Drycleaner Site Profiles

Wright's Dry Cleaners, Winter Haven, Florida

Description
Historical activity that resulted in contamination.

This is an active drycleaning facility that has been operating since 1975. The facility uses both PCE and petroleum drycleaning solvents. A UST where No. 2 fuel oil was formerly stored has been abandoned. The facility is served by a septic tank/drainfield. The facility is located approximately 450 feet upgradient of a small sinkhole lake. Contaminant sources at the site include soils beneath the biulding floor slab near the drycleaning machine and the septic tank/drainfield.

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


Contaminant Media Concentration (ppb) Nondetect
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene groundwater 12 ppb
Tetrachloroethene (PCE) groundwater 54 ppb
Tetrachloroethene (PCE) soil 493 ppb
1,2,4-trimethylbenzene soil 225 ppb
1,3,5-trimethylbenzene soil 115 ppb
naphthalene soil 233 ppb
Trichloroethene (TCE) groundwater 3 ppb

Site Hydrology

Deepest Significant Groundwater Contamination:   12ft bgs
Plume Size:   Plume Length: 60ft
Plume Width: 140ft
Plume Thickness: 12ft
Average Depth to Groundwater:   6ft

Lithology and Subsurface Geology

 
  Very fine to fine-grained sand with silty fine-grained sand interbed
Depth: 0-49ft bgs
49ft thick
Conductivity: 20ft/day
Gradient: 0.04ft/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?
  Yes 
Type of Vapor Mitigation System(s):
  Soil Vapor Extraction

Remediation Scenario

Cleanup Goals:
  Groundwater - MCLs: PCE=3.0 ug/l; TCE=3.0 ug/l; cis 1,2-DCE=70 ug/l

Soils - Leachability Cleanup Target Level: PCE=30.0 ug/kg

Technologies

In Situ Monitored Natural Attenuation
 

Why the technology was selected:
Natural Attenuation was selected as the groundwater remedy because of the low contaminant levels detected in groundwater and the presence of PCE degredation products indicating that natural attenuation was occuring in groundwater.

Next Steps:
Site Closed

Cost to Design and Implement:
$4,512.69 (Limited RAP) $20,074.88 (IRM & Septic tank repair) $29,328.40 (Implementation)

In Situ Soil Vapor Extraction
 

Why the technology was selected:
SVE was selected as the soil remedy at the site because of the presence of VOC compounds in permeable soils.

Date implemented:
The SVE system was installed in September/October of 1999 and began operation on October 15, 1999.

Final remediation design:
The SVE system utilized 2 vertical vapor extraction wells and 2 vertical air inlet wells. All four wells were installed through the facility floor slab. Piping for all the wells was run to the ceiling of the facility, then routed outside the back of the building to the equipment compound. All wells: 2" PVC screened 1'-6' bgs SVE Blower: 5.0 HP Ametek Rotron Blower, 100 cfm (50 cfm/point)against a vacuum of 80 inches water Air Inlet Blower: 2.5 HP Ametek Rotron Blower, 60 cfm (30 cfm/point)against a pressure of 80 inches water Emission Treatment: 300 lb GAC canister System radius of influence (ROI): 20' During the first six weeks of system operation, SVE and air inlet wells were connected to the SVE line so that all airflow was from the subsurface and contaminants were not displaced laterally. SVE discharge flow rate: 126 cfm, vacuum of 40 inches of water Air injection rate: 65 cfm, pressure of 42 inches of water ROI: approximately 20'

Results to date:
SRCO approved 2/5/04. The operational period was 12 months. During that time, the system was turned off for one week each after 5 months and 8 months of operation. System restartups showed rebounds in influent concentrations. The SVE system was shut down 11/06/00, and recovered an estimated 16.8 lbs of VOCs. The final groundwater sampling event occurred 08/08/03. Confirmatory soil and groundwater sampling show this site has met the Florida DSCP goals and should be issued a Site Rehabilitation Completion Order (SRCO).

Next Steps:
Site Closed

Cost to Design and Implement:
$4,512.69 (Limited RAP) $20,074.88 (IRM & Septic tank repair) $29,328.40 (Implementation)

Ex Situ Soil Removal
 

Why the technology was selected:
Contaminated sludge and wastewater were found in the septic tank. Sludge: 62,000 ug/kg PCE; 5,800 ug/kg TCE; 13,000 ug/kg 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene; 5,000 ug/kg 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene; 15,000 ug/kg p-Isopropyltoluene. The septic tank was pumped out as part of an interim remedial measure (IRM). A total of 3.74 tons of sludge/liquid were disposed of off-site.

Next Steps:
Site Closed

Cost to Design and Implement:
$4,512.69 (Limited RAP) $20,074.88 (IRM & Septic tank repair) $29,328.40 (Implementation)

Costs

Cost for Assessment:
  $86,560.08

Cost for Operation and Maintenance:
  $57,449.03 (O&M, Confirm Sampling) $31,435.73 (GW Monitoring) $6,480.06 (SVE & MW decomission)
Total Costs for Cleanup:
  $238,640.86

Lessons Learned

Introduction of air into air inlet wells installed in dead spaces will increase the pressure gradient between SVE wells and and air inlet wells, enhancing air movement towards SVE wells.
The presence of fine silt interbed in the unsaturated zone acted to retain contaminants and resulted in a rebound in contaminant influent concentrations after two system shutdown periods.

Contacts

Stacie Davis, Project Manager
Bureau of Waste Cleanup (MS 4520)
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2400
(850) 245-8967
Anastasia Davis@dep.state.fl.us

Brian Moore, Contractor
HSA Environmental Engineers & Scientists
4019 East Fowler Avenue
Tampa, Florida 33167
(850) 971-3882
bmoore@hsa-env.com

Site Specific References

Contamination Assessment Report May 1998
Remedial Action Plan 02/1999
Remediation Performance Reports 10/99-11/00
Groundwater Monitoring Reports 09/99-08/03