B231 Addition_Hazard_Material_Survey.pdf

Final Submittal 313 21 December 2011

Final Submittal 314 21 December 2011

Hazardous Materials Survey

Page | 1

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Barge, Waggoner, Sumner & Cannon (BWSC) was retained to perform a hazardous materials survey for Building 231 contained within the Robins Air Force Base located outside Warner Robins, Georgia. The purpose of the survey was to identify, and sample, suspected asbestos containing material (ACM), along with visually identify other possible contaminants of concern, that would be disturbed during internal renovation and alteration activities associated with the addition of a second floor to the current one story structure.

The renovation will not impact the B 231 lab section. As a result the BWSC survey team was instructed not to enter or survey this portion of the facility.

BWSC performed the inspection on September 14, 2011. A total of seventeen (17) samples were collected for possible ACM. The sampled material consisted of floor tiles, ceiling tiles, drywall, joint-compounds and roofing materials. Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM) analysis was utilized in order to determine if the samples were ACM. The facility was constructed in the late 1980’s, according to interviews with base personnel, and BWSC attempted to identify if any building features would possibly contain hazardous constituents.

Visual inspections were made for the possible presence of mercury and/or polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) ballasts and switches. In addition, BWSC checked for the presence of equipment that might be older than the age of the building, such as electrical transformers, and possibly be suspect for containing PCB oil or PCB-contaminated oil.

1.1 Hazardous Materials Summary

The purpose of the survey was to identify ACM in the subject property. Sample locations are listed in Table 1 of this report. A total of seventeen (17) homogeneous areas of suspect ACM were sampled during the survey of areas that would be disturbed during renovation activities. No samples were found to contain asbestos.

The areas of inspection included all sections of Building 231 except the small laboratories located in the southern portion of the building. The inspection also included a survey of suspect asbestos containing materials, inspection for possible PCBs, inspection for mercury containing materials, inspection for possible lead based paint, and a visual check for any other possible hazardous materials.

Asbestos

There were no asbestos containing materials (ACM) identified by the inspection.

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)

Following the inspection, only fluorescent light ballasts could be assumed to contain PCBs.

Some electrical transformers were placarded as containing “Non-PCB” oil while the rest of the transformers were not placarded. Given the age of the facility, PCB contamination is not likely but cannot be completely dispelled without analytical data. BWSC only performed a visual inspection and did not sample oil from non-placarded transformers.

Final Submittal 315 21 December 2011

Page | 2

Mercury

Possible mercury sources included thermostat switches and mercury vapor within fluorescent tubes. During the inspection all thermostat switches within the areas of renovation did not appear to contain mercury switches.

Lead

No sampling was performed for lead paint. The areas of renovation were all painted and should be characterized prior to disposal. The OSHA standard 29 CFR 1926.62 will apply for any work performed in these areas.

2.0 INTRODUCTION

BWSC performed a hazardous materials survey for Building 231 at Robins Air Force Base in Warner Robins, Georgia. The purpose of the survey was to identify possible hazardous materials that may be disturbed during renovations. BWSC performed the survey on September 13, 2011 and activities included a survey of suspect ACM, inspection for possible PCB contamination, inspection for mercury- and lead-containing materials and a visual search for other possible hazardous materials.

3.0 ASBESTOS SURVEY FINDINGS

The ACM inspection was performed in accordance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 40 CFR 61 National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS), and 40 CFR 763 Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) Protocol. Mr. Randy Bell and Mr. Jonathan Hardin, of BWSC, performed the inspection. Sample analysis was performed by Frost Environmental, LLC and their analytical report is located in Appendix A.

All appropriate certification documents are located in Appendix B.

3.1 ACM Survey Findings

3.1.1 Suspect Asbestos Containing Building Materials

A total of seventeen (17) samples comprising 3 homogeneous areas of suspect ACM were sampled from areas of the renovation. No samples were found to contain asbestos.

3.1.2 Non Asbestos Containing Building Materials

A total of 17 homogenous materials of suspect ACM were sampled. As shown in Table 1, all samples were found not to contain asbestos.

Final Submittal 316 21 December 2011

Page | 3

Table 1 – Non ACM

Sample No.

MATERIAL (TYPE) FUNCTIONAL SPACE

B231-001 Brown Mastic, White Leveling Compound Main Conference Room B231-002 12 X 12 Brown Floor Tile and Brown Mastic Room 119 B231-003 Ceiling Tile Throughout Building B231-004 Red Floor Tile Rear Vestibule B231-005 White Mastic Coating and Grey Mudding Throughout Building B231-006 Ceiling Tile Throughout Building B231-007 Drywall and Joint Compound Throughout Building B231-008 Pipe Insulation and Cloth Wrapping 700 Area Crawl Space B231-009 Insulation and Outer Coating Room 700 Area B231-010 Insulation and Cloth Wrapping Room 131 B231-011 Drywall and Joint Compound Room 123 B231-012 White floor Tile and Yellow Mastic Room 127, 128 and 129 B231-013 Drywall and Joint Compound Throughout Building B231-014 Roof Felt, Tar and Mastic Roof over Admin Area B231-015 Roof Felt, Tar and Mastic Roof over Admin Area B231-016 Roof Felt, Tar and Mastic Roof over Admin Area B231-017 Roof Penetration Mastic Roof over 700 Area

In addition, all pipe insulation within the areas of renovation - whether in the mechanical rooms or above drop ceiling - were fiberglass.

3.2 Asbestos Survey Protocol

Samples were given a unique numeric identification. Samples were placed in a sealed container; the sample was documented on a chain of custody and sent to a qualified laboratory for analysis.

The technique used for sampling the suspected materials was designed to minimize possible fiber release and in turn possible contamination of surrounding areas. All representative "suspect" materials sampled, were collected in accordance with the EPA's AHERA and "Guidance for Controlling Asbestos Containing Material in Buildings" (EPA 560 / 6-85-024, June 1985).

The sample location was sprayed with an amended water mixture. Then, a sample of the material was collected and properly stored in a labeled airtight container. A chain of custody form was completed for all bulk samples collected and subsequently delivered to a qualified laboratory for analysis using Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM).

Suspect ACM was inspected to determine the condition of the material and touched to determine its friability. A friable material is defined as a material that can be crumbled, or reduced to powder by hand pressure. A friable material has a higher potential of becoming airborne during disturbance.

Final Submittal 317 21 December 2011

Page | 4

BWSC personnel utilized PPE as deemed appropriate for each sampling event. Wet methods were employed during the collection of bulk samples.

3.3 Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) Findings

Polychlorinated biphenyls PCB’s inspection involved visual inspection for possible PCB’s sources such as hydraulic fluids, oils, greases and fluorescent light ballasts. Only concern identified during the inspection, were fluorescent light ballasts. Ballasts could not be accessed since the fluorescent lights were in operation. During the removal of ballasts, non PCB containing ballasts will be labeled as “Non PCB”. Any that are not labeled as Non- PCB’s are assumed to contain PCB’s.

3.4 Mercury Findings

BWSC inspected the areas of renovation for potential mercury sources. Possible sources included thermostat switches and mercury vapor within fluorescent light tubes and compact fluorescent bulbs. None of the thermostat switches within the areas of renovation appeared to contain mercury. Fluorescent light tubes were throughout the areas of renovation and will be located in most rooms that will be disturbed during renovation activities.

3.5 Lead Findings

No sampling was performed for lead paint. Since OSHA has no “lower threshold” for lead levels in painted components, the contractor must follow all applicable OSHA requirements and regulations during renovation and the disturbance of painted components. For all construction debris that results from renovation, the waste must be characterized prior to disposal to determine whether or not the material contains lead that renders the waste hazardous by characteristic. Hazardous waste characterization for lead is done by performing the EPA-approved Toxicity Characteristic Leachate Procedure.

3.6 Other Hazardous Materials

During the inspection, BWSC identified a 30,000 gallon diesel double walled tank used to run a back-up powered generator. The tank was in good condition and appeared full of fuel.

4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Fluorescent light ballasts and tubes must be properly handled when disturbed and should be inspected during removal. If not labeled “PCB Free” or “No PCB’s”, the ballasts and tubes should be analyzed by a qualified laboratory or treated as containing PCBs and properly disposed. Fluorescent light tubes and compact bulbs should be separated, stored in containers so as not to break the tubes and recycled or properly disposed. If electrical transformers will be taken out of service and are not placarded as “Non-PCB” then they should have the oil inspected prior to draining the transformer and disposing of the oil.

Final Submittal 318 21 December 2011

Page | 5

During renovation activities, construction waste must be characterized for lead content and hazard. In addition, the demolition/renovation contractor must follow all applicable OSHA regulations regarding lead in construction, such as 29 CFR 1926.62. The fuel tank, containing diesel fuel, should be clearly marked and protected so it does not become damaged resulting in a potential leak during renovation activities.

5.0 LIMITATIONS

BWSC performed a complete visual inspection of the areas that may be disturbed during the renovation. However, some materials may not been accessible or hidden and not identified or noted. BWSC performed the inspection to the best of their ability. If a material is uncovered during renovation that was not identified during the inspection, the material should be treated as hazardous until testing is performed.

Final Submittal 319 21 December 2011

Final Submittal 320 21 December 2011

Final Submittal 321 21 December 2011

Final Submittal 322 21 December 2011

Final Submittal 323 21 December 2011

Final Submittal 324 21 December 2011

Final Submittal 325 21 December 2011