THE ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY VERIFICATION
  wEPA
  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                                       PROGRAM
                                                NSF International
                       ETV Joint Verification Statement
    TECHNOLOGY TYPE:
    APPLICATION:
    TECHNOLOGY NAME:
    TEST LOCATION:
    COMPANY:
    ADDRESS:

    WEB SITE:
    EMAIL:
   Infrastructure Rehabilitation Technologies
   Coatings for Wastewater Collection Systems
   Standard Epoxy Coating 4553 (SEC 4553)
   University of Houston, CIGMAT

   Standard Cement Materials, Inc.
   5710 West 34th Street, Suite A
   Houston, TX 77092
   http://www.standardcement.com
   mariotamez(fl)standardcement.com
PHONE: (713) 680-0482
FAX: (713) 680-1017
EPA created the ETV program to facilitate the deployment of innovative  or  improved  environmental
technologies through performance verification and dissemination of information.  The program's goal is to
further environmental protection by  accelerating the acceptance and use of improved and more cost-effective
technologies. ETV seeks to achieve this goal by providing high quality, peer-reviewed data  on technology
performance to  those involved in the design, distribution, permitting, purchase, and use of environmental
technologies.

ETV works in  partnership  with recognized standards  and testing organizations; stakeholder  groups,  which
consist of buyers, vendor organizations, and permitters; and with the full participation of individual technology
developers. The program evaluates the performance of innovative technologies by developing test plans that are
responsive to the needs of  stakeholders, conducting field or laboratory tests (as appropriate),  collecting and
analyzing data, and preparing peer-reviewed reports. All evaluations are conducted in accordance with rigorous
quality assurance protocols to ensure that data of known and adequate quality are generated and  that the results
are defensible.
NSF International (NSF), in cooperation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), operates the
Water Quality Protection Center (WQPC), one of six centers under the Environmental Technology Verification
(ETV) Program. The WQPC recently evaluated the performance  of the Standard Epoxy Coating 4553 (SEC
4553), an epoxy coating system marketed by Standard Cement Materials, Inc. The SEC 4553 coating was tested
at the University of Houston's Center for Innovative Grouting Materials and Technology (CIGMAT).
10/36/WQPC-SWP
The accompanying notice is an integral part of this verification statement.

                     VS-i
                   September 2010

-------
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION
The following description of the Standard Cement Materials coating material (SEC 4553) was provided by the
vendor and does not represent verified information.

Use the Standard Epoxy Coating 4553, a 100% solids, solvent-less two-component epoxy coating system with
increased bond strength and broad range chemical resistance to protect concrete, steel, masonry and fiberglass
structures, and to repair chemical damaged concrete in moist and damp environments.

VERIFICATION TESTING DESCRIPTION - METHODS AND PROCEDURES
The objective of this testing was to evaluate SEC 4553 used in wastewater systems to control the deterioration
of concrete and clay infrastructure materials.  Specific testing objectives were to (1) evaluate the acid resistance
of SEC 4553 coated concrete  specimens and clay bricks, both with and without holidays  (small  holes
intentionally drilled through the coating and into the specimens; and, (2) determine the bonding strength of SEC
4553 to concrete and clay bricks.
Verification testing was  conducted using relevant  American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)(1) and
CIGMAT(2) standards, as described below.   Product characterization tests were conducted on the coating
material and  the uncoated concrete  and clay  specimens to assure uniformity prior to their use in the acid
resistance  and bonding strength tests. Standard Cement Materials' representatives were responsible for coating
the concrete and  clay specimens, under the guidance of CIGMAT staff members. The coated specimens were
evaluated over the course of six months.

PERFORMANCE VERIFICATION
(a) Holiday Test - Chemical Resistance
SEC 4553 coated concrete cylinders and clay bricks were tested with and without holidays in deionized (DI)
water and  a 1% sulfuric acid solution (pH=l).  A total of 20 coated concrete specimens and 20 coated clay brick
specimens was exposed.  Specimens were cured for two weeks prior to creation of 0.12 in. and 0.50 in. holidays.
The 0.12 in. holidays were exposed to both DI water and acid solution, while the 0.50  in. holidays were exposed
only to the acid solution.  Observation of the specimens at 30 and 180 days was made  for changes in appearance
such as blistering or cracks around the holiday  or  color changes in the  coating.   Control tests  were also
performed using specimens with no holidays. A summary of the chemical exposure observations is presented in
Table 1.

Table 1. Summary of Chemical Exposure Observations
Specimen DI Water (days)
Material Without With
(Coating Holidays Holidays
Condition) 3Q 18Q 3Q 18Q
Concrete - Dry N
Concrete - Wet N
Clay Brick -Dry N
Clay Brick - Wet N
N = No blister or crack;
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(n)
N(2)
N(2)
N(2)
N(2)
N(2) N(2)
N(2) N(2)
N (2) N (2)
N(2) N(2)
1% HiSCX. Solution (days)
Without With
Holidays Holidays
30 180 30 180
N(2) N(2) N(4) N(4)
N(2) N(2) N(4) N(4)
N(2) N(2) N(4) N(4)
N(2) N(2) N(4) N(4)
Comments
Color change in coating
submerged in acid solution.
Color change in coating
submerged in acid solution.
Color change in coating
submerged in acid solution.
Color change in coating
submerged in acid solution.
= Number of specimens.
10/36/WQPC-SWP
The accompanying notice is an integral part of this verification statement.

                      VS-ii
September 2010

-------
A specimen, made only of SEC 4553 and submerged in water for 10 days, showed no weight change over the
period. Likewise, over an exposure time of 180 days, weight changes in coated specimens with no holidays
showed less than 1% gain in DI and acid exposures. With holidays, coated concrete specimens showed < 0.75%
weight change, while coated clay brick specimens showed 2.5-4.3% gains. Changes in the diameters/dimensions
of the specimens at the holiday levels were negligible after 180 days of exposure.

(b) Bonding Strength Tests (Sandwich Method and Pull-Off Method)
Tests were performed to determine the bonding strength between the SEC 4553 coating and concrete/clay brick
specimens over a period of six months.  Twelve sandwich (6 dry-condition, 6 wet-condition) and twenty pull-off
(10 dry-condition, 10 wet-condition) tests were performed on both coated  concrete samples and coated clay
bricks.

Sandwich Test Method (CIGMAT CT 3)
CIGMAT CT 3,  a modification of ASTM C321-94, was used for the testing. SEC 4553 was applied to form a
sandwich between a like pair of rectangular specimens (Figure 1 (a)), both  concrete brick and clay brick, and
then tested for bonding strength and failure type following a curing period. The bonding strength of the coating
was determined using a load frame (Figure 1 (b)) to determine the failure load and bonding strength (the failure
load divided by the  bonded area). The sandwich bonding tests were completed at 30, 90 and 180 days after
application of the SEC 4553.
  (a) Test specimen configuration                          (b) Load frame test setup
                        Figure 1.  Bonding test arrangement for sandwich test.

Dry-coated specimens were dried at room conditions for at least seven days before they were coated, while wet-
coated specimens were immersed in water for at least seven days before the specimens were coated.  Bonded
specimens were cured under water up to the point of testing. The type of failure was also characterized during
the load testing, as described in Table 2.

Pull-Off Method (CIGMAT CT 2)
Per CIGMAT CT 2,  a 2-in. diameter  circle  was cut into  coated  concrete prisms  and  clay bricks to a
predetermined depth to isolate the coating, and a metal fixture was glued to the isolated coating section using a
rapid setting epoxy. Testing was completed on a load  frame  with the arrangements  shown in Figure 2, with
observation of the type of failure, as indicated in Table 2.  The specimens were prepared in the same manner as
for the sandwich test. The specimens were stored under  water in plastic containers and the coatings were cored
24 hrs  prior to the testing. The  bonding tests were completed at 30, 60 and 180 days after application of the
SEC 4553.  Results of the bonding tests are included in Table 3.
10/36/WQPC-SWP
The accompanying notice is an integral part of this verification statement.

                      VS-iii
September 2010

-------
Table 2. Failure Types in Sandwich and Pull-Off Tests
Failure Type         Description
                                                  Sandwich Test
                                                                 Pull-off Test
    Type-1
    Type -2
    Type-3
   Substrate Failure
   Coating Failure
   Bonding Failure
                                                Concrete/Clay Brick
                                                ,


                                                v         I
                                               Coating ' - '

                                               Concrete/Clay Brick
                                                  X _
                                              Coating
                                               Concrete/Clay Brick
                                                  X
                                               Coating
                                                      I        I
                                                      ' - '
 metal
 fixture
                                                                                               Coating
                                                                                 Concrete/Clay Brick
metal
fixture
                                                                                               Coating
                                                                                Concrete/Clay Brick
metal
fixture
                                                                                               Coating
                                                              Concrete/Clay Brick
    Type-4
    Type-5
Bonding and Substrate
       Failure
 Bonding and Coating
       Failure
                                              Concrete/Clay Brick
                                                 X
                           Coating     I       'I




                             Concrete/Clay Brick
                                              Coating
metal
fixture
                                                                                               Coating
                                                                                Concrete/Clay Brick
                                                                            metal
                                                                            fixture
                                                                                               Coating
                                                                                Concrete/Clay Brick
               Loading Direction
    Metal Fixture
            Coring  Coating
                    Substrate
                   (a) Specimen preparation                      (b) Load frame arrangement

                         Figure 2. Pull-off test method load frame arrangement.
10/36/WQPC-SWP
         The accompanying notice is an integral part of this verification statement.

                                 VS-iv
                                                                                          September 2010

-------
Table 3. Summary of Test Results for Bonding Strength Tests (12 Specimens for Each Condition)
Substrate -
Application
Condition
Concrete - Dry

Concrete - Wet

Clay Brick - Dry

Clay Brick -Wet

Test1
Sandwich
Pull-off
Sandwich
Pull-off
Sandwich
Pull-off
Sandwich
Pull-off
Failure Type
1 2
5
5
6
4
6
10
6
7
- Number of Failures Failure Strength (psi)
345 Range
1 185-
5 78-
204-
6 89-
172-
184-
271-
3 170-
260
266
279
256
279
310
345
287
Average
224
188
242
184
245
246
310
225
    1 Sandwich test (CIGMAT CT-2/Modified ASTM D 4541-85) or Pull-off test (CIGMAT CT-3/ASTM C 321-94).
    2See Table 2.

(c)  Summary of Verification Results
The performance of the Standard Cement Materials, Inc. SEC 4553 Epoxy Coating for use in wastewater
collection systems was evaluated for chemical resistance and the bond of the coating with both wet and dry
substrate materials, made up of concrete and clay brick.  The type of bonding test, whether sandwich test or
pull-off test, impact the  mode of failure and bonding strength for both substrate materials.  The testing
indicated:

General Observations

   Samples of the  coating material alone  showed  no weight gain when exposed to water over a 10-day
    period.
   None of the  coated concrete or clay brick specimens, with and without holidays, showed any indication
    of blisters or cracking during the six-month holiday-chemical resistance tests.
   There were no observed changes in the dimensions of coated  concrete or clay brick specimens at the
    holiday levels for either DI or acid exposures.
   All  of the bonding tests (total  of  64)  resulted in either a substrate (Type-1) failure, (49  tests)  or a
    bonding/substrate (Type-4) failure (15 tests).

Concrete Substrate
   Weight gain was < 0.45% for any of the coated concrete specimens  without holidays.
   Weight  gain  was <0.75% for wet or dry specimens  with holidays for acid exposure; no  significant
    change with holiday size.
   Weight gain of about 3.0% for wet and dry specimens with holidays for water exposure.
   Average tensile  bonding strength  with dry-coated concrete was  202 psi, with  individual  specimens
    ranging  from 78 to 266 psi; 10 of the 16 failures were in the concrete substrate (Type-1) failures, with the
    remaining six being a bonding/substrate (Type-4) failure.
   Average tensile bonding strength  with wet-coated  concrete was  206 psi, with  individual  specimens
    ranging  from 89 to 279 psi; 10 of the  16 failures were concrete  substrate (Type-1) failures, with the
    remaining six being bonding/substrate (Type-4) failures.
10/36/WQPC-SWP
The accompanying notice is an integral part of this verification statement.

                    VS-v
September 2010

-------
Clay Brick Substrate
   Weight gain was less than 1% for any of the coated clay brick specimens without holidays.

   Weight gain of about 2.5-4% for both dry-and wet-coated specimens with holidays for both water and
    acid exposures; no significant change for holiday size.

   Average tensile bonding strength  for dry-coated clay brick was 247 psi, with individual specimens
    ranging from  172 to 310 psi; all 16 of the failures were substrate (Type-1) failures.

   Average tensile bonding strength with wet-coated clay brick was 257 psi, with individual specimens
    ranging from  170 to 345 psi;  13 of the 16  failures were substrate  (Type-1) failures, with the remaining
    three being bonding/substrate (Type-4) failures.

Quality Assurance/Quality Control
NSF completed a  technical systems audit prior to the start of testing to ensure that CIGMAT was equipped to
comply with the test plan.  NSF also completed a data quality audit of at least 10% of the test data to ensure
that the reported data represented the data generated during testing.
     Original signed by                                   Original signed by
     Sally Gutierrez	October 6, 2010         Robert Ferguson	October 23, 2010
     Sally Gutierrez                    Date              Robert Ferguson               Date
     Director                                            Vice President
     National Risk Management Research Laboratory     Water Systems
     Office of Research and Development                 NSF International
     United States Environmental Protection Agency
    NOTICE: Verifications are based on an evaluation of technology performance under specific, predetermined criteria and
    the appropriate quality assurance procedures. EPA and NSF make no expressed or implied warranties as to the performance
    of the technology and do not certify that a technology will always operate as verified. The end user is solely responsible for
    complying with any and all applicable federal, state, and local requirements. Mention of corporate names, trade names, or
    commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use of specific products. This report is not an
    NSF Certification of the specific product mentioned herein.
        Availability of Supporting Documents
        Referenced Documents:
        1)  Annual Book of ASTM Standards (1995), Vol. 06.01, Paints-Tests for Formulated Products and Applied
            Coatings, ASTM, Philadelphia, PA.
        2)  CIGMAT Laboratory Methods for Evaluating Coating Materials, available from the University of Houston,
            Center for Innovative Grouting Materials and Technology, Houston, TX.
        Copies of the Test Plan for Verification of Standard Cement Materials Coatings for Wastewater
        Collection Systems (August, 2008), the verification statement, and the verification report (NSF Report
        Number 10/36 WQPC-SWP) are available from:
            ETV Water Quality Protection Center Program Manager (hard copy)
            NSF International
            P.O. Box 130140
            Ann Arbor, Michigan 48113-0140
        NSF website: http://www.nsf.org/etv (electronic copy)
        EPA website: https://www.epa.gov/etv (electronic copy)
10/36/WQPC-SWP             The accompanying notice is an integral part of this verification statement.       September 2010

                                                 VS-vi

-------