Laserfiche WebLink
• While this technology is considered effective for treating inorganic compounds in <br /> groundwater, the technology is considered not viable for treatment of organic contaminants <br /> such as those in the shallow aquifer near the CHSL. <br /> 3.6 CORRECTIVE ACTION TECHNOLOGY SCREENING SUMMARY <br /> Of the 16 corrective action technologies screened for further consideration, six were <br /> considered viable and 10 were considered "not viable" for use at the CHSL(Table 6) <br /> Table 6 <br /> Summary of Corrective Action Technology Screening <br /> VIABLE ALTERNATIVES NON-VIABLE ALTERNATIVES <br /> Final Cover System Extension Bioremediation <br /> Landfill Gas System Expansion In-Situ MERD Treatment Wall <br /> Air Sparging and Vapor Extraction Phytoremediation <br /> Intrinsic Remediation In-Situ Vitrification <br /> Groundwater Extract with Air Stripping Treatment GAC Fluidized Bed <br /> Groundwater Extraction with GAC Treatment Biological Treatment System <br /> Chemical Oxidation <br /> Above-Ground MERD Reactor <br /> Reverse Osmosis <br /> Ion Exchange <br /> As previously described, those technologies considered "not viable" were characterized as <br /> such because they did not treat the type of constituents that have been identified in the <br /> shallow aquifer, have not demonstrated effectiveness at reducing the concentrations below <br /> those measured in the shallow aquifer, or were considered cost prohibitive when compared <br /> to other equally effective technologies. <br /> 4.0 DESCRIPTION OF VIABLE REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES <br /> The estimated system design, installation, operating, and maintenance costs for these <br /> alternatives are based on conservative estimates of the measures that could be required to <br /> mitigate the release at the CHSL(Table 7). <br /> Engineering Feasibility Study Geo-Lo Page ■ 21 <br /> Corral Hollow Sanitary Landfill ASSOCIATE S <br /> January 25,2013 <br />