So no surprise our latest project which is to renovate a school has turned up some relative nasties. Had a full destructive asbestos survey.
Done a bit of research and it would appear asbestos and its “dangerousnessess” is categorised 1 to 10.
That based on whether the fibres are bound into the substrate etc etc.
We have a large area of pitch flooring with fibres in but low graded on the scale of 1 to 10.
I believe below 4 is none licensed removable, am I right in thinking this?
We are consulting with the correct people but just wanted an stw impartial overview if anyone had relevant experience/qualifications.

ACM complex because of the different regulatory regimes. Even if non license-able for removal, it’s still likely to be a haz waste for disposal purposes. Get the right professionals and keep a close eyed on them…!

Your r&d survey report should have a section which classifies the ACM on the basis of what the asbestos type is, and what should be done ie remove or manage and whether it’s a licensable product. What is the product type in this flooring? When you say pitch flooring do you mean a wooden flooring? Is it therefore the bitumen adhesive below that’s asbestos?
I’m an asbestos analyst and surveyor so cab give you some qualified advice.

There are various sites within the school that have been noted. Unbelievably the most dangerous being an innocuous board on the back of the headmasters door. It has been planed up over time and had drawing pins etc stuck into it 😯
The flooring issue is the actual bituo under the tiles. Its low grade but we are looking to have it removed via a specialist as all the floors are coming up throughout.

all the floors are coming up throughout.

Oooooh. What’s going down? 😉

I’ve come across this whilst being the HSE/ qualified foreman doing Asbestos removal in Germany. The asbestos-fibres were in the tile-adhesive sticking the tiles to a 30 – 40mm bitumen Substrate. Removing and bagging up the whole bitumen part of the floor as opposed to machining off the adhesive after tile-removal. All operations were carried out in a sealed building under monitored negative-pressure with double-door system showersetc, operatives masked,suited & booted.

deadlydarcy – Member
Oooooh. What’s going down?

Easy, Darcy – you’ve got something coming up

Asbestos consultant here.

What you’re talking about is a material assesment score, which is basically how friable the material is (likelihood of fibre release) .

It’s the product type that determines whether it’s licensed non licensed or just to confuse you even more notifiable non licensed work, which is mainly based upon a risk assesment.

The workers will still need to be task manual trained if it is non licensed or nnlw.

On your survey there will be analysis results of asbestos type and asbestos product type, if you have this it will be easier to advise you.

Who do you work for Peter if you don’t mind me asking?

Thanks Sam. Report is on site. Will have a look when I get over later today. Would be great if you could pop back and advise.

Sambalaws, prob best not to say on here, let’s just say a UKAS accreited lab based on the SW.

Wrightyson, sometimes it much more cost effetive and quicker to screed over, or encapsulate the bitumen and then leave it in situ, it’s very low risk and more hassle than its worth to get rid of. You will also find that the whole negative pressure and sealed buidling won’t apply to this product as works can be carried out under semi controlled conditions.

Leaving in situ is not an option as we need to have the floors up to insulate and put a dpm in.
Got people on board but wanted a few ideas so as to make things clearer in my mind. It would appear we have low risk stuff apart from some mid risk caulking in a boiler and the deadly door panel.