National Bridge Inventory: Alabama


  • The state has identified needed repairs on 16,106 bridges.
  • This compares to 16,080 bridges that needed work in 2021.
  • Over the life of the IIJA, Alabama will receive a total of $225.0 million in bridge formula funds, which will help make needed repairs.
  • Alabama currently has access to $180.0 million of that total, and has committed $174.3 million towards 24 projects as of June 2025.
  • Of the 16,181 bridges in the state, 545, or 3.4 percent, are classified as structurally deficient. This means one of the key elements is in poor or worse condition.
  • This is down from 586 bridges classified as structurally deficient in 2021.
  • The deck area of structurally deficient bridges accounts for 2.1 percent of total deck area on all structures.

Top Most Traveled Structurally Deficient Bridges in Alabama

CountyYear BuiltDaily CrossingsType of BridgeLocation
Montgomery1969104,310Urban InterstateI-85 over S Jackson St
Montgomery197083,530Rural InterstateIn 85 over Union St
Jefferson196841,990Urban InterstateI - 20/59 East over Aaron Aronov Drive
Jefferson196841,990Urban InterstateI - 20/59 West over Arron Aronov Drive
Lee195840,660Urban InterstateI-85 over Moores Mill Creek
Baldwin196833,798Urban other principal arterialUS 98 over Fly Creek
Lee199632,040Urban freeway/expresswayUS 280 over First Avenue
Macon196331,250Rural InterstateI85 over Branch
Shelby192428,511Urban other principal arterialAl - 3 North over Peavine Ck * Acl RR
Montgomery192620,900Urban freeway/expresswayUS 31 over drainage Canal
Jefferson195519,500Urban other principal arterialAl - 5 (US 11) over Opossum Creek
Mobile196419,384Urban minor arterialMcgregor Ave over Eslava Creek
Madison196819,100Urban minor arterialSparkman Dr over Pinhook Creek
Montgomery196516,060Rural InterstateI65 SBL over Pintlala Creek
Montgomery196516,060Rural InterstateI65 NBL over Pintlala Creek
Lowndes196614,920Rural InterstateI65 SBL over Branch
Jefferson191514,000Urban local road22nd Street over Morris Ave * RR
Mobile196513,355Urban minor arterialUS 90 WB over Tensaw/Spanish River
Jefferson191013,000Urban local road22nd St over Rotary Trail Park
Jefferson191513,000Urban local road21st Street over Morris Ave * RR
Jefferson194512,820Urban other principal arterialAl - 150 over Lil Shades Ck
Madison196911,800Urban minor arterialWynn Dr over McDonald Creek
Elmore196511,550Rural minor arterialAl.14 over Al.Power Co.Canal
Coosa197211,250Rural arterialSR 38 / US280 over Socapatoy Creek
Walker197811,113Rural arterialAl-5 over Mulberry Fork Warrior

Bridge Inventory: Alabama

Type of BridgeNumber of BridgesArea of All Bridges
(sq. meters)
Daily Crossings on All BridgesNumber of Structurally Deficient BridgesArea of Structurally Deficient Bridges
(sq. meters)
Daily Crossings on Structurally Deficient Bridges
Rural Interstate6501,168,52815,496,55777,205182,990
Rural arterial1,1571,181,1409,135,36585,39953,714
Rural minor arterial1,4961,006,4955,164,9541575,64850,636
Rural major collector3,1101,293,5525,280,1915620,45768,172
Rural minor collector2,266643,1461,374,3187625,25812,250
Rural local road4,444926,5361,980,45730337,95059,845
Urban Interstate5831,941,73022,582,26455,106239,440
Urban freeway/expressway87191,4081,829,17121,00152,940
Urban other principal arterial574809,19311,239,38165,278111,814
Urban minor arterial420329,8944,535,877107,86288,852
Urban collector323213,8351,667,65371,18712,413
Urban local road1,071391,1252,929,6035017,86166,871
Total16,18110,096,58083,215,791545210,210999,937

Proposed Bridge Work

Type of WorkNumber of BridgesCost to Repair
(in millions)
Daily CrossingsArea of Bridges
(sq. meters)
Bridge replacement4,370$3,89214,827,6001,780,167
Widening & rehabilitation562$4784,385,336313,237
Rehabilitation2,937$4,80627,344,8453,051,707
Deck rehabilitation/replacement11$1992,76712,087
Other structural work8,226$7,36536,388,4524,903,554
Total16,106$16,56183,039,00010,060,752

About the data:

Data and cost estimates are from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) National Bridge Inventory (NBI), downloaded on June 24, 2025. Note that specific conditions on bridges may have changed as a result of recent work or updated inspections.

Effective January 1, 2018, FHWA changed the definition of structurally deficient as part of the final rule on highway and bridge performance measures, published May 20, 2017 pursuant to the 2012 federal aid highway bill Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21). Two measures that were previously used to classify bridges as structurally deficient are no longer used. This includes bridges where the overall structural evaluation was rated in poor or worse condition, or where the adequacy of waterway openings was insufficient.

The new definition limits the classification to bridges where one of the key structural elements—the deck, superstructure, substructure or culverts, are rated in poor or worse condition. During inspection, the conditions of a variety of bridge elements are rated on a scale of 0 (failed condition) to 9 (excellent condition). A rating of 4 is considered “poor” condition.

Cost estimates have been derived by ARTBA, based on 2023 average bridge replacement costs for structures on and off the National Highway System, published by FHWA. Bridge rehabilitation costs are estimated to be 68 percent of replacement costs. A bridge is considered to need repair if the structure has identified repairs as part of the NBI, a repair cost estimate is supplied by the bridge owner or the bridge is classified as structurally deficient. Please note that for a few states, the number of bridges needing to be repaired can vary significantly from year to year, and reflects the data entered by the state.

Bridges are classified by FHWA into types based on the functional classification of the roadway on the bridge. Interstates comprise routes officially designated by the Secretary of Transportation. Other principal arterials serve major centers of urban areas or provide mobility through rural areas. Freeways and expressways have directional lanes generally separated by a physical barrier, and access/egress points generally limited to on- and off-ramps. Minor arterials serve smaller areas and are used for trips of moderate length. Collectors funnel traffic from local roads to the arterial network; major collectors have higher speed limits and traffic volumes and are longer in length and spaced at greater intervals, while minor collectors are shorter and provide service to smaller communities. Local roads do not carry through traffic and are intended for short distance travel.