1565917 spc 1of1_appendix d.pdf

P-898 Replace SSN Berthing Pier 32 eProject No. 1565917

Naval Submarine Base New London - Groton, CT

Appendix D

APPENDIX 'D'

Hazardous Materials Survey Report

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SURVEY

REPLACE SSN BERTHING PIER 32

NAVAL SUBMARINE BASE NEW LONDON

GROTON, CONNECTICUT

Prepared for:

Moffatt & Nichol

800 World Trade Center Norfolk, Virginia 23510

Contact: Mr. David Cortinas, (757) 628-8222

Prepared by:

Wilcox & Barton, Inc.

#1B Commons Drive, Unit 12B Londonderry, New Hampshire 03053

Contact: Mr. William R. Wilcox, (603) 396-4190 x501

Wilcox & Barton, Inc. Project No: MOFF0009

February 15, 2017 Revised August 2, 2019

CERTIFICATION

Hazardous Materials Survey i Replace SSN Berthing Pier 32, Naval Submarine Base New London

The following personnel have prepared and/or reviewed this report for accuracy, content, and quality of presentation.

Document Name: Hazardous Materials Survey Replace SSN Berthing Pier 32 Naval Submarine Base New London Groton, Connecticut

Date/Version: February 15, 2017

Revised August 2, 2019

Paul J. Plagge, E.I.T.

Senior Project Engineer Connecticut Asbestos Inspector License No 000886

Robert W. Rooks, PE Principal Engineer

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Hazardous Materials Survey ii Replace SSN Berthing Pier 32, Naval Submarine Base New London

1.0 INTRODUCTION

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

3.0 SITE INSPECTION

3.1 Asbestos-Containing Materials Survey

3.2 Lead Paint Survey

3.3 PCB-Containing and Mercury-Containing Materials Survey

3.3.1 PCB-Containing Devices

3.3.2 PCB-Containing Materials

3.3.3 Mercury-Containing Devices/Lamps

3.4 Waste Stream Characterization

4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 Asbestos

4.2 Lead Paint

4.3 PCBs and Mercury-Containing Materials

4.4 Waste Stream Characterization

5.0 LIMITATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS

Tables Table 1 Asbestos Samples – Summary of Analytical Results Table 2 Lead Paint Samples – Summary of Analytical Results Table 3 Polychlorinated Biphenyls – Summary of Analytical Results

Figures Figure 1A Hazardous Materials Survey - Sample Locations – Pier 10 Figure 1B Hazardous Materials Survey - Sample Locations – Pier 17S Figure 1C Hazardous Materials Survey - Sample Locations – Pier 32 Figure 1D Hazardous Materials Survey - Sample Locations – Cane Pad Area

Appendix Appendix A “P468 – Pier 34 Replacement- Naval Submarine Base New London, Groton, Connecticut – Basis of Design Appendix A – Pre-Demolition Assessment & Hazardous Materials Assessment of Pier 10” dated May 2009 prepared by GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc.

Appendix B Inspector Certification Appendix C Laboratory Certifications Appendix D Laboratory Reports

Hazardous Materials Survey 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Wilcox & Barton, Inc. has completed a hazardous materials survey of the surfaces of Piers 10, 17 Stub and 32 at Naval Submarine Base New London, Connecticut (NAVSUBASE New London).

The work was performed under contract to Moffatt & Nichol in accordance with Naval Facilities Engineering Command Contract No. N40085-14-D-8113, Task Order 0001.

The purpose of this work was to identify asbestos-containing materials (ACM), lead paint-coated surfaces, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)-containing, and mercury-containing devices in support of the design of replacement of SSN Berthing Pier 32. Other hazardous materials were specifically outside the scope of this survey. This survey is subject to certain limitations noted herein.

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

Piers 10, 17 Stub, and 32 are located on the Thames River and are three of 10 active berthing piers located at NAVSUBASE New London.

3.0 SITE INSPECTION

The survey was performed on December 7 and 8, 2016 and June 24, 2019. It should be noted that on December 7, 2016, a submarine docked at Pier 32, and on December 8, 2016, ordnance was offloaded which restricted Wilcox & Barton, Inc. from accessing Pier 32. The Pier 32 survey was largely completed with the exception of the inspection of manholes. As part of the survey, Wilcox & Barton, Inc. reviewed an existing report entitled “Pre-Demolition Asbestos & Hazardous Materials Assessment, Pier 10. Naval Submarine Base New London, Groton Connecticut” dated May 2009 and prepared by GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. (GZA). A copy of that report is provided in Appendix A. A two-person field team performed the survey under the provisions of a job-specific Accident Prevention Plan and Activity Hazard Analysis approved prior to the start of work.

3.1 Asbestos-Containing Materials Survey

The asbestos-containing materials survey was led by a trained and accredited inspector; a copy of the inspector certification is contained in Appendix B. Accessible portions of the piers were inspected for suspect ACM. For each suspect ACM observed, the inspector described the material, assigned a unique identification number (homogenous material number), and recorded its location. Bulk samples of each suspect, distinct, homogenous material were collected in a random manner and submitted for laboratory analysis of asbestos. A homogenous material is defined as a construction material used on similar structure and utility components that is uniform in color and/or texture, based on the inspector’s judgment.

Sample locations are depicted on Figures 1A through 1D. Thirteen bulk samples representing six homogenous materials were submitted to ProScience Analytical Services, Inc. (ProScience) of Woburn, Massachusetts, for analysis by polarized light microscopy (PLM) by Method 600/R- 93/116 using the positive stop technique. In this technique, once a sample of a homogenous

Hazardous Materials Survey 2 material tests positive for asbestos, the remaining samples of that group are not analyzed. A copy of the laboratory certification for ProScience is presented in Appendix C.

The PLM method is not considered a reliable analytical method for non-friable organically bound (NOB) materials. NOB refers to a wide variety of non-friable building materials embedded in flexible-to-rigid asphalt or vinyl matrices generally associated with materials such as vinyl-asphalt tile, mastic, asphalt shingles, roofing materials, paint chips, caulking, and glazing compound. According to current state-of-the-art practices, transmission electron microscopy (TEM) analysis is recommended for NOB materials that test negative for asbestos by PLM. Fourteen bulk samples representing fourteen NOB homogenous materials were analyzed by TEM instead of PLM.

A material is defined by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as being a regulated asbestos-containing material if it contains greater than one percent (1%) asbestos based on laboratory analysis. A material can only be considered negative if analytical results from all bulk samples of an individual homogenous material indicate an asbestos content of 1% or less.

Asbestos was not detected in any of the samples analyzed. In the May 2009 GZA report, concrete samples from Pier 10 were trace (<1%) for asbestos.

A summary of sample locations, descriptions, and laboratory analytical results is presented in Table 1. Copies of laboratory reports are included in Appendix D.

3.2 Lead Paint Survey

Wilcox & Barton, Inc. performed a survey of painted surfaces of the piers. The location and general condition of each paint-coated surface was recorded. Paint system condition ranged from good to poor. The predominant paint systems consisted of the following:

Pier 10 (Information provided in GZA Report)

Blue Paint on Longitudinal Edge Beam on Reinforced Concrete Deck Curb Black Paint on Mooring Cleats and Double Bits on reinforced Concrete Deck Grey Paint on Steel Fender Pile Outboard of Reinforced Concrete Deck

Pier 17 Stub

Blue Paint on Concrete Deck Black Paint on Mooring Cleats Yellow Paint on Bollards Yellow Paint on Concrete Deck White on Steel Rim of Concrete Pipe Chase

Hazardous Materials Survey 3

Pier 32

Blue Paint (Over Light Blue) on Concrete De3ckWhite on Concrete Edge of Berth Black on Steel Bollards and Anchor Cleats

Crane Pad Area

Yellow Paint on Asphalt White Paint on Bollards Pale Yellow Paint on Bollards Blue Paint on Hydrant White/Yellow Paint on Bollards

Fifteen bulk samples were collected from surfaces exhibiting unique paint systems and submitted for laboratory analysis of lead by atomic absorption using Test Method SW846-7420/3051.

Laboratory analysis revealed detectable concentrations of lead within 11of the 15 paint systems.

Paint containing lead at concentrations greater than or equal to 0.5 % by weight is considered “lead-based paint” by both the EPA and the HUD definitions. Laboratory results are summarized in Table 2 –Paint Chip Samples – Summary of Analytical Results.

Painted materials that met or exceeded the 0.5% threshold are summarized in the following table.

Lead-Containing Paint Systems with Lead Concentration Greater than 0.5%

Description Location Concentration

(Weight %)

Black Paint Pier 17 Stump - Steel Anchor Mooring Cleats 1.2

Yellow Paint Pier 17 Stump – Yellow Striping on Concrete Pier 9.1

Yellow Paint Pier 17 Stump – Yellow on Bollards 10

Paint containing lead at or above a concentration of 0.06 % by weight meets the Consumer Product Safety Commission definition of “lead-containing paint.” For worker protection purposes under Occupational Safety and Health Administration rules, any amount of lead in paint poses a potential exposure risk. The following paint systems contained lead at a concentration below the 0.5% threshold but above the 0.06% threshold:

Lead-Containing Paint Systems with Lead Concentration Less than 0.5% and Greater than 0.06%

Description Location Concentration

(Weight %) Black Paint Chips Pier 10 – Mooring Cleats and Double Bits, Steel 0.14

White Paint Pier 17 Stump – Steel Rim of Concrete Utility Vault 0.23

Black Paint Pier 32 Steel Bollards and Anchor Mooring Cleats 0.31

Blue Paint Crane Pad Area Blue on Hydrant 0.28

Hazardous Materials Survey 4

During the survey, lead filling was observed in the anchoring holes of the mooring cleats and bollards on the piers. On Pier 32, approximately 17 mooring cleats and 16 bollards were observed. On Pier 10, approximately 16 mooring cleats and 2 bollards were observed. On Pier 17 Stub, two mooring cleats were observed. On the Crane Pad Area, approximately 8 mooring cleats were observed.

A copy of the laboratory report is included in Appendix D.

3.3 PCB-Containing and Mercury-Containing Materials Survey

3.3.1 PCB-Containing Devices

Wilcox & Barton, Inc. visually inspected the piers for the presence of potential PCB-containing materials. PCBs are a class of organic chemicals that were manufactured in the United States until the late 1970s and used in dielectric fluids for their insulation and heat transfer properties.

PCBs were used in electrical transformers, capacitors, heat transfer equipment, light ballasts, and specialty paints. Electrical devices manufactured prior to 1978 are commonly assumed to contain PCBs; most equipment manufactured after that time has a “PCB Free” or “No PCB” label.

During the inspection, no fluorescent lighting was observed on the piers. Large electrical transformers were observed on Piers 10 and 32. It is unknown if PCBs are present in the transformers. No other potential PCB-containing materials were observed during the inspection.

3.3.2 PCB-Containing Materials

One sample of caulking from the Crane Pad Area was submitted to Con-Test Analytical Laboratory (Con-Test) for analysis for PCBs by EPA Method 8082 following Soxhlet Extraction by EPA Method 3540C. EPA categorizes building materials containing greater than or equal to 50 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg), the action level established by the Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA) as PCB bulk product waste. PCBs were not detected. Analytical results are summarized in Table 3 - Polychlorinated Biphenyls - Summary of Analytical Results and a copy of the laboratory report is provided in Appendix D.

3.3.3 Mercury-Containing Devices/Lamps

Wilcox & Barton, Inc. visually inspected the piers for the presence of potential mercury-containing materials. Mercury is a heavy, shiny, silvery-white metal that is liquid at room temperature. Liquid mercury evaporates at room temperature, producing invisible, odorless vapors.

Mercury is particularly toxic and human exposure can result from inhalation of vapors, skin contact, and ingestion. Mercury has numerous industrial uses. Common devices often containing mercury include 1) controls for the measurement of vacuum, pressure, fluid, temperature, or flow (thermostats, thermometers, manometers, etc.), 2) switches (in furnaces, gas regulators, sump pumps, appliances, HVAC equipment, etc.), and 3) light bulbs (fluorescent, neon, high intensity discharge).

Hazardous Materials Survey 5

During the inspection, a total of 36 potential mercury-vapor lights were observed on Piers 10 and 32.

3.4 Waste Stream Characterization

Wilcox & Barton, Inc. collected a composite sample of materials representative of the likely demolition waste stream of the Crane Pad Area for disposal pre-characterization. Components were sampled by type and in relative quantities likely to be representative of the typical demolition debris waste stream. Glass, wiring, metal, and recyclables were not sampled. The composited waste stream contained concrete and asphalt.

A composite sample was submitted to Con-Test Analytical Laboratory of East Longmeadow, Massachusetts, for laboratory analysis of lead following extraction by the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP). In accordance with EPA regulations, when a TCLP sample extract contains lead at a concentration equal to or greater than 5.0 milligrams/liter (mg/L), the material is considered a hazardous waste. Lead was detected at a concentration of 0.014 mg/L. A copy of the laboratory report is included in Appendix D.

During their 2009 survey, GZA collected composite concrete and timber samples for TCLP lead analysis. Results ranged from not-detected to 0.32 mg/L. The results are presented in Appendix A.

4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The following conclusions are drawn from the findings of the survey.

4.1 Asbestos

Asbestos was not detected at a concentration greater than 1% in any material sampled by Wilcox & Barton, Inc. or GZA. If suspect materials are identified during construction that were in inaccessible areas, these materials must be analyzed for asbestos.

Any demolition or renovation that could disturb ACM must comply with state and federal environmental and safety standards. In accordance with 40 CFR Part 61, National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs), a contractor conducting any demolition that will disturb regulated ACM must: (1) notify the EPA Administrator of such activities; (2) use proper removal procedures; (3) use proper engineering controls to limit emissions of asbestos fibers; and (4) utilize proper waste disposal. Also, in accordance with NESHAPs, ACM that will be disturbed must be removed by a licensed asbestos abatement contractor prior to initiation of any demolition or renovation activities. If any hidden and previously undetected suspect ACM is uncovered during demolition activities, work must be stopped and the material tested for asbestos content. All ACM must be disposed of in accordance with all applicable state and federal requirements.

Under OSHA regulations, any demolition or renovation to be performed at a structure where ACM is present must be performed in accordance with a worker protection policy, including, but

Hazardous Materials Survey 6 not limited to, appropriate training, medical monitoring, respiratory protection, and other protective equipment.

Communication of hazards as specified in 29 CFR 1926.1101(k) requires that the facility owner provide notification of the presence, quantity, and location of ACM to people who may come in contact with the ACM during construction or renovation work. Warning signs are required to be posted at the entrance to mechanical rooms or immediately within if clearly noticeable. The signs will identify the ACM that is present, its location, and the proper work practices required to ensure that ACM is not disturbed. The signs must bear the following information:

DANGER

ASBESTOS

CANCER AND LUNG DISEASE HAZARD

AUTHORIZED PERSONNEL ONLY

Labels must be affixed to thermal system insulation and surfacing materials containing asbestos at a concentration greater than 1% and to all containers containing such products, including waste containers. Where feasible, installed asbestos products must contain a visible label. The label must contain the following information:

DANGER

CONTAINS ASBESTOS FIBERS

AVOID CREATING DUST

CANCER AND LUNG DISEASE HAZARD

4.2 Lead Paint

Lead was detected in several of the paint systems on the piers. The presence of lead in paint requires that any renovation or demolition work be performed under the worker protection requirements outlined in 29 CFR 1926.62. During demolition or renovation, paint materials containing lead should not be sanded, scraped, drilled, or otherwise altered unless proper engineering controls are utilized to prevent migration of fugitive lead-containing dust from the work area. Under OSHA regulations, any demolition or renovation to be performed at a structure where lead in paint is present must be performed in accordance with a worker protection policy, including, but not limited to, appropriate training, medical monitoring, respiratory protection, and other protective equipment.

4.3 PCBs and Mercury-Containing Materials

During the inspection, no fluorescent lighting was observed on the piers. Large electrical transformers were observed on the Piers 10 and 32, though the PCB content is not known to Wilcox & Barton, Inc. No other potential PCB-containing materials were observed during the inspection.

If potential PCB-containing materials are identified during renovation, the material must be handled, managed, and disposed of in accordance with all federal and state regulatory requirements.

Hazardous Materials Survey 7

A total of 36 potential mercury-vapor lights were observed on Piers 10 and 32. Mercury-containing materials must be handled, managed, and disposed of in accordance with applicable federal and state regulatory requirements. These items should be removed from the structures prior to commencement of renovation work if they are not to be re-used.

4.4 Waste Stream Characterization

Waste pre-characterization samples were collected from materials representative of the anticipated bulk demolition waste stream from renovation work. TCLP laboratory analysis for lead indicates that the likely demolition waste stream will not be considered hazardous waste.

Therefore, the demolition waste can be managed as regular construction and demolition debris.

5.0 LIMITATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS

This hazardous materials survey was restricted to observations made by Wilcox & Barton, Inc.

during inspection of the facility on the dates indicated. The results of this report do not guarantee that all ACM or lead paint have been located or identified for the following reasons:

1. Each suspect or confirmed ACM and lead paint was assumed homogenous. The possibility exists that the composition of materials that appear homogenous may differ from one location to another.

2. Suspect ACM or painted surfaces may be hidden within or behind structural components that were not accessible unless substantial demolition was performed.

3. Wilcox & Barton, Inc. did not enter any manholes due to confined space entry requirements; all inspections were performed and materials were collected without entering the manholes.

4. On December 7, 2016, a submarine docked at Pier 32, and on December 8, 2016, ordnance was offloaded which restricted Wilcox & Barton, Inc. from accessing Pier 32.

The Pier 32 survey was largely completed with the exception of the inspection of manholes.

Within the limitations mentioned above, this project has been undertaken and performed in a professional manner, in accordance with generally accepted practices, and using the degree of skill and care ordinarily exercised by reputable environmental consultants under similar circumstances.

Hazardous Materials Survey

TABLES

TABLE 1

Bulk Samples - Summary of Analytical Results

Hazardous Materials Survey Piers 10, 17 Stub, and 32

Naval Sub Base New London Groton, Connecticut [See notes on page 2]

10-B001 Black Caulking/Sealant 10-B001 Concrete Utility Duct 12/07/16 -- ND

10-B002 Reddish Brown Caulking 10-B002 Light Pole Base 12/07/16 -- ND

10-B003 Red Gasket 10-B003 Sanitary Sewer Piping 12/07/16 -- ND

10-B004 Black Caulking/Sealant 10-B004 Anchor Cleat Holes 12/07/16 -- ND

10-B005 Yellow Sealant 10-B005 Electrical Conduits 12/07/16 -- ND

10-B006 Grey Caulking 10-B006 Access Manhole 12/07/16 -- ND

1-CAULK* Caulking (Black) 1-CAULK* Concrete Blocks of Utility Duct in

Central Portion of Reinforced Deck

04/16/09 ND --

2-CAULK* Caulking (Black) 2-CAULK* Concrete Blocks of Utility Duct in

Central Portion of Reinforced Deck

04/16/09 ND --

1-5 CONCRETE* Concrete 1-5 CONCRETE* Reinforced Concrete Deck 04/16/09 TR Chrysotile --

6-10 CONCRETE* Concrete 6-10 CONCRETE* Reinforced Concrete Deck 04/16/09 TR Chrysotile --

1-TAR* Tar 1-TAR* Concrete Blocks of Utility Duct in

Central Portion of Reinforced Deck

04/16/09 ND --

2-TAR* Tar 2-TAR* Concrete Blocks of Utility Duct in

Central Portion of Reinforced Deck

04/16/09 ND --

17S-B001A Concrete Pier 12/07/16 ND --

17S-B001B Concrete Pier 12/07/16 ND --

17S-B008-2A Utility Vault, East Side 12/07/16 ND --

17S-B008-2B Utility Vault, East Side 12/07/16 ND --

17S-B008-3C Utility Vault, East Side 12/07/16 ND --

Pier 17 Stub

17S-B001

17S-B002

Concrete

White Pipe Insulation

TEM ResultsPLM ResultsMaterial ID# Homogenous Material Sample # Functional Space/ Sample Location Date Sampled

Pier 10

TABLE 1

Bulk Samples - Summary of Analytical Results

Hazardous Materials Survey Piers 10, 17 Stub, and 32

Naval Sub Base New London Groton, Connecticut [See notes on page 2]

TEM ResultsPLM ResultsMaterial ID# Homogenous Material Sample # Functional Space/ Sample Location Date Sampled

32-B001A Concrete Pier 12/08/16 -- ND

32-B001B Concrete Pier 12/08/16 -- ND

32-B002 White Caulking 32-B002 Light Pole Base 12/08/16 -- ND

32-B004 Grey Caulking 32-B004 Electric Transformer Base 12/08/16 -- ND

32-B005 Red Gasket 32-B005 Sanitary Sewer Piping 12/08/16 -- ND

32-B006 Grey Caulking 32-B006 Electric Box on Concrete Pad 12/08/16 -- ND

32-B007A Utility Vault, South Side 12/08/16 ND --

32-B007B Utility Vault, South Side 12/08/16 ND --

32-B008A Utility Vault, North Side 12/08/16 ND --

32-B008B Utility Vault, North Side 12/08/16 ND --

32-B009 White Caulking 32-B009 Base of Crane Column 12/08/16 -- ND

32-B0011A Transformer Pad 12/08/16 ND --

32-B0011B Transformer Pad 12/08/16 ND --

CPA B001 Light Grey Caulking CPA B001 Base of Chain Link Fence Post 06/24/19 -- ND Notes:

PLM Polarized Light Microscopy TEM Transmission Electron Microscopy ND Not Detected -- Not Analyzed TR Trace concentration (<1 %)

Samples colleceted by GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. in April 2009, and results provided in report entitled "Pre-Demolition Asbestos & Hazardous Materials Assessment, Pier 10. Naval Submaring Base New London, Groton Connecticut" dated May 2009

Pier 32

32-B001 Concrete

32-B007 Brown Pipe Wrap

32-B008 White Pipe Wrap

32-B0011 Concrete

Crane Pad Area

TABLE 2

Paint Chip Samples - Summary of Analytical Results

Hazardous Materials Survey Piers 10, 17 Stub, and 32

Naval Sub Base New London Groton, Connecticut

Blue Paint Chips Longitudinal Edge Beam on Reinforced

Concrete Deck Curb 04/16/09 0.00055

Gray Paint Chips Steel Fender Pier Outboard of

Reinforced Concrete Deck 04/16/09 0.0043

Black Paint Chips Mooring Cleats and Double Bits, Steel, Painted Black 04/16/09 0.14

Blue Paint Concrete Pier 12/07/16 0.011

Black Paint Steel Anchor Mooring Cleat 12/07/16 1.2

Yellow Paint Steel Bollards 12/07/16 10

Yellow Paint Striping on Concrete Pier 12/07/16 9.1

White Paint Steel Rim of Concrete Utility Vault 12/07/16 0.23

Blue over Light Blue Concrete Pier 12/07/19 ND (<0.007)

Black Steel Bollards and Anchor Cleats 12/07/19 0.31

Yellow Paint Asphalt Pavement 06/24/19 ND (<0.010)

White Paint Steel Bollards 06/24/19 ND (<0.024)

Pale Yellow Paint Steel Bollards 06/24/19 0.048

Blue Paint Hydrant 06/24/19 0.28

White/Yellow Steel Bollard 06/24/19 ND (<0.028) Notes:

1. Analyzed by EPA Method SW846-7420-3051 and reported on an "as received" wet weight basis.

ND (<0.016) Not detected above indicated laboratory reporting limit

"Lead-based paint" is defined by EPA/HUD as a lead concentration in paint >0.5% by weight.

Samples colleceted by GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. in April 2009, and results provided in report entitled "Pre-Demolition Asbestos & Hazardous Materials Assessment, Pier 10. Naval Submaring Base New London, Groton Connecticut" dated May 2009

Pier 17 Stub

Pier 32

17S-PC-1

17S-PC-2

17S-PC-3

17S-PC-4

17S-PC-5

32-PC-1

32-PC-2

Pier 10

Paint System Sample Location Date

Sampled

Lead

Concentration 1

(% weight) Sample #

Crane Pad Area

CPA PC 1

CPA PC 2

CPA PC 3

CPA PC 4

CPA PC 5

TABLE 3

Polychlorinated Biphenyls - Summary of Analytical Results

Hazardous Materials Survey Piers 10, 17 Stub, and 32

Naval Sub Base New London Groton, Connecticut

Aroclor-1016 NS 0.80 U Aroclor-1221 NS 0.80 U Aroclor-1232 NS 0.80 U Aroclor-1242 NS 0.80 U Aroclor-1248 NS 0.80 U Aroclor-1254 NS 0.80 U Aroclor-1260 NS 0.80 U Aroclor-1262 NS 0.80 U Aroclor-1268 NS 0.80 U Total Aroclors 50 0.80 U

All results are in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg)

TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act.

NS No standard established for individual arclors.

U Not detected at or above indicated reporting limit.

Bold Exceeds TSCA Action Level.

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Analysis by EPA Method 8082A

TSCA Action Level

Sample Identification

Sample Description

Sample Location

Sample Date

Base of Chain Link Fence Post

08/02/19

PCB-1

Light Grey Caulking

(CPA B001)

FIGURES

16 15 1314 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1A

20 19 18 1724 23 22 21

3839 37 36 35 34 32 30 2529 28 27 263133

PIER 10 - DEMOLITION

PLAN

DATE

FIG. No.DEC 2016

FY19 MCON PROJECT P898

REPLACE SSN BERTHING PIER 32

NAVSUBASE NEW LONDON, CT

PIER 10 - DEMOLITION PLAN

SCALE: 1" = 250'

TIMBER FENDER

SYSTEM

STEEL FENDER

SYSTEM

TIMBER FENDER

SYSTEM

STEEL FENDER

SYSTEM

NOTES:

1. INDICATES 18" DIA. CAST-IN-PLACE CONC. PILE WITH

FLUTED STEEL MONOTUBE

2. INDICATES 18" DIA. CAST-IN-PLACE CONC. BATTER PILE

WITH FLUTED STEEL MONOTUBE

3. INDICATES HP14x89 PILE WITH 30" Ø CONC. JACKET

4. INDICATES HP14x89 BATTER PILE WITH 30" Ø CONC. JACKET

5. SEE RECORD DRAWINGS FOR PILE TIP ELEVATIONS.

M A

T C

H

L

I N

E

M A

T C

H

L

I N

E

STEEL FENDER

SYSTEM, TYP.

CONC. PILE

CAP, TYP.

CONC. PILE

CAP, TYP.

S E

C T

I O

N

F I G

U R

E

S E

C T

I O

N

F I G

U R

E

S E

C T

I O

N

F I G

U R

E

29 SPACES @ 12'-0" = 348'-0"

29 SPACES @ 12'-0" = 348'-0"6 SPACES @ 15'-3" = 91'-6"

4'-6"

7'-6"

451'-6"

451'-6"

Figure 1A - Sample Location Plan - Pier 10

HAZARDOUS

MATERIALS SURVEY

LEGEND

10-B001

BULK SAMPLE

10-B003 10-B004

10-B001

10-B002

10-B006

10-B005

AutoCAD SHX Text DWG INFO: Q:\NOR\8500-32\CADD\_ACTIVE\_EXHIBITS\FACD FIGURES\P-898-FIG_10.DWG - PIER 10 - DEMOLITION PLAN | (c) MOFFATT AND NICHOL ENGINEERS

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Rectangle

Pplagge Rectangle

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Line

Pplagge Line

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Oval

PIER 17 - DEMOLITION

PLAN

DATE

FIG. No.DEC 2016

FY19 MCON PROJECT P898

REPLACE SSN BERTHING PIER 32

NAVSUBASE NEW LONDON, CT

PIER 17 - DEMOLITION PLAN

SCALE: 1" = 150'

NOTES:

TIMBER FENDER

SYSTEM, TYP.

D

C

B

A

20' 20' 20' 20'

2'-6"

86'-6"

4'

1. INDICATES HP14x89 STEEL PILES ENCASED IN 30" DIA

CONCRETE WITH A 48" DIA CONCRETE JACKET.

2. SEE RECORD DRAWINGS FOR PILE TIP ELEVATIONS.

F I G

U R

E

Figure 1B - Sample Locatino Plan - Pier 17 Stump

HAZARDOUS

MATERIALS SURVEY

LEGEND

17-B001

BULK SAMPLE

17-PC-1

PAINT CHIP SAMPLE

17S-B002C 17S-B002A 17S-B002B

17S-B001A17S-B001B

17S-PC-3

17S-PC-1 17S-PC-5

17S-PC-4

17S-PC-2

AutoCAD SHX Text DWG INFO: Q:\NOR\8500-32\CADD\_ACTIVE\_EXHIBITS\FACD FIGURES\P-898-FIG_12.DWG - PIER 17 - DEMOLITION PLAN | (c) MOFFATT AND NICHOL ENGINEERS

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Polygon

Pplagge Rectangle

Pplagge Rectangle

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Polygon

Pplagge Polygon

Pplagge Polygon

Pplagge Polygon

Polygon

PIER 32 -

DEMOLITION PLAN

DATE

FIG. No.DEC 2016

FY19 MCON PROJECT P898

REPLACE SSN BERTHING PIER 32

NAVSUBASE NEW LONDON, CT

HP14x89

PILE, TYP

M A

T C

H

L I N

E

M A

T C

H

L I N

E

20'

20' 20' 20' 20' 20' 20' 20' 20' 19'-6" 20' 20' 20' 20' 20'

10'-6"

420'-0"

4'-6"

15' 15' 15' 15' 15' 15' 15'-6" 20'

20'

1" = 250' feet

250250 0

HP14x89

PILE, TYP

PIER 32 - DEMOLITION PLAN

SCALE: 1" = 250'

QUAYWALL

S E

C T

I O

N

F I G

U R

E

S E

C T

I O

N

F I G

U R

E

NOTES:

1. INDICATES HP14x89 PILE WITH 30" Ø CONC. JACKET

2. INDICATES HP14x89 BATTER PILE WITH 30" Ø CONC. JACKET

3. SEE RECORD DRAWINGS FOR PILE TIP ELEVATIONS

420'-0"

FENDER

SYSTEM, TYP.

FENDER

SYSTEM, TYP.

Figure 1C - Sample Location Plan - Pier 32

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

SURVEY LEGEND

32-B001

32-PC-1

BULK SAMPLE

PAINT CHIP SAMPLE

32-B001A

32-B004

32-B0011A

32-PC-1

32-PC-2

32-B011B

32-B004

32-B006 32-B007

32-B008 32-B005

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text A

AutoCAD SHX Text B

AutoCAD SHX Text DWG INFO: Q:\NOR\8500-32\CADD\_ACTIVE\_EXHIBITS\FACD FIGURES\P-898-FIG_14.DWG - PIER 32 - DEMOLITION PLAN | (c) MOFFATT AND NICHOL ENGINEERS

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Polygon

Pplagge Rectangle

Pplagge Rectangle

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Line

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Oval

Pplagge Polygon

D

C

B

_J

I lj, cj / 2 0

BLDG 7 76

/ CJ 2 ST BRICK

FF = 5.76 / 0 0

/ < - Cl

�QJ

[II] ffi

' GA.,,�,

AMBERJACK RD

z -------- -�z�---- - ---------�---

N

9)(0 tr , !, co 'NC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 b

(.Q < Q::

Cl :::,;: Cl :C:.:

-1--.. Cl :t: (.J V)< Cl (_)

Cl Q

<- ca< -.._J :a:: Cl -.._J Qo st ca cs

0 0

LO 0

LO tj- tj-

LO LO LO

I//

2 3

X Q::

�a§

METAL SHED

---- Cl ' <

J c:, :a::

I I CQ 2:'V) I,;

METAL SHED I [Q]] I

v

0 v \1;\ @ I,;

Ml IQ.B - - �x v

00 �

I./ ct--0

I,;

./ 0' 1.----'" H-<J 1111

� 0 0 0 � = = 7J;!.;_=

0 C

A Ii� l/1 GUARD

SHACK b7 Q)

0 I rt!:

[X (

''y-t2:: f3:.:-_:::1-- -

CONC CONC

Lr) 7.0' CLF W/ 3 'i-

� � STRAND BARB WIRE

Q Q -.._J -.._J

0 0 0

LO 0 LO

n n N LO LO Lil

SURVEY PLAN - CRANE WEIGHT HANDLING AREA

SCALE: 1" = 20'

2 3

Cl -1--..

�:s ci: s:;

ts

7:9 � �kl V)

;� �c'E � f--... -kl Cl Q::

:a::� ±

>-- �ca kl Q::

:c:.: � 2r'l

� (_) Cl 2:§o <

-� CQ i-: V) N

LO

PLAN

NORTH

ED

�es to?

Q::

i-: 2r'l -

LO

LO

BLDG 7 75

1 ST BRICK

FF= 5.73

= = l2sl tm � z

AMBERJACK RD z lQ]

'CONC

'0/N i

Q -.._J

LO

1" = 20'

0 10' 20' - - 40'

APPROVED

FOR COMMANDER NAVFAC

ACTIVITY

SATISFACTORY TO

DES ••• DRW -- CHK -

PM/DM

BRANCH MANAGER

CHIEF ENG/ARCH

FIRE PROTECTION

z z

C\I M a:

w -a..

CJ

z-l a:

w en z

CIJ

CIJ

w a..

w a:

SCALE AS NOTED

EPROJECT NO.: 1565917

CONSTR. CONTR. NO.

NAVFAC DRAWING NO.

SHEET OF

V-109

DRAWFORM REVISION: 10 MAY 2014

0::

(!) z Cl z

1- ::I:

w w

D

B

A

Figure 1D - Sample Location Plan - Crane Pad Area

CPA B001CPA PCB 1

PC 1

PC 3

PC 4

PC 5

PC 4

LEGEND

PCB BULK SAMPLE

PAINT CHIP SAMPLE

BULK SAMPLE

Paul Rectangle

Paul Oval

Paul Rectangle

Paul Polygon

Paul Polygon

Paul Oval

Paul Rectangle

Paul Polygon

Paul Polygon

Paul Polygon

Paul

Appendix A

“P468 – Pier 34 Replacement- Naval Submarine Base New London, Groton, Connecticut – Basis of Design Appendix A – Pre-Demolition Assessment & Hazardous Materials Assessment of Pier 10” dated May 2009 prepared by GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc.

P468 P468 P468 P468 ---- Pier 34 ReplacementPier 34 ReplacementPier 34 ReplacementPier 34 Replacement

Naval Submarine Base New London

Groton, Connecticut

Basis of Design - Appendix A

Pre-Demolition Asbestos & Hazardous

Materials Assessment of Pier 10

PRE-DEMOLITION ASBESTOS &

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ASSESSMENT,

PIER 10,

NAVAL SUBMARINE BASE NEW LONDON,

GROTON, CONNECTICUT

PREPARED FOR:

NAVFAC, Facilities Engineering and Acquisition Division, c/o TranSystems, Norfolk, Virginia

PREPARED BY:

GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc.

Providence, Rhode Island

May 2009 File No. 32608.12

Copyright© 2009 GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc.

FIGURE 1

LOCATION PLAN

doug.le do doug.le do Callout Pier 10

FIGURE 2

PIER 10 ASSET INVENTORY SECTIONS

APPENDIX A

LIMITATIONS

LIMITENV.SA (1/1/91) PAGE 1

SITE ASSESSMENT LIMITATIONS

1. The observations described in this report were made under the conditions stated therein. The conclusions presented in the report were based solely upon the services described therein, and not on scientific tasks or procedures beyond the scope of described services or the time and budgetary constraints imposed by Client.

The work described in this report was carried out in accordance with the attached Terms & Conditions of Engagement.

2. In preparing this report, GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. (GZA) has relied on certain information provided by state and local officials and other parties referenced therein, and on information contained in the files of state and/or local agencies available to GZA at the time of the site assessment. Although there may have been some degree of overlap in the information provided by these various sources, GZA did not attempt to independently verify the accuracy or completeness of all information reviewed or received during the course of this site assessment.

3. In the event that bank counsel or title examiner for Client obtains information on environmental or hazardous waste issues at the site not contained in this report, such information shall be brought to GZA's attention forthwith. GZA will evaluate such information and, on the basis of this evaluation, may modify the conclusions stated in this report.

4. Observations were made of the site and of structures on the site as indicated within the report. Where access to portions of the site or to structures on the site was unavailable or limited, GZA renders no opinion as to the presence of hazardous material or oil, or to the presence of indirect evidence relating to hazardous material or oil, in that portion of the site or structure. In addition, GZA renders no opinion as to the presence of hazardous material or oil, or to the presence of indirect evidence relating to hazardous material or oil, where direct observation of the interior walls, floor, or ceiling of a structure on a site was obstructed by objects or coverings on or over these surfaces.

5. Unless otherwise specified in the report, GZA did not perform testing or analyses to determine the presence or concentration of asbestos or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's) at the site or in the environment at the site.

6. The purpose of this report was to assess the physical characteristics of the subject site with respect to the presence in the environment of hazardous material or oil. No specific attempt was made to check on the compliance of present or past owners or operators of the site with federal, state, or local laws and regulations, environmental or otherwise.

7. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based in part upon the data obtained from a limited number of soil and/or groundwater samples obtained from widely spaced subsurface explorations. The nature and extent of variations between these explorations may not become evident until further exploration.

If variations or other latent conditions then appear evident, it will be necessary to reevaluate the conclusions and recommendations of this report.

8. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based in part upon various types of chemical data and are contingent upon their validity. These data have been reviewed and interpretations made in the report. As indicated within the report, some of these data are preliminary "screening" level data, and should be confirmed with quantitative analyses if more specific information is necessary. Moreover, it should be noted that variations in the types and concentrations of contaminants and variations in their flow paths may occur due to seasonal water table fluctuations, past disposal practices, the passage of time, and other factors.

Should additional chemical data become available in the future, these data should be reviewed by GZA and the conclusions and recommendations presented herein modified accordingly.

9. Chemical analyses have been performed for specific parameters during the course of this site assessment, as described in the text. However, it should be noted that additional chemical constituents not searched for during the current study may be present in soil and/or groundwater at the site.

10. It is recommended that GZA be retained to provide further engineering services during construction and/or implementation of any remedial measures recommended in this report. This is to allow GZA to observe compliance with the concepts and recommendations contained herein, and to allow the development of design changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated.

ASBESTOS LIMITATIONS

1. The observations described in this report were made under the conditions stated herein.

The conclusions presented in the report were based solely upon the services described therein, and not on scientific tasks of procedures beyond the proposed Scope of Services.

The work described in this report was carried out in accordance with the attached Terms & Conditions of Engagement.

2. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on limited environmental sampling and visual observations, and were arrived at in accordance with generally accepted standards of industrial hygiene practice. No other warranty, express or implied, is made.

3. Where sample analyses were conducted by an outside laboratory or obtained from prior reports, GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. (GZA) has relied upon the data provided, and has not conducted an independent evaluation of the reliability of these data.

4. Samples were tested for asbestos content using the polarized light microscopy method. The conclusions presented in the report were based solely upon the services described herein, and not on scientific tasks or procedures beyond the proposed Scope of Services or the time and budgetary constraints imposed by Client.

5. The purpose of this report was to assess the physical characteristics of the subject site with respect to the presence of asbestos. No specific attempt was made to check on the compliance by any party with federal, state, or local laws and regulations. Observations were made of the Site as indicated within the report. While it was GZA's intent to conduct a thorough survey, it is important to note that we cannot guarantee that all asbestos or potentially hazardous materials within the surveyed area have been identified. ACMs have frequently been used in areas where detection is difficult until renovation, demolition, and/or asbestos abatement work begins and allows access to these remote areas.

6. Observations were made of the site as indicated within the report. Where access to portions of the site was unavailable or limited, GZA renders no opinion as to the presence of asbestos, or of indirect evidence relating to the presence of asbestos in that portion of the site.

7. Since GZA has no control over labor and materials costs and design, the estimates of abatement costs have been made on the basis of prior experience and discussions with contractors. The actual costs for various items will depend on actual market conditions when the project is bid. GZA does not guarantee the accuracy of cost estimates to contractor's bids for abatement costs.

8. The remedial costs are limited to those conditions which were characterized as a result of the survey completed at the site. GZA does not make any representation beyond which is represented in the attached letter. The remedial costs are based on the data presented.

9. The remedial costs do not include any element with respect to third-party claims, fines, penalties, or other charges which may be assessed against any responsible party because of either the existence of present conditions or the future existence or discovery of any such conditions.

10. Governmental agencies' interpretations, requirements, and enforcement policies vary from district office to district office, from state to state, and between federal and state agencies. In addition, statutes, rules, standards, and regulations may be legislatively

ASBESTOS LIMITATIONS continued changed and inter-agency and intra-agency policies may be changed from present practices. GZA has used its experience and judgment in making assumptions as to how anticipated changes in enforcement policies may affect remedial costs. Regardless, the remedial measures outlined herein will not exceed the stated costs.

11. It is recommended that GZA be retained to provide engineering services during design and/or implementation of any remedial measures recommended. This is to allow GZA to observe compliance with the concepts and recommendations contained herein, and to allow the development of design changes in the event that conditions differ from those anticipated.

12. GZA's asbestos/hazardous materials evaluation was performed in accordance with generally accepted practices of other consultants undertaking similar studies at the same time and in the same geographical area, and GZA observed the degree of care and skill generally exercised by other consultants under similar circumstances and conditions.

GZA's findings and conclusions must be considered not as scientific certainties, but rather as our professional opinion concerning the significance of the limited data gathered during the course of the asbestos/hazardous materials evaluation. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Specifically, GZA does not and cannot represent that the Site contains no asbestos-containing materials or other latent conditions beyond those observed by GZA during its asbestos evaluation.

13. This survey report, which presents our findings, is not to be used as a bid document/work plan, or in place of a work plan, for conducting asbestos abatement. When an asbestos abatement work plan is prepared, the State of Rhode Island requires that the plan be prepared by an EPA-certified and Rhode Island-licensed Asbestos Project Designer.

GZA recommends that a work plan be prepared and a bid walkthrough be administered by licensed personnel familiar with the on-site asbestos conditions.

14. The observations described in this report were made under the conditions stated herein. The report and opinions will be based solely upon the services described herein, and will not be based on scientific tasks or procedures beyond the scope of described services or the time and budgetary constraints imposed by Client.

REMEDIAL COST LIMITATIONS

1. The remedial costs are limited to those conditions which were characterized as a result of the environmental investigations completed at the site. GZA does not make any representation beyond which is represented in the attached letter. The remedial costs are based on the data presented.

2. The remedial costs do not include any element with respect to third-party claims, fines, penalties, or other charges which may be assessed against any responsible party because of either the existence of present conditions or the future existence or discovery of any such conditions.

3. Governmental agencies' interpretations, requirements, and enforcement policies vary from district office to district office, from state to state, and between federal and state agencies. In addition, statutes, rules, standards, and regulations may be legislatively changed and inter-agency and intra-agency policies may be changed from present practices. GZA has used its experience and judgment in making assumptions as to how anticipated changes in enforcement policies may affect remedial costs. Regardless, the remedial measures outlined herein will not exceed the stated costs.

4. It is recommended that GZA be retained to provide engineering services during final design, construction and/or implementation of any remedial measures recommended.

This is to allow GZA to observe compliance with the concepts and recommendations contained herein, and to allow the development of design changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated.

APPENDIX B

ASBESTOS ANALYTICAL LABORATORY REPORT (AMERISCI)

APPENDIX C

TOTAL LEAD ANALYTICAL LABORATORY REPORT (ECL)

APPENDIX D

TCLP CONCRETE ANALYTICAL LABORATORY REPORT (ECL)

APPENDIX E

TCLP WOOD ANALYTICAL LABORATORY REPORT (ECL)

APPENDIX F

QUALIFICATIONS

Appendix B

Inspector Certification sTATE OF CONNECTICUT 。EPAR'rMENT OF PUBLIC HEAIⅢ puRSUANT TO T肥PROVrsIONS OF T肥GENERAi‘ STATUTES OF CONNECTICUT

TⅢ INDIVIDUAL NAMED BELOW IS CERTRED

BY T咄S DEPARTMENT AS A

ASBESTOS CONSULTANT-tNSPECTOR

PAUL J PLAGGE

CER¶ FICA「E NO

OOO886

CURRENT THROUGH

O813111 9

VALIDATION NO

O3-690538

Appendix C

Laboratory Certifications

Appendix D

Laboratory Reports

39 Spruce Street * East Longmeadow, MA 01028 * FAX 413/525-6405 * TEL. 413/525-2332

July 10, 2019

Paul Plagge

Wilcox & Barton

17 Emerson St

Natick, MA 01760

Project Location: 10 Pleasant St.

Client Job Number:

Project Number: [none]

Laboratory Work Order Number: 19G0187

Enclosed are results of analyses for samples received by the laboratory on July 3, 2019. If you have any questions concerning this report, please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely, Raymond J. McCarthy

Project Manager

Table of Contents

Sample Summary 3

Case Narrative 4

Sample Results 5

19G0187-01 5

19G0187-02 6

Sample Preparation Information 7

QC Data 8

Polychlorinated Biphenyls with 3540 Soxhlet Extraction 8

B234930 8

TCLP - Metals Analyses 9

B235098 9

Dual Column RPD Report 10

Flag/Qualifier Summary 12

Certifications 13

Chain of Custody/Sample Receipt 14

ANALYTICAL SUMMARY

7/10/2019

Wilcox & Barton

17 Emerson St

Natick, MA 01760

ATTN: Paul Plagge

[none]

19G0187

The results of analyses performed on the following samples submitted to the CON-TEST Analytical Laboratory are found in this report.

PROJECT LOCATION:

PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER:

PROJECT NUMBER:

REPORT DATE:

WORK ORDER NUMBER:

FIELD SAMPLE # LAB ID: MATRIX TESTSAMPLE DESCRIPTION SUB LAB

10 Pleasant St.

PCB-1 19G0187-01 Caulk SW-846 8082A

TCLP 19G0187-02 Product/Solid SW-846 6010D

[TOC_1]Sample Summary[TOC]

CASE NARRATIVE SUMMARY

All reported results are within defined laboratory quality control objectives unless listed below or otherwise qualified in this report.

For method 6010, only Pb was requested and reported.

[TOC_1]Case Narrative[TOC]

SW-846 8082A

Qualifications:

A dilution was performed as part of the standard analytical procedure.

Analyte & Samples(s) Qualified:

O-32

19G0187-01[PCB-1]

The results of analyses reported only relate to samples submitted to the Con-Test Analytical Laboratory for testing.

I certify that the analyses listed above, unless specifically listed as subcontracted, if any, were performed under my direction according to the approved methodologies listed in this document, and that based upon my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, the material contained in this report is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, accurate and complete.

Lisa A. Worthington

Technical Representative

Date Received: 7/3/2019

Work Order: 19G0187Sample Description:Project Location: 10 Pleasant St.

Sample ID: 19G0187-01

Field Sample #: PCB-1

Sample Matrix: Caulk

Sampled: 6/24/2019 13:00

[TOC_2]19G0187-01[TOC]

AnalystAnalyzedDilution Flag/QualRLResultsAnalyte

Date/Time

Units

Date

PreparedMethod

Sample Flags: O-32 Polychlorinated Biphenyls with 3540 Soxhlet Extraction

ND 0.80 7/9/19 15:10 TGmg/Kg 7/7/19SW-846 8082A4Aroclor-1016 [1]

ND 0.80 7/9/19 15:10 TGmg/Kg 7/7/19SW-846 8082A4Aroclor-1221 [1]

ND 0.80 7/9/19 15:10 TGmg/Kg 7/7/19SW-846 8082A4Aroclor-1232 [1]

ND 0.80 7/9/19 15:10 TGmg/Kg 7/7/19SW-846 8082A4Aroclor-1242 [1]

ND 0.80 7/9/19 15:10 TGmg/Kg 7/7/19SW-846 8082A4Aroclor-1248 [1]

ND 0.80 7/9/19 15:10 TGmg/Kg 7/7/19SW-846 8082A4Aroclor-1254 [1]

ND 0.80 7/9/19 15:10 TGmg/Kg 7/7/19SW-846 8082A4Aroclor-1260 [1]

ND 0.80 7/9/19 15:10 TGmg/Kg 7/7/19SW-846 8082A4Aroclor-1262 [1]

ND 0.80 7/9/19 15:10 TGmg/Kg 7/7/19SW-846 8082A4Aroclor-1268 [1]

Surrogates % Recovery Recovery Limits Flag/Qual

Decachlorobiphenyl [1] 102 7/9/19 15:1030-150

Decachlorobiphenyl [2] 87.8 7/9/19 15:1030-150

Tetrachloro-m-xylene [1] 100 7/9/19 15:1030-150

Tetrachloro-m-xylene [2] 84.9 7/9/19 15:1030-150

[TOC_1]Sample Results[TOC]

Date Received: 7/3/2019

Work Order: 19G0187Sample Description:Project Location: 10 Pleasant St.

Sample ID: 19G0187-02

Field Sample #: TCLP

Sample Matrix: Product/Solid

Sampled: 6/24/2019 13:50

[TOC_2]19G0187-02[TOC]

AnalystAnalyzedDilution Flag/QualRLResultsAnalyte

Date/Time

Units

Date

PreparedMethod

TCLP - Metals Analyses

0.014 0.010 7/10/19 12:19 QNWmg/L 7/9/19SW-846 6010D1Lead

Sample Extraction Data

Prep Method: SW-846 3010A-SW-846 6010D

Lab Number [Field ID] Batch DateInitial [mL] Final [mL]

Leachates were extracted on 7/8/2019 per SW-846 1311 in Batch B234858

B235098 07/09/1950.0 50.019G0187-02 [TCLP]

Prep Method: SW-846 3540C-SW-846 8082A

Lab Number [Field ID] Batch DateInitial [g] Final [mL]

B234930 07/07/190.502 10.019G0187-01 [PCB-1]

[TOC_1]Sample Preparation Information[TOC]

Result Limit

Reporting

Units Level

Spike

Result

Source

%REC

%REC

Limits RPD

RPD

Limit Notes Analyte

Polychlorinated Biphenyls with 3540 Soxhlet Extraction - Quality Control

QUALITY CONTROL

[TOC_2]Polychlorinated Biphenyls with 3540 Soxhlet Extraction[TOC]

Batch B234930 - SW-846 3540C

[TOC_3]B234930[TOC]

Blank (B234930-BLK1) Prepared: 07/07/19 Analyzed: 07/09/19

Aroclor-1016 mg/Kg0.19ND

Aroclor-1016 [2C] mg/Kg0.19ND

Aroclor-1221 mg/Kg0.19ND

Aroclor-1221 [2C] mg/Kg0.19ND

Aroclor-1232 mg/Kg0.19ND

Aroclor-1232 [2C] mg/Kg0.19ND

Aroclor-1242 mg/Kg0.19ND

Aroclor-1242 [2C] mg/Kg0.19ND

Aroclor-1248 mg/Kg0.19ND

Aroclor-1248 [2C] mg/Kg0.19ND

Aroclor-1254 mg/Kg0.19ND

Aroclor-1254 [2C] mg/Kg0.19ND

Aroclor-1260 mg/Kg0.19ND

Aroclor-1260 [2C] mg/Kg0.19ND

Aroclor-1262 mg/Kg0.19ND

Aroclor-1262 [2C] mg/Kg0.19ND

Aroclor-1268 mg/Kg0.19ND

Aroclor-1268 [2C] mg/Kg0.19ND mg/Kg 3.85 30-150Surrogate: Decachlorobiphenyl 1064.08 mg/Kg 3.85 30-150Surrogate: Decachlorobiphenyl [2C] 1033.96 mg/Kg 3.85 30-150Surrogate: Tetrachloro-m-xylene 1124.30 mg/Kg 3.85 30-150Surrogate: Tetrachloro-m-xylene [2C] 92.53.56

LCS (B234930-BS1) Prepared: 07/07/19 Analyzed: 07/09/19

Aroclor-1016 mg/Kg0.20 3.94 40-14096.93.8

Aroclor-1016 [2C] mg/Kg0.20 3.94…