Μοving in the Right Direction

Εvery four years, the American Society of Civil Engineers releases its report card on the state of America’s infrastructure, grading how the nation’s often unseen but critically important energy, water, waste, transportation, and other backbone systems are doing in their role to protect people’s safety, serve society’s needs, and keep the economy moving. 

This year’s report, “ASCE 2025 Report Card for America’s Infrastructure,” offers some good news: The overall grade for the nation’s infrastructure rose from a C- in 2021 to a C in 2025. That is the highest grade awarded since the organization began rating these systems in 1998. The report card also calls for sustained investment in infrastructure maintenance and upgrades to improve the grade in the future.

“What this report card shows is that we’ve invested in our infrastructure, and that investment has made an improvement,” says Darren Olson, P.E., chair of the ASCE national committee on America’s infrastructure, which produces the quadrennial report card. 

According to ASCE, projects to improve the nation’s infrastructure have been grossly underfunded for decades. As a result, much of the nation’s infrastructure does not meet modern safety or usage standards, and some parts are nearing the end of their physical life span. A total investment of $9.1 trillion is necessary to bring America’s aging and underperforming infrastructure to a state of good health, ASCE says. 

Of the 18 categories measured in the report card this year, eight grades improved. Seven remained the same, two declined, and one, broadband, was graded for the first time this year. (See Table 1.) The highest grades were earned by ports (B) and rail (B-). The lowest grades were earned in stormwater management and public transit (both Ds). 

Marsia Geldert-Murphey, P.E., immediate past president of ASCE, characterizes the overall grade of the nation’s infrastructure as “fair, not great.” However, when considering how long it takes to plan, engineer, and build a single bridge or water treatment plant, going from a C- to C in four years is “showing us exactly what we wanted to see,” she says. “Anybody who is knee-deep in infrastructure understands it is not a quick fix.” 

Inspecting, maintaining, improving, and building new infrastructure are projects that take a long time — sometimes years or even decades. “Even when you streamline projects, you still have to plan, design, find out what your [environmental] impacts are, and buy rights of way and easements,” Geldert-Murphey says. In many cases, there must also be time to involve the public in discussions about how changes in infrastructure will impact their neighborhoods. “We need to get public involvement because, let’s face it, even as good as the best engineers are, they’re not going to have the best design if they don’t incorporate the stakeholders who are using that facility [or system] every single day.”

ASCE’s goal is to move toward a grade of B in the near future, which would mean that the nation’s infrastructure is fit for use at the moment — though not necessarily ready for changes in the future. (See “What the Grades Mean” on p. 39.) Those changes might include increased usage of highways or transit as local populations increase, or the need for water and wastewater treatment facilities to remove newly discovered contaminants. Aging infrastructure systems are also vulnerable to the effects of the climate crisis, the report notes. As floods become more intense and occur more often, the dams and levees that were built to protect communities may fail. High winds from more frequent and stronger hurricanes may damage power and telecommunications infrastructure.

Question of funding

In the report’s executive summary, A Comprehensive Assessment of America’s Infrastructure, ASCE credits much of the gradual improvement of the nation’s infrastructure to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, or IIJA. The bipartisan infrastructure law is a $1.2 trillion spending package signed into law in 2021 to fund new, improved, and upgraded systems related to roads, bridges, and public transportation; water, wastewater, and stormwater treatment; solid waste; clean energy and power distribution; ports and airports; broadband access; dams and levees; parks and recreation areas; and schools. 

Among the projects funded are the completion of four new gates at the Orlando International Airport, improvements to a rail and roadway project at the Port of Los Angeles that will speed the movement of goods from port to destination, and a continuation of state and local efforts to replace dangerous lead service lines. The funds are also part of the effort to rebuild the Francis Scott Key Bridge at the Port of Baltimore, which collapsed on March 26, 2024, after being struck by a container ship, killing six. The replacement bridge, to be completed by 2028 and funded entirely by the federal government, will be taller to allow new, larger ships to enter the port. It will also incorporate modern pier protection technology. 

Table 1: The Report Card for America’s Infrastructure Grades, 2021 Vs 2025

Report card committee chair Olson, who is the department head of water resources at Christopher B. Burke Engineering Ltd., in Rosemont, Illinois, says the IIJA had a distinct impact on infrastructure projects that were ready to proceed when funds were disbursed during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. “Transit really needed a boost,” Olson says. “Roads needed maintenance. And those were things that could get [done] quickly,” in the first few years of IIJA funding. He says those improvements were reflected in the report card grades. 

But funding from the IIJA is scheduled to expire in 2026. And funding from two other recent laws that contributed to improved grades will also run out soon. The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 contributed to the development of clean energy and climate resilience. Funding for these purposes runs out in 2032 and 2035, respectively. The CHIPS and Science Act of 2022, which received support from the Society of Women Engineers, contributed funds toward clean energy and wireless communications, and is set to expire in 2027. 

Underinvestment catches up

Large parts of the country’s infrastructure were built decades ago, says Ralph Exton, executive director of the Water Environment Federation, known as WEF. The nonprofit organization of 31,000 members includes scientists, engineers, regulators, academics, utility managers, plant operators, and other professionals involved in water treatment, wastewater treatment, and stormwater management. A water infrastructure needs assessment produced by WEF helped inform ASCE’s grades in those categories.

Exton says that although the nation’s infrastructure systems were designed and constructed using the best materials and techniques available at the time, their life spans were never expected to exceed 50 to 75 years. “A lot of the systems were designed 100 years ago, and maybe they were updated 50 years ago, but that was still 50 years ago,” he says. “So, we’re still behind the curve here.”

And while federal dollars paid for much of that infrastructure, federal investment in maintaining and improving these systems has decreased significantly over the decades. The responsibility for any servicing fell mainly to states, counties, and cities, which often have less ability to tax constituents or charge customers more for improvements and upgrades. For example, Olson says, the federal government contributed up to 65% of the funds that built the nation’s first large municipal drinking water and wastewater systems. But the federal share of maintenance, expansions, and improvements is now less than 10%. “It’s a double whammy of lack of funding combined with infrastructure that’s coming to its due date,” Olson says.

Even if these new sources of federal funds continue at current levels, ASCE estimates the gap between that spending and what would be needed for all of America’s infrastructure to reach a grade of B is roughly $3.7 trillion. That’s an astonishing number, but Olson says, “It took us decades to get here. It’s going to take us decades to get to where we should be.”

The mediocre condition of the nation’s infrastructure will cost American families roughly $2,700 apiece per year if funding is not continued at current levels, according to a 2024 ASCE report called “Bridging the Gap.” However, if the levels of funding established by recent laws were extended, that amount could be reduced by $700 per year. Geldert-Murphey says, “Whether it be potholes that are causing damage to your vehicle or drainage systems that were designed for flows that were projected in the 1970s and ’80s” and are now flooding, procrastinating on infrastructure repairs and upgrades wastes time and money. 

“The longer we put it off, the more expensive it is,” she says. “Number one, because of inflation, of course, but the other thing is that the quality degrades continually. So, what may have been a rehabilitation or a patch, so to speak, may become a complete replacement.”

There are no current plans to renew the IIJA when its funding runs out next year — and indeed, the Trump administration has moved to rescind funding for specific projects related to clean energy and electric vehicles. But Olson says the hope is that lawmakers may nevertheless see from the improvement in the overall grade that investing in infrastructure pays off. 

Variable resources

Ana Tijerina Esquino, a transportation engineer for Mott MacDonald in Portland, Oregon, was a member of the committee that produced the report card, working on the categories that received the highest and lowest grades: Ports and transit. Transit encompasses local bus, subway, and light-rail systems; a separate category, rail, includes cross-country rail systems that serve passengers, like Amtrak, and ship goods, such as Union Pacific Railroad. 

She says the B grade given to ports reflects the category’s variety of funding sources. “They get some money from private industry. They get some money from local municipalities. They get money from the state and perhaps also some federal dollars. So, their funding is more sustainable” than some other categories, she says.

“Transit is the opposite. Every transit project gets funded differently. Some cities provide money for transit, but generally speaking, that money is paid on a local level and from fares. And something that I don’t think people realize is, fares don’t really pay for the cost of transit systems,” Tijerina Esquino says. “Fares are a tiny portion; the rest falls on these metro or county governments.”

For example, in Oregon, where she works, there is no recurring, statewide transit funding, she says. In larger cities with more established mass transit systems — like New York City, Boston, and Philadelphia — funding may come from the states where the systems are located but not from surrounding states like Delaware or Connecticut that also use these transit systems. “We don’t want to necessarily say the federal government should pay for all of it,” Tijerina Esquino says. “But we want everyone to pay for a little bit.”

The categories of infrastructure that received the best grades, like ports and rail, also rely on private money. Often, the manufacturers, importers, and exporters that use these systems pay for their upkeep and improvements. 

Although the nation’s highways, bridges, and tunnels are primarily state-funded, they sometimes receive private investments through what are called public-private partnerships. For example, investors contribute funds toward designing and constructing toll lanes that expedite commutes in exchange for some or all of the tolls collected, giving them a return on their investments. 

Whether funded publicly or privately, state thoroughfares must meet state guidelines for safety and function, while federal highways must meet federal guidelines. The Federal Highway Administration governs two programs — one for bridges and one for tunnels — that call for regularly inspecting those facilities to ensure they meet safety standards. Most bridges are inspected every two years and may be checked more often if they are evaluated as deficient.

Thanks to these programs, Geldert-Murphey says, a lot of good data exist about roads, bridges, and tunnels. However, little consistent and reliable data are available in stormwater and broadband. ASCE graded stormwater for the first time in 2021, and its grade this year remained unchanged (D). Broadband was added this year after ASCE determined it had enough solid data to do so. “It took a lot of digging on our part to find what was available,” Geldert-Murphey says. “After COVID, we saw how important it was to understand who has access to broadband and who does not, and how it is affecting the quality of life and the ability for certain populations to thrive.” The report card cited Federal Communications Commission data that show that 24 million Americans, including 28% of those in rural communities and 23% of those living on tribal lands, do not have reliable broadband service in their homes or on a mobile device.

Staying safe

Some infrastructure requires investment not just to improve its operation, but to protect lives. John Roche, P.E., treasurer of the Association of State Dam Safety Officials and a member of its board of directors, says dams are a prime example. States set inspection schedules for dams, he says, and most assess them annually. And many state dam safety plans were only established in the 1970s and ’80s following catastrophic dam failures, such as the 1972 Buffalo Creek Dam in Logan County, West Virginia, in which 125 lives were lost, and the 1977 Laurel Run Dam in Johnstown, Pennsylvania, in which more than 40 lives were lost. 

State dam safety programs aim to inventory existing dams, assess their condition, permit their repairs, and set design standards for those upgrades. This is especially critical for what are called high-hazard dams, those that would be expected to cause a loss of life if they fail. “And it has now evolved into creating emergency action plans, ensuring high-hazard dams throughout the country have these plans, and seeing that they are communicated to first responders and emergency managers,” Roche says. The IIJA provided funding for those efforts, as well. 

The need for effective, easy-to-implement safety plans for high-hazard dams was demonstrated clearly when the Oroville Dam in the Sacramento Valley of California, the nation’s tallest dam, experienced a life-threatening crisis. In February 2017, heavy rainfall damaged the dam’s main and emergency spillways. Human and physical factors contributed to the incident, and although no lives were lost, 180,000 people living in the dam’s inundation zone had to be quickly evacuated. After the event, the Association of State Dam Safety Officials published a case study on the event that deemed its emergency plan “not sufficiently mature.” The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is in the process of updating that plan. 

Roche says that before the recent federal funding efforts, maybe 40% of high-hazard dams had any kind of emergency action plan. Now, that number is 83% or more. 

Additionally, some states have been able to use IIJA funds to complete or establish plans for what he calls “moonshot projects,” such as increasing staff levels or dam owner outreach and training. “In my state, one of our projects was to modernize our IT [information technology] infrastructure,” Roche says. “We’re still running on the frameworks of old databases from 20 and 30 years ago.”

The case for resiliency

ASCE says it is not enough to rebuild aging infrastructure to the same standards as the past because the climate crisis requires a higher level of resiliency to floods, winds, droughts, storms, and other natural disasters. “When we see things like hurricanes that inundate North Carolina, or the wildfires in California, or the power situations in Texas that caused widespread outages, people are beginning to understand the importance of resilience,” Olson says. 

Heavier rainfalls will continue to impact the capacity of some dams, says Roche — but so will wildfires. “Some people may say, ‘How does a wildfire impact dam safety?’ But you burn that land, it becomes barren, and the next time a big rain event happens, there’s not all of that vegetation to slow the flow of water,” he says. “So, we’re seeing higher peak inflows to dams and reservoirs combined with maybe mud flows from that now exposed land.”

Designing dams using more realistic predictions for rainfall and flood risks is essential. “What we call low-hazard dams are designed for the traditional 100-year, 24-hour storm,” Roche says. “And if that storm is now looking like a much more regular event,” those low-hazard dams will be tested more regularly and could fail, he says. In this way, low-hazard dams can become high hazard, posing an increased life safety risk. This is especially true as communities downstream of the dams continue to increase development in their inundation zones, Roche says.

Geldert-Murphey says ASCE has signed a memorandum of understanding with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to give it access to weather and rainfall data. ASCE will use the data to update its building codes and standards so that infrastructure built or repaired in the future can be resilient to the effects of a changing environment. 

Larger and more frequent floods also impact the stormwater collection system and the wastewater treatment facilities that treat stormwater. With continuing droughts in parts of the West and residential development there continuing unabated, there is also an issue with supplying all of the potable water needed for new and existing communities.

The Water Environment Federation’s executive director says it is time to stop considering water and wastewater treatment as a one-size-fits-all proposition. People need water for drinking and bathing, but industries and agriculture also use treated water, and that water doesn’t need to be treated to the same high standards as drinking water, Exton says. Treating some water to different standards can save money through lower energy and facility upgrade costs.

In parallel, wastewater treatment plants are increasingly considered water reclamation or recycling plants, with their effluent sometimes added to the mix of water sources that water treatment facilities will process. And the by-products of wastewater treatment can also be valuable, Exton says. “We need to think in terms of how we can recover resources from this liquid substance that we have,” he says. “You can extract energy from that water, you can extract nutrients from that water, and you can create biosolids that have beneficial reuse in agricultural purposes if you use the right treatment methodologies.”

In fact, he says, “If done right, we can extract enough energy and nutrients to pay for the ongoing operational and maintenance costs” of the facilities themselves. 

Eye on the future

New technologies like those used to treat wastewater to produce fertilizer and reusable water are helping civil engineers do more with less. Some use unmanned aerial vehicles to improve the accuracy and efficiency of safety inspections of dams and bridges. These UAVs can be outfitted with cameras, lidar scanners, or photogrammetric equipment to capture useful images of hard-to-reach structures. Underwater drones help inspect ports, piers, and the submerged portions of dams and levees. 

“We can collect all of those discrete data points and have a digital twin that will allow us to really understand how this structure is interacting with itself” and its surroundings, Roche says.

More investment is needed in developing and learning how to use these new technologies, Exton says. “We have a long way to go to fully utilize the more sophisticated tools at our disposal — the digital tools, artificial intelligence, machine learning — not only in how we design our facilities but then how we operate them, too,” he says.

It is often more cost-effective to maintain or improve existing infrastructure than to build new projects, according to ASCE. “But nobody wants to go and cut a ribbon when you’ve upgraded a roadway or enclosed a storm sewer,” Geldert-Murphey says. “We have to get excited about maintaining the existing systems we have.”

So ASCE, like SWE, encourages its members to advocate for investments in its causes at every level of government. ASCE also encourages its members to run for public office. Geldert-Murphey refutes the idea that doing so might present a conflict of interest if the office presides over projects that relate to the engineer’s practice. 

“You can serve and just recuse yourself from voting on anything that would affect you,” she says. “The one or two times that you would have to recuse yourself is a minor price to pay for all the other times that your voice is going to be there, talking about things that affect everyone in the community.”

Olson and Tijerina Esquino say they hope lawmakers will see from the results of this year’s report card that continued investment in infrastructure makes economic sense. “We’re hoping that having conversations with our lawmakers on every side of the aisle will help them see the need for a sustained investment,” says Tijerina Esquino. “Infrastructure has always been a bipartisan issue. Both red households and blue households rely on it.”