My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0010194
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
S
>
SONORA
>
110
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0545695
>
ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0010194
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/27/2020 5:36:37 PM
Creation date
5/27/2020 4:31:51 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
ARCHIVED REPORTS
FileName_PostFix
XR0010194
RECORD_ID
PR0545695
PE
3528
FACILITY_ID
FA0003877
FACILITY_NAME
CITY OF STOCKTON FIRE STATION #2
STREET_NUMBER
110
Direction
W
STREET_NAME
SONORA
STREET_TYPE
ST
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95203
APN
13731025
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
110 W SONORA ST
P_LOCATION
01
P_DISTRICT
001
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
LSauers
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
104
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
A <br /> h <br /> E <br /> A S S O C I A T E S I N C <br /> The advantages of in-situ air sparging with soil vapor extraction include <br /> • Short treatment tunes, usually 6 months to 2 years under optimal conditions <br /> . Readily available equipment and easy installation <br /> • Implementation with minimal disturbance to aboveground activities <br /> • Requires no removal, treatment, storage, or discharge considerations for groundwater <br /> • Cost competitive <br /> • Can be used under buildings and other locations that cannot be excavated <br /> In order to determine the effectiveness of vapor extraction and air spargmg, pilot testing was <br /> ' performed at the site Results indicated that both of these methods are feasible alternatives for <br /> remediation of the site Data provided by the pilot studies can be used to properly design a full- <br /> scale air sparge/soil vapor extraction system even though the pilot tests were not performed <br /> concurrently The pilot studies have also provided information on the concentration of VOCs that <br /> are likely to be extracted during the early stages of the operation <br /> 6.0 REMEDIATION ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION <br /> Each of the alternatives presented above were evaluated according to the following criteria <br /> I Level of protection of human health and the environment <br /> 2 Reduction of toxicity, mobility and volume of contaminants <br /> 3 Compliance with regulatory guidelines <br /> 4 Cost effectiveness/public benefit <br /> 5 Short term effectiveness <br /> 6 Long term effectiveness <br /> 7 Implementability <br /> 8 Regulatory and community acceptance <br /> 6.I Natural Attenuation with Groundwater Monitorin <br /> ♦ Criterion 1 <br /> The natural attenuation alternative has no immediate health based risks The site is surfaced <br /> with asphalt and concrete so the possibility for exposure to humans by volatilization, dust, or <br /> dermal contact with impacted soil and groundwater is muumal, with little or no fire or <br /> explosion hazard The shallowest aquifer is located approximately 20 feet below ground <br /> surface and is impacted This aquifer is currently classified as a drinking water source but is not <br /> generally used as such <br /> ' ♦ Cntenon 2 <br /> This alternative would reduce the existing levels+and volume of impacted soil and groundwater <br /> over tune by natural degradation and attenuation, but the rate of reduction is not known The <br /> W 162574 Wpilot-fs report doc 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.