July 14, 2000

The Honorable James T. Walsh, Chairman 

Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, HUD, and 

Independent Agencies 

Committee on Appropriations 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

As I indicated in my May 1, 2000 letter to you, I am writing to provide the current status of our 

efforts to develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), as requested in the House Report 

106-286 (Aug. 3, 1999), which accompanied the Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) and 

Housing and Urban Development's (HUD), and Independent Agencies' Appropriations Bill 

FY2000. The report noted that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has 

remediated, and will continue to remediate, sites under its jurisdiction to a level that fully 

protects public health and safety--and that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

should continue its policy to defer to the NRC for clean-up of NRC-licensed sites. The report 

stated that, in the interest of ensuring that sites do not face dual regulation, each agency is 

encouraged to enter into an MOU that clarifies the circumstances for EPA's involvement at 

NRC sites, when requested by NRC. 

In my May 1, 2000 letter to you, I noted that the agency representatives met several times to 

discuss each agency's policies and processes related to site decommissioning and to discuss 

options for development of an MOU. The agency representatives met again on June 23, 2000, 

and had additional conversations concerning language for an MOU. There has been continued 

progress in developing this language, and I believe that the agencies are constructively 

engaged in seeking resolution of the remaining issues. The MOU, as it is being currently 

developed, would have as its foundation deferral by EPA to NRC for cleanup of NRC-licensed 

sites. It would also provide for the NRC to consult with the EPA on sites undergoing 

decommissioning that involve radioactive groundwater coitamination, restricted release, or the 

use of alternate criteria for NRC license termination. 

The Commission continues to reserve its final conclusion on whether an MOU will be 

achievable. EPA and NRC staff continue to refine the language of the MOU and to discuss 

differences. I plan to provide you with a report by October 15, 2000 as to the status of the 

efforts we have made to resolve our differences and to adopt an MOU with EPA. 

Please do not hesitate to contact me if I may provide additional information. 

Sincerely, 

IRA . 

Richard A. Meserve

cc: Representative Alan B. Mollohan
July 14, 2000

The Honorable James M. Inhofe, Chairman 

Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands, 

Private Property and Nuclear Safety 

Committee on Environment and Public Works 

United States Senate 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

As I indicated in my May 1, 2000 letter to you, I am writing to provide the current status of our 

efforts to develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), as requested in the House Report 

106-286 (Aug. 3, 1999), which accompanied the Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) and 

Housing and Urban Development's (HUD), and Independent Agencies' Appropriations Bill 

FY2000. The report noted that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has 

remediated, and will continue to remediate, sites under its jurisdiction to a level that fully 

protects public health and safety--and that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

should continue its policy to defer to the NRC for clean-up of NRC-licensed sites. The report 

stated that, in the interest of ensuring that sites do not face dual regulation, each agency is 

encouraged to enter into an MOU that clarifies the circumstances for EPA's involvement at 

NRC sites, when requested by NRC. 

In my May 1, 2000 letter to you, I noted that the agency representatives met several times to 

discuss each agency's policies and processes related to site decommissioning and to discuss 

options for development of an MOU. The agency representatives met again on June 23, 2000, 

and had additional conversations concerning language for an MOU. There has been contini, "d 

progress in developing this language, and I believe that the agencies are constructively 

engaged in seeking resolution of the remaining issues. The MOU, as it is being currently 

developed, would have as its foundation deferral by EPA to NRC for cleanup of NRC-licensec. 

sites. It would also provide for the NRC to consult with the EPA on sites undergoing 

decommissioning that involve radioactive groundwater contamination, restricted release, or tl e 

use of alternate criteria for NRC license termination. 

The Commission continues to reserve its final conclusion on whether an MOU will be 

achievable. EPA and NRC staff continue to refine the language of the MOU and to discuss 

differences. I plan to provide you with a report by October 15, 2000 as to the status of the 

efforts we have made to resolve our differences and to adopt an MOU with EPA. 

Please do not hesitate to contact me if I may provide additional information. 

Sincerely, 

IRA/ 

Richard A. Meserve

cc: Senator Bob Graham
July 14, 2000

The Honorable Joe Barton, Chairman 

Subcommittee on Energy and Power 

Committee on Commerce 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

As I indicated in my May 1, 2000 letter to you, I am writing to provide the current status of our 

efforts to develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), as requested in the House Report 

106-286 (Aug. 3, 1999), which accompanied the Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) and 

Housing and Urban Development's (HUD), and Independent Agencies' Appropriations Bill 

FY2000. The report noted that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has 

remediated, and will continue to remediate, sites under its jurisdiction to a level that fully 

protects public health and safety--and that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

should continue its policy to defer to the NRC for clean-up of NRC-licensed sites. The report 

stated that, in the interest of ensuring that sites do not face dual regulation, each agency is 

encouraged to enter into an MOU that clarifies the circumstances for EPA's involvement at 

NRC sites, when requested by NRC. 

In my May 1, 2000 letter to you, I noted that the agency representatives met several times to 

discuss each agency's policies and processes related to site decommissioning and to discuss 

options for development of an MOU. The agency representatives met again on June 23, 2000, 

and had additional conversations concerning language for an MOU. There has been continued 

progress in developing this language, and I believe that the agencies are constructively 

engaged in seeking resolution of the remaining issues. The MOU, as it is being currently 

developed, would have as its foundation deferral by EPA to NRC for cleanup of NRC-licensed 

sites. It would also provide for the NRC to consult with the EPA on sites undergoing 

decommissioning that involve radioactive groundwater contamination, restricted release, or the 

use of alternate criteria for NRC license termination. 

The Commission continues to reserve its final conclusion on whether an MOU will be 

achievable. EPA and NRC staff continue to refine the language of the MOU and to discuss 

differences. I plan to provide you with a report by October 15, 2000 as to the status of the 

efforts we have made to resolve our differences and to adopt an MOU with EPA. 

Please do not hesitate to contact me if I may provide additional information. 

Sincerely, 

IRA/ 

Richard A. Meserve

cc: Representative Rick Boucher
July 14, 2000

The Honorable Tom Bliley, Chairman 

Committee on Commerce 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

As I indicated in my May 1, 2000 letter to you, I am writing to provide the current status of our 

efforts to develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), as requested in the House Report 

106-286 (Aug. 3, 1999), which accompanied the Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) and 

Housing and Urban Development's (HUD), and Independent Agencies' Appropriations Bill 

FY2000. The report noted that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has 

remediated, and will continue to remediate, sites under its jurisdiction to a level that fully 

protects public health and safety--and that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

should continue its policy to defer to the NRC for clean-up of NRC-licensed sites. The report 

stated that, in the interest of ensuring that sites do not face dual regulation, each agency is 

encouraged to enter into an MOU that clarifies the circumstances for EPA's involvement at 

NRC sites, when requested by NRC. 

In my May 1, 2000 letter to you, I noted that the agency representatives met several times to 

discuss each agency's policies and processes related to site decommissioning and to discuss 

options for development of an MOU. The agency representatives met again on June 23, 2000, 

and had additional conversations concerning language for an MOU. There has been continued 

progress in developing this language, and I believe that the agencies are constructively 

engaged in seeking resolution of the remaining issues. The MOU, as it is being currently 

developed, would have as its foundation deferral by EPA to NRC for cleanup of NRC-licensed 

sites. It would also provide for the NRC to consult with the EPA on sites undergoing 

decommissioning that involve radioactive groundwater contamination, restricted release, or the 

use of alternate criteria for NRC license termination. 

The Commission continues to reserve its final conclusion on whether an MOU will be 

achievable. EPA and NRC staff continue to refine the language of the MOU and to discuss 

differences. I plan to provide you with a report by October 15, 2000 as to the status of the 

efforts we have made to resolve our differences and to adopt an MOU with EPA. 

Please do not hesitate to contact me if I may provide additional information. 

Sincerely, 

IRA/ 

Richard A. Meserve

cc: Representative John D. Dingell
July 14, 2000

The Honorable Bob Smith, Chairman 

Committee on Environment and Public Works 

United States Senate 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

As I indicated in my May 1, 2000 letter to you, I am writing to provide the current status of our 

efforts to develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), as requested in the House Report 

106-286 (Aug. 3, 1999), which accompanied the Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) and 

Housing and Urban Development's (HUD), and Independent Agencies' Appropriations Bill 

FY2000. The report noted that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has 

remediated, and will continue to remediate, sites under its jurisdiction to a level that fully 

protects public health and safety--and that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

should continue its policy to defer to the NRC for clean-up of NRC-licensed sites. The report 

stated that, in the interest of ensuring that sites do not face dual regulation, each agency is 

encouraged to enter into an MOU that clarifies the circumstances for EPA's involvement at 

NRC sites, when requested by NRC. 

In my May 1, 2000 letter to you, I noted that the agency representatives met several times to 

discuss each agency's policies and processes related to site decommissioning and to discuss 

options for development of an MOU. The agency representatives met again on June 23, 2000, 

and had additional conversations concerning language for an MOU. There has been continued 

progress in developing this language, and I believe that the agencies are constructively 

engaged in seeking resolution of the remaining issues. The MOU, as it is being currently 

developed, would have as its foundation deferral by EPA to NRC for cleanup of NRC-licensed 

sites. It would also provide for the NRC to consult with the EPA on sites undergoing 

decommissioning that involve radioactive groundwater contamination, restricted release, or the 

use of alternate criteria for NRC license termination. 

The Commission continues to reserve its final conclusion on whether an MOU will be 

achievable. EPA and NRC staff continue to refine the language of the MOU and to discuss 

differences. I plan to provide you with a report by October 15, 2000 as to the status of the 

efforts we have made to resolve our differences and to adopt an MOU with EPA. 

Please do not hesitate to contact me if I may provide additional information. 

Sincerely, 

IRA/ 

Richard A. Meserve

cc: Senator Max Baucus
July 14, 2000

The Honorable Ron Packard, Chairman 

Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development 

Committee on Appropriations 

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

As I indicated in my May 1, 2000 letter to you, I am writing to provide the current status of our 

efforts to develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), as requested in the House Report 

106-286 (Aug. 3, 1999), which accompanied the Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) and 

Housing and Urban Development's (HUD), and Independent Agencies' Appropriations Bill 

FY2000. The report noted that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has 

remediated, and will continue to remediate, sites under its jurisdiction to a level that fully 

protects public health and safety--and that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

should continue its policy to defer to the NRC for clean-up of NRC-licensed sites. The report 

stated that, in the interest of ensuring that sites do not face dual regulation, each agency is 

encouraged to enter into an MOU that clarifies the circumstances for EPA's involvement at 

NRC sites, when requested by NRC. 

In my May 1, 2000 letter to you, I noted that the agency representatives met several times to 

discuss each agency's policies and processes related to site decommissioning and to discuss 

options for development of an MOU. The agency representatives met again on June 23, 2000, 

and had additional conversations concerning language for an MOU. There has been continued 

progress in developing this language, and I believe that the agencies are constructively 

engaged in seeking resolution of the remaining issues. The MOU, as it is being currently 

developed, would have as its foundation deferral by EPA to NRC for cleanup of NRC-licensed 

sites. It would also provide for the NRC to consult with the EPA on sites undergoing 

decommissioning that involve radioactive groundwater contamination, restricted release, or the 

use of alternate criteria for NRC license termination. 

The Commission continues to reserve its final conclusion on whether an MOU will be 

achievable. EPA and NRC staff continue to refine the language of the MOU and to discuss 

differences. I plan to provide you with a report by October 15, 2000 as to the status of the 

efforts we have made to resolve our differences and to adopt an MOU with EPA. 

Please do not hesitate to contact me if I may provide additional information. 

Sincerely, 

IRA! 

Richard A. Meserve

cc: Representative Peter J. Visclosky
July 14, 2000

The Honorable Pete V. Domenici, Chairman 

Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development 

Committee on Appropriations 

United States Senate 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

As I indicated in my May 1, 2000 letter to you, I am writing to provide the current status of our 

efforts to develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), as requested in the House Report 

106-286 (Aug. 3, 1999), which accompanied the Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) and 

Housing and Urban Development's (HUD), and Independent Agencies' Appropriations Bill 

FY2000. The report noted that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has 

remediated, and will continue to remediate, sites under its jurisdiction to a level that fully 

protects public health and safety--and that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

should continue its policy to defer to the NRC for clean-up of NRC-licensed sites. The report 

stated that, in the interest of ensuring that sites do not face dual regulation, each agency is 

encouraged to enter into an MOU that clarifies the circumstances for EPA's involvement at 

NRC sites, when requested by NRC. 

In my May 1, 2000 letter to you, I noted that the agency representatives met several times to 

discuss each agency's policies and processes related to site decommissioning and to discuss 

options for development of an MOU. The agency representatives met again on June 23, 2000, 

and had additional conversations concerning language for an MOU. There has been continued 

progress in developing this language, and I believe that the agencies are constructively 

engaged in seeking resolution of the remaining issues. The MOU, as it is being currently 

developed, would have as its foundation deferral by EPA to NRC for cleanup of NRC-licensed 

sites. It would also provide for the NRC to consult with the EPA on sites undergoing 

decommissioning that involve radioactive groundwater contamination, restricted release, or the 

use of alternate criteria for NRC license termination. 

The Commission continues to reserve its final conclusion on whether an MOU will be 

achievable. EPA and NRC staff continue to refine the language of the MOU and to discuss 

differences. I plan to provide you with a report by October 15, 2000 as to the status of the 

efforts we have made to resolve our differences and to adopt an MOU with EPA. 

Please do not hesitate to contact me if I may provide additional information. 

Sincerely, 

IRA/ 

Richard A. Meserve

cc: Senator Harry Reid
Accession Number ML003727800 

Estimated Page Count 7 

Document Date 07/14/2000 

Availability Non-Publicly Available 

Title Letter to Representative James T. Walsh re: Status of the 

Memorandum of Understanding Between NRC and EPA 

Author Name Meserve R A 

Author Affiliation NRC/Chairman, NRC/OCM 

Addressee Name Walsh J T 

Addressee Affiliation US HR 

Docket Number 

License Number 

Case/Reference Number 

Document/Report Number corr-00-01 17 

Media Type Electronic 

Physical File Location ADAMS 

Microform Addresses