Laserfiche WebLink
r <br /> SECTION 6 <br /> ENGINEERING EVALUATION OF <br /> REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES <br /> In this section, a preliminary evaluation of remedial alternatives is <br /> presented for the affected soilsand grount a awatffected to the Wemediat Weber <br /> sites. As discussed in previous sections, <br /> 1515 <br /> West Weber have been fully characterized; however, the area of <br /> concern at the 1325 West Weber site has not been fully defined. <br /> Therefore, <br /> are affecthat <br /> edby <br /> this evaluation <br /> tthe same econstituents of concernrnatives, it was in <br /> both site <br /> same manner (i.e., similar extent, concentration, etc.?. If fie <br /> activities at the 1.325 West Weber site indicate that this assumption is <br /> not information ewill be required.lternatives based on the most current <br /> field <br /> As required by the PAR guidelines, this section evaluates the <br /> alternatives identified for the remediation of hydrocarbon-containing <br /> soils and ground water. The first subsection identifies the criteria <br /> used to screen the alternatives. The following two subsections <br /> present a description of the remedial alternatives screened for soil <br /> r and ground water including an evaluation of each alternative based <br /> on the screening criteria. The final subsection identifies the <br /> preferred alternatives for the site. <br /> Screening Criteria <br /> Alternatives for the remediation of hydrocarbon-containing soils and <br /> ground water at the site were screened and evaluated based on four <br /> ility, cost, <br /> criteria. <br /> The criteria used were effectiveness,i Theem effec <br /> wtiveness, <br /> and timeliness of implementation. <br /> implementability, and cost criteria are components of the National <br /> Contingency Plan (NCP) and were used because these criteria <br /> provide a systematic method of alternative evaluation. Timeliness of <br /> implementation <br /> lsite-specific requie ments.as nadditional <br /> Eahlcritex~ilon is erion to <br /> accommodate <br /> actmmodate <br /> below. <br /> The effectiveness criterion evaluates the ability of the alternative-to <br /> address the specific chemical compounds present at the site. It <br /> measures the reliability the ala <br /> tive for <br /> treatment or disposal <br /> ofhe hydrocarbons at thesiteTh scrite on <br /> 6-1 <br />