Mendocino County Grand Jury
• 2011-2012
• Agency Response
Response to:
Rubberized Asphalt in Mendocino County
Response Form Grand Jury Report Title: Rubberized Asphalt Concrete in Mendocino County Report Dated : April 2, 2012*
⚠️ Aviso de traducción: Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Note: Missing finding numbers detected: F10, F11, F12, F13, F14
Findings and Recommendations 9 findings
F2
RAC projects divert waste tires from the landfill. City of Fort Bragg staff is unable to confirm or deny this finding. While it seems logical that use of waste tires in RAC would reduce the volume being disposed of at a landfill, city staff has no direct knowledge of that finding.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
RAC projects divert waste tires from the landfill. City of Fort Bragg staff is unable to confirm or deny this finding. While it seems logical that use of waste tires in RAC would reduce the volume being disposed of at a landfill, city staff has no direct knowledge of that finding.
F3
RAC street and highway surfaces provide a quiet ride for the traveling public. Based upon feedback from local residents who own property adjacent to a street that had a rubberized chip seal surface installed, the noise level appears to be quieter. City of Fort Bragg has no other evidence regarding noise level of RAC surfacing. The design thickness of RAC is less than AC.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
RAC street and highway surfaces provide a quiet ride for the traveling public. Based upon feedback from local residents who own property adjacent to a street that had a rubberized chip seal surface installed, the noise level appears to be quieter. City of Fort Bragg has no other evidence regarding noise level of RAC surfacing. The design thickness of RAC is less than AC.
F4
Do not agree because rubberized products can be used in a number of surface treatments and design thickness would be determined by the engineer.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
Do not agree because rubberized products can be used in a number of surface treatments and design thickness would be determined by the engineer.
F5
RAC is not a new, untested product. Agree; RAC continues to evolve with materials and methods. There are State Tire Recycling Grant Funds available to Public Works agencies
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
RAC is not a new, untested product. Agree; RAC continues to evolve with materials and methods. There are State Tire Recycling Grant Funds available to Public Works agencies
F6
that use RAC on their projects. Agree; City of Fort Bragg has received funds on two different occasions. Extensive studies and testing of RAC by numerous government agencies and
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
that use RAC on their projects. Agree; City of Fort Bragg has received funds on two different occasions. Extensive studies and testing of RAC by numerous government agencies and
F7
industry associations indicate that there are no significant differences between AC and RAC air emissions. Unable to confirm or deny as this is outside City staff purview. While we agree that there have been studies City staff is not familiar with these studies or their conclusions. Extensive studies and testing of RAC by numerous government agencies and
Related Recommendations (1)
R7
industry associations indicate that there are no significant differences between AC and RAC air emissions. Unable to confirm or deny as this is outside City staff purview. While we agree that there have been studies City staff is not familiar with these studies or their conclusions. Extensive studies and testing of RAC by numerous government agencies and
F8
industry associations indicate that there is not an issue with RAC regarding odor. Unable to confirm or deny as this is outside City staff purview. While we agree that there have been studies City staff is not familiar with these studies or their conclusions.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8
industry associations indicate that there is not an issue with RAC regarding odor. Unable to confirm or deny as this is outside City staff purview. While we agree that there have been studies City staff is not familiar with these studies or their conclusions.
F9
Methods to mitigate any possible RAC odor at the manufacturing plant are to use "warm-mix" RAC, maintaining low temperatures, or inclusion of an "asphalt additive" to the RAC mix. Unable to confirm or deny as this is outside City staff purview. City staff is unfamiliar with RAC process and how potential odors could be addressed.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9
Methods to mitigate any possible RAC odor at the manufacturing plant are to use "warm-mix" RAC, maintaining low temperatures, or inclusion of an "asphalt additive" to the RAC mix. Unable to confirm or deny as this is outside City staff purview. City staff is unfamiliar with RAC process and how potential odors could be addressed.
F15
Mendocino County taxpayers continue to pay the additional costs associated with manufacture and hauling of RAC from outside Mendocino County. Unable to confirm or deny what costs Mendocino County taxpayers are responsible for when RAC is utilized.
Related Recommendations (1)
R15
Mendocino County taxpayers continue to pay the additional costs associated with manufacture and hauling of RAC from outside Mendocino County. Unable to confirm or deny what costs Mendocino County taxpayers are responsible for when RAC is utilized. Recommendations:
* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.