Laserfiche WebLink
• Updated Corrective Action Plan—Tosco(76)Service Station No 11192, Stockton, California <br /> June 26 2002 <br /> 32 _Feasibility Study <br /> The responsible party shall conduct a feasibility study to evaluate the alternatives for remedying <br /> or mitigating the actual or potential adverse effects of the unauthorized release.Each alternative <br /> shall be evaluated for cost effectiveness, and the responsible party shall propose to implement the <br /> most cost-effective corrective action: <br /> GR has reviewed various proven and recent remedial options that are available for use at the site The <br /> following is a brief description and comparison of those options <br /> OPTION#1 - NO REMEDIAL ACTION/LONG TERM MONITORING <br /> COST $15,000 to $25,000 <br /> TIME FRAME Long term <br /> ADVANTAGES 1) Low annual cost <br /> 2) Minimal disruption of station operations <br /> DISADVANTAGES 1) Potential liability <br /> . 2) No defined project completion/closure <br /> 3) Potential migration of hydrocarbons <br /> CONCLUSION Not a suitable approach for this site at this time <br /> OPTION#2 - EXCAVATION OF IMPACTED SOIL <br /> COST $50,000 to $100,000 <br /> TIME FRAME Short term <br /> ADVAN'T'AGES 1) Potential for quick efficient source removal if site conditions are <br /> favorable <br /> DISADVANTAGES 1) The residual hydrocarbon impact is considered to be within the <br /> saturated groundwater zone,below the practical limit of excavation <br /> 2) Excavation does not address hydrocarbon impacted groundwater, <br /> therefore, hydrocarbon impact in the capillary fringe zone would be <br /> expected to return <br /> CONCLUSION Not a suitable approach for this site, more appropriate methods are <br /> available <br /> taozas os 9 <br />