Quick-N-Easy Wash-O-Mat and Artistic Cleaners, Wichita, Kansas

State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Site Profiles

Description
Historical activity that resulted in contamination.

Two former drycleaner facilities are sources within the large multi-source Gilbert-Mosley Site in Wichita, Kansas. The inactive facilities are within a commercial area that is surrounded by residential areas. Quick-N-Easy Wash-O-Mat was a coin-operated laundry with self-service drycleaning, while the Artistic Cleaners was a standard commercial drycleaner service. The Kansas Department of Health & Environment (KDHE) conducted site investigations in 1990 and distinguished the boundaries of the contaminant plumes resulting from the drycleaners separately from the rest of the Gilbert-Mosley Site. KDHE accepted the Quick-N-Easy and Artistic sites into the State of Kansas Drycleaning Facility Release Trust Fund in 1996.

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

Contaminant	Media	Concentration (ppb)
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene	groundwater	40 ppb
Tetrachloroethene (PCE)	groundwater	1,500 ppb
Tetrachloroethene (PCE)	soil	9,930 ppb
Trichloroethene (TCE)	groundwater	190 ppb

Site Hydrology

Deepest Significant Groundwater Contamination:		25ft bgs
Plume Size:		Plume Length: 2,000ft Plume Width: 400ft Plume Thickness: 25ft
Average Depth to Groundwater:		15ft

Lithology and Subsurface Geology

		silt and clay Depth: 1-12ft bgs 11ft thick Conductivity: 1.68ft/day Gradient: 0.002ft/ft
		Silty sand grading to sand/gravel Depth: 12-40ft bgs 28ft thick
		shale (bedrock) Depth: 40ft bgs

Pathways and DNAPL Presence

Groundwater

Sediments

Soil

DNAPL Present

Remediation Scenario

Cleanup Goals:

Reduce PCE and degradation compound groundwater contamination to below Alternate Cleanup Levels (ACL) which are risk-based levels established by the City of Wichita. The ACLs for groundwater in Wichita's Gilbert-Mosley Site are: PCE = 14 µg/L, TCE = 21 µg/L, cis 1,2-DCE = 70. Reduce soil contamination in accordance with KDHE Risk-Based Standards: PCE & TCE = 200 µg/kg, cis 1,2-DCE = 800 mg/kg.

Technologies

In Situ Chemical Oxidation

Why the technology was selected:
Permanganate injection was a new innovative technology that showed good potential so this site was chosen for a pilot test. The property surrounding the buildings was readily accessible for injection rigs and KDHE has a hazardous material storage building in the area allowing proper storage of the permanganate material.

Date implemented:
1999 (and continue at present)

Final remediation design:
The contractor installed a SVE system and completed two phases of sodium permanganate injections. The permanganate injection solution, known as Liquox, is a 40% liquid solution. In Phase I, the contractor diluted Liquox with water to 4%, and used direct push technology methods to inject approximately 757 gal of this solution. The contractor used three injection intervals within each of 33 probes, and injected a total of 25 gal of solution per probe. Injection time lasted 20–50 min depending on the formation intake of the solution. Sampling revealed that PCE concentrations decreased, degradation compound concentrations increased, and then PCE concentrations rebounded. KDHE concluded that the volume and concentration of permanganate was insufficient in Phase I. The contractor then diluted Liquox with water to 15% for Phase II, and injected a total of 1,472 gal. Phase II included six vertical injection intervals within each of 64 probes. The contractor injected approximately 23 gal of solution in each probe.

Results to date:
The permanganate injections have not significantly reduced overall PCE concentrations, except for in the area of the sewer line release. PCE concentrations rebounded and even increased shortly after both injection phases. The residual DNAPL in the soil appears to inhibit the success of the injection solutions. The source has not been sufficiently removed and continues to serve as a source for groundwater contamination. KDHE has concluded that permanganate desorbed residual DNAPL PCE off of the soil particles and caused it to dissolve in the groundwater causing an initial increase in concentrations. Once the permanganate was completely used, the remaining PCE likely resorbed to the soil particles or remained mobile. Therefore, KDHE believes that insufficient quantities of Liquox may limit the success of the treatment. Natural factors, such as iron and microorganisms, also compete for the permanganate and decrease the quantity available to treat the contaminants.

Next Steps:
KDHE has continued to evaluate sampling events, and will use these results to determine the next cleanup steps. The most recent sampling event revealed PCE concentrations up to 530 µg/L, TCE concentrations up to 85 µg/L, and cis-1,2-DCE concentrations up to 30 µg/L. New larger diameter SVE wells (2 - 3 feet diameter) are proposed. THe wells will be installed using a cable-tool rig or bucket auger rig.

Cost to Design and Implement:
$105,718

In Situ Soil Vapor Extraction

Why the technology was selected:
SVE was chosen due to the presence of buildings and utilities affecting access to the source areas. SVE is normally not a good choice for tight clays, but in this case an inefficient system is better than none at all.

Date implemented:
1999 (and continue at present)

Final remediation design:
The contractor installed a SVE system and completed two phases of sodium permanganate injections. The SVE wells targeted three "hot spots."

Results to date:
SVE appears to be effective, but relatively tight clays prevent a large radius of influence around the SVE wells. SVE has no impact on the permanganate injections.

Cost to Design and Implement:
$105,718

Costs

Cost for Assessment:		$23,033
Cost for Operation and Maintenance:		$61,928
Total Costs for Cleanup:

Lessons Learned

1. It is absolutely essential to remove the source prior to permanganate treatment events. Once the permanganate solution was used up, the source continued to release PCE. The volume and concentration of Liquox, therefore, was insufficient to treat the contamination. Substantially increased volumes may cause the technology to be cost prohibitive with limited budgets.
2. The sodium permanganate injection pilot study provided enhanced groundwater monitoring, therefore the O&M costs with this site are higher than normal.
3. KDHE also identified difficulty associated with injection process. Although the contractors were able to use standard probe rod diameters, there was nothing to prevent upward movement along the sides of the rod. This posed occasional problems. KDHE has requested the contractor to provide better injection method to seal the annulus space around the probe rods.
4. Sodium, manganese, and chloride levels were elevated following the sodium permanganate injections. Some levels initially exceeded allowable levels, but quickly reduced to acceptable levels.
5. Standard auger-installed SVE wells may have smeared borehole walls which negatively influenced the SVE systems abilities.