Laserfiche WebLink
�CESti <br /> least intrusive, as surface based treatment equipment is not required and temporary well points are <br /> used for nutrient injection. Operation and maintenance costs would be negligible Howcvcr, periodic <br /> I monitoring of the site conditions would be required Characteristics that should be investigated prior <br /> to system design include aquifer permeability, site hydrology, dissolved oxygen content, pH, redox <br /> conditions, temperature, soil moisture content, organic content, biodegradability of contaminants,and <br /> the presence of a Enhanced bioremediation <br /> may be classified as a long-term technology that may take several years to reach cleanup goals <br /> Treatibility tests, especially for the soil matrix, should be performed to further determine the feasibility <br />' of this technology and to define the remediation time frame and parameters Typical costs for <br /> enhanced bioremediation of soils range from$20 to $80 per cubic yard For groundwater, oxygen <br /> enhanced treatment typically ranges from$40 to $80 per 1,000 gallons treated, hydrogen peroxide <br /> enhancement costs are an order of magnitude more expensive than oxygen enhancement, and nitrate <br /> enhancement ranges from$160 to $230 per gallon <br /> Air sparging, as an in-situ treatment, appears feasible to meet the remedial objectives at this site <br /> Based on the site conditions, an air sparge system would be implemented by installing sparge and vent <br /> I wells along the approximate centerline of the groundwater plume This remediation system would <br /> also require surface trenching and installation of a treatment compound for sparging and venting <br /> equipment Characteristics that should be evaluated include vadose zone gas permeability, <br /> groundwater flow rate, radial influence of the sparging well, aquifer permeability and heterogeneities, <br /> I • and contaminant volatility and solubility Air sparging may be classified as a medium to long duration <br /> technology Pilot tests should be performed to further determine the feasibility of this technology and <br /> to define the remediation time frame and parameters Typical costs for air sparging range from <br /> $150,000 A50, 000 per acre of groundwater plume to be treated <br /> In-situ well aeration appears feasible to meet the remedial objectives at this site Based on the site <br /> conditions, an in-situ well aeration system would be implemented by installing wells along the <br /> centerline of the groundwater plume This remediation system would also require surface trenching <br /> and installation of a treatment compound for sparging and venting equipment Characteristics that <br /> should be evaluated include vadose zone gas permeability, groundwater flow rate, radial influence <br /> of the aeration well, aquifer permeability and heterogeneities, and contaminant volatility and <br /> solubility In situ well aeration may be classified as a medium to long duration technology Pilot tests <br /> should be performed to further determine the feasibility of this technology and to define the <br /> remediation time frame and parameters Typical costs for in-situ well aeration should be similar to <br /> air sparging <br /> I5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> .AES recommends that treatibihty analyses and pilot testing be conducted to further evaluate the best <br /> remediation technology for the Canteen Facility Following evaluation of the pilot test/treatibility <br /> 10 <br /> I <br />