Laserfiche WebLink
Treatability Study Report and Feasibility Evaluation for <br />In Situ Petroleum Hydrocarbon Remediation <br />Field Maintenance Shop #24, 8020 South Airport Way <br />Stockton, California <br />7.0 REMEDIAL FEASIBILITY EVALUATION AND <br />RECOMMENDATIONS <br />A preliminary evaluation of remedial alternatives was performed by OTIE. The analysis <br />considered the applicable cleanup criteria as they relate to the impacted soil and groundwater. <br />OTIE weighed the various selection criteria to determine the most feasible technology(ies) for <br />remediation of petroleum hydrocarbons at the site. A feasibility matrix was developed to present <br />a relative numeric evaluation of the various remediation technologies (Table 5). For this <br />qualitative evaluation, the relative value and importance of each specific category was provided <br />with a numeric value, between "1" (least feasible) to "Y (most feasible). Then each of the <br />technology categories was summed and the numeric rating or score was recorded. <br />The Remedial Matrix identified Air Sparging with SVE as the most feasible treatment method of <br />the methods evaluated. As described above, these methods will provide source zone mass <br />removal for expediting site cleanup. After the hydrocarbon source zone is removed to the extent <br />feasible and adsorbed -phase hydrocarbons are no longer a primary concern, further "polishing" <br />steps may be considered. Air Sparging with SVE could be converted to a low flow biosparge <br />system as a "polishing" measure. This would only be needed if the AS/SVE system went <br />asymptotic before reaching remedial action objectives and it was determined that natural <br />attenuation of the remaining dissolved phase plume was not feasible. For unsaturated soils, the <br />Remedial Matrix identified soil vapor extraction as the most feasible remedial alternative. <br />The Air Sparging with SVE technology may be proposed, in consultation with the CVRWQCB, <br />when all considerations are taken into account, such as cost, site logistics, remedial timeframe, <br />budget availability, and remedial action objectives. <br />It is important to note that in situ chemical oxidation (ISCO) was not evaluated during this effort <br />as there was not enough site data available. Currently an ISCO pilot study is being planned, and <br />the results will be used to update the remediation technology feasibility matrix (Table 5) prior to <br />selecting the final remedy. <br />OTIE 39 <br />