ATTACHMENT A-1665824 DB RFP 2 OF 2.pdf

***UNCLASSIFIED***

eProjects WO#: 1665824 Appropriation: UMC

ORDNANCE OPERATIONS SUPPORT &

INERT STORAGE REPLACEMENT

(P1289)

At the Naval Air Station Oceana, Virginia Beach, Virginia

VOLUME 2 of 2

PREPARED BY:

NAVFAC MID-ATLANTIC, PWD OCEANA FEAD, PM&E PRA211/214

NAS Oceana, 953 Hornet Drive, Building 820, Suite 210

Virginia Beach, Virginia 23460-2197

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) PREPARED BY:

DM (Design Manager): Beth White R.A. / Callum Gordon, R.A Architectural: Beth White R.A. / Callum Gordon, R.A

Civil: Howard Brewster, P.E.

Geotechnical: Marc Nellis, P.E.

Structural: Peyton Mulé, P.E.

Fire Protection: Kelsey Foster, E.I.T.

Mechanical/Plumbing: Kraig Sarver, P.E.

Electrical: Ray Ballance, P.E.

HazMat Specialist: Jeff Ghent, P.G.

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) APPROVED BY:

Design Engineering Branch Manager: Hilario S. D. Cortado, R.A.

Signature/Date:

Submitted By: Hilario S. D. Cortado, R.A. Date: Updated April 08, 2023

Work Order Number 1665824

SMALL PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS - Page 1

ORDNANCE OPERATIONS SUPPORT & INERT STORAGE REPLACEMENT

NAS Oceana, Virginia Beach, Virginia

Project Table of Contents – Volume 2 Part 6 Attachments

Appendix 9 – Hazardous Materials Information Appendix 10 – Geotechnical Report

ORDNANCE OPERATIONS SUPPORT & INERT STORAGE REPLACEMENT Work Order Number 1665824 NAS Oceana, Virginia Beach, Virginia

SMALL PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS - Page 2

Preface

This Request for Proposal (RFP) consists of six parts.

Part 1 contains typical contractual forms, procedures, bidding instructions, bond information, clauses and wage decisions.

Part 2 contains general contract administrative and execution requirements including, but not limited to safety, design criteria & process, quality control, security, schedule, invoicing, temporary facilities, and design and construction oversight processes.

Part 3 lists the project requirements, specific scope items, and expected quality level above and beyond those outlined in Part 4.

Part 4 contains Performance Specifications and minimum quality requirements.

Part 5, prescriptive specifications, contains necessary edited UFGS. Typically the scheduling, ECMS, Sustainability and safety spec are included here.

Part 6 contains background project information, references, and other project-specific requirements.

NAS Oceana, Virginia Beach, VA

PART 6 – APPENDIX 9

Part 6 Attachments

APPENDIX 9 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INFORMATION

• Draft Memorandum “Addressing Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Contaminated Media During Construction Projects” dated 10/03/2018

• “Basewide Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances Site Inspect Report” prepared by CH2M

• “Hazardous Materials Building Inspection Report”, Final Submittal dated March 5, 2021, prepared by GeoEnvironmental Resources, Inc.

October 3, 2018

MEMORANDUM FOR DEPUTY CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS

(FLEET READINESS AND LOGISTICS) (N4)

DEPUTY COMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS

(INSTALLATIONS AND LOGISTICS)

COMMANDER, MARINE CORPS SYSTEM COMMAND

COMMANDER, NAVY INSTALLATIONS COMMAND

COMMANDER, NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING

COMMAND

SUBJECT: Addressing Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Contaminated Media During Construction Projects

Ref: (a) DASN (E) Policy Memo, “Perfluorinated Compounds/Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFC/PFAS) – Identification of Potential Areas of Concern (AOCs),” 20 June 2016

(b) Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP) Management

DoDM 4715.20, 9 March 2012

(c) DON Environmental Restoration Program Manual, March 2018

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a suite of over 1,000 chemicals, several of which are of emerging public health concern to the Department of the Navy (DON), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), State regulatory agencies, and the general public.

PFAS are widely used chemicals found in various industrial and consumer products. The most common DON activity that could have resulted in the release of PFAS to the environment is the use of aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) for testing, training, firefighting, and other life-saving emergency responses. The EPA issued a lifetime health advisory for drinking water of 70 parts per trillion (ppt) for the combined value of two PFAS compounds (perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)) on 19 May 2016.

Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) is implementing reference (a) in accordance with references (b) and (c). In 2016, NAVFAC identified an initial inventory of known or suspected PFAS release sites at 127 active and closed installations. Since that time, NAVFAC has been conducting installation wide preliminary assessments/site inspections (PA/SI) to verify, validate, and update the inventory of PFAS release sites for further investigation and cleanup. Until all sites are fully characterized and final response actions are implemented, there is the potential to encounter PFAS contaminated media (e.g. excavated soil or groundwater removed for dewatering purposes) during construction projects (MILCON or Non-MILCON).

Reference (b), Enclosure 3, section 6.a. and reference (c), section 14.1.2 provide planning and construction considerations at or near contaminated sites. Potential PFAS impacted media needs to be identified early in the construction planning and siting process. Project planning, construction, and environmental personnel should work together to avoid siting projects on

PFAS contaminated media sites and/or over PFAS contaminated groundwater plumes. Actions to address PFAS contaminated media discovered during a construction project are funded as part of the construction project and will likely delay project completion, increase cost, and impact the DON mission..

The Federal and State regulatory requirements to address these emerging PFAS contaminants continues to evolve. At this time, there are no consistent regulatory requirements to address PFAS impacted media. DON has been required to address PFAS impacted media to varying degrees in different EPA regions and States. To bridge this gap, following are DON principles and guidelines to be followed on construction projects encountering PFAS impacted media:

1. PFAS are persistent in the environment and do not readily degrade, so PFAS impacted media shall not be spread to areas outside the construction footprint without proper characterization and controls/treatment..

2. Groundwater that is removed through dewatering efforts must comply with all Clean Water Act permitting requirements and principle 1 above. Some example scenarios are:

a. Discharge into a non-DON waste water treatment system that does not discharge to the ocean- EPA, the State, or the POTW will issue a industrial wastewater indirect discharge (pretreatment) permit for this discharge. This may, or may not, include limits for PFOS, PFOA, or other PFAS. If included, those limits must be achieved.

b. Discharge into a non-DON industrial waste water treatment system that does not discharge to the ocean- The industrial wastewater treatment system must possess a permit issued by EPA or the state that allows the discharge of PFAS. This may, or may not, include limits for PFOS, PFOA, or other PFAS. If included, those limits must be achieved.

c. Discharge into a DON waste water treatment system that discharges to the ocean - EPA or the State will issue a NPDES permit for this discharge. This may, or may not, include limits for PFOS, PFOA, or other PFAS. If included, those limits must be achieved.

d. Discharge into a DON waste water treatment system that does not discharge to the ocean - EPA or the State will issue a NPDES permit for this discharge. This may, or may not, include limits for PFOS, PFOA, or other PFAS. At a minimum, the levels of PFOS and PFOA discharged to this system shall be pre-treated to below 70 ppt.

e. Direct Discharge to a surface water or land surface - EPA or the State will issue a NPDES permit for the discharge to surface waters, and may regulate discharges to the ground. Any permit may, or may not, include limits for PFOS, PFOA, or other PFAS. At a minimum, the levels of PFOS and PFOA discharged through this means shall be pre-treated to below 70 ppt.

3. Regarding soil excavated during construction that is determined to have been impacted by historical releases of PFAS, appropriate procedures for handling and management of those soils should be coordinated and documented with the appropriate Navy environmental and health and safety experts. . The final disposition or management of impacted soils shall be in accordance with bullet 1 above. .

My points of contact are Mr. Richard Mach at richard.mach@navy.mil or (703)

614-5463 and Mr. Jim Rudroff at jim.rudroff@navy.mil or (703) 614-4217.

DASN (E), DASN (I&F), or ASN (EIE) mailto:richard.mach@navy.mil mailto:jim.rudroff@navy.mil

MW-B

9.82

MW-BG01

10.73

MW-BG04

20.42

MW-BG05

17.76

MW-BG06

11.99

MW-BG07

11.55

MW-BG09

11.5

MW-BG10

10.41

MW-BG11

9.22

MW-BG12

13.58

MW-BG13

12.66

OC-MW01

9.44

OC-MW02

12.77

OC-MW03

9.18

OC-MW04

10.1

OW11-MW1

11.13

OW11-MW4

11.53

OW11-MW5

11.51

OW11-MW6

11.35

OW11-MW7

11.15

OW11-MW8

10.76

OW11-MW9

10.52

OW26-MW1

13.67

OW2B-MW41

14.73

OW2C-MW19

12.66

OW2E-MW19

14.45

203MW-19

OC-MW07

MW4 near fuel tank

Hush House

Crash in Woods

Aircraft Hangars and Maintenance Buildings

Approximate Location of 1986 Plane Crash on Oceana Blvd

Site 11

SWMU 26

2007 Civilian Plane Crash

POL Tank Farm

US HWY 58

BIRDNECK RD

S

TATE

H W

Y 615

POTTERS RD

BELLS RD

N B

IR

D

N E

C K

R D

S

TAT

E H

W Y

NORFOLK AVE

S

TA

TE

H

W Y

2 79

S

TA

T E

H W

Y

S B

IR

D

N E

C K

R D

US HWY 58 BUS

I 264

DAM NECK RD

Figure 4-1 COCs Concentrations in the Columbia Aquifer

Basewide Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances Site Inspection Report NAS Oceana, Virginia Beach, Virginia

0 1,500 3,000750

Feet

\\brookside\gis_share\ENBG\00_Proj\N\Navy\CLEAN\MIDLANT\NASOceana\MapFiles\Basewide\678440_PFAS_SI\Figure_4-1_PFOS_PFOA_Detections_Columbia_Aquifer.mxd1/30/2018bmailhes

Legend Monitoring Wells with PFOS/PFOA Detections

Monitoring Wells with PFOS/PFOA Exceedances

Monitoring Wells with No PFOS/PFOA Detections

Non-Core Target Treatment Area (2004)

Core Target Treatment Area (2004) (Core)

Direction of Groundwater Flow

Groundwater Elevation Contour - November 2017 (dashed where inferred)

Sampling Area

Potential AFFF Release Areas

Fire Fighting Training Areas

Installation Boundary

Imagery Source: Esri, 2017

PFOA 11,600

PFOS 217,000 J

Total PFOA/PFOS 228,600

10/25/2016

OW11-MW1

PFOA 1,540

PFOS 33,200 J

Total PFOA/PFOS 34,740

OW11-MW4

10/26/2016

PFOA 4,100

PFOS 69,500 J

Total PFOA/PFOS 73,600

OW11-MW5

10/25/2016

PFOA 11,300

PFOS 101,000 J

Total PFOA/PFOS 112,300

OW11-MW6

10/26/2016

PFOA 18,700

PFOS 296,000 J

Total PFOA/PFOS 314,700

OW11-MW7

10/25/2016

PFOA 5,360

PFOS 18,800

Total PFOA/PFOS 24,160

OW11-MW8

10/25/2016

PFOA 10,100

PFOS 116,000 J

Total PFOA/PFOS 126,100

OW11-MW9*

10/25/2016

PFOA 22,600

PFOS 471,000

Total PFOA/PFOS 493,600

OW26-MW1*

11/1/2016

PFOA 4.92 J

PFOS 8.16 J

Total PFOA/PFOS 13.08

OC-MW01

11/1/2016

PFOA 15.6

PFOS 33.4

Total PFOA/PFOS 49

OC-MW03

11/1/2016

PFOA 12.6

PFOS 4,020

Total PFOA/PFOS 4,032.6

JTC-MW-B

11/1/2016

PFOA 6.84 J

PFOS 39.6

Total PFOA/PFOS 46.44

OC-MW04

10/31/2016

PFOA 413

PFOS 263

Total PFOA/PFOS 676

OW2E-MW19

11/1/2016

PFOA 222

PFOS 63.1

Total PFOA/PFOS 285.1

OW2B-MW41

11/1/2016

PFOA 5.75 J

PFOS 7.17 J

Total PFOA/PFOS 12.92

203MW-19

11/1/2016

OC-MW02

11/1/2016

No Detections

PFOA 13.5

PFOS 20.2

Total PFOA/PFOS 33.7

MW-BG01

10/31/2016

PFOA 2.02 J

MW-BG05*

10/28/2016

PFOS 11.4

MW-BG06

10/28/2016

PFOA 1.65 J

PFOS 29.2

Total PFOA/PFOS 30.85

MW-BG07

10/28/2016

PFOA 3.15 J

MW-BG09

10/31/2016

PFOS 1.23 J

MW-BG10

11/2/2016PFOS 15.6

MW-BG11

10/31/2016

PFOA 10.2

PFOS 46.5

Total PFOA/PFOS 56.7

MW-BG12

10/26/2016

PFOS 28.7

MW-BG13*

10/26/2016

Total PFOS/PFOA 70

USEPA

Lifetime Health

Advisory

Notes:

All units are ng/L (nanograms per liter) J - Estimated result

* - Field duplicate collected at this location; the greater of the results is shown Bold text indicates a detection Shading indicates exceedance of the USEPA Lifetime Health Advisory

No Detections

OC-F8F9-MW-F4

4/4/2017

PFOA 0.685 J

PFOS 3.63 J

Total PFOA/PFOS 4.315

OC-MW07

4/4/2017

PFOA 1100

PFOS 44,500 J

Total PFOA/PFOS 45,600

OW2C-MW25

2/23/2017

PFOA 42.9

PFOS 249

Total PFOA/PFOS 292

OW2C-MW05

2/23/2017

PFOA 134

PFOS 103

Total PFOA/PFOS 237

OW2E-MW09R

2/23/2017

PFOA 546 268

PFOS 2,430 1,340

Total PFOA/PFOS 2,976 1,608

2/23/201711/1/2016

OW2C-MW19

PFOA 1540

PFOS 78.7

Total PFOA/PFOS 1,619

OW2C-MW24

2/23/2017

PFOA 4.72 J

MW-BG04R

8/10/2017

Site 11

TABLE 4 1

Basewide PFAS Site Inspection NAS Oceana, Virginia Beach, Virginia

Sample ID

Sample Date

Chemical Name

Semivolatile Organic Compounds (ng/L) Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBS) Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS) 70 Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) 70 Total PFOS + PFOA* 70

Notes:

HQ = hazard quotient ng/L = nanogram per liter

Shading indicates detection

J = Analyte present. Value may or may not be accurate or precise

Bolded text indicates exceedance of USEPA Lifetime Health Advisory (May 2016)

UJ = Analyte not detected, quantitation limit may be inaccurate U = The material was analyzed for, but not detected

400,000

RSLs Tapwater

HQ = 1.0

(November 2017)

USEPA Lifetime Health Advisory

(May 2016)

Columbia Aquifer Groundwater Analytical Data (October and November 2016, February, May, and August 2017)

*In cases when both PFOA and PFOS are non detect, non detect limits of detection were added together to provide the total PFOA + PFOS limit of detection and the total was considered a non detect. In cases when either PFOA or PFOS was not detected, but the other of the two compounds was detected, only the detection was used to determine the total of PFOA and PFOS. Based on this dataset, there were no instances in which adding a concentration at the limit of detection of the non detected compound to the detected concentration of the detected compound would have resulted in an exceedance of the L HA, so there are no impacts to data usability.

1,930 4,950 4,740 51.7 9.86 195 97.9 116,000 J 471,000 471,000 63.1 249 2,430 1,340

10,100 22,600 21,200 J 222 42.9 546 268 126100 493600 492200 285.1 291.9 2976 1608

2/23/17 2/23/1710/25/16 11/1/16 11/1/16 11/1/16 11/1/16

OW11 MW9P 1016 OW2C MW19 1116OW2C MW05 0217 OW2C MW19 0217OW2B MW41 1116OW26 MW1 1116 OW26 MW1P 1116

Final Submittal

HAZARDOUS MATERIAL BUILDING

INSPECTION REPORT

P-1289 ORDNANCE OPERATIONS SUPPORT

& INERT STORAGE REPLACEMENT

Naval Air Station Oceana Virginia Beach, VA Contract No.: N40085-19-D-9164 Task Order: N40085-21-F-4528

March 5, 2021 ii

THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK.

Bamforth Engineers + Surveyors, Inc.

2207 Hampton Boulevard Norfolk, VA 23517

Attention: Mrs. Anna Lee Bamforth, P.E.

March 5, 2021

Subject: Final Submittal

Hazardous Building Material Inspection Report

P-1289 ORDNANCE OPERATIONS SUPPORT & INERT STORAGE

REPLACEMENT

Naval Air Station Oceana, Virginia Beach, VA G ER Project #130-7868

GeoEnvironmental Resources, Inc. has completed our hazardous materials sampling for the project described above. This work was completed in accordance with the scope of work outlined in our fee proposal P19-130- 7447, dated December 29, 2020. This report is relevant to the date of our field work and should not be relied upon for later dates.

We appreciate the opportunity of completing this work Bamforth Surveyors + Engineers, Inc. If there are any questions concerning this report, please contact us.

Sincerely, GeoEnvironmental Resources, Inc.

Brian T. Hyde H. Nelson Adcock, Jr., P.E.

Hazardous Materials Project Manager President

P-1289 ORDNANCE OPERATIONS SUPPORT & INERT STORAGE REPLACEMENT, NAS

OCEANA, VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

i

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................. 1-1

2. GENERAL INFORMATION ............................................................................................................................ 2-1

I. PROJECT OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................. 2-1

II. PREVIOUS INSPECTION REPORTS ...................................................................................................... 2-2

III. SAMPLING METHODOLOGIES ............................................................................................................. 2-2

A. Suspect Asbestos-Containing Materials (ACM) ....................................................................................... 2-2

B. Lead Based Paint (LBP) ............................................................................................................................... 2-3

C. Polychlorinated Biphyenls (PCBs) .............................................................................................................. 2-3

IV. ANALYTICAL METHODS ......................................................................................................................... 2-3

A. Suspect Asbestos-Containing Materials (ACM) ....................................................................................... 2-3

B. Lead Based Paint (LBP) ............................................................................................................................... 2-3

C. TCLP – Waste Stream .................................................................................................................................. 2-3

V. ABATEMENT CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................................................ 2-3

A. Asbestos .......................................................................................................................................................... 2-4

B. Lead-Based Paint ........................................................................................................................................... 2-4

C. Waste Stream Characterization ................................................................................................................... 2-4

D. PCB’s ............................................................................................................................................................... 2-4

E. Mercury Containing Components .............................................................................................................. 2-4

F. Bird Droppings .............................................................................................................................................. 2-4

G. Bees ................................................................................................................................................................. 2-5

VI. WASTE CLASIFICATION FOR PAINTED BUILDING COMPONENTS ................................... 2-5

VII. LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................................................ 2-5

3. HAZARDOUS BUILDING MATERIAL INSPECTION REPORTS ...................................................... 3-1

I. BUILDING 1140 ............................................................................................................................................. 3-1

A. General ............................................................................................................................................................ 3-1

B. Suspect ACM ................................................................................................................................................. 3-1

C. Lead Based Paint (LBP) ............................................................................................................................... 3-3

D. PCBs and Mercury Containing Light Tubes ............................................................................................. 3-4

E. Soil Sample ..................................................................................................................................................... 3-4

F. Waste Classification For Painted Building Components ........................................................................ 3-5

II. BUILDING 2025 .......................................................................................................................................... 3-37 i

A. General ..........................................................................................................................................................3-37

B. Suspect ACM .............................................................................................................................................. 3-37

C. Lead Based Paint (LBP) ............................................................................................................................ 3-37

D. PCBs and Mercury Containing Light Tubes .......................................................................................... 3-39

E. Waste Classification For Painted Building Components ...................................................................... 3-39

III. BUILDING 2026 .......................................................................................................................................... 3-51

A. General ..........................................................................................................................................................3-51

B. Suspect ACM .............................................................................................................................................. 3-51

C. Lead Based Paint (LBP) ............................................................................................................................ 3-51

D. PCBs and Mercury Containing Light Tubes .......................................................................................... 3-52

E. Waste Classification For Painted Building Components ...................................................................... 3-53

4. LICENSES .............................................................................................................................................................. 4-1

A. LICENSES

xiii

ACRONYMS

AAS Atomic absorption spectroscopy

ACBM Asbestos-containing building materials

ACM Asbestos-containing materials

ACT Acoustical ceiling tile

ADA Americans with Disability Act

AHERA Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act

ASHARA Asbestos Schools Hazard Abatement Reauthorization Act

ASTM American Society of Testing and Materials

CMU Cement masonry unit

CFC Chlorofluoro carbons

CHMM Certified Hazardous Materials Manager

CFR Code of Federal Regulation

CMU Concrete masonry unit

CSP Certified Safety Professional

DEHP Di (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate

DRO Diesel Range Organics

ECD Electron capture detectors

EA Each

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

GC Gas chromatography

GRO Gasoline Range Organics

GWB Gypsum wall board

HBM Hazardous building material

HID High intensity discharge

HM Homogeneous material

HUD U.S. Housing and Urban Development

LBP Lead-based paint

LF Linear feet

LS Lump sum

MDL Minimum detection limit mg/cm2 Milligrams per square centimeter mg/kg Milligrams per kilogram mg/L Milligrams per Liter ii

ND none detected

NVLAP National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration

PCB Polychlorinated biphenyl

PLM Polarized light microscopy ppm Parts per million

PWL Paint with lead

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

SAP Sample and Analysis Plan

SF Square Feet

TCLP Toxicity characteristic leaching procedure

TPH Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons

TSI Thermal System Insulation

VAC Virginia Administration Code

VOC Volatile Organic Compound

XRF X-Ray Fluorescence

1-1

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The project involved performing hazardous building material (HBM) inspections for the project titled “P-1289 Ordnance Operations Support & Inert Storage Replacement, NAS Oceana, Virginia Beach, VA.

The HBM inspection was performed on February 8, 2021.

The total number of buildings to be inspected as part of the Statement of Architect-Engineer Services (SAES) was three (3). A brief summary of the inspection findings is provided in the table below.

FACILITY NAME & MAGAZINE

NUMBER

APPROX.

SIZE

ACM LBP PWL

Building 1140 2,000 SF YES NO YES

Building 2025 4,300 SF YES NO YES

Building 2026 4,300 SF NO YES YES

ACM was found in Building 1140 and Building 2025. The ACM in Building 1140 consisted of 12-inch tan floor tile mastic in the restroom and silver coating on the building exterior. The ACM in Building 2025 consisted of silver coating on the building roof. The ACM was Category II Non-Friable. No ACM was identified in Building 2026.

Paints containing lead, cadmium and or chromium were identified in each of the three buildings. Lead Based paint was identified on the structural steel in Building 2026.

Fluorescent light fixtures with T-8 lamps were only observed in Building 1140. The electric ballasts associated with the T-8 fluorescent lamps are electronic. No PCB fluorescent light ballasts were observed.

A soil sample was collected outside the NE quadrant of Building 1140. The soil was analyzed for asbestos and RCRA TCLP metals. The soil sample did not contain asbestos fibers, nor did it contain RCRA TCLP concentrations above the laboratory reporting limits. The soil sample did not present a RCRA TCLP hazardous characteristic.

Bird droppings, fungal growth and the presence of bees were observed in and around the buildings.

1-2

P-1289 ORDNANCE OPERATIONS SUPPORT & INERT STORAGE REPLACEMENT, NAS OCEANA,

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

2-1

2. GENERAL INFORMATION

I. PROJECT OVERVIEW

The project involved performing hazardous building material (HBM) inspections for the demolition of three (3) buildings at Naval Air Station Oceana, Virginia Beach, Yorktown, Virginia. As described in the Statement of Architect/Engineer Services (SAES) the following buildings/facilities were inspected:

GER

ID#

BUILDING

FACILITY NAME LOCATION DATE

CONSTRUCTED

1140 Metal Quonset hut office and storage building

NAS Oceana

Circa early 1940’s

2025 Multi Bay Garage, pre-engineered metal building (PEMB) NAS Oceana 1968

3 2026 Multi Bay Garage, PEMB NAS Oceana 1968

The P-1289 Demolition Plan drawing below provides an overall location plan for the buildings and magazines described in this report.

NAS Oceana provided a POC to coordinated access to the various buildings as needed to complete the SOW.

The HBM inspection included assessing the various buildings for asbestos-containing materials (ACM), lead-based paint (LBP) and other potential HBMs such as Polychlorinated biphenyl’s (PCBs) in transformers and lighting ballasts, mercury containing light tubes and bird droppings.

2-2

II. PREVIOUS INSPECTION REPORTS

We were not provided with previous hazardous material reports for Buildings 1140, 2025 or 2026.

III. SAMPLING METHODOLOGIES

A. Suspect Asbestos-Containing Materials (ACM)

The AHERA regulation, 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 763, is the primary governing regulation when performing asbestos surveys. This regulation was originally enacted for school buildings but has since been applied to public and commercial buildings by the Asbestos School Hazard Abatement Reauthorization Act (ASHARA) in 1994 and by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) worker protection regulations in 1995, specifically 29 CFR 1926.1101(k). The demolition of structures is also subject to 40 CFR Part 61 “National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants” (NESHAPs). ACM is specifically addressed in 40 CFR 61 Subpart M “National Emission Standard for Asbestos.”

ACM is generally divided into three primary classifications as follows: (a) Surfacing material, (b) Thermal System Insulation, and (c) Miscellaneous material. These classifications are defined in 40 CFR 763.83 as provided below.

Miscellaneous material means interior building on structural components, structural members, or fixtures, such as floor and ceiling tiles, and does not include surfacing material or thermal system insulation.

Surfacing material means material in a school building that is sprayed-on, troweled-on, or otherwise applied to surfaces, such as acoustical plaster on ceilings and fireproofing materials on structural members, or other materials on surfaces for acoustical, fireproofing, or other purposes.

Thermal system insulation means material in a school building applied to pipes, fittings, boilers, breeching, tanks, ducts, or other interior structural components to prevent heat loss or gain, or water condensation, or for other purposes.

The sampling methodologies employed to address the ACM categories described above are as follows:

Surfacing material – An accredited inspector shall collect, in a statistically random manner that is representative of the homogeneous are, bulk samples from each homogeneous area of friable surfacing material that is not assumed to be ACM, and shall collect the samples as follows:

(1) At least three bulk samples shall be collected from each homogeneous area that is 1,000 SF or less.

(2) At least five bulk samples shall be collected from each homogeneous area that is greater than 1,000 SF but less than or equal to 5,000 SF.

(3) At least seven bulk samples shall be collected from each homogeneous area that is greater than 5,000 SF.

Thermal system insulation - An accredited inspector shall collect the samples as follows:

(1) At least three bulk samples, in a random distributed manner from each homogeneous area of thermal system insulation that is not assumed to be ACM.

(2) Collect at least one bulk sample from each homogeneous are of patched thermal system insulation that is not assumed to be ACM if the patched section is less than 6 linear or square feet.

(3) In a manner sufficient to determine whether the material is ACM or not ACM, collect bulk samples from each insulated mechanical system that is not assumed to be ACM where cement or plaster is used on fittings such as tees, elbows, or valves.

(4) Bulk samples are not required to be collected from any homogeneous area where the accredited inspector has determined that the thermal system insulation is fiberglass, foam glass, rubber, or other non-ACBM.

Miscellaneous material - An accredited inspector shall collect the samples as follows:

2-3

(1) In a manner sufficient to determine whether material is ACM or not ACM from each homogeneous area of friable miscellaneous material that is not assumed to be ACM.

Non-Friable suspected ACBM - An accredited inspector shall collect the samples as follows:

(1) If any homogeneous area of Non-Friable suspected ACBM is not assumed to be ACM, then an accredited inspector shall collect, in a manner sufficient to determine whether the material is ACM or not ACM, bulk samples from the homogeneous are of Non-Friable suspected ACBM that is not assumed to be ACM.

During the performance of this inspection the AHERA regulations were used as a guide for the sampling methodology.

B. Lead Based Paint (LBP)

Testing of painted surfaces for lead, cadmium and chromium was conducted by collecting bulk paint chip samples. The inspection was generally conducted using methodology recommended by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Modifications were made where appropriate for this project. It is important to note that this inspection was not a comprehensive, surface-by-surface evaluation, but rather a screening inspection of major painted components, which may contain LBP.

C. Polychlorinated Biphyenls (PCBs)

On January 1, 1979, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) banned the manufacturing of light ballasts which contain PCB’s and phased out most PCB uses. Therefore, all light ballasts manufactured prior to January 1, 1979 without “Non-PCB” markings must be considered PCB containing. The EPA’s actions subject all substances containing over 50 ppm PCBs to regulatory control (except for PCB-contaminated waste oil which is prohibited at any level).

We performed a visual inspection of fluorescent light ballasts and other lights observe inside the buildings.

IV. ANALYTICAL METHODS

A. Suspect Asbestos-Containing Materials (ACM)

Suspect ACM samples were analyzed using polarized light microscopy (PLM) and dispersion staining techniques. The analytical method was conducted in accordance with Method EPA-600/M4-82-020 and/or EPA 600/R-93/116. Analysis was performed by EMSL Analytical, Inc., Cinnaminson, NJ NVLAP Lab Code 101048-0, AIHA-LAP, LLC-IHLAP Lab

100194, NYS ELAP 10872, NJ DEP 03036.

B. Lead Based Paint (LBP)

Paint chip samples were analyzed for lead using inductively coupled plasma (ICP) emission spectroscopy (SW-846, 3050B/6010D). Analysis was performed by EMSL Analytical, Inc. Cinnaminson, NJ NELAP Certifications: 03036, PA

68-00367, AIHA-LAP, LLC ELLAP 100194, A2LA 2845.01.

C. TCLP – Waste Stream

TCLP samples were analyzed using protocol (SW 846), method 1311/6010D/7470A. Analysis was performed by EMSL Analytical, Inc. Cinnaminson, NJ NELAP Certifications: 03036, PA 68-00367, AIHA-LAP, LLC ELLAP 100194, A2LA 2845.01.

V. ABATEMENT CONSIDERATIONS

All abatement activities should be performed in accordance with FC 1-300-09N Navy and Marine Corps Design Procedures and UFC 3-810-01N Environmental Engineering for Facility Construction.

2-4

A. Asbestos

All asbestos abatement work shall be performed in accordance with all NAS Oceana, NAVFAC Environmental, local, state, and Federal regulations including but not limited to:

29CFR1926.1101 - Asbestos

40CFR61 - National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants

9VAC 20-81 - Virginia Solid Waste Management Regulations

18VAC 15-20 - Virginia Asbestos Licensing Regulations

B. Lead-Based Paint

The disturbance of all lead, cadmium and chromium painted surfaces shall be performed in accordance with all NAS Oceana, NAVFAC Environmental, local, state, and Federal regulations to protect workers and the environment, including but not limited to:

29CFR 1926.62 - Lead

29CFR 1926.1126 - Chromium

29CFR 1926.1127 - Cadmium

9VAC 20-60 - Virginia Hazardous Waste Management Regulations

9VAC 20-81 - Virginia Solid Waste Management Regulations

18VAC 15-30 - Virginia Lead-Based Paint Activity Regulations

C. Waste Stream Characterization

All waste stream characterizations shall be performed in accordance with all NAS Oceana, NAVFAC Environmental, local, state, and Federal regulations to protect workers and the environment, including but not limited to:

9VAC 20-60 - Virginia Hazardous Waste Management Regulations

9VAC 20-81 - Virginia Solid Waste Management Regulations

D. PCB’s

All PCB work shall be performed in accordance with all NAS Oceana, NAVFAC Environmental, local, state, and Federal regulations to protect workers and the environment, including but not limited to:

40CFR761 - Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in Commerce, and Use Prohibitions

9VAC 20-81 - Virginia Solid Waste Management Regulations

E. Mercury Containing Components

All mercury-containing components shall be handled in accordance with all NAS Oceana, NAVFAC Environmental, local, state, and Federal regulations to protect workers and the environment, including but not limited to:

9VAC 20-60 - Virginia Hazardous Waste Management Regulations

9VAC 20-81 - Virginia Solid Waste Management Regulations

F. Bird Droppings

At the time of our inspection, we observed bird droppings in and around the buildings. Bird droppings were considered lightly distributed throughout.

2-5

The demolition contractor and other personnel entering the buildings should consider wearing personal protective equipment including respiratory protection and disposable clothing when entering the buildings.

Waste disposal shall be handled in accordance with Federal, state, and local regulations.

G. Bees

At the time of our inspection, we did observe openings in the buildings. A visual inspection inside and around the buildings identified evidence of bee’s nests. The demolition contractor and other personnel entering the building should take special precautions to protect themselves from potential bee stings.

VI. WASTE CLASIFICATION FOR PAINTED BUILDING COMPONENTS

Building components and demolition waste streams which are painted must be properly characterized prior to disposal.

The EPA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations establish the limits for RCRA leachable metals (lead, cadmium, chromium, etc.). Leachable metals mean the amount of metals likely to leach from the waste into the surrounding soil/groundwater system of a landfill. The leachable concentration of chemicals in a waste stream is determined by an analytical method called the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP). Waste stream TCLP concentrations that equal or exceed the RCRA limits must be transported to a hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal facility. Precautions should be implemented to prevent the storage of any hazardous waste for more the 90 days.

Specific permits are necessary to store hazardous waste in excess of 90 days.

VII. LIMITATIONS

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Bamforth Surveyors + Engineers, Inc. and/or their agents. This service was performed in accordance with generally accepted environmental practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Our conclusions and recommendations are based, in part, upon information provided to us by others and our site observations. We have not verified the completeness or accuracy of the information provided by others, unless otherwise noted. Our observations and recommendations are based upon conditions readily visible at the time of our site visit, February 8, 2021, and upon current industry standards. During our inspection, accessible areas were visually inspected for the presence of asbestos and lead based paints. The findings at these locations area assumed to be representative throughout the impacted areas of the building. Inaccessible areas were not visually inspected. Areas inspected for the above-referenced materials were limited to those designated by the client. The inspection did include the entire building and was limited to the areas described in the report.

Under this scope of services, we assume no responsibility regarding response actions (e.g., O&M Plans, Remediation, Notifications, etc.) initiated because of these findings. We assume no liability for the duties and responsibilities of the Client with respect to compliance with local, state, and Federal regulations. Compliance with regulations and response actions are the sole responsibility of the Client and should be conducted in accordance with local, state, and Federal regulations and should be performed by appropriately licensed personnel, as warranted.

2-6

3-1

3. HAZARDOUS BUILDING MATERIAL INSPECTION REPORTS

I. BUILDING 1140

A. General

The date of construction for Building 1140 was provided in the SAES as early 1940’s. The building was estimated to contain 2,000 SF. The magazine was constructed on a concrete slab and incorporated a metal Quonset hut structure.

The exterior of the Quonset hut was covered with a silver coating. The building was in use and was in fair condition at the time of our inspection.

B. Suspect ACM

Typical suspect ACM materials in the building consisted of floor tile and mastic, SACT, residual floor tile mastic, floor leveling compound, concrete joint sealant, gypsum wallboard and joint compound, vinyl covebase and mastic and exterior silver coating on the structure. A total of twenty-four (24) suspect ACM samples were collected from the building. Table 1 below lists the suspect ACM samples along with the analytical results.

TABLE 1 – BUILDING 1140 - ASBESTOS SAMPLE RESULTS

SAMPLE

HA LOCATION DESCRIPTION CONDITION FRIABLE/NON-

FRIABLE

ANALYTICAL

RESULTS

1 1 Office area, ceiling 2' x 4' SACT, crater G F None Detected

2 1 Office area, ceiling

2' x 4' SACT, crater G F None Detected

3 2 Concrete floor

Residual tan mastic D NF None Detected

4 3 Concrete floor

Floor leveling compound

D NF None Detected

5 3 Concrete floor

Floor leveling compound

D NF None Detected

6 2 Concrete floor

Residual tan mastic D NF None Detected

7 4 Concrete floor joint

Black substance in joint

D F None Detected

8 4 Concrete floor joint

Black substance in joint

D F None Detected

9 5 Men's locker room ceiling

2' x 4' SACT, pinhole

G F None Detected

10 5 Men's locker room ceiling

2' x 4' SACT, pinhole

G F None Detected

11 6 Toilet floor 12" Red floor tile and tan mastic, top layer

G NF None Detected

12 7 Toilet floor 12" Black floor tile and tan mastic, top layer

G NF None Detected

3-2

13 8 Toilet floor 12" Tan floor tile and mastic, bottom layer

G NF None Detected

14 8 Toilet floor 12" Tan floor tile and mastic, bottom layer

G NF 2% Chrysotile (Mastic)

15 9 Toilet wall GWB joint compound

G F None Detected

16 9 Toilet wall GWB joint compound

G F None Detected

17 10 Toilet wall Gypsum wall board G F None Detected

18 10 Toilet wall Gypsum wall board G F None Detected

19 11 Toilet wall Grey 4" vinyl covebase and mastic

G NF None Detected

20 11 Toilet wall Grey 4" vinyl covebase and mastic

G NF None Detected

21 12 Exterior corrugated metal covering

Silver coating SD NF <1 % Chrysotile

22 12 Exterior corrugated metal covering

Silver coating SD NF 2% Chrysotile

23 13 Debris on ground

Silver coating SD NF <1 % Chrysotile

24 13 Debris on ground

Silver coating SD NF <1 % Chrysotile

Notes:

D – Damaged Condition F - Friable G – Good Condition HA – Homogeneous Area NF – Non-friable SD – Significantly Damaged Condition

The EPA defines ACM as any material which contains greater than 1% asbestos by weight. The following categories of ACM were identified in the building:

1. 12-Tan floor tile mastic – Estimated quantity: 50 SF.

2. Silver Coating – The silver coating was applied to the exterior of the metal Quonset hut. The approximate surface area of the silver coating was 4,200 SF.

3-3

C. Lead Based Paint (LBP)

A total of five (5) paint chip samples were collected from painted surfaces. Table 1A below lists the paint chip samples along with the analytical results.

TABLE 1A – BUILDING 1140 PAINT CHIP SAMPLE RESULTS (% by weight) Sample # Location Description Lead % Cadmium % Chromium %

P-1 Steel frame inside Quonset Hut

Silver paint 0.13 0.00086 0.78

P-2 Concrete floor Yellow paint 0.20 0.00021 0.051

P-3 Quonset Hut exterior at OH Door

Silver paint 0.21 0..00061 0.041

P-4 Concrete floor Green paint 0.055 0.00070 0.015

P-5 Composite paint sample (P1-P4)

Red, Yellow, Silver, Green Paint

.078 0.00016 0.023

Notes: Values without a “<” are considered to exceed the laboratory detection limit, BOLD values are Lead Based Paint.

There are two frequently used standards to define lead-based paint, the Consumer Product and Safety Commission (CPSC) and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). In 1978, the CPSC, acting under the authority of the Consumer Product Safety Act, banned the sale of paint containing more than 0.06% lead by weight to consumers.

The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 lowered the concentration of lead in paint that is permissible from 0.06% (600 ppm) to the new limit of 0.009% (90ppm), for specific paints and products. Paint which contains more than 0.009% lead by weight is defined as lead containing paint (LCP).

The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) defines Lead-based paint (LBP) as any paint, varnish, shellac, or other coating that contains lead equal to or greater than 1.0 mg/cm2 as measured by X-ray fluorescence (XRF) analyzer or laboratory analysis, or 0.5% by weight as measured by laboratory analysis.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Lead in Construction Standard (29 CFR 1926.62) does not define lead-based paint. However, to comply with OSHA, all painted surfaces with a lead concentration at or above the laboratory’s minimum detection limit (MDL) should be considered lead containing. Compliance with this standard is required even for paints with less than 0.5% or 0.009% lead by weight. Therefore, painted surfaces exceeding the MDL should not be disturbed without taking the appropriate precautions when performing certain high-risk tasks. Activities such as scraping, sanding, welding/torching and disturbance of painted surfaces could potentially release leaded dust. OSHA has categorized the following high risks tasks into three groups:

Group 1: manual demolition manual scraping heat-gun applications power tool cleaning with dust collection system spray paint with lead-based paints

Group 2: lead burning using lead-containing mortar

3-4 power tool cleaning without dust collection system rivet blasting cleanup activities where dry expendable abrasives are used movement and removal of abrasive blasting enclosures

Group 3: abrasive blasting welding, cutting, and burning on steel structures

The analytical results for lead paint indicated that each paint sample collected and analyzed was found to have lead concentrations above the laboratory's MDL. No paint samples were determined to be LBP.

Paints containing cadmium and chromium are often found as protective coatings on structural steel or exterior coatings on metal surfaces. These paints tend to be red, yellow, or orange and are typically the first layer. All of the bulk paint chip samples were also tested for cadmium and chromium. The analytical results for cadmium indicated each paint sample analyzed resulted in a concentration above the MDL. The analytical results for chromium indicated each paint sample analyzed resulted in a concentration above the MDL. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) identifies chromium as a confirmed carcinogen and cadmium as a suspect carcinogen.

Therefore, all existing painted surfaces scheduled for demolition should be considered lead, cadmium and chromium containing for the purposes of complying with 29 CFR 1926.62, 29 CFR 1926.1126 and 29 CFR 1926.1127 in order to protect workers and the environment.

Construction Standards established by OSHA for lead, cadmium and chromium are:

Lead 29 CFR 1926.62

Cadmium 29 CFR 1926.1127

Chromium 29 CRF 1926.1126

D. PCBs and Mercury Containing Light Tubes

We performed a visual inspection of the building for fluorescent light fixtures and PCB containing fluorescent light electrical ballasts. The building incorporated fluorescent light fixtures with T8 lamps. The electrical ballasts associated with T8 fluorescent light fixtures are typically electronic and do not contain PCBs. The fluorescent lamps are mercury containing and should be recycled or disposed of as universal waste in accordance with the Virginia Hazardous Waste Management Regulations. Estimated Quantity of Fluorescent lamps: 48 each.

E. Soil Sample

A composite soil sample was collected from the upper 12-inches of soil outside the NE quadrant of Building 1140. This area was selected because we observed pieces of debris that appeared to be like the exterior coating on the Quonset Hut.

The soil sample was analyzed for RCRA TCLP metals as well as asbestos.

Table 1B below lists the sample along with the analytical results.

TABLE 1B – Building 1140 – ASBESTOS & RCRA 8 SAMPLE RESULTS (Mg/L & % by Weight)

Sample

Location Arsenic

(RL=0.05)

Barium

(RL=5)

Cadmium

(RL=0.025)

Chromium

(RL=0.05)

Lead

(RL=0.05)

Selenium

(RL=0.1)

Silver

(RL=0.025)

Mercury

(RL=0.0016)

S1 Outside

NE

quadrant of Bldg.

ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

3-5

Sample

Location Asbestos (% by weight)

S1 Outside

NE

quadrant of Bldg.

ND

Notes: US EPA allowable toxicity limits for RCRA metals are: Arsenic 5.0 mg/L, Barium 100.0 mg/L, Cadmium 1.0 mg/L, Chromium 5.0 mg/L, Lead 5.0 mg/L, Mercury 0.2 mg/L, Selenium 1.0 mg/L, Silver 5.0 mg/L. BOLD values indicate toxicity limits above US EPA threshold. RL – Laboratory Reporting Limit. ND – None Detected above the RL.

Laboratory analysis did not identify any RCRA TCLP metals in the soil sample above the laboratory reporting limits.

Based on the laboratory analysis, the soil sample was characterized as Non-Hazardous.

The soil sample was determined to contain 2 individual layers. One was described as “Dark Gray Non-Fibrous (Rock)” and the second layer was described as “Grey Debris.” Both layers were analyzed for asbestos. The laboratory reported the asbestos content results as ND (no fibers detected.)

F. Waste Classification For Painted Building Components

Building components and demolition waste streams which are painted must be properly characterized prior to disposal.

The EPA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations establish the limits for RCRA leachable metals (lead, cadmium, chromium, etc.). Leachable metals means the amount of metals likely to leach from the waste into the surrounding soil/groundwater system of a landfill. The leachable concentration of chemicals in a waste stream is determined by an analytical method called the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP). Waste stream TCLP concentrations that equal or exceed the RCRA limits must be transported to a hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal facility. Precautions should be implemented to prevent the storage of any hazardous waste for more the 90 days.

Specific permits are necessary to store hazardous waste more than 90 days.

During the time of the inspection the building was in use. To preserve the building aesthetics an empirical approach was used to characterize the expected waste stream TCLP concentrations.

The primary building components expected to be disposed of during the building demolition are as follows:

Quonset hut exterior panels and structural steel

Gypsum wall board systems

Acoustical ceiling tiles

Concrete flooring

The structural steel components, metal doors/frames used in the building will generally be recycled.

The painted building components making up the waste stream would primarily consist of the gypsum wall board systems and possibly the concrete flooring.

TCLP testing on existing painted building materials when demolished as components of an assembly typically return results classifying the waste as nonhazardous. Painted material removed in the form of stripping, blasting, scraping or other methods that remove the paint coating from the substrate or produces a waste resulting primarily of paint material will likely result in a waste classified as hazardous. The contractor must characterize the waste stream generated during the project to ensure the waste stream is nonhazardous. If the waste stream is determined to be hazardous, special management procedures will be required.

3-6

3-7

PHOTO 1: TYPICAL VIEW OF THE ENTRANCE TO BUILDING 1140.

PHOTO 2: TYPICAL VIEW OF THE INTERIOR OF…