Laserfiche WebLink
I WE <br /> fflM <br /> provide some hydraulic cannecthat <br /> exsected This vi indicated by the fact <br /> rona would be ��WS was approximately 4 times <br /> sanded well <br /> F-ith the screened observation <br /> total. drawdown value <br /> greater than <br /> in 1' transmiss'�tdrawdo)wn data <br /> agreement between the the <br /> The general 6 recover* data and transmissivity <br /> fresm the a fcr�mation <br /> calculated pe foot,. The calculated <br /> Sul allons per dad P range of calcula-ce6 <br /> arts the int 200 200fl tions of an ave These <br /> ft Per year using test data. <br /> in the range <br /> °3.2_32 pumping <br /> velocitY values from the P P <br /> tsansmissivity shown in Attachment I. ether <br /> calculations are developed by WaterWark tog <br /> data data have been <br /> ling and hydrologic site. <br /> The camp ir►a2 stigatio:t and remedia tions for the <br /> With the Previous of remediation op and groundwater <br /> utili�od in tY"e evaluation with the former <br /> act+on plan aro arbons ust isassociat d$ tions considered <br /> Th: remedial patrolpufn hX • The op of the <br /> inpacted storage tanks on the property( ), t;e excavation <br /> underground include: on-site treatme disposal <br /> for soi3, rem,:diation followed by the in-sit" <br /> ocarbon impacted soils acted soils followed by <br /> hyd�' hydro a facility, and (a}' using vapor <br /> excavation npr a solid Waste soil <br /> to an app' from the affected PPn°gil and (5), for <br /> h drocarbons (4), sail three approaches <br /> removal of techniques, considered a Pump and treat system' <br /> extrac'tio•- 41e have component, and <br /> i at.ion. ncluding, (1) <br /> b_r�rerced.. remediation. i• alternative. <br /> gloundwaptap and treat system with a bioremediation <br /> c pPi g to the <br /> (2), um monitilrinc as part of a arc <br /> vrdin9 <br /> (3), Post clo3ure <br /> TIIG ve remediation al�ernatives were evaluated <br /> following criterya: health and the <br /> of protection of human uses of <br /> 1. �,evel including beneficial <br /> environment. <br /> ground and surface waters. and volume of <br /> Reduction <br /> Of tc,:Licity, mobility <br /> 2' <br /> contaluinants. <br /> 3. <br /> Compliance with regulatory guidelines. <br /> g, Cost effectiveness. <br /> 5. Short arra effectiveness. <br /> m effectiveness. <br /> 6• Lang ter <br /> 7. Implementabi.lity. <br /> g, ommunity <br /> Regulatory and C <br /> acceptance. <br /> 9. impacts on water conservation. <br /> 2 <br /> s <br /> SSLA402.w <br />