In 2024, there were nearly 25,900 road bridges in California, while Texas was the state with the highest number of road bridges, with over 56,700 road bridges.

In 2024, the U.S. state home to the most structurally deficient road bridges was Iowa, at 4,544 structurally deficient bridges in total. Pennsylvania was next, with 2,932 such bridges.

In 2024, 36 percent of all bridges in the United States were in need of replacement or rehabilitation. The number of U.S. bridges in need of repair or maintenance work has been slowly decreasing in the past years. Iowa was one of the states with most structurally deficient road bridges in the U.S.

Bridges are inspected every two years at minimum; bridges in poor condition are inspected more frequently. These inspections rate the conditions of various bridge elements. The inspection records are stored in a bridge management system. The Federal Highway Administration annually collects data on bridges more than 20 feet long from each state’s department of transportation, including the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation and New Jersey Department of Transportation, and stores it in their National Bridge Inventory.

This analysis considers a bridge's deck, super, and substructure ratings, or the culvert rating for a culvert. A score between 0 and 9 is given for each component. Bridges with scores between 7 to 9 for all three components are rated "good," those with any component scores of 4 or lower are rated "poor." A bridge that doesn't fall into a good or poor rating is considered “fair”.

Most bridges are on state roads and are maintained by the state’s department of transportation. Some bridges are on local roads and are maintained by local governments. The "Other" category covers bridges maintained by turnpike and toll authorities.

The bridge inventory data was obtained from Caltrans Structure Maintenance and Investigations (SM&I) Database as of 05/08/2020. SM&I performs bridge inspections in accordance with federal regulations on over 13,201 State Highway bridges and approximately 13,332 bridges owned by local government agencies. Caltrans bridge inspectors are responsible for maintaining the safety and integrity of over 26000 bridges owned by the State of California and California's local government agencies. For more information, please see Caltrans Division of Maintenance, Structure Maintenance & Investigation (SM&I) website at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/structur/strmaint/

The National Bridge Inventory (NBI) is a collection of information describing more than 600,000 bridges located on public roads, including Interstate Highways, U.S. highways, State and County roads, as well as publicly-accessible bridges on Federal lands. It presents a State by State summary analysis of the number, location, and general condition of highway bridges within each State.

This file contains location and identification information for bridges in Oregon. This includes bridges owned by the state, cities, counties, and other owners such as railroad bridges that cross state highways. It does not include bridges that are owned by Federal agencies. A bridge is a structure including supports erected over a depression or an obstruction, such as water, highway, or railway, and having a track or passageway for carrying traffic or other moving loads and having an opening measured along the center of the roadway of more than 20 feet.

Bridges-Rail in the United States According to The National Bridge Inspection Standards published in the Code of Federal Regulations (23 CFR 650.3), a bridge is: A structure including supports erected over a depression or an obstruction, such as water, highway, or railway, and having a track or passageway for carrying traffic or other moving loads. Each bridge was captured as a point which was placed in the center of the "main span" (highest and longest span). For bridges that cross navigable waterways, this was typically the part of the bridge over the navigation channel. If no "main span" was discernable using the imagery sources available, or if multiple non contiguous main spans were discernable, the point was placed in the center of the overall structure. Bridges that are sourced from the National Bridge Inventory (NBI) that cross state boundaries are an exception. Bridges that cross state boundaries are represented in the NBI by two records. The points for the two records have been located so as to be within the state indicated by the NBI's [STATE_CODE] attribute. In some cases, following these rules did not place the point at the location at which the bridge crosses what the user may judge as the most important feature intersected. For example, a given bridge may be many miles long, crossing nothing more than low lying ground for most of its length but crossing a major interstate at its far end. Due to the fact that bridges are often high narrow structures crossing depressions that may or may not be too narrow to be represented in the DEM used to orthorectify a given source of imagery, alignment with ortho imagery is highly variable. In particular, apparent bridge location in ortho imagery is highly dependent on collection angle. During verification, TechniGraphics used imagery from the following sources: NGA HSIP 133 City, State or Local; NAIP; DOQQ imagery. In cases where "bridge sway" or "tall structure lean" was evident, TGS attempted to compensate for these factors when capturing the bridge location. For instances in which the bridge was not visible in imagery, it was captured using topographic maps at the intersection of the water and rail line. TGS processed 784 entities previously with the HSIP Bridges-Roads (STRAHNET Option - HSIP 133 Cities and Gulf Coast). These entities were added into this dataset after processing. No entities were included in this dataset for American Samoa, Guam, Hawaii, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, or the Virgin Islands because there are no main line railways in these areas. At the request of NGA, text fields in this dataset have been set to all upper case to facilitate consistent database engine search results. At the request of NGA, leading and trailing spaces were trimmed from all text fields. At the request of NGA, all diacritics (e.g., the German umlaut or the Spanish tilde) have been replaced with their closest equivalent English character to facilitate use with database systems that may not support diacritics. The currentness of this dataset is given by the publication date which is 09/02/2009. A more precise measure of currentness cannot be provided since this is dependent on the NBI and the source of imagery used during processing.

The BSST was created for the Washington State Transportation RRAP which analyzed state highway and roads and their impacts from a Cascadia 9.0M earthquake. The RRAP report is available here: https://mil.wa.gov/asset/5d8ba2a03a1b7. The state bridge results in GIS format are available here: https://www.wsdot.wa.gov/mapsdata/geodatacatalog/default.htm . Technical and user manuals for the BSST tool are available here: https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1581518-washington-state-highway-bridge-seismic-screening-tool-bsst-technical-report In addition to the state bridges that were analyzed above, local bridges were obtained from WSDOT and analyzed in the BSST which is the data that is presented here. The data was provided from WSDOT to CISA Region 10. Much of the data for local (city/county) bridges were taken from the national bridge inventory and additional data that WSDOT had available. The local data used in the BSST is not complete and should be updated at the local level by bridge engineers and GIS specialist and analyzed in the BSST to ensure the latest bridge information is included in the tool. The data provided here is an initial analysis using data from WSDOT but it is recommend that local jurisdictions update their information and re-run the tool to ensure the most accurate data is used. The data provided here only includes bridges in western/central WA and only for a Cascadia 9.0M event. The 4,306 local highway bridges incorporated into this study from the WSDOT bridge inventory database were assessed using the BSST analysis methodology detailed previously in this report. Results consist of three types of outcomes: Bridge Damage Levels and Types, Bridge Repair Types, and Bridge Reopening Times. All output is a part of this feature class. Bridge damage types are projected on the basis of both damage level (None, Moderate, Significant), whether a bridge is a special bridge type, and also the types of damage that the bridge will experience (including both direct seismic and secondary earthquake-induced impacts); The projected repair types and reopening times necessary to bring bridges back to a minimum level of functionality that enables their use for emergency response were computed using the methodology specified in the Bridge Reopening Times section. Refer to the BSST Technical Report. The BSST was developed to assess the potential impacts of a CSZ earthquake to highway bridges in Washington State at a system-level as part of the Washington State Transportation Systems RRAP project. The results provided identify the Damage Levels, Damage Types, Repair Types and Reopening Times associated with 4,306 bridges located in Western and Central Washington that were evaluated for this RRAP project. Understanding that this analysis likely constitutes a “worst-case scenario” with respect to bridge damage, the results nonetheless project that the majority of bridges in Washington State will experience moderate to significant damage resulting from a CSZ earthquake. While the majority of bridges that experience damage could be reopened within one year of the earthquake, a substantial number of those bridges are projected to take more than a year to reopen—in many cases 2 or more years. The results also project that while many bridges may be reopened after either minor repairs/inspections or the construction of a temporary bypass road, a substantial number of more significantly damaged bridges span bodies of water and will require complete replacement prior to reopening. This suggests that significant gains in roadway corridor reopening times could be gained by focusing on retrofits or upgrades to these more vulnerable bridges that span rivers and other bodies of water. This tool is primarily intended to inform regional highway prioritization for emergency response activities; however, the BSST provides a useful evaluation methodology that could be applied to other regional emergency preparedness and infrastructure assessment studies. This could include studies of bridge infrastructure to other potential seismic events within the region, or at varying jurisdictional levels (i.e., county, local). The BSST also uses currently available seismic, seismically-induced secondary hazard and infrastructure information. As new seismic information becomes available, or as secondary-hazards (e.g., landslides, avalanches) become characterized more comprehensively, such information could be integrated into the current BSST methodology. Similarly, as seismic retrofit activities or other infrastructure improvement projects continue throughout Washington State, or as new infrastructure are built, it will be important that the infrastructure data integrated in the BSST also be updated periodically. Doing so will ensure that planners and infrastructure managers maintain the most current and complete understanding of the network-level seismic risks of a CSZ event to bridges in Washington. Please note that all results from the BSST are based on a model and information received from WSDOT. Damages from an earthquake may be different than what is provided here. Liquefaction data was used within the BSST tool. WADNR is the source for liquefaction data and is available here: https://www.dnr.wa.gov/programs-and-services/geology/geologic-hazards/geologic-hazard-maps#nehrp-site-class-and-liquefaction-susceptibilityUSGS ShakeMap was also used in the BSST tool for a M9.0 Cascadia earthquake and is available here: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/scenarios/eventpage/gllegacycasc9p0expanded_se/shakemap/pga. Data Assumptions/MethodologyData was provided by WSDOT for all local bridges. Data was transferred into BSST format. Bridges that were not included in the Cascadia 9.0M ShakeMap were removed from the tool. This mainly encompasses bridges in the far eastern side of the state. Removed all bridges that were designated as a pedestrian, trail or dam. Removed all bridges that had null or 0 structure length. Those bridges that had no main span quantity, all were changed to 1, meaning a single span bridge. For the bridges missing the federal functional class a value of 9 was assigned. For the bridges with a null in waterway adequacy these values were changed to N. For those bridges that had a null value for scour code these were change to N. Some points had low accuracy coordinates (lat/longs), so these locations were removed from the database since they could not be found. For those bridges that had a BMS elements ID related to a Pier Wall a W code was added to the Pier Type in the road bridges spreadsheet of the BSST tool. This would ensure these bridges were counted as having a pier wall. This information should be updated and verified by local jurisdictions. Snohomish County used the tool for their local bridges. A few of the bridges output in this tool was updated to reflect their results since better data was provided by the county. The tool uses AASHTO curves from various years. These curves were digitized in GIS from a pdf map. The accuracy of these maps could be up to +/- 10 miles due to digitizing the data at the state level. Most of the offset occurred in eastern WA, so impacts should be minimal.

Pennsylvania State Bridge Points comes from PennDOT's Bridge Management System 2 (BMS 2). The data provides information pertaining to the current condition of Pennsylvania’s bridges such as location, features carried/crossed, owner, maintenance responsibility, posting status, structural capacity, load rating, inspection condition information, underwater inspection information and proposed/completed maintenance items. Bridge data is updated daily. For additional data, you can Join the STRUCT_NUM with publicly available data (Excel) found here: State Bridges / Local Bridges. For more information on this layer, you can use the Data Dictionary available in both web and spreadsheet format.This feature layer only contains state owned bridges. If you would like to see all bridges (both state and locally owned) in Pennsylvania, please see the Pennsylvania Bridges feature layer. If you would like to see only locally-owned bridges, please see the Pennsylvania Local Bridges feature layer.

The National Bridge Inventory dataset is as of June 27, 2024 from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and is part of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT)/Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) National Transportation Atlas Database (NTAD). The data describes more than 615,000 of the Nation's bridges located on public roads, including Interstate Highways, U.S. highways, State and county roads, as well as publicly-accessible bridges on Federal and Tribal lands. The inventory data present a complete picture of the _location, description, classification, and general condition data for each bridge. The element data present a breakdown of the condition of each structural and bridge management element for each bridge on the National Highway System (NHS). The Recording and Coding Guide for the Structure Inventory and Appraisal of the Nation's Bridges contains a detailed description of each data element including coding instructions and attribute definitions. The Coding Guide is available at: https://doi.org/10.21949/1519105.

The NBI is a collection of information (database) describing the more than 600,000 of the Nation's bridges located on public roads, including Interstate Highways, U.S. highways, State and county roads, as well as publicly-accessible bridges on Federal lands. It presents a State by State summary analysis of the number, location, and general condition of highway bridges within each State.

The 2,717 state highway bridges incorporated into this study from the WSDOT bridge inventory database were assessed using the BSST analysis methodology detailed previously in this report. Results consist of three types of outcomes: Bridge Damage Levels and Types, Bridge Repair Types, and Bridge Reopening Times. All output is a part of this feature class. Bridge damage types are projected on the basis of both damage level (None, Moderate, Significant), whether a bridge is a special bridge type, and also the types of damage that the bridge will experience (including both direct seismic and secondary earthquake-induced impacts); The projected repair types and reopening times necessary to bring bridges back to a minimum level of functionality that enables their use for emergency response were computed using the methodology specified in the Bridge Reopening Times section. Refer to the BSST Technical Report. The BSST was developed to assess the potential impacts of a CSZ earthquake to highway bridges in Washington State at a system-level as part of the Washington State Transportation Systems RRAP project. The results provided identify the Damage Levels, Damage Types, Repair Types and Reopening Times associated with 2,717 bridges located in Western and Central Washington that were evaluated for this RRAP project. Understanding that this analysis likely constitutes a “worst-case scenario” with respect to bridge damage, the results nonetheless project that the majority of bridges in Washington State will experience moderate to significant damage resulting from a CSZ earthquake. While the majority of bridges that experience damage could be reopened within one year of the earthquake, a substantial number of those bridges (28.7 percent) are projected to take more than a year to reopen—in many cases 2 or more years. The results also project that while many bridges may be reopened after either minor repairs/inspections or the construction of a temporary bypass road, a substantial number of more significantly damaged bridges (797 structures) span bodies of water and will require complete replacement prior to reopening. This suggests that significant gains in roadway corridor reopening times could be gained by focusing on retrofits or upgrades to these more vulnerable bridges that span rivers and other bodies of water. This tool is primarily intended to inform regional highway prioritization for emergency response activities; however, the BSST provides a useful evaluation methodology that could be applied to other regional emergency preparedness and infrastructure assessment studies. This could include studies of bridge infrastructure to other potential seismic events within the region, or at varying jurisdictional levels (i.e., county, local). The BSST also uses currently available seismic, seismically-induced secondary hazard and infrastructure information. As new seismic information becomes available, or as secondary-hazards (e.g., landslides, avalanches) become characterized more comprehensively, such information could be integrated into the current BSST methodology. Similarly, as seismic retrofit activities or other infrastructure improvement projects continue throughout Washington State, or as new infrastructure are built, it will be important that the infrastructure data integrated in the BSST also be updated periodically. Doing so will ensure that planners and infrastructure managers maintain the most current and complete understanding of the network-level seismic risks of a CSZ event to Washington State highways.Please note that all results from the BSST are based on a model and information received from WSDOT. Damages from an earthquake may be different that what is provided here. Liquefaction data was used within the BSST tool. WADNR is the source for liquefaction data and is available here: https://www.dnr.wa.gov/programs-and-services/geology/geologic-hazards/geologic-hazard-maps#nehrp-site-class-and-liquefaction-susceptibilityUSGS ShakeMap was also used in the BSST tool for a M9.0 Cascadia earthquake and is available here: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/scenarios/eventpage/gllegacycasc9p0expanded_se/shakemap/pga. DHS distributed this data to WSDOT on August 22, 2019.

The bridge inventory data was obtained from Caltrans Structure Maintenance and Investigations (SM&I) Database as of 05/08/2020. SM&I performs bridge inspections in accordance with federal regulations on over 13,201 State Highway bridges and approximately 13,332 bridges owned by local government agencies. Caltrans bridge inspectors are responsible for maintaining the safety and integrity of over 26000 bridges owned by the State of California and California's local government agencies. For more information, please see Caltrans Division of Maintenance, Structure Maintenance & Investigation (SM&I) website at https://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/structur/strmaint/CalTrans GIS Data

The Bureau of Local Projects (BLP) administers bridge length structures (greater than 20 foot in length) that are owned and maintained by a Local Public Authority (LPA). The NBI bridge inspection data is required by the FHWA to be submitted annually by KDOT for all LPA owned bridge length structures.More information about the Kansas Department of Transportation (KDOT) can be found at the following URL: ksdot.org.

bridges road Texas State Highway Loop 20. name, type, use, Clearance below, date completed, date Opened, Height, city, administrative división, continent, Country, road, waterbody, latitude, Length, longitude, Number of spans, Width

bridges road Florida State Road 31. name, type, use, Clearance below, date completed, date Opened, Height, city, administrative división, continent, Country, road, waterbody, latitude, Length, longitude, Number of spans, Width

bridges road Texas State Highway 146. name, type, use, Clearance below, date completed, date Opened, Height, city, administrative división, continent, Country, road, waterbody, latitude, Length, longitude, Number of spans, Width

The NBI (NTAD) is a collection of information (database) describing the more than 610,000 of the Nation's bridges located on public roads, including Interstate Highways, U.S. highways, State and county roads, as well as publicly-accessible bridges on Federal lands. It presents a State by State summary analysis of the number, location, and general condition of highway bridges within each State. Please note: 11,168 records in this database were geocoded to latitude and logtitude of 0,0 due to lack of location information or errors in the reported locations.

bridges road Florida State Road 865. name, type, use, Clearance below, date completed, date Opened, Height, city, administrative división, continent, Country, road, waterbody, latitude, Length, longitude, Number of spans, Width