PB99-964006
EPA541-R99-024
1999
EPA Superfund
Record of Decision:
Jacksonville Naval Air Station OU 2
Jacksonville, FL
3/19/1999
-------
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
POTENTIAL SOURCES OF CONTAMINATION
2, 3, 4, 41/42, AND 43
OPERABLE UNIT 2
NAVAL AIR STATION JACKSONVILLE
JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA
UNIT IDENTIFICATION CODE: N00207
CONTRACT NO.: N62467-89-D-0317/076
OCTOBER 1998
SOUTHERN DIVISION
NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND
NORTH CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA
29418
I HUNTED ON KECYCLED MFCH
-------
-------
j ^
r UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
51 FORSTTH STREET
ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30303-8960
4WD-FF8 1 * »9
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Commanding Officer
Naval Air Station Jacksonville
Jacksonville, Florida 32212-5000
SUBJ: Final Record of Decision
Operable Unit Two
EPAID3FL6170024412
Dear Captain Turcotte:
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has reviewed the
Department of the Navy's Final Record of Decision (ROD) for Operable Unit Two -
Potential Sources of Contamination (PSCs) 2. 3, 4, 41, 42, 43 at Naval Air Station
Jacksonville pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended. EPA concurs with the findings and the
selected remedy presented in the ROD.
Sincerely,
Richard D. Green
Director
Waste Management Division
cc: David B. Struhs, Secretary
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Captain William H. Lewis, USN, Commanding Officer
Southern Division Naval Facilities Engineering Command
Internal Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov
R«cycl*d/R*cycUbl« • PmMd v»«h v«g*Ubto OH SaMd Inks on R*cyc**d P^«r (Minimum 25% Posteonsunw)
-------
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
POTENTIAL SOURCES OF CONTAMINATION 2, 3, 4, 41, 42, AND 43
OPERABLE UNIT 2
NAVAL AIR STATION JACKSONVILLE
JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA
Unit Identification Code: N00207
Contract No.: N62467-89-D-0317/076
Prepared by:
Harding Lawson Associates
2590 Executive Center Circle, East
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
Prepared for:
Department of the Navy, Southern Division
Naval Facilities Engineering Command
2155 Eagle Drive
North Charleston, South Carolina 29418
Anthony Robinson, Code 18511, Engineer-in-Charge
October 1998
-------
-------
CERTIFICATION OF TECHNICAL
DATA CONFORMITY (MAY 1987)
The Contractor, Harding Lawson Associates (formerly ABB Environmental Services,
Inc.), hereby certifies that, to the best of its knowledge and belief, the
technical data delivered herewith under Contract No. N62467-89-D-0317/076 are
complete and accurate, and they comply with all requirements of this contract.
DATE: September 16. 1998
NAME AND TITLE OF CERTIFYING OFFICIAL: Phylissa Miller
Task Order Manager
NAME AND TITLE OF CERTIFYING OFFICIAL: Frederick F. Bragdon, P.G.
Project Technical Lead
(DFAR 252.227-7036)
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98
-------
-------
The geologic evaluations and professional opinions rendered in this planning
document that describe the evaluation for Potential Sources of Contamination 2.
3, 4, 41, 42, and 43, Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida, were
conducted or developed in accordance with commonly accepted procedures consistent
with applicable standards of practice.
• ...
Frederick F. Bragddn-; P. G .v
Professional
Sate of Florida%*£Q^nse-No:-1861 ,'
*''••'••
Date:
9 - 2-2--
JAX-OU2.HOD
FGW.09.98
-------
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Record of Decision
Potential Sources of Contamination 2, 3, 4. 41, 42. and 43
Operable Unit 2
Naval Air Station Jacksonville
Jacksonville, Florida
Chapter Title Page No.
1.0 DECLARATION OF THE RECORD OF DECISION 1-1
1.1 SITE NAME AND LOCATION 1-1
1.2 STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE 1-1
1.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE SELECTED REMEDY ...... 1-1
1.4 DECLARATION STATEMENT 1-2
1.5 SIGNATURE AND SUPPORT AGENCY ACCEPTANCE OF THE REMEDY 1-2
2.0 DECISION SUMMARY 2-1
2,1 SITE NAME, LOCATION, AND DESCRIPTION . . . 2-1
2.2 SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES . . 2-1
2.2.1 PSC 2: Former Firefighting Training Area ........ 2-4
2.2.2 PSC 3: Wastewater Treatment Plant Sludge Disposal Area . 2-4
2.2.3 PSC ^4: Pine Tree Planting Area 2-11
2.2.4 PSC 41: Domestic Waste Sludge Drying Beds 2-11
2.2.5 PSC 42: Wastewater Treatment Plant Polishing Pond . . . 2-11
2.2.6 PSC 43: Industrial Waste Sludge Drying Beds 2-12
2.2.7 Drainage Areas 2-12
2.2.8 Groundwater 2-14
2.3 HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION 2-14
2.4 SCOPE AND ROLE OF OPERABLE UNIT 2-14
2.5 SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS 2-14
2.5.1 General Site Characteristics of OU 2 . . .2-15
2.5.2 PSC 2, Firefighting Training Area 2-15
2.5.2.1 Soil 2-15
2.5.2,2 Groundwater 2-16
2.5.3 PSCs 3 and 4, Land Disposal from Drying Beds Sludge . . 2-16
2.5.3.1 Soil and Sludge 2-16
2.5.4 PSC 41, Domestic Waste Sludge Drying Beds 2-17
2.5.4.1 Soil 2-17
2.5.5 PSC 42, Wastewater Treatment Effluent Polishing Pond . . 2-17
2.5.5.1 Soil 2-17
2.5.5.2 Surface Water and Sediment . . .2-18
2.5.6 PSC 43, Industrial Waste Sludge Drying Beds 2-19
2.5.6.1 Soil 2-19
2.5.7 Drainage Areas 2-19
2.5.7.1 Surface Water 2-20
2.5.7.2 Sediment 2-20
2.5.7.3 Drainage Swale Soil 2-21
2.5.8 Groundwater 2-21
2.6 SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS 2-21
2.6.1 Human Health Risk Assessment 2r22
2.6.1.1 PSCs 2, 41, and 43 . . . 2-22
2.6.1.2 PSCs 3 and 42 2-25
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.O9.98 _j_
-------
. TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Record of Decision
Potential Sources of Contamination 2. 3. 4, 41. 42. and 43
Operable Unit 2
Naval Air Station Jacksonville
Jacksonville. Florida
Chapter Title Page No.
2.6.1.3 PSC 4, OU 2 Drainage Areas, and OU 2
Groundwater 2-27
2.6.2 Ecological Risk Assessment 2-34
2.6.2.1 PSCs 2, 41, and 43 2-34
2.6.2.2 PSCs 3 and 42 2-35
2.6.2.3 PSC 4, OU 2 Drainage Areas, and OU 2
Groundwater 2-35
2.7 DESCRIPTION OF THE NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 2-36
2.8 DOCUMENTATION OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES .... 2-36
2.9 STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS 2-36
REFERENCES
APPENDIX
Appendix A: Responsiveness Summary
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Record of Decision
Potential Sources of Contamination 2. 3. 4, 41. 42, and 43
Operable Unit 2
Naval Air Station Jacksonville
Jacksonville, Rorida
Figure ^_____ Title Page No.
2-1 Facility Location Map 2-2
2-2 Facility Map and Location of Operable Unit 2 2-3
2-3 Location of Potential Sources of Contamination at Operable Unit 2 . 2-5
2-4 Surface Water Drainage Pattern, Operable Unit 2 . 2-13
LIST OF TABLES
Table : Title Page No.
2-1 Operable Unit 2 Summary of Investigations and Media Addressed . . . 2-6
2-2 Operable Unit 2 Investigative History 2-8
2-3 Summary of Human Health Contaminants of Potential Concern (HHCPCs) . 2-23
2-4 Comparison Result Summary for Residential and Industrial USEPA PRGs
and Florida STLs for PSCs 2, 41, and 43 . . . . .2-26
2-5 Comparison of Maximum Concentration of HHCPCs at PSCs 3 and 42 with
PRGs 2-28
2-6 Human Health Risk Summary PSC 4, OU 2 Drainage Areas, and OU 2
Groundwater 2-30
2-7 Human Health Summary of Risk Drivers PSC 4, OU 2 Drainage Areas, and
OU 2 Groundwater 2-32
2-8 Synopsis of Potential Federal Chemical-Specific ARARs for OU 2 . . . 2-37
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98
-------
GLOSSARY
ABB-ES
ARAR
bis
ABB Environmental Services, Inc.
applicable or relevant and appropriate requirement
below land surface
CCWE constituent concentrations in waste extract
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act
CPC contaminant of potential concern
DDE dichlorodiphenyldichloroethene
DPT direct-push technology
ECPC ecological contaminant of potential concern
ELCR excess lifetime cancer risk
ERA ecological risk assessment
FDEP Florida Department of Environmental Protection
FERE focused ecological risk evaluation
FRE focused risk evaluation
FRI focused remedial investigation
FTA firefighting training area
ft/day feet per day
GGC groundwater guidance concentration
HHCPC human health contaminant of potential concern
HHRA human health risk assessment
HI hazard index
IR installation restoration
IRA interim remedial action
IWTP Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant
JP jet propellant
LNAPL light nonaqueous-phase liquid
LUC land-use control
MCL maximum contaminant level
mg/kg milligrams per kilogram
MOA Memorandum of Agreement
NADEP Naval Aviation Depot
NAS Naval Air Station
NCP National Oil and Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan
OU operable unit
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98
-IV-
-------
GLOSSARY (Continued)
PAH
PCB
PRG
PSC
RA
RAO
RCRA
RI
RI/FS
ROD
SCG
STL
svoc
SWQC
TAL
TCLP
TPH
US EPA
VOC
WWTP
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon
polychlorinated biphenyl
preliminary remedial goal
potential source of contamination
risk assessment
remedial action objective
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
remedial investigation
remedial investigation and feasibility study
Record of Decision
soil cleanup goal
soil target level
semivolatile organic compound
surface water quality criteria
target analyte list
toxicity characteristic leaching procedure
total petroleum hydrocarbons
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
volatile organic compound
wastewater treatment plant
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98
-V-
-------
-------
1.0 DECLARATION OF THE RECORD OF DECISION
1.1 SITE NAME AND LOCATION. The site name is Operable Unit (OU) 2, which
comprises Potential Sources of Contamination (PSCs) 2 (Former Firefighting
Training Area [FTA]), 3 (Wastewater Treatment Plant [WWTP] Sludge Disposal Area),
4 (Pine Tree Planting Area), 41 (Domestic Waste Sludge Drying Beds), 42 (WVTP
Polishing Pond), and 43 (Industrial Waste Sludge Drying Beds) located at the
Naval Air Station (NAS) Jacksonville in Jacksonville, Florida.
1.2 STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE. This decision document presents the
selected remedial action for OU 2 at NAS Jacksonville. The selected action was
chosen in accordance with the requirements of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended by the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, and to the extent practicable, the
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan (NCP). The information
supporting this remedial action decision is contained in the Administrative
Record for this site, which is located at Southern Division Naval Facilities
Engineering Command in North Charleston, South Carolina. The information
repository, which also contains supporting documents for this remedial action
decision, is located at the Charles D. Webb Wesconnett Branch of the Jacksonville
Public Library.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the State of Florida concur
with the selected remedy.
1.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE SELECTED REMEDY. This Record of Decision (ROD) is the
final action for OU 2 and is based on results of the Remedial Investigation (RI)
and Risk Assessment (RA) completed for OU 2. The preferred remedial action at
OU 2 is No Further Action because of the following:
Interim remedial actions (IRAs) were conducted at PSCs 2, 41, 42, and
43.
Due to the presence of light non-aqueous phase liquids (LNAPL) and
petroleum related contaminants, and based on the CERCLA petroleum
exclusion, PSC 2 was transferred to the State's petroleum program.
Although no IRA was deemed necessary for PSC 3, an area of surface soil
was excavated at PSC 3 where one sample exceeded the industrial
preliminary remedial goal (PRG) for lead. Results of the focused risk
evaluation (FRE) for soils at PSC 3 support the No Further Action
remedy selection.
Sludge piles with elevated levels of trace metals at PSC 4 were
excavated prior to completion of the Human Health Risk Assessment
(HHRA). Cancer risks calculated for future residents exposed to soil
and sludge at PSC 4 are within USEPA acceptable risk range.
Because PSCs 41, 42, and 43 are all classified as Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) sites, they require a period of groundwater monitoring. The
Navy, USEPA, and Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) agreed
that a postclosure monitoring program of 2 to 3 years, combined with groundwater
data collected over the last decade, will meet the requirements of the RCRA. The
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.O9.98 •_•
-------
groundwater monitoring data will be used to determine if there are significant
changes in chemical levels that could potentially impact human health and the
environment over time .
1.4 DECLARATION STATEMENT. It has been determined by the Navy, USEPA, and FDEP
that No Further Action with a five-year review is necessary at OU 2 . In 'addition.
PSCs 41, 42, and 43 will require postclosure groundwater monitoring under the
RCRA for 2 to 3 years.
By separate Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the USEPA and the FDEP NAS
Jacksonville, on behalf of the Department of the Navy, agreed to implement
basewide certain periodic site inspection, condition certification, and agency
notification procedures designed to ensure the maintenance by Station personnel
of any _ site -specific land-use controls (LUCs) deemed necessary for future
protection of human health and the environment. A fundamental premise underlying
execution of that agreement was that through the Navy's substantial good- faith
compliance with the procedures called for therein, reasonable assurances would
be provided to the USEPA and FDEP as to the permanency of those remedies which
included the use of specific LUCs.
Although the terms and conditions of the MOA are not specifically incorporated
herein by reference, it is understood and agreed by the Navy, USEPA, and FDEP
that the contemplated permanence of the remedy reflected herein shall be
dependent upon the Station's substantial good-faith compliance with the specific
LUC maintenance commitments reflected therein. Should such compliance not occur
or should the MOA be terminated, it is understood that the protectiveness of the
remedy concurred in may be reconsidered and that additional measures may need to
be taken to adequately ensure necessary future protection of human health and the
Environment.
The "no further cleanup action" with groundwater monitoring is protective of
human health and the environment under current industrial land use, complies with
State and Federal applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs)
and is cost effective.
1.5
SIGNATURE AND SUPPORT AGENCY ACCEPTANCE OF THE REMEDY.
f .
Captain Stephen A. Turcotte Date
Commanding Officer, NAS Jacksonville
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98
-------
2.0 DECISION SUMMARY
2.1 SITE NAME. LOCATION. AND DESCRIPTION. NAS Jacksonville is located in Duval
County, Florida, on the western bank of the St. Johns River (Figure 2-1). OU 2
is located in the northern part of the installation and is bordered by the St.
Johns River to the north, the Timuquana Country Club to the west, and base
runways to the south and east (Figure 2-2). The official mission of NAS
Jacksonville is to provide facilities, service, and managerial support for the
operation and maintenance of naval weapons and aircraft to operating forces of
the U.S. Navy cas designated by the Chief of Naval Operations. Some of the tasks
required to accomplish this mission include operation of fuel storage facilities,
performance of aircraft maintenance, maintenance and operation of engine repair
facilities and test cells for turbojet engines, and support of weapons systems.
OU 2 contained two WWTP systems. Industrial wastewater from the Naval Aviation
Depot (NADEP) was treated in the Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant (IWTP),
and the effluent was then discharged to the WWTP prior to final discharge to
polishing ponds. The IWTP was closed in 1995. Currently, domestic wastewater
and pre-treated industrial wastewater from the NADEP is sent to the plant for
treatment. In the past, treated wastewater was discharged to a polishing pond,
chlorinated, then discharged to the St. Johns River. A former FTA is also
located within OU 2.
2.2 SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES. Environmental studies of the six
PSCs which comprise OU 2 began in 1983. A two-staged RI was developed to address
the environmental concerns at OU 2. The objectives of the first stage were to
identify source areas and define the extent of contamination at PSCs 2t 3, 41,
42, and 43 and, if necessary, remediate them through IRAs. Based on the results
of these investigations, IRAs were implemented at PSCs 2, 41, 42, and 43 to
address risks associated with site contaminants. Cleanup criteria, remedial
activities, and confirmatory sampling performed during the IRAs of PSCs 41, 42,
and 43 are discussed in the following documents: Certification and Closure
Report, Potential Source of Contamination 41 (ABB Environmental Services, Inc.
[ABB-ES], 1997a), Certification and Closure Report, Potential Source of
Contamination 62 (ABB-ES, 1997b) and Certification and Closure Report, Potential
Source of Contamination 43 (ABB-ES, 1997c). The remedial activities performed
at PSC 2 are documented in the document, Completion Report for PSC 2 Former
Firefighter Training Area, Naval Air Station Jacksonville (Bechtel Environmental,
Inc., 1996).
Results of the first stage of the RI are documented in two focused remedial
investigation and feasibility study (RI/FS) documents (ABB-ES, 1995a; 1994a).
The objectives of the second stage were to
investigate soil at PSC 4, and groundwater, surface water, and sediment
throughout OU 2, because these media were not covered (except at PSC
42) during the first stage of investigation,
determine if additional remedial actions were needed to reach a final
remedy, and
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98 2-1
-------
N
TALLAHASSEE
^JACKSONVILLE
ftv NAVAL AIR STATION
^JACKSONVILLE
DAYTONA BEACH
Gulf of Mexico
Atlantic
Ocean
NOTE:
NAS = Naval Air Station
SCALE: 1 INCH = 6 MILES
(APPROXIMATE)
FIGURE 2-1
FACILITY LOCATION MAP
\32Sn\025u-i2V!5C\02SUSO.OWG. N°-DK. 04/23/98 AutoCAD RI2
RECORD OF DECISION
OPERABLE UNIT 2
NAVAL AIR STATION
JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA
JAX-OU2.HOD
FGW.09.98
2-2
-------
ST. JOHNS
RIVER
N
OU 2 Site Location
ST.- JOHNS
RIVER
LEGEND
Facility boundary
Site location
NAS Naval Air Station
OU 2 Operable Unit 2
1250 2500
SCALE: 1 INCH = 2500 FEET
FIGURE 2-2
FACILITY MAP AND LOCATION
OF OPERABLE UNIT 2
:\02i'«\025l«-!J\RCO\02SUS«4.Dl
-------
if necessary, recommend remedial alternatives to achieve the final
remedy.
OU 2 is composed of six PSCs (see Figure 2-3). In addition to PSC-specific site
investigations, drainage areas and groundwater across OU 2 were investigated to
support the OU 2 RI (ABB-ES, 1998a). Table 2-1 presents an overview of the
assessments conducted to date and the associated media addressed, and Table 2-2
presents a historical summary of specific investigative activities. and
associated deliverables and findings for the PSCs within OU 2. Overall results
from both stages of investigation are documented in the Final RI (ABB-ES, 1998a).
The following is a description of the six PSCs contained within OU 2. Brief
descriptions of the drainage areas and the groundwater coverage are presented
following the PSC descriptions.
2-2-1—PSC 2: Former Firefiehtine Training Area PSC 2 consisted of a shallow,
unlined pit, approximately 100 feet in diameter. The pit was used for
firefighting training from approximately 1966 to 1991. Vehicles and parts were
sprayed with jet propellant (JP)-4, JP-5, aviation gasoline, or waste oil, then
ignited to simulate aircraft crashes.
Petroleum-contaminated soil and LNAPL were found at PSC 2 during the first stage
of the RI. The contamination was attributed to firefighting training activities
at the former FTA.
Using the Florida regulations for petroleum-contaminated soil as guidelines, the
remedial action contractor excavated soil at PSC 2 with total petroleum
hydrocarbon (TPH) concentrations greater than 50 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg)
and thermally treated it, and then the excavated area was backfilled. In the
source area, soil was excavated down to the water table. These remedial
activities were performed in 1995. LNAPL was not collected and was only
encountered occasionally as small globules and as a sheen on the surface of the
water.
Groundwater at PSC 2 was investigated during the second stage of the RI. LNAPL
was measured in a well installed in the center of the former FTA. Additionally,
a small plume of petroleum-related contaminants (primarily benzene, toluene,
ethylbenzene, and xylene) was detected.
Because of the presence of LNAPL and petroleum-related contaminants in
groundwater, the USEPA and FDEP have agreed to transfer jurisdiction over PSC 2
(including petroleum-contaminated groundwater) to Florida's petroleum program.
2.2.2 PSC 3: ffastewater Treatment Plant Sludge Disposal Area PSC 3 is a 15-acre
tract where approximately 20,000 tons of domestic and industrial sewage sludge,
reportedly containing metals and organic compounds, were disposed of between 1962
and 1980. The sludge was either dumped in piles or spread on the ground. The
site was divided into two parcels of land by an access road. The land north of
the road has been planted with pine trees, and the land south of the road is an
open field.
Paint^chips, observed in the shallow surface soil during the first phase of the
RI, confirmed that sludge was disposed of at PSC 3. Of the two parcels of land
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98 2-4
-------
Wastewater Treatment
Effluent Polishing Pond
Former Firefighter Training
PSC 3
Wastewater Treatment
Plant Sludge Disposal
Area - O
Wfiif' '"S^tJJ-i
PSC Potential source of contain motion
•^B Operable Unit 2 boundary
500 1000
SCALE: 1 INCH = tOOO FftT
FIGURE 2-3
LOCATION OF POTENTIAL SOURCES OF
CONTAMINATION AT OPERABLE UNIT 2
RECORD OF DECISION
OPERABLE UNIT 2
NAVAL AIR STATION
JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA
-------
°I
b"
-g
I
1
1
Area of
1 Interest Media
ro
&>
roo ^ surtace soil
PSC 3 Surface Soil
Subsurface Soil
PSC 4 Soil/Sludge
PSC 41 Surface Soil/
Rlter Media
Subsurface Soil/
Rlter Media
Groundwater
PSC 42 Sediment
Surface Water
Surface Soil
Groundwater
See notes at end of table.
Table 2-1
Operable Unit 2
Summary of Investigations and Media Addressed
Record of Decision
Potential Sources of Contamination 2, 3, 4, 41. 42, and 43
Operable Unit 2
Naval Air Station Jacksonville
Jacksonville, Rorida
FRI FRE FFS IRA Groundwater RCRA Closure
Monitoring Report ™ "*
X X X X
X X
X X
x x
X X X X y
^ A
X X X X x
X
X XX ,x
X XX x
x x
— — — — — __
— _
Comments
PSC 2 has been transferred to the Florida
petroleum program. Five temporary wells
were installed during the FRI to confirm the
presence of LNAPL. Subsurface soil samples
were collected during the FRI and analyzed for
TPH only.
Due to high concentrations of metals detected
at one sample location during the FRI, a single
"hot spot" was excavated in 1997 and incorporated
into the IRA at PSC 42.
Five small piles of sludge material, discovered
during site walkovers that preceded the Rl, were
removed in 1997 and incorporated into the IRA
at PSC 42.
Soil and sludge material solidified during the
IRA in 1995 were excavated and incorporated
as backfill into the IRA at PSC 42 in 1997.
Groundwater was collected during the FRI of
PSC 42 solely to support evaluation of remedial
alternatives.
-------
g
D
Table 2-1 (Continued)
Operable Unit 2
Summary of Investigations and Media Addressed
Record of Decision
Potential Sources of Contamination 2, 3, 4, 41, 42, and 43
Operable Unit 2
Naval Air Station Jacksonville
Jacksonville, Florida
Area of
Interest
Media
FBI
FRE FFS
IRA
Groundwater RCRA Closure
Monitoring Report
Rl
RA Comments
PSC43
to
OU 2 Drainage
Areas
OU2
Groundwater
Surface Soil/
Filter Media
Subsurface Soil/
Biter Media
Groundwater
Surface Water
Sediment
Surface Soil
Soil and sludge material solidified during the
IRA in 1995 were excavated and incorporated
as backfill into the IRA at PSC 42 in 1997.
X
X
X
X
X
X
Notes: Groundwater monitoring was initiated at PSCs 42, and 43 in 1984. Monitoring for PSC 41 began in 1990.
Groundwater samples collected at or immediately
downgradient of PSC 2 were not included in the
overall groundwater evaluation for OU 2 because
PSC 2 has been transferred to the Florida petro-
leum program.
PSC = potential source of contamination.
FRI = focused remedial investigation.
FRE = focused risk evaluation.
FFS = focused feasibility study.
IRA = interim remedial action.
RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
Rl = remedial investigation.
RA = risk assessment.
LNAPL = light nonaqueous-phase liquid.
TPH = total petroleum hydrocarbons.
IRA = interim remedial action.
OU = operable unit.
-------
Table 2-2
Operable Unit 2 Investigative History
Record of Decision
Potential Sources of Contamination 2,3,4.41.42, and 43
Operable Unit 2
Naval Air Station Jacksonville
Jacksonville. Florida
Date
Investigation Title
Activities
Findings
19B3
1983
1985
.1991
1994
1994
MS, MAS Jacksonville, Jacksonville,
Florida (Fred C. Hart & Associates)
Groundwater Monitoring Plan for RCRA
Compliance, HAS Jacksonville, Jack-
sonville, Florida (Geraghty & Miller)
Verification Study, NAS Jacksonville,
Jacksonville, Florida (Geraghty & Miller)
Quarterly Compliance Monitoring of
Polishing Pond and Domestic Sludge
Drying Beds, NAS Jacksonville, Jack-
sonville, Florida (IT Corporation)
Focused RI/FS, PSCs 2, 41, and 43 at
OU 2, NAS Jacksonville, Jacksonville,
Florida (ABB-ES, 1994a)
Technical Memorandum for Preferred
Remedial Alternative for PSC 2, OU 2,
NAS Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida
(ABB-ES, 1994b)
Review of historical records and aerial photographs.
Reid inspections and personal interviews.
Discussed general hydrogeologic conditions and
proposed monitoring well installation and sampling.
• Monitoring wells were installed at PSCs 2 and 4.
• Groundwater samples were collected.
• Soil samples were collected at PSC 4.
Presented quarterly sampling results for 11 wells
surrounding PSCs 41 and 42.
• Soil sampling and analysis were completed at PSC 2.
• Temporary observation wells were installed at PSC 2
and free-product samples were collected.
• Sampling of the sludge drying bed material and soils
surrounding the sludge drying beds was completed at
PSCs 41 and 43.
Provided elements of the IRA:
• Goals and objectives
• Remedial action criteria
• Description of IRA
• Cost estimate
PSCs 2,3, and 4 were identified as potential sources of
contamination.
At PSC 2. 6.000 gallons of jet fuel and waste oil were
burned annually from 1966 to 1991.
At PSC 3,20,000 tons of sludge-containing metals were
dumped between 1962 and 1980.
PSC 4 was used for disposal of paint shavings, sewage
sludge, asbestos, oil, and petroleum products between
1968 and 1975.
Three wells installed around PSC 43 in April 1994.
Quarterly sampling began.
Three wells installed around PSC 42 in June 1994.
Quarterly sampling began.
VOCs were found in soil at PSC 4.
Contamination above background levels found in all shal-
low aquifer wells. Recommended installation of additional
wells.
• Soil samples at PSC 2 contained SVOCs and VOCs
characteristic of weathered and/or burned waste petro-
leum products.
• Trace levels of SVOCs and VOCs were found in soil and
sludge material sampled at PSCs 41 and 43.
NA
See notes at end of table.
-------
o >
5*
bo
c0 c
O
o
Table 2-2 (Continued)
Operable Unit 2 Investigative History
Record of Decision
Potential Sources of Contamination 2, 3, 4, 41, 42, and 43
Operable Unit 2
Naval Air Station Jacksonville
Jacksonville, Florida
Date
Investigation Title
Activities
Findings
1994
1995
ro
CD
1995
1996
Interim Record of Decision for PSCs
2, 41, and 43 at OU 2, NAS Jack-
sonville, Jacksonville, Florida
(ABB-ES, 1994C)
Focused RI/FS, PSCs 3 and 42 at
OU 2, NAS Jacksonville. Jackson-
ville, Florida (ABB-ES, 1995a)
Interim Record of Decision for PSC
42 at OU 2, NAS Jacksonville,
Jacksonville, Florida
(ABB-ES, 1995b)
Completion Report for PSC 2 FFTA,
NAS Jacksonville, Jacksonville,
Florida (Bechtel Environmental, Inc.,
1996)
PSC 2
• Collected free product from soil and disposed of
off site.
• Excavated and treated contaminated soil on site
via low-thermal desorption.
• Backfilled with treated soil.
PSCs 41 and 43
• Removed and disposed of nonhazardous material.
• Excavated and treated hazardous material on site,
• Backfilled with treated materials.
• Treated material was consolidated on PSC 41.
• PSC 43 was backfilled with clean soil.
• Soil sampling and analysis were completed at PSCs 3
and 42.
• Surface water and sediment sampling were completed
within the polishing pond at PSC 42.
Installed in situ mobile stabilization unit.
Bermed and lined pond perimeter.
In situ stabilization of polishing pond sludge and
water.
Clearing and grubbing.
Soil excavation.
Free-product recovery and disposal.
Thermal desorption treatment.
Backfill.
Site restoration.
2 NA
Soil samples at PSC 42 contained inorganics, specifically,
cadmium, chromium, and lead.
Inorganics were detected in sediment and sludge deposits
at PSC 42.
Inorganics were detected in the surface water at PSC 42.
Inorganics were found at levels above background in
surface soil samples at PSC 3.
NA
NA
See notes at end of table.
-------
b °
gc
Table 2-2 (Continued)
Operable Unit 2 Investigative History
Record of Decision
Potential Sources of Contamination 2. 3,4,41. 42. and 43
Operable Unit 2
Naval Air Station Jacksonville
Jacksonville, Florida
Date
Investigation Title
Activities
Findings
ro
o
1997 Certification and Closure Report,
PSC41, MAS Jacksonville, Jack-
sonville, Florida (ABB-ES. 1997a)
1997 Certification and Closure Report,
PSC 42, NAS Jacksonville, Jack-
sonville, Florida (ABB-ES, 1997b)
1997 Certification and Closure Report,
PSC 43, NAS Jacksonville, Jack-
sonville, Florida (ABB-ES. 1997c)
1998 Rl, OU 2, NAS Jacksonville, Jack-
sonville, Florida (ABB-ES, 1998a)
Remedial activities were conducted in two phases:
• Phase 1 included excavation and on-site stabilization
of contaminated media from PSCs 41 and 43.
• Phase 2 included excavation of the previously stabi-
lized material from PSC 41, and transportation and
incorporation of the stabilized material into the backfill
covering cured and stabilized material at PSC 42.
• Installation of mobile treatment unit for in situ stabili-
zation.
• Construction of containment berm around polishing
pond.
• In situ stabilization of sediment, sludge, and water.
• Removed and disposed of nonhazardous material off
site.
• Excavated and treated hazardous material on site.
• Backfilled the excavated area.
OU 2-wide
• Groundwater investigation.
• Surface water and sediment investigation.
• Soil investigation.
NA
NA
NA
Due to presence of petroleum-related compounds in
groundwater, PSC 2 was transferred to Florida's
petroleum program.
No further actions recommended for PSCs 3 and 4.
PSCs 41, 42, and 43 were recommended for clean
closure under RCRA.
Groundwater monitoring for postclosure required for
PSCs 41, 42, and 43.
Notes: IAS = initial assessment study.
NAS = Naval Air Station.
PSC = potential source of contamination.
RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
VOC = volatile organic compound. ,
RI/FS = remedial investigation and feasibility study.
OU = operable unit.
ABB-ES = ABB Environmental Services, Inc.
SVOC = semivolatile organic compound.
NA = not available.
IRA = interim remedial action.
FFTA = firefighter training area.
Rl = remedial investigation.
-------
at PSC 3, only the southern one (Parcel 2) appears to have been utilized for
sludge disposal.
Although risks were not expected from exposure to soil at PSC 3, there were
concerns about the exceeded guidance cleanup goals for lead detected in one
surface soil sample collected at Parcel 2. Metals concentrations in this sample.
were also much higher than those detected in other PSC 3 samples.
Because of these concerns, soil around this sample was removed in January 1997
and incorporated into the ongoing IRA at PSC 42.
2-2-3—PSC 4: Pine Tree Planting Area PSC 4 comprises approximately 70 acres and
is located southwest of the WWTP. Approximately 5 to 6 acres in the northern
part of the area were planted with pine trees sometime after 1975: hence, the
name of the site. The rest of the site is an open grassy field. Portions of the
area were reportedly used for the disposal of wastewater sludge, asbestos, and
petroleum products between 1968 and 1975. The waste-was either dumped in piles
or spread on the ground. Investigators found evidence of sludge disposal in the
northern portion of the Pine Tree Planting Area (i.e., sludge piles and a sludge
layer containing paint chips) during the first portion of the RI. Evidence of
sludge disposal was not found anywhere else at PSC 4.
Samples from the piles contained high metal concentrations, which further
indicated that the piles consisted of sludge from the WWTP. Because of the metal
concentrations, the piles were removed in January 1997 along with soil
surrounding one sampling location in the same area as the piles. The excavated
sludge material and soil were incorporated into the ongoing IRA of PSC 42.
2.-.2-4—PSC 41: Domestic Waste Sludge Drying Beds A system of five unlined beds
were constructed in 1970 to dry sludge from the domestic WWTP. After the sludge
was dried, it was removed from the beds and disposed of at PSC 3, PSC 4, or a
landfill. During operations between 1970 and 1980, it was reported that
approximately 300 cubic yards of dried sludge were removed annually from the
domestic waste sludge drying beds. In 1987, the USEPA classified the drying beds
as a surface impoundment used for the treatment of listed RCRA hazardous waste.
The beds were permanently removed from service in 1987. Sludge remaining in the
drying beds was reported to have been removed and disposed of at an off-site
USEPA-permitted landfill.
The former domestic sludge drying beds were investigated during the first stage
of the RI. High metal concentrations were detected in samples of sludge bed
media and in soil beneath the former drying beds. To address the potential risks
and support RCRA closure, an IRA was implemented in 1995 at PSC 41. Soil and
filter media from ground surface down to the water table were excavated and
stabilized. Stabilized materials from PSC 41 and PSC 43 (simultaneously
undergoing an identical IRA) were used to backfill the excavation at PSC 41. In
January 1997, the stabilized and solidified sludge material was excavated and
incorporated as backfill into the ongoing IRA of PSC 42.
Because the source areas had been removed and treated, an RCRA closure report for
PSC 41 was completed in 1997 (ABB-ES, 1997a).
2-2-5—PSC 42: Wastevater Treatment Plant Polishing Pond The polishing pond was
constructed in 1970 to provide final clarification for approximately 2.3 million
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.O9.98
-------
gallons per day of treated wastewater from both the industrial and domestic
WWTPs. After clarification, the water was chlorinated and discharged to the St.
Johns River. The pond was permanently removed from service in May 1987. but
contained water until 1996. *
The polishing pond was investigated during the first stage of the RI. Based on
high concentrations of metals detected in sediment and surface water in the pond,
it was determined that an IRA was needed to support RCRA closure. Five inorganic
elements (cadmium, chromium, lead, nickel, and silver) were identified as
contaminants of concern to be addressed in the IRA. Remedial activities were
conducted at PSC 42 from March 1996 to April 1997 to address surface water and
sediment through treatment and in situ solidification of the sludge and
underlying soil. The RCRA Closure report for PSC 42 was completed in 1997
(ABB-ES, 1997b).
The selected IRA for treatment of contaminated surface water and sediment at
PSC 42 was based on results of the focused RI (FRI) for PSC 42. The selected IRA
is presented in the Interim Record of Decision for Potential Source of Contamina-
tion 42, Operable Unit: 2 (ABB-ES, 1995b) . The selected remediation was in situ
stabilization of contaminated media. Cleanup criteria, remedial activities, and
confirmatory sampling (for PSC 42 media) performed during the IRA of PSC 42 are
discussed in the Certification and Closure Report, Potential Source of
Contamination 42 (ABB-ES, 1997b) . Because the source areas at PSC 42 have been
removed and treated, no further action is recommended for RCRA closure of the
site. However, a period of postclosure groundwater monitoring for PSC 42 will
be performed to satisfy the requirements of the RCRA. ' ^^
w
2.2.6 PSC 43: Industrial Waste Sludge Dryine Beds The four industrial sludge ^^
drying beds were constructed in 1980 to dry sludge generated from the wastewater
treatment of plating wastes. During operations, approximately 41 cubic yards of
dried sludge were excavated annually from the drying beds and disposed of by land
spreading at PSC 3 and possibly PSC 4. The drying beds were removed from service
in 1988, with the remaining sludge removed and taken to an off-site USEPA-
permitted landfill in 1991.
PSC 43 was investigated during the first stage of the RI. High concentrations
of metals were detected in the sludge bed filter media and the underlying soil.
In order to reduce potential risks associated with the metals contamination and
comply with RCRA closure requirements, an IRA was implemented for PSC 43 in 1995.
The IRAs for PSCs 41 and 43 were performed concurrently. Contaminated filter
media and soil were excavated and stabilized, and temporarily placed in the
PSC 41 excavation. In 1997, the combined solidified material from PSCs 41 and
43 were excavated and incorporated as backfill into the ongoing IRA at PSC 42.
The RCRA closure report for PSC 43 was completed in 1997 (ABB-ES, 1997c).
2.2.7 Drainage Areas There are drainage ditches and swales in several areas of
OU 2 (see Figure 2-4). However, only the drainage ditch in the open field area
of PSC 4 contains water on a continuous basis. During the RI, surface water and
sediment samples were collected from this drainage ditch.
Samples were also collected from other drainage areas at OU 2. These drainage
areas are predominantly grass-lined swales and only contain water during or
immediately following rain storms. Therefore, samples obtained from these areas
were evaluated as soil in the RI.
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09,98 2-12
-------
I muquono
Country Club
ond Coll Couiu
PATROL ROAD /
V III. I INCH > IUU III!
FIGURE 1-4
lURFACC WATER DRAINAGE PATTERN
OPERABLE UNIT 1
* RUNWAY >•»
fiECOBD OF
OPtBABLE UNIT
fcAtf*7 H"*1 *'" "*"ON
''•uiv;'.'-- jACKSONVtttE. nor
-------
2.2.8 Groundwater Groundwater samples have been collected from wells at OU 2
since 1984, primarily as part of the RCRA compliance monitoring for PSCs 41. 42,
and 43. The results from pre-RI groundwater sampling events are summarized in
the OU 2 RI Workplan (ABB-ES, 1992).
Direct-push technology (DPT) was used to collect groundwater samples during the
RI. Analytical results from the DPT groundwater investigation were used in
selecting locations for installing five monitoring wells. These wells were then
sampled and the groundwater analyzed in support of the RI (ABB-ES, 1998a).
2.3 HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION. The RI report (ABB-ES, 1998a) and
the Proposed Plan (ABB-ES, 1998b) for OU 2 were completed and released to the
public in January 1998 and April 1998, respectively. These documents, and other
Installation Restoration (IR) program information, are available for the public's
review in the Information Repository and Administrative Record. The repository
is maintained at the Charles D. Webb Wesconnett Branch.of the Jacksonville Public
Library in Jacksonville, Florida. The notice of availability of the Proposed
Plan was published in the Florida Times Union on April 1, 1998, and in the Clav
Today on April 1 and April 3, 1998. These local editions target the communities
closest to WAS Jacksonville. The news releases presented information on the RI
at OU 2 and encouraged community members to submit written comments on the
Proposed Plan.
A public comment period was held from April 1, 1998, to May 15, 1998, to solicit
comments on the Proposed Plan. In addition, a public meeting was held on April
21, 1998. Representatives from NAS Jacksonville, USEPA, and the FDEP, plus the
Navy's environmental consultants, presented information on the results of the
OU 2 RI, the RA, and the Proposed Plan, and solicited comments from the
community. No comments were received during the public comment period.
2.4 SCOPE AND ROLE OF OPERABLE UNIT. Investigations at OU 2, the subject of
this ROD, indicated the presence of soil, groundwater, surface water and sediment
contamination resulting from past disposal practices. IRAs have been completed
for PSCs 2, 41, 42, and 43. In addition, "hot spot" soil removals were completed
at PSCs 3 and 4. Soil and sludge removed from PSCs 3, 4, 41, and 43 were
incorporated into the ongoing IRA at PSC 42. Because of the presence of LNAPL
and petroleum-related contaminants in the groundwater at PSC 2, jurisdiction over
PSC 2 has been transferred to Florida's petroleum program.
The IRAs completed at OU 2 addressed soil, surface water, and sediment contamina-
tion. Because the source of contamination at OU 2 has been removed during IRAs,
contamination in the groundwater is expected to decline over time.
The Navy, USEPA, and FDEP decided that the site conditions, RA results, and
regulatory requirements (ARARs) do not warrant establishing remedial action
objectives (RAOs) for OU 2.
2.5 SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS. Contaminant sources , defections, migration
pathways, contaminated media, and geologic and hydraulic conditions of OU 2 are
discussed in the OU 2 Focused RI/FS reports and the RI report. Site characteris-
tic data are summarized in the subsections and paragraphs below.
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09,98 2-14
-------
n
2.5.1 General Site Characteristics of OU 2
Geol°Kv- A generalized geologic cross section of OU 2 is shown and described .u
Volume 1 of the NAS Jacksonville IR program plan (Geraghty & Miller 1991) The
surficial soil consists of post-Miocene fluvial deposits, including 'fine -grained
sand, silty sand, clayey sand, and sandy clay overlying the Hawthorn Group The
post-Miocene deposits are up to 75 feet thick (United States Armv Corps of
Engineers) .
Surface Hydrology. A drainage divide runs northwesterly across OU 2 in the
vicinity of the access road running through PSC 3 and the sludge drying beds at
PSCs 41 and 43. South of the divide, runoff flows south and west into a drainage
ditch that begins 1,200 feet south of the WWTP. This ditch parallels the east-
west runway for approximately 3,000 feet, then turns north and flows off base
North of the divide, runoff flows toward the St. Johns River via drainage swales
on either side of the patrol road and in two 36- inch-diameter stormwater drainage
pipes paralleling the taxiway on the east side of OU 2.
Hvdrogeolosy. Groundwater flow in the surficial aquifer is generally northward
toward the St. Johns River, north of the surface drainage divide and south to
southwest south of the divide. Depth to groundwater generally ranges from near
surface to 5 feet below land surface (bis). Hydraulic conductivity ranges from
0.23 to 9.33 feet per day (ft/day) in the shallow zone and 3.54 to 81.35 ft/day
in the deep zone .
Meteorology. The meteorology of the Jacksonville area is described in detail in
Volume, 1 of the NAS Jacksonville IR Program Plan (Geraghty & Miller, 1991).
Contaminant Sources. OU 2 contaminant sources were addressed during IRAs . These
contaminant sources and the contaminated media included the following:
site Media •
2 soil, groundwater
PSCs 3 and 4 soil, sludge
PSCs 41 and 43 soil, sludge
PSC 42 _ ^ _ ^ _ soil, surface water, sediment
PSC-specific investigations conducted at OU 2 .are documented in the Focused RI/FS
and the Final RI . Soil was investigated at all PSCs, while surface water and
sediment were only investigated for PSCs 4 and 42 . Groundwater was investigated
as a whole across OU 2, and will be discussed in this ROD as such.
2.5.2 PSC 2. Firefjghting Training Area
2.5.2.1 Soil
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) . VOCs detected prior to the IRA included
ethylbenzene, 4-methyl-2-pentanone, and 2-butanone at the center of PSC 2. These
constituents are degradation products of hydrocarbon-based compounds related to
fuel, including jet and diesel fuel.
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98
2-15
-------
Semivolatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs). SVOCs detected in surface soils
consisted of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) . The PAH 2-methylnaphthal-
ene was found at the center and the northeastern edge of PSC 2. Other PAHs were
detected in low concentrations at one location near the eastern edge of PSC 2.
These PAHs included dibenz(a,h)anthracene, chrysene, pyrene, benzo(g,h,i)-
perylene,benzo(k)fluoranthene, indeno(l, 2 , 3-cd)pyrene, andbenzo(b)fluoranthene .
These constituents also appear to be associated with degradation of hydrocarbon-
based compounds related to fuel.
Pesticides and Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs). Pesticides were found near the
edge of PSC 2. These compounds included alpha-chlordane, gamma-chlordane, and
dieldrin. In addition, 4,4'-dichlorodiphenyldichloroethene (DDE) was detected
at one location within PSC 2. PCBs were not detected in any of the soil samples
collected from PSC 2.
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons. Horizontal TPH distribution indicated an
approximately circular zone of contamination with areas of highest concentrations
in and around the center of the former firefighting training pit. TPH
concentrations were found to rapidly dissipate toward the edges of the pit.
Inorganics. Inorganic compounds detected at PSC 2 included lead, chromium,
cadmium, and arsenic.
2.5.2.2 Groundwater
LNAPL Characterization. LNAPL was found to be present at PSC 2 and is
interpreted to be a petroleum product containing no PCBs or chlorides. Further
investigation activities will be handled through the petroleum program at NAS
Jacksonville.
2.5.3 PSCs 3 and 4. Land Disposal from Drying Beds Sludge
2.5.3.1 Soil and Sludge
VOCs. VOC analytical results indicated that soil contamination by VOCs was not
extensive at PSC 3 or PSC 4. Acetone and methylene chloride were the only two
VOCs detected at PSC 4. Both compounds are common artifacts of laboratory and
decontamination procedures. Carbon disulfide, xylene, and acetone were detected
in one sample at PSC 3.
SVOCs. Contamination by SVOCs was not considered extensive at either PSC 3 or
PSC 4. A summary of SVOCs detected is documented in the Focused Rl/FSs (ABB-ES,
1994a; 1995a) and the Final RI (ABB-ES, 1998a).
Pesticides and PCBs. Organochlorine pesticides were detected at PSC 3. Dieldrin
and low levels of alpha- and gamma-chlordane were detected in soils. Similar
low-level detections of dieldrin, and alpha- and gamma-chlordane were present at
PSC 4. The nature and extent of dieldrin contamination at PSC 3 and PSC 4 do not
appear to be related to sludge disposal operations and may have been a result of
past pest control practices.
Inorganics. Chromium, lead, and cadmium were the most often detected inorganics
at PSC 3. The extent of soil contamination by cadmium, chromium, and lead at
PSC 3 was primarily in the surface layer. Except for a small area in the
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98 2-16
-------
southern portion of Parcel 2 at PSC 3, metal contamination extended from the
former drying beds towards the center of the parcel, and extended south and west
of PSC 3.
Sludge samples obtained from PSC 4 revealed high inorganics concentrations in the
sludge piles. Arsenic was detected above Florida residential soil cleanup goals
(SCGs) in soil samples from across PSC 4, although there was no pattern to the
distribution of arsenic in soil. Because there was ro evidence of sludge
disposal in the areas of soil sampling, and the arsenic concentrations were
broadly distributed, it is likely that the arsenic concentrations detected in
soil at PSC 4 represents naturally occurring concentrations.
/
2.5.4 PSC 41. Domestic Waste Sludge Drying Beds
2.5.4.1 Soil Pre-IRA site characteristics are described in the paragraphs
below.
VOCs. Soil contamination by VOCs is not extensive at PSC 41. Acetone was the
only VOC detected, and it is considered a common artifact of laboratory and
decontamination procedures.
Inorganics. Sixty-nine soil samples were screened in the field for five heavy
metals (arsenic/cadmium, chromium, lead, and nickel). Nine samples of sand,
filter media, and soil were analyzed by an off-site laboratory for target analyte
list (TAL) metals. Seventeen metals were detected in these samples. Of the five
heavy metals screened in the field, lead was detected in all nine samples with
concentrations in the surface (0 to 1 foot bis) higher than in the subsurface.
Arsenic, cadmium, nickel, and chromium were each detected in five locations.
Each of the five metals was detected in the screening samples across all sampling
depths, from 0 to 4 feet bis, both within the drying beds and in the surrounding
soil. Field screening data for the five heavy metals were correlated with off-
site laboratory analyses.
An FRE performed for PSC 41 (discussed more thoroughly in Paragraph 2.6.1.1)
identified arsenic, chromium, and nickel as site contaminants which posed a
potential threat to human and ecological receptors. Based on results of the FRE,
five heavy metals (arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, and nickel) and respective
toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) extract cleanup concentrations
were selected as treatment criteria for the IRA at PSC 41. Although lead was not
found to pose potential risk at PSC 41, it was a risk driver for PSC 43, and
treatment criteria were based on results of the risk evaluation for both PSC 41
and 43 because the two sites were treated together and included in a single IRA.
The TCLP extract concentration of cadmium detected during the FRI for PSC 41
exceeded the constituent concentrations in waste extract (CCWE) limits for land
disposal, making cadmium the fifth metal in the list of treatment criteria for
the IRA at PSC 41.
2.5.5 FSC 42. Wastewater Treatment Effluent Polishing Pond
2.5.5.1 Soil Pre-IRA site characteristics are described in the paragraphs
below.
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98 2-17
-------
VOCs. Soil contamination by VOCs does not appear to be extensive in soil around
PSC 42. Acetone, the only VOC detected, is a common artifact of laboratory
decontamination procedures.
SVOCs. Contamination by SVOCs does not appear to be extensive at PSC 42. Except
for the detection of bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, all SVOC detections were below
contract-required quantitation limits.
Pesticides and PCBs. Organochlorine pesticides were detected in soil around PSC
42. Dieldrin, gamma-chlordane, and alpha-chlordane were also detected in soils
at PSC 42. No PCB compounds were detected. The nature and extent of organo-
chlorine pesticide contamination in soil around PSC 42 does not appear to be
related to PSC 42 operations and may have been a result of past basewide pest
control programs.
Inorganics. Fifty-six soil samples were screened for five metals (arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, lead, and nickel). Cadmium, chromium, and lead were the most
often detected metals in the soil screening samples. Nickel was detected in 7
of the 56 samples, and arsenic was below detection limits in all 56 screened
samples. Twelve soil samples were sent to a laboratory for confirmation of
screening results. Lead (12 of 12), chromium (11 of 12), and cadmium (7 of 12)
were detected in the confirmation samples, while arsenic and nickel were
undetected. Laboratory results showed that concentrations of lead, chromium, and
cadmium were above background levels 16, 67, and 88 percent of the time,
respectively.
The FRE completed for PSC 42 (discussed further in Paragraph 2.6.1.2) concluded
that unacceptable risks were not predicted for human or ecological receptors from
exposure to surface soil at PSC 42. Therefore, the IRA at PSC 42 did not address
soil surrounding the polishing pond.
2.5.5.2 Surface Water and Sediment Pre-IRA site characteristics are described
in the paragraphs below.
VOCs. VOC screening analytical results for sediment around the polishing pond
are documented in the Focused RI/FS. In the screening data, 2-butanone was
detected in all of the sediment samples. Acetone, benzene, carbon disulfide,
toluene, and total xylenes were detected in various sediment samples submitted
for analysis. Only one surface water sample showed low-detectable levels of
acetone and benzene.
SVOCs. SVOCs detected in all sediment samples include phenol and bis(2-
ethylhexyl)phthalate. Butylbenzyl phthalate and di-n-butyl phthalate were
detected in two of the four sediment samples. Di-n-octyl phthalate, fluor-
anthene, and benzo(b)fluoranthene were detected in various sediment samples.
Di-n-octylphthalate was detected at a low level in one surface water sample.
Pesticides and PCBs. There were no detections of pesticides or PCBs in the
PSC 42 sediment and surface water.
Inorganics. Seventeen sediment samples were initially screened for arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, lead, and nickel. Cadmium, chromium, lead, and nickel were
detected in all 17 sediment screening samples. Arsenic was not detected. Four
sediment samples were sent to a laboratory and analyzed for TAL inorganics to
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.9B 2-18
-------
confirm the screening results. Fifteen TAL inorganic parameters were detected
in all four sediment samples: aluminum, barium, cadmium, calcium, chromium.
copper, iron, lead, magnesium, manganese, mercury, silver, vanadium, zinc, and
cyanide. Eleven metals were detected in the three surface water samples analvzed
for TAL inorganics: aluminum, barium, calcium, chromium, iron, lead, magnesium.
manganese, nickel, potassium, and sodium.
The FRE performed for PSC 42 did not address the sediment, sludge, and water
present within the polishing pond, as it was assumed those materials would be
removed and/or treated as part of the IRA for the site. Five inorganic elements
(cadmium, chromium, lead, nickel, and silver), present in the sediments and
sludge at PSC 42 were identified in the Bench-Scale Mix Design (ABB-ES, 1995c)
as contaminants to be targeted in the IRA. Most of the surface water in the pond
was incorporated into the TRA stabilization process for contaminated media.
Excess surface water was sampled for discharge criteria established by the Navy
Public Works Center and discharged to the federally owned treatment works.
2.5.6 PSC 43. Industrial Waste Sludge Drvine Beds
2.5.6.1 Soil Pre-IRA site characteristics are described in the paragraphs
below.
VOCs. As in PSC 41, soil contamination by VOCs is not extensive at PSC 43.
Acetone was the only positive detection, and it is a common artifact of
laboratory decontamination procedures.
Inorganics. Sixty-eight soil samples-were screened in the field for arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, lead, and nickel. The highest screening concentrations of
chromium, cadmium, lead, and nickel were detected in the upper 2-inch filter
material layer of the sludge drying beds. Chromium was detected in every sample
from PSC 43 screened on site. Five samples were submitted to a laboratory for
TAL metals analyses. Of the five inorganics screened in the field, chromium and
lead were detected in all five samples. Cadmium and nickel were in three of five
samples, and arsenic was detected in two of the samples.
The FRE conducted for PSC 43 (discussed further in Paragraph 2.6.1.1) indicated
that observed levels of chromium, nickel, and lead posed potential risks to human
health for an industrial scenario. In addition to these three heavy metals,
arsenic and cadmium were chosen as treatment criteria for an IRA performed at PSC
43 . Arsenic was included because it was found to pose potential risk at PSC 41.
and both PSC 41 and PSC 43 were treated together and included in the IRA.
Likewise, cadmium was included because its TCLP extract concentration detected
during the FRI for PSC 41 exceeded the CCWE limits for land disposal.
2-5.7—Drainage Areas Discussion of results from sampling efforts for the
drainage areas have been divided into the following components:
Surface water - all surface water samples
Sediment samples - sediment samples collected from the PSC 4 drainage
ditch
Drainage swale soil - soil samples collected from other OU 2 drainage
areas
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98 2-19
-------
Site characteristics, based on the above listed components, are summarized in the MB
paragraphs below. W^
2.5.7.1 Surface Water
VOCs. Acetone and methylene chloride were detected in surface water samples at
low concentrations. Because these compounds were also detected in some of the
quality control samples and were found only at low concentrations, they may be
artifacts from common laboratory and decontamination procedures.
SVOCs. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate was detected in one surface water sample ac
an estimated concentration slightly greater than the Florida surface water
quality criteria (SWQC), but below the reporting limit.
Inorganics. Eleven metals and cyanide were detected at concentrations greater
than background levels. Concentrations of beryllium, cadmium, copper, iron,
lead, and mercury exceed Florida SWQC. Aluminum, barium, calcium, magnesium!
manganese, potassium, and vanadium have no Florida SWQC for comparison. Although
concentrations in some samples are greater'than background and/or Florida SWQC,
concentrations detected from the most downstream sample were all below background
levels. This indicates that inorganics detected in upstream samples are not
migrating downstream or off site.
2.5.7.2 Sediment
VOCs. Acetone was detected in all the sediment samples, and 2-butanone was
detected in two of the samples with highest acetone concentrations. Because both
of these VOCs are common artifacts of laboratory and decontamination procedures
and were also detected in some of the quality control samples, it is likely that
these VOCs were introduced to the samples during collection or analysis.
SVOCs. Benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, and fluoranthene were detected in
one sediment sample at estimated concentrations below the reporting limit. TPH
was also detected in this sample. The subject sample was located next to a road,
and the PAHs and TPH detected likely represent paving material and/or runoff from
the road.
Pesticides and PCBs. The pesticides dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane and DDE were
detected in duplicate samples at estimated concentrations below the reporting
limits. These low concentrations likely represent stationwide application of
pesticides.
Inorganics. Fifteen metals and cyanide were detected at concentrations higher
than background levels. The highest concentrations of most inorganics were
detected in a sample collected closest to the PSC 4 sludge disposal area.
However, soil samples collected between the sludge disposal area and the drainage
ditch have lower concentrations of inorganics than those detected in the above
referenced sample. This indicates that inorganics have not migrated to the ditch
via overland flow.
The concentrations of calcium, magnesium, and iron detected in the referenced
sediment sample suggest that dolomitic ballast from the road was in the soil
sample.
JAX-OU2ROD
FGW.O9.98 2-20
-------
2.5.7.3 Drainage Swale Soil
VOCs. No VOCs were detected at levels greater than benchmarks.
SVOCs. Benzo(a)pyrene was detected in one sample at the end of Patrol Road at
a level higher than Florida SCGs for both residential and industrial scenarios.
The source of the PAHs is unknown; however, roadway runoff and paving material
are possible sources. Additionally, at times, security personnel temporarily
park patrol cars in this area while on patrol.
Pesticides and PCBs. DDE and dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane were detected in
one sample at concentrations less than Florida residential SCGs.
Inorganics. Antimony, arsenic, beryllium, and cadmium were all detected at
concentrations greater than background levels. Levels of antimony and cadmium
are characteristic of treatment plant waste. Arsenic and beryllium are not
metals characteristic of the treatment plant waste. It is likely that arsenic
and beryllium levels are naturally occurring.
2-5-8—Groundwater Groundwater samples from compliance wells and monitoring
wells, and analytical results from the DPT groundwater investigation were used
to evaluate groundwater at OU 2. Samples from PSC 2 and immediately downgradient
from PSC 2 were not used during this evaluation.
VOCs. Acetone and methylene chloride were detected at concentrations above
benchmarks. Due to the levels found, and results of quality control samples, it
is likely that acetone and methylene chloride were introduced to the samples
during collection or analysis. Carbon disulfide and 1,1-dichloroethane were
detected at concentrations less than Florida groundwater guidance concentrations
(GGCs). ' .
SVOCs. Phenol was detected in one groundwater sample obtained near the domestic
sludge drying beds. Phenol may have migrated to groundwater from sludge
deposited in the drying beds.
Inorganics. Seven inorganics were detected at concentrations greater than
background levels. Of these inorganics, cadmium, manganese, sodium, and thallium
were detected at concentrations greater than established Florida GGCs. Cadmium
and manganese are likely related to sludge that was placed in the drying beds.
Sodium was detected at one sample location at a concentration greater than
background levels and Florida GGCs. Thallium was also detected in one sample
slightly above Florida GGCs, and it is believed that this is not related to the
sludge drying beds. It is likely that the thallium is naturally occurring.
2^J—SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS CERCLA directs the Navy to conduct an RA to
determine whether or not a site poses a current or future threat to human health
and the environment in the absence of any remedial action. Both a HHRA and
ecological risk assessment (ERA) were performed for OU 2. The RAs evaluated the
contaminants detected in site media during the FRIs (PSCs 2,3, 41, 42, and 43)
and the RI (PSC 4, OU 2 groundwater, and OU 2 drainage areas), and provided the
basis for selecting either remedial actions or a No Further Action alternative.
For ease of understanding, results of the risk evaluations are presented in the
same order in which they were conducted.
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98 2-21
-------
To assist in distinguishing inorganic contaminants from those that are present
naturally, analytical results were compared to background screening concentra-
tions for each medium sampled. These background screening concentrations are
twice the mean of the concentrations detected in the background samples for each
medium. The methods used to develop the background screening concentrations are
presented in the OU 1 RI/FS (ABB-ES, 1996).
2.6.1 Human Health Risk Assessment HHRAs were conducted to characterize the
risks associated with potential exposure to site-related contaminants at OU 2 for
human receptors. Four basic components of the HHRA were performed for each area
of OU 2: (1) selection of human health contaminants of potential concern
(HHCPCs), (2) exposure assessment, (3) toxicity assessment, and (4) risk
characterization.
HHCPCs. HHCPCs are chemicals found at levels above State and Federal risk-
screening levels and levels typical of an area. These contaminants of potential
concern (CPCs) are the focus of the RAs performed for each area of interest at
OU 2. Table 2-3 summarizes the HHCPCs selected for media for the six PSCs,
drainage areas, and groundwater at OU 2.
Exposure Assessment. An exposure assessment is performed to identify populations
that might come into contact with site-related chemicals and the pathways through
which exposure might occur.
Toxicitv Assessment. The toxicity assessment evaluates possible harmful effects
from exposure to the identified CPCs. Both carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic
risks associated with each CPC are evaluated.
Risk Characterization. For risk characterization, the results of the exposure
and toxicity assessments are combined to estimate the overall risk from exposure
to site contamination. For carcinogens, risk is expressed as a probability of
developing cancer. For noncarcinogens, the dose of a chemical for which a
receptor may be exposed is estimated and compared to a reference dose. The
reference dose is developed by USEPA scientists and represents the amount of a
chemical a person could be exposed to over a lifetime without developing adverse
effects. The measure of likelihood of adverse noncancer effects occurring in
humans is called the hazard index (HI). An HI greater than 1 suggests that
adverse effects are possible.
2.6.1.1 PSCs 2, 41, and 43 Based on results of the FRI, a FRE was performed for
PSCs 2, 41, and 43. The FRE is included in the Focused Remedial Investigation
and Feasibility Study for PSCs 2, 41, and 43 at Operable Unit 2 (ABB-ES, 1994a) .
The media within each PSC addressed in the FRE are presented in Table 2-1.
Groundwater across OU 2 was assessed during the overall RI; therefore, individual
groundwater investigations at PSCs 2, 41, and 43 were not completed during the
Focused RI/FS. The purpose of the focused human health risk evaluations for PSCs
2, 41, and 43 was to identify immediate threats to human health associated with
site contamination and to evaluate the need to perform IRAs for source control.
A fifth component of the HHRA, development of PRGs, was included in the FREs for
PSCs 2, 41, and 43. PRGs represent soil concentrations of CPCs that are not
expected to pose an unacceptable risk to humans by the respective route of
exposure. PRGs were compared with maximum detected concentrations of HHCPCs to
identify CPCs that may pose an unacceptable risk.
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.03.9B 2-22
-------
Table 2-3
Summary of Human Health Contaminants of Potential Concern (HHCPCs)
Record of Decision
Potential Sources of Contamination 2, 3, 4. 41. 42. and 43
Operable Unit 2
Naval Air Station Jacksonville
Jacksonville, Florida
Area of Interest
Environmental Medium
HHCPCs
PSC2'
PSC3Z
Parcel 1
Parcel 2
PSC43
Outside Sludge
Disposal Area
Within Sludge
Disposal Area
PSC 41'
'SC 422
Surface Soil
Surface Soil
Subsurface Soil
Surface Soil
Subsurface Soil
Surface Soil/Filter Me-
Subsurface Soil/Filter
Media
Surface Soil
VolatPe Organice: 2-butanone, 4-methyl-2-pentanone. acetone.
ethylbenzene, xylene (total)
Semh/olatile Organics: 2-methylnaphthalene, benzo(a)pyrene.
benzo(b)fluoranthene, benzo(g,h,i)pery!ene, benzo(k)fluoranthene.
chrysene, dibenz(a.h)anthracene, indeno(l,2.3-cd)pyrene.
naphthalene, pyrene
Pesticides/PCBs: 4,4'-DDE, dieldrin, alpha-chlordane, gamma-
chlordane
Inorganic*: aluminum, arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium.
copper, lead, manganese, zinc
Inorganics: lead
Inorganics: lead
Pesticides/PCBs: dieldrin
Inorganics: cadmium, chromium (trivalent), lead
Inorganics: lead
Inorganics: arsenic, beryllium, iron, thallium
Other: total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
Inorganics: arsenic, cadmium, iron
Other: TPH
Volatie Organic*: acetone
Inorganics: aluminum, arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium,
cobalt, copper, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel, selenium,
silver, zinc
Volatie Organics: acetone
Inorganics: aluminum, arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium,
cobalt, copper, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel, selenium.
silver, zinc
Inorganics: cadmium, lead
See notes at end of table.
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98
2-23
-------
Table 2-3 (Continued)
Summary of Human Health Contaminants of Potential Concern (HHCPCs)
Record of Decision
Potential Sources of Contamination 2. 3, 4, 41, 42. and 43
Operable Unit 2
Naval Air Station Jacksonville
Jacksonville. Rorida
Area of Interest
Environmental Medium
HHCPCs
PSC 43'
Surface Soil/Filter Media
Volatile Organics: acetone
Inorganics: aluminum, arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium.
cobalt, copper, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel, selenium.
silver, zinc
Subsurface Soil/Filter Media Volatile Organics: acetone
OU 2 Groundwater*
OU 2 Drainage Areas3 Surface Water
Sediment
Surface Soil
Inorganics: aluminum', arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium.
cobalt, copper, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel, selenium.
silver, zinc
Volatile Organics: acetone, methylene chloride
Semh/olatila Organics: phenol
Inorganics: arsenic, barium, cadmium, manganese, sodium.
thallium
Volatle Organics: acetone
Semh/olatle Organics: bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Inorganics: aluminum, arsenic, beryllium, iron, lead,
manganese, mercury, vanadium, zinc
Semh/olatite Organics: benzo(a)pyrene
Inorganics: arsenic, cadmium, iron, vanadium
Other: TPH
SamivolatPe Organics: benzo(a)pyrene, indeno{1,2.3.-cd)pyrene
Inorganics: antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, iron, lead,
silver
Other: TPH
1 Reference Document: ABB Environmental Services, Inc. (ABB-ES), Focused Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study,
PSCs 2, 41, and 43 at Operable Unit 2, NAS Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida (August 1994).
iBference Document: ABB-ES. Focused Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study for PSCs 3 and 42 at Operable Unit
2, NAS Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida (April 1995).
' Reference Document: ABB-ES. Remedial Investigation, Operable Unit 2. NAS Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida (January
1998).
Notes: PSC = potential source of contamination.
DDE = dichlorodiphenyidichloroethene.
PCB = polychlorinated biphenyl.
OU = operable unit.
NAS = Naval Air Station.
4ft
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09,98
2-24
-------
HHCPCs selected for surface soil at PSC 2 and soil/filter media at PSCs 41 and
43 are presented in Table 2-3. Identical exposure pathways and scenarios we-^
evaluated for PSCs 2, 41, and 43. Under current land use, adult commercial and
industrial workers could be exposed to contaminants in surface soil; therefore
exposure of these receptors (through ingestion of and direct dermal contact with
surface soil and inhalation of particulates and volatiles from surface soil) was
evaluated in the FRE. In addition, the FRE evaluated exposure to assumed future
resident adults and children via ingestion and dermal contact with surface soils.
Using contaminant-specific toxicity values, residential and industrial PRGs were
calculated for carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic effects to potential receptors.
The PRGs are based on a target cancer risk of 1 in 1,000,000 (10"e) for
carcinogens and a target HI of 1 for noncarcinogens. The risk characterization
for PSCs 2, 41, and 43 was based on a qualitative estimate of the risks at each
PSC. This approach adequately supports the objective of identifying whether CPCs
in soil at PSCs 2, 41 and 43 may pose .an unacceptable risk to human health. The
maximum detected concentrations of CPCs detected in soils from each of the PSCs
were compared to the PRGs and FDEP Soil Target Levels (STLs) (FDEP, 1994). Table
2-4 summarizes the results of the PRG and STL comparisons to maximum detected
concentrations of CPCs for both the residential and industrial scenarios.
Exceedances of PRGs indicate that unacceptable risks for human health may be
associated with exposure to the CPC. The results of the risk characterization
supported implementation of IRAs at PSCs 2, 41, and 43. The need for IRAs at the
PSCs was based on the comparison of CPCs to PRGs, since FDEP STLs were not
specifically calculated for the exposure pathways present at the sites.'
Due to the presence of LNAPL and petroleum-related contaminants detected in PSC 2
groundwater during the second stage of the RI, the USEPA and FDEP agreed to
transfer jurisdiction of PSC 2 to Florida's petroleum program. No further
actions are recommended for PSC 2 under the CERCLA program at OU 2. Because the
source areas at PSCs 41 and 43 have been removed and treated, no further actions
are recommended for RCRA closure of the sites. However, a period of postclosure
groundwater monitoring (of 2 to 3 years) will be performed to satisfy the
requirements of RCRA.
2.6.1.2 PSCs 3 and 42 Following completion of the FRIs, FREs were performed for
selected media at PSCs 3 and 42. Results of the FREs are included in the Focused
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study, PSCs 3 and 42 at Operable Unit 2,
NAS Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida (ABB-ES, 1995a). The media within each
PSC addressed in the FREs are presented in Table 2-3. Groundwater across OU 2
was assessed during the overall RI; therefore, individual groundwater investiga-
tions at PSCs 3 and 42 were not completed during the Focused RI/FS. The purpose
of the focused human health risk evaluations for PSCs 3 and 42 was to identifv
potential threats to human health associated with site contamination and to
evaluate the need to perform IRAs for soil.
As indicated in Table 2-1, a risk evaluation for surface water and sediment at
PSC 42 was not performed. As a result of FRI findings for those media, and in
order to satisfy RCRA closure requirements for the PSC, surface water and
sediment were addressed in an IRA for PSC 42. Therefore, surface .soil
surrounding the polishing pond was the only media addressed in the FRE for
PSC 42.
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98 2-25
-------
Table 2-4
Comparison Result Summary for Residential and Industrial
USEPA PRGs and Florida STLs for PSCs 2, 41, and 43
Record of Decision
Potential Sources of Contamination 2, 3, 4, 41, 42. and 43
Operable Unit 2
Naval Air Station Jacksonville
Jacksonville, Florida
Residential PRG Comparison Result Summary
PSC2
PSC41
PSC43
PSC2
PSC41
PSC43
Notes:
Exceedances of USEPA PRGs
Arsenic
Benzo(a)pyrene
Exceedances of USEPA PRGs
Arsenic
Chromium
Exceedances of USEPA PRGs
Arsenic
Chromium
Lead
Industrial PRG Comparison Result
No exceedances of USEPA PRGs.
Exceedances of USEPA PRGs
Arsenic
Chromium
Exeeedances of USEPA PRGs
Chromium
Lead
USEPA = U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
PRG = preliminary remedial goal.
STL = soil target level.
PSC = potential source of contamination.
Exceedances of
Arsenic
Benzo(a)pyrene
Dieldrin
Exceedances of
Arsenic
Chromium
Nickel
Exceedances of
Arsenic
Chromium
Copper
Manganese
Nickel
Summary
No exceedances
Exceedanees of
Arsenic
Chromium
Nickel
Exceedances of
Chromium
Nickel
FjgridajTLs
FloridajTLs
Florida STLs
of Rorida STLs.
Rorida STLs
Rorida STLs
JAX-OU2ROD
FGW.09,98
2-26
-------
PSC 3 was subdivided into two parcels for the purpose of evaluating risks-
Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 (Figure 2-3). The HHCPCs selected for surface and
subsurface soil at each parcel of PSC 3 and for surface soil at PSC 4? are
presented in Table 2-3. The potential exposure pathways and scenarios evaluated
tor PSCs 3 and 42 included ingestion and inhalation of soil particulates for an
industrial and general worker.
Using toxicity data for each CPC, PRGs were calculated and included in the FREs
for PSCs 3 and 42, in the same manner as the FREs for PSCs 2 41 and 43 PRGs
were calculated for carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic effects' to potential
receptors. The PRGs were based on a target cancer risk of 10'6 for carcinogens
and an HI of 1 for noncarcinogens. PRGs were calculated for all HHCPCs with the
exception of lead. Reference values for lead were based on a proposed soil
cleanup standard for lead that recommended cleanup goals be set between 500 and
1 000 mg/kg (USEPA, 1989). A concentration of 1,000 mg/kg of lead was used as
the industrial PRG. PRGs and FDEP STLs were compared to maximum HHCPC
concentrations to identify HHCPCs that may cause a potential risk with human
contact. The comparison of maximum detected concentrations of HHCPCs in soil at
PSCs 3 and 42 to PRGs was not a quantitative estimate of risk at each PSC
However this qualitative approach adequately supported the objectives of the
Focused RI/FS by identifying those areas with the highest contaminant concentra-
tions. Results of the comparison of FDEP STLs and PRGs to maximum detected
concentrations of CPCs for PSCs 3 and 42 are presented in Table 2-5.
In PSC 3 Parcel 2, the maximum detected concentration of lead (1 060 mg/kg) in
a single surface soil sample just exceeded the industrial PRG value of 1 000
mg/kg. The concentration of this sample was approximately five times higher than
the next highest samples, which had lead values of approximately 200 mg/kg
These five samples were randomly spaced over the site and appeared unrelated to
„„* *am?leJ?it:1} a lead concentration of 1,060 mg/kg. No other concentrations of
HHCPCs in PSC 3 Parcel 1 or Parcel 2 exceeded their respective PRGs for surface
soil or subsurface soil. For PSC 42, the maximum detected concentrations of
cadmium and lead in surface soil did not exceed their respective PRGs Overall
the results of the FREs for soils at PSCs 3 and 42 did not suggest the need for
IRAs. However, in 1997 an area of soil approximately 1 square meter in size was
excavated around the sample at PSC 3 Parcel 2 with a lead concentration exceeding
th« industrial PRG. The excavated soil was incorporated into the ongoing IRA at
42. No further actions are recommended at PSC 3.
2.6.1.3 PSC 4, OU 2 Drainage Areas, and OU 2 Groundwater Based on results of
the RIs for PSC 4, drainage areas at OU 2 , and OU 2 groundwater (conducted during
the second stage of OU 2 investigations), RAs were performed for those areas
Results of the RIs are documented in the Remedial Investigation, Operable Unit 2
NAS Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida (ABB-ES, 1998a).
PSC 4 was subdivided for purposes of conducting the 'RI . The three components are
referred to hereafter as (1) sludge piles, (2) soil within the PSC 4 disposal
area, and (3) soil outside the PSC 4 sludge disposal area (i.e., Open Field Area
and the portion of the Pine Tree Planting Area where no paint chips were found)
During site walkovers that preceded the RI, five small piles of sludge material
were discovered in the Pine Tree Planting Area. Relatively high concentrations
o£ trace metals (e.g., chromium, cadmium, mercury, and silver) were detected in
samples collected from the piles. The NAS Jacksonville Partnering Team agreed
to removal of the piles and inclusion of the sludge in the ongoing IRA at PSC 42
Therefore, the sludge piles were not included in the HHRA for PSC 4.
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98 2.07
-------
Table 2-5
Comparison of Maximum Concentration of HHCPCs at PSCs 3 and 42 with PRGs
Record of Decision
Potential Sources of Contamination 2, 3, 4, 41. 42. and 43
Operable Unit 2
Naval Air Station Jacksonville
Jacksonville, Rorida
HHCPC
Maximum Detected Concentration
Industrial PRG'
FDEP STLs for
General Worker
Exceedance of
PRG
PSC3
Surface Soil
Cadmium
Chromium (trivalent)
Dieldrin
Lead'
Subsurface Soil
Lead7
PSC42
Surface Soil
Cadmium
Lead'
Parcel 1
16.4
651
29
Parcel 2
75.2
12,200
0.140
1,060
6.2 3.2
(not subdivided)
65.6
284
2,040
2,040,000
0.362
1.000
1,000
2,040
1,000
621
306,000
0.269
NA
NA
621
NA
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
The PRG used for comparison is the lesser of the cancer or noncancer PRG.
The PRG for load is not based on calculation. Value used was based on a proposed soil cleanup standard that
recommended cleanup goals for lead be set between 500 and 1000 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) {USEPA 1989)
A concentration of 1000 mg/kg of lead was used as the industrial PRG.
Votes: All values are in mg/kg.
HHCPC = human health contaminant of potential concern.
PSC = potential source of contamination.
PRG = preliminary remedial goal.
FDEP = Rorida Department of Environmental Protection. •
STL = soil target level.
NA = not applicable.
USEPA = U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98
2-28
-------
u2 darearf r°ut-
The rmrir, ralnaSe areas, and OU 2 groundwater, are summarized iti
" three
et rk,
the risk characterization £or each a'rea addressed 'in th°e aT"^ " ' SUI"""y °f
from Che PSC 4 sludge piles and «
'""™0 " ""
Sludge at OU 2
No further actions are recommended for PSC 4
potential cancer JSS i« "^" ° exposure scenario (industrial),
d™
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.O9.98
2-29
-------
Table 2-6
Human Health Risk Summary
PSC 4, OU 2 Drainage Areas, and OU 2 Groundwater
Record of Decision
Potential Sources of Contamination 2. 3, 4. 41. 42. and 43
Operable Unit 2
Naval Air Station Jacksonville
Jacksonville, Florida
Media Receptor
PSC 4
Soil Outside the PSC 4 Adult
Sludge Disposal Area
Child
Total Resident. Outside the PSC 4
Sludge Disposal Area
Soil and Sludge within the Adult
PSC 4 Sludge Disposal Area
Child
Total Resident, within the PSC 4
Sludge Disposal Area
OU 2 Drainage Areas
Surface Water Adult
Child
Total Resident, Surface Water
Sediment Adult
Child
Total Resident, Sediment
Exposure Route
Ingestion
Dermal Contact
Inhalation
Total Adult
Ingestion
Dermal Contact
Inhalation
Total Child
Ingestion
Dermal Contact
Inhalation
Total Adult
Ingestion
Dermal Contact
Inhalation
Total Child
Ingestion
Dermal Contact
Total Adult
Ingestion
Dermal Contact
Total Child
Ingestion
Dermal Contact
Total Adult
Ingestion
Dermal Contact
Total Child
Hazard Index
0.03
0.009
NC'
0.04
0.3
0.01
NC'
0.3
N/A
0.02
0.06
NC'
0.08
0.2
0.09
NC'
0.3
N/A
0.04
0.9
0.9
0.9
1
2
N/A
0.03
0.07
0.1
0.3
0.1
0.4
N/A
Estimated Lifetime
Cancer Risk
6E-07
4E-07
6E-10
21E-06
1E-06
1E-07
5E-10
1E-06
2E-06
1E-06
5E-07
1E-09
2E-06
2E-06
2E-07
9E-10
33E-06
5E-06
8E-07
1E-05
1E-05
5E-06
5E-06
1E-05
52E-05
2E-06
3E-07
2E-06
4E-06
1E-07
4E-06
6E-06
See notes at end of table.
JAX-OU2ROD
FGW.09.98
2-30
-------
Table 2-6 (Continued)
Human Health Risk Summary
PSC 4, OU 2 Drainage Areas, and OU 2 Groundwater
Record of Decision
Potential Sources of Contamination 2. 3. 4, 41. 42. and 43
Operable Unit 2
Naval Air Station Jacksonville
Media Receptor
OU 2 Drainage Areas (continued)
Drainage Swale Soils Adult
Child
Total Resident, Drainage Swale Soils
OU 2 Groundwater
Groundwater Adult
Child
Total Resident, Groundwater
Exposure Route Hazard Index
Ingestion
Dermal Contact
Inhalation
Total Adult
Ingestion
Dermal Contact
Inhalation
Total Child
Ingestion
Total Adult3
Ingestion
Total Child3
0.1
0.4
NC1
0.52
1
0.7
NC1
2
N/A
3
3
6
6
N/A
t Noi calculated because inhalation noncancer toxicity values were not available
To a risk discrepancy with risk calculation spreadsheets is due to rounding algorithm.
Total excess l.fetime cancer risk is based on two times the risk from ingesTion of the volatile
groundwater to account for inhalation of volatiles and dermal contact with groundwater
Notes: PSC = potential source of contamination.
OU = operable unit.
NC = not calculated.
N/A = not applicable.
Estimated Lifetime
Cancer Risk
6E-06
4F-06
1E-09
1E-05
1E-05
2E-06
1E-09
1E-05
2E-05
1E-04
1E-04
6E-05
6E-05
2E-04
constituents in
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.O9.98
2-31
-------
ro
b
ro
Medium
PSC 4
Surface Soil Outside the PSC 4
Sludge Disposal Area
Surface Soil and Sludge within
the PSC 4 Sludge Disposal Area
OU 2 Drainage Areas
Surface Water
Sediment
Drainage Swale Soils
OU 2 Groundwater
Groundwater
Table 2-7
Human Health Summary of Risk Drivers
PSC 4, OU 2 Drainage Areas, and OU 2 Groundwater
Record of Decision
Potential Sources of Contamination 2, 3, 4, 41, 42. and 43
Operable Unit 2
Naval Air Station Jacksonville
Jacksonville, Florida
Life™ CaS £*' Cancer ffisk Driver Tota' Haf fd "°™™ «* Driver
Utetime Uancer Risk |n(jex' (Hazard Index)
2E-06 Arsenic (2E-06) rj.03 N/A3
5E-06 Arsenic (3E-06) 0.3 N/A3
2E-05 Arsenic (5E-06) 2 Iron (2)
Beryllium (2E-05)
6E-06 Benzo(a)pyrene (1E-06) 0.4 N/A3
Arsenic (SE-06)
2E-05 Benzo(a)pyrene (2E-05) 2 Antimony (0.4)
lndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene (1E-06) Cadmium (0.9)
Arsenic (3E-06) Iron (0.2)
Beryllium (2E-06) Silver (0.2)
2E-04 Methylene chloride4 (1E-06) 6 Arsenic (2)
Arsenic (2E-04) Barium (0.6)
Cadmium (2)
Manganese (0.3)
Thallium (2)
' Total excess lifetime cancer risk is the combined adult and child risks for each pathway.
J Hazard Index is the highest of the adult or child total hazard indices.
* There are no noncarcinogenic risk drivers for the medium because the total hazard indices do not exceed the target value of 1.0.
Total excess lifetime cancer risk is the sum of the ingestion risk plus two times the risk from ingestion of the volatile constituents in
groundwater to account for inhalation of volatiles and dermal contact with groundwater.
Notes: PSC = potential source of contamination.
OU = operable unit.
N/A = not applicable.
-------
for
characteristic of sludge at OU 2 and ma, ^ md ber>-1U^ are not
"
• -— -
detected in rh? detec.ted ln a samPle from the eastern drainage
" '
for
S.-SS2?
of sodlun, dec.c f itorlns weiu may be *
USEPA
.
^
field contaminants distribution indicates that they are laboratory or
only cadraium and ^^t\r^site%?lat^d^ '
of the other three metal* r« K i related' Additionally, the concentrations
Florida GGCs Based on the " Y SliShtly exceed Federal MCLs and
hu.an receptors are eXpoSegondrt A -
placed on the base to nr«««f srounawa^er at ou 2- Access restrictions will be
surficial aquif" in the Iffl^^^^ ^ *" Sroundwat-r at OU 2 from the
^
notification pr^ed^res desi.n.d^6 "' C°ndition certification, and agency
of any site-specmc LUCs d?/ H ^^ ^ maintena"" by Station personnel
and t^e env?ro4ent A funL^rT^ ^ ^^ Prot-tion of hu^an health
ronment. A fundamental premise underlying execution of that
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98
2-33
-------
agreement was that through the Navy's substantial good-faith compliance with the
SI??! rTrn^P for th^ein, reasonable assurances would be provided to the
USEPA and FDEP as to the permanency of those remedies which included the use of
specific LLCs.
Although the terms and conditions of the MOA are not specifically incorporated
herein by reference, it is understood and agreed by the Navy, USEPA and FDEP
that the contemplated permanence of the remedy reflected herein shall be
dependent upon the Station's substantial good-faith compliance with the specific
LUC maintenance commitments reflected therein. Should such compliance not occur
or should the MOA be terminated, it is understood that the protectiveness of the
remedy concurred in may be reconsidered and that additional measures may need to
be taken to adequately ensure necessary future protection of human health and the
environment.
No further action is required for groundwater at OU 2 , with the exception of
postclosure monitoring required for RCRA closure of PSCs 41, 42, and 43.
2.6.2 Ecological Risk Assessor, The purpose of the ERA was to characterize
a""!Vr ^ 13dVerSe SffeCtS t0 •"logical receptors associated with
!2?TeH 5° slte;related contaminants at OU 2 . Basic components of the ERA
performed for each area of OU 2 include the following: (1) identification of
caon o
SonSSn recol°glcal receptors and pathways, (2) selection of ecological
contaminants of potential concern (ECPCs) , (3) exposure assessment, (4)
ecological effects assessment, and (5) risk characterization. The following
'
p 2« 4h and 43 The Focused Ecological Risk Evaluation (FERE) for
P -/' . 1( and 43 is included in the Focused Remedial Investigation and
Feasibility Study for PSCs 2 , 41 , and 43 at Operable Unit 2 (ABB-ES 1994a) The
CPCs selected for ecological evaluation are the same as those selected for the
focused human health risk evaluation for soils 0 to 1 foot bis at PSCs 2 41 and
'o (see Table 2-3).
An earthworm bioassay was completed for PSC 2 to determine the direct toxicitv
of contaminated soil to soil invertebrates. Based on the result of the toxicitv
testing, it was determined that an IRA at PSC 2 was necessary for the protection
of ecological receptors (soil dwelling invertebrates). The testing results
indicated that a conservative soil action level for an IRA for the protection of
fauna to direct toxic effects would be 53 mg/kg. Soils with TPH concentrations
**?** 5° mS/kS were excavated and treated during the IRA conducted at
in iyy5 .
For PSCs 41 and 43, a quantitative determination of ecological risk and
acceptable concentrations of CPCs in soil and filter media was determined to be
unnecessary as part of the FREs, since the volume of material to be removed
W1!!D™e sludSe ^y^g beds would be determined by the closure requirements
Dc^f , * A ^ualitative appraisal of the metal content of material within the
esc 41 and PSC 43 drying beds suggested it presented a possible hazard The
primary ecological concern with heavy metals in soils is the potential transfer
of metals from the soils to terrestrial invertebrates or plants. Results of the
FREs for PSCs 41 and 43 supported implementation of IRAs at the sites As
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98
2-34
-------
mentioned previously, IRAs were implemented and closure reports for both PSCs
were completed in 1997. •
2.6.2.2 PSCs 3 and 42 The FERE for PSCs 3 and 42 is included in the Focused
Radial Investigation and Feasibility Study. PSCs 3 and 42 at Operable Vr> t ?
hAS Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida (ABB-ES, 1995a) . "'
The results of the FERE for PSC 3 indicated that none of the ECPCs selected for
potential ecological receptors and exposure pathways presented unacceptable risks
for terrestrial wildlife, terrestrial plants, or" soil invertebrates
An FERE for surface water and sediment at PSC 42 was not performed. Based on RI
results, those media were addressed in an IRA. Therefore, surface soil
the Polishing pond was the only media addressed in the FERE for
. ecol°gical receptors of contamination at PSC 42 include terrestrial
wildlife, terrestrial plants, and terrestrial invertebrates. Potential exposure
routes^ for terrestrial wildlife at PSC 42 include ingestion of soil and food
items that may be contaminated as a result of accumulation of contamination from
the soil. Risks for terrestrial plants and invertebrates were not evaluated
m^n^H6 ^^ °f *Urface soil' contamination surrounding the polishing pond was
Identified « ?PP f ' 7"° ^ ' thW Pesticides- «* ten inorganics were
±n«p 1 f f°r S1UrfaCe S0il surroun plSnCS' °r S0il ^"ebrates; therefore, the IRA
for PSC 42 did not need to address surface soil surrounding the pond.
2.62.3 PSC 4, OU 2 Drainage Areas, and OU 2 Groundwater The ERAs for PSC 4
OU 2 drainage areas, and OU 2 groundwater are documented in the Remedial
' °Perable Unlc 2- NAS Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida (ABB-ES,
-
No risks were estimated for wildlife receptors, terrestrial plants, or for soil
invertebrates exposed to PSC 4 surface soil outside the sludge disposal area'
however, potential risks to terrestrial plants and invertebrates from exposure
to chromium in soil and sludge within the PSC 4 sludge disposal area were
identified. The PSC 4 sludge disposal area is in a portion oPf the Pine Tree
Planting Area where there is virtually no understory due to the heavy pine needle
litter (i.e., stressed herbaceous vegetation is not evident). Although it is
unknown how chromium concentrations within the PSC 4 sludge disposal area may
actually be impacting soil invertebrates, chromium concentrations are well below
the Florida residential SCGs , and no further actions were recommended for PSC 4.
The primary risk contributors for surface water are aluminum, iron, and zinc
The samples with high levels of metals were in a portion of the ditch with murky'
standing water that contains algae growth. Downstream, where the water is
flowing, levels of the metals were lower and do not pose a risk. Therefore the
metals in the upstream portion of the ditch are probably not site-related' but
are most likely related to the water conditions.
For sediment, metals and PAHs found in one sample are the primary contributors
to the risk. Arsenic is naturally occurring. PAHs are typically from roadway
runoff or paving material. y
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.O9.98
2-35
-------
Chromium found in drainage swales near the polishing pond is the primary risk
contributor. Cadmium and silver may also present a potential risk. However
grass is growing in the swales, so adverse effects to plants are not likely.
The ERA for OU 2 groundwater identified potential risks to aquatic receptors
Cadmium is the source of the potential risk; however, samples indicate that
cadmium is not moving from the groundwater to surface water. Therefore it is
not likely that aquatic receptors would be exposed to harmful levels of cadmium.
Based on the current use of OU 2 and the limited quality of the habitats that the
drainage areas provide, no further action is recommended for these areas.
2.7 DESCRIPTION OF THE NO ACTION ALTERNATTVF Based on the RA, no unacceptable
human health or ecological risks were identified at OU 2. Therefore, no action
is needed and no other remedial alternatives were considered.
However, PSCs 41, 42, and 43 have all been classified as RCRA units and require
postclosure monitoring of groundwater until standards are achieved An
abbreviated monitoring program of two to three years is believed to meet such
requirements. Should groundwater standards not be achieved in that time frame
groundwater will continue to be monitored as per RCRA instructions.
In addition, appropriate LUCs will be implemented at the operable unit to prevent
the emplacement of a residential scenario.
28 DOCUMENTATION OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES There are no significant changes in
this remedial action from that described in the Proposed Plan.
2.9 STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS. The no further action alternative selected and
implemented for OU 2 is consistent with CERCLA and the NCP. The IRAs conducted
at the PSCs were selected based on the RAO set for each PSC. These RAOs were
determined based on consideration of AJRARs. Table 2-8 lists and describes the
State and Federal chemical specific ARARs considered for OU 2
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98
2-36
-------
g X
b o
g
D
to
u
•vl
Table 2-8
Synopsis of Potential Federal Chemical-Specific ARARs for OU 2
Record of Decision
Potential Sources of Contamination 2, 3, 4, 41, 42, and 43
Operable Unit 2
Naval Air Station Jacksonville
Jacksonville, Rorida
Federal Standards and
Requirements
Occupational Safety and Health
Act (OSHA), Occupational
Health and Safety Regulations
[29 CFR Part 1910, Subpart Z]
Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA), Identifi-
cation and Listing of Hazardous
Wastes [40 CFR Part 261)
RCRA, Releases from Solid
Waste Management Units
[40 CFR Part 264, Subpart F]
Requirements Synopsis
Establishes permissible exposure limits for workplace exposure
to a specific listing of chemicals.
Defines those solid wastes subject to regulation as hazardous
wastes under 40 CFR Parts 262-265.
Establishes the requirements for solid waste management units
at RCRA-regulated temporary storage and disposal facilities.
The scope of the regulation encompasses groundwater protec-
tion standards (RCRA maximum contaminant levels), point of
compliance, compliance period, and requirements for ground-
water monitoring.
Consideration in the Remedial Response Process
Standards are applicable for worker exposure to OSHA hazardous
chemicals during remedial activities.
These requirements define RCRA-regulated wastes, thereby delineating
acceptable management approaches for listed and characteristically
hazardous wastes that should be incorporated into the characterization
and remediation elements of remedial response at PSC 42.
This rule is relevant and appropriate for Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act sites contaminated with RCRA
hazardous constituents, and potential applicable requirements for
groundwater remediation executed under the RCRA Corrective Action
Program. However, these requirements are not applicable to Superfund.
sites unless the action involves active placement in regulated units after
July 26, 1982.
Notes: ARAR = applicable or relevant and appropriate requirement.
OU = operable unit.
PSC = potential source of contamination.
CFR = Code of Federal Regulations.
-------
-------
REFERENCES
ABB Environmental Services, Inc. (ABB-ES). 1992. Remedial Investigation and
Feasibility Study Work Plan for Operable Unit 2, Nava' Air Station
Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida. Prepared for Southern Division. Naval
Facilities Engineering Command (SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM), North Charleston! South
Carolina (December).
ABB-ES. 1994a. Focused Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study, Potential
Sources of Contamination 2, 41, and 43 at Operable Unit 2, Naval Air
Station Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida. Prepared for SOUTHNAVFACE-
NGCOM, North Charleston, South Carolina (August).
ABB-ES. 1994b. Technical Memorandum for Preferred Remedial Alternative for
Potential Source of Contamination 2, Operable Unit 2, Naval Air Station
Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida. Prepared for SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM North
Charleston, South Carolina.
ABB-ES. 1994c. Interim Record of Decision for Potential Sources of Contamination
2, 41, and 43 at Operable Unit 2, Naval Air Station Jacksonville
Jacksonville, Florida. Prepared for SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM, North Charleston
South Carolina (September).
ABB-ES. 1995a. Focused Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study, Potential
Sources of Contamination 3 and 42 at Operable Unit 2, Naval Air Station
Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida. Prepared for SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM North
Charleston, South Carolina (April).
ABB-ES. 1995b. Interim Record of Decision for Potential Source of Contamination
42, Operable Unit 2, Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida
Prepared for SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM, North Charleston, South Carolina (June).
ABB-ES. 1995c. Solidification/Stabilization Bench-Scale Mix Design, Potential
Source of Contamination (PSC) 42 at Operable Unit 2, Naval Air Station
Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida. Prepared for SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM, North
Charleston, South Carolina (September).
ABB-ES. 1996. Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study, Operable Unit 1
Prepared for SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM, North Charleston, South Carolina (March).
ABB-ES. 1997a. Certification and Closure Report, Potential Source of Contamina-
tion 41, Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida. Prepared
for SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM, North Charleston, South Carolina (September).
ABB-ES. 1997b. Certification and Closure Report, Potential Source of Contamina-
tion 42, Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida. Prepared
for SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM, North Charleston, South Carolina (September).
ABB-ES. 1997c. Certification and Closure Report, Potential Source of Contamina-
tion 43, Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida. Prepared
for SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM, North Charleston, South Carolina (August)
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98 ReM
-------
REFERENCES (Continued)
ABB-ES. 1998a. Remedial Investigation. Operable Unit 2. Naval Ai- Stat'o-
Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida. Prepared for SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM North
Charleston, South Carolina (January).
ABB-ES. 1998b. Proposed Plan for Remedial Action, Naval Air Station Jackson-
ville, Operable Unit 2, Potential Sources of Contamination 2,3 £ 41 4?
and 43 Prepared for SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM, North Charleston, South Carolina
(April ) .
Bechtel Environmental, Inc. 1996. Completion .Report for PSC 2 Former Firefighter
Training Area, Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Florida
Prepared for SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM, North Charleston, South Carolina (August):
Florida Department of Environmental Protection. 1994. Resource Recovery and
Management: Bureau of Waste Management. Tallahassee, Florida.
Fred C Hart Associates, Inc. 1983. Initial. Assessment Study, Naval Air Station
Jacksonville, Florida. Prepared for Naval Energy and Environmental Support
Assess^nt and Control of Installation Pollutants Department
Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1983. Groundvater Monitoring Plan for RCRA Compliance
M fv ^ StCati0n- Jacksonville. Florida. Prepared for SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM
North Charleston, South Carolina (October).
Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1991. Wavy Installation Restoration Pro^ra^ Plan, Naval
Air Station, Jacksonville, Florida, Volume 1: Organization and Planning
Prepared for SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM, North Charleston, South Carolina (Septet
USEPA. 1989. Memorandum from Henry L. Longest II, Director, Office of Emergency
and Remedial Response, and Bruce Diamond, Director, Office of Waste
Programs Enforcement. Subject: "Interim Guidance on Establishing Soil Lead
Cleanup Levels at Superfund Sites." OSWER Directive 9355.4-02 Washington
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98
Ref-2
-------
APPENDIX A
RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY
-------
-------
Appendix A: Responsiveness Summary
Note: No comments were received during the public
comment period.
JAX-OU2.ROD
FGW.09.98
A-1
-------
a
-------
(!) S.2+3
S = gJ
kfc So
0) 0
0) O OS
CLJS > c
'H Q.OQ
0£.£o
e m
•n C 0) e
15 3-Ofc
Reproduced by NTIS
National Technical Information Service
Springfield, VA 22161
This report was printed specifically for your order
from nearly 3 million titles available in our collection.
For economy and efficiency, NTIS does not maintain stock of its vast
collection of technical reports. Rather, most documents are printed for
each order. Documents that are not in electronic format are reproduced
from master archival copies and are the best possible reproductions
available. If you have any questions concerning this document or any
order you have placed with NTIS, please call our Customer Service
Department at (703) 605-6050.
About NTIS
NTIS collects scientific, technical, engineering, and business related
information — then organizes, maintains, and disseminates that
information in a variety of formats — from microfiche to online services.
The NTIS collection of nearly 3 million titles includes reports describing
research conducted or sponsored by federal agencies and their
contractors; statistical and business information; U.S. military
publications; multimedia/training products; computer software and
electronic databases developed by federal agencies; training tools; and
technical reports prepared by research organizations worldwide.
Approximately 100,000 new titles are added and indexed into the NTIS
collection annually.
For more information about NTIS products and services, call NTIS
at 1-800-553-NTIS (6847) or (703) 605-6000 and request the free
NTIS Products Catalog, PR-827LPG, or visit the NTIS Web site
http://www.ntis.gov.
NTIS
Your indispensable resource for government-sponsored
information—U.S. and worldwide
-------
------- |