Laserfiche WebLink
5 <br /> a an "active" treatment alternative 'is not a cost-effective solution for the Stockton <br /> Service Center. This recommendation concurs with the findings of the Lawrence <br /> Livermore report. <br /> In June 1995, the SJCPHS approved the use of passive bioremediation at the site <br /> i <br /> in place of the active bioremediation system identified in the CAP. Black & Veatch <br /> prepared an amendment to the CAP (Addendum No. 2 to the Additional Site <br /> Assessment and Remedial Options Report, Black & Veatch, March 1996) defining <br /> passive bioremediation as the preferred'alternative. This amendment was submitted <br /> to the SJCPHS in March 1996. <br /> 4: <br /> U <br /> East Bay Municipal Utility District <br /> 96R7 9 Final closure Report <br /> 40429700.fcr <br /> l - <br />