Laserfiche WebLink
<*> ETIC <br /> ENGINEERING <br /> 2005 JUL 20 AM N: 03 <br /> 24 June 2005 S" 10 <br /> HEEN le"ONMETP,L <br /> ALTH 0t.PARN'TFiLNT <br /> Jennifer C Sedlachek <br /> ExxonMobil Refining and Supply Company <br /> 4096 Piedmont Avenue#194 <br /> Oakland, California 94611 <br /> Subject: Summary of Report of Findings: Evaluation ofPeroxone for the In Situ Chemical <br /> Oxidation of Petroleum Hydrocarbons <br /> Former Exxon RS 7-3942 <br /> 4444 North Pershing Avenue, Stockton, California <br /> i <br /> Dear Ms Sedlachek <br /> At the request of ExxonIVlobil Oil Corporation (ExxonMobil), ETIC Engineering, Inc (ETIC) <br /> prepared a Work Plan forBenchscale Study and Oxidant Injection Pilot Tests(dated December 2004) <br /> for the above-referenced facility which was submitted to and subsequently approved by the San <br /> Joaquin County Public Health Services Environmental Health Division(SJCPHS) and the California <br /> Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region (RWQCB) The attached Report of <br /> Findings Evaluation of Peroxone for the In Situ Chemical Oxidation of Petroleum Hydrocarbons, <br /> which was prepared by PRIMA Environmental (PRIMA) of Sacramento, California, presents the <br /> results of the benchscale testing proposed in the approved work plan <br /> Site-specific soil and groundwater samples, collected during the installation of three injection point <br /> pair wells(IP 1-IP3) and one exploratory boring(EBI),were provided to PRIMA to use in laboratory <br /> tests to assess the feasibility of injecting the oxidants ozone (03) and peroxone (a mixture of ozone <br /> and hydrogen peroxide) as an in situ oxidation technology for site remediation As part of this <br /> assessment, tests were designed to evaluate and compare the ability of the oxidants to remove <br /> petroleum hydrocarbons from soil and groundwater at the site, and to determine whether removal was <br /> due to volatilization(by sparging)or to destruction(via chemical oxidation) This was accomplished <br /> by comparing the effect of sparging with a chemically inert gas (nitrogen) to the effect of sparging <br /> with ozone Additionally, tests were designed to assess how this remedial technology would affect <br /> water quality, this assessment was made by quantifying the effect of peroxone on various secondary <br /> water quality parameters This included assessing the oxidation of tnvalent chromium [Cr(IE)] to <br /> hexavalent chromium[Cr(VI)],and the subsequent reduction back to the less toxic form[Cr(M)]over <br /> time <br /> The laboratory study clearly demonstrated that ozone and peroxone could destroy Total Petroleum <br /> Hydrocarbons as gasoline and as diesel, and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes in soil and <br /> groundwater from this site As a remedial alternative, peroxone appears to be more efficient than <br /> ozone, because peroxone destroyed a higher percent of hydrocarbons and generated a lower <br /> 2285 Morello Avenue Pleasant Hill CA 94523 • Phone 925 602 4710 • Fax 925 602 4720 • License #624022 <br />