Healthy Indoors Magazine - USA Edition

26 | February 2020 Conclusion While this study was not structured as a full scientific study, the results are nonetheless compelling. These samples were pulled at random and were not biased in their selec- tion. Since samples were submitted to EMSL blindly, EMSL cannot comment on how and why these caulk samples were collected in the field, other than the fact that they were submitted for the analysis of PCBs. It is important to note that more than half of the caulk samples analyzed contained PCBs, which is significant from a regulatory, disposal and health impact standpoint. Most importantly, if caulk is only considered for its PCB content and not its asbestos content prior to being impacted by demolition or renovation activi- ties, potential asbestos fiber releases and exposures could ensue due to the probability that the caulk can also contain asbestos fibers. Clearly there are liability, regulatory and health risks if caulk is not properly tested for both asbestos and PCBs and treated accordingly. This study has shown that there is the potential for caulk to contain both asbestos and PCBs and in many cases above regulatory thresholds, therefore proper planning for sampling and testing for both asbestos and PCBs should be considered when performing building inspections and surveys. Robert J. DeMalo, M.Sc. Rob has worked in the Asbestos, Environmental, Industrial Hygiene and Analy cal Laboratory in- dustries for over 29 years. He has intensely studied and worked with asbestos both in the field and laboratory se ngs with pub- lica ons in peer reviewed journals (ASTM). He has provided an- aly cal research and consulta on on method development to numerous Federal and State agencies. Rob currently sits on the Board of Directors for the Environmental Informa on Associa- on (EIA) and is a member of the ASTM D22.07 Commi ee for asbestos. Rob is a member of AIHA Na onal as well as the AIHA Metro NY, New Jersey and Philadelphia local sec ons. Rob has sample basis, six (6) of the thirty-one (31) samples ana- lyzed (19%) were found to contain both asbestos and PCBs, eleven (11) were found to contain only PCBs (36%), five (5) samples were found to only contain asbestos (16%) and nine (9) samples were non-detected for both asbestos and PCBs (19%). Most notably, six (6) of the caulk samples (19% of the samples studied) that did not contain PCBs >50 PPM, were found to contain asbestos with three (3) of those samples having concentrations >1% (ACM). Assuming the asbestos concentrations of these samples were not previ- ously characterized, this caulk could have been removed without the proper engineering controls to contain potential asbestos fiber release that could contaminate interior oc- cupant spaces as well as the outdoor environment. Fur- thermore, there is also potential for worker exposure if this caulk is removed or impacted without proper personal pro- tective equipment (PPE) to safeguard these workers from asbestos fiber exposures. The removal of ACM without proper notification and by licensed abatement contractors could also result in major regulatory fines and violations.

• Cover