The content on this page is currently minimally managed and may be outdated..


In Situ Chemical Oxidation at Two Drycleaner Sites, Hutchinson, Kansas and Jacksonville, Florida

Site Name:

Multiple (2) Dry Cleaner Sites - In Situ Chemical Oxidation


- Indeeda Cleaners, Hutchinson, KS
- Swift Cleaners, Jacksonville, FL

Period of

Ineeda Cleaners - August 1998 - Not provided
Swift Cleaners - December 2000 - April 2002


Full scale

In situ chemical oxidation
- At Ineeda Cleaners, three KVA C-Sparger wells were installed to surround the main groundwater contamination area, and ozone was injected to oxidize contaminants.
- At Swift Cleaners, 400 to 600 gallons of 14%-15% hydrogen peroxide (plus catalyst) were injected in two separate areas, IA and IB. In area IA, 12 wells were used, with 2 injections per well. In area IB, 13 wells were used, with 2 injections per well. For both areas, the radius of influence was 7.5 ft. During a third injection in areas IA and IB, a total of 600 gallons of 15% hydrogen peroxide was injected in 11 wells.

Cleanup Authority:

Varied by site

Chlorinated Solvents
- Both sites were contaminated with PCE and TCE Concentrations varied at the two sites, ranging from 4,400 to 10,000 µg/L for PCE, and 24 to 382 µg/L for TCE
- Ineeda Cleaners also reported the presence of cis 1,2-DCE at 134 µg/L
- Both sites reported that DNAPLs were present.

Waste Source:
Waste and wastewater from drycleaning operations

Type/Quantity of Media Treated:
- Reported plume areas ranged from 300,000 ft2 to 12,000,000 ft2, and reported plume depths ranged from 50 to 56 ft bgs. For Swift Cleaners, the reported actual treatment area was 4,500 ft2 and the reported actual treatment depth ranged from 35 to 45 feet. This information was not provided for Ineeda Cleaners.

Purpose/Significance of Application:
Use of in situ oxidation technologies for remediation of chlorinated solvents in groundwater at drycleaner facilities

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:
Cleanup goals were based on EPA MCLs, reported for Swift Cleaners as 3.0 µg/L for PCE and TCE; cleanup goals were not reported for Ineeda Cleaners.

- At Ineeda Cleaners, groundwater concentrations were not significantly reduced during the operation of the KVA system. The system experienced maintenance problems, which may have affected performance.
- At Swift Cleaners, contaminant levels were not reduced to below cleanup goals. First quarter sampling showed that PCE concentrations were reduced to below 200 µg/L. Second quarter sampling showed that several wells showed a rebound, with PCE concentrations rising to above the baseline level of 1,050 µg/L. Results of the third injection (in both areas IA and IB) continued to show contaminant rebound.

Cost Factors:
Reported design and implementation costs:
- Ineeda Cleaners: $100,900
- Swift Cleaners: $245,000

In situ chemical oxidation was conducted at two drycleaner sites contaminated with chlorinated solvents from drycleaning operations with TCE and PCE as the primary contaminants in groundwater. The concentration of PCE and TCE varied between the two sites, ranging from 4,400 to 10,000 µg/L for PCE, and 24 to 382 µg/L for TCE. Reported plume areas ranged from 300,00 ft2 to 12,000,000 ft2, and reported plume depths ranged from 50 to 56 bgs. The remediation involved in situ chemical oxidation at full-scale at both sites.

At one site, ozone was injected into the subsurface, and at the other site, hydrogen peroxide and catalyst (Fenton’s chemistry) were injected into the subsurface. The cleanup goal of EPA MCLs was not met at either site after up to 3 rounds of injection. At Ineeda Cleaners, this was attributed to problems with the KVA C-Sparger wells. At Swift Cleaners, rebound concentrations of PCE were observed after three injection events. Subsequent remediation efforts will be conducted at this site in three additional phases proceeding downgradient.