Skip to content

Publications

UNPAVED ROAD DUST MANAGEMENT
A Successful Practitioner's Handbook

Previous Chapter « Table of Contents » Next Chapter

References

REFERENCES

  1. BOLANDER, P. and Yamada, A. 1999. Dust Palliative Selection and Application Guide. Washington, DC: United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. (9977 1207 - SDTDC).
  2. GEBHART, R.L., Denight, M.L., Grau, R.H. 1999. Dust Control Guidance and Technology Selection Key. Champaign, IL: US Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratories. (USACERL Report 99/21).
  3. Guidelines for Geometric Design of Very Low-Volume Local Roads (ADT ≤ 400), 1st Edition. 2001. Washington, DC: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
  4. HUNTINGTON, G. and Ksaibati, K. 2010. Gravel Road Management: Implementation Guide. Laramie, WY: Wyoming Technology Transfer Center.
  5. IRWIN, K., Hall, F., Kemner, W., Beighley, E., Husby, P. 2008. Testing of Dust Suppressants for Water Quality Impacts. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
  6. JONES, D. 1999. Dust and Dust Control on Unsealed Roads. PhD Thesis, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
  7. JONES, D. 2008. Chemical Treatments on Unsealed Roads: Establishing a Chemical Treatment Program. Davis and Berkeley, CA: University of California Pavement Research Center.
  8. JONES, D. 2008. Chemical Treatments on Unsealed Roads: Additive Selection Guide. Davis and Berkeley, CA: University of California Pavement Research Center.
  9. JONES, D. 2008. Chemical Treatments on Unsealed Roads: Unsealed Road Evaluation Guide. Davis and Berkeley, CA: University of California Pavement Research Center.
  10. JONES, D. 2008. Chemical Treatments on Unsealed Roads: Protocols for Researching the Performance of Additives. Davis and Berkeley, CA: University of California Pavement Research Center.
  11. JONES, D. 2008. Chemical Treatments on Unsealed Roads: Fit-for-Purpose Certification of Additives. Davis and Berkeley, CA: University of California Pavement Research Center.
  12. KOCIOLEK, A. 2013. Unpaved Road Chemical Treatments, State of the Practice Survey. Publication No. FHWA-CFL/TD-13-002, January 2013. Lakewood, CO, Federal Highway Administration, Central Federal Lands Highway Division.
  13. Manual on Uniform Traffic Devices. Part 6: Temporary Traffic Control. 2009. Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration.
  14. PAIGE-GREEN, P. 1989. The Influence of Geotechnical Properties on the Performance of Gravel Wearing Course Materials. PhD Thesis, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.
  15. Potential Environmental Impacts of Dust Suppressants: "Avoiding Another Times Beach": An Expert Panel Summary. 2004. Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA/600/R-04/031).
  16. RUSHING, J. and Tingle, J. 2006. Dust Control Field Handbook: Standard Practices for Mitigating Dust on Helipads, Lines of Communication, Airfields, and Base Camps. Vicksburg, MS: US Army Engineer Research and Development Center. (ERDC/GSL SR- 06-7). Vicksburg, MS: US Army Engineer Research and Development Center. (ERDC/GSL SR- 06-7).
  17. SKORSETH, K. and Selim, A. 2000. Gravel Roads Maintenance and Design Manual. Washington DC: Federal Highway Administration.
  18. SMITH, G.A., Makowichuk, P.B. and Carter, D.J.E. 1987. Guidelines for Cost Effective Use and Application of Dust Palliatives. Ottawa, Canada: Transportation Association of Canada.
  19. STEEVENS, J., Suedel, B., Gibson, A., Kennedy, A., Blackburn, W., Splichal, D. and Pierce, J.T. 2007. Environmental Evaluation of Dust Stabilizer Products. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (ERDC/EL TR-07-13).
  20. Unsealed Roads: Design Construction and Maintenance. 2009. Pretoria, South Africa: Department of Transportation. (Technical Recommendations for Highways, No. 20).

APPENDIX A - DUST SCAN STEERING COMMITTEE

Last Name First Name Agency Title
STEERING TEAM    
Albert Steve Western Transportation Institute - Montana State University Director
Armstrong Amit Federal Highway Administration - Western Federal Lands Highway Division Technology Deployment Engineer
Barnes David University of Alaska - Fairbanks Civil Engineering Department Head
Bolander (1) (2) Peter USDA Forest Service Geotechnical/Pavement Engineer
Drewes (1) (2) Bruce Idaho Technology Transfer Center Center Manager
Duran (2) Matt EnviroTech Services, Inc. Vice President of Sales and Marketing
Fay (2) Laura Western Transportation Institute - Montana State University Research Scientist
Finger Susan US Geological Survey Program Coordinator
Huntington (2) George Wyoming Technology Transfer Center - University of Wyoming Senior Engineer/Transportation Training Coordinator
James (2) David University of Nevada - Las Vegas Associate Vice Provost for Academic Programs
Jones (1) (3) David University of California Pavement Research Center - Davis Associate Director/Principal Investigator/Research Engineer
Little (1) Ed US Geological Survey Branch Chief
Main Melvin Midwest Industrial Supply, Inc. Technical Support
Milne (2) Clark Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities Northern Region Maintenance Engineer
Nahra (1) (2) Mark Woodbury County, Iowa County Engineer
Ramos-Reyes Isabel Federal Highway Administration - Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division Technology/Safety Engineer
Rushing John U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center Research Civil Engineer
Skorseth Ken South Dakota Local Technical Assistance Program - SD State University Field Services Manager
Surdahl (1) (2) Roger Federal Highway Administration - Central Federal Lands Highway Division Technology Delivery Engineer
Vitale (1) (2) Bob Midwest Industrial Supply, Inc. CEO Markets Manager
Williams (1) (4) Bethany US Geological Survey Biologist
Yamada Alan US Forest Service Civil Engineer
Coordination & Logistics    
Kociolek (1) (2) Angela Western Transportation Institute - Montana State University Coordinator/Research Scientist
Scott (1) (2) Andrew Western Transportation Institute - Montana State University Editor/Driver
Ulberg Traci Meetings Northwest, LLC Logistics Support

(1) Traveled on the Scan
(2) Co-Author of this Handbook
(3) Lead Author of this Handbook
(4) Co-Author of the Handbook (Chapter 7)

APPENDIX B - SCAN TOUR ASSESSMENT FORMS


View larger version of Appendix B

Visual assessment form used on Scan to assess untreated road sections. (Developed by David Jones).

APPENDIX C - EXAMPLE COUNTY ROAD BUDGET PROPOSAL

WOODBURY COUNTY, IOWA UNPAVED ROAD MAINTENANCE PRACTICE, COST ANALYSIS, AND BUDGET REQUEST

This spreadsheet was prepared as an example of an unpaved road maintenance program. It includes a worksheet for calculating the cost of alternative road maintenance strategies.

In Iowa, granular surfaced roads have either gravel or crushed limestone for surfacing material. Other crushed rock or recycled products can be substituted for these aggregates provided they have an appropriate grading of coarse to fine material.

Standard county practice for maintenance of unpaved roads is to blade the roads every one to three weeks depending upon traffic and weather conditions, with gravel replacement as needed. This requires approximately 1.0 to 1.5 tons of gravel per mile per vehicle of the average daily traffic per year to maintain roads in an acceptable condition. Gravel loss is caused by traffic abrasion, loss of fines through dust and erosion, and by snow removal activities.

Woodbury County policy requires that roads with more than 200 vehicles per day or more than 12 houses per mile receive a dust palliative treatment. No efforts are made to stabilize the road. The example cost comparison in the attached spreadsheet does not include the cost of this surface treatment dust palliative. The addition of this palliative would influence the break even point for maintenance with no treatment vs. that with treatment. The cost of maintaining gravel roads increases with increasing traffic, especially when counts exceed 150 vehicles per day.

EXAMPLE COST COMPARISON MODEL SHEET

The following should be noted in the attached cost comparison model sheet:

  • This is an example only. When using this worksheet, practitioners will need to use their own numbers for wages, equipment costs, equipment productivity, and material costs. Carefully check the spreadsheet cells to be sure that values are carried forward in the correct order in the calculations.
  • Calculations of expenses should include all expenses anticipated for road maintenance and construction.
  • Full cost of staff including wages, benefits, and payroll taxes should be included.
  • Machine costs, if not documented, should be taken from a reliable source.
  • Comparative calculations should be adjusted for local construction prices.
  • Only direct agency costs are considered. Accident reduction and road user cost savings (e.g., vehicle operating costs) are not factored into the analysis, nor is the value of not having to deal with public complaints (with reduced maintenance and dust control provided by improved gravel roads, road administrators receive fewer complaints about road conditions).
  • Cost savings can be directed to improving other segments in the network.
  • Cost savings per mile increases with traffic count. Based on experience with other counties reviewed, gravel replacement may not be necessary for in excess of 15 years.
  • The life of treated roads, when treatment is done annually and fines are kept on the road surface, can exceed 20 years.

Summary of Results

Period Annual Costs (2013 $)
Untreated Treated
First Year $ 45,283 $ 45,259
5 Years $ 13,574 $ 10,629
10 Years $ 10,013 $ 6,848
15 Years $ 8,827 $ 5,426
20 Years $ 8,233 $ 4,714

Construction Data Sheet

Construction - Assumptions
Road has adequate base
5" of gravel placed per mile
Calcium chloride used in example calculations
0.25 gal/sq.yd applied late summer first year
Labor, Equipment and Materials for Construction Hourly Pay or rate Hourly Benefits Total Pay & Benefits Hours or Tons Per Year Price Tons Per Year Sq.Yds Treated Gallons Per Sq.Yd Annual Maint. Cost
Motor Grader Operator $ 19.24 $ 6.36 $ 25.60 16         $ 410
Truck Driver $ 19.24 $ 6.36 $ 25.60 208         $ 5,328
Tanker Driver $ 19.24 $ 6.36 $ 25.60 16         $ 410
Roller Operator $ 19.24 $ 6.36 $ 25.60 16         $ 410
Motor Grader $ 75.00 $ - $ 75.00 16         $ 1,200
Dump Truck $ 60.00 $ - $ 60.00 208         $ 12,487
Water Tanker $ 60.00 $ - $ 60.00 16         $ 960
Roller $ 35.00 $ - $ 35.00 16         $ 560
Gravel (per ton)         $ 6.50 3122     $ 20,292
First Year Construction Cost - Untreated $ 42,056
Calcium chloride (per sq.yd)         $ 0.35   14080 0.65 $ 3,203
First Year Construction Cost - Treated $ 45,259

Maintenance Data Sheets

Untreated Road Maintenance - Assumptions
Maintenance is 50% in first year
Weekly blading - 15 minutes per mile
Annual rock hauled to road to replace loss 1 ton/ADT
April 1 to November 15 maintenance blading AADT is 200
1 hour round trip for gravel hauling
Labor, Equipment and Materials Hourly Pay or rate Hourly Benefits Total Pay & Benefits Hours or Tons Per Year Price Tons Per Year Annual Maint. Cost
Motor Grader Operator $ 19.24 $ 6.36 $ 25.60 23.89     $ 612
Truck Driver $ 19.24 $ 6.36 $ 25.60 13.33     $ 341
Roller Operator $ 19.24 $ 6.36 $ 25.60 13.33     $ 341
Motor Grader $ 75.00 $ - $ 75.00 23.89     $ 1,792
Dump Truck $ 60.00 $ - $ 60.00 13.33     $ 800
Water Tanker $ 60.00 $ - $ 60.00 13.33     $ 800
Roller $ 35.00 $ - $ 35.00 13.33     $ 467
Gravel (per ton)         $ 6.50 200 $ 1,300
Annual Maintenance (Untreated) Construction Maintenance Total Cost   $ 6,453
Costs in first Year $ 42,056 $ 3,227 $ 45,283   $ 45,283
Costs over 5 Years $ 42,056 $ 25,812 $ 67,868   $ 13,574
Costs over 10 Years $ 42,056 $ 58,078 $ 100,134   $ 10,013
Costs over 15 Years $ 42,056 $ 90,343 $ 132,399   $ 8,827
Costs over 20 Years $ 42,056 $ 122,609 $ 164,665   $ 8,233
Treated Road Maintenance - Assumptions
Grader maintenance once per year at rejuvenation
0.40 gal/sq.yd annual rejuvenation
Labor, Equipment and Materials Hourly Pay or rate Hourly Benefits Total Pay & Benefits Hours or Tons Per Year Price Tons Per Year Sq.Yds Treated Gallons Per Sq.Yd Annual Maint. Cost
Motor Grader Operator $ 19.24 $ 6.36 $ 25.60 4         $ 102
Roller Operator $ 19.24 $ 6.36 $ 25.60 2         $ 51
Truck Driver $ 19.24 $ 6.36 $ 25.60 1         $ 26
Motor Grader $ 75.00 $ - $ 75.00 4         $ 300
Roller $ 35.00 $ - $ 35.00 2         $ 70
Water Tanker $ 60.00 $ - $ 60.00 1         $ 60
Gravel (per ton)         $ 6.50 0     $ -
Calcium chloride (per sq.yd)         $ 0.35   14080 $0.40 $ 1,971
Annual Maintenance Cost Construction Maintenance Total Cost

$ 2,580
Costs over 5 Years $ 45,259 $ 7,885 $ 53,144   $ 10,629
Costs over 10 Years $ 45,259 $ 23,224 $ 68,483   $ 6,848
Costs over 15 Years $ 45,259 $ 36,126 $ 81,385   $ 5,426
Costs over 20 Years $ 45,259 $ 49,028 $ 94,287

$ 4,714

Input Data Sheets

Benefit Rate Calculation Days Per Year Hours Per Day Pay Rate Hours per Year Percentage or value Hourly Rate
FICA     19.24   0.0765 $ 1.47

Retirement     19.24   0.0807 $ 1.55
Vacation 15 8 19.24 2080   $ 1.11
Holiday Pay 10 8 19.24 2080   $ 0.74
Sick Leave 12 8 19.24 2080   $ 0.89
Life Insurance       2080 $ 120.00 $ 0.06
Disability Insurance       2080 $ 1,126.00 $ 0.54
Hourly Benefit Value:           $ 6.36
Construction Productivity Hours Per Mile Tons per Load Hours per Load Tons per Mile Truck Hours
Motor Grader 16        

Water Tanker 16        
Roller 16        
Dump Truck   15 1 3122 208
Materials Width Thickness Length Unit Weight Tons Square Yards  
Gravel per mile 25 0 5280 110 3122  

Treated Square Yards 24   5280     14080
Maintenance Productivity: Untreated Road Weeks Per Year Hours Per Week Hours Per Year Grader Hours Tons per Load Hours per Load Tons per Mile per Year Loads per Year Truck Hours
Motor Grader Hours-Maintenance Blading 32 0.33   10.56          
Motor Grader Hours-Rock Spreading/Shaping     13.33 13.33          
Total Motor Grader Hours per mile       23.89          
Roller Hours     13.33            
Truck Hours         15 1 200 13.33 13.33
Water Tanker Hours         15 1 200 13.33 13.33
Maintenance Productivity: Treated Road Hours Per Mile Tons per Load Hours per Load Tons per Mile Truck Hours
Motor Grader 4

Roller 2
Water Tanker 1

APPENDIX D - TRAINING TOPICS

  1. Air quality
    1. Travel distances associated with dust
      1. Wind patterns and intensity
      2. Distance to the point of interest
    2. Human health
      1. Respiratory issues
      2. Residences coated with dust, possibly leading to other health issues
      3. Accident risk due to drivers' reduced visibility
    3. Livestock (and game) health
      1. Increased dental wear due to chewing vegetation coated in dust
      2. Respiratory issues
    4. Crops (and other vegetation)
      1. Problems related to coating crops with dust
    5. Equipment and Vehicle Damage
      1. Reduced life of air filters
      2. Damage related to dust throughout any machine exposed to dust
  2. Water Quality
    1. Runoff into adjacent waterways
    2. Over-application of chemicals
    3. Spills
  3. Reduced Agency Costs
    1. Less frequent routine blading due to stabilizing effects
    2. Less surfacing material loss
    3. Lowered dust loss, leading to less frequent regravelling
  4. User Costs
    1. Wet-weather performance issues
      1. Increased rutting due to higher moisture contents in the presence of hydrophilic treatments
      2. Increased accident risk due to slippery conditions
    2. Dry-weather performance issues
      1. Improved visibility leading to safer travel
      2. Better crust formation reduces washboards (rhythmic corrugations)
      3. Retention of fines, preventing washboarding and raveling
      4. Tolerate some roughness but preserve a durable, drainable crust.
  5. Understanding materials
    1. The importance of testing
    2. How material properties influence performance
    3. Deciding between sources
  6. Choosing an appropriate chemical treatment
    1. Understanding additive categories
    2. Choosing the right chemical treatment
    3. Dealing with suppliers
  7. Applying chemical treatments
    1. Preparing the road
    2. Safety and environmental considerations
    3. Spray-on application process
    4. Mix-in process
  8. Maintaining treated roads
    1. Preventing damage to crusts
    2. Preparing the road
    3. Rejuvenation treatments

Training Tip: Use pictures in addition to words when training

 

APPENDIX E - BASICS ABOUT ROAD DUST SUPPRESSANT CATEGORIES

Dust Suppressant Category Attributes Limitations Application Origin Environmental Impact
Water and Water Absorbing
Water
  • Agglomerates the surface particles together
  • Normally, readily available
  • Evaporates readily
  • Controls dust generally for less than a day
  • Generally the most expensive and labor intensive of the inorganic suppressants
  • Frequency depends on temperature and humidity; typically only effective from 1/2 to 12 hours
  • Any water source
Depends on water source
Calcium chloride (deliquescent)
  • Ability to absorb water is a function of temperature and relative humidity; for example, at 25°C (77°F) it starts to absorb water from the air at 29% relative humidity and at 38°C (100°F) it starts to absorb water at 20% relative humidity
  • Significantly increases surface tension of water film between particles, helping to slow evaporation and further tighten compacted soil as drying progresses
  • Treated road can be regraded and recompacted with less concern for losing moisture and density
  • Requires minimum humidity level to absorb moisture from the air
  • Doesn't perform as well as MgCl2 in long dry spells
  • Performs better than MgCl2 when high humidity is present
  • Slightly corrosive to metal, highly to aluminum and its alloys, attracts moisture thereby prolonging active period for corrosion
  • Rainwater tends to leach out highly soluble chlorides
  • If high fines content in treated material the surface may become slippery when wet
  • Effectiveness when less than 20% solution has performance similar to water
  • Generally 1 to 2 treatments per season
  • Initial application;
  • Flake @ 0.5 to 1.1 kg/m2 (1.0 to 2.0 #/sy), typical application 0.9 kg/m2 (1.7 #/sy) @ 77% purity
  • Liquid 35 to 38% residual @ 0.9 to 1.6 l/m2 (0.2 to 0.35 g/sy), typical application is 38% residual concentrate applied undiluted @ `1.6 l/m2 (0.35 g/sy) - Follow-up:@ 1/2 to 1/3 initial dosage
  • Brine
  • By-product in the form of brine from manufacture of sodium carbonate by ammonia-soda process and of bromine from natural brines
  • Three forms:
  • Flake, or Type I @ 77 to 80% purity
  • Pellet, or Type II @ 94 to 97% purity
  • Clear liquid @ 35 to 38% solids
  • Water quality impact: generally negligible if the proper buffer zone between treated area and water
  • Fresh water aquatic impact: may develop at chloride concentrations as low as 400 ppm for trout up to 10,000 ppm for other fish species
  • Plant impact: some species susceptible such as pine, hemlock, poplar, ash, spruce, and maple
  • Potential concerns with spills of liquid concentrate
Magnesium Chloride (Deliquescent)
  • Starts to absorb water from the air at 32% relative humidity independent of temperature
  • More effective than calcium chloride solutions for increasing surface tension, resulting in a vary hard road surface when dry
  • Treated road can be regraded and recompacted with less concern for losing moisture and density
  • Requires minimum humidity level to absorb moisture from the air
  • More suitable in drier climates
  • In concentrated solutions very corrosive to steel (note: some products may contain a corrosive- inhibiting additive), attracts moisture thereby prolonging active period for corrosion
  • Rainwater tends to leach out highly soluble chlorides
  • If high fines content in treated material the surface may become slippery when wet
  • Effectiveness when less than 20% solution has performance similar to water
  • Generally 1 - 2 treatments per season
  • Initial application: 28 to 35% residual @ 1.4 to 2.3 l/m2 (0.30 to 0.5 g/sy), typical application is 30% residual concentrate applied undiluted @ 2.3 l/m2 (0.50 g/sy)
  • Follow-up: @ 1/2 initial dosage
- Occurs naturally as brine (evaporated)
  • Water quality impact: generally negligible, function of the buffer zone between treated area and water
  • Fresh water aquatic impact: may develop at chloride concentrations as low as 400 ppm for trout up to 10,000 ppm for other fish species
  • Plant impact: some species susceptible such as pine, hemlock, poplar, ash, spruce, and maple
  • Potential concerns with spills
Sodium Chloride (Hygroscopic)
  • Starts to absorb water from the air at 79% relative humidity independent of temperature
  • Increases surface tension slightly less than calcium chloride
  • Can be reworked with a grader if surface is moist
  • Requires minimum humidity level to absorb moisture from the air
  • Moderately corrosive to steel in dilute solutions
  • Tends not to hold up as well as a surface application
  • Generally 1 - 2 treatments per season
  • Higher dosages than calcium treatment
  • Occurs naturally as rock salt and brines
  • Same as calcium chloride
Organic, Non Petroleum
Lignin Derivatives
  • Binds surface particles together
  • Greatly increases dry strength of material under dry condition
  • Retains effectiveness during long dry periods with low humidity
  • With a high amounts of clay, it tends to remain slightly plastic permitting reshaping and additional traffic compaction
  • Can be reworked with a grader if surface is moist
  • May cause corrosion of aluminum and its alloys
  • Surface binding action may be reduced or completely destroyed by heavy rain, owing to solubility of solids in water
  • Becomes slippery when wet, brittle when dry
  • Difficult to maintain as a hard surface, but can be done under adequate moisture conditions
  • Performance varies depending on tree species and extraction process
  • Generally 1 to 2 treatments per season
  • Initial: 10 to 25% residual @ 2.3 to 4.5 l/m2 (0.5 to 1.0 g/sy), typical application is 50% residual concentrate applied undiluted @ 2.3 l/m2 (0.50 g/sy) or
  • 50% residual concentrate applied diluted 1:1 w/water @ 4.5 l/m2 (1.0 g/sy)
  • May be advantageous to apply in two applications
  • Also in powdered form mixed at 1kg to 840 liters (1 lb to 100 gallons) of water and then sprayed
  • Water liquor product of sulfite paper making process, contains lignin in solution
  • Composition depends on tree species and chemicals used to extract cellulose; active constituent is neutralized lignin sulfuric acid containing sugar
  • Water quality impact: none
  • Fresh water aquatic impact: BOD may be high upon spills/leaching into a small streams
  • Plant impact: none
  • Potential concern with spills
Tall Oil Derivatives
  • Adheres surface particles together
  • Greatly increases dry strength of material under dry conditions
  • Surface binding action may be reduced or completely destroyed by long term exposure to heavy rain owing to solubility of solids in water
  • Difficult to maintain as a hard surface
  • Generally 1 treatment every few years
  • Initial: 10 to 20% residual solution @ 1.4 to 4.5 l/m2 (0.3 to 1.0 g/sy); typical application 40 to 50% residual concentrate applied diluted 1:4 w/water @ 2.3 l/m2 (0.50 gal/sy)
  • Distilled product of the kraft (sulfate) paper making process
  • Water quality impact: unknown
  • Fresh water aquatic impact: BOD may be high upon spills/leaching into a small streams
  • Plant impact: none
  • Potential concern with spills
Molasses/Sugar Beet Extract
  • Provides temporary binding of the surface particles
  • Can be reworked with a grader if surface is moist
  • Limited availability
  • Not researched
  • By-product of the sugar cane and sugar beet processing industry
  • Water quality impact: unknown
  • Fresh water aquatic impact: unknown
  • Plant impact: unknown, none expected
Vegetable Oils
  • Agglomerates the surface particles
  • Can be reworked with a grader if surface is moist
  • Limited availability
  • Oxidizes rapidly, then becomes brittle
  • Generally 1 treatment per season
  • Application rate varies by product, typically 1.1 to 2.3 l/m2 (0.25 to 0.50 g/yd2)
  • The warmer the product, the faster the penetration
  • Follow-up: apply at reduced initial dosages
  • Some products: canola oil, soybean oil, cotton seed oil, and linseed oil
  • Water quality impact: unknown
  • Fresh water aquatic impact: some products have been tested and have a low impact
  • Plant impact: unknown, none expected
Bio-fluids (Hydroscopic)
  • Agglomerates surface particles
  • Can be used in freezing temperatures
  • Can be reworked with a grader if surface is moist
  • Requires minimum humidity level to absorb moisture from the air
  • Pricing closely tied to bio-diesel and grain markets, therefore volatile
  • Generally 2 to 6 treatments per season
  • Initial: 0.3 gal/sq yd depending on road surface condition, and product
  • Frequency depends on temperature and humidity
  • Can be manufactured or a by-product of bio-diesel manufacturing
  • Plant or animal based, is renewable resource
  • Glycerin
  • Water quality impact : none
  • Fresh water quality impact: none
  • Plant impact: none
Organic Petroleum/Petroleum Resins/Mineral Oils
Asphalt based
  • Binds and/or agglomerates surface particles because of asphalt adhesive properties
  • Serves to waterproof the road
  • Under dry conditions some products may not maintain resilience
  • If too many fines in surface and high in asphaltenes it can form a crust and fragment under traffic and in wet weather
  • Some products are difficult to maintain
  • Generally 1 to 2 treatments per season
  • Initial: 0.5 to 4.5 l/m2 (0.1 to 1 g/sy) depending on road surface condition, dilution, and product
  • Higher viscosity emulsions are used for more open-graded surface materials
  • Follow-up: @ reduced initial dosages
  • Cutback asphalt: SC-70
  • Asphalt emulsion: SS-1, SS-1h, CSS- 1, or CSS-1h mixed with 5+ parts water by volume
  • Modified asphalt emulsions
  • Petroleum oils
  • Water quality impact : none after curing
  • Fresh water quality impact: none after curing
  • Plant impact: none, provided no direct application to plants
  • Beware spills
  • May have regulatory storage and reporting requirements
Petroleum Resins
  • Binds and/or agglomerates surface particles
  • Petroleum additives reduce moisture sensitivity
  • Crust is difficult to maintain
  • Generally 1 to 2 treatments per season
  • Initial: 0.5 to 4.5 l/m2 (0.1 to 1 g/sy) depending on road surface condition, dilution, and product
  • Combination of lignin and petroleum
  • Water quality impact : none after curing
  • Fresh water quality impact: none after curing
  • Plant impact: none, provided no direct application to plants
  • Beware spills
  • May have regulatory storage and reporting requirements
Mineral oils and base oils
  • Agglomerates surface particles
  • Applied neat - does not require dilution with water
  • Treated road can be re-graded and re-compacted without reapplication
  • Many products fall under this category - lack of test data
  • Temporary dust control
  • Generally 1 to 2 treatments per season
  • Initial: 0.3 gal/sq yd depending on road surface condition, and product
  • Follow-up: @ reduced initial dosages
  • Derived from crude oil solely through a physical separation process
  • Emulsified oils
  • Mineral oils
  • Can also be industrial waste
  • Wide variety of ingredients in these products
  • "Used" products are toxic
  • Oil in products might be toxic
  • Need product specific analysis
  • Potential concerns with spills and leaching prior to the product "curing"
  • May have regulatory storage and reporting requirements
Synthetic Polymer Emulsions
Synthetic Polymer Emulsions (Acrylates, polyvinyl acetates, polyvinyl chlorates, etc)
  • Binds surface particles through adhesive properties
  • Can increase shear strength of material
  • Can be used in stabilization and dust control applications
  • Difficult to maintain as a hard surface
  • Can break down under UV light
  • Performs best if mixed in
  • Generally 1 treatment every few years
  • Initial: 5 to 15% residual solution @ 1.4 to 4.5 l/m2 (0.3 to 1.0 g/sy); typical application is 40 to 50% residual concentrate applied diluted 1:9 w/water @ 2.3 l/m2 (0.50 gal/sy)
  • Can be by-product of the adhesive manufacturing process
  • Specifically formulated prime products to meet engineered specifications
  • Typically 40 to 60% solids
  • Water quality impact: none
  • Fresh water aquatic impact: generally low
  • Plant impact: none
  • Need product specific analysis
Synthetic Fluids
Synthetic Fluids ("Synthetic" defined by EPA environmental regulatory testing requirements [40 CFR 435])
  • Adhesive and cohesive binding mechanism
  • Increases shear strength
  • "Waterproofs material
  • Dust control and material stabilization
  • Does not require dilution with water
  • Performs at extreme temperatures
  • Can be reworked with a grader
None documented
  • Generally 1 treatment per season
  • Initial: 0.2 gal/sq yd depending on road surface condition, and product
  • Follow-up: @ reduced initial dosages
  • Manufactured specifically for dust control and surface stabilization
  • Produced by the reaction of specific chemical feedstock
  • Water quality impact - none
  • Fresh water quality impact - none
  • Plant impact - none Meets EPA environmental based criteria for synthetic (sediment toxicity, biodegradability, PAH content, aquatic toxicity, and oil sheen free)
Electrochemical/sulfonated oils and Enzymes
Electrochemical derivatives, sulfonated oils, ionic stabilizers, and enzymes
  • Changes characteristics of clay size particles
  • Generally effective regardless of climatic conditions
  • Good compaction aid
  • Performance dependent on fine clay mineralogy
  • Needs time to "set-up", that is react with the clay fraction
  • Difficult to maintain if full strengthening reaction occurs
  • Limited life span
  • Generally diluted 1 part product to anywhere from 100 to 600 parts water
  • Diluted product then used to compact the scarified surface
  • Proprietary, sulfonated oils and ionic stabilizers are often sulfuric acid based
  • Need product specific analysis
  • Some products are highly acidic in their undiluted form
Other, Mechanical
Clay Additives (Bentonite is most common)
  • Agglomerates with fine dust particles
  • Generally increases dry strength of material under dry conditions
- The surface may become slippery when wet if too much is added and soil fines content increased to above 20%
  • Generally 1 treatment every 5 years
  • Typical application rate is at 1 to 3% by dry weight
  • Mined natural clay deposits
  • Water quality impact: unknown
  • Fresh water aquatic impact: none
  • Plant impact: none

Previous Chapter « Table of Contents » Next Chapter

Explore CTIP
Innovation Exchange Webinars

Innovation Exchange Webinars

This webinar series advances peer to peer conversations for launching change to encourage innovative problem solving in transportation.

View webinars on-demand →

Stay connected with
Center for Local Aid Support (CLAS)

Sign up to receive the CLAS quarterly e-Newsletter.

Online Training Booklet for LTAPs

Download PDF for more information on available online training resources.

back to top