Laserfiche WebLink
With the completion of that operation, all equipment, structures, <br /> and wells had been disposed of , and only the contaminated soil <br /> remained to be treated. The following section discusses the <br /> remediation and proposed disposition of that spoil , <br /> DETAILS OF SOIL REMEDIATION: <br /> After reviewing several options, JTO decided to employ an exper-- <br /> amental technique for remediating the appro^imately BO00 cubic <br /> yards of spoil which was stored on site. The method employed a <br /> large Pug Mill , (normally used to make dry-max asphalt,) to <br /> thoroughly max the bacteria with the soil prior to placement in <br /> piles for remediation. JT0 contracted with Terra Environmental <br /> Services of Pane Grove, CA to provide services for injecting the <br /> bacteria and monitoring the degradation of the hydrocarbons in <br /> the spoil. Details of the remediation technique are summarized <br /> below. <br /> On July 10, 1992, 40 soil samples were taken under the super- <br /> vision of a representative of the County Environmental Health <br /> Division from areas, of apparent high levels of contamination. <br /> These were then combined into five (5) composites, which were <br /> tested for BTEX, Kerosene, Diesel , and Oil in order to estimate <br /> the average levels of contamination in the soil samples. Table I <br /> summarizes the results of that analysis, which revealed Benzene <br /> was not present, Toluene was detected in only one of the compo- <br /> site samples, and Ethylbenzene & Xylene were present in very low <br /> amounts. Kerosene was not detected, but diesel and oil were <br /> measured at significant levels in all 5 of the composite samples. <br /> Exhibit f includes copies of the laboratory reports and chain of <br /> custody for those samples. f <br /> A pug mall was set up on the property approximately as shown on 4 <br /> Plate VII. Contaminated spoil was picked up by a large front <br /> loader and dumped into a grizzly equipped with 6" screens to <br /> remove the larger material; from there it went by conveyor to <br /> another grizzly with 1" screens to remove additional large rocks <br /> , and concrete pieces. The material passing through was sprayed <br /> with a surfactant as it was transported on another conveyor belt <br /> to the pug mill . While the material was being mixed in the <br /> hopper, bacteria and nutrients were added and thorough mixed with <br /> the soil. The pug mall capacity was about 5,000 lbs, (1.3 CY) <br /> per batch; approximately .085 lbs. /CY of bacteria, .008 lbs./CY <br /> Of surfactant, and .0488 lbs./CY of nutrient were used for <br /> treatment. Material safety data sheets for the bacteria, <br /> nutrient, and surfactant are included in Exhlbat K. Water was <br /> also added to bring the soil mixture up to about 40% of the <br /> maximum field holding capacity; (approximately 12--15% by weight. ) <br /> 4 , <br />