My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0005260
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
M
>
MARIPOSA
>
2431
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0545532
>
ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0005260
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/13/2020 2:05:26 AM
Creation date
3/12/2020 11:43:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
ARCHIVED REPORTS
FileName_PostFix
XR0005260
RECORD_ID
PR0545532
PE
3528
FACILITY_ID
FA0022329
FACILITY_NAME
BLINCO TRUCKING
STREET_NUMBER
2431
Direction
E
STREET_NAME
MARIPOSA
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95205
APN
17130003
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
2431 E MARIPOSA RD
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.
/
41
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
I <br /> ,CVv:ATC <br /> A S S O C I A T E S I N C <br /> i <br /> 6 Long term effectiveness <br /> 7 Implementabdity <br /> 1 8 Regulatory and community acceptance <br /> 1 7.1 Soil Excavation <br /> ' ♦ Criterion I <br /> This altemative significantly increases the exposure of humans through volatilization of the <br /> contaminants and inhalation of and dermal exposure to dust and vapors created during <br /> 1 excavation activities The potential fire or explosion hazard should be rmnimal due to the <br /> relatively low levels of documented residual hydrocarbons <br /> ' ♦ Criterion 2 <br /> This alternative would not reduce the concentration of contaminants in the soil unless aeration <br /> of impacted soils occurs during transport and landfilling activities It would not be possible to <br /> 1 remove all the impacted soil without destruction of the building on site due to the proximity of <br /> the UST to the building Soil excavation would effectively eliminate the contaminants in the <br /> soil and would eliminate potential impacts on groundwater at the site by removing the source <br /> of contamination <br /> ♦ Criterion 3 <br /> This alternative can be implemented within regulatory guidelines <br /> Criterion 4 <br /> 1 This altemative is the least cost effective of the three alternatives due to high costs associated <br /> with implementation The fact that the impacted soil extends to a depth of 36 feet make this <br /> 1 alternative economically unfeasible The building on site would be damaged or extensive <br /> shonng would be required Costs associated with treating the soil on site or disposal of <br /> contaminated soil to an appropnate landfill and then backfilling the excavation with clean <br /> matenal also increase the total cost of remediation The cost of this remediation alternative is <br /> estimated to be between$200,000 and $400,000 <br /> ' ♦ Criterion S <br /> Soil Excavation would be effective in the short tern because it results in the direct removal of <br /> the contamination source Excavation would increase health-based nsks to humans via <br /> exposure of the impacted soil to the air and inhalation of and direct dermal contact with dust <br /> during site activities The time required to complete this alternative would be less than 6 <br /> months <br /> W 1943041r.p \clm=dm 7 <br /> 1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.