WORK PLANS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Former Countryside Market, Stockton,California Feasibility Study and Interim Remedial Action Plan May 20,2013 4.0 EVALUATION OF INTERIM REMEDIAL TECHNOLOGIES This section of the document identifies and evaluates remedial technologies that could be applicable to remediate the petroleum hydrocarbon plume and residually impacted soil beneath the Site. SGI understands that the remedial objectives for this Site are as follows: actively remediate the plume until petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations in groundwater are below MCLS and/or at acceptable risk levels to human health and the environment, ensure petroleum hydrocarbons do not continue to migrate to off- site receptor points/domestic wells, and obtain case closure. Identified remedial technologies that have the potential for meeting these goals will be evaluated by utilizing seven criteria: ➢ Overall Protection of Human Health and Environment; ➢ Compliance with Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs), ➢ Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence; ➢ Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility, and Volume through Treatment; ➢ Short-Term Effectiveness; ➢ Implementability; and ➢ Cost. 4.1 Screening of Remedial Technologies Prior to performing a detailed evaluation of remedial technologies that coulc meet the remedial objectives for the Site and surrounding area, an initial screening of an extensive list of remedial technologies was performed. The technologies were screened based primarily on the following four criteria: ➢ Satisfying Remedial Objectives; ➢ Feasibility/Implementability; ➢ Effectiveness; and ➢ Estimated Cost. Remedial technologies were further screened based on the Site-specific conditions. Thus, since expedited groundwater cleanup to protect the Site and surrounding area domestic wells is the main goal, and petroleum hydrocarbon impacts are both limited and largely located at depths that do not feasibly allow for trenching or excavation activities, all ex-situ treatment technologies were immediately rejected. These include any technologies that require groundwater extraction, assuch technologies have been shown to either be inadequate or require decades or longer to achieve/su tain cleanup objectives (Nyer 1996). It is important to note that only a few vapor phase treatment technologi s were considered since the available bioattenuation zone (State Water Resources Control Board Low-Threat Underground Storage Faasaiiry Study and lFaaabllity SWdy B CRAP-Tari rmaLcoc 4-1 The Source Group,Inc.