environmental, engineering, building sciences industrial ... · environmental, engineering, buildi...

Environmental, Engineering, Building Sciences Industrial Hygiene & Remediation Services

Corporate Headquarters

8048 Northcourt Road Houston, Texas 77040

Phone: 713.744.5800 Fax: 713.744.5888 www.tgeresources.com

Asbestos and Lead Survey Report

Improvement and Demolition of Select Features Clinton Drive Lift Station

4309 Clinton Drive Houston, TX 77020

WBS No: R-000267-0159-4

Task No.: 18-02 TGE Project No.: R13709.01

Prepared for:

City of Houston

Houston Public Works Capital Projects

Technical Services 611 Walker -14th Floor, Houston, Texas 77002

February 20, 2018

Environmental, Engineering, Building Sciences, Industrial Hygiene & Remediation Services

DUNS: 929574051 Texas HUB City of Houston SBE, WBE, DBE SBA Certified WOSB TX DOT Pre-certified WBEA/WBENC Certified WBE

TGE Corporate Office 8048 Northcourt Houston, Texas 77040 713-744-5800 Fax: 713-744-5888 www.tgeresources.com

February 20, 2018 Houston Public Works Capital Projects Technical Services 611 Walker -14th Floor, Houston, Texas 77002 Re: Asbestos and Lead Survey Report

Improvement and Demolition of Select Features - Clinton Drive Lift Station 4309 Clinton Drive, Houston, TX WBS No: R-000267-0159-4 Task No.: 18-02 TGE Project No.: R13709.01

TGE Resources, Inc., (“TGE”) has completed an Asbestos and Lead Survey of select areas of the Clinton Drive Lift Station, located at 4309 Clinton Drive in Houston, TX; (herein referred to as the “Site” or “Subject Area”). Specifically, TGE tested roof materials and select interior/exterior finishes associated with electrical equipment located along the east side of the Site structure. TGE was authorized to proceed with the contracted scope of services by the City of Houston, Houston Public Works, Capital Projects, Technical Services on February 7, 2018. This report contains project characteristics, sampling procedures, and results of laboratory analysis of bulk samples for asbestos content by polarized light microscopy (PLM) and paint chip samples for lead using Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Method 6010B. All data generated as a result of the subject sampling effort will remain confidential and will not be released to or viewed by any unauthorized person for any reason without prior written client consent. Our professional services have been performed, our findings obtained, and our recommendations prepared in accordance with customary principles and best practices in the fields of environmental science, and industrial hygiene. We appreciate the opportunity to provide client with Asbestos and Lead services. Should any questions arise related to the content of this report, or any related matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, TGE Resources, Inc. TDSHS Asbestos Agency License No. 10-0171 TDSHS Certified Lead Firm #2110003

Kristi Destouet Project Manager Texas Licensed Asbestos Individual Consultant (LAIC) License No.: 10-5770 TDSHS Certified Risk Assessor (#2071034) KMD/lj

Enclosures

Table of Contents

Qualifications and Limitations 1

Executive Summary 2

Asbestos Summary 2

Findings: 2

Recommendations: 2

Lead Summary 3

Findings: 3

Recommendation: 4

COMPREHENSIVE ASBESTOS SURVEY 5

Scope of Services 5

Facility Description 5

Sampling Techniques and Laboratory Methods 5

Survey Methods 7

Table 1: HAZARD CATEGORY AND RESPONSE ACTION 9

Laboratory Methods 10

Asbestos-Containing Material (ACM) Verification and Assessment 10

Hazard Assessment Results 10

TABLE 2: SUSPECT ACM ANALYTICAL RESULTS 10

Findings and Recommendations 11

CHECK LIST FOR ASBESTOS SURVEYS 14

LEAD-BASED PAINT SURVEY 16

Scope of Services 16

Sampling duties conducted by TGE were as follows: 16

Sampling and Analysis 16

Paint Samples Collection 16

TABLE 3: HAZARD CATEGORY AND RESPONSE ACTION 16

TABLE 4: SUSPECT LBP ANALYTICAL RESULTS 17

Laboratory Analytical Results 17

Findings 18

Recommendation 18

CHECK LIST FOR LEAD SURVEYS 19 Appendix A – Facility Location Photograph (Client Provided Floor Plans) Appendix B – Asbestos – Sample Location Photographs Appendix C – Lead – Sample Location Photographs Appendix D – Asbestos – Analytical Results and Chain-of-Custody (Figure 1) Appendix E – Lead – Analytical Results and Chain-of-Custody (Figure 2) Appendix F – Licenses and Certifications

R13709.01- Page | 1

Qualifications and Limitations This work product, prepared in conjunction with the attached assessment, is intended as a description of available information at the dates and locations given. This report does not warrant against future operations or conditions, nor does it warrant against operations or conditions present of a type or at a location not investigated. Opinions and recommendations presented herein apply to Site conditions existing at the time of TGE’s investigation and those reasonably foreseeable. Such findings cannot necessarily apply to Site changes of which this company is not aware and has not had the opportunity to evaluate. Our professional services have been performed, our findings obtained and our recommendations prepared in accordance with customary principles and practices in the fields of environmental science and engineering. This company is not responsible for the independent conclusions, opinions or recommendations made by others based on the field exploration and laboratory test data presented in this report. This report is intended for the sole use of City of Houston and its representatives. The scope of services performed may not be appropriate to satisfy additional users. Any unauthorized use or reuse of report findings, conclusions, or recommendations is at the risk of said user. Although TGE made every effort to ensure accuracy with regard to measurements of interior areas of study for purposes of preparing a floor plan, it must be understood that TGE is not a licensed architectural firm and does not warrant accuracy to a degree that may be required by others in preparing cost estimates for abatement and/or renovation efforts. TGE’s field drawings are for informational and reference purposes only. If a greater degree of accuracy is required than that implied herein, TGE encourages preparation of a drawing independent of this effort. No homogeneous areas were omitted from the survey with the exception of a grout/sealant located along the edges of transformer conduits leading from the exterior of the building into the interior of the Control Building. This material was inaccessible due to safety concerns (possibility of arching) and, as such, was not disturbed. Although this material was not tested, given the location of this material (exterior of the Control Building), and that the square footage of this material does not exceed an asbestos reporting unit (ARU) or 160 square feet, this material would not require notification or emission control as directed within the National Emissions Standard for Asbestos. Disturbance of this material would still require compliance with applicable OSHA regulations. Should additional materials not listed herein be discovered during future renovation/demolition activity (if any), the presence of asbestos per material must be ruled out prior to disturbance.

R13709.01- Page | 2

Executive Summary TGE Resources, Inc., (“TGE”) has completed an Asbestos and Lead Survey for select areas of Clinton Drive Lift Station, located at 4309 Clinton Drive in Houston, TX; hereinafter referred to as the “Site” or (more specifically) the “Subject Area.” Specifically, TGE tested roof materials and select interior/exterior finishes associated with electrical equipment positioned along the east side of the Site structure (see provided plans included in Appendix A of this report). TGE was authorized to proceed with the contracted scope of services by the City of Houston, Houston Public Works, Capital Projects, Technical Services on February 7, 2018. The survey was completed on February 12, 2018 and was performed by Ms. Kristi Destouet, Project Manager with TGE. Ms. Destouet is both a Texas Department of State Health Services (“TDSHS”) licensed Asbestos Individual Consultant (TDSHS License No.: 10-5770) and a TDSHS certified Lead Risk Assessor (No. 2071034). TGE is a TDSHS-licensed Asbestos Consulting Agency (TDSHS License No.: 10-0171), as well as a TDSHS certified Lead Firm (No. 2110003).

Asbestos Summary

As an outcome of this assessment, TGE documented the presence of nineteen (19) homogenous areas and a total of thiry-four (34) suspect asbestos bulk samples were collected and submitted to Xenco Laboratories for analysis of asbestos content via Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM). Following data reduction and associated hazard assessment, TGE presents the following Findings and Recommendations with respect to asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) at the Site (if any). Findings: Based on PLM analytical results, asbestos was identified in materials sampled for this survey. Specifically, approximately 1,500 square feet of black mastic (beneath non-ACM vinyl floor tile) located within the east portion of the Control Building1 was found with an asbestos content of 7% Chrysotile (sample # A-29, A-30 and A-312). At the time of the inspection, the black mastic was exposed in areas and the vinyl floor tile was damaged/in poor condition. As such, Site finishes associated with asbestos content are designated a City of Houston (COH) Asbestos Hazard Categorization of “C-2” (Asbestos Present); remaining materials are designated a COH Asbestos Hazard Categorization of “A” (No Asbestos Found). Recommendations:

• Given the presence of damaged/exposed asbestos-containing materials (and until abatement is performed), an OSHA Work Practices Program (OWP) following guidelines set forth in EPA 40 CFR 763 Subpart E, Texas Asbestos Health Protection Rules (TAHPR) and USEPA 40 CFR 61 Subpart M should be immediately implemented to safely manage confirmed ACM in the facility. The OWP would promote safe work practices within the facility, repair of damaged ACMs and include notification of non-transient building occupants and workers of the presence and location of such material. The OWP would also require re-inspection of the ACM and, if indicated, periodic air monitoring.

• Confirmed ACMs, which may be disturbed during renovation/demolition, if performed, shall be abated by a contractor licensed in the State of Texas to perform such work. Should COH decide to pursue abatement activities, cost estimates are provided below:

1 Although not confirmed, this material likely exists throughout the Maintenance and Control Building. 2 At TGE’s direction, the analyzing laboratory practiced first positive stop methods on this sample set. As such, given that sample A-29 was positive for asbestos content, samples A-30 and A-31 were not analyzed and the homogenous area has been determined to be an asbestos-containing material.

R13709.01- Page | 3

o Contractor cost for abatement efforts (eastern portion of the Control Building only):

$3,765 o Preparation of a specification: $705.50 o Air monitoring/Project Management: $943.78 per day (approximately 6 cassettes

used per day) o Close out report preparation: $919 o Total Estimate Project Cost (includes one shift) - $6,333.28

• Should potential renovation/demolition activities involve or discover any new or otherwise

previously non-tested (and non-assumed) material that has not been previously identified as asbestos-containing or appropriately ruled out by laboratory analyses (i.e., materials found in inaccessible areas at the time of renovation/demolition), asbestos assessment and characterization analyses must be performed prior to any activity that would move the newly found material from its position. If subsequent asbestos analyses prove conclusive for asbestos mineral content of greater than 1% in any material, abatement of the ACM must precede any activity that could disturb the material.

• A copy of this asbestos survey must be available at the Site at all times during renovation/demolition, and provided upon request to regulatory representatives. The report must be available for reference during all renovation or demolition activities and followed to the maximum extent practicable so that unknowing release of asbestos fibers may be avoided.

• TAHPR requires an asbestos survey each time a permit for renovation/construction is obtained

from the local municipality. Per TAHPR, the permittee must ensure that ACM is not re-installed within the building during reconstruction and refinishing. As such, TGE recommends that COH maintain and archive safety data sheets (SDSs) for all newly installed materials; or obtain Architect certification specific to no ACM being re-installed. This effort is intended to alleviate the need for future asbestos surveys of newly-constructed/finished areas.

Lead Summary Findings: As an outcome of this assessment, eight (8) homogenous areas of suspect lead-based paint (LBP) were identified at the time of the February 2018 Site visit, and fifteen (15) paint chip samples were collected and submitted to Xenco Laboratories for lead content analysis. Laboratory analysis of select paint chip samples reported lead at concentrations less than < 90 parts per million (ppm; or milligrams per kilogram) or greater than 90 ppm but less than 5,000 ppm. As such, painted surfaces at the Site are designated a City of Houston Lead Hazard Categorization of “A” (Allowable Lead Level) or “C-2” (Lead Present).

• Two (2) samples had lead content greater than 90 but less than 5,000 ppm. City of Houston

Hazard Category C-2 (Lead Present)

• Thirteen (13) samples had lead content less than 90 ppm. City of Houston Hazard Category A (Allowable Lead level)

R13709.01- Page | 4

Recommendation: Although regulated LBP was not identified on tested surfaces of, or in association with, the Site, elevated levels of LBP were found and, as such, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations (29 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] §1910.1025 and 29 CFR §1926.62) should be considered during planned renovation/demolition efforts. As such, appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) should be worn and exposure monitoring should be performed during disturbance of materials associated with elevated LBP to protect workers from exposure above the permissible exposure limit (50 micrograms per cubic meter of air averaged over an 8-hour period), as well as to identify airborne concentrations above lead action levels (30 micrograms per cubic meter of air averaged over an 8-hour period). Regarding items undergoing demolition, TGE recommends recycling of all painted components (inclusive of those paints containing detectable, yet not regulated, lead levels); abatement is not required at this time.

R13709.01- Page | 5

COMPREHENSIVE ASBESTOS SURVEY

Asbestos Assessment was conducted by TGE on February 12, 2018 by TDSHS licensed Asbestos Individual Consultant Ms. Kristi Destouet (TDSHS License No.: 10-5770). TGE is a TDSHS-licensed Asbestos Consulting Agency (TDSHS License No.: 10-0171). This report contains project characteristics, sampling procedures, and results of laboratory analysis of bulk samples by PLM and/or Point Count Method (PCM). According to information provided by Technical Services, the purpose of this effort is to provide information relative to the location, quantity and condition of ACMs and other building-related hazards prior to possible planned demolition of Site structures. All data generated in connection with this report will remain confidential and will not be released to or viewed by any unauthorized person for any reason without prior written COH consent. Scope of Services Sampling duties conducted by TGE were as follows:

• collection of samples of suspect ACMs by an inspector licensed with the State (and/or local authority) according to an appropriate frequency as defined by USEPA rules and OSHA, as well as State Standards;

• PLM and/or PCM analysis of bulk samples via a State-licensed National Institute of Standards and Technology's National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP) laboratory to detect and quantify the relative percentage of asbestos present, if any, in the sample; and

• each material found to contain asbestos, if any, was to be located and quantified, and a condition assessment made per visual and physical assessment procedures.

Facility Description The Clinton Drive Lift Station, is a sewage/wastewater pumping station that contains a subsurface area that extends reportedly 75 feet below ground surface in Houston, Harris County, Texas. Per publically available resources, the Lift Station was constructed sometime in the early 1980s. Associated renovations were not reported, nor apparent, at the time of the Site inspection with the exception of patched areas of the roof. The target area of the Site contains the roof of the Maintenance and Control Building as well as switch pads and transformers located along the eastern portion of the Site (including associated interior finishes that may be disturbed during renovation/demolition activities). Site structures were generally observed in good condition with the exception of peeling/cracking paint observed on electrical components as well as exposed black mastic/damaged vinyl floor tile observed within the eastern portion of the Control Building. In addition, during sampling of the roof, interior roof layers were associated with moisture (indicative of a poor roof seal). Entry into the lift station was provided via a gated driveway along the western Site limits.

Previous asbestos assessment reports and/or building records (if any) were not available for TGE to review. COH-provided floor plans (if any) are attached within Appendix A. Sampling Techniques and Laboratory Methods This assessment was performed with adherence to applicable USEPA rules and OSHA requirements governing asbestos management in schools and public buildings, as well as applicable State and local statutes. Specifically, the following regulatory standards and specific asbestos-related statutes/protocols were applied by TGE and its contract laboratory during the performance of field efforts related to this study, analytical review of resulting bulk samples and reduction of observations and data into this report.

R13709.01- Page | 6

Federal Standards Regulation Description

29 CFR 1910.1001 -

General Industry

Addresses potential asbestos exposure involving general industry applications, other than construction and renovation workers. This standard establishes minimum standards for the protection of workers involved in asbestos-related work or employees exposed to asbestos-contaminated places. These standards include required work practices, engineering controls, permissible exposure limits, written programs for respiratory protection and medical surveillance, methods for compliance, hazard communication, housekeeping, competent person training and responsibilities and required record keeping.

29 CFR 1910.1101 (formerly

1926.58) - Construction

Industry

Addresses asbestos exposure during construction and renovation activity; and sets forth standards which employers must follow in documenting the protection of workers. The current survey was based on the Final Rules for Asbestos Exposure in General Industry and Construction, issued August 10, 1994 and effective October 1, 1995. An employer or owner may demonstrate that presumed asbestos-containing materials (PACM), which includes thermal system insulation (TSI), sprayed-on or troweled-on surfacing material, and debris in work areas where such material is present, does or does not contain asbestos by having conducted an inspection pursuant to requirements of the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA), 40 CFR 763, Subpart E, to be discussed below. Material testing is to include analysis of a minimum of at least three bulk samples of each homogeneous area of PACM collected in a randomly distributed manner. The tests, evaluation and sample collection are to be performed by an accredited/licensed inspector or by a Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH). The employer/building owner may demonstrate that non-PACM materials, such as flooring materials including associated mastic and backing, do not contain asbestos based upon recognized analytical techniques. The material sampled may be designated as “asbestos free” if such material does not contain greater than 1% asbestos.

29 CFR 1910.134 - Respirator Program

Outlines rules for respiratory protection in a specific work environment. A respirator program must be put into place when asbestos is disturbed (i.e., during the performance of response actions), and as necessitated by OSHA in the designation of a “regulated area” during the performance of Class I, II, or III work. A respirator program must be put into place with the implementation of an Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Program for the safe management of ACM in place.

40 CFR 763, Subpart E – Asbestos in

Schools/ Commercial

Buildings

In October, 1986, AHERA was signed into law. Included in this law were specific provisions directing the USEPA to establish regulations and address standards for identifying, evaluating and controlling asbestos materials in schools (40 CFR, Part 763 Subpart E). This rule requires that all nonprofit elementary and secondary schools, both public and private, inspect their school buildings for asbestos-containing building materials (ACBM), develop a plan to manage the asbestos for each school building, notify parents and staff regarding management plan availability, provide asbestos awareness training to school maintenance and custodial workers among other requirements of the law. AHERA required schools to perform building inspections and prepare management plans for ACBM. Later, in 1995, OSHA adopted AHERA inspection protocols and procedures for use in public buildings (per 29 CFR 1910.1101). These protocols are used as the framework for OSHA inspections and inspection procedures utilized for this assessment.

R13709.01- Page | 7

Federal Standards Regulation Description

40 CFR 61, Subpart M –

National Emissions

Standards for Hazardous Air

Pollutants (NESHAP)

NESHAP provides for the control of environmental releases of asbestos caused by renovation/demolition activities. These regulations specify control requirements for most asbestos emissions and include work practices being followed to minimize the release of asbestos fibers during handling, removal and disposal of asbestos waste materials. NESHAP regulations are frequently enforced by a State or local agency. The NESHAP Standard requires: no discharge of visible emissions to the outside air during the collection processing, packaging, or transporting of any asbestos-containing waste material; adequate wetting of ACM; and processing of asbestos-containing waste material into non-friable forms.

State/Local Standards Regulation Description

25 Texas Administrative

Code (TAC) §295 - Texas Asbestos Health Protection

Rules

The State of Texas adopted rules (statutes) governing asbestos maintenance, removal and/or any related asbestos response action involving PACM or ACM. These rules, the Texas Asbestos Health Protection Rules (TAHPR), also include licensing requirements for individuals, consultants, abatement firms and building owners when asbestos is present, and/or when testing is performed to locate such material (25 TAC §295.71). Every aspect of asbestos management from inspection to removal, and maintenance in place, is to be performed by a licensed individual trained in accordance with TAHPR requirements. Beginning January 1, 2002, Texas Senate Bill 509, formally codified under 25 TAC §295.34 (l), required municipalities to verify that an asbestos survey has been conducted prior to issuing renovation/demolition permits for the interiors of public or commercial buildings. Such surveys must comply with State and Federal laws governing asbestos surveys, must incorporate the areas of the building where renovation or demolition will occur and must accurately describe the building materials where the renovation/demolition will take place. In accordance with 25 TAC §295.34(i), contractor installation of asbestos-containing products (unless there is no alternative building material) was prohibited. Additionally, contractors are required to have safety data sheets (SDSs) for all newly installed building materials (25 TAC §295.34 [j]). Maintaining and archiving the SDSs along with an architect or engineer signed statement stating the absence of ACM in new construction products will serve the purpose of a survey. This effort is intended to alleviate the need for an asbestos survey for the same areas, if they are to be renovated in the future.

Survey Methods

With reference to the foregoing regulatory framework, this section addresses criteria necessary for identifying, evaluating and assessing suspect ACMs. Homogeneous areas Prior to collecting bulk samples, distinct homogeneous sampling areas of suspect ACM were determined and specific sampling locations defined. A homogeneous sample area (per USEPA and OSHA) is defined as a material that is similar in appearance, color and generally having the same episode of installation as surrounding “like” material. Attempts were made to obtain representative samples of like materials, as this is the most efficient and cost-effective method for determination of ACM. It should be assumed that the compositions of like materials in a single homogeneous area are the same.

Homogeneous areas sampled as part of this survey included materials identified by TGE as suspect ACM and classified as friable (material containing more than one-percent asbestos that, when dry, can be crumbled, pulverized or reduced to powder by hand pressure); or, non-friable (material containing more than one-percent asbestos that, when dry, cannot be crumbled, pulverized or reduced to powder by hand pressure). If disturbed outside of controlled practices, small (microscopic) particles of friable materials are more likely to become airborne than non-friable materials, thereby increasing the potential for health hazards if asbestos is present.

R13709.01- Page | 8

Suspect ACM/PACMs

Asbestos is present in a wide variety of building materials. The three categories of ACMs per AHERA/OSHA are Thermal System Insulation (TSI), surfacing materials (a material that is troweled, sprayed or otherwise applied to a surface) and miscellaneous materials (any material not included in TSI or surfacing). The following general list of building materials are typically suspect of containing asbestos, unless information to the contrary is obtained from a reliable source (e.g., architect certification). This list is by no means exhaustive.

Surfacing Materials TSI Miscellaneous ACM

Ceiling/Wall Texture HVAC/Boiler Insulation Flooring Materials(1) Joint Compound Pipe Wrap/Insulation Wallboard Spray-Applied Materials Taping Compounds Ceiling Tiles Troweled-On Materials Thermal Paper Products Adhesives/Mastics Plaster/Stucco

Caulking/Putties

Exterior Construction Materials(2) Flexible Fabric Duct Connections

Includes vinyl floor tile (VFT), vinyl sheet flooring, ceramic floor tile. Includes roofing materials and roof penetration sealants.

Hazard Assessment According to AHERA (October 30, 1986), and as generally applied to other (non-school) commercial structures where asbestos is found, ACM is to be assessed in view of past, present or future likelihood of disturbance. Such considerations are referenced during the preparation of the Hazard Assessment. The magnitude of hazard presented by asbestos in buildings depends upon a number of factors relative to the condition, location and accessibility of the material to Site occupants and maintenance personnel, as well as transient occupants. The hazard assessment would apply to any occupant or maintenance personnel with the possibility of being exposed. With regard to the hazard assessment (and also the selection of homogeneous sampling areas), consistency must be assumed with regard to the location of suspect/confirmed ACM, the condition of the material and the quantity of ACM present. From the standpoint of current Site usage, the following factors were to be considered during the hazard assessment process, prior to the hazard ranking:

1) the specific location and the amount of ACM present (total quantity); 2) the condition of the material (friable/non-friable);

3) if damaged, the type, severity and extent or spread of damage;

4) the accessibility of the material to occupants;

5) the potential for disturbance of the material;

6) the known or suspected causes of damage (i.e., air erosion, vandalism, service or repair, vibration, water and general deterioration with age);

7) those preventive measures, if applicable, which might eliminate the likelihood of future

damage; and

8) specific actions recommended to protect human health.

R13709.01- Page | 9

Under the Hazard Assessment, ACM is typically examined and prioritized according to its condition, location, potential for damage and potential for fiber release. The priorities are usually divided into the following categories.

Hazard Ranking Description

Low Those non-friable materials in undamaged physical condition with a low potential for disturbance.

Moderate

Those currently non-friable materials, or friable materials in undamaged physical condition, that have a moderate potential for physical disturbance or damage (by various factors in connection with the building) rendering them friable and possibly causing local release of asbestos and discharge of asbestos fibers to the air.

High

Those friable materials or non-friable materials that have become friable and are in damaged physical condition; and/or likely to be disturbed by air erosion, water damage, construction activity, or other activities that may disturb/cause further damage to the ACM/PACM and cause release of asbestos locally and likely to the air.

Immediate Those friable materials (or non-friable materials that have become friable) that are significantly damaged, have released particulate (asbestos) locally and likely to the air and are very likely to expose unprotected persons.

The following table describes the asbestos hazard categories as defined by the COH.

Sample Collection Prior to bulk sample collection, each individual bulk sample was identified and assigned/labeled by a unique number specific to Survey nomenclature. If a material was determined to be friable and/or in a damaged condition, this material was wetted before sample collection. Photographic Documentation is provided in Appendix B. Sample locations were recorded and are depicted upon Figure 1 (Asbestos Sample and Containing Materials Location Map), which is included in Appendix D of this report. Reference numbers directly correspond to Chain of Custody Documentation included in Appendix D of this report. Materials typically not sampled (because they are not typically asbestos-containing) include wooden and non-insulated metal doors, metal, glass and non-manufactured stones and natural finishes. Materials that are typically not sampled so as to avoid “destructive assessment” include fire doors, “fire stop” insulation linings within electrical and mechanical building components and fixtures (including vibration fabrics), non-insulated electrical wiring, and other building “shell” applications or other hidden and/or inaccessible building components. As such, should additional suspect materials be encountered and be subject to disturbance (such that asbestos could be disturbed), these previously non-tested materials must be appropriately tested and ruled out by laboratory analyses prior to any such disturbance.

Table 1: HAZARD CATEGORY AND RESPONSE ACTION Hazard Category Response Action

C-1: Asbestos Present Serious health hazard, as defined by EPA, abatement should be a top priority C-2: Asbestos Present Health hazard, as defined by EPA, abatement should be planned C-3: Asbestos Present No action necessary unless renovation, remodeling, or demolition is planned B-1: Asbestos Present Contains 1% asbestos, or less, not regulated by TDH B-2: Asbestos Present Adequately enclosed B-3: Asbestos Present Adequately encapsulated A: No asbestos found N/A A-1: Asbestos Abated Once identified asbestos containing materials have been abated

R13709.01- Page | 10

Laboratory Methods Suspect building materials sampled were analyzed by the contract laboratory using the PLM method with dispersion-staining techniques according to US EPA Method EPA 600/R-93/116. This type of analysis requires the microscopist to take a portion of the bulk sample and treat it with a special light-refractive oil emulsion stain. The prepared slide is then subjected to a variety of tests while being viewed under magnification with polarized light. Each type of asbestos displays unique characteristics when subjected to these tests. Percentages of the identified types of asbestos are determined by visual estimation. Even though this is an estimation, any material containing greater than one percent (>1%) of any type of asbestos using the PLM Method is considered, by definition, an ACM and must be handled/managed according to OSHA, EPA and State regulations if disturbed or if in a damaged/friable condition. Xenco Laboratories, Inc. is accredited by the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP) for all the methods, analytes, and matrices reported in the data package included in Appendix D. Xenco Laboratories, Inc., is also licensed with the TDSHS. Asbestos-Containing Material (ACM) Verification and Assessment Interior and exterior finishes observed at the time of TGE’s survey are specified below. Relevant building material descriptions (e.g., color, texture, quantity, etc.) are summarized within chain-of-custody records included in Appendix D. Hazard Assessment Results The exact hazard ratings, as defined by the COH Hazard Category and Response Action (Table 1), are provided for reference in Table 2.

TABLE 2: SUSPECT ACM ANALYTICAL RESULTS

Homogenous Area Material Location Type Damaged Hazard

Risk

Asbestos Content3

(ND = Non Detect)

1 Roof Core Lower roof Non-friable No damage A ND

2 Roof Patch Lower roof Non-friable No damage A ND

3 Roof Core Higher roof Non-friable No damage A ND

4 Gray Caulking Roof edges Non-friable No damage A ND

5 Brown Sealant Higher roof Non-friable No damage A ND

6 Tar/Sealant Roof

footing/ support

Non-friable No damage A ND

7 Sealant – tan/black

Roof penetration Non-friable No

damage A ND

8 Caulking/sealant (orange/white)

Roof footing/ support

Non-friable No damage A ND

9 Caulking/sealant Roof wall Non-friable No A ND

3 Confirmed asbestos containing materials (if any) have been depicted on Figure 1B.

R13709.01- Page | 11

TABLE 2: SUSPECT ACM ANALYTICAL RESULTS

Homogenous Area Material Location Type Damaged Hazard

Risk

Asbestos Content3

(ND = Non Detect)

& foam damage

10 Black caulking Roof wall Non-friable No damage A ND

11 Sealant- gray/tan Roof wall Non-friable No damage A ND

12 Brick grout Roof wall Non-friable No damage A ND

13 Grout (cinderblock)

Roof wall Non-friable No damage A ND

14 Black tar Conduit Non-friable No damage A ND

15 Coating (tan/black)

Roof wall Non-friable Damaged A ND

16 Clear sealant Switch pad Non-friable No damage A ND

17 Brick grout Wall Non-friable No damage A ND

18 Tan VFT/ black mastic

Control building Non-friable Damaged C-2

7% Chrysotile

(mastic only)

19 Cinderblock grout (white)

Control building Non-friable No

damage A ND

Select samples may not have been analyzed due to a “first positive stop” request, whereby TGE instructs the laboratory to discontinue analysis of samples “in a series” per homogenous area if any sample analyzed contains asbestos greater than 1%. Furthermore, as tabulated above the “number of samples collected” does not reflect the number of samples submitted to the laboratory for analysis, as homogenous areas may not have been exclusive. For example, wallboard and texture may have been submitted as one sample with multiple layers, independently analyzed. Findings and Recommendations

Findings As an outcome of this assessment, TGE documented the presence of nineteen (19) homogenous areas and a total of thiry-four (34) suspect asbestos bulk samples were collected and submitted to Xenco Laboratories for analysis of asbestos content via PLM. Following data reduction and associated hazard assessment, TGE presents the following Findings and Recommendations with respect to ACMs at the Site (if any).

R13709.01- Page | 12

Based on PLM analytical results, asbestos was identified in materials sampled for this survey. Specifically, approximately 1,500 square feet of black mastic (beneath non-ACM vinyl floor tile) located within the east portion of the Control Building4 was found with an asbestos content of 7% Chrysotile (sample # A-29, A-30 and A-315). At the time of the inspection, the black mastic was exposed in areas and the vinyl floor tile was damaged/in poor condition. As such, Site finishes associated with asbestos content are designated a City of Houston (COH) Asbestos Hazard Categorization of “C-2” (Asbestos Present); remaining materials are designated a COH Asbestos Hazard Categorization of “A” (No Asbestos Found). Recommendations

• Given the presence of damaged/exposed asbestos-containing materials (and until abatement is performed), an OSHA Work Practices Program (OWP) following guidelines set forth in EPA 40 CFR 763 Subpart E, Texas Asbestos Health Protection Rules (TAHPR) and USEPA 40 CFR 61 Subpart M should be immediately implemented to safely manage confirmed ACM in the facility. The OWP would promote safe work practices within the facility, repair of damaged ACMs and include notification of non-transient building occupants and workers of the presence and location of such material. The OWP would also require re-inspection of the ACM and, if indicated, periodic air monitoring.

• Confirmed ACMs, which may be disturbed during renovation/demolition, if performed, shall be abated by a contractor licensed in the State of Texas to perform such work. Should COH decide to pursue abatement activities, cost estimates are provided below:

o Contractor cost for abatement efforts (eastern portion of the Control Building only):

$3,765 o Preparation of a specification: $705.50 o Air monitoring/Project Management: $943.78 per day (approximately 6 cassettes

used per day) o Close out report preparation: $919 o Total Estimate Project Cost (includes one shift) - $6,333.28

• Should potential renovation/demolition activities involve or discover any new or otherwise

previously non-tested (and non-assumed) material that has not been previously identified as asbestos-containing or appropriately ruled out by laboratory analyses (i.e., materials found in inaccessible areas at the time of renovation/demolition), asbestos assessment and characterization analyses must be performed prior to any activity that would move the newly found material from its position. If subsequent asbestos analyses prove conclusive for asbestos mineral content of greater than 1% in any material, abatement of the ACM must precede any activity that could disturb the material.

• A copy of this asbestos survey must be available at the Site at all times during renovation/demolition, and provided upon request to regulatory representatives. The report must be available for reference during all renovation or demolition activities and followed to the maximum extent practicable so that unknowing release of asbestos fibers may be avoided.

4 Although not confirmed, this material likely exists throughout the Maintenance and Control Building. 5 At TGE’s direction, the analyzing laboratory practiced first positive stop methods on this sample set. As such, given that sample A-29 was positive for asbestos content, samples A-30 and A-31 were not analyzed and the homogenous area has been determined to be an asbestos-containing material.

R13709.01- Page | 13

• TAHPR requires an asbestos survey each time a permit for renovation/construction is obtained

from the local municipality. Per TAHPR, the permittee must ensure that ACM is not re-installed within the building during reconstruction and refinishing. As such, TGE recommends that COH maintain and archive safety data sheets (SDSs) for all newly installed materials; or obtain Architect certification specific to no ACM being re-installed. This effort is intended to alleviate the need for future asbestos surveys of newly-constructed/finished areas.

R13709.01- Page | 14

CHECK LIST FOR ASBESTOS SURVEYS NAME OF THE FACILITY: Improvement and Demolition of Select Features – Clinton Drive Lift Station

FACILITY ADDRESS: 4309 Clinton Drive

DATE OF THE SURVEY: February 12, 2018

CONSULTANT: TGE Resources, Inc.

INSPECTOR (S) NAME: Kristi Destouet

Note: Items/information listed below must be included in the report. Use this checklist to ensure completeness of your report. Mark "X" or "check" in front of the information included in the report. Submit completed check list with the report. If a facility is surveyed for asbestos and lead, the survey reports shall be segregated in one binder or preferably two separate reports.

1. X Date and Contract number of the survey 2. X Scope of work

3. X Copy of the inspectors TDH license

4. X Name and address of the facility

5. X Statement of building records were used in the inspection and if not, why?

6. X Date of construction and last renovation (if any) of the building.

7. X Cover letter (in report) certain executive summary or executive summary begin the report format

8. N/A List of areas that were not inspected. Explain.

9. X Procedures and protocols used to collect bulk samples.

10. X List of measures taken to prevent potential fiber release form locations where samples were extracted

11. X Drawings and/or photographs with sample locations marked to facilitate future location of materials sampled.

12. X Statement...if an accredited (NVLAP) laboratory was used for Sample Analysis.

13. X Copy of the laboratory accreditation certificate.

14. X Copy of the laboratory analysis results of the bulk samples.

15. N/A Statement (by the laboratory) regarding Quality Assurance and Quality Control performed. (Can be provided upon request)

16. X Copy of the chain of custody form for the bulk samples.

17. X List of materials assumed to be containing asbestos.

18. X City of Houston Asbestos Hazard Categorization (AHC) list and categorization of all the samples according to the AHC list included in the report.

19. X Condition of the building structure such as deterioration, structural problems, or other damages.

R13709.01 - Page | 15

If Asbestos Present: 20. N/A Statement...if repeat analysis using point counting PLM was done as required by the city for

the samples that show less than 5% asbestos.

21. X Photographs of all Materials proven to be ACM are included.

22. X All asbestos containing materials are classified as Friable or Non-Friable.

23. X Recommendations are made for all Asbestos Containing Materials.

24. X Reasonably accurate quantities of ACM's are estimated and given in the report.

25. X Cost estimations are given for abatement.

26. X Operation and Maintenance Plans are recommended.

R13709.01 - Page | 16

LEAD-BASED PAINT SURVEY

Lead survey efforts were performed by Ms. Kristi Destouet, Project Manager with TGE. Ms. Destouet is both a Texas Department of State Health Services (“TDSHS”) licensed Asbestos Individual Consultant (TDSHS License No.: 10-5770) and a TDSHS certified Lead Risk Assessor (No. 2071034). This report contains project characteristics, sampling procedures, and results of laboratory analysis of paint chip samples for lead by EPA Method 6010B. According to information provided by Technical Services, the purpose of this report is to specify the presence/absence of lead-based paint (LBP) within the Subject Area, in possible anticipation of future Site renovation/demolition (select equipment/areas). All data generated in connection with this report will remain confidential and will not be released to or viewed by any unauthorized person for any reason without prior written COH consent.

Scope of Services

Sampling duties conducted by TGE were as follows:

• collection of paint chip samples of Site paints/coatings by an inspector/assessor certified with the State (and/or local authority) according to an appropriate frequency as defined by USEPA rules and OSHA, as well as State Standards;

• each material found to contain LBP, if any, was to be located and quantified, and a condition assessment made per visual and physical assessment procedures; and

• HUD sampling procedures and guidelines for evaluation and control of LBP in housing were

considered/generally followed for this survey.

Sampling and Analysis

Paint Samples Collection On February 12, 2018, TGE documented the presence of eight (8) homogenous areas of suspect LBP were identified and fifteen (15) paint chip samples were collected and submitted to Xenco Laboratories for lead content analysis. Each sample of paint was collected with properly decontaminated (cleaned) instruments or, given the level of apparent damage (peeling/cracking) was removed with hand pressure fitted with nitrile gloves. Each paint chip sample was collected; placed in an individual polyethylene bag; labeled with a unique identification number; and logged onto chain-of-custody documentation for submittal to Xenco Laboratories, Inc. in Houston, Texas for analysis. Xenco Laboratories, Inc. is accredited by the National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP), which is administered through the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) as a recognized laboratory for the methods, analytes and matrices reported in the data package included in Appendix E. Photographic Documentation of LBP sampling activities is provided for reference as Appendix C. Sample locations were recorded and are depicted upon Figure 2 (Paint Chip Sample Location Map), which are attached as Appendix E of this report. Reference numbers directly correspond to chain of custody documentation included in Appendix E of this report. Lead containing paint hazard categories as defined by the COH are presented in Table 3. Descriptions and locations of samples collected during this assessment are included in Table 4.

TABLE 3: HAZARD CATEGORY AND RESPONSE ACTION Hazard Category Response Action

C-1: Lead Present Health Hazard, as defined by current applicable Federal and State Regulations. Abatement Priority. (> 5,000 ppm or 0.5% by weight).

C-2: Lead Present

No action necessary when the material is adequately enclosed; must be addressed prior to demolition or renovation. OSHA regulations apply to workers or the public (> 90 ppm or 0.009% but < 5,000 ppm or 0.5% by weight).

A: Allowable Lead Level < 90 ppm or 0.009% by weight. A-1: Lead Abated Identified Lead Containing Materials (LCM) have been abated.

R13709.01 - Page | 17

Laboratory Analytical Results Lead-based paint is defined as paint and/or a surface coating that contains lead equal to or exceeding one milligram per square centimeter (1.0 mg/cm2) or 0.5% by weight. Xenco Laboratories is accredited by the National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP) for lead analysis as well as NELAC accredited under the Texas Laboratory Accreditation Program for all the methods, analytes, and matrices. Total Metals method (EPA 6010B) was utilized to detect the lead content in the paint materials sampled. Analytical lab results and associated custody chain are located in Appendix E.

6 J = The target analyte was positively identified below the quantitation limit and above the detection limit.

TABLE 4: SUSPECT LBP ANALYTICAL RESULTS

Sample Area

Location

Color I Hazard Lead Concentration - ppm (BRL= Below Reporting Limits)

L-1 Roof edge Brown/Category A 55.7

L-2 Roof edge Brown /Category C-2 107

L-3 Roof edge Brown /Category A 20.9 J6

L-4 Roof wall White/Category A 7.06

L-5 Roof wall White /Category A 2.20

L-6 Roof wall White /Category A 12.4

L-7 HVAC unit Silver/Category A 18.3 J

L-8 Ladder Yellow/Category A 15.1 J

L-9 Transformer Gray Green/Category A 48.0

L-10 Electrical pad (north) Pale Green/Category C-2 864

L-11 Electrical pad (central) Green/Category A 20.1

L-12 Electrical pad (south) Green/Category A 47.7

L-13 Control building wall White/cream /Category A 2.17

L-14 Control building wall White/cream /Category A 3.82

L-15 Control building wall White/cream /Category A 0.795 J

R13709.01 - Page | 18

Findings and Recommendations Findings As an outcome of this assessment, eight (8) homogenous areas of suspect lead-based paint (LBP) were identified at the time of the February 2018 Site visit, and fifteen (15) paint chip samples were collected and submitted to Xenco Laboratories for lead content analysis. Laboratory analysis of select paint chip samples reported lead at concentrations less than < 90 parts per million (ppm; or milligrams per kilogram) or greater than 90 ppm but less than 5,000 ppm. As such, painted surfaces at the Site are designated a City of Houston Lead Hazard Categorization of “A” (Allowable Lead Level) or “C-2” (Lead Present).

• Two (2) samples had lead content greater than 90 but less than 5,000 ppm. City of Houston

Hazard Category C-2 (Lead Present)

• Thirteen (13) samples had lead content less than 90 ppm. City of Houston Hazard Category A (Allowable Lead level)

Recommendation Although regulated LBP was not identified on tested surfaces of, or in association with, the Site, elevated levels of LBP were found and, as such, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations (29 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] §1910.1025 and 29 CFR §1926.62) should be considered during planned renovation/demolition efforts. As such, appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) should be worn and exposure monitoring should be performed during disturbance of materials associated with elevated LBP to protect workers from exposure above the permissible exposure limit (50 micrograms per cubic meter of air averaged over an 8-hour period), as well as to identify airborne concentrations above lead action levels (30 micrograms per cubic meter of air averaged over an 8-hour period). Regarding items undergoing demolition, TGE recommends recycling of all painted components (inclusive of those paints containing detectable, yet not regulated, lead levels); abatement is not required at this time.

R13709.01 - Page | 19

CHECK LIST FOR LEAD SURVEYS NAME OF THE FACILITY: Improvement and Demolition of Select Features – Clinton Drive Lift Station

FACILITY ADDRESS: 4309 Clinton Drive

DATE OF THE SURVEY: February 12, 2018

CONSULTANT: TGE Resources, Inc.

INSPECTOR (S) NAME: Kristi Destouet

Note: Items/information listed below must be included in the report. Use this check list to ensure completeness of your report. Mark "X" or "check" in front of the information included in the report. Submit completed check list with the report. If a facility is surveyed for lead and asbestos, the survey reports shall be segregated in one binder or preferably two separate reports. 1. X Statement...if "HUD Guidelines for Evaluation and Control of Lead Based Paint in

Housing" or any other criteria were followed for the survey. 2. X Date and Contract number of the survey.

3. X Scope of the work. 4. X Copy of the inspector(s) TDH Certificate.

5. X Name and Address of the facility.

6. N/A Statement...if building records were used in the inspection, and if not, Why?

7. X Cover letter (in report) containing executive summary or executive summary at the beginning of the report format.

8. X Date of construction and last renovation (if any) of the building.

9. X List of areas that were not inspected. Explain.

10. X Condition of the building structure such as deterioration, structural problems or other damages.

11. X List of components assumed to have lead based paint or coating, if any.

12. X City of Houston Lead Hazard Categorization (LHC) list and categorization of all the samples according to the LHC list included in the report.

If Analyzer Used: 13. N/A Performance Characteristics Sheet (PCS) for the XRF equipment/s used. Calibration

Check Test Results (Form 7.2, HUD Guidelines, or equivalent).

14. N/A Calibration Check Test Results (Form 7.2, HUD Guidelines, or equivalent).

15. N/A Statement...if HUD Guidelines were followed for Calibration Check Test of the XRF equipment and replacement XRF equipment, if used.

16. N/A Installation date and type of source for XRF equipment and replacement equipment, if used.

17. N/A Drawings and photographs with XRF reading locations marked to facilitate future location of XRF readings.

R13709.01 - Page | 20

If Samples Taken for Laboratory Analysis: 18. X Procedures and protocols used to collect paint chip samples.

19. X Copy of the chain of custody form for samples.

20. X Statement...if an accredited (NLLAP/ELLAP) laboratory was used for Sample Analysis.

21. X Copy of the Laboratory accreditation certificate.

22. X Copy of the laboratory analysis results of the paint chip samples.

23. X Statement (by the laboratory) regarding Quality Assurance and Quality Control performed. (Can be provided upon request)

24. X Photographs with sample locations marked to facilitate future location of coating materials sampled.

If Lead Found:

25. X Photographs of all component areas proven to have lead.

26. X Recommendations for all components proven to have lead based paint or coatings.

27. N/A Recommendations for Operation and Maintenance Plans.

28. N/A Estimated quantities of Lead Containing Materials.

29. N/A Cost estimations for abatement.

TGE Resources, Inc.

APPENDIX A

FACILITY LOCATION PHOTOGRAPH

8048 Northcourt RoadHouston, Texas 77040

TGE Project No.: R13709.01 Appendix AFacility Location Map"

0 80 160 240 320

Feet

LegendApproximate Site Limits

AGAR

WAL

, SAR

ANG

DW

G F

ILE:

PLO

T D

ATE:

BY:

C:\p

ww

orkd

ir\d0

3594

59\C

LIN

TON

_LS0

1C01

.dw

gW

edne

sday

, Jan

uary

31,

201

8 11

:23:

16 A

M

LIFT STATIONSTRUCTURE

SEE SHEETM-3

VALVE VAULT

30' R

.O.W

.

80' R

OW

MAINTENANCE&

CONTROLBUILDING

PARKINGAREA

100' R.O.W

30' R.O.W.

4309 CLINTON DRIVEHOUSTON TEXAS

SITE PLAN

EXISTING CONC.SIDEWALK

GENERAL SHEET NOTES

IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO FIELD VERIFY ALLEXISTING CONDITIONS FOR SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF THISWORK

ELEVATION BASED ON RECORD DRAWINGS NO. 32810

1.

2.

1.

2.

3.

CONTRACTOR TO REMOVE AND REPLACE SWITCH PAD

CONTRACTOR TO REMOVE AND REPLACE TRANSFORMER PAD

CONTRACTOR TO REMOVE AND REPLACE ELECTRICAL PAD

SHEET KEYNOTES

1

2

3

SOUTHERN PACIFIC RR

0.116 ACBROWN WILLIE

EARL ET UX

0.155 ACEHOU

INVESTMENTSLTD

SCALE: 1" = 20'-0"

0 20 40

1.642CLINTON GREG INVESTMENTS LTD

BAR

ON

STR

EET

HIRSCH ROAD

0.883 ACPROLER JL INC

CORP

BARON STREET

CLI

NTO

N D

RIV

E

100' R.O.WHIRSCH ROAD

60' R

OW

CLI

NTO

N D

RIV

E

TREE

132" TRUNK SEWER

132" TRUNK SEWER

132" INFLUENTAND EFFLUENTTRUNK SEWERS

TERMINAL SHAFT

INFLUENT ANDEFFLUENT STRUCTURES

LIMITS OF R.O.W

LIMITS OF R.O.W

LIMITS OF R.O.W

LIMITS OF R.O.W

PUMP ACCESSHATCH (TYP OF 15)

BRUSH

TOC ± 41.00*

DEMOLITION

LEGEND

ROOFDEMOLITION

AutoCAD SHX Text

CIVIL

AutoCAD SHX Text

CLINTON DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

LIFT STATION

AutoCAD SHX Text

SITE PLAN

AutoCAD SHX Text

DEMOLITION

AutoCAD SHX Text

1" = 20'-0"

AutoCAD SHX Text

1 1

AutoCAD SHX Text

No.

AutoCAD SHX Text

Date

AutoCAD SHX Text

Revisions

AutoCAD SHX Text

App.

AutoCAD SHX Text

Engineered by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc Texas Registered Engineering Firm F-6324

AutoCAD SHX Text

580 WESTLAKE PARK BLVD, SUITE 1000 HOUSTON, TEXAS 77079-2262 OFFICE: 713.212.0011713.212.0011

AutoCAD SHX Text

WBS NUMBER

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRAWING SCALE

AutoCAD SHX Text

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND ENGINEERING

AutoCAD SHX Text

CITY OF HOUSTON

AutoCAD SHX Text

SHEET NO.

AutoCAD SHX Text

OF

AutoCAD SHX Text

CITY OF HOUSTON PM

AutoCAD SHX Text

R-000267-0159-4

AutoCAD SHX Text

FARID SADEGHIAN, P.E.

AutoCAD SHX Text

CLINTON DR LS IMPROVEMENTS

AutoCAD SHX Text

FEMA FIRM PANEL 48201C0690N EFFECTIVE: JANUARY 1/6/2017 ZONE: ZONE X (UNSHADED) 100 YEAR BASE FLOOD ELEVATION AT CROSS SECTION J = 22.00 FEET 500 YEAR BASE FLOOD ELEVATION AT CROSS SECTION J = 27.00 FEET (NAD 88, 2001 ADJ.)

TGE Resources, Inc.

APPENDIX B

ASBESTOS - SAMPLE LOCATION PHOTOGRAPHS

Photographic Documentation of Asbestos Survey

R13709.01 – Clinton Lift Station

Photograph 1. Roof core sample location (associated layers non-ACM) within the lower roof area.


Photograph 5. Roof core sample location (associated layers non-ACM) within the higher roof area.


Photograph 4. Roof patch sample (associated layers non-ACM) located within the central portion of the lower roof area.

Photograph 6. Roof core sample location (associated layers non-ACM) within the higher roof area.



Photograph 7. Gray caulking (non-ACM) observed along roof edges.

Photograph 9. Brown sealant (non-ACM) observed along a penetration within the higher roof area.



Photograph 10. Tar/sealant (non-ACM) associated with a roof footing/support structure within the higher roof area.

Photograph 12. Tan/black sealant (non-ACM) associated with a penetration within the lower roof area.



Photograph 13. Orange/white caulking/sealant (non-ACM) associated with select penetrations observed throughout the lower roof area.

Photograph 15. Caulking/sealant and associated foam (all layers non-ACM) observed along the cinderblock wall (lower roof area).

Photograph 17. Gray/tan sealant (non-ACM) observed along the lower roof area cinderblock wall.

Photograph 14. Orange/white caulking/sealant (non-ACM) associated with select penetrations observed throughout the lower roof area.

Photograph 16. Black caulking (non-ACM) observed along the base of the cinderblock wall (lower roof area).

Photograph 18. Brick grout (non-ACM) observed along the west wall of the lower roof area.



Photograph 19. Cinderblock grout (non-ACM) observed throughout the lower roof area walls.

Photograph 21. Black tar (non-ACM) observed on roof conduit throughout the lower roof area.

Photograph 23. Tan/black coating (non-ACM) observed on cinderblock walls of the lower roof area.

Photograph 20. Cinderblock grout (non-ACM) observed throughout the lower roof area walls.





Photograph 25. Clear sealant (non-ACM) observed along the edge of the switch pad.

Photograph 27. Brick grout (non-ACM) located along the exterior of the subject building.

Photograph 29. Tan VFT (non-ACM) and associated black mastic (asbestos-containing) observed throughout the Control Building.







Photograph 33. Cinderblock grout (non-ACM) observed throughout the interior of the Control Building.



TGE Resources, Inc.

APPENDIX C

LEAD - SAMPLE LOCATION PHOTOGRAPHS

Photographic Documentation of Lead Based Paint Survey

R13657.01 – SEWPP Multi-Use Facility

Photograph 1. Brown paint (L-1: 55.7 ppm) observed along the roof edge.

Photograph 3. Brown paint (L-3: 20.9 J ppm) observed along the roof edge.

Photograph 5. White paint (L-5: 2.20 ppm) observed on the roof wall.

Photograph 2. Brown paint (L-2: 107 ppm) observed along the roof edge.





Photograph 7. Silver paint (L-7: 18.3 J ppm) observed on the roof HVAC unit.

Photograph 9. Gray green paint (L-9: 48 ppm) observed on the transformer.

Photograph 11. Green paint (L-11: 20.1 ppm) observed on the electrical pad (central).

Photograph 8. Yellow paint (L-8: 15.1 J) observed on the roof access ladder.

Photograph 10. Pale green paint (L-10: 864 ppm) observed on the electrical pad (north).

Photograph 12. Green paint (L-12: 47.7 ppm) observed on the electrical pad (south).



Photograph 13. White/cream paint (L-13: 2.17 ppm) observed on Control Building interior walls.

Photograph 15. White/cream paint (L-15: 0.795 J ppm) observed on Control Building interior walls.

Photograph 14. White/cream paint (L-14: 3.82 ppm) observed on Control Building interior walls.

TGE Resources, Inc.

APPENDIX D

ASBESTOS - ANALYTICAL RESULTS AND CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY

Analytical Report 576265for

TGE Resources, Inc.

Project Manager: Kristi Destouet

Clinton Drive Lift Station

15-FEB-18

R13709.01

4147 Greenbriar Dr.Stafford, TX 77477

Xenco-Houston (EPA Lab code: TX00122):Texas (T104704215-17-23), Arizona (AZ0765), Florida (E871002-24), Louisiana (03054)

Oklahoma (2017-142)

Xenco-Dallas (EPA Lab code: TX01468): Texas (T104704295-17-15), Arizona (AZ0809), Arkansas (17-063-0)

Xenco-El Paso (EPA Lab code: TX00127): Texas (T104704221-17-12)Xenco-Lubbock (EPA Lab code: TX00139): Texas (T104704219-17-16)Xenco-Odessa (EPA Lab code: TX00158): Texas (T104704400-17-13)

Xenco-San Antonio (EPA Lab Code: TNI02385): Texas (T104704534-17-3)Xenco Phoenix (EPA Lab Code: AZ00901): Arizona(AZ0757)

Xenco-Phoenix Mobile (EPA Lab code: AZ00901): Arizona (AZM757)

Collected By: Client

Page 1 of 44 Final 1.000

Case Narrative Report

576265Work Order: R13709.01Project ID:

Project Name: Clinton Drive Lift Station

Client Name: TGE Resources, Inc.

Sub to Dallas

Sample Receipt:

General Comments:

All analysis performs according to requirements unless noted below. See www.xenco.com for complete scope of accreditation.

Any variations on method specifications, regulatory requirements or SOPs outlined in the Quality Assurance Manualare outlined below.


PLM REPORT SUMMARY

9701 Harry Hines Blvd

Lab Code 200765-0TDSHS License No. 300364

Page 1 of 3

TGE Resources, Inc. 576265

Asbestos by PLMEPA Method 600/R-93/116

Clinton Drive Lift Station 02.15.2018

R13709.01 02.12.2018

Asbestos, Bulk Sample Analysis

576265-001

576265-002

576265-003

576265-004

576265-005

576265-006

576265-007

576265-008

576265-009

576265-010

576265-011

576265-012

576265-013

576265-014

576265-015

576265-016

576265-017

576265-018

576265-019

576265-020

576265-021

576265-022

A1

A2

A3

A4

A5

A6

A7

A8

A9

A10

A11

A12

A13

A14

A15

A16

A17

A18

A19

A20

A21

A22

lower roof

lower roof

lower roof

lower roof

higher roof

higher roof

roof edges

roof edges

higher roof

roof footing/support

roof edges

roof penetration



roof wall

roof wall

roof wall

roof wall

roof wall

roof wall

conduit

roof wall

Lab Sample No.

ClientField I.D. Sample Description/Location

Client:

Project:

Project No.:

Identification:

Test Method:

Work Order No.:

Report Date:

Sample Date:

None Detected - Roofing Material



None Detected - Roof Patch



None Detected - Caulking








None Detected - CaulkingNone Detected - Foam Insulation



None Detected - Brick

None Detected - Grout


None Detected - Tar Mastic

None Detected - Vinyl WrapNone Detected - Black Mastic

Asbestos Content


PLM REPORT SUMMARY

9701 Harry Hines Blvd

Lab Code 200765-0TDSHS License No. 300364

Page 2 of 3

TGE Resources, Inc. 576265

Asbestos by PLMEPA Method 600/R-93/116

Clinton Drive Lift Station 02.15.2018

R13709.01 02.12.2018

Asbestos, Bulk Sample Analysis

576265-023

576265-024

576265-025

576265-026

576265-027

576265-028

576265-029

576265-032

576265-033

576265-034

A23

A24

A25

A26

A27

A28

A29

A32

A33

A34

roof wall

roof wall

switch pad

wall (corner)

wall

wall

control building

control building

control building

control building

Lab Sample No.

ClientField I.D. Sample Description/Location

Client:

Project:

Project No.:

Identification:

Test Method:

Work Order No.:

Report Date:

Sample Date:

None Detected - Vinyl WrapNone Detected - Black MasticNone Detected - Brick

None Detected - Vinyl WrapNone Detected - Black Mastic





None Detected - Floor Tile7% Chrysotile - Black Mastic

None Detected - GroutNone Detected - Concrete


None Detected - GroutNone Detected - Grout

Asbestos Content


PLM REPORT SUMMARYLab Code 200765-0

TDSHS License No. 300364

9701 Harry Hines Blvd Page 3 of 3

These samples were analyzed by layers. Overall asbestos content for the sample is reported when requested. Specific layer or component asbestoscontent is indicated when present. These asbestos contents should be considered when establishing policy regarding these bulk materials.Quantification, unless otherwise noted, is performed by calibrated visual estimate. Asbestos in Non-friable Organically Bound (NOB) materials suchas floor tiles may not be accurately detected by PLM alone, and the EPA recommends further analysis of "None Detected" NOB samples bymethods such as gravimetric reduction/Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM). Point Counting is not recommended for most non-friable materialsunless combined with gravimetric reduction.

Results may not be reproduced except in full. This test report relates only to the samples tested. This report must not be used to claim approval orendorsement by NVLAP, NIST, or any agency of the federal government.

Analyst:

Approved Signature:

Melissa Kalkofen

:


Bulk Asbestos Analysis SheetLab Code 200765-0TDSHS License No. 300364

Page 1 of 32

TGE Resources, Inc. Client:

Clinton Drive Lift StationProject:

A1Field Id #:

lower roofClient Sample Description:

576265-001Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

Roofing MaterialLayer 1

+/-Non-fibrous

Ribbons

Non-fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel

Ref. IndexPerpendicular

Ref. Index

High

BirefExtintion

AngleSign Of

Elongation

Black Hard Y 50 0 100

Color Texture Homogeneous? % Fibrous %Asbestos % of Sample

Stereoscopic Examination

PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Cellulose Fibers

Tar Binders

10

50

40

%

Prep/Treatment: Asbestos Content: None DetectedHeat / Melt

Y

Friable?



Page 2 of 32



A2Field Id #:


576265-002Sample #:R13709.01Project #:


+/-Non-fibrous

Ribbons

Rods

Non-fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel


Ref. Index

High

0

BirefExtintion

AngleSign Of

Elongation




PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Cellulose Fibers

Glass Wool Fibers

Tar Binders

5

10

30

55

%


Y

Friable?



Page 3 of 32



A3Field Id #:


576265-003Sample #:R13709.01Project #:


+/-Non-fibrous

Ribbons

Rods

Monofilaments

Non-fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel


Ref. Index

High

0

High

BirefExtintion

AngleSign Of

Elongation




PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Cellulose Fibers

Glass Wool Fibers

Synthetic Fibers

Tar Binders

5

5

30

5

55

%


Y

Friable?



Page 4 of 32



A4Field Id #:


576265-004Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

Roof PatchLayer 1

+/-Non-fibrous

Ribbons

Monofilaments

Non-fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel


Ref. Index

High

High

BirefExtintion

AngleSign Of

Elongation




PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Cellulose Fibers

Synthetic Fibers

Tar Binders

10

2

3

85

%


Y

Friable?



Page 5 of 32



A5Field Id #:

higher roofClient Sample Description:

576265-005Sample #:R13709.01Project #:


+/-Non-fibrous

Ribbons

Rods

Non-fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel


Ref. Index

High

0

BirefExtintion

AngleSign Of

Elongation




PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Cellulose Fibers

Glass Wool Fibers

Tar Binders

5

30

10

55

%


Y

Friable?



Page 6 of 32



A6Field Id #:


576265-006Sample #:R13709.01Project #:


+/-Non-fibrous

Ribbons

Rods

Non-fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel


Ref. Index

High

0

BirefExtintion

AngleSign Of

Elongation




PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Cellulose Fibers

Glass Wool Fibers

Tar Binders

5

10

15

70

%


Y

Friable?



Page 7 of 32



A7Field Id #:

roof edgesClient Sample Description:

576265-007Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

CaulkingLayer 1

+/-Non-fibrous

Non-Fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel


Ref. Index BirefExtintion

AngleSign Of

Elongation

Gray Rubbery Y 0 0 100



PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Binders / Fillers

10

90

%


Y

Friable?



Page 8 of 32



A8Field Id #:


576265-008Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

CaulkingLayer 1

+/-Non-fibrous

Non-Fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel



AngleSign Of

Elongation




PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Binders / Fillers

10

90

%


Y

Friable?



Page 9 of 32



A9Field Id #:


576265-009Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

CaulkingLayer 1

+/-Non-Fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel



AngleSign Of

Elongation

Dark Gray Rubbery Y 0 0 100



PLM Examination:

Components

Binders / Fillers 100%


Y

Friable?



Page 10 of 32



A10Field Id #:

roof footing/supportClient Sample Description:

576265-010Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

CaulkingLayer 1

+/-Non-Fibrous

Ribbons

Monofilaments

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel


Ref. Index

High

High

BirefExtintion

AngleSign Of

Elongation




PLM Examination:

Components

Binders / Fillers

Cellulose Fibers

Synthetic Fibers

90

5

5

%


Y

Friable?



Page 11 of 32



A11Field Id #:


576265-011Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

CaulkingLayer 1

+/-Non-fibrous

Non-Fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel



AngleSign Of

Elongation




PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Binders / Fillers

10

90

%


Y

Friable?



Page 12 of 32



A12Field Id #:

roof penetrationClient Sample Description:

576265-012Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

CaulkingLayer 1

+/-Non-fibrous

Non-Fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel



AngleSign Of

Elongation

White Rubbery Y 0 0 100



PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Binders / Fillers

5

95

%


Y

Friable?



Page 13 of 32



A13Field Id #:


576265-013Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

CaulkingLayer 1

+/-Non-fibrous

Non-Fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel



AngleSign Of

Elongation




PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Binders / Fillers

5

95

%


Y

Friable?



Page 14 of 32



A14Field Id #:


576265-014Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

CaulkingLayer 1

+/-Non-fibrous

Non-Fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel



AngleSign Of

Elongation




PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Binders / Fillers

5

95

%


Y

Friable?



Page 15 of 32



A15Field Id #:

roof wallClient Sample Description:

576265-015Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

Caulking

Foam Insulation

Layer 1

Layer 2

+/-

+/-

Non-Fibrous

Closed Cells

Morphology

Morphology

Color /Pleochroism

Color /Pleochroism

ParallelRef. Index

ParallelRef. Index

PerpendicularRef. Index


Biref

Biref

ExtintionAngle

ExtintionAngle

Sign OfElongation

Sign OfElongation

White

Gray

Rubbery

Rubbery

Y

Y

0

0

0

0

40

60

Color

Color

Texture

Texture

Homogeneous?

Homogeneous?

% Fibrous

% Fibrous

%Asbestos

%Asbestos

% of Sample

% of Sample



PLM Examination:

PLM Examination:

Components

Components

Binders / Fillers

Synthetic Foam

100

100

%

%

Prep/Treatment:

Prep/Treatment:

Asbestos Content:

Asbestos Content:

None Detected

None Detected

Heat / Melt

Mechanical Separation

Y

Y

Friable?

Friable?



Page 16 of 32



A16Field Id #:


576265-016Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

CaulkingLayer 1

+/-Non-fibrous

Non-Fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel



AngleSign Of

Elongation

Black Rubbery Y 0 0 100



PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Binders / Fillers

10

90

%


Y

Friable?



Page 17 of 32



A17Field Id #:


576265-017Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

CaulkingLayer 1

+/-Non-fibrous

Non-Fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel



AngleSign Of

Elongation




PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Binders / Fillers

10

90

%


Y

Friable?



Page 18 of 32



A18Field Id #:


576265-018Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

BrickLayer 1

+/-Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel



AngleSign Of

Elongation

Tan Hard/Blocky Y 0 0 100



PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Cement / Binders

60

40

%

Prep/Treatment: Asbestos Content: None DetectedMechanical Separation

Y

Friable?



Page 19 of 32



A19Field Id #:


576265-019Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

GroutLayer 1

+/-Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel



AngleSign Of

Elongation

Gray Hard/Blocky Y 0 0 100



PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Cement / Binders

Pigment / Binders

20

60

20

%


Y

Friable?



Page 20 of 32



A20Field Id #:


576265-020Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

GroutLayer 1

+/-Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel



AngleSign Of

Elongation

Gray Hard/Blocky Y 0 0 100



PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Cement / Binders

Pigment / Binders

20

60

20

%


Y

Friable?



Page 21 of 32



A21Field Id #:

conduitClient Sample Description:

576265-021Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

Tar MasticLayer 1

+/-Non-fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel



AngleSign Of

Elongation




PLM Examination:

Components

Tar Binders 100%


Y

Friable?



Page 22 of 32



A22Field Id #:


576265-022Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

Vinyl Wrap

Black Mastic

Layer 1

Layer 2

+/-

+/-

Non-Fibrous

Monofilaments

Non-fibrous

Morphology

Morphology

Color /Pleochroism

Color /Pleochroism

ParallelRef. Index

ParallelRef. Index



High

Biref

Biref

ExtintionAngle

ExtintionAngle

Sign OfElongation

Sign OfElongation

White

Black

Rubbery

Resinous

Y

Y

5

0

0

0

98

2

Color

Color

Texture

Texture

Homogeneous?

Homogeneous?

% Fibrous

% Fibrous

%Asbestos

%Asbestos

% of Sample

% of Sample



PLM Examination:

PLM Examination:

Components

Components

Binders / Fillers

Synthetic Fibers

Tar Binders

95

5

100

%

%

Prep/Treatment:

Prep/Treatment:

Asbestos Content:

Asbestos Content:

None Detected

None Detected

Heat / Melt

Heat / Melt

Y

Y

Friable?

Friable?



Page 23 of 32



A23Field Id #:


576265-023Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

Vinyl Wrap

Black Mastic

Brick

Layer 1

Layer 2

Layer 3

+/-

+/-

+/-

Non-Fibrous

Monofilaments

Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

Morphology

Morphology

Morphology

Color /Pleochroism

Color /Pleochroism

Color /Pleochroism

ParallelRef. Index

ParallelRef. Index

ParallelRef. Index




High

Biref

Biref

Biref

ExtintionAngle

ExtintionAngle

ExtintionAngle

Sign OfElongation

Sign OfElongation

Sign OfElongation

White

Black

Red

Rubbery

Resinous

Hard/Blocky

Y

Y

Y

5

0

0

0

0

0

70

5

25

Color

Color

Color

Texture

Texture

Texture

Homogeneous?

Homogeneous?

Homogeneous?

% Fibrous

% Fibrous

% Fibrous

%Asbestos

%Asbestos

%Asbestos

% of Sample

% of Sample

% of Sample




PLM Examination:

PLM Examination:

PLM Examination:

Components

Components

Components

Binders / Fillers

Synthetic Fibers

Tar Binders

Aggregate

Cement / Binders

95

5

100

20

80

%

%

%

Prep/Treatment:

Prep/Treatment:

Prep/Treatment:

Asbestos Content:

Asbestos Content:

Asbestos Content:

None Detected

None Detected

None Detected

Heat / Melt

Heat / Melt


Y

Y

Y

Friable?

Friable?

Friable?



Page 24 of 32



A24Field Id #:


576265-024Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

Vinyl Wrap

Black Mastic

Layer 1

Layer 2

+/-

+/-

Non-Fibrous

Monofilaments

Non-fibrous

Morphology

Morphology

Color /Pleochroism

Color /Pleochroism

ParallelRef. Index

ParallelRef. Index



High

Biref

Biref

ExtintionAngle

ExtintionAngle

Sign OfElongation

Sign OfElongation

White

Black

Rubbery

Resinous

Y

Y

5

0

0

0

80

20

Color

Color

Texture

Texture

Homogeneous?

Homogeneous?

% Fibrous

% Fibrous

%Asbestos

%Asbestos

% of Sample

% of Sample



PLM Examination:

PLM Examination:

Components

Components

Binders / Fillers

Synthetic Fibers

Tar Binders

95

5

100

%

%

Prep/Treatment:

Prep/Treatment:

Asbestos Content:

Asbestos Content:

None Detected

None Detected

Heat / Melt

Heat / Melt

Y

Y

Friable?

Friable?



Page 25 of 32



A25Field Id #:

switch padClient Sample Description:

576265-025Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

CaulkingLayer 1

+/-Non-Fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel



AngleSign Of

Elongation

Clear Rubbery Y 0 0 100



PLM Examination:

Components

Binders / Fillers 100%


Y

Friable?



Page 26 of 32



A26Field Id #:

wall (corner)Client Sample Description:

576265-026Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

GroutLayer 1

+/-Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel



AngleSign Of

Elongation

Tan Hard Y 0 0 100



PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Cement / Binders

70

30

%


Y

Friable?



Page 27 of 32



A27Field Id #:

wallClient Sample Description:

576265-027Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

GroutLayer 1

+/-Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel



AngleSign Of

Elongation




PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Cement / Binders

70

30

%


Y

Friable?



Page 28 of 32



A28Field Id #:

wallClient Sample Description:

576265-028Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

GroutLayer 1

+/-Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel



AngleSign Of

Elongation




PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Cement / Binders

70

30

%


Y

Friable?



Page 29 of 32



A29Field Id #:

control buildingClient Sample Description:

576265-029Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

Floor Tile

Black Mastic

Layer 1

Layer 2

+/-

+/-

Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

Silky / Wavy

Non-fibrous

Morphology

MorphologyNone

Color /Pleochroism

Color /Pleochroism

1.56

ParallelRef. Index

ParallelRef. Index

1.55



Low

Biref

Biref0

ExtintionAngle

ExtintionAngle

+

Sign OfElongation

Sign OfElongation

Gray

Black

Hard

Resinous

Y

Y

0

7

0

7

99

1

Color

Color

Texture

Texture

Homogeneous?

Homogeneous?

% Fibrous

% Fibrous

%Asbestos

%Asbestos

% of Sample

% of Sample



PLM Examination:

PLM Examination:

Components

Components

Aggregate

Resin Binders

Chrysotile

Tar Binders

20

80

7

93

%

%

Prep/Treatment:

Prep/Treatment:

Asbestos Content:

Asbestos Content:

None Detected

7% Chrysotile (by Visual Estimate)

Heat / Melt

Heat / Melt

Y

Y

Friable?

Friable?



Page 30 of 32



A32Field Id #:


576265-032Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

Grout

Concrete

Layer 1

Layer 2

+/-

+/-

Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

Morphology

Morphology

Color /Pleochroism

Color /Pleochroism

ParallelRef. Index

ParallelRef. Index



Biref

Biref

ExtintionAngle

ExtintionAngle

Sign OfElongation

Sign OfElongation

White

Gray

Hard/Blocky

Hard/Blocky

Y

Y

0

0

0

0

30

70

Color

Color

Texture

Texture

Homogeneous?

Homogeneous?

% Fibrous

% Fibrous

%Asbestos

%Asbestos

% of Sample

% of Sample



PLM Examination:

PLM Examination:

Components

Components

Aggregate

Cement / Binders

Aggregate

Cement / Binders

Pigment / Binders

60

40

60

20

20

%

%

Prep/Treatment:

Prep/Treatment:

Asbestos Content:

Asbestos Content:

None Detected

None Detected



Y

Y

Friable?

Friable?



Page 31 of 32



A33Field Id #:


576265-033Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

GroutLayer 1

+/-Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

MorphologyColor /

PleochroismParallel



AngleSign Of

Elongation

White Hard/Blocky Y 0 0 100



PLM Examination:

Components

Aggregate

Cement / Binders

Pigment / Binders

70

20

10

%


Y

Friable?



Page 32 of 32



A34Field Id #:


576265-034Sample #:R13709.01Project #:

Grout

Grout

Layer 1

Layer 2

+/-

+/-

Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

Non-fibrous

Morphology

Morphology

Color /Pleochroism

Color /Pleochroism

ParallelRef. Index

ParallelRef. Index



Biref

Biref

ExtintionAngle

ExtintionAngle

Sign OfElongation

Sign OfElongation

White

Gray

Hard/Blocky

Hard/Blocky

Y

Y

0

0

0

0

30

70

Color

Color

Texture

Texture

Homogeneous?

Homogeneous?

% Fibrous

% Fibrous

%Asbestos

%Asbestos

% of Sample

% of Sample



PLM Examination:

PLM Examination:

Components

Components

Aggregate

Cement / Binders

Aggregate

Cement / Binders

Pigment / Binders

60

40

80

10

10

%

%

Prep/Treatment:

Prep/Treatment:

Asbestos Content:

Asbestos Content:

None Detected

None Detected



Y

Y

Friable?

Friable?

This test report may not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval of laboratory.The results only relate to the samples tested. This report must not be used to claim product certification, Approval, or endorsement by NVLAP, NIST, or any agency of the federal government.


Pag

e 38

of 4

4

F

inal

1.0

00

Pag

e 39

of 4

4

F

inal

1.0

00

Pag

e 40

of 4

4

F

inal

1.0

00

Inter-Office Shipment

Page 1 of 2

Date/Time: 02/13/18 14:03

576265-001

576265-002

576265-003

576265-004

576265-005

576265-006

576265-007

576265-008

576265-009

576265-010

576265-011

576265-012

576265-013

576265-014

576265-015

576265-016

576265-017

576265-018

576265-019

576265-020

576265-021

576265-022

576265-023

576265-024

576265-025

Sample Id

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

Matrix

A1

A2

A3

A4

A5

A6

A7

A8

A9

A10

A11

A12

A13

A14

A15

A16

A17

A18

A19

A20

A21

A22

A23

A24

A25

Client Sample Id

Lab# From:

Lab# To:

Created by:

Delivery Priority:

Air Bill No.:Dallas

Houston

Heidi Goertz

771476253739

Method

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

Lab Due HT Due

02/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

PM

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

Method Name

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Please send report to:

E-Mail:


Debbie Simmons

Address:Phone:

[email protected]

Sample Collection

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

Sign Analytes

1055979IOS Number


Inter-Office Shipment

Page 2 of 2

Date/Time: 02/13/18 14:03

576265-026

576265-027

576265-028

576265-029

576265-030

576265-031

576265-032

576265-033

576265-034

Sample Id

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

Matrix

A26

A27

A28

A29

A30

A31

A32

A33

A34

Client Sample Id

Inter Office Shipment or Sample Comments:

Lab# From:

Lab# To:

Created by:

Delivery Priority:

Air Bill No.:Dallas

Houston

Heidi Goertz

771476253739

Method

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

PLM

Lab Due HT Due

02/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/1802/15/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

03/12/18

PM

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

DES

Method Name

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Asbestos by PLM

Please send report to:

E-Mail:


Debbie Simmons

Address:Phone:

[email protected]

Sample Collection

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

02/12/18 00:00

Sign

Date Received:

Cooler Temperature:

Date Relinquished:

Heidi Goertz Angelica Martinez

02/13/2018 02/14/2018 11:40

1.1

Analytes

1055979IOS Number

Relinquished By Received By:


Inter Office Report- Sample Receipt Checklist

XENCO Laboratories

1055979IOS #:

02/13/2018 02:03 PMDate Sent:

DallasSent To:

Sample Receipt Checklist

Checklist reviewed by:Date:

Angelica Martinez02/14/2018

#2 *Shipping container in good condition? #3 *Samples received with appropriate temperature? #4 *Custody Seals intact on shipping container/ cooler? #5 *Custody Seals Signed and dated for Containers/coolers #6 *IOS present? #7 Any missing/extra samples? #8 IOS agrees with sample label(s)/matrix? #9 Sample matrix/ properties agree with IOS? #10 Samples in proper container/ bottle? #11 Samples properly preserved? #12 Sample container(s) intact? #13 Sufficient sample amount for indicated test(s)? #14 All samples received within hold time?

YesYesN/AN/AYesNoYesYesYesYesYesYesYes

#1 *Temperature of cooler(s)? 1.1

Acceptable Temperature Range: 0 - 6 degCAir and Metal samples Acceptable Range: Ambient

* Must be completed for after-hours delivery of samples prior to placing in the refrigerator

Nonconformance Documentation

Contact: Contacted by : Date:

NonConformance:

Corrective Action Taken:

Comments

Temperature Measuring device used :

Sent By:

02/14/2018 11:40 AMDate Received:Received By:

Heidi Goertz

Angelica Martinez


Prelogin/Nonconformance Report- Sample Log-InXENCO Laboratories

576265Work Order #:

02/13/2018 12:20:00 PMDate/ Time Received:



Checklist completed by: Date:


Debbie Simmons

02/13/2018

02/13/2018

#2 *Shipping container in good condition? #3 *Samples received on ice? #4 *Custody Seals intact on shipping container/ cooler? #5 Custody Seals intact on sample bottles? #6*Custody Seals Signed and dated? #7 *Chain of Custody present? #8 Any missing/extra samples? #9 Chain of Custody signed when relinquished/ received? #10 Chain of Custody agrees with sample labels/matrix? #11 Container label(s) legible and intact? #12 Samples in proper container/ bottle? #13 Samples properly preserved? #14 Sample container(s) intact? #15 Sufficient sample amount for indicated test(s)? #16 All samples received within hold time? #17 Subcontract of sample(s)? #18 Water VOC samples have zero headspace?

YesNoNoN/AN/AYesNoYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesN/A

sub plm to dallas




Analyst: PH Device/Lot#:

Comments

Heidi Goertz

Temperature Measuring device used : hou-068


(!

(!

(!(!(!

(! (!(!

(!

(!

(!

(! (!

(!

(!

(!

(! (! (!

(!

(!

(!

(!

(!

(!

(!

A1A3A6

A7

A8 A19

A25

A26

A13

A28

A24

A17

A18A27

A31

A30

A32A29A34

A10

A33

A9,A5 A4,A12

A14,A21

A15,A20,A22

A2,A11,A16,A23

Clinton Drive Lift Station4309 Clinton Drive

Houston, TX TGE Project No.: R13709.01

Figure 1Asbestos Sample and Containing Materials

Location Map"

0 10 20 30 40

Feet

Legend


(! Asbestos Sample (Exterior)

(! Asbestos Sample (Interior)

Asbestos-containing black mastic (beneath non-ACM VFT)

TGE Resources, Inc.

APPENDIX E

LEAD – ANALYTICAL RESULTS AND CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY

Analytical Report 576263for

TGE Resources, Inc.

Project Manager: Kristi Destouet

Clinton Drive Lift Station

15-FEB-18

R13709.01


Xenco-Houston (EPA Lab code: TX00122):Texas (T104704215-17-23), Arizona (AZ0765), Florida (E871002-24), Louisiana (03054)

Oklahoma (2017-142)

Xenco-Dallas (EPA Lab code: TX01468): Texas (T104704295-17-15), Arizona (AZ0809), Arkansas (17-063-0)

Xenco-El Paso (EPA Lab code: TX00127): Texas (T104704221-17-12)Xenco-Lubbock (EPA Lab code: TX00139): Texas (T104704219-17-16)Xenco-Odessa (EPA Lab code: TX00158): Texas (T104704400-17-13)

Xenco-San Antonio (EPA Lab Code: TNI02385): Texas (T104704534-17-3)Xenco Phoenix (EPA Lab Code: AZ00901): Arizona(AZ0757)

Xenco-Phoenix Mobile (EPA Lab code: AZ00901): Arizona (AZM757)

Collected By: Client


of 28 Final 1.000

Table of Contents

Cover Page 1 Cover Letter 3 Sample ID Cross Reference 4 Case Narrative 5 Certificate of Analysis Summary 6 Certificate of Analysis (Detailed Report) 9 Explanation of Qualifiers (Flags) 24

QC Summary 25

Chain of Custody 26

Sample Receipt Conformance Report 28

Houston - Dallas - Midland - San Antonio - Phoenix - Oklahoma - Latin America

Recipient of the Prestigious Small Business Administration Award of Excellence in 1994.Certified and approved by numerous States and Agencies.

A Small Business and Minority Status Company that delivers SERVICE and QUALITY

Project Manager: Kristi Destouet TGE Resources, Inc.8048 Northcourt RoadHouston, TX 77040 Reference: XENCO Report No(s): 576263 Clinton Drive Lift Station Project Address: 4309 Clinton Drive

Kristi Destouet:

We are reporting to you the results of the analyses performed on the samples received under the project namereferenced above and identified with the XENCO Report Number(s) 576263. All results being reported underthis Report Number apply to the samples analyzed and properly identified with a Laboratory ID number.Subcontracted analyses are identified in this report with either the NELAC certification number of thesubcontract lab in the analyst ID field, or the complete subcontracted report attached to this report.

Unless otherwise noted in a Case Narrative, all data reported in this Analytical Report are in compliance withNELAC standards. The uncertainty of measurement associated with the results of analysis reported isavailable upon request. Should insufficient sample be provided to the laboratory to meet the method andNELAC Matrix Duplicate and Matrix Spike requirements, then the data will be analyzed, evaluated andreported using all other available quality control measures.

The validity and integrity of this report will remain intact as long as it is accompanied by this letter andreproduced in full, unless written approval is granted by XENCO Laboratories. This report will be filed for atleast 5 years in our archives after which time it will be destroyed without further notice, unless otherwisearranged with you. The samples received, and described as recorded in Report No. 576263 will be filed for45 days, and after that time they will be properly disposed without further notice, unless otherwise arrangedwith you. We reserve the right to return to you any unused samples, extracts or solutions related to them if weconsider so necessary (e.g., samples identified as hazardous waste, sample sizes exceeding analytical standardpractices, controlled substances under regulated protocols, etc).

We thank you for selecting XENCO Laboratories to serve your analytical needs. If you have any questionsconcerning this report, please feel free to contact us at any time.

Respectfully,

15-FEB-18

Project ManagerDebbie Simmons


Sample Cross Reference 576263

TGE Resources, Inc., Houston, TXClinton Drive Lift Station

Sample Id

L1 / Roof EdgeL2 / Roof EdgeL3 / Roof EdgeL4 / Roof WallL5 / Roof WallL6 / Roof WallL7 / HVAC UnitL8 / LadderL9 / TransformerL10 / Electrical Pad (North)L11 / Electrical Pad (Central)L12 / Electrical Pad (South)L13 / Control Building WallL14 / Control Building WallL15 / Control Building Wall

02-12-18 00:0002-12-18 00:0002-12-18 00:0002-12-18 00:0002-12-18 00:0002-12-18 00:0002-12-18 00:0002-12-18 00:0002-12-18 00:0002-12-18 00:0002-12-18 00:0002-12-18 00:0002-12-18 00:0002-12-18 00:0002-12-18 00:00

Date Collected Lab Sample Id

576263-001576263-002576263-003576263-004576263-005576263-006576263-007576263-008576263-009576263-010576263-011576263-012576263-013576263-014576263-015

Sample DepthMatrix

SSSSSSSSSSSSSSS


CASE NARRATIVE

576263Work Order Number(s):15-FEB-18Report Date: R13709.01Project ID:


Date Received:

Client Name: TGE Resources, Inc.

02/13/2018

None

Sample receipt non conformances and comments:

Sample receipt non conformances and comments per sample:


R13709.01Project Id:

TGE Resources, Inc., Houston, TX

Kristi DestouetContact:4309 Clinton DriveProject Location:

Tue Feb-13-18 12:20 pm 15-FEB-18Debbie Simmons

Date Received in Lab:Report Date:

Project Manager:


This analytical report, and the entire data package it represents, has been made for your exclusive and confidential use.The interpretations and results expressed throughout this analytical report represent the best judgment of XENCO Laboratories.XENCO Laboratories assumes no responsibility and makes no warranty to the end use of the data hereby presented.Our liability is limited to the amount invoiced for this work order unless otherwise agreed to in writing.

Houston - Dallas - San Antonio - Atlanta - Tampa - Boca Raton - Latin America - Odessa - Corpus Christi________________________________


Certificate of Analysis Summary 576263

Total Metals by EPA 6010BFeb-15-18 15:23 Feb-15-18 15:28 Feb-15-18 15:32 Feb-15-18 15:36 Feb-15-18 15:40 Feb-15-18 15:44

mg/kg Units/RL: mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg

Feb-15-18 11:02Extracted: Feb-15-18 11:02 Feb-15-18 11:02 Feb-15-18 11:02 Feb-15-18 11:02 Feb-15-18 11:02

Analysis Requested

576263-001Lab Id:

Field Id: L1 / Roof Edge

PAINT CHIPS

Feb-12-18 00:00

Depth:

Matrix:

Sampled:

55.7 12.5 Lead 107 12.5 20.9 J 55.6 7.06 2.00 2.20 1.00 12.4 2.08

576263-002

L2 / Roof Edge

PAINT CHIPS

Feb-12-18 00:00

576263-003

L3 / Roof Edge

PAINT CHIPS

Feb-12-18 00:00

576263-004

L4 / Roof Wall

PAINT CHIPS

Feb-12-18 00:00

576263-005

L5 / Roof Wall

PAINT CHIPS

Feb-12-18 00:00

576263-006

L6 / Roof Wall

PAINT CHIPS

Feb-12-18 00:00

RL RL RL RL RL RLAnalyzed:

mg/kg







Project Manager:






Total Metals by EPA 6010BFeb-15-18 15:48 Feb-15-18 15:53 Feb-15-18 15:57 Feb-15-18 16:09 Feb-15-18 16:13 Feb-15-18 16:18

mg/kg Units/RL: mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg

Feb-15-18 11:02Extracted: Feb-15-18 11:02 Feb-15-18 11:02 Feb-15-18 11:02 Feb-15-18 11:02 Feb-15-18 11:02

Analysis Requested

576263-007Lab Id:

Field Id: L7 / HVAC Unit

PAINT CHIPS

Feb-12-18 00:00

Depth:

Matrix:

Sampled:

18.3 J 25.0 Lead 15.1 J 25.0 48.0 1.61 864 2.27 20.1 1.22 47.7 0.862

576263-008

L8 / Ladder

PAINT CHIPS

Feb-12-18 00:00

576263-009L9 / Transformer

PAINT CHIPS

Feb-12-18 00:00

576263-010L10 / Electrical Pad (North)

PAINT CHIPS

Feb-12-18 00:00

576263-011L11 / Electrical Pad (Central

PAINT CHIPS

Feb-12-18 00:00

576263-012L12 / Electrical Pad (South)

PAINT CHIPS

Feb-12-18 00:00

RL RL RL RL RL RLAnalyzed:

mg/kg







Project Manager:






Total Metals by EPA 6010BFeb-15-18 16:22 Feb-15-18 16:26 Feb-15-18 16:30

mg/kg Units/RL: mg/kg mg/kg

Feb-15-18 11:02Extracted: Feb-15-18 11:02 Feb-15-18 11:02

Analysis Requested

576263-013Lab Id:

Field Id: L13 / Control Building Wall

PAINT CHIPS

Feb-12-18 00:00

Depth:

Matrix:

Sampled:

2.17 0.926 Lead 3.82 0.847 0.795 J 0.877

576263-014L14 / Control Building Wall

PAINT CHIPS

Feb-12-18 00:00

576263-015L15 / Control Building Wall

PAINT CHIPS

Feb-12-18 00:00

RL RL RLAnalyzed:


Certificate of Analytical Results 576263


02.13.18 12.20 Date Received:02.12.18 00.00 Date Collected:576263-001Lab Sample Id:Paint ChipsMatrix: L1 / Roof EdgeSample Id:

Total Metals by EPA 6010B Analytical Method:

DEPAnalyst:

SW3050BPrep Method:

02.15.18 11.02 Date Prep:

PJBTech:

Lead

Parameter

3.41

Result

12.5

Flag

mg/kg

Units

1

DilCas Number

7439-92-1 55.7

3041165Seq Number:

RL

Wet WeightBasis:

MDL

02.15.18 15.23

Analysis Date

% Moisture:






DEPAnalyst:

SW3050BPrep Method:

02.15.18 11.02 Date Prep:

PJBTech:

Lead

Parameter

3.41

Result

12.5

Flag

mg/kg

Units

1

DilCas Number

7439-92-1 107

3041165Seq Number:

RL

Wet WeightBasis:

MDL

02.15.18 15.28

Analysis Date

% Moisture:






DEPAnalyst:

SW3050BPrep Method:

02.15.18 11.02 Date Prep:

PJBTech:

Lead

Parameter

15.2

Result

J55.6

Flag

mg/kg

Units

1

DilCas Number

7439-92-1 20.9

3041165Seq Number:

RL

Wet WeightBasis:

MDL

02.15.18 15.32

Analysis Date

% Moisture:




02.13.18 12.20 Date Received:02.12.18 00.00 Date Collected:576263-004Lab Sample Id:Paint ChipsMatrix: L4 / Roof WallSample Id:


DEPAnalyst:

SW3050BPrep Method:

02.15.18 11.02 Date Prep:

PJBTech:

Lead

Parameter

0.545

Result

2.00

Flag

mg/kg

Units

1

DilCas Number

7439-92-1 7.06

3041165Seq Number:

RL

Wet WeightBasis:

MDL

02.15.18 15.36

Analysis Date

% Moisture:






DEPAnalyst:

SW3050BPrep Method:

02.15.18 11.02 Date Prep:

PJBTech:

Lead

Parameter

0.273

Result

1.00

Flag

mg/kg

Units

1

DilCas Number

7439-92-1 2.20

3041165Seq Number:

RL

Wet WeightBasis:

MDL

02.15.18 15.40

Analysis Date

% Moisture:






DEPAnalyst:

SW3050BPrep Method:

02.15.18 11.02 Date Prep:

PJBTech:

Lead

Parameter

0.568

Result

2.08

Flag

mg/kg

Units

1

DilCas Number

7439-92-1 12.4

3041165Seq Number:

RL

Wet WeightBasis:

MDL

02.15.18 15.44

Analysis Date

% Moisture:




02.13.18 12.20 Date Received:02.12.18 00.00 Date Collected:576263-007Lab Sample Id:Paint ChipsMatrix: L7 / HVAC UnitSample Id:


DEPAnalyst:

SW3050BPrep Method:

02.15.18 11.02 Date Prep:

PJBTech:

Lead

Parameter

6.82

Result

J25.0

Flag

mg/kg

Units

1

DilCas Number

7439-92-1 18.3

3041165Seq Number:

RL

Wet WeightBasis:

MDL

02.15.18 15.48

Analysis Date

% Moisture:




02.13.18 12.20 Date Received:02.12.18 00.00 Date Collected:576263-008Lab Sample Id:Paint ChipsMatrix: L8 / LadderSample Id:


DEPAnalyst:

SW3050BPrep Method:

02.15.18 11.02 Date Prep:

PJBTech:

Lead

Parameter

6.82

Result

J25.0

Flag

mg/kg

Units

1

DilCas Number

7439-92-1 15.1

3041165Seq Number:

RL

Wet WeightBasis:

MDL

02.15.18 15.53

Analysis Date

% Moisture:




02.13.18 12.20 Date Received:02.12.18 00.00 Date Collected:576263-009Lab Sample Id:Paint ChipsMatrix: L9 / TransformerSample Id:


DEPAnalyst:

SW3050BPrep Method:

02.15.18 11.02 Date Prep:

PJBTech:

Lead

Parameter

0.440

Result

1.61

Flag

mg/kg

Units

1

DilCas Number

7439-92-1 48.0

3041165Seq Number:

RL

Wet WeightBasis:

MDL

02.15.18 15.57

Analysis Date

% Moisture:




02.13.18 12.20 Date Received:02.12.18 00.00 Date Collected:576263-010Lab Sample Id:Paint ChipsMatrix: L10 / Electrical Pad (North)Sample Id:


DEPAnalyst:

SW3050BPrep Method:

02.15.18 11.02 Date Prep:

PJBTech:

Lead

Parameter

0.620

Result

2.27

Flag

mg/kg

Units

1

DilCas Number

7439-92-1 864

3041165Seq Number:

RL

Wet WeightBasis:

MDL

02.15.18 16.09

Analysis Date

% Moisture:




02.13.18 12.20 Date Received:02.12.18 00.00 Date Collected:576263-011Lab Sample Id:Paint ChipsMatrix: L11 / Electrical Pad (Central)Sample Id:


DEPAnalyst:

SW3050BPrep Method:

02.15.18 11.02 Date Prep:

PJBTech:

Lead

Parameter

0.333

Result

1.22

Flag

mg/kg

Units

1

DilCas Number

7439-92-1 20.1

3041165Seq Number:

RL

Wet WeightBasis:

MDL

02.15.18 16.13

Analysis Date

% Moisture:




02.13.18 12.20 Date Received:02.12.18 00.00 Date Collected:576263-012Lab Sample Id:Paint ChipsMatrix: L12 / Electrical Pad (South)Sample Id:


DEPAnalyst:

SW3050BPrep Method:

02.15.18 11.02 Date Prep:

PJBTech:

Lead

Parameter

0.235

Result

0.862

Flag

mg/kg

Units

1

DilCas Number

7439-92-1 47.7

3041165Seq Number:

RL

Wet WeightBasis:

MDL

02.15.18 16.18

Analysis Date

% Moisture:




02.13.18 12.20 Date Received:02.12.18 00.00 Date Collected:576263-013Lab Sample Id:Paint ChipsMatrix: L13 / Control Building WallSample Id:


DEPAnalyst:

SW3050BPrep Method:

02.15.18 11.02 Date Prep:

PJBTech:

Lead

Parameter

0.253

Result

0.926

Flag

mg/kg

Units

1

DilCas Number

7439-92-1 2.17

3041165Seq Number:

RL

Wet WeightBasis:

MDL

02.15.18 16.22

Analysis Date

% Moisture:






DEPAnalyst:

SW3050BPrep Method:

02.15.18 11.02 Date Prep:

PJBTech:

Lead

Parameter

0.231

Result

0.847

Flag

mg/kg

Units

1

DilCas Number

7439-92-1 3.82

3041165Seq Number:

RL

Wet WeightBasis:

MDL

02.15.18 16.26

Analysis Date

% Moisture:






DEPAnalyst:

SW3050BPrep Method:

02.15.18 11.02 Date Prep:

PJBTech:

Lead

Parameter

0.239

Result

J0.877

Flag

mg/kg

Units

1

DilCas Number

7439-92-1 0.795

3041165Seq Number:

RL

Wet WeightBasis:

MDL

02.15.18 16.30

Analysis Date

% Moisture:


Houston - Dallas - San Antonio - Atlanta - Midland/Odessa - Tampa/Lakeland - Phoenix - Latin America

4147 Greenbriar Dr, Stafford, TX 774779701 Harry Hines Blvd , Dallas, TX 75220 5332 Blackberry Drive, San Antonio TX 78238 1211 W Florida Ave, Midland, TX 797012525 W. Huntington Dr. - Suite 102, Tempe AZ 85282

Phone Fax(281) 240-4200 (281) 240-4280(214) 902 0300 (214) 351-9139(210) 509-3334 (210) 509-3335(432) 563-1800 (432) 563-1713(602) 437-0330

Recipient of the Prestigious Small Business Administration Award of Excellence in 1994.Certified and approved by numerous States and Agencies.

A Small Business and Minority Status Company that delivers SERVICE and QUALITY

Flagging Criteria

X In our quality control review of the data a QC deficiency was observed and flagged as noted. MS/MSD recoveries were found to be outside of the laboratory control limits due to possible matrix /chemical interference, or a concentration of target analyte high enough to affect the recovery of the spike concentration. This condition could also affect the relative percent difference in the MS/MSD.

B A target analyte or common laboratory contaminant was identified in the method blank. Its presence indicates possible field or laboratory contamination.

D The sample(s) were diluted due to targets detected over the highest point of the calibration curve, or due to matrix interference. Dilution factors are included in the final results. The result is from a diluted sample.

E The data exceeds the upper calibration limit; therefore, the concentration is reported as estimated.

F RPD exceeded lab control limits.

J The target analyte was positively identified below the quantitation limit and above the detection limit.

U Analyte was not detected.

L The LCS data for this analytical batch was reported below the laboratory control limits for this analyte. The department supervisor and QA Director reviewed data. The samples were either reanalyzed or flagged as estimated concentrations.

H The LCS data for this analytical batch was reported above the laboratory control limits. Supporting QC Data were reviewed by the Department Supervisor and QA Director. Data were determined to be valid for reporting.

K Sample analyzed outside of recommended hold time.

JN A combination of the "N" and the "J" qualifier. The analysis indicates that the analyte is "tentatively identified" and the associated numerical value may not be consistent with the amount actually present in the environmental sample.

** Surrogate recovered outside laboratory control limit.

BRL Below Reporting Limit.

RL Reporting Limit

MDL Method Detection Limit SDL Sample Detection Limit LOD Limit of Detection

PQL Practical Quantitation Limit MQL Method Quantitation Limit LOQ Limit of Quantitation

DL Method Detection Limit

NC Non-Calculable

+ NELAC certification not offered for this compound. * (Next to analyte name or method description) = Outside XENCO's scope of NELAC accreditation


QC Summary 576263

TGE Resources, Inc.Clinton Drive Lift Station

MS/MSD Percent Recovery [D] = 100*(C-A) / BRelative Percent Difference RPD = 200* | (C-E) / (C+E) |LCS/LCSD Recovery [D] = 100 * (C) / [B]

LCS = Laboratory Control Sample MS = Matrix SpikeA = Parent Result B = Spike AddedC = MS/LCS Result D = MSD/LCSD % RecE = MSD/LCSD Result

7639139-1-BLK

576264-030

MB Sample Id:

Parent Sample Id:

Solid

Soil

Matrix:

Matrix:

Total Metals by EPA 6010B

Total Metals by EPA 6010B

Analytical Method:

Analytical Method:

SW3050B

SW3050B

Prep Method:

Prep Method:

02.15.18

02.15.18

Date Prep:

Date Prep:

Lead

Lead

Parameter

Parameter

%RPD

%RPD

Flag

Flag

20

20

RPD Limit

RPD Limit

0

2

3041165

3041165

Seq Number:

Seq Number:

02.15.18 14:42

02.15.18 14:54

Analysis Date

Analysis Date

Limits

Limits

75-125

75-125

LCSD %Rec

MSD %Rec

101

86

LCSD Result

MSD Result

101

129

LCS %Rec

MS %Rec

101

86

101

132

Spike Amount

Spike Amount

100

87.7

MB Result

Parent Result

<0.273

56.3

7639139-1-BKS

576264-030 S

LCS Sample Id:

MS Sample Id:

7639139-1-BSD

576264-030 SD

LCSD Sample Id:

MSD Sample Id:

mg/kg

mg/kg

Units

Units

LCS Result

MS Result


of 28 F

inal 1.000

Prelogin/Nonconformance Report- Sample Log-InXENCO Laboratories

576263Work Order #:

02/13/2018 12:20:00 PMDate/ Time Received:



Checklist completed by: Date:


Debbie Simmons

02/13/2018

02/13/2018

#2 *Shipping container in good condition? #3 *Samples received on ice? #4 *Custody Seals intact on shipping container/ cooler? #5 Custody Seals intact on sample bottles? #6*Custody Seals Signed and dated? #7 *Chain of Custody present? #8 Any missing/extra samples? #9 Chain of Custody signed when relinquished/ received? #10 Chain of Custody agrees with sample labels/matrix? #11 Container label(s) legible and intact? #12 Samples in proper container/ bottle? #13 Samples properly preserved? #14 Sample container(s) intact? #15 Sufficient sample amount for indicated test(s)? #16 All samples received within hold time? #17 Subcontract of sample(s)? #18 Water VOC samples have zero headspace?

YesNoNoN/AN/AYesNoYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesNoN/A




Analyst: PH Device/Lot#:

Comments

Heidi Goertz

Temperature Measuring device used : hou-068


(! (! (!

(!

(!

(!

(!(!

(!

(!

(!

(!

(!

(!(!L5 L3

L4

L9

L7L8

L6

L1

L2

L12

L11

L10

L13L15L14

TGE Project No.: R13709.01 Figure 2Paint Chip Sample Location Map"

0 10 20 30 40

Feet

Legend


(! Lead Sample (Exterior)

(! Lead Sample (Interior)

TGE Resources, Inc.

APPENDIX F

LICENSES AND CERTIFICATIONS

' .

Texas Department of State Health Services

Asbestos Individual Consultant

KRISTI M DESTOUET

License No. 105770

Control No. 96934

Expiration Date: 1/15/2018

.. .

• Texas Department ofState Health Services

Asbestos Inspector

EVA L LANGLEY

License No. 602337

Control No. 98675


' Texas Department of State Health Services


ROBIN D FRANKS

License No. 105379

Control No. 97025


•

Texas Department of State Health Services


TIMOTHY E CRUMP

License No. 105586

Control No. 97232


kmdestouet

Stamp

United States Department of Commerce National Institute of Standards and Technology

Certificate of Accreditation to ISO/IEC 17025:2005

NVLAP LAB CODE: 200765-0

Xenco LaboratoriesDallas, TX

is accredited by the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program for specific services, listed on the Scope of Accreditation, for:

Asbestos Fiber Analysis

2017-10-01 through 2018-09-30Effective Dates For the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program

This laboratory is accredited in accordance with the recognized International Standard ISO/IEC 17025:2005. This accreditation demonstrates technical competence for a defined scope and the operation of a laboratory quality

management system (refer to joint ISO-ILAC-IAF Communique dated January 2009).

environmental, engineering, building sciences industrial ... · environmental, engineering, buildi...

Documents