HomeMy WebLinkAboutAsbestos Report MAMA
T bb l Consulting Engineers & Environmental Scientists
618 South 25th Street
A TETRA TECH COMPANY P 0 Box 3061
Billings, MT 59107
Telephone: (406) 248 -9161
Fax: (406) 248 -9282
May 27, 2004
Mr. Steve Love
SUPERVALU, Inc.
PO Box 990
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440
steve.love@supervalu.com
SUBJECT: Transaction Screen Questionnaire
Vacant Former Grocery Outlet Store
College Station Shopping Center
2700 Texas Avenue South
College Station, Texas
Maxim Project No. 4550634.100
Dear Mr. Love:
Maxim Technologies, Inc. (Maxim) has completed the Transaction Screen Questionnaire (TSQ)
of the vacant former Grocery Outlet store located in the College Station Shopping Center, 2700
Texas Avenue South, College Station, Texas. The study was performed in accordance with the
Standard National Environmental Consultant Engagement Agreement - Multiple Projects,
between SUPERVALU INC. and Maxim, dated February 5, 1996, the engagement letter dated
April 26, 2004 (Attachment A), and, as noted therein, in general accordance with the American
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard Practice for Environmental Site
Assessments: Transaction Screen Process, E 1528 -00.
Maxim Technologies Inc. ® , a Tetra Tech company, Environmental Geologist Mr. Robert Dalton
conducted the site visit on May 6, 2004 and completed the site visit portion of the questionnaire.
As the site was vacant at the time of the site visit, the occupant section of the questionnaire was
not completed. The owner section of the questionnaire was not completed as the owner of the
site was not present during the site visit. A copy of the Transaction Screen Questionnaire is
located in Attachment B. One "Yes" answer was on the questionnaire completed by Mr. Dalton.
Two "Yes" answers were also on the Government Records/Historical Sources Inquiry section of
the questionnaire. The "Yes" answers on the questionnaire are discussed further in subsequent
sections of this report.
Question #2 1 b also had a "Yes" answer on the questionnaire completed by Mr. Dalton. This
question refers to the presence of suspect asbestos - containing building materials on the site.
Suspect asbestos - containing materials were sampled from the site and are discussed in
subsequent sections of this report.
Providing Cost- Effective Solutions to Clients Nationwide"
•
Mr. Steve Love
May 27, 2004
College Station Shopping Center, College Station, Texas
Page 2
The RCRA non - CORRACTS section of Question 22 had a "Yes" answer on the questionnaire.
Maxim contracted with EDR to perform the search of regulated facilities databases. The EDR
Report identified one RCRIS facility within Y2 mile of the site. The identified RCRIS facility is
located more than '/4 mile from the site and due to the distance is not considered an
environmental concern.
The Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) section of Question 23 also had a "Yes" answer
on the questionnaire. According to the EDR Report, two LUST facilities were identified within
'/2 mile of the site. The identified LUST facilities are located down to cross - gradient from the
site, based on the inferred direction of groundwater flow and are consequently not considered an
environmental concern.
The remaining facilities identified in the EDR Report are either down or cross - gradient of the
site based on the inferred direction of groundwater flow or are located more than 'A mile
upgradient from the site. These facilities are not expected to impact the site and are not
considered environmental concerns to the site at this time.
The site address was identified on the EDR report. According to the EDR report, Kmart, located
at 2700 South Texas Avenue, is a UST facility, with one registered tank. The tank contained
used oil and was 1,000 gallons. It has been removed from the ground, with no release reported.
Therefore, operation of a tank on the site is not considered an environmental concern.
The remaining facilities identified in the EDR Report are either down or cross - gradient of the
site based on the inferred direction of groundwater flow or are located more than '/4 mile
upgradient from the site. These facilities are not expected to impact the site and are not
considered environmental concerns to the site at this time.
Maxim also contracted with EDR to provide historical information regarding the site and past
site operations or occupants. EDR was unable to provide Historical Sanborn Maps for the site or
adjoining properties.
The EDR report also indicated the location of 100- and 500- year floodplains. According to this
report, the western portion of the College Station Shopping Center is located within a 500 -year
floodplain.
Asbestos Containing Building Materials
Maxim Environmental Technician Mr. Kenneth Williamson, a Texas Department of Health
(TDH) Accredited Asbestos Inspector, collected samples of suspect asbestos- containing
materials during a site visit on May 6, 2004. The samples were collected according to Texas
Department of Health Regulations and were sent to Steve Moody Micro Services, Inc. of
Carrollton, Texas for Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM) analysis of asbestos content. A copy of
the laboratory analytical report is located in Attachment E. The following suspect asbestos -
containing materials sampled from the site were found to contain more than 1% asbestos or
assumed to contain asbestos because they could not be sampled:
Maxim Technologies, Inc
Mr. Steve Love
May 27, 2004
College Station Shopping Center, College Station, Texas
Page 3
• 12 inch by 12 inch floor tile, off -white with gray streaks and associated black mastic, 2nd
Floor restrooms
• Sandy texturing and joint compound, 2 floor office and restrooms
• Roofing materials (assumed)
The following suspect materials were sampled from the site building and found not to be
asbestos - containing materials by laboratory analysis:
• 12 inch by 12 inch floor tile, white with gray specks and yellow mastic, main floor
• 2 foot by 4 foot ceiling tile, acoustical with pinholes, main floor
• Black cove base and cream mastic, main floor and 1st floor restrooms
• Drywall with smooth texturing and joint compound, main floor
• Drywall, no texturing, and joint compound, 1 floor restrooms
• 2 foot by 4 foot ceiling tile, white, 2 floor
• Drywall, no texturing, and joint compound, 2 floor
• Tan/beige cove base with tan mastic, 2 floor office and restroom
• Wheat vinyl wall covering and associated cream mastic, 2 floor restrooms
Site Description
The site consists of the northern-most suite in the College Station Shopping Center. The College
Station Shopping Center is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Texas Avenue
and Valley View Drive. The site, at the time of the site visit, was unoccupied. Former occupants
of the site included Grocery Outlet, a retail grocery store and drug store.
The College Station Shopping Center is a strip -type shopping center building and is located
along the southwestern boundary of the shopping center property. Parking lots are located
northeast of the building. Other retail spaces in the site building are located to the southeast of
the site and are occupied by Goodwill, Big Lots, and Tractor Supply. There is one outparcel in
the northeast corner of the shopping center that is occupied by a restaurant.
The main entrance to the site is located on the northeast side of the site building. The interior of
the site is finished as a main sales area, restrooms, a storage room, freezers, a compressor room,
a break room and a loading bay. Photographs of the site are located in Attachment F.
The site is connected to the City of College Station municipal drinking water and sanitary sewer
systems. Heating and cooling for the site building is provided by a forced -air system. Heating is
fueled by natural gas. The cooling system is electric.
Hazardous chemicals observed during the site visit include miscellaneous containers of cleaners.
There were also 12 one - gallon containers of paint, one 20 pound bag of floor leveling compound,
three five- gallon containers of paint, and one five- gallon container of clear floor tile adhesive.
The chemicals observed on the site are in manufacturer- labeled containers, with no evidence of
spillage. No storage tanks or containers of unknown contents were observed on the site during
Maxim Technologies, Inc .®
Mr. Steve Love
May 27, 2004
College Station Shopping Center, College Station, Texas
Page 4
the site visit. No chemical odors, corrosion, or stressed vegetation were observed during the site
visit.
No pits, ponds, or lagoons were observed on the site during the site visit. Solid waste was not
being generated on the site at the time of the site visit, as the site was not occupied. No indications
of buried solid waste, such as mounds, depressions, or areas of subsidence were observed on the site
during the site visit. A cardboard compactor, located in the storage room, was observed during the
site visit. A dumpster for the site was located on the southwest side of the building.
Fluorescent light ballasts, suspected to contain PCBs, were observed on the site during the site
visit. One 250 KVA transformer was observed in the mezzanine or second floor storage area in
the site. Pole- mounted transformers were observed southwest of the site building. The
transformers were not labeled concerning PCB content, but appeared to be in good condition.
Floor drains were observed in the site building during the site visit. The floor drains in the
restrooms were reportedly connected to the sanitary sewer system.
Adjoining and Surrounding Properties
Adjoining properties north and east of the College Station Shopping Center were commercial or
retail properties. An apartment complex was located west of the site. Several commercial/office
buildings were located south of the site. An Exxon gas station was located on adjoining property
east - northeast of the site. Based on the inferred direction of groundwater flow, this facility is
cross - gradient from the site and is not considered an environmental concern. Two gasoline
stations were located southeast of the site. These gasoline stations are considered up to cross
gradient from the site, however; as releases have not been reported for these facilities they are
not considered an environmental concerns to the site.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Maxim has completed a Transaction Screen Questionnaire (TSQ) of the vacant former Grocery
Outlet store located in the College Station Shopping Center, 2700 Texas Avenue South in
College Station, Texas. The TSQ was performed in accordance with the Standard National
Environmental Consultant Engagement Agreement - Multiple Projects, between SUPERVALU
INC. and Maxim, dated February 5, 1996, the engagement letter dated April 26, 2004 and, as
noted therein, in general conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Practice E 1528-
00.
A summary of recognized environmental conditions in connection with the site is presented
below:
➢ Historical Recognized Environmental Conditions
No historical recognized environmental conditions, as defined by ASTM, were identified
during this site investigation.
Maxim Technologies, Inc. '
Mr. Steve Love
May 27, 2004
College Station Shopping Center, College Station, Texas
Page 5
➢ De minimis Recognized Environmental Conditions
The following de minimis conditions, as defined by ASTM, were identified during this
site investigation:
➢ Asbestos - containing materials were identified in the site.
➢ Light ballasts suspected to contain PCBs were present in the site building.
➢ Containers of cleaners, paint, and floor adhesive were present on the site.
➢ Recognized Environmental Conditions
No recognized environmental conditions, as defined by ASTM, were identified during
this site investigation.
Based on the information reviewed for this investigation, further investigation of the site does
not appear warranted at this time. However, Maxim presents the following recommendations for
the site:
➢ Asbestos - containing materials have been identified in the site building. TDH and EPA
National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) regulations
require removal of asbestos - containing materials prior to any renovation or demolition
activities that would disturb these materials. Maxim recommends an additional
inspection of the building, prior to renovation, to determine quantities and exact locations
of asbestos - containing materials, appropriate asbestos abatement methods and
procedures, environmental controls, and layout of the project. The asbestos abatement
chosen must be conducted by a TDH licensed asbestos abatement contractor and
abatement must be conducted in accordance with a project design prepared by a TDH
licensed asbestos consulting agency. In addition, third party air monitoring must be
conducted during the abatement. It is also important to note that state and federal
regulations require a ten day notification prior to asbestos abatement or demolition
activities in a building, regardless of whether asbestos is present or not.
➢ Light ballasts at the site are considered to be PCB containing. If light ballasts at the site
are to be removed, Maxim recommends that they be inspected for the possible presence
of PCBs and disposed of properly.
➢ Containers of cleaner, paint, and floor adhesive should be removed from the site by the
current owner or the past occupant of the site for proper off -site disposal.
Information accumulated for this assessment will be retained with your project file. The report
and information in your file is considered confidential and will not be released without your
authorization. We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project and serve your
environmental needs. If you have any questions or comments concerning this report, feel free to
call us.
Maxim Technologies, Inc .®
Mr. Steve Love
May 27, 2004
College Station Shopping Center, College Station, Texas
Page 6
•
Sincerely,
Maechnologies,hc.
vg
Ryan C. Behrends Kim Medina
Environmental Scientist Environmental Scientist
Kenneth Williamson Rick Orr
TDH Licensed Asbestos Inspector TDH Licensed Asbestos Consultant
RCB/KM/rr
Attachments
Attachment A - Letter of Authorization
Attachment B — Transaction Screen Questionnaire
Attachment C — EDR Regulated Facilities Report
Attachment D — EDR Sanborn Map Report
Attachment E — Asbestos Analytical Report
Attachment F — Site Photos
(in two electronic copies)
MaioTechnologies,hc. ®
ATTACHMENT A
Letter of Authorization
ATTACHMENT E
Asbestos Analytical Report
PLM REPORT
Steve Moody Micro Services, Inc. NVLAP Lab No. 102056
1510 Randolph, Suite 602 TDH License No. 30
Carrollton, Texas 75006 (972) 446 -9482 PAT ID # 102577
Client : Maxim Technologies, Inc. - Billings, MT Lab Job No.: x4B -03792
Project : SUPERVALU, College Station Shopping Center 2704 -4 Report Date: 05/13/2004
Project # : 4550634.100 Sample Date : 5/6- 7/2004
Identification : Asbestos, Bulk Sample Analysis
Test Method : Polarized Light Microscopy / Dispersion Staining (PLM /DS)
EPA Method 600 / R -93 / 116 Page 1 of 4
On 05/11/2004, thirty-nine (39) bulk material samples were submitted by Kenneth Williamson of Maxim Technologies, Inc. - Austin, TX for asbestos analysis by
PLM/DS.
Copies of the lab data sheets are attached; additional information may be found therein. The results are summarized below:
Sample Number Client Sample Description / Location Asbestos Content
CS -01 1' x 1' Floor Tile (White w/ Gray Specks) and Mastic, None Detected - Floor Tile
Main Floor, Northwest Corner None Detected - Yellow Mastic
CS -02 1' x 1' Floor Tile (White w/ Gray Specks) and Mastic, None Detected - Floor Tile
Main Floor, Northeast Comer Office, West Side, Center None Detected - Yellow Mastic
CS -03 1' x 1' Floor Tile (White w/ Gray Specks) and Mastic, None Detected - Floor Tile
1st Floor, Men's Restroom, Southwest Comer None Detected - Yellow Mastic
CS -04 2' x 4' Ceiling Tile (Acoustical w/ Pinholes), None Detected - Ceiling Tile
Main Floor, North Side, Center •
CS -05 2' x 4' Ceiling Tile (Acoustical w/ Pinholes), None Detected - Ceiling Tile
o's Restroom, Center
CS -06 21st ' x Fl 4' C eiling Men Tile (Acoustical w/ Pinholes), None Detected - Ceiling Tile
1st Floor Women's Restroom, Southwest Comer
CS -07 Black Cove Base with Light Beige Mastic, None Detected - Cove Base
Main Floor, Northeast Corner Office, at Entrance Door None Detected - Cream Mastic
CS -08 Black Cove Base with Light Beige Mastic, None Detected - Cove Base
1st Floor, Men's Restroom, at Door None Detected - Cream Mastic
CS -09 Black Cove Base with Light Beige Mastic, None Detected - Cove Base
1st Floor, Women's Restroom, at Door None Detected - Cream Mastic
CS -10 Drywall Construction with Smooth Texture, None Detected - Drywall Material
Main Floor, South Wall at West Doors None Detected - Joint Compound
None Detected - Texture
CS -11 Drywall Construction with Smooth Texture, None Detected - Drywall Material
Main Floor, West Wall, Center None Detected - Texture
•
PLM REPORT
Steve Moody Micro Services, Inc. NVLAP Lab No. 102056
1510 Randolph, Suite 602 TDH License No. 30 -0084
Carrollton, Texas 75006 (972) 446 -9482 PAT ID # 102577
Client : Maxim Technologies, Inc. - Billings, MT Lab Job No.: x4B -03792
Project : SUPERVALU, College Station Shopping Center 2704 -4 Report Date: 05/13/2004
Project # : 4550634.100 Sample Date : 5/6- 7/2004
Identification : Asbestos, Bulk Sample Analysis
Test Method : Polarized Light Microscopy / Dispersion Staining (PLM /DS)
EPA Method 600 / R -93 / 116 Page 2 of 4
On 05/11/2004, thirty-nine (39) bulk material samples were submitted by Kenneth Williamson of Maxim Technologies, Inc. - Austin, TX for asbestos analysis by
PLM/DS.
Copies of the lab data sheets are attached, additional information may be found therein. The results are summarized below.
Sample Number Client Sample Description / Location Asbestos Content
CS -12 Drywall Construction with Smooth Texture, None Detected - Drywall Material
Main Floor, Northwest Corner None Detected - Joint Compound
None Detected - Texture
CS -13 Drywall Construction with Smooth Texture, None Detected - Drywall Material
Main Floor, Northeast Corner None Detected - Texture
CS -14 Drywall Construction with Smooth Texture, None Detected - Drywall Material
Main Floor, Southeast Corner at Doors None Detected - Joint Compound
None Detected - Texture
CS -15 Drywall Construction with Smooth Texture, None Detected - Drywall Material
Main Floor, South Wall 30' West of East Wall None Detected - Texture
CS -16 Drywall Construction with Smooth Texture, None Detected - Drywall Material
1st Floor, Men's Restroom at Door None Detected - Joint Compound
None Detected - Texture
CS -17 Drywall Construction with No Texture, None Detected - Cream Mastic
1st Floor, Men's Restroom at Door
CS -18 Drywall Construction with No Texture, None Detected - Cream Mastic
1st Floor, Women's Restroom at Door
CS -19 Drywall Construction with No Texture, None Detected - Cream Mastic
2nd Floor, West Restroom, North Wall, Center
CS -20 1' x 1' Floor Tile (Off-White w/ Gray Streaks) and Black Mastic, 5% Chrysotile - Floor Tile
2nd Floor, West Restroom, Foyer, West Side, Center 10% Chrysotile - Black Mastic
CS -21 1' x 1' Floor Tile (Off-White w/ Gray Streaks) and Black Mastic, 5% Chrysotile - Floor Tile
2nd Floor, West Restroom, Northeast Corner 10% Chrysotile - Black Mastic
PLM REPORT
Steve Moody Micro Services, Inc. NVLAP Lab No. 102056
1510 Randolph, Suite 602 TDH License No. 30 -0084
Carrollton, Texas 75006 (972) 446 -9482 PAT ID # 102577
Client : Maxim Technologies, Inc. - Billings, MT Lab Job No.: x4B -03792
Project : SUPERVALU, College Station Shopping Center 2704 -4 Report Date: 05/13/2004
Project # : 4550634.100 Sample Date : 5/6- 7/2004
Identification : Asbestos, Bulk Sample Analysis
Test Method : Polarized Light Microscopy / Dispersion Staining (PLM /DS)
EPAMethod600 /R- 93/116 Page 3of4
On 05/11/2004, thirty-nine (39) bulk material samples were submitted by Kenneth Williamson of Maxim Technologies, Inc. - Austin, TX for asbestos analysis by
PLM/DS.
Copies of the lab data sheets are attached; additional information may be found therein. The results are summarized below:
Sample Number Client Sample Description / Location Asbestos Content
CS -22 1' x 1' Floor Tile (Off-White w/ Gray Streaks) and Black Mastic, 5% Chrysotile - Floor Tile
2nd Floor, East Restroom, Foyer, West Side Center 10% Chrysotile - Black Mastic
CS -23 2' x 4' Ceiling Tile (White), None Detected - Ceiling Tile
2nd Floor, Office, South Side, Center
CS -24 2' x 4' Ceiling Tile (White), None Detected - Ceiling Tile
2nd Floor, East Restroom Foyer, Center
CS -25 2' x 4' Ceiling Tile (White), None Detected - Ceiling Tile
2nd Floor, West Restroom Foyer, Center
CS -26 Drywall Construction with Sandy Texture, None Detected - Drywall Material
2nd Floor, West Restroom Foyer, at Door 2% Chrysotile - Texture
CS -27 Drywall Construction with Sandy Texture, None Detected - Drywall Material
2nd Floor, East Restroom Foyer, at Door 2% Chrysotile - Texture
CS -28 Drywall Construction with Sandy Texture, None Detected - Drywall Material
2nd Floor, Office, Southwest Corner 2% Chrysotile - Joint Compound
2% Chrysotile - Texture
CS -29 Drywall Construction with No Texture, None Detected - Drywall Material
2nd Floor, Storage Room Wall at Door to Stairs None Detected - Joint Compound
CS -30 Drywall Construction with No Texture, None Detected - Drywall Material
2nd Floor, Attic Space over Cooler, at Door None Detected - Joint Compound
CS -31 Drywall Construction with No Texture, None Detected - Drywall Material
2nd Floor, Attic Space over Cooler, West Wall, Center None Detected - Joint Compound
CS -32 Drywall Construction with No Texture, None Detected - Drywall Material
2nd Floor, Stairwell, South Wall at Column None Detected - Joint Compound
PLM REPORT
Steve Moody Micro Services, Inc. NVLAP Lab No. 102056
1510 Randolph, Suite 602 TDH License No. 30 -0084
Carrollton, Texas 75006 (972) 446 -9482 PAT ID # 102577
Client : Maxim Technologies, Inc. - Billings, MT Lab Job No.: x4B -03792
Project : SUPERVALU, College Station Shopping Center 2704 -4 Report Date: 05/13/2004
Project # : 4550634.100 Sample Date : 5/6- 7/2004
Identification : Asbestos, Bulk Sample Analysis
Test Method : Polarized Light Microscopy / Dispersion Staining.(PLM /DS)
EPA Method 600 / R -93 / 116 Page 4 of 4
On 05/11/2004, thirty -nine (39) bulk material samples were submitted by Kenneth Williamson of Maxim Technologies, Inc. - Austin, TX for asbestos analysis by
PLM/DS.
Copies of the lab data sheets are attached; additional information may be found therein. The results are summarized below:
Sample Number Client Sample Description / Location Asbestos Content
CS -33 Drywall Construction with No Texture, None Detected - Drywall Material
1st Floor, Rear Storage Area, North Wall, South Side, None Detected - Joint Compound
Center Area, between Coolers
CS -34 Tan / Beige Cove Base with Mastic, None Detected - Cove Base
2nd Floor, Office at West Door None Detected - Tan Mastic
CS -35 Tan / Beige Cove Base with Mastic, None Detected - Cove Base
2nd Floor, West Restroom Foyer at Door None Detected - Brown Mastic
CS -36 Tan / Beige Cove Base with Mastic, None Detected - Cove Base
2nd Floor, East Restroom Foyer at Door None Detected - Brown Mastic
CS -37 Wheat Vinyl Wall Covering, None Detected - Wall Covering
2nd Floor, West Restroom, North Wall, Center. None Detected - Cream Mastic
CS -38 Wheat Vinyl Wall Covering, None Detected - Wall Covering
2nd Floor, West Restroom, North Wall, Center None Detected - Cream Mastic
CS -39 Wheat Vinyl Wall Covering, None Detected - Wall Covering
2nd Floor, East Restroom, North Wall, Center
These samples were analyzed by layers. Quantification, unless otherwise noted, is performed by calibrated visual estimate.
Results may not be reproduced except m full. This test report relates only to the samples tested.
These test results do not imply endorsement by NVLAP or any agency of the U.S. Government
Accredited by the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program for Bulk Asbestos Fiber Analysis under Lab Code 102056.
Analyst : Robert W. Miracle
Lab Director : Steve Moody Approved Signatory :
-' -- Thank you for choosing Steve Mood --- - - - - --
� —'— -- - --- '---- ' - -- -' - --- ----- -- -- -- Y 6 Y Micro Services — '-- ._- --- -- - -'— "- -'-
ra 4x53
1320
�,ON .
�
t UlOVATE N
to
Ne
HEIGHTS VENTURE ARCHITECTS LL.P.
RECEIVED
October 13, 2005 OCT 1 5 2005
Mr. David Cottrell
David Cottrell Investments, Inc.
7505 Highmeadow
Houston, Texas 77063
Tel: 713- 783 -5052
Fax: 713- 334 -4535
Re: Limited Asbestos Survey UE05449
Site: 2704 South Texas Avenue in College Station, Texas
Dear Mr. Cottrell:
The results of our survey of asbestos containing building materials in the above - described property are given below.
A. INTRODUCTION:
Unovate Environmental Services, LP (UES) conducted a limited asbestos survey inside the above referenced facility.
Suspect asbestos containing materials (ACM) were sampled and analyzed for asbestos content. The survey was
conducted on October 5, 2005 by UES inspector Zafar Ahmed. The following represents the survey report including
laboratory findings.
B. ASSUMPTIONS:
The inspection was conducted, per client request, for the purpose of finding out whether asbestos containing materials
were present in the facility. This survey does follow state or federal regulations governing asbestos work and can be
relied on for renovation activities.
UES conducted a visual inspection of the building materials found in a portion of the above referenced building. During
the walk - through, materials that were suspected of containing ACM were noted. According to OSHA, suspect materials
that are in buildings built prior to 1979 are presumed to be asbestos containing materials (or PACM).
Zafar Ahmed (TDH License #105650), a Texas Department of Health Licensed Asbestos Inspector, conducted the
survey. Materials suspected of containing asbestos specific to 40 CFR 763 (the EPA's Asbestos Material in Schools
Final Rule) were sampled using required safety procedures. Twenty -seven samples were collected from the facility. The
samples were selected at random, as recommended in EPA guidelines. The samples were sealed and taken to an
accredited laboratory, A & B Labs, for analyses. The construction materials in the samples were analyzed by polarized
light microscopy (PLM). The laboratory fmdings are included herein.
With regard to asbestos, a homogeneous area (an area of material that is uniform in color and texture) shall be
determined to contain asbestos if the results of at least one sample collected from it indicate that asbestos is present in an
amount greater than 1% (one percent). Once a material has been found to contain asbestos, all such materials in the
building are considered to contain asbestos.
P. 0 BOX 572502, HOUSTON, TEXAS 77257 -2502 * TELEPHONE 713 - 784 -9955 * FACSIMILE 713 - 784 -8889
Limited Asbestos Survey David Cottrell Investments, Inc.
2704 South Texas Avenue October 13, 2005
College Station, Texas Page 2
C. LIMITED SURVEY FINDINGS:
1 Black/silver mastic Roof Not detected
2 Black/silver mastic Roof Not detected
3 Black/silver mastic Roof Not detected
4 Ceiling tile Tractor Supply Company Not detected
5 Ceiling tile Tractor Supply Company Not detected
6 Ceiling tile Tractor Supply Company Not detected
7a 12 by 12 beige floor tile Tractor Supply Company Not detected
7b Yellow mastic Tractor Supply Company Not detected
8a 12 by 12 beige floor tile Tractor Supply Company Not detected
8b Yellow mastic Tractor Supply Company Not detected
9a 12 by 12 beige floor tile Tractor Supply Company Not detected
9b Yellow mastic Tractor Supply Company Not detected
l0a Sheetrock Tractor Supply Company Not detected
10b Texture and joint compound Tractor Supply Company Not detected
11 a Sheetrock Tractor Supply Company Not detected
l lb Texture and joint compound Tractor Supply Company Not detected
12a Sheetrock Tractor Supply Company Not detected
12b Texture and joint compound Tractor Supply Company Not detected
13a Covebase Tractor Supply Company Not detected
13b Yellow mastic Tractor Supply Company Not detected
14 Yellow mastic Tractor Supply Company Not detected
15a Covebase Tractor Supply Company Not detected
15b Yellow mastic Tractor Supply Company Not detected
16a 12 by 12 white floor tile Big Lots 3% Chrysotile
16b Black mastic Big Lots 8% Chrysotile
17a 12 by 12 white floor tile Big Lots Not analyzed
17b Black mastic Big Lots Not analyzed
18a 12 by 12 white floor tile Big Lots Not analyzed
18b Black mastic Big Lots Not analyzed
19a Sheetrock Big Lots Not detected
19b Texture and joint compound Big Lots Not detected
20a Sheetrock Big Lots Not detected
20b Texture and joint compound Big Lots Not detected
21a Sheetrock Big Lots Not detected
21b Texture and joint compound Big Lots Not detected
22a Sheetrock Goodwill Not detected
22b Texture and joint compound Goodwill Not detected
23a Sheetrock Goodwill Not detected
23b Texture and joint compound Goodwill Not detected
24a Sheetrock Goodwill Not detected
24b Texture and joint compound Goodwill Not detected
25 Plaster Exterior wall Not detected
26 Plaster Exterior wall Not detected
27 Plaster Exterior wall Not detected
From the laboratory analyses, all samples listed above in BOLD TYPE contain asbestos. All of the analytical results
are attached herein.
P. 0 BOX 572502, HOUSTON, TEXAS 77257 -2502 * TELEPHONE 713 -784 -9955 * FACSIMILE 713 - 784 -8889
Limited Asbestos Survey David Cottrell Investments, Inc.
2704 South Texas Avenue October 13, 2005
College Station, Texas Page 3
No destructive testing was conducted during the limited asbestos survey. The following suspected asbestos containing
materials were not sampled: moisture barrier, layers of flooring beneath floor), pipe insulation and mud/clothes on
elbows and/or tees associated with the water heater (the water heater was wrapped with sheet metal). If such materials
are encountered during demolition activities, they should be tested and any of these construction materials found to
contain asbestos should be abated following Department of State Health Services regulations.
D. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS:
Building materials which contain asbestos, which are in regulated facilities, and which are in good shape can be
managed under an Operations and Management Plan (O &M). An O &M spells out the procedures and practices that
must be applied to building cleaning, maintenance, renovation, and general operation to maintain a facility as free of
asbestos contamination as possible. The O &M would remain in effect until all ACM have been removed from the
property.
The three primary objectives for the O &M program would be:
(1) To clean existing contamination and minimize future fiber release by controlling access to the ACM;
(2) To develop a written plan that serves as a legal document. Properly prepared, this plan will act as a first line of
defense, documenting the building owners' prudence in dealing with asbestos in the building; and
(3) To defer more permanent abatement action (i.e. removal) and associated costs.
The reasoning behind such a program would be to minimize the potential for airborne hazards stemming from a release
of asbestos fibers. The plan would apply to maintenance staff, employees, occupants, and visitors. This includes
maintenance personnel, custodians, administrators, and, generally, all employees. The management of the program must
be placed under the direction and responsibility of one Designated Person. In the event that renovation, re-roofing, or
demolition operations become planned in areas where ACM were found, however, their abatement must be conducted.
During the survey, only a few readily accessible materials were evaluated. Any materials not readily accessible (i.e.
piping in the walls, hidden insulation treatments, etc.) and not assessed in this survey should be evaluated if and when
they are located during building renovation and demolition. It is recommended that should the need arise, a pre -
construction meeting be held with the renovation/demolition contractor and UES to discuss possible ACM, their
location, and precautions to be taken, when such work becomes planned.
E. DEMOLITION/RENOVATION CONSIDERATIONS:
Considering that demolition or renovation activities may become planned at the facility in reference, UES would be
pleased to offer its assistance and proposal to develop any needed asbestos project specifications for asbestos removal,
cost estimates, and to provide assistance in coordinating with the abatement contractor for any or all portions of the
above described work when and if it becomes needed. We would additionally be pleased to offer our services for
abatement inspection, project management, and air monitoring during the asbestos removal operations.
Federal and State (Texas Department of Health) regulations are in effect which require the removal of ACM prior to
demolition or renovation of a building, in the area where the planned activity is to take place. Damaged materials must
also be abated following regulatory requirements. With regard to asbestos abatement projects in the State of Texas,
currently employed considerations are:
1- Prior to commencing abatement activities, notification must be received by the TDH by mail at least ten working
days prior to the commencement of abatement activities. A TDH licensed asbestos abatement contractor must be
hired to perform the abatement activities and a TDH licensed asbestos consultant must be hired to prepare the
specifications and conduct the construction observation activities during the abatement project. Both of these must
be licensed by the TDH to perform such work and must be fully insured. The individuals representing these
companies must also be licensed.
2- Along with the notification, a filing fee is required. It is based on the amount of materials to be removed. The
minimum filing fee is $50.00 and the maximum is $3,000.00.
P. 0 BOX 572502, HOUSTON, TEXAS 77257 -2502 * TELEPHONE 713 - 784 -9955 * FACSIMILE 713 - 784 -8889
Limited Asbestos Survey David Cottrell Investments, Inc.
2704 South Texas Avenue October 13, 2005
College Station, Texas Page 4
3- On all abatement projects, a consultant should to be hired to perform the following tasks:
b To prepare specifications /construction documents;
b To conduct area air monitoring during abatement; and
b To collect final clearance containment area air samples prior to dismantlement of the containment area, in order
to ensure that the air inside is safe.
The contractor performing the abatement must be a different entity than the one performing the consulting activity. The
contractor may also retain a consultant to perform personnel air samples on his workers during abatement inside of the
containment area.
Upon completion of work and after air clearance samples are obtained, Unovate will provide a closure letter
documenting: that the asbestos containing materials identified in the scope of work have been satisfactorily removed
from the building, that the building is safe for re- occupancy and that all work has been conducted as per regulatory
requirements.
We appreciate this opportunity to have been of service to you. If you have any questions, please contact Mary Foote at 713-
784 -9955.
Respectfully:
(7,,,bd-
I
Hani Gabriel
Principal, UES
TDH Consultant License #10 -5622
P. 0 BOX 572502, HOUSTON, TEXAS 77257 -2502 * TELEPHONE 713 - 784 -9955 * FACSIMILE 713 - 784 -8889