24 year re inspection report gaston sdp1cdn4static.sharpschool.com/userfiles/servers... · gaston...

REINSPECTION REPORT

FOR

Gaston School District

Prepared for

GASTON SCHOOL DISTRICT 511J 300 PARK STREET SUITE A

GASTON, OR 97119

Prepared by

Professional Service Industries, Inc. 6032 N. Cutter Circle, Suite 480

Portland, Oregon 97217 Telephone 503-289-1778

PSI PROJECT NO. 0704651

August 8, 2013

___________________________ Denis M. Dooley Project Manager ___________________________ Robert W. White Principal Consultant

Gaston School District #511 JT August 8, 2013 21-Year AHERA Reinspection PSI Project Number 0704264

Gaston School District #511 JT 24-Year AHERA Reinspection PSI Project Number 0704651

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page INTRODUCTION 1 General Information 1 Authorization 1 Purpose 1 Warranty 1 STATEMENTS AND CERTIFICATION 2 Use of Accredited Inspectors 2 SCOPE OF SERVIES 3 METHODOLOGY 4 General References 4 General Procedures 4 Visual Reinspection and Reassessment 4 SUMMARY OF REINSPECTION 6 AHERA REINSPECTION REPORT 7 Introduction 7 Report Format 7 Information from the Six Three-Year Reinspection 8 Results of the Reinspection and Reassessment 9 Report of the Management Planner and the LEA Response 9 INSPECTION REPORT CERTIFICATIONS


1

INTRODUCTION GENERAL INFORMATION Professional Service Industries, Inc. (PSI) was retained by Gaston Schools to conduct an Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) type reinspection of known or assumed asbestos-containing building materials (ACBM) identified within the Gaston School District facilities located in Portland, Oregon. This reinspection report is for the exclusive use of the Gaston School District. AUTHORIZATION Authorization to perform this AHERA-type Reinspection was provided by the Gaston School District in the form of purchase order 13692, dated June 6, 2013. PURPOSE The purpose of this reinspection was to reassess the friability and condition of known or assumed ACBM identified in the LEA’s management plan and for compliance with AHERA’s Regulatory Requirements. WARRANTY PSI warrants that the findings contained herein have been prepared in general accordance with accepted professional practices as applied by similar professionals in the community at the time of its preparation. Changes in the state of the art or in applicable regulations after the date of this inspection could not have been anticipated and have not been addressed in this report. The inspection results reported herein are considered sufficient in detail and scope to determine the condition of accessible and/or exposed ACBM which have been identified in the LEA’s management plan and which were present in the facilities at the time of reinspection. There is a possibility that conditions may exist which could not be identified within the scope of the reinspection or which were not apparent during the site visit. This reinspection covered only areas which were identified in the LEA’s management plan and which were exposed and/or physically accessible to the inspector. This report was prepared pursuant to the contract PSI has with the client. That contractual relationship included an exchange of information about the subject site that was unique and between PSI and its client and serves as the basis upon which this report was prepared. Because of the importance of the communication between PSI and its client, reliance or any use of this report by anyone other than the client, for whom it was prepared, is prohibited and therefore not foreseeable to PSI.


2

Reliance or use by any such third party without explicit authorization in the report does not make said third party a third party beneficiary to PSI’s contract with the client. Any such unauthorized reliance on or use of this report, including any of its information or conclusions, will be at third party’s risk. For the same reasons, no warranties or representations, expressed or implied in this report, are made to any such third party. No other warranties are implied or expressed.


3

STATEMENTS AND CERTIFICATIONS USE OF ACCREDITED INSPECTORS PSI utilized inspectors accredited as per the EPA model Contractor Accreditation Plan, 40 CFR 763 (amended), Subpart E, and Appendix C. The inspection was conducted by the following PSI personnel: NAME ACCREDIATION # SIGNATURE Denis M. Dooley IMR-13-6366A __________________ The Management Plan Recommendations were developed by the following Management Planner: NAME ACCREDIATION # SIGNATURE Denis Dooley IMR-13-6366A __________________


4

SCOPE OF SERVICES

Reinspection and reassessment services were performed by EPA-accredited personnel. The scope of those services included the following:

A review of the existing management plan to determine areas requiring reinspection.

A visual inspection and reassessment of the condition of friable known or

assumed ACBM.

A visual and tactile inspection of known or assumed ACBM identified as non-friable to determine whether it had become friable since the last inspection.

Identification of those homogeneous areas that have become friable since

the last inspection.

Assessment of the condition of previously nonfriable known or assumed ACBM which has become friable since the last inspection.

Submission of a report to the LEA for inclusion in the management plan.

Quality control and adjustment, if necessary, of previous material

identification and quantification.


5

METHODOLOGY GENERAL REFERENCES Reinspection and reassessment procedures were performed in general accordance with the guidelines published by the EPA in 40 CFR, Part 763, Subpart E, October 30, 1987. GENERAL PROCEDURES Before beginning the reinspection, the inspector met the LEA contact to discuss the facility inspection, providing access, preferred inspection times, and other issues. The inspector reviewed the facility’s management plan and other pertinent documents which were available in order to become familiar with the facility and for use as a guide throughout the reinspection process. The reinspection itself consisted of two major activities: a visual reinspection and reassessment of previously identified friable and nonfriable known or assumed ACBM. Although these activities are named separately, they are integrated tasks. VISUAL REINSPECTION AND REASSESSMENT Each material known or assumed to contain asbestos was visually inspected and then touched to determine friability. The condition of these materials was reassessed to determine the likelihood that the ACBM would release asbestos fibers into the environment. The combination of its condition at the time of reinspection coupled with the likelihood of damage to the material in the future determined which AHERA damage category was assigned. During the initial AHERA inspection, ACBM was classified into homogeneous areas (HA) or unified sampling areas (USA). The ACBM in a given HA/USA was visually similar in color, texture, general appearance, and was apparently installed at the same time. Locations of these homogeneous materials were also noted. The first inspection classified both HA and USA into homogeneous Sampling Areas (HSA). The condition of each homogeneous known or assumed ACBM was assessed using the EPA decision tree approach which considers the following:

1) Source and type of damage:

- Physical contact - Water or air erosion - Deterioration or material delamination - Abrasions, punctures, tears, blistering, crumbling, etc.


6

2) Extent of damage:

- Good: No damage or little damage - Damaged: Less than 10% damaged, evenly distributed over the entire

material OR less than 25% damaged confined to a localized area of the material.

- Significantly Damaged: More than 10% damaged distributed evenly over

the entire material OR more than 25% damaged within a localized are of the material.

3) Potential for future damage:

Frequency of access to material Height of material Location of material in a plenum Degree of exposure of material Accessibility of material Presence in an area of air movement, vibrations, or loud noises.

Based on the above criteria, identified known and/or assumed ACBM were classified into one of the following damage categories:

Significantly Damaged Thermal System Insulation Damaged Thermal System Insulation Significantly Damaged Friable Surfacing Damaged Friable Surfacing Significantly Damaged Friable Miscellaneous Damaged Friable Miscellaneous ACBM with Potential for Significant Damage ACBM with Potential for Damage All Remaining Friable ACBM


7

SUMMARY OF REINSPECTION Changes in the condition of known and/or assumed ACBM were observed in these facilities. For specific information or a detailed listing of these changes regarding quantity, condition and the management planners recommended response action, please refer to the AHERA Reinspection and Management Planner Reports.

Building Name Homogeneous

Material Number Homogeneous Material Name

Status (Present / Removed)

Condition (Changed / Unchanged)

Elementary 04

MJP on Corrugated Pipe

Covering Present Unchanged

Elementary 05 Corrugated Pipe

Covering Present Unchanged Elementary 07 Vinyl Floor Tile Present Unchanged

Elementary Portable #21 01 Vinyl Floor Tile Present Unchanged

Elementary Portable #22 01 Vinyl Floor Tile Present Unchanged

Junior / Senior High 05 Vinyl Floor Tile Present Unchanged

High School Portables 01 Acoustical Plaster Present Changed*

* = Condition has continued to deteriorate, if portable is to remain, ceiling must be abated. MJP = Mudded Joint Packing


8

AHERA REINSPECTION REPORT INTRODUCTION The reinspection reports which follow contain the findings of the reinspection and reassessment. Each report identifies the homogeneous sampling area (which may have been termed a “unified sampling area” in the original management plan), the type of material, its location, friability, accessibility, damage category, perceived cause of damage and whether its condition has changed since the previous Three-Year Reinspection (Fifteen-Year Reinspection). REPORT FORMAT The following is a short explanation of each entry found on the Reinspection Report Forms. LEA NAME: Name of the Local Education Agency (School District) CAMPUS NAME: The name given to the complex that describes all buildings within the property boundaries BUILDING NAME: The name assigned to the structure in question AHERA INSPECTOR: The name of the inspector who performed the reinspection INSPECTION DATE: The date the reinspection was performed CERTIFICATION NUMBER: The number assigned to the inspector performing the reinspection by the EPA accredited training provider.


9

INFORMATION FROM THE PRIOR SIXTH THREE-YEAR REINSPECTION Unless the top right hand corner of the page is noted as a “New Area” in red, or the quantity found by the inspector was different from the original inspection or the previous (Sixth) Three-Year Reinspection, the information found in this section should match the previous Three-Year Reinspection inspection data provided by PSI. The location may be different for clarification purposes, but the HSA on this page should also match the HSA found in the previous report. If a red “New Area” appears in the upper right corner of the page, this material was not previously addressed in the initial management plan or prior Three-Year Reinspection reports and should be incorporated in to the plan. If the HSA numbers match but the quantities differ, this indicates that the verification of quantities indicated discrepancies that have been corrected with the proper quantities shown on the reinspection report forms. Homogeneous Sampling Area (HSA): This is a number assigned to the area in which the material was found. ACM Type: The asbestos-containing material type referenced on this reinspection report form. Damage Category: The category the ACM was assigned according to the seven damage categories defined by AHERA. Reason for Damage: The explanation, if any, as to why this ACM type is damaged. Recommended Response Action: The action recommended at the time of the original inspection. Location: A description of where the ACM was found. System: The mechanical system on which the ACM was found or a description of the use of the ACM. Asbestos: (Y) – yes the material contains asbestos or (N) – no the material does not contain asbestos. Friable: (Y) – yes or (N) – no Material Quantities: The amount of material found. Units will be square feet, linear feet or each. Examples include 975 square feet, 110 ft. 4 in. O.D. (outside diameter) and 35-4 in. O.D. The first indicates a surfacing material, the second is thermal system insulation that includes 110 feet or 4-inch outer diameter pipe insulation and the third is thermal system insulation that includes 35 hard mudded pipe fittings on a four inch outer diameter line.


10

RESULTS OF REINSPECTION AND REASSESSMENT 1. If a check mark is located after number one then the condition of the material in the

HSA mentioned has not changed and the response action in the previous Three-Year Reinspection report still applies. The remainder of the form should not be filled out if number one is checked.

2. If a check mark is located after number two then the condition of the material in the

HSA mentioned has changed. A new damage category will be assigned to the material in the HSA.

3. This will tell whether the material is considered friable or nonfriable. 4A. The appropriate reason for damage will be checked. 4B. The appropriate potential for disturbance will be checked. 5. If an area to be reinspected was not able to be accessed this will indicate why. 6. If samples were taken of this material during the reinspection the number of

samples, date samples taken and person sampling will be indicated. Comments: Information the inspector determines to be relevant to the situation but is not indicated in any of the other areas. REPORT OF MANAGEMENT PLANNER REVIEW AND LEA RESPONSE The Management Planner Review and LEA Response page for the HSA will follow the AHERA reinspection Report Form. The upper portion of this form is identical to the top portion of the AHERA Reinspection Report Form.

A. If a check mark is located in from of the A, the response action recommended in the previous Three-Year Reinspection report/management plan is still appropriate.

B. If a check mark is located in front of the B, the response action recommended

for this HSA has changed from the management plan. If this is the case, one of the lines labeled 1 through 6 will be checked. Relevant comments will also be found.

The bottom portion of this form is to be filled out by the LEA. This section must be completed to legally implement this Three-Year Reinspection.

REINSPECTION REPORTS

CERTIFICATIONS

24 year re inspection report gaston sdp1cdn4static.sharpschool.com/userfiles/servers... · gaston...

Documents