1. science
2. ecology
3. pollution

NPL-U30-2-5-R4
HRS DOCUMENTATION RECORD -- REVIEW COVER SHEET
Name of Site:
Trans Circuits, Inc.
EPA ID m FLD091471904
Contact Persons
U.S. EPA, Region IV:
Cynthia Gurley
404/562-8817
Documentation Record:
Andrew J. Grimmke
BLACK & VEATCH Special Projects, Corp.
770/594-2500
Pathways, Components or Threats Not Evaluated
Surface Water Pathway
The Surface Water Pathway will not be scored due to the limited numbers of potential receptors and the lack of a defined
surface water pathway.
Soil Exposure
Soil Exposure will not be scored. No resident population exists and the pathway does not contribute significantly to the
overall site score.
Air Pathway
The Air Pathway will not be scored based on its minimal contribution to the overall site score.
1
HRS DOCUMENTATION RECORD
Name of Site: Trans Circuits, Inc.
EPA ID m FLD091471904
EPA Region: 4
Date Prepared: 04/9/99
Street Address of Site: 210 Newman Road, Lake Park
County and State: Palm Beach County, Florida
General Location in the State: Southeast Coast
Topographic Map: U.S. Geological Survey 7.5-minute series topographic quadrangle map for Riviera Beach, Florida, 1946
(Photorevised 1983), (scale 1:24,000).
(Source 1) Latitude: 26E47'43" North
Longitude: 80E04'26" West (Ref. 3)
Scores
Ground Water Pathway
Surface Water Pathway
Soil Exposure Pathway
Air Pathway
100
Not Scored
Not Scored
Not Scored
HRS SITE SCORE
50.00
2
A copy of Figure 1 is available at the EPA Headquarters Superfund Docket:
U.S. CERCLA Docket Office
Crystal Gateway #1, 1st Floor
1235 Jefferson Davis Highway
Arlington, VA 22202
Telephone: (703) 603-8917
E-Mail: [email protected]
3
A copy of Figure 2 is available at the EPA Headquarters Superfund Docket:
U.S. CERCLA Docket Office
Crystal Gateway #1, 1st Floor
1235 Jefferson Davis Highway
Arlington, VA 22202
Telephone: (703) 603-8917
E-Mail: [email protected]
4
A copy of Figure 3 is available at the EPA Headquarters Superfund Docket:
U.S. CERCLA Docket Office
Crystal Gateway #1, 1st Floor
1235 Jefferson Davis Highway
Arlington, VA 22202
Telephone: (703) 603-8917
E-Mail: [email protected]
5
A copy of Figure 4 is available at the EPA Headquarters Superfund Docket:
U.S. CERCLA Docket Office
Crystal Gateway #1, 1st Floor
1235 Jefferson Davis Highway
Arlington, VA 22202
Telephone: (703) 603-8917
E-Mail: [email protected]
6
A copy of Figure 5 is available at the EPA Headquarters Superfund Docket:
U.S. CERCLA Docket Office
Crystal Gateway #1, 1st Floor
1235 Jefferson Davis Highway
Arlington, VA 22202
Telephone: (703) 603-8917
E-Mail: [email protected]
7
WORKSHEET FOR COMPUTING HRS SITE SCORE
1.
2a.
2b.
2c.
3.
4.
Ground Water Migration pathway Score
(Sgw)(from Table 3-1, line 13)
S
S2
100
10,000
Surface Water Overland/Flood Migration Component (from Table 4-1, line 30)
Not
Scored
Ground Water to Surface Water Migration component (from
Table 4-25, line 28)
Not
Scored
Surface Water Migration Pathway Score
(Ssw) Enter the larger of lines 2a and
2b as the pathway score.
Not
Scored
Soil exposure Pathway Score (Ss)
(from Table 5-1, line 22)
Not
Scored
Air Migration pathway Score (Sa)
(from Table 6-1, line 12)
Not
Scored
5.
Total of Sgw2 + Ssw2 + Ss2 + Sa2
6.
HRS Site Score -- Divide the value on
line 5 by 4 and take the square root
10,000
50.00
8
GROUND WATER MIGRATION PATHWAY SCORESHEET
FACTOR CATEGORIES AND FACTORS
Likelihood of Release to an Aquifer
Maximum Value
1. Observed Release
2. Potential to Release
2a. Containment
2b. Net Precipitation
2c. Depth to Aquifer
2d. Travel Time
2e. Potential to Release
[lines 2a x (2b + 2c + 2d)]
Likelihood of Release (higher of lines 1 and 2e) 2e)
Value Assigned
550
550
10
10
5
35
-----
500
550
--
a
a
100
10,000
100
50
18
b
b
b
b
5
20
b
0
0
1550
1550
5
5
550
Waste Characteristics
4. Toxicity/Mobility
5. Hazardous Waste Quantity
6. Waste Characteristics
32
Targets
7. Nearest Well
8. Population
8a. Level I Concentrations
8b. Level II Concentrations
8c. Potential Contamination
8d. Population (lines 8a + 8b + 8c)
9. Resources
10.
Wellhead Protection Area
11.
Targets (lines 7 + 8d + 9 + 10)
1578
Ground Water Migration Score for an Aquifer
12.
Aquifer Score
[(lines 3 x 6 x 11)/82,500]c
100
100
100
100
Ground Water Migration Pathway Score
13.
Pathway Score (Sgw), (highest value
from line 12 for all aquifers evaluated)c
a
b
c
Maximum value applies to waste characteristics category.
Maximum value not applicable.
Do not round to nearest integer.
9
REFERENCES
1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Hazard Ranking System, 40 CFR Part 300, Appendix A, 55 FR 51583,
December 14, 1990.
2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Superfund Chemical Data Matrix, June 1996, Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response. Appendix B-1; 101 pages.
3. U.S. Geological Survey, 7.5 Minute Series Topographic Quadrangle Maps for Florida: Riviera Beach 1949,
(Photorevised (PR) 1983); Palm Beach 1946, (PR 1983, Bathymetry Added 1986); Delta 1945 (PR 1983), scale 1:24,000.
4. Application to Operate/Construct Industrial Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems (DER form 17.1.122[5]),
for Temporary Operation, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, submitted by Trans/Circuits, Inc.,
February 2, 1981; 11 pages.
5. Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Interim Status Inspection, Trans Circuits, Inc., August 19, 1981;
1 page.
6. Palm Beach County Environmental Control Hearing Board, Stipulation, Case No. EP-15-81, Palm Beach County Health
Department, Petitioner, vs. Trans/Circuits, Inc., Respondent, November 19, 1981; 2 pages.
7. Mark A. Worley, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Incident Report for Trans/Circuits, Inc., Permit
No. IT-50-39756, January 19, 1982. Subject: Discharge overflow; 1 page.
8. State of Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Consent Order, OGC Case No. 82-0429, State of Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation, Complainant, vs. Trans/Circuits, Incorporated, Respondent, November 4,
1982; 7 pages.
9. Certificate of Completion of Construction, Domestic/Industrial Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems, Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation, Permit No. IC 50-49562, Trans/Circuits, Inc., September 16, 1982; 1 page.
10. Application to Operate/Construct Industrial Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems (DER form 17.1.122[5]),
for Construction, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, submitted by Trans/Circuits, Inc., January 20,
1982; 6 pages.
11. Application to Operate/Construct Industrial Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems (DER form 17.1.122[5]),
for Operation, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, submitted by Trans/Circuits, Inc., February 25, 1983,
11 pages.
12. W. Stanley Hynes, Vice President and General Manager, Trans/Circuits, Inc., Letter with attachments to State of
Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, October 12, 1984. Subject: Enclosed application for construction
permit, 85 pages, 2 sheets.
13. Palm Beach County Environmental Control Hearing Board, Interim Order, Case No. EP-15-81, Palm Beach County
Health Department, Petitioner, vs. Trans/Circuits, Inc., Respondent, November 23, 1983; 4 pages.
14. Palm Beach County Environmental Control Hearing Board, Second Interim Order, Case No. EP-15-81, Palm Beach
County Health Department, Petitioner, vs. Trans/Circuits, Inc., Respondent, January 30, 1984; 4 pages.
10
15. State of Florida, Division of Administrative Hearings, Recommended Order, Case No. 83-3676, Trans/Circuits, Inc.,
Petitioner, vs. State of Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Respondent, and Case No. 84-0191, State
of Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Petitioner, vs. Trans/Circuits, Inc., Respondent, September 19,
1984; 15 pages.
16. State of Florida, Division of Administrative Hearings, Final Order, Case No. 83-3676, Trans/Circuits, Inc., Petitioner,
vs. State of Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Respondent, and Case No. 84-0191, State of Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation, Petitioner, vs. Trans/Circuits, Inc., Respondent, October 2, 1984; 3 pages.
17. State of Florida, Department of Environmental Regulation, Notice of Intent to Deny, DER File No. IT 50-094319, In
the Matter of an Application for Permit by: W. Stanley Hynes, Vice President, Trans/Circuits, Inc., December 27,
1984; 3 pages.
18. State of Florida, Department of Environmental Regulation, Final Order Denying Application for Permit, Application
No. IT 50-094319, In the Matter of: Application for Permit by: W. Stanley Hynes, Vice President, Trans/Circuits, Inc.,
January 7, 1985; 2 pages.
19. Vivek Kamath, Engineer, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Letter to W. Stanley Hynes, Vice
President, Trans/Circuits, Inc., December 7, 1984. Subject: Permit No. IC 50-094320; 1 page.
20. Roy M. Duke, District Manager, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Letter with attachments to W.
Stanley Hynes, Vice President, Trans/Circuits, Inc., April 4, 1985, Subject: Extension to Permit No. IC 50-094320; 7
pages.
21. Geoffrey B. Watts, and Nicholas A. Brown, Riviera Beach Wellfield Contamination, Palm Beach, County. Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation, SIS, Groundwater Investigation Report #85-10, Tallahassee, FL, 1985; 183
pages.
22. Geo Tec, Inc., Sample Analysis Report, Trans Circuits, Inc., April 1985; 1 page.
23. Geo Tec, Inc., Sample Analysis Report, Trans Circuits, Inc., Sample No. 14735, February 6,1985; 1 page.
24. Geo Tec, Inc., Sample Analysis Report, Trans Circuits, Inc., Sample No. 15139, March 5,1985; 1 page.
25. John M. Barkett, Coll, Davidson, Carter, Smith, Salter, & Barkett, Letter with attachment to Alexander Pavda, Ph.D.,
Waste Programs Administrator, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, January 8, 1991; 5 pages.
26. Carol King, Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp. memorandum to Project File with attachment, Trans Circuits, Inc.,
July 13, 1998. Subject: Trans Circuits Percolation Pond; 3 pages.
27. Black and Veatch Special Projects Corp., Final Expanded Site Inspection/Remedial Investigation, Trans Circuits, Inc.
Lake Park, Palm Beach County, Florida, Prepared Under Contract No. 68-W9-0055 For the Waste Management
Division, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, October 30, 1998; 73 pages, Appendix A, 7 pages,
Appendix B, 516 pages, Appendix C 92 pages.
28. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Survey for Palm Beach County Area, Florida, Washington, D.C., December 1978;
Excerpt, 9 pages
29. Schroeder, M. C., Milliken, D. L., and Love S. K., Water Resources of Palm Beach County, Water Resource Study,
Report of Investigations: m 13, State of Florida, State Board of Conservation, Florida Geological Survey, 1954;
Excerpt, 14 pages.
11
30. U.S. Department of Interior, U. S. Geological Survey, Summary of the Hydrology of the Floridan Aquifer System in
Florida and in Parts of Georgia, South Carolina, and Alabama, U. S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1403-A,
1987; Excerpt, 7 pages.
31. Thomas M. Scott, The Lithostratigraphy of the Hawthorn Group (Miocene) Of Florida, Florida Geological Survey
Bulletin No. 59, Tallahassee, Florida, 1988; Excerpt, 18 pages.
32. James A. Miller, Hydrogeologic Framework of the Floridan Aquifer System in Florida and Parts of Georgia, Alabama,
and South Carolina, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1403-B, Washington, D.C., 1986; Excerpt, 10 pages.
33. R. Allan Freeze and John A. Cherry, Groundwater, Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N. J., 1979; Excerpt, 4 pages.
34. GZA/Armac, Inc., Contamination Assessment Report and Remedial Action Plan, Trans Circuits, Inc., Lake Park,
Florida, Prepared For: Florida Department of Environmental Regulation Southeast Florida District, West Palm Beach,
Florida, File No. Y-1082.00, February 1987; 218 pages.
35. William A. Martin, Robert Cilek, and Mark A. Murray, Ground Water Investigation, Supplementary Contamination
Report, Trans Circuits, Inc., Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER), March 1992; 42 pages.
36. U.S. EPA Contract Laboratory Program, Statement of Work for Inorganics Analysis; Multi-Media, MultiConcentration, Document Number OLM02.0, 3 pages including, U.S. EPA Contract Laboratory Program, Statement
of Work for Organics Analysis; Multi-Media, Multi-Concentration, Document Number OLM01.0, OLM0.2, 1/91,
OLM01M01.1, 12/90, and OLM01.5 4/91; 14 pages.
37. Walter Kosinsky, Project Manager, and Rick P. Harding, Ph.D., Associate District Manager, Goldberg-Zoino and
Associates, Inc., Letter with attachments to Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Southeast Florida
District, May 15, 1989. Subject: Trans Circuits, Inc., Lake Park, Florida, OGC Case No. 84-1061; 79 pages.
38. Goldberg-Zoino and Associates, Inc. Trans Circuits, Inc., Lake Park, Florida, OGC Case No. 84-1861, Summary of
Remedial Action, Prepared For: Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Southeast Florida District, West
Palm Beach, Florida, File No. X-60072.20, May 15, 1989; 244 pages 6 sheets.
39. Dennis J. Hynes, Trans/Circuits, Letter to Dr. Alexander Padva, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation,
Southeast District, May 17, 1989. Subject: Trans Circuits OGC Case No. 83-0721; 1 page.
40. Zoe Kulakowski, Bureau of Waste Cleanup, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Interoffice
Memorandum to Saadi Motamedi, Southeast District, June 12, 1989. Subject: Trans/Circuits, Inc., Lake Park, Palm
Beach County; 1 page.
41. Alexander Padva, Ph.D., Waste Program Administrator, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Southeast
District, Letter to Dennis J. Hynes, Trans/Circuits, Inc., September 29, 1989. Subject: Trans Circuits OGC Case No.
83-0721; 1 page.
42. John M. Barkett, Coll, Davidson, Carter, Smith, Salter, & Barkett, Letter to Alexander Pavda, Ph.D., Waste Programs
Administrator, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Jack Chisolm, Esquire, Office of the General Counsel,
Satate of Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Mr. Pat Zimmerman, Asset Specialist, Resolution Trust
Corporation, and Ms. Berta Frohlich, Small Business Administration, May 20, 1991. Subject: Trans/Circuits Inc.;
Loan Number: 725854-2 (RTC), Account No.: 7823910-10 (SBA); 2 pages.
43. GZA/Armac, Inc., Contamination Assessment Plan, Trans Circuits, Inc., Lake Park, Florida, Prepared For: Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation, Southeast Florida District, West Palm Beach, Florida, File No. Y-1082.00,
September 1986; 33 pages.
12
44. Hubert Wieland, Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp., telephone conversation with Bill Garten, Chief Operator,
Riviera Beach Water Treatment Plant, June 18, 1997. Subject: Water distribution system number of wells and
connections; 1 page
45. Paul F. Moisan, Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp., telephone conversation with Bill Garten, Chief Operator,
Riviera Beach Public Works, March 18, 1998. Subject: Water use information for Riviera Beach; 1 page
46. Andrew Grimmke, Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp., telephone conversation with Bill Garten, Chief Operator,
Riviera Beach Public Works, July 1, 1998. Subject: Riviera Beach Public Water Supply Update; 1 page
47. Paul Moisan, Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp., telephone conversation with Kay Downy, Manager, Palm Lakes
Estates Mobile Home Park, March 18, 1998. Subject: Water use information for Palm Lakes Estates; 1 page
48. Barker, Osha, & Anderson, Inc., Application to South Florida Water Management District, Modification, Renewal
of Combined Water Use Permits 50-100460-W & 50-00713046-W, City of Riviera Beach, Florida, July 1995; 171 pages.
49. U.S. Department of Commerce, 1990 Census of Population and Housing, Characteristics, Florida 1990 CPH-1-11,
August 1991; 2 pages.
50. H.L. Wieland, Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp., telephone conversation with Pat Austin, Mangonia Park
Utilities, December 10, 1997. Subject: Public Water Supply Wells; 1 page.
51. A. James McCarthy, Bureau of Waste Cleanup, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, interoffice
memorandum to Eric C. Nuzie, Bureau of Waste Cleanup, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, April 21,
1988. Subject: Mangonia Park Utilities; 1 page.
52. Carol W. King, Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp., telephone conversations with Bruce Gregg, Seacoast Utilities
Authority, July 7, 1997 and February 17, 1998. Subject: Number of connections, boundaries of area served, and map
request; 14 pages.
53. Andrew Grimmke, Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp., telephone conversations with Bruce Gregg, Seacoast
Utilities Authority, July 1, 1998. Subject: Seacoast Utilities water supply update; 1 page.
54. Paul F. Moisan, Project Manager, Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp., telephone conversation with Sharon James,
Receptionist, Pepsi-Cola Bottling Plant, March 18, 1998. Subject: Water use information for Pepsi-Cola; 1 page.
55. L. F. Land, Ground-Water Resources of the Riviera Beach Area, Palm Beach County, Florida, U. S. Geological Survey
Water-Resources Investigations 77-47, (Tallahassee, Florida, September 1977); 38 pages.
56. Frederick W. Meyer, Hydrogeology, Ground-Water Movement, and Subsurface Storage in the Floridan Aquifer
System in Southern Florida, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1403-G, Washington, D.C., 1989; 6 pages.
57. Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, Consent Final Judgement, Case
No. 84-1861-CA(L)D, State of Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, plaintiff, v. Trans/Circuits, Inc.,
Defendant, June 27, 1985; 7 pages.
58. David J. Levy, P.G., CHMM, President, Risk Management Services, Inc., Letter with Attachment to Ms. Karen
Thompson, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, March 5, 1997. Subject: Martino Furniture Refinishing;
14 pages.
59. Andrew Grimmke, Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp., telephone conversations with Linda Madernini, Tri-City
Wood Works, March 16, 1999. Subject: Tri-City Wood Works; 1 page.
13
SD-Characterization and Containment
Source No. 1
SOURCE DESCRIPTION
2.2 SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION
Number of the Source: 1
Name and description of the source: Evaporation/Percolation Pond.
The evaporation/percolation pond (the pond), originally constructed in 1981 was lined with a synthetic membrane, and
was designed to serve as an evaporation pond (Ref. 43, p. 1). The dimensions of the Evaporation/Percolation pond are
45 feet by 40 feet by 4 feet deep (Ref. 12, p. 50). At this time, Trans Circuits reported that the facility discharged
approximately 380 gallons per day (gpd) of electroplating rinse water to the pond (Ref. 4, pp. 3, 4, 9). Although design
for a treatment facility was ongoing in March 1981, effluent produced during this time was not treated, and was
discharged directly to the pond for evaporation (Refs. 4, pp. 2, 3; 10, p. 2). Discharge to the lined evaporation pond was
authorized under Permit No. IT 50-39756, Issued by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER) (Ref.
8, pp. 1, 2). During this period, Trans Circuits stated that if the pond was filled and inflow exceeded evaporation, the
pond was allowed to overflow (Ref. 4, pp. 7, 9). Overflow incidents were documented by the Palm Beach County Health
Department and FDER on August 19, 1981 and again on January 18, 1982 (Refs. 5; 6; 7; 8, p. 2).
Permit IT 50-39756 expired on May 31, 1982, yet Trans Circuits continued to utilize the evaporation pond for waste
disposal (Ref. 8, pp. 1, 3, 4). In addition, Trans Circuits failed to submit monthly monitoring reports to FDER, as required
under the permit (Ref. 8, p. 3). As a result of these actions and the previously discussed overflow incidents, Trans
Circuits was served with a Notice of Violation and Orders for Corrective Action by FDER on September 27, 1982 and
subsequently entered into a Consent Order with FDER on November 4, 1982 (Ref. 8).
In September 1982, an industrial wastewater treatment system was installed at the Trans Circuits site (Refs. 9; 10, pp. 1,
2). According to wastewater treatment system construction applications submitted by Trans Circuits to FDER, the
estimated quantity of effluent produced by the facility increased from 380 gpd in January 1982 to 16,800 gpd in October
1982, following the installation of the wastewater treatment system (Refs. 10, pp. 3, 4; 11, pp. 3, 11). During this period,
attempts were made to remove the liner in the evaporation pond to allow for percolation of treated wastewater into the
ground (Refs. 10, p. 2; 11, p. 2; 12, pp. 44, 45). Since portions of the liner could not be removed, the
evaporation/percolation process still proved to be inadequate during periods of heavy precipitation and portions of the
remaining liner were punctured to increase percolation rates (Refs. 12, pp, 44, 45; 43, p. 1). In early 1983, concrete walls
were installed around the perimeter of the pond, primarily to control overflow problems which developed during
precipitation events (Refs. 12, pp, 44, 45; 43, p. 1).
Industrial Waste Discharge Monitoring Reports submitted by Trans Circuits to FDER indicate that effluent limits were
exceeded for lead, copper, and fluoride in either the treatment plant discharge, in monitoring wells, or both during
October, November and December of 1982 and during January 1983 (Ref. 11, pp. 8 through 11).
An interim order adopted by the Palm Beach County Environmental Control Board on November 23, 1983 found, as a
Conclusion of Law that, "Respondent's (Trans Circuits') liquid industrial waste treatment and disposal system is an
installation which discharges to groundwater and which requires an operating permit from the Florida Department of
Environmental Regulation (DER)" and that operation of the system and discharge of effluent to groundwater occurred
"without an appropriate and valid permit from the DER...since October 21, 1983" (Ref. 13, pp. 1, 2). Trans circuits was
required, under the Interim Order to submit a proposed groundwater monitoring plan, a time schedule for implementation
of a hydrogeological survey, and analysis of sludge from the percolation pond (Ref. 13, p. 3).
A Second Interim Order, issued by the Palm Beach County Environmental Control Board and dated January 26, 1984,
found that operation and discharge without an appropriate permit had continued and that the schedule for
implementation of a hydrogeological survey had not been submitted (Ref. 14, p. 2). Trans Circuits was required, under
the second interim order, to develop a schedule for a hydrogeological survey and increase effluent sampling to twice
daily (Ref. 14, p. 3).
On March 8, 1984, Trans Circuits applied to DER for a permit to construct modifications and improvements to the existing
wastewater treatment system (Ref. 15, p. 7). The application was reviewed by DER and found to be incomplete (Ref. 15,
p. 8). After initially objecting, Trans Circuits responded to DER's request for additional information on June 27, 1984 (Ref
15, p. 8). However, Trans Circuits' submittal was again found to be lacking (Ref. 15, p. 8). Administrative Hearings were
14
held and on September 19, 1984, the State of Florida rejected Trans Circuits' permit application and withdrew the monthto-month authorization under which their wastewater treatment system had been operating (Refs. 15, pp. 14-15; 16).
On October 12, 1984, Trans Circuits submitted an application to FDER to improve the wastewater treatment system and
to operate the existing system on a temporary basis (Refs. 12, pp. 1, 4; 17). The temporary operating permit was denied
(Ref. 18). However, a permit was issued by FDER to construct improvements on the treatment system on December 10,
1984, and was extended on April 4, 1985 (Refs. 19; 20, p. 1).
Under the construction permit Trans Circuits was required to submit effluent samples for analysis of the volatile organic
compounds tetrachloroethene, trichloroethylene, and 1,1,1-trichloroethane (Ref. 20, pp. 4, 5). Grab samples of discharge
to the pond collected in February, March and April 1985 revealed the presence of all three compounds in the plant
effluent (Refs. 21, p. 89; 22; 23; 24).
In approximately June 1985, the Trans Circuits facility was closed and the treatment system dismantled (Ref. 25).
During the ESI conducted in 1997 and 1998 it was observed that the Evaporation/Percolation pond had been backfilled
(Ref. 26). The concrete walls located around the perimeter of the pond were visible above grade (Ref. 26). The pond liner
was encountered at 1.5 and 3.0 feet bls in borings for two of the three subsurface soil samples collected from the pond
(Ref. 26).
Location of the source, with reference to a map of the site:
The evaporation/percolation pond is located on the northern portion of the facility property, and directly adjacent
(northeast) the Trans Circuits Facility Building (Refs. 4, pp. 2, 9; 12, p. 50; 43, p. 1). (See the attached map on page 4 of
this Documentation Record which identifies the source area).
15
SD-Characterization and Containment
Containment:
Release to groundwater
It is documented that the evaporation/percolation pond was originally constructed with a liner (Ref. 43, p. 1). Portions
of the liner were removed in 1982 to allow for percolation of treated effluent from onsite industrial wastewater treatment
system. In addition, as plant output increased, the remaining portions of the liner were perforated to allow for increased
percolation (Refs. 10, p. 2; 11, p. 2; 12, pp. 44, 45). Treated effluent was reported by Trans Circuits to have exceeded
effluent limits for lead, copper, and fluoride in 1982 and 1983 (Ref. 11, pp. 8 through 11). In addition, evidence of
hazardous substance migration from the source area has been documented (See section 3.1.1. of this documentation
record). A containment value of 10 was assigned (Ref. 1, table 3-2)
VALUE: 10
16
SD-Hazardous Substances
Source No.: 1
2.4 WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
2.4.1 Hazardous Substances
Effluent samples collected by Trans Circuits from their facility discharge in October, November, and December of 1982
and January of 1983 exceeded discharge limits for copper and/or lead (Ref. 11, pp. 8-11). Effluent Samples collected in
February, March, and April 1985 indicated the presence of tetrachloroethene, trichloroethene, and 1,1,1-trichloroethane
(Refs. 21, p. 89; 22; 23; 24).
Source No. 1 - Effluent Samples
Sample
Number
Concentration
CRQL
8,780 Fg/L
NA
11, p. 11
150 Fg/L
NA
11, p. 11
November Copper
1982
Lead
4,660 Fg/L
NA
11, p. 10
580 Fg/L
NA
11, p. 10
December Copper
1982
Lead
761 Fg/L
NA
11, p. 9
90 Fg/L
NA
11, p. 9
15,900 Fg/L
NA
11, p. 8
190 Fg/L
NA
11, p. 8
3.9 Fg/L
NA
22
Trichloroethylene
0.5 Fg/L
NA
22
Tetrachloroethene
11.4 Fg/L
NA
22
24 Fg/L
NA
21, p. 89; 23
0.3 Fg/L
NA
21, p. 89; 23
122 Fg/L
NA
21, p. 89; 23
20.5 Fg/L
NA
24
October
1982
January
1983
Hazardous Substance
Copper
Lead
Copper
Lead
April 1985* 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
14735
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
February Trichloroethylene
1985
Tetrachloroethene
15139
Tetrachloroethene
March 1985
CRQL
Fg/L
NA
*
Reference
-- Contract Required Quantitation Limit
-- Micrograms per liter
-- Information is not available
-- Sample number is not provided
Soils from the percolation pond were sampled during the Expanded Site Inspection conducted from July 28, 1997 to
January 17, 1998, by U.S. EPA (Ref. 27, p. 14, 15). The source will be characterized with the hazardous substances found
during this investigation. See the attached map on page 5 of this documentation record for sample locations. Subsurface
soil samples which were used to characterize releases and background samples were taken at similar depths in soils of
similar consistencies (Ref. 27, pp. 29, 33, 34; 28, p. 30, plate 36).
During the ESI conducted in 1997, the evaporation/percolation pond liner was encountered at 1.5 and 3.0 feet bls in two
of the three subsurface soil samples collected from within the former pond boundary (Ref. 26). Subsurface soil samples
intended to characterize soils contaminated by the pond were collected from below this level (Ref. 27, pp. 19, 20).
17
SD-Hazardous Substances
2.4.1 Hazardous Substances
Source No. 1 - Subsurface Soil Samples
Sample
Number
Sample
Depth
Hazardous
Substance
TC-SB-A3 4.5-5.0 feet Copper
bls
Lead
TC-SB-A4 4.0-4.5 feet Copper
bls
Lead
TC-SB-B3 10-10.5 feet Copper
bls
Lead
TC-SB-B4 10-10.5 feet Copper
bls
Lead
CRQL
mg/kg
TC
SB
Concentration
CRQL
1,600 mg/kg
5 mg/kg
27, pp. 19, 20, Appendix B, p. 153;
36, p. C-1
550 mg/kg
0.6 mg/kg
27, pp. 19, 20, Appendix B, p. 153;
36, p. C-1
110 mg/kg
5 mg/kg
27, pp. 19, 20, Appendix B, p. 156;
36, p. C-1
40 mg/kg
0.6 mg/kg
27, pp. 19, 20, Appendix B, p. 156;
36, p. C-1
210 mg/kg
5 mg/kg
27, pp. 19, 20, Appendix B, p. 154;
36, p. C-1
130 mg/kg
0.6 mg/kg
27, pp. 19, 20, Appendix B, p. 154;
36, p. C-1
33 mg/kg
5 mg/kg
27, pp. 19, 20, Appendix B, p. 157;
36, p. C-1
12 mg/kg
0.6 mg/kg
27, pp. 19, 20, Appendix B, p. 157;
36, p. C-1
-- Contract Required Quantitation Limit (Ref. 36)
-- Milligrams per kilogram
-- Trans Circuits
-- Subsurface Soil Sample
18
Reference
SD-Hazardous Substances
2.4.1 Hazardous Substances
Background Subsurface Soil Concentrations
Sample
Number
Sample
Depth
Hazardous
Substance
TC-SB-A1 2.5-3.0 feet Copper
bls
Lead
TC-SB-B1 10-10.5 feet Copper
bls
Lead
CRDL
U
TC
SB
mg/kg
Concentration
CRDL
Reference
3U mg/kg
5 mg/kg
27, pp. 19, 20, Appendix B, p. 147; 36,
p. C-1
3.9 mg/kg
0.6 mg/kg
27, pp. 19, 20, Appendix B, p. 147; 36,
p. C-1
2U mg/kg
5 mg/kg
27, pp. 19, 20, Appendix B, p. 148; 36,
p. C-1
2.2 mg/kg
0.6 mg/kg
27, pp. 19, 20, Appendix B, p. 148; 36,
p. C-1
--Contract Required Detection Limit (Ref. 36)
--Material Analyzed for but not detected. The number shown is the minimum quantitation limit.
--Trans Circuits
--Subsurface Soil
--Milligrams per kilogram
19
SD-Hazardous Constituent Quantity
2.4.2. Hazardous Waste Quantity
2.4.2.1.1. Hazardous Constituent Quantity
No information on Constituent Quantity was available.
2.4.2.1.2. Hazardous Wastestream Quantity
No data was available on wastestream quantity.
2.4.2.1.3. Volume
The 1981 permit application for operation of the industrial wastewater treatment plant provides the volume of the
evaporation pond (evaporation/percolation pond) at 53,856 gallons in volume (Ref. 4, pp. 3, 9). Later permit applications,
submitted in 1982 and 1983, estimate the pond volume at 50,000 gallons (Refs. 10, p. 2; 11, p. 2). Although these values
conflict, the value of 53,856 gallons is consistent with the dimensions of the Evaporation/Percolation pond given in the
1982 and 1983 permit applications of 1800 square feet by 4 feet deep (Refs. 10, pp. 5; 11, p. 5).
1800 square feet x 4 feet deep = 7200 cubic feet or 266.7 cubic yards
(at 27 cubic feet per cubic yard)
Under Buried Backfilled Surface Impoundment:
266.7 / 2.5 (Ref. 1, Table 2-5) = 106.7
2.4.2.1.4. Area
The pond is reported to have areal dimensions of 40 feet by 45 feet, or 1800 square feet. However, the area tier is not
considered in the calculation of Hazardous Waste Quantity because volume information is available.
2.4.2.1.5. Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value
Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value: 106.7
Reference(s): 1, Table 2-5
20
SD-Summary
SITE SUMMARY OF SOURCE DESCRIPTIONS
Containment
Source
Number
1
Source Hazardous
Waste Quantity Value
106.7
Groundwater
Surface Water
Gas
Air Particulate
10
--
--
--
Sum: 106.7
Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100
Reference(s): 1, Table 2-5, Table 2-6, Table 3-2
21
GW-General
GROUNDWATER MIGRATION PATHWAY
3.0.1 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
Palm Beach County is underlain by two aquifers. The shallow aquifer is comprised of sand, shell, and limestone
deposited during the Pleistocene and Pliocene Epochs (Ref. 29, pp. 10, 11). The Floridan aquifer underlies the shallow
aquifer and is predominantly composed of limestone. The presence of confining beds which separate the two aquifers
creates artesian conditions within the Floridan aquifer. The confining beds in general are composed of marly sand, sandy
marl, and clay marl (Ref. 29, pp. 10, 11, 12, 24, 26).
The surficial material in the site area is classified as the St. Lucie-Urban Land-Paola association, described as nearly level
to sloping, excessively drained soils that are sandy throughout (Ref. 28, General Soil Map). The Trans Circuits facility
is underlain by soil classified as Paola Sand, at a 0 to 8 percent slope (PcB) (Ref. 28, p. 30, Sheet 36). Paola Sand is
generally nearly level to sloping, excessively drained, deep, and exhibits rapid permeability and is found along narrow
ridges near the Atlantic coast (Ref. 28, pp. 29, 30).
Geological formations underlying the surficial deposits include, in descending order: the Pamlico Sand; the Anastasia
formation; the Caloosahatchee Marl; the Hawthorn Group; and the Suwanee Limestone (Ref. 29, p. 8).
!
Pamlico Sand - consists of gray or white sand and will yield water to sand point wells. The unit reaches a thickness
of approximately 10 feet in the vicinity of the Coastal Ridge area (Ref. 29, pp. 9, 10, Table 1).
!
Anastasia Formation - consists of sand, sandstone, limestone, coquina, and shell beds. The unit reaches a thickness
of approximately 200 feet in the vicinity of the coastal ridge area (Ref. 29, pp. 9, 10, Table 1).
!
Caloosahatchee Marl - consists mainly of shelly sand and sandy shell marl with minor amounts of limestone and
sandstone. The thickness of the formation along the coast is not known (Ref. 29, pp. 9, 10, Table 1).
!
The Hawthorn Group (Formerly the Tamiami Formation, the Hawthorn Formation, and the Tampa Formation) - The
Miocene-aged Hawthorn Group is encountered at approximately 355 feet bls and is typically less than 400 feet thick
in the study area (Refs. 29, p. 11; 31, p. 56, table 1; 32, plates 12, 13). It is also comprised of, in descending order, the
Peace River Formation and the Arcadia Formation (Refs. 31, p. 56, Table 1; 32, Plates 12, 13). The Peace River
Formation is comprised of interbedded quartz sands, clays, and carbonates (Ref. 31, p. 79). The carbonate content
within the Peace River Formation increases with depth forming a gradational contact with the subjacent Arcadia
Formation (Ref. 31, p. 58). The Arcadia Formation rests conformably beneath the Peace River Formation and is
approximately 250 feet thick in the study area (Ref. 31, p. 58, Figure 42). The Arcadia Formation is generally
comprised of hard quartz sandy, phosphatic dolostone with some siliciclastic interbedding (Ref. 31, p. 58).
!
The Suwannee Limestone rests conformably beneath the Hawthorn Group in the study area, and consists of
crystalline and pelletal limestone (Refs. 31, Figure 33; 32, p. B32). The Suwannee Limestone is of Oligocene age and
is the uppermost of a series of thick carbonate units which rest beneath the Miocene-aged formations and form the
majority of the Floridan aquifer system (Refs. 29, Table 1; 32, pp. B53, B54). Additional units comprising this thick
sequence of carbonate deposits include, in descending order, the Ocala Limestone and the Avon Park Formation
(Refs. 29, Figure 4, p. 11; 30, Table 1).
The shallow aquifer near the coast is comprised of the Pamlico Sand, Anatasia Formation, and the Caloosahatchee Marl.
The base of the aquifer ranges from approximately 10 to 300 feet bls, with the aquifer thickness increasing in an eastward
direction (Ref. 29, pp. 7, 8, 10). Recharge to the aquifer generally occurs directly from rainfall which percolates from the
land surface to the aquifer (Ref. 29, pp. 19, 20). The water table at the site lies approximately 18 to 23 feet below land
surface (bls) (Ref. 34, pp. 18, 19, 20). Water level contour maps generally indicate groundwater within the shallow aquifer
is flowing easterly toward the ocean, however, the presence of the Riviera Beach Wellfield southeast of the site has
influenced the normal groundwater flow within the aquifer. Groundwater contour lines illustrate that the well field has
a large area of influence where the normal groundwater flow direction changes from eastward to toward the wellfield (Ref.
21, pp. 47-67).
A lithologic log completed during a previous subsurface investigation of the shallow aquifer beneath the site revealed
that it was comprised of approximately 20 feet of sand underlain by approximately 192 feet of sand and shell fragments
22
(Ref. 21, pp. 31-33, 46). Using the boring logs of monitoring wells installed during the investigation the shallow aquifer
was subdivided into four lithologic units. The upper most unit ranges from 20 to 40 feet in thickness and is composed
primarily of sand with occasional layers of organic material and a few hard stringers of calcareous cemented sandstone
in the lower portion. The second unit is composed of sand, up to 60 percent shell fragments, and frequent layers of
calcareous cemented sandstone (Ref. 21, pp. 36, 47). The third unit is lower in permeability and consists of fine sand and
abundant shell fragments. The fourth unit is composed primarily of calcareously cemented sandstone with up to 50
percent shell fragments. The shallow aquifer was not completely penetrated during the investigation (Ref. 21, p. 47).
Aquifer tests performed during investigations of the shallow aquifer indicate that water level fluctuations in the
uppermost unit were primarily caused by infiltration from rainfall, evapotranspiration, and downward leakage. Water
levels within units two and three, which are also under water table conditions, were found to be related to rainfall
occurrences (Ref. 21, p. 50). Water levels recorded for monitoring wells screened within unit four were consistently
lower than levels recorded for monitoring wells screened within the overlying units and within the same well cluster (Ref.
21, p. 50).
The confining unit which underlies the shallow aquifer is comprised of the Miocene aged Tamiami and Hawthorn (upper
part) Formations (Ref. 29, pp. 10, 11). The Tamiami Formation is principally composed of silty, shelly sands and silty shell
marls of low permeability with occasional thin interbedded limestone and sandstone (Ref. 29, p. 10, 11). The Tamiami
Formation ranges between 70 and 100 feet in thickness (Ref. 29, pp. 10, 11). Relatively impermeable clayey and sandy
marls compose most of the Hawthorn Formation which underlies the Tamiami Formation. The formation is approximately
500 feet thick beneath the eastern portion of Palm Beach County (Ref. 29, p. 11).
The Floridan aquifer is comprised of the Hawthorn Group (which includes the Tampa formation), the Suwanee Limestone,
the Ocala Limestone, and the Avon Park Formation (Ref. 29, pp. 7, 11). The Tampa Formation is approximately 130 feet
thick and composed mainly of light colored sandy limestone (Ref. 29, pp. 7, 11). The formations underlying the Tampa
are composed of dense, but cavernous and permeable limestones, which can act as a single hydrologic unit (Ref. 29, pp.
7, 11). Recharge to the Floridan aquifer has been inferred to occur in areas where the geologic formations (which
comprise the aquifer) lie near the surface and are unconfined or semiconfined (Ref. 30, p. A14).
The hydraulic conductivities of the aquifers and confining layer in the vicinity of the site, have not been determined;
however, estimates can be made by using a range of typical values recorded for a aquifer material similar in composition
to the aquifer in question. Sand and sand, shell mixtures similar to those that comprise the shallow or water table aquifer
have been estimated to have hydraulic conductivities on the order of 10-3 to 10-1 centimeters per second (cm/sec) (Ref.
33, p. 29). Clays and marls similar to those that comprise the confining layer have been estimated to have hydraulic
conductivities on the order of 10-10 to 10-7 cm/sec (Ref. 33, p. 29). Cavernous limestones similar to those that comprise
the Floridan aquifer have been estimated to have hydraulic conductivities on the order of 10-4 to 10 cm/sec (Ref. 33, p.
29). Previous investigations indicate that hydraulic conductivities of the upper portion of the shallow aquifer at the site
are estimated to be 3.5 x 10-4 to 1.1 x 10-1 cm/sec. These data are estimated by using the relationship between the grain
size, hydraulic properties and sensitivity tests performed at monitoring well locations at the site (Ref. 34, pp. 8, 9).
Hydrogeological investigations assessing groundwater conditions in the Riviera Beach area have identified two aquifer
systems in the area, the shallow aquifer and the Floridan aquifer (Ref. 55, pp. 9, 13, 15). The upper-most of these is the
shallow aquifer, which is the sole source for potable groundwater in the area (Ref. 55, pp. 15, 37). A confining unit rests
beneath the shallow aquifer and creates the upper confining unit for the Floridan aquifer system (Ref. 55, p. 15). In the
study area, the Floridan aquifer is brackish and is not utilized (Refs. 55, p. 15; 56 p. G1).
23
GW-Observed Release
3.1. LIKELIHOOD OF RELEASE
3.1.1. Observed Release
The Trans Circuits facility was evaluated and scored on the Observed Release Component to groundwater.
Contaminants were detected at levels greater than three times background in the shallow aquifer. The evaluation for
observed release was used to establish a groundwater mobility factor value of 1 for contaminants detected (Ref. 1,
section 3.2.1.2).
24
Aquifer Being Evaluated: Shallow Aquifer
Chemical Analysis:
•
Background Concentrations
SAMPLE ID*
DEPTH
DATE
TC-M5-ES
43
1/14/98
REFERENCE(S)
27, p. 50; 35 p.7
TC-MW-1I
124.50
1/15/98
27, p. 51, Appendix C, p. 6
TC-MW-1D
149.41
1/15/98
27, p. 53, Appendix C, p. 12
SAMPL
E ID*
TC-M5-ES
TC-MW-1I
TC-MW1D
HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCE
Lead
CONCENTRATION
(Fg/L)
CRQL
(Fg/L)
2U Fg/L
3 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 472; 36, p. C-1
REFERENCE
1,2-Dichloroethene
10U Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 447; 36, p. C-2
Trichloroethylene
10U Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 447; 36, p. C-2
1,2-Dichloroethene
10U Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 433; 36, p. C-2
Trichloroethylene
10U Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 433; 36, p. C-2
CRQL--Contract Required Quantitation Limit (Ref. 36)
U -- Material Analyzed for but not detected. The number shown is the minimum quantitation limit.
TC -- Trans Circuits
MW
-- Monitoring Well
Fg/L-- Micrograms per liter
ES -- Existing Shallow Well
*
-- During the ESI investigation, existing Monitoring well names were revised to reflect the site name acronym (TC) prefix and a suffix
to indicate well depth (Refs. 27, pp. 18, 22-24; 35, pp. 6, 7).
25
Chemical Analysis: (continued)
! Contaminated Samples (Shallow Wells)
SAMPLE ID*
DEPTH
DATE
REFERENCE
TC-PD-ES
48.43
1/15/98
27, p. 50; 35, p. 7
TC-DER1-ES
70.00
1/16/98
27, p. 50; 35, p. 7
SAMPL
E ID*
HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCE
CONCENTRATION
(Fg/L)
CRQL
(Fg/L)
REFERENCES
TC-PD-ES
Lead
4 Fg/L
3 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 486; 36, p. C-1
TC-DER1ES
Lead
3 Fg/L
3 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 456; 36, p. C-1
CRQL
TC
MW
Fg/L
J
ES
*
-- Contract Required Quantitation Limit (Ref. 36).
-- Trans Circuits, Inc.
-- Monitoring Well
-- Micrograms per liter
-- Estimated value
-- Existing Shallow Well
-- During the ESI investigation, existing Monitoring well names were revised to reflect the site name acronym (TC) prefix
and a suffix to indicate well depth (Refs. 27, pp. 18, 22-24; 35, pp. 6, 7).
In addition to the samples listed above, groundwater samples collected throughout 1986 from onsite monitoring wells
PS and PD by GZA/Armac on behalf of Trans Circuits, Inc. revealed elevated levels of lead during every month in 1986,
as compared to up-gradient monitoring well B4-N (Ref. 34, pp. 7, 22, 23, 28).
26
! Contaminated Samples (Intermediate Wells)
SAMPLE ID*
DEPTH
DATE
REFERENCE
TC-MW-2I
123
1/14/98
TC-DER4-EI
120
1/14/98
27, p. 58; 35, p. 7
TC-MW-4I
123
1/16/98
27, p. 59, Appendix C, p. 46
TC-DER1-EI
120
1/16/98
27, p. 59; 35, p. 7
TC-DER6-EI
125
1/17/98
27, p. 59; 35, p. 7
TC-MW-5I
123
1/17/98
27, p. 59, Appendix C, p.59
TC-MW-6I
123
1/15/98
27, p. 59, Appendix C, p.69
SAMPLE
ID*
TC-MW-2I
HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCE
1,2-dichloroethene (total)
CONCENTRATION
(Fg/L)
CRQL
(Fg/L)
16 Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, p. 58, Appendix C, p.18
REFERENCES
27, Appendix B, p. 432; 36, p. C-2
TC-DER4-EI
1,2-dichloroethene (total)
22 Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 427; 36, p. C-2
TC-MW-4I
1,2-dichloroethene (total)
89 Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 410; 36, p. C-2
TC-DER1-EI
1,2-dichloroethene (total)
69 Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 413; 36, p. C-2
TC-DER6-EI
1,2-dichloroethene (total)
29 Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 416; 36, p. C-2
TC-MW-5I
1,2-dichloroethene (total)
27 Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 419; 36, p. C-2
TC-MW-6I
1,2-dichloroethene (total)
93 Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 437; 36, p. C-2
Trichloroethene
(trichloroethylene)
380 Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 437, 36, p. C-2
CRQL
TC
MW
Fg/L
EI
*
-- Contract Required Quantitation Limit (Ref. 36).
-- Trans Circuits, Inc.
-- Monitoring Well
-- Micrograms per liter
-- Existing Intermediate Well
-- During the ESI investigation, existing Monitoring well names were revised to reflect the site name acronym (TC) prefix
and a suffix to indicate well depth (Refs. 27, pp. 18, 22-24; 35, pp. 6, 7).
27
! Contaminated Samples (Deep Wells)
SAMPLE ID*
DEPTH
DATE
TC-MW-2D
148
1/15/98
REFERENCE
TC-DER4-ED
145
1/14/98
27, p 60; 35, p. 7
TC-MW-4D
148
1/16/98
27, p. 61, Appendix C, p. 53
27, p. 60; Appendix C, p. 24
TC-DER1-ED
145
1/16/98
27, p. 61; 35, p. 7
TC-DER6-ED
150
1/17/98
27, p. 61; 35, p. 7
TC-DER7-ED
140
1/17/98
27, p. 61; 35, p. 7
TC-MW-6D
148
1/15/98
27, p. 61, Appendix C, p. 75
SAMPLE
ID*
TC-MW-2D
HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCE
1,2-dichloroethene (total)
CONCENTRATION
(Fg/L)
CRQL
(Fg/L)
16 Fg/L
10 Fg/L
REFERENCES
27, Appendix B, p. 430; 36, p. C-2
1,2-dichloroethene (total)
43 Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 428; 36, p. C-2
1,2-dichloroethene (total)
120 Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 411; 36, p. C-2
TC-MW-4D
Trichloroethene
(trichloroethylene)
35 Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 411; 36, p. C-2
1,2-dichloroethene (total)
32 Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 414; 36, p. C-2
TC-DER1-ED
Trichloroethene
(trichloroethylene)
230 Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 414; 36, p. C-2
TC-DER4-ED
TC-DER6-ED
1,2-dichloroethene (total)
19 Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 415; 36, p. C-2
TC-DER7-ED
1,2-dichloroethene (total)
18 Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 417; 36, p. C-2
1,2-dichloroethene (total)
44 Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p.441; 36, p. C-2
Trichloroethene
(trichloroethylene)
69 Fg/L
10 Fg/L
27, Appendix B, p. 441; 36, p. C-2
TC-MW-6D
CRQL
TC
MW
Fg/L
ED
*
-- Contract Required Quantitation Limit (Ref. 36).
-- Trans Circuits, Inc.
-- Monitoring Well
-- Micrograms per liter
-- Existing Deep Well
-- During the ESI investigation, existing Monitoring well names were revised to reflect the site name acronym (TC) prefix
and a suffix to indicate well depth (Refs. 27, pp. 18, 22-24; 35, pp. 6, 7).
28
Attribution:
Trans Circuits operated as a manufacturer of printed electronic circuit boards at 210 Newman Road in Lake Park, Florida
from the late 1970s until approximately June 1985, when the facility was closed (Refs. 15, p. 3; 25). Trans Circuits'
manufacturing operation involved the deposition of copper on plastic boards and the use of a lead or tin etch resist in
order to create an electrically conducting circuit board (Ref. 15, p. 3).
In the course of the manufacturing process, rinsewaters were used which become contaminated with copper and lead
from the manufacturing process (Ref. 15, p. 3). These rinsewaters were treated chemically to remove the metals and other
contaminants, and were then discharged to the unlined percolation pond located behind the Trans Circuits facility (Ref.
15, p. 3). It was estimated in 1984 that about 36,000 gallon per day of effluent were discharged to the percolation pond,
and subsequently the groundwater beneath the facility, every day (Ref. 15, p. 3)
The wastewater treatment system used by Trans Circuits did not provide sufficient treatment to remove lead, copper,
or fluoride to within groundwater standards, as required by their permit (Ref. 15, pp. 3, 4).
In early 1985, Trans Circuits began sampling their effluent for the volatile organic compounds trichloroethylene,
tetrachloroethene, and 1,1,1-trichloroethane as a condition of their December 10, 1984 construction permit (Ref. 20, p. 5;
21, p. 89). All three compounds were detected in the plant effluent in February and April 1985, and tetrachloroethene
was detected in the effluent in March 1985 (Refs. 21, p. 89; 22; 23; 24).
In September 1985, the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation produced Groundwater Investigation Report
No. 85-10 (Ref. 21). This report detailed contamination of wells in the Riviera Beach Wellfield by the volatile organic
compounds trichloroethylene and 1,2-dichloroethene (Ref. 21, p. 1). Evidence presented in the groundwater investigation
report links contamination responsible for closing Riviera Beach well No. 17 to the percolation pond located at the Trans
Circuits site (Ref. 21, pp. 68, 86 through 95). It was noted that 1,2-dichloroethene and trichloroethylene are typical
biotransformation products of tetrachloroethene, the contaminant found at the greater concentrations in the Trans
Circuits effluent (Ref. 21, pp. 90, 91). Samples collected for Report No. 85-10 were analyzed with an on-site gas
chromatograph using EPA Methods 601/602 and further support observed release and attribution to the site (Ref. 21,
p. 67).
Report No. 85-10 contains a detailed survey of known potential sources of contamination of the Riviera Beach Wellfield
(Ref. 21, pp. 22-28). In addition to Trans Circuits, Solitron Devices, Inc., Farmer and Irwin, Inc., BMI-Textron, Inc., and
"Thousands of Parts" Auto Junkyard were all considered as potential sources of contamination (Ref. 21, p. 22-28). The
report attributes contamination in Riviera Beach public well PW-11A to the Solitron, Inc. facility located approximately
one mile south of Trans Circuits (Ref. 21 pp. 95-108). In addition, the report evaluated the two industrial properties
adjacent to Trans Circuits most likely to be responsible for the contamination attributed to Trans Circuits, namely the
BMI-Textron facility and the "Thousands of Parts" Auto Junkyard (Ref. 21, pp. 22-28). The Report Concludes that
despite the installation of ten monitoring wells surrounding the BMI Textron, Inc. facility, the only contaminant present
attributable to BMI Textron operations was Isopropyl alcohol (Ref. 21, pp. 68, 81, 82, 86, 87). Indeed, neither
tetrachloroethene nor its metabolites were detected in monitoring wells installed to monitor the BMI Textron, Inc.
property (Ref. 21, pp. 68, 81, 82, 86, 87). Four monitoring wells installed at the "Thousands of Parts" Junkyard were not
sampled during the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation investigation because they had been previously
sampled for a full suite of parameters several months earlier (Ref. 21, p. 86). Although the surface soils in some parts of
the junkyard are saturated with engine oil, all four wells were found to be clean with respect to volatile chlorinated
organic solvents (Ref. 21, p. 86).
Two other properties located near the Trans Circuits site of potential interest are the Martino Furniture Refinishing
property and the Tri-City Wood Works. An environmental investigation was conducted at the Martino Furniture
Refinishing property by Risk Management Services, Inc. in January and February, 1997 (Ref. 58, p. 1). The investigation
involved the installation of two monitoring wells and the collection of soil and groundwater samples from each location
(Ref. 58, pp. 1, 2). The investigation revealed no organic constituents in soil or groundwater beneath the site (Ref. 58,
pp. 1, 2, 4). According to management at the Tri-City Wood Works, the facility has never engaged in any business
activity other than the purchasing, storing, cutting and selling of lumber (Ref. 59). According to Tri-City Wood Works,
29
wood treatment or any other use of industrial chemicals has not occurred during the 50 year history of the business at
the property (Ref. 59).
In May 1985, the DER and Trans Circuits entered into a consent agreement concerning contamination at the facility and
mandating groundwater restoration. The agreement was adjudicated in the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit
of Florida and a Consent Final Judgement was entered by Trans Circuits and FDER on June 27, 1985 (Ref. 35, p. 1; 57).
GZA/Armac, on behalf of Trans Circuits, produced a contamination Assessment Plan (CAP) in September 1986 and a
subsequent Contamination Assessment Report and Remedial Action Plan (CAR) in February 1987 (Refs. 34; 43). The
CAR concluded that the apparent source of groundwater contamination at the Trans Circuits property has been the
disposal of effluent to the percolation pond (Ref. 34, p. 12). In addition, the CAR concluded that the groundwater
contaminants of interest are volatile organic compounds including tetrachloroethene and trichloroethene (Ref. 34, p. 12).
A groundwater recovery and treatment program for aquifer restoration was initiated in April 1987 (Ref. 25, p. 2). A
significant reduction of contamination was observed and documented by GZA/Armac over the period of operation of
the system, particularly in the relatively shallow monitoring wells Pd and Ps, located within the boundary of the
percolation pond (Refs. 37, pp 1, 2; 38, Tables 1, 2, 3, 4, 5). Contaminant levels in the deeper monitoring wells 103, 104,
105, and 108 remained significantly elevated (Refs. 38, tables 1, 10, 11, 12, 15; 39; 40; 41). The remedial action was
discontinued by Trans Circuits on May 31, 1991, never meeting the satisfaction of the FDER (Refs. 39; 40; 41; 42).
Between July 28, 1997 and January 17, 1998, U.S. EPA Region 4 Contractor conducted a field sampling investigation at
the Trans Circuits facility (Ref. 27, p. 1). Environmental sampling consisted of 10 surface soil, 36 subsurface soil, and
35 groundwater samples (Ref. 27, pp. 17-24). Substances listed below were identified at elevated levels in the
groundwater samples (Ref. 27, Appendix B, pp. 410, 411, 413, 414, 415, 416, 417, 419, 427, 428, 430, 432, 433, 437, 441, 447,
456, 472, 486).
Hazardous Substances Released:
Trichloroethylene
1,2-dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethene
Lead
=================================================================================
Ground Water Observed Release Factor Value: 550
30
GW-Potential to Release
3.1.2. Potential to Release
The criteria constituting an observed release by chemical analysis to groundwater have been met. Therefore, the
potential to release component of this pathway was not scored.
31
GW-Toxicity/Mobility
3.2. WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
3.2.1 Toxicity/Mobility
Hazardous
Substance
Source
Number
Toxicity
Factor Value
Mobility
Factor Value
Toxicity/
Mobility
1,2-Dichloroethene
1
100
1*
100
2, p. B-7
Trichloroethylene
1
10
1*
10
2, p. B-19
Tetrachloroethene
1
100
1
100
2, p. B-18
Lead
1
10,000
1*
10,000
2, p. B-13
*
References
Found at levels 3 times background or greater than the SQL in the aquifer underlying the source at the site. Therefore, the
mobility factor value assigned is 1 (Ref. 1, Section 3.2.1.2). See Section 3.1.1.
=============================================================
Toxicity/Mobility Factor Value: 10,000
32
GW-Hazardous Waste Quantity
3.2.2. Hazardous Waste Quantity
SOURCE NUMBER
SOURCE HAZARDOUS WASTE
QUANTITY VALUE
(SECTION 2.4.2.1.5)
IS SOURCE HAZARDOUS
CONSTITUENT QUANTITY DATA
COMPLETE?
(YES/NO)
1
106.7
No
Sum of Values: 106.7
3.2.3. Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value
Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value (Ref. 1, Table 2-6):
Toxicity/Mobility Factor Value:
Toxicity/Mobility Factor Value X Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value:
100
10,000
100 x 10,000 = 1,000,000
Applied to Ref. 1, Table 2-7 yields a Waste Characteristics Factor
Category Value of: 32
=================================================================================
Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100
Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value: 32
33
GW-Targets
3.3. TARGETS
Twenty-five municipal wells are currently used by the Riviera Beach Public Works Department to serve approximately
11,486 connections (Refs. 3; 44; 45; 46). These wells are blended and no well draws more than 40% of the supply (Ref.
46). This system also supplies water to the Palm Lakes Estates Mobile Home Park, which has a total of 921 connections
(Refs. 46; 47). All 25 of these wells are located within a 4-mile radius of Trans Circuits (Refs. 3; 46; 48, Appendix B). The
water is drawn from the shallow aquifer and blended prior to distribution. Therefore, each well serves approximately
496.28 (12,407 ÷ 25) connections or 1,151.37 (496.28 X 2.32) persons using a conversion factor of 2.32 persons per
household from the 1990 U.S. Census data for Palm Beach County (Refs. 46; 48; 49). The nearest well (Riviera Beach Well
#17) is located within 0.50 mile of the facility (Refs. 3; 48, pp. 22, 23). Eight Riviera Beach wells (Riviera Beach Wells #4,
#6, #9, #10, #12, #13, #16, #18) are located between 0.50-1.0 mile from the Trans Circuits facility (Refs. 3; 26; 48, pp. 22,
23). Six Riviera Beach wells (Riviera Beach Wells #1, #7, #14, #15, #21, #801) are located between 1.0-2.0 miles from the
facility (Refs. 3; 26; 48, pp. 22, 23). Three Riviera Beach Wells (Riviera Beach Wells #803, #805, #961) are located between
2-3 miles from the facility (Refs. 3; 26; 48, pp. 22, 23). Seven Riviera Beach Wells (Riviera Beach Wells #851, #852, #861,
#862, #871, #921, #922) are located between 3-4 miles from the site (Refs. 3; 26; 48, pp. 22, 23). The City of Riviera Beach
alternates use of the wells on an odd-day/even-day schedule, blending approximately 12 wells daily (Refs. 46; 48 pp. 12,
13).
Mangonia Park Utilities operates a total of four wells located between 2-3 miles south of Trans Circuits (Refs. 3; 50; 51).
These wells serve a total of 350 connections, or a total of approximately 812 persons (Refs. 49; 50).
Seacoast Utilities operates 34 wells, with 20 within four miles of Trans Circuits (Refs. 3; 52; 53). Seacoast Utilities
supplies water to 27,650 connections or approximately 813.235 connections/1886.71 persons per well (Refs. 49; 52; 53).
The water from the Seacoast Utility wells is blended prior to distribution, and no well supplies more than 40% of the total
water (Ref. 52). Thirteen Seacoast Utilities wells (Seacoast Utilities Wells #RR-1, #RR-2, #RR-3, #RR-4, #RR-5, #RR-6,
#RR-7, #RR-8, #RR-21, #RR-22, #RR-23, #RR-24, #RR-25) are located between 1-2 miles from Trans Circuits (Refs. 3; 52).
Five Seacoast Utilities wells (Seacoast Utilities Wells #LS-4, #LS-6, #LS-7, #LS-10, #LS-11) are located between 2-3 miles
from Trans Circuits (Refs. 3; 52). Two Seacoast Utilities wells (Seacoast Utilities Wells #LS-8, #LS-9) are located between
3-4 miles from Trans Circuits (Refs. 3; 52).
All wells within the 4-mile radius of Trans Circuits are evaluated on the basis of potential contamination.
34
GW-Targets
Drinking Water Wells within 4 Miles of Trans Circuits
Well Identification
Distance from
Source (Mile)
Aquifer
Number of
Connection
s
Persons Per
Household
(Palm Beach
County)
Populati
on
Served
References
Riviera Beach Well #17
0.25 - 0.50
Shallow
496.28
2.32
1,151
3; 44; 45;
46; 47; 48,
p. 22, 23;
49
Riviera Beach Wells #4, #6, #9,
#10, #12, #13, #16, #18
0.50 - 1
Shallow
3,970.24
2.32
9,211
3; 44; 45;
46; 47; 48,
p. 22, 23;
49
Riviera Beach Wells #1, #7,
#14, #15, #21, #801
1-2
Shallow
2,977.68
2.32
6,908
3; 44; 45;
46; 47; 48,
p. 22, 23;
49
Seacoast Utilities Wells #RR-1,
#RR-2, #RR-3, #RR-4, #RR-5,
#RR-6, #RR-7, #RR-8, #RR-21,
#RR-22, #RR-23, #RR-24, #RR25
1-2
Shallow
10,572.06
2.32
24,527
3; 49; 52;
53
Mangonia Park Wells #1, #2, #3,
#4
2-3
Shallow
350
2.32
812
3; 49; 50;
51
Riviera Beach Wells #803,
#805, #961
2-3
Shallow
1,488.84
2.32
3,454
3; 44; 45;
46; 47; 48,
p. 22, 23;
49
Seacoast Utilities Wells #LS-04,
#LS-06, #LS-07, #LS-10, #LS11
2-3
Shallow
4,066.18
2.32
9,434
3; 49; 52;
53
Riviera Beach Wells #851,
#852, #861, #862, #871, #921,
#922
3-4
Shallow
3,473.96
2.32
8,060
3; 44; 45;
46; 47; 48,
p. 22, 23;
49
Seacoast Utilities Wells #LS-8,
#LS-9
3-4
Shallow
1,626.47
2.32
3,773
3; 49; 52;
53
35
GW-Nearest Well
3.3.1. Nearest Well
Well: Riviera Beach Well #17
Level of Contamination (I, II, or potential): Potential
If potential contamination, distance from source in miles: 0.25 - 0.50 miles
==============================================================================
Nearest Well Factor Value: 18
36
GW-Potential Contamination
3.3.2.4. Potential Contamination
Distance Category
Population
Distance-Weighted
Population Value
0
0
0.25 - 0.50 mile
1,151
1,013
1, Table 3-12; 3; 44; 45; 46;
47; 48, pp. 22, 23; 49
0.50 - 1 mile
9,211
1,669
1, Table 3-12; 3; 44; 45; 46;
47; 48, pp. 22, 23; 49
1 - 2 miles
31,435
9,385
1, Table 3-12; 3; 44; 45; 46;
47; 48, pp. 22, 23; 49; 52; 53
2 - 3 miles
13,700
2,122
1, Table 3-12; 3; 44; 45; 46;
47; 48, pp. 22, 23; 49; 50; 51;
52; 53
3 - 4 miles
11,833
1,306
1, Table 3-12; 3; 44; 45; 46;
47; 48, pp. 22, 23; 49; 52; 53
0 - 0.25 mile
References
Distance-weighted population values were determined for non-karst conditions. (See Section 3.0.1 of this Documentation
Record.)
Sum of Distance-Weighted Population Values: 15,495
X 0.1 (as applied to Reference 1, Section 3.3.2.4) = 1,550
===============================================================================
Potential Contamination factor Value: 1,550
37
GW-Resources
3.3.3. Resources
The City of Riviera Beach supplies groundwater used for commercial food production within a 4-mile radius of the site
(Ref. 54).
===============================================================================
Resources Factor Value: 5
38
GW-Wellhead Protection Areas
3.3.4. Wellhead Protection Area
All of the Sea Coast Utility Authority wellfields are in wellhead protection areas (Ref. 52, p. 1). All of the wells in the
Riviera Beach wellfields are in wellhead protection areas (Ref. 48, p. 16).
==============================================================================
Wellhead Protection Area factor Value: 5
39