CLU-IN Home

U.S. EPA Contaminated Site Cleanup Information (CLU-IN)


This content is being minimally managed and was last updated in July 2021. EPA recognizes that this content is relevant to site remediation stakeholders and will continue streamlined review and maintenance of this content.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. EPA Technology Innovation and Field Services Division

State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Site Profiles

First Coast Laundry & Cleaners, Jacksonville, Beach, Florida

Description
Historical activity that resulted in contamination.

This is an active PCE drycleaning facility that has been in operation since 1969. The facility is located in a mixed retail commercial/residential setting. The identified contaminant source areas are: former location of a PCE AST outside the rear (service door); two lint traps also located outside the rear door of the facility and the soils beneath the facility floor slab near the drycleaning machines. There have been reported discharges associated with the filter system of the drycleaning machines. During the site assessment, a sediment sample collected from one of the lint traps located behind the building had the following contaminants detected: 20.9 mg/kg PCE, 1.51 mg/kg TCE, 57.3 mg/k cis 1,2-DCE, 6.88 mg/kg trans 1,2-DCE, and 30.1 mg/kg vinyl chloride, indicating discharges to the sump/drains.

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
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene groundwater
Vinyl Chloride groundwater

Site Hydrology

Deepest Significant Groundwater Contamination:   55ft bgs
Plume Size:   Plume Length: 220ft
Plume Width: 180ft
Plume Thickness: 50ft
Average Depth to Groundwater:   3.64ft

Lithology and Subsurface Geology

 
  very fine-grained sand with 2-3% organic content and shell fragments
Depth: 0-19ft bgs
19ft thick
Gradient: 0.0012ft/ft
 
  60% shell hash & fine to medium-grained sand
Depth: 19-24ft bgs
5ft thick
 
  fine to very fine-grained sand with shells
Depth: 24-28ft bgs
4ft thick
 
  very fine to fine-grained sand, 10% silt, 2-5% clay
Depth: 28-31ft bgs
3ft thick
 
  verty fine to fine-grained sand with shells
Depth: 31-44ft bgs
13ft thick
 
  shell hash wiht very fine to medium-grained sand
Depth: 44-51ft bgs
7ft thick
 
  very fine to fine-grained sand with shells
Depth: 51-57.5ft bgs
6.5ft thick
 
  very fine to fine-grained sand, 10-15% silt, 5-10% clay, phosphate pebbles
Depth: 57.5-71ft bgs
13.5ft thick
 
  very fine-grained sand, 25-35% clay, phosphate grains
Depth: 71-75ft bgs
4ft thick

Pathways and DNAPL Presence

checkGroundwater
checkSediments
checkSoil
checkPresumptive Evidence of DNAPL

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:
  Soil: PCE = 30 ug/kg

Groundwater = PCE = 3 ug/l, TCE = 3 ug/l, cis 1,2-DCE = 70 ug/l, trans 1,2-DCE = 100 ug/l, vinyl chloride = 1 ug/l
Remedy Level:
  Interim Action

Technologies

In Situ Chemical Oxidation
 

Why the technology was selected:
Chemical oxidation using Cool-Ox (calcium oxide +2% hydrogen peroxide) was chosen to remediate the unsaturated zone at the site because most of the contaminated soil was located beneath a building that houses an active drycleaning operation and a shallow water table (less than 3 ft BLS, seasonally) makes operation of a soil vapor extraction system problematic.

Date implemented:
Cool-Ox was injected from November 13-16, 2007.

Final remediation design:
The Cool-Ox was delivered via 132 injection points installed on a 3 foot grid. A total of 34 injection points (3/4-inch boreholes) were installed beneath the facility floor slab in two general areas: 18 points located adjacent to the drycleaning machines and 16 points located inside the southeast corner of the building. The remaining 98 points were installed in the area outside of the southwestern corner of the building. This included the delivery door of the facility and the area near the stormwater drain. A total of 4,224 gallons of reagent was utilized or approximately 32 gallons of reagent per injection point. The Cool-Ox was injected using Hydro Dart at pressures of up to 500 p.s.i. The injection rate ranged from 2 to 2.5 gpm.

Results to date:
Conducted membrane interface probe logging (7 boreholes to 41 ft BLS) at the site June 5-7, 2009 and collected soil samples beneath buiding floor slab. All soil samples had detectable concentrations of PCE, ranging from 140 - 5,200 ug/kg, indicating that the Cool-Ox injection was not effective in remediating contaminated soil beneath the facility floor slab. Based on MIP and groundwater monitoring results, eight addtional monitor wells were installed at the site, including two wells installed beneath the drycleaning facility floor slab (screened across the water table). Highest contaminant concentrations in groundwater continue to be in the area just outside the service door of the facility adjacent to the sumps. Additional confirmatory soil sampling conducted in May 2010, found PCE concentrations ranging from 100 to 8,600 ug/kg in samples collected beneath the facility floor slab.

Next Steps:
Evaluating remedial technologies for the unsaturated zone. Large diameter vapor extraction wells are a possibility. Groundwater remedy will likely be bistimulation.

Cost to Design and Implement:
$131,200

Costs

Cost for Assessment:
  $138,100
Cost for Operation and Maintenance:
  Groundwater monitoring $6,700
Total Costs for Cleanup:
 

Lessons Learned

1. Membrane interface probe logging was useful in evaluating Cool-Ox injection and in selecting locations and screen intervals for additional monitor wells.

2. The presence of 2-3% organic material in soils may be a cause (high oxidant demand) of the general failure of the chemical oxidation remedy. Ineffective distribution of the oxidant may also have contributed to the problem.

3. We recommend that whenever feasible, a monitor well or monitor wells screened across the water table be installed beneath the facility floor slab of active drycleaning facilities.

Contacts

Aaron Cohen
Florida Dept. of Environmental Protection
Bureau of Waste Cleanup, MS 4500
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, Florida 32399
850-245-8974
Aaron.Cohen@dep.state.fl.us

Tim Larson, P.E., Consultant
Ecology & Environment, Inc.
1974 Commonwealth Lane
Tallahassee, Florida 32303
Phone: (850)574-1400
E-mail: Tlarson@ene.com

Site Specific References

Site Assessment Report: 2001
Remedial Action Plan: 2007
Post Injection Report: 2008
Monitoring Reports; 2002 - present

 

Top of Page