Bottom Ash in CMUs Is it Worth the Risk?

Chuck Downs – Director of Sales and Marketing

What are the key concerns with Bottom Ash CMUs ?

• Lesions / Blemishes on block face. Rust spots that cause paint to pop and stain painted surface. Remediation of these problems ,involves architects, owners, painters, masons and block manufactures.

• Environmental Concerns are growing. There are local examples of bottom ash ponds leaching arsenic and other heavy metals into the surrounding rivers and water supplies. The Tennessee Valley Authority spill has brought attention to how dangerous the bottom ash ponds are to the environment and surrounding communities.

• Health and Safety issue with bottom ash. The EPA is currently investigating the chemical make up of bottom ash. They are currently monitoring and measuring the amount of mercury, arsenic and other heavy metals found in bottom ash. The jury is still out on the long term health problems created by bottom ash.

Key Factors Involved in Producing Bottom Ash

The quality of the coal and where it is mined is important.

The efficiency of the burning process is just as important.

How and Where Your Bottom Ash is Stored are Growing Environmental Concerns !

Important ! How is your bottom ash filtered or cleaned?

More Filters Less Filters

Bottom Line: It’s a roll of the dice!

Clean , Smooth Texture vs. Shealy Electrical Wholesalers Inc.

Rust Stains, Pop Outs, Paint Issues Shaw AFB

Local Examples

Rust Stains, Pop Outs, Paint Issues

H H Gregg – Sandhill Village

Local Examples

•HH Gregg – Sandhill Village

• Food Lion - Blythewood

• Shaw AFB – Sumter

• Cane Bay Elementary School - Summerville

Food Lion - Blythewood

Shaw AFB Jim Henry (Commercial Painter)

Rust Stains, Pop Outs, Paint Issues

Cane Bay Elementary School – Summerville, SC

Cane Bay Elementary School Completed August 2009 Pictures Taken July 2011

Interior Walls Interior Walls

The good news is you have options !

Clean, Smooth Texture vs. (Lexington Court House)

Rust Stains, Pop Outs, Paint Issues (H.H. Gregg)

What are our options ? What can I do to protect the firm and my customer?

NO BOTTOM ASH Specifications

• No Bottom ash specifications protect your firm and your customers

• Eliminate anxiety over quality and liability issues

• LEED credits and points remain the same

Guide Specifications For

Lightweight Masonry Units

Part 1 – GENERAL

•Concrete masonry units shall be of modular dimensions and shall be of the same appearance and shall be cured by the same process delivered to

the project site in an air-dry condition. Units shall be made with lightweight aggregate conforming to ASTM C 331

•Standard Concrete Block: Comply with referenced standards as follows:

•Size: Standard units with nominal face dimensions of 16X8 inches and nominal depths as indicated on the drawings for specific locations.

•Special Shapes: Provide non-standard blocks configured for corners, lintels, and other detailed conditions.

•Load-Bearing Units: ASTM C90, lightweight.

•Both hollow and solid block as indicated.

•Exposed faces: Manufacturer’s standard color and texture.

•Lightweight Concrete Masonry Units:

•Lightweight concrete masonry units shall conform to the requirements of ASTM C 90 – latest edition, for load bearing masonry units. All units shall

be free of organic impurities that will cause rusting, staining or pop outs, and shall contain no combustible matter. The use of coal, coke, or

cinder/bottom ash aggregates, will not be allowed.

•All lightweight aggregate used in the concrete units shall be expanded shale, clay, slate or slag. Normal weight aggregate may be used.

•The producer of the lightweight concrete masonry units will furnish a letter of certification stating that all lightweight aggregate used in the

manufacturing of the units was expanded shale, clay, slate or slag and that no coal, coke, or cinder / bottom ash or similar type aggregates were

used.

•A random sample of the concrete masonry units may be taken and tested by an independent lab to assure that the concrete masonry units conform

to all specifications.

•Concrete Brick: ASTM C 55.

•Grade N, normal weight.

•Size: As indicated on drawings.

PART 2 – REFERENCES

ACI 216.1/TMS 0216.1 – Standard Method for Determining Fire Resistance of Concrete and Masonry Construction Assemblies

ACI 530 / ASCE 5/TMS 402 – Building Code Requirements for Masonry Structures

ACI 530.1 / ASCE 6/TMS 602 – Specification for Masonry Structures

ASTM C 55 – Standard Specification for Concrete Brick

ASTM C 90 – Standard Specification for Loadbearing Concrete Masonry Units

ASTM C 140 – Standard Test Methods of Sampling and Testing Concrete Masonry Units and Related Units

ASTM C 331 – Lightweight Aggregates for Concrete Masonry Units

Environmental and Health Concerns

• The State 1 08118/20111 Report: S.C. among nation's worst at regulating coal ponds •

Posted on Thu, Aug. 18,2011

• Report: S.C. among nation's worst at regulating coal ponds

• South Carolina is among the 12 worst states in the country for protecting the public and the environment from coal ash pollution, a new report says.

• The report, released Wednesday by Earthjustice and Appalachian Mountain Advocates, said that state laws and regulations overseeing coal ash disposal are deficient to protect health and drinking water across the country.

• South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, Virginia and Alabama are among the 12 worst states for oversight of coal ash waste disposal, the environmental groups said in a news release summarizing the report.

• Six of 22 coal ash dams in South Carolina are rated as high hazards, but the state's program overseeing the dams is deficient, the report says. The dams are not inspected enough, the report says.

• Coal ash waste sites typically consist of man-made ponds, where toxic residues from coal fired power plants are dumped. Some of these ponds, including SCE&G's in lower Richland County, have leaked arsenic into groundwater and rivers.

• The groups' report was released to raise awareness about proposed federal rules to regulate coal ash as hazardous waste. The groups support the tougher rules.

• The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is weighing the rules in the wake of a disastrous dam break three years ago that released more than 1 billion gallons of coal pollution in Tennessee.

• -- Sammy Fretwell • © 2011 TheState.com and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved. Iltlp..:L~Jw~1£tte.,-J~.--QITl

Environmental and Health Concerns

• 1. www.thestate.com/2009/01/08/v-print/843099/boxer-epa-should-regulate-coal.html

• 2. www.thestate.com/2010/01/23/v-print/1123623/headlineby-sammy-fretwell.html

• 4. www.the state.com/2012/01/12/v-print/2111858/arsenic- discharge-to-river-bring.html

• 3. www.earthjustice.org/news/press/2010/new-epa-testing-method-identifies-higher-coal-ash-threat-must-drive-agency-s-rulemaking

• 60 Minutes on TVA Kingston Spill and Coal Ash

• http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/04/coal-ash-on-60-minutes-un_n_309268.html

Resources

• Stalite - www.stalite.com

• Big River Industry - www.bigriverind.com

• Environmental Protection Agency - www.epa.gov