Drycleaner Site Profiles

Donaldson's Drycleaners, Neenah, Wisconsin

Description
Historical activity that resulted in contamination.

The Donaldson's One Hour Cleaners is an active facility that operates in a primarily commercial area, and has historically used perchloroethylene (PCE) as a drycleaning agent. Investigations conducted in 1994 revealed the presence of chlorinated solvents in local groundwater monitoring wells. Subsequent investigations suggest that Donaldson's released PCE to the soil and groundwater through the disposal of filters behind the facility and from bulk PCE deliveries through the rear building entrance. The PCE migrated to the asphalt, which was in poor condition. The exact quantity of PCE released is unknown, but investigations have documented contamination of PCE and its breakdown products in the soil, groundwater and fractured bedrock.

Remediation Status: Site closed


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


Contaminant Media Concentration (ppb) Nondetect
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene groundwater 19,000 ppb
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene soil 730 ppb
Tetrachloroethene (PCE) groundwater 86,000 ppb
Tetrachloroethene (PCE) soil 66,000 ppb
Trichloroethene (TCE) groundwater 6,400 ppb
Trichloroethene (TCE) soil 1,200 ppb
toluene groundwater ND
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene groundwater 130 ppb
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene soil 41 ppb
Vinyl Chloride groundwater 1,600 ppb
Vinyl Chloride soil 390 ppb
xylenes groundwater 7,500 ppb

Site Hydrology

Deepest Significant Groundwater Contamination:   45ft bgs
Plume Size:   Plume Length: 700ft
Plume Width: 300ft
Average Depth to Groundwater:   9ft

Lithology and Subsurface Geology

 
  red-brown clay
Depth: 0-8ft bgs
8ft thick
Conductivity: 0.19ft/day
Gradient: 0.001ft/ft
 
  fractured dolomite bedrock
Depth: 8ft bgs
Conductivity: 3.46ft/day

Pathways and DNAPL Presence

checkGroundwater
Sediments
checkSoil
DNAPL Present

Remediation Scenario

Cleanup Goals:
  The remedial goals include the removal of accessible contaminated soil, vapor and groundwater extraction at the source area, and closure above standards with continuing obligations in place (maintain surface barriers for direct contact and infiltration, entry on WDNR GIS Registry for remaining soil and groundwater contamination). Remediation of the residual plume is not yet determined. The goal of the soil removal, specifically, was to remove accessible hazardous waste soils. Soil performance standards, such as asphalt or concrete barriers, will be used to address concentrations of chlorinated compounds in excess of EPA groundwater protection criteria remaining in soil at the site. Given the lateral extent of chlorinated compounds in groundwater, it may not be practical to remediate groundwater to below the state groundwater quality standards (NR 140 Wis. Adm. Code). Long term remedial actions are currently being evaluated to address the remainder of the plume (11/05).
Remedy Level:
  Interim Action

Technologies

In Situ Cap
 

Why the technology was selected:
Contractors viewed these technologies as the most effective, feasible methods to contain contaminant concentrations in clay and bedrock, and to inhibit further migration of chlorinated compounds in groundwater. The access limitations and hydraulic conductivity of clay also influenced this decision. Remediation of the residual plume is not yet determined.

Date implemented:
October 2000

Final remediation design:
The primary source area was capped with asphalt to meet soil performance standards.

Results to date:
Contractors removed 60 tons of soil. Soil removal extended to a depth of 7 ft bgs. Contractors backfilled the excavation with clean sand to 4 ft bgs, followed by clay to 0.5 ft bgs. The clay was placed on the site to limit infiltration of surface water into the source area. Contractor placed 4 inches of crushed limestone on the clay to restore the excavation surface and to provide a base course for an asphalt cap. Source area well, EW1, immediately following excavation (10/00)had PCE at 55 ppm. PCE was present at 10 ppm in 6/01.

Next Steps:
Remedial action options are being evaluated to address entire plume. The pump & treat is no longer operating (2012).

Cost to Design and Implement:
$54,859.10 (soil excavation); Total spent as of 11/2005 - $227,000

In Situ Soil Vapor Extraction
 

Why the technology was selected:
Contractors viewed these technologies as the most effective, feasible methods to contain contaminant concentrations in clay and bedrock, and to inhibit further migration of chlorinated compounds in groundwater. The access limitations and hydraulic conductivity of clay also influenced this decision. Remediation of the residual plume is not yet determined.

Date implemented:
October 2000

Final remediation design:
Contractors installed an SVE unit from a leaking Underground Storage Tank site, connecting the SVE blower to a common well via PVC piping. Liquid collected in the vapor liquid separator was pumped to the air stripper. SVE and air stripper exhausts were connected and vented to the atmosphere. Sept 2003 - extraction shut down for evaluation of plume under steady state. March 2004 - extraction resumed due to increasing plume. February 2005 - vapor extraction discontinued to monitor under steady state. November 2005 - dual-phase extraction in source area resumed for plume control.

Results to date:
The dual extraction system (SVE and groundwater extraction) successfully controled the plume during operation. The system removed approximately 1 lb of chlorinated solvents per hour. PCE in groundwater adjacent to excavation, MW800, prior to RA was 86 mg/L. PCE concentration of treated water was approximately 3 µg/L, measured at start up, with a discharge limit of 50 µg/L PCE at MW800 in 4/05 was 4 mg/L.

Next Steps:
Remedial action options are being evaluated to address entire plume. The pump & treat is no longer operating (2012).

Cost to Design and Implement:
$36,460.50 (dual-phase extraction); Total spent as of 11/2005 - $227,000

Ex Situ Air Stripping
 

Why the technology was selected:
Contractors viewed these technologies as the most effective, feasible methods to contain contaminant concentrations in clay and bedrock, and to inhibit further migration of chlorinated compounds in groundwater. The access limitations and hydraulic conductivity of clay also influenced this decision. Remediation of the residual plume is not yet determined.

Date implemented:
October 2000

Final remediation design:
Contractors installed an SVE unit from a leaking Underground Storage Tank site, connecting the SVE blower to a common well via PVC piping. Liquid collected in the vapor liquid separator was pumped to the air stripper. SVE and air stripper exhausts were connected and vented to the atmosphere. The groundwater in the source area, the area of highest contamination, was pumped from a well to a diffused-air-type (multi-stage), shallow tray air stripper for treatment. Treated water was disposed of in local storm sewer system under a Wisconsin Point Source Discharge Permit (WPDES). Sept 2003 - extraction shut down for evaluation of plume under steady state. March 2004 - extraction resumed due to increasing plume. October 2004 - groundwater extraction shut down due to insufficient water level, vapor extraction continued. February 2005 - vapor extraction discontinued to monitor under steady state. October 2005 - groundwater extraction resumed due to increasing plume. November 2005 - dual-phase extraction in source area resumed for plume control.

Results to date:
The dual extraction system (SVE and groundwater extraction) successfully controled the plume during operation. The system removed approximately 1 lb of chlorinated solvents per hour. PCE in groundwater adjacent to excavation, MW800, prior to RA was 86 mg/L. PCE concentration of treated water was approximately 3 µg/L, measured at start up, with a discharge limit of 50 µg/L PCE at MW800 in 4/05 was 4 mg/L.

Next Steps:
Remedial action options are being evaluated to address entire plume. The pump & treat is no longer operating (2012).

Cost to Design and Implement:
$54,859.10 (soil excavation); $36,460.50 (dual-phase extraction) Total spent as of 11/2005 - $227,000

Ex Situ Pump and Treat
 

Why the technology was selected:
Contractors viewed these technologies as the most effective, feasible methods to contain contaminant concentrations in clay and bedrock, and to inhibit further migration of chlorinated compounds in groundwater. The access limitations and hydraulic conductivity of clay also influenced this decision. Remediation of the residual plume is not yet determined.

Date implemented:
October 2000

Final remediation design:
The groundwater in the source area, the area of highest contamination, was pumped from a well to a diffused-air-type (multi-stage), shallow tray air stripper for treatment. Treated water was disposed of in local storm sewer system under a Wisconsin Point Source Discharge Permit (WPDES). Sept 2003 - extraction shut down for evaluation of plume under steady state. March 2004 - extraction resumed due to increasing plume. October 2004 - groundwater extraction shut down due to insufficient water level, vapor extraction continued. October 2005 - groundwater extraction resumed due to increasing plume. November 2005 - dual-phase extraction in source area resumed for plume control.

Results to date:
The dual extraction system (SVE and groundwater extraction) successfully controled the plume during operation. The system removed approximately 1 lb of chlorinated solvents per hour. PCE in groundwater adjacent to excavation, MW800, prior to RA was 86 mg/L. PCE concentration of treated water was approximately 3 µg/L, measured at start up, with a discharge limit of 50 µg/L PCE at MW800 in 4/05 was 4 mg/L. Bedrock fracturing has enhanced the vertical and lateral migration of the chlorinated compounds. Contractors will continue to delineate the horizontal and vertical extent of the contaminant plume while remediation occurs.

Next Steps:
Remedial action options are being evaluated to address entire plume. The pump & treat is no longer operating (2012).

Cost to Design and Implement:
$36,460.50 (dual-phase extraction); Total spent as of 11/2005 - $227,000

Ex Situ Soil Removal
 

Why the technology was selected:
Contractors viewed these technologies as the most effective, feasible methods to contain contaminant concentrations in clay and bedrock, and to inhibit further migration of chlorinated compounds in groundwater. The access limitations and hydraulic conductivity of clay also influenced this decision. Remediation of the residual plume is not yet determined.

Date implemented:
October 2000

Final remediation design:
Contractors excavated 59.62 tons of soil containing elevated chlorinated compounds and transported soil off-site for chemical treatment and landfill disposal. The primary source area was capped with asphalt to meet soil performance standards.

Results to date:
Contractors removed 60 tons of soil. Soil removal extended to a depth of 7 ft bgs. Contractors backfilled the excavation with clean sand to 4 ft bgs, followed by clay to 0.5 ft bgs. The clay was placed on the site to limit infiltration of surface water into the source area. Contractor placed 4 inches of crushed limestone on the clay to restore the excavation surface and to provide a base course for an asphalt cap. Source area well, EW1, immediately following excavation (10/00)had PCE at 55 ppm. PCE was present at 10 ppm in 6/01.

Next Steps:
Remedial action options are being evaluated to address entire plume. The pump & treat is no longer operating (2012).

Cost to Design and Implement:
$54,859.10 (soil excavation); Total spent as of 11/2005 - $227,000

Costs

Cost for Assessment:
  $53,630(soil);
$96,534(groundwater). Groundwater investigation not complete. Vapor investigation - $2,932. Laboratory costs ~ $20,000.
Total spent as of 2012 - $173,096
Cost for Operation and Maintenance:
  $20,000 (approximate annual operation costs) Total as of 2012 - $446,007. Of this, $412,869 was reimbursible costs and $33,138 has been expended in deductible costs.
Total Costs for Cleanup:
 

Lessons Learned

1. Significant cost savings realized by installing used SVE equipment. The treatment system building, air stripper, transfer pump, heater, control panel, exhaust fan, and a portion of the piping were obtained from a leaking UST site. A new submersible pump was purchased, however, to ensure reliability.

2. Limited access to the source area and operation space severely restricted remediation options. Contractors had initially ruled out SVE as an option because of clay's low hydraulic conductivity value, but further analysis revealed SVE's potential at the site. A DNR engineer indicated that the dewatering that would occur from groundwater pumping could release some free product from the groundwater at the capillary fringe and in the rubble zone immediately above the bedrock.

Contacts

Jennifer Borski, Hydrogeologist
Bureau for Remediation and Redevelopment
WI Department of Natural Resources
625 E. County Road Y, Suite 700
Oshkosh, WI 54901-9731
920-424-7887
jennifer.borski@wisconsin.gov

Contractors:
Mark A. Foht, Project Manager
Robert E. Lee
4664 Golden Pond Park Ct
Oneida, WI 54155
920-662-9141