Document yk4beyDEZ5J0n18wBNgXdz8Ld

FILE NAME: Flooring (FLR) DATE: 1989 DOC#: FLR027 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Unpublished Inspection Report M ontgom ery County Public Schools MCn T Ct V S hTE OFFI CE T EL : 3 0 1 - 2 7 9 - 3 0 6 5 Dec 1 . 8 9 1 1 : 5 0 N o . 003 P . 0 1 SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH UNIT MONTGOMERY COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS RECEIVED Uti* i 51989 Support Services Depf. TO: CO: A FAX NO. DATE: FROM: FAX NO. PAGES : A Q w v L y - 5 gkg&ji_____________ - feoO A S S '- O S5X - AM IJNLCLUDING COVER LETTER COMMENTS: SHOULD THIS NOT TRANSMIT CLEARLY, CALL TERRY BAUMANIS, 2 7 9 - 3 4 7 8 OR 279-3479. TABLE OF CONTENTE SP-CTlW /m i E PAGE # t. INI KOOUCllON: ............................................................................................................................................ 1 i. PROC50URES USED: .................................................................................................... 1 1. SAMPLING PROTOCOL AND ANALYTICAL METHODS:..................... ............................................. 2 4. LIMITS FOR AIRUORNE ASBESTOS:................................................... 2 s. fle su L ! s o r s a m p l i n g .................................................................................................... 2 ' a CONCLUSIONS:............................................................................................................................................... 3 7. RECOMMENA IION$ ........................................ 4 ATTACHMENTS: 1. TABLES OF RESULTS ?.. HAiiD CCPIfcS OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORTS A. F. MEYER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 1. INTnODUCTION; Per your request. on October 13, 1909 A. F. Moydr and Associates, Inc, (AFMA) performed a limited stucy to determine asbestos fiber release, If any. from routine buffing and stripping of vinyl asbestos floor tiles. The 3iudy was performed by John B. Love and Reynolds B. Renshaw In classroom .18 at trio Sligo Middle School in Montgomery County, Maryland. Southern Insulation, a licensed asbestos abatement firm performed the buffing and stripping operations, Samples of the 9' x 9* vinyl floor tiles indicated they contained 5% chrysotHe asbestos in the ties themselves and 10% chrysotfle asbestos In the mastic used to adhere the tiles to the concrete floor of the school. This study 19very limited and must not be construed ae being ail Inclusive as to asbestos exposures encountered by custodial and maintenance staff, students, teachers, anc the general public in schools generated from routine buffing and stripping of asbestos-containing floor tiloa. It was intended to provide an indication of whether or not there is a potential to release asbestos fibers from the ttles during buffing or stripping It was also Intended to provide a foundation for further investigation if warranted based on its outcome. 2. PROCEDURES USED: The approximate lie of dassroom 18 was 30 feet by 28 feet (840 square faet). This part of the school was unoccupied at the time of the study. Prior to the buffing and stripping operations, the classroom was totally isolated from the rest of the school by constructing a containment consisting of two layers of 6 mil plastic sheeting on the walls and a three-stage decontamination facility connected to the area A high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) exhaust unit was placed inside the classroom. The exhaust unit was operated at a low setting so as not to provido rapid air exchange and filtration. The purpose of the unit was to create a slight negative pressure differential relative to adjacent areas of the school so fiber release would not occur outside the contained classroom. After total isolation of the area and prior to performing the floor maintenance, ail surfaces within ecmonpdluocyteidn:g were the classroom were pre*c!eaned via wet methods using amended water. All floor maintenance supplies (le. bufflng/stripper solutions and pads) were provided by Channel 4 and Montgomery County janitorial staff. Bulling and stripping procedures discua&Od at length with maintenance staff prior to the study. For the purposes of this study the following buffing and stripping methods were M ETH O D 1 - BU FFING Buff will: standard red buffing pad and standard buffing solution. (Duratton - approximately 45 minutes). MfcTMQD2 -STRIPPING Strip Fooi using standard stripping mixture mopped on and standard black stripping pad. Mop with dean water twlca aftftrwprds. (Duration - approximately 70 minutes). METHOD 3 TRIPPING Strip floor using a fine mist spray Of stripper solution end standard Week stripping pad. Mop with dean water twice afterwards. (Duration - approximately 70 minutes). During ail flooi maintenance operations, persons performing the work wore full-body protective (Tyvek) suits and full-face respirators equipped with raters designed for protection against airborne asbestos dust/fibers. Workers and survey persons, using appropriate procedures, entered and exited the work area through the decontamination facility. Once all buffing arid stripping operations wero complete and the study concluded, the floor was mopped and waxed to ensure any remaining dust or fiber would not becomo .iirborno onoo iho ooniainmont wac dlcmantlod and tho aroo re occupied A. F. MEYER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 1. SAMPLING PROTOCOL ANU ANALYTICAL METHODS: Uuik SAnpies were collwcted bum Uie water used during pre-deanlng, the water and stripper mbc . mopped up after thy final stripping method, the buffing (rad) ana stripping (black) pads used, and from the residual du^t (malnlng on the ties after tfw ffnai stripping and mopping method. General area air employ ware collected In the classroom prior to the buffing and tripping work, during each method used, *rxj under aggressive sampling curxJitkjn using a leaf blower after the final stripping and mopping method and before re-waxlng the floor. Two sample were collected during ach sampling period, one located approxurmteiy two feet from the fluor and the other approximating breathing 2one level, or five feet abov* tiw fluor. One eight-hour air sampfe was collected from tne workers' breathing rone. Two general die* *!r samples were collected outside the contained classroom at the entranco to tho decontamination facility. General air samples were collected with high volume line operated sampling pumps at a flow rate of a.b - .niters per minute (Ipm), The worker breathing zone air samplo was Heeled using a battery operated personal sampling pump at a flow rate of 2A ipm. AH sampling pumps wer% calibrated before and after each sampling period. Bulk samples were analyzed using Po!ari2od Light Microscopy (PIM) and transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM), Air samples obtained from Inside the classroom prior to, during, and after the buffing and stripping operations were collected on 0.45 micron pore 1rs mixed celtulcse ester mombrane filters wfth 50 mm r*on-conducttvc oxtensiort cowls. These samples were analyzed using Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM). The outside general area and worker breathing zone air samples were collected on 0.6 micron putc si* mixed cellulose ester membrane fillers with 50 mm non-conductlve extension cowls. These samples were analyzed using rhae Contrast Microscopy (PCM). The general area samples outside the contained classioom were also analyzed by TEM. (For specific methods of analyses used please -sec ihe attached tables). 4. LIMITS FOR AIRBORNE ASBESTOS: settings.a. Except for abatement activities, there are no exposure standards for non-occupational b. There are standards fur general air quality after completion of an abatement or response action and before (-occupation of the areas Involved. These standard are based on the analysis of a minimum of five samples collected within the work area after abatement Is complete. Samples analyzed using phase contrast microscopy must alt demonstrate concentrations less than 0.01 fibers per cubic centlmetei (f/cc). Samples analyzed using Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) must have an overage of less, than 70 structures per square millimeter or not be statistically significantly different (higher) than 5 samples collected from outside the contained work area. a The ETA's Worker Protection Rule 40 CFR Part 76 y.tgi has been extended to employees of local education agencies who perform operations, maintenance, and repair (O & M) activities Involving asbesios-oontainlnu material. Under the rule, the permissible exposure limit for asbestos based on an tight-hour time weighted average is 0.2 fibers per cubic centimeter (f/cc) with an action level of 0.1 f/cc. 8. R E S U tre OP SAMPLING: e. Analysis results of the sample collected from the water used during pro-cleaning indicated asbestos was presunt. Results of the sample coHocted from the stripper and water mix after the stripping operations showed duse to two times that of the water used during predeantng. In both Instances, asbestos structures detected were all less than to micrometers In length. Consequantly, the reported concentration of structures greater than 10 micrometers in both samples was less than 12?,,7 million structures per liter (MILL STR/L). b. Analysis results of tho bulk sample collected from the rsiduo on the buffing (rad) pad indicated a trace of chrysOUl asbestos. A. F. MEYER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. C. Analysis results uf ihe bulk sample collected from the resletuo on the stripping (black) pad indicated 1% chrysotile asbestos. d. Analysis results of the bulk sample coliacied from the remaining residua on the floors after the final stripping method Indicated a trace of chrysolite aebestoa. a. Itesults of the air sample collected from the workore breathing 2ono yielded a concentration of 0.013 flbera per cubic uentimotsr as an eight-hour time weighted average, t. General area air samples collected Inside the contained classroom before any buffing or tripping operations were performed (background) indicated airborne fiber densities of 30.5 and 45.3 etructures per mm* (0,01 and 0.015 structures per cc). ' 0, Cneral area air samples collected insfde the work area during buffing operations performed thowed alrbomo fiber densities of 15,3 and 45.8 structures per mm* (<0.Gi and 0.015 structures per cc). h. Coneral area air samples collected within the contained classroom during the first stripping operation (Method #2) showed airborne fiber densities of 91.6 and 229.0 structures per mm* (0.C2S and 0.072 structures por cc). 1. Gencml area air samples collected within the contained classroom during the second stripping operation (Method #3) yielded airborne fiber densities of 236,167.5 and 276,316.1 structures ^ analyzed per mm (77.5 and 89.2 structures per cc). It should be noted1that these samples, coukf n o tb e u ^ S * by slandard'TEM analysis because of excessive Ibading on the filters. The samples w e ? ^ prepared by low-temperature plasma ashing and aqueous redeposltlon duo to overloading of .the lit Complex asbestos structures consisting ,of multiple fibers may have disaggregated during aaropter225fr preparation. Consequently, asbestos structure counts may. be biased" high --^ j. Genera! area air samples collected using aggressive sampling techniques after the Anal stripping operation indicated airborne fiber densities of 137 4 and 183.2 structures per mm* (0.045 and 0-06 structures per cc). k. An asbestos sample analysis results are outlined in the attached Tables t and 2. e. CONC! UStON$: _ a._jAjjam rifrs^ dy^ s'flm fetrons and cannofoiTUsed.to-deflhftNelyquemtif^onafalo&SJpani' andlmaintcnance stefT exposure levels to*asbestos from`floor tlTeimarntenahce activ?tre8 fn*alUsituafl(3Rer iFappftes only to conditions a^ricounteredrarHitecRniduea-uaed at the. time. of. sampling,^ b. Concentrations found-kr the*workers-breathing-zone-during this study did norexceed-thg existing permissible exposure limit nor the action level outlined Tn the EPAYWorkeTProiectldn Rule. The sampling and analytical method required for worker exposure monitoring detects all fibers with characteristics of asbestos fibers and which are greater than 5 microns in length. Levels found hewover^ do warrant' consideration when assessing overall asbestos exposures to' employees involved`in routine* operation, maintenance and- repair activities. a Airborne asbestos fiber densities or concentrations found in the general air within classroom 18 prior to the buffing and stripping operations did not exceed filter background '.eveis (70 s/mm1) when analyzed using TM. d. General area air samples collected during huffing operations did not exceed filter -- i--.ai......Ka * art-sftrjorl ncfnn TFM A. F. MEYER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. . General a w samples canceled during tripping operations end under aggressive sampling techniques after all stripping was done did significantly exceed filter background levels when analyzed usinq TEM. tt appears that airborne asbestos structura deneltlce darted to Increase during the first stripping method (stripping mixture mopped on and ueing standard black stripping pad) and ' alevated tremendously during tho second stripping method (fine mist spray of stripper solution and using Standard black stripping pad). AggrassK/o sampling conducted after the second or final stripping mothod and after the floor was mopped showed that airborne asbestos structure densities returned to levels near those experienced during the first stripping method. ThQCleKT tO'Setleye tharstripptng.'^JQ^ asbestos-containing floor tiles using seml-wottechniques ha* a-far_Qreaterpotential iorraraaslhg,arri3ori5C,> isSSroSTthan stripping methods amytb^ng wit oir vary wet rriirthdbs.' icehould be noted~thrbrtr>a~* genera' area air samples collected Inside tne.ctasaroom_durinfl.these operation^ nearty all asbestos-" atructure* fpund wire tbss than S micronsJn length._j * f. Based on the air sampling, ft Is the opinion of this study that asbestos fibers or structures were Seated from tho floor tiles and became airborne during tho stripping operations performed. The levels found were above levels considered acceptab'e for determining the completion of a response or abatement action and before re-occupancy of such affected areas. _ -- 9' I'hft degree of health rtsicassoctated'wlth'tRFleviia'of'airborne sbestr found;canriot'bfc accurately'RSCrtttined without"further Investigation arxfexposure monitoring, r-~> T. HECOMMENDATIONS: a. Cunsietent with EPA'#guidance document 560/5-85-02* Guidance for ControHlnciAabtMtosContaining Matoriaisin Buildings ("Purple Book") paragraph 3.3.3, avoid removing, sanding or stripping floor tiles containing asbestos, if tiles are removed, do not sand asbestos backing material remaining on thfi floor b. Unple'neflt Interim policies In regards to the above until such time that further investigation Is performed and more scientific data becomes available or until specific guidance Is Issued by the appropriate regulatory agencies. a If asbestos-containing floor tiles must be stripped, use only wet stripping methods. Institute appropriate engineering controls, work practices, air monitoring, and employee protection programs. Assess oxpesures to workers during stripping and consider these exposures in overall exposure assessments of employees Involved In routine operations, maintenance, and repair activities. and d. Considerable attention should be tent to the potential for fiber release during asbestos- containing floor tile maintenance operations. EPA`$ Involvement participation Is imperative in affording an adequate assessment of exposure potentials. Appropriate regulatory guidance for local education agencies must be disseminated at the earliest possible date. ATTACHMENT 1 TABLES OF RESULTS A sb e sto s A k S a m p ln g desu ks S 4 g o R M d ta S c h o o l. U o rtg o m cry Ccendy, M orytead W R C -T V W ashington TABLE #1 ntMsm ssioM electwn hiczdsccpt o c n ) w rit 4 sm i CM! ---------------------------------------------------------- ! SAMPLE LOCATION sample rapes IP LIIEW JLOO0190931 JLCA10190932 JLCMOI90VOA Jictio ivo fo s JLS41O1909O6 JLC419190907 j HCA101989U6 1 JLC*1019890? JLC*10198910 JLCM019O9I2 JLCVI01969I3 JLCAiaiPW H 10/19/8? 10/19/89 10/19/ 10/19/89 IO/t9/8P 10/19/99 t0 /19/89 10/19/99 10/19/89 10/19/99 19/19/89 18/19/89 fre-saapla - background classroom 18 fre-taaple - beckfroand ctaasraea I f Work tree * <ltkod #1 9 5 ' Work area - .Settod #1 0 5 Work area * Metbac 72 0 2* Work area - Het.lod #2 9 S' Clean area * outside deem entrance Work era * Method *5 9 2' Uorfe area Metboc O 9 V Clean are - outside decan entrance Poet-atrip pre-van oppressive 9 2* P o st-strip - pre-wax. apereastwa 9* 1*99.9 w an t .99.1 12:8.0 1199.A iz :8 .o U79.0 117C.0 1192.0 1682.0 1166.0 118).0 TE9 AAALTSIS W A:99t1 r ii iH iin : i w it AS.8 31.5 A). * IS.3 91.6 229.0 122.1 236.16/. 6 OB.314.1 30.5 193.2 137.* n w s ccM iM sr hi arascapr (pan SAMPLE f SAMPLC OAK sw rie lacAiioN 31Z*10198908 JLCA 19)90911 CAT019891Z JL 000998919 '.0/19/89 *-0/19/89 10/19/89 10/19/09 Clean area - outside decen entrance Prrsoncl - Markers breathing zone Cteen area - outaide dace entrance flank SMPIE VOLUME : in n s PCX AUU.TS1S OF Alt F1BBI 0ELS1T* M F/ .... . 1* 79.0 17.4 1152.0 39.5 1662.0 22.5 910 * - Lets thns WO 1 f ( se n obecresd S/IM? - Structures per square a i It tester f/W K fib e rs per square e l! U re te r t f c c fib e rs par o b i t cent teatar S/CC * Structures per c M ttllU i A ir aarptes were analyzed using franeelsslon Eltccron Nicroecopp (1IM) EPA level II (TAAAtl Microscopy (PCMj eiOMI 7400 (ss a o d iiio d by O fe V M eeuntins n Im ) . SMptee Mart ansi] acc red it ad latoeratery. * Theee saaple* u ere prepared bp le u -te e p e re tu re p i a re a ashlnp and agumm re d e p o sit io n due t* o n r l M t l q a f e s t r u c t u r e s c a n e ls t ln p e f re d t i p i f ib e r s s a p b e r e d j eaepr e p a t s d f a b t a p ! p r e p a r s t ia n . C e n e e q w e llp , s e t Mh. / I Asbestos Bulk and Water Sampffng Results S lig o I W J i S c h o o l M M ilg a a e ry Causty, H u y b w l W HO TV W ashington TABLE #2 M l* SAMPLES s x ip ir # JLC4 30160901 JLC41018CW I A.(*10160902 u c iio ia m z AMPLE M IC 10/18/69 1C /18/59 I t / 10/0? 10/18/09 u m i l o o k ion Rad 1 l w tl'.e * c la s a ro M n 18 Rad f lo o r t t . a o a a tlc Tan flo o r t l'.e - cla ssra a a 15 Tan flo o r t ' l o a a o tic pe n ARAL IS IS C f RJIJC SA.VLES EXPRESSES IH PCTCCRT A l t e r 5 .8 M .D 5 .0 5 .0 UUT11UI * a c s a ip iia C h ryn tH i C h ry n tlll (h ry u tlU th ry w tih SAWLE * JitUCX*1:001I99S6991I65 AC4 10*95918 1' SAAMTPELE 1100// 19/0 ? 19/99 10/ 19/W SAMPLE L0CAII0N SlaadckpopdoMd uadseddudriunrginMg eMtheothdo#d1f t RaslihMl duat on floor after Method f l u1EmM AsRsAnLISIiSs Of SXX pbiccri WA sfa.eEsSra TT1rreaec*a MDMESTCTRICIPATLID1 OChhrryyoaeattlltl ChryaotU WICK tW L c s AJLtC0A4 11 00 1IU905 99 01 37 * " ,h** ASMtrSIS; SDAHAP1ELS 1100// 19/09 19/09 SMCLE LOCATION 1j TOTAL STRUICLTLURESICRCAil)CSHRATIOS WWaatteerr uuaaaadd dduurriinngg pflroeo-erlacalneatnnging a fte r fin a l tripping Method #3 9 6 6 6 .4 1 4 6 9 1 .6 <1U t SinIMn. <12 12 > " * r e a r Tlw V O No fiber Obaorvoa HILL STk/L H ilt (an I t r u l u M par I t or uWaettoert PsaonlparleizsedwaLrIgahnt/a0lylezpederUs IlainngSTterlnm(nai)!(*PlIaMn)C4l0ccC.rPaRnPMaritcro7s4c3opOyffH.AEMla) ESPuAkpaartthotd. 6a0n0d/ 4TiCM Laval | l , a M a t- y aw c r ttwi ( b p l K i a . Saoplea iara analysed by I . I . Laa Grom, an VINYL ASBESTOS FLOOR U LE STUOY ROUTINE 8UFRNG ANO STRIPPlNG OPERATIONS FOR WRC-TV WASHINGTON NOVEMBER 6, 1989 A. F. MEYER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ACKNOW LEDGEM ENT THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED BY JOHN B. LOVE. CONTRIBUTORS TO THE REPORT INCLUDED: REYNOLDS RENSHAW (AFMA) TOM DAGENHART AND MONICA M. MCCLOY (R. J. LEH GROUP). THE COOPERATION AND ASSISTANCE OF WRC-TV WASHINGTON, SOUTHERN INSULATION, AND THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN THE STUDY COVERED BY THIS REPORT IS MUCH APPRECIATED.