A COMPREHENSIVEASSESSMENT
OF AMERICA’SINFRASTRUCTURE

Letter from the President
Founded in 1852, ASCE is the country’s oldest civil engineering organization. It represents more than
150,000 civil engineers in private practice, government, industry, and academia who are dedicatedto advancing the science and profession of civil engineering, and protecting public health, safety,
and welfare. ASCE is comprised of 75 domestic and 17 international Sections, 158 Branches, and
118 Younger Member Groups. The Society advances civil engineering technical specialties through9 Institutes and leads with its many professional and public-focused programs. ASCE stands at theforefront of a profession that plans, designs, constructs, and operates society’s economic and social
engine – the built environment – while protecting and restoring the natural environment.
For more than 20 years, the American Society of Civil Engineers(ASCE) has been releasing its quadrennial Report Card for America’s
Infrastructure. In recent years, the Report Card’s message has taken holdas public opinion surveys regularly show that Americans recognize theneed to repair our nation’s aging and deteriorating infrastructure. Yet weare still not investing in infrastructure to the level that is required giventhese systems serve as the backbone of our economy. Failing to act torebuild America’s infrastructure costs every American family $3,300 ayear, with significant costs and consequences to the national economy.
The Report Card not only defines the problems facing our nation’s infrastructure; it also offers solutions
across all 17 categories. I am pleased to report that many of ASCE’s asks have been answered, such as
new funding and financing sources for building resilient infrastructure, a permanent fix for the Harbor
Maintenance Trust Fund, a modernization of state dam safety programs, and a mainstreaming of asset
management approaches across various infrastructure sectors.
However, significant challenges remain. Going forward, bold leadership and action, long-term,
consistent investment, and new approaches to ensure the resilience of our infrastructure whilesatisfying sustainability and climate change criteria will be the solutions to the short-term patches andsmall-scale improvements that have been implemented thus far. Through such transformative action,
our infrastructure will be improved and built for the future.
All Americans share a role in renewing the nation’s infrastructure and preparing for the future.
We must take collective action and make tough choices. Join ASCE and others in advocating
for infrastructure investment and modernization by sharing this 2021 Report Card for America’s
Infrastructure and contacting your elected officials. Modern, reliable infrastructure secures ournation’s shared prosperity, and helps us achieve our most inspiring vision of the future.

2________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Table of Contents
Introduction..................................................................................................................... 1
Key Findings................................................................................................................... 2
About the Report Card for America’s Infrastructure/Methodology ...................... 3
Infrastructure Categories............................................................................................. 4
Investment Pays............................................................................................................. 5
Cumulative Investment Chart ..................................................................................... 6
Recommendations to Raise the Grade........................................................................7
Infrastructure categories
Aviation................................................................................................................... 9
Bridges...................................................................................................................18
Dams.....................................................................................................................26
Drinking Water.....................................................................................................34
Energy...................................................................................................................44
Hazardous Waste.................................................................................................55
Inland Waterways.................................................................................................63
Levees................................................................................................................... 72
Parks & Recreation............................................................................................. 80
Ports..................................................................................................................... 90
Rail.........................................................................................................................99
Roads.................................................................................................................. 107
Schools..................................................................................................................117
Solid Waste......................................................................................................... 124
Stormwater.......................................................................................................... 131
Transit................................................................................................................... 141
Wastewater.......................................................................................................... 151
Broadband spotlight ................................................................................................. 162
Gamechangers............................................................................................................167
Infrastructure Report Card History........................................................................ 168
ASCE Committee on America’s Infrastructure.................................................... 169
Acknowledgements................................................................................................... 169
3________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Introduction
Infrastructure supports nearly every aspect of life. Our pipes deliver
drinking water to homes and hospitals. Airports, railroads, andinland waterways transport goods from farms and manufacturing
plants to store shelves. The roads that crisscross the country allow us
to get to work and school safely, and the network of transmission anddistribution lines keeps the lights on and our electronics charged.
Dams enable consistent water supply in arid climates, and levees holdback floodwaters to protect rain-soaked communities.
Since ASCE began issuing the Report Card in 1998, the grades have struggled to get out of the D’s.
However, more recently, decision-makers at all levels of government have recognized the critical role
our infrastructure plays in supporting our quality of life and economy. Voters and lawmakers alike havechampioned smart infrastructure policy and increased investment in our multimodal freight system,
drinking water networks, and more. This down payment on our infrastructure bill has contributed tomodest but meaningful improvements.

1________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Key Findings
The 2021 Report Card for America’s Infrastructure reveals
we’ve made some incremental progress toward restoring
our nation’s infrastructure. For the first time in 20 years,
our infrastructure is out of the D range.
The 2021 grades range from a B in rail to a D- in transit. Five category grades —aviation, drinking water, energy, inland waterways, and ports — went up, while
just one category — bridges — went down. And stormwater infrastructure
received its first grade: a disappointing D. Overall, eleven category grades were
stuck in the D range, a clear signal that our overdue bill on infrastructure is along way from being paid off.
While we grade 17 categories individually, our infrastructure is a system ofsystems and more connected than ever before. As we look at the low grades
and analyze the data behind them, there are three trends worth noting:

For the first timein 20 years, ourinfrastructure
GPA is a C-, up
from a D+ in 2017.
This is good news
and an indication
we’re headed in
the right direction,
but a lot of work
remains.

1.

Maintenance backlogs continue to be an issue, but asset management
helps prioritize limited funding. Sectors like transit and wastewater havestaggering maintenance deficits, but developing a clear picture of where theavailable funding is most needed improves overall system performance andpublic safety. The drinking water sector, for example, has embraced asset
management and new technology to pinpoint leaks and target repairs.

2.

State and local governments have made progress. Increased federal
investment or reform has also positively impacted certain categories.
Thirty-seven states have raised their gas tax to fund critical transportation investments since 2010. Ninety-eightpercent of local infrastructure ballot initiatives passed in November 2020. At least 25 major cities and states now
have chief resilience officers. These improvements were made by elected officials from both sides of the aisle andwith strong voter support. Meanwhile, categories like ports, drinking water, and inland waterways have been thebeneficiaries of increased federal funding.

3.

There are still infrastructure sectors where data is scarce or unreliable. Sectors like school facilities, levees, andstormwater still suffer from a lack of robust condition information or inventory of assets. To target investments andallocate funding, routine, reliable data should be the standard.

The elected officials and members of the public who have improved infrastructure policy and supported additional funding
are applauded. We’re seeing the benefits of this action in drinking water, inland waterways, and airports. The private sector
has invested in the electric grid, freight rail, and more.
However, significant challenges lie ahead. Importantly, the COVID-19 pandemic’s impacts on infrastructure revenue streams
threaten to derail the modest progress we’ve made over the past four years. In addition, many sectors and infrastructure owners
are learning what it will take to make our communities climate resilient as we grapple with more severe weather. Meanwhile,
many of our legacy transportation and water resource systems are still in the D range. These infrastructure networks sufferfrom chronic underinvestment and are in poor condition.
We’re headed in the right direction, but a lot of work remains.
2________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

About The Report Card forAmerica’s Infrastructure
Every four years, America’s civil engineers provide a comprehensive assessment of the nation’s 17
major infrastructure categories in ASCE’s Report Card for America’s Infrastructure. Using a simple A
to F school report card format, the Report Card examines current infrastructure conditions and needs,
assigning grades and making recommendations to raise them.
The ASCE Committee on America’s Infrastructure, made up of 31 dedicated civil engineers fromacross the country with decades of expertise in all categories, volunteers their time to work with ASCE
Infrastructure Initiatives staff to prepare the Report Card. The Committee assesses all relevant data
and reports, consults with technical and industry experts, and assigns grades using the following criteria:

Methodology
CAPACITY
Does the infrastructure’s capacity meet current and future demands?
CONDITION
What is the infrastructure’s existing and near-future physical condition?
FUNDING
What is the current level of funding from all levels of government for the infrastructure category as compared to theestimated funding need?
FUTURE NEED
What is the cost to improve the infrastructure? Will future funding prospects address the need?
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
What is the owners’ ability to operate and maintain the infrastructure properly? Is the infrastructure in compliance withgovernment regulations?
PUBLIC SAFETY
To what extent is the public’s safety jeopardized by the condition of the infrastructure and what
could be the consequences of failure?
RESILIENCE
What is the infrastructure system’s capability to prevent or protect against significant multi-hazard threats and incidents?
How able is it to quickly recover and reconstitute critical services with minimum consequences for public safety andhealth, the economy, and national security?
INNOVATION
What new and innovative techniques, materials, technologies, and delivery methods are being implemented to improve
the infrastructure?
In addition to this national Report Card, ASCE’s sections and branches also prepare state reports on a rolling basis.
Visit InfrastructureReportCard.org to learn about your state’s infrastructure.
3________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

G.P.A.

2021 Report Card forAmerica’s Infrastructure
AVIATION

PUBLICPARKSBRIDGES

RAIL

DAMS

ROADS

DRINKINGWATERSCHOOLS

ENERGYSOLID WASTE

HAZARDOUS
WASTE

STORMWATERINLAND
WATERWAYS

TRANSITLEVEESWASTEWATER

PORTS
4________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

$10
trillionin GDP

More than
3 million
jobs
in 20395________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org$2.4 trillion
in exports
over thenext 20 years6________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Recommendations to Raise the Grade
To improve our quality of life and strengthen our international
competitiveness, we need a strategic and holistic plan to renew,
modernize, and invest in our infrastructure. This plan should makebasic maintenance a centerpiece as we improve our legacy systems.
Importantly, policymakers must understand we are only as strong as
our weakest link — if our roadways become too rough to travel, if ourbridges close to heavier traffic like ambulances, or if our levees protect a
community at the expense of the one next door, the economy grinds to a
halt. We all pay the price.
ASCE urges bold leadership and action, sustained investment, and a focus
on resilience to raise the national infrastructure grade over the next four
years, so that every American family, community, and business can thrive.

1) Leadership and action

Smart investment will only be possible with strong leadership, decisive action, and a clear vision for our
nation’s infrastructure. Leaders from all levels of government, business, labor, and nonprofit organizations must cometogether to:a.

Incentivize asset management and encourage the creation and utilization of infrastructure data sets acrossclasses.

b.

Streamline the project permitting process across infrastructure sectors, while ensuring appropriate safeguards
and protections are in place.

c.

Ensure all investments are spent wisely, prioritizing projects with critical benefits to the economy, public safety,
environment, and quality of life (e.g., sustainability).

d.

Leverage proven and emerging tech to make use of limited available resources.

e.

Consider life cycle costs when making project decisions. Life cycle cost analysis determines the cost of building,operating, and maintaining the infrastructure for its entire life span.

f.

Support research and development of innovative materials, technologies, and processes to modernize and extend
the life of infrastructure, expedite repairs or replacements, and promote cost savings. Innovation should include a
component of integration and utilization of big data, as well as the “internet of things.”g.

Promote sustainability, or the “triple bottom line” in infrastructure decisions, by considering the long-term
economic, social, and environmental benefits of a project.
7________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

2) Investment
If the United States is serious about achieving an infrastructure system fit for the future, some specific steps must be
taken, beginning with increased, long-term, consistent investment. To close the nearly $2.6 trillion 10-year
investment gap, meet future need, and restore our global competitive advantage, we must increase investment

from all levels of government and the private sector from 2.5% to 3.5% of U.S. Gross Domestic
Product (GDP) by 2025. This investment must be consistently and wisely allocated, and must begin with thefollowing steps:a.

Congress should fully fund authorized infrastructure programs.

b.

Infrastructure owners and operators must charge, and Americans must be willing to pay, rates reflecting the true
cost of using, maintaining, and improving infrastructure.

c.

The surface transportation investment gap is the largest deficit in the categories of infrastructure that ASCE
evaluates. Continuing to defer maintenance and modernization is impacting our ability to compete in a global
marketplace and maintain a high quality of living domestically. Congress must fix the Highway Trust Fund.

d.

All parties should strive to close the rural/urban and underserved community resource divide by ensuring
adequate investment in these areas through programmatic set-asides.

e.

All parties should make use of public-private partnerships, where appropriate.

3) Resilience

We must utilize new approaches, materials, and technologies to ensure our infrastructure canwithstand or quickly recover from natural or man-made hazards. Advancements in resilience across all infrastructure
sectors can be made by:a.

Enabling communities, regardless of size, to develop and institute their own resilience pathway for all theirinfrastructure portfolios by streamlining asset management, implementing life cycle cost analysis into routine
planning processes, and integrating climate change projections into long-term goal-setting and capital
improvement plans.

b.

Incentivizing and enforcing the use of codes and standards, which can mitigate risks of major climate ormanmade events such as hurricanes, fires, sea level rise, and more.

c.

Understanding that our infrastructure is a system of systems and encourage a dynamic, “big picture” perspectivethat weighs tradeoffs across infrastructure sectors while keeping resilience as the chief goal.

d.

Prioritizing projects that improve the safety and security of systems and communities, to ensure continued
reliability and enhanced resilience.

e.

Improving land use planning across all levels of decision-making to strike a balance between the built and naturalenvironments while meeting community needs, now and into the future.

f.

Enhancing the resilience of various infrastructure sectors by including or enhancing natural or “green”
infrastructure.

8________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Aviation

9________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Prior to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the nation’s airports were
facing growing capacity challenges. Over a two-year period, passenger travel
steadily increased from 964.7 million to 1.2 billion per year, yet flight service
only increased from 9.7 to 10.2 million flights per year — contributing inpart to a total of nearly 96 million delay minutes for airline passengers in
2019. Terminal, gate, and ramp availability was not meeting the needs ofa growing passenger base. Under pre-COVID-19 projections, our aviation
system was set to have a 10-year, $111 billion funding shortfall, and thatgap has likely grown significantly as passenger volumes dropped in March
2020 and have yet to recover. However, funding from Congress has risen
from $11 billion annually to approximately $15 billion from 2017 to 2020.1
These additional investments are driving some early results as measured by
improved economic performance.

CONDITION & CAPACITY
The National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems(NPIAS) identifies 3,304 public-use airports in the U.S.,
which includes approximately 520 commercial service
airports. More than 2,500 of these NPIAS airports are
categorized as general aviation supporting flight training
and emergency services.2

rebounded to 32% of October 2019. While passenger
volumes have endured significant and potentiallysustained impacts during the pandemic, cargo volumes
have increased with the expansion of “e-commerce.”5
From 2017 to 2019, as passenger travel outpaced
available flights, delays in the aviation sector grew, andthe percentage of flights with “on-time” performancedecreased slightly from 80.1% to 79.2%.6 The total time
passengers were delayed increased from 65.8 million
minutes in 2017 to 95.8 million minutes in 2019. Delaysin 2019 were caused by a variety of reasons, including
aircraft arriving late, national aviation system delays, aircarrier delays, weather-related issues, and more.7

From 2017 to 2019, passenger travel steadily rose from
964.7 million to 1.2 billion passengers per year, while
commercial service flights increased from 9.7 million to10.2 million flights per year.3 4 However, since the onsetof the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020, the aviation
sector has been dramatically impacted. In April 2020,
passenger travel was 5% of the level seen in April 2019,and by October 2020, passenger volumes had only

10________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Flight Delays Over Time
100M
Flight Delay Minutes
80M
60M
40M
20M
0

2017

2018

2019

Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics

8

Causes of Flight Delays in 2019

Cancelled
9%

Diverted
1%

Air Carrier Delay
25%

Aircraft Arriving Late
33%

Weather Delay
3%

National Aviation System Delay
29%
Security Delay<1%

Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics911________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

While several factors influence air travel delays, airport
infrastructure continues to grapple with capacity needs
to serve the growing passenger base. The Airports Council
International–North America (ACI-NA) shows that overthe next few years, all categories of airports will require
investments in terminal buildings, access to terminals,
airfield capacity, and airfield reconstruction.10

Top Four Investment Needs as a Portion of Total Needs
for Large, Medium and Small Airports
50%

Terminal Buildings
Access to Terminals

40%

Capacity Needs
Reconstruction Needs

30%
20%
10%

46%

21%
9.4%

0%

36%

33%

10%

6.6%

Large Hub Airports

9.5%

16.7%

Medium Hub Airports

8%16.9% 14.8%

Small Hub Airports

Source: Airports Council International–North America

11

The largest portion of the investment need at large,
medium, and small airports is for terminal buildings andranges from 30% to nearly 50% of total needs. Similarly,
the FAA routinely publishes National Plan of Integrated
Airport Systems (NPIAS) reports of anticipateddevelopment activities determined by surveying nationwide
capital improvement plans. The NPIAS reports show thatthe needs for various types of airport development projects
continue to increase. Since 2019, forecasts for airport
needs to expand or rehabilitate terminal buildings ballooned
by 62%, pavement reconstruction needs increased by
28%, and capacity-related development needs rose by
31%. Specifically, capital needs for terminal buildings
grew from nearly $4.1 billion to more than $6.6 billion,
capacity projects rose from $3.1 billion to around $4.1
billion, and reconstruction projects increased fromaround $13.1 billion to nearly $16.9 billion.12

NPIAS airports are maintained in excellent, good, orfair condition. In fiscal year (FY) 2019, data indicatesthat 97.9% of runways at NPIAS airports are rated as
excellent, good, or fair, including 97.8% of commercial
service airport runways. While the portion of NPIAS
airports rated as excellent, good, or fair saw a slightincrease from 97.8% in FY 2017, commercial service
airport runways decreased from 98.2% during thesame timeframe. However, both categories remained
unchanged from FY 2015 to FY 2017.13 14 15
The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a severe decline
in flights and passenger boardings, reducing the current
capacity demand. Air carriers expect that it will takeyears to recover from this reduction in operations. The
long-term impacts of COVID-19 on air travel remain
unclear. It is important to note that there have been
similar boarding declines in the past due to traumatic
events such as September 11th, but passenger travel has
always ultimately rebounded and continued an upward
trajectory.

Fortunately, the condition of runways continues to beconsistent. The FAA sets system performance goals
to ensure that a minimum of 93% of paved runways at
12________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Passenger Boarding Totals After Historic Events
100M
90M
80M
70M
60M
50M
40M
30M

September 11th Terrorist Attacks
COVID-19 Pandemic

20M
01/20019/20015/2002
1/20039/20035/20041/20059/20055/20061/20075/20081/20099/20095/20101/20119/20115/20121/20139/20135/20141/20159/20155/20161/20179/20175/20181/20199/20195/2020

10M

Sources: Bureau of Transportation Statistics16 17

FUNDING & FUTURE NEEDOur nation’s airports have diverse revenue and funding
streams, but total financial resources fall short of the sector’s
estimated needs. These resources include federal, state, andlocal grants; revenue from general obligation bonds; airport
cash flow through concession fees and other revenue
mechanisms; and public–private partnerships (P3s). The
two primary federal sources of airport revenue come fromthe Airport Improvement Program (AIP), which is funded
generally through aviation fuel and airline ticket taxes, and
the Passenger Facility Charge (PFC), which is fundedthrough a federally mandated $4.50 capped user fee.

AIP or the PFC. The AIP has had the same annual
authorization level of $3.35 billion for over 10 years,
and the PFC cap has remained unchanged since 2000.
Despite an unchanged authorization level, Congresshas provided recent supplemental funding for the AIP
program, including $1 billion in FY 2018, $500 million
in FY 2019, and $400 million in FY 2020. The PFC
has continued to collect revenue to help make capital
improvements to our nation’s airports, with the mostrecent figures indicating that $3.6 billion in fees wascollected in 2019. While the PFC is not the solesource of airport capital project funding, it can help
alleviate the pre-COVID-19 pandemic, 10-year total
investment need of $237 billion.18 19 20

In 2018, a five-year FAA reauthorization was signed
into law; however, the legislation failed to increase the

Photo courtesy of WSP USALAGUARDIA AIRPORT TERMINAL B ARRIVALS HALL

13________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

The long-term impacts of COVID-19 are still unfolding
for airport revenue collection. However, in the last two
COVID-19 relief packages (the CARES Act and theConsolidated Appropriations Act of 2021), Congressprovided a total of $12 billion in direct aid to airports,

including $100 million for general aviation. As the
pandemic continues, the complex revenue streams that
airports depend on for infrastructure improvements arelikely to remain in flux.

OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, & INNOVATION
Airport operations and maintenance activities are
influenced by many factors, including the age of the
facilities, aircraft use patterns, and weather exposure,to name a few. Preventive maintenance such as sealcoat surface treatment, patching, and crack-sealing
must be regularly performed to protect and preserve
airfield pavement, while also serving to keep long-term
rehabilitation costs down. Airfield pavement maintenanceoccurs on a four- to seven-year cycle, while moresignificant repairs take place on a 15- to 25-year cycle.21

based to satellite-based system, NextGen replaces radio
communications with data exchange and automation.
This ultimately reduces the amount of informationneeded to be processed by an air crew and will increase
routing efficiency (shorten routes), save time and fuel,minimize traffic delays, increase capacity, and permit
controllers to monitor and manage aircraft, leading togreater safety.22 During NextGen implementation, the
FAA has reported more than 15,000 hours of delay
avoided through improved reroutes, more than 25,000
hours of communication time saved, and average
delays less than 17 minutes per flight, despite increased
reports of severe weather and traffic. Currently,
NextGen capabilities are being implemented at 30 of
the largest airports in the nation. Despite some positive
momentum, NextGen investments are taking about 4
years longer than expected to translate into foundational
infrastructure that supports the new technology.23 24

Technological advancements are playing a critical rolein improving airport service flexibility and efficiency.
Halfway through its multi-year investment andimplementation plan, the FAA has been rolling out
its Next Generation Air Transportation System(NextGen) that improves air travel safety, efficiency,
and predictability. While transitioning from a radar-

Airport operations and maintenance activities are influenced by manyfactors, including the age of the facilities, aircraft use patterns, andweather exposure, to name a few. Preventive maintenance such as seal coatsurface treatment, patching, and crack-sealing must be regularly
performed to protect and preserve airfield pavement, while also serving
to keep long-term rehabilitation costs down.

14________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Photo courtesy of WSP USA
SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT HARVEY MILK TERMINAL 1

PUBLIC SAFETY & RESILIENCE
The people and commerce using the nation’s airtransportation system are protected by the Transportation
Security Administration (TSA).25 While TSA’s primary
focus is placed on screening areas and eliminating airplanehijackings, safety goes beyond screening points. For
instance, the COVID-19 pandemic has played a majorrole in airport safety protocols. In February 2021, TSA
implemented an executive order requiring individuals towear a mask at TSA screening checkpoints and throughout
the commercial and public transportation systems until atleast May 2021.26 To support airport security, $4.9 millionof federal funds were spent on airport security in FY
2020 — consistent with federal spending since FY 2017.
However, the NPIAS has identified that from 2021 to2025, anticipated needs for safety and security projects
account for $1.6 billion, or nearly 4% of overall airport
funding needs.

commuter carriers, on-demand air taxis, and generalaviation operations.27 Maintaining safe conditions
through establishing runway safety areas, practicing
runway incursion mitigation, and implementing wildlife
hazard mitigation improves public safety by minimizing
the risk of serious accidents.28 29
The nation’s aviation system continues to be tested
by natural and man-made disasters. Specifically,
cybersecurity issues have the potential to cause harm
to all aspects of air travel. Aviation communication andpassenger services, like ticketing, are highly dependent
on a strong cybersecurity network, so ensuring
safeguards to this system ensures traveler safety andsystem resilience. Furthermore, during and after
natural disasters and other emergencies, airports play amajor role as a gateway for urgent relief and access tocritical supplies. Therefore, it is important that airports
develop and exercise rapid facilities assessments andrecovery strategies that can be efficiently and effectively
implemented after these types of events.

In 2018, the FAA reported 395 deaths caused by U.S.
airplanes — an increase from 347 the previous year.
The death total includes incidents on U.S. air carriers,
15________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Aviation

RECOMMENDATIONSTO RAISE THE GRADE·

Airport authorities should develop plans to improve resilience to potential
catastrophic events, whether it be seismic incidents, weather-related disasters,
cybersecurity threats, or global pandemics. Strong revenue mechanisms must be
developed that can withstand changes in passenger travel and provide long-term
revenue certainty.

·

Airports should continue to invest in capacity enhancements that will accommodate
projected capacity needs based on pre-COVID-19 pandemic trends.

·

Raise or eliminate the cap on the Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) to allow airports
the needed revenue to invest in their infrastructure.

·

Support efforts to increase federal funding for the Airport Improvement Program(AIP) and continue to support user fee mechanisms that fund the Airport and
Airway Trust Fund and maintain budgetary firewalls.

·

Explore the use of public-private partnerships (P3s) to support existing funding efforts.

·

Support innovative technology, like NextGen, that offers the ability to reduce
congestion and improve capacity.

·

Continue to recognize that there needs to be a strategic balance between
infrastructure investment, enhanced safety measures, and technology
improvements, both in investment and long-term planning.

SOURCES1.

American Society of Civil Engineers, “Failure to Act: Economic Impacts of Status
Quo Investment Across Infrastructure Systems,” 2021.

2.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, “National
Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS): 2021-2025.”

3.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics,“Passengers: All Carriers – All Airports.”

4. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, “Flights:
All Carriers – All Airports.”
5.

American Society of Civil Engineers, “Failure to Act: Economic Impacts of Status
Quo Investment Across Infrastructure Systems,” 2021.

6.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, “Annual
Airline On-Time Rankings 2003-2019.”

7.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, “Airline
On-Time Statistics and Delay Causes.”

8.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, “Airline
On-Time Statistics and Delay Causes.”16________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES (Cont.)
9.

Aviation

U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, “Airline
On-Time Statistics and Delay Causes.”

10. Airports Council International–North America, “Terminally Challenged: Addressing
the Infrastructure Funding Shortfall of America’s Airports: 2019-2023.”
11. Airports Council International–North America, “Terminally Challenged: Addressing
the Infrastructure Funding Shortfall of America’s Airports: 2019-2023.”
12. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, “Report toCongress: National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS): 2015-2019.”
13. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, “Report toCongress: National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS): 2017-2021.”
14. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, “Report toCongress: National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS): 2019-2023.”
15. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, “Report toCongress: National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS): 2021-2025.”
16. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics,“Passengers: All Carriers – All Airports.”
17. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, “U.S.
Airline Passengers.”
18. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, “Key
Passenger Facility Charge Statistics, (PFC Branch),” December 31, 2020.
19. Airports Council International–North America, “Terminally Challenged: Addressing
the Infrastructure Funding Shortfall of America’s Airports: 2021-2025.”
20. American Society of Civil Engineers, “Failure to Act: Economic Impacts of Status
Quo Investment Across Infrastructure Systems,” 2021.
21. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, “Report toCongress: National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS): 2019-2023.”
22. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration,“Modernization of U.S. Airspace.”
23. U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of Inspector General, “FAA Needs To
Strengthen Its Management Controls Over the Use and Oversight of NextGen
Developmental Funding,” FAA Report No. AV2018030, March 6, 2018.
24. U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of Inspector General, “FAA Has Made
Progress in Implementing Its Metroplex Program, but Benefits for Airspace Users
Have Fallen Short of Expectations,” FAA Report No. AV2019062, August 27, 2019.
25. Transportation Security Administration, “Mission.”
26. Transportation Security Administration, “Coronavirus (COVID-19) Information.”
27. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics,“Transportation Fatalities by Mode.”
28. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, “Report toCongress: National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS): 2021-2025.”
29. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, “Report toCongress: National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS): 2019-2023.”
17________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Bridges18________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
There are more than 617,000 bridges across the United States. Currently, 42%of all bridges are at least 50 years old, and 46,154, or 7.5% of the nation’s bridges,
are considered structurally deficient, meaning they are in “poor” condition.
Unfortunately, 178 million1 trips are taken across these structurally deficient
bridges every day. In recent years, though, as the average age of America’s
bridges increases to 44 years, the number of structurally deficient bridges has
continued to decline; however, the rate of improvements has slowed. A recent
estimate for the nation’s backlog of bridge repair needs is $125 billion. Estimatesshow that we need to increase spending on bridge rehabilitation from $14.4
billion annually to $22.7 billion annually, or by 58%, if we are to improve thecondition. At the current rate of investment, it will take until 2071 to make allof the repairs that are currently necessary, and the additional deterioration overthe next 50 years will become overwhelming. The nation needs a systematic
program for bridge preservation like that embraced by many states, whereby
existing deterioration is prioritized and the focus is on preventive maintenance.

CONDITIONS & CAPACITY
Over the past decade, a concerted effort has been madeinvolving all levels of government to reduce the numberof structurally deficient bridges across the nation. While
structurally deficient bridges are not inherently unsafe,
they require substantial investment in the form of
replacement or significant rehabilitation, and they present
higher risk for future closure or weight restrictions.

considerably to just 0.1% annually, while the number ofbridges that are slipping from good to fair condition isincreasing annually. Though higher traffic volume bridges
tend to receive more attention and are therefore lesslikely to be structurally deficient, on average 178 million
trips occur over structurally deficient bridges every day.
At the current rate of improvement, it is estimated to takemore than 50 years, stretching to the year 2071, to repair
all of these bridges. This is not a sustainable model. The rateof deterioration is exceeding the rate of repair, rehabilitation, and replacement, all while the number of bridges
sliding into the “fair” category is growing. However,

Encouragingly, as of 2019, just one in 13, or 7.5%2 of
highway bridges were designated structurally deficient,or poor, representing a significant improvement from
12.1% recorded a decade ago. Also encouraging is thatthe total percentage of bridge deck area that is classified
as structurally deficient, or poor, has decreased over the
past several years, totaling just 5.5% in 2019, compared
to 6.3% in 2016.
Even with this renewed focus, nearly 231,000 bridges,
in all 50 states, still need repair and preservation work.
Unfortunately, the annual rate of reduction of structurally
deficient bridges for the past two years has slowed
19________

bridges categorized as fair are aconcern and an opportunity, as
they are potentially one inspection
away from being downgradedin classification, but they canalso be preserved at a fractionof the cost required to addressa structurally deficient bridge.

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Bridge Condition
By Year
300K

Number of Bridges

282,343
283,486

278,480

276,107200K

280,817

277,552

213,191
219,023

225,640

231,225

237,394

245,150

288,126

286,163

257,000

267,316

285,613250,858Good

279,504

291,339

282,319 279,582

Fair

100K

0
2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, InfoBridge:
Data: https://infobridge.fhwa.dot.gov/Data/Dashboard

While recent improvements show a positive trend
To protect the public’s safety, the federal government
in addressing our poorest bridges, progress is notmandates national bridge inspections for all bridges on auniversal because states face different challenges
periodic basis. The amount of time between inspections
when maintaining, repairing, and replacing bridges.
can range from 12 to 48 months and is based on the
For example, in 2019, thebridge condition, type ofpercentage of structurally
While recent improvements bridge, traffic, location, anddeficient bridges ranged
age of the structure. If theshowapositivetrend
infrom 1% in Nevada to 22% in
bridge inspector finds any
addressing our poorest
Rhode Island.3
deficiency in the structural
capacity or with an element
bridges, progress is not
Less encouraging is thatof the bridge, that bridge
42% of the nation’s 617,084 universal because states face
be posted for load,different challenges when could
highway bridges are overweight, or speed restrictions;
50 years old, an increase
maintaining, repairing,
temporarily repaired; and/from 39% in 2016. Notably,
and replacing bridges.
or closed to the traveling
12% of highway bridges are
public to ensure their safety.
For example, in 2019, theaged 80 years or older.
percentage of structurally In 2019, just over 10% of
Structurally deficient bridges
bridges had such restrictions,deficient bridges ranged
specifically are nearly 69
a number that has remained
years old on average. Mostfrom 1% in Nevada to 22% stagnant over the past severalof the country’s bridges werein Rhode Island3.
years. Outside of direct
designed for a service life ofsafety concerns, posted
approximately 50 years, so
bridges can dramaticallyas time passes, an ever-increasing number of bridges will
increase driving time for larger vehicles such as school
need major rehabilitation or replacement.
buses, ambulances, fire trucks, and delivery trucks, in20________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

addition to interstate trucking. In rural areas, posted
bridges can prohibit the passage of emergency service
vehicles, which can slow response time and impede
rescue efforts.

horizontal clearances or inadequate approach roadwaygeometry. Such bridges do not serve current traffic
demand or meet current standards, and many of thesebridges act as bottlenecks, increasing congestion andcrash vulnerability due to inadequate widths, lanes, orshoulders, substandard vertical clearance, or insufficientlanes for traffic demand.

Finally, while the National Bridge Inventory no longer
tracks functionally obsolete bridges, there are still over
94,0004 bridges nationwide with inadequate vertical or

Photo Courtesy of WSP USA

FUNDING & FUTURE NEEDIn recent years, all levels of government have prioritizedbridge repairs through investments. To make many of theseinvestments, 37 states have either increased or reformed
their gas tax since 2010. However, despite states’
increased investments, overall spending in the country’s
bridges remains insufficient. The most recent Conditions
and Performance Report from the Federal Highway
Administration estimates the bridge backlog for repairs
for existing bridges at $125 billion and also estimates that
we need to increase spending on bridge rehabilitation by
58 percent from $14.4 billion annually to $22.7 billion
annually if we are to improve the condition.5

While state and local governments have demonstrated
initiative, federal investment in bridges remains stagnant.
As a result, the Highway Trust Fund, which historicallyfunds many of the nation’s road and bridge projects,
has been teetering on the brink of insolvency for over a
decade. The trust fund’s primary funding source is thefederal motor fuels tax, which has remained at 18.3 cents
per gallon since 1993. (See the Roads chapter for more
information regarding public spending.)

21________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

INNOVATIONAs the nation’s bridges continue to age, America’s emphasis
has slowly evolved from building new bridges to maintaining
existing ones. New technologies, materials, evaluation
techniques, and construction methods have advanced
in recent years to meet this challenge. Additionally, theindustry manual provided by the American Association ofState Highway and Transportation Officials now requires
new bridges to be designed with a 75-year service life,
compared to the customary 50 years, meaning bridges
are now being built to last longer.

being used more widely, while new technologies such as
infrared thermography, ground-penetrating radar, andremotely operated surveillance devices like flying andsubmersible drones are being deployed to assess bridge
conditions and to facilitate safer, more efficient engineering
decisions. Additionally, engineers are designing “living
bridges” where sensors are being embedded into newand existing structures to provide continuous feedback
on structural conditions. Finally, prefabricated bridge
elements and Accelerated Bridge Construction are being
used with more frequency to reduce the amount of timetraffic needs to be disrupted while a bridge is repairedor replaced. All of these innovations, technologies, andevaluation methods are effectively allowing engineers
to identify problems earlier, increase the lifespan of thenation’s bridges, stretch limited resources, and prioritize
public safety.

Bridge engineers are now using materials such as
ultra-high-performance concrete, corrosion-resistantreinforcement, high performance steel, composites, andimproved coatings to increase resilience and add durability,
higher strengths, and longer life to bridges. Additionally,
minimal-impact, non-destructive evaluation methods are

As the nation’s bridges continue to age, America’s
emphasis has slowly evolved from building new bridges tomaintaining existing ones. New technologies, materials,
evaluation techniques, and construction methods haveadvanced in recent years to meet this challenge.
Photo: rinyun

CONCRETE COLUMNS AND RUSTY METAL OF THE OLD BRIDGE.

22________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE

NearlyOur nation’s bridges comprise a vast, complex systemof unique structures, each of which is deteriorating at its
own pace and in need of specific treatments at specifictimes. In order to manage this large array of assets, states
are now required to develop and use Transportation AssetManagement Plans (TAMPs). The federally required
TAMPs outline a systematic, data-based approach forstates to manage their inventories. Each TAMP is required
to predict and set targets for the bridges that will be ingood or poor condition over the next 10 years. Strategic
asset management is one of the most cost-effective waysthat the nation is addressing its aging and deteriorating
bridge inventory.

21,000BRIDGES

were found to besusceptible to overtoppingor having their foundations
undermined during
extreme storm events.

One critical component of asset management is lifecycle cost analysis (LCCA). When the cost of a bridge
replacement, rehabilitation, or repair project is estimatedfor budgeting purposes without considering the longterm costs of maintenance, operation, replacement,
and retirement, decision-makers end up with anunderestimated value for their planning purposes. Because
bridges are costly and complex assets that provide decadesof service, the use of life-cycle cost analysis can minimize
long-term costs with a broad, upfront picture of the costs
over the infrastructure’s lifetime.

Photo by Joe Brady

RESILIENCE & PUBLIC SAFETY
As investments are made in the nation’s bridges, asystematic approach should be taken to make themmore resilient. Many of the country’s older bridges are
susceptible to extreme weather events and more prevalent
flooding, which can result in overtopping, washout, andother storm-related damage. In fact, nearly 21,000
bridges were found to be susceptible to overtopping or
having their foundations undermined during extreme
storm events. In seismic regions, earthquakes are asignificant threat, and a bridge’s ability to withstand these
extreme events is a significant safety issue.6

metal fatigue and cracking, and decrease the service
lives of bridges. The U.S. Department of Transportation
found that the introduction of double 33-foot trailer
trucks results in a projected 2,478 bridges requiringstrengthening or replacement at an estimated onetime cost of $1.1 billion.7 As future opportunities toplatoon connected or autonomous trucks become
more commonplace, bridges could see further stress.
Engineers are using new design requirements, materials,
and technologies to enhance the security and resilienceof bridges as they are being built. The great challenge
moving forward is to address the hundreds of thousandsof existing bridges so they can provide decades ofcontinued, safe service despite a greater frequency inextreme weather events or an increase in design loads.

Additionally, bridges are being subjected to trucks thatare heavier than those they were originally designed tosustain. These heavier trucks, which can surpass 40 ton
loads, threaten to overstress bridge elements, cause23________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

RECOMMENDATIONSTO RAISE THE GRADE

Bridges·

Increase funding from all levels of government to continue significant bridge repair,rehabilitation, and replacement.

·

Prioritize rehabilitating and preserving bridges in fair condition, as these bridges canoften be preserved at a fraction of the cost of replacement if the work is performed
in a timely manner. This approach can reduce the number of structurally deficient
bridges to below 5%, decrease the maintenance backlog, and address the large numberof bridges that have passed or are approaching the end of their design life.

·

Develop a balanced approach for our current aging bridge inventory that emphasizes
preservation, rehabilitation, and replacement where necessary, while also setting
aside funding for critical operation and maintenance. Bridge owners should consider
the costs across a bridge’s entire lifecycle (LCCA) to make smart design decisions
and prioritize maintenance and rehabilitation.

·

Fix the Highway Trust Fund by raising the federal motor fuels tax by five cents a year
over five years. In addition, to ensure long-term sustainable funding for the federal
surface transportation program, the current user fee of 18.4 cents per gallon on
gasoline and 24.4 cents on diesel should be tied to inflation to restore its purchasing
power, fill the funding deficit, and ensure reliable funding for the future.

·

Urge states to prioritize investments on bridges that are most critical, for example
those that experience the highest daily traffic volume, are on critical freight
corridors, evacuation routes, and develop multi-variable prioritization formulas forthe bridges in their state.

·

Advise states and the federal government to consider long-term funding solutions
for transportation infrastructure and potential alternatives to motor fuels taxes,
including mileage-based user fees.

·

Continue to fund research into the use of innovative technologies, materials, andconstruction techniques to extend the life of bridges and ensure they are climate
resilient.

DEFINITIONSSTRUCTURALLY DEFICIENT — Effective January 1, 2018, the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) changed the definition of “structurally deficient” aspart of the final rule on highway and bridge performance measures publishedon May 20, 2017, pursuant to the 2021 federal aid highway bill Moving Ahead
for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21). Two measures that were previously used to classify bridges as structurally deficient are no longer used. This
includes bridges where the overall structural evaluation was rated poor or worse
condition, or with insufficient waterway openings. The new definition limits theclassification to bridges where one of the key structural elements — the deck,superstructure, substructure, or culverts — are rated in “poor” or worse condition. Based on the new definition of structurally deficient, there are 6,533
bridges that would have been classified as structurally deficient in 2017 but did
not meet the new criteria in 2018.
24________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES

Bridges1.

American Road and Transportation Builder’s Association, Bridge Report, 2020.

2.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, National
Bridge Inventory, 2019.

3.

U.S. Department of Transportation, National Bridge Inventory, 2020.

4. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, InfoBridge:
Data.
5.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, “Status of
the Nation’s Highways, Bridges, and Transit Conditions and Performance Report,”
Chapter 7 – Capital Investment Scenarios – Highways, 23rd Edition.

6.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, InfoBridge:
Data.

7.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, MAP-21
Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study, April 2016.

25________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Dams

26
________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
There are over 91,000 dams1 in the country that serve many purposes.
Dams are classified by hazard potential. A high-potential hazard-potential
rating does not imply that a dam has an increased risk for failure; it simply
means that if failure were to occur, the resulting consequences would likely
be a direct loss of human life and extensive property damage. Over the last
20 years, the number of high-hazard-potential dams has more than doubled
as development steadily encroaches on once rural dams and reservoirs.2
Although the number of high-hazard-potential dams has increased, theoverall percentage of these dams protected by an Emergency Action Plan
has increased as well. As of 2018, 81% of such dams had a plan on file, up 5%
from 2015. Unfortunately, due to the lack of investment, the Association ofState Dam Safety Officials estimates the number of deficient high-hazardpotential dams now exceeds 2,300.3 Meanwhile, approximately 3% of dams
supply households and businesses with hydroelectric power, and many ofthese dams are privately owned by utilities and follow a rigorous operations
and maintenance schedule.4

CONDITION & CAPACITY
significant hazard-potential, meaning a failure would likely
cause significant economic damage, but not necessarily
loss of life, reduced during this period from 11,882 in 2017
to 11,343 dams7 in 2019.

Dams are present in all 50 states, serving a wide
range of daily needs, such as water storage, irrigation,hydropower, mining, flood control, and recreation. The
public most commonly thinks of engineering marvels
like the Hoover Dam in Nevada, which provides watersupply and hydroelectric power to Arizona, Nevada, andCalifornia. However, only 3% of dams are currently asource of hydroelectric energy.

Another contributing factor to the shift in classification ofdams is increases in state funding for dam safety programs.
With state dam safety programs better able to assess thesestructures, the opportunity for owners to become awareof rehabilitation, repair, or removal needs increases, as
does the likelihood of dams being classified as high hazard
potential. Signs of improved funding began as early as2015 as state economies began to recover from the 2008
recession.8 Approximately 69% of dams in the National
Inventory of Dams (NID) maintained by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers are state-regulated dams.9

Dams are classified by regulatory agencies based on theirhazard potential or anticipated downstream consequencesin the event of failure. The failure of a dam that is classified
as high-hazard-potential is anticipated to cause a loss oflife. As of 2019, there are approximately 15,600 dams5
in the United States that are classified as high-hazard
structures. Over the last 20 years, the number ofhigh-hazard-potential dams has more than doubled as
development steadily encroaches on once rural dams andreservoirs.6 Meanwhile the number of dams classified as

Recent crises following heavy seasonal rains, like the failureof the Oroville Dam spillway in 2017 or the failure of the27________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Edenville and Sanford dams in Michigan, have made major
headlines, highlighting the poor condition of many of thenation’s dams. Thankfully, incidents of large-scale flooding
such as these are rare. Proper maintenance, routine
inspection, necessary upgrades, and implementation of
an Emergency Action Plan can ensure optimal conditions,which in turn protect the public health, safety, and welfare.

time of their construction, they may have been considered
low hazard potential, so they may not be able to withstandthe increasingly frequent and severe weather events or other natural hazards like earthquakes.
A secondary classification applied to any dam refers to its
condition rating based on structural safety. In the National
Inventory of Dams (NID), dams can range from “not rated,” which refers to either the lack of inspection or lack ofrating, to “satisfactory,” indicating no existing or potential
dam safety deficiencies. States and federal agencies may
have additional definitions and rating applications that areused to classify dams. Definitions may vary slightly fromstate to state as well as among federal agencies.

The average age of our nation’s dams is 57 years. By 2030,
seven out of 10 dams in the United States will be over 50
years old. While this is not a reflection on hazard potential,
the high average age means that the majority of dams will
not have been built to current standards, let alone incorporate newer standards that improve their resilience andreduce the risk to downstream areas. Furthermore, at the

FUNDING & FUTURE NEED
Without specific funding programs, many dam owners
cite lack of funding as the reason maintenance andupgrades are deferred. As of 2019, over half (56.4%) of
U.S. dams were privately owned.10 The remaining dams
are divided among a variety of owners; among them,
20% are local, 4.7% are federal, while an almost equal
figure, 4.8%, are owned by states. It should be notedthat 42% of federal dams11 fall under the purview of the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) or the Bureau
of Reclamation. The smallest share of dams (2.4%) are
held by public utilities. Identifying dam owners is criticalas funding rehabilitation and repair falls to them.

In fact, the most recent Association of State Dam Safety
Officials’ (ASDSO) cost estimate indicates the combined
total to rehabilitate the nation’s non-federal dams
exceeds $66 billion.12 To rehabilitate just those highhazard-potential dams would cost nearly $20 billion.13
Additional estimates show the need to rehabilitate
federal dams is approximately $27.6 billion.14
The High Hazard Potential Dam Rehabilitation(HHPDR) Program authorized in 2016’s Water
Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN)
Act is one new program that can help address existing

As of 2019, over half (56.4%) of U.S. dams were privately owned.10
The remaining dams are divided among a variety of owners; among them,20%
are local

4.7%
are federal

28________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

4.8%
are owned by statesfunding needs. The goal of this program is to help fundthe repair, removal, or rehabilitation of the nation’s
non-federal, high-hazard-potential dams. In federal
fiscal year (FY) 2020 this program was funded at $10
million, less than 0.1% of the ASDSO need estimate anda quarter of its FY20 $40 million authorization.15

in the NID rated poor or unsatisfactory with an EAP.
When fully appropriated, the HHPDR program has thepotential to help repair some of the highest priority dam
safety rehabilitation projects in the country. Otherwise,
states must navigate a series of smaller state and federal
programs. Federal programs include those within the Bureau
of Reclamation and National Rural Conservation Services,
receiving more than $100 million in FY2019 for grants withfunding authority of more than $85 million. For the firsttime in FY2021, Congress appropriated $12 million to theCorps Water Infrastructure Financing Program (CWIFP),
which enables local investment in infrastructure projects
like dams that enhance community resilience to flooding,promote economic prosperity, and improve environmental
quality. While at the local level, nearly half of states have agrant or low-interest revolving loan program to assist dam
owners with repairs. This local commitment of funds canhelp stretch the potential federal grants even further.

Dam owners must meet eligibility requirements to receive
an HHPDR grant. Eligibility is subject to classification(a high-hazard-potential classification by the State Dam
Safety Program) and requires applicants to fail to meet
minimum dam safety standards, pose an unacceptablerisk to the public, and have an approved Emergency
Action Plan (EAP). As of June 2020, there areapproximately 60 projects across 25 states that could beconstruction-ready within the year based on pandemicrelated stimulus funds that would require approximately$538 million in total investment.16 Additionally, there
are 1,300 state-regulated high-hazard-potential dams

Source: EGLE Water Resource
EDENVILLE DAM POWERHOUSE & SPILLWAY

PUBLIC SAFETY
Dam failures not only put the public at risk, they canalso cost our economy billions of dollars in damages.
Failure includes more than the dam’s damage, but cannegatively impact many other infrastructure systems,

such as roads, bridges, and water systems. When a dam
fails, resources must be devoted to the prevention andtreatment of public health risks as well as the resulting
structural consequences.

29________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

EAPs identify potential emergency conditions at a dam,
specify preplanned actions to be followed to minimize
property damage and loss of life should those conditions
occur, and are initiated in the event of an impending
dam failure or other uncontrolled releases of water.
The number of high-hazard-potential dams with EAPs
continues to steadily climb toward a recommended goalof 100%; as of 2018, 81% of dams have EAPs — up from
77% in 2017.17 Additionally, 34 states reported 90% ormore of their high-hazard-potential dams had EAPs on
file,18 while this same number of states saw 100% of theirhigh-hazard-potential dams inspected in 2018.19

program performance. The range of state-regulated highhazard-potential dams per staff ranges from 5.8 to 120.7,
with a national average of 28.6 high-hazard-potential
dams per Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) staff. Nineteenstates have a staffing ratio more than 10 percent above thenational average. State numbers significantly above thehigh-hazard-potential dams per FTE national average canbe an indicator of the need for additional staff resources.
Adequate staffing can enable dam safety programs to
improve inspection rates and asset monitoring, while also
reducing dam owners’ challenges in completing needed
repairs and upgrades. At the federal level, the National
Dam Safety Program (NDSP), which was reauthorized
in 2018 through FY 2023, helps facilitate collaboration
among stakeholders within federal agencies, states, andowners to streamline dam safety roles and responsibilities.

Every state except Alabama has established a regulatory
program for dam safety that bears a large responsibility for
public safety, including the certification of EAPs. These
programs have regulatory authority for 69% of the NID
dams.20 Further improving public safety is the increase instaffing within state dam safety programs over the past
several years. In 2018, state programs spent nearly $60
million21 on dam safety regulation, a 22% increase over theprevious four years. One result from this spending is anincrease in dam safety program staff — nearly 450 fulltime equivalents22 — across the 50 states.

Finally, low head dams can pose a hazard to unassuming
public. A low-head dam is a relatively small, man-madestructure spanning a river or stream where water flows
over the entire length of the dam. Moderate-to-highflows over these dams create turbulent and recirculating
currents that can pull and trap individuals underwater.
Because low head dams are inconspicuous, people areoften unaware of the dangers these structures pose.

Adequate staffing is important to state dam safety

RESILIENCE & INNOVATION
In some areas, engineers, dam owners, regulators, andemergency management professionals are making efforts
to engage communities near dams to raise awareness of thepotential damage from failure. By expanding community
collaboration, stakeholders can support land use decisions,emergency action planning, and maintenance andrehabilitation funding, that all help reduce community risk
and improve resilience in the long term.

flood information and tools they can use to enhancetheir mitigation plans to protect public safety.24
The program looks at the lifetime of the asset andidentifies other risks within the watershed, which
could include dam failures. Dam Watch, a web-based
application, provides real-time monitoring of rainfall,snowmelt, stream flow, and seismic events that could
pose potential threats to dam safety. With its ability
to alert essential staff of critical events, Dam Watch
can help ensure Emergency Action Plans and related
procedures are executed in a timely fashion. Finally,
the ShakeCast system was developed by the U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS) as a means of assisting in
post-earthquake disaster management, which among
other things can include notifying dam owners ofpotential seismic risks.25 An extension of the USGS
tool, ShakeCast can provide real-time information thatenables decisionmakers to take quick action to secure
the asset and protect public health and safety.

Further increasing resilience of dams throughout thecountry is the shift toward a risk-based decision-making
process for the design, rehabilitation, and operation ofdams. This risk-based approach is innovatively coupledwith web-based tools developed by federal agencies,
like RiskMAP, DamWatch, and ShakeCast, that aid
dam owners in identifying, mitigating, and reacting topotential structural and downstream risks.23
RiskMAP, or Risk Mapping, Assessment, and Planning,
is a FEMA program that provides communities with30________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

RECOMMENDATIONSTO RAISE THE GRADE·

Fully fund the national dam rehabilitation and repair funding program at its full
appropriation of $40 million to cost-share repairs for publicly owned, non-federal,
high-hazard-potential dams.

·

Develop emergency action plans for every high-hazard-potential dam by 2025.

·

Implement a national public awareness campaign to educate individuals about highhazard-potential dams, specifically ensuring the public has a better understandingof the dam rating system and how we determine condition as well as the location andcondition of dams in their area.

·

Increase state funding for their respective dam safety programs, including adequate
staffing of state dam safety offices. Ensure all 50 states have dam safety programs.

·

Encourage state and federal agencies to meet reporting deadlines to ensure that
adequate data on dams are available for policymakers to facilitate decision-making
on funding and to the general public to promote public awareness.

·

Require federal agencies that own, operate, or regulate dams to meet the standardsof Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety.

·

Encourage improved land use planning at the local level so that communication
about how dams affect local areas is more accurately known and considered infuture planning.

Dams

31
________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

DEFINITIONS

Dams

EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN — A formal document that identifies potential emergency
conditions at a dam and specifies preplanned actions to be followed to minimize
property damage and loss of life should those conditions occur. The EAP contains
procedures and information to assist the dam owner in issuing early warningand notification messages to responsible downstream emergency management
authorities. It also should include inundation maps to show the emergency
management authorities the critical areas for action in case of an emergency.
DAM OWNER — Party or parties responsible for the safety and liability of the dam
and for financing its upkeep, upgrade, and repair.
DAM REGULATOR — Party or parties responsible for dam safety enforcement including the safety evaluations of existing dams, review of plans and specifications for dam construction and major repair work, periodic inspections ofconstruction work on new and existing dams, and review and approval of emergency action plans.
HIGH-HAZARD POTENTIAL DAM — A dam in which failure or mis-operation is
expected to result in loss of life and may also cause significant economic losses,
including damages to downstream property or critical infrastructure, environmental damage, or disruption of lifeline facilities.
SIGNIFICANT-HAZARD POTENTIAL DAM — A dam in which the failure or
mis-operation is not expected to cause loss of life, but results in significant
economic losses, including damages to downstream property, critical infrastructure, environmental damage, or disruption of lifeline facilities.
LOW-HAZARD POTENTIAL DAM — A dam located in a rural or agricultural area where
failure would not only cause the loss of the dam itself but may cause minor damage
to nonresidential and normally unoccupied buildings, or rural or agricultural land.

SOURCES
1.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, “National Inventory of Dams,” 2020 partial update.

2.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, “National Inventory of Dams,” 2020 partial update.

3.

Association of State Dam Safety Officials, “State Performance and Current Issues,”
Risk of Failure.

4.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, “National Inventory of Dams,” 2020 partial update.

5.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, “National Inventory of Dams,” 2020 partial update.

6.

Congressional Research Service, “Dam Safety Overview and the Federal Role,”
page 8, October 24, 2019.

7.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, “National Inventory of Dams,” 2020 partial update.

8.

Association of State Dam Safety Officials, “State Performance and Current Issues,”
Graph 3.
32________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES (Cont.)
9.

Dams

Congressional Research Service, “Dam Safety Overview and the Federal Role,” page
16, October 24, 2019.

10. Federal Emergency Management Agency, “Dam Ownership in the United States.”
https://www.fema.gov/dam-ownership-united-states (as of 10/22/19)
11. Congressional Research Service, “Dam Safety Overview and the Federal Role,” page18, October 24, 2019.
12. Association of State Dam Safety Officials, The Cost of Rehabilitating Our Nation’sDams: A Methodology, Estimate & Proposed Funding Mechanisms,” December
2002, updated 2019.
13. Association of State Dam Safety Officials, The Cost of Rehabilitating Our Nation’sDams: A Methodology, Estimate & Proposed Funding Mechanisms,” December
2002, updated 2019.
14. Congressional Research Service, “Dam Safety Overview and the Federal Role,” page34, October 24, 2019.
15. Federal Emergency Management Agency, “HHPDR Factsheet,” May 2020. https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/2020-08/fema_HHPD-fact-sheet_05-15-2020.pdf
16. HHPDR Project Spreadsheet shared by ASDSO. – will need to revisit this number
closer to publication.
17. Association of State Dam Safety Officials, “State Performance and Current Issues,”
Emergency Action Plans (EAPs) for High-Hazard Potential Dams.
18. Association of State Dam Safety Officials, “State Performance and Current Issues,”
Emergency Action Plans (EAPs) for High-Hazard Potential Dams.
19. Association of State Dam Safety Officials, “State Performance and Current Issues,”
Inspections of High-Hazard Potential Dams.
20. Congressional Research Service, “Dam Safety Overview and the Federal Role,” page
16, October 24, 2019.
21. Association of State Dam Safety Officials, “State Performance and Current Issues,”
Graph 3.
22. Association of State Dam Safety Officials, “State Performance and Current Issues,”
Graph 5.
23. Congressional Research Service, “Dam Safety Overview and the Federal Role,” pages
12-13, October 24, 2019.
24. Federal Emergency Management Agency, “RiskMap Factsheet.” https://www.fema.
gov/flood-maps/tools-resources/risk-map
25. U.S. Geological Survey, “ShakeCast.”

33________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

DrinkingWater

34________
Build Together

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Our nation’s drinking water infrastructure system is made up of 2.2 million
miles of underground pipes that deliver safe, reliable water to millions ofpeople.1 Unfortunately, the system is aging and underfunded. There is a water
main break every two minutes2 and an estimated 6 billion gallons of treatedwater lost each day in the U.S.,3 enough to fill over 9,000 swimming pools.
However, there are signs of progress as federal financing programs expand
and water utilities raise rates to reinvest in their networks.4 It is estimatedthat more than 12,000 miles of water pipes were planned to be replaced bydrinking water utilities across the country in the year 2020 alone.5 In 2019,about a third of all utilities had a robust asset management program in place
to help prioritize their capital and operations/maintenance investments withlimited dollars,6 which is an increase from 20% in 2016,7 8 Finally, water utilities
are improving their resilience by developing and updating risk assessments andemergency response plans, as well as deploying innovative smart water tech­
nologies like sensors and smart water quality monitoring.

CAPACITY & CONDITION
Access to clean and safe drinking water is critical to publichealth and economic prosperity and, on average, people
use around 82 gallons of water per person, per day in
the United States. Nearly half of water utilities report
declining or flat total water sales in the past 10 years,
largely due to efficiency improvements.9 Water usage
dropped 3% from 2010 to 2015, despite a 4% increasein the nation’s total population.10 Due to declining
water usage, there is currently adequate drinking watercapacity in the U.S. About 39 billion gallons of water a
day are withdrawn from surface water or groundwater
sources for public supply. Public supply use represents
about 12% of total freshwater withdrawals.

10,000 people.11 About 13 million households in the nation rely on water from private wells.12
Our nation’s drinking water infrastructure is composedof 2.2 million miles of pipe, most of which is undergroundand unseen by the millions of consumers who rely on
it every day; unfortunately, this often means that water infrastructure is out of sight and thus out of mind.13
Some of the nation’s oldest pipes were laid in the 19th
century, and pipes that were laid post-World War II havean average life span of 75 to 100 years, meaning thatmany of them are reaching the end of their design life.14
Between 2004 and 2017, various sources estimate
there were between 10 to 37 leaks and breaks per 100
miles of pipe.15 One report found a 27% increase in water
main break rates between 2012 and 2018, reaching an
estimated 250,000 to 300,000 breaks per year; thisis equivalent to a water main break every two minutes.16
Smaller utilities can have up to twice as many pipe breaks

There are more than 148,000 active drinking water
systems in the nation. Just 9% of all community water
systems serve over 257 million people, while the bulkof community water systems — 91%, or nearly 46,000
in total — serve communities with populations under35________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

than larger utilities, in part because smaller utilities often
have more miles of pipe per customer and have a smaller
customer base from which to collect revenue, resulting
in less funds for repair and asset management.17

ment rate that matches the lifecycle of the pipes. It isestimated that more than 12,000 miles of water pipes
were planned to be replaced by drinking water utilities
across the country in 2020.20

Water utilities are increasing the rate of pipe replacement and repair. In 2015, utilities were replacing, on average, 0.5% of their pipes per year,18 meaning it would
take an estimated 200 years to replace the entire system. By 2019, utilities were replacing between 1% and4.8% of their pipelines per year on average,19 a replace-

Drinking water systems currently lose at least 6 billion
gallons of water, or 9,091 Olympic-size swimming pools,
every day. This equates to 2.1 trillion gallons of non-revenue water loss per year.21 The U.S. lost an estimated$7.6 billion of treated water in 2019 due to leaks.

FUNDING
Funding for drinking water infrastructure has not kept
pace with the growing need to address aging infrastructure systems, and current funding sources do not meet
the total needs. In general, however, state and local governments have invested more than their federal counterparts. Despite the growing need for drinking water

infrastructure, the federal government’s share of capitalspending in the water sector fell from 63% in 1977 to 9%
of total capital spending in 2017.22 On average, about
two-thirds of public spending for capital investment inwater infrastructure since the 1980s has been made bystate and local governments.23

36________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

EPA Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Appropriations
The DWSRF provides low-interest loans to state and local drinking water infrastructure projects.
It has continued to receive increased federal appropriations since Fiscal Year (FY) 2017.

Funding (in millions)$1,200$1,000$800$600$1,163$1,164$1,126

2018

2019

2020

$863

$400
$200
$0

2017

However, there is some limited federal support. The U.S
Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Drinking
Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) provides
low-interest loans to state and local drinking water
infrastructure projects. The EPA provides an allotment foreach state based on its Drinking Water Needs Survey thatis conducted every four years, and states in turn provide
a 20% funding match. From 2013 to 2018, the DWSRF
program grew from just over $2 billion in 2013 to nearly$3 billion in 2018, providing loans of increasing sizes tostates. Federal appropriations for the DWSRF helped
boost the size of the program from FY17 to FY20.24 In
2018, the median size of a loan was about $1 million, andone quarter of the projects were co-funded with anothersource, including funding from the U.S. Department ofAgriculture’s (USDA) Rural Development program.25

The EPA’s Water Infrastructure Finance & Innovation
Act (WIFIA) program offers the sponsors of large
projects (generally over $20 million) a new financing tool
to leverage limited federal resources, stimulate additional
investment in our nation’s drinking water, wastewater,and stormwater infrastructure, and encourage greater
private sector participation. As of 2019, prospective
borrowers have submitted letters of interest for 156
projects, requesting over $21 billion in WIFIA loans,including $3.9 billion in requests for drinking waterprojects. Recognizing the program’s success, Congress
doubled the program’s funding in FY20 compared toFY17.26The additional support increased the program’s
lending capacity from $2.5 billion in 2017 to $6 billion
in 2019.27
Funding (in millions)

$70
$60
$50
$40

$20
$10
$0

$68

$63

$30

$60

$30

2017

2018

2019
37
________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

2020

WIFIA Program Funding
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Rural
Development has over 40 programs in place to support
drinking water needs in rural communities acrossthe nation. For example, its Water & Environmental
Programs (WEP) provides direct and guaranteed loans,grants, technical assistance, and training to build criticalinfrastructure for populations of 10,000 or less. From2015 to 2019, USDA provided over $4.5 billion for
2,016 drinking water projects.28

utilities felt they will be able to provide full cost service
in five years.29 Renewal and replacement of aging water
and wastewater infrastructure, as well as the financing
for capital improvements, are the top two issues facing
the water industry.30
Although 88% of Americans pay drinking water rates
that are lower than the EPA’s standard of affordability,
it is estimated that up to 36% of households will not
be able to afford the cost of drinking water by 2024.31
The EPA standard for affordability is that households
spend no more than 2% on drinking water and 4.5% ofmedian household income on both drinking water andwastewater services.32 33

Federal funding and financing is critical, but the primarydrinking water infrastructure funding mechanism is user
fees. The average nationwide monthly drinking water
rate increased 31% from 2012 to 2018. Although water
rates have increased, utilities are still facing funding
gaps; only 21% of all U.S. utilities report being able tofully cover the cost of providing drinking water services,and only 20% of very large utilities and 10% of small

OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
Decades old drinking water infrastructure systems,
declining water use, costs of regulatory compliance,and stagnant federal funding has resulted in many water
utilities struggling to fund the cost of operations andmaintenance of these systems.
Maintenance costs reached an all-time high of $50.2
billion above capital in 2017, in part due to deferred
capital projects.34 A recent survey found that 47% of themaintenance work undertaken by utilities is reactive anddone as systems fail.35
One of the measures that utilities are taking to
improve operations and maintenance and shore up
resilience and affordability is the development of asset
management programs, which shifts decision-making
from reactive to proactive. Some states have asset
management requirements for drinking water systems,
but there is no federal requirement. Other states givepriority for DWSRF loans to water projects that havean asset management plan or provide funding for asset
management plan development, training, and technicalassistance. Overall, nearly a third of drinking water

Photo courtesty of HRSDSUSTAINABLE WATER INITIATIVE FOR TOMORROW (SWIFT)IN EASTERN VIRGINIA

38________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

utilities have a robust asset management plan in place,36
which is an increase from 20% in 2016,37 while another

55% of utilities are in the process of implementation.38

FUTURE NEEDOur nation’s drinking water systems face staggering
public investment needs over the next several decades.
ASCE’s 2020 economic study, “The Economic Benefitsof Investing in Water Infrastructure: How a Failure to Act
Would Affect the U.S. Economic Recovery” found that theannual drinking water and wastewater investment gap
will grow to $434 billion by 2029.39 Additionally, thecost to comply with the EPA’s 2019 Lead and Copper
Rule is estimated at between $130 million and $286
million.40 41

Drinking water utilities also face
increasing workforce challenges.
Much of the current drinking water
workforce is expected to retire in
the coming decade, taking their
institutional knowledge along withthem. Between 2016 and 2026, anestimated 10.6% of water sector
workers will retire or transfer eachyear, with some utilities expecting as

much as half of their staff to retire in
the next five to 10 years.42

PUBLIC SAFETY
Since 1974, the EPA has regulated the nation’s publicdrinking water supply through the Safe Drinking Water
Act (SDWA). The EPA sets national health-based standards and determines the enforceable maximum levels
for contaminants in drinking water. All water suppliers
are required to notify consumers upon learning of a serious water quality problem, and states and the EPA are
required to prepare annual summary reports of water
system compliance that must be made available to the
public. In 2019, the number of public water systems withhealth-based violations was 15% lower than in 2017, andpublic water systems that were returned to SDWA compliance increased nearly 7% compared to 2017.43
Utilities face the increasing challenge of keeping pace withemerging contaminants such as per- and polyfluoroalkyl
substances (PFAS), lead and copper in drinking water, andthe regulatory requirements needed to remain in compliance with the SDWA. The EPA found that about 12% ofwater utilities’ needs are directly attributable to SDWA
compliance.44 Utilities in more rural communities have asmaller rate-payer base, which results in less revenue and39________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

limited financial capacity to address aging infrastructure
and compliance costs. Some struggling community water
systems have found success in voluntarily partnering witha larger water utility to access the capital and expertiseneeded to meet SDWA compliance.

RESILIENCE & INNOVATIONAs the nation faces more frequent extreme weather
events, water utilities are taking action to increase theresilience of their systems to ensure safety and reliability.
In fact, a 2019 survey found that emergency preparedness
is one of the top 10 issues facing the water industry.45
The America’s Water Infrastructure Act of 2018
required community water systems serving more than
3,300 people to develop or update risk assessments andemergency response plans (ERPs). The law sets deadlines,
all before December 2021, by which water systems mustcomplete and submit the risk assessment and ERP to the

EPA. The law also specifies the components that the risk
assessments and ERPs must address.
Utilities are also developing innovative smart watertechnologies such as leak detection, seismic resilient
pipes, smart water quality monitoring, and real time data
sensors, just to name a few. These technologies improve
resilience by allowing utilities to respond to changing
climate conditions, improve efficiency of operations by
reducing water losses, and deliver real-time data thatallows for interactive decision-making.

Photo courtesty of WSP
WATER TRAP ROCK WATER TREATMENT FACILITY IN LOUDOUN COUNTY, VIRGINIA

40________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

RECOMMENDATIONSTO RAISE THE GRADE

Drinking
Water·

Triple the amount of annual appropriations to the Drinking Water State Revolving
Fund program and fully fund the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act
program and the U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development programs.

·

Utilities should implement asset management programs, tools, and techniques to evaluate asset condition and risk, and to prioritize capital and O&M decisions; states should
provide funding, training, and technical assistance for asset management programs.

·

Increase utilities’ resilience by integrating smart water technologies such as machinelearning software and real time data sensors into drinking water infrastructure systems.

·

Eliminate the state cap on private activity bonds for water infrastructure projects tobring an estimated $6 billion to $7 billion annually in new private financing.

·

Increase federal and local support to find, train, and retain the next generation of thedrinking water sector workforce to help offset the large number of expected retirements.

·

Utilities need to conduct revenue forecasting models to determine the necessaryrate revenues that reflect the true cost of water that is needed to provide safe,
reliable drinking water and more resilient infrastructure.

·

Develop and fund affordability programs to ensure that low-income and vulnerable
communities do not bear a disproportionate burden of rate increases.

·

Support voluntary partnerships for small community water systems in need.

SOURCES
1.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs
Survey and Assessment, Sixth Report to Congress,” March 2018.

2.

Utah State University, Buried Structures Laboratory, “Water Main Break Rates in
the USA and Canada: A Comprehensive Study,” March 2018.

3.

CNT, “The Case for Fixing the Leaks,” 2013.

4.

Congressional Budget Office, “Federal Support for Financing State and Local
Transportation and Water Infrastructure,” October 2018.

5.

Interview with Bluefield Research Group on “Underground Infrastructure: U.S.
Water & Wastewater Pipe Network Forecast, 2019-2028,” November 2019.

6.

American Water Works Association, “2019 State of the Water Industry Report.”

7.

American Water Works Association, “2016 State of the Water Industry Report.”

8.

American Water Works Association, “2019 State of the Water Industry Report.”

9.

American Water Works Association, “2019 State of the Water Industry Report.”

10. U.S. Geological Survey, “Summary of Estimated Water Use in the United States in2015.”
11. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Drinking Water Dashboard.
12. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ground Water and Drinking Water.

41________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES (Cont.)
13. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs
Survey and Assessment, Sixth Report to Congress,” March 2018.

Drinking
Water

14. Utah State University, Buried Structures Laboratory, “Water Main Break Rates in
the USA and Canada: A Comprehensive Study,” March 2018.
15. American Water Works Association, “2019 State of the Water Industry Report.”
16. Utah State University, Buried Structures Laboratory, “Water Main Break Rates in
the USA and Canada: A Comprehensive Study,” March 2018.
17. Utah State University, Buried Structures Laboratory, “Water Main Break Rates in
the USA and Canada: A Comprehensive Study,” March 2018.
18. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs
Survey and Assessment, Sixth Report to Congress,” March 2018.
19. American Water Works Association, “2019 State of the Water Industry Report.”
20. Interview with Bluefield Research Group on “Underground Infrastructure: U.S.
Water & Wastewater Pipe Network Forecast, 2019-2028,” November 2019.
21. American Society of Civil Engineers and the Value of Water Campaign, “TheEconomic Benefits of Investing in Water Infrastructure: How a Failure to Act
Would Affect the U.S. Economic Recovery,” 2020.
22. EBP calculations using Congressional Budget Office, “Federal Support for
Financing State and Local Transportation and Water Infrastructure,” October 2018.
23. Congressional Budget Office, “Federal Support for Financing State and Local
Transportation and Water Infrastructure,” October 2018.
24. Congressional Research Service, “Funding for EPA Water Infrastructure: A Fact
Sheet,” March 6, 2019.
25. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Drinking Water State Revolving Fund:2018 Annual Report.”
26. Congressional Research Service, “Funding for EPA Water Infrastructure: A Fact
Sheet,” March 6, 2019.
27. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “WIFIA Program: 2019 Annual Report,”
February 2020.
28. Arcadis and Bluefield Research, “Demystifying Intelligent Water: Realizing theValue of Change with Advanced Asset Management,” 2019.
29. American Water Works Association, “2019 State of the Water Industry Report.”
30. American Water Works Association, “2019 State of the Water Industry Report.”
31. Arcadis and Bluefield Research, “Demystifying Intelligent Water: Realizing theValue of Change with Advanced Asset Management,” 2019.
32. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Affordability Criteria for Small Drinking
Water Systems: An EPA Science Advisory Board Report, a Report by theEnvironmental Economics Advisory Committee of the EPA Science Advisory,”
2002.

42
________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES (Cont.)
33. Black & Veatch Management Consulting, LLC, 2018-2019 “50 Largest Cities
Water & Wastewater Rate Survey,” 2019.

Drinking
Water

34. Arcadis and Bluefield Research, “Demystifying Intelligent Water: Realizing theValue of Change with Advanced Asset Management,” 2019.
35. American Water Works Association, “Utility Benchmarking: Performance
Management for Water and Wastewater,” 2018.
36. American Water Works Association, “2019 State of the Water Industry Report.”
37. American Water Works Association, “2016 State of the Water Industry Report.”
38. American Water Works Association, “2019 State of the Water Industry Report.”
39. American Society of Civil Engineers and the Value of Water Campaign, “TheEconomic Benefits of Investing in Water Infrastructure: How a Failure to Act Would
Affect the U.S. Economic Recovery,” 2020.
40. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Economic Analysis for the Proposed Leadand Copper Rule Revisions,” October 2019.
41. Arcadis and Bluefield Research, “Demystifying Intelligent Water: Realizing theValue of Change with Advanced Asset Management,” 2019.
42. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Drinking Water Dashboard.
43. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs
Survey and Assessment, Sixth Report to Congress,” March 2018.
44. American Water Works Association, “2019 State of the Water Industry Report.”43________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Energy44________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In a digital, connected world, Americans increasingly rely on readily available
and uninterrupted electricity. Over the last four years, transmission anddistribution and reliability-focused pipeline investments have increased, andoutages have declined slightly. Annual spending on high voltage transmission
lines grew from $15.6 billion in 2012 to $21.9 billion in 2017, while annual
spending on distribution systems — the “last mile” of the electricity network— grew 54% over the past two decades.1 Utilities are taking proactive steps
to strengthen the electric grid through resilience measures. However,weather remains an increasing threat. Among 638 transmission outage
events reported from 2014 to 2018, severe weather was cited as the
predominant cause.2 Additionally, distribution infrastructure struggles withreliability, with 92% of all outages occurring along these segments.3 In the
coming years, additional transmission and distribution infrastructure, smart
planning, and improved reliability are needed to accommodate the changing
energy landscape, as delivery becomes distributed and renewables grow.

CONDITION, CAPACITY, OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
Electricity
Energy infrastructure in the U.S. is used to generate,transmit, and distribute electricity. The electric industry
has invested significantly to meet customers’ demands,
but transmission and distribution (T&D) systems still
struggle with reliability. This problem is likely to accelerate
as the impacts of climate change persist and the public’s
expectation of more reliable, “always-on” electricity
increases.

or governmental agency. While investor-owned utilities(IOUs) make up only 6% of the number of electricity
providers, they serve 72% of U.S. electricity customers.5
The majority of the nation’s grid is aging, with somecomponents over a century old — far past their 50-year
life expectancy — and others, including 70% of T&Dlines, are well into the second half of their lifespans. The
transmission system, which can be thought of as the“interstate highway” of electricity delivery, is regulatedby the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC),
and mostly consists of high voltage transmission linesthat carry electricity across the country. The distribution
system, the “last mile” of the electric delivery system, isregulated by the states and consists of lower voltage linesthat act as the local roadways, carrying electric power
to neighborhoods and communities. The distribution
system also includes substations, individual customer
services and meters, as well as other components.6

Electricity delivery in the U.S. depends on an aging
and complex patchwork of power generation facilities,
600,000 miles of backbone transmission lines (240,000
miles of which are considered high-voltage lines or ≥ 230
Kilovolts), and around 5.5 million miles of local distributionlines that operate within federal, state, tribal, and local
regulatory jurisdictions.4 This system is responsible forproviding safe, reliable, and cost-effective electricity tocustomers. Each type of infrastructure may be owned byan investor or public utility, independent power producer,
45________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

These costly transmission and distribution problems,such as those from weather-related events and othercauses, result in power outages that are estimated tocost U.S. households $28 to $169 annually.

U.S. Electricity Generation
by Energy Source

Distribution is a key failure point in the electric gridin terms of system reliability. The distribution system
accounts for 92% of all electric service interruptions, a
result of aging infrastructure, severe weather events, andvandalism.7

Petroleum
0.5%
Nuclear
19.7%

These costly transmission and distribution problems, suchas those from weather-related events and other causes,
result in power outages that are estimated to cost U.S.
households $28 to $169 annually. For an increasingly
critical sector, U.S. data centers, on which many industries
rely, the cost of outages grew from $505,000 in 2010 to$740,000 in 2016, which equates to $8,851 per minutethat the electricity grid is malfunctioning.8

Renewable
Sources
17.5%

Coal
23.5%

For the first time, renewables (solar, wind, biomass,
geothermal, and hydropower) accounted for thelargest portion of new generating capacity in 2020.9
Renewables’ share of the generating capacity is on track
to increase significantly between now and 2023.10

Natural Gas
38.4%

Electricity generation from renewable energy sourcesrose from 18% in 2019 to 20% in 2020 and is expected
to rise to 22% in 2021, continuing to expand their lead

U.S. Energy Information Administration 201946________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

over coal (20.1%).11 Additionally, U.S. energy production
exceeded annual U.S. energy consumption in 2019 for the
first time since 1957.12 Near-term, U.S. energy systems
are projected to deliver sufficient energy to meet national
demands, although increasing electrification — particularlyof the transportation sector — could have a significant
impact. Electric vehicles (EV) are continuing to penetrate

the market. EV charging stations within the United States
has grown from 6,900 chargers in 2012 to approximately
61,000 by the end of 2017 for all vehicles. While demandrelated impacts due to electrification is uncertain, it isexpected that utilities will implement rates that will drive
charging to non-peak hours, affecting most passenger
vehicles and light duty trucks.13

Number of Outages Over TimeTOTAL NUMBER OF OUTAGES

3,149

3,071

2,840
2,169

PEOPLE AFFECTED (IN MILLIONS)

41.8

3,571

3,526

3,236
36.7

2,808

25.8

25.0
17.9

17.5

14.0

13.5

2008

3,879

3,634

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

14.2

2014

13.2

2015

2016

2017

2017 Eaton Blackout Tracker

Oil and Gas
Although traditional fossil-fuel-using sectors such astransportation and space heating are transitioning toelectrification, there is still dependence on existing oil andgas supply and recovery, processing, and pipeline delivery.
Much like the electric grid, the nation’s pipelines are also
aging, as witnessed by increasing failures and leakage
events, thus driving a need to employ improved inspection
techniques, preservation technologies, and sound decisionmaking for upgrades and replacements.14 America’s morethan 190,000 miles of oil pipelines and 2.4 million miles orgas pipelines connect sources such wells and port terminals
to refineries/processing facilities and consumers.15 Together,oil and natural gas supply 65% of the energy we use.16
Similar to electricity, much of the oil and gas infrastructure
is privately owned, operated at near full-time capacity,and publicly regulated.17 Over half of the natural gas

transmission and distribution network was installed before
1960, with urban systems being among the oldest.18 System
improvements are principally funded by regulated ownerrates and limited recovery; as such, modernization andupgrade investments are typically driven by urgency andnecessity rather than through asset management and lifecycle cost-based planning. The risks of aging infrastructure
have been witnessed even as recently as 2020 throughdamaging pipeline events in Baltimore, New York City, andPhiladelphia, and failed transmission and distribution lines
from Hurricanes Laura and Sally.19
New technology improvements have contributed todesign, construction, and maintenance methods of oil
and natural gas pipelines and improved asset integrity,
cost-efficiency, and extended service life expectations.
47________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

These new technologies have also greatly eliminatedincidents in newer systems.20

a record 19 million barrels per day and only one new refinery coming online. While production has kept up withdemand, outage-driven commodity price spikes are often experienced due to the capacity limitations and lackof geographic diversity of the oil and gas sector, as manysystems are along the Gulf of Mexico, frequently exposed to extreme storms.

Critical infrastructure bottlenecks also exist, including
the gas delivery constraints to New England and New
York and challenges with urban infrastructure upgrades.
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the nation’s 135 oil refineries are operating at ornear capacity with 2019’s production rate approaching

FUNDING & FUTURE NEED

All three major components ofthe electric grid (generation,transmission, and distribution)
have an investment gap. To
meet the latest state-driven
Renewable Portfolio Standards
in generation infrastructure,
the gap is projected to grow to
a cumulative $197 billion by
2029.21
Despite the large gap, transmission infrastructure has benefited from increased investment. Transmission spending
in the U.S. increased from $15.6 billion in 2012 to $21.9
billion in 2017, driven by a desire to provide access to clean
energy and to increase the grid’s reliability, security, andresilience.22 Spending also reduced congestion, lowered resource pricing, and renewed the focus on meeting customer needs.23 Across all regions of the country, factors suchas upgrades and replacements of aging transmission infrastructure, system hardening, and resilience measures thatminimize impacts from catastrophic events, improvements
to comply with evolving transmission reliability and security compliance standards, and expansion of the transmission system to integrate renewables and natural gas havecontributed to the increase in transmission spending.24 As
wind and solar generation grow, new T&D lines are required
to link these renewable resources to customers. Doing soallows owners to make investments that “harden” the gridand reduce outage frequency and duration.

Transmission spending
in the U.S. increased
from $15.6 billion in2012 to $21.9 billion
in 2017, driven bya desire to provide
access to clean energy
and to increase thegrid’s reliability,
security, andresilience.21

Spending on electricity distribution systems by major
U.S. electric utilities — representing about 70% of the48________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

total U.S. electric load — has risen 54% over the past
two decades, from $31 billion to $51 billion annually.25
This increase has been anchored by capital investment
from utilities that are working to upgrade aging
equipment. Poles, wires, and substation transformers
are being upgraded with advanced materials and newtechnology to better withstand extreme weather events,
to allow easier frequency and voltage control duringsystem emergencies, and to accommodate greater useof variable renewable generation.26

Order in 2020.29 Changes are expected to expedite thepermitting process to no more than two years for mosttransmission and distribution projects. Reducing delaysin the permitting process would facilitate the expansionof the nation’s energy infrastructure to increase its
capacity. However, these efforts must be made withsafeguards in place to protect the natural environment.
Investment in oil and gas infrastructure is driven bychanging sources, increasing demand, and pricing
fluctuations, in addition to physical condition, failure events,
and regulation. Where demand approaches or exceeds
existing supply in geographic regions, commodity pricing iselevated, and funding is justified. When commodity pricing
is low, infrastructure investment declines. Through 2035,
investment in oil and gas infrastructure is expected tocontribute $1.50 to $1.89 trillion to U.S. GDP, or between$79 billion and $100 billion annually.30 This investment
produces positive impacts on the economy, from employing
individuals to fostering delivery of lower cost energy tohouseholds and businesses.

In the past decade, investment in overhead poles,
wires, devices, and fixtures such as sensors, relays, andcircuits has risen by 69%, while spending on substationtransformers and other station equipment increased by
35%.27 Investment in customer meters has more thandoubled over the past decade as utilities have upgradedtraditional meters to smart meters that can be accessed
remotely, communicate directly to utilities, and support
smart consumption and pricing applications using realtime or near real-time electricity data. However, there will
be additional required investment to maintain these wires
and poles, transformers, meters, and similar equipment,
which are usually the responsibility of the local utility.28

The recent Keystone XL Pipeline permit rescindment
will have a future impact on America’s pipeline
infrastructure. In addition to the significant number ofjobs lost, the precedent of rescinding already granted
permits is concerning and could harm future investment
in all energy infrastructure.

The National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA),
which directs agencies to consider environmental
impacts in decision-making, was updated by Executive
ASCE 48: Design of Steel Transmission Pole
Structures

Provides a uniform basis for the design, detailing, assembly,
fabrication, testing, and erection of steel tubular structures forelectrical transmission poles31

ASCE 10: Design of Latticed SteelTransmission Structures

Provides requirements for the design of guyed and self-supporting
latticed steel electrical transmission structures32

ASCE Manual of Practice 74: Guidelines forElectrical Transmission Line Structural Loading

Provides most relevant and updated information related totransmission line structural loads and has been updated to address
impacts of climate change33

ASCE Manual of Practice 104: Recommended
Practice for Fiber-Reinforced Polymer
Products for Overhead Utility Line Structures

Details best practices for the use of fiber-reinforced polymer(FRP) composite poles and crossarms in resilient conductor support
applications34

ASCE Manual of Practice 123: Prestressed
Concrete Transmission Pole Structures

A complete engineering reference on static-cast and spun-cast
prestressed concrete poles for electric distribution and transmission
power lines35

ASCE Manual of Practice 141: Wood Pole
Structures for Electrical Transmission Lines:
Recommended Practice for Design and Use

Provides comprehensive knowledge of the principles and methods forthe design and use of wood poles for overhead utility line structures3649________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Preserving the nation’s energy infrastructure requires
balancing the affordability and access to delivered
energy products (e.g., electricity and natural gas) withmaintaining reliable and resilient service as well as

reducing the carbon footprint. This is readily addressed
through life-cycle cost analysis, wherein technology
improvements and best and sustainable practices toreplace aging infrastructure can be confirmed.

RESILIENCE & INNOVATION
While weather has always been the number one threat
to the energy sector’s reliability, climate change has only
exacerbated the frequency and intensity of these eventsand associated costs.37 The Department of Energy (DOE)
found that power outages are costing the U.S. economy$28 billion to $169 billion annually.38

sited near shorelines to have access to water. As a result,when hurricanes strike, power plants face significant
flooding damage. During Hurricane Harvey in Houston,
Texas, in 2017, wind and catastrophic flooding knocked
down or damaged more than 6,200 distribution poles,
and 21.4 gigawatts of generation were affected by winddamage, flooding damage, fuel supply issues, or evacuations
and shutdowns.41 As sea levels rise, storm surges would
hit further inland, causing more coastal flooding totransmission, distribution, and generation infrastructure.42

Rather than focusing on repairing the grid after a majordisaster, more utilities are taking proactive steps to adapt
to climate change, by strengthening the grid throughresilience measures and incorporating consensus-based
standards during long- and short-term planning.

Electric companies have invested more than $285 billion
in T&D since Superstorm Sandy, partially to harden
the energy grid and make it more resilient to futurestorms, including investing in new and upgraded T&D
infrastructure, improving efficiency and reliability, andenhancing protection to enable a more secure, flexible,
and resilient electric system.43

Incorporating these consensus-based standards inthe design and construction of T&D infrastructure,
which should be used for all overhead infrastructure(transmission, distribution, and communication) will
improve the physical strength of the systems and allow
them to better withstand natural disasters. The cost to
properly design a typical distribution line by following
the applicable standards increases by only $681 permile.39 This is not only considered cost-effective, butalso could prevent the loss of life.40

Other ways utilities have incorporated resilience arethrough increased utilization of microgrids and battery
storage.44 Innovations support decarbonization, electrified
transportation, remote pipeline inspections, and also
include smart technologies such as T&D line sensors.

Many of the nation’s 8,625 power plants were deliberately

PUBLIC SAFETY

Beyond just theinconvenience of having
no lights or internet,
prolonged power
outages have significant
consequences for everyone.
Nearly every other part ofour infrastructure relies onelectricity.

Pipeline incidents impacting people or the environment
have declined by 20% in the past five years, while
national pipeline capacity has grown by 12%. Pipeline andHazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)
statistics indicate that the frequency of significant pipeline
incidents has fluctuated between 291 to 308 incidents in2017 to 2019.45 Each incident typically results in someinjury or death as well as property damage in excess of$50,000 per event. Since 2017, significant pipeline
incidents have caused over $3 billion in property damage.
Clearly, continued upgrades and improvements areneeded but must be balanced against the advancementof electrification and demand shift, among other factors.
50________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Communications are the first to be impacted; public andprivate transportation is immediately affected; water andwastewater cease to operate; gas stations and grocery
stores cannot sell the goods that they have due to our
digital economy; and commercial activity immediately
terminates as even cash transactions require electric
registers. The public’s health is in danger as medical
devices could be shut off, water contaminated, and foodspoilage will begin.46

and operators reported 17 events to DOE that were
initially believed to be caused by cyber-related activity.
Further analysis of the 17 events shows only four were
determined to be related to cybersecurity, and none
disrupted the reliability or availability of the grid or
resulted in a power outage.47 But cyberattacks will only
increase and the possibility of a major breach on part of
the U.S. grid is always a risk.
Select energy systems, such as the transmission grid, arealso exposed to low-probability severe threats, such as
geomagnetic pulse, which could have a significant impact
on public safety and the economy. The DOE released a
Cybersecurity Strategy to strengthen the resilience andcybersecurity of the nation’s energy infrastructure.48
Additional actions by both FERC and the North American
Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) have focused onincreasing physical resilience, enhancing cybersecurity,and bolstering the interdependence of the nation’s energy
and telecommunications infrastructure. 49

With new technologies deployed by the transmission
system, power outages also bring increasing risks incyber and physical security. Consumers depend onelectricity constantly, and the grid’s reliability can be
impaired by cyberattacks on information technology
systems that support its operations, with the potential tocause power outages. The electric grid is becoming more
vulnerable to cyberattacks via industrial control systems,
consumer Internet of Things devices connected to thegrid’s distribution network, and the global positioning
system (GPS). From 2014 through 2018, grid owners

Photo courtesy of FirstEnergy Corp
CONSTRUCTION UNDERWAY ON FIRSTENERGY TRANSMISSION LINE UPGRADE IN NORTHEAST OHIO

51________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

RECOMMENDATIONSTO RAISE THE GRADE·

Adopt a federal energy policy that provides clear direction for meeting current andfuture demands factoring in technology change, carbon reduction, renewables anddistributed generation, state and market-based factors, and rate affordability.

·

Require the adoption of consensus-based standards for all overhead T&D lines,
structures, and substations to ensure safety and increase reliability.

·

Improve grid and pipeline reliability by increasing frequency and effectiveness ofcritical asset inspections and focusing on robust risk mitigation; consider life cycle
costs and technology impacts during system upgrades and replacements.

·

Develop a national hardening plan that considers investment in production/
generation and delivery (T&D, pipelines) to enable rapid restoration of energy
systems after natural and/or manmade disasters.

·

Consolidate federal, state, and local environmental reviews and permitting processes
so new T&D and pipelines can be funded, create jobs earlier, and modernize energy
infrastructure faster — while ensuring environmental and community impacts are
fully vetted and considered.

·

Design energy infrastructure including life-cycle cost analysis and constructionof additional transmission grid infrastructure to efficiently deliver power fromgeneration sources to regions with greatest demand requirements.

EnergySOURCES
1.

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Independent Statistics andAnalysis, Today in Energy, “Major Utilities Continue to Increase Spending on U.S.
Electric Distribution Systems,” July 20, 2018.

2.

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), “Failure to Act: Electric
Infrastructure Investment Gaps in a Rapidly Changing Environment,” 2020.

3.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), “Economic Benefits of Increasing Electric
Grid Resilience to Weather Outages,” 2013.

4.

U.S. Department of Energy, “Dynamic Line Rating: Report to Congress,” June 2019.

5.

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Independent Statistics andAnalysis, Today in Energy, “Investor-Owned Utilities Served 72% of U.S.
Electricity Customers in 2017,” August 15, 2019.

6.

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), “Failure to Act: Electric
Infrastructure Investment Gaps in a Rapidly Changing Environment,” 2020.

7.

Institution of Engineering and Technology, Generation, Transmission &Distribution, 2019, Vol. 13 Iss. 5, pp. 717-723. “Distribution system versus bulk
power system: identifying the source of electric service interruptions in the US.”

8.

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), “Failure to Act: Electric
Infrastructure Investment Gaps in a Rapidly Changing Environment,” 2020.

9.

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), “Office of Energy Projects,
Energy Infrastructure Update,” April 2020.
52________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES (Cont.)
10. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), “Office of Energy Projects,
Energy Infrastructure Update,” July 2020 and August 2020.

Energy11. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), “Office of Energy Projects,
Energy Infrastructure Update,” July 2020 and August 2020.
12. U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Independent Statistics andAnalysis, “U.S. Energy Facts Explained.”
13. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), “Failure to Act: Electric
Infrastructure Investment Gaps in a Rapidly Changing Environment,” 2020.
14. U.S. Department of Transportation, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA), “Gas Transmission Integrity Management Reporting:
GT IM Performance Measure,” 2021. (https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/gastransmission-integrity-management/gt-im-performance-measures)
15. U.S. Department of Transportation, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA), “PHMSA Regulations,” 2020.
16. U.S. Department of Transportation, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA), “General Pipeline FAQs,” 2018.
17. U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Independent Statistics andAnalysis, “Natural Gas Explained.”
18. U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Independent Statistics andAnalysis, “Natural Gas Explained.”
19. U.S. Department of Transportation, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA), “Cast and Wrought Iron Inventory.”
20. National Petroleum Council, “Dynamic Delivery: America’s Evolving Oil andNatural Gas Transportation Infrastructure,” 2019.
21. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), “Failure to Act: Electric
Infrastructure Investment Gaps in a Rapidly Changing Environment,” 2020.
22. Edison Electric Institute, “2018 Financial Review: Annual Report of the U.S.
Investor-Owned Electric Utility Industry,” pp 52-53, 2018.
23. Edison Electric Institute, “2018 Financial Review: Annual Report of the U.S.
Investor-Owned Electric Utility Industry,” pp 52-53, 2018.
24. U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Independent Statistics andAnalysis, Today in Energy, “Major Utilities Continue to Increase Spending on U.S.
Electric Distribution Systems,” July 20, 2018.
25. U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Independent Statistics andAnalysis, Today in Energy, “Major Utilities Continue to Increase Spending on U.S.
Electric Distribution Systems,” July 20, 2018.
26. U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Independent Statistics andAnalysis, Today in Energy, “Major Utilities Continue to Increase Spending on U.S.
Electric Distribution Systems,” July 20, 2018.

53________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES (Cont.)

Energy27. U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Independent Statistics andAnalysis, Today in Energy, “Major Utilities Continue to Increase Spending on U.S.
Electric Distribution Systems,” July 20, 2018.
28. Edison Electric Institute, “Smarter Energy Infrastructure: The Critical Role andValue of Electric Transmission,” 2019.
29. National Environmental Policy Act, “Executive Orders.”
30. American Petroleum Institute, “U.S. Oil and Gas Infrastructure Investment
Through 2035: An Engine for Economic Growth,” 2017.
31. ASCE 48: Design of Steel Transmission Pole Structures.
32. ASCE 10: Design of Latticed Steel Transmission Structures.
33. Manual of Practice 74: Guidelines for Electrical Transmission Line Structural Loading.
34. ASCE Manual of Practice 104: Recommended Practice for Fiber-Reinforced
Polymer Products for Overhead Utility Line Structures.
35. Manual of Practice 141: Wood Pole Structures for Electrical Transmission Lines:
Recommended Practice for Design and Use.
36. Manual of Practice 113: Substation Structure Design Guide.
37. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), “Failure to Act: Electric
Infrastructure Investment Gaps in a Rapidly Changing Environment,” 2020.
38. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), “Failure to Act: Electric
Infrastructure Investment Gaps in a Rapidly Changing Environment,” 2020.
39. Lynch, O, P.E., “But it’s Just a Distribution Line!” Electrical Transmission andSubstation Structures, 2012 Conference.
40. McKinsey and Company, “Why, and How, Utilities Should Start to Manage
Climate-Change Risk,” April 24, 2019.
41. McKinsey and Company, “Why, and How, Utilities Should Start to Manage
Climate-Change Risk,” April 24, 2019.
42. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), “Failure to Act: Electric
Infrastructure Investment Gaps in a Rapidly Changing Environment,” 2020.
43. Edison Electric Institute, “Smarter Energy Infrastructure: The Critical Role andValue of Electric Transmission,” 2019.
44. U.S. Department of Energy, “How Distributed Energy Resources Can Improve
Resilience in Public Buildings: Three Case Studies and a Step-by-Step Guide,” 2019.
45. U.S. Department of Transportation, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration, “Pipeline Incident 20 Year Trends.”
46. Federal Emergency Management Association, “Power Outages.”
47. U.S. Government Accountability Office, “Critical Infrastructure Protection:
Actions Needed to Address Significant Cybersecurity Risks Facing the Electric
Grid,” August 26, 2019.
48. U.S. Department of Energy, “Cybersecurity Strategy 2018-2020.”
49. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, “Cyber and Grid Security,” 2020.
54________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Hazardous
Waste

55
________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Photo courtesy of the Bureau of Land Management of Oregon & Washington

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
There are an estimated 35 million tons of hazardous materials managed
annually in the United States.1 In general, there is adequate capacity for thetreatment and disposal of these materials through the year 2044. However,progress toward mitigating legacy sites where hazardous waste was produced
and improperly disposed of has stalled. There are approximately 1,300
Superfund sites where cleanup activities are either incomplete or not yet
begun, roughly the same number as four years ago. Meanwhile, the Superfund
budget has remained essentially flat at around $1.1 billion over the last 10 years.2
The two other hazardous waste programs — one for brownfields and one forhazardous waste regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act — are also in a steady state. In general, grant funding for the Brownfields
Program has increased, but the program is still oversubscribed, with just 30%
of applicants receiving funding. Meanwhile, resilience is a growing concern atmany hazardous waste sites. Around 60% of all nonfederal Superfund sites arelocated in areas that may be impacted by flooding, storm surge, wildfires, orsea level rise related to climate change effects.3

CAPACITY & CONDITION
Recognizing that hazardous waste disposal without
planning and management endangers the public healthand environment, Congress passed the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) in 1976 to
manage hazardous waste from generation to disposal.
The RCRA Corrective Action (CA) program drives
the cleanup of legacy sites, while the RCRA permitting
program governs the generation and proper transport,
treatment, and disposal of hazardous waste for ongoing
operations that result in hazardous waste. To clean up
hazardous waste produced and improperly disposedof prior to the enactment of RCRA, Congressenacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) in 1980.
CERCLA created the hazardous waste cleanup programcommonly referred to as “Superfund.”National Capacity Assessment Report indicates that
there is adequate capacity nationwide for the treatment
and disposal of hazardous waste through the year 2044.
The 25-year capacity is noteworthy given that there has
been significant consolidation of commercial hazardous
waste management facilities. In contrast, the numberof hazardous waste generators has increased, primarilyreflecting increased compliance within the retail sector
on RCRA reporting requirements.4
The amount of hazardous materials requiring long-term
management has decreased by 22% between 2001 and2019, from 45 million tons to 35 million tons per year.
Another 1.5 million tons of hazardous wastes — suchas metals, solvent, or other recovery — were managed
by recycling. The number of facilities where hazardous
wastes are managed has decreased from over 2,100 to
964 over that period.5

The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) 201956________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Assuming per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)
are determined to be hazardous substances under
CERCLA, it is likely to result in more sites being added
to the Superfund program. Unfortunately, due to the factthat PFAS compounds are difficult and costly to treat,
they will present a significant challenge to our current
hazardous waste infrastructure.

responsible for the cleanup), and 51 sites proposed for the
NPL. There are 424 former Superfund sites, sites thathave been cleaned up and deleted from the NPL.6

Additionally, it is estimated that there are as many as
500,000 abandoned mines in our nation.7 Abandoned
mine lands (AMLs) pose health risks like radiation
exposure,poisonedfish,
andThe Superfund program contaminated soil, water, and air.
Surface runoff carries AML-originatedhas been essentiallysilt and debris down-stream, which“steady state”— theis often contaminated by metals andrate of deletions
acid. Acid mine drainage (AMD) fromabandoned mines poses significant
from the NPL plus
risks to surface water and groundwater.
remedial construction
Abandoned uranium mines pose thecompletions has been
added threat of radiation exposure tovery close to the rate at the list of health concerns.

SuperfundSuperfund is a mature program,and technologies for cleanup are
advancing; however, the capacity ofthe program to take on very large andcomplex sites, including contaminatedsediment sites and area-wide impacts
from legacy mining sites, is not
sufficient to address the scope of thewhich new sites haveproblem. While the impact of cleanup
The Superfund program has been
activities is clearly significant, increased
been added to the NPL. essentially “steady state”— the rate ofenforcement, liability provisions anddeletions from the NPL plus remedialtechnical requirements have led to a significant reduction
construction completions has been very close to thein careless disposal of hazardous materials.
rate at which new sites have been added to the NPL. In
2017, EPA revised the Hazard Ranking System (HRS),
The National Priorities List (NPL), maintained by EPA,
the evaluation system used to determine if sites should becontains the list of sites covered by Superfund. The NPL
considered for inclusion on the NPL based on the threat tois routinely updated as sites are cleaned and removed
human health and the environment. In that revision, EPA
from the list, and other sites are discovered, evaluated,added the potential for exposure to hazardous substances
and added. As of April 2020, there were 1,178 nonvia vapor intrusion, where vapor-forming chemicals
Federal Superfund sites, 157 Federal Sites (i.e., Superfund
migrate from the subsurface into overlying buildings.
sites where another federal department or agency is

Unfunded New Construction Projects

35

Projects

30
25
20

34

15
10

18
12

5
0

20

5
2014

3
2015

2016

2017
57
________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

2018

2019

Resource Conservation andRecovery Act (RCRA)

There has been a yearly increase in the number of sites
ready to be cleaned up; however, funding is lacking. In
essence, these are “shovel-ready” cleanup projects toprotect human health and the environment that are notmoving forward because of insufficient funding. These
unfunded projects tend to stay unfunded; of the 34
unfunded remedial construction projects in FY 2019, 16
had been unfunded for two or more years, and six had
been unfunded for four or more years. This has led to
the growth of the backlog of deferred projects. That
growth in backlog has occurred despite a decrease in thenumber of NPL additions over the last several years. For
example, only seven sites were added in FY 2019.

Whereas the Superfund program manages legacy
hazardous waste sites, RCRA provides instructions for
current hazardous waste generation. Under RCRA,
hazardous waste is managed from the moment it isgenerated to its final disposal. More than 80% of all
generated hazardous waste is produced by the chemical
manufacturing industry and the petroleum and coalproducts manufacturing industry. Over half the nation’s
hazardous waste is generated in the state of Texas.9
The “RCRA universe” includes over 45,000 facilities
that generate large quantities of hazardous waste,
about 1,200 hazardous waste management facilities,
and approximately 8,000 hazardous waste recycling
facilities. In addition, 3,779 contaminated sites, coveringover 18 million acres (approximately the size of South
Carolina) are being cleaned up under the RCRA
Corrective Action (CA) program.10

When funding is available, Superfund cleanups are
successful in converting contaminated sites into
commercially viable properties to the economic
benefit of communities. In 2017, EPA established aSuperfund Task Force and has undertaken a sustained
effort to examine the Superfund program and develop
recommendations to expedite the remediation of sites
and return them to communities. At the end of FY
2018, 529 current and former Superfund sites were in
reuse or continued use, supporting 8,690 businesses
that provided 195,465 jobs, resulting in $13.3 billion
in estimated annual employment income and $52.4
billion in annual sales — many times EPA’s expendituresat these sites. Fifty-nine of those sites are home torenewable energy projects, with an installed capacity of
360 megawatts.8

The effectiveness of RCRA can be measured by how
well it is protecting populations and preventing exposure
to hazardous chemicals. Program data from FY 2018shows that 95% of RCRA CA facilities have controls inplace that prevent human exposure to toxic chemicals,and 89% of RCRA facilities are effectively preventing
the migration of contaminated groundwater. Complete
construction of remediation systems has been achieved
at 70% of RCRA CA sites, and 36% have achieved
environmental performance goals.11

At the end of FY 2018,529 current andformer Superfund
sites were in reuse or

Brownfields
There are an estimated 450,000 brownfield sites in
the U.S. Brownfields differ from Superfund sites inthe degree and nature of the contamination, and often
in the site’s commercial potential. Cleaning up andreinvesting in brownfield sites increases local tax bases,
facilitates job growth, utilizes existing infrastructure,
reduces development pressures from open land, andboth improves and protects the environment. There are
multiple federal grant programs that provide funding
and incentives that support brownfields cleanup andrevitalization.

continued use, supporting

8,690 businesses
that provided

195,465 jobs,
resulting in$13.3 billion

in estimated annual employment
income andin annual sales$52.4 billion
58________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Brownfields redevelopment has resulted in significant
economic and environmental benefits, with an economic
benefit ratio of 20:1 for every federal dollar spent,increasing home values near former brownfield sites,business expansion, and job growth related to infrastructure
improvements and improved business performance. Since
2006, approximately 150,000 sites have been cleaned up,
facilitating the creation of more than 144,000 jobs, with 2
million acres made ready for reuse.12

FUNDING & FUTURE NEEDThe Superfund budget has remained essentially flat at
around $1.1 billion since 2009. In FY 2019, funding
limitations resulted in deferring cleanup on 34 sitesthat were ready for remedial construction. Funding
limitations have resulted in a growing backlog of deferredcleanups. In constant dollars, funding for the Superfund
program has decreased by 43% since FY 2000.13 14
In FY 2018, the Superfund Enforcement Program
obtained commitments from private parties ofapproximately $453 million for site cleanup and $80
million to reimburse the EPA. Historically, approximately
70% of Superfund cleanup activities has been paid for by
the parties found responsible (PRPs) for cleanup.15
Creative Commons

The 2017 Tax Cut and Jobs Act allows investors to deferor reduce taxes on capital gains for projects built within
census tracts of low-income and distressed communities
designated as “Opportunity Zones (OZ).” Investments incleaning up and redeveloping brownfields sites in an OZ
affords investors significant tax benefits, making more
projects financially attractive. The 2018 Brownfields
Utilization, Investment, and Local Development
Act (“BUILD Act”) increased the funding limit for
brownfields remediation grants from $200,000 per site
to $500,000.

State waste management agencies do much of the work
under RCRA, relying on federal grants to fund much of
their programs. It is critical that states and EPA maintainsufficient expertise and resources to process permits in atimely manner, enhance compliance reporting, expand
technical assistance to manufacturing and other waste
generators, and improve and streamline permitting
processes.17

Since 2017, the number of EPA employees has declined
by 8%.16 Declines can significantly compromise EPA’s
ability to effectively implement its responsibilities. With
loss of EPA Superfund project managers, scientists,
engineers, and procurement professionals, EPA’s ability
to keep pace with program needs is questionable.

For FY 2020, EPA issued 155 grants for communities
and tribes totaling over $65.6 million in EPA brownfields
funding through multiple grant programs18. Brownfields
competitive grant programs remain substantially oversubscribed, with approximately 30% of grant proposals
receiving funds.

HAZARDOUS WASTE IS STORED IN NEW YORK.

59________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

PUBLIC SAFETY & RESILIENCE
The core purpose of the nation’s hazardous waste
infrastructure is public safety — preventing the releaseof, and exposure to, hazardous and toxic substances.
Therefore, the infrastructure is generally fit for thatcore purpose. However, its resilience is less certain. A
2019 Government Accountability Office (GAO) reportfound that about 60% (945 of 1,571) of all nonfederal
National Priorities List (NPL) sites are located in areasthat may be impacted by flooding, storm surge, wildfires,or sea level rise related to climate change effects.19 A
clear demonstration of this risk occurred in 2017, when
Hurricane Harvey dumped nearly 50 inches of rain overthe greater Houston area, damaging several Superfund
sites that contain hazardous substances. At the San
Jacinto River Waste Pits site near Houston, floodwaters
eroded the containment structure, releasing highly toxic
wastes including dioxins into the river. In 2018, the Carr

Fire in California burned through the Iron Mountain
Mine site near Redding, California, nearly destroying
the water treatment system. According to the GAO
report, some high-density propylene lines that caught
fire nearly resulted in an explosion in the mine.21
Hazardous waste infrastructure also has an impact on
climate. As reported under EPA’s Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Program, the waste sector contributed
134 million metric tons of CO2-equivalents in 2018,
representing about 2.0% of direct, reported U.S.
emissions.21 New technologies and waste reduction
strategies have the potential to reduce the hazardous
waste management sector’s contribution to climatechange and strengthen the resiliency of our hazardous
waste infrastructure.

INNOVATION
Remediation technologies continue to improve, and more
effective site characterization and cleanup strategies
are being employed by EPA, other federal entities, andthe private sector, emphasizing adaptive management
and optimization of treatment systems.

60________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

RECOMMENDATIONSTO RAISE THE GRADE·

Increase funding for Superfund at a level sufficient to eliminate the backlog of
unfunded remedial actions within a three-year period, while also accelerating theimplementation of positive program reforms identified by EPA’s Superfund Task
Force.

·

Address staff shortages, training gaps, and contracting delays in the Superfund program.

·

Focus on Superfund and RCRA Corrective Action sites located near historicallydisadvantaged, low income communities, as these communities have been disproportionally harmed by exposure to contamination from these sites.

·

Accelerate and increase investment in PFAS research aimed at characterization,
treatment, and analysis of these compounds, as well as understanding health impacts. Drive that research to establish a protective and scientifically sound regulatory framework for managing PFAS in the environment.

·

Emphasize a robust technical focus and establish a stable, designated funding source
for mining site cleanup, which already consumes a large percentage of the Superfund budget.

·

Expand brownfields grant programs to support investment in pre-development sitecharacterization activities, increasing leverage and stimulating greater investment
from state, regional, local, and private funding sources.

·

Conduct further research on more sustainable, cost-effective remedial approaches
for mining sites.

·

Invest in technology to optimize and improve efficiency of groundwater treatment
systems.

Hazardous
Waste

SOURCES
1.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2020a. RCRAInfo, Hazardous Waste
Report data, reporting years 2001-2017.

2.

House Committee on Appropriation for the Department of Interior, Environment,
and Related Agencies, multiple years.

3.

U.S. Government Accountability Office, “Superfund: EPA Should Take Additional
Actions to Manage Risks from Climate Change,” GAO-20-73, October 18, 2019.

4.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “National Capacity Assessment Report
Pursuant to CERCLA Section 104(c)(9),” December 17, 2019.

5.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, https://rcrapublic.
epa.gov/rcrainfoweb/action/modules/br/summary/summarysearch;jsessionid=F52B8ECB8812AC217D90778C30D4EA89

6.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Superfund, “Superfund: National Priorities
List (NPL).”61________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES (Cont.)

Hazardous
Waste

7.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Superfund, “Abandoned Mine Lands: Site
Information.”

8.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Superfund FY 2019 Annual
Accomplishments Report,” EPA publication number 540R20001.

9.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Superfund Task Force Final Report,” EPA
publication number 540R119008, September 2019.

10. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Hazardous Waste, “Measuring Progress at
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action Facilities.”
11. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Hazardous Waste, “Measuring Progress at
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action Facilities.”
12. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Brownfields, “Brownfields Program
Accomplishments and Benefits: Leveraging Resources to Revitalize Communities.”
13. Probst K, “Superfund 2017: Cleanup Accomplishments and the Challenges Ahead,”2017.
14. Probst K, New York University School of Law and Environmental Law Institute,“Looking Back to Move Forward: Resolving Health & Environmental Crises,”
Chapter 6: Superfund at 40: Unfulfilled Expectations, November 2020.
15. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Superfund FY 2019 Annual
Accomplishments Report,” EPA publication number 540R20001.
16. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “FY 2021 EPA Budget in Brief,”
February 2020.
17. Personal Communications, Association of State & Territorial Solid Waste
Management Officials, April 24, 2020.
18. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Brownfields, “Brownfields Program
Accomplishments and Benefits: Leveraging Resources to Revitalize Communities.”
19. U.S. Government Accountability Office, “Superfund: EPA Should Take Additional
Actions to Manage Risks from Climate Change,” GAO-20-73, October 18, 2019.
20. U.S. Government Accountability Office, “Superfund: EPA Should Take Additional
Actions to Manage Risks from Climate Change,” GAO-20-73, October 18, 2019.
21. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
and Sinks: 1990-2018.”

62________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Inland
Waterways

63________
Waterways Council, Inc.

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Mississippi River and its tributaries, as well as the Columbia, Sacramento,
and San Joaquin Rivers on the West Coast make up nearly 12,000 milesof navigable waterways — the U.S. freight network’s “water highway.” Inland waterway infrastructure includes locks and dams as well as navigation
channels. Investing in this infrastructure helps move agricultural exports andrelieves strain on other transportation modes. One barge can move as many
tons as 70 tractor trailers.1 Recent boosts in federal investment and an increase in user fees have begun to reverse decades of declining lock and dam
conditions, with unscheduled lock closures reaching a 20-year low in 2017.2
While this is encouraging, the system still reports a $6.8 billion backlog3 inconstruction projects and ongoing lock closures — totaling 5,000 hours between 2015 and 2019 — harming the industries that rely on the waterways
to get their goods to market. The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimatesdelays cost up to $739 per hour for an average tow, or $44 million per year.4

CONDITION & CAPACITY
The waterway network is comprised of approximately
12,000 miles of inland navigation channels as well as anadditional 11,000 of intracoastal waterways owned and operated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).5
Most of the mileage of USACE’s inland network is comprised of the Mississippi River and connecting waterways.
Additional navigable waterways include the Columbia Riverthat makes up the border between Washington and Oregon
and the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers in California.

barge save farmers between $7 and $9 billion annually ascompared to other modes of transportation.10 In addition
to food products, the inland waterways move raw materials, manufactured goods, chemicals, coal, petroleum
products, and more.
Infrastructure on inland waterways is comprised of locks
and dams as well as navigation channels. Attempts are
made to dredge channels to ensure a minimum depth andwidth needed to support commercial barge traffic. However, the current USACE budget does not provide adequate funding to keep all channels consistently opened tothe authorized levels. As a result, some rivers are deemed
low use and are a lower dredging priority for USACE,
forcing system users to alter their shipping methods,
which in turn perpetuates the “low use” river designation.
Additionally, the growing severity and frequency of flooding is pushing more sediment into the navigation channels,
meaning more frequent dredging is necessary to keep theMississippi River and its tributaries navigable.

Inland waterways are an important part of the multimodal freight network, and nearly 830 million tons ofcargo are moved on the inland waterways system annually.6 The network is especially crucial for our agriculturalindustry, which relies on waterways to cost-effectively7 8
move and export wheat, soybeans, and other goods todomestic and international markets. One barge on theinland waterways can move as many tons as 70 tractor
trailers or 16 train cars.9 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) estimates that farm products moved via

64________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Locks and dams act as a stairway for cargo ships, enabling easier navigation during uneven and inconsistent water levels. When a ship reaches a lock, a gate opens, and the ship enters the lock chamber.
Once the ship is inside the chamber, the gate closes, and water either fills or empties from the lockchamber. Once the ship is level with the water on the other side of the opposite gate, the opposite
gate opens for the ship to proceed.

In total, there are 218 lock chambers at 176 sites on the
USACE waterways.11 Most of the locks and dams are wellpast their 50-year design life. Locks constructed on theUpper Mississippi, Illinois, and Tennessee Rivers were built
in the 1930s, while those on the Ohio River were generally

constructed in the 1950s.12 However, it is very important tonote that age does not necessarily correlate with the condition of a lock. Regular maintenance, rehabilitation, andappropriate applications of technological advancements
by USACE can considerably extend the lifespan of a lock.

National Lock Portfolio Service Trends
Main Chamber Mechanical Unavailable Hours(Events Longer Than One Day)
Unscheduled Hours

40000

Schedued Hours
35000
30000

HOURS

25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

FISCAL YEAR

Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers65________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
LA GRANGE LOCK AND DAM ON THE ILLINOIS WATERWAY

Inadequate funding for maintenance and rehabilitation
Congress has increased appropriations for inland
activities can cause lock deterioration, which leads towaterways, resulting in improved system performance,
unplanned system outages. Shippers using the inland
as measured by unscheduled lock closures. After
waterway system experience extraordinary losses frompeaking in 2010, unscheduled lock closures reached aunplanned outages when they can’t plan for these in
20-year low in 2017.15 From 2010 to 2014, the systemadvance and reroute or reschedule their shipments
experienced nearly 18,000 hours of unscheduledaccordingly. For example, when the LaGrange Lock andclosures, while the years 2015 to 2019 only saw 5,000
Dam in Beardstown, Illinois, experiences
hours of unscheduled maintenancean unplanned closure, manufacturers,
closures.16 While this is an improvement
On average
farmers, and other system users in 135
from previous years, 5,000 hours ofacross thecounties in 18 states are immediately
unscheduled delay is still indicative of
impacted. Each unplanned closure at the country, the USDA an aging system that has, for too many
estimates that
LaGrange Lock and Dam contributes toyears, lacked adequate and consistentnearly $1.7 billion annually in additional
delays cost up to maintenance and capital investments.
transport charges and a $2.1 billion loss
$739 per hour for Scheduled delays, while not necessarily
in farm-dependent incomes.13 Anotherdesired, are set to conduct muchan average tow,
study shows that failure of Lock and Damneeded capital construction and major
25 in Winfield, Missouri, could result inor $44 million
rehabilitation projects. This type of delay
12 million tons of agricultural products
per year.
lets shippers plan for outages, minimizing
diverted to over 500,000 truckloads
the impact to their operations. Thanks
between St. Louis and the Twin Cities
to increased funding from Congress, today USACE isover nine months (the average shipping season).14 Such ascheduling closures and reducing system inefficiencies.
closure would ultimately require shippers to spend $283
The planning and foresight that is being introduced to themillion in trucking costs and add nearly 22,000 tons ofsystem is resulting in higher reliability for shippers.
CO2 to the atmosphere. On average across the country,
the USDA estimates that delays cost up to $739 per hourfor an average tow, or $44 million per year.
66________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

FUNDING & FUTURE NEED
Traditionally, 50% of a major rehabilitation or new
50/50 cost share agreement between the General Fundconstruction project is paid for with support from theand the IWTF. Congress ultimately ended up paying for
U.S. General Fund, and 50% is supported with revenue
85% of the project, which resulted in Olmsted comingfrom the Inland Waterways Trust Fundonline four years earlier and freeing
For
every
$1
(IWTF) account.
up IWTF revenue for other projects.
Congress has since agreed to pay moreinvested in
The IWTF collects money from athan 50% for the Chickamauga Lockinfrastructure,
29-cents-per-gallon tax on barge fuelproject in Nashville.
paid by shippers using the navigation
between $2 andchannels. In 2015, a much sought-after$3 is generated in These additional appropriations byincrease to the barge fuel tax was signed
Congress help expedite the modernization
economic
activity
into law, which now raises approximatelyof the nation’s locks and dams, improve$25 million in additional annual funds andefficiency along the system, and realize
around the U.S.
has helped cut down on the backlog of
economic benefits earlier. For example,
over time.
maintenance projects.
Olmsted began contributing $640
million annually in economic benefits as
Supplemental appropriations made by Congress for thesoon as it was finished.18 In general, projects along theOlmsted Locks and Dam, a megaproject on the Ohioinland waterways system yield a substantial return onRiver in Illinois, helped accelerate the long-delayedinvestment. For every $1 of investment in infrastructure,project, and construction was completed in August
between $2 and $3 is generated in economic activity
2018. Olmsted was a new construction, but the $3 billion
around the U.S. over time.19
megaproject proved to be too expensive for the typical

Annual Construction Funding from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund
$450

405

$400

409

In Millions

$350

329.8

$300

269.9

$200

335

281

$250

$150

Dollars

399

200.5
160.9

$100
$50
$0

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

Source: USACE Inland Waterways Annual Reports, Nos. 24-3217

67________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

2018

2019

2020

OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
Regular operations and maintenance needs, such as minor
lock repairs and dredging, are paid for with appropriations
from the General Fund. Project costs are authorizedthrough the Water Resources Reform and Development
Act (WRDA) and appropriated by the Energy andWater Appropriations Act. In recent years, Congresshas not only regularly passed WRDA legislation, butinland waterways have been the beneficiary of robust
appropriations, which have spurred investment along thesystem and increased reliability for its users.

USACE allocates appropriated operations andmaintenance funding to inland waterway projects basedon risk and economic benefits to help prioritize limited
dollars. However, the agency lacks a definition ofdeferred maintenance, and as a result there are different
estimates of how much deferred maintenance exists on
the system.20 The USACE backlog of authorized projects
that are waiting for appropriations funding is $6.8 billion.
The agency reports a navigation backlog of $2.7 billion
annually in unmet maintenance work activities.

Annual Funding for Operations and Maintenance
$4.0
3.6

Dollars

$3.5

3

$3.0

In Millions

3.8

3.2

2.9

$2.5
2.4

2.4

2.4

2.4

$0.0
2010

2011

2012

2013

$2.0

3.1

3.7

$1.5
$1.0
$0.5
2014

2015

2016

Source: Waterways Council

68________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

2017

2018

2019

2020

PUBLIC SAFETY & RESILIENCE
The inland waterway network is very safe to operate.
According to USDA, on a million-ton-mile basis, there
are 21.9 rail fatalities and 79.3 truck fatalities for every
one fatality on the waterways system.21

The inland waterways are also susceptible to natural
disasters. For example, a major seismic event in
California could cause a breach or failure of one of
the levees that channel the state’s rivers. The results
would be incredibly costly and difficult to recover from,both from a budgetary and environmental perspective,
particularly for the neighboring farming communities.

A changing climate is contributing to less predictablewater levels and impacting the efficiency of thewaterway system. When water levels are too high or too
low, a river shuts down for barge traffic, and shippers areforced to utilize other modes of transport to get goods
to market. Traditionally, flood and drought periods weremore predictable, but today’s extreme weather incidents
are more frequent and more severe. For example, theMississippi River in Baton Rouge was flooded for 67 days
during 2018, which in turn forced hundreds of barges tooffload and shippers had to put their goods on trucks.22

Some waterways, like the Sacramento Deep Water
Shipping Channel, need funding for modernizationso vessels can safely maneuver in inclement weather.
Modernization projects on the Sacramento and San
Joaquin Rivers include navigation improvements andadditional structural assessments.23

Waterways Council, Inc.

INNOVATIONA GRAIN BARGE TRAVELS UNDERNEATH A BRIDGE ON THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER.

Federal funding for new and existing federal navigation
projects; designations of high- , medium- , and low-use
waterways; and private investment decisions all hinge
on tonnage reporting. Traditionally, shippers reported
tonnage based on national inland port boundaries
rather than geopolitical boundaries. For example, themunicipality of Helena, Arkansas, denotes their port
by one set of boundaries, while legislation designates
different boundaries, and shippers have operated undera third geographic area. This contributes to incorrect
tonnage reporting as goods move through these inland
ports. To obtain more accurate tonnage reporting,
USACE is creating a Geographic Information System(GIS) to prepare enterprise-wide statistical port
boundaries. Utilization of geospatial data will improve
public reporting and, in turn, create a more accurate
data map for policymakers to use when making funding
decisions.24
69________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

RECOMMENDATIONSTO RAISE THE GRADE

InlandWaterways·

Give USACE the authority to manage a project from start to finish and ensuresufficient and timely appropriations from Congress to avoid costly stop-and-startof construction that has traditionally taken place.

·

Develop and implement a standardized measurement for delays on the system.

·

Fund waterways projects at the authorized levels and do so consistently, passing a
Water Resources Development Act on a two-year cycle.

·

Ensure that full use of the Inland Waterways Trust Fund continues to be appropriated.

·

Increase the amount spent on operations and maintenance of the inland waterways
each year by providing more robust appropriations and consider a prioritization
method that can more strategically direct limited funds to needy projects.

·

Modify the cost sharing for future spending on construction and major rehabilitation
projects to require 25% of the project cost to be paid for by the IWTF and theremaining 75% to be derived from the General Fund.

DEFINITIONSDREDGE — To excavate or deepen the bed of a harbor, river, or other area of water byscooping out sediment and moving it to a different location. This technique isoften used to keep waterways navigable.
LOCK CHAMBERS — An enclosure consisting of a section of canal that can be closed
to control the water level. It is used to raise or lower vessels that pass through it.
TOW — Barges can be lashed together to form a “tow.” A tow may consist of anythingfrom four to six barges on smaller waterways to over 40 barges lashed together
on deeper and larger portions of the waterway system.

SOURCES
1.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Importance of Inland Waterways to U.S.
Agriculture,” August 2019.

2.

Belk, Edward E., Jr., PE, “U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Program
Update,” [PowerPoint Presentation]. Waterways Council, Inc., February 13, 2019.

3.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Handout from Deb Calhoun.

4. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Importance of Inland Waterways to U.S.
Agriculture,” August 2019.
5.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute of Water Resources, “Inland Waterway
Navigation: Value to the Nation,” May 2000.

6.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, “The U.S. Waterway System 2018 Transportation
Facts & Information,” November 2019.

7.

Congressional Research Service, “Inland Waterways Trust Fund,” February 26, 2018.
70________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES (Cont.)

InlandWaterways

8.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, “Value to the Nation Fast Facts,” 2017.

9.

Waterways Council, Inc., “An Inland Marine Highway for Freight,” Accessed
December 12, 2020.

10. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Importance of Inland Waterways to U.S.
Agriculture,” August 2019.
11. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, “Value to the Nation: Navigation.” Accessed
December 12, 2020.
12. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources, “The Declining
Reliability of the U.S. Inland Waterways System.”
13. The U.S. Waterways Foundation and the Maritime Administration, “The Impactsof Unscheduled Lock Outages,” October 2017.
14. Mid America Freight Coalition, “Modal Investment Comparison: The Impactof Upper Mississippi River Lock and Dam Shutdowns on State Highway
Infrastructure,” October 2017.
15. Belk, Edward E., Jr. PE, “U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Program
Update,” [PowerPoint Presentation]. Waterways Council, Inc., February 13, 2019.
16. Congressional Research Service, “Inland and Intracoastal Waterways: Primer andIssues for Congress,” July 2020.
17. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Inland Waterways Users Board 32nd Annual
Report,” August 2019.
18. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Louisville District Website, “Olmsted Locks andDam.”
19. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Importance of Inland Waterways to U.S.
Agriculture,” August 2019.
20. GAO, “Inland Waterways: Action Needed to Increase Budget Transparency andContracting Efficiency,” November 2018.
21. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Importance of Inland Waterways to U.S.
Agriculture,” August 2019.
22. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, “PortPerformance Freight Statistics in 2018, Annual Report to Congress 2019,”
2020.
23. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers San Francisco District and Port of West
Sacramento, “Draft SEIS/SEIR, Sacramento River Deep Water Ship Channel,” 1090543-02.01, February 2011.
24. Vanderbilt, Forrest, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water
Resources, “Aiding Navigation through Centralizing Information Dissemination,”[PowerPoint Presentation], October 25, 2018.

71________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Levees72________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Seventeen million people across the nation live or work behind a levee. Levees
protect critical infrastructure systems, $2.3 trillion of property, 4,500 schoolsthat collectively enroll over 2 million students, and a range of industries. The
National Levee Database contains nearly 30,000 miles of levees acrossthe U.S., and current estimates identify up to 10,000 additional miles oflevees outside of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) portfolio
whose location and condition are unknown due to complex and varying local
ownership.1 The USACE estimates that $21 billion is needed to improve andmaintain the moderate to high-risk levees in its portfolio, which represents
only about 15% of the known levees in the U.S.2 As more extreme weather
events result in increased flooding, such as the $20 billion in damages causedby flooding in the Midwest during the spring of 2019, it is now more important
than ever to have a complete inventory of the nation’s levees and to equip
communities with resources to mitigate flood risk and make necessary repairs.

CONDITION & CAPACITY
Communities in all 50 states, the District of Columbia,
Puerto Rico, and Guam depend on levees to mitigate
flood risk. Earthen embankments make up 97% of alllevees, while the remaining 3% are concrete, rock, andsteel floodwalls. The nation’s levees are, on average,
50 years old, and many were built using engineering
standards less rigorous than our current best practices.

are difficult to inventory due to the diverse public andprivate entities that own, operate, and maintain them.
Since 2017, the USACE has incorporated a variety ofdifferent inventory sources into the NLD; correctedlevee alignments (shortening or increasing lengths);
recategorized or removed structures that were notlevees; and added new levees, all of which brings the
database closer to being a complete inventory oflevees in the U.S. Most levees yet to be inventoried are
anticipated to have a zero to relatively low population(<100 population) behind them.3

Congress authorized the National Levee Safety Act in
the Water Resources Development Act of 2007. Thislegislation created the National Levee Database (NLD)
and authorized the inventory, inspection, and risk
assessment of all levees within the USACE’s portfolio.
Since that time, the USACE has inventoried nearly
30,000 miles of levees across the U.S., including
approximately 15,000 miles of levees not within theirportfolio and whose condition is unknown.

As of March 2019, the USACE has completed levee risk
assessments for three-quarters of the levees within theportfolio. For the remaining quarter, the USACE expects
to complete levee risk characterizations in the next few
years. Risk relates a levee’s condition to the potential
consequences for the size of the population living or
working behind the levee. The most recent risk assessmentshows that less than 4% of levees within the USACE
portfolio are characterized as high or very high risk down

However, this portfolio represents a small portion of
all the nation’s levees; it is estimated there are up to an
additional 10,000 miles of levees in the U.S., but they73________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

from 5% in 2017. Furthermore, 9% of USACE levees(FEMA) National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP),
are moderate risk, 60% are low risk, and the rest haveand roughly 270 of these levee systems are within the
not been assessed. By comparison,
USACE’s portfolio. A FEMA5% of levees within the USACE
accredited levee is one that is
Unfortunately, 80% of certified by a registered professional
portfolio were high or very high risk
high- or very high-risk engineer; meets the National Floodin 2017. While most levees within
levees were found to
the portfolio are characterized as
Insurance Program minimum
low risk, a larger portion of thehave one or more levee design, operation, and maintenancepopulation — about 45% — lives or
performance concerns requirements; and is expected toworks behind a high- or very highprovide 1% annual chance floodthat would likely result risk reduction. Approximately
risk levee. Unfortunately, 80% of
in a breach prior tohigh- or very high-risk levees were
30% of these accredited levees
found to have one or more levee
within the USACE’s portfolio are
overtopping.
performance concerns that would
characterized as moderate, high, or
likely result in a breach prior to overtopping.4
very high risk. These levee systems have about 3.6 million
people living or working behind them and protect $400
About 500 levee systems nationwide are accredited asbillion of property.5
part of the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s

OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
Roughly 70% of the levees, or nearly 10,000 milesof levees, within the USACE’s portfolio are operated
and maintained by a non-federal levee sponsor — i.e., amunicipality or special district. The remaining levees in
the portfolio — about 4,200 miles — are operated andmaintained by the USACE. Of the levees operated byan entity other than the USACE, 55% are operated

USACE
28%

and maintained by a levee district or water management
district, while 15% are operated and maintained bymunicipal or county governments. About 15% of alllevee systems within the USACE’s levee portfolio havemultiple levee sponsors responsible for operation andmaintenance.6

O&M Responsibility by Entity
Municipal Government
10%County Government
4%

Undeterminded
2%
Other Federal Agencies
1%
Tribal Government
1%

Levee District/Water
Management District
56%
U.S. ACE Portfolio broken down by entity responsible for O&M and percentage of miles of the total portfolio
Source: USACE 2018 Levee Portfolio Report74________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Local governments rarely have the resources necessary
to properly maintain a levee system; it may not be until
a flood event occurs that the levee owner recognizes
maintenance must be a priority. Many levees that local
governments are charged with managing were built
many years ago, and the knowledge of the construction
materials may be limited without costly and potentiallyinvasive investigations. Basic problems arise with
subsurface conditions such as seepage, undersizing of
the structure due to increased floods, and structuralissues due to erosion or destruction by tree roots,
ground-burrowing animals, or encroaching development.
Dedicated funding sources often do not exist for nonfederal levee sponsors to operate and maintain theirlevee systems.

There is currently no national standard or requirement
for levee design, construction, or operation andmaintenance.7 However, some states have regulatory
authority for the construction and safety of levees.

There is currently nonational standard or
requirement for levee
design, construction,
or operation andmaintenance.7

FUNDING & FUTURE NEEDIn 2018, it was estimated that $21 billion is needed to
improve and maintain the moderate- , high- , and very
high-risk levees in the USACE’s levee portfolio.8 Thisestimate does not include any of the levees outside of
the USACE portfolio, so the actual cost to improve andmaintain levees is likely much higher. Federal funding fornon-federally operated and maintained levees is limited,
and most levee operation, maintenance, and repair is the
responsibility of the levee owner.

Program provides federal repair funds to levees operated
and maintained by a non-federal levee sponsor that aredamaged by floods or coastal storms.9
The Water Resources Reform & Development Act(WRRDA) of 2014 authorized the creation of the
National Levee Safety Program, which is modeled after the
successful National Dam Safety Program. This program
creates levee safety guidelines and a levee rehabilitation
program, makes progress toward completing the National
Levee Database, provides assistance to states forestablishing safety programs, and promotes community
education and awareness about levees. In Fiscal Year

Nonetheless, several federal funding programs exist,
including the USACE Rehabilitation Program and the
National Levee Safety Program. The Rehabilitation

Local governments
rarely have theresources necessary
to properly maintaina levee system; it may
not be until a flood
event occurs that thelevee owner recognizes
maintenance must bea priority.
LEVEE CONSTRUCTION IN PUEBLO, COLORADO

75________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

2021, appropriators provided just $5 million, even though
the National Levee Safety Program is authorized at $79
million per year. Overall, federal funding for levees falls far
short of the estimated $21 billion investment need. Fully

funding the National Levee Safety Program is critical toidentifying the location and condition of all the nation’s
levees and in protecting people, communities, criticalinfrastructure systems, and trillions of dollars of property.

PUBLIC SAFETY & RESILIENCE
Levees are vital components of public safety and help
safeguard millions of people, other critical infrastructure
systems, and trillions of dollars of property. Over 9
million people — or 86% of the population living behind
USACE levees — are concentrated behind about 150
levees, or just 7% of the total USACE levee portfolio.

almost $350 billion in flood damages from October 2018
to September 2019.11
Nearly 40% of the levees in the USACE’s portfolio
have either a comprehensive emergency plan or recent
evacuation success. Thirteen percent of assessed levee
systems in the portfolio have either no flood warning
plan or their plan is out of date, which impacts morethan 600,000 people living and working behind theselevees. About 10 million people live and work behinda levee in the USACE portfolio that has some type offlood warning plan; however, nearly 7 million people live
in areas that do not have a detailed flood warning plan.
Flood warning systems, which include flood inundation
maps, contact information for emergency responders,and other key information, are strongly recommended
to be included in the development of an Emergency
Action Plan for all levee systems. Additionally, morethan 3 million people live and work behind levees incommunities that are unaware of flood risk.

Even well-maintained levees can breach, and water canseep through and underneath them; these effects are hardto detect but can weaken the levee’s stability. Frequent
extreme weather events put many communities at anincreased risk of flooding and levee breaches, including
those communities that were previously not in high floodrisk areas. In spring 2019, the Midwest experienced severe
flooding, causing over $20 billion in damages to public andprivate property and losses to crops and livestock. Over80 levee systems within the USACE levee portfolio were
overtopped and breached, sometimes multiple times,
and over 700 miles of levees were damaged. Preliminary
estimates indicate that levee repairs from these floods
alone could reach $1 billion.10 However, it is estimated that
USACE levee and shore protection projects prevented

FEMA and the USACE work collaboratively toincorporate information for levees collected by FEMA

Thirteen percent of assessed levee
systems in the portfolio have either
no flood warning plan or their plan isout of date, which impacts more than
600,000 people living and working
behind these levees.

76________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

into the NLD in order to increase public awareness about
flood risk, and to leverage criteria between existing andnew programs to provide incentives for sound flood risk
management. While FEMA does not build, own, operate,
maintain, or certify levees, they identify flood hazards
and work with federal, state, tribal, and local partners tocommunicate flood risks in areas with levees. The agency
is also responsible for determining and establishing flood
insurance risk rates.12 FEMA manages a suite of programs
that provide funding to states for mitigation activities that

reduce losses and protect life and property from futuredisaster damages, including the new Building Resilient
Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) Grant Program
and the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP),
among others. Eligible projects include construction ofor modification of levees, elevating flood-prone homes orbusinesses, retrofitting buildings to minimize damage fromflooding, and acquiring, demolishing, and/or relocating
NFIP-insured property owners.13

In spring 2019, the Midwest experienced severe flooding, causing:
Over

$20
billionin damages to public andprivate property and losses
to crops and livestock

Over

80
levee systems
within the USACE levee portfolio were
overtopped and breached,sometimes multiple times

Over

700
miles
of levees weredamaged.

INNOVATION
Several innovations have emerged in recent years to help
maintain and modernize the nation’s levees. LIDAR (Light
Detection and Ranging) technology is being tested andutilized to help identify levee maintenance issues, assess
levee vulnerabilities, and efficiently and cost-effectively
target improvements. This technology evaluates risk ofcatastrophic levee failure and provides continuous andaccurate assessments to mitigate risk.14 In other cases,
drones are being used to fly over levees to collect pertinent
data; this approach saves time and costs. Additionally,adding field-based sensing in new or existing levees todetect ground motion or seepage of water under levees

is being considered to detect potential areas of concern
before significant damage occurs.
Further, systems of “fuses” are being evaluated within levee
systems that would operate and divert flood water awayfrom areas where there are high concentrations of people,
property, and infrastructure. Much like fuses designed toprotect electronic devices, levee fuses would be placed to“break” and redirect flood water into lower risk areas. While
broken levee “fuses” would require post-flooding repair, thecosts to repair the fuses are likely to be dramatically lower
than the cost of restoring flood-damaged properties andinfrastructure in areas of higher population.
77________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

RECOMMENDATIONSTO RAISE THE GRADE·

Fully fund the National Levee Safety Program at $79 million a year to identify andinventory the location and condition of all the nation’s levees — federal and nonfederal alike — and complete the National Levee Database.

·Communities can work to reduce the number of new developments behind levees
through zoning restrictions and land development regulations.

·

Increase resources, education, and outreach efforts to those communities that live
and work behind levees in order to communicate to the public the risk to people,
property, and critical infrastructure systems behind levees, as well as the risk andconsequences of levee failure.

·

More broadly deploy and utilize innovative, efficient technologies, such as LIDAR,
to quickly assess levees and identify problems.

·

When appropriate, encourage property owners behind levees to purchase flood
insurance, even if behind an NFIP-accredited levee.

·

Increase the number of levees with an emergency action plan and flood warning plan.

·

Encourage states to regulate levee safety.

·

Consider using risk-based design approach when designing new levees and evaluating
existing levees.

LeveesSOURCES
1.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, “U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Levee Portfolio
Report: A Summary of Risks and Benefits Associated with the USACE Levee
Portfolio,” March 2018.

2.

Congressional Research Service, “Levee Safety and Risk: Status andConsiderations,” December 7, 2017.

3.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, “U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Levee Portfolio
Report: A Summary of Risks and Benefits Associated with the USACE Levee
Portfolio,” March 2018.

4. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, “U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Levee Portfolio
Report: A Summary of Risks and Benefits Associated with the USACE Levee
Portfolio,” March 2018.
5.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, “U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Levee Portfolio
Report: A Summary of Risks and Benefits Associated with the USACE Levee
Portfolio,” March 2018.

6.

Congressional Research Service, “Levee Safety and Risk: Status andConsiderations,” December 7, 2017.

78________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES (Cont.)

Levees7.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, “U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Levee Portfolio
Report: A Summary of Risks and Benefits Associated with the USACE Levee
Portfolio,” March 2018.

8.

Congressional Research Service, “Levee Safety and Risk: Status andConsiderations,” December 7, 2017.

9.

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Risk Mapping, Assessment andPlanning (Risk MAP), https://www.fema.gov/risk-mapping-assessment-andplanning-risk-map.

10. Federal Emergency Management Agency Hazard Mitigation Assistance,
https://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-assistance.
11. U.S. Society on Dams “Monitoring Levees,” May 2016.
12. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Risk Mapping, Assessment andPlanning (Risk MAP), https://www.fema.gov/risk-mapping-assessment-andplanning-risk-map.
13. Federal Emergency Management Agency Hazard Mitigation Assistance, https://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-assistance.
14. U.S. Society on Dams “Monitoring Levees,” May 2016.

79________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Ports80________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The nation’s more than 300 coastal and inland ports are significant drivers of
the U.S. economy, supporting 30.8 million jobs in 2018 and 26% of the total
GDP. Ports and port tenants plan to spend $163 billion between 2021 and2025, up by over $8 billion over the last four years. Investments are focusedon capacity and efficiency enhancements as maximum vessel size has doubled
over the last 15 years, and tonnage at the top 25 ports grew by 4.4% from2015 to 2019. Federal funding has increased through multimodal competitive
grant programs. However, there is a funding gap of $15.5 billion for waterside
infrastructure such as dredging over the next 10 years, with additional billions
needed for landside infrastructure. Smaller and inland ports are especiallychallenged to maintain their infrastructure and have difficulty competingfor federal grants. Meanwhile, a port’s success is reliant on the infrastructure
outside of its gates, which is often congested or in poor condition. For example,
just 9% of intermodal connector pavement — the portions of roadway thatconnect a port to other modes — are in good or very good condition.

INTRODUCTIONThe United States’ more than 300 ports1 serve as major
economic drivers and places of employment. According
to the American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA),
seaports contributed $5.4 trillion to the economy, or
nearly 26% of the total GDP in 2018. The economic
impact of ports is only growing. AAPA estimates that
30.8 million jobs were supported by ports in 2018, up
from 23.1 million in 2014.2

liquids and manufactured goods and equipment.
Port facilities vary widely in terms of productivity,
footprint, customers, and governance.3 Some ports
are privately owned and operated, while others aremanaged by a government or quasi-government
authority representing a city or state.4 The owner of aport may lease space or infrastructure to a tenant, mostcommonly a terminal operator. Terminal operators are
responsible for maintaining equipment and buildings, but
typically partner with a public agency for major capitalprojects.5 The varied ownership structures contribute to
the uniqueness of each port — the industry saying goes,“once you’ve seen one port, you’ve seen one port.”

Seaports in the U.S. are often located in or adjacent tolarge coastal metropolitan areas. By comparison, inland
ports are located on the Great Lakes or the inland
waterway network and are frequently in more rural
areas. Ports thrive on their flexibility to handle a variety
of products, from bulk aggregates and agriculture to81________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

CAPACITY & CONDITIONPort infrastructure includes docks, piers, channel
harbors, and more. In general, the conditions fromterminal to terminal within a port vary. However, all ports
are challenged to maintain their infrastructure in harshmarine environments. Corrosion from saltwater and deicing salts, constant wet and dry cycles, temperature
variations, and more accelerate the rate of decline ofeverything from cranes to wharfs.6 Port owners aretasked with monitoring the structural integrity of theirinfrastructure in these harsh environments.
Many ports can trace their origins back a century or more,
and all owners are pressed to continue to modernize theirinfrastructure. Seaports, for example, are consistently
expanded to accommodate larger container ships. Vessel
capacity at container ports is measured in TEUs, or“twenty-foot equivalents,” which equals one 20-footcontainer. Maximum vessel capacity has doubled in size
over the last 15 years, from 10,000 TEUs in 2005 toalmost 20,000 TEUs today.7 As vessels have increased
in size, port infrastructure — including berths, cranes,
and channel depths — have required investment to keeppace. Today, a growing number of shallow water ports are
dredged to a channel depth of 45 feet or more, which isnecessary for accommodating post-Panamax ships thatare now able to traverse an expanded Panama Canal.8
Other retrofits and modernizations are needed toaccommodate larger ships, including larger cranes.
According to the U.S. Department of Transportation’s(DOT) Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), in2019 the top 25 container ports operated a total of 504

Creative CommonsCRANES AT PORT OF GALVESTON IN TEXAS

Many ports can trace their
origins back a century or more,
and all owners are pressed tocontinue to modernize theirinfrastructure.

82________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Figure 1. Intermodal
Connector Pavement Condition

ship-to-shore gantry cranes, and nearly 50%, or 235,
were classified as super post-Panamax, or cranes large
enough to load and unload super post-Panamax ships.9
In general, ports are expanding and adding capacity
across the country. BTS reports the total tonnage
handled at the top 25 ports in the country grew by 4.4%
from 2015 to 2019.10 This growth is reflective of anindustry that is investing in its capacity and growing its
ability to accommodate larger volumes.

Fair
35%

While most ports are adding capacity to address growing
freight volumes, their success is contingent on the capacityof, and ease of access to, other modes of transportationsuch as roads and rail. On-dock rail allows for containers
to be loaded directly onto rail lines that are adjacent toport terminals. According to BTS, a total of 44 out of the
88 active container terminals at major U.S. ports had ondock rail access in 2019. All major ports either have ondock rail or are located nearby to rail facilities.11

Good
8%

Mediocre
19%

Poor
37%

Very Good
1%

Intermodal connectors are
the portions of roadways thatlink our National Highway
System to ports and othermodes. These segments are
traditionally underfunded, as
historical­ly they have not fit
neatly into existing funding
programs.

Intermodal connectors are the portions of roadways thatlink our National Highway System to ports and othermodes. These segments are traditionally underfunded, as
historically they have not fit neatly into existing funding
programs. A 2017 Federal Highway Administration(FHWA) report collected pavement condition readings
from the 798 designated freight intermodal connectors andfound that 37% of pavement condition was rated as poor.
These segments also contend with congestion; FHWA
specifically identifies port connectors as having some of theworst congestion, with a 14% speed drop between free-flow
conditions and slowest daytime conditions.12

FUNDING & FUTURE NEED
Funding for port infrastructure is derived from a variety
of sources, including federal, state, and local funding,as well as private sector revenue streams. Waterside
infrastructure needs, namely for dredging, are paid forthrough the federal Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund(HMTF). The HMTF collects its revenue through a
0.125% user fee on the value of the cargo in imported
containers, which equates to approximately $15 percontainer box. Ports, particularly on the East and Gulf
coasts, have significant dredging needs, but the fund’sbalance has traditionally been used to pay for thingsother than port needs, its designated purpose.

For the first time, in Fiscal Year (FY) 2019, total Harbor
Maintenance Trust Fund appropriations met the levelof new receipts and interest. The subsequent CARESAct codified the requirement that the money coming in
must be spent on dredging, as intended by the original
creation of the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. The
2020 Water Resources Development Act took this astep further, allowing for the use of the unspent balanceof $9.3 billion dollars in the HMTF by 2030.13
Landside federal funding is typically provided throughgrants. The U.S. DOT’s Better Utilizing Investments
to Leverage Development (BUILD) Transportation
83________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Discretionary Grant program allows for federal
multimodal investment opportunities. The BUILD
program and its predecessor (Transportation Investment
Generating Economic Recovery, or TIGER) provide an
average of 12% of available funding each round to port
projects, or roughly $1 billion over the past 11 cycles.14

Some states have dedicated funding for ports, including
Florida, Minnesota, Missouri, Virginia, and others.19 20 21 22
Additionally, ports — especially those located inland— have a diversified revenue stream that can include
housing, urban development, and more.
In general, ports continue to invest in their own
infrastructure. A survey conducted by the American
Association of Port Authorities (AAPA) reportsthat ports and port tenants plan to spend $163 billion
between 2021 and 2025, up from the forecasted $154.8
billion in the 2016-2020 AAPA study. Many ports havesuccessfully leveraged the modest increases in available
public funding to make more efficient and innovative
investments in capacity and condition projects.23 It
should be noted that forecasted capital spending overthe next four years is contingent on an economic
recovery and the continued availability of federal andstate funding.

A newer program is the FAST Act’s NationallySignificant Freight and Highway Projects program,
renamed INFRA in 2017. INFRA is designed for large
highway freight projects, but up to $500 million can bespent on multimodal projects, including those locatedinside a port gate. So far, 16% of available INFRA
dollars have been awarded to port projects, or roughly$358 million.15 Both INFRA and the BUILD program
are oversubscribed, with approximately $10 or more of
requests for every $1 available for award.16
Additionally, federal funding is now available throughthe U.S. DOT Maritime Administration’s Port
Infrastructure Development Program (PIDP). PIDP
was authorized in the FY2010 National Defense
Authorization Act but was not appropriated money
until FY2019. Congress’ FY2019 appropriations billprovided $287 for PIDP, and $221 million was available
the following year.17 18 It should be noted that most
PIDP funding is reserved for coastal seaports or Great
Lake ports, meaning inland ports receive a much smaller
amount of funding.

ASCE’s 2021 Failure to Act economic study looks atavailable funding compared to needs for navigationalrelated improvements, including dredging and lock anddam repair. The report shows that unmet waterside
infrastructure needs at coastal ports will be $12.3
billion over the next 10 years.24 Importantly, ASCE’s
infrastructure gap estimate does not consider landsideinvestments. In 2018, AAPA’s U.S. member ports
identified $32.03 billion for landside needs.25 Inland
river ports and terminals also have significant needs
that are not reflected in the AAPA estimate.

84________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

In the coming years, port owners and city planners will need todecide how to handle sea level rise. Relocating an entire port tohigher ground is almost certainly cost-prohibitive, but port owners
may decide to raise docks or relocate facilities offshore. Connecting
modes, such as on-dock rail and service roads, would similarly
need updates to continue providing access to ports.

Creative Commons

OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCEThe USDOT Strategic Plan identifies lifecycle andpreventive maintenance as a strategic objective tokeep the nation’s infrastructure in a state of good
repair. To implement this strategic objective, theMaritime Administration initiated an internal review in2017 and found that ongoing planning frequently fails
to target state-of-good-repair projects and could bebetter at considering resiliency to threats like weather
and earthquakes. The Maritime Administration
subsequently instituted a risk-based asset management
program and is encouraging port owners and operators
to utilize the risk rating and scoring systems created by
the agency.26

85________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

PUBLIC SAFETY & RESILIENCE
Ports have a key role to play in helping a community
recover from a natural or manmade disaster. Goods
can be transported via oceans and inland waterways
to communities in need when other trade routes
are blocked. Similarly, berths can accommodate
emergency vessels and personnel, as was observed in2020 when the 1,000-bed hospital ship USNS Comfort
docked at Port 90 in Manhattan to serve patientsduring the COVID-19 crisis.27 Ports are also able tosupport force deployment in the instance homeland
protection is needed. Nine federal agencies, including
the U.S. Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, andthe Maritime Administration work together to ensure
preparedness for national defense emergencies.28

In the coming years, port owners and city planners willneed to decide how to handle sea level rise. Relocating
an entire port to higher ground is almost certainly costprohibitive, but port owners may decide to raise docks
or relocate facilities offshore. Connecting modes, suchas on-dock rail and service roads, would similarly need
updates to continue providing access to ports. Somelimited investments are being made today to head off
potential complications of sea level rise. The Port of
Virginia, for example, is spending $375 million to raise
their power stations several feet off the ground andposition their data servers as far inland as possible.29

Photo courtesy of Illinois Ports Association
SENECA REGIONAL PORT ON THE ILLINOIS RIVERINNOVATIONIn the U.S., the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles
each have one fully automated terminal. Three semiautomated terminals can be found in Virginia and New
Jersey.30 Automation stands to add throughput capacityand provide safety benefits.31

through open-sourced platforms can improve
efficiencies at ports. Such benefits are already being
realized abroad.32 Advanced analytics also aid ports
in becoming more resilient as predictive approaches
driven by machine learning ensure flexible, responsive,
and adaptive management amid highly complex anddynamic scenarios.

Advanced analytics, such as blockchain, use existingand historic data collected with devices and sensors,86________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

RECOMMENDATIONSTO RAISE THE GRADE·

Remove the multimodal cap on INFRA funds and increase overall investment in the
INFRA and BUILD programs to ensure ports can effectively distribute and receive
goods as ships continue to grow in size.

·

Appropriate funds to the Congressionally authorized projects to ensure that projects
crucial to freight movement are completed in a timely manner.

·

Adopt new technologies to reduce wait times at docks, boost efficiency, improve
resilience, and increase security.

·

Improve freight and landside connections to strengthen the entire freight system
and reduce congestion that is costly to the economy when moving goods.

·

Ensure that ports are a part of comprehensive disaster planning. Ports play a criticalrole in the aftermath of a disaster, facilitating the movement of people and thedelivery of supplies. Integrating ports into a holistic disaster recovery plan — one
that is developed with all stakeholders and is based on the data and data sharing — isvital to ensuring a community can quickly recover.

·

Port owners and operators should utilize asset management to prioritize limited
funding and pinpoint needed repairs.

·

Ensure smaller ports can compete in existing and new competitive grant programs.

·

Spend down the balance of the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund on port projects.

Ports

87
________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES

Ports

1.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, “Ports,” accessed
September 29, 2020.

2.

American Association of Port Authorities, “2018 National Economic Impact of the
U.S. Coastal Port System,” March 2019.

3.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Ports Primer 3.1 Port Operations,”
accessed September 29, 2020.

4.

American Association of Port Authorities, “Seaport Governance in the UnitedStates and Canada,” February 2012.

5.

Bipartisan Policy Center, “A Deep Dive on America’s Ports,” July 2017.

6.

Valdez B, Ramirez J, Eliezer A, Schorr M, Ramos R & Salinas R, Journal of Marine
Engineering & Technology, “Corrosion assessment of infrastructure assets in coastalseas,” 2016, 15:3, 124-134. DOI: 10.1080/20464177.2016.1247635

7.

Margaronis S, American Journal of Transportation, “Port of Oakland Welcomes
19,200 TEU MSC Anna, one of the largest container ships to call North America,”
April 17, 2020.

8.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, “PortPerformance Freight Statistics in 2019: Annual Report to Congress 2020,”
January 2021.

9.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, “PortPerformance Freight Statistics in 2019: Annual Report to Congress 2020,”
January 2021, page 26.

10. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, “PortPerformance Freight Statistics in 2019: Annual Report to Congress 2020,”
January 2021, page 28.
11. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, “PortPerformance Freight Statistics in 2019: Annual Report to Congress 2020,”
January 2021, page 27.
12. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Freight
Management and Operations, “Freight Intermodal Connectors Study, Chapter 6.
Summary of Key Findings and Options for Future Research.” April 2017.
13. Congressional Research Service, “Water Resources Development Act of 2020,”
updated January 5, 2021.
14. American Society of Civil Engineers calculations.
15. ASCE internal analysis.
16. Davis J, Eno Center for Transportation, “DOT Announces $1.5 Billion in BUILD
Surface Transportation Grants,” December 11, 2018.

88________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES (Cont.)

Ports

17. U.S. Department of Transportation, “Maritime Administration Announces MoreThan $280 Million in Grants for Nation’s Ports.” U.S. DOT Maritime Administration,
February 14, 2020, press release.
18. U.S. Department of Transportation, “U.S. Transportation Secretary Elaine L. Chao
Announces Over $220 Million in Grants for America’s Ports,” October 15, 2020,press release.
19. Florida Department of Transportation, “FSTED Program.”
20. Minnesota Department of Transportation, “Port Development Assistance Program.”
21. Missouri Department of Transportation, “Freight Enhancement Program (FRE).”22. Virginia Department of Transportation, “Virginia Transportation Funding.”
23. American Association of Port Authorities, “Results of AAPA’s Port Planned
Infrastructure Investment Survey,” April 30, 2020.
24. American Society of Civil Engineers, “Ports and Inland Waterways: Anchoring the
U.S. Economy,” January 2021.
25. American Association of Port Authorities, “2018 National Economic Impact of the
U.S. Coastal Port System,” March 2019.
26. U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, Office of Ports& Waterways, “Risk-Based Lifecycle Management of In-Water Structures,”presentation given at American Association of Port Authorities Facilities Engineering
Seminar, April 2019.
27. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, “USNS COMFORT Arrives in New York in Supportof COVID-19 Response Efforts,” Washington Headquarters Services, U.S. Military,press release, March 30, 2020.
28. U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, “National Port
Readiness Network (NPRN),” accessed September 30, 2020.
29. Phillips E, Wall Street Journal, “At the Water’s Edge, Seaports Are Slowly Bracing for
Rising Ocean Levels,” February 11, 2019.
30. Mongelluzzo B, Journal of Commerce, “More North American port automation
expected,” July 4, 2019.
31. Leonard M, Supply Chain Dive, “Brief: Moody’s: With port automation comespolitical risk.” June 27, 2019.
32. Port of Rotterdam, Carbon Neutral in 3 Steps, accessed September 29, 2020.

89________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Public
Parks90________
Photo courtesy of the National Parks Service

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Americans spend a lot of time in their parks, visiting local parks and recreational
facilities more than twice a month on average.1 In 2017, people spent $887
billion on outdoor recreation, directly supporting 7.6 million jobs. There
are about 10 acres of public park land per 1,000 residents.2 Despite theirincreased popularity, investment in parks is lagging, resulting in deteriorating
bridges, trails, parking areas, drinking water systems, and more. State parks
and local parks face a $5.6 billion3 and $60 billion deferred maintenancebacklog, respectively. While the National Park Service’s deferred maintenancebacklog grew over 9% in the last decade with more than half of theirassets in need of repair, federal funding for parks is set to increase with passageof the Great American Outdoors Act of 2020. Meanwhile, limited space inurban areas is causing local governments, utilities, and nonprofits to be morecreative by building parks projects that provide mutually beneficial functions,such as public access spaces that also serve as flood control.

INTRODUCTION
Parks support economic prosperity and build thriving,healthy, resilient communities. Besides providing recreational
opportunities and green space for all ages, parks provide asuite of ancillary benefits such as higher property values,
protection and improvements to drinking water sources,
fewer urban heat islands, and stormwater management.4

Our nation’s public parks are owned and operated bya variety of government entities, including federal
agencies, such as the National Park Service (NPS) andthe U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), as well asstates, regional authorities, counties, and local entities.

CONDITION & CAPACITY
The National Park Service (NPS), which manages 419 parks,
covering over 85 million acres nationwide, hosted over 327
million visitors in 2019. The popularity of parks is growing,with national parks visits 13% higher now than a decade ago.
There are more than 8,500 state parks nationwide that
hosted 807 million visitors in 2017– nearly twice as many
visits as to federal parks and forests combined.5 There areabout 10 acres of public park land per 1,000 residents, andthe typical park and recreation agency has about eight fulltime employees for each 10,000 residents.6

agency currently reports $11.92 billion of deferred
maintenance, including $6.15 billion in bridges, tunnels,
and paved parking areas and roadways, and $5.77 billion
in wastewater and drinking water systems, dams, utility
systems, and other non-surface transportation projects.7
Over the past decade, deteriorating facilities, an increased
number of assets, and resource constraints resulted in a
9% growth in the deferred maintenance backlog.8 Stateparks, meanwhile, have well over $5.6 billion in deferred
maintenance backlogs, with the average state park facing$143.7 million of deferred maintenance. On average,
state parks rated both the condition of their roads andtheir water infrastructure a “5” (with 1 being the lowest

The NPS manages more than 75,000 constructedassets, and more than half of them need repair. The
91________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

and 10 being the highest).9 Local parks nationwide havean estimated $60 billion deferred maintenance backlog.

in 43 states. Over 90% of USACE recreation areas arelocated within 50 miles of a major metropolitan center.
Visitors to USACE recreation areas in 2016 spent $10.6
billion, supporting about 189,000 jobs nationwide.11

Parks generate economic value in addition to providing
recreational benefits. In 2019, 327 million visitors tonational parks resulted in $41.7 billion in benefits tothe nation’s economy and supported 340,500 jobs
nationwide. Visitors spent $21 billion in 2019, which
contributed to more than 278,000 jobs in park gateway
communities, or those within 60 miles of an NPS unit.10
This is an increase from 2018, when 318.2 million visitors
contributed $40.1 billion in national economic output
and spent an estimated $20.2 billion in local gateway
regions. In the last five years, NPS visitor spending has
increased by $4.1 billion, and the effect on the U.S.
economy grew by $9.7 billion.

Americans, on average,
visit their local park andrecreation facilities morethan twice a month. In
2017, America’s local parkand recreation agencies
generated $166.4 billion
in economic activity andsupported more than 1.1
million jobs,12 compared to$154 billion in economic
activity in 2015.13

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) manages
many outdoor recreation areas but trails the NPS in total
number of visitors, hosting almost 270 million visits per
year among their more than 402 lake and river properties

Photo courtesy of the National Park Service
THE GRAND CANYON

92________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Local jurisdictions and Americans alike are increasingly
rethinking what makes a park. Many local park andrecreation agencies are consolidating or partnering withother governmental agencies, private companies, and/or nonprofit organizations to provide a range of services,

including intergenerational programs, playgrounds,
walking loops, dog parks, music or movie events, and childand afterschool care, many of which can be incorporated
into existing parks facilities.14

OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE, FUNDING, AND FUTURE NEED
Despite the increasing popularity of parks, investment
is lagging, resulting in deferred maintenance backlogs
and deteriorated parks facilities nationwide. However, 4
in 5 Americans believe their local parks are well worth
the average $70 per person paid annually in local taxes
for their upkeep, with more than 30% of Americans
believing parks are worth more. An overwhelming 91%
of Americans agree that parks and recreation is an
important service provided by local governments.15

funding and $510 million in mandatory funding for its
deferred maintenance backlog, which is about 26% of
the agency’s full budget.16 Discretionary funding for NPS
deferred maintenance has increased by 52% over the last
decade, but these accounts also cover other maintenanceactivities outside of deferred maintenance.17 Even with theincreased funding, assets are rapidly deteriorating, andthere remains a large gap between what the NPS needs
and what they receive in annual funding.

Within the NPS, road and bridge improvements are
partly funded by mandatory allocations from the U.S.
Department of Transportation and fee collections.
Additionally, the NPS also collaborates with states
to submit joint applications for U.S. Departmentof Transportation grants. The remainder of repair,rehabilitation, and operations and maintenance fundingcomes from discretionary annual appropriations. In
FY2020, the NPS received $572 million in discretionary

Typical local park and recreation agencies receive 60%of their funding from general fund tax support. Because
the general fund is not dedicated to funding only parks,
the amount of money allocated each year is often
inconsistent. Meanwhile, typical local park and recreation
agencies dedicate 44% of their operating budget tomaintenance.18 Inconsistent, uncertain funding makes
capital planning for parks difficult.

93________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Sources of Operating Expenditures

Dedicated Levies
8%

Earned/Generated
Revenue
24%

Other Dedicated Taxes
3%
Grants2%
Other2%

General Fund Tax Report
60%
Sponsorships
1%

Source: National Recreation and Parks Association, “2020 NPRA Agency Performance Review”

Over the past decade, state parks’ operating expenditures
have steadily decreased, falling from more than $3
billion in 2008 to about $2.5 billion in 2019.19 Stateparks generate an average of 45% of their own funding
through user fees, while the remainder comes from thestates’ general funds and a mix of dedicated funds andfederal funds.

is authorized at $900 million a year; less than half of
the $40.9 billion in total revenues that have accrued in
the LWCF have been appropriated, leaving a balance ofapproximately $22 billion.
In 2020, the bipartisan Great American Outdoors Act
was enacted into law, which creates a National Parks andPublic Land Legacy Restoration Fund and directs up to$9.5 billion over five years in unobligated federal mineralrevenues — such as royalties from on and offshore oil& gas and renewable energy development on public
lands — to address the deferred maintenance backlog
at the NPS and other federal agencies with public
lands. The law also permanently and fully funds the
LWCF and ensures its funds are used for its intended
purpose. It is estimated that fully addressing the NPS
deferred maintenance backlog would create or support
108,364 jobs.22

The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) is a
critical source of funding for the protection of natural
resources, the preservation of water quantity and quality,
the development of outdoor recreation projects, andincreased recreation accessibility for all Americans.20
More than 98% of the nation’s counties have a park
project that has been funded by the LWCF.21 The LWCF
is funded with revenues generated through offshore
oil and gas energy development; for every $1 invested,a yield of $4 in economic value is realized. The LWCF

94________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

RESILIENCE AND PUBLIC SAFETY
As the frequency of extreme weather events increases,$3.8 billion in air pollution savings; and keeping cities
so does the need to reduce combined sewer overflows
cooler by reducing the heat island effect.23 Green(CSOs). CSOs discharge untreated wastewater andinfrastructure being implemented in parks across thestormwater, often containing
nation is also becoming
agricultural runoff and toxic
Over the past decade, state more cost competitive with
substances, directly into parks’ operating expenditures gray forms of infrastructurenearby bodies of water.
in certain contexts.
have steadily decreased,
While the primary way toGreen and open spaces,
falling from more than $3
deal with combined sewers
floodplains,
billion in 2008 to about $2.5 including
is the separation of storm
floodways, and estuaries,and sanitary sewers, the use
billion in 2019. State parks are being more fullyof parks as raingardens is an
generate an average of 45% embraced as part of a total
innovative way to manageof their own funding through parks programs. Efforts arestormwater
sustainably.
being made, especially in
These green infrastructure user fees, while the remainderareas of repeated flooding,systems use the natural comes from the states’ general
to return those areas toenvironment to manage funds and a mix of dedicatedtheir original uninhabitedstormwater and provide afunds and federal funds.
state so that they can notdiverse range of ancillary
only act as buffers between
benefits such as aesthetic
bodies of water and inhabited areas, but provide wildlife
value to communities; increasing property values by
habitat. In this way, our parks can contribute greatly
up to 20%; filtering rain which reduces water pollution
to the sustainability of communities and mitigate theand protects drinking water sources; providing up toeffects of climate change.

Photo Courtesy of WSP USA
BERKELEY ISLAND PARK IN OCEAN COUNTY, NEW JERSEY95________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

People use parks for a wide range of purposes, andthey expect that regardless of what activity they may
engage in, they are protected from crime and that help
will come in the case of natural disaster. For example,
the wildfires of 2020 greatly impacted public lands inthe western states. During the crisis, federal and stateagencies worked collaboratively to rescue campers andpreemptively close facilities to protect the public. A
dramatic example of this was the National Guard airliftof 150 people from a U.S. National Forest Service
campground that was cut off by fire.24

INNOVATION
Parks are increasingly being used for multiple functions,from recreation to green stormwater management, totransformation into lifelong learning centers used forarts, culture, education, events, conferences, retreats,
and other similar programs. State and local parks are
partnering with other agencies, nonprofit organizations,and private entities to find innovative ways to make thesegreen spaces accessible and desirable to every memberof the community.

Many states have implemented innovative funding
mechanisms for their parks. For example, some states
have dedicated sources of funding for recreation such asa portion of lottery proceeds, redirecting sales taxes on
sporting goods, or dipping into real estate tax revenues.
These funding tools have had varying levels of success.
However, revenues from federal excise taxes on shooting,hunting, fishing, and boating equipment provided morethan $1.1 billion to states in 2018.25

Some state parks are working with innovative Geographic
Information System (GIS) mapping technology toefficiently track all projects underway within the parksystem, including park, facility, and infrastructure needs.
These GIS databases assist with asset management andtask and revenue tracking, and they provide information
for data-driven decision-making on future development
and infrastructure repairs based on important metrics
like return of investment and infrastructure age.

Meanwhile, the NPS is engaged in partnerships whereoutside organizations assume some asset maintenanceresponsibilities or where the NPS leases assets toother parties in exchange for the lessee rehabilitatingor maintaining the asset. Many NPS units also engage
volunteer groups to perform maintenance duties; it’sestimated that if the NPS could increase its number ofvolunteers to 600,000 by 2028, it would result in 40
million hours of volunteer labor valued at $802.6 million
over a 10-year period.26

Photo Courtesy of WSP USASHIRLEY CHISHOLM STATE PARK IN BROOKLYN, NEW YORK96________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

RECOMMENDATIONSTO RAISE THE GRADE

PublicParks·

Fully fund the Great American Outdoors Act, which creates a dedicated fund to address
the National Park Service’s deferred maintenance backlog of nearly $12 billion andpermanently and fully funds the Land and Water Conservation Fund.

·

Enact legislation to permit agencies, including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, toretain user fees in the park system in which they were collected for use at its facilities,
for parks and recreation uses.

·

Mainstream the utility of GIS and other technologies to assist with asset management
and to enhance user experience at parks.

·

Promote the benefits of multiple-use parks that increase the community’s resilience,such as rain gardens, which reduce stormwater pollution and protect drinking water
sources.

·

Encourage local, state, and federal public parks to partner with other government
agencies and outside entities — private companies, nonprofit organizations, andvolunteer groups — to assist with asset maintenance and to develop multiple uses for thepark that maximize their use and benefit for the community.

·

Strive to make all parks facilities and programs accessible to everyone by making theparks walkable, making public transit accessible, and making the parks accommodating
to those of all ages, incomes, abilities, and community-specific needs.

·

Ensure that parks facilities and programs are maintained and located across all parts ofcommunities by eliminating “parks deserts.”

SOURCES
1.

National Recreation and Parks Association, “2018 Americans’ Engagement with
Parks Report.”

2.

Outdoor Industry Association, “2017 National Recreation Economy Report,” 2017.

3.

National Association of State Park Directors, 2020 Survey for ASCE, August 5, 2020.

4. City Parks Alliance, “City Parks Are a Smart Investment for America’s Health,Economy & Environment.”
5.

PERC, “How We Pay to Play: Funding Outdoor Recreation on Public Lands in the
21st Century,” May 2019.

6.

National Recreation and Parks Association “2020 NPRA Agency Performance Review.”

7.

National Park Service, “Deferred Maintenance.”

8.

Congressional Research Service, “National Park Service Appropriations: Ten-Year
Trends,” July 2, 2019.

97________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES (Cont.)
9.

PublicParks

National Association of State Park Directors, 2020 Survey for ASCE, August 5,
2020.

10. National Park Service, “2019 National Park Visitor Spending Effects,” 2019.
11. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Institute for Water Resources.
12. National Recreation and Parks Association and the Center for Regional Analysis at
George Mason University, “The Economic Impact of Parks,” 2020.
13. National Recreation and Parks Association and the Center for Regional Analysis at
George Mason University, “Economic Impact of Local Parks Report,” 2018.
14. City Parks Alliance, “Active Parks, Healthy Cities: Recommendations from the
National Study of Neighborhood Parks.”
15. National Recreation and Parks Association, “2018 Americans’ Engagement with
Parks Report,” 2018.
16. Congressional Research Service, “National Park Service Appropriations: Ten-Year
Trends,” July 2, 2019.
17. Congressional Research Service, “National Park Service Appropriations: Ten-Year
Trends,” July 2, 2019.
18. National Recreation and Parks Association, “2020 NRPA Agency Performance
Review,” 2020.
19. PERC, “How We Pay to Play: Funding Outdoor Recreation on Public Lands in the
21st Century,” May 2019.
20. U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service, Land and Water Conservation Fund.
21. City Parks Alliance, “A Smart Investment for America’s Economy: The Land andWater Conservation Fund.”
22. Cadmus Group, “Restoring Parks, Creating Jobs: How Infrastructure Restorationin the National Park System Can Create or Support Jobs,” June 2019.
23. City Parks Alliance, “City Parks Are a Smart Investment for America’s Health,Economy & Environment.”
24. Los Angeles Times, “As fire ‘engulfed everything’ around campers, an air rescue likeno other in the Sierra,” September 6, 2020.
25. PERC, “How We Pay to Play: Funding Outdoor Recreation on Public Lands in the
21st Century,” May 2019.
26. Government Accountability Office, “National Park Service: Process Exists forPrioritizing Asset Maintenance Decisions, but Evaluation Could Improve Efforts,”
December 2016.

98________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Rail

99
________
Photo Courtesy of the American Association of Railroads

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Our nation’s rail network is divided into two categories: freight rail andpassenger rail. Approximately 140,000 rail miles are operated by freight’s
Class I, II, and III railroads. Amtrak operates over a 21,400-mile network,
70% of which is owned by other railroads, also known as host track. Despite
freight and passenger rail being part of an integrated system, there remain
stark differences in the challenges faced by the two rail categories. Whilefreight maintains a strong network largely through direct shipper fees —investing on average over $260,000 per mile — passenger rail requires
government investment and has been plagued by a lack of federal support,
leading to a current state of good repair backlog at $45.2 billion. Along
our nation’s busiest passenger rail corridor, the Northeast Corridor,
infrastructure-related issues caused 328,000 train-delay minutes, or theequivalent of roughly 700 Northeast Regional train trips from Boston,
Massachusetts, to Washington, D.C.

CONDITION & CAPACITY
Approximately 140,000 rail miles are operated byClass I, II, and III freight railroads.1 Amtrak, the national
intercity passenger carrier, operates over a 21,400-mile
network. Approximately 70% of the 21,400 miles traveledby Amtrak trains are over tracks owned by other railroads.2

Freight Rail
Freight rail is divided into three classifications based on
yearly earnings and service distance.3
Freight RailClassification

Number of
Lines

Operating Revenues

Class I7

At least $490
million4

Class II

22

Between $39.1 and$489.9 million

Class III584

$39.1 million
or less

Photo courtesy of Amtrak

100________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

According to the American Association of Railroads,
from 2017 to 2019, Class I capital expenditures —including track, structures, and equipment — totaled
Top 4 Class I Railroads$38.3 billion over 198,554 operating track miles.
Included below is the latest operating data from the top
four Class I railroads:5

Road Operating Miles

Billions of Revenue TonMiles

Operating Revenue

BNSF Railroad

32,445702$23.4 Billion

Union Pacific (UP)32,236474$22.8 Billion

CSX Transportation

20,602

209$11.9 Billion

Norfolk Southern (NS)19,420207$11.4 Billion

Class II and III serve in partnerships with Class I railroads
to provide first and last mile service and delivery. Short line
and regional railroads (Classes II and III) in 2017 operated
in 49 states over 47,500 miles of track, or 29% of thenational rail network. The short line industry reports a $10
billion shortfall for state of good repair projects needed toretain strong connection to the Class I network.6

Amtrak service is provided along the Northeast Corridor(NEC) between Washington, D.C., and Boston and on
the national network incorporating state-supported
and long-distance services. State-supported service isprovided on 28 routes less than 750 miles in length, andlong-distance service is provided on 15 routes. Between
2017 and 2019, Amtrak spent $713 million on state-ofgood-repair projects. Infrastructure maintenance andreplacement is provided to Amtrak by host railroads, but
the Amtrak-owned NEC has unique infrastructure.11 12

According to the U.S. Department of Transportation’s(DOT) Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), in2018 there was a total of 1.7 million ton-miles per day
transported on our nation’s freight rail network, anincrease of over 100,000 ton-miles from the previous
year and an increase of nearly 400,000 over the past
20 years.7 Goods moved on the nation’s freight network
are projected to grow from 1.40 billion tons in 2018 to1.58 billion tons in 2045.8
Between 2017 and 2019, total U.S. carload traffic
decreased from 13.4 million to just under 13.0 million
carloads.9 10 This decline is largely associated with reduced
coal and mineral/ore shipments and was expected tocontinue through 2020, reflecting the downturn in theeconomy associated with the coronavirus pandemic.

In 2019, Amtrak’s
network carried 32.5
million riders to morethan 500 destinations
across 46 states and theDistrict of Columbia.
This translates to a daily
average of nearly 89,100
trips on more than
300 Amtrak trains.

Passenger RailIn 2019, Amtrak’s network carried 32.5 million riders
to more than 500 destinations across 46 states and theDistrict of Columbia. This translates to a daily average ofnearly 89,100 trips on more than 300 Amtrak trains.
Passenger travel operates on both privately and publicly
owned railroads. Host railroads include 93% freightrailroads, with the remainder owned by commuter
railroads, commuter authorities, and municipalities.

101________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

The NEC is largely owned by Amtrak and is the busiest
railroad segment in the passenger rail system, providing
18.8 million trips to 12.5 million riders in 2019. The
NEC is shared with eight commuter railroads (MBTA,
CTrail, Long Island Rail Road, Metro-North Railroad, NJ
TRANSIT, SEPTA, MARC, and VRE) who financially
support operating and capital costs.13 The NEC is at
capacity and has a current state-of-good-repair backlog
of $45.2 billion. Infrastructure-related issues continued
to be the largest source of delay on the corridor in 2019,causing 328,000 train-delay minutes.14 15

The Northeast Corridor Commission, comprised ofeight states (Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut,
New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, andMaryland) and the District of Columbia, was establishedby Congress to determine the funding needs of the NECthat would be shared between the commuter railroads
and Amtrak. The current NEC Commission report forinvestment needs for FY2020-24, has identified a $32.2
billion funding requirement, with $18 billion available,$7.6 billion being requested through existing federal
grant programs, and $6.6 billion currently unfunded.16

FUNDING, FUTURE NEED, AND OPERATION & MAINTENANCE
Freight RailClass II and III railroads reinvest an average of 25% to
33% of annual revenues in capital expenditures andmaintenance-of-way costs. Despite this investment,
funding for capital projects is very challenging. A federal
tax credit provides $0.50 on every dollar spent up to$3,500 per mile on track and bridge improvements. This
has resulted in approximately $4 billion in investment
since it was enacted in 2005.19

Over the last 40 years, private railroads have spentover $700 billion to develop the current network; thisincludes $24.9 billion in 2018 at an average of over
$260,000 per mile. Freight railroads determine theirproject priorities under two categories: mission-criticalprojects and potentially funded/optional projects.
Mission-critical projects include scheduled maintenanceand unscheduled repairs. Potentially funded or optional
projects include those that reduce bottlenecking, line
extensions, information technology solutions, and related
capital investments. Private railroads reinvest close to
20% of their operating revenue into infrastructure, and in2017, $11.5 billion was budgeted for capital expendituresby Class I railroads. Freight railroads use their revenues
to cover both operating costs and capital investments.17 18

Passenger RailIn addition to passenger revenues and state funding,
Amtrak relies on federal grants to operate, maintain,
and invest in capital programs for intercity passenger
rail. Under the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation(FAST) Act, Amtrak is authorized from fiscal year (FY)2016 through FY2020 a total of $8.1 billion in federal
grants, though Congress provided additional funding tosupport Amtrak over the course of the 5 year bill.

Fiscal Year (FY)

AnnualAppropriation

NEC

National Network

Net Financing Cash
Flows

2016

$1.4 Billion$400 Million$1.0 Billion$1.8 Billion

2017$1.5 Billion$328 Million$1.2 Billion$2.3 Billion

2018$1.9 Billion$650 Million$1.3 Billion$2.2 Billion

2019$1.9 Billion$650 Million$1.3 Billion$2.5 Billion

2020$2.0 Billion$700 Million$1.3 Billion

TBD

102
________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Photo Courtesy of the American Association of Railroads

Amtrak also receives funding from state agencies. In
FY2019, 18 states provided financial support, totaling$234.2 million, an increase by $0.4 million from theprevious year.20 Additionally, Amtrak received $1 billion
in direct aid through the CARES Act, with $492 million
directed toward the NEC and $526 million toward thenational network. In a recent round of COVID-19 relief(H.R. 133), Amtrak received an additional $1 billion,
with the NEC receiving $655 million and $345 million
directed toward the national network. It is important tonote that prior to the pandemic, Amtrak was projected
to require no federal funding support to cover operating
costs in FY2020.

PUBLIC SAFETY
In 2019, DOT’s Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)
reported a total of 11,667 accidents/incidents, a slightincrease from 11,247 incidents 10 years ago. Trespassing
on railroad rights-of-ways remains the leading cause ofrail-related fatalities, growing from 505 in 2017 to 577
in 2019, or 64% of total U.S. rail-related fatalities thatyear. Collisions at highway-rail grade crossings are thesecond leading cause of rail-related fatalities, making
up approximately 30% of total fatalities. Grade crossing
collisions declined in 2018 and 2019 from 2,230 to2,216, respectively.21

Through the implementation of Positive Train Control(PTC), both freight and passenger rail have usedtechnology designed to automatically stop a train before
certain accidents associated with human error canoccur.22 In 2020, Amtrak completed PTC installation on
all of its owned or controlled track miles. Amtrak spent$265.7 million and $222.9 million in 2018 and 2019respectively for PTC-related projects on their owned/
controlled rail lines and equipment. In December 2020,
FRA announced that PTC technology is in full operationon all required freight and passenger railroad route miles.

103________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

INNOVATION AND RESILIENCE
Rail technology development continues to focus on improving system efficiency and safety. Industry
technological advances include identifying freight car, locomotive, cargo, and track problems before
accidents, damage, or delays occur. Numerous track and infrastructure improvements have been
advanced including the use of defect detection vehicles, which detect internal flaws in rails; improved
metallurgy and fastening systems, which have enhanced track stability; and research to extend rail life,
reduce maintenance costs, and improve safety. Examples include the development of ground-penetratingradar and terrain conductivity sensors that identify below ground surface problems, and cybersecurity
systems advancements, including the establishment of the Rail Information Security Committee (RISC)
to identify and address future threats.23 24 Railroad-focused technology research and development is
supported by the railroad industry-owned Transportation Technology Center in Pueblo, Colorado.
As required by the FAST Act, DOT released the National Freight Strategic Plan (NFSP) which
identifies opportunities for the national multimodal freight system to improve safety, security,
and resilience; modernize freight infrastructure and operations to grow the economy and increase
competitiveness; and support data, technology, and workforce capabilities development that
improve freight system performance.

Photo by Katie Pruitt
AMTRAK’S PACIFIC SURFLINER ROUTE IN SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA

104________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

RECOMMENDATIONSTO RAISE THE GRADE·

Support concepts in the National Freight Strategic Plan (NFSP) that would improvethe multimodal freight network, enhance safety, provide for capacity improvements,
and improve economic competitiveness. As part of implementing the NFSP, a robust
National Asset Management system should be created to support the identification,prioritization, and sourcing of funding for capital investment projects.

·

Continue a financial and regulatory environment that supports private rail
investment and innovative financing options for future investment. This includes
maintaining the now permanent federal Railroad Track Maintenance Tax Credit
and supporting existing financing programs, such as the Railroad Rehabilitation and
Improvement Financing (RRIF) program and Transportation Infrastructure Financeand Innovation Act (TIFIA).

·

Encourage passenger rail infrastructure investment in high-population centers, andsupport continued investment for state-supported routes. Continue to support
rail investment in added capacity and expanded service in high-density markets torelieve system stress on other modes.

·

Sustain the planning for NEC investments and acquire funding for projects
identified in NEC Commission’s multi-year capital investment plan.

·

Fund regional freight rail investment plans, including the CREATE program, tosupport efficient operation and reduce delays by eliminating bottlenecks.

·

For future surface transportation reauthorizations, include and fund programs that
reduce hazards at railway-highway crossings.

Rail

SOURCES
1.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, “Freight Rail
Overview.”

2.

Amtrak, “Fiscal Year 2019 Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations and Consolidated Financial Statements with
Report of Independent Auditors,” 2019.

3.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, “Freight Rail
Overview.”

4. Association of American Railroads, “Railroad 101: Overview of America’s Freight
Railroads,” October 2020.
5.

Association of American Railroads, “Railroad Facts 2019,” 2019.

6.

The American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association (ASLRRA).

7.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, “U.S. TonMiles of Freight.”
105________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES (Cont.)

Rail

8.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, “Moving
Goods in the United States.”

9.

Association of American Railroads, “AAR Reports Freight Rail Traffic for 2017,
December and Week Ending December 30, 2017,” 2017.

10. Association of American Railroads, “Rail Traffic for December and the Week Ending
December 28, 2019,” 2019.
11. National Railroad Passenger Corporation and Subsidiaries (Amtrak),“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results ofOperations and Consolidated Financial Statements With Report of Independent
Auditors,” Fiscal Year 2019.
12. Amtrak, “FY2019 Company Profile: For the Period October 1, 2018 –September 30, 2019.”
13. Northeast Corridor Commission, “Northeast Corridor Annual Report: Operations
and Infrastructure, Fiscal Year 2018,” 2018.
14. Amtrak, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Resultsof Operations and Consolidated Financial Statements with Report of Independent
Auditors, Fiscal Year 2018,” 2018.
15. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, “Overview
Reports.”
16. Association of American Railroads.
17. Association of American Railroads, “Freight Railroad Capacity and Investment.”
18. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, “AASHTO
Freight Rail Study Support Services,” August 2018.
19. The American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association (ASLRRA).
20. Amtrak, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Resultsof Operations and Consolidated Financial Statements with Report of Independent
Auditors, Fiscal Year 2019,” 2019.
21. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, “Overview
Reports.”
22. Association of American Railroads, “Freight Railroads & Positive Train Control(PTC) Fact Sheet,” December 2020.
23. Association of American Railroads, “High-Tech Advances Improve Railroad Safety& Efficiency.”
24. Association of American Railroads. “Railroads and Cybersecurity.”106________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Roads107________
Photo courtesy of Matt Hoffman

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
America’s roads are critical for moving an ever-increasing number of people
and goods. However, these vital lifelines are frequently underfunded, and over
40% of the system is now in poor or mediocre condition. As the backlog of
rehabilitation needs grows, motorists are forced to pay over $1,000 every
year in wasted time and fuel. Additionally, while traffic fatalities have beenon the decline, over 36,000 people are still dying on the nation’s roads every
year, and the number of pedestrian fatalities is on the rise. Federal, state, andlocal governments will need to prioritize strategic investments dedicated to
improving and preserving roadway conditions that increase public safety on
the system we have in place, as well as plan for the roadways of the future,
which will need to account for connected and autonomous vehicles.

CONDITION, CAPACITY & PUBLIC SAFETY
There are over 4 million miles of public roadways in the UnitedStates carrying people and goods to their destinations everyday. However, these roadways are expected to withstandan ever-increasing volume of traffic each year, with vehicle
miles traveled reaching more than 3.2 trillion in 2019, an
18% increase from 2000.1 Unfortunately, the growing wear
and tear to our nation’s roads has left 43%2 of our public
roadways in poor or mediocre condition, a number that hasremained stagnant over the past several years. Of note, thevast majority of roads in poor and mediocre condition tend
to be on urban and rural collectors and the non-interstatesystem, while the interstate system tends to be in goodcondition. Overall, our deteriorating roads are forcing thenation’s motorists to spend nearly $130 billion3 each year
in extra vehicle repairs and operating costs. Even moretroubling is that the number of vehicle miles traveled onroads in “poor” condition has risen from 15% to more than
17% over the last decade.4

Roadway Condition
Mediocre
22.6%
Fair
15.4%

Poor
20.1%

Good
41.9%

Source: Data from TRIP, a National Transportation Research Nonprofit

108________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Congestion and Reliability

than operational changes. In fact, in many cases, roadway
expansion can lead to induced demand and further sprawl.

In the years following the 2008 economic recession,congestion increased by 1% to 3% annually and continues
to outpace population growth. In fact, 47%5 of the nation’s
urban interstates are experiencing congestion during peak
hours, and 30%6 of trips taken on the nation’s roads are
impacted by severe or extreme congestion. Compounding
the problem has been the growth of transportation network
companies (TNCs) or ride-sharing services, which initialstudies have shown can increase congestion in urban areas.
For example, studies have shown that TNCs have accounted
for 52% of vehicle delays in San Francisco alone.7 Withestimates that ridesharing trips can reach 97 million daily8
by 2030, congestion concerns will continue to grow.

Our nation’s highways and roads move 72%, or nearly$17 trillion,10 of the nation’s goods; therefore, consumers,
industry, and the traveling public require reliable andconsistent travel times.
While everyday congestion remains common in andaround many U.S. cities, unexpected congestion is highly
troubling for commuters and freight movement. Without
consistent, reliable travel times due to irregular andunpredictable backups, it is more difficult for the public
and shippers to plan their trips. Even after accounting
for unexpected crashes, bad weather, special events,
or other irregular congestion, the average American isspending 54 hours each year in traffic congestion, up
from 42 hours in 2014.11 If these trends continue, on
average across the U.S., a 60-minute trip is expected totake 106 minutes in 2039.12 While the Federal Highway
Administration is now encouraging agencies to adopt
travel time reliability measures to better manage andoperate transportation systems, work still needs to bedone to create a national database.

In 2017, congestion caused urban Americans to travel
an extra 8.8 billion hours and purchase and extra 3.3
billion gallons of fuel.9 This congestion costs the nation$166 billion each year, or approximately $1,080 annuallyin wasted time and fuel for the average auto commuter.
This is additional spending to the money already spent on
vehicle repair costs due to the condition of the roadways.
However, as every lane-mile of road costs approximately$24,000 annually in operation and maintenance,
roadway expansion can be more costly and less efficient

10 Most Congested Urban Areas in the U.S.
2019
Congestion
Rank

Urban Area

Hours
Lost In
Congestion

20182019
Change20172018
Change1 (1)Boston, MA

149

-5%

2 (3)

Chicago, IL

145

3 (5)

Philadelphia, PA

4 (2)Last Mile
Speed
(Mph)

Cost Per
DriverTotal Cost
Per City

3%$2,250

$4.1B

12

4%

0%

$2,146

$7.6B

11

142

4%

5%

$2,102$4.5B

10

New York City, NY

140

-4%

-3%

$2,072

$11B

11

5 (3)

Washington, DC

124

-11%

4%

$1,835

$4.1B

10

6 (7)

Los Angeles, CA

103

4%

-8%

$1,524

$8.2B

16

7 (6)

San Francisco, CA

97

-8%

-4%

$1,436

$3B

10

8 (9)

Portland, OR

89

10%

-7%

$1,317$1.2B

14

9 (11)

Baltimore, MD

84

5%

9%

$1,243$1.3B

1010 (12)Atlanta, GA

82

9%

-3%

$1,214$3.0B

12

PUBLIC SAFETY

Source: Inrix 2019 Global Traffic Scorecard

Incident
Impact109________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Bike

TransitTRAFFIC IN LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA

While traffic fatalities increased annually in the early partof the last decade, they have been declining since 2017.
Unfortunately, 36,096 people died on the nation’s roadways
in 2019, with an increasing proportion of those fatalities
suffered by non-motorists, such as pedestrians. In fact, in2019 over 6,000 pedestrians13 were killed, marking a 60%
increase of pedestrian fatalities from 10 years prior and thehighest number since 1988. Additionally, the overall fatality
rate in rural areas continues to be disproportionately higher
than the fatality rate on all other roadways, and it is estimatedthat roadway design features are likely a contributing factor
in approximately one-third of traffic fatalities. Investments
to widen lane, shoulder, and clearance widths, as well as
introducing more center lane rumble strips, lane markings,
and sidewalks are infrastructure improvements that could
reduce traffic fatalities.

In fact, in 2019 over 6,000
pedestrians13 were killed,
marking a 60% increase ofpedestrian fatalities from
10 years prior and thehighest number since 1988.
... the overall fatality rate inrural areas continues to bedisproportionately higher than
the fatality rate on all otherroadways, and it is estimatedthat roadway design features
are likely a contributing factor
in approximately one-third oftraffic fatalities.

The National Safety Council attributes the recent decline
in traffic fatalities to the implementation of several risk
mitigation actions over the last several years. For example,
since 2016, 10 cities have embraced Vision Zero models,110________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

and more than 30 other cities have joined the Vision
Zero Network, which is an alliance of communities
committed to making streets safer by taking actions suchas redesigning areas that have a history of high crashes
and lowering speed limits where possible. Further action
from policymakers and communities focused on reducing

traffic fatalities through infrastructure, combined withvehicles that are becoming safer through advances intechnologies, could reduce the severity of future crashes
or prevent them altogether. In fact, some estimates havefound that new technologies such as connected vehicles
can cut fatal crashes by as much as 86%.14

FUNDING & FUTURE NEEDThe U.S. has been underfunding its roadway maintenancefor years, resulting in a $786 billion backlog of road andbridge capital needs. The bulk of the backlog ($435 billion)
is in repairing existing roads, while $125 billion is needed forbridge repair, $120 billion for targeted system expansion,and $105 billion for targeted system enhancement (which
includes safety enhancements, operational improvements,and environmental projects).15 However, in 2017, federal,state, and local governments spent just $177 billion on
roads and bridges, with an increasing focus on operations
and maintenance needs.16 As roads age and deteriorate,
the most recent data estimates that over 62% of roadway
spending was directed toward system preservation, a

3% increase from the Federal Highway Administration’s
previous reporting period.17 Therefore over the next 20
years, the projected spending is estimated at $41 billion.
However, the funding required to rehabilitate pavement
and other operational conditions will average $53 billion
annually. We need to increase current spending levels by
a 29% to address the current and anticipated backlogs.18
Federal investment in roads has historically been paid forfrom a dedicated, user fee-funded source, the Highway
Trust Fund. Unfortunately, the Highway Trust Fund has
been teetering on the precipice of insolvency for nearly 15
years due to the limitations of its primary funding source,

The U.S. has been underfunding its roadway maintenancefor years, resulting in a $786 billion backlog of road andbridge capital needs.

111________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

the federal motor fuels tax. The tax of 18.4 cents per gallon
for gasoline and 24.4 cents for diesel has not been raisedsince 1993, and inflation has cut its purchasing power by
40%. Additionally, new vehicle fuel economy for passenger
vehicles has increased by 11 miles per gallon between 1993
and 2017, further reducing revenue. The Congressional
Budget Office estimates that by 2022 the Highway TrustFund is projected to have a $15 billion deficit as current
spending levels exceed revenues from user fees that supply
the fund.

states spent $151.8 billion on state-owned roads, up 9%
from the previous year.19
States are also exploring other revenue sources for funding
road investment, including mileage-based user fees. With
continued improvements in vehicle fuel efficiency andthe popularity of hybrid and electric vehicles, mileagebased user fees could present an opportunity for a longterm funding alternative to the motor fuels tax. However,while legislative and voter action has allowed some states
to maintain or increase local sources of roadway funding,federal funding remains a significant portion of overall roadfunding. Put another way, federal partnership for roadway
infrastructure is still required to maintain and modernize
the system. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic has led
to a sharp decline in vehicle miles travelled and therefore
gas tax receipts in 2020, and the full impact of this revenue
loss for state transportation budgets, could be as much as$37 billion over 2020 and 2021.20

Encouragingly, some state lawmakers are helping reverse
losses in the federal gas tax purchasing power by making thedecision to raise or reform state gas taxes. Since 2010, 37
states have raised or reformed their gas taxes either throughlegislative action or automatic formulas that regularly adjust
the gas tax rate. Furthermore, in 2019 alone, voters in 19
states approved $9.6 billion in one-time and recurring
revenue through ballot initiatives. In fact, in 2018 alone,

Gas Tax Increases Since 2010
WA
MT
OR

VT

ND
MN

ID

WY

WI

SD
NE

NV

UT

CA
AZ

CO

KS

IA
IL

NM

IN

OH
KY

MS

AL

GA

WV

VA

SC

MA
RI
CT
NJ
DE

LA

MD
FL

HI

NH

PA

NC

TN

AR

TX

AK

MI

MO

OK

NY

ME

DC
Gas tax
increases
since 2010

Source: Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy

112________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

INNOVATION
Timely, preventive maintenance of our roads with better
materials extends the life of pavement and costs lessthan reconstructing pavements after they reach failure.
The increased use of innovative materials to preserveand rebuild pavements that are better suited to today’svehicle loading and more resilient to environmental
impacts has led to longer lasting pavements and lower life
cycle costs. However, material innovations in pavements
have not kept pace with other areas of infrastructure,such as bridge construction.

with less impact on roadway users. The advent of smart
pavement is opening up the possibility for features likeradio-connected sensors being embedded in a road toconstantly monitor and report the pavement’s changing
condition or to charge electric cars as they drive along,thus reducing the need for off-road recharging stops.
Additionally, the use of next generation materials anddecentralized traffic lights to promote traffic flow areinnovative solutions for issues like congestion datacollection. Meanwhile, the increased focus on how toefficiently integrate bicycle and pedestrian traffic iscreating longer term congestion solutions in urban areas.

Advancements in technology have created opportunities
for the nation’s road networks. Technologies likeadvanced pavement monitoring, where the use ofmoisture and temperature sensors are embedded in the
pavement, have made it possible to collect information
about the condition of road pavements more quickly and

Furthermore, one of the largest technological shifts is
the introduction of connected and autonomous vehicles
onto the nation’s roadways. While these new technologies
can provide an opportunity to increase safety and

Rising temperatures are estimated to
add approximately $19 billion to pavement
costs each year by 2040.
Photo by Anna Denecke

113________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

mobility, reduce congestion, improve land use, andreduce our carbon footprint, if implemented incorrectly
this technology could have the opposite effect and leadto extra stress on the system. With 40 states having

enacted either legislation or an Executive Order related
to autonomous vehicles, policies are already accounting
for the deployment of these technologies on our nation’sroads.

RESILIENCE AND OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
The increase in severe weather events is damaging
key roadways that serve as community lifelines,
while simultaneously increasing maintenance needs,interrupting the normal operation of the nation’s roads,
creating delays, and negatively impacting the economy.
For example, rising temperatures are estimated to
add approximately $19 billion to pavement costs eachyear by 2040.21 Therefore, engineers are increasingly
incorporating the resilience of the road network during
the materials selection and design process and using
data-driven analysis to make investments. Furthermore,
the Federal Highway Administration now requires statetransportation departments and planning organizations(DOTs and MPOs) to consider resilience in the planning
process and include resilience considerations in asset
management plans.

and improving their road networks. Effective plans
focus on engineering and economic analysis to identify
a structured sequence of maintenance, preservation,
repair, rehabilitation, and replacement while promoting
actions that will help optimize their networks within theavailable funding constraints. Every state DOT is now
required to have an asset management plan in order toreceive federal funding, although many of these plans
still do not cover the majority of roadways, as the plans
are only required to cover the National Highway System.
While asset management plans still have room for
improvement, when paired with life-cycle cost analysis,
they are helping states set priorities and determine where
investments should be made to improve the overallsystem. Repaving and surface treatments might improvea roadway in the short term, but because underlying
roadways continue to age, replacing the road might bea more effective solution for the long-term. Life-cycle
cost analysis can help facilitate these decisions.

States are also developing asset management plans todefine strategic processes for operating, maintaining,114________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

RECOMMENDATIONSTO RAISE THE GRADE·

Focus resources on preserving a state of good repair, as the nation will never be able
to fully build its way out of congestion. Policies and efforts focused on improving
travel time reliability will need to be implemented to maximize the capacity of theexisting road network. This should be done in coordination with the acceleration of
the development and deployment of new technologies that promote an integrated,
multimodal transportation system.

·

Increase funding from all levels of government and the private sector to address thecondition and operations of the roadway system to maintain a state of good repair
and ensure safety for all users.

·

Fix the federal Highway Trust Fund by raising the federal motor fuels tax by five
cents each year over five years. To ensure long-term, sustainable funding for thefederal surface transportation program, the current user fee of 18.4 cents per gallon
on gasoline and 24.4 cents per gallon on diesel should be tied to inflation to restore
its purchasing power, fill the funding deficit, and ensure reliable funding for the
future.

·Develop state and local level comprehensive transportation asset management
plans that link asset management efforts to long-term transportation planning andincorporate the use of life-cycle cost analysis.

·

Create dedicated federal investments to build resilience into the nation’s road andbridge infrastructure and integrate resilience planning into State Transportation
Asset Management Plans.

Roads

DEFINITIONSCONDITION — The “ride quality” of highways and roadways is typically evaluatedusing the International Roughness Index (IRI), and the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) data are the only national source of pavement
condition ratings based on a consistent criterion. Using this information, TRIP
categorizes the condition of a region’s roads and highways into poor, mediocre,
fair, or good condition. The FHWA has found that a road surface with an IRI
rating below 95 provides a good ride quality, a road with an IRI from 95 to 170
provides an acceptable ride quality, and a road with an IRI above 170 provides
an unacceptable ride quality.

115________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES

Roads

1.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, “U.S.
Vehicle-Miles.”2.

TRIP, “Key Facts About the U.S. Surface Transportation System,” April 2020.

3.

TRIP, “Bumpy Road Ahead: America’s Roughest Rides and Strategies to Make Our
Roads Smoother,” October 2018.

4. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, “Statusof the Nation’s Highways, Bridges, and Transit Conditions and Performance
Report,” 23rd Edition.
5.

TRIP, “Restoring the Interstate Highway System,” July 2020.

6.

Texas A&M Transportation Institute, “2019 Urban Mobility Report,” August 2019.

7.

Transportation Research Board, “The Effect of Transportation Network Companies(TNCs) on Congestion in San Francisco.”

8.

National Governors Association, “Ahead of the Curve: A Policy Roadmap for States.”

9.

Texas A&M Transportation Institute, “2019 Urban Mobility Report,” 2019.

10. TRIP, “Restoring the Interstate Highway System Report,” July 2020.
11. Texas Transportation Institute.
12. American Society of Civil Engineers, “Failure to Act: Current Investment Trends in
Our Surface Transportation Infrastructure: Preliminary Findings,” 2020.
13. Governors Highway Safety Association, “New Projection: 2019 Pedestrian
Fatalities Highest Since 1988,” Press Release, February 27, 2020.
14. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Highway Loss Data Institute, “Lane Departure
Warning, Blind Spot Detection Help Drivers Avoid Trouble,” August 23, 2017.
15. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, “Status of
the Nation’s Highways, Bridges, and Transit Conditions and Performance Report,”
Chapter 7 – Capital Investment Scenarios – Highways, 23rd Edition.
16. Congressional Budget Office, “Public Spending on Transportation and Water
Infrastructure, by Level of Government,” October 15, 2018.
17. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, “Statusof the Nation’s Highways, Bridges, and Transit Conditions and Performance
Report,” 23rd Edition.
18. American Society of Civil Engineers, “Failure to Act: Current Investment Trends in
Our Surface Transportation Infrastructure,” 2020.
19. Reason Foundation, “25th Annual Highway Report,” November 2020.
20. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, July 2020 Request.
21. Nature Climate Change, “Increased Costs to U.S. Pavement Infrastructure from
Future Temperature Rise,” September 18, 2017.
116________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Schools

117________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
School facilities represent the second largest sector of public infrastructure
spending, after highways, and yet there is no comprehensive national data
source on K-12 public school infrastructure. What data is available indicatesthat 53% of public school districts report the need to update or replace
multiple building systems including HVAC systems. More than one-third of
public schools have portable buildings due to capacity constraints with 45%of these portable buildings in poor or fair condition. Meanwhile, as a share of
the economy, state capital funding for schools was down 31% in fiscal year2017 compared to 2008. That is the equivalent of a $20 billion cut. The best
estimates indicate a minimum of $38 billion annual funding gap for publicschool facilities across the country. Meanwhile, public schools increasingly
serve a secondary function as emergency shelters and community resource
facilities during man-made or natural disasters, and facility upgrades areneeded to effectively fulfill this important community purpose.

CAPACITY & CONDITION
There are approximately 84,000 public schools withnearly 100,000 buildings1 in the U.S. with a projected
enrollment of 56.8 million by 2026.2 Every community
across the U.S. has public school buildings and facilities.
They are used not only for learning, libraries, sports, andfeeding children, but also for community meetings andas emergency centers and shelters. To provide a safe andhealthy environment that is conducive to learning forchildren of all ages, school buildings need to be in goodcondition and provide adequate spaces, natural light,
working heating and air conditioning, clean water, andmodern technology to fulfill a host of other functions.

based on a wide variety of assumptions and definitions
regarding both conditions and needs.
School facilities represent the second largest sector of
public infrastructure spending, after highways, and yet
there is no comprehensive national data source on K-12
public school infrastructure. The most comprehensive
data available is a National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) survey for the 2012-2013 school year.4 The
U.S. General Accountability Office (GAO) issued a limited, one-time survey of school districts in 2020, whichfound that 53% of public school districts needed to update or replace multiple building systems, reinforcing
the findings of the NCES report that found that 53% of
public schools needed to spend money on repairs, renovations, and modernizations to bring the infrastructure
into good overall condition.5 Nearly 41% reported issues
with HVAC systems, a significant concern for facilities
where children routinely spend eight hours a day.

A 2015 Congressional Research Service report3 concluded that national data on the condition of school
infrastructure and the investment needs are extremely
limited and outdated, and comprehensive findings remain elusive. There is no consistent federal data collection process to aggregate information on the conditionof schools. Furthermore, the data that is collected is118________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

The NCES report, while older, was more comprehensive
and found that 24% of overall building conditions wererated as fair or poor, while 14% to 32% of systems andfeatures within these permanent buildings were rated infair or poor condition. Among the 31% of public school
systems with portable (temporary) buildings, 45% of

overall building conditions were rated as fair or poor.
Additionally, outdoor features were rated as fair or poor,
including school parking lots and roadways; fencing; bus
lanes and drop-off areas; outdoor athletic facilities; andoutdoor play areas/playgrounds.

OPERATION & MAINTENANCE
State and local governments face a constant challenge tokeep pace with operations and maintenance and the needfor new school construction, in addition to accommodating improved health and safety standards, stronger accessibility requirements, and new technology. Great strides
have been made in infusing technology into schools andinto the instructional process. Some school districts haveinvested heavily in the infrastructure required to accommodate technology. As the COVID-19 pandemic illustrated, investments in technology are critical to ensure
continued learning, yet despite progress, many school districts have not been able to keep pace. Meanwhile, school
districts need to upgrade HVAC systems and add capac-

ity to classrooms with outdoor classrooms, temporary
buildings, or leasing new space, all with limited budgets.
The GAO estimates that while 65% of school districts
have assessed their facilities within the past 10 years (86%of those do so yearly), 16% of districts have not done so
within the past 10 years. Planning is often lacking, as fourin 10 public schools do not have a long-term facility planin place to address operations and maintenance. Better
planning through life-cycle cost analysis will lead to a better allocation of resources. Such analysis should review
costs associated with planning, funding, design, construction, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning.

Amongpublic schools
withpermanent
buildings,
Percentof building
systems
and featuresinthe
fairbuilding
and poorsystems/features
condition
were rated as being in fair or poor condition in their permanent buildings
in public schools
with all permanent buildingsin 14% to 32% of the schools:
32%

31%

30%
each

29%
each
25%
each
22%

21%

19%
each

18%
14%

Windows

Plumbing/
lavatories

Heating
Energy Roof, interior Electricalsystem, air management finishes/
systemconditioning system, trim, internal
system,security communicaventilation/system, tion systemfiltration
exterior
systemlighting

Technology
infrastructureInterior
lighting
and life
safetyfeatures

Exterior
walls/
finishes

Framing,
floors, andfoundations

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, “Condition of America’s Public School Facilities: 2012
–13,” NCES 2014-022, March 2014.

119________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

FUNDING & FUTURE NEED
An estimated 55% of districts use local revenues as theirprimary source of funding for school facilities, compared
to 36% that rely mainly on state funds. The most common source of local funding is property taxes, which
are used in 77% of school districts. Other local fundingcomes from grants, bonding, other taxes, and public-private partnerships.

Between 1994 and 2013, school systems spent $973
billion for new school construction and capital projects
to improve existing infrastructure. This spending totaled$49 billion annually. However, to provide healthy andsafe 21st century learning environments, it is estimatedthat the nation should be spending $87 billion per year
on capital needs.7 This leaves an additional $38 billion peryear that is required to regularly upgrade existing facilities’
systems, components, fixtures, equipment, and finishes as
they reach the end of their anticipated life expectancy;
systematically reduce the backlog of deferred maintenance that has accumulated; and alter existing facilities to
respond to changing educational requirements.8

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reports that as ashare of the economy, state capital funding for schools was
down 31% in fiscal year 2017 compared to 2008.6 That’s
the equivalent of a $20 billion cut. Thirty-eight states cut
school capital spending as a share of the state economy
over the 2008-2017 period, in many cases drastically.

The numberof students
nationwide
enrolled inschool was

Every school day,nearlyThose whoare enrolled
make up

K-12 students andthree and older.

a dults occupy close
to 100,000
public schoolbuildings on an
estimated

50 million

six million

24.7%
of thepopulationage

76.4 million
in 2017(pre-school —college), notstatisticallydifferent from thelevel in 2016.

(U.S. Census)92 million acresof land. (NCES)(U.S. Census)

Enrollment is
projected toincrease by 3%
between the 20132014 and 2025-26
academic years —rising fromThe student
population
increased by nearly

5 million

between 1994 and2013, requiring an
additional

50 million to51.4 million
students.

13,000K-12schools.

(NCES)11(NCSF)10120________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Almost all schools (99%)
have some permanentbuildings.
31% have additional
portable (temporary)buildings.
The overall conditionof schools with only
permanent buildings was
excellent in 20%, good in 56%,
fair in 21%, and poor in 3%.
Among schools withportable buildings, overall
condition was excellent in
6%, good in 49%, fair in 36%,
and poor in 9%.
Photo by Kevin Longley
A TEMPORARY SCHOOL BUILDING IN MARYLAND.

Though the current school infrastructure funding gap isnearly $40 billion annually, the true cost is undoubtedly

higher due to school systems’ loss of income during the2020 pandemic and its impact on tax revenues.12

PUBLIC SAFETY AND RESILIENCE
To provide a safe and effective learning environment for
the nation’s K-12 students, public schools need to be ingood condition.
Public schools often serve a secondary function as emergency shelters and community resource facilities during
man-made or natural disasters. This critical function has
a significant role in public health, safety, and welfare, andrequires facilities to be maintained to function in emergencies and help communities recover quickly. Schools
require upgrades to effectively fulfill this important community purpose, including windows that can withstandhigh winds, structures designed to survive earthquakes,
and rooms specifically designed as shelters from tornados.

Photo courtesy of Brian Pallasch
SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION IN NORTH CAROLINA

121________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

RECOMMENDATIONSTO RAISE THE GRADE·

All schools (new and existing) should be designed to withstand seismic, wind, andflood events. State and local governments must support the widespread adoption
and enforcement of modern building and infrastructure codes, such as ASCE 7: Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures. ASCE
7 describes the means for determining flood, tsunami, snow, rain, atmospheric ice,earthquake, wind, and other loads and their combinations for general structural design. ASCE 7 is continuously updated to reflect our changing world and to makeinfrastructure more resilient in the face of new challenges.

·

The U.S. Department of Education should coordinate with state agencies and local
school districts to obtain and publish nationwide statistics on school infrastructure
at regular intervals.

·

School districts should focus on Life-Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA) principles in theplanning and design processes to evaluate the total cost of projects.

Schools·

Design new campuses for the lowest net present value cost that includes lifecycle O&M in addition to capital construction.

·

Implement building condition assessment of existing school infrastructure.

·

Budget for the total cost of ownership and train facilities staff to implement
these policies.

·

School districts should develop capital planning frameworks that can be nimble andresponsive to changing technologies and demographics, in order to optimize learning environments and consider the holistic needs of the community.

·

Continue to encourage school districts to adopt regular, comprehensive major maintenance, renewal, and construction programs, and implement preventive
maintenance programs to extend the life of school facilities.

·

Explore alternative financing for public school facilities, including lease financing, as
well as ownership and use arrangements, to facilitate school construction projects.

122________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES

Schools

1.

21st Century School Fund Inc., U.S. Green Building Council Inc., and the National
Council on School Facilities, “State of Our Schools: America’s K-12 Facilities,”
2016.

2.

Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics,“Projections of Education Statistics to 2026.” April 2018.

3.

Congressional Research Service, “School Construction and Renovation: A Review
of Federal Programs and Legislation,” updated August 31, 2020.

4.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Instituteof Education Sciences, “Condition of America’s Public School Facilities: 2012–13,”
NCES 2014-022, March 2014.

5.

“ K-12 Education: School Districts Frequently Identified Multiple Building
Systems Needing Updates or Replacement,” file:///G:/GRA/Word/Report%20
Card/2021%20Report%20Card/Categories/Schools/GAO%20Report%20
June%202020.pdf GOA-20-949, June 2020.

6.

Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, “School Infrastructure Needs a Funding
Infusion.” April 17, 2018.

7.

21st Century School Fund Inc., U.S. Green Building Council Inc., and the
National Council on School Facilities, “State of Our Schools: America’s K-12
Facilities,” 2016.

8.

21st Century School Fund Inc., U.S. Green Building Council Inc., and the
National Council on School Facilities, “State of Our Schools: America’s K-12
Facilities,” 2016.

9.

U.S. Census Bureau “More Than 76 Million Students Enrolled in U.S. Schools,
Census Bureau Reports,” 2018.

10. 21st Century School Fund Inc., U.S. Green Building Council Inc., and the
National Council on School Facilities, “State of Our Schools: America’s K-12
Facilities,” 2016.
11. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Institute of Education Sciences, “Condition of America’s Public School Facilities:
2012 –13,” NCES 2014-022, March 2014.
12. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Institute of Education Sciences, “Condition of America’s Public School Facilities:
2012 –13,” NCES 2014-022, March 2014.

123________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Solid Waste

124________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe U.S. produced approximately 268 million tons of municipal solid waste(MSW) in 2017, or 4.51 pounds per person per day. This is a modest increase
from the 4.4 pounds of MSW generated per person per day in 2014. Overall,
53% of waste is deposited in landfills, 25% is recycled, 10% is composted, and
13% is combusted for energy. The transport and disposal of MSW remains
largely funded and managed by the private sector. However, the U.S.
MSW management system faces a growing number of challenges such asplateauing recycling rates, emerging contaminants found in legacy landfills,
and significantly changing global markets. Funding mechanisms are needed
to invest in a nationwide solid waste infrastructure system that recognizes
MSW as a resource to be utilized more so than waste to be disposed.

INTRODUCTION
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines
municipal solid waste (MSW) as, “everyday items such as
product packaging, yard trimmings, furniture, clothing,bottles, cans, food, newspapers, appliances, electronics, andbatteries” that are discarded from residential, commercial, or
institutional sources.1 However, the EPA’s MSW definition
does not include industrial, hazardous, or construction anddemolition (C&D) waste, which are covered in a separate
report card chapter on hazardous waste.

shredding, compaction, incineration, or biologicaldegradation to reduce MSW volume. Thereafter, thegarbage may be transported to landfills, discrete areas,or excavations designed to protect the environment
from potential contaminants.2
Another approach, the waste-to-energy (WTE) process,involves non-recyclables from the waste stream undergoingcombustion, gasification, pyrolization, or anaerobic digestion
to produce electricity and heat. Finally, recycling andcomposting efforts include collecting, sorting, processing,and remanufacturing materials and organics, respectively,that are otherwise considered waste.

Solid waste management includes infrastructure for
landfills, converting waste to energy (WTE), andrecycling or composting. MSW processing includes

Figure 1: Solid Waste Management Infrastructure and Processes3

Diagram courtesy of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts125________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

CAPACITY & CONDITION
In 2017, the EPA reported that Americans generated
nearly 268 million tons of MSW, up from 262 million
tons in 2015 and 251 million tons in 2010. This represents
a modest increase in the per capita MSW generation ratefrom 4.45 to 4.51 pounds per person per day between
2010 to 2017, respectively.4 In the last few decades, anincreasingly larger portion of America’s MSW is diverted
from landfills. In 2017, 25% of waste was recycled, 10%
was composted, and nearly 13% was combusted via WTE
processes. However, recent years have shown that thepercentage of recycled and composted MSW materials
has plateaued.5

landfills exist, while over 1,250 are currently open withvarying amounts of remaining capacity.7 The average ageof landfills is somewhere between 30 and 50 years old.8
Also receiving MSW are the 759 WTE facilities across
20 states; the majority are in Florida and along theEast Coast.10 The most recent estimates of the nation’s
WTE facilities come from the U.S. Energy Information
Administration, which shows in 2015, nearly 29 million
tons, more than 10% of the nation’s MSW, was burned,
generating 2.3 gigawatts.11 While no publicly available
data exists to characterize the condition of the nation’smaterials recovery facilities, which sort and process
recyclables, from 2009 to 2020 the U.S. Bureau ofLabor Statistics reported an increase from 90612 to
1,33113 public and private materials recovery facilities.

Because there is no comprehensive database of landfills
in the U.S., the exact number and age is difficult todetermine.6 Estimates show that more than 2,600

In 2017, the EPA reported that Americans generated
nearly 268 million tons of MSW, up from
262 million tons in 2015 and 251 million tons in 2010.

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
A LANDFILL TRACTOR IN MINNESOTA.

126________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

OPERATION & MAINTENANCE
States play a leading role in ensuring federal regulations
are met for operating and maintaining MSW andindustrial waste landfills. However, some states may set
and follow more stringent requirements. In absence of an
approved state program, the federal requirements must
be met by waste facilities. Regulations address common
problems associated with landfills, including location
restrictions, liner requirements, leachate collection andremoval systems, groundwater monitoring, and closure
and post-closure care expectations.14

In 2020, to more sustainably manage the nation’s
solid waste, the EPA announced its National Recycling
Goal, which set a 10-year benchmark to increase therecycling rate for all materials by 50%.15 To achieve thisgoal, operational improvements include reducing thepercentage of the wrong materials such as food andother contaminants entering into the recycling stream.
Clean recyclables improve the efficiency of processing
materials into new products or energy. The EPA notesthat clear, consistent public education and outreach are
critically important to achieving this goal.16

PUBLIC SAFETY
An ongoing concern for landfills and other solid waste
management systems are emerging contaminants, which
are chemicals that are not commonly monitored but havethe potential to enter the environment and cause known orsuspected adverse ecological and/or human health effects.
They consist of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS),
pharmaceuticals, pesticides, industrial chemicals, surfactants,
personal care products, and more. These substances are
consistently being found in groundwater, surface water,
wastewater, drinking water, and some food sources.17 18

Over the past several years PFAS have become a major
concern to human health and the environment, and the
EPA has moved to list PFAS and associated chemicals
as hazardous substances. PFAS were traditionally usedin many products that are now ending up in landfills.
As a result, landfills are having to manage PFAS ingroundwater, especially at historic landfills that were notpreviously constructed to today’s specifications. PFAS
are also being identified in landfill leachate that is sent towastewater treatment plants.19

FUNDING AND FUTURE NEED
Funding for operation and maintenance (O&M) oflandfills and recycling facilities is generated throughtrash collection fees. The national average annual trashcollection or tipping fee increased from about $48
per ton in 2016 to more than $55 per ton in 2019.20
Similarly, O&M efforts for WTE facilities are also selffunded and prove to be most cost competitive in areas
with limited available land and dense populations.21

Adapting to the loss of international markets, EPA’s
National Recycling Strategy focuses on improving
and expanding domestic recycling markets.25 Various
companies plan to open new U.S. processing plants inOrangeburg, South Carolina, and Huntsville, Alabama.
The companies will shred or pelletize materials like plastic
food containers to make products such as artificial plants
and hangers.26

While recycling has made dramatic gains over the last
decade, more recent figures show a leveling off as global
markets for recycled materials dramatically changed.
In 2018, China instituted the National Sword policy
which halted the import of many types of solid waste,22
effectively closing off the destination for two-thirds ofthe world’s plastic waste.23 Available data suggest that thispolicy caused as much as 92% of U.S. plastic in the first partof 2018 to be sent to other Southeast Asian countries.24

There is, however, a lack of funding for research andseed capital to facilitate more marketable and innovative
ways to manage MSW and recyclable materials for a
useful purpose such as waste to energy (e.g., anaerobic
digesters and plasma gasification) or through newtechnologies that prevent solid waste from entering alandfill. Additional funding mechanisms are needed tohelp transition to a system that recognizes MSW as moreof a resource to be utilized than waste to be disposed.

127________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

From 2009 to 2020 the
U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics reported anincrease from 90612
to 1,33113 public andprivate materials
recovery facilities.

Photo courtesy of Belish
WASTE-TO-ENERGY PLANT.

RESILIENCE AND INNOVATION
Landfills are often vulnerable to natural disasters suchas hurricanes, earthquakes, and especially floods.
Such events can have a large impact on groundwaterconditions as well as the overall public health near
landfills. Additionally, damage to other infrastructure
systems such as roads, bridges, rail, the electric grid,
inland waterways, and other systems causes interruption
to MSW collection and disposal, which can lead tosignificant impacts on the public health.

the usefulness of the reprocessed PET, it can deal with
the impurities that occur as a result of single-stream
recycling, and it can be used with a variety of different
types of plastics, not just the high quality plastics likesingle-use bottles. However, the problem with thesetechnologies is they are still very expensive alternatives,
and the scale of facility with throughput capable ofprocessing all the plastic discarded by Americans is not
yet available.27 Therefore, some municipalities acrossthe country are trying to reduce the amount of plastics
entering MSW landfills by implementing bans on singleuse plastic. On a global scale, for example, since 2018,
Starbucks has been working to replace all plastic straws
with strawless lids and to develop a fully recyclable andcompostable cup.28

New processes can help reduce waste, particularly
plastics. There are researchers and companies in the U.S.
that are implementing practices such as pyrolysis to break
down polystyrene waste into its foundational material,
styrene. Others are looking to use engineered enzymes
that can break down polyethylene terephthalate (PET)
into purified terephthalic acid (PTA). The advantage ofusing depolymerization processes to break down PET
compared to mechanical processes is that it extends

128________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

RECOMMENDATIONSTO RAISE THE GRADE·

Pass legislation limiting the amount of packaging used in various industries, setting
standards for the recyclability of materials (e.g., single-use plastics), and addressing thetrue cost of waste by implementing deposits on bottles and fees on plastic bags.

·

Strengthen domestic markets for recycled materials in the U.S. by supporting companies
looking to build domestic reprocessing plastic facilities and reusing plastics.

·

Change the way Americans think of solid waste beyond “garbage” or “trash,” tounderstand that “waste is not waste until it is wasted.” The materials Americans routinely
discard are potential resources.

·

Support research and invest in alternatives for the use of waste as resources, such as
aerobic digesters and plasma gasification.

·

Oppose federal legislation that would ban the interstate movement of municipal solid
waste (MSW) to regional solid waste facilities designed in accordance with state andfederal regulations, recognizing that such transport may be appropriate and beneficial inregional solid waste planning efforts.

·

Encourage Congress to list polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) as hazardous substancesin Superfund.

Solid Waste

SOURCES
1.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Facts and Figures about Materials, Waste
and Recycling, “Guide to the Facts and Figures Report about Materials, Waste andRecycling.”

2.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Municipal Solid Waste Landfills.”

3.

Commonwealth of Massachusetts, “Municipal Waste Combustors.”

4. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Facts and Figures about Materials, Waste
and Recycling, “Advancing Sustainable Materials Management: 2017 Fact Sheet
Assessing Trends in Material Generation, Recycling, Composting, Combustion with
Energy Recovery and Landfilling in the United States,” November 2019.
5.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Facts and Figures about Materials, Waste
and Recycling, “Advancing Sustainable Materials Management: 2017 Fact Sheet
Assessing Trends in Material Generation, Recycling, Composting, Combustion with
Energy Recovery and Landfilling in the United States,” November 2019.

6.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Frequent Questions about Landfills.”

7.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Landfill Methane Outreach Program(LMOP), “Landfill Technical Data.”

8.

South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, “How Landfills Work.”

9.

Environmental Research & Education Foundation, “Waste & Recycling for Dummies.”

129________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

10. U.S. Energy Information Administration, Independent Statistics & Analysis, “Today
in Energy,” April 8, 2016.

Solid Waste

11. U.S. Energy Information Administration, Independent Statistics & Analysis, “Today
in Energy,” April 8, 2016.
12. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Green Jobs, “Careers in Recycling.”
13. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages.”
14. Environmental Research & Education Foundation, “Waste & Recycling for Dummies.”
15. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, America Recycles, “U.S. National
Recycling Goal.”
16. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, America Recycles, “U.S. National
Recycling Goal.”
17. Environmental Research & Education Foundation, “Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl
Substances (PFAS) – List of Scientific and Technical Studies Related to Solid
Waste.”
18. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, PFOA, PFOS and Other PFASs, “Basic
Information on PFAS.”
19. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, PFOA, PFOS and Other PFASs, “EPA
Actions to Address PFAS.”
20. Environmental Research & Education Foundation, “Analysis of MSW Landfill
Tipping Fees, April 2019 Analysis.”
21. Environmental Research & Education Foundation, “Waste & Recycling for Dummies.”
22. Environmental Research & Education Foundation, “Waste & Recycling for Dummies.”
23. Bloomberg Green, “China Upended the Politics of Plastic and the World Is Still
Reeling.”
24. The Guardian, “Huge rise in US plastic waste shipments to poor countries following
China ban.”
25. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, America Recycles, “National Recycling
Strategy,” draft October 5, 2020.
26. Resource Recycling, Inc., Plastics Recycling Update, “Chinese firms open up on
their U.S. recycling plans,” April 4, 2018.
27. Thiounn T and Smith RC. Journal of Polymer Science, 58.10: 1347-1364, “Advances
and approaches for chemical recycling of plastic waste,” April 20, 2020.
28. Starbucks Corporation, “Starbucks Strawless Lids Now Available Across the U.S.
and Canada,” September 10, 2020.

130________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Stormwater131________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Stormwater systems range from large concrete storm sewers, roadsideditches, and flood control reservoirs, to rain gardens and natural riverine
systems. While stormwater utilities are on the rise, with more than 40 states
having at least one, the impervious surfaces in cities and suburbs are also
expanding, exacerbating urban flooding, which results in $9 billion in damages
annually.1 Stormwater also affects water quality as polluted runoff frompavement enters water bodies. Nearly 600,000 miles of rivers and streams
and more than 13 million acres of lakes, reservoirs, and ponds are considered
impaired.2 Federal funding, though up in recent years, averages about $250
million annually, which leaves a growing annual funding gap of $8 billion justto comply with current regulations. With few dedicated funding sources,
complicated governance and ownership structures, expansive networks ofaging assets, increasingly stringent water quality regulations, and concerning
climate change projections, the expected performance of stormwater systems
is declining. Many of the country’s legacy stormwater systems are struggling
with the high cost of retrofits needed to address urban flooding and climatechange. Upgrading large networks of aging systems underneath densely
populated areas carries significant costs and engineering challenges.

INTRODUCTION
Stormwater runoff is defined as rain or snow melt thattravels over impervious surfaces such as roadways,
buildings, or parking lots, and landscaped or agriculturalareas and is then collected and conveyed into streams,
rivers, lakes, bays, or oceans.3 As impervious surfaces
in increasingly developed cities and suburbs expand, so
do the impacts of increased runoff from larger rainfall
events which can lead to urban flooding.4

natural filtration processes. Green infrastructure provides
benefits by reducing runoff, minimizing erosion, andcontributing to water quality improvements; examples
include rain gardens, constructed wetlands, vegetative
roadway bioswales, and permeable pavements.6
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
classifies stormwater systems as those that are publicly
owned, discharge into waters of the U.S., and are not partof a sewage treatment plant such as Municipal Separate
Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s). MS4s are regulated by
the EPA under the National Pollution and Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) program.7 Apart from EPA
regulations, states, counties, and local governments may
also require stormwater management practices throughlocal ordinances, building codes, and development plans.

Nationally, stormwater infrastructure can take many forms,
including piped systems, detention basins, ditches, canals,
channels, and roadway conveyance systems.5 In recent
years, green stormwater infrastructure has been introducedin new developments and coupled with traditional “grayinfrastructure” to maximize the benefits from naturalhydrologic cycles using vegetation, soils, site grading, and132________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

CAPACITY
While there is not yet a comprehensive national databaseof assets, estimates suggest there are 3.5 million miles ofstorm sewers, 270 million storm drains, and 2.5 million
stormwater treatment assets across the U.S.8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Under the NPDES MS4 program, municipalities are
required to map their stormwater systems and, as of 2018,nearly 40% of stormwater utilities have taken this step.15
Stormwater infrastructure capacity is principally derived
from the design standards used for construction. Terms
like “10-year” and “100-year storms” (meaning thosewith a 10% and 1% annual probability of occurrence,
respectively) are currently used to describe a system’s
capacity. However, such design standards have only
been used in recent decades, and the standards differ
within and between states.
While design standards govern a stormwater system’s
theoretical capacity, routine operation and maintenance(O&M), age, and the changing frequency and intensityof storm events, are the main drivers affecting astormwater system’s actual capacity. Given the recent
increase in rainfall trends and urbanization, the actual
capacity of a stormwater system is often less thanthe design standard.16 Many of the country’s legacy
stormwater systems, such as those in Chicago andPhiladelphia, for example, are now struggling with thehigh cost of retrofits that are needed to accommodate
these changes. Upgrading large networks of aging
systems that are now underneath densely populatedareas carries significant costs and engineering challenges.

Photo by Anna Denecke
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT INFRASTRUCTURE IN
WASHINGTON, D.C.

Given the recent increase in rainfall
trends and urbanization, the actual
capacity of a stormwater system
is oftentimes less than the design
standard.16

133________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

CONDITION
The condition of stormwater infrastructure is indicated,in part, by the system’s age. Without better stormwater
asset records, the average age of the system cannot
be directly determined, so the lifespan of the primaryconstruction material is used as a proxy. Stormwater
conveyance systems may be constructed of corrugatedmetal, reinforced concrete, or plastic, and their lifespan is
projected to be 50 to 100 years. Storage and treatment
systems such as detention and retention ponds havean average lifespan between 20 to 30 years.17 18 Basedon this, systems constructed in the 1970s or prior haveexceeded or are nearing the end of their useful lives

and are likely undersized given current stormwater
management practices and climate change impacts.
Another key indicator of stormwater infrastructure
condition is the system’s ability to reduce negative
impacts to local waterbodies. Under the NPDES
program, stormwater systems are required to meet theoverarching goal of reducing the discharge of pollutantsfrom runoff.19 20 While water quality is a priority acrossthe nation, from 2010 to 2018, the length of impaired
rivers and streams increased from about 424,000 miles
to more than 588,000 miles.21

Photo by Jim Gade
FLOODING IN MADISON, WISCONSIN

OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
Stormwater infrastructure may be owned and managed
by various public or private entities such as state or local
governments, individual or corporate property owners,
or homeowners’ associations. All stormwater systems
require some level of routine maintenance, but the ongoing
management of stormwater systems can be complex
and expensive. Storm sewers require jetting and cleaning,and stormwater detention basins, bio-retention facilities,
permeable pavement, and bioswales all require uniquemaintenance tasks with specialized knowledge. This can be achallenge for all levels of government, private property owners
such as shopping centers, or homeowners’ associations.

The MS4 NPDES permitting process has been an
effective regulatory lever influencing O&M practices
and frequency due to the expectation of routine
inspections. Under the NPDES program, all MS4s are
required to have maintenance plans. However, private
entities, cooperatives, and individual homeowners
responsible for O&M are often not routinely monitored
and left to manage critical and sometimes expensive
components of the stormwater system on their own.
Deferred maintenance increases the likelihood ofurban flooding and increases threats to water quality
protection.22 23134________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

FUNDING
Funding for stormwater infrastructure across the country
is limited and comes from multiple sources — local
revenue, state and/or federal grants and financing, andnon-traditional funding streams. Because the financial
responsibility for managing stormwater systems cansometimes be unclear and draw from entities’ generalfunds, hundreds of public entities in at least 40 states
have taken the initiative to create stormwater utilities tocollect fees based on property size, impervious area, andother site-specific characteristics. Out of communities
with municipal MS4s, the percentage with stormwater
utilities or fees has grown from approximately 19% in 2013
to upward of 26% in 2018.24 25 For a single family home,
the average monthly stormwater fee in 2018 was $5.34.26

the CWSRF’s program funding for stormwater projects
has trended upward from more than $58 million in 2012
to more than $387 million in 2019 with the portionof funding for green infrastructure also increasing.28
Though trends are improving, only 3% of all CWSRF
funds have gone toward stormwater and similar types ofprojects.29 Additionally, the EPA’s Water Infrastructure
and Finance Innovation Act (WIFIA) is another federal
funding mechanism. In 2019, at least three stormwater
infrastructure projects applied for $673 million in WIFIA
loans out of the program’s $7.7 billion in overall support.30
While there are limited and highly competitive grant
programs at the local, state, and federal levels that covera very small portion of the overall need, non-traditional
mechanisms for funding stormwater infrastructure havealso emerged and include public-private partnerships;
leveraged synergies among solid waste, transportation,
and/or wastewater sectors; and market-based solutions
that monetize permit requirements like nutrient and/or
stormwater volume trading.31 32

For large capital improvements, state entities ormunicipalities may use general obligation bonds. They
may also seek federal resources like those from the EPA’s
Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) whichhas provided nearly $2.2 billion for more than 1,100
stormwater projects since its inception.27 More recently,

Projects Awarded Clean Water SRF Funds Over Time70

Gray Infrastructure
Green Infrastructure

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

Source: Clean Water SRF Program Information National Summary (2019) https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2020-02/documents/us19.pdf

135________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

FUTURE NEED
As water quality measures for MS4 permitting become
more stringent, local governments and stormwater
utilities having to update or expand their systems,
stretching their limited economic resources. In 2020,
the Water Environment Federation’s National MS4
Needs Assessment estimated that the sector’s annual
funding gap is $8 billion among MS4 permittees.33 34
Separately, an economic analysis by ASCE shows a waterrelated infrastructure investment gap of $434 billion over
10 years for drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater
combined.

The trajectory of urban flooding impacts will likely continue
the upward trend as our older stormwater assets cannot
accommodate the changing rainfall patterns and intensity.35
Many utilities are behind in accounting for the conditionof their assets, planning, and funding for short- and longterm maintenance, and strategizing necessary capital
improvements. A clear picture of the existing assets andtheir condition is needed to provide flood projection models
with data to identify areas of significant risk where limited,available resources may be targeted for improvements.

Photo by ASCEPERMEABLE PAVEMENT AND STORMWATER DETENTION IS BUILT INTO A PARKING LOT IN RESTON, VIRGINIA.

PUBLIC SAFETY
Flooding is one of the nation’s greatest natural hazards,
carrying catastrophic public safety and economic tolls.
Annually, from 2004 to 2014, urban flooding alone costcommunities an average of $9 billion in direct damages
and 71 deaths.36

throughout the community may include sinkholes, flash
floods, collapsed roadways, extensive property damage,inflow into sanitary systems which inundates wastewater
treatment plants and pollutes waterways, and loss of life.
Over the last two decades, to buttress the impact of theselosses, the National Flood Insurance Program has morethan doubled its enacted policies while the number ofprivate insurance companies entering the market between
2016 to 2019 has also more than doubled.37

When stormwater systems become overwhelmed, there are
acute and long-term public safety implications that create
ripple effects to other infrastructure systems. Effects
136________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Photo courtesy of WSP
STORMWATER TREATMENT CHANNEL IN SOUTH FLORIDARESILIENCE & INNOVATION
Impacts from climate change will have variable effects
on the form and frequency of extreme events acrossthe nation. To withstand these effects, stormwater
infrastructure is increasingly implemented with acontext-sensitive approach, that leverages a localized
understanding of flood risk, land use practices andregulatory expectations. This approach informs thetypes, designs, locations, and long-term sustainabilityof stormwater systems. Resilience for stormwater
infrastructure is reflected by a mix of optimized green,gray, and natural infrastructure, land planning and urban
growth, updated asset management and, in water-scarceareas, the productive reuse of stormwater.

Current innovations employed by utilities include the useof real-time control systems, complex modeling, cloudcomputing, data storage, and predictive analysis.38 Largedatasets can be used to optimize the capacity of stormwater
conveyance, storage and treatment systems, investments
in O&M activities, and other costs. The affordability of
sensors has also improved, expanding the potential forsystem implementation of real time data and control.
Finally, some areas employ a regional approach tostormwater management through volume and nutrient
trading within watersheds. This can economically
incentivize stormwater innovation.

Copyright: RoschetzkyPhotography
HURRICANE HARVEY SUMMER FLOODING IN TEXAS

137________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

RECOMMENDATIONSTO RAISE THE GRADE·

Fully fund and disseminate information from the EPA’s Clean Watersheds Needs
Survey on a routine basis (every four years) and elicit more stormwater-related
detail, including information about maintenance, repair, pollution prevention, andurban flooding.

·

Develop a stormwater-specific funding and financing program based upon the bestpractices from the existing Clean Water State Revolving Fund.

·

Stormwater infrastructure and design regulations are critical for protecting
communities from costly urban flooding and protecting water quality in our waterways.
Stormwater systems should be a combination of gray, green, and natural infrastructureand should be mainstreamed in planning and development processes nationwide.

·

Develop state-based peer-to-peer partnerships to build local government capacity
to create and manage stormwater utilities that sustainably fund, operate, maintain,
assess, and, when necessary, expand stormwater infrastructure.

·

Establish a grant program for 21st century technical career training for “green
collar jobs” in the stormwater sector that recruit the next generation’s talent andmainstream tools for data-driven decision-making, such as asset management
software, life-cycle cost analysis, and affordable rate structuring.

·

Expand the inclusion of current and forecasted climate variability in codes andstandards for the design, operation, maintenance, and expansion of stormwater
infrastructure and routinely provide funding to NOAA to update the climate data.

·

Ensure stormwater infrastructure is fully eligible and aggressively pursued via federal
funding and financing mechanisms that are supporting the nation’s drinking water
and wastewater systems.

·

Develop a comprehensive education campaign on the true costs, savings, risks,
and avoided hazards associated with stormwater infrastructure investments, anddisseminate these details through broadly accessible platforms.

·

Educate communities on best practices for creating stormwater utilities that
institute rates that reflect the true cost of treating and handling stormwater runoff.

·

Point source and nonpoint source pollution should be addressed through awatershed approach that encourages regional coordination to improve impacts fromstormwater-induced flooding.

Stormwater138________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES

Stormwater

1.

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. “Framing the
Challenge of Urban Flooding in the United States,” 2019.

2.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “National Summary of State Information.”

3.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Stormwater Management Practices at
EPA Facilities.”

4.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, “Framing the
Challenge of Urban Flooding in the United States,” 2019.

5.

Geosyntec Consultants and Wright Water Engineers, Inc., “Urban Stormwater
BMP Performance Monitoring,” October 2009.

6.

The Water Environment & Reuse Foundation, “Stream Restoration BMP Database:Version 1.0 Summary Report,” 2017.

7.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Stormwater Discharges from Municipal
Sources.”

8.

McPhillips LE and Matsler AM, Frontiers in Build Environment, “Temporal Evolutionof Green Stormwater Infrastructure Strategies in Three U.S. Cities,” May 15, 2018.

9.

Woznicki SA, Hondula KL, and Jarnagin ST. Hydrological Processes, “Effectivenessof Landscape-Based Green Infrastructure for Stormwater Management inSuburban Catchments,” May 9, 2018.

10. https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/46916,
11. https://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/wri014278/
12. https://ir.library.illinoisstate.edu/etd/399/
13. PALS – Partnership for Action Learning in Sustainability, “Community
Engagement for Vulnerable Communities: Flooding Impacts and Adaptation in East
Riverdale-Beacon Heights,” Fall 2019.
14. City of Duvall, Washington, “Surface and Stormwater Plan: SEPA Draft,” January
29, 2018.
15. Black & Veatch Management Consulting, LLC, “2018 Stormwater Utility Survey,” 2018.
16. Moglen GE and Vidal GER, Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, “Climate Change
and Storm Water Infrastructure in the Mid-Atlantic Region: Design Mismatch
Coming?” November 2014.
17. “A Handbook of Constructed Wetlands: A Guide to Creating Wetlands for
Agricultural Wastewater, Domestic Wastewater, Coal Mine Drainage, andStormwater in the Mid-Atlantic Region,” Volume 1: General Considerations.
18. Water Research Foundation, “Recommended Operation and Maintenance Activity
and Cost Reporting Parameters for Stormwater Best Management Practices
Database,” 2018.

139________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES (Cont.)
19. Pitt R, Maestre A, and Clary J, “The National Stormwater Quality Database(NSQD), Version 4.02,” February 17, 2018.

Stormwater

20. The National Association of Clean Water Agencies, “MS4 Stormwater Permitting
Guide,” 2018.
21. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “National Summary of State Information.”
22. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, “Framing the Challengeof Urban Flooding in the United States,” 2019.
23. Water Research Foundation, “Recommended Operation and Maintenance Activity
and Cost Reporting Parameters for Stormwater Best Management Practices
Database,” 2018.
24. Western Kentucky University, “Stormwater Utility Survey,” 2018.
25. Kane JW and Shivaram R, The Brookings Institute, “As Flood Risks Intensify,
Stormwater Utilities Offer a More Resilient Solution,” September 21, 2017.
26. Western Kentucky University, “Stormwater Utility Survey,” 2018.
27. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Clean Water SRF Program Information
National Summary,” December 6, 2019.
28. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Clean Water SRF Program Information
National Summary,” December 6, 2019.
29. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “EPA Water Finance Support to Nutrient
Credit Markets.”
30. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Water Infrastructure Finance andInnovation Act (WIFIA).”
31. Congressional Research Service Report, “Federally Supported Projects and Programsfor Wastewater, Drinking Water, and Water Supply Infrastructure,” July 30, 2020.
32. Environmental Financial Advisory Board, “Evaluating Stormwater Infrastructure
Funding and Financing,” March 30, 2020.
33. Water Environment Federation, WEF’s Stormwater Institute, “National Municipal
Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Needs Assessment Survey Results,” 2020.
34. U.S. Global Change Research Program, “Climate Science Special Report.”
35. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. “Framing the
Challenge of Urban Flooding in the United States,” 2019.
36. Insurance Information Institute, “Facts + Statistics: Flood Insurance.”
37. Optirtc, Inc., Website: https://optirtc.com/
38. Shishegar S, Duchesne S, and Pelletier G. “Predictive Real-Time Control
Optimization of a Stormwater Management System.” 2019.

140________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Transit141________
Photo by Anna Denecke

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Public transit is essential to everyday living in communities across thecountry, providing access to jobs, schools, shopping, healthcare, and otherservices, while enabling equitable access and sustainable mobility options.
Unfortunately, 45% of Americans have no access to transit. Meanwhile,
much of the existing system is aging, and transit agencies often lacksufficient funds to keep their existing systems in good working order. Overa 10-year period across the country, 19% of transit vehicles, and 6% of fixed
guideway elements like tracks and tunnels were rated in “poor” condition.
Currently, there is a $176 billion transit backlog, a deficit that is expected to
grow to more than $250 billion through 2029. Meanwhile, transit ridershipis declining, a trend compounded by the COVID-19 pandemic. Failure toaddress the transit revenue shortfall will only exacerbate ridership declines
as service cuts mean that trip delays and reliability issues become more
frequent. This stands to increase congestion, hamper the economy, andworsen air quality in the coming years.

CAPACITY & CONDITION
Transit has a presence in every state and community
across the nation, whether it’s heavy rail systems in New
York, Atlanta, San Francisco, or Washington D.C.; lightrail transit in Boston, Denver, or Minneapolis; bus rapidtransit lines in Los Angeles, Cleveland, and Albuquerque;or bus networks and paratransit services that connect
urban and rural communities across the country.
In total, there are about 6,800 organizations in the U.S.
that provide transit services. In 2018, the Federal Transit
Administration reported 2,207 transit systems received
federal grant money, 928 of which were in urbanized areasand 1,279 in rural areas. Since the 1970s, transit has shown
long-term growth in ridership, especially as networks have
expanded beyond their traditional footholds. While theoverall number of transit passenger trips has increased by
37% over the past 50 years, the total number of trips has
decreased by 8% since its peak in 2014. The COVID-19
pandemic has only sharpened this decline, with the

Photo courtesy of Cherisha
BUS STOP IN HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA

142________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

American Public Transportation Association (APTA)
reporting at the beginning of the pandemic that stay-athome orders caused some agencies to experience a 70%
passenger decline.1 2 3 4operate on 1,811 miles, a dramatic 30% increase overthat same 10-year period.6

It has been reported that 41.7% of U.S. households
have only one vehicle or less and could benefit from
Between 2017 and 2019, there was a slight decline in totaltransit options, and 45% of Americans have no accessridership from 10.1 to 9.9 billion
to transit. System growth has thepassenger trips. Over this period,
potential to increase capacity, but
bus ridership continues to be theit must be coupled with routine
Unfortunately, the COVID-19
most used form of public transit,
maintenance for the older parts ofpandemic has caused major
averaging 4.7 billion passenger
the system. Unfortunately, capital
disruptions across all transit
trips annually, followed by heavy
investments for a growing number
agencies.
Nationally,transitrail at 3.8 billion, light rail at 524
of state-of-good-repair needs
ridership and fare revenues
million, commuter rail at 503
has not taken place. As a result,million, demand response attransit users face increased delays
were down in April 2020 from
207 million, and trolley bus at 81
due to service interruptions,
April 2019 by 73% and 86%,5
million passenger trips annually.
and agencies are grappling withrespectively. As the pandemic
growing maintenance and vehicle
Many transit systems havedrags on and continues to negprocurement costs. Under theinvested in expansion to
atively impact ridership, thismost recent 10-year projections,improve access and service
spare vehicle costs are expected totrend will continue to createlevels. Over the last two
grow to $770 million, while vehicledifficult financial situations as
decades, 52 new systems andmaintenance costs are likely to
124 extensions have opened,agencies look to improve theirgrow to $7.3 billion. These delays
resulting in a total of 1,393
transit infrastructure.
will cost passengers nearly $1.2
additional segment miles. In
billion over the next 10 years.7 8 9
2019, this expansion resulted
in the nation’s transit system comprising over 240,000
Transit vehicles and physical infrastructure must both beroute miles. Additionally, buses operate on overin good condition for the system to perform to expected
226,000 miles of streets and roads. While most bus
levels. Yet, in 2017 the Department of Transportation
services operate in mixed traffic, service is also provided
reported that over a 10-year period, 36.4% of facilities
on 4,864 miles of exclusive and controlled right-of-way,(bus and rail maintenance buildings and equipment/storageof which 1,105 miles are exclusive fixed guideway, whereyards), 21.4% of systems (train control, electrification,
only transit can operate, allowing for greater travel timecommunications, and revenue collection), 18.5% ofreliability. Furthermore, commuter and hybrid railroads
vehicles, 6.4% of fixed guideway elements (tracks,
operate over a combined 9,227 miles, a 12% growth intunnels, and bus guideways), and 5.5% of stations rated
miles over a 10-year period, while light rail/street cars
in “poor” condition.10 As a result, reliability challenges

Transit users face increased
delays due to service
interruptions, and agencies
are grappling with growing
maintenance and vehicle
procurement costs.
143________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

frequently plague our nation’s transit systems. Failure toaddress these systemic problems will likely cause moretrip delays and travel time uncertainty, perpetuatingridership declines that result in reduced funding available
for operation and maintenance.

maintenance work. The American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO)
recently reported that more than $19 billion was spentby state DOTs on transit systems, $11.5 billion was spenton operating costs, $4.4 billion on capital, $3.1 billion on
unrestricted, and $6.5 million was spent on planning.11

Aging assets mean that state and local governments
must increasingly fund transit system operations andTransit Vehicles Past Useful Life80

Years of Useful Life
Percent Past Useful Life

70
60

56

50
40
39

30
20
10
0

37

39

33

31

20
14
Buses

25

7
Commuter Rail
Locomotives

CommuterRail Cars

DemandResponsive
VehiclesLight Rail
Vehicles

FUNDING & FUTURE NEED
Transit system operating budgets traditionally rely on
fare revenue and state and local funding. In 2018, totaltransit funding increased by 1.8% to $74.2 billion fromthe previous year total of $71.1 billion. The Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) also reported in 2019 that directly
generated revenues funded 35.7% of transit operating
expenses, state sources covered 23%, local resources
covered 34.2%, and federal funding covered the remaining
7.1%. Under these conditions, a backlog of $176 billion fortransit investments has emerged and is expected to growto more than $250 billion through 2029.14 15$60 billion, $12 billion is authorized under generalfund appropriations to be directed to numerous FTA
programs, including the Capital Investment Grant(CIG) program. CIG serves as the primary federal
discretionary source of funds for transit expansion.
While it is currently authorized at $2.3 billion, recent
efforts in both fiscal year (FY) 2018 and 2019 haveseen an increase to $2.6 and $2.5 billion, respectively.
The remaining $48 billion is directed out of the Highway
Trust Fund (HTF) to support transit infrastructure,including a combined $12.9 billion for state-of-goodrepair needs. In October 2020, Congress passed a
one-year extension of the FAST Act, which extended
the law’s FY 2020 authorization levels to FY 2021. This
includes a total of $12.5 billion for FTA and $2.3 billion
for CIG.

As part of transit’s federal funding, the Fixing America’s
Surface Transportation (FAST) Act provided roughly$60 billion to the FTA, both through general fundauthorizations and Highway Trust Fund (HTF) contract
authority through the Mass Transit Account. Of this144________

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

The COVID-19 pandemic has at least temporarily
increased the federal government’s funding role fortransit. While much is yet to be determined for stabilizing
this system, $25 billion in emergency relief funding for
operating expenses went to transit agencies as partof the CARES Act to mitigate lost tax and passenger
revenue during the pandemic. Under the Consolidated
Appropriations for FY 2021, Congress provided an
additional $14 billion in relief.

essential to ensuring populations have access to transit
and these systems are kept in good working order.
There has been a slight increase in state transit funding, from $18.1 billion in 2016 to $19.2 billion in 2018.
Additionally, local support for transit investment has
also continued to grow. Since 2017, APTA reported
that over 70% of all transit-related ballot initiatives in
the U.S. were approved. Recent success has provided
additional funds and demonstrated a public interest in
further investment in our transit systems, as seen in
Table 1.16 17 18 19Federal funding is critical to supporting robust transit
systems. However, the state and local role is similarly

Ballot Measure Results for Transit, 2018-2020
2018

2019

2020

Public Transit Measures on the Ballot

38

20

52

Wins for Transit

31

16

47

Losses for Transit

7

4

5

$2.28

$7.23

$1.88

Revenue Total (Billion $)Photo courtesy of Valley Transportation Agency
BART TRAVELS ABOVE GROUND IN THE BAY AREA.

145________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

PUBLIC SAFETY  In 2018, there were 255 transit-related fatalities acrossthe nation. Over a three-year period, total transitrelated fatalities have remained relatively stable with aslight uptick in incidents. Comparatively, motor vehicle
fatalities have remained high, exceeding 35,000 deaths
a year since 2017.20 21 22

have half the traffic fatality rates as metro areas with lesstransit ridership. Specifically, metro areas with over 40
annual transit trips per capita have about half the traffic
fatality rate of metro areas with fewer than 20 transit
trips per capita. Robust investment in transit systems
develops life-saving benefits because this mode provides
an alternative for high-risk and vulnerable road users aswell as compact development that encourages safer traffic
speeds.23

Recent studies have found that areas with strong public
transportation networks have significantly lower overall
traffic fatality rates. Metro areas with high transit ridership

Photo courtesy of WSP
CONSTRUCTION FOR THE LOS ANGELES REGIONAL CONNECTOR

146________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

RESILIENCE
Transit systems’ resilience has been strained in recent
years due to a variety of hazards, such as sea level rise,
extreme winter weather, and the global health pandemic.

a reduction in fuel consumption by 4.16 billion gallons in
2017, and a decrease of another 1% the following year.
Twenty-five years ago, 95% of the nation’s bus fleet
was diesel powered, but that number has dramaticallydecreased now to only 42%. Furthermore, hybrid
electric buses saw an increase from just 1% in 2005 to
18% in 2019. Meanwhile, natural-gas–powered buses
saw an increase from 18% in 2009 to 29% in 2019. 24 25

Transit resilience must accommodate the needs ofindividual communities, including system availability andaccessibility, to promote healthy, economically viable, andenvironmentally friendly communities. Recent studies
have shown that improved transit access has the potential
to increase employment opportunities and broaden
overall economic activity. Seen over a 20-year period atcurrent wage rates, for every $1 billion invested in public
transportation, roughly 49,000 jobs are created.

New resilience challenges have also emerged amid the
COVID-19 pandemic. While transit has played a keyrole in safely moving essential workers, an emerging task
from the pandemic will be to establish and maintain new
passenger safety measures amid large revenue declines.
Additionally, transit agencies will need to build consumer
confidence in the public health and safety of riding ontransit systems.26 27

In recent years, transit agencies have taken strides tominimize their environmental impact, moving fleets
toward less reliance on fossil fuels, which accounted for

INNOVATIONIn recent years, many transit agencies have enteredpartnerships with mobility providers, as these services
complement public transit by providing service during
irregular hours, making first/last-mile connections,or providing transportation service in underserved
areas. Emerging Mobility on Demand (MOD) andmicromobility services, such as transportation network
companies and bike or scooter share, have played a criticalrole in expanding the definition of public transit. Though
MOD is still evolving, these services can provide solutions
to equitable transportation access, payment options,travel updates, multimodal connections, and enhanced
communication between the user and MOD systems.28 29

micromobility trips; this included 38.5 million scooter
trips, 36.5 million station-based bikeshare trips, and9 million dockless bikeshare trips, of which 6.5 million
were on e-bikes.30
Connected and autonomous vehicles (CAVs) are alsochanging the way our transit agencies are operating.
Across the U.S., several transit agencies have begun to offer service on autonomous buses, and many
low-speed automated pilots have begun. Additionally,
dozens of pilot programs have identified funding and arein various stages of planning and implementation. While
this technology currently operates on a small scale,
the FTA continues to implement the Strategic Transit
Automation Research (STAR) Plan, which studies theopportunities and associated automation risks and suggests that this technology will continue to be incorporated into the system.31

Nearly overnight, micromobility began to have apresence in communities of all sizes across the country.
Over a near 10-year period, we have seen annual
micromobility trips rise from roughly 320,000 to nearly
1 billion. In 2018, there was a total of 84 million shared147________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

RECOMMENDATIONSTO RAISE THE GRADE·

Transit is essential to creating more surface transportation system capacity and should
be at the forefront in how communities develop multimodal connectivity. This includes integrating transit and micromobility options with equitable access for all.

·Congress and the Administration should fix the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) by adding 25 cents to the current motor fuels user fee over the next five years and thenindex future increases against inflation using a multi-year rolling average of key indicators, such as the Producer Price Index or Consumer Price Index. As part ofthe solution to fix the HTF’s funding shortfall, there should be an effort to explore
future long-term revenue solutions.

·

Increase investment from state and local governments as well as the private sector to reduce the backlog of rehabilitation needs and increase transit mode share.
Continue increased investment in federal grant programs that improve and support
capital development.

·

Encourage the continued implementation of new technology into our transit system
to leverage innovation and mobility options. Together, these will continue to expand
and enhance the transit ecosystem to provide better access for all communities.

·

Apply asset management best practices to minimize long-term lifecycle costs andimprove the system’s overall condition.

Transit148________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES

Transit1.

American Public Transportation Association, “2020 Public Transportation Fact
Book,” 71st edition, March 2020.

2.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, The National
Transit Database (NTD), “NTD Data.”

3.

American Public Transportation Association, “2018 Public Transportation Fact
Book,” 69th edition, December 2018.

4.

American Public Transportation Association, “Policy Brief: Impact of COVID-19 on
Public Transit Agencies,” March 2020.

5.

American Public Transportation Association, “Ridership Report.”

6.

American Public Transportation Association, “2020 Public Transportation Fact
Book,” 71st edition, March 2020.

7.

American Society of Civil Engineers, “Failure to Act: Current Investment Trends in
our Surface Transportation Infrastructure,” 2021.

8.

American Public Transportation Association, “Public Transportation Facts.”

9.

U.S. Census Bureau, “American Community Survey.”

10. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration,” Status of
the Nation’s Highways, Bridges, and Transit: Conditions and Performance Report,”
23rd Edition.
11. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, “Surveyof State Funding for Public Transportation: Final Report 2020, Based on FY2018
Data,” 2020.
12. American Public Transportation Association, “Policy Brief: Impact of COVID-19 on
Public Transit Agencies,” March 2020.
13. American Public Transportation Association, “The Impact of the COVID-19
Pandemic on Public Transit Funding Needs in the U.S.,” May 5, 2020.
14. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, National Transit
Database, “2019 National Transit Summaries and Trends, (NTST).”
15. American Society of Civil Engineers, “Failure to Act: Current Investment Trends in
our Surface Transportation Infrastructure,” 2021.
16. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, “Surveyof State Funding for Public Transportation: Final Report 2020, Based on FY2018
Data,” 2020.
17. American Public Transportation Association, Nearly 90% of Transit Ballot Initiatives
Pass in 2017: https://www.apta.com/news-publications/press-releases/releases/
nearly-90-of-transit-ballot-initiatives-pass-in-2017/149________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES (Cont.)

Transit

18. American Public Transportation Association, Center for Transportation Excellence,“Public Transportation Wins Big at 85% Approval in the Midterm Elections,”
November 7, 2018.
19. American Public Transportation Association, Center for Transportation Excellence,“Campaigns: What Happened in 2020?”
20. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, “TS5.1 – Safety
and Security Time Series.”
21. U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
Traffic Safety Facts: Research Note, “2017 Fatal Motor Vehicle Crashes: Overview,”
October 2018.
22. U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
Traffic Safety Facts, “Early Estimate of Motor Vehicle Traffic Fatalities in 2019,” May2020.
23. American Public Transportation Association, Policy Development and Research,“Public Transit Is Key Strategy in Advancing Vision Zero, Eliminating Traffic
Fatalities,” August 2018.
24. American Public Transportation Association, “Economic Impact of Public
Transportation Investment: 2020 Update,” April 2020.
25. American Public Transportation Association, “Public Transportation Facts.”
26. American Public Transportation Association, “2019 Public Transportation Fact Book,”
70th edition, April 2019.
27. American Public Transportation Association, “2020 Public Transportation Fact
Book,” 71st edition, March 2020.
28. American Public Transportation Association, “Policy Brief: Continuing Impacts of
COVID-19 on Public Transit Agencies,” April 2020.
29. American Public Transportation Association, “The Impact of the COVID-19
Pandemic on Public Transit Funding Needs in the U.S.,” May 5, 2020.
30. National Association of City Transportation Officials, “Shared Micromobility in the
U.S.: 2018.”
31. American Public Transportation Association, “Economic Impact of Public
Transportation Investment: 2020 Update,” April 2020.

150________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Wastewater151________
Photo by Ivan Bandura

2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The nation’s more than 16,000 wastewater treatment plants are functioning,on average, at 81% of their design capacities, while 15% have reached or
exceeded it. Growing urban environments signal a trend that these facilities
will increasingly accommodate a larger portion of the nation’s wastewater
demand. Though large-scale capital improvements have been made tosystems experiencing sanitary sewer overflows, efforts have slowed inrecent years. As many treatment plants and collection networks approachthe end of their lifespans, the financial responsibilities for operation andmaintenance will become more costly. Estimates indicate that utilities
spent over $3 billion in 2019, or more than $18 per wastewater customer
to replace almost 4,700 miles of pipeline nationwide. Recently, the moreprevalent use of asset management plans enables 62% of surveyed utilities
to proactively manage wastewater infrastructure maintenance rather thanreactively respond to pipeline and equipment failures. In 2019, though theannual water infrastructure capital investment gap is $81 billion, the sector
has made strides to address current and future needs through resiliencerelated planning and innovations that produce profitable byproducts or costsavings from wastewater treatment.

INTRODUCTION
A critical component that influences the well-being of
any community is its system for removing and treating
wastewater for the protection of human and environmental
health. Wastewater infrastructure includes a network ofsewer pipes that collect and carry household, business,and industrial effluents to wastewater treatment
systems — onsite or centralized facilities. Within thesetreatment systems, wastewater undergoes processes toremove harmful constituents and reduce pollution to theEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA) and/or stateregulated levels prior to being discharged into nearby
waterbodies or, in some cases, recovered for water, energy,
and nutrient reuse.

Photo: rdonar
AXIAL HYDRODYNAMIC FLOW PUMP IN WASTEWATER PLANT.

152________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

CAPACITY
There are more than 16,000 publicly owned wastewater
treatment systems of various sizes serving the majorityof wastewater needs in the United States.1 The
remainder of the population — approximately 20% of
Americans — rely on onsite wastewater systems such as
septic tanks.2 Although the nation’s population growth
projections are modest,3 a 2018 Pew Research Center
study expects 86% of this growth to occur in urban andsuburban areas.4 Growing urban environments signala trend that centralized wastewater treatment plants(WWTP) will increasingly accommodate a larger portionof the nation’s wastewater demand. Currently, 62.5

billion gallons of wastewater per day is being treated bycentralized WWTPs. Across all sizes of WWTPs, systems
are operating at an average of 81% of their design
capacity, while 15% of systems are at or have exceededthat threshold.5
In addition to WWTPs, the nation’s wastewater footprint
also includes a network of over 800,000 miles of publicsewers and an additional 500,000 miles of private
lateral sewers that connect homes and businesses topublic sewer lines.6

CONDITION
The majority of the nation’s WWTPs are designed withan average lifespan of 40 to 50 years, so the systems
that were constructed in the 1970s, around the passingof the Clean Water Act in 1972, are reaching the end of
their service lives.7 However, smaller onsite systems, suchas septic tanks, have a shorter average lifespan of 20 to
30 years.8 Most states do not collect condition data forthese smaller systems, so an accurate assessment of theremaining lifespan or current condition is nearly impossible
to determine. In 2015, the National Association of Home
Builders estimated that the median age of owner-occupied
housing across the U.S. was 37 years old, an indication
that, without proactive homeowner maintenance, there
may be significant needs for upgrading and/or replacing
onsite wastewater infrastructure.9

Nationwide, the drinking water and wastewater pipes in
the ground are on average 45 years old,10 11 while somesystems have components more than a century old.12 The
typical lifespan expected for wastewater pipes is 50 to 100
years.13 As collection systems age and decline in condition,
groundwater and stormwater enters the networks throughcracks, joints, or illicit connections as inflow and infiltration.
When collection systems are overtaxed, sanitary sewer
overflows (SSOs) can occur. Between 2012 and 2016,
the EPA reports that improvements were made to morethan 180 of the nation’s large sanitary sewer systems,
which typically accommodate over 10 million gallons ofwastewater per day, and are prone to episodic SSOs.14 In
recent years, the progress has slowed.15 Aside from SSOs,
conveyance systems are also susceptible to other failures
like blockages caused by consumer products such as wipes
and paper towels.

In 2015, the National
Association of Home Builders
estimated that the medianage of owner-occupied
housing across the U.S. was
37 years old, an indication
that, without proactive
homeowner maintenance,
there may be significant
needs for upgrading and/or
replacing onsite wastewater
infrastructure.9
153________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

OPERATION & MAINTENANCE
Wastewater infrastructure may be owned by a public,
private, or cooperative entity, and the operation andmaintenance (O&M) may be conducted by the same
party or subcontracted elsewhere. As utilities face
the challenges of meeting increasingly stringent water
quality regulations, funding significant infrastructure
replacements, and affordably providing services amid
growing public and environmental health risks, theoption of merging (utility consolidation) may unlock
financial, technical, and managerial resources to meetcurrent needs and adapt to future demands.16

or oversight from state regulatory agencies, if O&M
goes unaddressed, systems may fail, costing homeowners
between $3,000 and $7,000.19
Thousands of miles of the nation’s aging pipes are buried
beneath increasingly urbanized cities and will require
more and more inter-agency collaboration and data
sharing, particularly as maintenance needs grow.20 In
a 2019 American Water Works Association report,
as much as 62% of wastewater pipeline maintenanceperformed by combined utilities occurs through theproactive execution of asset management plans; theremaining 38% is completed as a reactive response to
failures.21 The report goes on to mention, since 2017,
replacement rates for wastewater collection pipes haveessentially stagnated. Nevertheless, in 2020, BluefieldResearch estimated that utilities throughout thecountry will spend more than $3 billion on wastewater
pipe repairs and replacements, addressing 4,692 miles ofwastewater pipeline. This value translates into more than
$18 per wastewater customer, a cost that is projected to
grow by an average of 5% annually.22

According to the U.S. Conference of Mayors, trends
among municipal WWTPs show that nationwide O&M
expenditures have increased by approximately 4% annuallyfrom 1993 to 2017, an increase partially due to deferred
capital expenditures.17 Depending on the type of WWTP
and the collection system, O&M spending varies. In rural
areas where decentralized systems are common, theresponsibility to coordinate and finance O&M activities
ranging from $250 to $500 every three to five years falls
on homeowners.18 However, with little to no instruction

FUNDING
Wastewater infrastructure may be funded by local userof $504 annually for wastewater collection and treatfees and taxes, state-specific grants or discretionary
ment.27 28 Since 2008, user rates have trended upward to
set-asides, and federal grants or financing mechanisms.
reflect the true cost of service and also due to dwindling
Funding and financing difrevenues for many wasteThoughutilities
areseekingtofer through the simple factwater utilities.29 Thoughaddress affordability challenges utilities are seeking to adthat infrastructure financing, like any loan or bond,dress affordability chalin vulnerable communities,
requires repayment over alenges in vulnerable comdecreasing
usage
due
to
water
23
30- to 50-year period.
munities, decreasing usage
According to the Congres- conservation appliances, persistent due to water conservation
sional Research Service,leaks from aging infrastructure, appliances, persistent leaks
the federal government’s
and increasing inflation have all from aging infrastructure,share of capital investand increasing inflation havement has fallen from 63% contributed to the 24% increase in all contributed to the 24%
in 1977 to less than 9% in rates reported from 2008 to 2016. increase in rates reported
2017.24 State and local entifrom 2008 to 2016.30
ties shoulder the majority of capital projects and O&M
Some WWTPs are recouping savings and generating
expenses, which were approximately $20 billion in 1993
profits by implementing innovative technologies thatand increased to $55 billion by 2017.25 26
reuse water, recover energy, and recycle nutrients.31
Nationally, a single-family residence pays an average rate
Furthermore, state leaders have turned to levying
154________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

local taxes, initiating restoration fees, and creating
legislative set-asides as a means to invest in wastewater
infrastructure and to close the funding gap.

While wastewater utilities are responsible for covering
the majority of their expenses, many also look to federal
financing mechanisms, particularly for large capitalprojects.

EPA Clean Water State Revolving Fund Appropriations
Appropriations$1,800$1,600$1,400(Millions $)$1,200$1,000$800$600$1,394B$1,394B

FY2016FY2017$1,694B$1,694B$1,639B$1, 120B

$400
$200
$0

FY2018FY2019FY2020

FY2021

Wastewater Funding and Financing Mechanisms
Federal Agency

Program

Details

U.S.
Department ofAgriculture

Rural Utilities Service: Water andWaste Disposal Programs

The purpose of this program is to provide basic human amenities, alleviate
health hazards, and promote the orderly growth of the nation’s rural areas(communities with populations of 10,000 or less) by meeting the needfor new and upgraded drinking water, wastewater, stormwater, and solid
waste infrastructure.

U.S.
Departmentof Housing
and Urban
Development

Community Development Block
Grants (CDBG)

The program’s primary objective is to develop viable communities by
providing decent housing and a suitable living environment, and by
expanding economic opportunities, principally for persons of low andmoderate income. Accordingly, CDBG resources are not limited todrinking water, wastewater, and/or stormwater infrastrucure, but theseprojects must compete with other eligible activities including historicalpreservation, energy conservation, lead-based paint abatement,
and more. The block nature of the CDBG distribution enables local
government’s to exercise discretion and on-the-ground knowledge
when selecting appropriate projects that achieve program objectives.

U.S.
Environmental
Protection
AgencyWater Infrastructure Finance andInnovation Act Program (WIFIA)

Established in 2014, the WIFIA program provides credit assistance throughlong-term, low-cost supplemental loans for regionally and nationallysignificant infrastructure projects. WIFIA authorizes EPA to provide credit
assistance directly to an eligible recipient for a broad range of drinking water
and wastewater projects that generally cost $20 million or more.

U.S.
Environmental
Protection
AgencyClean Water State Revolving Fund
Loan Program (CWSRF)

Established in 1987 by amending the Clean Water Act, federal funds
are directed to CWSRF programs in all 50 states and Puerto Rico tocapitalize state infrastrucutre loans. CWSRF resources must be matchedby 20% state-backed funds. Various projects from CWSRF include new
construction and upgrades of wastewater treatment plants, stormwater
infrastructure, nonpoint source pollution management plans, and more.

155________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Photo courtesy of WSP USA
THE BALTIMORE BACK RIVER WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT

For instance, the EPA’s Clean Water State Revolving Fund
(CWSRF) provides resources to state agencies enablingthem to act as “infrastructure banks” that grant funds andoversee low-interest loans. CWSRF grants require local
entities to put forth a 20% match to the funds requested.
During FY16 and FY17, Congress assigned funding at$1.394 billion, increased that value to $1.694 billion for
FY18 and FY19, and then decreased FY20’s amount to$1.120 billion.32 In 2019, Bluefield Research reports thatstate agency requests for CWSRF funding exceeded$55.9 billion, indicating that the total, nationwide needsignificantly outpaces available funding.
Working in conjunction with EPA’s CWSRF program, theWater Infrastructure and Finance Innovation Act (WIFIA)
is an additional long-term, low-cost funding mechanism
for regionally and nationally significant, large-dollar-value
projects. From FY17 to FY19, Congress has increased
WIFIA’s lending capacity from $2.5 to $6 billion with morethan $21 billion being requested for over 150 applicants

During FY16 and FY17, Congressassigned funding at$1.394 billion,
increased that value to$1.694 billion

for FY18 and FY19, and thendecreased FY20’s amount to$1.120 billion.

32

156________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

nationwide. In FY19, the federal government invited morethan a dozen wastewater and water reuse projects to apply
for over $2.3 billion in loans.
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
manages the Community Development Block Grants
program under which urban, economically disadvantaged
areas may apply to receive grant funding. However, ruralcommunities, those that cannot financially bear the
responsibilities of long-term loans, may look to the U.S.
Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Rural Utilities
Service — Water and Environmental Program — for grantand financing options tailored particularly for their needs.

Photo: Louisville MSD
THE SOUTHWESTERN PARKWAY COMBINED SEWEROVERFLOW BASIN PROJECT

FUTURE NEEDIn 2019, the total capital spending on water infrastructure
at all levels was approximately $48 billion, while
capital investment needs were $129 billion, creating
an $81 billion gap. This underscores a chronic trend ofunderinvestment in critical water-related infrastructure—drinking water and wastewater systems. With this gap,
only 37% of the nation’s total water infrastructure capitalneeds were met. Assuming the water and wastewatersectors continue along the same path, the total gap willgrow to more than $434 billion by 2029.

expected lifespans, O&M for water infrastructure
become costlier. In 2019, 90% of the nation’s $104
billion O&M funding need was met, leaving an annual
gap of $10.5 billion. If trends continue, the country will
face a single-year O&M shortfall of $18 billion in 2039.
The implications of unaddressed capital and O&M futureneeds are particularly pervasive within the nation’s
water-reliant businesses and healthcare industry.
Economic projections indicate that by 2029, chronic
service disruptions would cost water-reliant businesses$111 billion and American households a cumulative $378
million in healthcare costs.33

Also influencing the wastewater sector’s future needs
are the growing O&M costs that are outpacing available
funding. As system components near or exceed their

PUBLIC SAFETY
In some communities where legacy infrastructure exists,
wastewater and stormwater systems are integrated into a
combined sewer network. When these areas experience
heavy rainfall or rapid snowmelt, the capacity of the
combined system is overtaxed and results in combined
sewer overflows where large volumes of partially treatedor untreated wastewater bypass the treatment process
and enter local waterbodies. According to the EPA,
there are approximately 860 combined sewer systems
throughout the country.34 Over the last two decades,
more than 200 of the nation’s largest combined sewer
systems (those serving > 50,000 people) have been
identified and had actions taken to reduce overflow
discharges that degrade water quality.35

Additionally, utilities grapple with treating and disposing
of byproducts containing contaminants of emerging
concern such as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances(PFAS, forever chemicals) or novel biological components(antibiotic-resistant genes).36 37 EPA studies state that
the PFAS family of chemicals is persistent in both theenvironment and human bodies, which means they arelikely to accumulate over time. Furthermore, evidenceshows that exposure to PFAS can lead to adverse humanhealth effects. As these threats increase, so too does theneed for costly improvements in wastewater treatment
systems.38 39

157________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

RESILIENCE
Utility managers, WWTP operators, engineers, andelected officials are increasingly incorporating aspectsof resilience — a system’s ability to withstand andadapt to the impacts of natural and/or man-madedisasters — into the design, siting, and planning phasesof their wastewater infrastructure. However, the suiteof wastewater infrastructure vulnerabilities varies bygeographic location, type of treatment system, age,and ownership status, so there is not a “one size fits all”
solution.

critical infrastructure decision-makers are shifting theirefforts from singularly addressing short-term metrics likepopulation growth, capacity demands, and affordability,
and are incorporating long-term, resilience-related
factors into planning such as sea level rise, frequency,
intensity, and likelihood of natural disasters, cybersecurity
threats, and post-interruption recovery time.41 For
instance, the drinking water sector recently set a
resilience precedent that may be instructive for many
wastewater stakeholders. In 2018, resilience planning was
streamlined within drinking water utilities with the signingof America’s Water Infrastructure Act (AWIA) which
requires drinking water systems to routinely develop andupdate Risk and Resilience Assessments and Emergency
Response Plans.42

For instance, some wastewater systems are in low-lying
areas that are especially prone to the impacts of flooding,while others may be in drought-prone regions or areas withincreasingly frequent wildfires.40 Rather than continuing
to operate under a “business as usual” framework, someAcross all sizes of wastewater treatment systems, technologicaland scientific innovations have made significant contributions
to addressing the sector’s challenges.

INNOVATION
Across all sizes of wastewater treatment systems,
technological and scientific innovations have madesignificant contributions to addressing the sector’schallenges. For example, water conservation appliances
have reduced the volume of wastewater entering thesystem, treatment process innovations have more
efficiently utilized existing capacity and limited resources,
and real-time conveyance network monitoring can
pinpoint and prioritize areas suffering from inflow andinfiltration or in need of O&M.

Antonio, Texas, implemented in-pipe sensors, data wascollected to optimize the network’s cleaning schedule,saving thousands of dollars in each location a sensor was
installed.43
Additionally, in recent decades, resource recovery
has increasingly shifted the traditional wastewater
treatment mindset away from generating a productsolely for disposal but reconceptualizing this “waste” asa “resource.” Innovations such as anaerobic digestors,
indirect potable reuse, and biosolids reuse systems
can recover water, energy, and nutrients from treatedwastewater and may contribute to the resilienceof treatment facilities, communities, and entire
watersheds.44 45

Sensors and monitoring innovations are being installed
to collect real-time data on the wastewater conveyancenetwork’s condition to inform and prioritize the system’s
O&M schedule. After a wastewater utility in San

158________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

RECOMMENDATIONSTO RAISE THE GRADE·Infrastructure owners should engage in asset management practices acrossinfrastructure sectors to extend the lifespan of assets and prioritize limited funding.
Asset management must include continuous assessment of the condition of assets
and prioritize investment decisions based upon a comprehensive suite of data.

·

More collaborations between researchers, technologists, wastewater utilities andoperators, and federal decision-makers will be needed to develop and quickly deploy
effective regulations, systems, public safety education, and policies that address
21st century concerns such as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS, forever
chemicals) or novel biological components.

·

Expand EPA’s CWSRF program and the Water Infrastructure and Finance
Innovation Act (WIFIA) with additional long-term, low-cost funding mechanisms
for regionally and nationally significant, large-dollar-value projects.

·

Identify new grant programs and funding mechanisms whose goal is to eliminate
and/or decouple the nation’s remaining combined sewer systems.

·

Develop a federal grant pilot program for publicly owned wastewater treatment
plants whose purpose is to create or improve waste-to-energy systems that increase
wastewater treatment efficiency.

·

Incorporate geographically specific projected impacts of climate change into
wastewater infrastructure planning and long-term funding decisions.

·Utilities should ensure their rates cover the full cost of service including operation,
maintenance, and capital needs; clearly communicate rate increases to the public;
and balance local issues of affordability.

·

As all wastewater systems face multiple and increasing natural threats, a rulesimilar to America’s Water Infrastructure Act of 2020 should be implemented todirect utilities to develop, update, and implement vulnerability (risk and resilienceassessments) and emergency response plans.

Wastewater

SOURCES1.

Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency, “Water and Wastewater Systems
Sector.”2.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Septic Systems Overview.”

3.

The World Bank Group, “Population Growth (Annual %) – United States.”

4. Pew Research Center, Social & Demographic Trends, What Unites and Divides
Urban, Suburban and Rural Communities, May 22, 2018.
5.

Interview with Bluefield Research Group on “Segmenting Utility CAPEX – U.S.
Municipal Water Infrastructure Forecast,” September 2019.

6.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, “Stateof Technology for Rehabilitation of Wastewater Collection Systems,” July 2010.
159________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES (Cont.)

Wastewater

7.

South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division ofEnvironmental Services, “Recommended Design Criteria Manual,” March 1991.

8.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,
Office of Water, “Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems Manual,” February 2002.

9.

Construction Dive, “NAHB: The Median Age of US Housing Continues to Climb.”

10. Tabuchi H, New York Times, “$300 Billion War Beneath the Street: Fighting toReplace America’s Water Pipes,” November 10, 2017.
11. Interview with Bluefield Research Group on “Underground Infrastructure: U.S.
Water & Wastewater Pipe Network Forecast, 2019-2028,” November 2019.
12. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wastewater Management, Officeof Water, “Primer for Municipal Wastewater Treatment Systems,” September 2004.
13. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,
Water Supply and Water Resources Division, “National Database Structure forLife Cycle Performance Assessment of Water and Wastewater Rehabilitation
Technologies (Retrospective Evaluation),” January 2014.
14. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Former National Compliance Initiative:
Keeping Raw Sewage and Contaminated Stormwater Out of Our Nation’s Waters.”
15. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Enforcement and Compliance History Online.
16. US Water Alliance, “Utility Strengthening Through Consolidation: Guiding
Principles for the Water Sector,” 2019.
17. The United States Conference of Mayors, “Local Government Makes RecordHigh Investments in Public Water & Sewer Infrastructure.”
18. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Septic Systems, “Why Maintain Your
Septic System.”
19. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Septic Systems, “Why Maintain Your
Septic System.”
20. Black & Veatch Management Consulting, LLC, 2018-2019 “50 Largest Cities
Water & Wastewater Rate Survey,” 2019.
21. American Water Works Association, “AWWA Utility Benchmarking:Performance Management for Water and Wastewater,” 2019.
22. Interview with Bluefield Research on “Underground Infrastructure: U.S. Water &Wastewater Pipe Network Forecast, 2019-2028,” published November 2019.
23. Congress of the United States, Congressional Budget Office, “Federal Support for
Financing State and Local Transportation and Water Infrastructure,” October 2018.
24. American Society of Civil Engineers, “The Economic Benefits of Investing in Water
Infrastructure: How a Failure to Act Would Affect the U.S. Economy Recovery.”
25. Congressional Research Service, “Federally Supported Water Supply andWastewater Treatment Programs,” May 3, 2019.
26. The United States Conference of Mayors, “$125.5 Billion – Record Spending on
Municipal Water and Sewer by Cities in 2017,” November 1, 2019.
160________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES (Cont.)
27. The National Association of Clean Water Agencies, “Cost of Clean Water Index,” 2018.

Wastewater

28. Black & Veatch Management Consulting, LLC, 2018-2019 “50 Largest Cities
Water & Wastewater Rate Survey,” 2019.
29. The United States Conference of Mayors, “$125.5 Billion – Record Spending on
Municipal Water and Sewer by Cities in 2017,” November 1, 2019.
30. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy,“Water and Wastewater Annual Price Escalation Rates for Selected Cities Acrossthe United States,” September 2017.
31. The World Bank, “Wastewater: A Resource that Can Pay Dividends for People, theEnvironment, and Economies, Says World Bank,” March 19, 2020.
32. Congressional Research Service, “Federally Supported Projects and Programs for
Wastewater, Drinking Water, and Water Supply Infrastructure,” July 30, 2020.
33. American Society of Civil Engineers, “The Economic Benefits of Investing in Water
Infrastructure: How a Failure to Act Would Affect the U.S. Economy Recovery.”
34. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES), “Combined Sewer Overflow Frequent Questions.”
35. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Enforcement, “Former National
Compliance Initiative: Keeping Raw Sewage and Contaminated Stormwater Out of
Our Nation’s Waters.”
36. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, PFOA, PFOS and Other PFASs, “Basic
Information on PFAS.”
37. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Science Inventory, “Detection of
Emerging, Clinically Relevant Antibiotic Resistance Genes in Wastewater from
Treatment Plants in Urban and Rural Areas in the United States.”
38. American Society of Civil Engineers, “The Economic Benefits of Investing in Water
Infrastructure: How a Failure to Act Would Affect the U.S. Economy Recovery.”
39. Water Environment Federation, “Current Priority: PFAS.”
40. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Case Study and Information Exchange.”
41. Committee on Adaptation to a Changing Climate, Ayyub BM, ed., “ClimateResilient Infrastructure: Adaptive Design and Risk Management,” Published online
October 2, 2018.
42. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Water Resilience, “America’s Water
Infrastructure Act: Risk Assessments and Emergency Response Plans.”
43. Water Online, “’Massive Savings’ Earn SAWS Recognition as Insightful Utility andAmong Top 10 Utility Papers Presented At WEFTEC19*,” September 26, 2019.
44. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Mainstreaming Potable Water Reuse in the
United States: Strategies for Leveling the Playing Field,” April 2018.
45. The Water Research Foundation, “Resource Recovery”

161________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Spotlight on
Broadband

A NOTE ON THIS SPOTLIGHT:
The importance of broadband infrastructure has grown exponentially as we increasingly rely on it to
support our connected lives. Meanwhile, civil engineers play a growing role in broadband installation, andhigh-speed internet is increasingly critical to the operation and modernization of our legacy infrastructure
systems. Because of this, the ASCE Committee on America’s Infrastructure felt it important to makerecommendations on how to improve broadband infrastructure. However, the committee determined162________
there was insufficient information on broadband infrastructure
to justify a category grade.
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SPOTLIGHT ON BROADBAND
Broadband, a generic term for high-speed internet access, enables students
of all ages to learn online and businesses to reach customers and coworkers; facilitates electronic and verbal communications; provides accessto healthcare and job openings; and can be the deciding factor of wherea company chooses to expand. When the coronavirus pandemic forced
millions of Americans to stay home in 2020 and 2021, an estimated one infive school-aged children lacked the high-speed internet connection neededto access lessons and other materials.1
The Federal Communications Commission(FCC) defines advanced telecommunications
capability as a download speed of 25 megabits(MGB) per second or higher, and upload
speeds of 3 MGB or higher. Internet canbe provided by satellite, digital subscriberline (DSL), cable, microwave, or fiber.
Presently, the FCC does not consider
wireless connections, e.g., cell phones,
in its assessment of broadband access.
Infrastructure includes tower-supported
antennae/repeaters (wireless), and fiber
optic or copper wire (wired). Wiredcommunications also involve a significant
amount of underground duct-installedcircuiting.

President Trump signed the Broadband
Deployment Accuracy and Technological
Availability (DATA) Act in early 2020
that requires the FCC to update theirbroadband maps to more accuratelyreflect broadband coverage. However,
the timeline for this update is unclear,and the FCC has stated more resources
are needed to carry out the DATA Act
mandate.3
Notably, disadvantaged and rural communities are typically worse off when it
comes to being able to access broadband
internet. A study by the Center for Public
Integrity reports that families with household incomes over $80,700 are five times more likely tohave access to broadband than a household with income
below $34,800 (the top fifth and lowest fifth income
thresholds, respectively).4

Estimates paint a fuzzy picture at best on how many
Americans can access broadband internet speeds.
According to the FCC, 93.5% of the U.S. population
has access to high-speed internet. However, there are
significant disparities in the FCC’s estimate, which defines“access” as one or more locations per census block capableof accessing download speeds of 25MGB or more. The
National Association of Counties (NACo) estimated in
20202 that 65% of counties have average connection
speeds lower than the FCC’s definition of broadband.
NACo reported counties of all sizes had connectivity
issues, but the majority of small and medium-sizedcounties (populations of <50,000 and 50,000-499,999,
respectively) experienced slower speeds, as compared toless than 20% of larger counties (population >500,000).

Americans’ reliance on fast internet is only forecasted
to grow in the coming years. According to the Cellular
Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA), data
use in 2018 was 73 times higher than in 2010.5 To meetthe demand for data, the telecommunications industry
is expanding and deploying more cell sites, launching
5G, and looking at the next generation of wireless.
Reliable and widespread access is also a prerequisite
for communities looking to integrate communications
and data into transportation and utilities infrastructure
systems.

163________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Americans’ reliance on fast internet
is only forecasted to grow in the coming years.

As elected officials and decision-makers work toward
increasing access, the role of civil engineers in the
deployment of broadband is important. Expanding
broadband infrastructure typically involves right-of-way
issues and “dig once” or co-location policies that haveheavy involvement from civil engineers. Additionally,
civil engineers manage construction and design anddeliver poles, structures, and towers across the country
that will play an increasingly important role in hosting
5G receptors, as well as assess the structural integrityof buildings that host transmitter and receiver antennas.

across the U.S. between 2000 and 2018. In 2020, theagency launched the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund, a
10-year, $20 billion program that will finance deploymentof faster broadband networks to underserved rural
areas.6 Other public agencies are also focused on closing
the digital divide. The U.S. Department of Agriculture
awarded $600 million in rural telecom grants between
2009 to 2016. Governors and state legislatures haveestablished broadband deployment grants and requested
coordinated policy from relevant state agencies.
Of course, significant work remains, and the accelerated
deployment of broadband should involve careful planningand productive partnerships between all levels ofgovernment and the private sector. These planning
efforts must recognize that rapid growth and expansion isnecessary to avoid technical obsolescence, also leverage
legacy infrastructure to the extent possible.

Federal, state, and local governments and the private
sector are working to close the digital divide. CTIA
reports the telecom industry has spent over $253 billion
in capital investments since the launch of 4G in 2010.
In 2019, telecom invested $27.4 billion in expanding
capacity, increasing coverage, developing infrastructure,and upgrading technology to support 5G. However,
it is important to note that private companies do nothave a natural incentive to invest and expand service inrural areas with smaller or less affluent customer bases,
contributing to service gaps in many of those regions.

Increasingly, other infrastructure sectors are relying
on telecommunication capabilities to modernize andimprove safety. Everything from autonomous vehicles
reading road signs to water pipes embedded with leakdetection sensors will depend on broadband access.
Looking forward, the pressing need to modernize ourinfrastructure networks will require information on
where broadband service is lacking and a clear vision ofwhere we’re headed.

Some public funding is available to help support the
deployment of broadband to previously unreachedcommunities. Through the FCC, the federal government
disbursed over $15 billion by funding various programs

164________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

RECOMMENDATIONSTO RAISE THE GRADE·

Ensure the updated maps required by the Broadband DATA Act are developed in atimely fashion and in close coordination with state, local, and private stakeholders,
including service providers.

·States and municipalities should develop broadband plans aimed at closing the
gap in digital for all. These plans should foster stakeholder engagement; identify
and remove limitations to improve data collection and mapping; support strategic
buildouts and deployment efforts; and encourage the preservation of conduit andright of way for future technologies.

·

A coordinated approach is needed to ensure broadband is built out to underserved
populations, similar to the Rural Electrification Act of 1936.

·

Co-location of broadband should be planned with existing infrastructure, especiallyin the instance where public funding is provided. This includes above-groundinfrastructure and the codification of “dig once” policies where service providers
install broadband conduit as other infrastructure is installed.

·

Enact and enforce codes and standards to ensure that utility poles and otherstructures that support 4G/5G and future telecommunications equipment are
structurally sound, reliable, and resilient.

Broadband

DEFINITIONSBROADBAND – Wired or wireless data streaming (internet) operating at speeds of atleast 25 megabits per second downstream, 3 megabits per second upstream.7
4G (MOBILE WIRELESS) – 4G data streaming at approximate speeds between 12
and 36 megabytes per second. This equates to a roughly six-minute download
time for a feature-length movie.
5G (MOBILE WIRELESS) – 5G data streaming as supporting up to 300 Mbps or
greater. A feature-length movie can be downloaded in as little as 15 seconds.8
FIBER OPTIC BROADBAND – Wired technology that converts data-carrying
electric signals to light, which can then be transmitted through glass fibers
approximately the diameter of human hair. According to the FCC, fibertransmits data at speeds far exceeding current DSL or cable modem speeds,
typically by tens or even hundreds of Mbps.
WIRELESS BROADBAND – Data streaming (internet connection) to a home orbusiness connects between the customer’s location and the service provider’sfacility. Wireless broadband can be mobile or fixed.
SATELLITE BROADBAND – The FCC defines satellite broadband as another formof wireless broadband, useful for serving remote or sparsely populated areas.
Speeds can be slower than DSL and cable modem, but 10 times faster than thedownload speeds of dial-up internet access. Extreme weather conditions candisrupt satellite service.
165________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

SOURCES

Broadband

1.

Pew Research Center, “Nearly one-in-five teens can’t always finish their
homework because of the digital divide,” October 26, 2018.

2.

National Association of Counties, “Understanding the True State of Connectivity
in America,” February 2020.

3.

Multichannel News, “Pai: FCC Lacks Resources to Implement BROADBANDDATA Act,” March 11, 2020.

4. The Center for Public Integrity, “Rich People Have Access to High-Speed
Internet: Many Poor People Still Don’t,” May 12, 2016.
5.

CTIA, “2019 Annual Survey Highlights,” June 20, 2019.

6.

Federal Communications Commission Press Release, “FCC Launches $20 billion rural
digital opportunity fund to expand rural broadband deployment,” January 30, 2020.

7.

Federal Communications Commission, “FCC Finds U.S. Broadband Deployment
Not Keeping Pace,” Report; Notice of Inquiry.

8.

Federal Communications Commission, 5G FAQs, Accessed on December 13, 2020.

166________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

OUR INFRASTRUCTURE VISION
Decision-makers at all levels of government increasingly recognize the critical role our infrastructure plays in supporting
our quality of life and economy. Voters and lawmakers alike have championed smart infrastructure policy and increased
investment in our multimodal freight system, drinking water networks, and more. We must not let this hard-earned
progress slip away if we want healthy, resilient communities and a strong economic foundation for the future. This down
payment on our infrastructure bill has contributed to modest but meaningful improvements.
Acting now will save us money in the long-term. Our investment gap is already ballooning, and we are underspending
on infrastructure by nearly $260 billion per year. Just as cars demand tune-ups and roofs require incremental repairs,
our infrastructure needs robust and sustainable funding to make continued needed improvements over time. Putting off
investment now will cost us and future generations down the line.
As we look for opportunities to create high-paying jobs, strengthen the backbone of the next century’s economy, build
resilient communities, and compete in the global marketplace, sound infrastructure policy and robust investment is thepath forward.

Game Changers:
ASCE has combed through successful solutions across the major infrastructure sectors to identify the most innovative
infrastructure #GameChangers. These are ground breaking infrastructure projects and programs that represent the latest
innovations in transportation, water, and energy infrastructure that are transforming the way engineers plan, build, andadapt to the nation’s infrastructure needs. ASCE’s list of #Gamechangers must meet one of the following criteria: innovativetechnologies, creative funding mechanisms, and unique collaborations between agencies or private firms.
https://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/solutions/gamechangers/

167________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD HISTORY
The concept of a report card to grade the nation’s infrastructure originated in 1988 with the congressionally chartered
National Council on Public Works Improvement report, Fragile Foundations: A Report on America’s Public Works. A
decade later, when the federal government indicated they would not be updating the report, ASCE used the approach andmethodology to publish its first Report Card on America’s Infrastructure in 1998. With each new report in 2001, 2005,
2009, 2013, 2017, and now 2021 – the methodology of the Report Card has been rigorously assessed so as to take into
consideration all of the changing elements that affect America’s infrastructure.
In 1988, when Fragile Foundations was released, the nation’s infrastructure earned a “C,” representing an average grade
based on the performance and capacity of existing public works. Among the problems identified within Fragile Foundations
were increasing congestion and deferred maintenance and age of the system; the authors of the report worried that
fiscal investment was inadequate to meet the current operations costs and future demands on the system. In each of
ASCE’s seven Report Cards, the Society found that these same problems persist. Our nation’s infrastructure is aging,underperforming, and in need of sustained care and action. Elected officials from both sides of the political aisle and at
all levels of government regularly cite the Report Card, beginning with the very first release in 1998, when President Bill
Clinton referenced the Report Card’s grade for Schools. News reports reference the Report Card on a daily basis, withmentions in The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, USA Today, The Washington Post, and the Los Angeles Times,
as well as on National Public Radio, NBC’s Today Show, 60 Minutes, CBS Evening News, and HBO’s Last Week Tonightwith John Oliver, among many others.
CATEGORY

1988**

1998

2001

2005

2009

2013

2017

Aviation

B-

C-

D

D+

D

D

D

Bridges

—

C-

C

C

C

C+

C+

Dams

—

D

D

D+

D

D

D

Drinking Water

B-

D

D

D-

D-

D

D

Energy

—

—

D+

D

D+

D+

D+

Hazardous Waste

D

D-

D+

D

D

D

D+

Inland Waterways

B-

—

D+

D-

D-

D-

D

Levees

—

—

—

—

D-

D-

D

Ports

—

—

—

—

—

C

C+

Public Parks & Recreation

—

—

—

C-

C-

C-

D+

Rail

—

—

—

C-

C-

C+

B

Roads

C+

D-

D+

D

D-

D

D

Schools

D

F

D-

D

D

D

D+

Solid Waste

C-

C-

C+

C+

C+

B-

C+

Stormwater

—

—

—

—

—

—

D

Transit

C-

C-

C-

D+

D

D

D-

Wastewater

C

D+

D

D-

D-

D

D+

GPA

C

D

D+

D

D

D+

D+

Cost to Improve**

—

—

$1.3T

$1.6T

$2.2T

$3.6T

$4.59T

168________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org

ASCE would like to thank the following organizations and individuals for their assistance during the Report
Card research and preparation process:Airport’s Council International – North
America
American Association of State Highway
and Transportation Officials
American Association of Port
Authorities
American Public Transportation
Association
American Short Line and Regional
Railroad Association
AmtrakAmy Ford, ITS America, Mobility on
Demand Alliance
Association of American Railroads
Association of State and Territorial Solid
Waste Management Officials, including
Dania Rodriguez, Kerry Callahan, andPaula Bansch
Association of State Dam Safety
Officials, including Lori Spragens andMark Ogden

Bluefield Research, including Reese
Tisdale, Erin Bonney, Eric Bindler,Mariel Marchand
Brian Bledsoe, Ph.D., University ofGeorgia
Eaton
Edison Electric Institute
EPA Office of Brownfields and Land
Revitalization, including Director David
Lloyd

National Recreation & Parks Association
National Waterways Foundation
Pew Charitable Trusts’ Restore
America’s Parks
Rural Community AssistancePartnership (RCAP)
Suzie Boxman, Ph.D., Environmental
Research and Education Foundation
The 21st Century School FundEPA Office of Superfund Remediation
and Technology Innovation, including
former Director James Woolford

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Kate Probst Consulting

U.S. Department of Homeland Security,
Federal Emergency Management
Association

Kevin Palaia, P.G., ICF
Montgomery County Maryland
Department of Environmental
Protection, including Adam Ortiz
National Association of State Park
Directors

U.S. Department of Agricultural Rural
Development

U.S. Department of Transportation
U.S. Energy Information Institute
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Waterways Council

The Report Card for America’s Infrastructure is prepared in collaboration between ASCE members and staff
and supported in part by the ASCE Foundation. Many thanks to the following staff members:
Joe Brady

Lizzie Howell

Tom SmithAnna Denecke

Kevin Longley

Ben Walpole

Emily Feenstra

Natalie Mamerow

Grace Wiley

Roxann Henze-Gongola

Christy Prouty

Christine Williams

Martin Hight

Caroline Sevier

Jane Howell

Laurie Shuster

ASCE would also like to thank:
Abby Gardner of Scottie Public Affairs

Karen Donohue with KLD Design

Ironistic

Alexa Lopez

Maria Matthews

LGND

Becky Hoffman, Mike Schmidt,
Arman Belding and the FleishmanHillard
team

Brian Pallasch

Weymouth Watson

Heather Smith

WordsFresh169________
2021 INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT CARD
www.infrastructurereportcard.org