Term Paper Sample

“The Goethals Toll Bridge Project: A Public-Private Partnership Project Examination”
Term Paper: CE671 – Integrated Infrastructure Performance and Risk Analysis Study
Edgar Gellada
Jieling Li
Katherine Waldman
Prepared For: Prof. Fadi Karaa, Ph.D.

Table of Contents
1 – Background and Rationale 3
P3 and the relevant laws 3
2 – The Goethals Toll Bridge Project 7
Scope of Work 8
Final Bridge Design 9
Other Salient Features(9) 10
Major Stakeholders and problems addressed 13
The FHWA Project Process 15
Project Performance Indicators 17
3 – Financial and Economic Analysis 18
DBFM Model 19
Benefit-Cost Analysis – Agency and Private Partner 19
Risk Assessment and Register 21
4 – Conclusion 24
5 – Appendix 25
6 – References 29
1 – Background and Rationale
This term paper aims to do an ex post facto evaluation of a critical infrastructure project
from the project financing and execution point of view. Essentially, this study will review the
performance and financial viability of the Goethals Toll Bridge Project. In doing so, the group
members will showcase their understanding of the concepts learned in the course.
The first part of this study discusses the rationale and underlying economic, financial, and
political conditions of the project, including a discussion of the Public-Private Partnership (P3)
and the specific model used. The second part is devoted to a detailed understanding of the project,
beginning with the historical background of Goethals Bridge, leading into the reasoning of its
design considerations, performance indicators, impact, and stakeholders. Finally, after a
conclusive review of the financials, the group will determine whether or not the utilization of the
P3 model was effective in this project and whether similar future infrastructure projects will yield
the same results.
P3 and the relevant laws
In March 2021, United States’ (U.S.) President, Joe Biden unveiled a US$2 trillion
infrastructure plan, known as the American Jobs Plan. This legislation encourages heavy
investment in rebuilding the nation's crumbling infrastructure and shifting to greener energy. The
breakdown of the intended spending is as follows:
1. Transportation - US$586 billion
2. Water, electric and internet - US$327 billion
3. New schools, colleges and federal buildings - US$378 billion
4. Home or community-based care for elderly and people with disabilities - $400 billion
5. Research and development - $180 billion

6. Manufacturing and business - $300 billion
7. Pandemic preparedness - $30 billion
8. Domestic manufacturers - $52 billion
9. Workforce development programs - $100 billion
The president plans to pay for his proposal by raising corporate taxes and eliminating tax
breaks for the fossil fuel industry, creating additional tax burden on those already in a higher tax
bracket. Previous experience has shown that excessive corporate taxes can also result in capital
flight and ultimately, job loss. The 2018 and 2019 U.S. Census Bureau has shown that New York
for two consecutive years had the highest population decreases compared to other states, showing
that factors of commuting or moving outweighed the cost of living found in the city.
A key finding by Watson and McBride (2021)1 states that “an increase in the federal
corporate tax rate to 28 percent would raise the U.S. federal-state combined tax rate to 32.34
percent, highest in the OECD and among Group of Seven (G7) countries, harming U.S. economic
competitiveness and increasing the cost of investment in America. We estimate that this would
reduce long-run economic output by 0.8 percent, eliminate 159,000 jobs, and reduce wages by 0.7
percent. Workers across the income scale would bear much of the tax increase. For example, the
bottom 20 percent of earners would on average see a 1.45 percent drop in after-tax income in the
long run”.
P3 in infrastructure development could be the solution of funding for all infrastructure
programs in the country, including the American Jobs Plan. According to a PWC report (2016)(1)
on P3s in the U.S., the estimated total infrastructure investment needed by 2020 was US$3.6
trillion, making Biden’s plan short US$1.2 trillion.
1
on a Tax Foundation Fiscal Fact No. 751
According to Levitt, Scott, and Garvin (2019)(2), more than thirty states in the U.S. have
already passed statutes allowing an option for a P3. Laws designed to attract long-term
investments in public infrastructure projects by creating a stable legal structure. The State of New
Jersey on August 14, 2018 enacted Chapter 90 of Public Law 2018(3), a P3 legislation. This
allowed for flexibility and collaboration for community-focused improvements and job creation.
Previously, N.J. Rev. Stat § 18A:64-85 only authorized state and county colleges to use P3s for the
on-campus construction, repair, alteration, or operation of a building, structure, or facility.
While the State of New York has yet to enact a P3 law, according to a CBC report (2008)(4)
it has had past experiences in implementing P3 projects. Projects mentioned in the report were:
1) the $1.8 billion AirTran Project from JFK International Airport (JFK) to the Jamaica
Station of the Long Island Railroad;
2) the JFK Terminal Four (T4) Project;
3) the New York City’s 20-year partnership with Cemusa, Inc. for the design, construction,
and maintenance of street furniture; as well as,
4) many other contracts to design, build, finance and operate waste-to-energy, materials
recovery and composting plants in different counties throughout New York state.
A brief history of Goethals Bridge
The original Goethals Bridge was built in 1928 and was originally known as the Arthur
Kill Bridge. It was later rebranded as Goethals’ Bridge, after Major General George Washington
Goethal, a tribute to the first consulting engineer of Port Authority. Throughout its 92 years of
operation until its demolition in 2018, it maintained a level of “historic integrity”.

Figure 1. Old Goethals Bridge
The economic boom at the beginning of the twentieth century, the incorporation of Staten
Island into New York City, as well as the expansion of factories and other industrial enterprises
along the Arthur Kill put a strain on the ferry system handling the freight, commuters and
automobiles traveling between Staten Island and New Jersey. To alleviate the traffic congestion
and allow for further economic development in the area, particularly on Staten Island, various
recommendations were put forth to connect Staten Island with New Jersey. From 1918 to 1927,
the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) built the old Goethals bridge at the
cost of US$7.2 million. It had 672 feet long central span, a 62 feet width which carried four lanes
of traffic, and a clearance of 135 feet.
In 1964, a 1,200-foot-long approach, roadway changes and ramps were constructed at a
cost of US$3.9 million. Other modifications to the bridge included a widening of the approach and
closure of the pedestrian walkways due to condition issues. Another rehabilitation was also
performed in 2006 for the bridge deck which extended its lifespan for another 10 years.
Figure 2. Project Location Map
2 – The Goethals Toll Bridge Project
Between 1997 and 2006, the PANYNJ held discussions and consultations about the
possible replacement, expansion or rehabilitation of the old Goethals Bridge which connects Staten
Island, New York to Elizabeth, New Jersey. Two alternatives being considered then were:
1. A twin three-lane replacement bridges north and south of the original alignment
2. A single-span bridge and demolition of the old bridge

The first alternative calls for the construction of the south lane bridge and the demolition
of the old bridge to make way for the construction of the north lane bridge. There were various
issues with the twin bridge alternative such as ice falling onto the roadway during winter months.
However, the twin bridge alternative was totally eliminated due to height restriction set up by the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to prevent interference with flights at Newark Liberty
International Airport. The towers were not to exceed 272 feet in height and required to slant
outwards because of aircraft flight patterns.
With the remaining option and after completion of a lengthy environmental review(7), the
PANYNJ took a huge step to move the project forward in 2010 by seeking private partners – its
first P3 initiative. The process began with the issuance of a Request for Information (RFI) which
is a preliminary to a Request for Proposals. The private consortium that won the bid was the NYNJ
Link Partnership, formed by Macquarie Infrastructure and Real Assets (MIRA) with a 90 percent
interest and Kiewit Development Company (KDC) with a 10 percent interest. They were chosen
because they offered the lowest cost to PANYNJ.(6)
The project was officially approved on April 24, 2013 for a total cost of US$1.521 billion
and to be delivered using the design-build-finance-maintain (DBFM) model with the private
partner covering just over US$1 billion of the total project cost.(8)
Scope of Work
The finalized scope of work (SOW) was listed in the Cost Estimate Review (CER) (8) and
decided by teams from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), PANYNJ and private
consultants. The official SOW, as follows:
1. A new six-lane cable stay bridge over the Arthur Kill Channel (the Main Bridge)
including the design and construction of standoff fendering along the New Jersey
bulkhead line as well as the design and construction of fendering for the New York
main tower if the developer’s final design warrants it necessary;
2. New approach structures in New Jersey and New York to link the main cable stay
bridge with the existing road network;
3. Work to tie in the New Jersey and New York approach roads to the geometry of the
approach spans;
4. Installation of all roadways, structures, electrical, mechanical, drainage, traffic signal
system, lighting, pavement markings, signage, utility adjustments or relocations and
inspection/maintenance facilities;
5. Permanent fencing generally following the Project Right of Way at ground level along
both sides of the Replacement Bridge, except through open waters and public roads;
6. A permanent access road, including a trestle bridge over Old Place Creek located
generally below the New York portion of the Replacement Bridge for purposes of
construction, maintenance and security;
7. Re-alignment and construction of Gulf Avenue in Staten Island;
8. Removal of the existing Goethals Bridge, appurtenances, existing bridge pier
protection system (dolphins), approach structures and associated infrastructure;
including the removal and/or relocation of attached facilities or utilities;
9. Removal of the existing ramp structure in New Jersey; and
10. Replacement of the Travis Branch railroad bridge over I-278.
Final Bridge Design
The final bridge crossing replacement design adopted for the project was a dual span, state-
of-the-art cable-stayed structure connecting the Arthur Kill with a 900 ft main span, a significant
navigational improvement over the previous 672 feet horizontal clearance for marine traffic of the
old bridge (See Figure 3). Each cable-stayed span boasts a total of 1,635 ft of suspended deck,
including side spans. The project in total has over 7,300 feet of elevated mainline structure
(including the cable-stayed bridge) in each direction, a new railroad bridge west of the New York
toll plaza, a maintenance and control facility, and an access road through the swamp land on the
New York side to facilitate maintenance and inspection.(9)
Figure 3. Main bridge configuration showing shallow stay cables.
In vast improvement compared to the old bridge, the new bridge has both the eastbound
and westbound structures designed to carry three 12-foot-wide lanes with full shoulders.
Other Salient Features(9)
Main Towers. The main towers of the new bridge are configured as a double “V” in
elevation, with each “V” supporting independent structures to comply with a project requirement
of prohibiting vertical tower legs. The open V shaped towers and the outward lean allowed for the
elimination of all cable and structure above the roadway and at the same time the hazard of ice
falling from these components into passing cars has been minimized during wintertime.
Deck System. The deck for the cable-stayed spans consisted of full depth, lightweight
precast concrete panels, made continuous by way of concrete closure pours over the floor beams,
edge girders, and between panels which were then provided with a polyester polymer concrete
overlay. The decks were also post-tensioned longitudinally to preclude tension in the top fiber of
concrete. The decks were also provided with an overlay of impermeable polyester polymer
concrete (PPC) and stainless steel reinforcement to prevent premature degradation.
Figure 4. Rendition of the new Goethals Bridge
Truss Redundancy. For the Goethals Bridge Replacement, the design team devised an
innovative use of materials to eliminate the fracture critical scenario and introduce redundancy by
connecting 1) the maintenance travelers supported by rails and 2) deck panel support beams used
as forms below the closure pours between panels to form a longitudinal truss thereby creating a
redundant load path. The provision of an alternate load path likewise allowed the re-classification
of the floor beams which need not be classified as fracture critical members (FCM) which allowed
for fabrication conforming to customary structural steel fabrication requirements and not invoking
the additional stringent material and fabrication provisions of fracture critical steel elements.
Extended Service Life. To ensure the new structure provides exemplary service for future
generations, PANYNJ specified major components to provide an extended service life (Figure 5).
Complex methods were used to validate the required service life, inclusive of chloride
penetration modeling of concrete, extensive permeability testing, materials selection, use of
sealers/membranes, careful selection of paint systems, and a detailed maintenance and operations
plan, all of which was
captured in a project-specific
corrosion protection plan.
Figure 5. Major components

and prescribed service life
Future Transit. The project requirements mandated that the project include provisions for
expansion in the form of a mass transit corridor which must meet the needs of either a dual light
rail transit (LRT) system or a transit roadway without the need to strengthen the towers, tower
foundations, or superstructure. Cable anchors also needed to accommodate the future transit load,
though not all cable strands needed to be installed at the time of initial build. The concept
considered the construction of new steel framing to connect the two interior edge girders of the
dual-span cable stayed bridge, add new floor beams, stringers, and a deck system to support the
new transit roadway.

Ship Collision. Ship impact risk mitigation was partly achieved by prescribing a span that
placed the towers well back from the navigable channel and included a fender wall on the New
Jersey side that barricaded the narrow waterway slip where the NJ tower is located. On the New
York side of the channel the tower is set back far from the channel but could potentially be
impacted in an extraordinary occurrence. Three specific risk vessels were considered: 1) 100,000
DWT tanker ship, 2) 50,000 DWT ship, and 3) a Jumbo Tank.
Figure 6. Goethals Stay bridge showing tower setback
Major Stakeholders and problems addressed
1. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) – The owner and lead
agency of the project and bridge infrastructure, providing functionality, design, and
reliability guidelines. The stakeholder with the overall responsibility in financial
and operational success of the endeavor.
2. NYNJ Link Partnership – The private partner tasked to design, build, finance and
maintain the infrastructure project. The stakeholder responsible for delivering and
maintaining the physical asset for the next 40 years. The agency responsible for
contributing 10% equity and solving issues related to design, logistics, means and
methods of construction, and performance.
3. Macquarie Infrastructure and Real Assets (MIRA) – A private partner who’s
responsible for supplying the remaining funds. The majority stakeholder in the
NYNJ Link Partnership consortium with 90% stake.
4. Kiewit Development Company (KDC) – A minority stakeholder holding 10% stake
in the NYNJ Link Partnership consortium. This group is also responsible for
supporting Kiewit’s design and construction activities.
5. Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) - A division of the U.S. Department
of Transportation that specializes in highway transportation primarily charged with
the Federal-aid Highway Program and the Federal Lands Highway Program. The
FHWA was involved in the unbiased risk-based review of the cost estimate to verify
its accuracy and reasonableness as mandated by The Moving Ahead for Progress in
the 21st Century Act (MAP-21).
6. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) – The government agency
responsible for listing the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) draft and final
document to the Federal Register. The agency responsible under Section 309 of the
Clean Air Act to review the environmental impact statements (EIS) and to comment
on the adequacy and the acceptability of the environmental impacts of the proposed
action.
7. New Jersey Economic Development Authority – The issuer of $457 million tax-
exempt private activity bonds (PABs) on behalf of NYNJ Link Partnership.

8. Kiewit Infrastructure Co. – The non-residential construction company that owned
70% of the construction project.
9. Weeks Marine Inc. – A New Jersey-based, maritime construction company that
owned 15% of the construction project.
10. Massman Construction Co. – A Kansas-based, civil and marine construction
company owned 15% of the construction project.
11. HNTB Corporation – An employee-owned American infrastructure design firm
that was responsible for providing professional and technical advisory services.
12. URS Corporation – An AECOM company engaged in engineering, design, and
construction responsible for providing professional program management support
services.
13. Prologis Development Services Incorporated – The operator of Port Reading Bank
where PANYNJ bought 1,017 wetland mitigation credits due to the construction
impacts on wetlands in both New York and New Jersey.
14. USDOT/Credit Council – The group primarily responsible for the Department’s
credit policies and overseeing the credit programs, such as the Transportation
Infrastructure Finance Innovation Act (TIFIA).
15. U.S. Coast Guard – The federal sponsor of the project responsible to make sure that
the project complied with the NEPA.
16. Local Authorities – Including the States of New York and New Jersey, the cities of
New York and Elizabeth, and the borough of Staten Island.
The FHWA Project Process
The FHWA mandates that for major highway transportation projects of US$500 million or
higher requires review and approval from FHWA HQ while for projects US$100 million to
US$500 million, approval is required but review is discretionary.
The Goethals Toll Bridge Project being a P3 project was required to be assessed for
appropriateness, legislative authority, allocation of risks with respect to a P3 project delivery
method. An assessment on whether the project was more suitable to traditional delivery methods
was also done.
In terms of planning, Figure 7 shows the processes that the project went through to comply
with the requirement of FHWA.
Figure 7. FHWA basic major project process.

Project Performance Indicators
Historical data of traffic volumes and E-ZPass for tunnels and bridges was extracted from
the official PANYNJ website (Appendix C). The data (January 2011-February 2021) is broken
down in terms of automobiles, trucks, and buses. The Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) is
calculated using a 365-day year (Figure 8) using linear regression on a 40-year forecast.
Figure 8. PANYNJ Traffic Volume for Goethals Bridge
According to the Minnesota DOT Guidance(12), benefit-related data such as Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT) and Vehicles Hours Traveled (VHT), as well as cost-related data should be
included in the engineering analysis of the project. However, VHT is often generated using travel
demand models or traffic operations models which are beyond the scope of this study. A very
simplistic approach in obtaining the VHT suggested in the Minnesota DOT Guidance is by
multiplying the AADT by the estimated time needed to travel the corridor. The PANYNJ website
does not list any historical data on travel time for both the old and new bridge. The website only
shows crossing times at any given time.
VMT should also be forecasted using the usual range of engineering tools and methods,
often similar to those used to estimate travel time savings. AADT can also be converted to VMT
by multiplying the AADT by the estimated distance traveled in the corridor which in this case, and
for simplicity, shall be assumed to be not much different considering the new bridge was built
parallel to the new bridge. While the new bridge is longer than the old bridge, the road alignment
before each approach is essentially the same highway.
In terms of the Car Crash Incidents, according to the PANYNJ press release(13) in February
2020, crashes at the bridge overall have declined by 57 percent due to the wider lanes and shoulders
of the new bridge as well as due to the new cashless tolling system.
3 – Financial and Economic Analysis
The financial highlight of the Goethals Toll Bridge Project follows:
NYNJ Link Partnership
Equity : US$106.8 million
TIFIA direct loan : US$473.7 million
Private activity bonds : US$453.3 million
Financing Cost : US$224 million
PANYNJ
Share in cost : US$363 million
Yearly payment : US$56.5 million
Contract duration : 40 years
No. of jobs : 2,250
Region-wide Econ. Benefit : US$872 million
Prior to the project implementation, the PANYNJ was collecting US$131.8 million/year in
tolls on the 4-lane bridge. The yearly operating costs were determined to be around US$24.7
million.
DBFM Model
The PANYNJ decided to pursue a P3 delivery method because their borrowing capacity
had been exhausted. A private partner that could finance or raise financing and be paid through an
Availability Payment set-up was needed.
According to Dochia and Parker (2009)(11), an availability payment can be defined as “a
payment for performance made irrespective of demand”. This is ideal when a public agency
wishes to retain full control of setting rates for the use of the infrastructure, when service quality
is an important goal, or when the public agency wants to cap its obligations and windfalls. This
plan has a ‘demand risk’ to the public agency but reduces the ‘risk premium’ in the private cost-
of-capital. The public agency will make payments to the private partner over a long period of time,
on the condition that the terms of the contract are met. This conditionality of payment also creates
an incentive for the private partner to provide efficiency gains in the design, construction, and
maintenance of the project.
Benefit-Cost Analysis – Agency and Private Partner
A tabulation of the results of the financial analysis from the point of view of the private
partner is shown below (Figure 9). For the P3 model to be sustainable for the Goethals Toll Bridge
Project, and for any other P3 project for that matter, the numbers should also make sense from the
point of view of the private partner. In reconstructing the financial model for this project, the
primary source of data was the PANYNJ Project Authorization. In the absence of certain actual
data, statistical and/or historical data were used such as the average tax-exempt Private Activity
Bond interest rate with redemption terms of 10 years. With regards to the TIFIA loan period, a 35-
year term was assumed. The private partner is also allowed to charge interests of around 5.18%
per annum for the financed amount.

In order to come up with the financial decision criteria, i.e., NPV and IRR, yearly costs
were determined and calculated. The present values of the yearly net revenue were then computed
(Appendix A).
NYNJ Link Partnership Amount
Equity/Initial Investment $106.8 million
Yearly Loan Repayment $27.1 million for 25 years
Yearly Bond Repayment $61.6 million for 10 years
Yearly Operations $25.2 million with 2%

/Maintenance Cost escalation per year
Yearly Availability Payment $56.5 million with 2%

escalation per year
PANYNJ Interests Payments $83.1 million for 25 years
Payback Period 9.5 Years
NPV @ 12% Discount Rate $127 million
IRR 20%
Contract Duration 40 Years

Figure 9. Private partner financial evaluation
To complete the financial picture of the Goethals Toll Bridge P3 project, a financial model
from the point of view of the PANYNJ was likewise developed. Using the AADT values in Figure
8, monetary values for the corresponding traffic volume were calculated. To simplify the
calculation, and due to the cashless tolling system implemented recently, a uniform toll amount of
$16 was used and assumed to remain constant throughout the 40-year period.
The Payback Period, NPV and IRR for the Goethals Toll Bridge Project from the
perspective of the public agency is tabulated below (Figure 10). The complete calculation is
attached in Appendix B.
PANYNJ Amount
Equity/Initial Investment $363 million
Payback Period 3.1 Years
NPV @ 12% Discount Rate $1.3 billion
IRR 35%
Contract Duration 40 Years

Figure 10. Public agency financial evaluation
Risk Assessment and Register
Pauline Hovy (2015) writing for the International Institute of Sustainable Development
(IISD) entitled Risk Allocation in Public-Private Partnerships: Maximizing value for Money, risks
in relation to P3(10) discusses 7 important points underlying the P3 model in infrastructure projects
as follows:
1. Risk allocation is a key feature of P3 such that the public agencies can transfer risks to
the private partner in an optimal manner which produces higher value for money
(VFM) for both parties.
2. Risks should be allocated to the party best able to manage them at the lowest cost such
that the party that manages the risk also bears its financial cost, as well as its gains
when properly mitigated.
3. Risk allocation should be about managing not only occurrence, but also impact. This
means asking the questions (1) which party is better able to control the occurrence of
the risk and (2) which party is better positioned to manage the outcome of the risk, or
control its ultimate cost?
4. Partial risk allocation may create greater incentives for the private party. Comparable
to health insurance companies which typically require users to bear a small portion of
the risk (the deductible), while insuring them against the large financial losses
incentivizes them to take preventative action against the risk materializing.
5. Risk allocation should minimize transaction costs by making parties strive to find risk
management solutions that will minimize monitoring, negotiation, and management
costs. The simpler the mechanism, the less costly it will be to manage the system and
the greater the opportunity to maximize VFM.
6. Risk transfer should be informed by market conditions through 1) a thorough
understanding of the party’s structure and organization, and 2) avoiding transfer of
“extraordinary risks” that are not acceptable to the regular markets.
7. Flexibility and “rules of the game” will help deal with changes in risks by devising
general guidelines for dealing with unexpected or new risks.
The FHWA and PANYNJ CER teams used the Uncertainty Quadrant shown in Figure 8 to
categorize risks. Followed by an identification of whether such risks are threats or opportunities
from a cost and schedule point of view.
Figure 8. Uncertainty Quadrant

Succeeding tables 1 to 4 shows the various threats and opportunities for the Goethals Toll Bridge P3 Project.
Cost Risk Register

Event Risk Minimum Most Likely
Phase Name Description of Risk Event Probability Cost Cost Maximum Cost
Accounts for additional scope due to further developed design. Ranges
Developer Design Growth from 1% to 3% with most likely of 2% of construction costs. 50% $5.8M $11.6M $17.5M
Accounts for cost of less significant risk identified during the review.
These costs may be related to bulkhead rehabilitation, flagging cost,
Project separation of sidewalk and roadway drainage, additional hazardous
Developer Contingency material investigation, and owner changes. 75% $2M $5M $8M
Accounts for recently implemented policy that requires incorporation
of fencing with higher height. Recent estimates are $7 million for
galvanize or $28 million for stainless steel for four runs of fencing. Unit
T prices for fencing on George Washington Bridge were referenced.
H Protective Additional cost related to bridge design to accommodate fencing is
R Developer Fencing negligible. 95% $5M $7M $10M
E Travis Bridge Additional cost related to design development and coordination with
A Developer Overpass Conrail. Cost of heavy steel may be the largest driver of uncertainty. 90% $5M $6.5M $8M
T Utility Accounts for relocation of residential utilities, discovery of unknown
S Developer Contingency utilities, and issues with TRANSCO 50% $0.25M $0.5M $1M
Accounts for delay caused to Developer for required parcels not being
ROW available related to negotiations and relocations issues. Cost impacts
Compensation include construction disruption such as multiple mobilizations and out
PANYNJ Events of sequence construction. 15% $1M $3M $5M
ROW Additional costs associated with delays, contractual, and condemnation
PANYNJ Contingency issues related to ROW. 100% $15M $25M $25M
Utility
Compensation Accounts for PANYNJ contingency for compensation events related to
PANYNJ Events utilities, i.e. breach of master utility agreement by utility. 25% 0 $5M $25M
O
P
P
O Potential savings due to innovation and refined design from developer
R proposals. For example, design loads may be reduced with additional
T investigations to provide better understanding of geotechnical issues
U P3 and required methods (drill shafts versus piles). Illustrative estimate
N Procurement assumes more robust design due to wetland mitigation and lateral
I Developer spread so savings may be realized in foundations, i.e. number of shafts,
T Innovation/ pile caps. These savings may range from 25-50% of foundation cost for
Y Developer Refinement approach spans. 100% $25M $50M $70M
Schedule Risk Register
Event Risk Minimum Most Likely Maximum

Phase Name Description of Risk Event Probability Duration (mo.) Duration (mo.) Duration (mo.)
T ROW
H Compensation Accounts for delay caused to Developer for required parcels not being
R Developer Events available related to negotiations and relocations issues. 15% 12 24 36
E
A Accounts for cumulative delay associated with coordination for
T railroads, TIFIA Loan, FHWA requirements, and third-party
S Developer Schedule Delay review/approval, permitting. 60% 1 2 6
O
P
P
O
R
T
U
N P3
I Procurement
T Early Accounts for potential of earlier completion of work due to
Y Developer Completion construction sequencing selected by developer. 50% 1 3 3
After the identification of these threats and opportunities, they were quantified and then a
risk sensitivity analysis was done using the Monte-Carlo Simulation (beyond the scope of this
study).
4 – Conclusion
In conclusion, the P3 model is a contract and not full privatization, which creates a safe
environment for a public to private risk transfer. A unique alternative infrastructure financing
model, that attracts investors with credit enhancements, while the subsidiary company protects the
private party’s risk. As discussed, if the subsidiary company fails, then another entity can step in
and assume the debt and operation responsibilities. This creates a safety net for the public entity,
while also encouraging the subsidiary and private companies to be encouraged to provide the best
services to keep the contract.
Comparable to a design-build project delivery method, the P3 model utilized in the
implementation of the Goethals Toll Bridge Project illustrated the advantage of involving the
contractor at the early stages of design and planning of the project. The adversarial relationship
that commonly happens on a traditional design-bid-build model is replaced by an efficient
collaboration between designers and contractors where all parties gain in the mitigation of all risks
involved.
After reviewing the historical, economic, financial, and political aspects of this project, the
group has determined that for Goethals’ Bridge the P3 model has been effective in this project.
The financials for both the NYNJ Link Partnership and the Port Authority of New York and New
Jersey shows positive numbers. The group believes that many other infrastructure projects can
yield similarly successful results under the P3 model.

5 – Appendix
Appendix A. Financial Analysis – NYNJ Link Partnership
Appendix B. Financial Analysis – PANYNJ
Appendix C. Average Annual Daily Traffic

APPENDIX A. NYNJ Link
Availability PANYNJ Loan Operations/ Yearly

Year Equity Payment Payments 5.18% Maintenance Cost TIFIA Loan Payment PAB Repayment Net Revenue
2018 0 $ (106,800,000) $ (106,800,000)
2019 1 $ 56,500,000 $ 83,145,799 $ (40,814,280) $ (27,112,728) $ (61,588,945) $ 10,129,846 $ (96,670,154)
2020 2 $ 57,630,000 $ 83,145,799 $ (41,630,566) $ (27,112,728) $ (61,588,945) $ 10,443,560 $ (86,226,594)
2021 3 $ 58,782,600 $ 83,145,799 $ (42,463,177) $ (27,112,728) $ (61,588,945) $ 10,763,549 $ (75,463,045)
2022 4 $ 59,958,252 $ 83,145,799 $ (43,312,440) $ (27,112,728) $ (61,588,945) $ 11,089,938 $ (64,373,107)
2023 5 $ 61,157,417 $ 83,145,799 $ (44,178,689) $ (27,112,728) $ (61,588,945) $ 11,422,854 $ (52,950,253)
2024 6 $ 62,380,565 $ 83,145,799 $ (45,062,263) $ (27,112,728) $ (61,588,945) $ 11,762,428 $ (41,187,825)
2025 7 $ 63,628,177 $ 83,145,799 $ (45,963,508) $ (27,112,728) $ (61,588,945) $ 12,108,794 $ (29,079,030)
2026 8 $ 64,900,740 $ 83,145,799 $ (46,882,778) $ (27,112,728) $ (61,588,945) $ 12,462,088 $ (16,616,943)
2027 9 $ 66,198,755 $ 83,145,799 $ (47,820,434) $ (27,112,728) $ (61,588,945) $ 12,822,447 $ (3,794,496)
2028 10 $ 67,522,730 $ 83,145,799 $ (48,776,843) $ (27,112,728) $ (61,588,945) $ 13,190,013 $ 9,395,518 Payback Period
2029 11 $ 68,873,185 $ 83,145,799 $ (49,752,380) $ (27,112,728) $ 75,153,876
2030 12 $ 70,250,648 $ 83,145,799 $ (50,747,427) $ (27,112,728) $ 75,536,292
2031 13 $ 71,655,661 $ 83,145,799 $ (51,762,376) $ (27,112,728) $ 75,926,357
2032 14 $ 73,088,775 $ 83,145,799 $ (52,797,623) $ (27,112,728) $ 76,324,222 TIFIA Loan Yearly Payment
2033 15 $ 74,550,550 $ 83,145,799 $ (53,853,576) $ (27,112,728) $ 76,730,045
2034 16 $ 76,041,561 $ 83,145,799 $ (54,930,647) $ (27,112,728) $ 77,143,985 PV $ 473,700,000.00
2035 17 $ 77,562,392 $ 83,145,799 $ (56,029,260) $ (27,112,728) $ 77,566,203 i annual 2.97%
2036 18 $ 79,113,640 $ 83,145,799 $ (57,149,845) $ (27,112,728) $ 77,996,866 Years 25
2037 19 $ 80,695,913 $ 83,145,799 $ (58,292,842) $ (27,112,728) $ 78,436,142 PMT ($27,112,728)
2038 20 $ 82,309,831 $ 83,145,799 $ (59,458,699) $ (27,112,728) $ 78,884,203
2039 21 $ 83,956,028 $ 83,145,799 $ (60,647,873) $ (27,112,728) $ 79,341,226
2040 22 $ 85,635,148 $ 83,145,799 $ (61,860,831) $ (27,112,728) $ 79,807,389 PAB Interest Payment
2041 23 $ 87,347,851 $ 83,145,799 $ (63,098,047) $ (27,112,728) $ 80,282,875
2042 24 $ 89,094,808 $ 83,145,799 $ (64,360,008) $ (27,112,728) $ 80,767,871 PV $453,300,000
2043 25 $ 90,876,705 $ 83,145,799 $ (65,647,208) $ (27,112,728) $ 81,262,567 i annual 6.00%
2044 26 $ 92,694,239 $ (66,960,152) $ (27,112,728) $ (1,378,642) Years 10
2045 27 $ 94,548,123 $ (68,299,355) $ (27,112,728) $ (863,960) PMT ($61,588,945)
2046 28 $ 96,439,086 $ (69,665,343) $ (27,112,728) $ (338,985)
2047 29 $ 98,367,868 $ (71,058,649) $ (27,112,728) $ 196,490
2048 30 $ 100,335,225 $ (72,479,822) $ (27,112,728) $ 742,675 PANYNJ Interest Payment
2049 31 $ 102,341,930 $ (73,929,419) $ (27,112,728) $ 1,299,783
2050 32 $ 104,388,768 $ (75,408,007) $ (27,112,728) $ 1,868,033 PV $1,151,000,000 (Loans, Bonds, Interests)
2051 33 $ 106,476,543 $ (76,916,167) $ (27,112,728) $ 2,447,648 i annual 5.18%
2052 34 $ 108,606,074 $ (78,454,491) $ (27,112,728) $ 3,038,856 Years 25
2053 35 $ 110,778,196 $ (80,023,581) $ (27,112,728) $ 3,641,887 PMT ($83,145,799)
2054 36 $ 112,993,760 $ (81,624,052) $ (27,112,728) $ 4,256,980
2055 37 $ 115,253,635 $ (83,256,533) $ (27,112,728) $ 4,884,374
2056 38 $ 117,558,708 $ (84,921,664) $ (27,112,728) $ 5,524,316 Payback Period 9.5 Years
2057 39 $ 119,909,882 $ (86,620,097) $ (27,112,728) $ 6,177,057 NPV @ 12% $ 126,956,597
2058 40 $ 122,308,079 $ (88,352,499) $ (27,112,728) $ 6,842,852 IRR 20%
APPENDIX B. PANYNJ
Payments to Yearly
Year Equity AADT Yearly Revenue Private Partner Net Revenue
2018 0 $ (363,000,000) $ (363,000,000)
2019 1 48,398.26 $ 282,645,856 $ (139,645,799) $ 143,000,057 $ (219,999,943)
2020 2 39,642.61 $ 231,512,864 $ (140,775,799) $ 90,737,065 $ (129,262,878)
2021 3 45,777.24 $ 267,339,085 $ (141,928,399) $ 125,410,686 $ (3,852,192)
2022 4 46,580.83 $ 272,032,074 $ (143,104,051) $ 128,928,023 $ 125,075,830 Payback Period
2023 5 47,384.43 $ 276,725,062 $ (144,303,216) $ 132,421,846
2024 6 48,188.02 $ 281,418,051 $ (145,526,364) $ 135,891,687
2025 7 48,991.62 $ 286,111,040 $ (146,773,976) $ 139,337,064
2026 8 49,795.21 $ 290,804,029 $ (148,046,539) $ 142,757,490
2027 9 50,598.80 $ 295,497,018 $ (149,344,554) $ 146,152,464
2028 10 51,402.40 $ 300,190,006 $ (150,668,529) $ 149,521,477
2029 11 52,205.99 $ 304,882,995 $ (152,018,984) $ 152,864,011
2030 12 53,009.59 $ 309,575,984 $ (153,396,447) $ 156,179,537
2031 13 53,813.18 $ 314,268,973 $ (154,801,460) $ 159,467,512
2032 14 54,616.77 $ 318,961,962 $ (156,234,574) $ 162,727,388
2033 15 55,420.37 $ 323,654,950 $ (157,696,349) $ 165,958,601
2034 16 56,223.96 $ 328,347,939 $ (159,187,360) $ 169,160,579
2035 17 57,027.56 $ 333,040,928 $ (160,708,191) $ 172,332,737
2036 18 57,831.15 $ 337,733,917 $ (162,259,439) $ 175,474,478
2037 19 58,634.74 $ 342,426,906 $ (163,841,712) $ 178,585,194
2038 20 59,438.34 $ 347,119,894 $ (165,455,630) $ 181,664,264
2039 21 60,241.93 $ 351,812,883 $ (167,101,827) $ 184,711,056
2040 22 61,045.53 $ 356,505,872 $ (168,780,947) $ 187,724,925
2041 23 61,849.12 $ 361,198,861 $ (170,493,650) $ 190,705,210
2042 24 62,652.71 $ 365,891,850 $ (172,240,607) $ 193,651,242
2043 25 63,456.31 $ 370,584,838 $ (174,022,504) $ 196,562,335
2044 26 64,259.90 $ 375,277,827 $ (92,694,239) $ 282,583,589
2045 27 65,063.50 $ 379,970,816 $ (94,548,123) $ 285,422,693
2046 28 65,867.09 $ 384,663,805 $ (96,439,086) $ 288,224,719
2047 29 66,670.68 $ 389,356,794 $ (98,367,868) $ 290,988,926
2048 30 67,474.28 $ 394,049,782 $ (100,335,225) $ 293,714,557
2049 31 68,277.87 $ 398,742,771 $ (102,341,930) $ 296,400,842
2050 32 69,081.47 $ 403,435,760 $ (104,388,768) $ 299,046,992
2051 33 69,885.06 $ 408,128,749 $ (106,476,543) $ 301,652,205
2052 34 70,688.65 $ 412,821,738 $ (108,606,074) $ 304,215,663
2053 35 71,492.25 $ 417,514,726 $ (110,778,196) $ 306,736,531
2054 36 72,295.84 $ 422,207,715 $ (112,993,760) $ 309,213,955
2055 37 73,099.44 $ 426,900,704 $ (115,253,635) $ 311,647,069
2056 38 73,903.03 $ 431,593,693 $ (117,558,708) $ 314,034,985 Payback Period 3.1 Years
2057 39 74,706.62 $ 436,286,682 $ (119,909,882) $ 316,376,800 NPV @ 12% $ 1,335,765,398
2058 40 75,510.22 $ 440,979,670 $ (122,308,079) $ 318,671,591 IRR 35%
2011 Monthly Traffic and Percent of E-ZPass Usage
(Updated Jun/2018)
TUNNELS AND BRIDGES
(Eastbound Traffic) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
All Crossings
Automobiles 7,943,315 7,786,178 9,115,286 9,154,369 9,613,655 9,571,519 9,917,576 9,347,570 8,985,654 9,023,450 8,844,310 9,125,590 108,428,472
Buses 235,698 225,739 268,014 264,736 274,926 275,851 277,006 275,933 259,279 257,228 247,247 248,627 3,110,284
Trucks 570,143 553,174 664,922 627,228 656,203 683,304 624,443 685,244 657,059 640,288 630,154 618,867 7,611,029
Total Vehicles 8,749,156 8,565,091 10,048,222 10,046,333 10,544,784 10,530,674 10,819,025 10,308,747 9,901,992 9,920,966 9,721,711 9,993,084 119,149,785
E-ZPass Usage (%) 76.7% 76.6% 76.9% 76.2% 76.1% 75.9% 74.3% 75.6% 77.3% 79.6% 79.7% 79.2% 77.0%
George Washington Bridge
Automobiles 3,370,936 3,272,225 3,843,661 3,895,462 4,109,595 4,087,871 4,286,338 4,029,977 3,831,941 3,794,633 3,755,512 3,838,062 46,116,213
Buses 36,807 36,337 42,201 41,868 44,575 45,933 48,498 44,918 39,980 37,018 35,205 33,718 487,058
Trucks 287,941 278,812 335,585 318,295 329,276 340,914 311,261 340,903 323,887 313,408 310,457 303,397 3,794,136
Total Vehicles 3,695,684 3,587,374 4,221,447 4,255,625 4,483,446 4,474,718 4,646,097 4,415,798 4,195,808 4,145,059 4,101,174 4,175,177 50,397,407
E-ZPass Usage (%) 74.8% 74.6% 74.9% 74.3% 74.3% 74.0% 72.3% 73.9% 75.9% 78.3% 78.5% 78.0% 75.3%
Lincoln Tunnel
Automobiles 1,244,648 1,222,260 1,435,307 1,436,851 1,469,370 1,450,951 1,446,782 1,386,454 1,368,670 1,414,449 1,360,566 1,407,683 16,643,991
Buses 165,583 156,704 185,900 183,567 187,682 186,651 184,111 186,798 179,702 181,822 176,902 180,754 2,156,176
Trucks 77,582 74,853 89,891 84,346 87,624 91,655 82,753 90,396 89,835 89,908 86,782 83,642 1,029,267
Total Vehicles 1,487,813 1,453,817 1,711,098 1,704,764 1,744,676 1,729,257 1,713,646 1,663,648 1,638,207 1,686,179 1,624,250 1,672,079 19,829,434
E-ZPass Usage (%) 79.0% 79.1% 79.1% 78.4% 78.3% 78.0% 76.3% 77.6% 79.2% 81.4% 81.6% 80.8% 79.0%
Holland Tunnel
Automobiles 1,192,262 1,183,356 1,383,611 1,354,127 1,404,464 1,392,537 1,415,311 1,333,653 1,292,859 1,337,877 1,308,279 1,369,636 15,967,972
Buses 18,936 18,580 22,661 22,175 24,059 23,971 25,336 25,690 23,379 22,350 20,367 20,700 268,204
Trucks 25,252 24,834 29,435 27,252 28,621 30,737 29,310 31,924 30,953 30,947 31,634 32,625 353,524
Total Vehicles 1,236,450 1,226,770 1,435,707 1,403,554 1,457,144 1,447,245 1,469,957 1,391,267 1,347,191 1,391,174 1,360,280 1,422,961 16,589,700
E-ZPass Usage (%) 73.8% 73.8% 74.1% 73.3% 73.1% 73.0% 71.0% 72.4% 74.3% 77.0% 77.0% 76.4% 74.1%
Goethals Bridge
Automobiles 908,233 896,210 1,044,992 1,053,866 1,128,772 1,121,666 1,206,196 1,125,589 1,076,713 1,067,176 1,053,908 1,083,376 12,766,697
Buses 8,722 8,511 10,411 10,157 10,978 11,390 11,227 11,495 9,740 9,692 8,948 8,265 119,536
Trucks 96,606 95,421 113,007 102,658 109,416 116,508 107,846 118,359 111,711 109,635 106,702 104,347 1,292,216
Total Vehicles 1,013,561 1,000,142 1,168,410 1,166,681 1,249,166 1,249,564 1,325,269 1,255,443 1,198,164 1,186,503 1,169,558 1,195,988 14,178,449
E-ZPass Usage (%) 76.8% 76.9% 77.3% 76.3% 76.3% 75.6% 74.2% 75.5% 76.9% 78.7% 78.7% 78.2% 76.7%
Outerbridge Crossing
Automobiles 989,714 979,631 1,134,072 1,141,720 1,216,294 1,233,632 1,284,348 1,201,291 1,147,633 1,142,344 1,101,917 1,155,746 13,728,342
Buses 3,907 3,866 4,745 4,782 5,212 5,405 5,522 4,820 4,206 4,152 3,705 3,357 53,679
Trucks 59,744 56,072 70,064 69,137 75,722 76,623 67,979 75,235 73,245 71,501 70,274 70,752 836,348
Total Vehicles 1,053,365 1,039,569 1,208,881 1,215,639 1,297,228 1,315,660 1,357,849 1,281,346 1,225,084 1,217,997 1,175,896 1,229,855 14,618,369
E-ZPass Usage (%) 81.8% 81.9% 82.1% 81.7% 81.8% 81.7% 80.8% 81.7% 82.5% 83.9% 84.0% 83.9% 82.3%
Bayonne Bridge
Automobiles 237,522 232,496 273,643 272,343 285,160 284,862 278,601 270,606 267,838 266,971 264,128 271,087 3,205,257
Buses 1,743 1,741 2,096 2,187 2,420 2,501 2,312 2,212 2,272 2,194 2,120 1,833 25,631
Trucks 23,018 23,182 26,940 25,540 25,544 26,867 25,294 28,427 27,428 24,889 24,305 24,104 305,538
Total Vehicles 262,283 257,419 302,679 300,070 313,124 314,230 306,207 301,245 297,538 294,054 290,553 297,024 3,536,426
E-ZPass Usage (%) 81.6% 81.4% 81.8% 80.9% 80.8% 80.8% 79.6% 80.7% 82.2% 84.3% 84.5% 84.2% 81.9%
(Updated Mar/2018)
TUNNELS AND BRIDGES
All Crossings
Automobiles 8,213,612 8,035,177 8,922,026 8,926,153 9,309,400 9,279,150 9,320,529 9,545,488 8,803,800 8,448,028 8,148,620 8,943,461 105,895,444
Buses 230,837 225,141 252,206 248,262 261,968 252,521 257,661 263,985 234,841 237,126 248,481 243,866 2,956,895
Trucks 582,044 578,229 639,269 616,260 658,221 641,584 616,630 649,974 581,684 596,445 644,360 595,235 7,399,935
Total Vehicles 9,026,493 8,838,547 9,813,501 9,790,675 10,229,589 10,173,255 10,194,820 10,459,447 9,620,325 9,281,599 9,041,461 9,782,562 116,252,274
E-ZPass Usage (%) 80.7% 80.6% 80.4% 79.8% 80.0% 79.2% 78.5% 79.1% 80.1% 81.2% 80.9% 80.4% 80.0%
Automobiles 3,466,198 3,403,296 3,776,733 3,800,033 3,989,147 3,950,022 3,938,602 4,064,364 3,745,627 3,613,061 3,530,822 3,764,422 45,042,327
Buses 31,139 32,270 36,306 35,555 38,900 38,686 40,140 39,204 34,274 35,049 34,840 33,738 430,101
Trucks 284,451 281,044 311,461 298,879 320,855 309,493 297,337 318,634 290,605 301,868 326,390 297,476 3,638,493
Total Vehicles 3,781,788 3,716,610 4,124,500 4,134,467 4,348,902 4,298,201 4,276,079 4,422,202 4,070,506 3,949,978 3,892,052 4,095,636 49,110,921
E-ZPass Usage (%) 79.5% 79.1% 79.0% 78.4% 78.7% 77.8% 76.8% 77.6% 78.7% 80.0% 79.7% 79.3% 78.7%
Lincoln Tunnel
Automobiles 1,264,594 1,225,113 1,368,212 1,371,508 1,379,275 1,363,012 1,349,939 1,367,403 1,314,035 1,303,701 1,255,820 1,346,790 15,909,402
Buses 167,814 162,144 180,432 177,057 183,978 176,106 177,959 184,836 167,684 168,647 180,166 178,807 2,105,630
Trucks 78,301 77,543 85,806 85,199 89,684 85,064 81,358 89,242 80,259 84,083 84,196 79,268 1,000,003
Total Vehicles 1,510,709 1,464,800 1,634,450 1,633,764 1,652,937 1,624,182 1,609,256 1,641,481 1,561,978 1,556,431 1,520,182 1,604,865 19,015,035
E-ZPass Usage (%) 82.7% 82.6% 82.3% 81.6% 81.9% 81.1% 80.2% 80.5% 81.7% 82.6% 82.4% 81.7% 81.8%
Holland Tunnel
Automobiles 1,238,578 1,210,725 1,354,370 1,313,721 1,383,353 1,369,231 1,364,617 1,384,751 1,296,412 1,219,479 1,003,234 1,350,480 15,488,951
Buses 18,492 17,398 19,790 20,079 21,941 20,423 21,750 22,344 18,719 18,897 16,386 17,688 233,907
Trucks 30,691 30,402 34,488 31,621 35,459 34,915 34,773 36,982 33,457 33,627 26,477 31,783 394,675
Total Vehicles 1,287,761 1,258,525 1,408,648 1,365,421 1,440,753 1,424,569 1,421,140 1,444,077 1,348,588 1,272,003 1,046,097 1,399,951 16,117,533
E-ZPass Usage (%) 78.1% 78.0% 77.8% 77.1% 77.4% 76.5% 75.4% 75.9% 77.0% 78.3% 78.1% 77.4% 77.2%
Goethals Bridge
Automobiles 953,229 933,634 1,030,675 1,051,085 1,096,654 1,108,960 1,160,643 1,179,889 1,053,576 991,045 1,034,847 1,063,539 12,657,776
Buses 8,407 8,401 9,867 9,762 10,566 10,675 10,861 11,234 8,753 9,078 10,640 8,586 116,830
Trucks 100,270 97,751 108,283 105,266 109,652 111,144 106,459 104,994 90,962 91,510 108,428 94,295 1,229,014
Total Vehicles 1,061,906 1,039,786 1,148,825 1,166,113 1,216,872 1,230,779 1,277,963 1,296,117 1,153,291 1,091,633 1,153,915 1,166,420 14,003,620
E-ZPass Usage (%) 80.0% 80.1% 79.8% 79.3% 79.4% 78.5% 78.1% 78.7% 79.8% 80.8% 80.1% 79.5% 79.5%
Automobiles 1,039,372 1,015,951 1,120,401 1,124,260 1,181,137 1,211,568 1,232,593 1,263,507 1,132,936 1,063,493 1,068,805 1,154,147 13,608,170
Buses 3,201 3,176 3,782 3,853 4,230 4,493 4,818 4,196 3,609 3,598 3,828 3,315 46,099
Trucks 64,006 67,758 73,344 69,773 76,310 75,510 73,276 75,542 65,851 64,749 75,775 70,500 852,394
Total Vehicles 1,106,579 1,086,885 1,197,527 1,197,886 1,261,677 1,291,571 1,310,687 1,343,245 1,202,396 1,131,840 1,148,408 1,227,962 14,506,663
E-ZPass Usage (%) 84.8% 84.8% 84.9% 84.4% 84.7% 84.4% 84.1% 84.7% 85.2% 85.7% 84.9% 85.0% 84.8%
Bayonne Bridge
Automobiles 251,641 246,458 271,635 265,546 279,834 276,357 274,135 285,574 261,214 257,249 255,092 264,083 3,188,818
Buses 1,784 1,752 2,029 1,956 2,353 2,138 2,133 2,171 1,802 1,857 2,621 1,732 24,328
Trucks 24,325 23,731 25,887 25,522 26,261 25,458 23,427 24,580 20,550 20,608 23,094 21,913 285,356
Total Vehicles 277,750 271,941 299,551 293,024 308,448 303,953 299,695 312,325 283,566 279,714 280,807 287,728 3,498,502
E-ZPass Usage (%) 85.1% 85.3% 85.5% 84.8% 85.1% 84.6% 84.5% 85.2% 85.8% 86.8% 85.8% 85.6% 85.3%
(Updated Mar/2018)
TUNNELS AND BRIDGES
All Crossings
Automobiles 8,216,417 7,353,012 8,794,256 8,760,101 9,227,283 9,178,849 9,348,192 9,545,880 8,752,102 9,049,069 8,610,969 8,615,632 105,451,762
Buses 234,474 210,454 243,226 251,224 260,353 247,917 263,429 262,242 237,511 261,268 235,548 240,576 2,948,222
Trucks 611,738 544,007 595,870 626,963 650,444 607,211 633,631 631,733 584,812 651,046 573,618 576,706 7,287,779
Total Vehicles 9,062,629 8,107,473 9,633,352 9,638,288 10,138,080 10,033,977 10,245,252 10,439,855 9,574,425 9,961,383 9,420,135 9,432,914 115,687,763
E-ZPass Usage (%) 82.2% 82.1% 81.3% 81.8% 81.4% 80.6% 80.1% 80.2% 81.7% 82.6% 82.0% 81.6% 81.4%
Automobiles 3,492,301 3,123,248 3,733,528 3,766,341 3,981,261 3,953,938 4,106,819 4,152,567 3,776,525 3,911,303 3,703,555 3,662,840 45,364,226
Buses 32,511 29,704 34,418 35,943 37,779 37,751 40,797 39,525 34,975 38,981 34,300 32,715 429,399
Trucks 305,464 273,128 297,909 309,843 324,597 300,167 317,906 308,715 287,352 320,486 278,530 284,522 3,608,619
Total Vehicles 3,830,276 3,426,080 4,065,855 4,112,127 4,343,637 4,291,856 4,465,522 4,500,807 4,098,852 4,270,770 4,016,385 3,980,077 49,402,244
E-ZPass Usage (%) 81.0% 80.7% 79.8% 80.4% 80.0% 79.2% 78.6% 78.6% 80.3% 81.4% 80.6% 80.4% 80.0%
Lincoln Tunnel
Automobiles 1,219,523 1,097,250 1,326,952 1,296,866 1,356,218 1,335,536 1,306,647 1,378,856 1,303,675 1,351,104 1,301,802 1,305,674 15,580,103
Buses 172,246 153,534 176,558 181,173 186,529 175,656 185,458 186,154 171,687 188,012 171,875 178,956 2,127,838
Trucks 82,619 74,588 84,178 87,944 91,920 86,168 87,223 90,951 86,784 95,470 86,100 84,064 1,038,009
Total Vehicles 1,474,388 1,325,372 1,587,688 1,565,983 1,634,667 1,597,360 1,579,328 1,655,961 1,562,146 1,634,586 1,559,777 1,568,694 18,745,950
E-ZPass Usage (%) 84.0% 84.1% 83.2% 83.7% 83.2% 82.5% 81.9% 81.5% 83.3% 84.1% 83.7% 82.9% 83.2%
Holland Tunnel
Automobiles 1,233,012 1,111,849 1,317,115 1,299,892 1,351,918 1,331,205 1,344,131 1,348,026 1,271,663 1,338,370 1,274,789 1,288,600 15,510,570
Buses 16,540 15,234 17,856 18,944 20,402 19,084 21,010 20,668 17,613 19,337 16,593 16,289 219,570
Trucks 33,758 30,770 34,261 36,180 37,660 36,240 37,882 37,664 34,316 39,110 35,190 34,398 427,429
Total Vehicles 1,283,310 1,157,853 1,369,232 1,355,016 1,409,980 1,386,529 1,403,023 1,406,358 1,323,592 1,396,817 1,326,572 1,339,287 16,157,569
E-ZPass Usage (%) 79.2% 79.3% 78.2% 78.9% 78.3% 77.6% 77.0% 77.0% 78.6% 79.6% 78.9% 78.4% 78.4%
Goethals Bridge
Automobiles 962,190 854,167 1,034,280 1,017,343 1,076,043 1,083,832 1,189,012 1,241,481 1,124,392 1,117,146 1,021,910 1,038,184 12,759,980
Buses 8,689 7,817 9,349 9,786 9,606 9,622 10,379 10,470 8,874 9,848 8,010 8,181 110,631
Trucks 98,080 85,752 90,900 96,045 97,157 92,866 110,489 116,861 107,682 113,319 92,644 93,854 1,195,649
Total Vehicles 1,068,959 947,736 1,134,529 1,123,174 1,182,806 1,186,320 1,309,880 1,368,812 1,240,948 1,240,313 1,122,564 1,140,219 14,066,260
E-ZPass Usage (%) 81.8% 82.0% 81.0% 81.6% 80.9% 79.9% 79.9% 80.3% 81.9% 82.6% 82.0% 81.6% 81.3%
Automobiles 1,053,973 937,802 1,121,310 1,115,188 1,183,467 1,203,344 1,126,688 1,144,093 1,013,425 1,055,048 1,048,288 1,074,183 13,076,809
Buses 2,851 2,690 3,269 3,526 3,985 4,021 3,795 3,253 2,504 2,936 2,956 2,830 38,616
Trucks 68,940 60,193 68,388 75,203 76,965 71,042 57,752 53,302 46,643 59,256 60,952 61,299 759,935
Total Vehicles 1,125,764 1,000,685 1,192,967 1,193,917 1,264,417 1,278,407 1,188,235 1,200,648 1,062,572 1,117,240 1,112,196 1,138,312 13,875,360
E-ZPass Usage (%) 86.3% 86.5% 86.1% 86.4% 86.3% 85.9% 85.6% 86.0% 86.8% 87.7% 86.9% 86.7% 86.4%
Bayonne Bridge
Automobiles 255,418 228,696 261,071 264,471 278,376 270,994 274,895 280,857 262,422 276,098 260,625 246,151 3,160,074
Buses 1,637 1,475 1,776 1,852 2,052 1,783 1,990 2,172 1,858 2,154 1,814 1,605 22,168
Trucks 22,877 19,576 20,234 21,748 22,145 20,728 22,379 24,240 22,035 23,405 20,202 18,569 258,138
Total Vehicles 279,932 249,747 283,081 288,071 302,573 293,505 299,264 307,269 286,315 301,657 282,641 266,325 3,440,380
E-ZPass Usage (%) 87.0% 87.3% 87.2% 87.4% 87.1% 86.4% 86.3% 86.6% 87.2% 87.9% 86.9% 87.1% 87.0%
(Updated Mar/2018)
TUNNELS AND BRIDGES
All Crossings
Automobiles 7,581,418 6,785,435 8,524,299 8,680,283 9,269,061 9,099,134 9,264,996 9,554,892 8,766,974 8,970,784 8,578,702 8,888,799 103,964,777
Buses 225,163 205,029 240,845 249,720 259,101 254,437 266,166 262,970 247,833 265,523 234,049 247,547 2,958,383
Trucks 564,243 505,101 597,809 615,686 630,217 599,563 606,175 584,882 599,664 635,092 555,789 600,272 7,094,493
Total Vehicles 8,370,824 7,495,565 9,362,953 9,545,689 10,158,379 9,953,134 10,137,337 10,402,744 9,614,471 9,871,399 9,368,540 9,736,618 114,017,653
E-ZPass Usage (%) 83.0% 82.9% 82.3% 82.1% 81.6% 81.2% 80.8% 80.3% 82.4% 82.8% 82.3% 82.2% 81.9%
Automobiles 3,255,715 2,891,336 3,667,843 3,772,933 4,059,315 3,924,976 4,041,566 4,188,938 3,821,762 3,900,970 3,753,086 3,857,135 45,135,575
Buses 30,449 28,186 35,065 35,147 38,502 37,885 41,886 40,298 34,689 37,246 33,410 33,041 425,804
Trucks 282,924 253,385 300,536 310,050 314,436 284,772 283,532 274,569 285,184 308,543 276,542 300,437 3,474,910
Total Vehicles 3,569,088 3,172,907 4,003,444 4,118,130 4,412,253 4,247,633 4,366,984 4,503,805 4,141,635 4,246,759 4,063,038 4,190,613 49,036,289
E-ZPass Usage (%) 81.8% 81.4% 80.8% 80.6% 80.1% 79.5% 79.0% 78.6% 80.9% 81.4% 80.8% 80.9% 80.4%
Lincoln Tunnel
Automobiles 1,159,422 1,050,042 1,312,849 1,322,246 1,389,716 1,363,822 1,326,877 1,369,748 1,306,417 1,368,904 1,294,683 1,332,199 15,596,925
Buses 168,063 152,260 176,087 182,730 185,988 181,313 187,178 186,013 180,691 193,430 171,803 185,247 2,150,803
Trucks 82,023 75,157 85,649 89,825 90,594 90,193 88,994 87,456 89,193 96,094 82,058 86,001 1,043,237
Total Vehicles 1,409,508 1,277,459 1,574,585 1,594,801 1,666,298 1,635,328 1,603,049 1,643,217 1,576,301 1,658,428 1,548,544 1,603,447 18,790,965
E-ZPass Usage (%) 84.6% 84.7% 84.0% 83.8% 83.2% 82.7% 82.5% 81.6% 83.8% 84.1% 83.9% 83.5% 83.5%
Holland Tunnel
Automobiles 1,132,938 1,017,220 1,261,875 1,221,890 1,303,867 1,289,702 1,306,025 1,337,589 1,256,700 1,279,894 1,229,097 1,278,468 14,915,265
Buses 14,519 13,351 16,173 17,915 18,857 19,446 20,614 20,355 18,136 18,877 15,447 15,644 209,334
Trucks 34,605 30,971 36,328 37,050 38,252 38,558 40,187 39,121 38,934 40,419 34,451 37,123 445,999
Total Vehicles 1,182,062 1,061,542 1,314,376 1,276,855 1,360,976 1,347,706 1,366,826 1,397,065 1,313,770 1,339,190 1,278,995 1,331,235 15,570,598
E-ZPass Usage (%) 79.8% 80.0% 79.3% 79.3% 78.7% 78.4% 77.8% 77.0% 79.4% 80.1% 79.5% 79.4% 79.0%
Goethals Bridge
Automobiles 878,738 789,584 995,437 1,051,963 1,138,786 1,114,883 1,154,540 1,208,704 1,074,889 1,080,707 1,045,803 1,083,542 12,617,576
Buses 7,699 7,186 8,699 9,074 10,037 10,102 10,418 10,473 9,521 10,408 8,641 8,914 111,172
Trucks 89,229 79,953 95,669 95,572 100,432 101,973 105,861 98,970 100,095 102,307 85,352 92,313 1,147,726
Total Vehicles 975,666 876,723 1,099,805 1,156,609 1,249,255 1,226,958 1,270,819 1,318,147 1,184,505 1,193,422 1,139,796 1,184,769 13,876,474
E-ZPass Usage (%) 83.1% 83.4% 82.6% 82.3% 81.8% 81.3% 80.8% 80.4% 82.7% 83.1% 82.5% 82.3% 82.1%
Automobiles 936,982 845,583 1,057,894 1,088,412 1,165,785 1,175,398 1,205,280 1,251,075 1,108,475 1,115,310 1,063,097 1,121,397 13,134,688
Buses 3,044 2,835 3,438 3,556 4,249 4,180 4,458 4,542 3,514 4,106 3,423 3,361 44,706
Trucks 58,413 51,082 61,896 66,537 69,147 66,536 69,385 68,933 70,454 70,835 63,840 69,052 786,110
Total Vehicles 998,439 899,500 1,123,228 1,158,505 1,239,181 1,246,114 1,279,123 1,324,550 1,182,443 1,190,251 1,130,360 1,193,810 13,965,504
E-ZPass Usage (%) 87.5% 87.5% 87.3% 87.0% 86.8% 86.6% 86.4% 86.2% 87.2% 87.6% 87.2% 87.2% 87.0%
Bayonne Bridge
Automobiles 217,623 191,670 228,401 222,839 211,592 230,353 230,708 198,838 198,731 224,999 192,936 216,058 2,564,748
Buses 1,389 1,211 1,383 1,298 1,468 1,511 1,612 1,289 1,282 1,456 1,325 1,340 16,564
Trucks 17,049 14,553 17,731 16,652 17,356 17,531 18,216 15,833 15,804 16,894 13,546 15,346 196,511
Total Vehicles 236,061 207,434 247,515 240,789 230,416 249,395 250,536 215,960 215,817 243,349 207,807 232,744 2,777,823
E-ZPass Usage (%) 88.2% 87.9% 87.8% 88.0% 88.2% 87.3% 87.1% 87.7% 88.5% 88.7% 88.2% 88.1% 88.0%
(Updated Mar/2018)
TUNNELS AND BRIDGES
All Crossings
Automobiles 7,644,253 7,182,428 8,398,380 8,791,886 9,381,274 9,136,614 9,503,847 9,740,436 8,829,925 9,147,969 8,834,152 9,121,287 105,712,451
Buses 220,716 212,400 247,405 252,958 254,964 258,920 269,205 259,248 246,142 259,664 238,194 249,656 2,969,472
Trucks 538,771 518,123 600,832 612,201 614,575 641,848 644,134 622,238 622,218 645,390 588,116 616,398 7,264,844
Total Vehicles 8,403,740 7,912,951 9,246,617 9,657,045 10,250,813 10,037,382 10,417,186 10,621,922 9,698,285 10,053,023 9,660,462 9,987,341 115,946,767
E-ZPass Usage (%) 83.1% 83.4% 83.1% 82.9% 82.1% 82.5% 81.3% 81.4% 82.8% 83.5% 83.4% 83.2% 82.7%
Automobiles 3,311,360 3,083,340 3,622,112 3,839,751 4,118,473 4,027,236 4,256,461 4,368,773 3,899,794 3,999,640 3,869,655 3,964,751 46,361,346
Buses 29,809 29,292 34,389 35,430 38,158 38,111 42,976 39,849 34,414 38,397 34,845 33,630 429,300
Trucks 272,725 263,926 305,932 311,434 309,045 322,220 323,153 313,023 313,364 326,100 295,113 310,116 3,666,151
Total Vehicles 3,613,894 3,376,558 3,962,433 4,186,615 4,465,676 4,387,567 4,622,590 4,721,645 4,247,572 4,364,137 4,199,613 4,308,497 50,456,797
E-ZPass Usage (%) 81.6% 81.8% 81.4% 81.2% 80.3% 80.8% 79.6% 79.7% 81.2% 82.0% 81.7% 81.7% 81.0%
Lincoln Tunnel
Automobiles 1,160,866 1,112,701 1,311,351 1,320,491 1,395,215 1,329,203 1,330,841 1,384,856 1,285,083 1,390,624 1,327,395 1,357,457 15,706,083
Buses 165,278 157,239 182,622 185,596 182,975 186,037 190,153 184,868 180,078 188,112 175,044 186,868 2,164,870
Trucks 75,344 74,594 88,303 90,411 90,996 95,582 93,453 90,275 90,671 95,649 87,751 87,606 1,060,635
Total Vehicles 1,401,488 1,344,534 1,582,276 1,596,498 1,669,186 1,610,822 1,614,447 1,659,999 1,555,832 1,674,385 1,590,190 1,631,931 18,931,588
E-ZPass Usage (%) 84.9% 85.3% 85.0% 84.8% 84.0% 84.4% 83.3% 83.2% 84.7% 85.2% 85.5% 84.9% 84.6%
Holland Tunnel
Automobiles 1,099,574 1,056,817 1,205,470 1,248,189 1,320,456 1,273,302 1,295,057 1,306,637 1,207,708 1,271,702 1,215,957 1,261,524 14,762,393
Buses 13,413 13,670 15,778 17,087 17,872 18,266 19,789 18,912 17,035 17,683 14,850 14,938 199,293
Trucks 33,275 32,651 36,838 37,243 37,137 39,389 39,742 38,643 38,103 39,943 36,218 38,152 447,334
Total Vehicles 1,146,262 1,103,138 1,258,086 1,302,519 1,375,465 1,330,957 1,354,588 1,364,192 1,262,846 1,329,328 1,267,025 1,314,614 15,409,020
E-ZPass Usage (%) 80.2% 80.8% 80.6% 80.3% 79.1% 79.6% 78.2% 78.2% 79.8% 80.9% 80.7% 80.6% 79.9%
Goethals Bridge
Automobiles 934,463 890,153 1,036,220 1,111,197 1,147,791 1,129,225 1,216,797 1,233,125 1,140,655 1,183,866 1,159,648 1,196,600 13,379,740
Buses 8,133 8,303 9,755 10,131 10,323 10,899 10,751 10,049 9,986 10,481 8,982 9,580 117,373
Trucks 82,768 80,624 94,005 97,272 97,818 103,958 106,933 100,223 101,405 105,058 95,133 100,858 1,166,055
Total Vehicles 1,025,364 979,080 1,139,980 1,218,600 1,255,932 1,244,082 1,334,481 1,343,397 1,252,046 1,299,405 1,263,763 1,307,038 14,663,168
E-ZPass Usage (%) 83.3% 83.8% 83.5% 83.2% 82.8% 83.1% 81.8% 81.8% 83.2% 84.1% 83.9% 83.5% 83.1%
Automobiles 954,304 885,600 1,043,156 1,114,199 1,217,858 1,205,559 1,244,251 1,295,679 1,143,937 1,160,821 1,121,021 1,182,936 13,569,321
Buses 2,932 2,866 3,599 3,680 4,531 4,550 4,582 4,662 3,703 4,143 3,666 3,725 46,639
Trucks 60,786 55,152 62,364 67,169 70,345 72,427 72,542 72,040 70,551 70,898 66,836 71,450 812,560
Total Vehicles 1,018,022 943,618 1,109,119 1,185,048 1,292,734 1,282,536 1,321,375 1,372,381 1,218,191 1,235,862 1,191,523 1,258,111 14,428,520
E-ZPass Usage (%) 87.6% 87.8% 87.7% 87.5% 87.0% 87.3% 86.8% 86.9% 87.6% 88.0% 87.8% 87.8% 87.5%
Bayonne Bridge
Automobiles 183,686 153,817 180,071 158,059 181,481 172,089 160,440 151,366 152,748 141,316 140,476 158,019 1,933,568
Buses 1,151 1,030 1,262 1,034 1,105 1,057 954 908 926 848 807 915 11,997
Trucks 13,873 11,176 13,390 8,672 9,234 8,272 8,311 8,034 8,124 7,742 7,065 8,216 112,109
Total Vehicles 198,710 166,023 194,723 167,765 191,820 181,418 169,705 160,308 161,798 149,906 148,348 167,150 2,057,674
E-ZPass Usage (%) 88.8% 89.3% 89.4% 90.2% 88.9% 89.4% 88.8% 89.2% 90.0% 90.9% 90.2% 89.8% 89.5%
(Updated Mar/2018)
TUNNELS AND BRIDGES
All Crossings
Automobiles 7,851,632 7,901,475 8,994,065 8,916,731 9,455,656 9,358,815 9,726,681 9,823,207 9,105,276 9,276,273 8,935,522 9,175,292 108,520,625
Buses 218,573 223,572 255,471 247,304 256,015 258,901 259,400 268,320 247,412 252,984 240,410 243,445 2,971,807
Trucks 542,634 556,800 631,436 606,070 614,830 644,843 592,681 643,455 614,073 614,283 609,826 608,008 7,278,939
Total Vehicles 8,612,839 8,681,847 9,880,972 9,770,105 10,326,501 10,262,559 10,578,762 10,734,982 9,966,761 10,143,540 9,785,758 10,026,745 118,771,371
E-ZPass Usage (%) 84.2% 84.1% 83.9% 83.7% 83.4% 83.2% 81.6% 82.4% 83.5% 83.9% 84.0% 83.5% 83.4%
Automobiles 3,413,921 3,427,053 3,916,365 3,871,396 4,114,075 4,081,237 4,322,901 4,394,894 4,019,208 4,063,370 3,902,912 3,970,512 47,497,844
Buses 30,297 32,266 36,098 36,066 38,443 39,305 43,234 40,936 36,388 37,690 35,333 34,129 440,185
Trucks 275,476 282,322 319,007 307,463 313,968 326,429 300,222 327,640 311,099 313,286 306,868 308,632 3,692,412
Total Vehicles 3,719,694 3,741,641 4,271,470 4,214,925 4,466,486 4,446,971 4,666,357 4,763,470 4,366,695 4,414,346 4,245,113 4,313,273 51,630,441
E-ZPass Usage (%) 82.6% 82.4% 82.2% 81.8% 81.5% 81.3% 79.6% 80.6% 81.7% 82.1% 82.2% 81.8% 81.6%
Lincoln Tunnel
Automobiles 1,179,345 1,204,833 1,347,730 1,334,841 1,413,596 1,368,607 1,377,526 1,373,425 1,324,441 1,383,619 1,322,573 1,362,347 15,992,883
Buses 163,016 165,370 189,426 180,459 184,456 185,381 181,539 191,812 180,409 183,710 176,492 181,466 2,163,536
Trucks 77,651 81,087 93,251 88,789 89,902 92,952 84,805 93,461 89,673 89,855 87,396 85,678 1,054,500
Total Vehicles 1,420,012 1,451,290 1,630,407 1,604,089 1,687,954 1,646,940 1,643,870 1,658,698 1,594,523 1,657,184 1,586,461 1,629,491 19,210,919
E-ZPass Usage (%) 86.3% 86.0% 86.1% 85.9% 85.5% 85.3% 83.9% 84.6% 85.6% 86.0% 86.3% 85.6% 85.6%
Holland Tunnel
Automobiles 1,096,868 1,106,842 1,253,854 1,238,334 1,283,515 1,251,153 1,269,235 1,271,073 1,219,508 1,262,770 1,219,501 1,254,277 14,726,930
Buses 12,837 13,356 15,362 16,091 17,284 17,780 18,150 18,586 16,290 16,847 14,448 14,028 191,059
Trucks 34,129 34,714 38,658 36,029 37,152 39,028 36,929 39,952 38,346 37,539 37,271 37,625 447,372
Total Vehicles 1,143,834 1,154,912 1,307,874 1,290,454 1,337,951 1,307,961 1,324,314 1,329,611 1,274,144 1,317,156 1,271,220 1,305,930 15,365,361
E-ZPass Usage (%) 81.6% 81.7% 81.3% 81.2% 80.8% 80.5% 78.9% 79.7% 80.7% 81.5% 81.7% 81.4% 80.9%
Goethals Bridge
Automobiles 1,023,846 1,028,548 1,175,259 1,185,117 1,267,726 1,258,240 1,322,578 1,321,535 1,205,452 1,198,114 1,170,694 1,210,299 14,367,408
Buses 8,344 8,482 9,917 9,951 10,563 10,986 10,757 11,255 9,816 9,931 9,537 9,309 118,848
Trucks 88,214 89,523 102,090 97,767 98,124 104,874 95,622 101,702 98,409 95,554 96,709 96,963 1,165,551
Total Vehicles 1,120,404 1,126,553 1,287,266 1,292,835 1,376,413 1,374,100 1,428,957 1,434,492 1,313,677 1,303,599 1,276,940 1,316,571 15,651,807
E-ZPass Usage (%) 84.6% 84.9% 84.5% 84.1% 83.9% 83.6% 82.1% 82.9% 83.9% 84.4% 84.5% 83.9% 83.9%
Automobiles 1,015,253 1,016,839 1,163,743 1,166,072 1,236,478 1,268,158 1,320,259 1,334,058 1,211,197 1,231,203 1,163,109 1,219,486 14,345,855
Buses 3,355 3,408 3,765 3,987 4,502 4,635 5,026 4,951 3,755 4,038 3,755 3,656 48,833
Trucks 60,953 62,484 71,073 69,531 68,736 74,569 68,895 73,720 69,860 71,400 74,181 71,345 836,747
Total Vehicles 1,079,561 1,082,731 1,238,581 1,239,590 1,309,716 1,347,362 1,394,180 1,412,729 1,284,812 1,306,641 1,241,045 1,294,487 15,231,435
E-ZPass Usage (%) 88.5% 88.6% 88.5% 88.2% 88.1% 88.1% 87.1% 87.5% 88.1% 88.2% 88.2% 87.7% 88.0%
Bayonne Bridge
Automobiles 122,399 117,360 137,114 120,971 140,266 131,420 114,182 128,222 125,470 137,197 156,733 158,371 1,589,705
Buses 724 690 903 750 767 814 694 780 754 768 845 857 9,346
Trucks 6,211 6,670 7,357 6,491 6,948 6,991 6,208 6,980 6,686 6,649 7,401 7,765 82,357
Total Vehicles 129,334 124,720 145,374 128,212 147,981 139,225 121,084 135,982 132,910 144,614 164,979 166,993 1,681,408
E-ZPass Usage (%) 91.1% 91.9% 92.0% 91.7% 90.8% 91.4% 90.8% 91.2% 91.7% 91.4% 89.8% 89.3% 91.0%
(Updated Mar/2018)
TUNNELS AND BRIDGES
All Crossings
Automobiles 8,303,266 7,704,449 8,577,084 9,143,075 9,429,117 9,454,253 9,791,872 9,879,403 9,213,345 9,391,364 9,031,438 9,193,698 109,112,364
Buses 229,804 211,571 241,926 239,964 259,601 259,384 261,899 268,170 243,816 258,844 245,496 241,375 2,961,850
Trucks 569,124 531,124 614,650 580,321 644,415 648,428 598,301 657,753 614,732 645,106 620,752 595,471 7,320,177
Total Vehicles 9,102,194 8,447,144 9,433,660 9,963,360 10,333,133 10,362,065 10,652,072 10,805,326 10,071,893 10,295,314 9,897,686 10,030,544 119,394,391
E-ZPass Usage (%) 84.8% 84.9% 85.1% 84.3% 84.8% 84.6% 83.6% 84.8% 85.4% 86.2% 86.1% 85.5% 85.0%
Automobiles 3,626,597 3,334,758 3,713,653 3,987,015 4,125,574 4,124,604 4,344,562 4,379,367 4,008,588 4,063,537 3,939,977 3,945,980 47,594,212
Buses 33,140 30,940 35,227 35,737 39,338 39,138 42,074 40,131 35,484 38,825 36,897 35,272 442,203
Trucks 291,047 269,207 314,012 296,186 328,367 322,908 302,033 325,222 303,109 321,125 309,064 301,392 3,683,672
Total Vehicles 3,950,784 3,634,905 4,062,892 4,318,938 4,493,279 4,486,650 4,688,669 4,744,720 4,347,181 4,423,487 4,285,938 4,282,644 51,720,087
E-ZPass Usage (%) 83.1% 83.2% 83.1% 82.3% 82.9% 82.9% 81.8% 83.1% 83.7% 84.5% 84.4% 83.9% 83.2%
Lincoln Tunnel
Automobiles 1,228,194 1,153,453 1,283,209 1,350,422 1,370,134 1,358,222 1,352,605 1,363,452 1,343,010 1,381,436 1,310,582 1,346,254 15,840,973
Buses 170,346 156,633 178,538 175,732 187,157 186,184 185,731 193,325 178,305 187,785 181,165 180,029 2,160,930
Trucks 81,197 76,924 86,876 82,323 89,831 90,485 81,607 92,421 88,725 93,771 90,542 82,605 1,037,307
Total Vehicles 1,479,737 1,387,010 1,548,623 1,608,477 1,647,122 1,634,891 1,619,943 1,649,198 1,610,040 1,662,992 1,582,289 1,608,888 19,039,210
E-ZPass Usage (%) 87.1% 87.3% 87.5% 86.6% 87.0% 86.7% 85.5% 86.3% 87.0% 87.8% 87.7% 86.8% 86.9%
Holland Tunnel
Automobiles 1,123,195 1,036,426 1,150,656 1,183,724 1,216,087 1,214,244 1,234,463 1,242,205 1,194,181 1,241,690 1,189,995 1,220,027 14,246,893
Buses 12,982 11,798 13,870 14,471 16,582 17,074 17,215 17,448 15,743 16,673 13,029 12,063 178,948
Trucks 35,588 33,050 37,773 34,462 39,014 39,797 36,530 40,127 37,801 39,044 37,580 34,936 445,702
Total Vehicles 1,171,765 1,081,274 1,202,299 1,232,657 1,271,683 1,271,115 1,288,208 1,299,780 1,247,725 1,297,407 1,240,604 1,267,026 14,871,543
E-ZPass Usage (%) 82.7% 82.8% 83.1% 82.3% 82.8% 82.3% 81.2% 82.3% 83.1% 84.1% 83.9% 83.5% 82.8%
Goethals Bridge
Automobiles 1,103,786 1,044,948 1,125,476 1,211,667 1,258,418 1,211,490 1,319,924 1,334,953 1,244,706 1,252,654 1,198,359 1,235,335 14,541,716
Buses 9,149 8,386 9,682 9,223 11,168 11,277 11,292 11,623 9,731 10,484 9,649 9,333 120,997
Trucks 89,573 81,448 93,653 87,911 99,975 103,422 95,120 106,800 98,623 101,442 98,284 94,497 1,150,748
Total Vehicles 1,202,508 1,134,782 1,228,811 1,308,801 1,369,561 1,326,189 1,426,336 1,453,376 1,353,060 1,364,580 1,306,292 1,339,165 15,813,461
E-ZPass Usage (%) 85.4% 84.9% 85.6% 84.9% 85.2% 85.1% 84.3% 85.3% 85.8% 87.0% 86.9% 86.1% 85.6%
Automobiles 1,091,171 1,021,070 1,143,881 1,229,021 1,253,855 1,321,880 1,356,559 1,356,996 1,240,679 1,254,348 1,189,905 1,229,988 14,689,353
Buses 3,414 3,098 3,565 3,875 4,171 4,523 4,566 4,598 3,636 4,022 3,769 3,719 46,956
Trucks 65,320 62,576 71,084 67,645 73,339 76,771 70,157 77,923 71,890 75,882 71,298 67,773 851,658
Total Vehicles 1,159,905 1,086,744 1,218,530 1,300,541 1,331,365 1,403,174 1,431,282 1,439,517 1,316,205 1,334,252 1,264,972 1,301,480 15,587,967
E-ZPass Usage (%) 88.6% 88.9% 88.8% 88.2% 88.6% 88.1% 88.0% 89.4% 89.6% 90.2% 90.1% 89.7% 89.0%
Bayonne Bridge
Automobiles 130,323 113,794 160,209 181,226 205,049 223,813 183,759 202,430 182,181 197,699 202,620 216,114 2,199,217
Buses 773 716 1,044 926 1,185 1,188 1,021 1,045 917 1,055 987 959 11,816
Trucks 6,399 7,919 11,252 11,794 13,889 15,045 12,854 15,260 14,584 13,842 13,984 14,268 151,090
Total Vehicles 137,495 122,429 172,505 193,946 220,123 240,046 197,634 218,735 197,682 212,596 217,591 231,341 2,362,123
E-ZPass Usage (%) 91.1% 92.4% 93.0% 91.9% 92.2% 91.2% 91.2% 91.7% 92.1% 92.3% 91.6% 91.0% 91.8%
TUNNELS AND BRIDGES
(Eastbound Traffic) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Year-to-Date
All Crossings
Automobiles 8,198,267 7,815,814 8,750,521 9,087,314 9,562,460 9,613,013 9,794,424 9,932,063 9,202,817 9,446,206 8,996,544 9,441,750 109,841,193
Buses 231,859 218,179 242,823 248,856 261,427 257,222 260,612 267,323 237,518 266,254 240,965 239,928 2,972,966
Trucks 586,010 545,985 611,518 609,980 666,588 651,742 635,722 671,030 592,845 666,934 613,247 591,969 7,443,570
Total Vehicles 9,016,136 8,579,978 9,604,862 9,946,150 10,490,475 10,521,977 10,690,758 10,870,416 10,033,180 10,379,394 9,850,756 10,273,647 120,257,729
E-ZPass Usage (%) 86.8% 87.1% 86.7% 86.9% 86.9% 86.4% 85.8% 86.2% 86.8% 87.7% 87.5% 87.0% 86.8%
Automobiles 3,537,542 3,371,104 3,753,545 3,927,179 4,147,409 4,160,343 4,235,102 4,319,604 3,946,592 4,007,231 3,829,643 4,028,730 47,264,024
Buses 33,810 33,185 36,304 38,113 40,555 40,955 42,940 40,626 34,768 38,967 34,772 33,492 448,487
Trucks 300,007 279,652 314,191 310,039 340,032 333,335 323,040 334,954 300,037 337,989 312,519 306,378 3,792,173
Total Vehicles 3,871,359 3,683,941 4,104,040 4,275,331 4,527,996 4,534,633 4,601,082 4,695,184 4,281,397 4,384,187 4,176,934 4,368,600 51,504,684
E-ZPass Usage (%) 85.2% 85.4% 84.9% 85.2% 85.2% 84.7% 84.1% 84.7% 85.2% 86.1% 86.0% 85.5% 85.2%
Lincoln Tunnel
Automobiles 1,210,788 1,146,328 1,308,361 1,336,737 1,375,807 1,358,583 1,366,572 1,338,140 1,317,163 1,362,216 1,291,219 1,330,127 15,742,041
Buses 174,177 161,192 179,319 181,938 188,704 182,840 184,677 191,948 173,497 193,888 177,952 179,738 2,169,870
Trucks 82,679 78,110 85,759 86,662 93,108 90,952 88,599 94,756 84,316 96,672 86,478 80,004 1,048,095
Total Vehicles 1,467,644 1,385,630 1,573,439 1,605,337 1,657,619 1,632,375 1,639,848 1,624,844 1,574,976 1,652,776 1,555,649 1,589,869 18,960,006
E-ZPass Usage (%) 88.3% 88.6% 88.4% 88.4% 88.5% 87.8% 86.8% 87.1% 87.9% 88.9% 88.8% 88.1% 88.1%
Holland Tunnel
Automobiles 1,086,414 1,039,416 1,171,366 1,168,331 1,248,648 1,243,676 1,251,774 1,270,737 1,212,724 1,278,950 1,205,211 1,282,520 14,459,767
Buses 10,910 10,812 12,595 13,581 15,276 15,904 15,725 16,747 14,308 16,102 13,516 13,009 168,485
Trucks 35,925 32,794 37,099 35,753 39,144 38,161 37,145 39,810 34,932 40,309 36,681 35,059 442,812
Total Vehicles 1,133,249 1,083,022 1,221,060 1,217,665 1,303,068 1,297,741 1,304,644 1,327,294 1,261,964 1,335,361 1,255,408 1,330,588 15,071,064
E-ZPass Usage (%) 84.7% 85.2% 84.9% 85.2% 85.2% 84.5% 83.8% 84.1% 84.9% 85.8% 85.7% 85.2% 84.9%
Goethals Bridge
Automobiles 1,066,035 1,052,465 1,174,165 1,242,677 1,277,667 1,283,749 1,410,456 1,435,758 1,306,556 1,351,330 1,295,461 1,351,997 15,248,316
Buses 8,826 8,868 10,267 10,471 11,508 11,793 11,587 12,374 10,423 11,849 10,360 9,993 128,319
Trucks 90,404 83,439 93,206 94,789 102,232 98,835 103,968 113,378 97,882 115,580 106,404 100,788 1,200,905
Total Vehicles 1,165,265 1,144,772 1,277,638 1,347,937 1,391,407 1,394,377 1,526,011 1,561,510 1,414,861 1,478,759 1,412,225 1,462,778 16,577,540
E-ZPass Usage (%) 87.4% 87.9% 87.5% 87.6% 87.6% 87.1% 86.7% 87.0% 87.6% 88.6% 88.5% 87.9% 87.6%
Automobiles 1,091,251 1,022,961 1,138,674 1,203,353 1,266,029 1,300,530 1,310,667 1,323,731 1,201,614 1,220,949 1,155,750 1,224,331 14,459,840
Buses 3,178 3,238 3,386 3,778 4,164 4,423 4,533 4,465 3,533 4,332 3,373 2,730 45,133
Trucks 62,783 58,965 65,289 69,151 76,239 73,852 68,888 72,830 62,541 61,188 56,818 56,224 784,768
Total Vehicles 1,157,212 1,085,164 1,207,349 1,276,282 1,346,432 1,378,805 1,384,088 1,401,026 1,267,688 1,286,469 1,215,941 1,283,285 15,289,741
E-ZPass Usage (%) 90.7% 90.9% 90.9% 90.9% 90.9% 90.5% 90.2% 90.6% 90.8% 91.5% 91.3% 91.0% 90.8%
Bayonne Bridge
Automobiles 206,237 183,540 204,410 209,037 246,900 266,132 219,853 244,093 218,168 225,530 219,260 224,045 2,667,205
Buses 958 884 952 975 1,220 1,307 1,150 1,163 989 1,116 992 966 12,672
Trucks 14,212 13,025 15,974 13,586 15,833 16,607 14,082 15,302 13,137 15,196 14,347 13,516 174,817
Total Vehicles 221,407 197,449 221,336 223,598 263,953 284,046 235,085 260,558 232,294 241,842 234,599 238,527 2,854,694
E-ZPass Usage (%) 92.0% 92.5% 92.3% 92.4% 92.0% 91.7% 91.5% 91.4% 91.8% 92.8% 92.3% 91.7% 92.0%
TUNNELS AND BRIDGES
All Crossings
Automobiles 8,399,371 7,904,169 9,144,855 9,210,806 9,724,774 9,720,676 9,872,238 10,091,355 9,433,397 9,540,159 9,287,870 9,465,110 111,794,780
Buses 234,955 216,103 245,981 252,186 261,454 246,296 258,497 258,282 236,342 256,361 234,762 239,192 2,940,411
Trucks 607,775 548,663 611,774 636,264 666,342 616,907 621,923 626,847 620,150 688,279 621,079 626,482 7,492,485
Total Vehicles 9,242,101 8,668,935 10,002,610 10,099,256 10,652,570 10,583,879 10,752,658 10,976,484 10,289,889 10,484,799 10,143,711 10,330,784 122,227,676
E-ZPass Usage (%) 88.2% 88.1% 87.7% 87.8% 87.8% 87.2% 86.8% 86.9% 88.1% 88.6% 88.5% 88.1% 87.8%
Automobiles 3,575,199 3,366,075 3,893,602 3,918,710 4,136,028 4,161,458 4,315,761 4,374,108 4,004,852 4,061,636 3,989,057 4,012,105 47,808,591
Buses 32,746 31,047 35,646 36,133 39,420 36,816 39,797 37,549 34,134 37,158 35,213 32,791 428,450
Trucks 312,702 280,444 312,514 324,044 336,075 306,617 299,823 300,681 294,056 340,714 307,206 309,045 3,723,921
Total Vehicles 3,920,647 3,677,566 4,241,762 4,278,887 4,511,523 4,504,891 4,655,381 4,712,338 4,333,042 4,439,508 4,331,476 4,353,941 51,960,962
E-ZPass Usage (%) 86.7% 86.4% 85.9% 86.2% 86.1% 85.4% 85.0% 85.2% 86.2% 86.8% 86.5% 86.1% 86.0%
Lincoln Tunnel
Automobiles 1,180,091 1,119,844 1,317,523 1,292,726 1,344,294 1,317,860 1,262,364 1,329,733 1,313,111 1,304,263 1,261,677 1,273,817 15,317,303
Buses 176,833 161,274 182,740 186,473 190,834 179,223 187,215 190,215 177,189 192,758 177,216 184,254 2,186,224
Trucks 81,467 76,089 84,844 88,148 93,794 87,198 87,039 89,094 86,412 91,700 83,783 81,213 1,030,781
Total Vehicles 1,438,391 1,357,207 1,585,107 1,567,347 1,628,922 1,584,281 1,536,618 1,609,042 1,576,712 1,588,721 1,522,676 1,539,284 18,534,308
E-ZPass Usage (%) 89.4% 89.2% 88.8% 88.8% 88.5% 87.6% 86.8% 86.6% 87.6% 87.9% 88.3% 87.7% 88.1%
Holland Tunnel
Automobiles 1,161,741 1,083,719 1,217,840 1,248,989 1,308,409 1,278,609 1,277,907 1,304,354 1,263,253 1,313,534 1,266,028 1,308,498 15,032,881
Buses 11,609 11,093 12,843 14,160 14,537 14,531 14,984 14,353 13,545 14,394 11,438 11,348 158,835
Trucks 36,616 33,274 35,888 37,174 39,059 37,095 37,680 38,395 36,651 39,193 35,480 36,188 442,693
Total Vehicles 1,209,966 1,128,086 1,266,571 1,300,323 1,362,005 1,330,235 1,330,571 1,357,102 1,313,449 1,367,121 1,312,946 1,356,034 15,634,409
E-ZPass Usage (%) 86.2% 86.2% 86.1% 85.9% 85.8% 85.1% 84.7% 84.7% 85.9% 86.6% 86.3% 85.8% 85.8%
Goethals Bridge
Automobiles 1,209,579 1,139,663 1,313,981 1,370,389 1,421,857 1,430,192 1,455,159 1,479,286 1,337,964 1,351,494 1,300,313 1,356,032 16,165,909
Buses 10,146 9,243 10,753 11,434 12,501 11,931 12,370 12,189 7,575 7,941 6,983 6,823 119,889
Trucks 107,142 95,808 106,421 110,944 116,266 110,710 117,873 115,007 123,655 133,578 118,596 123,568 1,379,568
Total Vehicles 1,326,867 1,244,714 1,431,155 1,492,767 1,550,624 1,552,833 1,585,402 1,606,482 1,469,194 1,493,013 1,425,892 1,486,423 17,665,366
E-ZPass Usage (%) 89.1% 89.1% 88.6% 88.7% 88.3% 87.7% 87.4% 87.5% 90.5% 91.3% 91.1% 90.9% 89.2%
Automobiles 1,085,139 1,015,924 1,168,007 1,175,002 1,235,445 1,246,344 1,269,437 1,295,800 1,215,474 1,210,509 1,178,547 1,214,875 14,310,503
Buses 2,650 2,684 2,995 3,032 3,184 2,964 2,972 2,863 2,857 2,855 2,760 2,868 34,684
Trucks 56,045 51,006 58,235 61,901 65,700 60,103 63,689 66,930 63,536 65,837 60,441 59,290 732,713
Total Vehicles 1,143,834 1,069,614 1,229,237 1,239,935 1,304,329 1,309,411 1,336,098 1,365,593 1,281,867 1,279,201 1,241,748 1,277,033 15,077,900
E-ZPass Usage (%) 91.9% 92.1% 91.9% 92.5% 93.8% 93.5% 93.2% 93.2% 93.7% 93.8% 93.7% 93.6% 93.1%
Bayonne Bridge
Automobiles 187,622 178,944 233,902 204,990 278,741 286,213 291,610 308,074 298,743 298,723 292,248 299,783 3,159,593
Buses 971 762 1,004 954 978 831 1,159 1,113 1,042 1,255 1,152 1,108 12,329
Trucks 13,803 12,042 13,872 14,053 15,448 15,184 15,819 16,740 15,840 17,257 15,573 17,178 182,809
Total Vehicles 202,396 191,748 248,778 219,997 295,167 302,228 308,588 325,927 315,625 317,235 308,973 318,069 3,354,731
E-ZPass Usage (%) 92.5% 93.2% 92.7% 93.1% 92.4% 91.6% 91.4% 91.4% 91.7% 92.0% 91.8% 91.6% 92.0%
TUNNELS AND BRIDGES
All Crossings
Automobiles 8,719,766 8,492,197 6,456,792 3,446,043 5,548,460 7,096,905 8,238,320 8,710,828 8,352,603 8,512,919 7,762,308 7,595,392 88,932,533
Buses 233,267 218,995 181,665 74,809 90,819 128,822 150,639 149,573 144,665 152,143 138,453 143,123 1,806,973
Trucks 624,241 573,120 596,714 444,102 517,020 599,518 623,538 611,208 614,705 644,799 602,381 638,256 7,089,602
Total Vehicles 9,577,274 9,284,312 7,235,171 3,964,954 6,156,299 7,825,245 9,012,497 9,471,609 9,111,973 9,309,861 8,503,142 8,376,771 97,829,108
E-ZPass Usage (%) 89.0% 89.3% 88.7% 88.3% 88.0% 88.3% 88.0% 88.1% 88.3% 88.4% 87.5% 87.0% 88.3%
Automobiles 3,720,343 3,619,349 2,788,888 1,529,569 2,529,460 3,200,525 3,698,076 3,818,395 3,611,734 3,657,912 3,345,556 3,264,746 38,784,553
Buses 32,881 31,788 22,374 9,862 13,160 17,312 19,557 20,877 21,004 22,940 21,036 20,487 253,278
Trucks 310,202 288,596 309,793 248,847 280,373 320,767 327,636 317,441 319,462 336,299 313,631 331,311 3,704,358
Total Vehicles 4,063,426 3,939,733 3,121,055 1,788,278 2,822,993 3,538,604 4,045,269 4,156,713 3,952,200 4,017,151 3,680,223 3,616,544 42,742,189
E-ZPass Usage (%) 87.2% 87.2% 86.6% 86.6% 86.1% 86.3% 86.1% 86.2% 86.5% 86.6% 85.2% 84.6% 86.3%
Lincoln Tunnel
Automobiles 1,170,919 1,148,542 813,745 383,971 609,548 812,672 989,456 1,130,222 1,123,701 1,198,572 1,067,069 1,065,246 11,513,663
Buses 179,633 167,082 143,343 59,029 72,462 100,995 118,319 115,284 110,544 115,238 104,465 109,603 1,395,997
Trucks 82,076 77,647 68,955 34,458 44,682 58,367 66,296 66,340 67,194 73,460 65,235 68,285 772,995
Total Vehicles 1,432,628 1,393,271 1,026,043 477,458 726,692 972,034 1,174,071 1,311,846 1,301,439 1,387,270 1,236,769 1,243,134 13,682,655
E-ZPass Usage (%) 89.3% 90.5% 90.7% 90.6% 90.3% 90.7% 90.3% 89.8% 90.2% 90.1% 88.6% 87.9% 89.8%
Holland Tunnel
Automobiles 1,205,160 1,179,009 872,813 426,493 667,543 809,884 940,543 1,012,757 992,203 1,034,668 954,977 965,635 11,061,685
Buses 9,929 9,080 6,195 1,669 1,873 2,906 3,300 3,619 3,518 3,938 3,724 3,301 53,052
Trucks 35,721 33,410 30,062 16,920 19,594 24,656 27,353 27,170 27,492 28,538 26,304 27,161 324,381
Total Vehicles 1,250,810 1,221,499 909,070 445,082 689,010 837,446 971,196 1,043,546 1,023,213 1,067,144 985,005 996,097 11,439,118
E-ZPass Usage (%) 86.9% 87.0% 86.3% 85.3% 85.7% 86.2% 86.0% 86.3% 86.6% 87.1% 86.8% 86.1% 86.5%
Goethals Bridge
Automobiles 1,245,951 1,225,161 940,770 486,631 796,197 1,053,083 1,233,205 1,303,366 1,244,659 1,201,319 1,159,532 1,110,455 13,000,329
Buses 6,961 7,396 7,091 2,859 1,776 5,808 7,200 7,102 6,838 6,987 6,257 6,798 73,073
Trucks 120,473 106,229 113,825 85,934 103,336 116,048 121,008 122,102 122,724 125,991 123,400 135,082 1,396,152
Total Vehicles 1,373,385 1,338,786 1,061,686 575,424 901,309 1,174,939 1,361,413 1,432,570 1,374,221 1,334,297 1,289,189 1,252,335 14,469,554
E-ZPass Usage (%) 91.1% 91.4% 91.1% 89.7% 89.3% 89.1% 88.7% 88.8% 89.0% 89.0% 88.8% 88.4% 89.5%
Automobiles 1,114,798 1,069,002 834,006 491,532 767,002 1,001,170 1,134,417 1,188,595 1,128,038 1,142,599 997,380 964,342 11,832,881
Buses 2,766 2,636 1,890 906 862 1,025 1,534 1,893 2,037 2,196 2,183 2,160 22,088
Trucks 59,456 52,525 58,965 46,509 56,086 64,588 65,587 62,603 62,632 64,002 58,790 60,561 712,304
Total Vehicles 1,177,020 1,124,163 894,861 538,947 823,950 1,066,783 1,201,538 1,253,091 1,192,707 1,208,797 1,058,353 1,027,063 12,567,273
E-ZPass Usage (%) 94.1% 94.2% 93.6% 92.8% 92.7% 92.7% 92.6% 92.7% 92.8% 92.7% 92.6% 92.6% 93.0%
Bayonne Bridge
Automobiles 262,595 251,134 206,570 127,847 178,710 219,571 242,623 257,493 252,268 277,849 237,794 224,968 2,739,422
Buses 1,097 1,013 772 484 686 776 729 798 724 844 788 774 9,485
Trucks 16,313 14,713 15,114 11,434 12,949 15,092 15,658 15,552 15,201 16,509 15,021 15,856 179,412
Total Vehicles 280,005 266,860 222,456 139,765 192,345 235,439 259,010 273,843 268,193 295,202 253,603 241,598 2,928,319
E-ZPass Usage (%) 92.6% 92.3% 89.4% 89.2% 90.1% 89.8% 89.2% 89.5% 89.8% 89.6% 89.3% 88.5% 90.0%
TUNNELS AND BRIDGES
All Crossings
Automobiles 7,523,213 6,381,651 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13,904,864
Buses 136,117 119,304 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 255,421
Trucks 600,290 533,089 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,133,379
Total Vehicles 8,259,620 7,034,044 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15,293,664
E-ZPass Usage (%) 87.2% 87.4% #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 87.3%
Automobiles 3,269,623 2,786,273 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,055,896
Buses 20,100 17,958 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38,058
Trucks 309,065 278,965 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 588,030
Total Vehicles 3,598,788 3,083,196 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,681,984
Lincoln Tunnel
Automobiles 1,028,403 884,903 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,913,306
Buses 104,311 90,379 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 194,690
Trucks 64,158 56,851 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 121,009
Total Vehicles 1,196,872 1,032,133 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,229,005
Holland Tunnel
Automobiles 963,279 820,638 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,783,917
Buses 2,368 2,151 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,519
Trucks 24,341 22,571 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 46,912
Total Vehicles 989,988 845,360 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,835,348
Goethals Bridge
Automobiles 1,090,197 915,546 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,005,743
Buses 6,558 6,298 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12,856
Trucks 130,719 113,386 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 244,105
Total Vehicles 1,227,474 1,035,230 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,262,704
Automobiles 952,741 791,337 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,744,078
Buses 2,003 1,759 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,762
Trucks 56,789 47,113 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 103,902
Total Vehicles 1,011,533 840,209 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,851,742
Bayonne Bridge
Automobiles 218,970 182,954 - - - - - - - - - - 401,924
Buses 777 759 - - - - - - - - - - 1,536
Trucks 15,218 14,203 - - - - - - - - - - 29,421
Total Vehicles 234,965 197,916 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 432,881
6 – References
1. PWC, Public-private partnerships in the US: The state of the market and the road ahead,
2016.
2. Levitt, et. al., Public–Private Partnerships for Infrastructure Development, April 26, 2019.
3. State of New Jersey, P.L.2018, CHAPTER 90, August 14, 2018.
4. Citizens Budget Commission, How Public-Private Partnerships Can Help New York
Address Its Infrastructure Needs, 2008.
5. Historic Bridges, www.historicbridges.com, copyright 2013-2021.
6. Bipartisan Policy Center, Infrastructure Case Study: Goethals Bridge Replacement, 2018.
7. ENR New York, ENR New York’s 2018 Best Projects, www.enr.com, September 27, 2018.
8. PANYNJ, Goethals Bridge Modernization Program – Project Authorization, April 24,

2013.
9. Condell, Seth, The Goethals Bridge Replacement Project.
10. Hovy, Pauline, Risk Allocation in Public-Private Partnerships: Maximizing value for
Money, risks in relation to P3, IISD 2015.
11. Dochia, Sylvia, et. al., Introduction to Public-Private Partnerships with Availability
Payments, 2009.
12. Minnesota DOT, Mn/DOT Benefit Cost Analysis Guidance, June 2005.
13. PANYNJ, Press Release Number: 23-2020, February 26, 2020.

Term Paper Sample

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Term Paper Sample

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Term Paper Sample

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

“The Goethals Toll Bridge Project: A Public-Private Partnership Project Examination”

Prepared For: Prof. Fadi Karaa, Ph.D.

design considerations, performance indicators, impact, and stakeholders. Finally, after a

the same results.

P3 and the relevant laws

breakdown of the intended spending is as follows:

1. Transportation - US$586 billion

2. Water, electric and internet - US$327 billion

3. New schools, colleges and federal buildings - US$378 billion

5. Research and development - $180 billion

7. Pandemic preparedness - $30 billion

8. Domestic manufacturers - $52 billion

9. Workforce development programs - $100 billion

P3 in infrastructure development could be the solution of funding for all infrastructure

trillion, making Biden’s plan short US$1.2 trillion.

on-campus construction, repair, alteration, or operation of a building, structure, or facility.

Station of the Long Island Railroad;

2) the JFK Terminal Four (T4) Project;

and maintenance of street furniture; as well as,

A brief history of Goethals Bridge

operation until its demolition in 2018, it maintained a level of “historic integrity”.

of traffic, and a clearance of 135 feet.

In 1964, a 1,200-foot-long approach, roadway changes and ramps were constructed at a

Figure 2. Project Location Map

2 – The Goethals Toll Bridge Project

2. A single-span bridge and demolition of the old bridge

outwards because of aircraft flight patterns.

because they offered the lowest cost to PANYNJ.(6)

consultants. The official SOW, as follows:

main tower if the developer’s final design warrants it necessary;

bridge with the existing road network;

4. Installation of all roadways, structures, electrical, mechanical, drainage, traffic signal

system, lighting, pavement markings, signage, utility adjustments or relocations and

construction, maintenance and security;

7. Re-alignment and construction of Gulf Avenue in Staten Island;

8. Removal of the existing Goethals Bridge, appurtenances, existing bridge pier

protection system (dolphins), approach structures and associated infrastructure;

including the removal and/or relocation of attached facilities or utilities;

9. Removal of the existing ramp structure in New Jersey; and

10. Replacement of the Travis Branch railroad bridge over I-278.

Final Bridge Design

New York side to facilitate maintenance and inspection.(9)

Figure 3. Main bridge configuration showing shallow stay cables.

Other Salient Features(9)

concrete (PPC) and stainless steel reinforcement to prevent premature degradation.

Figure 4. Rendition of the new Goethals Bridge

penetration modeling of concrete, extensive permeability testing, materials selection, use of

plan, all of which was

corrosion protection plan.

Figure 5. Major components

new transit roadway.

DWT tanker ship, 2) 50,000 DWT ship, and 3) a Jumbo Tank.

Figure 6. Goethals Stay bridge showing tower setback

Major Stakeholders and problems addressed

reliability guidelines. The stakeholder with the overall responsibility in financial

and operational success of the endeavor.

methods of construction, and performance.

3. Macquarie Infrastructure and Real Assets (MIRA) – A private partner who’s

NYNJ Link Partnership consortium with 90% stake.