DOCSLIB.ORG

For IRP Sites 10, 13, 15, 26, & 27, W/Appendices AC

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
For IRP Sites 10, 13, 15, 26, & 27, W/Appendices AC SEMS-RM DOCID # 1166269 THE UNITED STATES NAVY INSTALLATION RESTORATION PROGRAM FINAL RECORD OF DECISION FOR INSTALLATION RESTORATION PROGRAM SITES 10, 13, 15, 26, AND 27 ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE, GUAM January 2011 THE UNITED STATES NAVY INSTALLATION RESTORATION PROGRAM FINAL RECORD OF DECISION FOR INSTALLATION RESTORATION PROGRAM SITES 10, 13, 15, 26, AND 27 ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE, GUAM January 2011 Table of Contents Contents .................................................................................................................................. iii Acronyms ................................................................................................................................. v 1.0 Declaration .................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Site Name and Location ................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Statement of Basis and Purpose ........................................................................ 1-1 1.3 Selected Remedy and Statutory Determinations .............................................. 1-2 1.4 Authorizing Signatures ..................................................................................... 1-3 1.4.1 U.S. Navy .......................................................................................................... 1-3 1.4.2 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ............................................................ 1-5 1.4.3 Guam Environmental Protection Agency ......................................................... 1-7 2.0 Decision Summary ........................................................................................................ 2-1 2.1 Site Name, Location, and Description .............................................................. 2-1 2.2 Site History and Enforcement Activities .......................................................... 2-2 2.2.1 Base Operational History .................................................................................. 2-2 2.2.2 Site 10 History ................................................................................................ 2-19 2.2.3 Site 13 History ................................................................................................ 2-19 2.2.4 Site 15 History ................................................................................................ 2-19 2.2.5 Site 26 History ................................................................................................ 2-20 2.2.6 Site 27 History ................................................................................................ 2-20 2.2.7 Previous Investigations and Response Actions .............................................. 2-20 2.2.8 Enforcement Activities ................................................................................... 2-46 2.3 Community Participation ................................................................................ 2-46 2.4 Scope and Role of Operable Unit or Response Action .................................. 2-50 2.5 Site Characteristics ......................................................................................... 2-51 2.5.1 Physiography and Climate .............................................................................. 2-51 2.5.2 Geology ........................................................................................................... 2-51 2.5.3 Hydrogeology ................................................................................................. 2-52 2.5.4 Ecology ........................................................................................................... 2-53 2.5.5 Nature and Extent of Contamination .............................................................. 2-54 2.6 Current and Potential Future Land and Resource Uses .................................. 2-67 2.6.1 Land Use ......................................................................................................... 2-67 2.6.2 Groundwater and Surface Water Uses ............................................................ 2-69 2.7 Summary of Site Risks ................................................................................... 2-70 2.7.1 Summary of Human Health Risk Assessment ................................................ 2-70 2.7.2 Summary of Ecological Risk Assessment ...................................................... 2-98 2.8 Documentation of Significant Changes ........................................................ 2-105 3.0 Responsiveness Summary ............................................................................................ 3-1 3.1 Stakeholder Comments and Lead Agency Responses ...................................... 3-1 3.2 Technical and Legal Issues ............................................................................... 3-1 4.0 References ..................................................................................................................... 4-1 Final NFA ROD, IRP Sites 10, 13, 15, 26, and 27 iii Andersen AFB, Guam January 2011 Tables 2-1 Public Notification of Document Availability ........................................................... 2-49 2-2 Public Comment Period Requirements ...................................................................... 2-49 2-3 Exposure Point Concentrations for COCs Detected at Sites 10, 13, 15, 26, and 27 .. 2-72 2-4 Carcinogenic Toxicity Information for the Ingestion, Dermal Pathway ................... 2-81 2-5 Carcinogenic Toxicity Information for the Inhalation Pathway ................................ 2-82 2-6 Non-Cancer Toxicity Information for the Ingestion, Dermal Pathway ..................... 2-83 2-7 Non-Cancer Toxicity Information for the Inhalation Pathway .................................. 2-85 2-8 Summary of Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risks and Cumulative Non-Cancer Hazard Indices at the Seven Sites on Andersen AFB ................................................ 2-88 2-9 Assessment and Measurement Endpoints for Step 3a BERA Considerations for Sites 10, 13, 15, 26, and 27 ...................................................................................... 2-100 2-10 Tier 2 COPECs that Failed the Tier 2 LTL Screening Process ............................... 2-101 Figures 1 Location of Guam in the Pacific Ocean ....................................................................... 2-3 2 Andersen AFB Location Map ...................................................................................... 2-5 3 Site Location Map ........................................................................................................ 2-7 4 Location Map IRP Site 10............................................................................................ 2-9 5 Location Map IRP Site 13.......................................................................................... 2-11 6 Location Map of IRP Site 15 ..................................................................................... 2-13 7 Location Map of IRP Site 26 ..................................................................................... 2-15 8 Location Map IRP Site 27.......................................................................................... 2-17 9 Site 10 Sampling Locations ....................................................................................... 2-23 10 Excavation Boundaries and Soil Confirmation Sampling Locations IRP Site 10 ..... 2-25 11 Sampling Locations at Site 13 – Original Site ........................................................... 2-29 12 Sampling Locations at Site 13 – Expansion Site ....................................................... 2-31 13 Site 15 Sampling Locations ....................................................................................... 2-35 14 Site Excavation Boundaries, Site 15 Soil Removal Action ....................................... 2-37 15 Site 26 Sampling Locations ....................................................................................... 2-41 16 Site 27 Sampling Locations ....................................................................................... 2-47 17 Soil Sample Results Above Screening Levels, IRP Site 10 ....................................... 2-55 18 Soil Sample Results Above Screening Levels, IRP Site 13 (Original Site) .............. 2-57 19 Soil Sample Results Above Screening Levels, IRP Site 13 (Expansion Site) ........... 2-59 20 Post-Removal Soil Sample Results Above Screening Levels at IRP Site 15 ............ 2-63 21 Surface and Shallow Subsurface Soil Sample Results Above Screening Levels Locations at IRP Site 27 ............................................................................................ 2-65 22 Generalized Conceptual Site Model .......................................................................... 2-79 Appendices A Federal Facility Agreement Notice Letters B Responsiveness Summary and Response to Regulatory Comments C Risk Characterization Tables Final NFA ROD, IRP Sites 10, 13, 15, 26, and 27 iv Andersen AFB, Guam January 2011 Acronyms °F degree Fahrenheit µg/dL microgram per deciliter g/L microgram per liter % percent 36 ABW 36th Air Base Wing AFB Air Force Base AR Administrative Record AST aboveground storage tank BCO Base Commanding Officer BERA baseline ecological risk assessment BGP Base General Plan bgs below ground surface Bldg. Building BTV background threshold value Cal/EPA California Environmental Protection Agency
Load more

Recommended publications
  • United States Air Force and Its Antecedents Published and Printed Unit Histories
    UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AND ITS ANTECEDENTS PUBLISHED AND PRINTED UNIT HISTORIES A BIBLIOGRAPHY EXPANDED & REVISED EDITION compiled by James T. Controvich January 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTERS User's Guide................................................................................................................................1 I. Named Commands .......................................................................................................................4 II. Numbered Air Forces ................................................................................................................ 20 III. Numbered Commands .............................................................................................................. 41 IV. Air Divisions ............................................................................................................................. 45 V. Wings ........................................................................................................................................ 49 VI. Groups ..................................................................................................................................... 69 VII. Squadrons..............................................................................................................................122 VIII. Aviation Engineers................................................................................................................ 179 IX. Womens Army Corps............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • DOD Is Beefing up Operations at Andersen Air Force Base and Throughout the Marianas
    ccess is the name of the game for security in the Pacific. For airmen, this access hinges on Guam. Guam is an American pos- session—US soil. While there are many other desirable bas- Aing locations in the western Pacific, Guam—nearly 220 square miles of sov- ereign American territory about 3,900 miles west of Hawaii—is the only one where basing rights will never be an issue. Andersen Air Force Base, at the north- ern tip of the island, is a historic instal- lation. The main runway is famous for its dip in the center, an ocean cliff at the end, and its white color—radiating from crushed coral mixed in the concrete. Andersen hosted US combat aircraft in World War II and throughout the Vietnam War and the Cold War. For the last 10 years, USAF has been increasing its presence on Guam. So has the Navy, which homeports submarines there, and plans call for some Marine Corps aviation and ground units from Okinawa to move to a new home on the island. The strategic importance of Guam extends to other territories in the Marianas island chain such as Tinian and Saipan. President Obama’s Asia-Pacific rebal- ance leans heavily on Guam for access, transient staging, and presence. “What many people do not realize is that it sits at the tip of the spear for the defense of our nation and is woven into the strategic fabric of the Pacific theater,” noted Rep. Solomon Ortiz (D- Tex.) in 2009. The Guam Hub Before airpower, the Northern Mari- anas were the site of Spanish imperial stopovers and Japanese occupation.
    [Show full text]
  • Reposturing the Force V
    NAVAL WAR COLLEGE NEWPORT PAPERS 26 N A Reposturing the Force V AL U.S. Overseas Presence in the Twenty-first Century W AR COLLEGE NE WPOR T P AP ERS N ES AV T A A L T W S A D R E C T I O N L L U E E G H E T R I VI IBU OR A S CT MARI VI 26 Carnes Lord, Editor Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile Composite Default screen Cover Preparations for evening flight operations on board the aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75) in March 2005. U.S. Navy photo by Photographer’s Mate Airman Ryan O’Connor. T:\Academic\Newport Papers\Newport Paper Lord\Ventura\NPLord.vp Tuesday, February 07, 2006 10:14:03 AM Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile Composite Default screen Reposturing the Force U.S. Overseas Presence in the Twenty-first Century Carnes Lord, Editor NAVAL WAR COLLEGE PRESS Newport, Rhode Island T:\Academic\Newport Papers\Newport Paper Lord\Ventura\NPLord.vp Tuesday, February 07, 2006 10:14:13 AM Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile Composite Default screen Naval War College The Newport Papers are extended research projects that the Newport, Rhode Island Editor, the Dean of Naval Warfare Studies, and the Center for Naval Warfare Studies President of the Naval War College consider of particular Newport Paper Twenty-six interest to policy makers, scholars, and analysts. February 2006 The views expressed in the Newport Papers are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the President, Naval War College Naval War College or the Department of the Navy.
    [Show full text]
  • ROD) Presents the Selected Remedies for Installation Restoration Program (IRP) Sites 63, 64, and 77 Located in the Site-Wide Operable Unit at Andersen AFB, Guam
    SDMS DOCID # 1150011 THE UNITED STATES NAVY INSTALLATION RESTORATION PROGRAM FINAL RECORD OF DECISION FOR SITES 63, 64, AND 77 SITE-WIDE OPERABLE UNIT ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE, GUAM December 2010 THE UNITED STATES NAVY INSTALLATION RESTORATION PROGRAM FINAL RECORD OF DECISION FOR SITES 63, 64, AND 77 SITE-WIDE OPERABLE UNIT ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE, GUAM December 2010 I Form Approved REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188 The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources. gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and review ing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of I information, including suggestions for reducing the burden. to the Department of Defense, Executive Services and Communications Directorate (0704·0188}. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number . PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ORGANIZATION. j 1. REPORT DATE (00-MM-YYYY) , 2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED (From - To} 12-2010 Final 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER Final Record of Decision for Sites 63 , 64, and 77, FA8903-08-D-879 l Site-Wide Operable Unit, Andersen Air Force Base, Guam 5b. GRANT NUMBER I 5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER ] Brenda Nuding, Summer Barbina, and Scott Moncri ef, P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • The Madman Nuclear Alert the Madman Nuclear Scott D
    The Madman Nuclear Alert The Madman Nuclear Scott D. Sagan and Alert Jeremi Suri Secrecy, Signaling, and Safety in October 1969 On the evening of October 10, 1969, Gen. Earle Wheeler, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS), sent a top secret message to major U.S. military commanders around the world informing them that the JCS had been directed “by higher authority” to increase U.S. military readiness “to respond to possible confrontation by the Soviet Union.” The Strategic Air Command (SAC) was ordered to stand down all aircraft combat training missions and to increase the number of nuclear- armed B-52 bombers on ground alert. These readiness measures were imple- mented on October 13. Even more dramatic, on October 27 SAC launched a series of B-52 bombers, armed with thermonuclear weapons, on a “show of force” airborne alert, code-named Giant Lance. During this alert operation, eighteen B-52s took off from bases in California and Washington State. The bombers crossed Alaska, were refueled in midair by KC-135 tanker aircraft, and then ºew in oval patterns toward the Soviet Union and back, on eighteen- 1 hour “vigils” over the northern polar ice cap. Why did the U.S. military go on a nuclear alert in October 1969? The alert was a loud but secret military signal ordered by President Richard Nixon. Nixon sought to convince Soviet and North Vietnamese leaders that he might do anything to end the war in Vietnam, in accordance with his “madman the- ory” of coercive diplomacy. The nuclear alert measures were therefore spe- ciªcally chosen to be loud enough to be picked up quickly by the Soviet Union’s intelligence agencies.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Integrated Trip Report: Site Visits to Area 50, Andersen Air Force Base, Guam National Wildlife
    Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center Final Integrated Trip Report—Site Visits to Area 50, Andersen Air Force Base, Guam National Wildlife Refuge, War in the Pacific National Historical Park, Guam, Rota and Saipan, CNMI, 2004–2005 By Steven C. Hess and Linda W. Pratt 2006 Open-File Report 2005–1299 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Mark D. Myers, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia 2006 For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS Suggested citation: Hess, S.C. and Pratt, L.W., 2006, Final Integrated Trip Report—Site Visits to Area 50, Andersen Air Force Base, Guam National Wildlife Refuge, War in the Pacific National Historical Park, Guam, Rota and Saipan, CNMI, 2004–2005: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2005–1299 [available on the World Wide Web at URL http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1299 ]. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report. ii Contents Introduction .........................................................................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Linebacker Ii a View from the Rock
    BRIG GEN JAMES R. McCARTHY and LT COL GEORGE B. ALLISON A VIEW FROM THE ROCK LINEBACKER II A VIEW FROM THE ROCK Brigadier General James R. McCarthy and Lieutenant Colonel George B. Allison With a new foreword by Major General Thomas Bussiere, Commander, Eighth Air Force NEW EDITION Air Force Global Strike Command Office of History & Museums Barksdale AFB, Louisiana i LINEBACKER II | A VIEW FROM THE ROCK This is a New Edition of the original 1976 book published by Air University. It has been reformatted for print and e-book, with new layout, illustrations, front-matter, and index. The main text of the book has not been altered from the original. New Edition, 2018 Cover art by Matthew C. Koser New Edition illustrations by Zaur Eylanbekov History & Museums Program Air Force Global Strike Command 245 Davis Ave East Barksdale AFB, Louisiana 71110 ISBN: 978-0-9993317-0-5 (Perfect-bound) ii FOREWORD TO THE 2018 EDITION By Major General Thomas Bussiere, Commander, Eighth Air Force In 1909, Henry H. “Hap” Arnold, the first and only Five-Star General of the Air Force, saw his first airplane in Paris. His adventurous spirit would not allow him to sit the bench while this new technology took off. In April of 1911, Hap Arnold began learning how to fly— his instructors: the Wright Brothers! A year later, while flying his Wright Model C airplane, he went into an uncontrolled spin. He was able to recover the aircraft, but this event so traumatized Hap that he didn’t know if he could ever convince himself to fly again.
    [Show full text]
  • Guam, a US Territory in the Western
    SpiritsSpirits ofof GuamGuam Airmen of USAF’s 325th Bomb Squadron took their bombers from Missouri to Guam in the most ambitious B-2 deployment yet. 4444 AIR FORCE Magazine // NovemberNovember 20052005 Photography by Ted Carlson Spirits of Guam High above the Pacific, B-2 bomber pilots carry out a training mission in Spirit of Texas. It is one of four stealthy Spirits that operated from Andersen AFB, Guam, for six months, the longest B-2 deployment yet. AIRAIR FORCEFORCE MagazineMagazine // NovemberNovember 20052005 4545 uam, a US territory in the Western GPacific, has become an important staging area for Air Force bombers. Vari- ous long-range aircraft—B-1s, B-2s, and B-52s—based on the US mainland rotate through Andersen Air Force Base, an im- Photos Carlson Ted by mense facility on the island, maintaining a continuous presence in the region. While at Guam, units report to Pacific Air Forces and US Pacific Command. The bomber ro- tations in Guam began in early 2004. When on station, aircraft and airmen are under the 36th Air Expeditionary Wing. Individual aircraft are attached to expeditionary bomb squadrons. The bombers deployed to Guam give PACOM greater force-projection and global strike capability. Moreover, regular flying from Guam gives units valuable deploy- ment training and allows personnel to participate in coalition training exercises. The four B-2As most recently in Guam were deployed with their unit, the 325th Bomb Squadron, part of the 509th Bomb Wing of Whiteman AFB, Mo. The 325th de- ployed its entire squadron, which included 24 combat ready pilots and more than 200 other personnel.
    [Show full text]
  • Record of Decision (Rods)
    EPA/ROD/R09-02/635 2002 EPA Superfund Record of Decision: ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE EPA ID: GU6571999519 OU 04 YIGO, GU 07/02/2002 THE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE INSTALLATION RESTORATION PROGRAM FINAL RECORD OF DECISION FOR HARMON ANNEX OPERABLE UNIT ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE, GUAM July 2002 THE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE INSTALLATION RESTORATION PROGRAM FINAL RECORD OF DECISION FOR HARMON ANNEX OPERABLE UNIT ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE, GUAM July 2002 Form Approved REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503. 1 . AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED July 2002 Final 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS Record of Decision for Harmon Annex Operable Unit, F-41 624-00-D-8052-003 Andersen Air Force Base, Guam Delivery Order 03 6. AUTHOR(S) Michael Bone, P.E. (Foster Wheeler Environmental Corporation) Toraj Ghofrani, P.E. (EA Engineering, Science, & Technology, Inc.) 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER Foster Wheeler Environmental Corporation 43 Union Blvd., Suite 1010, Lakewood, CO 80228-1829 N/A EA Engineering, Science, & Technology, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • US Pacific Command Will Oversee 146 Military Exercises This Year to Build Relationships and Hone Combat Readiness
    Sharpening the Spear USAF photo by SSgt. Lakisha A. Croley By Richard Halloran US Pacific Command will oversee 146 military exercises this year to build relationships and hone combat readiness. 72 AIR FORCE Magazine / February 2011 ar more than any other mili- tary force in the Asia-Pacific region, US Pacific Com- mand trains airmen, soldiers, Fsailors, and marines in an extensive array of exercises intended to give them an advantage over likely adversaries—and thus deter potential enemies. USAF photo TSgt.by Shane CuomoA. Some of the 146 exercises on PA- COM’s schedule for Fiscal 2011 are those of a single service; more focus on joint training. Others are bilateral, where the US seeks to build trust and confidence in the forces of another nation. Still others are multilateral coalition-building efforts. Among the newer type of exercises is training for humanitarian operations. Cobra Gold is representative. In the spring, all four US services are sched- uled to head to Thailand to take part in Cobra Gold alongside Thai forces and those of Singapore, Japan, Indonesia, South Korea, and Malaysia, with a total Left: An F-15 is refueled during December’s Keen Sword exercise at Kadena AB, of 11,000 participants. The US Army Japan. Above: USAF, Thai Air Force, and Singapore Air Force members track a and Marine Corps alternate each year “downed” aircraft during a Cobra Gold exercise. Below: Photographers snap a C-17 Globemaster III during 2010’s RIMPAC exercise. PACOM participates in the most as the US ground element, with the exercises of any military force in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Usaf & Ussf Installations
    2021 ALMANAC USAF & USSF INSTALLATIONS William Lewis/USAF William A B-52 Stratofortress bomber aircraft assigned to the 340th Weapons Squadron at Barksdale Air Force Base, La., takes off during a U.S. Air Force Weapons School Integration exercise at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev., June 2. Domestic Installations duty USAF: enlisted, 1,517; officer, 1501. Own- command: USSF. Unit/mission: 13th SWS ing command: AETC. Unit/mission: 42nd (USSF), 213th SWS (ANG), missile warning. Bases owned, operated by, or hosting substantial ABW (AETC), support; 908th AW (AFRC), History: Dates from 1961. Department of the Air Force activities. Bases marked air mobility operations; Air Force Historical “USSF” were part of the former Air Force Space com- Research Agency (USAF), historical docu- Eielson AFB, Alaska 99702. Nearest city: mand and may not ultimately transfer to the Space mentation, research; Air University (AETC); Fairbanks. Phone: 907-377-1110. Acres: 24,919. Force. For sources and definitions, see p. 121. Hq. Civil Air Patrol (USAF), management; Total Force: civilian, 685; military, 3,227. Active- Active Reserve Guard Range USSF States Hq. Air Force Judge Advocate General Corps duty USAF: enlisted, 2,286; officer, 232. Owning (USAF), management; PEO-Business and command: PACAF. Unit/mission: 168th ARW UNITEDUnited STATES States Enterprise Systems (AFMC), acquisition. (ANG), air mobility operations; 354th FW (PA- History: Activated 1918 at the site of the CAF), aggressor force, fighter, Red Flag-Alaska AlabamaALABAMA Wright brothers’ flight school. Named for 2nd operations, Joint Pacific Alaska Range Complex Lt. William C. Maxwell, killed in air accident support; Arctic Survival School (AETC), training.
    [Show full text]
  • ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE, NORTH FIELD HAER No. GU-9 (Page 42)
    ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE, NORTH FIELD HAER No. GU‐9 Pati Point Yigo Guam County Guam WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA PHOTOGRAPHS HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior 333 Bush Street San Francisco, CA 94104 HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE, NORTH FIELD HAER No. GU‐9 Location: North Field is located on the northern end of Guam near Pati Point on present‐day Andersen Air Force Base (Andersen AFB) at latitude 13.58.58364, longitude 144.91395. The coordinate represents the northwest corner of the airfield. The coordinate was obtained on 9 December 2011 by plotting its location on the 1:24000 Pati Point, GU USGS topographic quadrangle map. The accuracy of the coordinate is +/‐12 meters. The coordinate’s datum is North American Datum 1983. North Field Runway’s location is restricted pending concurrence of the owner to release its location to the public. Andersen AFB is located near the town of Yigo, Guam. Present Owner: United States Air Force Present Use: Runway Significance: North Field (Site 66‐07‐1064) is significant for its association with Andersen AFB’s role as an important strategic and logistical location for the Air Force during the Cold War. North Field was originally constructed to serve as an airfield for B‐29 bombers as part of the strategic bombing campaign over Japan during World War II. After the war, the U.S. Air Force took control of the base and used it first as a bomber base for the Far East Air Force (FEAF) and then as the only Strategic Air Command (SAC) bomber base in the Pacific Rim.
    [Show full text]