 |
Code of Federal Regulations (Last Updated: November 8, 2024) |
 |
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 |
Appendix B to Part 277 - Hypothetical Example of Cost Apportionment
-
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 project $10,917,300 A 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 share) $165,489 I 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 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 maintenance costs IV 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 of railway and highway traffic $1,534,000 V 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 capacity $2,330,000 VI 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 (§ 277.8(b)), less contribution by third party, if applicable (§ 277.8c(3)).
(2) Share to be borne by the bridge owner is the sum of the direct and special benefits (§ 277.8(c)) expectable savings in repair or maintenane costs (paragraph 8d), costs attributable to requirements of railway and highway traffic (§ 277.8(e)), expenditure for increased carrying capacity (§ 277.8(f)) and expired service life of old bridge (§ 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.
Table A - Summary of Estimated Project Costs
No. and item Cost Fixed 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 party −432,000 Total cost of alteration to be apportioned 10,408,000 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) (table A) $10,917,300 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 railway and highway traffic 1,534,000 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 Table I - Bridge Owner's Share of Removing Old Bridge
Item to be removed Age at time of removal (years) - (1) Owner's share percent - (2) Removal cost - (3) Owner's share of removal - (4) Years remaining - (5) Present worth factor - (6) Owner's present 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 Total 521,908 368,104 165,489 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 highway traffic (less right-of-way) 1,503,100 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 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 timber walkways 3,950 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) @ 47⁄8%:875 ÷ 0.05372 16,288 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 HS20-44 loading1 $8,609,592 Cost of replacement-in-kind (hypothetical) bridge designed for Cooper E 45 and AASHO H15-44 loading1 6,279,592 Total 2,330,000 Table VII - Value of Expired Service Life of Old Bridge
[Replacement year - 1970]
Item to be removed Year built - (1) Original cost - (2) Salvage value - (3) Actual capital cost (2)-(3) - (4) Estimated service life - (5) Expired service life Value of expired service life (4) × (7) - (8) Years 1970-(1) - (6) Percent of total (6) (5) - (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