Additional Testing for Lead in Water at George M. Davis Elementary School

Transcription

1 April 22, 216 Mr. Arturo Rivera Director of Facilities City School District of New Rochelle 515 North Avenue New Rochelle, NY 181 Re: Additional Testing for Lead in Water at George M. Davis Elementary School Dear Mr. Rivera, At your request on behalf of the City School District of New Rochelle (CSDNR), Louis Berger has conducted additional testing for lead in water at the George M. Davis Elementary School. Louis Berger s Industrial Hygiene & Hazmat Manager, Mr. Andrew Cheskin conducted the testing on April 8, 216. Background As a pro-active and voluntary measure, the CSDNR requested that Louis Berger conduct testing of drinking water for all schools in the district. The request was in response to public concerns raised by the revelation of elevated levels of lead in drinking water in the Newark, NJ schools. Louis Berger conducted the district-wide testing of all of the CSDNR schools on March 23 and March 29, 216. At the George M. Davis Elementary School, there was a single sample that exceeded the EPA action level. There was also another sample slightly be the action level. Based upon the results and as the initial testing was a targeted program, Louis Berger recommended additional testing be conducted. Sampling Methodology Sampling Plan In developing the sampling plan for the additional testing, Louis Berger determined that in order to get a complete picture of the lead levels within the school, that all remaining unsampled drinking water sources would be included; these were: Hallway drinking fountains; and Classroom sink fountains. Protocols for Water Testing EPA recommends that a two-step sampling protocol be foled for identifying lead contamination, especially in large schools where many samples may be taken. In Step 1, screening samples are collected to identify the location of outlets providing water with high lead levels. In Step 2, fol-up water samples are taken from problem locations. The results of initial and fol-up samples (if necessary) are then compared to determine the sources of lead contamination and to determine appropriate corrective measures.

2 Initial Screening Samples In Step 1, initial screening samples were taken to determine (1) the lead content of water entering the school and (2) the lead content of water sitting in various outlets within the school. The goal of Step 1 is to identify problem outlets or outlets with high lead concentrations. Initial screening samples involve the collection of "morning, first-draw" water. Morning, first-draw water most often contains the highest concentrations of lead. Such samples will, therefore, generally reflect the "worst case scenario" for a given outlet. Fol-Up Samples In Step 2, if initial test results reveal lead concentrations greater than 2 ppb for a given outlet, analysis of fol-up samples are analyzed. EPA has established this numeric cutoff, or trigger to ensure that the sources of lead >2ppb contamination in drinking water outlets are identified. Fol-up samples involve the collection of water from an outlet where the water has run for 3 seconds; Louis Berger collected these samples in the same sampling event as the initial screening samples. This sampling approach is designed to analyze the lead content in the water in the plumbing behind the wall and the outlet. A comparison of initial and fol-up samples makes it possible to assess where the lead may be getting into the drinking water: either from the outlet or from the plumbing directly behind the outlet. Louis Berger chose to use the 15 ppb action level for these types of samples. As the EPA suggests, water samples were collected before the school opened and before any water was used. The EPA also recommends that the water should sit in the pipes unused for at least 8 hours but not more than 18 hours before a sample is taken; again, this was the case for each sample collected by Louis Berger. The 8 18 hour time distinction is made to ensure that the water collected is representative of the building's normal water use patterns. Samples were submitted to Chemtech for analysis while maintaining chain-of-custody. A copy of laboratory results and the chain of custody are presented at the end of this report in Appendix A. Chemtech is NY State Department of Health approved for analysis of lead in potable water. Laboratory approval can be found in Appendix B. Assessment Results Discussion The analytical results are presented in the table be by location within the School. For reference: the oddnumbered samples are the initial screening, first draw samples; even-numbered samples are the fol-up samples that were 3 seconds. Fol-up samples were only analyzed if the initial screening sample exceeded the EPA action level of 15 ppb. At total of 36 locations were tested, of which eight (8) initial screening samples were above the EPA action level of 15 ppb. The eight locations that exceeded the EPA action level were: the drinking fountain on ground level near the stage door, the drinking fountain outside the general office, and sink fountains inside Rooms 1, 2, 4, 8, 9 and 1. The results of 3 second flush samples for 6 of 8 locations were less than the louisberger.com

3 EPA action level; the sample that remained above 15 ppb was the drinking fountain outside the general office and the sink fountain in Room 8. Louis Berger noted that all eight (8) of the sample results that exceeded the EPA action level are in the east wing of the 1 st floor, from the General Office to Room 1. Based upon the results, it appears that there is a general source of lead that is impacting the east wing of the School. Assessment Results Summary Tables George M. Davis Jr. Elementary School Sample ID Date Time Location Lead Level (ppb) INITIAL SCREENING MARCH 29, 216 Davis-1A 3/29/16 7:28 Kitchen Food Prep Sink (Ground Level) 13.4 Davis-2A 3/29/16 7:31 DF- Hallway near Stage Door (Ground Level)- 1 st Draw 47.2 Davis-2B 3/29/16 7:31 DF- Hallway near Stage Door (Ground Level)-3 Second 3.14 Flush ADDITONAL SAMPLING APRIL 8, /8/216 5:3 DF-Hallway Outside Gym- 1 st Draw /8/216 5:32 DF-Cafeteria- 1 st Draw /8/216 5:39 Room 1-1 st Draw /8/216 5:4 Room 1-3 Second Flush /8/216 5:42 Room 2-1 st Draw /8/216 5:43 Room 2-3 Second Flush 2 9 4/8/216 5:45 Room 3-1 st Draw /8/216 5:48 Room 4-1 st Draw /8/216 5:49 Room 4-3 Second Flush /8/216 5:52 Room 5-1 st Draw /8/216 5:54 Room 6-1 st Draw /8/216 5:58 Room 7-1 st Draw /8/216 5:56 Room 8-1 st Draw /8/216 5:57 Room 8-3 Second Flush /8/216 6:3 Room 9-1 st Draw /8/216 6:4 Room 9-3 Second Flush /8/216 6:1 Room 1-1 st Draw /8/216 6:2 Room 1-3 Second Flush /8/216 6:9 Room 14A- 1 st Draw /8/216 6:11 Room 16-1 st Draw /8/216 6:13 Room 17-1 st Draw 6.33 louisberger.com

4 George M. Davis Jr. Elementary School Sample ID Date Time Location Lead Level (ppb) 31 4/8/216 6:15 Room 18-1 st Draw /8/216 6:17 Room 19-1 st Draw /8/216 6:19 Room 2-1 st Draw /8/216 6:21 Room 21-1 st Draw /8/216 6:23 Room 22-1 st Draw /8/216 6:25 Room 23-1 st Draw /8/216 6:27 Room 24-1 st Draw /8/216 6:29 Room 25-1 st Draw /8/216 6:33 Room 26-1 st Draw /8/216 6:35 Room 28-1 st Draw /8/216 6:4 Room 29-1 st Draw /8/216 6:42 Room 3-1 st Draw /8/216 6:44 Room 31-1 st Draw /8/216 6:46 Room 33-1 st Draw /8/216 6:49 Room 34-1 st Draw /8/216 6:51 Room 35-1 st Draw /8/216 6:53 Room 36-1 st Draw /8/216 6:55 Room 37-1 st Draw /8/216 6:6 DF-Hallway Outside General Office- 1 st Draw /8/216 6:7 DF-Hallway Outside General Office- 3 Second Flush 59.4 DF = drinking fountain Conclusions and Recommendations Eight (8) initial screening samples were above the EPA action level of 15 ppb and two (2) 3 second flush samples exceeded the EPA action level. All of the samples that exceeded the EPA action level are located in one area, the east wing of the 1 st floor. Based upon these results and observations, it appears that there is a localized source of lead that is impacting this area. In the interest of occupational health and safety, Louis Berger makes the foling recommendations: Temporarily remove from service all drinking water sources in the east wing of the 1 st floor. This interim measure is recommended until the source of the lead can be identified. Replace old ceramic type drinking fountains that have been known to have a lead lined basin. Clean all faucet aerators (if present) for all sources used for drinking and/or cooking. Lead bearing sediment may end up in drinking water from physical corrosion of leaded solder and can build up in the aerator over time. louisberger.com

5 Consider making a detailed plumbing profile for each School; this would be useful for future testing and would be an aid in locating any future problems that may occur and prioritizing remedial actions, as needed. Louis Berger could assist CSDNR with this task. Considering tracing out the East wing on the 1 st floor plumbing line that feeds these classrooms as it might be a lead line. If so the line should be removed. Consider additional testing for any drinking water sources (not included in the testing above) that have brass pipes, fittings, faucets, and valves. Brass fittings commonly used in drinking water outlets could contain up to 8 percent lead. Consider establishing a program for periodic testing for lead in drinking water within the CSDNR. Limitations, Exceptions and Assumptions Opinions and recommendations presented in this report apply to site conditions and features as they existed at the time of Louis Berger s site visits, and those reasonably foreseeable. They cannot necessarily apply to conditions and features of which Louis Berger is unaware and has not had the opportunity to evaluate. The conclusions presented in this report are professional opinions based solely upon Louis Berger s visual observations of accessible areas, laboratory test data, and current regulatory requirements. These conclusions are intended exclusively for the purpose state herein, at the sites indicated, and for the project indicated. It is important to recognize that this was a targeted sampling program as opposed to sampling program for every single drinking water source. Therefore, Louis Berger cannot act as insurers and cannot certify that all drinking water sources within Schools of the CSDNR have been identified or are safe. No expressed or implied representation or warranty is included or intended in our reports, except that our services were performed, within the limits prescribed by our client, with the customary thoroughness and competence of our profession. If you have any questions concerning this information, please feel free to contact me at (212) or Mr. Craig Napolitano, CHMM at (212) Sincerely, cc: C. Napolitano A. Cheskin Joseph L. Sbarra, CIH Manager, Industrial Hygiene louisberger.com

6 APPENDIX A LABORATORY RESULTS CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY louisberger.com

7 DATA FOR METALS PROJECT NAME : LEAD IN DW LOUIS BERGER GROUP, INC. 48 Wall Street 16th floor New York, NY - 15 Phone No: ORDER ID : ATTENTION : Jeff Leed DoD ELAP

8 Date : 4/18/216 Dear Jeff Leed, 34 water samples for the project were received on 4/8/216. The analytical fax results for those samples requested for an expedited turn around time may be seen in this report. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns regarding this report. Regards, Snehal Mehta snehal@chemtech.net

9

10

11

12

13

14 1-HOGYM-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 15:43 2.8

15 3-CAFETERIA-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 15:46 2.8

16 5-ROOM1-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 15:49 2.8

17 6-ROOM1-3SECOND H2595 H Lead ug/l 4/18/16 16:15 4/18/16 22:59 2.8

18 7-ROOM2-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 15:52 2.8

19 8-ROOM2-3SECOND H2595 H Lead ug/l 4/18/16 16:15 4/18/16 23:4 2.8

20 9-ROOM3-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 15:56 2.8

21 11-ROOM4-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 15:59 2.8

22 12-ROOM4-3SECOND H2595 H Lead ug/l 4/18/16 16:15 4/18/16 23:9 2.8

23 13-ROOM5-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 16:2 2.8

24 15-ROOM6-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 16:5 2.8

25 17-ROOM7-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 16:15 2.8

26 19-ROOM8-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 16:18 2.8

27 2-ROOM8-3SECOND H2595 H Lead ug/l 4/18/16 16:15 4/18/16 23:23 2.8

28 21-ROOM9-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 16:21 2.8

29 22-ROOM9-3SECOND H2595 H Lead ug/l 4/18/16 16:15 4/18/16 23:27 2.8

30 23-ROOM1-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 16:24 2.8

31 24-ROOM1-3SECOND H2595 H Lead ug/l 4/18/16 16:15 4/18/16 23:32 2.8

32 25-ROOM14A-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 16:27 2.8

33 27-ROOM16-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 16:3 2.8

34 29-ROOM17-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 16:33 2.8

35 31-ROOM18-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 16:36 2.8

36 33-ROOM19-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 16:39 2.8

37 35-ROOM2-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 16:42 2.8

38 37-ROOM21-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 16:51 2.8

39 39-ROOM22-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 16:54 2.8

40 41-ROOM23-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 16:57 2.8

41 43-ROOM24-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 17: 2.8

42 45-ROOM25-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 17:3 2.8

43 47-ROOM26-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 17:6 2.8

44 51-ROOM28-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 17:9 2.8

45 53-ROOM29-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 17:12 2.8

46 55-ROOM3-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 17:15 2.8

47 57-ROOM31-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 17:18 2.8

48 59-ROOM33-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 17:27 2.8

49 61-ROOM34-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 17:3 2.8

50 63-ROOM35-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 17:33 2.8

51 65-ROOM36-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 17:36 2.8

52 67-ROOM37-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 17:39 2.8

53 69HOGO-FD Lead ug/l 19:3 4/15/16 17:42 2.8

54 7-HOGO-3SECOND H2595 H Lead ug/l 4/18/16 16:15 4/18/16 23:37 2.8

55 APPENDIX B LABORATORY APPROVAL louisberger.com

56

57

58