Appendix_B_GEI_HBM_Report.pdf

Hazardous Building Materials Assessment and Survey Captain John Foster Williams U.S. Coast Guard Building, Boston, Massachusetts

Submitted to:

Appledore Marine Engineering 600 State Street, Suite E Portsmouth, NH 03801

Submitted by:

GEI Consultants, Inc.

400 Unicorn Park Drive Woburn, MA 01801 781-721-4000

May 17, 2016 Project No.: 1514790

Jeanne A. LeFebvre, PE Geotechnical Project Manager

Brandon J. Fagan, PG Construction Management Practice Leader

Consulting

Engineers and

Scientists

Hazardous Building Materials Assessment and Survey Captain John Foster Williams U.S. Coast Guard Building, Boston, Massachusetts

GEI Consultants, Inc. i

Table of Contents

1. Introduction 1

1.1 Background 1

1.2 Proposed Repairs 1

1.3 Basis of Survey 1

2. Hazardous Material Building Survey 3

2.1 Sampling Program Objectives 3

2.2 Survey 3

2.3 Building Material Hazards 4

2.3.1 Building Material Sampling and Analysis 5

2.3.1.1 Asbestos Survey 5

2.3.1.2 Lead-Based Paint Survey 5

2.3.1.3 PCB Sampling 5

2.3.1.4 Mercury Filled Fluorescent Lights & Equipment

Assessment 6

2.3.1.5 Bulk Building Material Sampling 6

2.3.1.6 Water & Solids/Sludge Material Sampling 7

3. Building Material Survey Results, Conclusions and Recommendations 8

3.1 Asbestos 8

3.2 Lead-Based Paints (LBP) 8

3.2.1 LBP Conclusion and Recommendations 10

3.3 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) 10

3.3.1 PCB Regulatory Guidance 10

3.3.2 PCB Results 10

3.3.3 PCB Recommendations and Conclusions 11

3.4 Mercury Components 11

3.4.1 Mercury Components Conclusions and Recommendations 12

3.5 Bulk Building Materials 12

3.5.1 Bulk Building Materials Regulatory Guidance 12

3.5.2 Bulk Building Materials Results 13

3.5.3 Bulk Building Materials Recommendations and Conclusions 14

3.6 Basement Collection Trench Materials & Standing Water 14

3.6.1 Sludge/Solids Results, Recommendations & Conclusions 14

3.6.2 Water Results, Recommendations & Conclusions 16

4. Limitations 18

GEI Consultants, Inc. ii

Tables

1. Laboratory Testing Results – Bulk Building Materials: Concrete, Brick & Mortar

Samples

2. Laboratory Testing Results – Caulking Samples

3. Laboratory Testing Results - Solids/Sludge Samples

4. Laboratory Testing Results – Water Samples

Figures

1. Bulk Building Material - Sample Location Plan

2. Water, Solids/Sludge - Sample Location Plan

Appendices A-HBMS. Inspection Report for Asbestos-Containing Building Materials and Lead-Based

Paint B-HBMS. Laboratory Analytical Results

GEI Consultants, Inc. 1

1. Introduction

GEI Consultants, Inc. (GEI) is pleased to provide this report for the hazardous building materials survey (HBMS) in preparation for the repairs of the Captain John Foster Williams U.S. Coast Guard Building. This report is based upon field sampling and investigations conducted at the Building, located at 408 Atlantic in Boston, Massachusetts on April 15, 2016.

1.1 Background

The site building consists of an 8-story above ground building with a 3-tiered basement that has stepped floor elevations that drop from the Fort Point Channel, on the east side of the building, to the west at Atlantic Avenue. The concrete and steel structure was constructed originally in 1918 with basement modifications made to convert a coal vault in 1972 and 1990. Storm and seawater infiltration has been reported in the basement and various explorations have been conducted over the past 44 years investigate the seepage. The current HBMS was conducted as part of an evaluation to mitigate water infiltration into the basement.

1.2 Proposed Repairs

The proposed repairs to the floor will included removal and replacement of surficial concrete followed by installation of a floor leveler that will pitch the floor to the trench drains. Floor locations were sampled for bulk materials where levelers and potential restoration were anticipated. Wall and related door structures that have been identified for coating applications or replacement were also sampled for bulk material conditions and media.

Caulking expected to be removed for disposal as part of restoration of doors was sampled and tested for PCB content.

It is expected that the floor drains will be drained and cleaned prior to reconstruction of the trenches. The solids/sludge and water from the trenches will need to be removed and disposed of as part of the project.

1.3 Basis of Survey

GEI proposed to sample floor, wall, water and solids in the basement in areas that will be impacted by the repair work. The HBMS was based on the following:

• Floor locations sampled for bulk material conditions and impacts for the purpose of application of coatings, leveler, infilling of voids, waterproofing injection, and removal of loose and friable floor material for disposal.

GEI Consultants, Inc. 2

• Sections of the building flooring will be top dressed with a leveler to induce positive drainage to the collection trenches.

• Floors are equipped with trench plates and grates for collection of water leaching into the building. These trenches will be restored including installation of fiberglass reinforced grating that will require removal of concrete, solids/sludge, and water from the water collection trenches in the basement of the building.

• Walls were observed to be a combination of brick and mortar and concrete. Due to the levels of decay, the walls will require removal of surficial materials including salt scaling, staining, paint, mortar and brick to facilitate resurfacing or coating.

• Walls will be coated with epoxy paints after removal of scaling and debris without the expectation of material replacement.

• Walls and floors will be sealed for crack conditions using injection technology including and not limited to polyurethane grouting.

• Free standing liquids on the floors and in the floor trenches will be collected by the contractor to dispose of the material for the purpose of conducting the repairs.

• Equipment inside the building will require relocation in areas of floors where leveler is proposed for placement (see attached Fig. 1).

• Entry doors to the basement (L1 Area) from the wharf side of the building and into the former coal storage area will be removed and replaced.

• Decayed steel interior doors (L3 Area) will be replaced at some locations.

• Proposed site work is not anticipated to repair damage to floor and wall surfaces which is due to incidental leaching.

GEI Consultants, Inc. 3

2. Hazardous Material Building Survey

2.1 Sampling Program Objectives

The HBMS was conducted to evaluate building materials that may be disturbed or impacted by the construction, including equipment. Equipment was sampled where the potential exists to move equipment, disturb coatings or caulking around the area and where equipment disconnects have the potential to disturb or impact potential asbestos-containing materials

(ACM).

2.2 Survey

Surveyed basement areas were investigated by levels, L1, L2 and L3, representing the respective levels of the basement from east to west in Fig. 1. Proposed repair work in L3 includes construction of a floor leveler to establish a drainage pattern that directs seepage water to the floor’s trench drains. All three basement levels will undergo some level of wall and floor repair/cover during waterproofing.

Our field work was based on the following observations and conditions:

• Renovation and demolition is proposed for completion under State of Massachusetts Building Regulations, CMR 780.

• The survey was limited to accessible building structures, foundation walls, and concrete slabs readily available for analysis in areas where work is proposed.

• The survey has been conducted in part for preparation and development of a cost estimate for performing waterproofing and restoration of the building basement and wharf side entry doors.

• The HBMS will be used to direct removal/decontamination/abatement of the building material and waste prior to waterproofing and assist with the ultimate disposition of the demolition debris.

This HBMS was conducted by a “competent person” in the environmental field as well as a Massachusetts-licensed asbestos inspector/surveyor (Smith & Wessel, Spencer, MA).

Survey activity was conducted in accordance with a site-specific health and safety plan (HASP). Data gathered included laboratory results from sampling building materials for:

• Development of waste characterization data for recycling, reuse, and disposal profiling.

• Management and handling of waste streams.

GEI Consultants, Inc. 4

• Evaluating building materials for construction worker exposure during demolition.

• Decommissioning/relocation of equipment.

• Preparation of a plan for monitoring and control of potential demolition emissions.

• Estimating quantities of waste streams (by others) for abatement and disposal.

• Data was not collected for characterization of building materials for in-place acceptance or re-use.

Samples were collected to develop a representative data set with statistical significance for characterization as demolition debris/bulk product waste. The survey laboratory data set is not comprehensive for all applications and disposal facilities and should be considered a basis for initial evaluation of the building materials for construction. Verification sampling may be required for disposal based on facility specific receiving parameters.

Samples of building materials were collected at three elevations in the basement Fig. 1 (L1, L2, L3). The basement floor is concrete in each of the 3 sections of the building basement.

Walls were constructed of concrete in some locations and brick & mortar as described herein.

2.3 Building Material Hazards

The survey provides a hazard assessment of the building under OSHA 29 CFR 1926.

Samples obtained for analysis were collected during one day of site work on April 15, 2016.

Two teams of personnel collected data on that date under the oversight of AME. GEI collected bulk samples of the building material, sludge/solid/water in the collection trenches and caulking at east wall, southern entry door along the wharf (interior). Smith and Wessel, of Spencer, MA (SWA) collected lead-based paint (LBP) data using a Niton Model XLS- 303A XRFA Screening tool. SWA results are in Appendix A-HBMS. SWA also collected samples of suspect asbestos-containing materials (ACM) in locations where waterproofing and site restoration activity have been proposed for development.

The survey considered types and levels of chemical contaminants in building materials that may be encountered during construction activity and waste generation during waterproofing and remodeling activity. The contaminants tested for include:

• Volatile organic compounds (VOCs)

• Semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs)

• Resource, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 8 metals ( arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, selenium, silver)

• Lead-based paint (LBP).

• Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in building material, based on bulk product sampling analysis for disposal.

GEI Consultants, Inc. 5

• Universal Wastes for Mercury (Hg)-containing lights and components.

• Batteries and ballasts.

2.3.1 Building Material Sampling and Analysis

Samples collected on the each basement levels were from interior locations as described herein. The exception was collection of caulking samples around the exterior of the wharf doors (2) for PCB analysis. ACM samples were collected by Ted Sherry of SWA (MA Certified ACM Inspector # 032572).

2.3.1.1 Asbestos Survey

The purpose of the inspection was to evaluate the types, locations, and extent of suspect ACM) and provide appropriate recommendations for abatement or management. SWA’s inspection addressed both friable (materials that can be easily crumbled, crushed, or pulverized by hand pressure) and non-friable suspect materials.

SWA identified asbestos in several materials, including moisture barrier coating, door caulking and floor expansion joint mastic (Appendix A-HBMS). SWA also investigated thermal system insulation (TSI), spray and trowel applied surfacing materials, and other miscellaneous materials. Several other materials tested by SWA did not contain asbestos, including black door caulking, brown wall caulking, white joint compound, and gray gypsum wallboard (Appendix A-HBMS).

SWA did not investigate inside live electrical switch boxes for insulators. This equipment is not expected to be removed or disposed of during repair work, but should be assessed for handling and disposal in event of removal.

2.3.1.2 Lead-Based Paint Survey

The purpose of the lead paint inspection was to evaluate the types, locations, and extent of suspect LBP on painted surfaces and to provide appropriate recommendations for its abatement and management. The results of SWA’s testing indicated the lead content of paints surveyed in the building ranged from less than 0.1 mg/cm2 to 27.0 mg/cm2 (Appendix A-HBMS).

2.3.1.3 PCB Sampling

GEI collected building materials which are schedule to be demolished or removed during waterproofing, door replacement, and surface preparation. PCBs were analyzed as part of the bulk material collected. Specific samples of material were also collected from caulking around the L1 area doors to the wharf.

GEI Consultants, Inc. 6

Analytical results indicate that the concentration of PCBs in the caulking tested were

4.65 and 1.81 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). These concentrations are below the 50 ppm Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA) standard, a standard that would require special handling and disposal for PCB impacted material.

We did not inspect light fixtures for PCB containing ballasts. Ballasts are not anticipated to be removed during sitework. Typically, ballasts installed after 1978 do not contain PCBs and are marked as such. Discussion with facility personnel report that PCB ballasted lights have been removed or replaced.

2.3.1.4 Mercury Filled Fluorescent Lights & Equipment Assessment

Given that the floor and wall impacts from water intrusion are generally on the bottom half of each level, restoration measures for the basement will not likely impact the lighting for removal and disposal of fluorescent lights containing mercury elements. Removal of fluorescent bulbs would require recycling of the bulbs. No heat regulating thermostats with associated mercury tubes were observed in the basement. Active/live electrical switchgear panels were observed in the basement and electrical switchgears may contain mercury components. Further assessments for mercury components will be necessary if switchgears components will be removed or modified as part of waterproofing.

2.3.1.5 Bulk Building Material Sampling

Bulk samples of building materials were collected for characterization of “bulk waste” for disposal. Bulk sampling of representative building materials were analyzed for the disposal parameters listed above. Samples were collected by drilling out volumes of representative material using a 1 inch diameter core drill at locations shown in Fig. 1. Samples from drill holes were collected and homogenized on aluminum foil and then placed in jars provided by the laboratory for analysis.

Sample composites of bulk building materials were collected at 9 locations (G-101, G103, G104, G105 and G107, Floor Samples & G203, G204, G205, G206, Wall Samples), Table 1.

Basement floors are not painted and were not screened for LBP. Wall samples G204 and G206 represented painted concrete surfaces (green color) representative of the majority of painted basement surface area. Samples G203 and G205 represented brick and mortar sample locations.

Locations of samples analyzed were considered representative of the material identified for recovery and repair of the basement building materials that will require:

• scarification of concrete and brick surfaces for painting and leveler coating preparation,

• drill penetration for crack injection of grout material, and

GEI Consultants, Inc. 7

• concrete removal of friable incompetent material,

• restoration of trenches and

• replacement of collection trench grate frames.

Sample locations are shown on (Fig. 1). Bulk building material composites (concrete, brick, and mortar) were collected and analyzed for the following contaminants of concern.

• RCRA 8 Total Metals (EPA Method 6010C, 7471B)

• Toxicity Characterization Leaching Procedure (TCLP) Metals (Method 1311/6010C)

• Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon (TPH) Diesel Range Organics (DRO)

• TPH Fingerprint

• PCBs (EPA Method 8082A/Sohxlet Extraction).

2.3.1.6 Water & Solids/Sludge Material Sampling

Solids/sludge samples from floor trenches, G403, G405 and G406 were collected from three L3 Areas in the basement as shown on Fig. 2. Samples of unfiltered water were also collected from the solids/sludge sampling locations at the G402W (G403S Sediment Location) and G404W (G405S Sediment Location). G401W was sampled from in the central portion of the L3 area where pooled water has collected on the floor.

Solids/sludge materials from collection trenches were analyzed for:

• VOC’s (EPA Method 8260B)

• TPH DRO

• TPH Fingerprint

• PCBs (EPA Method 8082A/Sohxlet Extraction)

• RCRA 8 Total Metals (EPA Method 6010C, 7471B) TCLP Metals (Method

1311/6010C)

• Reactivity (cyanide and sulfide)

Water Samples were analyzed for TPH DRO, TPH Fingerprint, RCRA 8 Total Metals, and Reactivity.

GEI Consultants, Inc. 8

3. Building Material Survey Results, Conclusions and Recommendations

3.1 Asbestos

The following friable and non-friable suspect materials were sampled for ACBM:

• Joint compound

• Gypsum board

• Residual Wall caulking

• Floor expansion joint mastic

• Door caulking

• Moisture barrier

A&B Environmental Services, Inc. of Houston, TX, a fully-accredited Department of Defense asbestos analytical laboratory, analyzed the bulk samples utilizing Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM) in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR Part 763, Subpart F, Appendix A. Because no non-friable organically bound (NOB) ACM materials were characterized for analysis (i.e. floor tiles), GEI did not require that SWA confirm PLM negative results with Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM).

Of those materials tested by SWA, the following contained asbestos: black moisture barrier coating, gray door caulking, and black floor expansion mastic and pressed board. SWA presents details of the sampling analytical procedures and identifies the amount of ACM present in the report in Appendix A-HBMS.

3.2 Lead-Based Paints (LBP)

SWA tested painted surfaces, including walls, ceilings, doors, windows, etc. The lead content of paints surveyed in the building ranged from less than 0.1 mg/cm2 to 27.0 mg/cm2.

Locations with concentrations of lead greater than 1.0 mg/cm2 include black painted brick walls in L1, green painted walls and a green painted metals stair in L2, and green, white and gray painted walls, doors, floor and curb in L3. Appendix A-HBMS contains a detailed list of surfaces containing LBP and describes the protocols for managing LBP, also shown below.

GEI Consultants, Inc. 9

Summary of Surfaces Coated With LBP

Location Substrate Color Component Approx.

Quantity

L1 Section

Brick Black Wall (near exit door) 6 sf Brick Black Wall (west) 50 sf Brick Concrete Wall (west wall) 160 sf

L2 Section

Hallway Brick Dark gray Lower wall (6’ & lower)

200 sf

Brick Light green Upper wall 150 sf Brick/concrete Light green Upper wall 500 sf Concrete Dark green Lower wall Include in above #

Generator room areas Brick Light/dark green

Upper wall 2,400 sf

Metal Green Stair system 1 door

L3 Section

Old coal room Concrete Light/dark green

Wall 2,500 sf

West, at stairs to storage, near electric panels, at hot water tanks & at floor sump pump

Brick Light/dark green

Wall 5,500 sf

At floor sump Concrete Light green Wall 1,500 sf Concrete White Curb 10 sf

North at blue thermo electron machine

Brick/concrete White Wall 450 sf

Door to old coal room Metal Green Doors 2 doors

North room w/HVAC duct

Metal Green Door 1 door

Old coal room Concrete Light/dark green

Wall 1,200 sf

Concrete Gray Floor 250 sf

At stairs to storage area Concrete Gray Floor 80 sf

GEI Consultants, Inc. 10

3.2.1 LBP Conclusion and Recommendations

SWA’s conclusions and recommendations are presented below:

1. Lead-based paint is present at the site. Handling or impacting components that are covered by LBP may require compliance with the OSHA lead standard. To minimize exposure to airborne dust or fumes, torch burning, cutting, grinding, or similar high impact work on components covered by LBP, disturbance should be minimized and engineering controls put in place to manage worker exposure.

Such work would need to be conducted by properly trained workers using appropriate worker protection.

2. Bulk material of brick and concrete sampled and analyzed were not hazardous based on levels reported in the samples collected on April 15, 2016. Additional testing may be necessary to fully characterize all locations and conditions identified for restoration and waterproofing activity.

3.3 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)

GEI conducted an inspection for suspect PCBs in caulking locations for door removal and replacement of the east side basement wharf doors. Bulk building materials were also testing for PCBs in wall and floor concrete and in brick. Laboratory analysis was conducted by A&B Environmental Services, Inc., of Houston, TX. A minimum of five grams of material were collected and placed into labeled individual sealed containers for delivery to the laboratory under a chain-of-custody.

3.3.1 PCB Regulatory Guidance

According to the EPA, PCBs are toxic and persistent chemicals that were used primarily as insulating fluid in heavy-duty electrical equipment. They were also utilized in a wide variety of products including paints, caulks, light fixture ballast, oils, plastics, adhesives, tapes, carbonless copy paper, floor finishes and related products. Because PCBs are suspected carcinogens and may cause other adverse health effects, the EPA banned their manufacture and installation starting in 1979.

3.3.2 PCB Results

Sampling and analytical testing of two samples of the building caulking materials from the wharf doors reported concentrations at 4.65 mg/kg and 1.81 mg/kg (Table 2). Caulking collected from the L1 doors was representative of both interior and exterior use of caulking.

Laboratory analytical results are reported in Appendix B-HBMS. The sample locations are shown on Fig. 1.

GEI Consultants, Inc. 11

Eight of the nine bulk samples collected for analysis of concrete and brick including materials with painted surfaces in the basement of the Williams building reported non-detect levels of PCBs (Table 3). Sample G206, the brick and mortar wall sample from the back (NE corner) of the former coal room reported 0.14 mg/kg of PCBs, an estimated concentration less than the laboratory detection limit. Wall sample G203 (located directly adjacent to caulking sample G301) in Fig. 1, reported non-detect levels in brick supporting results that indicate the low levels of PCBs reported in the caulking did not leach into brick at that location.

3.3.3 PCB Recommendations and Conclusions

Based on our observations, we conclude the following:

1. The results of PCBs analysis in caulking, concrete and brick materials tested at the site were below 50 ppm, the EPA standard of for regulating PCBs in products and wastes. Where PCBs contain less than 50 ppm but greater than one ppm, the products could be regulated if the PCB content was the result of contamination from PCBs in a TSCA source material, such as old caulking that had been removed with residue leaching into the newer product. If it can be determined that such products were original to the Williams building, or installed prior to October 1, 1984 they would be deemed an “Excluded Product” and no additional testing would be required.

2. Data collected during this survey does not support information that would indicate a source of PCBs exists above TSCA limits at the site. On this basis we do not believe that PCB-impacted material at the Williams building site was derived from a PCB source(s) with concentrations above 50 mg/kg. However, review of historical records and further investigation should be done to evaluate the respective areas where PCB concentrations were reported as part of disposal and/or reuse characterization of bulk wastes.

3. Based on the levels of PCB’s (below 1 ppm) reported in bulk building materials, wastes can be shipped to instate and out of state facilities that will accept building materials waste.

4. Caulking from the doors must be shipped facility that will accept PCB wastes with impacts greater than 1 mg/kg. Waste Management Landfill (Turnkey), Rochester, NH is one alternative for waste disposal acceptance (< 50 mg/kg).

3.4 Mercury Components

GEI observed fluorescent light bulbs suspected of containing mercury throughout the buildings. Should fluorescent light fixtures, thermostats, or switches require removal we recommend making the conservative assumption that they contain mercury and should be

GEI Consultants, Inc. 12 handled as a regulated waste. These materials are classified as “Universal Waste” and must be appropriately handled and packaged for disposal or recycling.

3.4.1 Mercury Components Conclusions and Recommendations

Mercury component are not expected to be impacted by the planned work. However, we note the following based on our site observations:

1. Prior to being impacted, all fluorescent light bulbs must be collected and properly packaged for disposal or recycling in a facility permitted to accept mercury containing waste.

2. The electrical switchgears must be further assessed for mercury components during dismantling.

3.5 Bulk Building Materials

Bulk building material samples G-100 (Floor) Series and G-200 (Wall) Series were accessed from the interior of the building in the basement. Sample data supports characterization of the building material for handling and disposal:

GEI observed the following conditions:

• Concrete floors of the building basement were generally unpainted.

• Concrete and brick walls on the interior were generally painted with a 2 tone green paint with exception of walls in the L1 area and wall locations where paint had deteriorated from walls on the north side of the L3 level.

• Concrete flooring in the building was generally competent. However, areas of salt degradation of the concrete floor surface were observed in the central area of Level 3 where standing water was observed. Standing water areas were not draining into the trenches at the time of this survey.

• Wall locations where seepage impacts have deteriorated the brick and mortar above floor level are characterized by spalling material, soft brick and mortar, deposits of salt and peeling paint.

3.5.1 Bulk Building Materials Regulatory Guidance

GEI does not anticipate that the building material being collected on site will have substantial economic value for reuse with waterproofing and trench restoration. GEI therefore compared the building material analytical results to standards applicable for disposal to Massachusetts Lined and Unlined landfills as wells as a recycling facilities (Table 1). These standards are published values and are intended for general reference in this report to demonstrate

GEI Consultants, Inc. 13 conditions for disposal of the building materials. Per the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) waste ban regulations/Solid Waste Management Facility Regulations, 310 CMR 19.000, asphalt, brick and concrete (ABC) rubble is banned from disposal at “solid waste” facilities in Massachusetts. Standards for disposal options to out-of-state landfills were not referenced.

Comparison of laboratory analytical results to disposal standards for building materials from the Williams Building site are not an endorsement of acceptance from a receiving facility.

HBMS laboratory results may not be complete for disposal without completion of additional sampling and analysis for receiving facility acceptance parameters.

Under the Massachusetts Beneficial Use Determination (BUD) standards, painted building materials that meet acceptable criteria for reuse under the applicable Method I/II/III standard can be placed/reused on site. If painted building materials are to be reused onsite GEI recommends the result of this survey data be compared to the BUD standards for material reuse. Applicable submittal of a BUD BWP SW form (39, 40, 41 or 42) will be required for DEP filing and material reuse.

3.5.2 Bulk Building Materials Results

Table 1 summarizes the results of the bulk building material analysis for the concrete, brick and mortar collected from the building basement. Laboratory analytical results are reported in Appendix B-HBMS.

• Testing of the concrete, brick and mortar samples collected from the unpainted basement floors did not report level of TPH, PCBs, Total or TCLP Metals that exceeded disposal or recycling facility acceptance parameters. Floor material was non-reactive (sulfide and cyanide).

• Testing of the concrete, brick and mortar samples collected from the unpainted and painted basement walls did not report levels of TPH, PCBs, Total and TCLP Metals that exceeded disposal or recycling facility acceptance parameters. Wall material was non-reactive (sulfide and cyanide).

• Two brick and mortar samples (G203 and G205) were collected from unpainted surface locations of brick and mortar. Both locations reported the highest total lead levels in building materials, 207 mg/kg and 626 mg/kg when compared to painted walls samples, respectively. The G205 location was formerly painted but the paint had spalled off over the years to a relatively clean surface. Neither location exceeded disposal facility acceptance standards.

• Four (4) of the nine (9) floor and wall samples (G107, G203, G204, G205) were tested for TCLP results based on total lead concentrations in the sample that exceeded http://www.mass.gov/eea/agencies/massdep/recycle/solid/massachusetts-waste-disposal-bans.html http://www.mass.gov/eea/agencies/massdep/recycle/solid/massachusetts-waste-disposal-bans.html http://www.mass.gov/eea/agencies/massdep/recycle/regulations/310-cmr-19-00.html http://www.mass.gov/eea/agencies/massdep/recycle/regulations/310-cmr-19-00.html

GEI Consultants, Inc. 14 the 20x rule for hazardous waste. None of the 4 samples tested for TCLP were hazardous for lead (>5mg/l).

• Low levels of TPH DRO (less than 86.9 mg/kg) were reported in every sample of the basement brick and concrete collected. The concentration of the DRO fraction reported in the samples was well below limits for disposal and recycling facility acceptance.

• PCB’s were non-detect or below the laboratory reporting limit in the 9 samples.

• None of the 9 samples reported reactivity.

3.5.3 Bulk Building Materials Recommendations and Conclusions

The following conclusions were drawn from the analytical results for the bulk building materials evaluated in this survey for material handling and disposal:

• Samples of concrete and brick building materials support disposal of the material as a non-hazardous waste.

• Reported total lead concentrations in unpainted building brick bulk material tested support the conclusion that levels of lead in brick in the building at those locations are likely related to the matrix composition of the brick and not LBP.

• None of the nine (9) bulk samples collected for lead in the building are hazardous for lead. However, lead levels have been reported in LBP and selective removal will require provisions for construction management, air monitoring, worker safety and handling.

• The source or sources of low levels of TPH are likely a combination of coating materials (paint) and petroleum products from historical use of heating/process equipment, fuel and oils in the basement. No fingerprint match for the DRO petroleum fraction was reported for the 9 samples tested.

• Building materials are not hazardous for RCRA 8 metals based on the nine (9) samples collected.

• Building materials removed and/or not tested that are not in kind with characteristics of the materials tested in the HBMS should be analyzed for disposal facility acceptance.

3.6 Basement Collection Trench Materials & Standing Water

3.6.1 Sludge/Solids Results, Recommendations & Conclusions

Three samples of solids/sludge were collected from the collection trenches in the floor on L3 (Fig. 2). Locations were selected for the distribution and representativeness of the material

GEI Consultants, Inc. 15 being collected in the trenched prior to the floor sump. The matrix of the material from the samples varied by location in composition and percentages. In general the material was a combination of fine inorganic material, solids, black and orange organic material, oxidized metal flakes/scale, and to a lesser degree paint chips.

Table 3 summarizes the results of the sludge/solids collected from the collection trenches in the building basement. Results of analysis of the sludge/solids were compared to potential landfill receiving facilities limits. However it is possible that the solids/sludge material may be collected by vacuum into a truck with the water in the collection trenches. Low percent solids sludge would be placed into the disposal facility onsite pit for solidification. Standards for facility acceptance of this material with water disposal are site specific.

GEI also included the Massachusetts Contingency Plan reportable concentration for and S-1 soil. Solids/sludge exceeding these limits from the trenches would not be acceptable if released to the environment.

Laboratory analytical results for the collection trench solids/sludge are reported in Table 3, Appendix B-HBMS. Testing results are reported as follows:

• VOCs: Non-detect.

• TPH: 229 to 734 mg/kg. The TPH fingerprint of the sludge was not matched to a specific hydrocarbon source material

• PCBs: 0.411 to 0.875 mg/kg.

• Metals: Metals were generally below MCP RCS-1 standards with the exception of lead and. Lead concentration ranged from 704 mg/kg to 904 mg/kg. Chromium ranged from 95.1 to 166 mg/kg. These concentrations are below acceptance criteria for in state landfills.

• Sample G403 and G406 were also analyzed for TCLP chromium where the total concentrations exceeded 20x the RCS-1 standard. The results were below the laboratory detection limits.

• Sample G403, G405 and G406 were also analyzed for TCLP lead where the total concentrations exceeded 20x the RCS-1 standard. The results were below the laboratory detection limits.

• None of the 3 samples were reactive.

The following conclusions were drawn from the analytical results for the trench sludge/solids evaluated in this survey for material handling and disposal:

• Samples of solids/sludge characterize materials for was disposal.

GEI Consultants, Inc. 16

• Testing did not quantify chromium tri-valent and hexavalent fractions in the sludge/solid sample. Results in Table 3 were highlighted for conservative reference herein to the hexavalent standard. RCRA 8 Metals analyzed by TCLP indicate that the sludge/solids are non-hazardous.

• Solids/sludge material from the trenches are not suitable for discharge/release to the environment based on the exceedance of the RCS-1 soil metal standards for lead.

• Solids should be collected for disposal to protect against distribution into the storm water collection system during site restoration and waterproofing construction.

3.6.2 Water Results, Recommendations & Conclusions

Three samples of water were collected from the collection trenches and floor slab on L3.

Locations are shown in Fig. 2. Locations were selected to characterize removal of the water from the floor and trenches during basement waterproofing and restoration. Water from the trenches was general clear coming from low velocity discharge flow (G402W and G404W).

Water sampled from the standing water on the floor on L3 (G401) was murky and multicolored with levels of organic solids present during collection. Standing water in the G401 area has collected on top of the concrete slab and it is pooled. It does not appear to change in level with tidal influence. It is different from the water in the collection trenches.

Table 4 summarizes the results of the water analysis. Results were compared to the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Standards for discharge of storm water under a NPDES Dewatering General Permit. Parameters referenced were from Appendix VIII of the permit conditions.

Laboratory analytical results for the water samples are reported in Appendix B-HBMS.

Testing results are reported as follows:

• VOCs: Below laboratory detection limits.

• TPH DRO: G401 (standing water) contained 1.25 milligrams per liter (mg/L) TPH.

• Metals: Below the NPDES standards in G402 and G403. Note that the selenium standard is very close to the reporting level marked “J” by the laboratory. Metals reported in standing water at G401 were significantly higher than the NPDES standards for discharge.

• Water in the 3 locations was not reactive and measured below the method detection limit of the instrument.

The following conclusions and recommendations were drawn from the analytical results of water collected in the basement.

GEI Consultants, Inc. 17

• Concentrations of metals from standing water were much higher than in trench water.

This is likely in part due to the solids observed in the standing water samples and the potential origin of the impacts.

Trench water is collected from seepage into the basement during tidal and storm events.

Water collection on the floor in L3 is potentially influence by machinery and process chemical loses to specific areas of the slab that are periodically cleaned up.

The samples of water in the collection trenches were grab samples recovered in relative calm conditions but were unfiltered compared to the sample from the standing water that was easily disturbed.

• Standing water in the basement collecting on the concrete slab in the L3 area is not suitable for storm water discharge and should be collected and disposed of prior to renovation and waterproofing construction.

• Removal of water from the collection trenches during site restoration should consider the potential effects of water quality of sludge disturbance and comingling with drainage water.

GEI Consultants, Inc. 18

4. Limitations

While GEI endeavored to conduct a thorough, comprehensive HBMS, some exclusions are warranted. Because our inspection addressed a limited number of areas, it is possible that the locations that we inspected were not fully representative of materials found in other areas.

Our inspection included was exclusive to the basement areas.

Additional limitations may have impacted our ability to inspect all locations such as poor lighting, access/height constraints, unusual building features, occupancy, and stored materials that blocked access to suspect materials. Stored goods, debris, and building materials that were removed and were either stored or loose were not inspected, but if observed were assessed and quantified.

GEI and SWA do not guarantee that all suspect ACM or PCB impacted materials were identified.

While GEI and SWA followed industry standards during the inspection, we do not warrant that all suspect hazardous building materials were identified in or on the buildings and shall not be held liable related to future abatement costs related to hazardous materials that are either not discovered or not appropriately characterized. This is due in part to inherent problems with every building inspection, such as, but not limited to:

• Seemingly homogeneous materials that are not in fact homogeneous.

• Seemingly representative locations that are not in fact representative.

• Layered materials that are not uniformly present or are isolated.

• Materials that are present and accessible but were not considered to be hazardous.

• Materials that are present in an isolated and limited quantity.

• Material that is present in locations that are unsafe or otherwise difficult to access.

GEI and SWA's inspection is inherently limited. All hazardous materials may only become apparent during the course of future renovation or demolition.

Our professional services for this project have been performed in accordance with generally accepted engineering practices; no warranty, express or implied, is made.

GEI Consultants, Inc.

Tables

GEI Consultants, Inc. Project 1514790 May 2016 B:\Working\NAVFAC\1514790-Williams Fed Bldg\01_ADMIN\060 Environmental-Haz Mat Final Report\Tables\T1 Concrete Lab Testing Results

Table 1. Laboratory Testing Results - Bulk Building Materials: Concrete, Brick & Mortar Samples Repairs to Captain John Foster Williams U.S. Coast Guard Building and Seawall 408 Atlantic Avenue Boston, Massachusetts

Sample Location: G101 G103 G104 G105 G107 G203 G204 G205 G206

Sample ID: G101 G103 G104 G105 G107 G203 G204 G205 G206

Sample Date: 4/15/2016 4/15/2016 4/15/2016 4/15/2016 4/15/2016 4/15/2016 4/15/2016 4/15/2016 4/15/2016 Matrix: Concrete Concrete Concrete Concrete Concrete Brick & Mortar Concrete Brick & Mortar Concrete

Analyte Method Units

Reuse Levels for MA State Unlined Landfill

Reuse Levels for MA State

Lined Landfill

Recycling Limits for Asphalt Batch

Plant (11.)

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) - Diesel Range Organics (DRO) 8015 mg/kg 2,500 5,000 NS 38.1 56.8 50.6 19.8 32.8 46.7 86.9 18.4 21.7 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) - Fingerprint D3328-78 No Match No Match No Match No Match No Match No Match No Match No Match No Match Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) 8082A mg/kg

Aroclor 1254 NS NS NS < 0.110 < 0.120 < .097 < 0.110 < 0.120 < 0.100 < 0.088 < 0.099 0.14 J Aroclor 1260 NS NS NS < 0.110 < 0.120 < .097 < 0.110 < 0.120 < 0.100 < 0.088 < 0.099 < 0.110 Total PCBs 2 2 1 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.14 J

Total Metals mg/kg Arsenic 6010C 40 40 30 4.0 2.6 2.6 2.4 3.4 3.2 3.8 5.3 5.1 Barium 6010C NS NS NS 55.4 46.3 41.3 49.5 51.6 99.9 58.7 117 49.1 Cadmium 6010C 30 80 30 0.43 < 0.17 < 0.17 < 0.17 < 0.17 0.17 J < 0.16 0.62 < 0.17 Chromium (Total) 6010C 1,000 1,000 500 12.9 J 14.8 20.1 13.7 16.2 12.4 22.1 19.2 12.3 Lead 6010C 1,000 2,000 1,000 24.1 16.4 6.8 4.7 106 207 101 626 6.5 Mercury 7471B 10 10 10 < 0.017 0.034 < 0.016 < 0.017 0.022 J 0.17 < 0.016 < 0.017 0.03 J Selenium 6010C NS NS NS < 0.42 < 0.42 < 0.42 < 0.42 < 0.42 < 0.41 < 0.40 < 0.45 < 0.42 Silver 6010C NS NS NS 0.25 J 0.27 J 5.0 0.91 7.4 < 0.21 < 0.20 2.5 < 0.21

TCLP Metals Lead 1311/6010C mg/L 5 5 5 NT NT NT NT < 0.0050 0.092 < 0.0050 0.18 NT

Other 7.3 mg/kg Cyanide Reactivity NS NS Non-Reactive < 1.6 < 1.6 < 1.5 < 1.6 < 1.6 < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.7 < 1.6 Sulfide Reactivity NS NS Non-Reactive < 53 < 53 < 52 < 53 < 53 < 51 < 51 < 55 < 52

General Notes:

1. In general, analytes detected in at least one sample are reported here. For a complete list of analytes see the laboratory data sheets.

2. "<" = The analyte was not detected at a concentration above the specified laboratory reporting limit.

3. Reuse levels for in-state unlined and lined landfills are cited from Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection COMM-97-001.

4. Recycling limits for asphalt batch plant are for the Aggregate facility in Stoughton, Massachusetts.

5. NS = No standard or criteria has been established for this analyte.

6. NT = The sample was not tested for this analyte.

7. ND = Not detected.

8. mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram.

9. mg/L = milligrams per liter.

10. Values in bold exceed MCP RCS-1 standards (not applicable to concrete).

11. Aggregate Recycling Acceptance Parameters

Qualifying Notes:

J The reported result is below the laboratory reporting limit and is estimated.

GEI Consultants, Inc. Project 1514790 May 2016 B:\Working\NAVFAC\1514790-Williams Fed Bldg\01_ADMIN\060 Environmental-Haz Mat Final Report\Tables\T2 Caulking Lab testing Results

Table 2. Laboratory Testing Results - Caulking Samples Repairs to Captain John Foster Williams U.S. Coast Guard Building and Seawall 408 Atlantic Avenue Boston, Massachusetts

Sample Location: G301 G302

Sample ID: G301 G302

Sample Date: 4/15/2016 4/15/2016 Matrix: Caulking Caulking

Analyte Method Units Out of State Landfill (5.)

Reuse Levels for MA State Unlined Landfill

Reuse Levels for MA State

Lined Landfill

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) 8082A mg/kg Aroclor 1254 NS NS NS 4.65 1.81 Total PCBs < 50 2 2 4.65 1.81

General Notes:

1. In general, analytes detected in at least one sample are reported here. For a complete list of analytes see the laboratory data sheets.

2. "<" = The analyte was not detected at a concentration above the specified laboratory reporting limit.

3. NS = No standard or criteria has been established for this analyte.

4. mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram.

5. Waste Management Turnkey Landfill, Rochester, New Hampshire receiving facility limit for PCBs.

GEI Consultants, Inc. Project 1514790 May 2016

B:\Working\NAVFAC\1514790-Williams Fed Bldg\01_ADMIN\060 Environmental-Haz Mat Final Report\Tables\T3 Sediment Lab Testing Results

Table 3. Laboratory Testing Results - Solid/Sludge Samples Repairs to Captain John Foster Williams U.S. Coast Guard Building and Seawall 408 Atlantic Avenue Boston, Massachusetts

Sample Location: G403 G405 G406

Sample ID: G403(S) G405(S) G406(S)

Sample Date: 4/15/2016 4/15/2016 4/15/2016 Matrix: Solid/Sludge Solid/Sludge Solid/Sludge

Analyte Method Units MCP RCS-1

Reuse Levels for MA State Unlined Landfill

Reuse Levels for MA State

Lined Landfill

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) 8260B mg/kg Total VOCs NS 4 10 ND ND ND

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) - Diesel Range Organics (DRO) 8015 mg/kg 1,000 2,500 5,000 519 734 229 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) - Fingerprint D3328-78 No Match No Match No Match Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) 8082A mg/kg

Aroclor 1248 NS NS NS < 0.027 0.285 < 0.03 Aroclor 1254 NS NS NS 0.376 0.395 0.187 Aroclor 1260 NS NS NS 0.101 0.195 0.224 Total PCBs 1 2 2 0.477 0.875 0.411

Total Metals mg/kg Arsenic 6010C 20 40 40 16.2 16.5 17.5 Barium 6010C 1,000 NS NS 562 224.0 508 Cadmium 6010C 70 30 80 5.5 14.7 3.6 Chromium (Total) 6010C 100 (1000)(14.) 1,000 1,000 166 95.1 152 Lead 6010C 200 1,000 2,000 904 576 704 Mercury 7471B 20 10 10 3.4 0.75 0.88 Selenium 6010C 400 NS NS < 2.8 < 2.9 < 3.0 Silver 6010C 100 NS NS 2.0 1.9 1.1 J

TCLP Metals Chromium 6010C mg/L < 0.0050 NT < 0.0050 Lead 1311/6010C mg/L 5 5 < 0.0050 < 0.010 < 0.0050

Other Method 7.3 mg/kg Cyanide Reactivity NS NS < 2.6 < 2.5 < 2.7 Sulfide Reactivity NS NS < 86 < 83 < 89

General Notes:

1. In general, analytes detected in at least one sample are reported here. For a complete list of analytes see the laboratory data sheets.

2. "<" = The analyte was not detected at a concentration above the specified laboratory reporting limit.

3. Reuse levels for in-state unlined and lined landfills are cited from Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection COMM-97-001.

4. Recycling limits for asphalt batch plant are for the Aggregate facility in Stoughton, Massachusetts.

5. NS = No standard or criteria has been established for this analyte.

6. ND = Not detected.

7. Sediment samples for VOC analysis were preserved in the field with methanol.

8. mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram.

9. mg/L = milligrams per liter.

10. Values in bold exceed MCP RCS-1 standards (not applicable to sediment).

11. Values highlighted green, underlined and in italics exceed levels for in-state lined landfill.

12. "(S)" - Solid/Sludge

13. Aggregate Recycling Acceptance Parameters

14. RCS-1 for total chromium is 100 mg/kg in the absence of hexavalent chromium data and 1,000 mg/kg if hexavalent chromium data exists.

F = Category F: Disposal at out-of-state landfill as hazardous waste.

Project 150471-0

May 2016 B:\Working\NAVFAC\1514790-Williams Fed Bldg\01_ADMIN\060 Environmental-Haz Mat Final Report\Tables\T4 Water Lab Testing Results

Table 4. Laboratory Testing Results - Water Samples Repairs to Captain John Foster Williams U.S. Coast Guard Building and Seawall 408 Atlantic Avenue Boston, Massachusetts

Sample Location: G401(W) G402(W) G404(W)

Sample ID: G401(W) G402(W) G404(W) Sample Date: 4/15/2016 4/15/2016 4/15/2016

Matrix: Standing Water Trench Water Trench Water

Analyte Method Units

NPDES

Dewatering

General Permit

Standard

(DGP)

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) 8260B ug/L Total VOCs ND ND ND

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) - Diesel Range Organics (DRO) 8015 mg/L 5 1.25 0.106 J < 0.10 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) - Fingerprint D3328-78 mg/L 5 No Match No Match No Match Total Metals ug/L

Arsenic 6010C 20 27 < 6 < 6 Barium 6010C NS 1450 76.2 J < 75 Cadmium 6010C 10 10.6 J < 6.0 < 6 Chromium (Total) 6010C 15 121 < 15.0 < 15 Lead (Total) 6010C 20 954 17.7 J < 13 Mercury 7471B NS 18.2 < 0.10 < 0.10 Selenium 6010C 20 26.4 J 19.4 J 21.1 J Silver 6010C 10 < 10 < 7.5 < 7.5

Other SW846 CH7 mg/L Cyanide Reactivity < 1.5 < 1.5 < 1.5 Sulfide Reactivity < 50 < 50 < 50

General Notes:

1. In general, analytes detected in at least one sample are reported here. For a complete list of analytes see the laboratory data sheets.

2. "<" = The analyte was not detected at a concentration above the specified laboratory reporting limit.

3. ND = Not detected.

4. ug/L = micrograms per liter.

5. mg/L = milligrams per liter.

6. "W" - Water Sample

7. Water samples collected from the basement and floor trenches on 4/15/16 were unfiltered.

8. Sample G401(W) was collected from standing water on the floor outside of the collection trenches.

9. "NS" - No Standard or criteria has been reported for this analyte from Appendix VIII of the DGP.

10. G402(W) and G404(W) were collected from water inside the collection trenches (Grab Sample).

Figures

G108

G101

G102

G103

G104

G105

G106

G107

G206

G201

G203

G202

G204

G205

G301

G302

\\geiconsulta B:\Working\NAVFAC\1514790-Williams Fed Bldg\00_CAD\Figures\{Report_Name}\1514790-03.dwg - 5/13/2016

Fig. 1

Captain John Foster Williams U.S. Coast Guard

Federal Building

Boston, Massachusetts

Appledore Marine Engineering, LLC

Portsmouth, New Hampshire

BUILDING BULK MATERIALS

SAMPLE PLAN

May 2016Project 1514790

Consultants

NOTES:

1. BASE PLAN DEVELOPED FROM "FIGURE 3.8 BASEMENT REPAIR OPTION 2 PLAN," OF THE CONCEPTUAL

DESIGN REPORT, FY15 REPAIRS TO CAPTAIN JOHN FOSTER WILLIAMS, U.S. COAST GUARD BUILDING, BOSTON, MA DATED FEBRUARY 2016 AND PREPARED BY APPLEDORE MARINE ENGINEERING, LLC.

GEI LEGEND:

FLOOR SAMPLE BY GEI, APRIL 15, 2016

WALL SAMPLE BY GEI, APRIL 15, 2016

16 32

Approximate Scale, Feet

CAULKING…