ARCHIVED REPORTS XR0012547 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Y r� r I I Woodward-Clyde Conslllta"Is hazardous waste cleanup sites, as well as those which are currently unproven or limited in application. The technologies are presented in two categories: 1) those suitable for soils remediation and, 2) those suitable for groundwater remediation. Within each category, the technologies are grouped according to the general remedial approach, with a number of technologies being suggested for each group. Table 6 lists the general remedial approaches together with the associated technologies. A brief discussion of each technology, together with its advantages and disadvantages or limitations, is presented in Table 7. This summary presents sufficient information for a preliminary assessment of the technologies. Wherever obvious disadvantages preclude its use, the technologies are dropped from further consideration. Only technologies that are suitable for immediate application at the Caltrans Shop 10 facility are selected from this list. 5.2 Apptir•ahla Remedial TechnctoClfes Based on the preliminary comparison of remedial technologies presented In Table 7, it appears that groundwater extraction with vapor extraction (VES) and/or enhanced insitu biological treatment of soils with discharge of air stripped treated water to a sanitary M` sewer that leads to a publicly owned treatment works (POTW) is a preferred treatment option. This remedial option is described in more detail In section, 8.0. The remaining technologies evaluated, including incinarailon, iand treatment, on-site landfilling, insitu sleamlair stripping, insitu soil fixation, wnd soil washing are Inappropriate for application at Cal+,ans Shop 10 facility. Reasons that these technologies were not selected are discussed below. 5,2,1 Incineration. Incineration is generally favored when there is a relatively small quantity of highly toxic material which can be destroyed by a mobile unit, or when there is a continous stream of waste which can be treated In a permanent installation, in combination with some form of heat recovery. The need to excavate soil at the Caltrans Shop 10 facility makes this alternative unattractive since coi,laminants are present to a depth of at least 55 feet and can be removed by vapor and groundwater extraction. In addition, mobile steam strippers are not readily avall&a, permanent facilities do not exist, and extensive testing is required to evaluate the effectiveness of the Incineration process. Incineration is therefore eliminated from further consideration. 16