Section

[Code of Federal Regulations]

[Title 33, Volume 3]

[Revised as of July 1, 2006]

From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access

[CITE: 33CFR277.8]

[Page 380-386]

TITLE 33--NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE WATERS

CHAPTER II--CORPS OF ENGINEERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, DEPARTMENT OF

DEFENSE

PART 277_WATER RESOURCES POLICIES AND AUTHORITIES: NAVIGATION POLICY:

COST APPORTIONMENT OF BRIDGE ALTERATIONS--Table of Contents

Sec. 277.8 Procedures for apportionment of costs.

This paragraph provides the procedures for apportionment of costs of

bridge alterations, as established by the U.S. Coast Guard (reference

Sec. 277.3(c)) and adapted for use in Corps planning and construction

programs. A sample apportionment of the cost of a hypothetical bridge

alteration is provided in Appendix B.

(a) Calculate the total estimated cost of bridge alteration. The

total estimated cost, to be apportioned by these procedures, includes

the cost of all necessary appurtenances required to complete the

alteration for use by both highway and railway traffic, including

engineering, design and inspection.

(b) Determine the salvage value of bridge to be altered. The salvage

value represents the worth of the materials in the old bridge which may

be used for scrap or for other purposes. The value will vary depending

on the intended use of the materials.

The bridge owner shall pay a share of the removal cost computed as that

part of the removal cost that the used service life bears to the total

estimated service life. The share of the bridge owner, thus computed,

represents an obligation incurred by the owner now by reason of the

needs of navigation which otherwise would not have to be met until the

bridge had reached the end of its useful life. Accordingly, the present

worth of the amount is computed deferred over the unexpired life. The

discount rate to be used in the present worth computation is that

established by the Water Resources Council, current at the time of the

study.

(2) Fixed charges. A fixed charge such as engineering, design, and

inspection costs, realtor and counsel fees, and the bridge owner's

administrative expenses is an undistributed cost, shared in the ratio

that each party shares in the cost of construction less fixed charges.

In computing the bridge owner's share of the fixed charges, all other

financial liabilities assigned to the bridge owner shall be included in

the computation.

(3) Contribution. If a third party should be involved in a bridge

alteration project, such as a party which might benefit from some

reasonable modification beyond the needs of navigation and the needs and

desires of the bridge owner, that party would be responsible for the

incremental costs of such further modification, and such costs would not

enter into the apportionment between the bridge owner and the Federal

Government.

(4) Betterments. Items desired by the bridge owner, but which have

no counterpart in the old bridge or are of higher quality than similar

items in the old bridge, will be included under this heading. Items

considered to fall within this category are listed below. It is intended

this list serve as a guide to indicate the types of items that may be

considered betterments. The cost of such items will be borne by the

bridge owner.

(i) Access roads.

(ii) Concrete or stone finish of embankment slopes instead of

seeding.

(iii) Water proofing and skid-resistant epoxy finish of masonry

surfaces.

(iv) Steel or concrete spans instead of timber trestle.

(v) Ballasted deck instead of open deck.

(vi) Trainman's walkways and sidewalks.

(vii) Elevators costing more than stairways.

(viii) Materials of greater thickness or heavier weight than

supported by design requirements.

(ix) Exotic materials for machinery and operator's house, including

tinted and insulated windows.

(x) Heaters and insulation in the machinery house.

(xi) Operator's house furnishings, air-conditioners, water coolers,

and medicine cabinets.

(xii) Hydraulic jacks for counterweight support.

(xiii) Fourth coat of paint, and exotic paint systems.

(xiv) Brass pipe and high alloy steel conduits.

(xv) Floodlights and metallic vapor arc lights.

(xvi) Spare parts.

(xvii) Lubricants and lubrication equipment, and tools in excess of

minimum requirements.

[[Page 381]]

(d) Determine expectable savings in repair or maintenance costs. (1)

The provisions of any features that would reduce annual maintenance

costs of the altered bridge, such as a wider navigation span eliminating

the requirement for protection works, reducing the overall length of the

bridge by fill in lieu of a trestle, or replacing two bridges with one

bridge, will be included under this heading. The bridge owner should

bear the increased annual maintenance cost that will accrue as a result

of providing any increased loading and width desired by the bridge owner

or attributable to the requirements of railway or highway traffic. Since

33 U.S.C. 516 does not mention bridge operating costs, any increase or

decrease in such costs shall not be included in the cost of alteration

to be apportioned. The bridge owner's obligation is computed by

capitalizing the estimated annual savings at the same rate of interest

used in Sec. 277.8(e)(1).

(2) Expectable savings in repair costs is that amount which the

bridge owner will not have to pay to restore his bridge, which may be in

a damaged condition or may be dilapidated, since the bridge is being

altered or removed as a part of the contemplated navigation improvement.

(e) Estimate costs attributable to requirements of railway and

highway traffic. Items desired by the bridge owner to meet the

requirements of railway and highway traffic, but which have no

counterpart in the old bridge, will be included under this heading.

Items considered to fall within this category are listed below. This

list does not contain all such items, but it is intended to serve as a

guide in determining which items might fall within this category.

(1) Increased navigational clearances for the benefit of land

traffic.

(2) Wider roadbed.

(3) Additional traffic lanes or track.

(4) Medians and wider traffic lanes.

(5) Increased train clearances and spacing of tracks.

(6) Larger cross and bridge ties.

(7) New and heavier rail and expansion joint devices.

(8) Additional signaling and communications systems.

(9) Additional right-of-way.

(f) Estimate expenditure for increased carrying capacity. The bridge

owner is required to pay the difference in cost between a bridge meeting

the navigation clearance requirements with the same live loading

capacity as the old bridge and new or altered bridge having any

increased live loading capacity desired. The cost of increased live

loading capacity will be based on the estimated cost of the new or

altered bridge with unit prices applied to the quantity of materials

estimated for a hypothetical bridge with the same live loading as the

old bridge, but with the increased clearances required by the navigation

improvement. The live loading of the new or altered bridge should be

compared with the live loading of the old bridge, based on normal

working stresses without overstress, overload, or reduction of safety

factor.

(g) Determine value of expired service life of old bridge. (1)

Section 6 of the Act provides, among other things, that the bridge owner

shall bear such proportion of the actual capital cost of the old bridge

or such part of the old bridge as may be altered or rebuilt, as the used

service life of the whole or a part bears to the total estimated service

life of the whole or such part. Guide service life figures have been

obtained from retirement curves based on mortality statistics, which

represent an attempt to consider economic causes of retirement in

addition to physical causes.

(2) For railroad bridges service life, figures of 100 years for

substructure, 70 years for superstructure, 37 years for treated timber,

35 years for automatic signals, 20 years for main rail, 30 years for

siding rail, and 20 years for crossties and bridge ties are considered

to be reasonable and will be used in computing the bridge owner's

liability. The service life of the operator's house and machinery house,

including machinery, is considered to expire with the removal of the

superstructure. For timber structures which have been in existence for

more than 50 percent of their estimated service life, the expired

service life is held usually at 50 percent providing the structure has

been adequately maintained and is in a good state of repair.

(3) The service life of highway bridges, except for certain long

span

[[Page 382]]

bridges, is usually limited by obsolescence as well as structural

deficiency and deterioration. Obsolescence may be due to insufficent

capacity for heavier loads and greater volume of traffic than the bridge

was originally designed for, safety requirements, and location.

Superstructures and pile bents are considered to have a service life of

50 years. Masonry substructure which could be reused in the renovation

of a bridge is considered to have a service life of 100 years.

(4) The foregoing service life figures are not to be used

arbitrarily, but as a basis for a fair judgment of the service life

considering all other factors that pertain in any particular case.

Appendix A to Part 277--Sec. 6, Pub. L. 647, as Amended (33 U.S.C. 516)

At the time the Secretary* shall authorize the bridge owner to

proceed with the project, as provided in Section 515 of this title, and

after an opportunity to the bridge owner to be heard thereon, the

Secretary shall determine and issue an order specifying the

proportionate shares of the total cost of the project to be borne by the

United States and by the bridge owner. Such apportionment shall be made

on the following basis: The bridge owner shall bear such part of the

cost as is attributable to the direct and special benefits which will

accrue to the bridge owner as a result of the alteration, including the

expectable savings in repair or maintenance costs; and that part of the

cost attributable to the requirements of traffic by railroad or highway,

or both, including any expenditure for increased carrying capacity of

the bridge, and including such proportion of the actual capital cost of

the old bridge or of such part of the old bridge as may be altered or

changed or rebuilt, as the used service life of the whole or a part, as

the case may be, bears to the total estimated service life of the whole

or such part. Provided, that in the event the alteration or relocation

of any bridge may be desirable for the reason that the bridge

unreasonably obstructs navigation, but also for some other reason, the

Secretary may require equitable contribution from any interested person,

firm, association, corporation, municipality, county, or State desiring

such alteration or relocation for such other reason, as a condition

precedent to the making of an order for such alteration or relocation.

The United States shall bear the balance of the costs, including that

part attributable to the necessities of navigation: and provided

further, that where the bridge owner proceeds with the alteration on a

successive partial bid basis the Secretary is authorized to issue an

order of apportionment of cost for the entire alteration based on the

accepted bid for the first part of the alteration and an estimate of

cost for the remainder of the work. The Secretary is authorized to

revise the order of apportionment of cost, to the extent he deems

reasonable and proper to meet any changed conditions.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Secretary of Transportation.

(June 21, 1940, ch. 409, Section 6, 54 Stat. 499; July 16, 1952, ch.

889, Section 2, 66 Stat. 733; Aug. 14, 1958, Public Law 85-640, Section

1(c), 72 Stat. 595.)

Appendix B to Part 277--Hypothetical Example of Cost Apportionment

Following is the interpretation of the principles as applied to the

alteration of a hypothetical highway--railroad bridge across Blank River

between City A and City B.

Reference table

1. Total estimated cost of alteration $10,917,300 A

project.

The existing double deck swing span will be replaced with a new

double deck lift span affording a horizontal navigation opening of 250

feet clear width between piers normal to the navigation channel and a

vertical clearance of 125 feet above mean high water in the raised

position.

2. Salvage............................ $77,300

This value is deducted from the original cost to determine the

actual capital cost (Table VII). It is also deducted from the Total

Estimated Cost of Alteration Project to determine the cost to be

apportioned.

3. Direct and special benefits:

a. Removing old bridge (owner's $165,489 I

share).

b. Fixed charges (owner's share).... 284,460 II

A fixed charge such as engineering, design and inspection costs,

realtor's and counsel's fees, and bridge owner's administrative expenses

is an undistributed cost shared in the ratio that each party shares the

cost of construction less fixed charges. In computing the bridge owner's

share of the fixed charges, all other financial liabilities assigned to

the bridge owner shall be included in the computation. (Table II).

c. Contribution by third party...... $432,000

Section 6 of the Act provides that in the event the alteration or

relocation of any bridge may be desirable for the reason that the bridge

unreasonably obstructs navigation, but also for some other reason, the

Secretary may require equitable contribution

[[Page 383]]

from any interested person, firm, association, corporation,

municipality, county, or State desiring such alteration or relocation

for such other reason, as a condition precedent to the making of an

order for such alteration or relocation. In the instant case, testimony

at the hearing developed that the bridge would require alteration

because of the navigation project but also City A desires to relieve

traffic on a nearby secondary road by providing access to the new

bridge. It is considered that as an equitable contribution, City A

should contribute an amount equal to one half of the expectable road

user benefit accruing over the next 10 years. Other methods for

determining the third party's contribution are acceptable depending on

the circumstances.

d. Betterments...................... $18,360 III

4. Expectable savings in repair or ............ IV

maintenance costs.

Repair.............................. $100,000

Maintenance......................... 16,288

The new bridge is designed for increased loading and width greater

than that of the old bridge. Therefore, the estimated annual maintenance

cost was based on a hypothetical bridge designed, but not constructed,

for the same loading and width as the old bridge but with increased

clearances as required to meet the needs of waterborne navigation, and

not on the estimated annual maintenance cost of the new bridge. The

savings in repair costs represents a savings to the bridge owner who

will not have to restore the bridge that was recently damaged since it

is being altered as a part of a proposed navigation improvement.

5. Costs attributable to requirements $1,534,000 V

of railway and highway traffic.

The old bridge carries a highway deck on the upper level consisting

of a roadway 18 feet wide (no sidewalks) and a railway deck on the lower

level with 110-lb. rails. The new bridge will carry a highway deck on

the upper level consisting of one 28-foot roadway and two 5-foot

sidewalks, and the railway deck will have new 130-lb. rails. In

addition, the railway deck will be paved to carry highway traffic. Thus,

the bridge may be kept in an intermediate raised position when not being

used by railway traffic to pass small-boat traffic without delaying

highway traffic. City A also desires to provide additional highway

approaches and right-of-way to connect a nearby secondary road with the

new bridge.

6. Expenditure for increased carrying $2,330,000 VI

capacity.

The highway deck of the old bridge was designed for a live loading

equivalent to AASHO H15-44 and the railway deck for live loading of

Cooper E 45. The highway deck of the new bridge will be designed for

live loading AASHO HS20-44, and the railway deck will be designed for

live loading of Cooper E 60. Accordingly, the bridge owner will pay the

additional cost for the increased carrying capacity of the new bridge.

7. Expired service life of old bridge. $511,300 VII

The structure of the old bridge was completed in 1908 and the

superstructure completed in 1909. For this hypothetical example it was

assumed the bridge would be replaced in 1970.

8. The following is an explanation of the procedure for determining

the tabulation of proportionate shares of costs to be borne by the

United States and the bridge owner presented in Table B.

(1) Cost of alteration to be apportioned is the total estimated cost

of the project (excluding contingencies) less salvage value (Sec.

277.8(b)), less contribution by third party, if applicable (Sec.

277.8c(3)).

(2) Share to be borne by the bridge owner is the sum of the direct

and special benefits (Sec. 277.8(c)) expectable savings in repair or

maintenane costs (paragraph 8d), costs attributable to requirements of

railway and highway traffic (Sec. 277.8(e)), expenditure for increased

carrying capacity (Sec. 277.8(f)) and expired service life of old

bridge (Sec. 277.8(g))

(3) Share to be borne by the United States is the difference between

the cost of alteration to be apportioned and the share to be borne by

the bridge owner.

(4) The exact amount of costs to be borne by the bridge owner will

be determined upon completion of the project.

(5) Contingencies may be included in the total shares to be borne by

both the United States and the bridge owner.

Tables

A. Summary of Estimated Project Costs.

B. Tabulation of Proportionate Shares of Cost To Be Borne by the United

States and the Bridge Owner.

I. Bridge Owner's Share of Removing Old Bridge.

II. Fixed Charges To Be Paid by Bridge Owner.

III. Betterments.

IV. Expectable Savings in Repair or Maintenance Costs.

V. Costs Attributable to Requirements of Railway and Highway Traffic.

VI. Expenditure for Increased Carrying Capacity.

VII. Value of Expired Service Life of Old Bridge.

[[Page 384]]

Table A--Summary of Estimated Project Costs

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fixed

No. and item Cost charges Total

------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 New bridge..................... $8,104,052 $570,000 $8,674,052

2 Removal of old bridge.......... 521,908 500 522,408

3 Approaches..................... 50,000 5,000 55,000

4 Additional highway approaches.. 1,530,000 15,000 1,545,000

5 Railroad force account work.... 41,800 3,500 45,300

6 Additional signaling........... 27,000 2,400 29,400

7 Right-of-way................... 13,240 900 14,140

8 Additional right-of-way........ 30,900 1,100 32,000

--------------------------------------

Total........................... 10,318,900 598,400 10,917,300

======================================

Total estimated cost of project. ........... ........... 10,917,300

======================================

Less salvage................... ........... ........... -77,300

Less contribution by third ........... ........... -432,000

party.........................

--------------------------------------

Total cost of alteration to be ........... ........... 10,408,000

apportioned.....................

Less right-of-way (Items 7 and 8) ........... ........... -46.140

--------------------------------------

Total Cost of construction...... ........... ........... 10,361,860

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table B--Tabulation of Proportionate Shares of Costs To Be Borne by the

United States and the Bridge Owner

Total estimated cost of project (excluding contingencies) $10,917,300

(table A).................................................

Less salvage............................................. 77,300

Less contribution by third party......................... 432,000

--------------

Total cost of alteration to be apportioned................ 10,408,000

==============

Share to be borne by the bridge owner:

Direct and special benefits:

Removing old bridge....................... $165,489

Fixed charges............................. 284,460

Betterments............................... 18,360

Expectable savings in repair or maintenance

costs:

a. Repair................................. 100,000

b. Maintenance............................ 16,288

Costs attributable to requirements of 1,534,000

railway and highway traffic................

Expenditure for increased carrying capacity. 2,330,000

Expired service life of old bridge.......... 511,300

-------------

Total..................................................... 4,959,897

==============

Share to be borne by the United States..................... 5,449,103

Contingencies 15 pct..................................... 817,365

--------------

Total..................................................... 6,266,468

==============

Share to be borne by the bridge owner...................... 4,959,897

Contingencies 15 pct..................................... 743,985

--------------

Total..................................................... 5,703,882

Note: The exact amount to be borne by the bridge owner will be

determined after completion of the project.

Table I--Bridge Owner's Share of Removing Old Bridge

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Age at time Owner's Owner's Present Owner's

Item to be removed of removal share Removal share of Years worth present

(years)--(1) percent--(2) cost--(3) removal--(4) remaining--(5) factor--(6) liability--(7)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Substructure.......................................... 62 62 $241,935 $150,000 38 .1639 $24,585

Protection Works...................................... 37 67 60,000 40,200 18 .4245 17,065

Superstructure........................................ 61 87 206,896 180,000 9 .6516 117,288

Signaling............................................. 61 100 440 440 0 1.0 440

Ties and Timber....................................... 20 67 6,000 4,000 10 .6213 2,485

Rail and Accessories:

Rail, 110 lb........................................ 33 100 1,000 1,000 0 1.0 1,000

Rail, 110 lb........................................ 13 65 5,637 3,664 .............. ........... 2,626

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 385]]

Total................................................ ............ ............ 521,908 368,104 .............. ........... 165,489

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Present Worth Factor based on 4\7/8\%, FY 1970, as established by Water Resources Council. The actual factor to be used shall be that current at the

time of alteration.

Table II--Fixed Charges To Be Paid by Bridge Owner

Cost of construction...................................... $10,361,860

Less fixed charges........................................ 598,400

-------------

Total.................................................... 9,763,460

=============

Owner's share less fixed charges:

Removing old bridge..................................... 165,489

Betterments............................................. 18,360

Expectable savings in repair or maintenance costs:

a. Repair............................................. 100,000

b. Maintenance........................................ 16,288

Costs attributable to requirements of railway and 1,503,100

highway traffic (less right-of-way)....................

Expenditure for increased carrying capacity............. 2,330,000

Expired service life of old bridge...................... 511,300

-------------

Total.................................................... 4,644,537

=============

Fixed charges by owner.................................... 284,460

4,644,537x598,400=284,460

--------------------

9,763,460

Table III--Betterments

New furniture and water cooler in control house............ $1,050

Increased cost of elevators over stairways................. 13,360

Increased cost of galvanized steel grating walkways over 3,950

timber walkways...........................................

------------

Total..................................................... 18,360

Table IV--Expectable Savings in Repair or Maintenance Costs

Repair Cost

Cost in 1970 to repair damaged bridge...................... $100,000

------------

Savings in repair costs.................................... 100,000

============

Maintenance Cost

Average annual maintenance cost for old bridge............. 16,875

Estimated annual maintenance cost for new bridge........... 16,000

------------

Total decrease in annual maintenance costs................ 875

============

Annual savings capitalized (50 years) @ 4\7/8\%:875/0.05372 16,288

Present worth factor based on 4\7/8\ pct., F.Y. 1970, as established by

Water Resources Council. The actual factor to be used shall be that

current at the time of the study.

Table V--Costs Attributable to Requirements of Railway and Highway

Traffic

Heavier running rail (130 lb in lieu of 110 lb)............ $11,200

Paving, lower deck......................................... 34,900

Additional signaling....................................... 27,000

Additional highway approaches.............................. 1,430,000

------------

Subtotal.................................................. 1,503,100

Additional right-of-way.................................... 30,900

------------

Total..................................................... 1,534,000

Table VI--Expenditure for Increased Carrying Capacity

Cost of new bridge designed for Cooper E 60 and AASHO HS20- $8,609,592

44 loading \1\............................................

Cost of replacement-in-kind (hypothetical) bridge designed 6,279,592

for Cooper E 45 and AASHO H15-44 loading \1\..............

------------

[[Page 386]]

Total..................................................... 2,330,000

\1\ Excludes all items in Table III and first two items in Table V.

Table VII--Value of Expired Service Life of Old Bridge

[Replacement year--1970]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Expired service life

------------------------- Value of

Year Original Salvage Actual Estimated Percent expired

Item to be removed built--(1) cost--(2) value--(3) capital cost service Years 1970- of total service life

(2)-(3)--(4) life--(5) (1)--(6) (6) (5)-- (4)x(7)--(8)

(7)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Substructure:

Pivot Pier......................................... 1908 $34,500 $0 $34,500 100 62 62 $21,390

Right End Pier..................................... 1908 18,580 0 18,580 100 62 62 11,520

Left End Pier...................................... 1908 21,410 0 21,410 100 62 62 13,274

Right Abutment..................................... 1908 8,600 0 8,600 100 62 62 5,332

Left Abutment...................................... 1908 11,410 0 11,410 100 62 62 7,074

Protection Works:

Pivot Pier......................................... 1909 5,800 0 5,800 37 61 \1\ 50 2,900

Right End Pier..................................... 1942 3,200 0 3,200 37 28 \1\ 50 1,600

Superstructure:

Swing Span......................................... 1909 168,920 19,400 149,520 70 61 87 130,082

Electrification.................................... 1957 5,000 500 4,500 22 13 59 2,655

Left Approach Spans................................ 1909 142,017 16,300 125,717 70 61 87 109,374

Right Approach Spans............................... 1909 156,692 19,300 137,392 70 61 87 119,531

Signaling............................................ 1909 15,000 1,000 14,000 35 61 100 14,000

Ties and Timber.................................... 1909 8,120 0 8,120 20 61 \1\ 50 4,060

Rail and Accessories:

Rail, 110 lb....................................... 1937 6,600 2,200 4,400 20 33 100 4,400

Rail, 110 lb....................................... 1957 43,679 18,600 25,079 20 13 65 16,301

Roadway Approaches: \2\

Pavement........................................... 1908 17,841 0 17,841 20 62 \1\ 50 8,921

New Lane........................................... 1961 43,609 0 43,609 20 9 45 19,624

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subtotal............................................ .......... ......... 77,300 633,678 ......... ............. ........ 492,038

Engineering.......................................... .......... 24,695 0 24,695 ......... ............. \3\ 78 19,262

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total............................................... .......... ......... 77,300 ............ ......... ............. ........ 511.300

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ Held at 50% if maintained in good condition.

\2\ Roadway approaches to be abandoned.

\3\ Weighted average 100 x492, 038/633, 678=78%.

Explanation of Columns for Table VII:

Column (1): Year Built is the original date that an item to be removed became a part of the bridge or the last known date that it was replaced. The

items to be removed should be broken down to show as much detail as possible, particularly where there is a variation in the year built and/or the

estimated service life.

Column (2): Original cost shall be supported by records furnished by bridge owner. Engineering cost should be estimated if unknown.

Column (3): Salvage--refer to Sec. 277.8(b).

Column (4): Actual capital cost is the original cost of the item to be removed minus the salvage value.

Column (5): Estimated Service Life--refer to Sec. 277.8(g).

Column (6) & (7): Expired Service Life--refer to Sec. 277.8(g).

Column (8): Value of expired service life is the actual capital cost of the item to be removed multiplied by the percent of expired service life.