Laserfiche WebLink
� � � � l♦ I♦ <br /> TA E 20 <br /> GROUND WATER REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVE SCREENING <br /> EVALUATION OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVE BY SELECTED CRITERIA <br /> Montgomery Ward,Stockton,California <br /> Page I of I <br /> GROUND WATER REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES <br /> Number CRITERIA Weights(0-10) Alternative 1 Pump-and-Treat AIternative 2 Air Spargmg <br /> 1 Probability of Achieving Cleanup Goals 10 Probability is very low due to Probability is relatively good based on <br /> contamination m soil pores and offsite results at other sites and pilot test <br /> source <br /> 2 Ease of Implementation 5 Relatively easy to implement since only Very easy to implement since most <br /> piping installation is required components are already installed <br /> 3 Availability of Space 8 Site has sufficient space since only a small Site has sufficient space since only a small <br /> aboveground space is required aboveground space is required <br /> 4 Disruption to Facility Operations 4 This alternative will have very little This alternative will have very little impact <br /> impact to facility operations during to facility operations during installation and <br /> installation and remediation remediation <br /> 5 Time of Completion 7 From experience, a drawback of this This alternative will probably require 2 years <br /> alternative is that this alternative will to complete <br /> probably take a significant amount of time <br /> in achieving cleanup <br /> 6 Cost of Completion 8 The cost to implement this alternative is This aitemative will require approximately <br /> about$400,630,mainly due to equipment $251,440,which is much lower than <br /> and operation costs alternative 1 <br /> 7 Applicabilitv to Soil Remediation 4 This alternative can be combined with This method requires use of soil vapor <br /> vapor extraction to enable remediation of extraction as part of the process <br /> 'dewatered zone' <br /> K 11232W971GRW7 EVAL XLS <br /> I <br /> Project No 1232 <br />