Interactive Map of US Coal Tar Sealant Bans & Restricted-Use Areas Now Online!

View US Coal Tar Sealant Bans & Government Restrictions in a larger map

By far the most popular page on this site is the list of coal tar sealant bans and restricted-use jurisdictions around the country.  With so much misinformation out there about bans, it seems like a reasonable thing to do.

I would recommend caution to the end-user.  Austin's first violation of the ban was by a contractor who thought he was outside the City's jurisdiction, but he wasn't.  Act like a carpenter, check twice, spray once.  That's the reason for the disclaimer below.

The pushpins, as well as larger geographical areas, are color-coded as follows:

• Blue: Outright Ban
• Red: Restricted Use, for Public & Private
• Green: Government Restricted Use

The dollar signs represent the corporate headquarters of Home Depot and Lowes who have both stopped selling coal tar sealants at their stores across the nation.

The map is interactive and allows the user to zoom and pan around the map.  If you click on the pushpins, then more information, if available, will pop up in a window.

This is intended to be a living document that gets updated as more jurisdictions change their regulations.  For now on, the map will reside on the "BAN" tab of this site.

If you know of any jurisdictions I might have missed, please let me know with a link verifying the ban or restriction.  Who knows, with passage of Congressman Lloyd Doggett's Coal Tar Sealant Reduction Act, maybe by this time next year the whole map will be blue.

Disclaimer:
This map is to be used for informational purposes only and is not intended to be used in deciding the legality of using coal tar sealants in any location in the United States.  The responsibility for verifying this is with the user.  It is recommended that the local authorities be contacted prior to commencing work to verify the current regulations.

California Coal Tar Seal Ban Narrowly Passes First Step

Assemblymember Jared Huffman, with support from a host of California environmental organizations, successfully led this week's committee hearing to a 5 to 4 vote! Huffman compared the exposure to coal tar sealant dust to secondhand smoke and said that it only takes one parking lot with coal tar sealant on it to expose people to this risk.

An explanation of the science was given by Dr. Peter Van Metre of the USGS in just 3 minutes!

Whether the committee hearing would take place or not was a little uncertain. What compelled the chair, Bob Wieckowski, to change his position from blocking the legislation from being heard in committee is unknown. He voted against it nonetheless.

California is developing a green chemistry review that will look at multiple chemicals that may do harm in the California environment.   Wieckowski said that he preferred this regulatory mechanism during the committee meeting.  That position was countered by the testimony of Bill Allayaud of the Environmental Working Group.  He said the concern over "single chemistry bills" should not apply in this situation for the following reasons:

1. Coal tar pavement sealant is a substance that is currently available to the citizens of California.
2. Coal tar pavement sealants are clearly and undeniably toxic.  No further research or debate is necessary.
3. Alternatives to this product are many times less toxic and are currently available.
4. It may be as many as 20 years before the Green Chemistry review will be ready to rule on this product.

This bill now goes on to the Appropriations Committee.

Related story:

California's Bob Wieckowski Fights Against Coal Tar Sealant Ban

More Coverage of Austin School District's Coal Tar Sealant Removal Plan

AISD to rid playgrounds of toxic tar: kxan.com

Related stories:

The problem of coal tar pollution at schools has been covered on this site previously: 

• Austin Schools Advance to Head of the Class with Landmark Sealant Cleanup Announcement
• Our Babies Are Exposed to Tar at Unsafe Levels at School
• Austin School District Nears Landmark Decision on Coal Tar Sealants
• Michigan School Wrestles With Coal Tar Sealant Issue

Bans Keep Spreading in Minnesota; Shoreview Makes #17

Another suburban Minneapolis-St. Paul community has passed a coal tar sealant ban.  Earlier this week I was contacted by a staff member who said Shoreview passed a ban at their March 19, 2012 City Council Meeting.    This passage marks 17 separate municipal coal tar sealant bans in Minnesota alone.   An interactive map of the bans and government use restrictions in the US is shown below.



View US Coal Tar Sealant Bans & Government Restrictions in a larger map

Landing on the Truth About the FAA and Coal Tar Sealers

The frequent question comes up in a discussion of coal tar sealants is "what about our airport and the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA)?  Don't we have to use coal tar sealants?"  The short answer is "no," but read on if you want to know why.

This misunderstanding is so pervasive, that some have even stated that airports might lose their federal funding unless they use coal tar.  While I won't get into the politics of procurement, it is safe to say that not only do airports around the country use other materials besides coal tar sealants, but many have been looking for alternatives for a very long time.

History

The reason that coal tar sealants have been historically used at airports is their fuel resistance.  If you remember your chemistry class taught you that "like dissolves like," then you'll understand that asphalt (a petroleum by-product) is damaged by fuel (a petroleum by-product) leaks from aircraft.  Airport can't afford to have deteriorating pavement both for structural strength and also to minimize any debris on the field that might get sucked up in an engine.

However, there are problems with coal tar sealants and fuel resistance and it has nothing to do with environmental or human health issues.  Several sources cite pavement damage when coal tar sealants crack and allow jet fuel to sit in the cracks and deteriorate the pavement.  The first entitled "Fuel Resistant Sealers and Binders for HMA Airfield Pavements (2009)," is a study of fuel resistant surface treatments.  It says that differential expansion and contraction of a coal tar sealants leads to cracking (p.1).  The study, while not approved by the FAA, was funded by the FAA.

The second source is the Army Corps of Engineers that found this same cracking phenomenon.  This report is: "Rejuvenators, Rejuvenator/Sealers, and Seal Coats for Airfield Pavements (2003)."

Alternatives

When the City of Austin passed the nation's first coal tar sealcoat ban, language was included that gives the airport an out if they couldn't find a suitable product to replace coal tar at their most critical location, the aircraft parking areas.  This is where a lot of fuel drips from the planes and fuel resistance is critical.   This is a VERY small percentage of the area sealed at the airport.

Since then the FAA has done research and has found products that can stand up to fuel drips. Several sealants were found to perform well.

Recently hot mix asphalt designs, dubbed "FRA" or "fuel resistant asphalt," have been used at several airports. So instead of being dependent on a surface treatment to protect an asphalt surface, the asphalt pavement is modified to itself be fuel resistant. How well does that work? Well enough that the military and the FAA are looking include this in their standard specifications.

Other airports around the country have used alternatives to coal tar sealants.  The San Francisco Airport, the John Wayne Airport (Orange County, CA) successfully used  a fuel resistant product  as well.   More on this particular product can be found at this link.

Since 2005 the Austin-Bergstrom International Airport has been using only asphalt-based products without any loss in FAA support.

So contrary to what you might hear, there are suitable alternatives to coal tar sealants being used today at airports around the country.  All without any loss in funding or support from the FAA.

City of Austin Names Creek in Honor of Coal Tar Sealant Pollution Pioneer Tom Bashara

It has been a year now, since the death of my friend and colleague, Tom Bashara.  Tom was the first to figure out the problem of coal tar sealant pollution.  Recently the City of Austin named the location of his discovery "Bashara Creek."  The following is what accompanied the announcement:

On April 4, 2012, the City of Austin erected a sign in the Barton Creek Greenbelt to pay tribute to Tom Bashara for discovering that coal tar pavement sealants were a source of elevated PAHs in Austin's waterways. This discovery on August 17, 2002 led to the City of Austin being the first in the nation to ban these sealants.

So in his honor, the sign officially names a Barton Creek tributary "Bashara Creek," where the contamination was first discovered.

Related Posts:

Tribute to My Friend, CTS Pollution Pioneer, Tom Bashara

16th Minnesota Community to Pass A Coal Tar Sealer Ban: Rosemount

Tonight, the City of Rosemount, Minnesota became the 16th community in Minnesota to pass a ban of coal tar pavement sealcoat.  Many suburban Minneapolis communities have awakened to the costs of cleaning up coal tar residues from stormwater facilities.  The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency estimates the cost to cleanup just the public facilities between $1 and $5 Billion.  No estimate has been given that includes all of the private facilities owned by home owners' associations, but it may add significantly to this number!

The Rosemount Council heard the first reading of the ban language on April 3rd.  The City Engineer, Andrew Brotzler, told council that the ban language was quite similar to other bans in the greater Minneapolis area and based upon recommendations by the Minnesota League of Cities.  He also reported that no retailers in Rosemount are currently selling coal tar-based sealer.

The ban is effective immediately.  At this time, the ban ordinance and supporting documentation are available here.

University of Michigan Continues Its Pledge to be Coal Tar Free

I wanted to take the opportunity to thank the University of Michigan for quietly sticking with their commitment to be free of coal tar sealants.  A recent report chronicles their efforts that are part of their "Good Housekeeping" provisions of their NPDES (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System) stormwater permit. They reviewed over 150 construction plans for conformity with this standard.  The report goes on to
say:

• University projects that involve sealing parking lot surfaces incorporate the NPDES permit language prohibiting coal tar emulsions to seal asphalt surfaces.
• Coal Tar Asphalt sealants were not used on the UMD (Dearborn) campus.

What was the origin of this effort?  I don't know.  A statewide ban was introduced in Michigan's legislature by Ann Arbor Senator Rebekah Warren in 2009 after the University of Michigan's prohibition went into effect.

Whatever the source, the Michigan story is an interesting one (as far as state permits go).  Last year I got an anonymous tip presumably from a State of Michigan government employee about a rash of coal tar sealant prohibitions throughout the state in 2008.  I doubled checked that source which led to my understanding that at least 70 stormwater permits throughout Michigan was the provision for the permittee to stop using coal tar sealants.  Technically the permits should be referred to as "government use restrictions" because they appear to restrict the use of sealant by the unit of government, but not the jurisdiction that they govern.  I have since found these provisions in other NPDES permits around the country.  The text of the comment is at the end of this post in italics.

According to several sources, the sealant prohibition was a small part of sweeping changes that many of the communities had real problems with.  They challenged this in court and as of now, most Michigan permittees have reverted back to their 2003 permits.

I must confess I don't know the full story in Michigan, but my gratitude for these efforts continues nonetheless.

Anonymous Post:

I greatly appreciate this resource where the State of Michigan can access both well known and also obscure information to support a ban of CTS. Michigan's efforts to date to ban CTS have flown under the radar on a national scale, and unfortunately they have run into some snags here too. In May 2008, Michigan issued two Phase II general permits for municipal separate storm sewers, and each included a CTS ban. The permits prohibited Municipal permittees from using coal-tar based products on their own properties. These permits were issued to approximately 230 municipalities by October 2008, and the bans went into effect. Unfortunately, in early 2010 the state was sued over several conditions of the permits, and the permits were withdrawn late last year. The coal tar ban was not a major reason for conflicts with the permits, but it got thrown out with the bathwater. The point I'd like to make is that Phase II MS4 permits are still a good vehicle to get CTS banned from use on large expanses of impervious surfaces in urban areas. As a result of the State's regulatory effort, the Michigan Department of Transportation instituted their own moratorium on the use of coal tar sealers at rest areas and their maintenance facilities, which began about 2006 or 2007. In 2010, there was a bill proposed in the State Legislature for a statewide ban. However, budget battles overshadowed that effort, and the November election ushered in an all new legislature. Nothing more has been heard of statewide legislation under the new leadership. The information you make available about what's going on in other states may help rekindle efforts here. Although I work for the State of Michigan, I did not seek approval to represent the State in this blog, so I am choosing to remain anonymous. The statements are my own and do not necessarily represent the great State of Michigan, but I thought it would be helpful for people to know that there have been several efforts here to institute bans, even if it has been under the radar. By Anonymous on Another State with a Municipal Coal Tar Sealant Ba... on 4/20/11

Chicago Sun-Times: Coal Tar Sealcoat May Be Cancer Time Bomb

A recent article in the Chicago Sun-Times covered an informational meeting led by Cassandra McKinney, stormwater engineer for McHenry County, Illinois.  This is the same county where the USGS found some of its highest PAH reading on a residential driveway.  The meeting was held in Lake County, which is also in suburban Chicago.

Ms. McKinney reviewed recent scientific reports from the USGS and a Baylor University toxicologist about the cancer risks of coal tar sealers.   

A representative of Lake County stated that they too are looking at alternatives to coal tar sealant use.

One of the entertaining aspects of the article was in the comments section where a frequent, coal tar industry supporter stated that the reason Austin passed its ban was to support Texas oil and not coal.  In seven years of covering this, that is a first.  Since government units or researchers in Minnesota, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, New Hampshire and Illinois have reached similar conclusions, perhaps they have secret oil reserves and are part of the same vast conspiracy?

The complete article can be found at this time at: Driveway Sealers May Be Can Time Bombs.

Related Posts: 

Chicago Tribune on CTS: Toxic goop; It might be coating your driveway and tracked into your home

Great New Resource for Coal Tar Info

Illinois Initiates Move to Allow Local Sealant Bans

California's Bob Wieckowski Fights Against Coal Tar Sealant Ban

In a strange twist, Assemblymember Wieckowski (D) is refusing to allow the California coal tar sealant ban to be heard in committee.  Unfortunately Wieckowski is the Chair of the Assembly Environmental Safety & Toxic Materials Committee and is blocking its hearing.  He doesn't think coal tar is a problem in California.

Since the Assemblymember won't take emails from outside of his district and his voicemail box is full, I thought it might be appropriate to express my thoughts here.

Assemblymember Wieckowski, please allow the hearing on AB 1704, the Coal Tar Sealant Ban to be heard in committee for the following reasons.

Existing laws have been ineffective to stop blatant deception by contractors spreading toxic, mutagenic material across the State of California.  In spite of studies showing the toxic and carcinogenic effects of coal tar sealants, contractors in California continue to deceive the public by advertising this substance as "environmentally-friendly" and "non-toxic." Consumer Alert: Contractor Deception on the Rise

Not a big enough problem in California?  One third of water bodies tested by the USGS exceeded the biological threshold effects level and have nearly 50% of the chemical sourcing FROM coal tar pavement sealants.  Coal Tar Sealant Dominates PAH Pollution Across the US

Also 25% of California, polled contractors prefer to use coal tar sealants and it only takes ONE parking lot, driveway or playground to expose children to cancer risks similar to second hand smoke.  It doesn't require an entire community to be covered in this material to be a risk. Poll of Nearly 1000 Applicators

This chemical has been shown to correlate to many childhood ailments include attention deficit, depression, lower IQ, and asthma. Prenatal Pollutant Exposure Adversely Affects Child Behavior

This also is an environmental justice issue.  The poor minorities of our communities must get protein where they can and that often is in polluted lakes and streams.  In one community, over 2/3 of the fish had tumors caused by this chemical!  High Rate of Fish Tumors Found

This isn't just another chemical that is detectable, but it is one that enters our environment at THOUSANDS of times higher than effects concentrations.   One of the primary United States Geological Survey (USGS) researchers on this subject called the concentrations "EXCEPTIONAL" in comparison to other toxins in our environment.  Coal Tar Sealcoat a Major Source of PAHs and to Air and Children Living Nearby

That is why this is the FIRST time in my career that I have spoken out against a product.  I have read the reports and contributed to some of them.  This is a material that the USEPA deemed highly toxic.  Myth of "Refined" Coal Tar Sealant

The USEPA report in October of 2011 said that the most effective way to deal with coal tar sealant pollution may be to BAN it.  EPA Runoff Study Says Bans May Be Best Way to Control Coal Tar Sealant Pollution

Please do the RIGHT thing and let this exceptional pollution problem be addressed.

Thomas Ennis, PE, LEED AP
Coal Tar Free America

For those of you who support this ban, please continue to call his office at: (916) 319-2020.  Perhaps his voicemail box will be available to take your call.