My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ARCHIVED REPORTS XR0006245
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
N
>
NAVY
>
1111
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0544294
>
ARCHIVED REPORTS XR0006245
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/29/2019 4:22:03 PM
Creation date
3/29/2019 4:14:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
ARCHIVED REPORTS
FileName_PostFix
XR0006245
RECORD_ID
PR0544294
PE
3528
FACILITY_ID
FA0007044
FACILITY_NAME
SAFEWAY MEAT PROCESSING PLANT
STREET_NUMBER
1111
STREET_NAME
NAVY
STREET_TYPE
DR
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95206
APN
16326007
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
1111 NAVY DR
P_LOCATION
01
P_DISTRICT
001
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
WNg
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
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
Antics ated Cost and Time Frame The anticipated time frame to remove the TPHD <br /> plume may be on the order of 5 to 10 years Anticipated costs would include injection <br /> and extraction well and system installation, O&M, costs, and air permit costs These <br /> costs may range from $100,000 to $300,000 depending on equipment selected and <br /> O&M requirements <br /> Conclusions <br /> Implementation of an active remediation approach does not appear to have benefits <br /> based on source removal activities conducted to date, the site setting, and the limited <br /> effectiveness of these approaches for remediation of TPHD impacts The UST removal <br /> and overexcavation of 1,200 cubic yards of soil have removed sources of groundwater <br /> impact and the vertical limits of excavation methods have been reached The site is <br /> located at an industrial location and the water quality of the first encountered water- <br /> bearing zone is generally poor, based on elevated concentrations of chlorides and <br /> sulfates exceeding MCLS Vapor extraction has limited effectiveness for removal of <br /> TPHD impacts and the higher utility costs that would be incurred for thermal desorption <br /> processes make this method not cost effective Groundwater extraction is unfavorable <br /> based upon the number of responsible parties in the site vicinity and potential for <br /> drawing impacts from other sources onto the site Furthermore, the absence of benzene <br /> • and general absence of PAH constituents shows that the site does not represent a threat <br /> to human health <br /> SAON 1PJ212794127941000 ICS-981cbe11 8 fmcon <br /> E-6 Rev 0,8/5/98 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.