My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0003206
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
H
>
HUNTER
>
610
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0541693
>
ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0003206
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/6/2020 12:02:45 PM
Creation date
2/6/2020 10:57:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
ARCHIVED REPORTS
FileName_PostFix
XR0003206
RECORD_ID
PR0541693
PE
2960
FACILITY_ID
FA0023897
FACILITY_NAME
TOYOTA TOWN INC
STREET_NUMBER
610
Direction
N
STREET_NAME
HUNTER
STREET_TYPE
ST
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95202
APN
13906033
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
610 N HUNTER ST
P_LOCATION
01
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\sballwahn
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
112
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
� v <br /> A S S O C I A T E S I N C <br /> Previous pilot testing indicated that the vapor extraction and air sparge is a feasible <br /> alternative for remediation of the site <br />' ♦ Criterion 3 <br /> This alternative can be implemented within regulatory guidelines <br /> ♦ Criterion 4 <br />' The soil vapor extraction and air sparging remediation alternative would require the <br /> installation of additional vapor extraction and sparge wells, air infection and vapor <br /> extraction equipment, and the abatement equipment A thermal oxidizing unit or catalytic <br />' oxidizing unit can be used initially for the treatment of off-gases but may be changed to <br /> vapor-phase carbon after concentrations are reduced to levels acceptable to the regulatory <br /> agencies Additional costs to the client would be incurred for permitting, leasing, and <br />' installing the vapor extraction equipment and treatment compound, and operation and <br /> maintenance of the system The cost of this alternative is estimated to be between $140,000 <br /> and $220,000 <br /> ♦ Criterion S <br /> This alternative should effectively remediate subsurface contaminants to acceptable <br /> regulatory levels within 1 to 3 years of implementation <br /> ♦ Criterion 6 <br /> The long term effectiveness for soil remediation would be good depending upon the degree <br /> of contaminant removal Groundwater would be monitored periodically until soil and <br /> groundwater is remediated to ensure that concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons are <br /> being reduced <br />' O Criterion 7 <br /> This alternative has some minor implementability problems due to the time involved in <br /> obtaining permits from the APCD for the vapor extraction system Permitting could take as <br />' much as 180 days depending upon APCD work load, but is typically completed in 60 to 90 <br /> days <br />' ♦ Criterion 8 <br /> Impact to the site occupants and surrounding businesses during installation and other site <br /> activities will be moderate This method has been shown to be effective and regulatory <br /> acceptance is expected <br /> 7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> Based on the soil and groundwater data compiled and included in this technical report, ATC <br /> Associates recommends in-situ air spargm with soil va o� r extraction for remediation of the <br /> W%62596Wcportslpi1otcap doc 13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.