Environmental Protection
Agency
Emergency end
Remedial Response
                     March 1983
Superfund
Record of Decision:
Commencement Bay/
Tacoma Well 12A Site,
WA

-------
                                   TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                            (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
 EPA/ROD/R10-83/001
2.
                              3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
 SUPERFUND RECORD OF DECISION:
 Commencement Bay/Tacoma Well  12A  Site,  WA
                              5. REPORT DATE
                              03/01/83
                              6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
                                                           8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
                                                            10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
                                                            11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
 401 M Street,  S.W.
 Washington,  D.C.  20460
                              13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                                Final ROD Report	
                              14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
                                                             800/00
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
      The  South Tacoma Channel, Well  12A is in the City of Tacoma,  WA, and lies within
 the Commencement Bay drainage area.   In Sept. 1981, Well 12A  was voluntarily removed
 from service  by the city when chlorinated organic solvents were detected.  During
 1982, volatile organics were discovered in nearby Well 9A which was also closed.  A
 ground water  study confirmed that  should the contaminated wells closest to the
 source remain shut down, pumping of  the other production wells  would draw the con-
 taminated plume throughout the well  field.
      The  cost-effective Initial Remedial Measure (IRM) is to  pump and treat water
 from Well 12A.  Pumping of the well  will assist in confining  contaminant movement
 within the  aquifer.  Air stripping will occasionally allow the  city to use the water
 when its  quality is acceptable.  The cost of the project is estimated to be
 $1,200,000.   Operation, maintenance,  and monitoring costs are estimated to be
 $60,000 annually.
      Key  Words: Cost Effective Alternative,  Ground Water Contamination, Hydraulic
                  Barrier, Contaminant Source  Location, Cleanup Goals, Dilution,
                  Water Quality Criteria,  Air  Pollution, Noise  Pollution, Selected
                  Alternative
 7.
                                KEY WORDS
                  DESCRIPTORS
                                              b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS  C.  COSATI Field/Croup
 Record of Decision
 Commencement  Bay/Tacoma Well 12A Site,  WA
 Contaminated  media:  gw
 Key contaminants:  solvents, VOCs, TCE,  DCE
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
                 19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report/
                   None
21. NO. OF PAGES
  56
                                              20. SECURITY CLASS (This page I
                                                 None
                                                                         22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220.1 (R«v. 4-77)   PREVIOUS EDITION is OBSOLETE

-------
                                                        INSTRUCTIONS

   1.   REPORT NUMBER
        Insert the LPA report number as it appears on the cover of the publication.

   2.   LEAVE BLANK

   3.   RECIPIENTS ACCESSION NUMBER
        Reserved for use by each report recipient.

   4.   TITLE AND SUBTITLE
        Title should indicate clearly and briefly the subject coverage of the report, and be displayed prominently. Set subtitle, if used, in smaller
        type or otherwise subordinate it to main title. When a report is prepared in more than one volume. rcpo;ii the primary title. add volume
        number and include subtitle for the specific title.

   6.   REPORT DATE
        Each report shall carry a date indicating at least month and year.  Indicate the basis on which it was selected (e.g.. dale i>Jissue, date of
        approval, date of preparation, etc.).

   6.   PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
        Leave blank.

   7.   AUTHOR(S)
        Give name(s) in conventional order (John R. Doe. J. Robert Doe. etc.). List author's affiliation if il iliffcrs from the per lot mi MI: ..rgani-
        zation.

   8.   PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER
        Insert if performing organization wishes to assign this number.

   9.   PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
        Give name, street, city, state, and ZIP code. List no more than two levels of an organisational hircarchy.

   10.  PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
        Use the program element number under which the report was prepared. Subordinate numbers may he included m parentheses.

   11.  CONTRACT/GRANT NUMBER
        Insert contract or grant number under which report was prepared.

   12.  SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
        Include ZIP code.

   13.  TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
        Indicate interim final, etc., and if applicable, dates covered.

   14.  SPONSORING AGkNCY CODE
        Insert appropriate code.

   IS.  SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
        Enter information not included elsewhere but useful,  such as: Prepared in cooperation with. I Miisluiion «\. ('resented .11 eniiiciauc "I.
        To be published in. Supersedes, Supplements, etc.

   16.  ABSTRACT
        Include a brief (200 words or less) factual summary of the most significant information contained in the icport.  II UK- report contains a
        significant bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.

   17.  KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
        (a) DESCRIPTORS • Select from the Thesaurus of Engineering and Scientific Terms the proper authorised terms ilui identify  the major
        concept of  the research and are sufficiently specific and  precise to be used as index entries lor cataloging.

        (b) IDENTIP1ERS AND OPEN-ENDED TERMS - Use identifiers for project namis, code names, equipment designators, etc. Use open-
        ended terms written in descriptor form for  those subjects for which no descriptor exists.

        (C) COSATI HELD GROUP •  Field and group assignments are to be taken from the 1965 ( OSA11 Subject Category List. Since the ma-
        jority of documents are multidisciplinary in nature, the Primary field/Group assignmcni(s) will be specific discipline. ;irea of human
        endeavor, or type of physical object. The application!s) will be cross-referenced with secondary I idcl/< iroup assignments thai  will follow
        the primary postingls).

   18.  DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
        Denote releasability to the public or limitation for reasons other than security for example "Release I jilinnicd." file any availability lo
        the public,  with address  and price.

   19. &20. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
        DO NOT submit classified reports to the National Technical Information service.

   21.  NUMBER OF PAGES
        Insert the total number of pages, including  this one and unnumbered pages, but exclude distribution list, il any.

   22.  PRICE
        Insert the price set by the National Technical Information Service or the Government Printing Office, if known.
EPA Form 2220-1 (R«v. 4-77) 
-------
                          ROD ISSUES ABSTRACT


Site;    Tacoma Well 12A, Washington

Region;  X

AA, OSWER
Briefing Date;  March 18, 1983


                           SITE DESCRIPTION

    The South Tacoma Channel, Well 12A is in the City of Tacoma,
Washington and lies within the Commencement Bay drainage area.  In
September 1981, Well 12A was voluntarily removed from service by the
city when chlorinated organic solvents were detected.  During 1982,
volatile organics were discovered in nearby Well 9A which was also
closed.  A ground water study confirmed that should the contaminated
wells closest to the source remain shut down, pumping of the other
production wells would draw the contaminated plume throughout the well
field.

                          SELECTED ALTERNATIVE

    The cost-effective Initial Remedial Measure (IRM) is to pump and
treat water from Well 12A.  Pumping of the well will assist in
confining contaminant movement within the aquifer.  Air stripping wil^i
occasionally allow the city to use the water when its quality is
acceptable.  The cost of the project is estimated to be $1,200,000.
Operation, maintenance and monitoring costs are estimated to be $60,000
annually.

        ISSUES AND RESOLUTIONS                     KEY WORDS

1.  Pumping and treatment of one well in a field   . Cost Effective
    of multiple wells to provide a hydraulic         Alternative
    barrier to future contaminant migration        . Ground Water
    into the field and into other wells may be       Contamination
    considered an appropriate remedial action.     . Hydraulic
                                                     Barrier

2.  Investigation to locate a contaminant          . Contaminant Source
    source should continue even when treatment       Location
    of a contaminated area has been approved as
    a remedial response.  The source, when
    identified, should also be treated by an
    appropriate remedial action.  The pumping of
    Well 12A will prevent migration of the
    contaminants to other wells in the field,
    but does not eliminate the source of
    contamination.  Work on locating the source
    is continuing.
                              -1-

-------
Tacoma Well 12A, Washington
March 18, 1983
Continued
        ISSUES AND RESOLUTIONS                     KEY WORDS

3.  Establishing the goal for cleanup involved     .  Cleanup  Goals
    adjusting the water quality criteria to        .  Dilution
    reflect periodic use and dilution.              .  Water  Quality
                                                     Criteria

4.  When selecting a remedial action it is         .  Air  Pollution
    important to evaluate air and noise            .  Noise  Pollution
    pollution which may result from the            .  Selected
    implementation of the remedy.                    Alternative
                              -2-

-------
                            RECORD OF DECISION

                        REMEDIAL ACTION SELECTION


SITE:     Tacoma Well 12A
          Commencement Bay/South Tacoma Channel
          Tacoma, Washington

Documents Reviewed
     V
I have reviewed the following documents describing the need for and
analysis of the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of remedial alternatives
for Well 12A in the South Tacoma Channel:

     Study Titled:  Remedial Investigation, Well 12A
                    Tacoma, Washington, 2/10/83  (Draft)

     Study Titled:  Tacoma Well 12A, Remedial Action
                    Feasibility Study, February 1983  (Draft)

     Executive and Narrative Summaries

     Record of Decision Summary Sheet

     Public Participation Responsiveness Summary

     Staff Recommendations

Declarations

Consistent with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act of 1980, and the National Oil and Hazardous Substances
Contingency Plan, I have determined that the pumping and treatment of
Well 12A is a necessary and timely remedial action to protect public
health and the environment, is a feasible and cost-effective remedy, and
1s a necessary component of any final remedy that will effectively and
reliably mitigate and minimize damage to, and provide adequate protection
of public health, welfare and the environment.  I have also determined
that the action 1s appropriate when balanced against the need to use
Trust Fund money at other sites.
                                    :ting Assistant Administrator
                            Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response

-------
                          WELL 12A REMEDIAL ACTION
                              EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In conjunction  with several  State  and local  agencies,  EPA  1s  proposing  a
remedial.action  to allow treatment of. water from the contaminated  drinking
water Well  12A.  EPA  Is  working  In  close conjunction with the State  Depart-
ments of Ecology and Social  and  Health Services, the City  of Tacoma  Water
Division and the Tacora Pierce County Health Department.

The well was discovered  to be contaminated  with volatile organic  solvents
about September  1981.  At the  advice  of the Department of Social  and Health
Services,  the City voluntarily  removed  the  water  well  from service.   In
April 1982,  U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency began  an Investigation  of
the extent  and  nature of the contamination  found  1n  Well  12A.  At  the same
time, the  Tacoma Pierce County Health Department began  an Investigation  as
to possible sources of the  contaminants.  The  results of the  former Investi-
gation  demonstrate  that  there 1s  a contaminated  plume with organic solvents
In concentrations  of parts per million to the northeast  of  City  Well  12A.
The ultimate sources of this plume have not yet been Identified.

During  1982,  Well  12A was  out  of service  but other wells within  the well-
field continued  to  pump.  The  contaminant plume moved Into the wellfleld and
volatile  organlcs   were  discovered 1n nearby  Well  9A.   This well   1s  now
closed.   Results of the  groundwater  Investigation Indicate  that  contamina-
tion will  continue to move Into  the  wellfleld as pumping continues unless
remedial  action  1s pursued.  Without  action,  the contamination will effec-
tively  eliminate  Tacoma's  source of water  for  meeting  the higher summer
demand.

The proposed  action 1s  a  treatment  system 1n Well 12A which  will  remove the
contamination through aeration.   Pumping  of Well  12A will provide a barrier
to future  contaminant migration  Into  the wellfleld.   Treatment will  provide
the City with water of acceptable quality for consumption.   It  Is possible
that the system will be overloaded by the  contaminant levels.  In  the case
that effluent quality falls, the system  will  discharge  to Commencement Bay
but at  a  level sufficient to protect aquatic life.

Several  alternatives  were  examined before  selecting this system.   The pro-
posal of 5  aeration towers  1s the most cost-effective of  any of  the systems
evaluated.  Cost of the project 1s about $1.2 million.

Additional  work 1s  being  done to  locate the  source of  contamination.   If
this can be accomplished, further measures  will be taken to mitigate contam-
ination of  the  aquifer.

More detailed Information can be  obtained from the Remedial  Action Feasibil-
ity Study and by contacting EPA Region 10.

-------
                             NARRATIVE SUMMARY
HISTORY

    Tacoma Well 12A 1s within the South Tacoma Channel  Commencement Bay
    Superfund designation.  This area of Tacoma,  Washington 1s a commercial
    Industrial zone with a long history of development.

    In September 1981, volatile organic contaminants were found 1n the
    well.  At the advice of the State Department  of Social and Health Ser-
    vices, the well was removed from service by the City.  At that time,  the
    concentration was several hundred parts per billion,  Including tetra-
    chloroethane, trlchloroethylene and dlchloroethylene.

    In October, Commencement Bay was listed-on the Interim Priority List.  A
    remedial groundwater Investigation was Initiated to determine the extent
    of contamination and potentially locate a source.  Concurrently, surface
    Investigations looked at business types to Identify those which may have
    contributed to the problem.

    To date, no source has been Identified.  However, a plume of contamina-
    tion has been located giving a general direction, northeast, to the
    primary source.  Concentration within the plume 1s several parts per
    million.

    During 1982, Well 12A was out of service.  All of the other wells were
    1n operation during the summer pumping season.  Analysis of these other
    wells showed that an additional well had become contaminated.  This well
    was the closest to 12A, Immediately southwest.  The groundwater study
    confirmed that should the contaminated wells  closest to the source
    remain shut down, pumping of the other production wells would draw
    contaminants closer and evidently all the wells would be tainted.

    With two wells contaminated and to be held out of service, the City of
    Tacoma 1s placed 1n a situation of water shortages during the summer.
    Further, 1f contamination 1s permitted to move Into the wellfleld, 30*
    of the total, water system capacity would be lost.

CURRENT STATUS

    The remedial action feasibility study addresses the options for mitiga-
    tion.  They are generally  1) no action and abandonment of the contami-
    nated wells, 2) alternative water supply, and 3) treatment.

    No action 1s an unacceptable option as 1t does nothing to protect the
    drinking water supply and quality for the City of Tacoma.  Without some
    mitigation, contamination would move within the aquifer to other wells.

-------
     No alternative sources of water exist for the City 1n the short  term.
     The wellfield is essential to the City's future drinking water planning.

     Pumping and treatment of Well  12A 1s the only alternative capable  of
     protecting the ground water aquifer and alleviating drinking water
     shortages.  Pumping of the well  will provide an effective hydraulic
     barrier to contaminant movement within the aquifer.  Treatment of
     the water will allow the City to use the water as Its quality permits
     or to discharge the water to Commencement Bay at a quality sufficient
     to protect marine life.

     Treatment at Well 12A 1s an interim measure.  As a source or sources
     can be identified, actions for local control at the source may be
     more effective 1n mitigating contamination 1n the aquifer.
PUBLIC INPUT
     On March 10, 1983, a public meeting was held  regarding the proposed
     action.  Concurrently, public comment was solicited from information
     made available.  A responsiveness summary 1s attached in this package.

STATE INPUT

     The State of Washington, through Its Departments of Ecology and Social
     and Health Services, along with the City of Tacoma and the Tacoma/
     Pierce County Health Department, have cooperated with Region 10 and
     have supported this project.  The State/EPA contract is attached in
     the package.

RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE

     Section 300.68(e)(1) of the NCP authorizes Initial remedial measures
     that are necessary to limit exposure or threat of exposure to a
     significant health or environmental hazard.  The current contamination
     of Well 12A and the potential for serious additional contamination of
     the aquifer absent action to pump and treat Well 12A warrants
     Implementation of the proposed remedial action as an Initial remedial
     measure.  Our evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of each of the
     proposed alternatives, the comments received from the public,
     Information from the Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study
     Reports, and Information from the State, support a decision that
     the proposed project of treatment of the contaminated drinking
     water well by aeration, utilizing the pumping as a hydraulic barrier,
     1s the appropriate remedy.

     Section 300.68(j) of the NCP also states that the_appropr1ate extent
     of remedy shall be determined by the lead agency's selection of the
     remedial alternative which the agency determines 1s cost-effective
     (I.e., the lowest cost alternative that 1s technologically feasible
     and reliable and which effectively mitigates and minimizes damage
     to and provides adequate protection of public health, welfare, or
     the environment.  The above information supports a finding that

-------
     this proposed action would be Tirecessary component  of any final
     remedy that will  effectively mltfgate damage to and  provide adequate
     protection of public health, welfare, and the environment.

     Approval  of this  project 1s requested along with approval  of an
     allocation for $1.2 million for Its Implementation as needed above,
     the State of Washington" has endorsed the project and has assumed  a
     10% cost  share.
SCHEDULE
     This project 1s based upon a  hydraulic barrier being developed prior
     to heavy usage of the well field.   This would  dictate project start
     up 1n July 1983.  Immediate authority  1s required to complete design
     and construction by this deadline.

-------
                                         \CSW-OI
                                              S. 35 fh  ST I
                                               /27/82»l4
            MONITORING W£LL
            CONCENTRATION (ug/L)
            EXISTING  CITY WATER WELL
            CONCENTRATION (ug/L)
         — ESTIMATED EQUIVALENT
            CONCENTRATION LEVELS
            11 SL 33th ST.
    j
    SCALE IN rr*T
AREAL  DISTRIBUTION OF  1,1,2,2  TETRACHLOROETHANE
    FROM  OCTOBER  27,  1982  TO  NOVEMBER  30,  1982

-------
                                       AREA EXTENDS
                                       TO THE'NORTH
                                       AND TO THE EAST
                                                 ceo
                                LEfigND

                          •  MONITORING WELL
                          O  EXISTING CITY WATER WELL
            j    CCMCTERY j
PROBABLE  PRIMARY  SOURCE  AREA
         REMEDIAL  INVESTIGATION
           TACOMA  WELL  I2A
           TACOMA. WASHINGTON

-------