PENNDOT RESEARCH
PENN S TATE
The Pennsylvania State University
Transportation
University Park, PA 16802-4710
(814) 865-1891 www.pti.psu.edu

1. Report No.
FHWA-PA-2008-005-PSU 008
4. Title and Subtitle
2. Government Accession No.
Pavement Markings State-of-the-Practice Study
7. Author(s)
Philip M. Garvey, Stephen J. Damin and Martin T. Pietrucha
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
The Thomas D. Larson Pennsylvania Transportation Institute
The Pennsylvania State University
201 Transportation Research Building
University Park, PA 16802-4710
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation
Bureau of Planning and Research
Commonwealth Keystone Building
400 North Street, 6 th
Floor
Harrisburg, PA 17120-0064
15. Supplementary Notes
COTR: Paul Koza, 717-346-9564
16. Abstract
Technical Report Documentation Page
3. Recipient’s Catalog No.
5. Report Date
February 29, 2008
6. Performing Organization Code
8. Performing Organization Report No.
PTI 2008-08
10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)
11. Contract or Grant No.
510602, PSU 008
13. Type of Report and Period Covered
Final Report: July 2, 2007 – March 1, 2008
14. Sponsoring Agency Code
Longitudinal pavement markings are used to delineate the limits of a travel lane, convey regulations or warnings, provide guidance to road users, and/or supplement other traffic control devices. The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation is interested in identifying pavement marking products, practices, and “lessons learned” in other states with climates and winter maintenance activities similar to those found in Pennsylvania. The Department executed an agreement with The Thomas D. Larson Pennsylvania
Transportation Institute at Penn State to perform research in this area to learn more about pavement marking practices. The goal of this research was to draw on the successes and failures of other states to improve Pennsylvania’s pavement marking program. This research report documents pavement marking practices in 19 other states and the solutions these states have developed and implemented to improve the visibility and useful life of pavement markings. This report includes a matrix that details the current state-of-the-practice in state pavement marking programs.
17. Key Words
Pavement markings, product, practice, traffic control device, application, performance, visibility, durability, winter maintenance
18. Distribution Statement
No restrictions. This document is available from the National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, VA 22161
19. Security Classif. (of this report)
Unclassified
20. Security Classif. (of this page)
Unclassified
21. No. of Pages
43
22. Price
Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized

PAVEMENT MARKINGS STATE-OF-THE-PRACTICE STUDY
FINAL REPORT
Work Order No. PSU-008
Intergovernmental Agreement No. 510602
Prepared for
Bureau of Planning and Research
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Department of Transportation
By
Philip M. Garvey, Stephen J. Damin and Martin T. Pietrucha
The Thomas D. Larson Pennsylvania Transportation Institute
The Pennsylvania State University
Transportation Research Building
University Park, PA 16802-4710
February 29, 2008
PTI 2008-08
This work was sponsored by the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation and the U.S.
Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of either the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, or the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at the time of publication. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ....................................................................................1
LITERATURE AND WEBSITE REVIEW ....................................................................................1
STATE-OF-THE-PRACTICE SURVEY........................................................................................8
SUMMARY...................................................................................................................................22
REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................................25
APPENDIX A: SURVEY INSTRUMENT
APPENDIX B: FINAL SURVEY RESULTS

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) is interested in identifying pavement marking products, practices, and “lessons learned” in other states with climates and winter maintenance activities similar to those found in Pennsylvania. The Department executed an agreement with Penn State’s Pennsylvania Transportation Institute (PTI) to perform research in this area to learn more about pavement marking practices. The goal of this research was to draw on the successes and failures of other states to improve Pennsylvania’s pavement marking program. This research report documents pavement marking practices in 19 other states and the solutions these states have developed and implemented to improve the visibility and useful life of pavement markings. This report includes a matrix that details the current state-of-the-practice in state pavement marking programs.
Longitudinal pavement markings are used to delineate the limits of a travel lane, convey regulations or warnings, provide guidance to road users, and supplement other traffic control devices. Part 3 of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices contains information about pavement marking application standardization, including color, width, and pattern; however the performance, durability, and overall efficiency of pavement marking materials depends on various factors (including material attributes, installation quality, traffic volume, weather, and snow plowing activities) such that the performance of a pavement marking material in one state will not necessarily match the performance in other states. It is reasonable, therefore, to expect that states will tailor their pavement marking practices to their respective local conditions. It is also reasonable to expect that states with similar climates and winter maintenance activities would have similar experiences with pavement marking successes and failures. This project was aimed at identifying states with characteristics similar to Pennsylvania’s and taking advantage of their experiences to improve Pennsylvania’s pavement marking program.
LITERATURE AND WEBSITE REVIEW
In Task 1, a brief literature and state DOT website review was conducted to determine current state pavement marking practices with specific emphasis on those geared toward providing effective marking under wet, nighttime and late season/cold temperature conditions. As some
1

members of the research team were recently involved in a related project for the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) (Donnell, Garvey, Sathyanarayanan, and Lee, 2005), many of the findings reported here were derived from that study.
Wet Weather Pavement Marking Practices
Pavement marking retroreflectivity depends on the light from oncoming headlamps striking reflective elements (e.g., glass beads) on the surface of the marking. When this happens, a portion of the headlamp beam is directed back toward drivers, allowing them to see the markings at night. When it rains, water on the pavement markings disturbs their optical properties. Like a mirror, instead of reflecting the light back to the light source, wet markings reflect much of the light from the vehicle forward, away from the driver at an angle equal to, but opposite of the entering (i.e., entrance) angle of the light. The markings lose much of their retroreflectivity and drivers cannot see them.
A great deal of research and product development has gone into solving this problem. Most of the solutions, however, are prohibitively expensive (e.g., preformed tape) or lack durability (e.g., large glass beads) under Pennsylvania’s harsh winters and punishing winter maintenance activities. PennDOT wished to identify the practices and lessons learned in other states with similar climates and winter maintenance activities to determine if there were cost-effective marking products or techniques currently in use that might be applied successfully to improve wet-night pavement marking visibility in Pennsylvania.
In a survey of state departments of transportation (i.e., Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Iowa,
Kentucky, Mississippi, North Dakota, Oregon, and Pennsylvania), Donnell et al. (2005) asked what new practices these agencies had implemented to increase the visibility of pavement markings under wet conditions. The following responses were given:
•
Pavement markings on rumble strips;
•
Wet night reflectance tape, also known as structured tape (e.g., 3M’s A-20 and A-21 products);
•
Larger glass beads;
•
Double drop beads (large and small bead diameter);
2

•
Increased use of retroreflective raised pavement markers;
•
Inlay tape and epoxy; and
•
“Rainline” thermoplastic (profile thermoplastic road marking specifically made for wet night visibility).
In that same study, Donnell et al. (2005) asked glass bead manufacturers for application recommendations for normal and wet-weather conditions. Table 1 is a summary of the responses. Donnell and his colleagues also surveyed contractors, some of whom reported that states were asking for “doubledrops” of beads using smaller and larger beads to increase nighttime wet visibility, although one contractor said the larger beads can be sheared by snow plows. Higher bead density was reported for thicker lines; for example, a 15-mil line might take
6 lb/gal, while a 20-25 mil line would use 12 lb/gal.
Table 1. Glass bead density response from glass bead manufacturer
(Donnell et al., 2005).
Cold Weather Pavement Marking Practices
Weather and climatic conditions affect the service life of pavement markings. Cottrell assessed the impact of snow removal activities on the durability of paint, thermoplastics, and waffle tapes.
The study recommended using inlaid markings in snowplow states and concluded that thicker
3

applications are counterindicated, as their high profile makes them more susceptible to abrasion by snowplow blades.
In a January 2000 research problem statement submitted by the Transportation Research Board’s committee on Signing and Marking Materials, titled, “Pavement Markings for Cold-Weather
Application,” the committee stated that as pavement overlays are often completed toward the end of the construction season and the beginning of cold weather in many states, it is difficult to effectively apply pavement markings. They stated: “Durable pavement marking materials are especially difficult to install during late construction season conditions because many of these materials are especially sensitive to cold temperature and high moisture conditions. If adverse installation conditions result in premature failure, the higher initial cost of durable marking materials results in much greater economic loss than if traffic paints are used. On the other hand, traffic paints are less durable and traffic paint service life is shorter on new pavements than on old pavements. Thus, using standard traffic paints to install markings on new pavements late in the construction season, especially in high traffic volume routes, reduces the effective life of the marking.”
The objectives of that proposed research included: the development of new pavement marking materials designed to be installed under low-temperature and high-moisture conditions; the field evaluation of the effectiveness of those marking materials; and a cost-effectiveness analysis of all new materials used in the research.
The committee on Signing and Marking Materials referenced an as yet to be conducted NCHRP synthesis project on the state-of-the-practice in applying pavement markings in cold weather environments. The committee gave the proposed project a high priority ranking because of the anticipated safety improvement and reduced life-cycle cost that would result from its successful completion. As yet, this research has not been conducted.
The following is a brief review of cold weather pavement marking practices in several states with winter conditions similar to those in Pennsylvania.
4

Minnesota
A June 2007 memorandum from the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) titled:
“Late season/cold weather temporary pavement markings” stated that the (Mn/DOT) Office of
Traffic, Safety, and Operations and the Chemical Laboratory are “working with pavement marking material manufacturers to find and/or develop improved materials that will provide appropriate performance when installed in late season/cold weather conditions.” Mn/DOT expects this will result in new products and procedures to add to its “Qualified Products List” for late season/cold weather pavement markings. It is Mn/DOT’s plan to evaluate all late season/cold weather applications to determine their effectiveness and performance.
In a related letter dated July 10, 2007, Mn/DOT approved for evaluation Ennis cold weather waterborne paint 985251 (White) and 985252 (Yellow) for late season/cold weather pavement marking. The letter stated that the approval is “on a limited basis for application on construction contracts for the purpose of evaluating the performance of this material for Late Season/Cold
Weather use on Minnesota highways and for inclusion on the approved products list for
Mn/DOT Late Season/Cold Weather pavement markings.”
Conditions of the evaluation include submission of a sample of each product to the Mn/DOT materials laboratory, approval of the material by the Mn/DOT Project Engineer for each project, application of the material at an ambient air temperature below 50 °F, and discussion between the contractor and the manufacturer regarding application details. Mn/DOT will hold the manufacturer and contractor responsible for all performance requirements. When the projects are completed, and after one winter season, the installations will be reviewed and the materials will “either be issued an extension for limited approval, placed on the approved products list for late season/cold weather, or removed from consideration for use in Minnesota.” (Effective April
5, 2007 these two Ennis products were also accepted by the Ohio Department of Transportation on a 1-year trial basis.)
Mn/DOT’s current approved late season/cold weather pavement marking materials are summarized in Table 2.
5

Epoxy
Table 2. Mn/DOT approved late season/cold weather pavement marking materials.
Product Name
LS 70
LS 90
Mark 70.3
Manufacturer
Epoplex
Epoplex
Poly-Carb, Inc.
Manufacturer Website http://www.epoplex.com http://www.epoplex.com http://www.poly-carb.com
Approval
Date
Provisional to
02-12-08
Provisional to
02-12-08
Provisional to
02-12-08
Provisional to
HPS-3 IPS
Provisional to
HPS-4 IPS
Paint
Product Name Manufacturer
UC-1525
White
UC-3595
Yellow
985251
Vogel Paint & Wax Co., Inc.
Vogel Paint & Wax Co., Inc.
Manufacturer Website www.diamondvogel.com www.diamondvogel.com
Approval
Date
Provisional to
03/22/08
Provisional to
03/22/08
Provisional to
985252 Provisional to
Iowa
Donnel et al. (2005) reported that the Iowa Manual on Pavement Marking Programs provides requirements for pavement marking placement locations and application processes.
Approximately 90 percent of all Iowa roads are marked with waterborne paints. If the pavement surface is colder than 40 °F, however, solvent-borne paints of a “volatile organic compound” are used.
6

Alaska
A study was conducted by Lu (1995) to evaluate pavement-marking materials in Alaska.
Durable pavement marking materials, such as methyl metacrylate (MMA), thermoplastics, and others are commonly used for pavement marking in Alaska. The types of pavement marking materials included in Lu’s study were thermoplastics, preformed tapes, traffic paints, and MMA.
The study included a 4-year subjective assessment to judge the performance of the pavement marking material. The survey concluded that MMA renders good visibility and that traffic paints were the least favorable alternative. A subsequent objective evaluation concluded that MMA was a more suitable product for cold regions in the northwestern parts of the United States, and it can be installed in the field at an ambient air temperature as low as 30 °F. Lu also concluded that thermoplastics are not suitable for cold regions and that paints had the shortest service life (4 months to 1 year) of the various materials tested.
Wisconsin
Donnell et al. (2005) reported that a semiannual monitoring evaluation study conducted by the
Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) on a cementitious pavement marking material concluded that pavement marking retroreflectivity readings increase after the initial installation as the top surface wears due to snowplow and traffic activities. This is because the glass beads are better exposed when the top layer is abraded. Other field studies found similar results when monitoring various other pavement marking materials such as epoxies, thermoplastics, and tapes .
Vermont
Vermont is experimenting with a pavement marking manufactured by Franklin Paint Company,
Inc. called “Cold Weather Waterborne Traffic Paint with XSR.” XSR is an acrylic resin, reported to allow application at an ambient air temperature of 35 °F and rising with a drying time of 9 minutes. The cost of the paint is $7.10 per gallon for white and $7.00 per gallon for yellow. The results of the initial tests conducted in the winter of 2006 have been reported to be promising.
7

Michigan
Scheuer et al. (1997) developed time-based retroreflectivity degradation curves by evaluating the performance of longitudinal marking lines in Michigan. Snow plowing and sanding were suspected to have adverse effects on the maintenance of lane line retroreflectivity. Lee et al.
(1999) conducted a 4-year evaluation of longitudinal pavement markings at 50 sites in Michigan that included Interstates and state truck routes. The study concluded that snowplowing and deicing activity are major contributing factors to retroreflectivity decay.
New Hampshire
Literature from New Hampshire states that when paint must be applied between the dates of
October 15 and April 15 on a pavement with a surface temperature below 40 °F, cold weather alternatives shall be used. New Hampshire refers to its “Traffic Paint Batch List” for the permitted retroreflective paints and its “Approved Products List” for the permitted removable preformed retroreflective tapes. However, while the state is currently working on identifying cold-weather paint to add to its qualified product list, the NHDOT Bureau of Traffic stated in a telephone conversation that it does not have any approved cold weather alternatives, neither tape nor paint. The current procedure is to allow “normal” striping to take place at temperatures below 40 °F and then to require the contractor to re-stripe when the temperature rises again in the spring. An email from NHDOT Bureau of Traffic stated:
“If painting was required after October 15 and before April 15 then the paint still needs to meet the material requirements of section 708 but we give them a little more drying time. When the paint contractors get batches from their supplier they need to send it in for testing and if the batch passes, our Materials and Research section keeps a list of approved batches so the construction field personnel can verify the paint being used on their particular job has been tested.”
8

STATE-OF-THE-PRACTICE SURVEY
Introduction
Although the literature and state DOT website review uncovered a good deal of information, to ensure that the most up-to-date procedures and practices were included in this report and to elicit both positive and negative experiences that have led to states’ current programs, a survey of state
DOTs was conducted.
A paper survey instrument was developed (Appendix A) to identify aspects of the pavement marking programs of 28 states identified by PennDOT as having climate conditions and winter maintenance practices similar to Pennsylvania. The survey included the following topics: paint type, application cost per mile, number of miles painted, weather conditions for application, marking durability, dry night retroreflectivity, wet night retroreflectivity, application process, pavement type (asphalt or concrete), and cold weather application practice.
State DOT Survey
The following states were selected as candidate survey recipients. They were selected because it was believed they would represent a broad range of pavement marking practices and because they have climates and winter maintenance activities similar to those found in Pennsylvania:
1.
New York
2.
New Jersey
3.
Connecticut
4.
Massachusetts
5.
Vermont
6.
New Hampshire
7.
Maine
8.
Ohio
9.
Virginia
10.
West Virginia
11.
Indiana
12.
Michigan
13.
Wisconsin
14.
Illinois
15.
Iowa
9

16.
Nebraska
17.
South Dakota
18.
North Dakota
19.
Colorado
20.
Wyoming
21.
Montana
22.
Idaho
23.
Oregon
24.
Washington
25.
California (Northern)
26.
Maryland
27.
Minnesota
28.
Alaska
Each agency was contacted by telephone. During this contact, the purpose of the study was explained, a request for participation was made, and the relevant member of the agency staff, who would be the respondent to the survey, was identified. A questionnaire was then mailed to each agency. Of the 28 states surveyed, 19 (68 percent) returned completed questionnaires.
These were:
1.
Alaska
2.
California
3.
Colorado
4.
Connecticut
5.
Illinois
6.
Massachusetts
7.
Michigan
8.
Minnesota
9.
Montana
10.
Nebraska
11.
New Hampshire
12.
New York
13.
North Dakota
14.
Ohio
15.
Oregon
16.
Virginia
17.
Washington
18.
West Virginia
19.
Wyoming
10

Results
The responses to the questionnaire are documented in detail for each state in spreadsheet form in Appendix B. The following section provides a brief summary of the responses from the 19 states for each of the 16 survey questions.
1. Approximately how much does your agency spend statewide on longitudinal pavement markings each year? Please indicate how much is expended by government forces and how much by contractors.
Of the 19 states that returned completed questionnaires, only MN, NY, and VA reported that this information was unavailable. Of the remaining 16 states, the range was from $1.25 million (AK) to $21.41 million (CA) with a range from $87,500 (AK) to $20 million (OH) being expended by contractors. The average overall expenditure was $9,061,342 with an average of $6,591,384 being striped by contractors.
2. What does your agency estimate is your installed cost per linear foot to apply each of the following longitudinal pavement marking materials?
The results are summarized in Table 3.
Table 3. Estimated installed cost per linear foot for application of longitudinal pavement marking materials.
Pavement Marking Material Cost Per Linear Foot
Water-Based Paint 4-in lane line
IL,MT,WY - .04
MI,NH,ND - .05
NY - .05-.16
6-in lane line
CA - .19
CT - .25 - .35
MA - .08
MI,NE,WA,WV - .07
OH - .06
Other
CO – $28.67/Gal
OR - .03-.06 (15 mil)
Solvent-Based Paint 4-in lane line
MI - .05
NY - .05-.16
6-in lane line
AK - .15
MI,OH - .08
NE - .03
Other
CO – $31/Gal
11

Epoxy-Based Paint 4-in lane line
IL - .30
MI - .25
MT, ND - .18
NY - .08 - .16
WY - .40
6-in lane line
AK - $2.15
CA - .49
CT - .36 -.70
MA - .45
MI - .40
OH - .35
Other
CO – $42-$45/Gal
Polyurea 4-in lane line
IL - .60
MI - .50
6-in lane line
MA - $1.00
MI - .70
NE - .81
Preformed Thermoplastic 4-in lane line
IL – $2.10
6-in lane line
CT - $3.60
NE - .55
OH - .30
WV - $4.00
Other
CO – $9 - $10 (ft
2
)
Spray Thermoplastic 4-in lane line
IL – .19
MI - .09
6-in lane line
CA - .27
MI -.12
Other
OR – .45 (90mils)
12

Polyester 4-in lane line
NY – .08
6-in lane line
OH -.08
Prefomed Tape 4-in lane line
IL – $2.14
MI - $1.05
ND – $2.56
WY - $7.00
6-in lane line
AK - $2.20
MI - $1.57
NE - $2.21
OH - $2.50
OR – $2.30-$2.70
Other
CO – $10 - $12 (ft
2
)
Screed/Extruded Hot Thermoplastic 4-in lane line
IL – .47
6-in lane line
CA - .36
MA - .60
OH - $2.55
Other
CO – $2.00 - $3.00 (ft
2
)
OR – .60 (90mils)
3. Of the following roadway types, what is the approximate number of miles in your state that have longitudinal markings?
Thirteen states responded to this question. The detailed responses by roadway classification can be found in Appendix B.
4. What is the approximate number of asphalt miles with longitudinal markings?
What is the approximate number of concrete miles?
What percentage of these longitudinal markings is applied by government forces and what percentage is contracted out?
Of the 19 states that returned completed questionnaires, 14 provided this information. Of those states, the range for asphalt was from 3,500 miles (AK) to 37,000 miles (WV), and for concrete was from zero miles (AK, MA, and NH) to 34,000 miles (WV). The average for asphalt was
12,408 miles and for concrete 3,482 miles. The percentage contracted out ranged from zero
(MN) to 100 (MI, NY, and WV), with an average of 60 percent.
13

5.
What are the approximate lane-miles marked by government and contractor forces for each of the following pavement marking materials on each of the indicated roadway types?
Nine states responded to this question. The detailed responses by roadway classification can be found in Appendix B.
6. How often do you use the following materials for longitudinal markings on Concrete and Asphalt pavement?
All 19 responding states responded to this question; the responses are summarized in Table 4.
The totals for concrete add up to 16 (not 19), as Alaska, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts have no concrete roads.
Table 4. Frequency of use of marking materials for longitudinal markings on concrete and asphalt pavement.
Pavement Marking Material
Water-Based Paint
Solvent-Based Paint
Epoxy-Based Paint
Polyurea
Preformed Thermoplastic
Spray Thermoplastic
Polyester
Concrete Asphalt
Often Seldom Never Often Seldom Never
14
1
4
3
9
3
1
2
6
4
4
3
2
1
0
9
3
9
9
11
14
19
2
10
3
8
4
1
0
6
5
5
3
4
1
0
11
4
11
8
11
17
Preformed Tape 7 5 4 8 6 5
Screed/Extruded Hot Thermoplastic 2 5 9 4 6 9
7. What is the estimated service life in months of the following longitudinal pavement marking materials for asphalt and concrete applications?
Only 2 of the 19 respondents did not respond to this question (IL and WA). Of the remaining 17 states, only 4 (CA, CO, NY, OR) partially differentiated between service life for asphalt and concrete. Table 5 displays the service life in months as a function of marking material. Detailed responses can be found in Appendix B.
14

Table 5. Service life as a function of marking material.
Pavement Marking Material Service Life (months)
Water-Based Paint 12 - 18 – CA
3 to 4 – CO
6 to 12 – MA,NE
12 to 24 – MN
1 to 24 – OR
3 to 6 – VA
12 – CT,MI,MT,NH,NY,ND,OH,WV,WY
Solvent-Based Paint 12 – AK,NY,ND,OH
6 to 7 – CO
6 – MI
6 to 12 –NE
1 to 6 – OR
Epoxy-Based Paint 36 – AK,CA
18 to 36 – CO
12 to 24 – CT
24 – MA
24 to 80 – MN
24 to 48 – MT
24 to 36 – NY
48 – ND
36 to 48 – OH
6-12 – OR
12 to 40 – VA
12 – WY
Polyurea 36 – MA
36 to 60 – MI
24 to 80 – MN
48 to 60 – NE
6 to 30 – OR
Preformed Thermoplastic 60 – CA
36 to 48 – CO
48 to 60 – NE
36 – NH
12 to 30 – OR
12 to 48 – VA
48 – WV
Spray Thermoplastic 24 to 36 – CA
30 to 45 – CO
12 – MI
48 – NE
6 to 50 – OR
12 to 36 - VA
15

Polyester 24 – NY
24 to 36 – OH
Preformed Tape 36 – CA
48 to 60 – CO,NE
60 – MI
48 to 96 – MN
36 – NH
24 to 36 – NY
72 – ND
40 to 120 – OR
36 to 72 - VA
Screed/Extruded Hot Thermoplastic 48 to 60 – CA
35 to 48 – CO
36 to 48 –OH
24 to 36 – MA, NH, NY
5 to 50 – OR
8. What are the estimated service lives in months of the following longitudinal pavement marking materials for each of the indicated roadway types?
Fifteen states responded to this question. The detailed responses by roadway classification can be found in Appendix B.
9. Does your agency replace longitudinal pavement markings on a predetermined cycle?
If “Yes,” then describe the cycle for each type of pavement marking material.
Eight states responded “No” to this question. Of the remaining 11 states, the responses were as follows:
1.
AK a.
Procedure varies by region
2.
CT a.
Epoxy - every 3 years
3.
MI a.
Waterborne - every year b.
Regular dry - late/early season only c.
Epoxy - don’t know yet d.
Polyurea - every 3 to 5 years e.
Spray thermo - every year f.
Preformed tape - every 5 years
4.
NH a.
Every season for water-based
16

5.
NE a.
Every 6 to 12 months depending on location and ADT for highways
6.
NY a.
Waterborne - every year b.
Solvent - used for temporary markings c.
Epoxy, thermoplastic, polyester, preformed tape - 2 to 3 years
7.
OH a.
Traffic paint - every year b.
Polyester - after 2 to 3 years c.
Thermoplastic - after 3 to 4 years d.
Epoxy - after 3 to 4 years
8.
OR a.
In-house waterborne paint retrace every or every other year b.
For other markings, replaced on as-needed basis often by construction projects
9.
WA a.
Transitioning from restriping everything every year to managing the markings to only restripe what is necessary
10.
WV a.
Interstate and expressway markings are replaced bi-annually b.
All other markings are replaced yearly
11.
WY a.
Yearly b.
As needed basis for some urban markings
10. Does your agency visually inspect pavement markings for retroreflectivity?
If “Yes,” then describe how this is done.
Seven states responded “No” to this question. Of the remaining 12 states, the responses were as follows:
1.
AK a.
Subjective visual inspection
2.
CA a.
During night-time drive-through visual inspections of traffic striping b.
Visual inspection of glass bead application using the daylight sun/shadow technique
17

3.
CO a.
Inspect during day and at night to help ensure the markings have their visibility and reflective properties intact b.
Use a retroreflectometer to check questionable areas. Take ten random samples from one-mile segment of where the area of question was found c.
If a questionable area is not compliant to standards, pavement markings are replaced
4.
CT a.
Visually inspected within two weeks of placement and retroreflectivity is measured
5.
MN a.
Presently (sic) use a retroreflectometer to measure roads as requested by the districts b.
Recently purchased several handheld retroreflectometers and the plan is to have each district take readings in the spring and fall to assist in new/developing pavement marking inventory system
6.
MT a.
Needs-based process that uses measurement and visual inspections to determine when markings need to be replaced
7.
NY a.
Final inspection at the end of projects, inspector drives the area looking for unacceptable locations
8.
OH a.
During night to check night visibility b.
Night visibility subjective rating based on 3 distinct attributes i.
Uniformity (0 to 4 points) ii.
Retroreflectivity (0 to 3 points) iii.
Nighttime color (0 to 3 points)
9.
OR a.
Regional pavement marking crews will often do visual inspections of the markings b.
An inspection occurs if there is an area of concern, new product under evaluation, or visibility complaint
10.
VA a.
Some locations do a night ride and look for problem areas
11.
WV a.
Visually inspect pavement markings within our district by district personnel b.
If pavement markings visually appear to be in poor shape or have poor retroreflectivity, then test these markings with handheld device
18

12.
WY a.
Statistical sampling of entire state once a year
11. Does your agency use a retroreflectometer to measure longitudinal pavement marking retroreflectivity?
If “Yes,” then what device(s) do you use?
Two states responded “No” to this question (AK and IL). Of the remaining 17 states, the responses were as follows:
1.
30-meter handheld retroreflectometer (no manufacturer reported): a.
MA, MI, OR
2.
Laserlux Van: a.
MI, MN, OR, WA, WV
3.
LTL-X: a.
CO, MN, OH, WA, MN, WA
4.
LTL 2000: a.
CA, CT, MN, NH, NY, ND, VA, WV
5.
Mirolux MX-30: a.
MT, NE, WY
12. Does your agency have a minimum requirement for dry night retroreflectivity of longitudinal pavement markings?
If “Yes,” please provide details; for example, what is the minimum, is it different for applied and maintained level, is it different for different color markings, for different marking materials?
Eight states responded “No” to this question. Of the remaining 11 states, the responses were as summarized in Table 6 (in mcd).
Table 6. Minimum requirement for dry night retroreflectivity of longitudinal pavement markings.
State White Yellow
Applied
CA 250 150
CT 250 175
MI 240 140
NH 200 150
ND 275 180
WV 300 225
Maintained
MN 100 80
OR 150 125
VA 100 NA
WA 90 90
WY 80 60
19

CA
CO
CT
IL
13. Does your agency have a minimum requirement for wet night retroreflectivity of longitudinal pavement markings?
If “Yes,” please provide details.
Sixteen states responded “No” to this question. Of the remaining three states, the responses were as follows:
1.
CT
2.
VA a.
250 MCD for white epoxy and 175 MCD for yellow epoxy markings a.
currently establishing 200 white, 100 yellow initial using ASTM E-2176
Modified method
3.
WV a.
200 MCD for white and 150 MCD for yellow markings under recovery conditions; b.
100 MCD for white and 75 MCD for yellow markings under continuous wet conditions
14. What are the weather conditions for longitudinal pavement marking application by marking material type on asphalt?
On concrete (if different)?
All 19 responding states answered this question. No state reported different conditions for asphalt and concrete. The states responses are presented in Table 7.
Table 7. Weather conditions for longitudinal pavement marking application by marking material type on asphalt and on concrete.
AK
MA
MI
MN
Paint: 40 deg. F.
Epoxy: Manufacturer’s recommendation
Preformed: 60 deg. F.
50 deg. F and dry pavement
Air and pavement temperatures 40 degrees F or higher
Pavement surface and weather conditions shall be conducive to satisfactory results.
40 deg. F minimum for road surface temperatures
Paint - 50 deg. F and dry pavement
Thermoplastic extruded - dry pavement 55 deg. F min; No later than Nov. 1/earlier then April 15
Preformed thermoplastic - pavement and air temps at or above 32 deg. F at time of installation
Epoxy - when air and pavement temps are min 35 deg. F and rising
Polyurea - surface and air temps are min. 40 deg. F and rising spray thermoplastic - surface and air temps are 50 deg. F and dry pavement
Thermoplastic- ambient temp. 45 deg. F and rising w/ dry surface
Latex paint - ambient temp 50 deg. F w/ dry surface
Epoxy - ambient temp. 35 deg. F, dry surface of min 40 deg. F
Polyurea - Ambient temp of 40 deg. F, dry surface of min 40 deg. F
Waterborne - dry, min 50 deg. F
Regular, dry - dry, min 25 deg. F
Epoxy - dry, min 35 deg. F
Polyurea - dry, min 40 deg. F and rising
Preformed tape - dry, min 60 deg. F and rising
Follow Manufacturer's Recommendations
20

MT
NE
NH
NY
ND
OH
OR
VA
WA
Waterborne - surface must be clean and dry. Apply the materials following the paint manufacturer's recommendations.
Epoxy - Apply the epoxy marking materials when pavement is clean and dry and the ambient temperature is 40 degrees F and rising.
Follow manufacturer’s recommendations for contract work
State painting done April through October given decent conditions
Dry Pavement with pavement 40 degrees F and rising
Pavement markings only to be applied during dry weather and very dry surfaces; pavement temp must be min 50 deg. F and ambient temp. must be min of 50 deg. F and rising
Waterbased - 40 deg. F +
Solvent - 45 deg. F +
Tape - 50 deg. F +
Epoxy - 50 deg. F +
Pavement markings applied at temperature of 50 deg. F or above
Dry pavement with pavement and air temperatures 50 degrees F and rising.
50 deg. F and rising
Waterborne paint - dry, 50 deg. F and rising
Methyl Methacrylate - dry, 40 deg. F and rising
Weather conditions set by contract
Waterborne and epoxy - 40 deg. F and rising, dry conditions
WV
WY
15. If you had to apply longitudinal markings to a roadway during late season/cold weather conditions (for example, with temperatures under 15 degrees Fahrenheit), what products and procedures would you use?
Ten states responded that they would not stripe in temperatures this cold. Of the remaining nine states, the responses were as follows:
1.
AK a.
Temporary raised pavement markers: L-shaped polyurethane body with retroreflective tape on the top vertical section, with a self-adhesive base.
Reflectorized on both faces of yellow markers and on one face of white markers.
Marker body 60 mil minimum thickness polyurethane with vertical leg approximately 2 inches high by 4 inches wide and base approximately 1.25 inch wide.
2.
CA a.
Use waterborne paint
3.
MI a.
Regular dry (solvent based) or polyurea using standard application or per manufacturer's recommendation
4.
MN (Under these conditions they would consider all markings applied as temporary); a.
Epoxy or paint materials in rural areas b.
Epoxy materials only in urban areas
5.
NE a.
Acetone paint instead of waterborne paint
21

6.
OR a.
Applied hot spray thermoplastic
7.
VA a.
Polyurea type product
8.
WV a.
Preformed thermoplastic and possibly polyurea
9.
WY a.
Waterborne paint
16. Do you use any special products or procedures to ensure wet night visibility of your longitudinal pavement markings?
Eight states responded “No” to this question. Of the remaining eleven states the responses were as shown in Table 8.
Table 8. States’ use of special products or procedures to ensure wet night visibility of longitudinal pavement markings.
CA
CT
MA
MI
MN
NE
NY
ND
OR
Retroreflective pavement marks and open-graded AC pavement are typically specified in areas of heavy rainfall
Raised pavement markings
Snowplowable reflectorized pavement markers (reflectorized pavement markers slotted in pavement)
Wet reflective tape for skips on new pavement
Pavement markings in shoulder rumbles
Piloted wet reflective polyurea
Tapes & latex applied, possible use of rumble strips in the future
3M wet reflective tape
Also use wet reflective beads in thermoplastic and polyurea
Larger glass beads ("Visibeads") are applied
NDDot has experimental sections of edge line marked in the rumple strip.
Experimental sections of 3M all-weather paint
Raised portions of markings with vertical edges which stand out of the water.
3M wet weather tape
3M 780 tape, 3M 380WR
Profiled lane lines on the Interstates and other Major Arterials in Western Washington
VA
WA
SUMMARY
The goal of this project was to improve Pennsylvania’s pavement marking program by identifying pavement marking practices in states with characteristics similar to Pennsylvania’s.
This was accomplished through a brief literature and state DOT website review and a formal
22

survey of 19 states. Two critical issues were of particular interest to PennDOT: marking for wet weather conditions and the application of markings in cold weather. The findings from the literature review and the survey for those two topics are summarized below.
Wet Weather Pavement Marking Practices
The literature and website survey revealed that the following materials and practices were being used to improve wet nighttime pavement marking visibility:
•
Pavement markings on rumble strips;
•
Wet night reflectance tape, also known as structured tape (e.g., 3M’s A-20 and A-21 products);
•
Larger glass beads;
•
Double drop beads (large and small bead diameter);
•
Increased number of beads (bead density);
•
Increased use of retroreflective raised pavement markers;
•
Inlay tape and epoxy; and
•
“Rainline” thermoplastic (profile thermoplastic road marking specifically made for wet night visibility).
When asked in the survey if the state agencies had a minimum retroreflectivity requirement for wet nighttime pavement markings, 16 states said they did not. Connecticut said it does, but it is the same as the state’s dry requirement (250 for white and 175 for yellow markings). Virginia plans to establish 200 for white and 100 for yellow, and West Virginia uses 200 for white and
150 for yellow markings under recovery conditions and 100 for white and 75 for yellow under continuous wet conditions.
When asked if they use any special products or procedures to ensure wet night pavement marking visibility, 8 states said they did not while 11 states did. The products and procedures are similar to those found in the literature and website review and include:
•
Raised pavement markings (often specified as “snowplowable”),
•
Wet reflective tape (e.g., 3M 780 tape, 3M 380WR),
•
Pavement markings in shoulder rumbles (i.e., rumble stripes),
•
Wet reflective polyurea,
•
Larger glass beads,
•
3M all-weather paint, and
•
Profiled lane lines.
23

Cold Weather Pavement Marking Practices
The literature and website survey resulted in few specific findings related to pavement marking materials and practices for late season or cold weather application. The main exception was MN, which has five approved cold-weather epoxy marking materials and two approved paint materials. The following materials are currently under evaluation:
•
MN and OH: Ennis cold weather waterborne paint 985251 (White) and 985252
(Yellow).
•
VT: Franklin Paint Company, Inc. “Cold Weather Waterborne Traffic Paint with
XSR.” (XSR is an acrylic resin.)
When asked in the survey what products or procedures would they use if they had to apply markings during late season/cold weather conditions (e.g., under 15 °F), 10 states said they would not stripe in such cold weather. Of the nine that said they would, the responses were as follows:
•
Temporary raised pavement markers,
•
Waterborne paint,
•
Regular dry (solvent-based) paint,
•
Epoxy,
•
Acetone paint,
•
Applied hot spray thermoplastic,
•
Polyurea, and
•
Preformed thermoplastic.
24

REFERENCES
Arseneau, B. Memo to District, District Traffic, Resident and District Design Engineers, Office of Traffic, Safety and Operations, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Roseville, MN, June
7, 2007.
Cottrell, B.H., Jr, Investigation of the Impact of Snow Removal Activities on Pavement Markings in Virginia . Final Report, No: FHWA/VA-96-R3; VTRC 96-R3, 33pp., September 1995.
Donnell, E.T., D. Lee, S. Sathyanarayanan, and B. P. Stodart., 2006, Methods to Maintain
Pavement Marking Retroreflectivity: Vol. III: Safety Enhancements for Curves: Findings from a
Nighttime Driving Experiment , Draft Report No. PTI 2006-06-III, The Thomas D. Larson
Pennsylvania Transportation Institute, University Park, Pa., 169 pp.
Lu, J. J., Performance of Traffic Markings in Cold Regions , Transportation Research Center,
University of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK, August 1995.
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Part 3: Pavement Markings , United States
Department of Transportation, 2003.
25

APPENDIX A
SURVEY INSTRUMENT

Pavement Markings State-of-the-Practice Survey
The Pennsylvania Transportation Institute
The Pennsylvania State University
Organization: ______________________________
1. Approximately how much does your agency spend statewide on longitudinal pavement markings each year? Please indicate how much is expended by government forces and how much by contractors.
2. What does your agency estimate is your installed cost per linear foot to apply each of the following longitudinal pavement marking materials.
Pavement Marking Material Cost Per Linear Foot
Water-Based Paint
Solvent-Based Paint
Epoxy-Based Paint
Polyurea
Preformed Thermoplastic
Spray Thermoplastic
Polyester
Preformed Tape
Screed/Extruded Hot Thermoplastic
Other
Other

3. Of the following roadway types, what is the approximate number of miles in your state that have longitudinal markings?
Marking Application (miles)
Pavement Marking Material Center Skip Edge
Interstates/Freeways
Multi-lane Arterials
Two-lane Arterials
Collectors
Others
4. What is the approximate number of asphalt miles with longitudinal markings?
What is the approximate number of concrete miles?
What percentage of these longitudinal markings is applied by government forces and what percentage is contracted out?
5. What are the approximate lane-miles marked by government and contractor forces for each of the following pavement marking materials on each of the indicated roadway types?
Pavement Marking
Material
Interstate/
Freeway
Multi-Lane
Arterials
Govt Contr Govt Contr
Two-lane
Arterials
Govt Contr
Collectors
Govt Contr
Water-Based Paint
Solvent-Based Paint
Epoxy-Based Paint
Polyurea
Preformed
Thermoplastic
Spray Thermoplastic
Polyester
Preformed Tape
Screed/Extruded Hot
Thermoplastic
Other
Other

6. How often do you use the following materials for longitudinal markings on Concrete and Asphalt pavement?
Pavement Marking Material Often
Concrete
Seldom Never
Asphalt
Often Seldom Never
Water-Based Paint
Solvent-Based Paint
Epoxy-Based Paint
Polyurea
Preformed Thermoplastic
Spray Thermoplastic
Polyester
Preformed Tape
Screed/Extruded Hot Thermoplastic
Other
Other
Pavement Marking Material Asphalt Concrete
7. What is the estimated service life in months of the following longitudinal pavement marking materials for asphalt and concrete applications?
Service Life (months)
Water-Based Paint
Solvent-Based Paint
Epoxy-Based Paint
Polyurea
Preformed Thermoplastic
Spray Thermoplastic
Polyester
Preformed Tape
Screed/Extruded Hot Thermoplastic
Other
Other

8. What are the estimated service lives in months of the following longitudinal pavement marking materials for each of the indicated roadway types?
Pavement Marking
Material
Interstate/
Freeway
Multi-Lane
Arterials
Two-lane
Arterials Collectors Other
Water-Based Paint
Solvent-Based Paint
Epoxy-Based Paint
Polyurea
Preformed
Thermoplastic
Spray Thermoplastic
Polyester
Preformed Tape
Screed/Extruded Hot
Thermoplastic
Other
Other
9. Does your agency replace longitudinal pavement markings on a predetermined cycle?
If “Yes,” then describe the cycle for each type of pavement marking material.
10. Does your agency visually inspect pavement markings for retroreflectivity?
If “Yes,” then describe how this is done.

11. Does your agency use a retroreflectometer to measure longitudinal pavement marking retroreflectivity?
If “Yes,” then what device(s) do you use?
12. Does your agency have a minimum requirement for dry night retroreflectivity of longitudinal pavement markings?
If “Yes,” please provide details; for example, what is the minimum, is it different for applied and maintained level, is it different for different color markings, for different marking materials?
13. Does your agency have a minimum requirement for wet night retroreflectivity of longitudinal pavement markings?
If “Yes,” please provide details..

14. What are the weather conditions for longitudinal pavement marking application by marking material type on asphalt?
On concrete (if different)?
15. If you had to apply longitudinal markings to a roadway during late season/cold weather conditions (for example, with temperatures under 15 degrees Fahrenheit), what products and procedures would you use?
16. Do you use any special products or procedures to ensure wet night visibility of your longitudinal pavement markings?

APPENDIX B
FINAL SURVEY RESULTS

STATE
AK
Total
QUESTION ONE
Contractor expended
$1,250,000.00
$87,500.00
Water-Based Paint per linear foot
4" do not use do not use do not use per gallon do not use
4"
Solvent-Based Paint per linear foot
6" per gallon
___ $0.15
___
4"
Epoxy-Based Paint per linear foot
6" per gallon
___ $2.15
___
4"
Polyurea per linear foot do not use
6" do not use
QUESTION TWO
4"
Preformed Thermoplastic per linear foot per square foot
6" do not use do not use do not use
4" do not use
Spray Thermoplastic per linear foot do not use do not use
4"
Polyester per linear foot
6" do not use
4"
Preformed Tape per linear foot
6" per square foot
___ $2.20
___
4" do not use
Screed/Extruded Hot Thermoplastic per linear foot per square foot do not use do not use do not use
CA $21,414,347.00
$13,936,206.00
___ $0.19
___ ___ do not use ___ $0.49
___ unsure unsure unsure unsure unsure ___ $0.27
___ do not use unsure unsure unsure ___ $0.36
___ ___
CO $15,675,180.85
Not available due to the way costs are recorded
___ ___ ___ $28.67
___ ___ $31.00
___ ___ $42-$45
CT $3,507,000 $780,000 ___ $0.25 - $0.35
___ ___ do not use ___ $0.36 - $0.70
___
Polyurea not used last few yrs.
do not use
___
___
___
$3.60
$9-$10
___ do not use do not use do not use do not use
___ ___ do not use
$10-$12 ___ ___ do not use
___ $2-$3
IL $9,500,000.00
$4,820,000.00
$0.04
___ ___ ___ do not use $0.30
___ ___ $0.60
___ $2.10
___ ___ $0.19
___ ___ do not use $2.14
___ ___ $0.47
___ ___ ___
MA $10,000,000.00
$9,000,000.00
___ $0.08
___ ___ do not use ___ $0.45
___ ___ $1.00
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A ___ $0.60
___ ___
MI $15,500,000 $14,725,000 $0.05
$0.07
___ ___ $0.05
$0.08
___ $0.25
$0.40
___ $0.50
$0.70
N/A N/A N/A $0.09
$0.12
___ N/A N/A $1.05
$1.57
___ N/A N/A N/A N/A
MN Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available
MT $6,774,755 $2,355,710 $0.04
___ ___ ___ do not use do not use do not use $0.18
___ ___ do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use
NE $5,000,000 $3,700,00 ___ $0.07
___ ___ ___ $0.03
___ do not use do not use do not use ___ $0.81
___ $0.55
___ do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use ___ $2.21
___ do not use do not use do not use do not use
NH $3,400,000
N/A
(No contractors)
$0.05
___ ___ ___ do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use
NY Not available Not available $0.05 to $0.16
___ ___ ___ $0.05 to $0.16
___ ___ $0.08 to $0.16
___ ___ do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use $0.08
___ variable variable variable variable variable variable variable
ND $2,300,000 $2,200,000 $0.05
___ ___ ___ Not available Not available Not available $0.18
___ ___ do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use $2.56
___ ___ do not use do not use do not use do not use
OH $21,070,788 $20,070,788 ___ $0.06
___ ___ ___ $0.08
___ ___ $0.35
___ do not use do not use ___ $0.30
___ do not use do not use do not use ___ $0.08
___ $2.50
___ ___ $2.55
___ ___
OR $7,500,000 Not available ___ ___
$0.03 to $0.06
at 15 mils
___ do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use do not use ___ ___ $0.45 at 90 mils do not use do not use ___
$2.30 to $2.70
by contractors
___ ___ ___
$0.60 at 90 mils
___
VA Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available
WA $9,139,400 $2,921,400 ___ $0.07
___ ___ N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
WV $6,700,000 $6,700,000 ___ $0.07
___ ___ N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A ___ $4.00
___ N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
WY $6,250,000
AVERAGE
$9,061,342
$1,500,000
AVERAGE
$6,591,384
$0.04
___ ___ ___ N/A N/A N/A $0.40
___ ___ N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $7.00
___ ___ N/A N/A N/A N/A

STATE
AK
Interstates/Freeways
Center Skip Edge
1080 CL Miles
QUESTION THREE
Multi-lane Arterials
Center Skip Edge
Two-lane Arterials
Center Skip Edge
1010 CL Miles 1210 CL Miles
Collectors
220 CL miles
Other
Center Skip Edge
0
Asphalt Miles
3500
CA Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available 10,500
QUESTION FOUR
Concrete Miles % Contracted out
0
4,500
N/A
Not Available
CO
5,250 lane-miles
5,250 lane-miles
5,250 lane-miles
16,800 lane-miles
16,800 lane-miles
16,800 lane-miles
22,200 lane-miles
N/A
22,200 lane-miles
39,500 lane-miles
N/A
39,500 lane-miles
N/A N/A
50 lane-miles
95% 5% 80%
CT 604 miles 2,038 miles 1,161 miles 25 miles 3,800 14 90%
IL Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available
MA 0 569 569 3400 3400 3400 2400 0 2400 5487 5487 5487 20000 5000 10000 32000 0 90%
MI 3,770 miles 2,510 miles 11,880 miles 1,210 miles
MN
238.3 Urban
675.6 Rural
238.3 Urban
675.6 Rural
238.3 Urban
675.6 Rural
657.2 Urban
5327.9 Rural
657.2 Urban
5327.9 Rural
657.2 Urban
5327.9 Rural
221.7 Urban
5327.9 Rural
MT 4,800 Total Lane Miles 0 0 0
N/A
20,000 Total Lane Miles
221.7 Urban
5327.9 Rural
13.7 Urban
1057.1 Rural
13.7 Urban
1057.1 Rural
13.7 Urban
1057.1
Rural
6.3 Urban
9.8 Rural
0 0 0 0
30 miles
N/A
0
6.3 Urban
9.8 Rural
Breakdown not available
Breakdown not available
0%
0
9,600
24,750
2,400
250
100%
59%
NE 858 858 858 964 964 964 0 8755 8755 0 0 0 0 0 0
NH not inventoried not inventoried not inventoried not inventoried not inventoried not inventoried not inventoried not inventoried not inventoried not inventoried not inventoried not inventoried not inventoried not inventoried not inventoried
8,778
4800
NY Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available 14,200
1779
0
25%
2%
1,300
1000
100%
95% ND 0 1200 2300 0 700 1300 500 3200 7500 400 2500 5400 0 0 0 7500
OH Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available
OR 1440 1550 1440 200 100 200 2600 100 5200 4200 300 8400 0 0 0 6500 500 30%
WV
WY
VA Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available
WA N/A 2000 3056 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 5,000 2,000 10%
550
0
550
830
550
830
1736
257
1736
260
1736
260 3055 3055
N/A
3055
N/A
2345
N/A
2345
N/A
Responsible for 34,610 miles outside of Interstates and freeways, can't breakdown beyond multi-lane arterials
2345
N/A
290 290 290
37,000 34,000 100%
5780
AVERAGE
12,408
1000
AVERAGE
3,482
2%
AVERAGE
56%

STATE
AK
Interstate/Freeway
Govt Contr
Multi-Lane Arterials
Govt Contr
Water-Based Paint
Two-Lane Arterials
Govt Contr Govt
Collectors
Contr
Total for all roadways
Govt Contr
Interstate/Freeway
Govt Contr
Multi-Lane Arterials
Govt Contr
Solvent-Based Paint
Two-Lane Arterials
Govt Contr Govt
Collectors
Contr
Total for all roadways
Govt Contr
Interstate/Freeway
Govt Contr
Multi-Lane Arterials
Govt Contr
Epoxy-Based Paint
Two-Lane Arterials
Govt Contr Govt
Collectors
Contr
Total for all roadways
Govt Contr
Interstate/Freeway
Govt Contr
Multi-Lane Arterials
Govt Contr
Polyurea
Two-Lane Arterials
Govt Contr Govt
Collectors
Contr
Total for all roadways
Govt Contr
Interstate/Freeway
Govt Contr
Multi-Lane Arterials
Govt Contr
QUESTION FIVE
Preformed Thermoplastic
Two-Lane Arterials
Govt Contr Govt
Collectors
Contr
Total for all roadways
Govt Contr
Unknown; Alaska does not track this information
CA
Breakdown by material not available;
Following totals are lane-miles marked by government forces
4287 miles on interstate/freeways, 2743 miles on multilane arterials, 8160 miles on two lane arterials
CO 20 100 1500 6050 2500 9800 6250 24900 10270 40850 30 50 50 100 50 100 100 300 230 550 700 2700 1650 6550 1900 7550 1550 6200 5800 23000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1050 0 350 0 100 0 100 0 1600
CT Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available
IL Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available
MA 0 0 2000 0 7000 0 6000 0 15000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1600 0 1600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
MI
MN
Don't know breakdown by roadway type;
100% is contracted out
Don't know breakdown by roadway type;
Government totals are centerline miles don't know breakdown for contractors
0 17,600
13309 0
Don't know breakdown by roadway type;
100% is contracted out
Don't know breakdown by roadway type;
Government totals are centerline miles don't know breakdown for contractors
0 0
0 0
Don't know breakdown by roadway type;
100% is contracted out
Don't know breakdown by roadway type;
Government totals are centerline miles don't know breakdown for contractors
0 0
7276 0
Don't know breakdown by roadway type;
100% is contracted out
Don't know breakdown by roadway type;
Government totals are centerline miles don't know breakdown for contractors
0 0
103 0
Don't know breakdown by roadway type;
100% is contracted out
Don't know breakdown by roadway type;
Government totals are centerline miles don't know breakdown for contractors
0 0
0 0
MT 200 0 0 0 10,100 0 0 0 10,300 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,600 0 0 0 10,100 0 0 0 14,700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NE Breakdown not available
NH does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track
NY Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available
ND 20 600 20 400 40 3400 30 2700 110 7100 40 0 40 0 40 0 30 0 150 0 0 240 0 140 0 110 0 70 0 560 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
OH Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available
OR 1220 300 50 50 5000 600 8000 3000 14270 3950 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 50 0 50 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
VA Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available
WA 3000 0 4200 0 12000 0 4200 0 23400 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WV 0 100 0 100 0 100 0 100 0 400 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 100 0 100 0 100 0 400
WY 4800 0 1460 0 9015 0 7035 0 22310 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 200 0 100 0 150 0 0 0 450 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

STATE
Interstate/Freeway
Govt Contr
Multi-Lane Arterials
Govt Contr
Spray Thermoplastic
Two-Lane Arterials
Govt Contr Govt
Collectors
Contr
Total for all roadways
Govt Contr
Interstate/Freeway
Govt Contr
Multi-Lane Arterials
Govt Contr
Polyester
Two-Lane Arterials
Govt Contr Govt
Collectors
Contr
Total for all roadways
Govt Contr
Interstate/Freeway
Govt Contr
Multi-Lane Arterials
Govt Contr
Preformed Tape
Two-Lane Arterials
Govt Contr Govt
Collectors
Contr
Total for all roadways
Govt Contr
Interstate/Freeway
Govt Contr
Multi-Lane Arterials
Screed/Extruded Hot Thermoplastic
Two-Lane Arterials
Govt Contr Govt Contr Govt
Collectors
Contr
Total for all roadways
Govt Contr
AK
CA
CO 0 250 0 350 0 100 0 100 0 800 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 250 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 350 0 100 0 100 0 100 0 0 0 300
CT Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available
IL Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available
MA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1600 0 4000 0 4000 0 9600
MI
MN
Don't know breakdown by roadway type;
100% is contracted out
Don't know breakdown by roadway type;
Government totals are centerline miles don't know breakdown for contractors
0 9,900
0 0
Don't know breakdown by roadway type;
100% is contracted out
Don't know breakdown by roadway type;
Government totals are centerline miles don't know breakdown for contractors
0 0
0 0
Don't know breakdown by roadway type;
100% is contracted out
Don't know breakdown by roadway type;
Government totals are centerline miles don't know breakdown for contractors
0 0
0 0
Don't know breakdown by roadway type;
100% is contracted out
Don't know breakdown by roadway type;
Government totals are centerline miles don't know breakdown for contractors
0 0
0 0
MT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NE
NH does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track does not track
NY Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available
ND 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 300 0 100 0 110 0 70 0 580 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
OH Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available
OR 500 2000 150 0 1000 500 800 500 2450 3000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 50 0 0 0 0 0 150 300 0 150 0 600 200 400 150 1450 350
VA Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available
WA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 165 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 165 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

STATE
AK
Concrete
Often Seldom
Water-Based Paint
Never
Asphalt
Often Seldom Never
Concrete
Often Seldom
Solvent-Based Paint
Never
Asphalt
Often Seldom Never
Concrete
Often Seldom
Epoxy-Based Paint
Never
Asphalt
Often Seldom Never
Concrete
Often Seldom Never
Polyurea
Asphalt
Often Seldom Never
Concrete
Often Seldom
QUESTION SIX
Preformed Thermoplastic
Never
Asphalt
Often Seldom Never
Concrete
Often Seldom
Spray Thermoplastic
Never
Asphalt
Often Seldom Never
Concrete
Often Seldom Never
Polyester
Asphalt
Often Seldom Never
Concrete
Often Seldom
Preformed Tape
Never
Asphalt
Often Seldom Never
Concrete
Often Seldom
Screed/Extruded Hot Thermoplastic
Never
Asphalt
Often Seldom Never
N/A X N/A X N/A X N/A X N/A X N/A X N/A X N/A X N/A X
CA X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
CO X X
CT X
IL X
MA N/A
MI X
MN X X
OR X
VA X
WA X
WV X
WY X
MT
NE X
X X
X
NH n/a n/a n/a X
NY X
ND X
OH X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
N/A
X
X n/a n/a n/a
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
X
X X
X X
X N/A
X
X
X
X
X
N/A
X
X
X
X
X
X
N/A
X X
X
X
X
X X
N/A
X
X X
X
X N/A
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
N/A
X
X
X
X
X
X
N/A
X X
X
X
X
X X X X X X
X
X X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X n/a n/a n/a
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X n/a n/a n/a
X
X
X
X X X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X n/a
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X n/a n/a
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X n/a n/a n/a
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X n/a n/a n/a
X
X
X X X
X
X n/a n/a n/a
X
X X X
X
X
X X n/a n/a n/a
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

STATE
Water-Based Paint
Concrete Asphalt
AK N/A N/A
Concrete
Solvent-Based Paint
Asphalt
N/A 12
CA 12 18 N/A N/A
Concrete
Epoxy-Based Paint
Asphalt
N/A 36
36
Concrete
Polyurea
Asphalt
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
QUESTION SEVEN
Preformed Thermoplastic
Concrete Asphalt
N/A N/A
Spray Thermoplastic
Concrete Asphalt
N/A N/A
60 24 36
Concrete
Polyester
Asphalt
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
Concrete
Preformed Tape
Asphalt
N/A Unknown
36
Screed/Extruded Hot Thermoplastic
Concrete Asphalt
N/A N/A
48 60
CO 3 to 4 6 to 7 18 to 24 18 to 36 N/A N/A 36 to 48 30 to 38 35 to 45 N/A N/A 48 to 60 36 to 48 35 to 45
OR
VA
WA
WV
WY
CT
MA
12
N/A 6 to 12
N/A
N/A
N/A 12 to 24 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
IL Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available
N/A N/A 24 N/A 36 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 24 to 36 don't know don't know 36 to 60 N/A N/A 12 N/A N/A 60 N/A N/A MI 12 6 6
MN
Don’t Differentiate between the 2 surface types;
12 to 24
MT 12 N/A
N/A
N/A
6 to 12
NY
ND
OH
NE 6 to 12
NH N/A 12
12
12
12
N/A
12
12
12
N/A
1 to 24
3 to 6
12
12
N/A don’t know
N/A
1 to 6
N/A
N/A
N/A
24 don’t know don’t know
N/A 12
24 to 80
24 to 48
48
36 to 48
6 to 12
12 to 40
N/A
N/A
24 to 36
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A don’t know don’t know don’t know
12 N/A
24 to 80
48 to 60
6 to 30
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A don’t know don’t know
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A N/A 48 to 96 N/A
N/A
48 to 60
36
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
48
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
24
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
48 to 60
N/A
36
N/A
N/A
N/A
24 to 36
72
24 to 36
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A
24 to 36 N/A
40 to 120
N/A
40 to 80
36 to 48
12 to 30 6 to 50 N/A N/A 6 to 50 5 to 50
12 to 48
48
Too many variables
12 to 36 don’t know don’t know 36 to 72 don’t know don’t know don’t know don’t know don’t know don’t know don’t know don’t know don’t know don’t know
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
24 to 36

STATE
Water-Based Paint
Interstate/Freeway Multi-Lane Arterials Two-Lane Arterials Collectors
Solvent-Based Paint
Interstate/Freeway Multi-Lane Arterials Two-Lane Arterials Collectors
Epoxy-Based Paint
Interstate/Freeway Multi-Lane Arterials Two-Lane Arterials Collectors
Polyurea
Interstate/Freeway Multi-Lane Arterials Two-Lane Arterials Collectors
QUESTION EIGHT
Preformed Thermoplastic
Interstate/Freeway Multi-Lane Arterials Two-Lane Arterials Collectors
Spray Thermoplastic
Interstate/Freeway Multi-Lane Arterials Two-Lane Arterials Collectors
Polyester
Interstate/Freeway Multi-Lane Arterials Two-Lane Arterials Collectors
Preformed Tape
Interstate/Freeway Multi-Lane Arterials Two-Lane Arterials Collectors
Screed/Extruded Hot Thermoplastic
Interstate/Freeway Multi-Lane Arterials Two-Lane Arterials Collectors
AK N/A N/A N/A N/A 6 6 12 12 36 36 60 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 36 36 60 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A
CA 8 12 18 24 N/A N/A N/A N/A 36 36 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 60 60 24 24 36 36 N/A N/A N/A N/A 48 48 60 60 48 60 72 72
CO N/A N/A 6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 to 24 24 30 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 24 36 36 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 48 to 60 60 to 72 N/A N/A 24 36 to 40 36 to 40 N/A
CT 12 12 12 12 N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 to 24 12 to 36 12 to 36 12 to 36 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
IL Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available
MA N/A 6 6 6 to 12 N/A N/A N/A N/A 24 N/A N/A N/A 36 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 24 to 36 36 36
MI 12 12 12 12 6 6 6 6 don’t know don’t know don’t know don’t know 36 to 60 36 to 60 36 to 60 36 to 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 12 12 12 N/A N/A N/A N/A 60 60 60 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A
MN ****See Question 7 - That is what MnDOT goes by for now****
MT 12 N/A 12 to 24 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 24 N/A 24 to 48 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
NE 6 6 6 12 6 6 6 12 N/A N/A N/A N/A 48 48 60 60 48 48 60 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 48 48 60 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A
NH 6 to 12 6 to 12 6 to 12 6 to 12 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 36 36 36 48 48 60 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 36 36 36 N/A 36 36 36
NY N/A N/A 12 12 N/A N/A N/A N/A 24 to 36 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 24 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
ND Sevice lives for roadway type same as question 7 service lives
OH 6 9 12 12 6 9 12 12 24 to 36 24 to 36 48 48 N/A N/A N/A N/A 24 to 36 24 to 36 48 48 N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 to 24 24 24 to 36 24 to 36 N/A N/A N/A N/A 24 to 36 24 to 36 48 48
OR 3 to 12 3 to 12 3 to 12 3 to 12 1 to 6 N/A N/A N/A N/A 6 to 20 N/A N/A N/A 12 to 25 12 to 25 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 6 to 36 7 to 36 8 to 36 9 to 36 N/A N/A N/A N/A 30 to 60 30 to 60 N/A N/A 6 to 36 6 to 36 6 to 36 6 to 36
VA 3 to 6 3 to 6 6 6 to 12 N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 to 40 12 to 40 24 to 48 24 to 48 N/A N/A N/A N/A 24 to 48 24 to 48 24 to 48 24 to 48 12 to 36 12 to 36 12 to 36 12 to 36 N/A N/A N/A N/A 36 to 72 36 to 72 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
WA too many variables
WV 24 24 12 12 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 48 48 48 48 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
WY 12 12 12 12 N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 12 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

STATE QUESTION 9 QUESTION 10 QUESTION 11
AK Varies By Region Yes; Subjective
CA No, done on an as needed basis
Retroreflectivity is checked during night-time drive-through visual inspections of traffic striping and also by visual inspection of glass bead application using the daylight sun/shadow technique
CO
CT
No
Visual inspection process as follows:
1. Inspect during day and at night to help ensure the markings have their visibility and reflective properties intact
2. If area of question found, use a reto-reflectometer to check area. Done by taking ten random samples from one-mile segment of where the area of question was found
3. If area of concern be found not compliant to standards, pavement markings are replaced
Yes, attempting to replace epoxy markings every 3 years
Yes, All pavement markings placed under contract are visually inspected within 2 weeks of placement and retroreflectivity is measured
IL No No
No
Delta LTL 2000
LTL-X
LTL 2000
No
MA
MI
MN
MT
No waterborne - every year regular dry - late/early season only epoxy - don’t know yet polyurea - every 3 to 5 years spray thermo - every year preformed tape - every 5 years
No
No
No
30 m. handheld retroreflectometer handheld retroreflectometer
& Laserlux mobile
1. Presently use a retro-reflectometer to measure roads as requested by the districts.
2. Recently purchased several handheld retro-reflectometers and the plan is to have each district take readings in the spring and fall to assist in new/developing pavement marking inventory system
Laserlux Van; handheld units include LTL-X and Ltl 2000's
No
Needs based process that uses measurement and visual inspections to determine when markings need to be replaced
Mx-30
NE
Highways with paint markings are replaced on a predetermined cycle of every 6 to 12 months depending on location and ADT
No Mirolux - 30
NH yes - every season for Water-Based
NY waterborne - every year solvent - used for temporary markings epoxy, thermoplastic, polyester, preformed tape -
2 to 3 yrs.
No
Final inspection at the end of projects, inspector will drive the area looking for unacceptable locations
LTL 2000
LTL 2000
ND No
No, typically for intactness
OH
OR
Traffic paint - every year
Polyester - after 2 to 3 years
Thermoplastic - after 3 to 4 years
Epoxy - after 3 to 4 years
Yes; during night to check night visibility
Night visibility subjective rating based on 3 distinct attributes
1. Uniformity (0 to 4 points)
2. Retroreflectivity (0 to 3 points)
3. Nighttime color (0 to 3 points)
In-house waterborne paint retrace every or every other year
For other markings, replaced on as needed basis often by construction projects
Regional pavement marking crews will often do visual inspections of the markings.
An inspection occurs if there is an area of concern, new product under evaluation, or visibility complaint
VA Not normally Yes, some locations do a night ride and look for problem areas
WA
Transitioning from restriping everything every year to managing the markings to only restripe what is necessary
WV
Interstate and expressway markings are replaced bi-annually
All other markings are replaced yearly
Not currently
Visually inspect pavement markings within our district by district personnel.
If pavement markings visually appear to be in poor shape or have poor retroreflectivity, then test these markings with handheld device.
WY
Yearly;
As needed basis for some Urban markings
Statistical sampling of entire state once a year
LTL-2000
(13) total LTL-X handhelds
8 handheld and mobile laserlux van
LTL-2000
Delta LTL-X
Mobile van on interstates and expressways
(40) - handheld LTL-2000
Mirolux MX 30 handhelds
>100 MCD
No
No applied level
200
No
> 275 MCD
No
>150 MCD
>100 MCD
QUESTION 12
White Yellow
No
> 250 MCD for new marks
> 150 MCD for new marks
No current minimum requirement;
CDOT currently determining whether or not to add a requirement to the specifications for dry night retroreflectivity
For epoxy only white >250 MCD yellow > 175 MCD
No
No No
>240 MCD >140 MCD
>80 MCD
No
No applied level
150
No
>180 MCD
No
>125 MCD
No
Considering maintaing a 90 for all lines
>300 MCD
>80 MCD
>225 MCD
>60 MCD
QUESTION 13
No
QUESTION 14
Asphalt
Paint: 40 deg. F min
Epoxy: Manufacturer's Recommendation
Preformed: 60 deg. F min
Concrete
N/A
QUESTION 15
Temporary Raised Pavement Markers:
L-Shaped Polyurethane body with retroreflective tape and adhesive base.
QUESTION 16
No
No Dry pavement with temperatures of 50 deg. F or more same Waterborne paint
Retroreflective pavement marks and open-graded AC pavement are typically specified in areas of heavy rainfall
No current minimum requirement;
CDOT currently determining whether or not to add a requirement to the specifications for wet night retroreflectivity
When air and pavement temperatures are at least 40 degrees F;
Pavement surface and weather conditions shall be conducive to satisfactory results
For epoxy only white >250 MCD yellow > 175 MCD
No
No
No
Not at this time
No
No same Would not stripe in this cold No
When road surface temps are at least 40 deg. F; discontinued during periods of rain same
Paint - 50 deg. F and dry pavement
Thermoplastic extruded - dry pavement 55 deg. F min, no later than Nov. 1/earlier then April 15
Preformed thermopastic - pavement and air temps at or above 32 deg. F at time of installation
Epoxy - when air and pavement temps are min 35 deg. F and rising
Polyurea - surface and air temps are min. 40 deg. F and rising spray thermoplastic - surface and air temps are 50 deg F and dry pavement
Thermoplastic- ambient temp. 45 deg. F and rising w/ dry surface
Latex paint - ambient temp 50 deg. F w/ dry surface
Epoxy - ambient temp. 35 deg. F, dry surface of min 40 deg. F
Polyurea - Ambient temp of 40 deg F dry surface of
N/A waterborne - dry, min 50 deg. F regular, dry - dry, min 25 deg. F epoxy - dry, min 35 deg. F polyurea - dry, min 40 deg. F and rising preformed tape - dry, min 60 deg. F and rising same
Does not stripe in this cold
N/A
N/A
Raised pavement markings
No
Snowplowable reflectorized pavement markers reflectorized pavement markers slotted in pavement
Follow Manufacturer's Recommendations
Waterborne - surface must be clean and dry. Apply the materials following the paint manufacturer's recommendations.
Epoxy - Apply the epoxy marking materials when pavement is clean and dry and the ambient temperature is 40 degrees
Manufacturer's recommendations for contract work;
State painting done from April thru October, given decent conditions
Follow Manufacturer's Recommendations same same products - regular dry (solvent based) or polyurea procedures - standard application or per manufacturer's recommendation
1. wet reflective tape for skips on new pavement
2. Pavement markings in shoulder rumbles
3. Piloted wet reflective polyurea
All markings applied are temporary;
Rural areas use either epoxy or paint materials;
Urban areas shall use epoxy materials only
Just starting to look into this area;
Tapes & latex applied, possible use of rumble strips in the future
N/A acetone paint instead of waterborne
N/A
3M wet reflective tape; wet reflective beads in thermoplastic and polyurea
No same Would not stripe in this extreme cold No
No
No
No
Dry Pavement with pavement 40 degrees F and rising
Pavement markings only to be applied during dry weather and very dry surfaces; pavement temp must be min 50 deg. F and ambient temp. must be min of 50 deg. F and rising waterbased - 40 deg. F + solvent - 45 deg. F + tape - 50 deg. F +
Epoxy - 50 deg. F + vement markings applied at temperature of 50 deg. F or ab same same same
Do not apply pavement markings in this cold
N/A
N/A
Larger glass beads ("Visibeads") are applied
NDDot has experimental sections of edge line that was marked in the rumple strip to improve wet night visibility. Also have experimental sections of 3M all weather paint
No
Not at this time
Dry pavement with pavement and air temperatures 50 degrees F and rising.
currently establishing 200 white, 100 yellow initial
ASTM E-2176 Modified method
50 deg. F and rising
No
200 MCD for white and 150 MCD for yellow markings under recovery conditions;
100 MCD for white and 75 MCD for yellow markings under continuous conditions
No
Waterborne paint - dry, 50 deg. F and rising
Methyl Methacrylate - dry, 40 deg. F and rising
No set weather conditions by contract
40 deg. F and rising, dry conditions for waterborne and epoxy same same same same same
When the case, applied hot spray thermoplastic; dry time with waterborne not acceptable under these conditions
Use different application methods creating raised portions of markings with vertical edges which stand out of the water.
Also using 3M wet weather tape
Would use a polyurea type product
Don't stripe in these conditions
Products used: 3M 780 tape, 3M 380WR
Testing methods used: ASTM E-2176 and 2177,
Profiled lane lines on the Interstates and other Major
Arterials in Western Washington due to lots of rain with very little snow
Preformed Thermoplastic and possible Polyurea ASTM requirements for wet night visibility
Waterborne No