -14 -030 23- Apr -03 F. The following were submitted to CRAB in a timely manner: DOCUMENT '13 Six -Year Program '13 Annual Construction Program '13 CAPP Program '13 Road Fund Budget '13 Maint Mgmt Wrk Pln & Budget '13 Road Levy Certification '12 Certification of Road Fund Exp For Traffic Law Enforcement '12 Engineer's Certification of Fish Barrier Removal Costs '12 Annual Construction Report '12 CAPP Report '12 Maint Mgmt Certification '12 Annual Certification '12 Road Log Update '13 PMS Certification for CAPA Eligibility. WAC 136 -15 -050 136 -16 -040 136- 300 -060 136 -11 -040 136- 150 -021 136- 150 -022 136- 150 -023 136 -16 -050 136- 300 -090 136 -11 -050 136 -04 -030 136 -60 -030 136 -70 -070 DUE DATE -12 31 -Dec -12 31 -Dec -12 31 -Dec -12 31 -Dec -12 01 -Feb -13 01 -Apr -13 01 -Apr -13 01 -Apr -13 01 -Apr -13 01 -Apr -13 01 -Apr -13 01 -May -13 31 -Dec -13 DATE OF ADOPTION/ PREPARATION 23- Jul -12 12- Dec -12 12- Dec -12 12- Dec -12 12- Dec -12 4- Feb -13 25- Mar -13 25- Mar -13 25- Mar -13 25- Mar -13 25- Mar -13 22- Mar -13 12- Dec -13 G. Projects to which construction expenditures were charged were all on the 2013 Annual Program. (If answer is No, please attach a brief explanation.) H. The County's construction by county forces limit for 2013 computed in accordance with RCW 36.77.065: I. The actual expenditure for construction by county forces as reported in the 2013 Annual Const. Report: J. A written report of bridge inspection findings was furnished to the legislative authority on as required by WAC 136 -20 -060. (Please attach a copy) # of Bridges: EMAIL WITH ATTACHMENTS TO THE COUNTY ROAD ADMINISTRATION BOARD NO LATER THAN APRIL 1, 2014 Must be followed by signed "County Certification" form via regular mail 11/02/12 DATE SENT TO CRAB 20- Dec -12 20- Dec -12 20- Dec -12 20- Dec -12 20- Dec -12 25- Jan -13 27- Mar -13 27- Mar -13 27- Mar -13 27- Mar -13 27- Mar -13 27- Mar -13 22- Mar -13 12- Dec -13 Yes X No $1,262,176 $124,287 July 8, 2013 124 Jefferson County Department of Public Works 623 Sheridan St. Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 385 -9160 Monte Reinders, P. E. Public Works Director /County Engineer Memorandum To: County Road Administration Board From: Monte Reinders, P.E., County Engineer /Public Works Director Date: March 7, 2014 Re: Explanation for Item G on the Annual Certification for Calendar Year 2013 In response to item "G" under the Operations category on the Annual Certification for Calendar Year 2013, all projects added to the Annual Construction Program during the year by Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners, are as follows: • CR 1927 Center Road Asphalt Overlay PH.S —This project was added to the 2013 ACP through Resolution 18 -13. It is on our 2013 -2018 -6 year TIP as #17. • CR 1928 Center Road Asphalt Overlay PH.6 — This project was added to the 2013 ACP through Resolution 19 -13. It is on our 2013 -2018 -6 year TIP as #18. • CR 1933 Quilcene Complete Streets — This project was added to the 2013 ACP through Resolution 37 -13. It is on our 2013 -2018 — 6 Year TIP as #22. • CR 1934 W. Uncas Rd Culvert Replacement — This project was added to the 2013 ACP through Resolution 43 -13. One projected listed was not on the ACP for 2013 and was not added by resolution because it was carried over from 2012's ACP. • CR 1821 Spruce Creek Replacement MP 9.71— This project had some roll over costs from the previous year and was included on the 2012 ACP. [End] MEMORANDUM Jefferson County Department of Public Works TO: Board of County Commissioners 623 Sheridan St. Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 385 -9160 Frank Gifford, Public Works Director Monte Reinders, A E., County Engineer FROM: Monte Reinders, P.E., County Engineer DATE: July 8, 2013 SUBJECT: Bridge Condition Report 2013 In accordance with WAC 136 -20 -030, and the National Bridge Inspection Standards, Jefferson County has completed the biennial inspections for all bridges on the county road system and has submitted the inspection reports to the Washington State Department of Transportation. The findings of the bridge inspection effort are hereby furnished to the county legislative authority per WAC 136 -20 -060. Structurally, all of the county's bridges are in good condition with no major deficiencies and require only routine maintenance. Tower Creek Bridge is being monitored for potential scour problems associated with down - cutting of the streambed. The Tower Creek streambed is becoming progressively deeper and wider in the vicinity of the bridge as a result of migration of the Hoh River, and repetitive high - flow events. In 2009, Public Works applied for, and was denied, Federal Highway Administration Emergency Relief funds to stabilize the Hoh River stream bank as an attempt to protect the Tower Creek Bridge and Upper Hoh Road. Due to lack of funding, there are no plans for preventative measures at this time. In 2010, Public Works applied for and received $2.97 million in federal funding to repaint the Queets Bridge, which spans the Queets River on Clearwater Road. The painting project is currently underway and scheduled to be completed in September, 2013. This project is 100% funded by the Federal Highway Administration. A new bridge was added to the system in 2012. At Spruce Creek, Upper Hoh Road milepost 9.70, a 22 ft. span, pre -cast, reinforced 3 -sided concrete structure was constructed. This project Bridge Condition Report 2013 Page 1 of 2 MEMORANDUM Jefferson County Department of Public Works TO: Board of County Commissioners 623 Sheridan St. Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 385 -9160 Frank Gifford, Public Works Director Monte Reinders, A E., County Engineer FROM: Monte Reinders, P.E., County Engineer DATE: July 8, 2013 SUBJECT: Bridge Condition Report 2013 In accordance with WAC 136 -20 -030, and the National Bridge Inspection Standards, Jefferson County has completed the biennial inspections for all bridges on the county road system and has submitted the inspection reports to the Washington State Department of Transportation. The findings of the bridge inspection effort are hereby furnished to the county legislative authority per WAC 136 -20 -060. Structurally, all of the county's bridges are in good condition with no major deficiencies and require only routine maintenance. Tower Creek Bridge is being monitored for potential scour problems associated with down - cutting of the streambed. The Tower Creek streambed is becoming progressively deeper and wider in the vicinity of the bridge as a result of migration of the Hoh River, and repetitive high - flow events. In 2009, Public Works applied for, and was denied, Federal Highway Administration Emergency Relief funds to stabilize the Hoh River stream bank as an attempt to protect the Tower Creek Bridge and Upper Hoh Road. Due to lack of funding, there are no plans for preventative measures at this time. In 2010, Public Works applied for and received $2.97 million in federal funding to repaint the Queets Bridge, which spans the Queets River on Clearwater Road. The painting project is currently underway and scheduled to be completed in September, 2013. This project is 100% funded by the Federal Highway Administration. A new bridge was added to the system in 2012. At Spruce Creek, Upper Hoh Road milepost 9.70, a 22 ft. span, pre -cast, reinforced 3 -sided concrete structure was constructed. This project Bridge Condition Report 2013 Page 1 of 2 corrected a fish- passage barrier, and replaced two failing culverts. The project was funded with 86.5% funding from the Federal Highway Administration. Attachments: Master Bridge List cc: Bridge Master File Bridge Condition Report 2013 Page 2 of 2 Jefferson County Public Works Master Bridge List LAST UPDATED: 7/8/13 Total number of bridges in inventory: Total number of permanently closed bridges: Total number of active bridges: Total number of West Jefferson County bridges: Total number of East Jefferson County Bridges 31 2 29 17 active bridges 1 permanently closed bridge 12 active bridges 1 permanently closed bridge 3 � � v � � a o �U U � � z o z o r•. g Ln N o S)[2IYW3 Q4) z z� z w� °` t7. GO WS).LN3IJ1A3a A'I'IVNn.L3f)H u. ¢ o M N n (O3) 3a,3 ,10sgO ATIVNOILJNfI z o M N O v �o DNI.LVK AJN3IJIAdn oo o t r- 00 00 00 0` NOI.LJ3dSN1 SY O O> O � a N � a � a` N N rn GaufflU3N .LN3wdlno ¢ Q p z v� vFi in vii vii O �n ONi.LYIIONI.LV�I3d z OF z OO z z OO z OO z z z z O a F. FO ¢ N 0O p FO O O O O v z a N M .�.. M a � � � N � :t. ..• ONI.LV'I ANOIN3ANI z OR z z R z OR z O z OF z P z z OF z oo M ¢ °, N '. o oo h --. "N •-- ... �o N O a.. M 'f O 71 Z 00 M O .� r N O _ N %0 v C W) h -- .. t— 00 O .... -- v agisod avoll z z Z z z z z z z z z NOLL33dSNI H3IVA%lf3UNfl O z O z O z Q z O z O z O z O z O z O z O z 7YJI] IZIJ lifloas z z z z z z z z z z z s32mvaA IVIJUS Z Z z z z Z Z z Z Z Z IYJ[112IJ z z z z z z z Z z z z .L7lflg Hv3 rn .n o+ v� a .o o v o�. v a (- a rn (- oo (71 O g �n S u GL cd ° E ° •° C Q' tu •°i wO `ci lad a Z Q n. Q v� ¢ ¢ rn Q c� ¢ a. ¢ o, y°. c°' o���cq �,c'�^ cc°' cc'r-cc°'cc'�c� cc UU U0. UF, 838888 UUU UUw °H �UUUUUwU•a u W c o U o CJ U o, ° ° o 2 u o U o U' '( a o U p :3 a� A Ur V v Ci v, E c� " " �-b v� y g .0 � p oo a E ak c_a E E m 94 OL rn U V U m 0. M E= aG G� cn E- F- a C4 (133d) H10N3 r � N tn v°i oo ry 73 M N o ^ ono M vii N 3WVN avom Uv qu °o�4' mix :a� C c°�t%a3a�t iza o 0 0 0 0 0 00 ON o o (71 00 2l3gwrlN aYo M M M c�v o $ o 3wv N a.�yL aIm 3 u Cy u u 1139wnNAlNno tn �o -0 w M � � 00 w N r4 N Np r4 N M S p S $ M O N 8N C ll3gwllAt 3mfll fllfls IVZI3a3 vii N 70 ON N oo0 M M �+ r- 00 00 00 000 000 000 a1 oo W � N 0000 .1 � ~a �m o U s"vw3 Ws) imial33a vI3van.LansiL 00 (OA) 3L3,1GSvO A'I'IvNollaNa N a; oNI.LVII AJN3[JIAAA °D °O NOU -MASNI Sv v � a3II1nb3I1.LN3wdlna OO ONI.LVN 9ml Lvu3d EO C,4 z o ONLLVx AIIOIN3AN �.. a3.LSOa avol z z NOIJL33JSNI 1f3UVA*Ql3aNlfl Z z 7vJLI.Il[J Nfloas O z Z s3mfllv3A Iviagas O z IVJILMJ 3an.L3VlI OZ Z .Cling av3 S N 3 3 L « d CV F- W U U U Lp V V y an U t.1 7 (133A) H.1.ON3 n .LSOd3�l o 00 0 °o 3wvN Uvoll •� �, a kn o kn Il39WAN avo N M r- M 3WVN c C� U O Il391"N A.LN[lo cWv M M M O o+ O 00 VMCIN "fl].JCIH LS �IVx3a3 en oo oo 3 �U b � o a U i A N u' Q S7iliVW c ° ,�j w w O F cn �I w Cl. (OA) 31310SVO A17VNOLL-3Na o �-, M o0 0 0 0 •o a a� v, (as) INmam3a ATiVZInlaflxx ^ v� v oo vi o0 00 �n M r ONLI.VZI AJN3I�lddfl 000 v° a $ ON oN a a 000 u" Q z a t kn NOIJ- 33asrn $ C Q Q C W) tn C N Q C 00 N a3mab3a I N3zvdlna o o P o o ca A co o ¢ ONI.LVIIONLLVRIA O O O O O O O o 0 oo F Q 000 �O �O pip pip pop (rte] ,z ONLVW AbQLN3A 0 O O O oON O O o0 O �av ON cli ^v �� ^� o00 N .-. .M.. cos -- .� a z GmOd avoll O O c O O O O O ¢ z z z z z z z z z z z z NOUJUSM MMLVAUMM O O O O O O O O O O O Q z z z z z z z z z z z zz 7t+.3Ull1a Ifflois z z z z z oz z z z z z z S3)i[ILV3d IVIJUS z z z z z z z z z z z z 'IVJLLINZ) 3ufLL)VHA z z z z °z z z z z z z z h N N M m 00 r O+ N IMag )IV3 r r 00 r r r 00 r r 00 r L � v "�•' O � � y OJ P. C S O O V V � �_ Ll � E, � � GL O U � V p � � L U o� o w u u U U U U U � U U j U U U U U Q o. [- •a U U U� U O O V u �%' V U F i u Ln Y U F. u U U qU `Q cc '1 LM ) ILLON3 r oro O N �p cc r M o0 0 _ 00 n O vi �D M h N ON xy. z °° 3wvN aVO �C 4p.�1 t.J z fWl1 r O O O O O O O O O O O a3gwnN avO M C4 tn o 00 00 v Q a a ° 8 a u u o a31MaN Al.Nno 3 0 3 3 3 3 0 3 N O O O O O O S 8 S *0 O � 00 ° O a3gwnN 3ar1 LOnaas Ivu3a oho w 00 0 00 ONO Qc 000 M oO oQo n 000 0000 3 y � .n u U O N GJ3 0 -1.o .a i SNxvw (O,) 9L310SOO A'I'IVNOLLJNf1 (QS) ,LN313MG A- 1'IVII UJfIILL p ri 0 ri JNLLVII AJNMJIA3fl O N N NOLUMSNI SVI awfloax .m3Wdina H NI O.LVx ONI.LVx3d OO O H OO O O N O 9NI.LVx AM(kLN3A �� O O F O O v U3.LSOd QVO O O O O O O z z z z z z NOLUMSN1 NUVAIMUM3 O O O O O O z z z z z z 'IVJLLIMJ Naois °z ° z z z z z S3xfLLV32[ TVIJ3d O z 0 z Z z z 'IVJIMJ 3xILLJVx O O W O O O z z >- z z z .L'Hf19 xV 3A a� N O N C) N N cOv Vf G' 7 O u U U a oo vA yo en g u U u lu w Uw Uw as a O O U � U Z. y V vi V '� cn Vl m fi F F CJ JA p � C C fL CA UU UU UU (L333)HLOWi �p Op � N N �O VN1 v�1 M JLSOd3 N ri ,•� 00 0 is 0 3WVN WO U 0 0 0 0 0 0 x3HWfIN GVOS o Nv eq It o+ o, ON a. U 3WV x 3 U VZO UIN A.LNAO 3 3 c 3 N M M M S SM x31awnN 3xruJnlus Ivx3a3 tn NO fn 0 N 0 O 00 000 0 0 ?C O WSDOT - Bridges and Structures - Ratings Adft Washington State V ' Department of Transportation Bridge Ratings The safety of bridge structures in Washington State is ensured through a meticulous inspection system, incorporating state and local agency inspection contributions. The condition of all bridge decks, superstructures and substructures are rated based on these inspections. USDOT's Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requires all state transportation agencies to report state, city, and county Structurally Deficient (SD) and Functionally Obsolete (FO) bridge ratings each year. These ratings are used to help determine federal bridge replacement and rehabilitation funding levels to the states. With the past collapse of the I -35W bridge in Minnesota much of the national discussion has focused on bridges being classified as structurally deficient and functionally obsolete. Unfortunately, these discussions have led to much confusion as to the actual meaning of the terms. Aside from tracking structurally deficient and functionally obsolete, WSDOT's Bridge Program emphasizes the importance of cost effective preservation programs, such as bridge replacement and rehabilitation, seismic retrofit, bridge painting, bridge deck rehabilitation, and bridge foundation scour mitigation. Structurally Deficient Structurally deficient means that a bridge requires repair or replacement of a certain component. This may include cracked or spalled concrete, the bridge deck, the support structure, or The US 101 Simpson Avenue Bridge the entire bridge itself. If the condition is such that it no longer over the Hoquiam River is able to carry its intended traffic loads it may be weight restricted. Being structurally deficient does not imply that the bridge is in danger of collapse or unsafe to the traveling public. Page I of 2 The 38th Street Bridge in Tacoma WSDOT has 135 state owned bridges, including one large span culvert, that are classified as structurally deficient as of Feb 21, 2013. Contract work is in progress or complete on 15 bridges. Functionally Obsolete Functional obsolescence is assessed by comparing the existing configuration of each bridge to current standards and demands. A bridge can be categorized functionally obsolete a number of ways like having substandard lane widths, or narrow shoulders. Another example would be a bridge that doesn't have enough vertical clearance for large trucks to pass under, causing repeat hits and damage to the bridge. Sufficiency Rating The sufficiency rating formula is a method of evaluating a bridge's sufficiency to remain in service, based on a combination of several factors. The result of the formula is a percentage in which 100 percent represents an entirely The State Route 20 Deception Pass Bridge to Whidbey Island http: / /www.wsdot.wa.gov/ Bridge /Reporting/BridgeRatings.htm 7/8/2013 WSDOT - Bridges and Structures - Ratings Page 2 of 2 sufficient bridge and zero percent represents an entirely insufficient or deficient bridge. The sufficiency rating doesn't necessarily indicate a bridge's ability to carry traffic loads. It helps determine which bridges may need repair or replacement, not potential for collapse. Like all other states, Washington annually submits a report to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) containing all of the required information for each of our bridges. FHWA uses this information to determine sufficiency ratings. Many factors are included in the ratings, a few examples include traffic volume, roadway width, structure type, roadway alignment, and the condition of the road deck and structure. A bridge's sufficiency rating affects its eligibility for federal funding for maintenance, rehabilitation, or replacement. For bridges to qualify for federal replacement funds, they must have a rating of 50 or below. To qualify for federal rehabilitation funding, a bridge must have a sufficiency rating of 80 or below. Good, Fair, and Poor Condition Good: A range from no problems to some minor deterioration of structural elements. View from under the SR 20 Deception Fair: All primary structural elements are sound but may have Pass Bridge deficiencies such as minor section loss, deterioration, cracking, spalling, or scour. Poor: Advanced deficiencies such as section loss, deterioration, cracking, spalling, scour, or seriously affected primary structural components. Bridges rated in poor condition may be posted with truck weight restrictions. As of June 2011, 5% of WSDOT bridges are in poor condition. Fracture Critical Fracture critical refers to a bridge component that might cause the entire bridge to collapse if that component failed. Copyright WSDOT © 2013 http: / /www.wsdot.wa.gov /Bridge /Reporting/BridgeRatings.htm 7/8/2013 Bridge Inspection Manual: Load Ratings Page 1 of 1 The Load Rating is a measure of bridge live load capacity and has two commonly used categories: • Inventory Rating, as defined by the current AASHTO Manual for Bridge Evaluation,3 is that load, including loads in multiple lanes that can safely utilize the bridge for an indefinite period of time. • Operating Rating, defined by the same manual, is the maximum permissible live load that can be placed on the bridge. This load rating also includes the same load in multiple lanes. Allowing unlimited usage at the Operating Rating level will reduce the life of the bridge. http: / /onlinemanuals .txdot.gov /txdotmanuals /ins /load_ratings.htm 7/8/2013