Laserfiche WebLink
Site Background Information Fortner Stockton Plating Facility I tj +, <br /> Pa e4of7 <br /> X11 �4 <br /> 'Water Extraction Pilot Test Report dated 31 January 2002 <br />' The January 2002 report stated that the soil at the site has a high percentage of fine-grained matrix <br /> ' and overall is homogenous and mostly fine-grained In general this soil type has a high adsorption , <br /> i' capacity and low` perrrieability, and thereby could potentially limit migration of dissolved <br /> hydrocarbons However,despite the fine-grained nature of the soil,the feasibility test results showed <br /> that ground water extraction should be effective on the site The ground water extraction rates during <br />' full-scale remediation are not likely to exceed the pilot test extraction rate(five gallons per minute), F <br /> and may be less for effective ground water extraction and stabilized drawdown <br />' In the report, AGE recommended^the use of ground water extraction as an alternative ground water 3� <br /> remediation technique at the site Ground water extraction should provide adequate capture of the' <br /> dissolved hydrocarbons, based on site-specific hydrogeologic conditions and` hydrocarbon <br />' distribution The limited areal distribution of high concentrations of dissolved hydrocarbons near the <br /> source of the release favors capturing the major portion of the dissolved hydrocarbons on the site <br /> A ground water extraction system in the source area,along the down-gradient portion of significantly. I <br />' impacted ground water, should effectively address the plume of impacted ground water AGE <br /> recommended preparation of a remedial action work plan for the installation of additional ground " <br /> water extraction wells around the former UST area in order to increase 1)the efficiency-of-operation <br /> of a ground water extraction treatment system and 2)the effectiveness of the ground water extraction <br /> systems ability to address the dissolved hydrocarbons <br />' The AGE-prepared Final Remediation Plan, dated 23 April 2002, recommended the use of ground <br /> water extraction as an alternative ground water remediation technique at the site, along with soil <br /> vapor extraction EHD letter, dated 26 July 2002, issued'a denial FRP and requested an additional ' 4 <br /> cost analysis of remediation technologies L <br /> The Grounad Water Extraction Clean Up Analysis, dated 31 August 2002,supported the idea that the , <br />' limited areal distribution of high concentrations of dissolved hydrocarbons near the source of the <br /> release favors an aggressive approach for removing the dissolved hydrocarbon on-site AGE r ' <br /> s , <br />' recommended a,ground,water extraction system In the source area and along the histoncal'down- <br /> gadient portion of significantly impacted ground water <br /> M <br /> f <br /> EHD approval letter of FRP technoloy date 28 May 2003 A Final Remediation Plan Addendum, <br /> dated 18 July 2003, was ap'roved by,the EHD on 29 July 2003 <br /> ' • ` 5 r a <br /> t , <br /> ,a z <br /> SOIL-VAPOR EXTRACTION SYSTEM INSTALLATION F <br /> � , i 1 <br />' The SVE system utilized two-inch diameter, schedule 40 PVC piping installed underground from i <br /> • each well-head'at vapor extraction wells and ground water,extraction wells EW-band EW-2 to the <br /> I <br /> l <br /> ` I Advanced GeoEnviranmental,Inc ' <br /> I I <br /> a <br /> it <br />