B08_Asbestos_Survey_0003.pdf

December 11, 2014

Mr. Frank Drauszewski U.S. Fish & Wildlife Services Parker River NWR 6 Plum Island Turnpike Newburyport, MA 01950

Re: Pink House, Plum Island Turnpike Building Survey Findings RPF File No. 146353

Deat Mr. Drauzweski:

ri=l RPF Environmental

~ TESTING & CONSULTING SERVICES

Hazardous Materials Inspection & Assessment

Asbestos, Mold, Lead Paint, Radon, PCBs

Air Quality Testing and Investigations

Industrial Hygiene, Safety & Training

On November 21, 2014, RPF Environmental, Inc, (RPF) conducted a survey at the Pink House located on the Plum Island Turnpike in Newburyport, Massachusetts. The survey was performed throughout the building as designated by you or your site representative for accessible asbestos and lead paint building material as indicated herein. Below is a summary of fmdings, discussion of the results and preliminary recommendations for proper management of the identified asbestos and lead paint building material. Attached to this report are the survey data tables, laboratory results, survey methodologies and limitations.

This report is not intended to be used as an abatement specification or work plan. To proceed with abatement work, the following important steps are necessary:

I. A work plan or project design documents must be prepared prior to abatement by a certified abatement project designer.

2. The abatement specification or, work plan should then be used to solicit bids from qualified abatement contractors. Only properly licensed contractors should be used for asbestos abatement and disposal.

3. A qualified industrial hygiene/testing consultant should conduct sufficient testing and inspections of the work, independent of the abatement contractor as well as provide for a State licensed project monitor independent of the abatement firm. The consultant should also prepare final abatement reports for the work.

Summary of Findings

The Pink House located on Plum Island Turnpike in Newburyport, Massachusetts is a two story house with an unfinished basement and walk up attic look out area. It is a wood framed building with multiple layers of various asphalt roofing. The building has been unoccupied for several years.

ll!IRPI' Environmental • www.airpf.com

US Fish and Wildlife Building Survey Findings

Pink House, Plum Island Turnpike, Newburyport, MA Page2

The scope of the survey included accessible asbestos-containing building material in accordance with the initial asbestos inspection requirements prior to renovation or demolition work as stated in the State regulations and applicable federal regulations. In addition, the survey included screenit)g for lead paint (LP).

Asbestos

Several types of suspect asbestos-containing building material (ACBM) were observed by RPF, including friable and nonfriable suspect material. Based on the testing performed by RPF asbestos was detected in the following materials:

• 9" Floor Tile • Window Glaze

• Floor Tile Mastic • Flashing Compound

• Insulating Board • Roofing with Silver Paint

• Ceramic Tile Mastic • Sink Basin Undercoat

Accessible areas of the exterior roofing locations were included in the survey. However, the upper portions of the main roof, attic roof and chimney were not accessible due to safety concerns. For the purpose of this survey the materials are assumed ACBM. When feasible and prior to demolition or disturbance, the roofing should be tested including · representative core samples and analysis of the different suspect materials.

Lead Paint

Based on the year of construction and extent of renovation conducted over the years, it is reasonable to assume that some lead paint (LP) is present. RPF conducted limited spot testing of paint and LP was confirmed to be present on various interior and exterior building components.

Depending on the extent of renovation and final construction plans, proper abatement and/or management of the materials will be required in accordance with applicable State and federal regulations. Renovation and demolition plans should be reviewed by a certified industrial hygienist and a licensed project designer for possible asbestos impact issues. Based on the impact assessment and planned usage, technical specifications should be prepared for abatement, as applicable. A management plan should also be prepared to address any asbestos or other hazardous material scheduled to remain after construction.

Discussion of Findings

Asbestos-Containing Building Material

Asbestos is the name for a group of naturally occurring minerals that separate into strong, very fine fibers. The adverse health effects associated with asbestos exposure have been extensively studied for many years. Results of these studies and epidemiological investigations have l!lJ RPf Environmental • www.airpf.com

Building Survey Findings

Pink House, Plum Island Turnpike, Newburyport, MA Page3 demonstrated that inhalation of asbestos fibers may lead to increased risk of developing one or more diseases. In all cases, extreme care must be used not to disturb asbestos-containing materials or to create fiber release episodes.

In the accessible locations surveyed, RPF identified twenty-~o (22) homogeneous groups of accessible suspect asbestos-containing building material. Suspect materials were identified based on current industry standards, EPA, and other guideline listings of potential suspect

ACBM.

The following is a summary list of the suspect ACBM identified and sampled during this survey:

Textured Surfacing Gypsum Board 9" Floor tile Brown with Black Flooring Mastic Insulating Board 12" Floor tile black and white with clear mastic

Laminate Counter Ceramic Tile Grout Ceramic Tile Mastic Homosote Board Sink Basin Undercoat Window Glaze Flashing Compound

Asphalt Shingles Roofing with silver paint Roofing Paper Siding Paper Roll Roofing Paper Wallpaper

A total of sixty-six (66) samples were extracted from the different groups of suspect material in accordance with EPA sampling protocols. Of the samples collected by RPF, asbestos was detected in ten ( I 0) groups of suspect ACBM. ·

Table 1 of Appendix A includes a list of ACBM and accessible asbestos identified in the building, EPA category listings, and asbestos content. A listing of the different homogenous groups of suspect material identified, samples collected, and analytical results is included in Appendix A.

The ACBM identified during this survey consists of friable and nonfriable material. The ACBM was observed to be in good to fair condition and, left .undisturbed and properly managed, is unlikely to cause any major fiber release episodes.

As reviewed with you some suspect material is assumed to be ACBM because sampling was not feasible at the time of the survey. For example, the upper roof attic roof and chimney sampling was not performed. All assumed ACBM should be handled as ACBM unless full testing is performed and the material is found to be non-detect for asbestos.

Lead Paint Screening

Based on the type and age of building construction, it is reasonable to assume that various painted surfaces contain some lead. It is not uncommon in buildings such as this and that have had various renovation and upgrades to have both lead containing paint and non lead containing paint. Lead is a toxic metal that was used for many years in paint and other products found in and around buildings and homes. Exposure to lead may cause a range of health effects, from l!!lRff' Environmental • www.alrpf.com

Building Survey Report

Pink House, Plum Island Turnpike, Newburyport, MA Page4 behavioral problems and learning disabilities, to seizures and death. Children six years old and under are most at risk; however, adults are also susceptible to the effects of lead over exposure.

For the purposes of this survey, RPF performed screening for lead in paint using a Niton X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) Meter of various interior and exterior painted surfaces. The results of this lead screening are included at Table 3 of Appendix A. The results of this testing showed lead concentrations in various interior and exterior painted surfaces at ranging from 0.01 to 3.9 milligrams per square centimeter (mg/cm2).

Based on this limited testing, it should be assumed that other painted surfaces at the site may also contain lead.

Current Commonwealth of Massachusetts Lead Poisoning regulations consider any paint that contains greater than 1.0 mg/cm2 to be lead-based paint. However, the intent of this survey was for construction purposes only and preliminary demolition waste stream implications, not for compliance with Massachusetts Lead Program, HUD, or any regulatory abatement order.

Any surfaces with lead present should be managed in accordance with current rules and guidelines, including but not limited to OSHA worker safety rules and State and EPA waste handling and disposal regulations. U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) construction rules do not specify any "safe" or acceptable levels of lead within paint for the purposes of occupational exposures. Therefore, construction work involving paint found to contain lead must be completed in accordance with OSHA regulations, not limited to the lead standard, 29 CFR 1926.62. Contractors completing work in areas found to contain lead, or where it is reasonable to assume lead may be present, should be notified of the presence (and potential presence) of lead and proper ':"ork protocols should be used.

As lead was found to be present in the screening, proper waste testing with TCLP extraction for lead and potentially other toxic materials should also be completed prior to disposal of any waste generated in accordance with current EPA requirements. Often times it is recommended that pre-demolition TCLP testing be completed such that waste can be segregated as required during demolition activity. Construction/demolition waste that is found to contain lead greater or equal to 5:0 milligrams per liter (mg/L) by TCLP analysis must be handled and treated as hazardous waste.

Please also note that construction and renovation work involving lead paint in housing and child occupied facilities built before 1978 is also regulated under the EPA Renovation, Repair, and Painting (RRP) rule. Any contractors conducting such work must be properly certified and must use lead safe work methods. pursuant to the EPA RRP rule. In addition, pursuant to Title X requirements landlords and sellers are required to disclose the results of lead inspections to tenants and purchasers, and to provide the warning notice and pamphlets in accordance with Title X and State requirements.

l!ll RPf Environmental • www.alrpf.com

Conclusions

Pink House, Plum Island Turnpike, Newburypor~ MA

Based on the survey findings, the building was found to contain ACBM and LP.

In accordance with current regulatory requirements, ACBM that may be impacted or disturbed (such that asbestos fiber release occurs) by renovation, demolition or other such activity must be removed. by qualified, licensed firms. Although regulations for removal of nonfriable ACBM are somewhat less stringent than the, requirements for friable ACBM, it should be noted that nonfriable ACBM that is subjected to grinding, abrasion, and other forces, could be rendered friable. In this event, the nonfriable ACBM would be re-categorized friable ACBM.

ACBM that will not be impacted by renovation or demolition activity may be left in place if managed properly and if the materials are maintained in good condition. ACBM to remain in the building should be included in an asbestos management plan and operations and maintenance (O&M) program detailing the measures to be used to safely occupy the building until the ACBM is fully removed.. An accredited Management Planner should prepare the O&M Program in accordance with the guidelines set forth in 40 CFR Part 763 (AHERA), Work impacting LP, must be performed in accordance with current State and federal standards, including but not limited safe work practices, engineering controls, proper waste packaging, and proper disposal, Work involving LP may require notification of tenants, if rented or leased space, prior to start of work.

Sufficiently in advance of the start of renovation and/or remediation work, abatement project design should be completed. As part the initial design steps any planned renovation and demolition activity should be reviewed for potential impact on ACBM. Asbestos removal is highly regulated at the State and federal level, and in some cases, at the local level also.

Notification to MA DEP is required I 0-days prior to the start of interior abatement work and demolition. Only qualified, trained, and licensed firms, as applicable, should be engaged to complete asbestos removal or other abatement activity. Asbestos abatement work must be designed ( abatement specifications or work plan prepared) by accredited personnel, All employees and contractors that may access or otherwise disturb areas with suspect ACBM present should be notified of the presence of ACBM and possible hidden ACBM, and the need to use caution when proceeding with work. Appropriate notifications, labeling and other hazard communications should be completed to all employees, contractors .and others in accordance with US OSHA regulations and other applicable requirements (including. asbestos labeling in accordance with 29 CFR Part 1926). The scope of RPF services for this survey did not include labeling of ACBM or hazard communications to other employees, building occupants, contractors, or subcontractors.

Documentation of current ACBM conditions and in-depth hazard assessment is beyond the scope-of-work for this initial survey. With the exception of the specific testing and analysis detailed herein, no other samples of materials, oil, water, ground water, air, or other suspect hazardous materials were collected in the course of this inspection that supports or denies these

~ RPF Environmental • www.airpf.com

Pink House, Plum Island Turnpike, Newburyport, MA conclusions. No additional service$ beyond those explicitly stated herein were performed and none should be inferred or implied. The sunnnary and conclusions are based on reasonably ascertainable information as described in this report. RPF Environmental, Inc. makes no guarantees, warranties, or references regarding this property or the condition of the property after the period of this report.

If you have any questions at this time, or if you would like to discuss the remediation process, please call our office.

Sincerely, RPF ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.

~'1{~ Kara Forsythe Sr. EH&S Consultant

Enclosures:

Appendix A: Data and Analytical Tables Appendix B: Site Sketch and Photographs Appendix C: Summary of Methodology and Limitations

146353121114rpt l!J RPF Environmental • www.airpf.com

APPENDIX A

9" Floor tile with flooring mastic

Insulating Board

Sink Basin Undercoat

Ceramic Tile Mastic

Window Glaze

Flashing Compound

Roofing with Silver Paint

Roofing

Notes:

TABLE 1

Hazardous Materials Inspection & Assessment

Asbestos, Mold, Lead Paint, Radon, PCBs

Air Quality Testing and Investigations

Industrial Hygiene, Safety & Training

Pink House, Plum Island Turnpike Newburyport, MA

SUMMARY OF ACBM & ASBESTOS IDENTIFIED

1st floor: living room, kitchen, 600 square feet Category I 4%-8% garage/entrance area Nonfriable Chrysotile 2□d floor: hallwa s I" floor: kitchen (back side of 12 square feet Friable RACM 15% chimney) Chrysotile

1st floor: kitchen 2 square feet Category II 10% Nonfriable Chrysotile

2"' floor: full bath 52 square feet Category II 5% Chrysotile Nonfriable

Throughout building 40 window units Category II 4% Chrysotile ( also some stored in including stored' Nonfriable basement Exterior roof along seruns 100 linear feet Category! 10%' where metal meets asphalt. Nonfriable Chrysotile Also assumed to be around the chimne Exterior lower roof portions, 1,000 square feet Category I 10% overhangs and garage under Nonfriable Chrysotile a !es Exterior upper roofing aod 1,500 square feet Category I Assumed attic roof Nonfriable ACBM

• Please note that Category 1 and Category 2 nonfriable ACM are recategorized as friable and/or RACM under certain conditions. Current State asbestos regulations are more strict and comprehensive than the EPA NESHAPs requirements.

• All quantities are approximate only and should be confirmed during abatement project design and abatement bidding.

• It is possible that some concealed or inaccessible ACBM is present. Care should be used when renovating/demolishing inaccessible building space. Further explorative survey work may be necessary during design and/or in conjunction with demolition.

!ill RPf Environmental • www.airpf.com sum Board

112114 HG lb-A Surfacin

112114 .HG lb -B G sum Board 112114 HG le-A Surfacin 112114HG lc-B sum Board 112114HG Id-A Surfacin l12114HG ld-B G sum Board 112114 HG le-A Surfacin

112114 HG le -B G sum Board

'n2114 HG If -A Surfacin 112114HGlf-B G sum Board

112114 HG lg -A Surfacin

112114 HG lg-B G sum Board 112114 HG lh -A Surfacin 112114HG lh-B G sum Board

Notes:

ri=lRPF Environmental

~ TESTING & CONSULTING SERVICES

TABLE2

US FISH & WILDLIFE

Pink House, Plum Island Turnpike

Newburyport, MA

Hazardous Materials Inspection & Assessment

Asbestos, Mold, Lead Paint, Radon, PCBs

Air Quality Testing and Investigations

Industrial Hygiene, Safety & Training

SUMMARY OF BULK MATERIAL SAMPLING AND RESULTS

Polarized Light Microscopy- EPA 600/R-93/116 Method

Samples Collected: November 21, 2014

Textured Surfacing, white, l st floor, kitchen, ceiHn

No Asbestos 15% Cellulose G sum Board, 1st floor, kitchen, ceilin Detected 85% Non-fibrous

Textured Surfacing, white, I st flodr, dining room, No Asbestos 100% Non-fibrous wall Detected

Gypsum Board, 1st floor, dining room, wall No Asbestos I 0% Cellulose Detected 90% Non-fibrous

Textured Surfacing, white, I st floor, family room, No Asbestos 100% Non-fibrous wall Detected

Gypsum Board, I" floor, family room, wall No Asbestos 15% Cellulose Detected 85% Non-fibrous

Textured Surfacing, white, 2nd floor, stairwell, No Asbestos I 00% Non-fibrous wall Detected

Gypsum Board, white, 2nd floor, stairwell, wall No Asbestos 15% Cellulose Detected 85% Non-fibrous

Textured Surfacing, 2nd floor, room l,_wall No Asbestos 100% Non-fibrous Detected

Gypsum Board, 2nd floor, room 1, wall No Asbestos 15% Cellulose Detected 85% Non-fibrous

Textured Surfacing, white, 2°• floor, room 2, wall No Asbestos 100% Non-fibrous Detected

Gypsum Board, 2"" floor, room 2, wall No Asbestos 15% Cellulose Detected 85% Non-fibrous

Textured Surfacing, 2nd floor, hallway, wall No Asbestos I 00% Non-fibrous Detected

Gypsum Board, 2•• floor, room 2, wall No.Asbestos 15% Cellulose Detected 85% Non-fibrous

Textured Surfacing, white, 1st floor, kitchen, No Asbestos 100% Non-fibrous ceilin Detected

Gypsum Board, 1st floor, kitchen, ceiling No Asbestos 15% Cellulose Detected 85% Non-fibrous

• Trace means less than 1 %. SFP Means analysis was terminated because asbestos was detected on a previous homogenous sample during the survey work. Please reference the "HG" group number.

• Please reference the full report for discussions and additional information and limitatious pertaining to these results.

Page 1 of4 ll!JRPF Environmental • www.airpf.com

/ I

112114HG Ii-A Surfacin 112114HG li-B G sum board

112114 HG 2a-A Tile

112114HG2a-B Mastic 112114HG2b-A Tile

112114HG2b-B Mastic

112114 HG 3

112114 HG 3b 112114HG4a-A Tile 112114 HG 4a- B 'Mastic

112114 HG 4b-A Tile

112114 HG4b-B Mastic

112114 HG 5

112114 HG6a-A Tile

1l21l4HG6a-B Mastic

112114HG6b-A Tile

Notes:

TABLE 2 (continued)

US FISH & WILDLIFE

Pink House, Plum Island Turnpike

Newburyport, MA

Hazardous Materials Inspection & Assessment

Asbestos, Mold, Lead Paint, Radon, PCBs

Air Quality Testing and Investigations

Industrial Hygiene, Safety & Training

SUMMARY OF BULK MATERIAL SAMPLING AND RESULTS

Polarized Light Microscopy- EPA 600/R-93/116 Method

Samples Collected: November 21, 2014

Textured Surfacing, white, I" floor, kitchen, No Asbestos 100% Non-fibrous ceilin Detected Gypsum Board, 1st floor, ~tchen, ceiling No Asbestos 15% Cellulose

Detected 85% Non-fibrous 911 Floor Tile, brown and gold, I st floor; living 8% Chrysotile 92% Vermiculite room

8% Chrysotile 92% Non-fibrous

9" Floor Tile 1st floor, livin room

9" Floor Tile, brown a1_1d gold, 1st floor, living *SFP *SFP room

*SFP *SFP

Mastic, 1st floor, livin room

Insulating Board, gray, I" floor, kitchen/dining 15% Chrysotile 40% Cellulose room, back side of fire lace 45% Non-fibrous Insulating Board, gray, I" floor, kitchen/dining *SFP *SFP room, back side of frr lace

No Asbestos I 00% Non-fibrous 1211 Floor Tile, white and black, 1 ~t flo'or, kitchen Detected

No Asbestos I 00% Non-fibrous Mastic, clear, 1st floor kitchen Detected

No Asbestos I 00% Non-fibrous 12" Floor Tile, white and black I" floor, kitchen Detected

No Asbestos I 00% Non-fibrous Mastic, clear, 1st floor, kitchen Detected.

Laminant counter, white, with mastic, I st floor, No Asbestos 70% Cellulose kitchen Detected 30% Non-fibrous 911 Floor Tile, white and black, with mastic, 2nd 4% Chrysotile 96% Non-fibrous floor, hallwa

8% Chrysotile 92% Non-fibrous Mastic, 2nd floor, hallwa

*SFP *SFP

9" Floor Tile, white and black, 2"' floor, hallwa

• Trace means less than I%. SFP Means analysis was terminated because asbestos was detected on a previous homogenous sample during the swvey work. Please reference the "HG" group number.

• Please reference the full report for discussions and additional information and limitations pertaining to these results.

Page 2 of4

BRPF Environmental • www.airpf.com

· !12114 HG 6b -B Mastic

112114HG7a

112114HG7b

112114 HG Sa-A Tile 112114 HG Sa-B Mastic

112114HGSb-A Tile 112114 HG Sb - B Mastic

112114HG9a

112114 HG 9b

112114 HG 10

112114 HG !Ob

112114HG 11

112114 HG lib

112114 HG 12

112114 HG 12b

112114 HG 13a

112114 HG 13b

Notes:

fiSl RPF Environmental

~ TESTING & CONSULTING SERVICES

TABLE 2 (continued)

· US FISH & WILDLIFE

Pink House, Plum Island Turnpike

Newburyport, MA

Hazardous Materials Inspection & Assessment

Asbestos, Mold, Lead Pain~ Radon, PCBs

Air Quality Testing and Investigations

Industrial Hygiene, Safety & Training

SUMMARY OF BULK MATERIAL SAMPLING AND RESULTS

Polarized Light Microscopy- EPA 600/R-93/116 Method

Samples Collected: November 21, 2014

Mastic, 2"' floor, hallwa

Linoleum, white and old, 1st floor, screen orch 2

Linoleum, white and old, 1st floor, screen orch 2 12" Floor Tile black, I" floor, half bathroom off screen orch #3 Mastic, clear, 1'1 floor, half bathroom off screen arch #3 r Tile black, I" floor, half bathroom off rch#3

Mastic, clear, pt floor, half bathroom off screen arch #3

Ceramic Tile Grout, white, pt floor, kitchen, back s lash ic Tile Grout, white, 2"' floor, full oom, waUs

Ceramic Tile Mastic, tan, I" floor, kitcheo, back s lash Ceramic Tile Mastic, tan, 2nd floor, full bathroom, walls Ceramic Tile Grout, white, 2nd floor, _full bathroom, floor ·

Ceramic Tile Grout, white, 2"d floor, full bathroom, floor Ceramic Tile Mastic, gray, 2nd floor, full bathroom, floor

Ceramic Tile Mastic, gray, 2nd floor, full bathroom, floor

Homosote Board, a , 1st floor, screen orch #2

Homosote Board, a , 1st floor, screen orch #3

*SFP

No Asbestos Detected

No Asbestos Detected

No Asbestos Detected

No Asbestos Detected

No Asbestos Detected

No Asbestos Detected

No Asbestos Detected

No Asbestos Detected

No Asbestos Detected

No Asbestos Detected

No Asbestos Detected

No Asbestos Detected 5% Chrysotile

*SFP

No Asbestos Detected

No Asbestos Detected

*SFP

15% Cellulose, 5% Fiber Glass SO% Non-fibrous

15% Cellulose, 5% Fiber Glass SO% Non-fibrous

I 00% Non-fibrous

I 00% Non-fibrous

100% Non-fibrous

I 00% Non-fibrous

I 00% Non-fibrous

100% Non-fibrous

100% Non-fibrous

I 00% Non-fibrous

100% Non-fibrous

100% Non-fibrous

95% Non-fibrous

*SFP

90% Cellulose 10% Non-fibrous

90% Cellulose 10% Non-fibrous

• Trace means less than I%. SFP Means analysis was terminated because asbestos was detected on a previous homogenous sample during the survey work. Please reference the "HG" group number.

• Please reference the full report for discussions and additional information and limitations pertaining to these result,;_

Page 3 of4

~RPP Environmental • www.airpf.com

112114 HG 15

112114 HG 15b

112114HG 16

I 12114 HG 16b

112114HG 17

I 12114 HG I 7b

I 12114 HG 18

I 12114 HG !Sb

112114HG 19a

I 12114 HG 19b

I 12114 HG 20a

II2114 HG 20b

II2II4 HG 21

I 12II4 HG 21b

112114HG22

I 12114 HG 22b 146353

Notes:

fi=lRPF Environmental

~ TESTING & CONSULTING SERVICES

TABLE 2 (continued)

US FISH & WILDLIFE

PinkHouse, Plum Island Turnpike

Newburyport, MA

Hazardous Materials-Inspection & Assessment

Asbestos, Mold, Lead Paint Radon, PCBs

Air Quality Testing and Investigations.

Industrial Hygiene, Safety & Training

SUMMARY OF BULK MATERIAL SAMPLING AND RESULTS

Polarized Light Microscopy - EPA 600/R-93/116 Method

Samples Collected: November 21, 2014

Window Glaze, a , exterior, west side, windows Window Glaze, gray, exterior, north side, windows Flashing Compound, black, exterior, east side, alon sidin and metal roof

Flashing Compound, black, exterior, east side, alon sidin and metal roof Asphalt Shingles, black and white, exterior, east side, to la er A.sphalt Shingles, black and white, exterior, east side, to la er Asphalt Shingles, black, exterior, ~ast side, 2nd la er

Asphalt Shingles, black, exterior, east side, 2nd la er

Roofing, black, with silver paint, exterior, east side, bottom la er

Roofing, black, with silver paint, exterior, east side, bottom la er

Roofing paper, tan, exterior, east side, under HG Roofing paper, tan, exterior, east side, under HG 19B

Siding Paper, black, exterior, east side, under wood cla boards

Siding Paper, black, exterior, east side, under wood cla boards

Roll Roofin , black, exterior, over ara e

Roll Roofin , black, exterior, over ara e

4% Chrysotile

I 0% Chrysotile

*SFP

No Asbestos Detected No Asbestos Detected

No Asbestos Detected No Asbestos Detected I 0% Chrysotile

*SFP

No Asbestos Detected No Asbestos Detected No Asbestos Detected No Asbestos Detected No Asbestos Detected No Asbestos Detected

96% Non-fibrous

I 0% Cellulose 80% Non-fibrous

*SFP

I 5% Fiber Glass 85% Non-fibrous I 5% Fiber Glass 85% Non-fibrous 15% Fiber Glass 85% Non-fibrous 15% Fiber Glass 85% Non-fibrous I 0% Cellulose 80% Non-fibrous

*SFP

95% Cellulose 5% Non-fibrous

· 95% Cellulose 5% Non-fibrous 60% Cellulose 40% Non-fibrous

60% Cellulose 40% Non-fibrous I 5% Fiber Glass 85% Non-fibrous I 5% Fiber Glass 85% Non-fibrous

• Trace means less than l %. SFP Means analysis was tenninated because asbestos was detected on a previous homogenous sample during the survey work. Please reference the "HG" group number.

• Please reference the full report for discussions and additional infonnation and limitations pertaining to these results.

P~ge 4 of4

111 RPF Environmental • www.airpf.com

'iReailiit ', ifflil:~ifl

TABLE3

US FISH & WILDLIFE

Hazardous Materials Inspection & Assessment

Asbestos, Mold, Lead Paint, Radon, PCBs

Air Quality Testing and Investigations

Industrial Hygiene, Safety & Training

Pink House, Plum Island Turnpike Newburyport, MA

XRF SURVEY RESULTS

Sample Collected: November 21, 2014

Calibration SRM2573 I.I Calibration SRM2573 I.I

Calibration SRM2573 .9

Wall Gypsum Wall Board White 1" Floor,

1.6 Kitchen

Null

Null

Cabinet Door Wood White I" Floor K.itch~n' 0.18

Cabinet Floor Wood White 1st Floor,

0.03 Kitchen

Cabinet Shelf Wood Red 1st Floor,

0.06 Kitchen

Door Casing Wood White l" Floor,

0.01 Kitchen

Null

Wall Gypsum Wall Board White l" Floor,

0.6 Dinin Room

1st Floor, Door Wood White Dining Room, 0.06

Closet 1st Floor, Door Casing Wood White Dining Room, 0.03 Closet

1st Floor, Closet Shelf Wood Pink Dining Room, 0.05

Closet

IIIRPF Environmental • www.airpf.com

TABLE 3 (continued)

US FISH & WILDLIFE

Pink House, Plum Island Turnpike

Newburyport, MA

XRF SURVEY RESULTS

Sample Collected: November 21, 2014

Hazardous Materials Inspection & Assessment

Asbestos, Mold, Lead Paint, Radon, PCBs

Air QualityTesting and Investigations

Industrial Hygiene, Safety & Training

·Reaili,ng ---.. •·>/i_.· ~- ~~, . ·• .:•c.·••>· • ' 'Riswt··.•· . '}'·"·_.•;.".·:.· -_·:J;_9pip9i1:1!,iit_/-: :J _._, ,_ .<"-• Location ,'. ·' trti~~iri25' .No .. , · .. _ ......... ,, .· _., .... > ,' ;,·-:,•.;:-.-\'.•· i•-_:-L,, 294 Riser Wood White I" Floor, Living

0.20 Room, Stairwell

295 Railing Wood White I" Floor, Living

0.09 Room, Stairwell

296 Post Wood White I" Floor, Living

0.19 . Room, Stairwell

1st Floor, 297 Newer Post Wood White Living Room, 0.06

Stairwell 1st Floor, 298 Tread Wood White Living Room, 0.09 Stairwell !st Floor, 299 Baseboard Wood White Living Room, 0.30 , Stairwell 1st Floor, 300 Door Wood White Living Room, 0.10 to porch

301 Shelf Wood White 1st Floor, Living

0.0 Room .

302 Window Sill Wood White 1st Floor, Living

0.25 Room

303 Window Casing Wood White I" Floor, Living

0.17 Room

304 Window Wood White 1" Floor, Living

1.2 Room

305 Door Wood White z•d Floor, Hall

0.17 closet

306 Door Case Wood White 2nd Floor, Hall

0.13 closet

307 Wall Gypsum Wall Board White 2nd Floor, Hall

0.03 closet

308 Window Sill Wood White 2"' Floor, Room

0.06

II§ RPf Environmental • www.alrpf.com

TABLE 3 (continued)

US FISH & WILDLIFE

Hazardous Materials Inspection & Assessment

Asbestos, Mold, Lead Paint, Radon, PCBs

Air QualityTesting and Investigations

Industrial Hygiene, Safety & Training

Pink House, Plum Island Turnpike Newburyport, MA

146353

Notes:

XRF SURVEY RESULTS

Sample Collected: November 21, 2014

Window Case Wood

Window Wood

Threshold Wood

Floor Wood

Floor Wood

Door Wood

Siding Wood

Door Case Wood

Null

Railing Wood

Window Trim Wood

Null

Calibration

Calibration

Calibration

White

White

Gray

Gray

Pink

Blue

Pink

White

· Stain

White

2nd Floor, Room

2nd Floor, Room

2nd Floor, Room

2°• Floor, Room

2nd Floor, Room3

Front Door Exterior·

Exterior Siding

Front Door

Front

Front Porch

SRM2573

SRM2573

SRM2573

0.12

3.4

1.6

0.8

2.3

0.5

3.9

0.06

0.14

0.4

1.0

I.I

1.2

• Lead based paint as defined by current state of NH lead poisoning prevention regulations, is _any paint that contains in excess of 1.0 mg/cm2 of lead.

• OSHA does not currently establish a percent lead for lead paint.

• mg/cm2 milligrams per centimeter square

-• cps means hertz measurement

• Null indicates the XRF analysis was stopped prior to the results.

• Please reference the full report for discussions and additional information and limitations pertaining to these results.

11!1 RPF Environmental • www.alrpf.com

APPENDIXB

1 3

1 4

1 5

1 6

2 0

2 1

2 3

2 4

2 5

2 s· 2 7

8 2

2 9

3 0

3 1

,0,;:::1RPF ENVIRONMENTAL INC.

'l,l •• 1,~•,lF,_nvironmental Health & Safety p:;: 11 < HC:.h / fAli(J hk Location: lh,f .LJ/,/)U /Jin"" IVLH. ti Subiect:

BaSedon:

I I i

I I

I ! i• '' I

$C1•rt .~A /)}q.::.

I i ' i

: ... L . ,,\ ... ) . I\

'::l

I I I

I ; 7. i i , I!! ,.!, J

I ::::'I

I i

.i .r, Date; I/ b tf/1,/

Checked: ' Revised:

l / !

1 i

11 ! 11 I I', rN)•r-! i I ! 'I h

I I "- I" .

I I i l i

/ I ' i I ~I~

! i j ili,, ' .

•··~- I I '"I 'T I~ ;

! I ; I ' i f?- !

i i i I

I I I i i I ! I i • 't i i ' 1

1r.1# j,, ' l I

I ' I i I I i ' ! ;

' i ' ' i ! '

I ! i

Paoe No.

File No. I•,,<- Bv: If ,J,L.

· Bv:

By:

I

: ' l i II IC: ,r , ., ' ,(' ' • • .... ~. ~ i/ 1·£ ],3 ' ' ..

I

1 ', ,,,,J ". 1 /1' " 1,11, I • I . ' I i ' ,,!7 l...f. 1L/xn l '--: ' I I

·r. ' / ! I • 1....,1 ..., ... \ -1 I 1-' vj f i. iA I IC. I L 1j..j •

,z_

I . ' i I

I i I I

I . Exterior view of the pink house. ACBM window glaze, flashing compound and roofing. LP on various exterior com onents.

3. ACBM 9" floor tile and mastic in the garage entrance.

5. View of the kitchen. ACBM sink basin undercoat and 9" floor and mastic underneath floorin_g.

APPENDIX B: SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

Site Address: US Fish and Wildlife

Pink House, Plum Island Turnpike Newburyport, MA

2. ACBM flashing compound along the side edges of the roof and metal. ACBM roofing under multiple layers of asphalt shin Jes.

4. ACBM insulating board behind the wood burning stove.

6. z,d floor: LP on the floor boards under the throw rugs.

11~1 ~~G ~1!~~u~~,';~~~ www.airpf.com

603-942-5432

Project No. 146353

APPENDIXC

Summary of Methodology: Asbestos-Coniaining Building Materials Survey

EPA accredited inspector(s) surveyed accessible space in tbe building or site areas included within tbe RPF Scope of Work (SOW) to identify suspect asbestos-containing building material (ACBM). Suspect ACBM was inventoried and categorized into homogeneous groups of materials. To tbe extent indicated in tbe report, samples were tben extracted from tbe different groups of homogeneous materials in accordance with applicable State and federal rules and regulations. For surveys in which tbe SOW included full inspections of tbe affect space, sampling metbodologies were based on tbe requirements set forth in 40 CFR Part 763 (EPA) and 29 CFR Part 1926.1101 (OSHA). For preliminary or limited surveys, findings apply to only tbe affected material or space as indicated in the RPF SOW and Report and additional inspection and testing will be required to satisfy regulatory obligations associated witb renovation, demolition, maintenance and otber occupational safety and healtb requirements.

Collected samples were individually placed into sealed containers, labeled, and submitted witb proper chain of custody forms to the RPF NVLAP-accredited vendor laboratory. Sample containers and tools were cleaned after each sample was collected. Samples were analyzed for asbestos content using polarized light microscopy (PLM). Altbough PLM is tbe metbod currently recognized in State and federal regulations for asbestos identification in bulk samples, PLM may not be sensitive enough to detect all of tbe asbestos fibers in certain types of materials, such as floor tile and otber nonfriable ACBM. In tbe event that more definitive results are requested in cases of with negative or trace results of asbestos are detected, RPF recommends that confirmation testing be completed using transmission electron microscopy.

For each homogeneous group of suspect material, a "stop at first positive" (SFP) method may have been employed during the analysis. The SFP method is based on current EPA sampling protocols and means that if one sample within a homogeneous group of suspect material is found to contain >I% asbestos, tben further analysis of tbat specific homogenous group samples is terminated and the entire homogeneous group of material is considered to be ACBM regardless of tbe otber sample results. This is based on tbe potential for inconsistent mi.x of asbestos in tbe product yielding varying findings across tbe different individual samples collected from the same homogeneous group. Unless otherwise noted in the report, sample groups found to have 1% to <10% asbestos content are assumed to be ACBM; to rebut Ibis assumption further analysis witb point count methods are required.

Inaccessible and hidden areas, including but not limited to wall/floor/ceiling cavity space, space with obstructed access (such as fiberglass insulation above suspended ceilings), sub floors, interiors of mechanical and process equipment, and similar spaces were not included in the inspection and care should be used when accessing tbese areas in tbe future. Unless otberwise noted in tbe RPF Report, destructive survey techniques were not employed during this survey.

In the event that additional suspect materials are encountered that are not addressed in this report, the materials should be properly tested by an accredited inspector. For example, during renovation and demolition it is likely tbat additional suspect material will be encountered and such suspect materials should be assumed to be hazardous until proper inspection and testing occurs.

RPF followed applicable industry standards; however, various assumptions and limitations of tbe metbods can result in missed materials or misidentification of materials due several factors including but not limited to: inaccessible space due to physical or safety constraints, space tbat is difficult to reach to fully inspection, assumptions regarding tbe determination of homogenous groups of suspect material, assumptions regarding attempts to conduct representative sampling, and potential for varying mixrures and layers of material sampled not being representative of all areas of similar material. Also reference tbe Limitations document attached to the report.

Ill RPF Environmental • www.airpf.com

Summary of Methodology: Lead in Paint Survey

Screening for lead in paint (LP) was performed using bulk sampling of paint or using an X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) meter for in situ measurements of various painted surfaces. For bulk sampling, samples for determinations were collected by scraping lead paint chips from the substrate. The surveyor attempted to sample layers of paint down to the substrate surface at each sample location. Samples were placed into proper sample containers, the containers were then sealed, labeled and shipped with chain of custody to the RPF AIHA accredited vendor laboratory. The samples were analyzed for total lead content using SW 846 3050B - NIOSH Method 7420. For XRF screening, the device was used and.calibrated in accordance with the equipment and industry guidelines applicable for the specific testing performed.

Unless specific TCLP waste characterizations were included in the RPF Scope of Work (SOW), further analysis of waste streams for toxicity characteristics including, but not necessarily limited to lead, may be required prior to disposal of ihe waste stream. Other toxics may also be present including other heavy metals and PCBs and it may also be necessary to conduct waste characterization for these materials.

Sampling was limited to the specific components as listed in the RPF Report and testing and survey was not completed on every different surface in every room or area in the building. In addition unless otherwise noted in the RPF Report, surface dust, air and soil testing were not conducted during this survey. In order to conduct thorough hazard assessments for lead exposures, representative surface dust testing and air monitoring throughout the building; LBP testing of all surfaces in the building, and representative soil testing in the exterior areas should be completed. This type of testing and analysis was beyond the SOW for the initial survey

The intent of this survey is for lead in construction purposes, not for lead abatement, lead inspections, or lead hazard assessments in residential situations. Specific survey and inspection protocols are required for residential lead-based paint inspections that were not included in the RPF SOW.

RPF followed applicable industry standards for construction related identification in nonresidential settings; however, RPF does not warrant or certify that all lead or other hazardous materials in or on the building has been identified and included in this report. Various assumptions and limitations of the methods can result in missed materials or misidentification of materials due several factors including but not limited to: inaccessible space due to physical or safety constraints, space that is difficult to reach to inspect of sample, assumptions regarding the determination of homogenous or like types of paint, assumptions regarding attempts to conduct representative sampling, and potential for varying mixtures and layers of material sampled not being representative of all areas of similar appearing material. Also reference the Limitations document.attached to the report.

11:!RPF Environmental • www.alrpf.com

LIMITATIONS

1. The observations and conclusions presented in the Report were based solely upon the services described herein, and not on scientific tasks or procedures beyond the RPF Environmental, Inc. Scope of Work (SOW) as discussed in the proposal and/or agreement. The conclusions and recommendations are based on visual observations and testing, limited as indicated in the Report, and were arrived at in accordance with generally accepted standards of industrial hygiene practice and asbestos professionals. The nature of this survey or monitoring service was limited as indicated herein and in the report or letter of findings.

Further testing, survey, and analysis is required to provide more definitive results and findings.

2. For site survey work, observations were made of the designated accessible areas of the site as indicated in the Report. While it was the intent of RPF to conduct a survey to the degree indicated, it is important to note that not all suspect ACBM material in the designated areas were specifically assessed and visibility was limited, as indicated, due to the presence of furnishings, equipment, solid walls and solid or suspended ceilings throughout the facility and/or other site conditions. Asbestos or hazardous material may have been used and may be present in areas where detection and assessment is difficult until renovation and/or demolition proceeds. Access and observations relating to electrical and mechanical systems within the building were restricted or not feasible to prevent damage to the systems and minimize safety hazards to the survey team.

3. Although assumptions may have been stated regarding the potential presence of inaccessible or concealed asbestos and other hazardous material, full inspection findings for all asbestos and other hazardous material requires the use of full destructive survey methods to identify possible inaccessible suspect material and this level of survey was not included in the SOW for this project. .For preliminruy surv.ey work, sampling and analysis as applicable was limited and a full survey throughout the site was not performed. Only the specific areas and /or materials indicated in the report were included in the SOW.

This inspection did not include a full hazard assessment survey, full testing or bulk material, or testing to determine current dust concentrations of asbestos in and around the building. Inspection resu.lts should not be used for compliance with current EPA and State asbestos in renovation/demolition requirements unless specifically stated as intended for this use in the RPF report and considering the limitations as stated therein and within this limitations document.

4. Where access to portions of the surveyed area was unavailable or limited, RPF renders no opinion of the condition and assessment of these areas. The survey results only apply to areas specifically accessed by RPF during the survey. Interiors of mechanical equipment and other building or process equipment may also have asbestos and other hazardous material present and were not included in this inspection. For renovation and demolition work, further inspection by qualified personnel will be required during the course of construction activity to identify suspect material not previously documented at the site or in this survey report. Bordering properties were not investigated and comprehensive file review and research was not performed, ·

5. For lead in paint, observations were made of the designated accessible areas of the site as indicated in the Report. Limited testing may have been performed to the extent indicated in the text of the report. In order to conduct thorough hazard assessments for lead exposures, representative surface dust testing, air monitoring and other related testing throughout the building, should be completed. This type of in depth testing and analysis was beyond the scope of services for the initial inspection. For lead surveys with XRF readings, it is recommended that surfaces found to have LBP or trace amount of lead detected with readings of less than 4 mg/cm2 be confirmed using laboratory analysis if more definitive results are required. Substrate corrections involving destructive sampling or damage to existing surfaces (to minimize XRF read-through) were not completed. In some instances, destructive testing may be required for more accurate results. In addition, depending on the specific thickness of the paint films on different areas of a building component, differing amounts of wear, and other factors, XRF readings can vruy slightly, even on the same building component. Unless otherwise specifically stated in the scope of services and fmal report, lead testing performed is not intended to comply with other state and federal regulations pertaining to childhood lead poisoning regulations.

RPF Service Limitations (cont.)

6. Air testing is to be considered a "snap shot" of conditions present on the day of the survey with the understanding that conditions may differ at other times or d;:ttes or operational conditions for the facility.

Results are also limited based on the specific analytical methods utilized. For phase contrast microscopy (PCM) total airborne fiber testing, more sensitive asbestos-specific analysis using transmission electron microscopy (TEM) can be performed upon request.

7. For asbestos bulk and dust testing, although polarize light microscopy (PLM) is the method currently recognized in State and federal regulations for asbestos identification in bulk samples, some industry studies liave found that PLM may not be sensitive enough to detect all of the asbestos fibers in certain nonfriable material, vermiculate type insulation, soils, surface dust, and other materials requiring more sensitive ~nalysis to identify possible asbestos fibers. In the event that more definitive results are requested, RPF recommends that confirmation testing be completed using TEM methods or other analytical methods as may be applicable to the material. Detection of possible asbestos fibers may be made more difficult by the presence of other non-asbestos fibrous components such as cellulose, fiber glass, etc., by binder/matrix materials which may mask or obscure fibrous components, and/or by exposure to conditions capable of altering or transforming asbestos. PLM can show· significant bias leading to false negatives and false positives for certain types of materials. PLM is limited by the visibility of the asbestos fibers. In some samples the fibers may be reduced to a diameter so small or masked by coatings to such an extent that they cannot be reliably observed or identified using PLM.

8. For hazardous building material inspection or survey work, RPF followed applicable industry standards;

however, RPF does not warrant or certify that all asbestos or other hazardous ma.terials in or on the building has been identified and included in this report. Various assumptions and limitations of the methods can result in missed materials or misidentification of materials due to several factors including but not limited to: inaccessible space due to physical or safety constraints, space that is difficult to reach

to. fully inspect, assumptions regarding the determination of homogenous groups of suspect material, assumptions regarding attempts to conduct representative sampling, and potential for varying mixtures and layers of material sampled not being representative of all areas of similar material.

9. Full assessments often requires multiple rounds of sampling over a period of time for air, bulk material, surface dust and water. Such comprehensive testing was beyond the scope of RPF services. In addition clearance testing for abatement, as applicable, was based on the visual observations and limited ambient area air testing as indicated in the report and in accordance with applicable state and federal regulations.

The potential exists that microscopic surface dust remains with contaminant present even in the event that th·e clearance testing meets the state and federal requirements. Likewise for building surveys, visual observations are not sufficient alone to detect possible contaminant in settled dust. Unless otherwise specifically indicated in the report, surface dust testing was not included in the scope of the RPF services.

IO. For abatement or remediation monitoring services: RPF is not responsible for observations and test for specific periods of work that RPF did not perform full shift monitoring of construction, abatement or remediation activity. In the event that problems occurred or concerns arouse regarding contamination, safety or health hazards during periods RPF was not onsite, RPF is not responsible to provide documentation or assurances regarding conditions, safety, air testing results and other compliance issues.

RPF may have provided recommendations to the Client, as needed, pertaining to the Client's Contractor compliance with the technical specifications, schedules, and other project related issues as agreed and based on results of RPF monitoring work. However, actual enforcement, or waiving of, contract provisions and requirements as well as regulatory liabilities shall be the responsibility of Client and Client's Contractor(s). Off-site abatement activities, such as waste transportation and disposal, were not monitored or inspected by RPF.

RPF Service Limitations (cont.)

I I. For services limited to clearance testing following abatement or remediation work by other parties: The testing was limited to clearance testing only and as indicated- in the report and a site assessment for possible environmental health and safety hazards was not performed as part of the scope of this testing.

Client, or Client's abatement contractor as applicable, was responsible for performing visual inspections of the work area to determine completeness of work prior to air clearance testing by RPF.

12. For site work, including but not limited to air clearance testing services, in which RPF did not provide full site safety and health oversight, abatement design, full shift monitoring of all site activity, RPF expresses no warranties, guarantees or certifications of the abatement work conducted by the Client or other employers at the job site(s), conditions during the work, or regulatory compliance, with the exception of the specific airborne concentrations as indicated by the air clearance test performed by RPF during the conditions present for the clearance testing. Unless otherwise specifically noted in the RPF Report, visnal inspections and air clearance testing results apply only to the specific work area and conditions present during the testing. RPF did not perform visual inspections of surfaces not accessible in the work area dne to the presence of containment barriers or other obstructions.