7. Asbestos and LBP Roof Inspection Report.pdf

MONTANA | WASHINGTON | IDAHO | NORTH DAKOTA | PENNSYLVANIA

4 0 6 . 7 6 1 . 3 0 1 0 t d h e n g i n e e r i n g . c o m

1 8 0 0 R i v e r D r i v e N o r t h

G r e a t F a l l s , MT 5 9 4 0 1

ASBESTOS INSPECTION SUMMARY

TD&H Engineering (TD&H) performed an asbestos inspection of Building 1840 located on Malmstrom Airforce Base in the Weapons Storage Area on September 25, 2024. The purpose of the pre-renovation inspection was to assess building materials suspected of containing asbestos on the roof of Building 1840.

The inspection was performed by Ms. Ashley Warner of TD&H, a Montana-accredited asbestos inspector, in accordance with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) – Asbestos Hazards and Emergency Response Act (AHERA) regulation 40 CFR 763.

The following building materials contain asbestos in quantities greater than 1%:

▪ Black fibrous caulk/sealant

▪ A silver surfaced black sealant found in the EPDM roof core

▪ Silver paint of vent hood

▪ Mesh vibration dampener

Sincerely, Ashley Warner Corey League, CHMM MTA-6159 Exp. 2025.02.16 MTA-5902 Exp. 2027.11.17 Industrial Hygiene Technician Project Manager

TD&H ENGINEERING TD&H ENGINEERING

TD&H Project No: 24-035-070

Report Issue Date: October 16, 2024

I : \2024\GTF\ 24 -035 MAFB Repai r Roof B1840 \05_DESIGN\ INDUSTRIAL

HYGIENE\APPENDIX\A_ASBESTOS INSPECTION SUMMARY \ASBESTOS SUMMARY PAGE.DOCX

t d h e n g i n e e r i n g . c o m

October 16, 2024

Mr. Jacob Henry Malmstrom Airforce Base

341 CONS/LGCA

7015 Goddard Drive, Rm 125 Malmstrom AFB, Montana 59402

RE: PRE-RENOVATION ASBESTOS AND LEAD-IN-PAINT

ROOF INSPECTION

BUILDING 1840 WEAPONS STORAGE AREA

MALMSTROM AIRFORCE BASE, MONTANA 59402

TD&H ENGINEERING JOB NO. 24-035-070

MAFB WORK ORDER NO. NZAS 21-0059

Dear Mr. Henry, In accordance with our Agreement for Engineering Services, TD&H Engineering, Inc. (TD&H) performed a limited pre-renovation asbestos and lead paint inspection of Malmstrom Air Force Base (MAFB) Building 1840 on September 25, 2024. This asbestos inspection report must be kept on site during all renovation activities. A summary of the asbestos inspection is provided in Appendix A. The Montana Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) has recently issued new rules, and the procedure followed by TD&H reflects these rules.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The area inspected was limited to the roof of Building 1840 in the Weapons Storage Area (WSA) on MAFB. The roof area is approximately 29,000 square feet. The roofing material consists of two layers of an insulation beneath a single-ply membrane. Each layer of insulation is approximately 1.5 inches thick. The building has had numerous roof renovations and additions following construction of the original building built in 1961, with additions in 1964, 1982, and 1998. Exterior walls of the building are concrete and concrete masonry units (CMU).

The inspection was limited to the roof per renovation plans to replace the roof and certain components on the roof. For the inspection, the roof was separated into seven sections based on different roof heights, and these were sampled as independent roof areas.

ASBESTOS INSPECTION

The Administrative Rules of Montana (ARM) 17.74.354 require an asbestos inspection be completed for all building materials prior to scheduled renovation activities to determine if asbestos-containing materials (ACM) are present. ACM is defined as any material or product that contains more than 1% asbestos. The National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants [NESHAP – 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 61], the Occupational Safety

October 16, 2024 PAGE NO. 2 and Health Administration (OSHA), and the ARM regulate asbestos due to the respiratory hazard that airborne asbestos fibers present. The inspection was performed by Ms. Ashley Warner of TD&H, a Montana-accredited asbestos inspector, in accordance with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) – Asbestos Hazards and Emergency Response Act (AHERA) regulation 40 CFR 763. Documentation of accreditation is provided in Appendix B.

Building materials were identified, categorized, numbered, and placed into homogeneous areas (HAs) for sample collection and laboratory analysis. The number of samples collected from building materials identified during the inspection is based on the following:

• Surfacing Materials: At least three samples for surfacing materials that are 1,000 square feet (SF) or less, at least five samples for surfacing materials that are greater than 1,000 SF but less than or equal to 5,000 SF, and at least seven samples for surfacing materials that are greater than 5,000 SF.

• Thermal System Insulation: Three samples from each HA of thermal system insulation, which may include but is not limited to boiler insulation, mudded fittings, and expanded vermiculite insulation.

• Miscellaneous Materials: Three samples from each HA of miscellaneous material, such as ceiling tile, wallboard system, cove base mastic, floor tile and mastic, concrete, roofing materials, and brick mortar.

• Materials Less Than Regulated Quantities: At least one sample from each HA of patching material, such as replacement floor tiles or patching plaster, and materials of less than 10 SF in total area, which are not subject to regulation by the Montana DEQ but may still trigger OSHA requirements.

A total of 34 suspect building materials were identified during the inspection. Bulk samples were collected from the building in accordance with the currently recognized standard protocol developed under AHERA. Bulk samples were placed into containers and shipped to CA Laboratories (CA Labs) in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, for analysis using Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM) in accordance with the EPA Method 600/R-93/116. CA Labs is accredited through the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s (NIST) National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP). The point-counting technique employed by CA Labs in the analysis of these samples has a limit of detection of approximately 0.1% by volume on samples that contained asbestos at concentrations under 1%.

A total of four HAs sampled during the inspection were determined by laboratory analysis to contain asbestos in quantities greater than 1%. These are shown in Table 1 below. The analytical report provided by CA Labs is provided in Appendix C, and sample locations are shown on Figure 1 in Appendix D.

Also shown in Table 1 is a Condition Ranking as detailed in the Malmstrom Air Force Base

Asbestos Management and Operations Plan. The plan lists four rankings as provided by Mr.

Robert Richards. These are detailed below:

• Ranking 1: Asbestos is damaged and poses a health hazard.

October 16, 2024 PAGE NO. 3

• Ranking 2: Asbestos is damaged but does not pose an immediate health hazard.

• Ranking 3: Asbestos is in good condition, does not pose a hazard, but is vulnerable to damage or wear.

• Ranking 4: Asbestos is in good condition and does not pose a hazard under normal conditions.

Table 1

Asbestos-Containing Building Materials

MAFB WSA Building 1840 Roof

Homogenous Area Description

Asbestos Content NESHAP Category Quantity

MAFB

Condition Ranking Location

N2.12 - Black Fibrous Caulk 6% II <1 ft² 4

Roof Level 2 Found on Silver Painted Support Beams

R2 - Silver Surfaced Black Sealant Associated with Non- Asbestos, Non- Reinforced EPDM Roofing with Two 1.5" Layers of Poly Foam Insulation on Concrete Deck (Silver Surfaced Black Sealant) 2% II

6,900 ft² (based on as-built) 4*

Layer on Level 2 Roofing

R7.1 - Silver Paint on Vent Hood 6% II 30 ft² 2

Level 1 Vent Hood

T3.1 - Mesh Vibration Dampener 20% RACM 3 ft² 1

Vibration Dampener on Roof Level 2 Component on Silver Painted Support Beams

*Layer contained within the roofing memebrane. Condition within the membrane is unknown. Under normal conditions the layer does not pose a hazard

October 16, 2024 PAGE NO. 4

All other HAs are listed as “None Detected” and are shown in Table 2. The analytical report provided by CA Labs is provided in Appendix C. Sample identification and locations are shown in Appendix D.

Table 2

Non-Asbestos-Containing Building Materials

MAFB WSA Building 1840 Roof

Homogenous Area (HA) Sample Description Location

N2.1 White Caulk on Membrane Roofing Roof Level 1

N2.2 Pink Painted Gray Caulk on Wall Siding Roof Level 1

N2.3 White Caulk Patches Roof Level 1

N2.4 Black Caulk Roof Level 1

N2.5 Gray Caulk Roof Level 1

N2.6 Peach/Tan Caulk Roof Level 1

N2.7 White Caulk on Vent Hood Roof Level 1

N2.8 White Caulk Patches Roof Level 2

N2.9 Gray Caulk Roof Level 2

N2.10 Black Caulk Roof Level 2

N2.11 Tan Caulk Roof Level 2

N2.13 Clear Caulk on R4.4 Roof Level 2

N2.14 Gray Caulk Roof Level 3

N2.15 White Caulk Patches Roof Level 3

N2.16 Black Caulk on R4.5 Roof Level 3

N2.17 White Caulk on Wall Base Roof Level 2

R1 Non-Reinforced EPDM Roofing with Two 1.5" Layers of

Poly Foam Insulation on Steel Pan Deck Roof Level 1

R3 Non-Reinforced EPDM Roofing with Two 1.5" Layers of

Poly Foam Insulation on Steel Pan Deck Roof Level 3

R4 Non-Reinforced EPDM Roofing with Two 1.5" Layers of

Poly Foam Insulation on Steel Pan Deck Roof Level 4

R5 Non-Reinforced EPDM Roofing with Two 1.5" Layers of

Poly Foam Insulation on Steel Pan Deck Roof Level 5

R6 Non-Reinforced EPDM Roofing with Two 1.5" Layers of

Poly Foam Insulation on Steel Pan Deck Roof Level 6

R7 Non-Reinforced EPDM Roofing with Two 1.5" Layers of

Poly Foam Insulation on Steel Pan Deck Roof Level 7

R4.1 Black Non-Reinforced EPDM Roofing Roof Level 1

R4.2 White Roof Patching Roof Level 2

R4.3 Gray Roof Patching/Coating Roof Level 2

R4.4 Black Non-Reinforced EPDM Roofing Roof Level 2

R4.5 Black Non-Reinforced EPDM Roofing Roof Level 3

R4.6 Green/Gray Roof Patching Roof Level 3

R7.2 Silver Paint Roof Level 2

Support Beams

October 16, 2024 PAGE NO. 5

Table 2

Non-Asbestos-Containing Building Materials

MAFB WSA Building 1840 Roof

Homogenous Area (HA) Sample Description Location

T13.1 Support Pipe Foam Filler Roof Level 2

Following receipt of the laboratory report, building materials containing asbestos were placed into one of the following three categories using NESHAP criteria:

• Category I: Non-friable 1 asbestos-containing packings, gaskets, resilient floor coverings, and asphalt roofing products – all containing more than 1% asbestos.

• Category II: All non-friable materials containing more than 1% asbestos except those found in Category I.

• Regulated Asbestos-Containing Materials (RACM): Friable materials, Category I non-friable materials that will or may be subjected to sanding, grinding, cutting, or abrading; or Category II non-friable materials that have a high probability of becoming or have become crumbled, pulverized, or reduced to powder by forces expected to act on the material in the course of demolition/renovation operations.

According to NESHAP regulation 40 CFR 61.145 (c)(1)(i) and ARM 17.74, any RACM or Category I or II ACM that may be rendered friable during demolition or renovation activities must be properly abated prior to beginning the project, which must be overseen by someone with training as a “competent person” per OSHA. NESHAP also requires that any demolition or renovation activities be free of visible dust or fugitive emissions from any regulated substances, including asbestos. All building materials should be adequately wetted to prevent release of particulate. Depending on the type of renovation planned, OSHA and state regulations may require personal air monitoring and the use of engineering controls.

It is a requirement under NESHAP regulations that at least ten working days prior to an asbestos abatement project, a written notification must be provided to the EPA. In the State of Montana, notification of asbestos abatement is sent to the MDEQ, Permitting and Compliance Division – Asbestos Control Program.

LEAD-IN-PAINT INSPECTION

A lead-in-paint inspection was conducted to identify painted components that may require specialized handling to comply with OSHA requirements or special disposal under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), which is administered by the EPA. The inspection was performed by an experienced technician with training as an LBP risk assessor. The lead inspection was limited to those components on the roof of Building 1840 that may be impacted by the planned renovation.

1 Friable means able to be crushed or reduced to powder by hand pressure when dry, or similarly broken or pulverized mechanically.

October 16, 2024 PAGE NO. 6

Lead-Based Paint Lead-based paint (LBP) is of concern both as a source of direct exposure through ingestion of paint chips and as a contributor to lead in interior dust and exterior soil. Regulatory agencies which have addressed lead-based paint include the EPA, Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), OSHA, and the Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC). There is no Montana state program for lead.

HUD guidelines define lead-based paint as:

• Paint in liquid form which contains 0.06%, by weight, calculated as lead metal in total nonvolatile content of the liquid paint, or

• Paint already applied which tests equal to or greater than 1.0 milligrams per square centimeter (mg/cm2) when using X-Ray Fluorescence technology, or 5,000 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) (0.5% by weight) when using atomic absorption spectroscopic analysis (AA).

Lead-Containing Paint The term “lead-containing paint” (LCP) applies to paint that has lead concentrations at less than the HUD guidelines or EPA disposal regulations. The OSHA standard for lead in the construction industry does not recognize a minimum safe concentration of lead. If any painted surface has any detectable level of lead, it must be presumed to present an occupational exposure to lead for OSHA-regulated construction work until a negative exposure assessment or exposure monitoring establishes otherwise.

Methods Paint chips were obtained by manually scraping paint from a measured area of substrate.

The bulk paint chip samples were placed into containers and shipped to SanAir Technologies Laboratory, Inc. (SanAir), in North Chesterfield, Virginia, for analysis of total lead content.

Painted surfaces were placed into (HAs) by identical colors, substrates, and building component types.

Results One HA tested positive for lead-based paint, and zero HAs were analyzed as lead-containing.

Paint sample 03 was not analyzed by SanAir due to insufficient amount of material for analysis;

therefore, the paint HA associated with sample 03 is assumed to contain lead. These are shown in Table 3, and the HA containing LBP is bolded in the table. Results of all painted surfaces analyzed and the laboratory report are contained in Appendix E, and paint chip sample locations are shown on Figure 2 in Appendix F.

Table 3

HAs Testing Positive for Lead Paint

MAFB WSA Building 1840 Roof

HA Component Substrate Color Paint Chip Lead Level

(ppm) Location

3 Vent Pipe Metal White Assumed Lead-

Containing North Center Roof

Level 1

Roof Component Support Beams Metal Silver 27,260

Center East Roof Level 2

October 16, 2024 PAGE NO. 7

RECOMMENDATIONS

The following recommendations for materials containing asbestos or lead are based on our observations and the anticipated scope of renovation.

Asbestos A total of four areas of ACM were identified.

The Category II roof caulk was non-friable at the time of the inspection and, if maintained in a non-friable state, may be removed in an unregulated fashion under state and federal law.

Any grinding, sawing, abrading, or pulverizing of the Category II asbestos-containing materials will render those materials friable and regulated (RACM).

Per OSHA, asbestos removal for Category I or II ACM in a non-friable “intact” condition must be overseen by a “competent person” holding current Montana accreditation as an Asbestos Contractor/Supervisor. If these materials are removed in a non-friable manner, asbestos abatement permitting will not be required. Limited air monitoring may be necessary for OSHA compliance.

The silver surfaced black sealant and silver paint are NESHAP Category II materials and may be rendered friable when removed. The mesh vibration dampener is a RACM. Asbestos abatement for RACM must be performed by a Montana-accredited abatement contractor. All personnel involved in the disturbance or removal of building components assumed to contain asbestos, or identified as asbestos containing, must be trained according to the requirements set forth in 29 CFR 1926.1101 (k)(9) and 75-2-511, Montana Code Annotated (MCA).

The MDEQ considers all categories of asbestos-containing material to be “special waste” under Montana Solid Waste Rules. Transport of RACM waste is regulated and will require a permit. RACM waste must also be segregated from the general renovation waste for disposal in the designated asbestos disposal area at a local landfill that is licensed to accept asbestos-containing material. Many landfills require that all categories of ACM be segregated from the general demolition waste stream. RACM must be double-bagged or double-wrapped in 6-mil plastic sheeting; non-RACM may be single-wrapped. All material must be wrapped “burrito style” with taped seams. The name and contact information of the owner must be provided in each waste package. We recommend that potential landfills for clarification be contacted prior to bidding or disposal.

Malmstrom Air Force Base Asbestos Management and Operations Plan as described above also includes recommendations for performing Operations and Maintenance (O&M) for each

HA identified as ACM. The recommendations as supplied by Mr. Richards are as follows:

• Ranking 1: Coordinate immediate removal or abatement.

• Ranking 2: Qualified personnel to control or encapsulate as soon as possible.

• Ranking 3: Schedule periodic re-inspection to ensure the area remains stable. This applies particularly to potentially friable asbestos, such as mechanical room TSI.

October 16, 2024 PAGE NO. 8

• Ranking 4: Schedule periodic re-inspection to ensure the area remains stable.

As listed in Table 1, ACM received Condition 1, 2, and 4 Rankings. The recommended O&M ranking will be based on renovation plans. Mr. Henry communicated the component housing

HA’s N2.12 and T3.1 will be removed per renovation plans. T3.1, the mesh vibration dampener on roof Level 2, should be addressed and encapsulated/removed as soon as possible. The silver paint on the vent hood has some weathered areas where the paint is chipped warranting an O&M 4 ranking.

Lead Work involving components covered with paint containing lead is governed by OSHA regulations. Disposal of lead, paint containing lead or building materials covered with paint containing lead is governed by EPA regulations.

EPA’s Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP). EPA’s Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Program Rule contained in 40 CFR Part 745, Subpart E, requires workers to be trained to use lead-safe work practices and requires renovation firms to be EPA-certified; these requirements became effective April 22, 2010. The RRP rule specifically applies to child occupied facilities or pre-1978 housing per HUD regulations. Since the building involved in the renovation does not meet this definition, only the EPA regulations described below will apply.

EPA Regulations for Disposal of Lead-Based Paint Components. When a waste stream tested using the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) per the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) TCLP Rule (40 CFR 261.24) results in a concentration of 5 mg/L or greater, these materials exceed regulatory standard for hazardous waste disposal. Wasting of these materials or components will therefore require specialized handling, transport, and disposal in a landfill licensed to accept the hazardous waste (Class I landfill).

Occupational Safety and Health Administration. The lead-based and lead-containing surfaces found in this inspection are intact and if not disturbed do not present a hazard to employees involved in the renovation. If these components are disturbed in a manner such as described below, then a hazardous condition may result and will need to be addressed according to OSHA regulations.

The OSHA standard for Lead in Construction, 29 CFR 1926, does not recognize a safe level of lead in dried paint to which workers may be exposed in an occupational setting.

Consequently, any disturbance to painted surfaces which contain a measurable quanti ty of lead must be considered as having the potential to create a risk to workers.

The OSHA standard cites a Permissible Exposure Level (PEL) of 50 micrograms of lead per cubic meter of air (μg/m3) and an Action Level (AL) of 30 μg/m3. Any amount above these levels triggers several safety and health provisions, including, but not limited to:

1. A respiratory protection program

2. Personal protective clothing and equipment

3. Changing areas including segregated storage of work and non-work clothing

4. Hand-washing facilities

5. Blood testing

6. Employee training

October 16, 2024 PAGE NO. 9

Also, if an employee is performing any of the following tasks:

1. Manual demolition, dry scraping, or dry sanding

2. Heat gun applications

3. Power tool cleaning

4. Other industrial operations involving lead as specified in the OSHA standards, then all of the above-mentioned safety items must be provided to the employees. If it is found that either the AL or the PEL is being exceeded, then other safety requirements must be met.

A NEA should be completed on employees that are performing the work. The NEA would ensure that good work practices may prevent employee exposure to elevated concentrations of airborne lead. The NEA should be performed on the same employees, using the same methods and using the same tools that will be used for the duration of the project.

Recommended Response Actions. Recycling is the preferable method of dealing with metal components coated with LBP and LCP from both an environmental and economic standpoint.

Most scrap metal recyclers are equipped to properly handle lead painted components. A copy of this report may be made available to the recycler and the landfill at your direction.

TCLP sampling of the waste stream may be required by High Plains Sanitary Landfill which serves the Great Falls area if LBP is present. If results are equal to or greater than 5.0 mg/L of lead, either removal of LBP or chemical fixation may be needed. If neither of these solutions is practical, the components must be disposed of in a Class I landfill.

Any work with LBP and LCP that has the potential to expose workers to airborne lead at or above the AL or PEL should be performed by a contractor using lead safe work practices.

LIMITATIONS

This asbestos and lead-in-paint inspection report was prepared based on information gathered during one site visit and interpretations of laboratory analytical results provided by Ca Labs and SanAir. The inspection report is intended to provide information concerning the various types of building materials that were considered suspect for containing asbestos or lead-in-paint and to inform you of which building materials tested positive.

The white paint on roof vent pipes and/or support pipes was not analyzed by SanAir due to an insufficient sample amount for processing. It is assumed these components will not be impacted by renovation plans. If they are impacted, a TD&H technician may need to resample.

Most building components were visible and accessible at the time of our site visit. However, additional suspect materials may be encountered during renovation activities. If work will disturb materials in addition to those included in this report, TD&H should be contacted and may need to be present during these activities.

This asbestos and lead-in-paint inspection report is intended for use by MAFB and their clients. The scope of services performed by TD&H Engineering may not be appropriate to satisfy the needs of other users, and any use or re-use of this document, or the findings presented herein, is at the sole risk of the user.

October 16, 2024 PAGE NO. 10

CLOSING

We appreciate this opportunity to provide these industrial hygiene-consulting services to you and look forward to assisting you through the remainder of the project. Should you have questions or need further clarification about information contained herein, please feel free to contact us at (406) 761-3010.

MTA-6159 Exp. 2025.02.16 MTA-5902 Exp. 2024.11.17

APPENDICES: A ASBESTOS INSPECTION SUMMARY

B DOCUMENTATION OF ACCREDITATION

C ASBESTOS LABORATORY REPORT

D ASBESTOS SAMPLE LOCATIONS

E PAINT SAMPLE LABORATORY REPORT

F PAINT SAMPLE LOCATIONS

I:\2024\GTF\24-035 MAFB Repair Roof B1840\05_DESIGN\INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE\24-035 MAFB B1840 Asbestos and LBP Roof Inspection Report.docx

APPENDIX A

TD&H Engineering (TD&H) performed an asbestos inspection of Building 1840 located on Malmstrom Airforce Base in the Weapons Storage Area on September 25, 2024. The purpose of the pre-renovation inspection was to assess building materials suspected of containing asbestos on the roof of Building 1840.

The inspection was performed by Ms. Ashley Warner of TD&H, a Montana-accredited asbestos inspector, in accordance with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) – Asbestos Hazards and Emergency Response Act (AHERA) regulation 40 CFR 763.

The following building materials contain asbestos in quantities greater than 1%:

▪ Black fibrous caulk/sealant

▪ A silver surfaced black sealant found in the EPDM roof core

▪ Silver paint of vent hood

▪ Mesh vibration dampener

MTA-6159 Exp. 2025.02.16 MTA-5902 Exp. 2027.11.17

TD&H Project No: 24-035-070

Report Issue Date: October 16, 2024

I : \2024\GTF\ 24 -035 MAFB Repai r Roof B1840 \05_DESIGN\ INDUSTRIAL

HYGIENE\APPENDIX\A_ASBESTOS INSPECTION SUMMARY \ASBESTOS SUMMARY PAGE.DOCX

APPENDIX B

DOCUMENTATION OF ACCREDITATION

has met the requirements of Montana Administrative Rule

17.74.362 and/or 17.74.363 for accreditation in the following asbestos occupation(s) through the specified expiration date(s).

ASHLEY WARNER

A

SH

LE

Y

W A

R N

ER

R

IV

ER

D R

IV

E

N O

R

TH

G R

EA

T

FA

LL

S M

T

MTA-6159

Asbestos Inspector Project Contractor/Supervisor

02/16/2025 03/01/2025

MT DEQ Asbestos Control Program

Initial Certificate has completed a Lead Risk Assessor Initial Training Course Presented by TD&H Engineering using EPA-Accredited Curriculum from EHS Materials

Training Instructor Peter Klevberg Expiration Date 06/07/2026 Dates of Course 03-28-23 thru 06-07-23 Test Passage 06/07/2023 Certificate No. 060723-01

Course Location TD&H Engineering 1800 River Drive North Great Falls, MT 59401 406.761.3010

Ash ley Wa rne r

L E A D B A S E D P A I N T R I S K A S S E S S O R has met the requirements of Montana Administrative Rule

17.74.362 and/or 17.74.363 for accreditation in the following asbestos occupation(s) through the specified expiration date(s).

HOMER C LEAGUE

H O

M E

R C

L E

A G

U E

R

IV

E R

D R

IV

E

N O

R T

H G

R E

A T

F A

L L

S M

T

MTA-5902

Asbestos Inspector Project Contractor/Supervisor Project Designer

11/17/2024 11/16/2024 12/13/2024

MT DEQ Asbestos Control Program

APPENDIX C

ASBESTOS LABORATORY REPORT

Attn:

Customer Project:

Reference #: Date: 10/1/2024

Analysis and Method

Discussion

Qualifications

Some samples (floor tiles, surfacings, etc.) may contain fibers too small to be detectable by PLM analysis and should be analyzed by TEM bulk protocols.

A "trace asbestos" will be reported if the analyst observes far less than 1% asbestos. CA Labs defines "trace asbestos" as a few fibers detected by the analyst in several preparations and will indicate as such under these circumstances.

Quantification of <1% will actually be reported as <=1% (allowable variance close to 1% is high). Such results are ideal for point counting, and the technique is mandatory for friable samples (NESHAP, Nov. 1990 and clarification letter 8 May 1991) under 1% percent asbestos and the "trace asbestos". In order to make all initial PLM reports issued from CA Labs NESHAP compliant, all <1% asbestos results (except floor tiles) will be point counted at no additional charge.

CA Labs is accredited by the National Voluntary Accreditation Program (NVLAP) for selected test methods for airborne fiber analysis (TEM), and for bulk asbestos fiber analysis (PLM). All analysts have a college degree in a natural science (geology, biology, or environmental science) or are recognized by a state professional board in one these disciplines .Extensive in-house training programs are used to augment education background of the analyst. The group leader of polarized light has received supplemental McCrone Research training for asbestos identification. This report is not covered by the scope of AIHA accreditation. Analysis performed at CA Labs, LLC 12232 Industriplex, Suite 32 Baton Rouge, LA 70809.

1800 River Drive North

Great Falls, MT 59401 MAFB B1840 WSA Roof Asbestos Inspection

CBR24096984

Summary of polarizing light microscopy (PLM / Stereomicroscopy bulk asbestos analysis) using the methods described in 40CFR Part 763

Appendix E to Subpart E (Interim and EPA 600 / R-93 / 116 (Improved). The sample is first viewed with the aid of stereomicroscopy. Numerous liquid slide preparations are created for analysis under the polarized microscope where identifications and quantifications are preformed. Calibrated liquid refractive oils are used as liquid mouting medium. These oils are used for identification (dispersion staining). A calibrated visual estimation is reported, should any asbestiform mineral be present. Other techniques such as acid washing are used in conjugation with refractive oils for detection of smaller quantities of asbestos. All asbestos percentages are based on calibrated visual estimation traceable to NIST standards for regulated of asbestos. Traceability to measurement and calibration is achieved by using known amounts and types of asbestos from standards where analyst and laboratory accuracy are measured. As little as 0.001% asbestos can be detected in favorable samples, while detection in unfavorable samples may approach the detection limit of 0.50% (well above the laboratory definition of trace).

Vermiculite containing samples may have trace amounts of actinolite-tremolite, where not found be PLM should be analyzed using TEM methods and / or water separation techniques. Suspected actinolite/vermiculite presence will be indicated through the sample comment section of this report.

Fibrous talc containing samples may even contain a related asbestos fiber known as anthophyllite. Under certain conditions the same fiber may actually contain both talc and anthophyllite (a phenomenon called intergrowth). Again, TEM detection methods are recommended. CA Labs PLM report comments will denote suspected amounts of asbestiform anthophyllite with talc, where further analysis is recommended.

CA Labs

Dedicated to

Quality

CA Labs, L.L.C.

12232 Industriplex, Suite 32

Baton Rouge, LA 70809

Phone 225-751-5632

Fax 225-751-5634

NVLAP #200772-0

TDSHS #300370

CDPHE #AL-18111

LELAP #03069

Materials Characterization - Bulk Asbestos Analysis Laboratory Analysis Report - Polarized Light

TD & H Engineering Corey League

Labs

A

C

Overview of Project Sample Material Containing Asbestos

Customer Project: MAFB B1840 WSA Roof Asbestos Inspection CA Labs Project #: CBR24096984

Black Sealant

Silver Surfaced Black Sealant

Gray Wrap

Glossary of abbreviations (non-asbestos fibers and non-fibrous minerals):

ca - carbonate gypsum - gypsum bi - binder or - organic ma - matrix mi - mica ve - vermiculite ot - other pe - perlite qu - quartz fg - fiberglass mw - mineral wool wo - wollastinite ta - talc sy - synthetic ce - cellulose br - brucite ka - kaolin (clay) pa - palygorskite (clay)

This report relates to the items tested. This report is not to be used by the customer to claim product certification, approval or endorsement by NVLAP, NIST, AIHA LAP, LLC, or any other agency of the federal government. This report may not be reproduced except in full without written permission from CA Labs. These results are submitted pursuant to CA Labs' current terms and sale, condition of sale, including the company's standard warranty and limitations of liability provisions and no responsibility or liability is assumed for the manner in which the results are used or interpreted. Unless notified in writing to return the samples covered by this report, CA Labs will store the samples for a period of ninety (90) days before discarding. A shipping or handling fee may be assessed for the return of any samples.

T3.1 T3.1-

1 Gray Wrap 20% Chrysotile

R2A R2A-

1 Silver Surfaced Black Sealant 2% Chrysotile

R7.1B R7.1

B-1 Silver Surfaced Black Sealant 6% Chrysotile

N2.12 N2.12-

1 Black Sealant 6% Chrysotile

CA Labs

Dedicated to

Quality

CA Labs, L.L.C.

12232 Industriplex, Suite 32

Baton Rouge, LA 70809

Phone 225-751-5632

Fax 225-751-5634

NVLAP #200772-0

TDSHS #300370

CDPHE #AL-18111

LELAP #03069

Sample # Layer

Analysts Physical Description of

Subsample

Asbestos type / calibrated visual estimate percent

List of Affected Building

Material Types

Labs

A

Polarized Light Asbestiform Materials Characterization

Customer Info: Attn: Customer Project:

10/1/2024

5 day 9/27/2024

Phone # 9/25/2024

Fax # 24-035-070

Laboratory Director

Chris Williams

1. Fire Damage significant fiber damage - reported percentages reflect unaltered fibers

2. Fire Damage no significant fiber damages effecting fibrous percentages

3. Actinolite in association with Vermiculite

4. Layer not analyzed - attached to previous positive layer and contamination is suspected

5. Not enough sample to analyze

6. Anthophyllite in association with Fibrous Talc

7. Contamination suspected from other building materials

8. Favorable scenario for water separation on vermiculite for possible analysis by another method

9. < 1% Result point counted positive

10. TEM analysis suggested

David Darby Senior Analyst

Analyst Alicia Stretz

Analysis Method: Interim (40CFR Part 763 Appendix E to Subpart E) / Improved (EPA-600 / R-93/116)

Preparation Method: HCL acid washing for carbonate based samples, chemical reduction for organically bound components, oil immersion for identification of asbestos types by dispersion attaining / becke line method.

ca - carbonate gypsum - gypsum bi - binder or - organic ma - matrix mi - mica ve - vermiculite ot -other pe - perlite qu - quartz fg - fiberglass mw - mineral wool wo - wollastinite ta - talc sy - synthetic ce - cellulose br - brucite ka - kaolin (clay) pa - palygorskite (clay) Approved Signatories:

100% qu, ma, bi

N2.3A N2.3

A-1 White Surfaced Gray Sealant N None Detected 100% qu, ma, bi

N2.2C N2.2

C-1 Gray Sealant Y None Detected

100% qu, ma, bi

N2.2B N2.2

B-1 Gray Sealant Y None Detected 100% qu, ma, bi

N2.2A N2.2

A-1 Gray Sealant Y None Detected

100% qu, ma, bi

N2.1C N2.1

C-1 White Surfaced Black Sealant N None Detected 100% qu, ma, bi

N2.1B N2.1

B-1 White Surfaced Black Sealant N None Detected

Non-asbestos fiber type / percent

Non-fibrous type

/ percent

N2.1A N2.1

A-1 White Surfaced Black Sealant N None Detected 100% qu, ma, bi

Sample # Com ment

Layer

Analysts Physical Description of

Subsample

Homo-geneo us

(Y/N)

Asbestos type / calibrated visual estimate percent

Turnaround Time: Samples Received:

406-761-3010 Date Of Sampling:

406-727-2872 Purchase Order #:

CA Labs

Dedicated to

Quality

CA Labs, L.L.C.

12232 Industriplex, Suite 32

Baton Rouge, LA 70809

Phone 225-751-5632

Fax 225-751-5634

NVLAP #200772-0

TDSHS #300370

CDPHE #AL-18111

LELAP #03069

Corey League CA Labs Project #:

TD & H Engineering MAFB B1840 WSA Roof

Asbestos Inspection

CBR24096984

1800 River Drive North

Great Falls, MT 59401 Date:

Labs

A

10/1/2024

5 day 9/27/2024

Phone # 9/25/2024

Fax # 24-035-070

Laboratory Director

Chris Williams

1. Fire Damage significant fiber damage - reported percentages reflect unaltered fibers

2. Fire Damage no significant fiber damages effecting fibrous percentages

3. Actinolite in association with Vermiculite

4. Layer not analyzed - attached to previous positive layer and contamination is suspected

5. Not enough sample to analyze

6. Anthophyllite in association with Fibrous Talc

7. Contamination suspected from other building materials

8. Favorable scenario for water separation on vermiculite for possible analysis by another method

9. < 1% Result point counted positive

10. TEM analysis suggested

David Darby Senior Analyst

Analyst Alicia Stretz

100% qu, ma, bi

Analysis Method: Interim (40CFR Part 763 Appendix E to Subpart E) / Improved (EPA-600 / R-93/116)

Preparation Method: HCL acid washing for carbonate based samples, chemical reduction for organically bound components, oil immersion for identification of asbestos types by dispersion attaining / becke line method.

ca - carbonate gypsum - gypsum bi - binder or - organic ma - matrix mi - mica ve - vermiculite ot -other pe - perlite qu - quartz fg - fiberglass mw - mineral wool wo - wollastinite ta - talc sy - synthetic ce - cellulose br - brucite ka - kaolin (clay) pa - palygorskite (clay) Approved Signatories:

N2.4C N2.4

C Black Sealant Y None Detected

100% qu, ma

N2.4

B-2 Black Sealant Y None Detected 100% qu, ma, bi

N2.4B+R4.

1B N2.4

B-1 Black Covering Y None Detected

100% qu, ma

N2.4

A-2 Black Sealant Y None Detected 100% qu, ma, bi

N2.4A+R4.

1A N2.4

A-1 Black Covering Y None Detected

100% qu, ma, bi

N2.3C N2.3

C-1 White Surfaced Gray Sealant N None Detected 100% qu, ma, bi

Asbestos type / calibrated visual estimate percent

Non-asbestos fiber type / percent

Non-fibrous type

/ percent

N2.3B N2.3

B-1 White Surfaced Gray Sealant N None Detected

406-761-3010 Date Of Sampling:

406-727-2872 Purchase Order #:

Sample # Com ment

Layer

Analysts Physical Description of

Subsample

Homo-geneo us

(Y/N)

TD & H Engineering MAFB B1840 WSA Roof

Asbestos Inspection

CBR24096984

1800 River Drive North

Great Falls, MT 59401 Date:

Turnaround Time: Samples Received:

CA Labs

Dedicated to

Quality

CA Labs, L.L.C.

12232 Industriplex, Suite 32

Baton Rouge, LA 70809

Phone 225-751-5632

Fax 225-751-5634

NVLAP #200772-0

TDSHS #300370

CDPHE #AL-18111

LELAP #03069

Corey League CA Labs Project #:

Labs

A

10/1/2024

5 day 9/27/2024

Phone # 9/25/2024

Fax # 24-035-070

Laboratory Director

Chris Williams

1. Fire Damage significant fiber damage - reported percentages reflect unaltered fibers

2. Fire Damage no significant fiber damages effecting fibrous percentages

3. Actinolite in association with Vermiculite

4. Layer not analyzed - attached to previous positive layer and contamination is suspected

5. Not enough sample to analyze

6. Anthophyllite in association with Fibrous Talc

7. Contamination suspected from other building materials

8. Favorable scenario for water separation on vermiculite for possible analysis by another method

9. < 1% Result point counted positive

10. TEM analysis suggested

David Darby Senior Analyst

Analyst Alicia Stretz

100% qu, ma, bi

Analysis Method: Interim (40CFR Part 763 Appendix E to Subpart E) / Improved (EPA-600 / R-93/116)

Preparation Method: HCL acid washing for carbonate based samples, chemical reduction for organically bound components, oil immersion for identification of asbestos types by dispersion attaining / becke line method.

ca - carbonate gypsum - gypsum bi - binder or - organic ma - matrix mi - mica ve - vermiculite ot -other pe - perlite qu - quartz fg - fiberglass mw - mineral wool wo - wollastinite ta - talc sy - synthetic ce - cellulose br - brucite ka - kaolin (clay) pa - palygorskite (clay) Approved Signatories:

N2.8B N2.8

B-1 White Surfaced Black Sealant N None Detected

100% qu, ma

N2.8A N2.8

A-1 White Surfaced Black Sealant N None Detected 100% qu, ma, bi

N2.7 N2.7-

1 White Sealant Y None Detected

100% qu, ma, bi

N2.6 N2.6-

1 White Sealant Y None Detected 100% qu, ma

N2.5C N2.5

C-1 Silver Surfaced Black Sealant N None Detected

100% qu, ma, bi

N2.5B N2.5

B-1 Gray Sealant Y None Detected 100% qu, ma

Asbestos type / calibrated visual estimate percent

Non-asbestos fiber type / percent

Non-fibrous type

/ percent

N2.5A N2.5

A-1 Silver Surfaced Black Sealant N None Detected

406-761-3010 Date Of Sampling:

406-727-2872 Purchase Order #:

Sample # Com ment

Layer

Analysts Physical Description of

Subsample

Homo-geneo us

(Y/N)

TD & H Engineering MAFB B1840 WSA Roof

Asbestos Inspection

CBR24096984

1800 River Drive North

Great Falls, MT 59401 Date:

Turnaround Time: Samples Received:

CA Labs

Dedicated to

Quality

CA Labs, L.L.C.

12232 Industriplex, Suite 32

Baton Rouge, LA 70809

Phone 225-751-5632

Fax 225-751-5634

NVLAP #200772-0

TDSHS #300370

CDPHE #AL-18111

LELAP #03069

Corey League CA Labs Project #:

Labs

A

10/1/2024

5 day 9/27/2024

Phone # 9/25/2024

Fax # 24-035-070

Laboratory Director

Chris Williams

1. Fire Damage significant fiber damage - reported percentages reflect unaltered fibers

2. Fire Damage no significant fiber damages effecting fibrous percentages

3. Actinolite in association with Vermiculite

4. Layer not analyzed - attached to previous positive layer and contamination is suspected

5. Not enough sample to analyze

6. Anthophyllite in association with Fibrous Talc

7. Contamination suspected from other building materials

8. Favorable scenario for water separation on vermiculite for possible analysis by another method

9. < 1% Result point counted positive

10. TEM analysis suggested

David Darby Senior Analyst

Analyst Alicia Stretz

100% qu, ma

Analysis Method: Interim (40CFR Part 763 Appendix E to Subpart E) / Improved (EPA-600 / R-93/116)

Preparation Method: HCL acid washing for carbonate based samples, chemical reduction for organically bound components, oil immersion for identification of asbestos types by dispersion attaining / becke line method.

ca - carbonate gypsum - gypsum bi - binder or - organic ma - matrix mi - mica ve - vermiculite ot -other pe - perlite qu - quartz fg - fiberglass mw - mineral wool wo - wollastinite ta - talc sy - synthetic ce - cellulose br - brucite ka - kaolin (clay) pa - palygorskite (clay) Approved Signatories:

N2.10B+R4

.4B N2.10

B-1 Black Covering Y None Detected

100% qu, ma

N2.10

A-2 Black Sealant Y None Detected 100% qu, ma, bi

N2.10A+R4

.4A N2.10

A-1 Black Covering Y None Detected

100% qu, ma, bi

N2.9C N2.9

C-1 Gray Sealant Y None Detected 100% qu, ma, bi

N2.9B N2.9

B-1 Gray Sealant Y None Detected

100% qu, ma, bi

N2.9A N2.9

A-1 Gray Sealant Y None Detected 100% qu, ma, bi

Asbestos type / calibrated visual estimate percent

Non-asbestos fiber type / percent

Non-fibrous type

/ percent

N2.8C N2.8

C-1 White Surfaced Black Sealant N None Detected

406-761-3010 Date Of Sampling:

406-727-2872 Purchase Order #:

Sample # Com ment

Layer

Analysts Physical Description of

Subsample

Homo-geneo us

(Y/N)

TD & H Engineering MAFB B1840 WSA Roof

Asbestos Inspection

CBR24096984

1800 River Drive North

Great Falls, MT 59401 Date:

Turnaround Time: Samples Received:

CA Labs

Dedicated to

Quality

CA Labs, L.L.C.

12232 Industriplex, Suite 32

Baton Rouge, LA 70809

Phone 225-751-5632

Fax 225-751-5634

NVLAP #200772-0

TDSHS #300370

CDPHE #AL-18111

LELAP #03069

Corey League CA Labs Project #:

Labs

A

10/1/2024

5 day 9/27/2024

Phone # 9/25/2024

Fax # 24-035-070

Laboratory Director

Chris Williams

1. Fire Damage significant fiber damage - reported percentages reflect unaltered fibers

2. Fire Damage no significant fiber damages effecting fibrous percentages

3. Actinolite in association with Vermiculite

4. Layer not analyzed - attached to previous positive layer and contamination is suspected

5. Not enough sample to analyze

6. Anthophyllite in association with Fibrous Talc

7. Contamination suspected from other building materials

8. Favorable scenario for water separation on vermiculite for possible analysis by another method

9. < 1% Result point counted positive

10. TEM analysis suggested

David Darby Senior Analyst

Analyst Alicia Stretz

100% qu, ma, bi

Analysis Method: Interim (40CFR Part 763 Appendix E to Subpart E) / Improved (EPA-600 / R-93/116)

Preparation Method: HCL acid washing for carbonate based samples, chemical reduction for organically bound components, oil immersion for identification of asbestos types by dispersion attaining / becke line method.

ca - carbonate gypsum - gypsum bi - binder or - organic ma - matrix mi - mica ve - vermiculite ot -other pe - perlite qu - quartz fg - fiberglass mw - mineral wool wo - wollastinite ta - talc sy - synthetic ce - cellulose br - brucite ka - kaolin (clay) pa - palygorskite (clay) Approved Signatories:

N2.14C N2.14

C-1 Gray Sealant Y None Detected

100% qu, ma, bi

N2.14B N2.14

B-1 Gray Sealant Y None Detected 100% qu, ma, bi

N2.14A N2.14

A-1 Gray Sealant Y None Detected

100% qu, ma, bi

N2.12 N2.12-

1 Black Sealant Y 6% Chrysotile 15% fg 79% qu, ma, bi

N2.11 N2.11-

1 White Sealant Y None Detected

100% qu, ma, bi

N2.10C N2.10

C-1 Black Sealant Y None Detected 100% qu, ma, bi

Asbestos type / calibrated visual estimate percent

Non-asbestos fiber type / percent

Non-fibrous type

/ percent

N2.10

B-2 Black Sealant Y None Detected

406-761-3010 Date Of Sampling:

406-727-2872 Purchase Order #:

Sample # Com ment

Layer

Analysts Physical Description of

Subsample

Homo-geneo us

(Y/N)

TD & H Engineering MAFB B1840 WSA Roof

Asbestos Inspection

CBR24096984

1800 River Drive North

Great Falls, MT 59401 Date:

Turnaround Time: Samples Received:

CA Labs

Dedicated to

Quality

CA Labs, L.L.C.

12232 Industriplex, Suite 32

Baton Rouge, LA 70809

Phone 225-751-5632

Fax 225-751-5634

NVLAP #200772-0

TDSHS #300370

CDPHE #AL-18111

LELAP #03069

Corey League CA Labs Project #:

Labs

A

10/1/2024

5 day 9/27/2024

Phone # 9/25/2024

Fax # 24-035-070

Laboratory Director

Chris Williams

1. Fire Damage significant fiber damage - reported percentages reflect unaltered fibers

2. Fire Damage no significant fiber damages effecting fibrous percentages

3. Actinolite in association with Vermiculite

4. Layer not analyzed - attached to previous positive layer and contamination is suspected

5. Not enough sample to analyze

6. Anthophyllite in association with Fibrous Talc

7. Contamination suspected from other building materials

8. Favorable scenario for water separation on vermiculite for possible analysis by another method

9. < 1% Result point counted positive

10. TEM analysis suggested

David Darby Senior Analyst

Analyst Alicia Stretz

100% qu, ma, bi

Analysis Method: Interim (40CFR Part 763 Appendix E to Subpart E) / Improved (EPA-600 / R-93/116)

Preparation Method: HCL acid washing for carbonate based samples, chemical reduction for organically bound components, oil immersion for identification of asbestos types by dispersion attaining / becke line method.

ca - carbonate gypsum - gypsum bi - binder or - organic ma - matrix mi - mica ve - vermiculite ot -other pe - perlite qu - quartz fg - fiberglass mw - mineral wool wo - wollastinite ta - talc sy - synthetic ce - cellulose br - brucite ka - kaolin (clay) pa - palygorskite (clay) Approved Signatories:

N2.16

B-2 Black Sealant Y None Detected

100% qu, ma, bi

N2.16B+R4

.5B N2.16

B-1 Black Covering Y None Detected 100% qu, ma

N2.16

A-2 Black Sealant Y None Detected

100% qu, ma, bi

N2.16A+R4

.5A N2.16

A-1 Black Covering Y None Detected 100% qu, ma

N2.15C N2.15

C-1 White Surfaced Gray Sealant N None Detected

100% qu, ma, bi

N2.15B N2.15

B-1 White Surfaced Gray Sealant N None Detected 100% qu, ma, bi

Asbestos type / calibrated visual estimate percent

Non-asbestos fiber type / percent

Non-fibrous type

/ percent

N2.15A N2.15

A-1 White Surfaced Gray Sealant N None Detected

406-761-3010 Date Of Sampling:

406-727-2872 Purchase Order #:

Sample # Com ment

Layer

Analysts Physical Description of

Subsample

Homo-geneo us

(Y/N)

TD & H Engineering MAFB B1840 WSA Roof

Asbestos Inspection

CBR24096984

1800 River Drive North

Great Falls, MT 59401 Date:

Turnaround Time: Samples Received:

CA Labs

Dedicated to

Quality

CA Labs, L.L.C.

12232 Industriplex, Suite 32

Baton Rouge, LA 70809

Phone 225-751-5632

Fax 225-751-5634

NVLAP #200772-0

TDSHS #300370

CDPHE #AL-18111

LELAP #03069

Corey League CA Labs Project #:

Labs

A

10/1/2024

5 day 9/27/2024

Phone # 9/25/2024

Fax # 24-035-070

Laboratory Director

Chris Williams

1. Fire Damage significant fiber damage - reported percentages reflect unaltered fibers

2. Fire Damage no significant fiber damages effecting fibrous percentages

3. Actinolite in association with Vermiculite

4. Layer not analyzed - attached to previous positive layer and contamination is suspected

5. Not enough sample to analyze

6. Anthophyllite in association with Fibrous Talc

7. Contamination suspected from other building materials

8. Favorable scenario for water separation on vermiculite for possible analysis by another method

9. < 1% Result point counted positive

10. TEM analysis suggested

David Darby Senior Analyst

Analyst Alicia Stretz

100% qu, ma, bi

Analysis Method: Interim (40CFR Part 763 Appendix E to Subpart E) / Improved (EPA-600 / R-93/116)

Preparation Method: HCL acid washing for carbonate based samples, chemical reduction for organically bound components, oil immersion for identification of asbestos types by dispersion attaining / becke line method.

ca - carbonate gypsum - gypsum bi - binder or - organic ma - matrix mi - mica ve - vermiculite ot -other pe - perlite qu - quartz fg - fiberglass mw - mineral wool wo - wollastinite ta - talc sy - synthetic ce - cellulose br - brucite ka - kaolin (clay) pa - palygorskite (clay) Approved Signatories:

R1B R1B-

1 White Covering Y None Detected

70% sy 30% qu, ma

R1A-

3 Tan Insulation Y None Detected 100% qu, ot

R1A-

2 Black Felt Y None Detected

100% qu, ma, bi

R1A R1A-

1 White Covering Y None Detected 100% qu, ma, bi

N2.17 N2.17-

1 White Sealant Y None Detected

100% qu, ma

N2.16

C-2 Black Sealant Y None Detected 100% qu, ma, bi

Asbestos type / calibrated visual estimate percent

Non-asbestos fiber type / percent

Non-fibrous type

/ percent

N2.16C+R4

.5C N2.16

C-1 White Covering Y None Detected

406-761-3010 Date Of Sampling:

406-727-2872 Purchase Order #:

Sample # Com ment

Layer

Analysts Physical Description of

Subsample

Homo-geneo us

(Y/N)

TD & H Engineering MAFB B1840 WSA Roof

Asbestos Inspection

CBR24096984

1800 River Drive North

Great Falls, MT 59401 Date:

Turnaround Time: Samples Received:

CA Labs

Dedicated to

Quality

CA Labs, L.L.C.

12232 Industriplex, Suite 32

Baton Rouge, LA 70809

Phone 225-751-5632

Fax 225-751-5634

NVLAP #200772-0

TDSHS #300370

CDPHE #AL-18111

LELAP #03069

Corey League CA Labs Project #:

Labs

A

10/1/2024

5 day 9/27/2024

Phone # 9/25/2024

Fax # 24-035-070

Laboratory Director

Chris Williams

1. Fire Damage significant fiber damage - reported percentages reflect unaltered fibers

2. Fire Damage no significant fiber damages effecting fibrous percentages

3. Actinolite in association with Vermiculite

4. Layer not analyzed - attached to previous positive layer and contamination is suspected

5. Not enough…