Laserfiche WebLink
Harding Lawson Assoclates <br /> The limited amount of on-site land available for aera- <br /> tion is a drawback. Aeration is also much less effective during <br /> rainy periods. The shortage of space and potentially inclement <br /> weather could prolong treatment. <br /> f- <br /> Although either method of aeration is technologically <br /> viable the logistics of implementing the <br /> g p g process could be con- <br /> plicated. . Nevertheless, the potential cost savings realized by <br /> avoiding disposal of soil at a Class 1 landfill make on-site <br /> aeration attractive. This method will be given further consider- <br /> i ation. <br /> Landfarming - Under this alternative, hydrocarbons in <br /> soils are destroyed through bacterial metabolism. Excavated ? <br /> soils are thinly spread and nutrients added to increase and <br /> s.2stain the indigenous microbial population. The successfully <br /> f <br /> in treated soilsdisposed of off-site at a Class III landfill. <br /> Landfarming is a well established technology that has <br /> x , <br /> g i proven very effective. Again, standard construction equipment <br /> can be used to handle the soils and treatment would be conducted <br /> k .1 <br /> on-site. A permit from the SJAPCD would be required. <br /> 1 The drawbacks to this alternative are the presence of <br /> the rainy season, the .limited available space on which to treat <br /> soils, and the amount of time required for the treatment to be <br /> effective. These factors will delay and/or prolong treatment. <br /> ..f This alternative is not acceptable, and therefore will not be <br /> given further consideration. <br /> 16 <br />