Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Funding And Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Interstate Bridge team outlines $5.68 billion first funded phase as program cost climbs
Summary
Program staff told the joint Oregon–Washington committee the updated 2026 estimate for the five‑mile corridor is $13.5–$14.4 billion and described a $5.68 billion first funded phase backed by $2.1B federal, $1B from each state and $1.5B projected in toll revenue; members pressed staff on lane decisions and contingency plans.
Carly Francis, interim program administrator for the Interstate Bridge Replacement program, told the joint Oregon–Washington committee on June 12 that a revised program estimate now places the five‑mile corridor at roughly $13.5 billion to $14.4 billion at a 70th‑percentile confidence level. She said the figure reflects construction‑market inflation, added scope detail and more conservative risk loading compared with earlier planning numbers.
The program team identified a ‘‘first funded phase’’ covering a new Columbia River bridge, connections to I‑5, Hayden Island and SR‑14, demolition of existing bridges, pre‑completion toll launch activities and transit design work. ‘‘The total updated cost for these components is $5.68 billion,’’ Francis said. Program financial leads told the committee the committed funding stack presented to federal reviewers currently totals about $5.69 billion, including $2.1 billion in federal funds, $1 billion from each state, and $1.5 billion in projected toll revenue.
Why it matters: Program staff said the phase must be independently useful so it can operate without additional follow‑on investments — a condition the federal government expects before obligating money. Francis warned that some previously apportioned federal funds risk being reclaimed if obligations are not in place by the end of September, and she said the team is prioritizing the finance plan and STIP/MTIP approvals needed for a federal record of decision.
Members pressed staff for detail on the assumptions behind the estimate and what happens if costs rise. Program representatives said the 2026 estimate incorporates an updated construction schedule, more detailed quantities and a probabilistic risk model that added contingency. ‘‘We identified many risks and modeled them into the estimate,’’ the program’s financial lead, Brent Baker, told the committee. When members asked for specifics on line‑item differences from prior estimates, staff pledged to provide follow‑up analyses in writing.
On lane configuration: Several lawmakers returned to a recurring question: whether the bridges should include one or two auxiliary lanes. Staff said the modified locally preferred alternative in the SEIS recommends one auxiliary lane and that shifting to two across the corridor would raise costs significantly; Chris Regan, environmental manager, estimated the corridor‑wide cost differential between those options at roughly $600 million to $1 billion.
What’s next: Staff said they will continue to refine the finance plan for federal review and that the program is pursuing the approvals and procurement materials the Federal Highway Administration requires before a record of decision and fund obligation. The committee scheduled follow‑up work, including requests for written detail on cost drivers, procurement packaging and the timeline for obligating federal funds.
