UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 5
77 WEST JACl<SON BOULEVARD
CHICAGO, IL 60604-3590

REPLY TO THE Al TENTION OF:

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:

ACTION MEMORANDUM - Request for Approval and Funding of a TimeCritical Removal Action at the Federated Metals Si te, Whiting and Hammond,
Lake County, Indiana (Site JD# C5DC)

FROM:

Andrew Maguire, On-Scene Coordinator (OSC) (J>-/.,,J_._,_,t /Jf)1~ -\<JC
Emergency Response Bra2 1 1 2/Emergency Response Section 3

THRU:

Cathy Stepp,~ . 1
Regional

TO:

E. Scott Pruitt
Administrator

AJJ

Act,, <01~
--

~

(c;;
U
l,i) 1j\

1,A./

· ~

~

.

I. PURPOSE

The purpose of this Action Memorandum is to request and document your approval to expend up
to $ 1,715,485.49 to conduct a time-critical removal action at the Federated Metals Site ("Site"),
in Whiting and Hammond, Lake County, Indiana (Figure I). The time-critical removal action
proposed herein is necessary to mitigate tlueats to public health, welfare, and the environment
posed by the presence of uncontrolled hazardous substances at the Site. There are no nationally
significant or precedent-setting issues associated with the proposed response at this non-National
Priority List (NPL) site.
This Action Memorandum serves as approval for expend itures by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, as the lead technical agency, to take actions described herein to abate the
imminent and substantial endangennent posed by the hazardous substances at the Site. The
proposed removal of the hazardous substances will be taken pursuant to Section 104(a)(I) of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42
U.S.C. § 9604(a)( l), and Section 300.4 15 of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances
Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 C.F.R. § 300.415.
II. SITE CONDITIONS AN D BACKGROUND

CERCLIS JD: C5DC
RCRA ID: IND 005 444 I 04
State 10: IND 005 444 104
Category: Time-Critical Removal Act ion
Site Location: 2230 Indianapolis Boulevard, Lake County, Indiana 46394, and surrounding
neighborhoods in Hammond and Whiting

RecycicdlRecyclablc •

Printed wilh Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Recycled P~por ( I 00% Post Consumer)

 A. Site Description
The Federated Metals Site is located in both Hammond and Whiting, Lake County, Indiana. The
Site consists of the former Federated Metals Corporation (FMC) facility at 2230 Indianapolis
Boulevard, Whiting, as well as sunounding residential areas in Hammond and Whiting. At this
time, the full extent of the residential contamination has not been fully delineated. Additional
residential sampling was conducted in April 2018 to further define the boundaries of the Site.
The former FMC facility covers approximately 36 acres in Whiting and Hammond, Indiana.
From 1937 until 1983, the FMC facility operated as a smelting, refining, recovery, and recycling
facility for non-ferrous metals including copper, zinc and lead. In 1985, FMC sold a 17- acre
pmtion of the facility containing the main manufacturing building, storage buildings and office
space to HBR Paiinership. Since then, a number of businesses, including an animal feed
company, a recycling center, and a building products company, have operated in various
outbuildings at the facility. Since 2007, two related companies - Northern Indiana Metals and
Whiting Metals - have owned the former FMC manufacturing building and conducted lead
reclaiming and blending operations there under Clean Air Act (CAA) permits issued by the
Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM). The Multi-State Custodial Trnst,
established by a federal bankruptcy court in 2009, owns an adjacent 19-acre landfill that was
once pa11 of the FMC facility.
From 2003 through December 2005, the former FMC facility was subject to Corrective Action
under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), 42 U .S.C. §§ 6901- 6992k,
pursuant to a 1992 federal court Consent Decree in US. v. Federated Metals Co,poration,
No. H90-0327(N.D.1N 1992), a 2001 EPA Final Remedy Decision, and a 2001 IDEM Agreed
Order. The $3.7 million Co1Tective Action ,vas funded by FMC's parent corporation, ASARCO,
and an IDEM RCRA closure fund. The Corrective Action involved consolidation of wastes
(primarily of slag dredged from adjoining Lake George, contaminated soils excavated from
facility production areas, and non-hazardous baghouse demolition debris) into an existing 19acre, on-site landfill and construction of a phyto-cap cover to mitigate infiltration of precipitation
and reduce leaching of metals (arsenic, lead and fluoride) to groundwater under the landfill. Offsite soil sampling was not part of the Corrective Action, nor were any samples taken from Lake
George (ENTACT 2006).
ASARCO filed for bankruptcy in August 2005 and abandoned the FMC facility in December
2005 before the Con-ective Action remedy was completed. In 2009, under a massive $1.79
billion bankrnptcy settlement which resulted in the dissolution of ASARCO, federal comis
established and funded a number of bankrnptcy trusts to address ASARCO's nationwide
environmental liabilities. The bankruptcy court allocated $1.2 million to the Multi-State
Custodial Trnst to complete the FMC landfill cover and conduct groundwater monitoring to
confirm performance of the remedy. The Trust took title to the landfill portion of the former
FMC property in 2012, and subsequently performed maintenance on the landfill, installed
additional on-site groundwater monitoring wells, and conducted several rounds of on-site and
off-site groundwater monitoring.

2

 On September 16, 20 16, the EPA Region 5 Land and Chemicals Division (LCD) referred the
Site to the EPA Region 5 Superfund Removal Program for an off-site residential assessment
(Cisneros 2016). LCD believed that there was a potential for elevated levels of heavy metals,
including lead and arsenic, in the residential properties located near the former FMC facility. The
LCD program indicated that it had no ability to fund and conduct soil sampling within the RCRA
Corrective Action program. In September 2017, EPA notified the Trustee that Corrective Action
remedy construction was complete. In December 20 17, EPA and IDEM asked the Trustee to
conduct seven more quatters of groundwater monitoring to confirm remedy perfonnance and
establish a baseline for an IDEM post-closure plan. That work is ongoing.
1. Remo, al Site Evaluation
1

Determining Potential Area of Concern
In November/December 2016, the EPA Region 5 Superfund removal program implemented a
broad sampling approach at publicly-owned right of ways and unoccupied residential properties
in order to determine the initial scope of the removal investigation. This initial investigation
identified lead contamination to the north and northeast of the f01mer FMC facility. In March
2017, more publicly owned properties were sampled, and narrovved the area of concern to a
much smaller area to the no11h of the fonner smelter. Lead as high as 2200 ppm was found in the
surface soils in the neighborhood. Results for both sampling events can be found in Table 1.
Based on the results of this sampling, it was detennined that the sampling needed to be expanded
to occupied residential properties.
Assessing site for potential vapor intrusion from landfill
In January 2017, groundwater and soil gas sampling was also conducted in residential areas of
the Site. Soil gas sample results indicated three samples exceeded screening levels. One sample
had an exceedance for 1,3-butadiene, a second had an exceedance of chlorofonn, and a third had
an exceedance of ethyl acetate. None of these were contaminants of concern from the FMC
landfill and the source of the contaminants is unknown. Analytical results from the groundwater
sampling showed no exceedances above EPA screening levels. Results indicated that no further
vapor intrusion sampling was necessary at the Site.
Landfill sampling to correlate off-site soil contamination to source material
In order to evaluate potential sources for lead found in residential yards, soil borings were
collected at the fom1er FMC landfill in June 2017. Analytical results from samples taken at the
landfill were between 6,990 ppm and 26,700 ppm for lead. Eleven soil samples from the landfill
and ten soil samples from residential properties were sent to a lab to assess whether the material
in the landfill from the former FMC facility is the same material that is present in the residential
yards. The lab documented the presence of any coal, coal ash, fl y ash, slag, lead bearing
particles or other metal particles in the samples. In a report provided by the lab, a comparison of
the trends from these analyses suggests a likely connection between the lead-bearing pai1icles
detected in both sets of samples (landfill and residential). F ive of the ten residential samples were
identified as likely to have been impacted by foundry processes. Numerous lead-bearing
particles, not commonly found in typical residential soi ls, were detected in the fine particles of
the five residential samples. All five residential samples contained weathered particles in the
fines which were elementally consistent with the glass-like material detected in the landfill

3

 samples (Microvision 2017).
Occupied residential sampling
Occupied residential properties were sampled March 2018 and in October and November 2017.
Of the 30 occupied residential properties sampled, 25 of the properties had surficial
concentrations that exceeded the EPA RML of 400 ppm for lead. Of these properties, nine had
surficial concentrations above 1,200 ppm for lead. Five of the prope11ies that had surficial lead
above 1,200 ppm had sensitive populations residing there at the time. The highest lead
concentration found at the smface of one of the residential properties was 2,760 ppm. These five
properties meet the tier I criteria as defined in the "Superfund Lead-Contaminated Residential
Sites Handbook". A summary of the results can be found below and the individual results can be
found in Table I.
Summary of Occupied Residential Sampling Conducted in 2017

Total number of properties
samoled:

30

Total number of prope1ties over
400 ppm lead:

25

Total number of properties over
1200 ppm lead:

9

Total number of prope1ties over
1200 ppm lead with sensitive
populations:

5

Continuing assessment activities at the Site
An integrated assessment with IDEM was conducted in April 2018 to further investigate the
scope of contamination at the Site. Additional rounds of soil sampling will likely be conducted in
the future by EPA and/or IDEM. As sampling results from properties are received, they will be
evaluated for potential time-critical removal actions.
2. Physical location

The address of the former FMC facility is 2230 Indianapolis Boulevard, Whiting, Lake County,
Indiana (Figures 1 and 2). Pat1s of the former FMC prope11y, as well as various smTOunding
residences, are located in Whiting and in Hammond, Indiana. The former FMC property is a 17acre, rectangular-shaped parcel that contained the fo1mer smelter operational areas and an
adjacent 19-acre landfill on the south and west sides of the fo1mer operational area of the facility.
The property is in a residential and commercial area. It is bounded to the north by Lake George
Trail, vacant land and residences; to the east by a commercial building and New York Avenue;
to the south by vacant land and Calumet College of St. Joseph; and to the west by Lake George.
Lake Michigan is located approximately 0.7 miles northeast of the prope11y. The residential area
of concern consists of the prope11ies primarily to the north and east oft he facility, but has yet to

4

 be fully defined.
An Environmental Justice (EJ) analysis for the Site was conducted (Attachment I). Screening of
the surrounding area used Region S' s EJ Screen Tool (which applies the interim version of the
national EJ Strategic Enforcement Assessment Tool (EJSEAT)). Region 5 has reviewed
environmental and demographic data for the area surrounding the Site and detennined that there
is a high potential for EJ concerns at this location.
3. Site Characteristics

The Site consists of the operational portions of the fonner FMC facility, an adjacent landfill
owned by a federal Trustee, and surrounding residential areas. From 1937 until 1983, the FMC
facility operated as a smelting, refining, recovery, and recycling facility for non-ferrous metals
including copper, zinc and lead. In 1985, FMC sold a 17- acre portion of the facility containing
manufacturing buildings and office space. Since 2007, Northern Indiana Metals and Whiting
Metals have conducted scrap lead reclaiming operations in the former FMC manufacturing
building, under CAA pennits issued by IDEM. The Multi-State Custodial Trust owns an adjacent
19-acre landfill that was once part of the FMC facility.
The residential area no1th of the FMC facility is a densely populated area consisting of mostly
single-family homes built during the early 20th centmy. Most of the homes have smaller yards
with areas averaging between 500 and 1000 square feet. This area is mixed with commercial
buildings along Indianapolis Boulevard. There are churches, schools, and daycares located
around the area.
To date, no EPA time-critical removal actions have been conducted at the Site. However, as
noted above, the forn1er FMC facility was subject to RCRA Corrective Action from 2003
through December 2005. At the end of that time, cleanup of the smelter portion of the former
FMC facility and primruy construction of the adjoining landfill was largely completed.
Conective Action then was suspended for seven years due to the bankruptcy of FMC's parent
corporation, ASARCO. Corrective Action resumed in 2012 when a Trust established by a federal
bankruptcy court took title to the landfill property and began cap maintenance and groundwater
well installation and monitoring, which is ongoing.
EPA has longstanding policies regarding defening CERCLA removal activities at sites where
RCRA Corrective Action is applicable. See 54 FR I 0520 (March 13, 1989); OECA
Memorandum, Coordination between RCRA Corrective Action and Closure and CERCLA Site
Activities (March 24, 1996). Accordingly, the instant removal action will focus on the residential
areas near the former FMC facility, rather than on the facility itself. RCRA Conective Action
has been completed at the operational po11ion of the fonner FMC facility, and an effective
Corrective Action remedy is in place at the landfill.
4. Release or threatened release into the environment of a hazardous substance, or
polJutant or contaminant

The presence of a hazardous substance in residential areas at the Site has been documented. Lead

5

 is a hazardous substance as defined by Section 101(14) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9601(14). See
40 C.F.R. § 302.4. Lead levels at the surface of the soil exceed residential EPA Removal
Management Levels (RMLs). This time-critical removal action is addressing actual leadcontaminated particles released from the former FMC facility during its former operations into
the adjacent neighborhood. This residential contamination was documented previously in the
Removal Site Evaluation section. The highest swficial concentration of lead observed during the
occupied residential sampling in October-November 2017 was 2,760 ppm.
Lead exposure via inhalation and/or ingestion can have detrimental effects on almost every organ
and system in the l1uman body. Exposure may occur from direct ingestion of soil in yards, soil
tracked indoors, or house dust; and inhalation of fugitive dust. Lead can cause a variety of health
problems to people who are exposed to it. Potential human receptors include residents, including
children six years of age and under, and pregnant or nursing women. Children are at greatest risk
from the toxic effects of lead. Initially, lead travels in the blood to the soft tissues (heart, liver,
kidney, brain, etc.). Then, it gradually redistributes to the bones and teeth where it tends to
remain. Children exposed to high levels of lead have exhibited nerve damage, liver damage,
colic, anemia, brain damage, and death. The most serious effects associated with markedly
elevated blood lead levels include neurotoxic effects such as ineversible brain damage.
Exposure may occur from direct ingestion of soil, soil tracked on shoes, and inhalation of dust
and soil particles from the yard. Potential human receptors include residents, including children
under seven, and pregnant or nursing women.
The known hazardous substance at the Site (lead) exists in the soil of residential properties. The
lead in soil is unsecured and has no containment. Lead has the potential to be released from these
residential properties by means such as tracking, surface runoff, and wind dispersion. These
potential releases may be increased in areas where soil isn't covered by grass or other means.
5. NPL status

This Site is not on the NPL, and has not been proposed for listing at this time. The EPA preremedial program and IDEM are evaluating the Site for potential NPL listing.
6. Maps, pictures and other graphic representations

Figure 1: Site Location Map
Figure 2: Site Layout Map
Table I: Occupied Residential Sampling Results (Redacted)
B. Other Actions to Date
1. Previous actions

From 2003 through December 2005, the FMC facility ,:vas subject to RCRA Corrective Action
under a 1992 federal court Consent Decree, a 200 I EPA Final Remedy Decision, and a 2001
6

 IDEM Agreed Order. The $3.7 million Co1Tective Action was funded by ASARCO and an
IDEM closure fund. The Co1Tective Action involved consolidation of wastes (primarily of slag
dredged from adjoining Lake George, contaminated soils excavated from facility production
areas, and non-hazardous baghouse demolition debris) into an existing on-site landfill and
constrnction of a phyto-cap cover to, mitigate infiltration of precipitation and reduce leaching of
metals to groundwater under the landfill.
In December 2005, cleanup of the smelter portion of the former FMC facility and primary
construction of the adjoining landfill ,:vas largely completed. Corrective Action then was
suspended for seven years due to the bankruptcy of FMC's parent corporation, ASARCO.
Corrective Action resumed in 2012 when a Trust established by a federal bankruptcy court took
title to the landfill property and began cap maintenance and groundwater well installation and
monitoring, which is ongoing.
Pursuant to EPA's 1995 CERCLA/RCRA defe1rnl policy, the instant removal action will focus
on the residential areas near the fmmer FMC faci lity, rather than on the facility itself. RCRA
Corrective Action has been completed at the operational portion of the former FMC facility, and
an effective Conective Action remedy is in place at the landfill.
2. Current actions

Conective Action activities continue at the fonner FMC landfill. The Trustee is continuing to
monitor groundwater to ensure the efficacy of the cover/cap remedy at the landfill.
C. State and Local Authorities' Roles
1. State and local actions to date

EPA has continually coordinated with the local cities of Hammond and Whiting, as well as the
Hammond Port Authority, regarding the investigation of contamination in residential areas near
the former FMC faci lity. The cities have assisted EPA with obtaining access agreements for
sampling an_d community outreach. The cities sent out a mailing to residents with EPA access
agreements leading up to the Fall 2017 sampling, and have assisted with additional access
agreements since then, as well.
Following receipt of the residential results from the Fall 2017 sampling event, EPA pre-remedial
program and IDEM began to evaluate whether the Site could potentially be listed on the NPL
due to the high percentage of prope11ies that came back with elevated levels of lead.
In April 2018, the EPA removal program and IDEM conducted an integrated assessment at the
Site. IDEM and the removal program collected soil samples at additional properties. The
objective of this sampling was to further evaluate the boundaries of the Site and extent of
contamination. Additionally, IDEM collected samples to fm1her inform its investigation as to
whether the Site could potentially be listed on the NPL.

7

 2. Potential for continued state/local response

EPA is coordinating with various local, State, and federal agencies regarding the Site. These
agencies include the cities of Whiting and Hammond, IDEM, the Hammond P011 Authority,
Jndiana State Depa11ment of Health (ISDH), and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry (ATSDR). EPA is providing data to its pa11ner agencies and coordinating discussions
about assessment and remediation at the Site. The pa1tner agencies will continue to assist with
community outreach.
The EPA removal program continues to coordinate with the EPA pre-remedial program and
IDEM to evaluate the Site for potential listing on the NPL. Further sampling will be conducted to
determine whether the Site can be listed and to determine the extent of contamination in the
neighborhood surrounding the former FMC facility. As additional rounds of sampling are
conducted by EPA and/or IDEM, the EPA removal program will continue to evaluate the need
for time-critical removals at prope11ies with elevated levels of lead.

III.

THREATS TO PUBLIC HEALTH, WELFARE, OR THE ENVIRONMENT, AND
STATUTORY AND REGULATORY AUTHORITIES

EPA's assessment indicates that conditions at the Site present an imminent and substantial threat
to the public health, or welfare, and the environment and meet the criteria for a time-critical
removal action as provided for in the NCP, 40 C.F.R § 300.415(b)(2). These conditions include,
but are not limited to, the following:
§ 300.415(b)(2)(i) - Actual or potential exposure to nearby human populations,
animals, or the food chain from hazardous substances or pollutants or
contaminants:

Certain residential properties at the Site are contaminated with lead in soil that exceeds RM Ls in
the top six inches. Lead is a hazardous substance as defined by Section 101 (14) of CERCLA.
Potential exposure through these pathways could cause imminent endangerment to human health,
welfare, or the environment.
As noted above, of the 30 occupied residential properties sampled, 25 of the properties had
surficial concentrations that exceeded the EPA RML of 400 ppm for lead. Of these prope11ies,
nine had surficial concentrations above 1,200 ppm for lead. Five of the properties that had
surficial lead above 1,200 ppm had sensitive populations residing there at the time. The highest
lead concentration found at the surface of one of the residential prope11ies was 2,760 ppm.
ATSDR states that exposure to lead can lead to negative health effects'. The main exposure
pathways for lead are through inhalation or ingestion. People can be exposed by swallowing or
breathing the lead into the body. The target system that lead affects in the body is the nervous
system. Exposure to lead over long periods of time can lead to a small increase in blood pressure,
anemia, and decreased neurological function. Exposure to high levels of lead can lead to brain
and kidney damage and ultimately death. Pregnant women and children are populations of
I http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/loxprofiles/tp 13 .pdf

8

 special concern for lead exposure. Lead exposure during pregnancy can cause miscarriage or
developmental problems in the unborn fetus. No safe level of lead exposure has been found for
children since they are more sensitive to lead than adults are. Health effects from lead exposure
in children include anemia, kidney damage, colic, muscle weakness, and brain damage'. Children
can also experience mental and physical development grov,1h effects.

§ 300.415(b)(2)(iv)- High levels of hazardous substances or pollutants or
contaminants in soils largely at or near the surface, that may migrate:
As stated previously, surface soils at the certain residential prope11ies at the Site exceed RMLs
established by the EPA for lead, which is a listed hazardous substance.
Residents at the Site may cause the high levels of lead to migrate into other areas including
inside the home by walking through and tracking in, gardening, play, and other residential
activities, especially in areas where the soil does not have any cover. Other means of migration
may include routine construction activities.

§ 300.415(b)(2)(v) - Weather conditions that may cause hazardous substances or
pollutants or contaminants to migrate or be released:
The lead contamination at residential properties at the Site exists in the soil, which is exposed to
the elements without proper containment. Release could occur from high ,vinds dispersing
surface particulate matter containing lead, resulting in exposure to residents, including sensitive
populations, within the site. Grass cover is generally lighter in the early spring and fall, allowing
more potential of tracking contaminated soil. Rain or thundershowers may cause the outdoor lead
to migrate via surface runoff.
§ 300.415(b)(2)(vii) - The availability of other appropriate federal or state response

mechanisms to respond to the release:
At this time, no local or State agency has the resources to respond to the immediate threat.
EPA Region 5 LCD referred the Site to the EPA CERCLA removal program due to the lack of a
mechanism and funding within the RCRA Corrective Action program to evaluate the residential
area outside of the former FMC facility.

IV. ENDANGERMENT DETERMINATION
Given the Site conditions, the nature of the known and suspected hazardous substances at the
Site, and the potential exposure pathways described in Sections JI and III above, actual or
threatened releases of hazardous substances from the Site, if not addressed by implementing the
response actions selected in this Action Memorandum, may present an inuninent and substantial
endangerment to public health, welfare, or the environment.

9

 V. PROPOSED ACTIONS AND ESTIMATED COSTS
A. Proposed Actions
1. Proposed action description

The 2003 "Superfund Lead-Contaminated Residential Sites Handbook" prepared by the EPA
Lead Sites Workgroup establishes tiers of properties for residential lead sites (U.S. EPA 2003).
Tier 1 prope11ies are defined as having "both sensitive populations (children up to 7 years old or
pregnant women)" and soil lead concentrations at or above I ,200 ppm at the surface. Tier 1
prope11ies can also be identified if a child's blood lead level is above 10 µg/dL. According to the
guidance, "Tier l should be the highest priority for immediate action". This action memo
addresses tier 1 properties that have been identified by EPA or that are identified during
additional rounds of sampling conducted at the Site in the future. The Site is currently being
evaluated for potential NPL listing, which could address contamination at remaining prope1iies
at the site. Tier 2 and 3 prope11ies, which are lower priorities according to the handbook, may be
considered for a time-critical removal at a later date depending on whether other mechanisms
exist in the future to address remaining contamination.

Superfund Lead-Contaminated Residential Sites Handbook: Tiered Prooerty Definitions
Properties that have both sensitive populations (children under 7 years
Tier I
old or pregnant women) and surface soil lead concentration of 1,200
ppm or higher. Or prope11ies with a children' s blood lead level at or
above 10ug/dL.
Prope11ies that have sensitive populations and soil lead concentrations
Tier 2
at or above 400 ppm and below 1,200 ppm. Or properties with no
sensitive populations with surface lead concentrations at or above
1,200 ppm.
Properties with no sensitive populations that have surface soil lead
Tier 3
concentrations at or above 400 ppm and below 1,200 ppm

The response actions described in this memorandum directly address actual or potential releases
of hazardous substances at the Site, which may pose an inuninent and substantial endangerment
to public health, or welfare, or the environment. Removal activities on-site will include:
a) Development and implementation of site-specific work plans, health and safety plan, and
emergency contingency plan;
b) Development and implementation of a sampling and analysis plan including air
monitoring;
c) Conducting air monitoring. Implementing dust control measures to ensure worker and
public health protection;
d) Provide for site security measures, as necessary;
e) Establish and maintain staging and stockpile area(s), as necessary;

10

 f) Excavation of soil at residences with pregnant women and/or children under the age of 7
where lead is equal to or exceeds 1,200 mg/kg at the surface as determined by EPA
sampling. Excavation of soil at properties where a child has a blood lead level of I0
µg/dL. To eliminate any direct contact and inhalation threats, soil will be excavated to a
depth not to exceed 24 inches below ground surface;
g) Replacement of excavated soil with clean soil;
h) If contaminated soil is identified at a depth greater than approximately 24 inches below
ground surface, a visual barrier such as orange construction fe11cing or landscape fabric
will be placed above the contaminated soil and beneath the clean backfill soil;
i) Restoration of each property to as close to practicable to its pre-removal condition;
j) Staging, treatment as necessary, transpo11ation, and disposal off-site of any hazardous
substances, pollutants and contaminants at a CERCLA-approved disposal facility in
accordance with EPA's Off-Site Rule (40 C.F.R. § 300.440); and
k) Taking any other response actions to address any release or threatened release of a
hazardous substance, pollutant and contaminant that the EPA OSC determines may pose
an imminent and substanti~I endangerment to the public health or the environment.
At this time, the exact number of properties requiring time-critical remediation is unknown. As
of the November 2017 round of sampling, four properties were identified as tier 1. The actual
number of properties subject to removal action may change due to additional properties being
sampled, more information being gathered about sensitive populations, or additional sensitive
populations moving into previously sampled residences at the site. An estimate of 20 tie1: l
prope11ies are expected and built into the scope of this action memo. This estimate is based on
the percentage of tier 1 properties discovered in previous sampling extrapolated to the current
area of concem.
Removals at tier 2 and 3 contaminated properties that are adjacent to or in close proximity of a
tier l prope1ty may be excavated if engineering controls cannot be implemented for the safety of
site workers and the public and/or to prevent the tracking of contamination during excavation
activities to other prope11ies.
The response action proposed herein will mitigate the threats at the Site by properly identifying,
consolidating, and packaging hazardous substances and materials on-site. The consolidated
materials will be removed and ultimately disposed of off-site. Additional Site activities may
include security, perimeter air monitoring, and decontamination on the Site, as needed to
complete the removal action. This response action will be conducted in accordance with Section
104(a)(l) ofCERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9604(a)(l) and Section 300.415 of the NCP, 40 C.F.R.
§ 300.415, to abate or eliminate the immediate threat posed to public health and/or the
environment by the presence of the hazardous substances. The intent of this action memo is to
only addresses tier 1 properties. Future actions at the Site may require amendment(s) to this
Action Memo to address any remaining contamination at the site.
The removal action will be conducted in a manner not inconsistent with the NCP. If necessary,
post-removal site control may be conducted consistent with the provisions of Section 300.415(1)
of the NCP.

11

 2. Contribution to remedial performance

The proposed action will not impede future remedial actions based on available information.
3. Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis (EE/CA)

Not Applicable.
4. Applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs)

Applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARAR) of federal and State law identified
in a timely manner will be complied with to the extent practicable considering the exigencies of
the situation. On April 4, 2018, EPA sent an email request to Rex Osborn of IDEM requesting
any State of Indiana ARARs that may apply (Maguire 2018). EPA will consider and implement
the submitted ARARs, as appropriate.
While it is not strictly an ARAR, all hazardous substances removed off-site pursuant to this
removal action for treatment, storage, and disposal will be treated, stored, or disposed of at a
facility in compliance, as the EPA detennines, with the EPA Off-Site Rule, 40 C.F.R. § 300.440.
5. Project schedule

Given the assumption of 20 properties requiring eXCc\Vation, it is estimated that the project will
take approximately 80 working days.
6. Estimated costs

REMOVAL ACTION PROJECT CEILING ESTlMATE
Extramural Costs:

$1,254,368

Regional Removal Allowance Costs:
Other Extramural Costs Not Funded from the Regional
Allowance:
Total START, including multiplier costs

$] 75,203
$1,429,57 1

Subtotal Extramural Costs
Extramural Costs Contingency (20% of Subtotal)
TOTAL REMOVAL ACTION PROJECT CEILING

12

$285,914
$1,715,485

 The response actions described in this memorandum directly address the actual or threatened
release of hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants at the Site which may pose an
imminen't and substantial endangerment to public health or welfare or to the environment. These
response actions do not impose a burden on affected property disproportionate to the extent to
which that property contributes to the conditions being addressed.
All hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants removed off-site pursuant to this removal
action for treatment, storage and disposal shall be treated, stored, or disposed at a facility in
compliance, as determined by EPA, with the EPA Off-Site Rule, 40 C.F.R. § 300.440.

VI.

EXPECTED CHANGE IN THE SITUATION SHOULD ACTION BE DELAYED
OR NOT TAKEN

Given the Site conditions, the nature of the hazardous substances on-site, the potential exposure
pathways to nearby populations described in Sections II, Ill, and IV above, and the actual or
threatened release of hazardous substances from the Site, failing to take or delaying action may
present an imminent and substantial endangennent to public health, welfare or the environment.

VII.

OUTSTANDING POLICY ISSUES

None

VIII. ENFORCEMENT
For administrative purposes, infonnation concerning the enforcement strategy for this site is
contained in the Enforcement Confidential Addendum.
The total EPA costs for this removal action based on full-cost accounting practices that will be
eligible for cost recovery are estimated to be $2,837,740.452•
($1,715,485.49 + $75,000) + (58.49% X $],790,485.49) == $2,837,740.45

2
Direct Costs include direct extramural costs and direct intramural costs. Indirect costs arc calculated based on an
estimated indirect cost rate expressed as a percentage of site specific direct costs, consistent with the full cost
accounting methodology effective October 2, 2000. These estimates do not include pre-judgement interest, do not
take into account other enforcement costs, including Department of Justice costs, and may be adjusted during the
course ofa removal action. The estimates are for illustrative purposes only and their use is not intended to create
any rights for responsible parties. Neither the lack of a total cost estimate nor deviation of actual total costs from
this estimate will affect the United States right to cost recovery.

13

 IX. RECOMMENDATION

This decision document represents the selected removal action for the Federated Metals Site in
Hammond and Whiting, Lake County, Indiana. Th.is document has been developed in accordance
with CERCLA as amended, and is not inconsistent with the NCP. This decision is based on the
Administrative Record for the site, see Attachment III. Conditions at the Site meet the NCP
criteria at 40 C.F.R. § 300.415(6)(2) for a time-critical removal action, and I recommend your
approval.
The total removal project ceiling, if approved, will be $1,715,485. Of this, an estimated
$1,254,368 may be used for the cleanup contractor costs. You may indicate your decision by
signing below.

APPROVE:

DISAPPROVE: _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __
E. Scott Pruitt
Administrator

DATE: _ _ _ __

Figures:
Ffgure 1: Site Location Map
Figure 2: Site Layout Map
Tables:
Table l: Summary of Sample Results·at Occupied Residential Prope11ies for Lead
Attachments:
I: Environmental Justice (EJ) Screen
II: Detailed Cleanup Contractor Estimate
JJI: Administrative Record Index
IV: Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE)

Enforcement Addendum
cc:

S. Ridenour, U.S. EPA, 5104A/B5 17F (Ridenour.Steve@epa.Qov)
L. Nelson, U.S. DOI, w/o Enf.Addendum,(Lindy_Nelson@ios.doi.gov)
Rex Osborn, IDEM ·w/o Enf. Addendum (rosborn@idem.in.gov)

14

 BCC PAGE HAS BEEN REDACTED

NOT RELEVANT TO SELECTION

OF REMOVAL ACTION

ENFORCEMENT ADDENDUM
HAS BEEN REDACTED – FOUR
PAGES

ENFORCEMENT CONFIDENTIAL
NOT SUBJECT TO DISCOVERY FOIA
EXEMPT

NOT RELEVANT TO SELECTION
OF REMOVAL ACTION

 Figure 1
Site Location
Federated Metals Site, Hammond/Whiting, IN

"

'\

\
·,

A

..

I

\

'·

,.

.,

N

,,
I

~

c:.:::..
'-

' ..

l~tnd

{ CP1oposed Sampling Area
;: : ; Approximate Sile Boundary

FedttllOd Mtl.:IIS
2230 lndllnlpolis Boulev,rd
Whtin . llke Count , lndi>n>

Flouro 1
Sito locar/011 Map

TETRA TECH
,_ • .,._ !,......, OCtlY"Allie,f
t <ll,,..W'Al)(.I

i.,.,.i,.r., ..

 Figure 2
S ile Location
Fcclcratcd Metals S ite, Hammond/Whitin g, IN

Fttt

uoond
L:; Approximole Site Bound~ry

FedtrJtod MtL>ls
2230 lndiJnlpo~, 8oultVJrd
'l/ht,ng. lll @Covnly. lndiJ nJ

Ffourc 2

Sire Layout Map

['Tl::j TETRA TECII
(-• ,• ft•-

C.C. IW-A • .r_,,

t ...... ."'".. '""

'-"''- c.,...

 Table 1
Occupied Residential Sample Results Ma r ch, October , & November 2017
Federated Meta ls Site, Hammond/Whiting, IN

I{· •·.

I

'

',, : , I

! •

1
:'

Analytica l results for surface
soil samples collected at
occupied resident ial
properties in 2017

Compound:

Lead

Units:

mg/kg

Analytical
Method:

SW6010
400 mg/kg

3/22/2017
Property 2

Property 2- Sample 1

3/22/2017

Property 3
Property 4

Property 3- Sample 1

3/23/2017

Property 4- Sample 1

11/3/2017

Properly 5

Property 5- Sample 1

Property 5
Property 6

Property 5- Sample 2
Property 6- Sample 1

11/3/2017
11/3/2017

Property 6

Property 6- Sample 2

10/30/2017
10/30/2017

Property 7

Property 7- Sample 1

10/30/2017

Property 8

Property 8- Sample 1

11/2/2017

Property 8

Property 8- Sample 2

11/2/2017

Property 9

Property 9- Sample 2

11/21/2017

Property 9

Property 9- Sample 1

11/21/2017

Property 10

Property 10- Sample 1

10/30/2017

Property 10
Property 11

Property 10- Sample 2

10/30/2017

Property 11- Sample 1

10/30/2017

Property 12

Property 12- Sample 1

11/21/2017

Property 12
Property 13

Property 12- Sample 2

11/21/2017
11/ 2/2017

Properly 13

Property 13- Sample 2
Property 13- Sample 1

Property 14

Property 14- Sample 1

10/31/2017

Property 14

Property 14- Sample 1 (Duplicate)

10/31/2017

Properties 15 and 16
(double lot)

Property 15/16- Sample 1

11/3/2017

Properties 15 and 16
(double lot)

Properly 15/16- Sample 2

11/3/2017

Property 17

Property 17- Sample 1
Property 17- Sample 2

10/30/2017
10/30/2017

Property 18

Property 18- Sample 2

11/1/2017

Property 17

11/2/2017

 Property 18

Property 18- Sample 1

Property 19

Property 19- Sample 1

11/2/2017

Property 20

Property 20- Sample 2

11/21/2017

Property 20

Property 20- Sample 2 (Duplicate)

11/21/2017

Property 20

Property 20- Sample 1

11/21/2017

Property 21

Property 21- Sample 1

11/3/2017

Property 22

Property 22- Sample 2

10/31/2017

Properly 22

Property 22- Sample 1

10/31/2017

11/1/2017

Property 23

Property 23- Sample 1

10/31/2017

Property 24

Property 24- Sample 1

10/31/2017

Property 25

Properly 25- Sample 1

10/30/2017

Property 26

Property 26- Sample 2

11/1/2017

Property 26

Property 26- Sample 2 (Duplicate)

11/1/2017

Property 26

Property 26- Sample 1

11/1/2017

Property 27

Property 27- Sample 1

11/1/2017

Property 27

Property 27- Sample 1 (Duplicate)

11/1/2017

Property 28

Property 28- Sample 1

11/1/2017

Property 28

Property 28- Sample 1 (Duplicate)

11/1/2017

Property 29

Property 29- Sample 1

11/1/2017

Properly 30

Property 30- Sample 1

11/1/2017

J

Notes: Property addresses and sample IDs have been blinded to protect persona lly identifiable
information (PII).

Total number of properties
sampled in 2017:

30

Tota l number of properties
over 400 ppm:

25

Total number of properties
over 1200 ppm:

9

Total number of properties
over 1200 ppm with
sensitive populations:

5

 Attachment I

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Removal Action
Environmental Justice (EJ) Screen for Federated Metals Site
Hammond/Whiting, Lake County, Indiana
Original- March 2018

 EJSCREEN Report (Version 2017)
1 n-Jlo Ring Contorod a t -11.673830,•87.403717, INOIANA, EPA Region 5
Approximnlo Populnlion; 10,107
Input Arca (sq. milos): 3.14

Selcclc~d Variables

State
Percentile

EPA Region

Percentile

USA
Percentile

70
78

75
75

61
61

70
78
78

76
75
75

63
60
61

86
81

05
79

75
72

00
86

79

67
79

EJ Indexes

El Index for PM2.S
EJ lr.dex for Ozone
EJ Index for NATA. Diesel PM
EJ Index for NATA. /\Ir Toxics c.:inccr Risk
El Index for NATA. Respiratory ftazard Index
EJ Index for Traffic Proximity and Volume
EJ Index for Lead Paint Indicator
EJ Index for Superfund Proximity
El Index for RMP Proximity
EJ Index for Hazardous Waste Proximity
EJ Index for Wastewater DlscharRe Indicator

84

86
00

60

84

86

84

EJ Index for the Selected Asca Compared to All People's O!ockgroups In the State/Region/US
I I»

EJ lndt • U

State Percentile

Regional Percentile

•

USA

Percentile

•

l hls r(,port ~ 'l th~ velvtt for tm'lrnnrnt-r1t,I .md c .rnoc,rar,Uc lft.1katou aM f JSC..Rl f Uln1t11H. II sho.\"S ff't\..-onrr~ nul 1..nd d~rroJJ.' Ihie uw dJtl (P.1.. W
Ntlrr.JttJ concenaa:ion cl 01-otie n th~ all). "n.1 d~ ih:)WJ \\h.>t smce-rdle NCh ,aw dJt.J val~ rr-ptNtt1H. I~
p«ctntlts p1u ,ide Pfflt« tf\~ e n how th?
Wrt,d block. ,,cup or buff« NN con-p.utllOlhe c:·n~tre \lltt, [PA r~ n, ot n11kn. r« e-u mrlr-, If it itf\t1'1 butler, h •t !he 9Sth fltfCtnU1en,:JOM\1de, thh
rN\1-M thu on1y s J)ef<Nll o f tht USpo,ptj1tlcntus" l'tll htf Lbck crcupvWt tMnthe ll\<"flCf'pe,fKJ.n ln lhe loulla, brin1 ...n.3.) fltd. · ~ \ 'NIS
\\hkhtht
d1ta are avl h ltp,, M::I 11.e trLtdKICH u ~ d. v,ary auou tht-se ildk.1tcn. lmpo,t ~ t c.r,e us .md urctrt.wltk-1 •PPY 10 dJ, Kfttnln,&•I~ lrJam•!k,n. so II Is
Huntl~ IDll"ldtfUH'd t~ l ff'IUllor" on .:ir,rtct•f1tt•lnttf1Ut-L1tkm1 .and .1r11Mutlc taol 1hc-w, hdk~lon.. Pll"Jse> ~ f'EJSUU.Clldcxurtt r.C,UIM for dl,<ut.$lon of

'°'

tht"it" I\\UC1

lcfuct u!ln,: f t pt:Il f .

l,larth 19, 2018

l/3

 oEPA

~~
~

l'l«Kt'>1

-

EJSCREEN Report (Ve rsion 20 17)

1 mllo Ring Centered ot 41.673839,87.493717, INDIAllA, EPA Region 5

Approxlmato Population: 10,197
Input Area (sq. mlles): 3.14

!

'

........
4

l

.I

l

... .,
I

h,1 .

c.... .

..,,,.,.
.. .

.\

{ .~,• •• ,n

>•;•t

...

•

~

.

i. ,

~ r,11 111-..1 , __. ·, , ·

ft •• 11.,.

o~ry

...

1,1.uch 29. 2018

+

"',

'-... ,,
,:,.,,,.
I
'
••

•

o11 t~• JPoW
hul ru .. "t.

riil __ l , ; I ,,....,

""

:v..•Dn1, , '-.
,. u ,

~.i~~\ ~~r:.tr.1~11·.-:-:.~~,..~ f."•.... ,

Sites re porting to EPA
Superfund NPl
Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities (TSDF)

M etch 29, 2018

I

I

«.«

0

0
0

l /3

 oEPA~~1.rrrt(«ooi

EJSCREEN Rep ort (Version 2017)

1 mile RIng Cent ereI.I al 41.673839,•87.493717, INDIANA, EPA Re gion 5
Appro xlmat o Popu l nti on:

10,107

Inpu t Area (s q . m iles): 3. 14

Sel ected Variables

V alue

St ate

%lie In

Avg.

St ate

EPA

%He in

Region

EPA

AVf!.,

Re1!10 11

USA

%lie In

Avg.

USA

Envlronmental Indicat or s
Particulat e Matter (PM 2. s 1n11g/1n1)
Ozone (wb)
1

11 .6

10.9

95

10. 1

95

9.14

95

37.6

26

30.4

26

36.2

30.2

3

1.04

0.035

71

0.932 60-70th

NATA. cancer Risk (11reume 1l;kpe, mJlllon)

36

34

65

34 60-70th

40

NATA• Respirat ory Hazard Index

1.7

1.4

79

1.7 60-70th

1.0 50-60th

NATA• Diesel PM (11g/m

)

Traffic Proximity and Volume (daly t rafflccount/dlstanceto ,oad)

0.930 60-70th
<50th

690

250

92

370

07

690

82

Lead Paint Indicat or (96 Pre-19601tou11ng)

0.84

0.35

93

0.39

91

0.29

94

Suoerfu nd Proxi mity (shecount/hn dlm r.cel

0.10

0.16

79

0.13

05

0.13

03

5.2

0.81

99

0.81

99

0.73

99

0.10

0.070

92

0.091

09

0.093

89

0.0042

0.29

60

4.2

67

30

76

27%

79

29%

77

36%

63

06

25%

80

38%

62

84

34%

60
67

RMP Proxi mity ( racl lty coont/1.m <11tance)
Hazardous Wast e Proximity (facillly counr/km dhtance)
W astewat er Discharge Indicator
{todc hy-we:lghted concenttatlon/m dlrtancc)
Demographic In di cators
Dem ograp hic Inde x

40%

M inority Population

42%

Low Income Population

30%

35%

59

33%

4%

2%

B4

2",.(,

80

5%
13%

65

LlnRuist lcallv Isolated Populat ion
Populat ion Wit h Less Than HIRh School Educat ioJ\

19%

15%

12%

60

11%

75

Populat ion Under 5 years of age

7%

6%

59

6%

62

6%

60

Populat ion over 64 years of age

11%

14%

30

14%

37

14%

42

' The llational-Sc.:>le Air Tod n Ass<:Sllllcnt (tlATA) Is EPA's orttolng, cornp1che nsh-e cval ,otlon ofoll toxics in the United Sta tes. r PA tlweloptd the IIAlA to
pri01lti1e air to,ic,, t1nhsion souJCM, and locations of lntert-<t for f111tl1~r study. h Is lrnport,int to rl'mcmbc1thot IIATA povldcs IJ1oad c,sllmote1 of he,1hh ,111.,
over (ll'ogr.i,:hlc • ••• s of lhe country. not defl'lllM 1hl:s to spe<lflc lndh,idlJ.lls Of locatlon1. More Information on the IIAlA analy>i, can be found
at: http,://www.ep,.ga1/rutlona~• ~·tod cs-a1\ei, mtot.

For addit ional Information, see: ww w.epa.gov/cnvironmentaljust lce

EJS<.IUEtl I• a ml'<'14ns lool for p1~,clllro, I me only. II CilO help Identify arNs that m.1y wa11,1nt od:fllorul con, ldrraUon, arulysk. or outrNch. II ooes not
p1ovlde a b.1111 for d e<l1lon-rniling;tiu1II m,y hc'3 ldt-ntlfy potcntlal MNS of (J ccn,t rn. u~,s should l:.eep In mlrd that mcenlng tools aie subject to 1ub1tantlal
u~:enatnty In tln:11 deroog1a~A1tc and envlronrnental data, p,ullrnlOJly 1•,hen looklrtt a t srn.,tl geoJraplk a1N,. hnrc1tant rnvNls and unteit alnties applf to tl~s
scr<t:nlng~wel lnforrnatlon, so It h es.cnUal to undt-<sland the !Imitations en appror, late fnlc1p1et atlon, and applcatlons or these indita tors, l'lea1e sc,,
EJSCRHI~ docu, nem,llon for dlicu1slcn ul tht-se l1wes befofl' u~ng Jf1lDJtS. !his screening 10d doc,s not provl±, d ata on ,-,e,y ,.,.v!,onrnent,,1 hrpa,t and
demoar,,pNc fu tnr tlut rn..,y be rtlevant to a panlnJ ar locallcn. EJSCJlfflt o utpuis ihould be <Upplerncnted \\ilh .,d~hlon, I lnfo11na1lon a nd lot;il kn01,iccl~
be lore laking any action to addn,ss potential EJ conrrrns.

March 29. 20 18

3/3

 ATTACHMENT II
DETAILED CLEANUP CONTRACTOR ESTIMATE
HAS BEEN REDACTED – TWO PAGES

NOT RELEVANT TO SELECTION
OF REMOVAL ACTION

 ATTACHMENT III
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REMOVAL ACTION

ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
FOR THE .

FEDERATED METALS SITE
HAMMOND/WHITING, LAKE COUNTY, INDIANA
ORIGINAL
APRIL, 2018
~EMS ID:
SEMSID

DATE

AUTHOR

REC[PIENT

TJTLEffiESCRIPTION

940518

8/1/03

U.S. EPA

File

Lead-Contaminated Residential
Sites Handbook

2

940521

5/26/06

ENTACT LLC

ASARCO LLC

Corrective Measures Completion
Repmt

3

940517

8/1/07

U.S. Dept. of
Health & Human
Services

File

Toxicological Prolilc for Lead

4

940519

9/16/16

Cisneros, J., U.S.
EPA

801Ties, S., U.S.
EPA

Memo Re: CERCLA Referral Off-Site Soil Sampling Proximal
to a RCRA Site

5

938959

8/24/17

MicroVision
Laboratories, Inc.

Tetra Tch, Inc.

Forensic Report (REDACTED)

6

940522

12/20/17

Ellis, 1-1., Tetra
Tech, Inc.

Maguire, A., U.S.
EPA

Data Validation Report

7

940516

4/4/18

Maguire, A., U.S.
EPA

Ocborn, R.,
Indiana Dept. of
Environmental
Management

Letter Re: ARA RS for Federated
Metiils Site

Maguire, A., U.S.
EPA

Kaplan, R., U.S.
EPA

Action Memorandum re:
Request for Approval and
Funding ofa Time-Critical
Removal Action at the Federated
Metals Site

NO.

8

 ATTACHMENT IV

INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT COST ESTIMATE
HAS BEEN REDACTED – TWO PAGES

NOT RELEVANT TO SELECTION
OF REMOVAL ACTION