B09_Amd_2_03_CRMO_Masonry_and_Paint_Analysis_December_2023_0002.pdf

PRESERVING THE PAST TRANSFORMING TOMORROW

NPS

CRATERS OF THE MOON

NATIONAL MONUMENT AND PRESERVE

ARCO, IDAHO

Image: NPS CRMO Website

• CROSS SECTION MICROSCOPY PAINT ANALYSIS

• XRF ANALYSIS

• POROSITY AND DENSITY TESTING

• ASBESTOS TESTING

Prepared for Anderson Hallas Architects

December 11, 2023 By BUILT ENVIRONMENT EVOLUTION

BEE * PO BOX 9464, ASPEN, CO 81612 * 303-562-5872 * WWW.BE-EVOLUTION.COM

(Intensionally Left Blank)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Six paint samples and two concrete masonry unit (CMU) samples were taken from the Craters of the Moon National Monument and Preserve in Arco, Idaho, by Anderson Hallas Architects. The sample locations included multiple areas of the exterior of the structure, from multiple substrates. The protocol for testing included analyzing the paint samples using cross section microscopy, to test the CMU samples with XRF analysis, then test for porosity and density, and finally to test for asbestos. The first three layer of paint of each sample were matched to the Munsell color system, with additional color matching to the Benjamin Moore paint catalog. The XRF testing included analysis of 85 elements, which was pared down to the most relevant findings for brevity of the report.

CMU porosity and density testing followed ASTM Standard C642-21 protocols, and asbestos testing was the final step for the CRMO samples.

The combination of tests showed various issues that began to paint a larger picture, allowing for fortuitous overlaps. Deterioration found in some paint samples matched with areas of possible overspray from a suspected waterproofing sealant, which was shown in the porosity testing and corroborated with the XRF tests. This all combines to allow for a 1958 CMU that has a sealant applied in approximately 1965-1975, that penetrates to a depth of up to 2mm below the surface of the CMU. The sealant is still functional, and would be resistant to any additional water-based coatings, what is currently most common binder with new legislation regarding VOCs. Should future coatings be required, mock-ups for testing adhesion are recommended. If the sealant is to be removed, it would most likely require the mechanical removal of the surface, up to a 2mm depth. Chemical removal would require extensive dwell times, and could cause more damage than a mechanical removal.

Findings regarding the original paint color shows what appears to be a uniform color on all surfaces tested - Munsell 10R 3/4, color matched to Benjamin Moore CP 2085-10 Arroyo Red. No samples show that any portion of the sampled areas were replaced or constructed at a later date, as all first paint layers appear to match. XRF findings showed both samples have very similar make up, with each sample showing a face with higher chloride content, that coincides with a hydrophobic coating seen in the porosity tests. Calcium spikes appear to correspond with the large aggregate, which has an elemental make up similar to limestone. Porosity and density testing showed both samples to be very similar, both with a porosity reading of 4.24 and 4.25 percent.

No quantifiable asbestos or lead was detected in the samples, nor was cadmium, arsenic, or uranium.

Should any additional questions come up regarding findings, please reach out to BEE and Anderson Hallas Architects.

PAINT ANALYSIS REPORT

INTRODUCTION

Paint has been used for millennia to beautify and protect the surfaces of structures, both the interiors and exteriors. The mixes, binders, pigments, solvents and techniques have evolved. Knowledge of these changes over time informs the investigation process when analyzing a structure, and when analyzing paint.

COMMON TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

• Oil – binds the pigment together, affects gloss, and dry time. Common oils used in structural coatings include linseed oil, Tung oil, in some areas fish oil, etc.

• Distemper – pigment, casein or animal glue, water.

• Milk Paint – milk (casein binder), lime, pigment.

• Calcimine – pigment, lime, water, animal glue or casein.

• Lime wash, Color wash – water and lime, with pigment added for colors.

• Encaustic – hot wax painting.

• Tempera – water and pigment, egg yolk can be added.

• Turpentine, - originally distilled from the resign of the terebinth or turpentine tree, found in the Mediterranean. Later distilled from various pines.

• Mineral spirits – distilled from petroleum.

• Varnish – Damar Varnish from Dammar gum.

• Metal coatings – such as alkyd enamels, exposure to oxygen polymerizes the binder.

• Modern Paints o Latex – water-borne sub-micrometre polymer particles (rubber latex is not a component) o Epoxies and Polyurethanes – cures via catalyzed polymerization forming a hard plastic surface o Powder coatings – little or no solvent used, applied to a surface that has been treated with an electrostatic application of dry powder and heated.

o May contain additives – can affect surface tension, improve flow, control skinning, fight bacterial growth, etc.

PERFORMANCE

Paint has been used to protect both interior and exterior surfaces, and to express the style of the time and the tastes of the owner. Using paint as a protective coating can help prevent moisture penetration of the substrate, prevent deterioration of the substrate from Ultra Violet light, and can also prevent scuffs and abrasive damage. It is easy to maintain paint coatings and cheap to use for this purpose. Color has been part of paint from the earliest signs of its use. Used to express the style of the period, paint has been used to decorate for millennia. Often it is used as an indication of important space, a public space, or a sacred space. Expense of the paint treatment is related to the pigments included in the paint, and the techniques employed.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF PAINT

As paint has developed over time, so have the formulas. The search for pigments that have lasting color continues today. Some of the first pigments were earth, clay, and plant products. The Egyptians were the first recorded to use ground glass as pigments.

White lead and red lead have been used for over four thousand years. Distant travel to the Far East and the Americas yielded new pigments made from items such as semi-precious gemstones, and beetles. The industrial revolution yielded new colors and pigments, but the most radical changes came during and after WWII as the world embraced chemistry and changed paint formulas and pigments. With the knowledge of paint history, it can be possible to identify the time of the paint application from the pigments used, the binders, and the color.

PAINT ANALYSIS AND USES

Paint Analysis can allow a conservator to understand the original paint scheme, identify newer materials and/or additions to a structure, and the correct identification of the various layers can tell the history and care of the space. Once the paint has been sampled it is viewed through the microscope, the original treatment of the substrate becomes clear. The sampling of the structure is critical to correctly identify the paint scheme. Sampling in areas with the least exposure to causes of deterioration, such as sunlight, the elements, smoke, and abrasions, yields the most intact and informative samples. Knowledge of the style of the period informs the sampling process, instructing the conservator as to where it is most likely to find color changes or decorative painting.

Items that seem out of place can be sampled to see where the paint layers match or diverge. The number of paint layers can indicate an elements approximate age, and show where new materials have been introduced. The layers of paint can also show periods of neglect and deterioration, fading or darkening due to UV or smoke, and it can show a change in what type of paint was used.

PROJECT SPECIFICS AND RESULTS

Six paint samples were taken from the in Craters of the Moon National Monument and Preserve in Arco, Idaho, for Anderson Hallas Architects. The sampling included multiple areas of the exterior of the structure, of wood and metal substrates, in an attempt to record the original paint campaign. All the samples collected were examined using cross section microscopy at 100x to 300x magnification. The samples showed up to 8 paint layers. The first three layer of paint of each sample were matched to the Munsell color system, if three were intact. Munsell color matching is used in accordance with ASTM standards. Additional color matching to the Benjamin Moore paint catalog was conducted, and with these colors, specifications for the commercial paint and color can be determined. While all samples did not arrive intact, paint colors were matched and sequencing estimated in efforts not to require additional site visits. Findings show that there was some deterioration of the first layer of paint, as well various treatments for the original primer. Some wood received varnish, other areas show a thin, neutral primer coat. The cause of paint deterioration could not be identified, but could include overspray of a masonry treatment, such as the hydrophobic coating found in the XRF and porosity tests. This cannot be determined without more precise sample locations, but upon consulting the Anderson Hallas team, it seems to have high probability. If this theory is correct, we can postulate that the masonry coating was applied sometime between 1965-1975.

It appears all samples consistently show “Red Earth 10R 3/4 BM CP 2085-10 Arroyo Red” as the first paint color, which should be the original color from the period of construction. A few locations (sample 5 + 6) show the second layer changing, indicating these locations added color to the original paint scheme, Rust Orange 2.5YR 5/6 BM CP 2175-30 Rust. The third layer is seen in all samples, Peach Brown 10YR 8/4 BM CC 114 Honey Burst. No samples show that any of the areas sampled were replaced or constructed at a later date, as all original paint layers appear to match.

CHART OF FIRST PAINT LAYERS

SAMPLE # LOCATION 1ST LAYER

(ORIGINAL)

2ND LAYER 3RD TOTAL #

OF

LAYERS

1 PT-1

Bay 4 - beam

Varnish, Clear

Red Earth 10R 3/4

BM CP

2085-10 Arroyo Red

Peach Brown

10YR 8/4

BM CC 114

Honey Burst

2 PT-2

Soffit - Bay 4

Varnish, Clear

Red Earth 10R 3/4

BM CP

2085-10 Arroyo Red

Peach Brown

10YR 8/4

BM CC 114

Honey Burst

3 PT-3

Bay 3 - Transom Panel

Gray Primer Red Earth -deteriorated 10R 3/4

BM CP

2085-10 Arroyo Red

Peach Brown

10YR 8/4

BM CC 114

Honey Burst

4 PT-4

Bay 6 - Steel Window

Red Earth -deteriorated 10R 3/4

BM CP 2085-10

Arroyo Red

Peach Brown

10YR 8/4

BM CC 114

Honey Burst

Light Rose

5YR 8/1

4 (?)

sample not intact

5 PT-5

Bay 4 - Garage Guard

Gray Primer Red Earth -deteriorated 10R 3/4

BM CP

2085-10 Arroyo Red

Rust Orange

2.5YR 5/6

BM CP

2175-30 Rust

6 PT-6

Bay 4 - Garage Transom

Medium Gray Brown

10YR 5/1

BM CC 999

Rustic Taupe

Red Earth 10R 3/4

BM CP

2085-10 Arroyo Red

Rust Orange

2.5YR 5/6

BM CP

2175-30 Rust

5 (?)

sample not intact

Gloss levels on the analysis forms are visual estimates.

GLOSS LEVELS Gloss at 60° Sheen at 60°

High Gloss Gloss Level 7 85+ units Min 35 units

Traditional Gloss Gloss Level 6 70-85 units Min 35 units

Traditional Semi-gloss Gloss Level 5 5-70 units Min 35 units

Satin-like' Finish Gloss Level 4 25-35 units Min 35 units

Traditional 'eggshell-like' Finish Gloss Level 3 10-25 units 10-35 units

Sheen Flat ‘velvet-like' Finish Gloss Level 2 10 units 10-35 units

Traditional Matte Finish - flat Gloss Level 1 5 units 10 units

PAINT ANALYSIS FORMS

PAINT ANALYSIS FORM

Project Name: NPS CRMO

Project Location: Arco, ID

Sampled by: AH Date: Sept 19, 2023

Analyzed by: BEE Date: Sept 28 - Oct 8, 2023

Sample Description: 1

PT-1

Bay 4 - beam

Substrate: Wood Top Color: Red-Brown

LAYER

COLOR DESCRIPTION MUNSELL

GLOSS

LEVEL

NOTES

1 Varnish - thick Clear 6

2 Red Earth 10R 3/4 4 BM CP 2085-10 Arroyo Red

3 Peach Brown 10YR 8/4 4 BM CC 114 Honey Burst

4 Brown

5 White

6 Brown

7 Light Gray - thick

8 Red-Brown

Project Name: NPS CRMO

Project Location: Arco, ID

Sampled by: AH Date: Sept 19, 2023

Analyzed by: BEE Date: Sept 28 - Oct 8, 2023

Sample Description: 2

PT-2

Soffit - Bay 4

Substrate: Wood Top Color: Red Brown

LAYER

COLOR DESCRIPTION MUNSELL # GLOSS

LEVEL

NOTES

1 Varnish Clear 6 Thick

2 Red Earth 10R 3/4 4 BM CP 2085-10 Arroyo Red

3 Peach Brown 10YR 8/4 4 BM CC 114 Honey Burst

4 Brown

5 Red Brown

Project Name: NPS CRMO

Project Location: Arco, ID

Sampled by: AH Date: Sept 19, 2023

Analyzed by: BEE Date: Sept 28 - Oct 8, 2023

Sample Description: 3

PT-3

Bay 3 - Transom Panel

Substrate: Wood Top Color: Off White

LAYER

COLOR DESCRIPTION MUNSELL # GLOSS

LEVEL

NOTES

1 Gray Primer 2

2 Red Earth - deteriorated 10R 3/4 4 BM CP 2085-10 Arroyo Red

3 Peach Brown - thick 10YR 8/4 4 BM CC 114 Honey Burst

4 Brown - small sign, looks scraped

5 Light Rose 5YR 8/1

6 Off White

Project Name: NPS CRMO

Project Location: Arco, ID

Sampled by: AH Date: Sept 19, 2023

Analyzed by: BEE Date: Sept 28 - Oct 8, 2023

Sample Description: 4

PT-4

Bay 6 - Steel Window

Substrate: Steel Top Color: Off White

LAYER

COLOR DESCRIPTION MUNSELL # GLOSS

LEVEL

NOTES

1 Red Earth - deteriorated 10R 3/4 4 BM CP 2085-10 Arroyo Red

2 Peach Brown - thick 10YR 8/4 4 BM CC 114 Honey Burst

3 Light Rose 5YR 8/1 2

4 Off White

Sample not intact, no sign of substrate. Colors found were in bits, and assumed to be in the order of the previous sample

Project Name: NPS CRMO

Project Location: Arco, ID

Sampled by: AH Date: Sept 19, 2023

Analyzed by: BEE Date: Sept 28 - Oct 8, 2023

Sample Description: 5

PT-5

Bay 4 - Garage Guard

Substrate: Wood Top Color: Off White

LAYER

COLOR DESCRIPTION MUNSELL # GLOSS

LEVEL

NOTES

1 Gray Primer 2

2 Red Earth - deteriorated 10R 3/4 4 BM CP 2085-10 Arroyo Red

3 Rust Orange 2.5YR 5/6 4 BM CP 2175-30 Rust

4 Peach Brown - thick 10YR 8/4 4 BM CC 114 Honey Burst

5 Light Rose 5YR 8/1

6 Off White

No substrate found

Project Name: NPS CRMO

Project Location: Arco, ID

Sampled by: AH Date: Sept 19, 2023

Analyzed by: BEE Date: Sept 28 - Oct 8, 2023

Sample Description: 6

PT-6

Bay 4 - Garage Transom

Substrate: Wood? Top Color: Light gray

LAYER

COLOR DESCRIPTION MUNSELL # GLOSS

LEVEL

NOTES

1 Medium Gray Brown 10YR 5/1 4 BM CC 999 Rustic Taupe

2 Red Earth 10R 3/4 4 BM CP 2085-10 Arroyo Red

3 Rust Orange 2.5YR 5/6 4 BM CP 2175-30 Rust

4 Peach Brown - thick 10YR 8/4 4 BM CC 114 Honey Burst

5 Light Gray

Substrate not attached , sample splintered, layer sequencing estimated from colors found and previous samples

XRF ANALYSIS REPORT

pXRF DESCRIPTION: from the Bruker Corporation

One of the greatest challenges in the conservation field is correctly identifying materials, whether for the purpose of studying and understanding an object, for the purpose of conserving an object for future generations, or for the purpose of restoring an object that has been damaged or degraded over time. Elemental composition— such as provided by XRF technology—is often used in the study of historical materials and works of art in order to ascertain provenance and fabrication technology; to distinguish between original and non-original materials (i.e. materials that are the product of a previous conservation effort); and to determine the course of treatment.

The Bruker Tracer family of XRF (X-ray fluorescence) analyzers has become the de facto standard for investigations in conservation environments, thanks to its capacity for completely non-destructive elemental identification. The Bruker Tracer offers the utmost in flexibility for the analysis of non-uniform materials, allowing those who know the most about conservation to determine the analysis settings for the objects to be studied.

Elemental composition can be determined reliably and sensitively, ensuring that an appropriate treatment plan can be determined.

Handheld X-ray fluorescent (XRF) analyzers have the capability to quantify or qualify nearly any element from Magnesium to Uranium, depending on specific instrument configurations. Portable XRF spectrometers allow you to take the battery operated analyzer to the sample rather than bringing the sample into the lab. XRF is an acronym for x-ray fluorescence, a process whereby electrons are displaced from their atomic orbital positions, releasing a burst of energy that is characteristic of a specific element.

This release of energy is then registered by the detector in then XRF instrument, which in turn categorizes the energies by element. The entire fluorescence process occurs in small factions of a second. A measurement using this process and a modern handheld XRF gun can be made in a matter of seconds. The actual time required for a measurement will depend on the nature of the sample and the levels of interest. High percentage levels will take a few seconds while part-per-million levels will take a few minutes.

Additional pXRF DESCRIPTION: from the BEE

The Bruker Tracer III V has been used on site for various conservation projects by BEE since 2013. Generally the Bruker Tracer is used in conservation labs found in museums and in the field for geology, and archeology. However BEE has provided the most consistent use of the XRF Tracer in the built environment, testing materials in-situ, and enhancing the documentation process beyond what we have been able to ascertain previously. The learning curve in reading the pXRF, analyzing the results, and creating the best practices for field testing continue to develop to make BEE one of the best consultants in the US and abroad with the Bruker pXRF Tracer. In addition to having a better understanding of both the assets and issues with using the pXRF Tracer in architectural preservation, BEE has developed a library of various materials found in the built environment, throughout the United States. As our libraries develop, so does our immediate understanding of the materials we are testing in-situ. As our testing program continues, we develop a sense of the time and place, i.e. masonry that matches samples from near by or abroad, glass that matches Tiffany or European samples, metals that have impurities or alloys that match a manufacturer from a specific period, etc. In addition, the pXRF is excellent at identifying contaminants, areas of deterioration, and previous preservation work. This saves both time and money when developing a preservation and maintenance plan for the project. The information collected with the pXRF often has more information than expected when informing the current project. Elemental information gathered during a documentation process will in turn inform future projects that may require a different set of questions and answers, the answers which we hope are contained in the elemental analysis generated by the pXRF Tracer.

XRF SPECIFICATIONS

Brand Bruker

Model Tracer III SD

Technical Specs

Anode composition Ultra-thin Rhodium foil anode for high efficiency emission of low energy photons to maximize sensitivity to low a mass element like Na. The elemental range in frm Ne to Cf with the capability to measure trace amounts of radioactive elements without the use of the x ray tube

Anode: max. Voltage

(V) / max. current (A)

45 kV / 45 micro amps

SDD detector diameter 10mm to provide the customer wit the Highest resolution maximum eds xrf data acquisition of all systems. (145 eV at Mn k line at data acquisition orates of 100,000 cps) Maximum sensitivity is assured by the closest detector sample/ spacing of all systems of 4mm, making the system capable of measuring Sr to levels of 1 ppm and Mg to levels of 0.03 weight percent in ceramics.

Beam Diameter on the samples

From 3mm to 1mm

Lowest beam diameter 1mm

Video Camera (type and if comes with illumination)

Cameral and built in illumination:

Misumi MO-B1003, with lens LP10065-50LIR-31. The model number for the camera with lens and camera part numbers independently.

1/10” Color CCIQ II Pico camera White LED light x 4 Pixel: 400 x 400 (NTSC / Pal) 3300mV/Lux

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

Two samples of the masonry were sent to BEE for testing. The requested tests included X-ray fluorescent spectrometer testing (6), Porosity and density testing (2), and asbestos testing (2). Lead testing was requested, but was not conducted as a cost savings, since the XRF testing showed the lead content (or lack of it). Please find the test results for the XRF starting on p.23, the porosity results on p.37, and the Asbestos test on p.38.

XRF findings showed both samples have very similar make up, with a red-colored concrete and large aggregate. Each sample showed a face that had higher chloride content, that seemed to coincide with a hydrophobic coating seen in the porosity tests.

The coating varied in the penetration depth, but showed a maximum depth of approximately 2 millimeters. Calcium spikes appear to correspond with the large aggregate, which has an elemental make up similar to limestone. The positive identification of the aggregate type would take additional testing and sample, please reach out if this is required at a future date.

TEST LOCATION: Sample #1a: CRMO Brick Sample 1, exterior face

NOTABLE FINDINGS

High readings for calcium (Ca), iron (Fe) and silica (Si), as expected. High potassium

(K) is unusual. Little to no lead (Pb), arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), and uranium (U).

INDIVIDUAL SPECTRA FOR TEST LOCATION

DATA FOR TEST LOCATION

Si 1931

S 65

Cl 1005

Ar 618

K 3084

Ca 14898

Ti 471

Mn 267

Fe 20780

Co 286

Ni 44

Cu 278

Zn 238

As 1

Cd 3

Pb 118

U 65

TEST LOCATION: Sample #1b: CRMO Brick Sample 1, side/depth sample

NOTABLE FINDINGS

Very high readings for calcium (Ca), high readings for iron (Fe) and silica (Si), as expected. High potassium (K) is unusual. Little to no lead (Pb), arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), and uranium (U).

INDIVIDUAL SPECTRA FOR TEST LOCATION

Si 2367

S 133

Cl 1978

Ar 504

K 1845

Ca 48556

Ti 239

Mn 252

Fe 34676

Co 352

Ni 242

Cu 206

Zn 145

As 49

Cd 6

Pb 61

U 46

TEST LOCATION: Sample #1c: CRMO Brick Sample 1, interior face

NOTABLE FINDINGS

High readings for calcium (Ca), iron (Fe) and silica (Si), as expected. High potassium

(K) is unusual. Little to no lead (Pb), arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), and uranium (U).

INDIVIDUAL SPECTRA FOR TEST LOCATION

Si 2706

S 61

Cl 2290

Ar 728

K 2903

Ca 1831

Ti 790

Mn 249

Fe 15180

Co 131

Ni 114

Cu 270

Zn 286

As 1

Cd 6

Pb 27

U 50

TEST LOCATION: Sample #2a: CRMO Brick Sample 2, exterior face

NOTABLE FINDINGS

High readings for calcium (Ca), iron (Fe) and silica (Si), as expected. High potassium

(K) is unusual. Little to no lead (Pb), arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), and uranium (U).

INDIVIDUAL SPECTRA FOR TEST LOCATION

Si 2099

S 114

Cl 2192

Ar 743

K 1433

Ca 8056

Ti 629

Mn 239

Fe 23400

Co 108

Ni 64

Cu 256

Zn 381

As 1

Cd 3

Pb 39

U 48

TEST LOCATION: Sample #2b: CRMO Brick Sample 2, side/depth sample

NOTABLE FINDINGS

High readings for calcium (Ca), iron (Fe) and silica (Si), as expected. High potassium

(K) is unusual. Little to no lead (Pb), arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), and uranium (U).

INDIVIDUAL SPECTRA FOR TEST LOCATION

Si 1594

S 191

Cl 932

Ar 516

K 1562

Ca 51849

Ti 126

Mn 271

Fe 24517

Co 302

Ni 298

Cu 282

Zn 136

As 1

Cd 1

Pb 57

U 46

TEST LOCATION: Sample #2c : CRMO Brick Sample 2, interior face

NOTABLE FINDINGS

High readings for calcium (Ca), iron (Fe) and silica (Si), as expected. High potassium

(K) is unusual. Little to no lead (Pb), arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), and uranium (U).

INDIVIDUAL SPECTRA FOR TEST LOCATION

Si 2336

S 55

Cl 1029

Ar 697

K 2892

Ca 22786

Ti 333

Mn 256

Fe 23950

Co 277

Ni 99

Cu 247

Zn 234

As 1

Cd 4

Pb 20

U 27

DATA POINT COMPARISON

Sample 1a Sample 1b Sample 1c Sample 2a Sample 2b Sample 2C

Si 1931

S 65

Cl 1005

Ar 618

K 3084

Ca 14898

Ti 471

Mn 267

Fe 20780

Co 286

Ni 44

Cu 278

Zn 238

As 1

Cd 3

Pb 118

U 65

Si 2367

S 133

Cl 1978

Ar 504

K 1845

Ca 48556

Ti 239

Mn 252

Fe 34676

Co 352

Ni 242

Cu 206

Zn 145

As 49

Cd 6

Pb 61

U 46

Si 2706

S 61

Cl 2290

Ar 728

K 2903

Ca 1831

Ti 790

Mn 249

Fe 15180

Co 131

Ni 114

Cu 270

Zn 286

As 1

Cd 6

Pb 27

U 50

Si 2099

S 114

Cl 2192

Ar 743

K 1433

Ca 8056

Ti 629

Mn 239

Fe 23400

Co 108

Ni 64

Cu 256

Zn 381

As 1

Cd 3

Pb 39

U 48

Si 1594

S 191

Cl 932

Ar 516

K 1562

Ca 51849

Ti 126

Mn 271

Fe 24517

Co 302

Ni 298

Cu 282

Zn 136

As 1

Cd 1

Pb 57

U 46

Si 2336

S 55

Cl 1029

Ar 697

K 2892

Ca 22786

Ti 333

Mn 256

Fe 23950

Co 277

Ni 99

Cu 247

Zn 234

As 1

Cd 4

Pb 20

U 27

CONCRETE TESTING

Two CMU concrete samples were sent to BEE for testing. After XRF analysis, the two samples were run through the lab using ASTM Standard C642-21 protocols. The results can be found on the charts below.

BEE * PO BOX 9464, ASPEN, CO 81612 * 303-562-5872 * WWW.BE-EVOLUTION.COM

STANDARD TEST METHOD FOR DENSITY ABSORPTION AND

POROSITY IN HARDENED CONCRETE

ASTM C642-21

Sample 1

Location: CRMO Building 3 Masonry

Description: Red with coarse aggregate, no apparent coatings

Sample 2

Location: CRMO Building 3 Masonry

Description: Red with coarse aggregate, no apparent coatings

SAMPLE # OVEN DRY MASS SATURATED MASS -

IMMERSION

SATURATED MASS -

BOILING

IMMERSED APPARENT

MASS

1 196.74 200.22 200.74 106.64

2 245.93 250.27 250.92 133.3

SAMPLE # ABSORBTION

AFTER

IMMERSION,

ABSORBTION

AFTER

BOILING, %

BULK

DENSITY,

DRY

BULK

DENSITY

AFTER

IMMERSION

BULK

DENSITY

AFTER

BOILING

APPARENT

DENSITY

POROSITY,

1 1.77 2.03 2.09 2.127 2.133 2.184 4.25

2 1.76 2.03 2.09 2.128 2.133 2.183 4.24

ASBESTOS TESTING

Two CMU concrete samples were sent to BEE for testing. After XRF analysis, the two samples were run through the lab for porosity testing. The samples were then sent to an outside lab for Asbestos testing. Please find the results on the chart below.

BEE * PO BOX 9464, ASPEN, CO 81612 * 303-562-5872 * WWW.BE-EVOLUTION.COM

Attn: Natalie Feinberg Lopez Built Environment Evolution PO Box 9464 Aspen, CO 81612

Customer ID:

Customer PO:

Received:

EMSL Order:

BTEE19

11/20/2023 9:45am

161122787

Fax: Phone: (303) 562-59872

Project: CRMO EMSL Project:

Analysis Date: 11/24/2023

Test Report: Asbestos Analysis of Bulk Material via EPA 600/R93/116 and/or EPA 600/M4-82-020 Method(s) using Polarized Light Microscopy

Non- Asbestos

Asbestos

Sample Description Appearance % Fibrous % Non-Fibrous % Type

161122787-001

Red Gray Non-Fiberous Non-Homogeneous

80% Non-fibrous (other) 20% Quartz

None Detected

161122787-002

Red Gray Non-Fiberous Non-Homogeneous

80% Non-fibrous (other) 20% Quartz

None Detected

Initial Report from 12/08/23 15:53:18

Analyst(s)

Nathan Nastav (2) Richard Harding, Laboratory Manager or other approved signatory

Test Report PLM-7.23.0 Printed:12/11/2023 11:08:46 AM