Laserfiche WebLink
t <br /> d <br /> wo <br /> Y <br /> sanded zone would be expected to provide some hydraulic connection <br /> With the screened interval. This is indicated by the fact that <br /> total drawdown in observation well MW5 was approximately 4 times <br /> greater than in Mwl. <br /> The general agreement between the transmissivlty (m) value <br /> calculated from the MW6 recovery data and the MW5 drawdown data <br /> supports the interpretations of an average formation transmissivity <br /> in the range of 200_2000 gallons per day per foot. <br /> velocit_+ is 3.2-32 ft per year usingThe calculated <br /> transmiss.ivity values from the range of calculated <br /> calculations are shown in AttactunenPumping <br /> I Ping test data. These <br /> The sampling and hydrologic data developed by WaterWork together <br /> - with the previous investigation and remediation data have been <br /> utilized in the evaluation of remediation options for the site. <br /> The remedial action plan must address both soils and groundwater <br /> Impacted by petroleum hydrocarbons associated <br /> underground storage tanks on the with the former <br /> for soil remediation include property. The options considered <br /> hydrocarbon impacted {1}. the excavation of the <br /> P soils followed by on-site treatment, (2), <br /> excavation of the hydrocarbon impacted soils followed by disposal <br /> to an appropriate solid wase <br /> facility, <br /> = removal of hydrocarbons from the affected soil area using vapor <br /> extraction techniques, f,4), soil capping, and (5n soil <br /> bioremediation. We have considered thre a <br /> groundwater remediation including, (1), a PPrand eat aches~ for <br /> (2), a pump and treat system withr' bioremediation componentstand <br /> ,•� <br /> (3), Post closure monitoringas <br />' The above remediatlon- ale Part of a soil capping alternative. <br /> followingrnatives were evaluated according to the <br /> criteria: <br /> 1• Level of protection of human health and the <br /> environment, including beneficial uses of <br /> ground and surface waters. <br /> 2• Reduction of toxicity, mobility and volume of <br /> contaminants. <br /> 3• Compliance with regulatory guidelines. <br /> 4• Cost effectiveness. <br /> 5• Short term effectiveness. <br /> 6. Long term effectiveness. <br /> 7. Implemertability. <br /> 8• Regulatory g ry and Community accE,ctancG: <br /> 9. Impacts on water conservation. <br /> i�1 HBLR�OZ.vp - 2 - - <br />