My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ARCHIVED REPORTS XR0000240
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
B
>
B
>
1604
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0543431
>
ARCHIVED REPORTS XR0000240
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/5/2019 3:38:23 PM
Creation date
2/5/2019 2:07:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
ARCHIVED REPORTS
FileName_PostFix
XR0000240
RECORD_ID
PR0543431
PE
3528
FACILITY_ID
FA0003683
FACILITY_NAME
Caltrans-Stockton
STREET_NUMBER
1604
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
B
STREET_TYPE
St
City
Stockton
Zip
95206
APN
171-090-08
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
1604 S B St
P_LOCATION
01
P_DISTRICT
001
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.
/
101
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
6.0 DISCUSSION OF INTERIM SOIL REMEDIAL OPTIONS <br /> Environmental studies performed at the site indicate that a TPHg plume remains in soil generally <br /> beneath the UST excavation. Presented below are discussions of the remedial options typically <br /> evaluated for sites with soil impacted with TPHg. <br /> Remedial options associated with the current groundwater impacts are not discussed herein. Source <br /> removal of the residual TPHg in soil should be performed to evaluate potential benefits to <br /> groundwater associated with operation of the VES. After removal of the source hydrocarbons from <br /> soil, the remaining groundwater plume can be evaluated from arisk-based perspective for a possible <br /> low risk and no further action classification. This evaluation should be performed after final policy <br /> relative to low risk site criteria is issued by the State of California Water Resources Control Board. <br /> Such policy is currently under development. <br /> 6.1 No Remediation Alternative <br /> Due to the plume of TPHg-impacted soil beneath the site contacting groundwater, there exists the <br /> potential for continued leaching of petroleum hydrocarbons from soil to groundwater. Such leaching <br /> could further degrade the current groundwater quality and contribute to further downgradient <br /> groundwater plume expansion. Due to the potential for continued leaching of petroleum <br /> hydrocarbons to groundwater beneath the site, the "no remediation" alternative will not be given <br /> further consideration. <br /> 6.2 Excavation of Soil <br /> The removal of soil impacted with petroleum hydrocarbons would require extensive excavation <br /> beneath the UST excavation. Due to the depth of soil impacts being on the order of 65 feet, <br /> excavating impacted soil would not be a cost-efficient means of remediation. This option is <br /> considered non-permissible and will not be given further consideration. <br /> 6.3 On-site Soil Aeration,Off-site Soil Treatment <br /> These options would require the direct excavation of soil and are not feasible for the same reason <br /> presented in Section 6.2. <br /> 6.4 Bioremediation <br /> The design of an in-situ soil bioremediation system typically includes provisions for the injection of <br /> air, water, and nutrients into the plume for the purpose of enhancing the biological growth of <br /> naturally occurring microorganisms. The existence of residual TPHg in soil in proximity to <br /> groundwater poses risks associated with the injection of water for bioremediation. The leaching of <br /> Project No.S8100-06-11C -7- December 17,1996 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.