Laserfiche WebLink
09 March 2012 <br /> AGE-NC Project No. 96-0235 <br /> Page 2 of 2 <br /> AGE believes that an.$in-situ method will be required to mitigate the contaminates to near <br /> regulatory clean-up levels.The in-situ methods include; the current ozone injection and the <br /> previously proposed air-sparging; additionally in-situ chemical oxidation with injection solid <br /> media or liquid (Regenox or peroxide media) would be feasible for the site. <br /> Ground water extraction will not be effective in both cost and performance, over the <br /> duration required to remediate the site. Based on the ground water aquifer pumping test <br /> results, the feasibility of ground water extraction as a remediation option for removal of <br /> hydrocarbon-impacted ground water would required excessive time, mainly due to lower <br /> than acceptable recoverable hydrocarbon concentrations with low ground water production <br /> quantities, and be limited in the removal of adsorbed hydrocarbons from the impacted soil <br /> below the water table. Additionally, the costs for monthly discharge connection, discharge <br /> and treatment equipment capital, reduces the efficiency of ground water extraction <br /> treatment. The USTCF has clarified electrical and utilities are to be costs incurred and paid <br /> directly by the claimant. <br /> AGE requests a suspension of the directive for a feasibility study and sampling until the <br /> USTCF claim authority has been assigned to the current property owner KRC. <br /> If you have any questions or comments, please contact our office at (209) 467-1006. <br /> Advanced GeoEnvironmental,��ss NAL <br /> �o M R. liTc�s� <br /> No 7473 }* <br /> William R. Little <br /> Senior Project Geologist sr9T� <br /> California Professional Geologis �f 6t <br /> cc: West Clay/Knife River Construction <br /> Mr. Mark Owners , USTCF <br /> Mr .lamps Rarton CVRWO('R <br />