My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0002480
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
F
>
FRESNO
>
1817
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0540859
>
ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0002480
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/15/2020 4:14:00 PM
Creation date
1/15/2020 3:04:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
ARCHIVED REPORTS
FileName_PostFix
XR0002480
RECORD_ID
PR0540859
PE
2960
FACILITY_ID
FA0023361
FACILITY_NAME
PLAY N PARK (FORMER BARNES TRUCKING)
STREET_NUMBER
1817
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
FRESNO
STREET_TYPE
AVE
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95206
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
1817 S FRESNO AVE
P_LOCATION
01
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\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.
/
112
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
CLEAWWT-ER <br />' G R O U P <br /> Environmental Serwees <br /> Remedial Media Remedial <br /> Option Affected ITechnologyEvaluated <br /> Option 5 Soil Excavation w/Soil Aeration <br /> Groundwater Enhanced Bioremediation(iSOC) <br />' Option 6 Soil Enhanced Bioremediation(iSOC) <br /> Groundwater Enhanced Bioremediation(iSOC) <br />' The technical ment and approximate cost of each remedial technology is discussed below in light <br /> of site conditions The costs have not been rigorously determined, but are approximations based <br /> on a brief assessment of the equipment and operation involved in each option The costs assume <br /> operation for one year, however, operation of an engineered system may extend beyond one year <br /> and result in higher operation and maintenance costs Actual costs could be approximately 25% <br /> higher or lower Additionally, the costs shown do not account for any additional investigative or <br /> groundwater monitoring costs <br />' 6.2 Remedial Alternatives for Soil <br /> I6 2 1 Soil Excavation <br /> Excavation of contaminated soil is often the most effective remedial option in situations where <br /> the contamination is primarily restricted to areas at or above the water table, accessible from the <br /> surface and less than 30 feet bgs Excavating to depths greater than 30 feet bgs, or in saturated <br /> soils becomes increasingly cost prohibitive due to shoring necessities, equipment access to the <br /> excavation (ramping), and hauling and disposal or treatment costs of large volumes of potentially <br /> highly contaminated soil It should be noted that due to the fluctuation in groundwater table <br /> elevations at the site, excavation would be best performed during the summer or fall months <br />' when the water table is relatively low (i e approximately 12 feet bgs) Excavation would be <br /> impractical if executed during the periods of high water table (i a spring, approximately 7 feet <br /> bgs) <br /> At this site, excavation of the contaminated soil beneath the former UST pit would be a costly <br />' and not easily accomplished alternative because the sorbed-phase contamination resides in the <br /> saturated zone Excavation in this area would require extensive dewatering of the excavated <br /> area, necessitating water disposal or pretreatment prior to discharge, and probably shoring of the <br /> sidewalls Excavation would likely have a direct impact on future groundwater contamination, as <br /> I <br /> ZB171C CAP 12 November 20,2002 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.