Laserfiche WebLink
.s <br /> Stockton ?lating Inc. <br /> Qcto"r 10, 1991 <br /> Page -11- <br /> former tank site. One of the drawbacks of this option are that <br /> the limits of gasoline contamination need to be further <br /> t investigated, most likely with additional soil borings, which ►Ay <br /> i be very difficult due to the limited space. Also the soil types <br /> ..- at the site which consist of clay, silt and fine sand, generally <br /> -? <br /> are too fine grained and dense for optimum vapor extraction. in <br /> -- large zones. The advantage of this option is that as the <br /> I volatiles are removed from the soils, the potential for further <br /> �.d <br /> contamination of soils and groundwater is reduced. <br /> Option 3 <br /> Re-excavate the site to remove as much of the remaining <br /> fes" " gasoline contaminated soil as possible. The clean soil would be <br /> segregated and left an site while the contaminated soil would be <br /> loaded onto trucks and delivered to another SPI property for <br /> r.4ffie8iation or temporary storage. The disadvantage of this <br /> option is that it may not be possible to remo-re all of the <br /> 1 contaminated soil without jeopardizing the structural integrity <br /> ` of the building near SB3: Therefore, -depending on the quantity <br /> and concentration of remaining contamination, additional <br /> remediation may be necessary (ie.9 vapor extraction) . The <br /> advantage of this option is that much of the gasoline <br /> �., contaminated soil located beneath and adjacent to tank site TKl- <br /> 90 could be removed. The actual fieldwork would probably require <br /> only a few days. Re-excavation may be the most economical <br /> rsmedial option, ------- - -----. -- --------- ----------------- ----- .-- -- <br /> Mi <br /> � L <br /> ro CONDOR <br /> I ' <br /> .. <br />