&EPA
             United States
             Environmental Protection
             A g e n c y
                         October, 1982
                         (Revised!
            Toxic Substances
Asbestos Exposure
Assessment In Buildings
Inspection Manual

-------
   ASBESTOS EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT IN BUILDINGS
                INSPECTION MANUAL
              Revised:  October 1982
                   Prepared By

                Wolfgang Brandner
          Regional Asbestos Coordinator
         Air and Waste Compliance Branch
       Air and Hazardous Materials Division
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency - Region VII
               324 East llth Street
           Kansas City, Missouri  64106
                  (816) 374-6538

-------
-11-

-------
                                 HLii-


                           TABLE OF CONTENTS



              Section                                        Page


Introduction and Background                                   1


Asbestos Exposure Assessment                                  6


   Air Monitoring                                             7


   Fiber Release Mechanisms                                  10


Building Inspection                                          14


   Evaluation Form #1                                        14


   Evaluation Form #2                                        23


Exposure Assessment - A Numerical System                     28


   Step 1:  Factor Score Selection                           29


   Step 2:  Exposure Number Calculation                      64
   Step 3:  Comparison of Exposure Number to                  65
            Corrective Action Scale
Use of Algorithm Scores to Determine Potential                68
for Fiber Release
Ceiling Tiles and Pipe and Boiler Wrapping                    72

-------
-iv-

-------
                      FIGURES AND TABLES

                                                        Page
Figure 1     Description of Spray-Applied Asbestos-       3
             Containing Material

Figure 2     Types of Ceiling Construction               19

Figure 3     Thickness of Coating                        20
Table 1      Asbestos Exposure Assessment Factor         30
             Scores

Table 2      Corrective Action Scale                     66

-------
-vi-

-------
                                     -1-




                                 INTRODUCTION




Once friable asbestos-containing material has been identified in a



building, the potential that the material will release asbestos fibers




and contaminate the building should be evaluated.  This manual will




introduce you to the different types of materials found in buildings,



explain some of the difficulties of ascertaining the potential of




these materials to release asbestos fibers, and describe the methods




for scoring the conditions you observe in buildings.  This inspection



manual is designed to be used in conjunction with the Environmental




Protection Agency's (EPA) Guidance Documents, "Asbestos-Containing




Materials in School Buildings: Part 1 and Part II".   The Part I Guidance



Document describes how to conduct visual building inspections and how




to collect samples of ceiling or wall material suspected of containing




asbestos.  A more detailed description is presented herein on how to inspect



buildings, particularly schools, for asbestos-containing material and




how to evaluate the potential hazard of exposure to asbestos fibers.






                             BACKGROUND




During the past four years, members of the EPA Region VII office evaluated



over 600 buildings in Iowa, Missouri, Kansas and Nebraska, identified as



containing asbestos.  Inspection of these buildings revealed basically three




types of sprayed-on asbestos-containing material (See Figure 1).  One was




very fibrous (composed almost entirely of fibers), spongy, fluffy, loosely



bonded, highly friable (easily crushed by hand pressure), and one to four




inches thick.  The asbestos content was usually greater than 10% with a

-------
                                    -2-




raaximum asbestos concentration of 98%.  It had the appearance of cotton




candy or Spanish moss hanging from the celling and/or walls.  This material




was usually a mixture of asbestos plus cellulose, rock wool, or fibrous




glass which had been spray-applied and in many instances had been tamped




(compressed).  Several instances were found in which latex or enamel paints




had been applied over the asbestos-containing material.






A second type of asbestos-containing  material was an essentially non-fibrous,




cementitious material commonly referred to as acoustical plaster.  The major



component of the cementitious, acoustical plaster was usually a dense,




non-fibrous mixture of granular materials such as perlite, calcite, calcium




carbonate and vermiculite.  The only fibrous component was the asbestos,



usually at a concentration of less than 10%.  This acoustical plaster had most




frequently been spray-applied; although, in a few instances it had been




troweled on.  This material had a coarse sand, textured appearance and was



most often 1/8 inch to 1/2 inch thick, with a maximum thickness of 3/4 inch.




Such materials were soft and could easily be indented by hand pressure




and if rubbed, a powder residue remained on the hand.  It was light tan in



color If unpainted, but was frequently observed coated with latex paint.






The third type of spray-applied coating was a very hard, concrete-like asbestos-




containing material.  It also had a coarse sand, textured appearance and was




approximately 1/8 to 3/4 inch thick.  It was most often used to fireproof




structural steel members and was therefore commonly referred to as fireproofing




concrete.  It did not leave a powder residue on the hand when rubbed and required




a mechanical device to penetrate the material.

-------
                                         FIGURE 1.
thick
                 DESCRIPTION OF  SPRAY-APPLIED
                ASBESTOS-CONTAINING MATERIAL
               FIBROUS
           ASBESTOS IS:
            1. Highly Friable
            2. Very soft
            3. Fluffy & Spongy
            4. Loosely bonded
               together
            5. Composed almost
               entirely of fibers
            6. Cotton candy/Spanish
               Moss appearance
            7. Usually contains more
               than 10% asbestos
   GRANULAR
 CEMENTITIOUS
ASBESTOS IS:
  1. Friable
  2. Soft, easily indented
     by hand pressure
  3. Easily rubbed off as
     powder by hand
     pressure
  4.. Non-fibrous mixture
    of granular material,
     (only fibrous components
     are the few asbestos
     fibers)
  5. Densely packed
  6. Coarse sand, textured
     appearance
  7. Usually contains less
     than 10% asbestos
  8. Commonly referred to as
   -  acoustical plaster
CONCRETE LIKE
                                                                   thick
 ASBESTOS IS:
  1.  Hard
  2.  Not friable; can not
      be damaged by
      hand pressure
  3.  Requires mechanical
      device to penetrate
      surface
  4.  Non-fibrous mixture
      of granular material,
      (only fibrous components
      are the asbestos
      fibers]
   5. Densely packed
   6. Coarse sand, textured
       appearance
                                                                               concrete slab
                                                                               or steel deck
                                                 asbestos
                                                 insulation
UJ

-------
                                     -4-




Other types of asbestos-containing material have been observed in other parts




of the United States.  An asbestos-containing material having the consistency




and appearance of mud is an example of a type of material observed in a




Maryland school but, to date, not encountered in mid-western schools and



buildings.  It is therefore possible that the user of this manual may



encounter an asbestos-containing material not described herein.  Evaluation




of such materials should be the same as illustrated in this text.






Asbestos-containing materials were most frequently encountered in the following



areas:  air handling room(s), boiler room, gymnasium, auditorium, stage and




backstage, cafeteria, bandroom and music practice rooms, library, bathrooms,




swimming pool, corridors, and above suspended ceilings.  Each of these areas



should be inspected and samples collected of suspect material.  The highly




friable, spongy, asbestos-containing material was rarely observed throughout




an entire building.  In most cases it was observed only in isolated rooms.



For this reason, it is extremely important that each and every air handling




room or music practice room, etc. be inspected.   We have inspected schools




with bare concrete in two air handling rooms only to find the ceiling and walls



in the third air handling room coated with two-inch thick asbestos-containing




material.  Such air handling rooms are of particular concern because the fan




can pull asbestos fibers off the ceiling and walls and blow the fibers throughout



the building.






Of all the asbestos-containing buildings examined in the Midwest, approximately




80% of the coatings were acoustical plaster having the appearance of textured




ceilings and having the consistency of the second type of asbestos-containing

-------
                                     -5-




material described above.  Whenever cementitious, acoustical plaster was




found, it had usually been spray-applied on ceilings throughout the entire




building.  The predominant celling construction in mid-western schools




was found to be a 3 coat plaster system on suspended metal lath.  The



final coat, or finish coat, of this 3 coat plaster system was the acoustical




treatment containing asbestos fibers.






The concrete like coating was rarely located and usually did not represent




an asbestos fiber exposure hazard because the material was not friable.



In one instance though, this fire proofing concrete had been applied to




structural steel columns which were frequently bumped by fork lifts.  Pieces



of fire proofing concrete were knocked to the floor and pulverized by the



tires of the fork lifts thereby releasing asbestos fibers.






The use of asbestos as pipe and boiler wrapping is widespread.  Damaged




asbestos wrapping can easily be rewrapped in canvas or with duct tape.  Since




such wrapping usually has a high asbestos content, it is important to note



damaged or split canvas jackets and to determine what activity caused the




damage so preventive measures can be instituted.






Many other products in buildings contain asbestos.  Just because asbestos is




present in a product or on a ceiling or a wall does not automatically represent a



hazardous situation.  Only if these asbestos-containing products or coatings




release asbestos fibers is there a potential for harm.  To evaluate whether a




potentially hazardous condition exists, a technique to assess and predict exposure



to asbestos fibers had to be developed.

-------
                                   -6-



                       ASBESTOS EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT




Since early 1979 EPA has been investigating the development of an assessment




inspection technique which could be used not just to measure the level of



fibers in the air at any one time but rather to predict the potential for




fiber release from material and subsequent contamination of the area.  EPA




identified eight factors which describe the condition of the material in



the building, the characteristics of the activities in the vicinity of




the material, and the results of analysis of the material contents.  The




information collected through an inspection of an area for these factors



could be combined through a formula to provide a measure of the exposure




potential.  This information could also be used to compare different




sites to one another to determine which problems are most severe and to



decide the best corrective action.






All exposure assessment systems now under consideration have a similar




basic format; the inspector visually inspects the area, assesses a value




for each of the factors according to the severity of conditions found in



each inspection area, and combines these values using the formula provided




by the exposure evaluation system.  By computing the weighted values In




the formula, the exposure evaluation system gives an "exposure score" or




indication of the appropriate corrective action.  The score for each area




can then be compared to other scores; the higher the score, the greater




potential for fiber release and building contamination.

-------
                                   -7-




AIR MONITORING



When EPA first began to address the problem of evaluating asbestos exposure




In buildings, one of the first techniques to be investigated was to take




air samples in the area around the asbestos-containing materials and



determine the concentrations of asbestos fibers*  The levels found in




these early examinations could then be compared with the Occupational



Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA) workplace standard for asbestos.



This standard was established to reduce the worker exposure in asbestos




mining and processing industries.  This technique has subsequently proven




to be inappropriate in school buildings because of problems in both



attempting to monitor the highly variable levels of fiber release found




in nonindustrial situations and problems in the sampling technique.






The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) developed




the method for use in measuring airborne asbestos in industry.  NIOSH's



air monitoring method involves drawing a measured amount of air through a




filter and counting the fibers on the filter using a technique called




Phase Contrast Microscopy.






Early researchers looking at asbestos exposure in buildings with friable



asbestos-containing material attempted to use air monitoring with the




NIOSH technique.  However, several considerations made the NIOSH method



unsuitable for assessing potential exposure to asbestos in schools and



other buildings.






First, it is impossible for the microscoplst, using phase contrast



microscopy as required by the technique, to distinguish between asbestos

-------
                                   -8-




and other fibers, so that any other fibers found in the area, such as




fibers from carpets and clothing, animal hairs, or wood fiber, could be




mistaken for asbestos.  This is not a problem in industry where the fibers




are known to be asbestos but could lead to misidentifications in other




buildings where the type of fiber is not known.






Second, an analyst using the NIOSH Phase Contrast Microscopy Method cannot




identify thin fibers (fiber diameter less than 0.5 micrometers) no matter




the length of the fiber.  The method also does not count fibers shorter than




5 micrometers.  Therefore, use of the NIOSH method will not detect short/thick




fibers nor long/thin fibers both of which are frequently found in buildings.






Last, and most important, is the fact that the NIOSH method uses short-




term, high volume samples which are (1) inadequate to record the occasional,




high-level fiber releases which occur when the material is disturbed because




it is impossible to predict the location or frequency of these disturbances,




and (2) inadequate to record the low levels typically found in schools




during those times when disturbances of the material are not occurring in




the vicinity of the sampling device.






The NIOSH technique was developed for use in industrial settings where




the level of asbestos could be assumed to be constant and within the




range of detectability of the technique.  However, in schools, unpredictable




"peak exposures" from occasional impacts are a significant source of




fiber release which could result in building users' exposure to asbestos




and which cannot, in most cases, be recorded by short term sampling




techniques.  Further research has Indicated that very long term sampling




(such as one to three weeks) and analysis using electron microscopy rather

-------
                                   -9-




than phase contrast microscopy could be used to measure the low and



variable concentrations of fibers in schools.  This technique is, however,




extremely expensive and time consuming and has therefore not proven useful




in evaluating the thousands of school buildings where exposure problems



are thought to exist.






Because of the highly unpredictable frequency of fiber release in schools




and the limitations of the N10SH analytical technique to identify different




types and sizes of fibers, air monitoring using the NIOSH technique has



proven to be an inappropriate method for evaluating asbestos exposure




problems in schools and similar buildings.

-------
                                   -10-




                         FIBER RELEASE MECHANISMS




The asbestos-containing materials most likely to release asbestos fibers



are those which were sprayed or troweled onto ceilings and walls or




other structural elements  for fireproofing, acoustic or thermal insulation,




or decoration.  Because of  the type of mixtures used by the construction




industry, these materials  are commonly friable, that is easily crushed




or crumbled  to a powder when dry, and easily disturbed.  The common




application  technique of pumping a dry mixture of asbestos and binder



through a ring of water at  the nozzle of the applicator tended to create




a very friable mixture.  The more friable  the material, the poorer the




cohesive strength of the material and the  easier it is for the fibers



to come loose.






The type of  building also  plays a part in  predicting whether the material




will be disturbed and fibers released.  This is particularly true in




schools built in the periods from World War II up until the late 1970's



when the use of spray-applied asbestos was banned.  Schools were usually




constructed  with low ceilings and the level of user activity is high;




large numbers of students  use the hallways, classrooms, and other areas



of the school for six to eight hours a day.  The materials are often




located within reach of the students and the frequent movement of the




population,  as well as regular cleaning and rnalntenance, can stir up the



fallen fibers and resuspend them in the air where they can be inhaled by




occupants of the building.




From this discussion, three mechanisms which describe how fibers



are released and dispersed within the building can be identified:

-------
                                   -11-



FALLOUT and IMPACT, which cause the fibers to be released from the




material, and RESUSPENSION of the fibers, which promotes the dispersal




of the fibers throughout the building.  These three mechanisms provided



the basis for the development of the eight assessment factors.






FALLOUT




Fallout is the constant release of fibers which occurs as a result of the




weak bonds in the material as it was installed or which have developed



over time due to the deterioration of the bonding materials.  Fallout can




be caused by building vibrations and movements of people or machines in




the vicinity of the material.  These relatively constant disturbances can



break the weak bond between the asbestos fibers and the rest of the



material and release the fibers into the air.  In many cases the material




was not properly applied, for example the components may have been poorly



mixed or not allowed to cure properly, and the material is prematurely



losing its cohesive strength.  In other cases the material, which may




have been in place for up to 35 years, has simply outlived its useful



life and deteriorated.  Conditions in the area where the material was



applied, such as a particularly high humidity or long exposure to the




sun, can speed up the deterioration process.






The type of substrate (the material to which the friable asbestos-



containing material was applied) may also contribute to the fallout.




Very smooth substrates, such as concrete slabs or steel, or soft material



such as wallboard, tend to offer a poor surface for bonding which may



lead to a premature failure of the adhesive bond between the friable




asbestos-containing material and the substrate.  The entire coating of

-------
                                   -12-




material may then pull away from the substrate and be more susceptible




to failure if disturbed.






Usually, fallout is a slow, imperceptible process, but the rate of fiber



release may increase with the age of the structure as the material




deteriorates.  The rate  of fallout varies primarily due to the level of




background vibration and movement and  to the integrity of the material.



Background vibration may be caused by  heating and ventilation equipment,




by structural vibration, and by human  activity.




IMPACT



Impact is any direct contact with the  material that knocks fibers loose.




Such contact may be intentional, as when material is disturbed to install




electrical systems, or when the material is damaged by vandalism.  It may



also be unavoidable and  accidental, as in the case of maintenance activity.






The frequency of the impact depends on both the location of the material




and the type of activities which occur in the area.  If the material is




accessible to building users, the chances of impact are obviously greater.



The use of the structure where the material is located and the activities




of the building users also increase or decrease the chance of impact*




The amount of fibers released during impact will vary according to both



the intensity of the impact as well as the quality of the installation,




especially the degree of friability, the cohesive and adhesive strength




of the material, and the degree of deterioration which has occurred.

-------
                                   -13-



Generally speaking, impact is responsible for a large release of airborne



fibers in a short amount of time.  Fallout is low level and relatively




constant, and occurs over a long period of time.






RESUSPENSION




Resuspenslon is the secondary dispersal or reentrainment of fibers which



have previously been released by impact or fallout.  The released fibers




will accumulate in the area and be easily stirred up during the course




of routine activities such as maintenance and general foot traffic.



Once resuspended the fibers will remain in the air for long periods of




time.  Because the asbestos fibers are extremely aerodynamic, that is




they tend to float in the air for long periods of time, resuspension can



lead to high concentrations of airborne fibers in areas where there is a



source of fibers from fallout and impact.






Resuspension is caused by activities such as sweeping, dusting, and




pedestrian traffic and by air current from circulation systems.  As an



example of the level of fibers in the air which can be caused by




resuspension, in a university library where custodians continuously dusted




over a mile of shelving, concentrations of airborne asbestos in the



vicinity of the custodian's breathing zone reached over twice the current




industrial standard for asbestos factory workers.  Measurable levels




were also found in the vicinity of other library users at some distance



from the dusting.  Generally, resuspension is proportional to the level




of activity within the area.

-------
                                    -14-






                             BUILDING INSPECTION




Two evaluation forms have been developed to assist you in performing a complete




building inspection and to help you assess the risk of exposure to asbestos




fibers.  The data you record will provide the basis for advice on asbestos




control measures given to building owners.  An explanation of the importance




of this data and how it will be used follows.






EVALUATION FORM #1




All blanks on Evaluation Form #1 should be filled in.  Some questions listing




multiple answers require you to circle the appropriate term(s).  This form must




be completed for each building or school inspected and will require interviewing




the maintenance supervisor and/or the school principal.  Evaluation Form #2




should be completed only if friable material is found.






The first part of Form #1 is self-explanatory.  Many state and local agencies




are cooperating with EPA in this program and you should be aware of who




these contacts are.  In most states, the asbestos contact is in the State




Health Department.  Be sure to include the mailing address of the school so




that suggested abatement procedures can be sent to the school officials.  Line




seven requests the school district number and the total number of schools in




that particular district.  This information is needed to assure that all




public and private schools in each district in the state have been inspected.




Line eight requires you to circle which type of building is being inspected.




Circle which type of construction material was used.

-------
                                     -15-




The type of roof in schools Is usually flat with a gravel/asphalt coating.



The reason for asking about the type of roof Is that often water damage to




asbestos-containing ceilings can only be corrected by first repairing the




roof.  The date constructed and/or renovated Is of concern because asbestos



was sprayed In buildings mainly from 1945 to 1978.  Buildings constructed




and/or renovated during this period deserve special attention.   The reason




for requesting the number of floors is to alert you to the possibility that



air-handling rooms could be on several floors.  The presence of a basement




usually indicates the location of the boiler room.  The attic may have been




sprayed with asbestos-containing insulation and sometimes air-handling rooms



are located here.






Number of faculty, students, maintenance personnel and other building occupants




indicates number of people being exposed.  Number of other building occupants




should include such individuals as secretaries, lunch-room workers, volunteer



aides, etc.  Frequency of building evening use, and for what purpose, provides




information on the degree of activity in the building and may indicate an




area receiving more damage than other areas.






The persons contacted and their telephone number should be listed.  This



identifies the persons familiar with the conditions in the building from whom




additional information can be obtained at a later date, If needed.  The section




for comments Is provided to record such information as the names of other



schools or buildings built by the same contractor In the same time period.




It is highly probable that these other buildings also contain asbestos material.

-------
                                     -16 -
                          BUILDING EVALUATION FORM #1
                     U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                   REGION VII - TOXICS AND PESTICIDES  BRANCH
                              324 EAST 11TH STREET
                          KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI  64106      Date:
Evaluator:
 Address:
Phone #
State or Local Asbestos Contact:
EPA Asbestos Coordinator:  Wolfgang Brandner, Kansas City, Missouri  (816)  374-6538
Building Visited:	
Address:
District No.
 Number of Schools  in  District:
Type of Building:   Elementary    Jr. High   Sr. High   Other:	
Type of Construction:   Pre-Cast Concrete      Steel Frame        Wood
                        Cast in Place Concrete      Other:	
Type of Roof:	
                                             Masonry
Date Constructed:
Areas Renovated:
             Date Renovated:
Number of Floors:
Number of Faculty:
Basement:    Yes     No          Attic:    Yes     No
           Number of Students:
No. of Maintenance Personnel:
         No.  of other  Building  Occupants:
Number of Evenings Building Used Per Week:
Parts of Building Used in Evening:	
Purpose of Evening Use:	
Persons Contacted and Telephone Numbers:
Comments:
Friable Material Found:   Yes       No
Total Amount of Friable Material in Building:
                           Evaluator's Signature:
                        If yes, complete Form #2
                       	sq. ft.

-------
                          BUILDING EVALUATION FORM #1               *
                     U.  S.  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                   REGION  VII - TOXICS AND PESTICIDES  BRANCH
                             324 EAST 11TH STREET
                          KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI  64106      Date:
Evaluator:  Roy  Jotf£S      Address: £"PA  K.c. . Mo.     Phone #
State or Local  Asbestos  Contact:
EPA Asbestos Coordinator;   Wolfgang Brandner, Kansas City.  Missouri  (816)  374-6538
Building Visited:   WORTHV/EST   HIGH  SCHOOL _
Address;  3?*J/  Go*y _     Number of Students:    /.
No. of Maintenance Personnel :    7      No. of other Building Occupants:
Number of Evenings Building Used Per Week: _ S_ _
Parts of Building Used in Evening: a /
Purpose of Evening Use;   sports , ^e.e+i^»s }
Persons Contacted and Telephone  Numbers : ^ &. r ry f4 «.r t . S<*.* t. of- R /•(•*.
                                         r^"^  /   T    /   r-      -c.- - ^
Comments; An
Friable Material Found:   (Jep      No                 If yes, complete Form #2
Total Amount of Friable Material  in  Building;  3.?   So    sq. ft.
                           Evaluator 's Signature:

-------
                                     -18-




Indicate whether material was found that could be crushed and pulverized




by hand pressure.  If such friable material was discovered, Evaluation




Form #2 should be completed  for each unique situation in the building.




It may be necessary to consult the school's architect or review the




school's floor plan in order  to determine the total number of square




feet of friable material in  a building.  The total amount of friable




material provides some measure of the magnitude of the suspected problem.




Be sure to sign the evaluation form.






EVALUATION FORM #2 - Front Side




Evaluation Form #2 is to be  filled out only if friable material is present.




This form is used to describe the conditions in a separate room or in a




part of a room; therefore, it is very likely that more than one of these




forms will be filled out in  a single building.  This form contains a few




blanks which need to be filled in.  Most of the remainder of the form




requires circling the appropriate description of the conditions observed.






The observations made will provide the following data:  1) What area is




coated with asbestos?  2) What is the type of ceiling construction and




its shape?  Figure 2 presents the type of ceiling construction most




frequently encountered in our inspections.  Undoubtedly other types of




ceiling construction will be  found.  3) Height of ceiling.  4) What is




the type of wall construction if the wall is coated with asbestos-containing




material?  5) What is the thickness of the asbestos-containing material?




6) Is the thickness uniform over the entire sprayed surface (See Figure




3)?  7) Is it spongy and fluffy (See Figure 1)?  8) Are pieces of the




coating lying on the floor or on other horizontal surfaces?

-------
                                    FIGURE 2.
            TYPES  OF  CEILING  CONSTRUCTION
          CONCRETE JOIST
     AND BEAM CONSTRUCTION
• • • •  •
* * m^f** '
.•''&'.••;•
                       I
>.*.•;. ••• •...
*:#::•&;
• "  **"•*•«
• • • • ^^^^^J
'••'•'•' '•\5%?
:•**:-: 3°^
           OFTEN ASBESTOS APPLIED
          ONLY ON UNDERSIDE OF DECK
           NOT ON JOISTS OR BEAMS
              CONCRETE WAFFLE SLAB CONSTRUCTION
                                 ASBESTOS USUALLY
                                 UNIFORM THICKNESS
    STEEL BEAM CONSTRUCTION
   CONCRETE OR STEEL.' DECK ^^^^^IjS^i^S^^-'^
               SUSPENDED CEILING CONSTRUCTION
                                     ^
                                                                             BAR JOISTS
                                                                            OR CONCRETE
                                                                              JOISTS
                              STEEL
                              BEAMS
                                                               WIRES
                                                             — AND ~"
                                                              CHANNELS
                                             :«s-s»i-:-:-.--MiS^>»Hg:
SPRAYED-ON
 ASBESTOS
                    ASBESTOS USUALLY SPRAYED ON EXPANDED METAL LATH

-------
                     FIGURE 3.
         THICKNESS  OF COATING
UNIFORM COATING
NON-UNIFORM COATING
          Concrete joist and beam construction
      Asbestos:
   uniform thickness
      of coating
                         itJrte&H •'..-.. • t.*ii>yL!4l*/wSWftl':.-''\.i^i*w
         Asbestos:
     thickness of coating
          varies

-------
                                   -21-




9) Has it been painted?  If painted then an attempt should be made to identify




the paint used.  10) Has material been tamped (compressed)?  11) Does the



coating cover the entire ceiling and/or wall or only the beams and joists, or




only the spaces between the beams (See Figure 2)?  12) Is the coating a




granular, cementitious surface having a textured appearance (See Figure 1)?



13) If cementitious material, does it leave a powder on the hands when




rubbed or is powder on furniture and the floor?  14) Are curtains, drapes,




expandable partitions, etc., being pulled across the asbestos-containing



surface.  15) What type of floor and air circulation is present?  16)  How




are the lights mounted and how many lights are present?  The space for




comments is provided to record any of these findings in more detail.






The information collected on Evaluation Form #2 provides the detailed data



upon which suggestions for corrective action can be made to a school or




building owner.  Ceiling construction and height may determine whether a




suspended ceiling can be installed or whether removal is the best option.



The texture of the surface upon which an asbestos coating has been



applied will determine if the cleaned wall or ceiling has to be sealed




with an encapsulant after the asbestos has been removed.






The type of heating/cooling system needs to be Identified as to whether it



is central air or unit ventilators or some other kind.  We have observed




some schools with no asbestos in any of the classrooms, corridors or gymnasium,




but found severely damaged asbestos-containing material on the ceiling and



walls of the fan room.  A central air duct system connected to the fan served




as the conduit for spreading asbestos fibers throughout the entire building.



Whether the lights are surface mounted to the asbestos-containing material,

-------
                                   -22-




suspended (hang below the asbestos) or recessed (submerged into the asbestos-



containing material) may affect the choice of abatement methods.  If an




enclosure system were chosen, recessed and surface mounted lights would




have to be lowered and  rewired.






The type of  floor is important to note because instructions must be provided



on how to remove asbestos fibers from carpet if any is present.  Tile and




wood floors  can easily  be damaged if water containing a wetting agent is




allowed to contact such floors during asbestos removal.  The building



owners need  to be alerted to  this potential problem so that they can




make certain the contractor takes appropriate steps to protect these




types of floors.






The question about what is above the room being evaluated is significant



when the possibility of ceiling vibration exists.  Some schools have




been evaluated in which classrooms were in the basement and the gymnasium




was directly above these rooms.  The floor of the gymnasium vibrated



frequently from ball impacts  and other sports activities, causing asbestos




fibers to shake loose from the coating on the basement classroom ceilings.

-------
                                   -23-



EVALUATION FORM #2 - Reverse Side




On the reverse stde of Form #2 is a numerical system (algorithm) for




evaluating the asbestos exposure hazard in a room.  This algorithm was



developed for EPA and evaluated in several large urban and statewide




school systems.  It has been used in both the Iowa and Kansas school




inspection efforts by state inspectors.  The remainder of this manual



describes this evaluation system and how to determine which numerical




values to assign to each of the factors being evaluated.






Recent comparisons of this algorithm with long-term air sampling data




revealed that the algorithm did not provide accurate and reliable exposure



information.  For example, some instances were observed in which low




numerical scores were recorded indicating no need for abatement actions




yet air samplings revealed significant levels of asbestos fibers in the



air.  Research is continuing in an effort to develop more reliable hazard




evaluation systems.  In the meantime, this algorithm along with the




other information collected on Evaluation Forms #1 and 92 is the best



available tool for measuring potential risk.

-------
                                 -24-
                    BUILDINGS EVALUATION FORM #2
               U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY
              REGION VII - TOXICS AND  PESTICIDES SECTION     Date:
                        324 EAST  11TH  STREET
                    KANSAS CITY,  MISSOURI  64106       Dist. No.:_
Room:	Sample Number(s):_

Building:	Address:	
Evaluator:                               Phone No*:
Coated  Area:  Celling  Wall(s)   Structural Members Above Suspended Celling

              Pipe  Lagging        Boiler  Insul.     Other:	
Type  of
Celling:    Concrete      3  Coat  Plaster  System      Suspended Metal Lath

            Concrete Joists  and Beams     Tile     Suspended Lay-In Panels

            Metal  Deck    Corrugated  Steel       Steel Beam or Bar Joists

Celling Height: _ ft.
Ceiling  Shape:     Flat           Dome           Other
                                                (draw):
                   W/V/S/V       /-VV>
                   Folded Plate        Barrel

Type  of  Wall  (If  Coated):    Smooth Concrete   Rough Concrete   Masonry

                             Plasterboard      Other: _

Amount of Friable Material  in Area being Evaluated: _ sq. ft.

Description         Fibrous        Granular/Cementltious     Concrete Like
of Coating:     (highly  friable)         (soft)                  (hard)

Thickness: _ Inch(s)     Is thickness uniform:      Yes   No

Coating  debris  on Floor/Furniture/Work Surfaces:      Yes   No

Curtains, expandable  partitions, etc. being pulled across coating: Yes  No

Coatng is Painted:    Yes   No        Coating Is tamped:  Yes   No

Type  of  Lighting:   Surface Mounted       Suspended       Recessed

No. of Lights: _   Type of Heating/Cooling System: _
Type of Floor:    Concrete    Tile    Wood    Carpet    Other:

What is above the room being evaluated?	

Comments;



                             Evaluator's signature:	
                                       (continue on back)

-------
                                 -25-
                    BUILDINGS EVALUATION FORM #2
               U. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
              REGION VII - TOXICS AND PESTICIDES SECTION
                        324 EAST 1 1TH STREET
                    KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI  64106       Dlst. No. \
                                                             Date:/*-
Room ;
                    srA .
           LMetal Deck)    Corrugated Steel

Celling Height; jgo- 3o   ft.

Celling Shape:    Flat
                                                    Suspended Metal Lath

                                                  Suspended Lay-In Panels

                                                       Beam or Bar Joists^
                                               Other
                                                (draw):
                  Folded Plate       Barrel

Type of Wall (If Coated):   Smooth Concrete   Rough Concrete

                            Plasterboard      Other:
                                                                 sonry
Amount of Friable Material in Area being Evaluated;  /*>, pop    sq. ft.

Description   /"   Fibrous   " \  Granular/Cementltious     Concrete Like
of Coating:   ((highly friable))       (soft)                  (hard)

Thickness; «7-3  inch(s)     Is thickness uniform:      Yes

Coating debris on Floor/Furniture/Work Surfaces:    \^£)  No

Curtains, expandable partitions, etc. being pulled across coating: Yes

Coatng is Painted:   Yes  (N$)       Coating Is tamped:  Yes  (No^>
Type of Lighting:   Surface Mounted      ("Suspended^     Recessed

No. of Lights:     /»2      Type of Heating/Cooling System:

                                     CWood
                                              Carpet    Other:
Type of Floor:    Concrete    Tile

What is above the room being evaluated?

Comments: A*L**tat. #* IIe** +/»j j*M£tAl>*<**4*  »rt»p* *t»r*4 *jml«jf ** II.
                          —
                             Evaluator's signature;
                                       (continue on back)

-------
                                    - 26 -
                        NUMERICAL EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
FACTORS
1. CONDITION
2. WATER DAMAGE
3. EXPOSED SURFACE
+
4. ACCESSIBILITY
5. ACTIVITY/MOVEMENT
6. AIR PLENUM/AIR STREAM
7. FRIABILITY
X
8. % CONTENT

SCORES

(0,2.5)
(0,1,2)
(0,1,4)
(0,1,4)
(0,1,2)
(0,1)

(0,1,2,3)
(0,2,3)


SUM

PRODUCT X

EXPOSURE NUMBER
Additional Comments and/or Illustrations:

-------
                                    -27  -



                        NUMERICAL  EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
FACTORS
1. CONDITION
2. MATER DAMAGE
3. EXPOSED SURFACE
•f
4. ACCESSIBILITY
5. ACTIVITY/MOVEMENT
6. AIR PLENUM/AIR STREAM
7. FRIABILITY
X
8. % CONTENT ft%A~o*ite

SCORES

(0,2,5) S
(0,1,2) *
(0,1,4) H
(0,1,4) V
(0,1,2) *
(0,1) '

(0,1,2,3) 3
(0.2.3) 3

^**>/
SUM , ,

PRODUCT X -

EXPOSURE NUMBER / k X
Additional Comments and/or Illustrations:

-------
                                   -28-

                 EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT - A NUMERICAL SYSTEM

An asbestos exposure assessment  system is a decision tool which can be

used to determine the  level  of exposure to asbestos which exists in a

building and which  can also  indicate what, if any, corrective action is

required to control the problem.   Chapter 7 "Exposure Assessment" of EPA's

manual  "Asbestos-Containing  Materials in School  Buildings:  A Guidance

Document-Part  I" presents eight  factors which must be considered by the

building inspector  when determining whether a hazardous condition exists

due to  the presence of asbestos.   Presented is a method for numerically

combining these factors to obtain an "Exposure Number" which, when compared

to a "Corrective Action Scale" will indicate whether (and in some cases

which)  abatement action is necessary.^  The actual characteristics of

the asbestos-containing material and the activities in the vicinity of

the material provided  the basis  for the selection of the eight assessment

factors.


The numerical  system has been prepared taking into consideration fiber

characteristics, asbestos risk factors, and experience with school

exposure situations.   It is  intended as a guide  by which officials can

determine the  appropriate level  of concern for an exposure problem.  It

will also aid  in the selection of appropriate corrective methods.

Chapter 7 points out limitations  of exposure assessment, which apply to

numerical as well as unquantified methods.
1 A true exposure assessment must consider factors such as duration of
exposure and population characteristics.  This numerical method does not
Include such factors.

-------
                                   -29-




The numerical system has three steps:  (1) the eight factors are assigned a




numerical value by the inspector of the building; (2) the numerical values are



combined by SL mathematical formula to produce the Exposure Number; and (3) the




Exposure Number is compared to the Corrective Action Scale.  These three steps




should be performed for each area of the building in which asbestos has either



been found or is believed to be present.  The three steps of the exposure




assessment are described below.






Step 1;  Factor Score Selection




Table 1 presents a list of the eight factors, a brief description of the



range or extent to which a particular condition applies, and a numerical




"Factor Score" corresponding to that description.  The building inspector




must first select the description best fitting the situation in that area.



Only the scores Indicated can be assigned to a factor.  For example, "1",




"3", and "4" are not acceptable scores for material condition.  The selected




score must then be written in the appropriate box (1 through 8) of Form 92




which initiates Step 2.






The area to be evaluated may be any part of the building where the factors




remain uniform.  For example, an auditorium with both an inaccessible ceiling




surface in the stage area and a very accessible and damaged surface in the



audience area constitutes two different areas.  The scores for the two




areas may exhibit a wide variation in exposure numbers, a different exposure




assessment, and possibly different corrective actions.






A detailed description of the eight factors and photographs representing



each of the numerical values has been assembled from actual building

-------
Factor

1.  Material Condition
    (Deterioration/
     Damage)
            -30-

          TABLE I

ASBESTOS EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
       FACTOR SCORES

    Range or Extent

    None
    Moderate; small areas
Score

  0
                           Widespread;  severe;  pieces dislodged
2.  Water Damage
    None
                           Minor
                           Moderate  to major
3.  Exposed Surface
    Area
    Not exposed.  Located above suspended
    ceiling.  None visible without removing
    panels or ceiling sections	

    10% or less of the material is exposed

    10% to 100% of the material is exposed
4.   Accessibility
    Not accessible
                            Low;   Rarely accessible
                           Moderate  to high;  Access may be  frequent
5.  Activity and
    Movement
    None or low;  Libraries, most classrooms

    Moderate;  Some classrooms, corridors	

    High:  Some corridors and cafeterias, all
    gymnasiums	
6.  Air Plenum or
    Direct Air Streams
    None
                           Present
7.  Friability
    Not Friable
                           Low  friability.  Difficult but possible
                           to damage by hand.	

                           Moderate friability.  Fairly easy  to
                           dislodge and crush.	

                           Highly  friable.  Fluffy, spongy, flaking,
                           pieces  hanging.  Falls apart when  touched.
8.  Asbestos Content
    (total % present)
    Trace to 1%
                           1% to 50%
                           50% to 100%

-------
                                   -31-



inspections conducted in the four state area.  The photographs have been




included to provide graphic images of the type of conditions described by




each of the numerical values and to provide some uniformity to the




assigning of these values when different inspectors rate suspected



asbestos-containing material.






                        ASSESS EACH OF THE FACTORS



Carefully consider each of the following seven factors (the eighth factor,



asbestos content, must be determined from laboratory reports) and record




your observations:






FACTOR ONE.  MATERIAL CONDITION;




The condition of the asbestos-containing material is the most important



indicator of whether fibers have been released in the past or may be




released in the future.






An assessment of the condition should evaluate:  the quality of the




installation, the adhesion of the friable material to the underlying



substrate, deterioration, destruction of the material by water, vandalism




which has damaged the material, and any other damage.  Evidence of debris




on horizontal surfaces, material hanging, dislodged chunks, scrapings,



indentations, or cracking are indicators of poor material condition.

-------
                                    -32-




 Condition is  closely related to other factors  considered  in  the  assessment



 inspection:   if the asbestos-containing material  is  accessible,  it  is




 likely to be  damaged; if  the activity level  is high  in  the area,  the level




 of  damage may be high;  and materials  which are exposed  may be more  likely



 to  sustain damage.






 Accidental or deliberate  physical contact  with the friable material can




 result in damage to the asbestos-containing  material.   Inspectors should




 look for any  evidence that the asbestos-containing material  has  been



 disturbed such as finger  marks in the material, graffltti, pieces dislodged




 or  missing, scrape marks  from movable equipment or furniture, or accumulation




 of  the friable material on floors, shelves,  or other horizontal  surfaces.






 Asbestos-containing material may deteriorate as a result  of  the  quality



 of  the installation as  well as environmental factors which affect the




 cohesive strength of the  asbestos-containing material or  the strength of




 the adhesion  to the substrate.  Deterioration  can result  in  dusting of



 the surface of the asbestos-containing material,  delamination of  the




material (i.e.  separating into layers),  or an  adhesive  failure of the




material  where it pulls away from the substrate and  either hangs  loosely



or  falls  to the floor and exposes the substrate.  Inspectors should




touch  the asbestos-containing material and determine if dust is  released




when the  material is  lightly brushed  or  rubbed.

-------
                                   -33-




If the coated surface "gives" when slight hand pressure is applied or the




material moves up and down with light pushing, the asbestos-containing




material is no longer tightly bonded to its substrate.






This factor is comprised of three levels:




     A.  NO DAMAGE:  Material is intact and shows no sign of deterioration,




         No pieces larger than a half-dollar have been dislodged.




         NUMERICAL VALUE:  0

-------
                                   -34-
FACTOR ONE:  MATERIAL CONDITION:
     B.  MODERATE DAMAGE - SMALL AREAS:  Through visual inspection and




         physical contact there are  indications that 10% or less of the




         material is breaking up into  layers or beginning to fall.  There




         may be small areas where  the  material is deteriorating.  There




         may be signs of accidental  or intentional damage.




         NUMERICAL  VALUE:  2



-------
                                   -35-
FACTOR ONE.  MATERIAL CONDITION:

     C.  WIDESPREAD SEVERE DAMAGE:   Greater than 10% of the material is

         damaged.  Large pieces are dislodged and/or debris in the area

         is evident.  Parts of the  material may be suspended from the

         ceilings or may have fallen to the floor.  Evidence of severe

         accidental or intentional  damage.

         NUMERICAL VALUE:  5
                                                          Severely deteriorated
                                                          and damaged asbestos-
                                                          containing ceiling
                                                          insulation. -Note the
                                                          material is composed
                                                          entirely of fibers.
Asbestos-containing
wall  insulation
deteriorated  and
falling  to  the floor,


-------
                                   -36-
FACTOR ONE.  MATERIAL CONDITION:
     C.  WIDESPREAD SEVERE DAMAGE:  (continued)



          Large  pieces  of  granular/cementitious, asbestos-containing
          acoustical  plaster have seperated  from the ceiling and
          fallen to the floor.
          Pieces of asbestos-containing, acoustical plaster lying on
          the  floor and  being  pulverized by  foot  traffic.

-------
                                     -37-




FACTOR TWO.  WATER DAMAGE;




Water damage is usually caused by roof leaks, particularly in schools with




flat roofs or a concrete slab and steel beam construction.  Skylights can




also be significant sources of leaks.  Water damage can also result from




plumbing leaks and water in the vicinity of pools, locker rooms, and lava-




tories .






Water can dislodge, delaminate, or disturb friable asbestos-containing materials




that are otherwise in good condition and can increase the potential for fiber




release by dissolving and washing out the binders in the material.  Materials




which were not considered friable may become friable after water has dissolved




and leached out the binders.  Water can also carry fibers as a slurry to other




areas where evaporation will leave a collection of fibers that can become resus-




pended in the air.






Inspect the area for visible signs of water damage such as discoloration of the




asbestos-containing material, stains on the asbestos-containing material,




adjacent walls, or floor, buckling of the walls or floor, or areas where pieces




of the asbestos-containing material have separated into layers (delaminated) or




come loose and fallen down thereby exposing the substrate.






Close inspection is required.  In many areas staining may only occur in a




limited area while water damage causing delamination may have occurred in a




much larger area.  In addition, the water damage may have occurred since the




original inspection for friable material was conducted causing new areas to




become friable and require an assessment inspection.

-------
                                     -38-




Delamination Is particularly a problem in areas where the substrate is a very




smooth concrete slab.  Check to see if the material "gives" when pressure is




applied from underneath.






This factor is comprised of three levels:




     A.  NO WATER DAMAGE:  No water stains or evidence of the material being




         disturbed by water.  No stains on the floor or walls to indicate




         past water damage.




         NUMERICAL VALUE:  0

-------
                                     -39-
FACTOR TWO.  WATER DAMAGE:
     B.  MINOR WATER DAMAGE:  Small areas of the material or adjacent floor




         and/or walls show water stains and ceiling material may be slightly




         buckled.  However, pieces have not fallen from the ceiling and the




         damage affects 10 percent or less of the material.




         NUMERICAL VALUE:  1

-------
                                     -40-
FACTOR TWO.  WATER DAMAGE:
     C.  MODERATE TO MAJOR WATER DAMAGE:  Water has dislodged some of the

         material and caused the material to break away, or has become

         saturated and has the potential to fall, and/or greater than 10

         percent of the material has been affected.  Asbestos fibers have

         been carried from the asbestos-containing material by water,

         evaporation has occurred, and the fibers have been deposited on

         other surfaces.

         NUMERICAL VALUE:  2
          Water has destroyed the bond between the acoustical plaster
          and the substrate.  Note delamination of ceiling coating.

-------
                                     -41-
FACTOR TWO.  WATER DAMAGE:
     C.  MODERATE TO MAJOR WATER DAMAGE:   (continued)
         Water damage particularly severe around sky lights.
                                                *
         Water has leached asbestos fibers from the acoustical plaster ceiling,
         carried these fibers down the wall and evaporated leaving a deposit
         of asbestos fibers on the wall.

-------
                                     -42-




FACTOR THREE.  EXPOSED SURFACE AREA;




The amount of asbestos-containing material exposed to the area occupied by




people can increase the likelihood that the material may be disturbed and




determines whether the fibers can freely move through the area.  An asbestos-




containing material is considered exposed if it can be seen, i.e. if there




are no physical barriers which must be moved in order to get to the material,




For a material not to be exposed, the barrier must be complete, undamaged,




and not likely to be removed or dislodged.  An asbestos-containing material




should be considered exposed if it is visible, regardless of the height




of the material.






If the asbestos-containing material is located behind a suspended ceiling




with movable tiles, a close inspection must be made of the condition of




the suspended ceilings, the likelihood and frequency of access into the




suspended ceiling, and whether the suspended ceiling forms a complete




barrier or is only partially concealing the material.






Asbestos-containing material above a suspended ceiling is considered




exposed if the space above the suspended ceiling comprises an air plenum.




Suspended ceilings with numerous louvers, grids or other open spaces




should be considered exposed.

-------
                                     -43-




This factor is comprised of three levels:




     A.  MATERIAL NOT EXPOSED:  Located above suspended ceiling.  None




         visible without removing panels or ceiling sections.  Suspended




         ceiling is not damaged.




         NUMERICAL VALUE:  0

-------
                                     -44-
FACTOR THREE.  EXPOSED SURFACE AREA:
     B.  TEN PERCENT OR LESS OF THE MATERIAL IS EXPOSED:  A few panels of

         a suspended celling have been removed.  Spaces between ceiling

         tiles exist which would allow fibers to pass through the barrier.

         NUMERICAL VALUE:  1
                                        i

Space between
suspended ceiling
Danels and wall.
Asbestos-containing
Insulation above
suspended celling.
Light difuser panel
missing from sus-
pended ceiling.
Light recessed into
as bestos-containing
insulation.

-------
                                     -45-
FACTOR THREE.  EXPOSED SURFACE AREA:
     C.  GREATER THAN 10 PERCENT OF THE MATERIAL IS EXPOSED.




         NUMERICAL VALUE:   4

-------
                                     -46-




FACTOR FOUR.  ACCESSIBILITY;




If the friable asbestos-containing material can be reached by building users




or maintenance people either directly or by impact from objects used in the




area, it is accessible and subject to accidental or intentional contact and




damage.  Material which is accessible is most likely to be disturbed in the




future.






Evidence of degree of accessibility can also be determined by examining




asbestos-containing surfaces for impact marks, gouges, scrapes, finger marks,




items thrown into the material, etc.  Even coated ceilings 25 feet high have




been observed with pencils, pens, forks and other items stuck in the material.




Also note such practices as stacking boxes from floor to ceiling.  The top




box may scrape the asbestos-containing coating off the ceiling when it is




moved.






The proximity of the friable asbestos-containing material to heating,




ventilation, lighting and plumbing systems requiring maintenance or repair




may increase its accessibility.






In addition, the activities and behavior of persons using the building




should be included in the assessment of whether the material is accessible.




For example, persons involved in athletic activities may accidentally cause




damage to the material on the walls and ceilings of gymnasiums through contact




by balls or athletic equipment.  To become fully aware of the uses of the




building by its occupants, the inspector should consult with building staff




or personnel familiar with routine building activities.

-------
                                     -47-

This factor is comprised of three levels:

     A.  NOT ACCESSIBLE:  The material is located above a tight suspended

         ceiling or is concealed by ducts or piping.  The building occupants

         cannot contact the material.

         NUMERICAL VALUE:  0
          Asbestos-containing insulation on ceiling behind a suspended,
          splined-tile ceiling.

-------
KACTOK KOUK.   ACCKSSIIIII.ITY:


       H.   KAKKI.Y  ACCKSSIHI.K:   Tin- inatnlal  In  rontai'ti-d  only din Ing abnormal

            activity  mull MM   I 111 i ci| in-ill   ma I  ill rnancc  or  i •  |-.i I i  ol  nearby  In'iilni;

            -••• ni  i 1.11  11 HI .  Mi'liiini'   01   |i I mill, i  n;'  •. ,". i i-iM'. .   tin i  I il I ii)'.  01 i iijiani .'i  rarely

            t < null  t lie  mat t-1 I a I  01   t Ii i ow  ol» |i-r t n   i,'. i I n-. I  I I .

            NIIMI'KICAI. VAI.IIK:    I
                                                             »,.-jJ*-*^"«»
            l.lf.lit  MxtiiM'  i	...-.I  Into  II.IH--II on (  onl ,t I nl UK  I nmi I at 1 on ,
            liji.n i-  .iliovi-  MIIII|IIMII|I-I|  « i-ll hi)-,  lan-ly <-iit <• t c
-------
KACTOK  KOIIK.   ACCI'.SSIIII I.ITY:








     C.      IIICHI.Y ACCK.SSIHI.K:   M/it.-il.il   In  cmintr t ril  I r ci| ncnt  I y  ',  ncr ii|i i n I '.   .111  i  i in I  n I  t lie





              in.iii-il.il  liming  iK.iinil  .irtlvlly  .it   which  I I mi-  I licy  r out I in-I y





              I micll Mild  (I I u I ixlf'c  I In- in.il i-i I .1 I •;  MI  Iliiuw  iili|i-rln  ,i^.,ilii'il  It





              NIIMKKICAI.  VAI.IIK:    /t


-------
                                     -50-
FACTOR FOUR.  ACCESSIBILITY:
      C.  HIGHLY ACCESSIBLE: (continued)

           Look, for evidence of contact and damage such as finger marks in
           acoustical plaster ceilings.
           Although some ceilings may be more than 18 feet high, evidence
           of ball impact damage is observable on the ceiling.

-------
  FACTOR FOUR.  ACCESSIBILITY:

       C.  HIGHLY ACCESSIBLE:  (continued)

Although some asbestos-
containing ceiling
insulation may be out
of the reach of
building occupants,
a ceiling is still
considered highly
accessible if items
have been thrown at
it.  In many cases
such items remain
embedded in the
insulation, as
the paper airplanes
in the photograph.
••

          Another example of highly
          accessible, asbestos-
          containing insluation is
          wall coatings.  Normal
          activities such as flip-
          ping a light switch can
          result in knocking pieces
          of the wall insulation to
          the floor.

-------
                                       -52-




FACTOR FIVE.  ACTIVITY AND MOVEMENT;




The level of activity and movement in the vicinity of the astestos-containing




material can affect both the potential for disturbance of the material as well




as the level of resuspension of the fibers which have come loose from the




material.  Consider not only the movement caused by the activities of people




in the area but also movement from other sources such as high vibration from




adjacent rooms, highways, etc.






Another source of vibration is sound, such as music and noise.  Sound sets air-




waves in motion at certain frequencies.  As these sound waves impact on asbestos-




containing material, they may vibrate this material and contribute to fiber




release.  Therefore fibers may be released to a greater extent in a band room,




music practice room, or auditorium than in the remainder of the building.  Air-




craft noise also has the ability to vibrate buildings; therefore, the inspector




should determine if the building is in a direct flight path.  Although 1 am




not aware of any research data which would substantiate my hypothesis that




sound vibrations could contribute to fiber release, common sense would indicate




that this theory has merit.  During our inspections we have learned that in




several schools whose ceilings were coated with asbestos-containing acoustical




plaster, the band rooms were dustier than any other room in the school and




granular material was deposited on floors and desks after music practice sessions.






The level of activity can best be described by identifying the purpose of the area




as well as estimating the number of persons who enter the area on a typical day.






This factor is comprised of three levels:




     A.  NONE OR LOW ACTIVITY:  This level would normally include areas




         such as administrative offices, libraries, and those classrooms




         where the population is quiet and non-destructive.




         NUMERICAL VALUE:  0

-------
                                     -53-
FACTOR FIVE.  ACTIVITY AND MOVEMENT:
     B.  MODERATE ACTIVITY:  This level describes corridors, classrooms or




         other areas where activities exist that could create undue vibration.




         This vibration could result in fibers being released from the




         material into the immediate area.




         NUMERICAL VALUE:  1

-------
                                     -54-
FACTOR FIVE.  ACTIVITY AND MOVEMENT:

     C.  HIGH ACTIVITY LEVEL:  This level may be found in cafeterias and

         corridors whose occupants are vandalous or disruptive in their

         activities.  This also includes all gymnasiums, swimming pools

         and rooms containing machinery.

         NUMERICAL VALUE:  2
                                                     Although the activity
                                                     level of the room
                                                     occupants may be low,
                                                     sound waves generated
                                                     by the musical instru-
                                                     ments may vibrate the
                                                     asbestos-containing
                                                     insulation and result
                                                     in fiber release.
   Gymnasiums are high activity level
   areas and ceiling damage is usually
   evident.

-------
                                     -55-




FACTOR SIX.  AIR PLENUM OR DIRECT AIR STREAM;




An air plenum exists when the return (or, in rare cases, conditioned) air




leaves a room or hall through vents in a suspended ceiling and travels at




low speed and pressure through the space between the actual ceiling and




the suspended ceiling or ducts.  In evaluating whether an air plenum or




direct air stream is present the inspector must look for evidence of ducts




or cavities used to convey air to and from heating or cooling equipment or




the presence of air vents or outlets which blow air directly onto friable




material.






A typical construction technique is to use the space between a suspended




ceiling and the actual ceiling as a return air plenum.  In many cases you




will have to lift the tiles in the suspended ceiling to check if this is the




case.  Inspection of the air handling or HVAC equipment rooms may also provide




evidence of the presence of this material in the plenums.






Special attention should be paid to whether activities such as maintenance




frequently occur which would disturb the material in the plenum.  Also any




evidence that the material is being released or eroded (i.e. is it damaged




or deteriorated so that the material is free to circulate in the airstream)




such as accumulations of the material in the plenum should be noted.

-------
                                     -56-




The presence of a direct air stream is indicated by discoloration of the




asbestos coating in the vicinity of a vent or erosion patterns may be




evident in the asbestos-containing material.







This factor is comprised of two levels:




     A.  NO AIR PLENUM OR DIRECT AIR STREAM PRESENT:




         NUMERICAL VALUE:  0
             An Anemostat - air diffuser designed to direct  the




             air stream downward in a circular pattern,  usually




             directing no air passage across  ceiling surface.




             No dust patterns are evident either on the  ceiling




             or on nearby walls.

-------
                                     -57-




FACTOR SIX.  AIR PLENUM OR DIRECT AIR STREAM:




     B.  AIR PLENUM OR DIRECT AIR STREAM PRESENT:   Look for dust patterns




         deposited by an air stream on surfaces next to air supply diffusers,




         Fan rooms coated with asbestos-containing material may be con-




         tributing asbestos fibers to the building air if the circulation




         system draws air from such a coated room.  Look for debris from




         the asbestos-containing material being deposited on dampers and




         filters of the air intake.




         NUMERICAL VALUE:  1
          Look for air erosion patterns in the ceiling or wall coating.

-------
                                        -58-

   FACTOR SIX.   AIR PLENUM OR DIRECT AIR STREAM:

        B.  AIR PLENUM OR DIRECT AIR STREAM PRESENT:
(continued)
Insulation debris
on ceiling tiles
                                                               Erosion Pattern in
                                                               Asbestos Ceiling
                                                               Insulation.
                                                             <-Open End Air Duct
                                                               Suspended Ceiling
                                                               Tiles
                   Air Plenum Space Above Suspended Tile Ceiling
                                                               As bestos-Containing
                                                               insulation debris
             Close-up of lower portion of photo above,
                                                               Perforated Metal
                                                               Ceiling Tiles  (Note
                                                               numerous  1/8 inch
                                                               holes in  tiles)

-------
                                     -59-




FACTOR SEVEN.  FRIABILITY:




The term "friable" is applied to material that  can  be  crumbled,  pulverized,




or reduced to powder by hand pressure.   In order to evaluate  the friability




of the material it must be touched.   The asbestos-containing  material  can




vary in degree of friability.  The more friable the material,  the greater




the potential for asbestos fiber release and  contamination.   Spray applied




asbestos-containing material is generally more  friable than trowel applied




material.







This factor is comprised of four levels:




     A.  NOT FRIABLE:  Material that is hard  and crusty.   Cannot be




         damaged by hand.  Sharp tools  required to  penetrate  material.




         NUMERICAL VALUE:  _0









     B.  LOW FRIABILITY:  Material that is difficult yet  possible to damage




         by hand.  Material can be indented by  forceful impact.   If the




         granular, cementitious asbestos-containing material  is  rubbed,




         it leaves granules on the hand but no  powder.




         NUMERICAL VALUE:  1




                                       v*r/-      N^BT

-------
                                       -60-
KACTOK SKVKN.   KK1AH1UTY:
     C.  MODKKATK KKIAHll.lTY:  Kairly eany  to  dislod^i- ami nush or





         pulverize.   Material may bt>  removed  In small  or lai^i- |ilecea.




         Material In soft and can eaully  be  Indented by hand |>re«sure.





          Tin-  granular, ceraentttloua aabeBtos-contal ul nf, inaiftlal leaves a





         powiltT residue on the hands when ruhb«'d.




         NUMKKICAL VA1.UK:  2

-------
                                       I-1
FACTOR SKVKN.  KK1 ABILITY:




     L).  IIK;H KKIABIUTY:  The material  In  tlutfy,  spongy,  or flaking and may




         huve pieces hau^lu^ ciown.   Kaully  crushed  or pulverized by minimal




         hand pressure.  Material may  disintegrate  or fall  apart when touched,




         NUMKK1CA1.  VAI.IIK:   3

-------
                                     -62-



FACTOR EIGHT.  ASBESTOS CONTENT:



The percentage for all types of asbestos present should be added for the total



asbestos content.  The numerical value is assigned based upon the report of



analysis, not on appearance of the material.  The photographs are included only



to demonstrate the appearance of coatings most frequently observed that contain



asbestos at the concentrations describing this factor.  Many coatings look



just like those represented in the pictures, but do not contain any asbestos.





With a high percentage of asbestos, there are more fibers that can be released



and contaminate the building environment.  Therefore, if certain areas are



identical in their assessment using the other seven factors, this factor will



be helpful in establishing priorities and indicating which area needs to be



addressed first.  This factor is comprised of three levels:



     A.  TRACE AMOUNTS TO ONE PERCENT.



         NUMERICAL VALUE:  0_





     B.  ONE PERCENT TO FIFTY PERCENT.  Ceiling and wall coatings most



         frequently encountered in this category were the granular, cementitious



         acoustical plasters.



         NUMERICAL VALUE:  2
            -           V
                              '  .


           '-  •     >:'  '   J**l
                                                     • •

-------
                                     -63-
FACTOR EIGHT.  ASBESTOS CONTENT:
     C.  FIFTY PERCENT TO ONE HUNDRED PERCENT.  Most frequently materials




         containing over 50% asbestos were pipe and boiler wrapping or the




         fibrous, cotton candy, type sprayed-on insulation.




         NUMERICAL VALUE:  3

-------
                                     -64-




Step 2:  Exposure Number Calculation




The Exposure Number is derived from the Factor Scores by a formula.  After




entering the chosen Factor Scores on lines 1 through 8 of Form #2:




    a)  Sum factors 1 through 6 and enter opposite SUM;




    b)  Multiply factor 7 times factor  8, and enter opposite PRODUCT;




    c)  Multiply SUM times PRODUCT and  enter opposite EXPOSURE NUMBER.




This number represents the result of your assessment for each area of the




building.  The values can range from 0  to 162.  The higher the numerical




value, the greater the potential for fiber release and therefore the more




hazardous the situation.  The Exposure  Number must now be compared to the




Corrective Action Scale, which is Step  3.

-------
                                     -65-



Step 3:  Comparison of Exposure Number to Corrective Action Scale




Table II, Corrective Action Scale, presents four types of corrective action,




a brief description of each, and a range of Exposure Numbers for which that




Corrective Action is appropriate.  Compare the Exposure Number derived in




Step 2 to the ranges in Table II to determine whether action is needed.




For example, an Exposure Number of 60 clearly Indicates that the asbestos



should be removed.  An Exposure Number of 10, however, might suggest




encapsulation or deferral of action.  In this case it is necessary to



further analyze the situation, perhaps to consider factors such as length




of time that action could be deferred.




The Exposure Number can be used:




    (1) To determine whether corrective action can be deferred or




        initiated.  With a score of zero to twelve, corrective action




        can usually be deferred.  This is assuming that a continuing




        inspection program will be Implemented and that Inadvertent




        damage to the material will be avoided.




    (2) To set priorities for decision making.  The higher the exposure




        number, the higher the priority.



    (3) To select a corrective action.  The exposure number Indicates




        methods found to be appropriate in school exposure situations.




        The corrective action scale is to be considered as a guideline for



        decision making.  Local conditions will have significant




        Influence on corrective action selection.

-------
                                     -66-




                                   TABLE 2




                           CORRECTIVE ACTION SCALE
CORRECTIVE ACTION
Deferred Action
EXPOSURE NUMBER RANGE
         0-12
Encapsulation




There appears to be a wide range of




numbers and conditions where use of




a sealant has provided a satisfactory




solution.  Encapsulation seems to be appro-




priate especially for conditions where




there is a large area exposed



(Factor 3) and there is a low score




for the other factors.  It is




inappropriate to use encapsulation




where severe water damage or the




potential for water damage is evident




(Factor 2).  A high accessibility




factor (Factor 4) also indicates that




encapsulation is inappropriate.






Enclosure
Enclosure has been used over virtually




the entire range from below 10 to above
        10-50

-------
                                     -67-



100.  It is also, by far, the least used




corrective method.  It is an Inappropriate




corrective method in the same situations




where encapsulation is inappropriate




(Factors 3, 2, and 4).






Removal                                                         40 and over




Removal is the only complete solution.



It is usually appropriate where the




exposure number indicates a high exposure



problem.  Removal can be inappropriate




if the asbestos material must be removed




from a complex surface (such as pipes,




lines, and ducts) which is relatively




inaccessible.

-------
                                      -68-




        USE  OP ALGORITHM SCORES  TO DETERMINE POTENTIAL FOR FIBER RELEASE






 In  the  previous  publication  of  this  manual  examples  were  provided demonstrating




 the use of  algorithm scores  to  determine  appropriate corrective actions.




 During  four years of  use by  EPA Regional  Office inspectors as well as by




 state inspectors, the algorithm was  found to be more useful  as  an indicator




 of  the  degree of hazard than as a justification method for a particular




 corrective  action.   Experience  has shown  that the  corrective action  chosen by




 a building  owner often  is determined by none of the  algorithm factors;  instead,




 it  is determined by  available financial resources  and by  employee as well as




 public  pressure.  The algorithm proved to be a useful tool in setting




 priorities.  The assumption  was made that the higher the  algorithm exposure




 number, the more hazardous the  situation and the more likely for  asbestos




 fibers  to be released Into the  building air.  In this  manner school districts




 as well as building owners could  be  advised  of which buildings  or areas within




 buildings needed correction  on  a  priority basis and  which ones  could be postponed.






 The use of an algorithm or any  other assessment system for determining the need




 to  take corrective actions relies  on estimating the  likelihood  of fiber




 release from asbestos-containing  materials.   Factors  are  evaluated which are




 assumed to  represent  a  relationship  between  the asbestos-containing materials




and airborne, asbestos  fiber levels.  Such an assessment  tool has the advantage




of being practical by allowing  an inspector  the use  of  the powers of observation




to reveal the potential for  future fiber release even when actual levels of




airborne asbestos fibers are  relatively low.  An Inspector trained In the use




of the algorithm can  evaluate the asbestos-containing materials in various

-------
                                     -69-



locatlons within a single building or in different buildings and compare



results.  This type of comparative rating system can then be used for setting



asbestos control priorities.






To determine the validity of the assumed relationships between the eight



algorithm factors and actual concentrations of airborne asbestos fiber levels,



EPA sponsored a comprehensive study in an urban school district comparing



algorithm scores with air monitoring.  Of the eight algorithm factors assumed



to be positively correlated to measured levels of airborne asbestos fibers,



only two were confirmed:  the presence of water damage and proximity of the



asbestos-containing material to an airstream created by the ventilation



system.  Results for the degree of friability, percent asbestos content and



degree of activity did not confirm prior expectations of a direct relationship



with airborne asbestos fiber levels.  The factors of accessibility, degree of



exposed surface area, and condition of the material did not receive a fair



evaluation because little or no variation in algorithm scores was observed in



the schools.  These and other findings indicate that ratings derived from



subjective assessments of fiber release potential are not reliable indicators



of measured airborne asbestos levels*  This conclusion Illustrates that air



monitoring only provides information on current airborne fiber levels and



cannot be used as a tool to predict potential fiber release.  The algorithm



was intended as a device to measure the potential for fiber release and as



such is a useful evaluation mechanism in the hands of a trained Inspector.



By recognizing the limits of the algorithm, as demonstrated by the recent



EPA study, It can still be a useful hazard evaluation tool.

-------
                                     -70-




In our experience, we recognized that the algorithm was not sufficient within




itself to allow us to make asbestos abatement suggestions to school officials




and building owners.  Therefore, Evaluation Form #1 and the front of Evaluation




Form #2 were developed.  By combining the algorithm scores with information




from these forms abatement decisions could be reached.  For example, if the




algorithm score was high, over 60, and there was asbestos debris on the floor




and almost every square inch of ceiling was covered by ball impact marks, the




prudent decision was made to close and seal the gymnasium until asbestos




removal could be undertaken.  Conversely, if the algorithm score was low,




below 15, and there was no asbestos debris on horizontal surfaces, the




asbestos-containing ceiling coating was out of the reach of the building




occupants, objects had not been thrown into the ceiling coating, and neither




curtains nor expandable partitions were brushing across the asbestos-containing




material, no abatement actions were needed but periodic re-inspections and




wet cleaning methods were instituted.






An algorithm score of between 10 and 40 indicated an asbestos-containing




material that was still in relatively good condition but was likely to be



releasing asbestos fibers.  Such material could be considered for encapsulation.




In addition to the algorithm score, the appropriateness of encapsulation was




in part determined by the thickness of the asbestos-containing material and




whether this thickness was uniform throughout the spray-applied material.




Based on previous encapsulation studies by Battelle Laboratories under contract




to EPA, most penetrating encapsulants could only penetrate through 3/4 inch




of fibrous material.  Only two encapsulants were capable of penetrating to




1 1/4 inch.  Therefore, fibrous coatings thicker than 3/4 inch were considered

-------
                                     -71-




for encapsulation only after testing to determine if the encapsulant could



penetrate through the coating and re-attach it to the substrate.  Such other




factors as adherence of the asbestos-containing material to the substrate




and cohesive strength within the material itself also had to be evaluated




before a decision on encapsulation could be reached, especially if an encap-




sulant was to be used which formed a membrane over the material rather than




penetrate through it.  In many instances encapsulation was found to be a




useful abatement technique for use on granular/cementitious acoustical plaster.




Before encapsulation is selected as the abatement choice, the encapsulant




should be applied to test patches of the asbestos-containing material and a




determination made that asbestos fibers are not released from the treated




material even when subjected to inadvertent abuse.  The decision to encapsulate




must be made with the understanding that periodic re-application of the




encapsulant will be required during the remaining useful life of the building




and before demolition of the structure can occur, the encapsulated asbestos



must be removed as required by EPA regulation.






Perhaps the most important lesson learned form recent evaluations of the




algorithm factors is that decisions to undertake corrective action to control




asbestos exposures must rely on informed judgement.  The algorithm is only



one of several tools which can be used to collect information upon which a




judgement to conduct asbestos abatement can be based.  Until new and more




accurate evaluation techniques are developed, the algorithm and the associated




forms described in this document represent one practical approach to detecting




and evaluating existing asbestos exposure hazards and determining the potential




for future asbestos fiber release.

-------
                                     -72-
                  CEILING TILES AND PIPE AND BOILER WRAPPING


Although this manual concetrates more on inspecting and evaluating asbestos-

containing ceiling and wall coatings, suspended ceiling tiles as well as pipe

and boiler wrapping should not be overlooked as potential sources of asbestos

fibers.  The familiar suspended ceiling panels, approximately 1/2" thick, have

in almost all cases been found to be composed of non-asbestos materials.

However some thin, 1/8" thick, suspended ceiling tiles have been found to be

composed of as much as 30% asbestos.  These thin tiles are a hard, non-friable

material and under normal use conditions are not expected to release asbestos

fibers.  If these thin tiles are broken as a result of being dropped or some

other activity, they will shatter and release fibers.  The inspection program

should note the existence of such tiles so that care can be taken not to

damage the tiles.
      Asbestos-containing,
      1/8 inch thick, sus-
      pended ceiling tile.
      (End view of broken
      tile,  note fibers.)
Non-asbestos, 1/2 inch thick,
suspended ceiling panel.
(End view)

-------
                                   -73-
Asbestos-containing pipe and boiler wrapping has been manufactured in various

forms, the most common having the appearance of a white, chalky material.

Often this material has been preformed to accoraodate a certain diameter pipe

or molded into bricks for attachment around boilers.  Other types of pipe and

boiler wrapping have the appearance of mud or an insulating blanket.  Some

pipe wrapping has been made from corrugated, asbestos-containing paper.  Pipe

and boiler wrapping is covered on the outside with a protective jacket con-

structed of such materials as cloth, canvas or metal.  Undamaged and intact

protective jackets should prevent spontaneous asbestos fiber release.  Care

must be exercised to prevent the tearing of the fabric jackets and the release

of asbestos fibers.  Such common practices as laying ladders against pipes

and boilers or storing boxes against wrapped pipes may have to be eliminated

to prevent destruction of the asbestos-containing insulation and fiber release.

Correcting minor damage to pipe and boiler wrapping can often be accomplished

with duct tape or re-wrapping torn protective jackets.  Replastering of the

pipe and boiler wrapping may be required for larger damaged areas.  If damage

to the protective jacket and wrapping is so extensive that removal is the only

option, the same containment and worker protection measures must be implemented

as required for safe asbestos removal from ceilings or walls.

  Asbestos-containing, corrugated
  paper, pipe wrapping covered by
  a protective jacket.
Preformed, asbestos/magnesia,
pipe wrapping covered by a
protective jacket.

-------
 -74-




 NOTES
U.S.  GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: !983-666-113/252

-------