An Investigation of Emulsion Stabilized Limestone Screenings, HR-309, 1994

A significant amount of waste limestone screenings is produced during aggregate production. This waste material cannot be used in highway construction because it does not meet current highway specifications. The purpose of this research was to determine if a waste limestone screenings/emulsion mix could be used to construct a base capable of supporting local traffic. A 1.27 mile (2.04 km) section of roadway in Linn County was selected for this research. The road was divided into seven sections. Six of the sections were used to test 4 in. (100 mm) and 6 in. (150 mm) compacted base thicknesses containing 2.5%, 3.5%, and 4.5% residual asphalt contents. The seventh section was a control section containing untreated waste limestone screenings. This research on emulsion stabilized limestone screenings supports the following conclusions: (1) A low maintenance roadway can be produced using a seal coat surface on 6 in. (150 mm) of stabilized limestone screenings with 4.5% asphalt cement; (2) A 6 in. (150 mm) emulsion stabilized base with less than 3.5% asphalt cement does not produce a satisfactory low cost maintenance roadway; (3) A 4 in. (100 mm) emulsion stabilized base does not produce a satisfactory low cost maintenance roadway; and (4) A 2 in. (50 mm) asphalt concrete surface would be necessary on many roads to provide a low maintenance roadway using emulsion stabilized limestone screenings.

An Investigation of Emulsion Stabilized Limestone Screenings, HR-309, 1989

During the processing of limestone to produce commercial aggregates, a significant amount of waste limestone screenings is produced. This waste material cannot be used in highway construction because it does not meet current highway specifications. The purpose of this research was to determine if a waste limestone screenings/emulsion mix could be used to construct a base capable of supporting local traffic. A 1.27 mile section of roadway in Linn County was selected for this research. The road was divided into seven sections. Six of the sections were used to test 4" and 6" compacted base thicknesses containing 2.5%, 3.5%, and 4.5% residual asphalt contents. The seventh section was a control section containing untreated waste limestone screenings.

The Travler, February, 2001

Newsletter for Economic Development

Audit report on Pottawattamie County, Iowa for the year ended June 30, 2008

Audit report on Pottawattamie County, Iowa for the year ended June 30, 2008

Iowa County Engineer's Annual Highway Report Requirements, January 2011

1. Iowa Code Section 309.22 requires the County Engineer to submit an Annual Report to the Iowa DOT by September 15 of each year. 2. Iowa DOT Administrative Rule 761, Chapter 173.3 requires the Iowa DOT to distribute a detailed set of instructions to the counties for the preparation of the report. The instructions constitute the standard requirements and forms to be followed. 3. Iowa DOT Administrative Rule 761,Chapter 178 establishes requirements for the reporting by cities and counties of project cost information to the Iowa DOT 4. Iowa DOT policy states that the report shall cover the fiscal year from July 1st of the past calendar year to June 30th of the current calendar year.

Iowa Department of Transportation Major Items - Preliminary Quantity Report, May 21, 2013; With Addendums

Weekly letting report.

Iowa Department of Transportation Major Items - Preliminary Quantity Report, January 20, 2016; With Addendums

Weekly letting report

2011 Calendar Year Annual Report of the Watershed Improvement Review Board

The Board, codified in Chapter 466A, is an independent, self-governing body directed to award grants for water quality improvement and flood prevention in the state. The Board is authorized to request applications from soil and water conservation districts, local watershed improvement committees, public water supply utilities, counties, county conservation boards and cities and award grants to these entities. These grants are funded by the Watershed Improvement Fund. Although no appropriation was received in FY2012, returned funds from some prior years' grants plus interest earned on the Watershed Improvement Fund allowed the Board to issue one Request For Applications in 2011. On September 9, the Board awarded grants to eight applicants for a total of $1,506,309. In addition to providing environmental benefits, these implementation projects stimulate economic recovery, empower local groups to improve water quality and create jobs through the purchase oflocal goods and services.