ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0007712 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

TABLE 8 COMPARISON OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES THRIFTY OIL STATION 171 1250 North Wilson Way Stockton CA HGC 1016 _ ca ?ltal Br W 03t1 l I _ E Qty - Q� jWyAntaget Ocst m '' 71 1 hoe, - ate � _ n"-a t sP`<' r �� aitom; Gtr__ Very effective above the High cost, removal of 10,000 cubic yards of Excavation groundwater,difficult infrastructure soil $900,000 1 Year Not Applicable $0 $900000 Not cost effective below the water table MTBE remediation may Not effective with Increases aerobic be slow, high cost, can elevated Costs are high, not Enhanced Bioremediation hydrocarbon created unwanted by- concentrations of 10 Years Groundwater $0 $750000 effective for soil, biodegradation products,does not work petroleum Sampling unwanted by-products well for soil hydrocarbons $750,000 Unpredictable in fine Costs are low to grained soil, requires Assumed 20 sparge moderate,success Strips BTEX and MTBE very tight spacing of wells Also requires unlikely, could cause it Sparging fromroundwater wells, not effective with continued vapor 5 Years $25,000 $150,000 $230,000 g clay confining layer, p plume to migrate extraction $80,000 offsite, not technically could cause plume feasible migrate offsite Reduces BTEX and MTBE in vadose zone, Two pumping welts Costs are low to Groundwater Pumping with offers containment for Does not remediate treatment with air moderate, most Vapor Extraction groundwater plume, groundwater stripper and two 5 years $45,000 $225,000 $285,000 technically feasible, exposes soil beneath the contamination carbon vessels provides containment water table for vapor $60,000 of plume extraction