Skip directly to search Skip directly to A to Z list Skip directly to site content

PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT

NAVAL AIR STATION CECIL FIELD
(a/k/a USN AIR STATION CECIL FIELD)
JACKSONVILLE, DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA


APPENDIX A:

SUMMARY OF SITE EVALUATIONS, NAS CECIL FIELD(Future reuse categories obtained from NAS CF Base Reuse Plan, Table 4-51)
Base Area and Site Name Public Health Evaluation Comments
Main Station: by proposed future use category
Forestry Site 17: Oil/Sludge Disposal Pit
AOI 35: PCBs on Perimeter Road

No past exposure situations were identified for these sites

No one is currently coming into contact with contaminated materials at levels posing a potential health hazard

Lease and transfer documents will provide notification of residual contamination left on site, if any, minimizing the likelihood that workers will be exposed during future development of the properties

Investigations complete - remedial action on-going: Site 17

? What is the status of AOI 35?

Light Industry No sites are located in the area proposed for light industry reuse

Since no waste sites or areas of interest are located in this area, no past, current, or future exposure situations were identified

Not applicable
Parks and RecreationSite 3: Oil/Sludge Disposal Pit
Site 4: Grease Pits
Site 5: Oil Disposal Area
Site 6: Lake Fretwell Rubble Disposal
Site 11: Golf Course Pesticide Disposal
Site 19: Rowell Creek Rubble Disposal
AOI 20: Hazardous Waste Storage
AOI 21: Golf Course Maintenance Area
AOI 22: Golf Course Fairway 7 Disposal
AOI 35: PCBs on Perimeter Road Lake Fretwell

No past exposure situations were identified for these sites

No one is currently coming into contact with contaminated materials at levels posing a potential health hazard

Lease and transfer documents will provide notification of residual contamination left on site, if any, minimizing the likelihood that workers will be exposed during future development of the properties

Testing of Lake Fretwell game fish by NAS CF demonstrates that past and current consumption of fish from this lake does not pose a health hazard. However, there is uncertainty in (i) whether releases of contaminants to the lake are on-going and (ii) whether the investigations of the remaining potential source areas will permit identification and mitigation of the source.

Investigations complete - no further action required to protect public health and the environment: Lake Fretwell

Investigations complete - remedial action in 1998: Sites 3, 5, 11

Investigations complete - remedial action selection in 1998: Sites 4, 6, 19

ATSDR recommends that the Cecil Field Development Commission develop and implement a fish tissue monitoring plan to ensure that future concentrations of mercury and PCBs in fish do not pose a hazard to the health of Lake Fretwell fishers.

Heavy Industry Site 12: Public Works Rubble Disposal
AOI 25: Transformer Storage Yard
AOI 26: Building 81 DDT Site
AOI 27: Building 81 HAZMAT Shed
AOI 35: PCBs on Perimeter Road

No past exposure situations were identified for these sites

No one is currently coming into contact with contaminated materials at levels posing a potential health hazard

Lease and transfer documents will provide notification of residual contamination left on site, if any, minimizing the likelihood that workers will be exposed during future development of the properties

Investigations complete - remedial action selection in 1998: Site 12

? What is the status of AOIs 25, 26, 27, 35?

Aviation-related Site 7: Old Fire Fighting Training Area
Site 16: AIMD Seepage Pit
AOI 28: North TCP Site
AOI 29: Building 313 TCP Site
AOI 30: Building 313
AOI 31: South TCP site
AOI 32: Supply Building 35 HAZMAT Storage Area
AOI 33: DRMO Storage Area
AOI 35: PCBs on Perimeter Road

No past exposure situations were identified for these sites

No one is currently coming into contact with contaminated materials at levels posing a potential health hazard

Lease and transfer documents will provide notification of residual contamination left on site, if any, minimizing the likelihood that workers will be exposed during future development of the properties

Investigations complete - remedial action in 1998: Sites 7, 16

? What is the status of AOIs 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33?

General AviationSite 3: Oil/Sludge Disposal Pits
Site 4: Grease Pits
Site 17: Oil/Sludge Disposal Pit SW
AOI 35: PCBs on Perimeter Road

No past exposure situations were identified for these sites

No one is currently coming into contact with contaminated materials at levels posing a potential health hazard

Lease and transfer documents will provide notification of residual contamination left on site, if any, minimizing the likelihood that workers will be exposed during future development of the properties

Investigations complete - remedial action on-going: Sites 3, 17

Investigations complete - remedial action selection in 1998: Site 4

Forestry/Airport ReserveSite 1: Old Landfill
Site 2: Recent Landfill
Site 8: Bore Site Range/Hazardous Waste Storage Area/Fire Training
Site 9: Recent Grease Pits
Site 10: Rubble Disposal Area
Site 18: Ammunition Disposal Area
AOI 23: Aviation Ordnance Area (AVORD)
AOI 24: AVORD Pistol Range
AOI 34: Rowell Creek Ordnance Disposal
AOI 35: PCBs on Perimeter Road

No past exposure situations were identified for these sites

No one is currently coming into contact with contaminated materials at levels posing a potential health hazard

Lease and transfer documents will provide notification of residual contamination left on site, if any, minimizing the likelihood that workers will be exposed during future development of the properties

Investigations complete - no further action required to protect public health and the environment: Sites 9, 10

Investigations complete - remedial action in 1998: Sites 1, 2, 8

Investigations complete - remedial action selection in 1998: Sites 18

? What is the status of AOIs 23, 24, 34?

Commercial No sites are located in the area proposed for commercial reuse

Since no waste sites or areas of interest are located in this area, no past, current, or future exposure situations were identified

Not applicable
Conservation No sites are located in the area proposed for conservation reuse

Since no waste sites or areas of interest are located in this area, no past, current, or future exposure situations were identified

Not applicable
Yellow Water Weapons Area (YWWA): by proposed future use category
Forestry No sites are located in the area proposed for forestry reuse

Since no waste sites or areas of interest are located in this area, no past, current, or future exposure situations were identified

Not applicable
Light Industry Yellow Water Weapons Complex

No past exposure situations were identified for these sites

No one is currently coming into contact with contaminated materials at levels posing a potential health hazard

Lease and transfer documents will provide notification of residual contamination left on site, if any, minimizing the likelihood that workers will be exposed during future development of the properties

Eastern and central portion of the Yellow Water Area. The YWWC is categorized as a "grey" area requiring further investigation to determine whether environmental contamination has occurred from the previous storage and maintenance of radiochemical weapons. USEPA is providing oversight of radiation surveys to be conducted by NAS CF and Navy RASO during the summer, 1998.
Parks and RecreationSite 15: Blue 10 Ordnance Disposal Area
Site 14: Blue 5 Ordnance Disposal Area
AOI-20: Haz. Waste Storage-Bldg. 610
Abandoned Wastewater Treatment Plant
Abandoned Transportation Maint. Facility
Abandoned Munitions Magazines Former Artillery Range

No past exposure situations were identified for these sites

No one is currently coming into contact with contaminated materials at levels posing a potential health hazard

Lease and transfer documents will provide notification of residual contamination left on site, if any, minimizing the likelihood that workers will be exposed during future development of the properties

Levels of soil contaminants at Site 15 present a potential health hazard to current and future recreational users. USEPA and the NAVFACENGCOM-South Division have recommended to the Cecil Field Development Commission that future recreational activities planned for the YWWA avoid Site 15

Investigations complete - no further action required to protect public health and the environment: Sites 14

Investigations complete - remedial action selection in 1998: Sites 15

? What is the status of AOI 20, the wastewater treatment plant, transportation maintenance facility, munitions magazines, and former artillery range?

Currently, Site 15 is posted with signs alerting users to the chemical hazards in the area and remedy selection is scheduled for 1998.

Heavy Industry No sites are located in the area proposed for heavy industry reuse

Since no waste sites or areas of interest are located in this area, no past, current, or future exposure situations were identified

Not applicable
Commercial No sites are located in the area proposed for commercial reuse

Since no waste sites or areas of interest are located in this area, no past, current, or future exposure situations were identified

Not applicable

Main Station Systems
Petroleum Storage Tanks and PipelinesNorth Fuel Farm
South Fuel Farm
Jet Engine Test Cell
Underground Storage Tanks
Day Tank 2
Tank 199
103rd Street Jet Fuel Pipeline

No past exposure situations were identified for these sites

No one is currently coming into contact with contaminated materials at levels posing a potential health hazard

Past releases of jet fuel from the 103rd Street pipeline at on- and off-base locations did not pose a health hazard: private wells and the indoor air quality of nearby buildings were not impacted. The pipeline is currently out of service and is scheduled for in-place abandonment and closure in conjunction with the closure of NAS CF in 1999. In-place closure does not pose a public health hazard.

Petroleum products stored in tanks includes aviation and motor fuel, oil, heating fuel, lubricants, and hydraulic fluids. NAS CF will remove all tanks and remediate all tank areas prior to closure in 1999.

The State of Florida is responsible for administering the underground storage tank program.

In general, for all petroleum sites, soil removals and free product recovery from groundwater are complete or on-going. Remedial actions and groundwater monitoring on-going.

Potable Water System

Backflow prevention devices are not in place in the distribution system to prevent the flow of non-potable water into potable water lines.

The distribution system is believed to be composed of copper pipe with lead welded joints; however, compliance testing of taps indicates that lead and copper concentrations in drinking water are below state and federal standards and, therefore, safe for household use.

NAS CF has been abandoning non-potable wells and monitoring wells that are no longer needed throughout the facility. These wells are being abandoned per FDEP and the St. John River Water Management District requirements.

The NAS CF water supply (and wastewater supply) system will be upgraded and consolidated into the City of Jacksonville public water supply at base closure.



APPENDIX B: ATSDR'S EXPOSURE EVALUATION PROCESS

INFORMATION ON HOW ATSDR ASSESSES EXPOSURE

What is meant by exposure?

ATSDR's public health assessments are driven by exposure or contact. Chemicals released intothe environment have the potential to cause harmful health effects. Nevertheless, a release doesnot always result in exposure. People can only be exposed to a chemical if they come in contactwith that chemical. If no one comes into contact with a chemical, then no exposure occurs, thusno health effects could occur. Often the general public does not have access to the source area ofthe environmental release; this lack of access becomes important in determining whether thechemicals are moving through the environment to locations where people could come intocontact with them.

The route of a chemical's movement is thepathway. ATSDR identifies and evaluatesexposure pathways by considering howpeople might come into contact with achemical. An exposure pathway could involveair, surface water, groundwater, soil, dust, oreven plants and animals. Exposure can occurby breathing, eating, drinking, or by skincontact with a substance containing thechemical.



How does ATSDR determine which exposure situations to evaluate?

ATSDR scientists evaluate site-specific conditions to determine whether people are beingexposed to site-related contaminants. When evaluating exposure pathways, ATSDR identifieswhether exposure to contaminated media (soil, water, air, waste, or biota) is occurring throughingestion, dermal (skin) contact, or inhalation.

If exposure is possible, ATSDR scientists then consider whether contamination is present atlevels that might affect public health. ATSDR selects chemicals for further evaluation bycomparing them against health-based comparison values. Comparison values are developed byATSDR from available scientific literature concerning exposure and health effects. Comparisonvalues are derived for each of the media and reflect an estimated chemical concentration that isnot expected to cause harmful health effects for a given chemical, assuming a standard dailycontact rate (e.g., amount of water or soil consumed or amount of air breathed) and standardbody weight.

Comparison values are not thresholds for harmful health effects. ATSDR comparison valuesrepresent chemical concentrations many times lower than levels at which no effects wereobserved in experimental animal or human epidemiologic studies. If chemical concentrations areabove comparison values, ATSDR further analyzes exposure variables (e.g., duration andfrequency) for health effects, including the toxicology of the chemical, other epidemiologystudies, and the weight of evidence.

Some comparison values used by ATSDR scientists include ATSDR's environmental mediaevaluation guides (EMEG), reference dose media evaluation guides (RMEG), and cancer riskevaluation guides (CREG). EMEGs, RMEGs, and CREGs are non-enforceable, health-basedcomparison values developed by ATSDR for screening environmental contamination for furtherevaluation. Risk-based concentrations (RBCs) and soil screening levels (SSLs) are health-basedcomparison values developed by EPA Region III to screen sites not yet on the National PrioritiesList (NPL), respond rapidly to citizens inquiries, and spot-check formal baseline riskassessments.

More information about the ATSDR evaluation process can be found in ATSDR's Public HealthAssessment Guidance Manual at http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/HAC/HAGM/ or by contactingATSDR at 1-888-42-ATSDR. For reference, Appendix A defines some of the technical termsused in this public health assessment and a List of Acronyms is available after the Table of Contents.

If someone is exposed, will they get sick?

Exposure does not always result in harmful health effects. The type and severity of health effectsthat occur in an individual as the result of contact with a chemical depend on the exposureconcentration (how much), the frequency and duration of exposure (how long), the route orpathway of exposure (breathing, eating, drinking, or skin contact), and the multiplicity ofexposure (combination of chemicals). Once exposure occurs, characteristics such as age, sex,nutritional status, genetics, lifestyle, and health status of the exposed individual influence howthat individual absorbs, distributes, metabolizes, and excretes the chemical. Taken together, thesefactors and characteristics determine the health effects that can occur as a result of exposure to achemical in the environment.

Considerable uncertainty exists regarding the true level of exposure to environmentalcontamination. To account for that uncertainty and to protect public health, ATSDR scientiststypically use high-end, worst-case exposure level estimates to determine whether harmful healtheffects are possible. These estimated exposure levels are usually much higher than the levels towhich people are really exposed. If the exposure levels indicate harmful health effects arepossible, a more detailed review of exposure, combined with scientific information from themedical, toxicologic, and epidemiologic literature about the health effects from exposure to harmful substances, is performed.


APPENDIX C.

FUEL RELATED SPILLS AT NAS CECIL FIELD
Location Year of Release Gallons released Reported Type of Fuel Action to Date
North Fuel Farm19852200JP-5 See North Fuel Farm,
Tank 76-E
CA completed at the site, RAP completed in FY 1997, Revision to RAP December 1997. Free product will continue to be collected as long as tanks remain in operational status. Soil remediation and groundwater remediation will be initiated upon tank decommissioning.
North Fuel FarmAugust198722, 772 JP-5
North Fuel FarmFebruary 1991913000JP-5
North Fuel Farm,
Tank 76
November 19931, 800JP-5
North Fuel Farm spill and release to
Sal Taylor Creek Contaminate Area and Possum Dam
February 1991NotidentifiedJP-5CAR 1994, CAR Addendum 1996and 1997 that recommends NFAexcept at Possum Dam
Truck Stand(Facility 372)December 1990 JP-5 Ca and CAR Completed. CAR addendum submitted July 1994. IRA (soil removal) completed, CAR addendum submitted July 1994. Monitoring Only Plan (MOP) has been implemented for Groundwater.
South Fuel FarmJuly 1991NotidentifiedNotidentifiedAll Tanks Removed. CA, CAR,RAP Completed ?.

RAP implementation to begin inearly FY98

Jet Engine Test Cell Facility
(Facilities 334, 339, 328 and 811)
October1989FailedprecisionfitnesstestingJP-5CA, CAR, CAR addendum, RAPCompleted.

Tanks Removed and RAPimplemented in FY97

NASJacksonville -NAS Cecil FieldJet Fuel PipelineJuly1989UnknownJP-5Site Transferred to NASJacksonville

CA and RAP Completed. RAPimplemented (soil removed andgroundwater being monitored).

NASJacksonville -NAS Cecil FieldJet Fuel PipelineJuly19976,100gallonsJP-5Contaminated soil removed underemergency response. CA to beinitiated by end of FY97
HelicopterCrash SiteFebruary 19921,800gallonsJP-5PCAR submitted in January 1994. Car submitted in FY 95. S-3 CrashSite : IRA completed in August 1994. Designated by regulatorycommunity as NFA (No furtheraction required)
S-3 Crash TankDecember 1991Unknown

? WorstCasegallon offuel thatS-3 cancarryincludingsupplemental tanks

NotidentifiedIRA completed in August 1994.
Day Tank 11981497, 000gallonsJP-5 CA completed. CAR completed. RAP completed, Free produce will continue to be collected as long as tank remains in and operational status
Soil remediation and ground water remediation will be initiated upon tank decommissioning
Day Tank 21996Unknown,29,000gallons offreeproductrecoveredJP-5Tank was taken out of service andremoved in August of 1997. IRAcompleted in August 1997. CAinitiated.
Tank 199?UnknownHeatingoilCA Completed in June 1997.Monitoring only required byRegulatory Stakeholders
CA = Contamination Assessment
CAR = Contamination Assessment Report
FY = Fiscal year ( October to September)
IRA = Interim Remedial Action
NFA = No Further Action
PCAR = Preliminary CAR
RAP = Remedial Action Plan
S-3 =
UST = Underground Storage Tank
Source: Table 2-27 Tank Investigation Program Sites, NAS Cecil Field Date??
Fuel Tanks, Fuel Lines and Abandoned fuel lines from fuel farms, to runways, under hangers and other structures1940-2000Unknown JP- 5
Other Fuels

OtherFuelAdditives

Not investigated to date.

Some closed with fuel remaining inlines



APPENDIX D. NAVY'S EVALUATION OF INDOOR AIR


Click here to view Appendix D in PDF format
[PDF, 2190KB]


APPENDIX E. INDOOR AIR SCREENING AND SAMPLING STRATEGIES

  1. Evaluating Possible Indoor Air Locations (due to underlying contaminated groundwater at NAS Cecil Field)
  2. Determining buildings with the greatest potential for indoor air contaminant migrationand determine if indoor air sampling would be necessary. To help select buildings to bescreened, ATSDR recommends that levels of gases found in soil and groundwater becompared to Oregon Department of Environmental Quality published Tier 1 Look-upTable (Oregon DEQ, 1999) and Connecticut Department of Environmental Protectionpublished Reference Table A (Connecticut DEP), as well, as use and comparison with thescreening model and Tier-2 groundwater model developed by Johnson and EttingerModel (1991) for subsurface vapor intrusion into buildings. Comparisons with all threeof the above should be considered conservative estimates and should be considered forplanning purposes only. Nevertheless, the results of comparisons to these tables and themodeling effort can aid in the planning and development of a more comprehensive fieldprogram to help determine the levels of indoor air contamination from soil andgroundwater vapor migration. Comparison should be used to identify a representativesample of buildings most likely to have elevated levels near source areas, plumes orutility pipe lines.

  3. Field Screening
  4. ATSDR recommends field screening followed by confirmation sampling.

    • Screen cracks, openings, drains, utility passages, of selected building with probesthat can measure, methane and carbon dioxide that may indicate the presence ofthe biogenic gases. Using a FID (Flame Ionization Detector) and CO2 meter orcombination of the two should be used. A portable gas chromatograph with PIDand ECD with concentrator should be used for other chemicals. Cracks orlocations that show high methane should be flagged for confirmation samplingincluding those that cause the FID to flame out because of lack of O2 or otherfactors such as humidity. FID can detect methane and most compounds withcarbon-hydrogen or carbon-carbon bonds. The FID is effected, but less sensitivethen the PID to humidity, but light hydrocarbon gases eliminate the ability todetect toxic gases (EPA, 1996a). EPA's Environmental Response Team identifiesthat the FID can only read organic compounds but responds poorly tohydrocarbons, and halogenated hydrocarbons and fuel. The FID as with the PID,instrument response is affected by high and low temperatures, electrical fields,and FM radio transmissions. Not only will high levels of methane cause the FIDto flame out, but moisture can also cause the FID to flame out or not light at all.


    • After determining the methane levels, ATSDR recommends the use of a portableGC with combination of sensors to include PID (11.7 EV lamp)/ ECD withconcentrator that is capable of measuring ppb/ppt range depending onconcentration ranges of other contaminants that may mask readings or otherpotable GC with greater capability based on available funding. Dust and humidityreduce sensitivity and the PID. EPA identifies that high concentrations ofmethane can cause a down scale deflection of the PID meter (EPA, 1996a).


    There are other technologies that meet or exceed these standards.

  5. Indoor Air Sampling
  6. If indoor air sampling is indicated from the modeling, ATSDR is recommending indoorair sampling for aerobic and anaerobic breakdown products. Publications by the U. S. AirForce Center for Environmental Excellence indicate that anaerobic biodegradationprocesses create both biogenic gases and petroleum breakdown products and the primarychemicals released to the environment are chlorinated hydrocarbons (Wiedemeier et al.,1995; Newell et al., 1995). ATSDR recommends indoor air sampling should include thefollowing:

    • Biogenic gasses including methane, ethane, propane and other gases fromhydrocarbons breakdown and fuels (aviation fuels, turbine fuels and aviationgasoline, JP5; diesel fuel; heating oils; and motor gasoline).


    • Chlorinated hydrocarbons (trichloroethylene (TCE), trichloroethane (TCA)dichloroethylene (DCE), dichloroethane (DCA), carbon tetrachloride,chlorobenzene, and vinyl chloride).


    • Hydrocarbons including benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, xylene, diethyleneglycol monomethyl ether, fuel hydrocarbon fractions and trimethylbenzene (foundin JP5).

Next Section      Table of Contents

  
 
USA.gov: The U.S. Government's Official Web PortalDepartment of Health and Human Services
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 4770 Buford Hwy NE, Atlanta, GA 30341
Contact CDC: 800-232-4636 / TTY: 888-232-6348

A-Z Index

  1. A
  2. B
  3. C
  4. D
  5. E
  6. F
  7. G
  8. H
  9. I
  10. J
  11. K
  12. L
  13. M
  14. N
  15. O
  16. P
  17. Q
  18. R
  19. S
  20. T
  21. U
  22. V
  23. W
  24. X
  25. Y
  26. Z
  27. #