Drycleaner Site Profiles

American Prime Cleaners, Jacksonville, Florida

Description
Historical activity that resulted in contamination.

Drycleaning, using PCE was performed at this site from 1990 until December of 1996 when it was converted to a dry drop-off facility. A Phase II Site Assessment conducted in August of 1998 found PCE concentrations in soil samples as high as 100 mg/kg and PCE concentrations in groundwater as high as 42,000 ug/L. The shopping center in which the drycleaning facility was formerly located was razed in February 2000 and in March 2000, a total of 1,964 cubic yards of contaminated soil was excavated to a depth of 4 feet BLS in the former location of the drycleaning machine and the service door of the former facility. An additional 8 cubic yards of contaminated soil was excavated on March 14, 2000. The site is now in the parking lot of a newly constructed shopping center. The site setting is retail commercial/residential. In September of 1998, The Florida DEP received an application for the former facility for the Florida Drycleaning Solvent Cleanup Program and the site was determined to be eligible for state-funded cleanup in August of 1999.

Remediation Status: In groundwater monitoring


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


Contaminant Media Concentration (ppb) Nondetect
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene groundwater 32.6 ppb
Tetrachloroethene (PCE) groundwater 32.6 ppb
Tetrachloroethene (PCE) groundwater 32.6 ppb
Trichloroethene (TCE) groundwater 32.6 ppb
toluene groundwater 32.6 ppb
groundwater 32.6 ppb
groundwater 32.6 ppb
groundwater 32.6 ppb
groundwater 32.6 ppb
groundwater 32.6 ppb
groundwater 32.6 ppb
groundwater 32.6 ppb
groundwater 32.6 ppb
groundwater 32.6 ppb
soil 35 ppb
groundwater 48.4 ppb
groundwater 2.9 ppb

Site Hydrology

Deepest Significant Groundwater Contamination:   30ft bgs
Plume Size:   Plume Length: 100ft
Plume Width: 40ft
Plume Thickness: 25ft
Average Depth to Groundwater:   6.16ft

Lithology and Subsurface Geology

 
  very fine to fine-grained sand, trace of clay
Depth: 0-5ft bgs
5ft thick
Gradient: 0.0064ft/ft
 
  fine-grained sand with a few clay lenses
Depth: 5-12ft bgs
7ft thick
 
  very fine to fine-grained sand
Depth: 12-24ft bgs
12ft thick
 
  very fine-grained sand with lenses of silt
Depth: 24-30ft bgs
6ft thick
 
  very fine to fine-grained sand with thin clay seams
Depth: 30-35ft bgs
5ft thick
 
  very fine to fine-grained sand
Depth: 35-50ft bgs
15ft thick

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?
  Yes 
Type of Vapor Mitigation System(s):
  Passive Vapor Barrier
Sub-slab Depressurization
Sub-slab Pressurization
Passive Venting
HVAC controls/modifications
Soil Vapor Extraction

Remediation Scenario

Cleanup Goals:
  Soil: PCE = 30 ug/kg

Groundwater: = 3 ug/l, TCE = 3 ug/l, cis 1,2-DCE = 70 ug/l, vinyl chloride 1 ug/l
Remedy Level:
  Full Scale Remedy

Technologies

ex Situ Biostimulation
 
ex Situ Soil Vapor Extraction
 
ex Situ Carbon Adsorption
 
ex Situ Carbon Adsorption
 
ex Situ Carbon Adsorption
 
ex Situ Carbon Adsorption
 
ex Situ Carbon Adsorption
 
ex Situ Carbon Adsorption
 
ex Situ Carbon Adsorption
 
in Situ Soil Vapor Extraction
 

Why the technology was selected:
Although soil sampling found minimal contamination during the site assessment work conducted in 2006, an active soil gas survey (Modified Active Gas Sampling - MAGS) was conducted and soil gas samples collected had PCE concentrations as high as 17.2 mg/cubic meter, indicating sufficient PCE was still present in the unsaturated zone to continue to act as an ongoing source for groundwater contamination. Since the soil was permeable (fine to fine-grained sand) and was capped by the asphalt parking lot and the water table was relatively deep for a Jacksonville site, the decision was made to install a soil vapor extraction system to address contaminated soil at the site. Biostimuation using ChitoRem was chosen as the groundwater remedy because anerobic conditions existed in groundwater and PCE daughter products were present. ChitoRem SC-20 is a chitin complex. It has been described as a food grade biopolymer. It is composed of crushed crab shell material (< 1 mm in nominal size). It has an approximate composition of 20% chitin, 40% chitin-bound calcium carbonate, 30% protein and less than 9% nitrogen.

Date implemented:
Soil Vapor Extraction: September 24, 2009.

Date completed:
October 27, 2011. SVE system operated for 25 months.

Final remediation design:
The soil vapor extraction system consists of eleven (11) vertical vapor extraction wells constructed of 4-inch Schedule 40 PVC. The wells were screened from 1-4 ft BLS. The system is powered by a 7.5 HP blower. Off gas is treated via a 170-lb. G.A.C. vessel. The system design flow rate is 196 scfm with an applied vacuum of 20 inches w.c.

Cost to Design and Implement:
All technologies: Design: $10,500
Implementation: $102,300

in Situ Biostimulation
 

Why the technology was selected:
Biostimuation using ChitoRem was chosen as the groundwater remedy because anerobic conditions existed in groundwater and PCE daughter products were present. ChitoRem SC-20 is a chitin complex. It has been described as a food grade biopolymer. It is composed of crushed crab shell material (< 1 mm in nominal size). It has an approximate composition of 20% chitin, 40% chitin-bound calcium carbonate, 30% protein and less than 9% nitrogen.

Date implemented:
Biostimulation (ChitoRem): September 2009.

Final remediation design:
ChitoRem SC-20 was emplaced in four 3-foot diameter boreholes drilled with a large diameter hollow stem auger. Three of these boreholes were drilled to a depth of 8 ft BLS. Amendment distribution wells, 6-inches in diamter, with 3 feet of 0.01-inch slot screen (formed in an L-shaped joint in the bottom of the auger hole) were installed in the bottom of the boreholes. The boreholes were backfilled with a mixture of #57 limestone and ChitoRem to approximatley one foot above the water table. Approximatley 25 pounds of ChitoRem was emplaced in each of the three distribution wells. Another 3 foot diamter borehole was drilled to 11 ft BLS and two 6-inch diameter amendment distribution wells were installed in the borehole with 7 foot of 0.01-inch slot screens installed slanted in the borehole. Approximatley 25 pounds of ChitRem was emplaced in each of these amendment distribution wells. The bottom 5.5 feet of this borehole was backfilled with a mixture of #57 limestone and ChitoRem. A total of 250 pounds of ChitoRem was used at the site.

Results to date:
The latest groundwater monitoring event was conducted in March 2012. Two monitor wells produced groundwater samples with contaminant concentrations exceeding MCLs: MW001 - 5.8 ug/L PCE; MW002 - 14 ug/L PCE, 21 ug/l TCE, 27 ug/l cis 1,2-DCE.

Next Steps:
Continue monitored natural attenuation.

Cost to Design and Implement:
All technologies: Design: $10,500
Implementation: $102,300

Costs

Cost for Assessment:
  $61,700
Cost for Operation and Maintenance:
 
Total Costs for Cleanup:
 

Lessons Learned

Excavation of contaminated soil in March 2000, when the shopping center was razed, resulted in a large drop in contaminant concentrations in groundwater. PCE concentrations in groundwater were 40,000 ug/L. The highest PCE concentration found in gorundwater during the site assessment conducted in 2006 were 580 ug/L.



Contacts

Miranda McClure, Project Manager
Bureau of Waste Cleanup (MS4520)
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2400

Phone: (850) 245-8941
E-mail: Miranda.McClure@dep.state.fl.us

Kelly Baltz, P.E., Consultant
Golder & Associates
9428 Baymeadows Road
Jacksonville, Florida 32256

Phone: (904) 421-4207
E-mail: Kelly_Baltz@Golder.com

Site Specific References

Site Assessment Report: 2006
Remedial Action Plan: 2009
Construction Completion Report: 2010
Operation & Maintenance Reports 2009-2010.
Groundwater Monitoring Report 2012