Laserfiche WebLink
O Criterion 7 <br /> Of all the alternatives the passive remediation approach is the easiest to implement. Well <br /> ' destruction permits would be obtained from the appropriate agencies and the wells would <br /> be destroyed by overdrilling the well casing and sand pack and pressure grouting the <br /> ' boring to the surface <br /> O Criterion 8 <br /> Since minimal activity would be conducted at the site, the impact on the community <br /> ' would be very minor and not disruptive to the businesses located on the site and nearby <br /> However, regulatory agencies may be hesitant to approve this alternative due to the long <br /> term duration of the project <br /> ' 8..2 Alternative 2 - Soil Excavation and, Off-site„Disposal <br /> o Criterion i <br /> This alternative significantly increases the exposure of humans through volatilization of <br /> ' the contaminants and inhalation of and dermal exposure to dust created during excavation <br /> activities The potential fire or explosion hazard should be minimal due to the relatively <br /> ' low levels of documented residual hydrocarbons <br /> ' O Criterion 2 <br /> This alternative would not reduce the concentration of contaminants in the soil unless <br /> ' aeration of impacted soils occurs during transport and landfilling activities It would not <br /> be possible to remove all the impacted soil without destruction of the building on site due <br /> ' to the depth of the excavation The limits of the excavation would extend laterally 25 <br /> to 30 feet beyond the extent of impacted soil due to sloping requirements to safely <br /> ' excavate soil to depth of 45 feet Soil excavation would effectively eliminate the <br /> contaminants from the site, and would eliminate potential future impacts on groundwater, <br /> at the site by removing the secondary source of contamination <br /> 1500471REPORMCAP 0694 FNL 12 <br />