Enclosure

COMMUNICATION PLAN

FOR THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

BETWEEN THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AND THE 

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ENTITLED: 

CONSULTATION AND FINALITY ON

DECOMMISSIONING AND DECONTAMINATION OF CONTAMINATED SITES

PURPOSE

This Communication plan outlines the process that will be used to effectively communicate the 

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to internal and external stakeholders. The

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

entered into an MOU on Consultation and Finality on Decommissioning and Decontamination of

Contaminated Sites (Attachment 1), recognizing their common commitment to protect the

public health and safety and the environment. Decommissioning involves safely removing a

facility from service and reducing residual radioactivity to a level that allows the NRC licensee to

close out its license and safely release part or all of its property for other purposes. The

purpose of the MOU is to describe a basic framework for the relationship between the agencies

as they fulfill their respective responsibilities for the radiological decommissioning and

decontamination of NRC-licensed sites. 

GOALS

Key goals of the MOU are: 1) to provide reasonable assurance that decommissioning of power

reactors, material licensees, and fuel cycle facilities, and the radioactive wastes from

decommissioning, are managed in a manner that protects public health and safety and the

environment; 2) to achieve finality of actions taken by licensees and each Federal agency

when an NRC licensee decommissions its facility; 3) to increase public confidence in NRC’s

commitment and ability to carry out licensing and regulatory responsibilities for the

decommissioning of nuclear facilities; and 4) to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of

analyses supporting license termination decisions. This communications plan will aid in the

fulfillment of these goals and identify the following communications objectives:

1. Ensuring clear communications between NRC, EPA, other involved Federal and State

agencies, NRC licensees, and the public;

2. Increasing public confidence in the site’s decommissioning and license termination

process; and

3. Fostering each regulatory agency’s accountability and credibility by demonstrating that

each coordinate with the other, is well-managed, and is independent.

BACKGROUND

In 1997, the Commission published a final regulation on decommissioning criteria after

considering extensive public comments. Under the authority of the Atomic Energy Act, the
- 2 -

Commission’s regulations are 10 CFR Part 20, Subpart E. This MOU does not change these

requirements. The MOU is a framework which the agencies can improve decision-making and

ensure stakeholder confidence.

Since September 8, 1983, EPA has generally deferred listing on the Comprehensive

Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) National Priorities List

(NPL) those sites that are subject to NRC’s licensing authority. EPA deferred with the

understanding that NRC’s actions are consistent with the CERCLA requirement to protect

human health and the environment. However, as EPA stated in a Federal Register notice

announcing the policy of CERCLA deferral to NRC, if EPA “...determines that sites which it has

not listed as a matter of policy are not being properly responded to, the Agency will consider

listing those sites on the NPL” (see 48 FR 40658). Some licensees have decided to cease

operations and begin decommissioning. These licensees and various stakeholders have

expressed concerns on the finality of decisions since each of the two Federal agencies has

different criteria for decommissioning and licensees could incur significant costs if compelled to

meet both sets of criteria. They have also said that this approach was neither risk-based nor

needed to protect public health and safety and the environment.

An August 3, 1999, report (106-286) from the House Committee on Appropriations to

accompany the bill covering EPA’s FY1999 Appropriations/FY 2000 budget request states:

Once again the Committee notes that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission

(NRC) has and will continue to remediate sites under its jurisdiction to a level

that fully protects public health and safety, and believes that any reversal of the

long-standing policy of the Agency to defer to the NRC for cleanup of NRC’s

licensed sites is not a good use of public or private funds. The interaction of the

EPA with the NRC, NRC licensees, and others, with regard to sites being

remediated under NRC regulatory requirements--when not specifically requested

by the NRC--has created stakeholder concerns regarding the authority and

finality of NRC licensing decisions, the duration and costs of site cleanup, and

the potential future liability of parties associated with affected sites. However,

the Committee recognizes that there may be circumstances at specific NRC

licensed sites where the Agency's expertise may be of critical use to the NRC. 

In the interest of ensuring that sites do not face dual regulation, the Committee

strongly encourages both agencies to enter into an MOU which clarifies the

circumstances for EPA's involvement at NRC sites when requested by the NRC. 

AUDIENCE

External Stakeholders

Stakeholders, external to NRC, that have an interest in, or are affected by, our

regulatory programs and decisions include: licensees; applicants; industry groups; NRC

fee-payers; EPA; members of the public; environmental and business organizations;

civic and public interest groups; Congressional representatives; and other Federal,

State, Tribes, and Local Governments; and the media.
- 3 -

Internal Stakeholders

Stakeholder organizations within NRC include: the Commission; the Executive Director

for Operations; the Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards (NMSS); the

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation; the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research; the

Office of Congressional Affairs (OCA); Regions, the Office of the General Counsel; the

Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste; the Office of State and Tribal Programs

(OSTP); the Office of Administration’s Division of Facilities and Security; and the Office

of Public Affairs (OPA).

KEY MESSAGES

• NRC’s most important mission is to protect public health and safety, common

defense and security, and the environment. 

• NRC is responsible for decision-making on NRC-licensee decommissioning

plans and license terminations. EPA has adopted a policy of deferral to NRC

decision-making on decommissioning without the need for consultation on sites

except in specific circumstances. NRC has agreed to consult with EPA when

any of the following MOU trigger criteria are met/exceeded:

• NRC determines that there will be radioactive ground-water

contamination in excess of EPA’s Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs)

at the time of license termination (Attachment 3); 

• Sites request restricted release (10 CFR 20.1403) or the use of alternate

criteria for license termination (10 CFR 20.1404); and

• There will be radioactive soil contamination at the time of license

termination exceeding the corresponding levels in Table 1 of the MOU. 

• Although both agencies have continuing fundamental policy differences, each

agency entered into the MOU to facilitate consultation, which can improve

decision-making on decommissioning. NRC believes this approach and

framework for decision-making are consistent with NRC policy and its dosebased regulation.

• Because dual regulation drives up the cost of decommissioning without providing

a commensurate increase in the level of protection to the public and

environment, and because the MOU does not fully meet the intent of the House

Appropriations Committee, NRC will continue to seek legislation that would

eliminate the possibility of dual regulation of Atomic Energy Act contaminants for

all decommissioning licensees (except in rare cases in which the NRC or the

cognizant Agreement State invokes the application of CERCLA as necessary to

effect an adequate cleanup).
- 4 -

COMMUNICATIONS TEAM

NRC Points of Contact

• Mr. Jack Strosnider, Director, NMSS, and Ms. Margaret Federline, Deputy

Director, NMSS, are the senior executives responsible for management of the

materials program. If concerns arise that cannot be resolved, then Sections

V.E.2 and V.E.5 of the MOU provide that NRC and EPA senior management

representatives will consult.

Mr. Jack R. Strosnider, Director

 Office of Nuclear Material Safety

 and Safeguards

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Washington, DC 20555-0001

• Mr. Larry Camper, Director, Division of Waste Management and Environmental

Protection (DWMEP), NMSS and oversees decommissioning activities. He has

the lead responsibility for managing the technical and regulatory aspects of site

decommissioning. 

• Mr. Dan Gillen, Deputy Director, Decommissioning Directorate, DWMEP,

supervises the project managers responsible for daily operations with

decommissioning sites, and the MOU Project Manager. The Deputy Director is

the first manager that would respond to inquiries or concerns at an NRC-licensed

site undergoing decommissioning concerning implementation of the MOU. If the

concern cannot be resolved, then it will be raised to the next NRC management

level. 

• Mr. Derek Widmayer, DWMEP, NMSS, is the NRC Project Manager (PM) for the

MOU. The PM will respond to inquiries or concerns about the MOU and help

stakeholders to identify information or other staff contacts needed to respond to

their questions. 

NRC Project Manager:

Derek A. Widmayer, Project Manager

NMSS/DWMEP/DCD

Telephone: 301-415-6677

• An NRC PM has been assigned to each site undergoing decommissioning. The

site PM has the lead responsibility for communicating with the stakeholders

(including communications with licensees’ that are the subject of NRC-EPA

consultation), as well as managing the technical and regulatory aspects of site

decommissioning.
- 5 -

EPA Points of Contact

• Mr. Michael Cook, Director, EPA Office of Superfund Remediation and

Technology Innovation (OSTRI), and Ms. Betsy Southerland, Division Director,

EPA OSTRI, Assessment and Remediation Division (ARD), are the senior

executives responsible for management of the EPA Superfund program. If

concerns arise that cannot be resolved, then Sections V.E.2 and V.E.5 of the

MOU provide that the NRC and EPA senior management representatives will

consult.

Mr. Michael B. Cook, Director

Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Washington, DC 20460

• Mr. Stuart Walker or Ms. Robin Andersen are the staff members in EPA’s Office

of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation, who will respond to

inquiries or concerns about the MOU and help stakeholders to identify

information or contacts needed to respond to their questions. 

EPA Point of Contact:

Stuart A. Walker, Project Manager

EPA/OSWER/OSRTI/ARD/SPB

Telephone: 703-603-8748

TOOLS

 Electronic Communications

• Except for proprietary, classified, or other sensitive information, non-sensitive

correspondence about the MOU and all correspondence about the specific site

undergoing decommissioning will be placed in the NRC Agencywide Documents

Access and Management System (ADAMS). Reports of meetings held about the

MOU will also be placed in ADAMS, as long as they also do not contain

proprietary, classified, or other sensitive information.

• The MOU and all significant site-specific correspondence concerning

consultation under the MOU will be posted on the Agency’s external NRC

Decommissioning webpage under a specific heading dedicated to the MOU to

facilitate communication of the interactions between NRC and EPA. 

 General MOU Communications

• Changes to the MOU will be announced in the Federal Register.

• The NRC PM will coordinate with the Organization of Agreement States (OAS)

(through OSTP), as required, regarding potential MOU’s between Agreement

States and the EPA. Furthermore, NRC will keep OAS abreast of developments

between NRC and EPA, regarding the MOU.
- 6 -

• The NRC PM and site PM will conduct telephone conferences with the licensee

as needed to discuss regulatory and technical issues about a specific site.

• The staff will use telephone calls, video conferences, letters, e-mails, and other

means of communication to respond to inquiries from stakeholders on the MOU

or specific sites.

• Should NRC become aware of other stakeholders, NRC will extend these same

measures to open communications with them. 

 Site - Specific MOU Communications

• NRC conducts two levels of site-specific communication under the MOU (See

Attachment 2 - Flowchart):

Level 1: Technical Consultation

• Technical consultation gives NRC a chance to request EPA’s involvement at

sites before the licensee initiates remediation, but after NRC is reasonably

comfortable that licensees’ proposed actions and cleanup levels are acceptable. 

Under level 1 consultation, NRC staff will engage EPA staff in a technical

discussion on sites that NRC reasonably believes will trigger the MOU at the time

of license termination, based on the Decommissioning Plan (DP) or License

Termination Plan (LTP) that NRC is prepared to approve. For level 1

consultation, NRC may invoke the 90-day consultation period specified in the

MOU. NRC will take action it determines to be appropriate based on its

consultation with EPA. If NRC does not adopt EPA recommendations, NRC will

inform EPA of its basis, and may either notify EPA that it will re-enter into sitespecific consultation after site remediation, if the values in the Final Status

Survey Report still exceed the MOU triggers, or escalate the issue to a higher

level of NRC management. Level 1 consultation will begin no later than 120

days before the expected date of approving the DP/LTP (except for sites which

already have a DP/LTP pending NRC approval at the time which NRC begins

implementing site-specific consultation under the MOU). Level 1 consultation

would not occur earlier than the point in time that the staff concludes that the

licensee’s proposed actions and cleanup levels appear to be acceptable.

• When conducting level 1 consultation, staff will use the letter template provided

in SRM-03-0206. In addition, consistent with SRM-03-0206, staff will consult the

Commission before conducting level 1 consultation for any sites that are “very

complex or potentially controversial...”

Level 2: Formal Consultation

• Formal consultation is reserved for sites that have Final Status Survey 

measurements that trigger the MOU and where EPA and NRC staffs have

already engaged in a technical dialogue (i.e., level 1 consultation), and issues

remain. Consultation at this level will use the process outlined in the MOU (e.g.,

escalation to management if issues remain). 
- 7 -

• Consistent with SRM-03-0206, staff will consult with the Commission before

conducting level 2 consultation.

Notification

(NRC also sent Notifications to the EPA on sites that would have been Level 1

consultation sites had their DPs or LTPs not already been approved prior to the MOU

being signed. Level 2 consultations may still be necessary for these sites if they trigger

the MOU at the time of license termination. There are no more sites with approved DPs 

or LTPs which require NRC to notify the EPA.) 

NRC to EPA Letters

• When an NRC licensee is identified for consultation, the licensee will be notified

telephonically by its NRC site PM. In addition, the licensee will be copied on any

consultation letter sent from NRC to EPA before the site-specific MOU letter is

transmitted. 

• EPA will also be informed telephonically prior to the consultation letter being

transmitted. 

• The NRC PM will email the consultation letter to OPA for information in case

there is any public interest on the site-specific correspondence. 

• Similarly, any further correspondence from NRC to EPA concerning a specific

site (e.g., if the EPA response to a consultation letter requires an NRC

response), will include a telephonic notice to the licensee prior to the NRC letter

being transmitted, followed by transmittal of a copy of the correspondence to the

licensee. 

• EPA will be informed telephonically also prior to these further correspondence

letters being transmitted. 

• The NRC PM will email the EPA letter to OPA for information in case there is any

public interest on the site-specific correspondence.

• The NRC PM will email the EPA letter to OCA for information in case there is any

Congressional interest on the site-specific correspondence. 

• Following transmittal, the NRC MOU PM will post the site-specific

correspondence on the NRC’s Public Decommissioning webpage. 

EPA to NRC Letters

• If the EPA responds to a site-specific MOU correspondence, the NRC MOU PM

will notify the NRC site PM about the response as soon as possible, and provide

the NRC site PM with a copy of the response letter when it is received. 
- 8 -

• The NRC PM should notify the licensee telephonically about the EPA response

as soon as he/she is informed by the NRC PM, and send a copy of the EPA

response to the licensee following the telephonic notice.

• The NRC PM will ensure that OPA receives a copy of the EPA correspondence

for information in case there is any public interest on the site-specific

correspondence between the two agencies. 

• Following receipt, the NRC MOU PM will post the site-specific correspondence

on the NRC’s Public Decommissioning webpage. 

 Public Meetings

• Meetings open to the public will be categorized as opportunistic, invitational,

routine, or optional. Meetings concerning the MOU will be those public meetings

that occur where NRC is in attendance and is asked to discuss the MOU. An

invitational meeting is one where NRC is requested to present a discussion on

the MOU. A routine meeting is one that typically occurs on a recurring basis with

a stakeholder. An optional meeting may include a public meeting specifically to

discuss the MOU which will be announced at least 2 weeks in advance of the

meeting, in accordance with standard NRC practice.

• A meeting report will be prepared within 30 working days of the end of the

meeting. The meeting report will be distributed to all appropriate stakeholders,

on request, and placed in ADAMS. No meeting will involve classified,

proprietary, or safeguards information.

 Internal Communications

• The NRC PM for the MOU will keep NRC site PMs informed regarding sitespecific consultation with EPA under the MOU.

• NRC site PMs will use e-mail, notes, briefings, and meetings to coordinate sitespecific and policy information pertinent to the MOU, with other NRC staff and

managers as appropriate.

• The NRC PM for the MOU will provide e-mails, briefings, presentations, and any

other material to the Commission, the Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste the

Decommissioning website, to D-Board meetings, to the Decommissioning

Counterparts meetings, and other internal meetings and coordinating

committees, as required, to facilitate communication on the status of

implementation of the MOU

 Instructions to Licensing Offices

In accordance with the November 25, 2002, letter from Martin Virgilio, NRC project

managers and license reviewers should review information in the DP or LTP (for

possible Level 1 Consultation) or in the Final Status Survey Reports or Groundwater

Assessments (for possible Level 2 Consultation) for the sites they manage. The PM
- 9 -

should determine if any of the criteria in the MOU could be triggered. If there are any

indications of soil or ground-water contamination that could exceed the MOU values at

the time of license termination, and/or it is likely that the site license will be terminated

under NRC’s restricted or alternate release provisions, then the project manager is to

notify the Deputy Director, NMSS/DWMEP. Based on this information and subsequent

dialogue with the project manager and license reviewer, NMSS/DWMEP, in accordance

with the above guidance will make a determination regarding whether (and when) to

conduct site-specific consultation with EPA. NMSS/DWMEP, is responsible for

coordinating all day-to-day interactions with EPA regarding implementation of this MOU.

EVALUATION AND MONITORING

Each agency has appointed a designated contact for implementation of the MOU. The NRC

designated contact is the Director, NMSS, and the EPA designated contact is the Director,

Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation, or as each designee delegates. 

The designated individuals should meet at least yearly to review sites that trigger consultation

and, at the request of either agency, to review specific NRC-licensed sites that meet the criteria

for formal consultation pursuant to Section V.C.2.

Attachments:

1. MOU

2. MOU Flowchart

2. EPA MCLs
ATTACHMENT 1

EPA/NRC MOU: Available in ADAMS at ML022830208 and online at:

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/news/2002/mou2fin.pdf
ATTACHMENT 2
1

For those isotopes where an MCL is calculated, concentration values were rounded using the same format

as EPA guidance for the 1976 MCL rulemaking.

Attachment 3: List of Radionuclides addressed by

4 mrem/yr man-made beta particles and photon emitters MCL standard1

Nuclide pCi/l Nuclide pCi/l Nuclide pCi/l Nuclide pCi/l

H-3 20,000 Sr-85 m 20,000 Sb-124 60 Er-169 300

Be-7 6,000 Sr-85 900 Sb-125 300 Er-171 300

C-14 2,000 Sr-89 20 Te-125m 600 Tm-170 100

F-18 2,000 Sr-90 8 Te-127 900 Tm-171 1,000

Na-22 400 Sr-91 200 Te-127m 200 Yb-175 300

Na-24 600 Sr-92 200 Te-129 2,000 Lu-177 300

Si-31 3,000 Y-90 60 Te-129m 90 Hf-181 200

P-32 30 Y-91 90 Te-131m 200 Ta-182 100

S-35 inorg 500 Y-91m 9,000 Te-132 90 W-181 1,000

Cl-36 700 Y-92 200 I-126 3 W-185 300

Cl-38 1,000 Y-93 90 I-129 1 W-187 200

K-42 900 Zr-93 2,000 I-131 3 Re-186 300

Ca-45 10 Zr-95 200 I-132 90 Re-187 9,000

Ca-47 80 Zr-97 60 I-133 10 Re-188 200

Sc-46 100 Nb-93m 1,000 I-134 100 Os-185 200

Sc-47 300 Nb-95 300 I-135 30 Os-191 600

Sc-48 80 Nb-97 3,000 Cs-131 20,000 Os-191m 9,000

V-48 90 Mo-99 600 Cs-134 80 Os-193 200

Cr-51 6,000 Tc-96 300 Cs-134m 20,000 Ir-190 600

Mn-52 90 Tc-96m 30,000 Cs-135 900 Ir-192 100

Mn-54 300 Tc-97 6,000 Cs-136 800 Ir-194 90

Mn-56 300 Tc-97m 1,000 Cs-137 200 Pt-191 300

Fe-55 2,000 Tc-99 900 Ba-131 600 Pt-193 3,000

Fe-59 200 Tc-99m 20,000 Ba-140 90 Pt-193m 3,000

Co-57 1,000 Ru-97 1,000 La-140 60 Pt-197 300

Co-58 300 Ru-103 200 Ce-141 300 Pt-197m 3,000

Co-58m 9000 Ru-105 200 Ce-143 100 Au-196 600

Co-60 100 Ru-106 30 Ce-144 30 Au-198 100

Ni-59 300 Rh-103m 30,000 Pr-142 90 Au-199 600

Ni-63 50 Rh-105 300 Pr-143 100 Hg-197 900

Ni-65 300 Pd-103 900 Nd-147 200 Hg-197m 600

Cu-64 900 Pd-109 300 Nd-149 900 Hg-203 60

Zn-65 300 Ag-105 300 Pm-147 600 Tl-200 1,000

Zn-69 6,000 Ag-110m 90 Pm-149 100 Tl-201 900

Zn-69m 200 Ag-111 100 Sm-151 1,000 Tl-202 300

Ga-72 100 Cd-109 600 Sm-153 200 Tl-204 300

Ge-71 6,000 Cd-115 90 Eu-152 200 Pb-203 1,000

As-73 1,000 Cd-115m 90 Eu-154 60 Bi-206 100

As-74 100 In-113m 3,000 Eu-155 600 Bi-207 200

As-76 60 In-114m 60 Gd-153 600 Pa-230 600

As-77 200 In-115 300 Gd-159 200 Pa-233 300

Se-75 900 In-115m 1,000 Tb-160 100 Np-239 300

Br-82 100 Sn-113 300 Dy-165 1,000 Pu-241 300

Rb-86 600 Sn-125 60 Dy-166 100 Bk-249 2,000

Rb-87 300 Sb-122 90 Ho-166 90