Laserfiche WebLink
HtINICN-YOMER <br /> Mr. Charles Leub:icr <br /> 10 October 1991 <br /> .� Page 7 <br /> I is an In-situ <br /> eth <br /> Three remediation alternatives are <br /> presented.hepeto elum hydrocarbons that are present. <br /> on vapor extraction to remove xcavthe p <br /> Alternatives 2 and 3 involve d hydrocarbon rtes (Alternativetion of soil <br /> contaminated disposal nspo t facility <br /> of he <br /> permitted for petroleum Y oration Yard far treatment utilizing an <br /> contaminated soil to the District's Corp <br /> aboveground vapor extraction system (AernaentedtonTable 2. <br /> ebreakdown <br /> The assumptions used in <br /> costs for the three alternatives is preses <br /> developing these costs are also presented in Table 2. <br /> Alternative 1 - 'In-situ Va or Extraction <br /> feet <br /> Because the volume of soil requiring remediation stein comprised of 1 a(nu mberbof 0 apo <br /> by 18 feet), an in-situ vapor extrac Y <br /> sed vapor extract <br /> extraction wells is a viable n wells connected to a blowin-situ alternative. The er.o The wells would be screened <br /> _ consists of 9 vapor extraction <br /> f 5 feet and 20 feet. The suction side of the blower woulde <br /> between a depth othe blower <br /> connected to the wells and the exhaust gas f to discharge to he atmosphere. Since <br /> rbhe <br /> canisters to capture hydrocarbon vapors p _ <br /> ingair emissions peits would be <br /> site is a school yard,the pe orcnallyprocess be requiped forining commercial sites and would inc uie <br /> ' <br /> more exten'.;ive than would <br /> parental notiflcatio 0 excluding costs foand possibly a r not notifying the ppublic nfor this conducting apublic <br /> alternative i s$48,00 , <br /> meeting. <br /> Alternative 2 -Excavation and Offsite Uisnosa! <br /> nated <br /> l at 8 <br /> This alternative entails the excavatioendB$5e o d he°results of soiof l)boring B i1, the <br /> permitted treatment or disposal facility. <br /> maximum depth of excavation <br /> will continue untied l that areeno indications en 15 to 20 eof petroleum <br /> ground surface. m by headspace <br /> hydrocarbons such as <br /> airs, odoen rs <br /> r organalected from vapors abo bottom a d sidewalls of the <br /> analysis. Soil sampleswill oil <br /> - vation to efthe res <br /> acility which is permittedults oflfor hydrocarbon wmonitoring. h stes. Theeestimated lc4 t <br /> dispooed of at a Y <br /> for this alternative is $60,000• <br /> Ex v ton an Ab v r n Va or Ex c I <br /> tive 2, <br /> of <br /> Excevat[on procedures will follow permitted facise itycthe sail ribed forw ltltbetreated by vapor�extraetian <br /> disposing of the soil at a pe lacing the sail on a <br /> at the District's Corporation Yard. This will be accomplished by p <br /> - —liner, embedding perforated plastic pipe in the soil and covering the soil with plastic <br />