1998-04-01 ARRA PacketAGENDA
Regular Meeting of the Governing Body of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
* * * * * * **
Alameda City Hall
Council Chamber, Room 390
2263 Santa Clara Avenue
Alameda, CA 94501
Wednesday, April 1, 1998
Meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m.
City Hall will open at 5:15 p.m.
1. ROLL CALL
2. CONSENT CALENDAR
2 -A. Approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of March 4, 1998.
3. ACTION ITEMS
3 -A. Report recommending authorization for the Executive Director to fmalize and execute a
14 -year lease with Orton Development, Inc. for Building 5.
3 -B. Alameda Point campus issues:
• Final report by Dr. Robert Fisher and consideration of results of campus outreach/
marketing efforts.
• Overview by Ed Levine, ARRA Facilities Manager, of potential campus users.
• Board consideration of ARRA staff recommendation to commence serious
negotiations with three potential campus users (California School of
Professional Psychology, Touro University and Pan- Pacific University)
4. ORAL REPORTS
4 -A Oral report from the BRAG updating the ARRA on current activities.
4 -B. Written report from the Executive Director updating the ARRA on:
1. Status of the Western Aerospace Museum business plan for Hangar 41
2. Quarterly report on lease revenue
4 -C. Oral report from the Executive Director (non - discussion items).
5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
(Any person may address the governing body in regard to any matter over which the
governing body has jurisdiction, or of which it may take cognizance, that is not on the
agenda.)
ARRA Agenda - April 1, 1998 Page 2
6. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY
7. ADJOURNMENT
This meeting will be simultaneously broadcast on cable channel 22.
The next regular ARRA meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, May 6, 1998.
Notes:
• Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact Patti Van Mark, ARRA
Secretary, at 864 -3400 at least 72 hours before the meeting to request an interpreter.
• Accessible seating for persons with disabilities (including those using wheelchairs) is available.
• Minutes of the meeting are available in enlarged print.
• Audio tapes of the meeting are available for review at the ARRA offices upon request.
APPRO D
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, March 4, 1998
The meeting convened at 5:40 p.m. with Chair Appezzato presiding.
ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Ralph Appezzato, Mayor, City of Alameda
Albert DeWitt, Councilmember, City of Alameda
Barbara Kerr, Councilmember, City of Alameda
Tony Daysog, Councilmember, City of Alameda
James Sweeney, alternate to Councilmember Karin Lucas, City of Alameda
Mark Friedman, alternate to Wilma Chan, Alameda County Board of Supervisors,
District 3
Jay Leonhardy, alternate to Henry Chang, Jr., alternate to Elihu Harris, Mayor, City
of Oakland
Kathleen Ornelas, alternate to Ellen Corbett, Mayor, City of San
Absent: Vice Chair Sandre Swanson, District Director, 9th Congressional District
Ex- officio: Lee Perez, Base Reuse Advisory Group (BRAG)
CONSENT CALENDAR
2 -A. Approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of February 4, 1998.
Speakers: None.
Alternate Friedman moved approval of the Consent Calendar. The motion was seconded
by Member DeWitt and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes: 8. Noes: 0. Absent: 1.
ACTION ITEMS
3 -A. Report and recommendation from the Deputy City Manager, Alameda Point. that the City
of Alameda retain Building 1 as City Hall West.
Speakers:
Bill Garvine, Executive Director of the Alameda Chamber of Commerce, stated that the
Chamber is in support of maintaining Building 1 as City Hall West and thanked the City
Manager, Executive Director and Deputy City Manager for relocating City staff there while also
retaining core staff located at City Hall.
®recycled paper 1 H:\MENSLEY\ARRA \MINUTES \1998\3- 4- 98.MIN
Chair Appezzato indicated that the City Council has already approved this proposal. Deputy
City Manager Bob LaGrone stated that staff recommends the move as it provides a presence of
City staff on the West End. In addition, it saves the City money on rent, and necessary building
improvements and upgrades will be made without cost to the City. Mr. LaGrone, who is retiring
from the City on March 6, also introduced Dina Tasini, who will take over as Cooperative
Services Manager.
Member Daysog stated that he does not support this move because he feels that the City staff
should all be located at the historic civic core at City Hall.
Member Kerr moved to approve the recommendation of retaining Building 1 at Alameda
Point as City Hall West. The motion was seconded by Alternate Friedman and passed by
the following voice vote: Ayes: 7. Noes: 1 (Daysog). Absent: 1.
3 -B. Report recommending that ARRA expand the scope of work of Gallagher & Lindsey to
include the management of the Admiral's House (100 West Essex).
Speakers: None
Member DeWitt mentioned that the original idea for the Admiral's House was to be used as a
meeting and conference center. By including this property in the Gallagher & Lindsey plan, it
will allow repairs and improvements to be made which will enable it to someday be used for that
purpose.
Alternate Friedman moved to approve the recommendation to expand the scope of work of
Gallagher & Lindsey to include the management of the Admiral's House. The motion was
seconded by Member Kerr and passed by the following voice vote: Ayes: 8. Noes: 0.
Absent: 1.
ORAL REPORTS
4 -A. Economic & Planning Systems report on East Bay Regional Park District financing.
Chair Appezzato indicated that this item would be taken out of order due to the absence of the
EPS consultant.
4 -B. Oral report and presentation on the film studio RFP status and presentation by Mass
Illusions.
Speakers:
Bill Garvine, Executive Director of the Alameda Chamber of Commerce, said that the Chamber
is enthused about Mass Illusions establishing a presence at Alameda Point because it brings
wealth and technology jobs to the City.
erecycled paper 2 H: \MENSLEY\ARRA\MINUTES \1998\3- 4- 98.MIN
Executive Director Kay Miller said that the ARRA was planning to do an RFP to see if there was
a film studio interested in permanently locating here, although the feedback received thus far
indicated that probably would not happen. Then Mass Illusions, who has been a tenant for a
year, asked the ARRA to hold off on the RFP because they believe they can provide this service.
The City Manager has met with Mass Illusions already, and it has been agreed to hold off on the
RFP for 90 days so that Mass Illusions can put together a proposal. The amount of space that
Mass Illusions is interested in is the same as the space that would have been proposed in the RFP
process (Building 19 and Hangars 11, 12, 400 and 1 -2 bays of 24).
Michael Van Himbergen, Vice President of Strategic Relations for Mass Illusions, introduced
his staff members who were present and then showed a five- minute video of some of the
company's work. He then stated that there are presently 65 employees and that they plan to
double their staff within the next six months. They are presently working on two major motion
pictures, and in addition to visual effects, the company also does software development and
provides other studio services.
Robert Bobo, Managing Director, provided some business background on the company. It is
owned by Manex Group, a 120- year -old financial company located in England. He said that
Mass Illusions is currently based in Massachusetts, but they have not had much community
support there, which they have gotten here in Alameda. They would like to move their
headquarters to Alameda Point.
Chair Appe7J ito confirmed that what Mass Illusions desires is to be selected as the operator who
will invite other film studios to work here. Mr. Bobo stated that is what they plan to do, by
working directly with different studios and interacting with other industry contacts they have.
Alternate Leonhardy inquired about the company's commitment to hiring locally. Mr. Bobo said
that their first priority will be to hire local talent, that they plan to set up training programs and
work with local schools. He also indicated that their hiring needs would cover a broad spectrum
-- such as construction, catering services, and office personnel -- not just high technology
positions, and that, as opposed to a studio locating here, it should be steady rather than cyclical
employment.
Member DeWitt stated that the ARRA would be committing a large amount of space to the
project and inquired how the rent would be allotted. Executive Director Miller confirmed that it
would be approximately 250,000 square feet and that the rental details will be worked out in the
proposal.
4 -C. Informational briefing on CyberTran. a new transportation comp. y proposing to locate at
Alameda Point.
John Huetter, Director of CALSTART at Alameda Point, stated that the "hatchery project" has
been in place at Alameda Point for two years, with the purpose of creating and growing advanced
transportation technologies. He then introduced Neil Garcia - Sinclair, California Operations
Manager of CyberTran, which would like to locate in Hangar 20 with CALSTART. Mr. Garcia
Sinclair presented an overview of the advantages of light rail systems, as well as CyberTran's
recycled paper 3 H:\MENSLEY\ARRA \MINUTES \1998\3- 4- 98.MIN
funding status. He then explained how the company is proposing to take on a six -month project
of building a one -mile test track on the north/south taxiway behind the hangars, followed by a
longer track in the following 18 months.
Member Daysog asked how many people CyberTran expected to employ to build the track, and
Mr. Garcia - Sinclair replied it should be 30 -35, with a larger work force in subsequent years when
vehicles are being produced. He thought perhaps they would be able to use some former NAS
Alameda employees.
Alternate Leonhardy asked about the company's relationship to the Idaho National Engineering
and Environmental Lab, where CyberTran's founder is employed. Mr. Garcia - Sinclair stated that
the Lab is operated by Lockheed Martin under contract to the Department of Energy, but that
CyberTran is clear of DOE involvement and has its own patents.
Speakers:
Bill Smith, interested citizen of Alameda, spoke about electric vehicles as they relate to light rail.
4 -A. Economic & Planning Systems report on East Bay Regional Park District financing.
Executive Director Miller stated that this report had been jointly funded by the City and East Bay
Regional Park District (EBRPD), and that there will be additional meetings between the ARRA
and City and the ARRA and EBRPD. If this plan were to go forward, it would require a
Memorandum of Understanding among the City, the ARRA and the Park District.
James Musbach of Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) presented two alternatives for the
construction of a regional park at Alameda Point. Alternative A involved a full regional park,
including a shoreline trail, marina and park grounds, at a construction and equipment cost of $7.6
million. Alternative B included only a shoreline trail and marina area, at a construction and
equipment cost of $1.9 million. He then discussed several funding options, including state
bonds, grants, recreation revenues, ARRA funds, and City taxes or fees. The recommended
financing strategy calls for the Park District to provide capital funding (through bonds, grants,
etc.), the ARRA to redistribute EBRPD infrastructure allocation, police costs to be incorporated
into Alameda Point costs, and local funding for the remaining $110,000 per year.
Chair Appez7ato stated he did not believe the ARRA and City could or should fund a regional
park at this time because they have their hands full just financing the sports complex. He
inquired about the effects of land banking and what other funding options may be available.
Alternate Leonhardy asked about the costs for police services and how many officers that would
pay for. Mr. Musbach stated that he was not sure how many but that it would be more than two
and that it could be part of the force serving Crown Beach.
Member Daysog said that in March of 1994, at the first ARRA/BRAG meeting, the public
expressed a strong interest in having a trail, so he thinks at least a trail should be pursued.
However, funding needs to be realistic, so he asked if the sale of land had been considered. He
recycled paper 4 H:\MENSLEY\ARRA \MINUTES \199813- 4- 98.MIN
felt that if the Triangle Park were sold for private development uses, that could fund most of
Alternative B. He added that the RV park should no longer be a consideration.
Chair Appezzato pointed out that selling land for private use would involve a totally different
conveyance -- private, not public.
Alternate Friedman said that he thinks the community does want to bring a park to the area and
feels there are many creative ways to finance it, which the EBRPD should know about.
Member Kerr expressed concern that the City /ARRA take on this financial burden and that by
reallocating funds for the infrastructure and police costs, it would result in cutting funds
somewhere else. She asked if this would be a fee park and if people would be able to lease it for
private use.
Alternate Sweeney said he does not feel the City could take on this expense until 2012 and that
the focus needs to be on the rest of the base and getting revenue flowing. He also mentioned that
volunteers could probably build just the trail.
Chair Appezzato reiterated that this was just an informational presentation to inform everyone
about the options available.
Speakers:
Douglas Siden, Alameda representative on the EBRPD Board of Directors, said that the Park
District philosophy is that they [the District] don't have to "do it all" and that there is great
promise out here for a park to benefit the public.
Bill Smith, interested citizen of Alameda, stated that the real money here is in the other
businesses on the base and that should be the first priority.
4 -D. Oral report from the BRAG updating the ARRA on current activities.
BRAG Chairman Lee Perez announced that the BRAG had a successful retreat on February 21
with the City Manager and staff, and that there will be a full report to the ARRA in the near
future.
4 -E. Written report from the Executive Director updating the ARRA on:
1. Status of Coast Guard housing
2. Western Aerospace Museum -- status of business plan for Hangar 41
3. Golf course feasibility study status
4. Wildlife refuge issues
5. Status of the campus outreach effort
6. Navy response to the inquiry about street lighting at Alameda Point
7. Status of the Tidelands Trust appraisal
8. Status of Economic Development Conveyance
9. Redevelopment area (APIP) financing plan
recycled paper 5 H:\MENSLEY\ARRA\MINUTES \1998\3- 4- 98.MIN
Regarding #5, Executive Director Miller added that there will be a full presentation regarding the
campus outreach effort at the next ARRA meeting, and that this information will also be
presented to the BRAG at their March 18 meeting.
Member DeWitt stated that at the last ARRA meeting, the Board requested that steps be taken to
expedite the Record of Decision and asked if any of the items in the status report would impact
or slow down the ROD, particularly the Coast Guard housing.
Executive Director Miller stated that the Coast Guard housing would not affect the ROD in any
way because the use is the same. The one issue that could impact the ROD is the wildlife refuge,
specifically the size and the biological opinion, which was just received and is currently being
reviewed.
4 -F. Oral report from the Executive Director (non- discussion items). None.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
Speakers:
Richard Neveln, Nimitz Airfield Society, had three comments: handicap access to the building
was not available that evening [note - the door handle was broken]; flying in historical aircraft to
the museum is important and should be pursued; and he is excited to see hybrid electric motor
and gas vehicles being pursued by businesses at the base.
Bill Smith, interested citizen of Alameda, stated that the community wants access to the base and
this could also mean tourist dollars.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE GOVERNING BODY - None.
ADJOURNMENT
Chair Appezzato asked for a moment of silence for Member DeWitt's sister who had recently
passed away. Chair Appezzato then adjourned the meeting at 7:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Patti Van Mark
ARRA Secretary
recycled paper b H:\MENSLEY\ARRA \MINUTES \1998\3- 4- 98.MIN
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Interoffice Memorandum
March 24, 1998
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Kay Miller, Executive Director
SUBJ: Report recommending authorization for the Executive Director to finalize and
execute a 14 -year lease with Orton Development, Inc. for Building 5.
Background:
Building 5, with approximately 375,000 sq. ft. in gross floor area, is the largest single building at
Alameda Point. This building formerly served as the center of the Naval Aviation Depot's
(NADEP) aircraft repair and rebuild operation.
Under NADEP, the building was subdivided into a number of shop units providing the services
needed to build an aircraft from the ground -up. With the Navy's departure, the ARRA has
inherited a very large building with a myriad of semi- connected spaces. The cost to upgrade and
modify this building is estimated at $3 million. The facility is essentially unleasable in its present
configuration.
Discussion:
Orton Development, Inc. (ODI) is a well - established East Bay industrial real estate company that
specializes in restoring large obsolete and/or non - functional industrial buildings for multi -tenant
occupancy. A copy of a brochure for Orbit Property Corporation (ODI's affiliate) is enclosed for
your background. ODI proposes to master lease Building 5 and upgrade and subdivide the
facility to accommodate a range of subtenant uses and sizes. Of particular value in this proposal
is ODI's commitment to provide a number of light - industrial spaces in the 3,000 - 15,000 sq. ft.
range that are currently in high demand but short supply at Alameda Point.
As master lessee, ODI will manage the planning, engineering design, and construction of
building upgrades. They will also obtain financing for the project and direct ongoing leasing and
property management services. If the ARRA Governing Body approves ODI's proposal, ODI
will perform a due diligence study to confirm the feasibility of redeveloping Building 5 for
multi -tenant occupancy. The study will be funded entirely by ODI at an estimated cost of
$30,000. If the study provides reasonable assurance that the project revenues will meet pre-
defined criteria, ODI will lease the building. Current estimates are that the building's net leasable
area will be approximately 250,000 sq. ft. The lease's key business terms are summarized
below:
1. Use: Multi -tenant industrial and office space. ODI will make best efforts to provide small
spaces appropriate to the Alameda market.
Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
March 24, 1998
Page 2
2. Term: The term of the sublease will be equivalent to the term remaining in the ARRA's
Master Lease with the Navy. This is currently just under 14 years. The sublease would be
extended to 20 years if and when the ARRA receives authority to extend from the Navy
following the Record of Decision. An extended lease period is required to provide
adequate time to amortize the estimated $3 million loan needed to finance building
upgrades.
3. Financing: Equity and debt financing will be arranged by ODI. ODI's subtenant leases
will secure the debt.
4. ARRA/City of Alameda Compensation:
• Rent equal to 50% of all net operating revenues after repayment of equity
contribution by ODI. The projected minimum annual rent is $120,000.
• 100% ownership of building upgrades at conclusion of lease term.
• Payment of approximately $80,000 per year in common services fees to the City
from what would otherwise be non - productive property.
Fiscal Impact:
This sublease will result in a $3 million upgrade to Building 5 at no cost or risk to the ARRA.
The value of these improvements will revert to the City at the conclusion of the lease term. An
otherwise unleasable building will be subdivided for multi - tenant use resulting in new business
taxes for the City. The combined minimum annual income from rent and common services fees
will be $200,000.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the ARRA governing body authorize the Executive Director to finalize
and execute the proposed 14 -year lease for Building 5 with Orton Development, Inc.
Respectfully submitted,
Kay Miller
Executive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Interoffice Memorandum
March 26, 1998
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Kay Miller, Executive Director
SUBJ: Conclusion of the campus outreach/marketing effort and staff recommendation to
commence serious negotiations with three potential campus users (California School
of Professional Psychology, Touro University and Pan-Paci c University)
Background:
Dr. Robert Fisher, the consultant engaged to conduct the campus outreach/marketing effort, has
concluded his work and will be making that report orally to the ARRA Board on April 1 (his written
report is enclosed). In summary, the report concludes that no single college or university expressed
interest in the entire 65 -acre Alameda Point campus as a result of this outreach effort. However, the
outreach effort may have generated interest that will result in academic institutions pursuing leases
of individual buildings or smaller parcels in the campus area.
Dr. Fisher's report was presented to the BRAG on March 18, and they accepted the report and
recommend to the ARRA governing body that ARRA staff now be authorized to commence serious
negotiations with currently- interested academic institutions. The BRAG heard presentations from
California School of Professional Psychology (CSPP), Touro University, and Pan- Pacific University
(PPU), and endorsed ARRA commencing negotiations with all three of these potential campus users.
Discussion:
During the last six months, ARRA staff has engaged in serious discussions with three different
colleges that are interested in moving to Alameda Point. The following provides a brief description
of each of the college's programs and facility requirements. A map is attached which shows the
facilities each school is interested in leasing.
1. California School of Professional Psychology (report distributed at meeting)
California School of Professional Psychology (CSPP) is a 30 -year -old post - graduate school
offering masters and doctoral programs in research and clinical psychology. CSPP operates
schools in Alameda, San Diego, Los Angeles and Fresno. Their combined number of full -
time students, faculty and staff in Alameda is 700. During the last ten years, CSPP has
leased a building in Marina Village. They now wish to expand into a larger facility and have
identified the former NAS Alameda Medical/Dental Clinic as an ideal location. It is
estimated that the cost of renovating this building to accommodate CSPP's needs will be
approximately $3.5 million. Current plans are to finance this renovation through a City -
initiated revenue bond that will be secured by the lease and amortized over the lease term.
CSPP's rent will be set at a level sufficient to cover debt service on the bond, building
maintenance expenses, and common service fees. Details regarding the proposed lease and
financing will be presented for approval to the ARRA Board in May 1998. Current plans call
for completion of construction and occupancy in time for the fall 1999 semester.
2. Touro College (President's Report enclosed)
Touro College is a New York City based university offering a full spectrum of
undergraduate, graduate and professional degree programs. Touro has satellite operations in
Moscow, Beijing, Tel Aviv and San Francisco. Their financial statement indicates a net
worth in excess of $150 million. Our initial contact with Touro came through their medical
school subsidiary, the San Francisco School of Osteopathic Medicine. They currently share
a building with the San Francisco School of Podiatry adjacent to Mt. Zion Hospital in San
Francisco. Touro has decided to move its School of Osteopathy to the East Bay and has
established ties with prominent East Bay hospitals. They are also interested in replicating
their other degree programs on the west coast. They are interested in leasing at least five
buildings at Alameda Point with a combined area of 250,000 sq. ft. These include the former
movie theater, bowling alley and re- employment center (which will be converted to
classroom and laboratory facilities); the former Chief Petty Officers' galley (the Top Four
Club) for food service; and the Bachelor Officers' Quarters (BOQ) for dormitories. Touro
is also interested in leasing several of the Big Whites and West Housing apartment buildings
for faculty and graduate student housing.
3. Pan Pacific University (Background information enclosed)
Pan- Pacific University (PPU) has submitted a considerably scaled -down proposal from their
earlier request. PPU is now proposing to lease only one wing of the Bachelor Enlisted
Quarters (BEQ) and the galley. The combined area of these buildings, 284,000 sq. ft., would
be taken down on a phased basis as their enrollment grows. PPU has a $3 million
commitment from a major Korean university to support its start-up operating and capital
costs. A detailed evaluation of PPU's proposed program, organization and financial capacity
is contained in the attached report by Dr. Robert Fisher. Because PPU is not an established
institution, ARRA staff contracted with Dr. Fisher to evaluate the potential financial viability
of PPU.
Based on Dr. Fisher's evaluation of PPU and the challenges it faces to become a fmancially
secure, academically accredited college, ARRA staff will work to achieve a lease
arrangement that protects the ARRA from any financial exposure. Dr. Fisher will be at the
ARRA meeting to discuss ways that PPU might address its financial and academic
challenges in order to give ARRA confidence to proceed with a lease.
We will come back to the Board for approval of any campus leases.
Fiscal Impact:
The goal of any campus leasing will be to benefit the ARRA/City economically by increasing the
value of the campus buildings through upgrades and enhancements and generating rental income
from the buildings. Development of a college community at Alameda Point will also result in
substantial secondary economic benefits through job generation and increased business for Alameda
merchants and service providers. Each of the campus leases will need to be tailored to the specific
needs of the institution, the financial capability of the institution, and ARRA's limited capability to
pay for building improvements. The goal will be to treat each of the institutions fairly and achieve
some equity among the institutions, even though each "deal" may be structured very differently to
meet the unique needs and circumstances of each institution. The precise fiscal impact of each of
the campus "deals" will be laid out for the Board when we ask its approval of the individual lease
packages.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the ARRA Board accept the report of Dr. Robert Fisher regarding the campus
and authorize staff to immediately commence serious lease negotiations with California School of
Professional Psychology, Touro University, and Pan - Pacific University for facilities in the campus
area at Alameda Point.
Respectfully submitted,
Vam
Kay Miller
Executive Director
H:\MENSLEY\ARRA \STAFFREP\ 1998 \CAMPUS.M1CT
__ 71 ,
-----Fs.--" . _ - ii
LIMN •
iii/h. 0
0
- 1:- \ i A
m.LiN . , 0.,,p0 „,
W. REDLINE AVE.' ("144,, &\-$1,c) A ,
E3 0 1 ' 1_, .':& .P, 11:::) a ----,,,,„„6„,,,,;, .% ;,' .
fiLL512) 0 T „,__L , .., L. Y '''' sZ",,, &\.) .t,
I -. p , ,,, ‘,..S.5._.D.-...‹.-..,_./...--- ...\.,
< -4' v W. ES XERIVE j , 4 W. ESSEX DRIVE
..) V C C
0 * n cj If't cii-PUS CHRISTI ROAD
tcdo tr.. rj:il (., , ) 't I 000E1E3 (00000
no j riv. MIDWAY AVE. W. MIDWAY AVE. 4
Ena N .r' 71_1122.411,---, -___,3 t_ti'( ‘ 110 mom i__
- 0 ri 0 G irn a
1 Erj= o r 3 r_. ri) - - - n - 11 I I C11., Fr: 1 1 ) 0 :'
El Requested by the California School of Professional Psychology - 39,000 sf [1=a: C== c
_ El Requested by the S.F. College of Osteopathy - 273,000 sf =me 11
n Requested by Pan Pacific University - 284,000 sf
' 1
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Interoffice Memorandum
March 24, 1998
TO: Honorable Members of the
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Kay Miller, Executive Director
SUBJ: Written status report on. ARRA activities from the Executive Director
1. Status of the Western Aerospace Museum business plan for Hangar 41. As you are aware, we
have already approved the lease for Building 77 for the Naval Air Museum, and they are currently
in the process of getting their City use permit and appropriate City approvals for occupancy of that
building. Phase 2 of the museum plan is to occupy Hangar 41, a 120,000 square foot hangar adjacent
to Building 77. The business plan for the Phase 2 takeover of Hangar 41 was submitted to the
ARRA on March 16 and was referred to the BRAG ad hoc task force on the museum. A review of
the business plan was conducted by ARRA staff, staff from the City Economic Development
Agency, and the City Building and Fire Departments. The following deficiencies in the business
plan were identified:
A. The business plan appeared to seriously understate the amount and cost of building upgrades
that would be required for occupancy.
B. The income /revenue projections seemed to rely heavily on grants that have yet to be obtained.
C. The cost of the displays and exhibits and of getting the displays in place appears inadequate.
ARRA staff made its report to the BRAG Museum Task Force on March 24 and recommended that
the museum be given two more months to address these deficiencies. The BRAG ad hoc task force
concurred in this recommendation. We would, therefore, expect a revised business plan to be
available for review in late May with an expected recommendation to the BRAG in June, and ARRA
Board action in July.
2. Quarterly report on lease revenue. We committed to provide the ARRA Board with a status of
our quarterly lease revenues, and that report is attached.
Respectfully submitted,
VIAJULA-
Kay Miller
Executive Director
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Intra office Memorandum
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Kay Miller
Nanette Banks
March 26, 1998
SUBJECT: Lease Revenue Quarterly Report
In December 1997 when the ARRA Governing Body approved the 1998 lease revenue budget, our
report included providing the Board with quarterly reports. Since the ARRA packet is mailed prior
to the close of the quarter, I have used March 15, 1998 as the close of the quarter.
Revenue:
The 1998 lease revenue projection is $2,770,600. However, the operating budget assumed a
vacancy rate of three percent to allow for a more conservative forecast of income and was therefore
$2,687,482. Assuming that projection, the income at the close of the first quarter should be
$671,870. As of March 15, 1998, there was $529,791 revenue collected. Given that our projection
included new tenants who may have not assumed occupancy in this quarter and the remaining 15
days in this quarter, these projections appear to be tracking on schedule.
Expenditures:
The Board approved the following expenditures and this is how they are tracking to date:
Approved Expenditure
ARRA Board
EDA Matching Requirement
OEA ARRA Office Budget
Port Insurance
Port Operations
Facility Property Management & Maintenance
Assistant Facilities Manager
Deconstruction Demonstration Project
East Housing Solicitation
Common Services Fee
Reserve
TOTAL
Printed on recycled paper
amount
$ 10,800
700,000
410,000
90,000
690,000
150,000
75,000
24,000
75,000
400,000
62.682,
Amount Spent
$ 550
$ 0
16,389
23,966
148,612
73,334
8,930
0
0
0
1.400
$2,687,482 $ 275,181
Correspondence
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Interim Leasing Status Report
Signed Leases
Ise3- 98.xls
Page 1
Tenant
Term of
Occupancy
Building #
Occupied Bldg. (Sq.
Ft.)
1
ACET (Environmental Tech. Incubator)
long tern
7
- 15,550
2
Alameda Point Storage (1200 Mini - storage Units)
long term
near Bldg. 530
-
3
Alameda Unified School District (Child Care Ctr.) .
long term
258
12,430
4
Bay Ship & Yacht (Ship Repair)
long term
292
2,700
5
Bureau of Electricity (Storage Yard)
long term
at FISC
-
6
CALSTART (Electric Vehicle Consortium)
long term
20
66,000
7
City Garage Carstar (Vehicle Painting)
long term
24
12,927
8
City of Alameda (Ferry Terminal Parking)
long term
-
38,976
9
City of Alameda (Gym and Pool)
long term
76 & 134
58,450
10
City of Alameda (Officers' Club)
long term
60
29,550
11
City of Alameda (Records Storage)
long term
397
17,000
12
City of Alameda (Soccer Field)
long term
Adjacent to Bldg. 360
13
Delphi Productions (Exhibit Displays)
long term
39
110,000
14
Forem Metal Mfg. (Sheet Metal Contractor)
long term
114
20,000
15
Giannotti (Ship Parts & Repair)
long term
113
13,150
16
Haviside & Heastings (Ship Repair)
long term
43
10,500
17
Housing Units (31 units in West Housing)
long term
-
47,177
18
Interscope Communications (Film Co.)
5 months
portion of 11
50,000
19
Love Center Ministries
6 months
portion of 12.
8,000
20
MARAD (Ready Reserve Fleet)
long term
Piers 1, 2,3
-
21
MARAD
long teen
168
117,419
22
Mass Illusions (Film Co.)
5 months
portion of 11
10,000
23
Navigator Systems (Furniture Mfgr.)
long term
14
40,000
24
Nelson's Marine (Boat Repair)
long term
167 & finger piers
55,450
25
Piedmont Baseball Foundation
1 year
200,688 sq. ft. field
-
26
Piedmont Soccer Club
1 year
280,000 sq. ft. field
-
27
Polyethylene Products (Plastics Recycling)
long term
398
10,000
28
Puglia Engineering (Ship Repair)
long term
67
14,000
29
Quality Assured Products (Valve Mfgr.)
long term
21
66,000
30
Richard Miller Photography (Photography)
long term
621
5,770
31
Tower Aviation (Avionics)
long term
530
82,250
32
Trident 3M Services (Port Mgmt./Maint.)
long term
15
16,603
Number of Properties Currently Occupied:
32
Buildings (sq. ft.) Currently Occupied:
929,902
Current Employment in Leased Buildings:
548
Projected Future Employment in Leased Buildings:
1,371
Ise3- 98.xls
Page 1
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Alameda Point/NAS Alameda (510) 864 -3400
950 W. Mall Square - Building 1 Fax: (510) 521 -3764
Alameda, CA 94501 -5012
Governing Body
Ralph Appercato
Chair
Mayor, City of Alameda
Sandre R. Swanson
Vice -Chair
District Director for
9th Congressional District
Wilma Chan
Supervisor, District 3
Alameda County Board
of Supervisors
Henry Chang, Jr.
Oakland Councilmember
serving for
Elil u Harris
Mayor, City of Oakland
Ellen M. Corbett
Mayor
City of San Leandro
Tony Daysog
Councilmember
City of Alameda
Albert H. DeWitt
Councilmember
City of Alameda
Barbara Kerr
Councilmember
City of Alameda
Karin Lucas
Councilmember
City of Alameda
Kay Miller
Executive Director
•Recycled paper
March 18, 1998
Dave Ryan
Base Conversion Manager
EFA West
900 Commodore Drive
San Bruno, CA 94066
Dear Dave:
As you are aware, at the February ARRA meeting, the Board directed that a letter
be sent to the Navy expressing our serious concerns about on -going delays in the
EIS and the subsequent delay in the issuance of the ROD. The Board asked that we
include a chronology of the delays in the ROD. Quite candidly, we have been
unable to retrace the exact history. Suffice it to say, the initial EIS and ROD were
expected in the spring and summer of 1997, then delayed to May of 1998, then
slipped to September of 1998, and our latest official commitment is for completion
of the EIS by the end of this year with the issuance of a ROD in January of 1999.
Yet, we continue to hear that there may be further delays.
The Board feels strongly that the January 1999 date for the ROD must be adhered
to, and that a complete and adequate EIS/EIR must be finished in a timely manner
to allow for the issuance of the ROD in early 1999. The Board asked that the
consequences of further delays be articulated. In terms of the EIS slippage, as you
know, a number of other documents and activities and approvals rely on the
issuance of the EIS. Let me name just a few:
1. The City's General Plan Amendment is going to rely on the joint
EIR/EIS as the basis for its environmental review.
2. The Alameda Point Improvement Project Area requires its own
environmental review under CEQA. The basis for that CEQA
review is relying upon the joint EIR/EIS. The City is currently in
the process of going to the Legislature for the second time to request
an extension of the environmental review caused by the delay in the
EIR/EIS.
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Interim Leasing Status Report
Pending Leases and Licenses
Ise3 -98xIs
Page 2
Tenant
Building Number
g
Area Ft.)
(Sq.
Interim Use
Permits Approved
1
Altamont Technologies (Trans. Equipment Mfg.)
25
18,000
2
Antiques by the Bay (Swap Meet)
-
portion of taxiway H
3
Cellular One (Antenna Site)
-
60' x 20'
X
4
City Garage Carstar (Vehicle Painting)
25
5
Delaco/Woodmasters (Cabinetry)
44
5,100
X
6
Door Christian Fellowship Church
564
8,600
7
Dynamic Marine Boatworks (Boat Production)
166
55,000
X
8
Forty Plus (Career Counseling)
90
4,500
X
9
FOSS Environmental Services
13
34,540
10
Harbor Bay Maritime (Storage)
Pier 1 North
200'
11
Integrated Technology Group (Computer Rebuild)
66
30,900
12
Marine Sanitation
611
1,000
13
Mass Illusions (Film Company)
19
23,706
14
NorCal Soccer (Dome)
near Piers
-
15
San Francisco Drydock
612
4,000
16
Sigi, Inc. (Crepe Mfg..)
42
3,000
X
17
Simmba Systems (Records Storage)
9
92,817
18
Solo Energy Corp. (Prototype Testing)
12 & 22
176,108
19
United States Customs Service
29
19,480
20
USS Hornet Foundation
Pier 3
-
21
Zebra Motors, Inc. (Electric Vehicles)
23
65,500
COMPLETED LICENSES:
Tenant
Bldg. No./Space
1
Acad. of Model Aeronautics (Model Planes)
portion of Runway 25
2
Alameda Recycling Co. (Storage)
Bay 2Bldg. 24
3
Area 51 Productions (Event Production Co.)
portion of taxiway
4
Area 51 Productons (Auto Mfg. Marketing Survey)
5A
5
Area 51 Productions (Rehearsal studio)
12
6
Boy Scouts of America
Spike & Pitch Park
7
Chamber of CommerceBOE (Inter. Trade Expo)
22
8
CINCPAC (Fleet Week '97)
Pier 3 South
9
City of Alameda/Bureau of Electricity (EV Expo)
23
10
Clubhouse Pictures (Film Co.)
25
11
Disney Studios (Film Co.)
24
12
Great Benefit Productions (Film Co.)
Portions of 24 & 25
13
Industrial Light and Magic (Film Co.)
400A
14
Industrial Light and Magic (Film Co.)
portion of taxiway
15
Interscope Communications (Film Co.)
11,12,400A
16
Interscope Communications (Film Co.)
2
17
Interscope Communications (Film Co.)
pool
18
Microsoft (Software Co.)
400A
19
Nadel Productions (Film Co.)
portion of taxiway
20
Off Duty Productions (Film Co.)
portion of roadway
21
Rysher Entertainment (Film Co.)
24
Ise3 -98xIs
Page 2
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
Alameda Point/NAS Alameda
950 W. Mall Square - Building 1
Alameda, CA 94501 -5012
Governing Body
Ralph Appezzato
Chair
Mayor, City of Alameda
Sandr6 R. Swanson
Vice -Chair
District Director for
9th Congressional District
Wilma Chan
Supervisor, District 3
Alameda County Board
of Supervisors
Henry Chang, Jr.
Oakland Councilmember
serving for
Elihn Harris
Mayor, City of Oakland
Ellen M. Corbett
Mayor
City of San Leandro
Tony Daysog
Councilmember
City of Alameda
Albert H. DeWitt
Councilmember
City of Alameda
Barbara Kerr
Councilmember
City of Alameda
Karin Lucas
Councilmember
City of Alameda
Kay Miller
Executive Director
•Recycled paper
March 20, 1998
Mike Anderson
East Bay Regional Park District
2950 Peralta Oaks Court
P.O. Box 5381
Oakland; CA 94605 -0381
Dear Mike:
(510) 864 -3400
Fax: (510) 521 -3764
As you are aware, Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) presented their report on
potential financing strategies for the East Bay Regional Park District proposed park
and trail system at Alameda Point to the ARRA Board on March 4, 1998. As you
and your District Board Member Doug Siden heard, Alameda City Council
members of the ARRA Board expressed grave reservations about the City
participating financially in a regional park at the very time the City is facing
daunting financial challenges. As City Manager Jim Flint discussed with your
General Manager, Patrick O'Brien, the District may need to revisit other ways of
financing the operating costs at Alameda Point. You may also want to give more
thought to the concept of "land banking" portions of the park until such time as a
source of revenue can be identified.
In the meantime, City of Alameda staff have met to discuss the concept of the City
providing more of the police and security services at the Alameda Point facilities.
In that context, we discussed whether there might be some economies in looking at
this arrangement for Crown Beach as well. Alameda Police Chief Burnham
Matthews will be contacting the District's Police Chief to better understand the
implications and potential costs of this proposal.
I am going to be out of the country for the month of April and will plan to arrange
a meeting between the City and the District to further discuss financing possibilities
when I return in May.
Dave Ryan
March 18, 1998
Page 2
3. Disposition and Development Agreement with any developer of the FISC requires
its own environmental review under CEQA.
4. The ARRA has been selected for Local Agency Military Base Recovery Act
( LAMBRA) designation, which is akin to a state enterprise zone. The ARRA
expects that this designation will assist greatly in its marketing of the base to both
short-term and long -term users. However, the LAMBRA designation cannot go into
effect until the EIRJEIS has been certified.
The City and ARRA staff have committed to keeping the EIR/EIS moving on a path to allow it to
be completed by the end of this year. As you know, City and ARRA staff are just completing a very
fast - tracked review of the sixth Administrative Draft.
The consequences of delays in the ROD are the primary cause for concern. The ARRA and the City
cannot enter into long -term agreements with users or developers until the ROD has been issued. We
are already experiencing pressure from even interim users who are insisting on longer term leases
because of the investment in property they are proposing to make. We are continually approached
by developers who are interested in long -term redevelopment of the base, and their first questions
are "When do you expect the ROD ?" and "When do you expect conveyance of title ? ". The bottom
line is that long -term investors are reluctant if not absolutely unwilling to "do deals" with such a
cloud of uncertainty. Delays in the ROD beyond early 1999 are simply unacceptable.
As you know, ARRA and City staff are doing everything within our power to resolve issues such
as the USFWS refuge size as quickly as possible. We will continue to do our part to avoid further
delays. At the February 5 meeting with Deputy Assistant Secretary Cassidy, he promised to look
into what can be done to get the EIS and ROD back on track. What can the Navy commit to the
ARRA in terms of a promise of a time line that can really be adhered to? I will convey your
response to the Board as soon as I have received it.
Sincerely,
Kay Miller
Executive Director
cc: ARRA Board
Jim Flint, City Manager
9th Congressional District office
Senator Barbara Boxer's office
Arc E.colqgy 833
Market Street, Selte 1107, San Fn�, C4 94103
(4
TcL (415) 495 -1786 Fux. 4954 787 , arc@ge.epe.org
Much 12, 1998
Jolm Gararnx'acrdi
Deputy Sean my of the Interior
U.S. Department of the Interior
1849 C St NW, Room 5110
Washinpon, D.C. 20240
Dear Deputy Secretary G
We are writing to you to.preserve the bamdaries ofthe Alamecht Natimal Wildlife
designating 525 netts should have . Your deasioa
' d this issue, but an error in the of 's of has
City officials to move Refuge
..
A. you are primly aware, the request for 525 acres was based on specie boundaries encompassing all of tint
habitat used by California Least Tan. The City of Alameda estimated the enck ed
subsequently used 525 acres as the term for those specific . at 525 acres. Everyone
The Fish and Wildljfe Service has since revised the acreage
, officials who were
with your eho i are using the errvr as an excuse to revisit the issue. , are i on the number o f unhappy boundaries from which the nrunbu was derived. They are new (unspecified) boundaries as
the re ncdy instead of corrected acreage estimates, despite the fact that nuarre precise measurenuma also increased the
number of acres for the rest of the base.
The boundaries of the Refuge that Fish and Wildlife sekened re&et, to ,, ; best of anynae's knowledge, the habitat
needed to protect the least terns. So far, the 'a analysis ban been by a ,, growing colony
by City officials to redraw the bowidatiea are not supported by is or coatservutioa
PAP
Nor are the econcrnic reasons to move the boundary. In our previous
.: , • to You, we explained at length
that developing additional land at the former base would not yield a net . - ,.» pin because the itdditional
infrastructure costs cannot be recovered. The City's own consultants have pointed out that the amount of
Alameda that the former' naval air stamen can host is capped, by limited tunnel and bridge to the City of
(1� is an island). To spread the faced amount of development lover addition' base acreage simply drives
up costs without corresponding increa. ses in revenues.
We urge you once again to interject rationality into the process and resist pressure to redraw the Refuge boundary.
Thank you for your help.
Yours truly,.
Eve Bach
Staff Economist/Planner
cc: Gold Gate Audubon Society
/'Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority
C. matiaUG3- 11.0003/12198
TOTAL P.02
Mike Anderson
March 20, 1998
Page 2
I want to thank the District for your financial participation in the EPS study, and I believe we can
still continue to work toward the goal of having park and trail facilities at Alameda Point that satisfy
regional and local needs.
Sincerely,
v
Kay Miller
Executive Director
cc: ARRA Board
Jim Flint, City Manager
Patrick O'Brien, EBRPD General Manager
Chief Burnham Matthews
James Musbach, EPS
SAUSAL
CORPORATION
422 WHITNEY ST., SAN LEANDRO, CALIF. 94577
510/568-6800 FAX 510/632-9789
March 3, 1998
Board of Directors
Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA)
950 W. Mall Square, Suite 100
Alameda, CA 94501
Via: Celia Karian, ARRA Project Manager
Re: Building 39 Upgrades
Gentlemen:
Please find enclosed for your review and consideration Jin Construction and Electric
letter of February 27, 1998 forwarded to Sausal Corporation on March 2, 1998.
Jin Electric erroneously assumed that the note 1 on sheet E-7 "Done under ARRA
contract" referring to electrical panel boards and switchgear, was excluded from this
contract and to be performed by others.
As noted in Jin's letter, this issue was not raised or addressed until the preconstruction
conference on January 22, 1998 after award of the contract had been made.
Jin's price was significantly below other electrical subcontractors and I am convinced
that: 1) They did not include the work associated with note 1 on page E-7 in their
bid; 2) They are absorbing the significant loss indicated in their letter; and 3) The
City of Alameda and ARRA are receiving the same significant benefit of their error. I
am enclosing copies of all other electrical subcontract bids to assist in your evaluation
of their request.
Notwithstanding the serious financial impact of this error, Jin Construction and Electric
has proceeded to fully man the project and are performing in a completely professional
manner to the benefit of the project.
As noted in their letter, Jin Construction and Electric is a small minority firm and to
absorb this loss would place their company in severe financial distress.
The Board's forbearance in this matter is respectfully requested.
I will be available to assist in any manner you deem appropriate and want to emphasize
that 1 expect no remuneration to Sausal Corporation as a result of your actions in this
matter.
Once again; your positive consideration is greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
J.E. Ward
President
Attachments
California State Contractor's License No 281425
422 WHITNEY ST.. SAN LEANDRO. CALIF 9
U.J/ UL(1 JJO 14.U4
415 .,UV .Jii1
J 1.11 Construction & Electric Co.
General Building & Electrical Contractor Connvewr's Lie. Na 547686 (d &
Page 2 of 2
This is my promise to you that we are going to perform continuously the Electrical
work in this project even we may not get the compensation of S 40,000.00, then we
loose our shirt.
HONORABLE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, Please help the JIN Construction &
Electric Co. because we are an ASIAN MINORITY owned company and are trying
to survive in this very competitive construction industry.
We are really appreciate for your considerations on the subject matter, Thank you
very much.
Respectfully Yours,
Jin E. Lee, President
Via : Jim Ward, Sausal Corporation
Enclosure : Cost Estimate Attachment
161)1 Donner Avenue. Suite 42 • San Francisco. CA 94124
„LT 5) '422- 1 5()() Fax' (4 1 5) 1422 -2300
e1 / W / 1 i'ib 1Z:04 41'J-- o4C
jL1L Construction & Electric Co.
.
General Building & Electrical Contractor contractor's tic. No 547686 (B &C-10)
page 1 of 2
FEB. 27, 1998
ATTN: BOARD OF DIRECTORS
ALAMEDA REUSE and REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Alameda Point/NAS Alameda
950 West Mall Square, Bldg. #1
Alameda, CA, 94501 -5012
RE: Electrical Work at BLDG. #39 UPGRADES.
(Note #1 on Elect. Dwg. E -7)
Dear Sir :
It is very nice opportunity for The JIN Construction & Electric Co. to work on the
BLDG. #39 Upgrade Project for the ARRA and it is my honor to communicate with
you on this occasion.
This is the very important matter for us and we are appealing to you for your help
and considerations of the followings;
The JIN Construction & Electric Co. discussed at the pre - construction meeting
on Jan 22,1998 with Sausal Corp, Architect and ARRA's Representative about the
NOTE NO.1 "DONE UNDER ARRA CONTRACT", shown on the Electrical Dwg.
E -7 which We, the JIN Const. & Electric Co. interpreted that ARRA had contracted
separately with outside contractor to perform this portion of work but
Unfortunately we did not included this portion in the Base Bid.
The JIN Construction & Electric Co. is a SMALL MINORITY Company and we
are unable to bear this much loss of money(S 40,000.00) in financially.
Honorable Directors, we are willing to lose our profit and overhead on this Power
Supply work, however the direct cost for the Materials - Equipment and Power
Panels (S 20,229.22) and Labor - Electricians (Approx. S 20,000.00), Total of approx.
5 40,000.00 which is over and beyond of total profit of this entire electrical job and
this has to be compensated somehow to stay above the water.(Refer to an attach-
ment of cost estimate)
1601 Donner Avenue, Suitt: T2 - San Francisco, CA 941.24
�., i a � s'I : :- f <()n - I :ix (1 1 5) x22 -230(
LEAD BASED PAINT AND ASBESTOS ABATEMENT
WHITE AND CPO HOUSING UNITS
ALAMEDA POINT
Naval Facilities Engineering Commmand, Engineering Field Activity West plans to
perform Lead Based Paint (LBP) and Asbestos Abatement at the White Housing
(Big Whites) and Chief Petty Officer (CPO) Housing Units at Alameda Point
in 1998. The purpose of the work is to abate LBP and asbestos hazards that have
been identified by surveys conducted by the Navy. The Navy intends to transfer the
housing units to the local community as part of the Base Realignment and Closure
(BRAG) process for closing bases.
19 White Housing units, including an Admiral's quarters, and 30 CPO housing units
were constructed in 1941. The houses are located within the historical district at
Alameda Point, as indicated in the Activity Environmental Impact Report. A portion of
the housing units were inspected by the Navy Publics Works Department (PWC) in 1995
in accordance with Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) criteria for
the presence of lead and asbestos. Lead and damaged friable asbestos is present in
interior and exterior portions of the structures, and will require abatement prior to
transfer of the property.
EFA West has contracted an additional LBP survey and preparation of the attatched
Implementation Work Plans in anticipation of awarding the abatement phase of the work
in January, 1998. The Implementation Work Plans provide background details for the
abatement, and include a Health and Safety plan. Following approval of the Work Plan,
the Contractor will perform a comprehensive survey in the Big Whites and identify those
locations where elevated levels of lead are present. The Contractor will also determine
whether removal of soil containing lead is required by regulatory criteria. The Contractor
has inspected the housing and has determined the location of pipe lagging containing
asbestos, which will be removed or encapsulated as part of the abatement process.
The selected method of LBP abatement is to perform chemical stripping of paint from
impact and friction surfaces, and to encapsulate painted interior and exterior walls by
repainting. HUD allows this method of encapsulation provided the encapsulation
product or system,. meeting ASTM criteria, is warranted by the manaufacturer to perform
for at least 20 years as a durable barrier between lead based paint and the environment.
ASTM E1795 96 MI 0759510 0553783 553 1•
Daslpnation: E 1795 - 96
ateheeatM l ewers root 11280.8e AND &*T00%a
102 3 ' Drew D. west Qmwe delam M 1000
llybes! taw Ow *wawa Okay *1 AS1M samesk owns AVM
V sat Mud It sir amid estlrasd Om. M dem oar ran Mesa.
Standard Specification for
Non - Reinforced Liquid Coating Encapsulation Products for
Leaded Paint in Buildings'
Tide eerdna r bsed mew re sad duipeits 2 1733; Ile member is etisrh Ib iewi g the deiosedee Whims lie 1tr at
esiceel saaptiesi es„ in dome ef iseidee, sir per glee enisies. A aratter is perseterse Wiese, tM7teref ate wgpatd.A
wpuwipt sosias (t) Winless se editorial dame es Ones tea ea edrae �.........s1.
1. Scope '
1.1 This specification covers minimum material pecfoe-
®woe requiranents and labaamcy tat precede= far
son.eeinfo exd liquid coating encapsulation p (tangle
or multipie•oat systems) for leaded paint in buildings. The
test methods and practices included sot listed in Table 1.
Specifications for reinforced liquid coating emotion
products are provided in Specification E 1797.
1.2 This specification does not address the selection of an
encapsulation product for specific use conditions. Specific
use conditions may requite; pesformsaoe videos other than
those stated in this specification. See Guide E 1796.
1.3 Encapsulation products for we on industrial steel
structures are not coveted in this epa3&ation. IaduYrial
staff structures include, but are not limited to, bridges, water
towers, and tanks.
1.4 This specification does not cover the use of euapai-
laiion products intended for sue on nuidential ar*cxior
coated metal surface:, u no concision control requirements
are included. However. this specification does not preclude
the use of enem soiation as an abatement tochscdogy on •
residential eacte for metal coated =feces.
IS This specification applies to any Don-ccinioseed liquid
applied product, designed to reduce human =post= to lead
in paints, Which relies *madly on adhesion for attachment
to the surface.
1.6 The laboruesy =dug swilled in this lion
a
shall tling the �p system, whether single or
multiple coat, as applied in the field. A non-r infuse ad ligaid
coining encapsulation product shall be comprised of all
principal =apostate in the system, including the base and
top coats and primer, if specified, for field appiiadoa.
Except for dry abrasion trains, obese specialty primers
maybe used for flash rest resistance, primers shay not be
used .may for product peritxmancs testing in accedence
witb'stus cation.
1.7 The values stated in SI units we to be *carded ded as the
standard. Tbc values given in parentheses are for informa-
tion only.
1.1 The results of the test methods included in this
specification rlr address performance.
1.9
sleety concerns. if ary, associated with its use. It is the
D Tide ,ersitsse as is seder tee jredeselss .1 Aerie[ Cseiesece 64 se
ledieeeese das5diaes and is eta Oen tostesesailliir of 301.23
as Late Peke Abmr.ea.
Cantu edines ep/nst 4 Mole 11, 1116. Tublisbed >tsA► MIL odis*
pddi-Mad es Ps l6 -13. Lan review Wake PS 16 -33.
1 Sep (71 . ii 1 sxlfr fel tsTIO r 13101Ms
TAW! 1 Alphabetioal Licit of Teed aMeteds and Prattles
Tao Method
Mlle Test Weal Tea
well ► Mlsen5 et Method ad.
Rattles NO WO
AaMer1
Mang
Corde=lwemmrur
Delius weigh p• Orlon
Oty atsaan 40054000
w1611111an toe prises
r
Pee Pe pepodon
Ineareneketoos
Moderato asses
Pentellet
not OD
fierubsseelence
alenareet reoreasy soidaero
Tier4peperaes
TM ewe Peperatol
voc.
Weer end disc last wreence
Weer swat sentnenfai
tessettengisolna
u 03903
3s 0004
u
3A 01473
3.1 04010
1.1.3 01005, 01135
6.12 0323
u 01
62.1 04701
3.1 02724
3.12 03273.03274
3.13 03310 Pedesi J
ii 2300
3.11 02453
3.14 03304
6.12
3.7 ti 34
3.14 0 2370
3.12
OA •03 33
u 01243
14 01!53
33.1.10 .009
0011
2011
2012
responsibility ((the uw tf this atenden( to establish ammo-
i of limitations to determine the applica-
bility
1
Referenced Documents
2.1 ASTM Standards
D16 Terminology Relating to Paint, Varnish, Lacquer,
and Mated Products=
D522 Test Methods for Mandrel Bend Test of Attached
Organic Coatines2
D Practices fax Producing Films of Uniform Thick-
ness of Paint, Varnish, and Related Products on Test
D 100 Test Method for Mesuusement of Dry -Film Thick-
ness of Organic Coatings thin Miaromete rs2
D 1186 Test Methods for Nondestructive Measurement of
Dry Film Ilddeness of Nonmagnetic Coatings Applied
to a Ferrous Basel
D1308 Tart Method for Effect of Household Chemicals
an Clear and Pigmented Orpnic Finishes)
D 1475 Test Method for Density of Paint, Varnish, Lac-
quer, and Related Products=
D1653 Test Methods for Water Vapor Transmission of
Organic Costing Fdms2
Meted Bold: ef4STMStadui;. Val O601.
3 me se, Iasi of 4$IM Slasdalrlt, Val PM
ASTM E1795 96 / 0759510 0563785 356 -
CO E 1795
when determined in acooldaawe with 9.13.2.
4.14 Tensile paformance depends
on specific use =editions. However, the tat results shall be
reported in accordance with 9.14.
Hahn 3-T1nos addbional prapsedes art of omens ter ewsaah-
faeoed ligaid mreinp socsosulatios peod.a . Thee ass ao.butdon
toddle, andsions dale - septic raw and esawe sad tad eternal far.
Hower. asenionatats for than paopaeaas atataot its iaotarled in Ibis
olocidastion at dais tiara Wawa tbsa act no sdnevans ASTM or
Faisal ton sad nds far &wadable thou for two of
thaw psapsetiss, ontabotian tsrdeitlr cad miaow dories application
sad arlrti, msy b sagas an Fed Sims sad load atedadoss or
The war at Ibis apacilicesion is advised to detagusiss
Wad& cede appdadoes or odious= Ladd. Ties *drains of resluiso.
cwt for Was propa14 to dais spodicatios wI its whoa
aitabls tat aocfbods yes saadalge
S. Sampling
3.1 Prior to sampling. establish the condition of the
container since damage to it may cause evsposation, sldu-
oing, or other uadeairabie effects. Excessive stamp time and
temperature fluctuations may cease settling or changes in
viscosity. Materials beyond the manufactu'uu's stated shelf
life shill not be sampled.
5.2 T ickening. settling. and eepatation ate undesivable
and objectionable if a eatin& aloe storage, cannot be
readily reconditioned and made suitable for application with
a masonabk amount of stirring. The rdcrc need method
=vas promisees far determining changes in properties after
stomp. Determine the conditions in the container in accor-
dance with Method 3011 of the Federal Test Method
Standard No. 141C.
5.3 Sample the weaved= in accordance with Puataioe'
E 300. Damming the density in aoeadsnce with Test
Method D 1475 sod repeat unt8 two suocasaive readings
*gee within 90 g (0.2 lb). Samples for testing may then be
taken.
5.4 Report the size of the container from wblch the
sample was taken and product Modification Dodos. A 3.*-L
(1 -gal) sample is usaally sullickest for the recommended
USU.
6. Test Specimens
6.1 Preparation ((Test Paste
6.1.1 The tat specmeen (substrate) shall be the
encapsulant coated teat panel.
6.1.2 Prior to paeduct appleation, the tin plated steel
panels shalt be solvent cleaned in accedence with Method
2012 of the Fedeai Tat Method Standatd No. 141C.
Supplement the tea pond cleaning procedure with an
additional cleaning so then water wets the entire surface of
the panel. Dry and wipe dean.
6.1.3 Product application n shalt be performed acing the
draw-down procedure in accedence with Practice D 823.
Determine dryfilm thickness in acme= with Test
Method D 1005 or D 1i$6. If a range of thicknesses is
specified by Um esanufivatneer hw field application, the
minimum value of this room shall bet need for product
testing in accedence with this specification. Dr7 -film thick-
ness shall remain coaaant for ail tats.
6.1.4 touring shall be performed under standard labora-
tory conditions in acoaadanoe with D 3924. ant time shall
Ccw,lynt by the 5UIt 11 SOCIET RI TIMDC 1 MTUIMi
Tle sN a 16:n:57 I9T'r
be 7 days unless otherwise sgacd upon between the pus.
chaser and seller. Curs time shall remain constant for all
tau.
6.2 Preparation oilier Film Series u
6.2.1 Free film specimens shall be prepstod in accordance
with Pectic D 470*.
63 'Laboratory Tear
6.3.1 Where applicable, all teat methods and practices
included in this specificities shall be peonmed under
standard laboratory coalitions. ASTM standard conditions
for laboeatory testing are 23 t 2`C (73.5 t 33'F) and 50 t
5'R dative hty.
7. Nmether OM=
7.1 Impact Resistanca+-A minimum of two panels shall
be tested in accedence with 91.
7.2 Adhesion-A • minimum of the locations each on
two plods shall be toned is accordance with 9.2.
7.3 Dry Abrasion Raitfanar -A minimum of two panels
shall be nested is accordance with 9.3.
7.4 Water Vapor Trarumiuioa -A minimum of throe
asps stall be tested in =ordain= with 9,4,
73 Flexibility --A minimum of three =eh shall be
tested in =aide= with 93.
74 Water and Chemical
7.6.1 Spar Test -For the 24-h coveted spot test, a min-
imum of two tests for each seasgeot than be performed in
accedence with 9.6.
7.62 Immersion Tat -For the 24-h listilbd water hu-
test, s minimum of three sets of locations on one
panel shall be toted is accosdance with 9.6.
7.7 Surface Burning minimum of one
panel shall be totted in with 9.7.
7.11 Vatatfls Orga do Compotand (VOt) COitted •A min-
imum of one test shall be performed is acandancts with 92.
7.9 Weathering -Far non.sninfeced liquid coating en-
prodncea dynamited for ercneriot use, alter wauth-
eing, a minimum of three teats for chalking shall be
performed in montane: with 99. A minhmsm of throe
locations each on two panels shall= tested for adhesion in
accaulanoe with 9.2. A minimum of time panda shall be
teased for theollity in accordance with 9.5. A minimum of
ten specimen shall he mated for teaile properties in
acconiance with 9.14.
7.10 Aging-After aging. a minimum of three locations
each on two panels shall be tested for adhesion in accedence
with 9.2. A minimum of throe goads shall be tested for
fiedia ity in aocctdanae with 9.5. A minimum of ten
speeituens shall be tested for tensile properties in accordance
with 9.14.
7.11 Senrb Resistance--A minimum of two panels shall
be tested in wooden= with 9.11.
7.12 Mildew Rout' ance-A minimum of three panels
shall be tested in accordance with 9.12.
7.13 Paiatability:
7.13.1 A minimum of two paneh with three locations per
pand doll be tested in accordance with 9 .13.1.
7.13.2 A minimum of two panels with dune locations per
panel shalt be used in aoeondanas with 9.13.2.
7.14 Terssilt P vpatw --A minimum of ten specimens
shag be tested in accedence with 9.14.
3
ASTM E1795 16 MI 0759510 0563784 91T •
�! E 1706
D2370 Tat Method kw Tam& Properties of Orpnic
D24$6 estT Method for Saab Resistance of Interior Leta
Re WA Pitt'
D2794 Tat Method for Rada= ofOrpnie Coatiap to
Meta of Rapid Defamation RAY
D3273 Tat Method fat Redman= to Growth of ivied on
Ore Souls et interior Conchs* ism Envimommdel
Ciamberl
D3274 Tat Method tot Evalastikg Deg= of Surface
Diesureasent of Paint Fibs by Miaotisl (Fungal or
Algal) Growth or Sal and Diet Accumulation*
D3359 Taft Methods for Measuring Adhesion by Tape
Tat*
D3924 tot Standen! Environment kw Con-
• ' and Tasting Pain, Varnish. Lacqua and
Remand Minable
D3960 Practice ibr Vases Oeysaic Com-
pound ('V Contact of Paints ad ltd Coalinga*
D4460 Tat Method kw Abadan Resistance of Omani:
Cesium:* the Taber Abraee2
D4n4 Teat F keEvaivatiagDegrceoft ngof
Baader D4700 Pendioa b Paperation of Uniform Pxec Films of
B
84 Tat Method ker Suess Bunting Clasartetistial of
E 300 Practice for
B 1605 Taninokey Ratting to ithatement of hamlet
i Lardeased Paint in Mean. -tad Reseed
B 17• 96 Guide tar Selection sad Use of Lipid Coating
Inagenderion B 17917 Prudes for fore Leaded Liquid � Ea-
Products kw bladed Paint is thedinse
053 beaks *w Onssathe Light- rend W
W Type) for
• of Nonmetals Maledek*
23 Fsfend Tat Mahe* Statdad I4IC'
2011 Paperedos cfSteei Pants
2012 Perpatesion o(Tia Paads
3011 Condition in Container
3. Terainairgy
3.1 For definition of terms used k this
ate toT i D16 and 81605.
3.2 Dicroiption of Tess. sr: This Simko*
321 hod 1ty —the amity of as encepsuladoa
product to most or iabibit the tamspott eked to its surfs=
4.
4.1 iarsal performance is 92 cm-
kg (110 ha.-1b) direct impact (dart is, cooks sire up) with cat
ankh/gin =baste deterasined by viand obearvation using
5x areaMostion and in acamdance with 9.1.
ewriesslsrak dtt77/Sioslrrk Mai elm.
aossoot 4/ASTMagookook 1rMi3+aS.
•.fmadlwk4/.4rlJifaro6iit Mat 14.52.
' Malt& dame Sttimbodititios Daesmraar Order D. SW 4 WW1 D.
Tae IlabbiosAva.rbilootstgideb PA 191 114074. After NPoO .
2
Copyright by tbs aEM tOC113Y n MI*lg'a NOM
z
Tau Sap w WSW NO
4.2 pufaimaaoe is a 5A ming
when thlamined in a000nis= with 93.
4.3 Dry Amnion performance is
no grew than a 20 % loss in film thickness after 1000
aides when determined in accoedanoe with 9.3.
44 Wass Vapor Trunsmistioo --Tat results shall be
reported in accordance with 9.4
Num 1.4fiedieme petianeasee d greeds ea azelitacened tad we
4.5 performance is absence of
orackhg and other visual detects measured at 6.4 mm (0.25
in.) has the 3.2-mm (0.125.1*.) end of the conical mandrel
altar a 14 band and determined in accordance with 9.5.
4.6 Wear and Ciaxiaol
4.6.1 Spot Test —For Ile 24-11 cowered spot cast, deter.
mined is aceordenee with 9.6.1, after a recovery period of 1
h, siaimum petinarance is no evidence of blistering,
wirinkfies, =ding or Alter aseao.a y parka
024 6, mini.. is ao disdinpi.habie diast-
ases bathe hardness between the area exposed to the reagent
and ails= unexposed area what rubbed lightly with a
tome *pass=
4.6.2 hisatersion Taw —Fee the 24-h dktWed water minim' performanos for adhesion is a 5A
determined hi accordance with 9.6. Aker a recovery
p
period 024 h. the portions of 132* panel that were and wan
not hamessed shoed be indistingddrable with respect to
id
4.7 &mbar Ambit Charoctaistiss—hfiaimuin when rubbed lightly with a tongue 1 ater-
seance Dt a dame m ad index (PSI) of ket than 25 and a
snake devekpinent satin, 0 less than 30 determined in
aocoadence with 9.7. ‘,
4.8 Ifoktk Omsk Conipowrd MOO results she be repotted in accordance et
Te
Unit 3-Afebeile aeprds esespetred eergedeseseses way be Needled
by Mast Sista, sad bd naatsts 7 anus amid eadiassors
49 W riot noa.reialtxeed add matins en-
apathies products designated for exterior me, resistance to
emathaing is dieennimed in at=10011 with 93. Mmimua
petfammesce is an g acing for chalking Athinsure perfor-
mance tot adhesion and oexthilicy k as egaised for each
prepay when unexposed panels are taped. Minimum
pakaremce for donation is ao more than 33 % relative
change from the ultimate value obtained wires unexposed
partisan
4.10 Agin —Elects of aging see daterabsed in
deans with 9.10. Maim= perfosmance far adhesion and
thedbUy ism specified for each geopcaty wean unexposed
pads as tasted. Denim= pafocmance for eionsadon is
no mess than 35 % relative cue from the ultimate value
• when =upend pa nee axe taped.
4.11 burs to substrate (that is, aura n of coating)
after 1200 cycles whoa determined in accordance with 9.11.
412 It Mew Rtatstaaat— Minimum perfarmaaoe is as g
rating when daoermiaed in accordance with 9.12.
4.13 hibachi,*
4.13.1 Minimum peufosmanoe for session is a 5A rating
when domed in accordance with 9.13.1.
4.131 Minimum performance for adhesion is a 5A rating
ASTM E1795 / 0759510 0563767 129 IN
• E 1795
Neu) 4—V tabula of moor dome Orr aspossas r volosherfew
Nies mew ind sisW.aooduatartiwt sa erateeorheo Pradrazt often
osier r eo moot it the did. not report viral eater dasfea.
Waimea perforators is at trail epos b the peschaser e t the miter.
9.11 Sauk Jtadatano —Demme pub resistance in
accordance with Tact Method D 2446.
9.12 Mildew to mildew
in wands= with Test Method D 3273. Determine =deg
in aceordeme with Test Method D 3274.
9.13 PaiarabitkS jReoratabilhy-- Theme as all applicable
ASTM or £edaal test methods to mean= West
however, the two tat to
A, that be
the
9.13.1 Asiatab lily. —Apply the mammalian prods to
a 0256•mm (0 .0104n.) tit plated sled pod. Allow the
townpasletion paduct to care for at least 7 days earas agreed
upon betwoea p uchaser and paler. Apply aunt of standard
commercially available Lux paint in accordance with the
lam print manufactusax'a spolifications for dram tit.
ness and eon time. Detamine the degree of odheskau
between the enaws:dant and the latex paint in accordance
with Tao Method D 3359, Method A.
9.13.2 R,.. atiiliiy- -Apply the encapsulation product to
a 0256-mm (0.010 -in.) tie plated steed panel Allow the
enequulation product to eras for at beset T days ear as agreed
upon between purchaser and seller. Apply another cast of
the macepedation product to the panel. Apply both mats in
accordanoe with the manufacturer's specifications for dry-
film thicimera. Determine the degree of adhesion between
the two coats of the encsmulant in aocardaax with Test
Method D 3359, Method A.
Nate S— tbatt o1 feaatodors ave rtedtotheseapaadamyaida
tea ideatiticados of vii a.1 dews L the sawed todees attar gotta
mace of tea satirise tea,
9.14 Teauile . tensile properties in
accordance with Teat Method D 2370. Test shall be per-
formed au &ea film, act less than 0.075 mm (0.003 in.)
thick Specimens shall be 100 mm (4 in.) in length and 6.25
mm (0.25 in.) in width. Use a pga length of 50 mm (2 in.)
and a erase head speed of 10 t 1 man/min (0.5 t 0.05
in./min). Deteraine percent elongation at 700 kPa (100 pd).
10. Report
10.1 The tact report shall include a brief description of the
system tatted, including use of any primers, base costs and
top coats, appiiaarion instructions, curing *auditions, and
substrates used. Rapait day -film thickens and dry/cure tine.
� and product ideate codes. Report the type nes
of
Mee paint used in the paintsbility tat (9.13). The average
value and ail individual test results for all performance
properties listed in this specifuattion shall be repotted,
11. Keywords
11.1 abatement; encapsulant; fit°°' o leaded
paint liquid liquid puLtion product
tan- reinfoaned liquid coating encapeulatioa product
1bAa,r a .raa.aary far limeyeraikre* Mow aspsalm wera. WWI? renv paws tom camas /b...irara+
eft gourwiwraadMM_ t*.. LloamOar~ Owea,. p. np. aiMtarotroramaMaaMar aildyalanyaratti
/ a• rVIP. mad a.aikoflawtsaia.eral as* * .waaae.yawarmowwgwaaayi.
' YMOW a. w.ir.afa.rYaae/aae�rwOl.rMi.kM. nauira..nra.MMwniw / wry M pew aid
Intsv lm err arrwa MAIM rs rlwwsursis Mateo lawkwo nwtlMetabra rr.Avaraebrlaaaalrar
era— panto ww..a...ar M mew aawa/ more.?? at. arsine of Mr _ LL
erarrad a..uaae e. WWI per any abler. mew ate Mar par arrr•ro Aso me avaaame • aaYMaley pat Mar orb pour
Wpm Immo r tl. AMA Craraaoae we ellw. bar. TOO Mr► Maw to ► agnf o.i.ard.a, AA Mai
5
topredtt ay tar NEU= SiX1UTY an tunics MEWLS
Ito Sop ell 16:32:5? 3 ?
AS711 E1795 96 NI 0759510 05113716 292 IN
E 1795
9.6.19 Household Cleaners."
9.6.1.10 Nail Polish ,Remover (non-acetone based).
9.6.111 Distilled Water.
9.62 Immersion Test -- Conduct the banal= tat by
immsaelog one half of the panel is distilled water for 24 bat
standard laboratory coathtiams. Protect the buts, sides, and
edges of the panel against rusting. After removal. allow the
peed to dry for 2 h at standard laboratory coalitions before
sesdng for adhesion in a000rdanoe with Tat Mod D 3359,
Method A.
9.7 Surface Burning surface
bguainge6*daistiax in accordance with Test Method E 84
using Sling Board or equivalent as subsume..
9.1 Volatile Oraank Comps (FOCI Coment-lDeter-
mine VOC content in ao oaianoa with Practice D 3960.
9.9 Weathering-For nose- refnfarced liquid coating en-
capsulation products de:iWasted for exterior use, determine
the tepee of weathering in accordance wbb Freed= 0 53.
Conduct practice for 1000 b wader flnaresoeat lumps with a
peak emission at 313 nm and a time/temperature cycle of 4
k UV at 60'C and 4 h condensation at50C. Evaluate the
degree of clud ing in accordance with Tad Method D 4214,
Method A, using wool felt of* contrasting odor. Determine
the degree of adhesion is accordance with Tat Method
D 3359, Method A. (9.2) using 0.256-mm (0.0104*.) tin
plated sled panels u substrate, the flexibility in accordance
with Test Method D 522 (9.5) using 0.256 -mm (0 .010 -in..)
tin plated steel panels as substrata Evaluate tusk properties
in accordance with Test Method D 2370 (9.14),
9.10 .aging -There is no apphable ASTM or Federal tat
method to aaemsere aging for how-
ever. the following tat method, involving subjecting tes
panels to cbsmges from high to law tempaaturaa, shall be
9. 101 Eranier Products-Expose panels coated with err
terror we products to twelve ocher (throe cyder shall be
performed on one day, resulting in a four day eat), each
cycle involving the following time/tempaxtuse chasm
4YC (1207) for 1 b, room temperature is IS ruin, -1ST
(0°F) for 1 b. and room temperature for 15 min. Store panels
at -1S''C (0°F) overnight between cyder. After exposure,
deterz>sian the degree of adhesion in acaxrdanm with Test
Method D 3359, Method A, (9.2) using 0256 -mm (0.010'
in.) tin plated steel panels as sub:uate, and the iiexibility . in
madam with Tat Method D 522 (93) wing 0.236 -mm
(0.010ia.) tin Dated steel panels as subsamte. Evaluate
tensile properties in a000adanee with Ted Method D 2370
(9.14).
9.10.2 Interior Products- Expose panels coated with iota
riot tee products to a regimen of 40'C fora period of 2
uhf. After exposure, determine the degree of adhesion in
accordance with Test Method D 3359, Method A, (9.2) using
0.256 tam (0 010•in.) tin plated steel panels as substrate, and
the it aulplity in a000zdance with Test Method D 522
(Seetion 9.5) using 0.2564m (0.010in.) tin plated Seel
panels as substrate.
Teat Method D Evaluate te� m accordance
Ratestieg
8.1 limy falllwn occult, the material may be retatod to
establish as aformity in acooadanoe with agreement between
the purchaser and the seller. Conditions of retesting shall be
identical to brae specified kc initial testing.
9. Test Methods
srsis*aaoe in
9.1
iccaoedance with Teat Method D 2794 using 0.81 mm (0.032
in.) sine phosphate treated, eo1d-rolled sted panels as sesb-
gusto and 15.9 am (0.625 is.) panda diameter.
9.2 Aribestoretermine the degree of adhesion in ac-
cordance with Test Method D 3359, Method A, using 0.256
mm (0.010 in.) tit plated steel panels as substrate.
9.3 Dry Abrasion dry abrasion
racism= in accordance with Test Method D 4060 using
CS-17 wheels, a 10004 *eight, and 0.81 -man (0.032 -in.)
cold-rolled steel panels as subsume. Where applicable, w-
ebby primers used only for Oath rvat moisteners and not u a
component of the product system may be wed. U rued,
subtract the thickness of the primer coat from the total film
thidasts used in the performance calculation. To mare
accurately measure film lost, draw diagonal lines with a
marking pea from corner to career across the tut paneL
Measure initial and final film thkknem in an area approxi-
mately 31.4 mm (1.25 in.) from all four corners.
9.4 Water Vapor the water
vapor traamhaion is madams with Test Method D 1653.
Method A (Dry Cap Method), °sedition A. Test u free film
with a minimum thickness of 0.075 ram (0.003 in.).
93 FJeadbitisp-Determine the donee of fleacilility is
accordance with Tod Method D 522 wing a conical mandrel
and 0.256-men (0.010ia.) tin plated steel pales as subsume.
9.6 Wirers and CJswnirxt the ee'
sistance to writers and ohmic& in accordance with Tel
Method D 1308, using 0256 -mm (0.0104n.) tin - plated steel
panels as substrate for the imitation test and glus panels for
the spot tats.
9.6.1 Spat Test - Conduct the spot test as follows on the
following reagents For each zrat. add 3 ml to a cotton
ball placed on the coated glass panel. Cover the cotton ball
with a watch glass or other suitable device. After 24 h,
remove the cotton ball and gently pet dry with a paper towel.
After a lot recovery period, examine coating film with the
unaided eye for the memos of blisters, Melding, cracking.
or &lamina:1k= After a 24-h r000vexy period, evahsste for
evidence of softening by fishily rubbing the affected area and
an adjuvant u espaed am with a wood tongue deprrxtoc.
9.6.1.1 Ethyal Alcohol (50 % volume).
9.6.12 White Vinegar.
9.6.1.3 Sadiwss Hydraodde (5 %).
9.6.14 Hydrochloric Add (5 %).
9.6.1.5 Citric Add (5 %).
9.6.1.6 Cram OLL
9.6.1.7 Ceuta Beverages
9.6.12 Lubrieming
•a..o Oft. • wet+ es• er> w• a eterta.ss Oda Cbea. Agora. au►3101.
Ms boas 6rd audit tar this memos.
• to s.1 erg a ura.msd usi -ark of a mifid ae4 Ye. New Yak. NY
Katt. W eau fwd oekiie a: din meow
Caa;rit%t by tar aBIdil Sir:IIIY RR 2Sta1C t I*TUIIrS
Du Sep aq 36:39:5? In?
4
es Fames 4as, a roMmed Asthma& of r!s Qa.• Ca. arm bars Mead
AMA., As lie forma
Z
u
z
4
L
0
N
rILE• 0251 -8.0W0
NOT TO SCALE
.0
•
cu
0
0
0
0
0_
o
1 9
0
Li