Score: -6 (6/11/12)

Mendocino County Grand Jury • 2011-2012

Rubberized Asphalt Concrete in Mendocino County Dated April 2, 2012

Published: April 02, 2012 7 pages

Ver PDF original

⚠️ 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.

Findings and Recommendations 15 findings

The County Board of Supervisors is the District Board of Directors.

No recommendations for this finding

RAC projects divert waste tires from the landfill.

Related Recommendations (3)

Mendocino County Public Works agencies (Cities of Willits, Fort Bragg, and Ukiah and the DOT) use RAC for their projects for pavement top lift and overlays. (Findings 2-6)

Mendocino County Public Works agencies take advantage of the State Tire Recycling Grant funds. (Findings 2-6)

The District work cooperatively with the owner-operators of all asphalt plants to help each other achieve their desired goals. (Findings 2-9)

RAC street and highway surfaces provide a quiet ride for the traveling public.

Related Recommendations (3)

Mendocino County Public Works agencies (Cities of Willits, Fort Bragg, and Ukiah and the DOT) use RAC for their projects for pavement top lift and overlays. (Findings 2-6)

Mendocino County Public Works agencies take advantage of the State Tire Recycling Grant funds. (Findings 2-6)

The District work cooperatively with the owner-operators of all asphalt plants to help each other achieve their desired goals. (Findings 2-9)

The design thickness of RAC is less than AC.

Related Recommendations (3)

Mendocino County Public Works agencies (Cities of Willits, Fort Bragg, and Ukiah and the DOT) use RAC for their projects for pavement top lift and overlays. (Findings 2-6)

Mendocino County Public Works agencies take advantage of the State Tire Recycling Grant funds. (Findings 2-6)

The District work cooperatively with the owner-operators of all asphalt plants to help each other achieve their desired goals. (Findings 2-9)

RAC is not a new, untested product.

Related Recommendations (6)

Mendocino County Public Works agencies (Cities of Willits, Fort Bragg, and Ukiah and the DOT) use RAC for their projects for pavement top lift and overlays. (Findings 2-6)

Mendocino County Public Works agencies take advantage of the State Tire Recycling Grant funds. (Findings 2-6)

The District work cooperatively with the owner-operators of all asphalt plants to help each other achieve their desired goals. (Findings 2-9)

The District conduct self-funded odor monitoring. (Findings 5, 7-14)

The District reconsiders the need and value to the taxpayers for RAC odor plans and neighborhood patrols. (Findings 5, 7-15)

The District be aware of what other Air Management Districts in the State are doing. (Findings 5, 7, 12, 15)

There are State Tire Recycling Grant Funds available to Public Works agencies that use RAC on their projects.

Related Recommendations (3)

Mendocino County Public Works agencies (Cities of Willits, Fort Bragg, and Ukiah and the DOT) use RAC for their projects for pavement top lift and overlays. (Findings 2-6)

Mendocino County Public Works agencies take advantage of the State Tire Recycling Grant funds. (Findings 2-6)

The District work cooperatively with the owner-operators of all asphalt plants to help each other achieve their desired goals. (Findings 2-9)

Extensive studies and testing of RAC by numerous government agencies and industry associations indicate that there are no significant differences between AC and RAC air emissions.

Related Recommendations (3)

The District work cooperatively with the owner-operators of all asphalt plants to help each other achieve their desired goals. (Findings 2-9)

The District conduct self-funded odor monitoring. (Findings 5, 7-14)

The District reconsiders the need and value to the taxpayers for RAC odor plans and neighborhood patrols. (Findings 5, 7-15)

Extensive studies and testing of RAC by numerous government agencies and industry associations indicate that there is not an issue with RAC regarding odor.

Related Recommendations (3)

The District work cooperatively with the owner-operators of all asphalt plants to help each other achieve their desired goals. (Findings 2-9)

The District conduct self-funded odor monitoring. (Findings 5, 7-14)

The District reconsiders the need and value to the taxpayers for RAC odor plans and neighborhood patrols. (Findings 5, 7-15)

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.

Related Recommendations (3)

The District work cooperatively with the owner-operators of all asphalt plants to help each other achieve their desired goals. (Findings 2-9)

The District conduct self-funded odor monitoring. (Findings 5, 7-14)

The District reconsiders the need and value to the taxpayers for RAC odor plans and neighborhood patrols. (Findings 5, 7-15)

F10

The District uses California Health and Safety Code, which defines odor as a public nuisance.

Related Recommendations (2)

The District conduct self-funded odor monitoring. (Findings 5, 7-14)

The District reconsiders the need and value to the taxpayers for RAC odor plans and neighborhood patrols. (Findings 5, 7-15)

F11

The District has determined that odor is considered a “public nuisance violation” when there are three or more complaints to the District in a 24 hour period. 4

Related Recommendations (2)

The District conduct self-funded odor monitoring. (Findings 5, 7-14)

The District reconsiders the need and value to the taxpayers for RAC odor plans and neighborhood patrols. (Findings 5, 7-15)

F12

There have never been three RAC odor complaints to the District in any 24- hour period.

Related Recommendations (2)

The District conduct self-funded odor monitoring. (Findings 5, 7-14)

The District reconsiders the need and value to the taxpayers for RAC odor plans and neighborhood patrols. (Findings 5, 7-15)

F13

The District requires construction contractors to prepare an “odor control plan” and to conduct “neighborhood odor patrols” as conditions on their RAC permits.

Related Recommendations (3)

To increase transparency, Mendocino County Public Works agencies clearly state in their bid documents for RAC projects those District permit requirements that could increase the bid prices. (Findings 13–15)

The District conduct self-funded odor monitoring. (Findings 5, 7-14)

The District reconsiders the need and value to the taxpayers for RAC odor plans and neighborhood patrols. (Findings 5, 7-15)

F14

The District is the only Air Quality Management District in Northern California to require contractors to provide RAC odor mitigation plans and conduct RAC odor patrols.

Related Recommendations (3)

The District conduct self-funded odor monitoring. (Findings 5, 7-14)

The District reconsiders the need and value to the taxpayers for RAC odor plans and neighborhood patrols. (Findings 5, 7-15)

F15

Mendocino County taxpayers continue to pay the additional costs associated with manufacture and hauling of RAC from outside Mendocino County.

Related Recommendations (2)

The District reconsiders the need and value to the taxpayers for RAC odor plans and neighborhood patrols. (Findings 5, 7-15)

Agency Responses 3

Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.

AQMD

April 02, 2012 • 9 pages • 14 responses • Score: -9 (+0, 5, -9) View Details ▾

PDF

14 responses to findings and recommendations

The County Board of Supervisors is the District Board of Directors.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

The District agrees with this finding. The Air Quality Management District actually has two Boards, the District Board of Directors and the Hearing Board. As established by California Health and Safety Code, Section 40100, the Board of Supervisors sits as the Air Quality Management District Board of Directors. The makeup of the Board could include members from the four incorporated cities if the Board so desired. The Air Quality Management District Board establishes general policy direction for the District, approves the budget, adopts or amends regulations and appoints the Air Pollution Contr...

RAC projects divert waste tires from the landfill.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

The District is unable to confirm or deny this finding. The origin of the products used in the production of Rubberized Asphalt Concrete is not under the purview of the District. Finding #3 - RAC street and highway surfaces provide a quiet ride for the traveling public. AQMD Response: The District is unable to confirm or deny this finding. The quality of street and highway surfaces using Rubberized Asphalt Concrete or non-Rubberized Asphalt Concrete is not under the purview of the District. Finding #4 - The design thickness of RAC is less than AC. AQMD Response: The District is unable to confi...

RAC street and highway surfaces provide a quiet ride for the traveling public.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

The District is unable to confirm or deny this finding. The quality of street and highway surfaces using Rubberized Asphalt Concrete or non-Rubberized Asphalt Concrete is not under the purview of the District. Finding #4 - The design thickness of RAC is less than AC. AQMD Response: The District is unable to confirm or deny this finding. The design thickness of street and highway surfaces using Rubberized Asphalt Concrete or non-Rubberized Asphalt Concrete is not under the purview of the District. Finding #5 - RAC is not a new, untested product. AQMD Response: The District partially disagrees w...

The design thickness of RAC is less than AC.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

The District is unable to confirm or deny this finding. The design thickness of street and highway surfaces using Rubberized Asphalt Concrete or non-Rubberized Asphalt Concrete is not under the purview of the District. Finding #5 - RAC is not a new, untested product. AQMD Response: The District partially disagrees with this finding. Although there have been studies and testing done on Rubberized Asphalt Concrete, the District is unaware of any studies conducted at a facility where homes are located less than 200 feet from the Asphalt Batch Plant. The North State Street Asphalt Batch Plant is s...

RAC is not a new, untested product.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

The District partially disagrees with this finding. Although there have been studies and testing done on Rubberized Asphalt Concrete, the District is unaware of any studies conducted at a facility where homes are located less than 200 feet from the Asphalt Batch Plant. The North State Street Asphalt Batch Plant is surrounded on three sides by residential neighborhoods and is less than 200 feet from low income housing. Because of the geography in the area, the North State Street Asphalt Batch Plant sits at a lower elevation than the surrounding residential housing. In addition, the North State ...

There are State Tire Recycling Grant Funds available to Public Works agencies that use RAC on their projects.

Response: Disagree Score: -1

The District is unable to confirm or deny this finding. The State Tire Recycling Grant Funds are not available to the District therefore the District is not aware of the requirements for public works agencies receiving those grant funds for their projects. Finding #7 - Extensive studies and testing of RAC by numerous government agencies and industry associations indicate that there are no significant differences between AC and RAC air emissions. AQMD Response: The District disagrees with this finding. Although there have been studies and testing done on Rubberized Asphalt Concrete, indicating...

Extensive studies and testing of RAC by numerous government agencies and industry associations indicate that there are no significant differences between AC and RAC air emissions.

Response: Disagree Score: -1

The District disagrees with this finding. Although there have been studies and testing done on Rubberized Asphalt Concrete, indicating that emissions from Rubberized Asphalt Concrete are similar to traditional Hot-Mix Asphalt, the potential increase in emissions of air toxics and other regulated compounds, in addition to State law and District regulations, require the District to evaluate emissions based on the specific facility as well as the new process and/or specific equipment used. The CalTrans Highway 20 Study conducted in 2005 in Lake County in which the District took part, included emi...

Extensive studies and testing of RAC by numerous government agencies and industry associations indicate that there is not an issue with RAC regarding odor.

Response: Disagree Score: -1

The District disagrees with this finding. Although there have been studies and testing done on Rubberized Asphalt Concrete, the District is unaware of any studies conducted at a facility where homes are located less than 200 feet from the Asphalt Batch Plant. The CalTrans Highway 20 Study conducted in 2005 involved an Asphalt Batch Plant located more than 3/4 of a mile from homes. During the Highway 20 Study (in which District staff took part) objectionable sulfur odors were detected during the production of the Rubberized Asphalt Concrete as well as during the transport and lay-down activitie...

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.

Response: Disagree Score: -1

The District disagrees with this finding. The use of 'warm-mix' rubberized asphalt is not approved for all road projects. For example, CalTrans used warm mix for the Highway 1 project in 2011, but chose not to use warm mix for similar work at the same time on Highway 128. The District cannot mandate the use of "Warm Mix" or "Hot Mix" on a project. The production of all forms of asphalt require proper temperature control, however production temperature and odors must be balanced with other factors. Lowering the production temperature may not comply with the bid specifications required due to th...

F10

The District uses California Health and Safety Code, which defines odor as a public nuisance.

Response: Disagree Score: -1

The District disagrees with this finding. The District is a regulatory enforcement agency. The District enforces the California Health and Safety Code as well the Federal Clean Air Act and District regulations. Public Nuisance is defined in California Health and Safety Code, Section 41700. Specifically Section 41700 states: "...A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever quantities of air contaminants or other material that cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or that endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety ...

F11

The District has determined that odor is considered a “public nuisance violation” when there are three or more complaints to the District in a 24 hour period. 4

Response: Disagree Score: -1

The District disagrees with this finding. The District has not made the determination as stated above. Three or more complaints in a 24-hour period do not automatically constitute a "public nuisance violation". Three or more complaints from unrelated individuals who are not operating in concert, is a general guideline for enforcement staff. Odors must be confirmed by District staff and the source of the odors must be clearly identified. Each case is reviewed individually taking into consideration all available evidence. Finding #12 - There have never been three RAC odor complaints to the Distr...

F13

The District requires construction contractors to prepare an “odor control plan” and to conduct “neighborhood odor patrols” as conditions on their RAC permits.

Response: Disagree Score: -1

, the District does not permit, track or regulate the transport and lay-down activities associated with the use of Rubberized Asphalt Concrete. Therefore, the District has never required odor control plans or neighborhood odor patrols from contractors. The requirement for an "odor control plan" in the case of Rubberized Asphalt Concrete production is a permit condition contained in the permit issued to the production facility only. Finding #15 - Mendocino County taxpayers continue to pay the additional costs associated with manufacture and hauling of RAC from outside Mendocino County. AQMD Res...

F14

The District is the only Air Quality Management District in Northern California to require contractors to provide RAC odor mitigation plans and conduct RAC odor patrols.

Response: Disagree Score: -1

The District disagrees with this finding. As stated in the District's response to Finding #13, the District does not permit, track or regulate the transport and lay-down activities associated with the use of Rubberized Asphalt Concrete. Therefore, the District has never required odor control plans or neighborhood odor patrols from contractors. The requirement for an "odor control plan" in the case of Rubberized Asphalt Concrete production is a permit condition contained in the permit issued to the production facility only. Finding #15 - Mendocino County taxpayers continue to pay the additional...

F15

Mendocino County taxpayers continue to pay the additional costs associated with manufacture and hauling of RAC from outside Mendocino County.

Response: Disagree Score: -1

The District disagrees with this finding. The District did not receive an application for the production of Rubberized Asphalt Concrete until 2011. A permit was issued for the project at the time and has since expired. The District cannot issue a permit for the production of Rubberized Asphalt Concrete unless an application has been submitted. At the time of the Grand Jury Report, the District had not received an application from any facility for a permit to produce Rubberized Asphalt Concrete in Mendocino County. Since there have been no applications for the production of Rubberized Asphalt C...

City of Fort Bragg

April 02, 2012 • 4 pages • 21 responses • Score: +2 (+4, 6, -2) View Details ▾

PDF

21 responses to findings and recommendations

The County Board of Supervisors is the District Board of Directors.

Response: Unknown Score: 0

Mendocino County Public Works agencies (Cities of Willits, Fort Bragg, and Ukiah and the DOT) use RAC for their projects for pavement top lift and overlays. (Findings 2-6)

Response: Will Implement

Scheduled: Future street resurfacing projects Score: +1

Where practical and depending on specific design, use of RAC will be utilized on street projects within the City of Fort Bragg. The last two resurfacing projects have utilized rubberized chip with slurry seal with good results. RAC will be considered on all future street resurfacing projects.

RAC projects divert waste tires from the landfill.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

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.

Mendocino County Public Works agencies take advantage of the State Tire Recycling Grant funds. (Findings 2-6)

Response: Implemented

Scheduled: Ongoing Score: 0

The City of Fort Bragg has already taken advantage of RAC grants on two previous streets projects and will continue to do so in the future as long as those funds are offered.

RAC street and highway surfaces provide a quiet ride for the traveling public.

Response: Agree Score: +1

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.

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

The City of Fort Bragg always requires contractors to be responsible for obtaining all necessary permits associated with a construction project and does not incorporate particular requirements from other agencies. It is the contractors responsibility to contact permitting agencies and establish necessary costs associated with permitting

The design thickness of RAC is less than AC.

Response: Disagree Score: -1

Do not agree because rubberized products can be used in a number of surface treatments and design thickness would be determined by the engineer.

The District work cooperatively with the owner-operators of all asphalt plants to help each other achieve their desired goals. (Findings 2-9)

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

RAC is not a new, untested product.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree; RAC continues to evolve with materials and methods.

The District conduct self-funded odor monitoring. (Findings 5, 7-14)

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

There are State Tire Recycling Grant Funds available to Public Works agencies that use RAC on their projects.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree; City of Fort Bragg has received funds on two different occasions.

The District reconsiders the need and value to the taxpayers for RAC odor plans and neighborhood patrols. (Findings 5, 7-15)

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

Extensive studies and testing of RAC by numerous government agencies and industry associations indicate that there are no significant differences between AC and RAC air emissions.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

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.

The District be aware of what other Air Management Districts in the State are doing. (Findings 5, 7, 12, 15)

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

Extensive studies and testing of RAC by numerous government agencies and industry associations indicate that there is not an issue with RAC regarding odor.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

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.

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.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

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.

F10

The District uses California Health and Safety Code, which defines odor as a public nuisance.

Response: Unknown Score: 0

F11

The District has determined that odor is considered a “public nuisance violation” when there are three or more complaints to the District in a 24 hour period. 4

Response: Unknown Score: 0

F13

The District requires construction contractors to prepare an “odor control plan” and to conduct “neighborhood odor patrols” as conditions on their RAC permits.

Response: Unknown Score: 0

F14

The District is the only Air Quality Management District in Northern California to require contractors to provide RAC odor mitigation plans and conduct RAC odor patrols.

Response: Unknown Score: 0

F15

Mendocino County taxpayers continue to pay the additional costs associated with manufacture and hauling of RAC from outside Mendocino County.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Unable to confirm or deny what costs Mendocino County taxpayers are responsible for when RAC is utilized.

City of Willits Explanations

September 20, 2012 • 2 pages • 7 responses • Score: +1 (+2, 0, -1) View Details ▾

PDF

7 responses to findings and recommendations

Mendocino County Public Works agencies (Cities of Willits, Fort Bragg, and Ukiah and the DOT) use RAC for their projects for pavement top lift and overlays. (Findings 2-6)

Response: Will Implement

Scheduled: Future projects where use of RAC is deemed warranted and reasonable Score: +1

City of Willits staff has not implemented this recommendation, but will implement it in a future projects where use of RAC is deemed warranted and reasonable.

Mendocino County Public Works agencies take advantage of the State Tire Recycling Grant funds. (Findings 2-6)

Response: Will Implement

Scheduled: Future project where use of RAC is deemed warranted and reasonable Score: +1

City of Willits staff has not implemented this recommendation, but will implement it in a future project where use of RAC is deemed warranted and reasonable.

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

City of Willits staff will NOT be implementing this recommendation.

Extensive studies and testing of RAC by numerous government agencies and industry associations indicate that there are no significant differences between AC and RAC air emissions.

Response: Unknown Score: 0

City of Willits staff is not able to confirm or deny this statement.

Extensive studies and testing of RAC by numerous government agencies and industry associations indicate that there is not an issue with RAC regarding odor.

Response: Unknown Score: 0

City of Willits staff is not able to confirm or deny this statement.

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.

Response: Unknown Score: 0

City of Willits staff is not able to confirm or deny this statement.

F15

Mendocino County taxpayers continue to pay the additional costs associated with manufacture and hauling of RAC from outside Mendocino County.

Response: Unknown Score: 0

City of Willits staff is not able to confirm or deny this statement.

No Responses Found 2

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.

Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Elected County Office

Ukiah City