My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ARCHIVED REPORTS XR0000007
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
A
>
ACACIA
>
304
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0543359
>
ARCHIVED REPORTS XR0000007
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/22/2018 11:13:50 AM
Creation date
10/22/2018 9:56:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
ARCHIVED REPORTS XR0000007
FileName_PostFix
XR0000007
RECORD_ID
PR0543359
PE
3528
FACILITY_ID
FA0000733
FACILITY_NAME
RIPON USD-MAIN KITCHEN
STREET_NUMBER
304
Direction
N
STREET_NAME
ACACIA
STREET_TYPE
AVE
City
RIPON
Zip
95366
APN
25904005
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
304 N ACACIA AVE
P_LOCATION
05
P_DISTRICT
005
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
WNg
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
86
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
iC\V( 0 <br /> A S S O C I A T E S I N C <br /> ♦ Criterion 6 <br /> The long term effectiveness would be considerable if the entire plume of impacted <br /> groundwater is contained in the radius of influence of the pumping wells, preventing any <br /> possibility of additional migration of groundwater <br /> ♦ Criterion 7 <br /> This alternative would have minor implementation difficulties due to the high volume of <br /> activity at the site <br /> ♦ Criterion 8 <br />' The immediate impact to the nearby community would be moderate Negative impacts <br /> would include noise and disruption of site activities for one to two weeks when the <br /> groundwater extraction and treatment system is installed Impact of additional water <br />' through City of Ripon sewer system would likely be minimal <br /> 8.3 In-Situ Air Snaraing with Soil Vapor Extraction <br /> ♦ Criterion 1 <br /> This alternative has minimal health-based risks Petroleum hydrocarbons are removed from <br /> extracted vapor prior to release to the atmosphere eliminating the risk of exposure to <br /> humans Groundwater would be monitored periodically to ensure that reduction is <br /> occurring The potential fire or explosion hazard is minimal due to the relatively low levels <br /> of documented residual hydrocarbons, and would be further minimized with a properly <br /> designed system and regularly scheduled monitoring and maintenance <br /> 1 ♦ Criterion 2 <br /> Vapor extraction and air sparging would reduce the level of toxicity, mobility and volume <br /> of contaminants in the soil and groundwater to levels acceptable to regulatory agencies A <br /> pilot test would have to be conducted to determine if this is a feasible alternative for <br /> remediation of the site <br /> ♦ Criterion 3 <br /> This alternative can be implemented within regulatory guidelines <br /> ' ♦ Criterion 4 <br /> The soil vapor extraction and air spargmg remediation alternative would require the <br /> installation of at least three vapor extraction wells, at least one air sparge well, and the <br /> abatement equipment A pilot test would be conducted to determine if this remedial option <br /> is feasible If the pilot test indicates this remedial option is feasible, vapor-phase carbon can <br /> be used for treatment of off-gases It may be necessary to utilize another off-gas abatement <br /> method, which would require considerable capital outlay Additional costs to the client <br /> ' would be incurred for permitting, purchasing or leasing, and installing the vapor extraction <br /> W 1130991reportslsumweh doc 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.