Document 2j5G83b6J0Xpe3N828V1098pR

Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Lynn, Tricia [/0=EXCHANGELABS/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=D8747BA49CDE485EA4AC58DBF09C3DCD-TRICIA SLUSSER] 1/25/2018 8:15:04 PM Ex. 6 Re: Reporting on repurposing fo rm e r Superfund sites Lynne-- For attribution to "an EPA spokesperson:" 1 . 1understand that, to date (12/21/17), 395 sites have now been remediated and removed from the Superfund list. Is this correct? Any ballpark for how many more sites might be remediated and removed from the list going forward - in say, one year or 10 years? That is correct. As of Jan. 18, 395 sites have been deleted from the Superfund National Priorities List. We display the upto-date number of NPL sites, including deleted sites, at https://www.epa.gov/superfund/superfund-national-priorities-listnpl. The number of sites to be deleted in the coming years will be the number of sites where no further response is appropriate and EPA determines that criteria has been met to warrant a delisting decision. 2. Why is reuse of the sites important? What kind of follow-up, if any, does the EPA do after a site is removed from the Superfund list? Does the agency - or others - monitor the reuse? EPA places a high priority on land revitalization as an integral part of its Superfund cleanup mission. This land would otherwise be unused. Instead, Superfund cleanups have allowed hundreds of communities to reclaim formerly contaminated Superfund sites for protective and productive uses. This redevelopment brings major economic benefits. Information EPA has collected at 487 of the 888 sites in reuse indicate these sites supported approximately 6,600 businesses in 2017. These businesses' ongoing operations generate annual sales of $43.6 billion and employ more than 156,000 people who earned a combined income of $11.2 billion. Regarding what EPA does after a site is deleted from the NPL, EPA conducts follow-up reviews -- even after NPL deletion -- every five years when hazardous substances remain on site above levels that permit unrestricted use and unlimited exposure. 3. Of the repurposing uses so far, could you share examples of what has worked the best? Any particularly innovative approaches that future projects could consider? Communities have successfully reused Superfund sites for many industrial, commercial, ecological and recreational purposes. Many Superfund sites have been redeveloped in innovative ways, including alternative energy facilities (https://www.epa.gov/superfund-redevelopment-initiative/alternative-energv-superfund-sites) and mixed-use developments that bring together jobs and amenities. The Superfund Redevelopment Initiative (SRI) provides success stories resulting from fruitful partnerships. These can be accessed on the SRI website: https://www.epa.gov/superfund-redevelopment-initiative/depth-case-studies-superfundreuse. There are 30 in-depth case studies available. Two projects are highlighted below to give a sense of the redevelopment stories unfolding nationwide: The Sullivan's Ledge Solar Project is one of numerous renewable energy facilities located on current and former contaminated lands. Built on an old landfill affected by soil and groundwater contamination, the facility generates pollution-free energy and has restored a vacant area to beneficial use. The 1.75-megawatt facility includes over 5,000 block-mounted fixed-tilt solar panels. Project financier SunEdison, Inc., leases the site from the city and then sells the solar net metering credits back to the city at a reduced rate under a 20-year power purchase agreement. In the early 1980s, decades of disinvestment had left the Tacoma, Washington, waterfront abandoned and blighted. Industrial activities contaminated soil, groundwater and sediments across more than 10 square miles of Commencement Bay and Tacoma. The City of Tacoma, the Washington State Department of Ecology, EPA and Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA Tier 13 ED 002061 00006218-00001 other stakeholders collaborated to engage the public, clean up the area, address liability issues, establish publicprivate partnerships, secure funding, and revitalize the waterway. Today, the cleanup of the Thea Foss Waterway is complete. A public esplanade extends along the shore, punctuated by public parks, apartment buildings, restaurants and diverse businesses. The Museum of Glass is home to a contemporary collection of artists from around the world, with the Chihuly Bridge of Glass connecting the museum to downtown Tacoma. New, state-ofthe-art marinas and water-based businesses have established the Thea Foss Waterway as a major boating destination in the Puget Sound region. 4. What uses so far have proved problematic? Any lessons we can take away to inform future repurposing projects? EPA has not noticed that any one type of reuse has proven problematic. Best, Tricia Tricia Lynn Office of Public Affairs U.S. EPA Office: 202.564.2615 From:! Ex. 6 Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 8:20 PM To: Lynn, Tricia <lynn.tricia(5)epa.gov> Subject: Re: Reporting on repurposing former Superfund sites j)n Behalf Of Lynne Peeples Thanks again, Tricia. Questions below. Yes, I would need answers by 1/26. A call would still be ideal, if at all possible. Appreciate it! 1 .1understand that, to date ( l2/21/17), 395 sites have now been remediated and removed from the Superfund list. Is this correct? Any ballpark for how many more sites might be remediated and removed from the list going forward --in say, one year or 10 years? 2. Why is reuse of the sites important? What kind of follow-up, if any, does the EPA do after a site is removed from the Superfund list? Does the agency --or others --monitor the reuse? 3. Of the repurposing uses so far, could you share examples of what has worked the best? Any particularly innovative approaches that future projects could consider? 4. What uses so far have proved problematic? Any lessons we can take away to inform future repurposing projects? On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 10:29 AM, Lynn, Tricia <lynn.tricia@epa.gov> wrote: Hi Lynne-- Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA Tier 13 ED 002061 00006218-00002 Thanks for your email. In order to proceed, I'll need a complete list of your questions (though we can go back with follow-up if necessary). I also want to confirm that 1/26 is your deadline. I'm happy to ask about a call, but please be aware that they're not always available. If not, we can generally respond in writing. Thanks again. I look forward to hearing from you soon. --T ricia From:[ Ex. 6 Sent: W ^ h e s d i9 7 ]iifU ify l7 ;2 0 1 8 n 3 l ^ M To: Lynn, Tricia <lynn.tricia@epa.gov> Subject: Re: Reporting on repurposing former Superfund sites In Behalf Of Lynne Peeples J Good afternoon, Just wanted to follow up on my request. Thanks so much again. Lynne On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:29 PM, Lynne Peeples <lpeeples@post.harvard.edu> wrote: Hi Tricia, I'm reporting a story for Ensia on the repurposing of former Superfund sites --examples of what lands are being used for now, lessons learned so far as to what works well and what doesn't, etc. Would it be possible to connect me with someone at the EPA who could speak to this? The sooner the better, of course, but anytime in the next two weeks would be fine. Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA Tier 13 ED 002061 00006218-00003 Thanks so much, in advance, for your time and help. Best, Lynne L y n n e P e e p le s j Science, Health and Environment Reporter w: 646-233-3217 |i Ex."6 Vww.lvnnepeeples.com i__________ I ________! L y n n e P e e p l e s j Science, Health and Environment Reporter w: r"'""Fy" 646-233-32171 fi"" " ' iwww.lvimepeeples.com L y n n e P e e p l e s [ Science, Health and Environment Reporter w: 646-233-3217 ij g jww w.ivnnepeeples.com Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA Tier 13 ED 002061 00006218-00004