Previous Chapter « Table of Contents » Next Chapter
The target audience of this survey was unpaved road managers, practitioners and researchers. At least 2,500 people saw or received the targeted survey invitation with 199 respondents completing the online survey between December 8, 2009 and February 4, 2010. Not all respondents answered every question. The number of respondents to each question is specified in the body of the text but omitted here for ease. Therefore, percentages cited in summary below are calculated based on the number of respondents to individual questions and not the 199 figure above.
Fifty one percent (51%) of respondents indicated an affiliation with county level government. Fifty nine percent (59%) identified their job role as a decision maker or manager within their agency or organization. Twenty five percent (25%) indicated that their agency/organization does not apply chemical treatments. For those agencies that manage unpaved roads but do not apply chemical treatments, the top five most common reasons were 1.) lack of funding, 2.) cost ineffectiveness, 3.) environmental/health concerns, 4.) equipment limitations, and 5.) insufficient information to make informed decisions.
Seventy five percent of respondents (75%) represented agencies responsible for 3 to 500 miles (4.8 to 805 km) of paved roads. The average paved road network length for respondents of this survey was 1,235 miles (1,986 km). Fifty six percent of respondents (56%) represented agencies responsible for 2 to 500 miles (3.2 to 805 km) of unpaved roads. The average unpaved road network length for respondents of this survey was 2,001 miles (3,220 km). The average "per mile" budget reported was $4,989 for paved and $3,909 for unpaved. The majority of respondents (83%) indicated that 5% or less of their agency's unpaved road maintenance budget is used for chemical treatments. Sixty one (61%) indicated that their agency will apply chemical treatments if a land owner pays for it.
Roughly 80% of respondents indicated that their agency has been employing chemical treatments for six or more years. Ninety eight percent (98%) of those that use or promote the use of chemical treatments indicated it was to control (fugitive road) dust, in part, to comply with federal regulations, for human and livestock health, in response to public complaints, or as a courtesy to the public. Other top reasons were to reduce maintenance costs and extend grader maintenance intervals.
By far, the most common method of chemical application is by spraying directly onto the road surface rather than mixing into road surface layers. The chemicals mostly commonly used by respondent agencies are magnesium chloride (MgCl) and calcium chloride (CaCl), with lignin sulfonates a distant third. When asked for the rationale behind their agency's most commonly used treatment, 72% cited cost effectiveness. Ninety five percent (95%) of respondents were either generally satisfied or very satisfied with the performance of their agency's most commonly used treatment.
Respondents overwhelmingly indicated a subjective and/or qualitative approach to evaluating the performance of their chemical treatments (e.g., visual assessment/drive-by evaluation and gauging feedback from the public). Twenty-five percent (25%) of respondents or fewer indicated they take an objective and/or quantitative approach by documenting differences between treated and untreated roads or by taking measurements. Interestingly, however, 76% of respondents indicated their agency has evaluated chemical treatment experiments in the past and 67%
indicated their agency/organization plans to evaluate chemical treatment experiments in the future.
Most respondents indicated that their agency/organization has had generally positive experiences with product manufacturers and suppliers. A solid 60% agreed that manufacturers and suppliers should form an industry association.
Respondents indicated that, typically, agencies rely on historical experience and their own in- house guidelines. A variety of guideline documents used are listed in Table 2. Most respondents (80% or more) indicated that they believe chemical treatments can be considered an unpaved road best management practice, however, they also agreed that more research and more comprehensive guidelines for their use are needed. Furthermore, 60% of respondents consider their agency/organization's chemical treatment program a good example of a best management practice. Still, 85% of respondents indicated that a "how to" manual for best practices in application would be a highly desired output from a national program of managed research on unpaved road management practices.
Bill Grants Federal Requirements Seminar 
An introductory webinar to assist local and tribal agencies with applying for transportation funding under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL).
