Laserfiche WebLink
TABLE 9 <br /> SOIL AND GROUND WATLR CORRECTIVE ACTION ALTERNA I (VES <br /> Former Chase Chevrolet (Van Buren) Facility <br /> 424 North Van Buren Street, Stockton, California - <br /> Estimated Costs T yP�teal <br /> 'Method, Advantages Disadvantages v(incl Monttonng Estimated <br /> Monitoring and Duration <br /> Maintenance) Requirements <br /> UST Nos 3-6 (cont ) <br /> In-situ • Relatively simple design and • Regulatory appr9val can be $60,000 to Monthly vapor 12 to 24 <br /> Bioremediation operation • Short treatment difficult to obtain • Additional $110,000 total cost monitoring, quarterly months <br /> (Soil) period, usually 12 to 36 months inoculations and nutrient soil sample collection, <br /> • Works well in most soil types supplementation sometimes micro biological <br /> where no biotoxicity is present necessary• Less effective in analysis of samples <br /> soils with high concentrations <br /> of hydrocarbons <br /> I ' <br /> Natural Attenuation • Lower costs than most active •Not effective for Higher $6,000 to$8,000 Installation of unknown <br /> (Soil) remedial alternatives • Minimal contaminant concentrations• annually additional borings, <br /> disturbance to the site• Potential 'Migration of contamination Ground water <br /> use below structures may occur- Longer time frame monitoring <br /> than active remediation • May <br /> not achieve cleanup levels <br /> within reasonable length of <br /> time <br /> I <br /> rtrlvrutccd GLoLtivironmcnta[,lite <br />