Drycleaner Site Profiles

Jefferson Cleaners, Port Arthur, Texas

Description
Historical activity that resulted in contamination.

Jefferson Cleaners is an active dry cleaning facility that has operated an onsite dry cleaning plant for over 30 years. This facility continues to use PCE as its dry cleaning solvent. The distribution of COCs appears to remain on-site.

Remediation Status: In active remediation


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


Contaminant Media Concentration (ppb) Nondetect
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene groundwater 58 ppb
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene groundwater 11,000 ppb
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene soil 7,500 ppb
1,1-Dichloroethene groundwater 27 ppb
Tetrachloroethene (PCE) groundwater 8,800 ppb
Tetrachloroethene (PCE) soil 28,000 ppb
Trichloroethene (TCE) groundwater 4,900 ppb
Trichloroethene (TCE) soil 8,900 ppb
Vinyl Chloride groundwater 45 ppb
Vinyl Chloride soil 493 ppb

Site Hydrology

Deepest Significant Groundwater Contamination:   23ft bgs
Plume Size:   Plume Length: 170ft
Plume Width: 60ft
Plume Thickness: 10ft
Average Depth to Groundwater:   15ft

Lithology and Subsurface Geology

 
  Fill material
Depth: 0-1ft bgs
1ft thick
Gradient: 0.002ft/ft
 
  Sandy clay
Depth: 1-5ft bgs
4ft thick
Gradient: 0.002ft/ft
 
  Clay
Depth: 5-11ft bgs
6ft thick
Gradient: 0.002ft/ft
 
  Sandy silt or sandy clay
Depth: 11-18ft bgs
7ft thick
Gradient: 0.002ft/ft
 
  Clayey sand, wet
Depth: 18-23ft bgs
5ft thick
Gradient: 0.002ft/ft
 
  Very stiff sandy clay
Depth: 23-35ft bgs
12ft thick
Gradient: 0.002ft/ft
 
  Fine sand, saturated and flowing
Depth: 35-50ft bgs
15ft thick
Gradient: 0.002ft/ft
 
  Clayey fine sand
Depth: 50-55ft bgs
5ft thick
Gradient: 0.002ft/ft

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?
   

Remediation Scenario

Cleanup Goals:
  Reduce COC levels below MCLs.
The goal of the excavation was to remove soils containing
concentrations of the dry cleaning related constituents of concern above the TCEQ Tier 1 GWSoilIng
Protective Concentration Levels (PCLs).
Remedy Level:
  Interim Action

Technologies

In Situ Chemical Oxidation
 

Why the technology was selected:
In-situ chemical oxidation has been documented as an effective remediation technology for the remediation of chlorinated solvents in groundwater. In-situ treatment was conducted to minimize any potential movement of the plume while creating a environment conducive for COC destruction. The response action also compliments the natural attenuation processes to provide long term stability within the contaminant plume. KMnO4 was selected as the oxidizing solution based upon the nature and location of the contamination, the size of the contaminated area, the type of soil present, and the hydrogeology of the area.

Date implemented:
June 2011

Final remediation design:
An in-situ chemical
oxidation event was completed June 2011.
200 gallons of a KMnO4 solution is
injected into the first GWBU
through 16 temporary injection points. A
second in-situ chemical oxidation event
was completed January 2012. 200 gallons
of a KMnO4 solution is injected into the
first
GWBU through 14 temporary injection
points. A third in-situ chemical
oxidation event was completed April
2012. 120 gallons of a KMnO4 solution is
injected into the first GWBU
through 8 temporary injection points.

Results to date:
Sampling data shows site wide decreases in concentrations due to the in-situ chemical oxidation events. Concentrations of PCE have decreased between 50 and 80 percent over the course of the response action period. A similar decrease in the oncentrations of TCE and cis-
1,2-DCE has occurred during this same period. Groundwater monitoring data has indicated that the plume is not laterally mobile. Concentrations in other monitoring wells remain stable or are declining over the past several years.

Approximately 12 to 15 cubic feet of contaminated soil was removed from the site.

Next Steps:
Continuing a regular groundwater monitoring program to establish temporal trends in the groundwater monitoring data
and monitor the effectiveness of the groundwater response action.

Additional rounds of ISCO are also planned.

Cost to Design and Implement:
$78,000

In Situ Monitored Natural Attenuation
 

Why the technology was selected:
In-situ chemical oxidation has been documented as an effective remediation technology for the remediation of chlorinated solvents in groundwater. In-situ treatment was conducted to minimize any potential movement of the plume while creating a environment conducive for COC destruction. The response action also compliments the natural attenuation processes to provide long term stability within the contaminant plume. KMnO4 was selected as the oxidizing solution based upon the nature and location of the contamination, the size of the contaminated area, the type of soil present, and the hydrogeology of the area.

Date implemented:
June 2011

Final remediation design:
An in-situ chemical
oxidation event was completed June 2011.
200 gallons of a KMnO4 solution is
injected into the first GWBU
through 16 temporary injection points. A
second in-situ chemical oxidation event
was completed January 2012. 200 gallons
of a KMnO4 solution is injected into the
first
GWBU through 14 temporary injection
points. A third in-situ chemical
oxidation event was completed April
2012. 120 gallons of a KMnO4 solution is
injected into the first GWBU
through 8 temporary injection points.

Results to date:
Sampling data shows site wide decreases in concentrations due to the in-situ chemical oxidation events. Concentrations of PCE have decreased between 50 and 80 percent over the course of the response action period. A similar decrease in the oncentrations of TCE and cis-
1,2-DCE has occurred during this same period. Groundwater monitoring data has indicated that the plume is not laterally mobile. Concentrations in other monitoring wells remain stable or are declining over the past several years.

Approximately 12 to 15 cubic feet of contaminated soil was removed from the site.

Next Steps:
Continuing a regular groundwater monitoring program to establish temporal trends in the groundwater monitoring data
and monitor the effectiveness of the groundwater response action.

Additional rounds of ISCO are also planned.

Cost to Design and Implement:
$78,000

Ex Situ Soil Removal
 

Why the technology was selected:
Removal of the COCs will permanently eliminate concentration from leaching above the critical soil PCLs.

Date implemented:
June 2011

Final remediation design:
The final excavation limit was
8 by 10 feet to a depth of approximately
4 feet. The excavation was backfilled
with clean select fill, compacted, and
later resurfaced with concrete. The soil
was taken to an approved landfill.

Results to date:
Sampling data shows site wide decreases in concentrations due to the in-situ chemical oxidation events. Concentrations of PCE have decreased between 50 and 80 percent over the course of the response action period. A similar decrease in the oncentrations of TCE and cis-
1,2-DCE has occurred during this same period. Groundwater monitoring data has indicated that the plume is not laterally mobile. Concentrations in other monitoring wells remain stable or are declining over the past several years.

Approximately 12 to 15 cubic feet of contaminated soil was removed from the site.

Next Steps:
Onsite, 2 areas of contaminated soil remain below the existing dry cleaning facility. The dry cleaner operator has indicated a plan to ultimately complete the on-site construction of a new facility and demolish the existing dry cleaning facility. The remaining soil response action will be completed at that time.

Cost to Design and Implement:
$78,000

Costs

Cost for Assessment:
  $133,000
Cost for Operation and Maintenance:
 
Total Costs for Cleanup:
 

Lessons Learned

Some rebound has occurred. The original plan was to close the site in 2-3 years using ISCO, but additional response may be needed to reach closure.

Contacts

Dan Switek, P.G.
Project Manager
Remediation Division
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
12100 Park 35 Circle, MC-137
Austin, TX 78753
phone: (512) 239-4132
email: dan.switek@tceq.texas.gov

Site Specific References

Groundwater Sampling Event Summary and Status Report 2012
Response Action Effectiveness Report 2012
Soil Response Action Report 2012
Response Action Plan 2011
Affected Property Assessment Report 2011