S02_Attachment_Tank Inspection Report 31 pages.pdf

EVALUATION OF THE

150,000 GALLON STEEL ELEVATED WATER TANK

“JAMES A. HALEY VETERANS HOSPITAL TANK”

TAMPA, FLORIDA

FOR

JAMES A. HALEY VETERANS HOSPITAL

TAMPA, FLORIDA

July 14, 2016

16.086.F132.001

TIC

TANK

INDUSTRY

CoNSULTANIS

7740 West New York Street Indianapolis, Indiana 46214

317 I 271-3100 - Phone

317 I 271-3300- FAX

Sacramento, California

916 I 717-3608

Plainfield, Illinois 815 I 556-8335

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 412 I 262-1586

El Paso, Texas 915 I 790-0790

Houston, Texas 281 I 367-3511

July 22, 2016

SUBJECT:

The subject of this report is the field evaluation of the 150,000 gallon steel ele vated water tank at the J runes A. Haley Veterans Hospital in Tampa, Florida. The tank was owned by the J runes A. Haley Veterans Hospital and was known as the "Jrunes A. Haley Veterans Hospital Tanlc." The field evaluation was performed on July 14, 2016 by Chad D. Mitchell, NACE Coating Inspector Level 2-Certified Cert. No. #56876, and Eugene Dube of Tank fudustry Consultants.

The Owner's representatives on the site at the time of the field evaluation were Travis Garret and Rich Burns. The double-ellipsoidal tank was of welded· steel construction. According to information on the tank nruneplate, the tank was built in 1976 by Brown Steel Contractors, Inc., and had a capacity of 150,000 gallons.

The tank nameplate also stated that the 5-column tank was 125 ft to bottom ca pacity level. The tank was previously evaluated by Tank fudustry Consultants on July 26, 2000.

OBJECTIVE:

The purpose of this washout and evaluation was to determine the condition of the tank interior, exterior, exposed foundations, and accessories. The evaluation of the riser interior was limited due to the broken safety grate over the· riser opening.

The purpose of this report is to present the findings of the evaluation and to make recommendations for recoating, repairing, corrosion protection, and maintenance.

Budget estimates for the work, anticipated life of the coating and the structure, and the replacement cost of the tank are also included.

AUIBORIZATION: ·

This washout, evaluation, disinfection, and report were au,thorized in the Notice of Award dated April 18,_2016 from Jose. R. Sierra-Colon.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The tank coating was in good overall condition on the exterior and in good to fair overall condition on the interior. It is recommended that the existing cathodic protection system be repaired and properly operated in the next 6 months, and that the interior surfaces be spot cleaned and spot coated at that time. It is recom mended that the areas of corrosion on the balcony be repall:ed and recoated in the next year.

An Employee-Owned Company

150,000 Gallon Elevated Tank, "James A. Haley Veterans Hospital" James A. Haley Veterans Hospital, Tampa, Florida

Page2

16.086.FJ32.001

ANSI/OSHA and Safety-Related Deficiencies: There were OSHA and safety-related deficiencies observed on this tank. These deficiencies included:

+ the tower ladder safe-climbing device was painted, + the tower ladder side rails were too small (ANSI Al4.3), + the tower ladder vandal deterrent was not locked, + conduits were attached to the tower ladder brackets (29 CPR 1910.27(b )(2)), + the balcony mid-rail was too small (29 CFR 1910.23(e)(3)(iii)), + the balcony toe bar height was too small (29 CPR 1910.23(e)(4)), + conduits extended across the balcony floor and were a trip hazard, + the shell and roofladder safe-climbing device had been painted, + the shell and roofladder side rails were too small (ANSI A14.3), + exposed wiring was noted on the roof, + the interior ladder was not equipped with a safe-climbing device (29 CPR 1926.1053(a)(19)), + the interior ladder head clearance was too small (29 CPR 1910.27(c)(l)), and + the interior ladder should not be used due to the corrosion and metal loss noted.

If the Owner wishes to fully comply with OSHA and safety-related standards, it is recommended that these deficiencies be rectified.

A WW A and Operational Deficiencies: There were sanitary and operating deficiencies observed on this tank as well. These deficiencies included:

+ the roof manhole curb was too small, + the roof manhole was not locked, + a gap was noted between the roof vent pallet and the vent neck, and + what appeared to be a lead joint was noted on the inlet/outlet pipe.

These deficiencies should be corrected.

The safety-related, sanitary, and operating deficiencies listed above are not intended to be a complete list of deficiencies on this tank. The Owner should refer to the complete report text and accompanying photographs for a complete account of all observed deficiencies.

This evaluation and the reporting of the condition of this tank do not warrant the original structural condition of the tank or any of the original design for seismic loadings. Likewise, recommendations for this tank do not include modifications which may be required for compliance with present structural codes.

PHOTOGRAPHS:

Color photographs were taken of the visible portions of the foundations, the tank interior and exterior and are included as a part of this report. The significant photographs are keyed to the observations.

NOMENCLATURE:

Page3

16.086.FJ32.001

The terms used in describing the various components of steel water tanks are unique to the industry. In fact, the terms vary from firm to firm and from person to person. In an attempt to define the terms used in this report, a sketch of the general type of tank covered is included at the end of the narrative portion of this report. Also, to aid in reference to the colunms, the ladder colunm is referred to as colunm 1 and the remaining 4 colunms are numbered clockwise. Warning: Some appurtenances on this tank may be referred to as erection or rigging attachments, lugs, or brackets. This does not mean that they are safe for rigging. Each attachment for each tank should be evaluated on an individual basis by a structural engineer or an experienced rigger before being used. These devices may have been intended for only the original erectors and painters to use with specialized equipment.

ADHESION TESTS:

All adhesion tests performed during this evaluation were done in general accordance with ASTM D3359. The results are reported herein using the ASTM scale. The ASTM scale is a relative scale to rate adhesion from 0 to 5 with 5 being the best. A table of adhesion test results classification is includ ed with this report following the sketch of the tank.

HEAVY METALS TESTS:

Samples of the exterior and interior coating systems were sent to a laboratory for inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry analyses. The test results were as follows:

·• Cadmium/•.···· Chromium

Lead ... ·· .. .... .. ·. ··.· .. · .. · ..

mg/kg percent mg/kg percent mg/kg percent Exterior <0.4 <0.00004% 3.6 0.00036% 24 0.0024% Interior <0.4 <0.00004% 61 0.0061% <l <0.0001%

Tank Industry Consultants performs this test only to determine if there is lead, cadmium, or chromium present in the coating samples. To limit damage to the existing coating, only small areas were tested.

The small number of samples taken and the difficulty of retrieving all primer from the steel profile may cause the tests performed to not accurately represent the total coating system. Variations in thickness, types of coatings applied, and the interim cleaning and painting operations will also affect the actual readings. The reliability of the results is also dependent on the amount of primer included in the sam ple. Additional testing to determine the amount of leachable contaminants present in the spent clean ing debris will need to be performed following cleaning operations at the time of repainting. Results from the laboratory analysis are included following the adhesion tables.

150, 000 Gallon Elevated Tank, "James A. Haley Veterans Hospital"

ULTRASONIC TIDCKNESS MEASUREMENTS:

Roof:

Shell:

Bowl:

Riser:

Cap:

Finger:

Knuckle:

Knuckle:

Finger:

Saucer:

(all readings were taken through coating)

0.248 in. to 0.260 in.

0.248 in. to 0.250 in.

0.252 in. to 0.255 in.

0.317 in. to 0.322 in.

Column:

0.330 in. to 0.335 in.

0.342 in. to 0.365 in.

0.312 in. to 0.318 in.

0.266 in. to 0.271 in.

0.489 in. to 0.496 in.

OBSERVATIONS:

A. Foundations and Site

SITE:

Size: approx. 55 ft x 75 ft Fence:

Gate:

Type: brick Height: 9 ft 6 in.

Location: east side of site Width: 12 ft Locked: yes

Nearest Structures:

Type: chemical storage building Direction: northwest Distance: approx. 2 ft

Type: chemical storage building Direction: northwest of column #5 Distance: approx. 4 ft

Nearest Overhead Power Lines: none visible

FOUNDATIONS:

Number: 5 columns, 1 riser Size:

Column: 36 in. x 41 in.

Riser: 6 ft x 6 ft

Sealant: polyurethane

Page4 16.086.Fl32.00J

Column Projection Grout Number: Above Grade: Thickness:

1 7 in. to 8-1/2 in. 1-5/8 in.

2 5 in. to 7 in. 1-112 in. to 1-5/8 in.

3 7-112 in. to 8-112 in. 1-112 in. to 1-5/8 in.

4 6-1/2 in. to 9-112 in. 1-112 in. to 1-3/4 in.

5 7-112 in. to 9-114 in. l-l/2in.

Riser 18-1/2 in. to 19-3/4 in. 3-3/8 in.

Page5 16.086.Fl32.001

1. Site Location: The tank was located at the James A. Haley Veterans Hospital in Tampa, Florida. The hospital was located north and east of the tank site. Parking lots were located directly adjacent to the tank site. No overhead power lines were noted near the site at the time of the evalua tion. (See photos 1-3)

2. Site Conditions: The tank site was covered with concrete with several areas of gravel not-

ed. Vegetation had grown between the foundations and the concrete covered site. The tank site was fenced. The brick fence was equipped with a locked gate at the east side of the site. The gate was equipped with a favade. Two chemical storage buildings and a building which housed electrical equipment were located on the site. The site appeared to be used as storage as several miscellaneous items, such as unused signs, were noted on site. Numerous electrical cabinets were located on site.

(See photos 1-2, 4-11)

3. Foundations: The exposed surfaces of the foundations appeared to be in nearly their orig-inal structural condition at the time of this field evaluation. No significant failures were noted on the foundations at the time of the evaluation. The colunm foundations generally exhibited the A WW A recommended projection of 6 in. to 12 in. above grade; however, the riser foundation exceeded the rec ommended projection. The foundations had been coated. The coating appeared to be in good condi tion as no significant failures were noted at the time of the evaluation. Conduit was attached to one of the column foundations and an electrical outlet was attached to another colunm foundation. (See pho tos 15-16, 19)

4. Grout: The column and riser base plates were equipped with a pad of grout between the base plates and the tops of the foundations. The grout appeared to be in good overall condition as no significant failures were noted at the time of the evaluation. The grout had been coated, and the coat ing appeared to be in adequate condition at the time of the evaluation. There was a polyurethane seal ant located at the grout-to-base plate interface. The sealant appeared to be in good condition at the time of the evaluation.

5. Site Piping: Above ground valves and piping were located on the site to the northeast of the tank riser. Other than minor pinhead corrosion the piping appeared to be in good overall condition at the time of the evaluation. (See photos 12-14)

B. Exterior Tower and Container

DESCRIPTION:

Construction: welded steel Columns: 5 Tower: 4 bays Bowl: ellipsoidal Shell:

Diameter: approx. 35 ft Shell Height: 6 ft 8 in.

Roof: ellipsoidal

NAMEPLATE:

Location: above riser manhole

BUILT BY

BROWN STEEL CONTRACTORS, INC.

NEWMAN, GA.

CAP. GALS. 150,000

HEIGHT TO LWL 125'0"

DATE 1976

COLUMNS:

Type: tubular Size: approx. 20 in. diameter

VA HOSPITAL TAMPA, FLA

5445-0001

PROPERTY TAG

Base Plate: approx. 27 in. square x 1-1/8 in. thick Anchor Bolts:

RISER:

Number Per Column: 2 Size: 2-3/8 in. diameter

Diameter: approx. 3 ft Base Plate: approx. 40 in. square x 5/8 in. thick Anchor Bolts:

Number: 4 Size: 1-112 in. diameter

RISER MANHOLE:

Type: double-crab Size: 12 in. x 16 in.

Cover:

Bolts:

Size: 14-1/4 in. x 18 in.

Hinged: no

Number: 2 Size: 3/4 in. diameter x 8 in. long

16.086.FJ32.00J

DIAGONAL BRACING:

Bottom Bay:

Rod Diameter: 2 in. diameter enlarged to 2-1/4 in. diameter Wing Plate: 6 in. x 12 in. x 1 in. thick

Second Bay:

Rod Diameter: 2 in. diameter enlarged to 2-1/4 in. diameter Wing Plate: 6 in. x 24 in. x 7 /8 in. thick

Third Bay:

Rod Diameter: 1-5/8 in. diameter enlarged to 1-7 /8 in. diameter Wing Plate: 6 in. x 24 in. x 7 /8 in. thick

Top Bay:

Rod Diameter: 1-3/8 in. diameter enlarged to 1-3/4 in. diameter Wing Plate: 6 in. x 24 in. x 7 /8 in. thick

Rod Pin Size: 1-5/8 in. diameter x 4 in. long

RISER RODS:

Number of Levels: 3 Size: 1 in. diameter enlarged to 1-1/8 in. diameter Wing Plate: 4-1/4 in. x 5 in. x 3/8 in. thick Rod Pin Size: 1 in. diameter x 1-1/2 in. long

STRUTS:

Type: WF beam Beam Size:

Bottom Level: 8 in. x 7 in.

Middle Level: 8 in. x 7 in.

Top Level: 6-1/2 in. x 7-1/4 in.

Rod Pin Size: 1-3/4 in. diameter x 2-1/2 in. long

INLET PIPE:

Size: 8 in. diameter Brackets:

Column:

Shell:

Size: 10 in. x 1/2 in., flat bar x 6 in. long Spacing: 8 ft

Size: 10 in. x 1/2 in., flat bar x 5 in. long Spacing: 50-3/4 in.

OVERFLOW PIPE:

Size: 8 in. diameter Visible Air Break: 14 in.

Protective Screen: none Flap Gate: yes Brackets:

Size: 3 in. x 3/8 in., flat bar x 3 in. long Spacing: 10 ft

16.086.Fl32.001

TOWER LADDER:

Number of Rungs: 121w/4 rung half-ladder at top Distance From Ground to Lowest Rung: 10 ft 9 in.

Width: 16 in.

Side Rails: 2 in. x 3/8 in., flat bar Rung Size: 3/4 in. diameter Spacing: 12 in. on center Toe Room: 9-114 in.

Brackets:

Construction: welded Size: 4 in. x 3/8 in., flat bar x 14 in. long Spacing: 10 ft

Safe-Climbing Device: notched-tubular rail Vandal Deterrent:

Size: 34 in. wide x 8 ft high aluminum Side Panels: 13 in. x 1/16 in., flat bar x 8 ft high Locked: no

BALCONY:

Width: 29-1/2 in.

Handrail:

Height: 42 in.

Size: 3 in. x 1-1/2 in., channel

Uprights: 3 in. x 1-1/2 in., channel Mid-Rail: 2 in. x 1/4 in., flat bar Toe Bar:

Size: 6 in. x 3/8 in., flat bar Height Above Floor: 2-1/2 in.

Access Opening:

Width: 19-1/2 in.

Closure Chains: yes

BALCONY OBSTRUCTION LIGHTS:

Type: double-globe Number: 5 Location: on safety railing Manufacturer: Airport Equipment International Testing Services Model Number: AC 150/5345 Operational: yes, 3 of 5 Photoelectric Cell: none visible

Page8 16.086.Fl32.001

SHELL MANHOLE:

Location: west side of shell Type: flanged and bolted Size: 20 in. diameter Bolts:

Number: 24 Size: 3/4 in. diameter x 2-1/2 in. long

Cover Plate: 25-1/2 in. diameter x 3/8 in. thick

SHELL AND ROOF LADDER:

Number of Rungs: 25 Type: fixed Side Rails: 2 in. x 3/8 in., flat bar Width: 16 in.

Rung Size: 3/4 in. diameter Spacing: 12 in. on center Toe Room: 8-3/8 in.

Safe-Climbing Device: notched-tubular rail

LOGO: "VA"

Color: blue Location: northeast side of shell Brush Stroke: 18 in.

Sign Length: 10 ft

ROOF OPENINGS:

Manhole:

Size: 24 in. square Type: hinged Curb: 3 in.

Welded: exterior only Overlap: 2 in.

Locked: no

Roof Vent:

Type: clog-resistant Neck Height: 20 in.

Neck Diameter: 24 in.

Screen:

Orientation: horizontal Size: fine mesh

Cover: 48 in. diameter

16.086.Fl 32.001

ROOF OBSTRUCTION LIGHTS:

Type: double-globe Location: adjacent to roof vent Manufacturer: Airport Equipment International Testing Services Model Number: AC 150/5345 Operational: yes Photoelectric Cell: none visible

EXTERIOR COATING AND METAL CONDITION:

Coating Thickness Approx. % Failure to

Range Typical Underlying

Rust Coating

Columns 10 mils to 21.5 mils 15.5 mils <2% Neg.

Riser 12 mils to 20 mils 16 mils Neg. Neg.

Diagonal Bracing 17 mils to 28 mils 23.5 mils Neg. < 1% Riser Rods - - Neg. 5% Struts 11.5 mils to 23 .5 mils 15.5 mils Neg. Neg.

Bowl 9.5 mils to 13.5 mils - Neg. Neg.

Balcony 11.5 mils to 26 mils 17 mils Neg. 5o/o Shell 9 mils to 15 .5 mils 11 mils Neg. Neg.

Roof 11 mils to 15 .5 mils 13 mils Neg. Neg.

Key to Table Adhesion 5 (very good)

4 (good) T ~Topcoat to Underlying Coating

3 (fair) 2 (poor) 1 (very poor) 0 (very poor)

S ~Primer to Steel

Adhesion

5 s 5T 5T

5S 5S 5S 5S 5 s

Page JO 16.086.Fl32.00J

Metal Loss

Typical Deepest

Neg. Neg.

Neg. Neg.

Neg. Neg.

Neg. Neg.

Neg. Neg.

- Holes Neg. Neg.

Neg. Neg.

Neg. ~negligible

1. '.Exterior Coating Condition: The coating on the exterior of the tower and container ap-peared to be in good condition and was providing adequate protection from corrosion to most of the underlying steel. The exterior coating exhibited very good adhesion to the underlying coating and steel.

2. Base Plates: The column and riser base plates appeared to be in good overall condition at the time of the field evaluation. No areas of significant coating failure or corrosion were noted at the time of the evaluation.

3. Anchor Bolts: Each of the columns was equipped with 2 anchor bolts, and the riser was equipped with 4 anchor bolts. The anchor bolts were not equipped with chairs. Previous metal loss was observed on the anchor bolts on column #2. No areas of significant active corrosion were noted on the anchor bolts. One of the column anchor bolt threads was even with the top of the anchor bolt nut.

4. Column Condition: The columns were of welded steel construction and appeared to be in nearly their original structural condition at the time of the field evaluation. The column coating ap peared to be in good overall condition and exhibited very good adhesion to the steel. The coating had chalked. Runs and drips were noted in the coating, and mildew was observed on the columns in areas.

An 8 in. diameter inlet pipe was attached to column #2. Bracket remains from the previous cathodic

150, 000 Gallon Elevated Tanlc, "James A. Haley Veterans Hospital"

Page II 16.086.Fl32.00J protection system were located on column #1. Some of the columns were equipped with threaded and plugged fittings near grade. (See photos 19-20)

5. Riser Condition: The riser was of welded construction. The riser appeared to be in nearly its original structural condition at the time of the field evaluation. The riser coating appeared to be in good overall condition and exhibited very good adhesion to the underlying coating. The riser coating had chalked, and mildew was observed on the riser surfaces. The riser was equipped with a double crab manhole. The riser manhole cover was not equipped with a hinged support. The tank nameplate was attached to a bracket located above the riser manhole. A pressure gage was located on the east side of the riser near grade. A drain which was equipped with a ball valve was located on the north side of the riser near grade. Corrosion was noted on the drain pipe projection. (See photos 22-25)

6. Diagonal Bracing: The coating system on the diagonal bracing appeared to be in good overall condition at the time of the field evaluation. The coating exhibited very good adhesion to the underlying coating. The coating had chalked, and runs and drips were noted. Mildew was noted on the diagonal bracing in areas. The diagonal bracing rods were enlarged at the ends. The diagonal bracing was equipped with turnbuckles, clevises, and wing plates. No significant corrosion was noted within the clevises. (See photos 26-30)

7. Riser Rods: The tower was equipped with three sets of riser rods which were located at the strut levels and just below the bowl. The coating system on the riser rods appeared to be in fuir overall condition at the time of the evaluation as corrosion and minor metal loss were noted on the top set of riser rods. The riser rods were equipped with turnbuckles, clevises, and wing plates. No signifi cant corrosion was noted within the clevises. It is the opinion of Tank Industry Consultants that the riser rods should not be used for rigging purposes or personnel access. (See photos 29-32)

8. Struts: The tower was equipped with three sets of struts. The struts were pinned and not welded to the wing plates. The struts appeared to be in nearly their original structural condition at the time of this field evaluation. The coating appeared to be in good overall condition and exhibited very good adhesion to steel. Drips and runs were observed in the coating, and mildew was observed on the struts in areas. The struts were not equipped with drain holes; however, no evidence of ponded water was noted at the time of the evaluation. (See photos 26, 28-30, 33)

9. Overflow Pipe: The overflow pipe exited through the roof and extended down the shell, through the balcony, and down the column to near grade. The overflow pipe was equipped with an above-ground air break. The discharge end of the overflow pipe was equipped with a flap gate. The overflow pipe was welded to brackets which were welded to the column and shell. The overflow pipe and brackets appeared to be in nearly their original condition. No areas of significant coating failure or corrosion were noted on the overflow pipe and brackets at the time of the evaluation. (See photos 17- 18)

10. Inlet Pipe: An inlet pipe extended up column #2 from grade, through the balcony, and into the roof. The inlet pipe was equipped with welded to brackets which were welded to the column and shell. The inlet pipe and brackets appeared to be in nearly their original condition at the time of the evaluation. Spot corrosion was noted on the inlet pipe and brackets. The balcony penetration was equipped with a curb. (See photos 21, 55-58, 60, 67-68)

16.086.Fl32.001

11. Tower Ladder: There were safety and ANSI/OSHA deficiencies noted: (1) the paint on the safe-climbing device may not allow the device to function properly, (2) the 2 in. x 3/8 in.

side rails did not precisely meet the required minimum of 2-1/2 in. x 3/8 in. side rails, (3) the vandal deterrent was not locked, and (4) conduit was attached to the ladder brackets which could interfere with the unrestricted use of the side rails by the climber. The tower was equipped with a ladder which provided access from near grade to the balcony. The ladder was equipped with a notched-tubular safe-climbing device; however, the device had been painted in areas and may not func tion properly. The tower ladder was welded to brackets which were welded to the colunm. The tower ladder and brackets appeared to be in nearly their original structural condition at the time of this field evaluation. The ladder was equipped with a vandal deterrent; however, the vandal deterrent was not locked and the side plates were deformed. A light was located adjacent to the tower ladder on the col unm. (See photos 34-38, 44)

12. Bowl Condition: The coating on the bowl surfaces appeared to be providing adequate overall corrosion protection to the majority of the steel. Minor corrosion was observed on the bowl.

13. Balcony Condition: There were safety and OSHA deficiencies noted: (1) the 2 in. x 114 in. mid-rail did not meet the required 2 in. x 2 in. x 3/8 in. minimum, (2) the safety rail ing toe bar height of 2-112 in. did not meet the minimum required 4 in. height, and (3) the con duit on the balcony floor was a trip hazard. Access to the balcony from the tower ladder was ac complished by climbing through an opening in the balcony safety railing. The balcony floor was equipped with drain holes; however, evidence of trapped water was found on the balcony near the shell and toe bar. The coating on the balcony appeared to be in poor overall condition as widespread coating failures had allowed for corrosion and metal loss to occur on the top and bottom sides of the balcony.

Several areas of corrosion on the balcony floor had led to holes in the balcony. The balcony coating exhibited very good adhesion to the steel. Eight patch plates were located on the balcony and stratified corrosion was observed at these plates. Conduit was located on the balcony, and extended across the floor. Corrosion was noted around the pipe curbs in the balcony. The balcony was equipped with safe ty railing which was constructed of welded steel flat bar and angle members. Five obstruction lights were mounted to the balcony safety railing. Two of the obstruction lights were not operational at the time of the evaluation. The balcony obstruction lights were not equipped with a photoelectric cell.

The underside of the balcony floor was intermittently welded to the shell and toe bar. Lugs were noted on the underside of the balcony. It is recommended that the lugs not be used for rigging purposes.

(See photos 39-54, 59)

14. Shell Condition: The contour of the tank shell was good as no significant discontinuities were observed at the time of this field evaluation. The coating appeared to be in good overall condition and exhibited very good adhesion to the steel. The coating had experienced significant chalking. A logo was on the northeast side of the shell. The logo was blue and appeared to be in good overall con dition. A flanged and bolted shell manhole was located on the west side of the shell. The shell plate at the manhole was equipped with a reinforcing plate. Corrosion was noted on the manhole bolts. (See photos 63-64)

15. Water Level Indicating Device: A target gage was located on the roof adjacent to the shell and roof ladder. In its current condition, the target gage was not capable of functioning properly as the weight on the interior had broken off. The coating had peeled off in areas on the target gage markings. (See photos 61-62, 66-67)

16.086.Fl32.00J

16. Exterior Shell and Roof Ladders: There were safety and ANSI/OSHA deficiencies noted: (1) the paint on the safe-climbing device may not allow the device to function properly, and (2) the 2 in. x 3/8 in. side rails did not precisely meet the required minimum of 2-112 in. x 3/8 in. side rails. A ladder extended up from the balcony to the approximate center of the roof. The ladder was equipped with a notched-tubular rail safe-climbing device; however, paint was noted on the device in areas, and it may not function properly. The ladder was welded to brackets which were welded to the container. The ladder and brackets appeared to be in nearly their original structural condition at the time of this field evaluation. Minor coating failures were noted on the lad der. (See photo 65)

17. Roof Condition: There was a safety deficiency noted: exposed wiring was observed at the conduit junction box and at the broken wiring at the electrical equipment. The contour of the roof was adequate at the time of this evaluation. ·The coating on the roof appeared to be in good to fair overall condition and exhibited very good adhesion to the steel. Random pinhead corrosion and areas had peeled to rust. Conduit was noted on the roof and one of the junction box covers was incor rectly installed. Electrical equipment was observed on the roof and the wires had broken off and were exposed. Cathodic protection hand holes were noted in the roof and the cover plates for these holes were in good overall condition. Lugs were noted on the roof. It is recommended that the lugs not be used for rigging purposes. (See photos 69-72)

18. Obstruction Lights: The roof was equipped with a double-globe obstruction light mount ed near the roof vent. The obstruction light was illuminated at the time of this field evaluation. The obstruction light did not appeared to be equipped with a photoelectric cell. (See photo 73)

19. Roof Manhole: There were sanitary, AWWA, and operational deficiencies noted:

(1) the 3 in. high manhole neck did not meet the required minimum of 4 in., and (2) the manhole cover was not locked. The roof was equipped with one manhole. The manhole was equipped with a hinged cover which was not locked prior to or after the evaluation. The manhole was welded on the exterior and was caulked on the interior.

20. Roof Vent: There was a sanitary and operational deficiency noted: a 114 in. gap was noted between the vent pallet and the vent neck. The roof was equipped with what appeared to be a clog-resistant vent in the approximate center of the roof. The vent appeared to be equipped with pallets which would facilitate ventilation during filling or draining of the tank. The proper operation or design of the pallets was not verified during this evaluation. The screening on the roof vent appeared to be in good overall condition. No areas of significant corrosion or coating failure were noted on the vent at the time of the evaluation. The pallet was warped and a gap was noted between the pallet and the vent neck. (See photos 74-76)

C. Interior Surfaces

INTERIOR CONTAINER LADDER:

Number of Rungs: 27 Width: 16 in.

Rung Size: 3/4 in. diameter Spacing: 12 in. on center Side Rails: 4 in. x 1-3/4 in., channel Toe Room: open Head Clearance: 26 in.

Brackets:

Construction: welded at top and bolted at bottom Size: 5 in. x 1/2 in., flat bar x 16 in. long and 2 in. x 2 in., angle

Safe-Climbing Device: none

CATHODIC PROTECTION:

Anodes:

Type: vertical segmented cast iron Number on Wire: 7

OVERFLOW:

Inlet Type: funnel Location: approx. 1 ft below roof knuckle-to-finger connection

RISER SAFETY GRATE:

Riser Opening: 36 in. diameter Grate Size: 3/4 in. diameter bars and 2 in. x 1/2 in., flat bar Brackets: 3 in. x 1/2 in., flat bar x 8 in. long Hinged Access Opening: yes but not operable

INTERIOR RISER LADDER: none

INTERIOR PIPING:

Inlet Pipe:

Location: roof Size: 8 in. diameter Projection: approx. 2 in.

Welded: exterior only

Inlet/Outlet Pipe:

Size: 8 in. diameter Projection: 36 in. above riser floor Protective Cover: 19 in. diameter

16.086.F132.001

Drain Pipe:

Size: 3 in. diameter Projection: flush

INTERIOR COATING AND METAL CONDITION:

Roof Bowl Riser

Coating Thickness % Failure to Range

10.5 mils to 49 mils

18.5 mils to 42.5 mils 14 mils to 16.5 mils

Adhesion 5 (very good) 4 (good) 3 (fair) 2 (poor) 1 (very poor) 0 (very poor)

Typical Primer Rust

26 mils Neg. Neg.

27 mils Neg. < 1/2%

- Neg. < 112%

Key to Table T ~ Topcoat to Underlying Coating

S ~Primer to Steel

Adhesion

4T 4T 4S

16.086.FJ32.001

Metal Loss Typical Deepest

Neg. 1/32 in.

1/32 in. 1/16 in.

Neg. 1/16 in.

Neg. ~negligible

I. Interior Coating Condition: The coating on the interior surfaces of the tank appeared to be in fair overall condition. The interior coating exhibited good adhesion to the steel and underlying coating.

2. Roof Condition: The coating on the roof plates appeared to be in fair overall condition and exhibited good adhesion to the underlying coating. Corrosion was noted on the roof plates around the cathodic protection hand hole covers. Rust staining was noted below the inlet in the roof. The inlet pipe penetrated through the roof knuckle, and the penetration into the roof was not welded. Hand holds were located on the roof plates, and corrosion was observed on and around the hand holds. It is the opinion of Tank Industry Consultants that the hand holds should not be used for rigging pur poses. (See photos 77-82)

3. Shell Condition: The coating on the interior shell appeared to be in good to fair overall condition. The shell coating had been discolored from minerals in the water and rust streaks were not ed on the shell below the inlet pipe in the roof. Minor areas of corrosion were noted on the shell. (See photos 78, 80, 82, 84)

4. Water Level Indicating Device: The target gage was not capable of functioning properly at the time of the evaluation as the weight for the float was broken and laying in the bowl of the tank.

(See photo 85)

5. Interior Container Ladder: There were safety and ANSI/OSHA deficiencies noted:

(1) the ladder was not equipped with a safe-climbing device, (2) the 26 in. head clearance did not precisely meet the required 30 in. minimum, and (3) severe corrosion and metal loss was ob served on tile ladder brackets and rungs. A ladder extended from the roof manhole down to the bowl of the tank. The ladder was not equipped with a safe-climbing device. The interior ladder was welded to brackets at the roof and bolted to a slip-type bracket at the bowl. The ladder was in very poor overall condition as significant metal loss and corrosion were observed. It is the opinion of Tank Industry Consultants that the interior ladder not be used by personnel. (See photos 86-90)

16.086.Fl32.001

6. Overflow Pipe: The overflow pipe was equipped with a funnel-type inlet. The location of the overflow inlet was such that the top capacity level was below the roof finger-to-roof knuckle con nection. (See photo 82)

7. Bowl Condition: The coating on the bowl appeared to be in fair overall condition and ex-hibited good adhesion to the underlying coating. Areas of spot corrosion had allowed metal loss to oc cur. Pit depths of up to 1/16 in., and pit depth measurements of 1/32 in. were typical. A drain plug was located in the bowl. A safety grate was located over the riser opening in the bowl; however, the grate' s hinged access opening was rusted shut. Bracket remains were noted on the bowl. (See photos 91-93)

8. Riser Condition: The coating on the interior riser appeared to be in good to fair overall condition and had good adhesion to the steel. The riser safety grate had corroded shut and the majority of the riser evaluation was limited due to access. The coating had slightly peeled to corrosion on the upper riser surfaces. The riser ladder bracket remains were noted on the riser. (See photos 93-97)

9. Riser Piping: There was a sanitary deficiency noted: the inletfontlet pipe was equipped with what appeared to be a lead joint. The inlet/outlet pipe was located in the base of the riser. The pipe projected 36 in. above the riser base plate. The inlet/outlet pipe was equipped with a removable protective cover. A drain pipe was located in the base of the riser and was flush with the riser wall. (See photos 98-100) ·

10. Cathodic Protection System: The container and riser were equipped with a cathodic pro tection system. The system consisted of vertical segmented cast iron anodes which were supported from the roof. The wiring was intact. The cathodic protection rectifier had been removed from the base of the tank and the system did not appear to be operational. Corrosion and metal loss were noted on the interior surfaces below the high water line. The reference electrode was located near the center of the container. (See photos 78-80, 83)

RECOMMENDATIONS:

A. Foundations and Site

1. Site Maintenance: The site should be maintained so that the top of all foundations con-tinues to project a minimum of 6 in. to a maximum of 12 in. above grade and so that proper drainage away from the foundations continues. The gate should continue to be locked at all times to deter unau thorized entry and limit liability for the Owner. The vegetation between the foundation and site con crete should be removed. Care should be taken during rehabilitation due to the adjacent hospital, the chemical storage buildings on site, and the electrical equipment building on site.

2. Site Access and Restoration: Contractor and heavy equipment access to the site would be extremely difficult due to the size of the site. Provisions should be included in the specifications for the restoration of any paving, curbing, sidewalks, fences, sod, or other surfaces and structures disturbed by the contractor's work.

3. Tank and Site Security: Water tanks have been defined by some courts under certain cir-cumstances as attractive nuisances. As such, there may be a significant potential liability to the Owner

16.086.F132.001 for injury to persons on the tank and tank site, even if access is not authorized. Recent events have prompted the entire water industry to consider measures that inhibit intentional acts that could threaten the water supply. A review of the security requirements for the tank and site is recommended to con firm that the existing measures are consistent with the Owner's security requirements for their water system. Primary tank and site security should be focused on eliminating, preventing, and detecting un authorized access to the tank. Such security measures might include routinely and periodically verify ing all manholes and gates are locked, and all exterior ladders have suitable deterrents. Other security measures might include installing no-trespass signs, installing barbed wire, installing new site lighting, adding motion detectors on the site, installing surveillance cameras, installing alarms on gates and tank manholes, and arranging more frequent site visits by law enforcement agencies.

4. Foundations: If the foundations should deteriorate prior to performing other tank rehabili-tation operations, any unsound concrete should be chipped to sound material and the concrete should be brush-off blasted. Any deteriorated areas or voids found should have a bonding agent and a vinyl emollient modified concrete patching mortar applied to build up the surface to its original contour.

(This repair did not appear to be necessary at the time of this evaluation.) The concrete should then be painted with a concrete sealer.

5. Grout Maintenance: All loose grout should be chipped away to solid material when the tank is empty. Any shim plates which can be removed should be taken out. Any voids in the grout should be filled with a nonshrinking, nonstaining, structural grout material. The grout should be placed as far back under the base plates as possible and squared off vertically with the edge of the base plates.

(This repair did not appear to be necessary at the time of this evaluation.) Any gap between the steel base plates and the grout should be filled with a flexible sealant.

6. Sealant Maintenance: When the exterior repainting is performed, the existing sealant should be removed and replaced with new flexible polyurethane sealant.

B. Exterior Tower and Container

1. Life of the Exterior Coating: The exterior coating system appeared to be providing good protection to the majority of the steel surfaces. Tank Industry Consultants believes that the exterior of the container and tower surfaces should not need to be painted within the next 5 to 6 years from a cor rosion standpoint. However, the areas of corrosion on the balcony floor should be repaired and recoat ed within the next year. Due to the very good adhesion of the existing exterior coating, topcoating ap pears to be viable. The exterior coating system should be evaluated immediately prior to preparing specifications to determine if the coating adhesion is still adequate to accept a topcoat.

2. Coating Testing: Prior to preparation of specifications for the cleaning and coating of the exterior of the tank, samples of the exterior coating system should be subjected to laboratory analysis to test for ingredients which may at that time be subject to regulations concerning their handling and dis posal.

3. Cleaning: When the exterior is to be cleaned, all varieties of containment should be inves-tigated. Containment of the wind-blown debris and paint droplets will be required due to the proximity of the adjacent hospital.

4. Recommended Coating System:

Pagel8 16.086.Fl32.00J

a. Spot Clean and Topcoat: If the exterior is to be repainted within the next few years, then spot cleaning and topcoating the tank appears to be the recommended option. The typical life of a spot cleaned and topcoated system is approximately 7 to 8 years, but is highly de pendent on previous surface preparation and the condition of the underlying coating system.

b. Coating Application: The entire exterior surfaces of the tank should be high-pressure washed to remove chalked coating, mildew, and contaminants. After washing, the dam aged and rusted areas should be spot cleaned to the equivalent of an SSPC-SP 6, Commercial Blast Cleaning, or SSPC-SP 11, Power Tool Cleaning to Bare Metal. All areas of excessive coating thickness and runs in the coating should be cleaned to the equivalent of an SSPC-SP 7, Brush-Off Blast Cleaning, to remove the excessive mils. The spot cleaned areas should receive a spot prime coat compatible with the present coating system. The entire exterior surfaces should then be intermediate coated and topcoated with a compatible coating system.

5. Alternative Coating System:

a. Complete Cleaning and Repainting: The optimum long-life coating system pres-ently available for this site is an epoxy-polyurethane coating system. Properly formulated and applied polyurethanes have good resistance to condensation, mildew, and chipping. The polyure thanes also have excellent color and gloss retention and the longest expected service life of any of the common exterior tank coatings. The typical life of a properly applied epoxy-polyurethane coating system is approximately 15 to 20 years. These coatings are also presently manufactured to meet current voe requirements.

b. Coating Application: When the tank is to be repainted, the tank should be com-pletely cleaned and repainted. The entire tank exterior should be cleaned to the equivalent of an SSPC-SP 6, Commercial Blast Cleaning and have an epoxy-primed, epoxy intermediate and pol yurethane finish coating system applied. However, care must be taken during the application of this particular coating system because this coating does have poor dry-fall characteristics, and po tential damage to the surrounding property must be taken into consideration. The polyurethane coatings also require close monitoring of temperature and humidity during application.

6. Effective Service Life: Tank Industry Consultants defines the life of a coating as the amount of time before repainting becomes necessary due to coating failure and corrosion. During the coating life the Owner should expect the coating to lose its gloss, start to chalk, show signs of weather ing, and possibly some rust staining. Future touch-up may be required on isolated coating failures. If aesthetics are a concern, the Owner may have to topcoat the repainted tank prior to the end of the ex pected service life. However, future topcoating would be less expensive than complete cleaning and recoating and could delay the next complete cleaning and repainting for many years.

7. Other Systems: With air emission volatile organic compounds (VOC) restrictions being put in place around the nation, alternative coating systems may become available which would be via ble options for this tank. The Owner should review the available systems prior to preparing specifica tions for the recoating project.

16.086.Fl32.001

8. Coating Curing: It would be more economical to paint the tank exterior at the same time the interior is painted, since the tank must be drained while the exterior is painted, and the applied coat mgs cure. This will also reduce mobilization and observation costs.

9. Rehabilitation Schedule: To obtain the lowest possible prices for the work outlined in the recommendations, the Owner should have the specifications prepared and the work bid in the early fall, with the work scheduled to start in early winter.

10. Grinding and Bracket Removal: Any unused brackets or erection lugs should be re moved prior to the exterior repainting. Any weld burrs, weld spatter, or erection scars should be ground off to provide a smooth surface for the application of the coating.

11. Level Indicating Device: If the Owner does not utilize the level indicating device, it and all associated couplings, brackets, and components should be removed from the tank. Patch plates should be welded over the openings created by the indicating device removal. The patch plates should be completely seal welded on both the interior and exterior surfaces. h1 its present condition, the exist ing level indicating device is not operational.

12. Nameplate: The tank nameplate should be removed for the cleaning and coating of the tank. The nameplate should be cleaned and reattached to the tank using the existing bracket.

13. Electrical Apparatus: All unused electrical conduit, antennas, fixtures, electrical meter ing equipment, cathodic protection apparatus, and control cabinets should be removed from the tank and tank site. All required equipment should be repaired in accordance with the National Electric Code

(NEC).

14. Anchor Bolts: After abrasive blast cleaning, the anchor bolts and nuts should be examined for deterioration. If deterioration is found and the anchor bolts and nuts are mild steel, the deteriorated areas of the anchor bolts should be repair welded as necessary. The column anchor bolt nut that was flush with the top of the bolt should be tightened.

15. Riser and Shell Manholes: At the time of exterior rehabilitation, the riser manhole should be enlarged to be at least 24 in. in diameter. At the time of recoating and repairs, the gaskets for the riser and shell manholes should be replaced and the bolts should be replaced with galvanized bolts.

The covers for the existing manholes should be equipped with hinged support arms.

16. Riser Rods: The riser rods should not be used for rigging or personnel access.

17. Struts: The ends of the struts should be seal welded to the wing plates.

18. Exterior Ladders: The exterior ladders should be replaced with ladders which meet cur rent requirements. The safe-climbing devices should be removed and the paint should be removed or the safe-climbing devices should be replaced. At the time of the exterior repainting, the safe-climbing devices should be cleaned and protected from the application of the exterior coating.

19. Vandal Deterrent: The existing vandal deterrent and side plates should be removed and replaced. The new vandal deterrent should be locked to improve water system security.

16.086.Fl32.00J

20. Balcony: At the time of the exterior repairs and repainting, the balcony should be flooded and additional drain holes installed to adequately drain water from the balcony. The holes from corro sion in the balcony should be patched within the next year. The conduit which extends across the bal cony floor should be relocated to eliminate the trip hazard. The existing mid-rail should be replaced with a mid-rail which meets existing requirements. Additionally, the toe bar should be equipped with an extension so that it is a minimum of 4 in. above the balcony floor.

21. Clog-Resistant Vent: The pallet on the vent should be replaced and proper operation of the vent should be verified.

22. Additional Roof Manhole: An additional roof manhole should be installed in the roof and should comply with A WW A standards.

23. Roof Manhole: The existing roof manhole dimensions did not comply with current A WW A standards. TI1erefore, the roof manhole should be modified to include a 4 in. high curb and should be locked to improve water system security.

24. Roof: The wiring on the roof should be repaired, and the conduit junction box cover should be repositioned so that it is installed correctly.

25. Obstruction Lights: The Owner should file a FAA Form 7460 to verify the need for ob struction lighting on the tank. If the lighting is required, new bulbs and globes should be installed. If the lighting is not required, the light assembly and all associated conduits and brackets should be re moved. If the lights are required, a photoelectric cell should be integrated into the system to reduce bulb maintenance costs.

C. Interior Surfaces

1. Life of the Interior Coating: The interior coating system appeared to be in generally fair overall condition. The spot coating failures in the bowl and riser had allowed pitting to occur. To pre vent additional metal loss at the areas of coating failure on the interior surfaces, the cathodic protection system should be replaced within the next 6 months. It is recommended that the areas of corrosion be spot cleaned and spot coated at that time. If a cathodic protection system in not installed or repaired, the interior should be recoated in the next 3 to 4 years. It is recommended that when the interior is completely cleaned and repainted, an epoxy coating system should be used.

2. Coating Testing: Prior to preparation of specifications for the cleaning and coating of the interior of the tank, samples of the interior coating system should be subjected to laboratory analysis to test for ingredients which may at that time be subject to regulations concerning their handling and dis posal.

3. Cathodic Protection: To prevent further corrosion and metal loss at the areas of coating failure below the top capacity level, the existing cathodic protection system should be replaced.

a. Type: The cathodic protection system should be replaced with a system which fea-tures long-life anodes, automatic potential and current control, with an independently controlled circuit and anode for the riser should be specified.

16.086.Fl 32.001

b. Scheduling: If the cathodic protection system is installed prior to complete cleaning and repainting the tank interior, the system should be removed and protected prior to cleaning and painting. After the interior is completely cleaned and recoated, the cathodic protection sys tem should not be energized until after the First Anniversary Inspection. The Owner should con duct washouts and evaluations approximately every 3 years to monitor the need for cathodic pro tection. As the interior coating begins to show signs of failure, the cathodic protection system should be energized to aid in minimizing corrosion below the top capacity level.

c. Maintenance: Cathodic protection, if operated and maintained properly, will control active corrosion below the water level and extend the useful life of a coating system. It should be noted that maintenance as recommended by the cathodic protection manufacturer is required for the cathodic protection system to work properly. Without proper monitoring, the cathodic pro tection system may operate too high and cause the coating to blister, or the system may operate too low and not adequately protect the exposed steel surfaces.

4. Recommended Interior Coating System:

a. Epoxy Coating System: The optimum long-life coating system presently available for the interior of water tanks is a two-component epoxy coating system. A three-coat epoxy sys tem is recommended for the interior of this tank. This coating system should meet the certifica tion criteria of ANSI/NSF 61 and state department of health regulations.

b. Coating Application: When the interior is to be repainted, the…