Laserfiche WebLink
Site Background Information Former Stockton Plating Facility <br /> �• g <br /> Page 4 of 7 <br /> Water Extraction Pilot Test Report dated 31 January 2002 <br />' The January 2002 report stated that the soil at the site has a high percentage of fine-grained matrix <br /> and overall is homogenous and mostly fine-grained In general this soil type has a high adsorption <br />' capacity and low permeability, and thereby could potentially limit migration of dissolved <br /> hydrocarbons However,despite the fine-grained nature of the soil,the feasibility test results showed <br /> that groundwater extraction should be effective on the site The groundwater extraction rates during <br />' full-scale remediation are not likely to exceed the pilot test extraction rate(five gallons per minute), <br /> and may be less for effective ground water extraction and stabilized drawdown <br />' In the report, AGE recommended the use of ground water extraction as an alternative ground water <br /> remediation technique at the site Ground water extraction should provide adequate capture of the <br /> dissolved hydrocarbons, based on site-specific hydrogeologic conditions and hydrocarbon <br />' distribution The limited areal distribution of high concentrations of dissolved hydrocarbons near the <br /> source of the release favors capturing the mayor portion of the dissolved hydrocarbons on the site <br />' A groundwater extraction system in the source area,along the down-gradient portion of significantly <br /> impacted ground water, should effectively address the plume of impacted ground water AGE <br /> recommended preparation of a remedial action work plan for the installation of additional ground <br /> lie water extraction wells around the former UST area in order to increase 1)the efficiency-of-operation <br /> of a ground water extraction treatment system and 2)the effectiveness of the ground water extraction <br /> systems ability to address the dissolved hydrocarbons <br />' The AGE-prepared Final Remediation Plan, dated 23 April 2002,recommended the use of ground <br /> water extraction as an alternative ground water remediation technique at the site, along with soil <br />' vapor extraction EHD letter, dated 25 July 2002, issued a denial FRP and requested an additional <br /> cost analysis of remediation technologies <br /> tThe Ground Water Extraction Clean Up Analysis, dated 31 August 2002,supported the idea that the <br /> limited areal distribution of high concentrations of dissolved hydrocarbons near the source of the <br /> release favors an aggressive approach for removing the dissolved hydrocarbon on-site AGE <br />' recommended a ground water extraction system in the source area and along the historical down- <br /> gradient portion of significantly impacted ground water <br /> EHD approval letter of FRP technoloy date 28 May 2003 A Final Remediation Plan Addendum, <br /> dated 18 July 2003,was approved by the EHD on 29 July 2003 <br /> SOIL-VAPOR EXTRACTION SYSTEM INSTALLATION <br /> tThe SVE system utilized two-inch diameter, schedule 40 PVC piping installed underground from <br /> each well-head at vapor extraction wells and ground water extraction wells EW-1 and EW-2 to the <br /> 1 <br /> Arlvancerl GeoEnvironmental,Inc <br />