EPA/530-R-93-005
NTIS: PB93-154 631
Technical Guidance Document
DETERMINING THE INTEGRITY OF CONCRETE SUMPS
Contract No. 68-C9-0036
Work Assignment No. 1-71
Project Officer
David Carson
Waste Minimization, Destruction
and Disposal Research Division
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
RISK REDUCTION ENGINEERING LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECT!^ AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
-------
DISCLAIMER
This material has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency under contract number 68-09-0036, Work
Assignment 1-71, to SCS Engineers. It has been subjected to the Agency's
review and it has been approved for publication as an EPA document.
Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute
endorsement or recommendation for use.
11
-------
FOREWORD
This Technical Guidance Document (TGD), prepared in cooperation with the
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, presents recommended pro-
cedures for assessing the structural integrity of hazardous waste sumps
constructed of concrete. This document describes: 1) mechanisms that can
cause failure of concrete structures, 2) procedures to be used in
performing a basic investigation, 3) steps to be followed in conducting a
secondary investigation, 4) methods of concrete repair, and 5) protective
coatings that can be applied to concrete.
-------
ABSTRACT
This guidance document explains how to assess the structural integrity
of a hazardous waste sump that is made of concrete. First, mechanisms of
concrete structural failure are examined to provide a foundation for
conducting investigations. Steps for basic and secondary investigations,
including methods for concrete inspection and sump leak testing, are
presented. As part of the basic investigation, an approach for static head
leak testing of water-filled sumps is provided. Lastly, methods for
concrete repair and information on coatings for concrete are presented.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Contract Number
68-C-9-0036, Work Assignment No. 1-71, under the sponsorship of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. This report covers a period from March
1990 to July 1991, and the work was completed as of August 1991.
-------
CONTENTS
Disclaimer ii
Foreward i i i
Abstract i v
Figures vi i i
Tables viii
Section Page
1 Introduction 1
Purpose and Objectives 1
Regulatory Overview 1
Overview of Concrete Sump Integrity Determination 3
Organization of this Document 5
2 Understanding Mechanisms That Cause Failure of Concrete
Structures 6
Basic Sump Design 6
Major Modes of Structural Failure 6
Cracks 6
Joint Failure 8
Helpful References 9
3 Conducting a Sump Integrity Investigation 11
Introduction 11
The Basic Investigation 12
Planing the Investigation 12
Review Existing Data 13
Preparing the Sump for Inspection 13
Steam Cleaning 14
Scarification .' 14
Blast Cleaning i 14
Acid Etching 15
Chemical Cleaning 15
-------
CONTENTS (continued)
Secti on Page
3 (continued)
Performing a Preliminary Inspection 15
Conduct a Sump Tightness Test 18
Static Head Test 19
Tracer Tests 21
Preparing a Report 25
The Secondary Investigation 27
Non-destructive Testing 27
Acoustic Pulse-Echo 27
Impact Echo 28
Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity 28
Ultrasonic Spectroscopy 28
Radar 28
Gamma Radiometry 29
Core Sampl i ng 29
Laboratory Investigation 30
4 Methods of Concrete Repair 32
Introduction 32
Cracks 32
Joint Failure 33
Methods of Concrete Repai r 33
Grouting 33
Patching 33
Joint Repairing 34
Strengthening 34
Epoxy Injection 34
Drilling and Plugging 34
Flexible Seal ing 34
Drypacking 35
Over! aying 35
Helpful References 35
-------
CONTENTS (continued)
Section Page
5 Coatings for Concrete Structures 36
Introduction 36
Coatings 36
Protective Coatings 37
Waterproofing Coatings 40
Coating Installation 40
APPENDICES
A Regulations: Subpart J of Part 264 and 265 44
B Protective and Waterproofing Coatings for Concrete 59
C Sources of Information 65
D Useful References: An Annotated Listing 68
E Useful References: Topic Area Cross-Reference 81
F Water Level Measuring Equipment 84
GLOSSARY 85
VI 1
-------
FIGURES
Figure Page
2-1 Joints - Schematic Diagram 7
3-1 Example Sump Surface Defect Drawing 17
3-2 Typical Setup for a Static Head Test 20
3-3 Tracer Test in an Open Sump 26
5-1 Typical Application of External Waterproofing and Internal
Protective Barrier Systems 41
TABLES
Table Page
1-1 Retrofit Schedule for Secondary Containment 4
3-1 Sample Calibration Calculations 22
3-2 Formulas for Converting Measured Depth Change to Leak Rate
in Gallons per Hour 24
5-1 Protective Barrier Systems - General Categories 39
vm
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES
This guidance document focuses on hazardous waste sumps and the steps
that can be used to assess their structural integrity. Because of the
apparent lack of a nationally-recognized technique to assess the condition
of existing concrete sumps, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
has assembled existing knowledge concerning concrete structures and
applicable leak detection technologies in this document. Guidance is
presented to sump owners on how to assess the integrity of their sumps.
REGULATORY OVERVIEW
Pursuant to Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA), tank systems that are used to store/treat hazardous waste are reg-
ulated under 40 CFR Parts 260, 261, 262, 264, 265, 270, and 271 (July
14,1986, FR 51, 25422 -25486). These regulations do not apply to under-
ground tanks storing petroleum or hazardous substances under RCRA Subtitle
I. These regulations apply to any tank system (aboveground, inground,
underground), of any material (steel, concrete, fiberglass).
The terms "sump" and "tank" are defined below to provide a foundation
for this regulatory discussion. In 40 CFR 260.10, EPA defines these terms
as follows:
o "Sump" means any pit or reservoir that meets the definition of a
tank and those troughs/trenches connected to it that serve to
collect hazardous waste for transport to hazardous waste storage,
treatment, or disposal facilities. This description does not apply
to sumps covered by the exception EPA added to this definition in
the Liner and Leak Detection rule on January 29, 1992 (57 FR 3486).
o "Tank" means a stationary device, designed to contain an accumula-
tion of hazardous waste which is constructed primarily of
non-earthen materials (e.g., wood, concrete, steel, plastic) that
provide structural support.
The definition of a sump has been interpreted by EPA to include sumps
that are designed to serve as a primary containment system for hazardous
waste as well as those designed to serve as a secondary containment system
for tanks that contain hazardous waste (September 2, 1988, FR 53, 34084 -
34085).
1
-------
Subpart J of Part 264, "Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardous
Waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities," and Part 265, "Interim
Status. Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardous Waste Treatment,
Storage, and Disposal Facilities," (Appendix A) set forth the requirements
for hazardous waste tank systems. As previously discussed, these require-
ments also apply to sumps. The regulatory discussion in this subsection
examines EPA requirements for assessing the structural integrity of
hazardous waste tank systems as applied to sumps.
Owners and operators of existing sumps without secondary containment
are required by 40 CFR 264.191 and 265.191 to determine whether the sump is
capable of storing or treating hazardous waste without posing a threat of
release of hazardous waste to the environment (i.e., not leaking or not
"unfit for use"). The assessment must determine that the sump is
adequately designed and has sufficient structural strength and
compatibility with wastes managed to ensure that it will not collapse,
rupture, or fail. The assessment must consider:
Design standards;
Hazardous characteristics of the wastes;
Existing corrosion protection;
Age of the system; and
Results of:
- A leak test,
- An internal inspection, or
- Other tank integrity examination.
The assessment must be reviewed and certified by an independent, quali-
fied Registered Professional Engineer and must be kept on file at the
facility.
All new sumps must be assessed before being put into use (40 CFR
264.192 and 265.192). Existing sumps without secondary containment must be
leak- tested on an annual basis or assessed by an independent Registered
Professional Engineer using a procedure and a schedule that will be
adequate to detect leaks or conditions that may lead to leaks (40 CFR
264.193(1) and 265.193(1)).
The regulations require that the assessment be conducted by January 12,
1988. However, the regulations applicable to aboveground, onground, and
underground tanks that can be entered for inspection (e.g., sumps) are
promulgated pursuant to RCRA (pre-HSWA) authorities. Sumps located in an
authorized state do not have to be assessed until the state amends its
regulations and imposes a deadline. Sumps located in unauthorized states
must be assessed within the Federal deadline (January 12, 1988).
-------
Existing sumps that are found not to be leaking (structurally sound)
and fit for use are required to install secondary containment in accordance
with the phase-in schedule presented in Sections 264.193(a) and 265.193(a)
(see Table 1-1); whereas existing sumps that are found to be leaking or
unfit for use must go through a remedial process described in Sections
264.196 and 265.196. Once an existing sump without a secondary containment
system has leaked or caused a release, it must be repaired and a secondary
containment system must be installed that satisfies the requirements of
Sections 264.193 and 265.193. If the sump cannot be repaired, it must be
permanently removed from service in accordance with Sections 264.197 and
265.197.
Some owners of existing sumps may decide to meet the requirement of
retrofitting secondary containment by installing a new sump within their
old sump (allowing the old sump to serve as the secondary container). Such
an approach to meeting the secondary containment requirement requires the
old sump to be assessed as structurally sound, or to be repaired and made
structurally sound.
Because concrete is not impermeable, to make a concrete sump or
secondary container structurally sound, the unit must be coated or lined
with a material that is impermeable to prevent migration of contaminants
into and through the concrete structure. Such a coating must be compatible
with the materials that may be contained by the structure.
OVERVIEW OF CONCRETE SUMP INTEGRITY DETERMINATION
Although methods for assessing the integrity of typical closed tank sys
terns are fairly Well established, standard methods for assessing the integ-
rity of sumps, systems that are open to the atmosphere, had not been devel-
oped. Consequently, EPA has created this Technical Guidance Document (TGD)
to assist sump owners in making this assessment.
A sump integrity investigation can be outlined as follows:
The basic investigation involves the following steps:
- Planning of the investigative survey,
- Reviewing engineering data,
- Preparing the sump for inspection,
- Performing the inspection, and
- Conducting a sump tightness test.
A secondary investigation must be performed if the basic investiga-
tion is inconclusive. Such investigation may require
non-destructive (e.g., pulse-echo) or destructive (obtaining core
samples and performing laboratory analysis) concrete testing tech-
niques.
-------
TABLE 1-1. RETROFIT SCHEDULE FOR SECONDARY CONTAINMENT
Type of Sump
Secondary Containment Retrofit Deadline
Existing Sump Used to Store or
Treat EPA Hazardous Waste
Nos. F020, F021, F022, F023,
F026, and F027
Existing Sump of Known and
Documented Age
Existing Sump for Which the Age
Cannot be Documented
- if Sump Age is > 7 years
Existing Sump that Stores or
Treats Materials that Become
Designated as Hazardous Waste
After Jan. 12, 1987
Within 2 years from Jan. 12, 1987.
Within 2 years from Jan. 12, 1987, or
when the sump has reached 15 years of
age, whichever comes later.
Within 8 years from Jan. 12, 1987.
By the time the facility reaches 15
years of age, or within 2 years of
Jan. 12, 1987, whichever comes later.
Within the above-listed schedules,
except that the date on which the
material becomes a hazardous waste must
be used in place of Jan. 12, 1987, as
a basis.
-------
ORGANIZATION OF THIS DOCUMENT
j
The remaining sections of this document are organized as follows:
Section 2 discusses mechanisms of concrete structural failure;
Section 3 describes how to conduct a basic and secondary sump
investigation;
t Section 4 provides an overview of methods used for concrete repair;
and
Section 5 presents information on coatings for concrete.
Appendices provide the reader with supporting information such as copies of
regulations, sources of additional information, and a listing of useful
references.
-------
SECTION 2
UNDERSTANDING MECHANISMS THAT CAUSE FAILURE OF CONCRETE STRUCTURES
Two major failure mechanisms can cause loss of structural integrity in
a sump, namely stress-induced cracks and joint failure. Another possible
source of sump leakage is gradual permeation of hazardous materials through
sump walls that do not have a protective coating. This section will focus
on major structural failure mechanisms as they can result in the most
sudden and drastic releases from a sump.
BASIC SUMP DESIGN
Sumps can vary greatly in size and design. They can range in capacity
from a few to.hundreds of thousands of gallons. Small sumps can be built
in place or they can be precast and delivered to the site. Small precast
structures have the design advantage of lacking joints, a structural
component that can fail. As a result of their size, large sumps are
constructed in place and require joining of large blocks of concrete, each
poured and cured as a unit (monolith). These monoliths are connected by
joints. Figure 2-1 shows that various types of joints can be created to
join sump slabs with their walls as well as to join monolith wall sections.
The exhibit shows that a typical joint in a sump can consist of:
Bars of steel (rebar) that are used to reinforce the joint of the
monolith structures;
« Joint compounds (e.g., bonders and fillers) to help secure the
joint; and
Field-molded or preformed seals (e.g., waterstops, gaskets, or
compression seals) to make the joint water tight and to protect the
reinforcing steel from conditions that facilitate corrosion.
MAJOR MODES OF STRUCTURAL FAILURE
Cracks
Concrete failure can be caused by shear, compressive, and tensile
stresses in the concrete. These stresses usually result from structural
movement and/or forces applied to the structures. When these stresses
reach limits that the structure is unable to resist, cracks usually occur
-------
.- PLAN VIEW
KEYED VERTICAL WALL JOINT
RECESS FOR JOINT
COMPOUND
WATERSTOP
REINFORCING STEEL
X-SECTION
KEYED WALL/SLAB JOINT
WALL
WATERSTOP
AREA WHERE JOINT
'SEALER IS USED
SLAB
JOINT REINFORCING
"TIE-IN
REINFORCING STEEL
X-SECTION
OFFSET WALL/SLAB JOINT
WALL
WATERSTOP
AREA WHERE JOINT
SEALER 8/OR FILLER
IS USED
REINFORCING STEEL ^ SLAB
t
TYPES OF GENERAL WATERSTOP
CONFIGURATIONS
CONCRETE
x/:
JOINT
LABYRINTH RIBS TO ANCHOR
AND FORM LONG PATH SEAL,
OR DUMBBELL END TO
ANCHOR AND FORM CORK-IN-
BOTTLE SEAL.
Figure 2-1. Joints - Schematic Diagram
-------
in the concrete. The following are examples of factors that can cause such
stresses:
Structural overload;
i Differential settlement;
Inadequate bonding between piping imbedded in the concrete and the
concrete;
Inadequate construction joints;
Improper placement of backfill behind the structure;
Corrosion of the steel reinforcing. The corrosion process
generates chemicals (iron oxides and hydroxides) that have a
greater volume than the original metal, causing the structure to
shift and crack;
Temperature changes that cause expansion and contraction of the
concrete and subsequent cracking; and
Chemicals that come in contact with the structure that can result
in expansive reactions causing tensile stresses.
In addition to external forces, inappropriate design or construction
methods may cause structural failure. For example, insufficient cover over
the rebar, inadequate placement of construction joints, improper concrete
mixture and/or curing, lack of proper drainage behind the wall of the sump,
and design errors can contribute to loss of structural integrity.
If not repaired, even small cracks in the concrete can present a
problem because they often expand, allowing more liquid into the matrix of
the concrete and thereby promoting further concrete degradation. Thus,
appropriate and timely repairs of small cracks are required to prevent
leakage of substances out of the sump structure.
Possible concrete failures caused by shear, compressive, and tensile
forces usually can be identified by the appearance of structural cracks.
For minor stress failures, more detailed analysis of the structure is
required (see Section 3). Note that some structural cracks may be too
severe to repair, thus necessitating replacement of the sump.
Joint Failure
Another potential leakage point in concrete sumps occurs at
construction joints. Typical causes of joint failure include the
following:
Improper design (including designing an insufficient number of
joints);
-------
t Application of stresses that exceed the conditions for which the
joint was designed;
Improper preparation of joint surface inhibiting adhesion of the
joint material to the structure;
0 Use of poor or inappropriate joint material (e.g., filler or
waterstop); and
t Improper construction.
In general, joint failure usually is detected by a visual inspection
of the joint seal and the surrounding concrete. Appropriate and timely
repair of a failed joint is essential to preventing leakage from a sump.
Water stop failure is a special type of joint failure that can result
from a variety of causes, and is thus discussed in greater depth below.
Waterstops can be made of rigid or flexible materials such as polyvinyl
chloride (PVC), high density polyethylene (HOPE), low density polyethylene
(LDPE), Polypropylene (PP), Nylon (NYL), or various natural or synthetic or
rubber compounds. Waterstop failure can be caused by:
Excessive structural movement at the joint causing the waterstop to
rupture;
Poor concrete mixture causing honeycomb areas around the waterstop
(creating a poor surface for a seal, particularly with a rigid
waterstop);
Improper surface preparation preventing proper bonding to the
concrete;
Breaks or discontinuities in the waterstop resulting from poor
construction practices; and/or
Incompatibility of the waterstop material with the sump contents.
Defects in the waterstop are not always evident from visual
inspection. Some common signs that may be a result of a defective waterstop
are wetness of concrete at the joints and deterioration of the structure
adjacent to the waterstop. If these signs are present, but a thorough
investigation of the sump reveals no apparent defects in the concrete, the
integrity of the joints and waterstops should be questioned; and they
should be examined.
To prevent liquids from escaping from the sump, failed waterstops must
be repaired. The installation of a secondary waterstop and joint filler
are common methods of repair. If not repaired, a waterstop not only allows
flow of liquids through the structure, but can result in a reduction in the
structural strength of the sump. Joint repair is further discussed in
Section 3 of this report.
-------
HELPFUL REFERENCES
The following documents provide information on concrete structures,
causes-of concrete failure, ways to detect a failure, and problems that may
occur if faults are not repaired.
ACI 504R-90: Guide to Joint Sealants for Concrete Structures.
ACI SCM 21-89: Repairs of Concrete Structures -- Assessments.
Methods and Risks.
ACI 224.1R-89: Causes. Evaluation, and Repair of Cracks in
Concrete Structures.
McDonald, J. E., Repair of Waterstop Failures: Case Histories. U.S.
Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment
Station, Technical Report REMR-CS-4, 1986.
Stowe, R. J. and H. T. Thornton, Jr., Engineering Condition Survey
of Concrete in Service. U.S. Department of the Army, Corps of
Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, Technical Report
REMR-CS-1, 1984.
0 ACI 201.1R-68(84): Guide for Making a Condition Survey of Concrete
in Service.
0 ACI Compilation No. 5: Concrete Repair and Restoration. 1980.
10
-------
SECTION 3
CONDUCTING A SUMP INTEGRITY INVESTIGATION
INTRODUCTION
Owners and operators of existing sumps, which are used for treating or
storing hazardous wastes and do not have secondary containment, are
required by 40 CFR 264.191(a) and 265.191«{a) to determine that the sump is
capable of storing or treating hazardous waste without posing a threat of
release of hazardous waste to the environment. A written assessment of the
integrity of the sump must be kept on file at the facility. This assess-
ment must conclude that the sump is adequately designed and has sufficient
structural strength and compatibility with wastes being stored or treated
to ensure that it will not collapse, rupture, or fail. Furthermore, the
assessment must be reviewed and certified by an independent, qualified
Registered Professional Engineer. The assessment may be complicated by the
fact that many sumps are constructed so that only the interior surface can
be visually inspected. The following must be addressed by the assessment:
Design standards of the sump (including troughs and trenches
connected to the collection basin);
Hazardous characteristics of the wastes;
Existing corrosion protection measures;
Documented or estimated age of the sump; and
Results of a leak test, internal inspection, or other tank
integrity examination addressing cracks, leaks, corrosion, and
erosion.
Until secondary containment is installed, 40 CFR 264.193(i) and
265.193(i) require the sump to be leak-tested annually or the overall con-
dition to be assessed by an alternate procedure on an appropriate schedule.
The frequency of the assessment and procedure used must be adequate to
detect obvious cracks, leaks, and corrosion or erosion that may lead to
cracks or leaks. The material used to construct the sump, age of the sump,
type of corrosion or erosion protection used, rate of corrosion or erosion
observed during the previous inspection, and the characteristics of the
waste being stored or treated must all be considered in determining the
frequency of assessments. If the sump is permitted, a schedule should have
been developed during the permitting process.
11
-------
The purpose of this section is to provide sump owners and operators
guidance in conducting the required assessments. A two-phased approach is
presented. The first phase, or the basic investigation, evaluates the
general condition of the sump structure and identifies areas of suspected
deficiencies or problems. The determination of a need for a secondary
investigation, which includes test methods that are highly specialized,
time consuming, and/or costly, should be based on the results of the basic
investigation.
THE BASIC INVESTIGATION
The basic investigation should provide the owner or operator with
sufficient information to determine the integrity of the sump or determine
if additional testing is required. The steps involved in the basic
investigation include:
Planning the investigation;
Reviewing existing data;
Preparing the sump for inspection;
Performing a preliminary inspection, or
Conducting a sump tightness test; and
Preparing a report.
The steps presented in this document represent a logical progression
in completing the assessment. While the steps are recommended, they are
not required. Each of the steps is discussed below.
Planning the Investigation
The overall purpose of the investigation is to determine whether the
sump is leaking; unfit for use; or whether it will collapse, rupture, or
fail. Furthermore, the owner or operator must ensure that the investiga-
tion addresses all required considerations including documenting the design
standards and the age of the sump, assessing waste compatibility, and
evaluating existing corrosion protection. To make sure that all of these
other considerations are addressed, the scope and objective of the investi-
gation should be clearly established. To make the.best use of time and
resources, a plan for gathering documentation and the appropriate
procedures and techniques for cleaning, inspecting, and testing the sump
should be determined before beginning the investigation. The owner or
operator should plan to take the sump out of service for at least 7 days
for cleaning, inspecting, and testing.
Early in the planning process, the owner or operator should carefully
review qualifications and select personnel to conduct the operations
required by the investigation. Personnel should have knowledge of causes
of concrete failure and practical experience diagnosing concrete defects.
A list of individuals and firms who assess tank system integrity can be
found in Compilation of Persons Who Design. Test. Inspect, and Install
Storage Tank Systems. US EPA/530-SW-88-019, February 1988. The owner or
12
-------
operator must remember that the assessment cannot be certified by his own
engineer. The assessment must be reviewed and certified by an independent,
qualified Registered Professional Engineer.
Review Existing Data
A review of existing data regarding the sump will serve two purposes.
First, the assessment must address the considerations presented above
(i.e., document sump age, design, corrosion or erosion protection, and
waste compatibility); existing data should provide the owner or operator
with information necessary to complete the assessment. Second, a thorough
evaluation of concrete integrity in existing structures must consider all
aspects of design, construction, operation, and maintenance. Available
information, including design documents, as-built drawings, operation and
maintenance records, existing test reports, and records of waste composi-
tion can be reviewed for both purposes.
The written assessment must document the age of the sump if the infor-
mation is available. Note should be made that the owner or operator must
know the age of the sump to determine when secondary containment is
required. If the age of the sump cannot be documented, the age of the
facility should be documented. This may be determined through a review of
dated blueprints, contracts, and insurance forms.
Preparing the Sump for Inspection
Before the condition of all internal surfaces can be assessed, stored
wastes must be removed from the sump. It may be necessary to clean the
internal surfaces to remove waste residues, dirt, and weakened aggregate.
Cleaning also may be required to protect the inspector from exposure to
hazardous materials. Appropriate safety precautions for working with
hazardous materials should be observed during the cleaning process. Where
appropriate, safety precautions related to confined space entry should be
employed.
The owner or operator should be aware that waste and debris generated
by the clean-up process (e.g., sand, water, concrete), if considered to be
a mixture of a solid waste and hazardous waste, must be managed as a
hazardous waste unless:
The mixture includes a waste listed as hazardous in Subpart D of
Part 261 because of a characteristic (i.e., ignitability,
corrosivity, reactivity, toxicity) and the mixture no longer
exhibits the characteristic [see 40 CFR 261.3(a)(2) (1ii) and
(iv)]. For example, if a spent non-halogenated solvent (F003) is
managed in the sump, wastes and debris generated from sump cleaning
would not need to be managed as hazardous waste if they did not
exhibit the characteristic of ignitability. On the other hand,
wastes and debris generated from cleaning a sump managing a spent
halogenated solvent used in degreasing (F001), which is listed as a
toxic waste, must be managed as hazardous waste.
13
-------
The mixture no longer exhibits the characteristic that causes the
waste managed in the sump to be hazardous (see 40 CFR 261.3(d)(l)).
For example, wastes and debris generated from cleaning a sump manag
ing a waste exhibiting the toxicity characteristic for chromium
(D007) are not considered hazardous if testing (i.e., TCLP) demon-
strates that the chromium concentration in the sump cleaning waste
is below 5 mg/1.
A comprehensive reference for commonly-used cleaning methods is the
American Concrete Institute's A Guide to the Use of Waterproofing.
Dampproofing. Protective, and Decorative Barrier Systems for Concrete, ACI
515.IR-79, Section 3.4 - Surface Preparation. Methods that can be used to
clean concrete include:
Steam Cleaning--
Wastes can be removed from the sump surface through the use of steam.
Surfactants can be incorporated, as appropriate, to facilitate chemical
decomposition. An advantage of steam cleaning is that thermal decomposi-
tion or hydrolysis may occur, depending on the nature of the wastes managed
in the sump. However, if the steam is applied using a hand-held wand, the
operation is labor intensive; if the steam application is automated, the
operation requires costly, specialized equipment.
Scarification--
Scarification by a mechanical impacting device can be used to remove
thick overlays of dirt or weakened material. Grinding may be useful when
small areas are to be cleaned or when the cleaned surface must be smooth.
Advantages of scarification include: deeper penetration and removal of
waste residues than most surface removal techniques and suitability for
application to large as well as small areas.
Water blasting or sand blasting is usually necessary after scarifica-
tion to remove weakened aggregate, generating substantial quantities of
contaminated debris. This method also presents a potential explosion
hazard if pockets of combustible wastes are encountered. Finally, obstruc-
tions such as pipes or pumps in the sump can make scarification of some of
the concrete surfaces extremely difficult.
Blast Cleaning--
Blast or abrasive cleaning is an effective method to remove laitance,
dirt, efflorescence, and weak surface material. Three types of blast
cleaning procedures are: dry sandblasting, wet sandblasting, and high-
pressure water jetting.
High-pressure water jetting is a relatively-inexpensive, non-hazardous
surface cleaning technique that uses off-the-shelf equipment. Variations,
such as use of hot or cold water, solvents, and surfactants can be incorpo-
rated to meet site-specific needs. Because no solid abrasive is used,
14
-------
however, waste that has penetrated the surface layer may not be removed
completely. Another disadvantage to this method is the need to collect and
treat a significant volume of contaminated water.
Dry sandblasting has three disadvantages: generation of large amounts
of dust and debris, slowness, and the possibility of detonating pockets of
combustible contaminants. Wet sandblasting has an advantage over conven-
tional (dry) sandblasting, because the need for a dust collection system is
eliminated. However, wet sandblasting requires collection and treatment of
contaminated liquids.
Acid Etching--
This method uses a commercial grade hydrochloric acid solution that is
spread over the concrete surface by a stiff-bristle broom or brush. The
surface is then flushed with water. Prior to acid etching, the surface
should be examined to determine the necessity for pre-cleaning to remove
surface contaminants that acid etching will not remove, such as moderate
grease and oil.
An advantage of acid etching is that certain contaminants are decom-
posed or neutralized as they are removed from the surface. However, two
disadvantages include: hazards due to the acid and the necessity of
special application equipment. Because acid etching is less dependable
than mechanical abrading, it is only recommended where no alternative means
of cleaning are possible. If acid etching must be employed, it should be
performed by experienced applicators.
Chemical Cleaning--
This step may be necessary prior to blast cleaning or acid etching to
remove surface contaminants such as oil, grease, and dirt. Solutions of
caustic soda or trisodium phosphate may be used, as well as proprietary
detergents specially formulated for use on concrete. Such chemicals are
applied with vigorous scrubbing, followed by flushing with water to remove
both the detergent and contaminants. Solvents should not be used for this
purpose, because they tend to dissolve the material, spread the contamina-
tion over a larger area, and may carry the contaminants farther into the
wall.
i
Performing a Preliminary Inspection
The preliminary inspection discussed below is primarily a visual
inspection to assess the condition of the interior surfaces of the sump.
Limited testing, such as with a rebound hammer (ASTM C 805-85), also may be
conducted to assess the uniformity of the concrete to delineate zones or
regions of poor quality or deteriorated concrete. As noted above, all
appropriate safety precautions should be observed during the inspection.
The following is a summary of the basic procedures that can be
employed in a preliminary inspection:
15
-------
The alignment of the concrete elements should be checked, and the
sump structure should be assessed for signs of irregular foundation
settlement or deflection. Signs include bulges and low or high
areas in the sump walls or floor that are accompanied by cracking.
t All exposed concrete surfaces should be visually examined for evi-
dence of deterioration, which is defined as any harmful change in
the concrete's normal- mechanical, physical, or chemical properties
caused by separation of its components. Deteriorated areas should
be classified, measured, and located on a surface defect drawing or
sketch (see Figure 3-1 for an example surface defect drawing).
Surface deterioration classifications include: disintegration,
distortion, efflorescence, exudation, incrustation, pitting,
popout, erosion, scaling, peeling, spalling, stalactites, stalag-
mites, dusting, or corrosion.
All cracks should be investigated. If possible, the concrete
should be inspected for cracks immediately after removal of liquid,
because cracks tend to be larger while swollen with moisture.
Additionally, the contrast created by the darker, moist crack with
the quicker-drying uncracked concrete surface tends to make cracks
more visible. Stained cracks can be an indication of liquid seep-
age out of or into the sump. Rust-stained straight cracks can
indicate corrosion of reinforcing steel.
Cracked areas should be measured, classified, and located on the
surface defect drawing or sketch. Cracks should be classified by
direction, width, and depth:
- The following can be used to identify direction: longitudinal,
transverse, vertical, diagonal, and random.
Suggested width ranges include: fine (-less than 1 mm), medium
(between 1 and 2 mm), and wide (over 2 mm). Cracks that are 6
mm or more in width usually penetrate the entire wall.
- Crack types include pattern cracking, checking, hairline
cracking, and D-cracking.
Surfaces should be inspected for evidence of chemical attack
commonly due to sulfates, acids, and alkali-aggregate reaction.
Previously-repaired areas should be examined for integrity and
bonding with concrete.
Pipe penetrations should be checked closely, because they are
especially vulnerable to leaking.
Joints, adjacent concrete, and joint filler should be examined to
determine their condition.
16
-------
INLET
6"X6"AREA OF
CORROSION
i X 6 AREA OF
V DIAGONAL
\/CRACKS
(MEDIUM)
>
\
\
\
PUMP INLET PIPE -"
TO REMOVE CONTENTS
AREA OF
EROSION
2"X3' JOINT
'SPALL
2'X 3'AREA OF
RANDOM CRACKS
(FINE)
Figure 3-1. Example Sump Surface Defect Drawing*
* Problems with joints may be best shown by the inspector in a separate drawing.
17
-------
It is also important to inspect any surface coatings or linings, because
they serve as the first line of defense against leakage, while also
protecting the concrete. Many of the related inspection tools and methods
are sophisticated and require extensive training of the inspecting
technician; some are as simple as piercing the coating with a pen knife,
but even such methods require considerable prior experience on the part of
the inspector to be reliable. Procedures that can be used to inspect
coatings or linings include:
Coating thickness can be measured by a Tooke gauge, which makes a
precise angled cut through the coating. The cut is then examined
through a 50x magnifier. Because coatings have a permeation rate,
albeit slight, a minimum thickness must be maintained to ensure
effectiveness.
I Pinholes and cracks usually can be found visually with the aid of a
30x magnifier. If possible, the coating should be examined while
still wet, as well as dry, since cracks may shrink after drying.
It may be possible to use the Holiday test, which is commonly used
to check for tiny discontinuities (pinholes) in coatings on steel
tanks, to investigate coatings covering electrically-conductive
concretes. The test locates discontinuities through passage of an
electrical current to the tank where there is no resistant coating.
However, the test is normally used on metal tanks, and the high
voltages necessary to use it on concrete may cause damage to the
coating. More information on the Holiday test and appropriate
safety precautions can be found in the National Association of
Corrosion Engineers' publication RP-01-88 Discontinuity (Holiday)
Testing of Protective Coatings.
The coating should be inspected for signs indicating loss of
adhesion to the concrete. Some of the signs are visible, such as
wrinkling. Most of the reliable adhesion tests are destructive.
On hard coatings, however, a steel pipe rolled across the surface
will usually reveal areas of poor adhesion by a change in sound.
The coating should be inspected for signs of contamination.
Visible signs that the coating is contaminated include: swelling
or blistering, yielding a "fish eye" effect; softening; and
crinkling of the surface, yielding an "alligator" effect. Symptoms
that do not necessarily mean the coating is failing include
discoloration or "bleaching," and etching of the surface.
Photographs of the coating should be taken and saved for comparison
with photographs from future inspections.
Conduct a Sumo Tightness Test
Because sumps, including connecting troughs, are generally configured
as open-topped tanks, they are not amenable to precision leak testing
18
-------
techniques applied to enclosed under-ground storage tank systems. Two
tests, however, that may be successfully applied to sumps are the static
head test and tracer tests. Each is discussed below.
Static Head Test
The static head test is a volumetric leak test whereby the sump is
filled with water and checked for changes in volume by measuring the drop
in water level over time. This method can be applied to most enterable
sumps; however, sumps containing equipment that may be damaged by water
cannot be leak tested using this method. The problem with this test,
however, is that the precision of the test varies inversely with the
exposed surface area of the sump contents. This means that the test may
last several days to detect a small leak in a large sump.
The following steps present the recommended approach for conducting
the static head test. Steps 1 through 5 address test setup and equilibra-
tion. The remaining steps address the actual test period. Figure 3-2
illustrates a typical setup. The recommended steps are:
1. Isolate the sump to prevent any liquids from entering or leaving
during the test period. Attach a steel rule or other appropriate
depth gauge to the side of the sump to monitor depth throughout the
test period.
2. Fill the sump with water, record the water level from the gauge,
measure the dimensions, and calculate the exposed surface area of
the sump contents.
3. Cover openings with plastic sheeting, supported on lumber (if neces
sary) to maintain a saturated atmosphere over the sump and prevent
evaporative water loss. The plastic sheeting should be sloped (if
necessary) to shed rain and prevent pooling.
4. Install a small chamber (approximately 1 foot in diameter x 2 feet
in length) for use as a stilling well and calibration chamber
(Figure 3-2). The chamber should be placed at a location in the
sump that will provide the most accurate measurement of a drop in
water level. The chamber should not be completely submerged so
that its contents will remain isolated from the sump contents. The
level inside the chamber should be allowed to equilibrate with the
level of the sump contents through an open stopcock valve located
below the water line.
5. Install a device in the stilling well/calibration chamber to
measure water level changes. A sensitive, float-activated sensor,
pressure transducer, or other water level sensor-should be used
that can detect small changes in head and distinguish a leak from
background "noise." However in small sumps, the depth gauge may be
adequate to determine if the sump is leaking. See Appendix F for
sources of sensitive sensors.
19
-------
6. Monitor the water level and temperature for at least
24 hours to verify that the system has equilibrated
(i.e., absorption by the concrete pores and cracks
has ceased).
7. Calibrate the equipment as follows or follow the
manufacturer's recommendations:
o Close the stopcock valve on the calibration chamber
to isolate it from the sump.
o Start and zero the recording equipment, and note
the level on the depth gauge.
o Place a known volume in the calibration chamber
(metal calibration slug or known volume of water)
and record the rise in water level.
o Calculate the predicted rise in water level and use
that value to calibrate the equipment (see Table
3-1 for a sample calculation).
o Repeat the calibration process until 3 consecutive
readings are within 10 percent of one another.
20
-------
8. Open the calibration chamber stopcock to allow free water
movement between the sump and the chamber. Record the
water level and temperature at the start of the test and
periodically throughout the test period. The monitoring
period should include at least l diurnal cycle (24 hours)
to record the effect of temperature fluctuations. The
total length of the test should be sufficient to assure
the certifying engineer of the sump's condition. It may
be necessary to extend the test period several days if a
leak is suspected on the basis of the initial test period
(especially in sumps with a large surface area). A
continuously-recording device provides the most useful
data record for analysis.
9. Calculate the leak rate in gallons per hour (see Table
3-2 for sample calculations). For example, a water level
drop of 1 mm per hour from a 2 m by 2 m sump represents a
loss of 400 cc (0.106 gallons) per hour.
Tracer Tests--
Leak testing also can be accomplished by mixing a tracer
(i.e., a distinctive chemical substance) with water in the sump.
If the sump leaks, the water carries the tracer which then
disperses into the surrounding soil.
Before beginning the test, the backfill around the sump
should be checked for constituents than could interfere with
detection of the tracer. The tracer should be applied at a
concentration that is detectable at least
21
-------
TABLE 3-1. SAMPLE CALIBRATION CALCULATIONS
Diameter of calibration chamber
R
Area
Area
1 cu. cm
1.0 ml
25.3 cm
Radius (cm)
(R*R)*Pi
502.725510 sq. cm
2.6417E-04 gallons
1.0000280 cu. cm
Measured
Change
In Depth
(mm)
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.006
0.007
0.008
0.009
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
Vol ume
(cu. cm)
0.05027255
0.10054510
0.15081765
0.20109020
0.25136275
0.30163530
0.35190785
0.40218040
0.45245295
0.50272551
1.00545102
1.50817653
2.01090204
2.51362755
3.01635306
3.51907857
4.02180408
4.52452959
5.02725510
10.0545102
15.0817653
20.1090204
25.1362755
30.1635306
35.1907857
40.2180408
45.2452959
Volume
(gal)
1.3281E-05
2.6561E-05
3.9842E-05
5.3122E-05
6.6403E-05
7.9684E-05
9.2964E-05
1.0624E-04
1.1953E-04
1.3281E-04
2.6561E-04
3.9842E-04
5.3122E-04
6.6403E-04
7.9684E-04
9.2964E-04
1.0624E-03
1.1953E-03
1.3281E-03
2.6561E-03
3.9842E-03
5.3122E-03
6.6403E-03
7.9684E-03
9.2964E-03
1.0624E-02
1.1953E-02
(continued)
22
-------
TABLE 3-1. (continued)
Measured
Change
In Depth
(mm)
1.00
0.01989
2.00
3.00
Volume
(cu. cm)
50.2725510
1.000028 *
100.545102
150.817653
Volume
(gal)
1.3281E-02
2.5000E-02 *
2.6561E-02
3.9842E-02
(Cal . slug)
3.76489
189.270626 *
Exact volumes of calibration slug.
5.0000E-02 * (Cal. slug)
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
10.00
201.090204
251.362755
301.635306
351.907857
402.180408
452.452959
502.725510
5.3122E-02
6.6403E-02
7.9684E-02
9.2964E-02
1.0624E-01
1.1953E-01
1.3281E-01
23
-------
TABLE 3-2. FORMULAS FOR CONVERTING MEASURED DEPTH CHANGE
TO LEAK RATE IN GALLONS PER HOUR
For a RECTANGULAR OR SQUARE SUMP
Leak Rate (gals./hour) = (df - d^) x L x H x CF
Where cL = Final depth in inches, feet, or millimeters
d. = Initial depth in inches, feet, or millimeters
L = Length (inside) of sump in feet*
W = Width (inside) of sump in feet*
CF** = 0.00866 if (df - d.) is in inches
= 0.104 if (df - d.) is in feet
= 0.000341 if (df - d^) is in millimeters
For a ROUND SUMP
Leak Rate (gals./hour) - (df - d^ x D2 x CF divided by 4
Where D = Diameter (inside) of sump in feet*
(d, - d.) and CF are same as for rectangular sump
* If L and W (or D for round sumps) are given in meters instead of feet,
multiply leak rate calculated from these formulas by 10.8.
** The conversion factors (CF's) are based on a 72-hour test period (time
between initial and final depth measurements). If a different period
was used, divide the calculated leak rate by the correct number of
hours, then multiply by 72 to obtain the corrected leak rate.
If the leak rate in metric units is desired, multiply the leak rate
calculated in gallons per hours by 3.79 to get leak rate in liters per
hour.
24
-------
one order of magnitude above the background concentration should a leak be
present. The type of tracer that is selected should be distinct from the
wastes managed in the sump, so that it may be detected should a leak have
already occurred.
If the sump is located at or below the ground water level, ground
water monitoring is used to detect the presence of the tracer outside the
sump (Figure 3-3) . If the sump is located above the water table, then
monitoring of the vadose zone water can be conducted through the use of
suction lysimeters or shallow ground water monitoring wells.
If the tracer is not detected through monitoring, the sump can be
considered to be tight. Sufficient time, however, must be allowed for the
tracer to diffuse through the medium and be detected for tracer monitoring
to be successful. The waiting time will vary depending on the type of
tracer used and the leak rate.
If the sump system can be sealed, volatile tracers may be used and
leaks detected using soil vapor monitoring techniques. Without a seal, a
volatile tracer could evaporate from the test liquid (water) before it has
time to "leak" to the soil. It may be possible to prevent evaporation of
the tracer by covering the sump with a gas impermeable membrane and
"sealing" it at the edges (e.g., with sand bags as weights). Vapor
monitoring wells could be constructed in a manner similar to ground-water
monitoring wells (Figure 3-3). Vapors can rise unassisted through the
wells or can be withdrawn by hand-operated or mechanical pumps. Collected
samples can be sent to a lab for analysis or can be analyzed on site using
portable equipment.
Monitoring for volatile tracers also can be conducted by driving a
probe into the ground. A tool known as a "punch probe" or "bar punch" can
be used to quickly punch a small-diameter hole 125 to 150 cm deep into the
soil surrounding the sump. A probe or tube is then immediately dropped
into the hole and the hole is sealed at the top with soil or clay. Vapors
are drawn through the tube and sampled just as from a cased monitoring
well.
Two primary advantages to using a probe rather than a monitoring well
are that locations can be sampled quickly and at a lower cost. The disad-
vantages include: ability to reach only a limited depth, soils that are
too firm or rocky are hard to penetrate, very loose soils will collapse in
the hole before probe insertion, and resulting samples sizes are small.
Punches will not pierce cement concrete, but can pierce asphaltic concrete.
Preparing a Report
The investigation should be concluded with a formal report clearly
stating the condition of the sump. Evidence of structural failure and any
existing or potential problems in its surrounding site, foundation, electn
cal features, mechanical features, or hydraulic features should be noted
and explained. The report should include a detailed site plan, accurate
25
-------
WEIGHT TO _
SEAL PLASTIC )
CONCRETE
SUMP WALL'
-GROUND WATER
MONITORING
WELL
PLASTIC COVER
WATER CONTAINING
TRACER
PUMP
VAPORS MOVE THROUGH SOIL
DISSOLVED NON-VOLATILE
TRACER MOVES THROUGH
GROUND WATER
VAPOR
MONITORING
"WELL OR
TUBE
GROUND WATER
LEVEL
Figure 3-3. Tracer Test in an Open Sump
26
-------
plan and section drawings or sketches of the sump and foundation, and
references to all engineering design and construction inspection data
reviewed. Waste analysis and compatability determinations also should be
included. In addition, the report should summarize the inspection and any
testing performed. The visual inspection should be documented with photo-
graphs and surface defect drawings or sketches locating and defining
damaged, deteriorated, or cracked concrete. When appropriate, recommenda-
tions for conventional or state-of-the-art repairs should be given.
While an independent Registered Professional Engineer is not required
to perform the visual inspection or conduct the leak test, he is required
to review documentation and certify, based on knowledge and belief, that
the sump is sound. Therefore, the information contained in the final
report must be sufficiently detailed to provide a basis for this judgment.
THE SECONDARY INVESTIGATION
To certify the sump as sound, it may be necessary to conduct a
detailed secondary investigation to supplement the results of the basic
investigation. Non-destructive techniques, such as the acoustic pulse-echo,
may be used to further examine cracks, voids, and concrete thickness. If
the results of the non-destructive tests are inconclusive, it may be neces-
sary to have a petrographic analysis performed on concrete samples by a
laboratory. Non-destructive tests, sampling, and laboratory analysis are
further discussed below.
Non-Destructive Testing
A number of common techniques are available for non-destructively test
ing existing concrete structures for discontinuities such as cracks or
voids. A sump owner or operator should be aware, however, that several
methods are clearly not suited for sumps because of required test condi-
tions or equipment constraints. For example, infrared thermographic and
X-ray techniques are proven examination methods; but the thermographic
technique requires incident sunlight; and X-ray tests require access to
both sides of the concrete structure.
Several tests have potential for use'in sumps. Although the suitabil-
ity of these methods has been well-documented for use on large concrete
structures such as roads and dams, most currently require further develop-
mental work before they can be routinely, and cost-effectively, applied to
concrete sumps. Suitable test methods include:
Acoustic Pulse-Echo--
A mechanical pulse is generated by impact or electronically on one
face of the concrete slab. The signal passes through the slab, reflects
from the back face of the slab, and is received by a transducer at the
front face. If the concrete is solid, the oscilloscope screen displays two
signals; one corresponding to the original impact, and the other for the
27
-------
reflected pulse. Intermediate signals indicate the presence of internal
discontinuities (e.g., cracks). If the thickness of the slab is known, the
pulse velocity can be determined. Generally, the higher the pulse
velocity, the higher the quality of the concrete.
Acoustic pulse-echo still requires developmental work before it can be
routinely applied to concrete slabs and walls. For example, pulses
generated within the sonic range, such as those produced by a Schmidt
hammer, are not resolvable in concrete less than several feet thick. Even
in the ultrasonic range, which is more suited to thin concrete sections,
the signal-to-noise ratio must be reduced to readily detect thin cracks and
f1aws.
Impact Echo--
The impact-echo method (API SP-112) is a modified version of the
pulse-echo technique. A spring-loaded impactor imparts compression and
shear waves to the concrete. The reflected waves are monitored by a
transducer. Although developed recently, the method is considered viable
for routine use on concrete slabs.
Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity--
A precursor of the acoustic pulse-echo technique is the ultrasonic
pulse velocity method (ASTM C 597-83). It differs from the acoustic
pulse-echo technique in that it is designed to be applied in situations
where both sides many of the concrete structure are accessible --a
situation that is not common in sumps. It can be applied on a single side,
but with limited precision. If used by an expert, however, some useful
data on flaws may be obtained. The advantage of this technique is that it
is currently available in off-the-shelf, portable instruments.
Ultrasonic Spectroscopy
This technique is still in experimental stages, but it is based on the
principle that propagation of elastic waves in concrete will result in scat
tering, mode conversion, and dispersion due to inclusions, boundaries, and
inhomogeneities of materials. It may prove feasible for determining the
size of existing cracks.
Radar--
Current technology uses a pulse of low-power radio frequency energy
that is directed into the concrete. When an interface (such as a
pavement/base interface) is encountered, a portion of the energy is
reflected back to an antenna. The reflected energy is converted to a
visual form on an oscilloscope or strip chart for interpretation; special
attention must be given to data interpretation as it can be easily misin-
terpreted. This technique can be applied from a single side of a structure
and is capable of detecting microcracks. Low-power, high-resolution radar
has been used successfully to detect deterioration in large structures;
28
-------
however, future development of smaller, portable instruments will be
necessary to make it suitable for use in sumps.
Gamma Radiometry--
This method incorporates a Geiger or scintillation counter to measure
the backscatter of gamma radiation from a concentrated source (ASTM C
1040-85). It is a useful and relatively simple means to determine varia-
tions in density within the concrete. The method can be used on sump sur-
faces, because only one side of the concrete structure being tested needs
to be accessible. Gamma radiometry, however, does not yield information
regarding the cause of the density variation; which may be due to cracks,
less dense aggregate, trapped moisture, or other irregularities. This test
should be viewed as a preliminary screening tool; further investigation
using other techniques will be necessary.
Core Sampling
If non-destructive tests are inconclusive, especially in cases where a
leak is suspected, it may be necessary to analyze samples of the concrete
in a laboratory. Due to the associated cost and destructive nature of the
sampling process (i.e., coring), this practice is not recommended for rou-
tine assessment of sumps. This discussion is intended to provide the
reader with a broad overview of the process for obtaining concrete samples.
For further information, the reader is referred to Standard Test Method for
Obtaining and Testing Drilled Cores and Sawed Beams of Concrete (ASTM C
42-87), and Standard Practice for Examination and Sampling of Hardened
Concrete in Constructions (ASTM C 823-83).
Concrete slabs and walls are typically sampled by removing core speci-
mens with a rotary drill. In general, the number of samples taken must be
sufficient to be representative of the concrete structure, but also will be
dependent upon the scope of the laboratory testing program. Two types of
core samples can be taken: (1) those that are intended to represent the
variability of the concrete, and (2) those that are intended to display a
specific feature of interest. Samples of specific features, such as
isolated spalls or popouts, should include representative examples of the
feature as well as the underlying and adjacent concrete. Development of a
sampling plan is discussed further ,in ASTM C 823-83.
The core sample should be taken perpendicular to the concrete surface
and should include the exposed surface, near-surface concrete, and concrete
at depth. For concrete slabs or walls less than 1 foot thick, ASTM C
823-83 recommends that the sample extend through the entire depth of the
concrete. If the concrete is greater than 1 foot thick, a minimum core
depth of 1 foot is recommended. Deeper drilling, however, may be necessary
to determine the extent of cracking, condition of joints, extent of any
cement-aggregate reactions, condition of concrete in contact with subgrade
material, and variability of the concrete.
29
-------
If the core extends through the depth of the concrete, a soil sample
may be taken to test for the presence of wastes managed In the sump.
Various equipment is available for the collection of soil samples. Two
standard tools that are suitable for soil sampling under these circum-
stances are the soil probe and the soil auger. Once collected, the soil
sample should be placed in a container that is compatible with the analyte
class of interest and shipped to a qualified laboratory for analysis.
After sampling has been completed, the cored areas will require
repair. Even though core sampling is destructive, the resulting holes can
be repaired to be more leak resistant than the existing concrete. Methods
of concrete repair are discussed in Section 4.
Laboratory Investigation
As discussed earlier, some qualitative information can be obtained by
visually examining the concrete surface, however, the most useful data for
determining sump soundness comes from a qualified petrographer examining
sections of core samples brought into the laboratory. For further informa-
tion on petrographer qualifications, apparatus used in the examination,
specimen preparation, and sample examination, the reader is referred to the
Standard Practice for Petrographic Examination of Hardened Concrete (ASTM C
856-83). The purpose of this discussion is to provide a sump owner or
operator with an overview of the useful information that can be obtained
from a laboratory investigation.
A petrographic examination of a concrete sample can provide the
following general information:
Condition of the concrete;
t Causes of inferior quality, distress, or deterioration;
Probable future performance;
Whether the concrete was constructed as specified;
Description of the cement matrix, including the kind of hydraulic
binder used, degree of hydration, degree of carbonation, unsound-
ness of the cement, presence of a mineral admixture, nature o'f the
hydration products, adequacy of curing, and unusually high water/
cement ratio of the paste;
Determination of presence and effects of alkali-silica, alkali-
carbonate, or cement-aggregate reactions or reactions between.
contaminants and the matrix;
t Attack by sulfate or other chemicals;
Harmful effects of freezing or thawing;
30
-------
t Safety of the structure with respect to present or proposed use;
Damage due to fire;
0 Performance of the coarse or fine aggregate or determination of
aggregate composition;
Factors that caused a given concrete structure to serve satisfac-
torily in its environment; and
Presence and nature of surface treatments.
Though a complete petrographic examination is capable of providing all
of the above mentioned information, not all of it is necessary to determine
sump soundness. The owner or operator should consult with an experienced
petrographer to determine the scope of the examination and the kind of
information needed. At a minimum, however, the core sample should be
examined for the following:
Condition of the aggregate,
Pronounced cement-aggregate reactions.
Deterioration of aggregate particles in place,
Denseness of cement paste,
Homogeneity of the concrete,
Depth and extent of carbonation,
Occurrence and distribution of fractures,
Characteristics and distribution of voids, and
Presence of contaminating substances.
If soil samples were taken concurrently with concrete cores, they can
be analyzed to determine if wastes managed in the sump are present in
surrounding soils, indicating leakage from the sump. The appropriate
technique and level of detection that will be used to analyze the samples
will be dependent upon the nature of the wastes and their behavior in the
environment (e.g., degradation). All testing, however, should be in
accordance with EPA approved test methods found in SW-846, Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste. (3rd edition). The owner or operator should
consult with a qualified laboratory to determine the appropriate analytical
procedures and test parameters.
31
-------
SECTION 4
METHODS OF CONCRETE REPAIR
INTRODUCTION
As discussed in Section 2, stress-induced cracks and joint failure are
two common reasons for sump failure. To prevent hazardous wastes from
being released into the environment, an owner or operator may find it
necessary to initiate repairs on cracks or failed joints. Furthermore, 40
CFR 264.15(c) and 265.15(c) require an owner or operator to remedy any
deterioration or malfunction identified in any hazardous waste management
unit and CFR 264.196 and 265.196 sets forth what the owner/operator is to
do in response to leaks or spills and disposition of leaking or unfit-
for-use tank systems. The purpose of this section is to provide a brief
overview of methods available to repair cracks and failed joints in
concrete sumps.
CRACKS
Cracks occur when a concrete structure is unable to withstand stresses
such as differential settlement, structural overload, and temperature
changes. If cracks are not too severe, it is possible to initiate repairs
to prevent leakage of wastes out of the sump structure. If they are not
repaired, however, cracks can expand and continue to deteriorate the struc-
tural integrity of the sump. As cracks expand and allow more liquid into
the matrix of the concrete, deterioration can be accelerated.
For repairs to be successful, however, the cause of the crack must
first be identified or the repaired area may experience the same type of
failure. As discussed in Section 3, several methods can be1 used to
determine if cracking is caused by structural movement or due to other
factors such as chemical attack or inferior quality. These methods
include:
0 Monitoring existing cracks for movement,
Core sampling, and
Petrographic analysis of concrete samples.
Once the cause of the crack failure is known, the concrete can be
repaired properly. For example, resin-based epoxies can be used to "weld"
the cracked area and restore structural strength and integrity to the con-
crete structure. Because epoxies do not allow flexibility in the repaired
32
-------
area, their use should be limited to non-moving cracks such as those caused
by shrinkage during the curing process.
If the sump is subject to movement, however, a compound containing
polyurethane is more appropriate for repairs. When properly used, this
type of repair effectively stops movement of liquid through cracks while
allowing some movement and flexibility in the concrete structure.
Structural strength is not restored to the concrete with this type of
repair.
JOINT FAILURE
Sump failure also can be attributed to joint failure. As discussed in
Section 2, joint failure can be caused by improper sump design, stress,
improper joint preparation, use of poor or inappropriate joint material,
and improper construction. A visual inspection of the joint filler and the
surrounding concrete is generally sufficient to determine if the joint has
failed. Deteriorated joint filler, honeycomb concrete surrounding the
waterstop, and moisture accumulation in the joint of a dry sump are some
suspect conditions. As with cracks, failed joints should be repaired to
restore structural integrity to the sump and prevent wastes from entering
the environment. Methods of repair must be specific to the cause of
failure to avoid a recurrence.
METHODS OF CONCRETE REPAIR
A number of techniques can be used to repair joints and cracks in con-
crete. Nine methods that may be used for repairing concrete sumps are:
Grouting
Grout is a commonly used material for concrete repair. A chemical
grout can be used to repair cracks as small as 0.002 inches while Portland
cement grout can be used for wide cracks. Non-shrinking grout can be used
to repair honeycombed or defective concrete after removal of the damaged
area. Several other grouts, including chemical, epoxy, cement-based, and
polymer grouts, are available to meet wide-ranging concrete repair needs.
Patching
Patching is a commonly-used method to replace loose, spalled, or
crumbled concrete with new material. Portland cement mortar/concrete
(PCC), polymer- and epoxy-modified PCC, and fiber-reinforced materials can
be used for patching. Because surface deterioration is generally
symptomatic of underlying structural problems, patching is effective only
if structural repairs are initiated. For example, spalled areas on an
unlined concrete unit should not be repaired prior to investigation into
its cause. Spall ing can be an indicator of a leak that is causing the
concrete to deteriorate.
33
-------
Joint Repairing
Joint failures can involve various structural components such as the
waterstop, filler, and concrete surrounding the joint. The method of joint
repair is dependent upon the structural components involved and the mode of
failure. Generally speaking, a joint repair may require removal of filler
material, inspection of the waterstop and surrounding concrete, repair of
the concrete, replacement of the waterstop (possibly a different type), and
resealing of the joint with appropriate filler material. Common techniques
of joint repair include poured-in-place seals and pre-formed seals.
Joint failure resulting from movement along the joint may require use
of a flexible, elastomeric seal and a joint device. A joint device is a
mechanism that allows for controlled movement along joints. For example, a
joint device may consist of a system of dowels that span the joint,
providing limited flexibility where bi-directional movement is anticipated.
Such a system allows movement while preventing structural damage to the
sump.
Strengthening
Strengthening the structure is a means to address structural overload
that can be caused by excessive tensile, compressive, and shear stresses.
Common methods used for strengthening structures include post-tensioning,
tie-down, bracing, and grouting. Depending on the situation, strengthening
methods can become quite complicated.
EPOXY Injection
Narrow and extremely fine cracks, down to 0.05mm (0.002 inches) in
width, can be repaired through epoxy injection techniques. A specially-
formulated, low-viscosity epoxy is used in this process. Because the epoxy
material does not allow structural movement in the repaired area, use is
limited to dormant cracks such as those that develop during the concrete
curing process.
Drilling and Plugging
Drilling and plugging is a repair method in which a hole is drilled
the length of the crack and is subsequently filled with 'grout or resilient
material. The plugging material used is dependent upon the objective of
the repairs. To use this method of repair, the crack must be accessible at
one end and must extend in a fairly straight line.
Flexible Sealing
Active cracks can be repaired with a flexible seal that will allow
some movement of the concrete structure. The crack must first be routed
and the surface properly prepared. Once this has been accomplished, the
crack is filled with a flexible sealant.
34
-------
Drypackinq
Drypacking is a repair method where a low-water-content mortar is used
to produce a connection with the existing concrete structure. For a
successful repair, the use of drypack is limited to narrow, dormant cracks.
Because the drypacking material has a low water/cement ratio, shrinkage is
not a problem.
Overlaying
Concrete overlays are sometimes used to repair concrete surfaces that
contain numerous fine cracks. This method is not recommended for active
cracks. Site conditions must be considered when choosing an overlay
material.
HELPFUL REFERENCES
A list of member concrete repair specialty firms can be obtained from
the International Association of Concrete Repair Specialists (IACRS),
Dulles International Airport, P.O. Box 17402, Washington, D.C. 20041. The
following documents provide further information on concrete repair methods:
American Concrete Institute, ACI 224.IR-84, Causes. Evaluation, and
Repair of Cracks in Concrete Structures. Detroit, MI, 1984.
American Concrete Institute, ACI 504R-90, Guide to Sealing Joints
in Concrete Structures. Detroit, MI, 1990.
t American Concrete Institute, ACI Compilation No. 5, Concrete Repair
and Restoration. Detroit, MI 1980.
American Concrete Institute Committee 311, ACI Publication SP-2,
ACI Manual of Concrete Inspection. Seventh Ed., Detroit, MI, 1988.
0 American Water Works Association, ANSI/AWWA D110-86, AWWA Standard
for Wire-Wound Circular Prestressed-Concrete Water Tanks. Denver,
CO, 1987.
t
McDonald, J.E., Repair of Waterstoo Failures: Case Histories.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Technical Report REMR-CS-4,
Vicksburg, MS, 1986.
35
-------
SECTION 5
COATINGS FOR CONCRETE STRUCTURES
INTRODUCTION
As discussed earlier in this document, 40 CFR 264.191, 264.192,
265.191, and 265.192 require that new and existing sumps be adequately
designed and have sufficient structural strength and compatibility with the
wastes being stored or treated to ensure that they will not collapse,
rupture, or fail. To prevent releases to the environment, 40 CFR 264.193
and 265.193 require installation of secondary containment. Secondary
containment systems are required to be designed, installed, and operated to
prevent any migration of wastes or accumulated liquid to soil, ground
water, or surface water.
To meet the intent of the above requirements, an owner or operator
must apply a protective coating or liner to a concrete sump that is used to
manage wastes or used to provide secondary containment. First, protective
coatings or barriers can prevent concrete deterioration, which can poten-
tially lead to sump failure. Second, because unprotected concrete is con-
sidered permeable to liquids, a coating or barrier is necessary to prevent
releases of hazardous wastes or constituents into the environment. To be
effective, the appropriate coating or barrier must be compatible with the
waste to be managed in the sump.
The purpose of this section is to provide an overview of the basic
properties of coatings, discuss the factors influencing selection of an
appropriate coating, and describe coating installation. A more detailed
evaluation of coatings is provided in Appendix B.
COATINGS
Four types of coatings, or barrier systems, are generally applied to
concrete: waterproofing systems, dampproofing systems, protective systems,
and decorative paint. Each of these systems is thoroughly reviewed in the
American Concrete Institute's (ACI) publication: A Guide to the Use of
Waterproofing. DampproofinQ. Protective, and Decorative Barrier Systems for
Concrete (ACI 515.IR-79). Because dampproofing and decorative paint are of
little use in enhancing waste compatibility or preventing releases to the
environment, they will not be discussed further in this document. This
section will focus on protective and waterproofing coatings that are
suitable for use on concrete sumps.
36
-------
,
^t
UJ
Q^
LU
1
2
1 1 1
UJ
C5
1
GO
z:
UJ
GO
to
oi
a:
ce
CO
LU
0
LU
O
C£.
O_
,_|
1
LO
LU
_J
m
H~
4-*
L.
V
»* 01
O co
M **-
VI
ID t-
Ol
O
3 C
U
X W
0)
4>-> 4-*
O «
C X
CO
4-»
3 0)
O ft)
. 4-J
a. o
x u
H- a.
1
V)
>,
on
01
<5
m
01
o
Q.
*~
01
Ol
c ae
S"~ in
c
"io o
4J *-
O JC
t H-
o c
>,, g
o o
L. M- t.
(11 E
> 01 >
01 -C C
CO U LU
Tt
1
(rt *"*.
4-1 OJ
r N
«« ai
vi a)
c
o i1
1 tj
01 L.
-O ia
Ol
4-1 OJ
in L.
e
^ OJ
1 3
o
C Q. 01
O X U
~ 01 C
U 01 4J
01 U VI
O T3 VI
L. 01 01
a. Q£ U
1 l
01
4-1
0
L. -O
U 01
IO 4J
J= iO
4J C
o
JC U
4-1
E O
c u f>
10 0 .
J= 10 0
4-1 a.
01 O
I- >, 0
3 X
^ o u
i a.
O 01 *
CL >
L.
- 01 O
C 10
|Q IO >
L. r- 01
>> C
4-1 VI 01
3 >> U
-a x >,
O 4J
c fl -
1 U
> , 01
"o ^ "§
a.
oi at
t_ V)
Q. -.3
1 l
1 U
r 4-*
O
O.r
K»
- O
X 0
X
01 X
o
CL
U 0)
01
J3 U
3 4-»
a 'fl
Oi O
4-1 U
u
- 01 01
4J C C
^ j2 ^g
£ 4- 4^
O- « Ol
₯1 t. t_
< 3 3
1
0> V)
(J
4-1 ^~
C «3
0
u en
ot -C
4->
01 «
1- C
(j o
c -
O 4J
U 3
f
U W
O 13
a.
i
^~
CJ
J3
U
c
o
en
c
o
c
CL
o
VI 1
"O tf>
V)
a o *>
c « u
v i-
c 4J a.
0 3
« -D O
U **-
C
U 3 *
»*- V) X
O t-
4-1 X fl
01 01 "O
u
O 4-1
C C r
O 01 TJ W
4-» C
OJ U .C Q-
' 4J 01 O
o 4-» en
u c c c
Q_ ._ ,^
I
T3
Ol U
^Z ?L
o
C vi
t.
ot
4-* V)
V) r
0) TI
X
as
o!
01
^- VI
3
O
H- C
"O E
c 3 -n
VI IO
J3 VI
X C U
O iO
a.
01 -
01 VI
-a c
01 «3 >,
i 4-1 .
*- 0) 10
14-1-3
1 3 VI
-a >. a
C i
to Cu-'-
^
1 ^
CO
o
4-1 O
4J
csi en
0)
10
5
e
01
C
L. C
TD E VI
o
W 01 "~
i- 4-1 0
O 3 IQ V>
O 01
, 0
l-'° c^
T3 O IO J^
IQ L. 'io
01 O
vi u a*
.* 3 C
c vi en o
10 O L.
4J O. X 4->
X O VI
01 01
4-1 01 -
ai en ja vi
1-3 C
O O in o
Si"
0 X 3
4-» Q.^*-
O O V)
0)0-
o cn'fl *
t- c i- TJ
a. oi wi
i
Ol
V) 4-*
I"
o
a .»
oi a.
u
u ~o
O 01
>4- M
C
lj -^
U 4->
1 VI
t/1 r
Q Q.
'at -
4-*
X 0)
X JZ
0 V,
0) 01
Q O)
01 U
u a.
U 0
O 01
4- C
c
01 0)
U L.
l 3
vi U
(A I
c ~ tn
^ VI c
u L. vi a
3 o) *a -*-
E U 3
VI IQ i
j^ a
C 4-1 01 V)
IQ C 4J
4-1 01 3 4-1
4-1 ^O VI
01 S
u. c u -a
O 01 01 C
C 4^ 4-1 <0
O C 10
U * 3B K
VI
U O 4-1 -
01
O 3 I- ^
i ° M *~
t
2
c
!
a.
no
j=
4-1
a
01
>o
o
u
a.
o
1 X
4-> X
V) O
x a.
* v» 0)
V)
SX *D
X 01
4J O r-
X 0) ^
V) U-
D C
Ol 01 3
4-* f~-
~
i e
CO O
CM o in
4-1 CM
o
4-1 CM U
o^ 1!
CM « O
01
t-
01
01
a tn
51
t- 4W
4-> «a
S-
U 4
§1
u u
O "c
t. at
u- >
oi 'o
4-» M
01 -**.
t- "O
o
c u
o
O
cz
ai
o
-Q
Tj
IO
§
t.
<4-
0)
u
U V)
§ §
U -
4-1
** u
a i
U i
01 u
c -~
2 i
-a -c
C 01
10 C
3 M
M- 3
Q Ji
01 o
U
U U
O -Q
I4_
c *-
o
4) O
1_ 1_
1 CL
VI 1
VI "O
r O
o 10
u
i
~
01
3
4-*
^
VI
c
at
u
u
c
o
u
c
TJ
u
u
1
o
c
a
V)
VI
1
Ol
CL
01
jc
4~l
4-»
X
a
at
«
3
c/l
-Q
C
id
fM
Of
in
Co
^
g
L.
a
0)
u
-a
o
L.
a.
01
01
J3
"^
^_
H-
#
39
-------
operator be cautious and be assured that the coating will meet his needs.
Coating materials made by different manufacturers do not perform equally,
even when classified as the same generic type. The specific ingredients or
quantities of similar ingredients used by different coating manufacturers
varies, which can affect coating performance. Therefore, coating selection
should be based on actual testing or past experience.
Testing should be conducted by applying the desired coating to
concrete specimens and subjecting both to the actual sump environment or
one that simulates as closely as possible this environment. If a coating
must be selected before tests of significant duration can be conducted, the
supplier should be requested to submit fully-documented case histories
where his coating has protected concrete under the same or similar
environmental conditions.
Finally, it should be noted that if conditions are severe enough to
deteriorate good quality concrete, it may be difficult to find a coating
that will provide complete and lasting protection. Under these
circumstances, consideration should be given to neutralizing severely
aggressive liquid wastes.
Waterproofing Coatings
Waterproofing coatings typically are used to prevent water (e.g.,
ground water) from passing into, through, or out of concrete under
hydrostatic pressure. Traditionally, waterproofing coatings consist of
multiple layers of bituminous-saturated felt or fabric cemented together
with hot-applied coal tar pitch or asphalt for application to the outside
surface of a concrete structure. Cold-applied systems using multiple
applications of asphaltic mastics and glass fabrics also have been used.
Recently, however, a number of other waterproofing coatings are available,
such as elastomeric membrane barriers, cementious membranes, modified
bituminous materials, bentonite- based materials, and various proprietary
types. Commonly-used waterproofing coatings are discussed more fully in
Appendix B.
COATING INSTALLATION
Coatings can be applied to either the inside facing or outside facing
of a concrete structure, depending on the type of protection needed. In
most cases, a protective coating will be installed on the inside facing of
the sump to prevent contact of the wastes and the concrete surface and to
provide-a secure bond between the coating and the concrete. To preserve
this bond between the protective coating and the concrete, it may be
necessary to install a waterproofing coating on the outside face of the
sump to prevent water infiltration. Figure 5-1 is a cross-section that
shows both an internal protective coating and external waterproofing
coating as they could be applied to a concrete sump.
40
-------
Protective coatings are designed to protect concrete from
deterioration when it is exposed to chemicals. Waterproofing is used to
prevent.movement of water into, through, or out of concrete under
hydrostatic pressure. Although both types of coatings are designed for a
specific purpose, it is possible that either type of coating could
simultaneously serve both functions. For example, certain types of
waterproofing also may protect concrete from corrosive soil conditions.
Protective Coatings
In general, the vulnerability of concrete to chemical attack results
from three of its characteristics: permeability, alkalinity, and
reactivity. Penetration of liquids into concrete is sometimes accompanied
by chemical reactions with cement, aggregates, or embedded steel. For
example, acidic compounds, salts of weak bases, ammonium salts, and some
polyhydroxy compounds, such as glycols, can deteriorate concrete. Most
carbonates and nitrates, some chlorides, fluorides, and silicates;
petroleum products that are free of fatty oil additives; and weak alkaline
solutions, however, are normally harmless to mature concrete. For more
specific information on determining waste compatibility with concrete, the
reader is referred to ACI's publication 515.IR-79 on barrier systems
(discussed above) and the Portland Cement Association's publication:
Effects of Substances on Concrete and Guide to Protective Treatments. Where
Required (1981).
Protective coatings inhibit chemical deterioration by preventing
contact of the sump contents with concrete surfaces. However, not all
individual coatings are equally suited for use under all circumstances. In
other words, a coating that is effective under one set of operating
conditions and a given chemical environment may not be effective in
preventing deterioration under different circumstances. The selection of
an appropriate coating will be dependent upon the type and concentration of
wastes managed in the sump, as well as frequency and duration of contact.
Physical conditions, such as temperature, pressure, mechanical wear or
abrasion, and freeze/thaw cycles also are important considerations. When
selecting a coating, the owner or operator should be aware of the
following:
t The coating must be resistant to deterioration or degradation by
the wastes to which it will be exposed. The wastes should,not
cause swelling, dissolving, cracking, or embrittlement of the
coating at operating temperatures. For example, organic solvents
are generally incompatible with chlorinated rubber coatings, and
oxidizing acids are generally incompatible with epoxy coatings.
t The coating must exhibit good adhesion to the concrete and must
have a very low permeability. Certain wastes can diffuse or
permeate through coating materials, causing loss of adhesion,
without appearing to have degraded the coating material. This
phenomenon is typical of acidic chemicals on plastic or rubber
coatings.
37
-------
The temperature of the wastes contacting the coating material will
affect performance. Each material has its own characteristic
. maximum operating temperature for a given environment. Rapid
temperature changes can crack some coating materials or break the
bond between the coating and concrete.
t The abrasion resistance must be adequate to prevent the coating
material from being abraded under operating conditions.
Materials that are completely bonded to the concrete substrate are
preferred over those that are unbonded. Bonded materials prevent
water, which has entered through a membrane rupture, from migrating
at the coating/concrete interface. Leaks in unbonded coatings are
more difficult to trace than leaks in fully bonded coatings.
t If coating materials are exposed to weather, they must be resistant
to ultraviolet light and ozone, or provisions should be made to
protect exposed areas with weather resistant flashing materials.
As an example, some preformed barriers use clear polyethylene films
that should not be left exposed.
Liquid-applied materials should not be used over unreinforced light
weight aggregate concrete fills or thin veneers that use PVA or
latex additives or bonding adhesives.
Liquid-applied barriers may not cover, hide, or level surface
irregularities.
Where conditions may cause deterioration of the concrete around the
reinforcing steel, a method for the direct protection of, the steel
may be desirable.
Coatings should not be used as surface applications over concrete
decks that already have a barrier or coating on the underside.
Blistering or delamination can result from entrapped moisture. An
exception is an unbonded coating that is vented or a coating that
has an adequate transmission rate.
Table 5-1 summarizes the types of coatings typically used to protect
concrete under differing chemical environments (e.g., mild, intermediate,
and severe). Some of the generic types of materials used for coatings
include asphalt, coal tar, polyvinyl chloride, acrylics, epoxy, neoprene,
chlorinated rubber, and polyurethanes. Thickness of coatings is generally
dependent upon the severity of the environment. Coatings can be
hot-applied, cold-applied, or sheet-applied, depending upon the particular
coating material. Appendix B more fully describes the most common
materials used as protective coatings for concrete. Many of those
described are suitable for use with sumps.
The owner or operator should work closely with the coating supplier to
select a coating that will be effective. It is important that the owner or
38
-------
EXTERNAL
WATERPROOFING
BARRIER.
MIS
BARRIER-CONCRETE
INTERFACE
PROTECTIVE
BARRIER MATERIAL
CONCRETE STRUCTURE
>
GROUND AND
GROUND WATER
Figure 5-1. Typical Application of External Waterproofing and
Internal Protective Barrier Systems to Concrete Sumps
41
-------
Before installation of the desired coating can begin, the sump surface
must be thoroughly cleaned; inspected; patched or repaired; and tested for
moisture accumulation, cleanliness-, and surface strength. The condition of
the surface of the concrete (especially cleanliness) is critical to success
ful installation of the coating. A smooth surface essentially free of
honeycomb, depressions, fins, holes, humps, dust, dirt, oils, and other
surface contaminants is necessary to provide continuous support to the
coating material (otherwise punctures can be expected) and good adhesion.
Release agents on forms, curing compounds, and evaporation-retarding
admixtures may create adhesion problems for coatings on new concrete.
Methods for cleaning concrete surfaces have been discussed earlier in
Section 3 of this document.
After the sump has been thoroughly cleaned, it should be inspected for
defects and repaired, where necessary. Section 4 of this document
discusses common techniques used to repair or patch concrete. However, the
owner or operator should be aware that patching materials containing
polymer additives designed to improve adhesion to concrete may adversely
affect adhesion between the patched area and the selected coating. The
coating manufacturer may recommend specific patching materials.
Finally, the concrete surface should be tested for cleanliness,
moisture accumulation, and surface condition. Wiping the surface should
not leave a white powder or dust on a dark cloth. Water should not bead on
the surface as this indicates the presence of oil. Moisture should not
accumulate on the sump surface in less time than is required to cure the
coating material. A test sheet of polyethylene can be taped to the
concrete surface to determine the time for moisture to accumulate on the
underside of the sheet. If scraping the concrete surface with a putty
knife produces a loose, powdery material, then excessive laitance is
present. A patch of the coating should be applied to the prepared sump
surface to test the surface strength of the concrete. Since there is no
standard patch test method, the manufacturer of the coating material should
be asked to recommend test methods.
The owner or operator should carefully oversee all surface preparation
and coating installation to assure that work is completed in accordance
with the coating manufacturer's specifications. Following are additional
suggestions for coating installation:
Follow the manufacturer's guide specification. Resolve questions
or disputed areas before contract documents or final specifications
are issued for bids and eventual award of a contract.
Specify that all technical data from the manufacturer and
applicator be submitted to the specifying agency for approval after
award of the contract.
42
-------
Establish the limitations and requirements during application that
will be imposed by weather conditions (e.g., temperature, rain,
wind).
r' Request that the manufacturer confirm that the coating selected is
suitable for the end use intended. Their performance guarantee
should be defined by the manufacturer.
Specify that the applicator of a liquid-applied coating be approved
and certified by the manufacturer of the system.
43
-------
= « = «* «*3£-=«o£5 i^*ia« ^2H So
e
ui
LT)
10
CM
u_
.. o
< -a
II
Q.
O.
CQ
44
-------
o
r«
*° == iil
o ^ c * . ,> * a
u o y ° ^ w
lill^lMl
« O .2 ?1 £. «> ~"
* *.= ;. Su-iaf-Ssi
« 3iit:.|ii55
« S-o c
Sox-si;.*
a «« = 3 ° «
a = - a o -a «j
3 g a a '
e
.u
=:^='3= i
. 3|^=-^.-§l
«a * a 3 u
IS3-S-30-" S
!*=--3
* -5Z-| tl
«-eS J5.2 . ^iSSJ^ 31
!!V !i I llfsaa ,s
isl^l sg l£ii£i!j =:.
3^ i = o5 £a3'-oHH- -=--
3«*-^a 'Jl ~. -. 3^3 .^-4
So32 OQ ==: = 3:r ux d".
2 ooooi-^i.
WWW W03--
U~«ow« Sou'-^o-^a^u' _, .^«^j;-o
« ""3"3 "3 2 S -' "S'S ^^ si3 ° ^ * c u"0 a= «"> S «S~
" ^ S= 2^e e<* £js = 3 < « = ii r =i a a « « J{- »
« aa^«>«W'M*4h.aat3Ca^«^«^«-3h.a^3w 7
lils|lili.s5|**;«eOoy^-o^e u c« c
u S c£c.u*3Q-2u = - = - u
""* w *i c
J =f I
i "of I
" -^ o
? il '
i |I 1
: -J §
S 38 S
art «^
^2 »«
" 5- 5
j«^ o 5 J« _ ± SS >_. w_. *
:«S~u^=S:=3 3^ a «a-3
a3«*2S«o'iJ^: = «j:c
-i a > a a T5uoawcc3a
2«
a"
2s
c c
~ o
» Q ... 5s"
: ==a5g
i x. y a
r^s^s^
: > e a e
« u c
S u O
' * a=-S «
iMiaa:
i£?^ ?1
C S
175 =5
jisls^l
a"3co|
f= l«ial s:i ss
.=>5g -.a1 ««
3 » S S-o - c-o- --
s^s-"!^- i|| E^
^i|iii|§iii =;
£:-§-' 5 "» ? -3 2-
3 n -a s ->,e«)-?3c S
MHj^i3 ol|?S|5ipal I
-4^1-lJ "silsl-iS-ti I
rli!lps?s|i i^ii^iaMi
ifj^i Ii?^l iiisi.-ilil
>i!!«:l^=6st il5»sa:-ssg
« s
!l|S^2§l* = 2l=?5a3252?
- s --o J ar a * -z£ o2 5 c--33;j:
45
-------
-------
-J _ £ _ 5
O
*** i
"a
k.
^3
a'13"l = 's»>=,o'" 3~3-"'a«"?Mo"23* = 3-a"33^a_2=«i a ~ - 2 ~ = a - =
53'-='°-"" 3 a «* .5 3 ~ SCCUM - 53"*cj;2a~ i = £ ~-j:-5
** ^* fc« >» ^ 3 TN i ^ *^ ^ ii ~- 3 ^ ^ o u _, ~ * ~~ ^ ^
^« 3 u * ii *» ^ ^ ^ o .2 3 ^ > 5 a a J2 £ ^ "* ^ ?^
! 3 =-=Ji
.' X ^ ~ a
i « = - 3
.a ill 8
3 S" ~ "a T
,-«^2=-u?5««lS-
So
o-
«-j-~ ^^'~~_a^*vir~w'"*i** w=a*ri ** 5 * 3S ^ ^ ai w TS**W. jz -*--as
-e-s^sIl^-li-s-ts-FPi-ISiMs^^-l ^-Illui| = -p3i?!|§I^
§-E9-s91=s-il = !l'H = il5y5-sl*c>|g^«iSsi = x^5t||§2| = Ip-5|-H = E2
2 J 53^ 323 a.2 2 = ;?3 = o3^&f5 - 53 3i = Ja 3S 2 i ^ 3 J 3 = ~ J
r S=::HS
= 3|3 3= S
? ^5a|o«
^ 1»||-s
I M = a u | o
o a
- s
~ a
= o
3 ji
3
p s
3 : :
- y .±
~ = 3
= i_ o -
j «
_ "
3.
3^-3
:is°
= u2 o ,
u 13 £ - - -
>
w
C
a
g
\u
* - 2 "5 £
U
a
a .2" 3 « - ^ > 3-*'.
ue~ 3OJ«J2S oak^^ua 1.3
u«3 ^^"^Ci O»i-^^_a^ M*
5 12 IS
3 S-a * a
: 3-0 j «
" «c>«
J2r ««
o o °*
: >> 3C ^
;=:«- -
-= -«-a- daS"!
I =2^2 = >=3|-^
^ *i /^ ~ 4J j V. »| <
Jl ^
O
o
o
Ji
a
b
7 'j
o
S «-«2'
- 2-el
u. Si e »"
isittii
= a 3S
£ a
u ?
SiSga
O -3 0^-3 u
3 jj °£
2 3
o s
« -j
«13
Ss
S
3 "S
a u
5> =
vi <!
rt
'i
J552i=
^ CT3=55 -
^= "? 5
0£ 2c 3
If5ssl
2*C ~-
S = . 3 =
M > rj C
3==5
SsS^
-S*l
l«ag
!'£
_ y
^3,
U-, C.
!lS
III II
a « >? s
.. "3
~- V
x-a
C *f ** s] * _
_ « -" ^ a
-=^ fta«
?:i 2i
5i* =s
?33 8-5
= Ǥ !i
:sr -5
o »> M =
«Hs ' £
= C = -3^
» « C
Ml
4) C J2
2 M-3
S o5
Ssi
^ a y
-S«
^°s-
°^«
«-s
2 c
6 «
§2
-2-5-3
« -1 -
S « 2
..§£ =
^i«
ti=°
i C-
:=2|=^
=a3
= 0
_S = a-u>J_i^a.
i3=-=is- = «-
/i .^
ti >
a ^ « ^ u "
3 S a u "? £
° 3 > So =
o « s so:"
"? 2 "" u - ^
2 o
^^~
^3S
u c«
- c
3 S2
U "3 |^
«; S > O
2 = «-
u «
«l
« 2
Sr
w u
if
c "
*j
u*3
88
c.«
o ^
9
:3l
."»""£
2- V
:«
shll
a|«E»
5.S5SS.
3 °IS
u *
- l|x
l=I|o:
= a 0-3
S " i s '
? ^ i_
iJSSa
5 3-a s
> -j " 2
i:;iiili=
Sz^-o^Is^
2i:3a2s..,,_s
^3
j
-~s. ~Z?f ^i £ - 3 ~ a*3^ So 3a»
a ;
o 2
3
W ^j
yC C <
j1« 5 a i
3 C 3
-2 - o
131!"
_ yJ3 _
v
££
"v-a _"
i- u a »>
2? C a 3
- « = =
O _
V 3
a 5.
° - - *
:' 3
2 5
3x|h
a Jt- a
OS^ ?
a(L a z
47
-------
o» £. 3
!- ISSI:
^8 =|E|.
« e s
1 >- o = _ - " ,
ll
3
I'
s ; <3 u
- S3- »
"~ 2 ° S^ i 2
u C
- - - - 2 -
!|2=s -
5- §I*~-3 e§3=^=« -» ta3j<-| ss^3ft2Bs= s^| sM5xfl«aSs; ^" = 2 §1
:l.;clll llilili lHii^a !I^i?|tll !!L la|^!tl!l^Hlil S^
plBlLhilfllii NitlHJnPHHl!i?iH!H 11
I = °a'3s=:-3".f s*i=|*2 |slil|«2 °lHI*?5g !=!& ill"*s£;,llll « = !2 =i
>
w
C
a
<
e
«
3 a "a
nce
3) o
fK
K
«
^ tn
|i
ta
=
o _
°8«
5"3
"=£ -
w ^ *^
u -
§°
=s
2"-5|
2 2 =3 -£-2.= J= -^ s
C ^5"^ --O^^C.-r
3
EH
J U4)a
U = 71 S «
2 = - - i-3
2 V 3 2«°3
Hs !W
£ a "* SS
W !8 ** U O
° - j.£ rs
fe5- llll
3 I
of a u «^ =
^*£ cS .
« > u oaw^
£*=1 1553
&; e^o"
- = jj o V
O _ ;
- C C ~
u S o u
3 « U3
S==S
£SSS
!18!
O rt M O
u a u.
2 I o S
llll
V "3 U
S ;- d £U '
^ S.'T ^»-
3 a o u J3
20 3
« 5«= sSu^ o a o u£ 3
0^*3 £ ^i 2 * « - a
u --!__ 3 2 a 7-5 a
^J cd^-('-«
eu: = .j=.<^i^-
x» *
48
-------
- a
«j .So w
o
ca
U
o
« ^
-. e> .
e *>
i? I
»s "
-s =
S 5 .2
U
-2*3
!!
u
3
>» C
J 3
1 « w * U
.
Hi!.i : I^
5jii~2> 2i5o«s;^ §Ic^e-s S"^;
^^o 2«- «'« *-3o-»°-0
^*- *J
a5 =j:f
Sc-i^SSJ^
«oa"u~^£
* 3 4f-= = =
he i
o HO
= 5 -
£ i
U A
y
"7
49
-------
5oa33
m»
at X o -* «-j
-sells
2=52 S~ =
S e o g
* - - a
U
O
-------
c
9
c
g
J:
>
2
U4
£3 O -
a « =
= 2 *
o a
> -
«« =
31
!!IS
*- u «
w
|
S
a.
ja
a
v»
linss
< * ° « a a
« 22
S t£5Si
2 ^S3?5
s «-sag-
* « u 3
«S r'wS-"-3 =i««3!=i« =u^s3-=5 s|a= a5" - S * 3 = "
i- S-S-lseS-S- 2 - £5.2 «<= = ? ««s2fSi2° s«2o£^ o^3-^S
§3 s-|« = sn|- 55 ^g«f= 3a s-2aS2Sao«3i?ro* Ss_.jjdi
^
^
o
u
at
u.
U
O
3:1^
Ills
a~ as
sis!
^^22
SS=2
a-5S
« a > °
~ A ° k.
. = O w
«"5;S
5 = = »i
o
ul
*^
to
o
«
-_; 2
4g T* >
Jl i i>
* s "*
5 «-3 o
4J **
e-" S
e o ei
u «t
«e?5
wi= =
51
-------
PI
9>
IO
-O
«
tan
i-ui 1 1 m i ..
^O- -3»,,k. >» ^ -* >» r uS-n-" S au^U 2^ua * OT
o.«s»..j*£c » w * ** d oSu c 'a-aSja. -C.^o^uo s«
Sl'--M|i «"l^a = flii f ^^s|=:j?|j^ |
e = e-5 J= i> .-2as, = 5"3c.^ 5 £ = - -1 « c«-= -5 3« o
|"iiisti,:lil-»i ? 1^1 f lP?;-!liiMi- !
-Control of E
n3
W
9
-
_
"a
>_
^
u
i Mclulllc
3
± S
ft-o
ff aj
>
LJ
Environmental Protection Aj,«n.
o
u
*J
M
V
h
"«
k.
3
U
b.
31
*J
4J
^
S
Q
^
Ji
u
.3
C
V)
^j
«n
01
v
3
>,
2
^-Q2522
11^2-:= i£ia-:?2 g«9h2ijllSs£S;?^l'5SS i
^
k.
a
u
u
a
a
slon;
' structural il
^I3-!^! II^a!| !l1J^i^f»i?s;fi:||l||lh2|
l^il? i -iio==1°^i!:s2s-^^^r?||5.af=!£=|5£^oao
5 || 351 2 =|«^S3S-Ss5S2S3=83^1^fl51?22.iSl = SS5SS
=<3afc3s gjsssi = 5 aiss s 2«ss5aJ2»IIa5
!s.!liiillt^ :t i m*& ^ i §2 i««
s u 5 u =,J: iu5*-^ :?"_ =°S=a--= = Z & £"3«3
^ = v.s"--ase2=| i5 * §=-=3*s 5= 2 ji0 Is--
ll!:|:s' iifi !M lis=i 11 i|..||i s:u
i:-|f!!;pi!i s!i! ii^j! 11 * mil !!«
iKlf!5sl!8= fJsMl!II§ s; | ifii!} Hat
P!3ildH3f i-iliJUlU 11 ! isilisH lit:
:i|I|i;:! i| l|ii i m V IJIillIs -f;:
- °'-^3«;i -T = c*'3'3.a2 a^'5** »c a M-S:^;^4* co.ec
5|.>.S«4-:3 = .=i:?l|S||;!S IS S3sSgsa;lS?2SS =
!^JP!I|II-!^P Iflll! 1 IIi!l!ll"i«|i:
Illlll=lll!lIs!l5!5!l!i^3|«i§£sS|o|j|iy|
o
u
lystem or component, coiiilstl
one or more o( the (ollowlng:
ilallallon.
strnctlon or 1
o
u
u
a
5
4J
^
91
'a
(A) Corrosion-resistant inalcrl
* ^ ^
u r ~ ~ Z - -
= 3 o = ~ s -:
»3 8«==|
VI U -^
_,- a&s
n-.-n -
l»f S2 a
= a - 2 « =
O»^A-:
^J ^-3 " a =
H = -H ^ £ -
i - -2 5 -
»a a- 5 =
U ^ U > -
st°.|K
3 if §* - =
£ 2 ^J "C s
O
3
5
i)rovl(lc<
c.
^
>
c
d
J->
< J 'u a a ^ 3
s II5
y) ~ ^ _j
S -= =
conilrucllon such as special all(
flbertlais reinforced plasllc;
(D) Corrosion reslstaril coating
as cpoxy or fiberglass) wllli cut
protecllon (e g.. Impressed cum1
6acil(lclul unodei); and
-f
n
n
y
">
^
3
d
"a
^i
"3
'j
y
u
U
5
^
3
3
jl
^
a
~A
n
4
n
u
^
n
j
;j
z
-
j
3
u
^
a
j
j
/
JC
ft
u
rt
5
a
^
X
1
5
J
^
3
U
3
«
y
<
«
-^
y
^
3|
5
>
~
^i
5
u
u
c
J
J
J
J
5"
a
^
jj
<
2
Ill
U
S
o
e i!
= e ?
s u
5 u-3 -
u .5
'515 A-3 3
3=353-
«=2«23
,--J-l
3==5-3
^ U *~ ~
c a s ~Z "
0''5- -
73 £ . cS S
SSi «r«
9 » 5 _o
S"isb£
=iilB3
Sr&3'-»
£ a-3 « »
22*113
S *» J2
53 w 5U
Sf|l5
?* =
3ae
s$l
*«3
ls«?*f!
5 s' i » s
- * J C 5i
3 = 8!
Ji~ 3 .. 5
2S--5
£=,2*2
2 s? s
»i « J 3
|SI
± v
111
'*" s
. » -;
3-S5S
stts
3 « *
«"S ?
-C 5-
u 4 ' a 4*
°3:--=2
« = c-1 *
2 * = 2*
.a « = 3 *
si
! 3
VI
«
M
a
u -^ J _x J i
\*'*\~-
0 « ? :
«
a -
2lsli§«
sfss;:.
= .2 = ^HS
SaTS^agSJ
-3 S362»
* u. «J .
'151s^^aa
jssfassfs
|c£?:-:s
S?* 2^-Se^
^&l3iii|
""Sr»«s2 .
.88525=0
15*5^ 2 .-2
iciaji^K
::s5rNb
5l2^sjn
»5u -3^-a s
i-u-3lssHa
2 a * a c >. w 2! ~ A -.JL
" s"«'!IIiJI!si
i^=i«l-:
3 u 2 -a .o "s «
r-°^«S5*:
r 5 - « - =
/i -j Ji a 3.
S^3S
I*!
-2|-
°c|
-«ss
S^2^
a « c
!i!1ss
* S ^ 2 M S
£ - - - »
£ -a a a ? .-
° ii * ^
£ 'S ~ 3 ^ 11
'*.§ -1?
3l!!|!
- - - - j
52
-------
u*
.2 ** &
! IS -^ ^5 * c* *
e
w
e
*
S .
U
W
si
ZZ
,ai =« 3 o
32J2«-3«S««'3«3
ig3iiuiisi:-i
H -i - _" = M-:: = 3 = >
«=S^'2o S »!» « 3
-<2T:gsO'>a=*.j^:
o
an
53
-------
it
e
* \ mi*
o
«
at
v a *- i
u
£
a
Z OSJ{u«i:'Z'3Sc'--2c .ai-ai--<'--2 -= a
5
5«?>H0--*-'=«Js2«!« "af----2fS5S=it
£JS!§==°S?8srig= 2s!!f32?SS5&2
r . -r i > u 9 _5> .ia a r ? ~aaa ?h3
§1
« u
a*>«'_.»Ifi>«s
« "tao-Saag.
- 5"0 2"2 £2." s-
^iiniis^sli^i^igi^sU^-
c2= 3S 23&a^?3 = a32|s^-;:-il= = o
3
Sill
3 3= 3 el 5= -S-5 ^^^ 3 " 2? "3a "5
r I !i |:I ! ill I lUi i
| | 53. 1=3 |§ 53 nl Sifl" 11 =
< | s-afsg !5 ^S '"8 S|2s *| ^
s < 5S = ««-2 S-o ..5 Sg>. ^tSTJ -2.. a
= « « - 2 C 5 ?
53 S 'a a
l!l= sis
X7>
"-^22i;>'a
5 3 - as 2
*-.|Si
-------
55
-------
- 2 " - = -
2 S ? =
« u *-- ajft
32-=; = jlP
SI, II si
ifl*3=a
'J 5 y -i o a 5
fir I'll^ls
*l JI ! ~ ~ ~ ^
= ^ - y » S
: « -n v - a
i ** _O y " = if S?
w C « 3 S
o ~ 5 *" jj H - i. -
*--*- wCu^Sj;
£-£* 222. i i» » xo^
= 5 q = f i-ji 3 == ; =
I&35
"la
i 5
o 2 >
41 !>
Q. V *>
!*-
-^22
e-^e
5-S3
S = fe =
33i2-<|-;
« «£ S « a« 2 3 '
ssissgMr
5-b>«*Isl§.
a«al3TS«t|<
S~ £ = a a"? 5 "'
°~o«S?S-:
1 5?1-?
§ ^3^^
J S « . I
c §2?S
LU aC c S
i§i§
31 is
3|5-
:I3I =
iss!*
** «
'a = u
. S «s e
;-«*^
;E5»S
! o -" «
:|s>-
« *
te.
a
., h. * »fc. cu
: * et -^ -^ ^ wi
«^i
;-» ""
u £_ 2
"S « -1~-=
«22^^o-w^-£
2 5S^ -a" a^uS
-5f-«-*T!^~"-
. 3.0 s
II!
ipi
a s s-3
a ^, o s
E^gS
= e S «
30::.*
w5 o e
M;j
.= ii
S4i
-u
5 u
- " «
o C
«|;
i X C
.£ U b
-e5
._ « c
°- =
^. n 0
u a _
** O
B «>
u o . Zi
gS-fJ^Suf
5^^5^'»i'J' =
Islllsl2
i ««u'S-1' =e«C2
sglSsSsg-iai^saaij^i
"S * r* w C .*».*; = .5-tCi.^o.C
^Ti"2. -»-*ifti±5.COfc.,«»-:5c**
^§528
^°2=-
«£ 2-i >
^ £ s« >« 2
u v S « «
S j u Sa:^ o
"*3j*-J» 4» C "^
li c «^ " E
523&--S2
_ u ^ « a
5o£|rj£«
slls
u S
2S°^
.3=1
"3 O ^ 31 O
"SSJS".
l&tl3S
?»«-'
sis -I;
II!
s8|
W = «l
so ; »
|= IS
Is'!!-..
::^i
i i u S c
till
"Hi
= - - c 2 2~ a
§sEio==:
« = oC -*a«o
= -=?« 2 c « 0,3
:_ c.
sic
a « o
a a^
:S£-
= £ »= «
fc. O » -«
3 »
" =
_.' w
c c
« «l
C a,^ u a w «
« ; 3 O
o 33 S
so;
il
d u
s=
z .
5
5 = s
-a » £3
sals
u S > S
2 o <
iiii
" a -
| = 1
r u
S 2 2
?" 3 5
^ &s
- n «
U « D.23
5if~2
ilsll
* «=="
Tlfzx
«&; = =
i; 5ss~o
Ss- = s
T y ^ 2
SilJ
s-33
« s- =«
j:is =-
7^ « ?
5 » J s
* u _
SIS 2
3 ? -i ff
1=°i
5- » J
1 u
J}
«2
i". **
-------
o
n
u\
o
il S
o- = -,2w = = *«.= _ a 2 . 2
2S s 3-2I|*«l $-:?.§
~ «> s - n ^ « ? « -a - ^ _
y - S S
M-
832*5 -«S2i«i*..2 S = i
i " 5 ? "r^ = MH523.u .s 3
t a . i >. "52sszSo" r?~
I §5! i!Ji !
^
ols
2 «
2i
: ji ~ ; . o
s s « - 2 » 3
J3.S3§as
- 3 C
-Ila2.a
JNIH:
o » --i S »
a a
S^i = -3
a- 3^2
u a
5 O " 3 ;
3 »,-3 N-32
3
*2
J2: = s
"^ ^
2=o=^ 32U
2 = _-S s = aS
311°
- i j =
r!
4 -
« C-
M
4 J
^ w *T *" .. ^ -
Hillflli
= 0suS'o'«t!:
25-5:
^ * S rt ^ " _i 5 ? ^ »i ^«
i23-«
°-s?t
« j: * 3
3?^>^:
^-*sl=
> O O s
k. U =
Tj O1
= 2
f-33
e J'-
i * « 2 5
ilpl
! = 3 S -
3|Su:
7^ a
rcj~~ aesj
aSex-_- =2 o * » °
= 3" s. £-»
cr «-n b. ? : ^
£!si2il
i ^2 is'SSi
« » - 5 o-v
& ^a Ia2a7!
1 * ^ 2
, v > = a
2^
*»
57
-------
sco= ?o = ^ "f«-Si
*o Cjcu«5w»»c^_J"'-3
fJi°f!ifiil§i!i
-------
APPENDIX B
PROTECTIVE AND WATERPROOFING COATINGS FOR CONCRETE
PROTECTIVE COATINGS
The following subsections describe the most common materials used
for protective coatings:
Acrylic Resins
Acrylic resins are formulated from the vinyl polymerization of
acrylic monomers that are modified by the addition of
plasticizers and prepolymers. They are used as a thin unfilled
coating or as a thick sand-filled mortar.
Aaohalt
Suitable products for use as protective coatings may be made from
either high-consistency natural asphalts or from
refinery-produced products that may vary significantly in
consistency. Various fillers, fibers, solvents, or even
polymers, may be added to improve or modify certain physical
characteristics. Coating materials may range in consistency from
thin, cold-applied liquids to heavy, hot-applied mastics.
Because of their good resistance to acids and oxidizing
solutions, asphalt coatings, alone or in combination with
reinforcements such as bituminized glass fabrics, may be used for
protection of concrete vessels used to contain acids and salt
solutions. However, resistance to solvents is poor. Resistance
to water is often considered to be lower than it is with
coal-tar-derived products.
Emulsions
Bituminous emulsions are made using either asphalt or coal tar
base binders, which are modified as required by the manufacturer
prior to emulsification. The binders are dispersed in water,
using either mineral stabilizers or chemical -type emulsifying
agents to assist in dispersion and to retain emulsion stability.
Coal tar base emulsions are usually mineral stabilized.
Bituminous emulsions frequently possess thixotropic or "false
body1* characteristics, which permit application of relatively
thick coats of materials with a minimum of sagging. They may be
brush, spray, or roller applied. Films deposited from emulsions
are likely to be more permeable to water vapor but are often
capable of withstanding higher temperatures than asphalt
coatings. Films deposited from the mineral stabilized emulsions
are considered to have excellent atmospheric exposure
characteristics .
59
-------
Chlorinated Rubber "
Chlorinated rubber resins are produced by chlorinating isoprene rubber.
Coatings containing chlorinated rubber adhere well to concrete and are
widely-used for concrete floor coatings, traffic paints, and swimming
pools/ They have excellent resistance to alkalies, moisture, and abrasion.
They have adequate resistance to a wide range of common acids, aliphatic
hydrocarbons, and lower alcohols. Resistance is poor to nitric, acetic,
and sulfurous acids, and concentrated aqueous ammonia. Aromatic
hydrocarbons, fatty acids, and animal and vegetable oils dissolve
chlorinated rubber. These coatings have limited resistance to heat and
will decompose when used above 225° F. In continuous, direct sunlight,
only pigmented materials, or those with ultraviolet absorbers, can be used
satisfactorily.
Coal Tar
Coal-tar-based coating materials are derived from the destructive distilla-
tion of coal. They range in consistency from thin liquids to heavy mastics
and/or semi-solids and can either be hot-applied or may be applied cold.
Emulsions of coal tar also are available. Cold-applied barriers usually
contain a solvent; those that do are known as cutbacks. The hot-applied
and cutback forms may suffer surface cracking, resulting in an "alligator"
texture when exposed to the atmosphere; however, coal tar emulsions have
excellent atmospheric exposure characteristics. Coal-tar-based coatings
have excellent water resistance. Their resistance to acids is moderate and
is good to alkalies. They normally do not support bacterial growth.
Composite Barriers
Two types of composite coatings are popular. Acid-proof brick or tile
barriers are used to protect concrete from very aggressive chemicals when
an easily-cleanable surface is required. The primary component, a
chemical-resistant material, is applied directly to the concrete surface.
The secondary component, brick or tile with a chemical-resistant mortar, is
used to protect the relatively-fragile primary component from mechanical
abuse or excessive temperature. Chemical-resistant mortars include:
furan, phenolic, sulfur, silicate, and polyester mortars.
Filled eooxv. toocoated with an eooxv is another commop composite barrier.
An epoxy resin, normally solventless, is blended with aggregate (usually
silica of various sizes) to produce a coating that can be either sprayed,
brushed, squeegeed, or troweled. This system is used to seal the concrete
surface and fill the surface porosity prior to topcoating with a protective
barrier that is resistant to the intended environmental conditions.
Epoxy Resins
The epoxy resin normally used for protective coatings is based on a
reaction product of bisphenol A and epichlorohydrin. The epoxy resin,
which is usually a liquid, must have a curing agent or hardener added. The
60
-------
most commonly-used curing agents are aliphatic amines, amine adducts, amidoamines, and pdyamides.
Properly selected and applied epoxy systems provide a very tough, durable barrier with excellent
caustic, acid, and solvent resistance. Epoxy formulations are compatible with concrete, providing
excellent adhesion.
Filled Epoxv. Polyester, and Urethane Resins
A low-viscosity resin is blended with graded fillers (in the range of 40 to 200 mesh) to form a troweiable
mix that is applied approximately 1/4-inch-thick to a concrete floor. Vertical walls may be covered to
this thickness by using specially-formulated materials. A high proportion of fillers, generally 5 to 1 by
weight of activated resin, reduces the coefficient of thermal expansion and makes the coating more
resistant to thermal shock. Fillers also reduce shrinkage stresses formed when the liquid epoxy
polymerizes to a solid. These coating materials are normally formulated to protect concrete floors
subject to intermittent chemical exposure.
Glass-Reinforced Epoxy Resin
A glass-reinforced epoxy barrier is multi-coat, in the dry-film thickness range of 20 mil to 250 mi. As
thickness increases, a greater chance exists that discontinuities or pinholes in the barrier material will be
eliminated. This type of coating is used to protect concrete from acids and other aggressive chemicals
that could cause rapid concrete disintegration.
Glass-Reinforced Furan Resin
This system is similar to the glass-reinforced system discussed above. A primer must be applied to the
concrete surface before the furan resin, to prevent the acid catalyst used to cure the furan from
attacking the concrete. After the primer is applied, one coat of a filled furan mortar is troweled on the
surface and glass doth is embedded in the furan before it hardens. After the furan has set, a second
trowel coat of furan mortar is applied. After the furan has hardened, a 60 ml layer of neoprene latex is
spray-applied. The neoprene acts as a parting agent so that the furan resin mortar, used with an
acid-proof brick covering, will not adhere to the glass-reinforced furan barrier.
Procured Neonrene Sheet
Procured neoprene sheet, ranging in thickness from 60 to 125 ml, is often used in severe chemical
service conditions. It can be applied to a smooth concrete surface by using neoprene adhesives. Joints
witt be reliable, If constructed property, because neoprene adhesives have the same chemical resistance
as the neoprene sheet If the concrete structure to be protected has a complicated geometry, a
catalyzed neoprene solvent-based formulation may be spray- or brush-applied to a thickness of 60 ml.
This material wi have the same chemical resistance as the sheet material.
61
-------
Plasticized Polwinvl Chloride (PVC) Sheet
PVC sheet can be used as a protective coating for certain severe chemical
service conditions. Its application is similar to precured neoprene sheet
discussed above.
Polyester Resins
Two types of polyester resins are normally used as protective coatings in
more severe chemical environments. One is based on the reaction between
maleic anhydride and bisphenol A, and the other is produced by reacting
acrylic acid with an epoxy and is commonly called a "vinyl ester." These
resins are mixed with styrene monomer to lower viscosity and improve worka-
bility. The liquid resin is converted to a solid by using a peroxide cata-
lyst such as benzoyl peroxide and an accelerator such as dimethyl analine.
The concentration of the catalyst may be varied to change the rate of
curing. A water-resistant primer should be applied to the concrete surface
before the resin is applied. A final topcoat containing 1 to 2 percent
paraffin prevents the material from remaining tacky.
Glass-Reinforced Polyester Resin
This type of coating is similar to the glass-reinforced epoxy coating pre-
viously discussed. Two forms of glass reinforcement are used with poly-
ester coating materials. One form uses glass fibers as either non-woven
mat or woven fabric. The other uses glass flakes, approximately 5 mil
thick and 60 mil in diameter, as reinforcement. A water-resistant primer
on the concrete surface is necessary for proper curing of the coating
materials.
Polyurethane Resins
Urethane coating materials are formulated from the reaction of a resin com-
ponent (polyol) and an isocyanate curing agent. The name "urethane" encom-
passes a large family of materials, so care must be taken to match job
service requirements with the proper type of coating. Generally, urethanes
have good resistance to chemical attack and excellent impact and abrasion
resistance. They have excellent adhesion characteristics, are hard, yet
flexible; and exterior grades exhibit long-term gloss and color retention.
Although they are usually supplied as two component systems, single
component systems, which are cured by moisture in the air, are available.
Polyvinvl Butvral
Polyvinyl butyral resin has excellent resistance to weathering and is used
to seal concrete surfaces. The resin is dissolved in a solvent and is
applied in thin films of less than 3 mils per coat.
62
-------
WATERPROOFING COATINGS
Following is a brief overview of commonly used systems for waterproofing
concrete structures:
Hot-Applied Bituminous Materials
The materials used for hot-applied systems are bituminous substances of
either coal tar pitch or asphalt derived from petroleum. The bitumens used
in hot-applied systems have very little strength within themselves.
Fabrics and felts are used as reinforcement to withstand the strains of
expansion, contraction, temperature changes, vibrations, and structure
movement. Fabric has two advantages over felt: 1) it is stronger, more
pliable, and conforms more readily to irregular surfaces; therefore, it is
generally used as reinforcement at corners and angles; and 2) it can
absorb vibration and movement better than felt.
Cold-Applied Bituminous Materials
Cold bituminous systems use asphalt emulsions or solvent cut-back asphaltic
mastics. As with hot-applied systems, these mastics and emulsions have
little strength, so fabric is necessary for reinforcement. It is difficult
to determine when the emulsions are fully cured; but it is important to
prevent reemulsion by preventing water contact with emulsions that have not
completely cured. Cold-applied systems are easier to use than hot-applied
systems where smoke, vapor, or fire considerations prohibit use of
bituminous heating equipment close to the application.
Liquid-Applied ElastomeHc Materials
Elastomeric materials are liquids that are applied by means of squeegee,
roller, brush, trowel, or spray. When cured, they form a'film resistant to
water and many other chemicals. With some of these materials, the manufac-
turer may require reinforcement with glass fabric. Liquid-applied
membranes are formulated as single- or multi-component products such as
neoprene (polychloroprene), neoprene-bituminous blends, polyurethane,
polyurethane- bituminous blends, and epoxy-bituminous blends.
Sheet-Applied Barrier Materials
Precured elastomeric sheet materials may be fully bonded to the substrate
or unbonded depending upon the manufacturer's recommendations. (Sheets
that are unbonded are usually found between layers of concrete; bonding is
recommended for lining sumps.) Sheet-applied materials, generally
available, are listed below:
Neoprene is a synthetic rubber identified as polychloroprene. It
has good resistance to intermittent oil exposure and to bacteria,
fungi, acids, ultraviolet light, and ozone. It is usually applied
in 60 mil sheets and may be used either exposed or below wearing
surfaces.
63
-------
Butyl is a synthetic rubber identified as polyisobutylene. It is
best suited for below grade, concealed waterproofing installations.
Resistance to ozone, ultraviolet, bacteria, fungi, and soil acids
is good.
EPDM is a synthetic rubber resulting from the polymerization of
ethylene and propylene. Properly-formulated compounds based on
EPDM provide good resistance to ozone, ultraviolet light, and
weathering. EPDM remains elastic through a wide range of
temperatures.
Plasticized PVC is produced by adding a plasticizer to hard and
rigid PVC plastic. The result is a soft, pliable material that
has properties similar to the three elastomeric materials listed
above. Some vinyls have relatively poor resistance to direct
exposure to ultraviolet rays and weather compared to elastomeric
materials.
Neoprene, butyl, and EPDM sheets are joined by adhesive bonding. The adhe-
sives are usually solvent-based elastomers that are brush applied to the
barrier surfaces where the sheets will overlap to form the joint. Solvent
cementing (chemical welding) is used to bond adjoining sheets of PVC. The
solvent dissolves the overlapping sheet surfaces to be joined, which are
then pressed together. When the solvent diffuses, the sheets are united.
Preformed Barrier Materials
A prefabricated waterproofing barrier usually consists of polyethylene
film, polyvinylchloride film, or non-woven plastic fabric, coated on one or
both sides with bituminous materials derived from either asphalt or coal
tar base materials and usually modified with various polymers to improve
physical properties. Preformed barrier materials are supplied in either
sheet or roll form and range in thickness from 40 to 200 mil. The roll
form is generally more pliable and can be formed around and into corners.
Sheet material is not as pliable and must be cut to fit corners and other
changes in the form of the concrete surface.
Cementlous Membrane Barrier Materials
These membranes are waterproofing barriers that become hard and rigid after
being mixed. They can be applied by trowel, spray, or by the dry-shake/
power trowel method to thickness ranging between 1/8 inch for normal appli-
cations to 1/4 to 2 inch for heavy traffic bearing applications. Cemen-
tious membranes can be dressed to provide a smooth, rough, or textured
finish. These membranes are commonly used on surfaces that will be left
exposed, such as pools, tanks, fountains, and concrete decks.
64
-------
APPENDIX C
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
1. American Concrete Institute
Box 19150
Detroit, MI 48219-0150
(313) 532-2600
2. American National Standards Institute, Inc.
1430 Broadway
New York, NY 10018
(212) 354-3300
3. American Society of Civil Engineers
345 East 47th Street
New York, NY 10017
(212) 705-7496
4. American Society for Concrete Construction
426 South Westgate
Addison, IL 60101
(708) 543-0870
5. American Society for Testing and Materials
1916 Race Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103
(215) 299-5462 customer service: (215) 299-5585
6. American Waterworks Association
6666 West Quincy Avenue
Denver, CO 80235
(303) 794-7711
7. Canadian General Specifications Board
Canadian Government, Secretary
Phase III
9C1 Place du Portage
Hull, Quebec K1A 055
65
-------
8. Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute
933 North Plum Grove Road
Shamburg, IL 60173
.' (708) 517-1200
9. Construction Specifications Institute
601 Madison Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
(703) 684-0300
10. International Association of Concrete Repair Specialists
P.O. Box 17402
Dulles International Airport
Washington, DC 20041
(202) 260-0009
11. National Association of Corrosion Engineers
P.O. Box 218340
Houston, TX 77218
(713) 492-0535
12. National Institute of Standards and Technology
Center for Building Technology
Building 226 Room B158
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
(301) 975-6063
13. National Precast Concrete Association
825 East 64th Street
Indianapolis, IN 46220
(317) 253-0486
14. National Ready Mix Concrete Association
900 Spring Street
Silverspring, MD 20910
(301) 587-1400
15. Ontario Hydro
Director of Research
800 Kipling Avenue S.
Toronto, Ontario M8Z 5B2
Canada (416) 231-4111
16. Portland Cement Association
1520 Old Orchard Road
Skokie, IL 60077
(708) 966-6200
66
-------
17. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Concrete Laboratory, Waterway Experimental Station
3909 Halls Ferry Road
' Vicksburg, MS 39180-6199
* (601) 636-3111
18. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Inspection Division
20 Massachusetts Avenue NW
Washington DC 20314-1000
(202) 272-0222
19. U.S. Department of the Navy
Naval Publications and Forms Center
Military Specifications, Commanding Officer
5801 Tabor Avenue
Philadelphia, PA 19120
(215) 697-2000
67
-------
APPENDIX D
USEFUL REFERENCES: AN ANNOTATED LISTING
1. American Concrete Institute, ACI 201.1R-68, Guide For Making a
Condition Survey of Concrete in Service. 1984.
This Guide provides a system for reporting on the condition of
concrete in service. A detailed checklist is presented for
conducting a survey of the condition of concrete. The definition
of terms associated with the durability of concrete is included as
an appendix.
2. American Concrete Institute, ACI 207-3R, ACI Manual of Concrete
Practice. Part 1, 1979.
This document addresses core drilling in concrete.
3. American Concrete Institute, ACI 224.1R-89, Causes. Evaluation, and
Repair of Cracks in Concrete Structures. 1989.
The causes of cracks in concrete structures are summarized. The
procedures used to evaluate cracking in concrete and the principal
techniques for the repair of cracks are presented. Evaluation
techniques and criteria are described. The key methods of crack
repair are discussed, and guidance is provided for their proper
application.
4. American Concrete Institute, ACI 228.1R-89, In-Place Methods for
Determination of Strength of Concrete. 1989.
Methods for determining the in-place compressive strength of
concrete are discussed. Recommendations are given as to the number
of tests needed and statistical interpretation of test results.
5. American Concrete Institute, ACI 311.4R-88, Guide for Concrete
Inspection. 1988.
This committee report discusses the types of inspection activities
involved in concrete construction as well as the responsibilities
of the various individuals and organizations involved. Recommended
minimum levels on inspection and the means for implementing these
plans are given for various purposes and projects.
68
-------
6. American Concrete Institute, ACI 350R-89, Environmental Engineering
Concrete Structures." 1989.
This committee report contains recommendations for structural
design, materials, and construction of structures commonly used in
water and wastewater treatment works such as concrete tanks and
reservoirs. Special emphasis is placed on crack minimization and
special load accommodation. Design of joints, proportioning of
concrete, placement, curing, and protection against chemicals also
are described.
7. American Concrete Institute, ACI 504R-90, Guide to Sealing Joints in
Concrete Structures. 1990.
Joint sealants are described and illustrated. Joint movement and
design, joint sealant function, sealant installation, and joint
sealant repair are discussed.
8. American Concrete Institute, ACI 515.1R-79 (85), A Guide to the Use of
Waterproofing. Dampproofinq. Protective and Decorative Barrier Systems
for Concrete. 1985.
This committee report includes a table listing the effects of
various chemicals on concrete, and sections on concrete
conditioning, waterproofing, and dampproofing barrier systems, as
well as protective and decorative barrier systems. Concrete
cleaning methods also are delineated. Information provided will
assist in the selection, placement, installation, and inspection of
these barrier systems.
9. American Concrete Institute, ACI Compilation No. 5, Concrete Repair
and Restoration. Detroit, 119 pp., 1980.
This compilation of papers on concrete repair and restoration is
reprinted from Concrete International: Design and Construction,
V.2, No. 9, September 1980. Special emphasis is placed on bridge
repair and restoration with many case histories discussed.
10. American Concrete Institute, ACI SCM 21-89, Repairs of Concrete
Structures -- Assessments. Methods and Risks. 1989.
Provides a collection of case studies on concrete repair that apply
ACI guides for performing a condition survey and strength
evaluation.
11. American Concrete Institute Committee 311, ACI Publication SP-2, ACI
Manual of Concrete Inspection. Seventh Edition, 1981.
This document outlines fundamental concepts relating to concrete,
inspections procedures for new construction, and some methods of
repair (e.g., grouting and epoxy resin injection).
69
-------
12. American Concrete Institute, Special Publication 108, Whiting, David
and Arthur Malitt, Eds., Permeability of Concrete. Detroit, pp. 225,
1988.
Concrete permeability influences the durability and ultimate
longevity of concrete structures. At the 1987 ACI Fall Convention,
new materials for reducing permeability and techniques for its
measurement are rapidly being developed. The 11 papers presented
at this convention form the subject matter. Both materials aspects
and test procedures are described.
13. American Concrete Institute, Special Publication 112, Lew, H.S., Ed.,
Nondestructive Testing. Detroit, 221 pp., 1988.
A collection of papers dealing with various aspects of the
non-destructive testing of concrete including laboratory studies,
field applications, and statistical analysis of data.
14. ASTM, C 42-87, Standard Test Method for Obtaining and Testing Drilled
Cores and Sawed Beams of Concrete. 1987.
This test method covers obtaining, preparing,'and testing (1) cores
drilled from concrete for length or compressive or splitting
tensile strength determinations and (2) beams sawed from concrete
for flexural strength determinations.
15. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), C 215-85, Standard
Test Method for Fundamental Transverse. Longitudinal, and Torsional
Frequencies of Concrete Specimens. 1985.
This test method is intended primarily for detecting significant
changes in the dynamic modulus of elasticity of laboratory or field
test specimens that are undergoing exposure to weathering or other
types of potentially deteriorating influences.
This test method may be used to assess the uniformity of field con-
crete, but it should not be considered as an index of compressive
or flexural strength nor as an adequate test for establishing the
compliance of the modulus of elasticity of field concrete with that
, assumed by design.
The conditions of manufacture, the moisture content, and other
characteristics of the test specimens materially influence the
results obtained.
Different computed values for the dynamic modulus of elasticity may
result from widely different resonant frequencies of specimens of
different sizes and shapes of the same concrete. Therefore,
comparison of results from specimens of.different sizes or shapes
should be made with caution.
70
-------
16. ASTM, C 457-82a, Standard Practice for Microscopical Determination of
Air-Void Content and Parameters of the Air-Void System jn Hardened
Concrete. 1988.
This standard practice describes microscopical determinations of
air void content, specific surface, spacing factor, and air-paste
ratio of the air-void system in hardened concrete. Two methods are
included: the linear transverse (Rosiwal) method and modified
point-count method.
17. ASTM, C 597-83, Standard Test Method for Pulse Velocity through
Concrete. 1983.
This test method may be used to advantage to assess the uniformity
and relative quality of concrete, to indicate the presence of voids
and cracks, to estimate the depth of cracks, to indicate changes in
the properties of concrete, and in the survey of structures, to
estimate the severity of deterioration or cracking.
NOTE 1. Moisture content of concrete can affect pulse velocity.
The results obtained by the use of this test method should not be
considered as a means of measuring strength nor as an adequate test
for establishing compliance of the modulus of elasticity of field
concrete with that assumed in design.
NOTE 2. When circumstances permit, a velocity/strength (or
velocity/modulus) relationship may be established by the deter-
mination of pulse velocity and compressive strength (or modulus
of elasticity) on a number of samples of concrete. This
relationship may serve as a basis for the estimation of strength
(or modulus of elasticity) by further pulse/velocity tests on
that concrete.
The procedure is applicable in both field and laboratory testing
regardless of size or shape of the specimen within the limitations
of available pulse-generating sources.
NOTE 3. Presently available test equipment limits path lengths
to approximately 50 mm (2 in.) minimum and 15 m (50 ft.) maxi-
mum, depending, in part, upon the frequency and intensity of the
generated signal. The upper limit of the path length depends
partly on surface conditions and partly on the characteristics
of the interior concrete under investigation. The maximum path
length is obtained by using transducers of relatively low vibra-
tional frequencies (10 to 20 kHz) to minimize the attenuation of
the signal in the concrete. (The resonant frequency of the
transducer assembly, that is, crystals plus backing plate,
determines the frequency of vibration in the concrete.) For the
shorter path lengths where loss of signal is not the governing
factor, it is preferable to use vibrational frequencies of 50
71
-------
kHz or higher to achieve more accurate transit-time measurements '
and hence greater sensitivity.
18. ASTM, C 805-85, Standard Method for Rebound Number of Hardened
Concrete. 1985.
. A steel hammer impacts with a predetermined amount of energy, a
steel plunger in contact with a surface of concrete, and the
distance that the hammer rebounds is measured.
The rebound number determined by this method may be used to assess
the uniformity of concrete in situ, to delineate zones or regions
(areas) of poor quality or deteriorated concrete in structures, and
to indicate changes with time in characteristics of concrete such
as those caused by the hydration of cement so that is provides
useful information in determining when forms and shoring may be
removed.
This test method is not intended as an alternative for strength
determination of concrete.
Optimally, rebound numbers should be correlated with core testing
information. Due to the difficulty of acquiring the appropriate
correlation data in a given instance, the rebound hammer is most
useful for rapidly surveying large areas of similar concretes in
the construction under consideration.
19. ASTM, C 823-83 (88), Standard Practice for Examination and Sampling of
Hardened Concrete In Constructions. 1983.
The examination may provide a basis for laying out in situ testing
of the concrete.
The sampling can provide materials for petrographic examination, in
accordance with Practice C 856, chemical or physical analytical
procedures, or any of a wide variety of destructive or
non-destructive tests to determine physical, mechanical, or
structural properties of the concrete-
The results of examination and sampling carried out in accordance
with this practice may be used for a variety of purposes and to
serve a variety of objectives.
20. ASTM, C 856-83, Standard Practice for Petrocraphic Examination of
Hardened Concrete. 1983.
The probable usefulness of petrographic examination in specific
instances may be determined by discussion with an experienced
petrographer of the objectives of the investigation proposed or
underway may include:
72
-------
0 Determination in detail of the condition of concrete in a
construction.
0 Determination of the causes of inferior quality, distress, or
deterioration of concrete in a construction.
0 Determination of the probable future performance of the
concrete.
0 Determination whether the concrete in a construction was or was
not as specified. In this case, other tests may be required in
conjunction with petrographic examination.
0 Description of the cementitious matrix, including qualitative
determination of the kind of hydraulic binder used, degree of
hydration, degree of carbonation, if present, evidence of
unsoundness of the cement presence of a mineral admixture, the
nature of the hydration products, adequacy of curing, and
unusually high water/cement ratio of the paste.
0 Determination whether alkali-silica or alkali-carbonate
reactions, or cement-aggregate reactions, or reactions between
contaminants and the matrix have taken place, and their effects
upon the concrete.
0 Determination of whether the concrete has been subjected to and
affected by sulfate attack, or other chemical attack, or early
freezing, or to other harmful effects of freezing and thawing.
0 Part of a survey of the safety of a structure for a present or
proposed use.
0 Determination whether concrete subjected to fire is essentially
undamaged or moderately or seriously damaged.
0 Investigation of the performance of the coarse or fine aggregate
in the structure, or determination of the composition of the
aggregate for comparison with aggregate from approved or
specified sources.
i
0 Determination of the factors that caused a given concrete to
serve satisfactorily in the environment in which it was exposed.
0 Determination of the presence and nature of surface treatments,
such as dry shake applications on concrete floors.
21. ASTM, C 1040-85, Standard Test Methods for Density of Unhardened and
Hardened Concrete in Place by Nuclear Methods. 1985.
These test methods are useful as rapid, non-destructive techniques
for the in-place determination of the density of unhardened
73
-------
concrete. The backscatter method is also useful for the same "
purpose on hardened concrete. The fundamental assumptions inherent
in the test methods are that Compton scattering is the dominant
interaction and the the material under test is homogeneous.
i
- These test methods are suitable for control and for assisting in
acceptance testing during construction, for evaluation of concrete
quality subsequent to construction, and for research and
development.
NOTE 1. Care must be taken when using these test methods in
monitoring the degree of consolidation, which is the ratio of
the actual density achieved to the maximum density attainable
with a particular concrete. The methods presented here are used
to determine the actual density. A density measurement, by any
method, is a function of the components of concrete and may
vary, to some extent, in response to the normal, acceptable
variability of those components.
Test results may be affected by reinforcing steel, by the chemical
composition of concrete constituents, and by sample heterogeneity.
The variations resulting from these influences are minimized by
instrument design and by the user's compliance with appropriate
sections of the test procedure.
Results of tests by the backscatter method also may be affected by
the density of underlying material. The backscatter method
exhibits spatial bias in that the apparatus's sensitivity to the
material under it decreases with distance from the surface of the
concrete.
22. ASTM, E 177-90, Standard Practice for Use of the Terms Precision and
Bias in ASTM Test Methods. 1990.
Part A of the "Blue Book," Form and Style for ASTM Standards,
requires that all test methods include statements of precision and
bias. This practice discusses these two concepts and provides
guidance for their use in statements about test methods.
Precision -- A statement of precision allows potential users of a
test method to assess in general terms the test method's usefulness
with respect to variability in proposed applications. A statement
on precision is not intended to contain values that can be exactly
duplicated in every user's laboratory. Instead, the statement pro-
vides guidelines as to the kind of variability that can be expected
between test results when the method is used in one or more
reasonably competent laboratories.
74
-------
Bias -- A statement on bias furnishes guidelines on the relation-
ship between a set of typical test results produced by the test
method under specific test conditions and a related set of accepted
reference values.
23. ASTM, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 04.02, Concrete and
Aggregates. 1990.
Specifications, test methods, practices, and definitions of terms
relating to aggregates, concrete reinforcing steel, etc.
24. ASTM, Manual of Aggregate and Concrete Testing, revised 1987.
This Manual of Aggregate and Concrete Testing is intended to
supplement, not in any way to supersede, the various ASTM methods
of sampling and testing of aggregate and freshly mixed and hardened
Portland cement concrete. This manual was prepared by Committee
C-9 on Concrete and Concrete Aggregates and has been accepted by
the Society for publication as information only. The manual is not
a part of the ASTM methods. Comments and suggestions on the manual
will be welcomed by Committee C-9.
Many specifications for aggregates and concrete are based on the
results of ASTM methods of testing and therefore strict adherence
to the requirements of the test methods is important. The methods
have been prepared carefully, but it is impractical to describe the
minute details of manipulations. Improper use of test procedures
can result in inaccurate data and mistaken conclusions about
aggregate and concrete quality. Accordingly, this manual directs
attention to many of the factors that might affect the results of
the tests.
25. American Water Works Association, ANSI/AWWA D110-86, AWWA Standard for
Wire-Wound Circular Prestressed-Concrete Water Tanks. 1987.
This ANSI/AWWA standard covers current recommended practice for the
design, construction, inspection, leak test, leak repair, and main-
tenance of wire and strand-wound circular prestressed-concrete
water containing structures. This standard applies to containment
structures for use with potable water and non-aggressive process
water and wastewater only and should not be used in the design of
containment for highly-aggressive waters or high-temperature waters
without special considerations. It is not intended for use
designing structures for storage of chemicals or slurries.
26. American Water Works Association Committee on Water Holding
Structures, "A Summary Report on Concrete Waterholding Structures,"
75
-------
Journal of the American Water Works Association.' pp 458-459, August'
1978.
This committee report defines the scope of the AWWA Committee on
Concrete Water Holding Structures and presents the results of a
survey on leakage allowances in concrete reservoirs. A
bibliography of literature dealing with concrete waterholding
structures is included.
27. Closner, J.J., Design and Application of Prestressed Concrete for Oil
Storage. The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, 11
pp., 1975.
This paper presents some of the existing examples of concrete in
the petroleum storage field as well as the features available with
prestressed concrete tanks. The design, construction, lining, and
costs associated with prestressed concrete tanks also are
discussed.
28. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Office of Solid Waste,
EPA/530-SW-86-044, Technical Resource Document for Storage and
Treatment of Hazardous Waste in Tank Systems. December 1986.
This document provides owners or operators of hazardous waste
storage tanks guidance in preparing Part B permit applications and
for the Federal and State officials who will be processing these
applications required by Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations,
Part 270 (40 CFR 270). Included is an extensive table of leak
detection methods.
29. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Office of Solid Waste,
EPA/530-SW-88-0005, Draft Report - Clean Closure of Hazardous Waste
Tank Systems and Container Units. November 12, 1987.
This report examines various methods of cleaning hazardous waste
storage units, including those constructed of concrete. Cleaning
methods are examined in terms of their applicability for 10 cate-
gories of contaminants. Advantages and disadvantages of the
methods are listed.
30. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Hazardous Waste Engineering
Research Laboratory, EPA/600/2-85/028, Guide for Decontaminating
Buildings. Structures, and Equipment at Superfund Sites. March 1985.
This document served as a primary source document for
EPA/530-SW-88-0005. It outlines various methods of cleaning and
addresses related engineering considerations, safety concerns,
advantages, disadvantages, waste disposal options, and costs. Case
studies are also included in an appendix.
76
-------
31. Grotta, H.M., et al, Development of Novel Decontamination Techniques
for Chemical Agents Contaminated Facilities Phase I Identification and
Evaluation of Concepts. U.S. Army Toxic and Hazardous Materials
Agency, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, Report DRXTH-TE-CR-83208, Volumes
Land II, 1983 (Distribution limited to Government Agencies).
In this technical report, both old and new untried methods of
decontaminating concrete are described. The objective of this
research and development program on novel processing technology is
to identify, evaluate, and develop novel techniques to decontami-
nate Army buildings and their contents that have become contami-
nated with chemical agents. In this Phase I study, about 65 con-
cepts were generated and described to permit their evaluation
against the criteria of mass transfer, destruction efficiency,
safety, damage to structures, penetration depth, applicability to
complex structures, operating costs, capital costs, and waste
treatment costs, the most promising concepts were the use of hot
gases, vapor circulation, and chemical methods using either
monoethanol amine, n-octyl-pyridinium aldoxime bromide (OPAB) or
ammonia. These methods will be laboratory tested in a future
study.
32. Hooten, R. Douglas, "Permeability and Pore Structure of Cement Pastes
Containing Fly Ash, Slag, and Silica Fume," American Society for
Testing and Materials, reprinted from Special Technical Publication
897. Philadelphia, pp. 128-143, 1986.
A part of research to develop a highly durable concrete container
for radioactive waste disposal in chloride and sulfate-bearing
granite ground water, a variety of cement pastes were studied.
Various proportions of fly ash, slag, and silica fume were used to
make cement paste. While all three supplementary cementing
materials reduced ultimate permeabilities, silica fume was most
effective in reducing permeability at early ages.
33. Hooten, R. Douglas, "Problems Inherent in Permeability Measurement,"
presented at and in Proceedings of the Engineering Foundation
Conference on Advances in Cement Manufacture and Use. Potosi,
Missouri, July 31-August 5, 1988.
This paper discusses some of the variables affecting permeability
testing of concrete. Current laboratory testing methodology is
addressed and some thoughts are offered on improved techniques.
The paper concludes by stressing the importance of developing
standardized permeability testing methods for concrete.
34. Hooten, R. Douglas and Lillian D. Wakeley, Influence of Test
Conditions on Water Permeability of Concrete in a Triaxial Cell,
Unpublished.
The hydraulic conductivity of three concretes with a high ratio of
77
-------
water to cementitious solids are measured in a triaxial cell. Test
variables included confining pressure, driving pressure, the ratio
of these two pressures, and sample length. The effect of these
variables on measured permeability is discussed.
35. International Association of Concrete Repair Specialists, "Concrete
You Can See Through," Concrete Repair Bulletin. Volume 2, No. 1,
February 1989.
Provides brief description of concrete petrographic examination and
a range of costs per sample.
36. International Association of Concrete Repair Specialists, Surface
Preparation Guidelines for the Repair of Deteriorated Concrete
Resulting from Reinforcing Steel Oxidation. Nos. 03730, 03731, 03732,
and 03734, 1989.
This Technical Committee document presents guidelines and
illustrations for surface preparation in repair of concrete that
has deterioriated as a result of reinforcing steel oxidation.
37. McDonald, James E., Repair of Waterstoo Failures; Case Histories.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Technical Report REMR-CS-4, Washington,
DC, 244 pp., 1986.
Twenty case histories concerning the repair of waterstop failures
are presented. The materials and techniques used in the repair are
emphasized. Information in each case history (if available)
includes (a) project description, (b) location and cause of
leakage, (c) repair material, and (d) follow-up evaluation results.
38. National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE), RP-01-88, Pi scon -
tinuity (Holiday) Testing of Protective Coatings. 1988.
This standard provides procedures for determining discontinuities
in coatings on conductive surfaces, including some concretes, using
two types of test equipment: low voltage wet sponge and high
voltage spark testers. Also included are instructions for testing
repaired areas and safety precautions.
39. NACE, RP-02-88, Inspection of Linings on Steel and Concrete. 1988.
Presented are proper inspection procedures for linings on steel and
concrete. Inspection of surface preparation, coating materials,
and application of coatings are addressed. Pre-job conference
instructions and information on the type of inspection equipment
also are provided.
78
-------
40. Portland Cement Association, 15071:030, Underground Concrete Tanks.
undated.
This information sheet briefly discusses underground concrete tank
design, construction, testing, and surface treatment and gives
suggestions for further reference in each topic. A set of drawings
of an underground tank are provided to help in making preliminary
estimates and in drawing final plans.
41. Portland Cement Association, Effect of Various Substances on Concrete
and Protective Treatments. Where Required. 1981.
Describes concrete compatibility with various substances and
presents guidance on the use of surface barriers.
42. Stowe, Richard L. and Henry T. Thornton, Jr., Engineering Condition
Survey of Concrete in Service. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Technical
Report REMR-CS-1, Washington, DC, 109 pp., 1984.
This report provides guidance and summarizes pertinent inspection
procedures and methods of evaluation of concrete in service in
existing civil works structures. Topics include reviewing engi-
neering data, field investigations, and laboratory investigations.
43. Thornton, Henry T., Jr., and A. Michael Alexander, Development of
Nondestructive Testing Systems for In Situ Evaluation of Concrete
Structures. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Technical Report REMR-CS-10,
Washington, DC, 167 pp., 1987.
Additional capability to non-destructively evaluate concrete in
large structures was required. This report is divided into five
tasks: Non-destructive methods for interior concrete; Underwater
mapping and profiling; Engineering guidance for evaluation of
concrete in service; vibration signature measurements; and model
analysis, finite- element feasibility. An effort was made to
develop an ultrasonic pulse-echo system for the investigation and
evaluation of the interior of concrete structures. The system is
presently useful for making thickness measurements on concrete
pavements and floor slabs. Limited tests have shown that a metal
1 plate and a plastic pipe can be located in a concrete slab of 9
inches of thickness or less. In addition, a high-resolution
acoustic mapping system was developed which will provide an
accurate and comprehensive evaluation of top surface wear on
underwater horizontal surfaces. The mapping system can operate in
5 to 30 feet of water and produce accuracies of +/- 2 inches
vertically and +/- 1 foot laterally. Vibration signatures were
obtained from various large structures using the impact-resonance
technique.
79
-------
44. Whiting, D., Rapid Determination of the Chloride Permeability of
Concrete. Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA/RD-81/119,
Washington, DC, 174 pp., 1981.
The most promising method developed to determine the permeability
of concrete to chloride ions involves application of d.c. voltage
in the range of 60.0 to 80.0 volts for 6 hours to either a section
of reinforced concrete bridge deck or a core taken from a concrete
structure. To run one complete test takes two days. Concretes can
be ranked according to high, moderate, low, or very low chloride
permeability.
45. Woodland, L.R., et al, Pilot Plant Testing of Caustic Spray/Hot Gas
Building Decontamination Process. U.S. Army Toxic and Hazardous
Materials Agency, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, Report No. AMXTH-TE-CR-
87112, August 1987.
A decontamination method was developed and tested to eliminate the
explosive and toxic hazard of munition processing wastes. A pilot
project using hot gas treatment was begun at Cornhuskers AAP (Grand
Island, NE) in a contaminated cinderblock building. The
pilot-scale test indicated that a 900 degree F gas stream heating
the inside wall and floor surfaces to about 500 degrees F will
reduce wall surface explosive contaminant concentration to about 1
mg/sq cm, reduce the concrete block interior explosive contaminant
concentration to about 0.11 ug/gm, and minimize the loss of
structural strength from heating to 5 percent of compressive
strength and 20 to 30 percent less in tensile strength.
80
-------
'-
LU
O
O£
LU
LU
LU
1
^O
O
OS
u
LU
LU OS
X
H-I 0
O M
Z«k
Ck
UJ O
Q. f
^«
V)
LU
LU
oe
LU
| i
Uo
LU
oe
^j
Lu
LU
g_
01
0)
L.
g
O
U
o
o
0)
m
"M
oe
V)
u
1
i
u
"c
Si
(J
a
h-
0
X
1
O
fc.
o
o.
01
QC
c
o
u
-* 01
0) V
C r-
o 10
cm
10 0) 3
C «J «-
C 0
E 3
X «*- *-!
uj O */}
c
O "O
01
4-» tn w
(O O U
c a. o
X fl
X »*- 3
UJ O C/)
u
*~ O 01 E
0) <*- i- *-
C 3 10 >1
en
c
c
01
u
c
o
^
u
c u
01 -u
*- rt
1 §
^
1 . >
g
§
Xil IXI Xl
1 1 1 1 II
XlXl l IXXXXXI l
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (
1 1 t 1 1 II
XXXXi l l l IX' XXI > IXI I
h
c/1
*""
CO
oe
UJ
h-
M« 5
<
UJ Z
2 V
f en
(/) 00
5 « «a.o »"!» £
UJ to COOI(O r^ O GO
t i i i i a> o i z i >
uj ae as a: at ae co cr> a: coca >
o t - a; tx a. co ^ ^
u cj c*j cj cw **^ PO 1/1 L/> (j t/i en t/> wi
*C OUCJCJCJOtJOOCJCJOLJ <
u <««««««: L.)
DC 0£
< 5
i i i i i i i i * ii
i i l l i l i i X > l
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
l l l l l i i l 1 Xl
*
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11
,
XXXXXXXX1 XX
1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1
1 1 1 l l l X 1 1 XI
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II
1 1 1 I f 1 1 1 1 II
1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 II
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 l 1 1 ) t X X 1 XI
*O1
c
M
0)
CsJ 0)
O -M
^ L.
o u
c
o
'o
M JJ
-o «
u at
«a oi
s 11
§ j2 <*
«-* in
a a
i i i i t t t i i f
V v4 if) ^ O CM l/l V PN O 3
cM^Lnascoeoo < oc
*
i
V)
01
-M
V}
Of
tfl
tft
01
L.
"D
^
II
*
U
a.
o
V
+»
0)
V)
V)
Of
J_
3
x
81
-------
0)
3
C
C.
0
O
Ul
X
a
2
a.
S
j
vt
a.
§
CO
01
01
u
U
c
a
o
a
01
+*
^_
ae
M
o
i
r-
O
J
u
01
u
o
"-5
X
01
-C
o
u
a.
01
ce
c
o
M
0,8
«3 *-
0) 01
J Q
C
O Q
C 01
*O 01 3
c +» *-
~ C 0
§ t-
X "*-*-*
LU O CO
e
o -a
01
M « M
« CO CO CO
en
c
'c
ni
eu
tj
§
c u
(A
01 O
a o
z
UJ
ill i l l X X X
II 1 1 1 1 1 1
XII i l 1 l i l
1 1 1 1 1 1
XXI X 1 t l l 1
III 1 I 1 1 1 1
It) 111(11
II 1 1 1 1 1 1
Xii l l l i l l
II 1 1 1 1 1 1
I l X I I i l 1 1
III 1 III
l 1 l i X X X I l 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
XIX i l i l i l l
CJ
z
CO
Of
UJ
^
^
LU
1 *
1 £ S
i 22
o u
Z 3 UJ
O u X
«t o
u c >-
O 1-
c/1 "D UJ
< VO "o U
co z a
w o u
5 3 ti LJ
ce < ae
UJ 2 11 U
i 1 2 <
-» u
5 S § i
O < CJ u_
K co
UJ 0
X l
< CJ
LU
t/1
^
3 1
>- CO
U =1
Z 0
LU O
rsj
2 =
CJ
LU CJ
a » o x
as T o co o
a. o o c\j H-
l i 0
_ J U3 CO "^. 5-
« CO CO LO X
* i i co ce
UJ CO CO <\J
Z O O O CO
o co 1 Z O
0 UJ
c r> u. o
m a ec
*j o ae
1) co o
w a. u
^ ftl Ctf
3 c a u-
co o o
u 'a! >- z
-o x o
«J CE
II 2 1
co a i
-------
^^
o
3
4J
0
u
^^
LU
X
Q
Ul
0.
^
*
'
m
in
01
4-1
01
i-
a
c
o
o
-a
a
^ _
01
oe
«i
u
o.
o
u
I
u
>2
u
o
I
u
V
£
a
i.
O 01 U g
01 >*- U 4-»
4-t U U «
C 3 * ><
/» OQ t/1
at
c
c
01
0
c
o
^
u
. 3
C t-
~^ 01
3 §
H-
z
u
s
ii i i « i
II 1 1 X 1
1 III
XI XIII
II 1 1 1 1
II 1 1 1 1
II 11
II XXI 1
II III
II XIII
1 1 1 1 1
IX 1 1 1 1
II III
II 1 1 1 X
1 111
XI Xlli
a
c
- ^ U
O U OX 1
tg O^V ^ OC C UJ
"a x a i
H- c *- 4J ae o: x
z 3 o o 3 tn =C i-
Ul 0 0) < X
X u w 4J -nSi
Ul CTI4-I O
o DO- z o
X C ** 1 O O Z
a: 3 ui i z <
_> : r ui z » _;
i 3 ce i a
oe o o ~ o
O 1- X X 0
:£
V
c
c
o
u
u
£
01
a.
01
4-1
01
(.)
§
u
(rt
OJ
«
A)
U
-o
-o
<
K
«
.2
JD
o
C
c
o
m
~a
a.
in
4-»
g
^j
VI
01
in
m
in
a
u
»
*
u
'a.
o
4-*
01
_c
4-1
(4
01
in
01
u
II
X
83
-------
APPENDIX F
HATER LEVEL MEASURING EQUIPMENT
If inspection of the sump indicates that a leak may be present, the
certifying engineer may require that a leak test be performed. The static
head test described in Section 3 of this document relies upon detection of
changes in the water level within the test sump. 'In small sumps, a
temporary scale may be mounted on the sump wall or the water level on a
side wall may be marked, thereby permitting changes in water level to be
observed and recorded over a period of hours or days.
In sumps with a large surface area, electro-mechanical devices such as
a float-operated strain gauge (load cell) or linear variable displacement
transformer (LVDT) may be appropriate for detecting small changes in the
1iquid level.
Horner Creative Products of Bay City, Michigan, has a strain gauge
system marketed under the name "Horner Ezy-Chek II - Underfill Method."
This system normally is used to test underground storage tanks with
capacities to 12,000 gallons by using an underfill method which requires
that the tank be only 95 percent full. This tank'configuration represents
a liquid surface area of approximately 16.36 m (152 sq. ft.); thus, this
equipment is appropriate for monitoring water level in sumps up to
approximately 150 sq. ft. in surface area.
For sumps with larger surface areas, more sensitive devices are
necessary to monitor surface levels such as the LVDT with a computerized
data acquisition system developed by CCS Control Systems, San Dimas,
California. This system uses a specially-designed float-activated LVDT
system with computerized data processing to elimiriate "noise" and to
identify true changes in water surface level.
Certain sump configurations may prevent the use of the static head
test; in which case, a tracer test may prove useful. A water-soluble,
non-toxic tracer is introduced into the sump and allowed to escape with the
leak, if one is present. The unique chemical tracer can be detected on the
outside of the sump if a release has occurred. The choice of tracer and
monitoring method is site-specific. Tracer tests are used routinely by
Tracer Research Corporation, Tucson, Arizona, to verify the integrity of
underground storage tanks.
84
-------
GLOSSARY
"Aboveground tank" means a device meeting the definition of "tank" as set
forth in Section 260.10 that is situated in such a way that the entire
surface area of the tank is completely above the plane of the adjacent
surrounding surface and the entire surface area of the tank (including the
tank bottom) can be visually inspected.
"Ancillary equipment" means any device including, but not limited to, such
devices as piping, fittings, flanges, valves, and pumps, that is used to
distribute, meter, or control the flow of hazardous waste from its point of
generation to storage or treatment tank(s), between hazardous waste storage
and treatment tanks to a point of disposal on site, or to a point of
shipment for disposal off site.
"Authorized state" means a state operating a hazardous waste program
approved by EPA and authorized to administer and enforce its hazardous
waste program in lieu of the federal program.
"CFR" means the Code of Federal Regulations.
"Characteristics" means the characteristics of a hazardous waste: ignita-
bility, corrosivity, reactivity, and toxicity. Any solid waste that
exhibits one or more of these characteristics is classified as a hazardous
waste.
"Certification" means a statement of professional opinion based upon
knowledge and belief.
"Component" means either the tank or ancillary equipment of a tank system.
"Corrosion" means disintegration or deterioration of concrete or
reinforcement by electrolysis or chemical attack.
"Efflorescence" means a deposit of salts, usually white, formed on a
surface, the substance having emerged from below the surface.
"Erosion" means deterioration brought about by the abrasive action of
fluids or solids in motion.
"Existing tank system" or "existing component" means a tank system or
component that is used for the storage or treatment of hazardous waste and
is in operation, or the installation of which has begun, on or prior to the
effective date of the regulations (July 14, 1986). Installation will be
85
-------
considered to have commenced if the owner or operator has obtained all
federal, state, and local approvals or permits necessary to begin physical
construction of the site or installation of the tank system, and if either:
1) a continuous on-site physical construction or installation program has
begun; or 2) the owner or operator has entered into contractual obliga-
tions, which cannot be cancelled or modified without substantial loss, for
physical construction on the site or installation of the tank system
scheduled to be completed within a reasonable time.
"Exudation" means a liquid or viscous gel-like material discharged through
a pore, crack, or opening in the surface.
"Facility" means all contiguous land, structures, appurtenances, and
improvements on the land used for treating, storing, or disposing of
hazardous waste. A facility may consist of several treatment, storage, or
disposal operational units (e.g., one or more landfills, surface impound-
ments, or combinations of them). i
"Ground water" means water below the land surface in a zone of saturation.
"Hazardous waste" means a solid waste that meets one of two conditions and
has not been excluded from regulation:
1) Exhibits a characteristic of a hazardous waste (40 CFR Sections
261.20 through 261.24), or
2) Has been listed as hazardous (40 CFR Sections 261.31 through
261.33).
"Honeycomb" means voids left in concrete due to failure of the mortar to
effectively fill the spaces among coarse aggregate particles.
"HSWA" means the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (Public Law
98-616).
"Incrustation" means a crust or coating, generally hard, formed on the
surface of concrete or masonry construction.
"Interim status" means that period in which a treatment, storage, or
disposal facility can operate without a pemiit (facilities that were in
existence, or for which construction had commenced, prior to November 19,
1980; or in existence on the effective date of regulatory changes under
RCRA that cause the facility to be subject to Subtitle C regulation).
Applicable standards are found at 40 CFR Part 265.
"Incompatible waste" means a hazardous waste which is unsuitable for:
1) placement in a particular device or facility because it may cause
corrosion or decay of containment materials (e.g., container inner liners
or tank walls); or 2) co-mingling with another waste or material under
uncontrolled conditions because the co-mingling, might produce heat or
86
-------
pressure, fire or explosion, violent reaction, toxic dusts, mists, fumes or
gases, for flammable fumes or gases.
"Inground tank" means a device meeting the definition of "tank" set forth
in Section 260.10 that has a portion of the tank wall situated to any
degree on or within the ground, thereby preventing expeditious visual
inspection of the surface area of the tank that is on or in the ground.
"Inner liner" means a continuous layer of material placed inside a tank or
container which protects the construction materials of the tank or
container from the contained waste or reagents used to treat the waste.
"Laitance" means an accumulation of fine particles on the surface of fresh
concrete due to upward movement of water (as when excessive mixing water is
used).
"Leak-detection system" means a system capable of detecting the failure of
the primary containment structure or the presence of hazardous waste or
accumulated liquid in the secondary containment structure. Such a system
must employ operational controls (e.g., daily visual inspections for
releases into the secondary containment system of aboveground tanks) or
consist of an interstitial monitoring device designed to detect
continuously and automatically the failure of the primary containment
structure or the presence of a release of hazardous waste into the
secondary containment structure.
"Listed" means a hazardous waste that has been placed on one of three
lists: non-specific source wastes, specific source wastes, commercial
chemical products.
"Management" or "hazardous waste management" means the systematic control
of the collection, source separation, storage, transportation, processing,
treatment, recovery, and disposal of hazardous waste.
"New tank system" or "new tank component" means a tank system or component
that will be used for the storage or treatment of hazardous waste and for
which installation has commenced after July 14, 1986. However, for the
purposes of Sections 264.193(g)(2) and 265.193(g)(2), a new tank system is
one for which construction commences after July 14, 1986.
"Onground tank" means a device meeting the definition of "tank" in Section
260.10 that is situated in such a way that the bottom of the tank is on the
same level as the adjacent surrounding surface so that its external tank
bottom cannot be visually inspected.
"Operator" means the person responsible for the overall operation of the
facility.
"Owner" means the person who owns a facility or part of a facility.
87
-------
"Pitting** means development of relatively small cavities in a
surface, due to a phenomena such as corrosion or cavitation, or,
in concrete, localized disintegration.
"Popout" means the breaking away of small portions of a concrete
surface due to internal pressure which leaves a shallow, conical
depression.
"Release" means any spilling, leaking, emitting, discharging,
escaping, leaching, or disposing into ground water, surface
water, or subsurface soils.
"Scaling1* means local flaking or peeling away of the near surface
portion of concrete or mortar.
"Secondary containment" means a method of containing releases;
technologies include liners, vaults, and double-walled tanks.
"Spall" means a fragment, usually in the shape of a flake,
detached from a larger mass by a blow, by the action of weather,
by pressure, or by expansion within the large mass.
"Storage" means the holding of hazardous waste for a temporary
period, at the end of which the hazardous waste is treated,
disposed of, or stored elsewhere.
"Sump" means any pit or reservoir that meets the definition of
tank and those troughs/trenches connect to it that serve to
collect hazardous waste for transport to hazardous waste storage,
treatment, or disposal facilities. This description does not
apply to sumps covered by the exception EPA added to this
definition in the Liner and Leak Detection rule on January 29,
1992 (57 IB 3486).
"Tank" means a stationary device, designed to contain an
accumulation of hazardous waste, which is constructed primarily
of non-earthen materials (e.g., wood, concrete, steel, plastic)
which provide structural support.
"Tank system" means a hazardous waste storage or treatment tank
and its associated ancillary equipment and containment system.
"Toxic vasts" means a hazardous waste that has been listed in 40
CFR Section* 261.31 through 261.33 because it contains one of the
toxic constituents included in 40 CFR Part 261, Appendix VIII.
(Substances included in Appendix VIII have been shown in
scientific studies to have toxic, carcinogenic, mutagenic, or
teratogenic effects on humans or other life forms.)
ss
-------
"Treatment" means any method, technique, or process, including
neutralization, designed to change the physical, chemical, or
biological character or composition of any hazardous waste so as
to neutralize such waste, or so as to recover energy or material
resources from the waste, or so as to render such waste
non-hazardous, or less hazardous; safer to transport, store, or
dispose of; or amenable for recovery, amenable for storage, or
reduced in volume.
"Underground tank** means a device meeting the definition of
"tank" set forth in Section 260.10 whose entire surface is wholly
submerged within the ground (i.e, totally below the surface of
and covered by the ground).
"Unfit-for-use tank system11 means a tank system that has been
determined through an integrity assessment or other inspection to
be no longer capable of storing or treating hazardous waste
without posing a threat of hazardous waste release to the
environment.
89
------- |