Loading...
200 2ND AVE S (3).7: 7 Z,,j L) FIRE PREVENTION Serviizg Brier, Eanionas, and 12425 Meridian Ave S INSPECTION REPORT "NOROMISH-CO! Mout7dake Terrace Everett, WA 98208 PIRE 0 EDMONDS 1] BRIER_ Phone (425):551-1200 El MOUNTLAKE TERRACE 0 UNINCORPORATED DISTRwww.FireDistrict].org Fax-(425) 55'1-1272 200 2 nd Avenue S 98020 F4EQuE STAT 16 SHIFT*' nnualcy F 1 LOCATION: -71(-023?- Wastewater Treatment Plant 425i��� SCHEDULED Feb 2017 BUSINESS NAME: PHONE: DATE DUE � MAILING 64f 2U2 LIFIR 0 ADDRESS: BUSINESS OWNER:' A HOME PHONE: ql,'5- qoj - -1776 EMERGENCY-1: HOME PHONE: CURRENT KEY ACCESS-2: HOME PHONE: r - C. 4,- ej W 4 L CITY YES N 0 BUSINESS F-1 EMAIL: LICENSE PERSON CONTACTED: INITIAL INSPECTION DATE NAME OF INSPECTOR: -IRk:bYbIl=lV1b: AS12/1 FE2/1112:00:OOAM Date Last Serviced: 4(,-( HAZARDS FOUND AND LOCATIONS /10MMUNICATIONS - re- 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 I AGREE TO CORRECT THE ABOVE VIOLATION(S) IN THE NEXT 30 DAYS X 1st RE -INSPECTION 2nd RE -INSPECTION FINAL RE -INSPECTION - EXTENSION VIOLATIONS DATE DUE. DATE DUE. GRANTEDTO: CITED: DATE DUE. PERSON PERSON PERSON CONTACTED: CONTACTED: CONTACTED: 2 INSPECTOR. INSPECTOR- INSPE TOR- 1 3 DATE. DATE DATE: CITATION ISSUED VIOLATIONS VIOLATIONS PRE -CITATION 4 1 5 1 5 LETTER SENT NUMBER: CODE 5 2 6 2 6 DATE, SECTION RETURN RECEIPT RECEIVED 6 �7, 3 7 DISPOSrTION 7 4 8 4 8 DATE LETTER NEEDED YES NO LETTER NEEDED [] YES El NO 18 FIRE PREVENTION Seij�ing Brier, Ednionds, and 12425 Meridian Ave S INSPECTION REPORT SPOHOMISH Co. Mountlake Terrace Everett, WA 98208 0 EDMONDS [1 BRIER I DISTiFIRE fflT_ Phone (425) 551-1200 Fax 551-1272- [] MOUNTLAKE TERRACE El UNINCORPORATED www.FireDistrictl.org (425) FREQUENCY STATION 1, SHIFT LOCATION: 200 2 nd Avenue S 98020 AnnL 17-A I Wastewater BUSINESS NAME: Treatment Plant 4257752525 PHONE: SCHEDULEDFeb 2015 DATE DUE II' 647202 MAILING UFIR � ADDRESS: Zuvela, Curt BUSINESS OWNER: HOME PHONE: EMERGENCY-1: HOME PHONE: CURRENT KEY ACCESS-2: HOME PHONE: CITY YES NO BUSINESS 1:1 El EMAIL: LICENSE PERSON CONTACTED: INITIAL INSPECTION DATE NAME OF INSPECTOR: \p4(c( _0 I ILI HAZARDS FOUND AND LOCATIONS COMMUNICATIONS 1 t?s, V, I%VVVJ _W 2 '000, 2 3 3 4 4 5 6 6 7 7 I AGREE TO CORRECT THE ABOVE VIOLATION(S) IN THE NEXT 30 DAYS X 1st RE -INSPECTION DATE DUE: 2nd RE -INSPECTION DATE DUE: EXTENSION GRANTEDTO: FINAL RE -INSPECTION DATE DUE: VIOLATIONS CITED: PERSON CONTACTED: PERSON CONTACTED: PERSON CONTACTED: I INSPECTOR: INSPECTOR: INSPECTOR: 2 DATE: D E: DATE: 3 VIOLATIONS 1 5 VIOLATIONS 1 5 PRE -CITATION LETTER SENT CITATION ISSUED NUMBER: 4 2 6 2 6 DATE: CODE SECTION: 5 3 7 7 RETURN RECEIPT RECEIVED 6 4 18 _3 4 18 DATE: DISPOSITION: 7 LETTER NEEDED C] YES [I NO LETTER NEEDED F] YES [I NO FIRE DEPARTMENT COPY City of Edmonds Edmonds Waste Water Treatment Plant 2002 nd Ave S Edmonds Wa. 98020 Tuesday June 30th 2015 I met with Pamela Randolph (manager) and Curt Zuvela (supervisor) at the treatment plant. The "watch for me" system has been newly upgraded and has had some problems in the past but they believe the newest upgrade has eliminated these problems. The system is used when there is only one employee working at the plant. The system call's the employee on the radio and if that employee does not get to a disarming station the system will call Snocom and then 4 other employees of the treatment plant. The employees will respond to the plant to assist fire department. The system was reprogrammed and tested with FM19 in attendance. The system performed as it was intended. It comes across all radios and computer screens to alert them during the normal business hours. In addition: 1. Should we add the phone number to the radio used by the single employee to premise information? If they were trapped but able to communicate the radio can be called by fire captain for location and rescue. That number is 425-712-0423. 2. We have pre -fire maps in our apparatus but they also have four larger, laminated copies just inside the office doors. Knox box is up to date. 3. They would like to extend an invitation to the department to do rescue drills at the plant. This would familiarize crews to the facility but does not limit the rescue team to only treatment plant scenarios. With their concrete pits and structure it could easily simulate a freeway overpass or concrete tilt up structure. 4. 1 will extend this invitation to the Battalion Chiefs through BC Hepler, who in turn can work with the training division. My thoughts were some area familiarization / meet and greet, short drill in the near future and followed in a few months with a more structured drill. This of course is totally up to the Battalions, training and the needs of the department. S. Contact information: Pamela Randilph, Manager 425-409-4776 Curt Zuleva, Supervisor 425-771-0237 curt.zuvela@edmondswa.gov ....... FIRE PREVENTION 124 INSPECTION REPORT SNOHOMISH CO. Serving Briet; Edindnds, and ��eridian Ave S EIEDMONDS Mozinflake Terrace" t4tett, WA 98208 BRIER FIRE Phone (425)� 551-1200 0 MOUNTLAKE TERRACE [I UNINCORPORATED DISTRItIT wwwFireDistrictLorg Fax (425) 5514272 FREOUENCY STATION & SHIF"I LOCATION: 200'2 nd Avenue S 98020 Annual -117-0 BUSINESS NAME: Wastewater Treatment Plant PHONE: 42577525025 SCHEDULED Feb 2014 DATE DUE I` - MAILING UFIF447 202 ADDRESS: BUSINESS OWNER: HOME PHONE: EMERGENCY-1: HOME PHONE: 2 7) CURRENT YES NO KEY ACCESS-2: HOME PHONE: CITY BUSINESS F] EMAIL: LICENSE INITIAL INSPECTION DATE PERSON CONTACTED: NAME OF INSPECTOR: 7 FIRE SYSTEMS: AS�-d, 8 FE //VFDLkE)o.x//jr-,,J HAZARDS FOUND AND LOCATIONS / COMMUNICATIONS 2 2 3 AL�A:F�? 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 I AGREE TO CORRECT THE ABOVE VIOLATION(S) IN THE NEXT 30 DAYS X 1st RE -INSPECTION 2nd RE -INSPECTION EXTENSION FINAL RE -INSPECTION VIOLATIONS DATE DUE. DATE DUE, GRANTEDTO, DATE DUE: CITED. PERSON PERSON PERSON CONTACTED: CONTACTED: INSPECTOR: CONTACTED: 1 INSPECTOR: INSPECTOR: 2 DATE: DATE: DATE' 3 VIOLATIONS VIOLAT PRE -CITATION CITATION ISSUED 1 5 1 5 LETTER SENT NUMBER: 4 41, CODE 5 2 6 DATE: SECTION: 13 RETURN RECEIPT 6 3 7 3. 7 RECEIVED DISPOSITION: .4 .8 )n 4 .8 DATE: LETTER NEEDED [-] YES PINO LETTER NEEDED F1 YES El NO 8 FIRE DEPARTMENT COPY FIRE PREVENTION Serving Brier, Edmonds 12425 Meridian Ave S INSPECTION REPORT SNOHOMISH CO:' FIRE " Mountlake: Terrace, and Everett, WA 98208 OEDMONDS 0 BRIER STIR, 40, a�_12 the T6Wh of W6odi4y T Pho'ne-.(425)- 551-1200 E]WOODWAY Ej MOUNTLAKE TERRACE www.FireDistrictl.org Fax (425) 551-1272 [1 UNINCORPORATED FREQUENCY STATION & SHIFF" LOCATION: 201) 2nd Avenue S 365 17 C I BUSINESS NAME: Wastewater Treatment Plant PHONE: 42�7752525 SCHEDULED DATE DUE 1' MAILING 200 2nd Ave S UFIR � 647 2202 0 ADDRESS: Edmonds 98020 BUSINESS OWNER: KQkft���, HOME PHONE: PREFIRE EMERGENCY-1: Zuvela, Curt 360631116 HOME PHONE: �'CURRENT KEY ACCESS-2: HOME PHONE: CITY YES NO BUSINESS El 0 LICENSE P RSONCONTACTED: INITIAL INSPECTION DATE 113 NAME OF INSPECTOR: FIRE AS 6/08 I'D LkBx _j FE J_JA3L SYSTEMS: ANNUAL HAZARDS FOUND AND LOCATIONS / COMMUNICATIONS Ra'f ire. - L-_-LA-R_4j 1 -4 L(z 2 Teg20_JV' 6cXk 2 3 3 i 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 I AGREE TO CORRECT THE ABOVE VIOLATION(S) IN THE NEXT 30 DAYS X 1st RE -INSPECTION DATE DUE: 2nd RE -INSPECTION DATE DUE: EXTENSION GRANTED TO: FINAL RE -INSPECTION DATE DUE: VIOLATIONS CITED: PERSON CONTACTED:'�—\n /V. PERSON CONTACTED: PERSON CONTACTED: INSPEcToe-. i INSPECTOR: INSPECTOR: 2 DATE: DATE: DATE: 3 VIOLA I NS 1 VIOLATIONS 1 5 PRE -CITATION LETTER SENT CITATION ISSUED NUMBER: 4 2 6 L 2 6 DATE: CODE SECTION: 5 3 7 3 7 RETURN RECEIPT RECEIVED 1 6 4 8 4 18 DATE: DISPOSITION: \1 LETTER NEEDED [] YES El NO LETTERNEEDED F] YES NO 8 FIRE DEPARTMENT COPY z000� CITY OF EDMONDS FIRE DEPARTMENT 510, PERMIT 01 01 November 6, 2012 N/A November 2012 Date of Issue UFIR Number Date of Expiration 0'11 This PERMIT is issued to: John Lucasini located at: I WWTP: 200 2nd Ave S Edmonds, WA Ffoengage in the bu siness, occupation or process of: HOT WORK OPERATIONS 0/ 10 And shall constitute permission to maintain, store, use or handle materials or to conduct process which produce conditions hazardous to life or property or to install equipment used in 0/ connection with such activities as follows: Po' 01 100. 01 0 0 10 0 FA—Ilowed Occupant Load: N/—A--] 0 10, Pursuant to the provisions of the International Fire Code, any violation of the Code may be grounds for the revocation of this PERMIT. 0 0 0 Fire Marshal R Fire Prevention Division This Permit Must Be Posted At All Times in The Premises Mentioned Above City of Edmonds Community Development Code 19.25.020 CITY OF'EDMONDS DEPARTMENT OF FIRE PREVENTION PERMIT .re'. 5�� January 1, 2011 647-001-02Z-202 December 31, 2011 Date of Issue UFIR Number Date of Expiration I This PERMIT is issued to: I COE Wastewater Treatment Plant I I located at: 1200 2nd Avenue South S I Edmonds, WA I I To engage in the business, occupation or pr cess of: I And shall constitute permission to maintain, store, use or handle materials or to conduct process which produce conditions hazardous to life or property or, to install equipment used in connection with such activities as follows: Welding operation, storage and closed use of hazardous materials: Sodium hypochlorite, sodium bisulfite, sodium hydroxide, diesel fuel I Allowed Occupant Load: I -- 77�] Pursuant to the provisions of the International Fire Code, any violation of the Code may be grounds for the revocation of this PERMIT. I This.permit does not take the place of any license required by law and is not transferable. Any change in the use or occupancy of premises shall require a new permit. FirqMarshal,J Debbrtment of Fire P This Permit Must Be Posted At All Times in The Premises Identified Above City of Edmonds Community Development Code 19.25.020 APPLICATION FOR PERMIT FOR MATERIALS OR PROCESSES January 3, 2012 Please verify and correct the following information: Name of Company (DBA): COE Wastewater Treatment Plant Edmonds Location 200 2nd Avenue S In conformity with the terms of the International Fire Code, application is Welding operation, storage and� closed use of hereby made to store, use hazardous materials: Sodium hypochlorite, sodium or maintain the following bisulfite, sodium hydroxide, diesel fuel activity, storage or pro- cesses: c/o Edmonds WWTP - 200 Second Ave S Mailing Address: WWTP Manager Edmonds, WA 98020 EFD LIFIR #: 64700102Z202 (for office use) Your Signature Your Name (print). -e Your Title Please make corrections, attach $40 payable to the City of Edmonds and mail to: Fire Marshal Department of Fire Prevention 121-5 th Avenue North I Edmonds, WA 98020 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Rec'd Check# I Print For Tier Two Emergency and Hazardous Chemical Inventory Specific Information by Chemical Revised October 2008 Community Right -to -Know (REQUIRED INFORMATION) ID #: WAD980738736 (12-digit number beginning with CRK or WA) Facility Identification UBI/DOR#: Name EDMONDS WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT Main Contact Name PAMELA RANDOLPH Email PAMl:LA.KANL)ULFH@tL)MUNU Title PLANT MANAGER Phone 025) 771-0237 Fax #25 ) 771-0255 Address 200 SECOND AVENUES. Mailing Address Must be included if different from Facility Address Address 200 SECOND AVENUES. City EDMONDS State WA Zip 98020 City EDMONDS County SNOHOMISH StateWA Zip 98020 Latitude 474736 Longitude 1222232 NAICS Codel 12112111312 10] Dun & Bradstreet No. I I I I I JED Emergency Contact Name PAMELA RANDOLPH Title PLANT MANAGER Phone (425) 409-4776 24-hr. Phone 425 ) 771-0237 Name CURT ZUVELA Title PLANT SUPERVISOR Phone 0601 631-1246 24-hr. Phone (425) 771-0237 Owner/ Name CITY OF EDMONDS Operator Street 121 5TH AVENUE N. City EDMONDS State WA Zip 98020 Phone (425)775-2525 Important: Read all instructions before completing form. Reporting Period: From January I to December 31, 2012 10 Subject to section 11 2r of Clean Air Act Chemical Description Physical and Health Hazards (check all that apply) INVENTORY Storage Codes Container Type Pressure Temperance Storage Locations (Non -Confidential) CAS 10 1618114117116113 14 116 11 Trade SecretM Chem. Name DIESEL FUEL #2 FrX-7] F ire Sudden Release dof Pressure 0 Reactivity IM Immediate (acute) Delayed (chronic) 42,900 Max. Amount (lbs. Avg. Amount (lbs.) Max. Daily Amount (code) M4 Avg. Daily Amount (code) No. of Days On -site B I LIST IN PARKING LOT EHS Name Check all irl LM X1 that apply pa-" M—ix Soi LiqEd T(�"7a_s ure Eq CAS 11011011 111311 111 7 3 F21 Trade SecretEl -0 M Chem. Name SODIUM HYDROXIDE Fire Sudden Release 9 of Pressure ri Reactivity I Immediate (acute) FRI Delayed (chronic) Iff [IFire Sudden Release bof Pressure Reactivity Immediate (acute �acute) Delayed (chronic) Max. Amount (lbs. Avg. Amount (lbs.) M4 Max. Daily Amount (code) Avg. Daily Amount (code) No. of Days On -site 62,945 Max. Amount (lbs. Avg. Amount (lbs.) 4 — Max. Daily Amount (code) gAvg. Daily Amount (code) 4 No. of Days On -site C 0 El C Ll E] E TANK IN NE CORNER OF LOWER LEVEL IN THE 600 BLDG EHS Name Check all M M ELI 11E] [0 113 that apply Pure Mix Solid Liquid Gas EHS TWO TANKS IN THE CHEMICAL STORAGE RM - NE CAS 11011011711611811 111.5 12 10 11 Trade S.cmtQ Chem. Name SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE (-UKNtK Ul- I Nt bUU 131-DU EHS Name Check all X X that apply Pure Mix olid Liquid Gas EHS Certification (Read and sign after completing all sections) I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am fwniliar with the information-s individuals responsible for obtaining the information, I believe that the submitted information i's true, PAMELA RANDOLPH, PLANT MANAGER / Q,-S!; � Name and official title ofowner/operator's authorized representative Signature pages one thru L_ and that based on my inquiry of these '4, "mp'et)e 2.14.12 Date Signed OPTIONAL ATTACHMENTS I have attached a site plan I have attached a list of site coordinate abbreviations I have attached a description of dikes and other safeguard measures CITY OF EDMONDS 1215- AVENUE N. - EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 (425) 771-0215 FIRE DEPARTMENT t S9 LOCATION: 200 2nd Avenue.. S BUSINESS NAME: Wastewater Treatment Plant MAILING 200 2nd Ave S FIRE PREVENTION SAFETY SURVEY PHONE: 4257752525 1 ADDRESS: Edmonds 98020 BUSINESS OWNER: Koho,Stephen HOMEPHONE: 4256737113 EMERGENCY-1: Zuvela, Curt HOME PHONE: 3666311246 KEY ACCESS-2: HOME PHONE: FREQUENCY STATION 11 SHIFT 365 17 A SCHEDULED DATE DUE 01 02/01/11 UFIR o 647 2202 PREFIRE PERSON CONTACTED: INITIAL INSPECTION DATE NAME OF INSPECTOR: cior- A4Z r-Ing I=n ! Lpv SYSTEMS: q / io ANNUAL HAZARDS FOUND AND LOCATIONS / COMMUNICATIONS T 1 11 - , 411 ENTER CODE ONLY ONCE 10 VIOLATION CODE ck�.e�_ ALL e' 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 11st RE -INSPECTION DATE DUE: 2nd RE -INSPECTION DATE DUE: EXTENSION GRANTED TO: FINAL RE -INSPECTION DATE DUE: VIOLATIONS CITED: PERSON CONTACTED: ct) PERSON CONTACTED: PERSON CONTACTED: 1 INSPECTOR: INSPECTOR: INSPE :)R: 2 DATE'Q DATE, DATE- 3 ONS I o 15 �IIOLATIONS 1 5 PRE-CRATION LETTER SENT CITATION ISSUED NUMBER: 4 2 6 2 6 DATE: CODE SECTION: 5 3 3 7 RETURN RECEIPT. RECEIVED 6 4 .8 4 6 DATE: DISPOSITION: 6 �, LETTER NEEDED E] YES n NO LETTER NEEDED F] YES NO FIRE DEPARTMENT COPY IIIIII'MoM 09/27/2010 08:32 2062911498 SIMPLEX GRINNELL PAGE 01 me simplexerinne,11BE SAFE. Tom 0 quarterly 0 Annual 0 3 Year E] 5 Year [:) PjW1Cd4 sm 1?189762 REPORT OF SPRINKLER INSPECTION Dater---MM010 CUSTOMER Waste Water Treatment Plant NSPECTOR NAME Kevin Fisk MMK.PXGRMP W:LL OFFICE fm 200 2nd Ave 8 1 200 2nd Ave S. 9520 Mh Avenue S, Suite 100. Seaft, WA ITY I STIPROV I ZlPfP`C Edmonds WA—M020 PHONE# 206.291.1400 .rrhi. Kirk VIck -- I 1, GENERAL (To be answered by Customer.) a. Hav& there been any changes in the occupancy classification, machinery or operations since the last inspection? b. Have there been any changes OF repalm to the fire protedion systems since the last Inspection? a It a fire has occurred since the las(inspodion, have all damaged �pd kler systern components been replaced? FIf "yes- to a. b or c. list changes In Section IS. d. Has the pong in all dry systems been chocked for proper pkA within the post No years? Date last checked: (chock recommended at least every 6 years) e. Has the piping in all systems been checked for obstructive materials? Date lea chacked: Unknown (check required at least overy 6 years) f. Have all fire pumps been tested to full capacity using hose Mmams or" mamm within the past 12 months? 9. Are gravity. surface or pressure lank' proitected from freezing? I h. Standard sprinklers 60 years old or older? [j OR (20yr) []Dry (10 Vr) a325F/163C (5W) E]Cormlve env/1. (5yr.) (Testing or replacemant required for them types of sprinklers -) I. Are any extra high temperature solder sprinklers regularly exposed to temperatures near 3ODF/149C? j. Have gauges been toMed. calibraW of replaced in the %at 5 years? Date unknown k. Alarm valves and associetedl trim been internally ins post 5 years? Date 1. Check vaNv3 internally inspected in The lost 5 years? Date m. Has the private fire main been now tested in lost 6 years7 oats n. Standpipe 5 year MquIl11M@nt3- 11. Dry standPIP0 hydrostatic test Date 2. Flow test Date El I Ll I E] Ll 3. Hose hydroslatic test Date 4. Pressure control valve test Date 5. pressure reducing valve test Date a, Have pressure reducing volves been tested at fun raw within the past 5 years? Date El I q. How master pressure reducing valves been tested at fun Raw within the past I yeaf? r. Have the sprinkler systems been extended to all areas of the building? s. Am the building areas protected by a wet sysiern heated, including its blind affics and perimeter areas? Im It, Am all exterim openings protected against the entrance of coldl W7 2. CONTROL VALVES 2. Are all sprinkler system main oontrol valves and all other valves In the appropriate open or closed position? b. Am all oontrol valves sealed or supervised In the open position? Eff Pnmmm Emm-,MT-MIIIIII MINNEMEM MINNIE]= 111MIN 0-mum No MEMO 110owl MR IBM in basement north wan aG71W7 GoVoWd 20M 31MOMCG(WON LF. All n9hW r"W"Q. 09/27/2010 08:32 2062911498 SIMPLEX GRINNELL PAGE 02 SimplexGrinnell sE sA FE. REPORT OF SPRINKLER INSPECTION Pne 2 of 4 3. WATER SUPPLIES Pressure Fire Pump & Tank Li a. Water supply sources? City: Gravity Tank; E] Pressure Fire Pump & City El Main Drain Text Results Made During This Inspection Prerumm Fire Pump & Pond E) Tam Pipe Located Size Test Pipe Static Supply Pressure Before Residual Pressure Return tim to Static Pressure Test Pipe Located Size Test Pipe Static Supply Pressure Before Residual Pressure Return time to Static Pressure basecrant @ riser 2 inch 130 120 4.TANKS. PUMPS. FIRE DEPT. CONNECTIONS YESI NA I NO I a. Do fire pumps, gravity, surface or pressure tanks appear to be In good external conditions? b. Are gravity, surface and pressure tanks at the proper pressure and/or water levels? 4 Li c. Has Do storage tank been Internally inspected In the last 3 ym. (unfined) of 5 yrs. (fined)? Date: 4 d. Are Rm dept. connections in satisfactory condition, couplings free, cap& or plugs in place and check valves fight.? e, Are fire dept. connections visible and accessible? 5. WET SYSTEMS a. No. of systems: I Make & Model 4Automatic 373 b. Am cold weather vaWS in ft rilippropriallo open or closed position? If closed, has piping been drained? c. Has the Customer been advised that cold weather valwas are not recommended? d. Have all the anfifteeze systems been tested? Dow 'rho antifreeze tests indicated protection to: (Note temp & " for each. Example: -1 SF1126C a- Did alarm valves, water flow alarm devices and retards test satisfactority7 6. DRY SYSTTEMS a. No. of systems: Make & Model: Dete lost trip tested: E] Partial Lj Full b. Are ft air prissure and priming water WmIs normal? c. Did the air compressor operate satisfactorily? d. Air compressor oil chocked? El BeIt7E1 e. Were Auxiliary I Low Poird drains drained during (his inspection? No. of Drains: Locations I ) 2) 3) f. Did all quick opening devices operate satisfactority? Make: g. Did all the dry valves operate satisfactorily during this Inspedion? h. Is the dry valve house heated? 1. Do dry valves appear to be protected from freezing? 7. SPECIAL SYSTEMS a. No. of systems: make & model: Type: b. Were valves tested as required? c. Did all tout responsive systems OPemt* satisfactorily? d. Did the supwwisory features operate during testing7 a. Has a supplemental test form for this system been completed and provided to the customee? Auxiliary equipment: No. Type: Location Test results V. ALARMS YES NA NO a. Did the water motors and gong operate during testing? T71 b. Did the electric alarms operate during testing? Li 10 1 Q Did the supervisory elarms operate during testing) 7= or -11 SF/-26C (Please Mach) SG71607 IRQV.01=) CopymgM 2" SinW&xGr1rwW1 LP. AM dutft ramONed V -1 09/27/2010 08:32 2062911498 SIMPLEX GRINNELL PAGE 03 Simplex6rinnell BE SAFE. REPORT OF SPRINKLER INSPECTION 9. SPRINKLEM - PIPING a. Do sprinklers generally appear to be in good external condftn? b. Do sprinklers generally appear to be free of oorrovion. paint, or loading a c. Are extfa sprinklors and sprinkler wren ch available on the promises? (0. size, finish, temp, brand. of spare hands) d. Does the exposed exterior condition of piping, drain valves, check valves, h and strainers appear to be satisfactory? a. Does the hand hose on the sprinkler system appear to be in satisfactory co I. Does them appear to be proper clearance betwen the top of all storage an POP2014 visible ebstrucCiods? YESI NA I NO I U, I Li I D U -a Ty 2noOM, pressure gouges, open gpiinklers ndkion? d the sprinkler deflector? 21 , 0 0 (33 Ia. EXPLANATION OF"NO"AkSWERS AND DEFICIENCIES. (Sectioneldthruil): 11. THE INSPECTOR SUGGESTS THE FOLLOWING NECESSARY IMPROVEMENTS. THESE SUGGESTIONS ARE NOT THE RESULT OF AN ENGINEERING SURVEY AND 00 NOT REFLECT CONDITIONS ABOVE CEILINGS OR IN CONCEALED SPACES' FDC and IPE and Gauges appear to be due for Syr service 12- ADJUSTMENTS OR CORRECTION$ MADE. 13. LIST CHANGES IN OCCUPANCY, HAZARD OR FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM, AS ADVISED BY CUSTOMER IN SECTION I a-c; 14. INSPECTION DEFICIENCIES AND SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS WERE DISCUSSED WITH THE CUSTOMER /CUSTOMER rY-ES-r7N0 REPRESENTATIVE. If No, explain. PORTANT NOTICE To CUSTOMER Custwwacknvwk*es and agmes tN#. in the ab3enoe of a Smioe Agrearod betmn the parties, servim hereunder am perbmed pursuant the leans and conditions ofthis Report agmm thil Or sarmes have bw cwnpkW to owbWs $940scW ard that ft writarnis in good wmtng orderand rWair, at= savloas ob., were of a w4xinuy nab= in Which case Customer 6*V*j4es ro pan otaxwers rydn may hm bwn 4*nud or Is othawise Inopmble wo serft wn be q-W . CUSTOMER'S ATTENTION 13 DIRECTED TO THE 1.1111III[ATION OF LIABILITY, WARRANTY, INDEMNITY AND OTHER CONDITIONS AT THE REVERSE SIDMD OF US REPORT. This Agmemant has been drawn up aid exegAed in Erglish at ft request ol and with am U cwturmnoe of Cuftrer. Ce mrMd a ft r6d06 en anglals 6 Ia demande am raew6nert du d" - -.0- CUSTONER IA 0— 6 Ott &- e Z-A Date: QA�16 4LL INSPECTOR SIGNATURE PRINT NAME DUPLICATE TO: STREET: CITY, STATE AND ZIP: ATTN: ri As CopyriqM 20D8 Sioo*�GtVmH LP. AM Aghft Memed. mmimIA IFA ie ASAM-11 RX ICAACP 8071607 (Rew-010) ......... . . . . . . . . . . . .. ...... ...... ....... ....... ...... rX ' ;01 F%"' . . . . . . . . . ... .... ;. ......... ..... . RED 19023 36thAv. W, SUiL-.E,Ly1hiLVvud, WA -48036 U.S.A. (425) 771 -1166 Fax (421) 771-4472 Occupancy Name: Building Owner.. Owner Agent: Certification Given FIRE ALARM SYSTEMS (One System per Report) YELLOW I WHITE te"' CONFIDENCE TEST I V REPAIRS I larbor M=o- Condo Occupancy Address: Mo - Id Ave N 4302, Ednionds '14 Pacific Nortiiwcst Propvrty NignA Phone Number: (421) 775-9828 25 Dick Potter Phone Number: (4:���- Date of Inupectio * n: 040)/2010 Testers Name: Kcm Day D)OO 87F- L r— E== ID Inspection Type: V �Annual Quarterly SFD Certific ion Nii V- SCP--- -C-4U3 Monitoring: Phone ff:-ZC,600-? 5'2- Account#: FACP Manufacturer: FLI Model #: 7100-2D Locafion:-1—'--'fjr- # of Initiating Circuit&: 2 # of Signal CirCUita: 2 Notes: ALARM SYSTEM FUNCTIONALITY Yes No N/A All notification circuits operational? L".1 All circuits chocked for electrical supervision? All auxiliary equipment operates (elevators, fans, dampers)? Key to panel available7 operating instructions at panel? Trouble indicators function properly? L'I'lo oe Test record posted at panel? Signals received at central station? Operator # Found: Corrections Made: Date Corrected: 9//0 0 1 1 1 L- - - I---- CorrectedBy: Keo 04 SFD Certification This certifies that this fire and life safety system has been properly inspected for reliability to cover the items listed in this report and is consistent with Seattle Fire Department Fire Code atandard3, and that docrepanc-ies are noted and have been reported to the building Owner/Manager for corre_pdve 4tion. Signature of Tester: Li"Nr Id— - Phone CAA 139 1140-3 Signature of Owner: - V A7— �: SYSTEM DEVICES MODEL# TOTAL TESTED SATISFACTORY? Yes No N/A Ham/Strobes UrIl'110Wurl �tf 3? Strobe Only Ham Only FC1 P241 10 + P241 I OK 1 Speaker/Strobes Speaker only gaundff Bafifi laells 2 Manual Pulls EdwarcL, 9 Photo Smoke Detectors FCT ASDPL 5 Ion Smoke Detectors Combination Smoke/Heat 135* Rate of Rise Heat FCJ ATTAT. 19 2000 Rate of Rise Heat 135* Fixed Tamp Heat 2000 Fixed Temp Heat Duct Smoke Detectors Detector Remote Indicators Remote Annunciators Elevator Recall Output Fan Pressurization Door Holders Door Unlock Curtains/Rall-down Doors Fire Fighter Phones Main FACP /I'\ Trouble with AC off? - �Yq) No Battery backup operational? Ye No Battery voltage (no load) volts Battery voltage (full load) volts Charge circuit voltage volts Battery Size Del V PanelType: %\ Trouble with AC off? Yes No Battery backup operational? Yes No Battery voltage (no load) volts Battery voltage (full load) volt's Charge circuit voltage volts Battery Size PanelType: Trouble with AC off 7 Yes No Battery backup operational? Yes No Battery voltage (no load) volts Battery voltage (full load) volts Charge circuit voltage volts Battery size PanelType: Trouble with AC off? Yes No Battery backup operational? Yes No Battery voltage (no load) volts Battory voltage (full load) volts Charge circuit voltage volts Beftry Size City ofJOW AhmFire Department __��.ZDVANCED ,XFIRE PROTECTION, INC. CONFIDENCE TEST REPORT Seattle Fire Department Confidence Testing �Offider: 206.386.1448, Fax:206.615.1068 DRY - A-UTOMATIC SPRINKLERS Certification Given (NOTE: ONE SYSTEM PER REPORT) RE D 0 [YELLOW Ell WHITE -2 Date of Inspection: _// CONFIDENCE TEST., Annua$G-QuarterlyO Acceptance 0 1 REPAIRS: 0 Tester's Name (print): _-517,'1-5?�)l I sFDcerarcaffonNumbe.r.1- SCP--3-C6?,,,1--5,/` Occupancy Name: Occupancy Address: A/ Responsible Person: Phone -Number: Fuliding Owner's Name: Building Owner's Address: Contact Person: -Phone Number: Central Station monitoring? Yes-5- No El Control Panel Manul:acturer: Y-14 Monitoring Co. Name: Model Number: Problems Found: (1fadditional room is required, plem add a separate sheet) Corre(;bons Made: (if additibnal rwm is required, please add a separate sheet) Date Corrected: Corrected by: The below items on the check list shall be inspected and tested. This list does not constitute all the required inspecting and testing of the Fire and Life Safety system. Please refer to the Seattle Fire Department Fire Code for inspecting and testing requirements. 94. Was a Trip Test (dry trip) conducted? 96. The Dry System tripped in ­P3 seconds. 96. Was a Flow Test conducted? 97. Static Pessure: A 1 2 0 — psi Flow Pessure: 90 psi 98. Was 2" Main Drain checked? 99. Were all Flow Switches, Supervisory Switches and Alarm Bells tested? 100. Does the Alarm Bell operate ? 101. Does the Air Compressor refill the system in 30 minutes or less ? 102. Were all Heat Actuation Devices tested on the Pre -action and Deluge systems? 103. Were all valves inspected and lubricated ? 104. Were all valves "sealed" or supervised? 105. Are signs provided on all valves? 106. Are the Pumper Connections and Clapper valves unobstructed ? 107. Are the sprinkler heads less than 50 years old? 108. Is the sprinkler head coverage acceptable? 109. Are spare sprinkler heads available? 110. Was the system drained and restored to normal operation ? OtherEj N/A E] N/A El N/A-6- Yes-&-- No Q Yes-B, No Q Yes Q_ No El YesQ. No E] Yes-B- No Q Yes & No El Yes 0 No El Yes_Q_ No Q Yes4J. No Q Yes.Q. No C3 Yes�9 NO. El Yes-@_ No C3 Yes-2- No C1 Yes-& No C3 Yes-5- No Q This certifies that this Fire and Life Safety system has been properly inspected for reliability to cover the items listed in this report and is consistent with the Seattle Fire Department Fire Code standards and discrepancies are noted and have been reported to the buildog Owner/Manager for corrective action. Signature of Teste - '���P h �an a - �42 5 �AR 3 - 1� Testing Agency: Advanced Fire Protection, Inc. 425.483.5657 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1543 , Woodinville, WA 98072 FIRE PREVENTION 1W OF EDMONDS SAFETY SURVEY 121 5TH AVENUE N. - EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 (425) 771-0215 FIRE DEPARTMENT 41 843 0 " FREQUENCY STATION & SHIFT-" LOCATION: 201) 2nd Avenue S 365 1 17 D BUSINESS NAME: Wastewater Treatment Plant 4257752525 PHONE: SCHEDULED 02j()JI10 DATE DUE 1� MAILING 200 2nd Ave S UFIR 0 647 2202 ADDRESS: Edmonds 98020 BUSINESS OWNER: - Koho, Stephen HOME PHONE: 4256737113 PREFIRE -2,, 3(-o-(o_3( — f2q(O� 25-3 EMERGENCY-1: 4 HOME PHONE: KEY ACCESS-2: 360-Rup5m HOME PHONE: APP+ Cv,+- ZUve-to, 3/11 e PERSON CONTACTED: Cur NAME OF INSPECTOR: v 14 f c0cs INITIAL INSPECTION DATE FIRE AS 6108 FD Lk8x FE c> f / 10 SYSTEMS: ANNUAL HAZARDS FOUND AND LOCATIONS / COMMUNICATIONS ENTER CODE ONLY ONCE I� 00- 0 1 OP 0 P-efe,�v VIOLATION CODE 1 E X-0 5- -1 PEL- G09-- 0"GP'3 2 P-Q 2 3 TP'r_L-W7i3- 01"3V4 tz�R-P­­,y 3 E)(0 5 4 T(Ir_-L,600_0(f�P309 4 5 09k ab 5 C/ 6 6 7 7 8 r I e--,N 8 In our continuing effort to promote fire safety and prevention within the community, your fire department. conducts regularly scheduled "Fire Safety Survey Inspections" of all businesses and multi -family occupancies in the City of Edmonds. You are to be congratulated on the relative good condition of your occupancy in regards to fire safety. Above you will find the item(s) that were noted during our inspection which require attention to bring them into compliance with the minimum standards adopted by the City of Edmonds. Please call (425) 775-7720 within 30 days to schedule a reinspection. Any overlooked hazards or violations of the fire regulations does not imply approval of such condition or violation. If you require additional information or assistance, please contact this office by calling (425) 775-7720 between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. BUSINESS COPY HP LaserJet M2727nf MFP Fax Confirmation Report City of Edmonds FireDept 425-775-7721 Apr-14-2010 3:04PM Job Date Ti me Type Identification 1054 4/14/2010 3:04:03PM Send 97710255 Duration Pages Result 0: 51 , I OK FIRE PREVENTION CITY OF EDMONDS SAFETY SURVEY .RE DEPARTMENT - Z, - -, FAIR�5 "`1m7 'D- 2M 2nd Avenue S 4257752525 SCHE 0, suE,,,SNAN.,: wastewater Trealm ant Plead PHONE: ON OM 021101/10 MALING 200 2nd Ave S 647 2202 ADDRESS: Edmonds BM20 euswEssowNER, Koho, Stephen HOME PHONE: 4256737113 PREFIRE 3(.C)-6.3*kN�1 12q('-1§30590W ENIERnENCY- i: C�4 FKONE; KEYA=SS-2; t'Sb~. Hoke PHOW A P&- C—t- DXM mno.co� C.4 0 NAMEor,"Pe�. H..+ LIKOX ANNUAL SYSTENIS: Vo� �OGFOMANDLOC�*NS/ TreL- ol opo� 2 P 'T I 13- (151`304 &A -a-/ ,-Tw� . ..... a 7 in our continuing effort to Promote tire "rely and prevention within the community, your tire department conduct& regularly scheduled 'Fire Safety Survey inspections" of all businesses and munl4amily occupancies in the City of Fdmonda. You are to be Congratulated on the relative good condition of your Occupancy in regards to fire safety. Above YOU wfll find the Hernia) that were noted during our inspection Which require aftntion to bring thern Into compliance with the minimum standards adopted by the City of Edmonds. Please call (425) 775-7720 IthIn 30 days to schedule a reinspection. Val of such condition or violation. Any overlooked hazards Of Violation$ of the tire regulations does not imply appro 9 5) If you requIre additional Information or assistance, Please Contact this office by callIn (42 775-7720between the hours of 0 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. BUSINESS COPY FIRE PREVENTION C ITY OF EDMONDS SAFETY SURVEY 1215- AVENUE N. - EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 (425) 771-0215 FIRE DEPARTMENT 4P St. 189 rj LOCATION: 200 2nd Avenue S 4257752525 BUSINESS NAME: Wastewater Treatment Plant PHONE: MAILING 200 2nd Ave S ADDRESS: Edmonds 98020 HOME PHONE: 42�6737113 BUSINESS OWNER: - Koho, Stephen i 3C,0-4,31 253 EMERGENCY-1: +k&,44@n Cur� HOME PHONE: 36MY52 KEY ACCESS-2: t-ew ~1 HOME PHONE: I FREOUENCY �1(�N & SHIFT 365 17 D SCHEDULED 02101/10 DATE DUE 11' LIFIR Do 647 2202 PREFIRE Appf- C v,+- 'Z,.j Vel 0,- 3/11 (P- INITIAL INSPECTION DATE PERSON CONTACTED: 31 ( I I NAME OF INSPECTOR: Hvo+AyR'Tol& IM9 13, e- k c6fa i I FE W to FIRE AS 6/08—FD LkBx . . I SYSTEMS: ^11d1'dUr%L- HAZARDS FOUND AND LOCATIONS / COMMUNICATIONS ENTER CODE ONLY ONCE 0 TPE:L 100- 0 VIOLATION CODE 2 PeL FE P I a I /?—Q P114 2 0 (3p3V L4 1(,e P,,,"Y f /A -ty 3 3 E)(O 4 TPEL, 60 4 ex 4 5 'IF 10 5 I> d ----- — 6 6 7 7 Li L 8 8 In our continuing effort to promote fire safety and prevention within the community, your fire department. conducts regularly scheduled "Fire Safety Survey Inspections" of all businesses and multi -family occupancies in the City of Edmonds. You are to be congratulated on the relative good condition of your occupancy in regards to fire safety. Above you will find the item(s) that were noted during our inspection which require attention to bring them into compliance with the minimum standards adopted by the City of Edmonds. Please call (425) 775-7720 within 30 days to schedule a reinspection. Any overlooked hazards or violations of the fire regulations does not imply approval of such condition or violation. If you require additional information or assistance, please contact this off ice by calling (425) 775-7720 between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. BUSINESS COPY —.,,o�DVAPNCED P.O. Box 1543 , Woodinville, WA 98072 CONFIDENCE TEST REPORT WET - AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLERS NOTE: ONE SYSTEM PER REPORT Inspection Date: 07TCONFIDENCE TEST: Annuall-jia,-QuarterlyQ Acceptance 0 1 REPAIRS: El Tester's Name (pfint):11A;?0,(- 72 Certification Number. Occupancy Name: cw,41 L� : MA-�; 7, -)—t --, e — > Occupancy Addressc=-C7;�044///:� Al Responsible -Person: Phone Number:—aZ2 Building Owner's Name: I Building Owner's Address: I Conta ct.Person: Phone Number: Central Station monitoring? Yes No Q Control Panel Manufacturer: Monitoring Co. Name: /-1q9z42E�1 K---T)P - Model Number: /V - A ProblemsFound: (Ifadditional room is required, please add a separate sheet.) Corrections Made: (If additional room is required, please add a separate sheet.) DateCorrected: Corrected by: The below items on the check list shall be inspected and tested. This list does not constitute all the required inspecting and testing of the Fire and Life Safety system. Please refer to the local Fire Department Fire Code for inspecting and testing requirements. 80. Was a Flow Test conducted? Yes No E] 81. Static Pessure: Z-267 psi Flow Pessure: ?,5r psi !10 Yeso No [I 82. Was 2" Main Drain checked? OtherQ Ye "ley S No El 83. Were all Flow Switches, Supervisory Switches and Alarm Bells tested? N/A El Yes No C] 84. Does the Alarm Bell operate ? N/A E) Yes No Ej 85 W6re all valves inspected and lubricated ? Ye ; s�g No Q 86. Were Pressure Regulating valves tested? Yes 0 No 87. Were all valves "sealed" or supervised? Ye sl�e No E] 88. Are signs provided on all valves? Yes 'No Q 89. Are the Pumper Connections and Clap per valves unobstructed ? Ye�,ff No 0 90. Are the sprinkler heads less than 50 years old? N o Ef- 92. Are spare sprinkler heads available? Y e - s,�J No D 93. Was the system left in service? Yes a No C) This report certifies that this Fire and Life Safety system has been properly inspected for reliability to cover the items listed in this report and is consistent wit , h the local Fire Departme.nt.Fire Code standards and any found discrepancies have been noted and reported, to the building Owner/Manager, for corrective action to be taken. Signature of Tester: Testing Agency: Advanced Fire Protection, Inc. Phone: 425.483.5657 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1543 Woodinville, WA 98072 CITY OF EDMONDS FIRE PREVENTION FILE MEMO/HAZARD FORM DATE REPORTED BY OF SUBJECT ADDRESS: Nook CONCERNS/ coto-Tp HAZARDS: SIGNE D FOLLOW-UP: ujr�l Lbp,) -ro Lk) A-LL- LA-))L-L- Of-) 51p PLL fz:�91� F;e� C6ly3h/,) Lefc-(cA4A9 -r-pc- M I L'i +cI T� c'ON-C6114 �J G- O-F�C6<1�6 (c-)A) -5717-9: SIGNED Fv� DATE 2�t.�-j r SUBJECT ADDRESS: 2019 CITY OF EDMONDS FIRE PREVENTION FILE MEMO/HAZARD FORM REPORTED BY L--- OF I CONCERNS/ A` R-6." HAZARDS: AA lEl 5,� c SIGNED FOLLOW-UP: IN 14MM 10 F",Uj C�c, -i-*.v P,,W hWOO &-..I TL A46-4&1- -M &+54-V c_H_-.r- SpAtjz-e�- F::�qg_ tf., �c c-c '70 7�� F-0 c-Nze7 _T4$"e_ Ce-IL-4 19V -0%96;0 4-r-- L--,17-P +-0 v 0� F-P. GQ A-L,,, f:7'Clq 7V C&&& C'T- wl-,p W, LL- SIGNED — It-f 17-76+1-� -V -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I ORDER #: 0309@ TOMER: F0403256 '444���,r P L,+,L// rCH #: 033110018 STICKER #: 033110142 rs #: 23 '.CODE #: 0190951502116 r�,_e 0 �R"Atl;�5 J ODUCT : X--jCEo`(50#) --------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- -------- -------- --------------------------------------------- Page: I MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET: X—ICE (50#) DATE OF ISSUE SUPERSEDES 1A000-000000- -4854 6/02/1998 5/26/1998 CVPMTAW T - nRWRR-AL INFOPMATION Trade Nam & Synonyms mical Nam & Synonyms X- ICE (50# ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- mical Familys Formula Mixture --> X TMIXTURE --------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ufacturer-8 Name. ,14SEARCH DIV. OF_NCH_CORP. -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------- --------------- --- ---------------------------------- 'rose' : 152110 'ING, TX 7SO15 --------- ----- ------ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Emergency Phone Number spared By. Product code Number )ICKSON/CHEMIST 4854 --------------------- 800-424-9300 ------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ SECTION 11 - HAZARDOUS INGREDIENTS THE HAZARDS PRESENTED BELOW ARE THOSE OF THE INDIVIDUAL COMPONENTS gradients) !7191EH Hazard IRRITANT TLV Y_0MG/M3 1. PRL ' Y5—MG/M3 2. STEL iFOT EST. CAB * 10043-52-4 IRRITANT 10MG/M3 1. 15MG/M3 2. NOT EST. 07647-14-5 DIUM CHLORIDE IRRITANT IOMG/M3 1. ISMG/M3 2. NOT EST. 07447-40-7 TASSIUM CHLORIDE IRRITANT IOMG/M3 1. 15MG.M3 2. NOT EST. 10476-85-4 RONTIUM CHLORIDE SECTION IIa - NON -HAZARDOUS INGREDIENTS (NON -HAZARDOUS INGREDIENT NAMES AND CAS NUMBERS ARE PROTECTED UNDER NJ TRADE) Secret Registry #: 409363-5086 SECTION III - PHYSICAL DATA 'iling Point M. �1500 Specific Gravity - (H20-1) ------------------ -------- �.2 ------------------------------------- -------- --- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- spor Pressure (XK HG) s 0.005 Color ------------------------------------- ------ WHITE -------------------------------------------- ----- ----------------- ---- ------------------------- apor Density (Air-1). N/A Odor. ODORLESS ----------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Clarity. OPAQUE R 0 100% , N/A ------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------ Evaporation Rate (BU_A/C.1) --------------- N/A Volatile by Volumes < 1 - - ----------- ---- --- ------- ------------------------------------------------- -- -------------------------------------------------------------- .20 - Solubility- APPRECIABLE --------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Viscosity. -------------------------- GRANULAR ----------------------------------------- -------- CVrTTnW TV - FIRE AND EXPLOSION HAZARD ,lash Point Flammable Limits LEL UEL ION -PLAN / T.C.C. N/A N/A N/A -------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- I -------- -------------------------------------------- --- txtinguishing Media Chemical X —Water Spray ­Oth r C -Foam X .--Alcohol Foam X ­-0O2 ....... X_­Dry --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- - ------------------------ �pecj&l Fire Fighting Proceduress AND L PROTECTIVE GEAR. CHOOSE EXTINGUISHING MEDIA BASED PRODUCT IS NON-FLAMMABLE. FIREFIGHTERS SHOULD WEAR A SELF-CONTAINED BREATHING APPARATUS FUL )H THE NATURE OF THE SURROUNDING FIRE. I ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------- Unusual Fire and Explosion Hazards. N/A ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Aerosol Level (NFPA_30B) , .... N/A -------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------- ----- ------------ NFPA 704 Hazard Rating (0-insLgnificant J.Slight 2.Moderate 3.High 4-Rxtre=) 2 —Health 0 —Flammability 0 —Instability —Special ------------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------- RMrTTON V - HEALTH HAZARD DATA Threshold Limit Values NOT ESTABLISHED FOR MIXTURE. SEE SECTION 11 ------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------- ------- --- Effects of overexposures -Acute (Short To= Exposure) EYF -IWTACT� DUSTS CAUSE SEVERE IRRITATION WITH POSSIBLE CORNEAL INJURY. WHEN DISSOLVING, THE HEAT PRODUCED MAY CAUSE MORE INTENSE EFFECTS AS WELL AS TH BURNS. SKIN CONTACT: WHEN DISSOLVING ON WET SKIN, THE HEAT PRODUCED MAY CAUSE IRRITATION AND EVEN THERMAL BURNS. MAY CAUSE MORE SEVERE INHALATIONt MAY CAUSE RESPIRATORY IRRITATION SEEN AS COUGHING AND SNEEZING. INGESTION: MAY R& E IF THE SKIN IS ABRADED (SCRATCHED OR ABRADED) IARRHEA CAUSE IRRITATION WITH POSSIBLE ULCERATIONS, NAUSEA, VOMIT- ING_AND_D - ---------------- ------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------- --- ---------------- -Chronic (Long Term Exposure) NO CHRONIC EFFECTS KNOWN. MEDICAL CONDITIONS AGGRAVATED BY EXPOSURE ARE PRE-EXI�TING SKIN CONDITIONS SUCH AS DERmATiTIS. TARGET ORGANS: NONE KNOWN. MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET: X-ICE (50#) Page: 3 SECTION XI - REGULATORY INFORMATION (Continued) ise ingredients listed above are subject to the reporting requirements of 313 of Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act Of :6 and 40 CFR part 372. I -------------------------------- ,ase call 1-800-527-9919 for additional information if you are a California customer. g is not intended,for users in the state of California. SECTION XII - REFERENCES RESHOLD LIMIT VALUES FOR CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES AND PHYSICAL AGENTS AND jLA)GICAL EXPOSURE INDICES, ACGIH, 1997. OSHA PEL. VENDOR'S MSDS E, OF THE COMPONENTS WITHIN THIS PRODUCT CAN BE FOUND IN THE CURRENT TSCA VENTORY. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ PR;IRRITANT, FLAM/ FLAMM: FLAMMABLE, COMB .COMBUSTIBLE, CORR:CORROSIVE RC:CARCINOGENIC, TOX:TOXIC, N/A:NOT APPLICABLE, NIE:NOT ESTABLISHED, C:CLEVELAND OPEN CUP, PMCC: PENSKY -MARTIN CLOSED CUP, TCC:TAGLIABUE CLOSED P, LEL:LOWER EXPLOSION LIMIT, UEL:UPPER EXPLOSION LIMIT, NFPA-.NATIONAL RE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION, IARC: INTERNATIONAL AGENCY FOR THE RESEARCH ON NCER, NTP:HATIONAL TOXICOLOGY PROGRAM, OSHA: OCCUPATIONAL SAYETY & HEALTH MINISTRATION, ACHGIH:AMERICAN CONFERENCE OF GOVERNMENTAL INDUSTRIAL GIENISTS, TLV:THRESHOLD LIMIT VALUE , PEL,PERMISSIBLE EXPOSURE LEVEL, KL�SHORT-TERM EXPOSURE LIMIT, MLD t MILD, MOD;MODERATE, SEVzSEVERE, T.MUTAGENIC, ASPHYX:ASPHYXIANT - ----------- --------- ------ -- ----- -- ---- ------- 2 - INFORMATION - CONTAINED - HEREIN - IS - BASED - ON - DATA CONSIDERED ACCURATE IN LIC31T OF CURRENT FORMULATION- HOWEVER, No WARRANTY IS EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED :UARDING THE ACCURACY OF THESE DATA OR THE RESULTS TO BE OBTAINED FROM THE USE THEREOF' =SEARCH DIV. OF NCH CORP. assumes no responsibility for personal injury or property damage caused by the use, storage, or disposal of the product L a manner not reco=—Aed on the product label. Users assume all risks associated with such unrecommanded use, storage, or disposal of the .oduct. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Lj M A T E R I A L S A F E T Y D A 'E i, T 24-hour Emexgency Phone: (800)255-3924 Page I PRODUCT CODE: PRODUCT NAME: SLIPN- SLIDE I-L-119 CODES: H C F R P PRODUCT CODE: 5699 VHMIS CIASS: SECTION I - MANUFACTURER IDENTIFICATION MANWACTURER'S NAbE: ATCO International ADDRESS 2126 King5ton Court Marietta, CA 30067-a902 INFORMATION PHONE (770)-324-7550 I DATE PRINTED: 11/03/200-2 PREPARED BY: LARRY E_ OBERT, DIRECTOR OF TEC�[NIC�­ " - I "RV ICES REVISION DATE: 07/Zg/2002 SECTION II HASARDOUS INGREDIENTS�'�� x III INFORMATION REPORTABLE COMPONENTS i WEIGHT CAS-------------------------------------------------------- P EL ---------- .-----.----TLV ------ PERCENT ­ LPG PROPELLANT '000PPm 1000pp.-n HEPTANE 142-82-1 400-ppm 400ppm PHYSICAL/CMUCAI, CFARAC TERISTICS 15OILING RANGE: 1.56 F SPECIFIC �-R!vj-jy (H20=1) VAPOR DENSITY: N71:1 EVAPORAull-Os"RIATE: NID DENSITY: 9-17 lb/gl HATERIAI SOLU15ILITY IN WATE R: INSOLUBLE. N7, APPEARANCE AND ODOR: SMCVM GREY GREA3E_ PH (Diluted) IU� ODOR: SOLVENT -LIKE - SECTION IV - FIRE AND EXPLOS]EDE HxizApD DATA OSHA FLAMMILITY CLASSIFICATION: CLASS 11 FLASH POINT: 122 F FLAMMABLE LM�Em IN AIR DY VOLUME- LOWER: 1_1 UPPER: EXTINGUISHING MEDIA: Dry chemical!%, Foam, or C2r�>:?L� SPECIAL FIREFIGHTING PROCEDURES: None - UNUSUAL FIRE AND EXPLOSION HASARDIS: Expo!5ure to a ,cau!5e bur5ting- 6ove 120 deg-F may SECTION V - REACTIV7'--,,":f -,IATA STA15ILITY: Product iz --table under normal CONd1#IONS TO AVOID:,,C'j)en flame, 15park5, or. high -er' �=a_) =Lre. INCOMPATIBILITY" (MATERIALS TO AVOID) : Strong oxi-I ­z 4 "1 1 agent,z MATERIAL SAFETY DA'-f".m sHEz—r 24-hour Emergency Phone: (800)255-;3924 Page 2 PRODUCT CODE: 5699 RMARDOUS DECCMPOSITION OR 13YPRODUCTS: Thermal and or bt�rn.Lng may produce oxide5 of carbon and v2riou!s hydr0C2rbon---.. HAZARDOUS POLIMERIZATION: Will not occur under n:::.,z:�.-i;..L zondit--onz == SECTION VI - HEALTH HAZARD DATA, ===-- - -- PRIMARY ROUTES OF ENTRY: Inh2lation X Ey-n t'=-t�zct, X Shin Contact X EXPOSURE LIMIT: Pefer to Section II for PEL / TL��il- �-ixpo I 5ure 13-mit!s- ACUTE EFFECTS OF OVEREXPOSURE INHALATION: , May . cau!5e. diz ,in�z5. Exces--sive may exnct!--e� -2d to unconzciou!5nez5- EYE CONTACT: Eye irritant- May C2UZe injury -'-'e-ft untre2zed- SKIN CONTACT: May c2uze 5kin irritation on repe;zra:d' or prolonged conz2cD- SKIN ABSOR15TION: Prolonged or repeated cont2cs �-4izh, -zhe �kill may cau5e defatting and irritation. INGESTION: Harmful if 5W211owed. Can C2U!5e thro-at, and ga5tro- inte5tin2l tr2at lirrit2tion, n2U5e2, vomiting, 'diarrhea - Azzpirzr�ion of materi2l into the lung5 can cau5e chemical ...,hich can be CHRONIC EFFECTS OF OVEREXPOSURE: There are no )tn--�-.- miiectz frDm zhiz product. CARCINOGENICITY: NTP CARCINOGEN: IARC M.NOG.11APHS: OSHA REGULA.TED: MEDICAL CONDITIONS GENERALLY AGGRAVATED 13Y OVERE:&2-f-Ja-UR'Z: Pr-c--exi!5 -zing d4norderm of t the zkin, rezpir2tory L�yztem, coronary artery di::ea�.e C.!-- ;�nem-a May he :ggrav2ted by the expo5ure to thim m2ter!21- 12-1ERGENCY AND FIRST AID PROCEDURES INHALATION: Remove to fre5h 2ir- If bre2th;n-' , Z'=-Oppea give 2rtii.Lzi21 rempiration- Get 1MMEDIATE MEDICAL ATTENTION EYE CONTACT: Irtunedlzzely flu5h eye5 with lzrg�- -xic-unr-5 Z:unn3-ng water for at le—t 15 minuzez-while holding upper and 1;_-. � %TQ! 1 lidz 0'rlen- irritation perziztz get medical attention immediately - I SKIN CONTACT: Wz5h expozed area thoroughly wi,-*.`,-1 t':;aD and 742mer- ConzUlt 2 phy--ici2n if irritation develop5- INGESTION: Do not induce vomiting- Seek -ten ': -tijn lmmedi2telu. SECTION VII - PRECAUTIONS FOR SAF:- LleXIDLING ,�,N-D USE STEPS TO 15E TAKEN IN CASE MATERIAL IS RELEASED W� SPTIJ�D: P6=c:"ve ail -,,-.n--rion mource5- Avoid bre2thing vapor5. Shut off zourc�t :-.- - '. -1 — . I - Lt Can be done Zzfely- Uze non—p2rkinq tool5- Ab!5orb with and di5no5e of in zacordznce -,�,ith applic2ble regulationz. MATERIAL SAFETY DA-T,�--. sH,:r:Er 24-houx E=exg--nczy Phone: (aOO)255-3924 Page 3 PRODUCT CODE: 5699 WASTE DISPOSAL METHOD: Di!5po!5e of in accordance ap�-,Jj , -cable Federal, .1-7t2te, and local regulation!s. Under RCRA regul2tion!5, it 4zi --nm of the product u5er to determine, at the time of di5po521, whetnaL A mAteriml iz h2zzrdoum- PRECAUTIONS To 15E TAREN IN HANDLING AND STORING: In ary, cool Pjace away from heat or open flame- Do not ztore at OTHER PRECAUTIONS: Follow label in5zruction--s- KEE"'� OUT OF OF CHILDREN - SECTION VIII - PERSONEL SA=P-Y 11E�LSURES RESPIRATORY PROTECTION: None needed unlezz vent i 1;a-z i---n in noz adequate to reduce v2por5 below TLV Jevel5- If needed, u5e 2 NIOSH approved ra5pir2tor with an organic vapor cartridge - VENTILATION: LOC21 mechanical exh2urt to provide vent-iiation. PROTECTIVE GLOVES: For prolonged contact wear im�;�tzv.Lrju- jo. e!5 EYE PROTECTION: Safety eye protection to protect �-pizzn c-f and 21zo aero5ol 5ize p2rticlez iz recommended - OTHER PROTECTIVE CLOTHING OR EQUIPMENT: None req-.a-IL-ac. WORR/HYGIENIC PRACTICES: W2!sh thoroughly after SECTION Il - REGULATORY 1INFORMAT-10ji TOXIC SU15STANCES CONTROL ACT (TScA): A ' 11 ahemic2."- �z--:Y-Ponent� thiz are li5ted on the T'-CA inventory Lizt, or are -.�rom SARA Section 312 HAZARD CATEGORIES: Fire Haz2r Re--cti7i-�y Haz2r' Acute Health Hazard X Chronic Health Hazard --Ire55ure i2z2rd X SARA Section 313 REPORTABLE COMPONENTS: (3Ce 3eC7:7-Z',-. ;Lpnl4aable) — SECTION X INEUgjjATIj3N =======— -- DOT SHIPPING NAME: OMVI-D Con5umer Commodity DOT HAZJARD CLASS: Not Applicable UN NUMER: Not Applicable r DOT PACKING GROUP: Not Applicable SPECIAL SHIPPING INFORMATION: Regulated only whe.:-. airar2ft. r2n5porrazion by '"he ---- information an -zhlz Material Safety DZZ2 !thec7 " -- -Dur current- available data and be5t Opinion 25 to the proper handling :-!` c� tllll— Product under normal conditionz- Any u5e of thi� product -which iz not :-n ::-onfo=--.iAncc -4i--h th-45 Data 3heet or which invoive5 uzing thiz product in -.ish other mzireriaiz, or Proce--5e5 i5 the �ole rezpon5ibility of the uzer- w- Printed: 11/03/03 14:10 ATCO international SHIP TO: 981656 EDMUNDS W W PLANT ATTNv KIRK VICK 200 2ND AVENUE SOUTH 00001 Order: 0102400 ORDER DATS 11/03/2001 12:00:00 CUSTOMER WWI DAIK 01101119bo 12:00:00 SALES REP, VASINEn ROCHELLE OPERATOR: FAUTH E30PPE SHIP VIA CODE F. 0, 0, T E R M WHSE FEXGND DEST ***DEET*** NET GA 00957 PRODUCT DESCRIPTION 5699-DA SLIP-N-SWDE TOTAL GROSS WEIGHTu PICKED By CHECKED B'-' EDMUNDS jkl�i 98020 SHIP DATE P.D. if 1439 ORDER SHIP CT 1 DA io 3260 'B' st. W # E Seattle: 1-206-622-6040 AUBUP—,WA,98Wl Tacoma 1-233-474-6242 So. King 1-253-833-4375 ENVIR-TS094P FAX 1-253-939-2898 ENVIRONMENTAL TANK SERVICE, INC. To: Local District Fire Marshal Date: 10/27/03 Re: UST Decommissioning Qualifications Recently, we sent out an informational letter to you. Due to a clerical error, this letter lacked the attachment. Enclosed, please find the missing attachment. We apologize for any inconvenience that this may have caused you. Thank you Decommission Permits, Charges, and Inspections Department/Clty Permit Plan not to Scale Plan to Scale Permit Cost Permit Acquired at Insp Inspection by Allows P/WIC Notes Algona Yes Yes No Charge Fire Department no We Auburn yes Yes No Charge Fire Department no Fire Department Bellevue Yes No Charge Contractors Blanket Ucense no Black Diamond no No Charge NtA no no Bothell yes $65.00 Fire Department no Bremerton yes Yes No Charge City Building yes I Fire Departmerd Brier Yes Yes $30.W Fire Department yes Fire Department Buckley yes yes $50.00 Fire Department Yes permit desk Burien Yes Yes $50.00 Fire Department yes Fire Department yes Des Moines Yes Yes $55.00 Department yes Fire Department Edaevvood Yes Yes $30.00 -Fire Fire Department no Fire Department Edmonds yes no no $40.00 City Building yes Fire Department Enumclaw yes yes $51.50 Fire Department yes Fire Department Everett yes "s No Charge Fire Department yesi Fire Department Federal Way yes yes $35.00 Fi-re Department vesl Fire Department FirCrest - yes $34.15 Buildina Department No NIA Yes Gig Harbor yes Yes City Bulkling City Bu ng Issaquah - yes _$35.00 $40.00 City Building yes Fire Department Kenmore Yes $55.00 Fire Deparhymud no Kent Yes yes I $50.OD Fire Department yes Fire Department I(irkland no No Charge NIA NIA N/A Lakeforest Park "S $55.00 Fire Department no Lakewood yes Yes $10.00 Fire Department no I WA yes Lynnwood yes Yes No Charge City Buikfing yes Fire Dqmftmt Maple Valley KCFD 943 See King County Yes WrysAlle Yes yes No Charoe Fire Departmerd ves Fire Department Mercer Island yes yes $109.00 city Buikflng yes Fire 64-artmem Milton yes yes I No Charge Fire Department yes Fire Department Mountlake Terrace Yes Yes $30.00 Fire Department yes permit desk Nevxastle Ves Yes Removal $101.40 Fill $73.35 City BuiWing yes, City Building Normandy Park yes yes $75.00 City Hall no Fire Department North Shore Yes $55.00 Fire Department no Fire Deparlment Olympia yes yes See File City Building yes Fire Departrnent Minimurn 2 Soil Samples Required Pierce County (2 Week Processing) Yes yes $85.00 Fire Prevention Bureau no fda Yes Puyallup Yes Yes $45.00 Fire Department yes - Fire Department Redmond "S Yes No Charge City or Fire Department Yes Renton Yes Yes $30.00 Fire Prevention Bureau no N/A Sea-Tac Yes Yes No Charge Fire Department yes Fire Department Seattle yes no no $68.00 Fire Department yes yes Shoreline KCFD #4 Vft yes no $121.00 City Building yes Fire Department Snohomish County no NIA Steilacum yes yes No Charge Fire Department yes Fire Department Sumner Ves $84.00 City Building yes Fire Departmerd Soil test Required Tacoma Yes no no $10.00 Fire Department no _ yes Thurston County Yes $114.50 Fire Department yes Fire Depadmimd Soil Test Required Tukwila no no no No Charge NIA NZA N/A Tuffmater yes $40.00 City Building no N/A (3) ofplans required for permit Unincorporated I(ing County Yes Yes no No Charge Contractors Blanket License no University Place Yes no $50.00 Fire Department no N/A �Lan e Clark Count,) Ves; $114.00 Fire ?Mrshars office yes Fire Department Inspection $1 2.00 h7n is d See King County yes It. Ild/22/2003 08:16 5626952323 MCMA STER CARR a PAGE 02/11 ETS SCHAE) MATERIAL SAFETY DATA R CORPORATION HEET MSDS No: 201 ETS Effective Date: 041=00 11. CHEMICAL PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION Product Group: REFRACTORY CERAMIC FIBER PRODUCT Chemical Name: VITREOUS ALUMINOSILICATE FIBER Synonym(s): RCF, ceramic fiber, synthetic vitreous fiber (SVq,), man-made vitreous fiber (MMVF), man-made mj�neral fiber (MMMF) Trade Names- Monster Modu", Perm -A -Lining&, K-Lite E lanketTm; K-Lite Bulk FiberT"; K-Lite Anchored BlockTm; Rameshield Blankel I'm; Firestop Banket"A Manufacturer/Supplier. ETS S HAEFER CORPORATION 8050 HI GHLAND POINTE PARKWAY MACEDONIA, OH 44056 Product Stewardship Program. PHONE: (8t 863-5400 FAX.- (330) 468-6010 12. COMPOSITION I INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS COMPONENTS CASNUMBE % 11Y WEIG Refractories, Fibers. Aluminosilicate 142SWO-e 100 (See Section 8 "Exposure Controls I Personal Protection" f4 or exposure guidelines) 13. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION EMERGENCY OVERVIEW WARNING! POSSIBLE CAN PER HAZARD BY INHi:LAION. (See Serfion 11 for more infbrmati I CHRONIC EFFECT There has been no increased incidence of respiratory disease in studies e animal studies, long term laboratory exposure to doses hundreds of times has produced fibrosis, lung cancer and mesothelioma in rats or hamsters. specially sized to maximize rodent respirability. 3ning occupationally exposed workers. In 11 - pr than normal occupational exposures � fters; used in those studies were 10/-22/2003 08:16 5626952323 MCMASTER CARR PAGE 03/11 MSDS No: 201 ETS Effective Date: 04/22J2002 OTHER POTENTI[AL EFFECTS TARGET ORGANS: Respiratory Tract (nose and throat� Eyes, Skin RESPIRATORY TRACT (nose and throat) IRRITATION: If inhaled in sWeient qua", may cause temporary, mild mechanical irritation to resp ratory tract. Symptoms may include scratchiness of the nose or throat, cough or chest discomfort. EYE IRRITATION: May cause temporary. mild mechanical Irritation. Fibers may be abrasive: prolonged c )nW may cause damage to the outer surface of the eye. WIN IRRITATION: May cause temporary. mild mechanical irritation. Exposure may also resuit in inflammi ition, rash or itching. GASTROINTESIINAL IRRITATION: Unlikely route of exposure. MEDICAL CONDITIONS AGGRAVATED BY EXPOSURE: Pre-existing medical conditions, including dermatitis, asthma or chronic lung disease ay be aggravated by exposure; Individuals who have a history of allergies may experience greater amounts of skin a respiratory irritation. HAZARD CLASSIFICATION Although studies, involving occupationally exposed workers, have not identified any increased incidence of respiratory disea,se, results from animal testing have been used as the basis for hazard cl; Lssification. In each of the following cams, the conclusions are qualitative only and do not rest upon any quantitat� e analysis suggesting that the hazard actually may occur at current o=piational exposure levels, In October 2001, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (LARC) carcinogen) remains the appropriate IARC classification for RCF. The Seventh Annual Report on Carcinogens (1994), prepared by the National respirable RCF and glasswooi as substances msonably anticipated to be carc The American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) Carcinogen! that Group 2b (possible human cology Program (NTP), classified classified RCF as 'A2-Suspected Human The Commission of The European Communities (DG XI) has classified RCF s a substance 'that should be regarded as 9 R is carcinogenic to man." lk I The State of California, pursuant to Proposition 65, The Safe Drinking water aqd Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, has listed * ceramic fibers (airborne fibOrS Of respirable size)" as a chemical known to the Slate of California to cause cancer. The Canadian Environmental Protection Agency (CEPA) has classified RCF The Canadian Workplace Hazardous Materials Inforrination System (WH Causing Other Toxic Effects. - The Hazardous Materials Identification System (HMIS) — Health V Flammability 0 Reactivity 0 (I denotes potential for chronic effects) 4. FIRST AID MEASURES FIRST AID PROCED!JRES RESPIRATORY TRACT (nose & throat) IRRITATION - If resPiratory tract irritation develops. move the person to a dust free location. Get Section 8 for additional measures to reduce or eliminate exposure. EYE IRRITATION: If eyes become irritated, flush immediately VAth large amounts of lukewarm water for at from the eyeball to ensure thorough rinsing. Do not rub eyes. Get medical attention if i *probably carcinogenic" (Group 2). — RCF is classified as Class D2A - Materials Protection Index: X (Employer Determined) attention if the irritation coftnues. See 15 minutes. Eyelids should be held away )n persists. 10/22/2003 08:16 5626952323 MCMASTER CARR PAGE 04/11 I MSDS NO: 201US EfFe-4 SKJN IRRITATION: If skin becomes irritated, remove soiled clothing. Do not rub or scratch exposed skin. Wa 5 "ter. Using a sidn cmarn or lotion after washing may be helpful. Date: area of contact thoroughly with soap and GASTROINTESTINAL IRRITATION: If gastrointestrial tract irritation develops, move the Person to a dust free environment NOTES TO PHYSICLAMS: Skin and respiratory effects are the result of, temporary. mild mechanical irritation; fibeil exposure does not result in allergic manifestations. F5. -FIRE FIGHTING MEASURES NFPA Codes: Flammability: 0 Health: I Reactivity: 011 Special, 0 NFPA Unusual Hazards: None Flammable Properties: None Flash Point: None Hanirdous Decomposition Products: None Unusual Fire and Explosion Hazard. None Extinguishing Media: Use extinguishing media suitable for typil of surmunding fire 16. AtCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES SPILL PROCEDURES Avoid creating airborne dust. Dust suppressing cleaning methods such as wet witeeping or vacuuming should be used to clean the work area. If vacuuming, the vacuum should be equipped with a H '-'PA filter. Comp sweeping should not be used for cleaning. -ressed air or dry 7. HANDLING AND STORAGE STORAGE Store in original container in a dry area. Keep container closed when not in US( HANDLING Handle ceramic fiber carefully. Limit use of power tools unless in conjunction J h local exhaust. Use hand tools whenever possible. Frequenty clean the work area with HEPA f Itered vacuum r wet sweeping to minimize the accumulation of debris. Do not use compressed air for clean-up. F EMPTY CONTAINERS Product packaging m ay contain residue. Do not reuse. 18. (POSURE CONTROLSIPERSONAL PROTECTION E?(POSURE GUIDELINES OSHA PEL None )ZE G. ;I There is no sPecil'ic regulatory standard for RCF in the U.S. OSHA's "Particulate �ot Otherwise Regulated (PNOR), standard (29 CFR 19 10. 1000, Subpart Z, Air ContarninantS] applies generally - Total Dust 1,p Mg/M3 ; Respirable Fraction 5 mglm3. The Refractory Cerarnic Fibefs Coalition (RCFC) has sponsored comprehensive t 'xicology and epidemiology studies to identify potential RCF-related health effects [see Section I I for more detaiN. con , U, -related scientific literature. and rther evaluated the data in a smu�-W-the- science. conducted a thorough review of the RCF ulted experts farnillar with fiber and particle art quantim" risk assessment Based on these efforts and in the ateence of an SHA PEL, RCFC has adopted a recommended exposure guideline (REG), as measured under NIOSH Method 74 B. The manufacturers' REG is intended WProiwte occupational health and safety through feasible exposure controls and, ductions as determined by"ensive it industrial hygiene mon Rod ng efforts undertaken voluntarily and pursuant to an ag r mentwith the U.S. Environmental 3 1 10/22/2003 08:16 5626952323 MCMASTER CARR PAGE 05/11 MSDS No: 201 ETS Effe�tive Date: 04/ Protection Agency. !1 OTHER OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE LEVELS (OELI RCF-related occupational exposure limits vary internationally, Regulatory OEI Austria — 0.5 fica; Canada — 0.5 to 1 .0 f/= Denmark — 1.0 f/cc,- France — O.E new installations), Netherlands — 1 .0 f/cc; New Zealand — 1.0 f1cc; Norway — Voc: United Kingdom — 2-0 f/m Non -regulatory OEL examples include: ACG The bibjectives; and criteria underlying each of these OEL decisions also vary. limits and their relative applicability to the workplace is best perfbrTned, on a c� Hygienist ENGINEERING CONTROLS Use feasible engineering controls such as local exhaust ventilation, point of g stations, emission controlling tool designs, and mat terials handling equipment emissions. PERSONAL PROTECTION EQUIPMENT examples include: Australia — 0.5 f/cc; 10c; GerTnany-0.5 floe (0.25 f/ccfbr .Of/cc; looland-2.0f/cc; Sweden-1.0 i TLV - 0.2 f/cc: RCFC REG — 0.5 Voc. 'he evaluation of occupational exposure e-by-case basis, by a qualified InduWal dust collection, down draft work to minimize airborne fiber Respiratm Protection — RCF: When engineering and/or administrative controls are insufficient to maintain v orkplaci exposures within the 0.5 Vcc REG, the use of appropriate respiratory protection, pursuant to the requireme its of OSHA Standards 29 CFR 1910.134 and 29 CFR 1926.103, is recommended. The following information is provided as an example of appropriate respiratory protection for aluminosilicate fibers. The evaluation of workplace I iazards and the identification of appropriate respiratory protection is best performed, on a case -by -case basisu by a qualified Industrial Hygienist. 114ANUFACTURER'S RESPIRATORY PROTEC71ON RECOF IMENDATIONS - - WHEN HANDLING RCF PRODUCTS Rag�Wrable Airborne Fiber Concentration Respirator Recomm �ndationt (levels are 8-hr. time -weighted avvages) Not yet determined but expected to be below 5.0 f/ce based on Half -face. air purifyinj respirator equipped with a NIOSH operation certified P 100 particu ate filter cartridge 'Reliably" less than 0.5 Vcc Optional 0.5 f1cc to 5-0 f1ce Half -Mee, air puriVnq d . respir r equipped with a NJOSH certified P100 particu �i te filter qartridge 5.0 f1cc to 26 floc Fulk cepiece, air put fying respirator equipped with a NIOSH certified Pi 00 particul ;ite filter cartridge or PAPR I Greator than 25 f/cc PAPR with tight-fitdrig Full facepiece or a supplied air respirator in continuous flow mode When individual workers request respiratory protection as a A NIOSH certified real irator, such as a disposable particulate matter of personal comfort or choice where exposures are, respirator, or respirato S with filter cartridges rated N95 or better l"reliab �� below 0.5 f/ce I The P1 00 recommendation is a conservative default choice: in some cases, soi�cl arguments can be made that other respirator types (e.g., N95, R99, etC,) may be suitable for some tasks or work en ironments. The P1 00 recommendation I is not designed to limit informed choices, provided that respiratory protection dections comply with 29 CFR 1910.134. OtheLInforniatlon: Concenti,ations, based upon an eight -hour time weighted average (TWA)' determ,inGd by air samples collected and analyzed pursuant to NIOSH method'7400 (B) for airborne fil>ers. 10/22/2003 08:16 5626952323 MCMASTER CAR PAGE 06/11 L--MSDS No., 201ETS Effe�tive Pate: 04/22t2002 + The rbanufacturer recommends the use of a full,-facepiece, air purifying i aspirator equipped with an appropfiate ortidulaiiinfi�ft,ir cartridge during furnace tear -out events and the removal of used RCF to control exposures to airborne fiber and the potential presence of crystalline silica. If exposurE levelsare known. the respiratory protection chart provided above may be applied. I Potential exposure to other airborne contaminants should be evaluated y a qualified Industrial Hygienist for the sellection of appropriate respiratory protection and air monitoring. I Skig Protection. - Wear gloves. head coverings and full body clothing as necessary to prevent s0n irritation. Washable or disposa I ble dothing may be used, If possible, do not take unwashed work clothing home. Ilf soiled work clothing must be taken home, employers should ensure employees are trained on the best practices to minimize or avoid non-wcrk dust exposure (e.g., vacuum cJothes before leaving the work area, wash work clothibg sep�rately. rinse washer before washing other household clothes, etc.). I Eye Protection: I Wear safety glasses with side Welds or other forms of eye protection in compi'ance w ith appropriate OSHA standards to prevent eye irritation. The use of contact lenses is not recommended, unles.- used in conjunaon with appropriate eye protection. Do not touch eyes with soiled body parts or materials. If possible. have eye -washing facilities readily available where eye irritation can occur. A PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES i I ODOR AND APPEARANCE - CHEMICAL FAMILY: BOILING POINT. - WATER SOLUBILITY MELTING POINT: SPECIFIC GRAVITY: VAPOR PRESSURE: ll VAPOR DENSrrY (Air = 1): % VOLAll MOLECULAR FORMULA: 110. STABILITY AND REACTIVITY White, odorless, fibrous mated, Vitreous Aluminosilicate Fibers Not Applicable Not Soluble in Water 1760- C (3200- F) 2.50-2.75 Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable CHEMICAL STABILITY: Stable under conditions of norm ii use INCOMPATIBILITY: None CONDITIONS TO AVOID: None HAZARDOUS DECOMPOSITION PRODUCTS: None HAZARDOUS POLYMERIZATION: Not Applicable 111. TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION i I HEALTH DATA SUMMARY- Epidernioll studies of RCF production workers have indicated no nor other significant health effects. In animal studies, long-term, high. development of respiratory disease in rats and hamsters. EPIDEMIOLOGY: fhe —Univ��of Cincinnati is conductilng, an ongoing epiderniologic ln�idence of respiratory disease ation exposure resulted in the The evidence obtained from 10/22/2003 08:16 5626952323 MCMA STER CARR MSDS No: 201ETS Effe�l employees in U. S. RCF manufacturing facilities is as follows: 1) There is no evidence of any fibrotic lung disease (interstitial fibrosis) from e 2) Them is no evidence of an elevated incidence of lung disease among RCF i n 3) In early studies an apparent statistical "trenT within the exposed population duration and some measures of lung firiction. The observations were clinical�, made on an individual employee, the results would be interpreted as being wit! i range. A more recent longitudinal study of employees with 5 or more pulmona y observations, finding no effect on lung function associated with RCF productioi i seemed to indicate an interactive effect between smoking and RCF exposure: i n interactive effecL Nevertheless, to promote good health, RC:F employees are t PAGE 07/11 04/22/2002 st X-fays. employees, vas observed between RCF exposure insignificant If these observations were n the normal (predicted) respiratory function tests refutes the earlier experience. Initial data (circa 1987) ore recent data, however. found no ill actively encouraged not to smoke. 4) Pleural plaques (thickening along the chest wall) have been observed in as allnu I mber of RCF employees. Some studies appear to show a relationship between the occurrence of pleural plaquts on chest radiographs and the following variables: (a) years since RCF production hire date; (b) duration of RCF produi tion employment; and (c) cumulative RCF exposure. The best evidence to date indicates that pleural plaques are a -narker of exposure only. Pleural plaques are not associated with pulmonary impairment. The pathogenesis of ;'eural plaques remains incompletely understood; however, the mechanism appears to be an inflammatory response caused by inhaled fibers, TOXICOLOGY: A number of toxicological studies designed to identify any potential heaalt9hi effife from RCF exposure have been completed. In one study, conducted by the Research and Consulting Com'pan , (Geneva, Switzerland), rats and hamsters were exposed to 30 mg/m3 (about 200 fibers/cc) of special"repare 1p RCF for 6 hours/day, 5 daystweek. for up to 24 months. In rats, a statiacally significant increase in lung tumors w bserved: two mesotheliomas (cancer of the pleural lining between the chest waill and lung) were also identified. Hamst Ys did not develop lung tumors; however, interstitial fibrosis and mesothelioma was found. Some, in the Scien,fic community, have concluded that the 14 maximum tolerated dose* was exceeded and that significant particle contamin ition was a confounding issue; therefore, these study findings may not represent an accurate assessment of the potentio for RCF to produce adverse health effects. In a related mul"ose study with a similar protocol, other rats were exposed t I doses of 16 mg/m� 9 mgW, 3 mglm-1 which corresponds to about I 16, 75, and 25 fibers per cubic centimeter respe4vely. This study found no statistically significant increase in lung cancer. Some cases of pleural and parenchymal 'I rosis were seen in the 16 mg/m-1 dose group. Some cases of mild fibrosis and one mesotheliorna were observed in tt 9 9 mg1W group. No acute respiratory el'iects were seen in the rats in the 3 mg1m` exposure group, which suggests tt at there may be a dose/response threshold, below which !rTeversible respiratM impacts do not occur. Other toxicological studies have been conducted which utilized non-physiologi I exposure methods such as intrapleural, intraperitoneal and intratracheal implantation or injection. Some of these studies have found that RCF is a, potential carcinogen. Some experts, however, suggest that these tests have fir ifted relevance because they bypass many of the biological mechanisms that prevent fiber deposition or facilitate fiber clearance. To obtain more epidemiology or toxicology information, please call the toll free elephone number for ETS Schaefer 112. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION' - No ecological concerns have been identified. [13. DISPOSAL CONSIDE WASTE MANAGEMENT: To prevent waste materials from becoming airborne during waste storage, tran 'I rtabon and disposal, a covered container or plastic bagging is recommended. To RnP—OSAL RCF, as manufactured, is not classified as a hazardous Waste according to Fedei al regulations (40 CFR 281). Any processing, use, alteration or chemical additions to the product, as purchased. mdy alter the disposal requirements. Under Federal regulations, it is the waste generators responsibility to properly ch, tracteriZe a waste material, to determine. if it is a *hazardous' waste. Check local, regional. state or provincial regulations to identify all applicable disposal requirements. I 6 10/22/2003 08:16 5626952323 MCMASTER CARR PAGE 08/11 MSDS No: 201 ETS 114. TRANSPORT INFORMATION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO rATION(poT) Hazard Class- Not Regulated Labels: Not Applicable Placards: Not Applicable .- Date: 0412212002 1 United Nations (UN) Num r Not Applicable I North America (NA) Num Not Applicable Bill of Lading: Product Name INTERNATIONAL Canadian TDG Hazard Class & PIN: Not regulated Not classified as dangerous goods under ADR (road). RID (train) or IMDG (shil F15. 'REGULATORY INFORMATION UNITED STAIgS REGULATIONS EPA: Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization not contain any substances reportable under Se( Sections 311 and 312 (40 CFR 370) apply (dela) Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) — RCF I however, it is not required to be listed on the TS( Comprehensive Environmental Response, Cc (CERCLA.) and the Clean Air Act (CAA) - RCF i greater than one micron and thus is not consider, OSHA: Comply with Hazard Communication Standard 1926.59 and the Respiratory Protection Stand. 1926.103. California, Ceramic fibers (airborne particles of respirable si: Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of of California to cause cancer. Other States: RCF products are not known to be regulated by s state and local 0SFlA and EPA regulations may contact your local regulatory agency. INTERNATIONAL REGULATIONS ket (SARA) Title III - This product does bris 302, 304, 313, (40 CFR 372). <1 hazard). is be�n assigned a CAS number, k inventory. ipensation and Liability Act intains fibers with an average diameter J a haza�ous air pollutant. 29 CFR 1910.1200 and 29 CFR cls 29 CFR 1910.134 and 29 CFR �) is Iiited in Proposition 65, The Safe 986 as a chemical known to the State Ites oiher than California; however, ,ply to'these products. If in doubt. Canada: Canadian Workplace Hazardous Materials lnfc rmation System (WHMIS) - RCF is classified as Class E)2A - Materials Causing othe, Toxic Effects Canadian Environmental Protection Art (CEPA) -All substances in this product are listed, as required, on the Domestic Substances L st (DSL) European Union- European Directive 971691EC classified RCF as i Category 2 carcinogen; that is it "should be regarded as if it is carcinogenic to ma " 116. OTHER INFORMATION I I RCF DEViTRIFICATION: As produced, all RCF fi rs are vitreous (91") materials that do not contain or, stalline silica. Continued exposu're to elevated temperatures may cause these fibers to devitrify (become crystalline). "'he first; crystalline formation (mullite) begins to occur at approximately 985* C (11805" F). Crystall;ne silica (criptobalit6) formation may begin at temperatures of approximately 1200* C (2192* F). The occurrence and a t t f ��talline phase formation is x erp o cr% f dependent on the duration and temperature of exposure, fiber chemistry and/or �e pres_�nce of fluxing agents. The 10/22/2003 08:16 5626952323 MCMASTER CARR PAGE 09/11 S No: 2 01 ETS— presence Of crystalline phases can be confirmed only through lab Yt-03�7—analy., MC's evaluation of crystalline silica states 'Crystalline Mica inhaled in the for Occupational sources is carcinogenic to humans (Group 1)' and additionally no Working Group noted that carcinogenicity in humans was not detected in all inc Carcinogenicity may be dependent on inherent characteristics of the crystalline biOlOgical activity or distribution of its polymorphs! (IARC Monograph Vol. 68, crystalline silica amongst substances which may 'reasonably be anticipated to I IARC and NTIP did not evaluate after -service RCF, which may contain various c of after -service RCF samples obtained pursuant to an exposure monitoring agn furnace conditions sampled, most did not contain detectable levels of crystallinE found that (1) simulated after -service RCF showed litHe. or no, activity where e;� intraperitoneal injecUon; and (2) after -service RCF was not cytotoxic to macropt 320 ),g/crn2 - by comparison, pure quartz or tristobalite were significantly active te Date: 04/22/2002 of the " It face' fiber. of quartz or cristobante from � "in making the overall evaluation, the �,-tNal circumstances studied. lica, or on external factors afrecting its 97). NTP liStS all polymorphs of � carcinogens.* ystalline phases. However, an analysis �ment with the EPA, found Wt in the silica. Other relevant RCF studies *sure was by inhalation or by )ge-like cells at concentrations up to it much lower levels (circa 20 Xglcm). RCF AFTER-SERvir-F RFMnV L: Respiratory protection should be prov4ded in compliance with OSHA staridards., During FACE RESPIRATOR is recommended f^ 4 removal operations, a FULL u— ul lalauun exposure along with eye and respiratory tract irritation. A Spe�dfiic evaluation of workplace hazards and the identification of appropriate r0-,:,P1ratOry protection is best performed, on 2 cM-by-case basis, by a qualified industrial hygiene professional. PRODUCT STEWARDSHIP PROGRAM On February 11, 2002, the Refractory Ceramic Fibers Coalition (RCFC) and the U S. Occ . upational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) introduced a voluntary worker protection program entitled I ISP 2002, a comprehensive, multi- faceted 6sk management program designed to control and reduce workplace ey4x sures; to refractory ceramic fiber (RCF). For more information regarding PSP 2002, please refer to the RCFC web site: http -/Avww.rcfcnet- DEFINITIONS-, ACGIH: ADR. American CGnfefOnee Of Govemmental Industrial H CAA. CarriagO Of DaNGMS Goods by Road (Internal5on CleanAirAct CAS: Chemical Abstws Service CERCLA; Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compen DSL: Domestic Substances Ust EPA; Environmental Protection Agency EU: European Union f/cc: Fibers per cubic centimeter HEPA: High Efficiency Particulate Air HMIS-. Hazardous Materials Identification System LARC: International Agency for Research on Cancer IATA- International Air Transport Association IMDG: International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code MW&- Milligrams per cubic meter of air rnmpcf: Million particJes per cubic meter NFPA: National Fire Protection Association NIOSH: National Institute for Occupational SaIety and Health OsKk- Occupational Safety and Health Administration 29 CFR 1910.134 1926.103: OSHA Respiratory Protection Standards 29 CFR '19110.11201) & 1926.59: OSHA Hazard Communication Standards PEU Permissible Exposure Limit (OSHA) PIN: Product Identification Number PNOC: Particulates Not Otherwise Classified PNOP- Particulates Not Otherwise Regulated PSP: Product Stewardship Program RCFC: Refractory CerarNe Fibers Coalition RCRA: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act REG: REL: Recommended Exposure Guideline (RCFC) Recommended Exposure Limit (NIOSH) RID: Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Rail (International F ienists Regulation) and Liability Act Westfall, John A-V�� . From: Westfall, John Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:58 AM To: Ness, Steven Cc: Allison, Steve Subject: RE: Confined Space at the wwtp Steve: If WWTP is required to document what available, (or contracted) rescue services are available to them for their CS operations, the EFD agreement that you describe is not really an agreement in an obligatory sense, but a statement of EFD CS capabilitites. Is this right? I brought the question up in Safety meeting this morning -why wouldn't we have "agreements" with the rest of City Departments (or private companies) that operate in confined spaces? With your clarification previous, the "statement of capabilities" (my term) should be available to all City Departments (and privates) for the understanding of what rescue services they can depend upon from EFD. And from their State workplace requirements -they can calculate the shortfalls for what additional resources (by contract, etc ... ) they may need to perform CS in the approved manner. Could this statement be just a generic faxable/emailable document we can provide to anyone upon inquiry? My only concern is the liability assumption for the rest of the City departments that do CS work. And a natural thought is that they are in their right to ask to see our training records to assure that our perishable capabilities are being maintained (thanks to you). I am trying to understand the needs and collect the fallout from the pandora's box that I opened up. I am glad that you are conscientious in the training as well as the administration of the EFD program. As I am not suggesting that you turn the record -keeping over to anyone else. Thanks, Steve. ----- Original Message ----- From: Ness, Steven Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 8:23 AM To: Westfall, John Cc: Allison, Steve; Tomberg, Thomas Subject: RE: Confined Space at the wwtp Actually, they would be considered the contractor since they are sending their employees into the space. We are considered a third party rescue service. The burden is on them to ensure that we are trained and equipped to perform rescues. As well as the burden is on us to train and equip our people. I maintain all of the training records for the entire south county team. If the new TO wants to take that on, that would be great, but for now I plan to keep doing it. I would say that we are about 80% compliant in that every member of the team is supposed to do a permit space rescue annually, but with kelly days and vacations, its tough to get everyone. As well as some people don't want to come off duty to drill. I sent a draft agreement to Chief Allison which outlines our training and equipment capabilities. Please ask if you have any other questions. I believe the confined space standard is one of the most misunderstood laws in the occupational safety WAC. Lt. Ness ----- Original Message ----- From: Westfall, John Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 8:02 AM To: Ness, Steven Cc: Allison, Steve; Tomberg, Thomas Subject: RE: Confined Space at the wwtp Steve: Thanks for the update. I see what you say are the requirements. I don't see that we are a "contractor" as termed in the WAC. Steve: Thanks for the verification. Jon Lein offered to write it up -all you would need to do is review, redline and have Chief sign. The annual CSR training requirement is not specifically for the WWTP space, right? And following the initial agreement they will be looking for training documentation from Fire Group. For future edification, are the CSR training records maintained by you until TO arrives? Thanks, John ----- Original Message ----- From: Ness, Steven Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 8:08 PM To: Westfall, John Cc: Allison, Steve; Tomberg, Thomas Subject: Confined Space at the wwtp John, Just for your info, concerning the CSR issues at the wwtp. The WAC does put the responsibility for providing rescue services on the contractor(company entering the space). So, the wwtp is responsible for verifying that rescue services are available( 296-62-14150). 1 think that a verbal handshake agreement between the FID and the wwtp would not be sufficient proof of them securing and verifying rescue services. As the WAC outlines, they must have proof that we are trained in the appropriate rescue techniques, and perform permit space rescue training at least annually, and are familiar with their spaces and hazards. At the direction of my BC, I will contact John Lien and generate a document that will satisfy the WAC which outlines an agreement between the two agencies for rescue services. Thank you for your concern in this matter. Lt. Steve Ness Westfall, John From: Tomberg, Thomas Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:40 AM To: Ness, Steven; Westfall, John Cc: Allison, Steve Subject: RE: Confined Space at the wwtp 12/15/03 1 appreciate the good -faith efforts each of you are trying to make re what Jon Lein believes requires a written agreement between the Sewer Treatment Plan and the Fire Department. I disagree, and should have become involved sooner. This issue is in the hands of Noel Miller and Steve Koho. Thanks. TT ----- Original Message ----- From: Ness, Steven Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 8:23 AM To: Westfall, John Cc: Allison, Steve; Tomberg, Thomas Subject: RE: Confined Space at the wwtp Actually, they would be considered the contractor since they are sending their employees into the space. We are considered a third party rescue service. The burden is on them to ensure that we are trained and equipped to perform rescues. As well as the burden is on us to train and equip our people. I maintain all of the training records for the entire south county team. If the new TO wants to take that on, that would be great, but for now I plan to keep doing it. I would say that we are about 80% compliant in that every member of the team is supposed to do a permit space rescue annually, but with kelly days and vacations, its tough to get everyone. As well as some people don't want to come off duty to drill. I sent a draft agreement to Chief Allison which outlines our training and equipment capabilities. Please ask if you have any other questions. I believe the confined space standard is one of the most misunderstood laws in the occupational safety WAC. Lt. Ness ----- Original Message ----- From: Westfall, John Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 8:02 AM To: Ness, Steven Cc: Allison, Steve; Tomberg, Thomas Subject: RE: Confined Space at the wwtp Steve: Thanks for the update. I see what you say are the requirements. I don't see that we are a "contractor" as termed in the WAC. Steve: Thanks for the verification. Jon Lein offered to write it up -all you would need to do is review, redline and have Chief sign. The annual CSR training requirement is not specifically for the WWTP space, right? And following the initial agreement they will be looking for training documentation from Fire Group. For future edification, are the CSR training records maintained by you until TO arrives?' Thanks, John ----- Original Message ----- From: Ness, Steven Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 8:08 PM To: Westfall, John Cc: Allison, Steve; Tomberg, Thomas Subject: Confined Space at the wwtp Wesffall, John From: Westfall, John Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 4:06 PM To: Lein, Jon Cc: Smith, Mike Subject: RE: Fire code question Jon: Current exit signs are legal. Do you need floor arrows -No. Do you need escape plans posted -No. Would they be nice to have? Yes Would plans for confined spaces be nice to have? Yes. John ----- Original Message ----- From: Lein, Jon Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 3:53 PM To: Westfall, John Subject: Fire code question Hi John, Quick question -are just our current exit signs at the WWTP legal for the Fire Code? A question was asked, do we need arrows in the buildings to the exits and/ or escape plans posted in a non-public building? Thanks, Jon Lein Westfall, John From: Westfall, John Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 4:14 PM To: Fire Dept Group Cc: Koho, Steve Subject: Edmonds WWT zardous Product Change Members: The Wastewater Treatment Plant has made changes to their hazardous product state and no longer utilize chlorine gas for treatment, greatly reducing the hazard to the community. And the hazards are minimized for FD response. I The change has been made for Sodium Hypochlorite, a 12.5% chlorine solution,in the quantity of 6000 gallons. There are two 3000 gallon tanks in a containment area designed to hold the contents of a single tank in an accidental rupture/failure and fire protection water. In the case of a spill in the contain m ent'area, the product can be safely pumped into the wastewater as it enters the plant. This is the same storage are I a previously utilized for 8 tons of chlorine gas. The storage area (Bldg 100) is sprinklered. There is a spill detection alarm still, however, this typically alerts only plant workers who responds to assess the severity of the situation. There are plant workers on site approximately 20 hours per day. They have an existing automatic telephone dialer to respond after hours to certain alarms. Co -located is a 750 gallon tank of Sodium Bisulfite used to dechlorinate the product (turning the chlorine to salt) prior to sending out into the Sound. Product usage requires approximately 30 day hypochlorite resupply in the form of a 5000 gallon tank truck. Safeties have been designed into the new storage and process: only treatment plant personnel operate to pump the product from the supply truck and the supply truck now will be pumped from a parking lot location that forms an independent containment and reroutes the spilled product into the sewage entering the plant. This system is normally in operation and requires no manual actuation. The hypochlorite and bisulfite have dissimilar pump connections for refilling respective tanks. Infrequent accidents have occurred in Treatment Plants when the wrong product is pumped into the other tank. Manager Steve Koho is working on an update to their response plan that will include an automatic ringdown to SNOCOM once the emergency scenarios and alarm activations are evaluated. There will be a discrete N FPA 704 diamond at Bldg 100 to identify the hazards. Security concerns being what they are, allowances will be made that include a reduction of hazard labeling in public areas. I encourage a refamiliarization with the facility and have a look at the new improved product storage area. There are confined space areas throughout the plant. The Pre -fire warrants an update. Contact Steve Koho x1l 356 to make arrangements for a tour guide prior to your visit. FM MEMORANDUM ID TRACKING # DATE REPORTED BY: W6�-;rf--4VL_ OF SUBJECTADDRESS: bU"JV CONCERNS/ HAZARDS: 21 0 0 c ej- _1z) 7� SIGNED FOLLOW-UP: Vl-� rTz�� L-6i,�.) ov - r / r25- Ti-h c, o4-rd:- PX-0 v I dL--6 k9e'C��, -s,Pl t, L Co-740-7_ /w4 C,V-4c 1 T17 4V6 OAJ &­,i� ffu 1 doe,,p _6�rrc_ao SA D,97"e_ f Y7,,J T 5,1166 c I -"el r-7 4 T-W A.r V 16^ p*r— PD 5 r5D t 1 M-t5!4 _JwtTt�- FLvl,!;-tLLQ5"m_� lg� AJ C'()j, C SIGNED: City of Edmonds Sb Fire Prevention Bureau Westfall, John From: Westfall, John Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 8:02 AM To: Ness, Steven Cc: Allison, Steve; Tomberg, Thomas Subject: RE: Confined Space at the wwtp Steve: Thanks for the update. I see what you say are the requirements. I don't see that we are a "contractor" as termed in the WAC. Steve: Thanks for the verification. Jon Lein offered to write it up -all you would need to do is review, redline and have Chief sign. The annual CSR training requirement is not specifically for the WWTP space, right? And following the initial agreement they will be looking for training documentation from Fire Group. For future edification, are the CSR training records maintained by you until TO arrives? Thanks, John ----- Original Message ----- From: Ness, Steven Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 8:08 PM To: Westfall, John Cc: Allison, Steve; Tomberg, Thomas Subject: Confined Space at the wwtp John, Just for your info, concerning the CSR issues at the wwtp. The WAC does put the responsibility for providing rescue services on the contractor(company entering the space). So, the wwtp is responsible for verifying that rescue services are available( 296-62-14150). 1 think that a verbal handshake agreement between the FD and the wwtp would not be sufficient proof of them securing and verifying rescue services. As the WAC outlines, they must have proof that we are trained in the appropriate rescue techniques, and perform permit space rescue training at least annually, and are familiar with their spaces and hazards. At the direction of my BC, I will contact John Lien and generate a document that will satisfy the WAC which outlines an agreement between the two agencies for rescue services. Thank you for your concern in this matter. Lt. Steve Ness Westfall, John From: Allison, Steve Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:10 PIVI To: Ness, Steven Cc: Westfall, John Subject: FW: WWTP Confined Space Steve, Since you know the WAC and Federal issues like the back of your hand, please contact Jon Lien and determine what he is looking for in the Confined Space. Then be prepared to compile a SOP for department use. If you have any questions, please ask. Thanks. Steve Allison Battalion Chief, B Shift Edmonds Fire Department (425) 672 - 5756 Office (425) 754 - 1837 Nextel ----- Original Message — From: Westfall, John Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 8:37 AM To: Allison, Steve Cc: Tomberg, Thomas Subject: WWTP Confined Space Steve: WWTP has gone to new Hypochlorite solution 12 1/2 % to replace the Chlorine gas. I visited yesterday to inspect for deficiencies in their change project. In discussion, Jon Lein is the safety guy down there (for years) and has in his mind that his WSHA rules require a written agreement with the FD for confined space operations. I'm looking at vertical standard WAC 296-305-05003 (6/99) Confined space rescue operations. and written agreements are not addressed. He may be confused over "contract outside rescue services", which we are not. Para (3) requires only an active (FD) training program and supporting documentation for that training. Will you contact him to clarify what he needs from us? Jon Lein x1 237 Thank you, John Westfall, John From: Westfall, John Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 11:10 AM To: Koho, Steve Cc: Tomberg, Thomas; Miller, Noel Subject: RE: Chlorine Steve: The Fire Department thanks you for keeping us posted on hazards and this project. John ----- Original Message ----- From: Koho, Steve Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 10:59 AM To: Westfall, John Cc: Tomberg, Thomas; Miller, Noel Subject: Chlorine John, As of Tuesday, May 27, there is no longer gaseous chlorine at the Treatm�nt Plant. We are currently using a temporary storage tank (with containment), located in the parking lot, that stores a 12% solution of sodium hypochlorite (bleach). Construction continues towards retrofitting a room within the plant to house the perrnanent chemical storage tanks. Expected completion date is late July or early August. Steve 1 Westfall, John From: Tomberg, Thomas Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 11:01 AM To: Fire Dept Group Cc: Koho, Steve Subject: FW: Chlorine 5/29/03 Good news for us and the City. Crews will drop by and check on the status of the conversion as it progresses. Thanks. TT ----- Original Message ----- From: Koho, Steve Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 10:59 AM To: Westfall, John Cc: Tomberg, Thomas; Miller, Noel Subject: Chlorine John, As of Tuesday, May 27, there is no longer gaseous chlorine at the Treatment Plant. We are currently using a temporary storage tank (with containment), located in the parking lot, that stores a 12% solution of sodium hypochlorite (bleach). Construction continues towards retrofitting a room within the plant to house the I permanent chemical storage tanks. Expected completion date is late July or early August. Steve 4_� -rI Westfall, John From: Westfall, John Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 4:05 PM To: Koho, Steve Cc: Tomberg, Thomas; Sheridan, Chris Subject: Process change to liquid chlorine Steve: Thanks for the heads up on your plans to change from gaseous to liquid chlorine. For all intents Fire Department response during construction and using gas during that time will remain near the same as we currently anticipate, however; Your employee/facility response plan will require change(s). With the concern of security and blossom of terror events, we must consider physical security as well as hazard risk management and mitigation. Yours and Chris's expertise will be my preferential guide regarding treatment process during construction (any chance we can change to bleach treatment BEFORE the construction phase?). Lastly, and ultimately assuring that the State regulatory folks are on -board with the plan of construction for process changes. I will draw a letter of suggestion to endorse your plan as we get closer to project time. Please keep me posted as we get there. Our firefighters must understand the change of hazard and hazard relocation during construction with regards to their response. I Thank you, John Date: To: Via: Via: From: Subject: MEMORANDUM August 4, 1999 unffl: �-Ct. Krugmire 8/10/99 Lt. Yokum 8/17/99 FF. White 8/24/99 /FIVI Westfall WWTP EPA Ian This is a lot of paper, most of which is a PAID consultation for a disastrous hypothetical release of chlorine. Top page is an explanation of the new requirements. The plan itself appears to be only 8 pp. Steve Koho, WWTP Director is providing us with an opportunity to make adjustments to his plan. Please take a look at the plan with respect to the deadlines shown and pass on to the next Tech. Return to me by 8/24 and perhaps Dave and/or Andre and I can meet with Steve at our place on 8/25 for a short time. Please mark up the plan with your questions, comments, and suggestions. Thanks for your quick review and comments. City of Edmonds �b Fire Marshal Like many industries that have only recently realized what affect the 'Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 have had on their operations and reporting, fire service first responders are now becoming aware of the emergency response information the US. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires under the Emergency Plan- ning and Community"Right to Know"Act (EPCRA) and Section 112 of the Clean Air Act. There's been confusion in both industry and the fire service about these laws, and there are disagreements as to what should be done. To its credit, EPA is trying to sort out this confiision by setting up a special liaison in the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency illustration: Blair Thornley Anthony R. ONeiH Response to inform industry of EPA require- ments and to answer inquiries from the fire service. You can tap into the office through the internet at www.epa.gov/ceppo/. Here's a brief overview of what you'll find. What you won't find are the underlying con- troversies. Right to know EPCRA requires annual haz-mat inventory reports from most industries that manu- facture or handle hazardous chemicals. EPCRA, in turn, gives local fire service first responders and community interest groups access to information about the pres- ence of hazardous chemicals in their communities so that appropriate emergency response plans can - be develoned. These hazardous chemicals are tied in with OSHA Hazardous on their sites. FMPs require a hazard assess- ment, an accident prevention program, and an emergency response program. Congress authorized the accident preven- tion program under Section 112r(7) of the Clean Air Act to cover "release prev-ention, detection and correction requirements... monitoring, record -keeping, secondary con- tainment, and other design, equipment, work practice, and operational require- ments...." Some industries argue that this program sounds a lot Eke NFPA codes and standards requirements and feel that, if they meet NFPA requirements that have been adopted nationally, they shouldnrt have to meet additional EPA code requirements. For example, members of the propane industry feel that, because their facilities meet NFPA 58, Liquefied Petroleum Gas Code, which has been adopted in all 50 states,.they shouldn't be burdened with EPA!s requirements, aswell. Communications Standards and Mater- Worst -case scenarios ial Safety Data Sheets. EPAs risk management plans require Risk management plans Under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Congress re- quired EPA to list hazardous materials that, when accidentally released, 'can cause death, injury, or serious adverse effects in humans or the environment. EPA was required to use the EPCRA Est as a starting point for required risk man- agement plans (RMPs), which industries must develop if they have threshold quantities of the hazardous chemicals that off -site consequence analysis data ele- ments, which include worst -case scenarios, be made available to the public, as well as to first responders. In the wrong hands, fire ser- vice leaders worry, these worst -case scenarios could become a blueprint for terrorism. For- tunately the FBI and EPA agree, and, for now, there's no intention of publishing them on the Internet, as originally proposed. The bottom line is that these EPA regu- lations affect all- NFPA members, so it's incumbent upon us to know not on] y* the benefits* of the Clean Air Act but itg require- ment-s and, their impact. 4 Anthony K ONeill is NFPA vicepresident of Gov- ernment Affairs, in our Washington, D. C, ojice. I�FPAJournal July/August 1999 MANAGEMENT SYSTEM The Plant Manager will have overall responsibility for implementing the Risk Management Program elements at the Edmonds WWTP. t I e Certification Letter Certification Statement for Program Level 2 & 3 Processes To the best of the undersigned's knowledge, information, and belief formed after reasonable inquiry, the C' information submitted is true, accurate, and complete. Signature"" Print Name Title Date Facility Name: City of Edmonds Wastewater Treatment PI RIVIP Report for City of Edmonds Wastewater Treatment Plant Section 1. Registration Information 1.1 Source Identification: a. Facility Name: City of Edmonds Wastewater Treatment Plant b. Parent Company #1 Name: c. Parent Company #2 Name: 1.2 EPA Facility Identifier: 1.3 Other EPA Systems Facility Identifier: 1.4 Dun and Bradstreet Numbers (DUNS): a. Facility DUNS: b. Parent Company #1 DUNS: c. Parent Company #2 DUNS: 1.5 Facility Location Address: a. Street 1: 200 Second Ave, South b. Street 2: C. City: Edmonds f. County: Snohomish Facility Latitude and Longitude: g. Lat. (ddmmss.$): 47 47 36.0 I. LattLong Method: 11 j. Lat/Long Description: CE 1.6 Owner or Operator: a. Name: City of Edmonds b. Phone: (425) 775-2525 Mailing address: c. Street 1: 200 Second Ave, South e. City: Edmonds d. State: WA e. Zip: 98020 - h. Long. (dddmmss.$): -122 22 32.0 Interpolation - Map Center of Facility d. Street 2: f. State: WA g. Zip: 98020 - 1 1.7 Name and title of person or position responsible for part 68 (RMP) implementation: a. Name of person: Stephen Koho 6/21/99 3:33:41 PM Page 1 of 8 Facility Name: City of Edmonds Wastewater Treatment PI b. Title of person or position: Plant Manager 1.8 Emergency contact: a. Name: Steve Koho b. Title: Plant Manager c. Phone: (425) 771-0237 d. 24-hour phone: (425) 743-1033 e. Ext. or PIN: 1.9 Other points of contact: a. Facility or Parent Company E-Mail Address: steve@ci.edm6nds.wa.us b. Facility Public Contact Phone: (425) 771-0237 c. Facility or Parent Company WWW Homepage Address: www.ci.edmonds.wa.us 1.10 LEPC: ESCA '7 1.11 Number of full time employees on site: 160 1.12 Covered by: a. OSHA PSM: Yes b. EPCRA 302: No c. CAA Title V: No Air Operating Permit ID: 1.13 OSHA Star or Merit Ranking: No 1.14 Last Safety Inspection (by an External Agency) Date: 05/12/1997 1.15 Last Safety Inspection Performed by an External Agency: State occupational safety agency 1.16 Will this RMP Involve predictive filing?: No 6/21/99 3:33:42 PM Page 2 of 8 Facility Name: City of Edmonds Wastewater Treatment PI Section 1. 17 Process(es) a. Process ID: Program Level 3 Chlorine gas b. NAICS Code 22132 Sewage Treatment Facilities c. Process Chemicals c.1 Chemical Name c.2 CAS Nr. c.3 Oty (lbs.) 1 Chlorine 7782-50-5 16,000 Section 2. Toxics: Worst Case Toxics: Worst Case ID: 1 2.1 a. Chemical Name: Chlorine b. Percent Weight of Chemical (if in a mixture): 2.2 Physical State: Gas Liquified by Pressure 2.3 Model used: EPA's RIVIP Guidance for Waste Water Treatment Plants Reference Tables or Equations 2.4 Scenario: Gas Release 2.5 Quantity released: 2,000 lbs 2.6 Release rate: 200.0 lbs/min 2.7 Release duration: 10.0 mins 2.8 Wind speed: 1.5 m/sec 2.9 Atmospheric Stability Class: F 2.10 Topography: U rban 2.11 Distance to Endpoint: 0.90 ml 2.12 Estimated reside n within distance to endpoint: D,8OO 2.13 Public receptors within distance to endpoint: a. Schools: Yes d. Prisons/Correction facilities: No b. Residences: Yes e. Recreation areas: Yes c. Hospitals: No f. Major commercial, office, or industrial areas: Yes g. Other (Specify): 2.14 Environmental receptors within distance to endpoint: a. National or state parks, forests, or monuments: No b. Officially designated wildlife sanctuaries, preserves, or refuges: Yes c. Federal wilderness areas: No d. Other (Specify): 2.15 Passive mitigation considered: a. Dikes: No d. Drains: No 6/21/99 3:33:42 PM Page 3 of 8 Facility Name: City of Edmonds Wastewater Treatment PI b. Enclosures: Yes e. Sumps: No c. Berms: No f. Other (Specify): 2.16 Graphic file name: Edmonds.jpg Section 3. Toxics: Alternative Release Toxics: Alternative Release ID: 1 3.1 a. Chemical Name: Chlorine b. Percent Weight of Chemical (if In a mixture): 3.2 Physical State: Gas Liquified by Pressure 3.3 Model used: EPA's RMP Guidance for Waste Water Treatment Plants Reference Tables or Equations 3.4 Scenario: Pipe leak 3.5 Quantity released: 42 lbs 3.6 Release rate: 0.7 lbs/min 3.7 Release duration: 60.0 mins 3.8 Wind speed: 3.0 m/sec 3.9 Atmospheric Stability Class: D 3.10 Topography: U rban 3.11 Distance to Endpoint: 00.03mi 3.12 Estimated residential population within distance to endpoint: 10 3.13 Public receptors within distance to endpoint: a. Schools- No d. Prisons/Correction facilities: No b. Residences: Yes e. Recreation areas: No c. Hospitals: No f. Major commercial, off Ice, or industrial areas: No g. Other (Specify): 3.14 Environmental receptors within distance to endpoint: a. National or state parks, forests, or monuments: No b. Officially designated wildlife sanctuaries, preserves, or refuges: No c. Federal wilderness areas: No d. Other (Specify): 3.15 Passive mitigation considered: a. Dikes: No d. Drains: No b. Enclosures: Yes e. Sumps: No c. Berms: No f. Other (Specify): 3.16 Active mitigation considered: a. Sprinkler systems: No f. Flares: No b. Deluge system: No g. Scrubbers: Yes c. Water curtain: No h. Emergency shutdown systems: Yes 6/21/99 3:33:43 PM Page 4 of 8 Facility Name: City of Edmonds Wastewater Treatment PI l�,l d. Neutralization: Yes 1. Other (Specify): e. Excess flow valve No 3.17 Graphic f Ile name: Edmonds.jpg Section 4. Flammables: Worst Case --- No Data To Report Section 5. Flammables: Alternative Release --- No Data To Rep Section 6. Accident History No Data To Report 7 M6 Section 7. Prevention Program 3 Process Id: I Chlorine gas Prevention Program ID: 1 Prevention Program Description: Information and procedures are contained in the Plant's Process Safety Management plant on the following issues: Process safety information, Process hazard analysis, Operationg procedures, Training, Mechanical integrity, Management of change, Pre -startup review, Compliance audits, Incident investigation, Employee participation, Hot work permit, and Contractors. In addition to the written program, new employees receive specific training on these issues and all employees receive annual refresher training on the prevention program elements. 7.1 NAICS Code: 22132 7.2 Chemicals: Chemical Name Chlorine 7.3 Date on which the safety Information was last reviewed or revised: 06/01/1997 7.4 Process Hazard Analysis (PHA): a. The date of last PHA or PHA update: 06/01/1999 b. The technique used: What If: Yes Failure Mode and Effects Analysis: No Checklist: No Fault Tree Analysis: No' What If/Checklist: No Other (Specify): HAZOP: No c. Expected or actual date of completion of all changes from last PHA or PHA update: 06/0111999 d. Major hazards identified: I Toxic release: Yes Contamination: No Fire: No Equipment failure: No Explosion: No Loss of cooling, heating, electricity, Instrument air: No Runaway reaction: No Earthquake: No Polymerization: No Floods (flood plain): No 6/21/99 3:33:43 PM Page 5 of 8 Facility Name: City of Edmonds Wastewater Treatment PI Overpressurization: No Tornado: No Corrosion: No Hurricanes: No Overfilling: No Other (Specify): e. Process controls In use: Vents: No Emergency air supply: Yes Relief valves: Yes Emergency power: Yes Check valves: No Backup pump: No Scrubbers: Yes Grounding equipment: No Flares: No Inhibitor addition: No Manual shutoffs: Yes Rupture disks: �o Automatic shutoffs: Yes Excess flow device: No Interlocks: Yes Quench system: �o Alarms and procedures: Yes Purge system: No Keyed bypass: No None: No Other (Specify): f. Mitigation systems in use: (Sprinkler system: No Water curtain: No Dikes: No Enclosure: Yes Fire walls: No Neutralization: No Blast walls: No None: No Deluge system: No Other (Specify): g. Monitoringidetection systems In use: Process area detectors: Yes None: No Perimeter monitors: No Other (Specify): h. Changes since last PHA or PHA update: Reduction In chemical Inventory: No Installation of perimeter monitoring systems: No Increase In chemical Inventory: No Installation of mitigation systems: No Change process parameters: No None recommended: Yes Installation of process controls: No None: No Installation of process detection systems: No Other (Specify): 7.5 The date of most recent review or revision of operating procedures: 06/01/1999 7.6 Training: a. The date of the most recent review or revision of training programs: 06/01/1999 b. The type of training provided: 6/21/99 3:33:43 PM Page 6 of 8 Facility Name: City of Edmonds Wastewater Treatment PI Classroom: Yes On the job: Yes Other (Specify): c. The type of competency testing used: Written test: No Observation: Yes Oral test: No Other (Specify): Demonstration: Yes 7.7 Maintenance: a. The date of the most recent review or revision of maintenance procedures: b. The date of the most recent equipment Inspection or test: c. Equipment most recently Inspected or tested: Yokes, pigtails, regulators, valves and piping 7.8 Management of change: a. The date of the most recent change that triggered management of change procedures: b. The date of the most recent review or revision of management of change procedures: 7.9 The date of the most recent pre -startup review: 7.10 Compliance audits: a. The date of the most recent compliance audit: b. Expected or actual date of completion of all changes resulting from the compliance audit: 7.11 Incident investigation: a. The date of the most recent Incident Investigation (if any): b. The expected or actual date of completion of all changes resulting from the investigation: 7.12 The date of the most recent review or revision of employee participation plans: 7.13 The date of the most recent review or revision of hot work permit procedures: 7.14 The date of the most recent review or revision of contractor safety procedures: 7.15 The date of the most recent evaluation of contractor safety performance: Section 8. Prevention Program 2 --- No Data To Report I Section 9. Emergency Response 9.1 Written Emergency Response (ER) Plan: a. Is facility included In written community emergency response plan? b. Does facility have its own written emergency response plan? 9.2 Does facility's ER plan Include specific actions to be taken In response to accidental releases of regulated substance(s)? No 06/01/1999 06/01/1999 06/01/1999 06/01/1999 06/01/1999 6/21/99 3:33:43 PM Page 7 of 8 Facility Name: City of Edmonds Wastewater Treatment P1 9.3 Does facility's ER plan Include procedures for Informing the public and local agencies responding to accidental releases? 9.4 Does facility's ER plan Include Information on emergency heath care? No 9.5 Date of most recent review or update of facility's ER plan: 9.6 Date of most recent ER training for facility's employees: 9.7 Local agency with which facility's ER plan or response activities are coordinated: a. Name of agency: ESCA b. Telephone number: (425) 776-3722 9.8 Subject to: a. OSHA Regulations at 29 CFR 1910.38: Yes b. OSHA Regulations at 29 CFR 1910.120: No c. Clean Water Act Regulations at 40 CFR 112: No d. RCRA Regulations at 40 CFR 264, 265, and 279.52: No e. OPA-90 Regulations at 40 CFR 112,33 CFR 154,49 CFR 194, or 30 CFR 254: No f. State EPCRA Rules or Laws: Yes g. Other (Specify): Executive Summary Attached File Name: EXECUT-1.TXT RMP Validation Errors --- No Data To Report 6/21/99 3:33:44 PM Page 8 of 8 The Edmonds Wastewater Treatment Plant approaches chernicalmanagement in the safest manner possible to protect the public and the environment.1 Like 98% of US water and wastewater treatment plants, we utilize chlorine to disinfect our treated water. At the Edmonds Wastewater Treatment Plant, we use approximately 200 pounds of chlorine each day as part of the disinfection process that provides our community with effective sanitation. Chlorine has been safely used to disinfect drinking water for nearly 100 years, reducing or eliminating the risk of such waterborne diseases as cholera, typhoid, and dysentery. We have long understood the hazards of handling chlorine, which if not done properly, can pose a risk to the community. Chlorine is listed in the EPA's new Risk Management Program Rule (Fd*APR). Since we have more than 2,500 pounds of chlorine on our site, we are required by the EPA to submit a Risk Management Plan. The RMPR has ensured that in the unlikely event of a release, local area emergency responders and other authorities are fully trained and ready to engage specific plans to remediate the situation quickly. The Edmonds Wastewater Treatment Plant has used chlorine to disinfect water for more than 20 years. Since the plant a5 upgra&A�in 199 1, wehave not had any accidents or leaks that resulted in chlorine being released to the environment. The threat to the environment is an air emissions issue, since a chlorine leak woul ' d occur in a gaseous state. A chlorine leak, therefore, would not send waters with high chlorine levels into Puget Sound. Chlorine is supplied in cylinders delivered to the plant by a vendor, and is stored in a room specially designed to contain chlorine gas leaks. A chlorine leak in this room would be routed to a scrubber that would remove the chlorine gas. To protect the public, the chlorine cylinders in the storage room are chained down to prevent any movement in the event of an earthquake. In addition to the cylinder constraints, a specially designed room, and the dedicated air handling system, t,he room also has continuous air monitoring. These sensors will alarm the plant's computer system as well as activate an audible plant siren if even a small amount of chlorine is detected. The new EPA regulation requires the City to perform two analyses: a worst case release scenario, and an alternative release scenario. The EPA dictates the conditions in the worst case scenario, which assumes that the largest storage tank fails c�tastrophically to empty itself in 10 minutes on a day with very low wind. Although this release may be physically impossible, EPA mandates its consideration. In reality, the chlorine would be released from the storage cylinder as a flashing liquid that would probably auto -chill and form a puddle of "chlorine ice," only a fraction of which would evaporate in 10 minutes. In the required worst case release scenario, the storage room would be unable to contain the gas and chlorine gas would be released to the atmosphere. Using EPA's model, chlorine would be detectable over an area with a radius of 0.9 miles from the Treatment Plant. In light of the fact that the worst case release scenario is not likely to occur, EPA also mandates that each facility create an alternative release scenario,that is more realistic than the worst case scenario. The City hired an outside engineering company to analyze the plant, its chlorine handling equipment and process, and interview plant employees to determine the most likely alternative release scenario. A systematic evaluation of the overall process was conducted and the firm determined that a broken connection pipe would be the most likely mode of failure. The amount of chlorine to leak from the pipe in such a scenario is within the operating parameters of the existing scrubber. Such an incident would be detected by the sensors, contained within the room, and vented to the scrubber until the tank valve is closed. Assuming that some of the gas was able to leak out of the room, the engineering company estimated that chlorine would be detectable approximately 150 feet from the storage room. In addition to equipment and building safeguards, safe handling of chlorine is also addressed through a prevention program. This program is covered under a separate regulation called Process Safety Management, and has been in p�ace for years. Issues such as training, hazard review, operating procedures, maintenance, and safety information are all included in the Plant's prevention program. The response plan for a chlorine leak varies depending upon the severity of the leak. Trained plant personnel deal with small leaks that are contained.: Response to a large leak or an unconfined leak would be directed by the Fire Department.! A dedicated team in the Lynnwood Fire Department has been specially trained to work with hazardous chemical releases, and would respond to any leak that could threaten the public. Additionally, the plant worked closely with the local emergency planning committee (ESCA) in developing a separate hazardous materials response plan. This interaction between our facility and emergency responders provides information to be exchanged and procedures developed that will assure a timely and appropriate response. We are confident that the added protection of the new Risk Management Plan will ensure that our personnel, the environment and the community continue to remain safe and healthy. W v6v-, kee -� of- I Page I of I SkIMPIN Figure 1 Vulnerability Zones for Hypothetical Chlorine Releases Edmonds Wastewater Treatment Plant A A71 -`-3, 1 . . . . . . .... Worst -Case Chlorine Release 0.87 mile to 3 ppm j 'L Ire !);I 14LE4 I! Scale 1 2400' 40! 4q Source: Thomas Bros. Maps Edmonds Wastewater Treatment Plant lorine jv Alternate Ch Release 0.03 mile to 3 ppm .4r Ilk I-19W M. nIM191 tA . zi AM A M file:HA:\EDMONDS.JPG 6/18/99