An Audit Report on the Department of Transportation's Bridge Inspection Program
December 2009
Report Number 10-017
Overall Conclusion
The Department of Transportation (Department) conducted bridge inspections in a timely manner and substantially in compliance with federal and state laws and Department policies. All 303 routine bridge inspections that auditors tested at 5 district offices were conducted substantially in accordance with federal and state requirements. However, the Department did not ensure that load restrictions were posted within the federally required time limit on bridges that had been identified as no longer being able to support the state legal load.
According to federal requirements, load restrictions should be posted on state-owned bridges within 90 days of a bridge inspection. Based on a review of 41 postings, the Department took an average of 319 days to post load restrictions on state-owned bridges, exceeding the federal time limit by an average of 229 days. Federal regulations and Department policy require non-state-owned bridges to be load posted within 180 days of a bridge inspection. Seventy-two percent of non-state-owned bridges auditors reviewed were load posted by local entities within the federal time limit. The Department works closely with local entities to close bridges that are no longer safe for the traveling public.
Monitoring practices regarding quality control and quality assurance are inconsistent among the five district offices auditors visited because the Department's Bridge Division provides only limited guidance and oversight to district offices. While the Department's district offices monitored the contracted consultant engineers who perform most of the State's bridge inspections, both the district offices' and the Bridge Division's monitoring activities did not fully comply with Department policies and procedures or federal requirements.
The Department has established a process to comply with state law and policies and procedures for procuring bridge inspection services; however, it should improve its procurement and contracting practices to ensure compliance. All consultant engineers hired in the 2005-2007 and 2007-2009 inspection cycles met minimum requirements to perform bridge inspections. However, the Department did not adequately track and document all elements of the procurement process or compose the consultant engineer selection team in full accordance with the Texas Administrative Code and Department policy.
The district offices that auditors visited did not consistently submit consultant engineer performance evaluations to the Bridge Division as required by Department policy. District offices completed 68 percent and 39 percent of consultant engineer performance evaluations during the 2005-2007 and 2007-2009 contract periods, respectively. In addition, the Bridge Division provided limited guidance to the district offices for applying evaluation criteria to consultant engineers' performance. These evaluations are important because of the large number of bridges inspected by consultant engineers. During the 2007-2009 inspection cycle, the Department awarded contracts totaling $25 million for consultant engineer services to conduct 92.8 percent of the Department's bridge inspections. The Department later amended these contracts to total $28 million.
Data tested in the Department's Bridge Inventory, Inspection, and Appraisal Program (BRINSAP) system, which the Department uses to meet federal reporting requirements, was reliable and accurate. However, the Department should improve the effectiveness of the system's edit check related to inspection dates to ensure compliance with time frames established by federal requirements to enter the data. The Department also did not follow a formal system development life cycle methodology when creating a new Web-based system that is scheduled to replace BRINSAP.
The Department used a reasonable methodology to develop budgets for Bridge Division operations and bridge inspection consulting services for the 2009-2011 inspection cycle. Auditors could not assess the reasonableness of the district offices' budgets because the Department does not require district offices to create a separate budget for bridge inspection activities. However, all consultant engineer-submitted invoices tested were accurate and reviewed in compliance with Department policy.
Federal Stimulus Funds
Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), the federal government allocated Texas $2.25 billion for transportation infrastructure projects. According to the Department, a portion of these funds will be used to supplement critical bridge rehabilitation and replacement projects that were not funded from the federal Highway Bridge Program, which is the State's primary source of funding for bridge construction and repairs. The ARRA funds will enable the Department to add 52 bridge maintenance projects and 7 new bridge construction projects, according to the Department. As of October 2009, the Department had approved contracts for 49 of those 59 additional ARRA-funded projects. These projects are identified in Appendix 4 and total approximately $35.05 million.
Contact the SAO about this report.
Download the Acrobat version of this report. (.pdf)
If you prefer an HTML version, follow this link to an Adobe site which converts PDF files to HTML.