Industrial Hygiene Survey

Transcription

1 Industrial Hygiene Survey Zapolski Real Estate, LLC. 501 Washington Street Durham, NC Prepared by: The EI Group, Inc Gateway Centre Blvd. Morrisville, NC Original Report Date: September 16, 2016 Project ID: IHMO Cameron Faulconer Industrial Hygienist Christopher B. Murray, CIH, CSP Senior Vice President Operations

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary 3 Introduction 4 Sampling Methodology 5 Findings and Discussion 6 Conclusions 11 Appendix 13 Field Sample Data Sheet Asbestos (Area and Clearance) Laboratory Analytical Results EMSL Analytical, Inc. 2

3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Asbestos abatement air monitoring was conducted September 1-2, 2016 by Mr. Cameron Faulconer, Industrial Hygienist of The EI Group, Inc. (EI), during off-peak hours at the office of the University of North Carolina (UNC) Institute for the Environment located at 137 East Franklin Street (Floor 6) in Chapel Hill, NC, to evaluate area concentrations during gross removal and clearance sampling following the completion of abatement of approximately fifteen (15) square feet of asbestos-containing spray-applied fireproofing containing five percent (5%) chrysotile asbestos. Samples were collected by Cameron Faulconer, Industrial Hygienist, of The EI Group (EI). Two area sample results, collected adjacent to the mini-containment constructed in the staircase foyer and on the desk of cubicle 6501A, returned results above the EPA-established clearance level of 0.01 fibers per cubic centimeter. The two remaining viable area samples, collected in the Conference Room and in the adjacent walkway of cubicles 6601A&B were below a concentration of 0.01 fibers per cubic centimeter. 3

4 INTRODUCTION An asbestos air monitoring study was conducted at the office of the University Of North Carolina (UNC) Institute for the Environment located at 137 East Franklin Street (Floor 6) in Chapel Hill, NC to evaluate area concentrations of airborne asbestos during gross removal and clearance sampling following the completion of abatement. Samples were collected on September 1-2, 2016 by Mr. Cameron Faulconer, Industrial Hygienist of The EI Group Inc. A total of approximately fifteen square feet of asbestos-containing spray-applied fireproofing overspray was removed in order to allow for temporary leak-prevention measures to be applied to the affected thermal systems insulation (TSI) on which the fireproofing was adhered. It should be noted that the TSI on the cast iron piping was confirmed by The EI Group, Inc. to be negative for asbestos content via a Comprehensive Asbestos Survey performed on July 14-15, 2015 (Report Date: July 31, 2015; contains 85% mineral wool and 15% non-fibrous material). A total of five (5) area samples were collected to characterize the concentration of airborne asbestos during gross removal in order to ascertain the possibility of a breach in containment (or other means of asbestos fiber escape, such as improper work practices) from the isolated work areas during gross removal. Objectives The study was conducted to assess the area concentrations of airborne asbestos during gross removal of approximately fifteen (15) square feet of asbestos-containing spray-applied fireproofing. Scope Every effort has been made to provide as complete and comprehensive an evaluation as professionally practical. However, inherent constraints of time, observation and scope of work must be recognized. The findings are representative of conditions apparent at the time and not necessarily indicative of previous or current conditions. It should not be construed that actions taken as a result of this work will achieve complete compliance with every regulatory standard nor prevent every possible accident or loss. Neither should it be considered that any recommendations noted are the only possible actions to be taken. Management should assess and analyze each recommendation in relation to corporate resources, objectives and activities. This report is intended for the exclusive use of Zapolski Real Estate, LLC and shall not be relied upon by other parties without prior written consent of The EI Group, Inc. 4

5 SAMPLING METHODOLOGY Asbestos Asbestos air samples were collected on 25-millimeter (mm), 0.8-micrometer pore-size, mixed cellulose ester (MCE) filter cassettes. Samples were analyzed on-site by Cameron Faulconer, Industrial Hygienist, of The EI Group, Inc. (EI), North Carolina Licensed Air Monitor # Four (4) area samples were collected by attaching a sampling train to a surface determined to best characterize the concentration of asbestos in the vicinity of the sample area. Three (3) clearance samples were collected inside the negative-pressure enclosures (NPE s, or containments ). Two field blanks were analyzed with the sample set for quality control. Sample media was prepared and analyzed according to the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health Method 7400, B Counting Rules utilizing Phase Contrast Microscopy. Copies of the Field Sampling Data Sheet may be referenced in the Appendix of this report. EI participates in the Proficiency Analytical Testing (PAT) which allows the participants to demonstrate proficiency with established test methods. The object of the program is to demonstrate their ability to correctly analyze samples by determination of assigned values for quantitative analysis and correct identification of those test items on a quarterly basis. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION Asbestos All samples were taken while EHG, LLC. asbestos abatement personnel were performing gross removal of asbestos-containing spray-applied fireproofing building material. Work practices, methods of removal, and integrity of engineering controls (negative air-pressure machines, negative-pressure enclosures, and decontamination methods) were monitored by The EI Group, Inc. periodically before and during gross removal. Proper donning and doffing of personal protective equipment (PPE) waste bag-out, disposal methods were also monitored. The work was completed satisfactorily for the full duration of abatement. Low-volume negative-pressure verification checks were conducted periodically by Mr. Faulconer and returned satisfactory results. All negative-pressure machines were operating at a setting of two-thousand cubic feet per minute (CFM) on the HIGH setting. EHG abatement personnel wore coveralls, half-face respirators, safety glasses, and safety-toed boots. Decontamination methods were observed to be performed to satisfaction. 5

6 Gross removal was performed in three (3) small NPE s ( mini-containments ) composed of two layers of six-millimeter (6-mm) polyethylene sheeting with one negative air-pressure unit facilitating a negativepressure environment within the enclosure. Each containment was delineated as a regulated area with OSHA-approved signage displayed on the entrance to each enclosure. One employee performed gross removal tasks while one employee applied amended water (wet methods for gross removal of asbestos; contains soap water with surfactant) during removal, bagging, and performed bag-out tasks following removal. All asbestos-containing material (ACM) waste was placed in a six-millimeter polyethylene waste bag and was goose-necked with an air-tight seal. Amended water was also applied while placing material within the waste bags. A total of five (5) area samples were collected to characterize the concentration of airborne asbestos during gross removal in order to ascertain the possibility of a breach in containment (or other means of asbestos fiber escape, such as improper work practices) from the isolated work areas during gross removal. The clearance level of 0.01 fibers per cubic meter (f/cc), established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), was used as a reference value, although the concentration is not mandated to be utilized by either the EPA or Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). One (1) area sample was collected in the staircase foyer, near the entrance to the staircase on the sixth floor (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill - Institute for the Environment). The sample period was started at the beginning of gross removal within the approximately sixteen (16) square foot containment area and ended at the completion of gross removal, yielding a total sampling period of two hundred and thirty-nine (239) minutes. Entrance and egress flaps were constructed and the walls and floor of the area were isolated from the external environment with two layers of six-millimeter (6-mm) polyethylene sheeting and utilized on both doorways on the southwestern and northeastern ends of the foyer. The average flow rate for sampling period was liters per minute (lpm) with a total sample volume of 2397 liters (L). Approximately two (2) square feet of asbestos-containing fireproofing overspray was removed from the surface of fiberglass TSI, covered with a paper jacket. The sample was analyzed on-site following termination of the sampling period and returned a result of fibers per cubic centimeter (f/cc). This result was above the EPA-established clearance level. One (1) area sample was collected in Conference Room (Room #209) along the northern wall of the room. The sample period was started at the beginning of gross removal within the approximately sixteen (16) square foot containment area and ended at the completion of gross removal, yielding a total sampling period of two hundred and eight-seven (287) minutes. A mini-containment was constructed 6

7 with two layers of flooring and wall material with six-millimeter polyethylene material. The average flow rate for the sampling period was liters per minute (lpm) with a total sample volume of 2890 liters (L). Approximately six (6) square feet of asbestos-containing fireproofing overspray was removed from the surface of fiberglass TSI, covered with a paper jacket. The sample was analyzed on-site following termination of the sampling period and returned a result of fibers per cubic centimeter (f/cc). This result was below the EPA-established clearance level. One (1) area sample was collected between cubicles 6601A&B in the adjacent walkway to the four cubicles in the room along the northern wall of the room. This sample was collected to ascertain the concentration that are possibly being entrained into the office area. The nearest area of asbestos abatement was the mini-containment constructed in the staircase foyer. The duration of the sampling period was one hundred and seventy (170) minutes. The average flow rate for the sampling period was liters per minute (lpm) with a total sample volume of 2463 liters (L). The sample was analyzed onsite following termination of the sampling period and returned a result of fibers per cubic centimeter (f/cc). This result was above the EPA-established clearance level. One (1) area sample was collected in the Telecom room; the sampling filter cassette was positioned on the entrance doorway to the room. The sample period was started at the beginning of gross removal within the approximately sixteen (16) square foot containment area and ended at the completion of gross removal, yielding a total sampling period of one hundred and fifty-five minutes (155) minutes. A minicontainment was constructed with two layers of flooring and wall material with six-millimeter polyethylene material. The sample was voided due to possible obstruction of the sampling train. EI made this determination by receiving three results from the sampling filter cassette with a value of zero (0) fibers per cubic centimeter (f/cc). Approximately two (2) square feet of asbestos-containing fireproofing overspray was removed from the surface of fiberglass TSI, covered with a paper jacket. One (1) area sample was collected on the desk of cubicle 6501A in the nearby office approximately fifty (50) feet northwest of the stairway foyer containment. This sample was collected to ascertain the concentration that are possibly being entrained into the office area. The duration of the sampling period was two hundred and seventy-two (272) minutes. The average flow rate for the sampling period was 2.69 liters per minute (lpm) with a total sample volume of 731 liters (L). The sample was collected with a personal pump and analyzed on-site following termination of the sampling period and returned a result of fibers per cubic centimeter (f/cc) with average flow rate of 2.69 liters per minute. This result was above the EPA-established clearance level. 7

8 A total of three (3) clearance samples were collected and analyzed on-site by EI immediately following sample termination of the sampling period. These samples were taken for the purpose of determining whether the concentration of airborne asbestos fibers were safe for re-entry following abatement. The sampling period was started immediately following final cleaning and encapsulation within the regulated area (mini-containment) and terminated after a minimum volume of 1500 liters was reached. The of 0.01 fibers per cubic centimeter (f/cc), established by the EPA, was used as a concentration of regulatory compliance. Upon return of sample results, EHG, LLC. personnel were permitted and instructed to deconstruct the containments. One (clearance) sample was collected inside the regulated area (cassette was inserted through an orifice on the southwestern wall of the containment and sealed immediately following placement) within the fire staircase foyer and analyzed on-site by EI immediately following the termination of the sampling period. The duration of the sampling period was a total of one hundred and seven (107) minutes with an average flow rate of liters per minute and total sample volume of 1514 liters. The sample returned a result of fibers per cubic meter, which was below the EPA-established clearance level. One (clearance) sample was collected inside the regulated area (cassette was inserted through an orifice on the southeastern wall of the containment and sealed immediately following placement) within the Conference Room (Room #209) and analyzed on-site by EI immediately following the termination of the sampling period. The duration of the sampling period was a total of one hundred and sixteen (116) minutes with an average flow rate of liters per minute and total sample volume of 1627 liters. The sample returned a result of fibers per cubic meter, which was below the EPA-established clearance level. One (clearance) sample was collected inside the regulated area (cassette was inserted through an orifice on the southeastern wall of the containment and sealed immediately following placement) within the Telecom room and analyzed on-site by EI immediately following the termination of the sampling period. The duration of the sampling period was a total of one hundred and thirty (130) minutes with an average flow rate of liters per minute with a total sampling volume of 1829 liters. The sample returned a result of fibers per cubic meter, which was below the EPA-established clearance level. At the top of the next page, a table displaying the results of the area and clearance samples taken on September 1, 2016 through September 2, 2016: 8

9 Table 1: Area and Clearance Sample Results Sample Location Sample Type Volume Concentration Detection (L) (f/cc) Limit Staircase Foyer Conference Room (Room #209) Area (Gross Between Cubicles 6601A&B Removal) Telecom VOID Cubicle 6501A on desk Staircase Foyer Conference Room Clearance Telecom EPA Clearance Level (NIOSH 7400): 0.01 f/cc Two area sample results, collected adjacent to the mini-containment constructed in the staircase foyer and on the desk of cubicle 6501A, returned results above the EPA-established clearance level of 0.01 fibers per cubic centimeter. The two remaining viable area samples, collected in the Conference Room and in the adjacent walkway of cubicles 6601A&B were below a concentration of 0.01 fibers per cubic centimeter. Upon the return of samples results that exceeded the EPA-established clearance level, EI submitted the samples to EMSL Analytical, Inc. (EMSL) of Morrisville, North Carolina for analysis utilizing Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM, NIOSH Method 7402), Selected Area Electron Diffraction (SAED), and Energy Dispersive X-Ray Microanalysis (EDX), which is a composite analysis termed the EPA Level II Method. EMSL is accredited by the American Industrial Hygiene Association s National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP). The EPA Level II Method is capable of yielding results with greater relevance and accuracy than that of the Phase Contrast Microscopy Method. The Phase Contrast Microscopy Method (NIOSH Method 7400) initially conducted on-site by EI includes all fibers within the one hundred (100) viewing fields that meet the condition of being at least 5 micrometers in length with a three to one aspect ratio (3:1, length to width). The EPA Level II Method includes all fibers that fall within this criteria, however the magnification is 10,000x during analysis, whereas the magnification is 40x when performing the PCM method. Ten percent (10%) of the samples were analyzed utilizing SAED and EDX to confirm the presence or absence of asbestos fibers by refractory index and elemental composition analyses, respectively. Table 2 on the next page displays the results of the EPA Level II (TEM) analysis conducted by EMSL: 9

10 Table 2: Area Sample Results EPA Level II (TEM) EMSL Analytical, Inc. Sample Location Sample Type Concentration Analytical (s/mm 2 ) Sensitivity Staircase Foyer <7.70 < Conference Room (Room #209) Area (Gross <7.70 < Between Cubicles 6607A&B Removal) <7.70 < Cubicle 6501A on desk <7.70 < EPA Clearance Level (NIOSH 7402): 70 s/mm 2 Any detected fibers that return results indicative of either of the two classes of asbestos (serpentine or amphibole) are included in the calculation of the fiber loading, which is measured as a unit of area (structures per millimeter squared, s/mm 2 ). All sample results were below the laboratory Minimum Reporting Limit (MRL) of 7.70 s/mm 2, which is well below the EPA Clearance Level for TEM analysis in terms of asbestos fiber loading of 70 s/mm 2. The results returned by this analysis are the final results for the area samples collected on September 1-2,

11 CONCLUSIONS Asbestos abatement air monitoring was conducted September 1-2, 2016 by Mr. Cameron Faulconer, Industrial Hygienist of EI, during off-peak hours at the office of the University of North Carolina (UNC) Institute for the Environment located at 137 East Franklin Street (Floor 6) in Chapel Hill, NC, to evaluate area concentrations during gross removal and clearance sampling following the completion of abatement of approximately fifteen (15) square feet of asbestos-containing spray-applied fireproofing containing five percent (5%) chrysotile asbestos. Samples were collected by Cameron Faulconer, Industrial Hygienist, of The EI Group (EI). Two area sample results, collected adjacent to the mini-containment constructed in the staircase foyer and on the desk of cubicle 6501A, returned results above the EPA-established clearance level of 0.01 fibers per cubic centimeter NIOSH Method 7400 (Phase Contrast Microscopy). The two remaining viable area samples, collected in the Conference Room and in the adjacent walkway of cubicles 6601A&B were below a concentration of 0.01 fibers per cubic centimeter. All area (gross removal) samples collected on September 1-2, 2016 were submitted to EMSL Analytical, Inc. for analysis via Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM), NIOSH Method 7402 for confirmation of asbestos loading. All four area samples returned results below the Laboratory Minimum Reporting Limit (MRL) at <7.70 s/mm 2 (structures per millimeter squared), which is well below the EPA-established clearance level in terms of asbestos fiber loading of 70 s/mm 2. 11

12 APPENDIX Field Sample Data Sheet Asbestos (Area and Clearance) Laboratory Analytical Results EMSL Analytical, Inc.

13 The EI Group, Inc. PCM Analysis Summary: Air Sampling Project Information: Job Number: IHMO Client Name: RESOLUTE, Inc. Job Location: Apex Baptist Church Salem Street, Apex, NC Shift Time1st Cassette Size: 25mm Area(s) of Work: Multi-purpose Room Air Monitor: Cameron Faulconer Signature: Sampling Date: 9/1/2016-9/2/2016 Respiratory Protection Analyst: Cameron Faulconer Signature: Analysis Date: 9/2/16 (Clearance), 9/15/2016 (Area) X 1/2 Face Reviewed By: Christopher Murray Signature: Review Date: 9/16/2016 PAPR Key for the Type of Sampling : 1=Background, 2=Gross Removal, 3=Fine Cleaning, 4=Finals, X= Voided Sample, P=personnel Type C/other IWA =Inside Work Area, OWA =Outside Work Area Blank Sample Data: Sample# Fiber Count 0 Fields: 100 Sample# Fiber Count 0 Fields: 100 Avg. Cnt: 0 Area Sampling Data: Sample# Sample Type Sample Location and Notes Start Time End Time Total Time (Minutes) Avg. Flow Rate (LPM) Sample Volume (Liters) Fiber Count Fields Counte d Fiber Per CC (F/CC) Detection limit Staircase Foyer 8:58:00 PM (9/1/2016) 12:57:00 AM (9/2/2016) Conference Room 21:10 (9/1/2016) 00:57 (9/2/2016) Between Cubicles 6601A&B (Walkway) 21:20 (9/1/2016) 1:10 (9/2/2016) Telecom 22:20 (9/2/2016) 00:55 (9/2/2016) 155 VOID Cubicle 6501A (on desk) 22:15 (9/1/2016) 2:47 (9/2/2016) C - Staircase Foyer 00:45 (9/2/16) 2:32 (9/2/16) C - Conference Room 1:16 (9/2/2016) 3:12 (9/2/2016) C - Telecom 2:02 (9/2/16) 4:12 (9/2/16) Gateway Centre Boulevard Suite 200, Morrisville, NC Tel (919) , Fax (919)

14 EMSL Analytical, Inc Gateway Centre Blvd., Suite 600, Morrisville, NC Phone/Fax: (919) / (919) raleighlab@emsl.com EMSL Order: CustomerID: CustomerPO: ProjectID: ENVI67 Attn: Carra Herring The EI Group, Inc Gateway Centre Blvd, Suite 200 Morrisville, NC Phone: (919) Fax: (919) Received: 09/22/16 2:25 PM Analysis Date: 9/23/2016 Collected: 9/1/2016 Project: IHMO Test Report: Asbestos Fiber Analysis by Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM), Selected Area Electron Diffraction (SAED), and Energy Dispersive X-Ray Microanalysis (EDX) - Performed by EPA Level II Method. Sample Volume (liters) Asbestos # Structures Analytical Sensitivity Concentration Type(s) Asbestos Non-Asb. (S/cc) (S/mm²) S/cc Notes AB None Detected <7.70 < Conference Room None Detected <7.70 < A None Detected <7.70 < Staircase Foyer None Detected <7.70 < Analyst(s) Kelly Gallisdorfer (4) Billy Barnes, Asbestos Lab Manager or other approved signatory Disclaimers: The laboratory is not responsible for data reported in structures/cc, which is dependent on volume collected by non-laboratory personnel. This report may not be duplicated, except in full, without written permission by EMSL Analytical, Inc. This report must not be used to claim product endorsement by NVLAP or any agency of the U.S. Government. This report relates only to the samples reported above. Quality control data (including 95% confidence limits and laboratory and analysts' accuracy and precision) is available upon request. The test results contained within this report meet the requirements of NELAC unless otherwise noted. Samples received in good condition unless otherwise noted. Samples analyzed by EMSL Analytical, Inc. Morrisville, NC Initial report from 09/26/ :16:37 THIS IS THE LAST PAGE OF THE REPORT. Test Report TEMLevelII Printed: 9/26/2016 9:16:37 AM 1