My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0012190
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
W
>
WILSON
>
102
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0545890
>
ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0012190
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/22/2020 12:23:34 PM
Creation date
7/22/2020 11:28:35 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
ARCHIVED REPORTS
FileName_PostFix
XR0012190
RECORD_ID
PR0545890
PE
3526
FACILITY_ID
FA0025958
FACILITY_NAME
ROEK BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION
STREET_NUMBER
102
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
WILSON
STREET_TYPE
WAY
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95205
APN
15502065
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
102 S WILSON WAY
P_LOCATION
01
P_DISTRICT
001
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
LSauers
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
257
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
o Criterion 3 <br /> ' This alternative can be implemented within regulatory guidelines <br /> Criterion 4 <br /> ' This alternative would require sigmhcant capital outlays on the part of the property <br /> owner Capital costs are associated with installation of extraction wells and <br /> treatment systems, and could approach $300,000 to $500,000 Ongoing operation <br /> and maintenance costs could approach $30,000 to $50,000 per year <br /> r ' c Criterion 5 <br /> f The alternative should have an immediate impact on reducing the volume and. degree <br /> ' of contamination in the soil The impact on reducing the volume and degree of <br /> contamination in groundwater would require significant additional time <br /> ' o Criterion 6 <br /> The long term effectiveness for soil and groundwater remediation would be <br /> considerable depending upon the degree of contaminant removal The estimated <br /> timeframe to achieve cleanup is five to ten years <br /> 0 Criterion 7 <br /> i <br /> This alternative would have implementability problems due to the time involved in <br /> obtaining permits for the groundwater extraction system, system design and <br /> installation <br /> a Criterion 8 <br /> Impact to businesses during installation and other site activities would be minimal <br /> and should meet with public and regulatory acceptance <br /> 4.0 PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE FOR REMEDIATION <br /> ` 4.1 Soil Vapor Extraction <br /> t An evaluation of alternatives has shown Alternative 1 - Passive Remediation, Alternative 2 - <br /> Soil Excavation and Offsite Disposal, and Alternative 5 - Vapor Extraction and Groundwater <br /> ' Extraction to be less attractive for this site Ground Zero proposes to remediate <br /> F hydrocarbon-bearing soil beneath the site by installing and operating a vapor extraction <br /> system (VES) and continue groundwater monitoring to evaluate if impact to groundwater is <br /> declining If impact to groundwater is not declining sufficiently to satisfy regulatory agency <br /> K <br /> grnun&LE rocl.lcap 19 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.