Laserfiche WebLink
3.2.1 Air Sparging with Soil Vapor Extraction <br /> Advantages. SVE and AS are most effective in coarse grained soils where the radius of <br /> influence exceeds 100 feet. SVE, suited to gasoline range hydrocarbons (<C12), would <br /> address the gasoline impacts defined during site assessment activities. They are localized <br /> on-site adjacent to the UST complex and gasoline dispenser island. <br /> Disadvantages. SVE/AS does not contain the movement of groundwater and is Iimited in <br /> the removal of MTBE from the groundwater. <br /> Approximate Cost_and Time Frame. The approximate cost to implement SVE/AS <br /> expansion is minimal with the existing system and piping in place to make the necessary <br /> additions. The expansion and operation of the system would range from $100,000 to <br /> $300,000 depending on period of system operation. Operation may range from 6 months <br /> to 2 years. <br /> 3.2.2 Groundwater Extraction and Treatment <br /> Advantages. Groundwater extraction and Treatment is an effective way to contain the <br /> spread of the contaminates in the groundwater, provided the radius of influence is large <br /> enough to encompass most of.the plume. <br /> Disadvantages. GWET is suited for all contaminates at the site. Based on the geology <br /> observed during field activities, the extraction of groundwater would be effective, <br /> however, the extraction rate is not known and the amount of groundwater required to <br /> create a sufficient ROI could be very high. The installation of a GWET system would <br /> require additional construction and piping activities at the site. <br /> Approximate Cost and Time Frame. The approximate cost to implement GWET includes <br /> feasibility testing, design, installation, and system operation and may range from <br /> $100,000 to $300,000 depending on period of system operation. Operation may range <br /> from 1 year to 6 years. <br /> 3.2.3 Bioremediation <br /> Advantages. Bioremediation is an effective way to treat contaminated groundwater using <br /> the naturally occurring microbe population. It is not capital intensive and is very cost- <br /> effective. <br /> Disadvantages. Bioremediation is a slow process compared to other more capital <br /> intensive remedial alternatives. It can take many years for bioremediation to take place <br /> without some intervention. The limiting factors with bioremediation is usually the lack <br /> 3-3 <br /> ESJ:1E:\USA100651REPORTS10065P201.BOC-98Vsg:1 Rev.0,1126199 <br /> 20A41-007.001 <br />