69–008 

110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 110–760 

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE BILL (H.R. 3999) TO AMEND 

TITLE 23, UNITED STATES CODE, TO IMPROVE THE SAFETY OF FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAY BRIDGES, TO STRENGTHEN BRIDGE INSPECTION 

STANDARDS AND PROCESSES, TO INCREASE INVESTMENT IN THE RECONSTRUCTION OF STRUCTURALLY DEFICIENT BRIDGES ON THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. 

JULY 15, 2008.—Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

Mr. ARCURI, from the Committee on Rules, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H. Res. 1344] 

The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration House 

Resolution 1344, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to the House 

with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted. 

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 3999, the ‘‘National Highway Bridge Reconstruction and Inspection Act of 2007,’’ 

under a structured rule. The resolution provides for one hour of 

general debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and 

ranking minority member of the Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure. 

The resolution waives all points of order against consideration of 

the bill except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. The 

resolution provides that the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in part A of this report shall be an original bill for 

the purpose of amendment. The resolution provides that the 

amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in part A of this 

report shall be considered as read. The resolution waives all points 

of order against the amendment in the nature of a substitute except those arising under clause 10 of rule XXI. This does not affect 

the point of order available under clause 9 of rule XXI (regarding 

earmark disclosure). 

The resolution makes in order only those further amendments 

printed in part B of this report. The amendments made in order 

may be offered only in the order printed in this report, may be offered only by a Member designated in this report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in this report 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with REPORTS
2 

equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, 

shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a 

demand for a division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. The resolution waives all points of order 

against the amendments except those arising under clause 9 or 10 

of rule XXI. 

The resolution provides one motion to recommit with or without 

instructions. Finally, notwithstanding the operation of the previous 

question, the Chair may postpone further consideration to a time 

designated by the Speaker. 

EXPLANATION OF WAIVERS

Although the rule waives all points of order against the bill and 

its consideration (except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule 

XXI), the Committee is not aware of any points of order against the 

bill or its consideration. The waivers of all points of order against 

the bill and its consideration (except those arising under clause 9 

or 10 of rule XXI) are prophylactic. 

COMMITTEE VOTES

The results of each record vote on an amendment or motion to 

report, together with the names of those voting for and against, are 

printed below: 

Rules Committee record vote No. 565 

Date: July 15, 2008. 

Measure: H.R. 3999. 

Motion by: Mr. Dreier. 

Summary of motion: To make in order and provide appropriate 

waivers for an amendment by Rep. Mica (FL), #18, which would 

allow states to continue to transfer a portion of their bridge funding to other highway projects if the Secretary recognizes the State 

has no deficient bridges on the National Highway System, or that 

the State will spend more on bridges from other sources than Federal bridge funding and the transfer will not affect the States’ fiveyear bridge performance plan. 

Results: Defeated 4–9. 

Vote by Members: McGovern—Nay; Hastings (FL)—Nay; Matsui—Nay; Cardoza—Nay; Welch—Nay; Castor—Nay; Arcuri—Nay; 

Sutton—Nay; Dreier—Yea; Diaz-Balart—Yea; Hastings (WA)—Yea; 

Sessions—Yea; Slaughter—Nay. 

Rules Committee record vote No. 566 

Date: July 15, 2008. 

Measure: H.R. 3999. 

Motion by: Mr. Diaz-Balart. 

Summary of motion: To make in order and provide appropriate 

waivers for an amendment by Rep. Flake (AZ), #9, which would 

allow States to obligate funds received from SAFETEA–LU or 

FY08 Consolidated Appropriations Act to repair or replace structurally-deficient bridges, and an amendment by Rep. Fossella (NY), 

#14, which would allow funds appropriated under this act to be 

used for traffic mitigation measures that may be necessary during 

bridge rehabilitation or replacement projects. 

Results: Defeated 4–9. 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with REPORTS
3 

Vote by Members: McGovern—Nay; Hastings (FL)—Nay; Matsui—Nay; Cardoza—Nay; Welch—Nay; Castor—Nay; Arcuri—Nay; 

Sutton—Nay; Dreier—Yea; Diaz-Balart—Yea; Hastings (WA)—Yea; 

Sessions—Yea; Slaughter—Nay. 

Rules Committee record vote No. 567 

Date: July 15, 2008. 

Measure: H.R. 3999. 

Motion by: Mr. Diaz-Balart. 

Summary of motion: To make in order and provide appropriate 

waivers for an amendment by Rep. Blunt (MO), #1, which would 

require the EPA to remove a boutique fuel from the list published 

pursuant to the EP Act of 2005 if that fuel ceases to be included 

in any State implementation plan or if the fuel is functionally identical to a Federal fuel control promulgated and implemented by 

EPA. It also would provide the EPA with additional authority to 

waive from controls and prohibitions on fuels if fuel supply issues 

result from any unexpected problems with distribution or delivery 

equipment that is necessary for transportation and delivery of fuel 

or fuel additives. 

Results: Defeated 4–9. 

Vote by Members: McGovern—Nay; Hastings (FL)—Nay; Matsui—Nay; Cardoza—Nay; Welch—Nay; Castor—Nay; Arcuri—Nay; 

Sutton—Nay; Dreier—Yea; Diaz-Balart—Yea; Hastings (WA)—Yea; 

Sessions—Yea; Slaughter—Nay. 

Rules Committee record vote No. 568 

Date: July 15, 2008. 

Measure: H.R. 3999. 

Motion by: Mr. Hastings (WA). 

Summary of motion: To make in order and provide appropriate 

waivers for an amendment by Rep. Shimkus (IL), #17, which would 

enable the Department of Energy to enter into agreements with up 

to 6 coal liquefaction projects for the purpose of establishing price 

parameters which will provide the projects with a federal price 

guarantee. 

Results: Defeated 4–9. 

Vote by Members: McGovern—Nay; Hastings (FL)—Nay; Matsui—Nay; Cardoza—Nay; Welch—Nay; Castor—Nay; Arcuri—Nay; 

Sutton—Nay; Dreier—Yea; Diaz-Balart—Yea; Hastings (WA)—Yea; 

Sessions—Yea; Slaughter—Nay. 

Rules Committee record vote No. 569 

Date: July 15, 2008. 

Measure: H.R. 3999. 

Motion by: Mr. Hastings (WA). 

Summary of motion: To make in order and provide appropriate 

waivers for an amendment by Rep. Pitts (PA), #13, which would require the President to open at least three closed military installations for the purpose of siting new refineries and would expedite 

the refinery application process. 

Results: Defeated 3–7. 

Vote by Members: McGovern—Nay; Hastings (FL)—Nay; Matsui—Nay; Castor—Nay; Arcuri—Nay; Sutton—Nay; Dreier—Yea; 

Hastings (WA)—Yea; Sessions—Yea; Slaughter—Nay. 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with REPORTS
4 

SUMMARY OF AMENDMENT IN PART A MADE IN ORDER AS ORIGINAL

TEXT

Section 1 of the amendment changes the short title of the bill to 

the ‘‘National Highway Bridge Reconstruction and Inspection Act of 

2008.’’

Section 2 requires the Secretary of Transportation (‘‘Secretary’’) 

to develop a system to assign a risk-based priority to repair, rehabilitate, or replace each structurally-deficient or functionally-obsolete bridge. It requires the National Academy of Sciences to review 

the process for assigning risk-based priorities for repair, reconstruction, or replacement of structurally-deficient and functionallyobsolete bridges. It also establishes the requirements for State participation in the Highway Bridge Program. States are required to 

establish a five-year performance plan for the inspection of highway bridges and the rehabilitation and replacement of any structurally-deficient or functionally-obsolete bridges. 

Section 3 provides that the standards established under this Act 

are to be designed to ensure uniformity among the States in the 

conduct of inspections and evaluations. It sets forth minimum 

standards for inspections. It requires the Secretary to expand its 

bridge inspector training program to ensure that all persons conducting highway bridge inspections receive appropriate training 

and certification. It requires annual inspections of structurally-deficient highway bridges. 

Section 4 expands the activities eligible to receive funding under 

the highway research program to include research into non-destructive inspection technologies. 

Section 5 authorizes $1 billion in FY 2009 to repair, reconstruct, 

and replace structurally-deficient bridges on the National Highway 

System. Funds are to be distributed by formula pursuant to Federal-aid highway apportionments for Federal-aid highway bridges 

under the Highway Bridge Program. Funds shall be used for the 

replacement or rehabilitation of structurally-deficient National 

Highway System bridges. Funds may not be transferred to other 

Federal-Aid Highway programs. The amendment prohibits any congressional or administration earmarks of funding provided under 

this program. 

Section 6 authorizes the Secretary to establish and implement a 

pilot program for two fiscal years to evaluate the effectiveness, accuracy, and reliability of the use of advanced condition assessment 

inspection processes and technologies in monitoring and evaluating 

the structural health of a highway bridge. The Secretary is authorized to make grants to States to conduct projects under the pilot 

program. 

SUMMARY OF AMENDMENTS MADE IN ORDER

(Summaries derived from information provided by sponsors.) 

1. Oberstar (MN): Would make technical corrections to the 

amendment in the nature of a substitute. (10 minutes) 

2. Mica (FL): Would require the Government Accountability Office to conduct a study of the Federal Highway Administration’s 

bridge rating system. The study shall specifically address the effectiveness of using the terms ‘‘structurally deficient’’ and ‘‘functionVerDate Aug 31 2005 04:25 Jul 16, 2008 Jkt 069008 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR760.XXX HR760

bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with REPORTS
5 

ally obsolete’’ in describing the condition of the highway bridge inventory in the United States. (10 minutes) 

3. Diaz-Balart, Mario (FL): Would consider emergency evacuation 

routes in the risk-based prioritization for replacement or rehabilitation of deficient bridges. (10 minutes) 

4. Walz (MN): Would require the Secretary of Transportation to 

report to Congress, within 15 days of issuing a critical finding that 

result in the closure of a bridge, on the economic impact and impact on regional transportation that will result from the bridge closure. The amendment also requires the Secretary to recommend solutions to mitigate such impacts. (10 minutes) 

5. Miller, Candice (MI): Would require the Secretary of Transportation to conduct a study on the cost benefits of using carbon fiber 

composite materials in bridge projects instead of traditional construction materials. (10 minutes) 

6. Conaway (TX)/Sutton (OH)/Arcuri (NY): Would express that it 

is the sense of Congress to encourage States that receive Federal 

funding to develop corrosion mitigation and prevention plans. The 

plans are encouraged to contain expected useful life of the bridge, 

details of corrosion mitigation and prevention methods in construction and maintenance of the bridge, certification and approval by 

a corrosion expert and corrosion training for all bridge inspectors. 

(10 minutes) 

7. Shays (CT): Would request the GAO to conduct a study on factors contributing to bridge construction and rehabilitation delays 

and ways to expedite construction projects. (10 minutes) 

8. Loebsack (IA): Would require the Secretary, in consultation 

with the states to study the risks posed by a ‘‘500 year’’ flood to 

bridges on federal-aid highways, bridges on other public roads, and 

bridges on Indian reservations and park bridges while also giving 

consideration to safety, serviceability, essentiality for public use, 

and public safety, The Secretary would report the results to Congress not later than 2 years after enactment of the legislation. (10 

minutes) 

9. Shea-Porter (NH): Would allow a state performance plan to 

provide for increased inspection of a historic bridge rather than rehabilitation or replacement. (10 minutes) 

10. Childers (MS): Would provide that none of the funds may be 

used to employ workers in violation of section 274A of the Immigration and Nationality Act. (10 minutes) 

11. Capuano (MA): Would create a National Tunnel Inspection 

Program that would establish national tunnel inspection standards 

and ensure uniformity among the States in the conduct of such inspections. (10 minutes) 

PART A: TEXT OF AMENDMENT MADE IN ORDER AS ORIGINAL TEXT

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘National Highway Bridge Reconstruction and Inspection Act of 2008’’. 

SEC. 2. HIGHWAY BRIDGE PROGRAM. 

(a) BRIDGES ON FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS.—

(1) RISK-BASED PRIORITIZATION FOR REPLACEMENT AND REHABILITATION OF DEFICIENT BRIDGES.—Section 144 of title 23, 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with REPORTS
6 

United States Code, is amended by striking subsections (b) and 

(c) and inserting the following: 

‘‘(b) BRIDGES ON FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS.—The Secretary, in consultation with the States, shall—

‘‘(1) inventory all bridges on Federal-aid highways that are 

bridges over waterways, other topographical barriers, other 

highways, and railroads; 

‘‘(2) identify each bridge inventoried under paragraph (1) 

that is structurally deficient or functionally obsolete; 

‘‘(3) assign a risk-based priority for replacement or rehabilitation of each such bridge after consideration of safety, serviceability, and essentiality for public use, including the potential 

impacts to regional and national freight and passenger mobility if the serviceability of the bridge is restricted or diminished; 

and 

‘‘(4) determine the cost of replacing each such bridge with a 

comparable facility or of rehabilitating such bridge. 

‘‘(c) BRIDGES ON OTHER PUBLIC ROADS.—

‘‘(1) INVENTORY OF BRIDGES.—The Secretary, in consultation 

with the States, shall—

‘‘(A) inventory all those highway bridges on public roads, 

other than those on any Federal-aid highway, which are 

bridges over waterways, other topographical barriers, 

other highways, and railroads; 

‘‘(B) identify each bridge inventoried under subparagraph (A) that is structurally deficient or functionally obsolete; 

‘‘(C) assign a risk-based priority for replacement or rehabilitation of each such bridge after consideration of safety, 

serviceability, and essentiality for public use, including the 

potential impacts to regional and national freight and passenger mobility if the serviceability of the bridge is restricted or diminished; and 

‘‘(D) determine the cost of replacing each such bridge 

with a comparable facility or of rehabilitating such bridge. 

‘‘(2) INVENTORY OF BRIDGES FOR HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE.—

The Secretary may, at the request of a State, inventory 

bridges, on and off Federal-aid highways, for historic significance. 

‘‘(3) INVENTORY OF INDIAN RESERVATION AND PARK BRIDGES.—

As part of the activities carried out under paragraph (1), the 

Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of the Interior, 

shall—

‘‘(A) inventory all those highway bridges on Indian reservation roads and park roads which are bridges over waterways, other topographical barriers, other highways, and 

railroads; 

‘‘(B) identify each bridge inventoried under subparagraph (A) that is structurally deficient or functionally obsolete; 

‘‘(C) assign a risk-based priority for replacement or rehabilitation of each such bridge after consideration of safety, 

serviceability, and essentiality for public use, including the 

potential impacts to regional and national freight and pasVerDate Aug 31 2005 04:25 Jul 16, 2008 Jkt 069008 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR760.XXX HR760

bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with REPORTS
7 

senger mobility if the serviceability of the bridge is restricted or diminished; and ‘‘(D) determine the cost of replacing each such bridge 

with a comparable facility or of rehabilitating such 

bridge.’’. (2) PROCESS FOR ASSIGNING RISK-BASED PRIORITIES.— (A) DEADLINE FOR ESTABLISHMENT.—After modifying national bridge inspection standards in accordance with the 

amendments made by section 3 and not later than 18 

months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall establish a process for assigning risk-based 

priorities under sections 144(b)(3), 144(c)(1)(C), and 

144(c)(3)(C) of title 23, United States Code, as amended by 

paragraph (1) of this subsection. 

(B) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 18 months 

after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall 

submit to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a 

report containing a description of the process for assigning 

risk-based priorities established under subparagraph (A). 

(C) INDEPENDENT REVIEW.— (i) PARTICIPATION OF NATIONAL ACADEMY OF

SCIENCES.—Not later than 18 months after the date of 

enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall enter into 

appropriate arrangements with the National Academy 

of Sciences to permit the Academy to conduct an independent review of the process for assigning risk-based 

priorities established under subparagraph (A). 

(ii) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 2 years 

after the date of enactment of this Act, the Academy 

shall submit a report on the results of the review to 

the Secretary, the Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure of the House of Representatives, and 

the Committee on Environment and Public Works of 

the Senate. 

(iii) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is 

authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subparagraph $2,000,000 for fiscal year 2009. Such sums 

shall remain available until expended. 

(b) APPORTIONMENT.—Section 144(e) of such title is amended by 

adding at the end the following: ‘‘In this subsection, the term ‘deficient bridge’ means a bridge that is structurally deficient or functionally obsolete.’’. 

(c) PARTICIPATION.—Section 144(d) of such title is amended by 

adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(5) REQUIREMENTS FOR STATE PARTICIPATION.—

‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—As a condition for providing assistance to a State under this section, the Secretary shall require the State to take the following actions: 

‘‘(i) INSPECTIONS.—Not later than 24 months after 

the date of enactment of this paragraph, and at least 

once every 24 months thereafter (except as otherwise 

provided by section 151(d)), the State shall inspect all 

highway bridges described in subsections (b) and (c) 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with REPORTS
8 

that are located in the State in accordance with the 

standards established under section 151 and provide 

updated information on such bridges to the Secretary 

for inclusion in the national bridge inventory. 

‘‘(ii) CALCULATION OF LOAD RATINGS.—The State 

shall—

‘‘(I) not later than 24 months after the date of 

enactment of this paragraph, calculate the load 

rating for all highway bridges described in subsections (b) and (c) that are located in the State; 

‘‘(II) at least once every 24 months thereafter, 

reevaluate and, as appropriate, recalculate the 

load rating for each such bridge; and 

‘‘(III) ensure that the safe load-carrying capacities for such bridges are properly posted. 

‘‘(iii) PERFORMANCE PLAN.—The State shall develop, 

not later than 24 months after the date of enactment 

of this paragraph, update annually, and implement a 

5-year performance plan for—

‘‘(I) the inspection of highway bridges described 

in subsections (b) and (c) that are located in the 

State; and 

‘‘(II) the rehabilitation and replacement of any 

of such bridges that are structurally deficient or 

functionally obsolete. 

‘‘(iv) BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.—Notwithstanding section 303(c), the State shall develop and 

implement a bridge management system that meets 

the requirements of section 303. 

‘‘(B) APPROVAL OF PERFORMANCE PLANS.—

‘‘(i) SUBMISSION TO THE SECRETARY.—A State that 

establishes a 5-year performance plan under subparagraph (A)(iii) shall submit the plan and each update of 

the plan to the Secretary for approval. 

‘‘(ii) CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL.—Not later than one 

year after the date of enactment of this paragraph, the 

Secretary shall establish criteria for the approval of 

performance plans and updates submitted under 

clause (i). 

‘‘(iii) APPROVAL AND DISAPPROVAL.—The Secretary 

shall approve or disapprove each 5-year performance 

plan and update submitted by a State under this subparagraph. If the Secretary disapproves a plan or update, the Secretary shall inform the State of the reasons for the disapproval and shall require the State to 

resubmit the plan or update with such modifications 

as the Secretary determines necessary.’’. 

(d) INFORMATION AND REPORTS.—Section 144(h) of such title (as 

redesignated by subsection (g)(1)(G) of this section) is amended to 

read as follows: 

‘‘(h) INFORMATION AND REPORTS.—

‘‘(1) UPDATES OF INFORMATION.—The Secretary shall annually revise, as necessary, the information required under subsections (b) and (c). 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with REPORTS
9 

‘‘(2) REPORTS TO CONGRESS.—Concurrently with the President’s annual budget submission to Congress under section 

1105(a) of title 31, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee 

on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public 

Works of the Senate a report containing— ‘‘(A) a description of projects and activities approved 

under this section; ‘‘(B) the information updated under paragraph (1), including a description of the priority assigned, on a national 

basis and by State, for the replacement or rehabilitation of 

each structurally deficient or functionally obsolete bridge 

on a Federal-aid highway; ‘‘(C) a description of any project or activity carried out 

by a State under this section in the preceding fiscal year 

that is inconsistent with the priorities assigned by the Secretary under subsection (b)(3), (c)(1)(C), and (c)(3)(C); and ‘‘(D) such recommendations as the Secretary may have 

for improvements of the program authorized by this section.’’. (e) TRANSFERABILITY OF FUNDING.—Section 144 of such title is 

amended by inserting after subsection (r) (as redesignated by subsection (g)(1)(G) of this section) the following: ‘‘(s) TRANSFERABILITY OF FUNDING.—Notwithstanding section 126 

or any other provision of law, a State may transfer funds apportioned to the State under this section for a fiscal year to another 

apportionment of funds to the State under this title only if the 

State demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary that there 

are not any bridges on the National Highway System located in the 

State that are eligible for replacement.’’. (f) DEFINITIONS.—Section 144 of such title is further amended by 

adding at the end the following: ‘‘(t) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the following definitions apply: ‘‘(1) FUNCTIONALLY OBSOLETE.—The term ‘functionally obsolete’ as used with respect to a bridge means a bridge that no 

longer meets current design standards relating to geometrics, 

including roadway width, shoulder width, and approach alignment, for the traffic demands on the bridge. 

‘‘(2) STRUCTURALLY DEFICIENT.—The term ‘structurally deficient’ as used with respect to a bridge means a bridge that 

has— ‘‘(A) significant load-carrying elements that are in poor 

or worse condition due to deterioration or damage, or both; ‘‘(B) a load capacity that is significantly below current 

truckloads and that requires replacement; or ‘‘(C) a waterway opening causing frequent flooding of the 

bridge deck and approaches resulting in significant traffic 

interruptions. ‘‘(3) REHABILITATION.—The term ‘rehabilitation’ means major 

work necessary to restore the structural integrity of a bridge 

and work necessary to correct a major safety defect. ‘‘(4) REPLACEMENT.—The term ‘replacement’ as used with respect to a structurally deficient or functionally obsolete bridge 

means a new facility constructed in the same general traffic 

corridor that meets the geometric, construction, and structural 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with REPORTS
10 

standards, in effect at the time of such construction, required 

for the types and volume of projected traffic of the facility over 

its design life.’’. 

(g) NATIONAL BRIDGE INVENTORY.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than one year after the date of 

enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall take necessary actions to make information contained in the national bridge inventory established under section 144 of title 23, United States 

Code, more readily available to the public, including actions to 

make the information easier to understand. 

(2) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized 

to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $2,000,000 for 

fiscal year 2009. Such sums shall remain available until expended. 

SEC. 3. NATIONAL BRIDGE INSPECTION PROGRAM. 

(a) NATIONAL BRIDGE INSPECTION STANDARDS.—Section 151(a) of 

title 23, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 

following: ‘‘The standards established under this subsection shall 

be designed to ensure uniformity among the States in the conduct 

of such inspections and evaluations.’’. 

(b) MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF INSPECTION STANDARDS.—Section 151(b) of title 23, United States Code, is amended—

(1) in paragraph (4) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end; 

(2) in paragraph (5) by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and 

(3) by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(6) establish procedures for conducting annual compliance 

reviews of State inspections, quality control and quality assurance procedures, load ratings, and weight limit postings of 

structurally deficient highway bridges; 

‘‘(7) establish procedures for States to follow in reporting to 

the Secretary—

‘‘(A) critical findings relating to structural or safety-related deficiencies of highway bridges; and 

‘‘(B) monitoring activities and corrective actions taken in 

response to such a finding; and 

‘‘(8) provide for testing with a state-of-the-art technology that 

detects growth activity of fatigue cracks as small as 0.01 inches 

on steel bridges exhibiting fatigue damage or bridges with fatigue susceptible members.’’. 

(c) REGULATIONS ON CRITICAL FINDINGS OF BRIDGE DEFICIENCIES.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall issue 

regulations establishing procedures to be used by States in reporting critical findings of bridge deficiencies, and subsequent 

monitoring activities and corrective actions, to the Secretary in 

accordance with the standards to be established under section 

151(b)(7) of title 23, United States Code, as added by subsection (b)(3) of this section. 

(2) CONTENTS.—Regulations to be issued under paragraph 

(1) shall—

(A) establish a uniform definition of the term ‘‘critical 

finding’’; 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with REPORTS
11 

(B) establish deadlines for State reporting of critical 

finding determinations to the Secretary; 

(C) establish requirements for monitoring and follow-up 

actions and reporting following a critical finding determination; and 

(D) provide for enhanced training of bridge inspectors relating to critical findings. 

(d) TRAINING PROGRAM FOR ALL BRIDGE INSPECTORS.—Section 

151(c) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘The Secretary shall expand the scope of the training program to 

ensure that all persons conducting highway bridge inspections receive appropriate training and certification under the program.’’. 

(e) FREQUENCY OF BRIDGE INSPECTIONS.—Section 151 of such 

title is amended——

(1) in subsection (b)(2) by inserting ‘‘in accordance with subsection (d)’’ before the semicolon; 

(2) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e); and 

(3) by inserting after subsection (c) the following: 

‘‘(d) FREQUENCY OF BRIDGE INSPECTIONS.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), the standards 

established under subsection (a), at a minimum, shall provide 

for—

‘‘(A) annual inspections of structurally deficient highway 

bridges using the best practicable technologies and methods; 

‘‘(B) annual in depth inspections of fracture critical 

members, as such terms are defined in section 650.305 of 

title 23, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the 

date of enactment of this paragraph); and 

‘‘(C) biennial inspections of highway bridges that have 

not been determined to be structurally deficient. 

‘‘(2) EXTENSIONS.—Upon the request of a State, the Secretary 

may extend, to a maximum period of 48 months, the time between required inspections of a highway bridge that has not 

been determined to be structurally deficient if the Secretary 

determines that—

‘‘(A) the extension is appropriate based on the age, design, traffic characteristics, and any known deficiency of 

the bridge; 

‘‘(B) the extension is consistent with the 5-year performance plan of the State approved under section 144(d)(5)(B); 

and 

‘‘(C) granting the extension will increase the overall safety of the State’s bridge inventory.’’. 

(f) QUALIFICATIONS OF PROGRAM MANAGERS AND TEAM LEADERS.—

(1) REVISION OF REGULATIONS.—Not later than one year after 

the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall revise regulations contained in section 650.309 of 

title 23, Code of Federal Regulations, relating to the qualifications of highway bridge inspection personnel, to require that, 

in addition to meeting the qualifications identified in such section (as in effect on the date of enactment of this Act)—


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with REPORTS
12 

(A) an individual serving as the program manager of a 

State be a professional engineer licensed under the laws of 

that State; 

(B) an individual serving as a team leader for a State for 

the inspection of complex bridges or follow-up inspections 

of bridges for which there has been a critical finding be a 

licensed professional engineer; and 

(C) an individual serving as a team leader for a State for 

the inspection of all other bridges be a licensed professional engineer or have at least 10 years of bridge inspection experience. 

(2) APPLICABILITY.—The additional qualification requirements specified in paragraphs (1)(A), (1)(B), and (1)(C) shall 

apply only to an individual selected by a State to serve as the 

program manager or a team leader after the date of issuance 

of revised regulations under paragraph (1). 

(g) EFFECTIVE DATE.—Not later than one year after the date of 

enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall modify national bridge 

inspection standards and modify the training program for bridge 

inspectors in accordance with the amendments made by this section. 

SEC. 4. SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH. 

Section 502(d) of title 23, United States Code, is amended—

(1) in paragraph (2) in the matter preceding subparagraph 

(A) by inserting ‘‘and enhance the safety’’ before ‘‘of bridge 

structures’’; and 

(2) in paragraph (4) by striking ‘‘for use with existing infrastructure facilities and with next-generation infrastructure facilities’’ and inserting ‘‘for assessing the structural integrity of 

existing infrastructure facilities and next-generation infrastructure facilities’’. 

SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—There is authorized to be appropriated to carry 

out section 144 of title 23, United States Code, $1,000,000,000 for 

fiscal year 2009. 

(b) APPORTIONMENT AND USE OF FUNDS.—Funds appropriated 

pursuant to subsection (a)—

(1) shall be apportioned among the States under paragraphs 

(1) and (2) of section 144(e) of such title; 

(2) shall be used for the replacement and rehabilitation of 

structurally deficient highway bridges on the National Highway System; and 

(3) shall be available for obligation in the same manner as 

other funds apportioned under chapter 1 of such title, except 

that such funds shall not be transferable and shall remain 

available until expended. 

(c) LIMITATION.—None of the funds appropriated pursuant to 

subsection (a) may be earmarked by Congress or any Federal department or agency for a specific project or activity. 

SEC. 6. BRIDGE ADVANCED CONDITION ASSESSMENT PILOT PROGRAM. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall establish 

and implement a pilot program to evaluate the effectiveness, accuVerDate Aug 31 2005 04:25 Jul 16, 2008 Jkt 069008 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR760.XXX HR760

bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with REPORTS
13 

racy, and reliability of the use of advanced condition assessment inspection processes and technologies (including fiber optic, vibrating 

wire, acoustical emissions, and peak strain displacement technologies) in monitoring and evaluating the structural health of a 

highway bridge. Technologies evaluated under the pilot program 

shall be real-time sensing technologies that record objective data to 

determine accurate conditions assessments of critical bridge elements. 

(b) GRANTS.— (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may make grants to States 

to conduct projects under the pilot program. 

(2) APPLICATIONS.—A State seeking a grant under the pilot 

program shall submit an application to the Secretary in such 

form and containing such information as the Secretary may require by regulation. 

(c) ELIGIBILITY.—

(1) SELECTION OF HIGHWAY BRIDGES.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—In awarding grants under the pilot 

program, the Secretary shall select not more than 15 highway bridges in not more than 5 States for participation in 

the program. 

(B) BRIDGE REQUIREMENTS.—The Secretary may select a 

highway bridge under subparagraph (A) only if the bridge 

is— (i) as of the date of enactment of this Act, classified 

as structurally deficient under section 144 of title 23, 

United States Code; 

(ii) a nonredundant, fractural critical structure; and 

(iii) greater than 200 feet in length. 

(2) SELECTION AND USE OF TECHNOLOGIES.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall select no fewer 

than 2 types of real-time, in-service, sensor-based, commercially-available, advanced-condition assessment technologies to be used in the pilot program. 

(B) DURATION OF REAL-TIME DATA COLLECTION.—The duration of real-time data collection from each highway 

bridge selected for participation in the pilot program shall 

be not less than one year. 

(C) USE OF CALIBRATED FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

MODEL.—At least one-half of the highway bridges selected 

for participation in the pilot program shall also be evaluated using a calibrated finite element analysis model of 

the bridge, based upon data from the advanced condition 

assessment technologies. 

(d) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share payable on account of a 

project carried out under the pilot program shall be 80 percent of 

the cost of the project. 

(e) DURATION OF THE PILOT PROGRAM.—The Secretary shall carry 

out the pilot program for a period of 2 fiscal years. 

(f) FINAL REPORT.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 6 months after the last day 

of the pilot program, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 

Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a report that describes the effectiveVerDate Aug 31 2005 04:25 Jul 16, 2008 Jkt 069008 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR760.XXX HR760

bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with REPORTS
14 

ness and benefits of the pilot program carried out under this 

section. 

(2) CONTENTS.—The report shall describe, at a minimum––

(A) the cost effectiveness of the technologies and processes selected; 

(B) the objectivity, reliability, and accuracy of the technologies and processes employed in providing condition assessments of the highway bridge; 

(C) the quality of the data collected and measured; and 

(D) any recommendations for improving or expanding 

the pilot program or the use of structural health monitoring technologies or processes, including a suggested 

plan for wider adoption based on potential highway bridge 

repair and replacement savings by the Federal Government and State governments. 

(g) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to 

be appropriated to carry out this section $5,000,000. 

(h) AVAILABILITY OF AMOUNTS.—Amounts appropriated to carry 

out this section shall be available for obligation in the same manner as funds apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23, United States 

Code, except that such funds shall not be transferable and shall remain available until expended. 

PART B: TEXT OF AMENDMENTS MADE IN ORDER

1. AN AMENDMENT TO BE OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE OBERSTAR

OF MINNESOTA, OR HIS DESIGNEE, DEBATABLE FOR 10 MINUTES

In section 2(a)(2)(A), after ‘‘the Secretary’’ insert ‘‘, in consultation with the States,’’. 

In section 2(d), strike ‘‘(as redesignated by subsection (g)(1)(G) of 

this section)’’. 

In section 2(e), strike ‘‘(as redesignated by subsection (g)(1)(G) of 

this section)’’. 

At the end of section 3(f), add the following: 

(3) COMPLEX BRIDGE DEFINED.—In this subsection, the term ‘‘complex bridge’’ means a highway bridge with unusual characteristics, including movable, suspension, and cable-stayed 

highway bridges. 

In section 6(c)(1)(B)(ii), strike ‘‘fractural’’ and insert ‘‘fracture’’. 

2. AN AMENDMENT TO BE OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE MICA OF

FLORIDA, OR HIS DESIGNEE, DEBATABLE FOR 10 MINUTES

At the end of the amendment, add the following: 

SEC. 7. EFFECTIVENESS OF BRIDGE RATING SYSTEM. 

(a) STUDY.—The Comptroller General shall conduct a study of 

the effectiveness of the bridge rating system of the Federal Highway Administration, including the use of the terms ‘‘structurally 

deficient’’ and ‘‘functionally obsolete’’ to describe the condition of 

highway bridges in the United States. 

(b) EVALUATION OF STATE SYSTEMS.—In conducting the study, 

the Comptroller General shall evaluate bridge rating systems used 

by State departments of transportation and provide recommendations on how successful aspects of such bridge rating systems may 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with REPORTS
15 

be incorporated into the bridge rating system of the Federal Highway Administration. 

(c) REPORT.—Not later than February 1, 2009, the Comptroller 

General shall submit to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committee on 

the Environment and Public Works of the Senate a report on the 

results of the study. 

3. AN AMENDMENT TO BE OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE MARIO

DIAZ-BALART OF FLORIDA, OR HIS DESIGNEE, DEBATABLE FOR 10 

MINUTES

In section 2(a)(1), in the matter proposed to be inserted as section 144(b)(3) of title 23, United States Code, after ‘‘public use’’ insert ‘‘and public safety’’ and after ‘‘impacts’’ insert ‘‘to emergency 

evacuation routes and’’. 

In section 2(a)(1), in the matter proposed to be inserted as section 144(c)(1)(C) of title 23, United States Code, after ‘‘public use’’

insert ‘‘and public safety’’ and after ‘‘impacts’’ insert ‘‘to emergency 

evacuation routes and’’. 

In section 2(a)(1), in the matter proposed to be inserted as section 144(c)(3)(C) of title 23, United States Code, after ‘‘public use’’

insert ‘‘and public safety’’ and after ‘‘impacts’’ insert ‘‘to emergency 

evacuation routes and’’. 

4. AN AMENDMENT TO BE OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE WALZ OF

MINNESOTA, OR HIS DESIGNEE, DEBATABLE FOR 10 MINUTES

At the end of section 3, add the following: 

(h) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 15 days after a critical 

finding determination is made by a State which results in the closure of a bridge, the Secretary of Transportation shall report to the 

appropriate Committees of Congress regarding the impact, including the economic impact, on regional transportation and transit 

that will result from the bridge closure and recommend solutions 

to mitigate such impact. 

5. AN AMENDMENT TO BE OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE MILLER OF

MICHIGAN, OR HER DESIGNEE, DEBATABLE FOR 10 MINUTES

At the end of the amendment, add the following: 

SEC. 7. USE OF CARBON FIBER COMPOSITE MATERIALS IN BRIDGE 

REPLACEMENT AND REHABILITATION PROJECTS. 

(a) STUDY.—The Secretary of Transportation shall conduct a 

study of the cost benefits of using carbon fiber composite materials 

in bridge replacement and rehabilitation projects instead of traditional construction materials. 

(b) REPORT.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment 

of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to the Committee on 

Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives 

and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a report on the results of the study conducted under this section. 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with REPORTS
16 

6. AN AMENDMENT TO BE OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE CONAWAY

OF TEXAS, OR HIS DESIGNEE, DEBATABLE FOR 10 MINUTES

At the end of the bill, add the following: 

SEC. 7. SENSE OF CONGRESS. 

It is the sense of Congress that each State should prepare a corrosion mitigation and prevention plan, for a project for construction, replacement, or rehabilitation of a bridge, that includes the 

following: 

(1) An estimate of the expected useful life of the bridge. 

(2) An estimate of environmental exposure of the bridge, including marine, deicer application, industrial, rural, rainfall, 

temperature, freeze-thaw, and other factors that influence corrosion prevention and corrosion mitigation strategies. 

(3) An identification of the functional classification of the 

bridge. 

(4) Details of corrosion mitigation and prevention methods 

that will be used with respect to the bridge, taking into account—

(A) material selection; 

(B) coating considerations; 

(C) cathodic protection considerations; 

(D) design considerations for corrosion; and 

(E) concrete requirements. 

(5) Details of a project maintenance program for the life of 

the bridge. 

(6) A certification that the plan was developed by the State 

or States and approved by a corrosion expert. 

(7) A certification that each individual conducting inspections of Federal-aid highway bridges in the State or States receives training from a corrosion expert. 

7. AN AMENDMENT TO BE OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE SHAYS OF

CONNECTICUT, OR HIS DESIGNEE, DEBATABLE FOR 10 MINUTES

Redesignate sections 4 through 6 as sections 5 through 7, respectively. 

After section 3, insert the following: 

SEC. 4. GAO STUDY. 

Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, 

the Comptroller General shall conduct a study and report its findings to the Secretary of Transportation regardingl 

(1) the identification of factors that contribute to construction 

delays of bridge rehabilitation; and 

(2) any recommendations the Comptroller General may have 

to simplify and expedite the construction of bridges that are to 

be rehabilitated. 

8. AN AMENDMENT TO BE OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE LOEBSACK

OF IOWA, OR HIS DESIGNEE, DEBATABLE FOR 10 MINUTES

At the end of the bill, add the following: 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with REPORTS
17 

SEC. 7. FLOOD RISKS TO BRIDGES. 

(a) STUDY.—The Secretary of Transportation, in consultation 

with the States, shall conduct a study of the risks posed by floods 

to bridges on Federal-aid highways, bridges on other public roads, 

bridges on Indian reservations, and park bridges that are located 

in a 500-year floodplain. 

(b) CONSIDERATIONS.—In conducting the study, the Secretary 

shall give consideration to safety, serviceability, essentiality for 

public use, and public safety, including the potential impacts to regional and national freight and passenger mobility if the serviceability of a bridge is restricted or diminished. 

(c) REPORT.—Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment 

of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and 

the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate a 

report on the results of the study. 

9. AN AMENDMENT TO BE OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE SHEA-PORTER OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, OR HER DESIGNEE, DEBATABLE FOR 10 

MINUTES

In section 2(c), before the closing quotation marks at the end of 

the matter proposed to be inserted as section 144(d)(5) of title 23, 

United States Code, insert the following: 

‘‘(C) HISTORIC BRIDGES.—

‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—A 5-year performance plan of a 

State under subparagraph (A)(iii) may provide for 

more frequent, in-depth inspection of a historic bridge 

located in the State in lieu of replacement of the 

bridge if the Secretary determines that—

‘‘(I) it is appropriate based on the age, design, 

traffic characteristics, and any known deficiency of 

the bridge; and 

‘‘(II) granting the exception will increase the 

overall safety of the State’s bridge inventory. 

‘‘(ii) HISTORIC BRIDGE DEFINED.—In this subparagraph, the term ‘historic bridge’ means any bridge that 

is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. 

10. AN AMENDMENT TO BE OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE CHILDERS

OF MISSISSIPPI, OR HIS DESIGNEE, DEBATABLE FOR 10 MINUTES

At the end of section 5, add the following: 

(d) COMPLIANCE WITH IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT.—

None of the funds appropriated pursuant to subsection (a) may be 

used to employ workers in violation of section 274A of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a). 

11. AN AMENDMENT TO BE OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE CAPUANO

OF MASSACHUSETTS, OR HIS DESIGNEE, DEBATABLE FOR 10 MINUTES

At the end of the bill, add the following: 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with REPORTS
18 

SEC. 7. NATIONAL TUNNEL INSPECTION PROGRAM. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Title 23, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 149 the following: 

‘‘§ 150. National tunnel inspection program 

‘‘(a) NATIONAL TUNNEL INSPECTION STANDARDS.—The Secretary, 

in consultation with State transportation departments and interested and knowledgeable private organizations and individuals, 

shall establish national tunnel inspection standards for the proper 

safety inspection and evaluation of all highway tunnels. The standards established under this subsection shall be designed to ensure 

uniformity among the States in the conduct of such inspections and 

evaluations. 

‘‘(b) MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR INSPECTION STANDARDS.—The 

standards established under subsection (a) shall, at a minimum— ‘‘(1) specify, in detail, the method by which highway tunnel 

inspections shall be carried out by the States; ‘‘(2) establish the maximum time period between the inspections based on a risk-management approach; ‘‘(3) establish the qualifications for those charged with carrying out the inspections; ‘‘(4) require each State to maintain and make available to 

the Secretary upon request— ‘‘(A) written reports on the results of the inspections together with notations of any action taken pursuant to the 

findings of the inspections; and ‘‘(B) current inventory data for all highway tunnels located in the State reflecting the findings of the most recent 

highway tunnel inspections conducted; ‘‘(5) establish procedures for national certification of highway 

tunnel inspectors; ‘‘(6) establish procedures for conducting annual compliance 

reviews of State inspections and State implementation of quality control and quality assurance procedures; and 

‘‘(7) establish standards for State tunnel management systems to improve the tunnel inspection process and the quality 

of data collected and reported by the States to the Secretary 

for inclusion in the national tunnel inventory to be established 

under this section. 

‘‘(c) TRAINING AND CERTIFICATION PROGRAM FOR TUNNEL INSPEC- TORS.—The Secretary, in cooperation with State transportation departments, shall establish a program designed to ensure that all individuals carrying out highway tunnel inspections receive appropriate training and certification. Such program shall be revised 

from time to time to take into account new and improved techniques. 

‘‘(d) NATIONAL TUNNEL INVENTORY.—The Secretary shall establish a national inventory of highway tunnels reflecting the findings 

of the most recent highway tunnel inspections conducted by States 

under this section. 

‘‘(e) AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.—To carry out this section, the Secretary may use funds made available pursuant to the provisions of 

sections 104(a) and 502.’’. 

(b) SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM.—Section 133(b)(1) of 

such title is amended by inserting ‘‘, tunnels that are eligible for 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with REPORTS
19 

assistance under this title (including safety inspection of such tunnels),’’ after ‘‘highways)’’. (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The analysis for chapter 1 of 

such title is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 

149 the following: 

‘‘150. National tunnel inspection program’’. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with REPORTS