New asebstos containg materials?

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message David Axt, AIA, CCS, CSI Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 693 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Wednesday, August 09, 2006 - 06:59 pm:    Do any NEW materials nowadays contain asbestos? Our hazardous materials consultant has contracted with the owner to test new construction materials coming on to the jobsite to ensure that they do not contain asbestos. Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEED AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 404 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Friday, August 11, 2006 - 09:24 am:    There was something a few years back ('01?) regarding gypsum board in the south that had come from Mexico and contained asbestos. That was the last thing I heard and I don't know if it's an issue anymore. David Axt, AIA, CCS, CSI Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 696 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Friday, August 11, 2006 - 01:20 pm:    The hazmat consultant wants to test the following materials: gypsum plaster gypsum backer board fiber-cement backer board Portland cement plaster gypsum wallboard moisture-resistant wallboard joint materials gypsum wall sheathing gypsum soffit sheathing board building paper gypsum shaft liner mortar grout liquid trowel applied waterproof membrane self-adhering waterproof membrane acoustical ceiling panels acoustical surface applied ceiling tile acoustical tile adhesive linoleum linoleum adhesives terrazzo tile leveling compound patching compound floor adhesive rubber flooring adhesives carpet adhesive construction adhesive marker board adhesives corner guard adhesive pipe gaskets pipe joint compound pipe insulation inserts HVAC flexible connectors acoustical insulation acoustical sealant factory applied all-service jacket for fiberglass insulation joint tape I will bet anyone here $1000 that he finds no asbestos in any of these materials. Any takers? Ronald L. Geren, RA, CSI, CCS, CCCA, MAI Senior Member Username: specman Post Number: 306 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Friday, August 11, 2006 - 01:43 pm:    I thought somebody was just trying to justify his fee, but there may be some truth behind his request. I found this paper on the Environmental Working Group's website (http://www.ewg.org/reports/asbestos/documents/pdf/asb-bans2.pdf) that clarifies use of asbestos in some products and materials. Apparently the "ban" isn't as strong as it is made out to be. In your case, David, I guess it's a matter of whether or not the Owner wants ANY asbestos in his project--banned or not. David Axt, AIA, CCS, CSI Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 697 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Friday, August 11, 2006 - 02:26 pm:    This begs the question of what will the hazmat consultant do if they find new asbestos containing materials? Of course they will reject it and not let it be installed on the job, but can they sue the manufacturer? Will they notify EPA of applicable government authorities? What if the specs clearly state that "ABC Adhesive" is acceptable and the adhesive is found to contain asbestos? Is the architect then liable? It is also interesting that the hazmat consultant is not testing for lead, PCBs or other hazardous materials. Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEED AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 405 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Friday, August 11, 2006 - 02:27 pm:    From http://www.nsc.org/ehc/indoor/asbestos.htm - The following: Where Is It Found? Most products made today do not contain asbestos. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) have banned several asbestos products, and manufacturers have voluntarily agreed to limit the use of others. Any products made that still contain asbestos are required to be clearly labeled. However, many types of building products and insulation materials made before the 1970s contain asbestos. These products include pipe and furnace insulation materials; asbestos and cement shingles, siding, and roofing; millboard; resilient floor tiles, the backing on vinyl sheet flooring, and floor tile adhesives; soundproofing or decorative material; patching and joint compound; fireproof gloves and stove-top pads; and automobile brake pads and linings, clutch facings, and gaskets. And this has a date of April 14, 2006. (underlining mine) David Axt, AIA, CCS, CSI Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 698 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Friday, August 11, 2006 - 04:27 pm:    Lynn, Thanks. I assumed that if a product HAS to contain asbestos that it would be clearly labeled....and indicated several times. So what the heck is the hazmat consultant doing testing new products? I can see if we got some obscure product from some little know Third World Country, but USG, Armstrong, Johns Manville, WR Grace, etc. are not going to risk letting asbestos get into their products (again). I think that am going to start up a new consulting service where I will test materials for Kryptonite. George A. Everding, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: geverding Post Number: 205 Registered: 11-2004 Posted on Friday, August 11, 2006 - 04:54 pm:    Why not consider requiring manufacturer's certificates that the products they are supplying are asbestos-free? And what about MSDS? Wouldn't they show what's in the product? Seems to me there should be standard type documentation from the big guy manufacturers that would satisfy your owner's concerns. Also, I'm not clear if your owner sought out the consultant to do all these tests, or if the consultant marketed these services to the owner. David Axt, AIA, CCS, CSI Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 700 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Friday, August 11, 2006 - 05:01 pm:    I think the consultant is marketing the services to the owner. I also think the owner is convinced that by hiring the consultant the will be assure that no asbestos contain materials will be installed on the job. (Something he would have received for free.) Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEED AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 406 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Friday, August 11, 2006 - 05:32 pm:    Someone once said "there's one born every minute" or something to that effect... David Axt, AIA, CCS, CSI Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 701 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Friday, August 11, 2006 - 06:04 pm:    Years ago at a SCIP meeting I heard of a manufacturer suing a spec consultant for specifying their products on the project. Something about the specifier should have known not to specify those products in that situation. I remember hearing that it nearly bankrupted the guy trying to fight the lawsuit. Can anybody help me out here with details? Robert E. Woodburn Senior Member Username: bwoodburn Post Number: 131 Registered: 01-2005 Posted on Friday, August 11, 2006 - 06:40 pm:    I was there (in 93, 94 or 95, if I remember correctly). I remember it this way: The large conglomerate material supplier's legal department sued the architect and its spec consultant (separately) for specifying sprayed-on fireproofing that contained asbestos (it contained vermiculite made from a mineral deposit with a small--may have been a trace--amount of asbestos). I believe it sued the owner too--seems to have been intended as a pre-emptive strike to put would-be litigants on notice that they would fight back with countersuits. The various phases of the suit dragged on for several years, and involved hundreds of hours of searching records, preparing a case, testimony, etc. If the architect's liability insurance carrier had not agreed to cover the specifier under the architect's policy, the specifier's out-of-pocket expenses for defense would have been devastating. As it was, the devastation was mainly to the specifier's time and health, but devastating it was, nevertheless--severely so. Needless to say, the conglomerate's marketing department was appalled. But they were powerless against their legal counterparts. It left a really bad taste in the mouths of many of us, some of which lingers to this day when the name of that company is mentioned. For years, I avoided specifying that company's products whenever possible. I do specify some of its other products now--not without some lingering emotion--but I don't specify its fireproofing if I can help it. Who wants to specify the product of a company that might sue you for specifying it? I believe other forum participants were there. Does that sound about right? David Axt, AIA, CCS, CSI Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 703 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Friday, August 11, 2006 - 07:20 pm:    Robert, Thanks. Please e-mail me the name of the company. I think I know who it is though....there are not that many to choose from. daxt@bassettiarch.com Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: awhitacre Post Number: 377 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Saturday, August 12, 2006 - 12:34 pm:    what must also be rememebered is that part of this suit was particular to Canadian tort law; the same conditions and legal requirements are not part of the American tort system. I seem to remember that David actually sat in on the SCIP meetings where this was discussed. Richard L Matteo, AIA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: rlmat Post Number: 171 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Saturday, August 12, 2006 - 12:37 pm:    Robert, Could you also e-mail me the name of the company. I've had my own issues with at least 2 over the past few years...although nothing in the legal realm...more on the product substitution side. Thanks. rmatteo@tbparchitecture.com Mitch Miller, AIA ,CSI, CCS, MAI Senior Member Username: m2architek Post Number: 88 Registered: 02-2004 Posted on Monday, August 14, 2006 - 08:46 am:    please email the name also...thanks mmiller@usaarchitects.com Ellis C. Whitby, AIA, PE, CSI Senior Member Username: ecwhitby Post Number: 18 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Monday, August 14, 2006 - 08:55 am:    Please email me the name also; Thanks ellis.whitby@HDRinc.com Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEED AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 408 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Monday, August 14, 2006 - 09:01 am:    Please send the name to me, too - ljavoroski@hga.com Tracy Van Niel Senior Member Username: tracy_van_niel Post Number: 186 Registered: 04-2002 Posted on Monday, August 14, 2006 - 10:49 am:    Hi Robert: I'm a "me too", could you also send the name to me as well? Thanks. tvanniel@dgcolumbus.com Vivian Volz, RA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: vivianvolz Post Number: 74 Registered: 06-2004 Posted on Monday, August 14, 2006 - 01:15 pm:    Some mirror mastics contain asbestos, or did as recently as 2004. Apparently it is a convenient mineral fiber to maintain the high build for spot application without shrinkage. And if the mastic never becomes friable, it's not a particular danger. (You're in more danger from the mirror falling off the wall if the mastic becomes friable than you are of lung cancer from the asbestos.) Still, we now spec asbestos-free mirror mastic. John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 565 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Monday, August 14, 2006 - 01:20 pm:    There is also the question of the definition of "contains asbestos." For purposes of abatement and regulation as hazardous waste, this figure is not zero percent. Richard Howard, AIA CSI CCS Senior Member Username: rick_howard Post Number: 89 Registered: 07-2003 Posted on Monday, August 14, 2006 - 02:54 pm:    Asbestos is one of those things that is surrounded by hysteria that gets in the way of common sense. Airborne asbestos is present at backgound levels in some parts of the country at levels approaching the recommended indoor exposure limits. It is a fairly common mineral often found in rock at or near the surface. However, there are no regulations concerning outdoor exposure levels. That is a good thing, otherwise we might have to evacuate areas near the Rocky Mountains. Asbestos is frequently found together with other minerals traditionally used as lightweight aggregate in various building materials, such as plaster, sprayed fireproofing, and lightweight CMU. It is very difficult to separate these minerals from each other. This is why you may find trace amounts of asbestos or asbestos-like minerals, such as tremolite, in products made with vermiculite. The point is, a "zero percent" fiber count may be unobtainable. Can your owner live with that reality? Richard A. Rosen, CSI, CCS, AIA Junior Member Username: rarosen Post Number: 2 Registered: 08-2006 Posted on Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 09:04 am:    There is an ASTM standard that defines asbestos containing material (ACM) based on the materials percentage of asbestos content. I have been unable to locate it. The OSHA defination of ACM is "any material which contains more than 1 percent asbestos". At a previous office we included the following under Submittals: "Provide manufacturer’s certification in accordance with Section 01 60 00 requirements that [Name Product(s) or Material(s)] contain no asbestos containing material (ACM) or other finely-divided particulate matter that can be released as an airborne health hazard during or after installation. Certification may be based on recent or previous test results, provided material or products tested are identical to those proposed for this project." Your consultant appears to be following an ASTM protocal for sampling materials for asbestos testing. The basic approach is that if I don't know or have proof that the material is not an ACM I have to test to confirm one way or the other. Tobin Oruch, CDT Senior Member Username: oruch Post Number: 32 Registered: 04-2003 Posted on Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 11:32 am:    Some potentially useful info at http://www.epa.gov/asbestos/ Marvin Chew Senior Member Username: bigmac Post Number: 22 Registered: 03-2001 Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 02:50 pm:    The name of the company in question was and still is Grace. Ron Beard CCS Senior Member Username: rm_beard_ccs Post Number: 152 Registered: 10-2002 Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 04:02 pm:    Interesting Observation: While working with on project in the U.S. Capitol several years ago, the subject of asbestos in plaster came up. I was advised not to worry about it because - - - - in Congress' wisdom it exempted the Federal asbestos law for the U.S. Capitol when it wrote the legislation. Contrary to all the jokes about (and in) Congress, someone up there is smarter than we have given them credit. Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: awhitacre Post Number: 384 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 05:30 pm:    just to back up on history: the specifier in the Grace case was an EMPLOYEE of the architectural firm at the time the architectural work occurred. This was a remodel of a building that was built in the early 1970's, back before all the asbestos hysteria occurred, and the building was purchased by the Canadian government (or the Vancouver BC government) for use for its own offices. when the building was remodeled, of course the asbestos had to be abated, and the government was not permitted to enter into contracts that had to do with hazardous materials. there was no money for that in the budget, and the governmental agency sued Grace for having asbestos in the fireproofing to recover those costs. Remember: at the time the building was built, the product was legal and customary. Grace then, in its counter suit, alleged that the owner shouldn't have purchased the building if it knew that there was asbestos, and that the architects were also at fault for not warning the government of this fact. By this time, the specifier for the remodel was a self-employed consultant, but since he was an employee at the time of the project, he was covered under the firm's liability insurance. of course, the insurance didn't cover the lost time, the stress, or any of the other ancillary costs to either the firm or the (by now) independent specifier. I do consulting with Grace on their marketing and have had a number of conversation wtih them about this case, and the one thing that is emphasized continually is that the circumstances of this were very particular to Canadian case law. there were a number of us in SCIP who were wary of Grace back when this was happening, which was 15 years ago now. this is not a current issue; the case has been settled for a decade and getting worked up about it now is really shutting the door after the horses have all run out. Robert E. Woodburn Senior Member Username: bwoodburn Post Number: 134 Registered: 01-2005 Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 06:25 pm:    Anne, thanks for adding those further details, clarifications and corrections to the story. That's exactly what I hoped would happen after I posted my own recollections.