HRS DOCUMENTATION RECORD-REVIEW COVER SHEET
Name of Site: U.S. Smelter and Lead Refinery, Inc. (USS Lead)
Contact Persons
Site Investigation: Mark Jaworski, Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM), Site
Investigation, (317) 233-2407
Documentation Record: Laura Ripley, United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region V, (312)
886-6040
Mark Jaworski, IDEM, Site Investigation, (317) 233-2407
Pathways. Components, or Threats Not Scored
The ground water migration pathway, the soil exposure pathway, and the drinking water threat and human food
chain threat of the surface water pathway were not scored as part of this Hazard Ranking System (HRS) evaluation.
These pathways/components were not included because a release to these media does not significantly affect the
overall site score and because the environmental threat component of the surface water migration pathway and the
air pathway produce an overall site score well above the minimum required for the site to qualify for inclusion on the
National Priorities List (NPL). These pathways are of concern to EPA and may be evaluated during future
investigations.
Note: The air pathway documents an observed release of lead at USS Lead (See Section 6.1.1 of this HRS
documentation record). This is further supported by evidence of soil contamination, both on and off the property in
the vicinity of USS Lead. Levels of lead which may pose a threat to nearby individuals have been documented on
the USS Lead property, as well as on nearby residential areas. Residential soil lead levels ranged from as low as
62.6 mg/kg (background level) to as high as 1680 mg/kg [Refs. 64, pp. 3-3, 4-5 to 4-6, 4-9 to 4-11, Appendix D; 81,
Table 3, Figures 4a, 4b, 8a,8b & 9, Appendix E Tables E-l, E-2 & E-3; 82, pp. 7, 8, 9, Table 1 (p. 58); 94, pp 003 to
018, 044, 048, 049, 050, 052 to 055, 057 to 060, 063, 065 to 070, 072, 073, 075 to 079, 086, 087, 090, 092, 093,
110],Until a more comprehensive study can be done, however, elevated lead levels in the residential soils will not be
used in the overall site score.
-------
HRS DOCUMENTATION RECORD
Name of Site:
EPA Identification No.:
EPA Region:
Street Address of Site:
County/State/Zip Code:
U.S. Smelter and Lead Refinery, Inc.
IND047030226
Date Prepared: September 2008
Date Revised: April 2009
5300 Kennedy Avenue* (Refs. 67, p. 004; 68, p. 1)
Lake County, Indiana, 46312
General Location in the State: Northwestern Indiana (Refs. 17; 18; 19; 20)
Topographic Map:
Latitude:
Site Reference Point:
Congressional District:
Highland, Indiana Quad (7.5') (Ref. 18)
N41°37'0.33"Longitude: W87°27'50.57" (Ref. 106)
Approximate center of the source area
01
* The street address, coordinates, and contaminant locations presented in this HRS documentation record
identify the general area the site is located. They represent one or more locations EPA considers to be part
of the site based on the screening information EPA used to evaluate the site for NPL listing. EPA lists
national priorities among the known "releases or threatened releases" of hazardous substances; thus, the
focus is on the release, not precisely delineated boundaries. A site is defined as where a hazardous
substance has been "deposited, stored, placed, or otherwise come to be located." Generally, HRS scoring
and the subsequent listing of a release merely represent the initial determination that a certain area may
need to be addressed under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA). Accordingly, EPA contemplates that the preliminary description of facility boundaries at the
time of scoring will be refined as more information is developed as to where the contamination has come to
be located.
SITE SCORING SUMMARY
Pathway Scores:
Air Pathway
Ground Water Pathway
Soil Exposure Pathway
Surface Water Pathway
HRS SITE SCORE
100.00
NS
NS
60.00
58.31
1
-------
WORKSHEET FOR COMPUTING HRS SITE SCORE
s sf
1. Ground Water Migration Pathway Score (Sgw)
2a. Surface Water Overland/Flood Migration Component 60.00 3600.00
(from Table 4-1, line 30)
2b. Ground Water to Surface Water Migration Component
(from Table 4-25, line 28)
2c. Surface Water Migration Pathway Score (Ssw) 60.00 3600.00
Enter the larger of lines 2a and 2b as the pathway score.
3. Soil Exposure Pathway Score (Ss)
(from Table 5-1, line 22)
4. Air Migration Pathway Score (Sa) 100.00 10000.00
(from Table 6-1, line 12)
5. Total of Sgw2 + Ssw2 + Ss2 + Sa2 13600.00
6. HRS Site Score 58.31
Divide the value on line 5 by 4 and take the square root
2
-------
TABLE 4-1
SURFACE WATER OVERLAND/FLOOD MIGRATION COMPONENT SCORESHEET
Factor Categories and Factors
Maximum Value
Value Assisned
DRINKING WATER THREAT
Likelihood of Release
1. Observed Release
550
550
2. Potential to Release by Overland Flow
2a. Containment
10
2b. Runoff
25
2c. Distance to Surface Water
25
2d. Potential to Release by Overland Flow (lines 2a x
(2b + 2c))
500
3. Potential to Release by Flood
3a. Containment (Flood)
10
3b. Flood Frequency
50
3c. Potential to Release by Flood
(lines 3a x 3b)
500
4. Potential to Release
(lines 2d + 3c, subject to a maximum of 500)
500
5. Likelihood of Release
(higher of lines 1 and 4)
550
550
Waste Characteristics
6. Toxicity/Persistence
a
NS
7. Hazardous Waste Quantity
a
NS
8. Waste Characteristics
100
NS
Tareets
9. Nearest Intake
50
NS
10. Population
10a. Level I Concentrations
b
NS
10b. Level II Concentrations
b
NS
10c. Potential Contamination
b
NS
lOd. Population
(lines 10a + 10b + 10c)
b
NS
11. Resources
5
NS
12. Targets (lines 9 + lOd +11)
b
NS
Factor Categories and Factors
Maximum Value
DRINKING WATER THREAT (Concluded)
Drinkine Water Threat Score
13. Drinking Water Threat Score
((lines 5 x 8 x 12)/82,500, subject to a maximum of 100)
100
NS
HUMAN FOOD CHAIN THREAT
Likelihood of Release
14. Likelihood of Release
(same value as line 5)
550
550
3
-------
Waste Characteristics
15.
Toxicity /Persistence/Bioaccumulation
a
NS
16.
Hazardous Waste Quantity
a
NS
17.
Waste Characteristics
1,000
NS
Tareets
18.
Food Chain Individual
50
NS
19.
Population
19a. Level I Concentrations
b
NS
19b. Level II Concentrations
b
NS
19c. Potential Human Food Chain Contamination
b
NS
19d. Population
(lines 19a + 19b + 19c)
b
NS
20.
Targets (lines 18 + 19d)
b
NS
Human Food Chain Threat Score
21.
Human Food Chain Threat Score
((lines 14 x 17 x 20)/82,500, subject to a maximum of
100)
100
NS
Factor Categories and Factors
Maximum Value
Value Assisned
ENVIRONMENTAL THREAT
Likelihood of Release
22.
Likelihood of Release
(same value as line 5)
550
550
Waste Characteristics
23.
Ecosystem Toxicity/Persistence/
Bioaccumulation
a
500,000,000
24.
Hazardous Waste Quantity
a
100
25.
Waste Characteristics
1,000
320
Tareets
26.
Sensitive Environments
26a. Level I Concentrations
b
0
26b. Level II Concentrations
b
150
26c. Potential Contamination
b
0
26d. Sensitive Environments
(lines 26a + 26b + 26c)
b
27.
Targets (value from 26d)
b
150
Environmental Threat Score
28.
Environmental Threat Score
((lines 22 x 25 x 27)/82,500, subject to a maximum of 60)
60
60.00
SURFACE WATER OVERLAND/FLOOD MIGRATION COMPONENT SCORE FOR A WATERSHED
29.
Watershed Score0
(lines 13 +21 +28,
subject to a maximum of 100)
100
60.00
SURFACE WATER OVERLAND/FLOOD MIGRATION COMPONENT SCORE
30.
Component Score (S0f)°,
(highest score from line 29 for all watersheds evaluated,
subject to a maximum of 100)
100
60.00
4
-------
aMaximum= value applies to waste characteristics category.
bMaximum value not applicable.
cDo not round to nearest integer.
Table 6-1 —Air Migration Pathway Scoresheet
Factor categories and factors
Maximum Value
Value Assigned
Likelihood of Release:
1. Observed Release
550
550
2. Potential to Release:
2a. Gas Potential to Release
500
2b. Particulate Potential to Release
500
2c. Potential to Release (higher of lines 2a and 2b)
500
3. Likelihood of Release (higher of lines 1 and 2c)
550
550
Waste Characteristics:
4. Toxicity/Mobility
(a)
200
5. Hazardous Waste Quantity
(a)
100
6. Waste Characteristics
100
10
Targets:
7. Nearest Individual
50
50
8. Population:
8a. Level I Concentrations
(b)
2810
8b. Level II Concentrations
(b)
8c. Potential Contamination
(c)
8d. Population (lines 8a + 8b + 8c)
(b)
2860
9. Resources
5
10.
Sensitive Environments:
10a. Actual Contamination
(c)
10b. Potential Contamination
(c)
10c. Sensitive Environments (lines 10a + 10b)
(c)
11.
Targets (lines 7 + 8d + 9 + 10c)
(b)
2860
Air Migration Pathway Score:
12. Pathway Score (Sa) [(lines 3 x 6 x ll)/82,500]d
100
100.00
a Maximum value applies to waste characteristics category
b Maximum value not applicable
°No specific maximum value applies to factor. However, pathway score based solely on sensitive environments
is limited to a maximum of 60.
d Do not round to nearest integer
5
-------
Figure 2-1 USS Refinery
1990 Aerial Photograph
mm
QakJiffietRivef
EaBt Chicago
Mapped by: Diane C'sbcrn. IDEM. Cf5ca c: Laud Quality,
In c.oa sr-ns; -k G1S Sam res May 2COB
I Sources:
National Hydrography D ataset (NKD)
Indiana DBpirtzasu: of 7razspartiticc. State Boundary
1990 Ascisi Photography
Proce33_De3crtpttem:
The 5bur-volume report titled 'Nartnu-est Isdazza Site Im.-BC.inry and
Landuse Landcovor Study (SPA, 1991} wk provided by personnel of IDEM to
personnel of cbftIGS, as pet of a contract with IDEM and USAGE bo pro chic; a
GIS database.
IG-S personnel fleaanod ii& hi static zl aerial photos ted mylzr mvdajs
contaizins I2r.d-.ae desisnado&i and -a-aste-sire invertoriss. The inages w&re
produced it a resoLnricn of 690 dpi and -.Tar; savedis lit ? fomsst
The ESEJ AjcGIS (f 9.1) GecraiBrsucinE 1ooL wis disc, ass-dlc gectefsrccre tie
zonal pcotogt2phs. «ang ths 2-M3 National AaricukuTal Trr.i pary Program
(NAIP) color zerialphotographs is tie "base data. Tee de tz.nl t transfematien
methoel nznssd '1st Qrdar Polynomial (ASine)" was used The coordinate
systemteat was usedis UTM Zone 16,NAD 83. Qn average, 2C control points
were used to geocefstenre each c f-he historical zsciai scot oar apis.
ESRI Arc Catalog was then used to ere ice the pcsoual geodatabase raster
catalog GRAND_CAL_AHJALS_1990- ESRI Arr Catalog was thai. used to
Load all of she individual 199C sen a] photographs inco the raster c stale 3 for the
BintitB studv area
Slag Waste Pile
{Source 1)
Refer bock:
I D - TSD RCRA Inspection Report US.5 Lead 3.e finer,-, Inn.
21 - MearKtritiicham to Fil& (Ecology zrd Environment. Inc.)
23 - MecoorancLzn to File (E & E)
24 -Irsroffice memarand'ecn Review of Labor iron,- Results for U-S.S. Lead Refinery
Company,
to Mike Sidcels
38 - Final USS Lead Modified RCRA Facility Investigation (MRFI) Rspcct
43 - letter isitc. attachments Michael Muk'dka (IPA)
45 - L^ijicon Report U S.S. Lead Refinery. Inc
77 - MKJI Work Plan Addendum
78 - MRFI Report 2nd Interim Stabilization Measure Report
10® - USS Lead Slag File Sarface Water Drainage
Disclaimer: Ibis inzp does not represent a legal docmnant. It as mlecdedto serve as an aid in
graphic representation only. It is roc warranted Ear acc'jx&cy or suitabiliiy 5cr any purpose.
US Smelter & Lead Refinery, Inc. (USS Lead)
East Chicago, Lake County, IN
EPA ID: IND 047030226
Pre Demolition/Remediation of Facility
e
-------
Aerial view of facility in March of 1986
Figure 2-2 Facility Features (as of 1986) (Ref. 65, Figure 2-2)
1 Tank Houaa
2 Store BuMog
3 Maintonano* Shop
4 Foundation aI S»v*r Rat.
8 Talurlum tMdg.
8 Satisfy BrMkar Bklg
7 CXftc*
• By-Ptoducb Btdj
0 Baghow
10 Mixad Ma tab Btig
SITE FEATURES
7
-------
Figure 2-3 Source Map (as of 1991) (Ref. 65, Figure 2-3)
0 500 400 600
LEGEND
iwioytt wot
tmmam of mmcm % 2
8
-------
US Smelter & Lead Refinery, Inc. (USS Lead)
East Chicago, Lake County, IN
EPA ID: IND 047030226
Approximate Property Boundary Map
East Chicago
Remediated
Slag Waste Pile
{Source 1)
:
Referent 7B- MRB Report and interim Stahlllzallon Measure Report
References:
1D- TSD RCRA Inspection Report US.S. Lead Refinery. Inc.
21 - Memorandum Id File (Ecology and ETNtranment, Inc.)
23- Memorandum to File (E& E) :
24 -mterarnce memorandum Review of Lafcoratcry Results- for U.S.S. -
Lead Renner>' Company, to MIKeSictels
36 - Final USS Lead Modified RCRA Facility Investigation (MRFlj Report
43- Letter wtlh attachments to Mtehael Muiuika |EPA>
45 - LRJgaitefi Report, U.S.S. Lead Refinery, tnc.
77- MRFI Won Plan Addendum
76 - MRFI Report and interim StabllzaStan Measure Report
106 - USS Lead Slag Pile Surface Water Drainage
Disclaimer "mis map dees not represent a legal document, it Is intended
to serve as an aid in grapfiic represenaBon only. It is not warranted Tor
accuracy or stftafilllty for any purpo&e.
Mapped by: Otane O&torr, IDEM, once of Land Qualty,
Engineertng & GIS Services, May 2309
Sources:
Natkxid Hydrography Dalaset (NHD)
Inflana Department of Transportation Stale Boundary
2005 Indiana Onnqjtiot^aphy ilncfanaMap
Frame wort Data Wrt'ft'.lljdflaT gC.'Jry
Reference 77 - MRFI Wortc Plan Addendum
-------
REFERENCES
Reference
Number Description of the Reference
1. EPA, Hazard Ranking System, Final Rule 40 CFR 300, Appendix A, 55 FR 51532,
December 14, 1990. 142 pages.
2. EPA, Superfund Chemical Data Matrix (SCDM), January 28, 2004.
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/hrsres/tools/scdm.htm Accessed 02/26/2008. 11
pages, excerpt.
3. Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board Monthly Monitoring Report for NPDES Discharge
Permits of U.S. S. Lead Refinery, Inc., East Chicago, Indiana, October, November,
December 1986. 9 pages.
4. United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Motion of Plaintiff United
States for Partial Summary Judgment, for U.S.S. Lead Refinery, Inc., Civil Action No. H
85-0469, October 31, 1985. 36 pages.
5. Gnaedinger, Robert J., Field Investigation Report (Finals Concerning Distribution of Lead
(Pb) at U.S. Smelting Lead Refining. Inc.. Hazardous Waste Investigations Section, EEI
Branch of S & A Division - Region V, August 27, 1980. 11 pages.
6. Hall, Cynthia, Plan Review and Permit Section, State Board of Health, Indianapolis, Indiana,
office memorandum, to U.S.S. Lead Refinery, Inc. RCRA file, EPA ID: IND047030266,
July 12, 1985. 2 pages.
7. Monteen, Timothy, U.S. Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Chicago District,
letter, to the Director of the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board, October 31, 1978. 1
page.
8. Lamm, David, Solid Waste Management Section, Indiana State Board of Health, letter to
Timothy Monteen, U.S. Department of Army Corps of Engineers, Chicago District,
November 22, 1978. 1 page.
9. Palin, Bruce. Memorandum to U.S.S. Lead Refinery, Inc., East Chicago, Indiana, December
27, 1978. 1 page.
10. Indiana State Board of Health (ISBH), TSD RCRA Inspection Report U.S.S. Lead Refinery.
Inc.. EPA ID: IND047030226, September 27, 1985. 20 pages (missing pages 15 and 17).
11. EPA, Region V, Environmental Regulatory Review Grand Calumet River and Indiana
Harbor Canal. Great Lakes National Program Office, October 1982. 68 pages.
12. EPA, Region V, Master Plan for Improving Water Quality in the Grand Calumet
River/Indiana Harbor Canal. January 1985. 163 pages.
13. EPA, Region V, Site Inspection, U.S.S. Lead Refinery, Inc., Central Field Investigations
Section, Central District Office, Environmental Services Division, January 10, 1984. 5
pages.
14. Hancock, Daniel F., Vic Windle, and Ed Surla, Fugitive Dust Test Report in the Vicinity of
U.S. S. Lead Refinery. Inc.. East Chicago. Indiana, conducted by Emissions Sampling
Section (ESS), Air Pollution Control Division (APCD), ISBH, September 16, 1985. 27
pages.
10
-------
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29
30
31
32
33.
Air Pollution Control Division, Field Inspection Report, May 7, 1985. 1 page.
City of East Chicago, Indiana, Department of Air Quality Control, Routine Inspection Form,
August 2, 1984. 2 pages.
United States Geological Survey (USGS), Calumet City, IL-IN Quadrangle, 7.5 Minutes
Series: 1:24,000. 1998. 1 page.
USGS, Highland, Indiana Quadrangle, 7.5 Minute Series: 1:24,000. 1998. 1 page.
USGS, Lake Calumet, IL-IN Quadrangle, 7.5 Minute Series: 1:24,000. 1997. 1 page.
USGS, Whiting, Indiana Quadrangle, 7.5 Minute Series: 1:24,000. 1998. 1 page.
Bieze, C.F., Ecology and Environment, Inc. (E & E), memorandum to File, June 13, 1985. 2
pages.
Resource Consultants, Inc., Site Assessment Plaa U.S.S. Lead Refinery, Inc., East Chicago,
Indiana, August 3, 1990. 137 pages.
Mueller, Don, E & E, memorandum to File, EPA, Region V, December 22, 1982. 6 pages.
Raveed, Dan, Chemical Evaluation Section, Indiana Department of Environmental
Management (IDEM), Interoffice memorandum Review of Laboratory Results for U.S.S.
Lead Refining Company, to Michael Sickels, Enforcement Section, IDEM, March 31, 1987.
41 pages.
Hudack, David C., Supervisor, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior,
letter to Harry Atkinson, Chief, Site Investigation Section, Office of Solid and Hazardous
Waste, IDEM, February 24, 1989. 2 pages.
Warner, Ted, Compliance Monitoring Section, IDEM, memorandum to RCRA file, August
1, 1986. 3 pages.
EPA, Boice, Richard E., Chemical Engineer, EEIB, memorandum RCRA/ISS Inspection of
USS Lead Refinery, to Rich Shandross, Site Investigation Office, Indiana, Waste
Management Bureau, March 27, 1981. 30 pages.
EPA, Site Inspection Report. EPA form No. 2070-13, prepared by Curtis Michols,
November 25, 1985. 15 pages.
E & E, Field Investigations of Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites, Sampling Results for
U.S.S. Lead Refinery, Inc., May 1982. 9 pages.
Steels, R.D., Plant Engineer, U.S.S. Lead Refinery, Inc., letter to Jim Hunt, Water Pollution
Control Division, ISBH, February 4, 1977. 2 pages.
Williams, Harry D., Technical Secretary, Division of Land Pollution Control (LPCD), ISBH,
memorandum to Air Pollution Control Board (APCB), ISBH, July 2, 1985. 16 pages.
EPA, Inspection Report of Hammond Lead and U.S.S. Lead Refining Soil Survey.
Hammond, Indiana and East Chicago, Indiana, October 15, 1985. 18 pages.
Warner, Ted, Compliance Monitoring Section, IDEM, memorandum to U.S.S. Lead
Refinery, Inc., RCRA File, IND047030226, East Chicago, Indiana, December 21, 1988. 6
pages.
11
-------
34.
35
36.
37.
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47.
48
49
50
51
Resource Consultants, Inc., Revised Closure Plan. forBaghouse Dust and Calcium Sulfate
Sludge Waste, U.S.S. Lead Refinery, Inc., East Chicago, Indiana, January 17, 1991. 16
pages.
Bidwell, Donald J., Vice President-General Manager, U.S.S. Lead Refinery, Inc., Waste Pile
Closure Plan. U.S.S. Lead Refinery, Inc., East Chicago, Indiana, August 13, 1982. 5 pages.
Nygard, Dean, U.S. Lead Refinery, Inc., site photographs, ISBH, September 9, 1977. 20
pages.
Harris Publishing Company, Harris Indiana Industrial Directory. Twinsburg, Ohio, 1986.
Excerpt, 9 pages.
Geochemical Solutions, Final USS Lead Modified RCRA Facility Investigation (MRFI)
Report, March 1, 2004. 882 pages.
Hurt, Oral G., Technical Secretary, Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board, National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit No. IN0032425, June 10, 1975. 1
page.
Schaefer, Robert B., Regional Counsel, and Charles B. Sutfin, Water Division Director,
EPA, memorandum to Valdas V. Adamkus, Regional Administrator, EPA, Litigation
Report: United States Smelting Lead Refinery, Inc., September 28, 1984. 3 pages.
Jackson, Wilma, Office Manager, Harbison Walker Refractories, telephone conversation,
contacted by Mike Dieckhaus of E & E, July 23, 1991. 1 page.
Bohr, E. A., Technical Secretary, Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board NPDES permit
No. IN0032425, March 29, 1985. 1 page.
McGuire, John J., Environmental Engineer, Central District Office, EPA, letter with
attachment to Michael Mikulka, Chief of the Compliance Section, EPA, September 28,
1990. 3 pages.
Kovach, Ronald D., Environmental Scientist, Water Division. EPA, Affidavit, United States
Smelting Lead Refinery, Inc., and attachment, May 12, 1986. 42 pages.
Dunham, Eric, Assistant Region Counsel, EPA, and Ronald Kovach, Environmental
Scientist, Water Division, EPA, Litigation Report, U.S.S. Lead Refinery, Inc., and
attachment, undated. 134 pages.
Golubski, Gerald R., Environmental Engineer, Central District Office, EPA, Compliance
Sampling Inspection Report, U.S.S. Lead Refinery, March 5, 1985. 27 pages.
Steiner, Charles, Aquatic Biologist, Central Regional Laboratory, EPA, letter to Ed
DiDomenico, Water Quality Branch, EPA, January 30, 1984. 2 pages.
U.S.S. Lead Refinery, Inc., Discharge Monitoring Reports for NPDES Discharge Permits,
Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board January, 1984 to April, 1985. 32 pages.
Jaworski, Mark, IDEM. USS Lead Site HRS - Potentially exposed population for the air
pathway, and the distance from USS Lead, August 7, 2008. 2 pages.
Vick, Rebecca, Bankrupt U.S.S. Lead in East Chicago agrees to pay fine in lawsuit
settlement, "Hammond Times", Volume B-2, July 4, 1991. 1 page.
Giammaria, Ann, Secretary, W. R. Grace, East Chicago, Indiana, telephone conversation,
contacted by Steve Mclntire, IDEM, February 14, 2008. 1 page.
12
-------
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
Williamson, Bob, Plant Manager, RESCO Products Inc., Hammond, Indiana, telephone
conversation, contacted by Steve Mclntire, IDEM, February 14, 2008. 1 page.
Haan, Rich, Plant Manager, Universal SVCS, East Chicago, Indiana, telephone
conversation, contacted by Steve Mclntire, IDEM, February 12, 2008. 1 page.
C., Ronnie, Secretary, Calregion Supply Inc., East Chicago, Indiana, telephone conversation,
contacted by Steve Mclntire, IDEM, February 14, 2008. 1 page.
Lobewinski, Joe, Sales Department, Pinder Polyurethane & Plastics, East Chicago, Indiana,
telephone conversation, contacted by Steve Mclntire, IDEM, February 14, 2008. 1 page.
Plant, Angie, Secretary, Central Rent A Crane Inc., Hammond, Indiana, telephone
conversation, contacted by Steve Mclntire, IDEM, February 26, 2008. 1 page.
Arzon, Chary, Secretary, Meretic Corporation, East Chicago, Indiana, telephone
conversation, contacted by Steve Mclntire, IDEM, February 12, 2008. 1 page.
Ulm, Judy, Secretary, St. Mary's School, East Chicago, Indiana, telephone conversation,
contacted by Steve Mclntire, IDEM, February 25, 2008. 1 page.
Cartagene, Connie, Secretary, Block Junior High School, East Chicago, Indiana, telephone
conversation, contacted by Steve Mclntire, IDEM, February 25, 2008. 1 page.
Jenkins, Kanisha, School City of Hammond Administrative Center, Hammond, Indiana,
telephone conversation, contacted by Steve Mclntire, IDEM, February 25, 2008. 1 page.
Donnely, Mrs., Secretary, Edison Elementary School, Hammond, Indiana, telephone
conversation, contacted by Steve Mclntire, IDEM, February 25, 2008. 1 page.
May, Diane, Secretary, St. Catherine of Siena School, Hammond, Indiana, telephone
conversation, contacted by Steve Mclntire, IDEM, February 26, 2008. 1 page.
Vele, Margie, Secretary, West Side Junior High School, East Chicago, Indiana, telephone
conversation, contacted by Steve Mclntire, IDEM, February 25, 2008. 1 page.
IDEM, Expanded Site Inspection, USS Lead, April 2008. 256 pages.
EPA, HRS Documentation Record for USS Lead, August 30, 1991, 71 pages.
EPA, Referral of RCRA Subtitle C Corrective Action Facility to CERCLA, June 24, 2004.
4 pages.
IDEM, Adoption of Partial Interim Agreed Order (N-296), IDEM vs USS Lead, April 10,
1990. 23 pages.
EPA, Administrative Order on Consent: In the Matter of: U.S.S. Lead Refinery, Inc.,
November 18, 1993. 109 pages.
IDEM, Mark Jaworski, Telephone conversation with Brian Freeny, EPA, May 22, 2008. 1
page.
EPA, Designation of a Corrective Action Management Unit (CAMU) and Interim
Stabilization Measures Workplan, November 13, 1996. 22 pages.
EPA, Design Plan and Specifications for CAMU, July 29, 1998. 2 pages.
13
-------
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
USS Lead, USS Lead Refinery Site - Area A Remediation Plan, January 17, 2000. 37 pages.
IDEM, Area A Remediation Work Plan, February 18, 2000. 3 pages.
IDEM, USS Lead Wetlands Probable Point of Entry to Lead Concentration Map 2,
December 2007. 1 page.
IDEM, USS Lead Background Sample Location Report, August 3, 2007. 101 pages.
Arc GIS 9.2 Webhelp Topic, Mapping and visualization, Measuring distances and areas,
http://webhelp.esri.eom/arcgisdesktop/9.2/index.cfm?tocVisable=0&ID=245&TopicName=
Measuring%20distances%20and%20areas&pid=240 Accessed 04/02/2008. 2 pages.
Capiro, Mirtha, EPA, Modified RCRA Facility Investigation (MRFI) Work Plan Addendum,
letter to Norman Johnson, July 2, 2003. 3 pages.
Capiro, Mirtha, EPA, MRFI Report and Interim Stabilization Measures Report, letter to
Norman S. Johnson, August 31, 2004. 35 pages.
EPA, Documentation of Environmental Indicator Determination, RCRA Corrective Action
Environmental Indicator (EI) RCRIS code (CA 725) Human Health Exposures Under
Control, September 30, 2004. 10 pages.
USS Lead, Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifests IND047030226, multiple dates in 1991 and
1992. 256 pages.
Mikulka, Michael J., P.E., EPA, and Capiro, Mirtha, EPA, Report onX-Ray Fluorescence
Field Study of Selected Properties in Vicinity of Former USS Lead Refinery Facility, East
Chicago, Indiana, October 2003. 82 pages.
EPA, Quality Assurance Project Plan, USS Lead Refinery Inc. and Vicinity, July 2003.
Released April 16, 2004. 71 pages.
EPA, Addendum 1 to Final Report ON X-Ray Fluorescence Field Study of Selected
Properties In Vicinity of Former USS Lead Refinery Facility, East Chicago, Indiana, June
14, 2004. 9 pages.
EPA, Addendum to the Referral of RCRA Subtitle C Corrective Action Facility to
CERCLA, September 27, 2006. 7 pages.
IDEM, Telephone conversations between Steve Mclntire (IDEM) and various personnel
regarding the number of employees and students at particular addresses in East Chicago,
Indiana, February 11, 12, 26, 29, March 4, 2008. 12 pages.
USGS and US Department of the Interior, Quality of the Grand Calumet River, Lake
County, Indiana and Cook County, Illinois, October 1984. 174 pages.
U. S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory
Map, Highland Quadrangle, November 1981. 1 Page.
EPA. 40 CFR 230.3 (Definitions), July 1, 2004 Edition. 2 pages.
Smith, Jim R., Ph.D., IDEM to Jaworski, Mark, IDEM, USS Lead Additional Info, March 5,
2008. 4 pages.
E&E, Telephone conversation between Mike Driskhous (E&E) and Tom Race (Dupont),
July 23, 1991. 1 page.
14
-------
91. Smith, Jim. R., IDEM Office Memorandum to Jaworski, Mark, IDEM, USS Lead Site, East
Chicago, Lake County , Indiana, March, 12, 2008. 95 pages.
92. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey of Lake County,
Indiana, July 1972. 6 pages, excerpt.
93. Federal Register Notice, EPA, 40 CFR Part 300,
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/p9202Q7.htm, February 7, 1992. Accessed March
12, 2008. 18 pages.
94. EPA, USS Lead (IN) Analytical Data to Jaworski, Mark, IDEM, February 29, 2008. 155
pages.
95. Metcalfe, Fran, IDEM, Office Memorandum to Jaworski, Mark, IDEM, Evaluation of
ESAT's CLP Data Package Completeness Report, Case #37004, March 14, 2008. 2 pages.
96. Strecker, Jacqueline, ISBH, Office Memorandum to McPhail, Warren, ISBH, Process
Meteorological Data to Assist in the Evaluation of the USS Lead Facility in Hammond,
Indiana, August 20, 1985. 6 pages.
97. Williams, Harry D., ISBH, Office Memorandum to Strecker, Jacqueline, ISBH, USS Lead
Refinery in East Chicago, Indiana, October 21, 1985. 3 pages.
98. Harsha, Shri, ISBH, Office Memorandum to Titus, Barry J., ISBH, Lead SIP - Fugitive
Emissions, January 30, 1985. 2 pages.
99. IDEM, Air Sample Location Map, July 2008, 1 page.
100. Department of Air Quality Control, City of East Chicago, Indiana, Routine Inspection Form,
August 30. 1 page.
101. ScienceDirect. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science? ob=ArticleURL& udi=B6V78-
4FC3S0W-
5& user=10& coverDate=06%2F15%2F2005& rdoc=l& fmt=& orig=search& sort=d&v
iew=c& acct=C000050221& version=l& urlVersion=0& userid=10&md5=2e4b65f5f321
ea67f4fc8bddca878f75. Harvard Medical School, Michael B. Rabinowitz, Lead Isotopes in
Soils Near Five Historic American Lead Smelters, Received July 20, 2004; accepted
November 15, 2004; available online January 29, 2005. 14 pages.
102. American Journal of Public Health. Eckel, William P., MS, Rabinowitz, Michael B., PhD,
Foster, Gregory D., PhD, Discovering Unrecognized Lead-Smelting Sites by Historical
Methods, April 2001. 3 pages.
103. Collier, Shannon, Rill, & Scott, Attorneys-at-Law, State of Indiana Lead SIP, May 22, 1986.
27 pages.
104. Collier, Shannon, Rill, & Scott, Attorneys-at-Law, Indiana Lead SIP, June 3, 1986. 18
pages.
105. IDEM, USS Lead, Wetlands Area within Quarter Mile Radius Map, March 2008. 1 page.
106. IDEM, Site Location Map, Arc GIS 9.2, May 2008, 1 page.
107. Maupin, Marty, IDEM. Electronic Mail Message to Sickels, Mike et al, IDEM. Field Notes
for USS Lead Sampling, Sample descriptions of SD1 through SD7. November 16, 2007. 2
pages.
15
-------
108. Sickels, Mike, IDEM. Electronic Mail Message to Mark Jaworski, IDEM. USS Lead Slag
Pile Surface Water Drainage. May 22, 2008. 1 page.
109. Andrews & Kurth, Letter to Mr. Larry G. Reed, EPA. NPL for Uncontrolled Hazardous
Waste Sites - Proposed Rule No. 12 U.S.S. Lead Refinery, Inc. March 19, 1993. 2 pages.
110. IDEM, Office Memorandum from Smith, Jim to Jaworski, Mark. HRS Wetlands near USS
Lead Site, East Chicago, Lake County, Indiana. May 29, 2008. 2 pages.
111. IDEM. Office Memorandum from Smith, Jim to Jaworski, Mark. USS Lead Site HRS-
Sensitive Environment: Habitat Known to be Used by a State Designated Endangered or
Threatened Species. June 3, 2008. 2 pages.
112. IDEM. Office Memorandum from Smith, Jim to Jaworski, Mark. USS Lead Site HRS-
Particular Areas, Relatively Small in Size, Important to Maintenance of Unique Biotic
Communities. June 3, 2008. 11 pages.
113. Jaworski, Mark, IDEM. Electronic Mail Message to Laura Ripley, EPA. Sanborn Map
Review. June 9, 2008. 9 pages.
114. Jaworski, Mark, IDEM. Electronic Mail Message to Laura Ripley, EPA. Sanborn Maps,
Glidden Co. June 10, 2008. 3 pages.
115. IDEM. Sample Field Sheets for the USS Lead ESI sampling event, November 2007. 60
pages.
16
-------
Site Summary
The U.S. Smelter and Lead Refinery, Inc. (USS Lead) site (CERCLIS ID No. IND047030226) consists of
releases of lead from sources resulting from facility operations. All operations associated with the facility
were terminated in December 1985 (Refs. 22, p. 017; 64, p. 11; 65, p. 019; 66, p. 3; 68, p. 5; 81, p. 007; 84, p.
003). Prior to cessation of operations, USS Lead consisted of a primary lead smelting and refinery facility
from the early 1900s to 1973, and was subsequently converted to a secondary lead refinery, which began
recovering lead from scrap metal and used automotive batteries (Refs. 22, pp. 007, 014, 016; 45, p. 5; 64, p.
11; 65, p. 019; 68, p. 5; 81, p. 1; 84, p. 003).
The EPA Superfund program prepared an HRS documentation record for the USS Lead site, dated August 30,
1991, as part of the February 7, 1992 proposal to the NPL (Refs. 65; 84, p. 003; 93, pp. 1, 16; 109). A request
was subsequently made on behalf of USS Lead to defer consideration of the proposed listing of USS Lead
(Ref. 109, p. 2).
A 39+/- acre wetland, is present on the southern portion of the facility property. This area meets the criteria for
a wetland as defined in 40 CFR Section 230.3 (Refs. 1, p. 51625; 91, pp. 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 49, 51, 53, 55, 57, 59,
61, 62, 63; 88; 110). This area is inundated and/or saturated by surface water at frequency and duration
sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances does support, a prevalence of vegetation typically
adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. This portion of the property contains hydrophytes in both hydric
and non-hydric soils (Refs. 88; 91, pp. 47 through 61). National Wetland Inventory Maps published by the U.
S. Fish and Wildlife Service indicate that this wetland is designated as freshwater emergent wetland (Ref. 87).
This wetland meets the definition of a wetland as defined in 40 CFR 230.3, and is considered eligible as a
sensitive environment for HRS scoring (Refs. 1, Table 4-24, p. 51625; 87, 88; 110).
The southern portion of the facility property, mainly the wetland area, is within a habitat known to be used by
State designated endangered or threatened species. The Marsh Wren and Bebb's Sedge are
endangered/threatened species in this area that have been identified within the past five years (Refs. 91, pp. 9,
10; 105, 111, p. 1). The Blandings Turtle, another endangered species is also found in this area (Ref. 91, pp.
9, 10). The Blandings Turtle and the Franklin Ground Squirrel were last observed in 1999 and 1992
respectively (Ref. 91, pp. 9, 10). Also, the wetland area, a particular area, relatively small in size, is important
to the maintenance of unique biotic communities. It is part of the Grand Calumet River Corridor (Refs. 91, pp.
3,4, 6, 7, 8, 18, 24; 112, pp. 1-6).
The sources include a slag waste pile and wastewater discharges from an NPDES outfall at the USS Lead
facility resulting from former smelter and lead refining operations (See Sections 2.2 and 2.2.1 of this HRS
Documentation Record). The primary hazardous substance of concern in the sources is lead (See Section 2.2.2
of this HRS Documentation Record). A release of lead to the surface water and air pathways has been
documented (See Sections 4.1.2.1.1, 4.1.4.3.1.2, and 6.1.1 of this HRS Documentation Record). Elevated
levels of lead have been detected in the wetland area (See Section 4.1.2.1.1 and 4.1.4.3.1.2 of this HRS
Documentation Record).
Source 1, a waste pile (lead slag pile), one of the waste sources identified at USS Lead, is an area that was
located to the south of the plant buildings which was used for disposal of blast furnace slag (Refs. 7; 9; 25, p.
1; 27, p. 2; 65, p. 019; 68, p. 7). Between 1980 and 1986, 8 samples of the waste slag material were collected
as part of facility sampling inspections (Refs. 5, p. 4; 24, pp. 8-12, 14, 15, 31; 29, p.4; 68, p. 13). In the
analyses of the seven samples collected in 1986, the slag was shown to contain lead at concentrations ranging
from 12,000 to 53,000 mg/kg (Refs. 24, pp. 2, 4, 8 to 12, 14, 15,31). Some of the lead bearing waste was
deposited directly into part of a wetland, which covers the southern part of the USS Lead property (Refs. 7; 9;
25, p. 1; 27, p. 2; 36, pp. 8A, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14; 65, p. 12; 68, p. 7). This is the same wetland as discussed
above. Blast furnace lead bearing slag generated on the facility was dumped on plant property and once a year
17
-------
was leveled off into the property wetland (Ref. 9). Overland flow (surface water drainage) came in contact
with the lead bearing slag and drained into the regularly inundated facility wetland from the southeast sector of
the slag pile probable point of entry (PPE #l)(Ref. 108, Figure 2-4 of this HRS Documentation Record).
Source 2, outfall 001 at USS Lead was permitted under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit for the discharge of blast furnace non-contact process cooling water and water from in-plant
storm drains into the Grand Calumet River. The first NPDES permit was issued to the facility in June 1975,
with an expiration date of March 1980 (Refs. 4, p. 006; 39, p. 1; 40, p. 2; 45, p. 16A).
It needs to be noted that there were two (2) NPDES outfall locations for waste water discharge that existed at
the USS Lead facility during its period of operation. At the time the original NPDES permit was issued in
1975, the outfall (PPE #2) was located between the main slag disposal area (south of the Battery Breaker
Building and the By-products Building) and the smaller slag disposal area (southwest of the Mixed Metals
Building) (Refs. 13, p. 5; 46, p. 020, 027; 65, p. 031). The outfall flowed through a discharge channel, and
back-flow, leaching from the slag pile area, and channel sediments could potentially interfere with weekly
monitoring samples (Refs. 13, p. 2; 65, p. 031). The drainage from this outfall (PPE#2) was allowed to
discharge directly into the facility's wetland area located on the southern portion of the property (Ref. 45, p.
114, Figure 2-4 of this HRS Documentation Record).
Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) available from 1982 through 1984, revealed numerous exceedances of
permit allowable levels for lead from PPE #2 (Refs. 45, pp. 06, 15, 16A, 17, 18, 66, 68, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 81,
83, 85, 87, 89, 91, 93, 95, 98, 99, 101, 104, 105, 109-114, 115-120, 126, 127, 130; 65, p. 20).
In November 1984, a new outfall (PPE #3) was constructed and the former one (PPE #2) was sealed with
cement (Refs. 43, p. 2; 46, pp. 002, 003). The rerouted waste water flowed into a well southeast of the Store
Building and from there directly into the onsite canal on the property (Ref. 46, p.002, 003, 020, 027). The
onsite canal drains into the Grand Calumet River. DMRs of samples collected from this outfall between
5/1985 to 12/1986 revealed numerous instances when permit limitations were exceeded for arsenic, cadmium
copper, and lead (Refs. 3, pp. 1-9; 44, pp. 2, 3, 04 to 08 11-13, 16, 19, 20, 22, 25, 28, 29, 31, 34, 35, 37; 65, p.
20).
In addition to the impact to the surface water pathway, a release of lead to the air by direct observation and
chemical analysis was also noted (See Section 6.1.1 of this HRS Documentation Record).
The site is scored based on releases from the facility that have resulted in Level I human targets, including
former facility employees via the air migration pathway; as well as releases that have resulted in Level II
environmental threat targets, via the surface water pathway (See Sections 4.1.4.3 and 6.3 of this HRS
Documentation Record).
Facility and Site Description
The USS Lead facility is located on a 79-acre tract of land at 5300 Kennedy Avenue in East Chicago, Indiana
(Refs. 22, p. 009; 23, p. 3; 38, Section 2.1; 33; 64, pp. 08, 11; 65, p. 12; 68, p. 004; 84, p. 003; 91, p. 3). In
1906, the Delamar Copper Refinery operated at the facility as a copper smelter (Refs. 22, p. 011; 65, p. 12; 68,
p. 5; 81, p. 1; 84, p. 003). In 1920, the property was purchased by U.S. Smelting Refining and Mining and the
facility became a lead refining facility (Refs. 22, p. 014; 68, p. 5; 81, p. 1; 84, p. 003). The property was later
purchased by U.S. Smelter and Lead Refinery (USS Lead). Between 1972 and 1973, USS Lead was converted
to a secondary lead smelter, recovering lead from automobile batteries (Refs. 22, p. 016; 45, p. 5; 64, p. 011;
68, p. 5; 81, p. 1; 84, p. 003). All operations ceased in 1985 (Refs. 22, pp. 007, 017; 64, p. 011; 65, p. 019; 66,
p. 3; 68, p. 5; 81, p. 1; 84, p. 003). The facility's hazardous waste management units included calcium sulfate
sludge waste piles and baghouse dust waste piles (Refs. 22, p. 018; 26, pp. 1-3; 50, p. 1; 68, pp. 4, 7; 84, p.
003). Other sources of contamination at the facility have included baghouse dust piles, plastic chip waste
piles, rubber chip piles, and a slag pile located in the wetlands on the property (Refs. 22, p. 026; 68, pp. 3, 4, 7,
8, 11; 100; 84, p. 003). Wetland areas are present on the southern portion of the property (Refs. 68, p. 4; 87;
Figures 2-1, 2-2, 2-3, and 2-4 of this HRS Documentation Record; 91, pp.4, 6, 7, 8, 47, 62, 63, 72, 76, 80, 82).
These wetland areas have become contaminated with lead (Refs. 64, pp. 18-20, 25, 26, 29, Appendices E, F;
68,pp. 7, 8, 11-13, 15; 94,pp.112 to 117, 119, 122, 124to 126, 135, 136, 141; Section 4.1.2.1.1 of this HRS
18
-------
Documentation Record). Habitats used by State endangered/threatened species are also present in the
impacted areas of the wetland (Ref. 91, pp. 9, 10, 35, 43, 76, 82, 90; and Section 4.1.4.3.1.2 of this HRS
Documentation Record).
Facility Enforcement History
In June 1986, USS Lead was found not to be in compliance with a majority of the original findings of IDEM
vs USS Lead, Cause no. N-296, which required the clean up of some materials on the property (Ref. 26). In
1990, IDEM issued an Interim Agreed Order to USS Lead requiring closure of the hazardous waste piles under
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) (Refs. 34, p. 04; 67, pp. 016, 017; 84, p. 003). The
EPA Superfund program completed a HRS Documentation Record dated August 30, 1991, as part of the
February 7, 1992 proposal to the National Priorities List (NPL) (Refs. 65; 84, p. 003; 93, pp. 1, 16; 109). The
HRS documentation record indicated elevated lead levels in soils on the USS Lead property could be
attributed to USS Lead (Ref. 65, p. 059). Also, the HRS documentation record evaluated the surface water
and air migration pathways and the potential threat to wetlands and USS Lead employees as the basis for the
proposal of USS Lead to the NPL (Refs. 65; 84, p. 003). In 1993, a request was made on behalf of USS Lead
to defer consideration of the proposed listing of USS Lead (Ref. 109, p. 2). On November 18, 1993, EPA
RCRA issued an Administrative Order of Consent (AOC) to USS Lead under RCRA 3008(h) authority (Refs.
66, p. 3; 68; 81, p. 1; 84, p. 003). The AOC required implementation of interim measures on the property and
off the facility investigations (Refs. 68, p. 17; 81, p. 1; 84, p. 003). The off facility investigations conducted
by USS Lead were limited to the "railroad perimeter area" and "Triangle area" (Refs. 38, Sections 3.6, 3.14;
81, p. 007, Figure 2b; 84, p. 003). The "railroad perimeter area" extends from Kennedy Avenue to the
facility's property boundary on the east, across from the former DuPont facility. The "triangle area" extends
from 151st Street to the facility's property boundary on the north (Refs. 38, Figures 15, 18, Appendices 3, 4, 5;
81, Figure 2b; 84, p. 003). The results from USS Lead's off facility investigations can be found in the "Final
USS Lead Modified RCRA Facility Investigation (MRFI) Report" (Refs. 38, Sections 3.6, 3.14, Tables 5, 6, 8
to 10, 13; 78; 81, Figure 2; 84, p. 004).
On November 13, 1996, EPA issued a Corrective Action Management Unit (CAMU) designation for the USS
Lead facility (Refs. 70; 84, p. 004). On July 29, 1998, EPA approved the Final Design Plan and Specification
for the CAMU (Refs. 71; 84, p. 004). In an August 31, 2004 letter to USS Lead, EPA informed USS Lead that
EPA will evaluate information from the MRFI report related to migration from the USS Lead facility to off-
site areas of residential, commercial or industrial land use. In addition, EPA identified some remaining
concerns based on a human health and ecological risk screening for the USS Lead facility (Ref. 78). The EPA
letter indicated that current property conditions do not meet the Environmental Indicator (EI) CA750 of
migration of contaminated ground water under control. Specifically, the letter stated that available data
indicate that concentrations of antimony, arsenic and cadmium in ground water may be causing exceedances of
State Water Quality Standards for those parameters in the surface water from the on-site wetlands and riparian
areas on the USS Lead property (Ref. 84, p. 005). USS Lead has achieved control of current human exposures
based on the worker scenario and limited access to trespassers as documented in a September 30, 2004, EI
determination CA725. Also, this EI determination indicated that soil contamination outside of the USS Lead
property boundaries, including residential properties, was beyond the scope of the EI as it was referred to
EPA's Superfund program (Refs. 78, p. 6; 79). As described in the June 24, 2004 referral of USS Lead to
CERCLA, EPA conducted soil sampling in the residential areas to the north of 151st Street subsequent to the
USS Lead's limited off facility investigation (Refs. 66, p. 3; 81, pp. 007-015, Figures 4a, 4b, 8a, 8b, 9, Table
3; 82; 83, pp. 1-7). The soil sampling conducted by EPA uncovered elevated lead concentrations exceeding
400 ppm to above 1,000 ppm which was the basis for recommending appropriate CERCLA action (Refs. 81,
pp. 007-015, Figures 4a, 4b, 8a, 8b, 9, Table 3; 82; 83, pp. 002-007).
19
-------
2.2 SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION
Two (2) sources are used to score USS Lead. The two (2) sources are: 1) a slag waste pile, and 2) waste
water discharges. Another possible source that was present on USS Lead was baghouse dust that was found
throughout portions of the property and a soil area contaminated with lead (Refs. 22, pp. 019, 021, 035, Figure
2; 34, pp. 08, 09, 11, 12; 65, pp. 21, 27-30; 68, pp. 5 to 8; Figures 2-1; 2-2 and 2-3 of this HRS Documentation
Record). The pathways that are evaluated for this documentation record are the surface water pathway and the
air migration pathway.
Figures 2-1, 2-2, 2-3, and 2-4 depict site location, source area locations, site features, and a copy of an aerial
photo of USS Lead. These figures and the aerial photo show conditions at USS Lead in 1986 and in 2005.
Since 1990, many parts of the facility have been addressed by the RCRA Program (See the Site Summary of
this HRS Documentation Record).
2.2.1 SOURCE IDENTIFICATION
Number of the source: 1
Name: Slag Waste Pile
HRS Source Type: Waste Pile
Description and Location of the source:
Waste pile (lead slag pile), one (1) of the waste sources identified at USS Lead, is an area that was located to
the south of the plant buildings which was used for disposal of blast furnace slag (Refs. 7; 9; 25, p. 1; 27, p. 2;
68, p. 7). Some of the waste was deposited in part of a wetland, which covers the southern part of the USS
Lead property (Refs. 7; 9; 25, p. 1; 27, p. 2; 36, pp. 9, 10, 11, 13, 14; 68, p. 7). The first blast furnace was
installed on the facility in 1926 but it only operated on an intermittent basis. In 1973, when the plant was
converted from a primary to a secondary lead smelting facility, a larger blast furnace was installed that
operated continuously, averaging about 315 days per year (Ref. 22, pp. 016, 020). The blastfurnace slag
generated on the facility was dumped on plant property and once a year was leveled off into the property
wetland (Ref. 9).
Between 1980 and 1986, 8 samples of the waste slag material were collected as part of facility sampling
inspections (Refs. 5, p. 4; 24, pp. 8-12, 14, 15, 31; 68, p. 13). In the analyses of the seven samples collected in
1986, the slag was shown to contain lead at concentrations ranging from 12,000 to 53,000 mg/kg (Ref. 24, pp.
2, 4, 8 to 12, 14, 15,31).
The slag pile was never capped and was subject to dispersion. Therefore, there were possible airborne releases
of contaminants prior to the remediation of this area (Refs. 36, pp. 11-12; 67, p. 008; 78, p. 005; 100).
A Modified Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Facility Investigation (MRFI) Report was
prepared for USS Lead, 5300 Kennedy Avenue, East Chicago, Indiana by Geochemical Solutions, L.L.C.
(Ref. 38). This MRFI Report describes the conceptual site model, describes the work completed for the site
characterization at the USS Lead facility, and presents the data collected under the MRFI work plans. The
MRFI illustrates and depicts the lead concentrations found in the soils throughout the USS Lead property
before and after remediation activities that were conducted. The MRFI Report was prepared in partial
fulfillment of the EPA Administrative Order on Consent (AOC), Docket number V-W-001-94 (Refs. 38,
Sections Executive Summary, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2; 68, p. 001, 003). The MRFI Report presents data to fulfill
requirements by EPA in project letters (Refs. 38, Sections Executive Summary and 1.0; 77; 78).
The MRFI states that most soils that were identified as contaminated were removed and consolidated in the
on-site CAMU. Continued sampling in the wetlands, identified elevated contaminated levels that cannot be
removed from the wetlands due to physical constraints and therefore remain in place (Ref. 38, Executive
Summary).
The MRFI noted that off site air dispersion was modeled by LAW and TechLaw and then substantiated using
soil samples as proposed in the MRFI Work Plan Addendum and as described in the MRFI Addendum Off-
20
-------
Site Sampling and Analysis Report. Sample results initiated off-site remediation (Ref. 38, Executive
Summary, Appendices 3, 4, and 5).
According to the MRFI report, the slag pile was removed and disposed into the on-facility CAMU. The clean
up of the slag began with the approved ISM workplan (9/17/96) and was completed in the third quarter of
2002 (Refs. 38, Section 2.4, p. 015; 72, p. 5; 84, p. 005). Prior to the remediation of Area A, a clay berm was
constructed around the limits of the slag pile located to the south of the plant buildings. The berm was
constructed to prevent recontamination of the area by the river after remediation. The slag pile was then
excavated and placed inside the CAMU (Refs. 38, Section 3.5; 72, p. 5; 84, pp. 004, 005). Confirmation
samples were taken and all confirmation lead levels reported were below 100 mg/kg except for confirmation
sample SP2 which was at 529 mg/kg (Refs. 38, Section 3.5, Table 4, and Figure 18).
Surface water runoff from the slag disposal area had contaminated the wetlands to the south and southwest
(Refs. 65, pp. 12 to 15, 27, 28; 67, p.008; 68, pp. 7, 8, 11 to 13, 15). The slag pile was never covered to protect
from dispersal by wind (Refs. 27, p. 2; 67, p. 008; 78, p. 005; 100). Although remedial activities were
conducted in the wetland area, they were never completed as shown by the analytical results from the ESI
sampling event. Extensive contamination that resulted from sources #1 and #2 still remains in this wetland
area (Refs. 64, pp. 18-20, 25, 26, 29, Appendix E, F; 94, pp.112 to 117, 119, 120, 122, 124 to 126, 135, 136,
141; Section 4.1.2.1.1 of this HRS documentation record).
Location of the source, with reference to map of the site:
The main portion of the slag waste pile was located to the south of three (3) facility buildings, the Mixed
Metals Building, the By-products Building, and the Battery Breaker Building (Figure 2-3 of this HRS
Documentation Record).
2.2.2 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES ASSOCIATED WITH THE SOURCE
- Source Samples:
Below is the concentration of lead detected in blast furnace slag samples collected from USS Lead. Sampling
was performed in 1984 by Ecology and Environment (E & E) and 1986 by IDEM (Refs. 24, pp. 2, 14, 15; 29,
pp. 04-08; 68, pp. 006, 007, 008). The sample collected by IDEM in 1986 is listed below. The media of the
sample was the actual slag waste from Source l(Refs. 24, pp. 2, 14, 15; 68, p. 008).
Also, according to a 1977 letter written by the plant engineer at USS Lead, the lead content of the slag
disposed of on-site was typically 1%. If it was greater, it would have been recycled (Ref. 30, p. 1).
Sample
ID
Sample
Type
Date
Hazardous Substance
Hazardous
Substance
Concentration
Detection
Limit
Reference
C-
1486
E-2
Slag
12/1986
Lead
53,000 mg/kg
500 mg/kg
24, pp. 2, 15
C-
1485
E-2
Slag
12/1986
Lead
33,000 mg/kg
500 mg/kg
24, pp. 2, 14,
15
Key
mg/kg milligram per kilogram
21
-------
2.2.3 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AVAILABLE TO A PATHWAY
Containment Description
Containment Factor
Value
Ref.
Gas release to air:
NS
Particulate release to air: The slag pile was not capped, covered,
or protected by a windbreak. In 1985, an inspection of the facility
noted wind-blown emissions crossing the property line that may
have come from storage piles of furnace slag, flue dust, and
battery casings on the plant property. Analysis of the air that was
sampled down wind in 1985 showed that the lead concentration in
that sample was 96 micrograms per cubic meter greater than
background and exceeded an air benchmark of 50 micrograms per
cubic meter.
10
1, Table 6-9, p.
51653; 14, p.
02; 15; 31, pp.
02, 14; 36, pp.
11, 12; 67, p.
008; 100;
Figure 2-1 of
this HRS
Documentation
Record.
Release of hazardous substances via overland migration and/or
flood: The waste slag pile was deposited directly into the on-
facility wetland. Thus the source was in direct contact with the
wetland. Also, runoff/storm drainage may have come into contact
with the contaminated slag pile releasing lead into the on-facility
wetland.
10
I, Table 4-2, p.
51609; 7; 9;
24, pp. 2, 4, 8
to 12, 14, 15,
31; 25, p. 1;
27, p. 2; 36,
pp. 8A, 9, 10,
II, 13, 14; 67,
p. 6; 68, pp.
007,011,012
Notes: NS Not Scored
2.4.2. HAZARDOUS WASTE QUANTITY
The area of the slag pile, Source #1, is demonstrated in Figures 2-2 and 2-3 of this HRS Documentation
Record. Figure 2-4 of this HRS Documentation Record shows the small pond area created by the removal of
the slag pile. Constituent quantity information that is available gives a percentage breakdown of the
components in a "typical" analysis of slag. The chemical breakdown of the slag, which was obtained from a
1977 letter written by the plant engineer at the US S Lead facility, stated that the lead content of the slag
disposed of on the facility was typically 1%. If it was greater, it would have been recycled (Ref. 30, p. 1).
However, it is unknown how much slag was deposited.
2.4.2.1.1. Hazardous Constituent Quantity
Sufficient information is not available to document a hazardous constituent quantity (Ref. 1, Section 2.4.2.1.1,
p. 51590).
Hazardous Constituent Quantity Value (S): NS
2.4.2.1.2. Hazardous Wastestream Quantity
Sufficient information is not available to document a hazardous wastestream quantity (Ref. 1, Section
2.4.2.1.2, p. 51591).
Hazardous Wastestream Quantity Value (W): NS
2.4.2.1.3. Volume
The slag pile is no longer present at the site. The total volume of the pile is not known, and the amount of
waste slag released at the facility is not known.
22
-------
Volume Assigned Value: 0
(Ref. 1, Table 2-5, p. 51591)
2.4.2.1.4 Area
Prior to 1973, the amount of waste slag generated during this period is unknown (Ref. 22, p. 020). In 1973, a
new 100-ton blast furnace was installed, and was continuously in operation, averaging about 315 days per year
(Ref. 22, p. 020). Waste slag, generated while the plant was in operation, was disposed of on the property
south of the plant buildings (Refs. 7; 9; 27, p. 2; 36, pp. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14; 68, p. 7; Figure 2-3 of this HRS
Documentation Record).
As noted in the Source 1 narrative and the Site Summary, the majority of the slag pile has been removed from
the area and disposed into the CAMU on the facility, but detectable levels of lead remain. Since it is unknown
as to how much lead from the waste slag remains in the wetland area, a value of >0 but amount is unknown is
entered. Note: Currently a pond is present in the area where the slag pile was located (See Figures 2-3 and 2-4
of this HRS Documentation Record).
Area Assigned Value: >0 (amount is unknown)
(Ref. 1, Table 2-5, p. 51591)
2.4.2.1.5 Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value
Highest assigned value from Ref. 1, Table 2-6, p. 51591: >0
2.2.1 SOURCE IDENTIFICATION
Number of the source: 2
Name: NPDES Outfall - Wastewater Discharge
HRS Source Type: Other
Description and Location of the source:
Outfall 001 at USS Lead was permitted under a NPDES permit for the discharge of blast furnace non-contact
process cooling water and water from in-plant storm drains into the Grand Calumet River. It is not known
when the facility first began discharging waste water. Records indicate that the first NPDES permit was
issued to the facility in June 1975, with an expiration date of March 1980 (Refs. 4, p. 006; 39, p. 1; 40, p. 2;
45, pp. 15, 16A). A renewal application was filed in September 1982 (Refs. 4, p. 007; 40, p. 2; 45, p. 16A; 49,
p. 1). After the plant was closed in December 1985, storm water run-off collected from the facility processes
continued to be discharged through the outfall (Ref. 43).
Between the expiration of the first permit in 1980 and the issuance of the second permit in 1985, the facility
continued to discharge waste water to the Grand Calumet River (Refs. 40, p. 2; 42). Effluent samples
continued to be collected after the plant closed in December 1985, until July, 1987, when electrical power to
the facility was disconnected (Ref. 43, p. 2).
Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) available from September 1982 through June 1984 document
numerous exceedances of permit allowable levels for cadmium, copper, and lead (Refs. 45, pp. 06, 15, 16A,
17, 18, 66, 68, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 81, 83, 85, 87, 89, 91, 93, 95, 98, 99, 101, 104, 105, 109-114, 115-120, 126,
127, 130). Several enforcement actions were initiated against USS Lead in the 1980s. In April 1984, the
Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board issued an administrative complaint against USS Lead for alleged
violations of the effluent lead limitations (Ref. 4, p. 008). In May, 1985, the United States filed a civil action
to address its longstanding violations of the Clean Water Act (Ref. 4, p. 008). The facility was also cited at
this time for failing to submit noncompliance notification reports and for operating with an expired permit
(Ref. 4, pp. 004, 007,008). In 1986, a civil action was initiated against USS Lead for 24 excursions from the
lead effluent limitation during the period May 6, 1985 through February 25, 1986 (Ref. 44, p. 2). At least
some of these suits were settled out of court (Ref. 50).
23
-------
As stated in the Site Summary of this HRS Documentation Record, state and federal enforcement action
required the investigation and remediation of the impacted facility areas. Based on elevated analytical results
for heavy metals, remediation was conducted in the wetland area (Ref. 38, Section 3.15). Contaminated
sediments were excavated from the wetland area and placed into the CAMU (Ref. 38, Section 3.15). The
completion of the remedial activities was not based on the achievement of IDEM RISC clean up levels (Ref.
38, Section 3.15). The excavated areas can be seen as the open water area located southwest of area A (Refer
to Figure 2-4 of this HRS Documentation Record). Post excavation levels of contamination in the area that
was remediated can be found in Figure 18 of the MRFI (Ref. 38, Figure 18).
Location of the source: Two (2) outfall locations for the waste water discharge comprising Source 2 existed
at the USS Lead facility during its period of operation. At the time the original NPDES permit was issued in
1975, the outfall was located between the main slag disposal area (south of the Battery Breaker Building and
the By-products Building) and the smaller slag disposal area (southwest of the Mixed Metals Building) (Refs.
13, pp. 2, 5; 46, p. 020, 027). The outfall flowed through a discharge channel, and back-flow, leaching from
the slag pile area, and channel sediments could potentially interfere with weekly monitoring samples (Refs. 13,
p. 2; 45, p. 119; 46, p. 003).
In November 1984, a new outfall was constructed and the former one (1) was sealed with cement (Refs. 43, p.
2; 46, pp. 002, 003). The rerouted waste water flowed in to a well southeast of the Store Building and from
there directly into the canal on the property (Ref. 46, pp. 002, 003, 020, 027). DMRs of samples collected
from this outfall between May 1985 and December 1986, revealed numerous instances when permit limitations
were exceeded for arsenic, cadmium copper, and lead (Refs. 3, pp. 1-9; 44, pp. 2, 3, 04 to 08 11-13, 16, 19, 20,
22, 25,28, 29,31,34,35, 37).
2.2.2 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES ASSOCIATED WITH THE SOURCE (Source 2)
- Source Samples:
Below is a summary of hazardous substances in the blast furnace waste water. Results from samples collected
by USS Lead in 1984 and 1985 are shown. In the results from USS Lead, only the highest concentration of a
substance detected in one of the four (4) to five (5) samples collected per month are shown. For the 1984 USS
Lead samples, arsenic and lead were the only heavy metals which were analyzed.
For every sample, the effluent from Source 2 was the media sampled. All hazardous substances detected are
attributable to USS Lead.
Samples collected as a part of monitoring requirements for NPDES permit for discharge to site wetland
(February and April 1984) and to site canal (May. August, and November 1985)
Date of Hazardous Sample
Sample Substance Number
Cone.
mg/1)
Lead
Effluent
Limitation
Effluent
Reference
img/11
February
1984 lead
2/13/84
0.47
0.2
48, p. 2
April
1984 lead
4/10/84
0.60
0.2
48, p. 6
May
1985 cadmium
copper
5/13/85
5/13/85
0.30
0.08
0.02
0.02
44, p. 4
44, p. 4
24
-------
August
1985 arsenic 8/13/85 0.17 0.3 44, p. 19
lead 8/13/85 4.55 0.2 44, p. 20
November
1985 cadmium 11/5/85 0.625 0.02 44, p. 28
• Method Detection Limits were not available on the laboratory forms. However, the effluent
limitations were defined in the DMRs and these samples documented were greater than or equal to
the effluent limitations (Refs. 44, 48).
NA Not available
2.2.4 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AVAILABLE TO A PATHWAY (Source #2)
Containment Description
Containment Factor
Value
References
Gas release to air:
NS
Particulate release to air:
NS
Release to ground water:
NS
Release via overland migration and/or flood: Elevated levels of
lead from the effluent from the NPDES outfalls were allowed to
discharge directly in to the on-facility wetland. The metals in the
effluent discharge exceeded the NPDES discharge limits for the
metals.
10
1, Table 4-2,
p. 51609; 44,
pp. 2, 3, 4, 19,
20, 28, 30; 48,
pp. 2, 6
Notes: NS-Not Scored
2.4.2. HAZARDOUS WASTE QUANTITY
Because constituent quantity information for the waste water discharged at USS Lead is not complete, the
wastestream quantity for Source 2 will be used to arrive at the Hazardous Waste Quantity. The wastestream
quantity for only seventy-seven days of discharge will be calculated as a conservative estimate based on
available data (Refs. 45; 46).
2.4.2.1.1. Hazardous Constituent Quantity
Sufficient information is not available to document a hazardous constituent quantity (Ref. 1, Section 2.4.2.1.1,
p. 51590).
Hazardous Constituent Quantity Value (S): NS
2.4.2.1.2 Hazardous Wastestream Quantity (W)
Hazardous Quantity
Wastestream (pounds) References
Waste water discharge 43,000,000 45,46
Sum: 43,000,000 pounds
Hazardous Wastestream Quantity Value (W): 8,600
In 1973, when the facility began to do secondary lead refining, the blast furnace on the facility operated on a
regular basis (Ref. 22, p. 020). To obtain a wastestream quantity for Source 2, flow per day figures from
several months of DMRs were summed. For the period from April 1983, to October 1984 (minus June 1983),
a total discharge of 4,300,000 gallons was obtained for the 77 days (one a week) for which the effluent flow
25
-------
was documented (Refs. 45, pp. 66-91; 46, p.7).
After converting to the quantity to pounds, a divisor of 5,000 is used to determine the Hazardous Wastestream
Quantity (Ref. 1, Table 2-5, p. 51591).
10 pounds/gallon x 4,300,000 gallons = 43,000,000 pounds
43,000,000/5,000 = 8,600
Source Hazardous Wastestream Quantity Value: 8,600
Source No: 2
2.4.2.1.3. Volume
No documented estimate of the volume is available; therefore the value of 0 has been assigned (Ref. 1, Section
2.4.2.1.3, p. 51591).
Volume Assigned Value: 0
2.4.2.1.4. Area
Because Source #2 is a source type "other," the area tier is not applicable.
Area Assigned Value: Not Applicable
2.4.2.1.5 Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value
Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value: 8,600
Source No.: 2
Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 8,600
(Ref. 1, Table 2-6, p. 51591)
SUMMARY OF SOURCE DESCRIPTIONS
Source
No.
Source
Hazardous
Waste
Quantity
Value
Source
Hazardous
Constituent
Quantity
Complete?
(Y/N)
Containment Factor Value by Pathway
Ground water
(GW) Table (3-
2)
Surface Water (SW)
Air
Overland/flood
(Table 4-2)
GW to
SW
(Table
3-2)
Gas
(Table
6-3)
Particulate
(Table 6-9)
1
>0, but
amount
unknown
N
NS
10
NS
NS
10
2
8,600
N
NS
10
NS
NS
NS
NS - not scored
Assigned Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value for Surface Water Migration Pathway: 100
Description of Other Possible Sources at USS Lead:
As can be seen in Figure 2-1 of this HRS Documentation Record, the shadow of a stack can be observed next
to the former baghouse. Lead emissions at a rate of 16.07 tons of lead per year have been documented for the
USS Lead facility (Ref. 38, p. 216). Two air emission sources were listed for the USS Lead facility: 1) a point
source (stack) and 2) a volume source (roof vent) (Ref. 38, p. 219, 220).
Baghouse dust generated by the blast furnace used on the property was originally collected in bag filters inside
26
-------
of the baghouse and eventually resmelted (Ref. 22, p. 019). When the larger blast furnace was installed in
1973, however, recycling all of the approximate 300 tons of dust generated per month became impossible, and
dust awaiting recycling was stored in piles mainly near the baghouse and on a three (3) to five (5) acre area to
the north and west of the Tank House (Refs. 22, p. 019; 34, pp. 08, 10; 38, p. 015). By the late 1970's, an
estimated 8,000 tons of the baghouse dust were stockpiled on the facility (Refs. 22, p. 019; 34, p. 09; 38, p.
015).
The baghouse dust waste is a listed RCRA hazardous waste. It is classified as emissions control dust from
secondary lead smelters (#K069). The analysis of one (1) sample of the dust collected by IDEM in December
1986 indicated 370,000 mg/kg lead (Refs. 10, p. 2; 24, sample F-2, C-1489, pp. 2, 6, 16, 17, 28, 31, 37).
Results for a sample of the dust collected in 1981 support these findings (Ref. 29, pp. 4, 8).
In 1982, approximately 3,700 tons of the dust was brought into the Tank House to prevent dispersion by wind
(Ref. 22, p. 019). Either later that year or in 1986, a smelting facility based in New Jersey removed
approximately 1,600 of the 3,700 tons of dust for lead recovery (Refs. 22, p. 019; 34, p. 08). The volume of
the dust remaining throughout the site at USS Lead was unknown as some further amounts of dust may have
been recycled in-house. A July, 1991, document indicated that 2,100 tons of the baghouse dust were left in the
Tank House (Ref. 50).
The condition of the Tank House building, where the majority of the baghouse dust was being stored, was
noted by several state officials to be in poor condition. A number of reports state that the building had broken
and missing windows and was also missing portions of roof (Refs. 6, p. 1; 10, p. 4; 28, pp. 05, 06).
According to the MRFI report, the baghouse dust areas were removed and disposed off the facility (Refs. 38,
p. 015; 80, pp. 065-256). The baghouse dust is just a possible source of contamination at USS Lead.
Other possible sources of fugitive dust are flue dust and battery casings that were located on plant property.
Fugitive dust may also have been generated by traffic within the plant boundaries (Refs. 14, p. 2; 5, pp. 005,
006; 23, pp. 05, 06).
27
-------
4.0 SURFACE WATER MIGRATION PATHWAY
4.1 OVERLAND/FLOOD MIGRATION COMPONENT
The surface water pathway starts at the edge of the slag pile (Source #1) and from the NPDES permit outfall
(Source #2). It should be noted that the USS Lead facility had two different NPDES outfalls which are
considered source 2 (Refer to Figure 2-2 of this HRS Documentation Record). From these two (2) sources the
surface water pathway discharges through the on facility wetland, then flows into the Grand Calumet River,
then enters the Indiana Harbor Canal, and finally empties into Lake Michigan (Refs. 18; 19; 20). There are two
(2) releases by direct observation, documented by violation in NPDES permits and by the direct deposition of
lead slag into an on-property wetland (Refer to Section 2.2.1 of this HRS Documentation Record). There are
also sensitive environments such as wetlands and habitats for endangered species in the vicinity of the site
(Ref. 91, pp. 4, 6-10, 35, 43, 47, 63, 72, 76 (W4), 82, 89, 90). The sensitive environments of the surface water
pathway and the air pathway are the two (2) migration pathway routes that are being scored as part of this
HRS Documentation Record.
4.1.1.1 Definition of Hazardous Substance Migration Pathway for Overland/Flood Component
The USS Lead property is adjacent to the east branch of the Grand Calumet River (GCR) to the south, and the
Indiana Harbor Canal (IHC) to the west. The point where the IHC begins is near the northwest corner of the
USS Lead property boundary (Ref. 18). From this point the IHC flows north and empties into Lake Michigan
approximately five and one-half (5 V2) miles downstream (Refs. 11, pp. 05, 07; 12, p. 013; 18; 19; 20).
Other surface water bodies in the vicinity of the site include the USS Lead canal that begins near the southwest
edge of the plant area, flows to the southwest, and enters the GCR at a point upstream from the IHC. The
canal is approximately 1,000 feet long and 15 feet wide. An approximately 21 acre wetland area located on
the southern portion of the USS Lead property is contiguous with the GCR for approximately one-half (Vi)
mile and will also be considered part of the GCR (Refs. 68, p. 4; 87; 110; Figures 2-1, 2-2, 2-3, and 2-4 of this
HRS Documentation Record; 91, pp.4, 6, 7, 8, 47, 62, 63, 72, 76 (W4)).
Due to the influence of Lake Michigan, the irregularity of industrial effluent discharge into the east branch of
the GCR, and a surface water divide on the west branch of the GCR, flow patterns of the GCR and IHC are
somewhat complex, and flow reversals can occur resulting in the flow going other routes (Refs. 11; p. 05, 07,
08; 12, p. 013; 19; 20; 86, p. 14). Possible routes for hazardous substances to migrate into the GCR from USS
Lead would be either via the property canal, which discharges directly into the river, or via the on-property
wetland, which borders the river (See Figures 2-2 to 2-4 of this HRS Documentation Record). The furthest
upstream probable point of entry (PPE) of hazardous substances is where the eastern edge of the lead slag pile
meets the on-property wetland (See Figures 2-2 to 2-4 of this HRS Documentation Record). The furthest
downstream PPE is at the headwaters of the USS Lead canal (Ref. 64, p. 39).
The hazardous wastes at USS Lead pose a significant threat to surface water in the area because most of the
sources are located either in or near surface water. A number of references state that Source 1, the blast
furnace slag waste, was placed directly into part of the wetland area (Refs. 5, p. 6; 7, p. 1; 9, p. 1; 25, p. 1).
Analyses of slag samples collected from in and near the wetland indicate the presence of lead (Refs. 5, pp. 4,
9; 24, pp. 2, 4, 6, 8; 29, pp. 4, 8; 68, pp. 007, 008, 011, 012; Section 2.2.1 of this HRS documentation record).
Source 2, the blast furnace effluent, discharged directly into the on-property wetland or into the USS Lead
canal, and hazardous substances in the effluent could migrate from the discharge point to the GCR (Figure 2-1
of this HRS documentation record). The effluent contained both process water from the blast furnace
blowdown and cooling water (Ref. 11, Table 1, p. 7). Effluent samples collected during 1984 and 1985 show
effluent violations of lead, arsenic, cadmium, and copper (Refs. 44, pp. 4, 19; 48, pp. 2, 6).
The probable points of entry (PPEs) for contamination of the surface water pathway occur at the eastern edge
of the slag pile and the outfalls of the former NPDES discharge points (See Figures 2-2 to 2-4 of this HRS
Documentation Record).
28
-------
Likelihood of Release
4.1.2.1.1 Observed Release
Two (2) observed releases to surface water by direct observation are documented for USS Lead. The first is
the dumping of Source 1, the waste lead bearing slag, directly into the on-property wetland. The second is
non-permitted levels of heavy metals in blast furnace blowdown and cooling waste water, Source 2, directly
into the wetland and canal (Refs. 13, pp. 2, 5; 46, p.2; 47, p. 1).
As discussed in the Site Summary of this HRS Documentation Record, there are three probable points of entry
(PPEs). Overland flow (surface water drainage) came in contact with the lead bearing slag and drained into
the on-facility wetland from the southeast sector of the slag pile (PPE #1). At the time the original NPDES
permit was issued in 1975, the outfall (PPE #2) was located between the main slag disposal area (south of the
Battery Breaker Building and the By-products Building) and the smaller slag disposal area (southwest of the
Mixed Metals Building) (Refs. 13, p. 5; 46, p. 020, 027; Figs. 2-2 and 2-3 of this HRS Documentation
Record). In November 1984, a new outfall (PPE #3) was constructed and the former one (PPE #2) was sealed
with cement (Refs. 43, p. 2; 46, pp. 002, 003, 020, 027). According to the daily monitoring reports (DMRs),
discharge limits were exceeded for lead during the time that both NPDES outfalls (PPE #2 and PPE #3) were
permitted (Refs. 3, pp. 2, 5, 8; 44, pp. 02, 03, 05, 07, 09, 12, 13, 17, 20, 29; 45, pp. 06, 15, 16A, 17, 18, 66, 68,
71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 81, 83, 85, 87, 89, 91, 93, 95, 98, 99, 101, 104, 105, 109-114, 115-120, 126, 127, 130).
Direct Observation
Basis for Direct Observation for Source 1
In 1978, the Army Corps of Engineers reported to the State of Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board
regarding an unauthorized placement of fill consisting of slag and refractory material into the wetland on the
USS Lead property (Ref. 7, p. 1; 13, pp. 2, 5). The Indiana State Board of Health (ISBH) confirmed that this
activity was unauthorized (Ref. 8, p. 1). In December 1978, an ISBH official met with two employees at USS
Lead about the complaint (Ref. 9, p. 1). The process generated slag at a rate of 12 tons per day which was
dumped on the plant property, and once a year it was leveled off into the wetland south of the plant (Ref. 9, p.
1). In 1989, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service sent another notice about the industrial waste in the wetland on
USS Lead property to IDEM (Ref. 25, p. 1).
Hazardous Substances in the Release
Analyses of the lead slag deposited into the wetland have shown it to contain lead (Refs. 24, pp. 2, 4, 8-12, 14,
15, 30, 31; 30, p.l).
Basis for Direct Observation for Source 2
The blast furnace blowdown and cooling waste water discharged to the wetland or property canal at the USS
Lead facility was monitored on a regular basis for heavy metals, pH, fluoride, total dissolved solids, and total
suspended solids (Ref. 13, pp. 02, 05). Violations in lead, cadmium, copper, and arsenic effluent limits
occurred in 1984 and 1985 (Refs. 44, pp. 19, 20, 28, 29, 30; 48, p. 2; see Source 2 description in this HRS
Documentation Record).
In May 1985, EPA filed a civil action suit for earlier permit violations by USS Lead (Refs. 4, pp. 1,5; 44, p.
2).
Hazardous Substances in the Release
Violations in lead, cadmium, copper, and arsenic effluent limits occurred in 1984 and 1985 (Refs. 44, pp. 19,
20, 28, 29, 30; 48, p. 2; see Source 2 description in this HRS Documentation Record).
Hazardous Substances Released:
Lead, cadmium, copper, and arsenic
29
-------
Chemical Analysis
Observed releases by Chemical Analysis to the on-property wetland have been documented by chemical
analysis of sediment samples collected during the 2007 ESI.
The Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) conducted an Expanded Site Inspection (ESI)
in November 2007. During the ESI, sediment samples were collected from the on-property wetland area and
from wetlands that were considered background wetland samples that were located east of the on-property
wetlands (Ref. 64; 115) Analytical data from the 2007 ESI sampling event supports an observed release by
chemical analysis to the on-property wetland.
Background Samples:
Background wetland sediment samples were also collected during the November 2007 ESI (Refs. 64, pp. 18-
20, 25, 26, Appendix H, pp. 72 to 80, 85 to 91, 118, 159 to 168, 173, 174; 94, pp. 003 to 008, 012, 015 to 018,
061,062, 063, 112 to 117, 120, 123 to 126, 138, 139, 155). The background wetland samples were collected in
wetland areas located along the south side of the Grand Calumet River just east of USS Lead (Ref. 64,
Appendix E). The Grand Calumet River predominantly flows from east to west. However, water levels in
Lake Michigan may force the Grand Calumet River to flow backwards (Refs. 64, p. 24; 86, pp. 14, 15). These
background samples also demonstrated similar properties with other samples collected from the on-property
wetland (Ref. 64, pp. 19; 89). These samples were collected from the upper six (6) inches of sediment and
were of the same general soil description as all of the other wetland samples collected. Four samples were
selected for background soil samples. These samples include ME2PF7, ME2PF8, ME2PK0, and ME2PK1
(Ref. 64, pp. 19, 20).
A comparison of the background sediment samples and the on-property sediment samples shows relatively
comparable ranges of properties and are suitable for comparison to establish background and release. The
table below depicts the sample ID, sample characteristics, total organic carbon and total volatile solids. Note
that all sediment samples collected are from the Carlisle soil series (Ref. 92, pp. 2, 4, 5).
30
-------
EPA Number
IDEM
Control
Sample Location
Comments
Percent
Solids
Total
Organic
Carbon
Total
Volatile
Solids
References
ME2PF4
SD4
Wetland sample obtained from the northeast
sector of the wetland area
Black sediment (10YR 2/1), Soupy;
extremely saturated; Dominant
vegetation is cattails
14.8%
22.7%
43.1%
64, pp. 19,
173, 197;
107, pp. 1,
2
ME2PF5
SD5
Wetland sample located from the far
northeast sector of the wetland area;
Black sediment (10YR 2/1), Soupy;
extremely saturated; Dominant
vegetation is cattails
16.2%
31.1%
55.7%
64, pp. 19,
173, 198;
107, pp. 1,
2
ME2PK0
SD8
Wetland sample obtained upstream from the
USS Lead property at a point 30-40 feet from
river, 150 yards east of Kennedy Av.
Black sediment (10YR 2/1), moist;
Dominant vegetation is phragmites
43.2%
18.9%
27.3%
64, pp. 19,
87, 214
ME2PK1
SD9
Wetland sample obtained upstream from the
USS Lead facility, 100 yards east of SD8,
100 feet south of the Grand Calumet River,
about 350 yards east of Kennedy Av.
Black sediment (10YR 2/1), moist;
Dominant vegetation is phragmites
38.6%
17.2%
26.5%
64, pp. 19,
87, 214
ME2PG0
SDA
Wetland sample obtained southwest of
sample ME2PF4 and northeast of sample
ME2PF1
Black sediment (10YR 2/1), moist;
Dominant vegetation is cattails
18.6%
28.4%
53.6%
64, pp. 19,
174, 199
ME2PF7
SD7
Wetland sample obtained upstream from the
USS Lead property at a point on the east side
of Kennedy Av., S of Calumet River off of
Kennedy Av.
Black sediment (10YR 2/1), moist;
Dominant vegetation is phragmites
53.2%
8.56%
17.3%
64, pp. 19,
174, 198;
107, pp. 1,
2
ME2PF8
SD10
Wetland sample obtained upstream from the
USS Lead property on the east side of bridge
on Kennedy Av.; located adjacent to
embankment
Black sediment (10YR 2/1), moist;
Dominant vegetation is phragmites and
cattails
63%
4.93%
10.1%
64, pp. 19,
174, 198
All samples were collected using the same protocols and were analyzed for the same parameters. The samples were analyzed for metals according to CLP SOW ILM05.4
analysis procedures. In addition, all wetland samples collected during the November 2007 ESI were analyzed for TOC, TS, and TVS. The wetland samples were sent to
EPA's Central Regional Laboratory for the TOC, TS, and TVS analysis. TS and TVS analysis were performed according CRL SOP AIG019. TOC analysis was
performed using the LECO SC 444 (Refs. 64, pp. 18-20, 25, 26, Appendix H, pp. 72 to 80, 85 to 91,118, 159 to 168, 173, 174, 193-195, 206, 212; 94, pp. 003 to 008, 012,
015 to 018, 061, 062, 063, 112 to 117, 120, 123 to 126, 138, 139).
31
-------
Sediment samples ME2PF7, ME2PF8, ME2PK0, and ME2PK1 were obtained for the November 2007, ESI (Ref. 64, pp 18-20, Appendices E, F). These samples, which
were obtained upstream from the USS Lead facility, are considered reference background wetland samples. Even though these samples do not represent natural
background due to the high lead levels, there is still a three times increase in the concentration of lead in the on-property wetland samples when compared to these
samples. The samples were collected in an area east of the USS Lead property on the south side of the Grand Calumet River, east of Kennedy Avenue (Ref. 64, pp 18-20,
Appendices E, F).
32
-------
Sample ID
Sample
Medium
Sample
Location
Depth
Date
Reference
ME2PF7
Sediment
Wetland east of
USS Lead
0-6 inches
11-14-07
64, pp. 18-20,
Appendices E,
H, p. 174; 115,
p. 054
ME2PF8
Sediment
Wetland east of
USS Lead
0-6 inches
11-14-07
64, pp. 18-20,
Appendices E,
H, p. 174; 115,
p. 057
ME2PK0
Sediment
Wetland east of
USS Lead
0-6 inches
11-14-07
64, pp. 18-20,
Appendices E,
H, p. 87; 115, p.
055
ME2PK1
Sediment
Wetland east of
USS Lead
0-6 inches
11-14-07
64, pp. 18-20,
Appendices E,
H, p. 87; 115, p.
056
Background Level
The table below provides a summary of the concentrations of hazardous substances detected in the
background wetland samples collected from east of the on-property wetland during the 2007 ESI. The
analytical data package and data validation report from the sampling event are provided in Reference 64,
Appendix H, pp. 72 to 80, 85 to 91, 118, 159 to 167, 169, 171 to 175, 190 and Reference 94, pp. 003 to
008, 012, 015 to 018, 061, 062, 063, 112 to 117, 120, 123 to 126, 138, 139, 155.
Sample
ID
Hazardous Substance
Sample Concentration
(mg/kg)
Sample
Quantitation
Limit (SQL)
(mg/kg)
References
ME2PF7
Lead
1270 mg/kg
2.0 mg/kg
Refs. 64, pp. 18-20,
25, 26, Appendices
E, F, H, pp. 159 to
167, 169, 171 to
175, 190; 94, pp.
112 to 117, 120, 123
to 126, 138, 155; 95
ME2PF8
Lead
332 mg/kg
1.6 mg/kg
Refs. 64, pp. 18-20,
25, 26, Appendices
E, F, H, pp. 159 to
167, 169, 171 to
175, 190; 94, pp.
112-116, 120, 123,
126, 139, 155; 95
ME2PK0
Lead
1780 mg/kg
2.3 mg/kg
Refs. 64, pp. 18-20,
25, 26, Appendices
E, F, H, pp. 72 to
79, 84, 85 to 91,
118; 94, pp. 003 to
008, 012, 015 to
018, 061, 063; 95
ME2PK1
Lead
1550 mg/kg
2.5 mg/kg
Refs. 64, pp. 18-20,
25, 26, Appendices
E, F, H, pp. 72 to
33
-------
79, 84, 85 to 91,
118; 94, pp. 003 to
008, 012, 015 to
018, 062, 063; 95
mg/kg milligrams per kilogram
U The analyte was analyzed for, but was not detected above the reported contract required detection
limit (CRDL).
Based on the above lead concentrations, the highest lead level 1780 mg/kg was selected as the reference
background lead concentration. The following sediment samples obtained from the on-property wetland were
found to be greater than three times the 1780 mg/kg lead concentration and meet the requirements of an observed
release (Refs. 1, Section2.3,p. 51589; 64,pp 18-20,25,26, AppendicesE,F,H,pp. 159to 166,168,171to 174,
190; 94, pp. 112 to 117, 119, 122 to 126, 135, 136, 141, 155).
- Contaminated Samples
Sample ID
Sample
Medium
Sample Location
Distance
from
Source
Depth
Date
References
ME2PF4
Sediment
On-property
wetland
(USS Lead
Property)
120 feet
0-6 inches
11/13/07
Ref. 64, pp 18-20,
Appendix E, F,
H, pp. 173, 174;
74; 115, p. 51
ME2PF5
Sediment
On-property
wetland
(USS Lead
Property)
95 feet
0-6 inches
11/13/07
Reference 64, pp.
18-20,
Appendices E, F,
H, pp. 173, 174;
74; 115, p. 52
ME2PG0
Sediment
On-property
wetland (USS
Lead Property)
435 feet
0-6 inches
11/14/07
Ref. 64, pp. 18-
20, Appendices
E, F, H, pp. 173,
174; 74; 115, p.
59
Sample ID
Sample
Medium
Hazardous
Substance
Hazardous Substance
Concentration
SQL
Benchmark for SW
Environmental
Ref. 2, p. 005
References
ME2PF4
Sediment
Lead
6570 mg/kg
7.7 mg/kg
NA
Refs. 64, pp.
18-20, 25, 26,
Appendices E,
F, H, pp. 159 to
166, 168, 170,
173 to 175 190;
94, pp. 112 to
117, 119, 122,
124 to 126, 135,
155; 95
ME2PF5
Sediment
Lead
6440 mg/kg
3.6 mg/kg
NA
Refs. 64, pp 18-
20, 25, 26,
Appendices E,
F, H, pp. 159 to
170, 173 to 175,
190; 94, pp. 112
to 117, 119,
120, 122, 124 to
126, 136, 155;
95
34
-------
Sample ID
Sample
Medium
Hazardous
Substance
Hazardous Substance
Concentration
SQL
Benchmark for SW
Environmental
Ref. 2, p. 005
References
ME2PG0
Sediment
Lead
5620 mg/kg
5.5 mg/kg
NA
Refs. 64, pp 18-
20, 25, 26,
Appendices E,
F, H, pp. pp.
159 to 166,167,
168, 169, 171 to
175, 190; 94,
pp. 112 to 117,
120, 123 to 126,
141, 155; 95
Key
mg/kg milligrams per kilogram
NA Not Applicable
Attribution:
The information gathered documents the presence of a contaminant associated with the USS Lead and the
sediments in the on-property wetlands. The hazardous substance in the waste slag are attributable to USS
Lead because the slag was an on-facility generated waste. Also, because a hazardous substance was detected
in waste water being discharged from the USS Lead facility, the lead in the release is at least partly attributable
to the USS Lead property (Refs. 44, p. 5, 19, 20, 28, 29; 48, pp. 2, 6).
At least part of the contamination is attributed to the USS Lead facility by direct observation based on the
following:
1) NPDES outfall Discharge Monitoring Reports;
2) The slag pile being deposited directly into the wetland.
The Dupont Corporation, located approximately '/i mile upstream from the USS Lead facility on the Grand
Calumet River, was a manufacturer and packager of inorganic pesticides (i.e. lead arsenate). Several waste
management units have been established on the property. A slurry wall has also been completed on site to
address any on site ground water issues. The facility is currently undergoing RCRA Corrective Action
activities (Ref. 69).
Any potential contamination from the Dupont facility which may have reached the Grand Calumet River
would be reflected in the background samples that are located between the Dupont facility and the USS Lead
wetlands.
The concentrations of lead in the background samples are significantly less than what is currently being seen
on the USS Lead property wetland. Therefore, the lead in the wetland on the USS Lead property can be at
least partly attributed to USS Lead (Ref. 74; Section 3.1.1 of this HRS Documentation Record).
Also, please see the information in the Site Summary and Section 2.2 of this HRS Documentation Record.
Presently, the USS Lead on-property wetland consists of swampy areas of standing water that serve as
wetlands. Several species of state endangered and threatened birds and plants are known to exist in the
vicinity of the wetland (Ref. 91, pp. 4, 6-10, 23, 35, 43, 47, 63, 72, 76, 82, 90).
Hazardous Substances Released:
Lead
Cadmium*
Copper*
Arsenic*
35
-------
*Although, cadmium, copper, and arsenic were released in regards to Source #2 in 1984 and 1985, current
analytical data does not show these past releases (Refs. 44, pp. 19, 20, 28, 30; 48, p. 2; see Source 2
description in this HRS Documentation Record).
Surface Water Observed Release Factor Value: 550
4.1.4 Environmental Threat
4.1.4.2 Environmental Threat Waste Characteristics
4.1.4.2.1 Ecosystem Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation
The ecosystem toxicity and persistence values, the environmental bioaccumulation values, and the ecosystem
toxicity/persistence/bioaccumulation factor values for all hazardous substances associated with Source #1 and
Source #2 are presented in the table below. The combined ecosystem toxicity/persistence/bioaccumulation
factorvalues were obtained from HRS Table 4-21 (Ref. 1, Section 4.1.4.2.1.4, p. 51623).
Hazardous Substance
Source
Ecosystem
Persistence
Bioaccumulation
Ecosystem
References (Ref
No.
Toxicity
Factor
Value**
Tox/Persisten
1, Section
Factor
Value*
ce/Bio Factor
4.1.4.2.1.4,p.
Value
Value (Table
51623)
4-21)
Lead
1,2
1000
1
50,000
50,000,000
Ref. 2, p. 005
Arsenic
2
10
1
5,000
50,000
Ref. 2, p. 007
Cadmium
2
10,000
1
50,000
500,000,000
Ref. 2, p. 009
Copper
2
1,000
1
5,000
5,000,000
Ref. 2, p. 011
* The river persistence value was used since the nearest sensitive environment is the on-property wetland
which is part of the Grand Calumet River.
**Bioaccumulation factor value for Freshwater
Ecosystem Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation Factor Value: 5 x 108
4.1.4.2.2 Hazardous Waste Quantity
Source No.
Source Type
Source Hazardous Waste
Quantity
1
Waste Pile (slag)
>0, but value is unknown
2
Other: Waste Water Discharge
8600
Sum of Values:
As documented in Section 4.1.4.3 of this HRS Documentation Record, targets along the surface water
migration pathway are subject to Level II concentrations; therefore, a Hazardous Waste Quantity factor value
from Table 2-6 or 100, whichever is greater, is assigned as the hazardous waste quantity factor value for that
pathway (Ref. 1, Section 2.4.2.2, p. 51592).
Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100
(Ref. 1, Section 2.4.2.2, p. 51592)
4.1.4.2.3 Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value
The environmental waste characteristics factor value is obtained by multiplying the (ecosystem toxicity/
persistence factor value) and the hazardous waste quantity factor value for the watershed, subject to a
maximum product of 1 x 108. Then multiply the product by the ecosystem bioaccumulation potential factor
36
-------
value for that hazardous substance, subject to a maximum product of 1 x 1012 (Ref. 1, Section 4.1.4.2.3, p.
51624). The product is assigned a waste characteristic factor category value from HRS Table 2-7 (Ref. 1,
Section 2.4.3.1, p. 51592). The values presented below are for cadmium.
Ecosystem Toxicity/Persistence Factor Value: 10,000
Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100
Bioaccumulation Potential Factor Value: 50000
10,000 (Ecotox) X 100 (Hazardous Waste Quantity is 100) = 1 x 106 X 50,000 (Bio Accumulation) = 5 X 1010
Then enter 5 X 1010into HRS Table 2-7
HRS Table 2-7 gives you a waste characteristics factor category value of 320
Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value: 320
(Ref. 1, Table 2-7, p. 51592)
4.1.4.3 Environmental Threat Targets
4.1.4.3.1.1 Level I Concentrations
There are no level I concentrations; therefore, level I concentrations were not evaluated as part of this HRS
Documentation Record.
4.1.4.3.1 Sensitive Environments
4.1.4.3.1.2 Level II Concentrations
Actual contamination is shown in the preceding sections by establishing an observed release by chemical
analysis to wetland sediments, which includes other sensitive environments, of the same substance.
Contaminants that meet the criteria for observed releases to the surface water pathway were detected in
sediment samples (Section 4.1.2.1. lof this HRS Documentation Record). Therefore, Level II concentrations
are assigned (Ref. 1, Sec. 2, p. 51592).
A 39+/- acre wetland, is present on the southern portion of the facility property. This area meets the criteria
for a wetland as defined by the Hazard Ranking System and as defined in 40 CFR Section 230.3 (Refs. 1, p.
51625; 91, pp. 3, 4, 6, 8, 49, 51, 53, 55, 57, 59, 61, 62, 63; 88; 110). This area is inundated and/or saturated by
surface water at frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances does
support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. This portion of the
property contains hydrophytes in both hydric and non-hydric soils (Refs. 88; 91, pp. 47 through 61). National
Wetland Inventory Maps published by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service indicate that this wetland is
designated as freshwater emergent wetland (Ref. 87). This wetland meets the HRS definition of a wetland, 40
CFR 230.3, and is considered eligible for HRS scoring (Refs. 1, Table 4-24, p. 51625; 87; 88; 110).
This wetland had become contaminated with lead and other metals as a result of lead bearing slag (Source #1)
being dumped directly into the wetland and of discharging water from an NPDES permitted outfall (Source
#2)(Refs. 44, pp. 4, 19-20, 28, 30; 48, pp. 2, 6; 36, pp. 9-14; 64, pp 18-20, 25, 26, Appendices E, F; 65, p. 12;
68, pp. 7, 8, 11-13, 15; 94, pp.112-116, 119, 122, 126, 135-136, 141, 153).
The wetland is a habitat known to be used by State designated endangered or threatened species. A habitat
known to be used by State designated endangered or threatened species meets the HRS definition of a
sensitive environment (Ref. 1, Table 4-23, p. 51624). The wetland is an area/habitat known to be used by the
marsh wren, cistothorus palustris, a state designated endangered bird (Refs. 91, pp. 9, 10; 111, p. 1). The last
sighting of the bird was in 2007. Bebbs Sedge, carex bebbii, a state designated threatened plant, was found in
the wetland area in 2007(Refs. 91, pp. 9, 10, 35, 43, 76, 82, 90; 105; 111, p. 1). Also, the wetland area, a
particular area, relatively small in size, is important to the maintenance of unique biotic communities. It is part
of the Grand Calumet River Corridor (Refs. 91, pp. 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 18, 24; 112, pp. 1-6).
37
-------
Sample ID
Sample
Medium
Hazardous
Substance
Hazardous
Substance
Concentration
SQL
Benchmark for
SW
Environmental
Ref. 2, p. 005
Reference
ME2PF4
Sediment
Lead
6570 mg/kg
7.7 mg/kg
NA
Refs. 64, pp. 18-20,
25,26, Appendices E,
F, H, pp. 159 to 166,
168, 170, 173 to 175
190; 94, pp. 112 to
117, 119, 122, 124 to
126, 135, 155; 95
ME2PF5
Sediment
Lead
6440 mg/kg
3.6 mg/kg
NA
Refs. 64, pp 18-20,
25,26, Appendices E,
F, H, pp. 159 to 171,
173 to 175, 190; 94,
pp. 112 to 117, 119,
120, 122, 124 to 126,
136, 155; 95
ME2PG0
Sediment
Lead
5620 mg/kg
5.5 mg/kg
NA
Refs. 64, pp 18-20,
25,26, Appendices E,
F, H, pp. pp. 159 to
166, 168, 169, 171 to
175, 190; 94, pp. 112
to 117, 120, 123 to
126, 141, 155; 95
Key
mg/kg: milligrams per kilogram
Sensitive Environment
Distance from PPE to
Nearest Sensitive
Environment
Reference
Sensitive Environment
Value (Ref. 1, Table 4-
23, p. 51624)
Habitat known to be used
by State designated
endangered species
(Marsh Wren)
Oft
74; 91, pp. 9, 10, 35,43;
111,p. 1
50
Habitat known to be used
by State designated
threatened species
(Bebbs Sedge)
Oft
74; 91, pp. 9, 10, 76, 82,
90; 111, p. 1
50
Particular areas,
relatively small in size,
important to maintenance
of unique biotic life
(Grand Calumet River
Corridor)
Oft
74; 91, pp. 4, 10, 18, 24;
112, pp. 1-6
25
There is evidence that the Blandings Turtle and the Franklin Ground Squirrel, both of which are State designated
endangered or threatened species, are also in the area. These two species were last observed in the area in 1999
and 1992 respectively (Ref. 91, pp. 9, 10). It is unclear whether these species remain in the site area at this time.
As PPE#1 is within the wetlands, there is no distance from PPE #1 to the nearest sensitive environment (Ref.
74).
Sum of Level II Sensitive Environments Value: 125
38
-------
Wetlands
Wetland sediment samples ME2PF4, ME2PF5, and ME2PG0 meet the requirements for an observed release
(Refs. 1, Section2.3, p. 51589; Section 4.1.2.1.1 of this HRS Documentation Record). The total length of
wetlands frontage documented at the USS Lead on-property wetland that are subject to Level II concentrations
of hazardous substances is determined by measuring the distance from PPE #1 to sample ME2PF4 to sample
ME2PG0 to sample ME2PF5 and then back to the PPE (Refs. 74; 76). The perimeter of the wetlands outlined
by connecting a line to PPE #1 and these three sample points represents a quadrilateral (Ref. 74). The
perimeter of the wetland measured by this quadrilateral that is subject to Level II concentrations is 1,206.52
feet or .228 miles (Ref. 74). The distance from PPE #1 to each of the three (3) sample points and back to the
PPE #1 was calculated using ESRI®ArcMap™ 9.2, Copyright© 1999-2007, ESRI Inc (Refs. 74, 76). The
distance was determined based on the locations of the sediment samples as logged into the Trimble Global
Positioning System Unit upon the time of collection, and then transferred to the ESRI®ArcMap™ 9.2
program. These locations were then placed on the digitized and rectified aerial photograph of the area. Then
using this program, the ruler option of the program allows users to find distances between sample locations
(Refs. 74, 76). Sample locations are depicted in Reference 64, Appendices E and F. The perimeter of the
wetlands was calculated using ESRI®ArcMap™ 9.2, Copyright© 1999-2004, ESRI Inc (Ref. 76). The
assigned HRS wetland rating for Level II concentrations is 25 (Ref. 1, Table 4-24, p. 51625).
Wetland
Wetland Frontage (ft)
Wetland Frontage (miles)
Reference
PEM
1,206.52
.228
Refs. 74; 76; 91, p.4, 6, 7,
8, 47, 63, 72, 76
Notes:
Sum of Level II Wetland Frontages: .228 miles
Wetlands Value (Ref. 1, Table 4-24): 25
Sum of Level II Sensitive Environments Value + Wetlands Value: 25 + 125
Level II Concentrations Factor Value: 150
39
-------
Soil Exposure Pathway - Not Scored
Evidence of soil contamination, both on and off the property exists in the vicinity of USS Lead. Levels of
lead, which may pose a threat to nearby individuals, have been documented on the USS Lead property, as well
as on nearby residential and industrial areas. Investigations in the area indicate that a lead release had
occurred to residential properties greater than 0.25 miles but less than 4 miles of USS Lead (Refs. 64, pp.16,
26, 27, 30-32, Appendix D; 68, p. 12; 81, Table 3, Figures 4a, 4b, 8a,8b & 9, Appendix E Tables E-l, E-2 &
E-3; 82, pp. 7, 8, 9, Table 1 (p. 58); 94, pp 003 to 018, 044 to 050, 052 to 060, 063, 065 to 070, 072, 073, 075
to 079, 086, 087, 090, 092, 093, 110). In 2007, there were at least 18 residential properties identified during a
recent sampling event as having elevated levels of lead in their soil. Residential soil lead levels ranged from
as low as 62.6 mg/kg (background level) to as high as 1680 mg/kg (Refs. 64, pp. 16, 26, 27, 30-32, Appendix
D; 94, pp 003 to 018, 044 to 050, 052 to 060, 063, 065 to 070, 072, 073, 075 to 079, 086, 087, 090, 092, 093,
110). In 1985, EPA conducted a lead soil survey where 19 lead soil samples were taken in areas surrounding
USS Lead. The lead levels ranged from 100 mg/kg to 11,000 mg/kg with six locations containing lead levels
above 1,100 mg/kg (Ref. 32, pp. 4, 5, 6). However, until a more comprehensive study can be done, elevated
lead levels will not be used in the overall site score.
40
-------
6.0 AIR MIGRATION PATHWAY
Literature indicates that lead releases have occurred to soils and air from lead smelters (Refs. 38, p. 227; 101,
p.2; 102, pp. 1-3). The State of Indiana as part of their State Implementation Plan was working on a
rulemaking which would propose emission limitations in June 1986 (Refs. 31, p. 1; 103; 104).
As can be seen in Figure 2-1 of this HRS Documentation Record, the shadow of a stack can be observed next
to the former baghouse. Lead emissions at a rate of 16.07 tons of lead per year have been documented for the
USS Lead facility (Ref. 38, pp. 205, 216). Two air emission sources were listed for the USS Lead facility: 1) a
point source (stack) and 2) a volume source (roof vent) (Ref. 38, pp. 205, 219, 220).
Inspection of the site indicates that "lead flue dust had been casually hauled around in a front end loader, for
example, with excessive loss by spill or by wind" (Ref. 5, p. 006). The air pathway may have also been
compromised because the slag pile was never capped and was subject to dispersion (Refs. 36, pp. 11, 12; 67,
p. 008; 100; Figure 2-1 of this HRS documentation record). Therefore, there were likely airborne releases of
contaminants prior to the remediation of this area (Refs. 67, p. 006; 100).
As the past air releases from USS Lead pose a threat to human health and the environment to, at minimum,
those humans exposed when the releases occurred, EPA is scoring the air migration pathway as part of this
HRS Documentation Record (Ref. 102, p. 1).
6.1 LIKELIHOOD OF RELEASE
This HRS Documentation Record will evaluate the release factor in terms of an observed release by direct
observation and chemical analysis (See Section 6.1.1 of this HRS Documentation Record).
6. 1. 1 OBSERVED RELEASE BY DIRECT OBSERVATION AND CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
Direct Observation
An observed release of lead to the air by direct observation has been documented at the USS Lead property.
According to an inspection of the facility by the Air Pollution Control Division in April 1985, the company
was told that they were violating 325 IAC6-4 which applies to Maximum Allowable Fugitive Dust Emissions
(Refs. 15; 31, p. 14).
The inspection noted "a number of areas where there were problems. Many piles of material were scoured by
the wind. Dust on nearly all drives with vehicle traffic which were a source of wind-blown emissions crossing
the property line. Handling of collected dust from baghouses was not satisfactory. Street sweeper was not
adequately cleaning the roads (although it was not seen in operation)" (Ref. 15).
The slag pile was never capped (Refs. 36, pp. 11, 12; 67, p. 008; 100; Figure 2-1 of this HRS Documentation
Record). The 1985 inspection of the facility noted wind-blown emissions crossing the property line that may
have come from storage piles of furnace slag, flue dust, and battery casings on the plant property (Refs. 14, p.
02; 15). In addition, as mentioned above, another inspection of the facility found that "lead flue dust had been
casually hauled around in a front-end loader, for example, with excessive loss by spill or by wind" (Ref. 5, p.
006).
Chemical Analysis
Air data collected by the Indiana State Board of Health on September 16, 1985, showed that a release
(primary) sample, collected downwind of the USS Lead site, had a total suspended particulate concentration
that exceeded the maximum allowable increase (as defined in Indiana's air regulations) over background.
Since the air sample exceeded an allowable particulate concentration, the USS Lead facility was found to be
out of compliance with (in violation of) Regulation 325 IAC 6-4, Section 2(c) (Ref. 14, p. 02).
The background and release (primary) samples were also analyzed for lead. The air release sample downwind
of the USS Lead facility contained lead at a concentration of 38.187 ug/m3. This concentration was found to
41
-------
be over 100 times the level in the background sample (Ref. 14, p. 13). Since the air release sample was
significantly greater than the background air sample, an observed release by chemical analysis is noted. Based
on the locations of the primary and background samples and on wind direction, the elevated levels of lead in
the primary sample may be at least partially attributed to the USS Lead facility (Refs. 14, pp. 02, 13; 96, pp.
001,006; 97, pp. 001,002).
Background Sample - across Grand Calumet River, opposite southernmost part of USS Lead property
In an effort to document airborne releases from the USS Lead facility, it was necessary to determine the wind
directions during days when air lead samples were obtained. The appropriate raw meteorological data was
reviewed and a wind vector analysis was constructed. A background air sample was obtained based on these
parameters and was obtained just south of the USS Lead facility (Refs. 14, pp. 02, 08; 96, p.006; 97, p. 001).
Below are the background concentrations that were obtained.
Particulate Concentration: 122 |ig/m3
Lead Concentration: 0.375 |ig/m3
References: 14, pp. 02, 08, 11, 13; 97, p. 002
|ig/m = micrograms per cubic meter
Release (Primary) Sample - just beyond northeast corner of USS Lead property
On September 16, 1985, an air sample was obtained (Ref. 97, pp. 001, 002). This air sample was considered a
release sample based on a vector analysis of wind direction (Refs. 96, p. 001; 97, p. 001). On this date, the
ground was sufficiently dry to allow the dust from the USS lead facility to become entrained in the air (Ref.
97, p. 001). The sample was obtained just northeast of the USS Lead facility (Refs. 14, p. 08; 18). Below are
the results of the test.
Particulate Concentration: 218 |ig/m3
Lead Concentration: 38.187 |ig/m3
References: 14, pp. 02, 08, 10, 13; 97, p. 002
Attribution: Attribution to the site via the air pathway is supported by the presence of the slag waste pile,
flue dust and battery casings located on the USS Lead property (Refs. 14, p. 02; 15, 100). In addition, an
observed release to the air by direct observation has been documented (Refs. 14, pp. 02, 08, 10, 11, 13; 15; 96,
p. 001; 97, pp. 002, 003; and See Section 6.1.1 of this HRS Documentation Record).
Other Possible Non Site-related Sources
IDEM conducted a review of files and Sanborn Maps to determine if there are any other sources of
lead that may have adversely impacted the air as well as the surrounding soils via the air pathway. The review
revealed the presence of at least six other facilities that were involved with lead processing activities in the
past. The facilities are Anaconda, Eagle Picher, Metals Refining, US Reduction, Hammond Lead and Dupont.
A map showing the location of these other facilities is found in Reference 75, p. 79. The layout of these
facilities were reviewed on 1930 Sanborn Insurance maps (Refs. 75, pp. 81, 82, 83; 113, pp. 1-9). Below are
brief findings regarding these facilities:
The Glidden Co.: Metals Refining. Inc. Division (1.36 mi. SW of USS Lead)
Sanborn maps show that Metals Refining, Inc. recycled lead at the site in 1930. The maps indicate that an
oxidizing plant and a refinery had operated at this site. A metal powder blending area, an iron powder facility,
and other processes were utilized. Historical research indicated that lead smelting has occurred at the site
(Refs. 75, pp. 9, 79, 83; 113, pp. 1, 2; 114, pp. 1, 2, 3).
United States Reduction (US Reduction) (0.77 mi. N of USS Lead)
According to 1930 Sanborn maps, US Reduction was a manufacturer of white metal. The facility consisted of
an evaporating building, ore storage areas, an oil tank room, ingot storage, a machine shop, a melting area,
other metal storage buildings, and an ore mill. No other historical information was found (Refs. 75, pp. 9, 79,
42
-------
81,82, 83; 113, pp. 1,2).
Anaconda Lead Products/International Lead Products (0.62 mi. N. NW of USS Lead)
According to 1930 Sanborn maps, Anaconda Lead Products was a manufacturer of white lead and zinc oxide.
The facility consisted of a pulverizing mill, white lead storage areas, an electrical substation, a lowden drier
building, several water towers, an electrolytic building consisting of a tank room and a cell room, a chemical
laboratory, a machine shop, a zinc oxide experimental unit building, a furnace, several settlers, a motor room,
offices, a baghouse, and other miscellaneous buildings and processing areas. No other historical information
was found (Refs. 75, pp. 9, 79, 83; 113, pp. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8).
Metals Thermit Corporation (0.77 mi. NW of USS Lead)
The Metal Thermit Corporation operated a detinning plant. The facility consisted of a smelter, a general
laboratory, a raw materials room, a general repair shop, an engine room, offices, and other miscellaneous
buildings and processing areas (Refs. 75, pp. 9, 79, 83; 113, pp. 1, 2, 9).
Hammond Lead (1.53 mi. SW of USS Leadl
No historical information was found for this facility at this time (Ref. 75, pp. 9, 79, 83).
Eagle Picher (location unspecified)
No historical information was found for this facility at this time (Ref. 75, pp. 9, 79, 83).
The Dupont Corporation (0.3 mi. E of USS Lead)
The Dupont Corporation was a manufacturer and packager of inorganic pesticides (i.e. lead arsenate). Several
waste management units have been established on site. A slurry wall has also been completed on site to
address any on site ground water issues. The facility is currently undergoing RCRA Corrective Action
activities (Refs. 69; 75, p. 79).
Air Observed Release Factor Value: 550
6.1.2 POTENTIAL TO RELEASE
Because an observed release has been identified, air potential to release is not scored (Ref. 1, Section 6.1.1, p.
51651).
6.2 WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
6.2.1 TOXICITY/MOBILITY
Because lead meets the criteria for an observed release to the atmosphere, a mobility factor of 0.02 is assigned
to it (Ref. 1, Section 6.2.1.2, p. 51655).
Gas Particulate Toxicity
Toxicity Mobility Mobility Mobility
Hazardous Factor Factor Factor Factor
Substance Source(s) Value Value Value (Table 6-13)
Lead 1 10,000 N/A 0.02 200
Refs: See Source Description Section, Source 1, in this documentation record which indicates that lead is
associated with this source. See Reference 1 and 2 for toxicity and mobility factor values (Refs. 1, Section
6.2.1.2, p. 51655 and Table 6-13, p. 51660; 2, p. 005).
The substance with the highest toxicity/mobility factor value is lead, with a value of 200.
Toxicity/Mobility Factor Value: 200
43
-------
6.2.2 HAZARDOUS WASTE QUANTITY
Is Source Hazardous
Waste Constituent Quantity
Source# Quantity Value (Section 2.4.2.1.51 Data Complete?
1 *>0, but amount is unknown no
* Although the majority of the slag pile has been remediated, remnants/residual material still remains.
Therefore a value of >0, but amount unknown is assigned (Ref. 1, Section 2.4.2.2, p. 51591).
Sum of values: >0, but amount is unknown
The Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value is assigned 100, because an air migration pathway target is
subject to a Level I concentration (Ref. 1, Section 2.4.2.2, p. 51592 and Section 6.2.2, p. 51660).
6.2.3 WASTE CHARACTERISTICS FACTOR CATEGORY VALUE
Toxicity/mobility factor value
x hazardous waste quantity factor value = 2 x 104
200 x 102 = 2 x 104
From Table 2-7, Reference 1, p. 51592, a factor category value of 10 is assigned.
Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100
Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value: 10
6.3 TARGETS
As noted in the Superfund Chemical Data Matrix, the NAAQS/NESHAPS benchmark for lead in air is 1.5
ug/m3. Since the air release sample was significantly greater than the background air sample, and this sample
exceeded a benchmark, 1.5 ug/m3, targets subject to this concentration are considered level I (Refs. 1, Section
6.3, pp. 51660, 51661, Table 6-14; 2, p. 005).
Based on the 1985 air sampling event, an air sample was obtained northeast of source 1. The air sample was
obtained 'A mile from the site source. Analysis of that air sample showed that the lead concentration in that
sample was three times greater than background and exceeded an air benchmark. Therefore all human targets
up to '/i mile are subject to actual contamination (the level I concentration) (See Section 6.1.1 of this HRS
Documentation Record).
Level I Distance Categories
Sample ID: Release (Primary) sample from air observed release
Location: Just beyond the property boundary of USS Lead at its northeast corner
References: 14, p. 08; 18; 99
Sources: 1
Distance from the source in miles: 1458 feet or 0.276 mile
References: 14, pp. 02, 08, 11, 13; 15; 18; 36, p. 14; 67, p. 008; 99
Distance categories subject to Level I concentrations: on-a source and 0 to Va mile
There are two Distance Categories: 1) On a source
21 >0 to '/4 mile
44
-------
Level II Distance Categories
There are no Level II distance categories.
Potential Contamination Distance Categories
Because considering only the Level I human targets is sufficient to provide a maximum air pathway score for
the site, potential human targets were not included in the pathway score.
6.3.1 NEAREST INDIVIDUAL FACTOR
Nearest Individual - Level I Concentrations
Based on the 1985 air sampling event, an air sample was obtained northeast of source 1. The air sample was
obtained 'A mile from the site source. Analysis of that air sampled showed that the lead concentration in that
sample was three times greater background and exceeded an air benchmark. Therefore all targets up to 'A mile
are subject to actual contamination (the level I concentration) (See Sections 6.1.1 and 6.3 of this HRS
Documentation Record).
The nearest population that is subject to Level I concentration is based on the workers on the USS Lead
property.
Location: on-site
Source: 1
Distance from the nearest source in miles: on site
References: 14, pp. 02, 08, 11, 13; 99
Nearest Individual Factor Value: 50
6.3.2 POPULATION
6.3.2.2 LEVEL I CONCENTRATIONS
6.3.2.2 LEVEL I CONCENTRATIONS
According to a directory published in 1986, the USS Lead facility employed 71 people (Ref. 37, p. 4). This
figure is from prior to the plant closing in December 1985.
Also included in the Level I population category is those people living or working within the 0 to '/i mile
distance ring. This includes 50 employees at the E. I. Dupont plant to the east and 160 employees at Harbison
Walker Refractory to the south (Refs. 41; 90).
The population data as documented in the 1991 HRS Documentation Record is being used. An observed
release by chemical analysis was established as documented in Section 6.1.1 of this HRS Documentation
Record. The population data for the time in which the release occurred is as follows:
USS Lead 71 People
E.I Dupont 50 People
Harbison Walker Refractory 160 People
Total 281 People
Target Score: (281 x 10) = 2810
Level 1
Target Score: 2810
45
-------
*The 0 -1/4 mile radius is currently measured from the boundary of the small pond where the slag pile was
located prior to its removal.
6.3.2.3. LEVEL II CONCENTRATIONS
There are no level II targets identified.
6.3.2.4 POTENTIAL CONTAMINATION
Although not used to calculate the pathway score, employees, residents, and students located greater than one-
quarter ('/,) mile and less than four (4) miles from USS Lead could have been considered subject to potential
contamination. The table below is a partial listing of the population within each distance category, which is
provided for informational purposes. IDEM staff had called the schools/businesses/factories listed below to
obtain the number of employees (see references listed below).
Distance Name of No. of students/
Category Facility residents/employees References
0 -'/4 Mile NA NA (All targets in 0-1/4
Mile are considered
Level 1)
- '/2 Mile Universal SVCS 3 Refs. 49, p. 1; 53
Calregion Supply 4 Refs. 49, p. 1; 54
Pinder Polyurethane
& Plastics 8 Refs. 49, p. 1; 55
Central Rent A Crane 25 Refs. 49, p. 1; 56
Meretic Corporation 14 Refs. 49, p. 1; 57
Resident Population* 1205 Refs. 49, p. 1; 64, Appen. A
Central States 34 Refs. 49, p. 1; 85, p 1
Marketing
Total 1293
*Note: Elevated levels of lead were detected in the soil in the residential area to the north/northeast of the
USS Lead property that lies in the '/i - '/? mile radius of Source 1 (Refs. 68, p. 12; 81, Table 3, Figures 4a,4b,
8a,8b & 9, Appendix E Tables E-l, E-2 & E-3; 82, pp. 1,2,3, Table 1; 64, pp. 3-3, 4-5 to 4-6, 4-9 to 4-11,
Appendix D; 94, pp 003 to 018, 044, 048, 049, 050, 052 to 055, 057 to 060, 063, 065 to 070, 072, 073, 075 to
079, 086, 087, 090, 092, 093, 110).
Vi -1 Mile Resident 4433 Refs. 49, p. 1; 64, Appen. A
Population
St. Joseph Carmelite 122 Refs. 49, p. 1; 85, p. 2
Home for Girls
Union Tank Car Co. 5 Refs. 49, p. 1; 85, p. 3
46
-------
Fuentes Auto Repair 2
Polaris Kars Auto Body 2
Mikes Automotive 3
Creviston Trucking Inc. 7
Center
Chicago Flame 30
Hardening Co. Inc.
Topbulb.com LLC 15
United States Postal 50
Majac Inc. 13
Budget Maintenance 25
& Construction
Service
Total 4707
1 -2 Mile St. Mary's School 71
Block Junior High 80+ 500 students
School
Harding Elementary 710
School
St. Catherine 170
West Side Junior 593
High School
Resident Population 32589
TOTAL: 34713
2-3 Miles Resident 46,423
Population
Total
3 to 4 Miles Edison Elementary 780
School
Resident 41,099
Population
Total 41,879
Refs. 49, p. 1; 85, p. 4
Refs. 49, p. 1; 85, p. 5
Refs. 49, p. 1; 85, p 6
Refs. 49, p. 1; 85, p. 7
Refs. 49, p. 1; 85, p. 8
Refs. 49, p. 1; 85, p. 9
Refs. 49, p. 1; 85, p 10
Refs. 49, p. 1; 85, p. 11
Refs. 49, p. 1; 85, p. 12
Refs. 49, p. 1; 58
Refs. 49, p. 1; 59
Refs. 49, p. 1; 60
Refs. 49, p. 2; 62
Refs. 49, p. 2; 63
Ref. 64, Appendix A
Ref. 64, Appendix A
Ref. 61
Ref. 64, Appendix A
47
-------
6.3.3
RESOURCES
No commercial agriculture, or silviculture or major or designated recreation areas are located with Zi mile of a
source at USS Lead.
6.3.4 SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENTS
Although not used to calculate the pathway score, a 39+/- acre wetland, is present on the southern portion of
the facility property. This area meets the criteria for a wetland as defined by the Hazard Ranking System and
as defined in 40 CFR Section 230.3 (Refs. 1, p. 51625; 91, pp. 3, 4, 6, 8, 49, 51, 53, 55, 57, 59, 61, 62, 63; 88;
110). This area is inundated and/or saturated by surface water at frequency and duration sufficient to support,
and that under normal circumstances does support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in
saturated soil conditions. This portion of the property contains hydrophytes in both hydric and non-hydric
soils (Refs. 88; 91, pp. 47 through 61). National Wetland Inventory Maps published by the U. S. Fish and
Wildlife Service indicate that this wetland is designated as freshwater emergent wetland (Ref. 87). This
wetland meets the HRS definition of a wetland, 40 CFR 230.3, and is considered eligible for HRS scoring
(Refs. 1, Table 4-24, p. 51625; 87; 88; 110).
The wetland is a habitat known to be used by State designated endangered and threatened species. A habitat
known to be used by State designated endangered or threatened species meets the HRS definition of a
sensitive environment (Ref. 1, Table 4-23, p. 51624). The wetland is an area/habitat known to be used by the
marsh wren, cistothorus palustris, a state designated endangered bird. The last sighting of the bird was in
2007. Bebbs Sedge, carex bebbii, a state designated threatened plant, was found in the wetland area in
2007(Refs. 91, pp. 9, 10, 35, 43, 76, 82, 90; 111, p. 1).
The wetland area is also within a habitat known to be used by the state designated endangered blandings turtle,
emydoidea blandingii. The last sighting of the turtle was in 1999. The franklin ground squirrel, spermophilus
franklinii, a state designated endangered animal, was also observed in this habitat. The last sighting of the
squirrel was in 1992 (Ref. 91, pp. 9, 10). It is unclear whether these two species remain in the site area at this
time. Also, the wetland area, a particular area, relatively small in size, is important to the maintenance of
unique biotic communities. It is part of the Grand Calumet River Corridor (Refs. 91, pp. 4, 10, 18, 24; 112,
pp. 1-6).
The sensitive environments with 'A mile of the USS Lead sources include the site wetland and the habitat for
two state designated endangered or threatened species, the Marsh Wren and Bebbs Sedge (Refs. 91, pp. 9, 10,
35,43,76, 82, 90; 105; 111, p. 1).
48
------- |