Laserfiche WebLink
t ' <br /> i <br /> a <br />' ' z 14 November 1995 <br /> AGE NC Project No 95-0121 <br />' Page 18,of 20 <br /> u <br /> 1 dissolved hydrocarbon concentrations at the Nomelhru site with similar sites, a cleanup period of 24 > <br /> months is likely <br /> 7 3 5 COST F s <br /> Bioremediation of ground water can be a very cost-effective method of treatment With little on-site <br /> equipment required beyond the initial inoculation, the cost for in-situ bioremediation at the Nomellim <br /> site would be between $70,000 and $85,000 However, monitoring will vary depending upon <br /> regulatory requirements, which could significantly increase,the total cost of the project _ <br /> Typical costs for monthly momtbnng of an tri-sad bioremediation system, in addition to standard' <br />' quarterly sampling, would be approximately $1,500 00 per month Based on a one-year treatment <br /> period,the total cost for in-situ bioremediation at the Nomellim site would be between $80,000 and <br />' $110,000 <br /> pp , <br /> I 1 <br /> 8.0, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REMEDIATION OF HYDROCARBON- <br /> IMPACTED SOIL , <br />' Vadose-zone contamination at the site is present in the immediate vicinity of the former UST <br /> excavation from depths of approximately 15 to 30 feet bsg However, "smear zone' impaction at the <br /> site is laterally more extensive <br /> Excavation would require the removal of a significant volume of overburden soil before impacted sod <br /> could be removed Therefore, excavation does not appear to be a viable remedial method for the <br /> Isite We recommend an,rn-situ method for remediation <br /> I r <br /> Both in mu methods described in this CAP would be equally effective in remediating shorter-chain <br /> hydrocarbons'(gasohne) at the,site However, SVE will have little effect on the longer-chain <br /> hydrocarbons(diesel)present -Bioremediation has proven effective on both longer- and shorter-chain <br /> hydrocarbons <br /> From a cost basis, implementation of an in-situ bioremediation'program could be less costly than <br /> SVE However, monitoring requirements could increase the cost of bioremediation significantly It , <br /> t is our experience that regulatory agencies throughout the'State of California are apprehensive of <br /> approving the bioremediation method without conducting a comprehensive pilot test Performance <br /> ' of a comprehensive bioremediation pilot test would increase the total cost further <br /> t, <br /> t <br /> I <br /> , , r <br /> o t <br /> r <br /> f' <br />