Amend_0006_-_Atch_1_-_HBMS_Report_-_Altus.pdf

20163918.001A/TUL16R35933 Page i of iii March 2, 2016 © 2016 Kleinfelder

REPORT OF LIMITED HAZARDOUS BUILDING

MATERIALS SURVEY

COMMISSARY ARCHITECTURAL and

REFRIGERATION UPGRADE PROJECT

ALTUS AIR FORCE BASE

ALTUS, OKLAHOMA

DeCA PROJECT NUMBER WE16MI02

KLF PROJECT #20163918.001A

MARCH 2, 2016

Copyright 2016 Kleinfelder All Rights Reserved

ONLY THE CLIENT OR ITS DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES MAY USE THIS DOCUMENT AND ONLY FOR THE SPECIFIC

PROJECT FOR WHICH THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED.

Amendment 0006 Attachment 1

Solicitation HDEC03-17-R-0002 Altus AFB, OK

20163918.001A/TUL16R35933 Page ii of iii March 2, 2016

A report prepared for:

Ms. Amy Sibley Komatsu Architecture 3880 Hulen Street, Ste. 300 Ft. Worth, Texas 76107

Report of Limited Hazardous Building Materials Survey Commissary Architectural and Refrigeration Upgrade Altus Air Force Base Altus, Oklahoma DeCA Project Number WE16MI02

Prepared By:

Brent H. Neece, REPA Project Manager

Reviewed By:

Richard Stevenson California Certified Asbestos Consultant No. 06-3992 California Certified Lead Inspector/Assessor No. 14042

Kleinfelder, Inc.

10835 E. Independence St., Suite 102 Tulsa, OK 74116 480-763-1200

March 2, 2016 Kleinfelder Project Number 20163918.001A

20163918.001A/TUL16R35933 Page iii of iii March 2, 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

2 INTRODUCTION AND BUILDING DESCRIPTIONS

2.1 INTRODUCTION

2.2 BUILDING DESCRIPTION

2.3 PHYSICAL LIMITATIONS

3 ASBESTOS-CONTAINING MATERIALS SURVEY

3.1 ASBESTOS-CONTAINING MATERIALS SURVEY METHODS

3.2 REGULATORY OVERVIEW FOR ASBESTOS

3.2.1 Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act

3.2.2 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants

3.2.3 Asbestos Standard for the Construction Industry

3.3 ASBESTOS-CONTAINING MATERIALS SURVEY RESULTS

4 LEAD-BASED PAINT SURVEY

4.1 LEAD-BASED PAINT SURVEY METHODS

4.2 REGULATORY OVERVIEW FOR LEAD-BASED PAINTS

4.3 LEAD-BASED PAINT SURVEY RESULTS

5 OTHER HAZARDOUS BUILDING MATERIALS SURVEY

5.1 OTHER HAZARDOUS BUILDING MATERIALS SURVEY METHODS

5.2 REGULATORY OVERVIEW FOR HAZARDOUS BUILDING MATERIALS

5.3 OTHER HAZARDOUS BUILDING MATERIALS SURVEY RESULTS

6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

7 LIMITATIONS

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A - Personnel Accreditations Appendix B – Asbestos Survey Report, Analytical Data Report, and Chain-of-Custody Documentation Appendix C – Lead-Based Paint Inspection Report, XRF Data, Paint Chip Analytical Data, and Chain of Custody Documentation

20163918.001A/TUL16R35933 Page 1 of 16 March 2, 2016

Report of Limited Hazardous Building Materials Survey Commissary Architectural and Refrigeration Upgrade

Altus Air Force Base Altus, Oklahoma

DeCA Project Number WE16MI02

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report presents results of a limited Hazardous Building Materials Survey (HBMS) performed by Kleinfelder on January 28, 2016, at targeted areas of the Commissary located at Altus Air

Force Base (Site) in Altus, Oklahoma. The limited HBMS was performed as part of planned renovations and equipment upgrade or replacement proposed for the Commissary Architectural and Refrigeration Upgrade project. The purpose of the HBMS was to evaluate the presence, location, and quantity of accessible suspected hazardous building materials that may represent a potential worker safety hazard if disturbed, and/or may require special handling and/or disposal as hazardous waste as part of planned Commissary Architectural and Refrigeration Upgrade project. Suspected hazardous building materials surveyed included asbestos-containing materials (ACMs), lead-based paints (LBPs), and building equipment that may contain other hazardous materials, including polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), mercury or mercury vapor, and chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)-containing refrigerants, or other potential hazardous materials.

The following presents a summary of findings from the limited HBMS. The findings are based on observations made during the HBMS and our review of laboratory analytical results of samples collected during the HBMS. A more detailed discussion of HBMS survey methods and results are presented in Sections 3 through 5 of this report.

Asbestos-Containing Materials

Sample No.

Material Description

Estimated Quantity Condition

% Asbestos and Type

NESHAP

Classification Material

Locations

018a Tile mastic 550 square feet

Good 5% Chrysotile

Category I Non-Friable

Employee break room

20163918.001A/TUL16R35933 Page 2 of 16 March 2, 2016

Lead-Based Paint

Based on our review of x-ray fluorescence (XRF) equipment readings and the paint chip sample analysis report, one painted surface at the Altus Air Force Base Commissary (metal railing in the vestibule between the Staging and Sales Areas) exceeded the established United States

Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and United States Department of Housing and Urban

Development (HUD) criteria for LBP of 1.0 milligrams per square centimeter mg/cm2 of lead by

XRF measurement.

Material Description

Estimated Quantity Condition

XRF Result Paint Chip Sample Results Material

Locations

Wall Railing 120 linear feet

Fair 1.3-1.8 mg/cm2 1.82% lead by weight

Wall railings between Staging Area and Sales

Area

Other Hazardous Building Materials

It was noted that the current refrigeration, freezers, and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning

(HVAC) equipment were labeled as utilizing R-22 and R-404A refrigerants, which may contain

CFCs. The thermostats were observed to be electronic, which are typically a mercury-containing type of control. The lighting through the facility consisted of fluorescent light fixtures. The fluorescent light fixtures utilize ballasts that may contain PCBs and the light tubes may contain a small amount of mercury vapor. Kleinfelder did not attempt to dismantle the existing light fixtures to assess their contents.

Several cleaning solvents and liquids were observed in the Staging Area and in the Sales Area which were determined to be general housekeeping type materials. Safety Data Sheets (SDS) were present in the facility in the vestibule between the Staging and Sales Areas. The materials were stored in small quantities. No indications of improper storage or disposal were observed.

20163918.001A/TUL16R35933 Page 3 of 16 March 2, 2016

2 INTRODUCTION AND BUILDING DESCRIPTIONS

2.1 INTRODUCTION

This report presents results of a limited HBMS performed by Kleinfelder on January 28, 2016, at targeted areas of the Commissary located at Altus Air Force Base (Site) in Altus, Oklahoma. The limited HBMS was performed as part of planned renovations and equipment upgrade or replacement proposed for the Commissary Architectural and Refrigeration Upgrade project. The purpose of the HBMS was to evaluate the presence, location, and quantity of accessible suspected hazardous building materials that may represent a potential worker safety hazard if disturbed, and/or may require special handling and/or disposal as hazardous waste as part of planned Commissary Architectural and Refrigeration Upgrade project. Suspected hazardous building materials surveyed included ACMs, LBPs, and building equipment that may contain other hazardous materials, including PCBs, mercury or mercury vapor, and CFC-containing refrigerants, or other potential hazardous materials.

2.2 BUILDING DESCRIPTION

The Commissary building is an approximate 58,000 square-foot, one-story concrete block structure on a concrete slab foundation. The building was originally constructed in 1986, and has had various upgrades/modifications to different interior systems in 1999, 2001, 2003, 2008, 2010, and 2013. Exterior walls consist of concrete block while the roofing system is a built-up type roof with aggregate covering. Interior walls are finished with ceramic tile, gypsum wallboard and painted concrete block. Interior floors are either bare concrete (Receiving, Staging, and

Mechanical Areas) or finished with vinyl floor tiles (Sales Area floors, offices, rest rooms). Interior ceilings are finished with 2-foot by 4-foot lay-in ceiling tiles. Refrigeration and freezer cases are located in the western and southern portions of the Commissary. The compressor and condenser equipment is located in the Mechanical Room. Building HVAC equipment is primarily roof-mounted.

2.3 PHYSICAL LIMITATIONS

Kleinfelder’s survey included accessible areas of the interiors and/or exteriors of the proposed areas of renovation and equipment upgrade/replacement of the Commissary Architectural and

Refrigeration Upgrade project. The survey is considered limited because destructive sampling techniques were not used during the surveys and because only areas of renovation or equipment

Amendment 0006 Attachment 1

20163918.001A/TUL16R35933 Page 4 of 16 March 2, 2016 upgrade/replacement relating to the Commissary Architectural and Refrigeration Upgrade project were included in the surveys. Based on these limitations, there is a possibility that additional

ACMs, LBPs, or other hazardous materials may be encountered during building renovation activities in areas inaccessible to Kleinfelder at the time of the surveys (for example, between interstitial walls and ceiling spaces, or in underground utility conduits and pipes). In addition, ACMs, LBPs, or other hazardous materials may be present in areas not included in the scope of this survey. If suspect hazardous materials are encountered, they should be assumed to be hazardous until results of an appropriate assessment of the material indicate whether special handling and/or disposal are necessary.

20163918.001A/TUL16R35933 Page 5 of 16 March 2, 2016

3 ASBESTOS-CONTAINING MATERIALS SURVEY

3.1 ASBESTOS-CONTAINING MATERIALS SURVEY METHODS

Kleinfelder personnel and staff from subcontracted firm Environmental Measurements, LLC performed a visual survey of areas of proposed renovation and equipment replacement at the

Commissary building and collected representative bulk samples of building materials suspected to contain asbestos. The survey was completed consistent with Federal Asbestos Hazard

Emergency Response Act (AHERA) methods (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 763).

In accordance with the Contract Scope of Work, destructive inspection and sampling methods were not used for the survey. The field portion of our asbestos inspection included a visual inspection and the collection of bulk samples from suspect ACM. Suspect asbestos-containing materials were classified by Environmental Measurements’ accredited Building

Inspectors as Regulated ACM (RACM), Category I non-friable ACM, or Category II non-friable ACM in accordance with National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants

(NESHAP) regulations. Mr. James Gaylor of Environmental Measurements conducted the field portion of the work on January 28, 2016. Mr. Gaylor is an Oklahoma-licensed AHERA

Management Planner and his certification can be found in Appendix A.

Areas of homogeneous suspect ACM were identified by the visual inspection of building materials.

Bulk samples of suspect ACM were collected using hand tools, such as utility knives, chisels, or putty knives. An appropriate amount of sample was collected and each sample was placed in a sealable plastic bag and labeled with a unique sample identification number directly on the sample bag.

On Kleinfelder’s behalf, Environmental Measurements collected a total of 22 bulk samples from nine building materials identified as suspect ACM during the visual inspection. Bulk samples were collected by Environmental Measurements accredited Management Planner in a randomly distributed manner in general accordance with the EPA/AHERA regulation 40 CFR

Part 763.86 (Sampling). Each bulk sample was labeled, the appropriate chain-of-custody documentation was completed, and the samples were delivered under chain-of-custody protocol to Quantem Laboratories in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma for analysis of asbestos content. Samples were analyzed using Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM) coupled with dispersion staining as outlined in the USEPA Method 600/R-93/116. Quantem Laboratories is

Amendment 0006 Attachment 1

20163918.001A/TUL16R35933 Page 6 of 16 March 2, 2016 accredited under the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP) and has been assigned the NVLAP Lab Code 101959-0.

3.2 REGULATORY OVERVIEW FOR ASBESTOS

In Oklahoma, regulatory oversight for the management, removal, and disposal of ACMs is provided by federal and state agencies. The three primary regulations enforced by regulatory agencies that govern various activities (e.g., inspection, assessment, abatement, etc.) relating to

ACMs include the following: AHERA, NESHAP, and the Asbestos Construction Safety Standard

(as codified in Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration [OSHA]. Federal OSHA regulate asbestos as a worker health and safety issue. Federal OSHA and USEPA define ACM as material containing greater than one percent (1%) asbestos. The following is a brief description of the three major regulations relating to ACMs.

3.2.1 Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act

AHERA (40 CFR Part 763), as implemented by the USEPA, primarily pertains to the assessment and management of ACMs in Kindergarten through Grade 12, non-profit schools. However, many of the procedures, training requirements, and certifications defined by AHERA have become the industry standard for most other facilities. For this survey, AHERA protocols were generally utilized in the identification, assessment, and sampling of building materials suspected of containing asbestos.

3.2.2 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants

The scope and applicability of the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants

(NESHAP) asbestos regulation (Title 40 CFR, Part 61 Subpart M), applies in all buildings except single residential buildings having four units or less. The NESHAP requires a thorough inspection before any renovation or demolition activity. Whenever regulated asbestos-containing material (RACM) is to be disturbed by demolition or renovation, the NESHAP requires

USEPA notification, requires the management of waste through and after disposal, and requires no visible emissions during removal.

Category I material is defined as asbestos-containing resilient floor covering, asphalt roofing products, packings and gaskets. Asbestos-containing mastic is also considered a Category I material (EPA determination — April 9, 1991). Category II material is defined as all remaining

Amendment 0006 Attachment 1

20163918.001A/TUL16R35933 Page 7 of 16 March 2, 2016 types of non-friable ACM not included in Category I that, when dry, cannot be crumbled, pulverized, or reduced to powder by hand pressure. A non-friable asbestos-cement product such as "transite" is an example of Category II material. The asbestos NESHAP specifies that

Category I materials which are not in poor condition and not friable prior to demolition do not have to be removed, except where demolition will be by intentional burning. However, regulated asbestos-containing materials (RACM) and Category II materials that have a high probability of being crumbled, pulverized, or reduced to powder as part of demolition must be removed before renovation or demolition begins. Advance notice of the abatement and/or demolition must be provided to the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) Air Quality Division 10 working days before work begins. The 10-day NESHAP notification is required for all demolitions, whether asbestos is present or not. The NESHAP notification is required for renovations when the quantity of RACM to be disturbed is greater than 260 linear feet, 160 square feet, or 35 cubic feet. NESHAP requires that demolition activities be conducted with no visible emissions using wet methods. It is noted that although NESHAP regulates renovation and demolition activities, it does not protect individual workers performing asbestos abatement or provide instructions for how asbestos abatement projects should be performed.

3.2.3 Asbestos Standard for the Construction Industry

Federal OSHA, under its Asbestos Standard for the Construction Industry (29 CFR 1926.1101), regulates asbestos exposure in the work place. This includes persons working in a building containing ACM, as well as asbestos abatement workers/contractors. For abatement workers and contractors, the Asbestos Standard for Construction (i.e., the Construction Standard) regulates the following:

• Protection of workers and the public during removal of ACM;

• Medical surveillance requirements for workers;

• Detailed requirements for how ACMs are to be removed; and

• Training requirements for abatement personnel.

3.3 ASBESTOS-CONTAINING MATERIALS SURVEY RESULTS

Of the 9 suspect materials identified by Environmental Measurements, one (1) material was found to contain asbestos in amounts greater than 1% by PLM laboratory analysis. This material was the black mastic associated with the 12x12 black and white floor tile in the employee break room. The black mastic contains 5% chrysotile and is classified as a Category I non-friable

Amendment 0006 Attachment 1

20163918.001A/TUL16R35933 Page 8 of 16 March 2, 2016 material. The remaining samples collected from the Commissary building were reported by the laboratory as “none detected” for asbestos content. Figure A1.1 provided in the attached

Asbestos Survey Report (Appendix B), depicts asbestos bulk sample locations. A table is provided in the attached Asbestos Survey Report (Appendix B – page 6) that summarizes the black mastic material that was identified as containing greater than 1% asbestos. The table shows the location, quantity, percentage of asbestos, and condition of the material. Laboratory analytical results and chain-of-custody documentation are provided in Appendix B.

20163918.001A/TUL16R35933 Page 9 of 16 March 2, 2016

4 LEAD-BASED PAINT SURVEY

4.1 LEAD-BASED PAINT SURVEY METHODS

On behalf of Kleinfelder, Crystal Creek LLC personnel performed a survey of painted and/or coated surfaces suspected of containing lead at the Commissary and associated covered storage areas in general accordance with USEPA and HUD protocols. HUD and USEPA currently define lead-based paint as paint or other surface coating which contains lead equal to or greater than 1.0 mg/cm2 of surface area by XRF measurement, or either 0.5% lead by weight or 5,000 parts per million (ppm) total lead by paint chip analysis. Mr. Michael Jenkinson of

Crystal Creek LLC, an Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ)-certified Risk

Assessor/Inspector, performed the LBP survey. Mr. Jenkinson’s certification can be found in

Appendix A.

Predominant interior and exterior painted and/or coated surfaces were tested for the presence of lead utilizing a portable X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) Spectrometer (NITON XL-300A, Serial

Number 24295, source cadmium 109 / 40 mCi, assay date 8/1/2014). The XRF unit allows for non-destructive/non-intrusive measurements of lead content in paints up to 3/8-inch thick. Building components typically include such items as the walls, floors, doors, doorjambs, window sashes, window sills, stair treads, and other individual items which are used in the construction of the building. The substrate is the material underneath the paint. Substrates were classified as one of six types: brick, concrete, drywall, metal, plaster, and wood. For substrates on top of substrates, the substrate directly beneath the painted surface is identified. Crystal Creek LLC collected 253 XRF readings, including calibration tests, from building components suspected of containing lead at the Commissary (see report and figure showing sampling locations in Appendix C). The XRF measurements were recorded by Crystal Creek personnel via electronic storage in the XRF unit.

The survey included the visual observation and physical assessment of the painted surfaces.

Physical assessment is conducted by assessing if a painted surface is observed intact or damaged condition. Damaged paint appears as cracked, chipped and/or peeling away from the substrate, as a result of moisture, wear, heat and/or age. Paint condition descriptions were listed as "I" for intact, an "F" for fair, or a "P" for poor. During the visual surveys, suspect LBP in poor condition (e.g., peeling or otherwise damaged paints) was not observed. One confirmation chip sample was collected from the wall railing in the vestibule between the Staging and Sales Areas, which was submitted to Quantem Laboratories in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Quantem

Amendment 0006 Attachment 1

20163918.001A/TUL16R35933 Page 10 of 16 March 2, 2016

Laboratories is accredited by the American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA) Environmental

Lead Lab Accreditation Program (ELLAP) for analysis of lead in paint (Lab Code 101352)

4.2 REGULATORY OVERVIEW FOR LEAD-BASED PAINTS

The USEPA and HUD define LBP as paint containing greater than 0.5% lead by weight or 5,000 ppm of total lead by laboratory analysis, or a lead content of 1.0 mg/cm2 by XRF measurement.

Federal OSHA does not provide a definition for “lead-based paint” but refer to the USEPA and

HUD criteria mentioned above. Federal OSHA provides an Action Level (AL) of 30 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3) of airborne lead for an 8-hour, time-weighted average. Specific worker training and worker protection are to be provided by employers if workers are exposed to airborne lead at or above the AL. Additionally, Federal OSHA provides a Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) for worker exposure to airborne lead particles of 50 µg/m3 of air for an 8-hour, time-weighted average. Renovation or demolition activities that include materials with lead in any concentration could, under certain circumstances, trigger Federal OSHA regulations. The concentrations of airborne lead generated by disturbing paints at the Site would vary based upon several factors, including the type of activity (including "trigger tasks") and the severity of disturbance to the building materials. Measurement of airborne lead concentrations would require air monitoring during building material disturbance by a trained lead professional.

4.3 LEAD-BASED PAINT SURVEY RESULTS

The results of Crystal Creek LLC’s field measurements of the lead content of the predominant paints applied to the building components is included in the attached Lead-Based Paint

Inspection Report (Appendix C). In accordance with USEPA and HUD criteria, XRF measurement results were interpreted as follows: a “Positive-Lead-Based Paint (LBP)” result is indicated when the XRF measurement reading is 1.0 mg/cm2 or greater; a “Negative” result is indicated when the

XRF measurement reading is less than 1.0 mg/cm2. Based on our review of XRF readings, only one interior painted component associated with the building was found to contain lead in a quantity greater than 1.0 mg/cm2 of surface as measured by XRF. The component was an interior metal wall railing in a hall that connects the Staging Area to the Sales Area. A confirmation paint chip sample was collected from the wall railing, which was submitted to Quantem Laboratory for analysis of lead content. A review of the analytical results indicated the sample contained 1.82% lead by weight, which exceeds the 0.5% lead by weight criteria which defines lead-based paint by this method.

Amendment 0006 Attachment 1

20163918.001A/TUL16R35933 Page 11 of 16 March 2, 2016

5 OTHER HAZARDOUS BUILDING MATERIALS SURVEY

5.1 OTHER HAZARDOUS BUILDING MATERIALS SURVEY METHODS

Kleinfelder personnel visually inspected the areas of proposed renovation and equipment upgrade/replacement associated with the Commissary Architectural and Refrigeration Upgrade project for equipment that may contain PCB's, mercury or mercury vapor, CFC-containing refrigerants, and other potential hazardous materials. Survey methods included visual observation only. No samples of suspect hazardous materials were collected during this scope of work.

5.2 REGULATORY OVERVIEW FOR HAZARDOUS BUILDING MATERIALS

Regulatory oversight for removal and disposal of certain hazardous building materials is provided by a variety of Federal and State agencies. R-22 and R-404a refrigerant shall be treated as hazardous materials if disposed of, or there are recycling methods that may be used. Once the system and associated piping has been evacuated, the existing piping if determined to be in good condition and free of any damage or breaches will be suitable for use with the updated system and the new refrigeration material.

The USEPA requires that the insulating oils containing PCBs at concentrations greater than 50 milligrams per liter be disposed of properly by a licensed hazardous waste hauler. Several transformers in the vicinity of the refrigeration mechanical systems were observed and were not labeled as "Non-PCB"-containing; therefore, additional investigation is required to determine the

PCB content of the insulating oils used within the transformers.

Regulations that may apply (others not listed may apply) include the following:

29CFR 1910.100 Air Contaminants

40 CFR, Part 82 Protection of Stratospheric Ozone; Refrigerant recycling

40 CFR, Part 761 PCB Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in Commerce, and Use Prohibitions

40 CFR, Parts 260/270 Federal Regulations for Identification, Transportation, and Disposal of Hazardous Wastes

49 CFR, Parts 171/180 United States Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations

Amendment 0006 Attachment 1

20163918.001A/TUL16R35933 Page 12 of 16 March 2, 2016

5.3 OTHER HAZARDOUS BUILDING MATERIALS SURVEY RESULTS

The lighting throughout the scope of the refrigeration upgrade project scope of work consists of fluorescent light fixtures. These type of light fixtures utilize ballasts that could contain PCBs and the light tubes may also contain a small amount of mercury vapor It should be noted that

Kleinfelder did not attempt to disassemble any of the light fixtures during our hazardous materials survey.

The current refrigeration, freezers and HVAC system are labeled as utilizing R-22 and R-404A refrigerant, which may contain CFCs. The thermostats were observed to be electronic, which are typically a mercury-containing type of control.

Several cleaning solvents and liquids were observed and determined to be general housekeeping type materials. These types of materials are also stored in the Staging Area and in the Sales

Areas of the Commissary. The materials on site were stored in small quantities, and no indications of improper storage or disposal were noted.

20163918.001A/TUL16R35933 Page 13 of 16 March 2, 2016

6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on Kleinfelder’s limited HBMS and subsequent laboratory analysis, the following hazardous building materials have been identified in the areas of planned renovations and equipment upgrade or replacement proposed for the Commissary Architectural and Refrigeration

Upgrade project:

Asbestos-Containing Materials

Black mastic in association with 12 x 12 floor tiles was reported to contain 5% chrysotile asbestos and is classified as a Category I non-friable material which is not regulated under state law. The remaining samples collected from the Commissary building were reported by the laboratory as

“none detected” for asbestos content.

Lead-based Paint

Based on our review of XRF readings, one coated surface (metal railing in the vestibule between the Staging and Sales Areas) exceeded the established USEPA and HUD criteria of 1.0 mg/cm2 of lead by XRF measurement. A confirmation paint chip sample was also collected and was reported by the laboratory as containing 1.82% lead by weight, which exceeds the 0.5% lead by weight standard which defines lead-based paint by this method.

Other Hazardous Building Materials

• The current refrigeration, freezers and HVAC system are labeled as utilizing R-22 and R-

404a refrigerant.

• Fluorescent light tubes in the project area may contain mercury or mercury vapor and the associate light fixture ballasts may contain PCBs.

• Thermostats throughout the building may contain mercury.

• Several cleaning solvents and liquids were observed and determined to be general housekeeping type materials. There were no indications of improper storage or disposal.

Planned renovation or general work activities, which may disturb ACM or other hazardous building materials should be performed by properly trained and qualified personnel in accordance with all

Federal, State, and local regulations, as implemented by Federal OSHA and USEPA. Prior to future renovation or equipment upgrade/replacement work, Kleinfelder recommends that the following actions be taken:

Amendment 0006 Attachment 1

20163918.001A/TUL16R35933 Page 14 of 16 March 2, 2016

• Tile mastic is considered non-friable material and therefore not regulated under state law.

Work activities however, should be designed to eliminate the potential for any fiber release such as sanding, drilling, or sawing of this material. Notification should be provided to contractor and subcontractor personnel as to the presence of ACMs where noted in this report.

• It is recommended that any construction activities which have the potential to affect the lead based paint surfaces (including sanding and demolition) be conducted by workers who have received proper training in handling lead containing materials.

• If the HVAC or refrigeration equipment will be modified or replaced, it is recommended that the refrigerants be properly evacuated prior to decommissioning.

• If it is necessary to remove lighting fixtures, it is recommended that the fluorescent bulbs and ballasts be removed by qualified personnel for reuse or proper disposal.

• If it is necessary to remove thermostats, it is recommended that they be removed by qualified personnel for reuse or proper disposal.

20163918.001A/TUL16R35933 Page 15 of 16 March 2, 2016

7 LIMITATIONS

This work was performed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of Kleinfelder’s profession practicing in the same locality, under similar conditions and at the date the services are provided. Our conclusions, opinions and recommendations are based on a limited number of observations and data. It is possible that conditions could vary between or beyond the data evaluated. Kleinfelder makes no other representation, guarantee or warranty, express or implied, regarding the services, communication

(oral or written), report, opinion, or instrument of service provided.

This report may be used only by Client, the Project Manager, and the registered design professional in responsible charge and only for the purposes stated for this specific engagement within a reasonable time from its issuance, but in no event later than two (2) years from the date of the report. The work performed was based on project information provided by the Client. If

Client does not retain Kleinfelder to review any revisions or modifications to the project plans and specifications, Kleinfelder assumes no responsibility for the suitability of our findings.

In addition, if there are any changes in the field to the plans and specifications, Client must obtain written approval from Kleinfelder’s engineer that such changes do not affect our recommendations. Failure to do so will vitiate Kleinfelder’s recommendations.

Kleinfelder offers various levels of investigative and engineering services to suit the varying needs of different clients. It should be recognized that definition and evaluation of environmental conditions are a difficult and inexact science. Judgments leading to conclusions and recommendations are generally made with incomplete knowledge of site conditions present due to the limitations of data from field studies. Although risk can never be eliminated, more-detailed and extensive studies yield more information, which may help understand and manage the level of risk. Since detailed study and analysis involves greater expense, our clients participate in determining levels of service that provide adequate information for their purposes at acceptable levels of risk.

Acceptance of this report will indicate that the client has reviewed the document and determined that it does not need or want a greater level of service than provided.

Amendment 0006 Attachment 1

20163918.001A/TUL16R35933 Page 16 of 16 March 2, 2016

During the course of the performance of Kleinfelder's services, hazardous materials may have been discovered. Kleinfelder assumes no responsibility or liability whatsoever for any claim, loss of property value, damage, or injury that results from pre-existing hazardous materials being encountered or present on the project site, or from the discovery of such hazardous materials.

Nothing contained in this report should be construed or interpreted as requiring Kleinfelder to assume the status of an Owner, operator, or generator, or person who arranges for disposal, transport, storage, or treatment of hazardous materials within the meaning of any governmental statute, regulation, or order. Client is solely responsible for directing notification of all governmental agencies, and the public at large, of the existence, release, treatment or disposal of any hazardous materials observed at the project site, either before or during performance of

Kleinfelder's services. Client is responsible for directing all arrangements to lawfully store, treat, recycle, dispose, or otherwise handle hazardous materials, including cuttings and samples resulting from Kleinfelder's services.

20163918.001A/TUL16R35933 March 2, 2016

APPENDIX A

CERTIFICATIONS

Amendment 0006 Attachment 1

1 | P a g e

CURRICULUM VITAE | James Robert Gaylor, CHMM

Summary of Experience: James (Jim) Gaylor has been involved in a variety of environmental projects since 1981. Associated with Stanley Engineering, the majority of my practice as been focused on indoor air quality (IAQ) issues ranging from asbestos inspections, sampling and analysis, mold investigations and remediation to lead paint abatement projects. I have been actively involved in hazardous waste clean-ups of both airborne and surface / ground water remediation.

Over the last three decades, I have completed hundreds of inspections, abatements and investigations for both school districts, state and federal governments as well as private sector clients. For the last twenty-two years I have taught environmental and safety classes for several training providers including Moore-Norman Technology Center, Oklahoma Asbestos Training

Institute and others.

Education & Certifications: University of Central Oklahoma – B.S. Biology 1972

Certified Electron Microscopist - # 0153

Certified Histotechnologist (ASCP) – 008559

Certified Hazardous Material Manager (Master Level) - #9920

EPA Asbestos Supervisor # 264955

EPA – AHERA Management Planner - #OKMP134957

EPA – AHERA Project Designer - #OKPD144956

Personal Affiliations: American Association for the Advancement of Science

Electron Microscope Society of America

American Society of Military Engineers

New York Academy of Science

Alliance of Hazardous Materials Professionals

Military Service: U.S. Army, 1st Lt., Medical Service Corps

Experience: 2012- Present: Owner of Environmental Measurements LLC

2003- Present: Crystal Creek LLC, Industrial Hygienist

1990- Present: Moore Norman Technology Center, Adjunct Faculty

1987-2012: Stanley Engineering, Industrial Hygienist / Microscopist

1993-2005: State of Oklahoma, Dept. of Central Services, Industrial Hygienist

1985-1987: Standard Testing & Engineering, Director of Analytical Services

1982-1985: SEM-Tech, Inc. Analytical Laboratory, Owner/President

1981-1982: Well Site Drilling Service, Vice President

1977-1981: Dean McGee Eye Institute, Dir. of Electron Microscopy and

Supervisor, Pathology Laboratory

1969-1977: University of Oklahoma School of Medicine- Department of

Dermatology

2 | P a g e

Publications: (Peer Reviewed)

Olson, R.L., Gaylor, J.R. and Everett, M.A. “Skin Color, Melanin and Erythema”, Arch. Of Dermatology vol. 108, 1973.

Weigand, D.A. and Gaylor, J.R.: “Removal of Stratum Corneum in Vivo: An Improvement of the Cellophane Tape

Stripping Technique”, J. of Investigative Dermatology, Vol.60, No.2, 1973.

Weigand, D.A., Haygood, C. and Gaylor, J.R.: “Cell Layers and Density of Negro and Caucasian Stratum

Corneum”, J. of Investigative Dermatology, Vol 62, 563-568, 1974.

Olson, R.L., Gaylor, J.R. and Everett, M.A.: “Ultraviolet Induced Individual Cell Keratinazation”, J. of Cutaneous

Pathology, Vol 1, 120-124, 1974.

Weigand, D.A. and Gaylor, J.R.: “Irritant Reaction in Negro and Caucasian Skin”, Southern Medical Journal, Vol.

67, p.548.

Gaylor, J.R., Schafer, F., and Nordquist, R.E.: “An Ultrastructural Study of Human Melanoma in Vivo and Vitro”, 34th Proceeding of the Electron Microscopy Society of America, August 1976.

Rowsey, J.J., Gaylor, J.R., Dahlstrom, R., Doss, D.,: “Los Alamos Keratoplasty Techniques”, Contact and

Intraocular Lens Medical Journal, Vol. 6, No.1 p.1-12, Jan-Mar. 1980.

Rowsey, J.J., Gaylor, J.R., “ Plasma Membrane Kinetics” Proceedings, Association for Research and Vision in

Ophthalmology, Sarasota, Florida, 1978.

Rowsey, J.J., Gaylor, J.R.: “Alkali-Burned Corneas – Conjuntival Transplantation” Proceedings of the Association for Research and Vision in Ophthalmology, Sarasota, Flordia, April 1979.

Rowsey, J.J. , Reynolds, A.E., Gaylor, J.R., Doss, D., Dahlstron, R.: “Keratorefractive Surgery – Pluses and

Minuses” , Proceeding of the Association for Research and Vision in Ophthalmology, Orlando, Florida, May 1980.

Weigand, D.A., Haygood, C., Gaylor, J.R. and Anglin, J.H.: “ Racial Variations in the Cutaneous Barrier” Current

Concepts in Cutaneous Toxicity, Academic Press, p. 211-235, 1980.

Rowsey, J.J. and Gaylor, J.R.: “Intraocular Lens Disasters: Peripheral Anterior Synechia”, Ophthalmology, vol. 87, No 7, July 1980.

3 | P a g e

Papers Presented:

Bowman, J., Gaylor, J.R. and Rowsey, J.J.: “Corneal Alkali Burns” Clinical Problems in Ophthalmology, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, March 9th, 1979.

Robinson, J.A. and Gaylor, J.R.: “Reis Buckler’s Corneal Dystrophy” Clinical Problems in Ophthalmology, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, March 9th, 1979.

Robinson, J.A. and Gaylor, J.R.,: “ The Alkali Burned Cornea” Clinical Problems in Ophthalmology, Oklahoma

City, Oklahoma, April 11th, 1980.

Gaylor, J.R. and Rowsey, J.J.: “ Intraocular Lens Disasters – Peripheral Anterior Synechia” , Proceedings of the

Association for Research and Vision in Ophthalmology, Orlando, Florida, May 1980.

4 | P a g e

PROJECT/ LOCATION CLIENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Halliburton Energy Institute, Mark Carr

Environmental Services for Halliburton for the last 15 years.

Services include Training, Asbestos inspections and testing and surveys for IAQ issues in a number of facilities oon the Duncan, OK campus.

The Walsh Group/Archer Western Contractors, Jerry Weber Owner: USACE

Asbestos Abatement/Inspection of 206,000SF of asbestos flooring and 40,000 SF of HVAC duct insulation.

Location: Building 6050, Fort Sill, Oklahoma

Vanguard Contractors, John Fox Owner: USACE

Asbestos Abatement, Lead Based Paint Abatement, Mold Remediation, Asbestos Inspections, LBP Inspection/Risk Assessments, Water Intrusion Investigation and Mitigation Knox Hall, Building 700, Fort Sill, Oklahoma

GKK Works formerly Syska Hennessey Group Owner: USACE/Reynolds Army Hospital

Asbestos Abatement Location: (1) Fort Sill Veterinary Clinic, Building 721 Location: (2) Allen Dental Clinic, Building 6037

Flintco Construction, Dewayne Gifford Owner: Indian Health Services

Lead Based Paint Remediation, Asbestos Abatement Location: Pawnee Clinic, Pawnee, Oklahoma Year Performed: Complete 11/2007; $ 411,000.00

USACE / EPA USACE / EPA pilot project for floor tile removal completed in part at Ft. Sill. Mentioned in the preamble to 29CFR1910.1101

US Army, Fort Sill Oversight and Inspection base asbestos survey on Fort Sill (Stanley Engineering project).

Baptist Hospital, Presbyterian Hospital, St.

Anthony’s Hosp. And other health care facilities.

Project designer, Supervisor, Inspector & Consultant for several asbestos abatement and mold remediation projects.

Industrial Hygienist for the State of

Oklahoma

Responsible for 1.2M dollar annual budget to remove asbestos from schools and state owned buildings across the state. Direct or indirect supervision of as many as 35 workers and supervisors. Over 250 large abatement projects completed.

5 | P a g e

Stanley Engineering, Inc. Industrial Hygiene Associate for a comprehensive Industrial Hygiene and Engineering firm. Hundreds of diverse projects completed throughout North America.

General Motors Corporation

Oklahoma City Plant

Inspections and project oversight for several asbestos abatement projects throughout the plant over twenty years. Conducted confined space entries for workers safety.

Tinker Air Force Base Asbestos inspection on the base wide survey in 1984. Provides ongoing asbestos inspection, consulting and support for the Tinker’s

Environmental Group.

Oklahoma Department of Corrections Provided both Indoor Air Quality inspections (mold) and asbestos inspections for several of their administrative offices throughout

Oklahoma.

American Fidelity Insurance Co. Provide inspection and project design services for their Classen

Offices. ~250,000 ft2 to include asbestos and mold as well as other indoor air quality issues and complaints.

Oklahoma County Courthouse

Industrial Hygiene services, including asbestos, for numerous renovation projects over the last 15-20 years.

Department of Human Services Tulsa, Enid

Miami Warehouse former Goodrich Tire Plant

Elk City Public Schools

Comprehensive asbestos survey/Management Plan of their office buildings (75,0000 ft2 and 20,000 ft2 )

Currently working with the present owner to develop a management plan for asbestos control for this 700,000 ft2 facility.

Continuing support for both state and federal compliance under

AHERA as well as IAQ (mold) issues in several facilities;.

Oklahoma Heart Hospital Remediation of water intrusion and subsequent IAQ concerns.

Tulsa Public Schools Mold investigations and IAQ issues throughout the school system.

Also provide expert witness support for Comp. Court.

APPENDIX B

ASBESTOS SURVEY REPORT, ANALYTICAL DATA REPORT, AND CHAIN-

OF-CUSTODY DOCUMENTATION

Amendment 0006 Attachment 1

APPENDIX C

LEAD-BASED PAINT INSPECTION REPORT, XRF DATA, PAINT CHIP

ANALYTICAL DATA REPORT, AND CHAIN OF CUSTODY DOCUMENTATION

Amendment 0006 Attachment 1

LEAD-BASED PAINT INSPECTION REPORT OF:

ALTUS AFB COMMISSARY

BUILDING NO. 15

ALTUS AFB, OKLAHOMA 73127

Prepared For:

KLEINFIELD OKLAHOMA 100, LLC

10835 E. INDEPENDENCE ST., SUITE 102

TULSA, OKLAHOMA 74116

Prepared By:

Michael Jenkinson, Certified Inspector Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality No.OKRASR11413

Crystal Creek LLC 7909 NW 39th Street

Bethany, Oklahoma 73008

(405) 317-4856

Lead-Based Paint Inspection Date:

January 28, 2016

Report Date:

February 10, 2016

Amendment 0006 Attachment 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LEAD-BASED PAINT INSPECTION REPORT

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................. …2

FINDINGS

METHODOLOGY

RECOMMENDATIONS

LEAD INSPECTION FINAL SUMMARY REPORT

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX A – XRF Data Sheets/Laboratory Results APPENDIX B – Room Legend APPENDIX C – Personnel Certification

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A lead-based paint inspection was conducted at the Altus AFB Commissary, Building #15, Altus, Oklahoma, OK on January 28, 2016. The lead-based paint inspection was conducted by Michael Jenkinson, a Certified Risk Assessor/Inspector (Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality No.OKRASR11413).

The facility, constructed in 1986, is approximately 58,000 square foot buildings. The building is two story and the second floor is the mechanical room and is not painted. The exterior of the home is concrete with EIFS veneer with metal windows with and metal doors. The interior is primarily composed of concrete and drywall walls, concrete, acoustic and drywall ceilings with wood and metal doors. The floors are carpet, vinyl tile, ceramic tile and concrete. The only lead-based paint was identified on interior metal wall rail in a hall that connects the warehouse to the shopping area and is labeled as room 22 on the room legend map. No LBP was found on the exterior components of the building.

This inspection was conducted following the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Guidelines for the Evaluation and Control of Lead-Based Paint Hazards in Housing with the 1997 revisions and all State and Local regulations. The standard for lead-based paint as per HUD/EPA and the State of Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality standard of 1.0 mg/cm2 was followed. All requirements for the NITON XRF usage contained in the Performance Characteristics Sheet for the specific XRF were followed.

The painted surfaces in the rooms are identified as components which can generally be defined as architectural features of the building. Components consist of walls, ceilings, floors, doors, doorjambs, window sashes, windowsills, stair treads, etc. These are the visible parts of the building. Only painted components are tested. Each component may be represented many times in a single room. For example, there are generally baseboards on all walls in a room. It is not necessary to test each of these baseboards in the room as long as they appear to have the same paint history. The same process in used for all other components in the building. Walls in the home are identified as A, B, C and D. The “A” wall in each room is the wall in that room which is closest to the street. The remaining walls, “B”, “C”, and “D” are located in an ascending order proceeding clockwise from the “A” wall. Testing was performed using a NITON X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometer (XRF). When more than one window/door is on a wall, features are numbered left to right.

DISCLOSURE RESPONSIBILITY: A copy of this summary must be provided to new lessees (tenants) and purchasers of this property under Federal Law (24 CFR part 35 and 40 CFR part

745) before they become obligated under a lease or sales contract. The complete report must also be provided to new purchasers and it must be made available to new tenants. Landlords (lessors) and sellers are also required to distribute an educational pamphlet and include standard warning language in their leases or sales contracts to ensure that parents have the information they need to protect their children from lead-based paint hazards.

FINDINGS

Interior Lead-Based Paint Inspection

The only tested interior painted components associated with the buildings that were found to contain lead in a concentration greater than the federal threshold of 1.0 mg/cm2 of surface as measured by a XRF was identified on interior metal wall rails in a hall that connects the warehouse to the shopping area and is labeled as room 22 on the room legend map. There are 4 wall rails each 30 feet long for a total of 120 LF.

A confirmation chip sample was taken from the wall rail and sent to Quantem Laboratory, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. The results of 1.82% by weight exceeded the 0.5% lead by weight standard which determines lead -based paint by this method..

Exterior Lead-Based Paint Inspection

No LBP tested on exterior painted components were found to contain lead in a concentration greater than the federal threshold of 1.0 mg/cm2 of surface as measured by a XRF.

Any construction activities, which affect the proceeding paint films (including sanding and demolition) should be conducted by workers who have received proper training in the handling of lead contaminated materials.

METHODOLOGY

The format used for the lead-based paint survey and assessment includes the following items:

2.1 Definition of Room Equivalent

A Room Equivalent is an identifiable part of a building, such as a room, an exterior side, or an exterior area. Hallways, stairways, and exterior areas, such as loading docks, parking lots, and each side of a building, are all examples of room equivalents.

2.2 Delineation of Room Equivalent

Each room equivalent is made up of Components. Components may be located inside or outside a building. For example, components in a room are the ceiling, floor, walls, a door and its casing, the window sash, and window casings. The Substrate is the material underneath the paint. Many substrates exist, however, the HUD Final Guidelines recommend classifying substrates into one of six substrate types: brick, concrete, drywall, metal, plaster, and wood.

These substrate types are intended to include a broad range of materials. If the true substrate is not one of the six types, the substrate that most closely matches the true substrate is selected. For substrates on top of substrates, such as plaster on concrete, the substrate directly beneath the painted surface is used. A Testing Combination is characterized by the room equivalent, component, substrate, and visible color of paint. The Test Location is a specific area on a testing combination where the XRF (x-ray fluorescence) instrument tests for lead-based paint.

2.3 Sampling Strategies

The Sampling Strategy adheres to the EPA Performance Characteristic Sheet for the particular XRF instrument used, as well as the manufacture’s modifications and recommendations. The XRF used for detection of lead-based paint is the NITON XL-300a Spectrum Analyzer Lead Detector. It was manufactured by NITON Corporation, 74 Loomis Street, Bedford, Massachusetts 01730-0368. Each different testing combination for all room equivalents will be tested by XRF. According to the HUD Final Guidelines, a lead reading by XRF of 1.0 mg/cm2 or above is considered positive for the presence of lead-based paint. Below 1.0 mg/cm2 is considered negative. If there are any inconclusive readings, a paint-chip sample will be collected for laboratory analysis. Laboratory analysis will only be performed by an EPA NLLAP (National Lead Laboratory Accreditation Program) or AIHA ELLAP (Environmental Lead

Amendment 0006 Attachment 1

Laboratory Accreditation Program) approved laboratory. There is no inconclusive range for laboratory measurements / results.

2.4 Assessment Logic

Lead-Based Paint Risk Assessment is performed by use of the following Assessment Logic.

Any paint found to contain lead below the HUD…