PB96-963117
                                 EPA/ESD/R09-96/156
                                 March 1997
EPA   Superfund
       Explanation of Significant Difference
       for the Record of Decision:
       Litchfield Airport Area,
       aka: Phoenix-Goodyear Airport,
       Goodyear/Avondale, AZ
       12/22/1995

-------
              PHOENIX-GOODYEAR AIRPORT AREA SUPERFUND SITE



                 EXPLANATION OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES #3



                   for the FINAL REMEDY RECORD OF DECISION
                                                                   s.


                                 December 1995








I. INTRODUCTION



      On September 26,  1989, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)



signed a Record of Decision (ROD) for the final remedy at the Phoenix-Goodyear Airport



(PGA) site in Goodyear, Arizona. The State of Arizona concurred with the remedy selected in



the 1989 ROD. In January 1991, EPA issued an Explanation of Significant Difference (ESD



#1) which modified and clarified the 1989 ROD on five points. In May 1993, EPA modified the



ROD a second time to explain the differences between the final remedy originally selected in



the 1989 ROD and the final remedy which will be implemented at the site (ESD #2). EPA is



now modifying the ROD a  third time to explain further differences between the final remedy



selected in 1989 and the remedy currently being implemented at the site. These changes are



not fundamental alterations of the remedy described in the 1989 ROD.



      Under Section 117  of the Comprehensive Environmental  Response, Compensation,



and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended by the Superfund Amendment and



Reauthorization Act of 1986, and pursuant to 40 C.F.R. Section 300.435(c)(2)(i) (55 Fed.Reg.



8666, 8852 (March 8, 1990)), EPA is required to publish an ESD when significant (but not



fundamental) changes are being considered to a final remedial action plan as described in a



ROD. If the changes fundamentally alter the nature of the selected  remedy, an amendment to



the ROD would be required [40 C.F.R. Section 300.435(c)(2)(ii)]. In this instance, EPA has



made a few important changes that modify the ROD requirements, but do not alter the



hazardous waste management approach that EPA selected in the ROD.  The changes will

-------
enhance the effectiveness of the remedy, and promote more effective cleanup of the site.
The purpose for each of these changes is described in detail in Section III of this document.
       This document provides a brief background of the site, a summary of the remedy
selected in the 1989 ROD and how that remedy was modified by the 1991 and 1993 ESDs, a
description of how this ESD affects the remedy originally selected by EPA in the 1989 ROD,
and an explanation of why EPA is making these changes to the ROD.  EPA is issuing this
third ESD to the 1989 ROD in order to take into account information received by EPA after
EPA's issuance of the 1991 and 1993 ESDs.
       The southern portion of the site consists of the Loral Defense Systems-Arizona (Loral)
property and the Phoenix-Goodyear Airport property and any groundwater contamination
emanating from these areas.  The northern portion of the site consists of the Unidynamics
property and any groundwater contamination emanating from these areas.  This ESD
proposes to modify the remedy selected for the site as follows:
       (1) modify the groundwater remedy for Subunit A groundwater to allow air sparging  of
Subunit A groundwater in areas where a soil vapor extraction system can collect and treat the
volatile organic compound (VOC) vapors emitted by the air sparging system in a manner
consistent with the ROD; and
       (2) modify the groundwater remedy for Subunit A groundwater to include use of a
metal adsorption wellhead treatment system, where appropriate, for wells connected to the
existing groundwater treatment plant.  This system would be used at any Subunit A
groundwater remedy extraction well with chromium contamination that, without such  a system,
would result in the effluent at the Subunit A groundwater treatment plant exceeding site clean-
up standards for metal contaminants.
                                       Page 2

-------
       This ESD modifies the remedy selected in the ROD for both the northern and the

southern portion of the PGA site, but will initially be implemented only at the southern portion

of the site.  EPA will evaluate the effectiveness of air sparging at PGA-south before deciding
                                                                       s.
whether to implement air sparging at PGA-north.  Currently chromium is a contaminant of

concern at PGA-south but not at PGA-north; accordingly, metal adsorption wellhead treatment

is not anticipated at PGA-north at this time.

       This ESD and supporting documentation will become part of the PGA Administrative

Record.  Copies of the Administrative Record for the PGA site (including this ESD) have been

placed at the following locations:

             Avondale Public Library
             328 West Western Avenue
             Avondale, Arizona 85323
             (602) 932-9415

             EPA Region 9 Superfund Records Center
             95 Hawthorne Street - 4th floor
             San Francisco, California  94105
             (415) 536-2000

EPA provided a fifteen (15) working  day comment period for the State of Arizona in

accordance with 40 C.F.R. Section 300.515(h)(3). State of Arizona comments on this ESD

are summarized in Section IV of this document and are also included in the PGA

Administrative Record file.  Pursuant to 40 C.F.R. Section 300.435(c)(2)(i), EPA will publish a

notice summarizing this ESD in a major newspaper of general circulation. A formal public

comment period is not required for an ESD.
                                       Page 3

-------
II. BACKGROUND



       The following provides a brief background of the PGA site, short summaries of the



remedy selected in the original 1989 ROD and changes to the 1989 ROD established by the



1991 and 1993 ESDs. Additional background information can be found in the 1989 ROD, the



1991 BSD, the 1993 BSD, and in the PGA Administrative Record.



A. Site Background and Description



       The PGA site is located primarily in Goodyear, Arizona, approximately seventeen (17)



miles west of Phoenix in the western part of the Salt River Valley. A groundwater flow divide



splits the site along Yuma Road into northern and southern portions.  The northern portion of



the site consists of the Unidynamics property, located at  102 S. Litchfield Road and all areas



with groundwater contamination in excess of site clean-up standards related to and emanating



from the Unidynamics property.  The southern portion of the site consists of the Loral Defense



Systems property located at 1300 S. Litchfield Road, the PGA property, and all areas with



groundwater contamination in excess of site clean-up standards related to and emanating



from the Loral and/or PGA properties.  Attachment #1 provides a map indicating the



approximate site boundaries of the  Phoenix-Goodyear Airport Superfund site. The current



land uses on and near the site are  agricultural, industrial, and residential.



       In 1981, the Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS) discovered that



groundwater in certain areas of the site was contaminated with solvents and chromium.  EPA



and ADHS conducted additional sampling  of wells in 1982 and 1983 which revealed eighteen



(18) wells contaminated with trichloroethylene (TCE).  As a result, EPA added the PGA site



(originally listed as the "Litchfield Airport Area Superfund Site") to the National Priorities List



(NPL) on September 8, 1983 (see Federal Register. Vol. 48, No. 175, p. 40671).  Other



hazardous substances found at the PGA site include acetone, methyl ethyl ketone (MEK),






                                       Page 4

-------
1,1,1-trichloroethane (TCA), 1,1-dichloroethylene (DCE), other volatile organic compounds



(VOCs), and chromium.



       Most of the groundwater and soil contamination in the southern portion of the site is
                                                                        \,


located within the Loral and airport properties inside an area of the site designated as Section



16. Contaminated "shallow groundwater" (hereafter referred to as Subunit A groundwater)



within Section 16 was addressed in the first phase of the remedy for the PGA Superfund site



and is  referred to as the Section 16 Operable Unit. A Record of Decision for the Section 16



Operable Unit was signed on September 29, 1987. The designated remedy of a pump and



treat system for Subunit A groundwater has been operating since December 1989. A primary



objective of the Section 16 Operable Unit is to protect human health and the environment by



preventing the migration of contaminated groundwater and resulting aquifer degradation.



       Groundwater currently used for drinking water in the area of the site meets federal and



state drinking water standards.  However, because municipal water supplies in the area of the



site are dependent on groundwater, future population growth in the area could require use of



groundwater in contaminated areas and may result in potential exposure to hazardous



substances.



       The clean-up work in the northern portion of the site is being carried out by



Unidynamics, whereas the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company is the  lead party implementing



the work in the southern portion of the site.  EPA, with the assistance of the Arizona



Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ), authorizes and oversees all clean-up activities



at this  Superfund site.



B. Remedy Selected in the 1989 ROD



       The ROD for the final remedy at the PGA Site was signed by the EPA Regional



Administrator on September 26, 1989.  In addition to selecting the remedial actions described





                                        Page 5

-------
below, the final remedy also incorporates the Section 16 Operable Unit. The groundwater
clean-up levels for the PGA site are identified in Table 2-5 of the ROD1. The groundwater
cleanup levels for the Section 16 Operable Unit are identified in Table 2-5 and in Table 1 of
the 1987 ROD.
                    ROD Remedy for Southern Portion of PGA Site
       For the southern half of the site, the remedy consists of extraction and treatment of
contaminated Subunit A groundwater and "deep groundwater" (hereafter referred to as
Subunit B/C groundwater) and soil vapor extraction for contaminated soils.  The Subunit A
groundwater and the Subunit B/C groundwater remedial actions require a pump and treat
system using air stripping to remove VOCs from the groundwater.  The ROD states that
groundwater remedial action shall consist of three (3) new Subunit B/C groundwater wells for
extraction and treatment of Subunit B/C groundwater at a central treatment plant.  The ROD
states that the central treatment plant may be operated without emissions controls as long as
compliance with Federal, State, and local air pollution regulations can be maintained. In
addition, the ROD requires that treated water from the central treatment plant will be made
available to the City of Goodyear for municipal use.  The estimated total present worth cost of
the extraction and treatment facilities for the  groundwater remedy for the southern portion of
the site is $14,500,000.
       With  respect to VOC soil contamination at the southern portion of the PGA site, the
ROD selected a soil vapor extraction (SVE) system with emission controls.  The SVE system
is being implemented in certain required areas within an area identified as Target Area 2 in
   1 The groundwater cleanup levels in Table 2-5 of the ROD consist of: a) Federal and State of Arizona
legally Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs); and, b) other criteria used to ensure
the protectiveness of the remedy (known as To Be Considered (TBCs)).
                                        Page6

-------
Figure 5-2 of the ROD. The total present worth cost of the soil remedy for the southern



portion of the site is estimated to be $3,900,000 for a phased implementation.



                  ROD Remedy for Northern Portion of the PGA Site



      The remedial action selected for the northern portion of the site is similar to that



chosen for the south and includes a Subunit A groundwater remedy, a Subunit C groundwater



remedy, and a soil remedy.  The Subunit A groundwater remedy consists of a pump and treat



system using air stripping, followed by liquid phase granular activated carbon.  Vapor-phase



GAC air emission controls are required for the Subunit A groundwater remedy. The ROD



requires that the treated water from Subunit A groundwater remedy be reinjected, and the



treated water from the Subunit C groundwater remedy be incorporated into the community



water supply. The estimated present worth cost of the groundwater remedy for the northern



portion of the site is $14,000,000.



      The soil remedy consists of a SVE system with vapor-phase GAC air emission controls



to be implemented in the target area. The ROD identifies the target area as that area where



VOCs were detected in soil samples and the  area where soil gas samples exhibited VOCs



greater than 1 microgram per liter. The ROD provides that this area may be expanded or



reduced, as necessary, to include removal of 99 percent of the contaminants.  In addition, the



ROD states that excavation and treatment may be required to remove residual contamination



where soil vapor extraction is not effective. The estimated present worth cost of the SVE



system is $3,100,000.



C. The 1991 ESD changes to the 1989 ROD



      The ESD issued by EPA in January 1991 clarified and modified portions of EPA's



September 1989 ROD. To the extent that the 1991 ESD differed from the ROD, the 1991



ESD supersedes the ROD.  The 1991 ESD modified the ROD as. follows:






                                      Page?

-------
       (1)  The 1991 ESD revised the clean-up level for methyl ethyl ketone (MEK) in



groundwater from 170 parts per billion (ppb) to 350 ppb;



       (2)  The 1991 ESD set a clean-up level for acetone in groundwater at 70Q ppb;



       (3)  The 1991 ESD clarified the target area for the soil remedy in the northern portion



of the site and the criteria for establishing the clean-up levels.  On page four of the 1989



ROD, the soil remedy target area is described as "that area where VOCs were detected in soil



samples and the area where soil gas samples quantified VOCs greater than 1 microgram per



liter. The area may be expanded or reduced to include removal of 99 percent of the



contaminant."  In the 1991 ESD, EPA defined these statements to identify the soil remedy



target area for the northern portion of the PGA site to consist of target areas B and C defined



by all four circles in Figure 5-7 of the 1989 ROD;



       (4)  The 1991 ESD clarified the role of soil excavation as a remedy option, should the



selected soil remedy (soil vapor extraction) at the northern portion of the site prove ineffective.



The 1989 ROD states on page four that "excavation and treatment may be required to remove



residual contamination where soil vapor  extraction is not effective." In the 1991 ESD, EPA



interpreted  this to mean that excavation  and treatment of soil is one, but not the only, remedial



alternative EPA will consider for the soil  in the northern portion of the site if soil vapor



extraction is ineffective; and



       (5)  The 1991 ESD revised the selected remedy for an off-site agricultural well referred



to as the "Phillips Well" from wellhead treatment to routine water quality monitoring.   The 1991



ESD did not alter EPA authority to reimpose the requirement for wellhead treatment at the



Phillips Well should future monitoring indicate that the concentration  of any VOC has



exceeded the clean-up level identified in Table 2-5 of the 1989 ROD.  EPA's decision to
                                        Page 8

-------
reimpose wellhead treatment will be based on the Agency's review of water quality sampling

results for the Phillips well.

D. The 1993 ESD Changes to the 1989 ROD

       The ESD issued by EPA in April 1993 further modified portions of EPA's September

1989 ROD. To the extent that the April 1993 ESD differed from the ROD, the 1993 ESD

supersedes the ROD.

       The April 1993 ESD modified the selected remedy in the ROD for the northern portion

of the site as follows:

       (1) changed the emission control technology  for the Soil Vapor Extraction System from

vapor-phase granular activated carbon (GAC) to treatment by thermal oxidation with wet

scrubbing;

       (2) changed the designated  end use for water treated by the Subunit C groundwater

remedy from incorporation into the community potable water supply to reinjection back into the

Subunit C section  of the aquifer2; and

       (3) suspended the remedial  design and construction of the liquid-phase GAC treatment

requirement (or other similar effective technology) from the Subunit A groundwater remedy

until treatment plant influent data quality indicates the presence of a lower volatile compound

(e.g. ketones) at a concentration  of 50% or more of  its site groundwater cleanup standard.

       The April 1993 ESD modified the remedy selected for the southern portion of the site

as follows:
   2 An explanation of when municipal end-use may still be considered is explained in Section III.E of the
1993 ESD.
                                       Page 9

-------
       (1) changed the requirement for a centralized air stripping system for the Subunit B/C
groundwater remedy to a decentralized system (e.g., two or more independent liquid-phase
GAG treatment systems);
       (2) changed the designated end use for water treated by the Subunit B/C groundwater
remedy from municipal use to reinjection back into the Subunit B/C section of the aquifer3;
       The April 1993 ESD modified the selected remedy in the ROD for both portions of the
site as follows:
       (1) added the requirement that should any private or municipal drinking water well in
the vicinity of the PGA site, including but not limited to City of Goodyear wells number 1, 2, 3,
7, 10, 11 and the Parkshadows drinking water well, have an occurrence of a contaminant
listed in Table 2-5 of the ROD in a concentration in excess of its groundwater clean-up
standard and such contamination is related to contamination in the Unidynamics or airport
areas, such drinking water well(s) shall be treated as soon as possible by wellhead liquid-
phase GAG treatment  or other similar technology as approved by EPA.
       (2) established four additional groundwater clean-up standards for Table 2-5 of the
ROD as follows:
             Benzene - 5 parts per billion (ppb)
             Ethylbenzene - 700 ppb
             1,1,2,2 Tetrachloroethane - 0.18 ppb
             Tetrachloroethene - 5 ppb
   3 same as footnote 2.
                                       Page 10

-------
III.  MODIFICATIONS TO THE ROD REMEDY



A.  Air Sparging


       This ESD modifies the groundwater remedy for Subunit A groundwater to allow air
                                                                      X

sparging of Subunit A groundwater.  Air Sparging technology acts to transfer liquid-phase


VOC groundwater contamination to vapor-phase VOC in unsaturated soils lying above the


groundwater which can then be easily removed by a SVE system. Successfully implemented,


air sparging can accelerate the removal of VOCs from the groundwater and reduce the time


needed for restoration of the aquifer. Air sparging will only be allowed to operate in Subunit A


groundwater in areas where an  overlying soil vapor extraction system can collect and treat the


VOC vapors emitted by the air sparging system.  The overlying SVE system must treat all


collected VOC vapors in a manner allowed by and consistent with the ROD.


       An air sparging system works in the following manner: (a) air sparging wells introduce


contaminant-free air bubbles into groundwater contaminated with VOCs; (b) the sparged air


bubbles force the transfer of VOCs  dissolved in groundwater (or VOCs sorbed on soil particles


in the groundwater zone) into the sparged air bubbles themselves due to the preference of


VOCs for the vapor phase;  (c) the sparged air bubbles naturally rise to the top of the


groundwater,  collecting VOCs along the way, until the bubbles leave the groundwater and


enter into pore spaces in the unsaturated soils lying above the groundwater; and (d) the


vapor-phase VOC contamination in  the pore spaces of the unsaturated soils is then vacuumed


and removed from the soils by SVE wells for subsequent treatment.  Successful application of


air sparging technology would lead to an acceleration of VOC mass removal and ultimate


cleanup of Subunit A groundwater.


       Given the fact that cost per pound of VOCs removed from the groundwater via pump


and treat technology is considerably higher than the cost of air sparging plus SVE, EPA has




                                      Page 11

-------
concluded that air sparging is a cost-effective technology when applied appropriately.  In



December 1994, with EPA approval, Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company conducted a pilot test



of air sparging technology at PGA-south (Reference 1). The pilot test results indicated that air



sparging could effectively accelerate the Subunit A groundwater cleanup. By a project



summary document dated September 1992 (EPA/600/SR-92/173), EPA studies of this



technology indicate that air sparging may make it possible to substantially decrease the time



required to achieve site closure (Reference 2). The estimated cost of this component of the



ESD at PGA-south is $131,800.  The estimated cost of this component has not yet been



evaluated for PGA-north.  It is anticipated that by accelerating the groundwater cleanup, the



overall cost of groundwater cleanup will be significantly reduced.



B. Metal Adsorption



      In addition, this ESD modifies the groundwater remedy for Subunit A groundwater to



include the use of a metal adsorption treatment system at certain Subunit A groundwater



remedy extraction wells. This system is required at any Subunit  A groundwater remedy



extraction well with chromium contamination that, without such a  system, would result in the



effluent at the Subunit A groundwater treatment plant exceeding  site clean-up standards for



metal contaminants. Adsorption systems like those employing Granular Activated Carbon



(GAC) are a common treatment technology for groundwater cleanup with VOCs.  As explained



above, pursuant to ESD #2, GAC was made part of the ROD remedy for Subunit B/C



groundwater at PGA-south. By document dated June 1992, EPA issued a June 1992 fact



sheet providing basic information regarding GAC (Reference 3).  GAC and other support



media can be manufactured to be "ion-specific," which means that certain metal contaminants



will be especially attracted to and adsorbed onto the media. This ESD allows the use of metal



adsorption systems at the wellheads of  certain Subunit A remedy extraction wells that meet






                                      Page 12

-------
the above-described conditions.  With EPA approval, Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company



conducted a treatability study in November 1994 of groundwater extracted by Subunit A



remedy well E-17 by two metal adsorption technologies: one using chromium-specific treated



GAG and one using chromium-specific treated media known as N-Tech Advanced Affinity



Chromatography (References 4 and 5). These treatability studies concluded that either



chromium-specific treated media would effectively remove chromium from chromium



contaminated Subunit A groundwater at PGA-south (Reference 6).  The estimated cost of this



component of the ESD for implementation at PGA-south is $142,000.








IV. SUPPORT AGENCY COMMENTS



      The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) and the Arizona Department



of Water Resources (ADWR) reviewed and concurred with this ESD.  Both ADWR and ADEQ



considered the ESD to be an adequate document and submitted no comments.







 V. STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS



      Considering the  new information that has been developed and the changes made to



the selected remedy upon implementation of this ESD, EPA believes that the remedy for the



PGA site will remain protective of human health and the environment, will continue to comply



with federal and state requirements that are applicable or relevant and appropriate to this



remedial action, and will continue to be cost-effective.  In addition, the revised remedy uses



permanent solutions and alternative treatment technologies to the maximum extent practicable



for this site. Some of the changes and clarifications contained in this ESD are significant, but



none of the proposed changes fundamentally change the remedy.  EPA also believes these
                                      Page 13

-------
          modifications to the remedy will be cost effective, accelerating the clean-up and restoration of


          the groundwater at PGA.


                                                                                \.


          VI. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ACTIVITIES


                EPA has presented these changes to the remedy in the form of an ESD because the


          changes are of a significant but not fundamental nature.  EPA provided the State of Arizona


          with a fifteen (15) day comment period on this ESD.  In accordance with Section 117(c) of


          CERCLA, 42  U.S.C. Section 9617, EPA will publish a notice in the Arizona Republic and the


          West Valley View newspapers which describes this ESD and its availability for review. In


          accordance with 40 C.F.R. Section 300.435(c)(2)(ii), this ESD and all documents that support


          the changes and clarifications herein will be contained in the Administrative Record for the


          PGA site prior to the commencement of the remedial actions affected by the final ESD.
      -)  .
 —Z^              '              /
<^"~f^( Keith Takata                                  Date
^\/     Deputy Director, Superfund
    A
                                                Page 14

-------
                      -ATTACHMENT 1
             Approximate Boundaries of
 Phoenix Goodyear Airport Area Superfund Site
                     Camelback Road
 Indian School
Thomas Road
                    McDowell
                   Van Buren
                UNIDVNAMICS
               PHOENIX,
                            Phoenix Y/
                           Goodyear
                            Airport
   Lower Buck
eye Road
                                 Broadway
                        Gila River
                 _ _.„. Approximate
                 """""" Site Boundaries
                                          \pga\BM\widMrM4we r»v.M17B3 ItUAtml
                             A-1

-------
                                 ATTACHMENT 2

                                Index of References

1.     Phoenix-Goodyear Airport (South) Subunit A Groundwater Remedy Acceleration - Air
      Sparging, Scott Zachary, Metcalf & Eddy, May 1, 1995

2.     Project Summary:  A Technology Assessment of Soil Vapor Extraction and Air
      Sparging, US EPA RREL, EPA/600/SR-92/173, September 1992

3.     EPA Facts About Activated Carbon Treatment, US EPA, June 1992

4.     "New Activated Carbon Technology Recovers Heavy Metals", Tom Lewis III, Industrial
      Wastewater,  July/August 1994

5.     Advanced Affinity Chromatography, NTEC Solutions, Inc.

6.     Chromium Removal Options for Well E-17 - Phoenix-Goodyear Airport, Goodyear,
      Arizona, Sharp & Associates via fax, May 2, 1995
                                       A-2

-------