PB 98-964018
EPA 541-R98-074
October 1998
EPA Superfund
Record of Decision:
Pensacola Naval Air Station OU 17
Pensacola, FL
9/25/1998
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
61 FOI .SYTH STREET. SW
ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30303-8909
crp o r "--t.
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
4WD-FFB
Commanding Officer
Naval Air Station Pensacola
190 Radford Boulevard
Pensacola, Florida 32508-5217
SUBJ: Record of Decision - Operable Unit 17
NAS Pensacola NPL Site
Pensacola, Florida
D.ear Sir:
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 4 has
reviewed the above subject decision document and concurs with the
selected remedy for the Remedial Action at Site 42. This remedy
is supported by the previously completed Remedial Investigation
and Baseline Risk Assessment Reports.
The selected remedial alternative is no further action. This
involves taking no further remedial actions at the site and
leaving the environmental media as they currently exist. This
remedial action is protective of human health and the
environment, complies with Federal and State requirements that
are legally applicable or relevant and appropriate to the
remedial action and is cost effective.
RecyclmJ/RecyclabI* Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inds on 100% Recycled Paper (<0% Posiconsumer)
-------
-2-
EPA appreciates the coordination efforts of NAS Pensacola
and the level of effort that was put forth in the documents
leading to this decision. EPA looks forward to continuing the
exemplary ytfrking relationship with NAS Pensacola and Southern
Division Naval Facilities Engineering Command as we move toward
final cleanup of the NPL site.
Sincerely,
Richard D. Green
Director
Waste Management Division
cc: Elsie Munsell, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy
Ron Joyner, NAS Pensacola
Bill Hill, SOUTHDIV
David Grabka, FDEP
bcc: Allison Abernathy, FFRRO/OSWE
-------
FINAL RECORD OF DECISION
OPERABLE UNIT 17
SITE 42 - PENSACOLA BAY
NAS PENSACOLA
PENSACOLA, FLORIDA
SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM
Contract Number: N62467-89-D-0318
CTO-083
Prepared for:
Comprehensive Long-Term Environmental Action Navy
(CLEAN)
Naval Air Station Pensacola
Pensacola. Florida
ed by:
EaSafelnc.
5724 Summer Trees Drive
Memphis, Tennessee 38134
(5tl)372-7962
May 6,1998
-------
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Response to Technical Comments
Final Record of Decision
Operable Unit 17 (Site 42), NAS Pensacola
Comment 1
The last paragraph of Section 6.3 (Baseline Risk Assessment Conclusions) needs to be modified.
It discusses ecological risk related to Site 2 rather than Site 42. Comparison to the risk assessment
at Site 2 is appropriate, but the ecological risk should be correlated to Site 42. I suggest the
following wording:
"Ecological Risk at Site 42 was assessed in comparison to HQs which showed adverse effects to
the environment at Site 2, which is another Operable Unit in Pensacola Bay and was investigated
separately from Site 42. The environment at Site 42 was similar and comparable to the Site 2
area. The HQs at Site 42 were lower than those which showed adverse effects at Site 2, except
for the area around the barge loading dock. The constituents of concern at the barge loading dock
were PAHs which are likely from petroleum products unloaded at the dock. This contamination
will be further investigated under Florida's petroleum program."
Response:
Agreed. The last paragraph of Section 6.3 has been modified to the above language.
-------
FINAL RECORD OF DECISION
OPERABLE UNIT 17
SITE 42 - PENSACOLA BAY
NAS PENSACOLA
PENSACOLA, FLORIDA
SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM
Contract Number: N62467-89-D-0318
CTO-083
Prepared for:
Comprehensive Long-Term Environmental Action Navy
(CLEAN)
Naval Air Station Pensacola
Pensacola, Florida
Prepared by:
EnSafe Inc.
5724 Summer Trees Drive
Memphis, Tennessee 38134
(901) 372-7962
May 6, 1998
-------
Table of Contents
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS iv
DECLARATION OF THE RECORD OF DECISION vi
1.0 SITE NAME, LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 1
2.0 SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES 3
2.1 General Site History 3
2.2 Site-Specific History 3
3.0 HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION 8
4.0 SCOPE AND ROLE OF THE OPERABLE UNIT 9
5.0 SITE CHARACTERISTICS 10
5.1 Nature and Extent of Contamination 10
5.2 Fate and Transport 20
6.0 SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS 21
6.1 Ecological Risk Assessment 22
6.1.1 Problem Formulation 22
6.1.2 Preliminary Risk Characterization 23
6.1.3 Preliminary Exposure Estimate 43
6.1.4 Preliminary Risk Calculation 43
6.1.5 Uncertainties 45
6.1.6 Ecological Risk Summary 46
6.1.7 Conclusions 47
6.2 Human Health Exposure Assessment 47
6.2.1 Carcinogenicity and Noncancer Effects 51
6.2.2 Tissue Pathway 53
6.2.3 Conclusions 53
6.3 Baseline Risk Assessment Conclusions 55
7.0 THE SELECTED REMEDY 57
8.0 STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS 58
8.1 Protection of Human Health and the Environment 58
8.2 Attainment of the ARARs 58
8.3 Cost-Effectiveness 60
8.4 Use of Permanent Solutions to the Maximum Extent Practicable 60
8.5 Preference for Treatment as a Principal Element 60
-------
9.0 DOCUMENTATION OF NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES 61
10.0 REFERENCES 62
List of Figures
Figure 1-1 Site Location Map " 2
Figure 2-1 Contaminant Sources and Ecologically Sensitive Areas 4
Figure 5-1 Sediment Sampling Locations 11
Figure 6-1 Nature and Extent Silver 25
Figure 6-2 Nature and Extent of 4,4'-DDT 29
Figure 6-3 Nature and Extent Gamma-BHC (Lindane) 30
Figure 6-4 Nature and Extent Acenaphthylene 32
Figure 6-5 Nature and Extent Anthracene 33
Figure 6-6 Nature and Extent Benzo(a)Anthracene 34
Figure 6-7 Nature and Extent Benzo(a)Pyrene 35
Figure 6-8 Nature and Extent Chrysene 36
Figure 6-9 Nature and Extent Fluoranthene 37
Figure 6-10 Nature and Extent Fluorene 38
Figure 6-11 Nature and Extent Phenanthrene 39
Figure 6-12 Nature and Extent Pyrene 40
List of Tables
Table 2-1 NAS Pensacola Sites Related to Assessment Zones in Pensacola Bay 6
Table 5-1 Detected Inorganics in Sediment 12
Table 5-2 Detected Pesticides in Sediment 15
Table 5-3 Detected SVOCs in Sediment 17
Table 5-4 VOCs Detected in Sediment 19
Table 6-1 Site 42 Inorganics Exceeding Benchmark Levels 26
Table 6-2 Site 42 Pesticide/PCB Concentrations Exceeding Benchmark Levels 31
Table 6-3 SVOC Concentrations Exceeding Screening Criteria 41
Table 6-4 Summary Justification for Eliminating Human Exposure Pathways
Site 42 48
Table 6-5 Chemicals Detected in Crab Tissue Samples (in rag/kg)
NAS Pensacola, Site 2 54
Table 6-6 Risk Projections for COPCs Based on Tissue Ingestion 55
Table 8-1 ARARs and TBCs for Selected Remedy 59
-------
List of Appendices
Appendix A Glossary
Appendix B Responsiveness Summary
-------
List of Abbreviations
The following list contains may of the abbreviations, acronyms, and symbols used in this
document. A glossary of technical terms is provided in Appendix A.
ARAR Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements
BEHP bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
BRA Baseline Risk Assessment
CDI Chronic Daily Intake
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
COC Chemical of Concern
COPC Chemical of Potential Concern
E/A&H EnSafe/Allen & Hoshall
E&E Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ERA Ecological Risk Assessment
FDEP Florida Department of Environmental Protection
FFA Federal Facilities Agreement
HHRA Human Health Risk Assessment
HI Hazard Index
HQ Hazard Quotient
HRS Hazard Ranking System
ICW Intercoastal Waterway
ILCR Incremental Lifetime Excess Cancer Risk
IWTP Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant
MCL maximum contaminant level
mg/kg milligram per kilogram
MSL Mean Sea Level
NAS Naval Air Station
NCP National Contingency Plan
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPL National Priorities List
OU
PAH
PBS
Operable Unit
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon
Pensacola Bay System
IV
-------
List of Abbreviations (continued)
PCS Polychlorinated Biphenyl
PEL Probable Effects Level
ppb pan per billion
ppm part per million
PRAP Proposed Remedial Action Plan
PRO Preliminary Remediation Goal
QA Quality Assurance
QC Quality Control
RA Risk Assessment
RAB Restoration Advisory Board
RBC Risk-based Concentration
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RfD Reference Dose
RI Remedial Investigation
ROD Record of Decision
SARA Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
SQAG Sediment Quality Assessment Guideline
SSV Sediment Screening Value
SVOC Semivolatile Organic Compound
SWMU Solid Waste Management Unit
tPAH Total polyaromatic hydrocarbon
TAL Target Analyte List
TCL Target Compound List
TEL Threshold Effect Level
TOC Total Organic Carbon
TRC Technical Review Committee
USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
VOC Volatile Organic Compound
A*g/kg Micrograms per kilogram
-------
DECLARATION OF THE RECORD OF DECISION
Site Name and Location
Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
Naval Air Station Pensacola
Pensacola, Florida
Statement of Purpose
This decision document (Record of Decision), presents the selected remedial action for Operable
Unit 17 (Site 42, Pensacola Bay) at Naval Air Station Pensacola, Pensacola, Florida, which was
chosen in accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended by the Super-fund Amendments and Reauthorization
Act of 1986 (SARA), 42 U.S.C. § 9601 et seq., and to the extent practicable, the National
Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 300. This decision is based on the
administrative record for Operable Unit 17 at the Naval Air Station Pensacola.
The United States Environmental Protection Agency and the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection concur with the selected remedy.
Description of the Selected Remedy
This action is the first and final action for the operable unit. The remedial investigation and the
human health and ecological risk assessment conducted for Operable Unit 17 support a no-action
remedial alternative. The remedial investigation and risk assessment addressed all media at the
site, and therefore, no other actions will be considered for Operable Unit 17.
Declaration Statement
No remedial action is necessary to ensure protection of human health and the environment. The
selected remedy complies with federal and state requirements that are legally applicable or relevant
and appropriate to the remedial action, and is cost-effective.
. Denkler, Commanding Officer Date
Pensacola
VI
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6, 1998
1.0 SITE NAME, LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
Operable Unit (OU) 17 is Pensacola Bay (Site 42), an estuarine water body adjacent to the eastern
and southern borders of Naval Air Station (NAS) Pensacola in Escambia County. It includes the
Intercoastal Waterway (ICW) from Trout Point, east to NAS Pensacola's Pier 303, and terminating
at the mouth of Bayou Grande. Primarily situated in Escambia County, Pensacola Bay occupies
approximately 52 square miles of surface area. Approximately 10 miles of Pensacola Bay
coastline border NAS Pensacola property (Figure 1-1). The Florida Department of Environmental
Protection (FDEP) has classified Pensacola Bay as Class III waters, indicating its use for
recreation and maintaining a well-balanced fish and wildlife population.
NAS Pensacola land surface elevation ranges from 0 to approximately 40 feet above mean sea
level (msl). The most prominent topographic feature at NAS Pensacola is a bluff paralleling the
southern and eastern shorelines. Between the bluff and the shoreline, a nearly level marine terrace
is at approximately 5 feet above msl. Gently rolling uplands reach elevations of up to 40 feet
above msl landward of the bluff.
Surface soil at NAS Pensacola is primarily highly permeable sands limiting stream formation.
Several naturally occurring intermittent streams and numerous man-made drainage ditches flow
south into Pensacola Bay. The mean depth of Pensacola Bay in the NAS Pensacola area is 10 feet.
The depth to groundwater at NAS Pensacola ranges from less than 1 foot to approximately 20 feet
below land surface, depending upon land surface elevation and proximity to surface water bodies,
including Pensacola Bay. Groundwater is not currently used as a potable water source at
NAS Pensacola. Potable water for NAS Pensacola is received from Corry Station, approximately
4 miles north. Three NAS Pensacola supply wells on the facility are used for backup supplies only
during periods of peak demand. The zone in which the supply wells is screened is protected from
surface contamination by a 12- to 15-foot thick, low-permeability clay layer. Groundwater
contamination has not been detected in this zone.
-------
LEGEND
NAS PENSACOLA BOUNDARY
SHORE LINE
STREAM
MAIN STATION ENTRANCE
SCALE NOT TO SCALE
, SITE 42
RECORD OF DECISION
NAS PENSACOLA
FlCURf I -1
SITr. LOCAIIUN MAP
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6, 1998
2.0 SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES
2.1 General Site History
NAS Pensacola was placed on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA) National
Priorities List (NPL) in December, 1989. The Federal Facilities Agreement (FFA), signed in
October 1990, outlined the regulatory path to be followed at NAS Pensacola. NAS Pensacola
must complete not only the regulatory obligations associated with its NPL listing, but also must
satisfy the ongoing requirements of a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) permit
issued in 1988. That permit addresses the treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials
and waste and also the investigation and remediation of any releases of hazardous waste and/or
constituents from solid waste management units (SWMUs). RCRA governs ongoing use of
hazardous materials, and the rules of the operating permit. RCRA and the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) investigations and actions
are coordinated through the FFA, streamlining the cleanup process.
2.2 Site-Specific History
Since the early 1950s, numerous investigations have been conducted in and around the Pensacola
Bay System (PBS) to monitor the ecological health of the bay and determine the impact of
commercial, industrial, and municipal activities. Previous investigations have documented Navy
industrial activities discharging to Pensacola Bay. Other studies have been associated with
industrial activities of the entire PBS.
Since a complete list of hazardous substances managed or disposed of at Site 42 was not available,
a preliminary survey and Phase I sediment mapping were conducted in February 1995 to identify
potential sampling locations for further investigation. Sampling locations within Pensacola Bay
were selected based on a contaminant source diagram developed to evaluate sources of contaminant
input to Pensacola Bay. The contaminant source diagram, Figure 2-1, provides a
-------
Please contact Region 4 to obtain Figure 2-1
(Contaminant Sources and Ecologically Sensitive Areas)
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
overview of all identified RI sites, spill locations, and petroleum sites assessing the most likely
point(s) of discharge into the bay. Pertinent information is summarized in Table 2-1.
Collard (1991) summarizes the environmental-biological history of the PBS, documenting
published as well as previously unpublished data from numerous studies conducted from the 1950s
to the present. These studies, which were conducted to identify biological trends and help
understand the current status of the PBS, have been performed with varying sampling methods,
locations, and analytical procedures. They were presented in the work plan for Sites 40 and 42.
Collard's biological trends analysis concluded: (1) the data did not support distinct, discernible
trends and (2) future investigations should not attempt to evaluate existing data for these trends
because of significant database deficiencies.
Pensacola Bay Studies
1984 Thompson Engineering & Testing Sediment samples were collected along the
four edges of the turning basin for analysis of grain size, polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs), oil and grease, and total and volatile solids. PCBs were not detected and
metals concentrations were considered representative of natural conditions.
1984 Geraghty & Miller Sediment samples were collected from storm sewer outfalls
approximately 300 feet offshore of the facility's southeastern waterfront. Trace
amounts of arsenic were detected in some samples, but the method used was
inappropriate for assessing the total contaminant burden to sediment.
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6, 1998
Assessment
Zone
Potential Source
Table 2-1
NAS Pensacola Sites Related to
Assessment Zones in Pensacola Bay
Pathway Descriptions
Suspected Contaminants
OU 10
13
14
30
18
38
2
28
21'
39
4
Barge Fuel Loading
Dockb
3*
Groundwater discharge into bay
Groundwater discharge into bay
Surface water discharge outfalls (2)
Groundwater discharge
Surface water runoff
Groundwater discharge
Resident sediment from past discharges
Surface water runoff
Surface water runoff
Groundwater discharge
Surface water runoff through Wetlands 56, 57, 58 (Site 41)
Potential Spills
Groundwater and surface water flow through Wetland 52 (Site 41)
Metals, VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs
Metals, VOCs, SVOCs. Pest/PCBs
Metals, PCBs, PAHs
Metals, VOCs. SVOCs, Pest/PCBs
PCBs
VOCs
Metals, SVOCs
PCBs
Fuel
Metals. VOCs
Metals, SVOCs
Fuel
Metals. VOCs. SVOCs
Noltt:
NA
OU 10
Petroleum site
Not an IRP site
Not applicable
Operable Unit 10
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
1982-1985 Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Sediment samples
collected from Pensacola Bay's turning basin south of the waterfront, Big Lagoon,
and the mouth of Bayou Grande showed elevated concentrations of mercury and
lead. Ratios of Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen to total organic carbon (TOC) indicated
nitrogen-enriched sediments in the turning basin and at the mouth of
Bayou Grande.
1986 U.S. Navy Water and sediment samples collected from the turning basin were
analyzed for heavy metals during an environmental impact study. Results are
considered suspect because laboratory quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC)
data were not provided. According to the consultant's report, chromium and zinc
concentrations were elevated.
1991 E&E A Phase I Contamination Assessment/Remedial Activities Investigation
was conducted at Site 2, the waterfront sediment, to identify source areas and
contaminants of concern and to provide recommendations for the next phases of the
investigation. Results indicated metals, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), total
recoverable petroleum hydrocarbons, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs).
Site 2 (OU 3) was investigated as a separate remedial investigation (RI). The
description is provided here because Site 2 is within Site 42. At Site 2, most of the
contamination appeared related to the historical discharge of untreated industrial
waste from outfalls on the eastern end of the waterfront, specifically from
Building 71 (Site 38, OU 11). Other sources possibly contributing to the sediment
contamination cited above are operations at the aircraft carrier berth and naval
boatyard, commercial shipping, and private industrial facilities discharging effluent
to the bay.
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6, 1998
3.0 HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
Throughout the site's history, the community has been kept abreast of activities in accordance with
CERCLA Sections 113(k)(2)(B)(i-v) and 117. In January 1989, a Technical Review Committee
(TRC) was formed to review recommendations for and monitor progress of the investigation and
remediation efforts at NAS Pensacola. The TRC was made up of representatives of the Navy,
USEPA, FDEP, and the local community. In addition, a mailing list of interested community
members and organizations was established and maintained by the NAS Pensacola Public Affairs
Office. In July 1995, a Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) was established as a forum for
communication between the community and decision-makers. The RAB absorbed the TRC and
added members from the community and local organizations. Its members work together to
monitor progress of the investigation and to review remediation activities and recommendations
at NAS Pensacola. RAB meetings are held regularly, advertised, and are open to the public.
After finalizing the RI report, the preferred alternative for OU 17 was presented in the Proposed
Remedial Action Plan (PRAP), also called the Proposed Plan. A copy was sent to everyone on
the NAS Pensacola mailing list. The notice of availability of the Proposed Plan and RI documents
was published in the Pensacola News Journal on December 12, 1997, followed by a public
comment period from December 8, 1997 to January 22, 1998, to encourage public participation
in the remedy-selection process. The opportunity for a public meeting was provided during the
comment period.
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6, 1998
4.0 SCOPE AND ROLE OF THE OPERABLE UNIT
The proposed remedial action identified in this document is the "no action alternative." No action
is proposed for OU 17 sediment, because it does not pose an excess risk to human health and the
environment. This remedy is the first and final remedial action planned for OU 17.
This is the only Record of Decision (ROD) contemplated for OU 17. Operable Unit 17, which
consists of Site 42, is one of 13 operable units within NAS Pensacola. The purpose
of each operable unit is defined in the FY 1998 Site Management Plan
(SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM, 1997) for NAS Pensacola, which is in the Administrative Record.
Separate investigations and assessments are being conducted for the other operable units at
NAS Pensacola in accordance with CERCLA. Therefore, this ROD applies only to OU 17.
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
5.0 SITE CHARACTERISTICS
5.1 Nature and Extent of Contamination
In accordance with the Site 42 Phase II work plan and SAP, 141 locations were sampled along
approximately 10 miles of coastline. The Phase II sampling targeted the fine-grain sediments and
areas of high TOC identified during Phase I sampling. Phase I assessed areas of deposition and
erosion by mapping sediment types. TOC analysis was used to determine that the adsorptive
capacity of sediments were low. Figure 5-1 depicts the sediment sampling locations. This section
discusses the nature and extent of the analytes detected during the Phase II investigation.
Metals
Site 42 sediment samples were analyzed for 23 metals. Table 5-1 lists the frequency of detection,
range of nondetected upper bounds, range of detected concentrations, and average detected
concentrations. Frequency of detection is a ratio of detections to total samples analyzed. The
range of nondetects describes the range of nondetects in the sampling set as a minimum and
maximum. The range of detected concentrations shows the minimum and maximum
concentrations detected. The average detected concentration is the arithmetic mean of only the
detected concentrations. Nondetected concentrations were not included in this calculation to give
an accurate measure of what was detected.
As shown in Table 5-1, every metal on the list was detected. The frequency of detection was as
few as two in 141 and as much as 141 in 141. Not surprisingly, the primary seawater constituents
calcium, magnesium, potassium, and sodium were detected in every sample.
10
-------
BAYOU GXANDS
/ /-I'
PEffSACOLA
BAY
t
lew
KNSACOUBAY
LEGEND
PHASE!
' PHASE II
SCALE
COAST GUARD FACILITY
SITE 4 2
RECORD OF DECISION
NA8PEN3ACOLA
PEN6ACOLA, FLORIDA
FIGURE 5-1
LOCATION OF PHASE I AND II
SAMPLING STATIONS
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May6, 1998
Inorganics
Aluminum (Al)
Antimony (Sb)
Arsenic (As)
Barium (Ba)
Beryllium (Be)
Cadmium (Cd)
Calcium (Ca)
Chromium (Cr)
Cobalt (Co)
Copper (Cu)
Iron (Fe)
Lead (Pb)
Magnesium (Mg)
Manganese (Mn)
Mercury (Hg)
Nickel (Ni)
Potassium (K)
Selenium (Se)
Frequency of Detection
137/141
2/141
98/141
133/141
19/141
7/141
141/141
77/141
27/141
101/141
139/141
86/141
141/141
139/141
7/141
24/141
140/141
14/141
Table 5-1
Detected Inorganics in Sediment (mg/kg)
Range of Nondetects
12.2-52.0
0.11 - 1.4
0.12-3.1
0.12-0.9
0.06 - 0.55
0.12- 1.6
N/A
0.31 -4.4
0.12 - 1.6
0.22-0.3
45.8-76.3
0.07-11.0
N/A
0.4 - 0.44
0.05 - 0.5
0.54 - 6.6
81.1 -81.1
0.17- 1.60
Range of Detected
Concentrations
17.6-15,900
0.21 -0.45
0.12-22.3
0.07 - 99.3
0.09-1.1
0.21 - 0.92
67.2 - 47.400
0.39 - 84
0.15-3.8
0.25 - 30.4
19.3 26,700
0.15-43.9
111.1 - 10,800
0.19-677
0.08 - 0.64
0.71 - 10.8
36. - 3,560
0.22- 1.2
Average Detected Concentration
1.308
0.33
2.25
2.75
0.559
0.546
3.674
7.36
1.46
2.79
2,107
3.74
984
28.7
0.21
4.33
326
0.630
12
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
Inorganics
Frequency of Detection
Table 5-1
Detected Inorganics in Sediment (mg/kg)
Range of Nondetects
Range of Detected
Concentrations
Average Detected Concentration
Silver (Ag)
Sodium (Na)
Thallium (T1)
Vanadium (V)
Zinc (Zn)
2/141
141/141
11/141
129/141
82/141
0.22- I.I
N/A
0.17- 1.6
0.12-0.14
0.21 - 3.6
3.6 - 14.8
714 - 36,800
0.31-1.3
0.13-37.4
0.23 - 84.4
9.2
3.735
0.720
3.63
10.05
Notes:
N/A
mg/kg
Not applicable
milligrams per kilogram
13
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6, 1998
Pesticide/PCBs
Twenty-two pesticide/PCB-type compounds were detected in Site 42 samples. Table 5-2 shows
the frequency of detection, range of nondetected upper bounds, range of detected concentrations,
and average detected concentration. The frequency of detection was less than a third of the total
number of samples.
Semivolatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs)
Twenty-three SVOCs were detected in the 141 Site 42 samples. From Table 5-3, the frequency
of detection ranges from one to 34 detections in 141 samples.
Volatile Organic Compounds
Nine VOCs were detected in the 141 samples collected at Site 42. Table 5-4 displays the
frequency of detection, range of nondetected upper bounds, range of detected concentrations, and
average detected concentration. The frequency of detections is less than 1% of the total number
of samples analyzed.
No sediment quality screening values are available for VOCs in sediments. Areas of high TOC
and fine grained sediment such as Trout Point, barge fuel dock, concrete seawall and quay, and
industrial wastewater treatment plant (TWTP) show some or all of these VOCs just above the
detection limit.
Conclusions
All sample locations at which contamination was detected were surrounded by locations at which
no contamination was found. Thus, the areal extent of contamination is easily discernible from
the sampling data. The analytical data identified metals, pesticides, PCBs, SVOCs, and VOCs at
Site 42. Areas of greater contaminant detections compared to other areas sampled include the
14
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
Pesticides
4,4'-DDD
4.4'-DDE
4.4'-DDT
Aldrin
Aroclor-1242
Aroclor-1254
Aroclor-1260
Dieldrin
Endosulfan 1
Endosulfan II
Endosulfan sulfate
Endrin
Endrin aldehyde
Endrin keione
Heptachlor
alpha-BHC
alpha-Chlordane
beu-BHC
Detected
Frequency of Detection
12/141
8/141
16/141
8/141
4/141
16/141
20/141
5/141
34/141
2/141
1/141
9/141
6/141
1/141
4/141
47/141
9/141
5/141
Table 5-2
Pesticides in Sediment (/ig/kg)
Range of Nondelecls
0.19-3.3
0.19-3.3
0.19-3.3
0.093-1.6
2. -33.0
3. -33.0
2.0-28.3
0.19-3.3
0.1-1.6
0.19-3.3
0.19-3.3
0.19-3.3
0.19-3.3
0.19-3.3
0.093-1.6
0.093- 1.6
0.098-1.6
0.093 - 1.6
Range of Detected Concentrations
0.19-1.2
1.2-1.1
0.21 - 6.0
0.11 - 1.0
4.7-8.1
1 . - 26.0
i
0.52 - 10.0
0.22 - 0.78
0.1-0.7
0.2-0.53
0.24 - 0.24
0.13-0.61
0.2 0.61
0.26 - 0.26
0.14-0.45
0.1 -8.8
0.11-0.46
0.12-0.24
Average Delected
Concentration
0.5208
0.5363
0.9444
0.4313
6.375
5.8375
3.1085
0.476
0.2868
0.365
0.24
0.2944
0.3333
0.26
0.2625
1.4519
0.2022
0.16
15
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
Table 5-2
Detected Pesticides in Sediment 0
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 7998
SVOCs
2,2' -oxy bis( 1 -Chloropropine)
4-Meihyl phenol (p-Cresol)
Acenaphthylcne
Anthracene
Benzo(a)anthracene
Beiuo(a)pyrene
Benzo(b)fluorai)thene
Benzo(g.h,i)perylene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Butylbenzylphthalate
Carbazole
Chtysene
Di-n-butylphthalate
Dieihylphthalate
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
lndeno(l ,2,3-cd)pyrene
Naphthalene
Table 5-3
Detected SVOCs In Sediment Oig/kg)
Frequency of Detection Range of Nondetects
1/141
1/141
2/141
4/141
18/141
15/141
25/141
10/141
13/141
5/141
2/141
20/141
34/141
2/141
25/141
3/141
10/141
2/141
360.
360.
37.
36.
36.
36
36.
36.
36.
360.
360.
36.
360.
360.
36.
17
36.
36.
-1,700.0
- 1,700.0
- 1.700.0
- 170.0
- 170.0
. - 480.0
- 170.0
- 170.0
- 170.0
- 1,700.0
- 1,700.0
- 170.0
- 1,700.0
- 1.700.0
- 170.0
. - 84.0
- 170.0
- 170.0
Range of Detected
Concentrations
84.
120.
28.
51.
21.-
25.-
24.-
27.
21.
20.
53.
23.-
20.
21.
19.-
31.
21.
23.
-84.0
- 120.0
-92.0
- 650.0
1.800.0
1.100.0
1,700.0
- 470.0
- 870.0
-55.0
- 100.0
2.500.0
-82.0
- 170.0
2.600.0
- 63.0
- 480.0
-41.0
Average Detected
Concentration
84.0
120.0
60.0
220.75
174.5
156.7333
164.32
98.5
126.3846
30.6
76.5
220.4
30.2059
95.5
218.16
46.6667
94.9
32.0
17
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6, 1998
SVOCs
Pentachlorophenol
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Pyrene
bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate
Table 5-3
Detected SVOCs In Sediment Gig/kg)
Frequency of Detection Range of Nondetects
1/141 0. -4,200.0
16/141 36. - 170.0
7/141 . 360. -1.700.0
23/141 36. - 170.0
12/141 350. -1,700.0
Range of Detected
Concentrations
21. -21.0
21. -410.0
24. -71.0
22. - 2.300.0
52. - 1.400.0
Average Detected
Concentration
21.0
97.375
39.0
215.6522
279.0
Noit:
Aig/kg = micrograms per kilogram
18
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
Table 5-4
VOCs Detected in Sediment 0>g/kg)
Volatile;
2-Buianone (MEK)
Bromoe lhane
Carbon disulfide
Chlorobenzene
Chloromethane
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
Note:
Mg/kg = micrograms per kilogram
Frequency of Detection
62/141
1/141
10/141
7/141
3/141
1/141
6/141
Range of Nondetects
11.
11.
11.
11.
11.
11.
11.
-59.0
-59.0
-59.0
- 59.0
-59.0
-59.0
-59.0
Range of Detected
Concentrations
8.
4.
3.
2.
5.
2.
1.
-99.0
-4.0
-42.0
-9.0
-30.0
-2.0
-3.0
Average Detected Concentration
38.8333
4.0
15.6
5.4286
16.6667
2.0
1.3333
19
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6, 1998
barge loading dock, Coast Guard Station, concrete seawall and quay, and the IWTP.
Contamination in these areas is related to the discharges from these facilities.
5.2 Fate and Transport
Metals, VOCs, SVOCs, and pesticide/PCBs were found in Site 42 sediments. The marine
environment encourages the assimilation of these contaminants into sediment, which is transported
by currents and often deposited, unaffected by currents, for long periods of time. The chemistry
of seawater does not encourage contaminants to dissolve and, if they are dissolved, seawater
dilution prevents measuring their contribution to the sea.
The proximity of NAS Pensacola to the bay suggests some impact is occurring. Humans would
be exposed possibly by consumption of seafood, because the Bay seawater is not a source of
bathing or potable water. The ecological receptors affected by sediment contamination observed
will be sessile benthic macroinvertebrates such as oysters and barnacles, and mobile species
closely associated with the sediments such as crab, shrimp, and flounder. An edible crab tissue
study at Site 2 (within Site 42) did not detect any contaminants at a concentration causing a risk
to humans for consumption.
20
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
6.0 SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS
During the RI, a baseline risk assessment (BRA) evaluating excess human health risk and excess
ecological risk were conducted to evaluate the actual or potential risks to human health or the
environment resulting from the no-action scenario at Site 42. It is incorporated into Section 10
of the RI report. The BRA represents an evaluation of the no action alternative, because it
identified the risk present if no remedial action is taken. The assessment considers environmental
media and exposure pathways that could result in an unacceptable levels of exposure now or in the
foreseeable future. Data collected and analyzed during the RI provided the basis for the risk
evaluation.
Since Site 42 is a marine environment, the ecological risk assessment, which is a component of
the BRA, compared observed sediment concentrations to sediment screening values considered .to
be critical exposure levels for marine fauna. The approach used to assess human health is a
preliminary screening, evaluating exposure potential based on Site 42 physical characteristics.
BRA Objectives
Characterize the source media and determine the chemicals of potential concern (COPCs)
for Site 42 at NAS Pensacola.
Identify potential receptors and quantify potential exposures under current and future
conditions.
Qualitatively and quantitatively evaluate the adverse effects associated with the site-specific
COPCs.
21
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
6.1 Ecological Risk Assessment
The ecological risk assessment (ERA) is a key component of the BRA. It develops a qualitative
and/or quantitative ecological appraisal of the actual or potential effects of Site 42. The
assessment considers environmental media and exposure pathways potentially resulting in
unacceptable concentrations of exposure to flora and fauna now or in the foreseeable future.
6.1.1 Problem Formulation
This section uses basic information about the site setting, COPCs, potential receptor species, and
assessment endpoints to assess the environmental threat present. This assessment uses a qualitative
weight-of-evidence approach to judge the validity of a pathway to a receptor. To describe
qualitative risk, the terms "low," "medium," and "high" are used. These terms are not quantitative
but are useful in comparing one area or sample location to another.
Potential Receptors
Species with the highest potential for contamination effects are sessile benthic macroinvertebrates
such as oysters and barnacles, and mobile species closely associated with the sediments such as
crab, shrimp, and flounder.
Assessment Endpoints
The potential for negative effects to benthic communities from site-related contamination was the
primary assessment endpoint selected for the screening-level assessment for the site. The work
plan outlined a phased approach to assess ecological risks from site contamination. The phased
approach included a preliminary screening assessment in which concentrations were compared to
benchmark effects levels. If the screening assessment had exhibited a high potential for effects,
the subsequent phases (acute toxicity tests, diversity tests, or bioassays) would have been
conducted.
22
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
6.1.2 Preliminary Risk Characterization
To characterize risk to receptors, contaminant concentrations have been compared to sediment
quality guidelines. For assessment, the benchmark effects levels used to assess the potential
effects to benthic species are the USEPA Region IV Sediment Screening Values (SSVs) and the
FDEP Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines (SQAGs).
SSVs
SSVs are based on contaminant concentration associated with a low probability of unacceptable
risks to ecological receptors. The Office of Health Assessment has developed these for use at
Region IV hazardous waste sites. Because these numbers are based on conservative endpoints and
sensitive ecological effects data, SSVs represent a preliminary screening of site contaminant levels
to determine whether further investigation is needed. Ecological screening values are not
remediation levels. SSVs are derived from statistical interpretation of effects databases obtained
from the literature as reported in publications from the State of Florida, the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, and a joint publication by Long et al. (1995). These values are
based on observations of direct toxicity when available.
SQAGs
The preliminary SQAGs developed by McDonald (1994), are guidelines for evaluating sediment
contamination in coastal ecosystems. Defining the range of sediment contamination is a two-step
process. First, detected parameters are compared to the threshold effects level (TEL), the upper
limit of the range of sediment contaminant concentrations dominated by no effects data entries
(i.e., a minimal effects range). Within this range, sediment concentrations are not considered to
represent a hazard to aquatic organisms. Next, they are compared to the probable effects level
(PEL), which defines the lower range of contaminant concentrations that are usually associated
with adverse biological effects. The SQAGs do not address the potential for bioaccumulation of
persistent toxic chemicals and potential adverse effects on higher trophic levels of the food web.
23
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
Contaminant Results and Effect Characteristics
The following paragraphs discuss the contaminants detected in sediment collected from the
141 sample locations along approximately 10 miles of shoreline as described in Section 5.0, Site
Characteristics, above (Figure 5-1). Each contaminant is discussed by major contaminant type:
metals, pesticide/PCBs, VOCs, and SVOCs. Of the metals, only one detection of silver exceeded
the PEL. Of the organic constituents detected, one sample with DDT, two samples with lindane,
and one sample with PAHs exceeded the PEL.
Arsenic
Arsenic was frequently detected across Site 42 (98 detections in 141 samples). Only ten locations
exceeded the SSV and SQAG-TEL of 7.24 mg/kg (Table 6-1). No concentrations exceeded the
SQAG-PEL. The detected range for arsenic was 0.12 to 22.3 parts per million (ppm).
Cadmium, Chromium, and Copper
None of these metals exceeded the SQAG-PEL (See Table 6-1).
Mercury
The range of detected mercury was from 0.08 to 0.64 ppm. Only seven locations had mercury
above the SQAG-TEL. This small population suggests a low risk to ecological receptors. No
concentrations exceeded the FDEP SQAG PEL (see Table 6-1).
Silver
Silver was only detected at two locations; both exceeded the SQAG-TEL and SQAG-PEL. No
other detections of silver were found. Their locations suggest a relationship to the IWTP, which
has had a history of silver discharge. The limited extent alone (see Figure 6-1) suggests a low risk
to ecological resources (See Table 6-1).
24
-------
041HZ719
041U2TW \
MIMZ*01
MlHZfOl
(MIMZMI
04IMMO4
OUMBOI
042X212
047MZ972 _.
MlHZUt
04MZUI
042U2M4
M2MZM7
041M/00*
041MZ6W
042MZ«I1
042M28V4 -.-,'
042UZOK . , . '
JSE**.^ ,":''
.^jofflp... . . .>; .,.;..
felJMUM -. - /.. ' >,
Hi^rXM " '. ' '
' ' 1
\-'''
' '
..-..-
KW
BAYOUGRANDE
.:r IOWMJU \v,;.,.-,.. '{.('-":; .--_''.'. '-'
*' > V-^<^^../s^P«:\X;'^*;i^ '':/. '.-I"'.''.. "-'' '"'';'r i
-; ^tf»;. -^VA./X WA^M^: <>;.. ^ 7v.;:v;.-. ,; ?< !
;.:;. «^^^;-V''^-v>v vV-i *' ;-. ' " -.-r.-
.lo8^t;.V:TsV-s.;.'ir-;-i':v:1'. '.*>;."-:, :-.-. .-:..: -:.
'i4»«ri».:"^'!>;'^->'A 'J:A.''.-vc ;.'''" i::'-/i;\j: v-j'!-'';..-': .;-'.- '''j ''' :! ........._ .--»... .,-
i~\ '.'^^Sj":^:;:'.^4^ft'f;>V.^ ^".-l .;.'H^^?^4^V;:';'':'?.'";'v
'-' s?\'r^O&if;>?!K-? "!i-:^-;- J-?;JS^;:'i-(:- r: ^'-^s^'fi'H
^fr ici'&}^^^^ '
' --' ;^L£^s.^^ '
: :: , x-^i ' ' ;.,' » ''t . : -\ », -^ * . ,. "" \u.- '
'..">'. . t . « -^ tl '\\ \ ». \
-.'^. , A \ \ . \ \ \ \
\ 04IUZ7U
04»U73(
^ 041MZUO
04»U«U
042HU737
041MZ73J .
04JM/MJ
047MZW1
042MZS04
042MZS05
042MZM1
042MZSO*
04IM2EM
O42M/6I7-
O47MS6I3
O42MZ520
M2UZ522
042UZ52t
042MZ12)
042MZS30
042MZS31
042M7S33
042MZ6»4
042M7S3;
O42MZ639
042M2541
047M/M7
042MZS4]
042M7644
042M20OI
O47M/OO7
04 ?M 7003
O43M/A06
042UZ000
047U2817
ICW
PENSACOLA BAY
PENSACOLA
BAY
SCALE ,.,
, [ ! COAST GUARD FACILITY
OIMI MOO
LEGEND
A NONDETECT (139)
DETECTED (0)
EXCEEDS SEDIMENT QUALITY
SCREENING CONCENTRATION (2)
SCREENING LEVEL = 0.733 ppm
/j&jjJX SITE 42
n(lX}
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
Contaminant
Arsenic (As)
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Sample ID
042MZ543
042MZ601
042MZ603
042MZ603
042MZ616
042MZ805
042MZ807
042MZ823
042MZ826
042MZ827
042MZ827
042MZ901
042MZ901
042MZ603
042MZ901
042MZ603
042MZ543
042MZ601
042MZ61 1
042MZ816
042MZ903
042MZ906
Table 6-1
Site 42 Inorganics Exceeding Benchmark Levels
SQAG SQAG
Concentration SSV TEL PEL
16.3 7.24 7.24 41.6
19.6
8.8
17.3
12.0
10.8
10.8
17.3
22.0
22.3
0.9 1.0 0.676 4.21
0.92
84.0 52.3 52.3 160
30.4 18.7 18.7 108
18.9
43.9 30.2 30.2 112
0.17 0.13 0.13 0.696
0.64
0.14
0.14
0.13
0.17
HQ
2.3
2.7
1.2
2.4
1.7
1.5
1.5
2.4
3.0
3.1
1.3
1.4
1.6
1.6
1.0
1.4
1.3
4.9
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.3
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
Mav 6, 1998
Table 6-1
Site 42 Inorganics Exceeding Benchmark Levels
Contaminant
Silver
Sample ID
042MZ505
042MZ521
Concentration
3.6
14.8
SSV
2.0
SQAG
TEL
0.733
SQAG
PEL
1.77
HQ
4.9
20.2
Notes:
SSV = USEPA Region 4 Sediment Screening Value
SQAG = Florida Department of Environmental Protection Sediment Quality Assessment Guideline
TEL » Threshold Effects Level
PEL = Probable Effects Level
HQ = Hazard Quotient; Concentration/Effects Level.
27
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
Dieldrin
Dieldrin exceeded its SQAG-TEL of 0.715 ^g/kg at only one location (see Table 6-2) and it did
not exceed the SQAG-PEL or the SSV.
4,4'-DDT
For Site 42, three locations exceeded the SQAG-TEL of 1.19 /^g/kg (Table 6-2 and Figure 6-2).
Gamma-BHC (Lindane)
Lindane was detected above screening levels at 12 of the 141 locations in Site 42 (see Table 6-2
and Figure 6-3).
Arodor-1254
Aroclor-1254 was detected at 16 locations across the site. Of these, only two exceeded the TEL
and none exceeded the PEL (see Table 6-2). The limited distribution suggests limited risk to
ecological receptors.
Poly cyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons
Most SVOCs detected were PAHs, a general term applied to a group of compounds with two or
more benzene rings. They occur in the environment as a result of the incomplete combustion of
hydrocarbons, major constituents of petroleum and its derivatives. Oil spills and refinery effluents
are major sources of PAH contamination. In addition, storm water runoff from urban areas is
known to contain PAHs. The PAH content in storm water suggests hydrocarbon fuels and
asphalts associated with roadways as the source. During the sampling of Site 42, field crews
observed "tar balls" in dredge samples from the ICW.
28
-------
BAYOU GRANDE
1 1
1
1
' 04JM2.711
{ O47M7734
' 041MZ»OT
0.7M2.T ' '.' \
.' ITM\
\ \ \ \
04JM2801 . \ \ i \ \ \
2 - '-. \f V , ~-
Q42M2903 \< \
' 047U7MM ' ' ' \ \
' ' \ \ \ .
'p'^-V' »'
1 042UZV07
1 '
j
O47M/80B ' '
i 042M2811 ' ' '
043MZW4
042HZW7
M2M2B09
04>MZtn <
043M28I1
O42MZIH
HMutmz. *
, ...04&1'.: ",'r ;.'
' " "- '
'''.': : ..-'.
» '
i '
O42M77IS
^»
'
.
\
v -:'^
' Y
-%r"
**-< ^ ^
'N^.
.-! . \
?'. (i
. , . h
^__- 04IMZMI
, «f^^l_-. OUMZKB
jS"1----^'
IMIHZI1I . ' . /"
..,.. '\ |' "-->/
. \ . ' . -,, '. .' \ ojikjL, ^
f"": ':' -('^^^>P
V. ';.; . . ^; ii|vi:
* - ' r ' ", Aj'ifoP'v '* ;
< ' ' ' ' !- jM>*4riJii' ^*'sS-
''''.'.'.- ; : : ' ' ':' V-^gJ^l .
''*>', ' i OtS. . * 04JMZIO*
< w wnw
>i ;t t _,_ otmnw
; < 04niziii
L' , 04IM2BM
S f» « 04IM1MI
8 , , < OUHZUI
^«L . < M1MZU7
r
*''';-. ' (MitiiMlf C*>V» 46 O42UZU1 .-.-»«««
.v ' . T"11" i *\ PA Y
i '. . ''' ': ' * < 04«MZM>
' A^iifyl^g - -'VJJB* * ^ 04WAZW4
jOjH*1!" ' * --* - A* **»»
.
r ' * ~~ 042W2M1
i~ ^-^
.>! :.'.;.; . **»«»" ..^ . - 04IUZU1
4. ;t I'^IV' "" ^ \"' *''** ' »'*'». , *W** >«^-,^'-
! of2Muji .'#! ~*"/ "'"t/T" * *,-; ?~ "n, \ *\ "t{ ,x ^ "V/ Y* \ X\
042M2817 . ,'.',"* ^' ..I: t;
, ' *- f * m
04JMZ821 IJJS#7 ' *
0«7M/fl?7 -. 1 O42MZ616
'. ' 047MZB1I
042M21J4 '
' "pT" .,'
. i'l 1
«f«27JJ , t I
'' - '
t 'I* ^.-^ "^"
f
/
/
/
M2M2711
,' j',! ' ' ! 047MZ7I4
. 04IHZ71I
041MZ72I
04>U77» °*'1KU'
042-2,2* ' 0.^ 0.7MSS1"" ' SgSS? oSS"" ' "
\ ^ ***'-. r. \\ \ \ \ \ \\ fr \ \ \ OMittft*!
\\ \ ^^ \\ \ \ \ ^ \\ \ ^ \ ' 042MH44
\\ \ VX' xXA \ '"' xX;x ^Vv
\\ \ - ^ \ \ '. . s \\\
\\ XA \\ \ \ \''-- V-- v ««"
\ \ t \\ \\ \ \ \ \\ x \ 042«IZ«01
\\ \ \\\\\o4,-z.» \\.\x(jsr
\ \ ' ^ x \ ^ *W** \ '- ' 04IMZ«M
\\ \ \V.SSST
\ \ \ 0.2U2M3 °«»«~ ___..--
' - 042UZ7O* 04JMZ7W . . ^ . . - "~
\ «»»*'« _ . . .
042MZ7W /CW
<""""« 04W,» «'«» ; «7«7M <""""'
047M28I/
'**
SCALE
0
-------
BAYOV GRANDE
W1M2W7
04>MZ60«
(Miuzato
04tMZ«1l
MJM28H \.-V
04IM2«I( x
osssr -i*
04ZMZ»». -- . I
042M281I ,.\. 7' -
' ^SHf^-Jr*1'
;'."'::PS^-'
«**&^s
£&??$
* . 04IM2103
I ^ 042UZC04
"" " 042M2SOS
- MiMZtOt
M2MZ6M
. . < oututot
*~ 04JM2HJ
« ' -- 041MZ6I3
*""' M7U26lb
i. . i 042Ut>t«
. « 042U;tl|
J . 04JM2SX)
- 042MZ922
" -. 042M25J5
IS PENSACOLA : ' '\ " o«J"2«'
. .. . -. V * ' 04JMZUO
.«"««» - - .\ 04JM251I
.!'. < ' MJM2S31
'iaffiKt:; / ' 04J..ZM4
PENSACOLA
BAY
. , .
. ', C\JK .
v-.-- KJ v__ ...'.
' J '-
0.1-ao.
04"a"" \\
04n«aai\ \\
x u
Muanr
OUMZ7M
.M2MZ73I '
PENSACOLA BAY
(XJU/MJ
042MZIZ7
ICW
SCALE
COAST GUARD FACILITY
LEGEND
NONDETECT (112)
DETECTED (17)
EXCEEDS SEDIMENT QUALITY
SCREENING CONCENTRATION (12)
SCREENING LEVEL = 0.32 ppb
SITE 42
RECORD OF DECISION
NAS PENSACOLA
PENSACOLA, FLORIDA
FIGURE 6-3
NATURE AND EXTENT
GAMMA-BHC (LINDANE)
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6, 1998
Contaminant
4,4'-DDT
Aroclor-1254
Dieldrin
gamma-BHC
(Lindane)
Notes:
SSV
SQAG =
TEL
PEL
1
HQ
Table 6-2
Site 42 Pesticide/PCB Concentrations Exceeding Benchmark Levels
SQAG SQAG
Sample ID Concentration SSV TEL PEL
042MZ515 6.0 3.3 1.19 4.77
042MZ519 1.6
042MZ803 1.2
042MZ515 26.0 33' 21.6' 189'
042MZ519 23.0
042MZ519 0.78 3.3 0.715 4.3
042MZ605 1.3 3.3 0.32 0.99
042MZ614 0.4
042MZ616 0.85
042MZ618 0.85
042MZ619 0.48
042MZ620 1.2
042MZ622 0.52
042MZ702 0.46
042MZ727 0.41
042MZ730 0.4
042MZ732 0.47
042MZ901 0.32
USEPA Region 4 Sediment Screening Value
Florida Department of Environmental Protection Sediment Quality Assessment
Threshold Effects Level
Probable Effects Level
Represents effects level for total PCBs.
Hazard Quotient; Concentration/Effects Level.
HQ
5.0
1.3
1.0
1.2
1.1
1.1
3.8
1.3
2.7
2.7
1.5
3.8
.6
.4
.3
.2
.5
.0
Guideline
PAHs were detected at most of the locations sampled within Site 42, but they only exceeded the
total PAH (tPAH) SSV and TEL of 1,684 //g/kg at two of these. Fluoranthene exceeded its
screening level at 11 of the 141 sampling locations. All other individual compounds exceeded
their respective screening concentrations at fewer locations. Concentrations for locations where
screening concentrations were exceeded are listed in Table 6-3 and depicted in Figures 6-4 through
6-12.
31
-------
BAVOVGRANDE
MIMZ7U
047MZ7M
M1MZI01 \
O41M7K2 \ '.
M]MZ«04
047MZ6O7
04tW2«M
(MIUZMO
(uiMzen
04jMzeu -./V*
041MZ6I!
047MZK4 \
041H»0( \ \
^atoatti .*.'
Vxwwu
04MU701
IZMZ701 \ V. ' ' , \ 'J '
SS^AV^-- \,vl-NV :-.
r-,\\v. vSv'.:^A/''-'-:-
rw~:^s;.:;:.;'..-N/^V':' ,\\ ; - .
BIII..Y, ;; '.'.. 'v.',. -: v \^y) . ..; . '. -V
\\\V;*. \V1..- : - .*«??.,! ->.:,..;.\:.'\\;:.. ':.-\- "
\VvV'v\:\V:'- ^"'vV^:- ;;Vv:AX>.-4\^. ':\-:
^^VvA-; !;.v' / ,;r''\>xV:^y;r:V-:::::;>>4/ ".'X; v;>:
MIMtM*
04IMZWt
04WZWJ'
outturn \
O4IWZIW \
"^vUv.iV.vVNr.v^; .
"^Va.v^vVvi ::
o»maB/-...\ ..\ .-\ Vl '. A ' '
04JHZI
MlMZtW
M1M7IOI
MIM2XU
041MZS04
CM7M750S
04IM7.KM
041MZIOI
. . *<:' ** '^': L «'"
;. //i^':i>^U
', ;;; iagsr^l;:
tfASPBHSACOLA V
t/
MiMzcn - »A .
041MI510
04tM2»>
041M2B16
M1M»:7
041MZUO
MIMZUI
:£n>^« '-
r\\p.^v:-^r;,V!(\\;
\ \\\V-.\^iV;.'.\V\
\^v-.--:r?\\v-
T,Vr.vU;^\\\
: p , ..^ij^ ^^.^Li^^P*^^^^ '""
;.- ; :-..-^1 - f^ * »^- * 'A \ *.
|?'-';>f'r:
04IMZI10
OUMZtll
1 v ' 042UZ740
042MZKW
042MZI1]
OMMZtn
icw
-------
BAYOU GRANDE
042MZXM
041MK07
04tMZ7M \
04IMZM1 \ '
041MZW1 \ \ \
. 04MZM3 \ \ \ \
041MZKM \ \
042MZ6IO
042MZ«11
042HZ«U
042MZI1I N
\MK
cUttaea
. 049MZU1
itl"^\\\\\\
042MZ»M\ \ \ \ \ N '
IU7I01 \ \ \ \ \
041MZM1
041MZ907 .
042UZOO
041UZ(11
'-
IX
,Ln\
»UMZM<
-.- /- .-;i -s /
042HZt»
042MZ7U
1 \ 041HZ7I6
X s 042MZ7M
041MZ797
041MZ7M
.(M1MZ7M
4>M27tt
041M27I4
04JM27U
CUJMZ775
041MZ7M
041UI71I
041HZ72I
041U2730
041MZ731
CMIMiaW
' 041M76K
041UZ620
i.ri:
042UZ704
(MM! 10!
043MZ7W
ICW
1CW
PENSACOLA BAY
047M/M7
04IM7S03
047M2S04
042MZM5
042M2606
04JM2508
042M2SM
(M2M2S10
O42MZ522
042M2&J!)
042M2621
04JU2S30
042M2S3I
042MZ533
M2M2634
042MZM7
042M253*
042M2S4I
047M2U7
042MZM3
042MZ644
042MZMI
042MZ802
042M/603
042W20O6
(MiMZWf
042M26U
PENSACOLA
BAY
SCALE
COAST GUARD FACILITY
LEGEND
* NONDETECT (137(
DETECTED (0)
EXCEEDS SEDIMENT QUALITY
SCREENING CONCENTRATION (4)
SCREENING LEVEL = 46.9 ppb
SITE 42
RECORD OF DECISION
NAS PENSACOLA
PENSACOLA, FLORIDA
FIGURE 6-5
NATURE AND EXTENT
ANTHRACENE
-------
BAYOU GRANDE
041MZ7»
042MZ7M
042M2M1
04IU2M1
042MZt01
O42MZM4
042UZMI
M}UZ«04
041M2S07
041M2WM
04IM2>10 - '
04JMM1I . -
042MMU V*
04iM2g» x A
047M/M7
04)M2«ca
042M2MS
042MZKM
042MZIO*
04IMZCM
D42M21I2
047M/6ID
042M2MO
042MZ522
04JM2S1S
042M2527
04JM2S30
042MZUI
042M2S33
O42M2S41
041M/M7
. v'--Y-;^U/> 1 / \\ \ : '.\\\
-^^.^A^^^4^^^. \, / \\ \ -xx^z,,,
MM,,M, «wr .- '' . 1\ . ' ' f,* *. t ' . \\ ' «»"?'» '. \ ' \ MMIIBM
042M2t21.^ ~JJ ^ * V, , f^, \ \ . O 042M27.4 \ ' ', , ' \ 042M2.1.
047M2»IJ__ '->«. (v. 04IHZ»M \ T / *;' ' \ . 042M77H \ , . ' 042M2S70
«-^- rsr \ / / \\'>.>isg? -:Si" \ ~ -S"'
JSSW: ^ - 1 ^isF'" \ vv
/CW FENSACOLABAY
LEGEND
A NONDETECT (123)
> DETECTED (9)
SCALE , , EXCEEDS SEDIMENT QUALITY
SCREENING LEVEL = 74.8 ppb
042M2«OI
042M2M2
047M/603
047M7GOS
047U2KM
047M2«>t
047M2I12
f^K'- S'TE42
:(i«l)i RECORD OF DECISION
\\2x.' NASPENSACOLA
":-.' PENSACOLA, FLORIDA
FIGURE 6-6
NATURE AND EXTENT
BENZOIAJANTHRACENE
-------
BAYOU GRANDE
04J1C7H
M1UZ7V \
04IMZH1 \ \
04tMZ*0> \\ ,
MIMZtO* \ \\ \
O42M2KM t \ \ \ ,.
041HBOI \ \ \ \ \ \ ' ' '
-A\\\\\\
ouimoi \\ \ \ v. .\X\--
J=Tv\M\x. V--
N \\xv\\\ -,\\
«,««. \\|-N V.^ \\N
«««A v- .' ;' -. . : »
04IUZMM
O47MZOO7
M1M2XN
O4IMZ9IO
04IMZB11
O42MZ0U ^ - ~
042MZ016
,_. MiMzm -.''
XMiUIU] \ ' ' .
~ . .' atmrroi '. .
oimiiTo* : '.. ' ' . \ '-._.
oinu79 . ',
04IM/7II . ' ' \
1 . \ . x
'\' ' ' '*?
041UZ7K.
04JMZ7I7
04JHDK> '
MIMZ'I*
t )
\ V
\ X
NASPBNSACOLA
'v"^^;-..,
rui«*«
--r
O4JM7bO?
MJM76O3
O47M7504
047M/&05
042M?fiO«
042 MZ 50t
04JM/6M
O42M/6I2
04JM/613
O47M/6I0
042MZ520
042MZSZ2
O4IM/&4I
W7M/M?
043M26OI
LM/U/KU/
047M/Mf).l
04IUZI11 TS
O47M7BJ7 ' >>
041MZB24 ^
041MZM* h- .
041MZUB - - r> . '
"'"-' *
7f ' ' *
" A ; '
« 4 / . 041MZBM I
t 04IMZBII ,
04IMZMO
UM7IY1
/ « "*.'t« 'Z^-^f
* .' (\1
' 1 >
O42MZ740
047MZVM
(MIMtltl
1 ;
041MZ7J7
M1MZ71B
04IMZ737
O42M//U
> 041M2714
042MZ7W
(M2M272S
M2IU72«
047UZ72B
M2UZ72I
041UZ7W
MIMZ731
042MZ704
O47M//0/
042MZ7U
04IU261*
042UZ020
042MZ071
042MZ709
047M/6O6
042MZ9C4
042MZBI1
ICW
ICW
FENSACOLA BAY
PENSACOLA
BAY
SCALE
COAST GUARD FACILITY
LEGEND
A NONDETECT (1261
DETECTED (10)
EXCEEDS SEDIMENT QUALITY
SCREENING CONCENTRATION (5)
SCREENING LEVEL = 88.6 ppb
SITE 42
RECORD OF DECISION
NAS PENSACOLA
PENSACOLA. FLORIDA
FIGURE 6-7
NATURE AND EXTENT
BENZOIAIPYRENE
-------
BAYOU GRANDE
M1U2711
M1IU7M
MIHIIOI '
041MII01
rvc. .. r
M1MZ4W
MIMZM7
(Miuzaot \ \
041MI910 \ \ \
041MZS11 . \\X^"'
OMMMM './ic'V^C' ',
Mitcnis \,/\\. \<\i \
Minatot
M1MZW7
\ f\ ' V '«. " ' \ V'' ^
V V ...". V,-'- v : .- v
. ". \ V v\ r .'. '/ ' . ',
'\ ;-i . s-v^^r^v."'- v - . ; \ \ -
.... ,' . . '} \ < ' ... ... " . . '. . . ,-
. -.:.-:t'^'-.^..>v;-.-.\vv:\-:-. :.r-
».. ' '''-^^^Y^'^.''''^^.'^'.^';^-^
... N :-!> \!,a;-'ic4 *.%" «, %''. .- % ....'..V-
rfe':-''- -^'d^<:;v^:-;-,v;\,N-.v
^?f v.. ;y;:i:^^:^:vv:i:'v':^^^
.' ''!.'-; .-:.-.. :!>.->.*:-<1:.*.>V->:V.IV'-!F\V>C' <- !(&.'*£&:
- ' ':.: ''' : ^^iK^^^^S'K-^'r^
NUB*:' ; ;; ^r"1^ }\ r^V'T -\ ^
warn :.'''....:'.';. . * ' N ., *R V A N
IH1MZ7M
nuuxin
\-N\ V--. >>;'^M \--\\*.:
;\^V\}:'.:pUv^
vS^i^ft-i^--'.'^^'
V \ \ \ \ 041MM11
V \ \ \ M1M>...
\ X \ 04IMMW
\ X W1UZI10
\ 04JUZSJ3
042UZ7O)
'v '. 04?UJ(
X- ^ 04JMZ90*
O47MZ011
/CW
SCALE
f;^ COAST GUARD FACILITY
U'
PENSACOLA BAY
LEGEND
A NONDETECT (121)
* DETECTED (15)
EXCEEDS SEDIMENT QUALITY
SCREENING CONCENTRATION (5)
SCREENING LEVEL = 108.0 ppb
PENSACOLA
BAY
iii
l.Vj
'
SITE 42
RECORD OF DECISION
NASPENSACOLA
PENSACOLA, FLORIDA
FIGURE 6-8
NATURE AND EXTENT
CHRYSENE
-------
OWMItOl
041M2I03 \
04IMH04 <
MtMZMH
042UZM4
042UM07
042M/got . .
041MI«K>
043M2BII
042UZ<14 , -., --,' '
JM2MMIS A '. \
"~" -' ' . , \ \
laata - "V ., . % x, i. /s
*^".-- '. ' '.'.fjai-.
BAYOU GRANDE
042X2101 .
o«»uia7 . r
042IC8K) . '
042MZ«I1 ^ "-- ^ r
"\ il^-'-i.
O47M/M?
MJW8C3
M2MH04
04JM2MS
\\V-\\v 'tt»'
\\,r.-'.. \-.:--u*
M1UIE06
042MZ&I0
04IU/6H
WJMZ5IO
1 * ^
1^ It A ' . ' ' \ \ '
\\\ 1 xx v l °«
v\\ \ -X ' \ A 042M
\ A \ I -. ' \ 042MJ
', \ \ \ MIMZ7M , s. . - 04JMTJ
x \ , atna-nt ~-. x 04>yz7i
04IMZ711
04>IU7t4
042M77U
042MJ72I
'
041MZ7W
\ ^ '''- ' \ \
\ \ \ \ \\ \ 042MZ«13
I \ \ \ \ \ > 042U2BW
\ * 1 \ \ \ »4»MZil«
1 \ \ \ \ M1MZMO
\ \ ' > 04211103
1 042IC704 042U7701
ICV
PENSACOLABAY
LEGEND
A NONDETECT (116)
* DETECTED (14)
EXCEEDS SEDIMENT QUALITY
SCREENING CONCENTRATION (11)
SCREENING LEVEL = 113.0 ppb
M2M2S27
043M/S30
IM2U7UI
04JMZJJJ
CHJMZ6J4
042MIS41
047M/M1
042M2643
042M2644
042MZ<01
042MJ002
O42M2003
047U29M
-------
BAYOU GRANDE
MiMZ7>3
042MZ7»4
04JMZK"
042uz»oj
MZMZtOl \
04IMZiM
MtMZMI \
041UZ6U
04IMH1I v \ .
-
041M762/
042HZUO
042UZUI
041MZM9
041UZU4
042MZS37
04IMZUI
(MIMZMI
NASPBNSACOIA
042HZU1
042UZ<0>
041UZM1
047M20M
M1UZ7II
04JMZ714
04IUZ7W
041MZ7H
041MZ7Z*
441UZ704
-V 04>MZ>07
04JM27W
041MZ740
MZMWM
042MH17
041UZ»11 _a»JMI7M
ICW
ICW
PENSACOLA BAY
PENSACOLA
BAY
SCALE
COAST GUARD FACILITY
LEGEND
4 NONDETECT (138)
* DETECTED (0)
EXCEEDS SEDIMENT QUALITY
SCREENING CONCENTRATION
SCREENING LEVEL = 21.2 ppb
(3)
SITE 42
f; RECORD OF DECISION
NAS PENSACOLA
PENSACOLA. FLORIDA
FIGURE 6-10
NATURE AND EXTENT
FLUORENE
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
BAYOV GRANDE
M1U2KH
OUMZM7
MIMZIM \ \
04IM2«IO \ V \
\\x---i
04IU2K*
042M2aOt
042MZ6I2
041UZUO
042MZI23
041M27M*
: «42M27>7
1 outant .
.(W2MZ7M
N OtIMm*
x oukono
.- oumzni
042MZ7M
V 04IM7707
M2MZ7W
ICW
ICW
PENS ACOLA BAY
PBNSACOLA
BAY
SCALE
COAST GUARD FACILITY
LEGEND
A NONDETECT (118)
» DETECTED (15)
EXCEEDS SEDIMENT QUALITY
SCREENING CONCENTRATION (8)
SCREENING LEVEL - 153.0 ppb
SITE 42
RECORD OF DECISION
NAS PENSACOLA
PENSACOLA, FLORIDA
FIGURE 6-12
NATURE AND EXTENT
PYRENE
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6, 1998
Contaminant
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Chrysene
Fluoranthene
Table 6-3
SVOC Concentrations Exceeding Screening Criteria
SQAG SQAG
Sample ID Concentration SSV TEL PEL HQ
042MZ622
042MZ807
042MZ611
042MZ622
042MZ725
042MZ807
042MZ603
042MZ605
042MZ611
042MZ616
042MZ618
042MZ622
042MZ725
042MZ805
042MZ807
042MZ616
042MZ619
042MZ622
042MZ805
042MZ807
042MZ603
042MZ604
042MZ622
042MZ805
042MZ807
042MZ603
042MZ60S
042MZ611
042MZ614
042MZ618
042MZ619
042MZ620
042MZ622
042MZ725
042MZ805
042MZ807
28
92
52
130
51
650
130
95
85
89
84
310
80
120
1,800
110
140
330
140
1,100
160
120
520
240
2,500
190
130
220
140
150
120
120
730
210
210
2,600
330 5.87 128 4.8
15.7
330 46.9 245 1.1
2.8
1.1
13.9
330 74.8 693 1.7
1.3
1.1
1.2
1.1
4.1
1.1
1.6
24.0
330 88.8 763 1.2
1.6
3.7
1.6
12.4
330 108 846 1.5
1.1
4.8
2.2
23.1
330 113 1494 .7
.2
.9
.2
.3
.1
.1
6.5
.9
.9
23.0
41
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
Naphthalene
Table 6-3
SVOC Concentrations Exceeding Screening Criteria
Contaminant
Fluorene
Sample ED
042MZ611
042MZ622
042MZ807
Concentration
31
46
63
SSV
330
SQAG
TEL
21.2
SQAG
PEL
144
HQ
1.5
2.2
3.0
042MZ901
41
330 34.6
391
1.2
Phenanthrene 042MZ611 260
Pyrene
total PAHs
042MZ620 98
042MZ622 410
042MZ725 95
042MZ807 260
042MZ603 200
042MZ605 160
042MZ611 160
042MZ618 160
042MZ622 680
042MZ725 190
042MZ805 230
042MZ807 2,300
042MZ622 3,184
042MZ807 11,365
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 042MZ622 1,100
Notes:
SSV
SQAG =
TEL
PEL
HQ
042MZ718 1,400
USEPA Region 4 Sediment Screening Value
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Threshold Effects Level
Probable Effects Level
Hazard Quotient; Concentration/Effects Level.
330 86.7 544 3.0
1.1
4.7
1.1
3.0
330 153 1398 .3
.0
.0
.0
4.4
.2
.5
15.0
1,684 1,684 16,770 1.9
6.7
182 182 2647 6.0
7.7
Sediment Quality Assessment Guideline
42
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
Phthalate Esters
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (BEHP) exceeded the SSV and TEL of 182 /^g/kg at two locations (see
Table 6-3). No obvious source for this organic constituent was identified for either location.
Because of the frequent use in vacuum pumps and plastics in the laboratory, BEHP is considered
a common laboratory contaminant. However, these concentrations were not rejected during data
validation for BEHP.
Volatile Organic Compounds
No sediment screening values are present for VOCs. Detected concentrations are presented in
Section 5. The limited distribution and low values detected suggest a limited risk to ecological
receptors. VOCs are extremely mobile. At the concentrations observed, the VOCs would be
solutes in seawater or the sediment interstitial fluids.
6.1.3 Preliminary Exposure Estimate
The use of screening values for comparison of observed contaminant concentrations necessitates
an assumption that benthic associated fauna will use the area surrounding a sample location
exclusively for feeding and other life requisites. Also, this screening approach assumes that 100%
of the contaminant concentration found will be bioavailable to those benthic organisms found at
at the location. By applying both of these assumptions in the screening assessment, a very
conservative estimate of a chemical's potential effects is made.
6.1.4 Preliminary Risk Calculation
Based on the exposure estimate (100% of contaminant concentration) for benthic infauna
associated with the sample location, and by applying the most conservative effects benchmark, a
hazard quotient can be determined for each sampling location (see Tables 6-1 through 6-3). The
hazard quotient method compares the estimated exposure concentrations to the measured or
43
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
predicted threshold value for effect. Equation 1 presents the calculation method with explanation
of the variables used.
Equation 1 Hazard Quotient (HQ) = Sediment Concentration
SQAG Threshold Effect Level
An HQ of more than 1 is interpreted as a level at which there is a potential for adverse ecological
effects. An HQ of less than 1 does not indicate a lack of risk, but should be interpreted based on
the severity of the effect reported and the magnitude of the calculated quotient.
For Site 42, HQs were determined only for those contaminants exceeding the SQAG-TEL. Thus,
all quotients for the locations presented will exceed 1 and those locations not presented in the table
will be below 1. The following paragraphs discuss exceedances and spatial relevance, along with
an interpretation of the number of exceedances relative to the sample size.
Metals
HQs for arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, and mercury were all less than 5 (see
Table 6-1). Anthropogenic input of metals into sediments near NAS Pensacola has occurred, but
specific sources of these metals are difficult to determine. The limited distribution of exceedances
and the low HQ values suggest a low risk to ecological receptors.
Of the two screening level exceedances for silver, one had a HQ of 20.2. The proximity of the
elevated silver concentrations detected suggests the IWTP is the source. The limited extent
suggests a low risk to ecological resources.
Pesticides/PCBs
For the three pesticides and one PCB detections listed hi Table 6-2, all HQs were 5 or less, and
most were less than 2. Only 15 of the 141 locations sampled had pesticide/PCB concentrations
44
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6, 1998
above screening values and no spatial pattern was evident. Based on the limited distribution and
HQ values less than 5, risk to ecological receptors is low.
PAHs
Results for 10 PAH compounds were compared to screening values and values for total PAHs
(tPAH). Except for two locations, the HQs for all compounds did not exceed 3. For tPAHs, these
same two locations were the only ones with concentrations above the tPAH screening value of
1,684 ,ug/kg. This suggests the U.S. Coast Guard Station and the barge fueling pier are sources
of petroleum-related PAHs. The barge fueling pier will be investigated under the auspices of the
Florida petroleum program. Both facilities are permanent; it is expected operations will continue
in the future. These concentrations suggest moderate risk to ecological receptors in these areas.
BEHP
The HQs for two locations exceeding the screening value were 6 and 7.7. With only two of
141 locations exhibiting elevated concentrations, it is predicted risk to ecological receptors is
limited.
6.1.5 Uncertainties
All sampling programs may produce unavoidable variations to the design. Below are uncertainties
related to field conditions, laboratory procedures, or other circumstances are likely to have
influenced the investigation and risk assessment.
Analytical matrix interferences due to excess organic material in sediment. Sampling in
the grass beds near Trout Point required sampling roots and other benthic organisms with
the sediment sample.
45
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
The lack of criteria or screening values for some chemicals increases the uncertainty for
screening level assessments.
The hazard quotient approach lacks the consideration for natural metal concentrations, and
sediment grain-size and TOC effects as they relate to bioavariability. HQs calculated using
EPA's guidance are typically more conservative than field exposure scenarios indicate.
For example, at Site 2, Near-Shore Sediments in Pensacola Bay, no distinguishable
changes in benthic assemblages were distinguishable below an HQ of 10.0.
The dynamic nature of a marine ecosystem provides natural variability not considered in
receptor exposure scenarios.
6.1.6 Ecological Risk Summary
Sediment chemistry results show concentrations for arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead,
mercury, and silver are above TELs. Only one sample of silver exceeded a PEL. Hazard
quotients calculated for these metals did not show any significant potential risk to receptors. The
limited detections and distribution suggest a limited risk to ecological receptors.
PAHs appear to be the most significant organic contaminants found at the site. PAHs at Site 42
area are attributable to past practices, but recent oil spills and asphalt road runoff may have also
contributed to sediment loads. Samples taken near the barge loading dock and the Coast Guard
Station represent all the detections for PAHs exceeding the PEL. This suggests that sediments
near these sample locations are of moderate risk to ecological receptors. Both of these facilities
are permanent and it is expected that operations will continue in the future. The barge loading
dock will be investigated under the auspices of the Florida petroleum program. Pesticides, PCBs,
and phtnalate esters were detected in a limited number of samples and did not exceed a PEL. The
46
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6, 1998
limited distribution and detections suggest a low risk to ecological receptors; therefore, additional
phases of investigation were not performed.
6.1.7 Conclusions
Apparent anthropogenic effects on sediment quality at Site 42 was detected during the RI.
Contaminant classes included metals, pesticides and PCBs, PAHs, and phthalates. Although
calculated hazard quotients within each class of contaminants exceeded unity (suggesting a
potential risk), the calculated HQs were generally low (less than 10) and the areal distribution of
the contaminant was generally limited. These factors combine to suggest the detected
contamination presents a low risk to ecological resources at Site 42.
One noted exception to this is the PAH contamination at the barge fueling pier. This
contamination will be addressed under the auspices of Florida's petroleum program.
6.2 Human Health Exposure Assessment
This assessment examines the potential for excess human exposure to the contaminants detected
at Site 42.
Current Use
NAS Pensacola Site 42, near the industrial portion of the base, is currently limited to boating
activities. Human contact with site media will occur only due to activities associated with the
Rescue Training School (short duration swimming), and a public beach at Mustin Beach, west of
the Coast Guard Station. Otherwise, swimming is not authorized anywhere else within Site 42.
Exposure Scenarios
Exposure to media at Site 42 appears to be limited. Rescue Training activities involve training
students in the bay for a single class. This exposure is to the surface water only and does not
47
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6, 1998
constitute a significant route and thus no surface water samples were collected during the RI.
Contact with media near the developed portion of the base is limited by security, sediment depth,
and reduced adsorption of sediment to skin. Table 6-4 lists the common scenarios for exposure
routes. Mustin Beach samples had lower concentrations of contaminants than samples from other
areas, due to the strong surf and tidal currents in this area of Site 42.
Swimming
Except for the activities of the rescue swimming school and Mustin Beach, swimming is not
allowed at Site 42. The site is monitored by the U.S. Navy and Coast Guard. The Navy monitors
the seawall and quay, while the U.S. Coast Guard monitors boating traffic near the ICW.
Therefore, frequent human exposure to site sediments is not possible. Occasional trespassing is
possible, although trespassers would likely be arrested. Prudent individuals also would not risk
the physical hazards associated with swimming in the swift currents of the shipping channel.
Sediment
In addition to the security patrolling Site 42 and the surrounding area, other issues limit human
exposure to Site 42 media. Many samples were collected during the RI that would be deeper than
most swimmers could reach without diving equipment. If direct exposure were possible, sediment
near the shipping channel would be expected to contain chemicals of concern. However, direct,
frequent exposure to sediment is unrealistic because sediment is submerged year round. In
addition, sediment would wash off of skin rather than adsorbing, as is assumed for soil exposure.
Sediment is submerged year round.
48
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6, 1998
Table 6-4
Summary Justification for Eliminating Human Exposure Pathways Site 42
NAS Pensacola
Pensacola, Florida
Potentially Exposed
Population
Medium and Exposure
Pathway
Pathway Selected
for Evaluation
Reason for Selection or Exclusion
Current and Future
Site Users
Air Inhalation of
gaseous contaminants
emanating from soil
Air Inhalation of
chemicals entrained in
fugitive dust
No
No
Groundwater Ingestion
of contaminants during
potable or general use
Groundwater Inhalation
of volatilized groundwater
contaminants
Surface water Ingestion
of contaminants during
swimming
Surface water Inhalation
of volatilized groundwater
contaminants
Soil Incidental ingestion
Soil Dermal contact
Sediment Incidental
ingestion
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Site 42 contains no soil. No VOC
concentrations were reported in sediment
exceeding their corresponding soil risk
based concentrations (RBCs).
Site 42 contains no soil. Site 42 sediment is
submerged year-round. Consequently,
assessing sediment exposure as if it were
soil would not be appropriate. This
exposure pathway was eliminated in
accordance with USEPA Region IVs
Supplemental Guidance to RAGS Bulletin 3,
Exposure Assessment.
Groundwater is below the aquitard in
Pensacola Bay.
Groundwater is below the aquitard in
Pensacola Bay.
Swimming is allowed only at Mustin Beach.
Surface water was not considered to be a
possible source of contaminants.
Consequently, this medium was not
analyzed.
Swimming is allowed only at Mustin Beach.
Surface water was not considered to be a
possible source of contaminants.
Consequently, this medium was not
analyzed.
Site 42 contains no soil.
Site 42 contains no soil.
Swimming is allowed only at Mustin Beach.
Site 42 sediment is submerged year-round.
Consequently, assessing sediment exposure
as if it were soil would not be appropriate.
This exposure pathway was eliminated in
accordance with USEPA Region IVs
Supplemental Guidance to RAGS Bulletin 3.
Exposure Assessment.
49
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6, 1998
Table 6-4
Summary Justification for Eliminating Human Exposure Pathways Site 42
NAS Pensacola
Pensacola, Florida
Potentially Exposed
Population
Medium and Exposure
Pathway
Pathway Selected
for Evaluation
Reason Tor Selection or Exclusion
Sediment Dermal
contact
No
Wild game or domestic
animals Ingestion of
tissue impacted by media
contamination
Fruits and vegetables
Ingestion of plant tissues
grown in media
No
No
Swimming is allowed only at Muslin Beach.
Site 42 sediment is submerged year-round.
Consequently, assessing sediment exposure
as if it were soil would not be appropriate.
This exposure pathway was eliminated in
accordance with USEPA Region IVs
Supplemental Guidance to RAGS Bulletin 3.
Exposure Assessment.
Fishing and crabbing do occur in this area.
A study conducted at Site 2 (OU 13)
concluded that there was no excess risk
from consuming edible crab tissue.
Site 42 contains no soil. Aquaculture is not
a proposed land use and would not be
expected to be a concern at this site, relative
to direct exposure pathways considered. In
addition, these activities would be
prohibited in the ICW by the U.S. Coast
Guard.
Surface Water
Surface water samples taken for Site 2 (OU 13) indicate trace amounts of PAHs, VOCs, and the
usual metals associated with seawater. Only two compounds exceeded the federal or state criteria
in surface water. Silver exceeded the criteria in 18 of the 21 samples. However, the detections
may be the result of the natural salinity. The other chemical (2,4,6-trichlorophenol; 10 ppb) was
detected and exceeded its criteria of 6.5 ppb in only one of the 21 samples, indicating it is not
widespread. Exposure to surface water would be limited to swimming trespassers, due to the
stringent security enforced by the U.S. Navy and Coast Guard. Pensacola Bay seawater is not
potable because of the natural salinity.
50
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
Fishing and Crabbing
Fishing and crabbing are allowed and can be observed daily in Site 42. The most likely route of
exposure for contaminants to humans is via fishing and crabbing. During the Site 2 RI, edible
crab tissue was collected in Site 42 and Site 2. The study concluded that there is no excess risk
from the consumption of edible crab tissue. The results of that study are summarized in
Section 6.2.2, below.
Future Land Use
These submerged lands are owned by the State of Florida. Future land use at NAS Pensacola
Site 42 will be limited to boating, and exposure will be limited by the physical factors discussed
above.
6.2.1 Carcinogenicity and Noncancer Effects
The USEPA has established a classification system for rating the potential carcinogenicity of
environmental contaminants based on the weight of scientific evidence. The cancer classes are
described below. Cancer weight-of-evidence class "A" (human carcinogens) means that human
toxicological data have shown a proven correlation between exposure and the onset of cancer (in
varying forms). The "Bl" classification indicates that some human exposure studies have
implicated the compound as a probable carcinogen. Weight-of-evidence class "B2" indicates a
possible human carcinogen, a description based on positive laboratory animal data (for
carcinogenicity) in the absence of human data. Weight-of-evidence class "C" identifies possible
human carcinogens, and class "D" indicates a compound not classifiable with respect to it
carcinogenic potential. The USEPA has established slope factors (SF) for carcinogenic
compounds as a "plausible upper-bound estimate of the probability of a response (cancer) per unit
intake of a chemical over a lifetime."
51
-------
Record of Decision
MS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
In addition to potential carcinogenic effects, most substances can also produce systemic toxic
responses at doses greater than experimentally derived threshold levels. For these substances, the
USEPA has derived Reference Dose (RfD) values. A chronic RfD is defined as "an estimate (with
uncertainty spanning perhaps an order of magnitude or greater) of a daily exposure level for the
human population, including sensitive subpopulations, that is likely to be without an appreciable
risk of deleterious effects during a lifetime." These lexicological values are used in risk formulae
to assess the upper-bound level of cancer risk and noncancer hazard associated with exposure to
a given contamination concentrations.
For carcinogens, the potential risk posed by a chemical is computed by multiplying the chronic
daily intake (GDI, as mg/kg-day) by the SF (in reciprocal mg/kg-day). The hazard quotient (for
noncarcinogens) is computed by dividing the GDI by the RfD. The USEPA has set standard limits
(or points of departure) for carcinogens and noncarcinogens to evaluate whether significant risk
is posed by a chemical (or combination of chemicals). For carcinogens, the point-of-departure
range is IxlO"6 with a generally excepted range of IxlO4 to IxlO"6. These risk values correlate
with 1 in 10,000 and 1 in 1 million excess cancer incidence resulting from exposure to
xenobiotics.
For noncarcinogens, other toxic effects are generally considered possible if the hazard quotient
(or sum of hazard quotients for a pathway that is, the hazard index) exceeds unity (a value of 1).
Although both cancer risk and noncancer hazard are generally additive (within each target
organ/effect group) only if the target organ is common to multiple chemicals, a most conservative
estimate of each may be obtained by summing the individual risks or hazards regardless of target
organ. This BRA has taken the universal summation approach for each class of toxicant.
52
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6, 1998
6.2.2 Tissue Pathway
During the Site 2 RI, edible crab tissue was collected in Site 42 and Site 2. That data is
summarized in Table 6-5. Exposure to this tissue was evaluated under one scenario: current and
future site nonsubsistence fisherman ingesting shellfish 20 g/day for 175 days per year.
Table 6-6 presents the calculated risk and hazard for the tissue exposure pathways. As shown in
the tables below, an ILCR of 3x10* (rounded) was identified for the possible carcinogens detected
onsite. Hazard indices (His) of 0.7 and 0.2 were calculated for child and adult exposure to Site 2
tissues, respectively. The primary contributor to ILCR was heptachlor epoxide, and the primary
contributor to HI was copper. No chemicals of concern (COCs) were identified for this exposure
pathway. Because the ILCR for heptachlor epoxide exceeded 1x10*, it is important to note that
the calculations were based on the maximum concentration detected in Site 2 blue crab tissues.
An ILCR based on the arithmetic average tissue concentration reported for heptachlor epoxide
(0.00092 mg/kg) would not exceed the most stringent USEPA and FDEP threshold (1x10*).
6.2,3 Conclusions
The human health exposure assessment for Site 42 indicates that a complete human health risk
assessment was not required for the site due to a general lack of completed exposure pathways.
Without complete exposure pathway, no risk to human health can be associated with the
contamination.
The one exception to the lack of complete pathways is the ingestion of edible crab tissues collected
from the Bay. Although no specific investigation of this pathway was included in the Site 42 RI,
an exhaustive evaluation performed for Site 2 included data from crab collected from Site 2. The
results of that evaluation indicate no unacceptable risk is associated with the ingestion of crab
tissue from Pensacola Bay.
53
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
Table 6-5
Chemicals Detected in Crab Tissue Samples (in nig/kg)
NAS Pensacola, Site 2
Pensacola, Florida
Frequency of Default
Chemical Detection Concentrations
Calcium
Copper
Magnesium
Mercury
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Zinc
4,4' -ODD
4.4'-DDE
d.d'-DDT
Aldrin
Endrin
5/5
1/5
5/5
5/5
5/5
5/5
1/5
5/5
5/5
1/5
5/5
5/5
3/5
3/5
Hepiachlor epoxide 5/5
Notts:
* 0
1
2
3
NA
ND
NA
4.85
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.495
NA
NA
0.00056
NA
NA
NA
0.00023
NA
Range of Detected Screening
Concentrations Value
678 - 5,370
14.5 5
362 - 682
0.15-0.21 0.41
2,600 - 2,970
0.7-1.5 0.68
1.1 0.68
3.470 - 3,730
28.7-59.1 41
0.00056 0.013
0.00073 - 0.00065 0.0093
0.0019 - 0.0096 0.0093
0.00049 - 0.00093 0.00019
0.00023-0.00059 0.041
0.00026 - 0.0025 0.00035
Reference
Concentration
1,764
ND
722
0.4
5,260
1.74
ND
8.040
58.4
ND
0.0026
0.0026
0.00128
ND
0.00074
Notes
3
2,3
1.2
2.3
2
2.3
1
1
2
1
Retained as a chemical of potential concern based on comparison to screening value and reference concentration.
Does not exceed the screening value.
Does not exceed the reference concentration.
Chemical is considered an essential human nutrient.
Not applicable.
Not detected.
54
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
Table 6-6
Risk Projections for COPCs Based on Tissue Ingestion
NAS Pensacola - Site 2
Pensacola, Florida
Potential Future Use
Chemical
Copper
Silver
Zinc
4'4'-DDD
4'4'-DDT
Heptachlor
RfDused SFused
(mg/kg-day) (mg/kg-day)
0.0371 NA
0.005 NA
0.3 NA
NA 0.24
0.0005 0.34
epoxide 0.000013 9.1
Hazard Indices
Sum ILCR
Notes:
HQ
ILCR
LWA
child
adult =
nc =
c =
SF
Hazard quotient
Incremental lifetime excess cancer risk
Lifetime weighted average
Childhood exposure assumptions
Adult exposure assumptions
Noncarcinogen-based exposure assumptions
Carcinogen-based exposure assumptions
Slope factors
HQ
Child-iic
0.2
0.1
O.i
. NA
0.01
0.1
0.7
HQ
Adult nc
0.09
0.05
0.05
NA
0.005
0.05
0.2
ILCR
Iwa c
NA
NA
NA
1.4E-08
3.3E-07
2.3E-06
3E-06
In summary, the only complete human exposure pathway identified at Site 2 was the ingestion of
crab tissue. No unacceptable risks were associated with this potential exposure and no other
completed pathways were identified at the site. Therefore, Site 2 in not considered to present an
unacceptable risk to human health.
6.3 Baseline Risk Assessment Conclusions
Risk management decisions for NAS Pensacola Site 42 based on preliminary human health risk
assumptions are not warranted for sediment because of a lack of complete exposure pathways.
The only complete pathway to humans is through the consumption of seafood collected from
Site 42. A study completed for Site 2 concluded that there is no excess risk from consumption of
55
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
edible crab tissue. Site 2 consists of the near-shore sediments in an area where untreated industrial
wastewater had previously been discharged within Site 42. As such, it is considered to have a
much higher potential for unacceptable risk than Site 42 in general and it is appropriate to utilize
risk determinations from Site 2 in addressing Site 42.
Site 42 ecological risk was assessed by comparing HQs which showed adverse effects to the Site 2
environment, another operable unit in Pensacola Bay, that was investigated separately from
Site 42. The Site 42 environment is similar and comparable to the Site 2 area. Site 42 HQs were
lower than those that showed adverse effects at Site 2, except for the area around the barge loading
dock. The constituents of concern at the barge loading dock are PAHs which are likely from
petroleum products unloaded at the dock. This contamination will be further investigated under
Florida's petroleum program.
56
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6, 1998
7.0 THE SELECTED REMEDY
Based upon consideration of the requirements of CERCLA, the NCP, the human health risks
associated with Site 42, and public and state comments, the Navy has selected the "No Action"
alternative as the preferred remedial action alternative for this site. Based on the results of the
Remedial Investigation, no remedial action is necessary to control residual risks associated with
the site. Risks to human health are minimal due to a lack of completed exposure pathways to the
contamination. The only completed pathway identified was exposure to edible crab tissue. No
unacceptable risk is associated with this pathway. Similarly, no unacceptable ecological risk is
associated with the contamination detected at Site 42. Ecological hazard quotients are generally
low and areas of potential ecological risk are sparsely distributed.
As described in the preceding sections, this determination is based on both current and reasonable
maximum exposure scenarios under pre-existing institutional controls (a ban on swimming in the
area). An area of PAH contamination at the barge loading pier will be separately addressed under
Florida's petroleum program.
The selected alternative will attain all federal and state ARARs, is cost-effective, and uses
permanent solutions to the extent practicable.
Based on the information available at this time, the remedy represents the best balance among the
criteria used to evaluate remedies. The remedy is believed to be protective of human health and
the environment, will attain ARARs, will be cost-effective, and will use permanent solutions and
alternative treatment technologies or resource recovery technologies to the maximum extent
practicable.
57
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
8.0 STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS
Under CERCLA Section 121, 42 U.S.C. § 9621, the Navy must select remedies that are protective
of human health and the environment, comply with ARARs (unless a statutory waiver is justified),
are cost-effective, and use permanent solutions and alternative treatment technologies or resource
recovery technologies to the maximum extent practicable. In addition, CERCLA prefers remedies
employing treatment that permanently and significantly reduces the volume, toxicity, or mobility
of hazardous wastes as its principal element. The following sections discuss how the selected
remedy at Site 42 meets these statutory requirements.
8.1 Protection of Human Health and the Environment
The selected remedy protects human health and the environment. Based on current and reasonable
future maximum exposure scenarios, no unacceptable human health or ecological risks are
associated with existing conditions at Site 42.
8.2 Attainment of the ARARs
Pursuant to CERCLA Section 121(d), the remedial action for Site 42 must comply with federal
and state environmental laws that are either applicable or relevant and appropriate to the
circumstances of the release. Applicable requirements are those standards, criteria, or limitations
promulgated under federal or state law that specifically address a hazardous substance, pollutant,
contaminant, remedial action, location, or other circumstance at a CERCLA site. Relevant and
appropriate requirements are those that, while not legally applicable, still address problems or
situations sufficiently similar to those encountered onsite that their use is well-suited to the
particular site. Additional criteria to be considered (TBCs) are unpromulgated advisories and
guidance that are not legally binding, but provide pertinent guidance which should be considered
in determining the necessary level of cleanup to protect health or the environment.
58
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6, 1998
ARARs are generally considered in three distinct categories, although there is often some overlap
among the three:
Location-specific ARARs are restrictions placed on the concentration of hazardous substances or
the conduct of activities solely on the basis of location. Examples of location-specific ARARs
include state and federal requirements to protect floodplains, critical habitats, and wetlands, along
with solid and hazardous waste facility siting criteria. No location-specific ARARs or TBCs were
are identified for the selected remedy.
Action-specific ARARs are technology- or activity-based requirements or limitations on actions
taken with respect to hazardous wastes. These requirements are triggered by the particular
remedial activities that are selected to accomplish a remedy. Since there are usually several
alternative actions for any remedial site, various requirements can be ARARs. No action-specific
ARARs or TBCs were identified for the selected remedy.
Chemical-specific ARARs are specific numerical quantity restrictions on individual chemicals in
specific media. Examples of chemical-specific ARARs include the Maximum Contaminant Levels
(MCLs) specified under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Since there are usually numerous chemicals
of concern for any remedial site, various numerical quantity requirements can be ARARs.
Chemical-specific ARARs and TBCs for the selected remedy are presented in Table 8-1.
Table 8-1
ARARs and TBCs for Selected Remedy
Status Citation
Applicable FDEP's Class III Waters designation (applicable within Pensacola Bay)
TBC Supplemental Guidance to RAGS: Region 4 Bulletins - Ecological Screening Values (Sediment
Screening Values), USEPA Region IV, Atlanta, GA, November 1995.
TBC Approach to the Assessment of Sediment Quality in Florida Coastal Waters, FDEP Office of
Water Policy. Tallahassee, FL.. November. 1994.
59
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6. 1998
The selected remedy complies with all ARARs and TBCs identified in Table 8-1. There are no
action- or location-specific ARARs with which the selected remedy need comply.
8.3 Cost-Effectiveness
The "No Action" alternative is cost effective.
8.4 Use of Permanent Solutions to the Maximum Extent Practicable
The Navy, with USEPA and Florida concurrence, has determined that the selected remedy
represents the maximum extent to which permanent solutions and treatment technologies can be
used in a cost-effective manner for final remediation of Site 42 at NAS Pensacola. The Navy, with
USEPA and Florida concurrence, has determined that this selected remedy provides the best
balance of trade-offs in terms of long-term effectiveness and permanence; reduction in toxicity,
mobility, or volume achieved through treatment; short-term effectiveness; implementability; and
cost, while also considering the statutory preference for treatment as a principal element and
consideration of state and community acceptance. The selected remedy provides for long-term
effectiveness and permanence; is easily implemented; reduces toxicity, mobility, or volume; and
is cost-effective.
8.5 Preference for Treatment as a Principal Element
The selected remedy does not utilize treatment as a principal element of the remedial action. In
this instance, the data generated during the RI/FS indicate no further action is necessary to reduce
contamination to acceptable risk-based concentrations in a timely manner. The statutory
preference for remedies that employ treatment as a principal element does not require treatment
under these circumstances.
60
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6, 1998
9.0 DOCUMENTATION OF NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES
The proposed plan for OU 17 released on December 8, 1997 identified the no-action alternative
as the preferred alternative. The no-action alternative presented in the proposed plan is the same
as the no-action alternative described in this ROD. No comments were received during the public
comment period.
61
-------
Record of Decision
NAS Pensacola Operable Unit 17
Site 42 Pensacola Bay
May 6, 1998
10.0 REFERENCES
Col lard, Sneed. (1991). Surface Wafer Improvement and Management Program, The Pensacola
Bay System, Biological Trends and Current Status. Northwest Florida Water Management
District. Water Resources Special Report 91-3.
EnSafe/Allen & Hoshall. (1996). Final Remedial Investigation Report, Site 2, NAS Pensacola,
Pensacola, Florida. E/A&H: Memphis, Tennessee.
EnSafe/Allen & Hoshall. (1997). Final Remedial Investigation Report, Site 38, NAS Pensacola,
Pensacola, Florida. E/A&H: Memphis, Tennessee.
Long, E.R., D.D. MacDonald, S.L. Smith, and F.D. Calder. (1995). Incidence of Adverse
Biological Effects Within Ranges of Chemical Concentrations in Marine and Estuarine
\
Sediments. Environmental Management.
MacDonald, D.D. (1993). Development of an Approach to the Assessment of Sediment Quality
in Florida Coastal Waters.
Southern Division, Naval Facilities Engineering Command. (1997). FY1998 Site Management
Plan of the Installation Restoration Program for the Naval Air Station Pensacola,
Pensacola, Florida.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV. (1995). Draft Supplemental Guidance to
RAGS: Region 4 Bulletins, Ecological Risk Assessment, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region IV, Atlanta, GA.
N:\WMI\AOENNEN\PCOLA\CTO.OU\ROmSITE.42V42FNL.ROD
62
-------
Appendix A
Glossary
-------
This glossary defines terms used in this record of decision describing CERCLA activities. The
definitions apply specifically to this record of decision and may have other meanings when used
in different circumstances.
ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD: A file which contains all information used by the lead agency
to make its decision in selecting a response action under CERCLA. This file is to be available for
public review and a copy is to be established at or near the site, usually at one of the information
repositories. Also a duplicate is filed in a central location, such as a regional or state office.
AQUIFER: An underground formation of materials such as sand, soil, or gravel that can store
and supply ground water to wells and springs. Most aquifers used in the United States are within
a thousand feet of the earth's surface.
BASELINE RISK ASSESSMENT: A study conducted as a supplement to a remedial
investigation to determine the nature and extent of contamination at a Superfund site and the risks
posed to public health and/or the environment.
CARCINOGEN: A substance that can cause cancer.
CLEANUP: Actions taken to deal with a release or threatened release of hazardous substances
that could affect public health and/or the environment. The noun "cleanup" is often used broadly
to describe various response actions or phases of remedial responses such as Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study.
COMMENT PERIOD: A time during which the public can review and comment on various
documents and actions taken, either by the Department of Defense installation or the USEPA. For
example, a comment period is provided when USEPA proposes to add sites to the National
Priorities List.
-------
COMMUNITY RELATIONS: USEPA's, and subsequently Naval Air Station Pensacola's,
program to inform and involve the public in the Superfund process and respond to community
concerns.
COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND
LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA): A federal law passed in 1980 and modified in 1986 by the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA). The act created a special tax that goes
into a trust fund, commonly known as "Superfund," to investigate and clean up abandoned or
uncontrolled hazardous waste sites.
Under the program the USEPA can either:
Pay for site cleanup when parties responsible for the contamination cannot be located or
are unwilling or unable to perform the work.
Take legal action to force parties responsible for site contamination to clean up the site or
pay back the federal government for the cost of the cleanup.
DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION ACCOUNT (DERA): An account
established by Congress to fund DOD hazardous waste site cleanups, building demolition, and
hazardous waste minimization. The account was established under SARA.
DRINKING WATER STANDARDS: Standards for quality of drinking water that are set by both
the USEPA and the FDEP.
EXPLANATION OF DIFFERENCES: After adoption of final remedial action plan, if any
remedial or enforcement action is taken, or if any settlement or consent decree is entered into, and
if the settlement or decree differs significantly from the final plan, the lead agency is required to
publish an explanation of any significant differences and why they were made.
FEASIBILITY STUDY: See Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study.
-------
GROUNDWATER: Water beneath the earth's surface that fills pores between materials such as
sand, soil, or gravel. In aquifers, groundwater occurs in quantities sufficient for use as drinking
water, irrigation, and other purposes.
HAZARD RANKING SYSTEM (HRS): A scoring system used to evaluate potential relative
risks to public health and the environment from releases or threatened releases of hazardous
substances. USEPA and states use the HRS to calculate a site score, from 0 to 100, based on the
actual or potential release of hazardous substances from a site through air, surface water, or
groundwater to affect people. This score is the primary factor used to decide if a hazardous site
should be placed on the NPL.
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES: Any material that poses a threat to public health and/or the
environment. Typical hazardous substances are materials that are toxic, corrosive, ignitable,
explosive, or chemically reactive.
INFORMATION REPOSITORY: A file containing information, technical reports, and
reference documents regarding a Superfund site. Information repositories for Naval Air Station
Pensacola are located at the John C. Pace Library, University of West Florida; and the
NAS Pensacola Library, Building 633, Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida.
MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVEL: National standards for acceptable concentrations of
contaminants in drinking water. These standards are legally enforceable standards set by the
USEPA under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
MONITORING WELLS: Wells drilled at specific locations on or off a hazardous waste site
where groundwater can be sampled at selected depths and studied to assess the groundwater flow
direction and the types and amounts of contaminants present, etc.
-------
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST (NPL): The USEPA's list of the most serious uncontrolled or
abandoned hazardous waste sites identified for possible long-term remedial response using money
from the trust fund. The list is based primarily on the score a site receives from the Hazard
Ranking System. USEPA is required to update the NPL at least once a year.
PARTS PER BILLION (ppb)/PARTS PER MILLION (ppm): Units commonly used to express
low concentrations of contaminants. For example, 1 ounce of trichloroethylene in a million
ounces of water is 1 ppm; 1 ounce of trichloroethylene in a billion ounces of water is 1 ppb. If
one drop of trichloroethylene is mixed in a competition-size swimming pool, the water will contain
about 1 ppb of trichloroethylene.
PRELIMINARY REMEDIATION GOALS: Screening concentrations that are provided by the
USEPA and the FDEP and used to assess the site for comparison before remedial goals are set
during the baseline risk assessment.
PROPOSED PLAN: A public participation requirement of SARA in which the lead agency
summarizes for the public the preferred cleanup strategy, and the rationale for the preference,
reviews the alternatives presented in the detailed analysis of the remedial investigation/feasibility
study, and presents any waivers to clean up standards of Section 121(d)(4) that may be proposed.
This may be prepared either as a fact sheet or as a separate document. In either case, it must
actively solicit public review and comment on all alternatives under agency consideration.
RECORD OF DECISION (ROD): A public document that explains which cleanup alternative(s)
will be used at NPL sites. The Record of Decision is based on information and technical analysis
generated during the remedial investigation/feasibility study and consideration of public comments
and community concerns.
REMEDIAL ACTION (RA): The actual construction or implementation phase that follows the
remedial design and the selected cleanup alternative at a site on the NPL.
-------
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY STUDY (RI/FS): Investigation and analytical
studies usually performed at the same time, and together referred to as the "RI/FS." They are
intended to: (1) gather the data necessary to determine the type and extent of contamination at a
Superrund site; (2) establish criteria for cleaning up the site; (3) identify and screen cleanup
alternatives for remedial action; and (4) analyze in detail the technology and costs of the
alternatives in detail.
REMEDIAL RESPONSE: A long-term action that stops or substantially reduces a release or
threatened release of hazardous substances that is serious, but dose not pose an immediate threat
to public health and/or the environment.
REMOVAL ACTION: An immediate action performed to address a release or threatened release
of hazardous substances.
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT (RCRA): A federal law that
established a regulatory system to track hazardous substances from the time of generation to
disposal. The law requires safe and secure procedures to be used in treating, transporting, storing,
and disposing of hazardous substances. RCRA is designed to prevent new, uncontrolled hazardous
waste sites.
RESPONSE ACTION: As defined by Section 101(25) of CERCLA, a response action means
remove, removal, remedy, or remedial action, including enforcement activities related thereto.
RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY: A summary of oral and written public comments received
by the lead agency during a comment period on key documents, and the response to these
comments prepared by the lead agency. The responsiveness summary is a key part of the ROD,
highlighting community concerns for USEPA decision-makers.
SECONDARY DRINKING WATER STANDARDS: Secondary drinking water regulations are
set by the USEPA and the FDEP. These guidelines are not designed to protect public health;
-------
instead they are intended to protect "public welfare" by providing guidelines regarding the taste,
odor, color, and other aesthetic aspects of drinking water which do no present a health risk.
SUPERFUND: A trust fund established by CERCLA that can be drawn on to plan and clean up
past hazardous waste disposal sites and current releases or threats of releases of non-petroleum
products. Superfund is often divided into removal, remedial, and enforcement components.
SUPERFUND AMENDMENTS AND REAUTHORIZATION ACT (SARA): The public law
enacted on October 17, 1986, to reauthorize the funding provisions, and to amend the authorities
and requirements of CERCLA and associated laws. Section 120 of SARA requires that all federal
facilities "be subject to and comply with, this act in the same manner and to the same extent as any
non-governmental entity."
SURFACE WATER: Bodies of water that are aboveground, such as rivers, lakes, and streams.
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUND: An organic (carbon-containing) compound that
evaporates (volatilizes) readily at room temperature.
-------
RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY
Overview
At the time of the public comment period, the U.S. Navy had selected a preferred remedy to
address sediment and surface water contamination at Site 42 on NAS Pensacola. This preferred
remedy was selected in coordination with the USEPA and the FDEP. The NAS Pensacola
Restoration Advisory Board, a group of community volunteers, reviewed the technical details of
the selected remedy and raised no fundamental objections to its selection.
The sections below describe the background of community involvement on the project and
comments received during the public comment period.
Background of Community Involvement
Throughout the site's history, the community has been kept abreast of site activities through press
releases to the local newspaper and television stations reporting site activities. Site-related
documents were made available to the public in the administrative record at information
repositories maintained at the NAS Pensacola Library and the John C. Pace Library of the
University of West Florida.
In December 1997, newspaper announcements were placed to announce the public comment period
(December 8, 1997 through January 22, 1998), present the opportunity for a public meeting, and
included a short synopsis of the proposed plan. These advertisements ran in the Pensacola News
Journal on December 12, 1997. In conjunction with these newspaper announcements, addresses
on the Site 42 mailing list were sent the proposed plan.
-------
Appendix B
Responsiveness Summary
-------
Summary of Comments Received During the Public Comment Period
No comments were received during the public comment period.
------- |