Drycleaner Site Profiles

Model Steam Laundry, Goodland, Kansas

Description
Historical activity that resulted in contamination.

Model Steam Laundry operated from the 1950's to approximately 1986. The building is currently used for storage. In March 1998, three monitoring wells associated with a storage tank site were installed and PCE was discovered. An expanded site assessment lead to a source from the former location of the dry cleaning machine and along the sanitary sewer line leading out of the facility.

Remediation Status: In active remediation


Contaminants
Contaminants present and the highest amount detected in both soil and groundwater.


Contaminant Media Concentration (ppb) Nondetect
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene groundwater
Tetrachloroethene (PCE) groundwater
Tetrachloroethene (PCE) soil
Trichloroethene (TCE) groundwater

Site Hydrology

Deepest Significant Groundwater Contamination:   210ft bgs
Plume Size:  
Average Depth to Groundwater:   185ft

Lithology and Subsurface Geology

 
  Silt and clay with caliche
Depth: 0-40ft bgs
40ft thick
Gradient: 0.003ft/ft
 
  fine-grained silty sand grading to meduim and coarse-grained sand with fine to coarse gravel and caliche zones
Depth: 40-290ft bgs
250ft thick
 
  shale bedrock
Depth: 290ft bgs

Pathways and DNAPL Presence

checkGroundwater
Sediments
checkSoil
DNAPL Present

Vapor Intrusion Pathway

Has the potential for vapor intrusion (VI) been evaluated?
  No
Has a vapor mitigation system been installed?
  No 

Remediation Scenario

Cleanup Goals:
  PCE below EPA MCL's in groundwater and below KDHE RSK's in the soil.
Remedy Level:
  Full Scale Remedy

Technologies

In Situ Soil Vapor Extraction
 

Why the technology was selected:
The source investigation revealed extremely high levels of PCE in the soil at relatively shallow depths. Since the site building was vacant, excavation was chosen in conjuncting with SVE of the deeper source zone. Due to the depth to groundwater, air sparging was not chosen as a feasible option in this area. SVE and excavation were considered the most cost effective option.

Date implemented:
Excavation and installation in early July 2008. System start-up July 28, 2008

Final remediation design:
Excavation along the sewer line inside the building to a maximum 4ft depth. Five vertical SVE wells installed to a depth of 15 ft bgs, screened from 5-15 ft. The piping for the SVE wells run inside the trench of the excavated area.

Results to date:
As of March 2010, more than 1,100 pounds of VOCs have been removed from the site soil by the SVE system.

Next Steps:
Continue SVE system O&M and groundwater monitoring.

Cost to Design and Implement:
$65,177.10 for all technologies

Ex Situ Soil Removal
 

Why the technology was selected:
The source investigation revealed extremely high levels of PCE in the soil at relatively shallow depths. Since the site building was vacant, excavation was chosen in conjuncting with SVE of the deeper source zone. Due to the depth to groundwater, air sparging was not chosen as a feasible option in this area. SVE and excavation were considered the most cost effective option.

Date implemented:
Excavation and installation in early July 2008. System start-up July 28, 2008

Final remediation design:
Excavation along the sewer line inside the building to a maximum 4ft depth. Five vertical SVE wells installed to a depth of 15 ft bgs, screened from 5-15 ft. The piping for the SVE wells run inside the trench of the excavated area.

Results to date:
As of March 2010, more than 1,100 pounds of VOCs have been removed from the site soil by the SVE system.

Next Steps:
Continue SVE system O&M and groundwater monitoring.

Cost to Design and Implement:
$65,177.10 for all technologies

Costs

Cost for Assessment:
  $59,154.55
Cost for Operation and Maintenance:
  Roughly $20,000 per year.
Total Costs for Cleanup:
 

Lessons Learned

Private utility locators can not always locate all underground utilities. Numerous abandoned, undetecteable underground lines were encountered during the source removal. Parts of a car frame were actually removed from the excavated area.

Removing additional contaminated source area soil during the SVE system installation was an effective catalyst for remediating the site.

An existing system was transferred to this site. The oversized blower was very costly to a project's budget. Monthly energy costs were cut in half with the installation of a smaller, more efficient blower.

Contacts

Scott Yankey, P.G.
KDHE-Bureau of Environmental Remediation
Dry Cleaning and Landfill Remediation Unit
1000 SW Jackson, Suite 410
Topeka, KS 66612-1367
voice: 785-296-8025
fax: 785-296-4823