PB98-964010
EPA 541-R98-056
October 1998
EPA Superfund
Record of Decision:
Cecil Field Naval Air Station OU 5
Jacksonville, FL
8/4/1998
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
SITE 14, OPERABLE UNIT 5
NAVAL AIR STATION CECIL FIELD
JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA
UNIT IDENTIFICATION CODE: N60200
CONTRACT NO.: N62467-89-D-0317/090
JULY 1998
SOUTHERN DIVISION
NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND
NORTH CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA
29418
-------
v **. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
61 FORSYTH STREET. SW
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8909
2 8 1998
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
4WD-FFB
Commanding Officer
Attn.: David Porter
Base Environmental Coordinator
DON, Southern Division
Naval Facilities Engineering Command
Mail Code 18B2
P.O.Box 190010
North Charleston,
South Carolina 20419-9010
Subject: Naval Air Station Cecil Field, Jacksonville, Florida
Record of Decision for Operable Unit 5, site 14
Dear Mr. Porter:
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has received and reviewed the final Record
of Decision (ROD) for Operable Unit 5 (OU 5), site 14. EPA concurs with the Navy's decision
as set forth in the ROD dated July 1998. This concurrence is contingent with the understanding
that the selection of no further remedial action at this site is protective of human health and the
environment. Should new information indicate otherwise, the Navy is liable for any future
actions as required.
NAS Cecil Field was listed on the National Priorities List as Cecil Field Naval Air
Station in 1989. Prior to NPL listing and designation for closure, the Installation and
Restoration Program identified 18 sites as needing further investigation. These 18 sites were
grouped by usage and waste type to form eight operable units. OU 5 consists of sites 14 and 15,
which were both used for ordnance demolition. This Record of Decision addresses only site 14.
Site 14 is located in an area designated for forestry management and recreation per the NAS
Cecil Field Final Reuse Plan, dated February 1996. Development of groundwater resources and
construction of buildings at this location is not anticipated. The Remedial Investigation and
Risk Assessment for OU 5, site 14 identified no unacceptable risks for any media, therefore no
further action is being recommended at this time. However, any new information contradicting
this finding may require further investigation or remedial actions.
Recycled/Pecyclable • Printed with VegelaOle Oil Based Inks on 100% Recycled Paper (4O% Postconsurner)
-------
EPA appreciates the coordination efforts of NAS Cecil Field and the level of effort that
was put forth in the documents leading to this decision. EPA looks forward to continuing the
excellent working relationship with NAS Cecil Field and Southern Division Naval Facilities
Engineering Command as we move toward final cleanup of the NPL site. Should you have any
questions, or if EPA can be of any further assistance, please contact Ms. Deborah Vaughn-
Wright, of my staff, at the letterhead address or at (404) 562-8539.
Sincerely,
Richard D. Green
Director
Waste Management Division
cc: Mr. James Crane, FL DEP
Mr. Eric Nuzie, FL DEP
Mr. Michael Deliz, FL DEP
Mr. Mark Davidson, SOUTHDIV
-------
1.0 DECLARATION FOR THE RECORD OF DECISION
1.1 SITE NAME AND LOCATION. Site 14, Blue 5 Ordnance Disposal Area, is part of
Operable Unit (OU) 5 and is located in the north-central part of the Yellow Water
Weapons Area (YWWA) of Naval Air Station (NAS) Cecil Field, Jacksonville,
Florida. The site covers an area of approximately 19 acres. —
1.2 STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE. This Record of Decision (ROD) document
presents the selected remedial action for Site 14 (OU 5), which was chosen in
accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthor-
ization Act of 1986, and the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (40 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 300 [U.S. Environmental
ProtectionjAgency (USEPA), 1990]). This decision is based on the Administrative
Record for OU 5.
The USEPA and the State of Florida concur with the selected remedy.
1.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE SELECTED REMEDY. This ROD is the final action for Site
14 and is based on the results of the Remedial Investigation (RI) and Baseline
Risk Assessment (BRA) completed for OU 5. The selected remedy for Site 14 is No
Further Action. This remedy does not require any specific administrative on-site
actions, monitoring, or 5-year reviews to ensure there are no unacceptable
exposures to potential hazards posed by conditions at the site. This remedy is
consistent with the BRA conducted for conditions observed at the site. The
assessment concluded that there is no imminent threat to human health or the
environment.
1.4 STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS. The selected remedies are protective of human
health and the environment and are cost-effective. Although contaminants,
pathways, and receptors were identified to be present at Site 14, the risks
calculated for current or potential human and ecological receptors being exposed
to the soil and groundwater did (not exceed the USEPA acceptable risk criteria.
According to USEPA guidance, if no risk to human health or the environment is
identified, no further remedial action (including setting remedial action
objectives and conducting an engineering feasibility study [FSJ to evaluate
remedial alternatives) is warranted at the site to ensure protection of human
health and the environment.
1.5 SIGNATURE AND SUPPORT AGENCY ACCEPTANCE OF THE REMEDY.
David ! Porter, P.E. Date
Base Realignment and Closure
Environmental Coordinator
CEC-S14.ROO
FGW.07.98 1-1
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
SITE 14, OPERABLE UNIT 5
NAVAL AIR STATION CECIL FIELD
JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA
Unit Identification Code: N60200
Contract No. N62467-89-D-0317/090
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
Mark Davidson, Code 1879, Engineer-in-Charge
July 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-0317/090 are
complete and accurate and comply with all requirements of this contract.
DATE :
July 15. 1998
NAME AND TITLE OF CERTIFYING OFFICIAL:
Rao Angara
Task Order Manager
NAME AND TITLE OF CERTIFYING OFFICIAL:
Eric Blomberg, P.G.
Project Technical Lead
(DFAR 252.227-7036)
CEC-S14.ROD
FGW.07.98
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Record of Decision
Site 14. Operable Unit 5
Naval Air Station Cecil Field
Jacksonville, Rorida
Chapter Title Page No,
1.0 DECLARATION FOR 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 STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS 1-1
1.5 SIGNATURE AND SUPPORT AGENCY ACCEPTANCE OF THE REMEDY 1-1
2.0 DECISION SUMMARY 2-1
2.1 SITE NAME, LOCATION, AND DESCRIPTION 2-1
2.2 SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES 2-4
2.3 HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION 2-4
2.4 SCOPE AND ROLE OF OPERABLE UNIT 2-5
2.5 SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS 2-5
2.6 SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS 2-10
2.7 DESCRIPTION OF THE NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 2-22
2.8 DOCUMENTATION OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES 2-23
REFERENCES
Attachment A: Responsiveness Summary
CEC-S14.ROD
FGW.07.98
-------
LIST OP FIGURES
Record of Decision
Site 14, Operable Unit 5
Naval Air Station Cecil Field
Jacksonville, Florida
Figure Title Page No.
2-1 Location Map (FS Figure 1-1) 2-2
2-2 General Features (FS Figure 1-2) 2-3
2-3 Site 14, Surface Soil Screening Sample Locations 2-7
2-4 Site 14, Surface Soil Noncancer Risk Summary 2-17
2-5 Site 14, Groundwater Cancer Risk 2-18
2-6 Site 14, Groundwater Noncancer Risk Summary 2-19
2-7 Site 14, Surface Water Cancer Risk Summary 2-20
2-8 Site 14, Surface Water Noncancer Risk Summary 2-21
LIST OF TABLES
Table Title Page No.
2-1 Surface Soil Contaminants ' 2-8
2-2 Groundwater Contaminants 2-11
2-3 Surface Water Contaminants 2-13
2-4 Sediment Contaminants 2-15
2-5 Site 14 Risk Summary 2-16
CEC-S14.ROO
FGW.07.98
-------
GLOSSARY
ABB-ES
BEHP
bis
BRA
CERCLA
ELCR
ERA
FDEP
FS
FSWS
ft/day
ft/ft
K
NAS
NPL
OU
RAB
RI
ROD
SQAG
SVOC
TNB
TNT
TRPH
USEPA
USGS
VOC
YWWA
ABB Environmental Services, Inc.
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
below land surface
baseline risk assessment
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act
excess lifetime cancer risk
ecological risk assessment
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
feasibility study
Florida Class III surface water standards
feet per day
feet per foot
hydraulic conductivity
micrograms per liter
Naval Air Station
National Priority List
operable unit
Restoration Advisory Board
remedial investigation
Record of Decision
sediment quality assessment guideline
semivolatile organic compound
trinitrobenzene ,
trinitrotoluene
total recoverable petroleum hydrocarbons
U.S. Environmental' Protection Agency
U.S. Geological Survey
volatile organic compound
Yellow Weapons Water Area
CEC-S14.ROD
FGW.07.98
III
-------
1.0 DECLARATION FOR THE RECORD OF DECISION
1.1 SITE NAME AND LOCATION. Site 14, Blue 5 Ordnance Disposal Area, is part of
Operable Unit (OU) 5 and is located in the north-central part of the Yellow Water
Weapons Area (YWWA) of Naval Air Station (NAS) Cecil Field, Jacksonville,
Florida. The site covers an area of approximately 19 acres.
1.2 STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE. This Record of Decision (ROD) document
presents the selected remedial action for Site 14 (OU 5) , which was chosen in
accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthor-
ization Act of 1986, and the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (40 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 300 [U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA) , 1990]). This decision is based on the Administrative
Record for OU 5.
The USEPA and the State of Florida concur with the selected remedy.
1.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE SELECTED REMEDY. This ROD is the final action for Site
14 and is based on the results of the Remedial Investigation (RI) and Baseline
Risk Assessment (BRA) completed for OU 5. The selected remedy for Site 14 is No
Further Action. This remedy does not require any specific administrative on-site
actions, monitoring, or 5-year reviews to ensure there are no unacceptable
exposures to potential hazards posed by conditions at the site. This remedy is
consistent with the BRA conducted for conditions observed at the site. The
assessment concluded that there is no imminent threat to human health or the
environment.
1.4 STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS. The selected remedies are protective of human
health and the environment and are cost-effective. Although contaminants,
pathways, and receptors were identified to be present at Site 14, the risks
calculated for current or potential human and ecological receptors being exposed
to the soil and groundwater did not exceed the USEPA acceptable risk criteria.
According to USEPA guidance, if no risk to human health or the environment is
identified, no further remedial action (including setting remedial action
objectives and conducting an engineering feasibility study [FS] to evaluate
remedial alternatives) is warranted at the site to ensure protection of human
health and the environment.
1.5 SIGNATURE AND SUPPORT AGENCY ACCEPTANCE OF THE REMEDY.
David L. Porter, P.E. Date
Base Realignment and Closure
Environmental Coordinator
CEC-S14.ROD
FGW.07.98 1-1
-------
2.0 DECISION SUMMARY
2.1 SITE NAME. LOCATION. AND DESCRIPTION. NAS Cecil Field is located 14 miles
southwest of Jacksonville, Florida. The majority of Cecil Field is located
within Duval County; the southernmost part of the facility is located in northern
Clay County (Figure 2-1).
The area surrounding NAS Cecil Field is used primarily for forestry with some
light agriculture and ranching. Small communities and scattered dwellings are
in the vicinity of NAS Cecil Field; the closest abuts the western edge of the
facility. The closest incorporated municipality, Baldwin, is approximately 6.4
miles northwest of the main facility entrance.
To the east of NAS Cecil Field, the rural surroundings grade into a suburban
fringe bordering the major east-west roadways. Low commercial use, such as
convenience stores, and low density residential areas characterize the land use
(ABB Environmental Services, Inc. [ABB-ES], 199? [currently Harding Lawson
Associates]). A development called Villages of Argyle, when complete, is planned
to consist of seven separate villages or communities that will ultimately abut
NAS Cecil Field to the south and southeast. A golf course and residential area
also border NAS Cecil Field to the east (Southern Division, Naval Facilities
Engineering Command, 1989).
NAS Cecil Field was established in 1941 and provides facilities, services, and
material support for the operation and maintenance of naval weapons, aircraft,
and other units of the operation forces as designated by the Chief of Naval
Operations. Some of the tasks required to accomplish this mission over past
years included operation of fuel storage facilities, performance of aircraft
maintenance, maintenance and operation of engine repair facilities and test cells
for turbo-jet engines, and support of special weapons systems.
Site 14, which is part of OU 5, is located in the north-central portion of the
YWWA and covers an area of approximately 19 acres (Figure 2-2) . OU 5 is composed
of Site 14 and Site 15 (Blue 10 Ordnance Disposal Area).
The site was used as an ordnance disposal area from 1967 through 1977. Disposal
operations at this site consisted of detonation, which occurred approximately
once every 6 weeks. An ammunition bunker, located in the southeastern corner of
the site, was used for the temporary storage of materials to be detonated.
The types of ordnance disposed of included fuses, 100-pound bombs, large
munitions, and explosive materials that normally do not burn. Based on
interviews with explosive ordnance disposal personnel, typical explosives
detonated included trinitrotoluene (TNT), trinitrophenylmethylnitramine, and
cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine.
On the average, 300 to 450 pounds of explosive material were detonated each time.
Over the time period in which the site was utilized, it is estimated that 30,000
to 45,000 pounds of explosive material were detonated at the site.
There are no well-defined surface drainage patterns at Site 14. A small ditch,
which contained standing water during the on-site survey, borders portions of the
CEC-S14.HOD
FGW.07.98 2-1
-------
N
YELLOW WATER
WEAPONS AREA
vqm Site location
Drainage area
NOTE;
HAS = Naval Air Station
.75 1.5
SCALE: 1 INCH = 1.5 MILES APPROXIMATE
FIGURE 2-1
LOCATION MAP
K:\aU21\02Ml-07\ROON023UaM.OVXHP-POP 07/13/80 II: J7: 2«. AutoCAD HI«
RECORD OF DECISION
SITE 14, OPERABLE UNIT 5
NAVAL AIR STATION CECIL FIELD
JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA
CEC-S14.ROD
FGW.O7.98
2-2
-------
•n n
59
6"
CO
N
4
Source: Southern Division, Novgl Focilities Engineering Commond, 1964
LEGEND
-84-—— Topographic contours, contour interval: 2 feet
84.2 Topographic elevation in feet based on the
x National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929
PZ-5
CFUMW2S
Piezometer location and designation
Monitoring well location and designation
CF14SS5 Confirmatory surface soil sample location
A and designation
CFUSW/SOJ Confirmatory surface water and sediment
A location and designation
rv^N Tree line
-• fig." — Drainage ditch flow direction
125 250
SCALE: 1 INCH = 250 FEET
FIGURE 2-2
GENERAL FEATURES
RECORD OF DECISION
SITE 14, OPERABLE UNIT 5
NAVAL AIR STATION CECIL FIELD
JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA
-------
site on the southwest and northeast. Drainage probably ponds in the ditches on
site, with any off-site drainage entering scattered swampy areas near the site.
The site is predominantly a moist, open, grassy area, which through natural
succession is gradually developing a growth of pines. A dirt road borders the
site on the south. Planted pines occur along the eastern and northwestern
periphery of the site. The remainder of the surrounding area is a pine forest
with pockets of swamp forest in the low areas. There were no indications of
biological stress observed at the site (Envirodyne Engineers, 1985).
Site 14 is currently not used on a regular basis. During the base closure
process, if unexploded ordnance is located, it has been detonated at Site 14 in
recent years. Ordnance are placed in an explosives-lined hole and covered with
additional explosives and detonated. This technique of surrounding the ordnance
with explosives ensures destruction of the ordnance. The future use of Site 14,
as identified in the Base Reuse Plan, will be part of a managed forest.
2.2 SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES. NAS Cecil Field was placed on the
National Priority List (NPL) by the USEPA and the Office of Management and Budget
in December 1989. A Federal Facility Agreement for NAS Cecil Field was signed
by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), the USEPA, and the
Navy in 1990. Following the listing of NAS Cecil Field on the NPL and the
signing of the site management plan, remedial response activities at the facility
were conducted under CERCLA authority.
As stated in Section 2.1 of this ROD, Site 14 was used for ordnance detonation
activities from 1967 through 1977. Environmental investigations of Site 14 began
in 1985. The following reports describe the results of investigations at Site
14 to date:
Initial Assessment Study, NAS Cecil Field, Jacksonville, Florida
(Envirodyne Engineers, 1985)
RCRA Facility Investigation, NAS Cecil Field, Jacksonville, Florida
(Harding Lawson Associates, 1988)
Remedial Investigation, Operable Unit 5, Sites 14 and 15, Naval Air
Station Cecil field, Jacksonville, Florida (ABB-ES, 1997a)
Feasibility Study, Operable Unit 5, Naval Air Station Cecil Field,
Jacksonville, Florida (ABB-ES, 1997b)
Proposed Plan for Remedial Action, Naval Air Station Cecil Field, Site
24, Blue Ordnance Disposal Area, Operable Unit 5 (ABB-ES, 1998)
2.3 HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION. The results of the RI and the BRA
were presented to the NAS Cecil Field Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) (composed
of community members as well as of representatives from the Navy, and State and
Federal regulatory agencies).
The public was invited to an RAB meeting on February 17, 1998, for a briefing on
the results of the RI, the BRA, and the proposed plan, and to solicit comments
CEC-S14.ROD
FGW.07.98 2-4
-------
on Site 14 from the community. A 30-day comment period was held from May 1
through May 31, 1998. One comment was received during the public comment period
and is presented in the responsiveness summary in the attachment.
Public notices of the availability of the Proposed Plan were placed in the Metro
section of the Florida Times Union on May 5, 1998. The Proposed Plan and other
documents are available to the public at the Information Repository, Charles D.
Webb Wesconnett Branch of the Jacksonville Library, 6887 103rd Street,
Jacksonville, Florida.
2.4 SCOPE AND ROLE OF OPERABLE UNIT. As with many Superfund sites, environmen-
tal concerns at NAS Cecil Field are complex. As a result, work has been
organized into eight installation restoration OUs, along with more than 100 other
areas undergoing evaluation under the Base Realignment and Closure Program and
the State of Florida Petroleum Program.
Final RODs have been approved for OUs 1, 2, 3, 4, and 7. Final RIs, BRAs, and
FSs have been completed for OUs 5, 6, and 8. Interim RODs that addressed the
source areas of contamination were approved for OUs 2, 6, and 7. The other OUs
are in various stages of the RI/FS process.
Investigations at Site 14, the subject of this ROD, indicated the presence of
semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), total recoverable petroleum hydrocarbons
(TRPH), a pesticide, and inorganics in soil. In groundwater, one volatile
organic compound (VOC), a SVOC, and inorganics were detected. Surface water
contamination included VOCs , a pesticide, and inorganics. Sediment contamination
included SVOCs, TRPH, and inorganics. Many contaminants were detected in only
one sample, and most had concentrations below screening criteria. It should be
noted, as well, that the surface water was resampled and analyzed. Neither the
inorganics nor some of the SVOCs were detected in this second sampling of surface
water.
2.5 SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS.
Geology. The subsurface geologic materials recovered during monitoring well
installation activities at OU> 5 indicate that the sites are underlain by
undifferentiated, fine-grained sand. Lenses and stringers of silty or clayey
material were encountered intermittently. The stringers are generally less than
1 inch thick and are not continuous. Lithologic descriptions recorded during
monitoring well installation indicate that sand is present at each of the
monitoring well locations from land surface to total depth. Cross sections are
not presented because the maximum total monitoring well depth was 13 feet below
land surface (bis) and sand was the sole lithology described throughout that
interval in all monitoring well lithologic logs.
The lithologic log recorded during installation of the background monitoring well
CEFBK12DD, located approximately 4,000 feet west of Site 14, indicates that
Holocene and Pliocene sand is present from land surface to a depth of 66 feet
bis. Pliocene to Miocene sandy clay and dolomite are present from 66 feet to 81
feet bis. This unit, the proximate boundary between the surficial and
intermediate aquifers, is underlain by a thin layer of dolomite, representative
of the uppermost portions of the Miocene Hawthorn Group, from 81.feet to 83 feet
CEC-S14.ROO
FGW.07.98 2-5
-------
bis. Partially dolomitized sandy silt is present from 83 feet to 129 feet bis,
the total depth of the monitoring well.
Hvdrogeology. The surficial aquifer at Site 14 is composed predominantly of sand
from land surface to an approximate depth of 66 feet bis. The water table is
unconfined at Site 14 and may range between 1 and 4 feet bis during the year
depending upon rainfall events. The maximum total depth of the 3 monitoring
wells installed in the surficial aquifer at Site 14 is approximately 13 feet bis.
Sand was reported from land surface to total depth in each of the monitoring well
lithologic logs. Each monitoring well was screened across the water table in the
upper portion of the surficial aquifer.
Groundwater-level elevation measurements were recorded periodically for
piezometers and monitoring wells at Site 14. Review and evaluation of the water-
level elevation data collected from five piezometers installed at Site 14 support
the interpretation that Site 14 is located in the vicinity of a groundwater
divide. As a result, there is no predominant horizontal groundwater flow.
Instead, the groundwater flow direction can be radial with strong downward
gradient.
Slug tests were conducted on the Site 14 monitoring wells to estimate horizontal
hydraulic conductivity (K) . K values ranged from 8.8 feet per day (ft/day) to
9.5 ft/day for Site 14 monitoring wells, with an average K value of 9.2 ft/day.
Aquifer performance tests conducted at NAS Cecil Field by the U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) indicate that a K of 3 ft/day is a representative K value for the
surficial aquifer (USGS, 1996). Using the estimated value of 3 ft/day for K and
an estimated effective porosity of 0.20 (USGS, 1996), a hydraulic gradient of
0.00030 feet per foot (ft/ft) and 0.00064 ft/ft for Site 14, the seepage velocity
for Site 14 is estimated to range from 1.6 to 3.5 feet per year.
Contaminant Sources. At Site 14, the primary source of contamination would be
from the detonation activities that took place between 1967 and 1977. The types
of ordnance disposed included fuses, 100-pound bombs, large munitions, and
explosive materials that normally do not burn. Explosives (nitroaromatics)
detonated at the site included TNT, trinitrophenylmethylnitramine (tetryl), and
cyclotrimethylenenitramine. Ordnance detonation generates residual metals,
primarily aluminum and lead oxides and minor amounts of unreacted or partially
reacted organics.
Surface Soil. An extensive field screening program for TNT and VOCs was
conducted for surface soil at the site. Sample locations are presented in Figure
2-3. TNT was detected in 14 of 102 samples, at concentrations ranging from 1.0
to 2.9 milligrams per kilogram. The results indicate that TNT is sporadically
distributed at low concentrations that pose no explosive or biological hazard
over the area of investigation. No VOCs were detected in the 24 surface soil
samples collected for field screening purposes.
A subsequent confirmatory sampling program conducted for surface soil at Site 14
indicated the presence of three SVOCs (di-n-butylphthalate, butylbenzylphthalate,
and bis[2-ethylhexyl]phthalate [BEHPJ), a pesticide (endosulfan II), and several
inorganic chemicals. However, the concentrations of these chemicals were below
the Florida soil cleanup goals for residential areas (Table 2-1).
CEC-S14.ROD
FGW.O7.98 2-6
-------
lEGEMD
Surlou uS screening sampl* location and
dMlgnatio*
Trw (in*
"IT- Qrainagi ditch flow dirtction
sc«t£: i INCH i no rcn
FIGURE 2-3
SURFACE SOI SCREENS SAUPU LOCATIONS
RECORD OF DECISION
SHE W, OPERABLE (NT 9
NAVAL AM STATION CECt FB0
UCKSONVUE, aOROA
; i INCH • no ITCT
-------
.-• *.
o
N)
00
Table 2-1
Surface Soil Contaminants
Rflnc
Frequency Range of ^ °
Analyte of Reporting r
Detection1 Limits ,° C€
tions
Semivolatie Organic Compounds (mg/kg)
Record of Decision
Site 14, Operable Unit 5
Naval Air Station Cecil Field
Jacksonville, Florida
o of Mean of
*ed Detected Background Rjsk-Based
(7 CZ?*' Concentrations' Concentrations'
Butylbenzylphthalate 3/7 0.395 to 0.59 0.049 to 1.7 0.69 NA 1,600
Di-n-butylphthalate 7/7 NA 2.9 to
9.0 6.0 ' NA 780
bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate 3/7 0.395 to 0.59 0.056 to 1.3 0.49 NA 46
Pesticides and PCS* (mg/kg)
Endosulfanll 1/7 4 to 6 0.0006 0.0006 NA '47
Inorganic Analvtn (mg/kg)
Aluminum 7/7 NA <85* to
8,510 2,770 4,432 7,800
Barium 7/7 NA 1 to 5.1 3 14.4 550
Chromium 7/7 NA 0.59* to 7.9 2.8 7.8 '39
Copper 5/7 5 . 0.91* to 163 36 6.0 310
Iron 7/7 NA 79.9* to
2,480 510 1,486 2,300
Lead 5/7 0.6 2 to 7.4 4 197 I0400
Magnesium 2/7 i ,000 38.9 to
83.7 61.3 328 460,468
Manganese 4/7 3 0.71* to 2 1 22 180
Nickel 1/7 8 1.3 1.3 3.9 160
Potassium 3/7 1,000 13.5 to
Vanadium 7/7 NA 1.3 to
Total Recoverable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TRPH) Img/kg)
TRPH 7/7 NA 26 to
41.1 23.5 102 1,000,000
9.1 2.8 6.3 55
93 44 NA NSC
Florida Soil
Cleanup
Goals'
15,000
7,300
48
'390
75,000
5,200
'290
NSC
NSC
500
NSC
370
1,500
NSC
490
"380
Analyte
HHCPC7
(Yes/No)
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Reason7
S,G
S,G
S,G
S,G
B.S.G
S.G
S
B,S,G
B,S
B.S.G
S.G
S
S,G
G
See notes at end of table.
-------
•" r>
O m
59
Table 2-1 (Continued)
Surface Soil Contaminants
Record of Decision
Site 14, Operable Unit 5
Naval Air Station Cecil Field
Jacksonville, Rorida
ro
(b
' Frequency of detection is the number of samples in which the analyte was detected over the total number of samples analyzed (excluding rejected values).
1 The value indicated by an asterisk is the average of a sample and its duplicate. For duplicate samples having one nondetect value, one-half of the contract-required
quantification limit/contract-required detection limit is used as a surrogate concentration for results reported as nondetect.
1 The mean of detected concentrations is the arithmetic mean of all samples In which the analyte was detected. It does not include those samples with "R," "U," or "UJ"
validation qualifiers.
' The background screening concentrations are from the NAS Cecil Field inorganic background data set.
* For all chemicals except the essential nutrients (calcium, magnesium, potassium, and sodium), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Region III Risk-Based
Concentration (RBC) table for residential surface soil exposure per January 1993 guidance (USEPA, 1993) describes the process for screening. Actual values are taken from
the USEPA Region III RBC Table dated May 1996 (USEPA, 1996a), which are based on an excess lifetime cancer risk of 10'' and an adjusted hazard quotient of 0.1. For the
essential nutrients, screening values were derived based on recommended daily allowances (see Appendix B-1 of the General Information Report [ABB-ES, 1996]).
• Values are from Rorida Department of Environmenfal Protection's (FDEP's) memoranda titled, "Soil Cleanup Goals for Rorida" dated September 29, 1995 (FDEP, 1995), and
"Applicability of Soil Cleanup Goals for Florida" dated January 19, 1996 (FDEP, 1996). Note that they are also residential values.
7 Analyte was included or excluded from the risk assessment for the following reasons:
B « the maximum detected concentration did not exceed twice the arithmetic mean of detected concentrations at background locations and will not be considered
further.
S = the maximum detected concentration did not exceed the risk-based screening concentration and will not be considered further.
G = the maximum detected concentration did not exceed the Rorida guidance concentration and will not be considered further.
' The value is based on a mixture of endosulfan isomers.
' The value is based on hexavalent chromium.
10 The value for lead Is based on the USEPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, "Revised Interim Soil Lead Guidance for CERCLA Sites and RCRA Corrective
Action Facilities" (USEPA, 1994) and assumes residential land use.
" The screening value is from FDEP's "Development of Risk-Based Soil Cleanup Target Levels," Chapter 62-770, Rorida Administrative Code, February 1997 (FDEP, 1997).
Notes: The average of a sample and its duplicate is used for all table calculations.
Sample locations: CF14SS1, CF14SS2, CF14SS3, CF14SS4, CF14SS5, CF14SS6, CF14SS7.
Duplicate sample locations: CF14SS1D.
Background sample locations: CFBSS16, CFBSS17, CFBSS18, CFBSS19, CFBSS20, CFBSS21, CEFBSS9.
* •> see footnote 2.
HHCPC = human health chemical of potential concern.
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram.
NA = not applicable.
PCB = polychlorinated biphenyt.
NO = not detected in background.
NSC = no screening concentration available.
R = rejected.
U = not detected.
UJ = not detected.
-------
Groundwater. One VOC (toluene), one nitroaromatic (1,3,5-trinitrobenzene [TNB]),
and several inorganic chemicals were detected in groundwater samples (Table 2-2).
The concentrations of toluene, TNB, and beryllium were below Florida drinking
water standards and Florida groundwater guidance concentrations. Thallium was
detected in one of three groundwater samples and was not detected in its
associated duplicate sample. The concentration of thallium detected in this one
sample, 3 micrograms per liter (^g/-?) , was slightly higher than its regulatory
value of 2 ng/£. The concentrations of iron, aluminum, and manganese slightly
exceeded the Florida secondary drinking water standards. However, the concentra-
tions of aluminum, beryllium, iron, manganese, and thallium were below the NAS
Cecil Field inorganic background concentrations.
Surface Water. One VOC (acetone), one SVOC (BEHP), one pesticide (endrin), and
several inorganic compounds were detected in surface water samples from the site
(Table 2-3). Acetone was detected in similar concentrations in trip blanks and
does not appear to be associated with ordnance disposal activities at the site.
BEHP, a common laboratory contaminant, was detected in three out of four samples
at a maximum concentration of 43 j*g/i. Endrin was detected in only one of four
samples, at a concentration only slightly exceeding the Florida Class III surface
water quality standards (FSWS). Three inorganic chemicals (aluminum, beryllium,
and zinc) were detected at concentrations greater than FSWS or other screening
criteria. However, aluminum and beryllium were below the NAS Cecil Field
inorganic background concentrations.
Sediment. Two VOCs (acetone and 2-butanone), several SVOCs, and several
inorganics were detected in sediment samples collected from the drainage ditches
surrounding the site (Table 2-4). Only some detections of acenaphthalene and
BEHP exceeded the Florida sediment quality assessment guideline (SQAG) threshold
effect level, but the concentrations did not exceed the SQAG probable effect
level.
2.6 SUMMARY OF SITE RJSKS. The BRA provides the basis for taking action and
indicates the exposure pathways that need to be addressed by remedial action.
It serves as the baseline indicating what risks could exist if no action were
taken at the site. This section of the ROD reports the results of the BRA
conducted for Site 14. Potential ecological and human health risks were
identified for chemicals detected in surface soil, groundwater, and surface water
at Site 14. However, for current and future planned usage (as a managed forest),
risk levels fall within or below the USEPA acceptable cancer risk range of 10"*
to 10~6 and below the noncancer hazard index of 1 (with the exception of the
adult and child noncancer hazard indices for the ingestion of groundwater). Risk
levels for exposure to groundwater (cancer and noncancer risk for future land
use) and surface water (cancer risk for current and future land use) exceeded
FDEP's acceptable cancer risk of 10"6 and noncancer hazard index of 1.
Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) . The purpose of the HHRA was to characterize
the risks associated with the possible exposures to site-related contaminants for
human receptors. Potential health risks were evaluated under current and assumed
future land-use conditions. Results from the Site 14 HHRA are presented in Table
2-5, Figures 2-4 through 2-8, and summarized below.
Surface Soil. Risks to human health, for all receptors, fall below the USEPA's
and FDEP's acceptable risk for both current and future land use.
CEC-S14.ROO
FGW.07.98 2-10
-------
6"
' o
o
N>
Table 2-2
Groundwater Contaminants
Record of Decision
Site 14, Operable Unit 5
Naval Air Station Cecil Reid
Jacksonville, Florida
Analyte
Frequency
of
Detection'
Range of
Reporting
Limits
Range of
Detected Me
Concentrations)*)*
Background
an1 Screening
Concentrations4
Risk-Based
Concentrations'
Rorlda Guidance
Concentrations'
Analyte
HHCPC7
(Yes/No)
Reason7
Volatile Organic Compound* (j/g/J)
Toluene
Explo»lvM (j/a/l)
1 ,3.5-Trinltrobenzene
1/3
1/3
1 to 2
0.2 to 0.26
9
1.6»
9 NA
1.6 NA
75
0.18
40
50
No
Yes
S.G
Inorganic Analytn (j/g/l)
Aluminum
Barium
Beryllium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Nickel
Potassium
Sodium
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
2/3
3/3
2/3
3/3
2/3
1/3
3/3
3/3
3/3
1/3
3/3
3/3
V3
2/3
1/3
200
200
5
5,000
10
50
100
5,000
15
40
5,000
5,000
10
50
20
578 to 7,230' 3,900 13,102
7.6 to 23.2 16.6 88.2
2.1 to 3.35*
2.7 3.5
230 to 3,870 1,890 81,075
2.1 to 6.9*
4.5 18
13.7* 13.7 12.8
786 to 4,960 2,850 7,760
477 to 1,180 820 10,000
21* to 84.2 51 96
11.8* 11.8 25
252(01,510 800 4,330
6,720* to 10,500 8,510 16,500
5.5*
2.6 to 9.1
5.5 13.3
5.9 20.2
34.5* 34.5 76.8
3,700
260
0.016
1,100,000
'18
220
1,100
119,000
84
73
300,000
39,000
0.29
26
1,100
200
2,000
4
NSC
'100
NSC
300
NSC
50
100
NSC
160,000
2
49
5,000
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
S,G,B
S
S,G,B
S
S,B
S.G.B
S,B
S.G
S.G.B
S.G.B
See notes at end of table.
-------
Table 2-2 (Continued)
Groundwater Contaminants
ro
Record of Decision
Site 14, Operable Unit 5
Naval Air Station Cecil Reid
Jacksonville, Rorida
' Frequency of detection is the number of samples in which the analyte was detected over the total number of samples analyzed (excluding rejected values).
1 The value indicated by an asterisk is the average of a sample and its duplicate. For duplicate samples having one nondetect value, 1/2 the contract-required quantitation
limit/contract-required detection limit is used as a surrogate.
1 The mean of detected concentration is the arithmetic mean in which the analyte was detected. H does not include those samples with "R," "U," or "UJ" validation qualifiers.
4 The background screening concentrations are from the MAS Cecil Field inorganic background data set.
' For all chemicals except the essential nutrients (calcium, magnesium, potassium, and sodium), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Region III Risk-Based
Concentration (RBC) table for tap water exposure per January 1993 guidance (USEPA, 1993) describes the process for screening. Actual values are taken from the USEPA
Region III RBC Table dated May 1996 (USEPA, I996a), which are based on an excess lifetime cancer risk of 10"° and an adjusted hazard quotient of 0.1. For the essential
nutrients, screening values were derived based on recommended daily allowances (see Appendix B-1 of the General Information Report [ABB-ES, 1996]).
' The values are from Rorida Department of Environmental Protection's (FDEP's) "Groundwater Guidance Concentrations" dated June 1994 (FDEP, 1994a).
7 Analyte was Included or excluded from, the risk assessment for the following reasons:
B = the maximum detected concentration did not exceed twice the arithmetic mean of detected concentrations at background locations and will not be considered
further.
S = the maximum detected concentration did not exceed risk-based screening concentration and will not be considered further.
G = the maximum detected concentration did not exceed Rorida guidance concentration and will not be considered further.
' The value Is based on hexavalent chromium.
9 The value is based on trivalent chromium.
Notes: The average of a sample and its duplicates is used for all table calculations.
Sample locations: CF14MW1S through CF14MW3S
Duplicate sample locations: CF14MW3SD
Background sample locations: CFBKMW1S through CFBKMW5S. CFBKMW7S. and CFBKMW8S. Duplicate at CFBKMW4SD.
* = see footnote 2.
HHCPC = human health chemical of potential concern.
fjg/t = micrograms per liter.
NA = not applicable.
NSC = no screening concentration available.
ND « not detected in background.
R = rejected.
U = not detected.
UJ = not detected.
-------
:§
D
Table 2-3
Surface Water Contaminants
Record of Decision
Site 14, Operable Unit 5
Naval Air Station Cecil Field
Jacksonville, Rorida
Chemical
Frequency
of
Detection'
Range of
Reporting
limits
Range of
Detected
Concentrations!*)2
Mean of
Detected
Concentrations3
Background
Screening
Concentrations*
Region IV
Water
Quality
Standards'
Florida
Class III
Surface
Water
Quality
Standards'
Analyte
HHCPC?
(Yes/No)
Reason7
Volatile Organic Compound* (pg//)
Acetone 1/4
SamivoUtie Organic Compounds
b»(2.Ethylbexy»)phth*l«t« 3/4 10 2 to 43
Pe»ticid«« and PCB* (//g/l)
Endrin 1/4 0.1 0.0063
lnorg«ntc Analvtaa (fiyll)
M Aluminum 4/4 NA 254 to 634
Barium 4/4 NA 6.7* to 12.9
Beryllium 1/4 5 2.16
Calcium 4/4 NA 1,050* to 11,000
Copper 3/4 25 5.7 to 10.2
Iron 4/4 NA 158 to 658
Magnesium 4/4 NA 553* to 1,040
Manganese 4/4 NA 7.7 to 44.1
Nickel 1/4 40 3.3
Potassium 3/4 5,000 64.6 to 141
Sodium 4/4 NA 2,290* to 4,080
Vanadium 2/4 50 2.1 to 2.5
Zinc 1/4 20 90.3
16
0.0063
434
9.7
2
3,900
7.9
432
840
18.5
3.3
104
3,160
2.3
90.3
NA
NA
NA
1,040
43.7
2.2
43,000
7.4
3,030
5,580
49.3
20
2,060
12,180
4.5
51.4
NS
1.8
0.76
200
2,000
4
1,055,398
1,300
300
118,807
50
610
297,010
396,022
NS
5,000
NS
0.0023
NS
NS
0.13
NS
'500
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
'1.0
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
R
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
R
R
See notes at end of table.
-------
Table 2-3 (Continued)
Surface Water Contaminants
Record of Decision
Site 14, Operable Unit 5
Naval Air Station Cecil Reid
Jacksonville, Rorida
1 Frequency ol detection is the number of samples In which the analyte was detected over the total number of samples analyzed (excluding rejected values).
1A value indicated by an asterisk is the average of a sample and its duplicate. For duplicate samples having one nondetect value, 1/2 the contract-required quantitation
limit/contract-required detection limit is used as a surrogate.
1 The mean of detected concentrations is the arithmetic mean of all samples in which the analyte was detected. It does not include those samples with "R," "U," or "UJ"
validation qualifiers.
4 Background screening concentrations are from the NAS Cecil Field inorganic background data set.
* The value is from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Region IV Water Quality Standards, dated January 1996 (USEPA, 1996b). For essential nutrients (calcium,
magnesium, potassium, and sodium), the water quality values were derived based on recommended daily allowances.
8 The values are from Rorida Administrative Code (FAC), Chapter 62-302, for Class III freshwater bodies (for recreational use) dated January 1, 1995 (FAC, 1995). Only values
protective of human health were used for screening.,
7 Analyte was Included or excluded from'the risk assessment for the following reasons:
S * the maximum detected concentration did not exceed the Region IV Water Quality Standard and will not be considered further.
R = no screening value is available; analyte is selected as HHCPC.
' The surface water quality for this inorganic is hardness dependent.
Notes: The average of a sample and its duplicate is used for all table calculations.
Sample locations: CF14SW1, CF14SW2, CF14SW3, CF14SW4
Duplicate sample locations: CF14SW3SD
Bold <* compound was detected at concentrations that exceeded all screening criteria.
a
* = see footnote 2.
HHCPC = human health chemical of potential concern.
fjg/l = micrograms per liter.
NA = not applicable.
NS » no standard available.
PCB = polychlorinated biphenyl.
R = rejected.
U = not detected.
UJ = not detected.
-------
Table 2-4
Sediment Contaminants
Record of Decision
Site 14, Operable Unit 5
Naval Air Station Cecil
Reid
Jacksonville, Florida
Analytical Freqoufency
Parameter oMon*
Volatile Organic Compounds (ma/kq)
Acetone 4/4
2-Butanone 1/4
Semivolatie Organic ComDOimds (ma/ka)
Phenol 1/4
1,4-Dtchlorobenzene 1/4
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 1 /4
Acenaphthalerm 1/4
Diethylphthalate 3/4
Dimethylphthalate 1/4
Divj-butylphthalate 4/4
Butylbenzylphthalate 2/4
bM(2-Ethythexyt)phlhalate 2/4
Pyrene 1/4
Total Recoverable Petroleum Hydrocarbon*
TRPH 1/4
Inorganic Analvtes (ma/ka)
Aluminum 4/4
Barium 4/4
Chromium 4/4
Copper 4/4
Iron 4/4
Magnesium 1/4
Manganese 4/4
Nickel 1/4
Potassium 1/4
Vanadium 4/4
Range of
Lower Reporting
Limits
0.012 to 0.014
0.012 to 0.014
0.4 to 0.45
0.4 to 0.45
0.4 to 0.45
0.4 to 0.45
0.4 to 0.45
0.4 to 0.45
0.8 to 0.90
0.4 to 0.45
0.4 to 0.45
0.4 to 0.45
(TRPH) (ma/ka)
12 to 14
40
40
2
5
20
1,000
3
, 8
1,000
10
Range of
Detected
Concentrations
0.005 J to J0.0075 J
^.002 J
0.054 J
0.034 J
0.03 J
0.023 J
0.073 J to 2.4
30.02 J
41.9to*3.5
*0.065 J to 1.3
*0.015 J to 2.1
0.029 J
16 J
31 5 to 2,560
*0.86 to 3.1
0.69 to 3.1
0.80 to 0.94
85.9 to 444
57
0.48 to 2.4
1
20.3
0.53 to 2.4
FDEP
TEL
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
0.00671
NC
NC
NC
NC
0.182
0.153
NC
NC
NC
52.3
18.7
NC
NC
NC
15.9
NC
NC
SQAG2
PEL
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
0.0889
NC
NC
NC
NC
2.647
1.348
NC
NC
NC
160
108
NC
NC
NC
42.8
NC
NC
' Frequency of detection is the number of samples in which the compound was detected over the total number of
samples analyzed (CF14SD1, CF14SD2, CF14SD3. and CF14SD4, including a duplicate at CF14SD3).
1 FDEP. Approach to the Assessment of Sediment Quality in Florida Coastal Waters, November 1994 (FDEP, 1994b).
3 Average of sample and duplicate.
' Concentration values are from diluted samples.
Notes: Bold indicates parameter was detected at a concentration greater than SQAG-TEL guideline values.
FDEP = Rorida Department of Environmental Protection.
SQAG = sediment quality assessment guidelines.
TEL = threshold effect level.
PEL = probable effect level.
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram.
J - estimated concentration.
NC = no criteria available.
CEC-SM.ROD
FGW.07.98
2-15
-------
59
r\>
55
Table 2-5
Site 14 Risk Summary
Record of Decision
Site 14. Operable Unit 5
Naval Air Station Cecil Field
Jacksonville, Florida
Surface Soil G
, Fut
HI
Total Adult Trespasser 0.008 0.008
Total Adolescent Trespasser 0.01 0.01
Total Risk to Trespasser - -
Total Site Maintenance Worker 0.004 0.004
Total Excavation Worker 0.01 0.01
Total Occupational Worker - 0.02
Total Adult Resident - 0.07 2
Total Child Resident - 0.3 5
roundwater Surface Water
ure Land Use Current Land Use Future Land Use
| ELCR HI ELCR HI ELCR
0.02 8x10* 0.02 8x10""
0.02 5x10'e 0.02 5x10"*
NC 1x10'8 NC 1x10-8
_____
_____
_
1x10^ - - 0.04 2x10'
6x10' - - 0.08 1x10'
Total Risk to Resident - - NC 2X10"4 NC NC NC 3x10's
' No carcinogenic human health chemicals of potential concern were selected; therefore, ELCR was not calculated.
Notes: HI = hazard index.
ELCR = excess lifetime cancer risk.
NC = not calculated.
- = not analyzed.
-------
•" o
IP
62
.-" »
si
to
0.01
0.001
MOIL
USEPA * U.S. Environmentil Protection Agtncy
U8EPA
TtvwMd
Receptor
FIGURE 24
SURFACE SOIL NONCANCER RISK SUMMARY
RECORD OF DECISION
SITE 14, OPERABLE UNIT 5
NAVAL AIR STATION CECIL FIELD
JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA
H \HSWNCLDCECmflGJ4 PMS. STE1OXLS0713MIIH
-------
•n o
a m
$9
bi2
.-J A
10 '-a
to
CD
0.01
0.001
0.0001
s.
•3 0.00001
B>
w
o
J2
tr
«
o
o
UJ
0.000001
0.0000001
USEPA
Aoocptibto
• Rbk
R*ng*
Total Resident
Receptor
NOIL
USEPA = U.S. Environmtntil Protection Agency
FIGURE 2-5
GROUNDWATER CANCER RISK
RECORD OF DECISION
SITE H, OPERABLE UNIT 5
NAVAL AIR STATION CECIL FIELD
JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA
H WSWINGLBCECIHFK3J.5 PM5. SITH142 XLS 071398h»«
-------
6 2
O
o
ro
co
10
x
•o
0.1
0.01
0.001
MOTE;
USEPA«U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Adult Resident
Receptor
FIGURE 24
GROUNDWATER NONCANCER RISK SUMMARY
Child Resident
RECORD OF DECISION
SITE 14, OPERABLE UNIT 5
NAVAL AIR STATION CECIL FIELD
JACKSONVILLE, RORIDA
H \HSWINOLBCECIL\f K32-« PM5. STTE142.XLS 071388DM
-------
O m
59
s§
ro
o
0
O
5
0.01
0.001
0.0001
o
U 0.00001 H
01
0)
o
UJ
0.000001
0.0000001
Total Trespasser
Receptor
MOIL
USEPA = U.S. Environmentil Protection Agency
FIGURE 2-7
SURFACE WATER CANCER RISK SUMMARY
USEPA
Aco.fX.bt.
" Rtok
Rang*
Total Resident
RECORD OF DECISION
SITE 14, OPERABLE UNIT 5
NAVAL AIR STATION CECIL FIELD
JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA
H \HSWINGLE\CECIHFIG2-7 PM5. SITE142 XLS 07139«*iit
-------
ro
0.001
0.01
Adult Trespasser Adolescent Trespasser Adult Resident Child Resident
Receptor
USEPA - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FIGURE 2-8
SURFACE WATER NONCANCER RISK SUMMARY
USEPA
ThrtihoM
DCuiranl Ri»k
• Future Rnk
RECORD OF DECISION
SITE 14, OPERABLE UNIT 5
NAVAL AIR STATION CECIL FIELD
JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA
H \HSWINGLBCECIL\FIG2-8 PMS. SITE142 XLS 0713B8hn
-------
Groundwater. Based on the future use scenario, an excess lifetime cancer risk
(ELCR) of 2 in 10,000 (2x10**) was identified due to the presence of beryllium
and a noncancer hazard index of 2 (adult resident) and 5 (child resident) were
identified due to the presence of thallium (these scenarios are based on the use
of groundwater from the shallow surficial aquifer as drinking water). These
risks exceed USEPA and FDEP risk criteria. However, the beryllium concentrations
in groundwater at Site 14 are less than the State and Federal screening criteria
and are below the NAS Cecil Field background concentrations. Thallium, a
naturally occurring element, posed a potential noncancerous hazard to humans.
However, the concentration of thallium in groundwater was below the NAS Cecil
Field inorganic background concentration. ;
Other contributors to noncancer risk from exposure to groundwater come from iron
and aluminum. These concentrations, however, were also below the NAS Cecil Field
background values for groundwater.
Surface Water. Risks to all human receptors fall within the USEPA's acceptable
risk range for both current and future land use, but exceeded the FDEP target
risk of IxlO"6. The current ELCR associated with surface water (ingestion or
dermal contact) is IxlO'5 for an aggregate (combined adult and child) trespasser.
The future risk associated with surface water (ingestion or dermal contact) is
3xlO~5 for an aggregate (combined adult and child) resident. The major
contributors to this risk are BEHP and beryllium. The site trespasser scenario
considers a population that utilizes the surface water for activities such as
fishing, wading, or swimming. Surface water occurs in the ditches at Site 14 and
low areas on the site property. These areas do not contain water year round and
would not be able to support any sport fishing or other recreational use, such
as swimming or wading. The surface water does pose a risk to human health at
Site 14, but the exposure to humans is unlikely due to the small amounts of
surface water actually at the site and the minimal human activity at this site.
Additionally, the chemicals (BEHP and beryllium) that pose a risk in surface
water were not detected in a follow-up sampling event. These supplemental data
were not included in the risk assessment. Therefore, the actual risk may be
overestimated.
Ecological Risk Assessment (ERA). The purpose of the ERA was to characterize the
risks associated with the potential exposures to site-related contaminants at
Site 14 for ecological receptors. Potential risks were evaluated for selected
contaminants at the site. Results from the ERA indicated that the potential for
ecological risk is minimal to nonexistent.
2.7 DESCRIPTION OF THE NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE. Based on the risk assessment, no
unacceptable human health or ecological risks were identified at Site 14, OU 5.
Therefore, no action is needed and no other remedial alternatives were
considered.
Under the No Action alternative, no treatment will be performed. According to
the CERCLA regulations, Section 121, if no action is the preferred action, no
applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements apply to the site.
Because Site 14, OU 5 , poses no unacceptable risk and the No Action alternative
is warranted, it does satisfy the CERCLA criteria. The No Action alternative is
intended to be the final action. This solution is meant to be permanent and
CEC-S14.ROD
FGW0798 2-22
-------
effective in both the long and short term. The No Further Action decision is the
least-cost option with no capital, operating, or monitoring costs and is
protective of human health and the environment.
2.8 DOCUMENTATION OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES. No significant changes have been made
to this decision for No Further Action at Site 14, OU 5.
CEC-S14.ROD
FGW.07.98 2-23
-------
REFERENCES
ABB Environmental Services, Inc. (ABB-ES). 1992. Technical Memorandum for
Supplemental Sampling, Operable Units 1, 2, and 7, Naval Air Station Cecil
Field, Jacksonville, Florida. Prepared for Department of the Navy, Southern
Division, Naval Facilities Engineering Command (SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM) , North
Charleston, South Carolina.
ABB-ES. 1996. Draft General Information Report for NAS Cecil Field, Jackson-
ville, Florida. Prepared for Department of the Navy, SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM,
North Charleston, South Carolina.
ABB-ES. 1997a. Remedial Investigation, Operable Unit 5, Sites 14 and 15, Naval
Air Station Cecil Field, Jacksonville, Florida. Prepared for Department of
the Navy, SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM, North Charleston, South Carolina (October).
ABB-ES. 1997b. Feasibility Study, Operable Unit 5, Naval Air Station Cecil
Field, Jacksonville, Florida. Prepared for Department of the Navy,
SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM, North Charleston, South Carolina (November).
ABB-ES. 1998. Proposed Plan for Remedial Action, Naval Air Station Cecil Field,
Site 14, Blue Ordnance Disposal Area, Operable Unit 5. Prepared for
Department of the Navy, SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM, North Charleston, South Carolina
(April).
Envirodyne Engineers. 1985. Initial Assessment Study, NAS Cecil Field,
Jacksonville, Florida. Prepared for Department of the Navy, SOUTHNAVFAC-
ENGCOM, North Charleston, South Carolina.
Florida Administrative Code. 1995. Chapter 62-302. Tallahassee, Florida
(January).
Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). 1994a. "Groundwater
Guidance Concentrations." (June).
FDEP. 1994b. Approach to the Assessment of Sediment Quality in Florida Coastal
Waters. McDonald Environmental Services. Ltd. Ladysmith, British Columbia
(November).
FDEP. 1995. Memorandum: "Soil Cleanup Goals for Florida." Tallahassee, Florida
(September 29).
FDEP. 1996. Memorandum: "Applicability of Soil Cleanup Goals for Florida."
Tallahassee, Florida (January 19).
FDEP. 1997. "Development of Risk-Based Soil Cleanup Target Levels." Chapter 62-
770, Florida Administrative Code. Tallahassee, Florida (February).
Harding Lawson Associates. 1988. RCRA Facility Investigation, NAS Cecil Field,
Jacksonville, Florida. Prepared for Department of the Navy, SOUTHNAVFAC-
ENGCOM, North Charleston, South Carolina.
CEC-S14.ROD
FGW.O7.98 Ref-1
-------
REFERENCES (Continued)
Southern Division, Naval Facilities Engineering Command. 1989. NAS Cecil Field
Master Plan. (November).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1990. National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan, Final Rule. 40 Code of Federal
Regulation, Part 300. Federal Register, 55(46):8718. (March 8, 1990).
USEPA. 1993. Region III Risk-Based Concentration Table for residential surface
soil per January 1993 guidance, "Selecting Exposure Routes and Contaminants
of Concern by Risk-Based Screening," EPA/903/R-93-001.
USEPA. 1994. "Revised Interim Soil Lead Guidance for CERCLA Sites and RCRA
Corrective Action Facilities." Directive No. 9335.4-12. Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response. Washington, D.C.
USEPA. 1996a. Region III Risk-Based Concentration Table. USEPA Region III.
(May 30).
USEPA. 1996b. Region IV Water Quality Standards. Atlanta, Georgia (January).
U.S. Geological Survey. 1996. "Ground-Water Flow in the Surficial Aquifer System
and Potential Movement of Contaminants from Selected Water-Disposal Sites
at Cecil Field Naval Air Station, Jacksonville, Florida." Administrative
release.
CEC-S14.ROD
FGW.07.98 Ref-2
-------
ATTACHMENT A
RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY
-------
A public comment on the Site 14 Proposed Plan was received by the PAD at Cecil
Field. The comment was from Mrs. Frances Tabbott, 3544 Alcoy Road. Apparently
her property is located east of Yellow Water Weapons area, at least 2 miles
directly related to Site 14. There were several parts to the comment, but the
only part is as follows:
Mrs. Tabbot experienced some flooding on her property and is concerned that she
may experience some sort of groundwater or surface water contamination from Site
14 on her property.
Response: Surface water at Site 14 has been observed to be present as standing
water in ditches surrounding the site. Water is not present in the ditches
throughout the year and surface water flow away from Site 14 has not been
observed. The area around Site 14 is flat and swampy and ditches are not
connected to any surface water drainage system. Based on the USGS groundwater
flow model, Site 14 is a recharge area and groundwater flow is downward to the
Floridan Aquifer. No lateral flow away from Site 14 is expected.
No contaminants were detected at concentrations which generate an unacceptable
human health risk per USEPA risk assessment criteria. Therefore no further
remedial action is proposed for Site 14.
Based on these physical and chemical observations, it is not anticipated that
Mrs. Tabbot's property will be impacted by surface water or groundwater from Site
14.
CEC-S14.ROD
FGW.07.98 A-1
------- |